Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Species Status for Texas Hornshell, 52796-52809 [2016-18816]
Download as PDF
52796
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2016 / Proposed Rules
2. To assist commenters in reviewing
this revised proposal, the Board will
make its workpapers available to
commenters subject to the customary
Confidentiality Agreement.
3. Comments are due by October 11,
2016; replies are due by November 7,
2016.
4. A copy of this decision will be
served upon the Chief Counsel for
Advocacy, Office of Advocacy, U.S.
Small Business Administration.
5. This decision is effective on its
service date.
Decided: August 2, 2016.
By the Board, Chairman Elliott, Vice
Chairman Miller, and Commissioner
Begeman.
Tia Delano,
Clearance Clerk.
[FR Doc. 2016–18806 Filed 8–9–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915–01–P
enter FWS–R2–ES–2016–0077, which is
the docket number for this rulemaking.
Then, in the Search panel on the left
side of the screen, under the Document
Type heading, click on the Proposed
Rules link to locate this document. 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–R2–ES–2016–
0077, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
MS: BPHC, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls
Church, VA 22041–3803.
We request that you send comments
only by 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 Public
Comments, below, for more
information).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Chuck Ardizzone, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Texas Coastal
Ecological Services Field Office, 17629
El Camino Real #211, Houston, TX
77058; by telephone 281–286–8282; or
by facsimile 281–488–5882. Persons
who use a telecommunications device
for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at
800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2016–0077;
4500030113]
RIN 1018–BB34
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Endangered Species
Status for Texas Hornshell
AGENCY:
Executive Summary
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
Proposed rule.
ACTION:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), propose to
list the Texas hornshell (Popenaias
popeii), a freshwater mussel species
from New Mexico and Texas, as an
endangered species under the
Endangered Species Act (Act). If we
finalize this rulemaking as proposed, it
would extend the Act’s protections to
this species.
DATES: We will accept comments
received or postmarked on or before
October 11, 2016. 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 September 26, 2016.
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,
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:58 Aug 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
Why we need to publish a rule. Under
the Act, if a species is determined to be
an endangered or threatened species
throughout all or a significant portion of
its range, we are required to promptly
publish a proposal in the Federal
Register and make a determination on
our proposal within 1 year. Critical
habitat shall be designated, to the
maximum extent prudent and
determinable, for any species
determined to be an endangered or
threatened species under the Act.
Listing a species as an endangered or
threatened species and designations and
revisions of critical habitat can only be
completed by issuing a rule.
This rulemaking proposes the listing
of the Texas hornshell (Popenaias
popeii) as an endangered species. The
Texas hornshell is a candidate species
for which we have on file sufficient
information on biological vulnerability
and threats to support preparation of a
listing proposal, but for which
development of a listing regulation has
been precluded by other higher priority
listing activities. This proposed rule
reassesses all available information
regarding the status of and threats to the
Texas hornshell.
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
The basis for our action. Under the
Act, we can determine that a species is
an endangered or threatened species
based on any of five factors, acting alone
or in combination: (A) The present or
threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range; (B)
overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D)
the inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms; or (E) other natural or
manmade factors affecting its continued
existence. We have determined that the
Texas hornshell is in danger of
extinction due to habitat loss from loss
of water flow, decreased water quality,
and increased accumulation of fine
sediments (Factor A) and predation
(Factor C).
We will seek peer review. We will seek
comments from independent specialists
to ensure that our determination is
based on scientifically sound data,
assumptions, and analyses. We will
invite these peer reviewers to comment
on our listing proposal. Because we will
consider all comments and information
we receive during the comment period,
our final determination may differ from
this proposal.
We prepared a species status
assessment report (SSA report) for the
Texas hornshell. The SSA report
documents the results of the
comprehensive biological status review
for the Texas hornshell and provides an
account of the species’ overall viability
through forecasting of the species’
condition in the future (Service 2016,
entire). We received feedback from four
scientists with expertise in freshwater
mussel biology, ecology, and genetics as
peer review of the SSA report. The
reviewers were generally supportive of
our approach and made suggestions and
comments that strengthened our
analysis. The SSA report and other
materials relating to this proposal can be
found at https://www.regulations.gov
under Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2016–
0077.
Information Requested
Public Comments
We intend that any final action
resulting from this proposed rule will be
based on the best scientific and
commercial data available and be as
accurate and as effective as possible.
Therefore, we request comments or
information from other concerned
governmental agencies, Native
American tribes, the scientific
community, industry, or any other
interested parties concerning this
proposed rule. We particularly seek
comments concerning:
E:\FR\FM\10AUP1.SGM
10AUP1
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2016 / Proposed Rules
(1) The Texas hornshell’s biology,
range, and population trends, including:
(a) Biological or ecological
requirements of the species, including
habitat requirements for feeding and
spawning;
(b) Genetics and taxonomy;
(c) Historical and current range,
including distribution patterns;
(d) Historical and current population
levels, and current and projected trends;
and
(e) Past and ongoing conservation
measures for the species, its habitat, or
both.
(2) Factors that may affect the
continued existence of the species,
which may include habitat modification
or destruction, overutilization, disease,
predation, the inadequacy of existing
regulatory mechanisms, or other natural
or manmade factors.
(3) Biological, commercial trade, or
other relevant data concerning any
threats (or lack thereof) to this species
and existing regulations that may be
addressing those threats.
(4) Additional information concerning
the historical and current status, range,
distribution, and population size of this
species, including the locations of any
additional populations of this species,
particularly in Mexico.
(5) Information related to climate
change within the range of the Texas
hornshell and how it may affect the
species’ habitat.
(6) The reasons why areas should or
should not be designated as critical
habitat as provided by section 4 of the
Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)
(7) Specific information on:
(a) The amount and distribution of
habitat for the Texas hornshell;
(b) What areas, that are currently
occupied and that contain the physical
and biological features essential to the
conservation of the Texas hornshell,
should be included in a critical habitat
designation and why;
(c) Special management
considerations or protection that may be
needed for the essential features in
potential critical habitat areas, including
managing for the potential effects of
climate change; and
(d) What areas not occupied at the
time of listing are essential for the
conservation of the species and why.
Please include sufficient information
with your submission (such as scientific
journal articles or other publications) to
allow us to verify any scientific or
commercial information you include.
Please note that submissions merely
stating support for or opposition to the
action under consideration without
providing supporting information,
although noted, will not be considered
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:58 Aug 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
in making a determination, as section
4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that
determinations as to whether any
species is an endangered or threatened
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.
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, Texas Coastal Ecological
Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
Public Hearing
Section 4(b)(5) of the Act provides for
one or more public hearings on this
proposal, if requested. Requests must be
received within 45 days after the date of
publication of this proposed rule in the
Federal Register (see DATES, above).
Such requests must be sent to the
address shown in FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT. We will schedule
public hearings on this proposal, if any
are requested, and announce the dates,
times, and places of those hearings, as
well as how to obtain reasonable
accommodations, in the Federal
Register and local newspapers at least
15 days before the hearing.
Peer Review
In accordance with our joint policy on
peer review published in the Federal
Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270),
we will seek the expert opinions of five
appropriate and independent specialists
regarding this proposed rule. The
purpose of peer review is to ensure that
our listing determination is based on
scientifically sound data, assumptions,
and analyses. We invite comment from
the peer reviewers during the public
comment period on this proposed rule.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
52797
Previous Federal Actions
We identified the Texas hornshell as
a Category 2 candidate species in our
January 6, 1989, Review of Vertebrate
Wildlife (54 FR 554). Category 2
candidates were defined as species for
which we had information that
proposed listing was possibly
appropriate, but conclusive data on
biological vulnerability and threats were
not available to support a proposed rule
at the time. The species remained a
Category 2 candidate in subsequent
annual candidate notices of review
(CNOR) (56 FR 58804, November 21,
1991, and 59 FR 58982, November 15,
1994). In the February 28, 1996, CNOR
(61 FR 7596), we discontinued the
designation of Category 2 species as
candidates; therefore, the Texas
hornshell was no longer a candidate
species.
Subsequently, in 2001, the Texas
hornshell was added to the candidate
list (66 FR 54808, October 30, 2001).
