Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Threatened Status for the Northern Mexican Gartersnake and Narrow-Headed Gartersnake; Final Rule

Home , Agua Fria River, Algansea, Black Draw, Diamond Creek (Arizona), Longfin dace, Oak Creek Canyon

Vol. 79 Tuesday, No. 130 July 8, 2014

Part II

Department of the Interior

Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Threatened Status for the Northern Mexican Gartersnake and Narrow-Headed Gartersnake; Final Rule

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:23 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38678 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR telephone: 602–242–0210; facsimile: collectively as ‘‘harmful nonnative 602–242–2513. species.’’ Large-scale wildfires and land Fish and Wildlife Service FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: uses that divert, dry up, or significantly Steve Spangle, Field Supervisor, U.S. pollute aquatic habitat have also been 50 CFR Part 17 Fish and Wildlife Service, Arizona found to be significant threats. Ecological Services Field Office, 2321 Collectively, these threats have [Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2013–0071: West Royal Palm Road, Suite 103, adversely affected gartersnake 4500030113] Phoenix, AZ 85021; telephone: 602– populations, and most of their native prey species, such that the gartersnakes’ RIN 1018–AY23 242–0210; facsimile: 602–242–2513. Persons who use a telecommunications resiliency, redundancy, and Endangered and Threatened Wildlife device for the deaf (TDD) may call the representation across their ranges have and Plants; Threatened Status for the Federal Information Relay Service been significantly compromised. Northern Mexican Gartersnake and (FIRS) at 800–877–8339. Peer review and public comment. We sought comments from independent Narrow-Headed Gartersnake SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: specialists to ensure that our AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Executive Summary designation is based on scientifically Interior. Why we need to publish a rule. Under sound data, assumptions, and analyses. ACTION: Final rule. the Endangered Species Act, a species We invited these peer reviewers to may warrant protection through listing comment on our listing proposal. We SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and if it is endangered or threatened also considered all other comments and Wildlife Service (Service), determine throughout all or a significant portion of information received during the threatened species status under the its range. Listing a species as an comment period on the proposed listing Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act), endangered or threatened species rule. All comments are available at as amended, for the northern Mexican requires issuing a rule. This rule will http://www.regulations.gov (Docket No. gartersnake (Thamnophis eques finalize the listing of the northern FWS–R2–ES–2013–0071). megalops) and the narrow-headed Mexican gartersnake (Thamnophis Previous Federal Action gartersnake (Thamnophis eques megalops) and narrow-headed Please refer to the proposed listing rufipunctatus), native species from gartersnake (Thamnophis rufipunctatus) Arizona and New Mexico in the United rule for the northern Mexican as threatened species, initiated with our gartersnake and narrow-headed States. We also finalize a rule under proposed listing rule published on July authority of section 4(d) of the gartersnake (78 FR 41500; July 10, 2013) 10, 2013 (78 FR 41500), and finalize a for a detailed description of previous Endangered Species Act of 1973, as rule under authority of section 4(d) of amended (Act), that provides measures Federal actions concerning this species. the Act that provides measures that are We will also be finalizing the that are necessary and advisable to necessary and advisable to provide for provide for the conservation of the designation of critical habitat for the the conservation of the northern northern Mexican gartersnake and northern Mexican gartersnake. Both Mexican gartersnake. species are listed as threatened narrow-headed gartersnake in a separate The basis for our action. Under the rule in the future. Information regarding throughout their range, which, for the Endangered Species Act, we can northern Mexican gartersnake, also designation of critical habitat for these determine that a species is an species is available at http:// includes the Mexican states of Sonora, endangered or threatened species based Chihuahua, Durango, Coahuila, www.regulations.gov (Docket No. FWS– on any of five factors: (A) The present R2–ES–2013–0022). Zacatecas, Guanajuato, Nayarit, Hidalgo, or threatened destruction, modification, Jalisco, San Luis Potosı´, Aguascalientes, or curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) Background ´ Tlaxacala, Puebla, Mexico, Veracruz, Overutilization for commercial, ´ Northern Mexican Gartersnake and Queretaro. The effect of this recreational, scientific, or educational regulation will be to add these species purposes; (C) Disease or predation; (D) Subspecies Description to the lists of Endangered and The inadequacy of existing regulatory The northern Mexican gartersnake Threatened Wildlife and Plants. mechanisms; or (E) Other natural or ranges in color from olive to olive- DATES: This rule becomes effective manmade factors affecting its continued brown or olive-gray with three lighter- August 7, 2014. existence. We have determined that colored stripes that run the length of the ADDRESSES: This final rule is available predation from and competition with body, the middle of which darkens on the internet at http:// nonnative species such as bass toward the tail. This species may www.regulations.gov (Docket No. FWS– (Micropterus sp.), flathead catfish inhabit the same area as other native R2–ES–2013–0071) and http:// (Pylodictis sp.), channel catfish gartersnake species and can be difficult www.fws.gov/southwest/es/arizona. (Ictalurus sp.), Chihuahuan catfish for people without specific expertise to Comments and materials we received, as (Ictalurus chihuahua), bullheads identify. The snake may reach a well as supporting documentation we (Ameiurus sp.), sunfish (Lepomis sp.), maximum known length of 44 inches used in preparing this rule, are available and crappie (Pomoxis sp.), brown trout (in) (112 centimeters (cm)). The pale for public inspection at http:// (Salmo trutta), American bullfrogs yellow to light-tan lateral (side of body) www.regulations.gov. All of the (Lithobates catesbeiana), and crayfish stripes distinguish the northern comments, materials, and (northern (virile) crayfish (Orconectes Mexican gartersnake from other documentation that we considered in virilis) and red swamp crayfish sympatric (co-occurring) gartersnake this rulemaking are available by (Procambarus clarkia)) are the most species because a portion of the lateral appointment, during normal business significant threat affecting these stripe is found on the fourth scale row, hours at: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, gartersnakes across their range. while it is confined to lower scale rows Arizona Ecological Services Field Throughout the remainder of this final for other species. Paired black spots Office, 2321 West Royal Palm Road, rule, the nonnative species identified extend along the olive dorsolateral Suite 103, Phoenix, AZ 85021; immediately above will be referred to fields (region adjacent to the top of the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:23 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38679

snake’s back) and the olive-gray Habitat and Natural History activity was undetermined for 20 ventrolateral fields (region adjacent to Throughout its rangewide percent of the telemetry observations the area of the snake’s body in contact distribution, the northern Mexican (Boyarsky 2013, pers. comm.); at with the ground). The scales are keeled gartersnake occurs at elevations from Tavasci Marsh along the upper Verde (possessing a ridge down the center of 130 to 8,497 feet (ft) (40 to 2,590 meters River, they were inactive 60 percent of each scale). A more detailed subspecies (m)) (Rossman et al. 1996, p. 172) and the time (Emmons 2013b, pers. comm.). description can be found in our is considered a ‘‘terrestrial-aquatic In the northern-most part of its range, September 26, 2006 (71 FR 56227), or generalist’’ (Drummond and Marcı´as- the northern Mexican gartersnake November 25, 2008 (73 FR 71788) 12- Garcı´a 1983, pp. 24–26). The northern appears to be most active during July month findings for this subspecies, or Mexican gartersnake is a riparian and August, followed by June and by reviewing Rosen and Schwalbe obligate (generally found in riparian September (Emmons and Nowak 2013, (1988, p. 4), Rossman et al. (1996, pp. areas when not engaged in dispersal, p. 14). Northern Mexican gartersnakes 171–172), Ernst and Ernst (2003, pp. gestation, or hibernation behaviors) and may use different sites as hibernacula 391–392), or Manjarrez and Garcia occurs chiefly in the following general during a single cold-season and will (1993, pp. 1–5). habitat types: (1) Small, often isolated bask occasionally (Emmons 2014, pers. wetlands (e.g., cienegas (mid-elevation comm.). Taxonomy Although considered a highly aquatic wetlands with highly organic, reducing The northern Mexican gartersnake species, the northern Mexican (basic or alkaline) soils), or stock tanks (Thamnophis eques megalops) is a gartersnake uses terrestrial habitat for (small earthen impoundment)); (2) large- member of the family Colubridae and hibernation (Young and Boyarski 2012b, subfamily Natricinae (harmless live- river riparian woodlands and forests; pp. 25–28), gestation, seeking mates, bearing snakes) (Lawson et al. 2005, p. and (3) streamside gallery forests (as and dispersal. Along the middle Verde 596; Pyron et al. 2013, p. 31). The defined by well-developed broadleaf River preliminary telemetry data for the taxonomy of the genus Thamnophis has deciduous riparian forests with limited, northern Mexican gartersnake found a complex history, partly because many if any, herbaceous ground cover or that the species may travel at least 528 of the species are similar in appearance dense grass) (Hendrickson and Minckley feet (161 m) from the nearest water and and arrangement of scales and many of 1984, p. 131; Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, as much as 0.4 mi (0.6 km) in a single the early museum specimens were in pp. 14–16). Emmons and Nowak (2013, day (total distance traveled) (Emmons such poor and faded condition that it p. 14) found this subspecies most 2014, pers. comm.). Terrestrial habitat was difficult to study them (Conant commonly in protected backwaters, use in open, grassland-dominated 2003, p. 6). braided side channels and beaver landscapes with scattered livestock Prior to 2003, Thamnophis eques was ponds, isolated pools near the river tanks, such as in southern Arizona, may considered to have three subspecies, T. mainstem, and edges of dense emergent reflect that greater distances are traveled e. eques, T. e. megalops, and T. e. vegetation that offered cover and as suggested by the observation of a virgatenuis (Rossman et al. 1996, p. foraging opportunities when surveying large female northern Mexican 175). In 2003, an additional seven new in the upper and middle Verde River gartersnake observed in O’Donnell subspecies were identified under T. region. Additional information on the Canyon, which was far from source eques: (1) T. e. cuitzeoensis; (2) T. e. habitat requirements of the northern populations and may have been patzcuaroensis; (3) T. e. insperatus; (4) Mexican gartersnake within the United dispersing overland (Rosen and T. e. obscurus; (5) T. e. diluvialis; (6) T. States and Mexico can be found in our Schwalbe 1988, p. 14). Preliminary data e. carmenensis; and (7) T. e. scotti 2006 (71 FR 56227) and 2008 (73 FR from the population at Bubbling Ponds (Conant 2003, p. 3). Common names 71788) 12-month findings for this State Fish Hatchery show that home were not provided, so in this final rule, subspecies and in Rosen and Schwalbe ranges vary from 1.7 acres (0.7 ha) to we use the scientific name for all (1988, pp. 14–16), Rossman et al. (1996, 10.4 acres (4.2 ha), with a mean home subspecies of Mexican gartersnake other p. 176), McCranie and Wilson (1987, pp. range size of 6.2 acres (2.51 ha) (Young than the northern Mexican gartersnake. 11–17), Ernst and Ernst (2003, p. 392), and Boyarski 2012b, p. 23). These seven new subspecies were and Cirett-Galan (1996, p. 156). The northern Mexican gartersnake is described based on morphological The northern Mexican gartersnake is an active predator and depends on differences in coloration and pattern, surface active at ambient (air) smaller animals for its prey base (Rosen have highly restricted distributions, and temperatures ranging from 71 degrees and Schwalbe 1988, pp. 18, 20). occur in isolated wetland habitats Fahrenheit (°F) to 91 °F (22 degrees Northern Mexican gartersnakes forage within the mountainous Transvolcanic Celsius (°C) to 33 °C) and forages along along vegetated banklines, searching for Belt region of southern Mexico, which the banks of waterbodies (Rosen 1991, prey in water and on land, using contains the highest elevations in the p. 305, Table 2). While conducting different strategies (Alfaro 2002, p. 209), country (Conant 2003, pp. 7–8). visual surveys, Rosen (1991, pp. 308– or may forage along the edges of open Additional information regarding this 309) found that northern Mexican water and thick stands of vegetation subspecies’ taxonomy can be found in gartersnakes spent up to 60 percent of such as cattails. Generally, its diet de Queiroz et al. (2002, p. 323), de their time moving, 13 percent of their consists of native amphibians and Queiroz and Lawson (1994, p. 217), time basking on vegetation, 18 percent fishes, such as adult and larval Rossman et al. (1996, pp. xvii–xviii, of their time basking on the ground, and (tadpoles) native leopard frogs (e.g., 171–175), Rosen and Schwalbe (1988, 9 percent of their time under surface lowland leopard frog (Lithobates pp. 2–3), Liner (1994, p. 107), and cover. However, preliminary telemetry yavapaiensis) and Chiricahua leopard Crother et al. (2012, p. 70). A data from a population of northern frog (Lithobates chiricahuensis)), as well description of the taxonomy of the Mexican gartersnakes at the Bubbling as juvenile and adult native fish species northern Mexican gartersnake is found Ponds State Fish Hatchery show (e.g., Gila topminnow (Poeciliopsis in our September 26, 2006 (71 FR individuals were surface active during occidentalis occidentalis), desert 56227) and November 25, 2008 (73 FR 16 percent of telemetry observations, pupfish (Cyprinodon macularius), Gila 71788) 12-month findings for this not surface active during 64 percent of chub (Gila intermedia), and roundtail subspecies. telemetry observations, and surface chub (Gila robusta)) (Rosen and

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:23 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38680 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Schwalbe 1988, p. 18). Drummond and Page Springs and Bubbling Ponds State (Lampropeltis sp.), whipsnakes (Coluber Marcıás-Garcıá (1983, pp. 25, 30) found Fish Hatcheries in Arizona, but some sp.), regal ring-necked snakes that as a subspecies, Mexican predation attempts on snails have (Diadophis punctatus regalis), etc.), gartersnakes fed primarily on frogs. The proven fatal for gartersnakes because of wading birds, mergansers (Mergus northern Mexican gartersnake may their lower jaw becoming permanently merganser), belted kingfishers congregate at ephemeral amphibian lodged in the snails’ shell (Young and (Megaceryle alcyon), raccoons (Procyon breeding ponds to exploit high-density Boyarski 2012a, p. 498). Venegas- lotor), skunks (Mephitis sp.), and prey populations as observed at New Barrera and Manjarrez (2001, p. 187) coyotes (Canis latrans) (Rosen and Mexican spadefoot toads (Spea reported the first observation of a snake Schwalbe 1988, pp. 18, 39; Brennan et multiplicata) breeding sites (d’Orgeix et in the natural diet of any species of al. 2009, p. 123). Historically, large, al. 2013, pp. 213–215). Auxiliary prey Thamnophis after documenting the highly predatory native fish species items may also include young consumption of a Mexican alpine such as Colorado pikeminnow Woodhouse’s toads (Anaxyrus blotched gartersnake (Thamnophis (Ptychocheilus lucius) may have preyed woodhousei), treefrogs (Family Hylidae), scalaris) by a Mexican gartersnake (T. upon northern Mexican gartersnake earthworms, deermice (Peromyscus eques; subspecies not reported); a where the subspecies co-occurred. spp.), lizards of the genera Aspidoscelis behavior termed ophiophagy. Native chubs (Gila sp.) may also prey on and Sceloporus, larval tiger salamanders Ophiophagy has not been specifically neonatal gartersnakes, but has not been (Ambystoma tigrinum), and leeches reported in northern Mexican documented in the literature to our (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, p. 20; Holm gartersnakes, although they are a knowledge. and Lowe 1995, pp. 30–31; Degenhardt subspecies of the Mexican gartersnake. Sexual maturity in northern Mexican et al. 1996, p. 318; Rossman et al. 1996, Marcıás-Garcıá and Drummond (1988, gartersnakes occurs at 2 years of age in p. 176; Manjarrez 1998, p. 465). pp. 129–134) sampled the stomach males and at 2 to 3 years of age in Salamanders (Ambystoma spp.) may be contents of Mexican gartersnakes and females (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, pp. particularly important as prey for the prey populations at (ephemeral) 16–17). Northern Mexican gartersnakes northern Mexican gartersnake Lake Tecocomulco, Hidalgo, Mexico. are viviparous (bringing forth living populations in northern Mexico, both at Field observations indicated, with high young rather than eggs). Mating has lower elevations and along the Sierra statistical significance, that larger been documented in April and May Madre Occidental (Lemos-Espinal 2013, Mexican gartersnakes fed primarily followed by the live birth of between 7 pers. comm.). upon aquatic vertebrates (fishes, frogs, and 38 newborns (average is 13.6) in In situations where native prey and larval salamanders) and leeches, June, July, and August (Rosen and species are rare or absent, this snake’s whereas smaller Mexican gartersnakes Schwalbe 1988, p. 16; Nowak and diet may be almost completely fed primarily upon earthworms and Boyarski 2012, pp. 351–352; Boyarski comprised of nonnative species, leeches (Marcıás-Garcıá and Drummond 2013, pers. comm.). However, field including larval and juvenile bullfrogs 1988, p. 131). Marcıás-Garcıá and observations in Arizona provide (Lithobates catesbeianus), mosquitofish Drummond (1988, p. 130) also found preliminary evidence that mating may (Gambusia affinis) (Holycross et al. that the birth of newborn T. eques also occur during the fall, but further 2006, p. 23), or subadult green sunfish, tended to coincide with the annual peak research is required to confirm this bluegill, or largemouth bass (Emmons density of annelids (earthworms and hypothesis (Boyarski 2012, pers. and Nowak 2013, p. 5; Emmons 2013a, leeches). There is also preliminary comm.). Unlike other gartersnake pers. comm.). The most recent evidence that birth may coincide with a species, which typically breed annually, observations of northern Mexican pronounced influx of available prey in one study suggests that only half of the gartersnakes attempting to eat predatory a given area, especially with that of sexually mature females within a fish was discussed in Emmons and explosive breeders, such as toads, but population of northern Mexican Nowak (2013, p. 6) where they found more research is needed to confirm such gartersnake might reproduce in any one fish inside traps with gartersnakes, and a relationship (Boyarski 2012, pers. season (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, p. the fish appeared to have been partially comm.). Positive correlations were also 17). We found no information on the consumed and then regurgitated. These made with respect to capture rates longevity of northern Mexican observations suggest that, while (which are correlated with population gartersnakes but presume they may live northern Mexican gartersnakes may size) of T. eques to lake levels and to as long as 10 years in the wild. attempt to eat predatory fish (at least in prey scarcity; that is, when lake levels Historical Distribution the artificial confines of a wire trap), were low and prey species scarce, they may often be spontaneously Mexican gartersnake capture rates Within the United States, the northern regurtitated, potentially causing harm to declined (Marcıás-Garcıá and Mexican gartersnake historically the snake (Nowak and Santana-Bendix Drummond 1988, p. 132). While prey occurred predominantly in Arizona at 2002, p. 24), and may not be compatible scarcity could have driven snakes to elevations ranging from 130 to 6,150 ft prey for northern Mexican gartersnakes. become active or take shelter (40 to 1,875 m). It was generally found Interestingly, in a 2012 trapping effort underground, their results suggest the where water was relatively permanent along the upper Santa Cruz River, importance of available water and an and supported suitable habitat. The minnow traps that become self-baited adequate prey base to maintaining northern Mexican gartersnake has been with bullfrogs, mosquitofish, or viable populations of Mexican documented historically in every county macroinvertebrates captured snakes, but gartersnakes. Marcıás-Garcıá and and nearly every subbasin within those which contained green sunfish or Drummond (1988, p. 133) found that, Arizona, but its historical distribution largemouth bass never caught a single while certain prey items were positively was essentially the southern two-thirds northern Mexican gartersnake (Lashway associated with size classes of snakes, of Arizona. It was known from several 2012, p. 6). the largest of specimens consume any perennial or intermittent creeks, Chinese mystery snails prey available. streams, and rivers as well as lentic (Cipangopaludina chinensis) have also Native predators of the northern (still, non-flowing water) wetlands such been reported as a prey item for Mexican gartersnake include birds of as cienegas, ponds, or stock tanks. northern Mexican gartersnakes at the prey, other snakes (kingsnakes Records documenting northern Mexican

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38681

gartersnake exist within the following Espinal et al. 2004, p. 83). We are not secretive, and can be very difficult to subbasins in Arizona: Colorado River, aware of any systematic, rangewide detect in structurally complex, dense Bill Williams River, Agua Fria River, survey effort for the northern Mexican habitat (Emmons and Nowak 2013, p. Salt River, Tonto Creek, Verde River, gartersnake in Mexico. Therefore, we 13) or where they occur at very low Santa Cruz River, Cienega Creek, San use other related ecological surrogates population densities, which Pedro River, Babocomari River, and the (such as native freshwater fish) to characterizes most occupied sites in Rio San Bernardino (Black Draw) inform discussion on the status of lotic habitat. We considered factors such (Woodin 1950, p. 40; Nickerson and aquatic communities and aquatic habitat as the date of the last known records for Mays 1970, p. 503; Bradley 1986, p. 67; in Mexico, and therefore on the likely northern Mexican gartersnakes in an Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, Appendix I; status of northern Mexican gartersnake area, as well as records of one or more 1995, p. 452; 1997, pp. 16–17; Holm and populations. We believe that native prey species in making a Lowe 1995, pp. 27–35; Sredl et al. gartersnakes and native fish are closely conclusion on occupancy of the 1995b, p. 2; 2000, p. 9; Rosen et al. ecologically connected because of the subspecies. We used the year 1980 to 2001, Appendix I; Holycross et al. 2006, high level of dependency of the qualify occupancy because the 1980s pp. 1–2, 15–51; Brennan and Holycross gartersnakes on the fish as a food marked the first systematic survey 2006, p. 123; Radke 2006, pers. comm.; source. This discussion is found below efforts for northern Mexican Rosen 2006, pers. comm.; Holycross in the subheadings pertinent to Mexico. gartersnakes across their range in the 2006, pers. comm.; Cotton et al. 2013, p. Current Distribution and Population United States (see Rosen and Schwalbe 111). Numerous records for the northern Status (1988, entire) and Fitzgerald (1986, Mexican gartersnake (through 1996) in entire)) and the last, previous records Arizona are maintained in the Arizona Data on population status of northern were often dated several decades prior Game and Fish Department’s (AGFD) Mexican gartersnakes in the United and may not accurately represent the Heritage Database (1996a). States are largely summarized in likelihood for current occupation. Historically, the northern Mexican unpublished agency reports. In our Several areas where northern Mexican gartersnake had a limited distribution in literature review we found that gartersnakes were known to occur have New Mexico that consisted of scattered reductions in range and population received no, or very little, survey effort locations throughout the Upper Gila densities have affected the status of the in the past several decades. Variability River watershed in Grant and western northern Mexican gartersnake in survey design and effort makes it Hidalgo Counties, including the Upper significantly in the last 30 years. We difficult to compare population sizes or found that, in as much as 90 percent of Gila River, Mule Creek in the San trends among sites and between the northern Mexican gartersnakes’ Francisco River subbasin, and the sampling periods. For each of the sites historical distribution in the United Mimbres River (Price 1980, p. 39; discussed in Appendix A (available at States, the subspecies occurs at low to Fitzgerald 1986, Table 2; Degenhardt et http://www.regulations.gov, Docket No. very low population densities or may al. 1996, p. 317; Holycross et al. 2006, FWS–R2–ES–2013–0071), we have even be extirpated. For example, pp. 1–2). attempted to translate and quantify One record for the northern Mexican Holycross et al. (2006, p. 66) detected search and capture efforts into gartersnake exists for the State of the northern Mexican gartersnake at comparable units (i.e., person-search Nevada, opposite Fort Mohave, in Clark only 2 of 11 historical localities within hours and trap-hours) and have County along the shore of the Colorado the northern-most part of its range in the cautiously interpreted those results. River that was dated 1911 (De Queiroz United States. The degraded status of Because the presence of suitable prey and Smith 1996, p. 155). The subspecies the northern Mexican gartersnake, in a species in an area may provide evidence may have occurred historically in the rangewide context, is primarily the lower Colorado River region of result of predation by and competition that the northern Mexican gartersnake California, although we were unable to with harmful nonnative species, that may still persist in low density where verify any museum records for have been legally released, illegally survey data are sparse, a record of a California. Any populations of northern released, or have naturally dispersed native prey species was considered in Mexican gartersnakes that may have (explained below). However, ecological our determination of occupancy of this historically occurred in either Nevada or circumstances and potential threats vary subspecies. California were likely associated from site to site, and the same threats do Currently, there are only five northern directly with the Colorado River, and not affect every population with the Mexican gartersnake populations in the we believe the northern Mexican same magnitude across their range. United States, where the subspecies gartersnake to be currently extirpated in Regardless of how they got into the remains reliably detected and is Nevada and California. wild, harmful nonnative species are considered viable, and all are located in Within Mexico, northern Mexican now widespread and present throughout Arizona. The five known populations gartersnakes historically occurred the range of the northern Mexican are: (1) The Page Springs and Bubbling within the Sierra Madre Occidental and gartersnake. Land uses that result in the Ponds State Fish Hatcheries along Oak the Mexican Plateau in the Mexican dewatering of habitat, combined with Creek, (2) lower Tonto Creek, (3) the states of Sonora, Chihuahua, Durango, increasing drought, have destroyed upper Santa Cruz River in the San Coahuila, Zacatecas, Guanajuato, significant amounts of habitat Rafael Valley, (4) the Bill Williams Nayarit, Hidalgo, Jalisco, San Luis throughout the northern Mexican River, and (5) the upper and middle Potosı´, Aguascalientes, Tlaxacala, gartersnake’s range and have, therefore, Verde River. In New Mexico, the Puebla, Me´xico, Veracruz, and reduced its distribution within several northern Mexican gartersnake was last Quere´taro, comprising approximately 85 subbasins. documented in 2013 along the Gila percent of the total rangewide Where northern Mexican gartersnakes River in the vicinity of the Highway 180 distribution of the subspecies (Conant are locally abundant, they are usually crossing (Hotle 2013, entire) and is 1963, p. 473; 1974, pp. 469–470; Van reliably detected with significantly less considered to occur in extremely low Devender and Lowe 1977, p. 47; effort than populations characterized as population densities within its McCranie and Wilson 1987, p. 15; having low densities. Northern Mexican historical distribution along the Gila Rossman et al. 1996, p. 173; Lemos- gartersnakes are well-camouflaged, River and Mule Creek. While

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38682 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

historically known to occur on tribal access to information on survey efforts native prey species, and the presence of lands, the status of the northern and field data from Mexico. harmful nonnative species. For a Mexican gartersnake on tribal lands, In Table 1 below, we summarize the detailed discussion that explains the such as those owned by the White population status of northern Mexican rationale for site-by-site conclusions on Mountain or San Carlos Apache Tribes, gartersnakes at all known 29 historical occupancy, please see Appendix A is poorly known due to limited survey localities throughout their United States (available at http://www.regulations.gov, access. As stated previously, less is distribution, as supported by museum Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2013–0071). known specifically about the current records or reliable observations. We General rationale is provided in the categorized each population as either distribution of the northern Mexican introductory paragraph to this section, likely viable, likely not viable, or likely gartersnake in Mexico due to limited ‘‘Current Distribution and Population extirpated based on the historical survey Status.’’ records, suitable habitat, presence of

TABLE 1—CURRENT POPULATION STATUS OF THE NORTHERN MEXICAN GARTERSNAKE IN THE UNITED STATES [References for This Information Are Provided in Appendix A]

Suitable Harmful physical Native prey nonnative Population Location Last record habitat species species status present present present

Gila River (NM, AZ) ...... 2013 ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. Spring Canyon (NM) ...... 1937 ...... Yes ...... Possible ...... Likely ...... Likely extirpated. Mule Creek (NM) ...... 1983 ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. Mimbres River (NM) ...... Likely early Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely extir- 1900s. pated. Lower Colorado River (AZ) ...... 1904 ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely extirpated. Bill Williams River (AZ) ...... 2012 ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely viable. Agua Fria River (AZ) ...... 1986 ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. Little Ash Creek (AZ) ...... 1992 ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. Lower Salt River (AZ) ...... 1964 ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely extirpated. Black River (AZ) ...... 1982 ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. Big Bonito Creek (AZ) ...... 1986 ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. Tonto Creek (AZ) ...... 2005 ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely viable. Upper Verde River (AZ) ...... 2012 ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely viable. Oak Creek (AZ) ...... 2012 ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely viable. (Page Springs and Bubbling Ponds State Fish Hatcheries) ...... Spring Creek (AZ) ...... 1986 ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. Sycamore Creek (Yavapai/Coconino Co., AZ) ...... 1954 ...... Yes ...... Possible ...... Yes ...... Likely extirpated. Upper Santa Cruz River/San Rafael Valley (AZ) ...... 2013 ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely viable. Redrock Canyon (AZ) ...... 2008 ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. Sonoita Creek (AZ) ...... 2013 ...... Yes ...... Possible ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. Scotia Canyon (AZ) ...... 2009 ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... No ...... Likely not viable. Parker Canyon (AZ) ...... 1986 ...... Yes ...... Possible ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. Las Cienegas National Conservation Area and Cienega Creek 2012 ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Possible ...... Likely not via- Natural Preserve (AZ). ble. Lower Santa Cruz River (AZ) ...... 1956 ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely extirpated. Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge (AZ) ...... 2000 ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. Bear Creek (AZ) ...... 1987 ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. San Pedro River (AZ) ...... 1996 ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. Babocomari River and Cienega (AZ) ...... 1986 ...... Yes ...... Possible ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. Canelo Hills-Sonoita Grasslands Area (AZ) ...... 2012 ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38683

TABLE 1—CURRENT POPULATION STATUS OF THE NORTHERN MEXICAN GARTERSNAKE IN THE UNITED STATES— Continued [References for This Information Are Provided in Appendix A]

Suitable Harmful physical Native prey nonnative Population Location Last record habitat species species status present present present

San Bernardino National Wildlife Refuge (AZ) ...... 1997 ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. Notes: ‘‘Possible’’ means there were no conclusive data found. ‘‘Likely extirpated’’ means the last record for an area pre-dated 1980, and existing threats suggest the species is likely extirpated. ‘‘Likely not viable’’ means there is a post-1980 record for the species, it is not reliably found with minimal to moderate survey effort, and threats exist which suggest the population may be low density or could be extirpated, but there is insufficient evidence to support extirpation. ‘‘Likely viable’’ means that the species is reliably found with minimal to moderate survey effort, and the population is generally considered to be somewhat resilient.

We conclude that as many as 24 of 29 subspecies’ range in Mexico. Habitat of the species are similar in appearance known northern Mexican gartersnake alteration or removal, as a circumstance and scutelation (arrangement of scales) localities in the United States (83 of human population growth in Mexico, and because many of the early museum percent) are likely not viable and may is reported as a primary concern for specimens were in such poor and faded exist at low population densities that populations that occur in the Sierra condition that it was difficult to study could be threatened with extirpation or Madre Occidental (Lemos-Espinal 2013, them (Conant 2003, p. 6). There are may already be extirpated. In most pers. comm.). In other regions of approximately 30 species described in localities where the species may occur Mexico, such as the states of Sonora and the gartersnake genus Thamnophis at low population densities, existing Chihuahua, Lemos-Espinal (2013, pers. (Rossman et al. 1996, pp. xvii–xviii). survey data are insufficient to support a comm.) observed the northern Mexican Two large overlapping clades (related conclusion of extirpation. Only five gartersnake to be quite common. taxonomic groups) of gartersnakes have populations of northern Mexican Another gartersnake researcher from been identified called the ‘‘Mexican’’ gartersnakes in the United States are Mexico has observed the decline or and ‘‘widespread’’ clades, supported by considered likely viable where the disappearance of some populations in allozyme and mitochondrial DNA species remains reliably detected. In our central Mexico (Manjerrez 2008). genetic analyses (de Queiroz et al. 2002, November 25, 2008, 12-month finding, p. 321). The narrow-headed gartersnake we evaluated the total number of stream Narrow-Headed Gartersnake (Thamnophis rufipunctatus) is a miles in the United States that Species Description member of the ‘‘Mexican’’ clade and is historically supported the northern most closely related taxonomically to Mexican gartersnake that are now The narrow-headed gartersnake is a the southern Durango spotted permanently dewatered (except in the small to medium-sized gartersnake with gartersnake (Thamnophis nigronuchalis) case of temporary flows in response to a maximum total length of 44 in (112 (de Queiroz and Lawson 1994, p. 217; heavy precipitation), and we concluded cm) (Painter and Hibbitts 1996, p. 147). de Queiroz et al. 2002; p. 321). that the subspecies has been extirpated Its eyes are set high on its unusually Due to the narrow-headed from or occurs at low densities in as elongated head, which narrows to the gartersnake’s morphology and feeding much as 90 percent of its historical snout, and it lacks striping on the habits, there has been considerable range in the United States (73 FR 71788, dorsum (top) and sides, which deliberation among taxonomists about pp. 71792–71793). As shown in Table 1, distinguishes its appearance from other the correct association of this species harmful nonnative species are present gartersnake species with which it could within seven various genera over time in all but one northern Mexican co-occur (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, p. (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, pp. 5–6); gartersnake locality in the United States. 7). The base color is usually tan or grey- chiefly, between the genera The northern Mexican gartersnake is brown (but may darken) with Thamnophis (the ‘‘gartersnakes’’) and listed as threatened throughout its range conspicuous brown, black, or reddish Nerodia (the ‘‘watersnakes’’) (Pierce in Mexico by the Mexican Government. spots that become indistinct towards the 2007, p. 5). Chaisson and Lowe (1989, However, our understanding of the tail (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, p. 7; pp. 110–118) argued that the pattern of northern Mexican gartersnake’s specific Boundy 1994, p. 126). The scales are ultrastructural (as revealed by an population status throughout its range keeled. Degenhardt et al. (1996, p. 327), electron microscope) pores in the scales in Mexico is less precise than that Rossman et al. (1996, pp. 242–244), and of narrow-headed gartersnakes provided known for its United States distribution Ernst and Ernst (2003, p. 416) further evidence that the species is more because survey efforts are less and describe the species. appropriately placed within the genus available records do not exist or are Taxonomy Nerodia. However, De Queiroz and difficult to obtain for many regions. Lawson (1994, p. 217) rejected this Some specific geographic distribution We recognize the narrow-headed premise using mitochondrial DNA records for the Mexican states of Sonora, gartersnake, Thamnophis rufipunctatus, (mtDNA) genetic analyses to refute the Chihuahua, and San Luis Potosı´ were as a monotypic species (no currently inclusion of the narrow-headed presented in Lemos-Espinal (2013, pers. recognized subspecies exist). The gartersnake in the genus Nerodia and comm.). Lemos-Espinal (2013 pers. narrow-headed gartersnake is a member maintain the species within the genus comm), a Mexican herpetologist whose of the family Colubridae and subfamily Thamnophis. work is focused on the states of Sonora, Natricinae (harmless live-bearing The narrow-headed gartersnake was Chihuahua, and Coahuila, commented snakes) (Lawson et al. 2005, p. 596). The first described as Chilopoma that the number and magnitude of taxonomy of the genus Thamnophis has rufipunctatum by E. D. Cope (in Yarrow, threats are not equal across the a complex history partly because many 1875). Recently, Thamnophis

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38684 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

rufipunctatus nigronuchalis and T. r. occur at elevations from approximately shown to use upland habitat within 328 unilabialis were recognized as 2,300 to 8,000 ft (701 to 2,430 m), feet (100 m) during early fall and spring subspecies under T. rufipunctatus and inhabiting Petran Montane Conifer months, strongly associate with comprised what was considered the T. Forest, Great Basin Conifer Woodland, boulders in the floodplain during rufipunctatus complex (Rossman et al. Interior Chaparral, and the Arizona summer months, and use upland habitat 1996, p. 245). However, Rossman et al. Upland subdivision of Sonoran up to 656 feet (200 m) out of the (1996, pp. 244–246) elevated T. r. Desertscrub communities (Rosen and floodplain as hibernation sites (Nowak nigronuchalis to full species designation Schwalbe 1988, p. 33; Brennan and 2006, pp. 20, 26). and argued that recognition of T. r. Holycross 2006, p. 122). Bank-line vegetation is an important unilabialis be discontinued due to the An extensive evaluation of habitat use component to suitable habitat for this diagnostic differences being too difficult of narrow-headed gartersnakes along species (Nowak and Santana-Bendix to discern. Wood et al. (2011, p. 14) Oak Creek in Arizona is provided in 2002, pp. 26–37). Narrow-headed used genetic analysis of the T. Nowak and Santana-Bendix (2002, pp. gartersnakes will usually bask in rufipunctatus complex to propose the 26–37). In the upper reaches of Oak situations where a quick escape can be elevation of these three formerly Creek, occupied habitat is found in a made, whether that is into the water or recognized subspecies as three distinct steep-walled, confined canyon with under substrate such as rocks (Fleharty species, as a result of a combination of shallow, braided stream segments, 1967, p. 16). Common plant species interglacial warming, ecological and minimal silt, and good canopy coverage, associations include Arizona alder life-history constraints, and genetic vegetated islands and significant (Alnus oblongifolia) (highest correlation drift, which promoted differentiation of amounts of aquatic vegetation (Nowak with occurrence of the narrow-headed these three species throughout the and Santana-Bendix 2002, pp. 29–30). gartersnake), velvet ash (Fraxinus warming and cooling periods of the In the middle reaches of Oak Creek, pennsylvanica), willows (Salix ssp.), Pleistocene epoch (Wood et al. 2011, p. occupied habitat is found in a wider canyon grape (Vitis arizonica), 15). We use these most recent and canyon with less stream braiding, blackberry (Rubus ssp.), Arizona complete data in acknowledging these deeper pools, more silt, and high sycamore (Platanus wrightii), Arizona three entities as unique species: T. canopy coverage and stream-side black walnut (Juglans major), Freemont rufipunctatus (along the Mogollon Rim vegetation, but less aquatic vegetation cottonwood (Populus fremontii), of Arizona and New Mexico, the (Nowak and Santana-Bendix 2002, pp. Gambel oak (Quercus gambelii), and narrow-headed gartersnake, which is the 30–31). In the lower reaches of Oak ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) subject of this rule), T. unilabialis Creek, historically occupied habitat (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, pp. 34–35). (Chihuahua, eastern Sonora, and occurred outside of the canyon proper, Rosen and Schwalbe (1988, p. 35) noted northern Durango, Mexico), and T. with predominant pool-run sequences, that the composition of bank-side plant nigronuchalis (southern Durango, rare channel braiding, much silt, species and canopy structure may be Mexico). significantly less canopy coverage or less important to the species’ needs than Several common names have been streamside vegetation and few areas was the size class of the plant species used for this species including the red- with aquatic vegetation (Nowak and present; narrow-headed gartersnakes use spotted gartersnake, the brown-spotted Santana-Bendix 2002, p. 31). shrub- and sapling-sized plants for gartersnake, and the currently used, Nowak and Santana-Bendix (2002, pp. thermoregulating (basking) at the narrow-headed gartersnake (Rosen and 29–31) found the most narrow-headed waters’ edge (Degenhardt et al. 1996, p. Schwalbe 1988, p. 5). Further gartersnakes in the upper reaches of Oak 327), as well as islands within the discussion of the taxonomic history of Creek, followed by the middle reaches; stream channel that are created by sedge the narrow-headed gartersnake is no narrow-headed gartersnakes were (Carex spp.) tussocks (Nowak and available in Crother (2012, p. 71), found in the lower reaches. Nowak and Santana-Bendix 2002, p. 34). Degenhardt et al. (1996, p. 326), Santana-Bendix (2002, p. 33) found that, Narrow-headed gartersnakes may Rossman et al. (1996, p. 244), De in general, narrow-headed gartersnakes opportunistically forage within dammed Queiroz and Lawson (1994, pp. 213– in Oak Creek were more likely to be reservoirs formed by streams that are 229), Rosen and Schwalbe (1988, pp. 5– found within reaches without crayfish occupied habitat, such as at Wall Lake, 7), and De Queiroz et al. (2002, p. 321). and without silt. Population densities of New Mexico, (located at the confluence warm-water predatory fish increase on a of Taylor Creek, Hoyt Creek, and the Habitat and Natural History gradient from the upper to the lower East Fork Gila River) (Fleharty 1967, p. The narrow-headed gartersnake, reaches of Oak Creek, while the inverse 207) and most recently at Snow Lake in distributed across the Mogollon Rim of is true for native fish populations, and 2012 (located near the confluence of Arizona and New Mexico, is widely their presence confounds the analysis of Snow Creek and the Middle Fork Gila considered to be one of the most aquatic physical habitat preference of narrow- River) (Hellekson 2012b, pers. comm.) of the gartersnakes (Drummond and headed gartersnakes. Rosen and in New Mexico, but records from Marcias Garcia 1983, pp. 24, 27; Schwalbe (1988, p. 35) found that the impoundments are rare. The species Rossman et al. 1996, p. 246). This relative abundance of narrow-headed evolved in the absence of such habitat, species is strongly associated with clear, gartersnakes may be highest at the and impoundments are generally rocky streams, using predominantly conjunction of cascading riffles with managed as sport fisheries (Wall Lake pool and riffle habitat that includes pools, where waters were deeper than and Snow Lake are) and often maintain cobbles and boulders (Rosen and 20 in (0.5 m) in the riffle and deeper populations of harmful nonnative Schwalbe 1988, pp. 33–34; Degenhardt than 40 in (1 m) in the immediately species that are incompatible with et al. 1996, p. 327; Rossman et al. 1996, adjoining area of the pool. However, narrow-headed gartersnakes. p. 246; Nowak and Santana-Bendix more than twice the number of snakes The narrow-headed gartersnake is 2002, pp. 26–37; Ernst and Ernst 2003, was found in pools rather than riffles, surface-active generally between March p. 417). Rossman et al. (1996, p. 246) but this observation may not translate and November (Nowak 2006, p. 16). also note the species has been observed for smaller streams. Despite their highly Little information on suitable using lake shoreline habitat in New aquatic behavior, narrow-headed temperatures for surface activity of the Mexico. Narrow-headed gartersnakes gartersnakes in Oak Creek have been narrow-headed gartersnake exists;

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38685

however, it is presumed to be rather their fingerling size classes are also used Schwalbe 1988, p. 39), and possibly cold-tolerant based on its natural history as prey by narrow-headed gartersnakes, other generalist mammalian predators. and foraging behavior that often including brown trout (Rosen and Historically, large, highly predatory involves clear, cold streams at higher Schwalbe 1988, p. 39; Nowak and native fish species, such as Colorado elevations. Along Oak Creek in Arizona, Santana-Bendix 2002, p. 24; Nowak pikeminnow, may have preyed upon Nowak (2006, Appendix 1) found the 2006, pp. 22–23), green sunfish narrow-headed gartersnakes where the species to be active in air temperatures (Fleharty 1967, p. 223), and smallmouth species co-occurred. Native chubs (Gila ranging from 52 to 89 °F (11 to 32 °C) bass (Micropterus dolomieu) (M. Lopez, spp.) may also prey on neonatal and water temperatures ranging from 54 2010, pers. comm.). Reports suggest that gartersnakes. to 72 °F (12 to 22 °C). Jennings and brown trout are consumed more Sexual maturity in narrow-headed Christman (2011, pp. 12–14) found body frequently than smallmouth bass. Trout gartersnakes occurs at 2.5 years of age in temperatures of narrow-headed species are commonly stocked in, or males and at 2 years of age in females gartersnakes along the Tularosa River near, occupied narrow-headed (Deganhardt et al. 1996, p. 328). averaged approximately 68 °F (20 °C) gartersnake habitat. Fleharty (1967, p. Narrow-headed gartersnakes are during the mid-morning hours and 81 °F 223) reported narrow-headed viviparous. Narrow-headed gartersnakes (27 °C) in the late afternoon during the gartersnakes eating green sunfish. But breed annually, and females give birth period from late July and August. nonnative fish with spiny dorsal fins are to 4 to 17 offspring from late July into Variables that affect their body not generally considered suitable prey early August, perhaps earlier at lower temperature include the temperature of items due to the risk of injury to the elevations (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, the microhabitat used and water gartersnake during ingestion and pp. 35–37). Narrow-headed gartersnakes temperature (most predictive), but slope because of where they tend to occur in may live as long as 10 years in the wild aspect and the surface area of cover the water column (see discussion in the (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, p. 38). used also influenced body temperatures subsection ‘‘Fish’’ under the subheading Historical Distribution (Jennings and Christman 2011, p. 13). ‘‘Decline of the Gartersnake Prey Base’’ Narrow-headed gartersnakes have a and Nowak and Santana-Bendix (2002, The historical distribution of the lower preferred temperature for activity p. 24)). narrow-headed gartersnake ranged as compared to other species of Although the narrow-headed across the Mogollon Rim and along gartersnakes (Fleharty 1967, p. 228), gartersnake has been reported to also associated perennial stream drainages which may facilitate their highly aquatic prey upon amphibians such as frogs, from central and eastern Arizona, nature in cold streams. tadpoles, and salamanders (Stebbins southeast to southwestern New Mexico Narrow-headed gartersnakes 1985, p. 199; Deganhardt et al. 1996, p. at elevations ranging from 2,300 to 8,000 specialize on fish as their primary prey 328; Ernst and Ernst 2003, p. 418), we ft (700 to 2,430 m) (Rosen and Schwalbe item (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, p. 38; believe these are not important items in 1988, p. 34; Rossman et al. 1996, p. 242; Degenhardt et al. 1996, p. 328; Rossman their diet. Despite several studies Holycross et al. 2006, p. 3). The species et al. 1996, p. 247; Nowak and Santana- focusing on the ecology of narrow- was historically distributed in Bendix 2002, pp. 24–25; Nowak 2006, p. headed gartersnakes in recent times, headwater streams of the Gila River 22). They are believed to be mainly there are no other records of narrow- subbasin that drain the Mogollon Rim visual hunters (Hibbitts and Fitzgerald headed gartersnakes, under current and White Mountains in Arizona, and 2005, p. 364) heavily dependent on taxonomic recognition, feeding on prey the Gila Wilderness in New Mexico. visual cues when foraging based on items other than fish. Fitzgerald (1986, Major subbasins in its historical comparative analyses among other p. 6) referenced the Stebbins (1985) distribution included the Salt and Verde species of gartersnakes (de Queiroz account as the only substantiated River subbasins in Arizona, and the San 2003, p. 381). Unlike many other account of the species eating something Francisco and Gila River subbasins in species of gartersnakes that are active other than fish as prey, apparently as New Mexico (Holycross et al. 2006, p. predators (actively crawl about in search the result of finding a small salamander 3). Holycross et al. (2006, p. 3) suspect of prey), narrow-headed gartersnakes are larvae in the stomach of an individual the species was likely not historically considered to be ambush predators (sit- in Durango, Mexico. Formerly present in the lowest reaches of the Salt, and-wait method) (Brennan and recognized as a subspecies of Verde, and Gila Rivers, even where Holycross 2006, p. 122; Pierce et al. Thamnophis rufipunctatus, that perennial flow persists. Numerous 2007, p. 8). The specific gravity (ratio of individual is now recognized as T. records for the narrow-headed the mass of a solid object to the mass of unilabialis (Wood et al. 2011, p. 3). We gartersnake (through 1996) in Arizona the same volume of water) of the found one account of narrow-headed are maintained in the AGFD’s Heritage narrow-headed gartersnake was found to gartersnakes consuming red-spotted Database (1996b). The narrow-headed be nearly 1, which means that the snake toads in captivity (Woodin 1950, p. 40). gartersnake as currently recognized does can maintain its desired position in the Amphibian larvae (i.e. Hyla sp., not occur in Mexico. water column with ease, an adaptation Anaxyrus sp., Ambystoma sp.) are Current Distribution and Population to facilitate foraging on the bottom of generally available to narrow-headed Status streams (Fleharty 1967, pp. 218–219). gartersnakes as prey, yet observations of Native fish species most often narrow-headed gartersnakes using them Population status information associated as prey items for the narrow- are rare. Therefore, we do not consider suggests that the narrow-headed headed gartersnake include Sonora amphibians as ecologically important gartersnake has experienced significant sucker (Catostomus insignis), desert prey for this species. declines in population density and sucker (C. clarki), speckled dace Native predators of the narrow- distribution along streams and rivers (Rhinichthys osculus), roundtail chub headed gartersnake include birds of where it was formerly well-documented (Gila robusta), Gila chub (Gila prey, such as black-hawks (Etzel et al. and reliably detected. Many areas where intermedia), and headwater chub (Gila 2014, p. 56), other snakes such as regal the species may occur likely rely on nigra) (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, p. 39; ring-necked snakes (Brennan et al. 2009, emigration of individuals from occupied Degenhardt et al. 1996, p. 328). p. 123), wading birds, mergansers, habitat into those areas to maintain the Nonnative predatory fish species in belted kingfishers, raccoons (Rosen and species, provided there are no potential

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38686 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

barriers to movement, such as extensive headed gartersnake species across their two populations, which included the stretches of dewatered habitat, or high range (see Rosen and Schwalbe (1988, removal of 25 individuals from densities of harmful nonnative species. entire) and Fitzgerald (1986, entire)), Whitewater Creek and 14 individuals Holycross et al. (2006, entire) represents and the last, previous records were often from the Middle Fork Gila River before the most recent, comprehensive survey dated several decades prior and may not the onset of summer rains in 2012. effort for narrow-headed gartersnakes in accurately represent the likelihood for These 39 individuals were transported Arizona. Narrow-headed gartersnakes current occupation. Several areas where to the Albuquerque BioPark where 22 were detected in 5 of 16 historical narrow-headed gartersnakes were remain in captivity. The other 17 of the localities in Arizona and New Mexico known to occur have received no, or salvaged individuals were translocated surveyed by Holycross et al. (2006) in very little, survey effort in the past to Saliz Creek, where the resident native 2004 and 2005. Population densities several decades. Variability in survey prey base appears adequate, and beyond have noticeably declined in many design and effort makes it difficult to the effects from the Whitewater-Baldy populations, as compared to previous compare population sizes or trends Complex Fire. The status of those survey efforts (Holycross et al. 2006, p. among sites and between sampling populations in Whitewater Creek and 66). Holycross et al. (2006, pp. 66–67) periods. Thus, for each of the sites the Middle Fork Gila River has likely compared narrow-headed gartersnake discussed in Appendix A (available at deteriorated as a result of subsequent detections based on results from their http://www.regulations.gov, Docket No. declines in resident fish communities effort and that of previous efforts in the FWS–R2–ES–2013–0071), we have due to heavy ash and sediment flows, same locations and found that attempted to translate and quantify resulting fish kills, and the removal of significantly more effort is required to search and capture efforts into snakes, but subsequent survey data have detect this species in areas where it was comparable units (i.e., person-search not been collected. If the Whitewater formerly robust, such as along Eagle hours and trap-hours) and have Creek and Middle Fork Gila River Creek (AZ), the East Verde River (AZ), cautiously interpreted those results. populations did decline as a result of the San Francisco River (NM), the Black Where survey data are sparse, the these factors, only three remaining River (AZ), and the Blue River (AZ). presence of suitable prey species in an populations of this species remain Where narrow-headed gartersnakes area may provide evidence that narrow- viable today across their entire are locally abundant, they can usually headed gartersnakes may still persist at distribution. While historical records be detected reliably and with low densities. Therefore, a record of a confirm the narrow-headed gartersnake significantly less effort than populations native prey species was considered in was found on tribal lands, its current characterized as having low densities. our determination of occupancy of this status on tribal land is poorly known Narrow-headed gartersnakes are well- species. due to limited survey access. camouflaged, secretive, and very As of 2011, the only remaining In Table 2 below, we summarize the difficult to detect in structurally narrow-headed gartersnake populations population status of the narrow-headed complex, dense habitat where they where the species could reliably be gartersnake at all known localities could occur at very low population found were located at: (1) Whitewater throughout its distribution, as supported densities, which characterizes most Creek (NM), (2) Tularosa River (NM), (3) by museum records or reliable occupied sites. We considered factors Diamond Creek (NM), (4) Middle Fork observations. For a detailed discussion such as the date of the last known Gila River (NM), and (5) Oak Creek that explains the rationale for site-by- records for narrow-headed gartersnakes Canyon (AZ). However, populations site conclusions on occupancy and in an area, as well as records of one or found in Whitewater Creek and the status, please see Appendix A (available more native prey species, in making a Middle Fork Gila River were likely at http://www.regulations.gov, Docket conclusion on species occupancy. We significantly affected by the large No. FWS–R2–ES–2013–0071). General used all records that were dated 1980 or Whitewater–Baldy Complex Fire, which rationale is provided in the introductory later because the 1980s marked the first occurred in June 2012. In addition, paragraph to this section, ‘‘Current systematic survey efforts for narrow- salvage efforts were initiated for these Distribution and Population Status.’’

TABLE 2—CURRENT POPULATION STATUS OF THE NARROW-HEADED GARTERSNAKE [References for this information are provided in appendix A]

Suitable physical Native prey species Harmful nonnative Location Last record habitat present present species present Population status

West Fork Gila River (NM) ...... 2011 Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. Middle Fork Gila River (NM) ...... 2012 Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. East Fork Gila River (NM) ...... 2006 Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. Gila River (AZ, NM) ...... 2009 Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. Snow Creek/Snow Lake (NM) ...... 2012 Yes ...... No ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. Gilita Creek (NM) ...... 2009 Yes ...... Yes ...... No ...... Likely not viable. Iron Creek (NM) ...... 2009 Yes ...... Yes ...... No ...... Likely not viable. Little Creek (NM) ...... 2010 Yes ...... Possible ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. Turkey Creek (NM) ...... 1985 Yes ...... Yes ...... Possible ...... Likely not viable. Beaver Creek (NM) ...... 1949 Yes ...... Possible ...... Yes ...... Likely extirpated. Black Canyon (NM) ...... 2010 Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. Taylor Creek (NM) ...... 1960 Yes ...... No ...... Yes ...... Likely extirpated. Diamond Creek (NM) ...... 2011 Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely viable. Tularosa River (NM) ...... 2012 Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely viable. Whitewater Creek (NM) ...... 2012 Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. San Francisco River (NM) ...... 2011 Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. South Fork Negrito Creek (NM) .... 2011 Yes ...... Possible ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. Blue River (AZ) ...... 2007 Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38687

TABLE 2—CURRENT POPULATION STATUS OF THE NARROW-HEADED GARTERSNAKE—Continued [References for this information are provided in appendix A]

Suitable physical Native prey species Harmful nonnative Location Last record habitat present present species present Population status

Dry Blue Creek (AZ, NM) ...... 2010 Yes ...... Possible ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. Campbell Blue Creek (AZ, NM) .... 2010 Yes ...... Possible ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. Saliz Creek (NM) ...... 2013 Yes ...... Possible ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. Eagle Creek (AZ) ...... 2013 Yes ...... Possible ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. Black River (AZ) ...... 2013 Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. East Fork Black River (AZ) ...... 2004 Yes ...... Possible ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. Fish Creek (Tributary to East Fork 2004 Yes ...... Yes ...... Possible ...... Likely viable. Black River; AZ). White River (AZ) ...... 1986 Yes ...... Yes ...... Possible ...... Likely not viable. Diamond Creek (AZ) ...... 1986 Yes ...... Possible ...... Possible ...... Likely not viable. Tonto Creek (tributary to Big 1915 Yes ...... Possible ...... Possible ...... Likely extirpated. Bonita Creek, AZ). Canyon Creek (AZ) ...... 1991 Yes ...... Yes ...... No ...... Likely not viable. Upper Salt River (AZ) ...... 1985 Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. Cibeque Creek (AZ) ...... 1991 Yes ...... Yes ...... Possible ...... Likely not viable. Carrizo Creek (AZ) ...... 1997 Yes ...... Yes ...... Possible ...... Likely not viable. Big Bonito Creek (AZ) ...... 1957 Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely extirpated. Haigler Creek (AZ) ...... 2008 Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. Houston Creek (AZ) ...... 2005 Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. Tonto Creek (tributary to Salt 2005 Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. River, AZ). Deer Creek (AZ) ...... 1995 No ...... No ...... No ...... Likely extirpated. Upper Verde River (AZ) ...... 2012 Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. Oak Creek (AZ) ...... 2012 Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely viable. West Fork Oak Creek (AZ) ...... 2012 Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely viable. East Verde River (AZ) ...... 1992 Yes ...... Yes ...... Yes ...... Likely not viable. Notes: ‘‘Possible’’ means there were no conclusive data found. ‘‘Likely extirpated’’ means the last record for an area pre-dated 1980, and existing threats suggest the species is likely extirpated. ‘‘Likely not viable’’ means there is a post-1980 record for the species, it is not reliably found with minimal to moderate survey effort, and threats exist which suggest the population may be low density or could be extirpated, but there is insufficient evidence to support extirpation. ‘‘Likely viable’’ means that the species is reliably found with minimal to moderate survey effort, and the population is generally considered to be somewhat resilient.

Table 2 lists the 41 known localities of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife upon both species of gartersnake and for narrow-headed gartersnakes and Plants. Under section 4(a)(1) of the compete with them for prey. Harmful throughout their range. We have Act, we may list a species based on any nonnative species also compete with concluded that, in as many as 31 of 41 of the following five factors: (A) The gartersnake prey species as well as known localities (76 percent), the present or threatened destruction, modify habitat for both the gartersnakes narrow-headed gartersnake population modification, or curtailment of its and their prey, to the detriment of both is likely not currently viable and may habitat or range; (B) overutilization for gartersnakes. Landscape-level effects exist at low population densities that commercial, recreational, scientific, or from the continued expansion of could be threatened with extirpation or educational purposes; (C) disease or harmful nonnative species have may already be extirpated, but survey predation; (D) the inadequacy of changed the spatial orientation of these data are lacking in areas where access is existing regulatory mechanisms; and (E) gartersnakes’ distributions, creating restricted. In most localities where the other natural or manmade factors greater isolation between populations. species may occur at low population affecting its continued existence. Listing We expect the viability of extant densities, existing survey data are actions may be warranted based on any gartersnake populations to continue to insufficient to conclude extirpation. As of the above threat factors, singly or in degrade into the foreseeable future as a of 2014, narrow-headed gartersnake combination. result of ecological interactions with populations are considered currently In the following threats analysis, we harmful nonnative species. Riparian and likely viable in five localities (12 treat both gartersnake species in a aquatic communities in both the percent). The remaining five combined discussion because of southwestern United States and Mexico populations (12 percent) are considered partially overlapping ranges, similar currently likely extirpated. As displayed natural histories, similar responses to have been significantly impacted by a in Table 2, harmful nonnative species threats, and the fact that many threats shift in species’ composition, from one are a concern for all but four narrow- are shared in common throughout their of primarily native fauna, to one headed gartersnake populations. The ranges. dominated by an expanding assemblage status of these populations is expected of harmful nonnative animal species. Weakened Status of Native Aquatic to continue to decline. Harmful nonnative species have been Communities (Northern Mexican and introduced or have spread into new Summary of Biological Status and Narrow-Headed Gartersnakes) (Factors areas through a variety of mechanisms, Threats A, C, and E) including intentional and accidental Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533), The presence of harmful nonnative releases, sport stocking, aquaculture, and its implementing regulations at 50 species constitutes the most significant aquarium releases, bait-bucket releases, CFR part 424, set forth the procedures threat to the two gartersnake species. or natural dispersal (Welcomme 1984, for adding species to the Federal Lists Harmful nonnative species directly prey entire). The ecological ramifications of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38688 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

the adversarial relationships within in southeastern Arizona. In another reluctance of narrow-headed southwestern aquatic communities have example, Drummond and Macı´as Garcia gartersnakes to prey on nonnative, been discussed and described in a broad (1989, pp. 25, 30) found that Mexican predatory fish: (1) The laterally body of literature, extending from 1985 gartersnakes fed primarily on frogs, and compressed shape and presence of to the present (Meffe 1985, pp. 179–185; when frogs became unavailable, the sharp, spiny dorsal spines of many Propst et al. 1986, pp. 14–31, 82; 1988, species simply ceased major foraging nonnative, predatory fish present a p. 64; 2009, pp. 5–17; Rosen and activities. This led the authors to choking hazard to gartersnakes that can Schwalbe 1988, pp. 28, 32; 1997, p. 1; conclude that frog abundance is be fatal; and (2) nonnative, predatory Clarkson and Rorabaugh 1989, pp. 531, probably the most important correlate, fish (with the exception of catfish) tend 535; Douglas et al. 1994, pp. 9–19; and main determinant, of foraging to occupy the middle and upper zones Rosen et al. 1995, pp. 257–258; 2001, p. behavior in northern Mexican in the water column, while narrow- 2; Degenhardt et al. 1996, p. 319; gartersnakes. headed gartersnakes typically hunt Fernandez and Rosen 1996, pp. 8, 23– With respect to narrow-headed along the bottom (where native suckers 27, 71, 96; Richter et al. 1997, pp. 1089, gartersnakes, the relationship between and minnows often occur). As a result, 1092; Inman et al. 1998, p. 17; Rinne et harmful nonnative species, a declining nonnative, predatory fish may be less al. 1998, pp. 4–6; Nowak and Santana- prey base, and gartersnake populations ecologically available as prey. Bendix 2002, Table 3; Propst 2002, pp. is clearly depicted in one population Brown trout are highly predatory in 21–25; DFT 2003, pp. 1–3, 5–6, 19; along Oak Creek. Nowak and Santana- all size classes in a wide range of water 2004, pp. 1–2, 4–5, 10, Table 1; Bonar Bendix (2002, Table 3) found a strong temperatures, and they adversely affect et al. 2004, pp. 13, 16–21; Rinne 2004, correlation in the distribution of fish native fish communities wherever they pp. 1–2; Clarkson et al. 2005, p. 20; communities and narrow-headed are introduced (Taylor et al. 1984, pp. Fagan et al. 2005, pp. 34, 34–41; Knapp gartersnake communities in the vicinity 343–344). Predation on gartersnakes by 2005, pp. 273–275; Olden and Poff of Midgely Bridge. Downstream of that adult brown trout may be a particular 2005, pp. 82–87; Turner 2007, p. 41; point, nonnative, predatory fish species problem for narrow-headed gartersnakes Holycross et al. 2006, pp. 13–15; increase in abundance, and narrow- due to their overlapping distributions Brennan 2007, pp. 5, 7; Caldwell 2008a, headed gartersnakes notably decrease in and habitat preferences, both in terms of 2008b; d’Orgeix 2008; Luja and abundance. Upstream of that point, direct predation on neonatal Rodrı´guez-Estrella 2008, pp. 17–22; native fish and nonnative, soft-rayed gartersnakes and through competitive Propst et al. 2008, pp. 1242–1243; fish species increase in abundance as do pressures for gartersnakes by preying on Rorabaugh 2008a, p. 25; Brennan and narrow-headed gartersnakes (Nowak their food source. Specifically, the Rosen 2009, pp. 8–9; Minckley and and Santana-Bendix 2002, p. 23). younger age classes of brown trout Marsh 2009, pp. 50–51; Pilger et al. Fish (Northern Mexican and Narrow- present competition problems for the 2010, pp. 311–312; Stefferud et al. 2009, headed Gartersnakes)—Fish are an narrow-headed gartersnake by eating pp. 206–207; 2011, pp. 11–12; Young important prey item for the northern small fish. As brown trout mature into and Boyarski 2013, pp. 159–160). Mexican gartersnake and are the only the medium to larger size classes, they prey for the narrow-headed gartersnake. may prey upon neonatal narrow-headed Decline of the Gartersnake Prey Base Native fish communities throughout the gartersnakes. These issues are (Northern Mexican and Narrow-Headed range of these gartersnake have been on confounded by the fact that young Gartersnakes) (Factors A and E) the decline, both in terms of species brown trout are also eaten by narrow- The prey base of these gartersnakes composition and biomass, for many headed gartersnakes and may represent includes native amphibians and fish decades, and largely as a result of an important component of their prey populations. Declines in their prey base predation and competition from and base, depending on fish species have led to subsequent declines in the with nonnative, predatory fish species. composition and age classes represented distribution and density of gartersnake Stocked for sport, forage, or biological within the resident fish community. populations. In most areas across their control, nonnative fishes have been However, whatever benefits fingerling ranges, prey base declines are largely shown to become invasive where brown trout present for narrow-headed attributed to the introduction and released and do not require the natural gartersnakes are likely off-set by effects expansion of harmful nonnative species. flow regimes that native species do of brown trout predation on important Northern Mexican and narrow-headed (Kolar et al. 2003, p. 9), which has native fish species, and possible effects gartersnakes may be particularly contributed to their expansion in the to recruitment of narrow-headed vulnerable to the loss of native prey Gila River basin and elsewhere. gartersnakes through predation. species (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, pp. Northern Mexican and narrow-headed Harmful nonnative species invasions 20, 44–45). Rosen et al. (2001, pp. 10, gartersnakes can successfully use can indirectly affect the health, 13, 19) theorized that the northern nonnative, soft-rayed fish species as maintenance, and reproduction of Mexican gartersnake: (1) Is unlikely to prey, such as mosquitofish, red shiner, northern Mexican and narrow-headed increase foraging efforts at the risk of and introduced trout species, such as gartersnakes by altering their foraging increased predation; and (2) needs rainbow trout (Oncorynchus mykiss), strategy and compromising foraging adequate food on a regular basis to brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis), or success. Rosen et al. (2001, p. 19), in maintain its weight and health. If forced brown trout (Nowak and Santana- addressing the northern Mexican to forage more often for smaller prey Bendix 2002, pp. 24–25; Holycross et al. gartersnake, proposed that an increase items, a reduction in growth and 2006, p. 23). However, predatory fish in energy expended in foraging, coupled reproductive rates can result (Rosen et are not generally considered prey by the reduced number of small to al. 2001, pp. 10, 13). Rosen et al. (2001, species for northern Mexican or narrow- medium-sized prey fish available, p. 22) hypothesized that the presence headed gartersnakes and, in addition, results in deficiencies in nutrition, and expansion of nonnative predators are known to prey on neonatal and affecting growth and reproduction. This (mainly bullfrogs, crayfish, and green juvenile gartersnakes (Young and occurs because energy is allocated to sunfish (Lepomis cyanellus)) are the Boyarski 2013, pp. 158–159). Nowak maintenance and the increased energy primary causes of decline in northern and Santana-Bendix (2002, p. 24) costs of intense foraging activity, rather Mexican gartersnakes and in their prey propose two hypotheses regarding the than to growth and reproduction. In

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38689

contrast, a northern Mexican Nonnative, predatory fish compete with Mexican and narrow-headed gartersnake diet that includes both fish northern Mexican and narrow-headed gartersnakes. Native fish species that and amphibians, such as leopard frogs, gartersnakes for prey. In their extensive were likely prey species for these reduces the necessity to forage at a surveys, Rosen and Schwalbe (1988, p. gartersnakes and are now listed under higher frequency, allowing metabolic 44) only found narrow-headed the Act, include the bonytail chub (Gila energy gained from larger prey items to gartersnakes in abundance where native elegans, 45 FR 27710, April 23, 1980), be allocated instead to growth and fish species predominated but did not Yaqui chub (Gila purpurea, 49 FR reproductive development. Myer and find them abundant in the presence of 34490, August 31, 1984), Yaqui Kowell (1973, p. 225) experimented robust nonnative, predatory fish topminnow (Poeciliopsis occidentalis with food deprivation in common populations. Minckley and Marsh (2009, sonoriensis, 32 FR 4001, March 11, gartersnakes, and found significant pp. 50–51) found nonnative fishes to be 1967), beautiful shiner (Cyprinella reductions in lengths and weights of the single-most significant factor in the formosa, 49 FR 34490, August 31, 1984), juvenile snakes that were deprived of decline of native fish species and also Gila chub (Gila intermedia, 70 FR regular feedings versus the control their primary obstacle to recovery. Of 66663, November 2, 2005), Colorado group that were fed regularly at natural the 48 conterminous States in the pikeminnow (Ptychocheilus lucius, 32 frequencies. Reduced foraging success United States, Arizona has the highest FR 4001, March 11, 1967), spikedace of both northern Mexican and narrow- proportion of nonnative fish species (66 (Meda fulgida, 77 FR 10810, February headed gartersnakes means that percent) represented by approximately 23, 2012), loach minnow (Tiaroga individuals are likely to become 68 species (Turner and List 2007, p. 13). cobitis, 77 FR 10810, February 23, vulnerable to effects from starvation, Collier et al. (1996, p. 16) note that 2012), razorback sucker (Xyrauchen which may increase fatality rates of interactions between native and texanus, 56 FR 54957, October 23, juveniles and, consequently, affect nonnative fish have significantly 1991), desert pupfish (Cyprinodon recruitment. contributed to the decline of many macularius, 51 FR 10842, March 31, Northern Mexican gartersnakes have a native fish species from direct predation 1986), woundfin (Plagopterus more varied diet than narrow-headed and, indirectly, from competition argentissiums, 35 FR 16047, October 13, gartersnakes. We are not aware of any (which has adversely affected the prey 1970), and Gila topminnow studies that have addressed the direct base for northern Mexican and narrow- (Poeciliopsis occidentalis, 32 FR 4001, relationship between prey base diversity headed gartersnakes). Holycross et al. March 11, 1967). In total within and northern Mexican gartersnake (2006, pp. 52–61) documented Arizona, 19 of 31 (61 percent) native recruitment and survivorship. However, depressed or extirpated native fish prey fish species are listed under the Act. Krause and Burghardt (2001, pp. 100– bases for northern Mexican and narrow- Arizona ranks the highest of all 50 123) discuss the benefits and costs that headed gartersnakes along the Mogollon States in the percentage of native fish may be associated with diet variability Rim in Arizona and New Mexico. Rosen species with declining trends (85.7 in the common gartersnake et al. (2001, Appendix I) documented percent), and New Mexico ranks sixth (Thamnophis sirtalis), an ecologically the decline of several native fish species (48.1 percent) (Stein 2002, p. 21; Warren similar species to the northern Mexican in several locations visited in and Burr 1994, p. 14). gartersnake. Foraging for mixed-prey southeastern Arizona, further affecting species may impede predator learning, the prey base of northern Mexican The fastest expanding nonnative as compared to specialization on a gartersnakes in that area. species are red shiner (Cyprinella certain prey species, but it may also Harmful nonnative fish species tend lutrensis), fathead minnow (Pimephales provide long-term benefits such as the to be nest-builders and actively guard promelas), green sunfish, largemouth ability to capture prey throughout their their young, which may provide them bass (Micropterus salmoides), western lifespan (Krause and Burghardt 2001, p. another ecological advantage over native mosquitofish, and channel catfish 101). species that are broadcast spawners and (Ictalurus punctatus). A nonnative A wide variety of native fish species provide no parental care to their species can become invasive if (many of which are now listed as offspring (Marsh and Pacey 2005, p. 60). ecological advantages exist for broad endangered, threatened, or candidates In fact, nesting smallmouth bass will physical tolerances, feeding habits and for listing under the Act) were attack gartersnakes (Winemiller and diet, or reproductive behavior (Taylor et historically primary prey species for Taylor 1982, p. 270). It is, therefore, al. 1984, Table 16–1). These species are northern Mexican and narrow-headed likely that recruitment and survivorship considered to be the most invasive in gartersnakes (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, is greater in nonnative species than terms of their negative impacts on pp. 18, 39). Marsh and Pacey (2005, p. native species where they overlap, native fish communities (Olden and Poff 60) predict that, despite the significant providing nonnative species with an 2005, p. 75). Many nonnative fishes, in physical alteration of aquatic habitat in ecological advantage. Table 2–1 in Kolar addition to those listed immediately the southwestern United States, native et al. (2003, p. 10) provides a map above, including yellow and black fish species could flourish in these depicting the high degree of overlap in bullheads (Ameiurus sp.), flathead altered environments but for the the distribution of native and nonnative catfish (Pylodictis olivaris), and presence of harmful nonnative fish fishes within the Gila River basin of smallmouth bass, have been introduced species. Northern Mexican and, in Arizona and New Mexico as well as into formerly and currently occupied particular, narrow-headed gartersnakes watersheds thought to be dominated by northern Mexican or narrow-headed depend largely on native fish as a nonnative fish species. gartersnake habitat and are predators on principal part of their prey base, The widespread decline of native fish these species (Young and Boyarski 2013, although nonnative, soft-rayed species from the arid southwestern pp. 158–159) and their prey (Bestgen predatory fish have also been United States and Mexico has resulted and Propst 1989, pp. 409–410; Marsh documented as prey where they overlap largely from interactions with nonnative and Minckley 1990, p. 265; Sublette et in distribution with these gartersnakes species and has been noted in the listing al. 1990, pp. 112, 243, 246, 304, 313, (Nowak and Santana-Bendix 2002, pp. rules of 11 fishes under the Act, and 318; Abarca and Weedman 1993, pp. 6– 24–25; Holycross et al. 2006, p. 23; their historical ranges overlap with the 12; Stefferud and Stefferud 1994, p. 364; Emmons and Nowak 2013, p. 6). historical distribution of northern Weedman and Young 1997, pp. 1,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38690 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Appendices B, C; Rinne et al. 1998, pp. Similar changes in the dominance of case for the Cliff-Gila Valley area of the 3–6; Voeltz 2002, p. 88; Bonar et al. nonnative fishes have occurred on the Gila River where nonnative fishes 2004, pp. 1–108; Fagan et al. 2005, pp. Middle Fork Gila River, with a 65 increased from 1.1 percent to 8.5 34, 38–39, 41; Propst et al. 2008, pp. percent decline of native fishes between percent, while native fishes declined 1242–1243). Nonnative, predatory fish 1988 and 2001 (Propst 2002, pp. 21–25). steadily over a 40-year period (Propst et species, such as flathead catfish, may be Abarca and Weedman (1993, pp. 6–12) al. 1986, pp. 27–32). At the Redrock and especially dangerous to narrow-headed found that the number of nonnative fish Virden Valleys on the Gila River, the gartersnake populations through species was twice the number of native relative abundance in nonnative fishes competition and direct predation fish species in Tonto Creek in the early in the same time period increased from because they are primarily piscivorous 1990s, with a stronger nonnative species 2.4 percent to 17.9 percent (Propst et al. (fish-eating) (Pilger et al. 2010, pp. 311– influence in the lower reaches, where 1986, pp. 32–34). Four years later, the 312), have large mouths, and have a the northern Mexican gartersnake is relative abundance of nonnative fishes tendency to occur along the stream considered to still occur (Burger 2010, increased to 54.7 percent at these sites bottom, where narrow-headed p. 1, Madera-Yagla 2010, p. 6, 2011, p. (Propst et al. 1986, pp. 32–36). The gartersnakes principally forage. 6). percentage of nonnative fishes increased Rosen et al. (2001, Appendix I) and Beginning in 2014, the AGFD plans to by almost 12 percent on the Tularosa Holycross et al. (2006, pp. 15–51) stock 4.6 million Florida-strain River between 1988 and 2003, while on conducted large-scale surveys for largemouth bass, 3.3 million bluegill, the East Fork Gila River, nonnative northern Mexican gartersnakes in and 4.5 million black crappie annually fishes increased to 80.5 percent relative southeastern and central Arizona and into Roosevelt Lake in order to control abundance in 2003 (Propst 2005, pp. 6– narrow-headed gartersnakes in central the gizzard shad (Dorosoma 7, 23–24). and east-central Arizona, and cepedianum) population, which is In addition to harmful nonnative documented the presence of nonnative currently the most prevalent fish species species, various parasites may affect fish at many locations. Holycross et al. in the lake and is thought to be native fish species that are prey for (2006, pp. 14–15) found nonnative fish depressing sport fish populations in the northern Mexican and narrow-headed species in 64 percent of the sample sites reservoir (AGFD 2014, p. 3). Roosevelt gartersnakes. Parasites affecting various in the Agua Fria subbasin, 85 percent of Lake is not, and will never be, suitable species of native fishes within the range the sample sites in the Verde River habitat for the northern Mexican of these gartersnakes include Asian subbasin, 75 percent of the sample sites gartersnake because of its management tapeworm (U.S. Fish and Wildlife in the Salt River subbasin, and 56 as a sport fishery. However, if the goal Service (USFWS) National Wild Fish percent of the sample sites in the Gila of this effort is achieved, we expect a Health Survey 2010), Ichthyophthirius River subbasin. In total, nonnative fish higher risk of predation of gartersnakes multifiliis (Ich) (Mpoame 1982, p. 46; were observed at 41 of the 57 sites in lower Tonto Creek when a suitable Robinson et al. 1998, p. 603), anchor surveyed (72 percent) across the hydrologic connection is made between worm (Lernaea cyprinacea) (Robinson et Mogollon Rim (Holycross et al. 2006, p. Tonto Creek and the lake body al. 1998, pp. 599, 603–605; Hoffnagle 14). Entirely native fish communities (providing the opportunity for predatory and Cole 1999, p. 24), yellow grub were presumed in only 8 of 57 sites nonnative fish to move into lower Tonto (Clinostomum marginatum) (Amin surveyed (14 percent) (Holycross et al. Creek). We also expect high risk of 1969, p. 436; Mpoame and Rinne 1983, 2006, p. 14). It is well documented that predation of individual snakes that may pp. 400–401; Bryan and Robinson 2000, nonnative fish have now infiltrated the disperse downstream into the lake itself. p. 19; Maine Department of Inland majority of aquatic communities in the Fish surveys in the Salt River above Fisheries and Wildlife 2002a, p. 1), and southwestern United States as depicted Lake Roosevelt already indicate a black grub (Neascus spp.), also called in Tables 1 and 2, above, as well as in decline of roundtail chub and other black spot (Robinson et al. 1998, p. 603; Appendix A (available at http:// native fishes, with an increase in Bryan and Robinson 2000, p. 21; Lane www.regulations.gov, Docket No. FWS– flathead and channel catfish numbers and Morris 2000, pp. 2–3; Maine R2–ES–2013–0071). (Voeltz 2002, p. 49). Department of Inland Fisheries and Several authors have identified both In New Mexico, nonnative fish have Wildlife 2002b, p. 1; Paroz 2011, pers. the presence of nonnative fish as well as been identified as the main cause for comm.). However, currently, we have no their deleterious effects on native declines observed in native fish information on what effect parasite species within Arizona. Many areas populations (Voeltz 2002, p. 40; Propst infestation in native fish might have on have seen a shift from a predominance et al. 2008, pp. 1242–1243). Fish experts gartersnake populations. of native fishes to a predominance of from the U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Decline of Native Fish Communities nonnative fishes. On the upper Verde Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Bureau of in Mexico (Northern Mexican River, native species dominated the Land Management (BLM), University of Gartersnake)—The first tabulations of total fish community at greater than 80 Arizona, Arizona State University, The freshwater fish species at risk in Mexico percent from 1994 to 1996, before Nature Conservancy, and others occurred in 1961, when 11 species were dropping to approximately 20 percent in declared the native fish fauna of the Gila identified as being at risk (Contreras- 1997 and 19 percent in 2001. At the River basin to be critically imperiled, Balderas et al. 2003, p. 242). As of 2003, same time, three nonnative species and they cite habitat destruction and of the 506 species of freshwater fish increased in abundance between 1994 nonnative species as the primary factors recorded in Mexico, 185 (37 percent) and 2000 (Rinne et al. 2005, pp. 6–7). for the declines (DFT 2003, p. 1). They have been listed by the Mexican Federal In an assessment of the Verde River, call for the control and removal of Government as either endangered, Bonar et al. (2004, p. 57) found that, in nonnative fish as an overriding need to facing extinction, under special the Verde River mainstem, nonnative prevent the decline, and possible protection, or likely extinct (Alvarez- fishes were approximately 2.6 times extinction, of native fish species within Torres et al. 2003, p. 323), almost a 17- more dense per unit volume of river the basin (DFT 2003, p. 1). In some fold increase in slightly over four than native fishes, and their populations areas, nonnative fishes may not decades; 25 species are believed to have were approximately 2.8 times that of dominate the system, but their gone extinct (Contreras-Balderas et al. native fishes per unit volume of river. abundance has increased. This is the 2003, p. 241). In the lower elevations of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38691

Mexico, within the distribution of the several states in Mexico: (1) Habitat tributaries (Mercado-Silva et al. 2006, p. northern Mexican gartersnake, there are reduction or alteration (Sonora, 534). As a consequence of dam approximately 200 species of native Chihuahua, Durango, Coahuila, San operations, the main channel of the Laja freshwater fish documented, with 120 Luis Potosı´, Jalisco, Guanajuato); (2) remains dry for extensive periods of native species under some form of threat water depletion (Chihuahua, Durango, time (Mercado-Silva et al. 2006, p. 541). and an additional 15 that have gone Coahuila, Sonora, Guanajuato, Jalisco, The damming and modification of the extinct (Contreras-Balderas and Lozano San Luis Potosı´); (3) harmful nonnative lower Colorado River in Mexico, where 1994, pp. 383–384). The Fisheries Law species (Durango, Chihuahua, Coahuila, the northern Mexican gartersnake in Mexico empowered the country’s San Luis Potosı´, Sonora, Veracruz); and occurred, has facilitated the National Fisheries Institute to compile (4) pollution (Me´xico, Jalisco, replacement of the entire native fishery and publish the National Fisheries Chart Chihuahua, Coahuila, Durango). Within with nonnative species (Miller et al. in 2000, which found that Mexico’s fish the states of Chihuahua, Durango, 2005, p. 61). Each reservoir created by fauna has seriously deteriorated as a Coahuila, Sonora, Jalisco, and a dam is either managed as a nonnative result of environmental impacts Guanajuato water depletion is commercial fishery or has become a (pollution), water basin degradation considered serious, with entire basins likely source population of nonnative (dewatering, siltation), and the having been dewatered, or conditions species, which have naturally or introduction of nonnative species have been characterized as ‘‘highly artificially colonized the reservoir, (Alvarez-Torres et al. 2003, pp. 320, altered’’ (Contreras-Balderas et al. 2003, dispersed into connected riverine 323). The National Fisheries Chart is Appendix 1). All of the Mexican states systems, and damaged native aquatic regarded as the first time the Mexican with the highest numbers of fish species communities. Government has openly revealed the at risk are considered arid, a condition Mexico depends in large part on status of its freshwater fisheries and hastened by increasing desertification freshwater commercial fisheries as a described their management policies (Contreras-Balderas et al. 2003, p. 244). source of protein for both urbanized and (Alvarez-Torres et al. 2003, pp. 323– Aquaculture and Nonnative Fish rural human populated areas. 324). Proliferation in Mexico (Northern Commercial and subsistence fisheries Industrial, municipal, and agricultural Mexican Gartersnake)—Nonnative fish rely heavily on introduced, nonnative water pollution, dewatering of aquatic compete with and prey upon northern species in the largest freshwater lakes habitat, and the proliferation of Mexican gartersnakes and their native (Soto-Galera et al. 1999, p. 133) down to nonnative species are widely considered prey species. The proliferation of rural, small ponds (Tapia and Zambrano to be the greatest threats to freshwater nonnative fish species throughout 2003, p. 252). At least 87 percent of the ecosystems in Mexico (Branson et al. Mexico happened mainly by natural species captured or cultivated in inland 1960, p. 218; Conant 1974, pp. 471, dispersal, intentional stockings, and fisheries of Mexico from 1989–1999 487–489; Miller et al. 1989, pp. 25–26, accidental breaches of artificial or included tilapia (Tilapia spp.), common 28–33; 2005, pp. 60–61; DeGregorio constructed barriers by nonnative fish carp (Cyprinus carpio), channel catfish, 1992, p. 60; Contreras Balderas and (Welcomme 1984, entire). Lentic water trout, and black bass (Micropterus sp.), Lozano 1994, pp. 379–381; Lyons et al. bodies such as lakes, reservoirs, and all of which are nonnative (Alvarez- 1995, p. 572; 1998, pp. 10–12; Landa et ponds are often used for flood control, Torres et al. 2003, pp. 318, 322). In fact, al. 1997, p. 316; Mercado-Silva et al. agricultural purposes, and most the northern and central plateau region 2002, p. 180; Contreras-Balderas et al. commonly to support commercial of Mexico (which comprises most of the 2003, p. 241; Domı´nguez-Domı´nguez et fisheries. The most recent estimates distribution of the northern Mexican al. 2007, Table 3). A shift in land use indicate that Mexico has 13,936 of such gartersnake’s distribution in Mexico) is policies in Mexico to encourage free water bodies, where approximately 96 considered ideal for the production of market principles in rural, small-scale percent are between 2.47–247 acres (1– harmful, predatory species such as bass agriculture has been found to promote 100 hectares) and approximately half and catfish (Sugunan 1997, Section 8.3). land use practices that threaten local are artificial (Sugunan 1997, Table 8.3; Largemouth bass are now produced and biodiversity (Ortega-Huerta and Kral Alvarez-Torres et al. 2003, pp. 318, stocked in reservoirs and lakes 2007, p. 2; Randall 1996, pp. 218–220; 322). Areas where these landscape throughout the distribution of the Kiernan 2000, pp. 13–23). features are most prevalent occur within northern Mexican gartersnake (Sugunan These threats have been documented the distribution of the northern Mexican 1997, Section 8.8.1). throughout the distribution of the gartersnake. For example, Jalisco and The Secretariat for Environment, northern Mexican gartersnake in Mexico Zacatecas are listed as two of four states Natural Resources and Fisheries and are best represented in the scientific with the highest number of reservoirs, (SEMARNAP), formed in 1995, is the literature in the context of fisheries and Chihuahua is one of two states Mexican federal agency responsible for studies. Contreras-Balderas et al. (2003, known for a high concentration of lakes management of the country’s pp. 241, 243) named Chihuahua (46 (Sugunan 1997, Section 8.4.2). environment and natural resources. species), Coahuila (35 species), Sonora Based on the data presented in SEMARNAP dictates the stocking rates (19 species), and Durango (18 species) Sugunan (1997, Table 8.5), a total of 422 of nonnative species into the country’s as Mexican states that had some of the dammed reservoirs are located within lakes and reservoirs. For example, the most reports of freshwater fish species the 16 Mexican states where the permitted stocking rate for largemouth at risk. These states are all within the northern Mexican gartersnake is thought bass in Mexico is one fish per square distribution of the northern Mexican to occur. Mercado-Silva et al. (2006, p. meter in large reservoirs (Sugunan 1997, gartersnake, indicating an overlapping 534) found that, within the state of Table 8.8); therefore, a 247-acre (100-ha) trend of declining prey bases and Guanajuato, ‘‘Practically all streams and reservoir could be stocked with threatened ecosystems within the range rivers in the (Laja) basin are truncated 1,000,000 largemouth bass. The of the northern Mexican gartersnake in by reservoirs or other water extraction common carp, the subject of significant Mexico. Contreras-Balderas et al. (2003, and storage structures.’’ On the Laja aquaculture investment since the 1960s Appendix 1) found various threats to be River alone, there are two major in Mexico, is known for altering aquatic adversely affecting the status of reservoirs and a water diversion dam; 12 habitat and consuming the eggs and fry freshwater fish and their habitat in more reservoirs are located on its of native fish species, and is now

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38692 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

established in 95 percent of Mexico’s impacts of largemouth bass on native experienced adverse effects associated freshwater systems (Tapia and fishes in Mexico was in 1941 during the with nonnative species. Zambrano 2003, p. 252). examination of their effect in Lago de Amphibian Decline (Northern Basins in northern Mexico, such as Pa´tzcuaro (Contreras and Escalante Mexican Gartersnake)—Amphibians are the Rio Yaqui, have been found to be 1984, p. 102). Other nonnative fish a principle prey item for the northern significantly compromised by harmful species reported are soft-rayed and Mexican gartersnake, and documented nonnative fish species. Unmack and small bodied, and may be prey items for declines in amphibian population Fagan (2004, p. 233) compared younger age classes of gartersnakes. densities and distributions have historical museum collections of Several examples of significant significantly contributed to the decline nonnative fish species from the Gila aquatic habitat degradation or in northern Mexican gartersnakes. As an River basin in Arizona and the Yaqui destruction were also observed by example of these effects from another River basin in Sonora, Mexico, to gain Domıńguez-Domıńguez et al. (2007, region, Matthews et al. (2002, p. 16) insight into the trends in distribution, Table 3) in this region of Mexico, examined the relationship of diversity, and abundance of nonnative including the draining of natural lakes gartersnake distributions, amphibian fishes in each basin over time. They and cienegas for conversion to population declines, and nonnative fish found that nonnative species are slowly, agricultural purposes, modification of introductions in high-elevation aquatic but steadily, increasing in all three springs for recreational swimming, ecosystems in California. Matthews et parameters in the Yaqui Basin (Unmack diversions, and dam construction. It al. (2002, p. 16) specifically examined and Fagan 2004, p. 233). Unmack and should be noted that approximately 17 the effect of nonnative trout Fagan (2004, p. 233) predicted that, in percent of the localities sampled by introductions on populations of the absence of aggressive management Domıńguez-Domıńguez et al. (2007, amphibians and mountain gartersnakes intervention, significant extirpations or entire) are within the likely range of the (Thamnophis elegans elegans). Their range reductions of native fish species northern Mexican gartersnake; chiefly results indicated that the probability of are expected to occur in the Yaqui Basin sites located within the Rio Grande de observing gartersnakes was 30 times of Sonora, Mexico, which may have Santiago and Laja Basin. However, greater in lakes containing amphibians extant populations of the northern collectively, observations made by than in lakes where amphibians have Mexican gartersnake, as did much of the Domıńguez-Domıńguez et al. (2007, been extirpated by nonnative fish. These Gila Basin before the introduction of entire) provide a regional context to results supported a prediction by Jennings et al. (1992, p. 503) that native nonnative species. Loss of native fishes potential threats acting on northern impacts prey availability for the amphibian declines will lead directly to Mexican gartersnakes in their southern- northern Mexican gartersnake and gartersnake declines. most distribution. As of 2006, native threatens its persistence in these areas. Declines in the native leopard frog fish species dominated the fish Black bullheads (Ameiurus melas) were populations in Arizona have likely been community in both species composition reported as abundant, and common carp a significant, contributing factor to and overall abundance in the Laja Basin; were detected from the Rio Yaqui in declines in many northern Mexican however, the basin is now trending southern Sonora, Mexico (Branson et al. gartersnake populations. Native ranid toward a nonnative fishery compared to 1960, p. 219). Bluegill (Lepomis (of the family Ranidae) frog species, historical data. For example, nonnative macrochirus) were also reported at this such as lowland leopard frogs, northern species were most recently collected location, representing a significant range leopard frogs, and federally threatened expansion that the authors expected was from 16 of 17 sample sites in the basin, Chiricahua leopard frogs, have the result of escaping nearby farm ponds with largemouth bass significantly experienced declines in various degrees or irrigation ditches (Branson et al. expanding their distribution within the throughout their distribution in the 1960, p. 220). Largemouth bass, green headwaters of the basin and bluegill Southwest, largely due to predation and sunfish, and an undetermined crappie being widespread in the Laja River competition with nonnative species species have also been reported from (Mercado-Silva et al. 2006, pp. 537, 542, (Clarkson and Rorabaugh 1989, pp. 531, this area (Branson et al. 1960, p. 220). Table 4). The decline of native fishes in 535; Hayes and Jennings 1986, p. 490). Documented problems with aquatic this region of Mexico is likely negatively Rosen et al. (1995, pp. 257–258) found habitats in Mexico include water affecting the status of the northern that Chiricahua leopard frog distribution pollution, harmful nonnative species, Mexican gartersnakes there. in the Chiricahua Mountain region of and physical habitat alteration. All of Harmful nonnative fish species in Arizona was inversely related to these factors lead to declines in native Mexico (Contraras and Escalante 1984, nonnative species distribution. Along fish abundance and, therefore, a decline pp. 102–125) may be posing a the Mogollon Rim, Holycross et al. in the food source for the northern significant threat to the native fish prey (2006, p. 13) found that only 8 sites of Mexican gartersnake. Domıńguez- base of northern Mexican gartersnakes 57 surveyed (15 percent) consisted of an Domıńguez et al. (2007, p. 171) sampled and to the gartersnakes themselves. The entirely native anuran (of the order 52 localities for a rare freshwater fish, ecological risk of nonnative, freshwater Anura) community and that native frog the Picotee goodeid (Zoogoneticus fishes is only expected to increase with populations in another 19 sites (33 quitzeoensis), along the southern increases in aquaculture production, percent) had been completely displaced portion of the Mesa Central (Mexican most notably in the country’s rural, by invading bullfrogs. However, such Plateau) of Mexico and found 21 poorest regions (Tapia and Zambrano declines in native frog populations are localities had significant signs of 2003, p. 252). Amendments to Mexico’s not necessarily irreversible. Ranid frog pollution. Of the 29 localities where the existing fishing regulations imposed by populations have been shown to target species was detected, 28 of them other government regulations have been rebound strongly when nonnative fish also had harmful nonnative species relaxed, and investment in commercial are removed (Knapp et al. 2007, pp. 15– present, such as largemouth bass, fishing has expanded to promote growth 18). cichlids (Oreochromis sp.), bluegill, and in Mexico’s aquaculture sector Scotia Canyon, in the Huachuca Pa´tzcuaro chub (Algansea lacustris) (Sugunan 1997, Section 8.7.1). Several Mountains of southeastern Arizona, is a (Domıńguez-Domıńguez et al. 2007, pp. areas within the range of the northern location where corresponding declines 171, Table 3). The first assessment of the Mexican gartersnake in Mexico have of leopard frog and northern Mexican

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38693

gartersnake populations have been including the Agua Fria River in the both large-scale declines and local documented through repeated survey vicinity of Table Mesa Road and Little extirpations of many amphibians, efforts over time (Holm and Lowe 1995, Grand Canyon Ranch, and at Rock chiefly anuran species, around the p. 33). Surveys of Scotia Canyon Springs, Dry Creek from Dugas Road to world (Johnson 2006, p. 3011). Lips et occurred during the early 1980s and Little Ash Creek, Little Ash Creek from al. (2006, pp. 3166–3169) suggest that again during the early 1990s. Leopard Brown Spring to Dry Creek, Sycamore the high virulence and large number of frogs in Scotia Canyon were Creek (Agua Fria subbasin) in the potential hosts make Bd a serious threat infrequently observed during the early vicinity of the Forest Service Cabin, the to amphibian diversity. In Arizona, Bd 1980s and were nearly extirpated by the Page Springs and Bubbling Ponds fish infections have been reported in several early 1990s (Holm and Lowe 1995, pp. hatchery along Oak Creek, Sycamore of the native prey species of the 45–46). Northern Mexican gartersnakes Creek (Verde River subbasin) in the northern Mexican gartersnake within were observed in decline during the vicinity of the confluence with the the distribution of the snake (Morell early 1980s, with low capture rates Verde River north of Clarkdale, along 1999, pp. 731–732; Sredl and Caldwell continuing through the early 1990s several reaches of the Verde River 2000, p. 1; Hale 2001, pp. 32–37; (Holm and Lowe 1995, pp. 27–35). mainstem, Cherry Creek on the east side Bradley et al. 2002, p. 207; USFWS Surveys documented further decline of of the Sierra Ancha Mountains, and 2002, pp. 40802–40804; USFWS 2007a, leopard frogs and northern Mexican Tonto Creek from Gisela to ‘‘the Box,’’ pp. 26, 29–32). Declines of native prey gartersnakes in 2000 (Rosen et al. 2001, near its confluence with Rye Creek. species of the northern Mexican pp. 15–16). Rosen et al. (2013, p. 8) suggested that gartersnake from Bd infections have A former large, local population of the decline of leopard frogs in the contributed to the decline of this species northern Mexican gartersnakes at the Empire Valley of southern Arizona is in the United States (Morell 1999, pp. San Bernardino National Wildlife likely largely responsible for the decline 731–732; Sredl and Caldwell 2000, p. 1; Refuge (SBNWR) in southeastern of the northern Mexican gartersnake Hale 2001, pp. 32–37; Bradley et al. Arizona has also experienced a there. 2002, p. 207; USFWS 2002, pp. 40802– correlative decline of leopard frogs, and A primary factor in the decline of 40804; USFWS 2007a, pp. 26, 29–32). northern Mexican gartersnakes are now native amphibians as a food source for Evidence of Bd-related amphibian thought to occur at very low population northern Mexican gartersnakes in declines has been confirmed in portions densities or may be extirpated there southern Arizona is likely the result of of southern Mexico (just outside the (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, p. 28; 1995, impacts from nonnative species, mainly range of northern Mexican p. 452; 1996, pp. 1–3; 1997, p. 1; 2002b, bullfrogs. Rosen et al. (1995, pp. 252– gartersnakes), and data suggest declines pp. 223–227; 2002c, pp. 31, 70; Rosen 253) sampled aquatic herpetofauna at are more prevalent at higher elevations et al. 1996b, pp. 8–9; 2001, pp. 6–10). 103 sites in the Chiricahua Mountains where northern Mexican gartersnakes Survey data indicate that declines of region, which included the Chiricahua, can occur (Lips et al. 2004, pp. 560– leopard frog populations, often Dragoon, and Peloncillo Mountains, and 562). However, much less is known correlated with nonnative species the Sulphur Springs, San Bernardino, about the role of Bd in amphibian introductions, the spread of a chytrid and San Simon valleys. They found that declines across much of Mexico, in fungus (Batrachochytrium 43 percent of all ectothermic (cold- particular the mountainous regions of dendrobatidis, Bd), and habitat blooded) aquatic and semi-aquatic Mexico (including much of the range of modification and destruction, have vertebrate species detected were northern Mexican gartersnakes in occurred throughout much of the nonnative. The most commonly Mexico) as the region is significantly northern Mexican gartersnake’s U.S. encountered nonnative species was the understudied (Young et al. 2000, p. distribution (Nickerson and Mays 1970, bullfrog (Rosen et al. 1995, p. 254). 1218). Because narrow-headed p. 495; Vitt and Ohmart 1978, p. 44; Witte et al. (2008, p. 1) found that the gartersnakes feed on fish, Bd has not Ohmart et al. 1988, p. 150; Rosen and disappearance of ranid frog populations affected their prey base. A recent study Schwalbe 1988, Appendix I; 1995, p. in Arizona were 2.6 times more likely in in Panama by Kilburn et al. (2011, p. 452; 1996, pp. 1–3; 1997, p. 1; 2002b, the presence of crayfish. Witte et al. 132) found that reptiles may act as pp. 232–238; 2002c, pp. 1, 31; Clarkson (2008, p. 7) emphasized the significant reservoirs for Bd (at least in and Rorabaugh 1989, pp. 531–538; Sredl influence of nonnative species on the environments such as Panama) based on et al. 1995a, pp. 7–8; 1995b, pp. 8–9, disappearance of ranid frogs in Arizona. the presence of the fungus at non- 1995c, pp. 7–8; 2000, p. 10; Holm and In one area, Rosen et al. (2001, p. 22) pathological levels on lizards that occur Lowe 1995, pp. 45–46; Rosen et al. identified the expansion of bullfrogs in areas with significant Bd outbreaks in 1996b, p. 2; 2001, pp. 2, 22; Degenhardt into the Sonoita grasslands, which resident amphibians. Their study did et al. 1996, p. 319; Fernandez and Rosen contain occupied northern Mexican not conclude that Bd is a virulent reptile 1996, pp. 6–20; Drost and Nowak 1997, gartersnake habitat, and the pathogen, or that it causes disease- p. 11; Turner et al. 1999, p. 11; Nowak introduction of crayfish into Lewis induced population declines in reptiles and Spille 2001, p. 32; Holycross et al. Springs as being of particular concern (Kilburn et al. 2011, p. 132). 2006, pp. 13–14, 52–61). Holycross et al. for the northern Mexican gartersnake in Effects of Bullfrogs on Native Aquatic (2006, pp. 53–57, 59) documented that area. population declines and potential In addition to harmful nonnative Communities (Northern Mexican and extirpations of lowland leopard frogs species, disease and nonnative parasites Narrow-Headed Gartersnakes) (Factors (an important prey species of the have been implicated in the decline of A, C, and E) northern Mexican gartersnake) in most the prey base of the northern Mexican Direct predation by, and competition of the Agua Fria subbasin and areas of gartersnake. In particular, the outbreak with, bullfrogs is a serious threat to the Salt and Verde subbasins in the of chytridiomycosis or ‘‘Bd,’’ a skin northern Mexican gartersnakes period 1986–2006. Specifically, fungus, has been identified as a chief throughout their range (Conant 1974, Holycross et al. (2006, pp. 53–57, 59) causative agent in the significant pp. 471, 487–489; Rosen and Schwalbe detected no lowland leopard frogs at declines of many of the native ranid 1988, pp. 28–30; Rosen et al. 2001, pp. several recently, historically, or frogs and other amphibian species. As 21–22). Bullfrogs have and do threaten potentially occupied locations, indicated, Bd has been implicated in some populations of narrow-headed

