Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for Alabama Sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus suttkusi, 30361-30374 [E8-11461]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 27, 2008 / Proposed Rules
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No.
97.022, ‘‘Flood Insurance.’’)
Dated: May 9, 2008.
Michael K. Buckley,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Mitigation, Department of Homeland
Security, Federal Emergency Management
Agency.
[FR Doc. E8–11691 Filed 5–23–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–12–P
Public Comments
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[FWS–R4–ES–2008–0058; 92210–1117–
0000–FY08–B4]
RIN 1018–AV51
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Designation of Critical
Habitat for Alabama Sturgeon
(Scaphirhynchus suttkusi)
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), propose to
designate critical habitat for the
Alabama sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus
suttkusi) under the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended (Act). In total,
approximately 524 kilometers (326
miles) of river are proposed as critical
habitat. The proposed critical habitat
includes portions of the Alabama and
Cahaba Rivers in Autauga, Baldwin,
Bibb, Clarke, Dallas, Lowndes, Monroe,
Perry, and Wilcox Counties, in
Alabama.
DATES: We will accept comments
received or postmarked on or before July
28, 2008. We must receive requests for
public hearings, in writing, at the
address shown in the ADDRESSES section
by July 11, 2008.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by one of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS–R4–
ES–2008–0058; Division of Policy and
Directives Management; U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive,
Suite 222; Arlington, VA 22203.
We will not accept e-mail or faxes. We
will post all comments on https://
www.regulations.gov. This generally
means that we will post any personal
information you provide us (see the
Public Comments section below for
more information).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:32 May 23, 2008
Jkt 214001
Jeff
Powell, Aquatic Species Biologist, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Alabama
Ecological Services Field Office, 1208–
B Main Street, Daphne, AL 36526;
telephone 251/441–5858; facsimile
251/441–6222. If you use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD), call the Federal Information
Relay Service (FIRS) at 800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
We intend any final action resulting
from this proposal to be as accurate and
effective as possible. Therefore, we
request comments or suggestions on this
proposed rule. We particularly seek
comments concerning:
(1) The reasons why we should or
should not designate habitat as ‘‘critical
habitat’’ under section 4 of the Act (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), including whether
the benefit of designation would
outweigh threats to the species caused
by the designation, such that the
designation of critical habitat is not
prudent;
(2) Specific information on:
• The amount and distribution of
Alabama sturgeon habitat, flows needed
by the species; and amount and
distribution of free-flowing waters
within the species’ historical or present
range,
• What areas occupied at the time of
listing that contain features essential to
the conservation of the species we
should include in the designation and
why, and
• What areas not occupied at the time
of listing are essential for 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) Information regarding the potential
impacts of this proposed designation on
the activities we have identified that
may adversely affect critical habitat (see
the Application of the ‘‘Adverse
Modification’’ Standard section),
specifically those that are associated
with the following actions:
• Actions that would significantly
alter the existing flow regime to the
point at which the habitat could no
longer sustain normal behavior and
promote species recovery,
• Actions that would significantly
alter the morphology and stability of the
river channel,
• Actions that would significantly
decrease the amount of currently
available free-flowing habitat, and
• Actions that would significantly
alter water chemistry beyond what is
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
30361
required in the State of Alabama water
quality standards;
(5) Any foreseeable economic,
national-security, or other potential
impacts resulting from the proposed
designation, and, in particular, any
impacts on small entities, and the
benefits of including or excluding areas
that exhibit these impacts; and
(6) Whether we could improve or
modify our approach to designating
critical habitat in any way to provide for
greater public participation and
understanding, or to better
accommodate public concerns and
comments.
You may submit your comments and
materials concerning this proposed rule
by one of the methods listed in the
ADDRESSES section. We will not
consider comments sent by e-mail or fax
or to an address not listed in the
ADDRESSES section.
If you submit a comment via https://
www.regulations.gov, your entire
comment—including any personal
identifying information—will be posted
on the Web site. If you submit a
hardcopy comment that includes
personal identifying information, you
may request at the top of your document
that we withhold this information from
public review. However, we cannot
guarantee that we will be able to do so.
We will post all hardcopy comments on
https://www.regulations.gov.
Background
In this proposed rule, we intend to
discuss only those topics directly
relevant to the distribution of the
Alabama sturgeon and the designation
of its critical habitat. For more
information on the species, refer to the
final and proposed listing rules
published in the Federal Register on
May 5, 2000 (65 FR 26438), and on
March 26, 1999 (64 FR 14676),
respectively.
Sturgeon is the common name used
for large, bony-plated, primitive fishes
in the family Acipenseridae which
typically grow slowly and mature late in
life. The Alabama sturgeon
(Scaphirhynchus suttkusi) is the
smallest of all the North American
sturgeons, typically weighing only 1 to
2 kilograms (2 to 4 pounds) at maturity.
The head is broad and flattened shovellike at the snout, with a tubular and
protrusive mouth. As with all sturgeon
species, there are four barbels (whiskerlike appendages) located on the bottom
of the snout in front of the mouth that
are used to locate prey. The body is
lined with five rows of bony plates
called scutes. Bony plates also cover the
head, back, and sides, and the body
narrows abruptly to the rear forming a
E:\FR\FM\27MYP1.SGM
27MYP1
30362
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 27, 2008 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
narrow stalk between the body and tail.
The upper lobe of the tail fin is
elongated and ends in a long filament.
Coloration of the upper body is light tan
to golden yellow, with a creamy white
belly. The life span of the Alabama
sturgeon is unknown. Although few
individuals probably exceed 12 to 15
years of age, it is possible the species
may live longer.
The Alabama sturgeon is endemic to
rivers of the Mobile River Basin below
the Fall Line (inland boundary of the
Coastal Plain) (Mettee et al. 1996, p. 83;
Boschung and Mayden 2004, p. 109). Its
current range includes the Alabama
River from R.F. Henry Lock and Dam
downstream to the confluence of the
Tombigbee River. The species is also
known to survive in the Cahaba River.
For information on range of the species
see the Criteria Used to Identify Critical
Habitat section of this rule.
Despite extensive and intensive
efforts in the decade prior to its listing,
only eight Alabama sturgeon were
captured, or reported captured and
released. These fish were collected from
several locations in the Alabama River
between Millers Ferry Lock and Dam
and its confluence with the Tombigbee
River (Rider and Hartfield 2007, p. 490).
Since the 2000 publication of the final
rule listing the species, two Alabama
sturgeon have been captured or reported
captured. One of these was captured,
videotaped, and released in the lower
Cahaba River shortly after publication of
the final rule by a fisherman in July
2000. The most recent capture was an
individual collected from the Alabama
River below Claiborne Lock and Dam in
April 2007, by the Alabama Department
of Conservation and Natural Resources
(ADCNR). This fish was implanted with
a sonic tag and released in May 2007 at
the location at which it was captured.
Flows in the Alabama River are
heavily influenced by upstream releases
from Alabama Power Company and
Corps hydropower projects, and riverine
habitats are fragmented by Claiborne
and Millers Ferry Locks and Dams. This
240-mile (386-kilometer) stretch of the
Alabama River, along with the lower
Cahaba River, represents the last
remaining viable habitat for the
sturgeon.
Previous Federal Actions
On May 5, 2000, we listed the
Alabama sturgeon as endangered under
the Act (65 FR 26438). In the final
listing rule, we determined that
designation of critical habitat was
prudent but critical habitat was not
determinable, due to the lack of
information on the sturgeon’s biological
and habitat needs.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:40 May 23, 2008
Jkt 214001
Following this listing decision, the
Alabama-Tombigbee Rivers Coalition
(Coalition) brought suit in the United
States District Court for the Northern
District of Alabama under the citizensuit provision of the Act and the judicial
review provisions of the Administrative
Procedure Act, alleging several defects
in the listing process. The district court
dismissed the Coalition’s lawsuit for
lack of standing, but on appeal the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh
Circuit reversed, concluding that the
Coalition did have standing to challenge
the listing decision. On remand, the
District Court granted the United States’
motion for summary judgment but
ordered the Service to issue both a
proposed and final rule designating
critical habitat by May 14, 2006, and
November 14, 2006, respectively.
Alabama-Tombigbee Rivers Coalition et
al. v. Norton et al., No. CV–01–0194–
VEH (Final Order, Nov. 14, 2005). The
Coalition appealed and the District
Court stayed the judgment pending
review by the Eleventh Circuit. Under
the direction of the District Court, the
Service would have two years from the
time of the Eleventh Circuit’s decision
to complete the designation of critical
habitat.
On February 8, 2007, the Eleventh
Circuit affirmed the decision of the
District Court, finding among other
things that vacating the listing decision
was not the proper remedy for failure to
designate critical habitat. AlabamaTombigbee Rivers Coalition et al. v.
Kempthorne et al., 477 F.3d 1250 (11th
Cir. 2007). On May 16, 2007, the
Eleventh Circuit issued its judgment as
a mandate, thus lifting the stay imposed
by the District Court and requiring the
Service to issue a prudency
determination and, if prudent, a
proposed rule designating critical
habitat within one year (May 16, 2008),
and a final rule designating critical
habitat within one year after that (May
16, 2009). It should be noted that the
Coalition asked the Supreme Court to
review the Eleventh Circuit’s decision;
that request was denied on January 7,
2008. Alabama-Tombigbee Rivers
Coalition et al. v. Kempthorne et al., 128
S. Ct. 877 (2008).
For more information on previous
Federal actions concerning Alabama
sturgeon, refer to the final listing rule,
which we published in the Federal
Register on May 5, 2000 (65 FR 26438).
We are proposing this action in
accordance with section 4(b)(2) of the
Act.
Critical Habitat
Critical habitat is defined in section 3
of the Act as:
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(1) 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:
(a) Essential to the conservation of the
species, and
(b) Which may require special
management considerations or
protection; and
(2) 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 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
under the Act are no longer necessary.
Critical habitat receives protection
under section 7 of the Act through the
prohibition against Federal agencies
carrying out, funding, or authorizing the
destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat. Section 7 of the Act
requires consultation on Federal actions
that may affect 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 the
government or public to access private
lands. Such designation does not
require implementation of restoration,
recovery, or enhancement measures by
the landowner. Where the landowner
seeks or requests federal agency funding
or authorization that may affect a listed
species or critical habitat, the
consultation requirements of section 7
would apply, but even in the event of
a destruction or adverse modification
finding, the landowner’s obligation is
not to restore or recover the species, but
to implement reasonable and prudent
alternatives to avoid destruction or
adverse modification of critical habitat.
For inclusion in a critical habitat
designation, habitat within the
geographical area occupied by the
species at the time it was listed must
contain 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
(areas on which are found the primary
constituent elements, as defined at 50
CFR 424.12(b)). Occupied habitat that
contains the features essential to the
conservation of the species meets the
definition of critical habitat only if those
features may require special
E:\FR\FM\27MYP1.SGM
27MYP1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 27, 2008 / Proposed Rules
management considerations or
protection. Under the Act, we can
designate critical habitat in areas
outside the geographical area occupied
by the species at the time it is listed
only when we determine that those
areas are essential for the conservation
of the species.
Section 4 of the Act requires that we
designate critical habitat on the basis of
the best scientific and commercial data
available. Further, our Policy on
Information Standards Under the
Endangered Species Act (published in
the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59
FR 34271)), the Information Quality Act
(section 515 of the Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act for
Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106–554; H.R.
5658)), and our associated Information
Quality Guidelines, provide criteria,
establish procedures, and provide
guidance to ensure that our decisions
are based on the best scientific data
available. They require our 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 we are determining which areas
should be proposed as critical habitat,
our primary source of information is
generally the information developed
during the listing process for the
species. Additional information sources
may 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.
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 we
may eventually determine, based on
scientific data not now available to the
Service, are necessary for the recovery
of the species. For these reasons, a
critical habitat designation does not
signal that habitat outside the
designated area is unimportant or may
not be required for recovery of the
species.
Areas that support populations, but
are outside the critical habitat
designation, will continue to be subject
to conservation actions we implement
under section 7(a)(1) of the Act. They
are also subject to the regulatory
protections afforded by the section
7(a)(2) jeopardy standard, as determined
on the basis of the best available
scientific information at the time of the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:40 May 23, 2008
Jkt 214001
agency 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 (HCPs), 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) of the Act,
we used the best scientific data
available in determining areas within
the geographical area occupied at the
time of listing that contain features
essential to the conservation of Alabama
sturgeon, and areas outside of the
geographical area occupied at the time
of listing that are essential for the
conservation of Alabama sturgeon. We
have reviewed available information
pertaining to the habitat requirements of
this species. This information includes
our own published and unpublished
data, field notes, unpublished survey
reports, communications with qualified
experts, peer-reviewed scientific
publications, and the final and proposed
listing rules for the species. We are not
currently proposing any areas outside
the geographical area presently
occupied by the species because we are
unaware of any suitable areas of habitat
for this species outside of the area being
proposed.
At the time of listing, we lacked the
biological and habitat information
necessary to identify the primary
constituent elements and areas essential
for conservation. This lack of
information continues to be an issue,
since we have only two confirmed
Alabama sturgeon captures since
publication of the final rule. Therefore,
we reviewed the available data and
information on the Alabama sturgeon’s
closest related species, the pallid
(Scaphirhynchus albus) and the
shovelnose sturgeons (S. platorynchus).
Unfortunately, although both the pallid
and shovelnose sturgeons are more
abundant and widely distributed, very
little specific information is available
concerning their biological and physical
requirements. However, by synthesizing
the best scientific available data on all
three species, and considering historical
and current conditions at the locations
where Alabama sturgeon have been
collected, we have identified the
physical and biological requirements of
the Alabama sturgeon.
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
30363
Primary Constituent Elements
In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i)
of the Act and the regulations at 50 CFR
424.12, in determining which areas
occupied by the species at the time of
listing to propose as critical habitat, we
consider the physical and biological
features that are essential to the
conservation of the species to be the
primary constituent elements laid out in
the appropriate quantity and spatial
arrangement for conservation of the
species. These include, but are not
limited to:
(1) Space for individual and
population growth and for normal
behavior;
(2) Food, water, air, light, minerals, or
other nutritional or physiological
requirements;
(3) Cover or shelter;
(4) Sites for breeding, reproduction, or
rearing (or development) of offspring;
and
(5) Habitats that are protected from
disturbance or are representative of the
historical, geographical, and ecological
distributions of a species.
We derive the specific primary
constituent elements (PCEs) required for
the Alabama sturgeon from its biological
needs.
Space for Individual and Population
Growth and for Normal Behavior
All river sturgeons (Scaphirhynchus
spp.) are migratory and may migrate
hundreds of kilometers to spawn. The
newly hatched larvae of other river
sturgeon are free-floating and may drift
hundreds of kilometers before settling to
a benthic juvenile existence. Therefore,
connectivity of spawning, juvenile, and
adult feeding and growing habitats is
necessary for the conservation of the
species.
Based on collection records, the
species is known to inhabit the main
channel of large coastal plain rivers of
the Mobile River Basin. Specimens have
been taken over a variety of substrates
including sand, gravel, and mud, from
6 to 14 meters (m) (20 to 46 feet (ft))
deep (Williams and Clemmer 1991, p.
