Vol. 76 Thursday, No. 126 June 30, 2011

Part III

Department of the Interior

Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a Petition To List a Distinct Population Segment of the Fisher in Its United States Northern Rocky Mountain Range as Endangered or Threatened With Critical Habitat; Proposed Rule

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:34 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\30JNP2.SGM 30JNP2 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 38504 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR telecommunications device for the deaf initiated a status review of the species (TDD), call the Federal Information (75 FR 19925). The notice of a 90-day Fish and Wildlife Service Relay Service (FIRS) at (800) 877–8339. finding and commencement of a 12- SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: month status review for the USNRMs 50 CFR Part 17 DPS was published in the annual Background [Docket No. FWS–R6–ES–2010–0017; MO Candidate Notice of Review on 92210–0–0008] Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act (16 November 10, 2010 (75 FR 69222). U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that, for Fishers in the USNRMs were Endangered and Threatened Wildlife any petition to revise the Federal Lists previously petitioned for listing with a and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife U.S. Pacific States’ population in 1994 Petition To List a Distinct Population and Plants that contains substantial (see below). Segment of the Fisher in Its United scientific and commercial information U.S. Pacific States States Northern Rocky Mountain that listing may be warranted, we make Range as Endangered or Threatened a finding within 12 months of the date On June 5, 1990, we received a With Critical Habitat of our receipt of the petition. In this petition dated May 29, 1990, from Mr. finding, we will determine that the Eric Beckwitt, Forest Issues Task Force, AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, petitioned action is: (a) Not warranted, Sierra Biodiversity Project, and others Interior. (b) warranted, or (c) warranted, but the requesting that the Pacific fisher (Martes ACTION: Notice of 12-month petition immediate proposal of a regulation pennanti pacifica) be listed as an finding. implementing the petitioned action is endangered species in California, precluded by other pending proposals to Oregon, and Washington under the Act. SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and determine whether species are On January 11, 1991, we published a 90- Wildlife Service (Service), announce a threatened or endangered, and day finding (56 FR 1159) indicating that 12-month finding on a petition to list a expeditious progress is being made to the fisher in the Pacific States is a distinct population segment (DPS) of the add or remove qualified species from distinct population that is fisher (Martes pennanti) in its U.S. the Federal Lists of Endangered and geographically isolated from Northern Rocky Mountain range, Threatened Wildlife and Plants. Section populations in the Rocky Mountains including portions of Montana, Idaho, 4(b)(3)(C) of the Act requires that we and British Columbia and represents a and Wyoming, as endangered or treat a petition for which the requested listable entity under the Act. The finding also indicated that the petition threatened and designate critical habitat action is found to be warranted but had not presented substantial under the Endangered Species Act of precluded as though resubmitted on the information indicating that a listing may 1973, as amended (Act). After review of date of such finding, requiring a be warranted because of a lack of all available scientific and commercial subsequent finding be made within 12 information on fisher habitat needs, information, we find that listing the months. We must publish these 12- population size and trends, and fisher in the U.S. Northern Rocky month findings in the Federal Register. Mountains as threatened or endangered demographic parameters (56 FR 1159). is not warranted at this time. Previous Federal Actions On December 29, 1994, we received a petition dated December 22, 1994, from DATES: The finding announced in this U.S. Northern Rocky Mountains the Biodiversity Legal Foundation document was made on June 30, 2011. On March 6, 2009, we received a requesting that two fisher populations ADDRESSES: This finding is available on petition dated February 24, 2009, from in the western United States, including the Internet at http:// the Defenders of Wildlife, Center for the States of Washington, Oregon, www.regulations.gov at Docket Number Biological Diversity, Friends of the California, Idaho, Montana, and FWS–R6–ES–2010–0017. Supporting Bitterroot, and Friends of the Clearwater Wyoming, be listed as threatened under documentation we used in preparing (petitioners) requesting that the fisher in the Act. Based on our review, we found this finding is available for public the Northern Rocky Mountains of the that the petition did not present inspection, by appointment, during United States (USNRMs) be considered substantial information indicating that normal business hours at the U.S. Fish a DPS and listed as endangered or listing the two western United States and Wildlife Service, Montana Field threatened, and critical habitat be fisher populations as a DPS was Office, 585 Shepard Way, Helena, MT designated under the Act (Defenders of warranted (61 FR 8016, March 1, 1996). 59601; telephone (406) 449–5225. We Wildlife et al. 2009, entire). In an April The best available scientific evidence at ask the public to submit any new 9, 2009, letter to the petitioners, we that time indicated that the range of the information that becomes available responded that we had reviewed the fisher was contiguous across Canada concerning the status of, or threats to, information presented in the petition with some areas having abundant the fisher, in addition to new and determined that issuing an populations, and through southward information, materials, comments, or emergency regulation temporarily peninsular extensions, was contiguous questions concerning this finding, to the listing the species under section 4(b)(7) with the U.S. Rocky Mountain and above address. No information will be of the Act was not warranted (Guertin Pacific populations (61 FR 8016). No accepted by facsimile. The petition 2009, entire). We informed the evidence was presented in the petition finding, related Federal Register petitioners that due to staffing and to support physical, physiological, notices, and other pertinent funding constraints in Fiscal Year 2009, ecological, or behavioral separations (61 information, may be obtained online at we would not be able to further address FR 8016). http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/ the petition at that time, but would On December 5, 2000, we received a species/mammals/fisher/. complete the action when resources petition dated November 28, 2000, from FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: allowed. We published a 90-day finding 12 organizations, with the lead Mark Wilson, Field Supervisor, on April 16, 2010, stating that the organizations identified as the Center Montana Ecological Services Field petition presented substantial for Biological Diversity and the Sierra Office (see ADDRESSES); or by telephone information that listing a DPS of fisher Nevada Forest Protection Campaign, at (406) 449–5225. If you use a in the USNRMs may be warranted, and requesting that the West Coast DPS of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:34 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30JNP2.SGM 30JNP2 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules 38505

the fisher, including portions of inches (in.)), and females range from 75 States. A subsequent analysis California, Oregon, and Washington, be to 95 cm (29 to 37 in.) in length. At 3.5 questioned whether there is a sufficient listed as endangered and critical habitat to 5.5 kilograms (kg) (7.7 to 12.1 pounds basis to support recognition of different be designated under the Act. A court (lbs)), male fishers weigh about twice as subspecies based on numerous factors, order was issued on April 4, 2003, by much as females (2.0 to 2.5 kg (4.4 to 5.5 including the small number of samples the U.S. District Court, Northern District lbs)) (Powell et al. 2003, p. 638). Heavier available for examination (Hagmeier of California, that required the Service males have been reported across the 1959, p. 193). Regional variation in to submit for publication in the Federal range, including individuals within the characteristics used by Goldman to Register a 90-day finding on the 2000 USNRMs (Sauder 2010 unpublished discriminate subspecies appears to be petition (Center for Biological Diversity, data; Schwartz 2010 unpublished data); clinal (varying along a geographic et al. v. Norton et al., No. C 01—2950 an exceptional specimen from Maine gradient), and the use of clinal SC). On July 10, 2003, we published a weighed 9 kg (20.1 lbs) (Blanchard 1964, variations is ‘‘exceedingly difficult to 90-day petition finding that the petition pp. 487–488). Fishers may show categorize subspecies’’ (Hagmeier 1959, provided substantial information that variation in typical body weight pp. 192–193). Although subspecies listing may be warranted and initiated a regionally, corresponding with taxonomy as described by Goldman 12-month status review (68 FR 41169). latitudinal gradients. For example, (1935, p. 177) is often used in literature On April 8, 2004, we published a fishers in the more southern latitudes of to describe or reference fisher warranted 12-month finding for listing the U.S. Pacific States may weigh less populations in different regions of its of the fisher’s West Coast DPS (69 FR than fishers in the eastern United States range, and recent consideration of 18770). A listing action was precluded and Canada (Seglund 1995, p. 21; Dark genetic variation indicates patterns of by higher priorities and the West Coast 1997, p. 61; Aubry and Lewis 2003, p. population subdivision similar to the DPS was added to our candidate species 87; Lofroth et al. 2010, p. 10). earlier described subspecies (Kyle et al. list. On April 8, 2010, the Center for 2001, p. 2345; Drew et al. 2003, p. 59), Taxonomy Biological Diversity, Sierra Forest it is not clear whether Goldman’s Legacy, Environmental Protection The ‘‘Fisher of Pennant,’’ or Mustela designations of subspecies are Information Center, and Klamath- pennantii, was formally described by taxonomically valid. Therefore, for the Siskiyou Wildlands Center filed a Erxleben in 1777, based on accounts of purposes of this finding, we are complaint in the United States District the same specimen from either the evaluating the fisher in the USNRMs as Court for the Northern District of eastern United States or eastern Canada, a DPS of a full species (i.e., M. California seeking an order for the by Buffon in 1765 and the naturalist pennanti). Service to withdraw the 2004 Thomas Pennant in 1771 (Rhoads 1898 Biology warranted-but-precluded finding and as cited in Goldman 1935, p. 177; proceed with a proposed rule to list the Powell 1981, p. 1). Taxonomic stability Fishers are opportunistic predators, species under the Act (Center for was not attained until 80 years after primarily of snowshoe hares (Lepus Biological Diversity, et al. v. Salazar, et Buffon’s original description, when americanus), squirrels (Tamiasciurus, al., No. CV 10—1501). A resolution of taxonomists transferred the fisher to the Sciurus, Glaucomys, and Tamias spp.), the complaint is pending. genus Martes and changed the spelling mice (Microtus, Clethrionomys, and The West Coast fisher was included in of the species to pennanti (Hagmeier Peromyscus spp.), and birds (numerous the Service’s candidate notices of 1959, p. 185; Powell 1981, p. 1; Powell spp.) (reviewed in Powell 1993, pp. 18, review in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 1993, pp. 11–12). 102). Carrion and plant material (e.g., and 2010 (70 FR 24870, May 11, 2005; The fisher is classified in the order berries) also are consumed (Powell 71 FR 53756, September 12, 2006; 72 FR Carnivora, family Mustelidae, a family 1993, p. 18). The fisher is one of the few 69034, December 6, 2007; 73 FR 75176, that also includes weasels, mink, predators that successfully kills December 10, 2008; 74 FR 57804, martens, and otters (Anderson 1994, p. porcupines (Erethizon dorsatum), and November 9, 2009; 75 FR 69222, 14). It is the largest member of the genus porcupine remains have been found November 10, 2010). Martes, classified as subgenus Pekania, more often in the gastrointestinal tract and occurs only in North America and scat of fisher than in any other Species Information (Anderson 1994, pp. 22–23). Its predator (Powell 1993, p. 135). There is This ‘‘Species Information’’ section geographic range overlaps extensively only one study reporting the food habits concentrates on general biology and with that of the American marten of an established fisher population in fisher studies conducted in the (Martes americana—subgenus Martes), the USNRMs, and that study confirms USNRMs area. Additional information the only other Martes species in North that snowshoe hares, voles (Microtus regarding fisher biology in the western America (Gibilisco 1994, p. 59). and Clethrionomys spp.), and red portion of its range can be found in the Characteristic of the subgenus Pekania squirrels (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus) are Service’s 12-month finding on a petition is large body size compared with other similarly important prey in north- to list the West Coast DPS of the fisher Martes and the presence of an external central Idaho as they are in other parts (69 FR 18770). median rootlet on the upper carnassial of the range (Jones 1991, p. 87). Fishers (fourth) premolar (Anderson 1994, p. from Minnesota relocated to the Cabinet Description 21). Mountains of Montana subsisted The fisher is a forest-dwelling, Goldman (1935, p. 177) recognized primarily on snowshoe hare and deer medium-sized mammal, light brown to three subspecies of fisher based on (Odocoileus spp.) carrion (Roy 1991, p. dark blackish-brown in color, with the differences in skull dimensions, 29). As dietary generalists, fishers across face, neck, and shoulders sometimes although he stated they were difficult to their range tend to forage in areas where being slightly gray (Powell 1981, p. 1). distinguish: (1) Martes pennanti prey is both abundant and vulnerable to The chest and underside often have pennanti in the east and central regions; capture (Powell 1993, p. 100). Fishers in irregular white patches. The fisher has (2) M. p. columbiana in the central and north-central Idaho exhibit seasonal a long body with short legs and a long northwestern regions that include the shifts in habitat use to forests with bushy tail. Males range in length from USNRMs; and (3) M. p. pacifica in the younger successional structure 90 to 120 centimeters (cm) (35 to 47 western coast States of the United plausibly linked to a concurrent

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:34 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30JNP2.SGM 30JNP2 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 38506 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules

seasonal shift in habitat use by their (reviewed by Powell and Zielinski 1994, and navigating various landscape prey species (Jones and Garton 1994, p. p. 58; Lewis and Stinson 1998, pp. 7– features such as highways, rivers, and 383). 8; Zielinski et al. 2004, p. 652). In north- rural communities to establish their Fishers are estimated to live up to 10 central Idaho, the movements of a small own home range (York 1996, p. 47; Weir years (Arthur et al. 1992, p. 404; Powell number of radio-collared fishers and Corbould 2008, p. 44). In Maine and et al. 2003, p. 644). Both sexes reach indicated that males range from British Columbia, juveniles dispersed maturity their first year but may not be approximately 30 to 120 km2 (8.7 to 35 from 0.7 km (0.4 mi) to 107 km (66.4 mi) effective breeders until 2 years of age mi2) year round, and females range from from natal areas (York 1996, p. 55; Weir (Powell et al. 2003, p. 638). Fishers are 6 to 75 km2 (1.7 to 22 mi2), with a slight and Corbould 2008, p. 44). Dispersal solitary except during the breeding reduction in summer (Jones 1991, pp. characteristics may be influenced by season, which is generally from late 82–83). Fishers in Idaho have home factors such as sex, availability of February to the middle of May (Wright ranges larger than any other home unoccupied areas, turnover rates of and Coulter 1967, p. 77; Frost et al. ranges reported within the range of the adults, and habitat suitability (Arthur et 1997, p. 607). The breeding period in taxon (Idaho Office of Species al. 1993, p. 872; York 1996, pp. 48–49; north-western Montana and north- Conservation (IOSC) 2010, p. 4). Aubry et al. 2004, pp. 205–207; Weir central Idaho is approximately late The abundance or availability of and Corbould 2008, pp. 47–48). Long- February through April based on vulnerable prey may play a role in home distance dispersal by vulnerable, less observations of significant changes of range selection (Powell 1993, p. 173; experienced individuals is made at a fisher movement patterns and Powell and Zielinski 1994, p. 57). high cost and is not always successful. examination of the reproductive tracts Fishers exhibit territoriality, with little Fifty-five percent of transient fishers in of harvested specimens (Weckwerth and overlap between members of the same a British Columbia study died before Wright 1968, p. 980; Jones 1991, pp. 78– sex; in contrast, overlap between establishing home ranges, and only one 79; Roy 1991, pp. 38–39). Uterine opposite sexes is extensive, and size and in six juveniles successfully established implantation of embryos occurs 10 overlap are possibly related to the a home range (Weir and Corbould 2008, months after copulation; active gestation density of prey (Powell and Zielinski p. 44). One dispersing juvenile female is estimated to be between 30 and 60 1994, p. 59). Male fishers may extend or traveled an unusually long distance of days; and birth occurs nearly 1 year temporarily abandon their territories to 135 km (84 mi) over rivers and through after copulation (Wright and Coulter take long excursions during the suboptimal habitats before succumbing 1967, pp. 74, 76; Frost et al. 1997, p. breeding season from the end of to starvation (Weir and Corbould 2008, 609; Powell et al. 2003, p. 639). February to April presumably to p. 44). Individuals traveling longer Litter sizes for fishers range from one increase their opportunities to mate distances are subject to greater mortality to six, with a mean of two to three kits (Arthur 1989a, p. 677; Jones 1991, pp. risk (Weir and Corbould 2008, p. 44), (Powell et al. 2003, pp. 639–640). 77–78). However, males who and very few establish the stability of a Potential litter sizes in the USNRMs are maintained their home ranges during home range, which improves the chance between two to three per female, based the breeding season were more likely to of successful recruitment (Aubry et al. on the frequency of embryos recovered successfully mate than were 2004, p. 215). from harvested females (Weckwerth and nonresident males encroaching on an Wright 1968, p. 980; Jones 1991, p. 84). established range (Aubry et al. 2004, p. Habitat Newborn kits are entirely dependent 215). The occurrence of fishers at regional and may nurse for 10 weeks or more It is not known how fishers maintain scales is consistently associated with after birth (Powell 1993, p. 67). Kits territories; it is possible that scent low- to mid-elevation environments of develop their own home ranges by 1 marking plays an important role mesic (moderately moist), coniferous year of age (Powell et al. 2003, p. 640). (Leonard 1986, p. 36; Powell 1993, p. and mixed conifer and hardwood forests Populations of fisher fluctuate in size, 170). Direct aggression between with abundant physical structure near and reproductive rates may vary widely individuals in the wild has not been the ground (reviewed by Hagmeier 1956, from year to year in response to the observed, although signs of fishers entire; Arthur et al. 1989a, pp. 683–684; availability of prey (Powell and fighting and the capture of male fishers Banci 1989, p. v; Aubry and Houston Zielinski 1994, p. 43). with scarred pelts have been reported 1992 p. 75; Jones and Garton 1994, pp. An animal’s home range is the area (Douglas and Strickland 1987, p. 516). 377–378; Powell 1994, p. 354; Powell et traversed by the individual in its normal Combative behavior has been observed al. 2003, p. 641; Weir and Harestad activities of food gathering, mating, and between older littermates and between 2003, p. 74). Fishers avoid areas with caring for young (Burt 1943, p. 351). adult females in captivity (Powell and little or no cover (Powell and Zielinski Only general comparisons of fishers’ Zielinski 1994, p. 59). 1994, p. 39; Buskirk and Powell 1994, home range sizes can be made, because There is little information available p. 286); an abundance of coarse woody studies across the range have been regarding the long-distance movements debris, boulders, shrub cover, or conducted by different methods. of fishers, although long-distance subterranean lava tubes sometimes Generally, fishers have large home movements have been documented for provide suitable overhead cover in non- ranges, male home ranges are larger than dispersing juveniles and recently forested or otherwise open areas females, and fisher home ranges in relocated individuals before they (Buskirk and Powell, 1994, p. 293; British Columbia and the USNRMs are establish a home range. Fishers Powell et al. 2003, p. 641). In the larger than those in other areas in the relocated to novel areas in Montana’s understory, the physical complexity of range of the taxon (reviewed in Powell Cabinet Mountains and British coarse woody debris such as downed and Zielinski 1994, p. 58; reviewed in Columbia moved up to 163 km (100 mi) trees and branches provides a diversity Lofroth et al. 2010, pp. 67–70). Fisher from release sites, crossing large rivers of foraging and resting locations home ranges vary in size across North and making 700-m (2,296-ft) elevation (Buskirk and Powell 1994, p. 295). America and range from 16 to 122 changes (Roy 1991, p. 42; Weir and Forest succession is a dynamic square kilometers (km2) (4.7 to 36 Harestad 1997, pp. 257, 259). continuum that begins with an event square miles (mi2)) for males, and from Juveniles dispersing from natal areas such as wildfire, windthrow (areas of 4 to 53 km2 (1.2 to 15.5 mi2) for females are capable of moving long distances downed trees due to high winds) or