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38694 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

gartersnakes, but differing habitat 1997, pp. 1736–1751; Lawler et al. 1999; conspicuous examples, bullfrogs were preferences between bullfrogs and Bury and Whelan 1986, pp. 9–10; Hayes identified as the primary cause for narrow-headed gartersnakes lessen their and Jennings 1986, pp. 500–501; Jones collapse of the northern Mexican effect on narrow-headed gartersnake and Timmons 2010, pp. 473–474), gartersnake and its prey base on the populations. Bullfrogs adversely affect which are vital for northern Mexican SBNWR (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, p. northern Mexican and narrow-headed gartersnakes. 28; 1995, p. 452; 1996, pp. 1–3; 1997, p. gartersnake populations through direct Different age classes of bullfrogs can 1; 2002b, pp. 223–227; 2002c, pp. 31, predation of juveniles and sub-adults. affect native ranid populations via 70; Rosen et al. 1996b, pp. 8–9). Bullfrogs also compete with northern different mechanisms. Juvenile bullfrogs Once established, bullfrogs are Mexican gartersnakes for prey species. affect native ranids through persistent in an area and very difficult Bullfrogs are not native to the competition; male bullfrogs affect native to eradicate. Rosen and Schwalbe (1995, southwestern United States or Mexico, ranids through predation; and female p. 452) experimented with bullfrog and they first appeared in Arizona in bullfrogs affect native ranids through removal at various sites on the SBNWR, 1926 as a result of a systematic both mechanisms depending on body in addition to a control site with no introduction effort by the State Game size and microhabitat (Wu et al. 2005, bullfrog removal in similar habitat on Department (now, the AGFD) for the p. 668). Pearl et al. (2004, p. 18) also the Buenos Aires National Wildlife purposes of sport hunting and as a food suggested that the effect of bullfrog Refuge (BANWR). Removal of adult source (Tellman 2002, p. 43). The first introductions on native ranids may be bullfrogs, without removal of eggs and bullfrog record from New Mexico is different based on specific habitat tadpoles, resulted in a substantial dated 1885 (Degenhardt et al. 1996, p. conditions but also suggested that an increase in younger age-class bullfrogs 85). Bullfrogs are extremely prolific, are individual ranid frog species’ physical where removal efforts were the most strong colonizers, can reach high ability to escape influences the effect of intensive (Rosen and Schwalbe 1997, p. densities, are persistent via cannibalism, bullfrogs on each native ranid 6). Contradictory to the goals of bullfrog and may disperse distances of up to 10 community. Bullfrogs can also eradication, evidence from dissection mi (16 km) across uplands and likely negatively affect native ranid frog samples from young adult and subadult further within drainages (Bautista 2002, populations, both locally and regionally, bullfrogs indicated these age-classes p. 131; Rosen and Schwalbe 2002a, p. 7; as carriers or reservoir species for Bd, readily prey upon juvenile bullfrogs (up Casper and Hendricks 2005, p. 582; depending on the strain of Bd (Gervasi to the average adult leopard frog size) as Suhre 2008, pers. comm.; Rosen et al. et al. 2013, p. 169). well as juvenile gartersnakes, which 2013, pp. 35–36). Bullfrogs have been documented to suggests that the selective removal of Bullfrogs are large-bodied, voracious, occur throughout Arizona. Holycross et only the large adult bullfrogs (presumed opportunistic, even cannibalistic al. (2006, pp. 13–14, 52–61) found to be the most dangerous size class to predators that readily attempt to bullfrogs at 55 percent of sample sites in leopard frogs and gartersnakes), favoring consume any living thing smaller than the Agua Fria subbasin, 62 percent of the young adult and sub-adult age them. Bullfrogs have a highly varied sites in the Verde River subbasin, 25 classes, could indirectly lead to diet, which has been documented to percent of sites in the Salt River increased predation of leopard frogs and include vegetation, invertebrates, fish, subbasin, and 22 percent of sites in the juvenile gartersnakes (Rosen and birds, mammals, amphibians, and Gila River subbasin. In total, bullfrogs Schwalbe 1997, p. 6). These findings reptiles, including numerous species of were observed at 22 of the 57 sites illustrate that, in addition to large snakes (eight genera, including six surveyed (39 percent) across the adults, sub-adult bullfrogs also different species of gartersnakes, two Mogollon Rim (Holycross et al. 2006, p. negatively impact northern Mexican species of rattlesnakes, and Sonoran 13). A number of authors have also gartersnakes and their prey species. The gophersnakes (Pituophis catenifer documented the presence of bullfrogs findings also indicate the importance of affinis)) (Bury and Whelan 1984, p. 5; throughout many subbasins in Arizona including egg mass and tadpole removal Clarkson and DeVos 1986, p. 45; Holm and New Mexico adjacent to the during efforts to control bullfrogs and and Lowe 1995, pp. 37–38; Carpenter et historical distribution of the northern timing removal projects to ensure al. 2002, p. 130; King et al. 2002; Hovey Mexican or narrow-headed gartersnake, reproductive bullfrogs are removed and Bergen 2003, pp. 360–361; Casper including northern Arizona (Sredl et al. prior to breeding. Recent success in and Hendricks 2005, pp. 543–544; 1995a, p. 7; 1995c, p. 7), central Arizona regional bullfrog eradication has been Combs et al. 2005, p. 439; Wilcox 2005, and along the Mogollon Rim of Arizona found in a few cases described below in p. 306; DaSilva et al. 2007, p. 443; Neils and New Mexico (Nickerson and Mays the section entitled ‘‘Current and Bugbee 2007, p. 443; Rowe and 1970, p. 495; Hulse 1973, p. 278; Sredl Conservation of Northern Mexican and Garcia 2012, pp. 633–634). In one study, et al. 1995b, p. 9; Drost and Nowak Narrow-headed Gartersnakes.’’ three different species of gartersnakes 1997, p. 11; Nowak and Spille 2001, p. Bullfrogs not only compete with the (Thamnophis sirtalis, T. elegans, and T. 11; Holycross et al. 2006, pp. 15–51; northern Mexican gartersnake for prey ordinoides) totaling 11 snakes were Wallace et al. 2008; pp. 243–244; items but directly prey upon juvenile found inside the stomachs of resident Hellekson 2012a, pers. comm.), and, occasionally, sub-adult northern bullfrogs from a single region southern Arizona (Rosen and Schwalbe Mexican and narrow-headed (Jancowski and Orchard 2013, p. 26). 1988, Appendix I; 1995, p. 452; 1996, gartersnakes (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, Bullfrogs can significantly reduce or pp. 1–3; 1997, p. 1; 2002b, pp. 223–227; pp. 28–31; 1995, p. 452; 2002b, pp. 223– eliminate the native amphibian 2002c, pp. 31, 70; Holm and Lowe 1995, 227; Holm and Lowe 1995, pp. 29–29; populations (Moyle 1973, pp. 18–22; pp. 27–35; Rosen et al. 1995, p. 254; Rossman et al. 1996, p. 177; AGFD In Conant 1974, pp. 471, 487–489; Hayes 1996a, pp. 16–17; 1996b, pp. 8–9; 2001, Prep., p. 12; 2001, p. 3; Rosen et al. and Jennings 1986, pp. 491–492; Rosen Appendix I; Turner et al. 1999, p. 11; 2001, pp. 10, 21–22; Carpenter et al. and Schwalbe 1988, pp. 28–30; 2002b, Sredl et al. 2000, p. 10; Turner 2007; p. 2002, p. 130; Wallace 2002, p. 116). A pp. 232–238; Rosen et al. 1995, pp. 257– 41), and along the Colorado River (Vitt well-circulated photograph of an adult 258; 2001, pp. 2, Appendix I; Wu et al. and Ohmart 1978, p. 44; Clarkson and bullfrog in the process of consuming a 2005, p. 668; Pearl et al. 2004, p. 18; DeVos 1986, pp. 42–49; Ohmart et al. northern Mexican gartersnake at Parker Kupferberg 1994, p. 95; Kupferburg 1988, p. 143). In one of the more Canyon Lake, Cochise County, Arizona,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38695

taken by John Carr of the AGFD in 1964, communities to be particularly et al. 2013, pp. 210–213). This could provides photographic documentation vulnerable to crayfish because many have serious implications for northern of bullfrog predation (Rosen and endemic aquatic species never evolved Mexican gartersnakes because crayfish Schwalbe 1988, p. 29; 1995, p. 452). The in the presence of crayfish. Fernandez can now be considered a source of most recent, physical evidence of and Rosen (1996, p. 3) studied the disease in habitat that is devoid of bullfrog predation of northern Mexican effects of crayfish introductions on two amphibians but otherwise potentially gartersnakes is provided in photographs stream communities in Arizona, a low- suitable habitat for immigrating of a dissected bullfrog at Pasture 9 Tank elevation semi-desert stream and a high amphibians, such as leopard frogs, in the San Rafael Valley of Arizona that mountain stream, and concluded that which could serve as a prey base. had a freshly eaten neonatal northern crayfish can noticeably reduce species Because crayfish are so widespread Mexican gartersnake in its stomach diversity and destabilize food chains in throughout Arizona, New Mexico, and (Akins 2012, pers. comm.). riparian and aquatic ecosystems through portions of Mexico, the scope of this A common observation in northern their effect on vegetative structure, threat is significant for native Mexican gartersnake populations that stream substrate (stream bottom; i.e., amphibian populations and, therefore, co-occur with bullfrogs is a silt, sand, cobble, boulder) composition, to northern Mexican gartersnake preponderance of large, mature adult and predation on eggs, larval, and adult populations. snakes with conspicuously low numbers forms of native invertebrate and Inman et al. (1998, p. 3) documented of individuals in the newborn and vertebrate species. Crayfish fed on crayfish as widely distributed and juvenile age size classes. This occurs embryos, tadpoles, newly locally abundant in a broad array of due to bullfrogs preying on young small metamorphosed frogs, and adult leopard natural and artificial free-flowing and snakes more effectively, which leads to frogs, but they did not feed on egg still-water habitats throughout Arizona, reduced survival of young and masses (Fernandez and Rosen 1996, p. many of which overlap the historical depressed recruitment within 25). However, Gamradt and Kats (1996, and current distribution of northern populations (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, p. 1155) found that crayfish readily Mexican and narrow-headed p. 18; Holm and Lowe 1995, p. 34). In consumed the egg masses of California gartersnakes. Hyatt (undated, p. 71) lotic (flowing water) systems, bullfrogs newts (Taricha torosa). Crayfish are concluded that the majority of waters in prefer sites with low or limited flow, known to also eat fish eggs and larva Arizona contained at least one species such as backwaters, side channels, and (Inman et al. 1998, p. 17), especially of crayfish. In surveying for northern pool habitat. These areas are also used those bound to the substrate (Dorn and Mexican and narrow-headed frequently by northern Mexican and Mittlebach 2004, p. 2135). Fernandez gartersnakes, Holycross et al. (2006, p. narrow-headed gartersnakes, which and Rosen (1996, pp. 6–19, 52–56) and 14) found crayfish in 64 percent of the likely results in increased predation Rosen (1987, p. 5) discussed sample sites in the Agua Fria subbasin; rates and likely depressed recruitment observations of inverse relationships in 85 percent of the sites in the Verde of gartersnakes. Potential recruitment between crayfish abundance and native River subbasin; in 46 percent of the sites problems for northern Mexican reptile and amphibian populations, in the Salt River subbasin; and in 67 gartersnakes due to effects from including narrow-headed gartersnakes, percent of the sites in the Gila River nonnative species are suspected at northern leopard frogs, and Chiricahua subbasin. In total, crayfish were Tonto Creek (Wallace et al. 2008, pp. leopard frogs. Crayfish may also affect observed at 35 (61 percent) of the 57 243–244). Rosen and Schwalbe (1988, p. native fish populations. Carpenter sites surveyed across the Mogollon Rim 18) stated that the low recruitment at (2005, pp. 338–340) documented that (Holycross et al. 2006, p. 14), most of the SBNWR, a typical characteristic of crayfish may reduce the growth rates of which were sites historically or gartersnake populations affected by native fish through competition for food currently occupied by northern Mexican harmful nonnative species, is the likely and noted that the significance of this or narrow-headed gartersnakes, or sites cause of that populations’ decline and impact may vary between species. the investigators believed possessed possibly for declines in populations Crayfish alter the abundance and suitable habitat and may be occupied by throughout their range in Arizona. structure of aquatic vegetation by these gartersnakes based upon their Specific localities within the grazing on aquatic and semiaquatic known historical distributions. distribution of northern Mexican and vegetation, which reduces the cover A number of authors have narrow-headed gartersnakes where needed by frogs and gartersnakes, as documented the presence of crayfish bullfrogs have been detected are well as the food supply for prey species through their survey efforts throughout presented in Appendix A (available at such as tadpoles (Fernandez and Rosen Arizona and New Mexico in specific http://www.regulations.gov, Docket No. 1996, pp. 10–12). Fernandez and Rosen regional areas, drainages, and lentic FWS–R2–ES–2013–0071). (1996, pp. 10–12) found that crayfish wetlands within or adjacent to the frequently burrow into stream banks, historical distribution of the northern Effects of Crayfish on Native Aquatic leading to increased bank erosion, Mexican or narrow-headed gartersnake, Communities (Northern Mexican and stream turbidity, and siltation of stream including northern Arizona (Sredl et al. Narrow-Headed Gartersnakes) (Factors bottoms. Creed (1994, p. 2098) found 1995a, p. 7; 1995c, p. 7), central Arizona A and C) that filamentous alga (Cladophora and along the Mogollon Rim of Arizona Crayfish are another nonnative glomerata) was at least 10-fold greater in and New Mexico (Sredl et al. 1995b, p. species in Arizona and New Mexico that aquatic habitats that lacked crayfish. 9; Fernandez and Rosen 1996, pp. 54– threaten northern Mexican and narrow- Filamentous algae is an important 55, 71; Inman et al. 1998, Appendix B; headed gartersnakes through component of aquatic vegetation that Nowak and Spille 2001, p. 33; Holycross competition by consuming prey species provides cover for foraging gartersnakes, et al. 2006, pp. 15–51; Brennan 2007, p. of the gartersnakes and through direct as well as microhabitat for prey species, 7; Burger 2008, p. 4; Wallace et al. 2008; predation on juvenile gartersnakes in situations where predation risk is pp. 243–244; Brennan and Rosen 2009, themselves (Fernandez and Rosen 1996, high. p. 9; Karam et al. 2009; pp. 2–3; p. 25; Voeltz 2002, pp. 87–88; USFWS Crayfish have recently been found to Hellekson 2012a, pers. comm.), 2007a, p. 22). Rogowski et al. (2013, p. also act as a host for the amphibian southern Arizona (Rosen and Schwalbe 1,280) found Arizona’s aquatic disease-causing fungus, Bd (McMahon 1988, Appendix I; Inman et al. 1998,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38696 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Appendix B; Sredl et al. 2000, p. 10; the incidence of tail damage (Willis et predation attempts by bullfrogs. While Rosen et al. 2001, Appendix I), and al. 1982, pp. 100–101; Rosen and medically examining pregnant female along the Colorado River (Ohmart et al. Schwalbe 1988, p. 22; Mushinsky and northern Mexican gartersnakes, Rosen 1988, p. 150; Inman et al. 1998, Miller 1993, pp. 662–664; Fitch 2003, p. and Schwalbe (1988, p. 28) noted Appendix B). Specific localities within 212). This can be explained by higher bleeding from the posterior region, the distribution of northern Mexican basking rates associated with pregnant which suggested to the investigators the and narrow-headed gartersnakes where females that increase their visibility to snakes suffered from ‘‘squeeze-type’’ crayfish have been detected are predators. Fitch (2003, p. 212) found injuries inflicted by adult bullfrogs. In presented in Appendix A (available at that tail injuries in the common another example, Holm and Lowe (1995, http://www.regulations.gov, Docket No. gartersnake occurred more frequently in pp. 33–34) observed tail injuries in 89 FWS–R2–ES–2013–0071). Like adults than in juveniles. Predation on percent of northern Mexican bullfrogs, crayfish can be very difficult, juvenile snakes likely results in gartersnakes during the early 1990s in if not impossible, to eradicate once they complete consumption of the animal, Scotia Canyon in the Huachuca have become established in an area, which would limit observations of tail Mountains, as well as a skewed age depending on the complexity of the injury in their age class. class ratio that favored adults over sub- habitat (Rosen and Schwalbe 1996a, pp. Tail injuries can have negative effects adults, which is consistent with data 5–8; 2002a, p. 7; Hyatt undated, pp. 63– on the health, longevity, and overall collected by Willis et al. (1982, pp. 100– 71). success of individual gartersnakes from 101) on other gartersnake species. It is likely that crayfish populations, infection, slower swimming and Bullfrogs are largely thought to be where they overlap with northern crawling speeds, or impeding responsible for the significant decline of Mexican or narrow-headed gartersnakes, reproduction. Mushinsky and Miller northern Mexican gartersnake and its could have a varied influence on (1993, pp. 662–664) commented that, prey base at this locality, although the gartersnake populations. The size of while tail breakage in gartersnakes can latter has improved through recovery crayfish can influence their predatory save the life of an individual snake, it actions. In the Black River, crayfish are influence on gartersnakes or their prey also leads to permanent handicapping of very abundant and have been identified species; small crayfish are unlikely to the snake, resulting in slower swimming as the likely cause for a high-frequency pose a significant threat to gartersnakes and crawling speeds, which could leave of tail injuries to narrow-headed themselves but may still consume fish the snake more vulnerable to predation gartersnakes (Brennan 2007, p. 7; eggs or fry, whereas larger crayfish can or affect its foraging ability. Willis et al. Brennan and Rosen 2009, p. 9). Brennan prey on neonatal gartersnakes directly. (1982, p. 98) discussed the incidence of (2007, p. 5) found that, in the Black The presence of adequate numbers of tail injury in three species in the genus River, 14 of 15 narrow-headed favorable fish prey for narrow-headed Thamnophis (common gartersnake, gartersnakes captured showed evidence gartersnakes may counter the effects of Butler’s gartersnake (T. butleri), and the of damaged or missing tails (Brennan resident crayfish to some degree. eastern ribbon snake (T. sauritus)) and 2007, p. 5). In 2009, 16 of 19 narrow- Crayfish densities may also be affected concluded that individuals that suffered headed gartersnakes captured in the by periodic flooding, which is thought nonfatal injuries prior to reaching a Black River showed evidence of to reduce crayfish population densities length of 12 in (30 cm) are not likely to damaged or missing tails (Brennan and temporarily until recolonization occurs survive and that physiological stress Rosen 2009, p. 8). In the middle Verde from the dispersal of individuals from during post-injury hibernation may play River region, Emmons and Nowak downstream populations. More field an important role in subsequent fatality. (2013, p. 5) reported that 18 of 49 (37 research is needed to fully understand While northern Mexican or narrow- percent) northern Mexican gartersnakes the ecological relationship between headed gartersnakes may survive an captured had scars (n = 17) and/or crayfish and these gartersnakes, at least individual predation attempt from a missing tails tips (n = 7). at any particular site. However, the best bullfrog or crayfish with tail damage, available scientific and commercial secondary effects from infection of the Vegetation or other forms of information strongly suggests that wound may significantly contribute to protective cover may be particularly crayfish in larger size classes or in high fatality of individuals. Perry-Richardson important for gartersnakes to reduce the densities are a cause for concern for et al. (1990, p. 77) described the effects of harmful nonnative species on gartersnakes and their prey species, importance of tail-tip alignment in the populations. For example, the especially with other threats successful courtship and mating in population of northern Mexican simultaneously affecting gartersnake Thamnophiine snakes and found that gartersnakes at the Page Springs and populations. missing or shortened tails adversely Bubbling Ponds State Fish Hatcheries affected these activities and, therefore, occurs with harmful nonnative species Effects of Predation-Related Injuries to mating success. In researching the role (Boyarski 2008b, pp. 3–4, 8). Yet, only Gartersnakes (Northern Mexican and of tail length in mating success in the 11 percent of northern Mexican Narrow-Headed Gartersnakes) (Factor C) red-sided gartersnake (Thamnophis gartersnakes captured in 2007 were The tails of gartersnakes are often sirtalis parietalis), Shine et al. (1999, p. observed as having some level of tail broken off during predation attempts by 2150) found that males that experienced damage (Boyarski 2008b, pp. 5, 8). The bullfrogs, crayfish, or other predators, injuries or the partial or whole loss of relatively low occurrence of tail damage, and do not regenerate. The incidence of the tail experienced a three-fold as compared to 78 percent of snakes tail breaks in gartersnakes can often be decrease in mating success. with tail damage found by Rosen and used to assess predation pressure within The frequency of tail injuries can be Schwalbe (1988, pp. 28–31), may gartersnake populations. Attempted quite high in a given gartersnake indicate: (1) Adequate vegetation predation occurs on both sexes and all population; for example at the SBNWR density was used by gartersnakes to ages of gartersnakes within a (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, pp. 28–31), avoid harmful nonnative species population, although some general 78 percent of northern Mexican predation attempts; (2) a relatively small trends have been detected. For example, gartersnakes had broken tails with a population of harmful nonnative species female gartersnakes may be more ‘‘soft and club-like’’ terminus, which may be at a comparatively lower density susceptible to predation as evidenced by suggests repeated injury from multiple than sites sampled by previous studies

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38697

(harmful nonnative species population Luja and Rodrı´guez-Estrella (2008, p. Risks to Gartersnakes From Fisheries density data were not collected by 20) also state that Mexican people Management Activities (Northern Boyarski (2008b)); (3) gartersnakes may deliberately introduce bullfrogs for Mexican and Narrow-Headed not have needed to move significant ornamental purposes, or ‘‘for the simple Gartersnakes) (Factors A and E) distances at this locality to achieve pleasure of having them in ponds.’’ The The decline in native fish foraging success, which might reduce act of deliberately releasing bullfrogs communities from the effects of harmful the potential for encounters with into the wild in Mexico was cited by nonnative fish species has spurred harmful nonnative species; or (4) Luja and Rodrı´guez-Estrella (2008, p. resource managers to take action to help gartersnakes infrequently escaped 21) as being ‘‘more common than we recover native fish species. While we predation attempts by harmful can imagine.’’ Bullfrogs are available for fully support activities designed to help nonnative species, were removed from purchase at some Mexican pet stores recover native fish, recovery actions for ´ the population, and were consequently (Luja and Rodrıguez-Estrella 2008, p. native fish, in the absence of thorough ´ not detected by surveys. 22). Luja and Rodrıguez-Estrella (2008, planning, can have negative effects on p. 21) state that bullfrog eradication Expansion of the American Bullfrog and resident gartersnake populations. efforts in Mexico are often thwarted by Piscicides—Piscicide is a term that Crayfish in Mexico (Northern Mexican their popularity in rural communities Gartersnake) (Factors A, C, and E) refers to a ‘‘fish poison.’’ The use of (presumably as a food source). piscicides, such as rotenone or Bullfrogs are a significant threat to Currently, no regulation exists in antimycin A, for the removal of harmful native aquatic and riparian species Mexico to address the threat of bullfrog nonnative fish species has widely been throughout Mexico. Luja and Rodrı´guez- invasions or prevent their release into considered invaluable for the the wild (Luja and Rodrı´guez-Estrella Estrella (2008, pp. 17–22) examined the conservation and recovery of imperiled 2008, p. 22). As a result, the bullfrogs’ invasion of the bullfrog in Mexico. The native fish species throughout the distribution continues to increase in earliest records of bullfrogs in Mexico United States, and in particular the Gila Mexico, beyond what it would through were Nuevo Leon (1853), Tamaulipas River basin of Arizona and New Mexico (1898), Morelos (1968), and Sinaloa natural dispersal mechanisms. Rosen and Melendez (2006, p. 54) (Dawson and Kolar 2003, entire). (1969) (Luja and Rodrı´guez-Estrella Antimycin A is rarely used anymore 2008, p 20). By 1976, the bullfrog was report bullfrog invasions to be prevalent in northwestern Chihuahua and due to limited production and has been documented in seven more states: largely replaced by rotenone in field Aguacalientes, Baja California Sur, northwestern Sonora, where the northern Mexican gartersnake is thought applications. Experimentation with Chihuahua, Distrito Federal, Puebla, ammonia as a piscicide has shown San Luis Potosi, and Sonora (Luja and to occur. In many areas, native leopard frogs were completely displaced where promising results and may ultimately Rodrı´guez-Estrella 2008, p. 20). The replace rotenone in the future as a bullfrog was recently verified from the bullfrogs were observed. Rosen and Melendez (2006, p. 54) also desired control method if legally state of Hidalgo, Mexico, at an elevation demonstrated the relationship between registered for such use (Ward et al. of 8,970 feet (2,734 m), which indicates fish and amphibian communities in 2013, pp. 402–404). Currently, rotenone the species continues to spread in that Sonora and western Chihuahua. Native is the most commonly used piscicide. country and can exist even at the leopard frogs, a primary prey item for The active ingredient in rotenone is a uppermost elevations inhabited by the northern Mexican gartersnake, only natural chemical compound extracted northern Mexican gartersnakes occurred in the absence of nonnative from the stems and roots of tropical (Duifhuis Rivera et al. 2008, p. 479). As fish, and were absent from waters plants in the family Leguminosae that of 2008, Luja and Rodrı´guez-Estrella containing nonnative species, which interrupts oxygen absorption in gill- (2008, p. 20) have recorded bullfrogs in included several major waters. In breathing animals (Fontenot et al. 1994, 20 of the 31 Mexican States (65 percent Sonora, Rorabaugh (2008a, p. 25) also pp. 150–151). In the greater Gila River of the states in Mexico) and suspect that considers the bullfrog to be a significant subbasin alone, 57 streams or water they have invaded other States, but were threat to the northern Mexican bodies have been treated with piscicide, unable to find documentation. gartersnake and its prey base, some on several occasions spanning Bullfrogs have been commercially substantiated by field observations many years (Carpenter and Terrell 2005; produced for food in Mexico in made during surveys conducted in Table 6). However, this practice has Yucatan, Nayarit, Morelos, Estado de Chihuahua and Sonora in 2006 been the source of recent controversy Mexico, Michoaca´n, Guadalajara, San (Rorabaugh 2008b, p. 1). due to a perceived link between Luis Potosi, Tamaulipas, and Sonora, Few data were found on the presence rotenone and Parkinson’s disease in and their use for food was endorsed by or distribution of nonnative crayfish humans, as well as potential effects to the Mexican Secretary of Aquaculture species in Mexico. However, in a 2- livestock. Support (Luja and Rodrı´guez-Estrella week gartersnake survey effort in 2006 Speculation of the potential role of 2008, p. 20). However, frog legs in northern Mexico, crayfish were rotenone in Parkinson’s disease was ultimately never gained popularity in observed as ‘‘widely distributed’’ in the fueled by Tanner et al. (2011, entire), Mexican culinary culture (Conant 1974, valleys of western Chihuahua which correlated the incidence of the pp. 487–489), and Luja and Rodrı´guez- (Rorabaugh 2008b, p. 1). Based on the disease with lifetime exposure to certain Estrella (2008, p. 22) point out that only invasive nature of crayfish ecology and pesticides, including rotenone. As a 10 percent of these farms remain in their distribution in the United States result, in 2012, the Arizona State production. Luja and Rodrı´guez-Estrella along the Border region, it is reasonable Legislature proposed two bills that (2008, pp. 20, 22) document instances to assume that, at a minimum, crayfish called for the development of an where bullfrogs have escaped are likely distributed along the entire environmental impact statement prior to production farms and suspect the Border region of northern Mexico, the application of rotenone or antimycin majority of the frogs that were produced adjacent to where they occur in the A (S.B. 1453, see State of Arizona commercially in farms that have since United States, and act in a similar Senate (2012b)) and urged the U.S. ceased operation have assimilated into fashion on affected northern Mexican Environmental Protection Agency to surrounding habitat. gartersnake populations. deregister rotenone from use in the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38698 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

United States (S.B. 1009, see State of River, West Fork Gila River, Little narrow-headed gartersnakes) is planned Arizona Senate (2012b)). Public safety Creek, and O’Donnell Creek have all for renovation in 2015 (Burger and considerations were fully evaluated by a been subject to fish renovations using Jeager 2013, p. 2) and barrier multidisciplined technical team of these or similarly accepted protocols development. specialists that found no correlation (Carpenter and Terrell 2005; Table 6; The current standard operating between rotenone applications Paroz and Propst 2009, p. 4; Hellekson procedures for piscicide application, as performed, according to product label 2012a, pers. comm.). Therefore, adopted nationally and provided in instructions, and Parkinson’s disease northern Mexican or narrow-headed Finlayson et al. (2010, p. 23), provide (Rotenone Review Advisory Committee gartersnake populations in these streams guidance for assuring that nontarget, 2012, pp. 24–25). Nonetheless, have likely been negatively affected, due baseline environmental conditions (the continued anxiety regarding the use of to the eradication of a portion of, or biotic community) are accounted for in piscicides for conservation and their entire, prey base in these systems assessing whether mitigation measures management of fish communities leaves for varying periods of time. Big Bonito are necessary. This procedural protocol an uncertain future for this important Creek was restocked with salvaged states, ‘‘Survival and recovery of the management tool. Should circumstances native fish shortly after renovation aquatic community may be result in the discontinued practice of occurred. However, we are uncertain demonstrated by sampling plankton, using piscicides for fish recovery and how long other stream reaches remained macroinvertebrates (aquatic insects, management, the likelihood of recovery fishless post-treatment, but it was likely crustacea, leeches, and mollusks), and for listed or sensitive aquatic vertebrates to be a minimum of weeks in each amphibians (frogs, tadpoles, and larval in Arizona, such as northern Mexican instance, and possibly a year or longer and adult salamanders)’’ (Finlayson et and narrow-headed gartersnakes, would in some instances. al. 2010, p. 23). This protocol, adopted be substantially reduced, if not Although significant efforts are by the AGFD (see AGFD 2012a), does eliminated outright. generally made to salvage as many not in itself consider the effects of native fish as possible prior to leaving a treated water body without a The use of piscicides is a vital and treatment, logistics of holding fish for prey base for a sensitive species much scientifically sound tool, the only tool, several weeks prior to restocking limit less for a fish-specialist, such as the in most circumstances, for the number of individuals that can be narrow-headed gartersnake, for reestablishing native fish communities held safely. Therefore, not every extended periods of time. However, the and removing threats related to individual fish is salvaged, and native AGFDs’ internal Environmental nonnative aquatic species in occupied fish remaining in the stream are Assessment Checklist (EAC) addresses northern Mexican and narrow-headed subsequently lost during the treatment. considerations for nontarget aquatic gartersnake habitat. By extension, the The number of fish subsequently reptiles. Thus, we believe that concerns use of piscicides is also invaluable in restocked is, therefore, smaller than the for potential effects of piscicide the recovery and conservation of number of fish that were present prior treatments on these gartersnake species northern Mexican and narrow-headed to the treatment. The full restoration of within Arizona should not be gartersnakes. However, without proper native fish populations to pre-treatment substantial in the future. planning the amount of time a treated levels may take several years, depending As of 2012, a new policy was water body remains fishless post- on the size of the treated area and the finalized by the AGFD that includes an treatment can affect gartersnakes by size and maturity of the founding early and widespread public removing fish, their primary food populations. Restocking salvaged fish in notification and planning process that source. The time period between the fall may allow natural spawning and involves the approval of several rotenone applications and the recruitment to begin in the spring, decision-makers within four major subsequent restocking of native fish is which would provide a more immediate stages: (1) Piscicide project internal contingent on two basic variables, the benefit to resident gartersnake review and approval; (2) preliminary time it takes for piscicide levels to reach populations. planning and public involvement; (3) nontoxic levels and the level of Several streams within the intermediate planning and public certainty required to ensure that distribution of narrow-headed involvement; and (4) project renovation goals and objectives have gartersnakes in New Mexico have been implementation and evaluation (AGFD been met prior to restocking. identified for potential future fish 2012a, p. 3). Within the Internal Review Implementation of the latter barrier construction, for which piscicide and Approval stage of the process, consideration may vary from to a year applications are likely necessary. These sensitive, endemic, and listed species or longer, depending on the level of streams include Little Creek, West Fork potentially impacted by the project must certainty required by project Gila River, Middle Fork Gila River, be identified (AGFD 2012a, p. 13), such proponents. Carpenter and Terrell Turkey Creek, Saliz Creek, Dry Blue as northern Mexican or narrow-headed (2005, p. 14) reported that standard Creek, Iron Creek, and the San Francisco gartersnakes. This change ensures that protocols used by the AGFD for Apache River (Riley and Clarkson 2005, pp. 4– an analysis of potential effects to trout renovations at that time required 5, 7, 9, 12; Clarkson and Marsh 2012, p. nontarget wildlife by fisheries two applications of piscicide before 8; 2013, pp. 1, 4, 6; Hellekson 2013, management activities occurs within the repatriating native fish to a stream, pers. comm.). Of these, the Middle Fork same planning document, versus a waiting a season to see if the renovation Gila River and Turkey Creek appear to separate process. In addition, the was successful, and then continuing to the most likely chosen for renovation AGFD’s Conservation and Mitigation renovate if necessary. Past protocols (Clarkson and Marsh 2013, p. 8). Mule Program has specifically committed to have included goals for the renovated Creek and Cienega Creek, both occupied quickly restocking renovated streams water body to remain fishless for by northern Mexican gartersnakes, as that are occupied by either northern extended periods, sometimes up to an well as Whitewater Creek (occupied by Mexican or narrow-headed gartersnakes entire year before restocking (Carpenter narrow-headed gartersnakes), are under (USFWS 2011, Appendix C). and Terrell 2005, p. 14). At a minimum consideration but ultimately may not be Piscicide application protocols used and according to our files, reaches of Big chosen (Clarkson and Marsh 2013, pp. by the New Mexico Department of Game Bonito Creek, the West Fork Black 8–9). Haigler Creek (occupied by and Fish are provided in Pierce (2014,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38699

entire) and specify that effects to become fully submerged if there is a comm.). If not found in time, this amphibian species are reviewed prior to sudden, unanticipated rise in water situation would likely result in their application; however, the protocol does levels (e.g., storm event). During the death from drowning, predation, or not provide for an assessment of monsoon in Arizona and New Mexico, exposure. potential gartersnake effects from these types of storm events are common, The use of minnow traps is also treatment. No specific timeframe, post- and river hydrographs respond allowed in recreational fishing in treatment, was recommended by the accordingly with rapid and dynamic Arizona and New Mexico (AGFD 2013a, protocol for when native fish are increases in flow. p. 57; New Mexico Department of Game recommended for stocking into treated We are aware of examples where and Fish (NMDGF) 2013, p. 17). In waters (Pierce 2014, pers. comm.). We northern Mexican gartersnakes, Arizona and New Mexico, it is lawful to intend to coordinate with the New intentionally captured in minnow traps, set minnow traps for the collection of Mexico Department of Game and Fish as have drowned as a direct result of a live baitfish (AGFD 2013a, pp. 56–57; active partners in wildlife conservation rapid, unexpected rise in water levels. NMDGF 2013, p. 17). In Arizona, to ensure potential effects, from Some examples include an adult female minnow traps used for collecting live piscicide treatments, to either northern Mexican gartersnake along baitfish must be checked once daily and gartersnake are avoided or minimized. lower Tonto Creek in 2004, an adult and the trapping activity must occur where However, if proper protocols are not two neonates at the Bubbling Ponds captured bait will be used (AGFD 2013a, incorporated into future fish restoration State Fish Hatchery in 2009 and 2010, pp. 56–57); in New Mexico, there is no projects, these activities will continue to respectively, and an individual of stipulation on time intervals in the threaten local gartersnake populations. undisclosed age in the upper Santa Cruz regulations to check minnow traps Mechanical Methods—In addition to River (Holycross et al. 2006, p. 41, (NMDGF 2013, p. 17). In either scenario chemical renovation techniques, Boyarski 2011, pp. 2–3; Lashway 2012, in either state, these minnow traps are mechanical methods using p. 5). In another example, involving an likely to be fully submerged when in electroshocking equipment are often underwater funnel trap used to survey use and pose a drowning hazard to used in fisheries management, both for for lowland leopard frogs (but which are resident gartersnakes while foraging nonnative aquatic species removal and not used for fishery surveys), a large underwater, as they can be lured into fisheries survey and monitoring adult female northern Mexican the traps by fish already caught. activities that often occur in conjunction gartersnake was discovered deceased in We do not have adequate information with piscicide treatments. Northern the trap (Jones 2012a, pers. comm.). to assess the frequency and geographical Mexican and narrow-headed Death of that individual was likely due extent to which accidental drownings of gartersnakes often flee into the water as to drowning or predation by numerous gartersnakes in minnow traps may be a first line of defense when startled. In crayfish that were also confined in the occurring. This is mainly because it occupied habitat, gartersnakes present funnel trap with the gartersnake (Jones happens incidentally as a result of in the water and within the affected 2012a, pers. comm.). Depending on the trapping efforts for other species, and so radius of electroshockers are often mesh size of traps, neonatal gartersnakes it historically did not get reported by temporarily paralyzed from electrical can become stuck in the mesh of traps researchers. Without additional impulses intended for fish, and are, (Lashway 2012, p. 5), which could information, we cannot conclude at this therefore, readily detected by surveyors result in injury or death of the time that deaths from accidental (Hellekson 2012a, pers. comm.). We are individual. There are likely additional minnow trapping are likely having not aware of any research that has cases where northern Mexican or population-level effects on either investigated potential short- or long- narrow-headed gartersnake fatality from gartersnake. However, if even a few term consequences to gartersnakes from trapping has not been reported, adult females are lost from populations these events, and so we do not consider particularly where trapping has that already have low densities and low electroshock surveys as a substantial occurred in occupied habitat prone to rates of recruitment, these losses would threat to either gartersnake. flash flooding. contribute to population extirpations Trapping methods are also used in Minnow traps are often deployed for and the continued decline in the status fisheries surveys, for other applications monitoring fully aquatic species, such of the gartersnakes. Working with in aquatic species management, and for as fish, and are, therefore, intentionally researchers in the future to minimize the collection of live baitfish in positioned in the water column where the chances of snake drownings and to recreational fishing. One such common they are fully under water. Traps used report any incidental collections of method to study aquatic or semi-aquatic for this purpose may be checked less gartersnakes will be important for future wildlife (including populations of frequently, because risks to gill- conservation of both species. aquatic snakes such as gartersnakes) is breathing aquatic species are less if held Intentional Dewatering—Lastly, through the use of wire minnow traps. in the trap for longer periods of time. As dewatering or water fluctuation When used to monitor gartersnake fish collectively become trapped, the techniques are sometimes considered populations, wire minnow traps are trap becomes incidentally self-baited for for eliminating undesirable fish species anchored to vegetation, logs, etc., along gartersnakes and, if deployed in habitat from water bodies (Finlayson et al. the shoreline (in most applications) and occupied by either northern Mexican or 2010, p. 4). Dewatering of occupied positioned so that half to one-third of narrow-headed gartersnakes, these traps northern Mexican or narrow-headed the trap, along its lateral line, is above may accidentally attract, capture, and gartersnake habitat would have the water surface to allow snakes to drown gartersnakes that are actively deleterious effects to affected surface for air. These traps often attract foraging under water and are lured to populations by removing a primary prey species, such as small fishes and the traps because of captured prey habitat feature and eliminating the prey amphibian larvae (when present), and, species. Neonatal northern Mexican and base. Because northern Mexican therefore, become self-baiting. They are narrow-headed gartersnakes can also gartersnakes often occupy lentic water then checked according to a wriggle through the mesh of some wire bodies or intermittently watered canyon predetermined schedule. Because the minnow traps and become lodged bottoms, where this practice is most wire, twine, etc., used to anchor these halfway through, depending on the pore feasible, effects of dewatering activities traps is fixed in length, these traps may size of the wire mesh (Jaeger 2012, pers. may disproportionately affect that

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38700 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

species. This technique is being Arizona ranks the highest of all 50 some level of effect is still expected considered by the AGFD for pools States in the percentage of native fish based on logistical complications and within Redrock Canyon where northern species with declining trends (85.7 complexities of restoring fish Mexican gartersnakes could be percent). Similar trends in the loss of populations to pre-treatment levels. We adversely affected. We have been made native fish biodiversity have been expect to coordinate with resource aware that northern Mexican described in New Mexico and Mexico. managers in New Mexico as we do in gartersnakes are being considered by the Native amphibians such as the Arizona, to ensure gartersnake AGFD in their implementation planning Chiricahua leopard frog, an important populations are not significantly process. Depending on the availability component of the northern Mexican affected by these activities. However, if of suitable habitat regionally and the gartersnake prey base, have declined proper protocols are not incorporated length of time water is absent, these significantly and may face future into future fish restoration projects, activities may ultimately cause local declines as a result of Bd and harmful these activities will continue to threaten extirpations of gartersnake populations. nonnative species. Historical native frog local gartersnake populations. Other populations have been wholly replaced Summary mechanisms or activities used in by harmful nonnative species, both on fisheries management, such as In our review of the scientific and local and regional scales. These declines electroshocking, trapping, or commercial literature, we have found have directly contributed to subsequent dewatering, can result in the injury or that over time, native aquatic northern Mexican gartersnake death of northern Mexican or narrow- communities, specifically the native population declines or extirpations in headed gartersnakes, where these prey bases for northern Mexican and these areas. An adequate native prey activities coincide with extant narrow-headed gartersnakes, have been base is essential to the conservation and populations, and if they have not been substantially weakened as a result of the recovery of northern Mexican considered in the planning or cumulative effects of disease and gartersnakes, and this native ranid frog implementation processes. The harmful nonnative species. Harmful prey base faces an uncertain future if significance of these losses depends on nonnative species have been harmful nonnative species continue to the status of the gartersnake population intentionally introduced or have persist and expand their distributions in affected and whether or not either naturally dispersed into virtually every occupied habitat. gartersnake, as appropriate, was subbasin throughout the distribution of The best available commercial and considered in project planning. If northern Mexican and narrow-headed scientific information confirms that similar fisheries management gartersnakes in the United States and harmful nonnative species are the most techniques are used in Mexico, we Mexico. According to Geographic important threat to northern Mexican conclude that the northern Mexican Information System (GIS) analyses, and narrow-headed gartersnakes and gartersnake populations in Mexico are nonnative, predatory fish are known to their prey bases, and they have had a threatened by the same mechanisms occur in 90 percent of the historical profound role in their decline. A large described above. distribution of the northern Mexican body of literature documents that gartersnake and 85 percent of the northern Mexican and narrow-headed The presence of harmful nonnative historical distribution of the narrow- gartersnakes are uniquely susceptible to species ultimately affects where headed gartersnake in the United States. the influence of harmful nonnative northern Mexican and narrow-headed Bullfrogs are known to occur in 85 species in their biotic communities. gartersnakes can live as viable percent of the historical distribution of This sensitivity is largely the result of populations. Collectively, the the northern Mexican gartersnake and complex ecological interactions that ubiquitous presence of harmful 53 percent of the historical distribution result in direct predation on nonnative species across the landscape of the narrow-headed gartersnake in the gartersnakes; shifts in biotic community has appreciably reduced the quantity of United States. Crayfish are known to structure from largely native to largely suitable gartersnake habitat and changed occur in 77 percent of the historical nonnative; and competition for a its spatial orientation on the landscape. distribution of the northern Mexican diminished prey base that can Most northern Mexican and narrow- gartersnake and 75 percent of the ultimately result in the injury, headed gartersnake populations, even historical distribution of the narrow- starvation, or death of northern Mexican some considered viable today, live in headed gartersnake in the United States. or narrow-headed gartersnakes followed the presence of harmful nonnative Nonnative, predatory fish, bullfrogs, and by reduced recruitment, population species. While they continue to persist, crayfish are known to occur declines, and extirpations. they do so under constant threat from simultaneously in 65 percent of the Lastly, fisheries management unnatural levels of predation and historical distribution of the northern activities can have negative effects on competition associated with harmful Mexican gartersnake and 44 percent of gartersnake populations when nonnative species. This weakens their the historical distribution of the narrow- gartersnakes are not considered in resistance to other threats, including headed gartersnake in the United States. project planning and implementation. those that affect the physical suitability Native fish are important prey for The use of rotenone and other fisheries of their habitat (discussed below). This northern Mexican gartersnakes but management techniques are important ultimately renders populations much much more so for narrow-headed in the conservation and recovery of less resilient to stochastic, natural, or gartersnakes. Predation by and native fish. However, significant threats anthropogenic stressors that could competition with primarily nonnative, can occur if streams are left without an otherwise be withstood. Over time and predatory fish species, and secondarily intact fish community for extended space, subsequent population declines with brown trout and crayfish, are periods of time. New policies and have threatened the genetic widely considered to be the primary mitigation measures have been representation of each species because reason for major declines in native fish developed in Arizona that will reduce many populations have become communities throughout the range of the likelihood of these activities having disconnected and isolated from both gartersnakes. In Arizona, 19 of 31 negative effects on either northern neighboring populations. Expanding (61 percent) of all native fish species are Mexican or narrow-headed gartersnake distances between extant populations listed under the Act. Consequently, populations in the future. However, coupled with increasing populations of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38701

harmful nonnative species prevents habitat. In the absence of harmful Rosen and Melendez 2006, p. 54; Luja normal colonizing mechanisms that nonnative species, gartersnake and Rodrı´guez-Estrella 2008, pp. 17–22), would otherwise reestablish populations have shown resiliency, or Burger (2007, pp. 1–72) surveyed populations where they have become tolerance, to changes in their physical several sites in remote areas that extirpated. This subsequently leads to a habitat. appeared to be free of nonnative species. reduction in species redundancy when As discussed above, we found In some sites, the physical habitat for isolated, small populations are at harmful nonnative species to be a northern Mexican gartersnakes and increased vulnerability to the effects of significant and widespread factor that similar species of gartersnakes appeared stochastic events, without a means for continues to drive further declines in to be in largely good condition, but few natural recolonization. Ultimately, the and extirpations of gartersnake or no gartersnakes were detected. At effect of scattered, small, and disjunct populations. Furthermore, we found other sites, the physical habitat was populations, without the means to various activities have affected, and drastically affected by overgrazing, rural naturally recolonize, is weakened continue to affect, primary components development, or road crossings; species resiliency as a whole, which of the physical habitat required by however, gartersnakes were relatively ultimately enhances the risk of either or northern Mexican and narrow-headed easily detected, indicating seemingly both species becoming endangered. gartersnakes, even when the potential adequate population densities, but we Therefore, based on the best available impact of harmful nonnatives is absent. do not have the necessary data to scientific and commercial information, These activities, such as dams, water calculate population trends at sampled we conclude that harmful nonnative diversions, groundwater pumping, and localities. Inversely, gartersnake habitat species are the most significant threat to residential and commercial in Arizona and New Mexico is in both the northern Mexican and narrow- development, result in the loss of stream relatively better physical condition headed gartersnake, rangewide. We flow. The period from 1850 to 1940 compared to observations of these expect the impacts from harmful marked the greatest loss and habitats made in Durango and nonnative species to only increase in degradation of riparian and aquatic Chihuahua, Mexico. However, harmful the foreseeable future. The effects of communities in Arizona, many of which nonnative species are essentially these threats on both gartersnakes have were caused by anthropogenic (human- ubiquitous in the southwestern United resulted in the extirpation of a few caused) land uses (Stromberg et al. States, based on our literature review populations already and the decline in 1996, p. 114; Webb and Leake 2005, pp. and GIS modeling. Several sites visited abundance in the vast majority of 305–310). An estimated one-third of by Burger (2007, pp. 1–72) in Durango populations, so we expect the results of Arizona’s wetlands has dried or is no and Chihuahua, Mexico, had physical continuing decline of the gartersnakes, longer suitable (Yuhas 1996, entire). habitat in poor to very poor condition, in terms of additional population losses However, not all aquatic and riparian but were largely free of nonnative and increased risk of extinction in the habitats in the United States that species. These situations are rarely foreseeable future, which we consider as support northern Mexican or narrow- encountered in Arizona and New the next several decades. headed gartersnakes have been degraded Mexico and, therefore, provided Burger or lost. Despite the loss or modification Main Factors That Destroy or Modify the (2007, entire) a unique opportunity to of aquatic and riparian habitat, large examine differences in gartersnake Physical Habitat of Northern Mexican reaches of the Verde, Salt, San Pedro, and Narrow-Headed Gartersnakes population densities based on condition and Gila Rivers, as well as several of of the physical habitat, without the (Factor A) their tributaries, remain functionally confounding effect of harmful nonnative suitable as physical habitat for either Relationship Between Harmful species on resident gartersnake gartersnake species. Nonnative Species and Adverse Effects populations. to Physical Habitat (Northern Mexican Our treatment of how the loss or modification of physical habitat may Our observations of gartersnake and Narrow-headed Gartersnakes) affect the northern Mexican or narrow- populations in Mexico provide evidence The presence or absence of harmful headed gartersnake is based, in part, on for the relative importance of native nonnative species in occupied recent observations made in Mexico that prey species and the lack of nonnative gartersnake habitat affects the tolerance, illustrate the relationship of species in comparison to the physical or sensitivity, of gartersnake gartersnakes’ physical habitat suitability attributes of gartersnake habitat. For populations to factors or activities that to the presence of native prey species example, Burger (2007, pp. 6, 12, 36, 41, threaten to modify or destroy and the lack of harmful nonnative 58, 63) detected moderate to high components of their physical habitat. species, and the presence, or lack densities of gartersnakes at six sites When we use the term ‘‘physical thereof, of attributes associated with where their physical habitat was habitat,’’ we refer to the structural these gartersnakes’ physical habitat. In moderately to highly impacted by land integrity of aquatic and terrestrial 2007, two groups consisting of agency uses but were largely free of nonnatives. components to habitat, such as plant biologists (including U.S. Fish and Burger (2007, pp. 18, 26, 32, 61, 64, 66, species richness and density, available Wildlife Service staff), species experts, 67, 69, 72) also detected either low water, stream banks and substrates, and and field technicians conducted densities or no gartersnakes at nine sites any habitat feature that does not pertain numerous gartersnake surveys in where the physical habitat was in to the animal community, which we Durango and Chihuahua, Mexico moderate to good condition but where also define as a habitat component. The (Burger 2007, p. 1; Burger et al. 2010, nonnative species were detected. Eight animal community (the prey and entire). streams surveyed by Burger (2007, pp. predator species that co-occur within While considerable gartersnake 15, 22, 46, 49, 51–52, 54, 62) had little habitat) is not considered in our usage habitat in Mexico is affected by the to no surface flow, were without fish of ‘‘physical habitat,’’ for reasons presence of harmful nonnative species detections and had few to no described immediately below. In the (Conant 1974, pp. 471, 487–489; gartersnake observations. As a result, we presence of harmful nonnative species, Contreras Balderas and Lozano 1994, have formulated three general gartersnake populations are more pp. 383–384; Unmack and Fagan 2004, hypotheses: (1) Northern Mexican and sensitive to alterations in their physical p. 233; Miller et al. 2005, pp. 60–61; narrow-headed gartersnakes may be

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38702 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

more resilient to adverse effects to Larger dams may prevent movement of in moderate numbers in 1985 (Propst et physical habitat in the absence of fish between populations (which affects al. 1986, p. 83). These relationships are harmful nonnative species and, prey availability for northern Mexican most readily observed in canyon-bound therefore, more sensitive to negative and narrow-headed gartersnakes) and streams, where shelter sought by effects to physical habitat in the dramatically alter the flow regime of nonnative species during large-scale presence of harmful nonnative species; streams through the impoundment of floods is minimal (Propst et al. 2008, p. (2) the presence of an adequate prey water (Ligon et al. 1995, pp. 184–189). 1249). Propst et al. (2008, p. 1246) also base is important for persistence of These diversions also require periodic suggested the effect of nonnative fish gartersnake populations regardless of maintenance and reconstruction, species on native fish communities may whether or not harmful nonnative resulting in potential habitat damages be most significant during periods of species are present; and (3) detections and inputs of sediment into the active natural drought (simulated by artificial and effects from harmful nonnative stream. dewatering). species appear to decrease from north to Flow regimes within stream systems Effects from flood control projects south in the Mexican states of are a primary factor that shape fish threaten riparian and aquatic habitat, as Chihuahua and Durango (from the community assemblages. The timing, well as threaten the northern Mexican United States–Mexico International duration, intensity, and frequency of gartersnake directly in lower Tonto Border), as discussed in Unmack and flood events has been altered to varying Creek. Kimmell (2008, pers. comm.), Fagan (2004, pp. 233–243). degrees by the presence of dams, which Gila County Board of Supervisors (2008, Based on field data collected by has an effect on fish communities pers. comm.), Trammell (2008, pers. Burger (2007, entire), Burger et al. (Rinne et al. 1998, pp. 8–10; 2005, p. 2). comm.), and Sanchez (2008, pers. (2010, entire), and on the above Specifically, Haney et al. (2008, p. 61) comm.) all discuss a growing concern of hypotheses, we evaluated effects to suggested that flood pulses may help to residents that live within or adjacent to physical habitat in the context of the reduce populations of nonnative the floodplain of Tonto Creek in Gila presence or absence of nonnative species, and efforts to increase the County, Arizona, both upstream and species. Effects to the physical habitat of baseflows may assist in sustaining downstream of the town of Gisela, gartersnakes can have varying effects on native prey species for northern Arizona. Specifically, there is growing the gartersnakes themselves depending Mexican and narrow-headed concern to address threats to private on the composition of their biotic gartersnakes. However, the investigators property and associated infrastructure community. In the presence of harmful in this study also suggest that, because posed by flooding of Tonto Creek nonnative species, effects to physical the northern Mexican gartersnake preys (Sanchez 2008, pers. comm.). An habitat, especially those that diminish on both fish and frogs, it may be less important remaining population of or weaken the gartersnake prey base, are affected by reductions in baseflow of northern Mexican gartersnakes within believed to be comparatively more streams (Haney et al. 2008, pp. 82, 93). the Salt River subbasin occurs on Tonto significant than those that do not. As The effect of regulated flow regimes on Creek. In Resolution No. 08–06–02, the previously discussed, harmful the fish community in the Bill Williams Gila County Board of Supervisors nonnative species are essentially River was studied by Pool and Olden proactively declared a state of ubiquitous in Arizona and New Mexico (2014 In press, p. 5), who found the emergency within Gila County as a where the northern Mexican and presence of Alamo Dam having a result of the expectation for heavy rain narrow-headed gartersnakes occur and, negative effect on native fish, while and snowfall causing repetitive flooding therefore, exacerbate the effects from benefitting harmful nonnative species, conditions (Gila County Board of activities or factors that modify or which now account for the majority of Supervisors 2008, pers. comm.). In destroy their physical habitat. the fish fauna, in terms of species response, the Arizona Division of composition and relative biomass, in the Emergency Management called meetings Altering or Dewatering Aquatic Habitat Bill Williams River. and initiated discussions among (Northern Mexican and Narrow-headed Other streams that are not dammed in stakeholders in an attempt to mitigate Gartersnakes) the same watershed still reflect a largely these flooding concerns (Kimmell 2008, Dams and Diversions (Northern native fish community due to the pers. comm., Trammell 2008, pers. Mexican and Narrow-headed presence of a natural flow regime (Pool comm.). Gartersnakes)—The presence of water is and Olden 2014 In press, pp. 5–6). Mitigation measures that have been critical for northern Mexican and Collier et al. (1996, p. 16) mentions that discussed include removal of riparian narrow-headed gartersnakes, as well as water development projects are one of vegetation, removal of debris piles, their prey base. Activities that reduce two main causes for the decline of potential channelization of Tonto Creek, flows or dewater habitat, such as dams, native fish in the Salt and Gila rivers of improvements to existing flood control diversions, flood-control projects, and Arizona. Unregulated flows with structures or addition of new structures, groundwater pumping, seriously elevated discharge events favor native and the construction of new bridges. threaten the physical habitat of the species, and regulated flows, absent Adverse effects from these types of gartersnakes, because both fish and significant discharge events, favor activities to aquatic and riparian habitat, amphibians must have water to survive nonnative species (Propst et al. 2008, p. and to the northern Mexican gartersnake and reproduce and without this prey 1246). Interactions among native fish, or its prey species, will result from the base, gartersnakes cannot persist. Such nonnative fish, and flow regimes were physical alteration or destruction of activities are widespread in Arizona. observed in the upper reaches of the habitat, significant increases to flow For example, municipal water use in East Fork of the Gila River. Prior to the velocity, and removal of key foraging central Arizona increased by 39 percent 1983 and 1984 floods in the Gila River habitat and areas to hibernate, such as from 1998 to 2006 (American Rivers system, native fish occurrence was debris jams. Specifically, flood control 2006), and at least 35 percent of limited, while nonnative fish were projects permanently alter stream flow Arizona’s perennial rivers have been moderately common. Following the characteristics and have the potential to dewatered, assisted by approximately 95 1983 flood event, adult nonnative make the stream unsuitable as habitat dams that are in operation in Arizona predators were generally absent, and for the northern Mexican gartersnake by today (Turner and List 2007, pp. 3, 9). native fish were subsequently collected reducing or eliminating stream sinuosity

