Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the Northern Mexican Gartersnake as Threatened or Endangered With Critical Habitat, 315-324 [06-1]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 2 / Wednesday, January 4, 2006 / Proposed Rules
§ 9903.201–1
CAS Applicability.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(6) Firm fixed-priced, fixed-priced
with economic price adjustment
(provided that price adjustment is not
based on actual costs incurred), timeand-materials, and labor-hour contracts
and subcontracts for the acquisition of
commercial items.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. E5–8237 Filed 1–3–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3110–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a
Petition To List the Northern Mexican
Gartersnake as Threatened or
Endangered With Critical Habitat
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition
finding and initiation of status review.
wwhite on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
90-day finding on a petition to list the
northern Mexican gartersnake,
Thamnophis eques megalops, as
threatened or endangered with critical
habitat under the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended (Act). The
petitioners provided three listing
scenarios for consideration by the
Service: (1) Listing the United States
population as a Distinct Population
Segment (DPS); (2) listing the species
throughout its range in the United States
and Mexico based on its range-wide
status; or (3) listing the species
throughout its range in the U.S. and
Mexico based on its status in the United
States. We find the petition has
presented substantial information that
the northern Mexican gartersnake is a
listable entity, and we find that the
petition presents substantial scientific
and commercial data indicating that
listing may be warranted. Therefore, we
are initiating a status review to
determine if listing this species is
warranted. To ensure that the status
review is comprehensive, we are
soliciting scientific and commercial
information regarding this species. Any
determinations on critical habitat will
be made if and when a listing action is
initiated for this species.
DATES: The finding announced in this
document was made on December 13,
2005. To be considered in the 12-month
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:23 Jan 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
finding for this petition, comments and
information should be submitted to us
by March 6, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Data, information,
comments, or questions concerning this
petition and our finding should be
submitted to the Field Supervisor,
Arizona Ecological Services Field
Office, 2321 West Royal Palm Drive,
Suite 103, Phoenix, Arizona. The
petition, supporting data, and comments
will be available for public inspection,
by appointment, during normal business
hours at the above address.
If you wish to comment or provide
information, you may submit your
comments and materials by any one of
the following methods:
1. You may submit written comments
and information by mail to: Field
Supervisor, Arizona Ecological Services
Field Office, 2321 West Royal Palm
Drive, Suite 103, Phoenix, Arizona.
2. You may hand-deliver written
comments and information to our Field
Supervisor, Arizona Ecological Services
Field Office, 2321 West Royal Palm
Drive, Suite 103, Phoenix, Arizona.
3. You may fax your comments to
602–242–2513.
4. You may send your comments by
electronic mail (e-mail) directly to the
Service at MexGsnake@fws.gov, or to the
Federal Rulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov. Please include
‘‘Attn: northern Mexican gartersnake’’ in
the beginning of your message, and do
not use special characters or any form
of encryption. Electronic attachments in
standard formats (such as .pdf or .doc)
are acceptable, but please name the
software necessary to open any
attachments in formats other than those
given above. Also, please include your
name and return address in your e-mail
message. If you do not receive a
confirmation from the system that we
have received your e-mail message,
please submit your comments in writing
using one of the alternate methods
described above. In the event that our
internet connection is not functional,
please submit your comments by the
alternate methods mentioned above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Steve Spangle, Field Supervisor,
Arizona Ecological Services Field Office
(telephone 602–242–0210 and facsimile
602–242–2513).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Information Solicited
When we make a finding that
substantial information is presented to
indicate that listing a species may be
warranted, we are required to promptly
commence a review of the status of the
species. To ensure that the status review
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
315
is complete and based on the best
available scientific and commercial
information, we are soliciting
information on the northern Mexican
gartersnake. We request any additional
information, comments, and suggestions
from the public, other concerned
governmental agencies, Native
American Tribes, the scientific
community, industry, or any other
interested parties concerning the status
of the northern Mexican gartersnake. We
are seeking information regarding the
species’ historical and current status
and distribution, its biology and
ecology, ongoing conservation measures
for the species and its habitat, and
threats to the species and its habitat. If
you wish to comment or provide
information, you may submit your
comments and materials concerning this
finding to the Field Supervisor (see
ADDRESSES section).
Our practice is to make any comments
and materials provided, including
names and home addresses of
respondents, available for public review
during regular business hours.
Respondents may request that we
withhold a respondent’s identity, to the
extent allowable by law. If you wish us
to withhold your name or address, you
must state this request prominently at
the beginning of your submission.
However, we will not consider
anonymous comments. To the extent
consistent with applicable law, we will
make all submissions from
organizations or businesses, and from
individuals identifying themselves as
representatives or officials of
organizations or businesses, available
for public inspection in their entirety.
Comments and materials received will
be available for public inspection, by
appointment, during normal business
hours at the above address.
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) (Act), requires that
we make a finding on whether a petition
to list, delist, or reclassify a species
presents substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that
the petitioned action may be warranted.
We are to base this finding on all
information available to us at the time
we make the finding. To the maximum
extent practicable, we are to make this
finding within 90 days of our receipt of
the petition, and publish our notice of
this finding promptly in the Federal
Register.
Our standard for substantial
information within the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) with regard to a 90day petition finding is ‘‘that amount of
E:\FR\FM\04JAP1.SGM
04JAP1
316
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 2 / Wednesday, January 4, 2006 / Proposed Rules
wwhite on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
information that would lead a
reasonable person to believe that the
measure proposed in the petition may
be warranted’’ (50 CFR 424.14(b)). If we
find that substantial information was
presented, we are required to promptly
commence a review of the status of the
species.
In making this finding, we relied on
information provided by the petitioners
and evaluated that information in
accordance with 50 CFR 424.14(b). Our
process of coming to a 90-day finding
under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act and
§ 424.14(b) of our regulations is limited
to a determination of whether the
information in the petition meets the
‘‘substantial information’’ threshold.
We do not conduct additional
research at this point, nor do we subject
the petition to rigorous critical review.
Rather, as the Act and regulations
contemplate, in coming to a 90-day
finding, we accept the petitioner’s
sources and characterizations of the
information unless we have specific
information to the contrary.
Our finding considers whether the
petition states a reasonable case for
listing the species under the Act on its
face. Thus, our finding expresses no
view as to the ultimate issue of whether
the species should be listed. We reach
a conclusion on that issue only after a
more thorough review of the status of
the species. In that review, which will
be completed on or by September 15,
2006, we will perform a rigorous,
critical analysis of the best available
scientific and commercial information,
not just the information in the petition.
We will ensure that the data used to
make our determination as to the status
of the species is consistent with the Act
and Information Quality Act (44 U.S.C.
3516).
Petition
On December 19, 2003, we received a
petition dated December 15, 2003,
requesting that we list the northern
Mexican gartersnake, Thamnophis
eques megalops, as threatened or
endangered, and that critical habitat be
designated concurrently with the listing.
The petition, submitted by the Center
for Biological Diversity (hereinafter
referred to as the petitioners), was
clearly identified as a petition for a
listing rule, and contained the names,
signatures, and addresses of the
requesting parties. Included in the
petition was supporting information
regarding the species’ taxonomy and
ecology, historical and current
distribution, present status, and
potential causes of decline. We
acknowledged the receipt of the petition
in a letter to Mr. Noah Greenwald, dated
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:23 Jan 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
March 1, 2004. In that letter, we also
advised the petitioners that, due to
funding constraints in fiscal year 2004,
we would not be able to begin
processing the petition in a timely
manner.
On May 17, 2005, the petitioners filed
a complaint for declaratory and
injunctive relief, challenging our failure
to issue a 90-day finding in response to
the petition as required by U.S.C.
1533(b)(3)(A) and (B). In a stipulated
settlement agreement, we agreed to
submit a 90-day finding to the Federal
Register by December 16, 2005, and if
positive, complete a 12-month finding
on or by September 15, 2006 [Center for
Biological Diversity v. Norton, CV–05–
341–TUC–CKJ (D. Ariz)]. The settlement
agreement was signed and adopted by
the District Court for the District of
Arizona on August 22, 2005. This notice
constitutes our 90-day finding for the
petition to list the northern Mexican
gartersnake as threatened or
endangered, pursuant to the Court’s
order.
Biology and Distribution
The northern Mexican gartersnake
may occur with other native gartersnake
species and can be difficult to identify
in the field. The northern Mexican
gartersnake is a medium-sized member
of the family Colubridae with a
maximum known length of 112
centimeters (cm) [44 inches (in)]. It
ranges in background color from olive to
olive-brown to olive-gray. Three stripes
run the length of the body, with a
yellow stripe down the back that
darkens toward the tail. The pale yellow
to light-tan lateral stripes distinguish
the northern Mexican gartersnake from
other gartersnake species because a
portion of the lateral stripe is found on
the fourth scale row. Paired black spots
extend along the dorsolateral fields. A
light-colored crescent extends behind
the corners of the mouth.
The northern Mexican gartersnake is
one of ten subspecies currently
recognized under Thamnophis eques,
has the largest historical distribution of
these subspecies, and is the only
subspecies known to occur in the
United States. Robert Kennicott first
described this northern subspecies of
Mexican gartersnake in 1860 as Eutenia
megalops from the type locality of
Tucson, Arizona (Rosen and Schwalbe
1988). In 1951, Dr. Hobart Smith
renamed the subspecies with its current
scientific name of Thamnophis eques
megalops (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988). A
summary of taxonomic history can be
found in Rosen and Schwalbe (1988).
The historical distribution of northern
Mexican gartersnake in the United
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
States was constrained largely to
Arizona and, to a lesser degree, New
Mexico. There have been a number of
inventory, monitoring, and/or survey
efforts in the United States, most of
which occurred in Arizona (which
encompasses the vast majority of the
historical distribution of northern
Mexican gartersnakes in the United
States). Fewer survey data were found
in the literature for Mexico and New
Mexico. In Arizona, the historical
distribution once included the Santa
Cruz, San Pedro, Colorado, Salt, Agua
Fria, Rio Yaqui, and Verde River
watersheds and presumably the Gila
River watershed based on historically
suitable habitat and geographic
proximity to formerly extant
populations.
In New Mexico, the northern Mexican
gartersnake was once extant in the
upper Gila River watershed in Grant and
Hidalgo Counties. In April of 1977,
Roger Conant, James S. Jacob, and a
group of students counted
approximately 100 northern Mexican
gartersnakes in and around three small
ponds on private land southwest of
Mule Creek Village (Degenhardt et al.
1996). This population was considered
a stronghold for the species in New
Mexico (Degenhardt et al. 1996). Charlie
Painter, State Herpetologist for the New
Mexico Department of Game and Fish
(NMDGF), returned to this location in
May 1994 during favorable conditions
and found only one specimen (C.
Painter, pers. comm., New Mexico
Department of Game and Fish, 2005).
This represents a major decline in a
stronghold population. Mr. Painter
stated that he strongly suspects that
northern Mexican gartersnakes are
currently extirpated from New Mexico
based on several factors including
limited historical distribution in that
State, modification and loss of suitable
habitat, nonnative species
introductions, and the lack of
protections offered to non-listed, but
declining native species on private land
(all known records of northern Mexican
gartersnakes in New Mexico are on
private land) (C. Painter, pers. comm.,
New Mexico Department of Game and
Fish, 2005).
The current distribution of northern
Mexican gartersnakes within the United
States is now generally believed to be
limited to four geographic areas in
Arizona: (1) Middle/upper Verde
River—lower Tonto Creek; (2) Black
River watershed; (3) upper Santa Cruz/
San Pedro watersheds; and, (4) the San
Bernardino National Wildlife Refuge in
the upper Rio Yaqui watershed
(Fitzgerald 1986; Rosen and Schwalbe
1988; Arizona Game and Fish
E:\FR\FM\04JAP1.SGM
04JAP1
wwhite on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 2 / Wednesday, January 4, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Department 1996; Rosen et al. 2001;
Holycross and Burger 2005).
The subspecies is also historically
known from the Sierra Madre
Occidental and the Mexican Plateau in
the Mexican states of Sonora,
Chihuahua, Durango, Coahila,
Zacatecas, Guanajuato, Nayarit, Hidalgo,
´
Jalisco, San Luis Potosı, Aguascalientes,
´
Tlaxacala, Puebla, Mexico, Veracruz,
´
and Queretaro (Rossman et al. 1996).
The northern Mexican gartersnake is
considered a native riparian obligate
(restricted to riparian areas when not
engaged in dispersal behavior for the
purposes of genetic emigration);
occurring chiefly in the following
general habitat types: (1) Source-area
wetlands (e.g., cienegas (mid-elevation
wetlands with highly organic, reducing
soils), stock tanks (earthen water
impoundments), etc.); (2) large river
riparian woodlands and forests; and (3)
streamside gallery forests (as defined by
well-developed broadleaf deciduous
riparian forests with limited, if any,
herbaceous ground cover or dense grass)
(Hendrickson and Minckley 1984; Rosen
and Schwalbe 1988; Arizona Game and
Fish Department 2001). Habitat
characteristics preferred by the northern
Mexican gartersnake varies based on the
type of habitat. For example, in sourcearea wetlands, dense vegetation
consisting of knot grass (Paspalum
distichum), spikerush (Eleocharis),
bulrush (Scirpus), cattail (Typha),
deergrass (Muhlenbergia), sacaton
(Sporobolus), Fremont cottonwood
(Populus fremontii), Goodding’s willow
(Salix gooddingii), and velvet mesquite
(Prosopis velutina) may be preferred
(Rosen and Schwalbe 1988).
In small streamside riparian habitat,
this snake is often associated with
Arizona sycamore (Platanus wrightii),
sugar leaf maple (Acer grandidentatum),
velvet ash (Fraxinus velutina), Arizona
cypress (Cupressus arizonica), Arizona
walnut (Juglans major), Arizona alder
(Alnus oblongifolia), alligator juniper
(Juniperus deppeana), Rocky Mountain
juniper (J. scopulorum), and a number
of oak species (Quercus spp.) (McCranie
and Wilson 1986; Cirett-Galan 1996).
In riparian woodlands consisting of
cottonwood and willow or gallery
forests of broadleaf and deciduous
species along larger rivers, the northern
Mexican gartersnake may be observed in
less dense mixed grasses along the bank
or in the shallows (Rossman et al. 1996;
Rosen and Schwalbe 1988). Within and
adjacent to the Sierra Madre Occidental
in Mexico, it occurs in general habitat
associations described as montane
woodland, Chihuahuan desertscrub,
mesquite-grassland, and Cordillera
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:23 Jan 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
317
´
Volcanica montane woodland
(McCranie and Wilson 1987).