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:34 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30JNP2.SGM 30JNP2 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules 38507

timber harvest that removes or alters Winter detections of fisher are more (Jones and Garton 1994, p. 383). When major components of an environment. likely in drainages with a high amount fishers use younger forest types, they Over time the affected environment of canopy cover, and winter avoidance will select large-diameter trees or snags, experiences a series of changes or seral of dry areas is similar to summer if present, that are remnants of a stages in vegetation species and (Schwartz 2010, unpublished data). previously existing older forest stage structure. In the absence of disturbance Fishers in Idaho include forested (Jones 1991, p. 92). Because of this and over many decades to hundreds of environments of differing configurations selectivity for mature forest type or years depending on the forest type, in their home range including roadless structure, resting and denning sites may mature or late-seral structure and areas, industrial forest, and national be more limiting to fisher distribution species composition may result. Late- forests managed for multiple uses than foraging habitats, and should seral forests (also known as old-growth) (Albrecht and Heusser 2009, p. 19; IOSC receive particular consideration in are generally characterized by more 2010, p. 4). managing habitat for fishers (Powell and diversity of structure and function than The physical structure of the forest Zielinski 1994, pp. 56–57). younger developmental stages. Specific and prey associated with forest Cavities and branches in trees, snags, characteristics of late-seral forests vary structures are thought to be critical stumps, rock piles, and downed timber by region, forest type, and local features that explain fisher habitat use, are used as resting sites, and cavities in conditions. Fishers are associated more rather than specific forest types (Buskirk large-diameter live or dead trees are commonly with mature forest cover and and Powell 1994, p. 286), and the selected more often for natal and late-seral forests with greater physical composition of individual fisher home maternal dens (Powell and Zielinski complexity than other habitats ranges is usually a mosaic of different 1994, pp. 47, 56). Fishers do not appear (reviewed by Powell and Zielinski 1994, forested environments and successional to excavate their own natal or maternal p. 52). Other forest successional stages stages (reviewed by Lofroth et al. 2010, dens; therefore, other factors (i.e., may suffice if adequate cover and p. 94). Further, fishers are opportunistic heartwood decay of trees, excavation by structure is provided. For example, predators with a relatively general diet, woodpeckers, broken branches, frost or extensive, mid-mature, second growth and the vulnerability of prey may be fire scars) are important in creating forests are used by fishers in the more important to the use of an area for cavities and narrow entrance holes Northeast and Midwest United States foraging than the abundance of a (Lofroth et al. 2010, p. 112). The tree (Coulter 1966, pp. 59–60; Arthur et al. particular prey species (Powell and species may vary from region to region 1989b, pp. 680–683; Powell 1993, p. 92). Zielinski 1994, p. 54). In north-central based on local influences. In regions Idaho, fishers expand their use of young where both hardwood and conifers To what extent late successional forest stages in winter, likely in occur, hardwoods are selected more forests are required to support fisher response to a seasonal shift in habitat often, although they may be a minor may be dependent on scale (Powell et use by their prey or an increase in prey component of the area (Lofroth et al. al. 2003, p. 641). Home ranges may be vulnerability in these areas (Jones and 2010, p. 115). Den trees tend to be older established based on attributes at a Garton 1994, p. 383). Individuals and larger in diameter than other landscape scale, foraging at a site scale, translocated to the Cabinet Mountains of available trees in the vicinity (reviewed and resting and denning use based on Montana from Minnesota and by Lofroth et al. 2010, pp. 115, 117). the element or structural scale (Powell Wisconsin exhibit winter habitat use Little is known of natal or maternal den 1993, p. 89; Buskirk and Powell 1994, similar to that reported for fishers in use or selection in the USNRMs. A p. 284; Weir and Corbould 2008, p. 103). north-central Idaho (Roy 1991, p. 60). habitat study conducted in north-central Within areas of low and mid-elevation Fishers in north-central Idaho and Idaho found no kits or evidence of forests, the most consistent predictor of Montana also select forest riparian areas denning (Jones 1991, p. 83). A female fisher occurrence at larger spatial scales and draws or valley bottoms that have introduced into Montana’s Cabinet is moderate to high levels of contiguous a strong association with spruce, which Mountains used a downed hollow log canopy cover rather than any particular tend to have dense cover, high densities for a natal den only months after forest plant community (Buck 1982, p. of snowshoe hare, and a diversity of release, and it is likely that this 30; Arthur et al. 1989b, pp. 681–682; other prey types (Powell 1994, p. 354; suboptimal site was selected only Powell 1993, p. 88; Jones and Garton Jones 1991, pp. 90–93; Heinemeyer because of the female’s unfamiliarity 1994, p. 41; Weir and Corbould 2010, p. 1993, p. 90). with the area (Roy 1991, p. 56). 408). In north-central Idaho, mature to Fishers are more selective of habitat Snow conditions and ambient old-growth mesic forests of grand and for resting than they are about foraging temperatures may affect fisher activity subalpine fir in close proximity to or traveling habitat (Arthur et al. 1989b, and habitat use. Fishers in eastern parts riparian areas are used extensively p. 686; Powell and Zielinski 1994, p. 54; of the taxon’s range may be less active (Jones 1991, pp. 90, 113; Jones and Powell 1994, p. 353). Across the range, during winter and avoid areas where Garton 1994, p. 381); fishers in this fishers select resting sites with deep, soft snow inhibits movement study avoided forests with less than 40 characteristics of late successional (Leonard 1980, pp. 108–109; Raine percent crown cover and drier upland forests—higher canopy closure, large- 1981, p. 74). Historical and current sites composed of Abies grandis (grand diameter trees, coarse downed wood, fisher distributions in California and fir), Abies lasiocarpa (subalpine fir), and singular features of large snags, tree Washington are consistent with forested Pseudotsuga menziesii (Douglas fir), and cavities, or deformed trees (Powell and areas that receive low or lower relative Pinus ponderosa (ponderosa pine) Zielinski 1994, p. 54; Lofroth et al. snowfall (Krohn et al. 1997, p. 226; (Jones 1991, p. 90). A preliminary 2010, pp. 101–103). Rest sites may be Aubry and Houston 1992, p. 75). Fishers analysis of habitat associations in the selected for their insulating or in Ontario, Canada, moved from low- USNRMs indicates that in summer, thermoregulatory qualities and their snow areas to high-snow areas during fishers select areas with larger diameter effectiveness at providing protection population increases, indicating a trees and landscapes with a higher from predators (Weir et al. 2004, pp. possible density-dependent migration to proportion of large trees, and avoid dry 193–194). Resting locations for fishers less suitable habitats factored by snow areas typically populated by ponderosa in north-central Idaho are conditions (Carr et al. 2007, p. 633). pine (Schwartz 2010, unpublished data). predominately in mature forest types These distribution and activity patterns

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:34 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30JNP2.SGM 30JNP2 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 38508 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules

suggest that the presence of fisher and inhabited northwestern North America The distribution of fishers has been their populations may be limited by (Graham and Graham 1994, pp. 46, 58). described by numerous authors, and the deep snowfall. However, the reaction to Although there is limited fossil distribution boundaries vary depending snow conditions appears to be variable evidence available from central Canada, on the evidence used for occurrences. across the range, with fishers in some fishers’ expansion westward and The presumed presence of fishers has locations not affected by snow northward likely coincided with glacier been drawn along the lines of forest conditions or increasing their activity retreat and the subsequent development distribution, and the species has been with fresh snowfall (Jones 1991, p. 94; of the boreal spruce forests (Graham and consistently described as an associate of Roy 1991, p. 53; Weir and Corbould Graham 1994, p. 58). Fossil remains of boreal forest in Canada, mixed 2007, p. 1512). Thus, fishers’ reaction to early fisher in the northwest have been deciduous-evergreen forests in eastern snow may be dependent on a myriad of found in British Columbia, Washington, North America, and coniferous forest factors, including, but not limited to, and Oregon, and no fossil remains have ecosystems in the west (Lofroth et al. local freeze-thaw cycles, the rapidity of been discovered in the USNRMs region 2010, p. 39). Subsequently, range maps crust formation, snow interception by (Graham and Graham 1994, pp. 50–55). of historical distribution typically the forest canopy, and prey availability portray large areas of continuous (Krohn et al. 1997, p. 226; Mote et al. Our present understanding of the occurrence, although it is likely that the 2005, p. 44; Weir and Corbould 2007, p. historical (before European settlement) suitability of habitat to support fishers 1512). distribution of fishers is based on the within the portrayed range varied over accounts of natural historians of the time and spatial scales, subject to Historical Distribution Across the Range early 20th century and general climatic variation, large-scale of the Species assumptions of what constitutes fisher disturbances, and other ecological Fishers occur only in North America, habitat. The presumed fisher range prior factors (Giblisco 1994, p. 70; Graham appearing in the fossil record to European settlement of North and Graham 1994, pp. 57–58). Fishers approximately 30,000 years ago in the America (c. 1600) was throughout the do not occur in all forested habitats eastern United States throughout the boreal forests across North America in today, and evidence would indicate Appalachian Mountains, south to Canada from approximately 60° north they did not occupy all forest types in Georgia, Alabama, and Arkansas, and latitude, extending south into the the past (Graham and Graham 1994, p. west to Ohio and Missouri (Anderson United States in the Great Lakes area 58). Based on the contemporaneous 1994, p. 18). No fossil evidence of a and along the Appalachian, Rocky, and assemblages of fossilized remains, it is fisher range expansion to the north or Pacific Coast Mountains (Figure 1) likely that habitat selection by fishers west exists until the middle Holocene (Hagmeier 1956, entire; Hall 1981, pp. has historically been influenced by the (4,000 to 8,000 years ago) in southern 985–987; Powell 1981, pp. 1–2; Douglas availability of specific types of prey Wisconsin, and only within the past and Strickland 1987, p. 513; Gibilisco (Graham and Graham 1994, p. 58). 4,000 years is there evidence that fishers 1994, p. 60). BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:34 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30JNP2.SGM 30JNP2 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules 38509

BILLING CODE 4310–55–C decreases in population numbers, and extent in Canada (Weckwerth and Post-European Settlement Distribution local extirpations attributed to Wright 1968, p. 977; Brander and Books Across the Range of the Species overtrapping, predator control, or 1973, p. 53; Douglas and Strickland habitat destruction in the United States, 1987, p. 512; Powell and Zielinski 1994, In the late 1800s and early 1900s, fishers experienced reductions in range, including the USNRMs, and to a lesser p. 39). Since the 1950s, fishers have

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:34 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30JNP2.SGM 30JNP2 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP30JN11.008 38510 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules

recovered in some of the central and northwest Montana. A (Hagmeier 1956, entire; Hall 1981, pp. (Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan) and reintroduction of fishers to the Kootenay 985–987; Gibilisco 1994, p. 64) (Figure eastern (Northeastern States and West Region of southeast British Columbia, 1). The described historical distribution Virginia) portions of their historical an area just north of the USNRMs, was also includes individually isolated areas range in the United States as a result of attempted in the 1990s (Fontana et al. in the present-day Greater Yellowstone trapping closures and regulations, 1999, entire), but ‘‘the observed survival Ecosystem (northwest Wyoming, habitat regrowth, and reintroductions rate of translocated adults and the few southern Montana and east-central (Brander and Books 1973, pp. 53–54; cases of confirmed reproduction in the Idaho), and north-central Utah Powell 1993, p. 80; Gibilisco 1994, p. area were not likely sufficient for the (Gibilisco 1994, p. 64). The 61; Lewis and Stinson 1998, p. 3; Proulx population to expand and become self- representation of historical fisher et al. 2004, pp. 55–57; Kontos and sustaining’’ (Weir et al. 2003, p. 25). The distribution in the USNRMs by the Bologna 2008, entire). Fishers have not South Thompson Similkameen area of sources above should be viewed returned to the areas south of the Great south-central British Columbia, cautiously, because it is based on Lakes to the southern Appalachian bordering north-central Washington, limited information and records States (Proulx et al. 2004, p. 57). The produced 88 legally harvested fishers collected in the late 1800s to mid-1900s historical, early European settlement, between 1928 and 2007, and 13 since (Hagmeier 1956, pp. 154, 156, 161, 163; and contemporary distribution of fishers 1985 (Lofroth et al. 2010, p. 48). Because Hall 1981, p. 985) after European in the USNRMs is discussed in detail in the northern boundary of the South settlement had influence in the area. In the following sections. Thompson Similkameen is considered addition, as stated previously, fishers the southern extent of the fisher have been consistently described as Current Distribution Outside of the U.S. population distribution in the province associates of coniferous forest Northern Rocky Mountains (Weir and Lara Almuedo 2010, p. 36), ecosystems in the west, and the Presently, fishers are found in all the significance of the trapping data to presumed historical presence of fishers Canadian provinces and territories fisher distribution is not clear without was drawn along the lines of forest except Newfoundland and Prince more specific location information. distribution, with little physical Edward Island (Proulx et al. 2004, p. 55) Harvest data could indicate that evidence of whether fishers occupied (Figure 1). The fisher range in Quebec, individuals were captured at the those habitats. Ontario, and eastern Manitoba is periphery of larger, established Montana contiguous with currently occupied populations, that there is a low-density areas in New England, northern Atlantic population in south-central British No reliable records are available for States, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and the Columbia, or that individuals represent Montana, and historical and early Upper Peninsula of Michigan in the transient or extralimital (outside an settlement distribution in the western United States (Proulx et al. 2004, pp. established population area) records. forested areas of the State was assumed 55–57). In Saskatchewan and Alberta, In the western United States outside based on the reports of the presence of fishers are found primarily north of 52 of the USNRMs, fishers occur in a few fishers in northwest Wyoming and degrees and 54 degrees north latitude, disjunct and relatively small areas of central Idaho (Hagmeier 1956, p. 156). respectively, and form no known their former range in the Cascade Vinkey (2003, pp. 44–69) investigated breeding population with the United Mountains of southwest Oregon, the fisher records in the Rocky Mountains, States (Proulx et al. 2004, p. 58). In Klamath and Coastal Ranges of concentrating on Montana, to determine Alberta, trapping data indicate that a southwest Oregon and northwest the fisher distribution post-settlement rare fisher may occur to the south of California, and the Southern Sierra and prior to their apparent high-density population areas to Nevada Mountains in east-central disappearance in the 1920s (Newby and approximately 32 km (20 mi) north of California (Proulx et al. 2004; Lofroth et McDougal 1964, p. 487; Weckworth and the United States border along the al. 2010, pp. 47–49). A reintroduction Wright 1968, p. 977). The first reference Continental Divide near Waterton Lakes program is underway on the Olympic to fisher in Montana was a shipping National Park, (Corrigan 2010, pers. Peninsula of Washington State, and the record of pelts from Fort Benton in 1875 comm.; Hale 2010, pers. comm.)—an program’s objective of establishing a (Vinkey 2003, p. 49). Although shipping area contiguous with the USNRMs. self-sustainable population of fisher has records are not definitive of the product However, there is no indication that yet to be achieved (Lewis et al. 2009, p. origin, it is likely some of the fisher there is a population of fisher in 3). pelts were of Montana origin because of southern Alberta or whether the source Montana’s prominence in the fur trade of the occasional rare fisher detected Historical Distribution and Early and Fort Benton’s location at the upper there is the distant fisher population of European Settlement Distribution in the reaches of the Missouri River (Vinkey central Alberta, central British U.S. Northern Rocky Mountains 2003, p. 49). Columbia, or the USNRMs. Fishers Presumed historical distribution of Reports of fishers in Montana’s occupy low- to mid-elevation forested fishers in the USNRMs is depicted as Glacier National Park in the early 1900s areas throughout British Columbia, but continuous with eastern British were dismissed as ‘‘unreliable’’ and are rare or absent from the coast and Columbia and southwestern Alberta in ‘‘unauthentic’’ by Newby (cited in from the southern region for at least 200 Canada, bounded on the east by the Hagmeier 1956, p. 156); nevertheless, km (125 mi) to the border with the forested areas of the front range of the these records have been cited by other United States (Weir et al. 2003, p. 25; Rocky Mountains at approximately 113 authors, in addition to reports from Weir and Lara Almuedo 2010, p. 36). degrees west longitude in Montana, the early trappers, to support a distribution After reviewing known distribution south at approximately 44 degrees north of fishers in Montana as far south as records for fishers in 1956, Hagmeier (p. latitude, and the west in Idaho at Wyoming (Hoffman et al. 1969, p. 596; 156) noted that there were no known approximately 116.5 degrees west Vinkey 2003, p. 50). Hoffman et al. records from southeastern British longitude, extending to the northwest, (1969, p. 596) interpreted the lack of Columbia, which includes the Rocky north of the Palouse Prairie in Idaho to reliable records as an indication of the Mountains in the eastern Kootenay include the forested Pend Oreille River fisher’s extirpation in Montana and Region contiguous with northern Idaho area of northeastern Washington adjacent areas before any specimens

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:34 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30JNP2.SGM 30JNP2 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules 38511

