Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Removal of the Utah (Desert) Valvata Snail From the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife, 52272-52282 [2010-20517]
Download as PDF
52272
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 164 / Wednesday, August 25, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
Although this action does not require
any special considerations under
Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal
Actions to Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994), EPA seeks to
achieve environmental justice, the fair
treatment and meaningful involvement
of any group, including minority and/or
low-income populations, in the
development, implementation, and
enforcement of environmental laws,
regulations, and policies. As such, to the
extent that information is publicly
available or was submitted in comments
to EPA, the Agency considered whether
groups or segments of the population, as
a result of their location, cultural
practices, or other factors, may have
atypical or disproportionately high and
adverse human health impacts or
environmental effects from exposure to
the pesticide discussed in this
document, compared to the general
population.
XI. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report to each House of
the Congress and to the Comptroller
General of the United States. EPA will
submit a report containing this rule and
other required information to the U.S.
Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to
publication of this rule in the Federal
Register. This rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: August 13, 2010.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office
of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
■
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
PART 180—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. In §180.960, in the table, add
alphabetically the following polymer to
read as follows:
■
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:51 Aug 24, 2010
Jkt 220001
§ 180.960 Polymers; exemptions from the
requirement of a tolerance.
*
*
*
*
*
Polymer
CAS No.
*
*
*
Acetic acid ethenyl
ester, polymer with
oxirane, minimum
number average
molecular weight (in
amu), 17,000.
*
*
*
*
*
25820–49–9
*
*
[FR Doc. 2010–21138 Filed 8–24–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R1–ES–2008–0084;
[92220–1113–0000–C6]
RIN 1018–AW16
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
Under the authority of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act), we, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), are removing
the Utah (desert) valvata snail (Valvata
utahensis) from the Federal List of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
(List). Based on a thorough review of the
best available scientific and commercial
data, we determined that the Utah
valvata snail is more widespread and
occurs in a greater variety of habitats in
the Snake River than known at the time
of listing in 1992. We now know the
Utah valvata snail is not limited to areas
of cold-water springs or spring outflows;
rather, it persists in a variety of aquatic
habitats, including cold-water springs,
spring creeks and tributaries, the
mainstem Snake River and associated
tributary stream habitats, and reservoirs
influenced by dam operations. Given
our current understanding of the
species’ habitat requirements and
threats, the species does not meet the
definition of an endangered or
threatened species under the Act.
Therefore, we are removing the Utah
valvata snail from the List, thereby
removing all protections provided by
the Act.
SUMMARY:
Frm 00060
Fmt 4700
Brian Kelly, State Supervisor, at the
above address; by telephone 208–378–
5243; or by fax at 208–378–5262 e-mail
at: fw1srbocomment@fws.gov. 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
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Removal of the Utah
(Desert) Valvata Snail From the Federal
List of Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife
PO 00000
This effective date of this rule is
September 24, 2010.
ADDRESSES: This final rule is available
on the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov and at https://
www.fws.gov/idaho. Comments and
materials received, including supporting
documentation used in preparing this
rule, 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 83709; by
telephone.
DATES:
Sfmt 4700
The Utah valvata snail (Valvata
utahensis) was first recognized as a
species in 1902, based on specimens
collected from Utah Lake and Bear Lake,
Utah (Walker 1902, p. 125). Its common
name has since been changed by the
American Fisheries Society to the
‘‘desert valvata’’ in the benchmark text
for aquatic invertebrate nomenclature,
Common and Scientific Names of
Aquatic Invertebrates from the United
States and Canada (Turgeon et al. 1998,
p. 109), presumably due to the fact that
it is no longer known to occur in Utah.
However, because the species is
currently listed in the Code of Federal
Regulations as the Utah valvata snail,
Valvata utahensis will be referred to as
the Utah valvata snail throughout this
final rule.
Range
The Utah valvata snail, or at least its
closely related ancestors, has been
described as ranging widely across the
western United States and Canada as far
back as the Jurassic Period, 199.6 ± 0.6
to 145.5 ± 4 million years ago (Taylor
1985a, p. 268). Fossils of the Utah
valvata snail are known from Utah to
California (Taylor 1985a, pp. 286–287).
The Utah valvata snail was likely
present in the ancestral Snake River as
it flowed south from Idaho, through
Nevada, and into northeastern
California (Taylor 1985a, p. 303). The
Snake River’s course changed to join the
Columbia River Basin approximately 2
million years ago (Hershler and Liu
2004, pp. 927–928).
E:\FR\FM\25AUR1.SGM
25AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 164 / Wednesday, August 25, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
At the time of listing in 1992 (57 FR
59244, December 14, 1992), we reported
the range of the Utah valvata snail as
being limited to a few springs and
mainstem Snake River sites in the
Hagerman Valley, Idaho (River Mile
(RM) 585), a few sites above and below
Minidoka Dam (RM 675), and
immediately downstream of American
Falls Dam (RM 709).
New data collected since the time of
listing indicate that the Utah valvata
snail is discontinuously distributed in at
least 255 miles (410 kilometers (km)) of
the Snake River and some associated
tributary streams, an increase of nearly
122 river miles (196 km) from the
known range at the time of listing. Their
current range in the Snake River extends
from RM 585 near the Thousand Springs
Preserve (Bean in litt. 2005), upstream to
the confluence of the Henry’s Fork with
the Snake River (RM 837; Fields 2005,
p. 11). Colonies of the Utah valvata snail
have been found in the Snake River near
the towns of Firth (RM 777.5), Shelley
(RM 784.6), Payne (RM 802.6), and
Roberts (RM 815), and in the Henry’s
Fork approximately 9.3 miles (15 km)
upstream from its confluence with the
Snake River (at Snake RM 832.3)
(Gustafson in litt. 2003). Based on
limited mollusk surveys, the species has
not been found upstream from the
described location on the Henry’s Fork
or in the South Fork of the Snake River.
Tributary streams to the Snake River
where Utah valvata snails have been
collected include Box Canyon Creek
(RM 588) (Taylor 1985b, pp. 9–10), and
one location in the Big Wood River
(Wood River Mile (WRM) 35) (USBR
2003, p. 22).
Habitat Use
At the time of listing in 1992, the best
available data indicated that Utah
valvata snails ‘‘characteristically require
cold, fast water, or lotic habitats * * *
in deep pools adjacent to rapids or in
perennial flowing waters associated
with large spring complexes’’ (57 FR
59244, December 14, 1992). In
numerous field studies conducted since
then, the species has been collected at
a wide range of water depths, ranging
from less than 3.2 feet (1 meter)
(Stephenson and Bean 2003, pp. 98–99)
to depths greater than 45 feet (14
meters) (USBR 2003, p. 20), and at
temperatures between 37.4 and 75.2
degrees Fahrenheit (F) (4 to 24 degrees
Celsius (C)) (Lysne in litt. 2007; Gregg in
litt. 2006).
Work conducted by the Idaho
Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) in
the upper Snake River demonstrated
that Utah valvata snail presence was
positively correlated with water depth
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:51 Aug 24, 2010
Jkt 220001
(up to 18.37 feet (5.6 meters)) and
temperature (up to 63 degrees F (17.2
degrees C)) (Fields 2005, pp. 8–9), and
Utah valvata snail density was
positively correlated with macrophyte (a
water plant large enough to be observed
with the unaided eye) coverage, water
depth, and temperature (Fields 2006, p.
6). Similarly, Hinson (2006, pp. 28–29)
analyzed available data from several
studies conducted by the U.S. Bureau of
Reclamation (USBR) (2001–2004), Idaho
Power Company (IPC) (1995–2002),
IDFG, Idaho Transportation Department
(2003–2004) and others, and
demonstrated a positive relationship
between Utah valvata snail presence
and macrophytes, water depth, and fine
substrates. One study reported Utah
valvata snails in organically enriched
fine sediments with a heavy macrophyte
community, downstream of an
aquaculture facility (RM 588) (Hinson
2006, pp. 31–32).
Survey data and information reported
since the time of listing demonstrate
that the Utah valvata snail is able to live
in reservoirs, which were previously
thought to be unsuitable for the species
(Frest and Johannes 1992, pp. 13–14;
USBR 2002, pp. 8–9; Fields 2005, p. 16;
Hinson 2006, pp. 23–33). We now know
the Utah valvata snail persists in a
variety of aquatic habitats, including
cold-water springs, spring creeks and
tributaries, the mainstem Snake River
and associated tributary stream habitats,
and reservoirs.
Alterations of the Snake River,
including the construction of dams and
reservoir habitats, have changed fluvial
processes resulting in the reduced
likelihood of naturally high river flows
or rapid changes in flows, and the
retention of fine sediments (U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA) 2002, pp. 4.30–4.31), which
may also increase potential habitat for
the species (e.g., Lake Walcott and
American Falls Reservoirs; however, see
Summary of Factors Affecting the
Species below for a discussion of the
effects of rapidly drawing down
reservoirs). Utah valvata snail surveys
conducted downstream from American
Falls Dam (RM 714.1) to Minidoka Dam
(RM 674.5), from 1997 and 2001–2007,
consistently found Utah valvata snails
on fine sediments within this 39-mile
(62.9 km) river/reservoir reach of the
Snake River (USBR 1997, p. 4; USBR
2003, p. 8; USBR 2004, p. 5; USBR 2005,
p. 6; USBR 2007, pp. 9–11; USFWS
2005, p. 119). Surveys conducted
downstream of Minidoka Dam (RM
674.5) to Lower Salmon Falls Dam (RM
573.0) have also documented Utah
valvata snails in that reach, including
one record from the tailrace area of
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
52273
Minidoka Dam (the downstream part of
a dam where the impounded water
reenters the river) in 2001 (USFWS
2005, p. 120).
In summary, based on available data,
the Utah valvata snail is not as
specialized in its habitat needs as we
thought at the time of listing. In the
Snake River, the species inhabits a
diversity of aquatic habitats throughout
its 255-mile (410 km) range, including
cold-water springs, spring creeks and
tributaries, mainstem and free-flowing
waters, reservoirs, and impounded
reaches. The species occurs on a variety
of substrate types including both fine
sediments and more coarse substrates in
areas both with and without
macrophytes. It has been collected at
water depths ranging from less than 3.2
feet (1 meter) to greater than 45 feet (14
meters), and at water temperatures
ranging from 37.4 to 75.2 degrees F (3
to 24 degrees C).
Population Density
Like many short-lived and highly
fecund invertebrates, the density of
Utah valvata snails at occupied sites can
vary greatly. For example, at one coldwater spring site at the Thousand
Springs Preserve, Utah valvata snail
density in 2003 ranged between 0 and
1,724 snails per square meter (/m2),
with an average of 197 snails/m2
(Stephenson et al. 2004, p. 23). In the
mainstem Snake River between
American Falls Reservoir and Minidoka
Dam in 2002, Utah valvata snail
densities averaged 91 snails/m2 (ranging
from 0 to 1,188 snails/m2), and in
American Falls Reservoir densities
averaged 50 snails/m2 (range
unavailable) (USBR 2003, p. 20). In 2008
and 2009, monitoring efforts were
carried out at sites first monitored by
the USBR in the late 1990s and early
2000s below American Falls Reservoir,
which is a free-flowing riverine
environment (Gates in litt. 2009).
Monitoring results indicate these
specific colonies have decreased in
density and proportional occurrence
compared to results from the late 1990s
and early 2000s, with the greatest
densities found in 2009 ranging from 4
to 24 snails/m2 and presence ranging
from 5 to 9 percent (Gates in litt. 2009).
However, 2009 monitoring sites do not
represent a comprehensive survey of the
area below American Falls Reservoir as
only two of the four largest colonies
sampled in 2008 were sampled in 2009
(Gates in litt. 2009). Above American
Falls Reservoir in the mainstem Snake
River, Utah valvata snail densities
sampled in 2004 at six sites averaged
117 snails/m2 (ranging from 0 to 1,716
snails/m2) (Fields 2006, pp. 12–13).
E:\FR\FM\25AUR1.SGM
25AUR1
52274
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 164 / Wednesday, August 25, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
Within occupied reservoirs, the
proportional occurrence of snails is
relatively high. For all field studies and
surveys, lower Lake Walcott Reservoir
had the highest proportional occurrence
(USBR 2002, p. 5; USBR 2003, p. 6). For
sample years 2001 to 2006, the relative
proportion of samples containing Utah
valvata snails ranged from 40 (in 2004)
to 62 (in 2002) percent of samples
collected. Similarly, American Falls
reservoir samples contained a high
proportion of Utah valvata snails, with
the species detected in 21 (in 2001) to
33 (in 2003) percent of samples. Such
high proportional occurrence in
reservoirs over multiple years is
additional evidence that Utah valvata
snails are using reservoir habitats and
are not restricted to cold-water springs
or their outflows.
Previous Federal Actions
We listed the Utah valvata snail as
endangered on December 14, 1992 (57
FR 59244). Based on the best available
data at that time we determined that the
Utah valvata 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 completed
the Snake River Aquatic Species
Recovery Plan (Plan), which included
the Utah valvata snail. We have not
designated critical habitat for this
species.
On April 11, 2006, we initiated a 5year review of the species’ status (71 FR
18345) in accordance with section
4(c)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (Act; 16 U.S.C. 1531
et seq.). On December 26, 2006, the
Service received a petition from the
Governor of Idaho and attorneys from
several irrigation districts and canal
districts requesting that we remove the
Utah valvata snail 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 Utah valvata snail from
the List may be warranted, and
initiating a status review (72 FR 31264).
As part of our best available scientific
and commercial data analysis, we
conducted a 30-day peer review on a
draft status-review document, which
was completed in September 2007
(USFWS in litt. 2007).
On July 16, 2009, we published a
warranted 12-month finding on the
delisting petition and a proposed rule to
remove the Utah valvata snail from the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:51 Aug 24, 2010
Jkt 220001
Federal List of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife (74 FR 34539). We
solicited data and comments from the
public on the proposed rule. The
comment period opened on July 16,
2009, and closed on September 14,
2009. A summary of the comments we
received and our responses are provided
below.
Summary of Comments and Responses
In accordance with our policy on peer
review, published on July 1, 1994 (59
FR 34270), we solicited scientific peer
review from four appropriate and
independent experts following
publication of the proposed rule.
Reviewers were asked to review the
proposed rule to help ensure our use of
the best available scientific and
commercial data, and to maximize the
quality, objectivity, thoroughness, and
utility of the information upon which
the final rule is based. One of the peer
reviewers submitted comments which
we summarize and respond to below.
Peer Review Comments and Responses
(1) Comment: New monitoring data
collected in the Vista/Neeley section of
the Snake River below American Falls
Reservoir (RM 713; a free flowing
riverine environment) from 2008 and
2009 indicate lower Utah valvata snail
densities than were observed during
surveys in the late 1990s and early
2000s. These data, along with other
preliminary sampling results provided,
suggest that Utah valvata snail
populations can experience large
fluctuations in population size within
and among years.
Our Response: We thank the peer
reviewer for the additional monitoring
data, which we have incorporated into
this final rule.
While the Utah valvata snail
population appears to have declined
between 2002 and 2009 in the Vista/
Neeley section (RM 713) of the Snake
River, it should be noted that different
collection methods and sample sizes
used for data collection limit our ability
to precisely quantify site-specific Utah
valvata snail population declines. Also,
the data reported are from a small
portion (within 1.92 miles (3.2 km))
(USBR 2003, p. 4) of the 255-river-mile
(410 km) range of the Utah valvata snail
in the Snake River and tributary
streams. Lastly, the 2009 monitoring
sites do not represent a comprehensive
survey of the reach below American
Falls dam because they were based on
only two of the four largest colonies that
were sampled in 2008.
Compared to vertebrate species, most
invertebrates have short generation
times, small body size, and rapid rates
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
of population increase and decline. For
these reasons, invertebrate populations
frequently undergo large fluctuations in
size and may vary greatly between years
due to environmental parameters and
other factors affecting habitat (Ricklefs
1979, pp. 509–510; Murphy et al. 1990,
p. 41).
In general, consistent, long-term
monitoring of population abundance
and persistence throughout the range of
the Utah valvata snail is lacking. This
limits our ability to calculate reliable
estimates of population trends. In the
case of Utah valvata snails, although
there appears to be large interannual
variation in population numbers at the
few sites for which we have monitoring
data, such as in the Vista/Neeley section
of the Snake River, this is not
necessarily an indication that the
species’ status has degraded or that the
species is undergoing a long-term
population decline.
(2) Comment: The peer reviewer
stated that the greatest threat to the Utah
valvata snail is from annual dewatering
of the Snake River below the mainstem
dams. Annual water drawdowns expose
hundreds of meters of littoral zone
habitat in the Vista/Neeley and
Coldwater sections of the Snake River
within a period of days.
Our Response: In making our delisting
determination, we evaluated several
threat factors, including the operation of
existing hydropower dams. Within the
Vista/Neeley section below American
Falls reservoir, Utah valvata snails are
able to re-colonize most submerged
zones during summer high flows
(USFWS 2005, p. 127). Although up to
54 percent of the Utah valvata
population in the Neeley reach may be
subject to desiccation from annual water
withholdings upstream for storage,
existing operations by the Bureau of
Reclamation that provide minimum
flows (350 cubic feet per second (cfs))
below American Falls Dam (USFWS
2005, p. 25) are likely to provide for a
viable population there (USFWS 2005,
pp. 127–128). While annual drawdowns
are likely to negatively affect Utah
valvata snail populations in certain
years, the best available data indicate
that these drawdowns are not likely to
lead to significant, long-term population
declines (USFWS 2005, pp. 127–128).
A complete review and evaluation of
the threats affecting the Utah valvata
snail, including a discussion of our
rationale in assessing those threats, is
presented in the Summary of Factors
Affecting the Species section of this
rule.
(3) Comment: The peer reviewer
stated that 10 years of data indicate the
continued coexistence of the Utah
E:\FR\FM\25AUR1.SGM
25AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 164 / Wednesday, August 25, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
valvata snail and New Zealand
mudsnails in the Vista/Neeley section of
the Snake River (RM 713), which
implies that the New Zealand mudsnail
is not considered a threat to the
persistence of the Utah valvata snail.
However, the peer reviewer
recommends future population
monitoring at these sites.
Our Response: The Service would like
to thank the peer reviewer for the data
and comments. A complete review and
evaluation of the threat of the New
Zealand mudsnail, including a
discussion of our rationale in assessing
those threats, is presented in the
Summary of Factors Affecting the
Species section of this rule.
Public Comments and Responses
During the 60-day comment period on
the proposed rule, we received four
public comments, in addition to the
peer review comment. Public comments
that provided new substantive
information were incorporated into this
final rule, and are addressed below.
(4) Comment: The State of Idaho’s
Office of Species Conservation, along
with three canal companies and four
irrigation districts, supports the
proposal to delist the Utah valvata snail
based on new information regarding its
distribution and habitat requirements.
There are several management plans
and measures, not identified in the
proposed rule, which will likely benefit
the Utah valvata snail by increasing
Snake River flows including: The Nez
Perce Water Rights Agreement, the Bell
Rapids Mutual Irrigation Company
Water Rights Purchase, and recent
aquifer management planning projects
within the range of the Utah valvata
snail. In addition, information was
provided that the 2004 Idaho Power
Company Integrated Resource Plan does
not identify new hydropower projects
within the range of the Utah valvata
snail.
Our Response: We thank the State of
Idaho and others for the additional
information. We have incorporated the
relevant information into the Summary
of Factors Affecting the Species section
below.
(5) Comment: Several commenters
provided new data and information
regarding the ecology and threat factors
affecting the Utah valvata snail. One
commenter said that competition
between the Utah valvata snail and the
nonnative, invasive New Zealand
mudsnail may be a more significant
threat than we described, and therefore
we should further consider the effects of
the New Zealand mudsnail and other
invasive species on the Utah valvata
snail before removing it from the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:51 Aug 24, 2010
Jkt 220001
Federal List of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife. In addition, this
commenter stated that the effects of
climate change represent a new threat to
the Utah valvata snail and its habitat
and should be addressed and analyzed
in the final rule.
Our Response: We thank the
commenters who provided new
information and data for our
consideration in making this final
determination. We have evaluated the
available scientific and commercial data
regarding the Utah valvata contained in
reports, biological assessments and
opinions, published journal articles, and
other documents.
Our knowledge and understanding of
the habitat needs of the Utah valvata
snail has changed substantially since
the species was listed in 1992. Survey
data collected since 1992 indicate that
the geographic range of the species in
the Snake River is approximately 122
river miles (196 km) larger than known
at the time of listing, that it occurs in
a variety of substrate types (e.g., fines to
cobble size) and flows, and that it
tolerates a range of water-quality
parameters.
Surveys have shown the New Zealand
mudsnail frequently co-occurs with the
Utah valvata snail and may compete for
habitat or food. Although the New
Zealand mudsnail has been reported at
extremely high densities in the middle
Snake River (Richards et al. 2001, p.
375), and at moderate-to-high densities
at five sites in tributaries to the Snake
River and the Snake River above
American Falls Reservoir, there is no
evidence that after 20 years of cooccurrence the New Zealand mudsnail
has caused local extirpations of the Utah
valvata snail.
Regarding climate change, there is
compelling evidence that we are living
in a time of rapid, worldwide climate
change. For example, 11 of the 12 years
from 1995–2006 rank among the 12
warmest years since 1850 (Independent
Scientific Advisory Board (ISAB) 2007,
p. iii). In the Pacific Northwest,
regionally averaged temperatures have
risen 1.5 degrees F (0.8 degrees C) over
the last century, and are projected to
increase by another 3 to 10 degrees F
(1.5 to 5.5 degrees C) over the next 100
years (Mote et al. 2003, p. 54; Karl et al.
2009, p. 135). While the specific effects
of global climate change on the Utah
valvata snail are unclear, aquatic species
and their habitats may be particularly
vulnerable to changes in temperatures
and precipitation patterns. Nevertheless,
our current understanding of the Utah
valvata snail is that it occurs in a variety
of substrate types (e.g., fines to cobble
size), flows, and depths, and tolerates a
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
52275
range of water-quality parameters,
including elevated water temperatures.
Our updated evaluation of the threat
factors, including climate change, to the
Utah valvata snail is presented in the
Summary of Factors Affecting the
Species section of this final rule.
(6) Comment: One commenter stated
that populations believed to be Utah
valvata snails may in fact be Valvata
humeralis, and therefore recommended
that we positively identify all Utah
valvata snail populations, through
genetic analysis, before removing them
from the Federal List of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife.
Our Response: Studies and surveys
have documented the Valvata humeralis
snail often co-occurs with the Utah
valvata snail. Although these two
species possess many similar
morphological characteristics, they can
be distinguished through variations in
shell morphology. The Utah valvata
possesses a taller shell spire and more
prominent carinae than the Valvata
humeralis (Burch 1989, pp. 82–83;
Walker 1902, pp. 121–125). Miller et al.
(2006b, pp. 3–4) confirmed through
genetic analysis that the Utah valvata
snail and Valvata humeralis are distinct
species and demonstrated that the
species can be effectively distinguished
using morphological characteristics (i.e.,
the morphological data aligned with the
genetic data).
The Service, along with other
agencies and researchers, use the
difference in shell morphology as the
primary method to differentiate between
these two species. While we
acknowledge, given morphological
similarities, there is potential to confuse
individuals of these two species where
they co-occur (Miller et al. 2006b, p. 1),
genetic data confirm Utah valvata snail
occurrence at multiple sites within the
geographic range described at the
beginning of this document (Miller et al.
2006b, entire). Therefore, the Service
believes that additional genetic testing
of all Utah valvata snail populations for
identification purposes is unnecessary.
Summary of Factors Affecting the
Species
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533)
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
(List).
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) Present or
threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of habitat or range; (B)
E:\FR\FM\25AUR1.SGM
25AUR1
52276
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 164 / Wednesday, August 25, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D)
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.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
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 Utah
valvata snail as an endangered species,
we stated: ‘‘Six proposed hydroelectric
projects, including two high dam
facilities, would alter free flowing river
reaches within the existing range of [the
Utah valvata snail]. Dam construction
threatens the [Utah valvata 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 mollusc
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
these snails’’ (57 FR 59251).
Since the time of listing, proposed
hydroelectric projects discussed in the
1992 final 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:51 Aug 24, 2010
Jkt 220001
denied preliminary permits by the
FERC. In 2003, a notice was provided of
surrender of 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 in litt. 2006). In addition,
the 2006 IPC Integrated Resource Plan
does not identify any new, large
hydropower projects within the Snake
River (IPC 2006, p. 57). Lastly, recent
studies have shown that the Utah
valvata snail is not as limited in its
geographic range or habitat needs as we
had thought at the time of listing (see
Background section above).
Operation of Existing Hydropower Dams
In the 1992 final rule, we discussed
peak-loading, the practice of artificially
raising and lowering river levels to meet
short-term electrical needs by local runof-the-river hydroelectric projects, as a
threat to the Utah valvata snail. We also
stated, as was our understanding at the
time, that the Utah valvata snail ‘‘cannot
tolerate true impoundment or reservoir
conditions’’ (57 FR 59248). Studies
conducted since the time of listing have
shown the Utah valvata snail is able to
persist in reservoirs and in areas
downstream of peak-loading dams,
contrary to our understanding of the
species at the time of listing (USFWS
2005, pp. 105, 127–128; 57 FR 59244,
59245). For example, Lake Walcott (RM
702.5 to 673.5; upstream of Minidoka
Dam) appears to contain the largest
population of Utah valvata snails in the
Snake River system (USFWS 2005, pp.
111–112). This is likely due to relatively
good water quality in the reservoir
compared to downstream sections of the
Snake River near Hagerman where water
quality is influenced by agricultural,
municipal, and aquaculture flows into
the river. In lower Lake Walcott, there
is a large area of suitable Utah valvata
snail habitat that remains submerged
despite annual drawdowns during the
irrigation season (the reservoir
fluctuates up to 5 feet (1.5 meters)
annually, thereby limiting the number
of snails affected by dewatering and
desiccation). Further, surveys
conducted in the mainstem Snake River
in 1997, 1998, and 2001 from American
Falls Dam (RM 714.1) to Lake Walcott
(RM 702.5) indicate a fairly large and
viable population of Utah valvata snails
even though shoreline habitats in this
stretch undergo annual dewatering
(USFWS 2005, p. 119). In American
Falls reservoir, dam operations and
fluctuating flows have been estimated to
kill between 5 and 40 percent of the
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Utah valvata snails through dewatering
and desiccation of their habitat in most
years. Nevertheless, Utah valvata snails
continue to persist in both American
Falls and Lake Walcott reservoirs with
relatively high proportional occurrence
(USFWS 2005, p. 119).
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 [sic] survival. The [Utah valvata
snail] require[s] cold, well-oxygenated
unpolluted water for survival. Any
factor that leads to deterioration in
water quality would likely extirpate [the
Utah valvata snail]’’ (57 FR 59252). As
described above in the Species
Information section, our understanding
of the species’ habitat requirements has
changed substantially since 1992.
Furthermore, new information has
become available indicating (a)
improvements to Snake River water
quality where the species lives, and (b)
that Utah valvata snails inhabit and
persist in reaches of the Snake River
rich in nutrients (e.g., nitrogen and
phosphorus).
Factors that are known to degrade
water quality in the Snake River include
reduced water flow, warming due to
impoundments, and increases in the
concentration of nutrients, sediment,
and pollutants reaching the river from
agricultural and aquaculture inputs
(USFWS 2005, p. 106). In the 1990s and
early 2000s, several water-quality
assessments were completed for the
Snake River by the USEPA, USBR, U.S.
Geological Survey (USGS), and IPC. All
of these assessments generally
demonstrate that water quality in the
Snake River of southern Idaho meets
Idaho’s water-quality criteria for the
protection of aquatic life for some
months of the year, but may be poor in
reservoirs or during summer when
temperatures are high and flows are low
(Clark et al. 1998, pp. 20–21, 24–27;
Clark et al. 2004, pp. 38–40; Clark and
Ott 1996, p. 553; Clark 1997, pp. 1–2,
19; Meitl 2002, p. 33).
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, total coliforms) in excess of
State or Federal guidelines. Nutrientenriched waters primarily enter the
Snake River via springs, tributaries, fishfarm effluents, municipal wastetreatment 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 agriculture (e.g.,
E:\FR\FM\25AUR1.SGM
25AUR1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 164 / Wednesday, August 25, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
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.
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. 42–45).
Additionally, concentrations of lead,
cadmium, and arsenic have been
detected in snails collected from the
Snake River (Richards in litt. 2003).
The effects of pollutants detected in
the Snake River (e.g., metals, pesticides,
excess nutrients) on the growth,
reproduction, and survival of the Utah
valvata snail have not been evaluated.
The Utah valvata snail has been
documented to occur in low-oxygen,
organically-enriched sediments with
heavy macrophyte communities
downstream of an aquaculture facility
(RM 588) (Hinson 2003, p. 17),
indicating that the species may not be
as sensitive to these pollutants as we
once believed. Based on the best
available data, we are not aware that
water quality in the Snake River limits
growth, reproduction, or survival of the
Utah valvata snail in any portion of its
range.
Although several reaches of the Snake
River are classified as water quality
impaired (see further discussion below
in Factor D), there have been
improvements in Total Suspended
Solids (TSS) in certain reaches of the
River, primarily as a result of changing
irrigation practices between 1990 and
2005. There have also been substantial
declines in TP from changing
agricultural practices and changing
aquaculture feeds in the middle Snake
River downstream of Lake Walcott. Data
collected by the Idaho Department of
Environmental Quality (IDEQ) show
decreases of TSS near 64 percent
compared to 1990 levels, and decreases
of TP near 33 percent compared to 1990
levels (Buhidar in litt. 2006). The
specific water-quality parameters
required for the survival and persistence
of the Utah valvata snails are not
known. However, the Utah valvata snail
occurs over a relatively large
documented range of over 255 river
miles (410 km) (USFWS 2005, pp. 110–
113) and has the ability to tolerate and
persist in a variety of aquatic habitats
with some degree of water-quality
degradation (Lysne and Koetsier 2006,
pp. 234–237). For example, studies
conducted by the USBR in 2003 in Lake
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:51 Aug 24, 2010
Jkt 220001
Walcott Reservoir indicated the highest
Utah valvata snail densities occurred in
the lower reservoir, where the
sediments had the greatest percentage of
organic content (an indicator that
oxygen levels are likely low) (Hinson
2006, p. 19).
Summary of Factor A: Our
understanding of the habitat needs of
the Utah valvata snail has changed
substantially since the species was
listed in 1992. Compared to our
knowledge at the time of listing, survey
data collected since 1992 indicate that
the geographic range of the species in
the Snake River is approximately 122
river miles (196 km) longer and that the
species occurs on a variety of substrate
types (e.g., fines to cobble size) and in
varying water flows and depths. The
Utah valvata snail also tolerates a wider
range of water-quality parameters (e.g.,
dissolved oxygen and temperature) than
was originally believed. Threats
pertaining to the construction of new
hydropower dams as cited in the 1992
final rule no longer exist as the plans for
dam construction have expired or been
withdrawn. The operation of existing
hydropower dams and reservoirs
upstream of Minidoka Dam primarily
affect the distribution of the Utah
valvata snail along shoreline areas due
to fluctuating flows and seasonal
dewatering; however, the species
persists throughout these reservoirs
with relatively high proportional
occurrence. The available information
does not suggest that degraded water
quality in the Snake River is affecting
the species’ population numbers or
distribution. Evidence indicates that
improvements have been made in Snake
River water-quality parameters,
including TSS and TP in some Snake
River reaches, since listing. Therefore,
based on the best available scientific
and commercial data, threats of present
or future destruction, modification, or
curtailment of the Utah valvata snail’s
habitat or range do not rise to the level
such that the species meets the
definition of either endangered or
threatened under the Act.
Factor B. Overutilization for
Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
There is no known commercial or
recreational use of the species and
collections for scientific or educational
purposes are limited in scope and
extent. While collection could result in
mortality of individuals within a small
area, they are unlikely to have
population-level effects because only a
few individuals and institutions are
interested in collecting the species and
the life-history strategy of the species
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
52277
makes populations relatively resilient to
limited mortality (i.e., invests little in
reproduction, relatively high
reproductive output (many eggs laid at
a time), early age of reproduction, and
short lifespan). Therefore, based on the
best available scientific and commercial
data, threats from overutilization for
commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes to the Utah
valvata snail do not rise to the level
such that the species meets the
definition of either endangered or
threatened under the Act.
Factor C. Disease or Predation
Parasitic trematodes similar to those
of the genus Microphallus have been
identified in some freshwater snails
(e.g., Pyrgulopsis robusta) that share
similar habitats in the Snake River in
Idaho (Dybdahl et al. 2005, p. 8).
However, the occurrence of trematode
parasites on the Utah valvata snail has
not been studied.
Predators of the Utah valvata snail
have not been documented; however,
we assume that some predation by
native and nonnative species occurs.
Aquatic snails in general are prey for
numerous invertebrates and vertebrates
(Dillon 2000, pp. 274–304), and
predation on other 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; McCarthy and
Fisher 2000, p. 387).
While disease or predation likely
results in some Utah valvata snail
mortality, the life-history strategy of the
species makes populations relatively
resilient to limited mortality (i.e.,
invests little in reproduction, relatively
high reproductive output (many eggs
laid at a time), early age of reproduction,
and short lifespan). Therefore, based on
the best available scientific and
commercial data, threats from disease or
predation to the Utah valvata snail do
not rise to the level such that the species
meets the definition of either
endangered or threatened under the Act.
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
groundwater spring outflows or
tributary spring streams; (2) it was
unlikely that pollution-control
regulations would reverse the trend in
nutrient loading any time soon; (3) there
was a lack of State-mandated
protections for invertebrate species in
Idaho; and (4) regulations did not
E:\FR\FM\25AUR1.SGM
25AUR1
52278
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 164 / Wednesday, August 25, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
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 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.)
for unlisted snails. Below, we address
each of these four concerns.
Groundwater Withdrawal Regulations
Since 1992, new information has
become available clarifying the habitat
requirements of the Utah valvata snail.
The species is not limited to cool, fastwater, or lotic habitats, or perennial
flowing waters associated with large
spring complexes, as previously
believed. The species is able to live in
a variety of aquatic habitats, and is
locally abundant throughout a 255-mile
(410 km) stretch of the Snake River in
tributary streams, in the mainstem
Snake River, and in reservoirs that are
managed for annual drawdowns.
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 in litt.
1996). The State Water Plan was
updated in 1996, and included a table
of federally endangered and threatened
species in Idaho, including five Snake
River aquatic snails listed as endangered
or threatened in 1992: The Utah valvata
snail, Idaho springsnail (Pyrgulopsis
(=Fontelicella) idahoensis) (delisted in
2007), Snake River Physa (Physa
natricina), Bliss Rapids snail
(Taylorconcha serpenticola), and
Banbury Springs Lanx (Lanx n sp.
(undescribed)) (see 57 FR 59244). 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 in
litt. 1996). 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., fish and wildlife,
hydropower, or agriculture). Another
IDWR regulatory mechanism is the
ability of the Idaho Water Resource
Board to appropriate water for
minimum stream flows when in the
public interest (IDWR in litt. 2010).
Since 1992, the IDWR and other State
agencies have also created additional
regulatory mechanisms that limit future
surface and groundwater development,
including the continuation of various
moratoria on new consumptive water
rights and the designation of Water
Management Districts (Caswell in litt.
2007). The State is working with
numerous interested parties to stabilize
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:51 Aug 24, 2010
Jkt 220001
aquifer levels and enhance cold-waterspring outflows that feed into the Snake
River within the range of the Utah
valvata snail. In 2008, the Idaho
Legislature approved House Bill 428
establishing the Statewide
Comprehensive Aquifer Planning and
Management Program (SCAPMP) (I.C.
section 42–1779) and House Bill 644
which created the Aquifer Planning and
Management Fund (I.C. section 42–
1780) (State of Idaho in litt. 2008a,
2008b). Under the SCAPMP, the Eastern
Snake River Plane Aquifer (ESPA) was
identified for management planning
(IDWR 2009, entire). In 2009, the ESPA
Comprehensive Aquifer Management
Plan (CAMP) was made final. The goal
of the ESPA 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’’ (IDWR 2009, p. 4). The ESPA
CAMP ‘‘establishes a long-term program
for managing water supply and demand
in the ESPA through a phased approach
to implementation, together with an
adaptive management process to allow
for adjustments or changes in
management techniques as
implementation proceeds’’ (IDWR 2009,
p. 4). The long-term objective of the
ESPA CAMP is a net increase of 600,000
acre-feet of water annually by the year
2030 (IDWR 2009, p. 4). However, this
is a discretionary document and does
not have regulatory authority.
In 2005, Congress and the Idaho
Legislature approved the Snake River
Water Rights Agreement (SRWRA) in
the Snake River Basin Adjudication
(SRBA) (State of Idaho in litt. 2005a;
USA in litt. 2004). The Snake River
Component of the SRWRA allows the
USBR to lease up to 427,000 acre-feet of
water for flow augmentation, and
acquire up to 60,000 acre-feet of water
rights from the Snake River between
Milner (RM 639) and Swan Falls (RM
458), increasing total flow augmentation
up to 487,000 acre-feet within the range
of the Utah valvata snail (IDWR in litt.
2004). In 2005, the USBR acquired water
rights through a 30-year lease with the
State of Idaho for 98,000 acre-feet of
water from the Bell Rapids Mutual
Irrigation Company (State of Idaho in
litt. 2005b). This will potentially benefit
the Utah valvata snail by increasing
available wetted areas and connectivity
of available habitats within the range of
the species.
The State of Idaho established
moratoria in 1993 (the year after the
Utah valvata’s listing) that restricted
further surface-water and groundwater
withdrawals for consumptive uses from
the Snake River Plain aquifer between
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
American Falls Reservoir (RM 714.1)
and C.J. Strike Reservoir (RM 494). The
1993 moratoria, extended by Executive
Order in 2004 (Caswell in litt. 2006,
attachment 1), have not yet resulted in
stabilization of the Snake River Plain
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 in litt. 2010).
Although we anticipate groundwater
levels in the Snake River Plain aquifer
will likely continue to decline in the
near future, even as water-conservation
measures are developed and
implemented, this is unlikely to
endanger or threaten the Utah valvata
snail given the species’ distribution over
a 255-mile (410-km) range and its ability
to survive and persist in a wide variety
of aquatic habitats not dependent upon
Snake River Plain groundwater
outflows.
Pollution Control Regulations
Since 1992, reductions in sediment
(TSS) and phosphorus (TP) loading have
improved water quality in localized
reaches of the Snake River (Buhidar in
litt. 2005) (see Factor A above). Various
State-managed water-quality programs
are being implemented within the range
of the Utah valvata snail. These
programs tier 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 anti-degradation
policy in their water quality regulations
that protects water-body uses and highquality waters. Idaho’s anti-degradation
policy, updated in the State’s 1993
triennial review, is detailed in their
Water Quality Standards (IDEQ in litt.
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 in litt. 2010).
These NPDES permits are written to
E:\FR\FM\25AUR1.SGM
25AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 164 / Wednesday, August 25, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
meet all applicable water-quality
standards established for a water body
to protect human health and aquatic
life. Waters that do not meet waterquality standards due to point and nonpoint sources of pollution are listed on
USEPA’s 303(d) list of impaired water
bodies. States must submit to USEPA 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, Bureau of
Land Management (BLM) Resource
Management Plans, the State Water
Plan, and local ordinances. Since the
time of listing in 1992, the following
TMDLs have been approved by the
USEPA (approval year(s) in parentheses)
within the Utah valvata range: The Big
Wood River (2002), Billinglsey Creek
(2005), Blackfoot River (2002, 2007),
Idaho Falls (2004), Lake Walcott (2000,
2007), Little Wood River (2005),
Palisades (2002), Portneuf River (2001),
Raft River (2004), Snake River—King
Hill to C.J. Strike (2006), Middle Snake
River—aquaculture wasteload allocation
(2005), and the Teton River (a tributary
of Henry’s Fork of the Snake River) and
Teton River Supplement (2003).
Implementation plans that specify
pollution-control strategies and
monitoring needed to meet TMDL
recommendations and goals are either in
place or under development for 9 of
these 12 areas (IDEQ_2010a; 2010b).
State Invertebrate Species Regulations
There are no specific State regulatory
protections for the Utah valvata snail in
Idaho. The primary threats to the
species, as identified in our 1992 listing
rule, were related to the loss or
alteration of its aquatic habitats. The
lack of specific regulations protecting
individual Utah valvata snails does not,
by itself, imply that the species is
endangered or threatened.
While there are no State regulatory
protections for the Utah valvata snail, it
is considered a Species of Greatest
Conservation Need (SGCN) as identified
in the State of Idaho Comprehensive
Wildlife Conservation Strategy (CWCS)
(IDFG 2005 p. 4–75). The aim of the
CWCS is to provide a common
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:51 Aug 24, 2010
Jkt 220001
framework that will enable conservation
partners to jointly implement a longterm approach for the benefit of SGCN
through proactive conservation to
promote cost-effective solutions instead
of reactive measures enacted in the face
of imminent losses (IDFG 2005, p. V).
Federal Consultation Regulations
The threat of insufficient regulatory
mechanisms to address Utah valvata
conservation needs in the 1992 listing
rule was primarily related to the
proposed construction of six
hydroelectric dams within the
suspected, limited geographic range of
the species, coupled with our belief at
the time of listing that the species
required cold, fast-water, or lotic
habitats, and was negatively impacted
by dams that inundated free-flowing
river environments. As previously
described, hydroelectric dams are no
longer being proposed for construction
in the middle Snake River, and our
understanding of Utah valvata snail
geographic range, ecology, and habitat
requirements has changed. Thus, the
importance of a regulatory mechanism
to address these threats is no longer a
significant issue with regard to the
conservation of the Utah valvata snail.
Summary of Factor D: Although there
are no specific State regulations
protecting the Utah valvata snail, it is
considered a SGCN as identified in the
Idaho CWCS. The primary threats
identified in the final listing rule were
related to the loss or alteration of the
species’ habitat. Furthermore, as our
understanding of the species’ habitat
requirements has changed, so has our
understanding of the species’
conservation and regulatory needs.
Regulatory mechanisms such as Idaho’s
water-quality standards and TMDLs will
continue to apply to habitats occupied
by Utah valvata snails. Therefore, based
on the best available scientific and
commercial data, threats from
inadequate regulatory mechanisms to
the Utah valvata snail do not rise to the
level such that the species meets the
definition of either endangered or
threatened under the Act.
52279
New Zealand mudsnails frequently cooccur in cold-water spring, mainstem
Snake River, and reservoir habitats (37
percent co-occurrence in combined
habitat types), which may indicate that
these two species are able to co-exist or
that they actually have slightly different
resource preferences (e.g., periphytic vs.
perilithic algae) (Hinson 2006, p. 42).
However, Hinson (2006, p. 41) also
notes that the overlap in habitat
utilization between the Utah valvata
snail and the New Zealand mudsnail
could lead to direct competition for
resources between these two species.
In 2002 and 2004, the USBR reported
that New Zealand mudsnails were
increasing in Lake Walcott, yet the
densities observed were substantially
lower than those observed in mainstem
Snake River habitats (USBR 2003, p. 19;
USBR 2005, p. 6). Further upstream,
surveys conducted throughout
American Falls Reservoir indicate that
the distribution of New Zealand
mudsnails appears to be limited to the
upper end of American Falls Reservoir
near the input of the Snake and Portneuf
rivers (USBR 2003, p. 21), where the
habitat is not dewatered due to water
withdrawals for irrigation. Surveys
conducted even further upstream in the
Snake River and tributaries (Fields
2005, pp. 8–12) found moderate-to-high
densities of the New Zealand mudsnail
at five sites. However, Fields (2005, p.
10) stated that the current distribution
of New Zealand mudsnails in the Snake
River above American Falls Reservoir
could more strongly reflect patterns of
introductions rather than habitat
preferences. Populations of the New
Zealand mudsnail are not known to
occur in the Wood River, where a small
native or introduced population of the
Utah valvata snail is thought to occur.
The overall impact on the Utah valvata
snail from the nonnative New Zealand
mudsnail is not fully understood (Lysne
2003, pp. 85–86; Hinson 2006, p. 41).
However, after approximately 20 years
of co-occurrence, there is no evidence
suggesting that the New Zealand
mudsnail has supplanted or poses an
extinction risk to the Utah valvata snail
(Gates in litt. 2009).
Factor E. Other Natural or Manmade
Climate Change
Factors Affecting the Species’ Continued
There is compelling evidence that we
Existence
are living in a time of rapid, worldwide
Invasive Species
climate change. Although the extent of
warming likely to occur is not known
The final listing rule stated that
nonnative New Zealand mudsnails were with certainty at this time, the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
not yet abundant in cold-water spring
Change (IPCC) has concluded that
flows with colonies of the Utah valvata
warming of the climate is unequivocal,
snail, but that they likely did compete
with the species in the mainstem Snake and that continued greenhouse gas
emissions at or above current rates will
River habitats (57 FR 59254). Surveys
have found that Utah valvata snails and cause further warming (IPCC 2007, p.
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\25AUR1.SGM
25AUR1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
52280
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 164 / Wednesday, August 25, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
30). For example, 11 of the last 12 years
evaluated (1995–2006) rank among the
12 warmest years since 1850 (ISAB
2007, p. iii). In the Pacific Northwest,
regionally averaged temperatures have
risen 1.5 degrees F (0.8 degrees C) over
the last century, and are projected to
increase by another 3 to 10 degrees F
(1.5 to 5.5 degrees C) over the next 100
years (Mote et al. 2003, p. 54; Karl et al.
2009, p. 135). While the specific effects
of global climate change on the Utah
valvata snail are unclear, aquatic species
and their habitats may be particularly
vulnerable to changes in temperatures
and precipitation patterns.
Rising temperatures due to climate
change can affect aquatic species, such
as the Utah valvata snail, by altering the
timing and precipitation events in the
Pacific Northwest (Karl et al. 2009, p.
135). Increased cool season
temperatures cause precipitation to fall
in the form of rain as opposed to snow,
contributing to earlier snowmelt, earlier
timing of spring runoff, and lower water
levels during the warm season (Karl et
al. 2009, p. 135). Many fish and wildlife
species in the Pacific Northwest,
especially aquatic species, are
dependent on the timing of spring
snowmelt runoff (Karl et al. 2009, p.
135). Areas along the warmer western
slopes of the Cascade Mountains are
projected to see a 30 percent or more
reduction in warm season runoff by
mid-century, while the interior, colder
areas along the Rocky Mountains are
projected to experience a smaller, 10
percent reduction in spring runoff (Karl
et al. 2009, p. 135). Summer flows will
also likely decrease while water
temperature will increase, thereby
stressing many aquatic organisms,
especially those that have narrow
temperature and depth requirements.
Despite projected changes in climate
in the Pacific Northwest, we now know
the Utah valvata snail is not as
specialized in its habitat needs as we
thought at the time of listing and can
persist in a broad range of water flows,
depths, and temperatures. In the Snake
River, the species inhabits a diversity of
aquatic habitats throughout its 255-mile
(410 km) range, including cold-water
springs, spring creeks and tributaries,
mainstem and free-flowing waters,
reservoirs, and impounded Snake River
reaches. The species occurs on a variety
of substrate types including both fine
sediments and more coarse substrates in
areas both with and without
macrophytes. It has been collected at a
wide range of water depths, ranging
from less than 3.2 feet (1 meter) to
greater than 45 feet (14 meters), and at
water temperatures ranging from 37.4 to
75.2 degrees F (3 to 24 degrees C).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:51 Aug 24, 2010
Jkt 220001
Summary of Factor E: The New
Zealand mudsnail frequently co-occurs
with the Utah valvata snail and may be
competing for habitat or food. The New
Zealand mudsnail can reach extremely
high densities in the middle Snake
River (Richards et al. 2001, p. 375), and
has been recorded at moderate-to-high
densities at five sites in tributaries to the
Snake River and the Snake River above
American Falls Reservoir. Populations
of the New Zealand mudsnail are not
known to occur in the Wood River. The
precise impact on the Utah valvata snail
from the invasion of the New Zealand
mudsnail is unknown (Lysne 2003, pp.
85–86; Hinson 2006, p. 41). However,
after approximately 20 years of cooccurrence, there is no evidence
suggesting that the New Zealand
mudsnail has supplanted or caused
local extirpations of the Utah valvata
snail.
Further, while numerous scientific
studies indicate that the world is
warming due to anthropogenic causes,
and that increasing temperatures will
impact precipitation patterns in the
Pacific Northwest, it is difficult at this
time to determine the precise effects this
change will have on the Utah valvata
snail. Nevertheless, given the wide
variety of habitat conditions, water
depths, and temperature ranges the Utah
valvata snail has been found to occupy,
the species is likely to be resilient to
moderate changes in temperature and
precipitation patterns. Therefore, threats
from other natural or manmade factors
do not rise to the level such that the
species meets the definition of either
endangered or threatened under the Act.
Conclusion
As required by the Act, we considered
potential threat factors to assess whether
the Utah valvata snail is endangered or
threatened throughout its range.
Information collected since the species’
listing in 1992 indicates that the Utah
valvata snail is widely distributed and
occurs in a variety of ecological settings
over a 255-mile range of the Snake
River. Much of the Snake River within
the range of the Utah valvata is
influenced by seasonal dam operations
for hydroelectric or agricultural
purposes, yet the species persists in
these varied mainstem Snake River
systems, including impounded reservoir
habitats (e.g., Lake Walcott and
American Falls reservoirs). None of the
threats that we identified in the 1992
listing determination appear to be
significant to the species (individually
or in combination) in light of our
current understanding of its distribution
and life history; nor have we identified
any significant new threats to the
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
species. Therefore, we find that the Utah
valvata snail is not in danger of
extinction throughout its range, nor is it
likely to become so in the foreseeable
future.
The Service has determined that the
original data for classification of the
Utah valvata snail used in 1992 were in
error. However, it is important to note
that the original data for classification
constituted the best scientific and
commercial data available at the time
and were in error only in the sense that
they were incomplete when viewed in
context of the data now available. The
primary considerations to delist the
Utah valvata snail are described in the
five-factor analysis above.
Having determined that the Utah
valvata snail does not meet the
definition of endangered or threatened
throughout its range, we must next
consider whether there are any
significant portions of its range that are
in danger of extinction or are likely to
become endangered in the foreseeable
future. 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.
Applying the definition described
above, we first address whether any
portions of Utah valvata’s range
warranted further consideration. Based
on a genetic study of the Utah valvata
snail (Miller et al. 2006a) and the
ecological settings in which the species
occurs throughout its range, three
potential population units could be
analyzed as to whether they constituted
a significant portion of its range: The
Wood River population unit (WRM 35),
the Snake River population unit (RM
585 through RM 837), and the Hagerman
population unit (isolated springs
adjacent to the Snake River at RM 585).
We then evaluated whether each unit
constitutes a significant portion of the
range of the species, and if so, whether
that portion was endangered or
threatened.
Wood River Population Unit
There is a high degree of uncertainty
concerning the distribution and
abundance of the species in the Wood
River since there has been only one
documented colony and systematic
surveys have not been conducted. Based
on the limited information we have on
the Utah valvata snail in the Wood
River, this colony does not appear to
exist in an unusual or unique ecological
E:\FR\FM\25AUR1.SGM
25AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 164 / Wednesday, August 25, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
setting or contain a large portion of the
habitat or individuals (in fact, it appears
to constitute an extremely small portion
of the overall habitat and number of
individuals). Further, a genetics study
conducted by Miller et al. (2006a, pp.
2367–2372) found that the Wood River
occurrence is not genetically divergent
or unique from the Snake River
population unit. Because of genetic
similarities between Utah valvata snails
in the Snake River and Wood River
units, the Wood River unit could
provide some redundancy to the species
if the Snake River unit (see below for
further information) is extirpated by a
catastrophic event. However, given that
Utah valvata snails are distributed
discontinuously along 255 miles (410
km) of the Snake River unit, a
catastrophic event of the magnitude
necessary to simultaneously eliminate
all Utah valvata snail colonies from the
Snake River unit is highly unlikely. In
addition, due to the geographic
separation of the Wood River unit from
the Snake River unit, it is unlikely that
the Wood River unit would be a
significant source of snails to recolonize
the Snake River. Given these factors, we
determined the Wood River population
unit did not provide a significant
contribution to the species with regard
to redundancy, resiliency, and
representation, and was not evaluated
further.
Snake River Population Unit
The Snake River population unit
contains the largest and widest ranging
portion of the overall Utah valvata snail
population and contributes substantially
to the resiliency, representation, and
redundancy of the species. Other
information contributing to its
significance includes: (1) The
uppermost reaches of the Snake River
unit, including the Henry’s Fork River
where Utah valvata snail occurs, is not
influenced by dam and other water
management operations, and water
quality is considered to be better than
that found in the Wood River or
Hagerman reaches further downstream
in the Snake River; (2) Lower Lake
Walcott Reservoir has high densities
and high proportional occurrence of the
Utah valvata snail and likely provides
refugia for the species primarily due to
the human-induced stability of this
reservoir environment; and (3)
genetically, the Snake River population
unit represents the ancestral haplotypes
of this species (Miller et al. 2006a, p.
