Vol. 80 Tuesday, No. 193 October 6, 2015

Part III

Department of the Interior

Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Threatened Species Status for Black Pinesnake With 4(d) Rule; Final Rule

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:56 Oct 05, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\06OCR3.SGM 06OCR3 rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60468 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 193 / Tuesday, October 6, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR protection through listing if we Background determine that it is endangered or Species Information Fish and Wildlife Service threatened throughout all or a significant portion of its range. Listing a Species Description and Taxonomy 50 CFR Part 17 species as an endangered or threatened Pinesnakes (genus Pituophis) are [Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2014–0046; species can only be completed by large, non-venomous, oviparous (egg- 4500030113] issuing a rule. laying) constricting snakes with keeled This rule lists the black pinesnake RIN 1018–BA03 scales and disproportionately small (Pituophis melanoleucus lodingi) as a heads (Conant and Collins 1991, pp. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife threatened species. It includes 201–202). Their snouts are pointed. and Plants; Threatened Species Status provisions published under the Black pinesnakes are distinguished from for Black Pinesnake With 4(d) Rule authority of section 4(d) of the Act that other pinesnakes by being dark brown to are necessary and advisable to provide black both on the upper and lower AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, for the conservation of the black surfaces of their bodies. There is Interior. pinesnake. considerable individual variation in ACTION: Final rule. The basis for our action. Under the adult coloration (Vandeventer and Act, we may determine that a species is Young 1989, p. 34), and some adults SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and an endangered or threatened species have russet-brown snouts. They may Wildlife Service (Service), determine based on any of five factors: (A) The also have white scales on their throat threatened species status under the present or threatened destruction, and ventral surface (Conant and Collins Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act), modification, or curtailment of its 1991, p. 203). In addition, there may as amended, for the black pinesnake habitat or range; (B) overutilization for also be a vague pattern of blotches on (Pituophis melanoleucus lodingi), a commercial, recreational, scientific, or the end of the body approaching the tail. reptile subspecies from Alabama, educational purposes; (C) disease or Adult black pinesnakes range from 48 to Louisiana, and Mississippi. The effect of predation; (D) the inadequacy of 76 inches (in) (122 to 193 centimeters this rule is to add this subspecies to the existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E) (cm)) long (Conant and Collins 1991, p. List of Endangered and Threatened other natural or manmade factors 203; Mount 1975, p. 226). Young black Wildlife. We are also adopting a rule affecting its continued existence. We pinesnakes often have a blotched under the authority of section 4(d) of the have determined that the black pattern, typical of other pinesnakes, Act (a ‘‘4(d) rule’’) to provide for the pinesnake is threatened based on four of which darkens with age. The conservation of the black pinesnake. these five factors (Factors A, C, D, and subspecies’ defensive posture when DATES: This rule is effective November E), specifically the past and continuing disturbed is particularly interesting; 5, 2015. loss, degradation, and fragmentation of when threatened, it throws itself into a ADDRESSES: This final rule is available habitat in association with silviculture, coil, vibrates its tail rapidly, strikes on the Internet at http:// urbanization, and fire suppression; road repeatedly, and utters a series of loud www.regulations.gov and http:// mortality; and the intentional killing of hisses (Ernest and Barbour 1989, p. www.fws.gov/mississippiES/. Comments snakes by individuals. 102). and materials we received, as well as Peer review and public comment. We Pinesnakes (Pituophis melanoleucus) supporting documentation we used in sought comments from independent are members of the Class Reptilia, Order preparing this rule, are available for specialists to ensure that our Squamata, Suborder Serpentes, and public inspection at http:// determination is based on scientifically Family Colubridae. There are three www.regulations.gov. All of the sound data, assumptions, and analyses. recognized subspecies of P. comments, materials, and We also considered all comments and melanoleucus distributed across the documentation that we considered in information we received during two eastern United States (Crother 2012, p. this rulemaking are available by public comment periods. 66; Rodriguez-Robles and De Jesus- appointment, during normal business Escobar 2000, p. 35): The northern Previous Federal Action hours at: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, pinesnake (P. m. melanoleucus); black Mississippi Ecological Services Field Federal actions for the black pinesnake (P. m. lodingi); and Florida Office, 6578 Dogwood View Parkway, pinesnake prior to publication of the pinesnake (P. m. mugitus). The black Jackson, MS 39213; by telephone at proposed listing rule are outlined in that pinesnake was originally described by 601–965–4900; or by facsimile at 601– rule, which was published on October 7, Blanchard (1924, pp. 531–532), and is 965–4340. 2014 (79 FR 60406). Publication of the geographically isolated from all other FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: proposed rule opened a 60-day pinesnakes. However, there is evidence Stephen Ricks, Field Supervisor, U.S. comment period, which closed on that the black pinesnake was in contact Fish and Wildlife Service, Mississippi December 8, 2014. On March 11, 2015, with other pinesnakes in the past. A Ecological Services Field Office, 6578 we published a proposed critical habitat form intermediate between P. m. lodingi Dogwood Parkway, Jackson, MS 39213; designation for the black pinesnake (80 and P. m. mugitus occurs in Baldwin by telephone 601–965–4900; or by FR 12846) and invited the public to and Escambia Counties, Alabama, and facsimile 601–965–4340. Persons who comment on the critical habitat Escambia County, Florida, and may use a telecommunications device for the proposal; the entire October 7, 2014, display morphological characteristics of deaf (TDD) may call the Federal proposed listing rule; and the draft both subspecies (Conant 1956, pp. 10– Information Relay Service (FIRS) at economic analysis of the proposed 11). These snakes are separated from 800–877–8339. critical habitat designation. This second populations of the black pinesnake by SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 60-day comment period ended on May the extensive Tensas-Mobile River Delta 11, 2015. and the Alabama River, and it is Executive Summary We will finalize the designation of unlikely that there is currently gene Why we need to publish a rule. Under critical habitat for the black pinesnake flow between pinesnakes across the the Act, a species may warrant at a later date. Delta (Duran 1998a, p. 13; Hart 2002, p.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:56 Oct 05, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR3.SGM 06OCR3 rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 193 / Tuesday, October 6, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 60469

23). A study on the genetic structure of until September, and then moving back Camp Shelby may be a reflection of the the three subspecies of P. melanoleucus to their overwintering areas (Yager et al. higher habitat quality at the site (Getz et al. 2012, p. 2) showed evidence 2006, pp. 34–36). The various areas (Zappalorti in litt. 2015), as the snakes of mixed ancestry, and supported the utilized throughout the year may not may not have to travel great distances to current subspecies designations and the have significantly different habitat meet their ecological needs. A modeling determination that all three are characteristics, but these movement study of movement patterns in genetically distinct groups. Evidence patterns illustrate that black pinesnakes bullsnakes (Pituophis catenifer sayi) suggests a possible historical may need access to larger, unfragmented revealed that home range sizes intergradation between P. m. lodingi tracts of habitat to accommodate fairly increased as a function of the amount of and P. ruthveni (Louisiana pinesnake), large home ranges while minimizing avoided habitat, such as agricultural but their current ranges are no longer in interactions with humans. fields (Kapfer et al. 2010, p. 15). As contact and intergradation does not snakes are forced to increase the search Life History presently occur (Crain and Cliburn radius to locate preferred habitat, their 1971, p. 496). Black pinesnakes are active during the home range invariably increases. day but only rarely at night. As The dynamic nature of individual Habitat evidenced by their pointed snout and movement patterns supports the Black pinesnakes are endemic to the enlarged rostral scale (the scale at the premise that black pinesnake habitat longleaf pine ecosystem that once tip of their snout), they are should be maintained in large covered the southeastern United States. accomplished burrowers capable of unfragmented parcels to sustain survival Optimal habitat for these snakes tunneling in loose soil, potentially for of a population. In the late 1980s, a consists of sandy, well-drained soils digging nests or excavating rodents for gopher tortoise preserve of with an open-canopied overstory of food (Ernst and Barbour 1989, pp. 100– approximately 2,000 ac (809 ha) was longleaf pine, a reduced shrub layer, 101). Black pinesnakes are known to created at Camp Shelby. This preserve, and a dense herbaceous ground cover consume a variety of food, including which has limited habitat fragmentation (Duran 1998a, p. 2). Duran (1998b, pp. nestling rabbits (Sylvilagus aquaticus), and has been specifically managed with 1–32) conducted a radio-telemetry study bobwhite quail (Colinus virginianus) prescribed burning and habitat of the black pinesnake that provided and their eggs, and eastern kingbirds restoration to support the recovery of data on habitat use. Snakes in this study (Tyrannus tyrannus) (Vandeventer and the gopher tortoise, is centrally located were usually located on well-drained, Young 1989, p. 34; Yager et al. 2005, p. within a much larger managed area sandy-loam soils on hilltops, on ridges, 28); however, rodents represent the (over 100,000 ac (40,469 ha)) that and toward the tops of slopes in areas most common type of prey. The provides habitat for one of the largest dominated by longleaf pine. With other majority of documented prey items are known populations of black pinesnakes habitat types readily available on the hispid cotton rats (Sigmodon hispidus), in the subspecies’ range (Lee 2014a, p. landscape, we can infer that these various species of mice (Peromyscus 1). upland habitats were preferred by black spp.), and, to a lesser extent, eastern fox No population and habitat viability pinesnakes. They were rarely found in squirrels (Sciurus niger) (Rudolph et al. analyses have been conducted for the riparian areas, hardwood forests, or 2002, p. 59; Yager et al. 2005, p. 28). black pinesnake due primarily to a lack closed canopy conditions. From radio- During field studies of black pinesnakes of essential life-history and telemetry studies, black pinesnakes in Mississippi, hispid cotton rats and demographic data, such as estimates of were located below ground 53 to 70 cotton mice (Peromyscus gossypinus) growth and reproductive rates, as is the percent of the time (Duran 1998a, p. 12; were the most frequently trapped small case for many snake species (Dorcas and Yager et al. 2005, p. 27; Baxley and mammals within black pinesnake home Willson 2009, p. 36; Willson et al. 2011, Qualls 2009, p. 288). These locations ranges (Duran and Givens 2001, p. 4; pp. 42–43). However, radio-tracking were usually in the trunks or root Baxley 2007, p. 29). These results studies have shown that a reserve area channels of rotting pine stumps. suggest that these two species of should include an unconstrained During two additional radiotelemetry mammals represent essential (unfragmented) activity area large studies, individual pinesnakes were components of the snake’s diet (Duran enough to accommodate the long- observed in riparian areas, hardwood and Givens 2001, p. 4). distance movements that have been forests, and pine plantations Duran and Givens (2001, p. 4) reported for the subspecies (Baxley and periodically, but the majority of their estimated the average size of individual Qualls 2009, pp. 287–288). As with time was still spent in intact upland black pinesnake home ranges (Minimum many snake species, fragmentation by longleaf pine habitat. While they used Convex Polygons (MCPs)) at Camp roads, urbanization, or incompatible multiple habitat types periodically, they Shelby, Mississippi, to be 117.4 acres habitat conversion continues to be a repeatedly returned to core areas in the (ac) (47.5 hectares (ha)) using data major threat affecting the black longleaf pine uplands and used the obtained during their radio-telemetry pinesnake (see discussion below under same pine stump and associated rotted- study. A more recent study conducted at Factor E: Other Natural or Manmade out root system from year to year, Camp Shelby, a National Guard training Factors Affecting Its Continued indicating considerable site fidelity facility operating under a special use Existence). (Yager, et al. 2006, pp. 34–36; Baxley permit on the De Soto National Forest Very little information on the black 2007, p. 40). Several radio-tracked (NF) in Forrest, George, and Perry pinesnake’s breeding and egg-laying is juvenile snakes were observed using Counties, Mississippi, provided home available from the wild. Lyman et al. mole or other small mammal burrows range estimates from 135 to 385 ac (55 (2007, p. 39) described the time frame rather than the bigger stump holes used to 156 ha) (Lee 2014a, p. 1). Additional of mid-May through mid-June as the by adult snakes (Lyman et al. 2007, pp. studies from the De Soto NF and other period when black pinesnakes breed at 39–41). areas of Mississippi have documented Camp Shelby, and mating activities may Pinesnakes have shown some somewhat higher MCP home range take place in or at the entrance to seasonal movement trends of emerging estimates, from 225 to 979 ac (91 to 396 armadillo burrows. However, Lee (2007, from overwintering sites in February, ha) (Baxley and Qualls 2009, p. 287). p. 93) described copulatory behavior in moving to an active area from March The smaller home range sizes from a pair of black pinesnakes in late

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:56 Oct 05, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR3.SGM 06OCR3 rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60470 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 193 / Tuesday, October 6, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

