United States Department of the Interior
FISHANDWILDLIFESERVICE SouthFloridaEcologicalServicesOffice 133920(11Street Vero Beach,Florida32960
July 18,2016
JasonA. Kirk District Commander U.S.Army Corpsof Engineers PostOffice Box 4970 Jacksonville,Florida 32232-0019
ServiceCPA Code: 04EF2000-2016-CPA-0045 ServiceConsultationCode: 04EF2000-20I 6-F-0411 CorpsApplicationNo: SAJ-2015-00557(NW-CMW) DateReceived: November13,2015 ConsultationInitiation Date: May 25,2016 Applicant: TaylorMorrisonof Florida Project: Villagesof ManasotaBeach County: Sarasota
DearColonelKirk:
The U.S.FishandWildlife Service(Service)hasreceivedtheU.S.Army Corpsof Engineers’ (Corps)requestfor consultationdatedNovember13,2015for their issuanceof a permitto fill wetlandsunder Section404 of theCleanWaterAct to Taylor Morrisonof Florida(Applicant) for their proposedVillagesof ManasotaBeachresidential development project (Project).This document transmitsthe Service’sbiologicalopinionbased onour reviewof theProjectlocatedin SarasotaCounty,Florida,andits effectsonthethreatenedeasternindigo snake(Drymarchon coralscouperi). It alsoincludesandsummarizesour concurrencesfor the Corps’determinations for the federallythreatenedwoodstork(Mycteriaamericana)andFloridascrub-jay (Aphelocomacoerulescens).This documentis submittedin accordancewith section7 of the EndangeredSpeciesAct of 1973,asamendedin 1998(Act) (87 Stat.884; 16U.S.C.1531et seq.).
This Biological Opinionis based onthebiologicalassessmentprovidedto theCorps by SteinbaumandAssociates,Inc. EcologicalConsultants(Applicant’s consultant),correspondence, telephone conversations, emails,andothersourcesof information. As of May 25,2016,the Servicehasreceivedall the informationnecessaryfor initiation of formal consultationon the easternindigo snakefor this Projectasrequiredin theregulations governinginteragency consultations(50 CFR §402.14). A complete recordof this consultationis on file atthe South FloridaEcologicalServicesOffice in Vero Beach,Florida. Consultation history
On November13,2015,theServicereceivedtheCorps’ letternotifying of theCorps’permit applicationfor theProjectandseekingconcurrencefrom the Servicefor their determinationthat the proposedProject mayaffect,but is not likely to adverselyaffecttheFloridascrub-jayand wood stork. TheCorpsalsorequestedformal consultationfor theeffectsthat theproposed Projectmayhaveon theeasternindigo snake.
OnApril 19,2016,theServiceemailedtheCorpsrequestingadditionalinformationin theform of a Projectsiteplan.
On May 24,2016the Corpsemailedthe Servicewith a replyprovidingthesiteplanand additionalinformation.
BIOLOGICAL OPINION
This Biological Opinionprovidesthe Service’sopinionasto whethertheproposedProjectis likely tojeopardizethecontinuedexistenceof theeasternindigo snake.Thereis no designated critical habitatfor theeasternindigo snake;therefore,this Biological Opinionwill not address destructionor adversemodificationof critical habitat.
ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE JEOPARDY AND ADVERSE MODIFICATION DETERMINATIONS
Jeopardy determination
Section7(a)(2)of theEndangeredSpeciesAct requiresthat Federalagenciesensurethat any actiontheyauthorize,fund,or carryout is not likely tojeopardizethecontinuedexistenceof listedspecies.“Jeopardizethecontinuedexistenceof’ meansto engagein anaction that reasonablywould beexpected,directly or indirectly,to reduceappreciablythelikelihoodof both thesurvivalandrecoveryof a listedspeciesin thewild by reducingthereproduction,numbers, or distributionof thatspecies(50 Codeof FederalRegulations402.02).
Thejeopardyanalysisin thisBiological Opinionrelieson four components:(1) theStatusof the Species,which describestherange-wideconditionof thespecies,thefactorsresponsiblefor that condition,andits survivalandrecoveryneeds;(2) theEnvironmentalBaseline,which analyzes theconditionof thespeciesin theactionarea,thefactorsresponsiblefor that condition,andthe relationshipof theactionareato thesurvivalandrecoveryof thespecies;(3) theEffectsof the Action, whichdeterminethedirectandindirectimpactsof theproposedFederalactionandthe effectsof anyinterrelatedor interdependentactivitieson thespecies;and(4) theCumulative Effects,which evaluatetheeffectsof future, non-federalactivitiesin theactionareaon the species.
In accordancewith policy andregulation,thejeopardydeterminationis madeby evaluatingthe effectsof theproposed federalactionin thecontextof thecurrentstatusof thespecies,taking
2 into accountanycumulativeeffects,to determineif implementationof theproposedactionis likely to causeanappreciablereductionin thelikelihood of boththesurvivalandrecoveryof the speciesin thewild.
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSEDACTION
TheApplicanthasappliedfor a Departmentof theArmy permitto placefill in watersof theU.S. in conjunctionwith the expansionof existingculvertsfor the constructionof aresidential subdivision.TheProjectis locatedin in Sections11and 12,Township40 South, Range19Fast in SarasotaCounty(Figure 1). Thesiteis atotal of 781.0acres(ac)consistingprimarily of improvedpasture,palmettoscrubandpineflatwoods(seebelowfor specifics).This Projectwill beconstructedin phasesandthis Biological Opinioncovers allphasesof theProject. The Applicantplansto build up to 1,563residentialunits. The developmentwill bedividedinto threelargeanddistinctneighborhoodswith multiplephasesof developmentwithin each neighborhood(Figure2). It is anticipatedthat therewill bea 10-14yearbuild-out forthe development.
TheApplicanthasproposedto preserve260.8acof landwithin thetotal 781.0acProject footprint (Figure2). Of the260.0ac,102.0acarenative habitatpreservationandconservation areasthatwill besubjectto a conservationeasement.The remainderof the260.0acwill bein a restrictivecovenantthat requiresit to beretainedasopenspace.Thepreservedlandis embedded within thepropertyanddividedinto approximately21parcelsby plannedroads,residential neighborhoodsandthepropertyboundary.The HomeOwnersAssociation(HOA) or CommunityDevelopmentDistrict (CDD) will betheentityresponsiblefor contractingall aspectsof resourcemanagement.Resourcemanagementfor this Projectis required notonly by SarasotaCountyregulations(asoutlinedin theEnvironmentalTechnicalManualof Sarasota County’sLandDevelopmentRegulations)but by conditionsof rezoning.Includedare requirementsfor resource managementmonitoringandreport submittalto SarasotaCounty (asSarasotaCountywill beenforcingresourcemanagementfor this Project).Theparcels consistsof (approximateacreage):otheropenspace(110.4ac),freshwatermarsh(40.3ac),open spacelakes(35.9ac),pineflatwoods(35.4ac),wetprairies(10.1ac),xeric oak(6.4ac),wetland shrub(5.2ac),scrubbyflatwoods(4.9ac),temperatehardwoods(4.9ac),streamsandwaterways (4.5ac),exotic wetlandhardwoods(2.0ac),vegetatednon-forestedwetland(0.5ac), and wetlandmitigation (0.4 ac).
TheApplicantproposesto impact0.046acof wetlandsin associationwith theconstructionof thenewresidentialsubdivisionandassociatedinfrastructure.The Federalpermitis beingsought to constructfive ditch crossingsin placeof historic crossings(four of which werehistorically filled andpiped,andtheotherwassubjectto historicfill placement).The five crossingareasare throughditchesthat areregardedas“other surfacewaters” (OSW)by the Stateand“other waters”(OW) by the Corps.Neitheragencyis requiringmitigation for impactsto OSWor OW. Thenewcrossingswill improveerosioncontrolatthecurrentcrossingsandthereforewould enhancewaterquality. In addition,theApplicantproposes0.35acof wetlandcreation pertainingto apotentialwetland restoration/creation componentbetweentwo historically severedwetlands(Wetland29A and29B,Figure3). Wetlandmitigationwill bedeterminedvia
3 theUnifonn Mitigation AssessmentMethod(UMAM) — anyadditional wetlandmitigation neededto off-setfunctionalloss(asdeterminedthroughUMAM) wouldbeprovided.
