Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for the Flatwoods Salamander, 5856-5912 [07-470]

Agencies

• Fish and Wildlife Service
• DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 25 (Wednesday, February 7, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 5856-5912]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-470]



[[Page 5855]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Part III





Department of the Interior





-----------------------------------------------------------------------



Fish and Wildlife Service



-----------------------------------------------------------------------



50 CFR Part 17



 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical 
Habitat for the Flatwoods Salamander; Proposed Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 7, 2007 / 
Proposed Rules

[[Page 5856]]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

RIN 1018-AU85


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of 
Critical Habitat for the Flatwoods Salamander

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose to 
designate critical habitat for the flatwoods salamander (Ambystoma 
cingulatum) pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended 
(Act). In total, approximately 31,428 acres (ac) (12,719 hectares (ha)) 
fall within the boundaries of the proposed critical habitat 
designation. The proposed critical habitat is located in Baker, 
Calhoun, Franklin, Holmes, Jackson, Jefferson, Liberty, Santa Rosa, 
Wakulla, Walton, and Washington Counties in Florida; Baker and Miller 
Counties in Georgia; and Berkeley, Charleston, and Jasper Counties in 
South Carolina.

DATES: We will accept comments from all interested parties until April 
9, 2007. We must receive requests for public hearings, in writing, at 
the address shown in the ADDRESSES section by March 26, 2007.

ADDRESSES: If you wish to comment, you may submit your comments and 
materials concerning this proposal by any one of several methods:
    1. You may send by U.S. mail or hand-deliver written comments and 
information to Ray Aycock, Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service, Mississippi Fish and Wildlife Office, 6578 Dogwood View Pkwy, 
Jackson, MS 39213.
    2. You may send comments by electronic mail (e-mail) to linda_
laclaire@fws.gov. Please see the Public Comments Solicited section 
below for file format and other information about electronic filing.
    3. You may fax your comments to 601/965-4340.
    4. You may go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
    Comments and materials received, as well as supporting 
documentation used in the preparation of this proposed rule, will be 
available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal business 
hours at the Mississippi Fish and Wildlife Office (address above).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ray Aycock, Field Supervisor, 
Mississippi Fish and Wildlife Office (address above) (telephone: 601/
965-4900; facsimile: 601/965-4340). Persons who use a 
telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal 
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339, 7 days a week and 24 
hours a day.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Comments Solicited

    We intend that any final action resulting from this proposal will 
be as accurate and as effective as possible. Therefore, comments or 
suggestions from the public, other concerned governmental agencies, the 
scientific community, industry, or any other interested party 
concerning this proposed rule are hereby solicited. Comments 
particularly are sought concerning:
    (1) The reasons any habitat should or should not be determined to 
be critical habitat as provided by section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 
et seq.), including whether the benefit of designation will outweigh 
any threats to the species caused by designation;
    (2) Specific information on the amount and distribution of 
flatwoods salamander habitat, what areas should be included in the 
designations that were occupied at the time of listing that contain the 
features that are essential for the conservation of the species and why 
and what areas that were not occupied at the time of listing but are 
essential to the conservation of the species and why;
    (3) Land use designations and current or planned activities in the 
subject areas and their possible impacts on proposed critical habitat;
    (4) Any foreseeable economic, national security, or other potential 
impacts resulting from the proposed designation and, in particular, any 
impacts on small entities;
    (5) The adequacy of forest management plans and programs for 
Francis Marion, Osceola, and Apalachicola National Forests with respect 
to providing protection and conservation for the flatwoods salamander; 
and
    (6) Whether our approach to designating critical habitat could be 
improved or modified in any way to provide for greater public 
participation and understanding, or to assist us in accommodating 
public concerns and comments.
    If you wish to comment, you may submit your comments and materials 
concerning this proposal by any one of several methods (see ADDRESSES 
section). Please submit Internet comments to linda_laclaire@fws.gov. 
Please include ``Attn: flatwoods salamander'' in your e-mail subject 
header and your name and return address in the body of your message. If 
you do not receive a confirmation from the system that we have received 
your Internet message, contact us directly by calling our Mississippi 
Fish and Wildlife Office at phone number 601/965-4900.
    Our practice is to make comments, including names and home 
addresses of respondents, available for public review during regular 
business hours. Individual respondents may request that we withhold 
their names and home addresses, etc., but if you wish us to consider 
withholding this information, you must state this prominently at the 
beginning of your comments. In addition, you must present rationale for 
withholding this information. This rationale must demonstrate that 
disclosure would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy. 
Unsupported assertions will not meet this burden. In the absence of 
exceptional, documentable circumstances, this information will be 
released. We will always make 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.

Role of Critical Habitat in Actual Practice of Administering and 
Implementing the Act

    Attention to and protection of habitat is paramount to successful 
conservation actions. The role that designation of critical habitat 
plays in protecting habitat of listed species, however, is often 
misunderstood. As discussed in more detail below in the discussion of 
exclusions under the Act's section 4(b)(2), there are significant 
limitations on the regulatory effect of designation under Act's section 
7(a)(2). In brief, (1) designation provides additional protection to 
habitat only where there is a federal nexus; (2) the protection is 
relevant only when, in the absence of designation, destruction or 
adverse modification of the critical habitat would in fact take place 
(in other words, other statutory or regulatory protections, policies, 
or other factors relevant to agency decision-making would not prevent 
the destruction or adverse modification); and (3) designation of 
critical habitat triggers the prohibition of destruction or adverse 
modification of that habitat, but it does not require specific actions 
to restore or improve habitat.