26). The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
identified 30 locations in the Alabama
River where 58 Alabama sturgeon were
reportedly captured between 1950 and
1998, and documented channel
morphology and substrate types at 12 of
the capture locations during low flow
conditions. Substrates associated with
these capture sites included sand,
gravel, and limestone outcrops. All
capture locations downstream of
Claiborne Lock and Dam were either on
or within 300 m (984 ft) of a sandbar.
Most historical and recent sturgeon
capture sites are at or near features
E:\FR\FM\27MYP1.SGM
27MYP1
30364
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 27, 2008 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
presumably associated with feeding,
reproduction, or refugia and include
rock walls, channel training devices,
deep pools, mussel beds, and/or stable
sand and gravel bottoms (Burke and
Ramsey 1985, p. 53, Mayden and
Kuhajda 1996, p. 257, Hartfield and
Garner 1998, p. 4). The presence of
mussel beds represents stable channel
habitats with high aquatic invertebrate
diversity and density that are likely
important feeding areas for sturgeon;
deeper holes may be used as thermal
refugia during times of low flow and
warmer temperatures (Hartfield and
Garner 1998, p. 5).
Data collected from a radio-tagged
Alabama sturgeon, released in 1985 near
Millers Ferry Lock and Dam on the
Alabama River and tracked for four
months, showed that its preferred
position was in swift current at a depth
of 7.7 to 12.3 m (25 to 40 ft), but never
at the deepest part at any location
except where bottom contour was
uniform (Burke and Ramsey 1985,
p. 32). Irwin et al. (2005, p. 5) and
Kynard et al. (2007, p. 369) documented
that adult shovelnose sturgeon are more
active at night. This type of behavior
was also observed in juvenile
shovelnose sturgeon (Kynard et al. 2007,
p. 369), and a similar pattern is
currently being observed by the
Alabama sturgeon collected in 2007 that
is being tracked in the lower Alabama
River (ADCNR and Service unpublished
data 2007, 2008). During daylight hours
in the summer of 2007, this sturgeon
remained in the deeper, flowing
portions of the channel. However,
during the late afternoon and early
evening hours, the sturgeon moved into
shallower habitats directly adjacent to a
small perennial tributary. We have no
evidence that the sturgeon moves into
these tributaries; it may be taking
advantage of cooler water found at the
interface between the tributaries and the
main stem of the river. The amount of
time this tagged fish spent in these areas
suggests these areas are important for
feeding or for providing a thermal
refugia during the warmer summer
months.
Food
Reports suggest that the species is an
opportunistic bottom feeder (Mayden
and Kuhajda 1996, p. 257, Williams and
Clemmer 1991, p. 26, Burke and Ramsey
1985, p. 35). Keevin et al. (2007, p. 500)
conducted a stomach content analysis
on 12 Alabama sturgeon from museum
collections and found aquatic insects
and fish to be the dominate food items.
This is quite similar to the diets of the
pallid and shovelnose sturgeons
described by Gerrity et al. (2006, p. 606)
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:40 May 23, 2008
Jkt 214001
and Hoover et al. (2007, p. 494). Except
for the absence of fish in the diet of
shovelnose sturgeon, all three species
tended to feed on similar items,
primarily aquatic insects. The insects
identified in these studies are found
over a variety of substrates including
soft and hard rocky bottoms; therefore,
protection of most shallow-water habitat
(shoals, gravel or sand bars) is essential
to maintaining an acceptable food base.
A distinct difference observed by
Keevin et al. (2007, p. 502) in the diet
of the Alabama sturgeon was the
presence of ceratopogonids (biting
midges) and siphlonurids (of a family of
mayflies). These small, aquatic larvae
are very active, strong swimmers that
tend to occupy the water column or
areas near the surface (Keevin et al.
2007, p. 502), indicating that the
sturgeon may be a mid-water column
feeder. Irwin et al. (2005, p. 39) found
that juvenile shovelnose sturgeon
overwhelmingly preferred feeding in
sandy substrates and actively avoided
gravel areas. It is unknown if this
behavior is displayed by the Alabama
sturgeon, but 2007 tracking data suggest
that the species may rest in the deeper,
fast-flowing areas during the day and
feed in shallow, sandy shoal areas at
night (ADCNR and Service unpublished
data).
Water Quality
Egg development and hatching and
larval and juvenile development require
moderate to high levels of dissolved
oxygen, as well as acceptable levels of
other water quality parameters. For
example, research indicates a high
incidence of hermaphrodism in
shovelnose and pallid sturgeon may be
linked to water contamination (U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA) 2007, p. 4).
There are currently more than 1,600
National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permits
issued within the Alabama River
downstream of the Fall Line, which
could impact sturgeon habitat. It is
possible that some of these point-source
discharges, along with other non-point
sources of pollutants, could produce
pollutant concentrations that may be
harmful to the Alabama sturgeon. At the
time of listing in May 2000, we believed
that State water quality standards
(which the State adopted from the
national standards set by the USEPA)
were protective of the Alabama sturgeon
as long as discharges were within
permitted limits and enforced according
to the provisions of the Clean Water Act
(Biggins 1994, p. 4). These water quality
requirements were established with the
intent to protect all aquatic resources
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
within the State of Alabama and were
presumed to be protective of the
Alabama sturgeon. However, the Service
is currently in consultation with the
USEPA to evaluate the protectiveness of
criteria approved in USEPA’s water
quality standards for Alabama sturgeon
and other threatened and endangered
species and their critical habitats as
described in the Memorandum of
Agreement our agencies signed in 2001
(66 FR 11201). Other factors that can
potentially alter water quality are
droughts and periods of low flow, nonpoint source runoff from adjacent land
surfaces (e.g., excessive amounts of
nutrients, pesticides, and sediment),
and random spills or unregulated
discharge events. This could be
particularly harmful during drought
conditions when flows are depressed
and pollutants are more concentrated.
Therefore, adequate water quality is
essential for normal behavior, growth,
and viability during all life stages of the
sturgeon, including egg development
and hatching, and larval and juvenile
development.
Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, or
Rearing (or Development) of Offspring
The Alabama sturgeon is believed to
reach sexual maturity between 5 and 7
years of age. Spawning frequency of
both sexes is likely influenced by food
supply and fish condition, and may
occur every 1 to 3 years. Similar to other
river sturgeon, the Alabama sturgeon is
believed to migrate upstream during the
late winter and spring to spawn. These
movements are likely extensive and
cover long distances.
The capture of 12 individuals
(including several gravid females)
during a single collection trip near the
mouth of the Cahaba River on March 21,
1969, suggests directional movements
during the spawning season (Williams
and Clemmer 1991, p. 27). Gravid
females with ripe eggs have also been
collected during late March, April, and
early May, which may indicate a
prolonged spring spawning or yearly
variations in the occurrence of preferred
spawning temperatures. Actual timing
of spawning during this period may also
vary depending on water temperature
and river discharge. All sturgeon species
produce eggs that are adhesive and
require a current for proper
development. Although specific
locations at which eggs have been
deposited have not been identified for
the Alabama sturgeon, they are
presumably similar to those of other
river sturgeons, where eggs are
deposited on hard bottom substrates
such as bedrock, armored gravel, or
channel training works in deep water
E:\FR\FM\27MYP1.SGM
27MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 27, 2008 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
areas, and possibly in some larger
tributaries, such as the Cahaba River
(Burke and Ramsey 1985, p. 53).
Although no information about larval
development exists for the Alabama
sturgeon, we assume that the Alabama
sturgeon may have similar needs as
other river sturgeons which require
highly oxygenated, long stretches of
free-flowing water for development. The
larvae are planktonic, drifting with river
currents for 12 to 13 days after hatching,
and exhibit a swim-up and drift
behavior while floating in currents
(Kynard et al. 2007, p. 365). Research
indicates that pallid sturgeon larvae can
drift more than 200 kilometers (km) (125
miles (mi)) during the first 11 days of
the larval life stage, depending on water
velocities, before settling to the benthic
environment (Braaten and Fuller 2007,
p. 1). It is unclear, at present, whether
Alabama sturgeon require distances
comparable to those exhibited by pallid
sturgeon, but the life history strategy is
thought to be the same. A further
reduction in the distance of free-flowing
habitat currently available would likely
be detrimental to the sturgeon.
Riverine Flows and Channel Stability
Flows in the Mobile River Basin have
been substantially altered from natural
conditions due to the construction and
operation of the large number of
impoundments. Additionally, the river’s
temperature, biogeochemical processes
that would have occurred in the absence
of the dams, and pollution assimilation
capabilities have also been altered.
Flowing water provides a means for
transporting nutrients and food items,
moderating water temperatures and
dissolved oxygen levels, and diluting
pollutants, as well as transporting and
suspending developing sturgeon eggs
and larvae.
The quality of water, which comprises
the sturgeon’s chemical habitat, is
directly related to the volume of water
present in the river. It affects sturgeon
behavior, growth, and viability in all life
stages. In 1972, prior to the listing of the
sturgeon, a 4,640 cubic-feet-per-second
flow requirement in the Alabama River
at Montgomery was established. This
flow, which is approximately the 7Q10
(a measure of lowest 7-day flow
measured over a 10-year period) for this
section of the river, is believed to be
protective of the Alabama sturgeon. We
believe this flow would result in the
magnitude, frequency, duration, and
seasonality of discharge over time that
is necessary to maintain all life stages of
the species in the riverine environment,
including migration, breeding site
selection, resting, larval development,
protection of cool water refuges during
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:40 May 23, 2008
Jkt 214001
low flow periods, as well as sufficient
velocities to inhibit excessive
sedimentation.
Aquatic life, including fish, requires
acceptable levels of dissolved oxygen.
The type of organism and its life stage
determine the level of oxygen required.
Generally, among the fish, cold water
species are the most sensitive, with
young life forms being most critical.
Temperature, another water quality
parameter, is related to dissolved
oxygen. The amount of dissolved
oxygen that is present in water (the
saturation level) depends upon water
temperature. As the water temperature
increases, the saturated dissolved
oxygen level decreases. The more
oxygen there is in the water, the greater
the assimilative capacity (ability to
consume organic wastes with minimal
impact) of that water (Pitt 2000, pp. 6–
7). Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD)
is the oxygen that would be required to
stabilize the waste after its discharge
into a body of water. Wastewater
discharges that have a high BOD will
have a much greater detrimental effect
on stream dissolved oxygen during
critical summer months than they
would during colder months. Summer
months also have lower stream flow
rates, which worsens the problem by
further reducing the water’s assimilative
capacity (Pitt 2000, pp. 6–7). Flows
should be sufficient to ensure at least 4
milligrams per liter of dissolved oxygen
during low flow periods based on the
State water quality standards.
During 2007 and 2008, the Alabama
River Basin experienced the worst
drought ever recorded. Although this
drought is currently recognized as the
worst drought in modern history, some
researchers believe that it may not have
been that unusual (B. Erhardt, U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers Meteorologist,
pers. comm. 2008). Using bald cypress
(a long-lived species) growth rings as an
indication, the 2007–08 hydrologic
period may have actually been more
normal over the last 1000 years than
conditions experienced over the last 40
years (which may have been
exceptionally wet). Therefore,
considering that sturgeon species have
survived a range of hydrologic
conditions over the years, we believe
sturgeon are adapted to these periodic
low flow conditions. Although the
sturgeon we are currently tracking
survived the 2007–08 drought, we do
not believe that the Alabama sturgeon is
adapted to survive extended drought
periods where water quality is
compromised by excessive discharges
that the river is unable to assimilate.
More specifically, as described above,
low-flow conditions affect the chemical
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
30365
environment occupied by the fish and
extended low-flow conditions coupled
with higher pollutant levels would
likely result in behavior changes within
all life stages, but could be particularly
detrimental to early life stages (e.g., eggs
and larvae).
Stable river bottoms also are required
by the sturgeon. The presence of stable
river bottoms has been associated with
the recent and historical captures of
sturgeon in the Alabama and Tombigbee
Rivers. Hartfield and Garner (1998, p. 6)
documented the presence of stable
substrates interspersed between dredge
and disposal sites in the lower Alabama
River. These included areas with stable
sand and gravel river bottoms, and
bedrock walls. The presence of mussel
beds and a diverse and dense insect
community provide an indication that
channel bottoms are relatively stable
(Hartfield and Garner 1998, p. 6). As
mentioned above, the preferred diet of
the sturgeon is aquatic invertebrates;
therefore, the presence of mussel beds
may be an important indicator of
suitable sturgeon feeding habitat. This is
consistent with the data that are
currently being collected from the
sturgeon that was released and tracked
in 2007. This fish has remained in the
vicinity of well-known mussel beds on
the lower Alabama River since its
release.
Primary Constituent Elements (PCEs)
for the Alabama Sturgeon
Within the geographical area
occupied by the Alabama sturgeon at
the time of listing, we must identify the
PCEs that may require special
management considerations or
protections.
Based on the above needs and our
current knowledge of the life history,
biology, and ecology of the species, we
have determined that Alabama
sturgeon’s PCEs are:
1. A range of flows with a minimum
7-day flow of 4,640 cubic feet per
second during normal hydrologic
conditions, measured in the Alabama
River at Montgomery.
2. River channel with stable sand and
gravel river bottoms, and bedrock walls,
including associated mussel beds.
3. Limestone outcrops and cut
limestone banks, large gravel or cobble
such as that found around channel
training devices, and bedrock channel
walls that provide riverine spawning
sites with substrates suitable for egg
deposition and development.
4. Long sections of free-flowing water
to allow spawning migrations and
development of eggs and larvae.
5. Water temperature not exceeding
90 °Fahrenheit (32 °Celsius), dissolved
E:\FR\FM\27MYP1.SGM
27MYP1
30366
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 27, 2008 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
oxygen content over 4 milligrams per
liter, and pH (a measure of acidity)
within the range of 6.0 to 8.5.
With this proposed designation of
critical habitat, we intend to conserve
the physical and biological features that
are essential to the conservation of the
species, through the identification of the
appropriate quantity and spatial
arrangement of the PCEs sufficient to
support the life history functions of the
species. The critical habitat unit
proposed for designation contains all of
the PCEs and supports multiple life
processes.
Special Management Considerations or
Protection
When designating critical habitat, we
assess whether the occupied areas
contain the physical or biological
features essential to the conservation of
the species, and whether these features
may require special management
considerations or protection. It is
recognized that numerous activities in
and adjacent to the unit designated as
critical habitat, as described in this
proposed rule, may affect one or more
of the PCEs found in that unit. These
activities include, but are not limited to,
those listed in the Application of the
‘‘Adverse Modification’’ Standard
section as activities that may destroy or
adversely modify critical habitat. We
summarize here the primary threats to
the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
species.
Water quality, as discussed in the
Application of the ‘‘Adverse
Modification’’ Standard section, can
influence all life stages of the sturgeon.
Water pollution and changes in water
quality can originate from either nonpoint or point source discharges. Nonpoint source pollution is ubiquitous in
the Mobile Basin and can originate from
a variety of land use practices (such as
livestock grazing, row crop farming,
silvicultural, and residential
development). The impacts from nearly
all non-point source pollutant sources
can be managed by implementing the
appropriate best management practices.
This may include creation and
maintenance of riparian buffers, and
control of soil loss and runoff from
adjacent lands. Point source pollution
typically originates from industrial and
municipal discharges, but may include
any discharge that originates from a
single point. Point source pollution can
be managed by ensuring that NPDES
permitted discharges are within
compliance at all times. This requires
proper water quality monitoring and
record keeping, and ensuring that
enough flow is present in the river to
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:40 May 23, 2008
Jkt 214001
assimilate the volume of material that is
being discharged.
The Service should be consulted with
for disturbances to areas upstream of
those known to support sturgeon,
including perennial streams that may
provide critical thermal refuges to the
sturgeon at the interface with the main
channel, especially during times when
river flows are experiencing abnormally
low levels (i.e., during droughts).
Therefore, prior to channel-disturbing
activities, these areas should be
identified and precautions should be
taken to ensure that the integrity of
these areas is maintained. Minimizing
the effects of navigational dredging and
channelization (past evidence of which
can be seen throughout the historical
range of the sturgeon) can be
accomplished by avoiding the removal
of consolidated bed material and rock
walls, and consulting with the Service
on the proper disposal areas.
Criteria Used To Identify Critical
Habitat
The Alabama sturgeon is extremely
rare. Despite extensive and intensive
efforts in the decade prior to its listing,
only eight Alabama sturgeon were
captured, or reported captured and
released. All river sturgeons are
migratory and may migrate hundreds of
kilometers to spawn, and newly hatched
larvae may drift hundreds of kilometers
before settling. Therefore, connectivity
of spawning, juvenile, and adult feeding
and developmental habitats is necessary
for the conservation of the species.
We began our analysis by evaluating
the Alabama sturgeon in the context of
its distribution throughout the historical
range to determine what portion of the
range must be included to ensure
conservation of the species. We
considered several factors in this
evaluation: (1) Inclusion of reaches that
provide the highest likelihood of egg
and juvenile development, (2) inclusion
of reaches that contain suitable
spawning habitat, and (3) inclusion of
areas that provide protection of the
species during low flow periods and
other catastrophic events.
The historical range of the Alabama
sturgeon included nearly every major
basin in the Mobile River basin
downstream of the Fall Line, comprising
nearly 1,600 km (1,000 mi) of riverine
habitat in the Mobile River Basin in
Alabama and Mississippi. There are
records of Alabama sturgeon from
nearly all the major rivers in the Mobile
River Basin below the Fall Line,
including the Black Warrior,
Tombigbee, Alabama, Coosa,
Tallapoosa, Mobile, Tensaw, and
Cahaba Rivers (Burke and Ramsey 1985,
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
p. 1). However, over the last century, the
species has disappeared from at least 85
percent of its historical range, and since
the 1960s has experienced a significant
decline in the remaining range.
Recent collections (since 1990) of the
Alabama sturgeon are confined to the
lower Alabama River from its
confluence with the Tombigbee River
upstream to R.F. Henry Lock and Dam,
including the lower Cahaba River (Rider
and Hartfield 2007, p. 492). The entire
historical range of the Alabama sturgeon
is now controlled by a series of more
than 25 large locks or dams. These manmade structures have resulted in a series
of impoundments that are interspersed
with free-flowing reaches of varying
lengths. Within the Alabama sturgeon’s
historical range there are three dams on
the Alabama River (completed between
1969 and 1971), two on the Black
Warrior River (completed by 1971), and
six on the Tombigbee River (completed
between 1955 and 1985). These 11 dams
alone have impounded and fragmented
more than 970 km (583 mi) of riverine
habitat once occupied by sturgeon. Prior
to construction of these structures,
sturgeon could move freely between
feeding areas, and from feeding areas to
sites that were suitable for spawning
and development of eggs and larvae.
The locks and dams that impound the
river constitute barriers to sturgeon
passage. Although fish species that
occupy the middle of the water column
(e.g., shad, catfishes, paddlefish) could,
and do, pass through the locks while
they are being operated, there is no
evidence to suggest that sturgeon pass
through the lock chambers during
normal lockages. Most adult sturgeons,
including the Alabama sturgeon, are
benthic (bottom-dwelling) cruisers, and
are not likely to move up in the water
column to scale physical hurdles (Cooke
et al. 2002, p. 108). The lock chambers
at Millers Ferry and Claiborne Locks
and Dams have upper and lower sills
which form a rather large hurdle (about
30 feet above the river floor at the upper
end of Miller Ferry) for sturgeon moving
upstream and downstream.
With migration routes impeded,
isolated subpopulations of Alabama
sturgeon are unable to successfully
recruit adequate numbers to replenish
the population. Reduced numbers of
recruited sturgeon and surviving adult
fish can become more vulnerable to
localized declines in water and habitat
quality caused by hydropower releases,
local riverine and land management
practices, or by polluted discharges. It is
unlikely that Alabama sturgeon habitat
and life cycle requirements can be met
in long stretches of low flow, such as
those that exist in the impounded areas
E:\FR\FM\27MYP1.SGM
27MYP1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 27, 2008 / Proposed Rules
of the river, where decreased flows
typically cause silt and other fine
sediments to accumulate over bottom
habitats, creating unsuitable conditions
for spawning, feeding, and larval growth
and development.
The Alabama sturgeon is considered
extirpated from the upper Alabama,
Black Warrior, Tombigbee, Coosa,
Tallapoosa, Mobile, and Tensaw Rivers.
The Upper Alabama is isolated by
Robert F. Henry Lock and Dam, and this
reach of the river is essentially
impounded to the confluence of the
Coosa and Tallapoosa Rivers, and does
not contain appropriate habitat for the
conservation of the Alabama sturgeon.
Sturgeon have not been collected from
the Black Warrior, Coosa, Tallapoosa or
Tombigbee Rivers in more than 30
years. With the exception of the extreme
lower Tombigbee River, all of these
areas are isolated from currently
occupied river reaches and their
riverine habitats are impounded and
highly fragmented by multiple large
river dams. Although some isolated
areas within these drainages may
contain some of the appropriate habitat
features for Alabama sturgeon, their
limited extent and the lack of continuity
or accessibility to other habitats limits
their value to the species.
The Mobile, Tensaw, and lower
Tombigbee Rivers are currently
accessible to Alabama sturgeon;
however, there have been no confirmed
collections of the species in more than
20 years. In addition, the natural
hydrograph of the lower Mobile Basin
has been radically altered by multiple
navigation and hydropower dams on the
Tombigbee River, and the flows are
seasonally highly variable. These areas
may be occasionally used or visited by
subadult or adult Alabama sturgeon;
however, there is no recent evidence
that this is occurring and little historical
evidence of such use. Although some
habitat features occur in these river
reaches, their value in conservation of
the species is not known.
At the time of listing, we considered
the Alabama River from south of
Miller’s Ferry Lock and Dam to the
confluence of the Tombigbee River to be
occupied. Shortly after publication of
the listing rule, an Alabama sturgeon
was captured and released at river mile
8.5 in the Cahaba River. This capture of
an adult sturgeon indicated that this
area also was occupied at the time of
listing, given that the fish could not
have reached this area from other
sections of the river due to the lock and
dam arrangement (see the Riverine
Flows and Channel Stability section),
and would have been present at the time
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:40 May 23, 2008
Jkt 214001
the rule was published in the Federal
Register. Given the fish’s proximity to
the mouth of the Cahaba River and the
lack of barriers with the Alabama River
section located between R.F. Henry
Lock and Dam and the Millers Ferry
Lock and Dam, we believe the fish likely
to use all of these areas, and, therefore,
consider them occupied at the time of
listing. There is some evidence of past
upstream spawning runs in the Cahaba
River as well (Williams and Clemmer
1991, p. 27). Based on historical
information and recent collections, we
consider all of the following areas to be
currently occupied: The Alabama River
from R.F. Henry Lock and Dam
downstream to the confluence of the
Tombigbee River, and the Cahaba River
from its confluence with the Alabama
River upstream to U.S. Highway 82
which is close to the Fall Line at
Centreville, Alabama. Given the lack of
appropriate habitat elsewhere within
the historical range, we conclude that
this proposed designation should
include all currently occupied habitat.
Once we determined that the proper
scale of the proposed critical habitat
designation should cover the area
currently occupied by the species, we
assessed the critical life history
components of Alabama sturgeon as
they relate to habitat. Alabama sturgeon
use the rivers for spawning, larval and
juvenile feeding and development, adult
resting, feeding, and staging, and to
move between the areas that support
these components. Therefore, all areas
meeting these requirements were
considered for inclusion.
We then investigated the habitat types
that support these life history
components and where these habitat
areas are located. We evaluated
empirical data (including that gathered
from recent radiotelemetry), recent
channel bathymetry data (collected by
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers), as
well as published and unpublished
literature. These habitat components are
described in the Primary Constituent
Elements section of this proposed rule.
To determine which areas should be
designated as critical habitat, we then
evaluated where the necessary physical
and biological features of Alabama
sturgeon habitat occur within the
currently occupied habitat. Detailed
location data are included in the unit
description in the Proposed Critical
Habitat Designation section of this
proposed rule. We have determined that
these areas occur from the Alabama
River, at its confluence with the
Tombigbee River, upstream to R.F.
Henry Lock and Dam. This also includes
the Cahaba River upstream to U.S.
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
30367
Highway 82 near the Fall Line in Bibb
County. All of these areas support one
or more of the PCEs and are accessible
to sturgeon (i.e., not entirely blocked by
dams). All life stages are associated with
flowing waters and other features
characteristic of free-flowing riverine
habitats. Nearly the entire length of the
Alabama and Cahaba River currently
meet these requirements. This area is
being proposed as critical habitat to
ensure adequate protection of spawning
sites, habitat needed for juvenile
development, and movement of adult
sturgeon to and from spawning areas.
When determining proposed critical
habitat boundaries within this proposed
rule, we made every effort to avoid
including developed areas such as
waterways covered by buildings, docks,
dams, and other structures because such
waterways lack PCEs for Alabama
sturgeon. The scale of the maps we
prepared under the parameters for
publication within the Code of Federal
Regulations may not reflect the
exclusion of such developments. Any
such areas 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, a Federal
action involving these areas would not
trigger section 7 consultation with
respect to critical habitat and the
requirement of no adverse modification
unless the specific action may affect
adjacent critical habitat.
Proposed Critical Habitat Designation
We are proposing to designate one
contiguous section of the Alabama River
and a portion of the lower Cahaba River
as one critical habitat unit for Alabama
sturgeon. The areas we describe below
constitute our current best assessment of
areas that meet the definition of critical
habitat for the Alabama sturgeon. The
single unit we propose as critical habitat
is the Alabama River from its
confluence with the Tombigbee River,
Clarke and Baldwin Counties, Alabama,
upstream to R.F. Henry Lock and Dam,
Autauga and Lowndes Counties,
Alabama; and the Cahaba River from its
confluence with the Alabama River
upstream to U.S. Highway 82 near the
Fall Line in Bibb County, Alabama.
Following review of all areas within
the range of the species, we have
determined that the proposed critical
habitat area meets the definition of
critical habitat.
Table 1 shows the occupied unit, land
ownership and approximate area.
E:\FR\FM\27MYP1.SGM
27MYP1
30368
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 27, 2008 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 1.—OCCUPANCY OF ALABAMA STURGEON AND LAND OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT UNIT
Size of unit in
kilometers
(miles)
Critical habitat unit
Occupied at time
of listing
Currently
occupied
Alabama and Cahaba Rivers .................................................................
yes .....................
yes .....................
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Below, we present a brief description
of the unit and reasons why it meets the
definition of critical habitat for the
Alabama sturgeon.
Unit: Alabama and Cahaba Rivers,
Alabama
The critical habitat unit encompasses
524 km (326 mi) of river channel. The
portion of river channel in the Alabama
River extends 394 km (245 mi) from its
confluence with the Tombigbee River,
Baldwin and Clarke Counties, Alabama,
upstream to R.F. Henry Lock and Dam,
Autauga and Lowndes Counties,
Alabama; and the portion of river
channel in the Cahaba River extends
130 km (81 mi) from its confluence with
the Alabama River, Dallas County,
Alabama, upstream to U.S. Highway 82,
Bibb County, Alabama. The Alabama
and Cahaba Rivers are the last known
areas that still support the sturgeon,
both of which were occupied at the time
of listing. This was recently confirmed
by the 2007 collection of an individual
from the Alabama River below
Claiborne Lock and Dam, and the 2000
collection of an individual from the
lower Cahaba River (ADCNR pers.
comm. 2007). Although the Alabama
River, within this unit, contains two
physical barriers (Claiborne and Millers
Ferry Locks and Dams), it supports the
PCEs to sustain this extremely rare fish.
The single critical habitat unit includes
the channel of the rivers and streams
listed between the ordinary high water
mark on each bank, which is defined in
33 CFR 329.11 as ‘‘the line on the shore
established by the fluctuations of water
and indicated by physical
characteristics such as clear, natural line
impressed on the bank; shelving;
changes in the character of the soil;
destruction of terrestrial vegetation; the
presence of litter and debris; or other
appropriate means that consider the
characteristics of the surrounding
areas.’’ The distances between
landmarks marking the upstream and
downstream boundaries of the unit are
given in kilometers and equivalent
miles, as measured by tracing the
thalweg (a line connecting the lowest
points of successive cross sections) of
the stream, not the straight-line
distance. River miles referenced in this
rule were taken from a Corps of
Engineers 1985 stream mileage table.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:40 May 23, 2008
Jkt 214001
The river channel within the entire
unit is owned by the State of Alabama,
and the vast majority of adjacent lands
are under private ownership, with the
exception of a portion of the Cahaba
River that includes Talladega National
Forest (Oakmulgee Division). Although
the Oakmulgee Division encompasses a
total of 63,483.7 hectares (ha) (156,871
acres (ac)), there are only about 9,951.6
ha (24,591 ac) that are directly adjacent
to the Cahaba River. The Barton Beach
Reserve, a small tract owned by The
Nature Conservancy, encompasses 45.3
ha (112 ac) and covers approximately
1,150 meters (m) (3,773 ft) along the
Cahaba River. This unit meets the
definition of critical habitat based on
the discussion above and contains all
PCEs. This unit was known to be
occupied at the time of listing and is
currently occupied. Special
management of the PCEs for the
Alabama sturgeon and its habitat may be
required for the following threats: low
flow conditions, detrimental changes in
water quality, reduction in the amount
of free-flowing habitat, and detrimental
changes to the morphology or stability
of the river channel.
Effects of Critical Habitat Designation
Section 7 Consultation
Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires
Federal agencies, including the Service,
to ensure that actions they fund,
authorize, or carry out are not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of a
listed species or destroy or adversely
modify designated critical habitat.
Decisions by the 5th and 9th Circuit
Courts of Appeals have invalidated our
definition of ‘‘destruction or adverse
modification’’ (50 CFR 402.02) (see
Gifford Pinchot Task Force v. U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, 378 F.3d 1059 (9th
Cir 2004) and Sierra Club v. U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service et al., 245 F.3d 434,
442F (5th Cir 2001)), and we do not rely
on this regulatory definition when
analyzing whether an action is likely to
destroy or adversely modify critical
habitat. Under the statutory provisions
of the Act, we determine destruction or
adverse modification on the basis of
whether, with implementation of the
proposed Federal action, the affected
critical habitat would remain functional
(or retain the current ability for the PCEs
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
524 (326)
Land ownership by type
State.
to be functionally established) to serve
its intended conservation role for the
species.
Section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires
Federal agencies to confer with us on
any action that is likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of a proposed
species or result in destruction or
adverse modification of proposed
critical habitat. Conference reports
provide conservation recommendations
to assist the agency in eliminating
conflicts that may be caused by the
proposed action. We may issue a formal
conference report if requested by a
Federal agency. Formal conference
reports on proposed critical habitat
contain an opinion that is prepared
according to 50 CFR 402.14, as if critical
habitat were designated. We may adopt
the formal conference report as the
biological opinion when the critical
habitat is designated, if no substantial
new information or changes in the
action alter the content of the opinion
(see 50 CFR 402.10(d)). The
conservation recommendations in a
conference report are advisory.
If a species is listed or critical habitat
is designated, section 7(a)(2) of the Act
requires Federal agencies to ensure that
activities they authorize, fund, or carry
out are not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of the species or to
destroy or adversely modify its critical
habitat. If a Federal action may affect a
listed species or its critical habitat, the
responsible Federal agency (action
agency) must enter into consultation
with us. As a result of this consultation,
we document compliance with the
requirements of section 7(a)(2) through
our issuance of:
(1) A concurrence letter for Federal
actions that may affect, but are not
likely to adversely affect, listed species
or critical habitat; or
(2) A biological opinion for Federal
actions that are likely to adversely affect
listed species or critical habitat.
When we issue a biological opinion
concluding that a project is likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of a
listed species or destroy or adversely
modify critical habitat, we also provide
reasonable and prudent alternatives to
the project, if any are identifiable. We
define ‘‘Reasonable and Prudent
Alternatives’’ at 50 CFR 402.02 as
E:\FR\FM\27MYP1.SGM
27MYP1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 27, 2008 / Proposed Rules
alternative actions identified during
consultation that:
(1) Can be implemented in a manner
consistent with the intended purpose of
the action,
(2) Can be implemented consistent
with the scope of the Federal agency’s
legal authority and jurisdiction,
(3) Are economically and
technologically feasible, and
(4) Would, in the Director’s opinion,
avoid jeopardizing the continued
existence of the listed species or
destroying or adversely modifying
critical habitat.
Reasonable and prudent alternatives
can vary from slight project
modifications to extensive redesign or
relocation of the project. Costs
associated with implementing a
reasonable and prudent alternative are
similarly variable.
When we issue a biological opinion
concluding that a project is not likely to
jeopardize a listed species or adversely
modify critical habitat, but may result in
incidental take of listed animals, we
provide an incidental take statement
that specifies the impact of such
incidental taking on the species. We
then define ‘‘Reasonable and Prudent
Measures’’ considered necessary or
appropriate to minimize the impact of
such taking. Reasonable and prudent
measures are binding measures the
action agency must implement to
receive an exemption to the prohibition
against take contained in section 9 of
the Act. These reasonable and prudent
measures are implemented through
specific ‘‘Terms and Conditions’’ that
must be followed by the action agency
or passed along by the action agency as
binding conditions to an applicant.
Reasonable and prudent measures,
along with the terms and conditions that
implement them, cannot alter the basic
design, location, scope, duration, or
timing of the action under consultation
and may involve only minor changes
(50 CFR 402.14). The Service may
provide the action agency with
additional conservation
recommendations, which are advisory
and not intended to carry binding legal
force.
Regulations at 50 CFR 402.16 require
Federal agencies to reinitiate
consultation on previously reviewed
actions in instances where we have
listed a new species or subsequently
designated critical habitat that may be
affected and the Federal agency has
retained discretionary involvement or
control over the action (or the agency’s
discretionary involvement or control is
authorized by law). Consequently,
Federal agencies may sometimes need to
request reinitiation of consultation with
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:40 May 23, 2008
Jkt 214001
us on actions for which formal
consultation has been completed, if
those actions with discretionary
involvement or control may affect
subsequently listed species or
designated critical habitat.
Federal activities that may affect
Alabama sturgeon or its designated
critical habitat will require section
7(a)(2) consultation under the Act.
Activities on State, Tribal, local or
private lands requiring a Federal permit
(such as a permit from the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers under section 404 of
the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et
seq.) or a permit from us under section
10(a)(1)(B) of the Act) or involving some
other Federal action (such as funding
from the Federal Highway
Administration, Federal Aviation
Administration, or the Federal
Emergency Management Agency) are
examples of agency actions that may be
subject to the section 7(a)(2)
consultation process. Federal actions
not affecting listed species or critical
habitat, and actions on State, Tribal,
local or private lands that are not
federally funded, authorized, or
permitted, do not require section 7(a)(2)
consultations.
Application of the ‘‘Adverse
Modification’’ Standard
The key factor related to the adverse
modification determination is whether,
with implementation of the proposed
Federal action, the affected critical
habitat would continue to serve its
intended conservation role for the
species, or would retain its current
ability for the primary constituent
elements to be functionally established.
Activities that may destroy or adversely
modify critical habitat are those that
alter the physical and biological features
to an extent that appreciably reduces the
conservation value of critical habitat for
Alabama sturgeon. Generally, the
conservation role of Alabama sturgeon
critical habitat unit is to support the
various life-history needs of the species.
Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us
to briefly evaluate and describe, in any
proposed or final regulation that
designates critical habitat, activities
involving a Federal action that may
destroy or adversely modify such
habitat, or that may be affected by such
designation.
Activities that, when carried out,
funded, or authorized by a Federal
agency, may adversely affect critical
habitat and, therefore, should result in
consultation for Alabama sturgeon
include, but are not limited to the
following (please see Special
Management Considerations or
Protection section for a more detailed
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
30369
discussion on the impacts of these
actions to the listed species):
(1) Actions that would significantly
alter the existing flow regime to the
point at which the habitat could no
longer sustain normal behavior and
promote species recovery. Such
activities could include, but are not
limited to, construction and operation of
dams, water withdrawals, and
channelization. These activities could
eliminate or reduce spawning habitats,
impair the development of eggs and
larvae, impede or eliminate normal
migration patterns, reduce the ability of
the river to adequately assimilate
pollution, and compromise the integrity
and utility of cool water refuges
(perennial tributaries). In addition,
flows less than 4,640 cubic feet per
second, as determined by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers at Montgomery,
would need to be evaluated on an
individual basis to determine if they
may affect the critical habitat, and
conclusions could be dependent, in
part, on intervening flows (e.g., Catoma
Creek, Cahaba River), water
temperature, and dissolved oxygen
content in the Alabama River
downstream of Montgomery. Dependent
on these factors and conditions in the
river at the time of the consultation, a
Not Likely to Adversely Affect
Determination could still be possible.
(2) Actions that would significantly
alter the morphology and stability of the
river channel. Such activities would
include, but are not limited to, dredging
and mining of consolidated bed
material, impoundments, road and
bridge construction, and destruction of
riparian vegetation. These activities
could eliminate suitable substrates for
egg deposition and development,
increase turbidity, and initiate erosion
along the banks, which could increase
water temperatures and reduce the
width of the riparian zone.
(3) Actions that would significantly
decrease the amount of currently
available free-flowing habitat. Such
activities would include, but are not
limited to, construction and operation of
dams, water withdrawals, and
diversions. These activities could
further minimize the currently available
length of free-flowing habitat to support
spawning migrations and development
of eggs and larvae.
(4) Actions that would significantly
alter water chemistry beyond what is
required in the State of Alabama water
quality standards. Such activities would
include, but are not limited to, the
discharge of chemicals, biological
pollutants, nutrients, and other toxic
substances that originate from non-point
or point source discharges. These
E:\FR\FM\27MYP1.SGM
27MYP1
30370
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 27, 2008 / Proposed Rules
substances could directly, or through
accumulation in tissue, impair sturgeon
behavior, reproduction, and growth.
We consider the unit proposed as
critical habitat to contain features
essential to the conservation of Alabama
sturgeon. The unit is within the
geographic range of the species, it was
occupied by the species at the time of
listing, and it is currently occupied.
Federal agencies already consult with us
on activities that may affect the species,
to ensure that their actions do not
jeopardize the continued existence of
Alabama sturgeon.
Exemptions and Exclusions
Following review of all areas within
the range of the species, we have
determined that the proposed critical
habitat area meets the definition of
critical habitat.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the Act
The National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Pub. L. 108–
136) amended the Act to limit areas
eligible for designation as critical
habitat. Specifically, section 4(a)(3)(B)(i)
of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(B)(i))
now provides: ‘‘The Secretary shall not
designate as critical habitat any lands or
other geographical areas owned or
controlled by the Department of
Defense, or designated for its use, that
are subject to an integrated natural
resources management plan prepared
under section 101 of the Sikes
Improvement Act of 1997 (16 U.S.C.
670a), if the Secretary determines in
writing that such plan provides a benefit
to the species for which critical habitat
is proposed for designation.’’
There are no Department of Defense
lands with a completed integrated
natural resources management plan
within the proposed critical habitat
designation.
Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states that
the Secretary must designate and revise
critical habitat on the basis of the best
available scientific data after taking into
consideration the economic impact,
national security impact, and any other
relevant impact of specifying any
particular area as critical habitat. The
Secretary may exclude an area from
critical habitat if he determines that the
benefits of such exclusion outweigh the
benefits of specifying such area as part
of the critical habitat, unless he
determines, based on the best scientific
data available, that the failure to
designate such area as critical habitat
will result in the extinction of the
species. In making that determination,
the legislative history is clear that the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:40 May 23, 2008
Jkt 214001
Secretary has broad discretion regarding
which factor(s) to use and how much
weight to give to any factor.
Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, in
considering whether to exclude a
particular area from the designation, we
must identify the benefits of including
the area in the designation, identify the
benefits of excluding the area from the
designation, and determine whether the
benefits of exclusion outweigh the
benefits of inclusion. If based on this
analysis, we make this determination,
then we can exclude the area only if
such exclusion would not result in the
extinction of the species.
In the following sections, we address
a number of general issues that are
relevant to the exclusions we are
considering. In addition, we are
conducting an economic analysis of the
impacts of the proposed critical habitat
designation and related factors, which
will be available for public review and
comment when it is complete. Based on
public comment on that document, the
proposed designation itself, and the
information in the final economic
analysis, the Secretary may exclude
from critical habitat additional areas
beyond those identified in this
assessment under the provisions of
section 4(b)(2) of the Act. This is also
addressed in our implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 424.19.
Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we
must consider economic impacts. We
also consider a number of factors in a
section 4(b)(2) analysis. For example,
we consider whether there are lands
owned or managed by the Department of
Defense where a national security
impact might exist. We also consider
whether landowners having proposed
critical habitat on their lands have
developed any conservation plans for
the area, or whether there are
conservation partnerships that would be
encouraged by designation of, or
exclusion from, critical habitat. In
addition, we look at any Tribal issues,
and consider the government-togovernment relationship of the United
States with Tribal entities. We also
consider any social or other impacts that
might occur because of the designation.
In preparing this proposal, we have
determined that the lands within the
proposed designation of critical habitat
for the Alabama sturgeon are not owned
or managed by the Department of
Defense, there are currently no HCPs for
the Alabama sturgeon, and the proposed
designation does not include any Tribal
lands or trust resources.
We anticipate no impact to national
security, Tribal lands, partnerships, or
HCPs from this proposed critical habitat
designation. Based on the best available
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
information, we believe that this unit
contains the features essential to the
species. As such, we have considered
but not excluded any lands from this
proposed designation. However, during
the development of a final designation,
we will be considering economic
impacts, public comments, and other
new information, and areas may be
excluded from the final critical habitat
designation under section 4(b)(2) and
our implementing regulations at 50 CFR
424.19.
Economics
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act allows the
Secretary to exclude areas from critical
habitat for economic reasons if the
Secretary determines that the benefits of
such exclusion exceed the benefits of
designating the area as critical habitat.
However, this exclusion cannot occur if
it will result in the extinction of the
species concerned.
We are preparing an analysis of the
economic impacts of proposing critical
habitat for Alabama sturgeon. We will
announce the availability of the draft
economic analysis as soon as it is
completed, at which time we will seek
public review and comment. At that
time, copies of the draft economic
analysis will be available for
downloading from the Internet at the
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov, or by contacting
the Alabama Ecological Services Field
Office directly (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT). We may exclude
areas from the final rule based on the
information in the economic analysis.
Peer Review
In accordance with our joint policy
published in the Federal Register on
July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), we are
obtaining the expert opinions of at least
three appropriate independent
specialists regarding this proposed rule.
The purpose of peer review is to ensure
that our critical habitat designation is
based on scientifically sound data,
assumptions, and analyses. We have
invited these peer reviewers to comment
during this public comment period on
our specific assumptions and
conclusions in this proposed
designation of critical habitat.
We will consider all comments and
information we receive during this
comment period on this proposed rule
during our preparation of a final
determination. Accordingly, our final
decision may differ from this proposal.
Public Hearings
The Act provides for one or more
public hearings on this proposal, if we
receive any requests for hearings. We
E:\FR\FM\27MYP1.SGM
27MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 27, 2008 / Proposed Rules
must receive your request for a public
hearing within 45 days after the date of
this Federal Register publication. Send
your request to the person named in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section. We will schedule public
hearings on this proposal, if any are
requested, and announce the dates,
times, and places of those hearings, as
well as how to obtain reasonable
accommodations, in the Federal
Register and local newspapers at least
15 days before the first hearing.
Required Determinations
Regulatory Planning and Review
The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has determined that this rule is
not significant and has not reviewed
this rule under Executive Order (E.O.)
12866. OMB bases its determination
upon the following four criteria:
(1) Whether the rule will have an
annual effect of $100 million or more on
the economy or adversely affect an
economic sector, productivity, jobs, the
environment, or other units of the
government.
(2) Whether the rule will create
inconsistencies with other Federal
agencies’ actions.
(3) Whether the rule will materially
affect entitlements, grants, user fees,
loan programs, or the rights and
obligations of their recipients.
(4) Whether the rule raises novel legal
or policy issues.
At this time, we lack the available
economic information necessary to
determine whether the rule would have
an annual effect on the economy of $100
million or more or affect the economy
in a material way.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Regulatory Flexibility Act
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(RFA; 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as amended
by the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of
1996), whenever an agency must
publish a notice of rulemaking for any
proposed or final rule, it must prepare
and make available for public comment
a regulatory flexibility analysis that
describes the effects of the rule on small
entities (small businesses, small
organizations, and small government
jurisdictions). However, no regulatory
flexibility analysis is required if the
head of the agency certifies the rule will
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
entities. SBREFA amended RFA to
require Federal agencies to provide a
statement of the factual basis for
certifying that the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:40 May 23, 2008
Jkt 214001
At this time, we lack the available
economic information necessary to
provide an adequate factual basis for the
required RFA finding. Therefore, we
defer the RFA finding until completion
of the draft economic analysis prepared
under section 4(b)(2) of the Act and E.O.
12866. This draft economic analysis will
provide the required factual basis for the
RFA finding. Upon completion of the
draft economic analysis, we will
announce availability of the draft
economic analysis of the proposed
designation in the Federal Register and
reopen the public comment period for
the proposed designation. We will
include with this announcement, as
appropriate, an initial regulatory
flexibility analysis or a certification that
the rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities accompanied
by the factual basis for that
determination. We have concluded that
deferring the RFA finding until
completion of the draft economic
analysis is necessary to meet the
purposes and requirements of the RFA.
Deferring the RFA finding in this
manner will ensure that we make a
sufficiently informed determination
based on adequate economic
information and provide the necessary
opportunity for public comment.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
In accordance with the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et
seq.), we make the following findings:
(1) This rule will not produce a
Federal mandate. In general, a Federal
mandate is a provision in legislation,
statute, or regulation that would impose
an enforceable duty upon State, local, or
Tribal governments, or the private
sector, and includes both ‘‘Federal
intergovernmental mandates’’ and
‘‘Federal private sector mandates.’’
These terms are defined in 2 U.S.C.
658(5)–(7). ‘‘Federal intergovernmental
mandate’’ includes a regulation that
‘‘would impose an enforceable duty
upon State, local, or [T]ribal
governments’’ with two exceptions. It
excludes ‘‘a condition of Federal
assistance.’’ It also excludes ‘‘a duty
arising from participation in a voluntary
Federal program,’’ unless the regulation
‘‘relates to a then-existing Federal
program under which $500,000,000 or
more is provided annually to State,
local, and [T]ribal governments under
entitlement authority,’’ if the provision
would ‘‘increase the stringency of
conditions of assistance’’ or ‘‘place caps
upon, or otherwise decrease, the Federal
Government’s responsibility to provide
funding,’’ and the State, local, or Tribal
governments ‘‘lack authority’’ to adjust
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
30371
accordingly. At the time of enactment,
these entitlement programs were:
Medicaid; AFDC work programs; Child
Nutrition; Food Stamps; Social Services
Block Grants; Vocational Rehabilitation
State Grants; Foster Care, Adoption
Assistance, and Independent Living;
Family Support Welfare Services; and
Child Support Enforcement. ‘‘Federal
private sector mandate’’ includes a
regulation that ‘‘would impose an
enforceable duty upon the private
sector, except (i) a condition of Federal
assistance or (ii) a duty arising from
participation in a voluntary Federal
program.’’
The designation of critical habitat
does not impose a legally binding duty
on non-Federal Government entities or
private parties. Under the Act, the only
regulatory effect is that Federal agencies
must ensure that their actions do not
destroy or adversely modify critical
habitat under section 7. While nonFederal entities that receive Federal
funding, assistance, or permits, or that
otherwise require approval or
authorization from a Federal agency for
an action, may be indirectly impacted
by the designation of critical habitat, the
legally binding duty to avoid
destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat rests squarely on the
Federal agency. Furthermore, to the
extent that non-Federal entities are
indirectly impacted because they
receive Federal assistance or participate
in a voluntary Federal aid program, the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act would
not apply, nor would critical habitat
shift the costs of the large entitlement
programs listed above onto State
governments.
(2) We do not believe that this rule
will significantly or uniquely affect
small governments because the lands
being proposed for critical habitat
designation are river bottoms owned by
the State of Alabama and do not fit the
definition of ‘‘small governmental
jurisdiction.’’ Therefore, a Small
Government Agency Plan is not
required. However, as we conduct our
economic analysis, we will further
evaluate this issue and revise this
assessment if appropriate.
Takings
In accordance with E.O. 12630
(Government Actions and Interference
with Constitutionally Protected Private
Property Rights), we have analyzed the
potential takings implications of
designating critical habitat for Alabama
sturgeon in a takings implications
assessment. The takings implications
assessment concludes that this
designation of critical habitat for
Alabama sturgeon does not pose
E:\FR\FM\27MYP1.SGM
27MYP1
30372
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 27, 2008 / Proposed Rules
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
significant takings implications for
lands within or affected by the
designation.
Federalism
In accordance with E.O. 13132, this
proposed rule does not have significant
Federalism effects. A Federalism
assessment is not required. In keeping
with Department of the Interior and
Department of Commerce policy, we
requested information from, and
coordinated development of, this
proposed critical habitat designation
with appropriate State resource agencies
in Alabama. The designation of critical
habitat in areas currently occupied by
the Alabama sturgeon imposes no
additional restrictions to those currently
in place and, therefore, has little
incremental impact on State and local
governments and their activities. The
designation may have some benefit to
these governments because the areas
that contain physical and biological
features essential to the conservation of
the species are more clearly defined,
and the primary constituent elements
necessary to support the life processes
of the species are specifically identified.
This information does not alter where
and what federally-sponsored activities
may occur. However, it may assist local
governments in long-range planning
(rather than having them wait for caseby-case section 7 consultations to
occur).
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Civil Justice Reform
In accordance with E.O. 12988 (Civil
Justice Reform), it has been determined
that the rule does not unduly burden the
judicial system and that it meets the
requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of the Order. We have proposed
designating critical habitat in
accordance with the provisions of the
Act. This proposed rule uses standard
property descriptions and identifies
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
species within the designated areas to
assist the public in understanding the
habitat needs of the Alabama sturgeon.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This rule does not contain any new
collections of information that require
approval by OMB under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.). This rule will not impose
recordkeeping or reporting requirements
on State or local governments,
individuals, businesses, or
organizations. An agency may not
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of
information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:40 May 23, 2008
Jkt 214001
It is our position that, outside the
jurisdiction of the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the Tenth Circuit, we do not need to
prepare environmental analyses as
defined by NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.) in connection with designating
critical habitat under the Act. We
published a notice outlining our reasons
for this determination in the Federal
Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR
49244). This assertion was upheld by
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth
Circuit (Douglas County v. Babbitt, 48
F.3d 1495 (9th Cir. 1995), cert. denied
516 U.S. 1042 (1996)).
Clarity of the Rule
We are required by Executive Orders
12866 and 12988 and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1,
1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule we
publish must:
(1) Be logically organized;
(2) Use the active voice to address
readers directly;
(3) Use clear language rather than
jargon;
(4) Be divided into short sections and
sentences; and
(5) Use lists and tables wherever
possible.
If you feel that we have not met these
requirements, send us comments by one
of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES
section. To better help us revise the
rule, your comments should be as
specific as possible. For example, you
should tell us the numbers of the
sections or paragraphs that are unclearly
written, which sections or sentences are
too long, the sections where you feel
lists or tables would be useful, etc.
Government-to-Government
Relationship With Tribes
In accordance with the President’s
memorandum of April 29, 1994,
Government-to-Government Relations
with Native American Tribal
Governments (59 FR 22951), E.O. 13175,
and the Department of the Interior’s
manual at 512 DM 2, and Secretarial
Order 3206, we readily acknowledge our
responsibility to communicate
meaningfully with recognized Federal
Tribes on a government-to-government
basis. In accordance with Secretarial
Order 3206 of June 5, 1997 (American
Indian Tribal Rights, Federal-Tribal
Trust Responsibilities, and the
Endangered Species Act), we readily
acknowledge our responsibilities to
work directly with Tribes in developing
programs for healthy ecosystems, to
acknowledge that Tribal lands are not
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
subject to the same controls as Federal
public lands, to remain sensitive to
Indian culture, and to make information
available to Tribes. We have determined
that there are no Tribal lands that meet
the definition of critical habitat for
Alabama sturgeon. Therefore, we have
not proposed designation of critical
habitat for Alabama sturgeon on Tribal
lands.
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
On May 18, 2001, the President issued
an Executive Order (E.O. 13211; Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use) on regulations that
significantly affect energy supply,
distribution, and use. E.O. 13211
requires agencies to prepare Statements
of Energy Effects when undertaking
certain actions. There are currently two
hydroelectric dams (Robert F. Henry
and Millers Ferry Locks and Dams)
located on portions of the rivers under
consideration for designation of critical
habitat. Both Robert F. Henry and
Millers Ferry Locks and Dams are
located on the Alabama River and are
owned and operated by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, and have total
generating capacities of 68 and 75
megawatts, respectively. Hydroelectric
production was likely impacted by low
flows resulting from recent drought
conditions; however, under normal
hydrologic conditions, where flows at
Montgomery equal a 7-day average of
4,640 cubic feet per second, flows
would not be altered by this designation
of critical habitat. With designation of
critical habitat, the Service’s ongoing
consultation and future consultations
with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
on their management of the Mobile
River Basin reservoirs regarding the
Alabama sturgeon will require
assessment of potential impacts to
critical habitat. However, these
consultations were already required
because of the presence of Alabama
sturgeon in the rivers that are being
proposed for designation. Flow
recommendations for the Alabama
sturgeon remain the same as the levels
we consulted on prior to the
designation. Consequently, we do not
expect this proposed rule to designate
critical habitat for Alabama sturgeon to
significantly affect energy supplies,
distribution, or use. Therefore, this
action is not a significant energy action,
and no Statement of Energy Effects is
required. However, we will further
evaluate this issue as we conduct our
economic analysis, and review and
revise this assessment as warranted.
E:\FR\FM\27MYP1.SGM
27MYP1
30373
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 27, 2008 / Proposed Rules
To obtain a complete list of all
references we cited in this rulemaking,
contact the Field Supervisor, Alabama
Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Author(s)
The primary authors of this package
are the staff of the Alabama Field Office.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species,
Exports, Imports, Reporting and
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 16 U.S.C.
1531–1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201–4245; Public Law
99–625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise
noted.
Accordingly, we propose to amend
Part 17, Subchapter B of Chapter I, Title
50 of the Code of Federal Regulations,
as set forth below:
2. In § 17.11(h), revise the entry for
‘‘Sturgeon, Alabama’’ under ‘‘Fishes’’ in
the List of Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife to read as follows:
PART 17—[AMENDED]
§ 17.11 Endangered and threatened
wildlife.
1. The authority citation for part 17
continues to read as follows:
References Cited
*
recordkeeping requirements,
Transportation.
Species
Vertebrate population where endangered or threatened
Historic range
Common name
*
FISHES
*
*
Sturgeon, Alabama ..
*
Scientific name
*
*
Scaphirhynchus
suttkusi.
*
U.S.A. (AL, MS) ......
*
*
3. In § 17.95, amend paragraph (e) by
adding an entry for ‘‘Alabama sturgeon
(Scaphirhynchus suttkusi),’’ in the same
alphabetical order that the species
appears in the table at § 17.11(h),
between the existing entries for
Colorado squawfish and Gulf Sturgeon,
to read as follows:
§ 17.95
Critical habitat-fish and wildlife.
*
*
*
*
(e) Fishes
*
*
*
*
*
Alabama sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus
suttkusi)
(1) Critical habitat unit is depicted for
Baldwin, Monroe, Wilcox, Clarke,
Dallas, Lowndes, Autauga, Bibb, and
Perry Counties, Alabama, on the map
below.
(2) The primary constituent elements
of critical habitat for the Alabama
sturgeon are:
(i) A range of flows with a minimum
7-day flow of 4,640 cubic feet per
second, during normal hydrologic
conditions, measured in the Alabama
River at Montgomery.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
*
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:32 May 23, 2008
*
Jkt 214001
Status
Frm 00053
Critical
habitat
Special
rules
*
*
697
*
Sfmt 4702
*
*
*
*
NA ........................... E
Fmt 4702
*
When listed
*
*
*
(h) * * *
(ii) River channel with stable sand
and gravel river bottoms, and bedrock
walls, including associated mussel beds.
(iii) Limestone outcrops and cut
limestone banks, large gravel or cobble
such as that found around channel
training devices, and bedrock channel
walls that provide riverine spawning
sites with substrates suitable for egg
deposition and development.
(iv) Long sections of free-flowing
water to allow spawning migrations and
development of eggs and larvae.
(v) Water temperature not exceeding
90 °Fahrenheit (32 °Celsius), dissolved
oxygen content over 4 milligrams per
liter, and pH within the range of 6.0 to
8.5.
(3) Critical habitat does not include
manmade structures (such as buildings,
aqueducts, docks, dams, runways,
roads, and other paved areas) and the
land or waterway on which they are
located existing within the legal
boundaries on the effective date of this
rule.
(4) Critical habitat map unit. Data
layers defining the map unit were
PO 00000
*
*
*
17.95(e)
NA
*
created on a base of USGS 7.5′
quadrangles, and the critical habitat unit
was then mapped using Universal
Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinates.
(5) Unit: Alabama and Cahaba Rivers;
Baldwin, Monroe, Wilcox, Clarke,
Dallas, Lowndes, Autauga, Perry, and
Bibb Counties, Alabama
The unit encompasses 524 km (326
mi) of river channel. The portion of
river channel in the Alabama River
extends 394 km (245 mi) from its
confluence with the Tombigbee River,
Baldwin and Clarke Counties, Alabama,
upstream to R.F. Henry Lock and Dam,
Autauga and Lowndes Counties,
Alabama; and the portion of river
channel in the Cahaba River extends
130 km (81 mi) from its confluence with
the Alabama River, Dallas County,
Alabama, upstream to U.S. Highway 82,
Bibb County, Alabama.
Note: Map of Unit, Critical Habitat for
Alabama Sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus
suttkusi): Alabama and Cahaba Rivers,
follows:
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
E:\FR\FM\27MYP1.SGM
27MYP1
30374
*
*
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 27, 2008 / Proposed Rules
*
*
Dated: May 15, 2008.
Lyle Laverty,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and
Parks.
[FR Doc. E8–11461 Filed 5–23–08; 8:45 am]
*
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:40 May 23, 2008
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\27MYP1.SGM
27MYP1
EP27MY08.000
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
BILLING CODE 4310–55–C
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 102 (Tuesday, May 27, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30361-30374]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-11461]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[FWS-R4-ES-2008-0058; 92210-1117-0000-FY08-B4]
RIN 1018-AV51
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of
Critical Habitat for Alabama Sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus suttkusi)
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 Alabama sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus
suttkusi) under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act).
In total, approximately 524 kilometers (326 miles) of river are
proposed as critical habitat. The proposed critical habitat includes
portions of the Alabama and Cahaba Rivers in Autauga, Baldwin, Bibb,
Clarke, Dallas, Lowndes, Monroe, Perry, and Wilcox Counties, in
Alabama.
DATES: We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before July
28, 2008. We must receive requests for public hearings, in writing, at
the address shown in the ADDRESSES section by July 11, 2008.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public Comments Processing,
Attn: FWS-R4-ES-2008-0058; Division of Policy and Directives
Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive,
Suite 222; Arlington, VA 22203.
We will not accept e-mail or faxes. We will post all comments on
https://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any
personal information you provide us (see the Public Comments section
below for more information).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Powell, Aquatic Species
Biologist, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Alabama Ecological Services
Field Office, 1208-B Main Street, Daphne, AL 36526; telephone 251/441-
5858; facsimile 251/441-6222. If you use a telecommunications device
for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS)
at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Comments
We intend any final action resulting from this proposal to be as
accurate and effective as possible. Therefore, we request comments or
suggestions on this proposed rule. We particularly seek comments
concerning:
(1) The reasons why we should or should not designate habitat as
``critical habitat'' under section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.), including whether the benefit of designation would outweigh
threats to the species caused by the designation, such that the
designation of critical habitat is not prudent;
(2) Specific information on:
The amount and distribution of Alabama sturgeon habitat,
flows needed by the species; and amount and distribution of free-
flowing waters within the species' historical or present range,
What areas occupied at the time of listing that contain
features essential to the conservation of the species we should include
in the designation and why, and
What areas not occupied at the time of listing are
essential for 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) Information regarding the potential impacts of this proposed
designation on the activities we have identified that may adversely
affect critical habitat (see the Application of the ``Adverse
Modification'' Standard section), specifically those that are
associated with the following actions:
Actions that would significantly alter the existing flow
regime to the point at which the habitat could no longer sustain normal
behavior and promote species recovery,
Actions that would significantly alter the morphology and
stability of the river channel,
Actions that would significantly decrease the amount of
currently available free-flowing habitat, and
Actions that would significantly alter water chemistry
beyond what is required in the State of Alabama water quality
standards;
(5) Any foreseeable economic, national-security, or other potential
impacts resulting from the proposed designation, and, in particular,
any impacts on small entities, and the benefits of including or
excluding areas that exhibit these impacts; and
(6) Whether we could improve or modify our approach to designating
critical habitat in any way to provide for greater public participation
and understanding, or to better accommodate public concerns and
comments.
You may submit your comments and materials concerning this proposed
rule by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. We will not
consider comments sent by e-mail or fax or to an address not listed in
the ADDRESSES section.
If you submit a comment via https://www.regulations.gov, your entire
comment--including any personal identifying information--will be posted
on the Web site. If you submit a hardcopy comment that includes
personal identifying information, you may request at the top of your
document that we withhold this information from public review. However,
we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We will post all
hardcopy comments on https://www.regulations.gov.
Background
In this proposed rule, we intend to discuss only those topics
directly relevant to the distribution of the Alabama sturgeon and the
designation of its critical habitat. For more information on the
species, refer to the final and proposed listing rules published in the
Federal Register on May 5, 2000 (65 FR 26438), and on March 26, 1999
(64 FR 14676), respectively.
Sturgeon is the common name used for large, bony-plated, primitive
fishes in the family Acipenseridae which typically grow slowly and
mature late in life. The Alabama sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus suttkusi) is
the smallest of all the North American sturgeons, typically weighing
only 1 to 2 kilograms (2 to 4 pounds) at maturity. The head is broad
and flattened shovel-like at the snout, with a tubular and protrusive
mouth. As with all sturgeon species, there are four barbels (whisker-
like appendages) located on the bottom of the snout in front of the
mouth that are used to locate prey. The body is lined with five rows of
bony plates called scutes. Bony plates also cover the head, back, and
sides, and the body narrows abruptly to the rear forming a
[[Page 30362]]
narrow stalk between the body and tail. The upper lobe of the tail fin
is elongated and ends in a long filament. Coloration of the upper body
is light tan to golden yellow, with a creamy white belly. The life span
of the Alabama sturgeon is unknown. Although few individuals probably
exceed 12 to 15 years of age, it is possible the species may live
longer.
The Alabama sturgeon is endemic to rivers of the Mobile River Basin
below the Fall Line (inland boundary of the Coastal Plain) (Mettee et
al. 1996, p. 83; Boschung and Mayden 2004, p. 109). Its current range
includes the Alabama River from R.F. Henry Lock and Dam downstream to
the confluence of the Tombigbee River. The species is also known to
survive in the Cahaba River. For information on range of the species
see the Criteria Used to Identify Critical Habitat section of this
rule.
Despite extensive and intensive efforts in the decade prior to its
listing, only eight Alabama sturgeon were captured, or reported
captured and released. These fish were collected from several locations
in the Alabama River between Millers Ferry Lock and Dam and its
confluence with the Tombigbee River (Rider and Hartfield 2007, p. 490).
Since the 2000 publication of the final rule listing the species, two
Alabama sturgeon have been captured or reported captured. One of these
was captured, videotaped, and released in the lower Cahaba River
shortly after publication of the final rule by a fisherman in July
2000. The most recent capture was an individual collected from the
Alabama River below Claiborne Lock and Dam in April 2007, by the
Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (ADCNR). This
fish was implanted with a sonic tag and released in May 2007 at the
location at which it was captured.
Flows in the Alabama River are heavily influenced by upstream
releases from Alabama Power Company and Corps hydropower projects, and
riverine habitats are fragmented by Claiborne and Millers Ferry Locks
and Dams. This 240-mile (386-kilometer) stretch of the Alabama River,
along with the lower Cahaba River, represents the last remaining viable
habitat for the sturgeon.
Previous Federal Actions
On May 5, 2000, we listed the Alabama sturgeon as endangered under
the Act (65 FR 26438). In the final listing rule, we determined that
designation of critical habitat was prudent but critical habitat was
not determinable, due to the lack of information on the sturgeon's
biological and habitat needs.
Following this listing decision, the Alabama-Tombigbee Rivers
Coalition (Coalition) brought suit in the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Alabama under the citizen-suit provision
of the Act and the judicial review provisions of the Administrative
Procedure Act, alleging several defects in the listing process. The
district court dismissed the Coalition's lawsuit for lack of standing,
but on appeal the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
reversed, concluding that the Coalition did have standing to challenge
the listing decision. On remand, the District Court granted the United
States' motion for summary judgment but ordered the Service to issue
both a proposed and final rule designating critical habitat by May 14,
2006, and November 14, 2006, respectively. Alabama-Tombigbee Rivers
Coalition et al. v. Norton et al., No. CV-01-0194-VEH (Final Order,
Nov. 14, 2005). The Coalition appealed and the District Court stayed
the judgment pending review by the Eleventh Circuit. Under the
direction of the District Court, the Service would have two years from
the time of the Eleventh Circuit's decision to complete the designation
of critical habitat.
On February 8, 2007, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the decision of
the District Court, finding among other things that vacating the
listing decision was not the proper remedy for failure to designate
critical habitat. Alabama-Tombigbee Rivers Coalition et al. v.
Kempthorne et al., 477 F.3d 1250 (11th Cir. 2007). On May 16, 2007, the
Eleventh Circuit issued its judgment as a mandate, thus lifting the
stay imposed by the District Court and requiring the Service to issue a
prudency determination and, if prudent, a proposed rule designating
critical habitat within one year (May 16, 2008), and a final rule
designating critical habitat within one year after that (May 16, 2009).
It should be noted that the Coalition asked the Supreme Court to review
the Eleventh Circuit's decision; that request was denied on January 7,
2008. Alabama-Tombigbee Rivers Coalition et al. v. Kempthorne et al.,
128 S. Ct. 877 (2008).
For more information on previous Federal actions concerning Alabama
sturgeon, refer to the final listing rule, which we published in the
Federal Register on May 5, 2000 (65 FR 26438). We are proposing this
action in accordance with section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
Critical Habitat
Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the Act as:
(1) 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:
(a) Essential to the conservation of the species, and
(b) Which may require special management considerations or
protection; and
(2) 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 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 under the Act are no longer necessary.
Critical habitat receives protection under section 7 of the Act
through the prohibition against Federal agencies carrying out, funding,
or authorizing the destruction or adverse modification of critical
habitat. Section 7 of the Act requires consultation on Federal actions
that may affect 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 the government or public to access private lands. Such
designation does not require implementation of restoration, recovery,
or enhancement measures by the landowner. Where the landowner seeks or
requests federal agency funding or authorization that may affect a
listed species or critical habitat, the consultation requirements of
section 7 would apply, but even in the event of a destruction or
adverse modification finding, the landowner's obligation is not to
restore or recover the species, but to implement reasonable and prudent
alternatives to avoid destruction or adverse modification of critical
habitat.
For inclusion in a critical habitat designation, habitat within the
geographical area occupied by the species at the time it was listed
must contain 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 (areas on which are found the
primary constituent elements, as defined at 50 CFR 424.12(b)). Occupied
habitat that contains the features essential to the conservation of the
species meets the definition of critical habitat only if those features
may require special
[[Page 30363]]
management considerations or protection. Under the Act, we can
designate critical habitat in areas outside the geographical area
occupied by the species at the time it is listed only when we determine
that those areas are essential for the conservation of the species.
Section 4 of the Act requires that we designate critical habitat on
the basis of the best scientific and commercial data available.
Further, our Policy on Information Standards Under the Endangered
Species Act (published in the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR
34271)), the Information Quality Act (section 515 of the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L.
106-554; H.R. 5658)), and our associated Information Quality
Guidelines, provide criteria, establish procedures, and provide
guidance to ensure that our decisions are based on the best scientific
data available. They require our 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 we are determining which areas should be proposed as critical
habitat, our primary source of information is generally the information
developed during the listing process for the species. Additional
information sources may 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.
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 we may
eventually determine, based on scientific data not now available to the
Service, are necessary for the recovery of the species. For these
reasons, a critical habitat designation does not signal that habitat
outside the designated area is unimportant or may not be required for
recovery of the species.
Areas that support populations, but are outside the critical
habitat designation, will continue to be subject to conservation
actions we implement under section 7(a)(1) of the Act. They are also
subject to the regulatory protections afforded by the section 7(a)(2)
jeopardy standard, as determined on the basis of the best available
scientific information at the time of the agency 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 (HCPs), 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) of the Act, we used the best scientific
data available in determining areas within the geographical area
occupied at the time of listing that contain features essential to the
conservation of Alabama sturgeon, and areas outside of the geographical
area occupied at the time of listing that are essential for the
conservation of Alabama sturgeon. We have reviewed available
information pertaining to the habitat requirements of this species.
This information includes our own published and unpublished data, field
notes, unpublished survey reports, communications with qualified
experts, peer-reviewed scientific publications, and the final and
proposed listing rules for the species. We are not currently proposing
any areas outside the geographical area presently occupied by the
species because we are unaware of any suitable areas of habitat for
this species outside of the area being proposed.
At the time of listing, we lacked the biological and habitat
information necessary to identify the primary constituent elements and
areas essential for conservation. This lack of information continues to
be an issue, since we have only two confirmed Alabama sturgeon captures
since publication of the final rule. Therefore, we reviewed the
available data and information on the Alabama sturgeon's closest
related species, the pallid (Scaphirhynchus albus) and the shovelnose
sturgeons (S. platorynchus). Unfortunately, although both the pallid
and shovelnose sturgeons are more abundant and widely distributed, very
little specific information is available concerning their biological
and physical requirements. However, by synthesizing the best scientific
available data on all three species, and considering historical and
current conditions at the locations where Alabama sturgeon have been
collected, we have identified the physical and biological requirements
of the Alabama sturgeon.
Primary Constituent Elements
In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) of the Act and the
regulations at 50 CFR 424.12, in determining which areas occupied by
the species at the time of listing to propose as critical habitat, we
consider the physical and biological features that are essential to the
conservation of the species to be the primary constituent elements laid
out in the appropriate quantity and spatial arrangement for
conservation of the species. These include, but are not limited to:
(1) Space for individual and population growth and for normal
behavior;
(2) Food, water, air, light, minerals, or other nutritional or
physiological requirements;
(3) Cover or shelter;
(4) Sites for breeding, reproduction, or rearing (or development)
of offspring; and
(5) Habitats that are protected from disturbance or are
representative of the historical, geographical, and ecological
distributions of a species.
We derive the specific primary constituent elements (PCEs) required
for the Alabama sturgeon from its biological needs.
Space for Individual and Population Growth and for Normal Behavior
All river sturgeons (Scaphirhynchus spp.) are migratory and may
migrate hundreds of kilometers to spawn. The newly hatched larvae of
other river sturgeon are free-floating and may drift hundreds of
kilometers before settling to a benthic juvenile existence. Therefore,
connectivity of spawning, juvenile, and adult feeding and growing
habitats is necessary for the conservation of the species.
Based on collection records, the species is known to inhabit the
main channel of large coastal plain rivers of the Mobile River Basin.
Specimens have been taken over a variety of substrates including sand,
gravel, and mud, from 6 to 14 meters (m) (20 to 46 feet (ft)) deep
(Williams and Clemmer 1991, p. 26). The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
identified 30 locations in the Alabama River where 58 Alabama sturgeon
were reportedly captured between 1950 and 1998, and documented channel
morphology and substrate types at 12 of the capture locations during
low flow conditions. Substrates associated with these capture sites
included sand, gravel, and limestone outcrops. All capture locations
downstream of Claiborne Lock and Dam were either on or within 300 m
(984 ft) of a sandbar.
Most historical and recent sturgeon capture sites are at or near
features
[[Page 30364]]
presumably associated with feeding, reproduction, or refugia and
include rock walls, channel training devices, deep pools, mussel beds,
and/or stable sand and gravel bottoms (Burke and Ramsey 1985, p. 53,
Mayden and Kuhajda 1996, p. 257, Hartfield and Garner 1998, p. 4). The
presence of mussel beds represents stable channel habitats with high
aquatic invertebrate diversity and density that are likely important
feeding areas for sturgeon; deeper holes may be used as thermal refugia
during times of low flow and warmer temperatures (Hartfield and Garner
1998, p. 5).
Data collected from a radio-tagged Alabama sturgeon, released in
1985 near Millers Ferry Lock and Dam on the Alabama River and tracked
for four months, showed that its preferred position was in swift
current at a depth of 7.7 to 12.3 m (25 to 40 ft), but never at the
deepest part at any location except where bottom contour was uniform
(Burke and Ramsey 1985, p. 32). Irwin et al. (2005, p. 5) and Kynard et
al. (2007, p. 369) documented that adult shovelnose sturgeon are more
active at night. This type of behavior was also observed in juvenile
shovelnose sturgeon (Kynard et al. 2007, p. 369), and a similar pattern
is currently being observed by the Alabama sturgeon collected in 2007
that is being tracked in the lower Alabama River (ADCNR and Service
unpublished data 2007, 2008). During daylight hours in the summer of
2007, this sturgeon remained in the deeper, flowing portions of the
channel. However, during the late afternoon and early evening hours,
the sturgeon moved into shallower habitats directly adjacent to a small
perennial tributary. We have no evidence that the sturgeon moves into
these tributaries; it may be taking advantage of cooler water found at
the interface between the tributaries and the main stem of the river.
The amount of time this tagged fish spent in these areas suggests these
areas are important for feeding or for providing a thermal refugia
during the warmer summer months.
Food
Reports suggest that the species is an opportunistic bottom feeder
(Mayden and Kuhajda 1996, p. 257, Williams and Clemmer 1991, p. 26,
Burke and Ramsey 1985, p. 35). Keevin et al. (2007, p. 500) conducted a
stomach content analysis on 12 Alabama sturgeon from museum collections
and found aquatic insects and fish to be the dominate food items. This
is quite similar to the diets of the pallid and shovelnose sturgeons
described by Gerrity et al. (2006, p. 606) and Hoover et al. (2007, p.
494). Except for the absence of fish in the diet of shovelnose
sturgeon, all three species tended to feed on similar items, primarily
aquatic insects. The insects identified in these studies are found over
a variety of substrates including soft and hard rocky bottoms;
therefore, protection of most shallow-water habitat (shoals, gravel or
sand bars) is essential to maintaining an acceptable food base. A
distinct difference observed by Keevin et al. (2007, p. 502) in the
diet of the Alabama sturgeon was the presence of ceratopogonids (biting
midges) and siphlonurids (of a family of mayflies). These small,
aquatic larvae are very active, strong swimmers that tend to occupy the
water column or areas near the surface (Keevin et al. 2007, p. 502),
indicating that the sturgeon may be a mid-water column feeder. Irwin et
al. (2005, p. 39) found that juvenile shovelnose sturgeon
overwhelmingly preferred feeding in sandy substrates and actively
avoided gravel areas. It is unknown if this behavior is displayed by
the Alabama sturgeon, but 2007 tracking data suggest that the species
may rest in the deeper, fast-flowing areas during the day and feed in
shallow, sandy shoal areas at night (ADCNR and Service unpublished
data).
Water Quality
Egg development and hatching and larval and juvenile development
require moderate to high levels of dissolved oxygen, as well as
acceptable levels of other water quality parameters. For example,
research indicates a high incidence of hermaphrodism in shovelnose and
pallid sturgeon may be linked to water contamination (U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) 2007, p. 4).
There are currently more than 1,600 National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permits issued within the Alabama River
downstream of the Fall Line, which could impact sturgeon habitat. It is
possible that some of these point-source discharges, along with other
non-point sources of pollutants, could produce pollutant concentrations
that may be harmful to the Alabama sturgeon. At the time of listing in
May 2000, we believed that State water quality standards (which the
State adopted from the national standards set by the USEPA) were
protective of the Alabama sturgeon as long as discharges were within
permitted limits and enforced according to the provisions of the Clean
Water Act (Biggins 1994, p. 4). These water quality requirements were
established with the intent to protect all aquatic resources within the
State of Alabama and were presumed to be protective of the Alabama
sturgeon. However, the Service is currently in consultation with the
USEPA to evaluate the protectiveness of criteria approved in USEPA's
water quality standards for Alabama sturgeon and other threatened and
endangered species and their critical habitats as described in the
Memorandum of Agreement our agencies signed in 2001 (66 FR 11201).
Other factors that can potentially alter water quality are droughts and
periods of low flow, non-point source runoff from adjacent land
surfaces (e.g., excessive amounts of nutrients, pesticides, and
sediment), and random spills or unregulated discharge events. This
could be particularly harmful during drought conditions when flows are
depressed and pollutants are more concentrated. Therefore, adequate
water quality is essential for normal behavior, growth, and viability
during all life stages of the sturgeon, including egg development and
hatching, and larval and juvenile development.
Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, or Rearing (or Development) of
Offspring
The Alabama sturgeon is believed to reach sexual maturity between 5
and 7 years of age. Spawning frequency of both sexes is likely
influenced by food supply and fish condition, and may occur every 1 to
3 years. Similar to other river sturgeon, the Alabama sturgeon is
believed to migrate upstream during the late winter and spring to
spawn. These movements are likely extensive and cover long distances.
The capture of 12 individuals (including several gravid females)
during a single collection trip near the mouth of the Cahaba River on
March 21, 1969, suggests directional movements during the spawning
season (Williams and Clemmer 1991, p. 27). Gravid females with ripe
eggs have also been collected during late March, April, and early May,
which may indicate a prolonged spring spawning or yearly variations in
the occurrence of preferred spawning temperatures. Actual timing of
spawning during this period may also vary depending on water
temperature and river discharge. All sturgeon species produce eggs that
are adhesive and require a current for proper development. Although
specific locations at which eggs have been deposited have not been
identified for the Alabama sturgeon, they are presumably similar to
those of other river sturgeons, where eggs are deposited on hard bottom
substrates such as bedrock, armored gravel, or channel training works
in deep water
[[Page 30365]]
areas, and possibly in some larger tributaries, such as the Cahaba
River (Burke and Ramsey 1985, p. 53).
Although no information about larval development exists for the
Alabama sturgeon, we assume that the Alabama sturgeon may have similar
needs as other river sturgeons which require highly oxygenated, long
stretches of free-flowing water for development. The larvae are
planktonic, drifting with river currents for 12 to 13 days after
hatching, and exhibit a swim-up and drift behavior while floating in
currents (Kynard et al. 2007, p. 365). Research indicates that pallid
sturgeon larvae can drift more than 200 kilometers (km) (125 miles
(mi)) during the first 11 days of the larval life stage, depending on
water velocities, before settling to the benthic environment (Braaten
and Fuller 2007, p. 1). It is unclear, at present, whether Alabama
sturgeon require distances comparable to those exhibited by pallid
sturgeon, but the life history strategy is thought to be the same. A
further reduction in the distance of free-flowing habitat currently
available would likely be detrimental to the sturgeon.
Riverine Flows and Channel Stability
Flows in the Mobile River Basin have been substantially altered
from natural conditions due to the construction and operation of the
large number of impoundments. Additionally, the river's temperature,
biogeochemical processes that would have occurred in the absence of the
dams, and pollution assimilation capabilities have also been altered.
Flowing water provides a means for transporting nutrients and food
items, moderating water temperatures and dissolved oxygen levels, and
diluting pollutants, as well as transporting and suspending developing
sturgeon eggs and larvae.
The quality of water, which comprises the sturgeon's chemical
habitat, is directly related to the volume of water present in the
river. It affects sturgeon behavior, growth, and viability in all life
stages. In 1972, prior to the listing of the sturgeon, a 4,640 cubic-
feet-per-second flow requirement in the Alabama River at Montgomery was
established. This flow, which is approximately the 7Q10 (a measure of
lowest 7-day flow measured over a 10-year period) for this section of
the river, is believed to be protective of the Alabama sturgeon. We
believe this flow would result in the magnitude, frequency, duration,
and seasonality of discharge over time that is necessary to maintain
all life stages of the species in the riverine environment, including
migration, breeding site selection, resting, larval development,
protection of cool water refuges during low flow periods, as well as
sufficient velocities to inhibit excessive sedimentation.
Aquatic life, including fish, requires acceptable levels of
dissolved oxygen. The type of organism and its life stage determine the
level of oxygen required. Generally, among the fish, cold water species
are the most sensitive, with young life forms being most critical.
Temperature, another water quality parameter, is related to dissolved
oxygen. The amount of dissolved oxygen that is present in water (the
saturation level) depends upon water temperature. As the water
temperature increases, the saturated dissolved oxygen level decreases.
The more oxygen there is in the water, the greater the assimilative
capacity (ability to consume organic wastes with minimal impact) of
that water (Pitt 2000, pp. 6-7). Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) is the
oxygen that would be required to stabilize the waste after its
discharge into a body of water. Wastewater discharges that have a high
BOD will have a much greater detrimental effect on stream dissolved
oxygen during critical summer months than they would during colder
months. Summer months also have lower stream flow rates, which worsens
the problem by further reducing the water's assimilative capacity (Pitt
2000, pp. 6-7). Flows should be sufficient to ensure at least 4
milligrams per liter of dissolved oxygen during low flow periods based
on the State water quality standards.
During 2007 and 2008, the Alabama River Basin experienced the worst
drought ever recorded. Although this drought is currently recognized as
the worst drought in modern history, some researchers believe that it
may not have been that unusual (B. Erhardt, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers Meteorologist, pers. comm. 2008). Using bald cypress (a long-
lived species) growth rings as an indication, the 2007-08 hydrologic
period may have actually been more normal over the last 1000 years than
conditions experienced over the last 40 years (which may have been
exceptionally wet). Therefore, considering that sturgeon species have
survived a range of hydrologic conditions over the years, we believe
sturgeon are adapted to these periodic low flow conditions. Although
the sturgeon we are currently tracking survived the 2007-08 drought, we
do not believe that the Alabama sturgeon is adapted to survive extended
drought periods where water quality is compromised by excessive
discharges that the river is unable to assimilate. More specifically,
as described above, low-flow conditions affect the chemical environment
occupied by the fish and extended low-flow conditions coupled with
higher pollutant levels would likely result in behavior changes within
all life stages, but could be particularly detrimental to early life
stages (e.g., eggs and larvae).
Stable river bottoms also are required by the sturgeon. The
presence of stable river bottoms has been associated with the recent
and historical captures of sturgeon in the Alabama and Tombigbee
Rivers. Hartfield and Garner (1998, p. 6) documented the presence of
stable substrates interspersed between dredge and disposal sites in the
lower Alabama River. These included areas with stable sand and gravel
river bottoms, and bedrock walls. The presence of mussel beds and a
diverse and dense insect community provide an indication that channel
bottoms are relatively stable (Hartfield and Garner 1998, p. 6). As
mentioned above, the preferred diet of the sturgeon is aquatic
invertebrates; therefore, the presence of mussel beds may be an
important indicator of suitable sturgeon feeding habitat. This is
consistent with the data that are currently being collected from the
sturgeon that was released and tracked in 2007. This fish has remained
in the vicinity of well-known mussel beds on the lower Alabama River
since its release.
Primary Constituent Elements (PCEs) for the Alabama Sturgeon
Within the geographical area occupied by the Alabama sturgeon at
the time of listing, we must identify the PCEs that may require special
management considerations or protections.
Based on the above needs and our current knowledge of the life
history, biology, and ecology of the species, we have determined that
Alabama sturgeon's PCEs are:
1. A range of flows with a minimum 7-day flow of 4,640 cubic feet
per second during normal hydrologic conditions, measured in the Alabama
River at Montgomery.
2. River channel with stable sand and gravel river bottoms, and
bedrock walls, including associated mussel beds.
3. Limestone outcrops and cut limestone banks, large gravel or
cobble such as that found around channel training devices, and bedrock
channel walls that provide riverine spawning sites with substrates
suitable for egg deposition and development.
4. Long sections of free-flowing water to allow spawning migrations
and development of eggs and larvae.
5. Water temperature not exceeding 90 [deg]Fahrenheit (32
[deg]Celsius), dissolved
[[Page 30366]]
oxygen content over 4 milligrams per liter, and pH (a measure of
acidity) within the range of 6.0 to 8.5.
With this proposed designation of critical habitat, we intend to
conserve the physical and biological features that are essential to the
conservation of the species, through the identification of the
appropriate quantity and spatial arrangement of the PCEs sufficient to
support the life history functions of the species. The critical habitat
unit proposed for designation contains all of the PCEs and supports
multiple life processes.
Special Management Considerations or Protection
When designating critical habitat, we assess whether the occupied
areas contain the physical or biological features essential to the
conservation of the species, and whether these features may require
special management considerations or protection. It is recognized that
numerous activities in and adjacent to the unit designated as critical
habitat, as described in this proposed rule, may affect one or more of
the PCEs found in that unit. These activities include, but are not
limited to, those listed in the Application of the ``Adverse
Modification'' Standard section as activities that may destroy or
adversely modify critical habitat. We summarize here the primary
threats to the physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of the species.
Water quality, as discussed in the Application of the ``Adverse
Modification'' Standard section, can influence all life stages of the
sturgeon. Water pollution and changes in water quality can originate
from either non-point or point source discharges. Non-point source
pollution is ubiquitous in the Mobile Basin and can originate from a
variety of land use practices (such as livestock grazing, row crop
farming, silvicultural, and residential development). The impacts from
nearly all non-point source pollutant sources can be managed by
implementing the appropriate best management practices. This may
include creation and maintenance of riparian buffers, and control of
soil loss and runoff from adjacent lands. Point source pollution
typically originates from industrial and municipal discharges, but may
include any discharge that originates from a single point. Point source
pollution can be managed by ensuring that NPDES permitted discharges
are within compliance at all times. This requires proper water quality
monitoring and record keeping, and ensuring that enough flow is present
in the river to assimilate the volume of material that is being
discharged.
The Service should be consulted with for disturbances to areas
upstream of those known to support sturgeon, including perennial
streams that may provide critical thermal refuges to the sturgeon at
the interface with the main channel, especially during times when river
flows are experiencing abnormally low levels (i.e., during droughts).
Therefore, prior to channel-disturbing activities, these areas should
be identified and precautions should be taken to ensure that the
integrity of these areas is maintained. Minimizing the effects of
navigational dredging and channelization (past evidence of which can be
seen throughout the historical range of the sturgeon) can be
accomplished by avoiding the removal of consolidated bed material and
rock walls, and consulting with the Service on the proper disposal
areas.
Criteria Used To Identify Critical Habitat
The Alabama sturgeon is extremely rare. Despite extensive and
intensive efforts in the decade prior to its listing, only eight
Alabama sturgeon were captured, or reported captured and released. All
river sturgeons are migratory and may migrate hundreds of kilometers to
spawn, and newly hatched larvae may drift hundreds of kilometers before
settling. Therefore, connectivity of spawning, juvenile, and adult
feeding and developmental habitats is necessary for the conservation of
the species.
We began our analysis by evaluating the Alabama sturgeon in the
context of its distribution throughout the historical range to
determine what portion of the range must be included to ensure
conservation of the species. We considered several factors in this
evaluation: (1) Inclusion of reaches that provide the highest
likelihood of egg and juvenile development, (2) inclusion of reaches
that contain suitable spawning habitat, and (3) inclusion of areas that
provide protection of the species during low flow periods and other
catastrophic events.
The historical range of the Alabama sturgeon included nearly every
major basin in the Mobile River basin downstream of the Fall Line,
comprising nearly 1,600 km (1,000 mi) of riverine habitat in the Mobile
River Basin in Alabama and Mississippi. There are records of Alabama
sturgeon from nearly all the major rivers in the Mobile River Basin
below the Fall Line, including the Black Warrior, Tombigbee, Alabama,
Coosa, Tallapoosa, Mobile, Tensaw, and Cahaba Rivers (Burke and Ramsey
1985, p. 1). However, over the last century, the species has
disappeared from at least 85 percent of its historical range, and since
the 1960s has experienced a significant decline in the remaining range.
Recent collections (since 1990) of the Alabama sturgeon are
confined to the lower Alabama River from its confluence with the
Tombigbee River upstream to R.F. Henry Lock and Dam, including the
lower Cahaba River (Rider and Hartfield 2007, p. 492). The entire
historical range of the Alabama sturgeon is now controlled by a series
of more than 25 large locks or dams. These man-made structures have
resulted in a series of impoundments that are interspersed with free-
flowing reaches of varying lengths. Within the Alabama sturgeon's
historical range there are three dams on the Alabama River (completed
between 1969 and 1971), two on the Black Warrior River (completed by
1971), and six on the Tombigbee River (completed between 1955 and
1985). These 11 dams alone have impounded and fragmented more than 970
km (583 mi) of riverine habitat once occupied by sturgeon. Prior to
construction of these structures, sturgeon could move freely between
feeding areas, and from feeding areas to sites that were suitable for
spawning and development of eggs and larvae.
The locks and dams that impound the river constitute barriers to
sturgeon passage. Although fish species that occupy the middle of the
water column (e.g., shad, catfishes, paddlefish) could, and do, pass
through the locks while they are being operated, there is no evidence
to suggest that sturgeon pass through the lock chambers during normal
lockages. Most adult sturgeons, including the Alabama sturgeon, are
benthic (bottom-dwelling) cruisers, and are not likely to move up in
the water column to scale physical hurdles (Cooke et al. 2002, p. 108).
The lock chambers at Millers Ferry and Claiborne Locks and Dams have
upper and lower sills which form a rather large hurdle (about 30 feet
above the river floor at the upper end of Miller Ferry) for sturgeon
moving upstream and downstream.
With migration routes impeded, isolated subpopulations of Alabama
sturgeon are unable to successfully recruit adequate numbers to
replenish the population. Reduced numbers of recruited sturgeon and
surviving adult fish can become more vulnerable to localized declines
in water and habitat quality caused by hydropower releases, local
riverine and land management practices, or by polluted discharges. It
is unlikely that Alabama sturgeon habitat and life cycle requirements
can be met in long stretches of low flow, such as those that exist in
the impounded areas
[[Page 30367]]
of the river, where decreased flows typically cause silt and other fine
sediments to accumulate over bottom habitats, creating unsuitable
conditions for spawning, feeding, and larval growth and development.
The Alabama sturgeon is considered extirpated from the upper
Alabama, Black Warrior, Tombigbee, Coosa, Tallapoosa, Mobile, and
Tensaw Rivers. The Upper Alabama is isolated by Robert F. Henry Lock
and Dam, and this reach of the river is essentially impounded to the
confluence of the Coosa and Tallapoosa Rivers, and does not contain
appropriate habitat for the conservation of the Alabama sturgeon.
Sturgeon have not been collected from the Black Warrior, Coosa,
Tallapoosa or Tombigbee Rivers in more than 30 years. With the
exception of the extreme lower Tombigbee River, all of these areas are
isolated from currently occupied river reaches and their riverine
habitats are impounded and highly fragmented by multiple large river
dams. Although some isolated areas within these drainages may contain
some of the appropriate habitat features for Alabama sturgeon, their
limited extent and the lack of continuity or accessibility to other
habitats limits their value to the species.
The Mobile, Tensaw, and lower Tombigbee Rivers are currently
accessible to Alabama sturgeon; however, there have been no confirmed
collections of the species in more than 20 years. In addition, the
natural hydrograph of the lower Mobile Basin has been radically altered
by multiple navigation and hydropower dams on the Tombigbee River, and
the flows are seasonally highly variable. These areas may be
occasionally used or visited by subadult or adult Alabama sturgeon;
however, there is no recent evidence that this is occurring and little
historical evidence of such use. Although some habitat features occur
in these river reaches, their value in conservation of the species is
not known.
At the time of listing, we considered the Alabama River from south
of Miller's Ferry Lock and Dam to the confluence of the Tombigbee River
to be occupied. Shortly after publication of the listing rule, an
Alabama sturgeon was captured and released at river mile 8.5 in the
Cahaba River. This capture of an adult sturgeon indicated that this
area also was occupied at the time of listing, given that the fish
could not have reached this area from other sections of the river due
to the lock and dam arrangement (see the Riverine Flows and Channel
Stability section), and would have been present at the time the rule
was published in the Federal Register. Given the fish's proximity to
the mouth of the Cahaba River and the lack of barriers with the Alabama
River section located between R.F. Henry Lock and Dam and the Millers
Ferry Lock and Dam, we believe the fish likely to use all of these
areas, and, therefore, consider them occupied at the time of listing.
There is some evidence of past upstream spawning runs in the Cahaba
River as well (Williams and Clemmer 1991, p. 27). Based on historical
information and recent collections, we consider all of the following
areas to be currently occupied: The Alabama River from R.F. Henry Lock
and Dam downstream to the confluence of the Tombigbee River, and the
Cahaba River from its confluence with the Alabama River upstream to
U.S. Highway 82 which is close to the Fall Line at Centreville,
Alabama. Given the lack of appropriate habitat elsewhere within the
historical range, we conclude that this proposed designation should
include all currently occupied habitat.
Once we determined that the proper scale of the proposed critical
habitat designation should cover the area currently occupied by the
species, we assessed the critical life history components of Alabama
sturgeon as they relate to habitat. Alabama sturgeon use the rivers for
spawning, larval and juvenile feeding and development, adult resting,
feeding, and staging, and to move between the areas that support these
components. Therefore, all areas meeting these requirements were
considered for inclusion.
We then investigated the habitat types that support these life
history components and where these habitat areas are located. We
evaluated empirical data (including that gathered from recent
radiotelemetry), recent channel bathymetry data (collected by the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers), as well as published and unpublished
literature. These habitat components are described in the Primary
Constituent Elements section of this proposed rule.
To determine which areas should be designated as critical habitat,
we then evaluated where the necessary physical and biological features
of Alabama sturgeon habitat occur within the currently occupied
habitat. Detailed location data are included in the unit description in
the Proposed Critical Habitat Designation section of this proposed
rule. We have determined that these areas occur from the Alabama River,
at its confluence with the Tombigbee River, upstream to R.F. Henry Lock
and Dam. This also includes the Cahaba River upstream to U.S. Highway
82 near the Fall Line in Bibb County. All of these areas support one or
more of the PCEs and are accessible to sturgeon (i.e., not entirely
blocked by dams). All life stages are associated with flowing waters
and other features characteristic of free-flowing riverine habitats.
Nearly the entire length of the Alabama and Cahaba River currently meet
these requirements. This area is being proposed as critical habitat to
ensure adequate protection of spawning sites, habitat needed for
juvenile development, and movement of adult sturgeon to and from
spawning areas.
When determining proposed critical habitat boundaries within this
proposed rule, we made every effort to avoid including developed areas
such as waterways covered by buildings, docks, dams, and other
structures because such waterways lack PCEs for Alabama sturgeon. The
scale of the maps we prepared under the parameters for publication
within the Code of Federal Regulations may not reflect the exclusion of
such developments. Any such areas 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, a Federal action involving
these areas would not trigger section 7 consultation with respect to
critical habitat and the requirement of no adverse modification unless
the specific action may affect adjacent critical habitat.
Proposed Critical Habitat Designation
We are proposing to designate one contiguous section of the Alabama
River and a portion of the lower Cahaba River as one critical habitat
unit for Alabama sturgeon. The areas we describe below constitute our
current best assessment of areas that meet the definition of critical
habitat for the Alabama sturgeon. The single unit we propose as
critical habitat is the Alabama River from its confluence with the
Tombigbee River, Clarke and Baldwin Counties, Alabama, upstream to R.F.
Henry Lock and Dam, Autauga and Lowndes Counties, Alabama; and the
Cahaba River from its confluence with the Alabama River upstream to
U.S. Highway 82 near the Fall Line in Bibb County, Alabama.
Following review of all areas within the range of the species, we
have determined that the proposed critical habitat area meets the
definition of critical habitat.
Table 1 shows the occupied unit, land ownership and approximate
area.
[[Page 30368]]
Table 1.--Occupancy of Alabama Sturgeon and Land Ownership of the Proposed Critical Habitat Unit
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Size of unit
Critical habitat unit Occupied at time of Currently in kilometers Land ownership by
listing occupied (miles) type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama and Cahaba Rivers....... yes................ yes............... 524 (326) State.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Below, we present a brief description of the unit and reasons why
it meets the definition of critical habitat for the Alabama sturgeon.
Unit: Alabama and Cahaba Rivers, Alabama
The critical habitat unit encompasses 524 km (326 mi) of river
channel. The portion of river channel in the Alabama River extends 394
km (245 mi) from its confluence with the Tombigbee River, Baldwin and
Clarke Counties, Alabama, upstream to R.F. Henry Lock and Dam, Autauga
and Lowndes Counties, Alabama; and the portion of river channel in the
Cahaba River extends 130 km (81 mi) from its confluence with the
Alabama River, Dallas County, Alabama, upstream to U.S. Highway 82,
Bibb County, Alabama. The Alabama and Cahaba Rivers are the last known
areas that still support the sturgeon, both of which were occupied at
the time of listing. This was recently confirmed by the 2007 collection
of an individual from the Alabama River below Claiborne Lock and Dam,
and the 2000 collection of an individual from the lower Cahaba River
(ADCNR pers. comm. 2007). Although the Alabama River, within this unit,
contains two physical barriers (Claiborne and Millers Ferry Locks and
Dams), it supports the PCEs to sustain this extremely rare fish. The
single critical habitat unit includes the channel of the rivers and
streams listed between the ordinary high water mark on each bank, which
is defined in 33 CFR 329.11 as ``the line on the shore established by
the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics
such as clear, natural line impressed on the bank; shelving; changes in
the character of the soil; destruction of terrestrial vegetation; the
presence of litter and debris; or other appropriate means that consider
the characteristics of the surrounding areas.'' The distances between
landmarks marking the upstream and downstream boundaries of the unit
are given in kilometers and equivalent miles, as measured by tracing
the thalweg (a line connecting the lowest points of successive cross
sections) of the stream, not the straight-line distance. River miles
referenced in this rule were taken from a Corps of Engineers 1985
stream mileage table.
The river channel within the entire unit is owned by the State of
Alabama, and the vast majority of adjacent lands are under private
ownership, with the exception of a portion of the Cahaba River that
includes Talladega National Forest (Oakmulgee Division). Although the
Oakmulgee Division encompasses a total of 63,483.7 hectares (ha)
(156,871 acres (ac)), there are only about 9,951.6 ha (24,591 ac) that
are directly adjacent to the Cahaba River. The Barton Beach Reserve, a
small tract owned by The Nature Conservancy, encompasses 45.3 ha (112
ac) and covers approximately 1,150 meters (m) (3,773 ft) along the
Cahaba River. This unit meets the definition of critical habitat based
on the discussion above and contains all PCEs. This unit was known to
be occupied at the time of listing and is currently occupied. Special
management of the PCEs for the Alabama sturgeon and its habitat may be
required for the following threats: low flow conditions, detrimental
changes in water quality, reduction in the amount of free-flowing
habitat, and detrimental changes to the morphology or stability of the
river channel.
Effects of Critical Habitat Designation
Section 7 Consultation
Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires Federal agencies, including the
Service, to ensure that actions they fund, authorize, or carry out are
not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or
destroy or adversely modify designated critical habitat. Decisions by
the 5th and 9th Circuit Courts of Appeals have invalidated our
definition of ``destruction or adverse modification'' (50 CFR 402.02)
(see Gifford Pinchot Task Force v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 378
F.3d 1059 (9th Cir 2004) and Sierra Club v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service et al., 245 F.3d 434, 442F (5th Cir 2001)), and we do not rely
on this regulatory definition when analyzing whether an action is
likely to destroy or adversely modify critical habitat. Under the
statutory provisions of the Act, we determine destruction or adverse
modification on the basis of whether, with implementation of the
proposed Federal action, the affected critical habitat would remain
functional (or retain the current ability for the PCEs to be
functionally established) to serve its intended conservation role for
the species.
Section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires Federal agencies to confer with
us on any action that is likely to jeopardize the continued existence
of a proposed species or result in destruction or adverse modification
of proposed critical habitat. Conference reports provide conservation
recommendations to assist the agency in eliminating conflicts that may
be caused by the proposed action. We may issue a formal conference
report if requested by a Federal agency. Formal conference reports on
proposed critical habitat contain an opinion that is prepared according
to 50 CFR 402.14, as if critical habitat were designated. We may adopt
the formal conference report as the biological opinion when the
critical habitat is designated, if no substantial new information or
changes in the action alter the content of the opinion (see 50 CFR
402.10(d)). The conservation recommendations in a conference report are
advisory.
If a species is listed or critical habitat is designated, section
7(a)(2) of the Act requires Federal agencies to ensure that activities
they authorize, fund, or carry out are not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of the species or to destroy or adversely modify
its critical habitat. If a Federal action may affect a listed species
or its critical habitat, the responsible Federal agency (action agency)
must enter into consultation with us. As a result of this consultation,
we document compliance with the requirements of section 7(a)(2) through
our issuance of:
(1) A concurrence letter for Federal actions that may affect, but
are not likely to adversely affect, listed species or critical habitat;
or
(2) A biological opinion for Federal actions that are likely to
adversely affect listed species or critical habitat.
When we issue a biological opinion concluding that a project is
likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or
destroy or adversely modify critical habitat, we also provide
reasonable and prudent alternatives to the project, if any are
identifiable. We define ``Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives'' at 50
CFR 402.02 as
[[Page 30369]]
alternative actions identified during consultation that:
(1) Can be implemented in a manner consistent with the intended
purpose of the action,
(2) Can be implemented consistent with the scope of the Federal
agency's legal authority and jurisdiction,
(3) Are economically and technologically feasible, and
(4) Would, in the Director's opinion, avoid jeopardizing the
continued existence of the listed species or destroying or adversely
modifying critical habitat.
Reasonable and prudent alternatives can vary from slight project
modifications to extensive redesign or relocation of the project. Costs
associated with implementing a reasonable and prudent alternative are
similarly variable.
When we issue a biological opinion concluding that a project is not
likely to jeopardize a listed species or adversely modify critical
habitat, but may result in incidental take of listed animals, we
provide an incidental take statement that specifies the impact of such
incidental taking on the species. We then define ``Reasonable and
Prudent Measures'' considered necessary or appropriate to minimize the
impact of such taking. Reasonable and prudent measures are binding
measures the action agency must implement to receive an exemption to
the prohibition against take contained in section 9 of the Act. These
reasonable and prudent measures are implemented through specific
``Terms and Conditions'' that must be followed by the action agency or
passed along by the action agency as binding conditions to an
applicant. Reasonable and prudent measures, along with the terms and
conditions that implement them, cannot alter the basic design,
location, scope, duration, or timing of the action under consultation
and may involve only minor changes (50 CFR 402.14). The Service may
provide the action agency with additional conservation recommendations,
which are advisory and not intended to carry binding legal force.
Regulations at 50 CFR 402.16 require Federal agencies to reinitiate
consultation on previously reviewed actions in instances where we have
listed a new species or subsequently designated critical habitat that
may be affected and the Federal agency has retained discretionary
involvement or control over the action (or the agency's discretionary
involvement or control is authorized by law). Consequently, Federal
agencies may sometimes need to request reinitiation of consultation
with us on actions for which formal consultation has been completed, if
those actions with discretionary involvement or control may affect
subsequently listed species or designated critical habitat.
Federal activities that may affect Alabama sturgeon or its
designated critical habitat will require section 7(a)(2) consultation
under the Act. Activities on State, Tribal, local or private lands
requiring a Federal permit (such as a permit from the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers under section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251
et seq.) or a permit from us under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act) or
involving some other Federal action (such as funding from the Federal
Highway Administration, Federal Aviation Administration, or the Federal
Emergency Management Agency) are examples of agency actions that may be
subject to the section 7(a)(2) consultation process. Federal actions
not affecting listed species or critical habitat, and actions on State,
Tribal, local or private lands that are not federally funded,
authorized, or permitted, do not require section 7(a)(2) consultations.
Application of the ``Adverse Modification'' Standard
The key factor related to the adverse modification determination is
whether, with implementation of the proposed Federal action, the
affected critical habitat would continue to serve its intended
conservation role for the species, or would retain its current ability
for the primary constituent elements to be functionally established.
Activities that may destroy or adversely modify critical habitat are
those that alter the physical and biological features to an extent that
appreciably reduces the conservation value of critical habitat for
Alabama sturgeon. Generally, the conservation role of Alabama sturgeon
critical habitat unit is to support the various life-history needs of
the species.
Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us to briefly evaluate and
describe, in any proposed or final regulation that designates critical
habitat, activities involving a Federal action that may destroy or
adversely modify such habitat, or that may be affected by such
designation.
Activities that, when carried out, funded, or authorized by a
Federal agency, may adversely affect critical habitat and, therefore,
should result in consultation for Alabama sturgeon include, but are not
limited to the following (please see Special Management Considerations
or Protection section for a more detailed discussion on the impacts of
these actions to the listed species):
(1) Actions that would significantly alter the existing flow regime
to the point at which the habitat could no longer sustain normal
behavior and promote species recovery. Such activities