The sitehashistoricallybeenandis currently activelymanagedasa cattleranch. Specifically, the781.0acProjectfootprint consistsof thefollowing habitattypes:palmettoprairie(208.6ac), improvedpastures(146.6ac),pineflatwoods(131.3ac),woodlandpastures(71.5ac), unimprovedpastures(38.7ac),primitive trails (27.2ac),othernon-jurisdictionalwaters(23.9), wetprairie (21.2ac),freshwatermarsh(19.9ac), disturbedland (18.9ac),otherpines(17.8ac), xeric oak(12.1ac),mixedhardwoods(8.1 ac),scrubbyflatwoods(4.9ac),temperatehardwoods (4.9ac),openland (4.0ac),wetlandshrub(3.9ac),exoticwetlandhardwoods(2.0ac),cabbage palm (1.0 ac),andtransmissiontowers(0.2 ac).
To furtherminimizetheProject’sadverseeffectsto theeasternindigo snake,theApplicanthas agreedto implementtheService’sStandardProtectionMeasuresfor theEasternIndigo Snake (2013a)duringconstructionof theProject. In addition,theApplicanthasagreed tocontribute $1,500.00to theService’sEasternIndigo SnakeConservationFundasasupplemental conservationmeasurefor thelossof easternindigo snakehabitatthatwill resultfrom theProject.
Action area
Theactionareais definedasall areasto beaffecteddirectly or indirectlyby theFederal action. Forthis Project,the Servicehasidentifiedtheactionareaastheentire781.0acconstruction footprint. Theeasternindigosnakeis ahabitatgeneralistwith a large home rangeandmayuse mosthabitattypeswithin theProjectfootprint. Activities within the entire 781.0acProject boundarywill impactavailable habitatfor this species.
SPECIESNOT LIKELY TO BE ADVERSELY AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED ACTION
Wood stork
The Projectoccursin thegeographicrangeof thethreatenedwoodstork. TheCorpshas determinedthattheProject mayaffect,but is not likely to adverselyaffectthewood stork. The Corpshasalready receivedconcurrencefor this determination throughthe Service’sWoodStork EffectDeterminationKey (Service 2010)with thesequenceof A>B> NLAAbecausetheimpact to suitableforaginghabitatis lessthe0.5ac. No furtherconsultationis required.
Florida scrub-jay
TheProjectoccursin thegeographicrangeof theFloridascrub-jay.TheApplicantperformed two surveys (September2013andMarch2014)for this specieson theproposedProjectsite basedon theService’s surveyguidance(Service2004). Scrub-jayswerenot observedduringthe surveys. TheCorpshasdeterminedtheProject may affectbut is not likely to adverselyaffectthe Floridascrub-jay. Based on theinformationprovided,the Serviceconcurswith this determination.
4 STATUS OF THE SPECIES/CRITICAL HABITAT
PleaseseeEnclosurefor theStatusof the Speciesfor theeasternindigo snake.Critical habitat hasnot beendesignatedfor theeasternindigo snake;therefore,critical habitatwill not be affectedby theProject.
Analysis of the specieslikely to beaffected
Themodificationanddestructionof natural uplandandfreshwaterwetlandcommunitiesin south Floridawereaprimaryconsiderationin listing theeasternindigo snakeasthreatened.Another threatto thesnakeis habitatdegradationdue tolack of management,includingprescribedfire. TheProject’sadverseeffectsto theeasternindigo snakewill bediscussedin theremainderof thisBiological Opinion. Critical habitathasnotbeendesignatedfor theeasternindigosnake; therefore,nonewill beaffected.
The proposedactionhasthepotentialto adverselyaffecteasternindigo snakeadults,juveniles, nestsandhatchlingswithin theproposedProjectarea.Potential effectsincludeinjury, mortality, habitatlossor degradation,anddisturbanceresultingfrom theconstructionof theproposed Project.
ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE
As definedin Serviceregulations,“the environmentalbaselineincludesthepastandpresent impactsof all Federal,State,or privateactionsandotherhumanactivitiesin theactionarea,the anticipatedimpactsof all proposedFederalprojectsin theactionareathathavealready undergonefonnal or earlysection7 consultation,andtheimpactof Stateor privateactions which arecontemporaneouswith theconsultationin process.”
In addition,undertheAct’s regulatoryapproach,ifiture Federalactionsarenot included ineither theenvironmentalbaselineor thecumulativeeffectsanalysisof abiological opinion,because theywill besubjectedto consultationwhen theyoccur. See51 FederalRegister19,926,19,933 (June3, 1986,preambleto FWS consultationregulations).
Therefore,for our assessment,theenvironmentalbaselineincludesthe pastandpresentimpacts of all Federal,State,or privateactionsandotherhumanactivitiesin theactionarea,the anticipatedimpactsof all proposedFederalprojectsin theactionareathat havealready undergoneformal or earlysection7 consultation,andtheimpactof Stateor privateactions, which occursimultaneouslywith theconsultationin progress.
Statusof the specieswithin the action area
Theeasternindigosnakeis knownto useabouteveryhabitattype exceptfor bodiesof water
(LayneandSteiner1996,Service1999). A recordof aneasternindigo snakelocatedlessthan1 mile fromtheProjectlocationwasfoundin theServices’GeographicInformationSystem(015) databasefor recordedlocationsof federallylistedthreatenedandendangeredspecies(Figure4).
5 Easternindigo snakes arealsoknownto usegophertortoiseburrowsfor reffigia(Moler 1985). A generallistedspeciessurveywithin theentireProjectsitewascompletedin September2013 andMarch2014,via pedestrianor vehiculartransectsextending northandsouthacrossthesite aswell asalongtheboundary(Figure3). Duringthe surveys,36potentiallyoccupiedburrows and6 abandonedburrowswereidentified. No easternindigo snakeswere observedduringthe surveys.Dueto thepresenceof suitablehabitatandrefligia, we haveassumedthattheeastern indigosnakemayoccupysuitable habitatwithin the entireProjectsite. Thesizeof theaction arearepresentsa smallportionof thecombinedacreageof all habitatsusableby easternindigo snakesin southFlorida.
It is difficult to estimatethedensityof easternindigo snakesin theactionareadue toa general lackof existingdata. Therefore,datafrom othereasternindigo snakestudiesin Floridawere usedto estimatesnakedensityon theProjectsite. A 26-yearstudyconductedby Layneand Steiner(1996)atArchbold BiologicalStation(ABS), LakePlacid,Florida,determinedthe averagehomerangesizefor a femalewas46 acandthat of amalewas 184ac. Considering overlapbetweenthesexestherecouldbeup to 4 malesand16femalesor 20 snakestotal within the781.0acProjectarea. Because16femalesnakesareassumedpresent,we also assume16 nestswith eggscouldbepresent.