Candidates are those fish, wildlife, and
plants for which we have on file
sufficient information on biological
vulnerability and threats to support
preparation of a listing proposal, but for
which development of a listing rule is
precluded by other higher priority
listing activities. The Texas hornshell
was included in all of our subsequent
annual CNORs (67 FR 40657, June 13,
2002; 69 FR 24876, May 4, 2004; 70 FR
24870, May 11, 2005; 71 FR 53756,
September 12, 2006; 72 FR 69034,
December 6, 2007; 73 FR 75176,
December 10, 2008; 74 FR 57804,
November 9, 2009; 75 FR 69222,
November 10, 2010; 76 FR 66370,
October 26, 2011; 77 FR 69994,
November 21, 2012; 78 FR 70104;
November 22, 2013; 79 FR 72450,
December 5, 2014; and 80 FR 80584,
December 24, 2015). On May 11, 2004,
we were petitioned to list the Texas
hornshell, although no new information
was provided in the petition. Because
we had already found the species
warranted listing, no further action was
taken on the petition.
On September 9, 2011, the Service
entered into two settlement agreements
regarding species on the candidate list
at that time (Endangered Species Act
Section 4 Deadline Litigation, No. 10–
377 (EGS), MDL Docket No. 2165
(D.D.C. May 10, 2011)). This proposed
listing rule fulfills the requirements of
those settlement agreements for the
Texas hornshell.
Background
A thorough review of the taxonomy,
life history, ecology, and overall
viability of the Texas hornshell
E:\FR\FM\10AUP1.SGM
10AUP1
52798
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
(Popenaias popeii) is presented in the
Species Status Assessment Report for
the Texas Hornshell (SSA report)
(Service 2016; available at https://
www.regulations.gov). The SSA report
documents the results of the
comprehensive biological status review
for the Texas hornshell and provides an
account of the species’ overall viability
through forecasting of the species’
condition in the future (Service 2016,
entire). In the SSA report, we
summarized the relevant biological data
and a description of past, present, and
likely future stressors and conducted an
analysis of the viability of the species.
The SSA report provides the scientific
basis that informs our regulatory
decision regarding whether this species
should be listed as an endangered or
threatened species under the Act. This
decision involves the application of
standards within the Act, its
implementing regulations, and Service
policies (see Determination, below). The
SSA report contains the risk analysis on
which this determination is based, and
the following discussion is a summary
of the results and conclusions from the
SSA report. We solicited peer review of
the draft SSA report from five qualified
experts. We received responses from
four of the reviewers, and we modified
the SSA report as appropriate.
Species Description
The Texas hornshell is a medium
sized (3 to 4 inches long) freshwater
mussel with a dark brown to green,
elongate, laterally compressed shell
(Howells et al. 1996, p. 93; Carman
2007, p. 2). The Texas hornshell was
described by Lea (1857, p. 102) from the
Devils River in Texas and Rio Salado in
Mexico. Currently, the Texas hornshell
is classified in the unionid subfamily
Ambleminae (Campbell et al. 2005, pp.
140, 144) and is considered a valid
taxon by the scientific community
(Turgeon et al. 1998, p. 36).
Freshwater mussels, including the
Texas hornshell, have a complex life
history. Males release sperm into the
water column, which are taken in by the
female through the incurrent siphon
(the tubular structure used to draw
water into the body of the mussel). The
sperm fertilizes the eggs, which are held
during maturation in an area of the gills
called the marsupial chamber. The
developing larvae remain in the gill
chamber until they mature and are
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:58 Aug 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
ready for release. These mature larvae,
called glochidia, are obligate parasites
(cannot live independently of their
hosts) on the gills, head, or fins of fishes
(Vaughn and Taylor 1999, p. 913).
Glochidia die if they fail to find a host
fish, attach to a fish that has developed
immunity from prior infestations, or
attach to the wrong location on a host
fish (Neves 1991, p. 254; Bogan 1993, p.
599). Glochidia encyst (enclose in a
cyst-like structure) on the host’s tissue,
draw nutrients from the fish, and
develop into juvenile mussels weeks or
months after attachment (Arey 1932, pp.
214–215).
For the Texas hornshell, spawning
generally occurs from March through
August (Smith et al. 2003, p. 335), and
fertilized eggs are held in the marsupial
chambers of females for 4 to 6 weeks
(Smith et al. 2003, p. 337). Glochidia are
released in a sticky mucous net or string
(Carman 2007, p. 9); the host fish likely
swim into the nets, and the glochidia
generally attach to the face or gills of the
fish and become encysted in its tissue
(Levine et al. 2012, pp. 1858). The
glochidia will remain encysted for about
a month through transformation to the
juvenile stage. Once transformed, the
juveniles will excyst from the fish and
drop to the substrate. The known
primary host fishes for the Texas
hornshell are river carpsucker
(Carpiodes carpio), grey redhorse
(Moxostoma congestum), and red shiner
(Cyprinella lutrensis) (Levine et al.
2012, pp. 1857–1858).
Mussels are generally immobile but
experience their primary opportunity
for dispersal and movement within the
stream as glochidia attached to a mobile
host fish (Smith 1985, p. 105). Upon
release from the host, newly
transformed juveniles drop to the
substrate on the bottom of the stream.
Those juveniles that drop in unsuitable
substrates die because their immobility
prevents them from relocating to more
favorable habitat. Juvenile freshwater
mussels burrow into interstitial
substrates and grow to a larger size that
is less susceptible to predation and
displacement from high flow events
(Yeager et al. 1994, p. 220). Throughout
the rest of their life cycle, mussels
generally remain within the same small
area where they excysted from the host
fish.
Life span is not known for the Texas
hornshell, although two adult
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
individuals were captured and marked
in the Black River in New Mexico in
1997, and were recaptured 15 years later
(Inoue et al. 2014, p. 5). Species in the
subfamily Ambleminae, which includes
Texas hornshell, commonly live more
than 20 years (Carman 2007, p. 9), so we
assume the Texas hornshell can live at
least 20 years.
Little is known about the specific
feeding habits of Texas hornshell. Like
all adult freshwater mussels, Texas
hornshell are filter feeders, siphoning
suspended phytoplankton and detritus
from the water column (Yeager et al.
1994, p. 221; Carman 2007, p. 8).
Habitat and Range
Adult Texas hornshell occur in
medium to large rivers, in habitat not
typical for most mussel species: In
crevices, undercut riverbanks, travertine
shelves, and under large boulders
adjacent to runs (Carman 2007, p. 6;
Randklev et al. 2015, p. 8), although in
the Devils River, the species is found in
gravel beds at the heads of riffles and
rapids (Randklev et al. 2015, p. 8).
Small-grained material, such as clay,
silt, or sand, gathers in these crevices
and provides suitable anchoring
substrate. These crevices are considered
to be flow refuges from the large flood
events that occur regularly in the rivers
this species occupies. Texas hornshell
are able to use these flow refuges to
avoid being swept away as large
volumes of water move through the
system, as there is relatively little
particle movement in the flow refuges,
even during flooding (Strayer 1999, p.
472). Texas hornshell are not known
from lakes, ponds, or reservoirs.
The Texas hornshell historically
ranged throughout the Rio Grande
drainage in the United States (New
Mexico and Texas) and Mexico as well
as Mexican Gulf Coast streams south to
the northern Mexican state of Veracruz
(Johnson 1999, p. 23). Currently, five
known populations of Texas hornshell
remain in the United States: Black River
(Eddy County, New Mexico), Pecos
River (Val Verde County, Texas), Devils
River (Val Verde County, Texas), Lower
Canyons of the Rio Grande (Brewster
and Terrell Counties, Texas), and Lower
Rio Grande near Laredo (Webb County,
Texas) (Map 1). They are described
briefly below.
E:\FR\FM\10AUP1.SGM
10AUP1
Black River: The Black River, in Eddy
County, New Mexico, originates from
several groundwater-fed springs and
flows approximately 30 miles (mi) (48
kilometers (km)) through the
Chihuahuan Desert until its confluence
with the Pecos River (Inoue et al. 2014,
p. 3) near Malaga, New Mexico.
Extensive population monitoring (Lang
2001, entire; 2006, entire; 2010, entire;
2011, entire) and a long-term markrecapture study (Inoue et al. 2014,
entire) have yielded significant
information about the population size
and extent. Texas hornshell occur in
approximately 8.7 mi (14.0 km) of the
middle Black River, between two lowhead (small) dams (Lang 2001, p. 20).
The total population size has been
estimated at approximately 48,000
individuals (95 percent confidence
interval: 28,849–74,127) (Inoue et al.
2014, p. 7), with a diversity of size
classes, primarily aggregated in flow
refuges within narrow riffles. The
population remained relatively stable
over the 15 year study period from 1997
to 2012 (Inoue et al. 2014, p. 6).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:58 Aug 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
Pecos River: In the Pecos River,
inundation from Amistad Reservoir has
resulted in the extirpation of Texas
hornshell from the lower reaches of the
river. Additionally, salinity levels are
too high for freshwater mussel
habitation in much of the Pecos River
from the confluence with the Black
River in New Mexico, downstream to
the confluence with Independence
Creek. However, three live Texas
hornshell were collected from a small
section of the Pecos River downstream
of the confluence with Independence
Creek and upstream of Amistad
Reservoir near Pandale in Val Verde
County, Texas, as well as 37 shells
(Bosman et al. 2016, p. 6; Randklev et
al. 2016, p. 9). Farther downstream,
only dead shells were found in 2016,
although they were numerous (Bosman
et al. 2016, p. 6; Randklev et al. 2016,
p. 9). Live individuals had not been
collected at this location since 1973
(Randklev et al. 2016, p. 4).
Because the sample size of live
individuals is so small (three live
individuals found in recent months), it
is difficult to draw many conclusions
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
52799
about the population. The population
appears to be extremely small, and no
evidence of reproduction was noted.
Devils River: Texas hornshell were
historically found in the Devils River
and were known to occupy only the
lower reaches of the river, which are
currently inundated by Amistad
Reservoir (Neck 1984, p. 11; Johnson
1999, p. 23; Burlakova and Karatayev
2014, p. 19). In recent years, 11
individuals were collected from
upstream in the Devils River between
2008 and 2014 (Burlakova and
Karatayev 2014, p. 16; Karatayev et al.
2015, p. 4). More intensive surveys
conducted in 2014 and 2015, including
11 sites, have yielded 48 individuals at
two sites: All from The Nature
Conservancy’s Dolan Falls Preserve
except for a singleton at the Devils River
State Natural Area’s Dan A. Hughes Unit
(formerly known as the Big Satan Unit)
(Randklev et al. 2015, pp. 6–7). Because
of the increased number of individuals
collected in 2014 and 2105, it is likely
that the Devils River population is more
numerous than previously thought,
although we do not expect that this
E:\FR\FM\10AUP1.SGM
10AUP1
EP10AU16.000
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
52800
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2016 / Proposed Rules
population is particularly large based on
the limited number of collections to
date. Interestingly, Texas hornshell in
the Devils River occupy different
habitats than those in the rest of the
range; instead of being found under rock
slabs and in travertine shelves, they
occupy gravel beds at the heads of riffles
or in clean-swept pools with bedrock
(Randklev et al. 2015, p. 8). Even though
the number of collected individuals is
small, several young individuals were
found, as well as females brooding
glochidia (gravid females) (Randklev et
al. 2015, p. 8), indicating reproduction
and recruitment (offspring survive to
join the reproducing population) are
occurring in the Devils River
population.
Rio Grande—Lower Canyons: One of
two remaining populations of Texas
hornshell in the Rio Grande is found in
the Lower Canyons, just downstream of
Big Bend National Park, in Terrell
County, Texas. Burlakova and Karatayev
(2014, p. 16) found the species in low
density (approximately 40 individuals
per km) in this region of the Rio Grande.
Subsequent surveys by Randklev et al.
(2015, entire) confirmed the presence of
Texas hornshell in approximately 18.5
mi (30 km) of the Lower Canyons in two
sections, finding that the species
occupies approximately 63 percent of
sites with suitable (rocky) habitat. For
purposes of this analysis, we presume
the entire section between these
collections, approximately 62 mi (100
km), is occupied. Sites in the Rio
Grande—Lower Canyons reach vary in
density, with the densest sites near
Sanderson Canyon, Terrell County,
Texas, and decreasing downstream
(Randklev et al. 2015, p. 13); the average
density of Texas hornshell at each site
is lower compared to the Black River
and Rio Grande—Laredo (5 ± 14
individuals per site). Texas hornshell
may occur between the known occupied
sections, near the confluence with San
Francisco Creek (Howells 2001a, p. 6),
but limited access has prevented recent
surveys from determining current
occupancy of this reach. Young
individuals and gravid females have
been found throughout the Lower
Canyons reach, indicating recruitment is
occurring (Randklev et al. 2015, p. 8).
Rio Grande—Laredo: The largest
Texas hornshell population occurs from
Laredo, Texas (near La Bota Ranch just
northwest of Laredo), upstream
approximately 56 mi (90 km) (Randklev
et al. 2015, p. 7). The density in this
reach is high, with some habitat patches
containing more than 8,000 individuals
(Karatayev et al. 2015, p. 4) and 100
percent of surveyed patches of suitable
habitat containing Texas hornshell
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:58 Aug 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
(Randklev et al. 2015, p. 7). Throughout
this reach, the density of Texas
hornshell is estimated 170 ± 131
individuals per suitable (rocky) habitat
site (Randklev et al. 2015, p. 7). Young
individuals and gravid females have
been found throughout the Laredo
reach, indicating reproduction and
recruitment are occurring (Randklev et
al. 2015, p. 8). No live Texas hornshell
have been found downstream of the city
of Laredo in recent years.
Mexico: A large portion of the Texas
hornshell’s estimated historical range is
in Mexico. The species occurred in the
Rio Salado basin, which is a tributary to
the Rio Grande in Mexico, and in
approximately 15 rivers that flow into
the Gulf of Mexico. At one time, onehalf to two-thirds of the species’ range
may have been in Mexico.
Unfortunately, the most recent live
collections of Texas hornshell in Mexico
occurred in the 1980s (Mussel Project
2015, entire), and we have very few
records of surveys with positive or
negative collection data since that time.
We have no information on population
size or extent during those times of
collection, and we also have no
information on whether populations of
Texas hornshell still occur in one or
more of these streams; therefore, we
have very low confidence in the species’
current condition throughout most of
the Mexican range. One or more of these
populations may still be extant, or they
may all be extirpated.
Species Needs
Texas hornshell need seams of fine
sediment in crevices, undercut
riverbanks, travertine shelves, and large
boulders in riverine ecosystems with
flowing water and periodic cleansing
flows to keep the substrate free of fine
sediment accumulation. They need
water quality parameters to be within a
suitable range (i.e., dissolved oxygen
above 3 milligrams/liter (mg/L), salinity
below 0.9 parts per thousand, and
ammonia below 0.7 mg/L (Sparks and
Strayer 1998, p. 132; Augspurger et al.
2003, p. 2574; Augspurger et al. 2007, p.
2025; Carman 2007, p. 6)) and
phytoplankton as food. Finally, Texas
hornshell need host fish to be present
during times of spawning.
We describe the Texas hornshell’s
viability by characterizing the status of
the species in terms of its resiliency
(ability of the populations to withstand
stochastic events), redundancy (ability
of the species to withstand large-scale,
catastrophic events), and representation
(the ability of the species to adapt to
changing environmental conditions).
Using various time frames and the
current and projected resiliency,
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
redundancy, and representation, we
describe the species’ level of viability
over time. For the Texas hornshell to
maintain viability, its populations or
some portion thereof must be resilient.
A number of factors influence the
resiliency of Texas hornshell
populations, including occupied stream
length, abundance, and recruitment.
Elements of Texas hornshell habitat that
determine whether Texas hornshell
populations can grow to maximize
habitat occupancy influence those
factors, thereby increasing the resiliency
of populations. These resiliency factors
and habitat elements are discussed here.
Occupied Stream Length: Most
freshwater mussels, including Texas
hornshell, are found in aggregations,
called mussel beds, that vary in size
from about 50 to greater than 5,000
square meters (m2) (540 to greater than
53,800 square feet (ft2)), separated by
stream reaches in which mussels are
absent or rare (Vaughn 2012, p. 983).
Resilient Texas hornshell populations
must occupy stream reaches sufficient
in length such that stochastic events
that affect individual mussel beds do
not eliminate the entire population.
Repopulation by fish infested with
Texas hornshell glochidia from other
mussel beds within the reach, if present
and connected, can allow the
population to recover from these events.
Abundance: Mussel abundance in a
given stream reach is a product of the
number of mussel beds times the
density of mussels within those beds.
For populations of Texas hornshell to be
resilient, there must be many mussel
beds of sufficient density (∼200
individuals per 150 m2 (1,614 ft2); see
SSA report for more discussion) such
that local stochastic events do not
necessarily eliminate the bed(s),
allowing the mussel bed and the overall
population in the stream reach to
recover from any one event. We measure
Texas hornshell abundance by the
number of beds within the population,
and the estimated density of Texas
hornshell within each.
Reproduction: Resilient Texas
hornshell populations must also be
reproducing and recruiting young
individuals into the reproducing
population. Population size and
abundance reflects previous influences
on the population and habitat, while
reproduction and recruitment reflect
population trends that may be stable,
increasing, or decreasing. Detection of
very young juvenile mussels during
routine abundance and distribution
surveys happens extremely rarely due to
sampling bias; sampling for this species
involves tactile searches, and mussels
below about 35 millimeters (mm) (1.4
E:\FR\FM\10AUP1.SGM
10AUP1
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2016 / Proposed Rules
inches (in)) are very hard to detect.
Therefore, reproduction is verified by
repeatedly capturing small-sized
individuals near the low end of the
detectable range size (about 35 mm (1.4
in)) over time and by capturing gravid
females during the reproductively active
time of year (generally, March through
August (Smith et al. 2003, p. 335)).
Substrate: Texas hornshell occur in
flow refuges such as crevices, undercut
riverbanks, travertine shelves, and large
boulders. These refuges must have
seams of clay or other fine sediments
within which the mussels may anchor,
but not so much excess sediment that
the mussels are smothered. Those areas
with clean-swept substrate with seams
of fine sediments are considered to have
suitable substrate, and those with
copious fine sediment both in crevices
and on the stream bottom are
considered less suitable.
Flowing Water: Texas hornshell need
flowing water for survival. They are not
found in lakes or in pools without flow,
or in areas that are regularly dewatered.
River reaches with continuous flow are
considered suitable habitat, while those
with little or no flow are considered not
suitable.
Water Quality: Freshwater mussels, as
a group, are sensitive to changes in
water quality parameters such as
dissolved oxygen, salinity, ammonia,
and pollutants (i.e., dissolved oxygen
above 3 mg/L, salinity below 0.9 parts
per thousand, and ammonia below 0.7
mg/L (Sparks and Strayer 1998, p. 132;
Augspurger et al. 2003, p. 2574;
Augspurger et al. 2007, p. 2025; Carman
2007, p. 6)). Habitats with appropriate
levels of these parameters are
considered suitable, while those
habitats with levels outside of the
appropriate ranges are considered less
suitable.
Maintaining representation in the
form of genetic or ecological diversity is
important to maintain the Texas
hornshell’s capacity to adapt to future
environmental changes. Texas hornshell
populations in the Rio Grande and
Devils River (and, presumably, the
Pecos River, due to its proximity to Rio
Grande populations) have distinct
variation in allele frequencies from
those in the Black River (Inoue et al.
2015, p. 1916). We expect additional
variation was present in Mexican
populations. Mussels, like Texas
hornshell, need to retain populations
throughout their range to maintain the
overall potential genetic and life-history
attributes that can buffer the species’
response to environmental changes over
time (Jones et al. 2006, p. 531). The
Texas hornshell has likely lost genetic
diversity as populations have been
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:58 Aug 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
extirpated. As such, maintaining the
remaining representation in the form of
genetic diversity may be important to
the capacity of the Texas hornshell to
adapt to future environmental change.
Finally, the Texas hornshell needs to
have multiple resilient populations
distributed throughout its range to
provide for redundancy, the ability of
the species to withstand catastrophic
events. The more populations, and the
wider the distribution of those
populations, the more redundancy the
species will exhibit. Redundancy
reduces the risk that a large portion of
the species’ range will be negatively
affected by a catastrophic natural or
anthropogenic event at a given point in
time. Species that are well-distributed
across their historical range are
considered less susceptible to extinction
and have higher viability than species
confined to a small portion of their
range (Carroll et al. 2010, entire;
Redford et al. 2011, entire).
Summary of Biological Status and
Threats
The Act directs us to determine
whether any species is an endangered
species or a threatened species because
of any factors affecting its continued
existence. We completed a
comprehensive assessment of the
biological status of the Texas hornshell,
and prepared a report of the assessment,
which provides a thorough account of
the species’ overall viability. In this
section, we summarize the conclusions
of that assessment, which can be
accessed at Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–
2016–0077 on https://
www.regulations.gov.
Risk Factors
We reviewed the potential risk factors
(i.e., threats, stressors) that could be
affecting the Texas hornshell now and
in the future. In this proposed rule, we
will discuss only those factors in detail
that could meaningfully impact the
status of the species. Those risks that are
not known to have effects on Texas
hornshell populations, such as
collection and disease, are not discussed
here. The primary risk factors (i.e.,
threats) affecting the status of the Texas
hornshell are: (1) Increased fine
sediment (Factor A from the Act), (2)
water quality impairment (Factor A), (3)
loss of flowing water (Factor A), (4)
barriers to fish movement (Factor E),
and (5) increased predation (Factor C).
These factors are all exacerbated by
climate change. Finally, we reviewed
the conservation efforts being
undertaken for the species.
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
52801
Increased Fine Sediment
Texas hornshell require seams of fine
sediment under boulders and bedrock
and in streambanks in order to anchor
themselves into place on the stream
bottom; however, too much fine
sediment can fill in these crevices and
smother any mussels within those
spaces. Under natural conditions, fine
sediments collect on the streambed and
in crevices during low flow events, and
they are washed downstream during
high flow events (also known as
cleansing flows). However, the
increased frequency of low flow events
(from groundwater extraction, instream
surface flow diversions, and drought),
combined with a decrease in cleansing
flows (from reservoir management and
drought), has caused sediment to
accumulate to some degree at all
populations. When water velocity
decreases, which can occur from
reduced streamflow or inundation,
water loses its ability to carry sediment
in suspension; sediment falls to the
substrate, eventually smothering
mussels that cannot adapt to soft
substrates (Watters 2000, p. 263).
Sediment accumulation can be
exacerbated when there is a
simultaneous increase in the sources of
fine sediments in a watershed. In the
range of Texas hornshell, these sources
include streambank erosion from
agricultural activities, livestock grazing,
and roads, among others.
Interstitial spaces (small openings
between rocks and gravels) in the
substrate provide essential habitat for
juvenile mussels. Juvenile freshwater
mussels burrow into interstitial
substrates, making them particularly
susceptible to degradation of this habitat
feature. When clogged with sand or silt,
interstitial flow rates and spaces may
become reduced (Brim Box and Mossa
1999, p. 100), thus reducing juvenile
habitat availability.
All populations of Texas hornshell
face the risk of fine sediment
accumulation to varying degrees.
Elimination of Texas hornshell from
mussel beds due to large amounts of
sediment deposition has been
documented on the Black River in two
locations in recent years. In the future,
we expect this may continue to occur
sporadically. Fine sediments are also
accumulating at the Rio Grande—Laredo
population. Low water levels on the
Devils River will likely lead to
additional sediment accumulation at
this population, as well. In the future,
we expect lower flows to occur more
often at all populations and for longer
periods due to climate change.
E:\FR\FM\10AUP1.SGM
10AUP1
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
52802
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Water Quality Impairment
Water quality can be impaired
through contamination or alteration of
water chemistry. Chemical
contaminants are ubiquitous throughout
the environment and are a major reason
for the current declining status of
freshwater mussel species nationwide
(Augspurger et al. 2007, p. 2025).
Chemicals enter the environment
through both point and nonpoint
discharges, including spills, industrial
sources, municipal effluents, and
agricultural runoff. These sources
contribute organic compounds, heavy
metals, pesticides, herbicides, and a
wide variety of newly emerging
contaminants to the aquatic
environment. Ammonia is of particular
concern below water treatment plants
because freshwater mussels have been
shown to be particularly sensitive to
increased ammonia levels (Augspurger
et al. 2003, p. 2569). It is likely for this
reason that Texas hornshell are not
found for many miles downstream of
two wastewater treatment plants that
discharge into the Rio Grande: at Nuevo
Laredo, Mexico, and at Eagle Pass,
Texas (Karatayev et al. 2015, p. 14).
An additional type of water quality
impairment is alteration of water quality
parameters such as dissolved oxygen,
temperature, and salinity levels.
Dissolved oxygen levels may be reduced
from increased nutrients in the water
column from runoff or wastewater
effluent, and juveniles seem to be
particularly sensitive to low dissolved
oxygen (Sparks and Strayer 1998, pp.
132–133). Increased water temperature
from climate change and from low flows
during drought can exacerbate low
dissolved oxygen levels as well as have
its own effects on both juvenile and
adult mussels. Finally, salinity appears
to be particularly limiting to Texas
hornshell. The aquifer near Malaga,
New Mexico, contains saline water. As
the saline water emerges from the
ground, it is diluted by surface flow. As
surface flow decreases, however, the
concentration of salinity in the river
increases. Additionally, aquifers have
become increasingly saline due to
salinized water recharge (Hoagstrom
2009, p. 35). Irrigation return flows
exacerbate salinity levels as salts build
up on irrigated land and then are
washed into the riverway. The Pecos
River from the confluence with the
Black River to the confluence with
Independence Creek has become
particularly saline in the past few
decades, with levels at 7 parts per
million (ppm) or higher, which is too
high for freshwater mussel habitation.
Additionally, the Black River
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:58 Aug 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
downstream of the Texas hornshell
population has had salinity levels in the
range of 6 ppm, which may be one
reason the population has been
extirpated from the downstream reach.
Contaminant spills are also a concern.
In particular, the Black River population
is vulnerable to spills from the high
volume of truck traffic crossing the river
at low water access points (Bren School
of Environmental Management 2014, p.
26). Due to the topography and steep
slopes of these areas, spilled
contaminants and contaminated soils
could directly enter the surface water of
the river and negatively impact the
species (Boyer 1986, p. 300) and
downstream habitat. For the smaller
populations (Black, Devils, Pecos
rivers), a single spill could eliminate the
entire population.
A reduction in surface flow from
drought, instream diversion, or
groundwater extraction concentrates
contaminant and salinity levels,
increases water temperatures in streams,
and exacerbates effects to Texas
hornshell.
Poor water quality affects most Texas
hornshell populations currently to some
degree, and future water quality is
expected to decrease due to decreasing
river flow and increasing temperatures.
The Pecos River experiences very high
salinity levels upstream of the existing
population, and we expect that the
observed high mortality of the Pecos
River population is due to salinity
pulses. Rangewide, as water flow is
expected to decrease due to climate
change, water quality will decline.
Loss of Flowing Water
Texas hornshell populations need
flowing water in order to survive. Low
flow events (including stream drying)
and inundation can eliminate
appropriate habitat for Texas hornshell,
and while the species can survive these
events if they last for a short time,
populations that experience these
events regularly will not persist.
Inundation has primarily occurred
upstream of dams, both large (such as
Amistad, Falcon, and Red Bluff Dams)
and small (low water crossings and
diversion dams, such as those on the
Black River). Inundation causes an
increase in sediment deposition,
eliminating the crevices this species
inhabits. In large reservoirs, deep water
is very cold and often devoid of oxygen
and necessary nutrients. Cold water
(less than 11 degrees Celsius (°C) (52
degrees Fahrenheit (°F))) has been
shown to stunt mussel growth (Hanson
et al. 1988, p. 352). Because glochidial
release may be temperature dependent,
it is likely that relict individuals living
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
in the constantly cold hypolimnion
(deepest portion of the reservoir) in
these reservoirs may never reproduce, or
reproduce less frequently. Additionally,
the effects of these reservoirs extend
beyond inundation and fragmentation of
populations; the reservoirs are managed
for flood control and water delivery, and
the resultant downstream releases rarely
mimic natural flow regimes, tempering
the natural fluctuations in flow that
flush fine sediments from the substrate.
At the Rio Grande—Laredo
population, a low-water weir has been
proposed for construction (Rio Grande
Regional Water Planning Group 2016, p.
8–8). The dam would be located just
downstream of the La Bota area, which
contains the largest known and most
dense Texas hornshell bed within the
Rio Grande—Laredo population and
rangewide. The impounded area would
extend approximately 14 mi (22.5 km)
upstream, effectively eliminating habitat
for Texas hornshell from 25 percent of
the currently occupied area and likely
leading to extirpation of the densest
sites within this population.
Very low water levels are detrimental
to Texas hornshell populations, as well.
Effects of climate change have already
begun to affect the regions of Texas and
New Mexico where the Texas hornshell
occurs, resulting in higher air
temperatures, increased evaporation,
increased groundwater pumping, and
changing precipitation patterns such
that water levels rangewide have
already reached historic lows (Dean and
Schmidt 2011, p. 336; Bren School of
Environmental Management 2014, p.
50). The rivers inhabited by Texas
hornshell have some resiliency to
drought because they are spring-fed
(Black and Devils Rivers) and very large
(Rio Grande), but drought in
combination with increased
groundwater pumping and regulated
reservoir releases may lead to lower
river flows of longer duration than have
been recorded in the past. Streamflow in
the Rio Grande downstream of the
confluence with the Rio Conchos (near
the Rio Grande-Lower Canyons
population) has been declining since the
1980s (Miyazono et al. 2015, p. A–3),
and overall river discharge for the Rio
Grande is projected to continue to
decline due to increased drought as a
result of climate change (Nohara et al.
2006, p. 1087). The Rio Conchos
contributes more than 90 percent of the
flow of the lower Rio Grande (Dean and
Schmidt 2011, p. 4). However, during
times of drought (such as between 1994
and 2003), Mexico has fallen short of its
water delivery commitments, and so the
contribution of the Rio Conchos has
fallen to as low as 40 percent (Carter et
E:\FR\FM\10AUP1.SGM
10AUP1
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2016 / Proposed Rules
al. 2015, p. 15). The Rio Grande—Lower
Canyons population is downstream of
the confluence with the Rio Conchos
and is at risk from these reduced
deliveries. The Rio Grande—Lower
Canyons is very incised (in other words,
has vertical banks), and the population
occurs in crevices along the steep banks.
Due to the habitat characteristics of this
population, reductions in discharge in
this area may lead to a higher
proportion of the Texas hornshell
population being exposed than would
be found in other populations
experiencing similar flow decreases.
In the Black River, surface water is
removed from the river for irrigation,
including the Carlsbad Irrigation
District’s Black River Canal at the
diversion dam. Studies have shown that
flows in the river are affected by
groundwater withdrawals, particularly
those from the Black River Valley.
Groundwater in the Black River
watershed is also being used for
hydraulic fracturing for oil and gas
activities. Between 4.3 acre-feet
(187,308 ft3 (5,304 m3)) and 10.7 acrefeet (466,091 ft3 (13,198 m3)) of water is
used for each hydraulic fracturing job
(Bren School of Environmental
Management 2014, p. 91). Overall, mean
monthly discharge has already declined
since the mid-1990s, and mean monthly
temperatures have increased over the
past 100 years (Inoue et al. 2014, p. 7).
In the Black River, survivorship is
positively correlated with discharge
(Inoue et al. 2014, p. 9); as mean
monthly discharge decreases, we expect
Texas hornshell survivorship to
decrease, as well. The Black River is
expected to lose streamflow in the
future due to air temperature increases,
groundwater extraction, and reduced
precipitation.
In the Devils River, future water
withdrawals from aquifers that support
spring flows in the range of the Texas
hornshell could result in reduction of
critical spring flows and river drying. In
particular, there have been multiple
proposals to withdraw water from the
nearby aquifer and deliver the water to
municipalities (e.g., Val Verde Water
Company 2013, pp. 1–2). To date,
however, none have been approved.
As spring flows decline due to
drought or groundwater lowering from
pumping, habitat for the Texas
hornshell is reduced and could
eventually cease to exist. While Texas
hornshell may survive short periods of
low flow, as low flows persist, mussels
face oxygen deprivation, increased
water temperature, and, ultimately,
stranding.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:58 Aug 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
Barriers to Fish Movement
Two of the Texas hornshell’s primary
host fish species (river carpsucker and
red shiner) are known to be common,
widespread species. We do not expect
the distribution of host fish to be a
limiting factor in Texas hornshell
distribution. However, the barriers that
prevent fish movement upstream and
downstream affect the viability of Texas
hornshell.
Texas hornshell were likely
historically distributed throughout the
Rio Grande, Pecos River, Devils River,
and Black River in Texas and New
Mexico, as well as throughout the rivers
draining to the Gulf of Mexico from
which the species was known when few
natural barriers existed to prevent
migration (via host species) among
suitable habitats. The species colonized
new areas through movement of infested
host fish, and newly metamorphosed
juveniles would excyst from host fish in
new locations. Today, the remaining
populations are significantly isolated
from one another such that
recolonization of areas previously
extirpated is extremely unlikely if not
impossible due to existing
contemporary barriers to host fish
movement. The primary reason for this
isolation is reservoir construction and
unsuitable water quality. The Black
River is isolated from the rest of the
populations by high salinity reaches of
the Pecos River, as well as Red Bluff
Reservoir, and is hundreds of river
miles from the nearest extant
population. Amistad Reservoir separates
the three Texas populations from each
other, isolating the Rio Grande—Lower
Canyons, Devils River, and Rio
Grande—Laredo populations. There is
currently no opportunity for interaction
among any of the five extant U.S.
populations.
The overall distribution of mussels is,
in part, a function of the dispersal of
their host fish. Small populations are
more affected by this limited
immigration potential because they are
susceptible to genetic drift (random loss
of genetic diversity) and inbreeding
depression. At the species level,
populations that are eliminated due to
stochastic events cannot be recolonized
naturally, leading to reduced overall
redundancy and representation.
Increased Predation
Predation on freshwater mussels is a
natural ecological interaction. Raccoons,
snapping turtles, and fish are known to
prey upon Texas hornshell. Under
natural conditions, the level of
predation occurring within Texas
hornshell populations is not likely to
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
52803
pose a significant risk to any given
population. However, during periods of
low flow, terrestrial predators have
increased access to portions of the river
that are otherwise too deep under
normal flow conditions. High levels of
predation during drought have been
observed on the Devils River, and
muskrat predation has also been
reported on the Black River. As drought
and low flow conditions are predicted
to occur more often and for longer
periods due to the effects of climate
change, the Black and Devils Rivers are
expected to experience additional
predation pressure into the future.
Predation is expected to be less of a
concern for the Rio Grande populations,
as the river is significantly larger than
the Black and Devils Rivers and Texas
hornshell are less likely to be found in
exposed or very shallow portions of the
stream.
Effects of Climate Change
Climate change in the form of the
change in timing and amount of
precipitation and air temperature
increase is occurring, and continued
greenhouse gas emissions at or above
current rates will cause further warming
(Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC) 2013, pp. 11–12).
Warming in the Southwest is expected
to be greatest in the summer (IPCC 2013,
pp. 11–12), and annual mean
precipitation is very likely to decrease
in the Southwest (Ray et al. 2008, p. 1;
IPCC 2013, pp. 11–12). In Texas, the
number of extreme hot days (high
temperatures exceeding 95 °F (35 °C) are
expected to double by around 2050
(Kinniburgh et al. 2015, p. 83), and
Texas is considered one of the
‘‘hotspots’’ of climate change in North
America; west Texas is an area expected
to show greater responsiveness to the
effects of climate change (Diffenbaugh et
al. 2008, p. 3). Even if precipitation and
groundwater recharge remain at current
levels, increased groundwater pumping
and resultant aquifer shortages due to
increased temperatures are nearly
certain (Loaiciga et al. 2000, p. 193;
Mace and Wade 2008, pp. 662, 664–665;
Taylor et al. 2012, p. 3). Increased water
temperature can cause stress to
individuals, decrease dissolved oxygen
levels, and increase toxicity of
contaminants. Effects of climate change,
such as air temperature increases and an
increase in drought frequency and
intensity, have been shown to be
occurring throughout the range of Texas
hornshell (Kinniburgh et al. 2015, p.
88), and these effects are expected to
exacerbate several of the stressors
discussed above, such as water
temperature and flow loss (Wuebbles et
E:\FR\FM\10AUP1.SGM
10AUP1
52804
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
al. 2013, p. 16). As we projected the
future condition of the Texas hornshell
and which stressors are likely to occur,
we considered climate change to be an
exacerbating factor in the increase of
fine sediments, changes in water
quality, and loss of flowing water.
Due to the effects of ongoing climate
change, we expect the frequency and
duration of cleansing flows to decrease,
leading to the increase in fine sediments
and reduced water levels at all
populations. More extreme climate
change projections lead to further
increases in fine sediment within the
populations. Similarly, as lower water
levels concentrate contaminants and
cause unsuitable temperature and
dissolved oxygen levels, we expect
water quality to decline to some degree
in the future.
Conservation Actions and Regulatory
Mechanisms
About 7 percent of known occupied
habitat for the Texas hornshell is in
New Mexico, and the Service is
collaborating with water users, oil and
gas developers, landowners, and other
partners to develop candidate
conservation agreements (CCAs) for the
species on State, Federal, and private
lands. These agreements are currently
under development, and the potential
purpose is to provide voluntary
conservation that would reduce threats
to the species while improving physical
habitat and water quality. The key
conservation measures in the
agreements will be designed to limit oil
and gas development to areas outside of
the Black and Delaware River
floodplains, minimize erosion, and
maintain minimum water flows in the
rivers. Along with these measures, the
partners to the agreement are evaluating
alternatives to the multiple low water
crossings on the Black River. Partners
are considering alternate crossing
locations, which could include bridges
designed to allow host fishes to pass
through in addition to decreasing
potential contamination events. Because
these agreements have not been
completed, we are not considering the
conservation actions in our present
evaluation of the status of Texas
hornshell.
The New Mexico Department of Game
and Fish has begun Texas hornshell
reintroduction efforts into the Delaware
River, which is within the historical
range of the species. Adults and infested
host fish were released in suitable
habitat in the Delaware River in 2013
and 2015. Many of the released adults
have been subsequently located, and
success of the reintroduction will be
determined in the coming years. We
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:58 Aug 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
expect the reintroduction effort to
continue over the next several years, but
we are not considering the action to
have been successful to date.
In Texas, The Nature Conservancy
and Texas Parks and Wildlife
Department manage lands under their
purview in the Devils River watershed
for native communities, including Texas
hornshell. The large amount (over
200,000 acres) of land in conservation
management in the Devils River
watershed reduces the risks to Texas
hornshell from sediment inputs and
contaminants.
In the Rio Grande, we are not aware
of any management actions for Texas
hornshell. The Texas Comptroller of
Public Accounts has established an
Endangered Species Task Force and has
funded much of the recent research in
Texas on Texas hornshell, which has
led to greater understanding of the
species’ distribution in the State.
Current Condition
Overall, there are five known
remaining populations of Texas
hornshell, comprising approximately 15
percent of the species’ historical range
in the United States (see Map 1, above).
Historically, most Texas hornshell
populations were likely connected by
fish migration throughout the Rio
Grande, upstream through the Pecos
River, and throughout the tributaries,
but due to impoundments and river
reaches with unsuitable water quality
(for example, high salinity) they are
currently isolated from one another, and
repopulation of extirpated locations is
unlikely to occur without human
assistance. Here we discuss the current
condition of each known population,
taking into account the risks to those
populations that are currently occurring,
as well as management actions that are
currently occurring to address those
risks. We consider low levels of climate
change to be currently occurring,
resulting in reduced timing and amount
of streamflow, increased stream
temperatures, and increased
accumulation of fine sediments.
Black River: The Black River
population is quite dense and
recruitment appears to be high, but the
short size (8.7 mi (14.0 km)) of the
occupied reach limits this population’s
resiliency. Accumulation of fine
sediment in the substrate has already
occurred due to increased sediment
input into the river from road crossings,
culverts, and cattle grazing, combined
with a decreased frequency of cleansing
river flows. The current level of climate
change will continue to reduce flow in
the river from groundwater extraction
and drought, resulting in fewer
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
cleansing flows and increased fine
sediments. The distribution of Texas
hornshell in the Black River will remain
small, and the risk of a contaminant
spill will remain high, resulting in a
high likelihood that water quality will
become unsuitable and reduce
abundance of Texas hornshell
significantly. Therefore, taking into
account the current threats to the
population and its distribution within
the river, the Texas hornshell
population in the Black River has low
resiliency.
Pecos River: The Pecos River
population is extremely small and
exhibits no evidence of reproduction.
The few number of live individuals
among the very high number of dead
shells indicates a population in severe
decline; this is likely due to high
salinity levels in the river upstream of
the population. There is a high
likelihood this population will be
extirpated in the near future due to
water quality alone. Therefore, the
Pecos River population of Texas
hornshell has very low resiliency.
Devils River: The Devils River
population has low abundance and has
exhibited some evidence of
reproduction. The current level of
climate change will continue to reduce
flow in the Devils River due to
groundwater extraction and drought.
The low flows this population
experiences during dry times will
continue to become more frequent and
prolonged. Because Texas hornshell in
the Devils River occur at the heads of
riffles, they are vulnerable to complete
flow loss when water levels drop. The
reduction in cleansing flows will also
result in the accumulation of fine
sediments, reducing substrate quality.
Low flows will also affect water quality
parameters such as temperature and
dissolved oxygen, causing them to
become unsuitable for Texas hornshell.
Additionally, the species is already
vulnerable to predation from terrestrial
predators during times of low flow;
predation will occur more frequently as
periods of low flow become more
common. Overall, because the
population is currently small and would
be unlikely to grow, the Devils River
population has low resiliency.
Rio Grande—Lower Canyons: The
Lower Canyons population has
relatively high abundance and evidence
of recruitment. Drought and
groundwater extraction resulting from
currently observed levels of climate
change will continue to lower water
levels in the Rio Grande—Lower
Canyons population of Texas hornshell.
We expect that Mexico’s management of
the Rio Conchos will continue to be an
E:\FR\FM\10AUP1.SGM
10AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
unreliable source of water. This section
of the Rio Grande is relatively deep and
incised, and the population of Texas
hornshell primarily occurs in crevices
along the banks. Water flow reductions
would expose a high proportion of the
existing population; therefore, this
reduction in flow will likely have a
larger effect on the population size than
in other populations, although at a small
to moderate decrease in water flow we
still expect abundance to be maintained
at moderate levels. Overall, the Rio
Grande—Lower Canyons population
exhibits moderate resiliency.
Rio Grande—Laredo: Similar to the
Lower Canyons population, the Laredo
population has numerous mussel beds
with high Texas hornshell abundance
and evidence of reproduction. However,
drought and upstream water
management will continue to reduce
flows in the Rio Grande. Water quality
will continue to decrease due to lower
flows, and fine sediments will
accumulate. Declining water flow will
cause fine sediments to accumulate and
water quality to decline, leading to a
decline in population abundance.
Overall, the Rio Grande—Laredo has
moderate resiliency.
Mexico: We have low confidence in
the species’ current condition
throughout most of the Mexican range.
One or more of these populations may
still be extant, or they may all be
extirpated. We have no recent data on
the species’ occurrence in Mexico; the
last live recordings are from the mid1980s. Because of this uncertainty, we
did not rely on the Texas hornshell’s
distribution in Mexico when evaluating
the viability of the species.
Future Condition
As part of the SSA, we also developed
multiple future condition scenarios to
capture the range of uncertainties
regarding future threats and the
projected responses by the Texas
hornshell. Our scenarios included a
status quo scenario, which incorporated
the current risk factors continuing on
the same trajectory that they are on now.
We also evaluated four additional future
scenarios that incorporated varying
levels of increasing risk factors with
elevated negative effects on hornshell
populations. However, because we
determined that the current condition of
the Texas hornshell and the associated
status quo projections were consistent
with an endangered species (see
Determination, below), we are not
presenting the results of the other future
scenarios in this proposed rule. The
additional future scenarios project
conditions that are worse for the Texas
hornshell. Since the status quo scenario
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:58 Aug 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
was determined to be endangered, other
projected scenarios would also be
endangered, as they forecast conditions
that are more at risk of extinction than
the status quo. Please refer to the SSA
report (Service 2016) for the full
analysis of future scenarios.
Determination
Section 4 of the Act, and its
implementing regulations at 50 CFR part
424, set forth the procedures for adding
species to the Federal Lists of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants. Under section 4(b)(1)(a), the
Secretary is to make endangered or
threatened determinations required by
subsection 4(a)(1) solely on the basis of
the best scientific and commercial data
available to her after conducting a
review of the status of the species and
after taking into account conservation
efforts by States or foreign nations. The
standards for determining whether a
species is endangered or threatened are
provided in section 3 of the Act. An
endangered species is any species that
is ‘‘in danger of extinction throughout
all or a significant portion of its range.’’
A threatened species is any species that
is ‘‘likely to become an endangered
species within the foreseeable future
throughout all or a significant portion of
its range.’’ Per section 4(a)(1) of the Act,
in reviewing the status of the species to
determine if it meets the definition of
endangered or of threatened, we
determine whether any species is an
endangered species or a threatened
species because of any of the following
five factors: (A) The present or
threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range; (B)
overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D)
the inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms; and (E) other natural or
manmade factors affecting its continued
existence. Listing actions may be
warranted based on any of the above
threat factors, singly or in combination.
The fundamental question before the
Service is whether the species warrants
protection as an endangered or
threatened species under the Act. To
make this determination, we evaluated
extinction risk, described in terms of the
current condition of populations and
their distribution (taking into account
the risk factors (i.e., threats, stressors)
and their effects on those populations).
For any species, as population
conditions decline and distribution
shrinks, the species’ overall viability
declines and extinction risk increases.
We have carefully assessed the best
scientific and commercial information
available regarding the past, present,
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
52805
and future threats to the Texas
hornshell. Our analysis of the past,
current, and future influences on what
the Texas hornshell needs for long-term
viability revealed that there are five
influences that may pose a meaningful
risk to the viability of the species. These
are primarily related to habitat changes
(Factor A from the Act): The
accumulation of fine sediments, the loss
of flowing water, and impairment of
water quality, all of which are
exacerbated by the effects of climate
change. Predation (Factor C) is also
affecting those populations already
experiencing low stream flow, and
barriers to fish movement (Factor E)
prevent recolonization after stochastic
events.
The Texas hornshell has declined
significantly in overall distribution and
abundance, with the species currently
occupying approximately 15 percent of
its historical range in the United States.
Between one-half and two-thirds of the
Texas hornshell’s historical range
occurred in Mexico; we have very low
confidence in the species’ current
condition throughout most of the
Mexican range. The resulting remnant
populations occupy shorter reaches
compared to presumed historical
populations, and they are all isolated
from one another.
The primary historical reason for this
reduction in range was reservoir
construction and unsuitable water
quality. Large reservoirs have been
constructed on the Rio Grande and
Pecos River, and much of the Pecos
River upstream of the confluence with
Independence Creek now has salinity
levels too high for mussel habitation
(Hoagstrom 2009, p. 28). The effects of
these reservoirs extend beyond
fragmentation of populations; the
resultant downstream water releases do
not mimic natural flow regimes, and the
change in timing and frequency of
cleansing flows results in increases in
fine sediments, increases in predation,
and decreases in water quality. Add to
this the exacerbating effects of climate
change—increased temperature and
decreased stream flow—and the
remaining Texas hornshell populations
face moderate to high levels of risk of
extirpation currently. For the
populations occupying the smaller
reaches (such as the Black River, Devils
River, and Pecos River populations), a
single stochastic event such as
contaminant spill or drought could
eliminate an entire population of Texas
hornshell. These effects are heightened
at the species level because the isolation
of the populations prohibits natural
recolonization from host fish carrying
Texas hornshell glochidia, which likely
E:\FR\FM\10AUP1.SGM
10AUP1
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
52806
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2016 / Proposed Rules
happened in the past and allowed for
the species to ebb and flow from
suitable areas.
Populations in both large and small
reaches face risks from natural and
anthropogenic sources. Climate change
has already begun to affect the regions
of Texas and New Mexico where Texas
hornshell occurs, resulting in higher air
temperatures, increased evaporation,
increased groundwater pumping, and
changing precipitation patterns such
that water levels rangewide have
already reached historic lows. These
low water levels put the populations at
risk of habitat loss from increased fine
sediments, poor water quality, and
increased predation risk.
These risks, alone or in combination,
are expected to result in the extirpation
of additional populations, further
reducing the overall redundancy and
representation of the species.
Historically, the species, with a large
range of interconnected populations,
would have been resilient to stochastic
events such as drought and
sedimentation because even if some
populations were extirpated by such
events, they could be recolonized over
time by dispersal from nearby surviving
populations. This connectivity would
have made for a highly resilient species
overall. However, under current
conditions, connectivity is prevented
due to large reservoirs and unsuitably
high salinity levels between
populations. As a consequence of these
current conditions, the viability of the
Texas hornshell now primarily depends
on maintaining the remaining isolated
populations.
