Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a Petition to List Susan's Purse-making Caddisfly (Ochrotrichia susanae, 22012-22025 [2010-9458]

Agencies

• Fish and Wildlife Service
• DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 80 (Tuesday, April 27, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 22012-22025]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-9458]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[Docket No. FWS-R6-ES-2009-0025]
[MO 92210-0-0008]


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Finding 
on a Petition to List Susan's Purse-making Caddisfly (Ochrotrichia 
susanae) as Threatened or Endangered

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 list Susan's purse-making caddisfly 
(Ochrotrichia susanae) as endangered and to designate critical habitat 
under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. After review of 
all available scientific and commercial information, we find that 
listing Susan's purse-making caddisfly is not warranted at this time. 
However, we ask the public to submit to us any new information that 
becomes available concerning the threats to the Susan's purse-making 
caddisfly or its habitat at any time.

DATES: The finding announced in this document was made on April 27, 
2010.

ADDRESSES: This finding is available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov at docket number FWS-R6-ES-2009-0025. Supporting 
documentation we used in preparing this finding is available for public 
inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service, Western Colorado Field Office, 764 Horizon 
Drive, Building B, Grand Junction, CO 81506. Please submit any new 
information, materials, comments, or questions concerning this finding 
to the above street address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia S. Gelatt, Supervisor, 
Western Colorado Field Office, (see ADDRESSES); by telephone (970-243-
2778, extension 26); or by facsimile (970-245-6933). Persons who use a 
telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal 
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 
amended (Act) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), requires that, for any petition 
to revise the Federal Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and 
Plants that contains substantial scientific or commercial information 
that listing the species may be warranted, we make a finding within 12 
months of the date of receipt of the petition. In this finding, we will 
determine that the petitioned action is: (1) Not warranted, (2) 
warranted, or (3)

[[Page 22013]]

warranted, but the immediate proposal of a regulation implementing the 
petitioned action is precluded by other pending proposals to determine 
whether species are threatened or endangered, and expeditious progress 
is being made to add or remove qualified species from the Federal Lists 
of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. Section 4(b)(3)(C) of 
the Act requires that we treat a petition for which the requested 
action is found to be warranted but precluded as though resubmitted on 
the date of such finding, that is, requiring a subsequent finding to be 
made within 12 months. We must publish these 12-month findings in the 
Federal Register.

Previous Federal Action

    On July 8, 2008, we received a petition via e-mail from the Xerces 
Society for Invertebrate Conservation, Dr. Boris C. Kondratieff 
(Colorado State University), Western Watersheds Project, WildEarth 
Guardians, and Center for Native Ecosystems requesting that we list 
Susan's purse-making caddisfly as endangered under the Act and 
designate critical habitat. The petition included supporting 
information regarding the species' description, taxonomy, historical 
and current distribution, present status, habitat requirements, and 
potential threats. We acknowledged the receipt of the petition in a 
letter to the petitioners dated August 5, 2008. In the letter, we 
stated that we determined an emergency listing was not necessary. We 
also stated that, due to court orders and settlement agreements for 
other listing and critical habitat actions, all of our fiscal year 2008 
listing funds had been allocated and that further work on the petition 
would not take place until fiscal year 2009.
    Funding became available in fiscal year 2009, and we began work on 
the 90-day finding in November 2008. The 90-day finding was published 
in the Federal Register on July 8, 2009 (74 FR 32514). This notice 
constitutes the 12-month finding on the July 8, 2008, petition to list 
Susan's purse-making caddisfly as endangered.

Species Information

Species Description
    Susan's purse-making caddisfly is a small, hairy, brown caddisfly 
in the family Hydroptilidae under the Order Trichoptera. Most of its 
life is spent as an aquatic larva in spring and nearby stream habitats. 
Adults have forewings 2 millimeters (mm) (0.08 inch (in.)) long. The 
wings are dark brown with three transverse silver bands, one each at 
the wing base, the midline, and the apex (Flint and Herrmann 1976, p. 
894).
    The larvae of Hydroptilidae are unusual among the case-making 
families of Trichoptera in that they are free-living until the final 
(fifth) larval instar (developmental stage between molts) (Wiggins 
1996, p. 72). When the larvae molt to the fifth instar, they develop 
enlarged abdomens, build purse-shaped cases from silk and sand, and 
become less active (Wiggins 1996, p. 71). They construct a case that 
can be portable or cemented to the substrate (Wiggins 1996, p. 71). 
Larvae in this family are very small but can reach up to 6 mm (0.3 in.) 
in length (Wiggins 1996, p. 71). The head and the dorsal surface (top) 
of all three thoracic segments are dark brown and sclerotized 
(hardened) (Flint and Herrmann 1976, p. 894). Larval cases are small, 
flattened, bivalved, and open at each end, similar to other members of 
the genus Ochrotrichia. However, Susan's purse-making caddisfly larval 
cases are slightly shorter proportionally and are made from smaller 
grains of sand (Flint and Herrmann 1976, p. 894). The larvae eventually 
pupate (metamorphose from a larvae to an adult) within the case.
    Feeding behavior of Susan's purse-making caddisfly larvae has not 
been observed directly, but larvae in this genus generally feed by 
scraping diatoms from rocks (Wiggins 1996, p. 96), and larvae in the 
Hydroptilidae have been described as eating the cellular content of 
algae (Vieira and Kondratieff 2004, p. 47). Where the species has been 
collected, rocks that were thickly covered with larval cases were 
associated with heavy growth of filamentous algae and moss (Flint and 
Herrmann 1976, p. 897).
    Adult Trichoptera have reduced mouthparts and lack mandibles, but 
can ingest liquids. The adult flight period is estimated to be from 
late June to early August (Flint and Herrmann 1976, p. 897), although 
Herrmann et al. (1986, p. 433) stated that adults were collected from 
mid-April to late July. The specific life cycle of Susan's purse-making 
caddisfly is not known (Kondratieff 2009a, pers. comm.; Ruiter 2009a, 
pers. comm.). They are thought to produce one generation per year 
(Flint and Herrmann 1976, p. 897). After emerging from their pupal 
cases, they will mate and lay eggs in the water (Myers 2010, pers. 
comm.) and most likely only live for a week or two as adults. It is not 
known how long it takes for Susan's purse-making caddisfly eggs to 
develop into larvae, how long each larval stage lasts, or how long they 
are in the pupal state.
Taxonomy
    Susan's purse-making caddisfly was first described as Ochrotrichia 
susanae by Flint and Herrmann (1976, pp. 894-898) from specimens 
collected in 1974 at Trout Creek in Chaffee County, Colorado. The genus 
Ochrotrichia is widespread and fairly diverse in North America, with 
over 50 described species (Wiggins 1996, p. 96). Adults can be 
distinguished from other species in the genus Ochrotrichia based on 
characteristics of the genitalia. No challenges to the taxonomy have 
arisen since the species was named. We find that Flint and Hermann 
(1976, pp. 894-898) provide the best available information on the 
taxonomy of Ochrotrichia susanae. Therefore, we consider the Susan's 
purse-making caddisfly a valid species for listing under the Act.
Historic and Current Distribution
    Susan's purse-making caddisfly has only been historically 
documented from three sites: (1) Trout Creek Spring in Chaffee County, 
Colorado; (2) High Creek Fen in Park County, Colorado; and (3) 
Jaramillo Creek in Valles Caldera, New Mexico. Based on the best 
available information, we consider all three locations to be extant, as 
described in more detail below.
    From 1974 to 1994, Susan's purse-making caddisfly was only known to 
exist at and below Trout Creek Spring on U.S. Forest Service (USFS) 
land (Pike-San Isabel National Forest) in Chaffee County, Colorado 
(Herrmann et al. 1986, p. 433). Larvae, pupae, and adults were 
collected at the spring outfall area and downstream in Trout Creek at 
the Highway 285 Bridge, about 130 meters (m) (430 feet (ft)) away from 
the spring. Multiple collection attempts below the Highway 285 Bridge 
have not resulted in the caddisfly being found. There is no known 
reason for lack of occurrence downstream of the bridge (Herrmann 2010, 
pers. comm.). The spring and downstream stretch of creek habitat will 
hereafter simply be called Trout Creek Spring unless specific areas are 
mentioned. Trout Creek Spring is at an elevation of about 2,750 m 
(9,020 ft). The last known observation of the caddisfly at Trout Creek 
Spring was by one of the co-authors of the species description, Dr. 
Scott Herrmann, in 2007 (Herrmann 2009a, pers. comm.). We 
unsuccessfully attempted to relocate the species at this location at 
the end of July 2009; however, survey conditions were poor (Ireland 
2009, p. 2). Based on the long-term history of occupancy and the poor 
survey conditions at our last