Factors affecting the speciesenvironmentwithin the action area
Easternindigosnakes arevulnerablewithin theactionareadueto habitatlossresultingfrom the intensedevelopmentpressuresrelatedto southFlorida’sburgeoninghumanpopulation. Between2005and2060,Florida’spopulationis projectedto doubleto approximately36million people.Assumingasimilar patternof developmentat currentgrossurban densitiesfor each county, thistranslatesinto theneedto convertanadditional7 million acresof undevelopedland into urban landuses(Zwick andCarr2006). Accordingly, itis extremelylikely remaining unprotectedeasternindigo snakehabitatsin thevicinity of theProjectwill beconvertedto residentialsubdivisions,golf courses,andshoppingcenters.Moreover,easternindigo snakesare directlykilled by landclearingandotheractivitiesassociatedwith constructionand development. -
Remainingeasternindigo snakehabitatsarealsothreatenedby degradationresultingfrom fire exclusionandlack of management.Mostuplandandsomewetlandhabitatsin which the eastern indigosnakehasbeendocumentedrequireperiodicfire to maintain optimalhabitat. Theneedto protectagricultural,residential,andcommercialdevelopmenthasresultedin thesuppressionof wildfires. Furthermore,implementingprescribedbumsin areasadjacentto residentialareas is difficult dueto safetyconcernsandobjectionsof local residents. The Serviceis unawareof any recentfireswithin theactionarea.Naturallyfire maintainedhabitatslackingperiodicfire or managementbecomeovergrownandlesssuitableto easternindigo snakes.Overtime, eastern indigo snakeswill diminishin abundanceandeventuallymaybeextirpated.The“openspace” designatedpreservationareaswithin theProjectwill be difficult to burnand arealsolikely too smallandisolatedto allow usageby the easternindigo snake.
6 Climate change
Our analysesundertheAct includeconsiderationof observedor likely environmentaleffects relatedto ongoingandprojectedchangesin climate. As definedby the IntergovernmentalPanel on ClimateChange(IPCC),“climate” refersto averageweather,typically measuredin termsof themeanandvariability of temperature,precipitation,or otherrelevantpropertiesovertime; thus “climate change”refers toa changein suchameasurewhichpersistsfor anextendedperiod, typically decadesor longer,due tonaturalconditions(e.g.,solar cycles)or human-caused changesin thecompositionof theatmosphereor in landuse(IPCC2013,p. 1450). Detailed explanationsof globalclimatechangeandexamplesof variousobservedandprojectedchanges andassociatedeffectsandrisks attheglobal levelareprovidedin reportsissued,by theIPCC (2014andcitationstherein). Informationfor theUnited Statesatnationalandregionallevelsis summarizedin theNationalClimateAssessment(Melillo etal. 2014entireandcitationstherein; seeMelillo et al. 2014,pp.28-45for anoverview). Becauseobservedandprojectedchangesin climateatregionalandlocal levelsvary from globalaverageconditions, ratherthanusingglobal scaleprojections,weuse“downscaled”projectionswhen theyareavailableandhave been developedthroughappropriatescientificprocedures,becausesuchprojectionsprovide higher resolutioninformationthatis morerelevantto spatialscalesusedfor analysesof agivenspecies andthe conditionsinfluencingit (SeeMelillo et al. 2014,Appendix3, pp. 760-763for a discussionof climatemodeling,includingdownscaling).In our analysis,we useour expert judgmentto weighthe bestscientificandcommercialdataavailablein our considerationof relevantaspectsof climatechangeandrelated effects.
Climatechangemayresultin anincreasein theintensityor frequencyof tropical stormsand hurricanesin Florida. TheAtlantic Multi-decadalOscillation(AMO) alsoinfluencesrain patternsin Florida. We arecurrently inanAMO wetphasethatis predictedto persistthrough 2020(Miller 2010). The increasedrainfall associatedwith bothof thesefactorscouldreduceour ability to effectivelyuseprescribedbuming to managehabitatin optimalconditionsfor eastern indigo snakesandtheirprey. Increasedrainfall couldalsoreducethenumberof suitablerefugia by increasingtheareacoveredwith standingwateror thedurationof inundationof seasonally wet areas.
It is difficult to estimate,with anydegreeof precision,if a specieswill beaffectedby climate changeor exactlyhowtheywill beaffected.The Servicewill useStrategicHabitatConservation planning,anadaptivescience-drivenprocessthatbeginswith explicittrustresourcepopulation objectives,astheframeworkfor adjustingourmanagementstrategiesin responseto climate change(Service2006).
EFFECTS OF THE ACTION
Factors to be considered
This Projectsitecontainseasternindigo snakehabitatincludingrefugiain the form of gopher tortoiseburrows,andis locatedwithin thegeographicrangeof theeasternindigo snake.Two recordsof easternindigo snakeswerefoundin the Services’GIS databasefor recordedlocations
of federallylistedthreatenedandendangeredspecies.Onerecordwaslocatedlessthan 1mile
7 westof theProjectlocation,andthesecond waslocatedapproximately1.4miles northin undeveloped habitat contiguouswith theProjectfootprint (Figure4). Thetiming of construction for this Project,relativeto sensitiveperiodsof theeasternindigo snake’slifecycle,is unknown. Easternindigosnakesmaybe foundon andadjacent totheproposedconstructionfootprintyear- round. The Projectwill beconstructedin phasesandresultin thepermanentlossandalteration of amajority of theexistingground coveron theProjectsite. Thetime requiredto complete constructionof theProjectis not exactlyknown,but it is likely to becompletedin 10-14years (2030). Thedisturbanceassociatedwith theProjectwill bepermanentandresultin a lossof habitatcurrentlyavailableto theeasternindigosnake.
Theeasternindigo snakeis difficult to detectandquantif~’for thefollowing reasons:(1) it hasa wide rangingdistribution;(2) it hasapatchydistributionwithin suitablehabitat;(3) it haslimited detectabilitydue touseof burrowsor holesfor shelter; (4)thereis unlikely unoccupied suitable habitat;(5)juvenileshavelimited detectabilitydueto their affinity for thick vegetation;(6) it mayusecrypticshelteringareasthatmaybetemporarilyestablishedduringconstruction(e.g., brushpiles, equipment stockpiles,anddirt mounds).The lackof practicalmethodsto survey,in conjunctionwith wide-rangingactivity and usageof avarietyof habitattypes, makesit difficult to determinethe exactnumberof indigo snakesthatwill be affectedby the action.
Analysis for the effectsof the action
Much of theProjectfootprint currentlyprovideshabitattypessuitablefor theeasternindigo snake.The Projectwill resultin theconversionof easternindigo snakehabitat intohouses, pavedstreets,andotherinfrastructureassociatedwith a residentialdevelopment.
Beneficial effects
Beneficialeffectsarethoseeffectsof theproposedactionthat arewholly positive,without any adverseeffectsto thelistedspeciesor its critical habitat. Theproposedactionwill notresultin beneficialeffectsto the easternindigo snakeon theProjectsite.
Direct effects
Direct effectsarethoseeffectsthatare causedby theproposed action,atthetime of construction, and arereasonably certainto occur. Thedirecteffects thatthis Projectwill have on theeastern indigo snakeinclude(1) anincreasein thepotentialfor injuries andmortalitiesdue to construction activities,(2) thepermanentlossof habitatfor thespecies,(3) fragmentationand isolationof remainingundevelopedhabitatwithin thepropertyand(4) lossof connectivityto othersuitable habitatlocated outsidetheProjectfootprint.
Increasedpotential for injuries and mortalies of easternindigo snakesdue toland clearing activities
It is difficult to determinethenumberof easternindigo snakes(adults,juveniles,hatchlings,and nests)that couldbedirectly injuredor killed by Projectactivities. Dueto thenatureof the proposedaction(i.e.,vegetation removal,earthmoving andpiling, earthscraping,grading),the
8 Serviceestimatessomeof thesnakespresentatthetime of the actioncouldbeadverselyaffected by theProject. Easternindigo snakesin suitablehabitatslatedfor landclearingareprobably mostatrisk for injury or mortality. Thehabitat clearing,earthmoving,scrapingandpiling have thepotentialto crushsnakes,their nestsandeggs. Snakes can alsobeburiedin theirburrows andotherrefugia. Duringtheexcavationof gophertortoise burrows,snakesmayalsobeinjured or killed. It is difficult to estimatethedensityof easternindigo snakesin theactionareadueto a generallack of existingdata. Therefore,datafrom othereasternindigosnakestudiesin Florida wereusedto estimateanapproximatesnakedensityon theProjectsite.A 26-yearstudy conductedby LayneandSteiner(1996)atABS, determinedthe averagehomerange sizefor a femalewas 46acandthatof amalewas184ac. Consideringoverlapbetweenthesexesthere couldbe upto 4 malesand16femalesor 20 snakestotal within the 781.0acProjectarea. Because16femalesnakesareassumedpresent,we alsoassume16nestswith eggscouldbe present.