September. Based on dates when taproot, and lateral roots spreading out to remain below ground most of the hatchling black pinesnakes have been 50 feet (ft) (15.2 meters (m)) or more. time. However, a review of records, captured, the potential nesting and egg Longevity of wild black pinesnakes is interviews, and status reports, coupled deposition period of gravid females not well documented, but can be at least with a Geographic Information System extends from the last week in June to 11 years, based on recapture data from (GIS) analysis of current suitable the last week of August (Lyman et al. Camp Shelby (Lee 2014b, pers. comm.). habitat, indicated that black pinesnakes 2009, p. 42). In 2009, a natural nest with The longevity record for a captive male likely remain in all historical counties a clutch of six recently hatched black black pinesnake is 14 years, 2 months in Alabama and in 11 out of 14 pinesnake eggs was found at Camp (Slavens and Slavens 1999, p. 1). historical counties in Mississippi Shelby (Lee et al. 2011, p. 301) at the Recapture and growth data from black (Forrest, George, Greene, Harrison, end of a juvenile gopher tortoise pinesnakes on Camp Shelby indicate Jackson, Jones, Lamar, Marion, Perry, burrow. As there is only one that they may not reach sexual maturity Stone, and Wayne Counties). Black documented natural black pinesnake until their 4th or possibly 5th year pinesnake populations in many of the (Yager et al. 2006, p. 34). occupied counties in Mississippi occur nest, it is unknown whether the Potential predators of black subspecies exhibits nest site fidelity; in the De Soto NF. Much of the habitat pinesnakes include red-tailed hawks outside of De Soto NF has become however, nest site fidelity has been (Buteo jamaicensis), raccoons (Procyon highly fragmented, and populations on described for other Pituophis species. lotor), skunks (Mephitis mephitis), red these lands appear to be small and Burger and Zappalorti (1992, pp. 333– foxes (Vulpes vulpes), feral cats (Felis isolated on islands of suitable habitat 335) conducted an 11-year study of nest catus), and domestic dogs (Canis (Duran 1998a, p. 17; Barbour 2009, pp. site fidelity of northern pinesnakes in familiaris) (Ernst and Ernst 2003, p. 284; 6–13). New Jersey, and documented the exact Yager et al. 2006, p. 34; Lyman et al. same nest site being used for 11 years 2007, p. 39). Population Estimates and Status in a row, evidence of old egg shells in Duran and Givens (2001, pp. 1–35) Historical/Current Distribution 73 percent of new nests, and recapture reported the results of a habitat of 42 percent of female snakes at prior There are historical records for the assessment of all black pinesnake nesting sites. The authors suggest that black pinesnake from one parish in records (156) known at the time of their females returning to a familiar site Louisiana (Washington Parish), 14 study. Habitat suitability of the sites was should have greater knowledge of counties in Mississippi (Forrest, George, based on how the habitat compared to available resources, basking sites, Greene, Harrison, Jackson, Jones, Lamar, that selected by black pinesnakes in a refugia, and predator pressures; Lauderdale, Marion, Pearl River, Perry, previously completed telemetry study of therefore they would have the potential Stone, Walthall, and Wayne Counties), a population occupying what was for higher reproductive success and 3 counties in Alabama west of the considered high-quality habitat (Duran compared with having to find a new Mobile River Delta (Clarke, Mobile, and 1998b, pp. 1–44). Black pinesnake nest site (Burger and Zappalorti 1992, Washington Counties). Historically, records were joined using a contiguous pp. 334–335). If black pinesnakes show populations likely occurred in all of suitable habitat model (combining areas similar site fidelity, it follows that they these contiguous counties; however, of suitable habitat with relatively too might have higher reproductive current records do not support the unrestricted gene flow) to create success if their nesting sites were to distribution of black pinesnakes across ‘‘population segments’’ (defined as ‘‘that remain undisturbed. this entire area. Recently, a black portion of the population located in a pinesnake was observed in a new contiguous area of suitable habitat Specific information about county, Lawrence County, Mississippi, throughout which gene flow is relatively underground refugia of the black where the subspecies had not unrestricted’’) from the two-dimensional pinesnake was documented during a previously been documented (Lee point data. These population segments study conducted by Rudolph et al. 2014b, p. 1). However, is not known were then assessed using a combination (2007, p. 560), which involved whether this snake represents a new of a habitat suitability rating and data on excavating five sites used by the extant population. how recently and/or frequently black subspecies for significant periods of Duran (1998a, p. 9) and Duran and pinesnakes had been recorded at the time from early December through late Givens (2001, p. 24) concluded that site. By examining historical population March. The pinesnakes occurred singly black pinesnakes have likely been segments, Duran and Givens (2001, p. at shallow depths (mean of 9.8 in (25 extirpated from Louisiana and from two 10) determined that 22 of the 36 (61 cm); maximum of 13.8 in (35 cm)) in counties (Lauderdale and Walthall) in percent) population segments known at chambers formed by the decay and Mississippi. In these two studies, all the time of their study were either burning of pine stumps and roots historical and current records were extirpated (subspecies no longer (Rudolph et al. 2007, p. 560). The collected; land managers from private, present), or were in serious jeopardy of refugia were not excavated by the State, and Federal agencies with local extirpation. During the development of snakes beyond minimal enlargement of knowledge of the subspecies were this listing rule, we used GIS to reassess the preexisting chambers. These sites interviewed; and habitat of all historical the habitat suitability of the 14 are not considered true hibernacula records was visited and assessed. As population segments not determined to because black pinesnakes move above black pinesnakes have not been reported be in serious jeopardy of extirpation by ground on warm days throughout all west of the Pearl River in either Duran and Givens (2001, p. 10). Our months of the year (Rudolph et al. 2007, Mississippi or Louisiana in over 30 estimate of the number of populations p. 561; Baxley 2007, pp. 39–40). Means years, and since there are no recent was derived by overlaying habitat from (2005, p. 76, and references therein) (post-1979) records from Pearl River a current GIS analysis with the locality suggested that longleaf pine is likely to County (Mississippi), we believe them record data (post-1990) from species/ be more important than other southern to likely be extirpated from that county subspecies experts, Natural Heritage pine species to animals using as well. Programs, State wildlife agencies, and stumpholes, because longleaf pine has a In general, pinesnakes are particularly the site assessments of Duran and more resinous heartwood, deeper difficult to survey given their tendency Givens (2001, pp. 1–35) and Barbour

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:56 Oct 05, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR3.SGM 06OCR3 rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 193 / Tuesday, October 6, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 60471

(2009, pp. 1–36). We used locality the proposal. Newspaper notices information was limited on some life- records back to 1990, because this date inviting general public comment were history attributes but stated that, based coincides with that chosen by Duran published in the Mobile Press Register on the best available information, the and Givens (2001, pp. 1–35) and and Hattiesburg American on October Service had presented a compelling case Barbour (2009, pp. 1–36) in their 12, 2014, and again on March 15, 2015. for listing as threatened. Four of the comprehensive black pinesnake habitat We also presented several webinars on peer reviewers stressed the importance assessments. Using the movement and the proposed listing and critical habitat of stump holes and associated root home range data provided by black rules, and invited all stakeholders, systems to the subspecies and most pinesnake researchers (Duran 1998b, pp. media, and congressional noted the importance of conserving 15–19; Yager et al. 2005, pp. 27–28; representatives to participate and ask outlying populations to support Baxley and Qualls 2009, pp. 287–288), any questions. The webinar information conservation genetics of the subspecies. a population was determined to be was posted on our Web site along with Substantive peer reviewer comments are distinct if it was separated from other copies of the proposed listing rule, press addressed in the following summaries localities by more than 1.3 miles (mi.) release, and a question/answer and incorporated into the final rule as (2.1 kilometers (km)). Using our recent document. We did not receive any appropriate. assessment, we estimate that 11 of the requests for a public hearing within the (1) Comment: Peer reviewers provided 14 populations of black pinesnakes designated timeframe. During the two additional information and suggestions remain extant today. Five of these 11 comment periods for the proposed rule, for clarifying and improving the populations occur in Alabama and 6 in we received nearly 300 comments accuracy of the information in the Mississippi. However, current data are addressing the proposed listing and ‘‘Habitat,’’ ‘‘Life History,’’ ‘‘Historical/ insufficient to make a determination of critical habitat rules. In this final rule, Current Distribution,’’ Summary of the number of individuals that comprise we address only the comments Factors Affecting the Species, and each remaining population. regarding the proposed listing and the Available Conservation Measures Our current GIS analysis indicates associated rule under section 4(d) of the sections of the preamble of the proposed that 3 of the 11 remaining black Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). Comments rule. pinesnake populations, all located in specific to the proposed critical habitat Our Response: We appreciate these Alabama and lacking recent records, are designation (80 FR 12846) for this corrections and suggestions, and have not likely to persist long term due to: subspecies will be addressed in the final made changes to this final rule to reflect Presence on, or proximity to, highly critical habitat determination at a later the peer reviewers’ input. fragmented habitat; lack of protection date. All relevant substantive (2) Comment: Two peer reviewers and habitat management for the site; or information provided during comment stated that our characterization of ‘‘open both. The majority of the known black periods has either been incorporated canopy’’ as ≤70 percent canopy coverage pinesnake records, and much of the best directly into this final determination or in our discussion of target suitable black remaining habitat, occurs within the is addressed below. pinesnake habitat, under the two ranger districts that make up the De ‘‘Provisions of the Proposed Special Soto NF in Mississippi. These lands Peer Reviewer Comments Rule’’ section, was not appropriate. represent a small fraction of the former In accordance with our peer review They stated that studies have shown longleaf pine ecosystem that was policy published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR that pinesnakes more frequently utilize present in Louisiana, Mississippi, and 34270), we solicited expert opinion areas with <50 percent canopy coverage. Alabama, and was historically occupied from six knowledgeable individuals Our Response: There appears to be by the subspecies. At this time, we with scientific expertise that included some variability in the literature as to believe the six populations in familiarity with the black pinesnake and what percentage of canopy closure Mississippi (five on the De Soto NF and its habitat, biological needs, and threats, constitutes an open canopy. Therefore, one in Marion County) and two sites in as well as those with experience in we have removed any reference of a Alabama (in Clarke County) are the only studying other pinesnake species. We specific value for canopy coverage as ones considered likely to persist long received responses from all of the peer optimal habitat for the black pinesnake term because of their presence on reviewers. in this final rule. We have focused relatively unfragmented forest and We reviewed all comments we instead on the presence of an abundant protection or management afforded to received from the peer reviewers for herbaceous groundcover, which is a the habitat or subspecies. substantive issues and new information component of optimal habitat for this regarding the listing of black pinesnake. subspecies and is provided for in an Summary of Comments and The peer reviewers generally concurred appropriately open-canopied forest. Recommendations with our methods and conclusions, and (3) Comment: One peer reviewer In the proposed rule published on provided additional information, stated that the increasing use of erosion October 7, 2014 (79 FR 60406), we clarifications, and suggestions to control blankets (ECBs) containing requested that all interested parties improve this final rule. Four of the peer polypropylene mesh poses a potential submit written comments on the reviewers specifically expressed their threat to black pinesnakes. ECBs, which proposal by December 8, 2014. We support for the subspecies’ listing as a are often used for erosion control on reopened the comment period on the threatened species; a fifth peer reviewer pipeline construction projects, but may listing proposal on March 11, 2015 (80 questioned our characterization that the also be used for bird exclusion, have FR 12846) with our publication of a rate of decline had moderated for this been documented to entangle many proposed critical habitat designation for subspecies due to conservation actions, species of snakes, causing lacerations the subspecies. This second 60-day and suggested the black pinesnake and mortality. They often take years to comment period ended on May 11, might actually qualify as endangered. decompose, presenting a long-term 2015. During both comment periods, we The sixth peer reviewer limited her entanglement hazard, even when also contacted appropriate Federal and comments to the critical habitat discarded. State agencies, scientific experts and proposal and did not specifically Our Response: We appreciate this organizations, and other interested address the proposed listing rule. new information, and have made parties and invited them to comment on Several peer reviewers noted that changes to this final rule to reflect the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:56 Oct 05, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR3.SGM 06OCR3 rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60472 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 193 / Tuesday, October 6, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

peer reviewer’s input (see ‘‘Factor E: to indicate imminent extinction. consistent with the date used by black Other Natural or Manmade Factors Therefore, we find that the black pinesnake researchers to represent Affecting Its Continued Existence’’ in pinesnake meets the definition of a occupied localities in their the Summary of Factors Affecting the threatened species based on the comprehensive habitat assessments of Species section, below). immediacy, severity, and scope of the black pinesnake localities. These (4) Comment: One peer reviewer and threats described above (see records and the researchers’ reports several public commenters questioned Determination section, below). represent the best scientific data whether our determination of (5) Comment: Two peer reviewers and available at the time of listing. We ‘‘threatened’’ was appropriate, instead several public commenters questioned conducted an updated GIS habitat of ‘‘endangered.’’ While the public our determination that illegal collection analysis of the areas containing the post- commenters provided no justification from the wild was not a significant 1990 records, and if we found that for their statements, the peer reviewer threat to the black pinesnake. One peer sufficient forested habitat was still suggested there are no data that indicate reviewer suggested that people in the present, we determined that there was a rates of population decline have pet trade may value wild-caught reasonable likelihood that black moderated; therefore it is possible that individuals with novel genetics, while pinesnake populations may still occur the decline has accelerated. The peer public commenters postulated that the in those areas. If suitable habitat had reviewer mentioned that there have listing of the pinesnake may make it disappeared in proximity to the record, been minimal conservation more difficult for enthusiasts and we made the assumption that although accomplishments concerning the black hobbyists to purchase individuals, a few individual snakes may still be pinesnake throughout its intermittent therefore snakes from wild populations present, the area likely could no longer status as a candidate species over the may be more vulnerable to collection. support a population capable of last 30 years. Additionally, a peer reviewer suggested persisting long term. Our Response: The Act defines an that illegal collection would have a (7) Comment: Three peer reviewers endangered species as any species that drastic impact on those populations that and several other commenters is ‘‘in danger of extinction throughout may have only a few individuals. questioned our discussion and all or a significant portion of its range’’ Our Response: In this final listing assessment relating to the viability of and a threatened species as any species rule, we continue to rely upon the best the black pinesnake populations. Two ‘‘that is likely to become endangered scientific and commercial information peer reviewers noted we needed to throughout all or a significant portion of available, which in this case includes supply numerical values to demonstrate its range within the foreseeable future.’’ correspondence with individuals who both population viability and minimum The determination to list the black have experience with the history of the reserve area. pinesnake as threatened was based on pinesnake pet trade in the area (see Our Response: We do not currently the best available scientific and ‘‘Factor B: Overutilization for have data (numerical values) on what commercial data on its status, the Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or constitutes a viable population for the existing and potential threats to the Educational Purposes’’ in the Summary black pinesnake and, therefore, have subspecies, and ongoing conservation of Factors Affecting the Species section, removed any discussion on viability of actions. While it may be difficult to below). Those sources maintained that populations from this final listing rule. determine the ultimate success of these the need for collection of wild As stated in the ‘‘Population Estimates conservation actions, we know that specimens is thought to have declined and Status’’ section under the discussions between the Service and our dramatically due to the pet trade being Background section, above, we public lands partners, in particular, currently saturated with captive-bred determined that 3 of the 11 currently have resulted in new language within black pinesnakes. There is no known populations were not likely to their formal management plans to information available to suggest that persist in the long term due to their protect and enhance black pinesnake illegal collection will increase once the location on fragmented habitat and the habitat. For example, the Mississippi subspecies is listed (and no new lack of any protection or management in Army National Guard (MSARNG) has information to support this was received place. Viability, particularly with amended its integrated natural resources during the comment periods). Since the respect to minimum reserve area management plan (INRMP) to provide black pinesnake is fossorial (and thus (minimal acreage necessary to support a for the protection and management of difficult to locate), and does not viable population), will be discussed in the black pinesnake (see ‘‘Conservation overwinter in communal den sites, we our final critical habitat designation. Efforts to Reduce Habitat Destruction, believe this potential threat to be minor. Modification, or Curtailment of Its (6) Comment: Two peer reviewers and Federal Agency Comments Range’’ under Factor A in the Summary a number of public commenters stated (8) Comment: One Federal agency and of Factors Affecting the Species section, that using locality data from 1990 as many public commenters disagreed below). support for presence of extant with our assessment of the current We find that endangered status is not populations may not reflect the current decline of the longleaf pine ecosystem appropriate for the black pinesnake status of black pinesnakes and the in the Southeast. These commenters because, while we found the threats to subspecies may have since disappeared also questioned our statement that the subspecies to be significant and from these sites. On the other hand, a increases in longleaf pine forests rangewide, we did not find that the third peer reviewer stated that the lack through restoration efforts in the threats currently place the subspecies in of records for several decades in an area Southeast do not align with the range of danger of extinction throughout all or a is not sufficient evidence to support that the black pinesnake. significant portion of its range. black pinesnakes have been extirpated Our Response: See our discussion of Although there is a general decline in from that area if some suitable habitat longleaf pine habitat under Factor A: the overall range of the subspecies and still exists. The Present or Threatened Destruction, its available habitat, we believe that the Our Response: As we discussed in Modification, or Curtailment of Its rate of decline has slowed in recent ‘‘Population Estimates and Status’’ in Habitat or Range. Although there has years due to restoration efforts, and the Background section (above), we been an extensive effort to restore range contraction is not severe enough used data dated back to 1990, which is longleaf pine in the Southeast, the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:56 Oct 05, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR3.SGM 06OCR3 rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 193 / Tuesday, October 6, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 60473