The northern Mexican gartersnake is
surface active at ambient temperatures
ranging from 22° Celsius (C) to 33° C
(71° Fahrenheit (F) to 91° and forages
along the banks of waterbodies feeding
primarily upon native fish [e.g., Gila
topminnow (Poeciliopsis occidentalis
occidentalis), desert pupfish
(Cyrpinodon macularius), Gila chub
(Gila intermedia), and roundtail chub
(Gila robusta)] and adult and larval
native ranid frogs [e.g., lowland leopard
frog (Rana yavapaiensis) and Chiricahua
leopard frog (Rana chiricahuensis)], but
may also supplement its diet with
earthworms and vertebrates such as
lizards, small rodents, salamanders, and
hylid frogs (treefrogs) (Rosen and
Schwalbe 1988). An important
component of suitable northern
Mexican gartersnake habitat is an intact
native prey base that is not significantly
affected by nonnative, invasive species
(Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, 1997;
Clarkson and Rorabaugh 1989; Jennings
et al. 1992; Holm and Lowe 1995;
Fernandez and Rosen 1996; Rosen et al.
2001; Matthews et al. 2002; Holycross
and Burger 2005). However, in some
populations where the species is present
with bullfrogs, adult northern Mexican
gartersnakes will prey upon juvenile
bullfrogs and/or bullfrog tadpoles
(Holycross and Burger 2005). Juvenile
northern Mexican gartersnakes may also
prey upon nonnative mosquito fish
(Gambusia affinis) (Holycross and
Burger 2005).
Sexual maturity in male northern
Mexican gartersnakes occurs at two
years of age and at two to three years of
age in females. Northern Mexican
gartersnakes are ovoviviparous (eggs
develop and hatch within the oviduct of
the female). Mating occurs in April and
May in their northern distribution
followed by the live birth of between 7
and 26 neonates (newly born
individuals) (average is 13.6) in July and
August (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988).
Approximately half of the sexually
mature females within a population
reproduce in any one season (Rosen and
Schwalbe 1988).
Category 2 candidates was
discontinued, and the northern Mexican
gartersnake was no longer recognized as
a candidate.
Previous Federal Actions
We placed the northern Mexican
gartersnake on the list of candidate
species as a Category 2 species in 1988
(50 FR 37958). Category 2 species were
those for which existing information
indicated that listing was possibly
appropriate, but for which substantial
supporting biological data to prepare a
proposed rule were lacking. In the 1996
Candidate Notice of Review (February
28, 1996; 61 FR 7596), the use of
Information Provided in the Petition
The petitioners claim that northern
Mexican gartersnake populations in
Arizona are in decline and are clearly
threatened and reference several reports
that provide data on survey efforts for
the species. However, the petitioners’
state that information on the northern
Mexican gartersnakes’ population status
in New Mexico, and in particular,
Mexico is less certain but believed to
indicate potential extirpations or
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Discussion
We discuss below each of the major
assertions made in the petition,
organized by the listing factors found in
section 4(a)(1) of the Act. Section 4 of
the Act and its implementing
regulations found at 50 CFR 424 set
forth the procedures for adding species
to the Federal list of endangered and
threatened species. A species may be
determined to be an endangered or
threatened species if it is threatened by
one or more of the five factors described
in section 4(a)(1) of the Act and meets
either the definition of endangered or
threatened pursuant to section 3 of the
Act. An endangered species is any
species which is in danger of extinction
throughout all or a significant portion of
its range. A threatened species is any
species which is likely to become an
endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range. The five
listing factors are: (1) The present or
threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range; (2)
overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes; (3) disease or predation; (4)
the inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms; and (5) other natural or
manmade factors affecting its continued
existence. The petitioners contend that
all five factors are applicable to some
degree for the northern Mexican
gartersnake, as discussed below.
This 90-day finding is not a status
assessment of the northern Mexican
gartersnake and does not constitute a
status review under the Act. The
discussion presents information
provided in the petition related to the
factors used for evaluation of listing
pursuant to section 4(a)(1) of the Act for
the northern Mexican gartersnake.
A. Present or Threatened Destruction,
Modification, or Curtailment of the
Species’ Habitat or Range
Geographic Range and Status
E:\FR\FM\04JAP1.SGM
04JAP1
wwhite on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
318
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 2 / Wednesday, January 4, 2006 / Proposed Rules
declines (Lowe 1985; Stebbins 1985;
Rosen et al. 2001; Degenhardt et al.
1996; Howland 2000).
In 2000, Rosen et al. (2001)
resurveyed northern Mexican
gartersnake populations known to be
extant during the early to mid 1980s in
southeastern Arizona and included
additional information collected from
1993 to 2001. Rosen et al. (2001)
reported their results in terms of
increasing, stabilized, or decreasing
populations of northern Mexican
gartersnake. The primary means used to
sample the herpetofauna included
various trapping techniques and field
searches. Three sites (San Bernardino
National Wildlife Refuge, Finley Tank at
the Audubon Research Ranch near
Elgin, and Scotia Canyon in the
Huachuca Mountains) were intensively
surveyed with varied results at each site
that were discussed by the petitioners
and in further detail below.
According to the petitioners, the
northern Mexican gartersnake was the
primary gartersnake species at the San
Bernardino National Wildlife Refuge
from the 1950s through the 1970s. The
species is currently extirpated or near
extirpation in this area based on
substantial survey effort on the refuge
from 1985 to 1989 and again from 1992
to 1999, which noted severe declines
(Rosen and Schwalbe 1997; Rosen et al.
2001). Investigators described the
decline at the refuge as severe because
in 1995, 31 northern Mexican
gartersnakes were observed on the
refuge at a standardized capture rate of
0.248 captures/day while in 1999, one
northern Mexican gartersnake was
observed with a standardized capture
rate of 0.002 captures/day; a several-fold
decline. The decline of the northern
Mexican gartersnake on the refuge is
largely attributed to catastrophic
declines and the ultimate extirpation of
a primary prey species, the Chiricahua
leopard frog, a federally threatened
species (Rosen and Schwalbe 1997;
Rosen et al. 2001).
The petitioners reference Rosen and
Schwalbe (1997) which also provides a
detailed assessment of the status of the
northern Mexican gartersnake, as well
as other aquatic herpetofauna (reptiles
and amphibians) (including bullfrogs
and both Chiricahua and lowland
leopard frogs) within the San
Bernardino National Wildlife Refuge.
Their work summarizes many projects
which commenced in 1985 and focused
on (1) the impacts of bullfrog invasion
on the northern Mexican gartersnake; (2)
the effectiveness of bullfrog control
measures; and (3) the effectiveness of
leopard frog recovery efforts in the San
Bernardino Valley. The primary means
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:23 Jan 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
used to sample the herpetofauna
included various trapping techniques
and field searches.
Rosen and Schwalbe (1997) noted the
northern Mexican gartersnake as the
primary historical gartersnake species in
the San Bernardino National Wildlife
Refuge, but sampling results in the mid1980s indicated the species as
‘‘unusually uncommon.’’ Observations
of northern Mexican gartersnake
populations in 1985 and 1986 in the San
Bernardino National Wildlife Refuge
indicated that recruitment was severely
hampered due to the significantly
limited number of specimens observed
in the juvenile size classes. The
investigators attributed this observation
to bullfrog predation as most adult
specimens captured displayed several
scars from repeated apparent predation
attempts by bullfrogs (Rosen and
Schwalbe 1997). Bullfrog predation can
be discerned by such tail-scaring. Native
predators generally consume the entire
animal whereas bullfrogs will often
attempt to capture prey items larger
than they can subdue and physically
ingest, which results in the scaring
observed in northern Mexican
gartersnakes on the refuge and other
areas where they occur with bullfrogs.
Similar observations were made by
Holm and Lowe (1995) in Scotia
Canyon, Huachuca Mountains.
The petitioners reference Rosen and
Schwalbe (1997) in stating that declines
of northern Mexican gartersnakes have
been noted in the San Bernardino Valley
since before formal investigations
commenced at the San Bernardino
National Wildlife Refuge. Cumulative
data of gartersnake captures (including
both the northern Mexican gartersnake
and the Marcy’s checkered gartersnake
(Thamnophis marcianus marcianus)) in
the San Bernardino National Wildlife
Refuge indicated a 39 percent decline in
northern Mexican gartersnake capture
rate per unit effort between the 1980s
and the 1990s. These data were derived
from aquatic trapping of northern
Mexican gartersnake which provided
Rosen and Schwalbe (1997) with
substantial annual samples from 1993 to
1997. Rosen and Schwalbe (1997)
reasoned this decline could be
attributed to natural response to
persistent drought conditions but that it
may have ‘‘masked a critical, rapid
decline’’ in northern Mexican
gartersnake populations of southeastern
Arizona. The qualitative and
quantitative data generated from the
exhaustive research conducted on this
species in this area clearly confirms the
species is nearing extirpation from the
San Bernardino National Wildlife
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Refuge, a former stronghold (Rosen and
Schwalbe 1997; Rosen et al. 2001).
Surveys at Finley Tank located on the
Audubon Research Ranch near Elgin,
Arizona, that occurred during the period
from 1985 to 1988 and again in 2000
were cited by petitioners. Chiricahua
leopard frogs were noted as abundant in
the 1985 and 1986 field seasons but
have not been observed there since
1988. The petitioners cited an
observation by Dr. Phil Rosen found in
Rosen et al. (2001) where he explained,
‘‘At sites where leopard frogs are absent,
often apparently due to introduced
centrarchid fish [especially largemouth
bass (Micropterus salmoides) and green
sunfish (Lepomis cyanellus)] as at
Babocamari (Cienega), northern
Mexican garter snakes have become rare
prior to the arrival of the bullfrog. With
only fish to eat, growth is probably
markedly reduced, and further, at
centrarchid sites there are generally few
small-to medium-sized fish, of edible
size for most gartersnakes. In that
scenario, gartersnake reproduction is
likely to be reduced, and juvenile
growth slowed, as is consistent with the
low densities and generally smaller
snakes seen at the Babocamari.’’ The
decline of native leopard frogs from
Finley Tank, possibly exacerbated by
the effect of recent drought years on the
habitat within and around Finley Tank,
was, according to petitioners, the
principle factor which led to the
precipitous decline in northern Mexican
gartersnakes since 1988 at this location.
The last intensively resurveyed area
referenced by the petitioners and
discussed in Rosen et al. (2001) was
Scotia Canyon in the Huachuca
Mountains of southeastern Arizona. A
comparison of survey data from Holm
and Lowe (1995) suggests a possible
decline of northern Mexican gartersnake
populations in this area based on survey
data from 1980 to 1982, with low
capture rates in 1993, and even lower
capture rates in 2000. Rosen et al. (2001)
noted that bullfrogs were first detected
in Scotia Canyon in 1989, and by 1992
bullfrogs had overtaken the canyon. As
referenced in the petition, this bullfrog
invasion affected the northern Mexican
gartersnake age-class distribution in
Scotia Canyon to one favoring older
adults (too large to be eaten by bullfrogs)
with little, if any, recruitment in the
juvenile age-class due to bullfrog
predation on neonatal and juvenile
gartersnakes (Holm and Lowe 1995;
Rosen et al. 2001). Rosen et al. (2001)
commented that the data were too
sparse to confirm that extirpation of
northern Mexican gartersnakes from
Scotia Canyon was inevitable, but that
northern Mexican gartersnakes may still
E:\FR\FM\04JAP1.SGM
04JAP1
wwhite on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 2 / Wednesday, January 4, 2006 / Proposed Rules
persist there as a population vulnerable
to extirpation.
The petitioners also reference Holm
and Lowe (1995) who also conducted a
herpetofaunal assessment in Scotia
Canyon in 1993, using techniques such
as active searching during optimal
conditions and trapping using drift
fences (barriers at ground level that
direct the movements of small
vertebrate species into buried containers
adjacent to the barrier) with minnow
traps. The purpose of this assessment
was to compare the 1993 herpetofaunal
community to the 1980 through 1982
results in the same area. As discussed in
Rosen et al. (2001), Holm and Lowe
(1995) noted bullfrogs to have increased
markedly over the time between
surveys. Native ranid frogs were
uncommon during the surveys during
the early 1980s and were declared
locally extirpated from the study area in
1993. Of 39 northern Mexican
gartersnakes captured in 1993, 7 were
adults, 2 were yearlings, and 30 were
young of the year; as compared to 6
yearlings and 2 small adults captured in
1980 to 1982. Holm and Lowe (1995)
suggested such a population structure of
northern Mexican gartersnakes
indicated that while adults are capable
of living longer and achieving
significant size, recruitment is low due
to high mortality of juvenile snakes from
bullfrog predation. Their finding was
supported by 93 percent of northern
Mexican gartersnakes that were
observed with broken tails likely caused
by bullfrog predation attempts based
upon the predator community in this
area (Holm and Lowe 1995).
Four southeastern Arizona cienega
habitats were identified by the
petitioners as being resurveyed and
subsequently discussed in Rosen et al.
(2001): the Arivaca Cienega, the
Babocomari Cienega, Cienega Creek at
Empire-Cienega Ranch, and Lower
Cienega Creek at Cienega Creek County
Preserve. The Arivaca Cienega was a
historical locality for both the northern
Mexican gartersnake and the Chiricahua
leopard frog although neither species
has been found at this location since
1980 (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988; Rosen
et al. 2001). Arivaca Cienega was
surveyed on June 13, 1985, and the
authors recorded that bullfrogs were
‘‘extremely abundant’’ and grazing
pressure was heavy with over 500 cattle
grazing in the habitat (Rosen and
Schwalbe 1988). This locality was again
sampled in 1994 and 2000 with
extensive trapping and survey effort
which yielded a single northern
Mexican gartersnake (Rosen et al. 2001).
Rosen et al. (2001) commented that the
northern Mexican gartersnake
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:23 Jan 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
population of the Arivaca Cienega likely
succumbed to the effects of grazing and
a massive bullfrog population, but that
the single northern Mexican gartersnake
found in 2000 indicated the ‘‘tenacity of
a species that long ago apparently
became rare in the area.’’
A herpetologist surveyed the
Babocamari Cienega in June of 1958 and
noted that northern Mexican
gartersnakes, lowland leopard frogs, and
‘‘southern-form’’ (Chiricahua) leopard
frogs were extremely abundant (Rosen
and Schwalbe 1988; Rosen et al. 2001).
Some 27 years later in 1985, research
herpetologists again visited this location
only to find four northern Mexican
gartersnakes and no leopard frogs
(Rosen et al. 2001). Surveys that
occurred in 2000 did not find either
species (Rosen et al. 2001). Babocamari
Cienega was overtaken by black
bullheads (Ameiurus melas) and
largemouth bass (Micropterus
salmoides) between the late 1950s and
the mid-1980s (Rosen and Schwalbe
1988). Rosen et al. (2001) theorize that
competition for prey and direct
predation from nonnative fish were
involved in the decline of northern
Mexican gartersnakes and leopard frogs
at Babocamari Cienega.
The remaining two cienegas identified
by the petitioners and addressed by
Rosen et al. (2001) are both associated
with Cienega Creek in Santa Cruz and
Pima counties of Arizona. The first, a
former stronghold for northern Mexican
gartersnakes, was Cienega Creek at
Empire-Cienega Ranch which was
considered the ‘‘most natural cienega
remaining in southern Arizona that
supports a large and dense population
of Gila topminnow’’ (Rosen et al. 2001).
Aquatic habitat parameters at this
location prevented investigators from
setting traps per standard protocols,
which indirectly placed greater
emphasis, and less certainty, on handcollection of northern Mexican
gartersnakes. Regardless, three adult
northern Mexican gartersnakes were
captured by hand at this location: two
in 1986 and one in 2000. While still
extant, both northern Mexican
gartersnakes and leopard frogs have
declined precipitously from this area
and bullfrogs have successfully invaded.
The last of the cienega habitats that
was specifically investigated by Rosen
et al. (2001) and identified by the
petitioners was Lower Cienega Creek at
Cienega Creek County Preserve. Rosen
et al. (2001) states that this cienega was
historically lush with aquatic and
emergent vegetation. Overgrazing during
the early and mid-1980s denuded much
of the area’s vegetation and resulted in
significant erosion evidenced by the
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
319
downcutting of stream banks, in some
cases in excess of 4.6 meters (15 feet)
deep. Lowland leopard frogs have
nonetheless remained extant through
2001 (Rosen et al. 2001). According to
the petitioners, the cienega was
purchased by Pima County in the 1990s
and grazing has been prohibited on-site
since that time. Subsequent trips to this
area since the change in ownership have
revealed a significant improvement in
habitat characteristics. By 1998, the first
northern Mexican gartersnake was
observed on the new Cienega Creek
preserve and has been occasionally
observed there since (Rosen et al. 2001).
Rosen et al. (2001), in acknowledgement
of management objectives for this area,
the potential for habitat regeneration
and persistence, and its influence on
Cienega Creek as a whole, stated that
Cienega Creek ‘‘appears to have the
highest potential of any site in the U.S.
for preservation of the (northern)
Mexican gartersnake.’’
According to the surveyors, the many
sites in southeastern Arizona resurveyed
by Rosen et al. (2001) since the 1980s
yielded mixed results. Populations
possibly increased at 1 site (lower
Cienega Creek), were possibly stable at
2 (lower San Raphael Valley, Arivaca),
were negative at 14 [Empire-Cienega
Creek, Babocomari, Bog Hole, O’Donnell
Creek, Turkey Creek (Canelo), Post
Canyon, Scotia Canyon, Lewis Springs
(San Pedro River), San Pedro River near
Highway 90, Barchas Ranch Pond
(Huachuca Mountain bajada), Heron
Spring, Sharp Spring, Elgin-Sonoita
windmill well site, and Upper 13
Reservoir (San Raphael Valley)], and
showed major, demonstrable declines at
2 sites (San Bernardino National
Wildlife Refuge and Finley Tank). No
confirmed locality extirpations of
northern Mexican gartersnake in
southeastern Arizona were documented
in Rosen et al. (2001).
Habitat
Information Provided in the Petition
The petitioners state that northern
Mexican gartersnake habitat is
threatened by a variety of factors such
as livestock grazing, water withdrawal,
streambed modification, dams and dam
operation, groundwater pumping,
recreation, mining, encroaching urban
development, pollution, woodcutting,
cultural impacts, and climate change
(Hendrickson and Minckley 1984; Szaro
et al. 1985; Lowe 1985; Rosen and
Schwalbe 1988; and Rosen et al. 2001).
The petitioners did not provide
substantial information that addresses
such threats to northern Mexican
gartersnake habitat such as woodcutting,
E:\FR\FM\04JAP1.SGM
04JAP1
wwhite on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
320
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 2 / Wednesday, January 4, 2006 / Proposed Rules
pollution, cultural impacts, mining, and
recreation but cited Lowe (1985), which
discusses how such activities have led
to the extirpations of riparian reptile
and amphibian populations, and in
some cases, communities in specific
geographic areas.
The petitioners specifically identify
the loss of and continuing threats to
wetland and cienega habitats and
reiterate their importance to this
particular gartersnake subspecies
(Hendrickson and Minckley 1984; Lowe
1985). Hendrickson and Minckley
(1984) state that cienegas habitats are an
aquatic climax community based on
their data review. Many of these unique
habitats of the southwestern United
States, and Arizona in particular, have
been lost in the past century to
streambed modification, livestock
grazing, cultural impacts, stream flow
stabilization by upstream dams,
channelization, and stream flow
reduction from groundwater pumping
and diversions (Hendrickson and
Minckley 1984).
Many sub-basins where cienegas have
been severely modified or lost entirely
overlap, wholly or partially, the
historical distribution of the northern
Mexican gartersnake including the San
Simon, Sulphur Springs, San Pedro, and
Santa Cruz valleys of southeastern and
south-central Arizona. The San Simon
Valley possessed several natural cienega
habitats with ‘‘luxuriant vegetation’’
prior to 1885 and was used as a
watering stop for pioneers, military, and
surveying expeditions (Hendrickson and
Minckley 1984). In the subsequent
decades, the disappearance of grasses
and commencement of severe erosion
were the result of heavy grazing
pressure by large herds of cattle as well
as the effects from wagon trails that
paralleled arroyos, occasionally crossed
them, and often required stream bank
modification (Hendrickson and
Minckley 1984). Today, only the
artificially-maintained San Simon
Cienega exists in this valley. Similar
accounts of past conditions, adverse
effects from historical anthropogenic
activities, and subsequent reduction in
the extent and quality of cienega
habitats in the remaining valleys are
also provided in Hendrickson and
Minckley (1984).
The regional, ecological ramifications
of future climate change were noted by
the petitioners as a significant threat to
the northern Mexican gartersnake
habitat. Specifically, the petitioners
restated findings discussed in the Final
Report of the Southwest Regional
Climate Change Symposium and
Workshop that occurred in September
1997. Those findings indicated that the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:23 Jan 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
future climate in the American
southwest may include decreases in
summer and winter precipitation and an
increase of up to 4 °C (7 °F) in average
temperature. The petitioners claim that
such changes in weather patterns and
climactic conditions will result in more
variability in flows that could
compromise perennial and intermittent
streams.
The petitioners also contend that
northern Mexican gartersnake
populations are vulnerable to local
extirpation from the effects of livestock
grazing within and adjacent to stock
tanks, cienegas, and riparian areas
(Rosen and Schwalbe 1988).
Specifically, the loss of bank-side
vegetation removes an essential habitat
component for such behaviors as
foraging and escaping predation. Once a
northern Mexican gartersnake
population has been extirpated, Rosen
and Schwalbe (1988) state that
unassisted recolonization of extirpated
habitat is often precluded because it is
either isolated between lengthy
dewatered reaches of intermittent
streams or not available to suitable
overland routes of movement for an
aquatic habitat specialist.
The petitioners cite Rosen and
Schwalbe (1988) which provides an
example of where a known (as of 1983)
northern Mexican gartersnake
population was extirpated in 1984 in
Little Ash Creek of the upper Agua Fria
watershed, potentially due to effects of
overgrazing the stream banks and
emergent vegetation. A survey of the
area in April 1984 produced not a single
specimen, and the authors noted severe
overgrazing that had removed virtually
all the cover used by northern Mexican
gartersnakes in years prior. In August of
the following year, the area was
resurveyed. Rosen and Schwalbe (1988)
noted that livestock had been removed
from the area and that the vegetation
had regrown to become suitable for
northern Mexican gartersnake, yet an
intensive survey again yielded no
specimens.
The petitioners note that stock tanks
used in livestock management also
experience intentional or unintentional
introductions of nonnative species of
fish, amphibians, and crayfish by
anglers and private landowners (Rosen
et al. 2001). The alteration of habitat,
such as bank-side vegetation removal
and degradation, around stock tanks,
may also favor nonnative predators as a
secondary effect from livestock grazing
and a threat to northern Mexican
gartersnake (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988).
Alternatively, well-managed stock tanks
can provide habitat suitable for
occupation of the northern Mexican
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
gartersnake, both structurally and in
terms of its prey base, especially when
the tank remains devoid of nonnative
species while supporting native prey
species (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988).
The petitioners discuss how Szaro et
al. (1985) assessed the effects of grazing
on a similar species of gartersnake, the
wandering (terrestrial) gartersnake
(Thamnophis elegans vagrans). The
assessment compared wandering
(terrestrial) gartersnake populations in
both grazed and ungrazed portions of
the same stream. Results indicated that
snake abundance and biomass were
significantly higher in ungrazed habitat
with a five-fold difference in number of
snakes captured, despite the difficulties
of observing snakes in dense, complex
habitat (Szaro et al. 1985). Szaro et al.
(1985) also noted the importance of
riparian vegetation in thermoregulation,
foraging, and predation-avoidance
behaviors. The petitioners claim that the
northern Mexican gartersnake continues
to be impacted by on-going livestock
operations and provided specific reports
of adverse effects to northern Mexican
gartersnake habitat from livestock
grazing on public and private lands in
southeastern Arizona where the species
is thought to be extant (Rosen et al.
2001).
Lastly, the historical and potential
future effects to northern Mexican
gartersnake habitat from human
population growth and subsequent
water needs were discussed by the
petitioners. Specifically, once-perennial
extensive reaches of historical habitat
for the northern Mexican gartersnake
along the San Pedro and Santa Cruz
rivers have been lost to the effects of
groundwater pumping in response to
increasing human populations and
ensuing urbanization and development
within the region. The petitioners also
express concern for extant populations
of northern Mexican gartersnake in the
Arivaca Cienega and upper Verde River
because of projected population growth,
urbanization, and development in those
areas and evidence of adverse effects to
the water supply of these waterbodies
due to increasing numbers of regional
groundwater wells required to support
such growth.
Summary of Habitat Threats and
Evaluation of Information in the Petition
The petitioners have provided
substantial scientific information that a
variety of anthropogenic activities and
other factors that affect the habitat of
northern Mexican gartersnake.
E:\FR\FM\04JAP1.SGM
04JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 2 / Wednesday, January 4, 2006 / Proposed Rules
B. Overutilization for Commercial,
Recreational, Scientific, or Educational
Purposes
Information Provided in the Petition
The petitioners state that lawful or
unlawful field collecting of northern
Mexican gartersnakes has not
historically been a significant threat to
the species. However, the petitioners
cite that illegal field collecting may
significantly impact small isolated
populations, especially if reproductive
females are removed from the
population (Painter 2000). The northern
Mexican gartersnake may not be
collected without special authorization
by the AGFD or the NMDGF. Specific
discussion of the regulatory protections
for the northern Mexican gartersnake is
provided in Section D ‘‘Inadequacy of
Existing Regulatory Mechanisms’’
below.
Evaluation of Information in the Petition
Since collection of the species is not
known to be a major threat, the
petitioners did not argue that field
collection of the species for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes has contributed significantly
to the current status of the northern
Mexican gartersnake. However, the
petitioners did provide a rational
argument that small, isolated
populations may be particularly
vulnerable to extirpation from the future
illegal collection of reproductive
females.
C. Disease and Predation
wwhite on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Information Provided in the Petition
and Service Files
The petitioners acknowledge that
disease has not been a direct cause for
population decline of the northern
Mexican gartersnake. Based on our
information, while disease has not been
documented as a specific threat to
northern Mexican gartersnake in the
United States or Mexico, disease and
nonnative parasites have been
implicated in the decline of its native
prey species. The chytrid fungus
outbreak has been identified as a chief
causative agent in the significant
declines of many of the native ranid frog
species and regional concerns exist for
the native fish community due to
nonnative parasites such as the Asian
tapeworm (Bothriocephalus
achelognathi) in southeastern Arizona
(Rosen and Schwalbe 1997; Morell
1999; Sredl and Caldwell 2000; Hale
2001; Bradley et al. 2002).
The petitioners discussed the threats
from nonnative species invasions to
northern Mexican gartersnakes’
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:23 Jan 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
functional prey base. The petitioners
indicated that riparian communities in
Arizona have been significantly
impacted by a shift in species
composition, from being historically
dominated by native fauna to being
increasingly impacted by an expanding
assemblage of nonnative species (Rosen
and Schwalbe 1988, 1995, 1996, 1997;
Holm and Lowe 1995; Degenhardt et al.
1996; Fernandez and Rosen 1996; Rosen
et al. 2001). The petitioners referenced
research that suggested that a decline of
native prey species resulting from the
replacement with nonnative species has
a significant adverse effect on northern
Mexican gartersnakes (Rosen and
Schwalbe 1988, 1995, 1996, 1997; Holm
and Lowe 1995; Degenhardt et al. 1996;
Rosen et al. 2001). Subsequently, the
status of primary native prey species for
northern Mexican gartersnake is
declining (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988,
1995, 1996, 1997; Holm and Lowe 1995;
Degenhardt et al. 1996; Fernandez and
Rosen 1996; Rosen et al. 2001).
The petitioners identified several
species as primary prey species for the
northern Mexican gartersnake that had
special Federal or state status. For
example, the lowland leopard frog has
been extirpated from New Mexico and
from its former distribution in the lower
Gila and Colorado rivers, and is
considered Wildlife of Special Concern
by the Arizona Game and Fish
Department (AGFD). The Chiricahua
leopard frog was listed as threatened
without critical habitat under the Act on
June 13, 2002 (67 FR 40790). The Gila
chub was listed as endangered under
the Act on November 2, 2005 (70 FR
66663). The Gila topminnow was listed
as endangered under the Act on March
11, 1967 (32 FR 4001). The roundtail
and headwater chubs were petitioned
for listing as threatened or endangered
under the Act, and we published a
substantial 90-day finding on the
petition for both species on July 12,
2005 (70 FR 39981) indicating that the
petition provided substantial
information for us to initiate a status
review for the two species.
Additionally, the roundtail chub is
listed as threatened by the State of
Arizona. The decline of many
gartersnake prey species may be tied to
predation by and competition with
nonnative invaders; namely bullfrogs,
crayfish, and nonnative fish (Rosen and
Schwalbe 1988; Holm and Lowe 1995;
Rosen et al. 2001).
Petitioners state that the northern
Mexican gartersnake is particularly
vulnerable to a loss in native prey
species (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988).