TheStandard Protection Measuresfor the Eastern Indigo Snake(Service2013)requirethe applicantto developaprotectionandeducationplanfor all constructionpersonnelto follow. On-sitepersonnelshouldbefamiliar with thephysical descriptionof thesnakeandwhatto doif a snakeis observedduringanyphaseof construction activities.An easternindigosnakemustbe allowedto leavethe siteon itsown accordandmustnot beharassedin anyway.
Increasedvehiculartraffic duringProjectconstructionactivitieshasthepotentialto increasethe risk of snakemortality. Becausestandardconstruction conditionsrequiretheeducationof contractorsandequipmentoperators,postingof speedlimit signson all roadwaysduringProject constructionandoperation, onsitesignsexplainingthepenaltiesof intentionallyrunningover snakes,andthatconstructionwill ceaseif snakesareobserved,we anticipatetherisk of injury or deathon theaccessroadsto below.
Permanentlossof habitat
TheProjectwill resultin apermanentlossof 781.0acof easternindigo snakehabitat,through habitatdestructionandfragmentation,andcouldresultin thelossof up to 20 easternindigo snaketerritories. TheProjectsite, oncedeveloped,mayfurtherrestrictmovementof eastern indigo snakesfrom largertractsof undevelopedlandthroughfragmentationof habitat. Although theopenspaceareaswill preservesomehabitat,thespaceswill beisolatedoncetheresidential constructionis completeandwill not allow adequateuseandaccessby easternindigo snakes.
Additionally, visualdisturbancefrom personnelduringsitepreparationandclearingactivities couldalsocauseeasternindigosnakesto leavetheactionarea.This mayresultin missed foragingandmatingopportunitiesandtheseindividualsmaybemorevulnerableto predation andintraspecificaggression.Disturbedeasternindigo snakesmay alsohidein refugiaon site. Thismayresultin missedforagingandmatingopportunities,andtheseindividualsmaybe more vulnerableto injury or mortality duringlandclearingor gophertortoiseburrowexcavation.
9 Interrelated and interdependentactions
An interrelatedactivity is anactivitythatis partof theproposedactionand dependsonthe proposedactionfor itsjustification. An interdependentactivityis anactivity thathasno independentutility apartfrom theactionunder consultation.Interrelatedor interdependent actionsarenot expectedto resultfrom theProject.
Indirect effects
Indirecteffectsarethosethatarecausedby or resultfrom theproposedaction,arelaterin time, andarereasonablyexpectedto occur. The indirecteffectsthattheProjectwill haveon the easternindigo snakewithin theactionarea arediscussedbelowandincludeanincreasein the potentialfor injuries,deaths,anddisturbanceof indigo snakesfrom human-relatedactivity of residentsliving in theresidential development
Human-related activity
Theactivitiesof humansliving in theresidentialdevelopmentfollowing completionof the Project mayindirectly adverselyaffecteasternindigo snakes.The presenceof humansandtheir petswill increasethepotentialfor injuriesor mortalitiesof anysnakesremaining intheProject footprint or preservearea. Somehumansareknown to fearandhate snakesandmay indiscriminatelyattackor kill easternindigo snakeswhenencountered.Free-roamingpetsof residentsmayalsoinjure or kill snakes.Finally, collisionsfrom motorvehiclesusingtheroads in thenewdevelopmentwill increase thepotentialthat anyeasternindigo snakesoccurringin the Projectareawill injuredor killed.
Speciesresponseto the proposedaction
Implementation,operation,andmaintenanceof the Projectcanresultin actionsthatmaykill or injure easternindigo snakes,destroynests,anddestroyor degradeforaginghabitat. Clearing, earthmoving,earthpiling, construction, operation,andmaintenanceactivitiesmayalso adverselyaffectthesesnakesby causingthemto leavetheactionarea,andpossiblymiss foragingandmatingopportunities.Individualeasternindigosnakesfleeingthe areamaybe morevulnerableto predation,intraspecificaggression,andmortalityby increasedroadtraffic.
The numberof individualsthatwill bepresentatthetime of theproposedactionis not known. The Serviceestimatesasmanyas20 easternindigo snakesmaybepresentwithin the781.0ac proposedfor development. Furthermore,we anticipatethatup to sixteennestsmaybepresenton thedevelopmentsiteduringanygivennestingseason(April to July).
CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
Cumulativeeffectsincludetheeffectsof ffiture State,Tribal, local,or privateactionsreasonably certainto occurin theactionareaconsideredin this Biological Opinion. FutureFederalactions that areunrelatedto theproposedactionarenot consideredin this sectionbecausetheyrequire separateconsultationpursuantto section7 of theAct. Theactionareadoesnot extend beyond
10 theProjectfootprint andpreservearea.Therefore,cumulativeeffectsto theeasternindigo snake are not expectedto occurfrom theProject.
CONCLUSION
TheproposedProjectwill resultin thelossof 781.0acresof habitatfor the easternindigo snake. A potentiallossof 20 easternindigo snakes(4 male,16female,16nests)couldoccurasaresult of theProject. However,thepotentiallossof the easternindigo snakespresentattheProjectsite will not significantlyreduce the numbers,distribution,or reproductionof easternindigo snakes in southFlorida,or in theoverallrangeof thespecies.
TheProjectsitesupportsamosaicof uplandandwetlandhabitats.Thesurroundingareasconsist of low to mediumdensityresidentialdevelopmentto thewestandsouth,andundevelopedand agriculturelandsto thenorthandeast.The Projectwill causefurtherhabitatfragmentation.
As aminimizationmeasure,theApplicanthascommittedto implantingtheStandard Protection Measuresfor theEastern Indigo Snake(Service2013a). In addition,theApplicantwill voluntarily contribute$1,500.00to theService’sEasternIndigo SnakeConservationFundasa conservationmeasurefor the effectstheir781.0-acProjectwill haveto easternindigo snakes and their habitat. Thefundis usedto implementactionsthatbenefiteasternindigo snakes.
In conclusion,theServicebelievestheremaybedirecttakein theform of mortality or injury of up to 20 indigosnakesand 16nestsresultingfrom this Project,andin theform of disturbance. After reviewingthecurrentstatusof theeasternindigo snake,theenvironnientalbaselinefor the actionarea,theeffectsof theproposedactionandcumulativeeffects,andtheconservation measurespledgedby theApplicantin theProjectdescription,it is theService’sbiological opinion thatthedevelopmentof theProject,asproposed,is not likely tojeopardizethecontinued existenceof theeasternindigo snake.No critical habitathasbeendesignatedfor this species; therefore,nonewill be affected.
INCIDENTAL TAKE STATEMENT
Section9 of theAct andFederalregulationpursuantto section4(d) of theAct prohibit the takeof endangeredandthreatenedspecies,respectively,without specialexemption. “Take” is definedasto “harass,harm,pursue,hunt,shoot,wound,kill, trap, captureor collect,or to attemptto engagein anysuchconduct.” “Harm” is furtherdefinedby the Serviceto include significanthabitatmodificationor degradation thatresultsin deathor injury to listedspeciesby significantlyimpairingessentialbehavioralpatterns,includingbreeding,feeding,or sheltering. “Harass”is definedby theServiceasintentionalor negligentactionsthatcreatethelikelihood of injury to listedspeciesto suchanextentasto significantlydisruptnormalbehaviorpatterns which include,but arenot limited to, breeding,feeding,or sheltering.Incidentaltakeis defined astake thatis incidentalto, andnot the purpose of,thecarryingout of anotherwiselawful activity. Underthetermsof section7(b)(4)andsection7(o)(2), taking,thatis incidentalto and not intendedaspartof theagencyaction,is not consideredto beprohibited takingundertheAct providedthatsuchtakingis in compliancewith thetermsandconditionsof this IncidentalTake Statement.