footprint of the longleaf pine ecosystem public commenters further elaborated available information upon which to across its historical range continues to that it is the activities occurring prior to base listing actions. In arriving at our contract, with considerable losses being the clearcut, or the managed condition determination that the black pinesnake attributed to the conversion to loblolly after the clearcut, which are the meets the definition of ‘‘threatened’’ pine (Oswalt et al. 2015, p. 504). potential threats to habitat. Many public under the Act, we note our conclusion Increases in longleaf pine acreage from commenters recommended that is not based on estimates of population restoration efforts do not overlap clearcutting be exempted as an size or strictly on observational data, but completely with the range of the black intermediate treatment under the 4(d) on the reductions in range and numbers pinesnake (Ware 2014, pers. comm.). rule. of populations due to past threats, and Recent outlooks for the southern Gulf Our Response: We recognize that the negative impact of ongoing threats to region (which includes the range of the while some clearcut harvesting may those few populations that remain. black pinesnake) still predict large have a negative impact on black Observational data (records) were only percentage losses in longleaf pine pinesnake habitat, at other times it is a part of the analysis of population trends, distribution; in fact, Clarke County, necessary management tool to restore a as we evaluated habitat suitability Alabama, and several Mississippi forest to a condition suitable for through GIS as part of a probability of counties occupied by the black pinesnakes and other native wildlife. occurrence determination (please see pinesnake are predicted to have some of For instance, clearcutting off-site pine our response to Comment 6, above). The the highest percentages of longleaf pine species prior to afforestation or Service determined that the available loss in the Southeast (Klepzig et al. reforestation with longleaf pine and suitable habitat has diminished to the 2014, p. 53). clearcutting with longleaf reserves to point that many historical populations (9) Comment: One Federal agency and promote natural regeneration can both have been severely reduced and gene many public commenters disagreed that be very appropriate for creating and flow between surviving populations has urbanization is still a contributor to maintaining suitable black pinesnake been restricted to the point of habitat loss within the range of the black habitat. Therefore, we removed the preventing the natural recovery of the pinesnake and expressed concern with specific activity ‘‘clearcutting’’ from the subspecies. our forecast on the continued loss of list of activities which could potentially (12) Comment: One Federal agency forest land to urbanization over the next result in a violation of Section 9 of the expressed concern over our statement 50 years. Commenters stated that our Act. The 4(d) rule identifies activities that activities causing ‘‘ground forestry forecast was not adjusted to causing significant subsurface disturbance’’ could potentially result in account for the recent economic disturbance or the conversion of the a violation of take under section 9 of the collapse and subsequent changes in U.S. native longleaf pine forest to another Act and thereby impact military training timber markets and forecasts. forest cover type (or agricultural/urban or habitat restoration on the Camp Our Response: We recognize that not uses) as the specific activities Shelby Joint Forces Training Center all areas within the range of the black potentially causing take and threatening (Camp Shelby) in Mississippi. pinesnake are forecast to have the same the subspecies. Our Response: Following a review of predicted levels of population growth in (11) Comment: Two Federal agencies, the comments and our revision of the the next few decades, and some rural one State agency, and numerous public 4(d) rule, we have clarified the list of areas may experience population commenters stated that more data and potential section 9 violations (see declines. However, we also recognize information were needed before Available Conservation Measures, that many counties within the black proceeding with a federal listing of the below). We specifically focused on pinesnake’s range are still forecast to black pinesnake. Commenters noted the those activities that may impact the experience increases in urban land use, lack of demographic data, life-history black pinesnake refugia (stump holes), especially in areas near Mobile, studies, and current rangewide surveys the most important habitat feature for Alabama, that have historically seen and population estimates as critical the subspecies, in our development of drastic habitat loss. We used the information needed to assess the the list of potential section 9 violations. Southern Forest Futures Project to subspecies’ status and population Therefore, we have replaced ‘‘activities develop information in this rule trends. Several others noted that causing ground disturbance’’ with a regarding factors that are likely to result population estimates should be more focused statement of those in forest changes within the range of the considered a minimum because ‘‘activities causing significant black pinesnake; this analysis covered a pinesnakes are difficult to locate given subsurface disturbance.’’ We do not number of different scenarios of future their tendency to remain below ground believe that normal military training population/income growth and timber most of the time, and because most operations will cause significant prices and baseline tree planting rates black pinesnake records were the result subsurface disturbance in the forested (Klepzig et al. 2014, pg. vi). In all future of incidental observations in the course areas occupied by black pinesnakes, as scenarios, the southern Gulf region of other activities or biased based on artillery firing occurs on ranges that are (which includes the range of the black number of observers frequenting the maintained as mowed open fields, and pinesnake), as well as all the other area. troop- and vehicle-maneuvering southern U.S. subregions, exhibited a Our Response: It is often the case that activities do not cause significant strong growth in population (Klepzig et data are limited for rare species, and we disturbance that would destroy al. 2014, pg. 20). See our discussion of acknowledge that it would be useful to underground refugia. Habitat restoration longleaf pine habitat under Factor A: have more information on the black and maintenance activities are covered The Present or Threatened Destruction, pinesnake. However, as required by the under Camp Shelby’s INRMP, which Modification, or Curtailment of Its Act, we base our determination on the includes specific conservation measures Habitat or Range. best available scientific and commercial to benefit black pinesnakes, including (10) Comment: One Federal agency information at the time of our protection and maintenance of pine and numerous commenters disagreed rulemaking. Trend information on stumps (MSARNG 2014, p. 93). Military that clearcut harvesting (clearcutting) population levels and habitat loss/ training operations on Camp Shelby constituted a management activity that availability or population/habitat have been compatible with protection destroys black pinesnake habitat. Some indices often represent the best measures for the burrows of the gopher

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:56 Oct 05, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR3.SGM 06OCR3 rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60474 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 193 / Tuesday, October 6, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus), which prescriptive and recommended a 4(d) for the black pinesnake (80 FR 12846). has been federally listed for 28 years. rule similar to the Louisiana black bear This second comment period closed on We believe these operations will be (Ursus americanus luteolus) 4(d) rule, May 11, 2015. compatible with protecting black which exempts take occurring during all The Act requires the Service to pinesnakes and their habitat as well. As normal forestry activities that do not publish a final rule within 1 year from we have done with the gopher tortoise, negatively impact den trees (see 50 CFR the date we propose to list a species. In we will work with the Department of 17.40(i)). ADCNR also stated that it order to extend the comment period, we Defense (DoD) and Camp Shelby to would support a 4(d) rule that provides would have risked missing this ensure their military mission can be for open canopy conditions; abundant deadline, unless we sought an extension accomplished and habitat restoration ground cover; and refugia habitat such under section 4(b)(6)(B)(i) of the Act. efforts can continue. as stumps, snags, and woody debris. The Act allows this extension is if there Our Response: We appreciate the is substantial disagreement regarding Comments From States input from ADCNR and other the sufficiency or accuracy of the Section 4(b)(5)(A)(ii) of the Act commenters, and have made available data relevant to the requires the Service to give actual notice adjustments to the 4(d) rule to exempt, determination or revision concerned, of any proposed listing regulation to the among other things, all forest but only for 6 months and only for appropriate agency of each State in management activities that maintain purposes of soliciting additional data. which the species is believed to occur, lands in a forested condition, except Based on the comments we received and and invite each such agency to comment those activities causing significant data we evaluated, although there are on the proposed regulation. We received subsurface disturbance or converting differences in interpretation of the comments from the Alabama longleaf pine forests to other forest existing data, there is not substantial Department of Conservation and Natural cover types. This change is in scientific disagreement regarding the Resources, Wildlife and Freshwater recognition of the naturally decayed or sufficiency or accuracy of the available Fisheries Division (ADCNR); the burned-out pine stump holes as an data. Please also see our response to Mississippi Department of Wildlife, essential habitat feature for the black Comment 11, above. Fisheries and Parks (MDWFP); the pinesnake, much like the Louisiana (15) Comment: MDWFP and many Secretary of State for Mississippi; and black bear 4(d) rule was developed to public commenters voiced opposition to the Louisiana Department of Wildlife protect an essential habitat feature for any regulations that would prohibit and Fisheries (LDWF). The ADCNR that species. Not all suggested changes landowners from managing their lands provided an initial comment supporting were incorporated because not all for their objectives with the focus on the listing of the black pinesnake as activities are consistent with a 4(d) rule timber management operations. The threatened, which was followed later by that is ‘‘necessary and advisable for the Secretary of State for Mississippi and a letter rescinding its support for the conservation of the species.’’ We believe many public commenters expressed threatened listing and citing its belief this revised 4(d) rule for the black concern due to their perception that the that additional information was needed pinesnake focuses on protecting those proposed 4(d) rule, as written, prior to making a listing decision. The habitats and features most important to specifically required landowners to MDWFP noted that it did not support black pinesnake conservation, and adhere to certain timber management any regulation or listing that would addresses the standards supported by metrics, including placing limitations restrict or prohibit private landowners ADCNR. In addition, many forest on harvest size and canopy closure, as from managing their property for their operations in Alabama and Mississippi well as requiring the planting of only objectives, specifically timber may already be operating in a manner longleaf pine. management. These agencies in consistent with the 4(d) rule. For Our Response: Throughout the Alabama and Mississippi also expressed instance, the language associated with development of this listing rule, we concern that the 4(d) rule as proposed conversion of longleaf pine forests to have attempted to describe black was too narrow in scope and would other forest types is consistent with pinesnake habitat by characterizing the negatively impact private landowners Sustainable Forestry Initiative historical ecosystem in which managing timber. The LDWF initially guidelines that protect rare and pinesnakes evolved, and the primary commented that it did not consider the ecologically significant native forests habitat features important to black pinesnake extirpated in Louisiana, (SFI 2015, p. 4), while some landowners pinesnakes, with data from publications based on a 2005 reported observation; indicated that they did not routinely and reports to support the utility of however, they later retracted this remove stumps in these habitats. these habitat features. This has been statement. Based on further analysis, (14) Comment: One state agency taken by many as a prescription for how LDWF determined that the 2005 report (ADCNR) and many public commenters all landowners must manage their land was unverifiable and scientifically requested that the comment period be from now on; however, in no way is the invalid; therefore, it failed to meet the extended for the proposed listing. rule intended to prescribe management criteria as an element of occurrence in Our Response: We consider the two conditions. The Service will not require the Louisiana Natural Heritage Program comment periods on the proposed landowners to harvest their timber in a database. LDWF also stated that it listing, totaling 120 days, to have certain way, nor will we restrict supported the black pinesnake’s provided the public a sufficient landowners from managing loblolly or proposed listing as threatened with a opportunity for submitting comments. other pine tree species on their lands. 4(d) rule to exempt beneficial We provided a 60-day comment period We will continue to recommend that management practices and noted that associated with the publication of the longleaf pine be the preferred overstory Louisiana is continuing to lose suitable listing proposed rule, which opened on species within the historical longleaf upland pine habitat due to urban October 7, 2014 (79 FR 60406), and range. While black pinesnake habitat development. Specific issues raised by closed on December 8, 2014. We then management can be successfully the States are addressed below. reopened the comment period for an integrated with forestry practices in all (13) Comment: ADCNR and many additional 60 days on March 11, 2015, pine species, longleaf pine is better public commenters stated that the in association with our publication of suited for many reasons. Longleaf pines proposed 4(d) rule was overly our proposed critical habitat designation have open crowns that allow more

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:56 Oct 05, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR3.SGM 06OCR3 rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 193 / Tuesday, October 6, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 60475

sunlight to reach the ground. The trees pinesnake evolved, most noticeably in managed through multiple rotations or can be burned at younger ages and can that they exhibit frequent canopy converted to agriculture or urban areas be managed on longer rotations. Further, closure, often use practices that destroy will support populations long term. longleaf pines are more disease- and subsurface structure, and have more This is likely because the refugia habitat insect-resistant when compared to limitations on how fire may be used as has been removed, the surface can no loblolly pines, and more resistant to the primary management tool. longer support prey species, road wind damage due to the deep taproot Even in cases where loblolly is density and thereby the threat posed by and smaller crown density. favored in a more open condition, it road crossings increases, or simply It should also be noted that densely does not function in the same way as because the habitat (in any condition, planted pine plantations are not longleaf over the long term. In fact, the optimal or suboptimal) no longer considered habitat for the black Longleaf Alliance has said, ‘‘The remains on a site. pinesnake, and, therefore, any actions in introduction of periodic fire and these stands are unlikely to result in recovery of groundcover and wildlife Public Comments take. In addition, landowners are not communities may be possible without General Issue 1: Captive Propagation required to adhere to the conditions longleaf for the short term. Eventually, outlined in the 4(d) rule. There is no however, the fire regime necessary to (17) Comment: A number of requirement to follow these voluntary maintain the desired groundcover and commenters representing the captive guidelines and landowners who would wildlife communities can only be breeding community voiced concern prefer not to use the exemptions may maintained in longleaf pine forests. over the listing, especially with its consult with the Service on their Treating longleaf pine like loblolly pine impact to pet owners, future sales of forestry management practices if there is will not achieve the desired results’’ black pinesnakes, work of researchers, a potential to impact the black (Longleaf Alliance 2015, unpaginated). and zoological institutions. Some pinesnake. No consultation would be The tree species itself matters because, specifically requested that captive-bred needed for forest management activities over time, the fire necessary to maintain animals be excluded from the listing or outside of the known areas occupied by the herbaceous groundcover that exempted through a 4(d) rule to allow the subspecies. supports this subspecies is only well- unfettered continuation of captive (16) Comment: ADCNR and many tolerated by longleaf pine. Further, breeding, pet ownership, and trade. public commenters stated that it is not Means (2005, p. 76, and references Our Response: Black pinesnakes essential for longleaf pine to be the therein) suggested that longleaf pine is primary forest cover for an area to be likely to be more important than other acquired before the effective date of the considered black pinesnake habitat and southern pine species to animals using final listing of this subspecies (see that it is the structure of the forest that stumpholes, because longleaf pine has a DATES, above) may be legally held and is more important. Therefore, longleaf more resinous heartwood, deeper bred in captivity as long as laws pine should be de-emphasized taproot, and lateral roots spreading out regarding this activity within the State throughout the rule, and it should not 50 ft (15.2 m) or more. Therefore, we in which they are held are not violated. be a requirement to meet the provisions believe that the decline of the black This would include snakes acquired for the 4(d) rule. Consequently, some pinesnake is closely linked to the pre-listing by pet owners, researchers, public commenters maintained that if decline of the characteristic longleaf and zoological institutions. Future sale there is no indication that longleaf pines pine ecosystem. of captive-bred black pinesnakes, born are a necessary component of black Typically, if converted forests display from pre-listing acquired parents, pinesnake habitat, then the assumption an open-canopied condition, it is only within their State of their origin would that black pinesnake populations have temporary, and when the canopy closes be regulated by applicable laws of that declined proportionately with the that habitat becomes unsuitable for both State. If individuals outside the snake’s decline in longleaf pine forests is black pinesnakes and their prey. State of origin wish to purchase captive- invalid. Occurrence of pinesnakes in these bred snakes, they would have to first Our Response: We believe the forests should not be confused with acquire a 10(a)(1)(A) Interstate structure of the forest occupied by black preference for those types of habitat. We Commerce permit from the Service pinesnakes is very important, and we believe the pinesnakes in converted (Web site: http://www.fws.gov/forms/3- recognize that some studies have shown forests are selecting for the best 200-55.pdf). Information about the that pinesnakes have not always been available sub-optimal habitat, and intended purpose of purchasing a black found exclusively using longleaf pine although they may be persisting pinesnake is required because using forests, though it should be noted that sporadically in the modified habitat, federally threatened species as pets is the need for open-canopy and once the canopy closes again they will not consistent with the purposes of the herbaceous understory has been be forced to relocate because there will Act, which is intended to support the supported in these studies. be no herbaceous groundcover to conservation of species and recovery of Many forests are not managed to support prey populations on which the wild populations. However, an animal foster open conditions in the subspecies depends for survival. This with threatened species status may be understory. Typical pine plantation has been supported through radio- legally kept in captivity if it is captive- management (i.e., characterized by high telemetry data, which show that black bred and used for educational and/or stocking rates), for instance, differs from pinesnakes most often utilize open- breeding purposes consistent with the the conditions favored by this canopied forests (Baxley and Qualls aforementioned intent of the Act. subspecies for several reasons. Pine 2009, p. 289). Through the permit process, we are able plantations are not typically maintained A long history of removal of to track and monitor the trade in in the open-canopied condition with an subsurface structure (e.g., stumps and captive-bred listed species. For this abundant herbaceous groundcover that root channels) and conversion from reason, we believe exemption for this is characteristic of the structure of this native forests to other uses has activity through a 4(d) rule would not be historical ecosystem. These converted eliminated both the subspecies and appropriate, as it would not meet the forests differ from the native longleaf suitable habitat; therefore, it is unlikely standard of providing for the pine ecosystem in which the black that sites that have been intensively conservation of the subspecies.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:56 Oct 05, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR3.SGM 06OCR3 rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60476 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 193 / Tuesday, October 6, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