could be preserved. Thus, in Montana, Yellowstone National Park (Skinner genetic analysis of biological samples, the presumed occurrence of fishers 1927, p. 180). The inclusion of Utah in and photographs identified by a before translocations occurred in 1959 is the historical range of the fisher was knowledgeable expert. Eyewitness based on trapper accounts alone based solely on photographs of tracks accounts of a fisher itself, or its sign, by (Weckworth and Wright 1968, p. 977; taken in 1938 (Hagmeier 1956, p. 161). the general public or untrained observer Hoffman et al. 1969, p. 596). also may be found in agency databases Location of Restocking Efforts in the (IOSC 2010, p. 5–6); however, a correct Idaho U.S. Northern Rocky Mountains identification of fisher or its sign can be The historical presence of fisher in By 1930, fishers were thought to be difficult by an untrained observer and Idaho was based on an 1890 specimen extirpated from the USNRMs in these unverified records or anecdotal from Alturas Lake (originally Sawtooth Montana and Idaho as they were in reports should be viewed cautiously Lake) in the Sawtooth Mountains of other parts of the United States (Aubry and Lewis 2003, p. 81; Vinkey Blaine County in central Idaho (Williams 1963, p. 9; Newby and 2003, p. 59; McKelvey et al. 2008, (Goldman 1935, p. 177; Hagmeier 1956, McDougal 1964, p. 487; Weckworth and p. 551). Other animals that are similar p. 154; Drew et al. 2003, p. 62; Schwartz Wright 1968, p. 977). Montana in appearance and share similar 2007, p. 922), and other 20th century Department of Fish and Game (now habitats, such as the American marten, reports of fishers in the ‘‘mountainous Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks mink (Mustela vison), or domestic cat parts of the state,’’ including the Selkirk (MTFWP)) initiated a restocking (Felis catus), may be mistaken for (north), Bitterroot (northeast), and program for fisher in 1959 with 36 fishers (Aubry and Lewis 2003, p. 82; Salmon River (central) ranges (Hagmeier individuals from central British Lofroth et al. 2010, p.11; Kays 2011, p. 1956, p. 154). Only two fisher Columbia transplanted to the Purcell, 1). Animal signs, such as tracks, can be specimens document the presence of Swan, and Pintler Ranges in significantly altered by environmental fishers in the USNRMs prior to their northwestern and west-central Montana conditions, and fisher tracks can be presumed extirpation in the 1920s (Weckworth and Wright 1968, p. 979). confused with those of the more (Williams 1963, p. 9). Both specimens Idaho Fish and Game (IDFG) followed common American marten (Vinkey originated in Idaho. The above- with a reintroduction program for 2003, p. 59; Giddings 2010, pers. mentioned 1890 specimen from Alturas fishers in 1962. Forty-two fishers from comm.). Lake, Blaine County, in central Idaho is central British Columbia were housed in the collection of the National transplanted to areas considered to have Montana and Idaho Museum of Natural History in been formerly occupied before A legal trapping season for fisher was Washington, DC, and this specimen has presumed extirpation in north-central reopened in Montana in 1983 after a been pivotal for supporting historical Idaho, including the Bitterroot divide series of fisher transplantations and distribution and post-settlement area (Williams 1963, p. 9; reviewed by evidence that fishers were reproducing representation, and for suggesting that Vinkey 2003, p. 55). Minnesota and in the State (Weckwerth and Wright an indigenous population has survived Wisconsin were the sources for 110 1968, entire; MTFWP 2010, p. 3). The since the 1920s in the USNRMs fishers transplanted to the Cabinet majority of verified fisher records in the (Hagmeier 1956, p. 154; Hall 1981, p. Mountains of northwest Montana State through 2009 result from the 985; Drew et al. 2003, pp. 59, 62; Vinkey between 1989 and 1991 (Roy 1991, p. harvest program (Vinkey 2003, p. 51; et al. 2006, p. 269). An 1896 Harvard 18; Heinemeyer 1993, p. ii). After an MTFWP 2010, p. 2, Attachment 3). In Museum specimen collected in Idaho absence of authenticated records for addition, Montana agency files include County in north-central Idaho west of over 20 years in the USNRMs, areas near 48 incidental harvest records between the Bitterroot Divide, which separates release sites yielded fisher captures in 1968 and 1979 (Vinkey 2003, p. 51). Idaho and Montana, further supports the Montana in the years following the first Prior to 2002, Idaho records included extent of fisher distribution in the late reintroduction efforts in 1959 (Newby verified fisher presence by targeted live- 1800s, and supports a close ecological and McDougal 1964, p. 487; Weckworth trapped and incidental captures, or connection between north-central Idaho and Wright 1968, p. 979). No post- otherwise-obtained physical specimens, and west-central Montana (Vinkey et al. release studies were conducted in Idaho photographs, and individuals observed 2006, p. 269; Schwartz 2007, pp. 923– until the mid-1980s, but marten trappers directly by qualified experts (IOSC 924). in the State reported inadvertent 2010, p. 7). From 2004 to the present, captures of fishers by the late 1970s multiple State and Federal agencies in Wyoming and Utah (Jones 1991, p. 1). Montana and Idaho have partnered to The first reported fisher capture in collect biological data and samples by Wyoming is often cited as occurring in Contemporary Distribution in the U.S. live-trapping and hair-snares for genetic the 1920s from the Beartooth Plateau Northern Rocky Mountains testing (Albrecht and Heusser 2010, east of Yellowstone National Park near The use of unreliable records to p. 23; Albrecht 2010, unpublished data; the Montana State line (Thomas 1954, p. support distribution and population IOSC 2010, pp. 4–6; MTFWP 2010, p. 2); 28; Hagmeier 1956, p. 163). The pelt of extent has led to overestimation of other many surveys are conducted using a a poached fisher was confiscated in species’ ranges (Aubry and Lewis 2003, standardized protocol specific to fisher Yellowstone National Park in the 1890s, p. 86; McKelvey et al. 2008, p. 550). (Schwartz et al. 2007, entire). Fisher but it is not clear where the animal was Mindful of that, we have used the most detections (species identification) and captured originally (Skinner 1927, p. reliable and verified data in this genetic analyses to identify individual 194; Buskirk 1999, p. 169). Fishers have analysis of the fisher in the USNRMs. fishers have been provided to us as they been seldom described in Wyoming We base the contemporary (1960 to become available (Albrecht 2010, (Buskirk 1999, p. 169), and by the 1950s present) record of fisher distribution in unpublished data); the results of some fishers were considered ‘‘extinct or the USNRMs on verifiable or targeted fisher surveys are pending nearly so’’ in the Yellowstone area documented records of physical (IOSC 2010, p. 10). Harvest specimens (Thomas 1954, p. 3; Hagmeier 1956, p. evidence such as legal harvest or and targeted studies provide confident 163). As early as the 1920s the fisher incidentally captured specimens, identification of fishers, but may not was considered rare or absent from animals captured for scientific study, represent the full extent of fisher

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:34 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30JNP2.SGM 30JNP2 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 38512 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules

distribution due to biases of trapper Range, Flathead, and Swan Mountain introduction (Vinkey 2003, p. 53; effort, site accessibility, nonrandom site Ranges (Vinkey 2003, p. 53). Trapping MTFWP 2010, Attachment 2). selection to increase the efficacy of or targeted sampling has not been robust Fishers in Idaho are found in the detection, or a lack of either survey or in these areas west of the Continental Selkirk Mountains in the north, the trapping exposure (Vinkey 2003, p. 59; Divide since the early 1990s, but there Clearwater and Salmon River Mountains Schwartz et al. 2007, p. 6; Albrecht and are verified fisher detections over the in central Idaho, and the Bitterroot Heusser 2009, p. 19). past two decades (Vinkey 2003, p. 53; In western Montana from 1968 to the MTFWP 2010, Attachment 2) (Figure 2). Range, including the Selway-Bitterroot late 1980s, fishers were known to occur Fisher presence has been consistent in Wilderness, in the north-central portion in the Bitterroot Mountains bordering the Bitterroot Mountains to the present, of the State. north-central Idaho, and west of the and in the Cabinet Mountains in BILLING CODE 4310–55–P Continental Divide in the Whitefish northwest Montana since the late 1980s

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:34 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30JNP2.SGM 30JNP2 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules 38513

BILLING CODE 4310–55–C

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:34 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30JNP2.SGM 30JNP2 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP30JN11.009 38514 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules

Wyoming and Utah to that depicted in the historical (Vinkey 2003, p. 76; Vinkey et al. 2006, The contemporary distribution of distribution synthesized by Gibilisco in p. 268; Schwartz 2007, p. 924). Fishers in northwestern Montana and fisher in Wyoming is unknown. Rare 1994 (p. 64) (Figure 1). The extreme northern Idaho represent the reports of fisher tracks and harvested contemporary distribution of fishers geographically distant source specimens are available up until the includes forested areas of western populations from Minnesota and 1950s (Thomas 1954, p. 31; Hagemeier Montana and north-central to northern Wisconsin that were introduced into the 1956, p. 163; Buskirk 1999, p. 169). A Idaho, and the boundary is further Cabinet Mountains of Montana in the photograph of an animal near described in the ‘‘Distinct Vertebrate late 1980s (Drew et al. 2003, p. 59; Yellowstone National Park described as Population Segment’’ section of the Vinkey et al. 2006, pp. 268–269; a fisher was featured in a popular finding. Based on a lack of verified Albrecht 2010, unpublished data). publication in 1995 (Gehman, p. 2), but records or documentation, we cannot conclude that the fisher is present, or if British Columbia types also are found in to date there has been no professional or this region, reflecting offspring of a 1959 expert verification that the a breeding population was ever present, in Wyoming, including the Greater introduction from Canada, a remnant photographed animal is indeed a fisher. native population, or possibly natural Carnivore detection surveys were Yellowstone Ecosystem, which includes parts of south-central Montana, immigration from Canada (Vinkey et al. conducted in the Gallatin National 2006, p. 270; Schwartz 2007, p. 924). Forest in the northern Greater northwest Wyoming, and south-east Idaho. An assessment of the degree of Yellowstone Ecosystem between 1997 hybridization between native and and 2000, using camera stations, hair- Distribution Based on Genetic introduced individuals is difficult based snares, and snow track transects; the Characteristics on the assessment techniques. Analysis surveyors reported fisher tracks in snow Recent genetic analyses revealed the of genetic identity is conducted on in the Gallatin and Madison Ranges of mitochondrial DNA, which only reflects southern Montana (Gehman and presence of a remnant native population of fishers in the USNRMs that escaped the genetic contribution of the mother Robinson 2000, p. 7). These records are (Forbes and Alledorf 1991, p. 1346; considered unverified, because the use the extirpation presumed to have occurred early in the 20th century Vinkey 2003, p. 82). Males could make of sighting and track measurements a greater contribution to distant (Vinkey et al. 2006 p. 269; Schwartz alone are dependent on the observer’s populations based on their larger home 2007, p. 924). Fishers in the USNRMs level of skill, snow and weather range sizes and expanded wanderings today reflect a genetic legacy of this conditions, and ‘‘notoriously during the breeding period (Arthur remnant native population, with unique unreliable’’ (Vinkey 2003, p. 59). 1989a, p. 677; Jones 1991, pp. 7–78), but genetic identity found nowhere else in The Wyoming Fish and Game based on mitochondrial DNA analysis the range of the fisher and genetic Department (2010, p. IV–2–26) and alone, this contribution would not be contributions from fishers introduced Gibilisco (1994, pp. 63–64) report only detected. two verified records, both prior to 1970, from British Columbia and the Midwest in or near Yellowstone National Park. United States. We discuss the genetic Population Status One specimen was described from differences due to this the native legacy Estimates of fisher abundance and Ucross, Wyoming, in 1965 (Hall 1981, and its significance to the fisher taxon vital rates are difficult to obtain and p. 985) over 217 km (135 mi) east of the in the ‘‘Significance’’ section of the DPS often based on harvest records, trapper Beartooth Plateau and Yellowstone analysis later in this document. questionnaires, and tracking National Park, but most of that distance Individuals with native genes are information (Douglas and Strickland is open grassland or sagebrush, which is concentrated in the Bitterroot 1987, p. 522), and recent information is unsuitable for fisher. Proulx et al. (2004, Mountains of west-central Montana and limited. Habitat modeling and p. 59) could not confirm the presence of north-central Idaho, the St. Joe and behavioral or other natural history fisher in Wyoming in their status review Clearwater Regions, and the Lochsa characteristics (e.g., home range sizes) of Martes distribution. Schwartz et al. River corridor in Idaho (Vinkey 2003, also are used to estimate population (2007, p. 1) acknowledge that Wyoming p. 76; Vinkey et al. 2006, p. 267; sizes over a geographic area (Lofroth may contain fisher, but there is no Albrecht 2010, unpublished data). 2004, pp. 19–20; Lofroth et al. 2010, evidence to confirm that presence. Individuals in these areas appear to p. 50). Fisher densities over areas of Recently, fishers are described as form one population based on the suitable habitat have been reported, but ‘‘accidental’’ or ‘‘rare’’ in Wyoming with frequency of gene types (Schwartz 2007, there are no total or comprehensive assumed breeding or records of breeding p. 924). The unique genetic type also population sizes for the fisher in the in the northwest part of the State has been identified in the only two eastern United States or Canada. In the (Orabona et al. 2009, p. 152; Wyoming existing USNRMs fisher specimens from western range, fisher populations have Fish and Game Department 2010, p. IV– the 1890s (Schwartz 2007, p. 922). The been estimated using habitat models 2–26). However, the statement of fisher presence of this unique variation would and home range sizes. Late winter breeding in Wyoming is unsubstantiated indicate that fishers in the USNRMs populations in British Columbia range and apparently made in error, (Oakleaf were isolated from populations outside from 1,403 to 3,715 individuals (Lofroth 2010, pers. comm.). The fisher is the region by distance, small population 2004, p. 20). In the Southern Sierra considered extirpated in Utah (Biotics number, or both, for some time before Nevada Mountains, the fisher Database 2005, pp. 1–2). the influences that led to the presumed population is estimated between 160 to extirpation in the early 20th century 598 individuals depending on the Summary of Contemporary Distribution (Vinkey 2003, p. 82). Today, a genetic methods used, and an estimated 4,616 of Fisher in the U.S. Northern Rocky identity more commonly found in fishers inhabit the Southwest Oregon/ Mountains British Columbia populations also is Northern California area (reviewed by Based on the available verified present in the Bitterroot Divide area, Lofroth et al. 2010, p. 50). specimen data, contemporary fisher and fishers in this region are likely a As previously noted, fishers in the distribution in western Montana and mix of native and individuals USNRMs have increased in number and Idaho (Figure 2) covers an area similar translocated from British Columbia distribution since their perceived

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:34 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30JNP2.SGM 30JNP2 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules 38515

extirpation in the 1920s. However, little fisher presence in the entire area of (3) The population segment’s is known of the population numbers, potentially suitable habitat, but simply conservation status in relation to the trends, or vital rates of fishers in the to detect the presence of fisher; Act’s standards for listing, delisting, or USNRMs today. Preliminary work is therefore, traps were placed in areas reclassification (i.e., is the population ongoing to determine the geographic highly likely to support fisher (Albrecht segment endangered or threatened). range of the species, identify and Heusser 2009, p. 19). Thirty-four In evaluating the distribution of fisher populations with native and introduced fisher were identified in a 1,295-km2 and the geographic extent of a possible genes, and determine the abundance of (500-mi2) (one fisher per 38 km2 (14.7 DPS in the USNRMs, we examined individuals in populations using DNA mi2)) area of the Lochsa River corridor information cited in the petition analyses (Schwartz et al. 2007, pp. 1–2). of north-central Idaho during a targeted (Defenders et al. 2009, pp. 11–24), An evaluation of the translocation effort live-trap study between 2002 and 2004 published range maps, published works in the Cabinet Mountains of northwest (Schwartz 2010, unpublished data). that included historical occurrences, Montana between 2001 and 2003 Thirty individual fishers were captured unpublished studies related to fisher yielded only 4 live-trapped individuals in the Clearwater area north of the distribution, and other data submitted to and 28 track detections over 25 survey Lochsa River in north-central Idaho us subsequent to the request for weeks, indicating that the population between 2007 and 2010 (Sauder 2010, information published in the 90-day there is likely small and limited in unpublished data). Based on genetic finding for fisher (75 FR 19925). Fisher distribution (Vinkey 2003, p. 33) (Figure data, it appears that individuals in these distribution in the USNRMs and 2). Based on genetic similarities, fishers areas of north-central Idaho and fishers extended area was discussed in detail in in the Selkirk Mountains of northern in west-central Montana represent a the preceding ‘‘Distribution’’ section. Idaho, just south of the Canadian single population (Schwartz 2007, Discreteness border, are likely associated with the p. 924) (Figure 2). We have no fishers from Minnesota and Wisconsin additional information on the Lochsa Under the DPS policy, a population introduced to Montana’s Cabinet River or Clearwater surveys to segment of a vertebrate taxon may be Mountains to the east (Cushman et al. determine if these reports are indicative considered discrete if it satisfies either 2008, p. 180). Efforts to detect fisher in of comprehensive population numbers. one of the following conditions: the Selkirk Mountains between 2003 No habitat suitability or capacity model (1) It is markedly separated from other and 2005 using hair-snares for genetic is available for Idaho. populations of the same taxon as a analysis produced 26 samples identified consequence of physical, physiological, Evaluation of Listable Entities as fisher, although the number of unique ecological, or behavioral factors. individuals is likely much smaller than Under section 3(16) of the Act, we Quantitative measures of genetic or the number of samples (Cushman et al. may consider for listing any species, morphological discontinuity may 2008, p. 180). including subspecies, of fish, wildlife, provide evidence of this separation. A review of historical records and or plants, or any DPS of vertebrate fish (2) It is delimited by international carnivore research in Montana indicates or wildlife that interbreeds when mature governmental boundaries within which that the fisher is one of the lowest- (16 U.S.C. 1532(16)). Such entities are differences in control of exploitation, density carnivores in the State (Vinkey considered eligible for listing under the management of habitat, conservation 2003, p. 61). What is known of fisher Act (and, therefore, are referred to as status, or regulatory mechanisms exist populations today in Montana is listable entities), should we determine that are significant in light of section primarily derived from harvest data and that they meet the definition of an 4(a)(1)(D) of the Act. winter furbearer track surveys (MTFWP endangered or threatened species. In Western Montana and north-central to 2010, p. 2, Attachment 8, pp. 2–3). A this case, the petitioners have requested northern Idaho broadly encompass the Montana habitat model based on 30 that the fisher in the USNRMs be area under consideration for a fisher years of fisher presence data (the considered as a DPS of a full species for DPS in the USNRMs. The population majority being harvest data) listing as endangered or threatened area includes the contemporary (1960s conservatively estimates that there is under the Act. We concluded in our 90- reintroductions to present) distribution high habitat suitability capable of day finding on the petition that there is of fisher in the USNRMs and is best supporting 216 individuals support for a DPS of fisher in the circumscribed by geological features concentrated in the Bitterroot USNRMs (75 FR 19925), and we analyze and the distribution of habitat known to Mountains along the Idaho border, the this possibility further in the following support fisher. The distribution of Swan and Flathead River drainages, and section after reviewing the best available fishers in the USNRMs is bounded by the Whitefish and Cabinet Mountains information. the southern Bitterroot Range north of just south of the Canada border Lemhi Pass in Montana, east and then (MTFWP 2010, Attachment 8, pp. 2–3; Distinct Vertebrate Population Segment north along the Continental Divide Montana Natural Heritage Program Under the Service’s DPS policy (61 FR including forested areas east of the (MTNHP) 2010a, entire; 2010b, entire). 4722, February 7, 1996), three elements Divide to the Rocky Mountain Front, Most of the recent USNRMs fisher are considered in the decision north along the eastern boundary of survey effort has targeted the Coeur concerning the establishment and Glacier National Park, west along the d’Alene, St. Joe, Clearwater, and Lochsa classification of a possible DPS. These Boundary Mountains and northern areas of northern and north-central are applied similarly for additions to, or Whitefish Range in northern Montana, Idaho. In 2006 and 2007, 10 individual removal from, the Federal List of west to the southern Selkirk and fishers were identified in an area of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. southern Purcell Mountains to the Idaho approximately 8,951 km2 (3,456 mi2) of These elements include: boundary with Washington, south along potentially suitable habitat in the St. Joe (1) The discreteness of a population in the forested areas of northern Idaho and Coeur d’Alene areas, north and relation to the remainder of the species bounded on the west by the Palouse and south of Interstate 90 in northern Idaho to which it belongs; Camas Prairie regions, south along the (Albrecht and Heusser 2009, pp. 6, 8, (2) The significance of the population Western Mountains and North Payette 15). The St. Joe and Coeur d’Alene segment to the species to which it River to the Boise Mountains, northeast projects were not intended to elucidate belongs; and along the Salmon River to the southern

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:34 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30JNP2.SGM 30JNP2 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 38516 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules

Bitterroot Range north of Lemhi Pass in USNRMs whose home ranges include diversity. In making this determination, Idaho (Figure 2). The northern suitable habitat patches coincidental to we consider available scientific geographic extent of the fisher the border, because the closest evidence of the discrete population distribution roughly coincides with the concentration of fishers in Canada is segment’s importance to the taxon to border of the United States and Canada over 200 km (125 mi) north of the which it belongs. Since precise at 49 degrees north latitude. The fisher USNRMs through patchy habitat of low circumstances are likely to vary distribution in the USNRMs is the suitability (Weir 2003, p. 14; Weir and considerably from case to case, the DPS southern extent of the taxon’s known Lara Almuedo 2010, p. 36). The lack of policy does not describe all the classes range in the Rocky Mountains. suitable habitat in southeastern British of information that might be used in Fishers in the USNRMs are physically Columbia likely contributed to the determining the biological and or geographically separate from other failure to reestablish a fisher population ecological importance of a discrete fisher populations. The range of the there in the early 1990s (Fontana et al. population. However, the DPS policy fisher in the West Coast Range of 1999, p. 1; Weir et al. 2003, pp. 24–25). describes four possible classes of Washington, Oregon, and California is We have no direct confirmation that information that provide evidence of a separated from the USNRMs by fishers are moving between the population segment’s biological and distance, natural physical barriers, USNRMs and larger population centers ecological importance to the taxon to including the nonforested high desert in Canada; however, it is likely there is which it belongs. As specified in the areas of the Great Basin in Nevada and some interaction between transient DPS policy (61 FR 4722), this eastern Oregon and the Okanogan individuals from the larger population consideration of the population Valley in eastern Washington, major areas. Reports of transient or juvenile segment’s significance may include, but highways, urban and rural open- fishers moving linear distances up to is not limited to, the following: canopied areas, and agricultural 135 km (84 mi) are known from other (1) Persistence of the discrete development (69 FR 18770; Lofroth et parts of the fisher’s range (Weir and population segment in an ecological al. 2010, p. 47). Occupied areas in the Corbould 2008, p. 48), although shorter setting unusual or unique to the taxon; USNRMs are 150 to 200 km (93 to 124 distances of up to 107 km (66 mi) are (2) Evidence that loss of the discrete mi) from the closest edge of the West more common (York 1996, p. 55). It is population segment would result in a Coast fisher DPS abutting the unlikely that transient individuals significant gap in the range of a taxon; unoccupied Okanogan Valley of provide a functional connection (3) Evidence that the discrete Washington (69 FR 18770, Lofroth et al. between Canada population centers and population segment represents the only 2010, p. 33). Occupied areas in the the USNRMs. Individuals traveling surviving natural occurrence of a taxon USNRMs are approximately 418 km longer distances are subject to a greater that may be more abundant elsewhere as (300 mi) from the closest occupied area risk of mortality, and very few establish an introduced population outside its of the West Coast DPS in the southern the stability of a home range (Weir and historical range; or Cascade Mountains of southwest Oregon Corbould 2008, p. 44) required for (4) Evidence that the discrete or the Olympic Peninsula in successful long-term recruitment. population segment differs markedly Washington (National Park Service Because the intervening areas appear from other populations of the species in (NPS) 2009, entire; Lofroth et al. 2010, unable to support resident fishers, and its genetic characteristics. p. 47). There is no evidence to indicate we believe that the only fishers using A population segment needs to satisfy that fisher in the USNRMs were these areas are transient individuals only one of these conditions to be recently, or historically, connected to attempting to move between population considered significant. Furthermore, other fisher population centers in the centers, we have concluded that the other information may be used as United States (Gibilisco 1994, p. 64; USNRMs fisher population is markedly appropriate to provide evidence for Proulx et al. 2004, p. 57). Maps of separate from those to the north. significance. Below we address historical and recent fisher distributions conditions 1, 2, and 4. Condition 3 does show no connection in the contiguous Summary for Discreteness not apply to fishers in the USNRMs United States between occurrences in We conclude that the fisher in the because North American fishers are the USNRMs and the fisher populations USNRMs is markedly separated from distributed widely within their in the Midwest and Great Lakes area, other populations of the same taxon as historical range in Canada and the which occur approximately 1,126 km a result of physical factors, and thus eastern United States. meets the definition of a discrete (700 mi) away, across mostly Unusual or Unique Ecological Setting nonforested areas of unsuitable habitat population according to the Service’s (Hagmeier 1956, p. 151; Douglas and DPS policy. Because the entity meets The fisher is a forest-dependent Strickland 1987, p. 313; Gibilisco 1994, the first criterion for discreteness species, and marked separation from p. 64; Proulx et al. 2004, p. 57). (marked physical separation), an fishers in other geographic locations There is no indication that a evaluation with respect to the second may be indicated by variations in forest population of fisher exists in a large criterion (international boundaries) is types or ecological conditions geographic area of southern Alberta or not needed. influencing forest characteristics. southern British Columbia in Canada to Fishers in the western portion of the the north of the USNRMs (see Significance range (West Coast, western Canada, and ‘‘Distribution’’ section). Individual If a population segment is considered the USNRMs) generally inhabit fishers have been identified near the discrete under one or more of the landscapes dominated by conifer international boundary and observed conditions described in the Service’s forests, whereas fishers live in more using areas in both Canada and the DPS policy, its biological and ecological dense, lowland forests with higher USNRMs (Fontana et al. 1999, p. 19; significance will be considered in light proportions of deciduous trees in the Albrecht 2010, unpublished data; of Congressional guidance that the Northeast and upper Midwest United Giddings, 2010 pers. comm.). We authority to list DPSs be used States and Canada (Allen 1983, pp. 2– believe that the detections in extreme ‘‘sparingly’’ (see Senate Report 151, 96th 3; Arthur et al. 1989b, p. 687; Powell southern Canada represent wandering Congress, 1st Session) while 1993, p. 89; Buskirk and Powell 1994, individuals, or individuals in the encouraging the conservation of genetic p. 285; Jones and Garton 1994 p. 377;

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:34 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30JNP2.SGM 30JNP2 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules 38517

Ricketts et al. 1999, pp. 156, 160, 170). Batholith (Ricketts et al. 1999, p. 250; population. It is hypothesized that Fishers of the West Coast population McGrath et al. 2002, entire). Hardwood fisher distribution on the landscape is (Washington, Oregon, and California) trees, selected for fisher denning in limited by deep snow (Krohn et al. inhabit forest environments unusual in other parts of the range, are not 1995, p. 103; Krohn et al. 1997, p. 226). comparison to the rest of the taxon, and significant parts of the landscape in the If this is correct, then the precipitation are unique from other parts of the range USNRMs (reviewed by Powell 1993, pp. in the USNRMs, the majority of which based on the unusual forest 55–56; Heinemeyer and Jones 1994, p. falls as snow and is heavily influenced environment (69 FR 18777). Not only iii; reviewed by Lofroth et al. 2010, pp. by topography, could lead to geographic are the forests of the West Coast fishers 101, 108–109). The absence of partitioning and an overall less optimal lacking the broadleaf forest component hardwoods may be a limiting factor to habitat within the region. There are common in the eastern range, but the fishers in the region (Heinemeyer and observations of fishers using areas with coastal climate of wet winters and cool, Jones 1994, p. iii), or an indication of deep, fluffy snow in the USNRMs, dry summers produces distinctive successful adaptation to resources not which also could indicate an adaptation forests of sclerophyllic (leathery-leafed) used elsewhere. Both of these points are to local conditions, but the relationship evergreen trees and shrubs found speculative as there is little information between using or avoiding certain snow nowhere else in the range (Smith et al. available describing natal den selection conditions has not been evaluated 2001 pp. 17–18; 69 FR 18777). or successful reproduction in the statistically. Fishers in Idaho have some In addition to differences of forest USNRMs. of the largest home ranges recorded for type between the USNRMs and eastern Fishers in British Columbia and the species (reviewed by Powell and North America and the U.S. West Coast, Alberta are associated most commonly Zielinski 1994, p. 58; IOSC 2010, p. 4; fishers in the USNRMs occupy forest with the Sub-boreal Spruce and Boreal reviewed by Lofroth et al. 2010, p. 68), areas that differ due to influences of White and Black Spruce Biogeoclimatic possibly indicating suboptimal forest climate and precipitation patterns from Zones in the central to northern areas of resources often found in peripheral fisher population areas in western the provinces (Weir and Lara Almuedo populations (Wolf et al. 1996, p. 1147). Canada. Forested areas of western 2010, p. 36; Meidinger et al. 1991, p. The limited availability of hardwood Montana and central-to-northern Idaho 211; Delong et al. 1991, p. 239). The tree types used for denning in other are temperate, coniferous forests Sub-boreal Spruce Zone is a heavily areas of the range also may indicate a influenced by dramatic elevation forested montane region with uplands local adaptation to different den gradients that produce several types of dominated by Picea engelmannii x structures in the USNRMs and the vegetation zones (Ricketts et al. 1999, glauca (hybrid white spruce) and Abies selection of less optimal structures pp. 213–214, 250–251; Bailey 2009, p. lasiocarpa; Pinus contorta is common based on necessity. 89, plate 1). Topographic relief produces on drier sites (Meidinger et al. 1991, p. More information is needed to localized climate effects which add to 210). The climate of the Sub-boreal elucidate important ecological the vegetation variability within this Spruce Zone is continental and relationships for fishers in the USNRMs. region (Ricketts et al. 1999, pp. 213– characterized by severe, snowy winters Therefore, we do not conclude that the 214). Locally variable in predominant and relatively warm, moist, and short fisher in the USNRMs is significant to tree species or assemblages of species, summers (Meidinger et al. 1991, the taxon as a whole based on ecological this temperate zone encompasses the p. 210). Mean annual precipitation differences alone, but the observed USNRMs extending north along the ranges from 415 to 1,650 mm (16 to 65 differences indicate that fishers in the Continental Divide into southwestern in.) with less than half of that falling as region are subject to suboptimal habitats Alberta and southeast British Columbia snow in winter (Meidinger et al. 1991, and pressures typically seen in (Ricketts et al. 1999, pp. 213–214). p. 210). The Boreal White (Picea glauca) important peripheral populations. The northern areas of the USNRMs and Black (Picea mariana) Spruce Zone Strong selective pressures in peripheral are heavily influenced by maritime is a relatively dry zone with very long, populations may induce adaptations moisture patterns, and in addition to the very cold winters with short summer that may be important to the taxon in predominating Pseudotsuga monziesii, growing seasons, and annual the future. Pacific tree species such as Thuja precipitation averages between 330 and Significant Gap in the Range of the plicata (western red cedar), Tsuga 570 mm (13 and 22 in.), with 35 to 55 Taxon heterophylla (western hemlock) and percent falling as snow (DeLong et al. Abies grandis are present (McGrath et 1991, p. 238). P. glauca, P. mariana, P. The loss of the fisher in the USNRMs al. 2002, entire; U.S. Forest Service contorta, and A. lasiocarpa are major would result in a significant gap in the (USFS) 2009, p. 1). Severe winters with tree species in these zones (DeLong et range of the taxon and contribute to the heavy snowfall are usual and summers al. 1991, p. 238). Both the Sub-boreal extensive range retraction and are usually dry; precipitation is highly Spruce and Boreal White and Black fragmentation that has occurred since variable within the zone averaging Spruce Zones have a representative European settlement of North America between 510 to 1,020 mm (20 to 40 in.) deciduous tree component of Populus (Gibilisico 1994, p. 60). The USNRMs per year primarily falling as snow in tremuloides (trembling aspen), Betula represent one of only three historical fall, winter, and spring (USFS 2009, papyrifera (paper birch), and Populus peninsular reaches of the range in the p. 1). In the southern part of the balsamifera spp. Trichocarpa (black United States connecting with Canada USNRMs, maritime conditions decrease cottonwood) (DeLong et al. 1991, p. 238; and the southernmost extension of the along latitudinal and altitudinal clines Meidinger et al. 1991, p. 212; Weir and taxon’s distribution in the Rocky in the mountains of central Idaho and Corbould 2008, p. 5), all of which are Mountains (Gibilisco 1994, p. 60; Proulx the Bitterroot Range in west-central and tree hardwood types selected by fisher et al. 2004, p. 57). Range retraction in southwest Montana (McGrath et al. for reproductive dens (Weir and Lara the eastern United States south of the 2002, entire). A. grandis, P. monziesii, Almuedo 2010, p. 37). Great Lakes has isolated populations in and western spruce/fir forests, Larix Topographic relief in the USNRMs New England and northern Atlantic spp. (larch), Pinus ponderosa and Pinus produces localized variations in States from Minnesota and Wisconsin, contorta (lodgepole pine) characterize vegetation and seasonal snowfall not although the eastern United States the mountain forests of the Idaho widely seen in the western Canada populations retain connectivity to

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:34 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30JNP2.SGM 30JNP2 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 38518 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules

Canada (Gibilisico 1994, p. 60; Proulx et likely to be in suboptimal habitats and local environmental conditions or al. 2004, p. 57). subject to severe pressures that result in habitat than genotypes evolved Fisher populations in the western genetic divergence, as seen in USNRMs elsewhere (Kawecki and Ebert, 2004, p. United States are isolated from each fisher populations, either from genetic 1225), and the unique genetic other and the closest Eastern population drift or adaptation to local environments characteristics may have factored into in the Great Lakes area, and have lost a (Fraser 2000, p. 50). Because of their sustaining a rare population in the connection or have a severely exposure to strong selective pressures, USNRMs. The forces that shape diminished capacity to connect with peripheral populations may contain adaptation are often strongest in the larger population areas in Canada adaptations that may be important to the periphery of the range, and populations (Gibilisco 1994, p. 64; Zielinski et al. taxon in the future. Lomolino and situated here may be better suited to 1995, p. 107; Aubry and Lewis 2003, Channell (1998, p. 482) hypothesize that deal and adapt to changes in their pp. 86, 88; Weir 2003, pp. 19, 24, 25; because peripheral populations should environments (Lomolino and Channell Weir and Lara Almuedo 2010, p. 36). be adapted to a greater variety of 1998, p. 482). It is the intent of the DPS Extirpation of the USNRMs population environmental conditions, then they policy and the Act to preserve important would significantly impact may be better suited to deal with elements of biological and genetic representation of the species by shifting anthropogenic (human-caused) diversity. The loss of the native fisher the southern boundary of the western disturbances than populations in the lineage in the USNRMs would result in range of the taxon over 965 km (600 mi) central part of a species’ range. the loss of a unique and irreplaceable to the north. Only three individually We conclude that the loss of the genetic identity and the local adaptation isolated fisher populations in Oregon USNRMs fisher population would result and evolutionary potential that goes and California, two being native in a significant gap in the range of the with it. Thus, we conclude that the populations (Aubry and Lewis 2003, taxon by shifting the southern boundary USNRMs fisher differs markedly from p. 88; Lofroth et al. 2010, p. 47), would of the western range over 965 km (600 other members of the taxon in genetic be left in the entire southwest range of mi) to the north, leaving only three characteristics, and this difference is the taxon at a distance of over 800 km individually isolated populations in the significant to the conservation of the (500 mi) from populations in Canada entire southwestern range of the taxon. species. (Weir and Almuedo 2010, p. 36). The Thus, the USNRMs population meets recent fisher introduction to the definition of significant in our DPS Summary for Significance Washington’s Olympic peninsula is not policy. We conclude that the fisher considered here because its population in the USNRMs is significant Marked Genetic Differences establishment as a self-sustaining entity because its loss would result in a has not been demonstrated. Fishers in the USNRMs represent a significant gap in the range of the taxon, The retention of a fisher population in native lineage that escaped extirpation and its genetic characteristics differ the USNRMs is significant to the taxon early in the 20th century (Weckwerth markedly from those of other fisher because of its situation at the periphery and Wright 1968, p. 977; Schwartz 2007, populations. of the range. Populations at geographic p. 924). Close to half of the USNRMs margins, defined as peripheral fishers sampled have a unique Determination of Distinct Population populations, may be of high mitochondrial haplotype [a group of Segment conservation significance and important alleles (DNA sequences) of different Based on the best scientific and to long-term survival and evolution of genes on a single chromosome that are commercial information available, we species (Lesica and Allendorf 1995, closely enough linked to be inherited find that the fisher in the USNRMs is p. 756; Fraser 2000, p. 49). Populations usually as a unit]—Haplotype 12— both discrete and significant to the at the periphery tend not to be given found nowhere else in the range of the taxon to which it belongs. Fishers in the conservation priority because of their taxon (Drew et al. 2003, p. 57; Vinkey USNRMs are markedly separated from existence in lower quality habitats, and 2003, p. 82; Vinkey et al. 2006, p. 269). other populations of the same taxon as these populations are presumed to be Mitochondrial DNA is associated with a result of physical factors, further least likely to survive a reduction in the energy-producing structures within supported by quantitative differences in range (Wolf et al. 1996, p. 1147). This cells called mitochondria, and is genetic identity. The loss of the fisher in presumption is based on an existing inherited through the maternal line. the USNRMs would result in a theory that the cause of a species’ range Individuals with Haplotype 12 are significant gap in the range of the taxon contraction is erosion that commences significantly divergent from all other and the loss of markedly different at the periphery where population haplotypes in having an additional genetic characteristics relative to the numbers are low and progresses to the variation (Haplotype B) within a genetic rest of the taxon. Because the fisher in center where optimal habitats support structure associated with the the USNRMs is both discrete and higher population numbers (Lomolino mitochondria called Cytochrome b, significant, it qualifies as a DPS under and Channell 1995, pp. 336, 338). Upon while all of the other 11 mitochondrial the Act. closer examination, population haplotypes have the Haplotype A of the persistence is not biased toward larger, Cytochrome b region (Vinkey 2003, Distinct Population Segment Five- less isolated or more central regions of p. 79; Vinkey et al. 2006, p. 268; Factor Analysis a species historical range. Of 245 Schwartz 2007, p. 923). Unique genetic Since the fisher in the USNRMs vertebrate species experiencing haplotypes common to the native qualifies as a DPS, we will now evaluate geographic range contraction, 98 percent lineage are expected, considering the its status with regard to its potential for retained some species presence in peripheral location of the population listing as endangered or threatened peripheral populations, 68 percent and a history of severe population under the five factors enumerated in retained greater periphery than core, reduction and isolation (Lesica and section 4(a) of the Act. and 37 percent of species retained no Allendorf 1995, p. 754, Vinkey 2003, Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) core but remained in peripheral p. 82). Locally adapted populations and implementing regulations (50 CFR populations (Channell and Lomolino evolve traits that provide an advantage part 424) set forth procedures for adding 2000, p. 85). Peripheral populations are and higher level of fitness under the species to, removing species from, or

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:34 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30JNP2.SGM 30JNP2 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules 38519

reclassifying species on the Federal including: (1) Timber Harvest and the border of Montana and Idaho Lists of Endangered and Threatened Forest Management, (2) Development (Vinkey et al. 2006, p. 269). Timber Wildlife and Plants. Under section and Roads, (3) Climate Change, and (4) harvest was increasing in the USNRMs 4(a)(1) of the Act, a species may be Fire and Disease. Climate change is as fisher reintroductions (later realized determined to be endangered or discussed under Factor A, because the to be population augmentations) were threatened based on any of the primary impact of climate change on occurring in the late 1950s and early following five factors: fishers is expected to be through 1960s. Clearcutting practices, which (A) The present or threatened changes to the availability and removed all overhead cover in the destruction, modification, or distribution of fisher habitat. Many of harvest area, increased on private and curtailment of its habitat or range; these impact categories overlap or act public lands, and large areas of private (B) Overutilization for commercial, together to affect fisher habitat. timberland were converted to plantation recreational, scientific, or educational Timber Harvest and Forest Management forestry which emphasized clearcutting purposes; and even-aged forest regeneration (C) Disease or predation; Industrial timber harvest in the inland management practices (Hessburg and (D) The inadequacy of existing Northwest United States (Interior Agee 2003, p. 41). With plantation or regulatory mechanisms; or Columbia River Basin), including Idaho rotational forestry, the large tree (E) Other natural or manmade factors and western Montana, did not occur components and coarse woody debris affecting its continued existence. until the early 20th century (Hessburg are suppressed or not allowed to In making this finding, information and Agee 2003, pp. 40–41). Prior to accumulate to the point that they supply pertaining to the USNRMs fisher DPS in 1900, logging in Idaho and Montana denning or cold weather resting sites relation to the five factors provided in supplied timbers only to local concerns (Weir 2003, p. 16). From 1938 to present section 4(a)(1) of the Act is discussed such as mining and railroad day, low-elevation timberlands have below. In making our 12-month finding development, and did not become been depleted of large, older trees on the petition we considered and important to national markets until after considered late-seral or old-growth type, evaluated the best available scientific other forested areas (e.g., Great Lakes and the mid-elevation habitats retain and commercial information. region) had been depleted (Hessburg In considering what factors might only small amounts (DellaSala et al. and Agee 2003, p. 40). Early industrial 1996, p. 213; Lesica 1996, p. 37). The constitute threats to a species, we must logging used selective practices, taking look beyond the exposure of the species majority of presettlement upland old- only large, high-grade or salvage logs growth forest was in the drier forest to a particular factor to evaluate whether (Hessburg and Agee 2003, pp. 41–42). types of ponderosa pine/Douglas fir/ the species may respond to that factor By 1940, many inland northwest areas western larch, which are subject to in a way that causes actual impacts the containing dry forest types, typically of frequent low-intensity underburns that species. If there is exposure to a factor ponderosa pine, were intensively logged reduce ladder fuels (forest fire fuels that and the species responds negatively, the by this method; moist or mesic forest provide fire connectivity from factor may be a threat and, during the types favored by fishers in the Flathead understory to midlevel or canopy fuels) status review, we attempt to determine Valley and Whitefish Mountains in and more shade-tolerant vegetation in how significant a threat it is. The threat Montana and the Coeur d’Alene area of the understory (Green et al. 1992, p. 2). is significant if it drives, or contributes northern Idaho were also affected However, fishers are known to avoid to, the risk of extinction of the species (Lesica 1996, p. 34; Hessburg and Agee such that the species warrants listing as 2003, pp. 41–42). The balance of these forest types and they represent endangered or threatened as those terms forested areas in Idaho and Montana only minor components of areas used by are defined in the Act. However, the showed little or no logging activity up fishers (Jones and Garton 1994, pp. 377– identification of the factors that could to 1940 (Hessburg and Agee 2003, 378; Schwartz 2010, unpublished data). impact a species negatively may not be p. 42). In general, timber harvest and sufficient to compel a finding that the Historical fisher population numbers management over the last century has species warrants listing. The are not known, but reports of their resulted in the loss of old forest and information must include evidence presence declined in the 1920s to a large- and medium-diameter trees that sufficient to suggest that these factors point that the fisher was presumed historically were widely distributed in are operative threats that act on the extirpated in the USNRMs (Williams forest structures other than old growth species to the point that the species may 1963, p. 8; Weckwerth and Wright 1968, forest (Hessburg and Agee 2003, p. 45); meet the definition of endangered or p. 977; Brander and Books 1973, p. 52). still, the amount of land covered by threatened under the Act. Fishers in the USNRMs avoid dry forest forest in the USNRMs is similar to We are required by the Act to assess types (Schwartz 2010, unpublished historical times (Hessburg et al. 2000, threats information that may occur data), and because local subsistence p. 60). Timber harvest, together with fire within the foreseeable future. We define logging and early industrial logging exclusion, has produced younger, foreseeable future as a timeframe in were of limited geographic scale and homogenously structured forest patches, which impacts can be reasonably selected for dry forest types, it is especially in dry forest types, with more expected to occur. Where future unlikely that this contributed directly to canopy layers and more understory projections are not available, it is the fishers’ apparent demise across the vegetation than historically due to fire assumed that current trends will USNRMs area. Other factors or suppression (Hessburg and Agee 2003, continue unless information exists to combination of factors, discussed in pp. 45–46). Fragmentation of managed the contrary. Our evaluation of the subsequent sections, may have had landscapes has increased due to more fisher in the USNRMs follows. more influence on past fisher numerous and smaller patches of population reductions. various forest types, while roadless and Factor A. The Present or Threatened From the 1930s, timber harvest wilderness areas have retained a simpler Destruction, Modification, or continued (Hessburg and Agee 2003, less fragmented structure (Hessburg et Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range p. 41) while native fishers maintained al. 2000, p. 78). From a landscape Under Factor A, we will discuss a an undetected refugium likely, in the perspective, the departure from variety of impacts to fisher habitat Selway-Bitterroot Mountains straddling historical old-growth structure is most