11 Themeasuresdescribedbelowarenondiscretionaryandmustbeundertakenby theCorpssothat theybecomebinding conditionsof anygrantor permit issuedto Taylor Morrisonof Florida, Villagesof ManasotaBeachsubdivision,asappropriate,for theexemptionin section7(o)(2)to apply. The Corpshasa continuingdutyto regulatethe activity coveredby this incidentaltake statement.If theCorps(1) fails to assumeandimplementthetents andconditionsor (2) fails to requiretheApplicantto adhereto thetermsandconditionsof theincidentaltake statement throughenforceabletents that areaddedto thepermit,theprotectioncoverageof section7(o)(2) maylapse. In orderto monitortheimpactof incidentaltake,theCorpsor theApplicantmust reporttheprogressof theactionandits impacton the speciesto theServiceasspecifiedin the incidentaltakestatement[50 CFR §402.l4(i)(3)].
AMOUNT OR EXTENT OF TAKE ANTICIPATED
The Servicehasreviewedthebiologicalinformationfor the easternindigo snake,infoniiation presentedby theApplicant’s Consultant,andotheravailableinformationrelevantto this action. The Serviceanticipatestheactionwill causethepentanentlossor degradationof 781.0acof easternindigosnakehabitaton theProjectsite. Basedon thereporteddensitiesof easternindigo snakesatABS (LayneandSteiner1996),theServiceassumesup to 20 easternindigo snakesand 16easternindigo snakenestscouldbepresenton thesiteduringconstructionandmaybehanted (injury or mortality) or harassedincidentalto Projectconstruction.
EFFECT OF THE TAKE
In the accompanyingBiological Opinion,theServicedetermined this levelof anticipatedtakeis not likely to resultin jeopardyto listedspeciesor thedestructionor adversemodificationof critical habitatfor theeasternindigosnake.
REASONABLE AND PRUDENT MEASURES Whenprovidinganincidentaltakestatement, theServiceis requiredto givereasonableand prudentmeasuresit considersnecessaryor appropriateto minimize thetakealongwith tents and conditionsthatmustbecompliedwith, to implementthe reasonableandprudentmeasures. Furthentore,theServicemustalsospecifyproceduresto beusedto handleor disposeof any individualstaken. The Servicefindsthefollowing additionalreasonableandprudentmeasures arenecessaryandappropriateto reducetakeandto minimize thedirectandindirecteffectsof the proposedProjecton theeasternindigosnake:
Implementationof theProjectasproposedandoutlined inthe“Descriptionof the ProposedAction” sectionof this BiologicalOpinion
TERMS AND CONDITIONS
In orderto beexemptfrom theprohibitionsof section9 of theAct, theCorpsmustcomplywith thefollowing termsandconditions,which carryout the reasonableandprudentmeasures, describedaboveandoutlinerequiredreporting/monitoringrequirements.Thesetermsand conditionsarenon-discretionary.
12 • Follow theGopherTortoise(GopherusPolyphernus)PermittingGuidelines(FWC 2013) to locateandexcavategophertortoiseburrows.
• ImplementtheService’seasternindigo snakeprotectionandeducationplan (Plan) ora similarplanapprovedby the Service.
a. At least30 daysprior to anyclearingor landalteration activities,theapplicant shallnotify theappropriateServiceField Office via e-mailthatthePlanwill be implementedasdescribedbelow (SouthFloridaField Office: verobeach~fws.gov). b. A monitoringreportwill besubmittedto theServicewithin 60daysof Project completionof landclearingfor theProjectdetailingif indigo snakeswere observedduringlandclearingassociatedwith theProject.
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS AND DISPOSITION OF DEAD OR INJURED SPECIMENS
Uponlocatinga dead,injured,or sickthreatenedeasternindigo snakespecimen,initial notification shallbemade totheService’sOffice of Law Enforcement (Groveland,Florida; 352-429-1037).Additional notificationshallbemadeto FWC at 1-888-404-3922andthe Service’sSouthFloridaEcologicalServicesOffice (133920thStreet,Vero Beach,Florida 32960-3559; 772-562-3909).Careshouldbetakenin handlingsick or injuredspecimensto ensureeffectivetreatmentandcareandin handlingdeadspecimensto preservebiological materialsin thebestpossiblestatefor lateranalysisof causeof death. In conjunctionwith the careof sick or injuredendangeredor threatenedspeciesor preservationof biologicalmaterials from a deadanimal,thefinderhastheresponsibilityto ensureevidenceintrinsicto thespecimen is not unnecessarilydisturbed.
Thereasonableandprudentmeasures,with their implementingtermsandconditions,are designedto minimizetheimpactof incidentaltakethatmight otherwiseresultfrom theproposed action. The Service believesthatno morethan20 easternindigo snakesand16eastemindigo snakesnestswill beincidentallytaken. If, duringthecourseof theaction,this level of incidental takeis exceeded, suchincidentaltakerepresentsnewinformationrequiringreinitiationof consultationandreviewof thereasonableandprudentmeasuresprovided. TheFederal agency mustimmediatelyprovideanexplanationof thecausesof thetakingandreviewwith theService theneedfor possiblemodificationof the reasonableandprudentmeasures.
CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS
Section7(a)(l) of theAct directs Federalagenciesto utilize their authoritiesto furtherthe purposesof theAct by carryingout conservationprogramsfor thebenefitof endangeredand threatenedspecies.Conservation recommendationsarediscretionaryagencyactivitiesto minimize or avoidadverseeffectsof aproposedactionon listedspeciesor critical habitat,to helpimplementrecoveryplans,or to developinformation.
13 • The Service recommendstheCorpscontinueto closely coordinatewith uson the implementationof their FederalCWA section404permitprogramin areaswhereeastern indigo snakesmaybeaffected,sothat,whereapplicable,compensationcanbedesigned in suchamanner thatit provides benefitsto this species.Additional guidancecanbe foundin the EasternIndigoSnakeProgrammaticEffectDeterminationKey (Service 2013b). REINITIATION NOTICE
This concludesformal consultationontheTaylor Morrison Villagesof ManasotaBeach Project. Asprovidedin 50CFR §402.16,reinitiationof formalconsultationis requiredwhere discretionaryFederalagencyinvolvementor controlovertheactionhasbeenretained(or is authorizedby law) andif: (1) theamountor extentof incidentaltakeis exceeded;(2) theagency actionis subsequentlymodifiedin amanner thatcausesaneffectto the listedspeciesor critical habitatnot consideredin thisBiologicalOpinion;(3) newinformationrevealseffectsof the agencyactionthatmayaffectlistedspeciesor critical habitatin a manneror to anextent not consideredin thisOpinion;or (4) anewspeciesis listedor critical habitatdesignated thatmaybe affectedby the action. In instanceswheretheamount orextentof incidentaltakeis exceeded, anyoperations causingsuchtakemustceasependingreinitiation.
Thankyou for your cooperationin theeffort to protectfederallylisted speciesandfish and wildlife resources.If you have anyquestionsregardingthis Project,pleasecontactJohnTupy at 772-469-4292.
Sincerelyyours, th%~~ttca24&_ RoxannaHinzman Field Supervisor SouthFloridaEcologicalServicesOffice
Enclosure cc: electroniconly w enclosure Corps, Tampa,Florida(CandiceWheelahan) FWC,Tallahassee,Florida (FWC-CPS) Service,Vero Beach,Florida(Marilyn Knight, JohnTupy) LITERATURE CITED
FloridaFishandWildlife Conservation Commission.2013. GopherTortoisePermitting Guidelines(GopherusPolyphemus).FloridaFishandWildlife ConservationCommission, Tallahassee,Florida.