[[Page 5857]]

    Currently, only 476 species, or 36 percent of the 1,311 listed 
species in the United States under the jurisdiction of the Service, 
have designated critical habitat. We address the habitat needs of all 
1,311 listed species through conservation mechanisms such as listing, 
section 7 consultations, the section 4 recovery planning process, the 
section 9 protective prohibitions of unauthorized take, section 6 
funding to the States, the section 10 incidental take permit process, 
and cooperative, nonregulatory efforts with private landowners. The 
Service believes that it is these measures may make the difference 
between extinction and survival for many species.
    In considering exclusions of areas proposed for designation, we 
evaluated the benefits of designation in light of Gifford Pinchot Task 
Force v. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 378 F. 3d 1059 (9th 
Cir 2004) (hereinafter Gifford Pinchot). In that case, the Ninth 
Circuit invalidated the Service's regulation defining ``destruction or 
adverse modification of critical habitat.'' In response, on December 9, 
2004, the Director issued guidance to be considered in making section 7 
adverse modification determinations. This proposed critical habitat 
designation does not use the invalidated regulation in our 
consideration of the benefits of including areas. The Service will 
carefully manage future consultations that analyze impacts to 
designated critical habitat, particularly those that appear to be 
resulting in an adverse modification determination. Such consultations 
will be reviewed by the Regional Office prior to finalizing to ensure 
that an adequate analysis has been conducted that is informed by the 
Director's guidance.
    On the other hand, to the extent that designation of critical 
habitat provides protection, that protection can come at significant 
social and economic cost. In addition, the mere administrative process 
of designation of critical habitat is expensive, time-consuming, and 
controversial. The current statutory framework of critical habitat, 
combined with past judicial interpretations of the statute, make 
critical habitat the subject of excessive litigation. As a result, 
critical habitat designations are driven by litigation and courts 
rather than biology, and made at a time and under a time frame that 
limits our ability to obtain and evaluate the scientific and other 
information required to make the designation most meaningful.
    In light of these circumstances, the Service believes that 
additional agency discretion would allow our focus to return to those 
actions that provide the greatest benefit to the species most in need 
of protection.

Procedural and Resource Difficulties in Designating Critical Habitat

    We have been inundated with lawsuits for our failure to designate 
critical habitat, and we face a growing number of lawsuits challenging 
critical habitat determinations once they are made. These lawsuits have 
subjected the Service to an ever-increasing series of court orders and 
court-approved settlement agreements, compliance with which now 
consumes nearly the entire listing program budget. This leaves the 
Service with little ability to prioritize its activities to direct 
scarce listing resources to the listing program actions with the most 
biologically urgent species conservation needs.
    The consequence of the critical habitat litigation activity is that 
limited listing funds are used to defend active lawsuits, to respond to 
Notices of Intent (NOIs) to sue relative to critical habitat, and to 
comply with the growing number of adverse court orders. As a result, 
listing petition responses, the Service's own proposals to list 
critically imperiled species, and final listing determinations on 
existing proposals are all significantly delayed.
    The accelerated schedules of court-ordered designations have left 
the Service with limited ability to provide for public participation or 
to ensure a defect-free rulemaking process before making decisions on 
listing and critical habitat proposals, due to the risks associated 
with noncompliance with judicially imposed deadlines. This in turn 
fosters a second round of litigation in which those who fear adverse 
impacts from critical habitat designations challenge those 
designations. The cycle of litigation appears endless, and is very 
expensive, thus diverting resources from conservation actions that may 
provide relatively more benefit to imperiled species.
    The costs resulting from the designation include legal costs, the 
cost of preparation and publication of the designation, the analysis of 
the economic effects and the cost of requesting and responding to 
public comment, and in some cases the costs of compliance with the 
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4371 et seq.). These 
costs, which are not required for many other conservation actions, 
directly reduce the funds available for direct and tangible 
conservation actions.

Background

    It is our intent to discuss only those topics directly relevant to 
the designation of critical habitat in this proposed rule. For more 
information on the flatwoods salamander, refer to the final listing 
rule published in the Federal Register on April 1, 1999 (64 FR 15691).

Previous Federal Actions

    The flatwoods salamander (Ambystoma cingulatum) was listed as 
threatened on April 1, 1999 (64 FR 15691). At that time, we found that 
designation of critical habitat for the flatwoods salamander was not 
prudent because such designation would not be beneficial and may 
increase threats to the species. On April 1, 2005, Center for 
Biological Diversity, Wild South, and Florida Biodiversity Project 
filed a lawsuit against the Secretary of the Interior alleging failure 
to designate critical habitat for the flatwoods salamander. In a court-
approved settlement agreement, we agreed to reevaluate the need for 
critical habitat for the species and if prudent submit a proposed 
designation of critical habitat to the Federal Register by January 30, 
2007.

Critical Habitat

    Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the Act as--(i) the 
specific areas within the geographical area occupied by a species, at 
the time it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which are found 
those physical or biological features (I) essential to the conservation 
of the species and (II) that may require special management 
considerations or protection; and (ii) specific areas outside the 
geographical area occupied by a species at the time it is listed, upon 
a determination that such areas are essential for the conservation of 
the species. Conservation, as defined under section 3 of the Act, means 
to use and the use of all methods and procedures that are necessary to 
bring any endangered species or threatened species to the point at 
which the measures provided pursuant to the Act are no longer 
necessary. Such methods and procedures include, but are not limited to, 
all activities associated with scientific resources management such as 
research, census, law enforcement, habitat acquisition and maintenance, 
propagation, live trapping, and transplantation, and, in the 
extraordinary case where population pressures within a given ecosystem 
cannot be otherwise relieved, may include regulated taking.

[[Page 5858]]

    Critical habitat receives protection under section 7 of the Act 
through the prohibition against destruction or adverse modification of 
critical habitat with regard to actions carried out, funded, or 
authorized by a Federal agency. Section 7 requires consultation on 
Federal actions that are likely to result in the destruction or adverse 
modification of critical habitat. The designation of critical habitat 
does not affect land ownership or establish a refuge, wilderness, 
reserve, preserve, or other conservation area. Such designation does 
not allow government or public access to private lands. Section 7 is a 
purely protective measure and does not require implementation of 
restoration, recovery, or enhancement measures.
    To be included in a critical habitat designation, the habitat 
within the area occupied by the species must first have features that 
are essential to the conservation of the species. Critical habitat 
designations identify, to the extent known using the best scientific 
data available, habitat areas that provide essential life cycle needs 
of the species (i.e., areas on which are found the primary constituent 
elements, as defined at 50 CFR 424.12(b)).
    Habitat occupied at the time of listing may be included in critical 
habitat only if the essential features thereon may require special 
management or protection. Thus, we do not include areas where existing 
management is sufficient to conserve the species. (As discussed below, 
such areas may also be excluded from critical habitat pursuant to 
section 4(b)(2)). Accordingly, when the best available scientific data 
do not demonstrate that the conservation needs of the species require 
additional areas, we will not designate critical habitat in areas 
outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the time of 
listing. An area currently occupied by the species but not known to 
have been occupied at the time of listing will likely, but not always, 
be essential to the conservation of the species and, therefore, 
typically included in the critical habitat designation.
    The Service's Policy on Information Standards Under the Endangered 
Species Act, published in the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 
34271), and Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government 
Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106-554; H.R. 5658) 
and the associated Information Quality Guidelines issued by the Service 
provide criteria, establish procedures, and provide guidance to ensure 
that decisions made by the Service represent the best scientific data 
available. They require Service biologists, to the extent consistent 
with the Act and with the use of the best scientific data available, to 
use primary and original sources of information as the basis for 
recommendations to designate critical habitat. When determining which 
areas are critical habitat, a primary source of information is 
generally the listing package for the species. Additional information 
sources include the recovery plan for the species, articles in peer-
reviewed journals, conservation plans developed by States and counties, 
scientific status surveys and studies, biological assessments, or other 
unpublished materials and expert opinion or personal knowledge. All 
information is used in accordance with the provisions of Section 515 of 
the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 
2001 (Pub. L. 106-554; H.R. 5658) and the associated Information 
Quality Guidelines issued by the Service.
    Section 4 of the Act requires that we designate critical habitat on 
the basis of the best scientific data available. Habitat is often 
dynamic, and species may move from one area to another over time. 
Furthermore, we recognize that designation of critical habitat may not 
include all of the habitat areas that may eventually be determined to 
be necessary for the recovery of the species. For these reasons, 
critical habitat designations do not signal that habitat outside the 
designation is unimportant or may not be required for recovery.
    Areas that support populations, but are outside the critical 
habitat designation, will continue to be subject to conservation 
actions implemented under section 7(a)(1) of the Act and to the 
regulatory protections afforded by the section 7(a)(2) jeopardy 
standard, as determined on the basis of the best available information 
at the time of the action. Federally funded or permitted projects 
affecting listed species outside their designated critical habitat 
areas may still result in jeopardy findings in some cases. Similarly, 
critical habitat designations made on the basis of the best available 
information at the time of designation will not control the direction 
and substance of future recovery plans, habitat conservation plans, or 
other species conservation planning efforts if new information 
available to these planning efforts calls for a different outcome.

Methods

    As required by section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we use the best 
scientific data available in determining areas that contain the 
features that are essential to the conservation of the flatwoods 
salamander. This includes information from the proposed listing rule 
(62 FR 65787), final listing rule (64 FR 15691), site visits, soil and 
species map coverages, and data compiled in the Florida, Georgia, and 
South Carolina Natural Heritage databases. We do not propose any areas 
outside the geographical area presently occupied by the species.
    We also reviewed the available information pertaining to historical 
and current distribution, ecology, life history, and habitat 
requirements of the flatwoods salamander. This material included data 
in reports submitted by biologists holding section 10(a)(1)(A) recovery 
permits; research published in peer-reviewed scientific publications; 
museum records; technical reports and unpublished field observations by 
Service, State and other experienced biologists; additional notes and 
communications with qualified biologists or experts; and regional 
Geographic Information System (GIS) coverages.

Primary Constituent Elements

    In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) of the Act and regulations at 
50 CFR 424.12, in determining which areas to propose as critical 
habitat, we consider those physical and biological features that are 
essential to the conservation of the species (PCEs), and within areas 
occupied by the species at the time of listing, those PCES that may 
require special management considerations and protection. These 
include, but are not limited to, space for individual and population 
growth and for normal behavior; food, water, air, light, minerals, or 
other nutritional or physiological requirements; cover or shelter; 
sites for breeding, reproduction, and rearing (or development) of 
offspring; and habitats that are protected from disturbance or are 
representative of the historic geographical and ecological 
distributions of a species.
    The specific PCEs required for the flatwoods salamander are derived 
from the biological needs of the flatwoods salamander as described 
below and in the final listing rule (64 FR 15691).

Space for Individual and Population Growth and Normal Behavior

    The flatwoods salamander is a terrestrial species of the longleaf 
pine ecosystem. Flatwoods salamanders spend most of their lives 
underground, and occur in forested habitat consisting of fire-
maintained, open-canopied, flatwoods and savannas dominated by longleaf 
pine (Pinus palustris), with naturally-occurring slash pine (P.

[[Page 5859]]

elliotti) in wetter areas. Historically, fire-tolerant longleaf pine 
dominated the uplands, whereas slash pine, being less fire-tolerant, 
was confined principally to wetlands, wetland edges, and the wetter 
portions of pine flatwoods. Means et al. (1996, pp. 434-435) summarized 
the natural distribution of slash pine in reference to the flatwoods 
salamander and concluded that natural slash pine habitats constituted 
only a minor fraction of the species' upland habitat. Much of the 
original flatwoods habitat has been converted to pine (often slash 
pine) plantations and become a closed-canopy forest unsuitable as 
habitat for the flatwoods salamander. Nevertheless, flatwoods 
salamanders do occur on some slash and loblolly pine (P. taeda) 
plantation sites. The extent of habitat degradation has been variable 
among pine plantations. On some plantations, the original hydrology, 
ground cover, and soil structure have been less severely altered, and 
these are the areas where remnant flatwoods salamander populations 
still occur.
    Pine flatwoods and savannas are typically characterized by low, 
flat topography, and relatively poorly-drained, acidic, sandy soil that 
becomes seasonally saturated. In the past, this ecosystem was 
characterized by open pine woodlands maintained by frequent fires. 
Naturally ignited by lightning during spring and early summer, these 
flatwoods historically burned at intervals ranging from 1 to 4 years 
(discussion in Clewell 1989, p. 226). In some areas, such as southwest 
Georgia, the topography of pine flatwoods can vary from nearly flat to 
gently-rolling hills. The groundcover of the pine flatwoods/savanna 
ecosystem is typically dominated by wiregrass (Aristida stricta [= A. 
beyrichiana] Kesler et al. 2003, p. 9) in the Gulf Coastal Plain, which 
is often joined or replaced by dropseed (Sporobolus spp.) in the 
Atlantic Coastal Plain. Many other herbaceous plants are found in the 
groundcover and plant diversity is usually very high.
    During the breeding season, adult flatwoods salamanders leave their 
subterranean retreats and migrate to breeding sites during rains 
associated with passing cold fronts. Throughout their range, the 
salamanders breed at ephemeral (seasonally-flooded) isolated ponds (not 
connected to other water bodies) embedded within the mesic (moderate 
moisture) to intermediate-mesic flatwoods/savanna communities occupied 
by post-larval and adult salamanders (Palis and Means 2005, pp. 608-
609. There are some variations in vegetation, geology, and soils among 
geographic areas within the range of the salamander (most notably, 
differences between the Gulf Coast and Atlantic Coastal Plain 
communities); however, basic characteristics are fairly similar 
throughout. Both forested uplands and isolated wetlands (See further 
discussion of isolated wetlands in section ``Sites for breeding, 
reproduction, and rearing of offspring,'' below) are needed to provide 
space for individual and population growth and normal behavior.
    The distance between the wetland breeding and upland terrestrial 
habitats of post-larval and adult salamanders can vary considerably. 
According to Ashton (1992), flatwoods salamanders have been documented 
up to 5,576 ft (1,700 m) from breeding ponds. In the final listing 
rule, however, the Service used an estimate of 1,476 feet (ft) (450 
meters (m)) as the radius of a flatwoods salamander's principal 
activity area around a breeding pond based on research summarized in 
Semlitsch (1998, pp. 1115-1117) on this species and other species in 
its genus (U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1999, p. 15697).

Food, Water, Air, Light, or Other Nutritional or Physiological 
Requirements

    It is assumed that flatwoods salamanders eat small invertebrates 
that share their fossorial (underground) habitat. Records exist of 
earthworms that have been found in the stomachs of dissected adults 
(Goin 1950, p. 314). Larval flatwoods salmanders most likely prey on a 
variety of aquatic invertebrates and perhaps small vertebrates such as 
other amphibian larvae (Palis and Means 2005, p. 608). Data from a 
recent study of larval food habits found that freshwater crustaceans 
dominated stomach contents of preserved, wild-caught individuals from 
Florida and South Carolina (Whiles et al. 2004, p. 208). This likely 
indicates a preference for freshwater crustaceans, or perhaps is an 
indication that these invertebrates are the most abundant or most 
easily captured prey in breeding ponds.
    Within the pine uplands, a diverse and abundant herbaceous layer 
consisting of native species is important to maintain the prey base for 
adult flatwoods salamanders. Wetland water quality is important to 
maintain the aquatic invertebrate fauna eaten by larval salamanders. An 
unpolluted wetland with water free of sediment, pesticides, herbicides, 
and the chemicals associated with road runoff, is important to maintain 
the aquatic invertebrate fauna eaten by larval salamanders.

Cover or Shelter

    At wetland sites, developing larval flatwoods salamanders hide in 
submerged herbaceous vegetation during the day (Palis and Means 2005, 
p. 608) as protection from predators. Thus, an abundant herbaceous 
community in these ponds is important for cover.
    Generally, flatwoods salamander breeding pond and upland habitats 
are separated by an ecotone (area of transitional habitat) through 
which salamanders must move during pre- and post-breeding events (Palis 
1997, p. 58). The graminaceous (grass-like) ecotone represents a 
distinct habitat type and studies of migratory success in salamanders 
have demonstrated its importance to population survival (Rothermel 
2004, pp. 1544-1545).
    Post-larval and adult flatwoods salamanders occupy upland flatwoods 
sites where they live underground in crayfish burrows, root channels, 
or burrows of their own making (Goin 1950, p. 311; Neill 1951, p. 765; 
Mount 1975, pp. 98-99; Ashton and Ashton 2005, pp. 63, 65, 68-71). The 
occurrence of these below-ground habitats is dependent upon protection 
of the soil structure within flatwoods salamander terrestrial sites.

Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, and Rearing of Offspring

    Adult flatwoods salamanders move from the uplands to breed in ponds 
that are typically acidic, tannin-stained, isolated, ephemeral wetlands 
(marsh-like depressions) (Palis 1997, p. 53, 58; Safer 2001, p. 5, 12). 
Breeding occurs from late September to December when ponds flood due to 
rainy weather associated with cold fronts. If rainfall is insufficient 
to result in adequate pond flooding, breeding may not occur or, if 
larvae do develop, they may die before metamorphosis. Egg development 
from deposition to hatching occurs in approximately 2 weeks, but eggs 
do not hatch until they are inundated (Palis 1995, p. 352, 353). Larval 
salamanders usually metamorphose in March or April after an 11-to-18-
week larval period (Palis 1995, p. 352). Ponds dry shortly thereafter. 
A cycle of filling and drying is essential for maintaining the 
appropriate habitat conditions of these wetlands.
    The overstory within breeding ponds is typically dominated by pond 
cypress (Taxodium ascendens [=T. distichum var. imbricarium; Lickey and 
Walker 2002, p. 131)], blackgum (Nyssa sylvatica var. biflora), and 
slash pine (Palis 1997, p. 58, 59). An open midstory is often present 
as well and

[[Page 5860]]

dominant species include the myrtle-leaved holly (Illex myrtifolia) and 
other shrubs and small trees (Palis 1997, p. 58, 59). When they are 
dry, breeding ponds burn naturally due to periodic wildfires, 
especially during late spring and summer. Depending on canopy closure 
and midstory, the herbaceous groundcover of breeding sites can vary 
considerably (Palis 1997, p. 58, 59). However, flatwoods salamander 
larvae are typically found in those portions of breeding sites 
containing abundant herbaceous vegetation. The ground cover is 
dominated by graminaceous species. The floor of breeding sites 
generally consists of relatively firm mud with little or no peat. 
Burrows of crayfish (genus Procambarus, principally) are a common 
feature of flatwoods salamander breeding sites. Breeding sites are 
typically encircled by a bunchgrass (wiregrass or dropseed)--dominated 
graminaceous ecotone (see discussion of ecotone, above). Small fish, 
such as pygmy sunfishes (Elassoma spp.), mosquitofish (Gambusia 
holbrookii), and banded sunfish (Enneacanthus obesus) may be present, 
but large predaceous species are absent (Palis 1997, p. 58, 60).

Primary Constituent Elements for the Flatwoods Salamander

    Pursuant to our regulations, we are required to identify the known 
physical and biological features essential to the conservation of the 
flatwoods salamander (PCEs). Based on our current knowledge of the life 
history, biology, and ecology of the species and the requirements of 
the habitat to sustain the essential life history functions of the 
species, we have determined that the flatwoods salamander's PCEs are:
    1. Breeding habitat. Small (generally <1 to 10 acres (ac) (<0.4 to 
4.0 hectares (ha)), acidic, depressional standing bodies of freshwater 
(wetlands) that:
    (a) are seasonally flooded by rainfall in late fall or early winter 
and dry in late spring or early summer;
    (b) are geographically isolated from other water bodies;
    (c) occur within pine-flatwoods/savanna communities;
    (d) are dominated by grasses and grass-like species in the ground 
layer and overstories of pond cypress, blackgum, and slash pine.
    (e) have a relatively open canopy, necessary to maintain the 
herbaceous component which serves as cover for flatwoods salamander 
larvae and their aquatic invertebrate prey; and
    (f) typically have a burrowing crayfish fauna, but, due to periodic 
drying, the breeding ponds typically lack large, predatory fish (e.g., 
Lepomis (sunfish), Micropterus (bass), Amia calva (bowfin)).
    2. Non-breeding habitat. Upland pine flatwoods/savanna habitat that 
is open, mesic woodland maintained by frequent fires and that:
    (a) is within 1,500 ft (457 m) of adjacent and accessible breeding 
ponds;
    (b) contains crayfish burrows or other underground habitat that the 
flatwoods salamander depends upon for food, shelter, and protection 
from the elements and predation;
    (c) has an organic hardpan in the soil profile, which inhibits 
subsurface water penetration and typically results in moist soils with 
water often at or near the surface under normal conditions; and
    (d) often has wiregrasses as the dominant grasses in the abundant 
herbaceous ground cover, which supports the rich herbivorous 
invertebrates that serve as a food source for the flatwoods salamander.
    3. Dispersal habitat. Upland habitat areas between non-breeding and 
breeding habitat that allows for salamander movement between such sites 
and that is characterized by:
    (a) a mix of vegetation types representing a transition between 
wetland and upland vegetation (ecotone);
    (b) an open canopy and abundant native herbaceous species; and
    (c) moist soils as described in PCE 2, and underground structure, 
such as deep litter cover or burrows that provide shelter for 
salamanders during seasonal movements.
    This proposed designation is designed for the conservation of those 
areas containing PCEs necessary to support the life history functions 
that were the basis for the proposal. Each of the areas proposed as 
critical habitat in this rule have been determined to contain all PCEs 
of the flatwoods salamander.

Criteria Used To Identify Critical Habitat

    As required by section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act, we used the best 
scientific data available in determining areas that contain the 
features that are essential to the conservation of the flatwoods 
salamander. This includes information from the proposed listing rule 
(62 FR 65787), final listing rule (64 FR 15691), site visits, soil and 
species map coverages, and data compiled in the Florida, Georgia, and 
South Carolina Natural Heritage databases. We propose to designate no 
areas outside the geographical area presently occupied by the species.
    We have also reviewed available information that pertains to the 
habitat requirements of this species. This material included data in 
reports submitted by biologists holding section 10(a)(1)(A) permits; 
research published in peer-reviewed scientific publications; museum 
records, technical reports and unpublished field observations by 
Service, State, and other experienced biologists; management plans 
written by State biologists; State grant reports; additional notes and 
communications with qualified biologists or experts; and regional GIS 
coverages.
    In proposing to designate critical habitat for the flatwoods 
salamander, we selected areas occupied at the time of listing based on 
the best scientific data available that possess those physical and 
biological features essential to the conservation of the species that 
may require special management considerations or protection. In 
addition, we included two areas subsequently identified as occupied and 
essential to the conservation of the species. We found that the two 
newer (post-listing) occurrence records were in close proximity to 
areas already known to support the flatwoods salamander. We identified 
proposed critical habitat units that were occupied at the time of 
listing based on: (1) Presence of the defined PCEs; (2) density of 
flatwoods salamander occurrences; and (3) kind, amount, and quality of 
habitat associated with those occurrences. We identified proposed 
critical habitat units that were not occupied at the time of listing 
based on: (1) Density of flatwoods salamander occurrences; (2) kind, 
amount, and quality of habitat associated with those occurrences; and 
(3) a determination that these areas are essential to the conservation 
of the species.
    According to Ashton (1992), flatwoods salamanders have been 
documented up to 5,576 ft (1,700 m) from breeding ponds. However, in 
the final listing rule, we determined that a radius of 1,476 ft (450 m) 
from the wetland edge would protect the majority of the salamander 
population (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1999, p. 15697). Thus, the 
radius of 450 m was used to delineate critical habitat boundaries 
around breeding ponds, and proposed critical habitat areas separated by 
over 450 m were considered separate units or subunits.
    We considered the following criteria in the selection of areas that 
contain the essential features for the flatwoods salamander and focused 
on designating units: (1) Throughout the current geographic and 
ecological distribution of the species; (2) that retain or provide

[[Page 5861]]