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:34 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30JNP2.SGM 30JNP2 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 38520 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules

pronounced in the northern areas of the forest types where fire frequency and p. 18; Montana Department of Natural USNRMs, with a concurrent shift to intensity was mixed, and windthrow Resources and Conservation (MTDNRC) increasing old-forest multistory stages in was common, resulting in a complex 2010, p. 3). Private lands, including the southern areas (Wisdom et al. 2001, and intricate landscape mosaic of commercial timber operations with the p. 184). young, mixed-age, and late-seral primary objective of maximizing fiber As a result of timber harvest and components (Jones 1991, p. 111; Arno et production, comprise approximately 22 management practices, forest structures al. 2000, pp. 225–227). Thus, the result percent of the fisher forest types. The and quantities of large trees across the of silviculture treatments or harvest may extent of timber harvest operations are USNRMs have been affected. It is resemble the natural disturbances and driven by market forces and difficult to unclear how this has impacted fisher the succession that follows (Powell and predict (Morgan et al. 2005, p. 2), but it populations. There is no information Zielinski 1994, p. 64). is reasonable to conclude that regarding fisher population numbers management to maximize wood Current and Future Timber Harvest and within the region before European production (e.g., pre-thinning of stands), Management settlement, and no region-wide harvest, road construction and population numbers or trends are Commercial timber harvest, maintenance, and other activities will available today to allow a comparison of management for timber production, and continue into the future. the impacts of changes to the landscape the use of forestry techniques to protect, We expect the current timber over time on fisher populations. Fishers restore, and enhance forest ecosystems management and silviculture activity to were so rare as to be considered are ongoing activities in the USNRMs continue on national forest lands guided extirpated before large-scale harvesting and are expected to continue. Fourteen by management plans. The effects of occurred. Fifty years after the national forests comprise approximately present and future forest management introduction of 78 animals to 9 areas in 65 percent of the land area and 72 and timber harvest on the capacity of Idaho and Montana between 1959 and percent of the forest types known to be the USNRMs to support fishers may be 1962 (reviewed by Vinkey 2003, p. 55), used by fishers in the USNRMs (U.S. influenced by many factors, including concurrent with decades of post- Department of Agriculture (USDA) the location, scale, and juxtaposition of introduction timber harvest, fishers, half 2009, entire). Timber harvest or treatments to previous disturbances; the of which are of native lineage, persist on manipulation for either timber suitability of an area to provide fisher the landscape in a wider distribution production or other resource objectives habitat under natural conditions; and than they did before augmentations is stated in each forest’s Land and the habitat needs of fishers. The habitat (Vinkey 2003, p. 82; IOSC 2010, pp. 7, Resource Management Plan, which ecology of fishers in the USNRMs is not 10; MTFWP 2010, Attachment 4). provide direction for a 10- to 15-year well understood. Forest patches with Although there is little information period. National forests are subject to a high densities of large trees, canopy elucidating the density of fisher multi-use mandate and maintenance ‘‘in covers exceeding 40 percent, and populations in the USNRMs, the perpetuity of a high level of annual or riparian areas appear to be important; contemporary distribution of fishers regular periodic output of the various however, information is lacking appears to be similar to the historically renewable resources,’’ including timber regarding fishers’ requirements for patch depicted distribution in Idaho and (PL 104–333), and other legislative size and connectivity (Jones and Garton Montana (Gibilisco 1994, p. 64) (Figure mandates for forest health or fuels 1994, pp. 380, 385–386). Although some 1). reduction (e.g., Healthy Forests information is available from other We are not concluding that a cause Restoration Act (Pub. L. 108–148)), regions, habitat requirements for and effect relationship exists between which may require manipulation of successful denning and rearing of young increased timber harvest or treatment forested areas. Planning directives in the USNRMs are not known. Fishers and increasing fisher distribution. The specify lands for timber production for have been described as using ‘‘old- existing state of the USNRMs landscape long-term sustained yields; however, growth’’ forest types disproportionally is conducive to supporting fisher, but it silviculture (forest removed or treated) to their occurrence (Thomas et al. 1988, is unknown if the system has the acres on all forests in the USNRMs has p. 255); however, there also has been a capacity to support, in the long term, a generally declined over the past 15 lack of clarity in the use of the term self-sustaining population or years, including a significant reduction ‘‘old-growth’’ in forest ecology subpopulations in a metapopulation in clearcutting (USDA 2010a, entire; literature, and description of forest dynamic. Fisher home ranges in Idaho USDA 2010b, entire). The USFS actions characteristics at any particular and Montana are larger than most other are regulated and relevant authorities successional stage vary by geographic areas in the taxon’s range (reviewed by are discussed in the ‘‘Factor D’’ section region, forest type, and local conditions Powell and Zielinski 1994, p. 58; below. (Green et al. 1992 errata 2008, p. 2). reviewed by Lofroth et al. 2010, p. 68; State-owned forestry lands comprise Therefore, without specific parameters, IOSC 2010, p. 4), and this large size approximately 6 percent of the forest basing a loss of fisher habitat on trends could be the result of fragmentation or types preferred by fishers in the of ‘‘old-growth’’ or even ‘‘larger trees’’ low-quality habitat (Powell and USNRMs area. Timber harvest is an may be misleading. Zielinski 1994, p. 60), either naturally activity expected to continue on State Late seral or mature forest elements occurring or human-produced. Timber trust or endowment lands in both States such as snags and overhead cover are harvest and management have of Idaho and Montana, because of the important habitat features for fishers significant potential to alter the responsibility to maximize long-term throughout their range. These mature suitability of a landscape for fishers; financial returns to public schools and forest conditions may take many conversely, management of forests using other trust beneficiaries (Idaho Board of decades to hundreds of years to mechanical means or fire can assist in Land Commissioners 2007, p. 3; develop, and national forest creating conditions that foster larger Montana Code Annotated 2009a, entire). management direction is revised over trees, create snags, increase woody Forest resources are evaluated for short time periods relative to forest debris, or open densely stocked areas to management of a sustainable harvest on succession. National forest lands that provide habitat for fisher prey species. 5- to 10-year review schedules (Idaho support fishers today reflect natural Fishers in the USNRMs evolved in Board of Land Commissioners 2007, processes and silviculture actions

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:34 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30JNP2.SGM 30JNP2 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules 38521

spanning numerous planning periods as infrastructure or removal of cover, and comm.). Recent changes in the USFS’ well as actions taken before fishers could be impacted by increased travel management direction (70 FR comprehensive national forest susceptibility to direct mortality from 68264, November 9, 2005), require that management was mandated in 1976 (16 vehicle collisions, and increased national forest roads are managed in a U.S.C 1601–1614). Given the history of exposure to disease from pets and manner compatible with wildlife forest management and planning, we do animals such as raccoons associated resources. Accordingly, implementation not expect significant changes in the with human development (Ruediger of seasonal or permanent road closures availability of mature forest habitats 1994, p. 3; Carroll et al. 2001, p. 969; to benefit the threatened grizzly bear has through future forest planning cycles. Brown et al. 2008, p. 23). We have no likely provided benefits to fishers in The species continues to occupy its information that disease is a problem for many parts of the USNRMs. presumed historical range despite fishers in the USNRMs, and reports of Rapid housing growth has occurred in habitat alterations that have occurred fisher mortality due to vehicle collision close proximity to public lands in the within that range, although fisher are few (Vinkey 2003, p. 32; Giddings Rocky Mountain region since the 1990s, densities may be different. Fishers in 2010, pers. comm.) (see Factor C with much of it situated in areas already the USNRMs have been observed to use discussion below). considered wildland-urban interface roadless areas of forests, national forest The secondary effects of human and impacted by development (Alig et lands managed for multiple purposes, activity and infrastructure, and roads or al. 2010, p. 9). Additional residential and State forests and industrial forests road use, in causing fisher avoidance or development adjacent to public lands is managed primarily for commercial inhibiting movement on the landscape expected to increase by 10 to 42 percent timber production (J. Sauder, IDFG, are unclear. It is reported that fishers in in some areas of the USNRMs by 2030 unpublished data cited in IOSC 2010, p. California more often used areas with a (Stein et al. 2007, p. 8). The sale of 4), although it is unclear how fishers are greater than average density of low-use private nonindustrial lands (i.e., family- using these environments, or the roads (Dark 1997, p. 50), and, in Maine, owned forests) currently managed for relative importance of each to fishers seldom traveled in the vicinity of timber is a likely source for additional supporting individuals or fisher roads or powerline corridors (Coulter residential development (Alig et al. populations. We expect that fishers’ use 1966, p. 61). Conversely, Arthur et al. 2010, pp. 6–7), although it is uncertain of lands managed for timber production (1989b, p. 687) found that fishers in if a significant quantity of these lands is or multiple uses will occur in the future Maine were fairly tolerant of human mesic forest or dry forest type less under conditions fostered by the activity, including low-density housing, suitable for fishers. continuance of current management. farms, roads, and gravel pits, if forest There is a trend of large, industrially Therefore, we conclude that the best canopy cover was maintained in the managed or corporate forest properties available scientific and commercial vicinity. Roads in forested areas of the being divested for real estate information does not indicate that USNRMs are often constructed along development across the United States current or future forest management riparian corridors or forested valley that is expected to continue into the practices and timber harvest threaten bottoms, which are habitats fishers future. Although large areas of the fisher now, or in the foreseeable prefer. Targeted surveys for fishers are industrial forest are predicted to be lost future. often conducted near roads because of nationwide through 2050, most of this the ease of access and likelihood of loss is due to urbanization in the Development and Roads detecting fisher in a preferred habitat. southern United States (Alig et al. 2010, The USNRMs region encompasses Fishers do not avoid areas adjacent to a pp. 14–15). We know that fishers utilize large tracts of public lands with little or minor State highway that traverses industrial forests in the USNRMs (IOSC no development, wilderness areas, and National Forest land in Idaho (Schwartz 2010, p. 4). The availability of industrial numerous municipalities of varying et al. 2007, p. 6), and other targeted forest lands for other uses will likely size, low-density rural development, rail survey efforts for fishers in northern improve conditions for fishers in lines, road networks and other human Idaho have successfully detected fishers Montana, where over 1,253 km2 (484 developments. Most of the development in the vicinity of roads (Schwartz et al. mi2) of low-elevation commercial forest, and infrastructure, including national 2007, p. 6; Albrecht and Heusser 2009, originally intended to be sold for forest roads, have been on the landscape p. 8). This would imply that fishers are development purposes was instead for decades (Baker et al. 1993, p. 2; not displaced from suitable habitat by purchased for conservation and Havlick 2002, p. 11). Higher density the presence of roads or road use. Roads sustainable forestry by State, Federal, development and road networks are and landscape features such as rivers and conservation organizations situated in broad, open, lower-elevation have been implicated in increasing (MTFWP 2010, Appendix 13, entire; intermountain valleys or lower montane mortality risk to dispersing fishers, but The Nature Conservancy 2010, entire). areas, and most human activity and fishers have dispersed across, and did Dwellings, roads, and other dwellings adjacent to public lands occur not appear to be affected by roads, lakes infrastructure have been on the in dry woodlands or dry forest or rivers in other parts of the range landscape for decades, and areas (Hessburg and Agee 2003, p. 47). (York 1996, p. 46; Fontana et al. 1999, currently developed will see an increase Development in most cases is not far pp. 17; Weir and Corbould 2008, p. 44). in the density of development over the from public lands—primarily national Roads constructed on public lands to next 20 years. It is unknown if fisher forest. Mesic forest types and riparian provide access for resource use and habitats that are currently or potentially corridors preferred by fishers are extraction have been implicated in suitable will be affected directly by generally found at low to mid- increasing access for trappers that target future development. The proximity and elevations, and these highly productive fishers or that may accidentally trap availability of public lands may habitats often coincide with areas that them (Hodgman et al. 1994, p. 598). The moderate a loss of habitat if it occurs, receive above average levels of human closure of roads to provide grizzly bear but the impact to fishers is uncertain use (Carroll et al. 2001, p. 962). Where (Ursus arctos) habitat security is a because of a lack of understanding of development and roads coexist with possible reason for the reduction in how fishers use the lands at the these areas, habitat could be lost fishers harvested in Montana’s Flathead interface of public and private directly by replacement with and Swan Valley (Giddings 2010, pers. ownerships. Increased road traffic and

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:34 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30JNP2.SGM 30JNP2 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 38522 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules

human presence and recreational present the consensus of a large number increase the susceptibility of forest demands on public lands may increase of experts on climate change from vegetation to disease (Westerling et al. the risk to fisher of vehicle collisions around the world, as well as the 2006, p. 943; ISAB 2007, pp. 19, 25). and displacement from suitable habitats scientific papers used in those reports, Riparian areas are used extensively by near areas of high human use. Reports to represent the best available scientific fishers in the USNRMs (Jones 1991, pp. of fishers’ responses to human activity information. Where possible, we used 90–93). Changing water regimes or and the presence of roads are mixed empirical data or projections specific to decreased flow could decrease the and, therefore, difficult to conclude the western United States, which productivity of riparian species and with certainty. Habitat loss and includes the Northern Rocky Mountain affect vegetation structure necessary for increased direct mortality resulting from region, and have focused on prey and security cover. The potential increasing human development are a observations or expected effects on effects of climate change on the health concern but, based on the available forested ecosystems. of riparian systems could be exacerbated information, do not rise to a level of Specific regional projections for the by the demands from increasing human threat to the USNRMs fisher now, or in Interior Columbia Basin and the population, development, and land use the foreseeable future. USNRMs are warmer temperatures, with (Hansen et al. 2002, p. 159). more precipitation falling as rain than Projected changes of climate could Climate Change snow, diminished snowpack and altered result in a wide range of potential We know of no element of the fisher’s stream flow timing, increase in peak outcomes for fishers and their habitat. ecology or physiology that would be flow of rivers, and increasing water The effects to fishers in either the short directly affected by changes in climate. temperatures through the 21st century or long term in a focused geographic Predicted climate changes could impact (to 2099) (Hansen et al. 2001, p. 769; area cannot be reasonably discerned forested environments upon which ISAB 2007, pp. iii, 15–16). The without a specific aspect of the species’ fishers depend; therefore, we address consequences of these projections are ecology or physiology linked to a climate change under Factor A. unclear and could result in positive, confidently projected climate change Climate is influenced primarily by negative, or neutral impacts to fisher variable (e.g., water temperature long-term patterns in air temperature habitat and populations. Fisher habitat tolerance of fish, or early snowmelt and precipitation. The could expand due to warming reducing wolverine denning). Increasing Intergovernmental Panel on Climate temperatures extending the growing temperatures and drought could affect Change (IPCC) concluded that climate season and increased atmospheric fire frequency and intensity and the warming is unequivocal, and evident carbon dioxide escalating vegetation susceptibility of forest vegetation to from observed increases in global growth and extending forest area (Millar disease, but climate change itself does average air and ocean temperatures, et al. 2006, pp. 48–49). It is not represent a threat to fishers now or widespread melting of snow and ice, hypothesized that climate change will in the foreseeable future. and rising global mean sea level (IPCC produce greater tree species richness Fire and Disease 2007a, pp. 30–31). Continued over much of the coterminous United greenhouse gas emissions at or above States because of the current relatively Fire disturbance was an integral force current rates are expected to cause greater species richness in warmer in shaping the Northern Rocky further warming (IPCC 2007a, p. 30). climates (Hansen et al. 2001, p. 774). Mountains forest ecosystem well before Eleven of the 12 years from 1995 The potential habitats of dominant European settlement of the region through 2006 rank among the 12 rainforest conifers (e.g., western (Lesica 1996, p. 33). Lower, drier warmest years in the instrumental hemlock and red cedar that fishers use elevations were prone to frequent, low- record of global average near-surface in the USNRMs) are expected to intensity burns, while cool high- temperature since 1850 (Independent decrease west of the Cascades but elevation forests were subject to intense Scientific Advisory Board (ISAB) 2007, expand into mountain ranges of the stand-replacing events at intervals up to p. 7; IPCC 2007a, p. 30). During the last interior West (ISAB 2007, p. 26). If the 300 years (reviewed by Hessburg and century, mean annual air temperature hypothesis that fishers are limited by Agee 2003, p. 27). The grand fir/ increased by approximately 0.6 °C (1.1 deep winter snow is correct (Raine hemlock/cedar forests known to support °F) (IPCC 2007a, p. 30). Warming 1981, p. 74; Krohn et al. 1997, p. 226), fisher today in Idaho have a history of appears to be accelerating in recent decreased winter snowfall could highly variable mixed-intensity fire decades, as the linear warming trend increase the habitat available to fishers. regimes. Fire severity and return over the 50 years from 1956 to 2005 Changes in temperature and rainfall intervals varied widely ranging from (average 0.13 °C or 0.24 °F per decade) patterns are expected to shift the low-intensity fires with 16-year return is nearly twice that for the 100 years distribution of ecosystems northward intervals, to high-severity fires with 500- from 1906 to 2005 (IPCC 2007a, p. 30). (IPCC 2007b, p. 230) and up mountain year return intervals (reviewed by Climate change scenarios estimate that slopes (McDonald and Brown 1992, pp. Hessburg and Agee 2003, p. 27). Pre- the mean air temperature could increase 411–412; IPCC 2007b, p. 232). Predicted European settlement forests would by over 3 °C (5.4 °F) by 2100 (IPCC climate shifts over the next century likely have been in a shifting mosaic of 2007a, pp. 45–46). The IPCC also could result in the loss of alpine and different successional stages, with 4 to projects that there will likely be regional subalpine spruce-fir forests, for 46 percent of the landscape of trees increases in the frequency of hot example, forcing competition for prey older than 200 years old (reviewed by extremes, heat waves, and heavy between fishers and predators that are Lesica 1996, p. 37). A fire history from precipitation, as well as greater warming now occupying higher elevation niches 1650 to 1900 reveals that local fires or in high northern latitudes (IPCC 2007a, (e.g., lynx) (Koehler 1990, p. 848; no fires occurred in most years. p. 46). We recognize that there are Ruediger et al. 2000, p. 3), or novel Occurring less often were extensive scientific differences of opinion on predator-prey interactions could evolve regional fire events in warm, dry many aspects of climate change, (ISAB 2007, pp. 26, 28). Increasing summers that were preceded by warm including the role of natural variability temperatures without additional springs: Eleven of these events occurred in climate. In our analysis, we rely moisture could stress vegetation, alter in the 20th century (Morgan et al. 2008, primarily on synthesis documents that riparian systems, increase fire risk, and p. 723). One of the largest regional fires