Rosen et al. (2001) examined this issue
in greater detail and proposed two
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
321
plausible explanations: (1) The species
is reluctant to increase foraging efforts at
the risk of increased predation; and (2)
the species needs substantial food
regularly to maintain its weight and
health. If forced to forage more often for
smaller prey items, a reduction in
growth and reproductive rates may
likely result (Rosen et al. 2001).
Direct observations of predation of
northern Mexican gartersnake by native
species are not well documented in the
literature; however, several species of
native fauna opportunistically take
other native individuals when available
(Rosen and Schwalbe 1988). Some
examples of native predators on the
northern Mexican gartersnake may
include birds of prey, other snakes
(kingsnakes (Lampropeltis sp.),
whipsnakes (Masticophus sp.), etc.),
wading birds, raccoons (Procyon lotor),
skunks (Mephitis sp.), and coyotes
(Canus latrans) (Rosen and Schwalbe
1988). The scientific community does
not currently believe these native
predators are responsible for the
historical decline of northern Mexican
gartersnake as all these species
collectively evolved as a native
biological community.
Alternatively, the petitioners note that
nonnative predation threats have been
and continue to be a serious factor in
the decline of the northern Mexican
gartersnake from both effects to the
species itself and to its primary prey
base. Many nonnative fishes have been
introduced into northern Mexican
gartersnake habitats, such as bullhead,
green sunfish, and largemouth bass
(Rosen and Schwalbe 1988). Rosen et al.
(2001) noted the three most damaging
nonnative predators to the northern
Mexican gartersnake and its prey base in
southern Arizona were bullfrogs,
crayfish, and the green sunfish.
The petitioners claim that, of the
various nonnative predators that have
been introduced to post-settlement
Arizona, the bullfrog appears to be the
most detrimental to the northern
Mexican gartersnake (Rosen and
Schwalbe 1988, 1995, 1996; Holm and
Lowe 1995; Rosen et al. 2001). Bullfrogs
act as competitors to the northern
Mexican gartersnake by sharing prey
items such as frogs, fish, lizards, birds,
and even mammals (Rosen and
Schwalbe 1995). Bullfrogs are
particularly damaging to and persistent
in native riparian communities because
adult bullfrogs are cannibalistic and
larval bullfrogs can be sustained by
grazing on aquatic vegetation, which
means that a population of adult
bullfrogs can sustain itself even when
the native vertebrate prey base has been
E:\FR\FM\04JAP1.SGM
04JAP1
wwhite on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
322
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 2 / Wednesday, January 4, 2006 / Proposed Rules
extirpated by the species (Rosen and
Schwalbe 1995).
The petitioners referenced
documentation that discussed scientists
and landowners having directly and
indirectly observed bullfrogs eating
northern Mexican gartersnakes in the
juvenile and occasionally sub-adult size
classes (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988,
1995, 1996; Holm and Lowe 1995;
Rosen et al. 2001). A well-circulated
photograph of an adult bullfrog in the
process of consuming an adult or
subadult northern Mexican gartersnake
at Parker Canyon Lake, Cochise County,
Arizona, taken by John Carr in 1964,
provides photographic documentation
of bullfrog predation (Rosen and
Schwalbe 1988, 1995). The petitioners
referenced a common observation in
northern Mexican gartersnake
populations that co-occur with bullfrogs
is a preponderance of large, mature
adult snakes with conspicuously low
numbers of individuals in the neonate
and juvenile age size classes due to
bullfrogs eating young small snakes,
indicating low recruitment
(reproduction and survival of young)
(Rosen and Schwalbe 1988; Holm and
Lowe 1995).
The petitioners contend that bullfrogs
that are unable to capture, subdue, and
consume northern Mexican gartersnakes
continue to maintain persistent
predation pressure on individuals. Signs
of attempted predation on northern
Mexican gartersnakes can be readily
observed in the field by examining the
tail region of individual northern
Mexican gartersnakes (Holm and Lowe
1995; Rosen and Schwalbe 1996). Rosen
and Schwalbe (1988) discuss such
observations from the San Bernardino
National Wildlife Refuge where 78
percent of specimens observed had
broken tails with a ‘‘soft and club-like’’
terminus, instead of a long, fine point,
which suggests repeated injury
(multiple predation attempts). Rosen
and Schwalbe (1988) also noted
bleeding from this region by gravid
females when palpated for egg counts
resulting from these ‘‘squeeze-type’’ of
injuries inflicted by adult bullfrogs.
Holm and Lowe (1995) observed that 89
percent of captured northern Mexican
gartersnakes possessed similar tail
injuries during survey work in Scotia
Canyon in 1993, indicating heavy
predation from abundant bullfrogs
occurring there as well. These
observations made by researchers and
referenced by the petitioners indicate
that, while a sub-adult or adult northern
Mexican gartersnake may survive an
individual predation attempt from a
bullfrog while incurring tail damage,
secondary effects from infection of the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:23 Jan 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
wound can result in mortality of
individuals (Rosen et al. 1995). Smaller
snakes are swallowed whole by
bullfrogs.
The petitioners discuss specific
research and field experimentation that
has been dedicated to understanding the
effects of bullfrog predation on the
northern Mexican gartersnake and its
prey base in southeastern Arizona, and
possible methods for bullfrog
eradication (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988,
1997; Holm and Lowe 1995; Rosen et al.
2001). Specifically, northern Mexican
gartersnake and Chiricahua leopard frog
(prey for the gartersnake) populations
were repeatedly surveyed from 1986
through 1997 at locations on the San
Bernardino National Wildlife Refuge
that suffered from various degrees of
bullfrog invasion. Survey sites ranged
from an entirely native herpetofaunal
community to one dominated by
bullfrogs of various age classes.
The petitioners reference
experimentation with bullfrog removal
protocols was conducted at various sites
on the San Bernardino National Wildlife
Refuge in addition to a control site with
similar habitat on the Buenos Aires
National Wildlife Refuge with no
bullfrog removal (Rosen and Schwalbe
1997). Removal protocols employed
during this study (the extensive removal
of adult bullfrogs) resulted in
‘‘remarkable blooms’’ in younger ageclass bullfrogs where removal efforts
were intensive (Rosen and Schwalbe
1997). Evidence from dissection
samples of young adult and sub-adult
bullfrogs indicated that these age-classes
readily prey upon younger bullfrogs
[4.25 inches (109 mm) snout-vent
length] as well as juvenile gartersnakes,
which suggests that the selective
removal of large adults (favoring the
young adult and sub-adult age classes)
may indirectly lead to increased
predation of leopard frogs and juvenile
gartersnakes (Rosen and Schwalbe
1997). Consequently, this strategy was
viewed as being potentially ‘‘selfdefeating’’ and ‘‘counter-productive’’
but worthy of further investigation
(Rosen and Schwalbe 1997). Both
leopard frog and northern Mexican
gartersnake populations at various
locales on the San Bernardino National
Wildlife Refuge, where bullfrogs have
invaded, were notably affected by
nonnative predation (Rosen and
Schwalbe 1997). Rosen and Schwalbe
(1997) also indicated that northern
Mexican gartersnakes are precariously
close to extirpation from that area.
The petitioners state that Rosen et al.
(2001) concluded that the presence and
expansion of nonnative predators
(mainly bullfrogs, crayfish, and green
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
sunfish) continue to be the primary
causes of decline in northern Mexican
gartersnake populations in southeastern
Arizona due to their deleterious effects
to the northern Mexican gartersnake and
its prey populations. Specifically, Rosen
et al. (2001) identified the expansion of
the bullfrog into the Sonoita Grasslands
and to the threshold of the Canelo Hills
in the upper Santa Cruz River
watershed, and the expansion of
crayfish into Lewis Springs area of the
upper San Pedro River watershed (these
areas comprise one of the remaining
four, disjunct, geographic areas in the
United States where the species remains
extant), as particularly threatening to
the northern Mexican gartersnake
because these nonnative species have
proven difficult, if not impossible, to
eradicate once established in complex,
inter-connected habitats as discussed
below.
The petitioners reference Rosen and
Schwalbe (1997) who state that effective
bullfrog and nonnative fish removal is
possible in simple systems that can be
manipulated, such as stock tanks;
however, it can be expensive and
specially-designed fencing is likely
needed to prevent reinvasion. No
methods are available to effectively
remove bullfrogs or crayfish from lotic
(moving water), or complex interconnected systems. The petitioners
references indicate that the inability of
land managers to effectively address the
invasion of nonnative species in such
habitats highlights the particularly
serious nature of this specific threat.
While potential threats from human
land use activities can usually be
lessened or removed completely with
adjustments to land management
practices, the concern for the apparent
irreversibility of nonnative species
invasions becomes paramount.
While northern Mexican gartersnake
populations can be significantly affected
by bullfrog introductions, the
petitioners contend they can also be
adversely affected by disturbances in
the fish community caused by
nonnative fish introductions (Rosen et
al. 2001). The observations of the
northern Mexican gartersnake
populations and individual growth
trends made by Dr. Rosen at Finley
Tank prior to the arrival of the exotic
bullfrog provides insight on the effects
of nonnative fish invasions and the
potential nutritional ramifications of a
fish-only diet in a species that normally
has a varied diet which is largely
supported by amphibian prey items
(Rosen et al. 2001). The more energy
that is expended in foraging, coupled by
the reduced number of small to
medium-sized fish available in low
E:\FR\FM\04JAP1.SGM
04JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 2 / Wednesday, January 4, 2006 / Proposed Rules
densities, leads to nutritional
deficiencies for both growth and
reproduction because energy is instead
allocated to maintenance and the
increased energy costs of intense
foraging activity (Rosen et al. 2001).
Evaluation of Information in the Petition
The petitioners have provided
substantial scientific information that
effects of nonnative predation directly
on northern Mexican gartersnake and
indirectly on its prey base have had
negative implications for its status and
continue to threaten the species.
D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory
Mechanisms
wwhite on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Information Provided in the Petition
The petitioners contend that existing
regulatory mechanisms, at both the State
and Federal levels, have failed to cease
or reverse the decline of the northern
Mexican gartersnake. The petitioners
identified the Service, AGFD, NMDGF,
U.S. Forest Service, and the U.S. Bureau
of Land Management as agencies who
share a responsibility to protect the
northern Mexican gartersnake either via
jurisdictional directive or through landmanagement decisions.
At this time, northern Mexican
gartersnake is considered State
Endangered in New Mexico and take is
prohibited without a scientific
collecting permit issued by the NMDGF
as per New Mexico Statutory Authority
(NMSA) 17–2–41.C and New Mexico
Administrative Code (NMAC) 19.33.6.
However, while the NMDGF can issue
monetary penalties for illegal take, only
recommendations are afforded with
respect to actions that result in
destruction or modification of habitat
(NMSA 17–2–41.C and NMAC 19.33.6).
In the December 2003 petition, the
petitioners state that the AGFD allows
for the collection of up to four northern
Mexican gartersnakes per person per
year as specified in Commission Order
Number 43 (Arizona Game and Fish
Department 2001). However, according
to our information, in 2005, the AGFD
amended Commission Order Number
43, which closed the season on northern
Mexican gartersnakes. Take of northern
Mexican gartersnakes is no longer
permitted in Arizona without issuance
of a scientific collecting permit as per
Arizona Administrative Code R12–4–
401 et seq. While the AGFD can seek
criminal or civil penalties for illegal
take of northern Mexican gartersnakes,
only recommendations are afforded
with respect to actions that result in
destruction or modification of the
northern Mexican gartersnakes’ habitat.
The northern Mexican gartersnake is
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:23 Jan 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
considered a ‘‘Candidate Species’’ in the
AGFD’s draft Wildlife of Special
Concern in Arizona (WSCA) (Arizona
Game and Fish Department 1996). A
‘‘Candidate Species’’ is one ‘‘whose
threats are known or suspected but for
which substantial population declines
from historical levels have not been
documented (though they appear to
have occurred)’’ (Arizona Game and
Fish Department 1996). The purpose of
the WSCA list is to provide guidance in
habitat management implemented by
land-management agencies. No specific
conservation actions are mandated or
otherwise afforded under this
designation. The petitioners also
claimed that neither agency has
mandated recovery goals for the
northern Mexican gartersnake, nor does
either State have conservation
agreements for this species.
The petitioners provided an
assessment of the northern Mexican
gartersnakes’ legal status in Mexico, all
subspecies under Thamnophis eques are
listed as ‘‘Amenazadas,’’ or Threatened,
in the species’’ southern distribution in
Mexico by the Secretaria de Medio
Ambiente y Recursos Naturales
(Secretaria de Medio Ambiente y
Recursos Naturales 2003). This legal
distinction means that the species is in
danger of disappearance in the short- or
medium-term future from the
destruction and modification of its
habitat and/or from the effects of
shrinking population sizes (SEMARNAT
2001 [NOM–059–ECOL–2001]). This
designation prohibits taking of the
species, unless specifically permitted, as
well as activities that intentionally
destroy or adversely modify its habitat
(SEMARNAT 2000 [LGVS] and 2001
[NOM–059–ECOL–2001]). Additionally,
in 1988, the Mexican Government
passed a regulation that is similar to the
National Environmental Policy Act of
the United States. This Mexican
regulation requires an environmental
assessment of private or government
actions that may affect wildlife and/or
their habitat (SEMARNAT 1988
[LGEEPA])).
The U.S. Bureau of Land Management
considers the northern Mexican
gartersnake as a ‘‘Special Status
Species’’ and agency biologists actively
attempt to identify gartersnakes
incidentally observed during fieldwork
for their records (L. Young, U.S. Bureau
of Land Management, pers. comm.,
2005). Otherwise, no specific protection
or land-management consideration is
afforded to the species on U.S. Bureau
of Land Management lands.
The U.S. Forest Service does not
include northern Mexican gartersnake
on their ‘‘Management Indicator Species
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
323
List’’ but it is included on the ‘‘Regional
Forester’s Sensitive Species List’’. This
means that northern Mexican
gartersnakes are ‘‘considered’’ in land
management decisions, and individual
U.S. Forest Service biologists may
opportunistically capture and identify
the gartersnakes observed incidentally
in the field for their records, but are not
required to do so. The petitioners claim
that management under the U.S. Forest
Service does not adequately protect the
northern Mexican gartersnake from ongoing threats. For example, the petition
states that no particular management
consideration was given to the extant
populations of northern Mexican
gartersnake on the actively-used
Dukuesne and Lone Mountain grazing
allotments on the Coronado National
Forest where cattle are allowed direct
access to northern Mexican gartersnake
habitat.