InternationalPanelon ClimateChange.2013. Annex III: Glossary[Planton,S.(ed.)].Pp. 1147- 1465j~: ClimateChange2013: ThePhysicalScienceBasis.Contributionof Working GroupI to theFUIhAssessmentReportof theIntergovernmentalPanelon ClimateChange [Stocker,T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner,M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung,A. Nauels,Y. Xia, V. BexandP.M. Midgley (eds.)]. CambridgeUniversity Press,Cambridge,United KingdomandNew York,New York, USA.https: www.ipcc.chlpdfassessment reportlar5wgl /WGIARS AnnexIll FINAL.pdf
InternationalPanelon Climate. 2014. ClimateChange2014SynthesisReport.[Pachauri, R.K. etal.] 133pp. http: www.ipcc.ch/pdfassessment- reportar5syr ARS SYR FINAL SPM.pdf
Layne,J.N.,andT.M. Steiner. 1996. Easternindigosnake(Drymarchoncoraiscouperi): summaryof researchconductedon ArchboldBiological Station.Reportpreparedunder Order43910-6-0134to theU.S.FishandWildlife Service;Jackson,Mississippi.
Melillo J.M., T.C. Richmond,andG. W. Yohe,Eds. 2014. ClimateChangeImpactsin the UnitedStates: TheThirdNational ClimateAssessment.U.S.GlobalChangeResearch
Program.http nca2014.globalchange.gov downloads.
Miller, L. 2010. Climateof SouthFlorida;EvergladesRestorationTransitionPlanPhaseI BiologicalOpinion. Vero Beach,Florida:U.S.FishandWildlife Service.
Moler, P.E. 1985a.Distributionof theeasternindigo snake,Drymarchoncoraiscouperi,in
Florida.Herpetological Review16(2):37-38.
U.S.FishandWildlife Service. 1999. SouthFlorida multi-speciesrecoveryplan. U.S.Fishand Wildlife Service,Atlanta,Georgia.
U.S.Fish& Wildlife Service.2004.Scrub-jaysurveyprotocol.SouthFloridaEcological ServicesOffice, Vero Beach,Florida.(AppendixA).
U.S.FishandWildlife Service. 2006. StrategicHabitatConservation. Final Reportof the National EcologicalAssessment Teamto theU.S.FishandWildlife ServiceandU.S. GeologicSurvey.
U.S. FishandWildlife Service.2010. SouthFlorida ProgrammaticConcurrencefor theWood Stork(May 2010). FishandWildlife, SouthFloridaEcologicalServicesOffice; Vero Beach,Florida. U.S.Fish andWildlife Service.2013. StandardProtectionMeasuresfor theEasternIndigo Snake.U.S.FishandWildlife, SouthFlorida EcologicalServicesOffice; Vero Beach, Florida.
Zwick, P.D.,andM.H. Cam 2006. Florida2060. A populationdistributionscenariofor the Stateof Florida. A researchProjectpreparedfor 1000Friendsof Florida. Preparedby the GeoplanCenterattheUniversityof Florida, Gainesville,Florida.
16 ta lit ~ ~ S ~ !~l •~lüJ - a vi o
vi VEMICEAVE E 4 4
= vi
~ Ilanlaliol, %~ ru MIIItT3I fl M~ Il,tr~ ,, ~ ~‘ slinh, >
Ph ‘hI
a -I C•
to IIORII)~
C vi o a
ill ~hI A vi 5 78
0. to I 0% C ILc,I,iih(IE 0Iii’’,’ 075 15 3MiIes ~ .3
I iI,.,oI, — ~ $
Figure 1. Locationof theproposedVillagesof ManasotaBeachProject(redboundary)in SarasotaCounty,Florida. C) C
C — NIANASOtA HE,~CH ROAD a 2.
p, 0 n-i a Z’
NHtI1I~ )I1IIC*~IJ cOt o —
— ~z .-, t_ 00 ç~
— • — 0 00
Yb
I K IlK •) THREE CO ItCJEND C -u
~ —- P%N)l.wtIhlI~b•.II4~•~,AK~I 411
~ Ill
—0 — ~
—
~. --N o; 8 •l i, I—. -. :‘~~ •,, a “.? ‘.4 C) I — - — C. 0~• •1~}ø~C 1’..,,.
~ ~3 ~ - £ -I 2) Ni ~ct — LI) 24 C 321’ 21 ‘4’ 0 4- WL25 22 ~1 •~ ‘4 51 ‘9 MI I;!; I. 641 4~9 P. WIS 0 ,I4 V 819 ~ — Cd, o — 4, o -, ~, PS
CO 3 44 zcD-~C) - - Al- I 321 CO — n tfl tuG -p * ~‘r 41 DISTRICT 5%UIIIEUi N~!a 4- 4)1 •1 TI~VsSoO~Tw ~ .~2fi ~‘ wrP~P.I.me)-co.lo1l. .P. 641 -I K 321 •8 1’ ~ 64) L I 11ç “I
~ 0’~4
• ~ 4• 4.. S. ~ ~ - WILl I ~213 ,. 63~ •.I 21 I I.~”32~ ~Z1 I 0~ ~ • . I I . /‘~ :“~ •~
14 * 421213 WV 9 419 I- EuIilC5~ C0QE~ •-A - 3t6tj~ ‘I I,.-. 14 . A ~>j~ 293 390 04014 1*310 438 MIXED 11480*0003 ~CO 211 IMflOVED PASTIMES (MGI 410*0 H4*IMOCM) o —‘ 212 UNIMPROVED PASTURES 510 STREAMS & WA7ERWAVS ‘Ii- •_ I —NT, II, *OO14ijIO P45043805 523 LANES (LAR&R 7854 ID Ac.) qc~&%rr ill P141*0110 P11*1411 524 UNOS (LESS TNAII II 4g. • ~• 1Ffl~CV 411 PINt ‘1141*0003 419 020110 WEjIANI 14011*0005 AID OTHER PINES XII WOUND SNRIJI 421 DERIC oa 440 VEGETATED N014FORISIEO NUlls an 4211 rUN000S *STLMIO — — - IPPROIM4IL PaoflRI WIHC~I$ 11815101 USED P04 GEI(I11 DIED 51*0GEV 542120411€ 1504014140 US 10.01 A rOWS (USSOtMIEA 53311* 9111fl15) 425 TEIIPERAIE 41*0*00005541 FRESHWATER MARSH 911013 211*1 UGEI NOTE 4) I 0) 1 111 1€URI4IIOI 10311110 04 194$ (9301 13 C0,11PIU*/OFRorv*IE 014* *410 SMAll on (1*0511 10*514010) 443 WE’ P8149415 1*10 1011051 W~0WE (C€SPAID 0810€ 101(01105110 SPlItS II *1182111 PP 811104111 10*041141 ‘104115. Cd) 428 CA~AGC PALM 140 INSIMUBED LOll 5431W’ SIr 031 3. 11€ 041011 440 REEIAWINCE & LISTED 4301(5 45 518*11 ID noVa 4 1111 (DO? 1011115 HI 4890151411 811053114404404(11134 ?RIA&CIS 0510101 &M01L [SIlO 51(0(5 Ill TRi34S*I5Sl0I4 MOWERS P010151411 CM 0041(1 1041415t *0008 81*6 P1451111W 11438.5 SIRIT (MW 815*013) P90 0490 (Va 51(1411 *04101441% III DIES 45 ‘101089-101001*10*5010 PS C a~oo 10410 10141051 08~A (4/Il/I3-N/3I/IJI. MIIIWIV 4111104 3m?’. & 2/TO/Il) 440 14910.4 51(104 Ui/IS/Il 4 3/11/14), • 0.. SIEINBAUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. 05500 SPECIES 1(045101 M~ (II Cd, P.O. 500 ‘5*37 VILlAGES OF I4AN*SOEA 51*08 SITE 1401 70 S*PASOI*, P10410* 3427’ SIIASOFA COONTY FLORIDA SC’LR I p,oo~t. 941—921—2107 FAA: 941—911-2739 REVISED 3040104 7, 2015 0 ‘1)
0~0
U, 0C’.’