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38703

and associated pool and backwater has been completely dewatered by to harmful nonnative species whereas habitats that are critical to northern upstream diversions (Hellekson 2012a, reservoirs that experience greater Mexican gartersnakes and their prey pers. comm.). fluctuations in water levels provide less species. Threats presented by these Additional withdrawals of water from benefit for harmful nonnative species flood control planning efforts are the Gila and San Francisco Rivers may (Paradzick et al. 2006, entire). The considered imminent within the next occur in the next several decades as the timing of fluctuating water levels decade because high flows associated effects of drought and human contributes to their effect; a precipitous with the monsoon are expected to population levels increase. drop in water levels during harmful increase in both intensity and frequency Implementation of Title II of the nonnative fish reproduction is most according to climate change predictions, Arizona Water Settlements Act (AWSA) deleterious to their recruitment as discussed below in the section (Public Law 108–451) would facilitate (Paradzick et al. 2006, entire). A drop in ‘‘Climate Change and Drought.’’ the exchange of Central Arizona Project water levels outside of the reproductive Many streams in New Mexico, water within and between southwestern season of harmful nonnative species has currently or formerly occupied by river basins in Arizona and New less effect on overall population northern Mexican or narrow-headed Mexico, and may result in the dynamics (Paradzick et al. 2006, entire). gartersnakes, have been or could be construction of new water development Large dams can also act as fish barriers, affected by water withdrawals. projects. Section 212 of the AWSA which prevent upstream migration of Approximately 9.5 river mi (15.3 km) of pertains to the New Mexico Unit of the harmful nonnative fish that occur the Gila River mainstem in New Mexico, Central Arizona Project. The AWSA downstream of these structures. from Little Creek to the Gila Bird Area, provides for New Mexico water users to The cross-sectional profile of any are in private ownership and have been deplete 14,000 acre-feet of additional given reservoir also contributes to its channelized, and the water is largely water from the Gila Basin in any 10-year benefit for harmful nonnative fish used for agricultural purposes period. The settlement also provides the species (Paradzick et al. 2006, entire). (Hellekson 2012a, pers. comm.). Below ability to divert that water without Shallow reservoir profiles generally the Highway 180 crossing of the complaint from downstream pre-1968 provide maximum space and elevated mainstem Gila River, several water water rights in Arizona. New Mexico water temperatures favorable to diversions have reduced stream flow will receive $66 million to $128 million reproduction of harmful nonnative (Hellekson 2012a, pers. comm.). in non-reimbursable Federal funding. species, while deep reservoir profiles, Channelization has also affected a The Interstate Stream Commission (ISC) with limited shallow areas, provide privately owned reach of Whitewater funds may be used to cover costs of an commensurately less benefit (Paradzick Creek from the Catwalk downstream to actual water supply project, planning, et al. 2006, entire). Examples of Glenwood, New Mexico (Hellekson environmental mitigation, or restoration reservoirs that benefit harmful 2012a, pers. comm.). The Gila River activities associated with or necessary nonnative species, and therefore downstream of the town of Cliff, New for the project, and may be used on one adversely affect northern Mexican and Mexico, flows through a broad valley or more of 15 alternative projects narrow-headed gartersnakes (presently where irrigated agriculture and livestock ranging from Gila National Forest San or historically), include Horseshoe and grazing are the predominant uses. Francisco River Diversion/Ditch Bartlett Reservoirs on the Verde River, Human settlement has increased since improvements to a regional water and Roosevelt, Saguaro, Canyon, and 1988 (Propst et al. 2008, pp. 1237– supply project (the Deming Diversion Apache Lakes on the Salt River. The 1238). Agricultural practices have led to Project). Currently, 3 of the 15 projects Salt River Project (SRP) operates the dewatering of the river in the Cliff-Gila under consideration include elements of previously mentioned reservoirs on the valley at times during the dry season diversion or storage. At this time, it is Verde and Salt Rivers and, in the case (Soles 2003, p. 71). For those portions not known how the funds will be spent of Horseshoe and Bartlett Reservoirs, of the Gila River downstream of the or which potential alternatives may be received section 10(a)(1)(B) take Arizona–New Mexico border, chosen. While multiple potential project authorization under the Act for adverse agricultural diversions and groundwater proposals have been accepted by the effects to several avian and aquatic pumping have caused declines in the New Mexico Office of the State Engineer species (including northern Mexican water table, and surface flows in the (NMOSE) (NMOSE 2011a, p. 1), and narrow-headed gartersnakes) central portion of the river basin are implementation of the AWSA is still in through a comprehensive threat diverted for agriculture (Leopold 1997, the planning stages on these streams, minimization and mitigation program pp. 63–64; Tellman et al. 1997, pp. 101– and final notice is expected by the end found in SRP’s habitat conservation 104). of 2014. Should water be diverted from plan (SRP 2008, entire). There is no The San Francisco River in New the Gila or San Francisco Rivers, flows such minimization and mitigation Mexico has undergone sedimentation, would be diminished and direct and program developed for the operation of riparian habitat degradation, and indirect losses and degradation of Lake Roosevelt, where comparatively extensive water diversion, and at habitat for the narrow-headed limited fluctuation in reservoir levels present has an undependable water gartersnake and its prey species would benefit harmful nonnative species and supply throughout portions of its length result. negatively affect northern Mexican or (Hellekson 2012a, pers. comm.; 2013, In addition to affecting the natural narrow-headed gartersnakes and their pers. comm.). The San Francisco River behavior of streams and rivers through prey bases in Tonto Creek. A detailed is seasonally dry in the Alma Valley, changes in timing, intensity, and analysis of the effects of reservoir and two diversion structures fragment duration of flood events, dams create operations on aquatic communities is habitat in the upper Alma Valley and at reservoirs that alter resident fish provided in our intra-Service biological Pleasanton (NMDGF 2006, p. 302). An communities (Paradzick et al. 2006, and conference opinion provided in approximate 2-stream-mi (3.2-km) reach entire). Water level fluctuation can USFWS (2008, pp. 112–131). of the lower San Francisco River affect the degree of benefit to harmful The Effect of Human Population between the Glenwood Diversion and nonnative fish species. Reservoirs that Growth and Development on Water Alma Bridge, which would otherwise be experience limited or slow fluctuations Demands and Gartersnake Habitat good narrow-headed gartersnake habitat, in water levels are especially beneficial (Northern Mexican and Narrow-headed

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38704 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Gartersnakes)—Arizona’s population is northern Mexican and narrow-headed change is relatively recent, instream expected to double from 5 million to 10 gartersnakes, through June 2012, to be in water rights have low priority, and are million people by the year 2030, which ‘‘severe drought.’’ Ongoing drought often never fulfilled because more will put increasing pressure on water conditions have depleted recharge of senior diversion rights have priority. demands (Overpeck 2008, entire). aquifers and decreased base flows in the Existing water laws are considered Arizona increased its population by 474 region. While drought periods have outdated and reflect a legislative percent from 1960 to 2006 (Gammage been relatively numerous in the arid interpretation of water resources that is 2008, p. 15) and is second only to Southwest from the mid-1800s to the not consistent with current scientific Nevada as the fastest growing State in present, the effects of human-caused understanding of the hydrologic terms of human population (Social impacts on riparian and aquatic connection between groundwater and Science Data Analysis Network communities have compromised the surface water (Gelt 2008, pp. 1–12). (SSDAR) (2000, p. 1). Over ability of these communities to function Water for development and approximately the same time period, under the additional stress of prolonged urbanization is often supplied by population growth rates in Arizona drought conditions. Below we further groundwater pumping and surface water counties where northern Mexican or discuss the effect of climate change- diversions from sources that include narrow-headed gartersnake habitat induced drought in the future. reservoirs and Central Arizona Project’s exists have varied by county but are no The Arizona Department of Water allocations from the Colorado River. As less remarkable, and all are increasing: Resources (ADWR) manages water stated previously, groundwater Maricopa (463 percent); Pima (318 supplies in Arizona and has established pumping creates a cone of depression percent); Santa Cruz (355 percent); five Active Management Areas (AMAs) within the affected aquifer that slowly Cochise (214 percent); Yavapai (579 across the State (ADWR 2006, entire). radiates outward from the well site. percent); Gila (199 percent); Graham An AMA is established by ADWR when When the cone of depression intersects (238 percent); Apache (228 percent); an area’s water demand has exceeded the hyporheic zone of a stream (the Navajo (257 percent); Yuma (346 the groundwater supply and an active transition zone between two percent); LaPaz (142 percent); and overdraft has occurred. In these areas, adjacent ecological communities under Mohave (2,004 percent) (SSDAR 2000, groundwater use has exceeded the rate or beside a stream channel or floodplain entire). From 1960 to 2006, the Phoenix where precipitation can recharge the between the surface water and metropolitan area alone grew by 608 aquifer, and these areas are subject to groundwater that contributes water to percent, and the Tucson metropolitan regulation pursuant to Arizona’s the stream itself), the surface water flow area grew by 356 percent (Gammage Groundwater Code with a goal of may decrease, and the subsequent 2008, p. 15). Population growth in balancing groundwater use with drying of riparian and wetland Arizona is expected to be focused along recharge (reaching safe yield) by the vegetative communities can follow. wide swaths of land from the year 2025. Geographically, these five Continued groundwater pumping at international border in Nogales, through AMAs overlap the historical such levels draws down the aquifer Tucson, Phoenix, and north into distribution of the northern Mexican or sufficiently to create a water-level Yavapai County (called the Sun narrow-headed gartersnake, or both, in gradient away from the stream and Corridor ‘‘Megapolitan’’) and is Arizona. The establishment of these floodplain (Webb and Leake 2005, p. predicted to have 8 million people by AMAs further illustrates the condition 309). Complete disconnection of the of limited water availability for riparian aquifer and the stream results in strong 2030, an 82.5 percent increase from habitat in these areas both currently and negative effects to riparian vegetation 2000 (Gammage et al. 2008, pp. 15, 22– into the future, and they indicate a (Webb and Leake 2005, p. 309) that 23). If build-out occurs as expected, it cause of concern for the long-term result in a reduction or loss in surface could indirectly affect (through maintenance of northern Mexican and water and riparian vegetation that can increased recreation pressure and narrow-headed gartersnake habitat. reduce or eliminate the local prey base demand for water) currently occupied These areas are already vulnerable to that gartersnakes depend on for habitat for the northern Mexican or declines in surface and groundwater survival. narrow-headed gartersnake, particularly availability, and surface water may not The arid southwestern United States regional populations in lower Cienega be sustainable to support the is characterized by limited annual Creek near Vail, Arizona, and the Verde gartersnakes’ prey base. An overdraft of precipitation, which means limited Valley, and, to a lesser extent, Red Rock groundwater withdrawal creates what is annual recharge of groundwater Canyon in extreme south-central referred to as a cone of depression aquifers; even modest changes in Arizona. within the groundwater. Reduced or groundwater levels from groundwater The effect of the increased water eliminated surface flow can result in pumping can affect above-ground withdrawals may be exacerbated by the areas where these cones of depression stream flow as evidenced by depleted current, long-term drought facing the intersect with stream alluvium (deposits flows in the Santa Cruz, Verde, San arid southwestern United States, which in a valley a stream flows through). Pedro, Blue, and lower Gila rivers as a is predicted to continue. The effect of The presence of surface water is a result of regional groundwater demands long-term drought has already been primary habitat component for northern (Stromberg et al. 1996, pp. 113, 124– observed in the Southwest. Philips and Mexican and narrow-headed 128; Rinne et al. 1998, p. 9; Voeltz 2002, Thomas (2005, pp. 1–4) provided stream gartersnakes. Existing water laws in pp. 45–47, 69–71; Haney et al. 2009 p. flow records that indicate that the Arizona and New Mexico may not be 1). Groundwater demands are expected drought Arizona experienced between fully adequate to protect gartersnake to reduce surface water flow in Arivaca 1999 and 2004 was the worst drought habitat from the dewatering effects of Creek, Babocomari River, lower Cienega since the early 1940s and possibly groundwater withdrawals. New Mexico Creek, San Pedro River, upper Verde earlier. The Arizona Drought water law now includes provisions for River, and Agua Fria River over the next Preparedness Plan Monitoring instream water rights to protect fish and several decades (Haney et al. 2009 p. 3, Technical Committee (ADPPMTC) wildlife and their habitats. Arizona Table 2), which historically or currently (2012) determined the drought status water law also recognizes such support northern Mexican or narrow- within the Arizona distributions of provisions; however, because this headed gartersnake populations. If

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38705

surface flow is lost entirely from Scientific studies have shown a link agreement that it is the largest water additional stress caused by drought between the Big Chino aquifer and user in the basin (Harris et al. 2001, p. induced by projected climate change in spring flows that form the headwaters of 213; Varady et al. 2000, p. 232). Along the Southwest, local or regional the Verde River. It is estimated that 80 the upper San Pedro River, Stromberg et extirpations of both gartersnake species to 86 percent of baseflow in the upper al. (1996, pp. 124–127) found that are likely to occur. Verde River comes from the Big Chino wetland herbaceous species, important Water depletion is a concern for the aquifer (Wirt 2005, p. G8). An in-depth as cover for northern Mexican Verde River (Garner et al. 2013, entire). discussion of the potential effects to the gartersnakes, are the most sensitive to For example, the City of Prescott, Verde River from pumping of the Big the effects of a declining groundwater Arizona, experienced a 22 percent Chino Aquifer is available in Marder level. Webb and Leake (2005, pp. 302, increase in population between 2000 (2009, pp. 183–189). However, while 318–320) described a correlative trend and 2005 (U.S. Census Bureau 2010, p. these withdrawals could potentially regarding vegetation along southwestern 1), averaging around 4 percent growth dewater the upper 26 mi (42 km) of the streams from historically being per year (City of Prescott 2010, p. 1). In Verde River (Wirt and Hjalmarson 2000, dominated by marshy grasslands addition, the towns of Prescott Valley p. 4; Marder 2009, pp. 188–189), it is preferable to northern Mexican and Chino Valley experienced growth uncertain that this project will occur gartersnakes, to currently being rates of 66 and 67 percent, respectively given the cost and administrative dominated by woody species that are (Arizona Department of Commerce challenges it faces. An agreement in more tolerant of declining water tables 2009a, p. 1; 2009b, p. 1). This growth is principle was signed among the Salt due to their deeper rooting depths. The facilitated by groundwater pumping in River Project, the City of Prescott, and cone of depression associated with the Verde River basin. In 2004, the cities Town of Prescott Valley to work toward regional groundwater pumping is of Prescott and Prescott Valley resolution of water rights in the Verde expected to continue expanding its purchased a ranch in the Big Chino watershed, and, in 2012, influence on surface flow in the San basin in the headwaters of the Verde Comprehensive Agreement No. 1, which Pedro River over the next several River, with the intent of drilling new established monitoring and modeling decades, which is expected to further wells to supply up to approximately 5 plans, was entered into. Within the reduce surface flow in the river and million cubic meters (4,000 acre-feet Verde River subbasin, and particularly negatively affect riparian vegetation (AF)) of groundwater per year. Barnett within the Verde Valley, where the (Stromberg et al. 1996, pp. 124–128). and Hawkins (2002, Table 4) reported northern Mexican and narrow-headed Another primary groundwater user in population census data from 1970, as gartersnakes could occur, several other the San Pedro subbasin is Fort well as projections for 2030, for activities continue to threaten surface Huachuca. Fort Huachuca is a U.S. communities situated along the middle flows (Rinne et al. 1998, p. 9; Paradzick Army installation located near Sierra Verde River or within the Verde River et al. 2006, pp. 104–110). subbasin as a whole, such as Clarkdale, Portions of the Verde River or its Vista, Arizona. Initially established in Cottonwood, Jerome, and Sedona. From tributaries are permanently or 1877 as a camp for the military, the Fort 1970–2000, population growth was seasonally dewatered by water has some of the earliest priority dates recorded as Clarkdale (384 percent), diversions for agriculture (Paradzick et for water rights in the state (Varady et Cottonwood (352 percent), Jerome (113 al. 2006, pp. 104–110). The demands for al. 2000, p. 230). Fort Huachuca has percent), and Sedona (504 percent) surface water allocations from rapidly pursued a rigorous water use reduction (Barnett and Hawkins 2002, Table 4). growing communities and agricultural plan, working over the past decade to Projected growth in these same and mining interests have altered flows reduce groundwater consumption in the communities from 1970–2030 was or dewatered significant reaches during Sierra Vista subbasin. Their efforts have tabulated at Clarkdale (620 percent), the spring and summer months in some focused primarily on reductions in Cottonwood (730 percent), Jerome (292 of the Verde River’s larger, formerly groundwater demand both on-post and percent), and Sedona (818 percent) perennial tributaries such as Wet Beaver off-post and increased artificial and (Barnett and Hawkins 2002, Table 4). Creek, West Clear Creek, and the East enhanced recharge of the groundwater Garner et al. (2013, p. 5) found that Verde River (Girmendonk and Young system. Annual pumping from Fort the Verde Valley population grew 13 1993, pp. 45–47; Sullivan and Huachuca production wells has percent in 10 years from 63,000 in 2000 Richardson 1993, pp. 38–39; Paradzick decreased from a high of approximately to 71,000 in 2010. These examples of et al. 2006, pp. 104–110), which may 3,200 AF in 1989, to a low of documented and projected population have supported either the northern approximately 1,400 AF in 2005. In growth within the Verde River subbasin Mexican or narrow-headed gartersnake, addition, Fort Huachuca and the City of indicate ever-increasing water demands or both. Groundwater pumping in the Sierra Vista have increased the amount that have impacted base flow in the Tonto Creek drainage regularly of water recharged to the regional Verde River and are expected to eliminates surface flows during parts of aquifer through construction of effluent continue. The middle and lower Verde the year (Abarca and Weedman 1993, p. recharge facilities and detention basins River has limited or no flow during 2). that not only increase stormwater portions of the year due to agricultural Further south in Arizona, portions of recharge but mitigate the negative diversion and upstream impoundments, the once-perennial San Pedro River are effects of increased runoff from and it has several impoundments in its now ephemeral, and water withdrawals urbanization. The amount of effluent middle reaches, which could expand are a concern for the San Pedro River that was recharged by Fort Huachuca the area of impacted northern Mexican (USGS 2013, p. 3). The Cananea Mine in and the City of Sierra Vista in 2005 was and narrow-headed gartersnake habitat. Sonora, Mexico, owns the land 426 AF and 1,868 AF, respectively. Blasch et al. (2006, p. 2) suggests that surrounding the headwaters of the San During this same year, enhanced groundwater storage in the Verde River Pedro. There is disagreement on the stormwater recharge at detention basins subbasin has already declined due to exact amount of water withdrawn by the was estimated to be 129 AF. The total groundwater pumping and reductions in mine, Mexicana de Cananea, which is net effect of all the combined efforts natural channel recharge resulting from one of the largest open-pit copper mines initiated by Fort Huachuca has been to stream flow diversions. in the world. However, there is reduce the net groundwater

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38706 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

consumption by approximately 2,272 post-closure of the Rosemont Copper Mexican and narrow-headed AF (71 percent) since 1989 (USFWS Mine, should it be permitted for gartersnakes. 2007b, pp. 41–42). Additional water development (see http:// The ecology and natural histories of conservation and recharge efforts have www.rosemonteis.us/final-eis). northern Mexican and narrow-headed since been implemented by Fort The best available scientific and gartersnakes are strongly linked to Huachuca and have reduced the Fort’s commercial information indicates that water. As discussed above, the northern effect on baseflow in the upper San any reduction in the presence or Mexican gartersnake is a highly aquatic Pedro River to near zero, as analyzed in availability of water is a significant species and relies largely upon other a recent section 7 consultation (see threat to northern Mexican and narrow- aquatic species, such as ranid frogs and http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/ headed gartersnakes, their prey base, native and nonnative, soft-rayed fish as arizona/Documents/Biol_Opin/120173_ and their habitat. This is because water prey. The narrow-headed gartersnake is Fort%20HuachucaFINALBO_ is a fundamental need that supports the the most aquatic of the southwestern 3.31.2014.pdf). necessary aquatic and riparian habitats gartersnakes and is a specialized Groundwater withdrawal in Eagle and prey species needed by both species predator on native and nonnative, soft- Creek, primarily for water supplying the of gartersnake. Through GIS analyses, rayed fish found primarily in clear, large open-pit copper mine at Morenci, we found that approximately 32 percent rocky, higher elevation streams. Because Arizona, dries portions of the stream of formerly perennial streams have been of their aquatic nature, they may be (Sublette et al. 1990, p. 19; USFWS dewatered within the historical uniquely susceptible to environmental 2005; Propst et al. 1986, p. 7) that distribution of the northern Mexican change, especially factors associated otherwise supports habitat for narrow- gartersnake. Within the historical with climate change (Wood et al. 2011, headed gartersnakes. Mining is the distribution of the narrow-headed p. 3). Together, these factors are likely largest industrial water user in gartersnake, approximately 13 percent to make northern Mexican and narrow- southeastern Arizona (ADWR Undated of formerly perennial streams have been headed gartersnakes vulnerable to (accessed 2014), p. 62). The Morenci dewatered. With continued human effects of climate change and drought mine on Chase Creek is North America’s population growth and corresponding discussed below. Several climate-related trends have largest producer of copper, covering water use throughout the range of both been detected since the 1970s in the approximately 24,281 hectares (ha) gartersnakes, we expect the loss of southwestern United States, including (60,000 acres (ac)). Water for the habitat due to reduction in stream flows increases in surface temperatures, Morenci mine is pumped from the Black to increase in the foreseeable future and River as an inter-basin transfer via rainfall intensity, drought, heat waves, result in additional declines and pipeline and open channel to Willow extreme high temperatures, and average extirpations of gartersnake populations. Creek, an east-flowing tributary to Eagle low temperatures (Overpeck 2008, Creek, then downstream more than 30 Climate Change and Drought entire). Annual precipitation amounts in stream miles (50 km) to a facility where (Northern Mexican and Narrow-headed the southwestern United States may water is withdrawn and pumped uphill gartersnake)—Our analyses under the decrease by 10 percent by the year 2100 to the mine in the adjacent Chase Creek Act include consideration of ongoing (Overpeck 2008, entire). Seager et al. drainage (Arizona Department of Water and projected changes in climate. The (2007, pp. 1181–1184) analyzed 19 Resources 2009, p. 1; Marsh 2013, pers. terms ‘‘climate’’ and ‘‘climate change’’ different computer models of differing comm.). We are not aware of plans for are defined by the Intergovernmental variables to estimate the future the closure of the Morenci Mine over Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). climatology of the southwestern United the next several years, and as the price ‘‘Climate’’ refers to the mean and States and northern Mexico in response for copper increases, the demand for variability of different types of weather to predictions of changing climatic copper mining will increase into the conditions over time, with 30 years patterns. All but 1 of the 19 models future. being a typical period for such predicted a drying trend within the The Rosemont Copper Mine proposed measurements, although shorter or Southwest; one predicted a trend to be constructed in the northeastern longer periods also may be used (IPCC toward a wetter climate (Seager et al. area of the Santa Rita Mountains in 2007, p. 78). The term ‘‘climate change’’ 2007, p. 1181). A total of 49 projections Santa Cruz County, Arizona, will thus refers to a change in the mean or were created using the 19 models, and include a mine pit that will be variability of one or more measures of all but 3 predicted a shift to increasing excavated to a depth greater than that of climate (e.g., temperature or aridity (dryness) in the Southwest as the regional aquifer. Water will thus precipitation) that persists for an early as 2021–2040 (Seager et al. 2007, drain from storage in the aquifer into the extended period, typically decades or p. 1181). Northern Mexican and pit. The need to dewater the pit during longer, whether the change is due to particularly narrow-headed mining operations will thus result in natural variability, human activity, or gartersnakes, and their prey bases, ongoing removal of aquifer water both (IPCC 2007, p. 78). Various types depend on permanent or nearly storage. Upon cessation of mining, a pit of changes in climate can have direct or permanent water for survival. A large lake will form, and evaporation from indirect effects on species. These effects percentage of habitats within the current this water body will continue to remove may be positive, neutral, or negative and distribution of northern Mexican and water from storage in the regional they may change over time, depending narrow-headed gartersnakes are aquifer. This aquifer also supplies on the species and other relevant predicted to be at risk of becoming more baseflow to Cienega Creek, immediately considerations, such as the effects of arid with reductions in snow pack east of the proposed project site. Several interactions of climate with other levels by 2021–2040 (Seager et al. 2007, groundwater models have been variables (e.g., habitat fragmentation) pp. 1183–1184). This has severe developed to analyze potential effects of (IPCC 2007, pp. 8–14, 18–19). In our implications for the integrity of aquatic expected groundwater withdrawals. The analyses, we use our expert judgment to and riparian ecosystems and the water latest independent models indicate that weigh relevant information, including that supports them. a potentially significant reduction to uncertainty, in our consideration of In assessing potential effects of baseflows in Cienega Creek and Emprire various aspects of climate change and predicted climate change to river Gulch are expected within 50 years their predicted effects on northern systems in New Mexico, Molles (2007,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38707

entire) found that: (1) Variation in Chiricahua leopard frog was also found These nonnative predatory species stream flow will likely be higher than to be the most vulnerable in terms of its evolved in river systems with variation in precipitation; (2) predicted physiology (Coe et al. 2012, p. 18). hydrographs that were largely stable, effects such as warming and drying are Relative uncertainty for the not punctuated by flood pulses in which expected to result in higher variability vulnerability assessment provided by native species evolved and benefit from. in stream flows; and (3) high-elevation Coe et al. (2012, Table 2.2) ranged from Propst et al. (2008, p. 1246) also fish and non-flying invertebrates (which 0 to 8 (higher score means greater suggested that nonnative fish species are prey for gartersnake prey species) uncertainty), and the northern Mexican may benefit from drought. are at greatest risk from effects of gartersnake score was 3, meaning that Changes to climatic patterns may predicted climate change. Enquist and the vulnerability assessment was more warm water temperatures, alter stream Gori (2008, p. iii) found that most of certain than not. Coe et al. (2012, entire) flow events, and increase demand for New Mexico’s mid- to high-elevation focused their assessment of species water storage and conveyance systems forests and woodlands have experienced vulnerability to climate change on those (Rahel and Olden 2008, pp. 521–522). either consistently warmer and drier occurring on the Coronado National Warmer water temperatures across conditions or greater variability in Forest in southeastern Arizona. temperate regions are predicted to temperature and precipitation from However, it is not unreasonable to expand the distribution of existing 1991 to 2005. However, Enquist et al. hypothesize that results might be harmful nonnative species, which (2008, p. v) found the upper Gila and applicable in a larger, regional context evolved in warmer water temperatures, San Francisco subbasins, which support as applied in most climate models. by providing 31 percent more suitable narrow-headed gartersnake populations, The bullfrog, also assessed by Coe et habitat. This conclusion is based upon have experienced very little change in al. (2012, pp. 16, 18, Table 2.2), was studies that compared the thermal moisture stress during the same period. shown to be significantly less tolerances of 57 fish species with Cavazos and Arriaga (2010, entire) vulnerable to predicted climate change predictions made from climate change found that average temperatures along than either northern Mexican temperature models (Mohseni et al. the Mexican Plateau in Mexico could gartersnakes or Chiricahua leopard frogs 2003, p. 389). Eaton and Scheller (1996, rise in the range of 1.8 °F (1 °C) to 9 °F with an uncertainty score of 1 (very p. 1,111) reported that, while several (5 °C) in the next 20 years, according to certain). We suspect bullfrogs were cold-water fish species (such as trout, a their models. Cavazos and Arriaga found to be less vulnerable by Coe et al. prey species for narrow-headed (2010, entire) also found that (2012) to predicted climate change in gartersnakes) in North America are precipitation may decrease up to 12 southeastern Arizona due to their expected to have reductions in their percent over the next 20 years in the dispersal and colonization capabilities, distribution from effects of climate same region, with pronounced decreases capacity for self-sustaining cannibalistic change, several harmful nonnative in winter and spring precipitation. populations, and ecological dominance species are expected to increase their Potential drought associated with where they occur. Based upon climate distribution. In the southwestern United changing climatic patterns may change models, nonnative species States, this situation may occur where adversely affect the amphibian prey biology, and ecological observations, the quantity of water is sufficient to base for the northern Mexican Rahel et al. (2008, p. 551) concluded sustain effects of potential prolonged gartersnake. Amphibians may be among that climate change could foster the drought conditions but where water the first vertebrates to exhibit broad- expansion of nonnative aquatic species temperature may warm to a level found scale changes in response to changes in into new areas, magnify the effects of suitable to harmful nonnative species global climatic patterns due to their existing aquatic nonnative species that were previously physiologically sensitivity to changes in moisture and where they currently occur, increase precluded from occupation of these temperature (Reaser and Blaustein 2005, nonnative predation rates, and heighten areas. Species that are particularly p. 61). Changes in temperature and the virulence of disease outbreaks in harmful to northern Mexican and moisture, combined with the ongoing North America. narrow-headed gartersnake populations, threat to amphibians from the Rahel and Olden (2008, p. 526) expect such as the green sunfish, channel persistence of disease-causing bacteria that increases in water temperatures in catfish, largemouth bass, and bluegill, such as Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis drier climates such as the southwestern are expected to increase their (Bd) may cause prey species to United States will result in periods of distribution by 7.4 percent, 25.2 experience increased physiological prolonged low flows and stream drying. percent, 30.4 percent, and 33.3 percent, stress and decreased immune system These effects from changing climatic respectively (Eaton and Scheller 1996, function, possibly leading to disease conditions may have profound effects p. 1,111). outbreaks (Carey and Alexander 2003, on the amount, permanency, and quality Vanishing Cienegas (Northern pp. 111–121; Pounds et al. 2006, pp. of habitat for northern Mexican and Mexican Gartersnake)—Cienegas are 161–167). Of the 30 different vertebrate narrow-headed gartersnakes as well as particularly important habitat for the species in the Sky Island region of their prey base. Changes in amount or northern Mexican gartersnake because southeastern Arizona, the northern type of winter precipitation may affect these areas present ideal habitat Mexican gartersnake was found to be snowpack levels as well as the timing of characteristics for the species and its the fifth most vulnerable (total their discharge into high-elevation prey base and have been shown to combined score) to predicted climate streams. Low or no snowpack levels support robust populations of both change; one of its primary prey species, would jeopardize the amount and (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, p. 14). the Chiricahua leopard frog, was reliability of stream flow during the arid Hendrickson and Minckley (1984, p. determined to be the fourth most spring and early summer months, which 131) defined cienegas as ‘‘mid-elevation vulnerable (Coe et al. 2012, p. 16). Both would increase water temperatures to (3,281–6,562 ft (1,000–2000 m)) the northern Mexican gartersnake and unsuitable levels or eliminate flow wetlands characterized by permanently the Chiricahua leopard frog ranked the altogether. Harmful nonnative species saturated, highly organic, reducing highest of all species assessed for such as largemouth bass are expected to (lowering of oxygen level) soils.’’ Many vulnerability of their habitat to benefit from prolonged periods of low of these unique communities of the predicted climate change, and the flow (Rahel and Olden 2008, p. 527). southwestern United States, Arizona in

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38708 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

particular, and Mexico have been lost in observed within the areas of greater High stream-side recreation levels can the past century to streambed Tucson and Phoenix, Arizona, where result in increased siltation of streams, modification, intensive livestock impacts have modified riparian which can result in lower recruitment grazing, woodcutting, artificial drainage vegetation, structurally altered stream rates of native fish and, therefore, structures, stream flow stabilization by channels, facilitated nonnative species negatively affect the prey base for upstream dams, channelization, and introductions, and dewatered large narrow-headed gartersnakes (Nowak stream flow reduction from groundwater reaches of formerly perennial rivers and Santana-Bendix 2002, pp. 37–38). pumping and water diversions where the northern Mexican gartersnake In the arid Gila River Basin, recreational (Hendrickson and Minckley 1984, p. historically occurred (Santa Cruz, lower impacts are disproportionately 161). Stromberg et al. (1996, p. 114) Gila, and lower Salt Rivers, distributed along streams as a primary state that cienegas were formerly respectively). Urbanization and focus for recreation (Briggs 1996, p. 36). extensive along streams of the development of these areas, along with Within the range of the northern Southwest; however, most were the introduction of nonnative species, Mexican and narrow-headed destroyed during the late 1800s, when are largely responsible for the likely gartersnakes in the United States, the groundwater tables declined several extirpation of the northern Mexican majority of the occupied areas occur on meters and stream channels became gartersnake from these regions. Federal lands, which are managed for incised. Drying trends are expected to Development near riparian areas recreation and other purposes. On the continue into the next several decades usually leads to increased recreation. Gila National Forest, and associated and likely beyond. Riparian areas located near urban areas private, state, or non-Forest Service Development and Recreation Within are vulnerable to the effects of increased inholdings in the area, heavy recreation Riparian Corridors (Northern Mexican recreation. An example of such an area use can affect gartersnakes within and Narrow-headed Gartersnake)— within the existing distribution of both occupied narrow-headed gartersnake Development within and adjacent to the northern Mexican and narrow- habitat along the Middle Fork Gila riparian areas has proven to be a headed gartersnake is the Verde Valley. River, the West Fork Gila River between significant threat to riparian biological The reach of the Verde River that winds Cliff Dwellings and Little Creek, and communities and their suitability for through the Verde Valley receives a high Whitewater Creek from the Catwalk to native species (Medina 1990, p. 351; amount of recreational use from people Glenwood (Hellekson 2012a, pers. Nowak and Santana-Bendix 2002, p. living in central Arizona (Paradzick et comm.). Much of the recreation use in 37). Riparian communities are sensitive al. 2006, pp. 107–108). Increased human these areas is related to hiking and to even low levels (less than 10 percent) use results in the trampling of near- backpacking, which are not a threat to of urban development within a subbasin shore vegetation, which reduces cover gartersnakes except when increased (Wheeler et al. 2005, p. 142). for gartersnakes, especially newborns. human visitation leads to more Development along or within proximity Increased human visitation in occupied gartersnake encounters and potentially to riparian zones can alter the nature of habitat also increases the potential for more killing of gartersnakes where the stream flow dramatically, changing adverse human interactions with foot trail is near the canyon bottom (see once-perennial streams into ephemeral gartersnakes, which frequently leads to ‘‘Adverse Human Interactions with streams, which has direct consequences the capture, injury, or death of the snake Gartersnakes’’ below). on the riparian community (Medina (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, p. 43; Ernst 1990, pp. 358–359). Medina (1990, pp. and Zug 1996, p. 75; Green 1997, pp. Urbanization on smaller scales can 358–359) correlated tree density and age 285–286; Nowak and Santana-Bendix also impact habitat suitability and the class representation to stream flow in a 2002, pp. 37–39). prey base for the northern Mexican or high-elevation system with a narrow Oak Creek Canyon, which represents narrow-headed gartersnakes, such as alluvium basin, finding that decreased an important source population for along Tonto Creek, within the Verde flow reduced tree densities and narrow-headed gartersnakes, is also a Valley, and the vicinity of Rock Springs generally resulted in few to no small- well-known example of an area with along the Agua Fria River (Girmendonk diameter trees. Small-diameter trees very high recreation levels (Nowak and and Young 1997, pp. 45–52; Voeltz assist northern Mexican and narrow- Santana-Bendix 2002, p. 37). In 1995, 2002, pp. 58–59, 69–71; Holycross et al. headed gartersnakes by providing 1.3 million people visited the Red Rock 2006, pp. 53, 56; Paradzick et al. 2006, additional habitat complexity, Ranger District, which includes Oak pp. 89–90). One of the more stable thermoregulatory opportunities, and Creek Canyon and the Sedona, Arizona populations of the northern Mexican cover needed to reduce predation risk area; that figure climbed to six million gartersnake in the United States, at the and enhance the usefulness of areas for visitors by 1999 (Nowak and Santana- Page Springs and Bubbling Ponds fish maintaining optimal body temperature. Bendix 2002, p. 37). Recreational hatcheries along Oak Creek, is likely to Development along lower elevation activities in the Southwest are often be affected by future small-scale streams with broad alluvial basins may heavily tied to water bodies and riparian development over the next decade. As have different effects on stream flow areas, due to the general lack of surface mitigation for effects to species covered and riparian vegetation, as compared to water on the landscape. Increased under their habitat conservation plan for high-elevation streams. The presence of recreational impacts on the quantity and the operation of Horseshoe and Bartlett small shrubs and trees may be quality of water, as well as the adjacent Reservoirs on the Verde River, the Salt particularly important for the narrow- vegetation, negatively affect northern River Project will be funding headed gartersnake (Deganhardt et al. Mexican and narrow-headed development improvements and 1996, p. 327). Development within gartersnakes. The impacts to riparian capacity expansion at these State-owned occupied riparian habitat also likely habitat from recreation can include and operated hatcheries for the purpose increases the number of human- movement of people or livestock, such of creating a native fish hatchery. gartersnake encounters and, therefore, as horses or mules, along stream banks, Construction is likely to include the the frequency of adverse human trampling, loss of vegetation, and replacement of earthen ponds currently interaction, described below. increased danger of fire starts (Northern used by the gartersnakes, with Obvious examples of the influence of Arizona University 2005, p. 136; Monz modernized non-earthen units. urbanization and development can be et al. 2010, pp. 553–554). However, the AGFD is committed to

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38709

maintaining the healthy population of uses, are linked to significant human (dewatering, nonnative species, p. 247); northern Mexican gartersnakes at these population growth over the past century the Rıó Papaloapan (pollution, p. 252); hatcheries, and is investigating land use in Mexico. Mexico’s human population and the Rıó Pańuco Basin (nonnative options to improve gartersnake habitat. grew 700 percent from 1910 to 2000 species, p. 295). These examples should A variety of activities associated with (Miller et al. 2005, p. 60). Mexico’s not be construed as to suggest that all ongoing and future operation of the population increased by 245 percent native fishes are threatened and all hatchery is likely to contribute to some from 1950 to 2002 and is projected to aquatic habitat or ecosystems are in level of fatality in resident gartersnakes, grow by another 28 percent by 2025 peril. Rather, these examples suggest but that level might be offset by a (EarthTrends 2005, p. 1). Growth is that threats may be localized in some mitigation strategy when adopted. concentrated in Mexico’s northern states examples and wider-ranging in others, Diminishing Water Quantity and (Stoleson et al. 2005, Table 3.1) and is but collectively several types of threats Quality in Mexico (Northern Mexican now skewed towards urban areas (Miller are acting in various degrees across Gartersnake)—While effects to riparian et al. 2005, p. 60). The human numerous drainages in Mexico, and aquatic communities affect both the population of Sonora, Mexico, doubled throughout the range of the northern northern Mexican gartersnake and the in size from 1970 (1.1 million) to 2000 Mexican gartersnake. This provides narrow-headed gartersnake in the (2.2 million) (Stoleson et al. 2005, p. some level of insight into the status of United States, Mexico provides habitat 54). The population of Sonora is native aquatic ecosystems within its only for the northern Mexican expected to increase by 23 percent, to range. gartersnake. Threats to northern 2.7 million people, in 2020 (Stoleson et Excessive sedimentation also appears Mexican gartersnake habitat in Mexico al. 2005, p. 54). Increasing trends in to be a significant problem for aquatic include intensive livestock grazing, Mexico’s human population will habitat in Mexico. Recent estimates urbanization and development, water continue to place additional stress on indicate that 80 percent of Mexico is diversions and groundwater pumping, the country’s freshwater resources and affected by soil erosion caused by loss of vegetation cover and continue to be the catalyst for the vegetation removal related to grazing, deforestation, and erosion, as well as elimination of northern Mexican fires, agriculture, deforestation, etc. The impoundments and dams that have gartersnake habitat and prey species. most serious erosion is occurring in the modified or destroyed riparian and states of Guanajuato (43 percent of the Much knowledge of the status of aquatic communities in areas of Mexico state’s land area), Jalisco (25 percent of aquatic ecosystems in Mexico has come where the species occurred historically. the state’s land area), and Me´xico (25 Rorabaugh (2008, pp. 25–26) noted from fisheries research, which is percent of the state’s land area) (Landa threats to northern Mexican particularly applicable to assessing the et al. 1997, p. 317), all of which occur gartersnakes and their native amphibian status of northern Mexican gartersnakes within the distribution of the northern prey base in Sonora, which included because of the gartersnakes’ ecology and Mexican gartersnake. Miller et al. (2005, disease, pollution, intensive livestock relationship to other aquatic and p. 60) stated that ‘‘During the time we grazing, conversion of land for riparian vertebrates. Fisheries research have collectively studied fishes in agriculture, nonnative plant invasions, is particularly applicable because of the Me´xico and southwestern United States, and logging. role fishes serve as indicators of the the entire biotas of long reaches of major Illegal or under-regulated logging in status of the aquatic community as a streams such as the Rıó Grande de the Sierra Madre of Mexico, and whole. Miller et al. (2005) reported Santiago below Guadalajara (Jalisco) and particularly within Chihuahua (Sierra information on threats to freshwater Rıó Colorado (lower Colorado River in Tarahumara), has been identified as a fishes and riparian and aquatic Mexico) downstream of Hoover significant environmental concern communities in specific water bodies (Boulder) Dam (in the United States), (Gingrich 1993, entire). Gingrich (1993, from several regions throughout Mexico have simply been destroyed by p. 6) described the risk to streams from within the range of the northern pollution and river alteration.’’ These excessive logging in the Sierra Madre as Mexican gartersnake: headwaters of the streams are within the distribution of including increased flooding, increased Rıó Lerma (extirpation of freshwater fish the northern Mexican gartersnake. The sedimentation, and lower baseflows. In species, nonnative species, pollution, geographic extent of threats reported by an attempt to reverse disturbing trends dewatering, pp. 60, 105, 197); medium- Miller et al. (2005) across the in logging practices, the World Wildlife sized streams throughout the Sierra distribution of the northern Mexican Fund-Mexico (2004, entire) has begun Madre Occidental (localized gartersnake in Mexico is evidence that implementing a conservation plan for extirpations, logging, dewatering, pp. they are widespread through the the Sierra Tarahumara region. Ramirez 109, 177, 247); the Rıó Conchos country, and encompass a large Bautista and Arizmendi (2004, p. 3) (extirpations of freshwater fish species, proportion of the distribution of the stated that the principal threats to p. 112); the rıós Casas Grandes, Santa northern Mexican gartersnake in northern Mexican gartersnake habitat in Marıá, del Carmen, and Laguna Mexico. Mexico include the drying of temporary Bustillos (water diversions, groundwater In northern Mexico, effects of ponds, livestock grazing, deforestation, pumping, channelization, flood control development, which is expected to wildfires, and human settlements. In practices, pollution, and introduction of continue at similar rates, if not increase, addition, nonnative species, such as nonnative species, pp. 124, 197); the Rıó over the next several decades, such as bullfrogs and nonnative, predatory fish, Santa Cruz (extirpations, p. 140); the Rıó agriculture and irrigation practices on have been introduced throughout Yaqui (dewatering, nonnative species, p. streams and rivers in Sonora have been Mexico and continue to disperse 148, Plate 61, p. 247); the Rıó Colorado documented at least as far back as the naturally, broadening their distributions (nonnative species, p. 153); the rıós 1960s. Branson et al. (1960, p. 218) (Conant 1974, pp. 487–489; Miller et al. Fuerte and Culiacań (logging, p. 177); found that the perennial rivers that 2005, pp. 60–61; Luja and Rodrı´guez- canals, ponds, lakes in the Valle de drain the ‘‘mountains’’ (Sierra Madre) Estrella 2008, pp. 17–22). Me´xico (nonnative species, extirpations, are ‘‘silt-laden and extremely turbid, Mexico’s water needs for urban and pollution, pp. 197, 281); the Rıó Verde mainly because of irrigation practices.’’ agricultural development, as well as Basin (dewatering, nonnative species, Specific rivers were not identified impacts to aquatic habitat from these extirpations, Plate 88); the Rıó Mayo where Branson et al. (1960, p. 218)

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38710 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

describes the effects of irrigation pine–oak communities of higher municipal, and agricultural discharges practices, but the Sierra Madre in elevation habitats (within the (Lyons and Navarro-Perez 1990, p. 37; Sonora is within the known distribution distribution of the northern Mexican Lyons et al. 1995, p. 572). of the northern Mexican gartersnake in gartersnake) in the Sierra Madre Native fish communities of west- Mexico and, therefore, suggests that at Occidental in Mexico, specifically central Mexico have been found to be in least some portion of occupied habitat noting that ‘‘. . . the relative pristine serious decline as a result of habitat has been adversely impacted by these character of the pine–oak woodlands is degradation at an ‘‘unprecedented’’ rate practices. Smaller mountain streams, threatened . . . every time a new road due to water withdrawals (diversions for such as the Rio Nacozari in Sonora were is bulldozed up the slopes in search of irrigation), as well as untreated found to be ‘‘biological deserts’’ from new madera or pasturage. Once the road municipal, industrial, and agricultural the effects of numerous local mining is built, further development follows; discharges (Lyons et al. 1998, pp. 10– practices (Branson et al. 1960, p. 218). pueblos begin to pop up along its 11). Numerous dams have been built The perennial rivers and their mountain length. . . .’’ Several drainages that along the Lerma River and along its tributaries that may have been possess suitable habitat for the northern major tributaries to support one of historically occupied by northern Mexican gartersnake occur in the area Mexico’s most densely populated Mexican gartersnakes (as well as their referenced above by McCranie and regions during the annual dry period; prey species) have since been adversely Wilson (1987, p. 2), including the Rio de the water is used for irrigation, industry, affected, which likely contributed to la Cuidad, Rio Quebrada El Salto, Rio and human consumption (Lyons et al. declines in these areas. Chico, Rio Las Bayas, Rio El Cigarrero, 1998, p. 11). From 1985 to 1993, Lyons Minckley et al. (2002, pp. 687–705) Rio Galindo, Rio Santa Barbara, and the et al. (1998, p. 12) found that 29 of 116 provided a summary of threats (p. 696) Rio Chavaria. (25 percent) fish sampling locations to two newly described (at the time) In the southern portion of the visited within the Lerma River species of pupfish and their habitat in northern Mexican gartersnake’s range in watershed were completely dry and Chihuahua, Mexico, which occur with Mexico, growth and development another 30 were too polluted to support the northern Mexican gartersnake and around Mexico City resulted in a fish community. These figures comprise part of its prey base. Initial agricultural practices and groundwater indicate that over half of the localities settlement and agricultural development demands that dewatered aquatic habitat visited by Lyons et al. (1998, p. 12) that of the area resulted in significant and led to declines, and in some cases, maintained fish populations prior to channel cutting through soil layers extinctions of local native fish species 1985 no longer support fish, which has protecting the alluvial plain above them, (Miller et al. 1989, p. 25). Considerable likely adversely affected local northern which resulted in reductions in the base research has been focused in the central Mexican gartersnake populations, and level of each basin in succession and west-central regions of Mexico, perhaps led to population declines or (Minckley et al. 2002, p. 696). Related within the southern portion of the extirpations. to these activities, the building of dams northern Mexican gartersnake’s range, Soto-Galera et al. (1999, p. 137) and diversion structures dried entire where native fish endemism (unique, reported fish and water quality reaches of some regional streams and narrowly distributed suite of species) is sampling results from within the Rio altered flow patterns of others high, as are threats to their populations Grande de Morelia-Lago de Cuitzeo (Minckley et al. 2002, p. 696). This was and habitat. Since the 1970s in central Basin of Michoacań and Guanajuato, followed by groundwater pumping Mexico, significant human population Mexico. The easternmost portion of this (enhanced by the invention of the growth has resulted in the basin occurs at the periphery of the electric pump), which lowered overexploitation of local fisheries and known northern Mexican gartersnake groundwater levels and dried up springs water pollution; these factors have range in Mexico. Soto-Galera et al. and small channels and reduced the accelerated the degradation of stream (1999, p. 137) found that over the past reliability of baseflow in ‘‘essentially all and riverine habitats and led to fish several decades, diminishing water systems’’ (Minckley et al. 2002, p. 696). communities becoming reduced or quantity and worsening water quality Subsequently, the introduction and undergoing significant changes in have resulted in the elimination of 26 expansion of nonnative species in the structure and composition (Mercado- percent of native fish species from the area successfully displaced or extirpated Silva et al. 2002, p. 180). basin, the extinction of two species of many native species (Minckley et al. These shifts in fish community native fish, and declining distributions 2002, p. 696). Conant (1974, pp. 486– composition, population density, and of the remaining 14 species. These 489) described significant threats to shrinking distributions have adversely figures suggest significant concern for northern Mexican gartersnake habitat affected the northern Mexican aquatic ecosystems of this region. Some within its distribution in western gartersnake prey base in the southern conservation value, however, is realized Chihuahua, Mexico, and within the Rio portion of its range in Mexico. The when headwaters, springs, and small Concho system where it occurs. These Lerma River basin is the largest in west- streams are protected as parks or threats included impoundments, water central Mexico and is within the municipal water supplies (Lyons et al. diversions, and purposeful distribution of the northern Mexican 1998, p. 15), but these efforts do little introductions of largemouth bass, gartersnake in the states of Jalisco, to protect larger perennial rivers that common carp, and bullfrogs. Guanajuato, and Quere´taro in the represent valuable habitat for northern In the central portions of the northern southern portion of its range. Lyons et Mexican gartersnakes. Mexican gartersnakes’ range in Mexico, al. (1995, p. 572) reported that many Mercado-Silva et al. (2002, Appendix such as in Durango, Mexico, population fish communities in large perennial 2) reported results from fish community growth since the 1960s has led to rivers, isolated spring-fed streams, or sampling and habitat assessments along regional effects such as reduced stream spring sources themselves of this region 63 sites across central Mexico; the flow, increased water pollution, and have been ‘‘radically restructured’’ and easternmost of these sites include most largemouth bass introductions, which are now dominated by a few nonnative, of the northern Mexican gartersnake’s ‘‘have seriously affected native biota’’ generalist species. Lowland streams and southern range. Specifically, sampling (Miller et al. 1989, p. 26). McCranie and rivers in this region are used heavily for locations in the Balsas, Lerma, Morelia, Wilson (1987, p. 2) discuss threats to the irrigation and are polluted by industrial, Pańuco Moctezuma, and Pańuco