According to information presented in
the Petition, the vast majority of extant
populations of northern Mexican
gartersnake in the United States occur
on U.S. Bureau of Land Management
and U.S. Forest Service managed lands,
yet the petitioners contend that neither
the U.S. Bureau of Land Management or
the U.S. Forest Service have
management plans for the northern
Mexican gartersnake.
Riparian species represent a unique
community in Arizona and
approximately 50 percent of federally
listed species that are native to Arizona
are riparian or aquatic species. The
petitioners noted, as previously
mentioned, several prey species of the
northern Mexican gartersnake that had
special legal status. Specifically, the
petitioners named four primary prey
species for the northern Mexican
gartersnake, the Chiricahua leopard frog,
Gila topminnow, Gila chub, and
roundtail chub are federally listed or
have been petitioned for listing (i.e.,
roundtail chub). Other listed or
proposed riparian species, or their
proposed or designated critical habitat,
overlap the current or historical
distribution of the northern Mexican
gartersnake. However, the petitioners
contend that, despite secondary
protections that may be afforded to the
northern Mexican gartersnake from
federally listed species and/or their
critical habitat, riparian and aquatic
habitats in general continue to be
adversely impacted for reasons
previously discussed and the status of
the northern Mexican gartersnake has
continued to decline throughout its
range in the United States.
E:\FR\FM\04JAP1.SGM
04JAP1
324
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 2 / Wednesday, January 4, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Evaluation of Information in the Petition
The petitioners have provided
substantial information that current
regulatory mechanisms may not
adequately protect the northern
Mexican gartersnake and that the
species may be continuing to decline
throughout its distribution in the United
States, and potentially in Mexico.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors
Affecting the Species’ Continued
Existence
wwhite on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Information Provided in the Petition
Marcy’s checkered gartersnake may
have ecological implications to the
decline and future conservation of the
northern Mexican gartersnake in
southern Arizona according to
information presented in the petition.
Marcy’s checkered gartersnake is a semiterrestrial species that is able to co-exist
to some degree with nonnative
predators. This is largely due to its
ability to forage in more terrestrial
habitats, specifically in the juvenile size
classes (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988). In
every age class, the northern Mexican
gartersnake forages in aquatic habitats
where bullfrogs also occur, which
increases not only the encounter rate
between the two species, but also the
juvenile mortality rate of the northern
Mexican gartersnake. Marcy’s checkered
gartersnake is a potential benefactor of
this scenario. The petitioners contend
that as northern Mexican gartersnake
numbers decline within a population,
space becomes available for occupation
by checkered gartersnakes, which
maintains density-dependent pressures
on the gartersnake population,
potentially accelerating the decline of
the northern Mexican gartersnake
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:23 Jan 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
(Rosen and Schwalbe 1988). This, in
combination with the other factors
described above that have adversely
affected the northern Mexican
gartersnake prey base and the suitability
of occupied and formerly occupied
habitat, has contributed to the decline of
this species.
Evaluation of Information in the Petition
The petitioners have provided
substantial scientific information
indicating that under certain
circumstances the Marcy’s checkered
gartersnake may outcompete the
northern Mexican gartersnake and could
exacerbate the decline of the northern
Mexican gartersnake in areas that
contain small populations of the
subspecies.
Finding
We have reviewed the petition and
literature cited in the petition. On the
basis of our review, we find that the
petition presents substantial
information indicating that listing the
northern Mexican gartersnake may be
warranted. The petition provides
information that the main threats appear
to be predation and competition with
nonnative species, and secondary
threats are habitat destruction and
alteration from a variety of human
activities. As such, we will initiate a
status review of the northern Mexican
gartersnake and, following a review of
available scientific and commercial
data, make a determination of whether
listing the species under the Act is
warranted at that time.
We have reviewed the available
information to determine if the existing
and foreseeable threats pose an
emergency. We have determined that an
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
emergency listing is not warranted for
this species at this time because some
local populations within the middle/
upper Verde River—lower Tonto Creek
and upper Santa Cruz/San Pedro
watersheds are not facing immediate
threats. However, if at any time we
determine that emergency listing of the
northern Mexican gartersnake is
warranted, we will initiate an
emergency listing.
The petitioners also request that
critical habitat be designated for this
species. We always consider the need
for critical habitat designation when
listing species. If we determine in our
12-month finding that listing the
northern Mexican gartersnake is
warranted, we will address the
designation of critical habitat in the
subsequent proposed rule.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited
herein is available upon request from
the Field Supervisor (see ADDRESSES
section).
Author
The primary authors of this document
are staff at the Arizona Ecological
Services Office (see ADDRESSES section).
Authority
The authority for this action is the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: December 13, 2005.
Marshall Jones,
Deputy Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 06–1 Filed 1–3–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
E:\FR\FM\04JAP1.SGM
04JAP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 2 (Wednesday, January 4, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 315-324]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-1]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding on
a Petition To List the Northern Mexican Gartersnake as Threatened or
Endangered With Critical Habitat
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition finding and initiation of status
review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
90-day finding on a petition to list the northern Mexican gartersnake,
Thamnophis eques megalops, as threatened or endangered with critical
habitat under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). The
petitioners provided three listing scenarios for consideration by the
Service: (1) Listing the United States population as a Distinct
Population Segment (DPS); (2) listing the species throughout its range
in the United States and Mexico based on its range-wide status; or (3)
listing the species throughout its range in the U.S. and Mexico based
on its status in the United States. We find the petition has presented
substantial information that the northern Mexican gartersnake is a
listable entity, and we find that the petition presents substantial
scientific and commercial data indicating that listing may be
warranted. Therefore, we are initiating a status review to determine if
listing this species is warranted. To ensure that the status review is
comprehensive, we are soliciting scientific and commercial information
regarding this species. Any determinations on critical habitat will be
made if and when a listing action is initiated for this species.
DATES: The finding announced in this document was made on December 13,
2005. To be considered in the 12-month finding for this petition,
comments and information should be submitted to us by March 6, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Data, information, comments, or questions concerning this
petition and our finding should be submitted to the Field Supervisor,
Arizona Ecological Services Field Office, 2321 West Royal Palm Drive,
Suite 103, Phoenix, Arizona. The petition, supporting data, and
comments will be available for public inspection, by appointment,
during normal business hours at the above address.
If you wish to comment or provide information, you may submit your
comments and materials by any one of the following methods:
1. You may submit written comments and information by mail to:
Field Supervisor, Arizona Ecological Services Field Office, 2321 West
Royal Palm Drive, Suite 103, Phoenix, Arizona.
2. You may hand-deliver written comments and information to our
Field Supervisor, Arizona Ecological Services Field Office, 2321 West
Royal Palm Drive, Suite 103, Phoenix, Arizona.
3. You may fax your comments to 602-242-2513.
4. You may send your comments by electronic mail (e-mail) directly
to the Service at MexGsnake@fws.gov, or to the Federal Rulemaking
Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. Please include ``Attn: northern
Mexican gartersnake'' in the beginning of your message, and do not use
special characters or any form of encryption. Electronic attachments in
standard formats (such as .pdf or .doc) are acceptable, but please name
the software necessary to open any attachments in formats other than
those given above. Also, please include your name and return address in
your e-mail message. If you do not receive a confirmation from the
system that we have received your e-mail message, please submit your
comments in writing using one of the alternate methods described above.
In the event that our internet connection is not functional, please
submit your comments by the alternate methods mentioned above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Spangle, Field Supervisor,
Arizona Ecological Services Field Office (telephone 602-242-0210 and
facsimile 602-242-2513).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Information Solicited
When we make a finding that substantial information is presented to
indicate that listing a species may be warranted, we are required to
promptly commence a review of the status of the species. To ensure that
the status review is complete and based on the best available
scientific and commercial information, we are soliciting information on
the northern Mexican gartersnake. We request any additional
information, comments, and suggestions from the public, other concerned
governmental agencies, Native American Tribes, the scientific
community, industry, or any other interested parties concerning the
status of the northern Mexican gartersnake. We are seeking information
regarding the species' historical and current status and distribution,
its biology and ecology, ongoing conservation measures for the species
and its habitat, and threats to the species and its habitat. If you
wish to comment or provide information, you may submit your comments
and materials concerning this finding to the Field Supervisor (see
ADDRESSES section).
Our practice is to make any comments and materials provided,
including names and home addresses of respondents, available for public
review during regular business hours. Respondents may request that we
withhold a respondent's identity, to the extent allowable by law. If
you wish us to withhold your name or address, you must state this
request prominently at the beginning of your submission. However, we
will not consider anonymous comments. To the extent consistent with
applicable law, we will make all submissions from organizations or
businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as
representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, available
for public inspection in their entirety. Comments and materials
received will be available for public inspection, by appointment,
during normal business hours at the above address.
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) (Act), requires that we make a finding
on whether a petition to list, delist, or reclassify a species presents
substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the
petitioned action may be warranted. We are to base this finding on all
information available to us at the time we make the finding. To the
maximum extent practicable, we are to make this finding within 90 days
of our receipt of the petition, and publish our notice of this finding
promptly in the Federal Register.
Our standard for substantial information within the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) with regard to a 90-day petition finding is ``that
amount of
[[Page 316]]
information that would lead a reasonable person to believe that the
measure proposed in the petition may be warranted'' (50 CFR 424.14(b)).
If we find that substantial information was presented, we are required
to promptly commence a review of the status of the species.
In making this finding, we relied on information provided by the
petitioners and evaluated that information in accordance with 50 CFR
424.14(b). Our process of coming to a 90-day finding under section
4(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Sec. 424.14(b) of our regulations is limited
to a determination of whether the information in the petition meets the
``substantial information'' threshold.
We do not conduct additional research at this point, nor do we
subject the petition to rigorous critical review. Rather, as the Act
and regulations contemplate, in coming to a 90-day finding, we accept
the petitioner's sources and characterizations of the information
unless we have specific information to the contrary.
Our finding considers whether the petition states a reasonable case
for listing the species under the Act on its face. Thus, our finding
expresses no view as to the ultimate issue of whether the species
should be listed. We reach a conclusion on that issue only after a more
thorough review of the status of the species. In that review, which
will be completed on or by September 15, 2006, we will perform a
rigorous, critical analysis of the best available scientific and
commercial information, not just the information in the petition. We
will ensure that the data used to make our determination as to the
status of the species is consistent with the Act and Information
Quality Act (44 U.S.C. 3516).
Petition
On December 19, 2003, we received a petition dated December 15,
2003, requesting that we list the northern Mexican gartersnake,
Thamnophis eques megalops, as threatened or endangered, and that
critical habitat be designated concurrently with the listing. The
petition, submitted by the Center for Biological Diversity (hereinafter
referred to as the petitioners), was clearly identified as a petition
for a listing rule, and contained the names, signatures, and addresses
of the requesting parties. Included in the petition was supporting
information regarding the species' taxonomy and ecology, historical and
current distribution, present status, and potential causes of decline.
We acknowledged the receipt of the petition in a letter to Mr. Noah
Greenwald, dated March 1, 2004. In that letter, we also advised the
petitioners that, due to funding constraints in fiscal year 2004, we
would not be able to begin processing the petition in a timely manner.
On May 17, 2005, the petitioners filed a complaint for declaratory
and injunctive relief, challenging our failure to issue a 90-day
finding in response to the petition as required by U.S.C. 1533(b)(3)(A)
and (B). In a stipulated settlement agreement, we agreed to submit a
90-day finding to the Federal Register by December 16, 2005, and if
positive, complete a 12-month finding on or by September 15, 2006
[Center for Biological Diversity v. Norton, CV-05-341-TUC-CKJ (D.
Ariz)]. The settlement agreement was signed and adopted by the District
Court for the District of Arizona on August 22, 2005. This notice
constitutes our 90-day finding for the petition to list the northern
Mexican gartersnake as threatened or endangered, pursuant to the
Court's order.
Biology and Distribution
The northern Mexican gartersnake may occur with other native
gartersnake species and can be difficult to identify in the field. The
northern Mexican gartersnake is a medium-sized member of the family
Colubridae with a maximum known length of 112 centimeters (cm) [44
inches (in)]. It ranges in background color from olive to olive-brown
to olive-gray. Three stripes run the length of the body, with a yellow
stripe down the back that darkens toward the tail. The pale yellow to
light-tan lateral stripes distinguish the northern Mexican gartersnake
from other gartersnake species because a portion of the lateral stripe
is found on the fourth scale row. Paired black spots extend along the
dorsolateral fields. A light-colored crescent extends behind the
corners of the mouth.
The northern Mexican gartersnake is one of ten subspecies currently
recognized under Thamnophis eques, has the largest historical
distribution of these subspecies, and is the only subspecies known to
occur in the United States. Robert Kennicott first described this
northern subspecies of Mexican gartersnake in 1860 as Eutenia megalops
from the type locality of Tucson, Arizona (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988). In
1951, Dr. Hobart Smith renamed the subspecies with its current
scientific name of Thamnophis eques megalops (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988).
A summary of taxonomic history can be found in Rosen and Schwalbe
(1988).
The historical distribution of northern Mexican gartersnake in the
United States was constrained largely to Arizona and, to a lesser
degree, New Mexico. There have been a number of inventory, monitoring,
and/or survey efforts in the United States, most of which occurred in
Arizona (which encompasses the vast majority of the historical
distribution of northern Mexican gartersnakes in the United States).
Fewer survey data were found in the literature for Mexico and New
Mexico. In Arizona, the historical distribution once included the Santa
Cruz, San Pedro, Colorado, Salt, Agua Fria, Rio Yaqui, and Verde River
watersheds and presumably the Gila River watershed based on
historically suitable habitat and geographic proximity to formerly
extant populations.
In New Mexico, the northern Mexican gartersnake was once extant in
the upper Gila River watershed in Grant and Hidalgo Counties. In April
of 1977, Roger Conant, James S. Jacob, and a group of students counted
approximately 100 northern Mexican gartersnakes in and around three
small ponds on private land southwest of Mule Creek Village (Degenhardt
et al. 1996). This population was considered a stronghold for the
species in New Mexico (Degenhardt et al. 1996). Charlie Painter, State
Herpetologist for the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish (NMDGF),
returned to this location in May 1994 during favorable conditions and
found only one specimen (C. Painter, pers. comm., New Mexico Department
of Game and Fish, 2005). This represents a major decline in a
stronghold population. Mr. Painter stated that he strongly suspects
that northern Mexican gartersnakes are currently extirpated from New
Mexico based on several factors including limited historical
distribution in that State, modification and loss of suitable habitat,
nonnative species introductions, and the lack of protections offered to
non-listed, but declining native species on private land (all known
records of northern Mexican gartersnakes in New Mexico are on private
land) (C. Painter, pers. comm., New Mexico Department of Game and Fish,
2005).