[[Page 22014]]

site visit, we consider the Trout Creek Spring site to still be 
occupied.
    In 1995, Susan's purse-making caddisfly specimens were discovered 
and collected at High Creek Fen in Park County, Colorado, about 27 
kilometers (km) (17 miles (mi)) north of the previously known locality 
(Durfee and Polonsky 1995, pp. 1, 5, 7). High Creek Fen is a unique 
groundwater-fed wetland with high ecological diversity. It is 
considered a rare type of habitat and the southernmost example of this 
unique habitat in North America (Cooper 1996, pp. 1801, 1808; Rocchio 
2005, p. 10; Legg 2007, p. 1). High Creek Fen is primarily owned by The 
Nature Conservancy (TNC) and the Colorado State Land Board (CSLB), as 
well as private landowners. The fen is about 2,980 m (9,320 ft) in 
elevation. Susan's purse-making caddisfly pupae were found at High 
Creek Fen on July 29, 2009, during a site visit in conjunction with the 
Trout Creek Spring site visit (Ireland 2009, p. 1). A subsequent visit 
to High Creek Fen on August 11, 2009, resulted in capture of an adult 
Susan's purse-making caddisfly (Ruiter 2009b, pers. comm.).
    In July 2008, an adult Susan's purse-making caddisfly was 
discovered near Jaramillo Creek within the Valles Caldera National 
Preserve (VCNP) west of Los Alamos, New Mexico (Flint 2009a, pers. 
comm.). The Preserve is owned by the U.S. Department of Agriculture 
(part of the National Forest System) but run by a nine member Board of 
Trustees; the Supervisor of Bandelier National Monument, the Supervisor 
of the Santa Fe National Forest, and seven other members with distinct 
areas of experience or activity appointed by the President of the 
United States (Valles Caldera Trust 2003, pp. 46-47). Dr. Oliver Flint, 
one of the co-authors of the species' description, identified the 
caddisfly collected from VCNP. The elevation of the capture area is 
approximately 2,750 m (8,600 ft). No larvae were discovered at the 
Jaramillo Creek site, so we do not know if the adult caddisfly 
represents a breeding population. If there is a breeding population in 
VCNP, it is unknown how close the adult was to its larval habitat and 
whether larvae are occupying a spring near Jaramillo Creek, Jaramillo 
Creek only, or a spring or creek in a nearby drainage. Adults are 
thought to be weak fliers, likely only flying 1 to 2 m (3 to 7 ft) when 
disturbed. They are thought to remain close to larval habitat for 
mating and oviposition (Xerces Society et al. 2008, pp. 6-7). 
Therefore, dispersal distance is thought to be very small (Xerces 
Society et al. 2008, pp. 6-7). This suggests that larval habitat was 
close to the adult capture site on Jaramillo Creek, but larval or pupal 
surveys specific to Susan's purse-making caddisfly have not been 
conducted on Jaramillo Creek or in VCNP. The postulated small dispersal 
distance also suggests that the population in VCNP is isolated from the 
populations in Colorado, and that the populations within Colorado are 
isolated from one another (Xerces Society et al. 2008, pp. 5, 12, 15). 
It is possible that incidental dispersal via wind or adhesion to 
animals or humans could occur, but neither dispersal method has been 
documented, and dispersal is likely uncommon (Kondratieff 2010, pers. 
comm.).
    The Service recognizes that only three populations of Susan's 
purse-making caddisfly have been found since the species' discovery in 
1974 (Flint and Herrmann 1976), and they are undoubtedly rare. In 1986, 
Herrmann et al. compiled a list of records for Susan's purse-making 
caddisfly, but this was only based on existing records and not the 
result of comprehensive field surveys. Despite the probable rarity, we 
believe additional populations may exist based on the following: (1) 
surveys have not encompassed all potential spring habitats in Colorado 
and New Mexico (Herrmann 2010, pers. comm.; Jacobi 2009, pers. comm.; 
Kondratieff 2010, pers. comm.; Ruiter 2010, pers. comm.); (2) it is 
particularly likely that potential spring habitats occurring on private 
land have not been surveyed (Kondratieff 2010, pers. comm.); (3) the 
caddisfly can only be identified at the pupal and adult stages so the 
species could easily be missed if surveys take place outside of the 
period from mid-June to early August (Flint and Herrmann 1976); (4) the 
adults are very small, only live for a week or two, and may not fly if 
conditions are too cold or windy, again causing surveyors to miss them; 
and (5) general surveys of aquatic species (not focusing on this 
particular species) may simply miss either pupae or adults due to low 
population size.
Status
    Susan's purse-making caddisfly has a Global Heritage Status Rank of 
G2, a National Status Rank of N2, and a Colorado State Rank of S2 
(NatureServe 2008, pp. 1-4). NatureServe defines the G2 rank as 
signifying that a species is imperiled (at a high risk of extinction) 
globally due to a very restricted range, very few populations, steep 
population declines, or other factors. Species in these categories are 
defined as vulnerable to extirpation nationally or within a State or 
province. Only the Trout Creek Spring site is on file with NatureServe 
(2008, p. 1), but if High Creek Fen and Jaramillo Creek were added the 
rank would not change, since the NatureServe ranking system of G2 and 
N2 allows for 20 or fewer populations (NatureServe 2009, pp. 4, 7). No 
population estimate exists for the caddisfly at Trout Creek Spring, but 
Flint and Herrmann (1976, p. 898) collected 237 adults on July 1, 1975, 
and 118 adults on July 20, 1975. No adults were present during an 
August 5, 1975, collection attempt at Trout Creek Spring (Flint and 
Herrmann 1976, p. 898). Similarly, no extensive collection or 
population size estimate has been made for either High Creek Fen or 
Jaramillo Creek.
Habitat Requirements
    Larval and adult Susan's purse-making caddisflies are found in and 
around spring and stream habitat (Flint and Herrmann 1976, p. 897). 
Larvae inhabit waters that are cold, hard, well-oxygenated, highly 
buffered, and extremely low in trace metals (Flint and Herrmann 1976, 
p. 897). Adult riparian habitat preferences, if they exist, are unknown 
(Kondratieff 2009b, pers. comm.; Ruiter 2009c, pers. comm.). Since the 
adults only live for a week or two, it is possible that a specific 
vegetation type is not important to them. The riparian habitats 
adjacent to the streams at Trout Creek Spring and High Creek Fen are 
quite different from each other in both species present and vegetative 
structure (Ireland 2009, pp. 1-2), suggesting a lack of vegetation 
preference. However, riparian vegetation of some sort is likely 
beneficial for adult shelter and survival (Kondratieff 2009b, pers. 
comm.; Ruiter 2009c, pers. comm.).
    After emerging from their pupal cases as adults, females will mate 
and lay eggs in the water (Myers 2010, pers. comm.). Caddisflies 
typically lay eggs on immobile rocks, gravel, rooted vegetation, or 
anchored wood that will reduce movement of the eggs and, hence, reduce 
chances of abrasion or burial of the eggs by sediment (Myers 2010, 
pers. comm.). Specific information on substrate used for egg-laying by 
Susan's purse-making caddisfly is not available.
    Physical and chemical conditions of Trout Creek Spring were 
assessed in 1975 (Flint and Herrmann 1976, pp. 894-897). Water 
temperatures in the spring habitat were cold and varied little (14.4 to 
15.8 \o\C (57.9 to 60.4 \o\F)). Stream conditions included extremely 
high levels of dissolved oxygen (at or near 100-percent saturation), as 
well as high concentrations of dissolved calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg), 
and