0
ci 0 ‘F, ci -I-. C • (
0 C C 3 C -J 0 (0 DcCC, dl ~
C 0
‘1, 0 Figure4. Aerial photographof Villagesof ManasotaProjectarea(redboundary)andclosest easternindigo snakerecord(yellow points,outlinedin black,2003). Straight-linedistance betweeneasternrecordandclosestProject boundaryis approximately0.78miles;northern recordandclosestProjectboundaryis approximately1.4miles.
20 Status of the Species – Eastern Indigo Snake U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service January 2016
STATUS OF THE SPECIES – Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi)
Legal Status – threatened
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) listed the eastern subspecies of indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi ) as threatened under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act) (87 Stat. 884; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) in the Federal Register on January 31, 1978. The State of Florida recognizes the eastern indigo snake as Federally-designated Threatened. There is no designated critical habitat.
Species Description
Appearance/Morphology
The eastern indigo snake is the largest native snake species in North America with a maximum recorded length of 8.5 feet (ft) in length (2.6 meters [m]) (Moler 1992) and an unofficial record as having reached 10 ft long in the past (Holbrook 1842). Its color is uniformly lustrous-black, dorsally and ventrally, except for a red or cream-colored suffusion of the chin, throat, and sometimes cheeks. The head is small in proportion to the size of the body, slightly ovular, narrow, and flattened with an elongated snout. The eyes are large relative to the size of the head with black pupil and iris. The vertical plates, frontal plates, and superior orbital are broad with the former being pentagonal in shape. Its scales are large, hexagonal, and smooth in 17 scale rows at mid-body (the central 3 to 5 scale rows are lightly keeled in adult males). Its anal plate is undivided (Holbrook 1842). In the Florida Keys, adult indigo snakes seem to have less red on their faces or throats compared to mainland specimens (Lazell 1989).
Taxonomy
Holbrook (1842) first described all indigo snakes of North America as a monotypic taxon within the Linnaean genus Coluber (racers and whipsnakes), Coluber couperi. In 1843 Leopoldo Fitzinger moved indigo snakes from genus Coluber into their own genus, Drymarchon. Over time twelve subspecies of Drymarchon corais came to be recognized and at the time of listing the eastern indigo snake was considered one among these twelve subspecies (Drymarchon corais couperi [43 FR 4026 4029]). In 1991, Collins elevated this lineage to specific status based on allopatry and diagnosibility. Subsequent taxonomic work based on morphology has supported the designation of Drymarchon couperi as a distinct species within the genus (Wuster et al. 2001). Currently, the eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon couperi) is accepted by the scientific community as one of three separate species in genus Drymarchon, (Crother 2000, ITIS 2016).
Life History
The eastern indigo snake is an apex predator among snakes, eating any vertebrate it can overpower, especially other snakes (Keegan 1944; Belson 2000; Ernst and Ernst 2003, Stevenson et al. 2010).
1
Status of the Species – Eastern Indigo Snake U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service January 2016
It is a generalized predator immune to the toxins of the venomous snakes it encounters and is only limited by its gape and ability to overpower its prey. Food items include fish, frogs, toads, snakes, lizards, turtles, turtle eggs, small alligators, birds, and small mammals (Keegan 1944; Babis 1949; Kochman 1978; Steiner et al. 1983).
In south-central Florida, indigo snake breeding extends from June to January, egg-laying occurs from April to July, and hatching occurs during mid-summer to early fall (Layne and Steiner 1996). Young hatch approximately 3 months after egg-laying and there is no evidence of parental care. Indigo snakes in captivity take 3 to 4 years to reach sexual maturity (Speake and Smith 1987). It is possible female indigo snakes can store sperm and delay fertilization of eggs for significant periods of time or are parthenogenetic (Carson 1945). Carson (1945) concluded that sperm storage and delayed fertilization were the most likely explanation for the fertile eggs produced by an indigo snake that he had kept in captivity for more than 4 years. However, there have been several recent reports pathogenesis in other snakes, so it is possible sperm storage may not explain Carson’s (1945) example (Moler 1998). There is no information on indigo snake lifespan in the wild, although one captive individual survived 25 years, 11 months (Shaw 1959).
Habitat
Indigo snakes are active and spend a great deal of time foraging for food and searching for mates within their territories, with most activity occurring in the summer and fall (Speake and Smith 1987; Moler 1985a). Adult males have larger home ranges than adult females and juveniles; their home ranges average 554 acres (ac), reducing to 390 ac in the summer (Moler 1985b). In contrast, a gravid female may use from 3.5 to 106 ac (Speake and Smith 1987). In Florida, home ranges for females and males range from 5 to 371 ac and 4 to 805 ac, respectively (Smith and Dyer 2003). At Archbold Biological Station, the average home range size for females was determined to be 46 ac, and overlapping male home range size determined to be 184 ac (Layne and Steiner 1996).
Relative to other snake species, adult eastern indigo snakes have very large activity ranges and can move considerable distances in short periods of time (Service 2008). Habitat use varies seasonally between upland and wetland areas, especially in the more northern parts of the species' range. In southern parts of their range eastern indigo snakes are habitat generalists which utilize most available habitat types. Movements between habitat types in northern areas of their range may relate to the need for thermal refugia (protection from cold and/or heat).
In northern areas of their range indigo snakes prefer an interspersion of tortoise-inhabited sandhills and wetlands (Landers and Speake 1980). In these regions indigo snakes most often use forested areas rich with gopher tortoise burrows, hollowed root channels, hollow logs, or the burrows of rodents, armadillos, or land crabs as thermal refugia during cooler seasons (Lawler 1977; Moler 1985a; Layne and Steiner 1996). The eastern indigo snake in this region is typically classified as a longleaf pine savanna specialist because here, in the northern four-fifths of its range, the indigo snake is typically only found in vicinity of xeric longleaf pine–turkey oak sandhills inhabited by the gopher tortoise (Means 2006).
2
Status of the Species – Eastern Indigo Snake U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service January 2016
In the milder climates of central and southern Florida comprising the remaining one fifth of its range thermal refugia such as those provided by gopher tortoise burrows may not be as critical to survival of indigo snakes. Consequently, indigo snakes in these regions use a more diverse assemblage of habitats such as pine flatwoods, scrubby flatwoods, floodplain edges, sand ridges, dry glades, tropical hammocks, edges of freshwater marshes, muckland fields, coastal dunes, and xeric sandhill communities; with highest population concentrations of indigo snakes occurring in the sandhill and pineland regions of northern and central Florida (Service 1999). Indigo snakes have also been found in agricultural lands with close proximity to wetlands (Zeigler 2006).
In extreme south Florida (i.e., the Everglades and Florida Keys), indigo snakes also utilize tropical hardwood hammocks, pine rocklands, freshwater marshes, abandoned agricultural land, coastal prairie, mangrove swamps, and human-altered habitats. Though eastern indigo snakes have been found in all available habitats of south Florida it is thought they prefer hammocks and pine forests since most observations occur there and use of these areas is disproportionate compared to the relatively small total area of these habitats (Steiner et al. 1983).
Distribution
Historically, the eastern indigo snake occurred throughout Florida and in the coastal plain of Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi (Loding 1922, Haltom 1931, Carr 1940, Cook 1954, Diemer and Speake 1983, Lohoefener and Altig 1983, Moler 1985a). Most, if not all, of the remaining viable populations of the eastern indigo snake occur in Georgia and Florida (Service 2008).
Population Dynamics
Due to their use of subterranean refugia and frequent long-distance dispersal, detectability of eastern indigo snakes is low and estimates of mortality difficult (Hyslop et al. 2012). Consequently, the exact size and viability of the range wide population is unknown (Service 2008). However, there is no information indicating the range of eastern indigo snake has expanded or retracted, so it’s presumed the population is stable.
