Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing the Northern Long-Eared Bat With a Rule Under Section 4(d) of the Act, 2371-2378 [2015-00644]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 11 / Friday, January 16, 2015 / Proposed Rules
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R5–ES–2011–0024;
4500030113]
RIN 1018–AY98
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Listing the Northern LongEared Bat With a Rule Under Section
4(d) of the Act
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule and reopening of
comment period.
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), propose to
create a species-specific rule under
authority of section 4(d) of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act), that provides measures
that are necessary and advisable to
provide for the conservation of the
northern long-eared bat (Myotis
septentrionalis), should we determine
this species warrants listing as a
threatened species under the Act. In
addition, we announce the reopening of
the public comment period on the
October 2, 2013, proposed rule to list
the northern long-eared bat as an
endangered species under the Act.
DATES: We will accept comments
received or postmarked on or before
March 17, 2015. Comments submitted
electronically using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES,
below) must be received by 11:59 p.m.
Eastern Time on the closing date. We
must receive requests for public
hearings, in writing, at the address
shown in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT by March 2, 2015.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by one of the following methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. In the Search box,
enter FWS–R5–ES–2011–0024, which is
the docket number for this rulemaking.
You may submit a comment by clicking
on ‘‘Comment Now!’’
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail
or hand-delivery to: Public Comments
Processing, Attn: FWS–R5–ES–2011–
0024; Division of Policy and Directives
Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS
2042–PDM; Arlington, VA 22203.
We request that you send comments
only by one of the methods described
above. We will post all comments on
https://www.regulations.gov. This
generally means that we will post any
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with FRONTMATTER
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:29 Jan 15, 2015
Jkt 235001
personal information you provide us
(see the Public Comments section below
for more information).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Tony Sullins, Endangered Species
Chief, Midwest Regional Office, 5600
American Blvd. West, Suite 990,
Bloomington, MN 55437, by telephone
612–725–3548 or by facsimile 612–725–
3548. Persons who use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD) may call the Federal Information
Relay Service (FIRS) at 800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Summary
On October 2, 2013, the Service
proposed to list the northern long-eared
bat as an endangered species (78 FR
61046). To date, we solicited public
comment on this proposal on three
separate occasions, totaling 180 days.
Through these public comment periods,
we received numerous comments and
additional information suggesting we
evaluate listing the northern long-eared
bat as a threatened species with a
species-specific rule under section 4(d)
of the Act excepting specific forms of
take. The Service has not yet made a
final listing decision regarding the
status of the northern long-eared bat
(e.g., not warranted, threatened, or
endangered); however, in our review of
public comments we did determine that
if threatened status is warranted, a
species-specific rule under section 4(d)
of the Act rule may be advisable.
Therefore, this document consists of: (1)
A proposed rule under section 4(d) of
the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.),
that outlines the prohibitions, and
exceptions to those prohibitions,
necessary and advisable to provide for
the conservation of the northern longeared bat; and (2) a reopening of the
comment period for the proposed rule to
list the northern long-eared bat as an
endangered species under the Act.
The Need for the Regulatory Action and
How the Action Will Meet That Need
Based on information received during
three open comment periods and a time
extension, the Service is considering
multiple public comments and
additional information to determine if
listing as a threatened species may be
appropriate. If threatened status is
appropriate, Section 4(d) of the Act
specifies that, for threatened species, the
Secretary shall issue such regulations as
she deems necessary and advisable to
provide for the conservation of the
species. Further, a 4(d) rule may
identify activities that would not be
prohibited under section 9 of the Act.
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2371
Although the Service has not yet
made a final listing determination for
the northern long-eared bat, we are
proposing this 4(d) rule in the event that
our final listing determination is to list
the species as a threatened species. If we
list the species as an endangered species
or find that it does not warrant listing,
we will withdraw this proposed rule. If
we list the species as a threatened
species, we intend to publish a final
4(d) rule concurrent with, and as a
component of, the final listing rule.
Consistent with section 4(d) of the Act,
this proposed 4(d) rule provides
measures that are tailored to our current
understanding of the conservation needs
of the northern long-eared bat.
Statement of Legal Authority for the
Regulatory Action
Under section 4(d) of the Act, the
Secretary of the Interior has discretion
to issue such regulations as she deems
necessary and advisable to provide for
the conservation of the species. The
Secretary also has the discretion to
prohibit by regulation with respect to a
threatened species, any act prohibited
by section 9(a)(1) of the Act.
Summary of the Major Provisions of the
Regulatory Action in Question
The proposed species-specific 4(d)
rule prohibits purposeful take of
northern long-eared bats throughout its
range except in instances of removal of
northern long-eared bats from human
dwellings and authorized capture and
handling of northern long-eared bat by
individuals permitted to conduct these
same activities for other listed bats.
In areas not affected by white nose
syndrome (WNS), a disease currently
affecting many U.S. bat populations, all
incidental take resulting from any
otherwise lawful activity will be
excepted from prohibition.
In areas affected by WNS, all
incidental take prohibitions apply
except that take attributable to forest
management practices, maintenance and
limited expansion of transportation and
utility rights-of-way, removal of trees
and brush to maintain prairie habitat,
and limited tree removal projects shall
be excepted from the take prohibition,
provided these activities protect known
maternity roosts and hibernacula.
Further, removal of hazardous trees for
the protection of human life or property
shall be excepted from the take
prohibition.
Public Comments
To allow the public to comment
simultaneously on this proposed
species-specific 4(d) rule and the
proposed listing rule, we also announce
E:\FR\FM\16JAP1.SGM
16JAP1
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with FRONTMATTER
2372
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 11 / Friday, January 16, 2015 / Proposed Rules
the reopening of the comment period on
the Service’s October 2, 2013, proposed
rule to list the northern long-eared bat
as an endangered species under the Act.
If the result of our final listing
determination concludes that threatened
species status is appropriate for the
northern long-eared bat, we intend to
finalize the species-specific 4(d) rule
with the final listing rule. Therefore, we
request comments or information from
other concerned Federal and State
agencies, the scientific community, or
any other interested party concerning
the proposed listing and the proposed
4(d) rule. We also are seeking peer
review comments from knowledgeable
individuals with scientific expertise to
review our analysis of the best available
science and application of that science
and to provide any additional scientific
information to improve this proposed
rule. We will consider all comments and
information received during our
preparation of a final determination on
the status of the species and the rule
under section 4(d) of the Act, if
threatened status is determined.
Accordingly, if our final decision is to
list the species as a threatened species,
and we determine that it is necessary
and advisable to promulgate a species
specific 4(d) rule under the Act, any
4(d) rule we finalize may differ from
this proposal based on specific public
comments and any new information that
may become available.
With regard to the proposed 4(d) rule,
we particularly seek comments
regarding:
(1) Whether measures outlined in this
proposed rule under section 4(d) of the
Act are necessary and advisable for the
conservation and management of the
northern long-eared bat.
(2) Whether it may be appropriate to
except incidental take as a result of
other categories of activities beyond
those covered in this proposed rule and,
if so, under what conditions and with
what conservation measures.
(3) Whether the Service should
modify the portion of this rule under
section 4(d) of the Act that defines how
the portion of the northern long-eared
bat range will be identified as the ‘‘WNS
buffer zone.’’ We are seeking comments
regarding the factors and process we
used to delineate where on the ground
we believe WNS is likely affecting the
northern long-eared bat and whether
that delineation should incorporate
political boundaries (e.g., county lines)
for ease in describing the delineated
area to the public.
(4) Additional provisions the Service
may wish to consider for a rule under
section 4(d) of the Act in order to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:29 Jan 15, 2015
Jkt 235001
conserve, recover, and manage the
northern long-eared bat.
Please note that comments merely
stating support for or opposition to the
actions under consideration without
providing supporting information,
although noted, will not be considered
in making a determination, as section
4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that
determinations as to whether any
species is a threatened or endangered
species must be made ‘‘solely on the
basis of the best scientific and
commercial data available.’’
You may submit your comments and
materials concerning this proposed rule
by one of the methods listed in
ADDRESSES. We request that you send
comments only by the methods
described in ADDRESSES.
If you submit information via https://
www.regulations.gov, your entire
submission—including any personal
identifying information—will be posted
on the Web site. If your submission is
made via a hardcopy that includes
personal identifying information, you
may request at the top of your document
that we withhold this information from
public review. However, we cannot
guarantee that we will be able to do so.
We will post all hardcopy submissions
on https://www.regulations.gov. Please
include sufficient information with your
comments to allow us to verify any
scientific or commercial information
you include.
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 U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Midwest Regional Office (see
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Previous Federal Actions
For a complete list of previous
Federal actions, see the proposed rule to
list the northern long-eared bat (78 FR
61046). On October 2, 2013, we
published in the Federal Register a
proposed rule to list the northern longeared bat as an endangered species
under the Act. The proposed rule had a
60-day comment period, ending on
December 2, 2013. On December 2,
2013, we extended this comment period
through January 2, 2014 (78 FR 72058).
On June 30, 2014, we announced a 6month extension of the final
determination on the proposed listing
rule for northern long-eared bat, and we
reopened the public comment period on
the proposed rule for 60 days, until
August 29, 2014 (79 FR 36698). On
November 18, 2014, we again opened
the comment period for an additional 30
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
days, which closed on December 18,
2014 (79 FR 68657). During the
comment period we received one
request for a public hearing, which was
held in Sundance, Wyoming, on
December 2, 2014.
Background
On October 2, 2013, the Service
proposed to list the northern long-eared
bat as an endangered species. To date,
we solicited public comment on this
proposal on three separate occasions,
totaling 180 days. Through these public
comment periods, we received
numerous comments and additional
information suggesting we evaluate
listing the northern long-eared bat as a
threatened species with a speciesspecific rule under section 4(d) of the
Act excepting specific forms of take.
The Service has not yet made a final
listing decision regarding the status of
the northern long-eared bat (e.g., not
warranted, threatened, or endangered);
however, in our review of public
comments we did determine that if
threatened status is warranted, a
species- specific rule under section 4(d)
of the Act rule may be advisable.
Therefore, this document consists of: (1)
A proposed rule under section 4(d) of
the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.),
that outlines the prohibitions, and
exceptions to those prohibitions,
necessary and advisable to provide for
the conservation of the northern longeared bat; and (2) a reopening of the
comment period for the proposed rule to
list the northern long-eared bat as an
endangered species under the Act.
Unlike the Act’s provisions regarding
endangered species, the Act does not
specify particular prohibitions, or
exceptions to those prohibitions, for
threatened species. Instead, under
section 4(d) of the Act, the Secretary of
the Interior has the discretion to issue
such regulations as she deems necessary
and advisable to provide for the
conservation of such species, including
discretion to prohibit by regulation,
with respect to any threatened species,
any act prohibited under section 9(a)(1)
of the Act. By delegation from the
Secretary, the Service has exercised this
discretion to promulgate regulations
that apply general take and other
prohibitions (50 CFR 17.31) to
threatened species, while allowing
exceptions to those prohibitions as
authorized by permit (50 CFR 17.32).
Alternately, the Service may issue a rule
under section 4(d) of the Act that
establishes specific prohibitions and
exceptions that are tailored to the
specific conservation needs of a
particular species (see 50 CFR 17.31(c)).
E:\FR\FM\16JAP1.SGM
16JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 11 / Friday, January 16, 2015 / Proposed Rules
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with FRONTMATTER
In such cases, some of the prohibitions
and authorizations under 50 CFR 17.31
and 17.32 may be appropriate for the
species and incorporated into the rule,
but the 4(d) rule will also include
provisions that are tailored to the
specific conservation needs of the
threatened species and may be more or
less restrictive than the general
provisions at 50 CFR 17.31. The final
species-specific 4(d) rule will contain
all the applicable prohibitions and
exceptions.
This document discusses only those
topics directly relevant to the proposed
4(d) rule for the northern long-eared bat.
For more information on the northern
long-eared bat and its habitat, please
refer to the October 2, 2013, proposed
listing rule, (78 FR 61046), which is
available online at https://
www.regulations.gov (at Docket Number
FWS–R5–ES–2011–0024) or from the
Midwest Regional Office (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Provisions of the Proposed 4(d) Rule for
the Northern Long-Eared Bat
Under section 4(d) of the Act, the
Secretary may publish a species-specific
rule that modifies the standard
protections for threatened species with
prohibitions and exceptions tailored to
the conservation of the species that are
determined to be necessary and
advisable. Under this proposed 4(d)
special rule, the Service proposes that
all of the prohibitions under 50 CFR
17.31 and 17.32 will apply to the
northern long-eared bat and are
necessary and advisable to provide for
the conservation of the species, except
as noted below. The proposed rule
under section 4(d) of the Act will not
remove, or alter in any way, the
consultation requirements under section
7 of the Act.
As discussed in the October 2, 2013,
proposed rule (78 FR 61046), the
primary factor supporting the proposed
determination of endangered species
status for the northern long-eared bat is
the disease, white-nose syndrome
(WNS). We further determined that
other threat factors, including forest
management activities, wind-energy
development, habitat modification,
destruction and disturbance, and other
threats may have cumulative effects to
the species in addition to WNS;
however, they have not independently
caused significant, population-level
effects on the northern long-eared bat.
Based upon information received during
public comment periods, we are
reanalyzing the species status to
determine if listing as threatened is
appropriate. Therefore, we are
proposing this rule under section 4(d) of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:29 Jan 15, 2015
Jkt 235001
the Act and seeking public review and
comment on it so in the event we
determine that the northern long-eared
bat meets the definition of a threatened
species instead of an endangered
species we can finalize this 4(d) rule,
which provides exceptions to the
prohibitions for some of these activities
that cause cumulative effects, as we
deem necessary and advisable for the
conservation of the species concurrently
with our final listing determination.
We conclude that certain activities
described in this section of the
preamble, when conducted in
accordance with the conservation
measures identified herein, will provide
protection for the northern long-eared
bat during its most sensitive life stages.
These activities are: Forest management
activities, subject to certain time
restrictions, maintenance and minimal
expansion of existing rights-of-way and
transmission corridors (also subject to
certain restrictions), native prairie
management, other projects resulting in
minimal tree removal, hazard tree
removal, removal of bats from and
disturbance within human structures,
and capture, handling, attachment of
radio transmitters, and tracking
northern long-eared bats for a 1-year
period following the effective date of the
final rule. The Service proposes that
incidental take that is caused by these
activities implemented on private, State,
tribal, and Federal lands will not be
prohibited provided those activities
abide by the conservation measures in
the rule and are otherwise legal and
conducted in accordance with
applicable State, Federal, tribal, and
local laws and regulations.
Buffer Zone Around WNS and
Pseudogymnoascus destructans (the
Fungus That Causes WNS) Positive
Counties (WNS Buffer Zone)
Currently, not all of the range of
northern long-eared bat is affected by
WNS. In the proposed listing (78 FR
61046), the Service concluded that the
proposed status determination of
endangered species was primarily based
on the impacts from WNS, and that the
other threats, when acting on the
species alone, were not causing the
species to be in danger of extinction.
Given this information, the Service
proposes that while all purposeful take
will be prohibited with the exception of
removal of bats from human dwellings
and survey and research efforts
conducted within a 1-year period
following the effective date of the final
rule. All other take incidental to other
lawful activities will be allowed in
those areas of the northern long-eared
bat range not in proximity to
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2373
documented occurrence of WNS or
Pseudogymnoascus destructans, as
identified by the Service.
Currently, WNS is mainly detected by
surveillance at bat hibernacula. Thus,
our direct detection of the disease is
limited largely to wintering bat
populations in the locations where they
hibernate. However, bats are known to
leave hibernacula and travel great
distances, sometimes hundreds of miles,
to summer roosts. Therefore, the
impacts of the disease are not limited to
the immediate vicinity around bat
hibernacula, but have an impact on a
landscape scale. For northern long-eared
bats, as with all species, this means that
the area of influence of WNS is much
greater than the counties known to
harbor affected hibernacula, resulting in
impacts to a much larger section of the
species’ range. To fully represent the
extent of WNS, we must also include
these summer areas.
Overall, northern long-eared bats are
not considered to be long-distance
migrants, typically dispersing 40–50
miles (64–80 kilometers) from their
hibernacula. However, other bat species
that disperse much further distances are
also vectors for WNS spread and may
transmit the disease to northern longeared bat populations. It has been
suggested that the little brown bat
(Myotis lucifugus), in particular, be
considered a likely source of WNS
spread across eastern North America.
Little brown bats tend to migrate greater
distances, particularly in the western
portions of their range, with distances
up to 350 miles (563 km) or more
recorded (See Ellison 2008, p. 21;
Norquay et al. 2013, p. 510). In a recent
study, reporting on bat band recoveries
of little brown bats over a 21-year
period, Norquay et al. (2013, pp. 509–
510) describe recaptures between
hibernacula and summer roosts with a
maximum distance of 344 miles (554
km) and a median distance of 288 miles
(463 km).
For the purpose of this rule, the
portion of the northern long-eared bat
range that is considered to be affected
by WNS is that area within 150 miles
(241 km) of the boundary of U.S.
counties or Canadian districts where the
fungus Pseudogymnoascus destructans
or WNS has been detected. We
acknowledge that 150 miles (241 km)
does not capture the full range of
potential WNS infection, but represents
a compromise distance between the
known migration distances of northern
long-eared bats and little brown bats
that is suitable for our purpose of
estimating the extent of WNS infection
on the northern long-eared bat.
Anywhere outside of the geographic
E:\FR\FM\16JAP1.SGM
16JAP1
2374
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 11 / Friday, January 16, 2015 / Proposed Rules
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with FRONTMATTER
area defined by these parameters,
northern long-eared bat populations will
not be considered to be experiencing the
impacts of WNS.
The Service proposes to define the
term ‘‘WNS buffer zone’’ as the portion
of the range of the northern long-eared
bat within 150 miles of the boundaries
of U.S. counties or Canadian districts
where the fungus Pseudogymnoascus
destructans or WNS has been detected.
For purposes of this proposed 4(d)
rule, coordination with the local Service
Ecological Services field office is
recommended to determine whether
specific locations fall within the WNS
buffer zone. For more information about
the current known extent of WNS and
150-mile (241-km) buffer, please see
https://www.fws.gov/midwest/
endangered/mammals/nlba/.
Conservation Measures
The Service proposes that take
incidental to certain activities
conducted in accordance with the
following habitat conservation
measures, as applicable, will not be
prohibited (i.e., excepted from the
prohibitions):
(i) Occur more than 0.25 mile (0.4 km)
from a known, occupied hibernacula;
(ii) Avoid cutting or destroying
known, occupied maternity roost trees
during the pup season (June 1–July 31);
and
(iii) Avoid clearcuts within 0.25 (0.4
km) mile of known, occupied maternity
roost trees during the pup season (June
1–July 31).
Note that activities that may cause
take of northern long-eared bat that do
not use these conservation measures
may still be done, but only after
consultation with the Service. This
means that, while the resulting take
from such activities is not excepted by
this rule, the take may be authorized
through other means provided in the
Act (i.e., section 7 consultation or an
incidental take permit).
For purposes of this proposed rule
and the conservation measures listed
above, coordination with the local
Service Ecological Services field office
is recommended to determine the
specific locations of the ‘‘known
hibernacula’’ and ‘‘known maternity
roosts.’’ These locations will be
informed by records in each State’s
Natural Heritage database, Service
records, other databases, or other survey
efforts. Hibernacula are generally
defined as locations where one or more
northern long-eared bats have been
detected during hibernation or outside
during staging or swarming. Similarly,
maternity roosts are generally defined
through roost records in each State’s
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:29 Jan 15, 2015
Jkt 235001
Natural Heritage database, Service
records, other databases, or other survey
efforts for northern long-eared bat or
other bat species.
These conservation measures aim to
protect the northern long-eared bat
during its most sensitive life stages.
Hibernacula are an essential habitat and
should not be destroyed or modified
(any time of year). In addition, there are
periods of the year when northern longeared bats are concentrated at and
around their hibernacula (fall, winter,
and spring). Northern long-eared bats
are susceptible to disruptions near
hibernacula in the fall, when they
congregate to breed and increase fat
stores, which are depleted from
migration, before entering hibernation.
During hibernation, northern long-eared
bat winter colonies are susceptible to
direct disturbance. Briefly in spring,
northern long-eared bats yet again use
the habitat surrounding hibernacula to
increase fat stores for migration to their
summering grounds. This feeding
behavior is particularly important for
the females, who must obtain enough fat
stores to carry not only themselves, but
also their unborn pups, to their summer
home range. In the summer maternity
season, northern long-eared bat
maternity colonies are especially
vulnerable during the time after the
pups are born, but before pups are able
to fly (the non-volant period or pup
season). During this time, pups are
unable to flee danger without the
assistance of their mothers, thus
increasing the potential for activities
affecting maternity roosts to kill and
injure individual bats. Once the pups
can fly, this risk is reduced because the
pups will have the ability to flee their
roost if it is being cut or otherwise
damaged, potentially avoiding harm,
injury, or mortality.
The Service concludes that a 0.25mile (0.4-km) buffer should be sufficient
to protect most known, occupied
hibernacula and hibernating colonies.
This buffer will provide basic protection
for the hibernacula and hibernating bats
in winter from direct impacts, such as
filling, excavation, blasting, noise, and
smoke exposure. This buffer will also
protect some roosting and foraging
habitat around the hibernacula.
Northern long-eared bats have been
found up to 8.2 miles (13.2 km) from
their hibernacula during the fall,
although the majority of roosts were
within 1.6 miles (2.6 km) (Lowe 2012,
p. 32), using habitat within that area for
roosting, foraging, and swarming.
However, given that northern long-eared
bats are not locally abundant and
compose a small proportion of the total
number of bats in any given
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
hibernaculum (Barbour and Davis 1969,
p. 77; Mills 1971, p. 625; Caire et al.
1979, p. 405; Caceres and Barclay 2000,
pp. 2–3) and the species is rarely
recorded in concentrations of more than
100 in a single hibernaculum (Barbour
and Davis, 1969, p. 77), we do not
expect that all of the habitat around a
hibernaculum would be necessary for
these purposes. Therefore, our best
judgment is that protection of the
habitat within 0.25 mile (0.4 km) of
hibernacula should provide sufficient
habitat to meet the needs of most
hibernating populations.
The Service concludes that, in
addition to preservation of actual
known maternity roosts, a 0.25-mile
(0.4-km) buffer for all clearcutting
activities will be sufficient to protect the
habitat surrounding known maternity
roosts during the pup season. This
buffer will prevent the cutting of known
occupied maternity roost trees during
the pup season from clearcutting
activities and protect some habitat for
known maternity colonies. Northern
long-eared bats in the summer have an
approximate average maximum foraging
distance of 1.5 miles (2.4 km) from a
roost tree (Sasse and Perkins, 1996, p.
95; Badin, 2014, p. 76), and average
home range size has been documented
between 44–460 acres (Lacki et al. 2009,
p. 1169; Owen et al. 2003, p. 353; Carter
and Feldhamer 2005, p. 264). Based on
this information, our best judgment is
that the amount of land within 0.25 mile
(0.4 km) of a maternity roost, or 128
acres, will provide sufficient roosting,
foraging, and commuting habitat to
sustain most colonies for the duration of
the pup season.
Forest Management
The Service proposes that incidental
take that is caused by forest
management, when carried out in
accordance with the conservation
measures, will not be prohibited. Forest
management includes the suite of
activities used to maintain and manage
forest ecosystems, including, but not
limited to, timber harvest and other
silvicultural treatments, prescribed
burning, invasive species control,
wildlife openings, and temporary roads.
Such activities should also adhere to
any applicable State water quality best
management practices, where they exist.
Although forest ecosystems may include
non-forested land cover types, such as
wetlands and upland openings, this
category of activities generally
maintains forested landcover. We do not
consider conversion of a mixed forest
into an intensively managed
monoculture pine plantation as forest
management covered under this
E:\FR\FM\16JAP1.SGM
16JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 11 / Friday, January 16, 2015 / Proposed Rules
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with FRONTMATTER
proposed rule, as typically these types
of monoculture pine plantations provide
very poor-quality bat habitat.
Where northern long-eared bats are
present when these forest management
activities are performed, bats could be
exposed to habitat alteration or loss or
direct disturbance (i.e., heavy
machinery) or removal of maternity
roost trees (i.e., harvest). In general,
however, the northern long-eared bat is
considered to have more flexible habitat
requirements than other bat species
(Carter and Feldhamer 2005, pp. 265–
266; Timpone et al. 2010, pp. 120–121),
and most types of forest management
should provide suitable habitat for the
species over the long term (with the
exception of conversion to monoculture
pine forest, as discussed above). Based
upon information obtained during
previous comment periods on the
proposed rule to list the bat as an
endangered species, approximately 2
percent of forests in States within the
range of the northern long-eared bat are
impacted by forest management
activities annually (Boggess et al, 2014,
p. 9). Of this amount, in any given year
a smaller fraction of forested habitat is
impacted during the active season when
pups and female bats are most
vulnerable. These impacts are addressed
by the above conservation measures
proposed for inclusion in this rule.
Therefore, we anticipate that habitat
modifications resulting from activities
that manage forests would not
significantly affect the conservation of
the northern long-eared bat. Further,
although activities performed during the
species’ active season (roughly April
through October) may directly kill or
injure individuals, implementation of
the conservation measures provided for
in the proposed rule will limit overall
take by protecting currently known
populations during their more
vulnerable life stages.
Maintenance and Limited Expansion of
Existing Rights-of-Way and
Transmission Corridors
The Service proposes that incidental
take that is caused by activities for the
purpose of maintenance and limited
expansion of existing rights-of-way and
transmission corridors, when carried
out in accordance with the conservation
measures, will not be prohibited (i.e.,
will be excepted from the prohibitions).
Rights-of-way (ROW) and transmission
corridors are in place for activities such
as transportation (i.e., highways,
railways), utility transmission lines, and
energy delivery (pipelines), though they
are not limited to just these types of
corridors. The Service proposes that
take of the northern long-eared bat will
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:29 Jan 15, 2015
Jkt 235001
not be prohibited provided the take is
incidental to activities within the
following categories:
(1) Routine maintenance within an
existing corridor or ROW, carried out in
accordance with the previous described
conservation measures.
(2) Expansion of a corridor or ROW by
up to 100 feet (30 m) from the edge of
an existing cleared corridor or ROW,
carried out in accordance with the
previously described conservation
measures.
General routine maintenance is
designed to limit vegetation growth,
within an existing footprint, so that
operations can continue smoothly.
These activities may include tree
trimming or removal, mowing, and
herbicide spraying. However, depending
on the purpose of the corridor or ROW,
maintenance may only be performed
infrequently and trees and shrubs may
encroach into, or be allowed to grow
within, the ROW until such a time as
maintenance is required. Expansion of
these areas requires removal of
vegetation along the existing ROW to
increase capacity (e.g., road widening).
Northern long-eared bats can occupy
various species and sizes of trees when
roosting. Because of their wide variety
of habitat use when roosting and
foraging, it is possible that they may be
using trees within or near existing
ROWs. Therefore, vegetation removal
within or adjacent to an existing ROW
may remove maternity roost trees and
foraging habitat. Individuals may also
temporarily abandon the areas, avoiding
the physical disturbance until the work
is complete. While ROW corridors can
be large in overall distance, due to the
small scale of the habitat alteration
involved in maintenance of the existing
footprint, potential take is limited. No
new forest fragmentation is expected as
this expands existing open corridors.
We also expect that excepting take
prohibitions from ROW maintenance
and limited expansion will encourage
co-location of new linear projects within
existing corridors. We conclude that the
overall impact of ROW maintenance and
limited expansion activities is not
expected to adversely affect
conservation and recovery efforts for the
species.
Prairie Management
The Service proposes that incidental
take that is caused by activities for the
purpose of prairie management, when
carried out in accordance with the
conservation measures, will not be
prohibited (i.e., will be excepted from
the prohibitions). In some areas of the
northern long-eared bat range, tree and
shrub species are overtaking prairie
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2375
areas. Landowners and agencies
working to establish or conserve prairies
have to remove trees and brush in order
to maintain grasslands. Maintenance
activities include cutting, mowing,
burning, or herbicide use on woody
vegetation to minimize encroachment
into prairies (Grassland Heritage
Foundation Web site, accessed
December 23, 2014). If these prairies are
not managed, they can eventually
become shrub or forest lands sometimes
in as few as 40 years (Briggs et al. 2002
and Ratajczak et. al 2001). We conclude
that the overall impact of prairie
management is not expected to
adversely affect conservation and
recovery efforts for the species.
Projects Resulting in Minimal Tree
Removal
The Service proposes that incidental
take that results from projects causing
minimal tree removal, when carried out
in accordance with the conservation
measures, will not be prohibited (i.e.,
will be excepted from the prohibitions).
Throughout the millions of acres of
forest habitat in the northern long-eared
bat range, many activities involve
cutting or removal of individual or
limited numbers of trees, but do not
significantly change the overall nature
and function of the local forested
habitat. Some of these activities include
firewood cutting, shelterbelt renovation,
removal of diseased trees, tree removal
for other small projects (i.e., culvert
replacement), habitat restoration for fish
and wildlife conservation, and backyard
landscaping. These ongoing activities
can occur throughout the northern longeared bat range, but we do not believe
they materially affect the local forest
habitat for this species and in some
cases increase habitat availability in the
long term. We conclude that the overall
impact of projects causing minimal tree
removal is not expected to adversely
affect conservation and recovery efforts
for the species.
Hazardous Tree Removal
The Service proposes that incidental
take that is caused by removal and
management of hazardous trees will not
be prohibited (i.e., will be excepted
from the prohibitions). Removal of
hazardous trees is typically done as
deemed necessary for human safety or
for the protection of human facilities.
Hazardous trees typically have defects
in their roots, trunk, or branches that
make them likely to fall, with the
likelihood of causing personal injury or
property damage. The limited removal
of these hazardous trees may be widely
dispersed but limited, and should result
in very minimal incidental take of
E:\FR\FM\16JAP1.SGM
16JAP1
2376
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 11 / Friday, January 16, 2015 / Proposed Rules
northern long-eared bat. Therefore, the
Service proposes that take incidental to
the removal of hazardous trees will not
be prohibited. We recommend that,
wherever possible, removal of
hazardous trees be done during the
winter, when these trees will not be
occupied by bats. We conclude that the
overall impact of removing hazardous
trees is not expected to adversely affect
conservation and recovery efforts for the
species.
Removal of Bats From and Disturbance
Within Human Dwellings
The Service proposes that take that is
caused by removal of bats from and
disturbance within human dwellings
will not be prohibited (i.e., will be
excepted from the prohibitions),
provided those actions comply with all
applicable State laws. Northern longeared bats have further been
documented roosting in human-made
structures, such as buildings, barns, a
park pavilion, sheds, cabins, under
eaves of buildings, behind window
shutters, and in bat houses (Mumford
and Cope 1964, p. 72; Barbour and
Davis 1969, p. 77; Cope and Humphrey
1972, p. 9; Amelon and Burhans 2006,
p. 72; Whitaker and Mumford 2009, p.
209; Timpone et al. 2010, p. 119; Joe
Kath 2013, pers. comm.). We conclude
that the overall impact of bat removal
from human dwellings is not expected
to adversely affect conservation and
recovery efforts for the species. In
Is the area
affected by
WNS
(WNS
buffer
zone)?
Take prohibitions at 50
CFR 17.31 and 17.32
All apply, with the following exceptions listed here.
Yes ..........
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with FRONTMATTER
Capture, Handling, Attachment of Radio
Transmitters, and Tracking Northern
Long-Eared Bats for 1 Year
For a limited period of 1 year from the
effective date of this rule, the Service
proposes that purposeful take that is
caused by the authorized capture,
handling, attachment of radio
transmitters, and tracking of northern
long-eared bats by individuals permitted
to conduct these same activities for
other listed bats will be excepted from
the prohibitions. One method of
determining presence/probable absence
of northern long-eared bats is to conduct
mist-netting at summer sites or harp
trapping at hibernacula. Gathering of
this information is essential to monitor
the distribution and status of northern
long-eared bats over time. In addition,
northern long-eared bats are often
captured incidentally to survey and
study efforts targeted at other bat
species (e.g., Indiana bats). It is
necessary and advisable for the
conservation of northern long-eared bats
to provide an exception for the
purposeful take associated with these
normal survey activities conducted by
qualified individuals to promote and
encourage the gathering of information
following standard procedures
(including decontamination) as these
data will help us conserve and recover
this species. To receive an exception,
proponents must have an existing
research permit under section
10(a)(1)(A) of the Act (or similar State
collector’s permit applications in the
northeast region of the Service) for other
listed bat species. The rationale for this
limited time period is that a final listing
decision is expected at the start of the
bat field season, and it will be difficult
to amend all permits in time for this
year.
The Service concludes, for the reasons
specified above, that all of the
conservation measures, prohibitions,
and exceptions identified herein
individually and cumulatively are
necessary and advisable for the
conservation of the northern long-eared
bat and will promote the conservation of
the species across its range.
Table 1 (below) summarizes the
details of the species-specific proposed
4(d) rule for the northern long-eared bat.
Take exceptions
No ............
All apply, with the following exceptions listed here.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
addition, we provide the following
recommendations:
(A) Minimize use of pesticides (e.g.,
rodenticides) and avoid use of sticky
traps in and around structures with
roosting bats.
(B) If bats (of any species) are using
structures (e.g., barns or other
outbuildings) as roosts, and these
structures are proposed for removal,
removal should be performed outside of
the summer maternity season, unless
there are human health or safety
concerns associated with the structure.
Contact a nuisance wildlife specialist
for humane exclusion techniques.
17:29 Jan 15, 2015
Purposeful
Incidental
Actions with the intent to remove northern longeared bats from within human dwellings and
that comply with all applicable State regulations.
Actions relating to capture, handling, attachment
of radio transmitters, and tracking of northern
long-eared bats by individuals permitted to conduct these same activities for other bats, for a
period of 1 year following the effective date of
the final rule.
Actions with the intent to remove northern longeared bats from within human dwellings and
that comply with all applicable State regulations.
Any incidental take of northern long-eared bats resulting from otherwise lawful activities.
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Implementation of forest management, maintenance and expansion of existing rights-of-way
and transmission corridors, native prairie management, and minimal tree removal projects
that:
• Occur more than 0.25 mile (0.4 km) from a
known, occupied hibernacula;
• avoid cutting or destroying known, occupied maternity roost trees during the pup season (June
1–July 31); and
• avoid clearcuts within 0.25 (0.4 km) miles of
known, occupied maternity roost trees during
the pup season (June 1–July 31).
E:\FR\FM\16JAP1.SGM
16JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 11 / Friday, January 16, 2015 / Proposed Rules
Is the area
affected by
WNS
(WNS
buffer
zone)?
2377
Take exceptions
Take prohibitions at 50
CFR 17.31 and 17.32
Purposeful
Incidental
Actions relating to capture, handling, attachment
of radio transmitters, and tracking of northern
long-eared bat by individuals permitted to conduct these same activities for other bats, for a
period of 1 year following the effective date of
the final rule.
Removal of hazard trees for the protection of
human life and property.
Peer Review
In accordance with our joint policy
published in the Federal Register on
July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), we will seek
the expert opinions of at least three
appropriate and independent specialists
regarding this proposed rule. The
purpose of such review is to ensure that
our determination of status for this
species is based on scientifically sound
data, assumptions, and analyses. We
will send peer reviewers copies of this
proposed rule concurrent with
publication in the Federal Register. We
will invite these peer reviewers to
comment, during the reopening of the
public comment period, on our use and
interpretation of the science used in
developing our proposed rule to list the
northern long-eared bat and this
proposed rule under section 4(d) of the
Act.
We will consider all comments and
information we receive during the
comment period on this proposed rule
during preparation of a final
rulemaking. Accordingly, the final
decision may differ from this proposal.
Required Determinations
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with FRONTMATTER
Clarity of the Rule
We are required by Executive Orders
12866 and 12988 and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1,
1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule we
publish must: (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 ADDRESSES. To
better help us revise the proposed rule,
your comments should be as specific as
possible. For example, you should tell
us the numbers of the sections or
paragraphs that are unclearly written,
which sections or sentences are too
long, the sections where you feel lists or
tables would be useful, etc.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:29 Jan 15, 2015
Jkt 235001
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501, et seq.)
This rule does not contain any
collections of information that require
approval by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork
Reduction Act. This rule will not
impose recordkeeping or reporting
requirements on State or local
governments, individuals, businesses, or
organizations. An agency may not
conduct or sponsor and a person is not
required to respond to a collection of
information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
National Environmental Policy Act (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)
We have determined that
environmental assessments and
environmental impact statements, as
defined under the authority of the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969, need not be prepared in
connection with listing a species as an
endangered or threatened species under
the Endangered Species Act. We
published a notice outlining our reasons
for this determination in the Federal
Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR
49244). We intend to incorporate this
proposed rule under section 4(d) of the
Act into our final determination
concerning the listing of the species or
withdrawal of the proposal if new
information is provided that supports
that decision.
Government-to-Government
Relationship With Tribes
In accordance with the President’s
memorandum of April 29, 1994
(Government-to-Government Relations
with Native American Tribal
Governments; 59 FR 22951), Executive
Order 13175 (Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments), and the Department of
the Interior’s manual at 512 DM 2, we
readily acknowledge our responsibility
to communicate meaningfully with
recognized Federal Tribes on a
government-to-government basis. In
accordance with Secretarial Order 3206
of June 5, 1997 (American Indian Tribal
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Rights, Federal–Tribal Trust
Responsibilities, and the Endangered
Species Act), we readily acknowledge
our responsibilities to work directly
with tribes in developing programs for
healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge that
tribal lands are not subject to the same
controls as Federal public lands, to
remain sensitive to Indian culture, and
to make information available to tribes.
By letter dated July 29, 2014, we
contacted known federally recognized
tribal governments throughout the
historical range of the northern longeared bat. We sought their input on our
development of a proposed rule to list
the northern long-eared bat and
encouraged them to contact the Midwest
Regional Office or Regional Native
American contacts if any portion of our
request was unclear or to request
additional information. We did not
receive any comments regarding this
request.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited
in this proposed rule is available on the
Internet at https://www.regulations.gov at
Docket No. FWS–R5–ES–2011–0024 or
upon request from the Endangered
Species Chief, Midwest Regional Office
(see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authors
The primary authors of this proposed
rule are the staff members of the
Midwest Regional Office (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species,
Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, and
Transportation.
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we propose to further
amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter
I, title 50 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, as proposed to be amended
at 78 FR 61046 (October 2, 2013) as
follows:
E:\FR\FM\16JAP1.SGM
16JAP1
2378
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 11 / Friday, January 16, 2015 / Proposed Rules
2. Amend § 17.11(h) by adding an
entry for ‘‘Bat, northern long-eared’’ to
the List of Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife in alphabetical order under
Mammals to read as set forth below:
■
PART 17—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 17
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531–
1544; 4201–4245; unless otherwise noted.
Species
Historic range
Common name
Scientific name
§ 17.11 Endangered and threatened
wildlife.
*
*
*
(h) * * *
Vertebrate
population
where endangered or
threatened
Status
*
Entire ...........
T
*
When
listed
*
Critical
habitat
Special
rules
MAMMALS
*
Bat, northern long-eared ..
*
*
*
(Myotis septentrionalis) ...
*
*
3. Amend § 17.40 by adding paragraph
(n) to read as follows:
■
§ 17.40
Special rules—mammals.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with FRONTMATTER
*
*
*
*
*
(n) Northern long-eared bat (Myotis
septentrionalis). The provisions of this
rule are based upon the occurrence of
white-nose syndrome (WNS), a disease
affecting many U.S. bat populations.
The term ‘‘WNS buffer zone’’ identifies
the portion of the range of the northern
long-eared bat within 150 miles of the
boundaries of U.S. counties or Canadian
districts where the fungus
Pseudogymnoascus destructans or WNS
has been detected. For current
information regarding the WNS buffer
zone, contact your local Service field
office. Field office contact information
may be obtained from the Service
regional offices, the addresses of which
are listed in 50 CFR 2.2.
(1) Outside the WNS buffer zone, the
following provisions apply to the
northern long-eared bat:
(i) Prohibitions. Except as noted in
paragraphs (n)(1)(ii)(A) and (B) of this
section, all the prohibitions and
provisions of §§ 17.31 and 17.32 apply
to the northern long-eared bat.
(ii) Exceptions from prohibitions.
(A) Purposeful take:
(1) Take resulting from actions taken
to remove northern long-eared bats from
within human dwellings, if the actions
comply with all applicable State
regulations.
(2) Take resulting from actions
relating to capture, handling,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:29 Jan 15, 2015
*
U.S.A. (AL, AR, CT, DE,
DC, GA, IL, IN, IA, KS,
KY, LA, ME, MD, MA,
MI, MN, MS, MO, MT,
NE, NH, NJ, NY, NC,
ND, OH, OK, PA, RI,
SC, SD, TN, VT, VA,
WV, WI, WY); Canada
(AB, BC, LB, MB, NB,
NF, NS, NT, ON, PE,
QC, SK, YT).
Jkt 235001
*
*
attachment of radio transmitters, and
tracking of northern long-eared bats by
individuals permitted to conduct these
same activities for other species of bat
listed in § 17.11(h) until [INSERT DATE
1 YEAR AFTER EFFECTIVE DATE OF
FINAL RULE].
(B) Any incidental (non-purposeful)
take of northern long-eared bats
resulting from otherwise lawful
activities.
(2) Inside the WNS buffer zone, the
following provisions apply to the
northern long-eared bat:
(i) Prohibitions. Except as noted in
paragraphs (n)(2)(ii)(A) and (B) of this
section, all prohibitions and provisions
of §§ 17.31 and 17.32 apply to the
northern long-eared bat.
(ii) Exceptions from prohibitions.
Take of northern long-eared bat is not
prohibited in the following
circumstances:
(A) Purposeful take:
(1) Take resulting from actions taken
to remove northern long-eared bats from
within human dwellings, if the actions
comply with all applicable State
regulations.
(2) Take resulting from actions
relating to capture, handling,
attachment of radio transmitters, and
tracking of northern long-eared bats by
individuals permitted to conduct these
same activities for other species of bat
listed in § 17.11(h) until [INSERT DATE
1 YEAR AFTER EFFECTIVE DATE OF
FINAL RULE].
(B) Incidental take:
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4702
*
................
Sfmt 9990
*
*
NA
17.40(n)
*
(1) Implementation of forest
management, maintenance and
expansion of existing rights-of-way and
transmission corridors, native prairie
management, and minimal tree removal
projects that:
(i) Occur more than 0.25 mile (0.4 km)
from a known, occupied hibernacula;
(ii) Avoid cutting or destroying
known, occupied maternity roost trees
during the pup season (June 1–July 31);
and
(iii) Avoid clearcuts within 0.25 (0.4
km) mile of known, occupied maternity
roost trees during the pup season (June
1–July 31).
(2) Removal of hazardous trees for the
protection of human life and property.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: January 12, 2015.
Daniel M. Ashe,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2015–00644 Filed 1–15–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
E:\FR\FM\16JAP1.SGM
16JAP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 11 (Friday, January 16, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 2371-2378]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-00644]
[[Page 2371]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R5-ES-2011-0024; 4500030113]
RIN 1018-AY98
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing the
Northern Long-Eared Bat With a Rule Under Section 4(d) of the Act
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule and reopening of comment period.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose to
create a species-specific rule under authority of section 4(d) of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act), that provides
measures that are necessary and advisable to provide for the
conservation of the northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis),
should we determine this species warrants listing as a threatened
species under the Act. In addition, we announce the reopening of the
public comment period on the October 2, 2013, proposed rule to list the
northern long-eared bat as an endangered species under the Act.
DATES: We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before
March 17, 2015. Comments submitted electronically using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES, below) must be received by 11:59
p.m. Eastern Time on the closing date. We must receive requests for
public hearings, in writing, at the address shown in FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT by March 2, 2015.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter FWS-R5-ES-2011-0024,
which is the docket number for this rulemaking. You may submit a
comment by clicking on ``Comment Now!''
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R5-ES-2011-0024; Division of Policy and
Directives Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax
Drive, MS 2042-PDM; Arlington, VA 22203.
We request that you send comments only by one of the methods
described above. 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: Tony Sullins, Endangered Species
Chief, Midwest Regional Office, 5600 American Blvd. West, Suite 990,
Bloomington, MN 55437, by telephone 612-725-3548 or by facsimile 612-
725-3548. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-
8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Summary
On October 2, 2013, the Service proposed to list the northern long-
eared bat as an endangered species (78 FR 61046). To date, we solicited
public comment on this proposal on three separate occasions, totaling
180 days. Through these public comment periods, we received numerous
comments and additional information suggesting we evaluate listing the
northern long-eared bat as a threatened species with a species-specific
rule under section 4(d) of the Act excepting specific forms of take.
The Service has not yet made a final listing decision regarding the
status of the northern long-eared bat (e.g., not warranted, threatened,
or endangered); however, in our review of public comments we did
determine that if threatened status is warranted, a species-specific
rule under section 4(d) of the Act rule may be advisable. Therefore,
this document consists of: (1) A proposed rule under section 4(d) of
the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.), that outlines the prohibitions, and exceptions to those
prohibitions, necessary and advisable to provide for the conservation
of the northern long-eared bat; and (2) a reopening of the comment
period for the proposed rule to list the northern long-eared bat as an
endangered species under the Act.
The Need for the Regulatory Action and How the Action Will Meet That
Need
Based on information received during three open comment periods and
a time extension, the Service is considering multiple public comments
and additional information to determine if listing as a threatened
species may be appropriate. If threatened status is appropriate,
Section 4(d) of the Act specifies that, for threatened species, the
Secretary shall issue such regulations as she deems necessary and
advisable to provide for the conservation of the species. Further, a
4(d) rule may identify activities that would not be prohibited under
section 9 of the Act.
Although the Service has not yet made a final listing determination
for the northern long-eared bat, we are proposing this 4(d) rule in the
event that our final listing determination is to list the species as a
threatened species. If we list the species as an endangered species or
find that it does not warrant listing, we will withdraw this proposed
rule. If we list the species as a threatened species, we intend to
publish a final 4(d) rule concurrent with, and as a component of, the
final listing rule. Consistent with section 4(d) of the Act, this
proposed 4(d) rule provides measures that are tailored to our current
understanding of the conservation needs of the northern long-eared bat.
Statement of Legal Authority for the Regulatory Action
Under section 4(d) of the Act, the Secretary of the Interior has
discretion to issue such regulations as she deems necessary and
advisable to provide for the conservation of the species. The Secretary
also has the discretion to prohibit by regulation with respect to a
threatened species, any act prohibited by section 9(a)(1) of the Act.
Summary of the Major Provisions of the Regulatory Action in Question
The proposed species-specific 4(d) rule prohibits purposeful take
of northern long-eared bats throughout its range except in instances of
removal of northern long-eared bats from human dwellings and authorized
capture and handling of northern long-eared bat by individuals
permitted to conduct these same activities for other listed bats.
In areas not affected by white nose syndrome (WNS), a disease
currently affecting many U.S. bat populations, all incidental take
resulting from any otherwise lawful activity will be excepted from
prohibition.
In areas affected by WNS, all incidental take prohibitions apply
except that take attributable to forest management practices,
maintenance and limited expansion of transportation and utility rights-
of-way, removal of trees and brush to maintain prairie habitat, and
limited tree removal projects shall be excepted from the take
prohibition, provided these activities protect known maternity roosts
and hibernacula. Further, removal of hazardous trees for the protection
of human life or property shall be excepted from the take prohibition.
Public Comments
To allow the public to comment simultaneously on this proposed
species-specific 4(d) rule and the proposed listing rule, we also
announce
[[Page 2372]]
the reopening of the comment period on the Service's October 2, 2013,
proposed rule to list the northern long-eared bat as an endangered
species under the Act. If the result of our final listing determination
concludes that threatened species status is appropriate for the
northern long-eared bat, we intend to finalize the species-specific
4(d) rule with the final listing rule. Therefore, we request comments
or information from other concerned Federal and State agencies, the
scientific community, or any other interested party concerning the
proposed listing and the proposed 4(d) rule. We also are seeking peer
review comments from knowledgeable individuals with scientific
expertise to review our analysis of the best available science and
application of that science and to provide any additional scientific
information to improve this proposed rule. We will consider all
comments and information received during our preparation of a final
determination on the status of the species and the rule under section
4(d) of the Act, if threatened status is determined. Accordingly, if
our final decision is to list the species as a threatened species, and
we determine that it is necessary and advisable to promulgate a species
specific 4(d) rule under the Act, any 4(d) rule we finalize may differ
from this proposal based on specific public comments and any new
information that may become available.
With regard to the proposed 4(d) rule, we particularly seek
comments regarding:
(1) Whether measures outlined in this proposed rule under section
4(d) of the Act are necessary and advisable for the conservation and
management of the northern long-eared bat.
(2) Whether it may be appropriate to except incidental take as a
result of other categories of activities beyond those covered in this
proposed rule and, if so, under what conditions and with what
conservation measures.
(3) Whether the Service should modify the portion of this rule
under section 4(d) of the Act that defines how the portion of the
northern long-eared bat range will be identified as the ``WNS buffer
zone.'' We are seeking comments regarding the factors and process we
used to delineate where on the ground we believe WNS is likely
affecting the northern long-eared bat and whether that delineation
should incorporate political boundaries (e.g., county lines) for ease
in describing the delineated area to the public.
(4) Additional provisions the Service may wish to consider for a
rule under section 4(d) of the Act in order to conserve, recover, and
manage the northern long-eared bat.
Please note that comments merely stating support for or opposition
to the actions under consideration without providing supporting
information, although noted, will not be considered in making a
determination, as section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that
determinations as to whether any species is a threatened or endangered
species must be made ``solely on the basis of the best scientific and
commercial data available.''
You may submit your comments and materials concerning this proposed
rule by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. We request that you
send comments only by the methods described in ADDRESSES.
If you submit information via https://www.regulations.gov, your
entire submission--including any personal identifying information--will
be posted on the Web site. If your submission is made via a hardcopy
that includes personal identifying information, you may request at the
top of your document that we withhold this information from public
review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We
will post all hardcopy submissions on https://www.regulations.gov.
Please include sufficient information with your comments to allow us to
verify any scientific or commercial information you include.
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 U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Midwest Regional Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT).
Previous Federal Actions
For a complete list of previous Federal actions, see the proposed
rule to list the northern long-eared bat (78 FR 61046). On October 2,
2013, we published in the Federal Register a proposed rule to list the
northern long-eared bat as an endangered species under the Act. The
proposed rule had a 60-day comment period, ending on December 2, 2013.
On December 2, 2013, we extended this comment period through January 2,
2014 (78 FR 72058). On June 30, 2014, we announced a 6-month extension
of the final determination on the proposed listing rule for northern
long-eared bat, and we reopened the public comment period on the
proposed rule for 60 days, until August 29, 2014 (79 FR 36698). On
November 18, 2014, we again opened the comment period for an additional
30 days, which closed on December 18, 2014 (79 FR 68657). During the
comment period we received one request for a public hearing, which was
held in Sundance, Wyoming, on December 2, 2014.
Background
On October 2, 2013, the Service proposed to list the northern long-
eared bat as an endangered species. To date, we solicited public
comment on this proposal on three separate occasions, totaling 180
days. Through these public comment periods, we received numerous
comments and additional information suggesting we evaluate listing the
northern long-eared bat as a threatened species with a species-specific
rule under section 4(d) of the Act excepting specific forms of take.
The Service has not yet made a final listing decision regarding the
status of the northern long-eared bat (e.g., not warranted, threatened,
or endangered); however, in our review of public comments we did
determine that if threatened status is warranted, a species- specific
rule under section 4(d) of the Act rule may be advisable. Therefore,
this document consists of: (1) A proposed rule under section 4(d) of
the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.), that outlines the prohibitions, and exceptions to those
prohibitions, necessary and advisable to provide for the conservation
of the northern long-eared bat; and (2) a reopening of the comment
period for the proposed rule to list the northern long-eared bat as an
endangered species under the Act.
Unlike the Act's provisions regarding endangered species, the Act
does not specify particular prohibitions, or exceptions to those
prohibitions, for threatened species. Instead, under section 4(d) of
the Act, the Secretary of the Interior has the discretion to issue such
regulations as she deems necessary and advisable to provide for the
conservation of such species, including discretion to prohibit by
regulation, with respect to any threatened species, any act prohibited
under section 9(a)(1) of the Act. By delegation from the Secretary, the
Service has exercised this discretion to promulgate regulations that
apply general take and other prohibitions (50 CFR 17.31) to threatened
species, while allowing exceptions to those prohibitions as authorized
by permit (50 CFR 17.32). Alternately, the Service may issue a rule
under section 4(d) of the Act that establishes specific prohibitions
and exceptions that are tailored to the specific conservation needs of
a particular species (see 50 CFR 17.31(c)).
[[Page 2373]]
In such cases, some of the prohibitions and authorizations under 50 CFR
17.31 and 17.32 may be appropriate for the species and incorporated
into the rule, but the 4(d) rule will also include provisions that are
tailored to the specific conservation needs of the threatened species
and may be more or less restrictive than the general provisions at 50
CFR 17.31. The final species-specific 4(d) rule will contain all the
applicable prohibitions and exceptions.
This document discusses only those topics directly relevant to the
proposed 4(d) rule for the northern long-eared bat. For more
information on the northern long-eared bat and its habitat, please
refer to the October 2, 2013, proposed listing rule, (78 FR 61046),
which is available online at https://www.regulations.gov (at Docket
Number FWS-R5-ES-2011-0024) or from the Midwest Regional Office (see
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Provisions of the Proposed 4(d) Rule for the Northern Long-Eared Bat
Under section 4(d) of the Act, the Secretary may publish a species-
specific rule that modifies the standard protections for threatened
species with prohibitions and exceptions tailored to the conservation
of the species that are determined to be necessary and advisable. Under
this proposed 4(d) special rule, the Service proposes that all of the
prohibitions under 50 CFR 17.31 and 17.32 will apply to the northern
long-eared bat and are necessary and advisable to provide for the
conservation of the species, except as noted below. The proposed rule
under section 4(d) of the Act will not remove, or alter in any way, the
consultation requirements under section 7 of the Act.
As discussed in the October 2, 2013, proposed rule (78 FR 61046),
the primary factor supporting the proposed determination of endangered
species status for the northern long-eared bat is the disease, white-
nose syndrome (WNS). We further determined that other threat factors,
including forest management activities, wind-energy development,
habitat modification, destruction and disturbance, and other threats
may have cumulative effects to the species in addition to WNS; however,
they have not independently caused significant, population-level
effects on the northern long-eared bat. Based upon information received
during public comment periods, we are reanalyzing the species status to
determine if listing as threatened is appropriate. Therefore, we are
proposing this rule under section 4(d) of the Act and seeking public
review and comment on it so in the event we determine that the northern
long-eared bat meets the definition of a threatened species instead of
an endangered species we can finalize this 4(d) rule, which provides
exceptions to the prohibitions for some of these activities that cause
cumulative effects, as we deem necessary and advisable for the
conservation of the species concurrently with our final listing
determination.
We conclude that certain activities described in this section of
the preamble, when conducted in accordance with the conservation
measures identified herein, will provide protection for the northern
long-eared bat during its most sensitive life stages. These activities
are: Forest management activities, subject to certain time
restrictions, maintenance and minimal expansion of existing rights-of-
way and transmission corridors (also subject to certain restrictions),
native prairie management, other projects resulting in minimal tree
removal, hazard tree removal, removal of bats from and disturbance
within human structures, and capture, handling, attachment of radio
transmitters, and tracking northern long-eared bats for a 1-year period
following the effective date of the final rule. The Service proposes
that incidental take that is caused by these activities implemented on
private, State, tribal, and Federal lands will not be prohibited
provided those activities abide by the conservation measures in the
rule and are otherwise legal and conducted in accordance with
applicable State, Federal, tribal, and local laws and regulations.
Buffer Zone Around WNS and Pseudogymnoascus destructans (the Fungus
That Causes WNS) Positive Counties (WNS Buffer Zone)
Currently, not all of the range of northern long-eared bat is
affected by WNS. In the proposed listing (78 FR 61046), the Service
concluded that the proposed status determination of endangered species
was primarily based on the impacts from WNS, and that the other
threats, when acting on the species alone, were not causing the species
to be in danger of extinction. Given this information, the Service
proposes that while all purposeful take will be prohibited with the
exception of removal of bats from human dwellings and survey and
research efforts conducted within a 1-year period following the
effective date of the final rule. All other take incidental to other
lawful activities will be allowed in those areas of the northern long-
eared bat range not in proximity to documented occurrence of WNS or
Pseudogymnoascus destructans, as identified by the Service.
Currently, WNS is mainly detected by surveillance at bat
hibernacula. Thus, our direct detection of the disease is limited
largely to wintering bat populations in the locations where they
hibernate. However, bats are known to leave hibernacula and travel
great distances, sometimes hundreds of miles, to summer roosts.
Therefore, the impacts of the disease are not limited to the immediate
vicinity around bat hibernacula, but have an impact on a landscape
scale. For northern long-eared bats, as with all species, this means
that the area of influence of WNS is much greater than the counties
known to harbor affected hibernacula, resulting in impacts to a much
larger section of the species' range. To fully represent the extent of
WNS, we must also include these summer areas.
Overall, northern long-eared bats are not considered to be long-
distance migrants, typically dispersing 40-50 miles (64-80 kilometers)
from their hibernacula. However, other bat species that disperse much
further distances are also vectors for WNS spread and may transmit the
disease to northern long-eared bat populations. It has been suggested
that the little brown bat (Myotis lucifugus), in particular, be
considered a likely source of WNS spread across eastern North America.
Little brown bats tend to migrate greater distances, particularly in
the western portions of their range, with distances up to 350 miles
(563 km) or more recorded (See Ellison 2008, p. 21; Norquay et al.
2013, p. 510). In a recent study, reporting on bat band recoveries of
little brown bats over a 21-year period, Norquay et al. (2013, pp. 509-
510) describe recaptures between hibernacula and summer roosts with a
maximum distance of 344 miles (554 km) and a median distance of 288
miles (463 km).
For the purpose of this rule, the portion of the northern long-
eared bat range that is considered to be affected by WNS is that area
within 150 miles (241 km) of the boundary of U.S. counties or Canadian
districts where the fungus Pseudogymnoascus destructans or WNS has been
detected. We acknowledge that 150 miles (241 km) does not capture the
full range of potential WNS infection, but represents a compromise
distance between the known migration distances of northern long-eared
bats and little brown bats that is suitable for our purpose of
estimating the extent of WNS infection on the northern long-eared bat.
Anywhere outside of the geographic
[[Page 2374]]
area defined by these parameters, northern long-eared bat populations
will not be considered to be experiencing the impacts of WNS.
The Service proposes to define the term ``WNS buffer zone'' as the
portion of the range of the northern long-eared bat within 150 miles of
the boundaries of U.S. counties or Canadian districts where the fungus
Pseudogymnoascus destructans or WNS has been detected.
For purposes of this proposed 4(d) rule, coordination with the
local Service Ecological Services field office is recommended to
determine whether specific locations fall within the WNS buffer zone.
For more information about the current known extent of WNS and 150-mile
(241-km) buffer, please see https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/nlba/.
Conservation Measures
The Service proposes that take incidental to certain activities
conducted in accordance with the following habitat conservation
measures, as applicable, will not be prohibited (i.e., excepted from
the prohibitions):
(i) Occur more than 0.25 mile (0.4 km) from a known, occupied
hibernacula;
(ii) Avoid cutting or destroying known, occupied maternity roost
trees during the pup season (June 1-July 31); and
(iii) Avoid clearcuts within 0.25 (0.4 km) mile of known, occupied
maternity roost trees during the pup season (June 1-July 31).
Note that activities that may cause take of northern long-eared bat
that do not use these conservation measures may still be done, but only
after consultation with the Service. This means that, while the
resulting take from such activities is not excepted by this rule, the
take may be authorized through other means provided in the Act (i.e.,
section 7 consultation or an incidental take permit).
For purposes of this proposed rule and the conservation measures
listed above, coordination with the local Service Ecological Services
field office is recommended to determine the specific locations of the
``known hibernacula'' and ``known maternity roosts.'' These locations
will be informed by records in each State's Natural Heritage database,
Service records, other databases, or other survey efforts. Hibernacula
are generally defined as locations where one or more northern long-
eared bats have been detected during hibernation or outside during
staging or swarming. Similarly, maternity roosts are generally defined
through roost records in each State's Natural Heritage database,
Service records, other databases, or other survey efforts for northern
long-eared bat or other bat species.
These conservation measures aim to protect the northern long-eared
bat during its most sensitive life stages. Hibernacula are an essential
habitat and should not be destroyed or modified (any time of year). In
addition, there are periods of the year when northern long-eared bats
are concentrated at and around their hibernacula (fall, winter, and
spring). Northern long-eared bats are susceptible to disruptions near
hibernacula in the fall, when they congregate to breed and increase fat
stores, which are depleted from migration, before entering hibernation.
During hibernation, northern long-eared bat winter colonies are
susceptible to direct disturbance. Briefly in spring, northern long-
eared bats yet again use the habitat surrounding hibernacula to
increase fat stores for migration to their summering grounds. This
feeding behavior is particularly important for the females, who must
obtain enough fat stores to carry not only themselves, but also their
unborn pups, to their summer home range. In the summer maternity
season, northern long-eared bat maternity colonies are especially
vulnerable during the time after the pups are born, but before pups are
able to fly (the non-volant period or pup season). During this time,
pups are unable to flee danger without the assistance of their mothers,
thus increasing the potential for activities affecting maternity roosts
to kill and injure individual bats. Once the pups can fly, this risk is
reduced because the pups will have the ability to flee their roost if
it is being cut or otherwise damaged, potentially avoiding harm,
injury, or mortality.
The Service concludes that a 0.25-mile (0.4-km) buffer should be
sufficient to protect most known, occupied hibernacula and hibernating
colonies. This buffer will provide basic protection for the hibernacula
and hibernating bats in winter from direct impacts, such as filling,
excavation, blasting, noise, and smoke exposure. This buffer will also
protect some roosting and foraging habitat around the hibernacula.
Northern long-eared bats have been found up to 8.2 miles (13.2 km) from
their hibernacula during the fall, although the majority of roosts were
within 1.6 miles (2.6 km) (Lowe 2012, p. 32), using habitat within that
area for roosting, foraging, and swarming. However, given that northern
long-eared bats are not locally abundant and compose a small proportion
of the total number of bats in any given hibernaculum (Barbour and
Davis 1969, p. 77; Mills 1971, p. 625; Caire et al. 1979, p. 405;
Caceres and Barclay 2000, pp. 2-3) and the species is rarely recorded
in concentrations of more than 100 in a single hibernaculum (Barbour
and Davis, 1969, p. 77), we do not expect that all of the habitat
around a hibernaculum would be necessary for these purposes. Therefore,
our best judgment is that protection of the habitat within 0.25 mile
(0.4 km) of hibernacula should provide sufficient habitat to meet the
needs of most hibernating populations.
The Service concludes that, in addition to preservation of actual
known maternity roosts, a 0.25-mile (0.4-km) buffer for all
clearcutting activities will be sufficient to protect the habitat
surrounding known maternity roosts during the pup season. This buffer
will prevent the cutting of known occupied maternity roost trees during
the pup season from clearcutting activities and protect some habitat
for known maternity colonies. Northern long-eared bats in the summer
have an approximate average maximum foraging distance of 1.5 miles (2.4
km) from a roost tree (Sasse and Perkins, 1996, p. 95; Badin, 2014, p.
76), and average home range size has been documented between 44-460
acres (Lacki et al. 2009, p. 1169; Owen et al. 2003, p. 353; Carter and
Feldhamer 2005, p. 264). Based on this information, our best judgment
is that the amount of land within 0.25 mile (0.4 km) of a maternity
roost, or 128 acres, will provide sufficient roosting, foraging, and
commuting habitat to sustain most colonies for the duration of the pup
season.
Forest Management
The Service proposes that incidental take that is caused by forest
management, when carried out in accordance with the conservation
measures, will not be prohibited. Forest management includes the suite
of activities used to maintain and manage forest ecosystems, including,
but not limited to, timber harvest and other silvicultural treatments,
prescribed burning, invasive species control, wildlife openings, and
temporary roads. Such activities should also adhere to any applicable
State water quality best management practices, where they exist.
Although forest ecosystems may include non-forested land cover types,
such as wetlands and upland openings, this category of activities
generally maintains forested landcover. We do not consider conversion
of a mixed forest into an intensively managed monoculture pine
plantation as forest management covered under this
[[Page 2375]]
proposed rule, as typically these types of monoculture pine plantations
provide very poor-quality bat habitat.
Where northern long-eared bats are present when these forest
management activities are performed, bats could be exposed to habitat
alteration or loss or direct disturbance (i.e., heavy machinery) or
removal of maternity roost trees (i.e., harvest). In general, however,
the northern long-eared bat is considered to have more flexible habitat
requirements than other bat species (Carter and Feldhamer 2005, pp.
265-266; Timpone et al. 2010, pp. 120-121), and most types of forest
management should provide suitable habitat for the species over the
long term (with the exception of conversion to monoculture pine forest,
as discussed above). Based upon information obtained during previous
comment periods on the proposed rule to list the bat as an endangered
species, approximately 2 percent of forests in States within the range
of the northern long-eared bat are impacted by forest management
activities annually (Boggess et al, 2014, p. 9). Of this amount, in any
given year a smaller fraction of forested habitat is impacted during
the active season when pups and female bats are most vulnerable. These
impacts are addressed by the above conservation measures proposed for
inclusion in this rule.
Therefore, we anticipate that habitat modifications resulting from
activities that manage forests would not significantly affect the
conservation of the northern long-eared bat. Further, although
activities performed during the species' active season (roughly April
through October) may directly kill or injure individuals,
implementation of the conservation measures provided for in the
proposed rule will limit overall take by protecting currently known
populations during their more vulnerable life stages.
Maintenance and Limited Expansion of Existing Rights-of-Way and
Transmission Corridors
The Service proposes that incidental take that is caused by
activities for the purpose of maintenance and limited expansion of
existing rights-of-way and transmission corridors, when carried out in
accordance with the conservation measures, will not be prohibited
(i.e., will be excepted from the prohibitions). Rights-of-way (ROW) and
transmission corridors are in place for activities such as
transportation (i.e., highways, railways), utility transmission lines,
and energy delivery (pipelines), though they are not limited to just
these types of corridors. The Service proposes that take of the
northern long-eared bat will not be prohibited provided the take is
incidental to activities within the following categories:
(1) Routine maintenance within an existing corridor or ROW, carried
out in accordance with the previous described conservation measures.
(2) Expansion of a corridor or ROW by up to 100 feet (30 m) from
the edge of an existing cleared corridor or ROW, carried out in
accordance with the previously described conservation measures.
General routine maintenance is designed to limit vegetation growth,
within an existing footprint, so that operations can continue smoothly.
These activities may include tree trimming or removal, mowing, and
herbicide spraying. However, depending on the purpose of the corridor
or ROW, maintenance may only be performed infrequently and trees and
shrubs may encroach into, or be allowed to grow within, the ROW until
such a time as maintenance is required. Expansion of these areas
requires removal of vegetation along the existing ROW to increase
capacity (e.g., road widening).
Northern long-eared bats can occupy various species and sizes of
trees when roosting. Because of their wide variety of habitat use when
roosting and foraging, it is possible that they may be using trees
within or near existing ROWs. Therefore, vegetation removal within or
adjacent to an existing ROW may remove maternity roost trees and
foraging habitat. Individuals may also temporarily abandon the areas,
avoiding the physical disturbance until the work is complete. While ROW
corridors can be large in overall distance, due to the small scale of
the habitat alteration involved in maintenance of the existing
footprint, potential take is limited. No new forest fragmentation is
expected as this expands existing open corridors. We also expect that
excepting take prohibitions from ROW maintenance and limited expansion
will encourage co-location of new linear projects within existing
corridors. We conclude that the overall impact of ROW maintenance and
limited expansion activities is not expected to adversely affect
conservation and recovery efforts for the species.
Prairie Management
The Service proposes that incidental take that is caused by
activities for the purpose of prairie management, when carried out in
accordance with the conservation measures, will not be prohibited
(i.e., will be excepted from the prohibitions). In some areas of the
northern long-eared bat range, tree and shrub species are overtaking
prairie areas. Landowners and agencies working to establish or conserve
prairies have to remove trees and brush in order to maintain
grasslands. Maintenance activities include cutting, mowing, burning, or
herbicide use on woody vegetation to minimize encroachment into
prairies (Grassland Heritage Foundation Web site, accessed December 23,
2014). If these prairies are not managed, they can eventually become
shrub or forest lands sometimes in as few as 40 years (Briggs et al.
2002 and Ratajczak et. al 2001). We conclude that the overall impact of
prairie management is not expected to adversely affect conservation and
recovery efforts for the species.
Projects Resulting in Minimal Tree Removal
The Service proposes that incidental take that results from
projects causing minimal tree removal, when carried out in accordance
with the conservation measures, will not be prohibited (i.e., will be
excepted from the prohibitions). Throughout the millions of acres of
forest habitat in the northern long-eared bat range, many activities
involve cutting or removal of individual or limited numbers of trees,
but do not significantly change the overall nature and function of the
local forested habitat. Some of these activities include firewood
cutting, shelterbelt renovation, removal of diseased trees, tree
removal for other small projects (i.e., culvert replacement), habitat
restoration for fish and wildlife conservation, and backyard
landscaping. These ongoing activities can occur throughout the northern
long-eared bat range, but we do not believe they materially affect the
local forest habitat for this species and in some cases increase
habitat availability in the long term. We conclude that the overall
impact of projects causing minimal tree removal is not expected to
adversely affect conservation and recovery efforts for the species.
Hazardous Tree Removal
The Service proposes that incidental take that is caused by removal
and management of hazardous trees will not be prohibited (i.e., will be
excepted from the prohibitions). Removal of hazardous trees is
typically done as deemed necessary for human safety or for the
protection of human facilities. Hazardous trees typically have defects
in their roots, trunk, or branches that make them likely to fall, with
the likelihood of causing personal injury or property damage. The
limited removal of these hazardous trees may be widely dispersed but
limited, and should result in very minimal incidental take of
[[Page 2376]]
northern long-eared bat. Therefore, the Service proposes that take
incidental to the removal of hazardous trees will not be prohibited. We
recommend that, wherever possible, removal of hazardous trees be done
during the winter, when these trees will not be occupied by bats. We
conclude that the overall impact of removing hazardous trees is not
expected to adversely affect conservation and recovery efforts for the
species.
Removal of Bats From and Disturbance Within Human Dwellings
The Service proposes that take that is caused by removal of bats
from and disturbance within human dwellings will not be prohibited
(i.e., will be excepted from the prohibitions), provided those actions
comply with all applicable State laws. Northern long-eared bats have
further been documented roosting in human-made structures, such as
buildings, barns, a park pavilion, sheds, cabins, under eaves of
buildings, behind window shutters, and in bat houses (Mumford and Cope
1964, p. 72; Barbour and Davis 1969, p. 77; Cope and Humphrey 1972, p.
9; Amelon and Burhans 2006, p. 72; Whitaker and Mumford 2009, p. 209;
Timpone et al. 2010, p. 119; Joe Kath 2013, pers. comm.). We conclude
that the overall impact of bat removal from human dwellings is not
expected to adversely affect conservation and recovery efforts for the
species. In addition, we provide the following recommendations:
(A) Minimize use of pesticides (e.g., rodenticides) and avoid use
of sticky traps in and around structures with roosting bats.
(B) If bats (of any species) are using structures (e.g., barns or
other outbuildings) as roosts, and these structures are proposed for
removal, removal should be performed outside of the summer maternity
season, unless there are human health or safety concerns associated
with the structure. Contact a nuisance wildlife specialist for humane
exclusion techniques.
Capture, Handling, Attachment of Radio Transmitters, and Tracking
Northern Long-Eared Bats for 1 Year
For a limited period of 1 year from the effective date of this
rule, the Service proposes that purposeful take that is caused by the
authorized capture, handling, attachment of radio transmitters, and
tracking of northern long-eared bats by individuals permitted to
conduct these same activities for other listed bats will be excepted
from the prohibitions. One method of determining presence/probable
absence of northern long-eared bats is to conduct mist-netting at
summer sites or harp trapping at hibernacula. Gathering of this
information is essential to monitor the distribution and status of
northern long-eared bats over time. In addition, northern long-eared
bats are often captured incidentally to survey and study efforts
targeted at other bat species (e.g., Indiana bats). It is necessary and
advisable for the conservation of northern long-eared bats to provide
an exception for the purposeful take associated with these normal
survey activities conducted by qualified individuals to promote and
encourage the gathering of information following standard procedures
(including decontamination) as these data will help us conserve and
recover this species. To receive an exception, proponents must have an
existing research permit under section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Act (or
similar State collector's permit applications in the northeast region
of the Service) for other listed bat species. The rationale for this
limited time period is that a final listing decision is expected at the
start of the bat field season, and it will be difficult to amend all
permits in time for this year.
The Service concludes, for the reasons specified above, that all of
the conservation measures, prohibitions, and exceptions identified
herein individually and cumulatively are necessary and advisable for
the conservation of the northern long-eared bat and will promote the
conservation of the species across its range.
Table 1 (below) summarizes the details of the species-specific
proposed 4(d) rule for the northern long-eared bat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is the area affected Take exceptions
by WNS (WNS buffer Take prohibitions at 50 --------------------------------------------------------------
zone)? CFR 17.31 and 17.32 Purposeful Incidental
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No.................... All apply, with the Actions with the intent to Any incidental take of
following exceptions remove northern long-eared northern long-eared bats
listed here. bats from within human resulting from otherwise
dwellings and that comply lawful activities.
with all applicable State
regulations.
Actions relating to capture,
handling, attachment of radio
transmitters, and tracking of
northern long-eared bats by
individuals permitted to
conduct these same activities
for other bats, for a period
of 1 year following the
effective date of the final
rule.
Yes................... All apply, with the Actions with the intent to Implementation of forest
following exceptions remove northern long-eared management, maintenance and
listed here. bats from within human expansion of existing rights-
dwellings and that comply of-way and transmission
with all applicable State corridors, native prairie
regulations. management, and minimal tree
removal projects that:
Occur more than 0.25
mile (0.4 km) from a known,
occupied hibernacula;
avoid cutting or
destroying known, occupied
maternity roost trees during
the pup season (June 1-July
31); and
avoid clearcuts
within 0.25 (0.4 km) miles
of known, occupied maternity
roost trees during the pup
season (June 1-July 31).
[[Page 2377]]
Actions relating to capture, Removal of hazard trees for
handling, attachment of radio the protection of human life
transmitters, and tracking of and property.
northern long-eared bat by
individuals permitted to
conduct these same activities
for other bats, for a period
of 1 year following the
effective date of the final
rule.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peer Review
In accordance with our joint policy published in the Federal
Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), we will seek the expert
opinions of at least three appropriate and independent specialists
regarding this proposed rule. The purpose of such review is to ensure
that our determination of status for this species is based on
scientifically sound data, assumptions, and analyses. We will send peer
reviewers copies of this proposed rule concurrent with publication in
the Federal Register. We will invite these peer reviewers to comment,
during the reopening of the public comment period, on our use and
interpretation of the science used in developing our proposed rule to
list the northern long-eared bat and this proposed rule under section
4(d) of the Act.
We will consider all comments and information we receive during the
comment period on this proposed rule during preparation of a final
rulemaking. Accordingly, the final decision may differ from this
proposal.
Required Determinations
Clarity of the Rule
We are required by Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule we publish must: (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 ADDRESSES. To better help us
revise the proposed rule, your comments should be as specific as
possible. For example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections
or paragraphs that are unclearly written, which sections or sentences
are too long, the sections where you feel lists or tables would be
useful, etc.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.)
This rule does not contain any collections of information that
require approval by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the
Paperwork Reduction Act. This rule will not impose recordkeeping or
reporting requirements on State or local governments, individuals,
businesses, or organizations. An agency may not conduct or sponsor and
a person is not required to respond to a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)
We have determined that environmental assessments and environmental
impact statements, as defined under the authority of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, need not be prepared in connection
with listing a species as an endangered or threatened species under the
Endangered Species Act. We published a notice outlining our reasons for
this determination in the Federal Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR
49244). We intend to incorporate this proposed rule under section 4(d)
of the Act into our final determination concerning the listing of the
species or withdrawal of the proposal if new information is provided
that supports that decision.
Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes
In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994
(Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal
Governments; 59 FR 22951), Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments), and the Department of the
Interior's manual at 512 DM 2, we readily acknowledge our
responsibility to communicate meaningfully with recognized Federal
Tribes on a government-to-government basis. In accordance with
Secretarial Order 3206 of June 5, 1997 (American Indian Tribal Rights,
Federal-Tribal Trust Responsibilities, and the Endangered Species Act),
we readily acknowledge our responsibilities to work directly with
tribes in developing programs for healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge
that tribal lands are not subject to the same controls as Federal
public lands, to remain sensitive to Indian culture, and to make
information available to tribes.
By letter dated July 29, 2014, we contacted known federally
recognized tribal governments throughout the historical range of the
northern long-eared bat. We sought their input on our development of a
proposed rule to list the northern long-eared bat and encouraged them
to contact the Midwest Regional Office or Regional Native American
contacts if any portion of our request was unclear or to request
additional information. We did not receive any comments regarding this
request.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited in this proposed rule is
available on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No.
FWS-R5-ES-2011-0024 or upon request from the Endangered Species Chief,
Midwest Regional Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authors
The primary authors of this proposed rule are the staff members of
the Midwest Regional Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, and Transportation.
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we propose to further amend part 17, subchapter B of
chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as proposed to
be amended at 78 FR 61046 (October 2, 2013) as follows:
[[Page 2378]]
PART 17--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 1531-1544; 4201-4245; unless
otherwise noted.
0
2. Amend Sec. 17.11(h) by adding an entry for ``Bat, northern long-
eared'' to the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife in
alphabetical order under Mammals to read as set forth below:
Sec. 17.11 Endangered and threatened wildlife.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Vertebrate population
---------------------------------------------------------- Historic range where endangered or Status When Critical Special
Common name Scientific name threatened listed habitat rules
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mammals
* * * * * * *
Bat, northern long-eared.......... (Myotis U.S.A. (AL, AR, CT, Entire................ T ......... NA 17.40(n)
septentrionalis). DE, DC, GA, IL, IN,
IA, KS, KY, LA, ME,
MD, MA, MI, MN, MS,
MO, MT, NE, NH, NJ,
NY, NC, ND, OH, OK,
PA, RI, SC, SD, TN,
VT, VA, WV, WI, WY);
Canada (AB, BC, LB,
MB, NB, NF, NS, NT,
ON, PE, QC, SK, YT).
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
3. Amend Sec. 17.40 by adding paragraph (n) to read as follows:
Sec. 17.40 Special rules--mammals.
* * * * *
(n) Northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis). The
provisions of this rule are based upon the occurrence of white-nose
syndrome (WNS), a disease affecting many U.S. bat populations. The term
``WNS buffer zone'' identifies the portion of the range of the northern
long-eared bat within 150 miles of the boundaries of U.S. counties or
Canadian districts where the fungus Pseudogymnoascus destructans or WNS
has been detected. For current information regarding the WNS buffer
zone, contact your local Service field office. Field office contact
information may be obtained from the Service regional offices, the
addresses of which are listed in 50 CFR 2.2.
(1) Outside the WNS buffer zone, the following provisions apply to
the northern long-eared bat:
(i) Prohibitions. Except as noted in paragraphs (n)(1)(ii)(A) and
(B) of this section, all the prohibitions and provisions of Sec. Sec.
17.31 and 17.32 apply to the northern long-eared bat.
(ii) Exceptions from prohibitions.
(A) Purposeful take:
(1) Take resulting from actions taken to remove northern long-eared
bats from within human dwellings, if the actions comply with all
applicable State regulations.
(2) Take resulting from actions relating to capture, handling,
attachment of radio transmitters, and tracking of northern long-eared
bats by individuals permitted to conduct these same activities for
other species of bat listed in Sec. 17.11(h) until [INSERT DATE 1 YEAR
AFTER EFFECTIVE DATE OF FINAL RULE].
(B) Any incidental (non-purposeful) take of northern long-eared
bats resulting from otherwise lawful activities.
(2) Inside the WNS buffer zone, the following provisions apply to
the northern long-eared bat:
(i) Prohibitions. Except as noted in paragraphs (n)(2)(ii)(A) and
(B) of this section, all prohibitions and provisions of Sec. Sec.
17.31 and 17.32 apply to the northern long-eared bat.
(ii) Exceptions from prohibitions. Take of northern long-eared bat
is not prohibited in the following circumstances:
(A) Purposeful take:
(1) Take resulting from actions taken to remove northern long-eared
bats from within human dwellings, if the actions comply with all
applicable State regulations.
(2) Take resulting from actions relating to capture, handling,
attachment of radio transmitters, and tracking of northern long-eared
bats by individuals permitted to conduct these same activities for
other species of bat listed in Sec. 17.11(h) until [INSERT DATE 1 YEAR
AFTER EFFECTIVE DATE OF FINAL RULE].
(B) Incidental take:
(1) Implementation of forest management, maintenance and expansion
of existing rights-of-way and transmission corridors, native prairie
management, and minimal tree removal projects that:
(i) Occur more than 0.25 mile (0.4 km) from a known, occupied
hibernacula;
(ii) Avoid cutting or destroying known, occupied maternity roost
trees during the pup season (June 1-July 31); and
(iii) Avoid clearcuts within 0.25 (0.4 km) mile of known, occupied
maternity roost trees during the pup season (June 1-July 31).
(2) Removal of hazardous trees for the protection of human life and
property.
* * * * *
Dated: January 12, 2015.
Daniel M. Ashe,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-00644 Filed 1-15-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P