for connectivity between breeding sites that allows for the continued 
existence of viable and essential metapopulations (populations at 
individual ponds that interbreed over time), despite fluctuations in 
the status of subpopulations; (3) that possess large continuous blocks 
of occupied habitat, representing source populations and/or unique 
ecological characteristics; and (4) that contain sufficient upland 
habitat around each breeding location to allow for sufficient survival 
and recruitment to maintain a breeding population over the long term. 
The lands proposed as critical habitat collectively contain small, and 
in some cases, isolated, populations of the species. These small 
populations are at a high risk of extinction due to stochastic events 
and human-induced threats such as urban/agricultural development and 
habitat degradation due to fire suppression and hydrological 
alterations. Thus, we believe all lands proposed as critical habitat 
are essential for the persistence and conservation of the flatwoods 
salamander and meet the criteria as set forth above.
    We used the final listing rule to establish those areas occupied at 
the time of listing. All other areas proposed for critical habitat 
designation were based on occupancy data collected since listing. The 
currently occupied habitat of the flatwoods salamander is highly 
localized and fragmented. Due to several drought events, post-listing 
observations of salamanders have been made at breeding ponds in only a 
small portion of their occupied range and no population estimates are 
currently available. As with many rare species, especially pond-
breeding amphibians with fossorial adult life stages, detection 
probabilities are low even in ``normal'' weather years (Bailey et al. 
2004, p. 2463-2464). Flatwoods salamanders are particularly susceptible 
to drought, as breeding cannot occur if breeding ponds do not receive 
adequate rainfall. We know that isolated populations, including those 
of the flatwoods salamander, are highly susceptible to stochastic 
events. Thus, we have determined that all but one of the areas occupied 
at the time of listing contain the features essential to the 
conservation of the species and that the two units occupied since the 
time of listing are essential to the conservation of the species.
    All occurrence records for sites currently known to be occupied, 
typically a breeding pond, were initially plotted on maps using ArcMap 
(Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc.), a computer GIS 
program. The critical habitat units were then delineated by creating 
approximate areas for the units by screen-digitizing polygons (map 
units) using ArcMap. For ease of application in creating polygons, the 
original 1,476 ft (450 m) radius estimate used to generate the habitat 
occupied by a flatwoods salamander population was rounded up to 1,500 
ft (457 m). Polygons were created by overlaying the flatwoods 
salamander occurrence locations, extant-at-time-of-listing and 
subsequent-to-listing, with radius buffers of 1,500 ft (457 m). The 
area circumscribed by a circle of this radius would be 162 ac (66 ha) 
and this area was used as a starting point to delineate the amount of 
wetland and upland habitat occupied by salamanders at each occurrence 
and containing the features essential to their conservation (PCEs).
    Once the polygons were completed, they were overlaid on aerial 
photography. The aerial photography was analyzed to verify the 
occurrence of PCEs and their distribution within the polygons. Research 
on ambystomatid salamanders indicates that they need high terrestrial 
survival or immigration to persist (Taylor et al. 2005, p. 799). Thus, 
a flatwoods salamander population requires a sufficient amount of 
terrestrial habitat to ensure survival of adults in upland habitat, or 
immigration of juveniles to the population is needed from nearby 
breeding ponds. For this reason, if metapopulation structure was 
indicated by polygons which overlapped or were in immediate proximity 
to each other, polygons were combined to create areas containing 
multiple ponds connected to each other by upland habitat corridors. 
Additionally, we adjusted individual unit boundaries based on presence 
or absence of the PCEs.
    When determining proposed critical habitat boundaries, we made 
every effort to avoid including developed areas such as buildings, 
paved areas, and other structures that lack PCEs for the flatwoods 
salamander. The scale of the maps prepared under the parameters for 
publication within the Code of Federal Regulations may not reflect the 
exclusion of such developed areas. However, any such structures and the 
land under them inadvertently left inside critical habitat boundaries 
shown on the maps of this proposed rule have been excluded by text in 
the proposed rule and are not proposed for designation as critical 
habitat. Therefore, Federal actions limited to these areas would not 
trigger section 7 consultation, unless they affect the species or 
primary constituent elements in adjacent critical habitat.
    We are proposing to designate critical habitat on lands that we 
have determined were occupied at the time of listing and that contain 
sufficient PCEs to support life history functions essential for the 
conservation of the species. In addition we are proposing to designate 
two areas that were not known to be occupied at the time of listing 
(they occur within the same geographical area and were discovered after 
1999), and have been determined to be essential to the conservation of 
the species. All lands proposed for designation contain all PCEs and 
support multiple flatwoods salamander life processes.
    Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act authorizes us to issue permits for 
the take of listed species incidental to otherwise lawful activities. 
An incidental take permit application must be supported by a habitat 
conservation plan (HCP) that identifies conservation measures that the 
permittee agrees to implement to minimize and mitigate the impacts on 
the species by the requested incidental take. We often exclude non-
Federal public lands and private lands that are covered by an existing 
operative HCP from designated critical habitat because the benefits of 
exclusion outweigh the benefits of inclusion as discussed in section 
4(b)(2) of the Act. Currently, there are no existing or proposed HCPs 
for the flatwoods salamander, and as a result no exclusions are being 
proposed based on such an analysis.

Special Management Considerations or Protections

    When designating critical habitat, we assess whether the areas 
determined to be occupied at the time of listing and contain the 
primary constituent elements that may require special management 
considerations or protections. Threats to those features that define 
the primary constituent elements for the flatwoods salamander include 
the direct and indirect impacts of land use conversions, primarily 
urban development and conversion to agriculture and pine plantations; 
stump removal and other soil-disturbing activities which destroy the 
below-ground structure within forest soils; fire suppression and low 
fire frequencies; wetland destruction and degradation; and stochastic 
effects of drought or floods. Specific details regarding these threats 
can be found in the proposed listing rule (62 FR 65787) and final 
listing rule (64 FR 15691). Due to one or more of the threats described 
above, and as discussed in more detail in the individual unit 
descriptions below, we find that all areas known to be occupied

[[Page 5862]]

at the time of listing that we are proposing for designation as 
critical habitat contain PCEs that may require special management 
considerations or protections to ensure the conservation of the 
flatwoods salamander.

Proposed Critical Habitat Designation

    We are proposing 16 flatwoods salamander critical habitat units, 
some of which are divided into subunits (for a total 45 units/
subunits). The critical habitat units described below constitute our 
best current assessment of areas determined to be occupied at the time 
of listing containing the primary constituent elements that may require 
special management, and those additional areas that were not known to 
be occupied at the time of listing but were found to be essential to 
the conservation of the flatwoods salamander.