Threats
Throughout the eastern indigo snake’s range expanding urban areas are creating barriers to the dispersal of individuals and gene flow between populations, and habitat loss and degradation are a threat to the species (Lawler 1977, Moler 1985b). In northern areas of its range in Georgia and peninsular Florida the species is impacted by a decline in longleaf pine forests, gopher tortoises, and gopher tortoise habitat (Van Lear et al. 2005). In central and southern Florida the eastern indigo snake is less dependent on any one habitat type, but does avoid developed areas (Lawler 1977, Moler 1985a, Hyslop 2007). Throughout Florida developed areas are expanding rapidly with population growth at the expense of wildlife habitat (Cerulean 2008).
At the time of listing, other threats to the eastern indigo snake included commercial collection for the pet trade and mortality during the gassing of gopher tortoise burrows by individuals
3
Status of the Species – Eastern Indigo Snake U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service January 2016
attempting to drive rattlesnakes out for collection (43 FR 4026 4029). Since their listing additional potential threats to the species have expanded to include disease, road mortality, kills of indigo snakes by land owners and pets, and ATV use in gopher tortoise habitat (Service 2008).
Literature Cited
Babis, W. A. 1949. Notes on the food of the indigo snake. Copeia, 147-147.
Belson, M.S. 2000. Drymarchon corais couperi (eastern indigo snake) and Micrurus fulvius fulvius (eastern coral snake). Predator-prey. Herpetol Rev 31:105.
Carson, H. L. 1945. Delayed fertilization in a captive indigo snake with notes on feeding and shedding. Copeia, 222-225.
Carr, A.E. Jr. 1940. A contribution to the herpetology of Florida. University of Florida Publications, Biological Science Series: Volume III, No. 1.
Cerulean, S. 2008. Wildlife 2060: What’s at stake for Florida. Tallahassee: Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, 28. [Available at: myfwc.com/media/129053/FWS2060.pdf]
Collins, J. T. 1991. Viewpoint: a new taxonomic arrangement for some North American amphibians and reptiles. Herpetological Review, 22(2), 42-43.
Cook, F.A. 1954. Snakes of Mississippi. Mississippi Game and Fish Commission; Jackson, Mississippi.
Crother, B.I. (ed.). 2000. Scientific and standard English names of amphibians and reptiles of North America north of Mexico, with comments regarding confidence in our understanding (p. 82). Herpetology Circular No. 29: Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles.
Diemer, J.E., and D.W. Speake. 1983. The distribution of the eastern indigo snake, Drymarchon corais couperi, in Georgia. Journal of Herpetology 17(3): 256-264.
Ernst, C.H., and E.M. Ernst. 2003. Snakes of the United States and Canada. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Books.
Fitzinger L. 1843., Systema Reptilium. Amblyglossae, Braumüller et Seidel, Vindobonae [Vienna].
Haltom, W.L. 1931. Alabama reptiles. Alabama geological Survey and Natural History Museum, Paper No. 11:1-145.
4
Status of the Species – Eastern Indigo Snake U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service January 2016
Holbrook, J.E. 1842. North American Herpetology; or, A Description of the Reptiles Inhabiting the United States. Vol. III. J.Dobson. Philadelphia. 122 pp. (Coluber couperi, pp. 75–77 & Plate 16).
Hyslop, N. L. 2007. Movements, habitat use, and survival of the threatened eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon couperi) in Georgia (Doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia).
Hyslop, N. L., Stevenson, D. J., Macey, J. N., Carlile, L. D., Jenkins, C. L., Hostetler, J. A., and M.K. Oli. 2012. Survival and population growth of a long-lived threatened snake species, Drymarchon couperi (Eastern Indigo Snake). Population ecology, 54(1), 145-156.
Integrated Taxonomic Information System (http://www.itis.gov/) "Drymarchon". Retrieved January 13, 2016.
Keegan, H.L. 1944. Indigo snakes feeding upon poisonous snakes. Copeia 1944:59.
Kochman, H.I. 1978. Eastern indigo snake, Drymarchon corais couperi. Pages 68-69 in R.W. McDiarmid, ed. Rare and endangered biota of Florida. University Presses of Florida; Gainesville, Florida.
Lawler, H.E. 1977. The status of Drymarchon corais couperi (Holbrook), the eastern indigo snake, in the southeastern U.S.A. Herpetological Review 8(3):76-79.
Layne, J.N., and T.M. Steiner. 1996. Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi): summary of research conducted on Archbold Biological Station. Report prepared under Order 43910-6-0134 to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Jackson, Mississippi.
Lazell, J. D. 1989. Wildlife of the Florida Keys: a natural history.
Loding, H.P. 1922. A preliminary catalog of Alabama reptiles and amphibians. Alabama Geological Survey and Natural History Museum, Paper No. 5:1-59.
Lohoenfener, R. and R. Altig. 1983. Mississippi herpetology. Mississippi State University Research Center Bulletin 1, National Space Technology Laboratory Station, Mississippi. 21 pp.
Means, D. B. 2006. Vertebrate faunal diversity of longleaf pine ecosystems. In The Longleaf Pine Ecosystem pp. 157-213. Springer New York.
Moler, P. E. 1992. Eastern indigo snake. Rare and endangered biota of Florida, 3, 181-186.
Molar, P.E. 1985a. Distribution of the eastern indigo snake, Drymarchon corais couperi, in Florida. Herpetological Review 16(2):37-38.
5
Status of the Species – Eastern Indigo Snake U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service January 2016
Moler, P.E. 1985b. Home range and seasonal activity of the eastern indigo snake, Drymarchon corais couperi, in northern Florida. Final performance report, Study E-1-06, III-A-5. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission; Tallahassee, Florida.
Shaw, C.E. 1959. Longevity of snakes in the United States as of January 1, 1959. Copeia 1959(4):336-337.
Smith, R.B. and K.J. Dyer. 2003. Preliminary testing and comparison of herpetological survey techniques for eastern indigo snakes (Drymarchon couperi). Unpublished report submitted to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Jackson, MS. 15 pp. + figures.
Speake, D. W., and C.R Smith. 1987. Reproductive ecology, captive propagation, juvenile ecology and restocking potential of the eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi). Final report submitted to the US Fish and Wildlife Office, Jackson, Mississippi.
Stevenson, D. J., Bolt, M. R., Smith, D. J., Enge, K. M., Hyslop, N. L., Norton, T. M., and K.J. Dyer. 2010. Prey records for the eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon couperi). Southeastern naturalist, 9(1): 1-18.
Steiner, T.M., O.L. Bass, Jr., and J.A. Kushlan. 1983. Status of the eastern indigo snake in Southern Florida National Parks and vicinity. South Florida Research Center Report SFRC-83- 01, Everglades National Park; Homestead, Florida.
The Nature Conservancy. 2006. Protecting wild Florida: Preserving the best and last wilderness of Florida, Forever. A report by the Florida Chapter of The Nature Conservancy. 25 pp. + appendices.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1999. South Florida multi-species recovery plan. 23 pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2008. Eastern Indigo Snake Drymarchon couperi, 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. 33pp.
Van Lear, D. H., Carroll, W. D., Kapeluck, P. R., and R. Johnson. 2005. History and restoration of the longleaf pine-grassland ecosystem: Implications for species at risk. Forest Ecology and Management, 211, 150-165.
Wuster, W., Yrausquin, J. L., and A. Mijares-Urrutia. 2001. A new species of indigo snake from north-western Venezuela (Serpentes: Colubridae: Drymarchon). Herpetological Journal, 11(4): 157-166.
Zeigler, M. 2006. Personal communication. Citrus grove operations manager. Meeting with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on August 1, 2006. Agricultural Resource Management;Vero Beach, Florida.
6
Status of the Species – Eastern Indigo Snake U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service January 2016
7