(18) Comment: Several commenters stages of being open and closed, as the stumps, greatly reducing the availability stated that the Service should have pinesnakes would always be able to find of suitable refugia to black pinesnakes. taken information relating to the large areas where they could locate food, Our Response: It is likely that captive-bred population into the shelter, and mates. activities during site preparation that decision to list the subspecies. Several Our Response: We sincerely may greatly reduce the availability of other commenters stated listing was appreciate the efforts of forest refugia, such as clearing of stumps and unnecessary because captive-bred landowners to provide habitat for a other subsurface disturbance, may not animals could be released in the wild. variety of species and would like to occur as commonly now as in previous Our Response: While there have been continue working with the forest years, particularly on industrial forest great advances by snake enthusiasts and industry to further explore the benefits lands, and we have altered the language hobbyists in successful breeding of pine plantations. We believe there are in this final rule to reflect that. programs for pinesnakes, they are not several potential issues with depending However, because we received animals bred to be returned to wild on a matrix of pine plantations to comments from many others asking that habitats. The Service views captive provide suitable habitat for the these mechanical site preparation propagation programs as a last recourse subspecies long term; most notably, that activities be exempted under the 4(d) for conserving species. The Act directs not all forests are managed in a way that rule, we know that they do still occur. the Service to focus on conserving the will protect the subspecies or its habitat. These activities must be identified as ecosystems upon which endangered and At the time of the survey cited by the potential threats because one of the threatened species depend. Loss of commenter, two-thirds of those acres most important features of the habitat habitat is one of the primary threats to were comprised of young trees that had for black pinesnakes is the presence and this subspecies. Before captive animals not grown large enough to close the availability of naturally decayed or can be reintroduced, questions of canopy, as many of those lands go burned-out pine stump holes in which genetics, disease, and survival in the through cycles of having closed the snakes spend a large percentage of wild must be evaluated, which is canopies. For example, if a stand their time. Although pinesnakes may generally done in a recovery setting becomes closed when the trees are 5 to occasionally use debris piles and other while considering all of the options 7 years old, and the first thinning is at aboveground refugia, it is the available for conservation. Captive age 14 to 20, there is a period of 7 to subterranean refugia (i.e., stump holes) populations, even when they are 15 years when that stand is unsuitable that are thought to be most important to healthy and genetically diverse, will for pinesnakes. the subspecies. Those who manage to likely not survive in the wild without The idea that a matrix of the standards laid out under the 4(d) adequate habitat to support the intermittently open- and closed- rule will be exempted from ‘‘take’’ for subspecies. As we begin the recovery canopied forest stands provides suitable this subspecies. process, we will consider various habitat for black pinesnakes relies on General Issue 3: Private Land Issues options for recovery of the subspecies, several assumptions, such as that which may include captive propagation. suitable open habitat will always be (21) Comment: Many public If you have interest in participating, located in close proximity to areas commenters stated that there are please refer to the Available where the canopy is closing, that areas insufficient data to determine the effects Conservation Measures section, below, of suitable habitat will be expansive of the listing on landowners. They for further guidance on participating in enough to support the large home ranges expressed concern that the listing will this process. of these snakes, and that snakes which put an economic burden on private must relocate due to canopy closure will landowners and restrict their activities. General Issue 2: Forestry Management be able to find adequate access to Our Response: We understand that Practices relocated mates and prey in their shifted there is confusion and concern about (19) Comment: Several commenters home range. Both Lane et al. (2013, p. the effect of listing the black pinesnake. representing the forestry industry stated 231) and Hanberry et al. (2013, p. 57) We acknowledge that some economic that the Service misunderstands the state that small mammal abundance impacts are a possible consequence of nature and ecology of modern pine decreases in response to canopy closure, listing a species under the Act. plantations and mistakenly thinks that often to the point of mammals However, the Act does not allow us to pine plantations are static ‘‘closed abandoning the site. Therefore, stands consider such impacts when making a canopies’’ and have ‘‘thick mid-stories.’’ such as these, although open for a part listing decision. Rather, section They stated that pine plantations can of the time during the cycle of 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act specifies that provide suitable black pinesnake management and harvesting activities, listing determinations be made ‘‘solely habitat, and across a broad, actively- are not stable habitats for pinesnakes on the basis of the best scientific and managed forest landscape, pine and do not contribute to the long-term commercial data available.’’ Such plantations that are at different stages of conservation of the subspecies. In potential costs are therefore precluded development ensure that suitable addition, if incompatible site from consideration in association with a habitat is available at all times. The preparation activities remove subsurface listing determination. We are required commenters referred to a 2013 National refugia from a site, it is unlikely to consider economic impacts in the Council for Air and Stream pinesnakes would have retreat sites decision to designate critical habitat, Improvement (NCASI) report, which within these stands for several years and have conducted an economic states that of the almost 9 million acres following harvest. This increases the analysis for the proposed critical habitat of planted pine forests owned by large amount of time the subspecies has to rule, which is available at http:// corporate forest landowners, two-thirds spend on the surface vulnerable to www.regulations.gov under Docket No. of those acres were in some form of predators. FWS–R4–ES–2014–0065. open-canopied condition. The (20) Comment: Commenters disagreed The Service believes that restrictions commenters suggested that suitable with the Service’s characterization that alone are neither an effective nor a black pinesnake habitat should include site preparation in a modern pine desirable means for achieving the this type of matrix of forested stands plantation frequently involves conservation of listed species. We prefer where the canopy cover is at various mechanical clearing of downed logs and to work collaboratively with private

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:56 Oct 05, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR3.SGM 06OCR3 rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 193 / Tuesday, October 6, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 60477

landowners. We encourage any for listed species, as well as permits that encourage those management practices landowners with a listed species present can be obtained to protect private that support the black pinesnake. Under on their properties and who think they landowners from the take prohibition the Act, we have an obligation to assess may conduct activities that negatively when such taking is incidental to, and threats to species and, if appropriate, impact that species to work with the not the purpose of, the carrying out of provide for their protection. We have no Service. We can help those landowners an otherwise lawful activity. Private desire to limit private landowners’ determine whether a habitat landowners may contact their local ability to provide habitat for these conservation plan (HCP) or safe harbor Service field office to obtain information imperiled species; in fact, we have a agreement (SHA) may be appropriate for about these programs and permits. number of financial incentives through their needs. These plans or agreements (23) Comment: Private landowners our Private Lands program to help provide for the conservation of the should be compensated if land use is private landowners manage their listed species while providing the restricted on their property. properties for endangered and landowner with a permit for incidental Our Response: There is no provision threatened species. Continuation of take of the species during the course of in the Act to compensate landowners if longleaf pine restoration efforts across otherwise lawful activities. they have a federally listed species on the subspecies’ range will be necessary Furthermore, our 4(d) rule for black their property. However, as addressed in for conservation and recovery of this pinesnake, which includes exemptions our response to Comment 22, above, the subspecies and many other species. We for certain forest management activities, private landowners’ only obligation is have reviewed all the comments we was developed with the intent of not to ‘‘take’’ the subspecies, and many received from forest stakeholders and maximizing timber management forestry management activities have have used them to refine the 4(d) rule flexibility to landowners while also now been exempted from ‘‘take’’ (see and improve the balance of activities providing for the conservation of the 4(d) Rule, below). Also, as mentioned in that would promote conservation of the subspecies. Other voluntary programs, our response to Comment 21, above, we black pinesnake and its habitat and not such as the Service’s Partners for Fish have a number of programs to provide unnecessarily burden private and Wildlife program and the Natural management guidance and financial landowners. Please see also our Resources Conservation Service’s Farm assistance to private landowners responses to Comments 21 and 23, Bill programs, offer opportunities for managing their lands to benefit the above. private landowners to enroll their lands recovery of listed species. A number of General Issue 4: Science and receive cost-sharing and planning other Federal agencies and individual assistance to reach their management States provide financial assistance and (26) Comment: Several commented goals. The conservation and recovery of similar programs to interested that the Service is using any scientific endangered and threatened species, and landowners. and commercial data available and not the ecosystems upon which they (24) Comment: Several commenters necessarily the best available. They depend, is the ultimate objective of the stated that no private lands or State further stated that the Service did not Act, and the Service recognizes the vital lands should be included in the listing. undertake efforts to fill the data gaps importance of voluntary, nonregulatory Our Response: Under the Act, we concerning life history, habitat, and conservation measures that provide determine whether a species warrants status of the black pinesnake and have incentives for landowners in achieving listing based on our assessment of the put the burden on private landowners to that objective. We are committed to five-factor threat analysis using the best provide commercial and scientific data working with landowners to conserve available scientific and commercial rebutting the data advanced by the this subspecies and develop workable information; land ownership is not a Service. solutions. consideration in that determination. The Our Response: No new data were (22) Comment: Several commenters action of listing a species provides provided by these commenters to stated that property rights granted by protection for the species wherever it support this statement, although some the Constitution preclude the occurs. Protection for lands essential to have offered different interpretations of government from preventing the conservation of a listed species is the existing data. We have used the best landowners from managing property to covered under a designation of critical scientific and commercial data available meet their goals. Landowners should be habitat and is not a part of this listing to finalize our determination of able to make use of property at their rule. A proposed rule to designate threatened status for the black own free will as long as it falls within critical habitat for the black pinesnake pinesnake. Furthermore, our analysis is the current county, State, and Federal was published separately on March 11, supported by our peer reviewers. Please regulations. 2015 (80 FR 12846), and comments also see our responses to Comments 11 Our Response: The agency regarding that proposal will be and 14, above. acknowledges the rights granted by the addressed in the final critical habitat (27) Comment: One commenter stated Constitution. Prior court rulings address determination and if appropriate, the that the sightings of black pinesnakes in this concern in more detail. However, designation. Alabama in the mid-1990s were Section 9 of the Act makes it illegal for (25) Comment: Several commenters reported by individuals that were not anyone to ‘‘take’’ (defined as harass, noted that the continuous threat of biologists or herpetologists, so these harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, species listings and designations of records cannot be ‘‘scientific data.’’ trap, capture, collect, or attempt any of critical habitat will be a disincentive for Our Response: All Alabama records these actions) an endangered or landowners to participate in longleaf for the black pinesnake are either from threatened species. However, the mere pine restoration efforts, may encourage the Alabama Natural Heritage Program’s promulgation of a regulation, such as more landowners to grow a monoculture databases or from reputable listing a species under the Act, does not of loblolly, or may encourage more herpetologists. Heritage data are prevent landowners from managing landowners to abandon forest automatically accepted by the Service as their property to meet their goals. As ownership and management. valid due to the strict criteria for their discussed in our response to Comment Our Response: We acknowledge and acceptance as scientific records. 21, above, programs are available to commend landowners for their land Although the descriptive data (observer, private landowners for managing habitat stewardship and want to continue to date, coordinates, condition of the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:56 Oct 05, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR3.SGM 06OCR3 rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60478 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 193 / Tuesday, October 6, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