[[Page 22015]]

sulfate (SO4) (see Table 1 below), which gave the water a 
higher electrical conductance value than typically seen in most 
regional streams at the same elevation (Flint and Herrmann 1976, p. 
897). Conductivity is a measure of the level of salts in water as a 
result of elements such as calcium and magnesium. In 2009, temperature, 
pH, and total alkalinity were within the range of samples analyzed in 
1975 (Herrmann 2009b, pers. comm.). Analysis of additional water 
chemistry variables has not been completed.
    Water quality samples were taken in 1995 at High Creek Fen by 
Durfee and Polonsky (1995) and on undisclosed dates by Cooper (1996). 
High Creek Fen appears to have similar water quality characteristics 
(see Table 1 below) as Trout Creek Spring (Durfee and Polonsky 1995, p. 
5 and Table 2; Cooper 1996, pp. 1801, 1803). Water samples in Jaramillo 
Creek were taken in 2005 (Brooks 2009). The range of pH in Jaramillo 
Creek and a nearby spring is similar to the other two sites (see Table 
1 below). The conductivity was lower than Trout Creek Spring or High 
Creek Fen (Brooks 2009), indicating there are less salts in the water 
at VCNP.
    Trout Creek Spring values in Table 1 incorporate the range for both 
the spring proper and samples taken in the creek down to the Highway 
285 Bridge (Flint and Herrmann 1976, p. 897). High Creek Fen samples 
incorporate a range from three water sources feeding the fen (Cooper 
1996, p. 1803). Jaramillo Creek sample values include both the creek 
and a nearby spring location (Brooks 2009).

                          Table 1. Physio-chemical properties of water at Susan's purse-making caddisfly locations (Brooks 2009; Cooper 1996; Flint and Herrmann 1976).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Conductance
              SITE                        pH             ([micro]S/cm)         Ca(mg/l)            Mg(mg/l)            Na(mg/l)             K(mg/l)            SO4(mg/l)           Cl(mg/l)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trout Creek Spring                7.2-8.2             280-400             38-52               14-21               2.1-5.3             0.4-1.32            19-59               1.5-2.2
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
High Creek Fen                    7.8-8.1             420-2558            55-93               30-98               8.4-25.4            0.8-2.7             34.7-815.4          4.6-42.6
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VCNP                              6.6-8.0             61-76                                                                                               3.1-3.9             0.3-1.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Flint and Herrmann (1976, p. 897) state that conductance was 
directly related to calcium, magnesium, and sulfate concentrations. 
This conclusion appears logical, as High Creek Fen also had high 
concentrations of these elements and an even higher range of 
conductance than Trout Creek. Jaramillo Creek had low sulfate and low 
conductance compared to the other two locations (see Table 1 above). 
This outcome may suggest that calcium and magnesium levels were low as 
well, but actual levels were not analyzed. Since only an adult 
caddisfly was caught near Jaramillo Creek and we do not know if it came 
from the creek near the capture site, a nearby spring, or elsewhere, we 
do not know if the low conductance and sulfate (SO4) and 
chloride (Cl) values represent a lower range that Susan's purse-making 
caddisfly larvae and pupae can survive in.
    Temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen, total dissolved solids, and 
conductivity probably have the greatest influence on distribution of 
the caddisfly (Myers 2009, pers. comm.). Only pH and conductivity were 
measured at all three sites, and total dissolved solids were not 
analyzed at any of the three locations. We do not know if the caddisfly 
prefers springs with higher conductivity. Both Trout Creek Spring and 
High Creek Fen, where both larvae and pupae have been identified, have 
high conductivity. However, Jaramillo Creek has relatively low 
conductivity. Consequently, a range of conductivity levels may be 
suitable for Susan's purse-making caddisfly, and, therefore, more 
springs may be available for occupancy. However, as Myers (2009, pers. 
comm.) mentions, factors other than conductivity may be influencing 
habitat occupancy by Susan's purse-making caddisfly. With only three 
locations and scant available data, the range of habitat Susan's purse-
making caddisfly can live in remains unknown, but the best available 
information suggests that the water quality will be similar to the 
range of variables analyzed in the Trout Creek Spring and High Creek 
Fen areas.
    Larval and pupal Susan's purse-making caddisfly were collected at 
Trout Creek Spring in 1974 and 1975 (Flint and Herrmann 1976). Larvae 
and pupae primarily inhabited the sides of rocks in both the spring 
outfall and downstream locations. Concentrations of caddisflies were 
found in areas directly below small waterfalls and were often clustered 
in clumps that covered the rocks (Flint and Herrmann 1976, pp. 894-
897). During a 2009 site visit, concerns were raised that Trout Creek 
Spring may be impacted by poor water quality because of large amounts 
of filamentous algae in Trout Creek (Xerces Society 2009, p. 2). 
However, during earlier collections, larval and pupal cases were often 
found on the same rocks that had thick growths of moss and filamentous 
algae (Flint and Herrmann 1976, p. 897). Additionally, temperature, pH, 
and total alkalinity in 2009 were within the range of samples analyzed 
in 1975, indicating that the water quality at Trout Creek Spring has 
remained the same in these respects since 1975 (Herrmann 2009b, pers. 
comm.).

Summary of Information Pertaining to the Five Factors

    Section 4 of the Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 424) 
set forth procedures for adding species to, removing species from, or 
reclassifying species on the Federal Lists of Endangered and Threatened 
Wildlife and Plants. Under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, a species may be 
determined to be endangered or threatened based on any of the following 
five factors: (A) The present or threatened destruction, modification, 
or curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) overutilization for 
commercial, recreational, 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. In making this finding, information pertaining to 
Susan's purse-making caddisfly in relation to the five factors provided 
in section 4(a)(1) of the Act is discussed below. In making our 12-
month finding, we considered and evaluated the best available 
scientific and commercial information.

[[Page 22016]]

A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment 
of the Species' Habitat or Range

Livestock Grazing
    Susan's purse-making caddisfly appears to require cold and well-
oxygenated water (Flint and Herrmann 1976, p. 897). The species could 
be negatively impacted by decreased riparian vegetation, stream bank 
destabilization, and increases in water temperature if livestock 
grazing is not well managed. Intensive grazing may lead to erosion due 
to removal of riparian and upland vegetation, removal of soil litter, 
increased soil compaction via trampling, and increased area of bare 
ground (Schulz and Leininger 1990, pp. 297-298; Fleischner 1994, pp. 
631-636). Bare, compacted soils allow less water infiltration, which 
generates more surface runoff and can contribute to erosion as well as 
flooding and stream bank alterations (Abdel-Magid et al. 1987, pp. 304-
305; Orodho et al. 1990, pp. 9-11; Chaney et al. 1993, pp. 8-15). 
Increased erosion leads to higher sediment loads in nearby waters, 
which can degrade in-stream and riparian habitat and increase water 
turbidity. The more turbid the water, the more sediment it is carrying. 
Sediment can affect the caddisfly by reducing respiration ability; 
smothering eggs, larvae, and pupae; reducing forage for the larvae; and 
limiting suitable sites for egg laying (Myers 2010, pers. comm.).
    The combined impacts of vegetation loss, soil compaction, stream 
bank destabilization, and increased sedimentation associated with 
intensive livestock grazing can have a profound effect on aquatic 
macroinvertebrates. One study found a dramatic decline in 
macroinvertebrate abundance and species richness for some taxa, 
including caddisflies, on grazed versus ungrazed sites in Oregon 
(McIver and McInnis 2007, pp. 293, 300-301). A variety of aquatic 
macroinvertebrate community attributes relating to taxa diversity, 
community balance, trophic status (what level an animal is on the food 
chain), and pollution tolerance were negatively impacted by moderate or 
heavy grazing in small mountain streams in Virginia, compared to 
lightly grazed or ungrazed control areas (Braccia and Voshell 2007, pp. 
196-198).
    In 2008, the USFS issued an environmental assessment (EA) for 
Rangeland Allotment Management Planning in the Salida-Leadville 
Planning Area (USFS 2008a) that covers about 115,000 hectares (ha) 
(284,000 acres (ac)) around Trout Creek Spring. Trout Creek Spring is 
in the extreme uppermost portion of a finger of a grazing allotment 
(the Fourmile Allotment) on the Pike-San Isabel National Forest (USFS 
2008a, Appendix 1, p. 1). The majority of the allotment does not 
influence the Trout Creek Spring habitat. No grazing from cattle on the 
Fourmile Allotment occurs around the caddisfly's habitat in Trout Creek 
Spring because the only place where cattle could access the spring, the 
western bank from County Road 309, is steep (Gaines 2009a, pers. comm.; 
USFS 2009, p. 5).
    The Bassam Allotment is immediately downstream of the Fourmile 
Allotment. The allotment ends at the Highway 285 Bridge, and livestock 
cannot go upstream due to a fence at the allotment boundary (USFS 
2008a, Appendix 1 Bassam C&H Range Improvements, p. 1). Cattle can 
access the area below the bridge but rarely do (USFS 2010, p. 1). 
Grazing impacts could affect Susan's purse-making caddisfly habitat 
downstream of the bridge if the species historically occurred down 
there, but it has never been collected downstream of the bridge 
(Herrmann 2010, pers. comm.). Consequently, grazing on the Bassam 
Allotment is not currently known to impact the caddisfly or its 
habitat.
    The Chubb Park Allotment lies immediately upstream of Trout Creek 
Spring. The cattle on the Chubb Park Allotment cannot get to Trout 
Creek Spring because of allotment fences and cattle guards (USFS 2009, 
p. 5). Consequently, direct impacts to the caddisfly and its habitat do 
not occur from cattle on the Chubb Park Allotment. However, grazing in 
this allotment in the upper portion of the Trout Creek drainage has the 
potential to impact the caddisfly's habitat downstream through 
vegetation removal, erosion, and subsequent downstream sedimentation in 
the caddisfly habitat. The Trout Creek drainage becomes ephemeral 
within 300 m (984 ft) above Trout Creek Spring (Flint and Herrmann 
1976, p. 895; USFS 2009, p. 5), and may occasionally run during spring 
snowmelt or large thunderstorms (Ireland 2009, p. 2). These irregular 
seasonal flows in combination with increased vegetation and recently 
implemented improvements in grazing management (as discussed below) 
likely reduce the amount of sediment reaching the caddisfly habitat. 
However, we are not aware of any measurements of sediment deposition in 
the Trout Creek Spring habitat.
    The Chubb Park Allotment has split ownership between the USFS, 
CSLB, and private lands, with roughly three-quarters in USFS ownership 
(USFS 2008a, p. 53). From 1996 through 2008, 146 total cow/calf pairs 
were permitted on the Chubb Park Allotment for 153 days or 983 Animal 
Unit Months (AUMs) (USFS 2009, p. 6; USFS 2010, p. 1). In 2009, the 
USFS and CSLB reduced the AUMs by shortening the grazing period to 41 
days and allowing 410 cow/calf pairs to graze for a new total of 740 
AUMs (USFS 2009, p. 6). The private landowner elected to not graze due 
to drought and, along with the USFS and CSLB, rested the Chubb Park 
Allotment for 5 years from 2003-2007 (USFS 2010, p. 1). An electric 
fence erected for 8 km (5 mi) along Trout Creek upstream of the spring 
prior to the 2009 grazing season now prevents cattle from accessing 
this stretch of Trout Creek (USFS 2009, p. 5). However, the USFS may 
adjust the fence as they determine appropriate to meet the desired 
conditions (USFS 2010, p. 2). Currently all the pastures in the 
allotment are moving toward or meeting desired conditions (USFS 2010, 
p. 1). Herbaceous riparian vegetation appeared lush in July 2009 
(Ireland 2009, p. 2), and the cattle did not enter the fenced-off 
portion of the riparian zone (USFS 2009, p. 4). An increase in 
vegetative cover in the 8 km (5 mi) stretch of Trout Creek should limit 
sediment deposition downstream during snowmelt and thunderstorm events.
    The USFS installed a well in June 2005 about 8 km (5 mi) upstream 
of Trout Creek Spring that pipes water to a large holding tank, then 
into seven float-controlled livestock tanks to draw the livestock away 
from riparian areas (USFS 2009, p. 6). This action may limit grazing in 
the riparian areas, thereby further retaining vegetation and reducing 
sedimentation, but may negatively impact water quantity (see 
``Dewatering of Spring Habitat'' section below).
    The USFS (2009, pp. 1-5) provided present-day photos, as well as 
historical information and photos of Trout Creek in 1921 and 1933, that 
showed extensive erosion both upstream and downstream from Trout Creek 
Spring from excessive grazing and logging. Based on the photos, the 
sediment loads in the 1920s and 1930s almost certainly exceeded 
present-day loads. This means that the caddisfly was either able to 
withstand the sediment loads, the sediment was not deposited in the 
spring (allowing the caddisfly to survive), or conditions have improved 
since then to the extent that the caddisfly was able to colonize or 
recolonize Trout Creek Spring. Because cattle on the Bassam and 
Fourmile Allotments do not graze in the known

[[Page 22017]]

caddisfly habitat and grazing on the Chubb Park Allotment appears to be 
managed adequately, it is unlikely that cattle grazing on any of the 
three allotments under current and adaptive management causes 
sedimentation or direct impacts to the caddisfly or its habitat. The 
USFS has committed to adaptive management of the Chubb Park Allotment, 
which means that grazing or other actions may be adjusted based on 
observation of impacts on the ground or through scientific monitoring 
of conditions or both (USFS 2008b, p. 4). Adaptive management in the 
Chubb Park Allotment includes a variety of actions that can be 
categorized as adjusting grazing duration and timing, rotating cattle 
in different pastures, fencing cattle out of riparian areas, drawing 
cattle away from riparian areas with water developments, adjusting 
stocking rates, and managing vegetation (USFS 2008a, p. 28).
    No grazing occurs at High Creek Fen. The closest grazing occurs 
upstream about 1.5 km (0.9 mi) (Pague 2009, pers. comm.). Cattle also 
graze about 0.4 km (0.6 mi) downstream (easterly) and about 0.8 km (0.5 
mi) north and south of the fen (Pague 2009, pers. comm.). No grazing-
related impacts to the fen have been noted to date (Pague 2009, pers. 
comm.) or are expected in the future (Pague 2009, pers. comm.).
    The Valles Caldera National Preserve (VCNP) is approximately 36,000 
ha (89,000 ac) (Valles Caldera Trust 2009, p. 16), with 31 percent of 
the area suitable for grazing, including the area near where the adult 
caddisfly was found (Valles Caldera Trust 2009, pp. 75, 77). 
Historically, a large number of sheep and cattle were grazed on VCNP, 
but only cattle have been grazed for the last 40 years (Valles Caldera 
Trust 2009, p. 61). Historically, cattle and sheep grazing had an 
impact on Jaramillo Creek drainage, but since VCNP was created 
conditions have improved. Beginning in 2001, shortly after the VCNP was 
created, the number of cattle was reduced by about 93 percent 
(Parmenter 2009a, pers. comm.). Approximately 550 adult cows and 250 
calves were grazed in 2009, and this level is expected to continue in 
the future (Parmenter 2009b, pers. comm.). Cattle were grazed in the 
pasture surrounding the caddisfly location in 2008, but it was closed 
to grazing and herding in 2009 (Parmenter 2010, pers. comm.). The 
pasture is expected to remain closed to grazing and herding in the 
future (Parmenter 2010, pers. comm.).
    The primary native grazer in the VCNP is elk, with numbers of 
resident elk typically about 2,500 (Valles Caldera Trust 2009, p. 22). 
Seven thousand free-roaming elk live in the Jemez Mountains, which 
surround VCNP (Valles Caldera Trust 2009, p. 22). However, no 
measureable impact from elk grazing occurs in the area where the 
caddisfly was captured (Parmenter 2009b, pers. comm.).
    Stream condition in the VCNP appears to be improving. A proper 
functioning condition analysis was done in 2000 and 2006 to assess 
stream condition in VCNP (Valles Caldera Trust 2009, p. 68). 
Determining proper functioning condition includes analysis of 
vegetation, soils, geology, and hydrology but does not include water 
quality assessment (BLM 1998, pp. 2, 4). Four of five sections of the 
creek were rated as being in proper functioning condition in 2006, 
versus two of five in 2000 (Valles Caldera Trust 2009, p. 68). The 
other sections (three of five in 2000 and one of five in 2006) were 
rated as being on an upward trend. The section around the adult 
caddisfly capture site was rated as being in proper functioning 
condition (McWilliams 2006, pp. 7, 8, 17). Overall, 75 percent of the 
streams in VCNP are in proper functioning condition (Parmenter 2009a, 
pers. comm.). However, most of the streams on VCNP have water of 
quality that is considered impaired by State standards, primarily as a 
result of turbidity and temperature (Parmenter 2009a, pers. comm.). 
Unfortunately, temperature at the Jaramillo Creek caddisfly capture 
site is not known. Jaramillo Creek was one of the streams rated as non-
impaired overall in 2000, and was used as a reference stream during a 
benthic survey (Valles Caldera Trust 2009, p. 67). Jaramillo Creek had 
the highest number of taxa (31) and the highest diversity of aquatic 
insects of any creek in VCNP (Valles Caldera Trust 2009, p. 67). 
Therefore, we believe that livestock and elk grazing are not impairing 
water quality in a manner that threatens the Susan's purse-making 
caddisfly in Jaramillo Creek.
    In summary, the restricted distribution and narrow habitat 
requirements of Susan's purse-making caddisfly elevate the likelihood 
that grazing-induced impacts would have a negative impact on this 
species. Despite this possibility, no grazing impacts are apparent in 
the immediate vicinity of Trout Creek Spring. Additionally, there is no 
evidence that sedimentation from grazing in the Chubb Park Allotment is 
currently affecting Trout Creek Spring and effects are unlikely in the 
foreseeable future, considering current and adaptive management 
commitments. Grazing does not occur around the High Creek Fen caddisfly 
occurrence. There is no evidence that grazing at VCNP has impacted the 
caddisfly's habitat in recent years. We believe that grazing will 
continue for at least the next 20 years on both the Chubb Park 
Allotment and VCNP. However, we do not expect grazing to impact the 
caddisfly in the foreseeable future at either High Creek Fen or VCNP 
due to management practices currently in place and expected to continue 
in the future (Pague 2009, pers. comm.; Parmenter 2009a, pers. comm.; 
Parmenter 2009b, pers. comm.; Parmenter 2010, pers. comm.; Valles 
Caldera Trust 2009). We find no credible evidence that grazing is a 
threat to Susan's purse-making caddisfly now or in the foreseeable 
future.
Hazardous Fuel Reduction Activities
    The North Trout Creek Forest Health and Hazardous Fuel Reduction 
Project (North Trout Creek Project) (USFS 2007a) may impact Trout Creek 
Spring. The project is proposed to treat approximately 3,500 ha (8,700 
ac) out of a 6,200-ha (15,300-ac) project area with salvage logging, 
thinning, and prescribed fire to reduce hazardous fuel loads (USFS 
2007a, p. 1). The various components of the project are projected to 
take place over 5 to 7 years dependent on funding (USFS 2007a, p. 13). 
The closest proposed action under the project is about 10 km (6 mi) 
north of Trout Creek Spring. An additional timber sale project (Ranch 
of the Rockies Project) could result in 35 ha (86 ac) of impacts in the 
Trout Creek Pass area 5 to 8 km (3 to 5 mi) upstream of Trout Creek 
Spring (USFS 2007b, pp. 1-3). This timber sale project involves 
skidding and storing live and dead trees and piling the resulting 
slash. Although the proposed North Creek project location is at least 
10 km (6 mi) from caddisfly habitat, roads and prescribed fire related 
to logging and hazardous fuels reduction could potentially impact 
Susan's purse-making caddisfly as described in the ``Logging Roads'' 
and ``Prescribed Fire'' sections below.
    Very few or no harvestable trees occur at High Creek Fen, so 
logging there is not a potential threat. From 1935 to 1972, logging 
(particularly clear-cut logging) was conducted on VCNP (Valles Caldera 
Trust 2009, p. 164). Logging ceased in 1972, as result of a lawsuit 
(Valles Caldera Trust 2009, p. 164). Only minor selective logging has 
occurred since 1972, and it is expected that some thinning of second 
growth forests will continue to occur to prevent massive wildfires. 
However, no commercial logging is proposed (Parmenter 2009b, pers. 
comm.). There may be higher spring snowmelt from

[[Page 22018]]

thinning of trees, and possibly increased sedimentation, but the 
Science and Education Director of VCNP believes there should be minimal 
impact to the caddisfly (Parmenter 2010, pers. comm.). We do not expect 
any impacts to the caddisfly or its habitat from logging in the High 
Creek Fen and VCNP areas.
Logging Roads
    Disturbance associated with logging road construction and operation 
is a significant source of sediment load in streams (Cederholm et al. 
1980, p. 25). Unpaved permanent or temporary roads are a primary source 
of sediment in forested watersheds (Vora 1988, pp. 117, 119; Sugden and 
Woods 2007, p. 193). Similar to the effects of livestock grazing on 
aquatic habitats, roads remove vegetation, compact soil (reducing water 
infiltration), increase erosion and sedimentation, increase the amount 
of surface runoff and change its pattern, introduce contaminants, and 
facilitate the spread of invasive plant species (Anderson 1996, pp. 1-
13; Forman and Alexander 1998, pp. 210, 216-221; Jones et al. 2000, pp. 
77-82; Trombulak and Frissell 2000, pp. 19, 24; Gucinski et al. 2001, 
pp. 12-15, 22-32, 40-42; Angermeier et al. 2004, pp. 19-24). The 
cumulative effects on streams include increases in siltation, increases 
in nonpoint source pollution, increases in water temperatures, and 
decreases in dissolved oxygen levels. Since the caddisfly appears to 
inhabit springs with high dissolved oxygen, relatively low and stable 
water temperatures, and low trace metals (Flint and Herrmann 1976, p. 
897), we investigated the possibility that the cumulative effects of 
roads could threaten the caddisfly.
    The North Trout Creek Project would not create new permanent roads, 
but would allow creation of about 10 km (6 mi) of new temporary roads 
and reopen 16 km (10 mi) of existing closed roads (USFS 2007a, p. 83). 
The sediment yield from construction of temporary roads and reopening 
of closed roads associated with the fuel reduction project is estimated 
to be 41.2 tons/year, with 9.3 times greater sediment load in the Trout 
Creek watershed predicted from the action versus no action alternatives 
(USFS 2007a, p. 83). However, it is uncertain if the sediment will be 
deposited at, and affect the caddisfly or its habitat in, Trout Creek 
Spring, especially with actions described above improving the riparian 
area upstream of Trout Creek Spring. The riparian vegetation in the 
ephemeral upper Trout Creek channel will likely act as a sediment trap, 
thereby limiting the rate and average amount of sediment deposited in 
Trout Creek Spring. Since activities under the fuel reduction project 
have not yet occurred, it is presently unknown what effects the 
predicted sediment increase will have on Susan's purse-making 
caddisfly.
    Historic timber activities resulted in about 50 percent of VCNP 
being logged, with over 1,600 km (1,000 mi) of 1960s-era logging roads 
(Valles Caldera Trust 2009, p. 164) being built in winding and 
spiraling patterns around hills (Valles Caldera Trust 2009, pp. 59-60). 
The logging resulted in accelerated run-off and erosion that is still 
evident or active to some extent including continued erosion in gullies 
and roads immediately adjacent to Jaramillo Creek (Parmenter 2010, 
pers. comm.; Valles Caldera Trust 2009, p. 60). However, the run-off 
has been reduced by natural revegetation of grasses, forbs, and small 
trees and only minimal administrative use of logging roads (Parmenter 
2010, pers. comm.). Jaramillo Creek has improved with better management 
and is currently considered in good ecological condition (Valles 
Caldera Trust 2009, p. 68). Assuming that the adult caddisfly found 
next to Jaramillo Creek was hatched from nearby larval habitat, 
sedimentation from logging roads does not appear to be a threat to 
Susan's purse-making caddisfly habitat in the area now or in the 
foreseeable future.
Fire
    In addition to logging, the North Trout Creek Project involves 
prescribed burns (USFS 2007a, map 2.3). Regular burns conducted around 
the area of Trout Creek Spring could have a negative impact on stream 
quality, because burning has been shown to affect aquatic habitats and 
watersheds in a variety of ways (Neary et al. 2005, pp. 1-250). For 
example, mechanical site preparation and road construction needed to 
conduct prescribed burns can lead to increased erosion and sediment 
production, especially on steep terrain (Neary et al. 2005, pp. 54, 56, 
58). Removal of leaf litter from the soil surface through burning can 
lead to reduced water infiltration into the soil, increasing the amount 
of surface runoff into streams. Additionally, ash depositions following 
a fire can affect the pH of water. Negative impacts may be exacerbated 
by burning slash piles, since the fire intensity is greater when the 
fuel is piled in a small area, which can have a stronger impact on the 
underlying soil (Neary et al. 2005, p. 83). No prescribed burns will 
occur immediately around or upstream of Trout Creek Spring, but burns 
higher up in the Trout Creek watershed could add sediment from the 
burning and thinning activities (USFS 2007a, map 2.3). The proposed 
Ranch of the Rockies timber sale does not involve burning (USFS 2007b, 
pp. 1-3). Of course, natural wildfires could have the same effect as 
the prescribed burns or a more significant effect if burn intensity is 
high. However, the thinning and prescribed burning program is intended 
to reduce fuel loads to prevent high intensity wildfires.
    Prescribed burning does not take place at High Creek Fen (Schulz 
2009, pers. comm.). At VCNP, natural fire patterns were disrupted in 
the late 1800s with the introduction of livestock, human activities, 
and intentional fire suppression (Valles Caldera Trust 2009, pp. 96-
97). Natural fire events have not occurred in VCNP in many years. 
Prescribed fire at VCNP has been limited, with only one burn in 2004 
that is described as creating a positive vegetation response (Valles 
Caldera Trust 2009, p. 97). A prescribed fire plan is expected to be 
developed (Valles Caldera Trust 2009, p. 97), as there is concern for 
massive fires to occur (Parmenter 2009b, pers. comm.). Massive fires 
uphill or upstream of the caddisfly capture location would likely have 
a much greater effect on the caddisfly as there would be less 
vegetation to hold soil in place. However, thinning of secondary growth 
should help prevent massive fires in the future (Parmenter 2009b, pers. 
comm.).
    In summary, proposed logging activities and prescribed burning 
activities in the Trout Creek Spring watershed could potentially have 
negative impacts on the caddisfly by increasing the sediment load in 
Trout Creek. None of these activities is occurring at present, so there 
is no evidence of immediate impacts. If sediment transport does 
increase as a result of future logging and burning activities, it is 
unknown if the sediment will be deposited in Trout Creek Spring to an 
extent where it will affect the caddisfly. Sediment transport and 
deposition to the caddisfly habitat in the foreseeable future may be 
ameliorated by increased vegetation in the upper Trout Creek watershed 
under current grazing management. The VCNP is still experiencing some 
erosion from logging-related roads developed before 1972, but Jaramillo 
Creek is in good ecological condition and continues to improve. Since 
the adult caddisfly has limited dispersal, suggesting larval habitat is 
nearby, the caddisfly's existence in Jaramillo Creek indicates that 
sedimentation effects from logging roads do not appear to be having 
significant

[[Page 22019]]

impacts. Erosion and sedimentation is not expected to be a threat in 
the foreseeable future with increased vegetation, minimal logging, and 
minimal logging road use.
Dewatering of Spring Habitats
    Reduction of stream flow due to increased groundwater use and water 
diversion can have a dramatic impact on stream habitat and associated 
macroinvertebrate communities. Artificial flow reductions frequently 
lead to changes, such as decreased water depth, increased 
sedimentation, and altered water temperature and chemistry, whichh can 
reduce or influence macroinvertebrate numbers, richness, competition, 
predation, and other interactions (Dewson et al. 2007, pp. 401-411).
    The development of springs in the upper Trout Creek watershed could 
affect the hydrology of remaining springs and streams, in addition to 
reducing potential new habitat for Susan's purse-making caddisfly 
colonization. Trout Creek Spring itself is not currently proposed for 
livestock water development, but a well installed in 2005 pumps water 
from the upper ephemeral part of Trout Creek (USFS 2008a, Appendix 3 
Chubb Park C&H, p. 5). The well is 70 m (220 ft) deep and diverts 15 
liters (4 gallons) per minute, but it is not known what percentage of 
the available water this constitutes (USFS 2009, p. 6). Another six 
developments are planned in ephemeral tributaries to Trout Creek, 
consisting of water piped from six seeps to nearby stock tanks (USFS 
2008a, Appendix 1 Chubb Park C&H Range Improvements, p. l). The exact 
groundwater source or sources for Trout Creek Spring are unknown, and 
no study was conducted on the existing well to determine if it is 
capturing groundwater from a tributary to Trout Creek Spring (USFS 
2008c, p. 34). Trout Creek Spring discharge will be measured twice 
yearly to determine if water use in Chubb Park is affecting caddisfly 
habitat (USFS 2008a, p. 43). The USFS has not identified what actions 
it will take if spring discharge is found to be less than previous 
years (USFS 2010, p. 2).
    High Creek Fen is part of a 464-ha (1,147-ac) preserve owned and 
managed by TNC. Park County, where the preserve is located, has 
experienced significant population increases since the 1990s (Miller 
and Ortiz 2007, p. 2). Population growth in this area is accompanied by 
an increased demand for fresh drinking water. In 2000, 89 percent of 
the population of Park County received water from groundwater sources 
(Miller and Ortiz 2007, p. 2). The area surrounding High Creek Fen is 
currently being protected, but the fen itself is fed by groundwater 
sources. Sustained or increasing groundwater removal of water sources 
for the fen could have a deleterious effect on the hydrology of the fen 
and the invertebrate species it supports, including Susan's purse-
making caddisfly.
    However, we have no information to quantify the magnitude or 
temporal aspect of potential effects from groundwater withdrawal. TNC 
believes the water sources for the fen are fairly secure because there 
are conservation easements to the west (upstream) of the fen on private 
land, and water use in a sub-development around Warm Springs uses water 
that does not appear to be supporting High Creek Fen (Schulz 2009, 
pers. comm.). Additionally, the CSLB and Colorado Natural Areas Program 
(CNAP) signed an article of designation in 2001 to conserve 972 ha 
(2,401 ac) of CSLB land on the north side of the fen, and land on Black 
Mountain to the west of the fen, for the protection of the land and at 
least one water source (CNAP 2001, pp. 1-7). The land is included as a 
State Natural Area under CNAP.
    The VCNP contains 136 earthen stock ponds with about 30 percent of 
the ponds failing and causing erosion and sedimentation (Valles Caldera 
Trust 2009, pp. 24, 93). However, only two to four appear to be in the 
Jaramillo Creek drainage, and the amount of sedimentation they cause is 
minor (Parmenter 2009b, pers. comm.). The stock ponds capture snowmelt 
and rainwater and do not require water delivery from streams (Parmenter 
2009b, pers. comm.). No water is diverted from Jaramillo Creek 
(Parmenter 2009b, pers. comm.), and no additional water use is expected 
in the foreseeable future in VCNP (Parmenter 2009c, pers. comm.).
    In summary, the restricted distribution and narrow habitat 
requirements of Susan's purse-making caddisfly make it possible that 
human-induced alterations in stream hydrology and water chemistry, such 
as what could occur from dewatering of spring habitats, would have a 
negative impact on this species. Although groundwater development in 
the areas around caddisfly habitat has the potential to impact springs 
and streams, we do not have any data showing that quantity of water has 
been lowered to date. Consequently, the information that we do have 
does not indicate that dewatering is currently occurring and impacting 
caddisfly habitat or that it will impact the caddisfly in the 
foreseeable future.
Roads
    In addition to roads associated with hazardous fuel reduction 
projects as described above, Trout Creek Spring may be impacted by 
Highway 285 and County Road 309 (USFS 2007a, map 2.3). Highway 285, 
which receives heavy traffic, runs within 30 m (100 ft) of Trout Creek 
Spring on the eastern side of the spring. Roads accumulate a variety of 
contaminants including brake dust, heavy metals, and organic 
pollutants, which can be carried into streams by overland runoff 
(Forman and Alexander 1998, pp. 219-221; Trombulak and Frissell 2000, 
pp. 19, 22-24; Gucinski et al. 2001, pp. 40-42). Highway 285 receives a 
sand and 3-percent road salt mixture as a wintertime deicer (Cady 2009, 
pers. comm.). Based on the condition of vegetation around the spring, 
there is no indication of any effects from the sand/salt mixture 
(Ireland 2009, pp. 1-2). County Road 309, which is immediately above 
the spring on the west side, receives occasional snow plowing for a 
short distance up to a private residence (Gaines 2009b, pers. comm.) 
and also may occasionally get graded, which can increase the rate of 
erosion and deliver increased silt loads to Trout Creek Spring 
(Gucinski et al. 2001, pp. 12-15). However, there is no recent 
information on water quality or sedimentation at Trout Creek Spring to 
assess whether these factors are impacting Susan's purse-making 
caddisfly habitat.
    Highway 285 crosses High Creek on the western side of High Creek 
Fen. There also is a little-used dirt access road about 300 m (938 ft) 
north of High Creek Fen. Neither the highway nor the dirt road appears 
to be causing impacts to the caddisfly's habitat, as water quality 
appears good (Cooper 1996) and an adult caddisfly and pupae were found 
there in 2009 (Ireland 2009, p. 1; Ruiter 2009b, pers. comm.).
    One maintained dirt road crosses Jaramillo Creek next to the 
collection site in VCNP and continues north on the eastern side of the 
creek for about 2.4 km (1.5 mi). It is unknown how much sediment this 
contributes to the creek, but it may contribute some. This road 
connects with another approximately 2.4 km (1.5 mi) upslope from the 
caddisfly capture site. The second follows upper Jaramillo Creek for 
about 5 km (3 mi) and deposits sediment into the creek during 
rainstorms (Parmenter 2009b, pers. comm.). These roads are not open in 
the winter and no salt, chemicals, or herbicides are used along them 
(Parmenter 2009b, pers. comm.), so road contaminants are not an issue

[[Page 22020]]

around the known caddisfly location in VCNP.
    In summary, the restricted distribution and narrow habitat 
requirements of Susan's purse-making caddisfly make it possible that 
road contaminants could have a negative impact on this species. 
However, the available evidence does not support a conclusion that 
roads in and near Susan's purse-making caddisfly habitat are negatively 
impacting water quality or habitat at present or will do so in the 
foreseeable future.
Recreation
    Population growth in central Colorado has led to increased numbers 
of recreational users. The population of Chaffee County increased 28.1 
percent from 1990 to 2000, with much of the growth occurring in 
unincorporated areas, and the population of Colorado is expected to 
increase by about 50 percent within the next 20 to 25 years (Chaffee 
County Comprehensive Plan 2000, p. 10). A study of outdoor recreation 
trends in the United States found increases in participation in most of 
the activities surveyed, which included bicycling, primitive or 
developed-area camping, bird watching, hiking, backpacking, and 
snowmobiling (Cordell et al. 1999, pp. 219-321). Additionally, on the 
national level, off-road vehicle (ORV) usage has risen substantially. 
The number of people who reported engaging in ORV activities rose by 8 
million individuals between 1982 and 1995, and an increase of 16 
percent nationally is anticipated during the next 50 years (Bowker et 
al. 1999, pp. 339-340; Garber-Yonts 2005, p. 30). ORV use can 
negatively impact conditions in riparian areas through damage to 
riparian vegetation and stream banks, leading to increased 
sedimentation.
    ORV impacts have been documented at Trout Creek Spring (USFS 2007c, 
pp. 2-3). However, ORV use is restricted to existing roads in the Trout 
Creek Spring/Chubb Park area (USFS 2010, p. 2). The likelihood of 
future ORV use impacting the caddisfly's habitat at Trout Creek Spring 
is low due to fences above and below the spring as well as steep slopes 
down to the spring. ORV use in the Chubb Park Allotment could 
contribute sediment to Trout Creek through vegetation destruction and 
erosion, but road-restricted ORV use should greatly limit ORV-caused 
sedimentation.
    Damage to Trout Creek Spring also is possible from water withdrawal 
by campers (USFS 2007c, p. 2). Increased human passage to the spring to 
obtain water could damage the riparian zone and disturb habitat. 
However, the proximity to Highway 285, steep slopes off of County Road 
309, and open, narrow riparian zone limits the desirability for camping 
at the spring. People may occasionally go down to Trout Creek Spring 
proper for water, but if so, this occurrence appears to be limited as 
no sign of trampled vegetation or other impacts were evident during the 
July 2009 site visit. People also may use the ``parking area'' on the 
downstream side of the Highway 285 bridge to obtain water from Trout 
Creek, to fish, or to temporarily use the area for other purposes. 
However, the impact of people using the area below the bridge is likely 
minimal or non-existent since the caddisfly has only been collected 
upstream between the bridge and spring (Flint and Herrmann 1976, p. 
898; Herrmann 2010, pers. comm.). More specimens of another caddisfly, 
O. logana (no common name), were collected at the bridge site than at 
the spring. Consequently, Flint and Herrmann (1976, p. 898) 
hypothesized that O. logana replaces Susan's purse-making caddisfly in 
Trout Creek as it gets farther away from the spring. Additionally, 
Herrmann (2010, pers. comm.) has never collected the caddisfly 
downstream of the bridge.
    High Creek Fen is accessible to the public, but recreation of any 
kind is not known to be a threat (Schulz 2009, pers. comm.). The VCNP 
allows public access, with thousands of visitors annually (Valles 
Caldera Trust 2009, p. 142). However, VCNP uses reservations and a 
lottery to manage popular recreation activities or limits events to 
certain days and times (Valles Caldera Trust 2009, p. 212). Recreation 
is monitored, and no impacts from recreational activities have been 
noted in caddisfly habitat (Parmenter 2009b, pers. comm.). No ORV use 
is allowed in VCNP (Parmenter 2009c, pers. comm.). An environmental 
impact statement for public access and use is being prepared (Parmenter 
2009b, pers. comm.).
    In summary, although recreation is growing nationwide, the 
available information does not support a conclusion that any of the 
sites inhabited by Susan's purse-making caddisfly are being negatively 
impacted by recreational activities or that they will be in the 
foreseeable future.
Global Climate Change
    The effects of global climate change are being assessed in North 
America and throughout the world, and changes in precipitation 
patterns, stream hydrology, and bloom time have already been observed. 
Stream flows decreased by about 2 percent per decade across the last 
century in the central Rocky Mountain region (Rood et al. 2005, p. 
231).
    Effects of global climate change are anticipated to include warming 
in the western mountains, causing snowpack and ice to melt earlier in 
the season (Field et al. 2007, pp. 627, 632, 635). These changes could 
lead to both increased flooding early in the spring, and drier summer 
conditions, particularly in the arid western areas, which rely on 
snowmelt to sustain stream flows. Spring and summer snow cover has 
already been documented as decreasing in the western United States, and 
drought has become more frequent and intense (Intergovernmental Panel 
on Climate Change (IPCC) 2007, pp. 8, 12). Major hydrologic events, 
such as floods and droughts, are projected to increase in frequency and 
intensity (IPCC 2007, p. 18). Erosion also is projected to increase as 
the result of a combination of factors, such as decreased soil 
stability from higher temperatures and reduced soil moisture, and 
increases in winds and high intensity storms (IPCC 2007, pp. 12, 14, 
15, 18). However, IPCC (2007) data can only predict on a regional scale 
and are not predictive of conditions at specific sites. Ray et al. 
(2008) predict that Colorado will warm by about 1 degree Celsius 
([deg]C) (2.5 degrees Fahrenheit ([deg]F)) by 2025 and by about 2 
[deg]C (4.0 [deg]F) by 2050. Most of the observed snowpack loss in 
Colorado has occurred below 2,500 m (8,200 ft) with snowpack loss above 
this elevation predicted at between 10 and 20 percent (Ray et al. 
2008). With the lowest known caddisfly site in Colorado (Trout Creek 
Spring) occurring at 2,750 m (9,020 feet), the chance of effects from 
hydrological change and a warming climate is lessened.
    There is evidence that the temperature has been rising at VCNP 
since 1914 (Parmenter 2009a, pers. comm.; Parmenter 2009b, pers. comm.) 
and that precipitation has been dropping (Parmenter 2009b, pers. 
comm.). Average annual temperatures at Jemez Springs, New Mexico, which 
is about 16 km (10 mi) south of VCNP, rose from about 10.3 [deg]C (50.5 
[deg]F) in 1914 to 11.7 [deg]C (53 [deg]F) in 2005 (Parmenter 2009b). 
The mean January temperature rose from about 0 to 1 [deg]C (32 to 34 
[deg]F) during this time period (Parmenter 2009b). The mean July 
temperature increase stands out as it increased from about 20.6 to 23.1 
[deg]C (69 to 73.5 [deg]F) from 1914 to 2005 (Parmenter 2009b). The 
average annual precipitation at Jemez Springs decreased from about 46 
centimeters (cm) (18 inches (in)) to just over 38 cm (15 in) from 1914 
to 2005 (Parmenter 2009b). In 2006, following a

[[Page 22021]]

very dry winter and spring, Jaramillo Creek went dry for 30 days 
(Valles Caldera Trust 2009, p. 68). This was the driest period in 112 
years of records (Parmenter 2009a, pers. comm.). However, the caddisfly 
was found in 2008 on Jaramillo Creek. Consequently, Susan's purse-
making caddisfly larvae may survive in springs that had some water in 
them in 2006, or the caddisfly could have recolonized Jaramillo Creek 
since 2006 from some nearby refuge or drainage that was not dry in 
2006. We are not aware of any historical temperature or precipitation 
data that have been compiled or analyzed for the Trout Creek area or 
High Creek Fen area.
    In summary, based on predictions from IPCC over the next 40 years, 
the western United States is predicted to get warmer and dryer and have 
altered hydrologic cycles. Despite these predicted changes, the 
caddisfly does appear to have the ability to adapt to warmer and drier 
conditions from observations of weather patterns around the VCNP site. 
Furthermore, the high elevations that the caddisfly occurs at in 
Colorado will help shield it from climate change effects.
Summary of Factor A
    Although we have identified potential impacts to the caddisfly from 
livestock grazing, hazardous fuel reduction activities, logging roads, 
prescribed fire, current and proposed water development, road 
sedimentation and contamination, and recreation, the available 
information does not support a conclusion that these actions are 
currently impacting the cadd