Table 1.--Proposed Critical Habitat Units Occupied at the Time of Listing, Currently Occupied But Were Not Known
                              To Be Occupied at the Time of Listing, or Unoccupied
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Currently
                                                                            occupied (but not
                          Unit                            Occupied at time     known to be         Unoccupied
                                                             of listing      occupied at the
                                                                             time of listing)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Florida Units
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FL-1, Subunit A........................................                 X
FL-1, Subunit B........................................                 X
FL-2, Subunit A........................................                 X
FL-2, Subunit B........................................                 X
FL-3, Subunit A........................................                 X
FL-3, Subunit B........................................                 X
FL-3, Subunit C........................................                 X
FL-4...................................................                 X
FL-5, Subunit A........................................                 X
FL-5, Subunit B........................................                 X
FL-6, Subunit A........................................                 X
FL-6, Subunit B........................................                 X
FL-6, Subunit B........................................                 X
FL-7, Subunit A........................................                 X
FL-7, Subunit B........................................                 X
FL-7, Subunit C........................................                 X
FL-8, Subunit A........................................                 X
FL-8, Subunit B........................................                 X
FL-8, Subunit C........................................                 X
FL-9, Subunit A........................................                 X
FL-9, Subunit B........................................                 X
FL-9, Subunit C........................................                 X
FL-9, Subunit D........................................                 X
FL-9, Subunit E........................................                 X
FL-9, Subunit F........................................                 X
FL-9, Subunit G........................................                 X
FL-9, Subunit H........................................                 X
FL-9, Subunit I........................................  .................                 X
FL-9, Subunit J........................................  .................                 X
FL-9, Subunit K........................................                 X
FL-10..................................................                 X
FL-11, Subunit A.......................................                 X
FL-11, Subunit B.......................................                 X
FL-11, Subunit C.......................................                 X
FL-11, Subunit D.......................................                 X
FL-11, Subunit E.......................................                 X
FL-12, Subunit A.......................................                 X
FL-12, Subunit B.......................................                 X
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Georgia Units
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GA-1, Subunit A........................................                 X
GA-1, Subunit B........................................                 X
GA-1, Subunit C........................................                 X
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              South Carolina Units
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SC-1...................................................                 X
SC-2...................................................                 X
SC-3...................................................                 X
SC-4...................................................                 X
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 5863]]

    The total area with features essential to the conservation of the 
flatwoods salamander and other areas essential for the species' 
conservation is 43,202 ac (17, 484 ha). Of this, 31,428 ac (12,719 ha) 
are being proposed for critical habitat. The total area not proposed 
for critical habitat is 11,774 ac (4,765 ha). This includes 9,867 ac 
(3,993 ha) of Department of Defense (DoD) lands with INRMPs exempted 
under section 4(a)(3), and approximately 1,907 ac of land within St. 
Marks National Wildlife Refuge which do not meet the definition of 
critical habitat under section 3(5)(A). Table 2 below provides the 
approximate area (ac/ha) determined to meet the definition of critical 
habitat for the flatwoods salamander and area (ac/ha) being exempted 
from or not included in the final critical habitat designation, by 
State.

  Table 2.--Area (in ac/ha) Determined To Meet the Definition of Critical Habitat for the Flatwoods Salamander
 Containing the PCEs That May Require Special Management (Definitional Area) and Area Being Exempted From or Not
    Included in the Final Critical Habitat Designation (Area Not Included in Proposed Designation), by State
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Area not included in proposed designation
                 State                   Definitional area  (ac/ha)                    (ac/ha)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Florida................................  29,689 ac (12,015 ha).....  6,491 ac (2,627 ha).
Georgia................................  609 ac (247 ha)...........  5,283 ac (2,138 ha).
South Carolina.........................  1,130 ac (457 ha).........  ...........................................
                                        ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Totals.............................  31,428 ac (12,719 ha).....  11,774 ac (4,765 ha).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The approximate area (ac/ha) encompassed within each proposed 
critical habitat unit is shown in Table 3.

    Table 3.--Critical Habitat Units Proposed for the Flatwoods Salamander (Area Estimates Reflect All Land Within Critical Habitat Unit Boundaries)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Unit                  Federal  ac (ha)      State  ac (ha)      Local  ac (ha)     Private  ac (ha)              Total  ac (ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Florida Units
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FL-1, Subunit A.................  ...................  180 ac (73 ha).....  4 ac (2 ha).......  6 ac (2 ha).......  190 ac (77 ha).
FL-1, Subunit B.................  ...................  133 ac (54 ha).....  ..................  29 ac (12 ha).....  162 ac (66 ha).
FL-2, Subunit A.................  ...................  ...................  ..................  162 ac (66 ha)....  162 ac (66 ha).
FL-2, Subunit B.................  ...................  32 ac (13 ha)......  ..................  131 ac (53 ha)....  163 ac (66 ha).
FL-3, Subunit A.................  ...................  ...................  ..................  148 ac (60 ha)....  148 ac (60 ha).
FL-3, Subunit B.................  ...................  ...................  26 ac (11 ha).....  42 ac (17 ha).....  68 ac (28 ha).
FL-3, Subunit C.................  ...................  ...................  13 ac (5 ha)......  165 ac (67 ha)....  178 ac (72 ha).
FL-4............................  ...................  162 ac (66 ha).....  ..................  ..................  162 ac (66 ha).
FL-5, Subunit A.................  ...................  ...................  ..................  213 ac (86 ha)....  213 ac (86 ha).
FL-5, Subunit B.................  ...................  162 ac (66 ha).....  ..................  ..................  162 ac (66 ha).
FL-6, Subunit A.................  ...................  ...................  ..................  162 ac (66 ha)....  162 ac (66 ha).
FL-6, Subunit B.................  ...................  14 ac (6 ha).......  ..................  148 ac (60 ha)....  162 ac (66 ha).
FL-6, Subunit C.................  ...................  ...................  ..................  165 ac (67 ha)....  165 ac (67 ha).
FL-7, Subunit A.................  ...................  ...................  ..................  157 ac (64 ha)....  157 ac (64 ha).
FL-7, Subunit B.................  ...................  ...................  ..................  358 ac (145 ha)...  358 ac (145 ha).
FL-7, Subunit C.................  ...................  ...................  ..................  244 ac (99 ha)....  244 ac (99 ha).
FL-8, Subunit A.................  ...................  ...................  ..................  162 ac (66 ha)....  162 ac (66 ha).
FL-8, Subunit B.................  ...................  ...................  ..................  162 ac (66 ha)....  162 ac (66 ha).
FL-8, Subunit C.................  ...................  ...................  ..................  162 ac (66 ha)....  162 ac (66 ha).
FL-9, Subunit A.................  ...................  ...................  ..................  162 ac (66 ha)....  162 ac (66 ha).
FL-9, Subunit B.................  2,846 ac (1,152 ha)  ...................  ..................  511 ac (207 ha)...  3,357 ac (1,359 ha).
FL-9, Subunit C.................  1,084 ac (439 ha)..  ...................  ..................  32 ac (13 ha).....  1,116 ac (452 ha).
FL-9, Subunit D.................  333 ac (135 ha)....  ...................  ..................  ..................  333 ac (135 ha).
FL-9, Subunit E.................  1739 ac (704 ha)...  ...................  ..................  51 ac (21 ha).....  1,790 ac (725 ha).
FL-9, Subunit F.................  4,969 ac (2,011 ha)  ...................  ..................  231 ac (94 ha)....  5,200 ac (2,105 ha).
FL-9, Subunit G.................  258 ac (104 ha)....  ...................  ..................  ..................  258 ac (104 ha).
FL-9, Subunit H.................  8,176 ac (3,309 ha)  ...................  ..................  305 ac (123 ha)...  8,481 ac (3,432 ha).
FL-9, Subunit I.................  1,209 ac (489 ha)..  46 ac (19 ha)......  ..................  ..................  1,255 ac (508 ha).
FL-9, Subunit J.................  312 ac (126 ha)....  ...................  ..................  ..................  312 ac (126 ha).
FL-9, Subunit K.................  802 ac (325 ha)....  ...................  ..................  7 ac (3 ha).......  809 ac (328 ha).
FL-10...........................  ...................  162 ac (66 ha).....  ..................  ..................  162 ac (66 ha).
FL-11, Subunit A................  ...................  ...................  ..................  919 ac (372 ha)...  919 ac (372 ha).
FL-11, Subunit B................  ...................  ...................  ..................  162 ac (66 ha)....  162 ac (66 ha).
FL-11, Subunit C................  ...................  ...................  ..................  435 ac (176 ha)...  435 ac (176 ha).
FL-11, Subunit D................  ...................  ...................  ..................  162 ac (66 ha)....  162 ac (66 ha).
FL-11, Subunit E................  ...................  85 ac (34 ha)......  ..................  78 ac (32 ha).....  163 ac (66 ha).
FL-12, Subunit A................  1,109 ac (449 ha)..  ...................  ..................  ..................  1,109 ac (449 ha).