animal) were not always recorded at a conservation biology principles. process in that all landowners were not consistent level of detail in some of the Additionally, we requested comments provided actual notice of this older records, we scrutinized all or information from other concerned rulemaking. reputable location data to differentiate governmental agencies, the scientific Our Response: In the proposed listing between separate pinesnake community, industry, and any other rule published on October 7, 2014 (79 observations. interested parties concerning the FR 60406), we requested that all proposed rule. Comments and interested parties submit written General Issue 5: Procedural/Legal Issues information we received helped inform comments on the proposal by December (28) Comment: One commenter stated this final rule. 8, 2014. We reopened the comment that the Service should not use (29) Comment: Several commenters period on the listing proposal on March information that is not peer-reviewed in stated that because the proposed rule 11, 2015 (80 FR 12846) with our listing determinations. arose from the Service’s settlement of a publication of a proposed critical Our Response: The Act and our lawsuit, the Service is indirectly habitat designation for the subspecies. regulations do not require us to use only encouraged to list the subspecies, or This second 60-day comment period peer-reviewed literature, but instead avoid any delays in listing, even though ended on May 11, 2015. During both they require us to use the ‘‘best such delays might result in a more comment periods, we also contacted scientific data available’’ in a listing scientifically sound analysis of the appropriate Federal and State agencies, decision. Our Policy on Information subspecies. scientific experts and organizations, and Standards under the Act (published in Our Response: Section 4 of the Act other interested parties and invited the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 and its implementing regulations (50 them to comment on the proposal. FR 34271)), the Information Quality Act CFR part 424) set forth the procedures Newspaper notices inviting general (section 515 of the Treasury and General for adding species to the Federal Lists public comment were published in the Government Appropriations Act for of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife Mobile Press Register and Hattiesburg Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106–554; H.R. and Plants. We adhered to the American on October 12, 2014, and 5658)), and our associated Information requirements of the Act to determine again on March 15, 2015. We also Quality Guidelines (http://www.fws.gov/ whether a species warrants listing based presented several webinars on the informationquality/), provide criteria on our assessment of the five-factor proposed listing and critical habitat and guidance, and establish procedures threats analysis using the best available rules, and invited all stakeholders, to ensure that our decisions are based scientific and commercial data (see media, and congressional on the best scientific data available. Summary of Factors Affecting the representatives to participate and ask They require our biologists, to the extent Species, below). We had already any questions. The webinar information consistent with the Act and with the use determined, prior to the settlement was posted on our Web site along with of the best scientific data available, to agreement, that the black pinesnake copies of the proposed listing rule, press use primary and original sources of warranted listing under the Act, but release, and a question/answer information as the basis for listing had been precluded by the document. As such, we have met our recommendations to list a species. necessity to commit limited funds and obligations under the Act with regard to Primary or original information sources staff to complete higher priority species notification concerning the proposed are those that are closest to the subject actions. The black pinesnake has been listing. being studied, as opposed to those that included in our annual candidate cite, comment on, or build upon notices of review since 1999, during General Issue 6: Other primary sources. In making our listing which time scientific literature and data (32) Comment: Several commented decisions, we use information from have and continue to indicate that the that existing State regulations are many different sources, including subspecies is detrimentally impacted by adequate to protect the black pinesnake. articles in peer-reviewed journals, ongoing threats, and we continued to A Federal listing would only duplicate scientific status surveys and studies find that listing was warranted but existing protection because it is illegal completed by qualified individuals, precluded. Thus, the listing process is to kill the snakes. other unpublished governmental and not arbitrary, but uses the best available Our Response: Section 4(b)(1)(A) of nongovernmental reports, reports scientific and commercial data and peer the Act requires us, in making a listing prepared by industry, personal review to ensure sound science and determination, to take into account communication about management or sound decision-making. those efforts being made by a State or other relevant topics, management plans (30) Comment: Several commented foreign nation, or any political developed by Federal agencies or the that the Service should not list another subdivision of the State or foreign States, biological assessments, other species in Alabama because the Service nation, to protect the species. Under unpublished materials, experts’ is unable to fulfill various mandated Factor D in the proposed and final rules opinions or personal knowledge, and obligations with respect to other species to list the subspecies, we provide an other sources. In finalizing this listing already listed (i.e., timely recovery analysis of the existing regulatory determination, we have relied on plans, 5-year reviews) mechanisms. In that analysis, we published articles, unpublished Our Response: The listing of a species consider relevant Federal, State, and research, habitat reports, digital data is based on an analysis of threats tribal laws and regulations. Regulatory publicly available on the Internet, and according to the Act (see Determination mechanisms may negate the need for the expert opinions of subject biologists. section, below). The Act does not allow listing if we determine such That said, in accordance with our the Service to delay listing of new mechanisms address the threat to the peer review policy published on July 1, species until the Service has completed species such that listing is not, or no 1994 (59 FR 34270), we solicited peer certain actions, such as recovery plans longer, warranted. However, for the review from knowledgeable individuals and 5-year reviews, for other previously black pinesnake, the best available with scientific expertise that included listed species. information supports our determination familiarity with this subspecies and (31) Comment: Several comments that State regulations are not adequate other pinesnakes, the geographic region stated that our proposed rule denied to remove the threats to the point that in which the subspecies occurs, and potentially affected landowners due listing is not warranted. Existing State

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:56 Oct 05, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR3.SGM 06OCR3 rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 193 / Tuesday, October 6, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 60479

regulations, while providing some Our Response: We recognize that the supported a 4(d) rule that provides for protection for individual snakes, do not black pinesnake remains primarily on open canopy conditions; abundant provide any protection for their habitat lands where habitat management has ground cover; and refugia habitat such (see Summary of Factors Affecting the allowed them to survive, due in large as stumps, snags, and woody debris, and Species, Factor D discussion). Loss of part to voluntary actions incorporating we believe our 4(d) rule in this final habitat has been a primary driver of the good land-stewardship, and we want to listing determination is consistent with subspecies’ decline. The Act provides encourage management practices that that recommendation. habitat protection for listed species both support the subspecies. However, the (36) Comment: One commenter through section 7 and the designation of Service, in conducting its assessment of questioned why the black pinesnake critical habitat. In addition, listing the status of the black pinesnake needed Federal listing as it occurs in the provides resources under Federal according to standards in the Act, has range of other listed species. programs to facilitate restoration of determined that certain forest Our Response: The current range of habitat, and helps bring public management practices have contributed the black pinesnake overlaps with awareness to the plight of the species. to the subspecies’ decline. In order to several other longleaf pine endemics (33) Comment: One commenter stated protect the black pinesnake from that are federally listed including the that the Service should delay listing and continued decline, and because we have gopher tortoise, red-cockaded work with other State and Federal determined that it is likely to become woodpecker, and dusky gopher frog. agencies and with private landowners to endangered in the foreseeable future, we The black pinesnake likely receives develop prescribed burning programs to are listing the subspecies as threatened. benefit from longleaf pine restoration improve habitat and reverse the trend of We do recognize the contributions of efforts and other recovery actions decline of the black pinesnake, as it is forest landowners and have exempted implemented for these listed species, as largely due to the lack of fire in the from take a number of forest some threats to the black pinesnake are woods. management activities under the 4(d) similar to other listed species in its range. However, there are aspects of Our Response: We acknowledge that rule. We maintain that the best chance black pinesnake habitat that are unique the absence of prescribed burning has for conservation and, ultimately, the to them, specifically their use of and contributed to the degradation of the recovery of the subspecies will require need for belowground habitat, such as black pinesnake’s habitat and the the protections afforded by listing, as well as voluntary conservation measures stump holes, which are not required by decline of the longleaf pine ecosystem. these other listed species. The Service has made the determination undertaken by private landowners, with support from the States and Any ongoing conservation actions and that the black pinesnake is likely to the manner in which they are helping to become endangered in the foreseeable conservation organizations. We, and other Federal and State agencies, have a ameliorate threats to the subspecies future and that listing is warranted after number of existing programs that were considered in our final listing an analysis of the five threat factors provide incentives to private determination for the black pinesnake under the Act. There is no provision in landowners to initiate longleaf pine (see ‘‘Conservation Efforts to Reduce the Act that would allow us to decline management (e.g., Working Lands for Habitat Destruction, Modification, or to list a species once that determination Wildlife, Conservation Reserve Curtailment of Its Range’’ under Factor has been made. Furthermore, as Program). We will continue to work A, below). Our determination is guided discussed in our response to Comment with the public through these programs by the Act and its implementing 14, the criteria for delaying our listing to benefit the black pinesnake as we regulations, considering the five listing decision have not been met. As have done for other longleaf pine factors and using the best available discussed above in our response to endemics such as the threatened gopher scientific and commercial information. Comment 21, we have a number of tortoise and endangered red-cockaded Our analysis supported our programs that provide assistance and woodpecker (Picoides borealis) and determination of threatened status for financial incentives to private dusky gopher frog (Rana sevosa). this subspecies. landowners to increase the use of fire as (35) Comment: Several commenters (37) Comment: Several commenters a management tool, and we will asserted that because the proposed rule questioned why the subspecies should continue to actively pursue ways to was opposed by the ADCNR and be listed if the most important areas are work with the public and partners to Alabama Forestry Association (AFA), already being protected and managed. reverse the decline of the black which have expertise with the Another commenter stated that the vast pinesnake and its habitat. subspecies and Alabama forests, that the acres of public lands that exist within (34) Comment: Several commenters Service should not ignore ADCNR’s the range of the black pinesnake should stated that endangered species admonitions to gather further be enough to ensure the subspecies protection is more effectively achieved information before proceeding with a continues to persist. by allowing forest landowners to listing decision. Our Response: Conservation of the continue to manage their land under Our Response: We acknowledge and black pinesnake will require voluntary best management practices or value the expertise of the ADCNR and collaboration between Federal, State, by providing incentives to landowners the AFA. We fully respect the position and local agencies wherever the to initiate longleaf pine management. of the State, even when we do not subspecies occurs. About half of the Landowners and groups like Longleaf entirely agree on their interpretation of known black pinesnake populations Alliance and American Forest the data. The Service is required to occur primarily on public lands that are Foundation encourage landowners to make a determination based on the best typically managed to protect longleaf return to longleaf pine and to manage available scientific information, and pine habitat, and management efforts with fire, thinning, and harvesting, all of after reviewing the comments presented are ongoing on these public lands that which enhances black pinesnake by ADCNR and AFA, as well as all other benefit the black pinesnake; however, habitat. Regulations through listing comments we received, we believe that these efforts do not always meet all of would serve to further deter cooperative the information warrants a final listing the ecological needs of the subspecies management between public agencies determination as threatened for the (see Comment 36, above). We consider and landowners. black pinesnake. ADCNR stated that it the populations occupying the De Soto

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:56 Oct 05, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR3.SGM 06OCR3 rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60480 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 193 / Tuesday, October 6, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

NF in Mississippi as representing the information on habitat, threats, the Summary of Factors Affecting the core of the subspecies’ range, and these subspecies’ biology, and timber Species public lands are very important for the management practices, which have been Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533), conservation and recovery of the black incorporated into this final rule. We and its implementing regulations at 50 pinesnake, but Federal lands alone are have removed our discussion relating to CFR part 424, set forth the procedures insufficient to conserve the subspecies. the development of a candidate for adding species to the Federal Lists These areas represent only a small conservation agreement (CCA) for the of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife fraction of the current range of the black pinesnake between the Service and Plants. Under section 4(a)(1) of the subspecies. Populations on the and the U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Act, we may list a species based on (A) periphery of the range have high Department of Defense, the Mississippi The present or threatened destruction, conservation value as well in terms of Army National Guard (MSARNG), and modification, or curtailment of its maintaining the subspecies’ genetic the Mississippi Department of Wildlife, habitat or range; (B) overutilization for integrity, representing future Fisheries, and Parks because it was commercial, recreational, scientific, or conservation strongholds, providing never finalized. However, the educational purposes; (C) disease or future opportunities for population conservation measures outlined in the predation; (D) the inadequacy of connectivity and augmentation, and draft CCA were incorporated into the existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E) contributing to important ecosystem MSARNG’s 2014 updated integrated other natural or manmade factors functions in the ecological communities natural resources management plan (see affecting its continued existence. Listing where they occur (see also ‘‘Conservation Efforts to Reduce Habitat actions may be warranted based on any ‘‘Conservation Efforts to Reduce Habitat Destruction, Modification, or Destruction, Modification, or of the above threat factors, singly or in Curtailment of Its Range’’ under combination. Curtailment of Its Range’’ under Factor Summary of Factors Affecting the A, below). Species). We have also made the Factor A: The Present or Threatened (38) Comment: One individual following significant changes to the 4(d) Destruction, Modification, or commented that we should exempt rule: Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range activities conducted with cost-share • We have provided clarification to Fire-maintained southern pine funding sources under the 4(d) rule. take exemptions regarding prescribed This would include sources such as the ecosystems, particularly the longleaf burning and invasive species and pine ecosystem, have declined Service’s Partners for Fish and Wildlife vegetation control. Program (PFW) and the Natural dramatically across the South. Current • We have removed the take estimates show that the longleaf pine Resource Conservation Service’s exemption for ‘‘restoration along Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), forest type has declined 96 percent from riparian areas and stream buffers’’ as Environmental Quality Incentives the historical estimate of 88 million ac there is no need to exempt these Program (EQIP), and Wildlife Habitat (35.6 million ha) to approximately 3.3 activities because these areas are not Incentives Program (WHIP). million ac (1.3 million ha) (Oswalt et al. Our Response: The primary considered habitat for the subspecies, 2012, p. 13). During the latter half of the requirement for activities to qualify for and, therefore, activities associated with 20th century, Louisiana, Alabama, and exemption under section 4(d) of the Act their restoration are unlikely to result in Mississippi lost between 60 and 90 is that they must be necessary and take or promote conservation of this percent of their longleaf acreage (Outcalt advisable to provide for the subspecies. Any observations of black and Sheffield 1996, pp. 1–10). Recently, conservation of the species. These pinesnakes in riparian areas are longleaf acreage has been trending programs play an incredibly valuable incidental to individuals moving upward in parts of the Southeast role in conservation by providing between areas of suitable habitat, through restoration efforts; however, the assistance to private landowners to typically uplands. footprint of the longleaf pine ecosystem • manage their lands. However, there is We have broadened the scope of across its historical range continues to also a high level of variability among timber management activities exempted contract, primarily due to conversion to cost-share programs in terms of their from take to include all forest loblolly pine (Oswalt et al. 2015, p. primary conservation and management management activities that maintain 504). Additionally, increases in longleaf objectives, which makes it difficult to lands in a forested condition, except for pine acreage across the Southeast from determine definitively which programs conversion of longleaf-pine-dominated longleaf restoration efforts do not would always be beneficial to black forests to other cover types or land uses, overlap completely with the range of the pinesnakes. Therefore, we chose to or those activities causing significant black pinesnake (Ware 2014, pers. concentrate on the forestry and subsurface disturbance to the comm.); recent outlooks for the southern management activities beneficial to underground refugia for the black Gulf region still predict large percentage pinesnakes for exemption, instead of the pinesnake. losses in longleaf pine in many of the • individual programs. We have removed the requirement areas currently occupied by the that silvicultural treatments exempted subspecies (Klepzig et al. 2014, p. 53). Summary of Changes From the from take be performed under a Southern forest futures models predict Proposed Rule management plan or prescription declines of forest land area between 2 Based upon our review of the public toward target conditions for optimal and 10 percent in the next 50 years, comments, comments from other longleaf pine forest. Our revised 4(d) with loss of private forest land to Federal and State agencies, peer review rule allows for the management of other urbanization accounting for most of comments, and other new relevant open-canopied pine species. these declines (Wear and Greis 2013, p. information that has become available We have modified the list of actions 78). since the publication of the proposal, that may result in take under section 9 Natural longleaf pine forests, which we reevaluated our proposed rule and in light of modifications made to the are characterized by a high, open made changes as appropriate. During exemptions in the 4(d) rule, with the canopy and shallow litter and duff the comment periods, the Service focus on protecting this subspecies’ layers, have evolved to be maintained received clarifications and additional underground refugia. by frequent, low-intensity fires, which

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:56 Oct 05, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR3.SGM 06OCR3 rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 193 / Tuesday, October 6, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 60481

in turn restrict a woody midstory, and overexposure from thermal extremes or and a dense herbaceous ground cover) promote the flowering and seed elevated predation risk while the snakes within the range of the black pinesnake production of fire-stimulated are above ground searching for suitable is continuing. The coastal counties of groundcover plants (Oswalt et al. 2012, shelter. Black pinesnakes have persisted southern Mississippi and Mobile pp. 2–3). Although there are records of in those areas of pine forest, composed County, Alabama, are being developed black pinesnakes occurring in open- of both longleaf pine and other pine at a rapid rate due to increases in the canopied forests with overstories of species, where the forest structure human population. While forecast loblolly, slash, and other pines, they are approximates that which occurred models show that Federal forest land historically associated with the natural historically in longleaf pine forests, as will remain relatively unchanged longleaf pine forests, which have the described above. However, conservation overall in the next few decades, abundant herbaceous groundcover of black pinesnakes requires the long- projected losses in forest land are (Duran 1998a, p. 11; Baxley et al. 2011, term availability of these forest structure highest in the South, with declines in p. 161; Smith 2011, pp. 86, 100) habitat features, not just in the private forest land from urbanization necessary to support the black landscape, but within the subspecies’ accounting for most of the loss (Wear pinesnake’s prey base (Miller and Miller activity range. If they are required to 2011, p. 31). 2005, p. 202). move from area to area with the change Habitat fragmentation within the The current and historical range of the in habitat conditions, as would likely longleaf pine ecosystem threatens the black pinesnake is highly correlated occur on a pine plantation, their fitness continued existence of all black with the current and historical range of and long-term survival will be in pinesnake populations, particularly these natural longleaf pine forests, question (Yager et al. 2006, pp. 34–36). those on private lands. This is leading to the hypothesis that black When a site is converted to frequently the result of urban pinesnake populations, once contiguous agriculture, all vegetation is cleared and development, conversion of longleaf throughout these forests in Alabama, underground refugia are destroyed pine sites to densely stocked pine Mississippi, and southeast Louisiana, during soil disking and compaction. plantations, and the associated increases have declined proportionately with the Forest management strategies, such as in number of roads. When patches of ecosystem (Duran and Givens 2001, pp. fire suppression (see discussion under available habitat become separated 2–3). In the range of the black Factor E: Other Natural or Manmade beyond the dispersal range of a species, pinesnake, longleaf pine is now largely Factors Affecting Its Continued populations are more sensitive to confined to isolated patches on private Existence), increased stocking densities, genetic, demographic, and land and larger parcels on public lands. densely planting off-site pine species environmental variability, and Black pinesnake habitat has been (i.e., slash and loblolly pines), bedding, extinction becomes possible. This is eliminated through land use and removal of whole trees during likely a primary cause for the conversions, primarily conversion to harvesting (including downed trees and extirpation of the black pinesnake in agriculture and densely stocked pine stumps), all contribute to degradation of Louisiana and the subspecies’ plantations and development of urban habitat attributes preferred by black contracted range in Alabama and areas. Most of the remaining patches of pinesnakes. It is likely that the Mississippi (Duran and Givens 2001, longleaf pine on private land within the diminishing presence and distribution pp. 22–26). range of the snake are fragmented, of decaying stump holes and their Private landowners hold more than 86 degraded, second-growth forests (see associated rotting root channels may be percent of forests in the South and discussion under Factor E: Other a feature that limits the abundance of produce nearly all of the forest Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting black pinesnakes within their range investment and timber harvesting in the Its Continued Existence). (Baxley 2007, p. 44). region (Wear and Greis 2013, p. 103). Conversion of longleaf pine forests to Baxley et al. (2011, pp. 162–163) Forecasts indicate a loss of 11 to 23 densely stocked pine plantations often compared habitat at recent (post-1987) million ac (4.5 million to 9.3 million ha) reduces the quality and suitability of a and historical (pre-1987) black of private forest land in the South by site for black pinesnakes. Duran (1998b, pinesnake localities. She found that 2060. This loss, combined with p. 31) found that black pinesnakes sites recently occupied by black expanding urbanization in many areas prefer the typical characteristics of the pinesnakes were characterized by and ongoing splitting of land ownership longleaf pine ecosystem, such as open significantly less canopy cover; lower as estates are divided, will result in canopies, reduced mid-stories, and basal area; less midstory cover; greater increased fragmentation of remaining dense herbaceous understories. He also percentages of grass, bare soil, and forbs forest holdings (Wear and Greis 2013, p. found that these snakes are frequently in the groundcover; less shrubs and 119). This assessment of continued underground in rotting pine stumps. litter in the groundcover; and a more future fragmentation throughout the Some pine plantations have closed recent burn history than currently range of the black pinesnake, coupled canopies and thick mid-stories with unoccupied, historical sites. At the with the assumption that large home limited herbaceous understories during landscape level, black pinesnakes range size increases extinction portions of the timber rotation. Site selected upland pine forests that lacked vulnerability, emphasizes the preparation for planting of pine cultivated crops, pasture and hay fields, importance of conserving and managing plantations sometimes involves clearing developed areas, and roads (Baxley et large tracts of contiguous habitat to of downed logs and stumps, thereby al. 2011, p. 154). Thus, areas historically protect the black pinesnake (Baxley interfering with the natural occupied by black pinesnakes are 2007, p. 65). This is in agreement with development of stump holes and root becoming unsuitable at both the other studies of large, wide-ranging channels through decay or from landscape and microhabitat (small-scale snake species sensitive to landscape burning, and greatly reducing the habitat component) levels (Baxley et al. fragmentation (Hoss et al. 2010; availability of suitable refugia (Rudolph 2011, p. 164). Breininger et al. 2012). When factors et al. 2007, p. 563). This could have Degradation and loss of longleaf pine influencing the home range sizes of the negative consequences if the pinesnakes habitat (e.g., sandy, well-drained soils threatened eastern indigo snake are no longer able to locate a previous with an open-canopied overstory of (Drymarchon corais couperi) were year’s refugium, and are subject to longleaf pine, a reduced shrub layer, analyzed, the results suggested that

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:56 Oct 05, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR3.SGM 06OCR3 rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60482 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 193 / Tuesday, October 6, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

maintaining populations of this recently as 30 years ago, we believe acreage of Camp Shelby (132,195 ac subspecies will require large many populations have disappeared or (53,497 ha)). Most of this land is leased conservation areas with minimum drastically declined due to continued to DoD and owned by the Forest fragmentation (Breininger et al. 2011, habitat loss and fragmentation. For Service, which manages the land in pp. 484–490). instance, several sites where snakes accordance with its Forest Plan (see Impacts from urbanization are not have been captured historically are now explanation above). Only 5,735 ac consistent throughout the Southeast, developed and no longer contain (2,321 ha) of the acreage covered by the and some parts of Mississippi and habitat. INRMP provides habitat for the black Alabama may actually experience pinesnake. human population declines (Wear and Conservation Efforts To Reduce Habitat Longleaf pine habitat restoration Greis 2013, p. 21); however, the most Destruction, Modification, or projects have been conducted on recent assessment still predicts Curtailment of Its Range selected private lands within the range increased change in urban land use in When considering whether or not to historically occupied by the black the next 45 years in most of the counties list a species under the Act, we must pinesnake and likely provide benefits to occupied by the black pinesnake identify existing conservation efforts the subspecies (U.S. Fish and Wildlife (Klepzig et al. 2014, p. 23). Urbanization and their effect on the species. Service 2012, pp. 12–13). Additionally, appears to have reduced historical black The largest known populations of restoration projects have been pinesnake populations in Mobile black pinesnakes (5 of 11) occur in the conducted on wildlife management County by approximately 50 percent De Soto NF, which is considered the areas (WMAs) (Marion County WMA in (Duran 1998a, p. 17), to the point where core of the subspecies’ known range. Mississippi; Scotch, Fred T. Stimpson, pinesnakes are thought to be extirpated The black pinesnake likely receives and the area formerly classified as the from some areas directly surrounding benefit from longleaf pine restoration Boykin WMAs in Alabama) occupied by Mobile (Nelson and Bailey 2004, p. 44). efforts, including prescribed fire, or within the range of the black Substantial population declines were implemented by the U.S. Forest Service pinesnake, and on three gopher tortoise noted throughout the 1970s and 1980s in accordance with its Forest Plan, in relocation areas in Mobile County, (Mount 1986, p. 35). Jennings and Fritts habitats for the federally listed gopher Alabama. The gopher tortoise relocation (1983, p. 8) reported that, in the 1980s, tortoise, dusky gopher frog, and red- areas are managed for the open- the black pinesnake was one of the most cockaded woodpecker. (USDA 2014, pp. canopied, upland longleaf pine habitat frequently encountered snakes on the 60–65). Within the recently revised used by both gopher tortoises and black Environmental Studies Center (Center) Forest Plan, black pinesnakes are pinesnakes, and there have been recent in Mobile County. Urban development included on lists of species dependent records of black pinesnakes on the has now engulfed lands adjacent to the on fire to maintain habitat, species properties; however, the managed areas Center, and black pinesnakes are sensitive to recreational traffic, species are all less than 700 ac (283 ha) and thought to likely have been extirpated that are stump and stump-hole primarily surrounded by urban areas from the property (Duran 1998a, p. 10). associates, and species sensitive to soil with incompatible habitat. Therefore, Black pinesnakes were commonly seen disturbance (USDA 2014, Appendix G– we do not believe they would provide in the 1970s on the campus of the 85, G–92, G–100). The management sufficient area to support a black University of South Alabama in western strategies described within the Forest pinesnake population long term. Mobile; however, there have not been Plan provide general guidance that Furthermore, although there is any observations in at least the past 25 states project areas should be reviewed beneficial habitat management years (Nelson 2014, p. 1). to determine if such species do occur occurring on some of these WMAs and Populations on the periphery of the and if so to develop mitigation measures on the tortoise relocation areas, these range have conservation value in terms to ensure sustainability of the species, efforts do not currently target the of maintaining the subspecies’ genetic such as, in general, not removing dead retention or restoration of black integrity (i.e., maintaining the existing and downed logs or other woody debris pinesnake habitat, which would include genetic diversity still inherent in from rare communities. management targeted to maintain larger, populations that have not interbred in The MSARNG updated its INRMP in unfragmented tracts of open longleaf hundreds or thousands of years), 2014, and outlined conservation habitat. Stump removal still occurs providing future opportunities for measures to be implemented within the range of the subspecies and population connectivity and specifically for the black pinesnake on is particularly problematic as it removes augmentation, and contributing to lands owned by the DoD and the State refugia habitat for the subspecies. We important ecosystem functions (such as of Mississippi on Camp Shelby. Planned will continue to work with our State maintaining rodent populations) in the conservation measures include: and private partners to encourage the ecological communities where they Supporting research and surveys on the incorporation of these practices, where occur (Steen and Barrett 2015, p. 1). subspecies; habitat management appropriate. Many of the populations on the edge of specifically targeting the black the range are smaller, which increases pinesnake, such as retention of pine Summary of Factor A their susceptibility to localized stumps and prescribed burning; and In summary, the loss and degradation extinction from catastrophic and educational programs for users of the of habitat was a significant historical stochastic events, subsequently causing training center to minimize negative threat, and remains a current threat, to further restriction of the subspecies’ impacts of vehicular mortality on the black pinesnake. The historical loss range. Additionally, the footprint of wildlife (MSARNG 2014, pp. 93–94). of habitat within the longleaf pine longleaf pine in the Southeast has gone However, the INRMP addresses ecosystem occupied by black through substantial contraction recently integrative management and pinesnakes occurred primarily due to (Oswalt et al. 2015, p. 504), creating conservation measures only on the timber harvest and subsequent even higher susceptibility for these lands owned and managed by DoD and conversion of pine forests to agriculture, peripheral populations. Although the the State of Mississippi (15,195 ac residential development, and black pinesnake was thought to be fairly (6,149 ha)), which make up intensively managed pine plantations. common in parts of south Alabama as approximately 10 percent of the total This loss of habitat has slowed

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:56 Oct 05, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR3.SGM 06OCR3 rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 193 / Tuesday, October 6, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 60483

considerably in recent years, in part due saturated with captive-bred black 2012, pp. 810–811). However, the to efforts to restore the longleaf pine pinesnakes (Vandeventer in litt. 2014). severity and magnitude of predation by ecosystem in the Southeast. However, The need for the collection of wild these species are unknown. habitat loss is continuing today due to specimens is thought to have declined In summary, disease is not considered due to incompatible forestry practices, dramatically from the levels previously to be a threat to the black pinesnake at conversion to agriculture, and observed in the 1960s and 1970s this time. However, predation by fire urbanization, which result in increasing (Vandeventer in litt. 2014). Though ants and urban predators may represent habitat fragmentation (see discussion concern has been expressed that Federal a threat to the black pinesnake. under Factor E: Other Natural or listing may increase the demand for Factor D: The Inadequacy of Existing Manmade Factors Affecting Its wild-caught animals (McNabb in litt. Regulatory Mechanisms Continued Existence). While the use of 2014), based on current information we prescribed fire for habitat management have determined that overutilization for In Mississippi, the black pinesnake is and more compatible site preparation commercial, recreational, scientific, or classified as endangered by the has seen increased emphasis in recent educational purposes is not a threat to Mississippi Department of Wildlife, years, expanded urbanization, the black pinesnake at this time. Fisheries and Parks (Mississippi fragmentation, and regulatory Museum of Natural Science 2001, p. 1). Factor C: Disease or Predation constraints will continue to restrict the In Alabama, the pine snake (Pituophis use of fire and cause further habitat Snake fungal disease (SFD) is an melanoleucus spp.) is protected as a degradation (Wear and Greis 2013, p. emerging disease in certain populations non-game animal (Alabama Department 509). Conservation efforts are of wild snakes, though specific of Conservation and Natural Resources implemented or planned that should pathological criteria for the disease have 2014, p. 1), and in the 2015 draft of the help maintain black pinesnake habitat not yet been established. The disease Alabama Comprehensive Wildlife on Camp Shelby and the De Soto NF; has been linked to mortality events for Conservation Strategy, the black however, these areas represent a small other species, but has not yet been pinesnake is identified as a Priority 1, fraction of the current range of the documented in Pituophis or in any of Species of Greatest Conservation Need subspecies. the States within the range of the black (ADCNR 2015, p. 297). In Louisiana, the Impacts from urbanization are not pinesnake. While it is suspected of black pinesnake is considered consistent throughout the Southeast, threatening small, isolated populations extirpated (Louisiana Department of and some parts of Mississippi and of susceptible snake species, we Wildlife and Fisheries (LDWF) 2014, p. Alabama may actually experience currently have no evidence it is 2; Anthony in litt. 2015); however, human population declines (Wear and affecting the black pinesnake. We know Louisiana Revised Statutes for Wildlife Greis 2013, p. 21); however, the most of no other diseases that are affecting and Fisheries were recently amended to recent assessment still predicts the subspecies, and, therefore, disease is prohibit killing black pinesnakes or increased change in urban land use in not presently considered a threat to the removing them from the wild without a the next 45 years in most of the counties black pinesnake. permit from the LDWF (Louisiana occupied by the subspecies (Klepzig et Red imported fire ants (Solenopsis Administrative Code, 2014, p. 186), al. 2014, p. 23). Smaller populations on invicta), an invasive species, have been should they be found in the State again. the edge of the range are more implicated in trap mortalities of black Both Mississippi and Alabama have susceptible to localized extinction from pinesnakes during field studies (Baxley regulations that restrict collecting, catastrophic and stochastic events. 2007, p. 17). They are also potential killing, or selling of the subspecies, but Additionally, the footprint of longleaf predators of black pinesnake eggs, do not have regulations addressing pine in the Southeast has gone through especially in disturbed areas (Todd et al. habitat loss, which has been the primary substantial contraction recently (Oswalt 2008, p. 544), and have been cause of decline of this subspecies. et al. 2015, p. 504), creating even higher documented predating snake eggs under Where the subspecies co-occurs with susceptibility for these peripheral experimental conditions (Diffie et al. species already listed under the Act, the populations. Thus, habitat loss and 2010, p. 294). In 2010 and 2011, black pinesnake likely receives ancillary continuing degradation of the black trapping for black pinesnakes was benefits from the protective measures pinesnake’s habitat remains a significant conducted in several areas that were for the already listed species, including threat to this subspecies’ continued expected to support the subspecies; no the gopher tortoise, dusky gopher frog, existence. black pinesnakes were found, but high and red-cockaded woodpecker. densities of fire ants were reported The largest known expanses of Factor B: Overutilization for (Smith 2011, pp. 44–45). However, the suitable habitat for the black pinesnake Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or severity and magnitude of effects, as are in the De Soto NF in Mississippi. Educational Purposes well as the long-term effects, of fire ants The black pinesnake’s habitat is Although there is some indication on black pinesnake populations are afforded some protection under the that collection for the pet trade may currently unknown. National Forest Management Act have been a problem (Duran 1998a, p. Other potential predators of (NFMA; 16 U.S.C. 1600 et seq.) where 15), and that localized accounts of a pinesnakes include red-tailed hawks, it occurs on lands managed by the thriving pet trade for pinesnakes have raccoons, skunks, red foxes, and feral Forest Service that are occupied by been reported previously around cats (Ernst and Ernst 2003, p. 284; Yager federally listed species such as the Mobile, Alabama (Vandeventer and et al. 2006, p. 34). Lyman et al. (2007, gopher tortoise and red-cockaded Young 1989, p. 34), direct take of black p. 39) reported an attack on a black woodpecker. Forest Service rules and pinesnakes for recreational, scientific, or pinesnake by a stray domestic dog, guidelines implementing NFMA require educational purposes is not currently which resulted in the snake’s death. land management plans that include considered to be a significant threat. Several of these mammalian predators provisions supporting recovery of This overutilization would be almost are anthropogenically enhanced (urban endangered and threatened species. As exclusively to meet the demand from predators); that is, their numbers often a result, land managers on the De Soto snake enthusiasts and hobbyists; increase with human development NF have conducted management however, the pet trade is currently adjacent to natural areas (Fischer et al. actions, such as prescribed burning and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:56 Oct 05, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR3.SGM 06OCR3 rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60484 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 193 / Tuesday, October 6, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