The current distribution of northern Mexican gartersnakes within
the United States is now generally believed to be limited to four
geographic areas in Arizona: (1) Middle/upper Verde River--lower Tonto
Creek; (2) Black River watershed; (3) upper Santa Cruz/San Pedro
watersheds; and, (4) the San Bernardino National Wildlife Refuge in the
upper Rio Yaqui watershed (Fitzgerald 1986; Rosen and Schwalbe 1988;
Arizona Game and Fish
[[Page 317]]
Department 1996; Rosen et al. 2001; Holycross and Burger 2005).
The subspecies is also historically known from the Sierra Madre
Occidental and the Mexican Plateau in the Mexican states of Sonora,
Chihuahua, Durango, Coahila, Zacatecas, Guanajuato, Nayarit, Hidalgo,
Jalisco, San Luis Potos[iacute], Aguascalientes, Tlaxacala, Puebla,
M[eacute]xico, Veracruz, and Quer[eacute]taro (Rossman et al. 1996).
The northern Mexican gartersnake is considered a native riparian
obligate (restricted to riparian areas when not engaged in dispersal
behavior for the purposes of genetic emigration); occurring chiefly in
the following general habitat types: (1) Source-area wetlands (e.g.,
cienegas (mid-elevation wetlands with highly organic, reducing soils),
stock tanks (earthen water impoundments), etc.); (2) large river
riparian woodlands and forests; and (3) streamside gallery forests (as
defined by well-developed broadleaf deciduous riparian forests with
limited, if any, herbaceous ground cover or dense grass) (Hendrickson
and Minckley 1984; Rosen and Schwalbe 1988; Arizona Game and Fish
Department 2001). Habitat characteristics preferred by the northern
Mexican gartersnake varies based on the type of habitat. For example,
in source-area wetlands, dense vegetation consisting of knot grass
(Paspalum distichum), spikerush (Eleocharis), bulrush (Scirpus),
cattail (Typha), deergrass (Muhlenbergia), sacaton (Sporobolus),
Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii), Goodding's willow (Salix
gooddingii), and velvet mesquite (Prosopis velutina) may be preferred
(Rosen and Schwalbe 1988).
In small streamside riparian habitat, this snake is often
associated with Arizona sycamore (Platanus wrightii), sugar leaf maple
(Acer grandidentatum), velvet ash (Fraxinus velutina), Arizona cypress
(Cupressus arizonica), Arizona walnut (Juglans major), Arizona alder
(Alnus oblongifolia), alligator juniper (Juniperus deppeana), Rocky
Mountain juniper (J. scopulorum), and a number of oak species (Quercus
spp.) (McCranie and Wilson 1986; Cirett-Galan 1996).
In riparian woodlands consisting of cottonwood and willow or
gallery forests of broadleaf and deciduous species along larger rivers,
the northern Mexican gartersnake may be observed in less dense mixed
grasses along the bank or in the shallows (Rossman et al. 1996; Rosen
and Schwalbe 1988). Within and adjacent to the Sierra Madre Occidental
in Mexico, it occurs in general habitat associations described as
montane woodland, Chihuahuan desertscrub, mesquite-grassland, and
Cordillera Volc[aacute]nica montane woodland (McCranie and Wilson
1987).
The northern Mexican gartersnake is surface active at ambient
temperatures ranging from 22[deg] Celsius (C) to 33[deg] C (71[deg]
Fahrenheit (F) to 91[deg] and forages along the banks of waterbodies
feeding primarily upon native fish [e.g., Gila topminnow (Poeciliopsis
occidentalis occidentalis), desert pupfish (Cyrpinodon macularius),
Gila chub (Gila intermedia), and roundtail chub (Gila robusta)] and
adult and larval native ranid frogs [e.g., lowland leopard frog (Rana
yavapaiensis) and Chiricahua leopard frog (Rana chiricahuensis)], but
may also supplement its diet with earthworms and vertebrates such as
lizards, small rodents, salamanders, and hylid frogs (treefrogs) (Rosen
and Schwalbe 1988). An important component of suitable northern Mexican
gartersnake habitat is an intact native prey base that is not
significantly affected by nonnative, invasive species (Rosen and
Schwalbe 1988, 1997; Clarkson and Rorabaugh 1989; Jennings et al. 1992;
Holm and Lowe 1995; Fernandez and Rosen 1996; Rosen et al. 2001;
Matthews et al. 2002; Holycross and Burger 2005). However, in some
populations where the species is present with bullfrogs, adult northern
Mexican gartersnakes will prey upon juvenile bullfrogs and/or bullfrog
tadpoles (Holycross and Burger 2005). Juvenile northern Mexican
gartersnakes may also prey upon nonnative mosquito fish (Gambusia
affinis) (Holycross and Burger 2005).
Sexual maturity in male northern Mexican gartersnakes occurs at two
years of age and at two to three years of age in females. Northern
Mexican gartersnakes are ovoviviparous (eggs develop and hatch within
the oviduct of the female). Mating occurs in April and May in their
northern distribution followed by the live birth of between 7 and 26
neonates (newly born individuals) (average is 13.6) in July and August
(Rosen and Schwalbe 1988). Approximately half of the sexually mature
females within a population reproduce in any one season (Rosen and
Schwalbe 1988).
Previous Federal Actions
We placed the northern Mexican gartersnake on the list of candidate
species as a Category 2 species in 1988 (50 FR 37958). Category 2
species were those for which existing information indicated that
listing was possibly appropriate, but for which substantial supporting
biological data to prepare a proposed rule were lacking. In the 1996
Candidate Notice of Review (February 28, 1996; 61 FR 7596), the use of
Category 2 candidates was discontinued, and the northern Mexican
gartersnake was no longer recognized as a candidate.
Discussion
We discuss below each of the major assertions made in the petition,
organized by the listing factors found in section 4(a)(1) of the Act.
Section 4 of the Act and its implementing regulations found at 50 CFR
424 set forth the procedures for adding species to the Federal list of
endangered and threatened species. A species may be determined to be an
endangered or threatened species if it is threatened by one or more of
the five factors described in section 4(a)(1) of the Act and meets
either the definition of endangered or threatened pursuant to section 3
of the Act. An endangered species is any species which is in danger of
extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range. A
threatened species is any species which is likely to become an
endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range. The five listing factors are: (1) The
present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its
habitat or range; (2) overutilization for commercial, recreational,
scientific, or educational purposes; (3) disease or predation; (4) the
inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; and (5) other natural or
manmade factors affecting its continued existence. The petitioners
contend that all five factors are applicable to some degree for the
northern Mexican gartersnake, as discussed below.
This 90-day finding is not a status assessment of the northern
Mexican gartersnake and does not constitute a status review under the
Act. The discussion presents information provided in the petition
related to the factors used for evaluation of listing pursuant to
section 4(a)(1) of the Act for the northern Mexican gartersnake.
A. Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment of
the Species' Habitat or Range
Geographic Range and Status
Information Provided in the Petition
The petitioners claim that northern Mexican gartersnake populations
in Arizona are in decline and are clearly threatened and reference
several reports that provide data on survey efforts for the species.
However, the petitioners' state that information on the northern
Mexican gartersnakes' population status in New Mexico, and in
particular, Mexico is less certain but believed to indicate potential
extirpations or
[[Page 318]]
declines (Lowe 1985; Stebbins 1985; Rosen et al. 2001; Degenhardt et
al. 1996; Howland 2000).
In 2000, Rosen et al. (2001) resurveyed northern Mexican
gartersnake populations known to be extant during the early to mid
1980s in southeastern Arizona and included additional information
collected from 1993 to 2001. Rosen et al. (2001) reported their results
in terms of increasing, stabilized, or decreasing populations of
northern Mexican gartersnake. The primary means used to sample the
herpetofauna included various trapping techniques and field searches.
Three sites (San Bernardino National Wildlife Refuge, Finley Tank at
the Audubon Research Ranch near Elgin, and Scotia Canyon in the
Huachuca Mountains) were intensively surveyed with varied results at
each site that were discussed by the petitioners and in further detail
below.
According to the petitioners, the northern Mexican gartersnake was
the primary gartersnake species at the San Bernardino National Wildlife
Refuge from the 1950s through the 1970s. The species is currently
extirpated or near extirpation in this area based on substantial survey
effort on the refuge from 1985 to 1989 and again from 1992 to 1999,
which noted severe declines (Rosen and Schwalbe 1997; Rosen et al.
2001). Investigators described the decline at the refuge as severe
because in 1995, 31 northern Mexican gartersnakes were observed on the
refuge at a standardized capture rate of 0.248 captures/day while in
1999, one northern Mexican gartersnake was observed with a standardized
capture rate of 0.002 captures/day; a several-fold decline. The decline
of the northern Mexican gartersnake on the refuge is largely attributed
to catastrophic declines and the ultimate extirpation of a primary prey
species, the Chiricahua leopard frog, a federally threatened species
(Rosen and Schwalbe 1997; Rosen et al. 2001).
The petitioners reference Rosen and Schwalbe (1997) which also
provides a detailed assessment of the status of the northern Mexican
gartersnake, as well as other aquatic herpetofauna (reptiles and
amphibians) (including bullfrogs and both Chiricahua and lowland
leopard frogs) within the San Bernardino National Wildlife Refuge.
Their work summarizes many projects which commenced in 1985 and focused
on (1) the impacts of bullfrog invasion on the northern Mexican
gartersnake; (2) the effectiveness of bullfrog control measures; and
(3) the effectiveness of leopard frog recovery efforts in the San
Bernardino Valley. The primary means used to sample the herpetofauna
included various trapping techniques and field searches.
Rosen and Schwalbe (1997) noted the northern Mexican gartersnake as
the primary historical gartersnake species in the San Bernardino
National Wildlife Refuge, but sampling results in the mid-1980s
indicated the species as ``unusually uncommon.'' Observations of
northern Mexican gartersnake populations in 1985 and 1986 in the San
Bernardino National Wildlife Refuge indicated that recruitment was
severely hampered due to the significantly limited number of specimens
observed in the juvenile size classes. The investigators attributed
this observation to bullfrog predation as most adult specimens captured
displayed several scars from repeated apparent predation attempts by
bullfrogs (Rosen and Schwalbe 1997). Bullfrog predation can be
discerned by such tail-scaring. Native predators generally consume the
entire animal whereas bullfrogs will often attempt to capture prey
items larger than they can subdue and physically ingest, which results
in the scaring observed in northern Mexican gartersnakes on the refuge
and other areas where they occur with bullfrogs. Similar observations
were made by Holm and Lowe (1995) in Scotia Canyon, Huachuca Mountains.
The petitioners reference Rosen and Schwalbe (1997) in stating that
declines of northern Mexican gartersnakes have been noted in the San
Bernardino Valley since before formal investigations commenced at the
San Bernardino National Wildlife Refuge. Cumulative data of gartersnake
captures (including both the northern Mexican gartersnake and the
Marcy's checkered gartersnake (Thamnophis marcianus marcianus)) in the
San Bernardino National Wildlife Refuge indicated a 39 percent decline
in northern Mexican gartersnake capture rate per unit effort between
the 1980s and the 1990s. These data were derived from aquatic trapping
of northern Mexican gartersnake which provided Rosen and Schwalbe
(1997) with substantial annual samples from 1993 to 1997. Rosen and
Schwalbe (1997) reasoned this decline could be attributed to natural
response to persistent drought conditions but that it may have ``masked
a critical, rapid decline'' in northern Mexican gartersnake populations
of southeastern Arizona. The qualitative and quantitative data
generated from the exhaustive research conducted on this species in
this area clearly confirms the species is nearing extirpation from the
San Bernardino National Wildlife Refuge, a former stronghold (Rosen and
Schwalbe 1997; Rosen et al. 2001).
Surveys at Finley Tank located on the Audubon Research Ranch near
Elgin, Arizona, that occurred during the period from 1985 to 1988 and
again in 2000 were cited by petitioners. Chiricahua leopard frogs were
noted as abundant in the 1985 and 1986 field seasons but have not been
observed there since 1988. The petitioners cited an observation by Dr.
Phil Rosen found in Rosen et al. (2001) where he explained, ``At sites
where leopard frogs are absent, often apparently due to introduced
centrarchid fish [especially largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides)
and green sunfish (Lepomis cyanellus)] as at Babocamari (Cienega),
northern Mexican garter snakes have become rare prior to the arrival of
the bullfrog. With only fish to eat, growth is probably markedly
reduced, and further, at centrarchid sites there are generally few
small-to medium-sized fish, of edible size for most gartersnakes. In
that scenario, gartersnake reproduction is likely to be reduced, and
juvenile growth slowed, as is consistent with the low densities and
generally smaller snakes seen at the Babocamari.'' The decline of
native leopard frogs from Finley Tank, possibly exacerbated by the
effect of recent drought years on the habitat within and around Finley
Tank, was, according to petitioners, the principle factor which led to
the precipitous decline in northern Mexican gartersnakes since 1988 at
this location.
The last intensively resurveyed area referenced by the petitioners
and discussed in Rosen et al. (2001) was Scotia Canyon in the Huachuca
Mountains of southeastern Arizona. A comparison of survey data from
Holm and Lowe (1995) suggests a possible decline of northern Mexican
gartersnake populations in this area based on survey data from 1980 to
1982, with low capture rates in 1993, and even lower capture rates in
2000. Rosen et al. (2001) noted that bullfrogs were first detected in
Scotia Canyon in 1989, and by 1992 bullfrogs had overtaken the canyon.
As referenced in the petition, this bullfrog invasion affected the
northern Mexican gartersnake age-class distribution in Scotia Canyon to
one favoring older adults (too large to be eaten by bullfrogs) with
little, if any, recruitment in the juvenile age-class due to bullfrog
predation on neonatal and juvenile gartersnakes (Holm and Lowe 1995;
Rosen et al. 2001). Rosen et al. (2001) commented that the data were
too sparse to confirm that extirpation of northern Mexican gartersnakes
from Scotia Canyon was inevitable, but that northern Mexican
gartersnakes may still
[[Page 319]]
persist there as a population vulnerable to extirpation.
The petitioners also reference Holm and Lowe (1995) who also
conducted a herpetofaunal assessment in Scotia Canyon in 1993, using
techniques such as active searching during optimal conditions and
trapping using drift fences (barriers at ground level that direct the
movements of small vertebrate species into buried containers adjacent
to the barrier) with minnow traps. The purpose of this assessment was
to compare the 1993 herpetofaunal community to the 1980 through 1982
results in the same area. As discussed in Rosen et al. (2001), Holm and
Lowe (1995) noted bullfrogs to have increased markedly over the time
between surveys. Native ranid frogs were uncommon during the surveys
during the early 1980s and were declared locally extirpated from the
study area in 1993. Of 39 northern Mexican gartersnakes captured in
1993, 7 were adults, 2 were yearlings, and 30 were young of the year;
as compared to 6 yearlings and 2 small adults captured in 1980 to 1982.