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:34 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30JNP2.SGM 30JNP2 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules 38523

of the 20th century occurred in 1910, of small fisher populations on the Summary of Factor A 2 2 consuming over 11,675 km (4507 mi ) landscape. The fisher is a forest-dependent in northern Idaho and scattered Diseases that affect forest structure species that evolved in the USNRMs in locations in northwest Montana and composition could impact fisher a complex landscape mosaic shaped by (Morgan et al. 2008, p. 721). Regional habitats by reducing cover or altering fire, tree disease, and windthrow. In the fires in the early 1900s consumed more prey availability. Bark beetle USNRMs, younger forests provide mesic forest than regional fires in later (Dendroctonus spp.) eruptions have foraging habitat, but abundant mature years (Morgan et al. 2008, p. 725). It has been affecting forest structure for and old trees that provide extensive been suggested that the 1910 and 1934 canopy cover for resting and possibly fire events, in combination with millennia, but recent drought and increased winter temperatures have denning are also considered important overharvest by the fur industry, elements to support fishers on the contributed to the fisher population contributed to unprecedented rates of beetle infestations in lodgepole and landscape. Fisher populations were decline (Jones 1991, p. 1). greatly reduced to the point they were Active fire suppression by humans in ponderosa pine in the western United believed extirpated in the USNRMs in the mid-20th century has been States (Brunelle et al. 2008, pp. 836– the early 20th century. Human implicated in the accumulation of forest 837). Lodgepole forests in British vegetation believed to contribute to Columbia are a significant habitat type occupation and commercial timber more fire-prone conditions today for fishers in British Columbia, and harvest occurred at low levels early in the century, and anthropogenic (Hessburg and Agee 2003, pp. 44, 46). these forests have experienced alteration of fisher habitat is an unlikely However, a remarkable period between widespread mortality from beetle cause of the species’ population 1935 and 1987 was the longest period of infestation (Weir and Corbould 2010, p. low fire activity of the previous 250 collapse in this region. Over decades, 409). Infestations are widespread in fisher populations resurged, with the years, and the lack of large fire activity forested areas of Idaho and western was more a factor of cooler, wet climate help of augmentations, concurrently Montana (MTDNRC 2009, entire; Idaho with natural climate events such as conditions than fire suppression action Department of Lands 2010, entire), but (Morgan et al. 2008, p. 726). An abrupt drought and fire, and also the the affected forest types are a small permanent or long-lasting effects of change occurred in the 1980s from a fire component of fisher habitat in the regime of infrequent large fires of short development and timber harvest that USNRMs (Jones and Garton 1994, pp. potentially alter the important mature duration, to more frequent longer 377–378). Mortality of the overstory burning fires (Westerling et al. 2006, p. forest structure. occurs in affected stands, but fisher use 942). The shift was associated with Fourteen national forests comprise may not be affected if sufficient unusually warm springs, longer summer approximately 72 percent of the forest dry seasons associated with reduced secondary structure remains (Weir and types known to be used by fishers in the winter precipitation, and early spring Corbould 2010, p. 409). Over time, USNRMs, State forestry lands 6 percent, snowmelt (Westerling et al. 2006, p. affected trees or stands could provide and private lands including industrial 943), a climate pattern seen with standing (vertical) rest and den sites as timber lands comprise approximately 22 historical regional fire regimes. well as contributing to downed woody percent (USDA 2009, entire). Since the 1980s, the Northern Rocky debris in the understory (Simard et al. Commercial timber harvest, Mountains have seen the largest in press, p. 2). Standing beetle-killed management for timber production or absolute increase in large wildfire trees have been considered a significant fuels reduction (such as pre-commercial activity in the forest types least affected fire hazard which could fuel larger, thinning), prescribed burning, by previous fire exclusion: Mesic mid- landscape fires (Bentz et al. 2010, p. recreation and road maintenance and elevation and high-elevation forest types 611). Recent studies indicate that this use are ongoing in the region and we (Westerling et al. 2006, p. 943). Climate concern could be overstated as neither expect these activities to continue. model projections indicate decreased torching nor crowning would be Fishers have been observed to use snowpack, earlier snowmelt, and expected to increase with dead standing roadless areas of forests, national forest increasing temperatures contributing to trees with retained needles, and the lands managed for multiple purposes, longer fire seasons (Westerling et al. likelihood of sustaining an active crown and State forests and industrial forests 2006, p. 943). Moisture patterns are fire in dead stands significantly managed primarily for commercial more difficult to predict than decreases with tree collapse (Simard et timber production. It is unclear how temperature (Global Climate Change al. in press, pp. 2, 28). fishers are using these environments, or Impacts 2009, p. 135; Dai 2011, p. 16). their relative importance to supporting Disease processes are natural forces in Because many climate models predict individuals or fisher populations. higher precipitation levels associated shaping forest environments and may be However, habitats supporting fishers with climate warming, the interaction important in providing denning or today reflect past and current forest between precipitation and temperature resting structures for fishers. We have management, silviculture, and natural increase can be quite complex. If no information that the current bark processes, and we do not expect future temperatures increase without beetle epidemic is negatively impacting changes in the management of forest compensating moisture patterns or fisher habitat or fishers in the USNRMs. conditions to significantly vary from amounts, the predicted warmer springs An increase in incidence of forest current direction. and summers could produce conditions diseases or novel diseases also could Based on the limited available survey favorable to the occurrence of large fires accompany a changing climate, but as information, the contemporary in the future, regardless of past trends with fire, the threat to fisher habitats is distribution of fishers is similar to the (Westerling et al. 2006, p. 943). If this difficult to predict. Based on the historically depicted distribution in occurs, increased fire frequency and available information, climate driven Idaho and Montana, despite alterations intensity in forests could increase the events such as regional fires or disease that have occurred within its range. likelihood of direct fisher mortality, and insect infestations do not rise to the Current fisher population numbers or diminish the capacity of the landscape level of threat to the fisher now or in the trends are unknown. The existing state to support fisher, and increase isolation foreseeable future. of the USNRMs landscape is conducive

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:34 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30JNP2.SGM 30JNP2 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 38524 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules

to supporting fisher, but it is not clear a significant threat to fishers in the (Powell and Zielinski 1994, p. 45). The what the capacity of the system is to USNRMs. An increase in incidence of presence of fishers is closely associated support, in the long-term, a self- forest diseases or novel diseases also with the availability of their prey. In sustaining population or a could accompany a changing climate, general, fisher populations tend to be metapopulation dynamic of but as with fire, the threat to fisher distributed in small or isolated subpopulations. Interpreting the impact habitats is difficult to predict. Based on populations where their habitat or prey of past and present forest management, the available information, climate- distribution is fragmented naturally or resource extraction, or development is driven events such as regional fires that by human actions. Fishers in the complicated by an incomplete picture of may result from projected increases in USNRMs have some of the largest home how the animals are using an altered temperature, earlier spring snowmelt ranges recorded for the species landscape. Given the available and drought, or the increased (reviewed by Powell and Zielinski 1994, information, it does not appear that susceptibility of trees to disease or p. 58; IOSC 2010, p. 4; reviewed by forest management and timber harvest insects due to drought, do not rise to the Lofroth et al. 2010, p. 68), possibly are threats to the species currently or in level of a threat to the fisher in the indicating a fragmented, suboptimal the foreseeable future. foreseeable future. landscape typical of peripheral Dwellings, roads, and other We conclude that the best scientific populations, and consequently small infrastructure have been on the and commercial information available populations. Small or isolated landscape for decades, and currently indicates that the fisher in the USNRMs populations may be more intensely developed areas likely will see an is not now, or in the foreseeable future, affected by the additional mortality from increase in the density of development threatened by the present or threatened furbearer harvest than are more robust over the next 20 years. It is unknown if destruction, modification, or and widespread populations if harvest fisher habitats that are currently or curtailment of its habitat or range to the is not adequately regulated (Powell and potentially suitable will be affected extent that listing under the Act as an Zielinski 1994, pp. 45, 66). There is also directly by future development. The endangered or threatened species is the potential for fisher populations to be proximity and availability of public warranted at this time. seriously affected by unintended lands may moderate a loss of habitat, if Factor B. Overutilization for trapping or incidental trapping for other it occurs, but more needs to be Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or species, including other furbearers understood regarding how fishers are Educational Purposes (Powell and Zielinski 1994, p. 45). using the lands at the interface of public and private ownership. An increase in Unregulated overharvest, and the use Fishers are classified as furbearers traffic on roads, and increased human of strychnine as a trapping and general under State codes in both Idaho and presence and demands for recreation on predator control agent, in addition to Montana (IDFG 2010, p. 35; MTFWP public lands also, may increase the risk habitat loss, eliminated or greatly 2010, Attachment 10, p. 2). The fisher of vehicle collision and displacement reduced fisher numbers across the range also is considered a species of greatest from suitable habitats in proximity to by the mid-1900s (Douglas and conservation need in Idaho. Other areas receiving high levels of human Strickland 1987, p. 512; Powell 1993, furbearer species are legally trapped in use. Reports of fishers’ responses to p. 77). The closure of trapping seasons the State, but trapping seasons for human activity and the presence of in the 1920s and 1930s, reintroductions fishers have been closed for over 60 roads are mixed and, therefore, difficult and augmentations, and land-use years in Idaho (IOSC 2010, p. 12). to conclude with certainty. Habitat loss changes helped restore the fisher’s Fishers are legally trapped in Montana. and increased direct mortality resulting presence in many parts of its range The authority to regulate trapping from increasing human development are (Douglas and Strickland 1987, p. 512; procedures resides with the States’ a concern, but, based on the available Powell 1993, p. 80; Drew et al. 2003, 59; respective fish and wildlife or game information, do not rise to a level of Vinkey 2003, p. 61). The role of land use commissions (Idaho Administrative threat to the population. changes with respect to the increase in Code 13.01.16; Montana Code The Northern Rocky Mountain region fisher presence in the USNRMs is less Annotated 2009b), which review and has a history of local and periodic clear (see Factor A section), but the revise furbearer trapping regulations regional fire and tree disease events. regulation of trapping and end to every 2 years–most recently for the 2010 Fire and disease will continue to shape indiscriminate predator control has to 2012 seasons in Idaho (IDFG 2010, the forest landscape. While most climate likely had a positive influence. entire) and the 2010 and 2011 seasons predictions through the 21st century Trapping seasons were reopened in in Montana (MTFWP 2010, Attachment include increased temperature and many northeastern and Midwestern 10, p. 2). The 2-year rules review period earlier spring snowmelt conducive to States, including Montana, between has been in effect since at least 1986 in longer fire seasons, the uncertainty of 1949 and 1985, with accompanying Idaho and since 2006 in Montana moisture patterns makes regional fire regulations intended to prevent (MTFWP 2007, p. 2; White 2011c, pers. patterns difficult to predict. Forests in overtrapping and population decline comm.). Within this 2-year period, game the USNRMs are vulnerable to an (Powell 1993, p. 80). commissions and State wildlife agencies increasing frequency of large fires, Unregulated trapping was a have authority to close seasons, change which could lead to changes in forest significant cause of severe population season lengths, adjust or implement composition and structure, cause direct declines, because fishers are easily quotas, and apply other means to reduce fisher mortality, diminish the capacity trapped (Douglas and Strickland 1987, impacts to intentionally or incidentally of the landscape to support fisher, and p. 523), and where trapping occurs, trapped populations, if it is considered isolate small populations in a matrix of there is a potential for populations to be necessary (White 2011b, pers. comm.; unsuitable habitat. Although the negatively affected (Powell and Idaho Administrative Code 2010, potential for changing fire frequency Zielinski 1994, p. 64). Fisher 13.01.16; MTFWP 2010, Attachment 10, and intensity exists, these events cannot populations can also be sensitive to the p. 7). Based on the current trapping be predicted with confidence. The effects of trapping because of a slow regulations, fisher will not be targeted, current incidence of bark beetle reproductive rate and the sensitivity of but legal trapping will occur for other infestation does not appear to represent population numbers to prey fluctuations species during the 2-year period in

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:34 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30JNP2.SGM 30JNP2 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules 38525

Idaho, and legal trapping for fishers will density, and spacing patterns (reviewed with the start of a highly publicized be subject to the established regulations by Strickland 1994, pp. 153–158; Koen fisher habitat ecology project, and is and authority in Montana (see Factor D et al. 2006, p. 1489). For example, low indicative of fur trappers’ interest in section below). ratios of juveniles to adult females in a contributing information for the study Most of the population distribution harvest could be indicative of declining (White 2011b, 2011c, pers. comm.). information for Montana is based on populations (Strickland and Douglas Possible explanations of this recent specimens from the regulated furbearer 1981 in Koen et al. 2006, p. 1484), rise in fisher captures include, but are trapping program started in 1979 which could be compensated for by not limited to, population expansion or (MTFWP 2010, p. 2, Attachment 4, altering harvest quotas in succeeding better reporting and awareness, as stated entire; MTNHP 2010b, entire). There are years. In a single season, harvests take above (IOSC 2010, pp. 12–13; White 305 specimens, from legal harvest or several hundred to over a thousand 2011b, pers. comm.). Over the past 40 mortality incidental to legal harvest for individuals from many trapped years, Idaho incidental captures exhibit other species, recorded in MTFWP files populations across the North American a cyclic pattern of distinct highs and since 1968 (Vinkey 2003, p. 51; MTFWP range of the species (Association of lows every 4 to 5 years, which persist 2010, p. 2). Harvest over the past 27 Wildlife Agencies 2010, entire), and for 4 to 5 years. This pattern may reflect years has been most productive in statistical models can be applied to similar cyclic changes in fisher Trapping District 2, which includes the determine population trends or changes population numbers that are unrelated 200-km (125–mi) long Bitterroot Divide in demographics. The small harvest in to trapping effects (White 2011b, pers. with Idaho (MTNHP 2010b, entire), and Montana (from two to five individuals, comm.). The level of incidental captures trapping in Montana over the past 8 depending on the trapping unit) defies demonstrated between 2006 and 2010 is years has been conducted in this area statistical analysis (Giddings 2010, pers. the highest during the 40-year reporting almost exclusively (MTFWP 2010, comm.), and the evaluation of trapping period. Combined with the increase in Attachment 3, entire). The Bitterroot effects is based strongly on anecdotal sightings, the recent high Divide area in west-central Montana is demographics. Juveniles are represented number of captures may be indicative of a strong-hold for fishers of native in the harvest over the past 10 years, an increasing and expanding population lineage that form a population with and the predominant portion of the (White 2011b, 2011c, pers. comm.). fishers in Idaho (Schwartz 2007, p. 924). harvest consisting of younger-aged The number of trapping licenses sold Trapping District 2 has a five fisher males is interpreted as an indication of doubled between 2001 and 2008 in quota, which is filled most years light trapping pressure (MTFWP 2010, Idaho (IDFG 2008, p. 8), which could (MTFWP 2010, Attachment 8, pp. 1, 4). Attachment 8, p. 4), which is likely mean additional trapping pressure and Harvest or other factors may be compensatory to natural mortality. an increased risk of unintended impacting the fishers in Trapping captures. Fishers are most often caught District 1, including the Cabinet Fishers have been caught incidentally incidentally to trapping for American Mountains, in the northwest corner of to trapping for other furbearers in marten (White 2011b, pers. comm.). the State. The trapping quota has been Montana and Idaho. Montana records reduced from 10 to 2 between 1993 and indicate 11 incidental mortalities Although hundreds of martens are 1996, and harvest is low and variable between 1983 and 2009, in addition to harvested most seasons, the number of (MTFWP 2010, Attachment 8, p. 1). A legally harvested animals (MTFWP trappers targeting marten is low harvest level could reflect low 2010, p. 4). Since 1970 in Idaho, 242 comparatively low compared to those trapper effort, difficult access, fishers were trapped incidentally, 37 of targeting other species (IDFG 2007, p. variability in prey availability, or a those were reported as dead in the trap, 11; IDFG 2008, pp. 9–11). Marten small or difficult to detect population. 107 were released alive, and there were trapping efforts have remained steady in Six of the eight individuals captured 98 trapper reports of fishers captured years with both low and high incidental between 2003 and 2008 were adult but no indication of their condition fisher capture (IDFG 2008, p. 10); (MTFWP 2010, Attachment 3, entire), (IOSC 2010, p. 12; White 2011b, pers. therefore, the total number of trapping which suggests, but does not conclude, comm.). Incidental capture of fishers licenses sold may not be a good low recruitment. These low harvest has progressively increased between indicator of increased trapping pressure numbers are consistent with the scarcity 2006 and 2010 in Idaho due to unknown on fishers. of fisher detections described in the reasons, resulting in 22 of the 37 Both Montana and Idaho have a evaluation of the Cabinet Mountain mortalities known to have occurred in mandatory reporting requirement for reintroduction effort (Vinkey 2003, p. the past 40 years (White 2011b, pers. incidental mortality. Only Idaho 33), and possibly indicative of a comm.). In addition, in the past 5 years, requires reporting of animals trapped population that is small or difficult to 42 live releases from traps and 37 and released. The fate of released access. captures of unknown status also were animals is uncertain. Lewis and There is disagreement among reported (White 2011b, pers. comm.). Zielinski (1996, p. 295 and references researchers as to whether trap mortality The IDFG considers the ‘‘unknown’’ therein) report that live fishers are is additive (operates in addition to) or fishers to be live releases because it does difficult to remove from traps, and compensatory (compensates for) to not make sense to report a capture and suffer broken bones, hemorrhage, self- natural mortality. Trapping is often the not a mortality due to the following mutilation, and predation as main mortality factor for fisher (Krohn regulations: there is a legal requirement consequences of capture; estimated et al. 1994, pp. 139–140). Harvest to report all fisher captures, there is no survivability after release for directed mainly at juveniles is most penalty for incidental capture, it is incidentally captured fishers is as low likely to be compensatory, as juveniles illegal to possess a killed fisher, and as 50 percent in some studies. There are have higher natural mortality than there is a small financial incentive to no measures required to avoid or adults (Krohn et al. 1994, p. 144). surrender mortalities (White 2011c, prevent accidental capture of fishers in Numerous models are applied to pers. comm.). A change in the number either Montana or Idaho. Hence, managing harvest quotas to sustain of ‘‘unknowns’’ reported between 2006 additional mortality from incidental populations based on demographic and 2008 to a similar number of live capture and release may not be fully rates, estimated fecundity, population releases in 2009 and 2010 corresponds considered in management evaluations.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:34 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30JNP2.SGM 30JNP2 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 38526 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules

The known incidental capture 2008 period, 30 to 108 fishers were recent incidental captures could be a mortality is less than one fisher per year harvested annually in West Virginia, concern if the trend continues and there over the period of 1970 to 2005 in and the annual harvest in Rhode Island is no evaluation and consideration of Idaho, and 1983 to 2009 in Montana was as high as 97 individuals the potential impacts; however, efforts (MTFWP 2010, p. 4; White 2011b, pers. (Association of Fish and Wildlife are ongoing to elucidate the fisher’s comm.). Additional mortality from the Agencies 2010, entire). Fishers have ecology and devise beneficial trauma of capture and release and been legally harvested in Montana since management strategies. The potential unreported captures is likely, but 1983, with the current Statewide quota exists for targeted or incidental trapping quantification would be speculative. in place since 1996, and are considered to negatively impact fisher populations, The harvested population in west- stable at levels above the past 5-year but based on the available information, central Montana is considered stable, mortality occurrence in Idaho (MTFWP this potential does not rise to the level with the existing trapping pressure, 2010, Attachment 8, p. 3). Mortality in of threat at this time. including the reported incidental Montana and Idaho may be cumulative Summary of Factor B mortality, based on consistent yearly in areas of shared population, such as harvest over time and the continual the Bitterroot Mountains, but that Trapping is considered one of the presence of a high proportion of impact cannot be concluded based on most important factors influencing juveniles in the harvest (MTFWP 2010, the available information. fisher populations, and unregulated Appendix 8, p. 5). Relying on harvest Recent incremental increases in overharvesting contributed to the statistics to assess the status of the fisher incidental capture could be a concern in fishers’ severe population decline in the population in the Cabinet Mountain Idaho if the trend continues and there early 20th century. Targeted legal region of northwest Montana is not is no evaluation or consideration of the harvest occurs in Montana, and possible based on the lack of recent potential impacts to local and regional accidental capture and mortality occur incidental mortalities and limited populations. The available mortality in both Montana and Idaho. If not harvest in the area (MTFWP 2010, and incidental capture data lack context adequately regulated, low levels of Appendix 8, p. 4; Appendix 11). and could be interpreted in ways that harvest-related mortality, added to The impact of the reported level of reach a conclusion of benign or natural mortality, have the potential to unintentional mortality or capture in detrimental effects. The IDFG is negatively impact small, local Idaho is difficult to conclude based on conducting a habitat ecology study to populations. The Montana trapping the available information. As stated assist in adjusting management to season is monitored and regulated, and above, the increase in captures in Idaho benefit fishers, with results expected there is no information to conclude that could reflect an increase of trapper over the next 2 years (White 2011b, the distribution or population numbers effort for other furbearers. Alternatively, pers. comm.). By studying fishers’ of fisher are being negatively impacted increasing captures may result from habitat use, geographic or timing directly by the current trapping regimes. expanding or increasing fisher restrictions can be crafted to limit their Incremental increases in incidental populations and density-dependent exposure to trapping for other species. capture could be a concern in Idaho if displacement of juveniles to less We anticipate that the resulting data the trend continues without some suitable habitats that increase their will also be helpful in elucidating the evaluation of the local and regional vulnerability to capture. In addition, the incidence and trends of fisher mortality population impacts, and application of number of reported live-released in the USNRMs. remedial actions, if necessary. captures could be misleading. Released The role of overtrapping in reducing We conclude that the best scientific fishers are not tagged or identified in fisher populations is well known. and commercial information available any way. Because fishers are easily Trapping regulation, in addition to indicates that the fisher in the USNRMs trapped, it is possible that the live- habitat regeneration and population is not now, or in the foreseeable future, released data represent fewer augmentations in some cases, have threatened by overutilization for individuals who are repetitively contributed to recovery and persistence commercial, recreational, scientific, or captured. Individuals previously of fishers across the species range. educational purposes to the extent that released could be represented in the Fishers are legally trapped in Montana, listing under the Act as an endangered mortality data as well—a consequence but trapping seasons for fishers have or threatened species is warranted at of a later capture. been closed for over 60 years in Idaho. this time. The recent increased mortality in The Montana fisher trapping program Factor C. Disease or Predation Idaho may be compensatory to natural began in 1983. After a period of forces, and thus not affecting population adjustment, the current Statewide Mustelids are susceptible to viral- persistence. However, without a history quotas have been in place since 1996. borne diseases, including rabies, canine of demographic information (sex/age) of Combined with a low level of mortality and feline distemper, and plague the affected individuals, it is difficult to incidental to trapping for other species, contracted through contact with assess additive or compensatory effects. the Montana fisher population is domesticated or wild animals (reviewed Because demographic patterns are not considered stable with the existing by Lofroth et al. 2010, pp. 65–66). available, we look to other areas of the trapping pressure. There is no trapping Antibodies to a number of canine range where fisher populations are for fishers in Idaho, but a small number viruses have been isolated from fishers persisting with sustainable, regulated of fishers have been captured or killed in northwest California (Brown et al. harvest. Although factors affecting incidentally to the trapping of other 2008, p. 2). Parasitism by intestinal population dynamics differ between the species—primarily the American invertebrates (e.g., nematodes, eastern and western U.S. populations, marten—between 1970 and 2005. The trematodes) is common (reviewed by fishers in peripheral populations and reported incidental capture and Powell 1993, p. 72), and evidence of small geographic areas in the east mortality increased between 2006 and other bacterial, protozoan, and persist with regulated harvest far 2010 for unknown reasons; possible arthropod disease agents also have been exceeding the targeted and incidental explanations include an increasing and identified in fishers (Banci 1989, p. v; harvest that occurs in both Montana and expanding fisher population or greater Brown et al. 2008, p. 21). Individuals Idaho. For example: during the 2001– exposure to trapping or both. These weakened by parasitism or other

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:34 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30JNP2.SGM 30JNP2 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules 38527

infectious disease processes may be Local land use laws, processes, and The USFS’ Sensitive Species Policy more vulnerable to other sources of ordinances; (2) State laws and (USFS Manual (2670.32)) calls upon mortality such as predation. However, regulations; and (3) Federal laws and national forests to assist and coordinate little is known about the impacts of regulations. Regulatory mechanisms, if with States and other Federal agencies disease in fishers, and there is no they exist, may preclude listing if such in conserving species with viability documentation of disease-causing mechanisms are judged to adequately concerns. Special management widespread population decline (Powell address the threat to the species such emphasis is placed on Sensitive Species 1993, p. 71; Brown et al. 2008, p. 5). that listing is not warranted. to ensure their viability. The USFS is There is no information on the Seventy-two percent of the land area directed to develop and implement incidence of disease specific to fishers with forests typical of fisher habitat management practices to ensure these in the USNRMs. types (fir, spruce, hemlock, Douglas fir species do not become endangered or Fox, bear, mountain lion, great- (Jones and Garton 1994, p. 377–378)) in threatened. Management is in place at horned owls, and bobcat prey on fishers, the USNRMs is managed by Federal the individual forest plan level or although there is little evidence to entities within national forest or park through regional direction that indicate that healthy adult fishers have boundaries (USDA 2009, entire). addresses habitat needs of fishers. The many natural enemies except humans Approximately 15,969 km2 (6,165 mi2) habitat ecology of fishers in the region (Douglas and Strickland 1987, p. 516; of wilderness areas are incorporated is not well studied, but current Powell 1993, pp. 72–73). Forest within national forest boundaries. management direction addresses forest fragmentation that forces fishers to Private lands, including tribal and characteristics known to be important to travel long distances without suitable commercial timber lands, comprise fishers such as the protection of riparian hiding cover may increase their approximately 22 percent of fisher forest areas, retention of elements such as vulnerability to predation by other types, and the remaining 6 percent is snags and downed woody material, size carnivores (Heinemeyer 1993, p. 26; State or local government forest (USDA of forest openings, and the retention of Powell and Zielinski 1994, p. 62). 2009, entire). Fourteen national forests canopy cover (Samson 2006, pp. 15–16; Predation of fishers newly translocated form large areas of contiguous forested Bush and Lundberg 2008, p. 16). to Montana was reported (Roy 1991, pp. land area, often sharing boundaries with National Forests have been managing 29, 35; Heinemeyer 1993, p. 26), but this State forest lands occupying lower for old-growth forest since the 1990s, was attributed to the relocation elevations of intermountain valleys or guided by regional standardized techniques used and fitness of the transition areas with woodlands or definitions and descriptors (Green et al. individual animals (Powell and nonforested areas. 1992 Errata 2008, entire). The USFS Zielinski 1994, p. 62; Vinkey 2003, p. planning regulations require that forest 34). No information is available Federal Regulatory Mechanisms plans identify certain species as regarding predation of fisher from National Forest Management Act Management Indicator Species in order established populations in the USNRMs. to estimate effects of management Federal activities on national forest alternatives on fish and wildlife Summary of Factor C lands are subject to the National Forest populations (36 CFR 219.20). In There is little known about the Management Act of 1976 (NFMA) (16 addition to Sensitive Species status, the impacts of disease in fishers, and there U.S.C 1601–1614). The NFMA requires fisher is considered a Management is no information on the incidence of the development and implementation of Indicator Species by the Nez Perce and disease specific to fishers in the resource management plans for each Flathead National Forests to guide USNRMs. There is no evidence that unit of the National Forest System. vegetation management of old-growth healthy adult fishers in suitable habitat Implementation rules for resource forest (USFS 1999, p. 11; USFS 2006, p. are subject to excessive rates of planning have undergone numerous 14). Vegetation objectives include predation or that fisher populations in revisions and legal challenges. Planning maintaining or actively restoring the USNRMs are impacted by predation. rules amended in 2008 are being landscape composition, structure, and We conclude that the best scientific and reevaluated, and an amended 2000 patterns to a condition similar to that commercial information available planning rule is currently in place (74 expected under natural disturbance and indicates that the fisher in the USNRMs FR 67059, December 18, 2009). The succession regimes, and managing is not now, or in the foreseeable future, 2000 planning rule emphasizes landscapes to develop larger old-growth threatened by disease or predation to maintaining ecological conditions that patch sizes, healthy riparian areas with the extent that listing under the Act as provide a high likelihood of supporting mosaics of tree age and size classes, and an endangered or threatened species is the viability of native and desired retention of structural elements such as warranted at this time. nonnative species well distributed snags and down logs (USFS 1999, throughout their ranges within a plan Appendix A; USFS 2006, pp. 41–42). Factor D. The Inadequacy of Existing area. Ecological conditions need to be The habitat ecology of fishers in the Regulatory Mechanisms maintained to support the natural region is not well studied, but current To the extent that we identify distribution and abundance of a species management direction addresses forest possibly significant threats in the other and not contribute to its extirpation. characteristics known to be important to factors, we consider under this factor Individual national forests may fishers (USFS 1999, p. 24 and Appendix whether those threats are adequately identify species of concern that are A; USFS 2003a, p. III–7; USFS 2003b, addressed by existing regulatory significant to each forest’s biodiversity. Appendix A; USFS 2006, pp. 41–42; mechanisms. If a threat is minor or the The fisher is considered a sensitive Samson 2006, entire; Bush and effects uncertain, listing may not be species in the USFS Region 1 (western Lundberg 2008, entire). Within the warranted even if existing regulatory Montana and northern Idaho) and NFMA regulatory framework, mechanisms provide little or no Region 4 (central to southern Idaho) management direction and requisite protection to counter the threat. (USFS 2005, p. 4; USFS 2008, p. 6). A monitoring, forest management should Numerous mechanisms affect land and sensitive species is a species identified be consistent with supporting fisher species management in the USNRMs. by a regional forester for which viability habitat where natural ecological These mechanisms could include: (1) is a concern (USFS Manual (2670.5). conditions allow. If each plan area

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:34 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30JNP2.SGM 30JNP2 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 38528 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules

(national forest) supports a natural wilderness areas, formal wilderness ‘‘conserve scenery * * * and wildlife distribution and abundance, then the study areas, and other restricted Federal [by leaving] them unimpaired.’’ Due to large contiguous area of national forest lands (Section 102(d)). Projects the limited access to exploitive lands comprising the USNRMs would conducted to reduce fuels could provide activities such as timber or furbearer have the potential to support a regional a benefit to fishers by creating foraging harvest, National Parks, as with population. habitat if needed, promoting the growth wilderness areas, may provide refuges of larger trees by decreasing National Environmental Policy Act for fisher populations that are a source competition, and reducing catastrophic of individuals dispersing to peripheral As a sensitive species, the USFS is fire risk. While the reverse may be true, areas. required to consider effects in the application of the Sensitive Species documentation completed under the Policy should direct HFRA projects to State Management National Environmental Policy Act improve or maintain suitability of Montana (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). The habitats for fishers. NEPA requires Federal agencies to Regulatory mechanisms related to consider the environmental impacts of The Wilderness Act fisher conservation in Montana apply to their proposed actions and reasonable The USFS manages lands designated State forest and furbearer harvest alternatives to those actions. To meet as wilderness areas under the management. Montana State forests with this requirement, Federal agencies Wilderness Act of 1964 (16 U.S.C. 1131– fisher habitat types are situated in the conduct environmental reviews, 1136). Within these areas, the northwest and north-central part of the including Environmental Impact Wilderness Act states the following: (1) State, often sharing boundaries or Statements and Environmental New or temporary roads cannot be built; interspersed with national forest lands Assessments. The NEPA does not itself (2) there can be no use of motor in lower elevations of intermountain regulate activities that might affect vehicles, motorized equipment, or valleys. Timber harvest for revenue fishers, but it does require full motorboats; (3) there can be no landing generation is conducted on an annual evaluation and disclosure of of aircraft; (4) there can be no other form basis and includes forest types preferred information regarding the effects of of mechanical transport; and (5) no by fishers; forests also are managed to contemplated Federal actions on structure or installation may be built. promote a diversity of habitat sensitive species and their habitats. Lower-elevation forest in wilderness conditions beneficial to wildlife areas may be important refuges for (MTDNRC 2010, p. 1). Fishers are Healthy Forest Restoration Act fishers because of limited human access managed as a sensitive species The Healthy Forest Restoration Act of and less fragmentation than managed ‘‘primarily through managing for the 2003 (Pub. L. 108–148) (HFRA) forests (Hessburg et al. 2000, p. 78). For range of historically occurring improves the capacity to conduct example: The Selway-Bitterroot conditions appropriate to the site’’ hazardous fuels reduction projects on Wilderness in Idaho may have (Administrative Rules of Montana national forest lands to protect functioned as a refugium for native (ARM) 2003, 36.11.436). In 2003, communities within or adjacent to fishers that enabled their survival MTDNRC formally codified mitigation USFS boundaries (wildland-urban through the severe population decline measures specific to forest types interface); municipal watersheds at risk in the past, and the area appears to be preferred by fisher for State forest from fire; areas where windthrow or the a stronghold for native fishers today management including: Timber and existence or imminent risk of an insect (Vinkey 2003, pp. 90–91). salvage harvest, thinning, prescribed or disease epidemic significantly burning, road maintenance, and other threatens ecosystem components or National Park Service Organic Act activities (ARM 2003, entire). Project- resource values; and areas where The National Park Service Organic level evaluation emphasizes large snag wildland fire poses a threat to Act of 1916 (16 U.S.C. 1 et seq.), as and coarse woody debris retention and threatened and endangered species or amended, states that the NPS ‘‘shall emulation of natural forest patch size their habitat, or where the natural fire promote and regulate the use of the and shape to maintain or contribute to regimes are important for their habitat. Federal areas known as national parks, connectivity with crown canopy closure Provisions of the HFRA can be used monuments, and reservations to of greater than 39 percent and patch to expedite vegetation treatment, such conserve the scenery and the national greater than 91 m (300 ft) wide (ARM as mechanical thinning or prescribed and historic objects and the wildlife 2003, 36.11.403). Riparian areas, within fire, which could be beneficial or therein and to provide for the enjoyment 100 ft of class-I (fish bearing) streams detrimental to fishers on national forest of the same in such manner and by such and 50 ft of class-II (non-fish bearing) lands. The USFS and Department of the means as will leave them unimpaired streams, maintain or are allowed to Interior revised their internal for the enjoyment of future progress to at least 40-percent canopy implementing procedures describing generations.’’ Fishers or sign of fishers cover (ARM 2003, 36.11.440). There is categorical exclusions exempt from have been reported in Glacier National no specific direction to retain mature or NEPA review to expedite hazardous- Park in northern Montana, but recent larger trees for fisher independent of fuels reduction and vegetation verified information is lacking. The snag retention, but it is stated that the restoration projects meeting certain Park’s west side is a mix of conifer importance of late-successional riparian criteria (68 FR 33813, June 5, 2003; 68 forests, with maritime-influenced and upland forest shall be considered in FR 44597, July 29, 2003). western hemlock and western red cedar meeting the requirements for fishers The HFRA requires authorized existing in ‘‘ancient stands in places’’ (ARM 2003, 36.11.440). projects, including categorical (NPS 2010, entire), and likely capable of The fisher is classified as a regulated exclusions under NEPA, to be planned supporting fishers. The NPS does not furbearer in Montana (MTFWP 2010, and conducted consistent with resource manage habitats specifically for fishers, Attachment 10, p. 2). Montana is the management plans and other relevant but where fishers occur in Glacier only State in the western United States administrative policies, such as the National Park, they and their habitats where fisher trapping is still legal. USFS’ Sensitive Species Policy, and are protected from large-scale loss or Trapping season is open December 1 to prohibits authorized projects in degradation due to the NPS’ mandate to February 15, or within 48 hours of a