longleaf pine restoration, which benefit management, increased urban interface, found dead, and these 14 individuals gopher tortoises, red-cockaded and revised safety and health represent about 13 percent of all the woodpeckers, and black pinesnakes. regulations will continue to constrain pinesnakes found on Camp Shelby Within the recently revised Forest Plan, prescribed fire efforts. Some of these during that 8-year span (Lyman et al. black pinesnakes are included on lists of constraints could be in the form of 2012, p. 42). The majority of road species dependent on fire to maintain reduced fire intervals or reductions in crossings occurred between the last 2 habitat, species sensitive to recreational average area burned per fire event weeks of May and the first 2 weeks of traffic, species that are stump and (strategies often used in management of June (Lyman et al. 2011, p. 48), a time stump-hole associates, and species pine plantations), which may not period when black pinesnakes are sensitive to soil disturbance (USDA provide adequate fire intensity or known to breed (Lyman et al. 2012, p. 2014, Appendix G–85, G–92, G–100). frequency to suppress the overgrown 42). In the study conducted by Baxley The management strategies described understory and mid-story conditions (2007, p. 83) on De Soto NF, 2 of the 8 within the Forest Plan provide general that black pinesnakes are known to snakes monitored with radio- guidance that states project areas should avoid (Duran 1998b, p. 32). During a transmitters were found dead on paved be reviewed to determine if such species 2005 study using radio-telemetry to roads. This is an especially important do occur and if so to develop mitigation track black pinesnakes, a prescribed issue on these public lands because the measures to ensure sustainability of the burn bisected the home range of one of best remaining black pinesnake subspecies, such as, in general, not the study animals. The snake spent populations are concentrated there. It removing dead and downed logs or significantly more time in the recently suggests that population declines may other woody debris from rare burned area than in the area that had be due in part to adult mortality in communities. not been burned in several years (Smith excess of annual recruitment (Baxley As discussed under Factor A above, 2005, 5 pp.). and Qualls 2009, p. 290). Additional the MSARNG recently updated its Roads surrounding and traversing the support for the threat of fragmentation INRMP for Camp Shelby, and outlined remaining black pinesnake habitat pose by roads is presented by Steen et al. conservation measures to be a direct threat to the subspecies. Dodd (2012, p. 1092) who suggested that their implemented specifically for the black et al. (2004, p. 619) determined that modelling study of habitat loss and pinesnake on 5,735 ac (2,321 ha) of roads fragment habitat for wildlife. degradation in snakes provided potential pinesnake habitat owned or Population viability analyses have evidence that fragmentation by roads managed by DoD. These measures will shown that road mortality estimates in may be an impediment to maintaining benefit black pinesnake populations, some snake species have greatly viable populations of pinesnakes. and include a monitoring protocol to increased extinction probabilities (Row Exotic plant species degrade habitat help evaluate the population and et al. 2007, p. 117). In an assessment of for wildlife. In the Southeast, longleaf appropriate guidelines for maintaining data from radio-tracked eastern indigo pine forest associations are susceptible suitable habitat and microhabitats. snakes, it was found that adult snakes to invasion by the exotic cogongrass In summary, outside of the National have relatively high survival in (Imperata cylindrica), which may Forest and the area covered by the conservation core areas, but greatly rapidly encroach into areas undergoing INRMP, existing regulatory mechanisms reduced survival in edges of these areas habitat restoration, and is very difficult provide little protection from the along highways, and in suburbs to eradicate once it has become primary threat of habitat loss for the (Breininger et al. 2012, p. 361). Clark et established, requiring aggressive control black pinesnake. Longleaf restoration al. (2010, pp. 1059–1069) studied the with herbicides (Yager et al. 2010, pp. activities on Forest Service lands in impacts of roads on population 229–230). Cogongrass displaces native Mississippi conducted for other structure and connectivity in timber grasses, greatly reducing foraging areas, federally listed species do improve rattlesnakes (Crotalus horridus). They and forms thick mats so dense that habitat for black pinesnake populations found that roads interrupted dispersal ground-dwelling wildlife has difficulty located in those areas, but could be and negatively affected genetic diversity traversing them (DeBerry and Pashley improved by ensuring the protection of and gene flow among populations of 2008, p. 74). the belowground refugia critical to the this large snake (Clark et al. 2010, p. In many parts of Louisiana, snake. We will continue to work with 1059). In a Texas snake study, an Mississippi, and Alabama, there is a the Forest Service to design and observed deficit of snake captures in lack of understanding of the importance implement a more aggressive strategy traps near roads suggests that a of snakes to a healthy ecosystem. Snakes for protecting and monitoring the black substantial proportion of the total are often killed intentionally when they pinesnake. number of snakes may have been are observed, and dead pinesnakes have eliminated due to road-related mortality been found that were shot (Duran Factor E: Other Natural or Manmade and that populations of large snakes 1998b, p. 34). Lyman et al. (2008, p. 34) Factors Affecting Its Continued may be depressed by 50 percent or more and Duran (1998b, p. 34) both Existence due to this mortality (Rudolph et al. documented finding dead black Fire is the preferred management 1999, p. 130). pinesnakes that were intentionally run technique to maintain the longleaf pine Black pinesnakes frequent the sandy over, as evidenced by vehicle tracks that ecosystem, and fire suppression has hilltops and ridges where roads are most went off the road in vicinity of dead been considered a primary reason for frequently sited. Even on public lands, snakes. In addition, in one of these the degradation of the remaining roads are a threat. During Duran’s instances (Lyman et al. 2008, p. 34), longleaf pine forest. It is a contributing (1998b pp. 6, 34) study on Camp Shelby, footprints were observed going from the factor in reducing the quality and Mississippi, 17 percent of the black vicinity of the truck to the snake’s head, quantity of available habitat for the pinesnakes with transmitters were which had been intentionally crushed. black pinesnake. According to Wear and killed while attempting to cross a road. As development pressures mount on Greis (2013, p. 509), southern forests are In a larger study currently being remaining black pinesnake habitat, likely to see increasing challenges to conducted on Camp Shelby, 14 (38 human-snake interactions are expected prescribed burning in the future as land- percent) of the 37 pinesnakes found on to increase, which in turn is expected to use changes involving fuels the road between 2004 to 2012 were increase mortality, especially of adults.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:56 Oct 05, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR3.SGM 06OCR3 rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 193 / Tuesday, October 6, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 60485

Questionnaires have shown that snakes another source of mortality. Stochastic isolated patches of longleaf pine habitat are more likely to be intentionally run threats such as drought have the that continue to be degraded due to fire over than any other animal (Langley et potential to threaten black pinesnake suppression and fragmentation (Factor al. 1989, p. 43), and black pinesnakes populations, especially considering the E), incompatible forestry practices, and represent a large target as they attempt possibility of more drastic thermal urbanization. to cross roads, which may increase the extremes due to climate change, and the Threats under Factor E include fire frequency of deliberate killing (Whitaker suspected low reproductive rate of the suppression; roads; invasive plant and Shine 2000, p. 121). subspecies could exacerbate other species, such as cogongrass; random On many construction project sites, threats and limit population viability. environmental events, such as droughts; erosion control blankets are used to Overall, the threats under Factor E may and intentional killing by humans. Fire lessen impacts from weathering, secure act in combination with threats listed suppression and invasive plants result newly modified surfaces, and maintain above under Factors A through D and in habitat degradation. Roads surround water quality and ecosystem health. increase their severity. and traverse the upland ridges, which However, this polypropylene mesh Determination are primary habitat for the black netting (also often utilized for bird pinesnake, and these roads cause further exclusion) has been documented as We have carefully assessed the best fragmentation of the remaining habitat. being an entanglement hazard for many scientific and commercial information In addition, roads also increase the rate snake species, causing lacerations and available regarding the past, present, of human-snake interactions, which sometimes mortality (Stuart et al. 2001, and future threats to the black likely result in the death of individual pp. 162–163; Barton and Kinkead 2005, pinesnake. The black pinesnake is snakes. Vehicles travelling these roads p. 34A; Kapfer and Paloski 2011, p. 1). considered extirpated from Louisiana cause the deaths of a substantial number This netting often takes years to and three counties in Mississippi. of snakes. These threats in combination Threats to the remaining black decompose, creating a long-term hazard lead to an increased chance of local pinesnake populations exist primarily to snakes, even when the material has extirpations by making populations from two of the five threat factors been discarded (Stuart et al. 2001, p. more sensitive to genetic, demographic, (Factors A and E); however, predation 163). Although no known instance of and environmental variability. This is by fire ants and urban predators (Factor injury or death from this netting has especially true of populations on the C), and limitations of existing laws and been documented for black pinesnakes, periphery of the range, where smaller regulations (Factor D) also pose lower- it has been demonstrated to have populations are considerably more magnitude threats to the subspecies. negative impacts on other terrestrial vulnerable to the documented Potential threats such as snake fungal snake species of all sizes and thus poses contraction of the longleaf pine disease (Factor C) and entanglement in a potential threat to the black pinesnake ecosystem, and where stochastic events when used in its habitat. erosion control blankets (Factor E) are more likely to cause further Duran (1998b, p. 36) suggested that represent documented sources of restrictions of the range of the black reproductive rates of wild black mortality in other snake species, but pinesnakes may be low, based on failure there is no evidence yet that these have pinesnake. to detect either nests or mating caused mortality in black pinesnakes. Habitat loss has been extensive behaviors as observed during his Threats also occur in combination, throughout the black pinesnake’s range, studies. This observation has not been resulting in synergistically greater and the remaining habitat has been corroborated in the literature for other effects. Threats of habitat loss and fragmented into primarily small patches Pituophis species; however, if low degradation (Factor A) represent with barriers to dispersal between them, reproductive rates were common, it primary threats to the black pinesnake. creating reproductively isolated would inhibit conservation and While habitat restoration efforts are individuals or populations. The recovery. beginning to reverse the decline of the inadequacy of laws and regulations Random environmental events may longleaf pine forest in parts of the protecting against habitat loss also play a part in the decline of the southeastern United States, most of the contributes to increases in urbanization black pinesnake. Two black pinesnakes black pinesnake’s original habitat has and further fragmentation. Urbanization were found dead on the De Soto NF been either converted from forests to results in an increased density of roads, during drought conditions of mid- other uses or is highly fragmented. intensifying the potential for direct summer and may have succumbed due Today, the longleaf pine ecosystem mortality of adult snakes and reductions to drought-related stress (Baxley 2007, occupies less than 4 percent of its in population sizes. Reductions in p.41). historical range, and the black habitat quality and quantity have In summary, a variety of natural or pinesnake has been tied directly to this synergistic effects that may eventually manmade factors currently threaten the ecosystem. Much of the habitat outside cause localized extirpations. Threats to black pinesnake. Fire suppression has of the De Soto National Forest in the black pinesnake, working been considered a primary reason for Mississippi (the core of the range) has individually or in combination, are degradation of the longleaf pine become highly fragmented, and ongoing and significant and have ecosystem; however, invasive species populations on these lands appear to be resulted in curtailment of the range of such as cogongrass also greatly reduce small and isolated on islands of suitable the subspecies. the habitat quality for the black longleaf pine habitat (Duran 1998a, p. The Act defines an endangered pinesnake. Isolation of populations 17; Barbour 2009, pp. 6–13). species as any species that is ‘‘in danger beyond the dispersal range of the A habitat suitability study of all of extinction throughout all or a subspecies is a serious threat due to the historical sites for the black pinesnake significant portion of its range’’ and a fragmentation of available habitat. The estimated that this subspecies likely no threatened species as any species ‘‘that high percentage of radio-tracked black longer occurs in an estimated 60 percent is likely to become endangered pinesnakes killed while trying to cross of historical population segments. It is throughout all or a significant portion of roads supports our conclusion that this estimated that only 11 populations of its range within the foreseeable future.’’ is a serious threat, while human black pinesnakes are extant today, of We find that the black pinesnake meets attitudes towards snakes represent which about a third are located on the definition of a threatened species

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:56 Oct 05, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR3.SGM 06OCR3 rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60486 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 193 / Tuesday, October 6, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

based on the immediacy, severity, and Recognition through listing results in Federal agencies, States, Tribes, scope of the threats described above. public awareness, and conservation by nongovernmental organizations, We find that endangered status is not Federal, State, Tribal, and local businesses, and private landowners. appropriate for the black pinesnake agencies; private organizations; and Examples of recovery actions include because, while we found the threats to individuals. The Act encourages habitat restoration (e.g., restoration of the subspecies to be significant and cooperation with the States and requires native vegetation), research, captive rangewide, we believe it is unlikely that that recovery actions be carried out for propagation and reintroduction, and the threats will act on the subspecies in all listed species. The protection outreach and education. The recovery of a way that place the subspecies in required by Federal agencies and the many listed species cannot be danger of extinction throughout all or a prohibitions against certain activities accomplished solely on Federal lands significant portion of its range. About are discussed, in part, below. because their range may occur primarily half of the remaining black pinesnake The primary purpose of the Act is the or solely on non-Federal lands. To populations occur primarily on public conservation of endangered and achieve recovery of these species lands that are at least partially managed threatened species and the ecosystems requires cooperative conservation efforts to protect remaining longleaf pine upon which they depend. The ultimate on private, State, and Tribal lands. habitat. Management efforts on those goal of such conservation efforts is the Following publication of this final lands specifically targeting listed recovery of these listed species, so that listing rule, funding for recovery actions longleaf pine specialists, such as the they no longer need the protective will be available from a variety of gopher tortoise and red-cockaded measures of the Act. Subsection 4(f) of sources, including Federal budgets, woodpecker, should benefit the black the Act requires the Service to develop State programs, and cost share grants for pinesnake as well, especially if and implement recovery plans for the non-Federal landowners, the academic measures are employed to protect conservation of endangered and community, and nongovernmental belowground refugia. Additionally, the threatened species. The recovery organizations. In addition, pursuant to 5,735 ac (2,321 ha) of suitable pinesnake planning process involves the section 6 of the Act, the States of habitat covered by the Camp Shelby identification of actions that are Alabama, Louisiana, and Mississippi INRMP are under a conservation plan necessary to halt or reverse the species’ would be eligible for Federal funds to whose objectives include specifically decline by addressing the threats to its implement management actions that protecting black pinesnake survival and recovery. The goal of this promote the protection or recovery of microhabitats and increasing awareness process is to restore listed species to a the black pinesnake. Information on our of the human impacts to rare wildlife. point where they are secure, self- grant programs that are available to aid Thus, although there is a general decline sustaining, and functioning components species recovery can be found at in the overall range of the subspecies of their ecosystems. http://www.fws.gov/grants. and its available habitat, range Recovery planning includes the Please let us know if you are contraction is not severe enough to development of a recovery outline interested in participating in recovery indicate imminent extinction because of shortly after a species is listed and efforts for the black pinesnake. these existing efforts on public land and preparation of a draft and final recovery Additionally, we invite you to submit other ongoing restoration activities. plan. The recovery outline guides the any new information on this subspecies Therefore, on the basis of the best immediate implementation of urgent whenever it becomes available and any available scientific and commercial recovery actions and describes the information you may have for recovery information, we are listing the black process to be used to develop a recovery planning purposes (see FOR FURTHER pinesnake as threatened in accordance plan. Revisions of the plan may be done INFORMATION CONTACT). with sections 3(20) and 4(a)(1) of the to address continuing or new threats to Section 7(a) of the Act requires Act. the species, as new substantive Federal agencies to evaluate their information becomes available. The actions with respect to any species that Significant Portion of the Range recovery plan identifies site-specific is listed as an endangered or threatened Under the Act and our implementing management actions that set a trigger for species and with respect to its critical regulations, a species may warrant review of the five factors that control habitat, if any is designated. Regulations listing if it is endangered or threatened whether a species remains endangered implementing this interagency throughout all or a significant portion of or may be downlisted or delisted, and cooperation provision of the Act are its range. Because we have determined methods for monitoring recovery codified at 50 CFR part 402. If a species that black pinesnake is threatened progress. Recovery plans also establish is listed subsequently, section 7(a)(2) of throughout all of its range, no portion of a framework for agencies to coordinate the Act requires Federal agencies to its range can be ‘‘significant’’ for their recovery efforts and provide ensure that activities they authorize, purposes of the definitions of estimates of the cost of implementing fund, or carry out are not likely to ‘‘endangered species’’ and ‘‘threatened recovery tasks. Recovery teams jeopardize the continued existence of species.’’ See the Final Policy on (composed of species experts, Federal the species or destroy or adversely Interpretation of the Phrase ‘‘Significant and State agencies, nongovernmental modify its critical habitat. If a Federal Portion of Its Range’’ in the Endangered organizations, and stakeholders) are action may affect a listed species or its Species Act’s Definitions of often established to develop recovery critical habitat, the responsible Federal ‘‘Endangered Species’’ and ‘‘Threatened plans. When completed, the recovery agency must enter into consultation Species’’ (79 FR 37578; July 1, 2014). outline, draft recovery plan, and the with the Service. final recovery plan will be available on Federal agency actions within the Available Conservation Measures our Web site (http://www.fws.gov/ subspecies’ habitat that may require Other conservation measures endangered), or from our Mississippi conference or consultation or both as provided to species listed as endangered Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR described in the preceding paragraph or threatened under the Act include FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). include management and any other recognition, recovery actions, Implementation of recovery actions landscape-altering activities on Federal requirements for Federal protection, and generally requires the participation of a lands administered by the Forest prohibitions against certain practices. broad range of partners, including other Service or on National Wildlife Refuges

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:56 Oct 05, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR3.SGM 06OCR3 rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 193 / Tuesday, October 6, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 60487

managed by the Service; issuance of disturbance and maintenance, reduces (3) All forest management activities section 404 Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. mid-story and understory hardwoods, that maintain lands in a forested 1251 et seq.) permits by the U.S. Army and promotes abundant native condition, except for: (a) Conversion of Corps of Engineers; construction and herbaceous groundcover in the natural longleaf-pine-dominated forests (>51 maintenance of gas pipeline and power communities of the longleaf pine percent longleaf in the overstory) to line rights-of-way by the Federal Energy ecosystem where the black pinesnake other forest cover types or land uses; or Regulatory Commission; construction normally occurs. We recognize that (b) those activities causing significant and maintenance of roads or highways forest management activities such as subsurface disturbance, including, but by the Federal Highway Administration; thinning, reforestation and afforestation, not limited to, shearing, wind-rowing, land management practices supported mid-story and understory vegetation stumping, disking (except during fire by programs administered by the U.S. management, and final harvest break creation or maintenance), root- Department of Agriculture; (particularly in stands with undesirable raking, and bedding. Environmental Protection Agency conditions) are often needed to maintain We believe these actions and pesticide registration; and projects and/or restore forests to the conditions activities, while they may have some funded through Federal loan programs, that are preferable to black pinesnakes. minimal level of harm or temporary which may include, but are not limited The primary habitat features that require disturbance to the black pinesnake, are to, roads and bridges, utilities, protection in this ecosystem are the not expected to adversely affect the recreation sites, and other forms of burned-out or naturally decayed pine subspecies’ conservation and recovery development. stump holes that are heavily utilized by efforts. They will have a net beneficial black pinesnakes, in association with effect on the subspecies. When 4(d) Rule the development of the herbaceous practicable and to the extent possible, Under section 4(d) of the Act, the plant community that provides habitat the Service encourages managers to Service has discretion to issue and forage for prey. Therefore, activities conduct the activities listed above in a regulations that we find necessary and causing significant subsurface manner to: Maintain suitable black advisable to provide for the disturbance (like those listed below pinesnake habitat in large tracts; conservation of threatened wildlife. We under 3(b)) will not be exempted as minimize ground and subsurface may also prohibit by regulation with these actions are detrimental to disturbance; promote a diverse, respect to threatened wildlife any act maintenance and development of stump abundant native herbaceous prohibited by section 9(a)(1) of the Act holes and root channels critical to this groundcover; and allow for the natural for endangered wildlife. For the black subspecies. Another factor affecting the decay or burning of pine stumps. It pinesnake, the Service has developed a integrity of this ecosystem is the should be noted that harvest of longleaf 4(d) rule that is tailored to the specific infestation of invasive plants, pine (and other species) is included in threats and conservation needs of this particularly cogongrass. Activities such the exemption, as long as the longleaf subspecies. Exercising this discretion, as prescribed burning and invasive pine forests are not converted to other the Service has developed a 4(d) rule weed control, as well as forest forest cover types. Should landowners containing all the general prohibitions management activities associated with undertake activities in these areas (e.g., and exceptions to those prohibitions; restoring and maintaining the natural such as converting from longleaf to these are found at 50 CFR 17.31 and 50 habitat to meet the needs of the black loblolly) that are not covered by the CFR 17.32. However, as a means to pinesnake, positively affect pinesnake exemptions above and are likely to promote conservation efforts on behalf habitat and provide an overall result in take (as described below), they of the black pinesnake, we are finalizing conservation benefit to the subspecies. would need to consult with the Service a 4(d) rule for this subspecies that to find ways to minimize impacts to the modifies the standard protection for Provisions of the 4(d) Rule subspecies before proceeding with the threatened wildlife found at 50 CFR See Summary of Changes to the activity. 17.31. In the case of a 4(d) rule, the Proposed Rule, above, for changes to the We may issue permits to carry out general regulations (50 CFR 17.31 and 4(d) rule based on information we otherwise prohibited activities 17.71) applying most prohibitions under received during the public comment involving threatened wildlife under section 9 of the Act to threatened period. certain circumstances. Regulations species do not apply to that species, and This 4(d) rule exempts from the governing permits are codified at 50 the 4(d) rule contains the prohibitions general prohibitions at 50 CFR 17.31 CFR 17.32. With regard to threatened necessary and advisable to conserve that take incidental to the following wildlife, a permit may be issued for the species. activities when conducted within following purposes: For scientific As discussed in the Summary of habitats currently or historically purposes, to enhance the propagation or Factors Affecting the Species section of occupied by the black pinesnake: survival of the subspecies, for economic this rule, the primary threat to this (1) Prescribed burning, including all hardship, for zoological exhibition, for subspecies is the continuing loss and fire break establishment and educational purposes, and for incidental degradation of the open pine forests maintenance actions, as well as actions take in connection with otherwise habitat (e.g., the longleaf pine taken to control wildfires. lawful activities. There are also certain ecosystem), which requires active (2) Herbicide application for invasive statutory exemptions from the management to ensure appropriate plant species control, site-preparation, prohibitions, which are found in habitat conditions are present. and mid-story and understory woody sections 9 and 10 of the Act. Therefore, for the black pinesnake, the vegetation control. All exempted It is our policy, as published in the Service has determined that exemptions herbicide applications must be Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR authorized under section 4(d) of the Act conducted in a manner consistent with 34272), to identify to the maximum are appropriate to promote conservation Federal law, including Environmental extent practicable at the time a species of this subspecies. Foremost in the Protection Agency label restrictions; is listed, those activities that would or degradation of this habitat is the decline applicable State laws; and herbicide would not constitute a violation of or absence of prescribed fire, as fire is application guidelines as prescribed by section 9 of the Act. The intent of this the primary source of historical herbicide manufacturers. policy is to increase public awareness of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:56 Oct 05, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR3.SGM 06OCR3 rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES 60488 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 193 / Tuesday, October 6, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

the effect of a final listing on proposed INFORMATION CONTACT). We encourage tribal lands are not subject to the same and ongoing activities within the range any landowner who is concerned about controls as Federal public lands, to of a listed species. Based on the best potential take of the pinesnake on their remain sensitive to Indian culture, and available information, the following property from an action that is not to make information available to tribes. activities may potentially result in a covered under the 4(d) rule to consult There are no tribal lands located within violation of section 9 the Act; this list with the Service on conservation the range of the subspecies. is not comprehensive: measures that would avoid take or the References Cited (1) Unauthorized collecting, handling, process for obtaining an incidental take possessing, selling, delivering, carrying, permit under a safe harbor agreement or A complete list of references cited in or transporting of the black pinesnake, habitat conservation plan. this rulemaking is available on the including import or export across State Required Determinations Internet at http://www.regulations.gov lines and international boundaries, and upon request from the Mississippi except for properly documented antique National Environmental Policy Act (42 Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR specimens of these taxa at least 100 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). years old, as defined by section 10(h)(1) We have determined that Authors of the Act. environmental assessments and (2) Introduction of nonnative species environmental impact statements, as The primary authors of this final rule that compete with or prey upon the defined under the authority of the are the staff members of the Mississippi black pinesnake. National Environmental Policy Act, Ecological Services Field Office. (3) Unauthorized destruction or need not be prepared in connection List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 modification of occupied black with listing a species as an endangered pinesnake habitat (e.g., stumping, root or threatened species under the Endangered and threatened species, raking, bedding) that results in Endangered Species Act. We published Exports, Imports, Reporting and significant subsurface disturbance or the a notice outlining our reasons for this recordkeeping requirements, destruction of pine stump holes and determination in the Federal Register Transportation. their associated root systems used as on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244). refugia by the black pinesnake, or that Regulation Promulgation impairs in other ways the subspecies’ Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes Accordingly, we amend part 17, essential behaviors such as breeding, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the feeding, or sheltering; and conversion of In accordance with the President’s Code of Federal Regulations, as follows: occupied longleaf-pine-dominated memorandum of April 29, 1994 forests (>51 percent of longleaf in the (Government-to-Government Relations PART 17—ENDANGERED AND overstory) to other forest cover types or with Native American Tribal THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS land uses. Governments; 59 FR 22951), Executive (4) Unauthorized use of insecticides Order 13175 (Consultation and ■ 1. The authority citation for part 17 and rodenticides that could impact Coordination With Indian Tribal continues to read as follows: small mammal prey populations, Governments), and the Department of Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531– through either unintended or direct the Interior’s manual at 512 DM 2, we 1544; and 4201–4245, unless otherwise impacts within habitat occupied by readily acknowledge our responsibility noted. black pinesnakes. to communicate meaningfully with (5) Actions, intentional or otherwise, recognized Federal Tribes on a ■ 2. Amend § 17.11(h) by adding an that would result in the destruction of government-to-government basis. In entry for ‘‘Pinesnake, black’’ in eggs or cause mortality or injury to accordance with Secretarial Order 3206 alphabetical order under REPTILES to hatchling, juvenile, or adult black of June 5, 1997 (American Indian Tribal the List of Endangered and Threatened pinesnakes. Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust Wildlife to read as follows: Questions regarding whether specific Responsibilities, and the Endangered activities would constitute a violation of Species Act), we readily acknowledge § 17.11 Endangered and threatened section 9 of the Act should be directed our responsibilities to work directly wildlife. to the Mississippi Ecological Services with tribes in developing programs for * * * * * Field Office (see FOR FURTHER healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge that (h) * * *

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

******* REPTILES

******* Pinesnake, black ...... Pituophis melanoleucus U.S.A. (AL, Entire ...... T 861 NA 17.42(h) lodingi. LA, MS).

*******

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:56 Oct 05, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06OCR3.SGM 06OCR3 rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 193 / Tuesday, October 6, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 60489

■ 3. Amend § 17.42 by adding paragraph maintenance actions, as well as actions in the overstory) to other forest cover (h) to read as follows: taken to control wildfires. types or land uses; and (ii) Herbicide application for invasive (B) Those activities causing § 17.42 Special rules—reptiles. plant species control, site-preparation, significant subsurface disturbance, * * * * * and mid-story and understory woody (h) Black pinesnake (Pituophis vegetation control. All exempted including, but not limited to, shearing, melanoleucus lodingi). herbicide applications must be wind-rowing, stumping, disking (except (1) Prohibitions. Except as noted in conducted in a manner consistent with during fire break creation or paragraph (h)(2) of this section, all Federal law, including Environmental maintenance), root-raking, and bedding. prohibitions and provisions of §§ 17.31 Protection Agency label restrictions; * * * * * and 17.32 apply to the black pinesnake. applicable State laws; and herbicide Dated: September 28, 2015. (2) Exemptions from prohibitions. application guidelines as prescribed by Incidental take of the black pinesnake herbicide manufacturers. Stephen Guertin, will not be considered a violation of (iii) All forest management activities Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife section 9 of the Act if the take results that maintain lands in a forested Service. from: condition, except for: [FR Doc. 2015–25270 Filed 10–5–15; 8:45 am] (i) Prescribed burning, including all (A) Conversion of longleaf-pine- BILLING CODE 4333–15–P fire break establishment and dominated forests (>51 percent longleaf

VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:56 Oct 05, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\06OCR3.SGM 06OCR3 rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES