Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing the Rayed Bean and Snuffbox as Endangered, 67552-67583 [2010-27413]
Download as PDF
67552
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R3–ES–2010–0019; MO
92210–0–0008–B2]
RIN 1018–AV96
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Listing the Rayed Bean
and Snuffbox as Endangered
AGENCY:
Fish and Wildlife Service,
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), propose to
list the rayed bean (Villosa fabalis) and
snuffbox (Epioblasma triquetra) as
endangered throughout their ranges,
under Endangered Species Act of 1973,
as amended (Act). This proposed rule, if
made final, would extend the Act’s
protection to the rayed bean and the
snuffbox. We have determined that
designating critical habitat for these
species is prudent, but not determinable
at this time. The Service seeks data and
comments from the public on this
proposed listing rule.
DATES: We will consider comments we
receive on or before January 3, 2011. We
must receive requests for public
hearings, in writing, at the address
shown in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section on or before December
17, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by one of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments
on Docket No. FWS–R3–2010–0019.
• U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS–R3–
2010–0019; Division of Policy and
Directives Management; U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive,
Suite 222; Arlington, VA 22203.
We will post all comments on https://
www.regulations.gov. This generally
means that we will post any personal
information you provide us (see the
Public Comments section below for
more information).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Angela Boyer at the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Ohio Ecological
Services Field Office, 4625 Morse Road,
Suite 104, Columbus, OH 43230;
telephone 614–416–8993, ext. 22.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Comments
Our intent is to use the best available
commercial and scientific data as the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
foundation for all endangered and
threatened species listing
determinations. We therefore request
comments or suggestions from other
concerned governmental agencies, the
scientific community, industry, or any
other interested party concerning this
proposed rule to list the rayed bean and
snuffbox as endangered. We particularly
seek comments concerning:
(1) Survey results for the rayed bean
or snuffbox, as well as any studies that
may show distribution, status,
population size, or population trends,
including indications of recruitment;
(2) Pertinent aspects of life history,
ecology, and habitat use of the rayed
bean or snuffbox;
(3) Current and foreseeable threats
faced by the rayed bean or snuffbox, or
both species, in relation to the five
factors (as defined in section 4(a)(1) of
the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.));
(4) The specific physical and
biological features to consider, and
specific areas that may meet the
definition of critical habitat and that
should or should not be considered for
a proposed critical habitat designation
as provided by section 4 of the Act; and
(5) The data and studies to which this
proposal refers.
You may submit your comments and
materials concerning this proposed rule
by one of the methods listed in the
ADDRESSES section. We will not accept
comments sent by e-mail or fax or to an
address not listed in the ADDRESSES
section. Comments must be submitted to
https://www.regulations.gov before
midnight (Eastern Time) on the date
specified in the DATES section. Finally,
we will not consider hand-delivered
comments that we do not receive, or
mailed comments that are not
postmarked, by the date specified in the
DATES section.
We will post your entire comment
—including your personal identifying
information—on https://
www.regulations.gov. If you provide us
personal identifying information such as
your street address, phone number, or email address, you may request at the top
of your document that we withhold this
information from public review.
However, we cannot guarantee that we
will be able to do so.
Comments and materials we receive,
as well as supporting documentation we
used in preparing this proposed rule,
will be available for public inspection
on https://www.regulations.gov, or by
appointment, during normal business
hours at the Ohio Ecological Services
Field Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Public Hearing
The Act provides for one or more
public hearings on this proposal, if
requested. We must receive requests by
the date listed in the DATES section
above. Such requests must be made in
writing and addressed to the Field
Supervisor of the Ohio Ecological
Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
Background
Species Descriptions
The rayed bean is a small mussel
usually less than 1.5 inches (in) (3.8
centimeters (cm)) in length (Cummings
and Mayer 1992, p. 142; Parmalee and
Bogan 1998, p. 244; West et al. 2000, p.
248). The shell outline is elongate or
ovate in males and elliptical in females,
and moderately inflated in both sexes,
but more so in females (Parmalee and
Bogan 1998, p. 244). The valves are
thick and solid. The anterior end is
rounded in females and bluntly pointed
in males (Cummings and Mayer 1992, p.
142). Females are generally smaller than
males (Parmalee and Bogan 1998, p.
244). Dorsally, the shell margin is
straight, while the ventral margin is
straight to slightly curved (Cummings
and Mayer 1992, p. 142). The beaks are
slightly elevated above the hingeline
(West et al. 2000, p. 248), with sculpture
consisting of double loops with some
nodules (Parmalee and Bogan 1998, p.
244). No posterior ridge is evident.
Surface texture is smooth and subshiny, and green, yellowish-green, or
brown in color, with numerous wavy,
dark-green rays of various widths
(sometimes obscure in older, blackened
specimens) (Cummings and Mayer 1992,
p. 142; West et al. 2000, p. 248).
Internally, the left valve has two
pseudocardinal teeth (tooth-like
structures along the hinge line of the
internal portion of the shell) that are
triangular, relatively heavy, and large,
and two short, heavy lateral teeth
(Cummings and Mayer 1992, p. 142).
The right valve has a low, triangular
pseudocardinal tooth, with possibly
smaller secondary teeth anteriorly and
posteriorly, and a short, heavy, and
somewhat elevated lateral tooth
(Parmalee and Bogan 1998, p. 244). The
color of the nacre (mother-of-pearl) is
silvery white or bluish and iridescent
posteriorly. Key characters useful for
distinguishing the rayed bean from
other mussels is its small size, thick
valves, unusually heavy teeth for a
small mussel, and color pattern
(Cummings and Mayer 1992, p. 142).
The snuffbox is a small- to mediumsized mussel with males reaching up to
2.8 in. (7.0 cm) in length (Cummings
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
02NOP3
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
and Mayer 1992, p. 162; Parmalee and
Bogan 1998, p. 108). The maximum
length of females is about 1.8 in (4.5 cm)
(Parmalee and Bogan 1998, p. 108). The
shape of the shell is somewhat
triangular (females), oblong, or ovate
(males) with the valves solid, thick, and
very inflated. The beaks are located
somewhat anterior of the middle,
swollen, turned forward and inward,
and extended above the hingeline
(Cummings and Mayer 1992, p. 162).
Beak sculpture consists of three or four
faint, double-looped bars (Cummings
and Mayer 1992, p. 162; Parmalee and
Bogan 1998, p. 108). The anterior end of
the shell is rounded, and the posterior
end is truncated, highly so in females.
The posterior ridge is prominent, being
high and rounded, while the posterior
slope is widely flattened. The posterior
ridge and slope in females is covered
with fine ridges and grooves, and the
posterioventral shell edge is finely
toothed (Cummings and Mayer 1992, p.
162). When females are viewed from a
dorsal or ventral perspective, the
convergence of the two valves on the
posterior slope is nearly straight due to
being highly inflated. This gives the
female snuffbox a unique broadly
lanceolate or cordate perspective when
viewed at the substrate and water
column interface (Ortmann 1919, p. 329;
van der Schalie 1932, p. 104). The
ventral margin is slightly rounded in
males and nearly straight in females.
Females have recurved denticles on the
posterior shell margin that aid in
holding host fish (Barnhart 2008, p. 1).
The periostracum (external shell
surface) is generally smooth and
yellowish or yellowish-green in young
individuals, becoming darker with age.
Green squarish, triangular, or chevronshaped marks cover the umbone (the
inflated area of the shell along the
dorsal margin) but become poorly
delineated stripes with age. Internally,
the left valve has two high, thin,
triangular, emarginate pseudocardinal
teeth (the front tooth being thinner than
the back tooth) and two short, strong,
slightly curved, and finely striated
lateral teeth. The right valve has a high,
triangular pseudocardinal tooth with a
single short, erect, and heavy lateral
tooth. The interdentum (a flattened area
between the pseudocardinal and lateral
teeth) is absent, and the beak cavity is
wide and deep. The color of the nacre
is white, often with a silvery luster, and
a gray-blue or gray-green tinge in the
beak cavity. The soft anatomy was
described by Oesch (1984, pp. 233–234),
and Williams et al. (2008, p. 282). Key
characters useful for distinguishing the
snuffbox from other species include its
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
unique color pattern, shape (especially
in females), and high degree of inflation.
Taxonomy
The rayed bean is a member of the
freshwater mussel family Unionidae and
was originally described as Unio fabalis
by Lea in 1831. The type locality is the
Ohio River (Parmalee and Bogan 1998,
p. 244), probably in the vicinity of
Cincinnati, Ohio. Over the years, the
rayed bean has been placed in the
genera Unio, Margarita, Margaron,
Eurynia, Micromya, and Lemiox. It was
ultimately placed in the genus Villosa
by Stein (1963, p. 19), where it remains
today (Turgeon et al. 1998, p. 33). We
recognize Unio capillus, U. lapillus, and
U. donacopsis as synonyms of Villosa
fabalis.
The snuffbox is a member of the
freshwater mussel family Unionidae and
was described as Truncilla triqueter
(Rafinesque 1820, p. 300). The species
name was later changed to triquetra
(Simpson 1900, p. 517), from the Latin
triquetrous meaning ‘‘having three acute
angles,’’ a reference to the general shape
of the female. The type locality is the
Falls of the Ohio (Ohio River,
Louisville, Kentucky) (Parmalee and
Bogan 1998, p. 108). The synonymy of
the snuffbox was summarized by
Johnson (1978, pp. 248–249), Parmalee
and Bogan (1998, p. 108), and Roe (no
date, p. 3). This species has also been
considered a member of the genera
Unio, Dysnomia, Plagiola, Mya,
Margarita, Margaron, and Epioblasma at
various times since its description. The
monotypic subgenus Truncillopsis was
created for this species (Ortmann and
Walker 1922, p. 65). The genus
Epioblasma was not in common usage
until the 1970s (Stansbery 1973, p. 22;
Stansbery 1976, p. 48; contra Johnson
1978, p. 248), where it currently
remains (Turgeon et al. 1998, p. 34).
Unio triqueter, U. triangularis, U.
triangularis longisculus, U. triangularis
pergibosus, U. cuneatus, and U.
formosus are recognized as synonyms of
E. triquetra. Tricorn pearly mussel is
another common name for this species
(Clarke 1981a, p. 354).
Life History
The general biology of the rayed bean
and the snuffbox are similar to other
bivalved mollusks belonging to the
family Unionidae. Adults are
suspension-feeders, spending their
entire lives partially or completely
buried within the substrate (Murray and
Leonard 1962, p. 27). Adults feed on
algae, bacteria, detritus, microscopic
animals, and dissolved organic material
(Silverman et al. 1997, p. 1859; Nichols
and Garling 2000, p. 873; Christian et al.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
67553
2004, pp. 108–109; Strayer et al. 2004,
pp. 430–431). Recent evidence suggests
that adult mussels may also deposit-feed
on particles in the sediment (Raikow
and Hamilton 2001, p. 520). For their
first several months, juvenile mussels
employ foot (pedal) feeding, consuming
settled algae and detritus (Yeager et al.
1994, p. 221). Unionids have an unusual
mode of reproduction. Their life cycle
includes a brief, obligatory parasitic
stage on fish. Eggs develop into
microscopic larvae called glochidia
within special gill chambers of the
female. The female expels the mature
glochidia, which must attach to the gills
or the fins of an appropriate fish host to
complete development. Host fish
specificity varies among unionids. Some
species appear to use a single host,
while others can transform on several
host species. Following successful
infestation, glochidia encyst (enclose in
a cyst-like structure) and drop off as
newly transformed juveniles. For further
information on freshwater mussels, see
Gordon and Layzer (1989, pp. 1–17).
Mussel biologists know relatively
little about the specific life-history
requirements of the rayed bean and the
snuffbox. Most mussels, including the
rayed bean and snuffbox, have separate
sexes. The age at sexual maturity, which
is unknown for the rayed bean and
snuffbox, is highly variable among and
within species (0–9 years) (Haag and
Staton 2003, pp. 2122–2123), and may
be sex dependent (Smith 1979, p. 382).
Both species are thought to be long-term
brooders; rayed bean females brood
glochidia from May through October
(Parmalee and Bogan 1998, p. 108;
Ecological Specialists, Inc. (ESI) 2000, p.
5; Woolnough 2002, p. 23), and snuffbox
brood glochidia from September to May
(Ortmann 1912, p. 355; 1919, p. 327).
The only published research identifies
the Tippecanoe darter (Etheostoma
tippecanoe) as a host fish for the rayed
bean (White et al. 1996, p. 191). Other
rayed bean hosts are thought to include
the greenside darter (E. blennioides),
rainbow darter (E. caeruleum), mottled
sculpin (Cottus bairdi), and largemouth
bass (Micropterus salmoides)
(Woolnough 2002, p. 51). Based on
inference of closely related species,
additional hosts may be suitable,
including other darter and sculpin
species (Jones 2002, pers. comm.).
Juvenile snuffbox have successfully
transformed on logperch (Percina
caprodes), blackside darter (P.
maculata), rainbow darter, Iowa darter
(E. exile), blackspotted topminnow
(Fundulus olivaceous), mottled sculpin,
banded sculpin (C. carolinae), Ozark
sculpin (C. hypselurus), largemouth
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
02NOP3
67554
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
bass, and brook stickleback (Culaea
inconstans) in laboratory tests (Sherman
1994, p. 17; Yeager and Saylor 1995, p.
3; Hillegass and Hove 1997, p. 25;
Barnhart et al. 1998, p. 34; Hove et al.
2000, p. 30; Sherman Mulcrone 2004,
pp. 100–103).
Habitat Characteristics
The rayed bean is generally known
from smaller, headwater creeks, but
occurrence records exist from larger
rivers (Cummings and Mayer 1992, p.
142; Parmalee and Bogan 1998, pp. 244).
They are usually found in or near shoal
or riffle areas, and in the shallow, wavewashed areas of glacial lakes, including
Lake Erie (West et al. 2000, p. 253). In
Lake Erie, the species is generally
associated with islands in the western
portion of the lake. Preferred substrates
typically include gravel and sand. The
rayed bean is oftentimes found among
vegetation (water willow (Justicia
americana) and water milfoil
(Myriophyllum sp.)) in and adjacent to
riffles and shoals (Watters 1988b, p. 15;
West et al. 2000, p. 253). Specimens are
typically buried among the roots of the
vegetation (Parmalee and Bogan 1998,
pp. 245). Adults and juveniles appear to
produce byssal threads (thin, proteinbased fibers) (Woolnough 2002, pp. 99–
100), apparently to attach themselves to
substrate particles.
The snuffbox is found in small to
medium-sized creeks to larger rivers and
in lakes (Cummings and Mayer 1992, p.
162; Parmalee and Bogan 1998, p. 108).
The species occurs in swift currents of
riffles and shoals and wave-washed
shores of lakes over gravel and sand
with occasional cobble and boulders.
Individuals generally burrow deep into
the substrate except when spawning or
attempting to attract a host (Parmalee
and Bogan 1998, p. 108).
Strayer (1999a, pp. 471–472)
demonstrated in field trials that mussels
in streams occur chiefly in flow refuges,
or relatively stable areas that displayed
little movement of particles during flood
events. Flow refuges conceivably allow
relatively immobile mussels to remain
in the same general location throughout
their entire lives. He thought that
features commonly used in the past to
explain the spatial patchiness of
mussels (water depth, current speed,
sediment grain size) were poor
predictors of where mussels actually
occur in streams.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
Rayed Bean Historical Distribution
The rayed bean historically occurred
in 112 streams, lakes, and some humanmade canals in 10 States: Illinois,
Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, New
York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee,
Virginia, and West Virginia; and
Ontario, Canada. The mussel occurred
in parts of the upper (Lake Michigan
drainage) and lower Great Lakes
systems, and throughout most of the
Ohio and Tennessee River systems.
During historical times, the rayed bean
was fairly widespread and locally
common in many Ohio River system
streams based on collections made over
a several-decade period. The species
was once fairly common in the Belle,
South Branch Thames, Detroit, Scioto,
Wabash, and Duck Rivers; several
tributaries in the Scioto system
(Olentangy River, and Big Darby and
Alum Creeks); and Tippecanoe Lake
based on literature and museum records
(Call 1900; Watters 1994, p. 105; West
et al. 2000, p. 251; Badra 2002, pers.
comm.). The rayed bean was last
reported from some streams several
decades ago (North Branch Clinton,
Auglaize, Ohio, West Fork, Beaver,
Shenango, Mahoning, Mohican, Scioto,
Green, Barren, Salamonie, White, Big
Blue, Tennessee, Holston, South Fork
Holston, Nolichucky, Clinch, North
Fork Clinch, and Powell Rivers; Wolf,
Conewango, Oil, Crooked, Pymatuning,
Mill, Alum, Whetstone, Deer, Lick, and
Richland Creeks; and Buckeye,
Tippecanoe, Winona, and Pike Lakes).
The rayed bean population in Lake Erie
was once considerable (Ohio State
University Museum of Biological
Diversity (OSUM) collections), but has
been eliminated by the zebra mussel.
Rayed Bean Current Distribution
Extant populations of the rayed bean
are known from 28 streams and 1 lake
in six States and one Canadian
province: Indiana (St. Joseph River
(stream) (Fish Creek (tributary)),
Tippecanoe River (Lake Maxinkuckee,
Sugar Creek)), Michigan (Black River
(Mill Creek), Pine River, Belle River,
Clinton River), New York (Allegheny
River (Olean Creek, Cassadaga Creek,
French Creek)), Ohio (Swan Creek, Fish
Creek, Blanchard River, Tymochtee
Creek, Walhonding River, Mill Creek,
Big Darby Creek, Scioto Brush Creek),
(Great Miami River, Little Miami River
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(East Fork Little Miami River),
Stillwater River), Pennsylvania
(Allegheny River (French Creek
(Cussewago Creek))), and West Virginia
(Elk River); and Ontario, Canada
(Sydenham River, Thames River).
Rayed Bean Population Estimates and
Status
Based on historical and current data,
the rayed bean has declined
significantly rangewide and is now
known from only 28 streams and 1 lake
(down from 112), a 74 percent decline
(Table 1). This species has also been
eliminated from long reaches of former
habitat in hundreds of miles of the
Maumee, Ohio, Wabash, and Tennessee
Rivers and from numerous stream
reaches and their tributaries. In
addition, this species is no longer
known from the States of Illinois,
Kentucky, Tennessee, and Virginia. The
rayed bean was also extirpated in West
Virginia until the 2006 reintroduction
into the Elk River (Clayton 2007, pers.
comm.).
In this proposed rule, mussel shell
collection records have been classified
according to the condition of shell
material. Fresh dead (FD) shells still
have flesh attached to the valves, they
may or may not retain a luster to their
nacre, and their periostracum is nonpeeling, all indicating relatively recent
death (generally less than 1 year)
(Buchanan 1980, p. 4). Relic (R) shells
have lost the luster to their nacre, have
peeling or absent periostracum, may be
brittle or worn, and likely have been
dead more than a year (Buchanan 1980,
pp. 4–5; Zanatta et al. 2002, p. 482).
Generally, FD shells indicate the
continued presence of the species at a
site (Metcalf 1980, p. 4). The presence
of R shells only, along with repeated
failure to find live (L) animals or FD
shells, likely signifies that a population
is extirpated (Watters and Dunn 1993–
94, pp. 253–254). Shells labeled R may
originally have been reported by
collectors as either weathered dead (or
weathered dry) or subfossil. If no details
on shell condition were provided for a
record, the shell is simply referred to as
dead. In this document, a population is
considered viable if it is reproducing
and has enough individuals to sustain
the population at its current level for the
foreseeable future.
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
02NOP3
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
67555
TABLE 1—RAYED BEAN STATUS AT HISTORICAL LOCATIONS
River basin
Upper Great Lakes
Sub-basin.
Lower Great Lakes
Sub-basin.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Ohio River system .......
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Last observed
(R = relic)
Stream
Current status
Comments
Pigeon River ................................
1996 (R)
Extirpated ...................
Black River ...................................
2001
Unknown ....................
Mill Creek .....................................
Pine River ....................................
Belle River ....................................
Clinton River ................................
North Fork Clinton River ..............
Sydenham River (Canada) ..........
Thames River ...............................
Detroit River .................................
Rouge River .................................
Huron River ..................................
Raisin River ..................................
Macon Creek ................................
Maumee River ..............................
Swan Creek .................................
St. Joseph River ..........................
West Branch St. Joseph River ....
Fish Creek ....................................
Cedar Creek .................................
Feeder Canal to St. Joseph River
Auglaize River ..............................
Ottawa River ................................
Blanchard River ...........................
Sandusky River ............................
Tymochtee Creek .........................
Wolf Creek ...................................
Lake Erie ......................................
Ohio River mainstem ...................
Allegheny River ............................
Chautauqua Lake outlet ...............
Chautauqua Lake .........................
Olean Creek .................................
Cassadaga Creek ........................
Conewango Creek .......................
Oil Creek ......................................
French Creek ...............................
Cussewago Creek ........................
Crooked Creek .............................
West Fork River ...........................
Beaver River ................................
Shenango River ...........................
Pymatuning Creek .......................
Mahoning River ............................
Middle Island Creek .....................
Muskingum River .........................
Tuscarawas River ........................
Walhonding River .........................
Mohican River ..............................
Elk River .......................................
Scioto River ..................................
Mill Creek .....................................
Alum Creek ..................................
Blacklick Creek ............................
Olentangy River ...........................
Whetstone Creek .........................
Big Walnut Creek .........................
Walnut Creek ...............................
Big Darby Creek ..........................
Little Darby Creek ........................
Deer Creek ...................................
Sugar Creek .................................
Scioto Brush Creek ......................
Cedar Creek .................................
Buckeye Lake ..............................
Ohio and Erie Canal ....................
Great Miami River ........................
Little Miami River .........................
East Fork Little Miami River ........
2002
2002
2003
1992
1933
2003
2008
1983
<1914
1931–32
1941
1976–78 (R)
1913
2009
1998
1997 (R)
2009
1985
1988 (R)
1964
1998 (R)
2009
1978
1996
1971 (R)
1977–87
<1960
2007
<1919
<1919
2000
1994
∼1908
<1970
2005
1991
∼1908
<1913
∼1910
∼1908
∼1908
<1921
1980 (R)
1980 (R)
?
1991–95
1969
2008
1964
2007
1970
?
1962
1961
1961
1994 (R)
2008
1990 (R) or 1986 (R)
1981
<1900
1987
?
?
?
2009
1990–91
1990–91
Unknown ....................
Declining ....................
Unknown ....................
Unknown ....................
Extirpated ...................
Stable .........................
Unknown ....................
Extirpated ...................
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Stable .........................
Declining ....................
Extirpated.
Declining ....................
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Unknown ....................
Extirpated.
Unknown ....................
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Stable .........................
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Unknown ....................
Unknown ....................
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Stable .........................
Unknown.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Declining ....................
Extirpated.
Reintroduced in 2006.
Extirpated.
Unknown.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Declining ....................
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Unknown ....................
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated ...................
Unknown ....................
Unknown ....................
Unknown.
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
Small and of questionable viability.
Unknown.
Recruiting.
Recruiting.
Recruiting.
Unknown.
Recruiting.
Probably not recruiting.
Unknown.
Recruiting.
Unknown.
Recruiting.
Recruiting.
Recruiting.
Recruiting.
Probably not recruiting.
Unknown.
Probably not recruiting.
Unknown.
Probably not recruiting.
02NOP3
67556
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 1—RAYED BEAN STATUS AT HISTORICAL LOCATIONS—Continued
River basin
Last observed
(R = relic)
Stream
Current status
Comments
1987
1982 (R)
1982 (R)
1981 (R)
1983 (R)
1964
1983 (R)
<1900, ?
1962 (R)
1971
1994 (R)
1995
<1920
1934
1906
1997
1999 (R)
1956–57
1991
1995 (R)
1956
1998
<1903
1989–91 (R)
?
1944
1992 (R)
1992 (R)
?
1950
<1939
Unknown ....................
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Declining ....................
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Declining ....................
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Unknown ....................
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Holston River ...............................
North Fork Holston River .............
South Fork Holston River ............
Nolichucky River ..........................
Lick Creek ....................................
First Creek ...................................
Clinch River ..................................
North Fork Clinch River ...............
Powell River .................................
Elk River .......................................
Richland Creek ............................
Duck River ...................................
Tennessee River system.
Stillwater River .............................
South Fork Licking River .............
North Fork Elkhorn Creek ............
Eagle Creek .................................
Brashears Creek ..........................
Green River ..................................
Nolin River ...................................
Barren River .................................
Wabash River ..............................
Salamonie River ...........................
Mississinewa River ......................
Tippecanoe River .........................
Tippecanoe Lake .........................
Winona Lake ................................
Pike Lake .....................................
Lake Maxinkuckee .......................
Vermilion River .............................
Salt Fork Vermilion River .............
Middle Fork Vermilion River ........
North Fork Vermilion River ..........
Embarras River ............................
Sugar Creek .................................
White River ..................................
West Fork White River .................
East Fork White River ..................
Big Blue River ..............................
Walnut Creek ...............................
Mill Creek .....................................
Fall Creek .....................................
Sugar Creek .................................
Tennessee River mainstem .........
1914–15
1913
1914
1968
1967 (R)
?
1965
<1921
1913–15
1965
1892
1982
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Upper Great Lakes Sub-Basin
The rayed bean was not known from
the upper Great Lakes sub-basin until
1996, when relic specimens were
documented from a tributary to the St.
Joseph River, a tributary to Lake
Michigan. No extant populations of the
rayed bean are currently known from
this system.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Lower Great Lakes Sub-Basin
Of the 112 water bodies from which
the rayed bean was historically
recorded, 27 are in the lower Great
Lakes system. The species is thought to
be extant in 12 streams, which are
discussed below, but historically
significant populations have been
eliminated from Lake Erie and the
Detroit River.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
Black River—A tributary of the St.
Clair River, linking Lakes Huron and St.
Clair, the Black River is located in
southeastern Michigan. Hoeh and Trdan
(1985, p. 115) surveyed 17 sites in the
Black River system, including 12
mainstem sites, but failed to find the
rayed bean. The rayed bean was not
discovered there until the summer of
2001 when a single live (L) individual
was found in the lower river in the Port
Huron State Game Area (PHSGA) (Badra
2002, pers. comm.). A survey in 2003
failed to find any rayed bean, and two
surveys in 2005 found only two valves
(Badra 2008, pers. comm.). An
additional survey was performed in
2005 at six sites, but no rayed bean were
found (Badra 2008, pers. comm.). The
status of this population cannot be
accurately assessed at this time, but
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Probably not recruiting.
Possibly recruiting.
Unknown.
Unknown.
would appear to be small and of
questionable viability (Butler 2002, p.
8).
Mill Creek—Mill Creek is a tributary
of the Black River, St. Clair County, in
southeastern Michigan. The rayed bean
was discovered in Mill Creek in August
2002. Five dead specimens were found
approximately 0.5 miles (mi) (0.8
kilometers (km)) above its confluence
with the Black River in the PHSGA
(Badra 2002, pers. comm.). A Mill Creek
site 0.25 mi (0.4 km) from the
confluence of the Black River was
surveyed in 2003 and 2004 with one
rayed bean shell found during each
survey (Badra 2008, pers. comm.).
Similar to the population in the Black
River, the status of this newly
discovered population cannot be
accurately assessed at this time.
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
02NOP3
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
Pine River—Another tributary of the
St. Clair River, the Pine River is located
in southeastern Michigan. The rayed
bean was apparently not collected in the
Pine River until 1982 when specimens
were found at three sites (Hoeh and
Trdan 1985, p. 116). These collections
included 5 L individuals and 23 FD
specimens (Badra 2002, pers. comm.).
Hoeh and Trdan (1985, p. 116)
considered it to be ‘‘rare,’’ semiquantitatively defined as occurring at a
rate of less than one specimen per
person-hour sampling effort. In 1997,
two L individuals were found. The last
survey in the Pine River occurred in
2002 (Badra 2008, pers. comm.), and
one L rayed bean was documented
(Badra and Goforth 2003, p. 6). The
species may have declined significantly
since the 1980s, but is probably still
viable in the Pine River.
Belle River—The Belle River is a third
tributary of the St. Clair River harboring
an extant population of the rayed bean.
This species was first collected from the
Belle River in 1965, when 17 FD
specimens were collected (OSUM
1965:0106). The same site was revisited
in 1978, but only one FD shell is
represented in OSUM 1978:0013. Since
that time, L individuals or FD
specimens have been found in 1983 and
1992, while only R shells were found in
1994 (Badra 2008, pers. comm.). During
summer 2002 sampling, single L
specimens were found at two new sites,
with an additional four and two FD
specimens, respectively, also found
from these sites (Badra 2008, pers.
comm.). The status of the population is
still not well known, but appears to be
small.
Clinton River—The rayed bean was
first recorded from the Clinton River in
1933 (Badra 2008, pers. comm.). The
mussel fauna in the entire mainstem of
the Clinton River downstream of
Pontiac, Michigan, was apparently
wiped out by pollution between 1933
and 1977 (Strayer 1980, p. 147). In 1992,
Trdan and Hoeh (1993, p. 102) found 26
L individuals using a suction dredge
from a bridge site slated for widening
where Strayer (1980, p. 146) found only
R shells. The rayed bean represented 1.2
percent relative abundance of the 10
species collected at the site. The
population is probably viable but
currently restricted to about 3 mi (4.8
km) of stream in the western suburbs of
Pontiac. Its long-term status appears to
be highly precarious.
Sydenham River—The rayed bean in
the Sydenham River represents one of
the largest rayed bean populations
remaining. West et al. (2000, pp. 252–
253) presented a highly detailed
collection history of the rayed bean in
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
the Sydenham River. The rayed bean is
currently thought to exist in an
approximately 75-mi (120-km) reach of
the middle Sydenham, from the general
vicinity of Napier, Ontario, downstream
to Dawn Mills. The species appears to
be most abundant in the lower half of
this river reach. Although the range has
remained relatively consistent over
time, abundance data at repeatedly
sampled sites from the 1960s to the late
1990s indicate a general decline of the
rayed bean. Based on the range of sizes
and roughly equal number of specimens
in various size classes of the L and FD
material they gathered, West et al.
(2000, p. 256) considered the population
to be ‘‘healthy’’ and ‘‘reproducing’’
(recruiting). Data from sampling in 2001
shows evidence of recruitment and
variable size classes for both sexes from
most of the sites (Woolnough 2002, p.
50). Based on this data, the rayed bean
population in the Sydenham River is
doing considerably better than West et
al. (2000, pp. 252–253) suggested.
Woolnough and Morris (2009, p. 19)
estimates that there are 1.5 million
mature rayed bean in the Sydenham
River living in the 38-mile (61-km)
stretch between Napier Road near
Alvinston, Ontario, and Dawn Mills,
Ontario.
Thames River—The Thames River
flows west through southwestern
Ontario. The rayed bean was historically
known from only the south branch until
2008, when it was discovered in the
north branch. In July 2008, six gravid
(full of eggs) females were collected at
two north branch sites (Woolnough
2008, pers. comm.). In September 2008,
four L females and two L males were
collected at two different north branch
sites (Woolnough 2008, pers. comm.).
All of these individuals were collected
within a 4.5-mi (7.2-km) reach of the
river (Woolnough 2008, pers. comm.).
Woolnough and Morris (2009, p. 19)
estimates that there are 4,300 mature
rayed bean in the Thames River.
Maumee River System—The Maumee
River system, which flows into the
western end of Lake Erie, was once a
major center of distribution of the rayed
bean. The species was historically
known from eight streams in the system
in addition to the mainstem Maumee.
Further, an additional population was
discovered in the system in 2005 in
Swan Creek.
Swan Creek—Swan Creek is a
tributary of the lower Maumee River in
northwestern Ohio. This population was
discovered in 2005. Surveys conducted
in 2006 and 2007 found that the Swan
Creek population is limited to about 3
river mi (5 river km) between river mile
(RM) 18.3 and 15.3 (Grabarkiewicz
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
67557
2008, p. 11). The rayed bean was the
fourth most abundant unionid present
within the 2006–2008 sample area,
reaching densities of eight individuals
per square meter in some areas and
comprising about 14.1 percent of the
total mussel community (Grabarkiewicz
2008, p. 10). The rayed bean population
in Swan Creek is viable and, although
limited to a short reach, may be one of
the most robust remaining populations.
St. Joseph River—The St. Joseph River
is one of the two major headwater
tributaries to the Maumee, with a
drainage area in southeastern Michigan,
northwestern Ohio, and northeastern
Indiana. The mainstem flows in a
southwesterly direction to its
confluence with the St. Mary’s River to
form the Maumee in Ft. Wayne, Indiana.
The rayed bean was historically known
from numerous sites on the river, but
now apparently persists only at a couple
of sites in the lower St. Joseph River in
Allen and DeKalb Counties, Indiana
(Watters 1988b, p. 15; 1998, Appendix
C); a few FD specimens were found in
both studies, but no live individuals
were found. Grabarkiewicz and Crail
(2008, p. 13) surveyed six sites on the
West Branch St. Joseph River in 2007,
but did not encounter any rayed bean.
Fish Creek—A tributary of the St.
Joseph River that begins in Ohio, Fish
Creek flows west then south through
Indiana, then eventually east into Ohio
before joining the St. Joseph River at
Edgerton. The rayed bean persists in
Williams County, Ohio, and possibly
DeKalb County, Indiana. Based on the
appearance of 2 L individuals and FD
shells, it inhabits the lower 10 mi (16.1
km) or less of the stream (Watters 1988b,
p. 18; Grabarkiewicz 2009, pers.
comm.). Watters (1988b, p. ii)
considered Fish Creek to be ‘‘the most
pristine tributary of the St. Joseph
system.’’ A major diesel fuel spill from
a ruptured pipeline in DeKalb County in
1993 resulted in a mussel kill in the
lower portion of the stream (Sparks et
al. 1999, p. 12). It is not known if the
rayed bean was affected by the spill.
Surveys in 2004 (at 64 qualitative sites)
and 2005 (at 11 quantitative sites) failed
to detect the species (Brady et al. 2004,
p. 2; 2005, p. 3). However,
Grabarkiewicz (2009, pers. comm.)
reported finding two L and three FD
rayed bean in 2005 at the County Road
3 bridge in Ohio. In 2009, two FD rayed
bean were found in lower Fish Creek in
Ohio (personal observation). The
viability and status of this population is
uncertain (Fisher 2008, pers. comm.).
Blanchard River—The Blanchard
River is a tributary of the Auglaize River
in the Maumee River system, in
northwestern Ohio. First discovered in
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
02NOP3
67558
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
1946, this population is one of the
largest of the rayed bean rangewide. The
rayed bean in the Blanchard River is
restricted to 25–30 river mi (40–48 river
km) in the upper portion of the stream
in Hardin and Hancock Counties
upstream of Findley (Hoggarth et al.
2000, p. 22). Hoggarth et al. (2000, p. 23)
reported the rayed bean to be the fourth
most common species in the drainage.
The population is considered to be
viable.
Tymochtee Creek—Tymochtee Creek
is a tributary to the upper Sandusky
River in north-central Ohio, which
flows into the southwestern portion of
Lake Erie. The rayed bean is known
from three sites in a reach of stream in
Wyandot County and was first collected
in 1970. All collections of the rayed
bean have been small, with not more
than five FD shells found in any one
collection effort. The last record is for
1996, when a pair and three unpaired
valves were collected. The condition of
at least one of the valves indicated that
the rayed bean is probably still extant in
the stream, although no L individuals
were observed (Athearn 2002, pers.
comm.). The rayed bean status in
Tymochtee Creek is therefore currently
unknown.
Ohio River System
The rayed bean was historically
known from the Ohio River in the
vicinity of Cincinnati, Ohio,
downstream to the Illinois portion of the
river. It undoubtedly occurred
elsewhere in the upper mainstem. Few
historical records are known (mostly
circa 1900), and no recent collections
have been made, indicating that it
became extirpated there decades ago. It
was historically known from 71 streams,
canals, and lakes in the system,
representing roughly two-thirds of its
total range. Ortmann (1925, p. 354)
considered the rayed bean to be
‘‘abundant in small streams’’ in the Ohio
River system. Currently, only 16 streams
and a lake are thought to have extant
rayed bean populations in the system.
Allegheny River System—Nine
streams and Chautauqua Lake
historically harbored rayed bean
populations in the Allegheny River
system. Currently, the rayed bean is
found in half of these water bodies, but
in good numbers in two streams
(Allegheny River and French Creek) in
this drainage.
Allegheny River—The Allegheny
River drains northwestern Pennsylvania
and western New York joining the
Monongahela River at Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania, to form the Ohio River.
Ortmann (1909a, p. 179; 1919, p. 262)
was the first to report the rayed bean
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
from the Allegheny. The population
once stretched from Cataraugus County,
New York, to Armstrong County,
Pennsylvania. Based on historical
collections, it appears that the rayed
bean is more abundant now than it was
historically in the Allegheny River. This
may indicate that the rayed bean
population in the Allegheny has
expanded in the past 100 years. Many
streams in western Pennsylvania have
improved water quality since Ortmann’s
time, when he reported on the
wholesale destruction of mussels in
several streams (Ortmann 1909b, pp.
11–12). It currently occurs in
Pennsylvania downstream of Allegheny
(Kinzua) Reservoir in Warren County to
the pool of Lock and Dam 8 in northern
Armstrong County, a distance of over
100 river mi (161 river km) (Villella
Bumgardner 2008, pers. comm.). The
Allegheny population is viable and one
of the most important remaining
rangewide today.
Olean Creek—Olean Creek is a
tributary of the Allegheny River in
western New York. A small population
of the rayed bean is known from the
lower portions of the stream. Strayer et
al. (1991, p. 67) reported the rayed bean
from three sites during 1987–90
sampling, although just one L
individual was located with R shells
from the other two sites. Only R shells
were found in Olean Creek in 1994, but
three L individuals were found in 2000,
at the proposed construction site of the
City of Olean Water Treatment Plant
(ESI 2000, p. 8). Collected only during
their quantitative sampling effort, the
rayed bean represented a relative
abundance of 11.5 percent of the seven
L species sampled. The rayed bean age
distribution of these specimens also
indicates recent recruitment into the
population (ESI 2000, p. 9). Relic
specimens are now known from an 8-mi
(13-km) reach of stream, with L
individuals known from less than 1.5 mi
(2.4 km) of the lower creek. The Olean
Creek population appears viable, but is
small and tenuous (Butler 2008, pers.
comm.)
Cassadaga Creek—Cassadaga Creek is
a tributary of Conewango Creek in the
Allegheny River system, in western New
York. A small population of the rayed
bean is known from a single riffle (Ross
Mills) in the lower creek north of
Jamestown. Four L specimens were
found in 1994 (Strayer 1995). Muskrat
middens collected during the winter of
2002 produced 38 FD specimens with a
size range of 0.8–1.7 in (2.0–4.3 cm)
(Clapsadl 2002, pers. comm.). Although
the rayed bean is not known from other
sites in the stream, it appears to be
viable at this site. The highly restricted
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
extent of the population combined with
its proximity to roads and retail
development, including a gas station
close to the flood zone upstream, makes
it extremely susceptible to a stochastic
event (such as a toxic chemical spill).
French Creek—French Creek is a
major tributary of the middle Allegheny
River, in western New York and
northwestern Pennsylvania. One of the
largest rayed bean populations known is
found in much of the lower portions of
the stream in four Pennsylvania
counties (the species is not known from
the New York portion of stream).
Ortmann (1909a, p. 188; 1919, p. 264)
reported the species from two counties,
Crawford and Vanango. Not until circa
1970 did the population become more
thoroughly known, with museum lot
sizes indicating sizable populations at
several sites, particularly in the lower
reaches of the stream. Recent collections
indicate that population levels remain
high with the rayed bean occurring
throughout the mainstem (Villella
Bumgardner 2002, pers. comm.; Smith
and Crabtree 2005, pp. 15–17;
Enviroscience 2006, p. 5).
Cussewago Creek—Cussewago Creek
is a tributary of lower French Creek,
with its confluence at Meadville,
Crawford County, Pennsylvania. A
small population was reported in 1991
from Cussewago Creek (Proch 2001,
pers. comm.). The rayed bean is thought
to persist in the stream, but its current
status is unknown.
Walhonding River—The Walhonding
River is a tributary of the upper
Muskingum River system, in central
Ohio, forming the latter River at its
confluence with the Tuscarawas River at
Coschocton. Small numbers of rayed
bean shells are represented in OSUM
collections from the 1960s and 1970s.
During 1991–93, Hoggarth (1995–96, p.
161) discovered one L individual and
one FD specimen at one site, while four
R specimens were found at three other
sites. A small rayed bean population is
thought to remain in the Walhonding
River; its status is unknown, but is
deemed highly tenuous given the small
population size. The population is
probably nearing extirpation (Hoggarth
2008a, pers. comm.).
Elk River—The Elk River is a major
181-river-mi (291-river-km) tributary in
the lower Kanawha River system
draining central West Virginia and
flowing west to the Kanawaha River at
Charleston. The rayed bean was
extirpated in the Elk River sometime in
the 1990s. In 2006 and 2007,
approximately 600 adults were
reintroduced into the Elk River above
Clendenin. In 2008, an effort was made
to monitor the reintroduction. A 30-
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
02NOP3
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
minute search yielded two L
individuals, but efforts were
discontinued due to high water and
excessive habitat disturbance caused by
the search effort (Clayton 2008, pers.
comm.). The translocated adults are
thought to persist in the stream, but it
is unknown if this new population is
reproducing.
Scioto River system—The Scioto River
system, in central and south-central
Ohio, is a major northern tributary of
the Ohio River. A historically large
meta-population of the rayed bean
occupied at least 11 streams, the Ohio
and Erie Canal, and Buckeye Lake.
Sizable populations were noted in at
least the Olentangy River, and Alum
and Big Darby Creeks, based on OSUM
collections primarily from the 1960s. A
series of system reservoirs mostly north
of Columbus reduced habitat and
contributed to the elimination of some
populations in several streams (Alum,
Big Walnut, and Deer Creeks; Olentangy
and Scioto Rivers). The location of the
Columbus Metropolitan Area in the
heart of the watershed has also taken a
major toll on the species. The historical
Scioto rayed bean meta-population has
since been decimated by anthropogenic
factors. Currently, remnant populations
are known only from Mill Creek, Big
Darby Creek, and Scioto Brush Creek.
Mill Creek—Mill Creek is a tributary
of the Scioto River in central Ohio that
joins the Scioto River at the
O’Shaughnessy Reservoir northwest of
the City of Columbus. In 2004, seven FD
specimens were found during a survey
in the City of Marysville (Hoggarth
2005, p. 7). In 2007, Hoggarth (2007a,
pp. 5–6) found two L rayed bean at the
same site and one L individual at an
additional site. No other information is
available on the status of this
population.
Big Darby Creek—Big Darby Creek is
one of the major tributaries draining the
northwestern portion of the Scioto River
system in central Ohio. A sizable rayed
bean population was noted in Big Darby
Creek from OSUM collections primarily
from the 1960s. Watters (1994, p. 105)
reported finding a few FD specimens in
1986, but none in 1990, and indicated
that the rayed bean was probably
extirpated from Big Darby Creek. In
2006, one L individual was found at the
U.S. Highway 42 bridge replacement
project site (Hoggarth 2006, p. 6). This
individual was relocated to a site
upstream out of the impact zone of the
bridge project, and nine additional L
individuals were subsequently found at
the relocation site (Hoggarth 2006, p. 6).
In 2007, three L rayed bean were found
at the relocation site (Hoggarth 2007b, p.
9). Hoggarth (2008b, pers. comm.)
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
visited the same relocation site in 2008,
and reported finding ‘‘numerous living
specimens’’ of the rayed bean. The status
of this population cannot be accurately
assessed at this time, but would appear
to be small and of questionable viability.
Scioto Brush Creek— Scioto Brush
Creek is a small western tributary of the
lower Scioto River in Scioto County,
south-central Ohio. Watters (1988a, p.
45) discovered the rayed bean in this
stream in 1987, reporting two FD and
two R specimens from a site, and a R
specimen from a second site among the
20 sites he collected. This population’s
current status is uncertain.
Great Miami River—The Great Miami
River is a major northern tributary of the
Ohio River in southwestern Ohio that
originates from Indian Lake in westcentral Ohio and flows into the Ohio
River west of Cincinnati. The
occurrence of the rayed bean in the
Great Miami River was discovered in
August 2009, during a mussel survey for
a bridge project in Logan County, Ohio.
Only one individual was documented, a
male approximately 7 to 8 years of age
(Hoggarth 2009, pers. comm.). The
status of this newly discovered
population is not known.
Little Miami River—The Little Miami
River is a northern tributary of the Ohio
River in southwestern Ohio, flowing
into the latter at the eastern fringe of the
Cincinnati metropolitan area. Hoggarth
(1992, p. 248) surveyed over 100 sites in
the entire system. He found one L
individual at a site in Warren County
and possibly a subfossil shell at another
site, although there is contradictory data
in his paper (Butler 2002, p. 17). The
latter site may have been the same as
that reported for a pre-1863 record
(Hoggarth 1992, p. 265). The rayed bean
appears to be very rare in the Little
Miami, having been found extant at only
1 of 46 mainstem sites. Hoggarth (1992,
p. 267) highlighted the ‘‘fragile nature’’
of the extant mussel community in the
system, while noting that localized
reaches of the Little Miami were
‘‘severely impacted.’’ The species status
in the river is uncertain, but apparently
very tenuous and probably headed
toward extirpation (Butler 2002, p. 17).
East Fork Little Miami River—The
East Fork Little Miami River is an
eastern tributary of the lower Little
Miami River, with its confluence at the
eastern fringe of the Cincinnati
metropolitan area. According to OSUM
records, eight FD specimens were
reported from a site in eastern Clermont
County in 1973. Hoggarth (1992, p. 265)
reported one L, three FD, and one R
rayed bean from three sites in a 7-rivermi (11-river-km) stretch of the stream in
western Clermont and adjacent Brown
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
67559
County (including the 1973 site). Harsha
Reservoir on the East Fork destroyed
several miles of potential stream habitat
for the rayed bean a few miles
downstream of the extant population.
The status of the rayed bean in the river
is uncertain but probably of doubtful
persistence (Butler 2002, p. 17).
Stillwater River—The Stillwater River
is a western tributary of the middle
Great Miami River in southwestern
Ohio. The rayed bean is known from
two specimens, one FD and one R,
collected in 1987 at two sites spanning
the Miami–Montgomery County line
(OSUM records). Both sites occur in the
footprint of Englewood Reservoir
(constructed circa 1920), which serves
as a retarding basin (a constructed
empty lake used to absorb and contain
flooding in periods of high rain) that is
normally a free-flowing river except in
times of flood, therefore continuing to
provide riverine habitat that is normally
destroyed by permanently impounded
reservoirs. The rayed bean in the
Stillwater River may be extant, but its
status is currently unknown and
considered highly imperiled.
Tippecanoe River—The Tippecanoe
River is a large northern tributary of the
middle Wabash River in north-central
Indiana. The first records for the rayed
bean date to circa 1900 (Daniels 1903,
p. 646). Historically, this species was
known from numerous sites in six
counties in the Tippecanoe River. A
total of 12 FD specimens from 5 of 30
sites were found when sampled in 1992.
The rayed bean ‘‘is apparently on the
decline’’ in the river (ESI 1993, p. 87).
The Tippecanoe rayed bean population
was thought to be recruiting by Fisher
(2008, pers. comm.), but appears
tenuous and its long-term viability is
questionable.
Lake Maxinkuckee—Lake
Maxinkuckee is a glacial lake in the
headwaters of the Tippecanoe River in
north-central Indiana. The rayed bean
has been known from the lake for more
than a century (Blatchley 1901). A 1997
OSUM record included seven FD
specimens collected at its outlet to the
Tippecanoe River. Fisher (2002, pers.
comm.), who made the 1997 OSUM
collection, noted that many native
mussels had zebra mussels attached to
their valves and were apparently
contributing to their mortality. The
status of the rayed bean in Lake
Maxinkuckee is therefore highly
tenuous, and its long-term persistence
questionable.
Sugar Creek—Sugar Creek is a
tributary of the East Fork White River,
in the lower Wabash River system in
south-central Indiana. A rayed bean
population was first reported there in
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
02NOP3
67560
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
1930. Harmon (1992, p. 33) sampled 27
mainstem and 16 tributary sites finding
FD specimens at 3 mainstem sites and
R specimens from 2 other sites. The
sites with FD material were found in the
lowermost 6 mi (9.7 km) of stream. The
status and viability of this tenuous
population is uncertain (Fisher 2008,
pers. comm.).
Tennessee River System
Historically, the rayed bean was
known from the Tennessee River and 12
of its tributary streams. Ortmann (1924,
p. 55) reported that the rayed bean had
a ‘‘rather irregular distribution’’;
however, museum lots show that it was
fairly common in some streams (North
Fork Clinch, Duck Rivers). The last L
rayed bean records from the system,
with the exception of the Duck River,
were from the 1960s or earlier. The
species held on in the Duck until the
early 1980s. Recent intensive sampling
in the Duck watershed has failed to
locate even a R shell of the rayed bean
(Ahlstedt et al. 2004, p. 29). Tributaries
in this system have been extensively
sampled over the past 25 years. It is
highly probable that this species is
extirpated from the entire Tennessee
River system.
A project was initiated in 2008 to
reintroduce rayed bean into the Duck
River by translocating over 1,000 adults
from the Allegheny River system.
Although the rayed bean was extirpated
from the Duck River about 25 years ago,
major improvements in water quality
and physical habitat conditions have
occurred in the past 15 years. In
response to these improvements,
recruitment of nearly all extant mussel
species has been documented and
suggests that reintroduction of the rayed
bean might be successful (Anderson
2008, pers. comm.). The reintroduction
has not yet occurred.
The information presented in this
document indicates that the rayed bean
has experienced a significant reduction
in range and most of its populations are
disjunct, isolated, and with few
exceptions, appear to be declining (West
et al. 2000, p. 251). The extirpation of
this species from over 80 streams and
other water bodies within its historical
range indicates that substantial
population losses have occurred.
Relatively few streams are thought to
harbor sizable viable populations
(Sydenham, Swan, Blanchard, and
Allegheny Rivers, and French Creek).
Small population size and restricted
stream reaches of current occurrence are
a real threat to the rayed bean due to the
negative genetic aspects associated with
small, geographically isolated
populations. This can be especially true
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
for a species, like rayed bean, that was
historically widespread and had
population connectivity among
mainstem rivers and multiple
tributaries. The current distribution,
abundance, and trend information
illustrates that the rayed bean is
imperiled.
Snuffbox Historical Distribution
The snuffbox historically occurred in
208 streams and lakes in 18 States and
1 Canadian province: Alabama,
Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa,
Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan,
Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, New
York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee,
Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin;
and Ontario. The major watersheds of
historical streams and lakes of
occurrence include the upper Great
Lakes sub-basin (Lake Michigan
drainage), lower Great Lakes sub-basin
(Lakes Huron, Erie, and Ontario
drainages), upper Mississippi River subbasin, lower Missouri River system,
Ohio River system, Cumberland River
system, Tennessee River system, lower
Mississippi River sub-basin, and White
River system.
Snuffbox Current Distribution
Extant populations of the snuffbox are
known from 74 streams in 14 States and
1 Canadian province: Alabama
(Tennessee River, Paint Rock River, and
Elk River), Arkansas (Buffalo River,
Spring River, and Strawberry River),
Illinois (Kankakee River and Embarras
River), Indiana (Pigeon River, Salamonie
River, Tippecanoe River, Sugar Creek,
Buck Creek, Muscatatuck River, and
Graham Creek), Kentucky (Tygarts
Creek, Kinniconick Creek, Licking
River, Slate Creek, Middle Fork
Kentucky River, Red Bird River, Red
River, Rolling Fork Salt River, Green
River, and Buck Creek), Michigan
(Grand River, Maple River, Pine River,
Belle River, Clinton River, Huron River,
Davis Creek, South Ore Creek, and
Portage River), Minnesota (St. Croix
River), Missouri (Meramec River,
Bourbeuse River, St. Francis River, and
Black River), Ohio (Grand River, Ohio
River, Muskingum River, Walhonding
River, Killbuck Creek, Olentangy River,
Big Darby Creek, Little Darby Creek, Salt
Creek, Scioto Brush Creek, South Fork
Scioto Brush Creek, Little Miami River,
and Stillwater River), Pennsylvania
(Allegheny River, French Creek, West
Branch French Creek, Le Boeuf Creek,
Muddy Creek, Conneaut Outlet, Little
Mahoning Creek, Dunkard Creek,
Shenango River, and Little Shenango
River), Tennessee (Clinch River, Powell
River, Elk River, and Duck River),
Virginia (Clinch River and Powell
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
River), West Virginia (Ohio River,
Dunkard Creek, Middle Island Creek,
North Fork Hughes River, and Elk
River), Wisconsin (St. Croix River, Wolf
River, Embarrass River, Little Wolf
River, and Willow Creek), and Ontario
(Ausable River and Sydenham River). It
is probable that the species persists in
some of the 134 streams or lakes where
it is now considered extirpated (Butler
2007, p. 16); however, if extant, these
populations are likely to be small and
not viable.
Snuffbox Population Estimates and
Status
Based on historical and current data,
the snuffbox has declined significantly
rangewide and is now known from only
74 streams (down from 208 historically),
representing a 65 percent decline in
occupied streams (Table 2). Since
multiple streams may comprise a single
snuffbox population (French Creek
system), the actual number of extant
populations is less than 74. Extant
populations, with few exceptions, are
highly fragmented and restricted to
short reaches. Available records indicate
that 24 of 74, or 33 percent, of streams
considered to harbor extant populations
of the snuffbox are represented by only
one or two recent L or FD individuals
(Embarrass, Little Wolf, Maple, Pigeon,
Kankakee, Meramec, Ohio, Muskingum,
Olentangy, Stillwater, Green, Powell,
Duck, and Black Rivers; and Little
Mahoning, Middle Island, Big Darby,
Little Darby, Salt, South Fork Scioto
Brush, Slate, and Buck (Indiana),
Graham, Buck (Kentucky) Creeks.
Butler (2007, pp. 70–71) categorized
the extant populations into three groups
based on population size, general
distribution, evidence of recent
recruitment, and assessment of current
viability. Stronghold populations were
described as having sizable populations
generally distributed over a significant
and more or less contiguous length of
stream (30 or more river mi (48 or more
river km)), with ample evidence of
recent recruitment, and currently
considered viable. Significant
populations were defined as small,
generally restricted populations with
limited recent recruitment and viability.
Many significant populations are
susceptible to extirpation, but this
category has a broad range of quality.
The third category, marginal
populations, are defined as those which
are very small and highly restricted with
no evidence of recent recruitment, of
questionable viability, and that may be
on the verge of extirpation in the
immediate future. Following this
criteria, there are 6 stronghold
populations, 23 significant populations,
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
02NOP3
67561
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
and 45 marginal populations of
snuffbox.
A population is considered extant if L
individuals or FD specimens have been
located since approximately 1985. A
population is considered to be
recruiting if there was recent (within
approximately 10 years) evidence of
subadults (generally, individuals less
than or equal to 1.5 in (3.8 cm) long or
less than or equal to 4 years).
TABLE 2—SNUFFBOX EXTANT STREAM POPULATION SUMMARY BY STREAM OF OCCURRENCE
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Stream (state)
Wolf River (WI) ......
Embarrass River
(WI).
Little Wolf River
(WI).
Willow Creek (WI) ..
Grand River (MI) ....
Maple River (MI) ....
Pine River (MI) .......
Belle River (MI) ......
Clinton River (MI) ...
Huron River (MI) ....
Davis Creek (MI) ....
South Ore Creek
(MI).
Portage River (MI)
Grand River (OH) ...
St. Croix River (MN
and WI).
Kankakee River (IL)
Meramec River
(MO).
Bourbeuse River
(MO).
Ohio River (OH) .....
Muskingum River
(OH).
Walhonding River
(OH).
Killbuck Creek (OH)
Olentangy River
(OH).
Big Darby Creek
(OH).
Little Darby Creek
(OH).
Salt Creek (OH) .....
Scioto Brush Creek
(OH).
South Fork Scioto
Brush Creek (OH).
Little Miami River
(OH).
Stillwater River
(OH).
Pigeon River (IN) ...
Salamonie River
(IN).
Tippecanoe River
(IN).
Embarras River (IL)
Sugar Creek (IN) ....
Buck Creek (IN) .....
Muscatatuck River
(IN).
Graham Creek (IN)
St. Francis River
(MO).
Black River (MO) ...
Tygarts Creek (KY)
Kinniconick Creek
(KY).
Licking River (KY) ..
Slate Creek (KY) ....
Middle Fork Kentucky River (KY).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Last observed
Recruiting
Potential viability
Population size
Population trend
2006
1995
Yes ........................
? ............................
High .......................
? ............................
Large .....................
Small .....................
Declining ...............
? ............................
Stronghold.
Marginal.
1999
? ............................
? ............................
Small .....................
? ............................
Marginal.
2001
2002
2001
2002
2002
2003
2001
2005
1999
? ............................
Yes ........................
? ............................
? ............................
Yes ........................
Yes ........................
? ............................
Yes ........................
Yes ........................
? ............................
High .......................
? ............................
Low .......................
High .......................
High .......................
Low .......................
High .......................
High .......................
Small .....................
Medium .................
Small .....................
Small .....................
Small .....................
Large .....................
Medium .................
Medium .................
Small .....................
? ............................
? ............................
? ............................
Stable ....................
? ............................
Declining ...............
? ............................
? ............................
? ............................
Marginal.
Significant.
Marginal.
Marginal.
Significant.
Significant.
Significant.
Significant.
Significant.
1998
2006
2004
Yes ........................
Yes ........................
Yes ........................
High .......................
High .......................
High .......................
Medium .................
Medium .................
Large .....................
? ............................
? ............................
Declining ...............
Significant.
Significant.
Significant.
1991
1997
? ............................
? ............................
? ............................
? ............................
Small .....................
Small .....................
? ............................
Declining ...............
Marginal.
Marginal.
2006
Yes ........................
High .......................
Large .....................
Improving ..............
Stronghold.
2001
2005
? ............................
? ............................
Low .......................
? ............................
Small .....................
Small .....................
? ............................
? ............................
Marginal.
Marginal.
1991
? ............................
? ............................
Small .....................
Declining ...............
Significant.
2009
1989
? ............................
? ............................
? ............................
? ............................
Small .....................
Small .....................
Declining ...............
Declining ...............
Marginal.
Marginal.
2008
? ............................
? ............................
Small .....................
Declining ...............
Marginal.
1999
? ............................
? ............................
Small .....................
Declining ...............
Marginal.
1987
1987
? ............................
? ............................
? ............................
? ............................
Small .....................
Small .....................
? ............................
? ............................
Marginal.
Marginal.
1987
? ............................
? ............................
Small .....................
? ............................
Marginal.
1991
? ............................
? ............................
Small .....................
? ............................
Marginal.
1987
? ............................
? ............................
Small .....................
? ............................
Marginal.
1998
2004
? ............................
Yes ........................
? ............................
Low .......................
Small .....................
Small .....................
? ............................
? ............................
Marginal.
Significant.
2003
? ............................
? ............................
Small .....................
Declining ...............
Marginal.
2008
1990
1990
1988
Yes ........................
? ............................
? ............................
? ............................
Low .......................
? ............................
? ............................
? ............................
Small
Small
Small
Small
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
Declining ...............
Declining ...............
? ............................
? ............................
Significant.
Marginal.
Marginal.
Marginal.
1990
2006
? ............................
Yes ........................
? ............................
High .......................
Small .....................
Medium .................
Declining ...............
Stable ....................
Marginal.
Significant.
2002
1995
2005
Yes ........................
? ............................
? ............................
Low .......................
? ............................
Low .......................
Small .....................
Small .....................
Small .....................
? ............................
Declining ...............
Declining ...............
Significant.
Marginal.
Marginal.
2006
1992
1997
? ............................
? ............................
? ............................
Low .......................
? ............................
? ............................
Small .....................
Small .....................
Small .....................
? ............................
Declining ...............
? ............................
Marginal.
Marginal.
Marginal.
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
02NOP3
Status category
67562
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 2—SNUFFBOX EXTANT STREAM POPULATION SUMMARY BY STREAM OF OCCURRENCE—Continued
Stream (state)
Red Bird River (KY)
Red River (KY) .......
Rolling Fork Salt
River (KY).
Green River (KY) ...
Buck Creek (KY) ....
Clinch River (TN
and VA).
Powell River (TN
and VA).
Tennessee River
(AL).
Paint Rock River
(AL).
Elk River (TN and
AL).
Duck River (TN) .....
Buffalo River (AR) ..
Spring River (AR) ...
Strawberry River
(AR).
Allegheny River
(PA).
French Creek (PA)
West Branch
French Creek
(PA).
Le Boeuf Creek
(PA).
Muddy Creek (PA)
Conneaut Outlet
(PA).
Little Mahoning
Creek (PA).
Dunkard Creek (PA
and WV).
Shenango River
(PA).
Little Shenango
River (PA).
Middle Island Creek
(WV).
North Fork Hughes
River (WV).
Elk River (WV) .......
Ausable River (ON)
Sydenham River
(ON).
Last observed
Recruiting
Potential viability
Population size
Population trend
1995
∼2002
∼2005
? ............................
? ............................
? ............................
? ............................
? ............................
? ............................
Small .....................
Small .....................
Small .....................
? ............................
? ............................
? ............................
Marginal.
Significant.
Marginal.
1989
1987–90
2006
? ............................
? ............................
Yes ........................
? ............................
? ............................
High .......................
Small .....................
Small .....................
Large .....................
Declining ...............
Declining ...............
Stable or Declining
Marginal.
Marginal.
Stronghold.
2008
? ............................
? ............................
Small .....................
Declining ...............
Marginal.
2006
? ............................
? ............................
Small .....................
? ............................
Marginal.
2008
Yes ........................
High .......................
Large .....................
Improving ..............
Stronghold.
2007
Yes ........................
Low .......................
Small .....................
Stable ....................
Significant.
2001
2006
2005
1997
?
?
?
?
............................
............................
............................
............................
? ............................
? ............................
Low .......................
? ............................
Small .....................
Small .....................
Medium .................
Small .....................
?
?
?
?
Marginal.
Marginal.
Significant.
Marginal.
2001
? ............................
? ............................
Small .....................
? ............................
Marginal.
2008
2008
Yes ........................
? ............................
High .......................
? ............................
Large .....................
Small .....................
Stable ....................
? ............................
Stronghold.
Marginal.
2006
Yes ........................
Low .......................
Small .....................
? ............................
Marginal.
2008
1997
Yes ........................
? ............................
Low .......................
? ............................
Medium .................
Small .....................
? ............................
? ............................
Significant.
Marginal.
1991
? ............................
? ............................
Small .....................
? ............................
Marginal.
2009
? ............................
? ............................
Small .....................
Declining ...............
Significant.
2002
? ............................
? ............................
Small .....................
? ............................
Marginal.
2002
? ............................
? ............................
Small .....................
? ............................
Significant.
2001
? ............................
? ............................
Small .....................
Declining ...............
Marginal.
2001
? ............................
Low .......................
Small .....................
Declining ...............
Significant.
2004
2006
2002
? ............................
Yes ........................
Yes ........................
Low .......................
High .......................
High .......................
Medium .................
Medium .................
Large .....................
Improving ..............
Declining ...............
? ............................
Significant.
Significant.
Stronghold.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Upper Great Lakes Sub-Basin
The snuffbox was formerly known
from 15 streams and lakes in the upper
Great Lakes sub-basin. The Fox River
system in Wisconsin, particularly its
major tributary the Wolf River (and its
tributaries), had a widespread and
locally abundant population. The
species is thought to be extant in seven
sub-basin streams; however, all but the
Wolf and Grand Rivers have
populations that are considered
marginal.
Wolf River—The Wolf River is the
major tributary of the Fox River draining
a large portion of northeastern
Wisconsin and flowing southward to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
join the Fox River at Lake Butte Des
Morts, near Oshkosh. Snuffbox records
are known from Shawano, Waupaca,
and Outagamie Counties. The snuffbox
is known from a 30-river-mi (48-riverkm) reach of the Wolf River (Butler
2007, p. 21). It is one of the few
stronghold populations, but appears to
exhibit a low level of recruitment. Only
4 of 257 individuals collected in the
mid-1990s were less than 6 years old
(Butler 2007, p. 21). A bridge
replacement project on the south side of
Shawano, scheduled to begin in 2010,
may adversely impact the large snuffbox
bed located just downstream (ESI 2006,
p. 10). The zebra mussel occurs in this
river, with a 0.7 percent infestation rate
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
............................
............................
............................
............................
Status category
on unionids sampled in 2006 (ESI 2006,
p. 6). This large population continues to
be viable but appears to be in decline
(Butler 2008, pers. comm.).
Embarrass River—A western tributary
of the lower Wolf River, the Embarrass
River parallels the western bank of the
Wolf River before joining it at New
London, Wisconsin. A population of the
snuffbox is located in the headwaters
below a small dam at Pella, Wisconsin.
Records exist for three L individuals
and two dead specimens during 1987–
1988 and a single D specimen in 1995
(Butler 2007, p. 22). Its current status is
unknown.
Little Wolf River—The Little Wolf
River is a western tributary of the lower
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
02NOP3
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
Wolf River in Waupaca County,
Wisconsin. The snuffbox is known from
a single L individual collected in 1988
at RM 14 below the Mill Pond dam at
Manawa (Butler 2007, p. 22). Five D
specimens were found during 1999 at
RM 2, where shells were abundant in a
muskrat midden (Butler 2007, p. 22).
Nothing else is known regarding this
population.
Willow Creek—Willow Creek flows
eastward into Lake Poygan, a large flowthrough lake of the Wolf River system,
in Waushara County, Wisconsin. The
snuffbox is known from a single
observation of two L females in 2001
(Butler 2007, p. 22). No other
information is available on the status of
this population.
Grand River—The Grand River, a
major Lake Michigan tributary,
represents the largest lotic (moving
water) watershed in Michigan and is
located in the southwestern portion of
the State. The snuffbox is sporadically
distributed in approximately 25 river mi
(40 river km) of the middle Grand River,
approximately between the confluences
of the Flat and Maple Rivers. The
medium-sized population appears to
have a low level of viability, with
recruitment noted in 1999 (Badra 2008,
pers. comm.).
Maple River—The Maple River is a
northeastern tributary of the Grand
River draining south-central Michigan.
A single snuffbox record (one L
individual) is known from 2001 in
southern Gratiot County, approximately
20 river mi (32 river km) upstream of
the Grand River (Badra 2008, pers.
comm.). Portions of the Maple River and
several tributaries have been
channelized, but the suitability of these
channelized areas for the snuffbox is
unknown (Badra 2010, pers. comm.).
The current status of this small
population is unknown.
Pigeon River—The Pigeon River is a
headwater tributary of the St. Joseph
River system of Lake Michigan, flowing
westward across northern-most Indiana,
crossing the State border to its
confluence in southwestern Michigan.
One very large FD specimen was found
in 1998, among thousands of shells in
LaGrange County, Indiana (Butler 2007,
p. 24). The same site was sampled in
1996 without evidence of this species,
and R shells were found at three of nine
sites sampled in 2004 (Butler 2007, p.
24). The snuffbox occupied reach
historically covered more than 10 river
mi (16.1 river km) in north-central
LaGrange County. The species is very
rare in this river, and its viability is
unknown.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
Lower Great Lakes Sub-Basin
Of all the water bodies from which
the snuffbox was historically recorded,
32 are in the lower Great Lakes subbasin, including several chains-of-lakes,
springs, and channels in some systems
(Clinton, Huron Rivers). Historically
sizable populations occurred in some
streams (Lake Erie; Belle, Clinton,
Huron, Portage, and Niagara Rivers), but
the species had become
‘‘characteristically uncommon’’ by the
1970s (Strayer 1980, p. 147). A pre-zebra
mussel decline of unionids in Lake Erie
was noted (Mackie et al. 1980, p. 101),
and the snuffbox appeared extirpated
there by the late 1960s. The Lake St.
Clair population of snuffbox persisted
until around 1983 (Nalepa and Gauvin
1988, p. 414; Nalepa 1994, p. 2231;
Nalepa et al. 1996, p. 361), which was
the year the zebra mussel is thought to
have invaded (Schloesser et al. 1998, p.
70). Observations of L and FD snuffbox
from the Detroit River were made until
1994, but the mussel fauna has since
been devastated by zebra mussels, and
the snuffbox is now considered to be
extirpated (Schloesser et al. 1998 p. 69;
Butler 2007, p. 25). Other snuffbox
populations in the sub-basin may also
have suffered from zebra mussel
invasions, but not those in the Ausable
and Sydenham Rivers in Ontario. The
lack of impounded area on these
streams has likely prevented the
introduction or the establishment of
zebra mussels (Ausable River Recovery
Team 2005, p. 12; Dextrase et al. 2000,
p. 10). The snuffbox is considered
extant in 10 streams of the lower Great
Lakes sub-basin, including a stronghold
population in the Sydenham River and
sizable but reach-limited populations in
the Clinton River and Davis Creek. A
single FD valve was reported in 1998
from among 24 sites sampled in the
Thames River, but no evidence of the
snuffbox was found at 16 Thames sites
in 2004 (McGoldrick 2005, pers.
comm.). Currently, the species is
considered extant in Canada only in the
Ausable and Sydenham Rivers (Morris
and Burridge 2006, p. 9). Both of these
populations are viable.
Ausable River—The Ausable River is
a southeastern tributary of Lake Huron,
draining southwestern Ontario, Canada.
A survey conducted in 2006 found that
a sizable population of snuffbox occurs
in the lower portion of the stream in
over 23 river mi (37 river km)
(McGoldrick 2007, pers. comm.). The
size range of individuals found in the
2006 survey indicates recent
recruitment in the viable population
(McGoldrick 2007, pers. comm.; Staton
2007, pers. comm.).
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
67563
Pine River—A tributary of the St. Clair
River, the Pine River flows south and is
located in St. Clair County, in
southeastern Michigan. Although
apparently stable, the snuffbox
population is small, very restricted in
range, and has a low potential for
viability (Badra 2002, pers. comm.;
Badra and Goforth 2003, p. 23).
Belle River—The Belle River is
another tributary of the St. Clair River
in St. Clair County, flowing in a
southeasterly direction. Records for the
snuffbox date to the early 1960s, but all
L and FD records over the past 40 years
have been from the same lower
mainstem site. Historically, a sizable
population was found in the Belle (65
specimens, 1965). The Belle is located
in a primarily agricultural watershed
(Hoeh and Trdan 1985, p. 115), and is
impacted by sedimentation and runoff.
The population has declined to the
point of being small, but shows
evidence of recruitment and viability
(Badra 2002, pers. comm.; Badra and
Goforth 2003, p. 24; Sherman 2005,
pers. comm.).
Clinton River—The Clinton River is
an eastward flowing chain-of-lakes
tributary of Lake St. Clair in
southeastern Michigan. The snuffbox
population in the Clinton River is
limited to around 10 river mi (16.2 river
km) and lakeshore in the western
suburbs of Pontiac primarily between
Cass and Loon Lakes. This population
appears to be recruiting (Sherman
Mulcrone 2004, p. 64) and viable,
although apparently in decline since the
early 1990s (Badra 2002, pers. comm.;
Butler 2007, p. 27).
Sydenham River—The Sydenham
River is a large, southeasterly flowing,
eastern tributary of Lake St. Clair in
extreme southwestern Ontario. The
snuffbox was reported in the mid-1960s
and early 1970s but was overlooked
during surveys in 1985 (except D shells)
and 1991 (Butler 2007, p. 28). During
the 1997–99 sampling, a total of 10 L
and FD individuals were found from 4
of 12 sites, including the 3 1960s sites
(Metcalfe-Smith et al. 2003, p. 41). The
snuffbox was recorded at a rate of 0.22
per hour of effort during 1997–98
(Metcalfe-Smith et al. 2000, p. 728).
More recent sampling found 57 L and
FD individuals from 21 collection
events (some individuals may have been
counted multiple times) at six sites
during 2000–02. The increase in
numbers relative to historical
collections may be attributed to more
intensive sampling methods rather than
to improving population size (MetcalfeSmith et al. 2003, p. 46), thus making
population trend assessments difficult
(Morris and Burridge 2006, p. 12). This
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
02NOP3
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
67564
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
stronghold population is recruiting
(Butler 2007, p. 28), viable, and is
currently known from approximately 30
river miles (48 km) of the middle
Sydenham.
Huron River—The Huron River is a
major tributary of western Lake Erie
draining a significant portion of
southeastern Michigan. It is a complex
system of flow-through chains-of-lakes
and tributaries. The snuffbox is
considered extant in two disjunct upper
mainstem reaches. Individuals in the
middle Huron River reach and in Davis
Creek are considered a single
population segment (Marangelo 2005a,
pers. comm.).
Zebra mussels invaded the Huron
River system in the early 1990s. Zebra
mussel densities on individual mussels
increased from less than 1 in spring
1995 to 245 in winter 1998 (Nichols et
al. 2000, p. 72). Despite the increasing
presence of zebra mussels, the Huron
population is probably recruiting and
viable (Butler 2007, p. 29).
Davis Creek—Davis Creek is a chainof-lakes in the upper Huron River
system, primarily in southeastern
Livingston County, Michigan. The
snuffbox appears to be limited to the
lower 3 river mi (4.8 river km),
comprising a single population with one
of the extant Huron River population
segments in this area. This viable
population appears to be sizable and is
experiencing recent recruitment
(Marangelo 2005a, pers. comm.; Zanatta
2005, pers. comm.).
South Ore Creek—South Ore Creek is
a northern tributary of the Huron River,
forming a southward flowing chain-oflakes draining southeastern Livingston
County, Michigan. The snuffbox was
discovered in 1999, just upstream of Ore
Lake, which is near the Huron River
confluence (Butler 2007, p. 31). Three
subadult snuffbox (two age 2, one age 3–
4) were recorded. Despite the lack of
additional information, the small
population appears to be viable based
on recent recruitment.
Portage River—The Portage River is a
chain-of-lakes in the northwestern
portion of the Huron River system. Two
University of Michigan Museum of
Zoology (UMMZ) records suggest
historical abundance (Badra 2002, pers.
comm.). The species was reported as
‘‘rare’’ in the lower river during 1976–78
(Strayer 1979, p. 94). At least 22 L,
young (age 4 and younger) individuals
were identified in 1998 at one of three
sites upstream of Little Portage Lake and
Portage Lake (Butler 2007, p. 31). The
localized population appears to be
medium-sized and viable.
Grand River—The Grand River is a
99-river-mi (159-river-km) tributary of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
Lake Erie, flowing north then west to its
confluence northeast of Cleveland,
Ohio. Several museum snuffbox records
date back to the 1800s. Dozens of FD
snuffbox were found washed up on the
banks in the vicinity of the Interstate 90
crossing in Lake County, Ohio,
following a major flood in 2006 (Butler
2007, p. 32). The species is known from
approximately 12 river mi (19.3 river
km) downstream of Harpersfield Dam
(Huehner et al. 2005, p. 59; Zimmerman
2008a, pers. comm.). The sizable
population was considered recruiting
based on the 1995 Huehner et al. (2005,
p. 59) survey.
Upper Mississippi River Sub-basin
The snuffbox was historically known
from 17 streams in the upper
Mississippi River sub-basin. Records
exist for Mississippi River Pools (MRPs)
3–4, 5a–6, and 14–16 (Kelner no date, p.
6), with early surveys summarized by
van der Schalie and van der Schalie
(1950, p. 456). The species was reported
L in the upper river in the 1920s (Grier
1922, p. 15; Grier 1926, p. 119) but not
from subsequent surveys (254 sites
upstream of the Ohio River during
1930–1931 (UMMZ, Ellis 1931, pp. 1–
10), MRPs 5–7 and 9 in 1965 (Finke
1966, Table 2; Thiel 1981, p. 16), MRPs
3–11 during 1977–79 (Thiel 1981, p.
16)) and is now extirpated from the
mainstem of the Mississippi River
(Havlik and Sauer 2000, p. 4). Only 4 of
17 historical populations remain, but
they include two of the largest
rangewide (St. Croix and Bourbeuse
Rivers). Three populations, including
the St. Croix, appear to be declining.
St. Croix River—The St. Croix River is
a major south-flowing tributary of the
upper Mississippi River and forms the
border between southeastern Minnesota
and northwestern Wisconsin. Densities
of juvenile snuffbox declined at eight
sites between 1992 and 2002 (Hornbach
et al. 2003, p. 344). Snuffbox density at
Interstate Park declined significantly
between 1988 and 2004 (WIDNR 2004).
A flood in 2001 may have contributed
to these declines in mussel density, but
post-flood recruitment was also
surprisingly low (WIDNR 2004). The St.
Croix snuffbox population occurs from
the Northern States Power Dam (NSPD)
at RM 54.2 to RM 36.8 (Heath 2005,
pers. comm.), represents the species’
northernmost occurrence, and despite
recent observed declines, remains one of
the six stronghold populations
rangewide.
Kankakee River—The Kankakee River
is a major, westward-flowing, upper
Illinois River tributary with its
headwaters in northwest Indiana and
northeast Illinois. The snuffbox was
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
reported over a century ago (Baker 1906,
p. 63), but surveys in 1911 (43 sites;
Wilson and Clark 1913, pp. 41–50),
1978 (13 sites; Suloway 1981, p. 236),
1975–2000 (18 samples from an
unknown number of Will County,
Illinois, sites; Sietman et al. 2001, p.
279), and 1999 (4 sites, Stinson et al.
2000, Appendix C) failed to find it. It
was considered extirpated from the
Kankakee by Cummings et al. (1988, p.
16), but single FD specimens in Illinois
(Will County in 1988, Kankakee County
in 1991) were subsequently found. Only
R shells have been found since 1991.
The Kankakee River population, if
extant, appears small, localized, and of
doubtful viability.
Meramec River—The Meramec River
is a 236-mi (380-km) tributary that flows
northeasterly into the Mississippi River
downstream of St. Louis and drains the
northeastern slope of the Ozark Plateaus
in east-central Missouri. Early species
lists failed to report the snuffbox (Grier
1916, p. 518; Utterback 1917, p. 28).
Buchanan (1980, p. 63) found FD
specimens at three sites and R shells at
two other sites sampled in 1977–78.
Roberts and Bruenderman (2000, p. 85)
sampled 42 sites in 1997, including 26
of Buchanan’s (1980, p. 5) sites, and
found FD specimens at RM 33.5, 48.8,
and 59.8; and one L individual at RM
39.8. The L individual (2.4 in (6.1 cm),
approximately 6 years old) was reported
from a reach where a die-off, perhaps
attributable to disease, was reported in
1978 (Buchanan 1986, p. 44). There was
an obvious decline of mussels in the
system based on catch-per-unit-effort
data over the 20-year period (Roberts
and Bruenderman 2000, p. 8). The
Meramec snuffbox population is rare,
sporadically distributed over
approximately 26 river mi (41.8 river
km), and of unknown viability.
Bourbeuse River—The Bourbeuse
River is a 149-mi (240-km),
northeasterly flowing, northern tributary
of the Meramec River, joining it at RM
68. The snuffbox is currently distributed
over about 60 river mi (96.6 river km)
upstream of RM 16, plus a disjunct site
at the mouth of the river. Although it
was considered to have ‘‘greatly
declined’’ by the late 1990s (Roberts and
Bruenderman 2000, p. 15), post-2000
sampling indicates that the population
is recruiting, viable, and improving
(McMurray 2006, pers. comm.). The
Bourbeuse, one of the few stronghold
snuffbox populations rangewide, has
been augmented with laboratory
propagated juveniles since 2002
(McMurray 2006, pers. comm.).
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
02NOP3
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
Lower Missouri River System
The snuffbox was historically known
from four streams in this system. The
highly disjunct occurrences suggest that
it was more widespread historically. All
populations in the system are
considered extirpated (Butler 2007, p.
36).
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Ohio River System
Half of the water body occurrences for
the snuffbox rangewide are known from
the Ohio River system, which
collectively represented the largest
block of available habitat for this
species. Sizable populations historically
occurred in at least a dozen streams in
the system. Today, only French Creek is
considered to have a stronghold
population, although nine others are
also significant. Currently, the species is
known from 40 of the 107 streams of
historical occurrence.
Ohio River—The Ohio River is the
largest eastern tributary of the
Mississippi, with its confluence
marking the divide between the upper
and lower portions of the latter system.
Numerous historical records are known
from throughout the River. Recently,
single FD and L specimens have been
reported from just below Belleville Lock
and Dam, Ohio and West Virginia, in
1995 and 2001, respectively (ESI 2002,
p. 27). Having persisted in this highly
modified river may indicate that the
small population exhibits a low level of
viability.
Allegheny River—The 325-mi (523km) Allegheny River drains
northwestern Pennsylvania and a small
portion of adjacent New York flowing
south before joining the Monongahela
River at Pittsburgh to form the Ohio
River. Snuffbox collections are
sporadically known since around 1900
in Pennsylvania from Forest County
downstream to Armstrong County. The
snuffbox is currently known from three
disjunct sites over a 42-river-mi (67.6river-km) reach centered in Venango
County (Butler 2007, p. 37). Its
occurrence in the lower Allegheny River
and lower French Creek could be
considered a single population segment.
The viability status of the small
population is unknown.
French Creek—French Creek is a
major tributary of the middle Allegheny
River with its headwaters in western
New York and flowing south into
northwestern Pennsylvania. The
snuffbox is known from the length of
the stream in Pennsylvania in Erie,
Crawford, Mercer, and Venango
Counties. Most records date since
approximately 1970 (Dennis 1971, p.
97). Snuffbox collections made during
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
2002–2004 were summarized by Smith
(2005, pp. 3–9). Live and FD specimens
were found at 19 sites throughout the
stream. The size of the L individuals
indicated that multiple year classes
were represented, including subadults.
The species stretches for approximately
80 river mi (128.7 river km) from around
RM 10, upstream. The population
encompasses several of its tributary
population segments as well, making it
relatively more secure when compared
to most of the other stronghold
populations that are linearly distributed
and, thus, more susceptible to stochastic
events (Sydenham, Bourbeuse, and
Clinch Rivers). The French Creek
snuffbox population is considered large
and viable (Evans 2003a, pers. comm.;
Zimmerman 2008c, pers. comm.),
appears stable, and may represent the
best stronghold population rangewide.
West Branch French Creek—West
Branch of French Creek follows a
southerly course to its parent stream in
Erie County, Pennsylvania. The only
record for the snuffbox dates from 1993,
but the number of specimens and shell
condition are unknown (Evans 2003b,
pers. comm.). Union City Lake isolates
the upper French Creek and West
Branch French Creek population
segment from the main French Creek
population. The snuffbox was not found
at three sites sampled in 2006 (Smith
2006, pers. comm.). Zimmerman (2008c,
pers. comm.) documented 38 L
individuals at a site near Wattsburg,
Pennsylvania. This population appears
to be small and of unknown viability.
Le Boeuf Creek—Le Boeuf Creek is a
small western tributary of upper French
Creek flowing in a southerly direction
just west of West Branch French Creek
in Erie County. The first snuffbox
collections in this creek were made 100
years ago (Ortmann 1909a, p. 188). Two
FD and 6 R shells were reported in 1988
(Evans 2003b, pers. comm.), and 1 L, 16
FD, and 8 R specimens were found in
1991 (Butler 2007, p. 40). Three L
individuals were found at a site in 2006
(Smith 2006, pers. comm.). The
snuffbox population has recently
recruited and exhibits some level of
viability, but appears to be very limited
in extent.
Muddy Creek—Muddy Creek is an
eastern tributary of upper French Creek
in Crawford County, Pennsylvania. The
snuffbox was not discovered until the
summer of 2003. Forty-two L
individuals were reported from 11 of 20
lower river sites (Morrison 2005, pers.
comm.). Low numbers were found at
most sites, but 18 L individuals were
collected from a site near the mouth.
This occurrence is considered to be part
of the more extensive French Creek
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
67565
snuffbox population. Zimmerman
(2008c, pers. comm.) documented one L
female in 2008. The population is
medium-sized, occurs along 8 river mi
(12.9 river km) of the lower mainstem,
and is recruiting, as recent juveniles
were recorded (Morrison 2005, pers.
comm.).
Conneaut Outlet—This stream forms
the outlet to Conneaut Lake, flowing in
a southeasterly direction until its
confluence with middle French Creek,
Crawford County. The snuffbox was first
reported by Ortmann (1909a, p. 188),
and was rediscovered L in 1997, but
without collection details (Butler 2007,
p. 40). No specimens were found at a
site sampled in 2006 (Smith 2006, pers.
comm.). The snuffbox is considered rare
in this stream and its viability is
unknown.
Little Mahoning Creek—Little
Mahoning Creek is a tributary of
Mahoning Creek, a lower eastern
tributary of the Allegheny River
northeast of Pittsburgh. The snuffbox
was discovered in 1991, when sampling
produced two FD and one R specimen
at 1 of 12 sites in the system (Butler
2007, p. 41). The lower 10 miles of Little
Mahoning Creek is subject to periodic
inundation by a reservoir on Mahoning
Creek (Butler 2010, pers. comm.).
However, the impact of this periodic
flooding on the snuffbox is not known.
Viability is unknown.
Dunkard Creek—Dunkard Creek is an
easterly flowing, western tributary of the
middle Monongahela River, straddling
the Pennsylvania and West Virginia
State lines. Snuffbox records occur in
both States from several museum
collections from 1969–74. Small
numbers of specimens, of
undocumented condition, were found at
four sites during 1993–94 sampling in
Pennsylvania (Bogan 1993, p. 8; Evans
2003b, pers. comm.). Eight specimens,
of undocumented condition, were
collected at a West Virginia site in 1997.
On September 1, 2009, a fish kill was
reported in Dunkard Creek due to an
unknown cause (Clayton 2009, pers.
comm.). The Upper Monongahela River
Association (2009) reported that 161
aquatic species including fish, mussels,
and plants died along Dunkard Creek
due to this toxic event. According to
Clayton (2009, pers. comm.), the event
may have killed 100 percent of the
mussel fauna in the entire stream. The
status of this population is not known
at this time, but the snuffbox may now
be extirpated from Dunkard Creek.
Shenango River—The Shenango River
is a large tributary in the Beaver River
system, a northern tributary of the upper
Ohio River in west-central
Pennsylvania. The snuffbox was
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
02NOP3
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
67566
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
reported from four sites on the
Shenango in 1908 (Ortmann 1919, p.
328). Six L individuals were collected
from three sites sampled in 2001–02
between Jamestown and New Hamburg
(about 25 river mi (40.2 river km)). The
upper reach is considered the best
habitat in the Shenango River. The
population is small and has declined,
although some recent reproduction is
evident (Zimmerman 2008b, pers.
comm.).
Little Shenango River—The Little
Shenango River is a small tributary of
the upper Shenango River, Mercer
County, Pennsylvania. This population
was not located during limited surveys
(Dennis 1971, p. 97; Bursey 1987, p. 42),
but a single FD museum record from
1991 exists. The species was reported to
be relatively abundant and reproducing
in the lower portion in 2002
(Zimmerman 2008b, pers. comm.).
Viability of the small population is
unknown.
Middle Island Creek—Middle Island
Creek is a small tributary of the Ohio
River in northwestern West Virginia.
The first snuffbox records were made at
six sites in 1969, when the species was
locally common in Doddridge, Tyler,
and Pleasants Counties (Taylor and
Spurlock 1981, p. 157). The snuffbox
was later found at two sites in Tyler
County in 1980, and the overall mussel
population was considered to be
‘‘thriving’’ (Taylor and Spurlock 1981, p.
157). The most recent record was for a
single L individual collected in Tyler
County in 2001 (Zimmerman 2008b,
pers. comm.). This snuffbox population
has declined, is currently rare, and its
viability is questionable (Zimmerman
2008b, pers. comm.).
Muskingum River—The Muskingum
River is a large, southerly flowing,
northern tributary of the upper Ohio
River draining a significant portion of
east-central Ohio. The snuffbox, which
has a long collection history dating to
the early 1800s, occurred along the
entire mainstem and was locally
abundant. Two L individuals and two
FD shells were found in 1979, but no L
or FD snuffbox were found in surveys
conducted in 1979–81 (Stansbery and
King 1983) and in 1992–93 (Watters and
Dunn 1993–94, p. 241). A single L
specimen was located during sampling
for a construction project in 2005 near
Dresden (Taylor 2006, pers. comm.).
Viability of this population is unknown.
Walhonding River—The Walhonding
River is a short (23.3 river mi (37.5 river
km)), east flowing tributary of the
Muskingum River in central Ohio,
forming the latter river at its confluence
with the Tuscarawas River, and formed
by the confluence of the Mohican and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
Kokosing Rivers. The snuffbox
historically occurred throughout the
river. The extant snuffbox reach (RM
1.8–6.8) is downstream from Killbuck
Creek. The population had apparently
declined in range and size by the early
1990s and possibly further since. A once
productive site about 0.25 mi (0.40 km)
downstream of the Killbuck Creek
confluence yielded only a few mussels
of very common species in 2006, but no
snuffbox (Butler 2007, p. 44). The
Walhonding River population is
considered small and of unknown
viability.
Killbuck Creek—Killbuck Creek is a
large tributary of the lower Walhonding
River, flowing south from southern
Medina County to Coshocton County
and entering the latter at approximately
RM 7. Live and FD snuffbox were found
by Hoggarth (1997, p. 33) at eight sites
from RM 15 to the mouth. Its occurrence
has become more sporadic in the last 10
years. In spring 2006, 4 L adults were
found at 2 sites approximately 3 river
mi (4.8 river km) apart, while 9 large L
individuals and a single FD specimen
were collected near RM 13 during fall
2006 (Ahlstedt 2007, pers. comm.;
Butler 2007, p. 45). A shrinking
distribution, declining population size,
and lack of evidence of recent
recruitment suggest that the population
may be losing viability and trending
towards extirpation.
North Fork Hughes River—The North
Fork Hughes River is a westerly flowing
tributary of the Hughes River in the
lower Little Kanawha River system in
northwestern West Virginia. The
snuffbox was found at one of six North
Fork sites sampled during a 1981–82
survey of the Little Kanawha River
system (Schmidt et al. 1983). A total of
41 L adult individuals (23 reported as
gravid) were reported at 5 sites located
over a 1.5-mi (2.4-km) reach in North
Fork State Park, Richie County, in 1993
(Butler 2007, p. 46). At least 10 L
individuals were found at a site in the
park in 1997 (Butler 2007, p. 46), and
a single FD specimen was collected at
an additional site downstream in 2001
(Butler 2007, p. 46). This small snuffbox
population is declining and currently
restricted to less than 4 river mi (6.4
river km), but may be viable.
Elk River—The Elk River is a major,
181-mi (291-km) tributary in the lower
Kanawha River system draining central
West Virginia flowing west to the
Kanawha at Charleston. The snuffbox
went undetected in a 1920s survey
(Butler 2007, p. 46). Ten L individuals
were collected during 1991–1995, the
smallest being about 5 years old (Butler
2007, pp. 46–47). Collectively, 16 L
individuals were identified at 8 sites in
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
a 13-river-mi (20.9-river-km) reach in
Kanawha County in 2002, and 4 L
individuals were found at 4 sites in
2004 over a 16.8-river-mi (27-river-km)
reach further upstream (Douglas 2005,
pers. comm.). This medium-sized
population extends over 30 river mi
(48.3 river km), is viable, and may have
improved since the 1970s.
Tygarts Creek—Tygarts Creek is a
small, north-flowing, southern tributary
of the Ohio River in northeastern
Kentucky. Thirteen snuffbox were
reported from one of five sites sampled
in 1977 (Taylor 1980, p. 90). FD
specimens are also known from 1981
and 1987 (Cicerello 2003, pers. comm.).
Nine L (Butler 2007, p. 47) and 36 FD
specimens were found at 2 sites,
respectively, in 1988, while 1 L and 2
FD were reported from at least 2 sites in
1995 (Cicerello 2003, pers. comm.). The
overall mussel population appeared
‘‘healthy’’ in 1977 (Taylor 1980), but the
small snuffbox population has recently
declined, and its viability is unknown.
Scioto River System—The Scioto
River system in central and southcentral Ohio is a major northern
tributary of the upper Ohio River. The
system was one of the most routinely
sampled watersheds for mussels (mostly
OSUM records), and historically
harbored a large and thoroughly
dispersed snuffbox population in the
mainstem and 16 tributaries. The system
was either exceptional for its snuffbox
population, or it provided a general
historical perspective of what
researchers may have found if other
systems had been as thoroughly
sampled. Sizable populations were
noted in at least the Olentangy River,
Big Darby Creek, and Big Walnut Creek.
Development associated with the
Columbus metropolitan area has taken a
major toll on the aquatic fauna.
Pollutants from the 1800s included
wastes from sawmills, breweries, and
slaughterhouses (Butler 2007, p. 48).
Only a few fish species were found in
the Scioto River 100 years ago
(Trautman 1981, p. 33). Currently, 90 to
95 percent of the normal summer-fall
flow in the river consists of wastewater
treatment plant (WWTP) discharges
(Yoder et al. 2005, p. 410). Museum
records indicate that the snuffbox had
completely disappeared from the
mainstem by the 1970s. A series of
reservoirs around Columbus fragmented
habitat and eliminated or reduced
populations (Olentangy and Scioto
Rivers; Alum, Big Walnut and Deer
Creeks). Currently, remnant populations
remain in six streams, making the
snuffbox precariously close to
extirpation throughout this once rich
system.
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
02NOP3
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
Olentangy River—The Olentangy
River is a major headwater tributary of
the Scioto River, draining central Ohio
and flowing south to its confluence in
Franklin County. OSUM snuffbox
records date to the 1870s, although most
are from the 1950s and 1960s. The
snuffbox was reported from 15 of 31
mainstem sites collected during a
1960–61 survey, when it appeared
‘‘fairly common’’ in the lower river
(Stein 1963, p. 138). A single L
individual in southern Delaware County
and two FD specimens in eastern
Marion County were found among 30
sites in 1989, with R shells at 7 other
sites (Hoggarth 1990, pp. 20–27). The
small population has declined
(Hoggarth 1990, p. 14), and viability is
unknown.
Big Darby Creek—Big Darby Creek is
one of the major tributaries draining the
northwestern portion of the Scioto River
system in central Ohio. Dozens of large
OSUM lots of snuffbox date to the late
1950s; six Pickaway County collections
in 1962 alone had 250 L and FD
specimens. Watters (1990, p. 4; 1994,
p. 100) surveyed 42 mainstem sites in
1986 and 49 sites in 1990. Combining
the data from both years, 80 L and FD
snuffbox were collected at 22 sites
(Watters 1994, p. 101). The population
in 1990 occurred in a reach from
approximately RM 11.5 to RM 42.5. The
snuffbox was recruiting (Watters 1994,
p. 101); four individuals during both
1986 and 1990 were 2 to 5 years of age.
The overall population trend over the
past 40 years has been downward.
Between 1986 and 1990, the number of
L and FD specimens was reduced from
54 to 16 and its distribution declined
from 17 to 8 sites. Two FD specimens
were found at sites in Franklin (1996)
and Pickaway (2000) Counties, and
three other sites produced only R
specimens (OSUM records). This
historically large snuffbox population
has declined to marginal status and its
viability is questionable.
Little Darby Creek—Little Darby Creek
is the major tributary in the Big Darby
Creek system, flowing in a southeasterly
direction to its confluence in
southwestern Franklin County, Ohio.
The 25 OSUM lots for this species are
small (fewer than five specimens per
lot), date to the early 1960s, and
represent lower mainstem sites in
Madison County. Single FD and R
specimens were collected in 1999 from
a Union County site (OSUM 66740),
where L individuals were collected in
1964 (Stein 1966, p. 23). This site
yielded only R specimens in 1990
(Watters 1990, Appendix A.11; 1994,
p. 102). Overall, the snuffbox was
historically known from 35 river mi
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
(56 river km). The well documented
OSUM collection history illustrates the
steady decline of a snuffbox population
nearing extirpation.
Salt Creek—Salt Creek is an eastern
tributary in the Scioto River system,
south-central Ohio. All records (OSUM)
were collected in the lower mainstem
(Ross County) beginning in 1958. A
single L individual from 1987 represents
the last known record. The mussels in
this system ‘‘have been heavily
impacted, apparently by the towns of
Adelphi and Laurelville’’ (Watters 1992,
p. 78). The current status of this
snuffbox population is unknown.
Scioto Brush Creek—Scioto Bush
Creek is a small, western tributary of the
lower Scioto River in Scioto County,
south-central Ohio. The snuffbox was
discovered here in the 1960s (Watters
1988a, p. 45). Three L and FD
specimens from 2 sites and R shells
from 2 other sites were collected during
a 1987 survey covering 11 sites (Watters
1988a, pp. 210–220). The snuffbox
population, collectively known from
five fragmented sites along the lower
two-thirds of stream, is small, and its
viability is unknown.
South Fork Scioto Brush Creek—
South Fork Scioto Brush Creek is a
small tributary of Scioto Brush Creek, in
the lower Scioto River system. A single
snuffbox was found during a survey of
five sites in 1987 (Watters 1988a, pp.
210–220). The South Fork and Scioto
Brush Creek populations can be
considered a single population unit, the
viability of this unit is uncertain.
Kinniconick Creek—Kinniconick
Creek is a small, southern tributary of
the Ohio River in northeastern
Kentucky. Snuffbox was reported L from
4 of 15 sites sampled in 1982 with R
shells from an additional 2 sites (Warren
et al. 1984, pp. 48–49). Single FD and
L snuffbox were collected in 2001 and
2004, respectively, from sampling
efforts at several sites (Butler 2007,
p. 51), and a single FD specimen was
found while resurveying four sites in
2005 (Butler 2007, p. 51). The snuffbox
declined in the past few decades, is
considered rare, and its viability is
uncertain.
Little Miami River—The Little Miami
River is a northern tributary of the Ohio
River in southwestern Ohio, flowing
south into the latter at the eastern fringe
of the Cincinnati metropolitan area.
Snuffbox records from the Little Miami
date to the mid-1800s, but most
collections are from the past several
decades. Seven FD specimens were
found at 4 of 46 mainstem sites
surveyed during 1990–91, with 10 R
shells at 6 other sites (Hoggarth 1992,
p. 265). The FD specimens were found
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
67567
in approximately 20 river mi (32.2 river
km), mostly in Warren County. Current
viability of this small population is
unknown.
Licking River—The Licking River is a
southern tributary of the Ohio River in
northeastern Kentucky, flowing in a
northwesterly direction to its
confluence across from Cincinnati. The
snuffbox occurred at 13 of 60 historical
mainstem sites below Cave Run
Reservoir (Laudermilk 1993, p. 45) and
a preimpoundment site in the reservoir
footprint (Clinger 1974, p. 52). The
population extended approximately 50
river mi (80.5 river km). All collections
of snuffbox are small in number (Butler
2007, p. 52). A single L individual and
a FD specimen were found at 2 sites and
R shells were reported from 7 other sites
among 49 sites sampled in 1991
(Laudermilk 1993, p. 45). Single L and
FD snuffbox were collected in 1999
(Cicerello 2003, pers. comm.), and a
single L individual was found in 2006
(Butler 2007, p. 53). The snuffbox has
become very rare, sporadic in
occurrence, and its viability is
questionable.
Slate Creek—Slate Creek is a southern
tributary of the Licking River below
Cave Run Dam in east-central Kentucky.
Historically, the snuffbox was
considered ‘‘extremely abundant
throughout the stream’’ (Taylor and
Spurlock 1983) and collectively known
from six sites (Laudermilk 1993, p. 45).
Seventeen D specimens were recorded
from a site in 1987 (Cicerello 2003, pers.
comm.). A single FD and seven R
specimens were found at three sites
sampled in 1991 (Butler 2007, p. 53),
when it was considered ‘‘occasional’’ in
distribution (Laudermilk 1993, p. 45).
Twelve L individuals were found in
1992 (Cicerello 2003, pers. comm.).
Subsequent sampling has produced no
additional snuffbox; two sites and four
sites yielded only R specimens in 2001
and 2002, respectively (Cicerello 2005,
pers. comm.). If extant, the population
is marginal at best, with unlikely
viability.
Stillwater River—The Stillwater River
is a 67-mi (108-km), western tributary of
the Great Miami River draining
southwestern Ohio. The species was
collectively known from eight sites
throughout the River (Watters 1988a,
pp. 59–71; OSUM records). One FD
specimen below Englewood Dam in
Montgomery County was found among
18 sites surveyed in 1987, with R shells
from 5 other sites (Watters 1988a, pp.
59–71). No other information on the
small population is available, and its
viability is unknown.
Middle Fork Kentucky River—The
Middle Fork is one of three headwater
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
02NOP3
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
67568
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
tributaries (with the North and South
Forks) forming the Kentucky River,
flowing in a northerly then westerly
direction and draining a portion of
southeastern Kentucky. The snuffbox
was first reported in 1966. Three L
individuals and a R shell were found at
three sites in 1996, and a single L
individual was collected from another
site in 1997 (Cicerello 2003, pers.
comm.). All sites occur within a
10-river-mi (16-river-km) reach above
Buckhorn Reservoir in Leslie County.
This small population has unknown
viability.
Red Bird River—The Red Bird River is
a north-flowing headwater tributary of
the South Fork Kentucky River in Clay
County, southeastern Kentucky, forming
the latter at its confluence with Goose
Creek. Ten FD specimens were recorded
from two sites in 1988, and three L and
one FD snuffbox were collected from
four sites in 1995 (Cicerello 2003, pers.
comm.). This small population occurs
sporadically in the lower 20 river mi
(32 river km), and viability is unknown
(Cicerello 2003, pers. comm.; 2006, pers.
comm.).
Red River—The Red (or North Fork
Red) River is a westerly flowing
tributary of the upper Kentucky River in
eastern Kentucky. No L snuffbox were
found in surveys of the 9-river-mi
(15-river-km) reach of the Wild River
section during surveys of 1980, 1986,
and 1991 (Houp 1980, p. 56; 1993,
p. 96), but two FD and one L snuffbox
were found at three sites in 1988, while
five L individuals were found in 1996
(Cicerello 2006, pers. comm.). Mostly
males have been found since 2002, and
they are being held in captivity for
future culture efforts (Butler 2007,
p. 55). A small population persists over
a 10-river-mi (16-river-km) reach in the
lower section of the Red River Gorge
Geological Area of the Daniel Boone
National Forest in Menifee, Wolfe, and
Powell Counties (Cicerello 2006, pers.
comm.). Viability of this population is
unknown.
Rolling Fork Salt River—The Rolling
Fork is a major southern tributary of the
Salt River in central Kentucky, flowing
in a northwesterly direction to join the
Salt near its mouth. The snuffbox was
first reported in 1958 (Rosewater 1959,
p. 62). Seven FD specimens and a single
L subadult were collected in 1988 from
four sites in Larue, Marion, and Nelson
Counties (Cicerello 2003, pers. comm.;
Haag 2006, pers. comm.). A survey of 12
mainstem and 30 tributary sites in the
Rolling Fork system in 1998–99 yielded
no evidence of the snuffbox, prompting
an investigator to consider it extirpated
(Akers 2000, p. 13), but occasional
specimens may still be found (Butler
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
2007, p. 55). The species is sporadically
distributed over 40 river miles of the
upper river (Cicerello 2006, pers.
comm.). If it is still extant, the viability
of this small population is unknown.
Green River—A major southern
tributary of the lower Ohio River, the
Green River flows in a westerly
direction and drains west-central
Kentucky. Ortmann (1926, p. 182)
considered the snuffbox to be well
distributed over the system, but not
abundant. Large museum collections of
snuffbox were taken from Munfordville
during 1961–66, but only six R shells
were reported there in 1967. The
snuffbox has been rare since. Five L and
FD snuffbox were collected at 4 of 42
sites during 1987–89 sampling in
Mammoth Cave National Park (Cicerello
and Hannan 1990, pp. 16–17). Three L
and six FD snuffbox were reported in
the upper Green River from 1984–90
(Cicerello 2003, pers. comm.). A single
L individual was collected in Taylor
County in 1989 (Layzer 2009, pers.
comm.), but no evidence of the snuffbox
was reported at numerous other sites in
1999, 2000, 2001, and 2003 (Cicerello
2006, pers. comm.). Once abundant and
occurring over 200 river mi (322 river
km), the species has become
exceedingly rare since the 1960s.
Current snuffbox viability is unknown,
and it may be nearing extirpation from
the entire Green River system, where it
was formerly known from eight
tributaries.
Wabash River System—The Wabash
River is the second largest sub-basin
within the Ohio River system, the
watershed of the 350-mi (563-km) river
encompassing much of Indiana, westcentral Ohio, and southeastern Illinois.
The mainstem and at least 27 streams
had one of the largest snuffbox
population clusters. The species persists
today as seven small populations in the
system; the viability of these
populations is unknown (Butler 2007, p.
57).
Salamonie River—The Salamonie
River is a southern tributary of the
upper Wabash River, flowing in a
northwesterly direction and draining
east-central Indiana. Two historical
museum records were found. Nine sites
were surveyed during 1993–94 without
finding any evidence of the snuffbox
(ESI 1995, p. 19). The snuffbox was
rediscovered in 2004 above Salamonie
Reservoir, where two L individuals at
one site and FD shells, including a very
small juvenile, were found at another
site 2 mi (3 km) away (Fisher 2005, pers.
comm.). The small population is
considered to be recruiting and viable at
some level.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Tippecanoe River—The largest
tributary of the upper Wabash River
system, the Tippecanoe River drains
north-central Indiana and flows
westerly then southerly before joining
the Wabash near Lafayette. Nearly all
records of the snuffbox were made in
the past 20 years. Two weathered shells
were found in the lower mainstem
among 16 sites sampled in 1987
(Cummings et al. 1987, p. 25; Cummings
and Berlocher 1990, p. 93) and 30 sites
in 1991–92 (ESI 1993, p. 68). One L
individual and over 32 FD specimens
were found at a site at the upper end of
Freeman Reservoir during a 1993
drawdown that may have contributed to
their demise (Fisher 2003, pers. comm.).
A single FD specimen was found below
Shafer Reservoir among 13 sites
sampled in 2003 (ESI 2003, p. 9). The
viability of this declining population is
unknown, but it appears close to
extirpation (Fisher 2003, pers. comm.).
Embarras River—The Embarras River
is a southerly flowing, western tributary
of the lower Wabash River in
southeastern Illinois. Museum lots
represent collections dating to 1956 and
contain snuffbox from nine mainstem
and two tributary sites. A total of 9 L
and 15 FD specimens were collected at
four sites in 1986 in Coles and Douglas
Counties (Cummings et al. 1988, p. 8).
Although overall mussel abundance at
the 21 sites sampled in both 1956 and
1986 dropped 86 percent, the snuffbox
was one of only five species that
showed relatively stable population size
over the 30-year period (Cummings et
al. 1988, p. 9). Additional L and FD
snuffbox from museum collections were
recorded from single sites in 1988.
Three L and eight FD snuffbox were
found at two sites in 1992, and one L
and three FD were found at three of six
sites surveyed during 2001–2002. Since
1986, the small snuffbox population has
occurred sporadically at six sites over
50 river mi (80 river km) of the upper
river. The species was reported as
significant and viable by Butler (2007
pers. comm.), but has declined to some
extent. Recent surveys, however,
documented only one L individual in
2005 and one L and one FD in 2008,
indicating that the Embarras River
population may be closer to a marginal
population than a significant one
(Tiemann 2009, pers. comm.).
Sugar Creek—Sugar Creek is a
tributary in the upper East Fork White
River system, draining central Indiana
east and south of Indianapolis. A single
L individual from one site, FD
specimens from seven sites, and R shells
from an additional eight sites were
reported in 1990 (Harmon 1992, pp. 40–
41 1998). The snuffbox population
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
02NOP3
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
occurred sporadically over 35 river mi
(56 km) to near the mouth. Only R shells
were found while resampling some
historical sites in 1995, 1998, and 2001
(Butler 2007, p.59). It is questionable
whether the population remains extant.
Buck Creek—Buck Creek is a
southerly flowing, western tributary of
Sugar Creek in the upper East Fork
White River system east of Indianapolis.
A FD snuffbox was found near the
mouth and R specimens at an upstream
site in 1990 (Harmon 1992, p. 41.
Similar to the parent stream population
in Sugar Creek, the snuffbox may
already be extirpated in Buck Creek
(Fisher 2003, pers. comm.).
Muscatatuck River—The Muscatatuck
River is a large, westerly flowing
tributary of the upper East Fork White
River in southeastern Indiana. The
snuffbox was first reported from the
stream by Daniels (1903, p. 646). FD
specimens (unknown number) were
recorded at a site downstream from
Graham Creek that was sampled in 1988
(Harmon 1989, p. 118). Status and
viability of snuffbox in the Muscatatuck
River are unknown.
Graham Creek—Graham Creek flows
southwesterly to join Big Creek in
forming the Muscatatuck River in the
East Fork White River system in
southeastern Indiana. The species was
found FD (numbers unknown) at six
sites over 10 river mi (16 river km) of
the lower stream in Jennings County in
1988 (Harmon 1989, p. 117), and a
single FD specimen was found in 1990
(Harmon 1998). Viability of these small
population is unknown.
Cumberland River System—Snuffbox
populations are known from the
mainstem Cumberland River and 6 of its
tributaries. With few exceptions, most
mainstem records were made prior to
the 1920s when the species was locally
common (Wilson and Clark 1914, p. 45).
The snuffbox is considered extirpated
from the mainstem. Currently, a single
tributary population may be extant, but
is considered not viable. The species is
likely to become extirpated from the
entire river system in the foreseeable
future.
Buck Creek—Buck Creek is a
southerly flowing, northern tributary of
the upper Cumberland River below
Cumberland Falls in southeastern
Kentucky. One D valve was found at a
site in 1981 (Clarke 1981b, Appendix),
and two L and one FD snuffbox were
reported from three sites during 1983–
84 (Schuster et al. 1989, p. 82). The
species was also reported L from a lower
mainstem site among seven sites
sampled from 1987–90 (Layzer and
Anderson 1992, p. 16). A recent survey
found only R shells at 3 of 23 sites
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
(Hagman 2000, p. 21). If extant, the
declining snuffbox population in Buck
Creek is likely to become extirpated in
the foreseeable future.
Tennessee River System
The Tennessee River is the largest
tributary of the Ohio River, draining
seven southeastern States and joining
the Ohio near its mouth in western
Kentucky. The snuffbox originally was
known from throughout all but the
lower section of river and 17 of its
tributaries. Hundreds of miles of large
river habitat on the mainstem have been
lost under nine reservoirs, with
additional dams on several tributaries
(Clinch, Holston, and Elk Rivers)
(Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)
1971, p. 4). The loss of mussel resources
has been substantial (Watters 2000, p.
262). Muscle Shoals, the 53-river-mi
(85-river-km) reach in northwestern
Alabama, historically harbored 69
mussel species, the most diverse mussel
fauna ever known (Garner and
McGregor 2001, p. 155). The
construction of three dams (Wilson in
1925, Wheeler in 1930, and Pickwick
Landing in 1940) inundated most of the
mussel beds. No L snuffbox have been
reported at Muscle Shoals for around
100 years (Garner and McGregor 2001,
p. 162). The snuffbox may persist in the
mainstem at a very low density and in
only five tributaries. The Clinch River
maintains a stronghold population, but
highly restricted populations persist in
the other streams.
Clinch River—The 350-mi (563-km)
Clinch River is a major tributary of the
upper Tennessee River originating in
southwestern Virginia, and flowing in a
southwesterly direction to its
confluence near Knoxville in
northeastern Tennessee. No other river
in North America has extant
populations of more federally
endangered (15) and candidate (4)
species of mussels than does the upper
Clinch River above Norris Reservoir.
The snuffbox was reported from nine
sites by Ortmann (1918, pp. 601–606).
Museum records from Hancock County,
Tennessee, during 1965–71 documented
a very large population of snuffbox. The
snuffbox is generally distributed from
RM 170 to RM 195 in Hancock County,
but is sporadic in Virginia (RM 213–
235), where it has recently declined
(Butler 2007, p. 62). The snuffbox
population is recruiting, viable, and
currently stable, although decreased in
size and range from 40 years ago. The
Clinch River ranks among the six
stronghold snuffbox populations
rangewide.
Powell River—The Powell River is the
major tributary of the upper Clinch
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
67569
River flowing in a southwesterly
direction parallel to and northwest of
the Clinch River in southwestern
Virginia and northeastern Tennessee.
The snuffbox was reported at three sites
by Ortmann (1918, pp. 597–598), five
sites during 1973–78 by Dennis (1981,
p. 3), four sites from 1975–78 by
Ahlstedt and Brown (1979, p. 42), and
four Virginia sites in 1988–89 by
Wolcott and Neves (1994, p. 7). Large
collections attest to its former
abundance. The species was found L
and FD in the Powell River, Tennessee,
during 1989–90 (Hubbs et al. 1991,
Appendix A). Johnson (2008) collected
two L individuals at RM 95. The
population has declined, viability is
questionable, and its extirpation may be
imminent (Butler 2007, p. 63).
Tennessee River—The snuffbox
originally was known from all but the
lower section of the river. Butler (2007,
p. 61) reported the snuffbox as ‘‘believed
to be extirpated from the entire
Tennesssee River.’’ However, Yokley
(2002, p. 1) collected a single FD male
in 2002 at the U.S. 231 Bridge, Madison
and Morgan Counties. In 2006, one L
female was found at the same location,
though it was the only snuffbox out of
8,978 mussels collected at the site
(Yokley 2006, p. 1). Nothing further is
known about the status of the snuffbox
in the Tennessee River mainstem.
Paint Rock River—The Paint Rock
River is a southerly flowing, northern
tributary of the southern bend of the
Tennessee River in northeastern
Alabama and adjacent Tennessee. The
snuffbox was first reported from one of
six mainstem sites by Ortmann (1925, p.
359). No evidence of snuffbox was
found in two surveys during 1965–67
(Isom and Yokley 1973, p. 444) and a
1980 survey (Butler 2007, p. 64). Twelve
L and FD snuffbox were found at four
sites between RMs 13 and 21 (Ahlstedt
1995–96, p. 70). The species was again
absent from 10 upper mainstem sites
surveyed in 2002 (Godwin 2002, p. 9).
Four FD specimens of varying sizes
were found at lower river sites in 2002
(Fraley 2003, pers. comm.; Smith 2005,
pers. comm.) and 2003–2006 (Freeman
2006, pers. comm.). One L and 11 FD
specimens were found at RM 21 in
2005, and 2 L and 16 FD were collected
at RM 31 in 2007 (Gangloff 2007, pers.
comm.). In July 2008, Freeman (2008,
pers. comm.) observed multiple age
classes (sizes) of FD snuffbox in
middens between RM 34.7 and 32.5.
Fobian et al. (2008, p. 14) collected 21
L snuffbox at 7 sites and FD specimens
at 8 sites between RM 46.7 and 13.1.
The stronghold snuffbox population
exists between RMs 13 and 44, and is
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
02NOP3
67570
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
recruiting, viable, and has clearly
improved since 1980.
Elk River—The Elk River is a large,
northern tributary flowing 200 river mi
(322 river km) in a southwesterly
direction in the southern bend of the
Tennessee River in south-central
Tennessee and north-central Alabama.
Snuffbox collections have been
sporadic. The species was found at 2
sites in the mid-1960s (Isom et al. 1973,
p. 440), and a single L individual was
found among 108 sites sampled in 1980
(Ahlstedt 1983, p. 47). Single specimens
were also reported from 4 sites sampled
in the lower river in 1997 (Madison and
Layzer 1998, Table 6) and 16 sites
sampled in 1999 (Service 1999, p. 3). A
very large FD specimen was found at
RM 51 among 4 sites sampled in 2001
(Hubbs 2002, p. 5; Butler 2007, p. 65).
A single L and a FD snuffbox were
found at a site in Giles County during
qualitative sampling events at five sites
in 2005 (Ahlstedt et al. 2006). Ford
(2008, pers. comm.) reported collecting
FD specimens at Stairstep Shoals in
Giles County, Tennessee, in July 2007.
The small snuffbox population has
recently recruited, exhibits some level
of viability, and its numbers appear
relatively stable in recent history.
Duck River—The Duck River is the
downstream-most large tributary of the
Tennessee River draining south-central
Tennessee and flowing 285 river miles
(459 river km) west to its confluence
near the head of Kentucky Reservoir.
The snuffbox historically occurred
throughout the Duck River and, based
on museum records, was locally
common 40 to 50 years ago, but was
absent in surveys from RM 180
downstream in the mid-1970s (Ahlstedt
1981, p. 62; Dennis 1984, p. 38). Two L
individuals were collected from 2 of 99
sites surveyed in 1979 (Butler 2007, p.
66). A single L individual was
discovered in Maury County among 72
sites sampled during 2000–03 (Ahlstedt
et al. 2004, p. 119), but none were found
at 11 lower sites surveyed in 2000
(Schilling and Williams 2002, p. 409).
The snuffbox is very rare, and its
viability is uncertain.
Lower Mississippi River Sub-Basin
The Lower Mississippi River Subbasin includes 954 miles of the
Mississippi River from its confluence
with the Ohio River at Cairo, Illinois, to
its mouth in the Gulf of Mexico. The
snuffbox is known from a single stream
in this sub-basin, outside of the White
River system.
St. Francis River—The St. Francis
River is a major tributary of the lower
Mississippi with its headwaters in
southeastern Missouri, and flowing
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
south into northeastern Arkansas. The
only Arkansas records available for this
450-mi (724-km) river are from 1964,
located approximately 1 mi southwest
of Parkin in Cross County (Bates and
Dennis 1983, p. 63; Harris et al. 2007,
p. 10). Snuffbox records exist for Butler,
Wayne, and Stoddard Counties,
Missouri, where it was considered
‘‘locally abundant’’ (Oesch 1984, p. 235).
The species is known from above
Wappapello Reservoir, but was absent
from Missouri surveys conducted below
Wappapello Dam in 1983 (Bates and
Dennis 1983, p. 63) and 1986 (Ahlstedt
and Jenkinson 1991, p. 240). Twelve L
snuffbox were sampled at sites in 2002
(Hutson and Barnhart 2004, pp. 84–85).
Live individuals were found during
collections at RM 172.1 in 2005 and
2006 (Butler 2007, p. 67). The snuffbox
is restricted to a 10-mi (16-km) reach
(RM 172.1–182.0) on the northeastern
edge of the Ozark Plateaus in the
vicinity of Sam A. Baker State Park,
Wayne County (Hutson and Barnhart
2004, p. 85). This medium-sized
snuffbox population appears to be stable
and viable, but restricted in distribution.
White River System—The 690-mi
(1,110-km) White River is a large
tributary system of the western bank of
the Mississippi River. A snuffbox
population once occurred in the
mainstem and six of its larger
tributaries. The last record from the
mainstem in Arkansas is pre-1921
(Harris et al. 2007, p. 10). Highly
restricted populations persist in four
streams.
Buffalo River—The Buffalo River is a
large, eastward-flowing tributary of the
middle White River in north-central
Arkansas. The snuffbox was not found
during surveys in 1910 (26 sites; Meek
and Clark 1912, p. 13) and 1995 (40
sites; Harris 1996, p. 9), but two L
individuals were found at a single site
among 60 sites surveyed in 2006
(Matthews 2007, pers. comm.). The
small population occurs in the lower
river in Marion County, and its viability
is unknown.
Black River—The Black River is the
largest tributary in the White River
system, draining much of southeastern
Missouri and northeastern Arkansas
before flowing in a southerly direction
into the White River near Newport,
Arkansas. A long but sporadic collection
history for the snuffbox appears in the
300-mi (483-km) Black River. A single,
approximately 4-year-old L male was
collected at RM 65.5, Wayne County,
among 51 Missouri sites sampled in
2002 (Hutson and Barnhart 2004, p.
154). The species has become extirpated
from the lower river on the Mississippi
Embayment, including Arkansas. The
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
snuffbox appears rare but viable at some
level.
Spring River—The Spring River is a
large tributary of the Black River that
drains the eastern Ozark Plateaus in
south-central Missouri and northeastern
Arkansas. Based on pre-1986 records,
the snuffbox was known in low
numbers from at least four sites in
approximately 20 river mi (34 river km)
of the lowermost mainstem in Arkansas
(Harris and Gordon 1987, p. 53). A
single L adult male was found in
Lawrence County in 2005, and
represents the first L specimen found in
Arkansas in more than 20 years (Butler
2007, p. 69). Further, 53 FD snuffbox
were collected in four large muskrat
middens (Harris et al. 2007, p. 15). The
extent of the population is not known,
but it is probably limited to relatively
few miles in the lower mainstem in
Lawrence and Randolph Counties. This
population appears small, and its status
and viability are unknown.
Strawberry River—The Strawberry
River is a western tributary of the Black
River draining a portion of the
southeastern Ozark Plateaus in
northeastern Arkansas. The only
snuffbox records were from around 1983
and 1997 in the middle mainstem in
Sharp County (Butler 2007, p. 69). No
other details on these collections or the
status of the population are known.
Considering the dearth of records, the
snuffbox appears to be very rare in the
Strawberry River, and of unknown
viability.
Summary of Snuffbox Population
Estimates and Status
The snuffbox has declined rangewide
and appears to be extant in 74 of 208
streams and lakes of historical
occurrence, a 65 percent decline in
occupied streams. Realistically, much
more than 65 percent of the habitat
historically available for this species no
longer supports its populations. Habitat
losses measured in the thousands of
miles have occurred rangewide. Since
multiple streams may comprise single
snuffbox population segments (for
example, the French Creek system), the
actual number of extant populations is
somewhat less. Extant populations, with
few exceptions, are highly fragmented
and restricted to short reaches. The
elimination of this species from scores
of streams and thousands of miles of
stream reaches indicates catastrophic
population losses and a precipitous
decline in overall abundance. It is
reasonable to estimate that total range
reduction and overall population losses
for the snuffbox each approximate, if
not exceed, 90 percent.
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
02NOP3
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
Previous Federal Action
We identified the rayed bean as a
Category 2 species in a notice of review
published in the Federal Register on
May 22, 1984 (49 FR 21664). The rayed
bean remained a Category 2 species in
subsequent notices including January 6,
1989 (54 FR 554), November 21, 1991
(56 FR 58804), and November 15, 1994
(59 FR 58982). Prior to 1996, a Category
2 species was one that we were
considering for possible addition to the
Federal List of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife but for which
conclusive data on biological
vulnerability and threats were not
available to support a proposed rule. We
stopped designating Category 2 species
in the February 28, 1996, Notice of
Review (61 FR 7596). We now define a
candidate species as a species for which
we have on file sufficient information to
propose it for protection under the Act.
We designated the rayed bean as a
candidate species on May 4, 2004 (69
FR 24876).
We identified the snuffbox as a
Category 2 species in the notice of
review published in the Federal
Register on November 21, 1991 (56 FR
58804). The snuffbox remained a
Category 2 in the subsequent notice on
November 15, 1994 (59 FR 58982) but
was dropped from the list in the
February 28, 1996, Notice of Review (61
FR 7596), when we stopped designating
Category 2 species. The snuffbox is not
currently listed as a candidate species
for listing.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Summary of Information Pertaining to
the Five Factors
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533),
and its implementing regulations at 50
CFR part 424, set forth the procedures
for adding species to the Federal lists of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants. Under section 4(a)(1) of the
Act, we may determine a species to be
endangered or threatened due to one or
more of the following five factors: (A)
The present or threatened destruction,
modification, or curtailment of its
habitat or range; (B) overutilization for
commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes; (C) disease or
predation; (D) the inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E)
other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence. Listing
actions may be warranted based on any
of the above threat factors, singly or in
combination. Each of these factors is
discussed below.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
A. The Present or Threatened
Destruction, Modification, or
Curtailment of Their Habitat or Range.
Both species have experienced
significant curtailment of their occupied
habitats (see Background, above). The
rayed bean has been eliminated from
about 74 percent of the streams it
historically occurred in. This species
has also been eliminated from long
reaches of former habitat in hundreds of
miles of the Maumee, Ohio, Wabash,
and Tennessee Rivers and from
numerous stream reaches in their
tributaries. The snuffbox has been
eliminated from about 65 percent of the
streams in which it historically
occurred. Furthermore, extant
populations, with few exceptions, are
highly fragmented and restricted to
short reaches. Available records indicate
that 33 percent of streams considered to
harbor extant populations of the
snuffbox are represented by only one or
two recent L or FD individuals. The
primary cause of range curtailment for
both species has been modification and
destruction of river and stream habitats,
primarily by the construction of
impoundments.
Impoundment—Impoundments result
in the dramatic modification of riffle
and shoal habitats and a resulting loss
of mussel resources, especially in larger
rivers. Neves et al. (1997, pp. 63–64)
and Watters (2000, pp. 261–262)
reviewed the specific effects of
impoundments on freshwater mollusks.
Dams interrupt a river’s ecological
processes by modifying flood pulses;
controlling impounded water
elevations; altering water flow,
sediments, nutrients, and energy inputs
and outputs; increasing depth;
decreasing habitat heterogeneity;
decreasing stability due to subsequent
sedimentation; blocking host fish
passage; and isolating mussel
populations from fish hosts. Even small,
low-head dams can have some of these
effects on mussels.
The reproductive process of riverine
mussels is generally disrupted by
impoundments, making the rayed bean
and snuffbox unable to successfully
reproduce and recruit under reservoir
conditions. Population losses due to
impoundments have likely contributed
more to the decline and imperilment of
the rayed bean and snuffbox than has
any other single factor. Neither species
occurs in reservoirs lacking riverine
characteristics, and only the snuffbox
persists in large rivers with dams (Ohio
River), and then only in sections
retaining riverine characteristics
(generally tailwaters). Both species,
however, historically occurred in the
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
67571
wave-washed shallows of several glacial
lakes, an environment very different
from that found in impoundments.
Stream habitat throughout major
portions of the range of both species has
been impounded. The majority of the
Tennessee and Cumberland River
mainstems and many of their largest
tributaries are now impounded. There
are 36 major dams located in the
Tennessee River system, and about 90
percent of the Cumberland River
downstream of Cumberland Falls is
either directly impounded by U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (Corps) structures or
otherwise impacted by cold tailwater
released from dams. Watters (2000, pp.
262–263) summarizes the tremendous
loss of mussel species from various
portions of the Tennessee and
Cumberland River systems. The rayed
bean has been eliminated from the
Tennessee River system and the
snuffbox, once widespread throughout
both systems, now persists in only five
Tennessee River tributaries and one
Cumberland River tributary.
This impoundment scenario is similar
in many other parts of the range of the
rayed bean and snuffbox, and includes
numerous navigational locks and dams
(Ohio, Allegheny, Muskingum and
Green Rivers), major dams (Shenango,
Elk, Walhonding, Scioto, Little Miami,
Green, Nolin, Barren, Tippecanoe,
Wabash, Mississinewa, Salamonie, and
Duck Rivers), and low-head dams (Pine,
Belle, Clinton, Huron, Maumee,
Auglaize, Sandusky, Mahoning,
Tuscarawas, Walhonding, Scioto,
Olentangy, Wabash, Mississinewa, East
Fork White, West Fork White, and Duck
Rivers; and Middle Island, Big Walnut,
Alum, Big Darby, Little Darby, Sugar,
and Richland Creeks) that have
contributed to the loss of the species’
habitat. Sediment accumulations behind
dams of all sizes generally preclude the
occurrence of the rayed bean and
snuffbox.
Dredging and Channelization—
Dredging and channelization activities
have profoundly altered riverine
habitats nationwide. Hartfield (1993, pp.
131–141), Neves et al. (1997, pp. 71–72),
and Watters (2000, pp. 268–269)
reviewed the specific effects of
channelization on freshwater mollusks.
Channelization impacts a stream’s
physical (accelerated erosion, reduced
depth, decreased habitat diversity,
geomorphic instability, and riparian
canopy loss) and biological (decreased
fish and mussel diversity, changed
species composition and abundance,
decreased biomass, and reduced growth
rates) characteristics (Hartfield 1993, p.
131; Hubbard et al. 1993, pp. 136–145).
Channel construction for navigation has
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
02NOP3
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
67572
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
been shown to increase flood heights
(Belt 1975, p. 189). This is partially
attributed to a decrease in stream length
and increase in gradient (Hubbard et al.
1993, p. 137). Flood events may thus be
exacerbated, conveying into streams
large quantities of sediment, potentially
with adsorbed contaminants. Channel
maintenance may result in profound
impacts downstream (Stansbery 1970, p.
10), such as increases in turbidity and
sedimentation, which may smother
benthic (bottom-dwelling) organisms
such as the rayed bean and snuffbox.
The only known rayed bean
populations that remain in navigation
channels are in the upper two
navigation pools of the Allegheny River.
Activities associated with navigation
channels may have contributed to the
elimination of the rayed bean from the
Ohio, lower Allegheny, and Muskingum
Rivers, and potentially others. Channel
maintenance operations for barge
navigation have impacted habitat for the
snuffbox in several large rivers. Impacts
associated with barge traffic, which
include construction of fleeting areas,
mooring cells, docking facilities, and
propeller wash, also disrupt habitat.
Navigation maintenance activities may
continue to adversely affect this species
in the upper Ohio River. Hundreds of
miles of rayed bean (Olentangy,
Salamonie, Mississinewa, Vermilion,
North Fork Vermilion, Embarras Rivers)
and snuffbox (Grand, Kankakee,
Sangamon, Kaskaskia, Olentangy,
Salamonie, Mississinewa, Eel,
Vermilion, and North Fork Vermilion,
Embarras, Paint Rock, and St. Francis
Rivers; and Tonawanda, Killbuck,
Chickamauga, and Bear Creeks) streams
were dredged and channelized decades
ago, and some populations have been
eliminated from these streams. The
entire length of the Kankakee River in
Indiana was channelized by 1917. In
addition, hundreds of drains (formed
from ditching low-gradient creeks and
swales) were created around 100 years
ago in Illinois, Michigan, and other
midwestern States. Stream
channelizations were attempts to reduce
flooding, drain low-lying areas, and
‘‘improve’’ storm flow runoff.
Chemical Contaminants—Chemical
contaminants are ubiquitous throughout
the environment and are considered a
major threat in the decline of freshwater
mussel species (Cope et al. 2008, p. 451;
Richter et al. 1997, p. 1081; Strayer et
al. 2004, p. 436; Wang et al. 2007, p.
2029). Chemicals enter the environment
through both point and nonpoint
discharges, including spills, industrial
sources, municipal effluents, and
agricultural runoff. These sources
contribute organic compounds, heavy
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
metals, pesticides, and a wide variety of
newly emerging contaminants to the
aquatic environment. As a result, water
and sediment quality can be degraded to
the extent that mussel populations are
adversely impacted.
Chemical spills can be especially
devastating to mussels because they
may result in exposure of a relatively
immobile species to extremely elevated
concentrations that far exceed toxic
levels and any water quality standards
that might be in effect. Some notable
spills that released large quantities of
highly concentrated chemicals resulting
in mortality to mussels include: massive
mussel kills on the Clinch River at
Carbo, Virginia, occurred from a power
plant alkaline fly ash pond spill in 1967
and a sulfuric acid spill in 1970
(Crossman et al. 1973, p. 6);
approximately 18,000 mussels of several
species including 750 individuals from
three endangered mussel species were
eliminated from the upper Clinch River
near Cedar Bluff, Virginia, in 1998,
when an overturned tanker truck
released 1,600 gallons (6,056 liters) of a
chemical used in rubber manufacturing
(Jones et al. 2001, p. 20; Schmerfeld
2006, p. 12); and an ongoing release of
sodium dimethyl dithiocarbamate, a
chemical used to reduce and precipitate
hexachrome, starting in 1999 impacted
approximately 10 river miles (16 km) of
the Ohio River and resulted in an
estimated loss of one million mussels,
including individuals from two
federally listed species (DeVault 2009,
pers. comm.; Clayton 2008, pers.
comm.). These are not the only
instances where chemical spills have
resulted in the loss of high numbers of
mussels (Brown et al. 2005, p. 1457;
Neves 1991, p. 252; Jones et al. 2001, p.
20; Schmerfeld 2006, pp. 12–13), but are
provided as examples of the serious
threat chemical spills pose to mussel
species. The rayed bean and snuffbox
are especially threatened by chemical
spills because these spills can occur
anywhere there are highways with
tanker trucks, industries, or mines and
where these overlap with rayed bean
and snuffbox distribution.
Exposure of mussels to lower
concentrations of contaminants more
likely to be found in aquatic
environments can also adversely affect
mussels and result in the decline of
freshwater mussel species. Such
concentrations may not be immediately
lethal, but over time, can result in
mortality, reduced filtration efficiency,
reduced growth, decreased
reproduction, changes in enzyme
activity, and behavioral changes to all
mussel life stages. Frequently,
procedures which evaluate the ‘‘safe’’
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
concentration of an environmental
contaminant (for example, national
water quality criteria) do not have data
for freshwater mussel species or exclude
data that is available for freshwater
mussels (March et al. 2007, pp. 2066–
2067, 2073).
Current research is now starting to
focus on the contaminant sensitivity of
freshwater mussel glochidia and newlyreleased juvenile mussels (Goudreau et
al. 1993, pp. 219–222; Jacobson et al.
1997, p. 2390; Wang, 2007a, pp. 2041–
2046; Valenti 2005, pp. 1244–1245;
Valenti 2006, pp. 2514–2517; March
2007, pp. 2068–2073) and juveniles
(Bartsch et al. 2003, p. 2561; Augspurger
et al. 2003, p. 2569; Mummert et al.
2003, p. 2549, Wang, 2007b, pp. 2053–
2055, Wang, 2007a, pp. 2041–2046,
Valenti 2005, pp. 1244–1245; Valenti
2006, pp. 2514–2517; March 2007, pp.
2068–2073) to such contaminants as
ammonia, metals, chlorine, and
pesticides. The toxicity information
presented in this section focuses on
recent water-only laboratory acute
(sudden and severe exposure) and
chronic (prolonged or repeated
exposure) toxicity tests with early life
stages of freshwater mussels using the
standard testing methodology published
by the American Society for Testing and
Materials (ASTM) (American Society for
Testing and Materials 2008, pp. 1442–
1493). Use of this standard testing
method generates consistent, reliable
toxicity data with acceptable precision
and accuracy (Wang et al. 2007a, p.
2035) and was used for toxicity tests on
ammonia, copper, chlorine, and select
pesticides (Augspurger et al. 2007, p.
2025; Bringolf et al. 2007a, p. 2087;
Bringolf et al. 2007c, p. 2101; Wang et
al. 2007a, p. 2029; Wang et al. 2007b, p.
2036; Wang et al. 2007c, p. 2048). Use
of these tests has documented that while
mussels are sensitive to some
contaminants, they are not universally
sensitive to all contaminants
(Augspurger et al. 2007, pp. 2025–2026).
One chemical that is particularly toxic
to early life stages of mussels is
ammonia. Sources of ammonia include
agricultural sources (animal feedlots
and nitrogenous fertilizers), municipal
wastewater treatment plants, and
industrial waste (Augspurger et al. 2007,
p. 2026), as well as precipitation and
natural processes (decomposition of
organic nitrogen) (Goudreau et al. 1993,
p. 212; Hickey and Martin 1999, p. 44;
Augspurger et al. 2003, p. 2569; Newton
2003, p. 1243). Therefore, ammonia is
considered a limiting factor for survival
and recovery of some mussel species
due to its ubiquity in aquatic
environments, high level of toxicity, and
because the highest concentrations
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
02NOP3
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
typically occur in mussel microhabitats
(Augspurger et al. 2003, p. 2574). In
addition, studies have shown that
ammonia concentrations increase with
increasing temperature and low-flow
conditions (Cherry et al. 2005, p. 378;
Cooper et al. 2005, p. 381), which may
be exacerbated by the effects of climate
change, and may cause ammonia to
become more problematic for juvenile
mussels. The Environmental Protection
Agency’s established ammonia water
quality criteria (EPA 1985, p. 94–99)
may not be protective of mussels
(Augspurger et al. 2003, p. 2572; Sharpe
2005, p. 28) under current and future
climate conditions.
Mussels are also affected by metals
(Keller and Zam 1991, p. 543), such as
cadmium, chromium, copper, mercury,
and zinc, which can negatively affect
biological processes such as growth,
filtration efficiency, enzyme activity,
valve closure, and behavior (Naimo
1995, pp. 351–355; Keller and Zam
1991, p. 543; Jacobson et al. 1997, p.
2390; Valenti et al. 2005, p. 1244).
Metals occur in industrial and
wastewater effluents and are often a
result of atmospheric deposition from
industrial processes and incinerators.
Glochidia and juvenile freshwater
mussels have recently been studied to
determine the acute and chronic toxicity
of copper to these life stages (Wang
2007a, pp. 2036–2047; Wang 2007b, pp.
2048–2056). The chronic values
determined for copper ranged from 8.5
to 9.8 micrograms per liter (ug/L) for
survival and from 4.6 to 8.5 ug/L for
growth of juveniles. These chronic
values are below the EPA’s 1996 chronic
water quality criterion of 15 ug/L
(hardness 170 mg/L) for copper (Wang
2007b, pp. 2052–2055). March (2007,
pp. 2066, 2073) identifies that copper
water quality criteria and modified State
water quality standards may not be
protective of mussels.
Mercury is another heavy metal that
has the potential to negatively affect
mussel populations, and it is receiving
attention due to its widespread
distribution and potential to adversely
impact the environment. Mercury has
been detected throughout aquatic
environments as a product of municipal
and industrial waste and atmospheric
deposition from coal burning plants.
One recent study evaluated the
sensitivity of early life stages of mussels
to mercury (Valenti 2005, p. 1242). This
study determined that, for the mussel
species used (rainbow mussel, Villosa
iris), glochidia were more sensitive to
mercury than were juvenile mussels,
with the median lethal concentration
value of 14 ug/L compared to 114 ug/
L for the juvenile life stage. The chronic
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
toxicity tests conducted determined that
juveniles exposed to mercury greater
than or equal to 8 ug/L exhibited
reduced growth. These observed toxicity
values are greater than EPA’s Criteria
Continuous Concentration and Criteria
Maximum Concentration, which are
0.77 ug/L and 1.4 ug/L, respectively.
Based on these data we believe that
EPA’s water quality standards for
mercury should be protective of juvenile
mussels and glochidia, except in cases
of illegal dumping, permit violations, or
spills. However, impacts to mussels
from mercury toxicity may be occurring
in some streams. According to the
National Summary Data reported by
States to the EPA, 3,770 monitored
waters do not meet EPA standards for
mercury in the United States (https://
iaspub.epa.gov/waters10/attains_
nation_cy.control?p_report_type=T,
accessed 6/28/2010). Acute mercury
toxicity was determined to be the cause
of extirpation of a diverse mussel fauna
for a 70-mile (112-km) portion of the
North Fork Holston River (Brown et al.
2005, pp. 1455–1457).
In addition to ammonia, agricultural
sources of chemical contaminants
include two broad categories that have
the potential to adversely impact mussel
species: Nutrients and pesticides.
Nutrients (such as nitrogen and
phosphorus) can impact streams when
their concentrations reach levels that
cannot be assimilated, a condition
known as over-enrichment. Nutrient
over-enrichment is primarily a result of
runoff from livestock farms, feedlots,
and heavily fertilized row crops
(Peterjohn and Correll 1984, p. 1471).
Over-enriched conditions are
exacerbated by low-flow conditions,
such as those experienced during
typical summer-season flows and that
might occur with greater frequency and
magnitude as a result of climate change.
Bauer (1988, p. 244) found that
excessive nitrogen concentrations can
be detrimental to the adult freshwater
pearl mussel (Margaritifera
margaritifera), as was evident by the
positive linear relationship between
mortality and nitrate concentration.
Also, a study of mussel life span and
size (Bauer 1992, p. 425) showed a
negative correlation between growth
rate and eutrophication, and longevity
was reduced, as the concentration of
nitrates increased. Nutrient overenrichment can result in an increase in
primary productivity, and the
subsequent respiration depletes
dissolved oxygen levels. This may be
particularly detrimental to juvenile
mussels that inhabit the interstitial
spaces in the substrate where lower
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
67573
dissolved oxygen concentrations are
more likely than on the sediment
surface where adults tend to live
(Sparks and Strayer 1998, pp. 132–133).
Elevated concentrations of pesticide
frequently occur in streams due to
pesticide runoff, overspray application
to row crops, and lack of adequate
riparian buffers. Agricultural pesticide
applications often coincide with the
reproductive and early life stages of
mussels, and thus impacts to mussels
due to pesticides may be increased
(Bringolf et al. 2007a, p. 2094). Little is
known regarding the impact of currently
used pesticides to freshwater mussels
even though some pesticides, such as
glyphosate (Roundup), are used
globally. Recent studies tested the
toxicity of glyphosate, its formulations,
and a surfactant (MON 0818) used in
several glyphosate formulations, to early
life stages of the fatmucket (Lampsilis
siliquoidea), a native freshwater mussel
(Bringolf et al. 2007a, p. 2094). Studies
conducted with juvenile mussels and
glochidia determined that the surfactant
(MON 0818) was the most toxic of the
compounds tested and that L.
siliquoidea glochidia were the most
sensitive organism tested to date
(Bringolf et al. 2007a, p. 2094).
Roundup, technical grade glyphosate
isopropylamine salt, and
isopropylamine were also acutely toxic
to juveniles and glochidia (Bringolf et
al. 2007a, p. 2097). The impacts of other
pesticides including atrazine,
chlorpyrifos, and permethrin on
glochidia and juvenile life stages have
also recently been studied (Bringolf et
al. 2007b, p. 2101). This study
determined that chlorpyrifos was toxic
to both L. siliquoidea glochidia and
juveniles (Bringolf et al. 2007b, p. 2104).
The above results indicate the potential
toxicity of commonly applied pesticides
and the threat to mussel species as a
result of the widespread use of these
pesticides. All of these pesticides are
commonly used throughout the range of
the rayed bean and snuffbox.
A potential, but undocumented, threat
to freshwater mussel species, including
rayed bean and snuffbox, are
contaminants referred to as ‘‘emerging
contaminants’’ that are being detected in
aquatic ecosystems at an increasing rate.
Pharmaceuticals, hormones, and other
organic contaminants have been
detected downstream from urban areas
and livestock production (Kolpin et al.
2002, p. 1202). A large potential source
of these emerging contaminants is
wastewater being discharged through
both permitted (National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES))
and non-permitted sites throughout the
country. Permitted discharge sites are
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
02NOP3
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
67574
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
ubiquitous in watersheds with rayed
bean and snuffbox populations,
providing ample opportunities for
contaminants to impact the species (for
example, there are more than 250
NPDES sites in the Meramec River,
Missouri system, which harbors a
declining population of snuffbox;
Roberts and Bruenderman 2000, p. 78).
The information presented in this
section represents some of the threats
from chemical contaminants that have
been documented both in the laboratory
and field and demonstrates that
chemical contaminants pose a
substantial threat to the rayed bean and
snuffbox. This information indicates the
potential for contaminants to contribute
to declining rayed bean and snuffbox
populations—from spills that are
immediately lethal to species to chronic
contaminant exposure, which results in
death, reduced growth, or reduced
reproduction of rayed bean and
snuffbox.
Mining—The low pH commonly
associated with coal mine runoff can
reduce glochidial encystment rates, thus
impacting mussel recruitment (Huebner
¨
and Pynnonen 1992, p. 2350).
Additionally, adverse impacts from
heavy metal-rich drainage from coal
mining and associated sedimentation
has been documented in portions of
historical rayed bean and snuffbox
habitat in the upper Ohio River system
in western Pennsylvania (Ortmann
1909c, p. 97), West Virginia, and
southeastern Ohio. Likewise, coal
mining has impacted rayed bean habitat
in the upper Tennessee River system,
Virginia (Kitchel et al. 1981, p. 21), and
snuffbox habitat in eastern Kentucky
(lower Ohio and Mississippi River
systems in southeastern Illinois and
western Kentucky; upper Cumberland
River system in southeastern Kentucky
and northeastern Tennessee; and upper
Tennessee River system in southwestern
Virginia) (Ortmann 1909c, p. 103; Neel
and Allen 1964, pp. 428–430; Kitchel et
al. 1981, p. 21; Anderson et al. 1991, pp.
6–7; Gordon 1991, p. 2; Bogan and Davis
1992, p. 2; Layzer and Anderson 1992,
pp. 91–94; Ahlstedt and Tuberville
1997, p. 75; Milam et al. 2000, p. 53;
Warren and Haag 2005, p. 1394). Acid
mine drainage was implicated in the
mussel die-off in the Little South Fork
Cumberland River, Kentucky (Anderson
et al. 1991, pp. 6–7; Layzer and
Anderson, 1992, p. 94; Ahlstedt and
Saylor 1995–96, pp. 92–93; Warren and
Haag 2005, p. 1394). Tailings pond
failures have also impacted aquatic
resources (Powell River, Virginia; Butler
2007, p. 83). A decline of the snuffbox
and other imperiled mussels in the
Powell River was blamed on coal
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
mining impacts (Ahlstedt and
Tuberville 1997, p. 75). Increased
mining activities in the upper Clinch
River system is resulting in ‘‘blackwater’’
events (Jones and Neves 2004, p. 2).
Anecdotal evidence suggests that coal
fines are increasing in the Clinch River
reach that harbors a stronghold snuffbox
population (Butler 2007, p. 84). A coalfired power plant planned for the upper
Clinch River in Virginia would further
increase mining in the Clinch and
Powell watersheds.
Currently, coal mining activities occur
only in the Elk River in West Virginia
(Douglas 2010, pers. comm.). However,
if coal mining activities are reinitiated
in western Pennsylvania, they could
become a threat to populations of both
species in the lower French Creek and
the Allegheny River.
Instream and alluvial (clay, silt, sand,
or other material deposited by running
water) gravel mining has been
implicated in the destruction of several
mussel populations (Hartfield 1993, pp.
135–136; Brown and Curole 1997, pp.
239–240). Negative impacts associated
with gravel mining include stream
channel modifications (altered habitat,
disrupted flow patterns, sediment
transport), water quality modifications
(increased turbidity, reduced light
penetration, increased temperature),
macroinvertebrate population changes
(elimination, habitat disruption,
increased sedimentation), and changes
in fish populations (impacts to
spawning and nursery habitat, food web
disruptions) (Kanehl and Lyons 1992,
pp. 26–27; Roell 1999, p. 5). Gravel
mining may continue to be a localized
threat to rayed bean and snuffbox
populations (Kankakee, Bourbeuse,
Walhonding, Elk (Tennessee), and
Strawberry Rivers; Big Darby and Buck
(Kentucky) Creeks).
Other mining activities that impact
snuffbox populations include mining for
metals (lead, cadmium, zinc) in
Missouri. Mining has been implicated in
the decline of mussels from the upper
St. Francis River (Hutson and Barnhart
2004, pp. 86–87). Lead and barite
mining is common in the Big River, a
Meramec River tributary. A tailingspond blowout discharged 81,000 cubic
yards of mine tailings in 1977 that
impacted approximately 80 river mi
(129 river km) (Buchanan 1980, p. 9;
Roberts and Bruenderman 2000, p. 24).
As of 2000, high levels of heavy metals
were still detected in the system
(Roberts and Bruenderman 2000, p. 24)
and may continue to hinder stream
recovery. Forty-five tailings ponds and
numerous tailings piles remain in the
watershed (Roberts and Bruenderman
2000, p. 24).
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Oil and gas production may have
contributed to the decline of the rayed
bean and snuffbox in certain drainages
(Sangamon River in the upper
Mississippi River system; Slippery Rock
and Connoquenessing Creeks in the
upper Ohio River system; Green,
Kentucky, Salamonie, and Mississinewa
Rivers in the lower Ohio River system)
(Ortmann 1909c, p.104; Schanzle and
Cummings 1991, p. 1; ESI 1995, p. 39;
Cicerello 1999, p. 11). Pollutants
include brines, high levels of potassium,
and numerous organic compounds
(Imlay 1971, p. 39). An increasing
demand for domestic energy resources
is expected to accelerate oil and gas
exploration in certain rayed bean and
snuffbox streams in the foreseeable
future.
Siltation—Excessive sedimentation
affects an estimated 46 percent of all
U.S. streams (Judy et al. 1984),
including the majority of the streams
with extant rayed bean and snuffbox
populations. Sedimentation has been
implicated in the decline of mussel
populations nationwide, and is a threat
to rayed bean and snuffbox (Kunz 1898,
p. 328; Ellis 1936, pp. 39–40; Marking
and Bills 1979, p. 204; Vannote and
Minshall 1982, pp. 4105–4106; Dennis
1984, p. 212; Wolcott and Neves 1990,
pp. 74–75; Brim Box 1999, p. 79; Fraley
and Ahlstedt 2000, p. 194; Poole and
Downing 2004, pp. 119–120). Specific
biological impacts include reduced
feeding and respiratory efficiency from
clogged gills, disrupted metabolic
processes, reduced growth rates, limited
burrowing activity, and physical
smothering (Ellis 1936, pp. 39–40;
Stansbery 1971, p. 6; Imlay 1972, p. 76;
Marking and Bills 1979, p. 210; Vannote
and Minshall 1982, p. 4105; Waters
1995, p. 7).
Studies indicate that excessive
sediment level impacts are sublethal,
with detrimental effects not
immediately apparent (Brim Box and
Mossa 1999, p. 101). Physical habitat
effects include altered suspended and
bed material loads, and bed sediment
composition associated with increased
sediment production and run-off;
clogged interstitial habitats and reduced
interstitial flow rates and dissolved
oxygen levels; changed channels in
form, position, and degree of stability;
altered depth or width-depth ratio that
affects light penetration and flow
regime; aggraded (filling) or degraded
(scouring) channels; and changed
channel positions that dewater mussel
beds (Vannote and Minshall 1982, p.
4105; Gordon et al. 1992, pp. 296–297;
Kanehl and Lyons 1992, pp. 26–27;
Brim Box and Mossa 1999, p. 102).
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
02NOP3
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
Interstitial spaces in the substrate
provide essential habitat for juvenile
mussels. When clogged, interstitial flow
rates and spaces may become reduced
(Brim Box and Mossa 1999, p. 100), thus
reducing juvenile habitat availability.
The rayed bean burrows deep into
interstitial substrates, making it
particularly susceptible to degradation
of this habitat. Sediment may act as a
vector for delivering contaminants such
as nutrients and pesticides to streams.
Juveniles can readily ingest
contaminants adsorbed to silt particles
during normal feeding activities. These
factors may explain, in part, why so
many mussel populations, including
those of the rayed bean and snuffbox,
appear to be experiencing recruitment
failures.
Agricultural activities produce the
most significant amount of sediment
that enters streams (Waters 1995, pp.
17–18). Neves et al. (1997, p. 65) stated
that agriculture (including both
sediment and chemical run-off) affects
72 percent of the impaired river miles
in the country. Unrestricted access by
livestock is a significant threat to many
streams and their mussel populations
(Fraley and Ahlstedt 2000, p. 193). Soil
compaction for intensive grazing may
reduce infiltration rates and increase
run-off, and trampling of riparian
vegetation increases the probability of
erosion (Armour et al. 1991, pp. 8–10;
Trimble and Mendel 1995, pp. 238–239;
Brim Box and Mossa 1999, p. 103).
The majority of extant rayed bean and
snuffbox populations are threatened by
some form of agricultural runoff (e.g.,
nutrients, pesticides, sediment). The
Maumee River system, for example, has
a drainage area that contains
approximately 89 percent agricultural
land (Sanders 2002, p. 10.1). The
decline of rayed bean and snuffbox in
this system may be largely attributed to
stream habitat impacts resulting from
intensive farming and associated runoff.
The rayed bean and snuffbox once
occurred in the Maumee River
mainstem, as well as in up to nine of its
tributaries. Currently, the snuffbox is
extirpated from the Maumee River
system and the rayed bean is only found
in distinct but small reaches of the St.
Joseph River, Fish Creek, Swan Creek,
and Blanchard River. All of these
remaining populations (which comprise
about 20 percent of all remaining rayed
bean populations rangewide) are
currently threatened by ongoing
agricultural activities. This scenario is
echoed across the remaining extant
range of the rayed bean and snuffbox.
Other Activities Affecting Rayed Bean
and Snuffbox Habitat—Activities
associated with urbanization can be
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
detrimental to stream habitats (Couch
and Hamilton 2002, p. 1) and were
summarized by Feminella and Walsh
(2005, pp. 585–587). Developmental
activities may impact streams and their
mussel fauna where adequate
streamside buffers are not maintained
and erosion of impacted land is allowed
to enter streams (Brainwood et al. 2006,
p. 511). Types of development may
include highway construction, parking
lots, building construction, general
infrastructure (utilities, sewer systems),
and recreation facilities. Factors
impacting rayed bean and snuffbox
populations in urban and suburban
areas include lawn care chemicals
(Conners and Black 2004, pp. 366–367),
sedimentation, toxic effluents, domestic
sewage, road salts, and general runoff.
Impervious surfaces are detrimental to
mussel habitat by altering various
hydrological factors, including:
Increased volumes of flow, annual flow
rates, peak flows and duration, and
temperature; decreased base flow; and
changes in sediment loadings (Galli
1991, p. 28; EPA 1997, p. 4; DeWalle et
al. 2000, p. 2655; Myers-Kinzie et al.
2002, p. 822). These factors result in
flooding, erosion, channel widening,
altered streambeds, channel instability,
riparian and instream habitat loss, and
loss of fish populations (EPA 1997, p.
4). As little as 10 percent of a watershed
being impervious can cause channel
instability and a host of other stream
habitat effects (Booth 1991, p. 98; Booth
and Reinelt 1993, p. 549). Impervious
surfaces may reduce sediment input
into streams but result in channel
instability by accelerating stormwater
runoff, which increases bank erosion
and bed scouring (Brim Box and Mossa
1999, p. 103). Stream channels become
highly unstable as they respond to
increased flows by eroding a groove in
the bottom of the channel (incising),
which increases the force of the water
against the channel (shear stress) and
bed mobilization (Doyle et al. 2000, p.
156). Hydrological variability influences
the distribution of mussels in streams,
with distinct communities associated
with hydrologically flashy and
hydrologically stable streams (Di Maio
and Corkum 1995, p. 669). High shear
stress, peak flows, and substrate
movement limits mussel communities,
reduces abundance (particularly for
juveniles), and increasingly dislodges
mussels and moves them downstream
(Layzer and Madison 1995, p. 337;
Myers-Kinzie et al. 2002, p. 822;
Gangloff and Feminella 2006, p. 70).
Recruitment is also significantly
reduced in high discharge years
(Howard and Cuffey 2006, p. 688). Most
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
67575
rayed bean and snuffbox streams have
been impacted by general
developmental activities and increased
impervious surface levels (Butler 2007,
p. 88; Butler 2002, p. 25).
All rayed bean or snuffbox streams are
crossed by bridges and roads. Effects
from these structures were reviewed by
Wheeler et al. (2005). Categories of
impacts include primary effects
(construction), secondary effects (postconstruction), and indirect effects
(development associated with highway
presence) (Angermeier et al. 2004, pp.
21–24). Culverts act as barriers to fish
passage (Wheeler et al. 2005, p. 149),
particularly by increasing flow velocity
(Warren and Pardew 1998, p. 637).
Stream channels become destabilized
when culverted or improperly bridged
by interrupting the transport of woody
debris, substrate, and water (Wheeler et
al. 2005, p. 152).
Anthropogenic activities can lower
water tables, making rayed bean,
snuffbox, and other mussel populations
susceptible to depressed flow levels.
Water withdrawals for irrigation,
municipal, and industrial water
supplies are an increasing concern. U.S.
water consumption doubled from 1960
to 2000 and is likely to increase further
(Naiman and Turner 2000, p. 960).
Therefore, we anticipate water
withdrawals and potential stream
dewatering to be a threat to rayed bean
and snuffbox in the foreseeable future.
We have identified a number of
threats to the habitat of the rayed bean
and snuffbox which have operated in
the past, are impacting the species now,
and will continue to impact the species
in the foreseeable future. On the basis of
this analysis, we find that the present
and threatened destruction,
modification, or curtailment of the
species’ habitats is a threat to the rayed
bean and snuffbox throughout all of
their range. Based on our analysis of the
best available information, we have no
reason to believe that the present or
threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of rayed bean or snuffbox
habitat will change in the foreseeable
future. The decline of the freshwater
mussels in the eastern United States is
primarily the result the long-lasting
effects of habitat alterations such as
impoundments, channelization,
chemical contaminants, mining, and
sedimentation. Although efforts have
been made to restore habitat in some
areas, the long-term effects of large-scale
and wide-ranging habitat modification,
destruction, and curtailment will last far
into the foreseeable future.
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
02NOP3
67576
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
B. Overutilization for Commercial,
Recreational, Scientific, or Educational
Purposes
The rayed bean and snuffbox are not
commercially valuable species. Rare
species like the rayed bean and snuffbox
may increasingly be sought by lay and
experienced collectors. Most stream
reaches inhabited by these species are
restricted, and their populations are
generally small. Although scientific
collecting is not thought to represent a
significant threat, localized populations
could become impacted and possibly
extirpated by over-collecting,
particularly if this activity is
unregulated. Native Americans were
known to harvest the rayed bean for
food, but because of its size, utilization
rates were very low (Bogan 1990, p.
134). Localized declines of snuffbox
from use as bait by fishermen has been
noted (Cumberland River; Wilson and
Clark 1914, p. 45), although it is
unlikely that exploitation activities have
eliminated any snuffbox populations.
On the basis of this analysis, we find
that overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes is not now a threat to the
rayed bean or snuffbox in any portion of
their range or likely to become a
significant threat in the foreseeable
future.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
C. Disease or Predation
Little is known about diseases in
freshwater mussels (Grizzle and
Brunner 2007). However, mussel dieoffs have been documented in rayed
bean and snuffbox streams (Neves 1986,
p. 9), and some researchers believe that
disease may be a factor contributing to
the die-offs (Buchanan 1986, p. 53;
Neves 1986, p. 11). Mussel parasites
include water mites, trematodes,
oligochaetes, leeches, copepods,
bacteria, and protozoa (Grizzle and
Brunner 2007). Generally, parasites are
not suspected of being a major limiting
factor (Oesch 1984, p. 16), but a recent
study provides contrary evidence.
Reproductive output and physiological
condition were negatively correlated
with mite and trematode abundance,
respectively (Gangloff and Feminella
2004). Stressors that reduce fitness may
make mussels more susceptible to
parasites (Butler 2007, p. 90).
Furthermore, nonnative mussels may
carry diseases and parasites that are
potentially devastating to native mussel
fauna, including rayed bean and
snuffbox (Strayer 1999b, p.88).
The muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus) is
cited as the most prevalent mussel
predator (Kunz 1898, p. 328; Hanson et
al. 1989, p. 15). Muskrat predation may
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
limit the recovery potential of
endangered mussels or contribute to
local extirpations of previously stressed
populations, according to Neves and
Odom (1989, p. 940), but they consider
it primarily a seasonal or localized
threat. The snuffbox ranked fourth
among 12 species in a St. Croix River
muskrat midden, being nearly four
times more abundant than in
quantitative surveys (Tyrrell and
Hornbach 1998, p. 304). Numbers were
too low to determine selectivity indices
or statistics.
Muskrats were not thought to be a
threat to the rayed bean by West et al.
(2000, pp. 255–256), due to their general
selection of mussels larger than 1.4–1.6
in (3.6–4.1 cm) long (Convey et al. 1989,
p. 656; Hanson et al. 1989, p. 24). Neves
and Odom (1989, pp. 938–939) also
noted that muskrats did not select for
small mussels. Nevertheless, some
muskrat predation on the rayed bean
has recently been documented in
Cassadaga Creek, New York, but is
generally considered insignificant.
Other mammals (raccoon (Procyon
lotor), mink (Mustela vison), river otter
(Lutra Canadensis), striped skunk
(Mephitis mephitis), hog (Sus scrofa), rat
(Rattus spp.)), amphibians (hellbender
(Cryptobranchus alleganiensis)), turtles,
aquatic birds, and fishes (freshwater
drum (Aplodinotus grunniens), redear
sunfish (Lepomis microlophus)) feed on
mussels (Kunz 1898, p. 328; Meek and
Clark 1912, p. 6; Neck 1986, p. 64;
Tyrrell and Hornbach 1998, p. 301).
Hydra, non-biting midge larvae,
dragonfly larvae, crayfish, and
especially flatworms are invertebrate
predators on newly metamorphosed
juveniles (Zimmerman and Neves 2003,
p. 28; Klocker and Strayer 2004, p. 174).
The overall threat posed by these
predators on the rayed bean and
snuffbox is not considered significant.
Studies indicate that in some
localized areas, disease and predation
may have a negative impact on mussel
populations. However, based on our
analysis of the best available
information, we do not believe that
disease or predation is a significant
threat to the overall status of rayed bean
or snuffbox, nor do we believe that it is
likely to become a significant threat in
the foreseeable future.
D. The Inadequacy of Existing
Regulatory Mechanisms
Most States with extant rayed bean
and snuffbox populations prohibit
collection of mussels without a State
collecting permit. However,
enforcement of this permit requirement
is difficult.
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Sources of nonpoint source pollution
include timber clearcutting, clearing of
riparian vegetation, urbanization, road
construction, and other practices that
allow bare earth to enter streams (The
Nature Conservancy 2004, p. 13).
Current laws do not adequately protect
rayed bean and snuffbox habitat from
nonpoint source pollution, as the laws
to prevent sediment entering waterways
are poorly enforced. Best management
practices for sediment and erosion
control are often recommended or
required by local ordinances for
construction projects; however,
compliance, monitoring, and
enforcement of these recommendations
are often poorly implemented.
Furthermore, there are currently no
requirements within the scope of
Federal environmental laws to
specifically consider the rayed bean or
snuffbox during Federal activities, or to
ensure that Federal projects will not
jeopardize their continued existence.
Point source discharges within the
range of the rayed bean and snuffbox
have been reduced since the inception
of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251
et seq.), but this may not provide
adequate protection for filter-feeding
organisms that can be impacted by
extremely low levels of contaminants
(see Chemical Contaminants discussion
under Factor A). There is no specific
information on the sensitivity of the
rayed bean and snuffbox to common
industrial and municipal pollutants,
and very little information on other
freshwater mussels. Therefore, it
appears that a lack of adequate research
and data prevents existing regulations,
such as the Clean Water Act
(administered by the EPA and the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers), from being
fully used or effective.
Despite these existing regulatory
mechanisms, the rayed bean and
snuffbox continue to decline due to the
effects of habitat destruction, poor water
quality, contaminants, and other factors.
We find that these regulatory measures
have been insufficient to significantly
reduce or remove the threats to the
rayed bean and snuffbox and, therefore,
that the inadequacy of existing
regulatory mechanisms is a threat to
these species throughout all of their
range.
Based on our analysis of the best
available information, we have no
reason to believe that the
aforementioned regulations, which
currently do not offer adequate
protection to the rayed bean and
snuffbox, will be improved in the
foreseeable future.
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
02NOP3
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors
Affecting Its Continued Existence
Other factors have played a role in the
decline of rayed bean and snuffbox
populations. Reduced numbers of host
fish have an indirect impact by
contributing to reduced recruitment
(Watters 1996, p. 83; Khym and Layzer
2000, p. 183). Factors associated with
climate change likely to affect regional
mussel populations include changes in
stream temperature regimes and
precipitation levels that may indirectly
result in reduced habitat and declines in
host fish stocks (Hastie et al. 2003, p.
44). Remedial (such as flood control
structures) and preventative (for
example, more renewable energy from
hydroelectric facilities to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions) measures to
address climate change issues (Hastie et
al. 2003, p. 45) may impact rayed bean
and snuffbox populations in the future.
Population Fragmentation and
Isolation—The majority of the
remaining populations of the rayed bean
and snuffbox are generally small and
geographically isolated. The patchy
distributional pattern of populations in
short river reaches makes them much
more susceptible to extirpation from
single catastrophic events, such as toxic
chemical spills (Watters and Dunn
1993–94, p. 257). Furthermore, this
level of isolation makes natural
repopulation of any extirpated
population unlikely without human
intervention. Population isolation
prohibits the natural interchange of
genetic material between populations,
and small population size reduces the
reservoir of genetic diversity within
populations, which can lead to
inbreeding depression (Avise and
Hambrick 1996, p. 461).
The Scioto River system provides a
good example of the impacts of
population fragmentation and isolation.
Historically, the rayed bean and
snuffbox were widespread and locally
abundant in the mainstem and
numerous tributaries. The Scioto River
became highly contaminated over a
century ago (Trautman 1981, p. 33;
Yoder et al. 2005, p. 410), and these
species eventually died out in the
mainstem and most tributaries. The
population segments that persist have
become increasingly isolated due to
impoundments and other factors; all are
very small, highly fragmented, and
appear to be on a trend towards
extirpation.
Many rayed bean and snuffbox
populations are potentially below the
effective population size (EPS) required
to maintain genetic heterogeneity and
´
population viability (Soule 1980, p.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
162). Isolated populations eventually
die out when population size drops
below the EPS or threshold level of
sustainability. Recruitment reduction or
failure is a potential problem for many
small rayed bean and snuffbox
populations rangewide, a condition
likely exacerbated by their reduced
range and increasingly isolated
populations. Evidence of recruitment
has not been documented in many
populations, indicating that recruitment
reduction or outright failure is possible.
Many populations of both species may
be experiencing the bottleneck effect of
not attaining EPS. Small, isolated, below
EPS-threshold populations of shortlived species (most host fishes)
theoretically die out within a decade or
so, while below-threshold populations
of long-lived species (like the rayed
bean and snuffbox) might take decades
to die out even given years of total
recruitment failure.
We find that fragmentation and
isolation of small remaining populations
of the rayed bean and snuffbox are
current and ongoing threats to both
species throughout all of their range that
will continue into the foreseeable
future.
Exotic Species—Various exotic or
nonnative species of aquatic organisms
are firmly established in the range of the
rayed bean and snuffbox. The exotic
species that poses the most significant
threat to the rayed bean and snuffbox is
the zebra mussel (Dreissena
polymorpha). The invasion of the zebra
mussel poses a threat to the mussel
fauna in many regions, and species
extinctions are expected as a result of its
continued spread in the eastern United
States (Ricciardi et al. 1998, p. 616).
Strayer (1999b, pp. 77–80) reviewed in
detail the mechanisms by which zebra
mussels impact native mussels. The
primary means of impact is direct
fouling of the shells of live native
mussels. Zebra mussels attach in large
numbers to the shells of live native
mussels and are implicated in the loss
of entire native mussel beds. Fouling
impacts include impeding locomotion
(both laterally and vertically),
interfering with normal valve
movements, deforming valve margins,
and locally depleting food resources and
increasing waste products. Heavy
infestations of zebra mussels on native
mussels may overly stress the animals
by reducing their energy stores. They
may also reduce food concentrations to
levels too low to support reproduction,
or even survival in extreme cases.
Another way zebra mussels may
impact native mussels is through
filtering their sperm and possibly
glochidia from the water column, thus
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
67577
reducing reproductive potential. Habitat
for native mussels may also be degraded
by large deposits of zebra mussel
pseudofeces (undigested waste material
passed out of the incurrent siphon)
(Vaughan 1997, p. 11). Additionally, an
indirect impact is the proliferation of
aquatic plants from increased water
clarity in lakes, which in turn has
prompted managers to increase the use
of herbicides that may threaten mussels
via food reduction (Marangelo 2005b,
pers. comm.).
Zebra mussels are thoroughly
established in the Great Lakes drainages
and much of the Ohio River system,
overlapping much of the current range
of the rayed bean and snuffbox. Zebra
mussels have eliminated populations of
the rayed bean in Lakes Erie and
Tippecanoe and the Detroit River. The
greatest current potential for zebra
mussels to impact the rayed bean and
snuffbox are in the Lake St. Clair
drainages, Allegheny River, Tippecanoe
River, French Creek, and Lake
Maxinkuckee. In addition, there is longterm potential for zebra mussel
invasions into other systems that
currently harbor rayed bean and
snuffbox populations. However, zebra
mussels are not always a serious threat
to rayed bean and snuffbox (Tippecanoe
River, Fisher 2005, pers. comm.; Clinton
River, Butler 2007, p. 94; French Creek,
Butler 2007, p. 94). Significant but
highly fluctuating zebra mussel
populations remain largely restricted to
navigational waterways, although
smaller streams have also had their
mussel fauna virtually eliminated by
them (Martel et al. 2001, p. 2188). At
least two of the stronghold snuffbox
populations (Wolf River and French
Creek) presently have low numbers of
zebra mussels.
The Asian clam (Corbicula fluminea)
has spread throughout the range of the
rayed bean and snuffbox since its
introduction in the mid-1900s. Asian
clams compete with native mussels,
especially juveniles, for food, nutrients,
and space (Neves and Widlak 1987, p.
6; Leff et al. 1990, p. 415) and may
ingest sperm, glochidia, and newly
metamorphosed juveniles of native
mussels (Strayer 1999b, p. 82; Yeager et
al. 2001, p. 257). Dense Asian clam
populations actively disturb sediments
that may reduce habitat for juvenile
mussels (Strayer 1999b, p. 82).
Asian clam densities vary widely in
the absence of native mussels or in
patches with sparse mussel
concentrations, but clam density is
never high in dense mussel beds,
indicating that the clam is unable to
successfully invade small-scale habitat
patches with high unionid biomass
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
02NOP3
67578
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
(Vaughn and Spooner 2006, p. 335). The
invading clam therefore appears to
preferentially invade sites where
mussels are already in decline (Strayer
1999b, p. 82; Vaughn and Spooner 2006,
p. 332) and does not appear be a
causative factor in the decline of
mussels in dense beds. However, an
Asian clam population that thrives in
previously stressed, sparse mussel
populations can exacerbate unionid
imperilment through competition and
impeding mussel population expansion
(Vaughn and Spooner 2006, p. 335).
The round goby (Neogobius
melanostomus) is another exotic fish
species released into the Great Lakes
that is well established and likely to
spread through the Mississippi River
system (Strayer 1999b, pp. 87–88). This
species is an aggressive competitor of
similar sized benthic fish (sculpins,
darters) as well as a voracious carnivore
despite its size (less than 10 in. (25.4
cm) in length), preying on a variety of
foods, including small mussels and
fishes that could serve as glochidial
hosts (Strayer 1999b, p. 88; Janssen and
Jude 2001, p. 325). Round gobies may
therefore have indirect effects on the
rayed bean and snuffbox through
negative impacts to their host fishes.
Additional exotic species will
invariably become established in the
foreseeable future (Strayer 1999b, pp.
88–89). These include Limnoperna
fortunei, a biofouling mussel (an animal
that undesirably accumulates on wetted
surfaces) from southeast Asia that has
already spread to Japan and South
America, and ‘‘probably will have strong
effects’’ on native mussels (Strayer
1999b, p. 89). Exotic species could carry
diseases and parasites that may be
devastating to the native biota. Because
of our ignorance of mollusk diseases
and parasites, ‘‘it is imprudent to
conclude that alien diseases and
parasites are unimportant’’ (Strayer
1999b, p. 88).
Exotic species, such as those
described above, are an ongoing threat
to the rayed bean and snuffbox—a threat
that is likely to increase as these exotic
species expand their occupancy within
the range of the rayed bean and
snuffbox.
Summary of Threats
The decline of the rayed bean and
snuffbox (described by Butler 2002,
2007) is primarily the result of habitat
loss and degradation (Neves 1991, p.
252). These losses have been well
documented since the mid-19th century
(Higgins 1858, p. 551). Chief among the
causes of decline are impoundments,
channelization, chemical contaminants,
mining, and sedimentation (Neves 1991,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
pp. 260–261; 1993, p. 4–5; Williams et
al. 1993, p. 7; Neves et al. 1997, pp. 60–
72; Watters 2000, p. 269). These
stressors have had profound impacts on
rayed bean and snuffbox populations
and their habitat.
The majority of the remaining
populations of the rayed bean and
snuffbox are generally small and
geographically isolated (Butler 2002,
2007). The patchy distributional pattern
of populations in short river reaches
makes those populations much more
susceptible to extirpation from single
catastrophic events, such as toxic
chemical spills (Watters and Dunn
1993–94, p. 257). Furthermore, this
level of isolation makes natural
repopulation of any extirpated
population virtually impossible without
human intervention. Various nonnative
species of aquatic organisms are firmly
established in the range of the rayed
bean and snuffbox; however, the exotic
species that poses the most significant
threat to the rayed bean and snuffbox is
the zebra mussel (Dreissena
polymorpha) (Butler 2002, p. 27; 2007,
p. 93).
Proposed Determination
Section 3 of the Act defines an
endangered species as any species that
is ‘‘in danger of extinction throughout
all or a significant portion of its range’’
and a threatened species as any species
that ‘‘is likely to become an endangered
species within the foreseeable future
throughout all or a significant portion of
its range.’’ We find that the rayed bean
and snuffbox are presently in danger of
extinction throughout their entire range,
based on the immediacy, severity, and
scope of the threats described above.
Although there are ongoing attempts to
alleviate some threats, there appear to
be no populations without current
significant threats and many threats are
without obvious or readily available
solutions. Therefore, on the basis of the
best available scientific and commercial
information, we propose listing the
rayed bean and snuffbox as endangered
in accordance with sections 3(6) and
4(a)(1) of the Act.
Under the Act and our implementing
regulations, a species may warrant
listing if it is endangered or threatened
throughout all or a significant portion of
its range. Threats to the rayed bean and
snuffbox occur throughout their range.
Therefore, we assessed the status of the
species throughout their entire range.
The threats to the survival of the species
occur throughout the species’ ranges
and are not restricted to any particular
significant portion of those ranges.
Accordingly, our assessment and
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
proposed determination applies to the
species throughout their entire range.
Available Conservation Measures
Conservation measures provided to
species listed as endangered or
threatened under the Act include
recognition, recovery actions,
requirements for Federal protection, and
prohibitions against certain practices.
Recognition through listing results in
public awareness and conservation by
Federal, State, Tribal, and local
agencies, private organizations, and
individuals. The Act encourages
cooperation with the States and requires
that recovery actions be carried out for
all listed species. The protection
required by Federal agencies and the
prohibitions against certain activities
are discussed, in part, below.
The primary purpose of the Act is the
conservation of endangered and
threatened species and the ecosystems
upon which they depend. The ultimate
goal of such conservation efforts is the
recovery of these listed species, so that
they no longer need the protective
measures of the Act. Subsection 4(f) of
the Act requires the Service to develop
and implement recovery plans for the
conservation of endangered and
threatened species. The recovery
planning process involves the
identification of actions that are
necessary to halt or reverse the species’
decline by addressing the threats to its
survival and recovery. The goal of this
process is to restore listed species to a
point where they are secure, selfsustaining, and functioning components
of their ecosystems.
Recovery planning includes the
development of a recovery outline
shortly after a species is listed,
preparation of a draft and final recovery
plan, and revisions to the plan as
significant new information becomes
available. The recovery outline guides
the immediate implementation of urgent
recovery actions and describes the
process to be used to develop a recovery
plan. The recovery plan identifies sitespecific management actions that will
achieve recovery of the species,
measurable criteria that determine when
a species may be downlisted or delisted,
and methods for monitoring recovery
progress. Recovery plans also establish
a framework for agencies to coordinate
their recovery efforts and provide
estimates of the cost of implementing
recovery tasks. Recovery teams
(comprised of species experts, Federal
and State agencies, non-government
organizations, and stakeholders) are
often established to develop recovery
plans. When completed, the recovery
outline, draft recovery plan, and the
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
02NOP3
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
final recovery plan will be available on
our Web site (https://www.fws.gov/
endangered), or from our Ohio
Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Implementation of recovery actions
generally requires the participation of a
broad range of partners, including other
Federal agencies, States, Tribal, nongovernmental organizations, businesses,
and private landowners. Examples of
recovery actions include habitat
restoration (e.g., restoration of native
vegetation), research, captive
propagation and reintroduction, and
outreach and education. The recovery of
many listed species cannot be
accomplished solely on Federal lands
because their range may occur primarily
or solely on non-Federal lands. To
achieve recovery of these species
requires cooperative conservation efforts
on private, State, and Tribal lands.
If this species is listed, funding for
recovery actions will be available from
a variety of sources, including Federal
budgets, State programs, and cost share
grants for non-Federal landowners, the
academic community, and
nongovernmental organizations.
Additionally, under section 6 of the Act,
we would be able to grant funds to the
States of Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky,
Michigan, New York, Ohio,
Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, and
West Virginia for management actions
promoting the conservation of the rayed
bean and to the States of Alabama,
Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa,
Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan,
Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, New
York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee,
Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin
for the conservation of the snuffbox.
Information on our grant programs that
are available to aid species recovery can
be found at: https://www.fws.gov/grants.
Although the rayed bean and snuffbox
are only proposed for listing under the
Act at this time, please let us know if
you are interested in participating in
recovery efforts for these species.
Additionally, we invite you to submit
any new information on these species
whenever it becomes available and any
information you may have for recovery
planning purposes; if you submit
information after the date listed in the
DATES section above, you will need to
send it to the street address provided in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
Section 7(a) of the Act requires
Federal agencies to evaluate their
actions with respect to any species that
is proposed or listed as endangered or
threatened and with respect to its
critical habitat, if any is being
designated. Regulations implementing
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
this interagency cooperation provision
of the Act are codified at 50 CFR part
402. Section 7(a)(4) requires Federal
agencies to confer informally with us on
any action that is likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of a proposed
species or result in destruction or
adverse modification of proposed
critical habitat. If a species is listed
subsequently, section 7(a)(2) of the Act
requires Federal agencies to ensure that
activities they authorize, fund, or carry
out are not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of such a species or
to destroy or adversely modify its
critical habitat. If a Federal action may
affect a listed species or its critical
habitat, the responsible Federal agency
must enter into formal consultation with
us.
Federal agency actions that may
require conference or consultation as
described in the preceding paragraph
include the issuance of permits for
reservoir construction, stream
alterations, wastewater facility
development, water withdrawal
projects, pesticide registration,
agricultural assistance programs,
mining, road and bridge construction,
and Federal loan programs. Activities
will trigger consultation under section 7
of the Act if they may affect the rayed
bean or snuffbox, or both species,
addressed in this proposed rule.
Jeopardy Standard
Prior to and following listing and
designation of critical habitat, if prudent
and determinable, the Service applies
an analytical framework for jeopardy
analyses that relies heavily on the
importance of core area populations to
the survival and recovery of the species.
The section 7(a)(2) analysis is focused
not only on these populations but also
on the habitat conditions necessary to
support them.
The jeopardy analysis usually
expresses the survival and recovery
needs of the species in a qualitative
fashion without making distinctions
between what is necessary for survival
and what is necessary for recovery.
Generally, if a proposed Federal action
is incompatible with the viability of the
affected core area populations(s),
inclusive of associated habitat
conditions, a jeopardy finding is
considered to be warranted, because of
the relationship of each core area
population to the survival and recovery
of the species as a whole.
Section 9 Take
The Act and implementing
regulations set forth a series of general
prohibitions and exceptions that apply
to all endangered and threatened
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
67579
wildlife. If we finalize listing of the
rayed bean and snuffbox, these
prohibitions would be applicable to the
rayed bean and snuffbox. The
prohibitions of section 9(a)(2) of the Act,
codified at 50 CFR 17.21 for endangered
wildlife, in part, make it illegal for any
person subject to the jurisdiction of the
United States to take (includes harass,
harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill,
trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt
any of these), import or export, deliver,
receive, carry, transport, or ship in
interstate or foreign commerce in the
course of commercial activity, or sell or
offer for sale in interstate or foreign
commerce any listed species. It also is
illegal to possess, sell, deliver, carry,
transport, or ship any such wildlife that
has been taken illegally. Further, it is
illegal for any person to attempt to
commit, to solicit another person to
commit, or to cause to be committed,
any of these acts. Certain exceptions
apply to our agents and State
conservation agencies.
We may issue permits to carry out
otherwise prohibited activities
involving endangered wildlife under
certain circumstances. We codified the
regulations governing permits for
endangered species at 50 CFR 17.22.
Such permits are available for scientific
purposes, to enhance the propagation or
survival of the species, or for incidental
take in the course of otherwise lawful
activities.
It is our policy, published in the
Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR
34272), to identify, to the maximum
extent practicable at the time a species
is listed, those activities that would or
would not constitute a violation of
section 9 of the Act and associated
regulations at 50 CFR 17.21. The intent
of this policy is to increase public
awareness of the effect of this proposed
listing on proposed and ongoing
activities within a species’ range. We
believe, based on the best available
information, that the following actions
will not result in a violation of the
provisions of section 9 of the Act,
provided these actions are carried out in
accordance with existing regulations
and permit requirements:
(1) Activities authorized, funded, or
carried out by Federal agencies (e.g.,
bridge and highway construction,
pipeline construction, hydropower
licensing, etc.), when such activities are
conducted in accordance with the
consultation and planning requirements
for listed species under section 7 of the
Act.
(2) Any action carried out for
scientific research or to enhance the
propagation or survival of the rayed
bean or snuffbox that is conducted in
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
02NOP3
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
67580
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
accordance with the conditions of a 50
CFR 17.22 permit.
(3) Any incidental take of rayed bean
or snuffbox resulting from an otherwise
lawful activity conducted in accordance
with the conditions of an incidental take
permit issued under 50 CFR 17.22. NonFederal applicants may design a habitat
conservation plan (HCP) for the species
and apply for an incidental take permit.
HCPs may be developed for listed
species and are designed to minimize
and mitigate impacts to the species to
the greatest extent practicable.
We believe the following activities
would be likely to result in a violation
of section 9 of the Act; however,
possible violations are not limited to
these actions alone:
(1) Unauthorized killing, collecting,
handling, or harassing of individual
rayed bean or snuffbox, or both species,
at any life stage.
(2) Sale or offer for sale of rayed bean
or snuffbox in addition to delivering,
receiving, carrying, transporting, or
shipping in interstate or foreign
commerce any rayed bean or snuffbox.
(3) Unauthorized destruction or
alteration of the species’ habitat
(instream dredging, channelization,
impoundment, streambank clearing,
discharge of fill material) that actually
kills or injures individual rayed bean or
snuffbox by significantly impairing their
essential behavioral patterns, including
breeding, feeding, or sheltering.
(4) Violation of any discharge or water
withdrawal permit within these species’
occupied ranges that results in the death
or injury of individual rayed bean or
snuffbox by significantly impairing their
essential behavioral patterns, including
breeding, feeding, or sheltering.
(5) Discharge or dumping of toxic
chemicals or other pollutants into
waters supporting the species that
actually kills or injures individual rayed
bean or snuffbox by significantly
impairing their essential behavioral
patterns, including breeding, feeding, or
sheltering.
We will review other activities not
identified above on a case-by-case basis
to determine whether they may be likely
to result in a violation of section 9 of the
Act. We do not consider these lists to be
exhaustive, and provide them as
information to the public.
You should direct questions regarding
whether specific activities may
constitute a future violation of section 9
of the Act to the Field Supervisor of the
Service’s Ohio Ecological Services Field
Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section). Requests for copies of
regulations regarding listed species and
inquiries about prohibitions and permits
should be addressed to the U.S. Fish
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
and Wildlife Service, Ecological
Services Division, Henry Whipple
Federal Building, 1 Federal Drive, Fort
Snelling, MN 55111 (Phone 612–713–
5350; Fax 612–713–5292).
Critical Habitat
Background
Critical habitat is defined in section 3
of the Act as:
(i) The specific areas within the
geographical area occupied by a species,
at the time it is listed in accordance
with the Act, on which are found those
physical or biological features
(I) Essential to the conservation of the
species and
(II) That may require special
management considerations or
protection; and
(ii) Specific areas outside the
geographical area occupied by a species
at the time it is listed, upon a
determination that such areas are
essential for the conservation of the
species.
‘‘Conservation’’ is defined in section 3
of the Act as meaning the use of all
methods and procedures needed to
bring the species to the point at which
listing under the Act is no longer
necessary.
Critical habitat receives protection
under section 7 of the Act through the
prohibition against Federal agencies
carrying out, funding, or authorizing the
destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat. Section 7(a)(2) requires
consultation on Federal actions that
may affect critical habitat. The
designation of critical habitat does not
affect land ownership or establish a
refuge, wilderness, reserve, preserve, or
other conservation area. Such
designation does not allow the
government or public to access private
lands. Such designation does not
require implementation of restoration,
recovery, or enhancement measures by
non-Federal landowners. Where a
landowner seeks or requests Federal
agency funding or authorization for an
action that may affect a listed species or
critical habitat, the consultation
requirements of section 7(a)(2) of the
Act would apply, but even in the event
of a destruction or adverse modification
finding, Federal action agency’s and the
applicant’s obligation is not to restore or
recover the species, but to implement
reasonable and prudent alternatives to
avoid destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat.
For inclusion in a critical habitat
designation, the habitat within the
geographical area occupied by the
species at the time it was listed must
contain the physical and biological
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
features essential to the conservation of
the species, and be included only if
those features may require special
management considerations or
protection. Critical habitat designations
identify, to the extent known using the
best scientific and commercial data
available, habitat areas that provide
essential life cycle needs of the species
(areas on which are found the physical
and biological features (PBFs) laid out
in the appropriate quantity and spatial
arrangement for the conservation of the
species). Under the Act and regulations
at 50 CFR 424.12, we can designate
critical habitat in areas outside the
geographical area occupied by the
species at the time it is listed only when
we determine that those areas are
essential for the conservation of the
species and that designation limited to
those areas occupied at the time of
listing would be inadequate to ensure
the conservation of the species.
Section 4 of the Act requires that we
designate critical habitat on the basis of
the best scientific and commercial data
available. Further, our Policy on
Information Standards Under the
Endangered Species Act (published in
the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59
FR 34271)), the Information Quality Act
(section 515 of the Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act for
Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106–554; H.R.
5658)), and our associated Information
Quality Guidelines, provide criteria,
establish procedures, and provide
guidance to ensure that our decisions
are based on the best scientific data
available. They require our biologists, to
the extent consistent with the Act and
with the use of the best scientific data
available, to use primary and original
sources of information as the basis for
recommendations to designate critical
habitat.
When we are determining which areas
should be designated as critical habitat,
our primary source of information is
generally the information developed
during the listing process for the
species. Additional information sources
may include the recovery plan for the
species, articles in peer-reviewed
journals, conservation plans developed
by States and counties, scientific status
surveys and studies, biological
assessments, or other unpublished
materials and expert opinion or
personal knowledge.
Habitat is often dynamic, and species
may move from one area to another over
time. Furthermore, we recognize that
critical habitat designated at a particular
point in time may not include all of the
habitat areas that we may later
determine are necessary for the recovery
of the species. For these reasons, a
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
02NOP3
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
critical habitat designation does not
signal that habitat outside the
designated area is unimportant or may
not be required for recovery of the
species.
Areas that are important to the
conservation of the species, but are
outside the critical habitat designation,
will continue to be subject to
conservation actions we implement
under section 7(a)(1) of the Act. Areas
that support populations are also subject
to the regulatory protections afforded by
the section 7(a)(2) jeopardy standard, as
determined on the basis of the best
available scientific information at the
time of the agency action. Federally
funded or permitted projects affecting
listed species outside their designated
critical habitat areas may still result in
jeopardy findings in some cases.
Similarly, critical habitat designations
made on the basis of the best available
information at the time of designation
will not control the direction and
substance of future recovery plans,
habitat conservation plans (HCPs), or
other species conservation planning
efforts if new information available at
the time of these planning efforts calls
for a different outcome.
Prudency Determination
Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as
amended, and implementing regulations
(50 CFR 424.12), require that, to the
maximum extent prudent and
determinable, we designate critical
habitat at the time we determine that a
species is endangered or threatened.
Our regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(1))
state that the designation of critical
habitat is not prudent when one or both
of the following situations exist: (1) The
species is threatened by taking or other
human activity, and identification of
critical habitat can be expected to
increase the degree of threat to the
species, or (2) such designation of
critical habitat would not be beneficial
to the species.
There is currently no imminent threat
of take attributed to collection or
vandalism under Factor B
(overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes) for the rayed bean or
snuffbox, and identification of critical
habitat is not expected to initiate such
a threat. In the absence of finding that
the designation of critical habitat would
increase threats to a species, if there are
any benefits to a critical habitat
designation, then a prudent finding is
warranted. The potential benefits
include: (1) Triggering consultation
under section 7(a)(2) of the Act, in new
areas for actions in which there may be
a Federal nexus where it would not
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
otherwise occur because the species
may not be present; (2) focusing
conservation activities on the most
essential habitat features and areas; (3)
increasing awareness of important
habitat areas among State or county
governments, or private entities; and (4)
preventing inadvertent harm to the
species.
Critical habitat designation includes
the identification of the physical and
biological features of the habitat
essential to the conservation of each
species that may require special
management and protection. As such,
these designations will provide useful
information to individuals, local and
State governments, and other entities
engaged in activities or long-range
planning that may affect areas essential
to the conservation of the species.
Conservation of the rayed bean and
snuffbox and essential features of their
habitats will require habitat
management, protection, and
restoration, which will be facilitated by
disseminating information on the
locations and the key physical and
biological features of those habitats. In
the case of the rayed bean and snuffbox,
these aspects of critical habitat
designation would potentially benefit
the conservation of the species.
Therefore, since we have determined
that the designation of critical habitat
will not likely increase the degree of
threat to these species and may provide
some measure of benefit, we find that
designation of critical habitat is prudent
for the rayed bean and snuffbox.
Critical Habitat Determinability
As stated above, section 4(a)(3) of the
Act requires the designation of critical
habitat concurrently with the species’
listing ‘‘to the maximum extent prudent
and determinable.’’ Our regulations at 50
CFR 424.12(a)(2) state that critical
habitat is not determinable when one or
both of the following situations exist:
(i) Information sufficient to perform
required analyses of the impacts of the
designation is lacking, or
(ii) The biological needs of the species
are not sufficiently well known to
permit identification of an area as
critical habitat.
When critical habitat is not
determinable, the Act provides for an
additional year to publish a critical
habitat designation (16 U.S.C.
1533(b)(6)(C)(ii)).
In accordance with sections 3(5)(A)(i)
and 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act and regulations
at 50 CFR 424.12, in determining which
areas to propose as critical habitat, we
must consider those physical and
biological features essential to the
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
67581
conservation of the species. These
include, but are not limited to:
(1) Space for individual and
population growth and for normal
behavior;
(2) Food, water, air, light, minerals, or
other nutritional or physiological
requirements;
(3) Cover or shelter;
(4) Sites for breeding, reproduction,
and rearing (or development) of
offspring; and
(5) Habitats that are protected from
disturbance or are representative of the
historical, geographical, and ecological
distribution of a species.
We are currently unable to identify
the physical and biological features
essential for the conservation of the
rayed bean and snuffbox because
information on those features for these
species is not known at this time. The
apparent poor viability of the species’
occurrences observed in recent years
indicates that current conditions are not
sufficient to meet the basic biological
requirements of these species in many
rivers. Since the rayed bean and
snuffbox have not been observed for
decades in many of their historical
locations, and much of the habitat in
which they still persist has been
drastically altered, the optimal
conditions that would provide the
biological or ecological requisites of
these species are not known. Although
we can surmise that habitat degradation
from a variety of factors has contributed
to the decline of these species, we do
not know specifically what essential
physical or biological features of that
habitat are currently lacking for the
rayed bean and snuffbox.
Key features of the basic life history,
ecology, reproductive biology, and
habitat requirements of most mussels,
including the rayed bean and snuffbox,
are unknown. Species-specific
ecological requirements have not been
determined (for example, minimum
water flow and effects of particular
pollutants). Population dynamics, such
as species’ interactions and community
structure, population trends, and
population size and age class structure
necessary to maintain long-term
viability, have not been determined for
these species. Of particular concern to
both species is that many of the
remaining rayed bean and snuffbox
populations consist of very low
densities, which limit our ability to
investigate their population dynamics.
Basics of reproductive biology for these
species are unknown, such as age and
size at earliest maturity, reproductive
longevity, and the level of recruitment
needed for species’ survival and longterm viability. As we are unable to
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
02NOP3
67582
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
identify many physical and biological
features essential to the conservation of
the rayed bean and snuffbox, we are
unable to identify areas that contain
these features. Therefore, although we
have determined that the designation of
critical habitat is prudent for the rayed
bean and snuffbox, because the
biological and physical requirements of
these species are not sufficiently known,
we find that critical habitat for the rayed
bean and snuffbox is not determinable
at this time.
Peer Review
In accordance with our policy,
‘‘Notice of Interagency Cooperative
Policy for Peer Review in Endangered
Species Act Activities,’’ that was
published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR
34270), we will seek the expert opinion
of at least three appropriate
independent specialists regarding this
proposed rule. The purpose of such
review is to ensure listing decisions are
based on scientifically sound data,
assumptions, and analysis. We will send
copies of this proposed rule to the peer
reviewers immediately following
publication in the Federal Register. We
will invite these peer reviewers to
comment, during the public comment
period, on the specific assumptions and
the data that are the basis for our
conclusions regarding the proposal to
list rayed bean and snuffbox as
endangered and our proposal regarding
critical habitat for this species.
We will consider all comments and
information we receive during the
comment period on this proposed rule
during preparation of a final
rulemaking. Accordingly, our final
decision may differ from this proposal.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Public Hearings
The Act provides for one or more
public hearings on this proposal, if
requested. Requests must be received
within 45 days after the date of
publication of this proposal in the
Federal Register (see DATES). Such
requests must be sent to the address
shown in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section. We will schedule
public hearings on this proposal, if any
are requested, and announce the dates,
times, and places of those hearings, as
well as how to obtain reasonable
accommodation, in the Federal Register
and local newspapers at least 15 days
before the hearing.
Persons needing reasonable
accommodation to attend and
participate in a public hearing should
contact the Ohio Ecological Services
Field Office at 614–416–8993, ext. 22, as
soon as possible. To allow sufficient
time to process requests, please call no
later than one week before the hearing
date. Information regarding this
proposed rule is available in alternative
formats upon request.
Required Determinations
Clarity of Rule
We are required by Executive Orders
12866 and 12988 and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1,
1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule we
publish must:
(a) Be logically organized;
(b) Use the active voice to address
readers directly;
(c) Use clear language rather than
jargon;
(d) Be divided into short sections and
sentences; and
(e) Use lists and tables wherever
possible.
If you feel that we have not met these
requirements, send us comments by one
of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES
section. To better help us revise the
rule, your comments should be as
specific as possible. For example, you
should tell us the names of the sections
or paragraphs that are unclearly written,
which sections or sentences are too
long, the sections where you feel lists or
tables would be useful, etc.
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
3501, et seq.)
This proposed rule does not contain
any new collections of information that
require approval by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under
the Paperwork Reduction Act. This rule
will not impose new recordkeeping or
reporting requirements on State or local
governments, individuals, businesses, or
organizations. We may not conduct or
sponsor and you are not required to
respond to a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number.
Species
Vertebrate
population
where endangered or
threatened
Historic range
Common name
*
Scientific name
*
*
*
National Environmental Policy Act (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)
We have determined that we do not
need to prepare an environmental
assessment, as defined under the
authority of the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969, 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 proposed rule is available on the
Internet at https://www.regulations.gov
or upon request from the Field
Supervisor, Ohio Ecological Services
Field Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section).
Author
The primary author of this proposed
rule is Angela Boyer of the Ohio
Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section).
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species,
Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements,
Transportation.
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we propose to 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.
2. Amend § 17.11(h) by adding new
entries for ‘‘Mussel, rayed bean’’ and
‘‘Mussel, snuffbox’’ in alphabetical order
under CLAMS to the List of Endangered
and Threatened Wildlife as follows:
§ 17.11 Endangered and threatened
wildlife.
*
Status
*
*
When listed
*
*
.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
*
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
02NOP3
*
Critical
habitat
Special
rules
*
67583
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
Species
Vertebrate
population
where endangered or
threatened
Historic range
Common name
Scientific name
Status
When listed
Critical
habitat
Special
rules
CLAMS
*
Mussel, rayed bean .....
*
*
*
Villosa fabalis .............. U.S.A. (IL, IN, KY, MI,
NY, OH, PA, TN,
VA, WV, WI).
*
Mussel, snuffbox ..........
*
*
*
Epioblasma triquetra ... U.S.A. (AL, AR, IL, IN,
IA, KS, KY, MI, MN,
MS, MO, NY, OH,
PA, TN, VA, WV,
WI).
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
NA
*
E
*
....................
NA
NA
*
E
*
....................
NA
*
*
*
Dated: October 15, 2010.
Gary D. Frazer,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
*
[FR Doc. 2010–27413 Filed 11–1–10; 8:45 am]
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS3
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:02 Nov 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\02NOP3.SGM
02NOP3
*
NA
*
NA
*
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 211 (Tuesday, November 2, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 67552-67583]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-27413]
[[Page 67551]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part IV
Department of the Interior
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fish and Wildlife Service
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing the Rayed Bean
and Snuffbox as Endangered; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 75 , No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 67552]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R3-ES-2010-0019; MO 92210-0-0008-B2]
RIN 1018-AV96
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing the Rayed
Bean and Snuffbox as Endangered
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose to
list the rayed bean (Villosa fabalis) and snuffbox (Epioblasma
triquetra) as endangered throughout their ranges, under Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). This proposed rule, if made
final, would extend the Act's protection to the rayed bean and the
snuffbox. We have determined that designating critical habitat for
these species is prudent, but not determinable at this time. The
Service seeks data and comments from the public on this proposed
listing rule.
DATES: We will consider comments we receive on or before January 3,
2011. We must receive requests for public hearings, in writing, at the
address shown in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section on or
before December 17, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments on Docket No. FWS-R3-
2010-0019.
U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public Comments Processing,
Attn: FWS-R3-2010-0019; Division of Policy and Directives Management;
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Suite 222;
Arlington, VA 22203.
We will post all comments on https://www.regulations.gov. This
generally means that we will post any personal information you provide
us (see the Public Comments section below for more information).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Angela Boyer at the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Ohio Ecological Services Field Office, 4625 Morse
Road, Suite 104, Columbus, OH 43230; telephone 614-416-8993, ext. 22.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Comments
Our intent is to use the best available commercial and scientific
data as the foundation for all endangered and threatened species
listing determinations. We therefore request comments or suggestions
from other concerned governmental agencies, the scientific community,
industry, or any other interested party concerning this proposed rule
to list the rayed bean and snuffbox as endangered. We particularly seek
comments concerning:
(1) Survey results for the rayed bean or snuffbox, as well as any
studies that may show distribution, status, population size, or
population trends, including indications of recruitment;
(2) Pertinent aspects of life history, ecology, and habitat use of
the rayed bean or snuffbox;
(3) Current and foreseeable threats faced by the rayed bean or
snuffbox, or both species, in relation to the five factors (as defined
in section 4(a)(1) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.));
(4) The specific physical and biological features to consider, and
specific areas that may meet the definition of critical habitat and
that should or should not be considered for a proposed critical habitat
designation as provided by section 4 of the Act; and
(5) The data and studies to which this proposal refers.
You may submit your comments and materials concerning this proposed
rule by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. We will not
accept comments sent by e-mail or fax or to an address not listed in
the ADDRESSES section. Comments must be submitted to https://www.regulations.gov before midnight (Eastern Time) on the date
specified in the DATES section. Finally, we will not consider hand-
delivered comments that we do not receive, or mailed comments that are
not postmarked, by the date specified in the DATES section.
We will post your entire comment --including your personal
identifying information--on https://www.regulations.gov. If you provide
us personal identifying information such as your street address, phone
number, or e-mail address, you may request at the top of your document
that we withhold this information from public review. However, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.
Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting
documentation we used in preparing this proposed rule, will be
available for public inspection on https://www.regulations.gov, or by
appointment, during normal business hours at the Ohio Ecological
Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Public Hearing
The Act provides for one or more public hearings on this proposal,
if requested. We must receive requests by the date listed in the DATES
section above. Such requests must be made in writing and addressed to
the Field Supervisor of the Ohio Ecological Services Field Office (see
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Background
Species Descriptions
The rayed bean is a small mussel usually less than 1.5 inches (in)
(3.8 centimeters (cm)) in length (Cummings and Mayer 1992, p. 142;
Parmalee and Bogan 1998, p. 244; West et al. 2000, p. 248). The shell
outline is elongate or ovate in males and elliptical in females, and
moderately inflated in both sexes, but more so in females (Parmalee and
Bogan 1998, p. 244). The valves are thick and solid. The anterior end
is rounded in females and bluntly pointed in males (Cummings and Mayer
1992, p. 142). Females are generally smaller than males (Parmalee and
Bogan 1998, p. 244). Dorsally, the shell margin is straight, while the
ventral margin is straight to slightly curved (Cummings and Mayer 1992,
p. 142). The beaks are slightly elevated above the hingeline (West et
al. 2000, p. 248), with sculpture consisting of double loops with some
nodules (Parmalee and Bogan 1998, p. 244). No posterior ridge is
evident. Surface texture is smooth and sub-shiny, and green, yellowish-
green, or brown in color, with numerous wavy, dark-green rays of
various widths (sometimes obscure in older, blackened specimens)
(Cummings and Mayer 1992, p. 142; West et al. 2000, p. 248).
Internally, the left valve has two pseudocardinal teeth (tooth-like
structures along the hinge line of the internal portion of the shell)
that are triangular, relatively heavy, and large, and two short, heavy
lateral teeth (Cummings and Mayer 1992, p. 142). The right valve has a
low, triangular pseudocardinal tooth, with possibly smaller secondary
teeth anteriorly and posteriorly, and a short, heavy, and somewhat
elevated lateral tooth (Parmalee and Bogan 1998, p. 244). The color of
the nacre (mother-of-pearl) is silvery white or bluish and iridescent
posteriorly. Key characters useful for distinguishing the rayed bean
from other mussels is its small size, thick valves, unusually heavy
teeth for a small mussel, and color pattern (Cummings and Mayer 1992,
p. 142).
The snuffbox is a small- to medium-sized mussel with males reaching
up to 2.8 in. (7.0 cm) in length (Cummings
[[Page 67553]]
and Mayer 1992, p. 162; Parmalee and Bogan 1998, p. 108). The maximum
length of females is about 1.8 in (4.5 cm) (Parmalee and Bogan 1998, p.
108). The shape of the shell is somewhat triangular (females), oblong,
or ovate (males) with the valves solid, thick, and very inflated. The
beaks are located somewhat anterior of the middle, swollen, turned
forward and inward, and extended above the hingeline (Cummings and
Mayer 1992, p. 162). Beak sculpture consists of three or four faint,
double-looped bars (Cummings and Mayer 1992, p. 162; Parmalee and Bogan
1998, p. 108). The anterior end of the shell is rounded, and the
posterior end is truncated, highly so in females. The posterior ridge
is prominent, being high and rounded, while the posterior slope is
widely flattened. The posterior ridge and slope in females is covered
with fine ridges and grooves, and the posterioventral shell edge is
finely toothed (Cummings and Mayer 1992, p. 162). When females are
viewed from a dorsal or ventral perspective, the convergence of the two
valves on the posterior slope is nearly straight due to being highly
inflated. This gives the female snuffbox a unique broadly lanceolate or
cordate perspective when viewed at the substrate and water column
interface (Ortmann 1919, p. 329; van der Schalie 1932, p. 104). The
ventral margin is slightly rounded in males and nearly straight in
females. Females have recurved denticles on the posterior shell margin
that aid in holding host fish (Barnhart 2008, p. 1). The periostracum
(external shell surface) is generally smooth and yellowish or
yellowish-green in young individuals, becoming darker with age. Green
squarish, triangular, or chevron-shaped marks cover the umbone (the
inflated area of the shell along the dorsal margin) but become poorly
delineated stripes with age. Internally, the left valve has two high,
thin, triangular, emarginate pseudocardinal teeth (the front tooth
being thinner than the back tooth) and two short, strong, slightly
curved, and finely striated lateral teeth. The right valve has a high,
triangular pseudocardinal tooth with a single short, erect, and heavy
lateral tooth. The interdentum (a flattened area between the
pseudocardinal and lateral teeth) is absent, and the beak cavity is
wide and deep. The color of the nacre is white, often with a silvery
luster, and a gray-blue or gray-green tinge in the beak cavity. The
soft anatomy was described by Oesch (1984, pp. 233-234), and Williams
et al. (2008, p. 282). Key characters useful for distinguishing the
snuffbox from other species include its unique color pattern, shape
(especially in females), and high degree of inflation.
Taxonomy
The rayed bean is a member of the freshwater mussel family
Unionidae and was originally described as Unio fabalis by Lea in 1831.
The type locality is the Ohio River (Parmalee and Bogan 1998, p. 244),
probably in the vicinity of Cincinnati, Ohio. Over the years, the rayed
bean has been placed in the genera Unio, Margarita, Margaron, Eurynia,
Micromya, and Lemiox. It was ultimately placed in the genus Villosa by
Stein (1963, p. 19), where it remains today (Turgeon et al. 1998, p.
33). We recognize Unio capillus, U. lapillus, and U. donacopsis as
synonyms of Villosa fabalis.
The snuffbox is a member of the freshwater mussel family Unionidae
and was described as Truncilla triqueter (Rafinesque 1820, p. 300). The
species name was later changed to triquetra (Simpson 1900, p. 517),
from the Latin triquetrous meaning ``having three acute angles,'' a
reference to the general shape of the female. The type locality is the
Falls of the Ohio (Ohio River, Louisville, Kentucky) (Parmalee and
Bogan 1998, p. 108). The synonymy of the snuffbox was summarized by
Johnson (1978, pp. 248-249), Parmalee and Bogan (1998, p. 108), and Roe
(no date, p. 3). This species has also been considered a member of the
genera Unio, Dysnomia, Plagiola, Mya, Margarita, Margaron, and
Epioblasma at various times since its description. The monotypic
subgenus Truncillopsis was created for this species (Ortmann and Walker
1922, p. 65). The genus Epioblasma was not in common usage until the
1970s (Stansbery 1973, p. 22; Stansbery 1976, p. 48; contra Johnson
1978, p. 248), where it currently remains (Turgeon et al. 1998, p. 34).
Unio triqueter, U. triangularis, U. triangularis longisculus, U.
triangularis pergibosus, U. cuneatus, and U. formosus are recognized as
synonyms of E. triquetra. Tricorn pearly mussel is another common name
for this species (Clarke 1981a, p. 354).
Life History
The general biology of the rayed bean and the snuffbox are similar
to other bivalved mollusks belonging to the family Unionidae. Adults
are suspension-feeders, spending their entire lives partially or
completely buried within the substrate (Murray and Leonard 1962, p.
27). Adults feed on algae, bacteria, detritus, microscopic animals, and
dissolved organic material (Silverman et al. 1997, p. 1859; Nichols and
Garling 2000, p. 873; Christian et al. 2004, pp. 108-109; Strayer et
al. 2004, pp. 430-431). Recent evidence suggests that adult mussels may
also deposit-feed on particles in the sediment (Raikow and Hamilton
2001, p. 520). For their first several months, juvenile mussels employ
foot (pedal) feeding, consuming settled algae and detritus (Yeager et
al. 1994, p. 221). Unionids have an unusual mode of reproduction. Their
life cycle includes a brief, obligatory parasitic stage on fish. Eggs
develop into microscopic larvae called glochidia within special gill
chambers of the female. The female expels the mature glochidia, which
must attach to the gills or the fins of an appropriate fish host to
complete development. Host fish specificity varies among unionids. Some
species appear to use a single host, while others can transform on
several host species. Following successful infestation, glochidia
encyst (enclose in a cyst-like structure) and drop off as newly
transformed juveniles. For further information on freshwater mussels,
see Gordon and Layzer (1989, pp. 1-17).
Mussel biologists know relatively little about the specific life-
history requirements of the rayed bean and the snuffbox. Most mussels,
including the rayed bean and snuffbox, have separate sexes. The age at
sexual maturity, which is unknown for the rayed bean and snuffbox, is
highly variable among and within species (0-9 years) (Haag and Staton
2003, pp. 2122-2123), and may be sex dependent (Smith 1979, p. 382).
Both species are thought to be long-term brooders; rayed bean females
brood glochidia from May through October (Parmalee and Bogan 1998, p.
108; Ecological Specialists, Inc. (ESI) 2000, p. 5; Woolnough 2002, p.
23), and snuffbox brood glochidia from September to May (Ortmann 1912,
p. 355; 1919, p. 327). The only published research identifies the
Tippecanoe darter (Etheostoma tippecanoe) as a host fish for the rayed
bean (White et al. 1996, p. 191). Other rayed bean hosts are thought to
include the greenside darter (E. blennioides), rainbow darter (E.
caeruleum), mottled sculpin (Cottus bairdi), and largemouth bass
(Micropterus salmoides) (Woolnough 2002, p. 51). Based on inference of
closely related species, additional hosts may be suitable, including
other darter and sculpin species (Jones 2002, pers. comm.). Juvenile
snuffbox have successfully transformed on logperch (Percina caprodes),
blackside darter (P. maculata), rainbow darter, Iowa darter (E. exile),
blackspotted topminnow (Fundulus olivaceous), mottled sculpin, banded
sculpin (C. carolinae), Ozark sculpin (C. hypselurus), largemouth
[[Page 67554]]
bass, and brook stickleback (Culaea inconstans) in laboratory tests
(Sherman 1994, p. 17; Yeager and Saylor 1995, p. 3; Hillegass and Hove
1997, p. 25; Barnhart et al. 1998, p. 34; Hove et al. 2000, p. 30;
Sherman Mulcrone 2004, pp. 100-103).
Habitat Characteristics
The rayed bean is generally known from smaller, headwater creeks,
but occurrence records exist from larger rivers (Cummings and Mayer
1992, p. 142; Parmalee and Bogan 1998, pp. 244). They are usually found
in or near shoal or riffle areas, and in the shallow, wave-washed areas
of glacial lakes, including Lake Erie (West et al. 2000, p. 253). In
Lake Erie, the species is generally associated with islands in the
western portion of the lake. Preferred substrates typically include
gravel and sand. The rayed bean is oftentimes found among vegetation
(water willow (Justicia americana) and water milfoil (Myriophyllum
sp.)) in and adjacent to riffles and shoals (Watters 1988b, p. 15; West
et al. 2000, p. 253). Specimens are typically buried among the roots of
the vegetation (Parmalee and Bogan 1998, pp. 245). Adults and juveniles
appear to produce byssal threads (thin, protein-based fibers)
(Woolnough 2002, pp. 99-100), apparently to attach themselves to
substrate particles.
The snuffbox is found in small to medium-sized creeks to larger
rivers and in lakes (Cummings and Mayer 1992, p. 162; Parmalee and
Bogan 1998, p. 108). The species occurs in swift currents of riffles
and shoals and wave-washed shores of lakes over gravel and sand with
occasional cobble and boulders. Individuals generally burrow deep into
the substrate except when spawning or attempting to attract a host
(Parmalee and Bogan 1998, p. 108).
Strayer (1999a, pp. 471-472) demonstrated in field trials that
mussels in streams occur chiefly in flow refuges, or relatively stable
areas that displayed little movement of particles during flood events.
Flow refuges conceivably allow relatively immobile mussels to remain in
the same general location throughout their entire lives. He thought
that features commonly used in the past to explain the spatial
patchiness of mussels (water depth, current speed, sediment grain size)
were poor predictors of where mussels actually occur in streams.
Rayed Bean Historical Distribution
The rayed bean historically occurred in 112 streams, lakes, and
some human-made canals in 10 States: Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky,
Michigan, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, and West
Virginia; and Ontario, Canada. The mussel occurred in parts of the
upper (Lake Michigan drainage) and lower Great Lakes systems, and
throughout most of the Ohio and Tennessee River systems. During
historical times, the rayed bean was fairly widespread and locally
common in many Ohio River system streams based on collections made over
a several-decade period. The species was once fairly common in the
Belle, South Branch Thames, Detroit, Scioto, Wabash, and Duck Rivers;
several tributaries in the Scioto system (Olentangy River, and Big
Darby and Alum Creeks); and Tippecanoe Lake based on literature and
museum records (Call 1900; Watters 1994, p. 105; West et al. 2000, p.
251; Badra 2002, pers. comm.). The rayed bean was last reported from
some streams several decades ago (North Branch Clinton, Auglaize, Ohio,
West Fork, Beaver, Shenango, Mahoning, Mohican, Scioto, Green, Barren,
Salamonie, White, Big Blue, Tennessee, Holston, South Fork Holston,
Nolichucky, Clinch, North Fork Clinch, and Powell Rivers; Wolf,
Conewango, Oil, Crooked, Pymatuning, Mill, Alum, Whetstone, Deer, Lick,
and Richland Creeks; and Buckeye, Tippecanoe, Winona, and Pike Lakes).
The rayed bean population in Lake Erie was once considerable (Ohio
State University Museum of Biological Diversity (OSUM) collections),
but has been eliminated by the zebra mussel.
Rayed Bean Current Distribution
Extant populations of the rayed bean are known from 28 streams and
1 lake in six States and one Canadian province: Indiana (St. Joseph
River (stream) (Fish Creek (tributary)), Tippecanoe River (Lake
Maxinkuckee, Sugar Creek)), Michigan (Black River (Mill Creek), Pine
River, Belle River, Clinton River), New York (Allegheny River (Olean
Creek, Cassadaga Creek, French Creek)), Ohio (Swan Creek, Fish Creek,
Blanchard River, Tymochtee Creek, Walhonding River, Mill Creek, Big
Darby Creek, Scioto Brush Creek), (Great Miami River, Little Miami
River (East Fork Little Miami River), Stillwater River), Pennsylvania
(Allegheny River (French Creek (Cussewago Creek))), and West Virginia
(Elk River); and Ontario, Canada (Sydenham River, Thames River).
Rayed Bean Population Estimates and Status
Based on historical and current data, the rayed bean has declined
significantly rangewide and is now known from only 28 streams and 1
lake (down from 112), a 74 percent decline (Table 1). This species has
also been eliminated from long reaches of former habitat in hundreds of
miles of the Maumee, Ohio, Wabash, and Tennessee Rivers and from
numerous stream reaches and their tributaries. In addition, this
species is no longer known from the States of Illinois, Kentucky,
Tennessee, and Virginia. The rayed bean was also extirpated in West
Virginia until the 2006 reintroduction into the Elk River (Clayton
2007, pers. comm.).
In this proposed rule, mussel shell collection records have been
classified according to the condition of shell material. Fresh dead
(FD) shells still have flesh attached to the valves, they may or may
not retain a luster to their nacre, and their periostracum is non-
peeling, all indicating relatively recent death (generally less than 1
year) (Buchanan 1980, p. 4). Relic (R) shells have lost the luster to
their nacre, have peeling or absent periostracum, may be brittle or
worn, and likely have been dead more than a year (Buchanan 1980, pp. 4-
5; Zanatta et al. 2002, p. 482). Generally, FD shells indicate the
continued presence of the species at a site (Metcalf 1980, p. 4). The
presence of R shells only, along with repeated failure to find live (L)
animals or FD shells, likely signifies that a population is extirpated
(Watters and Dunn 1993-94, pp. 253-254). Shells labeled R may
originally have been reported by collectors as either weathered dead
(or weathered dry) or subfossil. If no details on shell condition were
provided for a record, the shell is simply referred to as dead. In this
document, a population is considered viable if it is reproducing and
has enough individuals to sustain the population at its current level
for the foreseeable future.
[[Page 67555]]
Table 1--Rayed Bean Status at Historical Locations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last observed (R =
River basin Stream relic) Current status Comments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Upper Great Lakes Sub-basin.... Pigeon River...... 1996 (R) Extirpated........ ..................
Lower Great Lakes Sub-basin.... Black River....... 2001 Unknown........... Small and of
questionable
viability.
Mill Creek........ 2002 Unknown........... Unknown.
Pine River........ 2002 Declining......... Recruiting.
Belle River....... 2003 Unknown........... ..................
Clinton River..... 1992 Unknown........... Recruiting.
North Fork Clinton 1933 Extirpated........ ..................
River.
Sydenham River 2003 Stable............ Recruiting.
(Canada).
Thames River...... 2008 Unknown........... Unknown.
Detroit River..... 1983 Extirpated........ ..................
Rouge River....... <1914 Extirpated........
Huron River....... 1931-32 Extirpated........
Raisin River...... 1941 Extirpated........
Macon Creek....... 1976-78 (R) Extirpated........
Maumee River...... 1913 Extirpated........
Swan Creek........ 2009 Stable............ Recruiting.
St. Joseph River.. 1998 Declining......... Probably not
recruiting.
West Branch St. 1997 (R) Extirpated........
Joseph River.
Fish Creek........ 2009 Declining......... Unknown.
Cedar Creek....... 1985 Extirpated........
Feeder Canal to 1988 (R) Extirpated........
St. Joseph River.
Auglaize River.... 1964 Extirpated........
Ottawa River...... 1998 (R) Extirpated........
Blanchard River... 2009 Unknown........... Recruiting.
Sandusky River.... 1978 Extirpated........
Tymochtee Creek... 1996 Unknown........... Unknown.
Wolf Creek........ 1971 (R) Extirpated........
Lake Erie......... 1977-87 Extirpated........
Ohio River system.............. Ohio River <1960 Extirpated........
mainstem.
Allegheny River... 2007 Stable............ Recruiting.
Chautauqua Lake <1919 Extirpated........
outlet.
Chautauqua Lake... <1919 Extirpated........
Olean Creek....... 2000 Unknown........... Recruiting.
Cassadaga Creek... 1994 Unknown........... Recruiting.
Conewango Creek... ~1908 Extirpated........
Oil Creek......... <1970 Extirpated........
French Creek...... 2005 Stable............ Recruiting.
Cussewago Creek... 1991 Unknown...........
Crooked Creek..... ~1908 Extirpated........
West Fork River... <1913 Extirpated........
Beaver River...... ~1910 Extirpated........
Shenango River.... ~1908 Extirpated........
Pymatuning Creek.. ~1908 Extirpated........
Mahoning River.... <1921 Extirpated........
Middle Island 1980 (R) Extirpated........
Creek.
Muskingum River... 1980 (R) Extirpated........
Tuscarawas River.. ? Extirpated........
Walhonding River.. 1991-95 Declining......... Probably not
recruiting.
Mohican River..... 1969 Extirpated........
Elk River......... 2008 Reintroduced in
2006.
Scioto River...... 1964 Extirpated........
Mill Creek........ 2007 Unknown...........
Alum Creek........ 1970 Extirpated........
Blacklick Creek... ? Extirpated........
Olentangy River... 1962 Extirpated........
Whetstone Creek... 1961 Extirpated........
Big Walnut Creek.. 1961 Extirpated........
Walnut Creek...... 1994 (R) Extirpated........
Big Darby Creek... 2008 Declining......... Unknown.
Little Darby Creek 1990 (R) or 1986 Extirpated........
(R)
Deer Creek........ 1981 Extirpated........
Sugar Creek....... <1900 Extirpated........
Scioto Brush Creek 1987 Unknown........... Probably not
recruiting.
Cedar Creek....... ? Extirpated........
Buckeye Lake...... ? Extirpated........
Ohio and Erie ? Extirpated........ ..................
Canal.
Great Miami River. 2009 Unknown........... Unknown.
Little Miami River 1990-91 Unknown........... Probably not
recruiting.
East Fork Little 1990-91 Unknown...........
Miami River.
[[Page 67556]]
Stillwater River.. 1987 Unknown........... Probably not
recruiting.
South Fork Licking 1982 (R) Extirpated........
River.
North Fork Elkhorn 1982 (R) Extirpated........
Creek.
Eagle Creek....... 1981 (R) Extirpated........
Brashears Creek... 1983 (R) Extirpated........
Green River....... 1964 Extirpated........
Nolin River....... 1983 (R) Extirpated........
Barren River...... <1900, ? Extirpated........
Wabash River...... 1962 (R) Extirpated........
Salamonie River... 1971 Extirpated........
Mississinewa River 1994 (R) Extirpated........
Tippecanoe River.. 1995 Declining......... Possibly
recruiting.
Tippecanoe Lake... <1920 Extirpated........
Winona Lake....... 1934 Extirpated........
Pike Lake......... 1906 Extirpated........
Lake Maxinkuckee.. 1997 Declining......... Unknown.
Vermilion River... 1999 (R) Extirpated........
Salt Fork 1956-57 Extirpated........
Vermilion River.
Middle Fork 1991 Extirpated........
Vermilion River.
North Fork 1995 (R) Extirpated........
Vermilion River.
Embarras River.... 1956 Extirpated........
Sugar Creek....... 1998 Unknown........... Unknown.
White River....... <1903 Extirpated........
West Fork White 1989-91 (R) Extirpated........
River.
East Fork White ? Extirpated........
River.
Big Blue River.... 1944 Extirpated........
Walnut Creek...... 1992 (R) Extirpated........
Mill Creek........ 1992 (R) Extirpated........
Fall Creek........ ? Extirpated........
Sugar Creek....... 1950 Extirpated........
Tennessee River system......... Tennessee River <1939 Extirpated........
mainstem.
Holston River..... 1914-15 Extirpated........
North Fork Holston 1913 Extirpated........
River.
South Fork Holston 1914 Extirpated........
River.
Nolichucky River.. 1968 Extirpated........
Lick Creek........ 1967 (R) Extirpated........
First Creek....... ? Extirpated........
Clinch River...... 1965 Extirpated........
North Fork Clinch <1921 Extirpated........
River.
Powell River...... 1913-15 Extirpated........
Elk River......... 1965 Extirpated........
Richland Creek.... 1892 Extirpated........
Duck River........ 1982 Extirpated........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Upper Great Lakes Sub-Basin
The rayed bean was not known from the upper Great Lakes sub-basin
until 1996, when relic specimens were documented from a tributary to
the St. Joseph River, a tributary to Lake Michigan. No extant
populations of the rayed bean are currently known from this system.
Lower Great Lakes Sub-Basin
Of the 112 water bodies from which the rayed bean was historically
recorded, 27 are in the lower Great Lakes system. The species is
thought to be extant in 12 streams, which are discussed below, but
historically significant populations have been eliminated from Lake
Erie and the Detroit River.
Black River--A tributary of the St. Clair River, linking Lakes
Huron and St. Clair, the Black River is located in southeastern
Michigan. Hoeh and Trdan (1985, p. 115) surveyed 17 sites in the Black
River system, including 12 mainstem sites, but failed to find the rayed
bean. The rayed bean was not discovered there until the summer of 2001
when a single live (L) individual was found in the lower river in the
Port Huron State Game Area (PHSGA) (Badra 2002, pers. comm.). A survey
in 2003 failed to find any rayed bean, and two surveys in 2005 found
only two valves (Badra 2008, pers. comm.). An additional survey was
performed in 2005 at six sites, but no rayed bean were found (Badra
2008, pers. comm.). The status of this population cannot be accurately
assessed at this time, but would appear to be small and of questionable
viability (Butler 2002, p. 8).
Mill Creek--Mill Creek is a tributary of the Black River, St. Clair
County, in southeastern Michigan. The rayed bean was discovered in Mill
Creek in August 2002. Five dead specimens were found approximately 0.5
miles (mi) (0.8 kilometers (km)) above its confluence with the Black
River in the PHSGA (Badra 2002, pers. comm.). A Mill Creek site 0.25 mi
(0.4 km) from the confluence of the Black River was surveyed in 2003
and 2004 with one rayed bean shell found during each survey (Badra
2008, pers. comm.). Similar to the population in the Black River, the
status of this newly discovered population cannot be accurately
assessed at this time.
[[Page 67557]]
Pine River--Another tributary of the St. Clair River, the Pine
River is located in southeastern Michigan. The rayed bean was
apparently not collected in the Pine River until 1982 when specimens
were found at three sites (Hoeh and Trdan 1985, p. 116). These
collections included 5 L individuals and 23 FD specimens (Badra 2002,
pers. comm.). Hoeh and Trdan (1985, p. 116) considered it to be
``rare,'' semi-quantitatively defined as occurring at a rate of less
than one specimen per person-hour sampling effort. In 1997, two L
individuals were found. The last survey in the Pine River occurred in
2002 (Badra 2008, pers. comm.), and one L rayed bean was documented
(Badra and Goforth 2003, p. 6). The species may have declined
significantly since the 1980s, but is probably still viable in the Pine
River.
Belle River--The Belle River is a third tributary of the St. Clair
River harboring an extant population of the rayed bean. This species
was first collected from the Belle River in 1965, when 17 FD specimens
were collected (OSUM 1965:0106). The same site was revisited in 1978,
but only one FD shell is represented in OSUM 1978:0013. Since that
time, L individuals or FD specimens have been found in 1983 and 1992,
while only R shells were found in 1994 (Badra 2008, pers. comm.).
During summer 2002 sampling, single L specimens were found at two new
sites, with an additional four and two FD specimens, respectively, also
found from these sites (Badra 2008, pers. comm.). The status of the
population is still not well known, but appears to be small.
Clinton River--The rayed bean was first recorded from the Clinton
River in 1933 (Badra 2008, pers. comm.). The mussel fauna in the entire
mainstem of the Clinton River downstream of Pontiac, Michigan, was
apparently wiped out by pollution between 1933 and 1977 (Strayer 1980,
p. 147). In 1992, Trdan and Hoeh (1993, p. 102) found 26 L individuals
using a suction dredge from a bridge site slated for widening where
Strayer (1980, p. 146) found only R shells. The rayed bean represented
1.2 percent relative abundance of the 10 species collected at the site.
The population is probably viable but currently restricted to about 3
mi (4.8 km) of stream in the western suburbs of Pontiac. Its long-term
status appears to be highly precarious.
Sydenham River--The rayed bean in the Sydenham River represents one
of the largest rayed bean populations remaining. West et al. (2000, pp.
252-253) presented a highly detailed collection history of the rayed
bean in the Sydenham River. The rayed bean is currently thought to
exist in an approximately 75-mi (120-km) reach of the middle Sydenham,
from the general vicinity of Napier, Ontario, downstream to Dawn Mills.
The species appears to be most abundant in the lower half of this river
reach. Although the range has remained relatively consistent over time,
abundance data at repeatedly sampled sites from the 1960s to the late
1990s indicate a general decline of the rayed bean. Based on the range
of sizes and roughly equal number of specimens in various size classes
of the L and FD material they gathered, West et al. (2000, p. 256)
considered the population to be ``healthy'' and ``reproducing''
(recruiting). Data from sampling in 2001 shows evidence of recruitment
and variable size classes for both sexes from most of the sites
(Woolnough 2002, p. 50). Based on this data, the rayed bean population
in the Sydenham River is doing considerably better than West et al.
(2000, pp. 252-253) suggested. Woolnough and Morris (2009, p. 19)
estimates that there are 1.5 million mature rayed bean in the Sydenham
River living in the 38-mile (61-km) stretch between Napier Road near
Alvinston, Ontario, and Dawn Mills, Ontario.
Thames River--The Thames River flows west through southwestern
Ontario. The rayed bean was historically known from only the south
branch until 2008, when it was discovered in the north branch. In July
2008, six gravid (full of eggs) females were collected at two north
branch sites (Woolnough 2008, pers. comm.). In September 2008, four L
females and two L males were collected at two different north branch
sites (Woolnough 2008, pers. comm.). All of these individuals were
collected within a 4.5-mi (7.2-km) reach of the river (Woolnough 2008,
pers. comm.). Woolnough and Morris (2009, p. 19) estimates that there
are 4,300 mature rayed bean in the Thames River.
Maumee River System--The Maumee River system, which flows into the
western end of Lake Erie, was once a major center of distribution of
the rayed bean. The species was historically known from eight streams
in the system in addition to the mainstem Maumee. Further, an
additional population was discovered in the system in 2005 in Swan
Creek.
Swan Creek--Swan Creek is a tributary of the lower Maumee River in
northwestern Ohio. This population was discovered in 2005. Surveys
conducted in 2006 and 2007 found that the Swan Creek population is
limited to about 3 river mi (5 river km) between river mile (RM) 18.3
and 15.3 (Grabarkiewicz 2008, p. 11). The rayed bean was the fourth
most abundant unionid present within the 2006-2008 sample area,
reaching densities of eight individuals per square meter in some areas
and comprising about 14.1 percent of the total mussel community
(Grabarkiewicz 2008, p. 10). The rayed bean population in Swan Creek is
viable and, although limited to a short reach, may be one of the most
robust remaining populations.
St. Joseph River--The St. Joseph River is one of the two major
headwater tributaries to the Maumee, with a drainage area in
southeastern Michigan, northwestern Ohio, and northeastern Indiana. The
mainstem flows in a southwesterly direction to its confluence with the
St. Mary's River to form the Maumee in Ft. Wayne, Indiana. The rayed
bean was historically known from numerous sites on the river, but now
apparently persists only at a couple of sites in the lower St. Joseph
River in Allen and DeKalb Counties, Indiana (Watters 1988b, p. 15;
1998, Appendix C); a few FD specimens were found in both studies, but
no live individuals were found. Grabarkiewicz and Crail (2008, p. 13)
surveyed six sites on the West Branch St. Joseph River in 2007, but did
not encounter any rayed bean.
Fish Creek--A tributary of the St. Joseph River that begins in
Ohio, Fish Creek flows west then south through Indiana, then eventually
east into Ohio before joining the St. Joseph River at Edgerton. The
rayed bean persists in Williams County, Ohio, and possibly DeKalb
County, Indiana. Based on the appearance of 2 L individuals and FD
shells, it inhabits the lower 10 mi (16.1 km) or less of the stream
(Watters 1988b, p. 18; Grabarkiewicz 2009, pers. comm.). Watters
(1988b, p. ii) considered Fish Creek to be ``the most pristine
tributary of the St. Joseph system.'' A major diesel fuel spill from a
ruptured pipeline in DeKalb County in 1993 resulted in a mussel kill in
the lower portion of the stream (Sparks et al. 1999, p. 12). It is not
known if the rayed bean was affected by the spill. Surveys in 2004 (at
64 qualitative sites) and 2005 (at 11 quantitative sites) failed to
detect the species (Brady et al. 2004, p. 2; 2005, p. 3). However,
Grabarkiewicz (2009, pers. comm.) reported finding two L and three FD
rayed bean in 2005 at the County Road 3 bridge in Ohio. In 2009, two FD
rayed bean were found in lower Fish Creek in Ohio (personal
observation). The viability and status of this population is uncertain
(Fisher 2008, pers. comm.).
Blanchard River--The Blanchard River is a tributary of the Auglaize
River in the Maumee River system, in northwestern Ohio. First
discovered in
[[Page 67558]]
1946, this population is one of the largest of the rayed bean
rangewide. The rayed bean in the Blanchard River is restricted to 25-30
river mi (40-48 river km) in the upper portion of the stream in Hardin
and Hancock Counties upstream of Findley (Hoggarth et al. 2000, p. 22).
Hoggarth et al. (2000, p. 23) reported the rayed bean to be the fourth
most common species in the drainage. The population is considered to be
viable.
Tymochtee Creek--Tymochtee Creek is a tributary to the upper
Sandusky River in north-central Ohio, which flows into the southwestern
portion of Lake Erie. The rayed bean is known from three sites in a
reach of stream in Wyandot County and was first collected in 1970. All
collections of the rayed bean have been small, with not more than five
FD shells found in any one collection effort. The last record is for
1996, when a pair and three unpaired valves were collected. The
condition of at least one of the valves indicated that the rayed bean
is probably still extant in the stream, although no L individuals were
observed (Athearn 2002, pers. comm.). The rayed bean status in
Tymochtee Creek is therefore currently unknown.
Ohio River System
The rayed bean was historically known from the Ohio River in the
vicinity of Cincinnati, Ohio, downstream to the Illinois portion of the
river. It undoubtedly occurred elsewhere in the upper mainstem. Few
historical records are known (mostly circa 1900), and no recent
collections have been made, indicating that it became extirpated there
decades ago. It was historically known from 71 streams, canals, and
lakes in the system, representing roughly two-thirds of its total
range. Ortmann (1925, p. 354) considered the rayed bean to be
``abundant in small streams'' in the Ohio River system. Currently, only
16 streams and a lake are thought to have extant rayed bean populations
in the system.
Allegheny River System--Nine streams and Chautauqua Lake
historically harbored rayed bean populations in the Allegheny River
system. Currently, the rayed bean is found in half of these water
bodies, but in good numbers in two streams (Allegheny River and French
Creek) in this drainage.
Allegheny River--The Allegheny River drains northwestern
Pennsylvania and western New York joining the Monongahela River at
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, to form the Ohio River. Ortmann (1909a, p.
179; 1919, p. 262) was the first to report the rayed bean from the
Allegheny. The population once stretched from Cataraugus County, New
York, to Armstrong County, Pennsylvania. Based on historical
collections, it appears that the rayed bean is more abundant now than
it was historically in the Allegheny River. This may indicate that the
rayed bean population in the Allegheny has expanded in the past 100
years. Many streams in western Pennsylvania have improved water quality
since Ortmann's time, when he reported on the wholesale destruction of
mussels in several streams (Ortmann 1909b, pp. 11-12). It currently
occurs in Pennsylvania downstream of Allegheny (Kinzua) Reservoir in
Warren County to the pool of Lock and Dam 8 in northern Armstrong
County, a distance of over 100 river mi (161 river km) (Villella
Bumgardner 2008, pers. comm.). The Allegheny population is viable and
one of the most important remaining rangewide today.
Olean Creek--Olean Creek is a tributary of the Allegheny River in
western New York. A small population of the rayed bean is known from
the lower portions of the stream. Strayer et al. (1991, p. 67) reported
the rayed bean from three sites during 1987-90 sampling, although just
one L individual was located with R shells from the other two sites.
Only R shells were found in Olean Creek in 1994, but three L
individuals were found in 2000, at the proposed construction site of
the City of Olean Water Treatment Plant (ESI 2000, p. 8). Collected
only during their quantitative sampling effort, the rayed bean
represented a relative abundance of 11.5 percent of the seven L species
sampled. The rayed bean age distribution of these specimens also
indicates recent recruitment into the population (ESI 2000, p. 9).
Relic specimens are now known from an 8-mi (13-km) reach of stream,
with L individuals known from less than 1.5 mi (2.4 km) of the lower
creek. The Olean Creek population appears viable, but is small and
tenuous (Butler 2008, pers. comm.)
Cassadaga Creek--Cassadaga Creek is a tributary of Conewango Creek
in the Allegheny River system, in western New York. A small population
of the rayed bean is known from a single riffle (Ross Mills) in the
lower creek north of Jamestown. Four L specimens were found in 1994
(Strayer 1995). Muskrat middens collected during the winter of 2002
produced 38 FD specimens with a size range of 0.8-1.7 in (2.0-4.3 cm)
(Clapsadl 2002, pers. comm.). Although the rayed bean is not known from
other sites in the stream, it appears to be viable at this site. The
highly restricted extent of the population combined with its proximity
to roads and retail development, including a gas station close to the
flood zone upstream, makes it extremely susceptible to a stochastic
event (such as a toxic chemical spill).
French Creek--French Creek is a major tributary of the middle
Allegheny River, in western New York and northwestern Pennsylvania. One
of the largest rayed bean populations known is found in much of the
lower portions of the stream in four Pennsylvania counties (the species
is not known from the New York portion of stream). Ortmann (1909a, p.
188; 1919, p. 264) reported the species from two counties, Crawford and
Vanango. Not until circa 1970 did the population become more thoroughly
known, with museum lot sizes indicating sizable populations at several
sites, particularly in the lower reaches of the stream. Recent
collections indicate that population levels remain high with the rayed
bean occurring throughout the mainstem (Villella Bumgardner 2002, pers.
comm.; Smith and Crabtree 2005, pp. 15-17; Enviroscience 2006, p. 5).
Cussewago Creek--Cussewago Creek is a tributary of lower French
Creek, with its confluence at Meadville, Crawford County, Pennsylvania.
A small population was reported in 1991 from Cussewago Creek (Proch
2001, pers. comm.). The rayed bean is thought to persist in the stream,
but its current status is unknown.
Walhonding River--The Walhonding River is a tributary of the upper
Muskingum River system, in central Ohio, forming the latter River at
its confluence with the Tuscarawas River at Coschocton. Small numbers
of rayed bean shells are represented in OSUM collections from the 1960s
and 1970s. During 1991-93, Hoggarth (1995-96, p. 161) discovered one L
individual and one FD specimen at one site, while four R specimens were
found at three other sites. A small rayed bean population is thought to
remain in the Walhonding River; its status is unknown, but is deemed
highly tenuous given the small population size. The population is
probably nearing extirpation (Hoggarth 2008a, pers. comm.).
Elk River--The Elk River is a major 181-river-mi (291-river-km)
tributary in the lower Kanawha River system draining central West
Virginia and flowing west to the Kanawaha River at Charleston. The
rayed bean was extirpated in the Elk River sometime in the 1990s. In
2006 and 2007, approximately 600 adults were reintroduced into the Elk
River above Clendenin. In 2008, an effort was made to monitor the
reintroduction. A 30-
[[Page 67559]]
minute search yielded two L individuals, but efforts were discontinued
due to high water and excessive habitat disturbance caused by the
search effort (Clayton 2008, pers. comm.). The translocated adults are
thought to persist in the stream, but it is unknown if this new
population is reproducing.
Scioto River system--The Scioto River system, in central and south-
central Ohio, is a major northern tributary of the Ohio River. A
historically large meta-population of the rayed bean occupied at least
11 streams, the Ohio and Erie Canal, and Buckeye Lake. Sizable
populations were noted in at least the Olentangy River, and Alum and
Big Darby Creeks, based on OSUM collections primarily from the 1960s. A
series of system reservoirs mostly north of Columbus reduced habitat
and contributed to the elimination of some populations in several
streams (Alum, Big Walnut, and Deer Creeks; Olentangy and Scioto
Rivers). The location of the Columbus Metropolitan Area in the heart of
the watershed has also taken a major toll on the species. The
historical Scioto rayed bean meta-population has since been decimated
by anthropogenic factors. Currently, remnant populations are known only
from Mill Creek, Big Darby Creek, and Scioto Brush Creek.
Mill Creek--Mill Creek is a tributary of the Scioto River in
central Ohio that joins the Scioto River at the O'Shaughnessy Reservoir
northwest of the City of Columbus. In 2004, seven FD specimens were
found during a survey in the City of Marysville (Hoggarth 2005, p. 7).
In 2007, Hoggarth (2007a, pp. 5-6) found two L rayed bean at the same
site and one L individual at an additional site. No other information
is available on the status of this population.
Big Darby Creek--Big Darby Creek is one of the major tributaries
draining the northwestern portion of the Scioto River system in central
Ohio. A sizable rayed bean population was noted in Big Darby Creek from
OSUM collections primarily from the 1960s. Watters (1994, p. 105)
reported finding a few FD specimens in 1986, but none in 1990, and
indicated that the rayed bean was probably extirpated from Big Darby
Creek. In 2006, one L individual was found at the U.S. Highway 42
bridge replacement project site (Hoggarth 2006, p. 6). This individual
was relocated to a site upstream out of the impact zone of the bridge
project, and nine additional L individuals were subsequently found at
the relocation site (Hoggarth 2006, p. 6). In 2007, three L rayed bean
were found at the relocation site (Hoggarth 2007b, p. 9). Hoggarth
(2008b, pers. comm.) visited the same relocation site in 2008, and
reported finding ``numerous living specimens'' of the rayed bean. The
status of this population cannot be accurately assessed at this time,
but would appear to be small and of questionable viability.
Scioto Brush Creek-- Scioto Brush Creek is a small western
tributary of the lower Scioto River in Scioto County, south-central
Ohio. Watters (1988a, p. 45) discovered the rayed bean in this stream
in 1987, reporting two FD and two R specimens from a site, and a R
specimen from a second site among the 20 sites he collected. This
population's current status is uncertain.
Great Miami River--The Great Miami River is a major northern
tributary of the Ohio River in southwestern Ohio that originates from
Indian Lake in west-central Ohio and flows into the Ohio River west of
Cincinnati. The occurrence of the rayed bean in the Great Miami River
was discovered in August 2009, during a mussel survey for a bridge
project in Logan County, Ohio. Only one individual was documented, a
male approximately 7 to 8 years of age (Hoggarth 2009, pers. comm.).
The status of this newly discovered population is not known.
Little Miami River--The Little Miami River is a northern tributary
of the Ohio River in southwestern Ohio, flowing into the latter at the
eastern fringe of the Cincinnati metropolitan area. Hoggarth (1992, p.
248) surveyed over 100 sites in the entire system. He found one L
individual at a site in Warren County and possibly a subfossil shell at
another site, although there is contradictory data in his paper (Butler
2002, p. 17). The latter site may have been the same as that reported
for a pre-1863 record (Hoggarth 1992, p. 265). The rayed bean appears
to be very rare in the Little Miami, having been found extant at only 1
of 46 mainstem sites. Hoggarth (1992, p. 267) highlighted the ``fragile
nature'' of the extant mussel community in the system, while noting
that localized reaches of the Little Miami were ``severely impacted.''
The species status in the river is uncertain, but apparently very
tenuous and probably headed toward extirpation (Butler 2002, p. 17).
East Fork Little Miami River--The East Fork Little Miami River is
an eastern tributary of the lower Little Miami River, with its
confluence at the eastern fringe of the Cincinnati metropolitan area.
According to OSUM records, eight FD specimens were reported from a site
in eastern Clermont County in 1973. Hoggarth (1992, p. 265) reported
one L, three FD, and one R rayed bean from three sites in a 7-river-mi
(11-river-km) stretch of the stream in western Clermont and adjacent
Brown County (including the 1973 site). Harsha Reservoir on the East
Fork destroyed several miles of potential stream habitat for the rayed
bean a few miles downstream of the extant population. The status of the
rayed bean in the river is uncertain but probably of doubtful
persistence (Butler 2002, p. 17).
Stillwater River--The Stillwater River is a western tributary of
the middle Great Miami River in southwestern Ohio. The rayed bean is
known from two specimens, one FD and one R, collected in 1987 at two
sites spanning the Miami-Montgomery County line (OSUM records). Both
sites occur in the footprint of Englewood Reservoir (constructed circa
1920), which serves as a retarding basin (a constructed empty lake used
to absorb and contain flooding in periods of high rain) that is
normally a free-flowing river except in times of flood, therefore
continuing to provide riverine habitat that is normally destroyed by
permanently impounded reservoirs. The rayed bean in the Stillwater
River may be extant, but its status is currently unknown and considered
highly imperiled.
Tippecanoe River--The Tippecanoe River is a large northern
tributary of the middle Wabash River in north-central Indiana. The
first records for the rayed bean date to circa 1900 (Daniels 1903, p.
646). Historically, this species was known from numerous sites in six
counties in the Tippecanoe River. A total of 12 FD specimens from 5 of
30 sites were found when sampled in 1992. The rayed bean ``is
apparently on the decline'' in the river (ESI 1993, p. 87). The
Tippecanoe rayed bean population was thought to be recruiting by Fisher
(2008, pers. comm.), but appears tenuous and its long-term viability is
questionable.
Lake Maxinkuckee--Lake Maxinkuckee is a glacial lake in the
headwaters of the Tippecanoe River in north-central Indiana. The rayed
bean has been known from the lake for more than a century (Blatchley
1901). A 1997 OSUM record included seven FD specimens collected at its
outlet to the Tippecanoe River. Fisher (2002, pers. comm.), who made
the 1997 OSUM collection, noted that many native mussels had zebra
mussels attached to their valves and were apparently contributing to
their mortality. The status of the rayed bean in Lake Maxinkuckee is
therefore highly tenuous, and its long-term persistence questionable.
Sugar Creek--Sugar Creek is a tributary of the East Fork White
River, in the lower Wabash River system in south-central Indiana. A
rayed bean population was first reported there in
[[Page 67560]]
1930. Harmon (1992, p. 33) sampled 27 mainstem and 16 tributary sites
finding FD specimens at 3 mainstem sites and R specimens from 2 other
sites. The sites with FD material were found in the lowermost 6 mi (9.7
km) of stream. The status and viability of this tenuous population is
uncertain (Fisher 2008, pers. comm.).
Tennessee River System
Historically, the rayed bean was known from the Tennessee River and
12 of its tributary streams. Ortmann (1924, p. 55) reported that the
rayed bean had a ``rather irregular distribution''; however, museum
lots show that it was fairly common in some streams (North Fork Clinch,
Duck Rivers). The last L rayed bean records from the system, with the
exception of the Duck River, were from the 1960s or earlier. The
species held on in the Duck until the early 1980s. Recent intensive
sampling in the Duck watershed has failed to locate even a R shell of
the rayed bean (Ahlstedt et al. 2004, p. 29). Tributaries in this
system have been extensively sampled over the past 25 years. It is
highly probable that this species is extirpated from the entire
Tennessee River system.
A project was initiated in 2008 to reintroduce rayed bean into the
Duck River by translocating over 1,000 adults from the Allegheny River
system. Although the rayed bean was extirpated from the Duck River
about 25 years ago, major improvements in water quality and physical
habitat conditions have occurred in the past 15 years. In response to
these improvements, recruitment of nearly all extant mussel species has
been documented and suggests that reintroduction of the rayed bean
might be successful (Anderson 2008, pers. comm.). The reintroduction
has not yet occurred.
The information presented in this document indicates that the rayed
bean has experienced a significant reduction in range and most of its
populations are disjunct, isolated, and with few exceptions, appear to
be declining (West et al. 2000, p. 251). The extirpation of this
species from over 80 streams and other water bodies within its
historical range indicates that substantial population losses have
occurred. Relatively few streams are thought to harbor sizable viable
populations (Sydenham, Swan, Blanchard, and Allegheny Rivers, and
French Creek). Small population size and restricted stream reaches of
current occurrence are a real threat to the rayed bean due to the
negative genetic aspects associated with small, geographically isolated
populations. This can be especially true for a species, like rayed
bean, that was historically widespread and had population connectivity
among mainstem rivers and multiple tributaries. The current
distribution, abundance, and trend information illustrates that the
rayed bean is imperiled.
Snuffbox Historical Distribution
The snuffbox historically occurred in 208 streams and lakes in 18
States and 1 Canadian province: Alabama, Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana,
Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, New
York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia, and
Wisconsin; and Ontario. The major watersheds of historical streams and
lakes of occurrence include the upper Great Lakes sub-basin (Lake
Michigan drainage), lower Great Lakes sub-basin (Lakes Huron, Erie, and
Ontario drainages), upper Mississippi River sub-basin, lower Missouri
River system, Ohio River system, Cumberland River system, Tennessee
River system, lower Mississippi River sub-basin, and White River
system.
Snuffbox Current Distribution
Extant populations of the snuffbox are known from 74 streams in 14
States and 1 Canadian province: Alabama (Tennessee River, Paint Rock
River, and Elk River), Arkansas (Buffalo River, Spring River, and
Strawberry River), Illinois (Kankakee River and Embarras River),
Indiana (Pigeon River, Salamonie River, Tippecanoe River, Sugar Creek,
Buck Creek, Muscatatuck River, and Graham Creek), Kentucky (Tygarts
Creek, Kinniconick Creek, Licking River, Slate Creek, Middle Fork
Kentucky River, Red Bird River, Red River, Rolling Fork Salt River,
Green River, and Buck Creek), Michigan (Grand River, Maple River, Pine
River, Belle River, Clinton River, Huron Ri