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:34 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30JNP2.SGM 30JNP2 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules 38529

quota being reached (MTFWP 2010, thresholds for adjusting quotas or unharmed or, if animals appear injured, Attachment 10, p. 7). There is practices. the IDFG is contacted for assistance authorization to close the season if (IDFG 2010, p. 36). Trappers are Idaho conditions or circumstances indicate a reimbursed $10 for the surrendered quota will be reached within 48 hours The fisher is identified as a species of carcass and are required to report the (MTFWP 2010, Attachment 10, p. 7). greatest conservation need in the Idaho capture, dead or released alive, on the Two districts are open for trapping— Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation harvest report. We are not aware of a District 1 in the northwest has a quota Strategy, which recommends actions to mechanism in place to adjust a trapping of two, including the Cabinet determine fisher population trends, season while in session, such as closing Mountains, and District 2 in west- landscape and regional scale response to a unit or area early, to accommodate an central Montana, including the habitat disturbance, genetic composition incidental take of a fisher or fishers. We Bitterroot Mountains, has a quota of of populations, and the relationship have no knowledge of how the reports five; there is a Statewide sub-quota of between habitat fragmentation and of incidental take of a fisher or fishers two females (MTFWP 2010, Attachment movement patterns (IDFG 2005, p. 365, are used to adjust subsequent marten 10, p. 7). Only one fisher may be taken Appendix B, p. 8). Species of greatest seasons or quotas, or those of other per person per season, and take must be conservation need are those considered target species that fisher could be caught reported within 24 hours to the MTFWP at high risk due to low number, incidentally to, in order to avoid (MTFWP 2010, Attachment 10, p. 7). declining numbers, or other factors that additional mortality. make them vulnerable to extirpation Reporting and surrender of an Management on National Forests and accidental mortality (unintended (IDFG 2005, Appendix B, pp. 1, 8). There are no identified regulatory State Forests for Other Species capture or outside legal season) must be Benefitting Fisher done within 24 hours of capture, and mechanisms that apply to habitat only uninjured animals can be released management for fisher in the State. All national forests in the USNRMs Implementing rules that protect from traps (MTFWP 2010, Attachment have amended their forest plans with riparian areas from timber harvest 10, p. 7). There are no penalties for the Northern Rockies Lynx Management actions for the Idaho Forest Practices surrendering an accidentally killed Direction to provide protections and Act apply to operations on lands under fisher, but there are penalties and fines conservation for the Canada lynx (USDA all management types. Management for being in possession of an 2007, entire). Lynx utilize mesic goals for class I streams include the coniferous forests although their range incidentally taken fisher (MTFWP 2010, retention of standing conifers, extends to higher elevation zones than p. 4). There is no regulatory mechanism hardwoods and snags within 15 m (50 fishers (reviewed by Ruediger et al. or requirement in place to minimize ft) on each side, leaving 75 percent of 2000, p. 1–3). Lynx similarly prefer to incidental take of fisher. existing shade, and within 9 m (30 ft) on move through continuous forest cover, Harvest quotas and seasons are each side of class II streams (Idaho frequently use riparian zones, and target evaluated and set by the MTFWP Administrative Code 2000, 20.02.01). snowshoe hare as a principle prey Commission every year, with the The fisher is legally classified as a species (reviewed by Ruediger et al. general regulations established for 2- furbearer in Idaho, but no legal season 2000, pp. 1–4, 1–7). Large woody debris year periods (Montana Code Annotated has been open for over 60 years (Idaho within mature or older conifer or mixed- 2009b; MTFWP 2010, Attachment 10, p. Administrative Code 2010, 13.01.16; conifer sites are selected by female lynx 2). Trends in harvest success, IOSC 2010, p. 11). Capture of fishers has for denning, and these elements are demographics (age class/sex), and snow occurred, primarily incidentally to known to be used by fishers (Jones and track surveys are used to determine the legally trapped marten during the open Garton 1994, p. 380; reviewed by effectiveness of the quota system and season from November 1 through Ruediger et al. 2000, p. 1–4; reviewed by assist in the State’s objective of January 31 (White 2011a, pers. comm.). Lofroth et al. 2010, p. 106). Direction is maintaining current fisher population There are no legislated regulatory in place for national forest lands to size and distribution (MTFWP 2010, mechanisms in place to minimize provide connectivity for lynx travel Attachment 8, pp. 1–3). A consistent incidental take of fisher, but voluntary throughout the USNRMs (USDA 2007, harvest and the presence of juveniles are trapper education is provided to help p. 27). Standards and guidelines for considered an indication of a stable direct trapping towards the intended specific habitat protections are applied population (MTFWP 2010, pp. 1–2). species (White 2011a, pers. comm.). in the north half of the USNRMs, where Snow track surveys are conducted along Marten and other furbearer trapping is habitats are known to be occupied by fixed routes in some areas of the State conducted under Statewide licensure lynx (USDA 2007, p. 29). Specific that do not receive targeted fisher but management occurs at smaller, measures are applied at the scale of a harvest (MTFWP 2010, Attachment 8, p. regional levels. There is no limit to the female lynx’s home range, which is 3); however, track surveys are number of Statewide licenses sold, and similar to home range sizes reported for conducted sporadically and are very no seasonal quotas for marten are in fisher in the USNRMs and British dependent on snow conditions for place (White 2011b, pers. comm.). The Columbia (reviewed by Ruediger et al. usefulness (Giddings 2010, pers. IDFG Commission has the authority to 2000, p. 6–2; reviewed by Lofroth et al. comm.). Quotas have been adjusted set bag or possession limits and seasons 2010, p. 68). These measures include downward several times since the (Idaho Administrative Code 2010, limiting disturbance by timber harvest establishment of the regulated trapping 13.01.16). A mandatory furtaker harvest and other activities, maintaining program in1983 in response to harvest report is required to be submitted to the patches conducive to denning and success, demographics of harvested IDFG by July 31 to assist with setting retention of coarse woody debris, animals, and track survey data. Quotas season limits (IDFG 2010, p. 38). An protecting regenerating areas that and harvest have been relatively incidental capture of a fisher that results provide snowshoe hare habitat, and consistent since 1996 (MTFWP 2010, in mortality requires reporting and retaining wooded areas (USDA 2007, Attachment 8, pp. 1, 3). We are not surrender of the carcass to IDFG within pp. 8–28). aware of any established objectives or 72 hours; live animals require In 1998, the Service issued a direction that indicates action immediate release if they appear biological opinion on the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:34 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30JNP2.SGM 30JNP2 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 38530 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules

implementation of USFS Land and the trapping of other furbearing animals. 405). This results in low population Resource Management Plans as The authority exists under States’ laws densities, as the population requires a amended by the Interim Strategy for to manage trapping programs, large amount of quality habitat for Managing Fish-Producing Watersheds in specifically for fisher, as well as other survival and proliferation. Fishers also Eastern Oregon and Washington, Idaho, species. However, we are unaware of are long-lived, have low reproduction Western Montana, and Portions of any policy or management direction that rates, and, though capable of long- Nevada (INFISH) (Service 1998, entire). would invoke that authority and apply distance movements, generally have The guidelines, developed to protect adaptive management or minimization small dispersal distances. Small bull trout and other fish habitat, also measures to reduce additional mortality dispersal distances may be a factor of may provide benefits to fisher by from unintended harvest. Since we did fishers’ reluctance to move through protecting riparian corridors, not consider that the threat of incidental areas with no cover (Buskirk and Powell establishing large woody debris mortality, based on the limited 1994, p. 286). Thus, where habitat is requirements, and delineating Riparian information available to us, rose to the fragmented it is more difficult to locate Habitat Conservation Areas which level of a threat to the species in the and occupy distant yet suitable habitat, would prohibit timber harvest in most foreseeable future, it is not necessary to and fishers may be aggregated into situations. Conservation Areas would be consider the effectiveness of the relative smaller interrelated groups on the established within 91 m (300 ft) slope regulatory mechanism. landscape (Carroll et al. 2001, p. 974). distance of either side of class I streams, We conclude that the best scientific Territoriality and habitat specificity to 46 m (150 ft) on both sides of and commercial information available compounded by habitat fragmentation perennial class II streams, and within 15 indicates that the fisher in the USNRMs may contribute to the strong genetic to 30 m (50 to 100 ft) of seasonal or is not now, or in the foreseeable future, structuring over intermediate intermittent streams and small wetlands threatened by the inadequacy of existing geographic distances seen in fisher (Service 1998, p. 9). regulatory mechanisms to the extent populations in other parts of the The USNRMs covers an area that that listing under the Act as an species’ range (Kyle et al. 2001, p. 2345; includes all or part of the Northern endangered or threatened species is Wisely et al. 2004, pp. 644, 646). Higher Continental Divide, Selway-Bitterroot, warranted at this time. It is unclear that levels of genetic structuring describe Selkirks, and Cabinet-Yaak Grizzly Bear regulatory mechanisms in addition to populations that are more genetically Recovery Zones. Fishers may benefit those described are needed for the distinct and have less intrapopulation from the reduction of road densities or species based on the current variation, a condition occurring in reduced motorized use of roads on understanding of threats. peripheral or more disturbed habitats of national forest lands or the large areas a species’ range with low effective of core habitat within 3rd and 4th order Factor E. Other Natural or Manmade population sizes and limited genetic watersheds with no motorized travel Factors Affecting Its Continued exchange (Kyle and Strobeck 2001, p. routes or high use trails within the Existence 343). Where these conditions exist, recovery zones (Interagency Grizzly Population Size and Isolation species face an increased vulnerability Bear Committee 1998, entire). to extinction (Wisely et al. 2004, p. 646). Management direction intended to A principle of conservation biology is Small, isolated populations can be at protect other species listed under the that small, isolated populations are risk from stochastic factors. Endangered Species Act could provide subject to an increased risk of extinction Demographic stochasticity (the chance benefit to fishers on Montana State from stochastic (random) events associated with annual survival forests. Montana State forests located in environmental, genetic, or demographic and reproduction) and environmental the Cabinet-Yaak and Northern events (Brewer 1994, p. 616). stochasticity (temporal fluctuations in Continental Divide Recovery Zones for Environmental changes such as drought, environment conditions) tend to reduce the threatened grizzly bear are managed fire or storms have severe consequences population persistence (Shaffer 1981, p. to limit road density and maintain if affected populations are small and 131). Combinations of factors can hiding cover near roads and adjacent to clumped together (Brewer 1994, p. 616). interact to increase the risk of riparian areas (ARM 2003, 36.11.432– Loss of genetic diversity can lead to extinction. Trapping pressure, for 433). Retention of coarse woody debris, inbreeding depression and an increased example, if additive to natural mortality, vegetative cover for landscape risk of extinction (Allendorf and Luikart could act by itself or in combination connectivity, and habitat for a common 2007, pp. 338–343). Demographic with environmental conditions to have prey species—snowshoe hare—are changes can reduce the effective significant impact on annual survival. intended to contribute to Canada lynx population size (number of breeding Regional fires that have occurred (Lynx Canadensis) habitat requirements individuals). Populations with small historically in the USNRMs could (ARM 2003, 36.11.435). The retention of effective size show reductions in reduce the suitability of large forest vegetation and minimization of population growth rates, loss of genetic tracts for decades, reducing habitat and disturbance in riparian areas to protect variability, and increases in extinction further isolating small populations. bull trout habitat also could benefit probabilities (Leberg 1990, p. 194; As stated above, we have little fisher on State forest land. Jimenez et al. 1994, p. 272; Allendorf information to indicate the number of and Luikart 2007, pp. 338–339). individuals, population dynamics, or Summary of Factor D There is little information to indicate evidence of genetic structuring and In our review of the factors affecting fisher population numbers or inbreeding for fishers in the USNRMs. fishers in the USNRMs, we found no population dynamics in the USNRMs. Although we have no information on single factor or accumulated effects of Fishers are vulnerable to the effects of fisher abundance, their home range factors that, when considered within the small populations and isolation based sizes are large—an indication that the foreseeable future, rose to a level on characteristics of their life history. availability of resources may be limiting significant enough to warrant the Fishers are known to be solitary and population size. Their restricted protections of the Act. There is a territorial, and require large home geographic range, based on isolation concern regarding the adequate control ranges where landscapes are less than from larger populations in Canada or the of mortality due to capture incidental to optimal (Weir and Corbould 2010, p. United States, frequently correlates with

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:34 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30JNP2.SGM 30JNP2 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules 38531

small population size (Purvis et al. potential threats, to the extent that regimes exists, these events are 2000, p. 1947). Given the restricted listing under the Act as an endangered dependent on complex patterns of distribution, the presumably small or threatened species is warranted at moisture availability and cannot be population size, and propensity to this time. predicted with confidence. aggregate on the landscape, fishers in Targeted legal harvest of fishers Finding—Determination of Status of the USNRMs are vulnerable to occurs in Montana and accidental Distinct Population Segment demographic, environmental, and capture and mortality occurs in both genetic stochasticity, which could As required by the Act, we considered Montana and Idaho. Low levels of impact long-term persistence. The the five factors in assessing whether the additional mortality from harvest to USNRMs fisher population resurged fisher in the USNRMs is endangered or natural mortality have the potential to from near extirpation in the 1920s with threatened throughout all or a negatively impact small, local possible assistance from augmentations. significant portion of its range. We have populations if not adequately regulated. It is likely that the historical carefully examined the best scientific There is no indication that the populations were never large. Fishers’ and commercial information available distribution or population numbers of response to the impacts of a changing regarding the status and the past, fisher are being negatively impacted landscape from human development present, and future threats faced by the directly by the current trapping regimes and timber harvest are uncertain. The fisher in the USNRMs. We reviewed the in Montana. Recent increases in species appears to have several petition, information available in our incidental capture and associated characteristics related to small files, and other published and mortality could be a concern in Idaho if population size that increase the unpublished information submitted to the trend continues without some species’ vulnerability to extinction from us by the public following our 90-day evaluation of the local and regional stochastic events and other threats on petition finding. We also consulted with population impacts and remedial the landscape. Currently, we do not fisher experts and other Federal and actions applied, if necessary. have sufficient information on these State resource agencies. We were able to A restricted geographic range like the environmental or anthropogenic threats qualitatively describe a foreseeable fisher’s in the USNRMs frequently to know whether they affect small future for forest management, correlates with small population size, populations to an extent that threatens development, and climate change and and it is likely that the historical the fisher in the USNRMs. We are discussed how we anticipate each factor populations were never large. Given the unable to quantify a foreseeable future to change over time. We were unable to restricted distribution, the presumably for stochastic events that may have project specific changes to the species small population size, and propensity to disproportionate negative effects on from these foreseeable actions into the aggregate on the landscape, fishers in small population sizes. We do not future because we do not have sufficient the USNRMs are vulnerable to anticipate the effects of these events on data to know how the analyzed factors extinction from stochastic events and small population size to change, but our will affect the species. other threats on the landscape which understanding of these effects may The fisher is a forest-dependent could impact long-term persistence. improve over time. species that evolved in the USNRMs in Fishers’ response to the impacts of a a complex landscape mosaic shaped by changing landscape from human Summary of Factor E climate driven events such as fire, development, timber harvest and Based on the best available drought, and forest diseases. Fisher climate change are uncertain. As stated information, we have no indication that populations were greatly reduced to the above, trapping pressure, if additive to other natural or anthropogenic factors point they were believed extirpated in natural mortality, could act by itself or are likely to significantly threaten the the USNRMs in the early 20th century in combination with environmental existence of the fisher in the USNRMs. due to unregulated overharvest and conditions to have significant impact on We recognize the inherent indiscriminate predator control. annual survival. Currently, we do not vulnerabilities of small populations and Although current comprehensive fisher have information on these threats to an restricted geographic range. The impacts population numbers and trends are not extent that allows us to know whether of various potential threats can be more known, fisher populations have small population size allows for other pronounced on small or isolated resurged from previous lows environmental or anthropogenic factors populations, and we have identified concurrently with the effects of human to create a threat to the fisher in the numerous potential threats occurring on development and timber harvest and the USNRMs. the landscape within the range of the regulation of harvest. The USNRMs Our review of the best available fisher in the USNRMs (see Factor A and landscape supports fisher, but it is scientific and commercial information B section). However, at this time we do unknown if the system has the capacity pertaining to the five factors does not not have information to indicate that to support a population long term. support the assertion that there are these activities pose a threat to the Interpreting or projecting the impacts of threats of sufficient imminence, fisher. Additionally, we do not consider forest management, development, and intensity, or magnitude to indicate that a small population alone to be a threat resource extraction is complicated by a the fisher in the USNRMs is in danger to species; rather, it can be a lack of knowledge of fisher habitat of extinction (endangered) within the vulnerability that can make it more ecology in the region, and mixed reports foreseeable future (threatened), susceptible to threat factors, if they are of how fishers respond to human throughout all or significant portion of present. disturbance. Fisher habitats could be its range. Therefore, we find that listing We conclude that the best scientific vulnerable to the climate change effects the fisher in USNRMs throughout its and commercial information available of increased temperature and earlier range as an endangered or threatened indicates that the fisher in the USNRMs spring snowmelt predicted to produce species is not warranted at this time. is not now, or in the foreseeable future, longer fire seasons. An increase in In making this finding, we recognize threatened by other natural or incidence of forest diseases or novel that the fisher in the USNRMs, despite anthropogenic factors affecting its diseases also could accompany a not being warranted for listing as continued existence, or that these changing climate. Although the endangered or threatened, may benefit factors act cumulatively with other potential for changing fire and disease from increased management emphasis

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:34 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\30JNP2.SGM 30JNP2 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2 38532 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 126 / Thursday, June 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules

due to its need for forest cover and further consideration, we determine of population numbers and dynamics, susceptibility to capture and mortality whether there is substantial information and an incomplete knowledge of from furbearer harvest. We recommend indicating that: (1) The portions may be tolerances to disturbance and habitat precautionary measures to protect the significant, and (2) the species may be needs, does not allow us to determine species be continued where they are in in danger of extinction there or likely to what portion of the range if any, would place and expanded where they are not. become so within the foreseeable future. be impacted to a significant degree more We recommend and encourage In practice, a key part of this analysis is than any other. additional research to improve the whether the threats are geographically Conclusion of 12-Month Finding understanding of the species, so that our concentrated in some way. If the threats responses to future potential threats can to the species are essentially uniform We do not find that the fisher in the be better understood. throughout its range, no portion is likely USNRMs is in danger of extinction now, Significant Portion of the Range to warrant further consideration. nor is it likely to become endangered Moreover, if any concentration of within the foreseeable future, Having determined that the fisher in threats applies only to portions of the throughout all or a significant portion of the USNRMs is not in danger of species’ range that clearly would not its range. Therefore, listing the species extinction or likely to become so within meet the biologically based definition of as endangered or threatened under the the foreseeable future throughout all of ‘‘significant’’ (i.e., the loss of that Act is not warranted at this time. its range, we must next consider portion clearly would not reasonably be We request that you submit any new whether there are any significant expected to increase the vulnerability to portions of the range where the fisher in information concerning the status of, or extinction of the entire species to the threats to, the fisher in the USNRMs to the USNRMs is in danger of extinction point that the species would then be in or is likely to become endangered in the our Montana Ecological Services Field danger of extinction), such portions will Office (see ADDRESSES section) foreseeable future. not warrant further consideration. The Act defines an endangered whenever it becomes available. New species as one ‘‘in danger of extinction If we identify portions that warrant information will help us monitor this throughout all or a significant portion of further consideration, we then species and encourage its conservation. its range,’’ and a threatened species as determine their status (i.e., whether in If an emergency situation develops for one ‘‘likely to become an endangered fact the species is endangered or the fisher in the USNRMs or any other species within the foreseeable future threatened in a significant portion of its species, we will act to provide throughout all or a significant portion of range). Depending on the biology of the immediate protection. species, its range, and the threats it its range.’’ The term ‘‘significant portion References Cited of its range’’ is not defined by the faces, it might be more efficient for us statute. For the purposes of this finding, to address either the ‘‘significant’’ A complete list of references cited is a portion of a species’ range (fisher in question first, or the status question available on the Internet at http:// the USNRMs) is ‘‘significant’’ if it is part first. Thus, if we determine that a www.regulations.gov and upon request of the current range of the species, and portion of the range is not ‘‘significant,’’ from the Montana Ecological Services it provides a crucial contribution to the we do not need to determine whether Field Office (see ADDRESSES section representation, resiliency, or the species is endangered or threatened above). redundancy of the species. For the there; if we determine that the species contribution to be crucial it must be at is not endangered or threatened in a Author a level such that, without that portion, portion of its range, we do not need to The primary author of this document the species would be in danger of determine if that portion is is staff of the Montana Ecological ‘‘significant.’’ extinction. Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER In determining whether a species is Applying the process described above INFORMATION CONTACT section above). threatened or endangered in a for determining whether a species is significant portion of its range, we first threatened in a significant portion of its Authority identify any portions of the range of the range, we considered status first to The authority for this action is the species that warrant further determine if any threats or potential Endangered Species Act of 1973, as consideration. The range of a species threats acting individually or amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). can theoretically be divided into collectively threaten or endanger the portions in an infinite number of ways. species in a portion of its range. We June 14, 2011. However, there is no purpose to have analyzed the threats to the degree Gabriela Chavarria, analyzing portions of the range that are possible, and determined they are Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife not reasonably likely to be significant essentially uniform throughout the Service. and threatened or endangered. To species’ range. The limited information [FR Doc. 2011–16349 Filed 6–29–11; 8:45 am] identify only those portions that warrant available for the fisher, such as the lack BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:34 Jun 29, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\30JNP2.SGM 30JNP2 emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS2