Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a Petition to Remove the Bliss Rapids Snail (Taylorconcha serpenticola) From the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife, 47536-47545 [E9-21949]
Download as PDF
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
47536
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 178 / Wednesday, September 16, 2009 / Proposed Rules
(2) The amount of the allotment for
each of the 50 States and the District of
Columbia, and for each of the
Commonwealths and Territories (not
including the additional amount for FY
2009 determined under paragraph
(c)(2)(ii) of this section) is equal to the
product of:
(i) The percentage determined by
dividing the amount in paragraph
(e)(2)(i)(A) by the amount in paragraph
(e)(2)(i)(B) of this section.
(A) The amount of the State allotment
for each of the 50 States and the District
of Columbia, and for each of the
Commonwealths and Territories (not
including the additional amount for FY
2009 determined under paragraph
(c)(2)(ii) of this section).
(B) The sum of the amounts for each
of the 50 States and the District of
Columbia, and the Commonwealths and
Territories in paragraph (e)(2)(i) of this
section.
(ii) The total amount available for
allotment for the fiscal year under
paragraph (b) of this section
(f) Allotment increase factor. The
allotment increase factor for a fiscal year
is equal to the product of the following:
(1) Per capita health care growth
factor. The per capita health care growth
factor for a fiscal year is equal to 1 plus
the percentage increase in the projected
per capita amount of the National
Health Expenditures from the calendar
year in which the previous fiscal year
ends to the calendar year in which the
fiscal year involved ends, as most
recently published by CMS before the
beginning of the fiscal year involved.
(2) Child Population Growth Factor.
The child population growth factor for
a fiscal year is equal to 1 plus the
percentage increase (if any) in the
population of children in the State from
July 1 in the previous fiscal year to July
1 in the fiscal year involved, as
determined by CMS based on the most
recent published estimates of the
Census Bureau available before the
beginning of the fiscal year involved
plus 1 percentage point. For purposes of
determining the Child Population
Growth Factor for FY 2009 for the
Commonwealths and Territories only, in
applying the previous sentence, ‘‘United
States’’ is substituted for ‘‘the State’’.
(g) Increase in State allotment for the
50 States and the District of Columbia
for FY 2010 through FY 2013 to account
for approved program expansions. In
the case of the 50 States and the District
of Columbia, the State allotment for FY
2010 through FY 2013, as determined in
accordance with the provisions of this
section, may be increased under the
following conditions and amounts:
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:46 Sep 15, 2009
Jkt 217001
(1) The State has submitted to the
Secretary, and has approved by the
Secretary a State plan amendment or
waiver request relating to an expansion
of eligibility for children or benefits
under title XXI of the Act that becomes
effective for a fiscal year (beginning
with FY 2010 and ending with FY
2013); and
(2) The State has submitted to the
Secretary, before the August 31
preceding the beginning of the fiscal
year, a request for an expansion
allotment adjustment under this
paragraph for such fiscal year that
specifies—
(i) The additional expenditures that
are attributable to the eligibility or
benefit expansion provided under the
amendment or waiver described in
paragraph (g)(1) of this section, as
certified by the State and submitted to
the Secretary by not later than August
31 preceding the beginning of the fiscal
year; and
(ii) The extent to which such
additional expenditures are projected to
exceed the allotment of the State or
District for the year.
(3) Subject to paragraph (e) of this
section relating to proration, the amount
of the allotment of the State or District
under this subsection for such fiscal
year shall be increased by the excess
amount described in paragraph (g)(2)(i).
A State or District may only obtain an
increase under paragraph (g)(2)(ii) of
this section for an allotment for FY 2010
or FY 2012.
(h) CHIP Fiscal Year Allotment
Process. As determined by the
Secretary, the CHIP allotments for a
fiscal year may be published as
Preliminary Allotments or Final
Allotments in the Federal Register.
§ 457.610
[Amended]
5. Amend the section heading for
§ 457.610 by—
A. Amending the section heading by
removing the words ‘‘for a fiscal year’’
and adding in its place ‘‘prior to FY
2009’’.
B. Removing the words ‘‘for a fiscal
year’’ and add in its place add ‘‘prior to
FY 2009’’in the first line of the
paragraph.
6. Add a new § 457.611 to subpart F
to read as follows:
§ 457.611 Period of availability for State
allotments for a fiscal year after FY 2008.
The amount of a final allotment for a
fiscal year after FY 2008, as determined
under § 457.609 and reduced to reflect
certain Medicaid expenditures in
accordance with § 457.616, remains
available until expended for Federal
payments based on expenditures
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
claimed during a 2-year period of
availability, beginning with the fiscal
year of the final allotment and ending
with the end of the succeeding fiscal
year following the fiscal year.
Authority: (Section 1102 of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1302)
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Program No. 93.778, Medical Assistance
Program)
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Program No. 93.767, State Children’s Health
Insurance Program))
Dated: June 19, 2009.
Charlene Frizzera,
Acting Administrator, Centers for Medicare
& Medicaid Services.
Approved: July 29, 2009.
Kathleen Sebelius,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9–22162 Filed 9–15–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4120–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R1–ES–2008–0073;
14420–1113–0000–C6]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a
Petition to Remove the Bliss Rapids
Snail (Taylorconcha serpenticola)
From the List of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 12-month petition
finding.
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
12-month finding on a petition to
remove the Bliss Rapids snail
(Taylorconcha serpenticola) from the
Federal List of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife (List) pursuant to
the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Based on a thorough review of the best
scientific and commercial data
available, the species continues to be
restricted to a small geographic area in
the middle-Snake River, Idaho, where it
is dependent upon cool-water spring
outflows. Although some threats
identified at the time of listing in 1992
no longer exist or have been moderated,
ground water depletion and impaired
water quality still threaten the Bliss
Rapids snail. In addition, there are
significant uncertainties about the
effects of hydropower operations and
New Zealand mudsnails on the
E:\FR\FM\16SEP1.SGM
16SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 178 / Wednesday, September 16, 2009 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
persistence of Bliss Rapids snails in
riverine habitats. In the absence of the
Act’s protections, existing regulations
are not likely to be sufficient to conserve
the species. Given our current
understanding of the species’
geographic distribution, habitat
requirements, and threats, the species
continues to meet the definition of a
threatened species under the Act.
Therefore, we have determined that
removing the Bliss Rapids snail from the
List is not warranted at this time.
DATES: We made the finding announced
in this document September 16, 2009.
ADDRESSES: This notice is available on
the Internet at https://www.fws.gov/idaho
and at https://www.regulations.gov at
Docket No. FWS–R1–ES–2008–0073.
Supporting documentation we used in
preparing this notice will be available
for public inspection, by appointment,
during normal business hours at the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Idaho
Fish and Wildlife Office, 1387 S.
Vinnell Way, Room 368, Boise, ID
87309; telephone (208) 378–5243;
facsimile (208) 378–5262. New
information, materials, comments, or
questions concerning this species may
be submitted to the Service at the above
address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff
Foss, Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Idaho Fish and
Wildlife Office, (see ADDRESSES section).
If you use a telecommunications device
for the deaf (TDD), you may call the
Federal Information Relay Service
(FIRS) at 800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Species Information
The Bliss Rapids snail was first
collected in 1959 at the Thousand
Springs Preserve in Idaho’s Snake River
by Dwight Taylor (57 FR 59244;
December 14, 1992) and formally
described by Hershler et al. (Hershler et
al. 1994, p. 235) as Taylorconcha
serpenticola in 1994. The Bliss Rapids
snail grows to approximately 0.08 to
0.16 inches (2.0 to 4.0 millimeter (mm))
in height. The shell is clear to white but
appears to have two morphs due to
coloration of the periostracum (the
shell’s outer layer). The periostracum
can be very light tan to dark brown-red
resulting in the ‘‘pale’’ and ‘‘orange’’
forms, respectively. The Bliss Rapids
snail has approximately 3.5 to 4.5
whorls (turn or curl in the shell) with
the protoconch (apex or top of the shell)
comprising about 1.5 whorls. The apex
(the highest point of the shell) is blunt.
Bliss rapids snails hatch, reproduce,
and die in a single year (Hershler et al.
1994, pp. 239, 240). They are dioecous,
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:46 Sep 15, 2009
Jkt 217001
having strictly male and female
individuals and may exhibit an
iteroparous (more than one reproductive
event in an individual’s lifetime)
reproductive strategy (Richards 2004, p.
119). The timing of reproduction
apparently varies by habitat-type. Egglaying normally occurs in spring
colonies between December and March,
while in river colonies egg laying occurs
in January and February (Hershler et al.
1994, p. 239). Eggs are laid singly, in
small capsules attached to the bottoms
or sides of rocks (Hershler et al. 1994,
p. 239). Emergence of young typically
takes place a few weeks after egg
deposition depending on water
temperature (Dillon 2000, p. 103), but
specific timing and temperature
information is lacking.
Bliss Rapids snails primarily consume
epilithic periphyton (diatom films that
primarily grow on rock surfaces), as do
many freshwater snails (Richards
2006b). They may also consume
quantities of detritus, bacteria, and
protozoa embedded in the simple sugar
matrix (i.e., the periphyton) on the
surfaces of benthic (bottom) substrates.
Range
At the time of listing in 1992, the
distribution of the Bliss Rapids snail
was thought to be discontinuous over
204 miles of the Snake River in Idaho,
between King Hill (river mile (RM) 546)
and Lower Salmon Falls Dam (RM 573)
with a disjunct occurrence at RM 749.
The species’ distribution upstream of
Upper Salmon Falls Reservoir was
known to be localized to spring
complexes (i.e., Thousand Springs (RM
585), Minnie Miller Springs (RM 585),
Banbury Springs (RM 589), Niagara
Springs (RM 599), and Box Canyon
Springs (RM 588)) (57 FR 59244;
December 14, 1992). This range was
based on approximately 14 spring/
tributary collection points (Richards et
al. 2006, p. 33). The reported occurrence
at RM 749 is now regarded as erroneous
because: (1) Samples from this
collection have not been located to
verify the occurrence (Frest 2002); (2)
the reported collection site is 150 river
miles upstream of the known
distribution of the species (Pentec 1991
in 57 FR 59244); and, (3) numerous
collection efforts in and above American
Falls Reservoir (U.S. Bureau of
Reclamation (USBR) 2003; USBR 2004;
USBR 2005; Gregg 2006), and in the
upper Snake River (Fields 2006) have all
failed to document the occurrence of the
species.
The current known range of the Bliss
Rapids snail is similar to what was
described at the time of listing (minus
the erroneous location at American Falls
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
47537
Reservoir). Increased sampling effort has
documented its presence at many more
locations within its range. Based on 837
sample events conducted by the Idaho
Power Company (IPC), the Bliss Rapids
snail is documented to occur within the
non-reservoir sections of the middle
Snake River from approximately RM
547 to RM 572, and RM 580 (Richards
et al. 2006, pp. 33–38). This represents
a refined distribution since the time of
listing in 1992 due to more accurate
survey data.
Bliss Rapids snails are also known to
occur in 14 springs or Snake River
tributary streams (from RM 552.8 to RM
604.5) derived from cold water springs
including: Bancroft Springs; Thousand
Springs and Minnie Miller Springs
(Thousand Springs Preserve); Banbury
Springs; Niagara Springs; Crystal
Springs; Briggs Springs; Blue Heart
Springs; Box Canyon Creek; Riley Creek;
Sand Springs Creek; Elison Springs; the
Malad River; Cove Creek (a tributary to
the Malad River); and the headwater
springs to Billingsley Creek (Richards et
al. 2006, p. 2; USFWS 2008a, p. 6).
The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
reported finding several Bliss Rapids
snails at Blue Lakes (approximately
Snake River mile 610.4) in 1994, but
surveys of this site in 1996 and 2007 did
not locate the species (Mebane 2007,
Grotheer 2008). Over 200 springs or
spring clusters have been mapped or
identified on the north side of the Snake
River canyon (Clark and Ott 1996, p.
559) where the Bliss Rapids snail has
been documented to occur. Springs also
occur on the south side of the Snake
River canyon (Clark and Ott 1996, p.
559), but studies conducted by the
Idaho Power Company (IPC) have not
observed Bliss Rapids colonies in
springs or tributaries on the south side
(Bates and Richards 2008). The species
is likely present at additional springs on
private lands that have not been
sampled (e.g., Hopper 2006b).
In summary, we now know the Bliss
Rapids snail to be distributed
discontinuously over 22 miles, from RM
547–560, RM 566–572, and at RM 580
on the Snake River and to occur in 14
springs or tributaries to the Snake River.
The area between RM 561–565
represents reservoir areas where the
Bliss Rapids snail does not occur. The
species’ overall geographic range has
not substantially changed since it was
first described by Hershler et al. (1994),
but the species has been detected at
more locations within its range.
Habitat Use
The Bliss Rapids snail occurs in cold
water springs and spring-fed tributaries
to the Snake River (hereafter referred to
E:\FR\FM\16SEP1.SGM
16SEP1
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
47538
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 178 / Wednesday, September 16, 2009 / Proposed Rules
as spring colonies), and in some reaches
of the Snake River (hereafter referred to
as river colonies). Available data
indicate that spring colonies are
consistently larger, at least in terms of
density and relative abundance, than
river colonies (Stephenson and Bean
2003, pp. 12, 18; Stephenson et al. 2004,
p. 24; Richards et al. 2006, pp. 97–99).
The species is absent from reservoirs
(Hershler et al. 1994, p. 237; Finni 2003,
p. 28; Richards et al. 2006, p. 35),
patchily distributed and in low
densities in the mainstem Snake River
(Stephenson et al. 2004, pp. 11, 22, 24;
Richards et al. 2006, p. 37), and
relatively abundant, though patchily
distributed in spring habitats
(Stephenson and Bean 2003, pp. 12, 18;
Richards 2004, pp. 59–69; Richards et
al. 2006, p. 37).
The Bliss Rapids snail is known to
occur on stable, cobble substrates in
unimpounded sections of the mainstem
Snake River (Richards et al. 2006, pp.
35, 41), on cobble-boulder substrates in
the Malad River (Stephenson and Clark
2004, p. 33), and on various substrates
in several spring complexes
(Stephenson and Myers 2003, p. 5). The
species is generally not found in, or on,
very fine (silt) sediments (Hershler et al.
1994, p. 237; Richards et al. 2006, p. 23),
but has been documented infrequently
on sand and gravel (Stephenson and
Myers 2003, p. 5), aquatic vegetation
(Lysne 2006), and coarse woody debris
(Hopper 2006a, Lysne 2006). A notable
exception to this characterization of
habitat use is the presence of Bliss
Rapids snails on fine sediments (silt/
gravel) at the upper pool in Cove Creek
(Stephenson and Myers 2003, p. 5), a
cold water spring creek tributary to the
Malad River. Overall, the cobbleboulder substrate is considered to be the
dominant habitat type where the Bliss
Rapids snail is found (Richards et al.
2006, p. 51).
Field studies and observations have
demonstrated that the species uses the
sides and bottoms of cobbles
preferentially to the exclusion of cobble
tops (Richards 2004, pp. 32–34). The
Bliss Rapids snail is found at various
water depths in springs ranging from 0.3
to 3 feet (0.1–1 meters (m)), and in
spring-fed tributary habitats ranging
from 0.07 to 3.35 feet (0.02–1.02 m)
(Stephenson and Myers 2003, pp. 23–
35; Stephenson and Clark 2004, p. 32).
This species has also been documented
to occur at depths up to 20 feet (6.1 m)
in the mainstem Snake River (Richards
et al. 2006, p. 52). Most Bliss Rapids
snails are found in less than 3 feet (0.9
m) of water (Richards et al. 2006, p. 43)
but this could be due to sampling effort.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:46 Sep 15, 2009
Jkt 217001
The Bliss Rapids snail has been
collected in water temperatures ranging
from 44.6 to 69.8 degrees Fahrenheit (F)
(7 to 21 degrees Celsius (C)) (Finni 2003,
p. 14; Clark et al. 2005, p. 55), but is
generally found in water temperatures
between 59 and 60.8 degrees F (15 and
16 degrees C) (Hershler et al. 1994, p.
237). Richards et al. (2001, p. 377)
collected Bliss Rapids snails from
Banbury Springs in thermally constant
waters measuring 55.2 to 61.5 degrees F
(12.9 to 16.4 degrees C), and Stephenson
and Clark (2004, p. 32) collected the
species from the Malad River in water
measuring 57.2 to 59.0 degrees F (14 to
15 degrees C).
Richards et al. (2006, pp. 39–51)
analyzed the physio-chemical data from
all IPC collections in river, spring, and
spring-influenced sites and determined
the probability of encountering Bliss
Rapids snails for various parameters.
The best predictors of Bliss Rapids snail
presence (i.e., having statistically
significant regression values based on
large samples), in order of significance,
were dominant substrate, conductivity
(a measure of total dissolved solids),
depth, dissolved oxygen, and
temperature (Richards et al. 2006, p.
41).
In summary, based on available
information, the Bliss Rapids snail
occurs in riverine and spring or springinfluenced habitats but is not known to
occur in reservoir habitats. It is known
from the Snake River (22 miles), the
Malad River (1 mile), Cove Creek (0.4
mile), and in 14 springs. In the Snake
River the species is predominately
associated with cobble-boulder
substrates; substrate use in spring
complexes is more variable. The species
is generally not found in, or on, very
fine sediments. It has been collected at
various water depths in springs ranging
from 0.3 to 3 feet (0.1–0.9 m), and in
spring-fed tributary habitats ranging
0.07 to 3.35 feet (0.02–1.02 m). This
species has also been documented to
occur at depths up to 20 feet (6.1 m) in
the mainstem Snake River. Most Bliss
Rapids snails are found in less than 3
feet (0.9 m) of water, but this may be an
artifact of sampling effort rather than
true habitat selection. The species has
been observed in water temperatures
ranging from 44.6 to 69.8 degrees F (7
to 21 degrees C), but is generally found
in water temperatures between 59 and
60.8 degrees F (15 and 16 degrees C).
Densities and Relative Abundance
It is difficult to estimate the density
and relative abundance of Bliss Rapids
snail colonies. The species is
documented to reach high densities in
cold-water springs and tributaries in the
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Hagerman reach of the middle Snake
River (Stephenson and Bean 2003, pp.
12, 18; Stephenson et al. 2004, p. 24),
whereas colonies in the mainstem Snake
River (Stephenson and Bean 2003, p. 27;
Stephenson et al. 2004, p. 24) tend to
have lower densities (Richards et al.
2006, p. 37). Bliss Rapids snail densities
in Banbury Springs averaged
approximately 32.53 snails per square
foot (350 snails per square meter) on
three habitat types (vegetation, edge,
and run habitat as defined by Richards
et al. 2001, p. 379). Densities greater
than 790 snails per square foot (5,800
snails per square meter) have been
documented at the outlet of Banbury
Springs (Morgan Lake outlet) (Richards
et al. 2006, p. 99).
In an effort to account for the high
variability in snail densities and their
patchy distribution, researchers have
used predictive models to give more
accurate estimates of population size in
a given area (Richards 2004, p. 58). In
the most robust study to date, predictive
models estimated between 200,000 and
240,000 Bliss Rapids snails in a study
area measuring 58.1 square feet (625
square meters) in Banbury Springs, the
largest known colony (Richards 2004, p.
59). Due to data limitations, this model
has not been used to extrapolate
population estimates to other spring
complexes, tributary streams, or
mainstem Snake River colonies.
However, with few exceptions (i.e.,
Thousand Springs and Box Canyon),
Bliss Rapids snail colonies are much
smaller in areal extent than the colony
at Banbury Springs, occupying only a
few square feet.
Previous Federal Actions
The Service listed the Bliss Rapids
snail as threatened on December 14,
1992 (57 FR 59244). At that time it was
an undescribed monotypic genus in the
family Hydrobiidae. Subsequent
research in 1994 formalized its
taxonomic status and its scientific
name—Taylorconcha serpenticola
(Hershler et al. 1994).
Based on the best available data at the
time of listing, we determined that the
Bliss Rapids snail was threatened by:
proposed construction of new
hydropower dams, the operation of
existing hydropower dams, degraded
water quality, water diversions, the
introduced New Zealand mudsnail
(Potamopyrgus antipodarum), and the
lack of existing regulatory protections
(57 FR 59244). In 1995, we published
the Snake River Aquatic Species
Recovery Plan (Plan), which included
the Bliss Rapids snail (USFWS 1995).
Critical habitat has not been designated
for this species.
E:\FR\FM\16SEP1.SGM
16SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 178 / Wednesday, September 16, 2009 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
On July 27, 2004, we initiated a 5-year
status review for the species in
accordance with section 4(c)(2) of the
Act (69 FR 44676). On December 26,
2006, the Service received a petition
from the Governor of Idaho and IPC
requesting that the Bliss Rapids snail be
removed from the List. On June 6, 2007,
the Service published a Federal Register
notice announcing that the petition
presented substantial scientific
information indicating that removing
the Bliss Rapids snail from the List may
be warranted, and the initiation of a 12month status review of the species to be
conducted concurrent with our 5-year
status review (72 FR 31250). A 30-day
peer review was completed in January
2008, on the draft status review
document of the best available
information and scientific literature
(USFWS 2008a).
As part of the 12-month status review,
we used a structured decision analysis
process (USFWS 2008b) to assist us in
making our 12-month finding. A
component of the structured decision
analysis was the formation of an expert
scientific review panel that provided us
with information regarding the current
status of the species and primary
threats. The Service reopened the public
comment period on its 90-day finding
from August 12 to August 27, 2008 (73
FR 46867), to allow the public to access
and provide comments on the scientific
review panel’s results and other
documents. No additional comments
were received.
Summary of Factors Affecting the
Species
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533
et seq.) and implementing regulations
(50 CFR part 424) set forth procedures
for adding species to, removing species
from, or reclassifying species on the
Federal List of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife. Section 4(b)(3)(A)
of the Act requires that for any petition
containing substantial scientific and
commercial information that listing,
delisting, or reclassification may be
warranted, we make a finding within 12
months of receiving the petition, on
whether the petitioned action is: (a) Not
warranted; (b) warranted; or (c)
warranted, but that immediate proposal
of a regulation implementing the
petitioned action is precluded by other
pending proposals to determine whether
other species are threatened or
endangered.
Under section 4 of the Act, a species
may be determined to be endangered or
threatened on the basis of any of the
following five factors: (A) The present or
threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range; (B)
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:46 Sep 15, 2009
Jkt 217001
overutilization for commercial,
recreation, scientific, or educational
purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D)
the inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms; or (E) other natural or
manmade factors affecting its continued
existence. We must consider these same
five factors in delisting a species. We
may delist a species according to 50
CFR 424.11(d) if the best available
scientific and commercial data indicate
that the species is neither endangered
nor threatened for the following reasons:
(1) The species is extinct; (2) the species
has recovered and is no longer
endangered or threatened; or (3) the
original scientific data used at the time
the species was classified were in error.
A species is ‘‘endangered’’ for
purposes of the Act if it is in danger of
extinction throughout all or ‘‘a
significant portion of its range’’ and is
‘‘threatened’’ if it is likely to become
endangered within the foreseeable
future throughout all or a significant
portion of its range. The word ‘‘range’’
in the significant portion of its range
(SPR) phrase refers to the range in
which the species currently exists. The
word ‘‘significant’’ in the SPR phrase
refers to the value of that portion to the
conservation of the species. For the
purposes of this analysis, we will
evaluate whether the currently listed
species, the Bliss Rapids snail, should
be considered threatened or endangered.
Then we will consider whether there are
any portions of the species’ range in
which it is in danger of extinction or
likely to become endangered within the
foreseeable future.
Factor A. The Present or Threatened
Destruction, Modification, or
Curtailment of the Species’ Habitat or
Range
Construction of New Hydropower Dams
In our 1992 final rule listing the Bliss
Rapids snail as a threatened species, we
stated: ‘‘Six proposed hydroelectric
projects, including two high dam
facilities, would alter free flowing river
reaches within the existing range of [the
Bliss Rapids snail]. Dam construction
threatens the [Bliss Rapids snail]
through direct habitat modification and
moderates the Snake River’s ability to
assimilate point and non-point
pollution. Further hydroelectric
development along the Snake River
would inundate existing mollusk
habitats through impoundment, reduce
critical shallow, littoral shoreline
habitats in tailwater areas due to
operating water fluctuations, elevate
water temperatures, reduce dissolved
oxygen levels in impounded sediments,
and further fragment remaining
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
47539
mainstem populations or colonies of
[the Bliss Rapids snail]’’ (57 FR 59251).
Proposed hydroelectric projects
discussed in the 1992 final listing rule
are no longer moving forward. The A.J.
Wiley project and Dike Hydro Partners
preliminary permits have lapsed; the
Kanaka Rapids, Empire Rapids, and
Boulder Rapids permits were denied by
the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (FERC) in 1995; there was
a notice of surrender of the preliminary
permit for the River Side Project in
2002; and two other proposed projects,
the Eagle Rock and Star Falls
Hydroelectric Projects, were denied
preliminary permits by the FERC. In
2003, a notice was provided of
surrender of the preliminary permit for
the Auger Falls Project. Information
provided by the State of Idaho indicates
that all proposals and preliminary
permits for the construction of new
dams along the mid-Snake River have
either lapsed or been denied by the
FERC (Caswell 2006).
Operation of Existing Hydropower Dams
In the December 14, 1992, final listing
rule we stated: ‘‘Peak-loading, the
practice of artificially raising and
lowering river levels to meet short-term
electrical needs by local run-of-the-river
hydroelectric projects also threatens [the
Bliss Rapids snail]. Peak-loading is a
frequent and sporadic practice that
results in dewatering mollusk habitats
in shallow, littoral shoreline areas
* * * these diurnal water fluctuations
[prevent the Bliss Rapids snail] from
occupying the most favorable habitats’’
(57 FR 59252). The Bliss Rapids snail
occurs in riverine and spring or springinfluenced habitats but is not known to
occur in reservoir habitats. Peak loading
operations within the range of river
colonies of the Bliss Rapids snail occur
below the Bliss Dam (RM 560) and the
Lower Salmon Falls Dam (RM 573)
(USFWS 2004, pp. 19, 20). For example,
at the Bliss Dam (Stephenson and Bean
2003, p. 30) the Snake River can
experience daily fluctuation of water
levels from hydropower generating
activities (peak loading) up to 7 feet (2.1
m). It appears that Bliss Rapids snails
are found primarily in areas less than 3
feet (0.9 m) deep, although this may be
an artifact of more intensive sampling at
shallow depths (Richards et al. 2006,
pp. 43, 52–56). Nevertheless, our
current understanding based on the best
available information, is that a majority
of Bliss Rapids snails in the Snake River
occupy shallow water. Furthermore,
Bliss Rapids snails in these shallowwater areas are susceptible to the effects
from peak loading operations, including
desiccation and freezing when water
E:\FR\FM\16SEP1.SGM
16SEP1
47540
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 178 / Wednesday, September 16, 2009 / Proposed Rules
levels drop and expose snails to
atmospheric conditions.
Laboratory studies have shown that
peak-loading during winter months, a
time when the species is reproducing, is
likely to result in mortality of individual
Bliss Rapids snails. Air temperatures
within the range of Bliss Rapids snails
in Idaho regularly fall below 32 degrees
F (0 degrees C) between November and
March (Richards 2006a, p. 28). In a
laboratory study conducted by Richards
(2006a, p. 12), half of the Bliss Rapids
snails subjected to a temperature of 19
degrees F (minus 7 degrees C) died in
less than an hour. In a field study,
Richards (unpublished data, cited in
Richards et al. 2006, pp. 125–126) found
that Bliss Rapids snails could survive
for many hours to several days in moist
conditions (i.e., undersides of cobbles)
and when air temperatures were above
freezing (32 degrees F (0 degrees C))
(Richards et al. 2006, p. 125). Although
the mortality rate outside of these
conditions has not been documented in
field studies or after an actual peak
loading event, work by other
researchers, utilizing laboratorycontrolled aquaria, found Bliss Rapids
snail mortality to be up to 100 percent
under conditions characteristic (winter
low and summer high temperatures) of
some hydropower operations in the
middle Snake River (Richards and
Kerans 2007, p. 4). Based on the above
information, peak loading likely affects
individual Bliss Rapids snails through
desiccation and freezing but the effects
of peak loading on the survival of Bliss
Rapids snail colonies in riverine
habitats is unknown at this time.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
Degraded Water Quality
In the 1992 final listing rule we
stated: ‘‘The quality of water in [snail]
habitats has a direct effect on the
species survival. The [Bliss Rapids
snail] require[s] cold, well-oxygenated
unpolluted water for survival. Any
factor that leads to deterioration in
water quality would likely extirpate [the
Bliss Rapids snail]’’ (57 FR 59252). New
information has become available
indicating some improvements to Snake
River water quality. Significant nutrient
and sediment reduction has occurred in
the Snake River following
implementation of the Idaho Nutrient
Management Act and regulated Total
Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)
reductions from the mid-1990s to the
present (Richards et al. 2006, pp. 5–6,
86). The Mid-Snake River reach also
receives a large infusion of clean, coldwater spring flows and supports the
highest densities and occurrence of
Bliss Rapids snails.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:46 Sep 15, 2009
Jkt 217001
Hypereutrophy (planktonic algal
blooms and nuisance rooted aquatic
plant growths), prior to listing in 1992,
was very severe during drought cycles
when deposition of sediments and
organic matter blanketed river substrate
often resulting in unsuitable habitat
conditions for Bliss Rapids snails.
Although some nutrient and sediment
reduction has been documented in the
Snake River since listing (Richards et al.
2006, p. 5), there are still large inflows
of agriculture and aquaculture runoff
entering the river at Twin Falls to Lower
Salmon Falls dam (RM 573). As a result,
nutrient and sediment concentrations
can be relatively high in this portion of
the river, especially during lower
summer flows (Richards et al. 2006, p.
91).
Phosphorus concentrations, the key
nutrient leading to hypereutrophic
conditions in the middle Snake River,
exceeded Environmental Protection
Agency (USEPA) guidelines for the
control of nuisance algae at numerous
locations along the Snake River from
1989 to 2002, including areas
immediately upstream of Bliss Rapids
snail colonies (Hardy et al. 2005, p. 13).
Several water quality assessments have
been completed by the USEPA, USBR,
and IPC, and all generally agree that
water quality in the Snake River of
southern Idaho meets Idaho water
quality standards for aquatic life for
some months of the year, but may not
meet these standards when
temperatures are high and flows are low
(Meitl 2002, p. 33). Idaho Department of
Environmental Quality’s (IDEQ) 2005
performance and progress report to the
USEPA states that projects are meeting
the Idaho non-point source pollution
program goals (IDEQ 2006, 115 pp.).
Others report that water quality has not
improved appreciably between 1989
and 2002 (Hardy et al. 2005, pp. 19–21,
49, 51).
Several reaches of the Snake River are
classified as water-quality-impaired due
to the presence of one or more
pollutants (e.g., Total Phosphorus (TP),
sediments (TSS), total coliforms) in
excess of State or Federal guidelines.
Nutrient-enriched waters primarily
enter the Snake River via springs,
tributaries, fish farm effluents,
municipal waste treatment facilities,
and irrigation returns (USEPA 2002, pp.
4–18 to 4–24). Irrigation water returned
to rivers is generally warmer, contains
pesticides or pesticide byproducts, has
been enriched with nutrients from fish
farms and land-based agriculture (e.g.,
nitrogen and phosphorous), and
frequently contains elevated sediment
loads. Pollutants in fish farm effluent
include nutrients derived from
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
metabolic wastes of the fish and
unconsumed fish food, disinfectants,
bacteria, and residual quantities of
drugs used to control disease outbreaks.
Furthermore, elevated levels of fine
sediments, nitrogen, and trace elements
(including cadmium, chromium,
copper, lead, and zinc), have been
measured immediately downstream of
several aquaculture discharges (Hinson
2003, pp. 44–45). Additionally,
concentrations of lead, cadmium, and
arsenic have been previously detected
in snails collected during a research
study in the Snake River (Richards
2002). The effects of these elevated
levels of nutrients and trace elements on
Bliss Rapids snails, both individually
and synergistically, are not fully
understood. However, studies have
shown another native Snake River snail,
the Jackson Lake springsnail
(Pyrgulopsis robusta), to be relatively
sensitive to copper (a common
component in algaecides) and
pentachlorophenol, a restricted use
pesticide/wood preservative (Ingersoll
2006), and Bliss Rapids snails are
known to be highly sensitive to copper,
ammonia, and pentachlorophenol
(Besser et al. 2008).
Water Diversions and Ground Water
Withdrawals
Threats to cold water springinfluenced habitats from ground water
withdrawal and diversions for irrigation
and aquaculture are not as they were
perceived when the Bliss Rapids snail
was listed in 1992. At the time the
species was listed in 1992, the threat
from ground water withdrawal was
identified only at Box Canyon, and the
scope of this threat was underestimated.
Based on the best available data, we
now know that this threat is likely to
affect the Bliss Rapids snail throughout
its range. In concert with the historical
losses of habitat to surface diversions of
spring water for irrigation and
aquaculture, the continuing decline of
the groundwater aquifer is one of the
primary threats to the long-term
viability of the Bliss Rapids snail.
Average annual spring flows
increased from about 4,400 cubic feet
per second (cfs) in 1910, to
approximately 6,500 cfs in the early
1960s, because widespread flood
irrigation caused artificial recharge of
the aquifer (Richards et al. 2006, pp. 84,
87). As a result of more efficient
irrigation practices from 1960 to the
present (i.e., switching from flood
irrigation or direct surface diversion to
more efficient center-pivot irrigation
systems utilizing ground water), more
water was pumped from the aquifer
while water percolation into the aquifer
E:\FR\FM\16SEP1.SGM
16SEP1
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 178 / Wednesday, September 16, 2009 / Proposed Rules
declined, resulting in declines (from the
high values of the 1960s) in average
annual spring flows to about 5,000 cfs
(Richards et al. 2006, pp. 84, 87).
Although the current spring flow levels
are total about 15 percent higher than
average spring flows measured in 1910,
they are declining. We anticipate spring
flows will likely continue to decline in
the near future, even as waterconservation measures are implemented
and are being developed as water
demands in the vicinity continue to
increase (USFWS 2008b).
The State of Idaho has taken steps to
improve ground water recharge and
limit new ground water development
within the eastern Snake River plain;
however, the Snake River Plain aquifer
level continues to decline (USFWS
2008b). Effects from the over-allocation
of ground water and the subsequent
declining ground water levels appear to
be more of a threat than previously
thought. Evidence indicates that springs
from the Eastern Snake River Aquifer
where the Bliss Rapids snail resides
depend on ground water levels and that
the ground water levels are declining
(USFWS 2008b) even with ongoing
measures attempting to address the
decline (Caswell 2007). Spring sites are
important since Bliss Rapids snail
colonies that occur in springs have been
shown to be a source of genetic diversity
to riverine colonies and to contain four
times as many private (i.e., unique)
alleles (n=16) compared to riverine
populations (Liu and Hershler 2009, p.
1296). Colonies in springs or at their
outflows are also the most dense, may
account for most of the reproductive
output of the species, and likely act as
refugia from competition with invasive
New Zealand mudsnails (see Factor E,
below). Finally, if spring colonies are
lost, particularly those at the upstream
end of the species’ distribution, the
probability of recolonization is likely to
be extremely small (USFWS 2008b).
Summary of Factor A: Our
understanding of the threats to the Bliss
Rapids snail has changed since we
listed the species in 1992. Some threats
are now known to be removed (i.e., new
hydropower dam construction) while
other threats have emerged (i.e.,
depletion of groundwater that supports
the spring colonies). All proposals for
the construction of new hydropower
dams have either expired or been
withdrawn. The Bliss Rapids snail
occurs in riverine and spring or springinfluenced habitats, but is not known to
occur in reservoir habitats. Some
colonies of Bliss Rapids snails are
known to occur in shallow-water areas
that are susceptible to peak loading
operations (i.e., below the Bliss Dam
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:46 Sep 15, 2009
Jkt 217001
(RM 560) and the Lower Salmon Falls
Dam (RM 573)). Individual snails may
be affected by desiccation and freezing
when water levels drop and expose
snails to atmospheric conditions, but
the effects on these colonies are
unknown. Water quality appears to have
improved in the Snake River, but new
research has indicated that the species
is sensitive to the toxic effects of some
aquatic contaminants such as copper,
which is known to be used in
aquaculture and discharged from
facilities into the Snake River. Springs
or spring-influenced habitats are
vulnerable from the effects of ongoing
and anticipated future ground water
depletion and degraded ground water
quality. Spring flows at several
occupied spring sites have been
declining due to continued ground
water withdrawal from the Eastern
Snake River Plain Aquifer. If spring
colonies are lost, it is unlikely that areas
would be recolonized and a loss of
occupied springs may reduce genetic
diversity and eliminate rare alleles.
Spring colonies are also important as
they may provide refugia from
competition with New Zealand
mudsnails (see Factor E, below).
Therefore, destruction, modification, or
curtailment of the Bliss Rapids snail’s
habitat or range is an ongoing primary
threat to the Bliss Rapids snail that is
likely to contribute to the species
becoming endangered in the foreseeable
future.
Factor B. Overutilization for
Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
Based on the best available scientific
and commercial information, we believe
that overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific or educational
purposes is not currently placing the
Bliss Rapids snail in danger of
extinction, and is not likely to result in
the endangerment or extinction of the
species in the foreseeable future. There
is no known commercial or recreational
use of the species and collections for
scientific or educational purposes are
likely limited in scope and extent.
While collection could result in
mortality of individuals within a small
area, it is unlikely to have a population
level effect because only a few
individuals and institutions are
interested in collecting a small number
of individuals of the species.
Factor C. Disease or Predation
Parasitic trematodes similar to those
of the genus Microphallus have been
identified in some freshwater snails in
Idaho (e.g., Pyrgulopsis robusta);
however, the occurrence of trematode
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
47541
parasites in Bliss Rapids snail has not
been studied (Dybdahl et al. 2005, p. 8).
Predators of the Bliss Rapids snail
have not been documented, but we
assume that some predation by native
and nonnative species occurs. Predation
on aquatic snails by crayfish and fish is
well documented (Lodge et al. 1994, p.
1265; Martin et al. 1992, p. 476; Merrick
et al. 1992, p. 225; Lodge et al. 1998, p.
53).
Based on the best available scientific
and commercial information, disease or
predation is not currently threatening
the viability of the Bliss Rapids snail
and is not expected to threaten its
viability in the foreseeable future.
Factor D. Inadequacy of Existing
Regulatory Mechanisms
In the 1992 final listing rule, we
found inadequate regulatory
mechanisms to be a threat because: (1)
Regulations were inadequate to curb
further water withdrawal from ground
water spring outflows or tributary spring
streams; (2) it was unlikely that
pollution control regulations would
reverse the trend in nutrient loading in
the near future; (3) there was a lack of
State-mandated protections for
invertebrate species in Idaho; and (4)
regulations did not require FERC or the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to address
Service concerns regarding licensing
hydroelectric projects or permitting
projects under the Clean Water Act
(CWA) for unlisted snails. Below, we
address each of these concerns in turn.
Ground Water Withdrawal Regulations
The Idaho Department of Water
Resources (IDWR) manages water in the
State of Idaho. Among the IDWR’s
responsibilities is the development of
the State Water Plan (IDWR 2006a). The
State Water Plan was updated in 1996
and included a table of Federally
threatened and endangered species in
Idaho, such as the Bliss Rapids snail.
The State Water Plan outlines objectives
for the conservation, development,
management, and optimum use of all
unappropriated waters in the State. One
of these objectives is to ‘‘maintain, and
where possible enhance water quality
and water-related habitats’’ (IDWR
2006a). It is the intent of the State Water
Plan that any water savings realized by
conservation or improved efficiencies is
appropriated to other beneficial uses
(e.g., agriculture, hydropower, or fish
and wildlife).
Another IDWR regulatory mechanism
is the ability of the Idaho Water
Resource Board to designate ‘‘in-stream
flows’’ (IDWR 2006b). The IDWR
currently has 89 licensed water rights
for minimum in-stream flows in Idaho
E:\FR\FM\16SEP1.SGM
16SEP1
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
47542
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 178 / Wednesday, September 16, 2009 / Proposed Rules
(IDWR 2006b). Of these, 11 potentially
have conservation benefits for Bliss
Rapids snails (i.e., provide for minimum
in-stream flows near tributary spring
outflows that provide habitat for Bliss
Rapids snails). However, individuals
that hold water rights with earlier
priority dates have the right to fill their
needs before the minimum stream flow
is considered. If there is not enough
water available to satisfy all of the water
rights, then the senior water rights are
satisfied first, and so on in order, until
there is no water left. It is the junior
water right holders that do not get water
when there is not enough to satisfy all
the water rights. Senior diversions can
legally dewater the stream in a drought
year or when low flows occur, leaving
no water for the minimum stream flow
(IDWR 2009), therefore impacting
species such as the Bliss Rapids snail.
The IDWR and other State agencies
have also created additional regulatory
mechanisms that limit future surface
and ground water development; they
include the continuation of various
moratoria on new consumptive water
rights and the designation of Water
Management Districts (Caswell 2007).
The State is attempting to stabilize
aquifer levels and enhance cold water
spring outflows from the Eastern Snake
River Plain by implementing water
conservation measures to be proposed
in the Comprehensive Aquifer
Management Plan (CAMP) for this area
(Barker et al. 2007). The goal of the
CAMP is to ‘‘sustain the economic
viability and social and environmental
health of the Eastern Snake Plain by
adaptively managing a balance between
water use and supplies.’’ The CAMP
will include several alternatives in an
attempt to increase water supply, reduce
withdrawals from the aquifer, and
decrease overall demand for
groundwater (Barker et al. 2007).
In addition, the State of Idaho
established moratoria in 1993 (the year
after listing of the Bliss Rapids snail)
that restricted further surface-water and
groundwater withdrawals for
consumptive uses from the Snake River
Plain aquifer between American Falls
Reservoir and C.J. Strike Reservoir. The
1993 moratoria were extended by
Executive Order in 2004 (Caswell 2006,
attachment 1). However, these actions
have not yet resulted in stabilization of
aquifer levels. Depletion of spring flows
and declining groundwater levels are a
collective effect of drought conditions,
changes in irrigation practices (the use
of central-pivot sprinklers contribute
little to groundwater recharge), and
groundwater pumping (University of
Idaho 2007). The effects of groundwater
pumping downstream in the aquifer can
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:46 Sep 15, 2009
Jkt 217001
affect the upper reaches of the aquifer,
and the effects of groundwater pumping
can continue for decades after pumping
ceases (University of Idaho 2007).
Thus, we anticipate groundwater
levels will likely continue to decline in
the near future, even as waterconservation measures are
implemented, and are being developed.
Furthermore, species associated with
these springs that are dependent upon
the presence of water, such as the Bliss
Rapids snail, will likely experience
local extinctions without the
opportunity for recolonization (USFWS
2008b). Loss of a colony from any
individual habitat patch, without
subsequent recolonization, increases the
extinction risk for the species as a
whole, a phenomenon dubbed the
‘‘extinction ratchet’’ (Burkey and Reed
2006, p. 11).
Pollution Control Regulations
Since the 1992 final listing rule,
reductions in TSS and TP loading have
improved water quality in localized
reaches of the Snake River (Buhidar
2005) (see Factor A above). Various
State-managed water quality programs
are being implemented within the range
of the Bliss Rapids snail. These
programs are tiered off the Clean Water
Act (CWA), which requires States to
establish water-quality standards that
provide for (1) the protection and
propagation of fish, shellfish, and
wildlife, and (2) recreation in and on the
water. As required by the CWA, Idaho
has established water-quality standards
(e.g., for water temperature and
dissolved oxygen) for the protection of
cold-water biota (e.g., invertebrate
species) in many reaches of the Snake
River. The CWA also specifies that
States must include an antidegradation
policy in their water quality regulations
that protects water-body uses and highquality waters. Idaho’s antidegradation
policy, updated in the State’s 1993
triennial review, is detailed in their
Water Quality Standards (IDEQ 2009).
The IDEQ works closely with the
USEPA to manage point and non-point
sources of pollution to water bodies of
the State through the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
program under the CWA. IDEQ has not
been granted authority by the USEPA to
issue NPDES permits directly; all
NPDES permits are issued by the
USEPA Region 10 (USEPA 2009). These
NPDES permits are written to meet all
applicable water-quality standards
established for a water body to protect
human health and aquatic life. Waters
that do not meet water-quality standards
due to point and non-point sources of
pollution are listed on EPA’s 303(d) list
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
of impaired water bodies. States must
submit to EPA a 303(d) list (waterquality-limited waters) and a 305(b)
report (status of the State’s waters) every
2 years. IDEQ, under authority of the
State Nutrient Management Act, is
coordinating efforts to identify and
quantify contributing sources of
pollutants (including nutrient and
sediment loading) to the Snake River
basin via the Total Maximum Daily
Load (TMDL) approach. In water bodies
that are currently not meeting waterquality standards, the TMDL approach
applies pollution-control strategies
through several of the following
programs: State Agricultural Water
Quality Program, Clean Water Act
section 401 Certification, BLM Resource
Management plans, the State Water
Plan, and local ordinances. Several
TMDLs have been approved by the
USEPA in stream segments within the
range of the Bliss Rapids snail in the
Snake River or its tributaries (Buhidar
2006), although most apply only to TSS,
TP, or temperature. Therefore, these
stream segments do not yet have water
quality attributes that are protective of
the Bliss Rapids snail until the TMDL
approach has sufficient time to bring the
stream segment water quality in line
with approved standards.
State Invertebrate Species Regulations
There has been no change in State
regulations regarding invertebrate
protections since the time of listing.
Take of Bliss Rapids snails is not
regulated under Idaho State law.
Federal Consultation Regulations
In Idaho, the USEPA retains authority
for the issuance of permits through the
NPDES, which is designed to manage
point source discharges. There are
presently more than 80 licensed
aquaculture facilities on the Snake River
permitted by the USEPA (USEPA 2002,
pp. 4–19, 4–20). Updated draft permits
for aquaculture and fish processing
facilities throughout Idaho have recently
been made available for public review
(71 FR 35269). Draft permits have been
issued for aquaculture facilities on
Billingsley Creek, Riley Creek, Niagara
Springs, and Thousands Springs, all
within the known range of the Bliss
Rapids snail. Facilities that produce less
than 20,000 pounds (9,072 kilograms) of
fish annually are not required to obtain
an NPDES permit (USEPA 2006, p. 3–
1). These smaller facilities lie outside of
this regulatory nexus, and as such their
discharges are not regulated or reported.
Since the species was listed in 1992,
Federal agencies, including the Army
Corps of Engineers and the FERC, have
been required to comply with section 7
E:\FR\FM\16SEP1.SGM
16SEP1
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 178 / Wednesday, September 16, 2009 / Proposed Rules
of the Act on any projects or managed
activities that may affect the Bliss
Rapids snail. If the species is delisted,
terms and conditions now required of
these agencies and their applicants to
reduce the effects of their actions on the
Bliss Rapids snail, such as placing
conservation measures into agency
permits, would not be required (e.g., see
USFWS 2007). Currently, IPC and the
Service are cooperating in a Settlement
Agreement (Agreement) approved by the
FERC. This Agreement was designed to
assess potential effects of the IPC’s
operations in the Wiley and Dike
Reaches, and was approved as part of
the biological opinion and license
issuance for the Lower Salmon Falls and
Bliss Projects. These studies and their
analyses are scheduled to be completed
in 2009.
The BLM manages more than 260
million acres of land in the 11 western
States, including land adjacent to the
Snake River in Idaho. The BLM manages
activities on Federal lands such as
outdoor recreation, livestock grazing,
mining development, and energy
production to conserve natural,
historical, cultural, and other resources
on the public lands (USBLM 2006). In
Idaho, the BLM has been consulting
with the Service pursuant to section 7
of the Act on ongoing BLM actions that
may affect the Bliss Rapids snail.
Through these consultation efforts,
coordinated and cooperative
conservation measures have been added
to proposed actions (e.g., new or
renewed grazing permits on public
lands) to minimize impacts to the
species. Programmatic guidance and
direction, documented through a
conservation agreement between the
BLM and Service, has increased the
likelihood that conservation benefits
may be realized for new, re-authorized,
and ongoing actions; however, without
the continued protections of the Act,
there are no regulatory assurances that
these conservation measures would
continue.
Summary of Factor D: While there are
no specific State regulations protecting
the Bliss Rapids snail, the primary
threats identified in the final listing rule
were related to the loss or alteration of
the species’ aquatic habitat. Regulatory
mechanisms such as Idaho’s water
quality standards and TMDLs will
continue to apply to habitats occupied
by the Bliss Rapids snail. Water quality
in some stretches of the Snake River has
improved, primarily for phosphorus and
TSS. New research indicates the species
is sensitive to some aquatic
contaminants such as copper, ammonia,
and pentachlorophenol. Ground water
withdrawal and the subsequent decline
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:46 Sep 15, 2009
Jkt 217001
47543
1992, p. 50; Richards et al. 2006, pp. 67–
68).
The physiological tolerances of the
New Zealand mudsnail, including
temperature and water velocity
(Winterbourn 1969, pp. 457, 458; Lysne
and Koetsier 2006b, p. 81); life history
attributes such as high fecundity and
growth rates (Richards 2004, pp. 25–34);
and wide variety of habitat use such as
springs, rivers, reservoirs, and ditches
(Cada 2004, pp. 27, 28; USBR 2002, pp.
3, 11; Hall et al. 2003, pp. 407, 408;
Clark et al. 2005, pp. 10, 32–35;
Richards 2004, pp. 47–67), may provide
the New Zealand mudsnail a
competitive advantage over Bliss Rapids
snails outside of cold headwater
springs.
Summary of Factor E: Studies since
the time of listing indicate that
competition for resources occurs
between the New Zealand mudsnail and
the Bliss Rapids snail due to similar life
history requirements. The New Zealand
mudsnail has become established and
widely distributed in the Snake River
and its tributaries, however we do not
know what this expansion has done to
the distribution and abundance of Bliss
Factor E. Other Natural or Manmade
Rapids snails. The current information
Factors Affecting the Species’ Continued is inconclusive as to whether the New
Existence
Zealand mudsnail presently endangers
The final listing rule stated that New
the Bliss Rapids snail, largely because
Zealand mudsnails (Potamopyrgus
Bliss Rapids snails appear to have
antipodarum) were not abundant in
refugia from competition with New
cold water springflows with colonies of
Zealand mudsnails in headwater
Bliss Rapids snails, but that they did
springs. However, the available
compete with the Bliss Rapids snail in
evidence suggests that the New Zealand
the mainstem Snake River (57 FR 59254; mudsnail may endanger the Bliss
December 14, 1992). We have no direct
Rapids snail in the foreseeable future
evidence that New Zealand mudsnails
given projected declines in aquifer
have displaced colonies of Bliss Rapids
levels, which will likely cause the
snails, but New Zealand mudsnails have extirpation of Bliss Rapids snails from
been documented in dark mats at
these refugia.
densities of nearly 400 individuals per
Conclusion
square inch in free-flowing habitats
In making a finding on whether or not
within the range of the Bliss Rapids
a species warrants listing under the Act
snail (57 FR 59254). Richards et al.
we must consider the legal definitions
(2006, pp. 61, 64, 68) found that Bliss
of ‘‘endangered’’ and ‘‘threatened.’’ A
Rapids snails may be competitively
excluded by New Zealand mudsnails in species is ‘‘endangered’’ for purposes of
the Act if it is in danger of extinction
most habitats, and that Bliss Rapids
snail densities would likely be higher in throughout all or ‘‘a significant portion
the absence of New Zealand mudsnails. of its range’’ and is ‘‘threatened’’ if it is
likely to become endangered within the
Both species are mostly scraper-grazers
foreseeable future throughout all or a
on algae and have similar resource
significant portion of its range
requirements (Richards et al. 2006, pp.
(emphasis added). The Act does not
59, 66). Furthermore, New Zealand
define the term ‘‘foreseeable future.’’
mudsnails have become established in
However, in a January 16, 2009
every cold water spring-fed creek or
memorandum addressed to the Acting
tributary to the Hagerman Reach of the
Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Snake River that has been surveyed
Service, the Office of the Solicitor,
(USFWS 2007). However, New Zealand
Department of the Interior, concluded,
mudsnails do not appear able to
‘‘* * * as used in the [Act], Congress
colonize headwater spring habitats,
intended the term ‘foreseeable future’ to
which may provide Bliss Rapids snails
describe the extent to which the
refugia from competition with New
Secretary can reasonably rely on
Zealand mudsnails (Frest and Johannes
of the aquifer that feeds springs where
the species occurs is a prominent threat.
Depletion of cold water spring flows
and declining ground water levels are a
collective result of drought conditions,
changes in irrigation practices, and
ground water pumping. The effects of
ground water pumping downstream in
the aquifer can affect the upper reaches
of the aquifer, and the effects of ground
water pumping can continue for
decades after pumping ceases. Thus, we
anticipate ground water levels will
likely continue to decline even if water
conservation measures are implemented
or are being developed. Some
conservation benefits to the species are
being realized through section 7
consultation with other Federal
agencies, but without the Act’s
protection there are no regulatory
assurances that these conservation
benefits would continue. Based on this
information, the inadequacy of existing
regulatory mechanisms represents an
ongoing threat to the Bliss Rapids snail
that is likely to contribute to the species
becoming endangered in the foreseeable
future.
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\16SEP1.SGM
16SEP1
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
47544
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 178 / Wednesday, September 16, 2009 / Proposed Rules
predictions about the future in making
determinations about the future
conservation status of the species.’’ In
considering the foreseeable future as it
relates to the status of the Bliss Rapids
snail, we considered the (1) biological
and demographic characteristics of the
species (such as habitat requirements
(water depth, substrate, and
temperature), spring vs. riverine
colonies, and dispersal and
recolonization ability), (2) our ability to
predict or extrapolate the effects of
threats facing the species into the future,
and the (3) the relative permanency or
irreversibility of these threats.
The Bliss Rapids snail is a species
endemic to Idaho and occurs primarily
in cold water spring tributaries and the
ground water influenced areas within
the Snake River. Studies conducted
since the species was listed in 1992
indicate that the species’ overall
geographic range has not substantially
changed since it was first described by
Hershler et al. (1994), but the species
has been detected in more riverine, cold
water springs, and spring tributary
locations within its historical range. The
Bliss Rapids snail has specific and
rather narrow habitat requirements in
the form of suitable substrate and water
temperature.
As discussed in the Summary of
Factors section, we believe, based on the
best available data, that it is reasonable
to expect the primary threats (i.e.,
reduced ground water levels, water
quality and pollution concerns, and
competition from nonnative species) to
Bliss Rapids snails will continue to
occur throughout the range of the
species and to affect all colonies into the
future. Ground water levels are expected
to continue to decline, resulting in
increased risks to spring and springinfluenced colonies beginning at the
upstream end of the species’ range.
Recent data show that spring colonies of
Bliss Rapids snail contain rare alleles,
and loss of such colonies are likely to
reduce genetic diversity, which in turn
reduces the species’ ability to respond
to changes in environmental conditions.
If current ground water trends
continue—and we have a reasonable
expectation that they will based on the
best available data—we expect some
colonies to become extirpated as sites
become unsuitable for Bliss Rapids
snails due to reduced flows and
degraded water quality. Loss of spring
colonies is also likely to result in the
loss of potentially important refugia
from competition with the New Zealand
mudsnail. Without the cold water spring
refugia that provide stable
environmental conditions (relative to
riverine habitats), there is significant
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:46 Sep 15, 2009
Jkt 217001
uncertainty regarding the ability of
riverine populations to persist in the
face of ongoing competition with New
Zealand mudsnails. These uncertainties
are exacerbated by existing hydropower
operations that result in unknown levels
of mortality to Bliss Rapids snails in the
riverine environment, and the relatively
low densities of Bliss Rapids snails in
riverine habitats. Because of these
significant uncertainties, if spring
populations were lost due to
groundwater depletion and/or changes
to water quality in the springs, we
would have little confidence that the
Bliss Rapids snail could persist in the
riverine environment alone.
Therefore, we have determined that
the Bliss Rapids snail is not now in
danger of extinction, but is likely to
become endangered in the foreseeable
future based on the expected persistence
of threats from reduced ground water
levels, water quality and pollution
concerns, and competition from
nonnative species.
Significant Portion of the Range
Analysis
Having determined that the Bliss
Rapids snail is likely to become
endangered within the foreseeable
future throughout all or a significant
portion of its range, we must next
consider whether there are any
significant portions of its range that are
currently in danger of extinction. The
Act defines an endangered species as
one ‘‘in danger of extinction throughout
all or a significant portion of its range,’’
and a threatened species as one ‘‘likely
to become an endangered species within
the foreseeable future throughout all or
a significant portion of its range.’’ The
term ‘‘significant portion of its range’’ is
not defined by statute. For purposes of
this finding, a portion of a species’ range
is significant if it is part of the current
range of the species and is important to
the conservation of the species because
it contributes meaningfully to the
representation, resiliency, or
redundancy of the species. The
contribution must be at a level such that
its loss would result in a decrease in the
ability to conserve the species.
The first step in determining whether
a species is threatened or endangered in
a significant portion of its range is to
identify any portions of the range that
warrant further consideration. The range
of a species can theoretically be divided
into portions in an infinite number of
ways. However, there is no purpose to
analyzing portions of the range that are
not reasonably likely to be significant
and threatened or endangered. To
identify only those portions that warrant
further consideration, we determine
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
whether there is substantial information
indicating that (1) the portions may be
significant and (2) the species may be in
danger of extinction there or likely to
become so within the foreseeable future.
In practice, a key part of this analysis is
whether the threats are geographically
concentrated in some way. If the threats
to the species are essentially uniform
throughout its range, no portion is likely
to warrant further consideration. If any
concentration of threats applies only to
portions of the range that are
unimportant to the conservation of the
species, such portions will not warrant
further consideration.
If we identify any portions that
warrant further consideration, we then
determine whether in fact the species is
threatened or endangered in any
significant portion of its range.
Depending on the biology of the species,
its range, and the threats it faces, it may
be more efficient in some cases for the
Service to address the significance
question first, and, in others, the status
question first. Thus, if the Service
determines that a portion of the range is
not significant, the Service need not
determine whether the species is
threatened or endangered there;
conversely, if the Service determines
that the species is not threatened or
endangered in a portion of its range, the
Service need not determine if that
portion is significant.
If the Service determines that both a
portion of the range of a species is
significant and the species is threatened
or endangered there, the Service will
specify that portion of the range where
the species is in danger of extinction
pursuant to section 4(c)(1) of the Act.
The terms ‘‘resiliency,’’
‘‘redundancy,’’ and ‘‘representation’’ are
intended to be indicators of the
conservation value of portions of the
species’ range. Resiliency allows the
species to recover from periodic
disturbance. A species will likely be
more resilient if large populations exist
in high-quality habitat that is
distributed throughout the range of the
species in such a way as to capture the
environmental variability within the
range of the species. It is likely that the
larger size of a population will help
contribute to the viability of the species.
Thus, a portion of the range of a species
may make a meaningful contribution to
the resiliency of the species if the area
is relatively large and contains
particularly high-quality habitat or if its
location or characteristics make it less
susceptible to certain threats than other
portions of the range. When evaluating
whether or how a portion of the range
contributes to resiliency of the species,
it may help to evaluate the historical
E:\FR\FM\16SEP1.SGM
16SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 178 / Wednesday, September 16, 2009 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
value of the portion and how frequently
the portion is used by the species. In
addition, the portion may contribute to
resiliency for other reasons—for
instance, it may contain an important
concentration of certain types of habitat
that are necessary for the species to
carry out its life history functions, such
as breeding, feeding, migration,
dispersal, or wintering.
Redundancy of populations may be
needed to provide a margin of safety for
the species to withstand catastrophic
events. This does not mean that any
portion that provides redundancy is a
significant portion of the range of a
species. The idea is to conserve enough
areas of the range such that random
perturbations in the system act on only
a few populations. Therefore, each area
must be examined based on whether
that area provides an increment of
redundancy that is important to the
conservation of the species.
Adequate representation insures that
the species’ adaptive capabilities are
conserved. Specifically, the portion
should be evaluated to see how it
contributes to the genetic diversity of
the species. The loss of genetic diversity
may substantially reduce the ability of
the species to respond and adapt to
future environmental changes. A
peripheral population may contribute
meaningfully to representation if there
is evidence that it provides genetic
diversity due to its location on the
margin of the species’ habitat
requirements.
Based upon factors that contribute to
our analysis of whether a species or
subspecies is in danger of extinction
throughout all or a significant portion of
its range, and in consideration of the
status of, and threats to, the Bliss Rapids
snail discussed previously, we find that
the primary threats to the continued
existence of the Bliss Rapids snail occur
throughout all of its range. Therefore, it
is not necessary to conduct further
analysis with respect to the significance
of any portion of its range.
Finding
On the basis of the best available
scientific and commercial information,
as discussed above, we find that the
Bliss Rapids snail is likely to become
endangered within the foreseeable
future (i.e., it is threatened, as defined
by the Act). Therefore, removing the
Bliss Rapids snail from the List is not
warranted.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited
herein is available upon request from
the Idaho Fish and Wildlife Office (see
ADDRESSES).
VerDate Nov<24>2008
18:54 Sep 15, 2009
Jkt 217001
Author
The primary authors of this document
are the Idaho Fish and Wildlife Office
(see ADDRESSES).
Authority
The authority for this action is the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: August 26, 2009.
Daniel M. Ashe,
Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. E9–21949 Filed 9–15–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 660
[Docket No. 0907281183–91184–01]
RIN 0648–AX98
Fisheries off West Coast States;
Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; Data
Collection for the Trawl Rationalization
Program
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for
comments.
SUMMARY: NMFS proposes to collect
data to support implementation of a
future trawl rationalization program
under the Pacific Coast Groundfish
Fishery Management Plan (FMP). NMFS
proposes to collect ownership
information from all potential
participants in the trawl rationalization
program. In addition, NMFS is notifying
potential participants that the agency
intends to use the Pacific States Marine
Fisheries Commission’s Pacific
Fisheries Information Network (PacFIN)
database and NMFS’ Northwest
Fisheries Science Center’s Pacific
whiting observer data from NORPAC (a
database of North Pacific fisheries and
Pacific whiting information) to
determine initial allocation of quota
share (QS) for the trawl rationalization
program, if it is approved and
implemented.
DATES: Comments on this proposed rule
must be received no later than 5 p.m.,
local time on October 16, 2009.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by RIN 0648–AX98 by any
one of the following methods:
Electronic Submissions: Submit all
electronic public comments via the
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
47545
Federal eRulemaking Portal https://
www.regulations.gov.
Fax: 206–526–6736, Attn: Jamie Goen.
Mail: Barry Thom, Acting
Administrator, Northwest Region,
NMFS, 7600 Sand Point Way NE,
Seattle, WA 98115–0070, Attn: Jamie
Goen.
Instructions: All comments received
are a part of the public record and will
generally be posted to https://
www.regulations.gov without change.
All Personal Identifying Information (for
example, name, address, etc.)
voluntarily submitted by the commenter
may be publicly accessible. Do not
submit Confidential Business
Information or otherwise sensitive or
protected information.
NMFS will accept anonymous
comments (enter N/A in the required
fields if you wish to remain
anonymous). Attachments to electronic
comments will be accepted in Microsoft
Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe
PDF file formats only. Written
comments regarding the burden-hour
estimates or other aspects of the
collection-of-information requirements
contained in this proposed rule may be
submitted to NMFS, Northwest Region
and by e-mail to
DavidlRostker@omb.eop.gov or fax to
(202) 395–7285.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jamie Goen, phone: 206–526–4656, fax:
206–526–6736, and e-mail
jamie.goen@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Electronic Access
This proposed rule is accessible via
the Internet at the Office of the Federal
Register’s Web site at https://
www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/.
Background information and documents
are available at the Pacific Fishery
Management Council’s website at https://
www.pcouncil.org/.
Background
Since 2003, the Pacific Fishery
Management Council (Council) has been
developing a trawl rationalization
program, which would affect the limited
entry trawl fishery of the Pacific Coast
groundfish fishery. The trawl
rationalization program is intended to
increase net economic benefits, create
individual economic stability, provide
full utilization of the trawl sector
allocation, consider environmental
impacts, and achieve individual
accountability of catch and bycatch.
The Council has developed the trawl
rationalization program through two
amendments to the Groundfish FMP: (1)
Amendment 20, the trawl
E:\FR\FM\16SEP1.SGM
16SEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 178 (Wednesday, September 16, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 47536-47545]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-21949]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2008-0073; 14420-1113-0000-C6]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Finding
on a Petition to Remove the Bliss Rapids Snail (Taylorconcha
serpenticola) From the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 12-month petition finding.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
12-month finding on a petition to remove the Bliss Rapids snail
(Taylorconcha serpenticola) from the Federal List of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife (List) pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (Act) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). Based on a thorough
review of the best scientific and commercial data available, the
species continues to be restricted to a small geographic area in the
middle-Snake River, Idaho, where it is dependent upon cool-water spring
outflows. Although some threats identified at the time of listing in
1992 no longer exist or have been moderated, ground water depletion and
impaired water quality still threaten the Bliss Rapids snail. In
addition, there are significant uncertainties about the effects of
hydropower operations and New Zealand mudsnails on the
[[Page 47537]]
persistence of Bliss Rapids snails in riverine habitats. In the absence
of the Act's protections, existing regulations are not likely to be
sufficient to conserve the species. Given our current understanding of
the species' geographic distribution, habitat requirements, and
threats, the species continues to meet the definition of a threatened
species under the Act. Therefore, we have determined that removing the
Bliss Rapids snail from the List is not warranted at this time.
DATES: We made the finding announced in this document September 16,
2009.
ADDRESSES: This notice is available on the Internet at https://www.fws.gov/idaho and at https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-
R1-ES-2008-0073. Supporting documentation we used in preparing this
notice will be available for public inspection, by appointment, during
normal business hours at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Idaho Fish
and Wildlife Office, 1387 S. Vinnell Way, Room 368, Boise, ID 87309;
telephone (208) 378-5243; facsimile (208) 378-5262. New information,
materials, comments, or questions concerning this species may be
submitted to the Service at the above address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Foss, Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, Idaho Fish and Wildlife Office, (see ADDRESSES
section). If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD),
you may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-
8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Species Information
The Bliss Rapids snail was first collected in 1959 at the Thousand
Springs Preserve in Idaho's Snake River by Dwight Taylor (57 FR 59244;
December 14, 1992) and formally described by Hershler et al. (Hershler
et al. 1994, p. 235) as Taylorconcha serpenticola in 1994. The Bliss
Rapids snail grows to approximately 0.08 to 0.16 inches (2.0 to 4.0
millimeter (mm)) in height. The shell is clear to white but appears to
have two morphs due to coloration of the periostracum (the shell's
outer layer). The periostracum can be very light tan to dark brown-red
resulting in the ``pale'' and ``orange'' forms, respectively. The Bliss
Rapids snail has approximately 3.5 to 4.5 whorls (turn or curl in the
shell) with the protoconch (apex or top of the shell) comprising about
1.5 whorls. The apex (the highest point of the shell) is blunt.
Bliss rapids snails hatch, reproduce, and die in a single year
(Hershler et al. 1994, pp. 239, 240). They are dioecous, having
strictly male and female individuals and may exhibit an iteroparous
(more than one reproductive event in an individual's lifetime)
reproductive strategy (Richards 2004, p. 119). The timing of
reproduction apparently varies by habitat-type. Egg-laying normally
occurs in spring colonies between December and March, while in river
colonies egg laying occurs in January and February (Hershler et al.
1994, p. 239). Eggs are laid singly, in small capsules attached to the
bottoms or sides of rocks (Hershler et al. 1994, p. 239). Emergence of
young typically takes place a few weeks after egg deposition depending
on water temperature (Dillon 2000, p. 103), but specific timing and
temperature information is lacking.
Bliss Rapids snails primarily consume epilithic periphyton (diatom
films that primarily grow on rock surfaces), as do many freshwater
snails (Richards 2006b). They may also consume quantities of detritus,
bacteria, and protozoa embedded in the simple sugar matrix (i.e., the
periphyton) on the surfaces of benthic (bottom) substrates.
Range
At the time of listing in 1992, the distribution of the Bliss
Rapids snail was thought to be discontinuous over 204 miles of the
Snake River in Idaho, between King Hill (river mile (RM) 546) and Lower
Salmon Falls Dam (RM 573) with a disjunct occurrence at RM 749. The
species' distribution upstream of Upper Salmon Falls Reservoir was
known to be localized to spring complexes (i.e., Thousand Springs (RM
585), Minnie Miller Springs (RM 585), Banbury Springs (RM 589), Niagara
Springs (RM 599), and Box Canyon Springs (RM 588)) (57 FR 59244;
December 14, 1992). This range was based on approximately 14 spring/
tributary collection points (Richards et al. 2006, p. 33). The reported
occurrence at RM 749 is now regarded as erroneous because: (1) Samples
from this collection have not been located to verify the occurrence
(Frest 2002); (2) the reported collection site is 150 river miles
upstream of the known distribution of the species (Pentec 1991 in 57 FR
59244); and, (3) numerous collection efforts in and above American
Falls Reservoir (U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) 2003; USBR 2004;
USBR 2005; Gregg 2006), and in the upper Snake River (Fields 2006) have
all failed to document the occurrence of the species.
The current known range of the Bliss Rapids snail is similar to
what was described at the time of listing (minus the erroneous location
at American Falls Reservoir). Increased sampling effort has documented
its presence at many more locations within its range. Based on 837
sample events conducted by the Idaho Power Company (IPC), the Bliss
Rapids snail is documented to occur within the non-reservoir sections
of the middle Snake River from approximately RM 547 to RM 572, and RM
580 (Richards et al. 2006, pp. 33-38). This represents a refined
distribution since the time of listing in 1992 due to more accurate
survey data.
Bliss Rapids snails are also known to occur in 14 springs or Snake
River tributary streams (from RM 552.8 to RM 604.5) derived from cold
water springs including: Bancroft Springs; Thousand Springs and Minnie
Miller Springs (Thousand Springs Preserve); Banbury Springs; Niagara
Springs; Crystal Springs; Briggs Springs; Blue Heart Springs; Box
Canyon Creek; Riley Creek; Sand Springs Creek; Elison Springs; the
Malad River; Cove Creek (a tributary to the Malad River); and the
headwater springs to Billingsley Creek (Richards et al. 2006, p. 2;
USFWS 2008a, p. 6).
The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) reported finding several Bliss
Rapids snails at Blue Lakes (approximately Snake River mile 610.4) in
1994, but surveys of this site in 1996 and 2007 did not locate the
species (Mebane 2007, Grotheer 2008). Over 200 springs or spring
clusters have been mapped or identified on the north side of the Snake
River canyon (Clark and Ott 1996, p. 559) where the Bliss Rapids snail
has been documented to occur. Springs also occur on the south side of
the Snake River canyon (Clark and Ott 1996, p. 559), but studies
conducted by the Idaho Power Company (IPC) have not observed Bliss
Rapids colonies in springs or tributaries on the south side (Bates and
Richards 2008). The species is likely present at additional springs on
private lands that have not been sampled (e.g., Hopper 2006b).
In summary, we now know the Bliss Rapids snail to be distributed
discontinuously over 22 miles, from RM 547-560, RM 566-572, and at RM
580 on the Snake River and to occur in 14 springs or tributaries to the
Snake River. The area between RM 561-565 represents reservoir areas
where the Bliss Rapids snail does not occur. The species' overall
geographic range has not substantially changed since it was first
described by Hershler et al. (1994), but the species has been detected
at more locations within its range.
Habitat Use
The Bliss Rapids snail occurs in cold water springs and spring-fed
tributaries to the Snake River (hereafter referred to
[[Page 47538]]
as spring colonies), and in some reaches of the Snake River (hereafter
referred to as river colonies). Available data indicate that spring
colonies are consistently larger, at least in terms of density and
relative abundance, than river colonies (Stephenson and Bean 2003, pp.
12, 18; Stephenson et al. 2004, p. 24; Richards et al. 2006, pp. 97-
99). The species is absent from reservoirs (Hershler et al. 1994, p.
237; Finni 2003, p. 28; Richards et al. 2006, p. 35), patchily
distributed and in low densities in the mainstem Snake River
(Stephenson et al. 2004, pp. 11, 22, 24; Richards et al. 2006, p. 37),
and relatively abundant, though patchily distributed in spring habitats
(Stephenson and Bean 2003, pp. 12, 18; Richards 2004, pp. 59-69;
Richards et al. 2006, p. 37).
The Bliss Rapids snail is known to occur on stable, cobble
substrates in unimpounded sections of the mainstem Snake River
(Richards et al. 2006, pp. 35, 41), on cobble-boulder substrates in the
Malad River (Stephenson and Clark 2004, p. 33), and on various
substrates in several spring complexes (Stephenson and Myers 2003, p.
5). The species is generally not found in, or on, very fine (silt)
sediments (Hershler et al. 1994, p. 237; Richards et al. 2006, p. 23),
but has been documented infrequently on sand and gravel (Stephenson and
Myers 2003, p. 5), aquatic vegetation (Lysne 2006), and coarse woody
debris (Hopper 2006a, Lysne 2006). A notable exception to this
characterization of habitat use is the presence of Bliss Rapids snails
on fine sediments (silt/gravel) at the upper pool in Cove Creek
(Stephenson and Myers 2003, p. 5), a cold water spring creek tributary
to the Malad River. Overall, the cobble-boulder substrate is considered
to be the dominant habitat type where the Bliss Rapids snail is found
(Richards et al. 2006, p. 51).
Field studies and observations have demonstrated that the species
uses the sides and bottoms of cobbles preferentially to the exclusion
of cobble tops (Richards 2004, pp. 32-34). The Bliss Rapids snail is
found at various water depths in springs ranging from 0.3 to 3 feet
(0.1-1 meters (m)), and in spring-fed tributary habitats ranging from
0.07 to 3.35 feet (0.02-1.02 m) (Stephenson and Myers 2003, pp. 23-35;
Stephenson and Clark 2004, p. 32). This species has also been
documented to occur at depths up to 20 feet (6.1 m) in the mainstem
Snake River (Richards et al. 2006, p. 52). Most Bliss Rapids snails are
found in less than 3 feet (0.9 m) of water (Richards et al. 2006, p.
43) but this could be due to sampling effort.
The Bliss Rapids snail has been collected in water temperatures
ranging from 44.6 to 69.8 degrees Fahrenheit (F) (7 to 21 degrees
Celsius (C)) (Finni 2003, p. 14; Clark et al. 2005, p. 55), but is
generally found in water temperatures between 59 and 60.8 degrees F (15
and 16 degrees C) (Hershler et al. 1994, p. 237). Richards et al.
(2001, p. 377) collected Bliss Rapids snails from Banbury Springs in
thermally constant waters measuring 55.2 to 61.5 degrees F (12.9 to
16.4 degrees C), and Stephenson and Clark (2004, p. 32) collected the
species from the Malad River in water measuring 57.2 to 59.0 degrees F
(14 to 15 degrees C).
Richards et al. (2006, pp. 39-51) analyzed the physio-chemical data
from all IPC collections in river, spring, and spring-influenced sites
and determined the probability of encountering Bliss Rapids snails for
various parameters. The best predictors of Bliss Rapids snail presence
(i.e., having statistically significant regression values based on
large samples), in order of significance, were dominant substrate,
conductivity (a measure of total dissolved solids), depth, dissolved
oxygen, and temperature (Richards et al. 2006, p. 41).
In summary, based on available information, the Bliss Rapids snail
occurs in riverine and spring or spring-influenced habitats but is not
known to occur in reservoir habitats. It is known from the Snake River
(22 miles), the Malad River (1 mile), Cove Creek (0.4 mile), and in 14
springs. In the Snake River the species is predominately associated
with cobble-boulder substrates; substrate use in spring complexes is
more variable. The species is generally not found in, or on, very fine
sediments. It has been collected at various water depths in springs
ranging from 0.3 to 3 feet (0.1-0.9 m), and in spring-fed tributary
habitats ranging 0.07 to 3.35 feet (0.02-1.02 m). This species has also
been documented to occur at depths up to 20 feet (6.1 m) in the
mainstem Snake River. Most Bliss Rapids snails are found in less than 3
feet (0.9 m) of water, but this may be an artifact of sampling effort
rather than true habitat selection. The species has been observed in
water temperatures ranging from 44.6 to 69.8 degrees F (7 to 21 degrees
C), but is generally found in water temperatures between 59 and 60.8
degrees F (15 and 16 degrees C).
Densities and Relative Abundance
It is difficult to estimate the density and relative abundance of
Bliss Rapids snail colonies. The species is documented to reach high
densities in cold-water springs and tributaries in the Hagerman reach
of the middle Snake River (Stephenson and Bean 2003, pp. 12, 18;
Stephenson et al. 2004, p. 24), whereas colonies in the mainstem Snake
River (Stephenson and Bean 2003, p. 27; Stephenson et al. 2004, p. 24)
tend to have lower densities (Richards et al. 2006, p. 37). Bliss
Rapids snail densities in Banbury Springs averaged approximately 32.53
snails per square foot (350 snails per square meter) on three habitat
types (vegetation, edge, and run habitat as defined by Richards et al.
2001, p. 379). Densities greater than 790 snails per square foot (5,800
snails per square meter) have been documented at the outlet of Banbury
Springs (Morgan Lake outlet) (Richards et al. 2006, p. 99).
In an effort to account for the high variability in snail densities
and their patchy distribution, researchers have used predictive models
to give more accurate estimates of population size in a given area
(Richards 2004, p. 58). In the most robust study to date, predictive
models estimated between 200,000 and 240,000 Bliss Rapids snails in a
study area measuring 58.1 square feet (625 square meters) in Banbury
Springs, the largest known colony (Richards 2004, p. 59). Due to data
limitations, this model has not been used to extrapolate population
estimates to other spring complexes, tributary streams, or mainstem
Snake River colonies. However, with few exceptions (i.e., Thousand
Springs and Box Canyon), Bliss Rapids snail colonies are much smaller
in areal extent than the colony at Banbury Springs, occupying only a
few square feet.
Previous Federal Actions
The Service listed the Bliss Rapids snail as threatened on December
14, 1992 (57 FR 59244). At that time it was an undescribed monotypic
genus in the family Hydrobiidae. Subsequent research in 1994 formalized
its taxonomic status and its scientific name--Taylorconcha serpenticola
(Hershler et al. 1994).
Based on the best available data at the time of listing, we
determined that the Bliss Rapids snail was threatened by: proposed
construction of new hydropower dams, the operation of existing
hydropower dams, degraded water quality, water diversions, the
introduced New Zealand mudsnail (Potamopyrgus antipodarum), and the
lack of existing regulatory protections (57 FR 59244). In 1995, we
published the Snake River Aquatic Species Recovery Plan (Plan), which
included the Bliss Rapids snail (USFWS 1995). Critical habitat has not
been designated for this species.
[[Page 47539]]
On July 27, 2004, we initiated a 5-year status review for the
species in accordance with section 4(c)(2) of the Act (69 FR 44676). On
December 26, 2006, the Service received a petition from the Governor of
Idaho and IPC requesting that the Bliss Rapids snail be removed from
the List. On June 6, 2007, the Service published a Federal Register
notice announcing that the petition presented substantial scientific
information indicating that removing the Bliss Rapids snail from the
List may be warranted, and the initiation of a 12-month status review
of the species to be conducted concurrent with our 5-year status review
(72 FR 31250). A 30-day peer review was completed in January 2008, on
the draft status review document of the best available information and
scientific literature (USFWS 2008a).
As part of the 12-month status review, we used a structured
decision analysis process (USFWS 2008b) to assist us in making our 12-
month finding. A component of the structured decision analysis was the
formation of an expert scientific review panel that provided us with
information regarding the current status of the species and primary
threats. The Service reopened the public comment period on its 90-day
finding from August 12 to August 27, 2008 (73 FR 46867), to allow the
public to access and provide comments on the scientific review panel's
results and other documents. No additional comments were received.
Summary of Factors Affecting the Species
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533 et seq.) and implementing
regulations (50 CFR part 424) set forth procedures for adding species
to, removing species from, or reclassifying species on the Federal List
of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act
requires that for any petition containing substantial scientific and
commercial information that listing, delisting, or reclassification may
be warranted, we make a finding within 12 months of receiving the
petition, on whether the petitioned action is: (a) Not warranted; (b)
warranted; or (c) warranted, but that immediate proposal of a
regulation implementing the petitioned action is precluded by other
pending proposals to determine whether other species are threatened or
endangered.
Under section 4 of the Act, a species may be determined to be
endangered or threatened on the basis of any of the following five
factors: (A) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) overutilization for
commercial, recreation, scientific, or educational purposes; (C)
disease or predation; (D) the inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms; or (E) other natural or manmade factors affecting its
continued existence. We must consider these same five factors in
delisting a species. We may delist a species according to 50 CFR
424.11(d) if the best available scientific and commercial data indicate
that the species is neither endangered nor threatened for the following
reasons: (1) The species is extinct; (2) the species has recovered and
is no longer endangered or threatened; or (3) the original scientific
data used at the time the species was classified were in error.
A species is ``endangered'' for purposes of the Act if it is in
danger of extinction throughout all or ``a significant portion of its
range'' and is ``threatened'' if it is likely to become endangered
within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion
of its range. The word ``range'' in the significant portion of its
range (SPR) phrase refers to the range in which the species currently
exists. The word ``significant'' in the SPR phrase refers to the value
of that portion to the conservation of the species. For the purposes of
this analysis, we will evaluate whether the currently listed species,
the Bliss Rapids snail, should be considered threatened or endangered.
Then we will consider whether there are any portions of the species'
range in which it is in danger of extinction or likely to become
endangered within the foreseeable future.
Factor A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or
Curtailment of the Species' Habitat or Range
Construction of New Hydropower Dams
In our 1992 final rule listing the Bliss Rapids snail as a
threatened species, we stated: ``Six proposed hydroelectric projects,
including two high dam facilities, would alter free flowing river
reaches within the existing range of [the Bliss Rapids snail]. Dam
construction threatens the [Bliss Rapids snail] through direct habitat
modification and moderates the Snake River's ability to assimilate
point and non-point pollution. Further hydroelectric development along
the Snake River would inundate existing mollusk habitats through
impoundment, reduce critical shallow, littoral shoreline habitats in
tailwater areas due to operating water fluctuations, elevate water
temperatures, reduce dissolved oxygen levels in impounded sediments,
and further fragment remaining mainstem populations or colonies of [the
Bliss Rapids snail]'' (57 FR 59251).
Proposed hydroelectric projects discussed in the 1992 final listing
rule are no longer moving forward. The A.J. Wiley project and Dike
Hydro Partners preliminary permits have lapsed; the Kanaka Rapids,
Empire Rapids, and Boulder Rapids permits were denied by the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) in 1995; there was a notice of
surrender of the preliminary permit for the River Side Project in 2002;
and two other proposed projects, the Eagle Rock and Star Falls
Hydroelectric Projects, were denied preliminary permits by the FERC. In
2003, a notice was provided of surrender of the preliminary permit for
the Auger Falls Project. Information provided by the State of Idaho
indicates that all proposals and preliminary permits for the
construction of new dams along the mid-Snake River have either lapsed
or been denied by the FERC (Caswell 2006).
Operation of Existing Hydropower Dams
In the December 14, 1992, final listing rule we stated: ``Peak-
loading, the practice of artificially raising and lowering river levels
to meet short-term electrical needs by local run-of-the-river
hydroelectric projects also threatens [the Bliss Rapids snail]. Peak-
loading is a frequent and sporadic practice that results in dewatering
mollusk habitats in shallow, littoral shoreline areas * * * these
diurnal water fluctuations [prevent the Bliss Rapids snail] from
occupying the most favorable habitats'' (57 FR 59252). The Bliss Rapids
snail occurs in riverine and spring or spring-influenced habitats but
is not known to occur in reservoir habitats. Peak loading operations
within the range of river colonies of the Bliss Rapids snail occur
below the Bliss Dam (RM 560) and the Lower Salmon Falls Dam (RM 573)
(USFWS 2004, pp. 19, 20). For example, at the Bliss Dam (Stephenson and
Bean 2003, p. 30) the Snake River can experience daily fluctuation of
water levels from hydropower generating activities (peak loading) up to
7 feet (2.1 m). It appears that Bliss Rapids snails are found primarily
in areas less than 3 feet (0.9 m) deep, although this may be an
artifact of more intensive sampling at shallow depths (Richards et al.
2006, pp. 43, 52-56). Nevertheless, our current understanding based on
the best available information, is that a majority of Bliss Rapids
snails in the Snake River occupy shallow water. Furthermore, Bliss
Rapids snails in these shallow-water areas are susceptible to the
effects from peak loading operations, including desiccation and
freezing when water
[[Page 47540]]
levels drop and expose snails to atmospheric conditions.
Laboratory studies have shown that peak-loading during winter
months, a time when the species is reproducing, is likely to result in
mortality of individual Bliss Rapids snails. Air temperatures within
the range of Bliss Rapids snails in Idaho regularly fall below 32
degrees F (0 degrees C) between November and March (Richards 2006a, p.
28). In a laboratory study conducted by Richards (2006a, p. 12), half
of the Bliss Rapids snails subjected to a temperature of 19 degrees F
(minus 7 degrees C) died in less than an hour. In a field study,
Richards (unpublished data, cited in Richards et al. 2006, pp. 125-126)
found that Bliss Rapids snails could survive for many hours to several
days in moist conditions (i.e., undersides of cobbles) and when air
temperatures were above freezing (32 degrees F (0 degrees C)) (Richards
et al. 2006, p. 125). Although the mortality rate outside of these
conditions has not been documented in field studies or after an actual
peak loading event, work by other researchers, utilizing laboratory-
controlled aquaria, found Bliss Rapids snail mortality to be up to 100
percent under conditions characteristic (winter low and summer high
temperatures) of some hydropower operations in the middle Snake River
(Richards and Kerans 2007, p. 4). Based on the above information, peak
loading likely affects individual Bliss Rapids snails through
desiccation and freezing but the effects of peak loading on the
survival of Bliss Rapids snail colonies in riverine habitats is unknown
at this time.
Degraded Water Quality
In the 1992 final listing rule we stated: ``The quality of water in
[snail] habitats has a direct effect on the species survival. The
[Bliss Rapids snail] require[s] cold, well-oxygenated unpolluted water
for survival. Any factor that leads to deterioration in water quality
would likely extirpate [the Bliss Rapids snail]'' (57 FR 59252). New
information has become available indicating some improvements to Snake
River water quality. Significant nutrient and sediment reduction has
occurred in the Snake River following implementation of the Idaho
Nutrient Management Act and regulated Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)
reductions from the mid-1990s to the present (Richards et al. 2006, pp.
5-6, 86). The Mid-Snake River reach also receives a large infusion of
clean, cold-water spring flows and supports the highest densities and
occurrence of Bliss Rapids snails.
Hypereutrophy (planktonic algal blooms and nuisance rooted aquatic
plant growths), prior to listing in 1992, was very severe during
drought cycles when deposition of sediments and organic matter
blanketed river substrate often resulting in unsuitable habitat
conditions for Bliss Rapids snails. Although some nutrient and sediment
reduction has been documented in the Snake River since listing
(Richards et al. 2006, p. 5), there are still large inflows of
agriculture and aquaculture runoff entering the river at Twin Falls to
Lower Salmon Falls dam (RM 573). As a result, nutrient and sediment
concentrations can be relatively high in this portion of the river,
especially during lower summer flows (Richards et al. 2006, p. 91).
Phosphorus concentrations, the key nutrient leading to
hypereutrophic conditions in the middle Snake River, exceeded
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) guidelines for the control of
nuisance algae at numerous locations along the Snake River from 1989 to
2002, including areas immediately upstream of Bliss Rapids snail
colonies (Hardy et al. 2005, p. 13). Several water quality assessments
have been completed by the USEPA, USBR, and IPC, and all generally
agree that water quality in the Snake River of southern Idaho meets
Idaho water quality standards for aquatic life for some months of the
year, but may not meet these standards when temperatures are high and
flows are low (Meitl 2002, p. 33). Idaho Department of Environmental
Quality's (IDEQ) 2005 performance and progress report to the USEPA
states that projects are meeting the Idaho non-point source pollution
program goals (IDEQ 2006, 115 pp.). Others report that water quality
has not improved appreciably between 1989 and 2002 (Hardy et al. 2005,
pp. 19-21, 49, 51).
Several reaches of the Snake River are classified as water-quality-
impaired due to the presence of one or more pollutants (e.g., Total
Phosphorus (TP), sediments (TSS), total coliforms) in excess of State
or Federal guidelines. Nutrient-enriched waters primarily enter the
Snake River via springs, tributaries, fish farm effluents, municipal
waste treatment facilities, and irrigation returns (USEPA 2002, pp. 4-
18 to 4-24). Irrigation water returned to rivers is generally warmer,
contains pesticides or pesticide byproducts, has been enriched with
nutrients from fish farms and land-based agriculture (e.g., nitrogen
and phosphorous), and frequently contains elevated sediment loads.
Pollutants in fish farm effluent include nutrients derived from
metabolic wastes of the fish and unconsumed fish food, disinfectants,
bacteria, and residual quantities of drugs used to control disease
outbreaks. Furthermore, elevated levels of fine sediments, nitrogen,
and trace elements (including cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, and
zinc), have been measured immediately downstream of several aquaculture
discharges (Hinson 2003, pp. 44-45). Additionally, concentrations of
lead, cadmium, and arsenic have been previously detected in snails
collected during a research study in the Snake River (Richards 2002).
The effects of these elevated levels of nutrients and trace elements on
Bliss Rapids snails, both individually and synergistically, are not
fully understood. However, studies have shown another native Snake
River snail, the Jackson Lake springsnail (Pyrgulopsis robusta), to be
relatively sensitive to copper (a common component in algaecides) and
pentachlorophenol, a restricted use pesticide/wood preservative
(Ingersoll 2006), and Bliss Rapids snails are known to be highly
sensitive to copper, ammonia, and pentachlorophenol (Besser et al.
2008).
Water Diversions and Ground Water Withdrawals
Threats to cold water spring-influenced habitats from ground water
withdrawal and diversions for irrigation and aquaculture are not as
they were perceived when the Bliss Rapids snail was listed in 1992. At
the time the species was listed in 1992, the threat from ground water
withdrawal was identified only at Box Canyon, and the scope of this
threat was underestimated. Based on the best available data, we now
know that this threat is likely to affect the Bliss Rapids snail
throughout its range. In concert with the historical losses of habitat
to surface diversions of spring water for irrigation and aquaculture,
the continuing decline of the groundwater aquifer is one of the primary
threats to the long-term viability of the Bliss Rapids snail.
Average annual spring flows increased from about 4,400 cubic feet
per second (cfs) in 1910, to approximately 6,500 cfs in the early
1960s, because widespread flood irrigation caused artificial recharge
of the aquifer (Richards et al. 2006, pp. 84, 87). As a result of more
efficient irrigation practices from 1960 to the present (i.e.,
switching from flood irrigation or direct surface diversion to more
efficient center-pivot irrigation systems utilizing ground water), more
water was pumped from the aquifer while water percolation into the
aquifer
[[Page 47541]]
declined, resulting in declines (from the high values of the 1960s) in
average annual spring flows to about 5,000 cfs (Richards et al. 2006,
pp. 84, 87). Although the current spring flow levels are total about 15
percent higher than average spring flows measured in 1910, they are
declining. We anticipate spring flows will likely continue to decline
in the near future, even as water-conservation measures are implemented
and are being developed as water demands in the vicinity continue to
increase (USFWS 2008b).
The State of Idaho has taken steps to improve ground water recharge
and limit new ground water development within the eastern Snake River
plain; however, the Snake River Plain aquifer level continues to
decline (USFWS 2008b). Effects from the over-allocation of ground water
and the subsequent declining ground water levels appear to be more of a
threat than previously thought. Evidence indicates that springs from
the Eastern Snake River Aquifer where the Bliss Rapids snail resides
depend on ground water levels and that the ground water levels are
declining (USFWS 2008b) even with ongoing measures attempting to
address the decline (Caswell 2007). Spring sites are important since
Bliss Rapids snail colonies that occur in springs have been shown to be
a source of genetic diversity to riverine colonies and to contain four
times as many private (i.e., unique) alleles (n=16) compared to
riverine populations (Liu and Hershler 2009, p. 1296). Colonies in
springs or at their outflows are also the most dense, may account for
most of the reproductive output of the species, and likely act as
refugia from competition with invasive New Zealand mudsnails (see
Factor E, below). Finally, if spring colonies are lost, particularly
those at the upstream end of the species' distribution, the probability
of recolonization is likely to be extremely small (USFWS 2008b).
Summary of Factor A: Our understanding of the threats to the Bliss
Rapids snail has changed since we listed the species in 1992. Some
threats are now known to be removed (i.e., new hydropower dam
construction) while other threats have emerged (i.e., depletion of
groundwater that supports the spring colonies). All proposals for the
construction of new hydropower dams have either expired or been
withdrawn. The Bliss Rapids snail occurs in riverine and spring or
spring-influenced habitats, but is not known to occur in reservoir
habitats. Some colonies of Bliss Rapids snails are known to occur in
shallow-water areas that are susceptible to peak loading operations
(i.e., below the Bliss Dam (RM 560) and the Lower Salmon Falls Dam (RM
573)). Individual snails may be affected by desiccation and freezing
when water levels drop and expose snails to atmospheric conditions, but
the effects on these colonies are unknown. Water quality appears to
have improved in the Snake River, but new research has indicated that
the species is sensitive to the toxic effects of some aquatic
contaminants such as copper, which is known to be used in aquaculture
and discharged from facilities into the Snake River. Springs or spring-
influenced habitats are vulnerable from the effects of ongoing and
anticipated future ground water depletion and degraded ground water
quality. Spring flows at several occupied spring sites have been
declining due to continued ground water withdrawal from the Eastern
Snake River Plain Aquifer. If spring colonies are lost, it is unlikely
that areas would be recolonized and a loss of occupied springs may
reduce genetic diversity and eliminate rare alleles. Spring colonies
are also important as they may provide refugia from competition with
New Zealand mudsnails (see Factor E, below). Therefore, destruction,
modification, or curtailment of the Bliss Rapids snail's habitat or
range is an ongoing primary threat to the Bliss Rapids snail that is
likely to contribute to the species becoming endangered in the
foreseeable future.
Factor B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
Based on the best available scientific and commercial information,
we believe that overutilization for commercial, recreational,
scientific or educational purposes is not currently placing the Bliss
Rapids snail in danger of extinction, and is not likely to result in
the endangerment or extinction of the species in the foreseeable
future. There is no known commercial or recreational use of the species
and collections for scientific or educational purposes are likely
limited in scope and extent. While collection could result in mortality
of individuals within a small area, it is unlikely to have a population
level effect because only a few individuals and institutions are
interested in collecting a small number of individuals of the species.
Factor C. Disease or Predation
Parasitic trematodes similar to those of the genus Microphallus
have been identified in some freshwater snails in Idaho (e.g.,
Pyrgulopsis robusta); however, the occurrence of trematode parasites in
Bliss Rapids snail has not been studied (Dybdahl et al. 2005, p. 8).
Predators of the Bliss Rapids snail have not been documented, but
we assume that some predation by native and nonnative species occurs.
Predation on aquatic snails by crayfish and fish is well documented
(Lodge et al. 1994, p. 1265; Martin et al. 1992, p. 476; Merrick et al.
1992, p. 225; Lodge et al. 1998, p. 53).
Based on the best available scientific and commercial information,
disease or predation is not currently threatening the viability of the
Bliss Rapids snail and is not expected to threaten its viability in the
foreseeable future.
Factor D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
In the 1992 final listing rule, we found inadequate regulatory
mechanisms to be a threat because: (1) Regulations were inadequate to
curb further water withdrawal from ground water spring outflows or
tributary spring streams; (2) it was unlikely that pollution control
regulations would reverse the trend in nutrient loading in the near
future; (3) there was a lack of State-mandated protections for
invertebrate species in Idaho; and (4) regulations did not require FERC
or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to address Service concerns
regarding licensing hydroelectric projects or permitting projects under
the Clean Water Act (CWA) for unlisted snails. Below, we address each
of these concerns in turn.
Ground Water Withdrawal Regulations
The Idaho Department of Water Resources (IDWR) manages water in the
State of Idaho. Among the IDWR's responsibilities is the development of
the State Water Plan (IDWR 2006a). The State Water Plan was updated in
1996 and included a table of Federally threatened and endangered
species in Idaho, such as the Bliss Rapids snail. The State Water Plan
outlines objectives for the conservation, development, management, and
optimum use of all unappropriated waters in the State. One of these
objectives is to ``maintain, and where possible enhance water quality
and water-related habitats'' (IDWR 2006a). It is the intent of the
State Water Plan that any water savings realized by conservation or
improved efficiencies is appropriated to other beneficial uses (e.g.,
agriculture, hydropower, or fish and wildlife).
Another IDWR regulatory mechanism is the ability of the Idaho Water
Resource Board to designate ``in-stream flows'' (IDWR 2006b). The IDWR
currently has 89 licensed water rights for minimum in-stream flows in
Idaho
[[Page 47542]]
(IDWR 2006b). Of these, 11 potentially have conservation benefits for
Bliss Rapids snails (i.e., provide for minimum in-stream flows near
tributary spring outflows that provide habitat for Bliss Rapids
snails). However, individuals that hold water rights with earlier
priority dates have the right to fill their needs before the minimum
stream flow is considered. If there is not enough water available to
satisfy all of the water rights, then the senior water rights are
satisfied first, and so on in order, until there is no water left. It
is the junior water right holders that do not get water when there is
not enough to satisfy all the water rights. Senior diversions can
legally dewater the stream in a drought year or when low flows occur,
leaving no water for the minimum stream flow (IDWR 2009), therefore
impacting species such as the Bliss Rapids snail.
The IDWR and other State agencies have also created additional
regulatory mechanisms that limit future surface and ground water
development; they include the continuation of various moratoria on new
consumptive water rights and the designation of Water Management
Districts (Caswell 2007). The State is attempting to stabilize aquifer
levels and enhance cold water spring outflows from the Eastern Snake
River Plain by implementing water conservation measures to be proposed
in the Comprehensive Aquifer Management Plan (CAMP) for this area
(Barker et al. 2007). The goal of the CAMP is to ``sustain the economic
viability and social and environmental health of the Eastern Snake
Plain by adaptively managing a balance between water use and
supplies.'' The CAMP will include several alternatives in an attempt to
increase water supply, reduce withdrawals from the aquifer, and
decrease overall demand for groundwater (Barker et al. 2007).
In addition, the State of Idaho established moratoria in 1993 (the
year after listing of the Bliss Rapids snail) that restricted further
surface-water and groundwater withdrawals for consumptive uses from the
Snake River Plain aquifer between American Falls Reservoir and C.J.
Strike Reservoir. The 1993 moratoria were extended by Executive Order
in 2004 (Caswell 2006, attachment 1). However, these actions have not
yet resulted in stabilization of aquifer levels. Depletion of spring
flows and declining groundwater levels are a collective effect of
drought conditions, changes in irrigation practices (the use of
central-pivot sprinklers contribute little to groundwater recharge),
and groundwater pumping (University of Idaho 2007). The effects of
groundwater pumping downstream in the aquifer can affect the upper
reaches of the aquifer, and the effects of groundwater pumping can
continue for decades after pumping ceases (University of Idaho 2007).
Thus, we anticipate groundwater levels will likely continue to
decline in the near future, even as water-conservation measures are
implemented, and are being developed. Furthermore, species associated
with these springs that are dependent upon the presence of water, such
as the Bliss Rapids snail, will likely experience local extinctions
without the opportunity for recolonization (USFWS 2008b). Loss of a
colony from any individual habitat patch, without subsequent
recolonization, increases the extinction risk for the species as a
whole, a phenomenon dubbed the ``extinction ratchet'' (Burkey and Reed
2006, p. 11).
Pollution Control Regulations
Since the 1992 final listing rule, reductions in TSS and TP loading
have improved water quality in localized reaches of the Snake River
(Buhidar 2005) (see Factor A above). Various State-managed water
quality programs are being implemented within the range of the Bliss
Rapids snail. These programs are tiered off the Clean Water Act (CWA),
which requires States to establish water-quality standards that provide
for (1) the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and
wildlife, and (2) recreation in and on the water. As required by the
CWA, Idaho has established water-quality standards (e.g., for water
temperature and dissolved oxygen) for the protection of cold-water
biota (e.g., invertebrate species) in many reaches of the Snake River.
The CWA also specifies that States must include an antidegradation
policy in their water quality regulations that protects water-body uses
and high-quality waters. Idaho's antidegradation policy, updated in the
State's 1993 triennial review, is detailed in their Water Quality
Standards (IDEQ 2009).
The IDEQ works closely with the USEPA to manage point and non-point
sources of pollution to water bodies of the State through the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program under the CWA.
IDEQ has not been granted authority by the USEPA to issue NPDES permits
directly; all NPDES permits are issued by the USEPA Region 10 (USEPA
2009). These NPDES permits are written to meet all applicable water-
quality standards established for a water body to protect human health
and aquatic life. Waters that do not meet water-quality standards due
to point and non-point sources of pollution are listed on EPA's 303(d)
list of impaired water bodies. States must submit to EPA a 303(d) list
(water-quality-limited waters) and a 305(b) report (status of the
State's waters) every 2 years. IDEQ, under authority of the State
Nutrient Management Act, is coordinating efforts to identify and
quantify contributing sources of pollutants (including nutrient and
sediment loading) to the Snake River basin via the Total Maximum Daily
Load (TMDL) approach. In water bodies that are currently not meeting
water-quality standards, the TMDL approach applies pollution-control
strategies through several of the following programs: State
Agricultural Water Quality Program, Clean Water Act section 401
Certification, BLM Resource Management plans, the State Water Plan, and
local ordinances. Several TMDLs have been approved by the USEPA in
stream segments within the range of the Bliss Rapids snail in the Snake
River or its tributaries (Buhidar 2006), although most apply only to
TSS, TP, or temperature. Therefore, these stream segments do not yet
have water quality attributes that are protective of the Bliss Rapids
snail until the TMDL approach has sufficient time to bring the stream
segment water quality in line with approved standards.
State Invertebrate Species Regulations
There has been no change in State regulations regarding
invertebrate protections since the time of listing. Take of Bliss
Rapids snails is not regulated under Idaho State law.
Federal Consultation Regulations
In Idaho, the USEPA retains authority for the issuance of permits
through the NPDES, which is designed to manage point source discharges.
There are presently more than 80 licensed aquaculture facilities on the
Snake River permitted by the USEPA (USEPA 2002, pp. 4-19, 4-20).
Updated draft permits for aquaculture and fish processing facilities
throughout Idaho have recently been made available for public review
(71 FR 35269). Draft permits have been issued for aquaculture
facilities on Billingsley Creek, Riley Creek, Niagara Springs, and
Thousands Springs, all within the known range of the Bliss Rapids
snail. Facilities that produce less than 20,000 pounds (9,072
kilograms) of fish annually are not required to obtain an NPDES permit
(USEPA 2006, p. 3-1). These smaller facilities lie outside of this
regulatory nexus, and as such their discharges are not regulated or
reported.
Since the species was listed in 1992, Federal agencies, including
the Army Corps of Engineers and the FERC, have been required to comply
with section 7
[[Page 47543]]
of the Act on any projects or managed activities that may affect the
Bliss Rapids snail. If the species is delisted, terms and conditions
now required of these agencies and their applicants to reduce the
effects of their actions on the Bliss Rapids snail, such as placing
conservation measures into agency permits, would not be required (e.g.,
see USFWS 2007). Currently, IPC and the Service are cooperating in a
Settlement Agreement (Agreement) approved by the FERC. This Agreement
was designed to assess potential effects of the IPC's operations in the
Wiley and Dike Reaches, and was approved as part of the biological
opinion and license issuance for the Lower Salmon Falls and Bliss
Projects. These studies and their analyses are scheduled to be
completed in 2009.
The BLM manages more than 260 million acres of land in the 11
western States, including land adjacent to the Snake River in Idaho.
The BLM manages activities on Federal lands such as outdoor recreation,
livestock grazing, mining development, and energy production to
conserve natural, historical, cultural, and other resources on the
public lands (USBLM 2006). In Idaho, the BLM has been consulting with
the Service pursuant to section 7 of the Act on ongoing BLM actions
that may affect the Bliss Rapids snail. Through these consultation
efforts, coordinated and cooperative conservation measures have been
added to proposed actions (e.g., new or renewed grazing permits on
public lands) to minimize impacts to the species. Programmatic guidance
and direction, documented through a conservation agreement between the
BLM and Service, has increased the likelihood that conservation
benefits may be realized for new, re-authorized, and ongoing actions;
however, without the continued protections of the Act, there are no
regulatory assurances that these conservation measures would continue.
Summary of Factor D: While there are no specific State regulations
protecting the Bliss Rapids snail, the primary threats identified in
the final listing rule were related to the loss or alteration of the
species' aquatic habitat. Regulatory mechanisms such as Idaho's water
quality standards and TMDLs will continue to apply to habitats occupied
by the Bliss Rapids snail. Water quality in some stretches of the Snake
River has improved, primarily for phosphorus and TSS. New research
indicates the species is sensitive to some aquatic contaminants such as
copper, ammonia, and pentachlorophenol. Ground water withdrawal and the
subsequent decline of the aquifer that feeds springs where the species
occurs is a prominent threat. Depletion of cold water spring flows and
declining ground water levels are a collective result of drought
conditions, changes in irrigation practices, and ground water pumping.
The effects of ground water pumping downstream in the aquifer can
affect the upper reaches of the aquifer, and the effects of ground
water pumping can continue for decades after pumping ceases. Thus, we
anticipate ground water levels will likely continue to decline even if
water conservation measures are implemented or are being developed.
Some conservation benefits to the species are being realized through
section 7 consultation with other Federal agencies, but without the
Act's protection there are no regulatory assurances that these
conservation benefits would continue. Based on this information, the
inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms represents an ongoing
threat to the Bliss Rapids snail that is likely to contribute to the
species becoming endangered in the foreseeable future.
Factor E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting the Species'
Continued Existence
The final listing rule stated that New Zealand mudsnails
(Potamopyrgus antipodarum) were not abundant in cold water springflows
with colonies of Bliss Rapids snails, but that they did compete with
the Bliss Rapids snail in the mainstem Snake River (57 FR 59254;
December 14, 1992). We have no direct evidence that New Zealand
mudsnails have displaced colonies of Bliss Rapids snails, but New
Zealand mudsnails have been documented in dark mats at densities of
nearly 400 individuals per square inch in free-flowing habitats within
the range of the Bliss Rapids snail (57 FR 59254). Richards et al.
(2006, pp. 61, 64, 68) found that Bliss Rapids snails may be
competitively excluded by New Zealand mudsnails in most habitats, and
that Bliss Rapids snail densities would likely be higher in the absence
of New Zealand mudsnails. Both species are mostly scraper-grazers on
algae and have similar resource requirements (Richards et al. 2006, pp.
59, 66). Furthermore, New Zealand mudsnails have become established in
every cold water spring-fed creek or tributary to the Hagerman Reach of
the Snake River that has been surveyed (USFWS 2007). However, New
Zealand mudsnails do not appear able to colonize headwater spring
habitats, which may provide Bliss Rapids snails refugia from
competition with New Zealand mudsnails (Frest and Johannes 1992, p. 50;
Richards et al. 2006, pp. 67-68).
The physiological tolerances of the New Zealand mudsnail, including
temperature and water velocity (Winterbourn 1969, pp. 457, 458; Lysne
and Koetsier 2006b, p. 81); life history attributes such as high
fecundity and growth rates (Richards 2004, pp. 25-34); and wide variety
of habitat use such as springs, rivers, reservoirs, and ditches (Cada
2004, pp. 27, 28; USBR 2002, pp. 3, 11; Hall et al. 2003, pp. 407, 408;
Clark et al. 2005, pp. 10, 32-35; Richards 2004, pp. 47-67), may
provide the New Zealand mudsnail a competitive advantage over Bliss
Rapids snails outside of cold headwater springs.
Summary of Factor E: Studies since the time of listing indicate
that competition for resources occurs between the New Zealand mudsnail
and the Bliss Rapids snail due to similar life history requirements.
The New Zealand mudsnail has become established and widely distributed
in the Snake River and its tributaries, however we do not know what
this expansion has done to the distribution and abundance of Bliss
Rapids snails. The current information is inconclusive as to whether
the New Zealand mudsnail presently endangers the Bliss Rapids snail,
largely because Bliss Rapids snails appear to have refugia from
competition with New Zealand mudsnails in headwater springs. However,
the available evidence suggests that the New Zealand mudsnail may
endanger the Bliss Rapids snail in the foreseeable future given
projected declines in aquifer levels, which will likely cause the
extirpation of Bliss Rapids snails from these refugia.
Conclusion
In making a finding on whether or not a species warrants listing
under the Act we must consider the legal definitions of ``endangered''
and ``threatened.'' A species is ``endangered'' for purposes of the Act
if it is in danger of extinction throughout all or ``a significant
portion of its range'' and is ``threatened'' if it is likely to become
endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range (emphasis added). The Act does not
define the term ``foreseeable future.'' However, in a January 16, 2009
memorandum addressed to the Acting Director of the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, the Office of the Solicitor, Department of the
Interior, concluded, ``* * * as used in the [Act], Congress intended
the term `foreseeable future' to describe the extent to which the
Secretary can reasonably rely on
[[Page 47544]]
predictions about the future in making determinations about the future
conservation status of the species.'' In considering the foreseeable
future as it relates to the status of the Bliss Rapids snail, we
considered the (1) biological and demographic characteristics of the
species (such as habitat requirements (water depth, substrate, and
temperature), spring vs. riverine colonies, and dispersal and
recolonization ability), (2) our ability to predict or extrapolate the
effects of threats facing the species into the future, and the (3) the
relative permanency or irreversibility of these threats.
The Bliss Rapids snail is a species endemic to Idaho and occurs
primarily in cold water spring tributaries and the ground water
influenced areas within the Snake River. Studies conducted since the
species was listed in 1992 indicate that the species' overall
geographic range has not substantially changed since it was first
described by Hershler et al. (1994), but the species has been detected
in more riverine, cold water springs, and spring tributary locations
within its historical range. The Bliss Rapids snail has specific and
rather narrow habitat requirements in the form of suitable substrate
and water temperature.
As discussed in the Summary of Factors section, we believe, based
on the best available data, that it is reasonable to expect the primary
threats (i.e., reduced ground water levels, water quality and pollution
concerns, and competition from nonnative species) to Bliss Rapids
snails will continue to occur throughout the range of the species and
to affect all colonies into the future. Ground water levels are
expected to continue to decline, resulting in increased risks to spring
and spring-influenced colonies beginning at the upstream end of the
species' range. Recent data show that spring colonies of Bliss Rapids
snail contain rare alleles, and loss of such colonies are likely to
reduce genetic diversity, which in turn reduces the species' ability to
respond to changes in environmental conditions. If current ground water
trends continue--and we have a reasonable expectation that they will
based on the best available data--we expect some colonies to become
extirpated as sites become unsuitable for Bliss Rapids snails due to
reduced flows and degraded water quality. Loss of spring colonies is
also likely to result in the loss of potentially important refugia from
competition with the New Zealand mudsnail. Without the cold water
spring refugia that provide stable environmental conditions (relative
to riverine habitats), there is significant uncertainty regarding the
ability of riverine populations to persist in the face of ongoing
competition with New Zealand mudsnails. These uncertainties are
exacerbated by existing hydropower operations that result in unknown
levels of mortality to Bliss Rapids snails in the riverine environment,
and the relatively low densities of Bliss Rapids snails in riverine
habitats. Because of these significant uncertainties, if spring
populations were lost due to groundwater depletion and/or changes to
water quality in the springs, we would have little confidence that the
Bliss Rapids snail could persist in the riverine environment alone.
Therefore, we have determined that the Bliss Rapids snail is not
now in danger of extinction, but is likely to become endangered in the
foreseeable future based on the expected persistence of threats from
reduced ground water levels, water quality and pollution concerns, and
competition from nonnative species.
Significant Portion of the Range Analysis
Having determined that the Bliss Rapids snail is likely to become
endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range, we must next consider whether there
are any significant portions of its range that are currently in danger
of extinction. The Act defines an endangered species as one ``in danger
of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range,''
and a threatened species as one ``likely to become an endangered
species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant
portion of its range.'' The term ``significant portion of its range''
is not defined by statute. For purposes of this finding, a portion of a
species' range is significant if it is part of the current range of the
species and is important to the conservation of the species because it
contributes meaningfully to the representation, resiliency, or
redundancy of the species. The contribution must be at a level such
that its loss would result in a decrease in the ability to conserve the
species.
The first step in determining whether a species is threatened or
endangered in a significant portion of its range is to identify any
portions of the range that warrant further consideration. The range of
a species can theoretically be divided into portions in an infinite
number of ways. However, there is no purpose to analyzing portions of
the range that are not reasonably likely to be significant and
threatened or endangered. To identify only those portions that warrant
further consideration, we determine whether there is substantial
information indicating that (1) the portions may be significant and (2)
the species may be in danger of extinction there or likely to become so
within the foreseeable future. In practice, a key part of this analysis
is whether the threats are geographically concentrated in some way. If
the threats to the species are essentially uniform throughout its
range, no portion is likely to warrant further consideration. If any
concentration of threats applies only to portions of the range that are
unimportant to the conservation of the species, such portions will not
warrant further consideration.
If we identify any portions that warrant further consideration, we
then determine whether in fact the species is threatened or endangered
in any significant portion of its range. Depending on the biology of
the species, its range, and the threats it faces, it may be more
efficient in some cases for the Service to address the significance
question first, and, in others, the status question first. Thus, if the
Service determines that a portion of the range is not significant, the
Service need not determine whether the species is threatened or
endangered there; conversely, if the Service determines that the
species is not threatened or endangered in a portion of its range, the
Service need not determine if that portion is significant.
If the Service determines that both a portion of the range of a
species is significant and the species is threatened or endangered
there, the Service will specify that portion of the range where the
species is in danger of extinction pursuant to section 4(c)(1) of the
Act.
The terms ``resiliency,'' ``redundancy,'' and ``representation''
are intended to be indicators of the conservation value of portions of
the species' range. Resiliency allows the species to recover from
periodic disturbance. A species will likely be more resilient if large
populations exist in high-quality habitat that is distributed
throughout the range of the species in such a way as to capture the
environmental variability within the range of the species. It is likely
that the larger size of a population will help contribute to the
viability of the species. Thus, a portion of the range of a species may
make a meaningful contribution to the resiliency of the species if the
area is relatively large and contains particularly high-quality habitat
or if its location or characteristics make it less susceptible to
certain threats than other portions of the range. When evaluating
whether or how a portion of the range contributes to resiliency of the
species, it may help to evaluate the historical
[[Page 47545]]
value of the portion and how frequently the portion is used by the
species. In addition, the portion may contribute to resiliency for
other reasons--for instance, it may contain an important concentration
of certain types of habitat that are necessary for the species to carry
out its life history functions, such as breeding, feeding, migration,
dispersal, or wintering.
Redundancy of populations may be needed to provide a margin of
safety for the species to withstand catastrophic events. This does not
mean that any portion that provides redundancy is a significant portion
of the range of a species. The idea is to conserve enough areas of the
range such that random perturbations in the system act on only a few
populations. Therefore, each area must be examined based on whether
that area provides an increment of redundancy that is important to the
conservation of the species.
Adequate representation insures that the species' adaptive
capabilities are conserved. Specifically, the portion should be
evaluated to see how it contributes to the genetic diversity of the
species. The loss of genetic diversity may substantially reduce the
ability of the species to respond and adapt to future environmental
changes. A peripheral population may contribute meaningfully to
representation if there is evidence that it provides genetic diversity
due to its location on the margin of the species' habitat requirements.
Based upon factors that contribute to our analysis of whether a
species or subspecies is in danger of extinction throughout all or a
significant portion of its range, and in consideration of the status
of, and threats to, the Bliss Rapids snail discussed previously, we
find that the primary threats to the continued existence of the Bliss
Rapids snail occur throughout all of its range. Therefore, it is not
necessary to conduct further analysis with respect to the significance
of any portion of its range.
Finding
On the basis of the best available scientific and commercial
information, as discussed above, we find that the Bliss Rapids snail is
likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future (i.e., it is
threatened, as de