Holm and Lowe (1995) suggested such a population structure of northern
Mexican gartersnakes indicated that while adults are capable of living
longer and achieving significant size, recruitment is low due to high
mortality of juvenile snakes from bullfrog predation. Their finding was
supported by 93 percent of northern Mexican gartersnakes that were
observed with broken tails likely caused by bullfrog predation attempts
based upon the predator community in this area (Holm and Lowe 1995).
Four southeastern Arizona cienega habitats were identified by the
petitioners as being resurveyed and subsequently discussed in Rosen et
al. (2001): the Arivaca Cienega, the Babocomari Cienega, Cienega Creek
at Empire-Cienega Ranch, and Lower Cienega Creek at Cienega Creek
County Preserve. The Arivaca Cienega was a historical locality for both
the northern Mexican gartersnake and the Chiricahua leopard frog
although neither species has been found at this location since 1980
(Rosen and Schwalbe 1988; Rosen et al. 2001). Arivaca Cienega was
surveyed on June 13, 1985, and the authors recorded that bullfrogs were
``extremely abundant'' and grazing pressure was heavy with over 500
cattle grazing in the habitat (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988). This locality
was again sampled in 1994 and 2000 with extensive trapping and survey
effort which yielded a single northern Mexican gartersnake (Rosen et
al. 2001). Rosen et al. (2001) commented that the northern Mexican
gartersnake population of the Arivaca Cienega likely succumbed to the
effects of grazing and a massive bullfrog population, but that the
single northern Mexican gartersnake found in 2000 indicated the
``tenacity of a species that long ago apparently became rare in the
area.''
A herpetologist surveyed the Babocamari Cienega in June of 1958 and
noted that northern Mexican gartersnakes, lowland leopard frogs, and
``southern-form'' (Chiricahua) leopard frogs were extremely abundant
(Rosen and Schwalbe 1988; Rosen et al. 2001). Some 27 years later in
1985, research herpetologists again visited this location only to find
four northern Mexican gartersnakes and no leopard frogs (Rosen et al.
2001). Surveys that occurred in 2000 did not find either species (Rosen
et al. 2001). Babocamari Cienega was overtaken by black bullheads
(Ameiurus melas) and largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) between
the late 1950s and the mid-1980s (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988). Rosen et
al. (2001) theorize that competition for prey and direct predation from
nonnative fish were involved in the decline of northern Mexican
gartersnakes and leopard frogs at Babocamari Cienega.
The remaining two cienegas identified by the petitioners and
addressed by Rosen et al. (2001) are both associated with Cienega Creek
in Santa Cruz and Pima counties of Arizona. The first, a former
stronghold for northern Mexican gartersnakes, was Cienega Creek at
Empire-Cienega Ranch which was considered the ``most natural cienega
remaining in southern Arizona that supports a large and dense
population of Gila topminnow'' (Rosen et al. 2001). Aquatic habitat
parameters at this location prevented investigators from setting traps
per standard protocols, which indirectly placed greater emphasis, and
less certainty, on hand-collection of northern Mexican gartersnakes.
Regardless, three adult northern Mexican gartersnakes were captured by
hand at this location: two in 1986 and one in 2000. While still extant,
both northern Mexican gartersnakes and leopard frogs have declined
precipitously from this area and bullfrogs have successfully invaded.
The last of the cienega habitats that was specifically investigated
by Rosen et al. (2001) and identified by the petitioners was Lower
Cienega Creek at Cienega Creek County Preserve. Rosen et al. (2001)
states that this cienega was historically lush with aquatic and
emergent vegetation. Overgrazing during the early and mid-1980s denuded
much of the area's vegetation and resulted in significant erosion
evidenced by the downcutting of stream banks, in some cases in excess
of 4.6 meters (15 feet) deep. Lowland leopard frogs have nonetheless
remained extant through 2001 (Rosen et al. 2001). According to the
petitioners, the cienega was purchased by Pima County in the 1990s and
grazing has been prohibited on-site since that time. Subsequent trips
to this area since the change in ownership have revealed a significant
improvement in habitat characteristics. By 1998, the first northern
Mexican gartersnake was observed on the new Cienega Creek preserve and
has been occasionally observed there since (Rosen et al. 2001). Rosen
et al. (2001), in acknowledgement of management objectives for this
area, the potential for habitat regeneration and persistence, and its
influence on Cienega Creek as a whole, stated that Cienega Creek
``appears to have the highest potential of any site in the U.S. for
preservation of the (northern) Mexican gartersnake.''
According to the surveyors, the many sites in southeastern Arizona
resurveyed by Rosen et al. (2001) since the 1980s yielded mixed
results. Populations possibly increased at 1 site (lower Cienega
Creek), were possibly stable at 2 (lower San Raphael Valley, Arivaca),
were negative at 14 [Empire-Cienega Creek, Babocomari, Bog Hole,
O'Donnell Creek, Turkey Creek (Canelo), Post Canyon, Scotia Canyon,
Lewis Springs (San Pedro River), San Pedro River near Highway 90,
Barchas Ranch Pond (Huachuca Mountain bajada), Heron Spring, Sharp
Spring, Elgin-Sonoita windmill well site, and Upper 13 Reservoir (San
Raphael Valley)], and showed major, demonstrable declines at 2 sites
(San Bernardino National Wildlife Refuge and Finley Tank). No confirmed
locality extirpations of northern Mexican gartersnake in southeastern
Arizona were documented in Rosen et al. (2001).
Habitat
Information Provided in the Petition
The petitioners state that northern Mexican gartersnake habitat is
threatened by a variety of factors such as livestock grazing, water
withdrawal, streambed modification, dams and dam operation, groundwater
pumping, recreation, mining, encroaching urban development, pollution,
woodcutting, cultural impacts, and climate change (Hendrickson and
Minckley 1984; Szaro et al. 1985; Lowe 1985; Rosen and Schwalbe 1988;
and Rosen et al. 2001). The petitioners did not provide substantial
information that addresses such threats to northern Mexican gartersnake
habitat such as woodcutting,
[[Page 320]]
pollution, cultural impacts, mining, and recreation but cited Lowe
(1985), which discusses how such activities have led to the
extirpations of riparian reptile and amphibian populations, and in some
cases, communities in specific geographic areas.
The petitioners specifically identify the loss of and continuing
threats to wetland and cienega habitats and reiterate their importance
to this particular gartersnake subspecies (Hendrickson and Minckley
1984; Lowe 1985). Hendrickson and Minckley (1984) state that cienegas
habitats are an aquatic climax community based on their data review.
Many of these unique habitats of the southwestern United States, and
Arizona in particular, have been lost in the past century to streambed
modification, livestock grazing, cultural impacts, stream flow
stabilization by upstream dams, channelization, and stream flow
reduction from groundwater pumping and diversions (Hendrickson and
Minckley 1984).
Many sub-basins where cienegas have been severely modified or lost
entirely overlap, wholly or partially, the historical distribution of
the northern Mexican gartersnake including the San Simon, Sulphur
Springs, San Pedro, and Santa Cruz valleys of southeastern and south-
central Arizona. The San Simon Valley possessed several natural cienega
habitats with ``luxuriant vegetation'' prior to 1885 and was used as a
watering stop for pioneers, military, and surveying expeditions
(Hendrickson and Minckley 1984). In the subsequent decades, the
disappearance of grasses and commencement of severe erosion were the
result of heavy grazing pressure by large herds of cattle as well as
the effects from wagon trails that paralleled arroyos, occasionally
crossed them, and often required stream bank modification (Hendrickson
and Minckley 1984). Today, only the artificially-maintained San Simon
Cienega exists in this valley. Similar accounts of past conditions,
adverse effects from historical anthropogenic activities, and
subsequent reduction in the extent and quality of cienega habitats in
the remaining valleys are also provided in Hendrickson and Minckley
(1984).
The regional, ecological ramifications of future climate change
were noted by the petitioners as a significant threat to the northern
Mexican gartersnake habitat. Specifically, the petitioners restated
findings discussed in the Final Report of the Southwest Regional
Climate Change Symposium and Workshop that occurred in September 1997.
Those findings indicated that the future climate in the American
southwest may include decreases in summer and winter precipitation and
an increase of up to 4 [deg]C (7 [deg]F) in average temperature. The
petitioners claim that such changes in weather patterns and climactic
conditions will result in more variability in flows that could
compromise perennial and intermittent streams.
The petitioners also contend that northern Mexican gartersnake
populations are vulnerable to local extirpation from the effects of
livestock grazing within and adjacent to stock tanks, cienegas, and
riparian areas (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988). Specifically, the loss of
bank-side vegetation removes an essential habitat component for such
behaviors as foraging and escaping predation. Once a northern Mexican
gartersnake population has been extirpated, Rosen and Schwalbe (1988)
state that unassisted recolonization of extirpated habitat is often
precluded because it is either isolated between lengthy dewatered
reaches of intermittent streams or not available to suitable overland
routes of movement for an aquatic habitat specialist.
The petitioners cite Rosen and Schwalbe (1988) which provides an
example of where a known (as of 1983) northern Mexican gartersnake
population was extirpated in 1984 in Little Ash Creek of the upper Agua
Fria watershed, potentially due to effects of overgrazing the stream
banks and emergent vegetation. A survey of the area in April 1984
produced not a single specimen, and the authors noted severe
overgrazing that had removed virtually all the cover used by northern
Mexican gartersnakes in years prior. In August of the following year,
the area was resurveyed. Rosen and Schwalbe (1988) noted that livestock
had been removed from the area and that the vegetation had regrown to
become suitable for northern Mexican gartersnake, yet an intensive
survey again yielded no specimens.
The petitioners note that stock tanks used in livestock management
also experience intentional or unintentional introductions of nonnative
species of fish, amphibians, and crayfish by anglers and private
landowners (Rosen et al. 2001). The alteration of habitat, such as
bank-side vegetation removal and degradation, around stock tanks, may
also favor nonnative predators as a secondary effect from livestock
grazing and a threat to northern Mexican gartersnake (Rosen and
Schwalbe 1988). Alternatively, well-managed stock tanks can provide
habitat suitable for occupation of the northern Mexican gartersnake,
both structurally and in terms of its prey base, especially when the
tank remains devoid of nonnative species while supporting native prey
species (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988).
The petitioners discuss how Szaro et al. (1985) assessed the
effects of grazing on a similar species of gartersnake, the wandering
(terrestrial) gartersnake (Thamnophis elegans vagrans). The assessment
compared wandering (terrestrial) gartersnake populations in both grazed
and ungrazed portions of the same stream. Results indicated that snake
abundance and biomass were significantly higher in ungrazed habitat
with a five-fold difference in number of snakes captured, despite the
difficulties of observing snakes in dense, complex habitat (Szaro et
al. 1985). Szaro et al. (1985) also noted the importance of riparian
vegetation in thermoregulation, foraging, and predation-avoidance
behaviors. The petitioners claim that the northern Mexican gartersnake
continues to be impacted by on-going livestock operations and provided
specific reports of adverse effects to northern Mexican gartersnake
habitat from livestock grazing on public and private lands in
southeastern Arizona where the species is thought to be extant (Rosen
et al. 2001).
Lastly, the historical and potential future effects to northern
Mexican gartersnake habitat from human population growth and subsequent
water needs were discussed by the petitioners. Specifically, once-
perennial extensive reaches of historical habitat for the northern
Mexican gartersnake along the San Pedro and Santa Cruz rivers have been
lost to the effects of groundwater pumping in response to increasing
human populations and ensuing urbanization and development within the
region. The petitioners also express concern for extant populations of
northern Mexican gartersnake in the Arivaca Cienega and upper Verde
River because of projected population growth, urbanization, and
development in those areas and evidence of adverse effects to the water
supply of these waterbodies due to increasing numbers of regional
groundwater wells required to support such growth.
Summary of Habitat Threats and Evaluation of Information in the
Petition
The petitioners have provided substantial scientific information
that a variety of anthropogenic activities and other factors that
affect the habitat of northern Mexican gartersnake.
[[Page 321]]
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
Information Provided in the Petition
The petitioners state that lawful or unlawful field collecting of
northern Mexican gartersnakes has not historically been a significant
threat to the species. However, the petitioners cite that illegal field
collecting may significantly impact small isolated populations,
especially if reproductive females are removed from the population
(Painter 2000). The northern Mexican gartersnake may not be collected
without special authorization by the AGFD or the NMDGF. Specific
discussion of the regulatory protections for the northern Mexican
gartersnake is provided in Section D ``Inadequacy of Existing
Regulatory Mechanisms'' below.
Evaluation of Information in the Petition
Since collection of the species is not known to be a major threat,
the petitioners did not argue that field collection of the species for
commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes has
contributed significantly to the current status of the northern Mexican
gartersnake. However, the petitioners did provide a rational argument
that small, isolated populations may be particularly vulnerable to
extirpation from the future illegal collection of reproductive females.
C. Disease and Predation
Information Provided in the Petition and Service Files
The petitioners acknowledge that disease has not been a direct
cause for population decline of the northern Mexican gartersnake. Based
on our information, while disease has not been documented as a specific
threat to northern Mexican gartersnake in the United States or Mexico,
disease and nonnative parasites have been implicated in the decline of
its native prey species. The chytrid fungus outbreak has been
identified as a chief causative agent in the significant declines of
many of the native ranid frog species and regional concerns exist for
the native fish community due to nonnative parasites such as the Asian
tapeworm (Bothriocephalus achelognathi) in southeastern Arizona (Rosen
and Schwalbe 1997; Morell 1999; Sredl and Caldwell 2000; Hale 2001;
Bradley et al. 2002).
The petitioners discussed the threats from nonnative species
invasions to northern Mexican gartersnakes' functional prey base. The
petitioners indicated that riparian communities in Arizona have been
significantly impacted by a shift in species composition, from being
historically dominated by native fauna to being increasingly impacted
by an expanding assemblage of nonnative species (Rosen and Schwalbe
1988, 1995, 1996, 1997; Holm and Lowe 1995; Degenhardt et al. 1996;
Fernandez and Rosen 1996; Rosen et al. 2001). The petitioners
referenced research that suggested that a decline of native prey
species resulting from the replacement with nonnative species has a
significant adverse effect on northern Mexican gartersnakes (Rosen and
Schwalbe 1988, 1995, 1996, 1997; Holm and Lowe 1995; Degenhardt et al.