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38711

Tampaoń basins each occurred within they could no longer support fishes. include the removal of vegetation, the the range of the northern Mexican Only 15 percent of the sites were still degradation of subbasin condition, gartersnake in the states of Guanajuato, capable of supporting sensitive species. altered stream behavior, and increased Queretaro, Mexico, and Puebla; Forty percent (17 different species) of sedimentation of streams. These effects approximately 30 locations in total. The the native fishes of the basin had can harm fish communities, as observed purpose of this sampling effort was to suffered major declines in distribution, in the 1990 Dude Fire, when score each site in terms of its index of and three species may be extinct. The corresponding ash flows resulted in fish biotic integrity (IBI) and environmental extent and magnitude of degradation in kills in Dude Creek and the East Verde quality (EQ), with a score of 100 the Rıó Lerma basin matches or exceeds River (Voeltz 2002, p. 77). Fish kills, representing the optimum score for each the worst cases reported for comparably also discussed below, can drastically category. The IBI scoring method has sized basins elsewhere in the world.’’ affect the suitability of habitat for been verified as a valid means to In the Transvolcanic Belt Region of northern Mexican and narrow-headed quantitatively assess ecosystem integrity the states of Jalisco, Mexico, and gartersnakes due to the removal of a at each site (Lyons et al. 1995, pp. 576– Veracruz in southern Mexico, Conant portion or the entire prey base. The 581; Mercado-Silva et al. 2002, p. 184). (2003, p. 4) noted that water diversions, Chiricahua leopard frog recovery plan The range in IBI scores in these pollution (e.g., discharge of raw cites altered fire regimes as a serious sampling locations was 85 to 35, and the sewage), sedimentation of aquatic threat to Chiricahua leopard frogs, a range in EQ scores was 90 to 50 habitats, and increased dissolved prey species for northern Mexican (Mercado-Silva et al. 2002, Appendix 2). nutrients were resulting in decreased gartersnakes (USFWS 2007a, pp. 38–39). The average IBI score was 57, and the dissolved oxygen in suitable northern The nature and occurrence of average EQ score was 74, across all 30 Mexican gartersnake habitat. Conant wildfires in the Southwest is expected sites and all 4 basins (Mercado-Silva et (2003, p. 4) stated that many of these to also be affected by climate change al. 2002, Appendix 2). According to the threats were evident during his field and ongoing and predicted future qualitative equivalencies assigned to work in the 1960s, and that they are drought. Current predictions of drought scores (Mercado-Silva et al. 2002, p. ‘‘continuing with increased velocity.’’ and/or higher winter low temperatures may stress ponderosa pine forests in 184), these values indicate that the High-Intensity Wildfires and which the narrow-headed gartersnake environmental quality score averaged Sedimentation of Aquatic Habitat principally occurs, and may increase the across all 30 sites was ‘‘good’’ and the (Narrow-Headed Gartersnake) biotic integrity scores were ‘‘fair.’’ It frequency and magnitude of wildfire. High-intensity wildfires lead to should be noted that 14 of the 30 sites Ganey and Vojta (2010, entire) studied excessive sedimentation and ash flows sampled had IBI scores equal to or less tree mortality in mixed-conifer and in streams, which can, in turn, result in ponderosa pine forests in Arizona from than 50, and 5 of those ranked as sharp declines, and even complete ‘‘poor.’’ Of all the basins throughout 1997–2007, a period of extreme drought. elimination, in fish communities They found the mortality of trees to be central Mexico that were scored in this downstream. According to the Apache- ´ severe; the number of trees dying over exercise, the two Panuco basins Sitgreaves National Forest forested represented 20 of the 30 sites sampled a 5-year period increased by more than vegetation types, historic fire-return 200 percent in mixed-conifer forest and and scored the worst of all basins intervals varied from frequent, low- (Mercado-Silva et al. 2002, p. 186). This by 74 percent in ponderosa pine forest intensity surface fires in ponderosa pine during this timeframe. Ganey and Vojta indicates that threats to the northern types (every 2–17 years), to mixed- (2010) attributed drought and Mexican gartersnake, its prey base, and severity fires in wet mixed-conifer subsequent insect (bark beetle) its habitat pose the greatest risk in this forests (every 35–50 years), to high- infestation to the die-offs in trees. portion of its range in Mexico. severity, stand-replacement fires of the Drought stress and a subsequent high Near Torreoń, Coahuila, where the spruce-fir ecosystems (every 150–400 degree of tree mortality from bark northern Mexican gartersnake occurs, years) (U.S. Forest Service (USFS) beetles make high-elevation forests more groundwater pumping has resulted in 2013). Low-intensity fire has been a susceptible to high-intensity wildfires. flow reversal, which has dried up many common, natural disturbance factor in Climate is a top-down factor that local springs, drawn arsenic-laden water forested landscapes for centuries prior synchronizes with fuel loads, a bottom- to the surface, and resulted in adverse to European settlement (Rinne and up factor. Combined with a predicted human health effects in that area (Miller Neary 1996, pp. 135–136). Rinne and reduction in snowpack and an earlier et al. 2005, p. 61). Severe water Neary (1996, p. 143) concluded that snowmelt, these factors suggest pollution from untreated domestic existing wildfire suppression policies wildfires will be larger, more frequent, waste is evident downstream of large intended to protect the expanding and more severe in the southwestern Mexican cities, such as Mexico City, number of human structures on forested United States (Fule´ 2010, entire). and inorganic pollution from nearby public lands have altered the fuel loads Wildfires are expected to reduce industrialized areas and agricultural in these ecosystems and increased the vegetative cover and result in greater irrigation return flow has dramatically probability of high-intensity wildfires. soil erosion, subsequently resulting in affected aquatic communities through Climate change-driven drought cycles increased sediment flows in streams contamination (Miller et al. 2005, p. 60). are also likely contributing to a (Fule´ 2010, entire). Increased Miller et al. (2005, p. 61) provide an changing fire regime in the west sedimentation in streams reduces the excerpt from Soto Galera et al. (1999) (Westerling et al. (2006, pp. 941–943). visibility of gartersnakes in the water addressing the threats to the Rıó Lerma, Westerling et al. (2006, p. 940) showed column, hampering their hunting ability Mexico’s longest river, which is that ‘‘large wildfire activity (in the as well as resulting in fish kills (which occupied by the northern Mexican western United States) increased is also caused by the disruption in the gartersnake: ‘‘The basin has experienced suddenly and markedly in the mid- nitrogen cycle post-wildfire), which a staggering amount of degradation 1980s, with higher large-wildfire reduce the amount of prey available to during the 20th Century. By 1985–1993, frequency, longer wildfire durations, gartersnake populations. Additionally, over half of our study sites had and longer wildfire seasons.’’ The unnaturally high amounts of sediment disappeared or become so polluted that effects of these high-intensity wildfires fill in pools in intermittent streams,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38712 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

which reduces the amount and narrow-headed gartersnakes in the Black narrow-headed gartersnake populations availability of habitat for fish and River, and narrow-headed gartersnakes as a result of the collapse in their prey amphibian prey. in the lower Blue River, will be base. In 2011 and 2012, both Arizona (2011 precarious into the near- to mid-term Since 2000, several wildfires have Wallow Fire) and New Mexico (2012 future, as will likely be the stability of affected occupied narrow-headed Whitewater-Baldy Complex Fire) gartersnake populations there. gartersnake habitat on the Gila National experienced the largest wildfires in their Immediate post-fire fish sampling in Forest. The West Fork Gila subbasin was respective State histories; indicative of Eagle Creek confirmed that fish affected by the 2002 Cub Fire, the 2003 the last decade that has been punctuated populations had been severely depleted, Dry Lakes Fire, and the 2011 Miller Fire; by wildfires of massive proportion. The but that some level of population each resulted in post-fire ash and 2011 Wallow Fire affected (to various rebound had occurred by 2 years post- sediment flows, which adversely degrees) approximately 540,000 acres fire (Marsh 2013, pers. comm.). affected fish populations used by (218,530 ha) of Apache-Sitgreaves Several large wildfires have occurred narrow-headed gartersnakes (Hellekson National Forest, White Mountain historically on the Gila National Forest. 2012a, pers. comm.). In 2011, the Miller Apache Indian Tribe, and San Carlos These fires have resulted in excessive Fire significantly affected the Little Apache Indian Reservation lands in sedimentation of streams and affected Creek subbasin and has resulted in Apache, Navajo, Graham, and Greenlee resident fish populations that serve as substantive declines in abundance of counties in Arizona as well as Catron prey for narrow-headed gartersnakes. the fish community (Hellekson 2012a, pers. comm.). Dry Blue and Campbell County, New Mexico (InciWeb 2011). From 1989–2004, numerous wildfires The 2011 Wallow Fire impacted 97 Blue creeks were affected by the 2011 cumulatively burned much of the percent of perennial streams in the Wallow Fire (Hellekson 2012a, pers. uplands within the Gila National Forest, Black River subbasin, 70 percent of comm.). Saliz Creek was highly affected which resulted in most perennial perennial streams in the Gila River by the 2006 Martinez Fire (Hellekson streams in the area experiencing ash subbasin, and 78 percent of the San 2012a, pers. comm.). Turkey Creek was flows and elevated sedimentation (Paroz Francisco River subbasin and resulted heavily impacted by the Dry Lakes Fire et al. 2006, p. 55). More recently, the in confirmed fish kills in each subbasin in 2003, which resulted in an extensive 2012 Whitewater-Baldy Complex Fire in (Meyer 2011, p. 3, Table 1); each of fish kill, but the fish community has the Gila National Forest in New Mexico these streams is known to support since rebounded (Hellekson 2012a, pers. is the largest wildfire in that State’s populations of either northern Mexican comm.). It is not certain how long the or narrow-headed gartersnakes. history. This wildfire was active for fish community was depleted or absent Although the Black River drainage more than 5 weeks and consumed from Turkey Creek, but it is suspected received no moderate or high-severity approximately 300,000 acres (121,406 that the narrow-headed gartersnake burns as a result of the 2011 Wallow ha) of ponderosa, mixed-conifer, population there may have suffered Fire, the Fish and Snake Creek pinyon-juniper, and grassland habitat declines from the loss of their prey base, subbasins (tributaries to the Black River) (InciWeb 2012). Over 25 percent of the as evidenced by the current low were severely burned (Coleman 2011, p. burn area experienced high-moderate population numbers. Black Canyon was 2). Post-fire fisheries surveys above burn severity (InciWeb 2012) and affected by large ash and debris flows Wildcat Point in the Black River found included several subbasins occupied by from the 2013 Silver Fire (USFS 2013, no fish in a reach extending up to the narrow-headed gartersnakes such as the entire). Prior to the 2002 Dry Lakes Fire, confluence with the West Fork of the Middle Fork Gila River, West Fork Gila Turkey Creek was largely populated by Black River. This was likely due to River, Iron Creek, the San Francisco nonnative, predatory fish species, in its subsequent ash and sediment flows that River, Whitewater Creek, Turkey Creek, lower reaches. Upper reaches were had occurred there (Coleman 2011, p. and Mineral Creek (Brooks 2012, Table largely dominated by native fish 2). Fisheries surveys of the Black River 1; Hellekson 2013, pers. comm.). Other species, which have since rebounded in in 2012 also reflected a largely absent extant populations of the narrow- numbers (Hellekson 2012a, pers. prey base for narrow-headed headed gartersnake in Gilita and South comm.), and may provide high-quality gartersnakes (narrow-headed Fork Negrito Creeks are also expected to habitat for narrow-headed gartersnakes, gartersnakes observed appeared to be in be impacted from the 2012 Whitewater- once the subbasin has adequately starving condition), but young-of-the- Baldy Complex Fire. Narrow-headed stabilized. year native fish were detected, which gartersnake populations in the Middle Effects to northern Mexican and may signal the beginning of fish Fork Gila River and Whitewater Creek narrow-headed gartersnake habitat from recruitment (Lopez et al. 2012, entire). formerly represented two of the four wildfire should be considered in light of Post-fire fisheries surveys at ‘‘the Box,’’ most robust populations known from effects to the structural habitat and in the Blue River, detected only a single New Mexico, and two of the five known effects to the prey base. Post-fire effects native fish. This was also likely due to rangewide, and are expected to have vary with burn severity, percent of area ash and sediment flows and the been severely jeopardized by post-fire burned within each severity category, associated subsequent fish kills that had effects to their prey base. Thus, we now and the intensity and duration of occurred there, extending down to the consider them currently as likely not precipitation events that follow Gila River Box in Safford, Arizona viable, at least until the watershed (Coleman 2011, p. 4). Low-severity (Coleman 2011, pp. 2–3). The East Fork stabilizes and again supports a fish burns within riparian habitat can Black River subbasin experienced community, or perhaps the next 5–10 actually have a rejuvenating effect by moderate to high-severity burns in 23 years. In reference to Gila trout removing decadent ground cover and percent of its total acreage that resulted populations, Brooks (2012, p. 3) stated providing nutrients to remaining in declines in Apache trout and native that fish populations are expected to be vegetation. As a result, riparian sucker populations, but speckled dace severely impacted in the West Fork Gila vegetative communities may be more and brown trout remained prevalent as River and Whitewater Creek. The loss of resilient to wildfire, given that water is of 2011 (Coleman 2011, p. 3). These fire fish communities in affected streams is present (Coleman 2011, p. 4). Willows, data suggest that the persistence of the likely to lead to associated declines, or an important component to narrow- prey base for northern Mexican and potential extirpations, in affected headed gartersnake habitat, can be

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38713

positively affected by low-severity efficiency from effects to water clarity, broader landscape, and the resiliency of burns, as long as the root crowns are not based on research conducted by de potential natural vegetation types to damaged (Coleman 2011, p. 4). High- Queiroz (2003, p. 381) that concluded adapt to climate change (USFS 2013, severity burns that occur within the the species relied heavily on visual cues entire). We are uncertain whether such floodplain of occupied habitat are during underwater striking behaviors. projects can be completed with the expected to have some level of shorter The presence of adequate interstitial scope and urgency required to reverse term effect on resident gartersnake spaces along stream floors may be the current trend of massive, high- populations through effects to the particularly important for narrow- intensity wildfires in the southwest but vegetative structure and abundance, headed gartersnakes. Hibbitts et al. intend to facilitate their implementation which may include a reduction of (2009, p. 464) reported the precipitous as project cooperators. We conclude that basking sites and a loss of cover, which decline of narrow-headed gartersnakes effects of high-intensity wildfires are could increase the risk of predation. in a formerly robust population in the threatening narrow-headed gartersnakes These potential effects need further San Francisco River at San Francisco with increasing likelihood of future study. Post-fire ash flows, flooding, and Hot Springs from 1996 to 2004. The impacts as a result of climate change. exact cause for this decline is uncertain, impacts to native prey populations are Summary longer term effects and can occur for but the investigators suspected that a many years after a large wildfire reduction in interstitial spaces along the The presence of water is critical to (Coleman 2011, p. 2). stream floor from an apparent both northern Mexican and narrow- conglomerate, cementation process may headed gartersnakes and their primary Post-fire flooding with significant ash have affected the narrow-headed prey species because their ecology and and sediment loads can result in gartersnake’s ability to successfully natural histories are strongly linked to significant declines, or even the anchor themselves to the stream bottom water. Several factors, both natural and collapse, of resident fish communities, when seeking refuge or foraging for fish manmade, contribute to the continued which poses significant concern for the (Hibbitts et al. 2009, p. 464). These degradation and dewatering of aquatic persistence of resident gartersnake circumstances would likely result in habitat throughout the range of northern populations in affected areas. low predation success and eventually Mexican and narrow-headed Sedimentation can adversely affect fish starvation. Other areas where gartersnakes. Increasing human populations used as prey by northern sedimentation has affected either population growth is driving higher and Mexican or narrow-headed gartersnakes northern Mexican or narrow-headed higher demands for water in both the by: (1) Interfering with respiration; (2) gartersnake habitat are Cibecue Creek in United States and Mexico. Water is reducing the effectiveness of fish’s Arizona, and the San Francisco River subsequently secured through dams, visually based hunting behaviors; and and South Fork Negrito Creek in New diversions, flood-control projects, and (3) filling in interstitial spaces (spaces Mexico (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, p. groundwater pumping, which affects between cobbles, etc., on the stream 46; Arizona Department of Water gartersnake habitat through reductions floor) of the substrate, which reduces Resources 2011, p. 1; Hellekson 2012a, in flow and complete dewatering of reproduction and foraging success of pers. comm.). The San Francisco River stream reaches. Entire reaches of the fish (Wheeler et al. 2005, p. 145). in Arizona was classified as impaired Gila, Salt, Santa Cruz, and San Excessive sediment also fills in due to excessive sediment from its Francisco Rivers, as well as numerous intermittent pools required for headwaters downstream to the Arizona– other rivers throughout the Mexican amphibian prey reproduction and New Mexico border (Arizona Plateau in Mexico that were historically foraging. Siltation of the rocky Department of Water Resources 2011, p. occupied by either or both northern interstitial spaces along stream bottoms 1). South Fork Negrito Creek is also Mexican or narrow-headed gartersnakes, decreases the dissolved oxygen content listed as impaired due to excessive are now completely dry due to where fish lay their eggs, resulting in turbidity (Hellekson 2012a, pers. diversions, dams, and groundwater depressed recruitment of fish and a comm.). pumping. Several groundwater basins subsequent reduction in prey Potential mechanisms exist that can within the range of northern Mexican abundance for northern Mexican and ameliorate the effects of wildfires, such and narrow-headed gartersnakes in the narrow-headed gartersnakes through the as prescribed fire, use of wildland fire, United States are considered active loss of prey microhabitat (Nowak and fuels management, and timber harvest, management areas where pumping Santana-Bendix 2002, pp. 37–38). As and can sustain desired conditions for exceeds recharge, which is a constant stated above, sediment can lead to fire-adapted ecosystems and provide threat to surface flow in streams and several effects in resident fish species habitat for threatened and endangered rivers connected to these aquifers. used by northern Mexican or narrow- species, but will only be effective at a Reduced flows concentrate northern headed gartersnakes as prey, which can landscape scale. The Guidance for Mexican and narrow-headed ultimately cause increased direct Implementation of Federal Wildland gartersnakes and their prey with fatalities, reduced reproductive success, Fire Management Policy is the harmful nonnative species, which lower overall abundance, and Department of Agriculture’s single accelerate and amplify adverse effects of reductions in prey species composition cohesive Federal fire policy, and it was native–nonnative community as documented by Wheeler et al. (2005, updated in February 2009. The intent of interactions. Where surface water p. 145). The underwater foraging ability this policy is to solidify that the full persists, increasing land development of narrow-headed gartersnakes (de range of strategic and tactical options and recreation use adjacent to and Queiroz 2003, p. 381) and likely are available and considered in the within riparian habitat has led to further northern Mexican gartersnakes is largely response to every wildland fire (USFS reductions in stream flow, removal or based on vision and is also directly 2013, entire). Benefits are considered to alteration of vegetation, and increased compromised by excessive turbidity include the movement of vegetation frequency of adverse human caused by sedimentation of water toward desired conditions, a greater interactions with gartersnakes. bodies. Suspended sediment in the contribution to landscape restoration, Exacerbating the effects of increasing water column may reduce the narrow- control of invasive species, a reduction human populations and higher water headed gartersnake’s visual hunting in uncharacteristic wildfire across the demands, climate change predictions

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38714 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

include increased aridity, lower annual specialized diet. These spaces are also neighboring populations because the precipitation totals, lower snow pack important spawning and egg deposition length or area of dewatered zones is too levels, higher variability in flows (lower habitat for native fish species used as great for dispersing individuals to low-flows and higher high-flows), and prey by narrow-headed gartersnakes. overcome. Therefore, normal colonizing enhanced stress on ponderosa pine When these spaces fill in with sediment, mechanisms that would otherwise communities in the southwestern the narrow-headed gartersnake may be reestablish populations where they have United States and northern Mexico. unable to forage successfully and may become extirpated are no longer viable. Increased stress to ponderosa pine succumb to stress created by a This subsequently leads to a reduction forests places them at higher risk of depressed prey base. in species redundancy when isolated, high-intensity wildfires, the effects of A significant reduction or absence of small populations are at increased which are discussed below. Climate a prey base results in stress of resident vulnerability to the effects of stochastic change has also been predicted to gartersnake populations and can result events, without a means for natural enhance the abundance and distribution in local population extirpations. Also, recolonization. Ultimately, the effects of of harmful nonnative species, which narrow-headed gartersnakes are scattered, small, and disjunct adversely affect northern Mexican and believed to rely heavily on visual cues populations, without the means to narrow-headed gartersnakes. while foraging underwater; increased naturally recolonize, is weakened Cienegas, a unique and important turbidity from suspended fine sediment species resiliency as a whole, which habitat for northern Mexican in the water column is likely to impede ultimately enhances the risk of either or gartersnakes, have been adversely their ability to use visual cues at some both species becoming endangered or affected or eliminated by a variety of level. Factors that result in depressed going extinct. Therefore, based on the historical and current land uses in the foraging ability from excessive best available scientific and commercial United States and Mexico, including sedimentation are likely to be enhanced information, we conclude that land uses streambed modification, intensive when effects from harmful nonnative or conditions described above that alter livestock grazing, woodcutting, artificial species are also acting on resident or dewater northern Mexican and drainage structures, stream flow northern Mexican and narrow-headed narrow-headed gartersnake habitat are stabilization by upstream dams, gartersnake populations. We consider threats rangewide, now and in the channelization, and stream flow the narrow-headed gartersnake to be foreseeable future. reduction from groundwater pumping particularly threatened by the effects of and water diversions. The historical loss wildfires as described because they Other Cumulative and Synergistic Effect of the cienega habitat of the northern occur throughout its range, the species of Threats on Low-Density Populations Mexican gartersnake has resulted in is a fish-eating specialist that is (Northern Mexican and Narrow-Headed local population declines or unusually vulnerable to localized fish Gartersnakes) extirpations, negatively affecting its kills, and wildfire has already In most locations where northern status and contributing to its decline significantly affected two of the last Mexican or narrow-headed gartersnakes rangewide. remaining five populations that were historically occurred or still occur Wildfire has historically been a formerly considered viable, pre-fire. We currently, two or more threats are likely natural and important disturbance factor have demonstrated that high-intensity acting in combination with regard to within the range of northern Mexican wildfires have the potential to eliminate their influence on the suitability of and narrow-headed gartersnakes. gartersnake populations through a those habitats or on the species However, in recent decades, forest reduction or loss of their prey base. themselves. Many threats could be management policies in the United Since 1970, wildfires have adversely considered minor in isolation, but when States have favored fire suppression, the impacted the native fish prey base in 6 they affect gartersnake populations in result of which has led to wildfires of percent of the historical distribution of combination with other threats, become unusual proportions, particularly along northern Mexican gartersnakes in the more serious. We have concluded that the Mogollon Rim of Arizona and New United States and 21 percent of that for in as many as 24 of 29 known localities Mexico. These policies are generally not narrow-headed gartersnakes rangewide, in the United States (83 percent), the in place in Mexico, and consequently, according to GIS analysis. These northern Mexican gartersnake wildfire is not viewed as a significant percentages represent only stream miles population is likely not viable and may threat to the northern Mexican within fire perimeters, not downstream exist at low population densities that gartersnake in Mexico. However, in the effects of ash flows within drainages, could be threatened with extirpation or last 2 years, both Arizona (2011 Wallow which would undoubtedly increase the may already be extirpated. We also Fire) and New Mexico (2012 percentage of habitat impacted, at least determined that in as many as 29 of 38 Whitewater-Baldy Complex Fire) have for narrow-headed gartersnakes, whose known localities (76 percent), the experienced the largest wildfires in their distribution overlaps more concisely narrow-headed gartersnake population respective State histories, which is with more and larger wildfires over is likely not viable and may exist at low indicative of the last decade having recent decades. population densities that could be been punctuated by wildfires of All of these conditions affect the threatened with extirpation or may significant magnitude. High-intensity primary drivers of gartersnake habitat already be extirpated, but survey data wildfire has been shown to result in suitability (the presence of water and are lacking in areas where access is significant ash and sediment flows into prey) and exist in various degrees restricted. We have also discussed how habitat occupied by northern Mexican throughout the range of both gartersnake harmful nonnative species have affected or narrow-headed gartersnakes, species. Collectively, they reduce the recruitment of gartersnakes across their resulting in significant reductions of amount and arrangement of physically range. In viable populations, their fish prey base and, in some suitable habitat for northern Mexican gartersnakes are resilient to the loss of instances, total fish kills. The interstitial and narrow-headed gartersnakes over individuals through ongoing spaces between rocks located along the their regional landscapes. The genetic recruitment into the reproductive age stream floor are important habitat for representation of each species is class. However, when northern Mexican the narrow-headed gartersnake because threatened when populations become or narrow-headed gartersnakes occur at of its specialized foraging strategy and disconnected and isolated from low population densities in the absence

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38715

of appropriate recruitment, the loss of higher in riparian areas than on the Forest Guardians 2004, pp. 8–10; even a few adults could substantially uplands (Trimble and Mendel 1995, pp. Holycross et al. 2006, pp. 52–61; increase the risk of extirpation of local 243–244). However, according to one Paradzick et al. 2006, pp. 90–92; USFS populations. Below, we discuss threats study along the Agua Fria River, 2008). Livestock grazing still occurs in that, when considered in combination, herbaceous ground cover can recover these subbasins but is a largely managed can appreciably threaten low-density quickly from heavy grazing pressure land use and is not likely to pose populations of these species with (Szaro and Pase 1983, p. 384). significant threats to either northern extirpation. Additional information on the effects of Mexican or narrow-headed gartersnakes historical livestock grazing can be found Historical and Unmanaged Livestock where closely managed. In cases where in Sartz and Tolsted (1974, p. 354); Grazing and Agricultural Land Uses poor livestock management results in Rosen and Schwalbe (1988, pp. 32–33, (Northern Mexican and Narrow-Headed fence lines in persistent disrepair, 47); Clary and Webster (1989, p. 1); Gartersnake) (Factor A) providing unmanaged livestock access Clary and Medin (1990, p. 1); Orodho et to occupied habitat, adverse effects from Currently in the United States, al. (1990, p. 9); and Krueper et al. (2003, loss of vegetative cover may result, most livestock grazing is a largely managed pp. 607, 613–614). activity, but in Mexico, livestock grazing Szaro et al. (1985, p. 360) assessed the likely in the presence of harmful is much less managed or unmanaged effects of historical livestock nonnative species. As we described altogether. Several examples of extant management on a related taxon and above, however, we strongly suspect gartersnake populations (in some cases, found that western (terrestrial) that northern Mexican and narrow- apparently robust populations) in gartersnake (Thamnophis elegans headed gartersnakes are somewhat Mexico were found in habitat that was vagrans) populations were significantly resilient to physical habitat disturbance heavily grazed with no riparian higher (versus controls) in terms of where harmful nonnative species are vegetation development; these sites abundance and biomass in areas that absent. were coincidently free or largely free of were excluded from grazing, where the The creation and maintenance of harmful nonnative species (Burger 2007, streamside vegetation remained lush, stock tanks is an important component entire). Historical livestock grazing has than where uncontrolled access to to livestock grazing in the southwestern damaged approximately 80 percent of grazing was permitted. This effect was United States. Stock tanks associated stream, cienega, and riparian complemented by higher amounts of with livestock grazing may facilitate the ecosystems in the western United States cover from organic debris from ungrazed spread of harmful nonnative species (Kauffman and Krueger 1984, pp. 433– shrubs that accumulate as the debris when they are intentionally or 435; Weltz and Wood 1986, pp. 367– moves downstream during flood events. unintentionally stocked by anglers and 368; Cheney et al. 1990, pp. 5, 10; Specifically, results indicated that snake Waters 1995, pp. 22–24; Pearce et al. abundance and biomass were private landowners (Rosen et al. 2001, 1998, p. 307; Belsky et al. 1999, p. 1). significantly higher in ungrazed habitat, p. 24). The management of stock tanks Fleischner (1994, p. 629) found that with a five-fold difference in number of is an important consideration for ‘‘Because livestock congregate in snakes captured, despite the difficulty northern Mexican gartersnakes in riparian ecosystems, which are among of making observations in areas of particular. Stock tanks associated with the most biologically rich habitats in increased habitat complexity (Szaro et livestock grazing can be intermediary arid and semiarid regions, the ecological al. 1985, p. 360). Szaro et al. (1985, p. ‘‘stepping stones’’ in the dispersal of costs of grazing are magnified at these 362) also noted the importance of nonnative species from larger source sites.’’ Stromberg and Chew (2002, p. riparian vegetation for the maintenance populations to new areas (Rosen et al. 198) and Trimble and Mendel (1995, p. of an adequate prey base and as cover 2001, p. 24). The effects of livestock 243) also discussed the propensity for in thermoregulation and predation grazing at stock tanks on northern cattle to remain within or adjacent to avoidance behaviors, as well as for Mexican gartersnakes depend on how riparian communities. Expectedly, this foraging success. Direct fatalities of they are managed. Dense bank and behavior is more pronounced in more amphibian species, in all life stages, aquatic vegetation is an important arid regions (Trimble and Mendel 1995, from being trampled by livestock has habitat characteristic for the northern p. 243). Effects from historical or been documented (Bartelt 1998, p. 96; Mexican gartersnake in the presence of unmanaged grazing include: (1) Ross et al. 1999, p. 163). Gartersnakes harmful nonnative species. This Declines in the structural richness of the may, on occasion, be trampled by vegetation can be affected if the vegetative community; (2) losses or livestock. A black-necked gartersnake impoundment is poorly managed. When reductions of the prey base; (3) (Thamnophis cyrtopsis cyrtopsis) had harmful nonnative species are absent, increased aridity of habitat; (4) loss of apparently been killed by livestock the presence of bank line vegetation is thermal cover and protection from trampling along the shore of a stock tank less important. Well-managed stock predators; (5) a rise in water in the Apache–Sitgreaves National tanks provide important habitat for temperatures to levels lethal to larval Forest, within an actively grazed northern Mexican gartersnakes and their stages of amphibian and fish allotment (Chapman 2005). development; and (6) desertification Subbasins where historical grazing prey base, especially when the tank: (1) (Szaro et al. 1985, p. 362; Schulz and has been documented as a suspected Remains devoid of harmful nonnative Leininger 1990, p. 295; Schlesinger et contributing factor for either northern species while supporting native prey al. 1990, p. 1043; Belsky et al. 1999, pp. Mexican or narrow-headed gartersnake species; (2) provides adequate 8–11; Zwartjes et al. 2008, pp. 21–23). declines include the Verde, Salt, Agua vegetation cover; and (3) provides In one rangeland study, it was Fria, San Pedro, Gila, and Santa Cruz reliable water sources in periods of concluded that 81 percent of the (Hendrickson and Minckley 1984, pp. prolonged drought. Given these benefits vegetation that was consumed, 140, 152, 160–162; Rosen and Schwalbe of well-managed stock tanks, we believe trampled, or otherwise removed was 1988, pp. 32–33; Girmendonk and well-managed stock tanks are an from a riparian area, which amounted to Young 1997, p. 47; Hale 2001, pp. 32– important, even vital at this time, only 2 percent of the total grazing space, 34, 50, 56; Voeltz 2002, pp. 45–81; component to northern Mexican and that these actions were 5 to 30 times Krueper et al. 2003, pp. 607, 613–614; gartersnake conservation and recovery.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38716 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Road Construction, Use, and been collected at the Bubbling Ponds pers. comm.). Areas with high visitation Maintenance (Northern Mexican and Hatchery since 2006. Of the 15 dead and recreation levels, where this type of Narrow-Headed Gartersnake) (Factor A) specimens, 8 were struck by vehicles on fatality is most likely to be more Roads can pose unique threats to roads within or adjacent to the hatchery common, include the Middle Fork and herpetofauna, and specifically to species ponds, perhaps while crossing between mainstem of the Gila River within 1 like the northern Mexican gartersnake, ponds to forage (Boyarski 2011, pp. 1– mile of Cliff Dwellings to Little Creek, its prey base, and the habitat where it 3). Van Devender and Lowe (1977, p. from the confluence with the East Fork occurs. The narrow-headed gartersnake, 47), however, observed several northern to Little Creek and the reach from alternatively, is probably less affected Mexican gartersnakes crossing the road Turkey Creek to the Gila Bird Area by roads due to its more aquatic nature. at night after the commencement of the south of Highway 180 (Hellekson 2013, Roads fragment occupied habitat and summer monsoon (rainy season), which pers. comm.), in Whitewater Creek from can result in diminished genetic highlights the seasonal variability in the Catwalk to Glenwood (Hellekson variability in populations from surface activity of this snake. Wallace et 2012a, pers. comm.), near San Francisco increased fatality from vehicle strikes al. (2008, pp. 243–244) documented a Hot Springs along the San Francisco and adverse human encounters as vehicle-related fatality of a northern River (Hibbitts and Fitzgerald 2009, p. supported by current research on Mexican gartersnake on Arizona State 466), the San Francisco River ‘‘Box’’, eastern indigo snakes (Breininger et al. Route 188 near Tonto Creek that Black Canyon near the FR150 crossing, occurred in 1995. and the south Fork Negrito Creek 2012, pp. 364–366). Roads often track (Hellekson 2013, pers. comm.). along streams and present a fatality risk Adverse Human Interactions With to gartersnakes seeking more upland, Gartersnakes (Northern Mexican and Environmental Contaminants (Northern terrestrial habitat for brumation and Narrow-Headed Gartersnake) (Factor E) Mexican and Narrow-Headed gestation. Roads may cumulatively A fear of snakes is generally and Gartersnake) (Factor A) impact both species through the universally embedded in modern Environmental contaminants, such as following mechanisms: (1) culture and is prevalent in the United heavy metals, may be common at low Fragmentation, modification, and States (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, p. 43; background levels in soils and, as a destruction of habitat; (2) increase in Ernst and Zug 1996, p. 75; Green 1997, result, concentrations are known to genetic isolation; (3) alteration of pp. 285–286; Nowak and Santana- bioaccumulate in food chains. A movement patterns and behaviors; (4) Bendix 2002, p. 39). We use the phrase bioaccumulative substance increases in facilitation of the spread of nonnative ‘‘adverse human interaction’’ to refer to concentration in an organism or in the species via human vectors; (5) an the act of humans directly injuring or food chain over time. A mid- to higher- increase in recreational access and the killing snakes out of a sense of fear or order predator, such as a gartersnake, likelihood of subsequent, decentralized anxiety (ophidiophobia), or for no may, therefore, accumulate these types urbanization; (6) interference with or apparent purpose. One reason the of contaminants over time in their fatty inhibition of reproduction; (7) narrow-headed gartersnake is vulnerable tissues, which may lead to adverse contributions of pollutants to riparian to adverse human interactions is health effects (Wylie et al. 2009, p. 583, and aquatic communities; (8) reduction because of its appearance. The narrow- Table 5). Campbell et al. (2005, pp. 241– of prey communities; and (9) acting as headed gartersnake is often confused for 243) found that metal concentrations population sinks (when population a venomous water moccasin accumulated in the northern watersnake death rates from vehicle strikes exceed (cottonmouth, Agkistrodon piscivorus), (Nerodia sipedon) at levels six times birth rates in a given area) (Rosen and because of its triangular-shaped head that of their primary prey item, the Lowe 1994, pp. 146–148; Waters 1995, and propensity to be found in or near central stoneroller (a fish, Campostoma p. 42; Foreman and Alexander 1998, p. water (Nowak and Santana-Bendix anomalum). Metals, in trace amounts, 220; Trombulak and Frissell 2000, pp. 2002, p. 38). Although the nearest water can be sequestered in the skin of snakes 19–26; Carr and Fahrig 2001, pp. 1074– moccasin populations are located over (Burger 1992, p. 212), interfere with 1076; Hels and Buchwald 2001, p. 331; 700 miles (1,127 km) to the east in metabolic rates of snakes (Hopkins et al. Smith and Dodd 2003, pp. 134–138; central Texas, these misidentifications 1999, p. 1261), affect the structure and Angermeier et al. 2004, pp. 19–24; prove fatal for narrow-headed function of their liver and kidneys, and Shine et al. 2004, pp. 9, 17–19; Andrews gartersnakes (Nowak and Santana- may also act as neurotoxins, affecting and Gibbons 2005, pp. 777–781; Bendix 2002, p. 38). nervous system function (Rainwater et Wheeler et al. 2005, pp. 145, 148–149; Adverse human interaction may be al. 2005, p. 670). Burger (1992, p. 209) Roe et al. 2006, p. 161; Sacco 2007, pers. largely responsible for highly localized found higher concentrations of mercury, comm.; Ouren et al. 2007, pp. 6–7, 11, extirpations in narrow-headed lead, and chromium in the skin of 16, 20–21; Jones et al. 2011, pp. 65–66; gartersnakes based on the collection snakes, as opposed to whole body Hellekson 2012a, pers. comm.). history of the species at Slide Rock State tissue, ‘‘suggesting that frequent Perhaps the most common factor in Park along Oak Creek, where high shedding of skin can act as a method of road fatality of snakes is the propensity recreation use is strongly suspected to toxic excretion by snakes.’’ Drewett et for drivers to unintentionally and result in direct fatality of snakes by al. (2013, entire) studied mercury intentionally run them over, both humans (Nowak and Santana-Bendix accumulation in 4 species of snakes because people often dislike snakes 2002, pp. 21, 38). Declines in narrow- (including the common gartersnake) (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, p. 43; Ernst headed gartersnake populations in the ranging from mostly aquatic to mostly and Zug 1996, p. 75; Green 1997, pp. North and East Forks of the White River terrestrial in an attempt to ascertain if a 285–286; Nowak and Santana-Bendix have also been attributed to humans snake’s ecology affected the risk of 2002, p. 39) and because they can be killing snakes (Rosen and Schwalbe exposure and tissue accumulation difficult to avoid when crossing roads at 1988, pp. 43–44). Locations in New levels. They found that the more aquatic perpendicular angles (Klauber 1956, p. Mexico where this unnatural form of the species’ ecology and prey base, the 1026; Langley et al. 1989, p. 47; Shine fatality has been observed include Wall higher risk for exposure and et al. 2004, p. 11). Fatality data for Lake (Fleharty 1967, p. 219) and accumulation of mercury (Drewett et al. northern Mexican gartersnakes have Whitewater Creek (Hellekson 2012a, 2013, pp. 7–8).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38717

Based on data collected in 2002–2010, heavy metals such as copper, zinc, and species. Therefore, Marcy’s checkered mercury appears to be bioaccumulating manganese (Eberhardt 1981, pp. 1, 16). gartersnake may simply be filling the in fish found in the lower reaches of These releases caused the death of all ecological void left by the decline of the Tonto Creek, where northern Mexican aquatic organisms in the San Pedro northern Mexican gartersnake. At a gartersnakes also occur (Rector 2010, River for a 60-mile (97-km) reach minimum, more research is needed to pers. comm.; Arizona Department of downstream of the mine (Eberhardt determine the relationship between Environmental Quality (ADEQ) 2011, 1981, pp. 1, 16). these two gartersnake species. The sizes of mines in Sonora vary Table 1). In fact, the State record for the Fatality From Entanglement Hazards highest mercury concentrations in fish considerably, as do the known environmental effects from mining- (Northern Mexican and Narrow-Headed tissue was reported in Tonto Creek from Gartersnake) (Factor E) this investigation by Rector (2010, pers. related activities (from exploration to comm.). Mean mercury levels in fish long after closure), which include In addressing the effects of soil were found to range from 0.2–1.5 mg/kg. contamination and drawdown of erosion associated with road The mean mercury concentration for all groundwater aquifers, erosion, acid construction projects or post-fire fish was 1.1 mg/kg (ADEQ 2011, p. 3). mine drainage, fugitive dust, pollution remedial subbasin management, erosion Due to the risks of adverse human from smelter emissions, and landscape control materials placed on the ground health effects, ADEQ (2011, p. 8) clearing (Stoleson et al. 2005, p. 57). We surface are often used. Examples of recommends that smallmouth bass, are aware of no specific research on products used in erosion or sediment green sunfish, and black bullheads potential effects of mining or control include mulch control netting, caught from Tonto Creek not be environmental contaminants acting on erosion control blankets, fiber rolls consumed, and common carp be northern Mexican gartersnakes, but (wattles), and reinforced silt fences consumed sparingly. Because conclude, based on the best available (California Coastal Commission 2012, p. gartersnakes eat fish, mercury may be scientific and commercial information, 1). Erosion control is considered a best bioaccumulating in resident that where this land use is prevalent, management practice for most soil- populations, although no testing of contaminants may be a concern for disturbing activities, and is broadly gartersnakes has occurred. resident gartersnakes or their prey. required as mitigation across the United States, in particular to avoid excess Specific land uses such as mining and Northern Mexican Gartersnake sedimentation of streams and rivers. smelting, as well as road construction Competition With Marcy’s Checkered Rolled erosion control products, such as and use, can be significant sources of Gartersnake (Northern Mexican temporary erosion control blankets and contaminants in air, water, or soil Gartersnake) (Factor E) permanent turf reinforcement mats, are through point-source and non-point Preliminary research suggests that two methods commonly used for these source mechanisms. Copper mining has Marcy’s checkered gartersnake purposes (Barton and Kinkead 2005, p. occurred in Arizona and adjacent (Thamnophis marcianus marcianus) 34). These products use stitching or net- Mexico for centuries, and many of these may impact the future conservation of like mesh products to hold absorbent sites have smelters (now the northern Mexican gartersnake in media together. At a restoration site in decommissioned), which are former southern Arizona. Rosen and Schwalbe South Carolina, 19 snakes (15 dead) sources of airborne contaminants. (1988, p. 31) hypothesized that bullfrogs representing 5 different species were Industrial mine sites occur in several are more likely to eliminate northern found entangled in the netting and had counties in Arizona (Greenlee, Pima, Mexican gartersnakes when Marcy’s received severe lacerations in the Pinal, Yavapai, and Gila), as well as in checkered gartersnakes are also present. process of attempting to escape their Grant County, New Mexico. The current Marcy’s checkered gartersnake is a semi- entanglement (Barton and Kinkead price of copper is high and is expected terrestrial species that is able to co-exist 2005, p. 34). Stuart et al. (2001, pp. 162– to continue to increase into the next to some degree with harmful nonnative 164) also reported the threats of net-like several decades, fueled by international predators. This might be due to its debris to snake species. Kapfer and development and economic growth. apparent ability to forage in more Paloski (2011, p. 4) reported at least 31 Overall, 18 mines are either in terrestrial habitats, specifically during instances involving 6 different species production or in the pre-production the vulnerable juvenile size classes of snake (including the common phases of development in Arizona and (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, p. 31; Rosen gartersnake) in Wisconsin that had New Mexico. The mining industry in et al. 2001, pp. 9–10). In every age class, become entangled in the netting used Mexico is largely concentrated in the the northern Mexican gartersnake for either erosion control or as a wildlife northern tier of that country, with the forages in aquatic habitats where exclusion product. In their review, State of Sonora being the leading nonnative predatory fish, bullfrogs, and Kapfer and Paloski (2011, p. 6) noted producer of copper, gold, graphite, crayfish are present, which increases that 0.5-in.-by-0.5-in. mesh has the molybdenum, and wollastonite, as well not only the encounter rate between greatest likelihood of entangling snakes. as the leader among Mexican States predator and prey, but also the juvenile Similar snake fatalities have not been with regard to the amount of surface fatality rate of the northern Mexican documented in Arizona or New Mexico, area dedicated to mining (Stoleson et al. gartersnake, which negatively affects according to our files. However, given 2005, p. 56). The three largest mines in recruitment. As northern Mexican the broad usage of these materials across Mexico (all copper) are found in Sonora gartersnake numbers decline within a the distribution of the northern Mexican (Stoleson et al. 2005, p. 57). One of population, space becomes available for and narrow-headed gartersnakes, it is these, the Cananea Copper Mine occupation by Marcy’s checkered not unlikely that fatalities occur, but go adjacent to the Upper San Pedro River gartersnakes. If competitive pressure unreported. The likelihood of either in northern Sonora, was responsible for between these two species has existed gartersnake species becoming entangled a massive spill event. For two over time, it is reasonable to conclude depends on the distance these erosion consecutive years (1977–1978), two that northern Mexican gartersnakes control materials are used from water in leaching ponds overflowed into the San were successfully out-competing occupied habitat and the density of Pedro River resulting in very acidic Marcy’s checkered gartersnake prior to potentially affected populations. water conditions and high levels of the invasion of harmful nonnative Because erosion control products are

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38718 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

usually used to prevent sedimentation monitoring data (Sleemen 2013, p. 1). prey base. We also recognize that, while of streams, there is a higher likelihood So far, no evidence of SFD has been the presence of stock tanks on the for gartersnakes to become entangled. found in the genus Thamnophis, but the landscape can benefit nonnative We encourage those who use these documented occurrence of SFD in species, well-managed stock tanks are materials in or near gartersnake habitat ecologically similar, aquatic colubrids currently an invaluable tool in the to take necessary precautions and such as Nerodia is cause for concern. conservation and recovery of northern monitor their use as gartersnake Parasites, such as the common Mexican gartersnakes and their prey. fatalities could occur. plerocercoid larvae of a Other activities, factors, or conditions Discarded fishing nets have also been pseudophyllidean tapeworm (possibly that act in combination, such as road documented as a source of fatalities for Spirometra spp.), have been observed in construction, use, and management, northern Mexican gartersnakes in the northern Mexican gartersnakes adverse human interactions, area of Lake Chapala, Jalisco, Mexico (Boyarski (2008b, pp. 5–6), which may environmental contaminants, (Barraga´n-Ramı´rez and Ascencio- not be detrimental to the snake’s health entanglement hazards, and competitive Arrayga 2013, p. 159). Netting or seining (Boyarski 2008b, p. 8). However, pressures from sympatric species, occur is not an authorized form of recreational Gu´ zman (2008, p. 102) first documented within the distribution of these fishing for sport fish in Arizona or New a Mexican gartersnake fatality from a gartersnakes and have the propensity to Mexico, but the practice is allowed in larval Eustrongylides sp. (endoparasitic contribute to further population either state for the collection of live nematode), which ‘‘raises the possibility declines or extirpations where baitfish (AGFD 2013a, p. 57; NMDGF that infection of Mexican gartersnakes gartersnakes occur at low population 2013, p. 17). Arizona fishing regulations by Eustrongylides sp. larvae might cause densities. An emerging skin disease, authorize seining for baitfish only where fatality in some wild populations,’’ SFD, has not yet been documented in the baitfish will be used and specify that especially if those populations are gartersnakes but has affected snakes of seining is not allowed in Coconino, under stress as a result of the presence many genera within the United States, Apache, Pima, and Cochise Counties. In of other threats. Nowak et al. (2014, pp. including ecologically similar species, other areas, it is suspected that most 148–149) reported the first observation and may pose a future threat to northern seinng activity occurs at sites dominated of what appears as maternal Mexican and narrow-headed by warmwater sportfish, where these transmission of endoparasites, gartersnakes. Where low-density gartersnakes are less likely to occur. We specifically of the genus (Macdonaldius populations are affected by these types are not certain of the frequency at which sp.). We found no substantive evidence of threats described above, even the loss these techniques are used for such that parasites represent a significant of a few reproductive adults, especially purposes in either state, but we do not threat to either gartersnake species. females, from a population can have suspect that discarded nets or seines are significant population-level effects, Summary commonly left on-site where they could most notably in the presence of harmful ensnarl resident gartersnakes. However, We found numerous effects of nonnative species. Continued this practice is used in Mexico as a livestock grazing that have resulted in population declines and extirpations primary means of obtaining freshwater the historical degradation of riparian threaten the genetic representation of fish as a food source and may be more and aquatic communities that have each species because many populations of a threat to local northern Mexican likely affected northern Mexican and have become disconnected and isolated gartersnake populations where this narrow-headed gartersnakes. from neighboring populations. This practice occurs. Mismanaged or unmanaged grazing can subsequently leads to a reduction in have disproportionate effects to riparian species redundancy and resiliency Disease and Parasites (Northern communities in arid ecosystems due to when isolated, small populations are at Mexican and Narrow-Headed the attraction of livestock to water, increased vulnerability to the effects of Gartersnake) (Factor C) forage, and shade. We found current stochastic events, without a means for Our review of the scientific literature livestock grazing activities to be more of natural recolonization. Based on the did not find evidence that disease is a a concern in Mexico, at least when it best available scientific and commercial current factor contributing to the occurs in areas that also support information, we conclude that these decline in northern Mexican or narrow- harmful nonnative species. The most threats have the tendency to act headed gartersnakes. However, a recent profound impacts from livestock grazing synergistically and disproportionately wildlife health bulletin announced the in the southwestern United States on low-density gartersnake populations emergence of snake fungal disease (SFD) occurred nearly 100 years ago, were rangewide, now and in the foreseeable within the eastern and midwestern significant, and may still be affecting future. portions of the United States (Sleemen some areas that have yet to fully 2013, p. 1). SFD has now been recover. Unmanaged or poorly managed Adequacy and Effectiveness at Reducing diagnosed in several terrestrial and livestock operations likely have more Identified Threats of Existing Regulatory aquatic snake genera including Nerodia, pronounced effects in areas impacted by Mechanisms (Northern Mexican and Coluber, Pantherophis, Crotalus, harmful nonnative species through a Narrow-Headed Gartersnake) (Factors D Sistrurus, and Lampropeltis. Clinical reduction in cover. However, land and E) signs of SFD include scabs or crusty managers in Arizona and New Mexico Below, we examine whether existing scales, subcutaneous nodules, abnormal currently emphasize the protection of regulatory mechanisms are adequate to molting, white opaque cloudiness of the riparian and aquatic habitat in allotment address the threats to the northern eyes, localized thickening or crusting of management planning, usually through Mexican and narrow-headed the skin, skin ulcers, swelling of the fencing, rotation, monitoring, and range gartersnakes discussed under other face, or nodules in the deeper tissues improvements such as developing factors and whether these regulations (Sleemen 2013, p. 1). While fatalities remote water sources. Collectively, are acting to alleviate the threats have been documented as a result of these measures have reduced the identified to the species. Section SFD, population-level impacts have not, likelihood of significant adverse impacts 4(b)(1)(A) of the Endangered Species due to the cryptic and solitary nature of on northern Mexican or narrow-headed Act requires the Service to take into snakes and the lack of long-term gartersnakes, their habitat, and their account ‘‘those efforts, if any, being

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38719

made by any State or foreign nation, or narrow-headed gartersnakes, their prey Service biologists who work within the any political subdivision of a State or base, or their habitat. range of either northern Mexican or foreign nation, to protect such species.’’ The majority of the extant populations narrow-headed gartersnakes may We interpret this language to require us of northern Mexican and narrow-headed opportunistically gather data for their to consider relevant Federal, State, and gartersnakes in the United States occur records on gartersnakes observed Tribal laws, regulations, and other such on lands managed by the U.S. Bureau of incidentally in the field or coordinate mechanisms that may minimize any of Land Management (BLM) and U.S. with other collaborators on surveys, the threats we describe in the threats Forest Service. Both agencies have although it is not required. The Gila analysis under the other four factors, or riparian protection goals that may National Forest mentions the narrow- otherwise influence conservation of the provide habitat benefits to both species; headed gartersnake in their land and species. We give strongest weight to however, neither agency has specific resource management plan, which statutes and their implementing management plans for northern Mexican includes standards relating to forest regulations, and management direction or narrow-headed gartersnakes. As a management for the benefit of that stems from those laws and result, some of the significant threats to endangered and threatened species as regulations. They are nondiscretionary these gartersnakes, for example, those identified through approved and enforceable, and are considered a related to nonnative species, are not management and recovery plans (Center regulatory mechanism under this necessarily addressed on these lands. for Biological Diversity (CBD) et al. analysis. Having evaluated the The BLM considers the northern 2011, p. 18). Neither species is significance of the threat as mitigated by Mexican gartersnake as a ‘‘Sensitive mentioned in any other land and any such conservation efforts, we Species’’ by default, due to its status resource management plan for the analyze under Factor D the extent to under the Act (U.S. Bureau of Land remaining national forests where they which existing regulatory mechanisms Management (USBLM) 2010), and occur (CBD et al. 2011, p. 18). are inadequate to address the specific agency biologists actively attempt to The New Mexico Department of Game threats to the species. Regulatory identify gartersnakes for their records and Fish lists the northern Mexican mechanisms, if they exist, may reduce for snakes observed incidentally during gartersnake as State-endangered and the or eliminate the impacts from one or fieldwork (Young 2005). BLM policy narrow-headed gartersnake as State- more identified threats. In this section, (BLM Manual Section 6840) requires threatened (NMDGF 2006, Appendix H). we review existing State and Federal consideration of sensitive species A species is State-endangered if it is in regulatory mechanisms to determine during planning of activities and jeopardy of extinction or extirpation whether they effectively reduce or projects and mitigation of specific within the State; a species is State- remove threats to the species. threats. The BLM’s Resource threatened if it is likely to become Management Plans include objectives endangered within the foreseeable A number of Federal statutes and management actions to benefit future throughout all or a significant potentially afford protection to northern riparian habitat and native fish; with portion of its range in New Mexico Mexican and narrow-headed some addressing ‘‘invasive wildlife (NMDGF 2006, p. 52). ‘‘Take,’’ defined gartersnakes or their prey species. These species’’ (USBLM 2013, p. 2). When the as ‘‘to harass, hunt, capture or kill any include section 404 of the Clean Water Agua Fria National Monument was wildlife or attempt to do so’’ by New Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Federal created in January 2000, lowland Mexico Statutes Annotated (NMSA) 17– Land Policy and Management Act (43 leopard frogs, native fish, northern 2–38.L., is prohibited without a U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), National Forest Mexican gartersnakes, and riparian scientific collecting permit issued by the Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1600 et habitat were designated as ‘‘monument New Mexico Department of Game and seq.), National Environmental Policy objects’’ under protection by the Fish as per NMSA 17–2–41.C and New Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), and National Monument (USBLM 2013, p. Mexico Administrative Code (NMAC) the Act. However, in practice, these 3). Similar conservation provisions are 19.33.6. However, while the New statutes have not been able to provide in place on the BLM’s National Mexico Department of Game and Fish sufficient protection to prevent the Conservation Areas (NCAs), such as the can issue monetary penalties for illegal currently observed downward trend in Las Cienegas NCA, San Pedro River take of either northern Mexican northern Mexican and narrow-headed NCA, and the Gila Box Riparian NCA. gartersnakes or narrow-headed gartersnakes or their prey species, and While these measures likely minimize gartersnakes, the same provisions are the concurrent upward trend in threats. the effect of otherwise adverse regional not in place for actions that result in Section 404 of the Clean Water Act land use activities on the aquatic loss or modification of their habitats regulates placement of fill into waters of community, gartersnake populations in (NMSA 17–2–41.C and NMAC 19.33.6) the United States, including the these areas remain in a precarious (Painter 2005). majority of northern Mexican and status. Prior to 2005, the AGFD allowed for narrow-headed gartersnake habitat. The U.S. Forest Service does not take of up to four northern Mexican or However, many actions with the include northern Mexican or narrow- narrow-headed gartersnakes per person potential to be highly detrimental to headed gartersnakes on their per year as specified in Commission both species, their prey base, and their Management Indicator Species List, but Order 43. The AGFD defines ‘‘take’’ as habitat, such as gravel mining and both species are included on the ‘‘pursuing, shooting, hunting, fishing, irrigation diversion structure Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species trapping, killing, capturing, snaring, or construction and maintenance, may be List (USFS 2007, pp. 38–39). This netting wildlife or the placing or using exempted from the Clean Water Act. means they are considered in land any net or other device or trap in a Other detrimental actions, such as bank management decisions, and protective manner that may result in the capturing stabilization and road crossings, are measures can be implemented to or killing of wildlife.’’ The AGFD covered under nationwide permits that minimize adverse effects of otherwise subsequently amended Commission receive limited environmental review. A lawful activities. However we found no Order 43, effective January 2005. Take lack of thorough, site-specific analyses examples of specific protective of northern Mexican and narrow-headed for projects can allow substantial measures that have been implemented gartersnakes is no longer permitted in adverse effects to northern Mexican or for these species. Individual U.S. Forest Arizona without issuance of a scientific

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38720 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

collecting permit (Ariz. Admin. Code criteria: (1) Size of the distribution of neither state law is designed to provide R12–4–401 et seq.) or special the taxon in Mexico; (2) state (quality) protection of habitat and ecosystems. authorization. While the AGFD can seek of the habitat with respect to natural Therefore, these laws are not reducing criminal or civil penalties for illegal development of the taxon; (3) intrinsic threats to the species such that they no take of these species, the same biological vulnerability of the taxon; longer meet the definition of provisions are not in place for actions and (4) impacts of human activity on the endangered or threatened under the Act. that result in destruction or taxon. INE began to use the MER in Current Conservation of Northern modification of the gartersnakes’ 2006; therefore, all species previously Mexican and Narrow-Headed habitat. In addition to making the listed in the NOM–059 were based Gartersnakes (Factor E) necessary regulatory changes to promote solely on expert review and opinion in the conservation of northern Mexican many cases. Specifically, until 2006, the Several conservation measures and narrow-headed gartersnakes, the listing process under INE consisted of a implemented by land and resource AGFD’s Nongame Branch continues to panel of scientific experts who managers, private land owners, and be a strong partner in research and convened as necessary for the purpose other stakeholders can directly or survey efforts that further our of defining and assessing the status and indirectly benefit populations of understanding of current populations, threats that affect Mexico’s native northern Mexican and narrow-headed and assist with conservation efforts and species that are considered to be at risk, gartersnakes. For example, the AGFD’s the establishment of long-term and applying those factors to the conservation and mitigation program conservation partnerships. definitions of the various listing (CAMP; implemented under an existing Throughout Mexico, the Mexican categories. In 1994, when the Mexican section 7 incidental take permit) has gartersnake is listed at the species level gartersnake was placed on the NOM– committed to either stocking (with of its taxonomy as ‘‘Amenazadas,’’ or 059 (SEDESOL 1994 (NOM–059–ECOL– captive-bred stock) or securing two Threatened, by the Secretaria de Medio 1994), p. 46) as a threatened species, the populations each of northern Mexican Ambiente y Recursos Naturales decision was made by a panel of and narrow-headed gartersnakes to help (SEMARNAT) (SEDESOL 2010, p. 71). scientific experts. minimize adverse effects to these Threatened species are ‘‘those species, Although the Mexican gartersnake is species from their sport fish stocking or populations of the same, likely to be listed as a threatened species in Mexico program through 2021 (USFWS 2011, in danger of disappearing in a short or and based on our experience Appendix C). Other CAMP medium timeframe, if the factors that collaborating with Mexico on trans- commitments include: (1) Developing a negatively impact their viability, cause border conservation efforts, no recovery gartersnake monitoring, research, and the deterioration or modification of their plan or other conservation planning restocking plan to guide CAMP habitat or directly diminish the size of occurs because of this status, and activities to establish or secure their populations continue to operate’’ enforcement of the regulation protecting populations; (2) developing outreach (Secretarıá de Desarrollo Social the gartersnake is sporadic, depending material to reduce the deliberate killing (SEDESOL) 2010, p. 5). This designation on available resources and location. or injuring of gartersnakes (placed in prohibits taking of the species, unless Based upon the best available scientific high angler access areas); (3) ensuring specifically permitted, as well as and commercial information on the that chemically renovated streams are prohibits any activity that intentionally status of the species, and the historic quickly restocked with native fish as destroys or adversely modifies its and continuing threats to its habitat in gartersnake prey; (4) conducting a live habitat. Additionally, in 1988, the Mexico, our analysis concludes that bait assessment team to develop Mexican Government passed a regulatory mechanisms enacted by the recommendations to amend live bait regulation that is similar to the National Mexican Government to conserve the management; (5) reviewing and Environmental Policy Act of the United northern Mexican gartersnake are not updating outreach programs on the risks States. This Mexican regulation requires adequate to address threats to the to native aquatic species from the an environmental assessment of private species or its habitat. transport of nonnative aquatic species; or government actions that may affect In summary, we reviewed a number of (6) developing and implementing a wildlife or their habitat (SEDESOL 1988 existing regulations that potentially public education program on Ley General del Equilibrio Ecolo´gico y address issues affecting the northern gartersnakes; and (7) working with the la Proteccioń al Ambiente (LGEEPA)). Mexican and narrow-headed New Mexico Department of Game and The Mexican Federal agency known gartersnakes and their habitats. Mexican Fish to examine the roll of escaped as the Instituto Nacional de Ecologıá law prohibits take of the northern rainbow trout from Luna Lake into (INE) is responsible for the analysis of Mexican gartersnake and the intentional tributaries to the San Francisco River in the status and threats that pertain to destruction or modification of northern supporting narrow-headed gartersnakes. species that are proposed for listing in Mexican gartersnake habitat. However The programs’ management strategy is the Norma Oficial Mexicana NOM–059 that law has not led to a reduction in encapsulated in AGFD (2014a, entire) (the Mexican equivalent to an threats such that they no longer meet and progress on activities through June endangered and threatened species list), the definition of endangered or 2013 is reported in AGFD (2012c, pp. and, if appropriate, the nomination of threatened under the Act. Furthermore, 26–30; 2013b, pp. 37–44). species to the list. INE is generally most existing regulations in the United Significant challenges will have to be considered the Mexican counterpart to States within the range of northern met for creating or securing two the United States’ Fish and Wildlife Mexican and narrow-headed populations each of northern Mexican Service. INE developed the Method of gartersnakes were not specifically or narrow-headed gartersnakes. Captive Evaluation of the Risk of Extinction of designed to protect the gartersnakes or propagation, if used to create stock for the Wild Species in Mexico (MER), their habitats, which is the overarching reintroductions, has only been possible which unifies the criteria of decisions threat to the species. For example, for northern Mexican gartersnakes. on the categories of risk and permits the Arizona and New Mexico both have Specifically, after approximately 6 years use of specific information fundamental statutes designed for protection of state- of experimentation with captive to listing decisions. The MER is based listed species that prohibit the direct propagation at five institutions, using on four independent, quantitative collection of individuals. However two colonies of northern Mexican

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38721

gartersnakes and three colonies of and outreach; and (4) managing against much of the recovery of the Chiricahua narrow-headed gartersnakes, success known threats to the species. leopard frog has occurred in areas that has been limited (see Gartersnake Implementation of the recovery plan have not directly benefitted the northern Conservation Working Group (GCWG) was to occur between the second half of Mexican gartersnake, either because 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010). In 2012 and 2007 through 2011, and was divided these activities have occurred outside 2013, approximately 60 northern into three main categories: (1) Improve the known distribution of the northern Mexican gartersnakes were produced at and maintain knowledge of potential Mexican gartersnake or because they one institution, 40 of which were threats to the narrow-headed have occurred in isolated lentic systems subsequently marked and released along gartersnake; (2) improve and maintain that are far removed from large Cienega Creek. These were the first knowledge of the biology of the narrow- perennial streams that typically provide gartersnakes of either species to be headed gartersnake; and (3) develop and source populations of northern Mexican produced under this program, but the maintain high levels of cooperation and gartersnakes. In recent years, significant current status of released individuals coordination between stakeholders and strides have been made in controlling remains unknown. No narrow-headed interested parties (Pierce 2007, pp. 16– bullfrogs on local landscape levels in gartersnakes have been produced in 17). Our review of the plan found that Arizona, such as in the Scotia Canyon captivity under this program since its it lacked specific threat-mitigation area, in the Las Cienegas National inception. Secondly, in order to have commitments on the landscape, as well Conservation Area, on the BANWR, and the greatest chance for success, the as stakeholder accountability for in the vicinity of Pena Blanca Lake in process of ‘‘securing’’ a population of implementing activities prescribed in the Pajarito Mountains. Recent efforts to either species will likely involve an the plan. We also found that actions return the Las Cienegas National aggressive nonnative removal strategy, calling for targeted nonnative species Conservation Area to a wholly native and will have to account for habitat removal or management were absent in biological community have involved connectivity to prevent reinvasion of the implementation schedule provided bullfrog eradication efforts, as well as unwanted species. Therefore, securing a in Pierce (2007, p. 17). As we have efforts to recover the Chiricahua leopard population of either species may discussed at length, harmful nonnative frog and native fish species. These involve removal of harmful nonnatives species are the primary driver of actions should assist in conserving the from an entire subbasin or on a continued declines in both gartersnake northern Mexican gartersnake landscape scale (Cotton et al. 2014, pp. species. No recovery plan, conservation population in this area. Bullfrog control 12–13). In situations where harmful plan, or conservation agreement has been shown to be most effective in nonnatives do not pose a threat to a currently exists in New Mexico with simple, lentic systems such as stock given population, other types of regard to the northern Mexican tanks. Therefore, we encourage livestock recovery actions may suffice. gartersnake (NMDGF 2006, Table 6–3). managers to work with resource To protect habitat for candidate, In Arizona’s State Wildlife Action managers in the systematic eradication threatened, and endangered species, Plan 2012–2022 (SWAP) (AGFD 2012b, of bullfrogs from stock tanks where they including northern Mexican Appendix E), both the northern Mexican occur, or at a minimum, ensure they are gartersnakes in the Agua Fria subbasin, and narrow-headed gartersnake are Tier never introduced. the AGFD purchased the approximate 1A Species of Greatest Conservation An emphasis on native fish recovery 200-acre (81-ha) Horseshoe Ranch along Need (SGCN). SGCN include those in fisheries management and enhanced the Agua Fria River located near the ‘‘species that each State identified as harmful nonnative species control to Bloody Basin Road crossing, east of most in need of conservation actions’’ favor native communities may be the Interstate 17 and southeast of Cordes and Tier 1A species include ‘‘those single most efficient and effective Junction, Arizona. The AGFD plans species for which the Department has manner to recover these gartersnakes, in (presumably in the next 5–10 years) to entered into an agreement or has legal addition to appropriate management for introduce northern Mexican or other contractual obligations, or all listed or sensitive native fish and gartersnakes, as well as lowland leopard warrants the protection of a closed amphibian species upon which they frogs and native fish species, into a large season’’ (AGFD 2012b, p. 16). The prey. Alternatively, resource pond, protected by bullfrog exclusion SWAP is not a regulatory document, management policies that are intended fencing, located adjacent to the Agua and does not provide any specific to directly benefit or maintain harmful Fria River. The bullfrog exclusion protections for either the gartersnakes nonnative communities, and which will fencing around the pond will permit the themselves, or their habitats. The AGFD likely exclude native species, will dispersal of northern Mexican does not have specified or mandated significantly reduce the potential for the gartersnakes and lowland leopard frogs recovery goals for either the northern conservation and recovery of northern from the pond, allowing the pond to act Mexican or narrow-headed gartersnake, Mexican and narrow-headed as a source population to the Agua Fria nor has a conservation agreement or gartersnakes, in those areas where they River. The AGFD’s short- to mid-term recovery plan been developed for either overlap with habitat occupied by either conservation planning for Horseshoe species. gartersnake. Ranch will help ensure the northern Indirect benefits for both gartersnake Fisheries managers strive to balance Mexican gartersnake persists in this species occur through recovery actions the needs of the recreational angling historical locality. designed for their prey species. Since community against those required by In 2007, the New Mexico Department the Chiricahua leopard frog was listed native aquatic communities. Fisheries of Game and Fish completed a recovery as threatened under the Act, significant management has direct implications for plan for narrow-headed gartersnakes in strides have been made in its recovery, the conservation and recovery of New Mexico (Pierce 2007, pp. 13–15) and the mitigation of its known threats. northern Mexican and narrow-headed that included the following management The northern Mexican gartersnake, in gartersnakes in the United States. objectives: (1) Researching the effect of particular, has likely benefitted from Clarkson et al. (2005) discuss known threats to, and natural history of, these actions, at least in some areas, management conflicts as a primary the species; (2) acquiring funding such as at the Las Cienegas Natural factor in the decline of native fish sources for research, monitoring, and Conservation Area and in Scotia Canyon species in the southwestern United management; (3) enhancing education of the Huachuca Mountains. However, States, and declare the entire native fish

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38722 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

fauna as imperiled. The investigators preferred as nonnative fisheries under diminish the recovery potential for cite nonnative species as the most the watershed designation process. gartersnakes in these areas, and, consequential factor leading to Another significant and confounding perhaps, even result in the local rangewide declines of native fish, and factor is the AGFD’s ‘‘no net loss’’ extirpations of populations of northern that such declines prevent or negate policy that addresses sport fishery Mexican and narrow-headed species’ recovery efforts from being resources statewide. There is no official gartersnakes. Alternatively, subbasins implemented or being successful written AGFD Commission guidance on that are targeted for wholly native (Clarkson et al. 2005, p. 20). ‘‘no net loss’’ according to AGFD (2009, species assemblages would likely secure Maintaining the status quo of current Appendix D), but ‘‘Commission policy the persistence of northern Mexican and management of fisheries within the DOM [Arizona Game Fish Department narrow-headed gartersnakes that occur southwestern United States will have Operating Manual] A2.24, Wildlife there, if not result in their complete serious adverse effects to native fish Management Program Goal and recovery in these areas. Specific species (Clarkson et al. 2005, p. 25), Objective #6 states, ‘provide and subbasins where targeted fisheries which will affect the long-term viability promote fishing opportunities to sustain management is to occur were not of northern Mexican and narrow-headed a minimum of 8,000,000 AUD per year provided in AGFD (2012b), but gartersnakes and their potential for by June 30, 1997.’ Although this policy depending on which areas are chosen recovery. Clarkson et al. (2005, p. 20) has yet to be revised by the for each management emphasis, the also note that over 50 nonnative species Commission, based on current data, we potential for future conservation and have been introduced into the remain below 8,000,000 AUD’s recovery of northern Mexican and Southwest as either sportfish or baitfish, statewide (AGFD 2009, Appendix D). As narrow-headed gartersnakes could and some are still being actively such, it was determined the either be significantly bolstered, or stocked, managed for, and promoted by Department’s goal to manage for no net significantly hampered. Close both Federal and State agencies as loss is consistent with current coordination with the AGFD on the nonnative recreational fisheries. Commission policy (A2.24). The ‘‘no net delineation of fisheries management To help resolve the fundamental loss’’ policy is a guiding tenet, and its priorities in Arizona’s subbasins will be conflict of management between native implementation is directed as follows instrumental to ensuring that fish and recreational sport fisheries, (AGFD 2009, Appendix D): conservation and recovery of northern Clarkson et al. (2005, pp. 22–25) Mexican and narrow-headed propose the designation of entire ‘‘When a sport fishery is valued less than gartersnakes can occur. subbasins as having either native or a native aquatic conservation value within a Conservation of these gartersnakes has management unit, the loss of sport fishing nonnative fisheries and manage for opportunity will be compensated for by gain been implemented in the scientific and these goals aggressively. The idea of of an equal number of AUDs in another area management communities as well. The watershed-segregated fisheries or management unit. This opportunity will AGFD recently produced identification management is also supported by Marsh be created within the same watershed when cards for distribution that provide and Pacey (2005, p. 62). As part of the possible. For this purpose, a watershed is information to assist field professionals AGFD’s overall wildlife conservation defined as a six-digit-numbered area with the identification of each of strategy, the AGFD has planned an referenced on the USGS’s Hydrological Unit Arizona’s five native gartersnake integrated fisheries management Map. If this is not possible, the opportunity species, as well as guidance on approach (AGFD 2012b, p. 106), which will be created within the same Department submitting photographic vouchers for regional boundaries. Again, if this is not is apparently designed to manage possible, the opportunity will be created university museum collections. Arizona subbasins specifically for either somewhere within the State with extensive State University and the University of nonnative or native fish communities. coordination between regional staff. If a net Arizona now accept photographic This strategy is described in detail in loss cannot be avoided, the Director will vouchers in lieu of physical specimens, AGFD (2009, entire), but the AGFD has evaluate if the loss is acceptable by gauging in their respective museum collections. not yet initiated implementation of this the input from the public process leading to These measures appreciably reduce the strategy or decided how fisheries will be the recommendation and may take the necessity for physical specimens (unless managed in Arizona’s subbasins, and we information to the Commission at his discovered postmortem) for locality are not aware of a specific discretion. The replacement opportunity will voucher purposes and, therefore, further implementation timeline. However, the be initiated no more than two years following reduce impacts to vulnerable the loss to anglers.’’ ‘‘current fish assemblage,’’ ‘‘current populations of northern Mexican or recovery or conservation category,’’ and Extensive coordination between narrow-headed gartersnakes. ‘‘current angling category’’ inform what AGFD and the Service will be required Despite these collective conservation is referred to as Step 2c: Identification under the no net loss policy with regard efforts we have described above, of Current Fishery Values’’ (AGFD 2009, to gartersnake conservation and northern Mexican and narrow-headed pp. 10–11). Factors such as angler recovery because the amount of suitable gartersnakes have continued to decline access (which contributes directly to riparian and aquatic habitat is finite, throughout their ranges due to past, angler use days (AUD)), existing fish yet, somehow, the existing opportunity current, and future threats that have not communities, and stream flow for AUD must be maintained. This been addressed through conservation considerations are likely to inform such increases the uncertainty for the efforts. broadly based decisions. persistence of existing gartersnake Due to the relative scarcity of populations in Arizona. Summary of Changes From the perennial streams in arid regions such Large perennial rivers that serve as Proposed Rule as Arizona, several of Arizona’s large sport fisheries also currently serve as Based on information provided during perennial rivers present an array of important habitat for northern Mexican the comment period by the general existing sport fishing opportunities and or narrow-headed gartersnake. If public, tribes, states, and peer angler access points, and already designated for sportfishing, fisheries reviewers, we updated the information contain harmful nonnative fish species management of these rivers would likely contained in the proposed rule for that are considered sport fish. We include the maintenance of predatory incorporation into this final rule. In anticipate that these rivers may be sport fish species, which would likely addition, new references were obtained,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38723

evaluated, and discussed in the would interfere with ongoing recovery Comment 2: It would be helpful to the deliberation of information in the final actions for listed fish species where they reader to visualize the historical and rule that were either not available or not co-occur. Another concern was based on current ranges of the two snakes if range obtained during the development of the how threats affecting these gartersnakes maps were included. proposed rule. For clarity, we also were prioritized in their scope and Our Response: Current distribution revised the language used in our magnitude in the proposed rule. In maps were provided and are available in Findings for the listing rule and in the general, peer reviewers generally the proposed rule to designate critical background and regulatory language of concurred with our methods and habitat for the northern Mexican and the 4(d) rule. However, no substantive conclusions and provided additional narrow-headed gartersnake, which changes were made to either the information, clarifications, and accompanied the proposed rule to list conclusion of the final listing rule or the suggestions to improve the final rule. the species in the Federal Register (78 scope of the final 4(d) rule. Peer reviewer comments are addressed FR 41550, July 10, 2013, p. 41586). in the following summary and Summary of Comments and Comment 3: The sentence ‘‘Fleharty incorporated into the final rule as Recommendations (1967, p. 227) reported narrow-headed appropriate. gartersnakes eating green sunfish, but In the proposed rule published on Comment 1: The term ‘‘spiny-rayed green sunfish is not considered a July 10, 2013 (78 FR 41500), we fish’’ has a very specific scientific suitable prey item’’ needs clarification. requested that all interested parties meaning, which is not consistent with Specifically, the authors need to provide submit written comments on the its use in the proposed rule. While this evidence that green sunfish is not a proposal by September 9, 2013. We also group includes some of the nonnative suitable prey item. Just because green contacted appropriate Federal, State, species of concern, such as sunfish and sunfish has spines in their medial and Tribal agencies, scientific experts bass, it does not include others, (caudal excluded) and lateral fins does and organizations, and other interested specifically the catfishes. Also, the term not mean that it is not suitable prey. parties and invited them to comment on spiny-rayed fishes as used here excludes Our Response: We added further the proposal. Newspaper notices a suite of nonnative fishes that are clarification to this text to support this inviting general public comment were problematic for native fish species and statement in the final rule under published in the Verde Valley likely for northern Mexican gartersnake ‘‘Habitat and Natural History’’ for the Independent, Camp Verde Bugle, and narrow-headed gartersnake, such as narrow-headed gartersnake. Arizona Daily Star, and the Silver City nonnative trouts (especially highly Comment 4: Please provide examples Sun News. We received a request for a predaceous brown trout (Salmo trutta), of ‘‘barriers to movement’’ of narrow- public hearing from the Hereford red shiner (Cyprinella lutrensis), and headed gartersnakes and additional Natural Resource Conservation District mosquitofish (Gambusia affinis)). The information on the ‘‘salvage efforts’’ in who later withdrew their request. term ‘‘spiny-rayed fishes’’ should either the discussion leading into Table 2. Our summary responses to the be eliminated from the document and Our Response: We provided examples substantive comments we received on replaced with accurate terminology or and additional information in the text in the proposed listing rules and proposed be defined specifically for its intended the final rule under ‘‘Current 4(d) rule are provided below. Comments use in the rule. The Service should simply providing support for or dispense entirely with use of ‘‘spiny- Distribution and Population Status.’’ opposition to the proposed rule, without rayed fishes’’ and use only the term Comment 5: With respect to any supporting information, were not ‘‘nonnative fishes.’’ nonnative fish species in the Gila River considered to be substantive and we do Our Response: In the proposed rule, basin, all were either intentionally or not provide a response. we intended to identify those species of accidentally introduced by humans; nonnative fish that were both there is no evidence that any species Peer Reviewer Comments considered highly predatory on gained access to the basin through In accordance with our peer review gartersnakes and also highly natural colonization as inferred in the policy published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR competitive with gartersnakes in terms proposed rule. 34270), we solicited expert opinion of common prey resources. The Our Response: We agree that no from eight knowledgeable individuals nonnative fish species we view as most evidence exists to support unassisted with scientific expertise that included harmful to gartersnake populations migration of nonnative fish species into familiarity with northern Mexican and include bass (Micropterus sp.), flathead the Gila River basin from outside the narrow-headed gartersnakes and their catfish (Pylodictis sp.), channel catfish basin. However, we acknowledge that habitat, biological needs, and threats. (Ictalurus sp.), sunfish, bullheads harmful nonnatives, once introduced, We received responses from five of the (Ameiurus sp.), bluegill (Lepomis sp.), are fully capable of naturally dispersing peer reviewers. crappie (Pomoxis sp.,) and brown trout within the watershed where habitat We reviewed all comments received (Salmo trutta). We agree that all connectivity permits. This latter concept from the peer reviewers for substantive nonnative fish species pose some level was the impetus for the notion of issues and new information regarding of threat to native aquatic ecosystems. ‘‘natural colonization’’, which is also the listing of northern Mexican and However, it is important to highlight referred to as dispersal. narrow-headed gartersnakes. All peer those nonnative fish species that pose Comment 6: The proposed rule reviewers shared the opinion that a the greatest threat to assist in mentions only trout of the genus Salmo thorough examination of all available prioritizing future conservation actions as occurring in habitat occupied by information was conducted in support that are most beneficial to northern either gartersnake. Rainbow trout of listing these gartersnakes. Peer Mexican and narrow-headed (Oncorynchus mykiss) and brook trout reviewers also commented that the gartersnakes. Therefore, we have (Salvelinus fontinalis) also occur. quality of the information presented in specifically defined in the beginning of Our Response: This oversight has the proposed rule was very high and the this final rule, what nonnative fish been corrected in the final rule in the analyses were thorough. There were species are considered ‘‘predatory’’ and subsection ‘‘Fish’’ within the concerns expressed regarding whether what nonnative species we consider subheading ‘‘Decline of the Gartersnake listing these gartersnakes as threatened ‘‘harmful.’’ Prey Base.’’

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38724 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Comment 7: The statements that they already are present and in those evaluation of the literature and nonnative fish ‘‘tend to occupy the habitats where they may invade or be cooperative work with gartersnakes, middle and upper zones in the water introduced in the future, which alternative prey species and appropriate column’’ while native fish tend to occur included virtually any watercourse or size classes are well-understood. We are ‘‘along the bottom’’ is not entirely body of water throughout the region. not, however, aware of any studies that accurate. For example, all of the Our Response: We added language to focused on how long a gartersnake catfishes (all of which are nonnative in reflect this fact in the subsection ‘‘Fish’’ could go without food before the Gila River system) are benthic in within the subheading ‘‘Decline of the physiological stress or starvation. We do habit, and these are among the species Gartersnake Prey Base.’’ know that, compared to snakes within considered harmful to gartersnakes and Comment 11: With respect to other genera or families, gartersnakes their prey. Among native fishes in the potential effects from fisheries have a relatively fast metabolism and Gila River system only loach minnow management activities, it would appear are active foragers, implying that would be characterized as benthic, that gartersnakes still occur in many of physiological stress or starvation may be although most native suckers and the streams that have received piscicide more of a concern in the absence of minnows (chubs largely excluded) do treatments. If so, why are these streams prey. forage along surfaces, including the and their renovation history discussed There are significant challenges with bottom. Moreover, large numbers of in the proposed rule because there is no salvaging gartersnakes for long-term native fish, longfin dace (Agosia evidence that chemical treatment in any captivity. First, facilities with the space, chrysogaster) in particular, occur in of these instances eliminated, depleted, equipment, and knowledge to care for shallow habitats where differentiating a or otherwise impacted a resident larger numbers of gartersnakes for long position in the water column is gartersnake population. The loss of a periods of time are very few, and problematic. major portion, or entire, prey base of a currently those that are capable, are Our Response: We have amended the gartersnake population will result in the nearly at full capacity because of their discussion in the subsection ‘‘Fish’’ loss of individuals from starvation, involvement with captive breeding within the subheading ‘‘Decline of the which is expected to result in weakened efforts. Second, narrow-headed Gartersnake Prey Base’’ in the final rule population viability and, potentially, gartersnakes have proven to be difficult to specify which groups of native or the loss of that population depending on to maintain in captivity due to their nonnative fish are likely to occur where the presence of other stressors, the unique physiological and prey in the water column. proximity of the next-closest source requirements. Lastly, it may prove Comment 8: It seems unlikely that population, and the status of the difficult if not impossible to salvage Yaqui catfish were suitable prey for population prior to treatment. gartersnakes from low-density gartersnakes, given their stiff pectoral Our Response: If the intent of a populations within complex habitat and and dorsal spines, and humpback chub renovation is to remove all fish from a therefore the risk of their complete likely never co-occurred with either stream, and the stream is occupied by extirpation from a renovation activity is gartersnake. Woundfin, conversely, has either gartersnake, which wholly or elevated. In the event an isolated records from the lower Salt River at partially requires fish in their prey base, population is extirpated, the risk of Tempe and would have been a listed the logical conclusion is that adverse forever losing their unique genetic prey species. effects to gartersnakes, at least lineage is also elevated and Our Response: We have removed temporarily, are likely under these unacceptable. humpback chub and Yaqui catfish, and circumstances. The presence of either Comment 13: The discussion about added woundfin, as species noted that gartersnake in a treated stream after the electrofishing impacts to gartersnakes is were possible prey species of either treatment is not evidence that no misleading and misinformed. The gartersnake and that are now listed adverse effects to individuals have statement that ‘‘gartersnakes present under the Act. occurred. within the water are often temporarily Comment 9: Brown trout are highly Comment 12: Traditionally, pre- paralyzed from electrical impulses predacious and should be considered as treatment salvage and post-treatment intended for fish’’ is true only to the harmful nonnative wildlife by the restocking favor larger-bodied size extent that the gartersnake actually is Service. classes of native fish, which could present and available to intercept the Our Response: We have reevaluated reproduce and provide smaller prey for electrical current. Personal experience potential effects of brown trout gartersnakes over a period of time. and interviews with colleagues suggest predation on native aquatic vertebrates Small-bodied species would also be that encounters of electroshockers and and concur that brown trout are highly saved for salvage and restocking, but are gartersnakes are exceptionally rare, not predatory in all size classes and in a more difficult to find. How are the ‘‘often’’ as suggested by the Service. wide range of water temperatures. Thus, interests of the gartersnakes rectified in Next, use of the term ‘‘electrocution’’ is we have identified the brown trout as a these situations? Alternatively, inappropriate as it by definition means ‘‘predatory’’ nonnative fish species and gartersnakes themselves could be killing, which is not only rare for discuss its ecological significance in the salvaged and restocked at a later date electroshocked fishes, but unknown for final rule in the subsection ‘‘Fish’’ after a prey base has been established. gartersnakes. within the subheading ‘‘Decline of the Our Response: We agree that fish Our Response: The statement in the Gartersnake Prey Base.’’ salvage operations, prior to treatment, proposed rule, ‘‘gartersnakes present Comment 10: In the proposed rule, are likely to favor larger individuals that within the water are often temporarily the Service identified several streams in may exceed the size classes most paralyzed from electrical impulses Arizona or New Mexico where preferred by gartersnakes as prey. For intended for fish’’ was intended to mean nonnative fish present management this reason, we intend to explore that gartersnakes had to be present in issues. However, nonnative fish are a partnerships and opportunities for the water and within the affected radius concern for management of native fish raising native fish of appropriate size of the electroshocker, otherwise the throughout Arizona and New Mexico, classes in hatchery settings for assumption is they would not be not only those streams specifically subsequent release into treated streams, affected and thus, not detected. By use mentioned. They are an issue where post treatment. Based upon our of the term ‘‘electrocuted,’’ it was not

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38725

our intention to imply that gartersnakes because the threat is real. Gartersnakes But, we disagree with the notion that which received an electrical charge will forage at any position within the incidental fatality from herpetological were mortally wounded. We have water column; northern Mexican surveys are potentially more significant removed the use of this term from the gartersnakes often forage at the water than activities that eliminate an entire final rule. ‘‘Detections’’ as cited in the surface and in intermediate depths, suite of prey species from habitat document are not ‘‘electrocutions.’’ while the narrow-headed gartersnake occupied by gartersnakes. We also stress Reports of gartersnakes detected during forages most frequently along the that listing these two gartersnakes electrofishing may be misleading bottom. The fact that minnow traps for should not be construed as an obstacle because it is unclear if those attributed fishery surveys are generally set to native fish recovery under any to Hellekson (2012, pers. comm.) were overnight and checked at least twice circumstances. Rather, the recovery of during surveys for fishes or for reptiles daily, and always during morning does these gartersnakes is inextricably and and amphibians, while detections not alleviate this threat. The reason that ecologically linked to native fish reported by Pettinger and Yori (2011) minnow traps used for gartersnake recovery. apparently were during surveys for surveys are set at the surface with half Comment 17: How many stock tanks Chiricahua leopard frog and not for of the trap above the water line is to are known within the range of northern fishes. Lastly, the references cited where prevent drowning of captured Mexican gartersnake and what gartersnakes were detected via gartersnakes. When used for fisheries proportion of these meet criteria for electroshocking referred to fisheries purposes, these traps incidentally self- being ‘‘well-managed?’’ Few stock tanks surveys; electroshocking is not a bait with gartersnake prey species (the are well-managed, and most lack recognized method for aquatic intended purpose is to capture fish) and peripheral vegetation that would herpetofauna surveys. We amended the are set below the water line. Checking function as suitable habitat for text in this final rule under the heading the traps a few times daily will not gartersnakes. The Service provides no ‘‘Risks to Gartersnakes from Fisheries prevent air-breathing, nontarget information to address these questions, Management Activities,’’ subheading organisms from drowning if captured. which is necessary to evaluate the ‘‘Mechanical Methods’’ to better We also note that both gartersnake actual or potential contribution of stock communicate our assessment of the species can be active at night, but are tanks to gartersnake conservation. potential effect of electrofishing surveys not certain their activity includes Our Response: The actual number of on gartersnakes. foraging. We did not intend to portray stock tanks that occur within the Comment 14: The term ‘‘self-baiting’’ that the incidental capture of distribution of the northern Mexican is rarely if ever used by fisheries gartersnakes by minnow-trapping for gartersnake is not currently known professionals in reference to wire fishery surveys happens frequently, but because not all tanks are georeferenced minnow traps. where it could incidentally result in the in GIS databases. However, based upon Our Response: We used the term loss of one or more reproductive females their common occurrence on the ‘‘self-baiting’’ with respect to how these in low population densities, a landscape, we conclude that the number types of mechanical traps work for population-level effect could result. is very large, possibly in the 100’s. We gartersnake surveys, which is indeed Lastly, we clarified in the final rule that through the function of self-baiting with funnel traps are not used in fishery also have no quantitative data on the minnows, amphibian larvae, etc. surveys. number of tanks that are ‘‘well- However, the term’s use in discussing Comment 16: Relative to fisheries managed.’’ Regardless, based upon our the use of these traps for fisheries management activities, it cannot be collective knowledge of how these surveys was inaccurate, and the term stressed enough that there currently is habitats are used by northern Mexican has been removed from the sentence no effective strategy to eliminate gartersnakes and primary prey species, where it was used in the proposed rule. harmful nonnative fishes other than use particularly in southern Arizona, we Comment 15: The proposed rule of piscicides and their use is critical for consider their existence as a vital provides two references documenting native fish recovery. It should also be contribution to conservation of the examples of gartersnakes that drowned noted that fisheries activities effects are northern Mexican gartersnake. Based on in wire minnow traps. One reported trivial compared to those attributed to our knowledge of habitat variables that from Holycross et al. (2006) and the herpetological activities and other best predict whether a gartersnake other from Boyarski (2011). Holycross et human factors. population could be sustained, the al. (2006) never mentions the word Our Response: We concur that presence of a native prey community ‘‘drown’’ in their report. It is also noted chemical renovations are vital to native and the absence of harmful nonnative that these few minnow-trap related fish recovery. To further clarify the vital species appear to be the most predictive fatalities occurred during surveys importance of piscicide use in the factors. Peripheral vegetation may specifically to capture gartersnakes, that recovery of the gartersnakes’ native prey provide cover for gartersnakes in stock is, the investigators were targeting base and the gartersnakes themselves, tanks where harmful nonnatives occur, gartersnakes with this effort. The we amended the passage in the final but it is not necessary for gartersnake inadvertent capture of a gartersnake is rule under the heading ‘‘Risks to populations in all circumstances. It may an exceptionally rare occurrence and Gartersnakes from Fisheries be possible that stock tanks have has not been reported from fisheries Management Activities,’’ subheading replaced, in part, the role of natural survey activities. ‘‘Piscicides.’’ cienegas as important gartersnake Our Response: The reference of We are confident that the discussion habitat, although no direct study has Holycross et al. (2006) describes the in the proposed and final rules been attributed to this hypothesis. flooding event, but not the death of an attributed to the potential threats to While stock tanks in different drainages individual gartersnake, which was these gartersnakes from the can be invaded by bullfrogs or crayfish incidentally killed in a trap when implementation of fishery management by means of natural dispersal, they can flooding occurred (observed by Service activities is objective, thoroughly also represent easily managed habitat to biologists). We discuss the potential referenced, and balanced. We agree that protect against (or rectify) invasion of threat of gartersnake fatality from other human-caused threats can pose harmful nonnative species. For these minnow traps used in fishery surveys comparably greater risks to gartersnakes. reasons, we currently value the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38726 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

existence of stock tanks for northern using these habitat parameters as and, therefore, represent a more Mexican gartersnake conservation. surrogates for occupied areas by the comprehensive list of plant species Comment 18: Mine spills are a threat northern Mexican gartersnake is an associations in a rangewide context. to gartersnakes and to their fish prey. appropriate use of the best available Nowak and Santana-Bendix (2002) and For example, mine spills made the San information, in the absence of more Nowak (2006) focus solely on one Pedro River toxic for a time, and a detailed information. population at Oak Creek and, therefore, naturally occurring population of Comment 21: We have recently do not account for variability of endangered Gila topminnow in Cocio surveyed and trapped Little Ash Creek preferred habitat across the species’ Wash, Arizona, was exterminated by a (August 2013); it has abundant range. mine spill. Numerous other examples of nonnative fish species and crayfish, Comment 24: The Service stated that this threat are available and should be scarce native dace populations, and very sexual maturity in narrow-headed included. few (n = 1 captured) bullfrogs. The gartersnakes occurs at 2.5 years of age in Our Response: We expanded our habitat extent (creek size) is small and males and at 2 years of age in females discussion of the threat of mining we suspect it no longer supports (Deganhardt et al. 1996, p. 328). I pollution under the heading northern Mexican gartersnakes so the suspect this assertion is overstated and ‘‘Environmental Contaminants,’’ to population is likely extirpated. scientifically inaccurate, based on field include the example from the San Pedro Our Response: We appreciate the studies and on animals currently River. updated information. However, the maintained in captivity. Captive-born Comment 19: Regarding the continued presence of some native fish female narrow-headed gartersnakes from discussion about management emphasis and limited bullfrog detections are signs the Black River (Arizona) maintained in relative to native and nonnative fishes, that northern Mexican gartersnakes captivity did not lay eggs until their it should be acknowledged that, at least could still exist, albeit at low or very third summer, even though they reached in Arizona, the management priority is low abundance, in Little Ash Creek. adult size within their second year recreational fisheries, and the operative Moreover, individual gartersnakes could (Nowak, unpublished data, 2012). AGFD’s policy is ‘‘no net loss’’ of sport disperse from the Agua Fria River, to Our Response: In the absence of other fishing opportunities when attempting which Little Ash Creek is a tributary. published data, we will continue to rely to balance sport fish and native fish We have not yet officially adopted a on published information regarding the management. It is well documented by protocol to establish population sexual maturity data presented and literature cited in the proposed rule that extirpation, but at a minimum, we referenced. In addition, observations native fishes and nonnative fishes expect such a protocol should include made in captive situations may be cannot coexist in the long term other robust survey data from multiple misleading because they may not reflect than under exceptional circumstances. consecutive years to account for factors affecting wild populations. Our Response: We understand the detectability constraints in low-density Comment 25: The proposed rule concern for the future of native fish and populations. Until such a protocol is provided a list of areas where narrow- by extension, northern Mexican and adopted, we hesitate to conclude that headed gartersnakes could be reliably narrow-headed gartersnakes. We gartersnakes are extirpated from a given found. The Upper Verde River, Tonto included discussion of the ‘‘no net loss’’ area, such as Little Ash Creek. Creek, and the Blue River should also be policy in the final rule under the Comment 22: Additional sites not included in this list. While occurring in heading ‘‘Current Conservation of encompassed by Table 1 include: low densities, individuals in these Northern Mexican and Narrow-headed Tavasci Marsh (Nowak et al. 2011; populations can still be reliably found Gartersnakes.’’ population possibly not viable but likely with minimal to moderate effort (e.g., Comment 20: The Service used the supported by recruitment from the Upper Verde River: Emmons and Nowak presence of a native prey species as Verde River); Peck’s Lake (Schmidt et 2012a, Emmons and Nowak 2013; Tonto evidence that a given area or stream may al. 2005; population possibly not viable Creek: Madara-Yagla 2010, 2011; and be occupied by northern Mexican but likely supported by recruitment Blue River: Rosen and Nowak unpubl. gartersnakes. This approach seems from the Verde River), and Dead Horse data, 2012). optimistic at best, and perhaps, when Ranch State Park (Emmons and Nowak Our Response: The population and the importance of habitat is also 2013; population likely viable). survey data reported in Appendix A considered, not scientifically justified. If Our Response: We are aware of these provide the basis for where narrow- native prey species are present, but the populations and included them with the headed gartersnakes are reliably found. habitat extent is too small, it is possible Verde River mainstem due to their close Populations considered likely viable that northern Mexican gartersnakes did proximity. have received significantly more field not occur or will not persist. Comment 23: The proposed rule cites study in most cases and, where they Our Response: In determining Rosen and Schwalbe (1988, pp. 34–35) haven’t, recent survey data show robust whether historically occupied habitat for a list of plant species associations for population densities with minimal remains occupied, we considered narrow-headed gartersnake habitat. survey effort. We understand the habitat surrogates in the determination Reliance on a single citation (whose inherent challenges with defining a where gartersnake survey data was results were based on visual encounter population’s status with a single phrase limited. Native prey species remain an surveys) to infer distribution-wide or term, but the data do not currently important attribute for northern habitat use is inappropriate. Please show that narrow-headed gartersnake Mexican gartersnake habitat and their include intensive study data from populations in the Upper Verde, Tonto presence in an area is evidence that the Nowak and Santana-Bendix (2002) and Creek, or the Blue River are near as resident, native biotic community may Nowak (2006) for a more complete look robust as those identified as likely still offer native prey. It is also at narrow-headed gartersnake–plant viable in Table 2. In the case of Tonto reasonable to assume that not every site associations. Creek, narrow-headed gartersnake along a stream course is suitable habitat Our Response: Rosen and Schwalbe records are comparably few, and for northern Mexican gartersnakes; these (1988, entire) sampled narrow-headed Madara-Yagla (2010, 2011) address only sites may be occupied by dispersing gartersnake populations in a multitude northern Mexican gartersnakes. individuals, however. We think that of streams across their range in Arizona Unpublished data from the Blue River

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38727

were not provided to us, and until those in the San Francisco River in New similar species’’ to northern Mexican data are provided and reviewed, we are Mexico with documentation of three gartersnake. unable to update the status of that narrow-headed gartersnakes (Hellekson Our Response: We state on several population, if warranted. 2012a, pers. comm.). Therefore, we treat occasions in the proposed rule that Comment 26: If only 8 to 10 percent this population as likely not viable larval and sub-adult bullfrogs are eaten of historic populations are viable, with rather than likely extirpated. by northern Mexican gartersnakes in the significant post-fire concerns for Comment 28: The statement attributed mid- to larger-size classes. However, populations from Whitewater Creek and to Rosen et al. (2001, p. 22) that the bullfrogs are not always available for the Black River, should this species be presence and expansion of nonnative gartersnake populations that exist where proposed for listing as ‘‘Endangered?’’ predators is the primary cause of native ranid frogs have disappeared, and Our Response: The current status of decline in northern Mexican bullfrogs pose a significant threat to the northern Mexican and narrow- gartersnakes and their prey in population recruitment of northern headed gartersnakes meets the southeastern Arizona may not have been Mexican gartersnakes in many areas. definition of threatened, not properly characterized. This paper does This impact outweighs any benefit of endangered. We found that both not state that nonnative predators are their existence as a source of prey. We gartersnakes are not currently in danger the only factor, but instead it explicitly consider relevant data from the common of extinction because they remain extant states the importance of other factors gartersnake as valid for a general biology in most of the subbasins where they such as climate and interspecific discussion as both species have a varied historically occurred, and known threats competition. Also, the paper’s prey base and both species occupy have not yet resulted in substantial conclusions are subjective and are varied habitats, albeit the northern range reduction or substantial number generally presented as testable Mexican gartersnake may be more of population extirpations to put either hypotheses, and should be cited with aquatic. species on the brink of extinction. caution rather than presented as Comment 30: In the discussion of the However, we do find that the ongoing scientifically tested facts. role of harmful nonnative species effects of the threats make both species relative to other threats implicated in Our Response: We agree that Rosen likely to become endangered in the the decline of native fisheries, the (2001) did not state that nonnative foreseeable future. Please see the proposed rule stated, ‘‘Aquatic habitat species are the only reason for northern sections entitled ‘‘Determination for destruction and modification is often Northern Mexican Gartersnakes’’ and Mexican gartersnake declines in considered a leading cause for the ‘‘Determination for Narrow-headed southern Arizona, rather harmful decline in native fish in the Gartersnakes’’ for further discussion of nonnatives were considered as the southwestern United States. However, our determinations. primary cause at most sites surveyed, as Marsh and Pacey (2005, p. 60) predict Comment 27: Regarding Table 2, state described in the proposed rule. Rosen that despite the significant physical that the population at Saliz Creek, New (2001, p. 21) postulated that ‘‘natural alteration of aquatic habitat in the Mexico is introduced; three recaptured climatic fluctuation’’ may be southwest, native fish species could not individuals were found there in 2013; responsible for a northern Mexican only complete all of their life functions however, the population is likely not population decline at one site in but could flourish in these altered viable. In addition, I do not know of any southern Arizona, which is not to say environments, but for the presence of post 1990’s records from the San that it was regarded in equal value as (harmful) nonnative fish species, as Francisco River in New Mexico; this harmful nonnative species in affecting supported by a ‘substantial and growing population is ‘‘likely extirpated’’ northern Mexican gartersnakes in body of evidence derived from case (Hibbitts et al. 2009). southern Arizona. Interspecific studies.’’ Our Response: Saliz Creek is a competition was also discussed in I would like to see a more robust tributary to the San Francisco River. The Rosen (2001) as a cause for concern at consideration, including citations San Francisco River formerly had a some sites. We evaluated the role of beyond March and Pacey (2005), of the robust population of narrow-headed climate change and interspecific importance of the loss of habitat in gartersnakes. Saliz Creek lies between competition in other sections of the native fish declines relative to harmful two additional tributaries to the San proposed and final rules as their nonnative species. It is my Francisco River, Whitewater Creek and discussion is not appropriately placed understanding that many species of the Tularosa River, which historically in the section referred to here. However, native fish rely on seasonal flooding to and currently (respectively) also had we changed the word ‘‘concluded’’ in induce spawning. robust populations. Saliz Creek also this sentence to ‘‘hypothesized.’’ Our Response: We agree that the role boasts a largely native fish community, Comment 29: The proposed rule of a natural flood regime is extremely with the exception of its lower-most discusses the importance of a varied important to the maintenance of native reach. Furthermore, prior to 2012, a prey base and cites a study that fish populations as well as important in total of 10 person-search hours were experimented with food deprivation on (temporarily) depressing resident spent surveying for narrow-headed the common gartersnake (T. sirtalis). harmful nonnative fish populations, and gartersnakes attributed to Saliz Creek, There is no scientifically valid reason to the proposed rule provides a thorough which does not constitute adequate conclude that a varied diet could not review of this topic, citing numerous survey effort to determine presence or include bullfrogs as a replacement for references. Natural flood regimes have absence. No compelling data suggest native leopard frogs, especially where largely disappeared from several large that narrow-headed gartersnakes never bullfrogs are currently abundant. It may perennial mainstem rivers and from a historically occurred in Saliz Creek not be scientifically valid to infer that small number of streams associated with prior to their release in 2012. Regarding foraging, physiological, and behavioral small reservoirs in Arizona and New population status in the San Francisco data collected from the common Mexico. However, many native fish are River, more recent survey efforts from gartersnakes will be representative of doing markedly poorly across their 2009–2011, consisting of approximately the populations of southwestern ranges where they co-occur with 100 person-search hours, reconfirmed gartersnakes. As such, I disagree that the harmful nonnative fish species, the narrow-headed gartersnake as extant common gartersnake is an ‘‘ecologically regardless of whether a natural flood

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38728 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

regime exists or not. No other threat is the recovery of northern Mexican narrow-headed gartersnakes in New as geographically ubiquitous as that gartersnakes is dependent on recovery Mexico also have fairly abundant from harmful nonnative species, which of native leopard frogs. crayfish and bullfrogs. When small- to is clearly reflected, in robust fashion, Our Response: We agree that bullfrogs medium-sized native fish are abundant, within the published literature. The in their larval and subadult age classes crayfish seem to be tolerated by the proposed and final rules review how can be prey for northern Mexican gartersnakes. In New Mexico very few threats to aquatic habitat that are not gartersnakes and, in some populations, sites have crayfish that can reach sizes directly associated with nonnative may be their primary prey items. where they would be a potential species have also resulted, in part, in However, unlike native leopard frogs, predator on narrow-headed the decline of numerous native fish bullfrogs in their adult age class become gartersnakes; in virtually all other sites, species in the United States and Mexico. a significant threat to resident northern the crayfish are uniformly small in size Based on our consultations with native Mexican gartersnake populations and due to periodic years with flooding that fish experts in private and public can depress or eliminate recruitment of extirpates them or drastically lowers sectors and the breadth of available young snakes into the reproductive age their numbers. literature, the findings of Marsh and classes within a population. Adult Our Response: We added discussion Pacey (2005) are consistent on the scope bullfrogs can extirpate a population of under ‘‘Effects of Crayfish on Native and magnitude of the effect of harmful northern Mexican gartersnakes by Aquatic Communities’’ to reflect nonnative fish on the decline of native directly preying upon snakes and out- extraneous influences on the threat of fish species. competing them for available prey. crayfish to gartersnake populations Comment 31: In the discussion of the Bullfrogs can also prevent the while noting that the available literature effects of bullfrogs on gartersnake recolonization of an area by dispersing strongly suggests that crayfish in larger populations, the proposed rule states gartersnakes via these same ecological size classes or in high densities are that bullfrogs may lower recruitment mechanisms. The view that bullfrogs are cause for significant concern for and lead to population declines of an adequate substitute for native gartersnakes and their prey species, northern Mexican gartersnake leopard frogs in the ecosystems of the especially with other threats populations. This is an over- northern Mexican gartersnake is not simultaneously affecting gartersnake generalization and is not supported by supported by the best available populations. scientific data across the range of the scientific information and, therefore, we Comment 36: The Middle Fork Gila species. In addition, the conclusion that do not support this supposition. River, Little Creek, and South Fork bullfrogs more effectively prey on young Comment 33: Regarding the incidence Negrito Creek populations of narrow- age classes is likely true but has not of tail injuries in gartersnake headed gartersnakes were identified as been substantiated by experimental populations, observations of this likely having been impacted by the 2012 studies. This statement does not phenomenon in upper Oak Creek, Whitewater-Baldy Complex fire and accurately reflect the situation in the Arizona, at sites where crayfish and considered as not likely viable. Post-fire Verde Valley (AZ), where all age classes bullfrogs are absent, seem to point to condition data were largely not of northern Mexican gartersnakes are fish or bird predation attempts, given available in 2012, but information from well-documented to co-occur with wide oval injury marks with pointed 2013 indicated that fish populations bullfrogs. Low recruitment could be due ends. were showing signs of recovery. to a number of factors other than Our Response: We noted in the final Our Response: Based on the nonnative species predation. rule under the heading ‘‘The Effects of potentially significant effects of wildfire Our Response: The scientific Predation-Related Injuries to on fish populations and, therefore, on community is in consensus, and we Gartersnakes’’ that tail injuries could be the narrow-headed gartersnake (detailed agree, that bullfrogs negatively affect caused by other predators other than in the proposed and final rules), we recruitment of northern Mexican strictly bullfrogs or crayfish. conservatively assessed these narrow- gartersnakes in areas where gartersnakes Comment 34: A more quantitative headed gartersnake populations as occur with bullfrogs in high densities. evaluation on habitat loss to dewatering likely not viable, given the size and The presence of other harmful would be worth sharing, assuming any scope of the Whitewater-Baldy Complex nonnatives or other possible threats can is available. Extensive dry reaches in the Fire. We were also involved with confound our understanding of the San Francisco River now exist, narrow-headed gartersnake salvage specific effects of bullfrogs, and we including locations that have historic operations from the Middle Fork Gila presented an extensive discussion of records for the narrow-headed River, strictly because it was assessed to this issue citing numerous scientific gartersnake. have been heavily impacted by wildfire. references. We believe our treatment of Our Response: We agree that a We treat Appendix A as a ‘‘living’’ the ecological effects of bullfrogs on quantitative evaluation of dewatered document and can update the status of northern Mexican gartersnakes is well stream habitat would be important to gartersnake populations as necessary supported by the best available fully characterize this threat. However, and as population data become scientific information. It is true that we were unable to locate georeferenced available, for sharing and conservation published examples of this concern data to assist in this effort and had to and recovery planning purposes. come from gartersnake populations in rely on existing literature to describe Comment 37: Narrow-headed southern Arizona, and we agree that any this threat. gartersnakes in the mainstem San gartersnake population could face a Comment 35: The adverse effects of Francisco River are reliably detected, unique array of potential threats that crayfish on narrow-headed gartersnakes and the population should be could also effect successful recruitment may be overstated, at least with respect considered as likely viable. across its distribution. to New Mexico. A clear connection Our Response: Gartersnake captures Comment 32: Given that northern between crayfish presence and per unit effort have significantly Mexican gartersnakes have been declining narrow-headed gartersnake declined in the San Francisco River documented to prey on bullfrogs in populations has yet to be definitely since they first became regularly multiple locations, it is misleading and made in field study. The two sites with monitored in the 1980’s. While scientifically inaccurate to imply that the highest apparent densities of individuals are still detected,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38729

population data we present in Appendix populations along the Middle Fork Gila within a population is hampered by A clearly describe the narrow-headed River, mainstem Gila River between harmful nonnatives, this resiliency is gartersnake population in the San Cliff Dwellings and Little Creek, and diminished and the presence of Francisco River as one in significant Whitewater Creek from Catwalk to adequate vegetation cover for protection decline. Glenwood. Recreation use along the against these nonnatives becomes more Middle Fork Gila River is certainly not important. When Federal actions are Federal Agency Comments heavy; most use is by hikers and planned, all aspects of project Comment 38: The proposed rule backpackers utilizing the existing trail evaluations should consider potential references the Management Indicator to access the Gila Wilderness. The effects to whatever prey base the Species, Regional Foresters’ Sensitive stream between the Cliff Dwellings and gartersnake population is using in a Species List, and land management Little Creek is the West Fork Gila River given area. This idea should be the decisions, but states that there are no not the mainstem. This reach of stream logical ‘‘framework’’ used in developing specific protective measures conveyed is located on National Park Service, projects in gartersnake habitat to to these species. However, the northern NMDGF, and USFS lands. The majority manage aggressively against harmful Mexican and the narrow-headed of this reach is on the NMDGF’s Heart nonnatives to improve population gartersnakes have been considered Bar Wildlife Area. Whitewater Creek resiliency and recruitment of sensitive species on the Regional from the Catwalk to Glenwood is gartersnakes. We also note that ‘‘adverse Forester’s sensitive species list for a predominately private property. effects’’ can have varying degrees of long time. An impact to these species is, Approximately 0.25 mile of stream, magnitude and scope and that, through therefore, considered as part of the downstream of the Catwalk, is USFS section 7 of the Act, most activities that environmental analysis for every forest lands and the remainder of this reach is could adversely affect species include management action. The USFS Sensitive private property. measures to reduce effects and potential Species Policy is to manage for viable Our Response: We amended this for take though the issuance of an populations of these species. Further, discussion in the final rule to state that incidental take permit. the USFS policy for sensitive species much of the recreation use in these Comment 42: While nonnative, spiny- provides protective measures such as areas is related to hiking and rayed fish such as green sunfish and direction to ‘‘Avoid or minimize backpacking, which are generally not smallmouth bass were common in the impacts to species whose viability has considered a threat to gartersnakes lower reach of Turkey Creek near its been identified as a concern’’ (Forest outside of the fact that increased human confluence with the mainstem Gila Service Manual (FSM) 2670.32 #3). A visitation leads to more gartersnake River prior to the Dry Lakes Fire, they decision that would impact sensitive encounters and potentially more killing did not make up the majority of the fish species ‘‘. . . must not result in loss of of gartersnakes where the foot trail is community. More upstream reaches species viability or create significant near the canyon bottom. were occupied by native fishes trends toward Federal listing’’ (FSM Comment 41: Throughout the including Gila chub, speckled dace, 2670.32 #4). proposed rule and during personal Sonora and desert suckers, and longfin Our Response: We more accurately communications with the Service, dace along with Gila X Rainbow trout summarized what protections are livestock grazing has not been identified hybrids. All of the native species afforded to ‘‘sensitive species’’ in the as a significant threat to these species. survived the fire runoff events, and, final rule. We found no examples However, the Service appears to be although populations were depressed (although we did not have the saying that, unless livestock are for some time, they had recovered well opportunity to review all previous excluded by fencing, adverse effects until recent fires. planning documents the USFS has may occur. The Service goes further by Our Response: We amended this developed in the past), and we were not stating that the adverse effects of discussion in the final rule to more provided any examples of measures that livestock are somehow most likely to accurately describe the fish community have been implemented by the USFS to occur when nonnative species are and effects of wildfire on Turkey Creek. ‘‘avoid or minimize impacts’’ to either present but that the species are resilient Comment 43: We disagree that the northern Mexican or narrow-headed to these disturbances if nonnatives are significant threats to these gartersnakes, gartersnake. We look forward to working absent. So, grazing along a stream such as those related to nonnative with the USFS in developing such adversely affects the species if species, are not addressed on USFS measures. nonnatives are present but does not lands. The role of the USFS is to manage Comment 39: What is the basis for have these same impacts if nonnatives land, addressing the needs of species’ assuming there is ‘‘continued anxiety’’ are absent? habitat. Management actions related to from the public regarding rotenone use? Our Response: We continue to believe nonnative fish and aquatic species Our Response: We have been an that livestock grazing is largely stocking, control, or eradication is under active participant in the public debate compatible with northern Mexican and direction of the State. Collaborative over potential threats to human health narrow-headed gartersnakes based on efforts are occurring on USFS lands to from rotenone use. The new and very the species’ apparent resiliency to improve species’ habitat through process-rich procedures now in place perturbations to their physical habitat, construction of fish barriers and stream for planning and implementing depending on the resident aquatic chemical renovations. rotenone use in Arizona are testament community. In our literature review and Our Response: We acknowledge the that piscicide use in the recovery of rare field experience, we found populations proactive measures taken by the USFS and listed fish is still considered of these gartersnakes to be resilient to to assist in restoring fish communities to controversial; although it is activities that affect their physical wholly native assemblages. scientifically well-supported that there habitat (vegetation abundance, Comment 44: The proposed rule states is no public harm from its use. structure, composition) when harmful that USFS management policies of the Comment 40: We disagree that, on the nonnative species are absent or at low past favored fire suppression. However, Gila National Forest, heavy recreation levels that allow for effective new policies have allowed for managing use within occupied narrow-headed recruitment of snakes in the population. wildfires that have a resource benefit, as gartersnake habitat is thought to impact When recruitment of gartersnakes well as prescribed fire. The Guidance

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38730 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

for Implementation of Federal Wildland exempt take of northern Mexican Our Response: We agree that Fire Management Policy is the gartersnakes as a result of livestock use adequately describing the status of each Department of Agriculture’s single at or maintenance of livestock tanks population at each historic locality as cohesive Federal fire policy. This policy located on non-federal lands. We also falling into one of three categories is contributes to landscape restoration, encourage the Service to continue to challenging. However, the general lack controls invasive species, reduces work closely with the AGFD to effect of data on many populations does not uncharacteristic wildfire across the meaningful conservation actions for allow us to refine these categories broader landscape, and improves the both species. further. In most cases, we have more resiliency of these potential natural Our Response: We agree, and we look information on the presence of threats at vegetation types to adapt to climate forward to continued coordination with each locality than good information on change. the AGFD in addressing the most the resident gartersnake population. It Our Response: We have updated this serious threats that affect either species was our interpretation that, in the discussion under the heading, ‘‘High- and to exploring opportunities for presence of known, and in some cases Intensity Wildfires and Sedimentation recovery with Federal, State, and local severe, threats that a low-density of Aquatic Habitat’’ in the final rule to partners and stakeholders. population is, at a minimum, at risk of include reference to the updated fire Comment 48: The statement that ‘‘The losing viability, most notably from policy and what it hopes to achieve in decline of the northern Mexican effects to reproduction and recruitment the mid to long term. gartersnake is primarily the result of such as in the presence of harmful Comment 45: The proposed rule states predation by and competition with nonnative species. that the 2011 Wallow Fire impacted 97 harmful nonnative species . . .’’ should Additionally, the process of percent of perennial streams in the be modified to reflect that this is a designating critical habitat requires us Black River subbasin and 70 percent of leading theory, but not necessarily true. to create a rule set for determining perennial streams in the Gila River Our Response: We think that harmful whether the species is present or not in subbasin. We request the Service clarify each historic locality, therefore, a nonnative species (bullfrogs, crayfish, how they are defining a subbasin. category called ‘‘Unknown’’ is not and warm-water, predatory fish) are the Typically, a subbasin is a fourth code appropriate. Appendix A provides primary driving factors behind the Hydrologic Unit. We do not consider the background information that decline of the northern Mexican and Wallow Fire to have affected any of the contributed to our site-by-site narrow-headed gartersnake. In the Gila River subbasins in New Mexico. determinations of population status. Our Response: We use the term proposed and final rules to list these Comment 50: We caution against subbasin in a general sense as a stream gartersnakes, we reviewed the best using percentages to express possible basin within a larger stream basin. We available scientific and commercial population extirpations or shifts to low further defined the area impacted by the information to reach this conclusion. densities because unrealistic 2011 Wallow Fire as within Apache- We do acknowledge that other threats expectations of recovery can be Sitgreaves National Forest, White such as climate change-induced established. Mountain Apache Indian Tribe, and San drought, dewatering of habitat, large- Our Response: We use percentages in Carlos Apache Indian Reservation lands scale wildfires, and others may have this listing rule and others to capture in Apache, Navajo, Graham, and also significantly contributed to the the rangewide context of the status of a Greenlee counties in Arizona, as well as decline of these gartersnakes, often in given species’ populations to allow the Catron County, New Mexico. We synergistic fashion with other threats public a coarse, quantitative assessment recommend the review of InciWeb affecting primary prey species. We also of the perceived status of a species, (2011), Meyer (2011; p. 3, Table 1), and acknowledge that some populations of given the best available scientific and Coleman (2011, pp. 2–3) for information northern Mexican gartersnakes in commercial data. on the effects of the 2011 Wallow Fire. particular, have persisted in the Comment 51: We suggest removing Comment 46: On the Apache- presence of harmful nonnative species the word ‘‘harmful’’ when referring to Sitgreaves National Forest forested to which further study is under way. the suite of nonnative species that have vegetation types, historic fire-return However, these ecological situations are been identified as the most intervals varied from frequent, low- rare within the distribution of these incompatible with the gartersnakes. intensity surface fires in ponderosa pine gartersnakes, as evidenced by While they may be incompatible, they types (every 2–17 years), to mixed- widespread population declines, and are not harmful in a general context. severity fires in wet mixed-conifer they should not be construed as Our Response: We use the adjective forests (every 35–50 years), to high- evidence that either gartersnake is ‘‘harmful’’ to distinguish those severity, stand-replacement fires of the ecologically compatible with harmful nonnative species that pose unique spruce-fir ecosystems (every 150–400 nonnative species in the long term. ecological risks to sustaining wild years). Rather, the scientific information is populations of northern Mexican and Our Response: We included these fire- convincing that harmful nonnative narrow-headed gartersnakes and their return interval data under the heading, species are largely responsible for the prey species. We consider bullfrogs, ‘‘High-Intensity Wildfires and declines in these gartersnakes. crayfish, and warm-water, predatory Sedimentation of Aquatic Habitat’’ in Comment 49: Reducing the status of sport fish as ‘‘harmful nonnative the final rule. the species at each historical locality as species.’’ This distinction is based on either ‘‘likely viable,’’ ‘‘likely not the predatory, or otherwise, notably Comments From States viable,’’ or ‘‘likely extirpated’’ as adverse interactions these species have Comment 47: The AGFD recognizes described in tables 1 and 2 may not with the gartersnakes and their prey. that both species have declined accurately capture the status of This distinction is important because considerably throughout their respective gartersnake populations. Perhaps an not all nonnative species are completely ranges in Arizona, and acknowledge ‘‘Unknown’’ category would have been incompatible with gartersnakes, and that listing under the Act is warranted. useful. Also, a low-density population some are used as prey for wild We also applaud the Service’s decision does not always indicate that the gartersnake populations; nonnative trout to propose a 4(d) rule that would population is not viable. are an example.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38731

Comment 52: There are no direct data River, Tonto Creek, or Parker Canyon geographically more so than other areas to prove that declines in native leopard Lake in Arizona where it is possible that identified. frogs have contributed to declines in effects to resident gartersnakes could Comment 57: The section of the northern Mexican gartersnake occur. Regardless, we included a proposed rule that discusses the populations. The Service should caveat statement in this final listing rule that Arizona Department of Water Resources the statement with a degree of notes that AGFD requires that baitfish Active Management Areas (AMAs) uncertainty. must be used where they are captured overstates the significance of the AMA Our Response: We specifically used and appreciate being notified of the designation for both gartersnake species. the word ‘‘contributed’’ to acknowledge regulation and its benefits for For example, the Phoenix AMA that leopard frog declines are a gartersnake conservation. includes no modern records of either contributing factor to northern Mexican Comment 55: Please elaborate on species and will not affect long-term gartersnake declines, not the sole factor. what is meant by the statement in recovery. In another example, the Pima As noted by the AGFD, leopard frogs are reference to the rate of Lake Roosevelt AMA includes only short stretches of an extremely important component to water level fluctuation as a benefit to the Gila River; the rest of the AMA is the northern Mexican gartersnake’s prey harmful nonnative fish species. outside the range of either gartersnake’s base—a fact also accepted within the Reservoir levels there fluctuate distribution. scientific community and demonstrated substantially. Our Response: In our evaluation of in field study. Our Response: We agree that water the effect of groundwater pumping on Comment 53: Potential risks to levels in Lake Roosevelt do fluctuate gartersnake habitat, we found several gartersnake populations from fisheries and further qualified the statement on references that discuss the known management activities were this issue in the final rule. We intended hydrological connection between mischaracterized in the proposed rule. to frame this discussion for comparative groundwater and surface flow in Potential effects to gartersnakes are purposes. That is to say, that compared southwestern streams. This is an evaluated by the AGFD though an to Horseshoe Reservoir, which is established concept in the scientific Environmental Assessment Checklist managed to minimize reproduction of community and the basis for process. harmful nonnative species in most widespread public concern in several Our Response: In our evaluation of years, Lake Roosevelt has several times areas of Arizona with respect to surface how fisheries management activities the capacity of Horseshoe Reservoir and flows including the Verde and San could adversely affect gartersnake fluctuation in water levels occur at a Pedro Rivers. We explained how populations, we reviewed procedures slower rate. The rate at which water overdrafts in groundwater use exceed specific to fisheries management as levels decline in these reservoir systems aquifer recharge (conditions that result provided in adopted protocols. The affects the reproduction and recruitment in an AMA designation) and result in a Environmental Assessment Checklist of harmful nonnative fish species; the cone of depression that can reduce or process is a parallel, internal process faster the decline, the more negative the eliminate surface flows in affected implemented by the AGFD in planning effect. streams. We listed the AMAs that both exercises that applies to multiple types Comment 56: It is not clear how overlap with the historical range of of management activities considered by ‘‘build-out’’ (in reference to human either gartersnake and provide context the State. We have added discussion of population growth and urban for the discussion of effects of this process to the final rule under the development) will affect Redrock increasing human population growth on heading ‘‘Risks to Gartersnakes from Canyon (in the vicinity of Patagonia, gartersnake populations through Fisheries Management Activities’’ and Arizona). indirect effects of groundwater appreciate that potential effects to these Our Response: The discussion in the demands. In doing so, we accurately gartersnakes (or any nontarget species) proposed and final rules where the issue captured the links in this cause and are fully evaluated prior to of build-out is addressed refers to the effect relationship. With respect to the implementing any activity within long-term development plan along the Phoenix AMA, we acknowledge that occupied or designated critical habitat major transportation corridors of I–19, effects on gartersnake populations are for the gartersnakes. I–10, and I–17 in Arizona. We identified no longer occurring. However, it was Comment 54: In Arizona, the trapping extant gartersnake populations that were our intent to discuss the causes of and subsequent use of baitfish in geographically proximal to these historical population extirpations, angling is generally constrained to areas proposed corridors which could which were a precursor to rangewide where sport fish and sport fishing experience indirect effects of declines observed today. Effects of the dominate, and, therefore, there is little development and growth in the human development of the greater Phoenix chance the activity would affect population (which is expected to double metropolitan area include effects from gartersnakes. In addition, regulations by 2030). Redrock Canyon is near the increasing regional demands on specify that bait fish must be used at the Town of Patagonia, which is near groundwater. Aquifer overdrafts were point of capture and not transported Nogales and the I–19 corridor. If likely contributing factors in the elsewhere for use. predictions for development and human extirpation of northern Mexican Our Response: We agree that, where population growth in Arizona are gartersnake populations in the lower angling activities are concentrated, it is accurate, we expect increased Salt, lower Gila, and lower Agua Fria likely due to the presence of sport fish development in the Patagonia area, River systems. and in the case where warm-water, higher levels of human recreation on Comment 58: No scientific evidence predatory fish species are present, it is public lands, and possible effects to has been produced that confirms a less likely that northern Mexican or water availability as a result of relationship between livestock grazing narrow-headed gartersnakes are increased regional groundwater in occupied gartersnake habitat in the immediately present. However, there are pumping or additional diversions. We presence of harmful nonnative species a few areas where angling is acknowledge in the final rule that, of the and that without their presence. concentrated in habitat that could be areas identified where there could be Our Response: We concur that no occupied by either or both gartersnake effects to gartersnake populations, specific scientific study has been species such as Oak Creek, the Verde Redrock Canyon is buffered afforded to this specific issue with

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38732 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

respect to either the northern Mexican comprises the second highest gartersnake prey species are reduced, gartersnake or the narrow-headed percentage of the species’ distribution which may lead to significant gartersnake. However, we have along the southwestern quadrant of the expansions in prey species distribution documented observations made of species’ distribution in Mexico or increases in their biomass or gartersnake populations in Mexico in (Rossman et al. 1996, p. 173). The population densities. This activity the presence of harmful nonnative remaining eight subspecies have much benefits the gartersnakes that use these species, as well as in their absence, in smaller distributions and in some cases prey communities. In another example, habitat heavily affected by other land are highly endemic; constrained to the construction of a fish barrier to uses such as unmanaged livestock perhaps a single lake. In our analysis of prevent the upstream migration of grazing. As discussed at length in the the status of northern Mexican harmful nonnative fish into a stream subsection below entitled ‘‘The gartersnake in Mexico, we made every provides direct benefits to the resident Relationship between Harmful attempt to analyze only those threats gartersnake population by reducing Nonnative Species and Adverse Effects that geographically overlap our predation pressure on the gartersnakes to Physical Habitat,’’ we found a unique understanding of the subspecies’ and their prey base. As for the recovery opportunity in Mexico to observe distribution, which supports the achievements made for the Chiricahua populations in habitat significantly position of a weakened status, leopard frog, we agree that, in some compromised by land use activities commensurate with Mexico’s listing. areas, these activities have benefited the such as unmanaged livestock grazing We do not disagree that there are likely gartersnakes, particularly for the where the aquatic community was habitats within its distribution in northern Mexican gartersnake where considered wholly native. Opportunities Mexico that remain largely intact, they have occurred in lentic habitat on to observe this scenario in the United physically and ecologically. We also landscape scales, and specifically in States generally do not occur due to note that harmful nonnative species, southern Arizona. However, many applied grazing management once introduced into a system, have an recovery actions specific to the prescriptions that largely prohibit ecological advantage over native species Chiricahua leopard frog have occurred extreme effects to riparian habitat, and and will expand their distribution and, at specific tanks higher in the the fact that harmful nonnative species therefore, the scope of their effects on watershed, not within the floodplain of are largely ubiquitous in habitat the landscape, much like what has been larger perennial stream systems, where occupied by these gartersnakes in the observed in Arizona for decades. This they would yield much more significant United States. Species experts involved fact, and the preponderance of scientific benefits to gartersnake populations. in the Mexico survey effort were in and commercial data we evaluated that Comment 61: Maintaining nonnative consensus that the most significant pertained to threats in Mexico, supports sport fish populations does not predictor of gartersnake occupancy in the position taken by the Mexican necessarily ‘‘significantly reduce the these affected habitats was the presence Government in listing the Mexican potential for the conservation and or absence of harmful nonnative gartersnake (T. eques) as threatened and recovery on northern Mexican and species. The fact that gartersnakes will is largely applicable to the northern narrow-headed gartersnakes.’’ The use vegetative cover to hide from Mexican gartersnake. Biological and Conference Opinion harmful nonnative species, and the fact Comment 60: We recommend issued by the Service that addresses the that, in the United States, gartersnake removing the discussion referring to the AGFD’s 10-year sport fish stocking populations that currently persist at fact that many of the recovery projects program (‘‘sport fish consultation’’) seemingly adequate densities in the for the Chiricahua leopard frog have not includes mitigation measures to presence of harmful nonnatives also provided direct benefits to the northern ‘‘address the effects of the proposed occur in habitat with adequate Mexican gartersnake. The Service does action and improve the baseline vegetative cover, provides further not provide citations for their statement conditions for native aquatic species.’’ support of this relationship. The best that indirect benefits for both Our Response: We agree that available scientific and commercial gartersnake species occur through maintaining nonnative sport fish data, coupled with the opinion of recovery actions designed for their prey populations in some areas may have species experts, suggests this species, and since the Chiricahua little effect or may even benefit some relationship is most likely real, and we leopard frog was listed under the Act, gartersnake populations. Not all fully endorse further scientific study of significant strides have been made in its nonnative species have the same this issue, if that opportunity exists. recovery and the mitigation of its known ecological effect on native aquatic Comment 59: In Mexico, the Mexican threats. communities. For this reason, and for gartersnake is listed as threatened Our Response: In assessing how the purposes of the greater listing throughout its range in that country and recovery activities for currently listed analysis afforded to these two at the species level of its taxonomy. The species may benefit either gartersnake, it gartersnakes in this rulemaking, we discussion of the threatened status of is important to discuss both the benefits specifically use the phrase ‘‘harmful northern Mexican gartersnake, as it and limitations of these activities on nonnative species’’ when discussing applies to this rulemaking, is, therefore, conserving or recovering nontarget those which significantly threaten the misleading given that there are currently species such as the northern Mexican northern Mexican or narrow-headed 10 subspecies, and the northern gartersnake. We used reasonable gartersnake. As previously stated, we Mexican gartersnake in Mexico occurs principles in conservation biology in consider harmful nonnative species to in some of the least accessible and least making the basic assertion that either include bullfrogs, crayfish, and warm- likely disturbed aquatic habitats in the gartersnake may benefit by recovery water, predatory fish. The majority of country. activities implemented for their native specific stocking activities that were Our Response: In Mexico, the clear prey species, such as the Chiricahua subject to the sport fish consultation majority of the distribution of the leopard frog. For example, when involved primarily salmonids (i.e., Mexican gartersnake (T. eques) is harmful nonnative species removal trout), which we do not consider to be composed of the northern Mexican projects are implemented on regional particularly harmful to these gartersnake (T. e. megalops). The scales, such as for bullfrogs, the gartersnakes or many of their prey Mexican gartersnake (T. e. eques) predation and competition pressure on species. For example, in some areas,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38733

nonnative trout are an important without discussing the status of the the status of these native fish species component to the narrow-headed northern Mexican gartersnake. This type rangewide. gartersnake prey base. Stocking of argument is an apparent effort to Our Response: We cited references activities under the sport fish build the case for listing the subspecies that discuss the status of native fish in consultation that involved harmful throughout its range based on inferred Mexico in our discussion of the status nonnative species were few, were effects of the decline of native fish of the northern Mexican gartersnake in constrained to lentic habitat (lakes, communities and habitat degradation, Mexico, and we did not imply those ponds, etc.), and were a significant despite the fact that clear data for the trends represented their status factor behind the ‘‘likely to adversely northern Mexican gartersnake decline rangewide. affect’’ determination made for these are only available for Arizona and New Comment 65: The Service identified a gartersnakes and several of their prey Mexico. number of streams or aquatic species. Our Response: We do not have communities in Mexico that have been Comment 62: In the discussion population studies of northern Mexican adversely affected by threats such as regarding potential ramifications for gartersnakes in Mexico. However, we declining native fisheries, gartersnake recovery with respect to have used the best scientific and sedimentation from logging, pollution, watershed-level fisheries management commercial data available. The etc. Yet, our observations often point to designations, the conclusions that were information shows the status of native the inverse in several headwaters of drawn seem premature. Not all aquatic vertebrates in habitat currently these identified streams. In other ´ nonnative fishes are considered as, or or formerly occupied by the northern examples, such as the Rıo Colorado in managed as, sport fish in Arizona, Mexican gartersnake generally correlate Sonora, the vicinity of Mexico City, or including many of the nonnative fishes to the status of northern Mexican unnamed streams draining the Sierra Madre, evidence that these areas were that are problematic for gartersnakes. gartersnakes. We cited examples of how Our Response: Our intention was not occupied by the northern Mexican aquatic ecosystems are adversely to predict which watersheds or gartersnake or occur within its affected by leading threats, such as particular streams would likely be distribution was not clearly presented. dewatering or the expansion of harmful designated as nonnative sport fisheries Our Response: Much like what has nonnative species, can affect the in the future. Rather, we simply been observed and documented in the northern Mexican gartersnake and its acknowledged that surface water is southwestern United States, headwater native prey species, such as fish. Native generally scarce in the arid Southwest streams are often less impacted than the fish comprise an important prey source and large perennial streams, even more mainstem rivers they feed. This is often for northern Mexican gartersnakes. so. We assume that some streams because of the remote nature of these Gartersnakes need them for nutrition in currently occupied by the gartersnakes headwaters, which can limit the effect are likely to be designated for nonnative order to carry out their life-history of human-caused threats (watershed- fisheries because of the scarcity of these functions. We found a significant scale effects increase in the downstream aquatic systems in Arizona, the existing amount of information that concluded direction), as well as the presence of access infrastructure, and the fish that native fish communities were natural or man-made barriers that communities that currently reside in significantly at risk, as documented by prevent upstream migration of harmful larger perennial streams. We are declines of many species in several nonnative species. Therefore, it may not concerned that if large, perennial subbasins across the distribution of the be appropriate to infer that, simply streams, which are important occupied northern Mexican gartersnake in because a headwater system is intact, habitat for northern Mexican and Mexico. Therefore, when a major source that the same holds true for the system narrow-headed gartersnakes (as well as of prey for northern Mexican lower in the watershed. With respect to their prey species), are designated as gartersnakes becomes rare or disappears whether streams identified as being nonnative sport fisheries in the future, entirely, the gartersnake population will impacted by various threats in Mexico they will be lost to the gartersnakes, be negatively affected through declines are within the distribution of the which would negatively affect their in the fitness of individuals associated northern Mexican gartersnake, the recovery rangewide. Furthermore, we with poor nutrition, stress, and references cited were not presented at a have a high degree of certainty that if starvation. Several different factors that geographic scale fine enough to any habitat occupied by either are contributing to the decline in native definitively conclude that a complete gartersnake is designated strictly as a fish communities include harmful overlap with the distribution of the nonnative fishery (that includes warm- nonnative species, dewatering of northern Mexican gartersnake exists, but water, predatory species), that habitat habitat, and pollution of habitat. These rather a portion of the stream overlaps. will no longer possess the values that stressors also negatively affect northern In addition, a number of the streams are important (or imperative) for species Mexican gartersnake populations both that were called into question by the recovery and the value of these areas for directly and indirectly. Native fish are, AGFD occur at the periphery of the recovery will be largely eliminated. therefore, an effective surrogate for use subspecies’ range in Mexico, which is Regarding nonnative species that are in determining how threats are acting on still not precisely understood by the problematic to gartersnakes and which individual northern Mexican scientific community. Therefore, we are not considered sport fish by the gartersnakes and their populations presented the data in a regional context, AGFD, we look forward to partnering throughout their distribution in Mexico. as evidence that such threats could with the AGFD and other public and Comment 64: We caution against affect the gartersnake where they private stakeholders in the removal of extrapolation, such as the statement that overlap. these species where they occur, and there has been a 17-fold increase (since Regarding whether the northern view this and similar recovery actions 1961) in the number of native fish Mexican gartersnake ever existed in the as the highest priority. species in Mexico that have been listed Rı´o Colorado in Sonora, there are two Comment 63: The proposed rule by the Mexican Federal Government as verified records from the Colorado River discussed at length the issue of either endangered, facing extinction, at Yuma from 1889 and 1890. We declining native fishes and degradation under special protection, or likely assume the species also occurred of aquatic systems in Mexico but did so extinct. The data cited do not speak to downstream into Mexico where suitable

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38734 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

habitat historically existed. We also bullfrogs, crayfish, and predatory fish Our Response: In the final rule, we presented data on threats to aquatic species, and include precautions to deleted the reference to the San Carlos habitat in the vicinity of Mexico City. minimize potential harm to affected Reservoir as an example of a reservoir While we agree that this area represents gartersnake populations during project within the range of the gartersnakes that the extreme southern end of the implementation. However, at this time, may be benefitting harmful nonnative subspecies’ distribution, we also we do not have sufficient information to species, because there are several other acknowledge that threats, particularly allow us to adequately confirm whether examples. USFWS (2008, pp. 112–131) harmful nonnative species, can have a such a 4(d) rule would be necessary and provides a complete scientific analysis larger geographic impact over time. advisable for the conservation of the of the relationship of reservoirs to Lastly, we presented information that species. We can consider such a rule in resident aquatic communities upstream suggested that threats may be affecting the future. Permitting authority for and downstream, includes many streams that drain the Sierra Madre, research needs is addressed through the scientific references that have been which in some cases were not issuance of section 10(a)(1)(A) permits. incorporated by reference in this final specifically identified by the principal With respect to the enhancement and rule, and comprises the basis for the investigators. Considering that the restoration of native riparian vegetation issuance of a section 10(a)(1)(B) Sierra Madre represents a large portion and stream structure, where water incidental take permit for the operation of the northern Mexican gartersnakes’ occurs, the vegetative structure is not of Horseshoe and Bartlett Reservoirs, in distribution in Mexico, it was viewed as limiting for gartersnake that case. We believe the same appropriate to include these data in our occupation in most cases. Where water relationships likely are true at San evaluation in a conservative assumption has been removed from streams by Carlos Reservoir. We look forward to that many, if not most, of the streams dams, diversions, or groundwater work with interested parties to identify were historically or currently occupied pumping, correcting these scenarios and solutions that meet water use interests by this subspecies. returning water to the system would be and the conservation needs of listed Comment 66: The New Mexico construed as a beneficial effect. For any species. Department of Game and Fish activity not explicitly addressed in our encourages an expansion of activities proposed 4(d) rule that would result in Public Comments authorized under a special rule under take of either gartersnake, a section 10 General section 4(d) of the Act to exempt permit would be required to avoid a landowners from prohibitions of take violation of section 9 of the Act. Comment 68: Threats to the under section 9 of the Act, for those Tribes gartersnakes are those caused by Federal actions that benefit the two and State fish and wildlife management gartersnakes, such as: (1) Enhancement Comment 67: In discussing the actions, or on Federal lands that can be and restoration of native riparian potential impacts of dams and reservoirs dealt with outside of the Act. vegetation and stream structure; (2) on resident fish communities, the Approximately 85 percent of the habitat control of harmful nonnative species, proposed rule identifies the San Carlos for the northern Mexican gartersnake is such as American bullfrogs and Reservoir as an example of a reservoir in Mexico. In Mexico, any activity that crayfish; (3) intensive research into the that benefits harmful nonnative species intentionally destroys or adversely biology of the two species of and, therefore, negatively affects the modifies occupied northern Mexican gartersnake; and (4) continuing research northern Mexican and narrow-headed gartersnake habitat is prohibited. into captive rearing and repatriation of gartersnakes. This statement should be the northern Mexican and narrow- omitted from the final rule for two Our Response: As stated in the headed gartersnakes. reasons. First, the proposed rule makes proposed rule, the Act requires us to Our Response: We agree that section this conclusory adverse effect make listing determinations based on 4(d) of the Act can provide important determination without any support the five threat factors, singly or in conservation potential in the recovery of whatsoever. Second, this conclusory combination, as set forth in section these two gartersnakes, and we determination is unnecessary to 4(a)(1) of the Act. The Act further appreciate the New Mexico Department establish that the northern Mexican requires us to make listing of Game and Fish’s willingness to gartersnake or the narrow-headed determinations solely on the basis of the explore such opportunities. We have gartersnake should be designated as best scientific and commercial data included a section 4(d) rule for the threatened. In 1924, Congress enacted available after taking into account those northern Mexican gartersnake in this the San Carlos Project Act, which efforts, if any, being made by any State rulemaking, which addresses the authorized the construction of the or foreign nation, or any political management of livestock tanks on non- Coolidge Dam and the creation of the subdivision of a State or foreign nation, Federal lands. Of the four special rule San Carlos Reservoir ‘‘for the purpose to protect such species, whether by possibilities offered by the New Mexico . . . of providing water for the irrigation predator control, protection of habitat Department of Game and Fish, of lands allotted to the Pima Indians on and food supply, or other conservation controlling (removing) harmful the Gila River Reservation, Arizona.’’ A practices within any area under its nonnative species is most likely to statement in the proposed rule that the jurisdiction. The Act requires us to give provide the highest conservation benefit San Carlos Reservoir adversely affects consideration to species that have been for northern Mexican and narrow- northern Mexican and narrow-headed designated as requiring protection from headed gartersnakes, and we are gartersnakes could affect the federally unrestricted commerce by any foreign interested in looking further into this mandated delivery of water to the Gila nation or pursuant to any international issue with our cooperators and River Indian Community. Any agreement; or identified as in danger of stakeholders, such as the New Mexico impediment to the Gila River Indian extinction or likely to become so within Department of Game and Fish. In order Community’s irrigation system threatens the foreseeable future, by any State to be most effective, such a 4(d) rule the Gila River Indian Community’s agency or by any agency of a foreign would have to be developed in close agriculture, economy, and most nation that is responsible for the coordination with affected agencies, importantly, the survival of its culture, conservation of fish or wildlife or explicitly authorize the removal of the value of which is immeasurable. plants.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38735

A number of existing regulations Mexican gartersnakes are already Comment 75: These gartersnakes are potentially address issues affecting the protected and do not need further already protected by the New Mexico northern Mexican and narrow-headed protection under the Act. Oak Creek, Department of Game and Fish. gartersnakes and their habitats. Tonto Creek, and the Upper Verde River Our Response: A number of existing However, existing regulations within are protected by spikedace and loach regulations potentially address issues the range of northern Mexican and minnow critical habitat. The San Rafael affecting the northern Mexican and narrow-headed gartersnakes typically Valley is protected by The Nature narrow-headed gartersnakes and their address only the direct take of Conservancy and San Rafael State Park. habitats. However, existing regulations individuals without a permit and The Bill Williams River is a National within the range of northern Mexican provide little, if any, protection of Wildlife Refuge. and narrow-headed gartersnakes gartersnake habitat. Arizona and New Our Response: We acknowledged in typically address only the direct take of Mexico statutes do not provide our proposed rule that other listed individuals without a permit, and protection of habitat and ecosystems. species’ historic ranges overlap with the provide little, if any, protection of Legislation in Mexico prohibits historical distribution of northern gartersnake habitat. Arizona and New intentional destruction or modification Mexican and narrow-headed Mexico statutes do not provide of northern Mexican gartersnake habitat, gartersnakes. However, as stated above protection of habitat and ecosystems. but neither that, nor prohibitions of and in the proposed rule, the Act Legislation in Mexico prohibits take, appear to be adequate to address requires us to make listing intentional destruction or modification ongoing threats. See ‘‘The Inadequacy of determinations based on the five threat of northern Mexican gartersnake habitat, Existing Regulatory Mechanisms’’ in the factors, singly or in combination, after but neither that legislation, nor proposed rule for further information. taking into account those efforts being prohibitions of take, completely address Comment 69: There is more recent made by any State or foreign nation to ongoing threats. See ‘‘The Inadequacy of data on surface activity of northern protect such species. Management by Existing Regulatory Mechanisms’’ in Mexican gartersnakes than Rosen (1991, Federal or State agencies, or non- this final rule for further information. pp. 308–309). More recent observations governmental organizations does not Comment 76: The Strategic Water indicate radio-tracked snakes were not necessarily eliminate activities that Reserve, managed by the New Mexico surface active 64 percent of the time at threaten these subspecies. Interstate Stream Commission, already holds and utilizes water rights to benefit Bubbling Ponds and 60 percent of the Comment 73: The northern Mexican endangered fish and wildlife species in time at Tavasci Marsh (upper Verde gartersnake in the United States is not New Mexico. Since the Service gives River) and the middle Verde River. a distinct population segment and does Our Response: We have updated the strongest weight to statutes because they not require protection under the Act. discussion under ‘‘Habitat and Natural are nondiscretionary and enforceable, Our Response: We did not propose to History’’ for the northern Mexican the New Mexico Interstate Stream list either gartersnake as a distinct gartersnake in this final rule to reflect Commission expects the Service to give population segment. We proposed to list more recent information, such as the weight to the Strategic Water Reserve the northern Mexican and narrow- information provided in the comment. statute in this final rule. Comment 70: The proposed rule states headed gartersnakes as threatened Our Response: We considered the that the northern Mexican gartersnake throughout their ranges. We also Strategic Water Reserve managed by the appears to be most active during July reviewed the best available scientific New Mexico Interstate Stream and August, followed by June and and commercial information to Commission and have updated the September. Based on recent survey conclude that the northern Mexican discussion in the final rule with this efforts it would probably be most gartersnake is a valid subspecies as new information. However, collectively, accurate to state that the species appears defined under the Act. existing regulations within the range of to be most active between May and Comment 74: The Service must follow northern Mexican and narrow-headed September. the guidance of Executive Order 13563 gartersnakes are not fully ameliorating Our Response: We have updated the of January 18, 2011, concerning making ongoing threats such that the subspecies discussion under ‘‘Habitat and Natural a new Federal rule. would not meet the definition of History’’ for the northern Mexican Our Response: Executive Order (E.O.) threatened. See ‘‘The Inadequacy of gartersnake in this final rule to reflect 13563 reaffirms the principles of E.O. Existing Regulatory Mechanisms’’ in more recent information, such as the 12866 while calling for improvements this final rule for further information. information provided in the comment. in the nation’s regulatory system to Comment 77: Contrary to what is Comment 71: The proposed rule so promote predictability, to reduce implied in the proposed rule, Clean broadly describes the species’ physical uncertainty, and to use the best, most Water Act section 404 nationwide habitat that it is difficult to determine innovative, and least burdensome tools permits receive rigorous environmental what types of riparian, wetland, and for achieving regulatory ends. The review by the Corps. terrestrial habitats are important to each executive order directs agencies to Our Response: We recognize that the of the gartersnakes and is conflicting consider regulatory approaches that Clean Water Act section 404 nationwide with previous characterizations. reduce burdens and maintain flexibility permits receive environmental review Our Response: The habitat and freedom of choice for the public by the Corps; however, this process does descriptions we provide in the proposed where these approaches are relevant, not appear to be ameliorating ongoing and final rules reflect the current feasible, and consistent with regulatory threats to northern Mexican or narrow- understanding of the types of habitat objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes headed gartersnakes such that the that are used by either gartersnake further that regulations must be based subspecies would not meet the species. The descriptions appear broad on the best available science and that definition of threatened. See ‘‘The because these gartersnakes, in particular the rulemaking process must allow for Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory the northern Mexican gartersnake, can public participation and an open Mechanisms’’ in this final rule for occur in varied ecological settings. exchange of ideas. We have developed further information. Comment 72: All five of the waters this rule in a manner consistent with Comment 78: What is the problem where there are viable populations of these requirements. with the management or resources at the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38736 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge leasing option retain a water right’s United States are considered likely (BANWR) that makes populations likely original priority date. viable. not viable. Our Response: Existing water laws in Comment 82: The Service assumes the Our Response: The abundance of Arizona and New Mexico may not be populations at Whitewater Creek and bullfrogs on the BANWR, specifically in fully adequate to protect gartersnake Middle Fork Gila River are likely the vicinity of Arivaca Lake and Arivaca habitat from the dewatering effects of deteriorated or have been severely Cienega, contributes to the northern groundwater withdrawals. New Mexico jeopardized after the Whitewater-Baldy Mexican gartersnake population being water law now includes provisions for Complex Fire, but subsequent survey categorized as likely not viable. As instream water rights to protect fish and data have not been collected. In the stated in our proposed rule, bullfrogs wildlife and their habitats. Arizona absence of subsequent survey data, the (and other harmful nonnatives) are a water law also recognizes such Service lacks information to supports its primary threat to the gartersnakes. The provisions; however, because this assumption that the narrow-headed presence of a single juvenile northern change is relatively recent, instream gartersnake populations have Mexican gartersnake was confirmed on water rights have low priority and are deteriorated. Further, we understand the BANWR in 2000 (Rosen et al. 2001, often never fulfilled because more that some of the northern Mexican Appendix I). The observation of this senior diversion rights have priority. gartersnakes discovered in the Gila juvenile suggests that at least some level With respect to New Mexico, we have National Forest in June 2013 were found of reproduction had occurred and may updated the discussion on New Mexico precisely in Whitewater Creek. Among still be occurring but more recent survey water rights laws in the final rule to the discovered snakes were young males work has not occurred there. The correct any inaccuracies. and at least one viable reproducing presence of dense cover probably helps Comment 80: The information in female, suggesting that the populations any remaining northern Mexican Table 1 of the proposed rule does not of northern Mexican gartersnakes are gartersnakes to avoid predation. match the information on page 41515. living and reproducing in the area. The In recent years, there has been a Page 41515 states that a former large, discovery of a reproducing population concerted management effort on the local population of northern Mexican of northern Mexican gartersnakes in this BANWR to recover the Chiricahua gartersnakes at the San Bernardino area suggests that populations of leopard frog in an array of tanks and narrow-headed gartersnakes may not be National Wildlife Refuge has their associated drainages, all of which as likely deteriorated as the Service experienced correlative decline of have been designated as critical habitat suggests. leopard frogs and are now thought to for the Chiricahua leopard frog. As a Our Response: The proposed rule result, it is likely that any northern occur at very low population density or states that the status of those Mexican gartersnakes that successfully may be extirpated. Table 1 states likely populations has likely deteriorated as a immigrate into the central tanks area of not viable. result of subsequent declines in resident the BANWR have an increased chance Our Response: We consider fish communities due to wildfires of persistence because of improved gartersnake populations with very low followed by heavy ash and sediment available habitat and a stable prey base population densities, and thus at higher flows, resulting fish kills, and the in an area that is likely free of nonnative risk of extirpation, such as the one at removal of snakes. Immediately after the predators. We also expect that San Bernardino National Wildlife Whitewater-Baldy Complex Fire, but dispersing Chiricahua leopard frogs Refuge, to be likely not viable. While the before the subsequent monsoon, we might help sustain a low-density population could already be extirpated, were actively working with other population of northern Mexican we did not have sufficient information agencies and species experts on gartersnakes on the refuge. We consider to categorize it as likely extirpated and assessing the likely damage to the the northern Mexican gartersnake to be so called it likely not viable. resident fish community and planning extant as a low-density population on Surveys and Monitoring salvage operations for narrow-headed the BANWR based on historical and gartersnakes. As stated in Appendix A recent records and the abundance of Comment 81: The proposed rule states (available at http://www.regulations.gov, available, suitable habitat and prey that the northern Mexican gartersnake Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2013–0071), populations in the vicinity of the most has declined significantly in the last 30 populations are thought to remain recent record. Appendix A contains years, but then goes on to state that extant at Whitewater Creek and Middle additional details on the status of the there are several areas where the species Fork Gila River, but in the short to mid northern Mexican gartersnake at this was known to occur but has received no term we anticipate the density of the and other refuges. or very little survey effort in the past narrow-headed gartersnake population Comment 79: What is the relationship decades. to be low due to the Whitewater-Baldy of the Arizona Department of Water Our Response: We based our Complex Fire. These sites may rebound Resource laws and the proposed listing conclusions on the best scientific and in the mid to long term when subbasin of the two gartersnakes? For New commercial data available at the time of conditions stabilize and fish begin to Mexico, the New Mexico State Engineer listing. We have concluded that, in as recolonize the stream or are otherwise indicated that any person in New many as 24 of 29 known localities in the reintroduced through restoration efforts. Mexico can apply to the State Engineer United States (83 percent), the northern See ‘‘High-Intensity Wildfires and for a permit for the lease of a valid Mexican gartersnake population is Sedimentation of Aquatic Habitat’’ existing water right to augment or likely not viable and may exist at low section of the final rule for additional maintain stream flow for the beneficial population densities that could be information. The best available use of fish and wildlife habitat, threatened with extirpation or may scientific and commercial data maintenance or restoration. Further, already be extirpated. In most localities indicated that high-intensity wildfires permits for the permanent transfer of where the species may occur at low have the potential to eliminate water rights for such purposes have population densities, existing survey gartersnake populations through a already been granted to the New Mexico data are insufficient to verify reduction or loss of their prey base. Interstate Stream Commission. Both the extirpation. Only five populations of Northern Mexican gartersnakes have Strategic Water Reserve option and the northern Mexican gartersnakes in the never been documented in Whitewater

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38737

Creek, but were rediscovered in the Gila potential population count for the mainstem Gila River above Mogollon River in 2013. species could be significantly higher Creek and below Turkey Creek. The U.S. Comment 83: Haney et al. (2008, p. than speculated. Bureau of Reclamation has abandoned 61) declared the northern Mexican Our Response: Surveys of every stock any intention of completing Hooker gartersnake as nearly lost from the tank that could occur within the Dam, and its reference as a possible Verde River, but also suggested that distribution of both gartersnake species future project should be deleted from diminished river flow may be an have not been done. The Act requires the final rule. important factor. Given the multiple that we base our evaluation on the best Our Response: We have confirmed recent detections of northern Mexican scientific and commercial information with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation gartersnakes along the upper and available. We agree that well-managed that there are no current plans to middle Verde River, this statement does stock tanks represent conservation and develop Hooker Dam, and it is not not seem relevant to include in the recovery opportunities for the northern referenced in the final rule. proposed rule. Mexican gartersnake and have Comment 88: Barriers to fish Our Response: More recent consequently developed a rule under movement out of Roosevelt Lake should population status data for the northern section 4(d) of the Act that exempts be acknowledged in the final rule. The Mexican gartersnake for the Verde River otherwise unauthorized take of northern Roosevelt Dam on the Salt River serves were preliminary and unpublished at Mexican gartersnakes from livestock use as an effective barrier to upstream fish the time the proposed rule was drafted. or maintenance of stock tanks on non- movement, which would prevent These newer data have been Federal lands. Stock tanks are not nonnative fish from moving upstream. incorporated into the final rule and considered suitable habitat for narrow- Our Response: In the final rule, we Appendix A. headed gartersnakes, and the species added a statement in our discussion of Comment 84: Is a consistent survey has never been reported using a stock dams to reflect this fact. protocol being followed each year? Is tank. Comment 89: The proposed rule states data collected from different surveys that additional land and water use comparable? Without scientific survey Harmful Nonnative Species and Other activities along Tonto Creek and the Salt protocol implemented consistently for Threats River, including areas upstream of at least 10 years, there can be no real Comment 86: No information is Roosevelt Lake, contribute to the evidence of population trends. provided describing San Carlos persistence of nonnative aquatic species Our Response: There is currently no Reservoir operations and their effects on that negatively affect the gartersnakes. accepted protocol for northern Mexican nonnative and native aquatic species, However, the Tonto Creek exhibits or narrow-headed gartersnake surveys; whether there are or ever has been seasonally intermittent flows in the however, some investigators have gartersnakes in or near the San Carlos lower reaches below Gun Creek. attempted to revisit locations where Reservoir and the status of any Sections of dry streambed serve as a others have surveyed in the past in an nonnative fish populations on the Gila barrier to upstream fish migration. attempt to establish population trends. River at San Carlos Reservoir. This is Further, high flow events have been Variability in survey design and effort not based on the best available science. documented to remove nonnative makes it difficult to compare population Our Response: Distribution data species by flushing them downstream. sizes or trends among sites and between strongly suggest that northern Mexican In addition, nonnative spiny-rayed fish sampling periods. For each of the sites and narrow-headed gartersnakes are not typically motivated to migrate discussed in Appendix A, we have historically occurred along the middle upstream out of lakes because they attempted to translate and quantify Gila River, as this was formerly a major prefer lentic over lotic habitats. search and capture efforts into perennial river with several known Our Response: Connectivity between comparable units (i.e., person-search populations both upstream and within otherwise spatially intermittent reaches hours and trap-hours) and have numerous tributaries, with suitable is established during seasonal periods of conservatively interpreted those results. habitat, and a robust native prey base. snowmelt runoff as well as during Where population trends have been Post-construction of the San Carlos medium- to large-scale flood pulses. established, they have been reported Reservoir, survey data are limited. Thus These opportunities contribute to the and reflect significant declines in both it remains difficult to ascertain the distribution of harmful nonnative fish species. current status of gartersnake throughout Tonto Creek, as Comment 85: The Service has failed populations upstream, downstream, or demonstrated in fish survey data that to survey, analyze data, and incorporate within the reservoir itself. As far as the has been collected, reviewed, and the effects of the thousands of livestock effect of the reservoir on the up- or reported in Appendix A. With respect to tanks and other impoundments that downstream aquatic community, similar whether harmful nonnative fish are ‘‘not have been constructed in recent times analysis have been performed for the typically motivated to migrate upstream that are now occupied by the narrow- Horseshoe and Bartlett Reservoirs, out of lakes,’’ the data are lacking to headed and northern Mexican which resulted in the issuance of a clearly defend this statement, especially gartersnakes. These stock tanks and section 10(a)(1)(B) permit for the when reservoir levels decrease, which manmade impoundments offer the best incidental take of native fish species, lessens the amount of space available in opportunity for refugia for the narrow- the lowland leopard frog, the northern reservoirs, which may in turn trigger headed and northern Mexican Mexican gartersnake, and the narrow- dispersal or movement behaviors in gartersnakes and could prove to be very headed gartersnake. USFWS (2008, pp. harmful nonnative fish that are known important for the future survival of 112–131) supports our rationale as to to be territorial by their nature. these gartersnakes, as well as the how adverse effects to native aquatic Additionally, the simple presence of Chiricahua leopard frog. Given the species occur from the presence and otherwise ‘‘lentic’’ nonnative species in quantity of tanks and other operation of reservoirs in the Gila River lotic habitat upstream of reservoirs to impoundments constructed in the last basin of Arizona. which they are hydrologically 50 years, the number of these structures Comment 87: In the proposed rule, connected, suggests this perceived that are used by the gartersnakes could the Service refers to the potential preference may not be altogether true; be substantial, and, therefore, the development of the Hooker Dam on the green sunfish are an excellent example.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38738 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Comment 90: A number of other assertion that harmful nonnative fish are Additionally, more fish have to be activities (both present and historical) in moving upstream out of Roosevelt Lake marked in the reservoir to create better the area of Tonto Creek and the Salt into Tonto Creek or the Salt River. Since opportunities for their discovery River in the vicinity and upstream of the biological opinion in 2008, elsewhere in the watershed. Lastly, Roosevelt Lake are likely contributing to monitoring conducted under the recent northern Mexican gartersnake the decline of gartersnakes and the Horseshoe-Bartlett Habitat Conservation records have been reported immediately aquatic and riparian habitat on which Plan has been implemented to upstream, if not adjacent to, Roosevelt they depend. Specifically, a historical document the movement of nonnative Lake, which affirms that adverse effects stocking program of nonnatives, fish upstream of the Horseshoe from harmful nonnative species that manmade impoundments within the Reservoir into the Verde River, and occur in Roosevelt Lake present a Tonto Creek floodplain, and other reaches of the Verde River have been demonstrable threat to that population activities identified in the proposed sampled, and to date no evidence of fish of northern Mexican gartersnakes. rule, such as groundwater pumping, movement has been detected. Comment 92: The proposed rule states flood control projects, urbanization, and Our Response: We agree that not that, on the upper Verde River, native livestock grazing. The major activities every dam has the same effect on the species dominated the total fish reducing flows and dewatering habitat stream on which it is located. We community at greater than 80 percent are occurring upstream of Roosevelt disagree that our treatment of the effects from 1994 to 1996, before dropping to Lake. A bridge is proposed over Tonto of dams on occupied lotic habitat are approximately 20 percent in 1997 and Creek, and 320 to 640 residences are unsupported. The identified section 19 percent in 2001. This statement projected to be built on the east side of discusses general effects of dams, based points to specific empirical data Tonto Creek, under the Gila County’s on available literature, as a suite of regarding declining native fish species comprehensive plan. This would effects common in all instances in in the upper Verde River watershed, but increase water and recreational use. The various degrees. This same section also there is no reference to verify the U.S. Forest Service’s Motorized Travel includes referenced discussion of sources, context, or specific species to Management Plan has the potential to specific dams or diversions and their which it is referring. open 2,567 miles (4,131 km) of road to specific effects on certain gartersnake Our Response: Rinne et al. (2005, pp. high clearance vehicles and 967 miles populations. The relationship of the 6–7) contains a discussion of shifting (1,556 km) to passenger vehicles. The cross-sectional profiles and water level fish communities in the Verde River, Tonto National Forest’s Salt River fluctuations of reservoirs to benefits to and Bonar et al. (2004, entire) contains Allotments Vegetative Management Plan harmful nonnative fish communities a detailed analysis of the role harmful would allow continued grazing on more was an integral part of a 4-year nonnative fishes have had on the native than 275,000 acres (111,000 ha) along evaluation, in close collaboration with fish community of the Verde River. Also the Upper Salt River. Potential impacts the operators of those reservoirs Bonar et al. (2004, pp. 6–7) summarizes to the narrow-headed gartersnake are themselves, dedicated to the this information. noted, and the potentially suitable development of the habitat conservation Comment 93: If it is true that the habitat for the northern Mexican plan for Bartlett and Horseshoe narrow-headed and northern Mexican gartersnake that occurs along the Salt Reservoirs on the Verde River. We gartersnakes have declined substantially River is the same area that the USFS incorporated by reference this in the United States and the decline of proposes for grazing. exhaustive analysis, which used the best these species is most likely due to the Our Response: We agree that available data to date (see SRP 2008, introduction of nonnative predator and numerous threats are affecting the status entire; USFWS 2008, pp. 112–131). competitor species as stated in the 2006 of both gartersnake species in Tonto We are not aware of any analysis and 2008 status reports, then the listing Creek. The final rule (see ‘‘Altering or afforded specifically to the potential of these species as threatened will do Dewatering Aquatic Habitat’’) references benefits of Roosevelt Dam operations to little for their recovery. land use activities in this area that we the sustainment or production of Our Response: As stated in the consider as having an effect on resident harmful nonnative fish populations in proposed rule, conservation measures gartersnake populations. Roosevelt Lake, Tonto Creek, or the Salt provided to species listed as endangered Comment 91: The Service’s River, upstream of Roosevelt Dam. The or threatened species under the Act generalized and unsupported assertions exhaustive analysis of these effects as include recognition, recovery actions, that all dams have the same impacts on they are attributed to similarly sized requirements for Federal protection, and gartersnakes should be removed from dams and reservoirs on the Verde River prohibitions against certain practices. the final rule. The ‘‘Altering or system referenced immediately above Recognition of conservation needs of Dewatering Aquatic Habitat’’ section of represent the most applicable, current, species through listing under the Act the proposed rule is not supported by and robust analyses to date. We do note results in public awareness and any citations regarding water level that Roosevelt Lake does not fluctuate as conservation by Federal, State, tribal, fluctuations in reservoirs and cross- much as does Horseshoe Reservoir on and local agencies, private section profiles of a reservoir. This the Verde River and, therefore, most organizations, and individuals. The Act section should provide citations and likely provides greater benefits to the encourages cooperation with the States recognize the diversity of the various resident harmful nonnative fish and recovery plans will identify types of reservoirs. community. With respect to fish recovery actions that will benefit listed Statements regarding the effect of sampling data from the implementation species. See ‘‘Available Conservation Roosevelt Lake on gartersnake of the Horseshoe and Bartlett HCP, Measures’’ in this final rule for populations in Tonto Creek and the sampling events do not occur during the additional information on this subject. upper Salt River lack any scientific or most appropriate time to capture Comment 94: Local persons are technical basis and should be removed movement of fish out of the reservoir catching gartersnakes in contests and from the final rule. Other than (during periods of rapid drawdown or seeing how many they can kill to win referencing a biological opinion during drawdown after periods of the contest. (USFWS 2008, pp. 112–131), the prolonged storage) and thus may not Our Response: We have no proposed rule provides no basis for the adequately capture these relationships. information to indicate that collection of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38739

gartersnakes is a significant threat. species or its critical habitat, the scientific premise regarding the However, if this activity is occurring, it responsible Federal agency must enter toxicology of mercury in ecosystems will be considered a prohibited take of into formal consultation with us. Lastly, and its ability to increase its the species, once listed. while we acknowledge in the proposed concentration in tissue with increasing Comment 95: The Service should take and final rules that large wildfires can trophic orders. Gartersnakes are tertiary into account the adverse effects of the have significant adverse effects on consumers and, therefore, are expected past Federal land management agency gartersnake populations and their prey to bioaccumulate contaminants such as burning programs and the recent base (in particular for narrow-headed mercury in their tissues. wildfires that have occurred in the gartersnakes), the literature is clear that Comment 98: The term excessive narrow-headed and northern Mexican harmful nonnative species pose the sedimentation as used in the proposed gartersnakes home ranges. Closer most significant threat to both species, rule is open to interpretation and should scrutiny of the current Federal land rangewide, through a variety of be defined to eliminate unnecessary management burning program, and lack ecological mechanisms. waste of resources of the Service in of a coherent thinning and logging Comment 96: The proposed rule states defending its finding. Any large storm program, coupled with a better that Cavazos and Arriaga (2010, entire) event that changes the morphology of a understanding of the effects of the found that average temperatures along channel or adjoining riparian habitat recent large wildfires, should be the Mexican Plateau in Mexico could can be used to control all human completed in order to focus future rise by as much as 1.8 °F (1 °C) in the activities in that they can be construed protection and restoration efforts next 20 years and by as much as 9 °F (5 to have caused the resulting flooding. towards what is truly causing the °C) in the next 20 years, according to Our Response: It is beyond our scope decline of the narrow-headed and their models. This statement is to quantitatively define what level of northern Mexican gartersnakes. There is confusing because the reference cites sedimentation is excessive for every no benefit to immediately listing these two different temperatures for the same stream. However, we agree that flood gartersnakes as threatened when there is timeframe in the same area. pulses naturally liberate sediment in doubt concerning the current and future Our Response: Climate models often arid southwestern watersheds. In the potential cause for decline of the report a range of scenarios, as was the absence of absolute values or metrics, species. case in this instance. We did revise that we consider excessive sedimentation Our Response: In the proposed rule, language for clarity. However, we expect that level in which resident gartersnake we discuss effects of recent fire precipitation and temperature trends, as prey species or gartersnakes themselves management policies on aquatic modeled under future climate change are not able to adequately carry out life- communities in Madrean Oak projections, to increase regional aridity history functions such as feeding, Woodland biotic communities in the in Mexico within the distribution of the sheltering, or breeding as a result of the southwestern United States. Existing northern Mexican gartersnake, which is effects of sedimentation. Arizona and wildfire suppression policies intended expected to place additional drought New Mexico also have turbidity or total to protect the expanding number of stress on stream flow and reduce the dissolved solid standards for surface human structures on forested public permanency of cienegas, marshes, and water, which can also be used as a lands have altered the fuel loads in livestock tanks. As streams dry, they reference. these ecosystems and increased the will become unsuitable as habitat for Comment 99: The proposal to list is probability of high-intensity wildfires this gartersnake and its prey base over based on the false premise that riparian (Rinne and Neary 1996, p. 143). The the next several decades. habitats are declining in the Southwest historical actions affecting a species are Comment 97: We request that the (see Webb et al. 2007). considered as background in our Service provide clarification and more Our Response: A comprehensive assessment in terms of their information regarding the presence of analysis of the scientific literature contribution to the present-day status of mercury in Tonto Creek and likely supports our evaluation of the status of these species. However, in evaluating sources of this substance. No study was habitat where these gartersnakes the status of the species, the Act cited for the claim that mercury appears historically or currently occur. requires that we assess present and to be bioaccumulating in fish in the Comment 100: We request the Service future factors that may threaten the lower reaches of the Tonto Creek, only clarify the year of reference in their species. If past actions are continuing a personal communication with Arizona projection that annual precipitation threats, these threats are evaluated Department of Environmental Quality. amounts in the southwestern United under the five-factor analysis. If these The information in the proposed rule is States may decrease by 10 percent by past actions are not continued factors, contrary to the Arizona Department of the year 2100. then these actions are not assessed in Environmental Quality’s 2011 report on Our Response: Overpeck (2008, the analysis of the future status because ‘‘Fish Consumption Risk Analysis for entire) is a presentation where this they are no longer present or future Tonto Creek, Arizona.’’ Specifically, information was originally presented factors threatening the species. desert suckers have the fourth highest although much of the information used Section 7(a)(1) of the Act requires that mercury levels, not the second. in Overpeck (2008) was from the all Federal agencies shall utilize their Our Response: We updated this Intergovernmental Panel on Climate authorities in furtherance of the discussion under ‘‘Environmental Change (IPCC 2007). We presume the purposes of the Act by carrying out Contaminants’’ in the final rule to year(s) of reference may be 2007–2008 programs for the conservation of include data reported by ADEQ (2011, because that is the time period when the endangered and threatened species. entire), as well as other information, and reference was created. Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires acknowledged in the proposed and final Comment 101: The Service should Federal agencies to ensure that activities rules that no study on the acknowledge the uncertainty of broad they authorize, fund, or carry out are not bioaccumulation of mercury in resident predictions associated with climate likely to jeopardize the continued gartersnakes has been implemented that change in their final rule. existence of the species or destroy or we are aware of. The suggestion that Our Response: In our analyses, we use adversely modify its critical habitat. If a bioaccumulation of mercury could be our expert judgment to weigh relevant Federal action may affect a listed occurring is based on the accepted information, including uncertainty, in

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38740 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

our consideration of various aspects of procedures, and provide guidance to Mexican gartersnakes, and it is further climate change and their predicted ensure that our decisions are based on doubtful that an accurate accounting effects on northern Mexican and the best scientific data available. exists of stream miles that historically narrow-headed gartersnakes. Information sources may include the were perennial and are now ephemeral. Comment 102: The Service states that recovery plan for the species, articles in This kind of information would require wildfire is a threat to the narrow-headed peer-reviewed journals, conservation dealing with specific time periods and gartersnake throughout its range. plans developed by States and counties, specific stream reaches, which is not However, the Service also discusses the scientific status surveys and studies, offered in the statement. Dry Lakes Fire of 2002, which resulted biological assessments, other Our Response: This assessment is in a complete fish kill in Turkey Creek. unpublished materials, or experts’ based on the best available scientific Turkey Creek has since been opinions or personal knowledge. We and commercial data for northern recolonized by native fish species receive and use information on the Mexican gartersnakes in the United almost exclusively. Consequently, it is biology, ecology, distribution, States. Museum records and habitat conceivable that snakes that survived a abundance, status, and trends of species requirements indicate the species period without fish might then find from a wide variety of sources as part technically occurred in every county themselves in an environment better of their responsibility to implement the and nearly every subbasin within suited to their needs (i.e., devoid of Act. This information includes status Arizona. We used GIS and information nonnative species) than before the fire. surveys, biological assessments, and on threats and status of historical Further, the Service states that both other unpublished material (that is, populations as well as habitat species of gartersnakes are somewhat ‘‘gray literature’’) from State natural preferences, in arriving at the 90 percent resilient to physical habitat disturbance resource agencies and natural heritage figure, which we consider to be where harmful nonnative species are programs, Tribal governments, other reasonably accurate given the absent. Federal agencies, consulting firms, information available. Considering the Our Response: We agree that if contractors, and individuals associated large number of stream miles that were enough individual narrow-headed with professional organizations and historically perennial within the gartersnakes can survive the post-fire higher educational institutions. We also historical distribution of the northern period of ash flows and fish kills, use published articles from juried Mexican gartersnake in Arizona that are without risking genetic bottlenecking professional journals. The reliability of now ephemeral, and the degraded status within the population, that an ensuing the information contained in these of populations as a result of a multitude native-only fish community would be sources can be as variable as the sources of threats, our presentation of the data highly beneficial. However, field themselves. As part of their routine represents the most accurate possible. research has proven that over time and activities, our biologists are required to without a barrier to upstream Effect of Listing on Non-Federal gather, review, and evaluate information Interests movement, harmful nonnative fish from these sources prior to undertaking ultimately make their way back into listing, recovery, consultation, and Comment 106: The language in the these streams and negatively affect the permitting actions. proposed rule that lists activities which native aquatic community. Therefore, Comment 104: If science-based and could result in the reduction of the any plausible post-fire benefits to commercial data are not available for distribution or abundance of important surviving narrow-headed gartersnakes populations, then any projections for gartersnake prey species, as well as are most likely short-lived. populations in the United States based reduce the distribution and amount of suitable physical habitat on a regional Information Quality and Quantity on northern Mexican gartersnake populations would necessarily be landscape for the gartersnakes Comment 103: Personal speculative. themselves, is an invitation for many communications of a graduate student Our Response: The Act requires that organizations to sue the Service for are a weak basis for determining the we use the best scientific and allowing activities deemed to affect the current status of the narrow-headed commercial data available at the time of gartersnake on a regional landscape gartersnake in New Mexico (or, as found listing. Appendix A (available at http:// basis. This gives the gartersnakes’ prey in other citations, the effects of the www.regulations.gov, Docket No. FWS– species endangered status under the Act Whitewater Baldy fire on the narrow- R2–ES–2013–0071) discusses such also. headed and northern Mexican considerations as the physical condition Our Response: The Act and its gartersnakes). Personal communications of habitat, the composition of the implementing regulations set forth a or gray literature are not subject to the aquatic biological community, the series of general prohibitions and necessary vigorous peer review and existence of significant threats, and the exceptions that apply to all wildlife substantiation that would meet the Act’s length of time since the last known listed under the ESA. The prohibitions requirements for science-based or observation of the subspecies in of section 9(a)(2) of the Act make it commercial data. presenting rationale for determining illegal for any person subject to the Our Response: As required by the Act, occupancy status at each locality. jurisdiction of the United States to take we based our proposal and this final Comment 105: The Service’s (includes harass, harm, pursue, hunt, rule on the best available scientific and statement that as much as 90 percent of shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or commercial data. Our Policy on historical populations in the United collect; or to attempt any of these), Information Standards Under the Act States either occur at low densities or import, export, ship in interstate (published in the Federal Register on are extirpated due to the total number commerce in the course of commercial July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271)), the of stream miles that are now activity, or sell or offer for sale in Information Quality Act (section 515 of permanently dewatered appears to be interstate or foreign commerce any the Treasury and General Government pure speculation and not supported by listed species. Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 factual data. It is doubtful that an We may issue permits to carry out (Pub. L. 106–554; H.R. 5658)), and our accurate accounting exists of stream otherwise prohibited activities associated Information Quality miles in the United States that involving endangered and threatened Guidelines, provide criteria, establish historically supported the northern wildlife species under certain

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38741

circumstances. A permit must be issued this time to determine that general of the above threat factors, singly or in for the following purposes: For actions benefitting the two species of combination. scientific purposes, to enhance the gartersnakes would meet the standard of Until recently the Service has propagation or survival of the species, a 4(d) rule to be necessary and advisable presented its evaluation of information and for incidental take in connection for the conservation of the species. We under the five listing factors in an with otherwise lawful activities. would need more specific information outline format, discussing all of the It is our policy, as published in the regarding the actions under information relevant to any given factor Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR consideration. and providing a factor-specific 34272), to identify to the maximum Comment 109: Concerned with the conclusion before moving to the next extent practicable at the time a species language in the proposed 4(d) rule, factor. However, the Act does not is listed, those activities that would or which states: ‘‘Incidental take of require findings under each of the would not constitute a violation of northern Mexican gartersnakes is not a factors, only an overall determination as section 9 of the Act. The intent of this violation of section 9 of the Act if it to the species’ status (for example, policy is to increase public awareness of occurs from any other otherwise legal threatened, endangered, or not the effect of a proposed listing on activities involving northern Mexican warranted). Ongoing efforts to improve proposed and ongoing activities within gartersnakes and their habitat that are the efficiency and efficacy of the the range of species proposed for listing. conducted in accordance with Service’s implementation of the Act See the Available Conservation applicable State, Federal, tribal, and have led us to present this information Measures section in the proposed rule local laws and regulations.’’ This in a different format that we believe for a list of activities that could language could be interpreted to allow leads to greater clarity in our potentially result in a violation of incidental take for any activity in the understanding of the science, its section 9 of the Act. Lastly, it is snake’s habitat as long as the activity uncertainties, and our application of our important to note that our emphasis for was legal. We suggest the following statutory framework to that science. the recovery of listed species is to assess language: (3) What activities are Therefore, while the presentation of and improve ecosystem function as a allowed? Incidental take of northern information in this rule differs from past basic tenant of conservation biology; Mexican gartersnakes is not a violation practice, it differs in format only. We this includes the physical habitat and of section 9 of the Act if it occurs from have evaluated the same body of biological community where a listed (a) otherwise legal activities involving information we would have evaluated species occurs. This management northern Mexican gartersnakes and their under the five listing factors outline habitat that are conducted in accordance construct is not unique to these format in the past, we are applying the with applicable State, Federal, tribal, gartersnakes. same information standard, and we are Comment 107: Listing will hinder and local laws and regulations, and (b) applying the same statutory framework conservation efforts of the New Mexico such activities occurring in northern in reaching our conclusions. Department of Game and Fish. Mexican gartersnake habitat pertain to Our Response: We disagree. Once maintenance activities at livestock tanks Determination for Northern Mexican these species are listed, funding for located on private, State, or tribal lands. Gartersnake recovery actions may be more accessible A livestock tank is an existing or future The Act defines an endangered from a variety of sources, including impoundment in an ephemeral drainage species as any species (or subspecies) Federal grants, State programs, and cost- or upland site constructed primarily as share grants for non-Federal a watering site for livestock. that is ‘‘in danger of extinction landowners, the academic community, Our Response: We have amended the throughout all or a significant portion of and nongovernmental organizations. In 4(d) rule, in the final rule, to reflect this its range’’ and a threatened species as addition, pursuant to section 6 of the recommendation. We revised the any species ‘‘that is likely to become Act, the States of Arizona and New language in the 4(d) rule to better endangered throughout all or a Mexico will be eligible for Federal funds describe our intention for the rule to significant portion of its range within to implement management actions that exempt only activities related to the the foreseeable future.’’ We have promote the protection or recovery of construction, use, and maintenance of carefully assessed the best scientific and the narrow-headed and northern stock tanks for livestock watering. These commercial information available Mexican gartersnakes. changes did not alter the scope of the regarding the status of the northern 4(d) rule. Mexican gartersnake and have Section 4(d) Rule determined that this subspecies meets Comment 108: If the Service decides Determination—Standard for Review the definition of a threatened subspecies to list the species, then we recommend Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533), under the Act based on its current status the development of a 4(d) rule to and its implementing regulations at 50 and the future threats to the subspecies. exempt landowners from prohibitions of CFR part 424, set forth the procedures We find that the northern Mexican take under section 9 of the Act for those for adding species to the Federal Lists gartersnake is not currently in danger of actions benefitting the two species of of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife extinction because it remains extant in gartersnakes, as was the case for the and Plants. Under section 4(a)(1) of the most of the subbasins where it Chiricahua leopard frog. Act, we may list a species based on (A) historically occurred, and its known Our Response: We proposed a special The present or threatened destruction, threats have not yet resulted in rule for the northern Mexican modification, or curtailment of its substantial range reduction or a gartersnake under section 4(d) of the Act habitat or range; (B) Overutilization for substantial number of population that would exempt take of northern commercial, recreational, scientific, or extirpations to put the subspecies on the Mexican gartersnakes as a result of educational purposes; (C) Disease or brink of extinction. Currently, only 6 livestock use at or maintenance of predation; (D) The inadequacy of former United States populations were livestock tanks located on non-Federal existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E) found to be likely extirpated, and 29 lands, and a final 4(d) rule is Other natural or manmade factors populations are believed to remain incorporated into this final rule. We do affecting its continued existence. Listing extant. Therefore, we determined that not have the necessary information at actions may be warranted based on any the present risk of extinction is not

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38742 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

sufficient to warrant a finding of groundwater pumping have dewatered available regarding the status of the endangered under the Act. entire reaches of historically occupied narrow-headed gartersnake and have However, the northern Mexican habitat in some areas. The rapidly determined that this species meets the gartersnake has undergone declines in growing human population in the arid definition of a threatened subspecies its abundance, and we found only 5 of southwestern United States, combined under the Act based on its current status 29 current populations in the United with a drought-limited supply of surface and the future threats to the species. States are likely viable into the water, will further increase future needs We find that the narrow-headed foreseeable future, or what we consider for water supplies and associated gartersnake is not currently in danger of to be the next several decades. While we infrastructure (dams, diversions, and extinction because it remains extant in are not able to quantify the status of all groundwater pumping) that will also most of the subbasins where it populations in Mexico, based on the contribute to habitat losses in the next historically occurred, and its known threats and the declining status of several decades. Losses of aquatic threats have not yet resulted in aquatic communities there, we assume a habitats are also expected due to the substantial range reduction or a similar status in the Mexican portion of impacts of climate change, which substantial number of population its range. We expect the status of the includes increased aridity, lower annual extirpations to put the species on the subspecies will decline in the next precipitation totals, lower snow pack brink of extinction. Currently, only 5 several decades mainly as a result of the levels, higher variability in flows (lower former populations were found to be continuing and expanding impacts of low-flows and higher high-flows) in the likely extirpated, and 36 populations are harmful nonnative species and the southwestern United States and believed to remain extant. Therefore, we increasing nature of threats associated northern Mexico. The population-level determined that the present risk of with human population growth and effect of factors that modify or destroy extinction is not sufficient to warrant a climate change. As the effects of these the physical attributes of gartersnake finding of endangered under the Act. threats escalate on the landscape (as habitat is amplified when they act in the However, the narrow-headed summarized below), we expect that presence of harmful nonnative species. gartersnake has undergone declines in additional populations will be Other factors act in combination to its abundance, and we found only 5 of extirpated, and that the northern negatively affect the northern Mexican 36 current populations are likely viable Mexican gartersnake will be in danger of gartersnake, including mismanaged or into the foreseeable future, or what we extinction in the foreseeable future. unmanaged livestock grazing (Mexico; consider to be the next several decades. In our review of the best available Factor A); road construction, use, and We expect the status of the species will scientific and commercial information, maintenance (Factor A); adverse human decline in the next several decades we found that aquatic ecosystems upon interactions (Factor E); environmental mainly as a result of the continuing and which the northern Mexican gartersnake contaminants (Factor A); erosion control expanding impacts of harmful relies have been significantly degraded techniques (Factor A); and possible nonnative species and the increasing by the introduction and proliferation of competitive pressures from sympatric nature of threats associated with human harmful nonnative species (Factors C species (Factor E). These threats occur population growth and climate change. and E). Harmful nonnative species within the distribution of this As the effects of these threats escalate (mainly predatory fishes, bullfrogs, and gartersnake and contribute to further on the landscape (as summarized crayfish) have been intentionally population declines or extirpations below), we expect that additional released or have naturally moved into where gartersnakes already occur at low populations will be extirpated, and that nearly every subbasin throughout the population densities due to the impacts the narrow-headed gartersnake will be range of the northern Mexican of harmful nonnative species. The in danger of extinction in the gartersnake. This has resulted in existing regulatory mechanisms foreseeable future. widespread declines in native fish and currently in place (Factor D) do not In our review of the best available amphibian communities, which are target the conservation of this scientific and commercial information, integral to the continued survival of the subspecies or its habitat in the United we found that native fish communities, northern Mexican gartersnake because States or Mexico. upon which the narrow-headed they serve as their primary food source. Therefore, on the basis of the best gartersnake relies heavily, have been Harmful nonnative species have available scientific and commercial significantly degraded by the indirectly impacted northern Mexican information, we find the northern introduction and proliferation of gartersnakes by predation on their prey Mexican gartersnake is likely to become harmful nonnative species (Factors C base (native fish and amphibians) and in danger of extinction throughout all of and E). Harmful nonnative species have directly impacted them through its range within the foreseeable future, (mainly predatory fishes, bullfrogs, and preying on young gartersnakes (Factor and we are listing the northern Mexican crayfish) have been intentionally B), which impacts gartersnake gartersnake as a threatened subspecies released or have naturally moved into populations through declines in the in accordance with sections 3(20) and nearly every subbasin throughout the recruitment of young snakes into the 4(a)(1) of the Act. range of the narrow-headed gartersnake. reproductive age class. In combination, This has resulted in widespread these factors have resulted in Determination for Narrow-Headed declines in native fish communities, population declines, range restrictions Gartersnakes which are integral to the continued within subbasins, and some population The Act defines an endangered survival of the narrow-headed extirpations. We found the threat related species as any species that is ‘‘in danger gartersnake because they serve as their to harmful nonnative species to be the of extinction throughout all or a primary food source. Harmful nonnative most significant and pervasive of all significant portion of its range’’ and a species have indirectly impacted threats affecting the subspecies. threatened species as any species ‘‘that narrow-headed gartersnakes by Additional threats to the habitat of is likely to become endangered predation on their prey base (native northern Mexican gartersnakes include throughout all or a significant portion of fish) and have directly impacted them water use activities, climate change, and its range within the foreseeable future.’’ through preying on young gartersnakes drought (Factor A). Dams, water We have carefully assessed the best (Factor B), which impacts gartersnake diversions, flood-control projects, and scientific and commercial information populations through the decline in

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38743

recruitment of young snakes into the where gartersnakes already occur at low achieve recovery of the species, reproductive age class. In combination, population densities due to the impacts measurable criteria that determine when these factors have resulted in of harmful nonnative species. The a species may be downlisted or delisted, population declines, range restrictions existing regulatory mechanisms and methods for monitoring recovery within subbasins, and some population currently in place (Factor D) do not progress. Recovery plans also establish extirpations. We found the threat related target the conservation of this species or a framework for agencies to coordinate to harmful nonnative species to be the its habitat. their recovery efforts and provide most significant and pervasive of all Therefore, on the basis of the best estimates of the cost of implementing threats affecting the species. available scientific and commercial recovery tasks. Recovery teams Additional threats to the habitat of information, we find the narrow-headed (composed of species experts, Federal narrow-headed gartersnakes include gartersnake is likely to become in and State agencies, nongovernmental water use activities, climate change, and danger of extinction throughout all of its organizations, and stakeholders) are wildfires (Factor A). Dams, water range within the foreseeable future, and often established to develop recovery diversions, flood-control projects, and we are listing the narrow-headed plans. When completed, the recovery groundwater pumping have dewatered gartersnake as a threatened species in outline, draft recovery plan, and the entire reaches of historically occupied accordance with sections 3(20) and final recovery plan will be available on habitat in some areas. The rapidly 4(a)(1) of the Act. our Web site (http://www.fws.gov/ growing human population in the arid Available Conservation Measures endangered), or from our Arizona southwestern United States, combined Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR with a drought-limited supply of surface Conservation measures provided to FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). water, will further increase future needs species listed as endangered or Implementation of recovery actions for water supplies and associated threatened under the Act include generally requires the participation of a infrastructure (dams, diversions, and recognition, recovery actions, broad range of partners, including other groundwater pumping) that will also requirements for Federal protection, and Federal agencies, States, Tribal, contribute to habitat losses in the next prohibitions against certain practices. nongovernmental organizations, several decades. Losses of aquatic Recognition through listing results in businesses, and private landowners. habitats are also expected due to the public awareness and conservation by Examples of recovery actions include impacts of climate change, which Federal, State, Tribal, and local habitat restoration (e.g., restoration of includes increased aridity, lower annual agencies, private organizations, and native vegetation), research, captive precipitation totals, lower snow pack individuals. The Act encourages propagation and reintroduction, and levels, higher variability in flows (lower cooperation with the States and requires outreach and education. The recovery of low-flows and higher high-flows), and that recovery actions be carried out for many listed species cannot be enhanced stress on ponderosa pine all listed species. The protection accomplished solely on Federal lands communities in the southwestern required by Federal agencies and the because their range may occur primarily United States. Wildfires in the arid prohibitions against certain activities or solely on non-Federal lands. To southwestern United States have grown are discussed, in part, below. achieve recovery of these species more frequent and severe, due in part to The primary purpose of the Act is the requires cooperative conservation efforts the fire management policies of past conservation of endangered and on private, State, and Tribal lands. decades. High-intensity wildfires that threatened species and the ecosystems Following publication of this final affect large areas contribute to upon which they depend. The ultimate listing rule, funding for recovery actions significant flooding and sedimentation, goal of such conservation efforts is the will be available from a variety of resulting in fish kills and the filling-in recovery of these listed species, so that sources, including Federal budgets, of interstitial spaces in river cobble, they no longer need the protective State programs, and cost-share grants for which the species uses for hunting fish), measures of the Act. Subsection 4(f) of non-Federal landowners, the academic as well as important pool habitat. These the Act requires the Service to develop community, and nongovernmental impacts negatively affect the fish and and implement recovery plans for the organizations. In addition, under section amphibian prey base for narrow-headed conservation of endangered and 6 of the Act, the States of Arizona and gartersnakes for extended periods of threatened species. The recovery New Mexico would be eligible for time. The frequency and intensity of planning process involves the Federal funds to implement large wildfires is likely to increase in identification of actions that are management actions that promote the the foreseeable future as an indirect necessary to halt or reverse the species’ protection and recovery of the northern effect of drier and hotter landscape decline by addressing the threats to its Mexican and narrow-headed conditions associated with climate survival and recovery. The goal of this gartersnakes. Information on our grant change. The population-level effect of process is to restore listed species to a programs that are available to aid factors that modify or destroy the point where they are secure, self- species recovery can be found at: http:// physical attributes of gartersnake habitat sustaining, and functioning components www.fws.gov/grants. is amplified when they act in the of their ecosystems. Please let us know if you are presence of harmful nonnative species. Recovery planning includes the interested in participating in recovery Other factors act in combination to development of a recovery outline efforts for these species. Additionally, negatively affect the narrow-headed shortly after a species is listed, we invite you to submit any new gartersnake, including road preparation of a draft and final recovery information on these species whenever construction, use, and maintenance plan, and revisions to the plan as it becomes available and any (Factor A); adverse human interactions significant new information becomes information you may have for recovery (Factor E); environmental contaminants available. The recovery outline guides planning purposes (see FOR FURTHER (Factor A); and erosion control the immediate implementation of urgent INFORMATION CONTACT). techniques (Factor A). These threats recovery actions and describes the Section 7(a) of the Act requires occur within the distribution of this process to be used to develop a recovery Federal agencies to evaluate their gartersnake and contribute to further plan. The recovery plan identifies site- actions with respect to any species that population declines or extirpations specific management actions that will is proposed or listed as endangered or

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38744 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

threatened and with respect to its The prohibitions of section 9(a)(2) of the Questions regarding whether specific critical habitat, if any is designated. Act, codified at 50 CFR 17.31 for activities would constitute a violation of Regulations implementing this threatened wildlife, make it such that all section 9 of the Act should be directed interagency cooperation provision of the the provisions of 50 CFR 17.21 apply, to the Arizona Ecological Services Field Act are codified at 50 CFR part 402. except § 17.21(c)(5). Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires We may issue permits to carry out CONTACT). Requests for copies of the Federal agencies to confer with the otherwise prohibited activities regulations concerning listed animals Service on any action that is likely to involving endangered and threatened and general inquiries regarding jeopardize the continued existence of a wildlife species under certain prohibitions and permits may be species proposed for listing or result in circumstances. Regulations governing addressed to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife destruction or adverse modification of permits are codified at 50 CFR 17.22 for Service, Endangered Species Permits, proposed critical habitat. If a species is endangered species, and at § 17.32 for P.O. Box 1306, Albuquerque, New listed subsequently, section 7(a)(2) of threatened species. A permit must be Mexico 87103 (telephone (505) 248– the Act requires Federal agencies to issued for the following purposes: For 6920, facsimile (505) 248–6922). ensure that activities they authorize, scientific purposes, to enhance the fund, or carry out are not likely to propagation or survival of the species, Rule for the Northern Mexican jeopardize the continued existence of and for incidental take in connection Gartersnake Under Section 4(d) of the the species or destroy or adversely with otherwise lawful activities. Act modify its critical habitat. If a Federal It is our policy, as published in the The Act does not specify particular action may affect a listed species or its Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR prohibitions, or exceptions to those critical habitat, the responsible Federal 34272), to identify to the maximum prohibitions, for threatened species. extent practicable at the time a species agency must enter into formal Instead, under section 4(d) of the Act, is listed, those activities that would or consultation with the Service. the Secretary of the Interior has the would not constitute a violation of Federal agency actions within the discretion to issue such regulations as section 9 of the Act. The intent of this species’ habitats that may require she deems necessary and advisable to policy is to increase public awareness of conference or consultation or both as provide for the conservation of such the effect of a proposed listing on described in the preceding paragraph species. The Secretary also has the proposed and ongoing activities within include management and any other discretion to prohibit by regulation with the range of species proposed for listing. landscape-altering activities on Federal respect to any threatened species, any lands administered by the Fish and The following activities could act prohibited under section 9(a)(1) of Wildlife Service, U.S. Bureau of potentially result in a violation of the Act. Exercising this discretion, the Reclamation, or U.S. Forest Service; section 9 of the Act; this list is not Service developed general prohibitions issuance of section 404 Clean Water Act comprehensive: (50 CFR 17.31) and exceptions to those permits by the U.S. Army Corps of (1) Unauthorized collecting, handling, prohibitions (50 CFR 17.32) under the Engineers; construction and possessing, selling, delivering, carrying, Act that apply to most threatened management of gas pipeline and power or transporting of the species, including species. Alternately, for other line rights-of-way by the Federal Energy import or export across State lines and threatened species, the Service may Regulatory Commission; construction international boundaries, except for develop specific prohibitions and and maintenance of roads or highways properly documented antique by the Federal Highway Administration; specimens of these taxa at least 100 exceptions that are tailored to the and other discretionary actions that years old, as defined by section 10(h)(1) specific conservation needs of the affect the species composition of biotic of the Act; species. In such cases, some of the communities where these species or (2) The unauthorized introduction of prohibitions and authorizations under their habitats occur, such as funding or harmful nonnative species that compete 50 CFR 17.31 and 17.32 may be permitting programs that result in the with or prey upon northern Mexican appropriate for the species and continued stocking of nonnative, and narrow-headed gartersnakes or their incorporated into a rule under section predatory fish. prey species, such as the stocking of 4(d) of the Act. However, these rules, The Act and its implementing nonnative, predatory fish, or illegal known as 4(d) rules, will also include regulations set forth a series of general transport, use, or release of bullfrogs or provisions that are tailored to the prohibitions and exceptions that apply crayfish in the States of Arizona and specific conservation needs of the to all endangered wildlife. The New Mexico; threatened species and may be more or prohibitions of section 9(a)(2) of the Act, (3) The unauthorized release of less restrictive than the general codified at 50 CFR 17.21 for endangered biological control agents that attack any provisions at 50 CFR 17.31. wildlife, in part, make it illegal for any age class of northern Mexican and Provisions of the Section 4(d) Rule person subject to the jurisdiction of the narrow-headed gartersnakes or any life United States to take (includes harass, stage of their prey species; Under section 4(d) of the Act, the harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, (4) Unauthorized modification of the Secretary may promulgate a special rule trap, capture, or collect; or to attempt channel, reduction or elimination of that modifies the standard protections any of these), import, export, ship in water flow of any stream or water body, for threatened species with measures interstate commerce in the course of or the complete removal or significant tailored to the conservation of the commercial activity, or sell or offer for destruction of riparian vegetation species that are determined to be sale in interstate or foreign commerce associated with occupied northern necessary and advisable. Under this 4(d) any listed species. Under the Lacey Act Mexican or narrow-headed gartersnake rule, all of the prohibitions under 50 (18 U.S.C. 42–43; 16 U.S.C. 3371–3378), habitat; and CFR 17.31 and 17.32 will apply to the it is also illegal to possess, sell, deliver, (5) Unauthorized discharge of northern Mexican gartersnake, except as carry, transport, or ship any such chemicals or fill material into any discussed below. The 4(d) rule will not wildlife that has been taken illegally. waters in which northern Mexican and remove or alter in any way the Certain exceptions apply to agents of the narrow-headed gartersnakes are known consultation requirements under section Service and State conservation agencies. to occur. 7 of the Act.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 38745

The creation, use, and maintenance of and advisable for the conservation of the of the United States to take (including stock tanks are important components of northern Mexican gartersnake. harass, harm, pursue, shoot, wound, livestock grazing in the southwestern Nothing in this 4(d) rule changes in kill, trap, capture, or collect; or attempt United States. A stock tank (or livestock any way the recovery planning any of these), import or export, ship in tank) is defined as an existing or future provisions of section 4(f) and interstate commerce in the course of impoundment in an ephemeral drainage consultation requirements under section commercial activity, or sell or offer for or upland site (as opposed to an active 7 of the Act or the ability of the Service sale in interstate or foreign commerce stream channel) constructed primarily to enter into partnerships for the any wildlife species listed as an as a watering site for livestock. Well- management and protection of the endangered species, without written managed stock tanks can provide northern Mexican gartersnake. Livestock authorization. It also is illegal under important habitats for northern Mexican use and maintenance of stock tanks on section 9(a)(1) of the Act to possess, sell, gartersnakes and their prey base, Federal lands will be addressed through deliver, carry, transport, or ship any especially when the tank: (1) Remains the section 7 consultation process; this such wildlife that is taken illegally. devoid of harmful nonnative species 4(d) rule applies only to non-Federal Prohibited actions consistent with while supporting native prey species; lands. section 9 of the Act are outlined for (2) provides adequate vegetation cover 4(d) Rule Determination threatened species in 50 CFR 17.31(a) for predator aversion and prey base and (b). This 4(d) rule applies all of the support; and (3) provides reliable water Section 4(d) of the Act states that ‘‘the prohibitions in 50 CFR 17.31(a) and (b) sources in periods of prolonged drought. Secretary shall issue such regulations as to the northern Mexican gartersnake, However, to create or maintain these she deems necessary and advisable to except activities on non-Federal lands physical attributes of well-managed provide for the conservation’’ of species that are incidental to construction, listed as a threatened species. tanks, management and maintenance continued use, and maintenance of Conservation is defined in the Act to can be necessary, which may have stock tanks. Based on the rationale mean ‘‘to use and the use of all methods temporary negative effects to these explained above, the provisions and procedures which are necessary to habitat attributes, but also long-term included in this 4(d) rule are expected bring any endangered species or beneficial effects to wildlife, including to contribute to the conservation of the threatened species to the point at which the northern Mexican gartersnake and northern Mexican gartersnake and are, the measures provided pursuant to (the its prey. Therefore, the management of therefore, necessary and advisable to Act) are no longer necessary.’’ stock tanks is an important provide for the conservation of the Additionally, section 4(d) states that the consideration for northern Mexican northern Mexican gartersnake. Secretary ‘‘may by regulation prohibit gartersnakes. with respect to any threatened species Required Determinations The 4(d) rule allows for use of stock any act prohibited under section tanks by livestock and construction, 9(a)(1).’’ National Environmental Policy Act (42 continued use, and maintenance of The courts have recognized the extent U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) those stock tanks. Stock tanks provide of the Secretary’s discretion under this We have determined that habitat for northern Mexican standard to develop rules that are environmental assessments and gartersnakes, and thus their presence appropriate for the conservation of a environmental impact statements, as within the gartersnake’s range provides species. For example, the Secretary may defined under the authority of NEPA, a conservation benefit to the species. find that it is necessary and advisable need not be prepared in connection This 4(d) rule allows landowners to not to include a taking prohibition, or to with listing a species as an endangered construct new stock tanks and to include a limited taking prohibition. See or threatened species under the Act. We continue to use and maintain those Alsea Valley Alliance v. Lautenbacher, published a notice outlining our reasons stock tanks on non-Federal lands 2007 U.S. Dist. Lexis 60203 (D. Or. for this determination in the Federal without the need for Federal permitting 2007); Washington Environmental Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR or oversight regarding compliance with Council v. National Marine Fisheries 49244). As documented in the Service’s the Act. Service, and 2002 U.S. Dist. Lexis 5432 Endangered Species Listing Handbook This provision may result in some (W.D. Wash. 2002). In addition, as (Service 1994), it is the position of the harm or disturbance of individual affirmed in State of Louisiana v. Verity, Service that rules promulgated under northern Mexican gartersnakes as a 853 F.2d 322 (5th Cir. 1988), the rule section 4(d) of the Act concurrently result of livestock or human activities at need not address all the threats to the with listing of the species fall under the the stock tanks; however, the level of species. As noted by Congress when the same rationale as outlined in the disturbance is expected to be minimal Act was initially enacted, ‘‘once an October 25, 1983, determination; thus and outweighed by the benefit to the animal is on the threatened list, the preparation of an environmental species from the presence of these Secretary has an almost infinite number assessment for the 4(d) rule is not habitats that are provided by stock of options available to her with regard required. tanks. to the permitted activities for those Given the benefits of well-managed species.’’ She may, for example, permit Government-to-Government stock tanks, the presence of well- taking, but not importation of such Relationship With Tribes managed stock tanks are an important species, or she may choose to forbid In accordance with the President’s component to northern Mexican both taking and importation but allow memorandum of April 29, 1994 gartersnake conservation and recovery. the transportation of such species, as (Government-to-Government Relations This stock tank provision in the 4(d) long as the measures will ‘‘serve to with Native American Tribal rule allows for construction, continued conserve, protect, or restore the species Governments; 59 FR 22951), Executive use, and maintenance of stock tanks on concerned in accordance with the Order 13175 (Consultation and non-Federal lands, and, therefore, purposes of the Act’’ (H.R. Rep. No. 412, Coordination with Indian Tribal because of the benefits associated with 93rd Cong., 1st Sess. 1973). Governments), and the Department of the habitat provided by well-managed Section 9 prohibitions make it illegal the Interior’s manual at 512 DM 2, we stock tanks, the 4(d) rule is necessary for any person subject to the jurisdiction readily acknowledge our responsibility

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2 38746 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 130 / Tuesday, July 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

to communicate meaningfully with government meeting with the White List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 recognized Federal Tribes on a Mountain Apache Tribe on September Endangered and threatened species, government-to-government basis. In 27, 2013, to discuss the gartersnake Exports, Imports, Reporting and accordance with Secretarial Order 3206 listing recommendations, and we agreed recordkeeping requirements, of June 5, 1997 (American Indian Tribal to review their Native Fish Management Transportation. Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust Plan for conservation benefit to Responsibilities, and the Endangered proposed and listed aquatic vertebrate Regulation Promulgation Species Act), we readily acknowledge species that occur on their lands. We Accordingly, we amend part 17, our responsibilities to work directly provided comments on that plan during subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the with tribes in developing programs for a conference call discussion on Code of Federal Regulations, as follows: healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge that December 16, 2013. The Yavapai tribal lands are not subject to the same Apache Tribe did not have any PART 17—[AMENDED] controls as Federal public lands, to comments on the proposed gartersnake remain sensitive to Indian culture, and ■ 1. The authority citation for part 17 listings. to make information available to tribes. continues to read as follows: Native American tribes potentially References Cited Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531– affected by the listing of these two 1544; and 4201–4245, unless otherwise gartersnakes include the San Carlos A complete list of references cited in noted. Apache Tribe, White Mountain Apache this rulemaking is available on the ■ 2. Amend § 17.11(h) by adding entries Tribe, and Yavapai Apache Tribe. On Internet at http://www.regulations.gov for ‘‘Gartersnake, narrow-headed’’ and March 12, 2013, we mailed and upon request from the Arizona ‘‘Gartersnake, northern Mexican’’ to the correspondence to these three tribes to Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR List of Endangered and Threatened request to meet with each tribe to FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). Wildlife in alphabetical order under discuss our listing recommendations for Reptiles to read as follows: the gartersnakes. We met with Authors representatives of the San Carlos § 17.11 Endangered and threatened The primary authors of this final rule wildlife. Apache Tribe on May 1, 2013, and no are the staff members of the Arizona * * * * * concerns regarding the proposed listings Ecological Services Field Office. were noted. We held a government-to- (h) * * *

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

******* Reptiles.

******* Gartersnake, narrow- Thamnophis U.S.A. (AZ, NM) Entire ...... T ...... NA ...... NA. headed. rufipunctatus. Gartersnake, north- Thamnophis eques U.S.A. (AZ, Entire ...... T ...... NA ...... 17.42(g). ern Mexican. megalops. NM), Mexico.

*******

■ 3. Amend § 17.42 by adding a new and 17.32 apply to the northern impoundment in an ephemeral drainage paragraph (g) to read as follows: Mexican gartersnake. or upland site constructed primarily as (2) Exemptions from prohibitions. a watering site for livestock. § 17.42 Special rules—reptiles. Incidental take of the northern Mexican Dated: June 9, 2014. * * * * * gartersnake will not be considered a (g) Northern Mexican gartersnake violation of section 9 of the Act if the Stephen Guertin, (Thamnophis eques megalops). (1) take occurs on non-Federal land and is Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Prohibitions. Except as noted in incidental to activities pertaining to Service. paragraph (g)(2) of this section, all construction, continued use, and [FR Doc. 2014–14615 Filed 7–7–14; 8:45 am] prohibitions and provisions of §§ 17.31 maintenance of stock tanks. A stock BILLING CODE 4310–55–P tank is an existing or future

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:11 Jul 07, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\08JYR2.SGM 08JYR2 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2