[[Page 5864]]

 
FL-12, Subunit B................  ...................  ...................  ..................  162 ac (66 ha)....  162 ac (66 ha).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Georgia Units
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GA-1, Subunit A.................  ...................  ...................  ..................  163 ac (66 ha)....  163 ac (66 ha).
GA-1, Subunit A.................  ...................  ...................  ..................  269 ac (109 ha)...  269 ac (109 ha).
GA-1, Subunit C.................  ...................  ...................  ..................  177 ac (72 ha)....  177 ac (72 ha).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  South Carolina Units
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SC-1............................  ...................  ...................  ..................  163 ac (66 ha)....  163 ac (66 ha).
SC-2............................  ...................  ...................  ..................  183 ac (74 ha)....  183 ac (74 ha).
SC-3............................  622 ac (252 ha)....  ...................  ..................  ..................  622 ac (252 ha).
SC-4............................  ...................  162 ac (66 ha).....  ..................  ..................  162 ac (66 ha).
                                 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Totals......................  23,459 ac (9,494     1,138 ac (461 ha)..  43 ac (17 ha).....  6,788 ac (2,747     31,428 ac (12,719 ha).
                                   ha).                                                          ha).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We present below brief descriptions of all units, and reasons why 
they meet the definition of critical habitat for the flatwoods 
salamander, including reasons why these PCEs require special management 
considerations or protections. Generally, the units are listed in order 
geographically west to east and south to north. The precise boundaries 
of each unit are described below as UTM coordinates (see Proposed 
Regulation Promulgation section).

Florida Critical Habitat Units (FL)

    There are 12 Florida units, some of which are further subdivided 
into subunits (for a total of 38 units/subunits), comprising 29,689 ac 
(12,015 ha) across 11 counties of Florida. All units/subunits meet the 
definition of critical habitat based on the discussion above and all 
units contain all PCEs or for those units not occupied at listing, are 
essential to the conservation of the species. Of these, 36 units/
subunits (28,122 ac (11,381 ha)) were known to be occupied at the time 
of listing and are currently occupied and two subunits (FL-9, Subunit I 
and FL-9, Subunit J), comprising 1,567 ac (634 ha), were not known to 
be occupied at the time of listing, but are currently occupied. The two 
subunits found to be occupied since listing are essential for the 
conservation of the species as they exist as part of a matrix of ponds 
within and adjacent to the Apalachicola National Forest, and their loss 
would negatively affect the long-term survival of this metapopulation, 
which is the largest existing metapopulation and is vital to the 
recovery of the species.
    The western- and southern-most known occurrences of the flatwoods 
salamander are represented by populations in Florida.
Unit FL-1
    Unit FL-1 is comprised of two subunits totaling 352 ac (143 ha) on 
Garcon Point in Santa Rosa County, Florida. Within FL-1, 180 acres (73 
ha) consist of State land in the Garcon Point Water Management Area 
managed by the Northwest Florida Water Management District (NWFLWMD), 
133 ac (54 ha) are on the Yellow River Marsh State Buffer Preserve 
(managed in part by the State of Florida/Department of Environmental 
Protection), 35 ac (14 ha) are in private ownership, and 4 ac (2 ha) 
are owned by the Santa Rosa Bay Bridge Authority.
Unit FL-1, Subunit A
    Unit FL-1, Subunit A encompasses 190 ac (77 ha) on Garcon Point in 
Santa Rosa County, Florida. Garcon Point is a peninsula that extends 
into an embayment of the Gulf of Mexico near Pensacola, Florida. Within 
this unit, 180 acres (73 ha) consist of State land in the Garcon Point 
Water Management Area managed by the Northwest Florida Water Management 
District (NWFLWMD), 6 ac (2 ha) are in private ownership, and 4 ac (2 
ha) are owned by the Santa Rosa Bay Bridge Authority. This currently 
occupied unit is located adjacent to Hwy. 191 within an extensive wet 
prairie. Since the majority of this currently occupied unit is owned by 
NWFLWMD, it is likely protected from direct agricultural and urban 
development; however, threats remain to the flatwoods salamander and 
its habitat that may require special management of the PCEs. They 
include the potential for fire suppression and potential hydrologic 
changes resulting from the adjacent highway that could alter the 
ecology of the breeding pond and surrounding terrestrial habitat. 
Ditches associated with highways can drain water from a site and