1996; Rosen et al. 2001). Subsequently, the status of primary native
prey species for northern Mexican gartersnake is declining (Rosen and
Schwalbe 1988, 1995, 1996, 1997; Holm and Lowe 1995; Degenhardt et al.
1996; Fernandez and Rosen 1996; Rosen et al. 2001).
The petitioners identified several species as primary prey species
for the northern Mexican gartersnake that had special Federal or state
status. For example, the lowland leopard frog has been extirpated from
New Mexico and from its former distribution in the lower Gila and
Colorado rivers, and is considered Wildlife of Special Concern by the
Arizona Game and Fish Department (AGFD). The Chiricahua leopard frog
was listed as threatened without critical habitat under the Act on June
13, 2002 (67 FR 40790). The Gila chub was listed as endangered under
the Act on November 2, 2005 (70 FR 66663). The Gila topminnow was
listed as endangered under the Act on March 11, 1967 (32 FR 4001). The
roundtail and headwater chubs were petitioned for listing as threatened
or endangered under the Act, and we published a substantial 90-day
finding on the petition for both species on July 12, 2005 (70 FR 39981)
indicating that the petition provided substantial information for us to
initiate a status review for the two species. Additionally, the
roundtail chub is listed as threatened by the State of Arizona. The
decline of many gartersnake prey species may be tied to predation by
and competition with nonnative invaders; namely bullfrogs, crayfish,
and nonnative fish (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988; Holm and Lowe 1995; Rosen
et al. 2001).
Petitioners state that the northern Mexican gartersnake is
particularly vulnerable to a loss in native prey species (Rosen and
Schwalbe 1988). Rosen et al. (2001) examined this issue in greater
detail and proposed two plausible explanations: (1) The species is
reluctant to increase foraging efforts at the risk of increased
predation; and (2) the species needs substantial food regularly to
maintain its weight and health. If forced to forage more often for
smaller prey items, a reduction in growth and reproductive rates may
likely result (Rosen et al. 2001).
Direct observations of predation of northern Mexican gartersnake by
native species are not well documented in the literature; however,
several species of native fauna opportunistically take other native
individuals when available (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988). Some examples of
native predators on the northern Mexican gartersnake may include birds
of prey, other snakes (kingsnakes (Lampropeltis sp.), whipsnakes
(Masticophus sp.), etc.), wading birds, raccoons (Procyon lotor),
skunks (Mephitis sp.), and coyotes (Canus latrans) (Rosen and Schwalbe
1988). The scientific community does not currently believe these native
predators are responsible for the historical decline of northern
Mexican gartersnake as all these species collectively evolved as a
native biological community.
Alternatively, the petitioners note that nonnative predation
threats have been and continue to be a serious factor in the decline of
the northern Mexican gartersnake from both effects to the species
itself and to its primary prey base. Many nonnative fishes have been
introduced into northern Mexican gartersnake habitats, such as
bullhead, green sunfish, and largemouth bass (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988).
Rosen et al. (2001) noted the three most damaging nonnative predators
to the northern Mexican gartersnake and its prey base in southern
Arizona were bullfrogs, crayfish, and the green sunfish.
The petitioners claim that, of the various nonnative predators that
have been introduced to post-settlement Arizona, the bullfrog appears
to be the most detrimental to the northern Mexican gartersnake (Rosen
and Schwalbe 1988, 1995, 1996; Holm and Lowe 1995; Rosen et al. 2001).
Bullfrogs act as competitors to the northern Mexican gartersnake by
sharing prey items such as frogs, fish, lizards, birds, and even
mammals (Rosen and Schwalbe 1995). Bullfrogs are particularly damaging
to and persistent in native riparian communities because adult
bullfrogs are cannibalistic and larval bullfrogs can be sustained by
grazing on aquatic vegetation, which means that a population of adult
bullfrogs can sustain itself even when the native vertebrate prey base
has been
[[Page 322]]
extirpated by the species (Rosen and Schwalbe 1995).
The petitioners referenced documentation that discussed scientists
and landowners having directly and indirectly observed bullfrogs eating
northern Mexican gartersnakes in the juvenile and occasionally sub-
adult size classes (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, 1995, 1996; Holm and Lowe
1995; Rosen et al. 2001). A well-circulated photograph of an adult
bullfrog in the process of consuming an adult or subadult northern
Mexican gartersnake at Parker Canyon Lake, Cochise County, Arizona,
taken by John Carr in 1964, provides photographic documentation of
bullfrog predation (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, 1995). The petitioners
referenced a common observation in northern Mexican gartersnake
populations that co-occur with bullfrogs is a preponderance of large,
mature adult snakes with conspicuously low numbers of individuals in
the neonate and juvenile age size classes due to bullfrogs eating young
small snakes, indicating low recruitment (reproduction and survival of
young) (Rosen and Schwalbe 1988; Holm and Lowe 1995).
The petitioners contend that bullfrogs that are unable to capture,
subdue, and consume northern Mexican gartersnakes continue to maintain
persistent predation pressure on individuals. Signs of attempted
predation on northern Mexican gartersnakes can be readily observed in
the field by examining the tail region of individual northern Mexican
gartersnakes (Holm and Lowe 1995; Rosen and Schwalbe 1996). Rosen and
Schwalbe (1988) discuss such observations from the San Bernardino
National Wildlife Refuge where 78 percent of specimens observed had
broken tails with a ``soft and club-like'' terminus, instead of a long,
fine point, which suggests repeated injury (multiple predation
attempts). Rosen and Schwalbe (1988) also noted bleeding from this
region by gravid females when palpated for egg counts resulting from
these ``squeeze-type'' of injuries inflicted by adult bullfrogs. Holm
and Lowe (1995) observed that 89 percent of captured northern Mexican
gartersnakes possessed similar tail injuries during survey work in
Scotia Canyon in 1993, indicating heavy predation from abundant
bullfrogs occurring there as well. These observations made by
researchers and referenced by the petitioners indicate that, while a
sub-adult or adult northern Mexican gartersnake may survive an
individual predation attempt from a bullfrog while incurring tail
damage, secondary effects from infection of the wound can result in
mortality of individuals (Rosen et al. 1995). Smaller snakes are
swallowed whole by bullfrogs.
The petitioners discuss specific research and field experimentation
that has been dedicated to understanding the effects of bullfrog
predation on the northern Mexican gartersnake and its prey base in
southeastern Arizona, and possible methods for bullfrog eradication
(Rosen and Schwalbe 1988, 1997; Holm and Lowe 1995; Rosen et al. 2001).
Specifically, northern Mexican gartersnake and Chiricahua leopard frog
(prey for the gartersnake) populations were repeatedly surveyed from
1986 through 1997 at locations on the San Bernardino National Wildlife
Refuge that suffered from various degrees of bullfrog invasion. Survey
sites ranged from an entirely native herpetofaunal community to one
dominated by bullfrogs of various age classes.
The petitioners reference experimentation with bullfrog removal
protocols was conducted at various sites on the San Bernardino National
Wildlife Refuge in addition to a control site with similar habitat on
the Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge with no bullfrog removal
(Rosen and Schwalbe 1997). Removal protocols employed during this study
(the extensive removal of adult bullfrogs) resulted in ``remarkable
blooms'' in younger age-class bullfrogs where removal efforts were
intensive (Rosen and Schwalbe 1997). Evidence from dissection samples
of young adult and sub-adult bullfrogs indicated that these age-classes
readily prey upon younger bullfrogs [4.25 inches (109 mm) snout-vent
length] as well as juvenile gartersnakes, which suggests that the
selective removal of large adults (favoring the young adult and sub-
adult age classes) may indirectly lead to increased predation of
leopard frogs and juvenile gartersnakes (Rosen and Schwalbe 1997).
Consequently, this strategy was viewed as being potentially ``self-
defeating'' and ``counter-productive'' but worthy of further
investigation (Rosen and Schwalbe 1997). Both leopard frog and northern
Mexican gartersnake populations at various locales on the San
Bernardino National Wildlife Refuge, where bullfrogs have invaded, were
notably affected by nonnative predation (Rosen and Schwalbe 1997).
Rosen and Schwalbe (1997) also indicated that northern Mexican
gartersnakes are precariously close to extirpation from that area.
The petitioners state that Rosen et al. (2001) concluded that the
presence and expansion of nonnative predators (mainly bullfrogs,
crayfish, and green sunfish) continue to be the primary causes of
decline in northern Mexican gartersnake populations in southeastern
Arizona due to their deleterious effects to the northern Mexican
gartersnake and its prey populations. Specifically, Rosen et al. (2001)
identified the expansion of the bullfrog into the Sonoita Grasslands
and to the threshold of the Canelo Hills in the upper Santa Cruz River
watershed, and the expansion of crayfish into Lewis Springs area of the
upper San Pedro River watershed (these areas comprise one of the
remaining four, disjunct, geographic areas in the United States where
the species remains extant), as particularly threatening to the
northern Mexican gartersnake because these nonnative species have
proven difficult, if not impossible, to eradicate once established in
complex, inter-connected habitats as discussed below.
The petitioners reference Rosen and Schwalbe (1997) who state that
effective bullfrog and nonnative fish removal is possible in simple
systems that can be manipulated, such as stock tanks; however, it can
be expensive and specially-designed fencing is likely needed to prevent
reinvasion. No methods are available to effectively remove bullfrogs or
crayfish from lotic (moving water), or complex inter-connected systems.
The petitioners references indicate that the inability of land managers
to effectively address the invasion of nonnative species in such
habitats highlights the particularly serious nature of this specific
threat. While potential threats from human land use activities can
usually be lessened or removed completely with adjustments to land
management practices, the concern for the apparent irreversibility of
nonnative species invasions becomes paramount.
While northern Mexican gartersnake populations can be significantly
affected by bullfrog introductions, the petitioners contend they can
also be adversely affected by disturbances in the fish community caused
by nonnative fish introductions (Rosen et al. 2001). The observations
of the northern Mexican gartersnake populations and individual growth
trends made by Dr. Rosen at Finley Tank prior to the arrival of the
exotic bullfrog provides insight on the effects of nonnative fish
invasions and the potential nutritional ramifications of a fish-only
diet in a species that normally has a varied diet which is largely
supported by amphibian prey items (Rosen et al. 2001). The more energy
that is expended in foraging, coupled by the reduced number of small to
medium-sized fish available in low
[[Page 323]]
densities, leads to nutritional deficiencies for both growth and
reproduction because energy is instead allocated to maintenance and the
increased energy costs of intense foraging activity (Rosen et al.
2001).
Evaluation of Information in the Petition
The petitioners have provided substantial scientific information
that effects of nonnative predation directly on northern Mexican
gartersnake and indirectly on its prey base have had negative
implications for its status and continue to threaten the species.
D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
Information Provided in the Petition
The petitioners contend that existing regulatory mechanisms, at
both the State and Federal levels, have failed to cease or reverse the
decline of the northern Mexican gartersnake. The petitioners identified
the Service, AGFD, NMDGF, U.S. Forest Service, and the U.S. Bureau of
Land Management as agencies who share a responsibility to protect the
northern Mexican gartersnake either via jurisdictional directive or
through land-management decisions.
At this time, northern Mexican gartersnake is considered State
Endangered in New Mexico and take is prohibited without a scientific
collecting permit issued by the NMDGF as per New Mexico Statutory
Authority (NMSA) 17-2-41.C and New Mexico Administrative Code (NMAC)
19.33.6. However, while the NMDGF can issue monetary penalties for
illegal take, only recommendations are afforded with respect to actions
that result in destruction or modification of habitat (NMSA 17-2-41.C
and NMAC 19.33.6).
In the December 2003 petition, the petitioners state that the AGFD
allows for the collection of up to four northern Mexican gartersnakes
per person per year as specified in Commission Order Number 43 (Arizona
Game and Fish Department 2001). However, according to our information,
in 2005, the AGFD amended Commission Order Number 43, which closed the
season on northern Mexican gartersnakes. Take of northern Mexican
gartersnakes is no longer permitted in Arizona without issuance of a
scientific collecting permit as per Arizona Administrative Code R12-4-
401 et seq. While the AGFD can seek criminal or civil penalties for
illegal take of northern Mexican gartersnakes, only recommendations are
afforded with respect to actions that result in destruction or
modification of the northern Mexican gartersnakes' habitat. The
northern Mexican gartersnake is considered a ``Candidate Species'' in
the AGFD's draft Wildlife of Special Concern in Arizona (WSCA) (Arizona
Game and Fish Department 1996). A ``Candidate Species'' is one ``whose
threats are known or suspected but for which substantial population
declines from historical levels have not been documented (though they
appear to have occurred)'' (Arizona Game and Fish Department 1996). The
purpose of the WSCA list is to provide guidance in habitat management
implemented by land-management agencies. No specific conservation
actions are mandated or otherwise afforded under this designation. The
petitioners also claimed that neither agency has mandated recovery
goals for the northern Mexican gartersnake, nor does either State have
conservation agreements for this species.
The petitioners provided an assessment of the northern Mexican
gartersnakes' legal status in Mexico, all subspecies under Thamnophis
eques are listed as ``Amenazadas,'' or Threatened, in the species''
southern distribution in Mexico by the Secretaria de Medio Ambiente y
Recursos Naturales (Secretaria de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales
2003). This legal distinction means that the species is in danger of
disappearance in the short- or medium-term future from the destruction
and modification of its habitat and/or from the effects of shrinking
population sizes (SEMARNAT 2001 [NOM-059-ECOL-2001]). This designation
prohibits taking of the species, unless specifically permitted, as well
as activities that intentionally destroy or adversely modify its
habitat (SEMARNAT 2000 [LGVS] and 2001 [NOM-059-ECOL-2001]).
Additionally, in 1988, the Mexican Government passed a regulation that
is similar to the National Environmental Policy Act of the United
States. This Mexican regulation requires an environmental assessment of
private or government actions that may affect wildlife and/or their
habitat (SEMARNAT 1988 [LGEEPA])).
The U.S. Bureau of Land Management considers the northern Mexican
gartersnake as a ``Special Status Species'' and agency biologists
actively attempt to identify gartersnakes incidentally observed during
fieldwork for their records (L. Young, U.S. Bureau of Land Management,
pers. comm., 2005). Otherwise, no specific protection or land-
management consideration is afforded to the species on U.S. Bureau of
Land Management lands.
The U.S. Forest Service does not include northern Mexican
gartersnake on their ``Management Indicator Species List'' but it is
included on the ``Regional Forester's Sensitive Species List''. This
means that northern Mexican gartersnakes are ``considered'' in land
management decisions, and individual U.S. Forest Service biologists may
opportunistically capture and identify the gartersnakes observed
incidentally in the field for their records, but are not required to do
so. The petitioners claim that management under the U.S. Forest Service
does not adequately protect the northe