2368). For all of these reasons, we
determined that the Snake River
population unit of the Utah valvata snail
constitutes a significant portion of the
species’ range. The Snake River
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:51 Aug 24, 2010
Jkt 220001
population unit was then evaluated to
determine if the Utah valvata snail is
endangered or threatened in this portion
of its range.
The Utah valvata snail is widely
distributed and occurs in a variety of
ecological settings in this population
unit, including impounded reservoir
habitats (e.g., Lake Walcott and
American Falls reservoirs). Water
quality is relatively good in the
upstream (Henry’s Fork) reaches of this
unit compared to other population
units, and the New Zealand mudsnail
has not become established throughout
this unit. None of the threats that we
identified in the 1992 listing
determination appear to be significant to
the Utah valvata snail in this population
unit (individually or in combination) in
light of our current understanding of its
distribution and life history; nor have
we identified any significant new
threats to the species in this unit (see
Rangewide analysis, above). Therefore,
we find that the Utah valvata snail in
the Snake River Population Unit is not
in danger of extinction, nor is it likely
to become so in the foreseeable future.
Hagerman Population Unit
The best available data indicate that
the Hagerman population unit is likely
isolated and separated geographically
from other Utah valvata snail colonies
farther upstream that constitute the
Snake River population unit, but overall
represents a small area of occupancy
compared to the rest of the range of the
species. The geographic isolation of the
Hagerman population unit is an
important consideration; the Miller et
al. (2006) genetics paper suggests that
Utah valvata snails found in cold-water
spring outflows at the Thousand Springs
Preserve may have been genetically
isolated for over 10,000 years and
should be evaluated to determine if they
can reproduce with other Utah valvata
snails elsewhere in their range. This
population unit also has a unique
ecological setting compared to the other
two units, as the species mainly occurs
in tributary springs (and at their coldwater outflows), and not in reservoir or
riverine habitats.
In light of the above, we concluded
that the Hagerman population unit may
constitute a significant portion of the
range of the Utah valvata snail. The
Hagerman population unit was then
evaluated to determine if the Utah
valvata snail is endangered or
threatened in this portion of its range.
Currently, water quality is not
considered to be a threat that is of high
severity or magnitude to the Hagerman
population unit for the reasons outlined
in Factor A of the rangewide analysis.
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
52281
Furthermore, two cold-water spring
outflows, Box Canyon and Thousand
Springs, provide a relatively highquality and stable aquatic environment
for some Utah valvata snail colonies.
Although flows have recently declined
in some cold-water springs due to
groundwater withdrawals, and water
quality and quantity could decrease
over time if flows are not preserved, the
Utah valvata snail would continue to
persist in the mainstem Snake River in
the Hagerman reach where it can
tolerate variable water temperatures and
water quality. Although there is
evidence of some density-dependent
effects and competition where the New
Zealand mudsnail co-occurs with the
Utah valvata snail, the Utah valvata
snail continues to persist in these
habitats. Despite approximately 20 years
of co-occurrence of the New Zealand
mudsnail and Utah valvata snail, there
is no evidence suggesting that the New
Zealand mudsnail has caused local
extirpations of the Utah valvata snail in
Hagerman reach. Therefore, we
conclude that the Hagerman population
unit of the Utah valvata snail is not
endangered or threatened in this portion
of its range.
In summary, our understanding of the
Utah valvata snail’s habitat
requirements, range, and threats has
changed since the time of listing. From
studies conducted since 1992, we now
know that the species occurs over a
much larger geographic range in the
Snake River, is able to live in a variety
of aquatic habitats, and is not limited to
cold, fast-water, or lotic habitats, or to
perennial flowing waters associated
with large spring complexes, as
previously believed. In addition, the
proposed construction of six new
hydropower facilities as discussed at the
time of listing is no longer a threat. The
Utah valvata snail is now known to
occur in, and persist in, aquatic habitats
influenced by dam operations (e.g.,
reservoirs, and at elevated water
temperatures), and the species co-exists
in a variety of Snake River aquatic
habitats with the invasive New Zealand
mudsnail. We have determined that
none of the existing or potential threats,
either alone or in combination with
others, are likely to cause the Utah
valvata snail to become in danger of
extinction within the foreseeable future
throughout all or any significant portion
of its range. The Utah valvata snail no
longer requires the protection of the Act,
and, therefore, we are removing it from
the Federal List of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife.
E:\FR\FM\25AUR1.SGM
25AUR1
52282
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 164 / Wednesday, August 25, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
Effects of This Rule
This rule revises 50 CFR 17.11(h) to
remove the Utah (desert) valvata snail
from the List of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife. Because no critical
habitat is designated for this species,
this rule does not affect 50 CFR 17.95.
The prohibitions and conservation
measures provided by the Act,
particularly through sections 7 and 9, no
longer apply. Federal agencies are no
longer required to consult with us to
ensure that any action they authorize,
fund, or carry out is not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of
this species.
Required Determinations
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) regulations at 5 CFR 1320, which
implement provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)
require that Federal agencies obtain
approval from OMB before collecting
information from the public. This rule
does not contain any new collections of
information that require approval by
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction
Act. This rule will not impose
recordkeeping or reporting requirements
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:51 Aug 24, 2010
Jkt 220001
on State or local governments,
individuals, businesses, or
organizations. An agency may not
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of
information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
National Environmental Policy Act
We have determined that we do not
need to prepare an Environmental
Assessment or Environmental Impact
Statement, as defined under the
authority of the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.), in connection with regulations
adopted under section 4(a) of the Act.
We published a notice outlining our
reasons for this determination in the
Federal Register on October 25, 1983
(48 FR 49244).
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited
in this rule is available upon request
from the Idaho Fish and Wildlife Office
(see ADDRESSES).
Authors
The primary authors of this document
are staff members of the Idaho Fish and
Wildlife Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (see ADDRESSES).
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species,
Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements,
Transportation.
Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we amend part 17,
subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the
Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:
■
PART 17—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 17
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 16 U.S.C.
1531–1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201–4245; Pub. L. 99–
625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted.
§ 17.11
[Amended]
2. Amend § 17.11(h) by removing the
entry for ‘‘Snail, Utah valvata’’ under
‘‘SNAILS’’ from the List of Endangered
and Threatened Wildlife.
■
Dated: August 9, 2010.
Wendi Weber,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010–20517 Filed 8–24–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
E:\FR\FM\25AUR1.SGM
25AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 164 (Wednesday, August 25, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 52272-52282]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-20517]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2008-0084; [92220-1113-0000-C6]
RIN 1018-AW16
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Removal of the
Utah (Desert) Valvata Snail From the Federal List of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Under the authority of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act), we, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), are
removing the Utah (desert) valvata snail (Valvata utahensis) from the
Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife (List). Based on a
thorough review of the best available scientific and commercial data,
we determined that the Utah valvata snail is more widespread and occurs
in a greater variety of habitats in the Snake River than known at the
time of listing in 1992. We now know the Utah valvata snail is not
limited to areas of cold-water springs or spring outflows; rather, it
persists in a variety of aquatic habitats, including cold-water
springs, spring creeks and tributaries, the mainstem Snake River and
associated tributary stream habitats, and reservoirs influenced by dam
operations. Given our current understanding of the species' habitat
requirements and threats, the species does not meet the definition of
an endangered or threatened species under the Act. Therefore, we are
removing the Utah valvata snail from the List, thereby removing all
protections provided by the Act.
DATES: This effective date of this rule is September 24, 2010.
ADDRESSES: This final rule is available on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov and at https://www.fws.gov/idaho. Comments and
materials received, including supporting documentation used in
preparing this rule, 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 83709; by telephone.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Kelly, State Supervisor, at the
above address; by telephone 208-378-5243; or by fax at 208-378-5262 e-
mail at: fw1srbocomment@fws.gov. 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
The Utah valvata snail (Valvata utahensis) was first recognized as
a species in 1902, based on specimens collected from Utah Lake and Bear
Lake, Utah (Walker 1902, p. 125). Its common name has since been
changed by the American Fisheries Society to the ``desert valvata'' in
the benchmark text for aquatic invertebrate nomenclature, Common and
Scientific Names of Aquatic Invertebrates from the United States and
Canada (Turgeon et al. 1998, p. 109), presumably due to the fact that
it is no longer known to occur in Utah. However, because the species is
currently listed in the Code of Federal Regulations as the Utah valvata
snail, Valvata utahensis will be referred to as the Utah valvata snail
throughout this final rule.
Range
The Utah valvata snail, or at least its closely related ancestors,
has been described as ranging widely across the western United States
and Canada as far back as the Jurassic Period, 199.6 0.6
to 145.5 4 million years ago (Taylor 1985a, p. 268).
Fossils of the Utah valvata snail are known from Utah to California
(Taylor 1985a, pp. 286-287). The Utah valvata snail was likely present
in the ancestral Snake River as it flowed south from Idaho, through
Nevada, and into northeastern California (Taylor 1985a, p. 303). The
Snake River's course changed to join the Columbia River Basin
approximately 2 million years ago (Hershler and Liu 2004, pp. 927-928).
[[Page 52273]]
At the time of listing in 1992 (57 FR 59244, December 14, 1992), we
reported the range of the Utah valvata snail as being limited to a few
springs and mainstem Snake River sites in the Hagerman Valley, Idaho
(River Mile (RM) 585), a few sites above and below Minidoka Dam (RM
675), and immediately downstream of American Falls Dam (RM 709).
New data collected since the time of listing indicate that the Utah
valvata snail is discontinuously distributed in at least 255 miles (410
kilometers (km)) of the Snake River and some associated tributary
streams, an increase of nearly 122 river miles (196 km) from the known
range at the time of listing. Their current range in the Snake River
extends from RM 585 near the Thousand Springs Preserve (Bean in litt.
2005), upstream to the confluence of the Henry's Fork with the Snake
River (RM 837; Fields 2005, p. 11). Colonies of the Utah valvata snail
have been found in the Snake River near the towns of Firth (RM 777.5),
Shelley (RM 784.6), Payne (RM 802.6), and Roberts (RM 815), and in the
Henry's Fork approximately 9.3 miles (15 km) upstream from its
confluence with the Snake River (at Snake RM 832.3) (Gustafson in litt.
2003). Based on limited mollusk surveys, the species has not been found
upstream from the described location on the Henry's Fork or in the
South Fork of the Snake River. Tributary streams to the Snake River
where Utah valvata snails have been collected include Box Canyon Creek
(RM 588) (Taylor 1985b, pp. 9-10), and one location in the Big Wood
River (Wood River Mile (WRM) 35) (USBR 2003, p. 22).
Habitat Use
At the time of listing in 1992, the best available data indicated
that Utah valvata snails ``characteristically require cold, fast water,
or lotic habitats * * * in deep pools adjacent to rapids or in
perennial flowing waters associated with large spring complexes'' (57
FR 59244, December 14, 1992). In numerous field studies conducted since
then, the species has been collected at a wide range of water depths,
ranging from less than 3.2 feet (1 meter) (Stephenson and Bean 2003,
pp. 98-99) to depths greater than 45 feet (14 meters) (USBR 2003, p.
20), and at temperatures between 37.4 and 75.2 degrees Fahrenheit (F)
(4 to 24 degrees Celsius (C)) (Lysne in litt. 2007; Gregg in litt.
2006).
Work conducted by the Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) in
the upper Snake River demonstrated that Utah valvata snail presence was
positively correlated with water depth (up to 18.37 feet (5.6 meters))
and temperature (up to 63 degrees F (17.2 degrees C)) (Fields 2005, pp.
8-9), and Utah valvata snail density was positively correlated with
macrophyte (a water plant large enough to be observed with the unaided
eye) coverage, water depth, and temperature (Fields 2006, p. 6).
Similarly, Hinson (2006, pp. 28-29) analyzed available data from
several studies conducted by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR)
(2001-2004), Idaho Power Company (IPC) (1995-2002), IDFG, Idaho
Transportation Department (2003-2004) and others, and demonstrated a
positive relationship between Utah valvata snail presence and
macrophytes, water depth, and fine substrates. One study reported Utah
valvata snails in organically enriched fine sediments with a heavy
macrophyte community, downstream of an aquaculture facility (RM 588)
(Hinson 2006, pp. 31-32).
Survey data and information reported since the time of listing
demonstrate that the Utah valvata snail is able to live in reservoirs,
which were previously thought to be unsuitable for the species (Frest
and Johannes 1992, pp. 13-14; USBR 2002, pp. 8-9; Fields 2005, p. 16;
Hinson 2006, pp. 23-33). We now know the Utah valvata snail persists in
a variety of aquatic habitats, including cold-water springs, spring
creeks and tributaries, the mainstem Snake River and associated
tributary stream habitats, and reservoirs.
Alterations of the Snake River, including the construction of dams
and reservoir habitats, have changed fluvial processes resulting in the
reduced likelihood of naturally high river flows or rapid changes in
flows, and the retention of fine sediments (U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (USEPA) 2002, pp. 4.30-4.31), which may also increase
potential habitat for the species (e.g., Lake Walcott and American
Falls Reservoirs; however, see Summary of Factors Affecting the Species
below for a discussion of the effects of rapidly drawing down
reservoirs). Utah valvata snail surveys conducted downstream from
American Falls Dam (RM 714.1) to Minidoka Dam (RM 674.5), from 1997 and
2001-2007, consistently found Utah valvata snails on fine sediments
within this 39-mile (62.9 km) river/reservoir reach of the Snake River
(USBR 1997, p. 4; USBR 2003, p. 8; USBR 2004, p. 5; USBR 2005, p. 6;
USBR 2007, pp. 9-11; USFWS 2005, p. 119). Surveys conducted downstream
of Minidoka Dam (RM 674.5) to Lower Salmon Falls Dam (RM 573.0) have
also documented Utah valvata snails in that reach, including one record
from the tailrace area of Minidoka Dam (the downstream part of a dam
where the impounded water reenters the river) in 2001 (USFWS 2005, p.
120).
In summary, based on available data, the Utah valvata snail is not
as specialized in its habitat needs as we thought at the time of
listing. In the Snake River, the species inhabits a diversity of
aquatic habitats throughout its 255-mile (410 km) range, including
cold-water springs, spring creeks and tributaries, mainstem and free-
flowing waters, reservoirs, and impounded reaches. The species occurs
on a variety of substrate types including both fine sediments and more
coarse substrates in areas both with and without macrophytes. It has
been collected at water depths ranging from less than 3.2 feet (1
meter) to greater than 45 feet (14 meters), and at water temperatures
ranging from 37.4 to 75.2 degrees F (3 to 24 degrees C).
Population Density
Like many short-lived and highly fecund invertebrates, the density
of Utah valvata snails at occupied sites can vary greatly. For example,
at one cold-water spring site at the Thousand Springs Preserve, Utah
valvata snail density in 2003 ranged between 0 and 1,724 snails per
square meter (/m\2\), with an average of 197 snails/m\2\ (Stephenson et
al. 2004, p. 23). In the mainstem Snake River between American Falls
Reservoir and Minidoka Dam in 2002, Utah valvata snail densities
averaged 91 snails/m\2\ (ranging from 0 to 1,188 snails/m\2\), and in
American Falls Reservoir densities averaged 50 snails/m\2\ (range
unavailable) (USBR 2003, p. 20). In 2008 and 2009, monitoring efforts
were carried out at sites first monitored by the USBR in the late 1990s
and early 2000s below American Falls Reservoir, which is a free-flowing
riverine environment (Gates in litt. 2009). Monitoring results indicate
these specific colonies have decreased in density and proportional
occurrence compared to results from the late 1990s and early 2000s,
with the greatest densities found in 2009 ranging from 4 to 24 snails/
m\2\ and presence ranging from 5 to 9 percent (Gates in litt. 2009).
However, 2009 monitoring sites do not represent a comprehensive survey
of the area below American Falls Reservoir as only two of the four
largest colonies sampled in 2008 were sampled in 2009 (Gates in litt.
2009). Above American Falls Reservoir in the mainstem Snake River, Utah
valvata snail densities sampled in 2004 at six sites averaged 117
snails/m\2\ (ranging from 0 to 1,716 snails/m\2\) (Fields 2006, pp. 12-
13).
[[Page 52274]]
Within occupied reservoirs, the proportional occurrence of snails
is relatively high. For all field studies and surveys, lower Lake
Walcott Reservoir had the highest proportional occurrence (USBR 2002,
p. 5; USBR 2003, p. 6). For sample years 2001 to 2006, the relative
proportion of samples containing Utah valvata snails ranged from 40 (in
2004) to 62 (in 2002) percent of samples collected. Similarly, American
Falls reservoir samples contained a high proportion of Utah valvata
snails, with the species detected in 21 (in 2001) to 33 (in 2003)
percent of samples. Such high proportional occurrence in reservoirs
over multiple years is additional evidence that Utah valvata snails are
using reservoir habitats and are not restricted to cold-water springs
or their outflows.
Previous Federal Actions
We listed the Utah valvata snail as endangered on December 14, 1992
(57 FR 59244). Based on the best available data at that time we
determined that the Utah valvata 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
completed the Snake River Aquatic Species Recovery Plan (Plan), which
included the Utah valvata snail. We have not designated critical
habitat for this species.
On April 11, 2006, we initiated a 5-year review of the species'
status (71 FR 18345) in accordance with section 4(c)(2) of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.). On December 26, 2006, the Service received a petition from the
Governor of Idaho and attorneys from several irrigation districts and
canal districts requesting that we remove the Utah valvata snail 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 Utah valvata snail from the
List may be warranted, and initiating a status review (72 FR 31264). As
part of our best available scientific and commercial data analysis, we
conducted a 30-day peer review on a draft status-review document, which
was completed in September 2007 (USFWS in litt. 2007).
On July 16, 2009, we published a warranted 12-month finding on the
delisting petition and a proposed rule to remove the Utah valvata snail
from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife (74 FR
34539). We solicited data and comments from the public on the proposed
rule. The comment period opened on July 16, 2009, and closed on
September 14, 2009. A summary of the comments we received and our
responses are provided below.
Summary of Comments and Responses
In accordance with our policy on peer review, published on July 1,
1994 (59 FR 34270), we solicited scientific peer review from four
appropriate and independent experts following publication of the
proposed rule. Reviewers were asked to review the proposed rule to help
ensure our use of the best available scientific and commercial data,
and to maximize the quality, objectivity, thoroughness, and utility of
the information upon which the final rule is based. One of the peer
reviewers submitted comments which we summarize and respond to below.
Peer Review Comments and Responses
(1) Comment: New monitoring data collected in the Vista/Neeley
section of the Snake River below American Falls Reservoir (RM 713; a
free flowing riverine environment) from 2008 and 2009 indicate lower
Utah valvata snail densities than were observed during surveys in the
late 1990s and early 2000s. These data, along with other preliminary
sampling results provided, suggest that Utah valvata snail populations
can experience large fluctuations in population size within and among
years.
Our Response: We thank the peer reviewer for the additional
monitoring data, which we have incorporated into this final rule.
While the Utah valvata snail population appears to have declined
between 2002 and 2009 in the Vista/Neeley section (RM 713) of the Snake
River, it should be noted that different collection methods and sample
sizes used for data collection limit our ability to precisely quantify
site-specific Utah valvata snail population declines. Also, the data
reported are from a small portion (within 1.92 miles (3.2 km)) (USBR
2003, p. 4) of the 255-river-mile (410 km) range of the Utah valvata
snail in the Snake River and tributary streams. Lastly, the 2009
monitoring sites do not represent a comprehensive survey of the reach
below American Falls dam because they were based on only two of the
four largest colonies that were sampled in 2008.
Compared to vertebrate species, most invertebrates have short
generation times, small body size, and rapid rates of population
increase and decline. For these reasons, invertebrate populations
frequently undergo large fluctuations in size and may vary greatly
between years due to environmental parameters and other factors
affecting habitat (Ricklefs 1979, pp. 509-510; Murphy et al. 1990, p.
41).
In general, consistent, long-term monitoring of population
abundance and persistence throughout the range of the Utah valvata
snail is lacking. This limits our ability to calculate reliable
estimates of population trends. In the case of Utah valvata snails,
although there appears to be large interannual variation in population
numbers at the few sites for which we have monitoring data, such as in
the Vista/Neeley section of the Snake River, this is not necessarily an
indication that the species' status has degraded or that the species is
undergoing a long-term population decline.
(2) Comment: The peer reviewer stated that the greatest threat to
the Utah valvata snail is from annual dewatering of the Snake River
below the mainstem dams. Annual water drawdowns expose hundreds of
meters of littoral zone habitat in the Vista/Neeley and Coldwater
sections of the Snake River within a period of days.
Our Response: In making our delisting determination, we evaluated
several threat factors, including the operation of existing hydropower
dams. Within the Vista/Neeley section below American Falls reservoir,
Utah valvata snails are able to re-colonize most submerged zones during
summer high flows (USFWS 2005, p. 127). Although up to 54 percent of
the Utah valvata population in the Neeley reach may be subject to
desiccation from annual water withholdings upstream for storage,
existing operations by the Bureau of Reclamation that provide minimum
flows (350 cubic feet per second (cfs)) below American Falls Dam (USFWS
2005, p. 25) are likely to provide for a viable population there (USFWS
2005, pp. 127-128). While annual drawdowns are likely to negatively
affect Utah valvata snail populations in certain years, the best
available data indicate that these drawdowns are not likely to lead to
significant, long-term population declines (USFWS 2005, pp. 127-128).
A complete review and evaluation of the threats affecting the Utah
valvata snail, including a discussion of our rationale in assessing
those threats, is presented in the Summary of Factors Affecting the
Species section of this rule.
(3) Comment: The peer reviewer stated that 10 years of data
indicate the continued coexistence of the Utah
[[Page 52275]]
valvata snail and New Zealand mudsnails in the Vista/Neeley section of
the Snake River (RM 713), which implies that the New Zealand mudsnail
is not considered a threat to the persistence of the Utah valvata
snail. However, the peer reviewer recommends future population
monitoring at these sites.
Our Response: The Service would like to thank the peer reviewer for
the data and comments. A complete review and evaluation of the threat
of the New Zealand mudsnail, including a discussion of our rationale in
assessing those threats, is presented in the Summary of Factors
Affecting the Species section of this rule.
Public Comments and Responses
During the 60-day comment period on the proposed rule, we received
four public comments, in addition to the peer review comment. Public
comments that provided new substantive information were incorporated
into this final rule, and are addressed below.
(4) Comment: The State of Idaho's Office of Species Conservation,
along with three canal companies and four irrigation districts,
supports the proposal to delist the Utah valvata snail based on new
information regarding its distribution and habitat requirements. There
are several management plans and measures, not identified in the
proposed rule, which will likely benefit the Utah valvata snail by
increasing Snake River flows including: The Nez Perce Water Rights
Agreement, the Bell Rapids Mutual Irrigation Company Water Rights
Purchase, and recent aquifer management planning projects within the
range of the Utah valvata snail. In addition, information was provided
that the 2004 Idaho Power Company Integrated Resource Plan does not
identify new hydropower projects within the range of the Utah valvata
snail.
Our Response: We thank the State of Idaho and others for the
additional information. We have incorporated the relevant information
into the Summary of Factors Affecting the Species section below.
(5) Comment: Several commenters provided new data and information
regarding the ecology and threat factors affecting the Utah valvata
snail. One commenter said that competition between the Utah valvata
snail and the nonnative, invasive New Zealand mudsnail may be a more
significant threat than we described, and therefore we should further
consider the effects of the New Zealand mudsnail and other invasive
species on the Utah valvata snail before removing it from the Federal
List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. In addition, this commenter
stated that the effects of climate change represent a new threat to the
Utah valvata snail and its habitat and should be addressed and analyzed
in the final rule.
Our Response: We thank the commenters who provided new information
and data for our consideration in making this final determination. We
have evaluated the available scientific and commercial data regarding
the Utah valvata contained in reports, biological assessments and
opinions, published journal articles, and other documents.
Our knowledge and understanding of the habitat needs of the Utah
valvata snail has changed substantially since the species was listed in
1992. Survey data collected since 1992 indicate that the geographic
range of the species in the Snake River is approximately 122 river
miles (196 km) larger than known at the time of listing, that it occurs
in a variety of substrate types (e.g., fines to cobble size) and flows,
and that it tolerates a range of water-quality parameters.
Surveys have shown the New Zealand mudsnail frequently co-occurs
with the Utah valvata snail and may compete for habitat or food.
Although the New Zealand mudsnail has been reported at extremely high
densities in the middle Snake River (Richards et al. 2001, p. 375), and
at moderate-to-high densities at five sites in tributaries to the Snake
River and the Snake River above American Falls Reservoir, there is no
evidence that after 20 years of co-occurrence the New Zealand mudsnail
has caused local extirpations of the Utah valvata snail.
Regarding climate change, there is compelling evidence that we are
living in a time of rapid, worldwide climate change. For example, 11 of
the 12 years from 1995-2006 rank among the 12 warmest years since 1850
(Independent Scientific Advisory Board (ISAB) 2007, p. iii). In the
Pacific Northwest, regionally averaged temperatures have risen 1.5
degrees F (0.8 degrees C) over the last century, and are projected to
increase by another 3 to 10 degrees F (1.5 to 5.5 degrees C) over the
next 100 years (Mote et al. 2003, p. 54; Karl et al. 2009, p. 135).
While the specific effects of global climate change on the Utah valvata
snail are unclear, aquatic species and their habitats may be
particularly vulnerable to changes in temperatures and precipitation
patterns. Nevertheless, our current understanding of the Utah valvata
snail is that it occurs in a variety of substrate types (e.g., fines to
cobble size), flows, and depths, and tolerates a range of water-quality
parameters, including elevated water temperatures.
Our updated evaluation of the threat factors, including climate
change, to the Utah valvata snail is presented in the Summary of
Factors Affecting the Species section of this final rule.
(6) Comment: One commenter stated that populations believed to be
Utah valvata snails may in fact be Valvata humeralis, and therefore
recommended that we positively identify all Utah valvata snail
populations, through genetic analysis, before removing them from the
Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife.
Our Response: Studies and surveys have documented the Valvata
humeralis snail often co-occurs with the Utah valvata snail. Although
these two species possess many similar morphological characteristics,
they can be distinguished through variations in shell morphology. The
Utah valvata possesses a taller shell spire and more prominent carinae
than the Valvata humeralis (Burch 1989, pp. 82-83; Walker 1902, pp.
121-125). Miller et al. (2006b, pp. 3-4) confirmed through genetic
analysis that the Utah valvata snail and Valvata humeralis are distinct
species and demonstrated that the species can be effectively
distinguished using morphological characteristics (i.e., the
morphological data aligned with the genetic data).
The Service, along with other agencies and researchers, use the
difference in shell morphology as the primary method to differentiate
between these two species. While we acknowledge, given morphological
similarities, there is potential to confuse individuals of these two
species where they co-occur (Miller et al. 2006b, p. 1), genetic data
confirm Utah valvata snail occurrence at multiple sites within the
geographic range described at the beginning of this document (Miller et
al. 2006b, entire). Therefore, the Service believes that additional
genetic testing of all Utah valvata snail populations for
identification purposes is unnecessary.
Summary of Factors Affecting the Species
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) 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 (List).
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) Present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of habitat or range; (B)
[[Page 52276]]
overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D) 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.
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 Utah valvata snail as an
endangered species, we stated: ``Six proposed hydroelectric projects,
including two high dam facilities, would alter free flowing river
reaches within the existing range of [the Utah valvata snail]. Dam
construction threatens the [Utah valvata 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 mollusc 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
these snails'' (57 FR 59251).
Since the time of listing, proposed hydroelectric projects
discussed in the 1992 final 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 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 in litt. 2006). In addition, the
2006 IPC Integrated Resource Plan does not identify any new, large
hydropower projects within the Snake River (IPC 2006, p. 57). Lastly,
recent studies have shown that the Utah valvata snail is not as limited
in its geographic range or habitat needs as we had thought at the time
of listing (see Background section above).
Operation of Existing Hydropower Dams
In the 1992 final rule, we discussed 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, as a
threat to the Utah valvata snail. We also stated, as was our
understanding at the time, that the Utah valvata snail ``cannot
tolerate true impoundment or reservoir conditions'' (57 FR 59248).
Studies conducted since the time of listing have shown the Utah valvata
snail is able to persist in reservoirs and in areas downstream of peak-
loading dams, contrary to our understanding of the species at the time
of listing (USFWS 2005, pp. 105, 127-128; 57 FR 59244, 59245). For
example, Lake Walcott (RM 702.5 to 673.5; upstream of Minidoka Dam)
appears to contain the largest population of Utah valvata snails in the
Snake River system (USFWS 2005, pp. 111-112). This is likely due to
relatively good water quality in the reservoir compared to downstream
sections of the Snake River near Hagerman where water quality is
influenced by agricultural, municipal, and aquaculture flows into the
river. In lower Lake Walcott, there is a large area of suitable Utah
valvata snail habitat that remains submerged despite annual drawdowns
during the irrigation season (the reservoir fluctuates up to 5 feet
(1.5 meters) annually, thereby limiting the number of snails affected
by dewatering and desiccation). Further, surveys conducted in the
mainstem Snake River in 1997, 1998, and 2001 from American Falls Dam
(RM 714.1) to Lake Walcott (RM 702.5) indicate a fairly large and
viable population of Utah valvata snails even though shoreline habitats
in this stretch undergo annual dewatering (USFWS 2005, p. 119). In
American Falls reservoir, dam operations and fluctuating flows have
been estimated to kill between 5 and 40 percent of the Utah valvata
snails through dewatering and desiccation of their habitat in most
years. Nevertheless, Utah valvata snails continue to persist in both
American Falls and Lake Walcott reservoirs with relatively high
proportional occurrence (USFWS 2005, p. 119).
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 [sic] survival.
The [Utah valvata snail] require[s] cold, well-oxygenated unpolluted
water for survival. Any factor that leads to deterioration in water
quality would likely extirpate [the Utah valvata snail]'' (57 FR
59252). As described above in the Species Information section, our
understanding of the species' habitat requirements has changed
substantially since 1992. Furthermore, new information has become
available indicating (a) improvements to Snake River water quality
where the species lives, and (b) that Utah valvata snails inhabit and
persist in reaches of the Snake River rich in nutrients (e.g., nitrogen
and phosphorus).
Factors that are known to degrade water quality in the Snake River
include reduced water flow, warming due to impoundments, and increases
in the concentration of nutrients, sediment, and pollutants reaching
the river from agricultural and aquaculture inputs (USFWS 2005, p.
106). In the 1990s and early 2000s, several water-quality assessments
were completed for the Snake River by the USEPA, USBR, U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS), and IPC. All of these assessments generally demonstrate
that water quality in the Snake River of southern Idaho meets Idaho's
water-quality criteria for the protection of aquatic life for some
months of the year, but may be poor in reservoirs or during summer when
temperatures are high and flows are low (Clark et al. 1998, pp. 20-21,
24-27; Clark et al. 2004, pp. 38-40; Clark and Ott 1996, p. 553; Clark
1997, pp. 1-2, 19; Meitl 2002, p. 33).
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, 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 agriculture (e.g.,
[[Page 52277]]
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. 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. 42-45). Additionally, concentrations of lead,
cadmium, and arsenic have been detected in snails collected from the
Snake River (Richards in litt. 2003).
The effects of pollutants detected in the Snake River (e.g.,
metals, pesticides, excess nutrients) on the growth, reproduction, and
survival of the Utah valvata snail have not been evaluated. The Utah
valvata snail has been documented to occur in low-oxygen, organically-
enriched sediments with heavy macrophyte communities downstream of an
aquaculture facility (RM 588) (Hinson 2003, p. 17), indicating that the
species may not be as sensitive to these pollutants as we once
believed. Based on the best available data, we are not aware that water
quality in the Snake River limits growth, reproduction, or survival of
the Utah valvata snail in any portion of its range.
Although several reaches of the Snake River are classified as water
quality impaired (see further discussion below in Factor D), there have
been improvements in Total Suspended Solids (TSS) in certain reaches of
the River, primarily as a result of changing irrigation practices
between 1990 and 2005. There have also been substantial declines in TP
from changing agricultural practices and changing aquaculture feeds in
the middle Snake River downstream of Lake Walcott. Data collected by
the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality (IDEQ) show decreases of
TSS near 64 percent compared to 1990 levels, and decreases of TP near
33 percent compared to 1990 levels (Buhidar in litt. 2006). The
specific water-quality parameters required for the survival and
persistence of the Utah valvata snails are not known. However, the Utah
valvata snail occurs over a relatively large documented range of over
255 river miles (410 km) (USFWS 2005, pp. 110-113) and has the ability
to tolerate and persist in a variety of aquatic habitats with some
degree of water-quality degradation (Lysne and Koetsier 2006, pp. 234-
237). For example, studies conducted by the USBR in 2003 in Lake
Walcott Reservoir indicated the highest Utah valvata snail densities
occurred in the lower reservoir, where the sediments had the greatest
percentage of organic content (an indicator that oxygen levels are
likely low) (Hinson 2006, p. 19).
Summary of Factor A: Our understanding of the habitat needs of the
Utah valvata snail has changed substantially since the species was
listed in 1992. Compared to our knowledge at the time of listing,
survey data collected since 1992 indicate that the geographic range of
the species in the Snake River is approximately 122 river miles (196
km) longer and that the species occurs on a variety of substrate types
(e.g., fines to cobble size) and in varying water flows and depths. The
Utah valvata snail also tolerates a wider range of water-quality
parameters (e.g., dissolved oxygen and temperature) than was originally
believed. Threats pertaining to the construction of new hydropower dams
as cited in the 1992 final rule no longer exist as the plans for dam
construction have expired or been withdrawn. The operation of existing
hydropower dams and reservoirs upstream of Minidoka Dam primarily
affect the distribution of the Utah valvata snail along shoreline areas
due to fluctuating flows and seasonal dewatering; however, the species
persists throughout these reservoirs with relatively high proportional
occurrence. The available information does not suggest that degraded
water quality in the Snake River is affecting the species' population
numbers or distribution. Evidence indicates that improvements have been
made in Snake River water-quality parameters, including TSS and TP in
some Snake River reaches, since listing. Therefore, based on the best
available scientific and commercial data, threats of present or future
destruction, modification, or curtailment of the Utah valvata snail's
habitat or range do not rise to the level such that the species meets
the definition of either endangered or threatened under the Act.
Factor B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
There is no known commercial or recreational use of the species and
collections for scientific or educational purposes are limited in scope
and extent. While collection could result in mortality of individuals
within a small area, they are unlikely to have population-level effects
because only a few individuals and institutions are interested in
collecting the species and the life-history strategy of the species
makes populations relatively resilient to limited mortality (i.e.,
invests little in reproduction, relatively high reproductive output
(many eggs laid at a time), early age of reproduction, and short
lifespan). Therefore, based on the best available scientific and
commercial data, threats from overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational purposes to the Utah valvata
snail do not rise to the level such that the species meets the
definition of either endangered or threatened under the Act.
Factor C. Disease or Predation
Parasitic trematodes similar to those of the genus Microphallus
have been identified in some freshwater snails (e.g., Pyrgulopsis
robusta) that share similar habitats in the Snake River in Idaho
(Dybdahl et al. 2005, p. 8). However, the occurrence of trematode
parasites on the Utah valvata snail has not been studied.
Predators of the Utah valvata snail have not been documented;
however, we assume that some predation by native and nonnative species
occurs. Aquatic snails in general are prey for numerous invertebrates
and vertebrates (Dillon 2000, pp. 274-304), and predation on other
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; McCarthy and Fisher 2000, p. 387).
While disease or predation likely results in some Utah valvata
snail mortality, the life-history strategy of the species makes
populations relatively resilient to limited mortality (i.e., invests
little in reproduction, relatively high reproductive output (many eggs
laid at a time), early age of reproduction, and short lifespan).
Therefore, based on the best available scientific and commercial data,
threats from disease or predation to the Utah valvata snail do not rise
to the level such that the species meets the definition of either
endangered or threatened under the Act.
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 groundwater spring outflows or
tributary spring streams; (2) it was unlikely that pollution-control
regulations would reverse the trend in nutrient loading any time soon;
(3) there was a lack of State-mandated protections for invertebrate
species in Idaho; and (4) regulations did not
[[Page 52278]]
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 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) for
unlisted snails. Below, we address each of these four concerns.
Groundwater Withdrawal Regulations
Since 1992, new information has become available clarifying the
habitat requirements of the Utah valvata snail. The species is not
limited to cool, fast-water, or lotic habitats, or perennial flowing
waters associated with large spring complexes, as previously believed.
The species is able to live in a variety of aquatic habitats, and is
locally abundant throughout a 255-mile (410 km) stretch of the Snake
River in tributary streams, in the mainstem Snake River, and in
reservoirs that are managed for annual drawdowns.
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 in litt. 1996). The State Water Plan was
updated in 1996, and included a table of federally endangered and
threatened species in Idaho, including five Snake River aquatic snails
listed as endangered or threatened in 1992: The Utah valvata snail,
Idaho springsnail (Pyrgulopsis (=Fontelicella) idahoensis) (delisted in
2007), Snake River Physa (Physa natricina), Bliss Rapids snail
(Taylorconcha serpenticola), and Banbury Springs Lanx (Lanx n sp.
(undescribed)) (see 57 FR 59244). 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 in litt. 1996). 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., fish and
wildlife, hydropower, or agriculture). Another IDWR regulatory
mechanism is the ability of the Idaho Water Resource Board to
appropriate water for minimum stream flows when in the public interest
(IDWR in litt. 2010).
Since 1992, the IDWR and other State agencies have also created
additional regulatory mechanisms that limit future surface and
groundwater development, including the continuation of various
moratoria on new consumptive water rights and the designation of Water
Management Districts (Caswell in litt. 2007). The State is working with
numerous interested parties to stabilize aquifer levels and enhance
cold-water-spring outflows that feed into the Snake River within the
range of the Utah valvata snail. In 2008, the Idaho Legislature
approved House Bill 428 establishing the Statewide Comprehensive
Aquifer Planning and Management Program (SCAPMP) (I.C. section 42-1779)
and House Bill 644 which created the Aquifer Planning and Management
Fund (I.C. section 42-1780) (State of Idaho in litt. 2008a, 2008b).
Under the SCAPMP, the Eastern Snake River Plane Aquifer (ESPA) was
identified for management planning (IDWR 2009, entire). In 2009, the
ESPA Comprehensive Aquifer Management Plan (CAMP) was made final. The
goal of the ESPA 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'' (IDWR 2009, p. 4).
The ESPA CAMP ``establishes a long-term program for managing water
supply and demand in the ESPA through a phased approach to
implementation, together with an adaptive management process to allow
for adjustments or changes in management techniques as implementation
proceeds'' (IDWR 2009, p. 4). The long-term objective of the ESPA CAMP
is a net increase of 600,000 acre-feet of water annually by the year
2030 (IDWR 2009, p. 4). However, this is a discretionary document and
does not have regulatory authority.
In 2005, Congress and the Idaho Legislature approved the Snake
River Water Rights Agreement (SRWRA) in the Snake River Basin
Adjudication (SRBA) (State of Idaho in litt. 2005a; USA in litt. 2004).
The Snake River Component of the SRWRA allows the USBR to lease up to
427,000 acre-feet of water for flow augmentation, and acquire up to
60,000 acre-feet of water rights from the Snake River between Milner
(RM 639) and Swan Falls (RM 458), increasing total flow augmentation up
to 487,000 acre-feet within the range of the Utah valvata snail (IDWR
in litt. 2004). In 2005, the USBR acquired water rights through a 30-
year lease with the State of Idaho for 98,000 acre-feet of water from
the Bell Rapids Mutual Irrigation Company (State of Idaho in litt.
2005b). This will potentially benefit the Utah valvata snail by
increasing available wetted areas and connectivity of available
habitats within the range of the species.
The State of Idaho established moratoria in 1993 (the year after
the Utah valvata's listing) that restricted further surface-water and
groundwater withdrawals for consumptive uses from the Snake River Plain
aquifer between American Falls Reservoir (RM 714.1) and C.J. Strike
Reservoir (RM 494). The 1993 moratoria, extended by Executive Order in
2004 (Caswell in litt. 2006, attachment 1), have not yet resulted in
stabilization of the Snake River Plain 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 in litt. 2010).
Although we anticipate groundwater levels in the Snake River Plain
aquifer will likely continue to decline in the near future, even as
water-conservation measures are developed and implemented, this is
unlikely to endanger or threaten the Utah valvata snail given the
species' distribution over a 255-mile (410-km) range and its ability to
survive and persist in a wide variety of aquatic habitats not dependent
upon Snake River Plain groundwater outflows.
Pollution Control Regulations
Since 1992, reductions in sediment (TSS) and phosphorus (TP)
loading have improved water quality in localized reaches of the Snake
River (Buhidar in litt. 2005) (see Factor A above). Various State-
managed water-quality programs are being implemented within the range
of the Utah valvata snail. These programs tier 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 anti-degradation
policy in their water quality regulations that protects water-body uses
and high-quality waters. Idaho's anti-degradation policy, updated in
the State's 1993 triennial review, is detailed in their Water Quality
Standards (IDEQ in litt. 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 in
litt. 2010). These NPDES permits are written to
[[Page 52279]]
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 USEPA's 303(d) list of impaired water bodies. States must
submit to USEPA 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, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Resource Management
Plans, the State Water Plan, and local ordinances. Since the time of
listing in 1992, the following TMDLs have been approved by the USEPA
(approval year(s) in parentheses) within the Utah valvata range: The
Big Wood River (2002), Billinglsey Creek (2005), Blackfoot River (2002,
2007), Idaho Falls (2004), Lake Walcott (2000, 2007), Little Wood River
(2005), Palisades (2002), Portneuf River (2001), Raft River (2004),
Snake River--King Hill to C.J. Strike (2006), Middle Snake River--
aquaculture wasteload allocation (2005), and the Teton River (a
tributary of Henry's Fork of the Snake River) and Teton River
Supplement (2003). Implementation plans that specify pollution-control
strategies and monitoring needed to meet TMDL recommendations and goals
are either in place or under development for 9 of these 12 areas
(IDEQ--2010a; 2010b).
State Invertebrate Species Regulations
There are no specific State regulatory protections for the Utah
valvata snail in Idaho. The primary threats to the species, as
identified in our 1992 listing rule, were related to the loss or
alteration of its aquatic habitats. The lack of specific regulations
protecting individual Utah valvata snails does not, by itself, imply
that the species is endangered or threatened.
While there are no State regulatory protections for the Utah
valvata snail, it is considered a Species of Greatest Conservation Need
(SGCN) as identified in the State of Idaho Comprehensive Wildlife
Conservation Strategy (CWCS) (IDFG 2005 p. 4-75). The aim of the CWCS
is to provide a common framework that will enable conservation partners
to jointly implement a long-term approach for the benefit of SGCN
through proactive conservation to promote cost-effective solutions
instead of reactive measures enacted in the face of imminent losses
(IDFG 2005, p. V).
Federal Consultation Regulations
The threat of insufficient regulatory mechanisms to address Utah
valvata conservation needs in the 1992 listing rule was primarily
related to the proposed construction of six hydroelectric dams within
the suspected, limited geographic range of the species, coupled with
our belief at the time of listing that the species required cold, fast-
water, or lotic habitats, and was negatively impacted by dams that
inundated free-flowing river environments. As previously described,
hydroelectric dams are no longer being proposed for construction in the
middle Snake River, and our understanding of Utah valvata snail
geographic range, ecology, and habitat requirements has changed. Thus,
the importance of a regulatory mechanism to address these threats is no
longer a significant issue with regard to the conservation of the Utah
valvata snail.
Summary of Factor D: Although there are no specific State
regulations protecting the Utah valvata snail, it is considered a SGCN
as identified in the Idaho CWCS. The primary threats identified in the
final listing rule were related to the loss or alteration of the
species' habitat. Furthermore, as our understanding of the species'
habitat requirements has changed, so has our understanding of the
species' conservation and regulatory needs. Regulatory mechanisms such
as Idaho's water-quality standards and TMDLs will continue to apply to
habitats occupied by Utah valvata snails. Therefore, based on the best
available scientific and commercial data, threats from inadequate
regulatory mechanisms to the Utah valvata snail do not rise to the
level such that the species meets the definition of either endangered
or threatened under the Act.
Factor E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting the Species'
Continued Existence
Invasive Species
The final listing rule stated that nonnative New Zealand mudsnails
were not yet abundant in cold-water spring flows with colonies of the
Utah valvata snail, but that they likely did compete with the species
in the mainstem Snake River habitats (57 FR 59254). Surveys have found
that Utah valvata snails and New Zealand mudsnails frequently co-occur
in cold-water spring, mainstem Snake River, and reservoir habitats (37
percent co-occurrence in combined habitat types), which may indicate
that these two species are able to co-exist or that they actually have
slightly different resource preferences (e.g., periphytic vs.
perilithic algae) (Hinson 2006, p. 42). However, Hinson (2006, p. 41)
also notes that the overlap in habitat utilization between the Utah
valvata snail and the New Zealand mudsnail could lead to direct
competition for resources between these two species.
In 2002 and 2004, the USBR reported that New Zealand mudsnails were
increasing in Lake Walcott, yet the densities observed were
substantially lower than those observed in mainstem Snake River
habitats (USBR 2003, p. 19; USBR 2005, p. 6). Further upstream, surveys
conducted throughout American Falls Reservoir indicate that the
distribution of New Zealand mudsnails appears to be limited to the
upper end of American Falls Reservoir near the input of the Snake and
Portneuf rivers (USBR 2003, p. 21), where the habitat is not dewatered
due to water withdrawals for irrigation. Surveys conducted even further
upstream in the Snake River and tributaries (Fields 2005, pp. 8-12)
found moderate-to-high densities of the New Zealand mudsnail at five
sites. However, Fields (2005, p. 10) stated that the current
distribution of New Zealand mudsnails in the Snake River above American
Falls Reservoir could more strongly reflect patterns of introductions
rather than habitat preferences. Populations of the New Zealand
mudsnail are not known to occur in the Wood River, where a small native
or introduced population of the Utah valvata snail is thought to occur.
The overall impact on the Utah valvata snail from the nonnative New
Zealand mudsnail is not fully understood (Lysne 2003, pp. 85-86; Hinson
2006, p. 41). However, after approximately 20 years of co-occurrence,
there is no evidence suggesting that the New Zealand mudsnail has
supplanted or poses an extinction risk to the Utah valvata snail (Gates
in litt. 2009).
Climate Change
There is compelling evidence that we are living in a time of rapid,
worldwide climate change. Although the extent of warming likely to
occur is not known with certainty at this time, the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has concluded that warming of the
climate is unequivocal, and that continued greenhouse gas emissions at
or above current rates will cause further warming (IPCC 2007, p.
[[Page 52280]]
30). For example, 11 of the last 12 years evaluated (1995-2006) rank
among the 12 warmest years since 1850 (ISAB 2007, p. iii). In the
Pacific Northwest, regionally averaged temperatures have risen 1.5
degrees F (0.8 degrees C) over the last century, and are projected to
increase by another 3 to 10 degrees F (1.5 to 5.5 degrees C) over the
next 100 years (Mote et al. 2003, p. 54; Karl et al. 2009, p. 135).
While the specific effects of global climate change on the Utah valvata
snail are unclear, aquatic species and their habitats may be
particularly vulnerable to changes in temperatures and precipitation
patterns.
Rising temperatures due to climate change can affect aquatic
species, such as the Utah valvata snail, by altering the timing and
precipitation events in the Pacific Northwest (Karl et al. 2009, p.
135). Increased cool season temperatures cause precipitation to fall in
the form of rain as opposed to snow, contributing to earlier snowmelt,
earlier timing of spring runoff, and lower water levels during the warm
season (Karl et al. 2009, p. 135). Many fish and wildlife species in
the Pacific Northwest, especially aquatic species, are dependent on the
timing of spring snowmelt runoff (Karl et al. 2009, p. 135). Areas
along the warmer western slopes of the Cascade Mountains are projected
to see a 30 percent or more reduction in warm season runoff by mid-
century, while the interior, colder areas along the Rocky Mountains are
projected to experience a smaller, 10 percent reduction in spring
runoff (Karl et al. 2009, p. 135). Summer flows will also likely
decrease while water temperature will increase, thereby stressing many
aquatic organisms, especially those that have narrow temperature and
depth requirements.
Despite projected changes in climate in the Pacific Northwest, we
now know the Utah valvata snail is not as specialized in its habitat
needs as we thought at the time of listing and can persist in a broad
range of water flows, depths, and temperatures. In the Snake River, the
species inhabits a diversity of aquatic habitats throughout its 255-
mile (410 km) range, including cold-water springs, spring creeks and
tributaries, mainstem and free-flowing waters, reservoirs, and
impounded Snake River reaches. The species occurs on a variety of
substrate types including both fine sediments and more coarse
substrates in areas both with and without macrophytes. It has been
collected at a wide range of water depths, ranging from less than 3.2
feet (1 meter) to greater than 45 feet (14 meters), and at water
temperatures ranging from 37.4 to 75.2 degrees F (3 to 24 degrees C).
Summary of Factor E: The New Zealand mudsnail frequently co-occurs
with the Utah valvata snail and may be competing for habitat or food.
The New Zealand mudsnail can reach extremely high densities in the
middle Snake River (Richards et al. 2001, p. 375), and has been
recorded at moderate-to-high densities at five sites in tributaries to
the Snake River and the Snake River above American Falls Reservoir.
Populations of the New Zealand mudsnail are not known to occur in the
Wood River. The precise impact on the Utah valvata snail from the
invasion of the New Zealand mudsnail is unknown (Lysne 2003, pp. 85-86;
Hinson 2006, p. 41). However, after approximately 20 years of co-
occurrence, there is no evidence suggesting that the New Zealand
mudsnail has supplanted or caused local extirpations of the Utah
valvata snail.
Further, while numerous scientific studies indicate that the world
is warming due to anthropogenic causes, and that increasing
temperatures will impact precipitation patterns in the Pacific
Northwest, it is difficult at this time to determine the precise
effects this change will have on the Utah valvata snail. Nevertheless,
given the wide variety of habitat conditions, water depths, and
temperature ranges the Utah valvata snail has been found to occupy, the
species is likely to be resilient to moderate changes in temperature
and precipitation patterns. Therefore, threats from other natural or
manmade factors do not rise to the level such that the species meets
the definition of either endangered or threatened under the Act.
Conclusion
As required by the Act, we considered potential threat factors to
assess whether the Utah valvata snail is endangered or threatened
throughout its range. Information collected since the species' listing
in 1992 indicates that the Utah valvata snail is widely distributed and
occurs in a variety of ecological settings over a 255-mile range of the
Snake River. Much of the Snake River within the range of the Utah
valvata is influenced by seasonal dam operations for hydroelectric or
agricultural purposes, yet the species persists in these varied
mainstem Snake River systems, including impounded reservoir habitats
(e.g., Lake Walcott and American Falls reservoirs). None of the threats
that we identified in the 1992 listing determination appear to be
significant to the species (individually or in combination) in light of
our current understanding of its distribution and life history; nor
have we identified any significant new threats to the species.
Therefore, we find that the Utah valvata snail is not in danger of
extinction throughout its range, nor is it likely to become so in the
foreseeable future.
The Service has determined that the original data for
classification of the Utah valvata snail used in 1992 were in error.
However, it is important to note that the original data for
classification constituted the best scientific and commercial data
available at the time and were in error only in the sense that they
were incomplete when viewed in context of the data now available. The
primary considerations to delist the Utah valvata snail are described
in the five-factor analysis above.
Having determined that the Utah valvata snail does not meet the
definition of endangered or threatened throughout its range, we must
next consider whether there are any significant portions of its range
that are in danger of extinction or are likely to become endangered in
the foreseeable future. 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.
Applying the definition described above, we first address whether
any portions of Utah valvata's range warranted further consideration.
Based on a genetic study of the Utah valvata snail (Miller et al.
2006a) and the ecological settings in which the species occurs
throughout its range, three potential population units could be
analyzed as to whether they constituted a significant portion of its
range: The Wood River population unit (WRM 35), the Snake River
population unit (RM 585 through RM 837), and the Hagerman population
unit (isolated springs adjacent to the Snake River at RM 585). We then
evaluated whether each unit constitutes a significant portion of the
range of the species, and if so, whether that portion was endangered or
threatened.
Wood River Population Unit
There is a high degree of uncertainty concerning the distribution
and abundance of the species in the Wood River since there has been
only one documented colony and systematic surveys have not been
conducted. Based on the limited information we have on the Utah valvata
snail in the Wood River, this colony does not appear to exist in an
unusual or unique ecological
[[Page 52281]]
setting or contain a large portion of