Of the five remaining isolated
populations, three are small in
abundance and occupied stream length
and have low to no resiliency. The
remaining two are larger, with increased
abundance and occupied stream length;
however, flow reduction, water quality
decline, and habitat loss from
sedimentation reduce the abundance
and distribution of those populations.
We have no information on population
status in Mexico. Therefore, the Texas
hornshell has no populations that are
currently considered highly resilient.
The high risk of extirpation of these
populations leads to low levels of
redundancy (few populations will
persist to withstand catastrophic events)
and representation (little to no
ecological or genetic diversity will
persist to respond to changing
environmental conditions). Overall,
these low levels of resiliency,
redundancy, and representation result
in the Texas hornshell having low
viability, and the species currently faces
a high risk of extinction.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:58 Aug 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
The Act defines an endangered
species as any species that is ‘‘in danger
of extinction throughout all or a
significant portion of its range’’ and a
threatened species as any species ‘‘that
is likely to become endangered
throughout all or a significant portion of
its range within the foreseeable future.’’
We find that the Texas hornshell is
presently in danger of extinction
throughout its entire range based on the
severity and immediacy of threats
currently impacting the species. The
overall range has been significantly
reduced, and the remaining habitat and
populations are threatened by a
multitude of factors acting in
combination to reduce the overall
viability of the species. The risk of
extinction is high because the remaining
populations have a high risk of
extirpation, are isolated, and have
limited potential for recolonization.
Therefore, on the basis of the best
available scientific and commercial
information, we propose listing the
Texas hornshell as endangered in
accordance with sections 3(6) and
4(a)(1) of the Act. We find that a
threatened species status is not
appropriate for the Texas hornshell
because of the currently contracted
range (loss of 85 percent of its historic
range in the United States, and likely
more in Mexico), because the threats are
occurring across the entire range of the
species, and because the threats are
ongoing currently and are expected to
continue or worsen into the future.
Because the species is already in danger
of extinction throughout its range, a
threatened status is not appropriate.
Under the Act and our implementing
regulations, a species may warrant
listing if it is endangered or threatened
throughout all or a significant portion of
its range. Because we have determined
that the Texas hornshell is endangered
throughout all of its range, no portion of
its range can be ‘‘significant’’ for
purposes of the definitions of
‘‘endangered species’’ and ‘‘threatened
species.’’ See the Final Policy on
Interpretation of the Phrase ‘‘Significant
Portion of Its Range’’ in the Endangered
Species Act’s Definitions of
‘‘Endangered Species’’ and ‘‘Threatened
Species’’ (79 FR 37578; July 1, 2014).
Available Conservation Measures
Conservation measures provided to
species listed as endangered or
threatened species under the Act
include recognition, recovery actions,
requirements for Federal protection, and
prohibitions against certain practices.
Recognition through listing results in
public awareness, and conservation by
Federal, State, Tribal, and local
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
agencies; private organizations; and
individuals. The Act encourages
cooperation with the States and other
countries and calls for recovery actions
to be carried out for listed species. The
protection required by Federal agencies
and the prohibitions against certain
activities are discussed, in part, below.
The primary purpose of the Act is the
conservation of endangered and
threatened species and the ecosystems
upon which they depend. The ultimate
goal of such conservation efforts is the
recovery of these listed species, so that
they no longer need the protective
measures of the Act. Subsection 4(f) of
the Act calls for the Service to develop
and implement recovery plans for the
conservation of endangered and
threatened species. The recovery
planning process involves the
identification of actions that are
necessary to halt or reverse the species’
decline by addressing the threats to its
survival and recovery. The goal of this
process is to restore listed species to a
point where they are secure, selfsustaining, and functioning components
of their ecosystems.
Recovery planning includes the
development of a recovery outline
shortly after a species is listed and
preparation of a draft and final recovery
plan. The recovery outline guides the
immediate implementation of urgent
recovery actions and describes the
process to be used to develop a recovery
plan. Revisions of the plan may be done
to address continuing or new threats to
the species, as new substantive
information becomes available. The
recovery plan also identifies recovery
criteria for review of when a species
may be ready for downlisting or
delisting, and methods for monitoring
recovery progress. Recovery plans also
establish a framework for agencies to
coordinate their recovery efforts and
provide estimates of the cost of
implementing recovery tasks. Recovery
teams (composed of species experts,
Federal and State agencies,
nongovernmental organizations, and
stakeholders) are often established to
develop recovery plans. When
completed, the recovery outline, draft
recovery plan, and the final recovery
plan will be available on our Web site
(https://www.fws.gov/endangered), or
from our Texas Coastal Ecological
Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
Implementation of recovery actions
generally requires the participation of a
broad range of partners, including other
Federal agencies, States, Tribes,
nongovernmental organizations,
businesses, and private landowners.
Examples of recovery actions include
E:\FR\FM\10AUP1.SGM
10AUP1
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2016 / Proposed Rules
habitat restoration (e.g., restoration of
native vegetation), research, captive
propagation and reintroduction, and
outreach and education. The recovery of
many listed species cannot be
accomplished solely on Federal lands
because their ranges may occur
primarily or solely on non-Federal
lands. To achieve recovery of these
species requires cooperative
conservation efforts on private, State,
and Tribal lands. If this species is listed,
funding for recovery actions will be
available from a variety of sources,
including Federal budgets, State
programs, and cost share grants for nonFederal landowners, the academic
community, and nongovernmental
organizations. In addition, pursuant to
section 6 of the Act, the States of Texas
and New Mexico would be eligible for
Federal funds to implement
management actions that promote the
protection or recovery of the Texas
hornshell. Information on our grant
programs that are available to aid
species recovery can be found at: https://
www.fws.gov/grants.
Although the Texas hornshell is only
proposed for listing under the Act at
this time, please let us know if you are
interested in participating in recovery
efforts for this species. Additionally, we
invite you to submit any new
information on this species whenever it
becomes available and any information
you may have for recovery planning
purposes (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT).
Section 7(a) of the Act requires
Federal agencies to evaluate their
actions with respect to any species that
is proposed or listed as an endangered
or threatened species and with respect
to its critical habitat, if any is
designated. Regulations implementing
this interagency cooperation provision
of the Act are codified at 50 CFR part
402. Section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires
Federal agencies to confer with the
Service on any action that is likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of a
species proposed for listing or result in
destruction or adverse modification of
proposed critical habitat. If a species is
listed subsequently, section 7(a)(2) of
the Act requires Federal agencies to
ensure that activities they authorize,
fund, or carry out are not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of
the species or destroy or adversely
modify its critical habitat. If a Federal
action may affect a listed species or its
critical habitat, the responsible Federal
agency must enter into consultation
with the Service.
Federal agency actions within the
species’ habitat that may require
conference or consultation or both as
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:58 Aug 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
described in the preceding paragraph
include management and any other
landscape-altering activities on Federal
lands administered by the Bureau of
Land Management, Bureau of
Reclamation, and National Park Service;
issuance of section 404 Clean Water Act
(33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) permits by the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; and
construction and maintenance of roads
or highways by the Federal Highway
Administration.
The Act and its implementing
regulations set forth a series of general
prohibitions and exceptions that apply
to endangered wildlife. The prohibitions
of section 9(a)(1) of the Act, codified at
50 CFR 17.21, make it illegal for any
person subject to the jurisdiction of the
United States to take (which includes
harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot,
wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect; or
to attempt any of these) endangered
wildlife within the United States or on
the high seas. In addition, it is unlawful
to import; export; deliver, receive, carry,
transport, or ship in interstate or foreign
commerce in the course of commercial
activity; or sell or offer for sale in
interstate or foreign commerce any
listed species. It is also illegal to
possess, sell, deliver, carry, transport, or
ship any such wildlife that has been
taken illegally. Certain exceptions apply
to employees of the Service, the
National Marine Fisheries Service, other
Federal land management agencies, and
State conservation agencies.
We may issue permits to carry out
otherwise prohibited activities
involving endangered wildlife under
certain circumstances. Regulations
governing permits are codified at 50
CFR 17.22. With regard to endangered
wildlife, a permit may be issued for the
following purposes: For scientific
purposes, to enhance the propagation or
survival of the species, and for
incidental take in connection with
otherwise lawful activities. There are
also certain statutory exemptions from
the prohibitions, which are found in
sections 9 and 10 of the Act.
It is our policy, as published in the
Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR
34272), to identify to the maximum
extent practicable at the time a species
is listed, those activities that would or
would not constitute a violation of
section 9 of the Act. The intent of this
policy is to increase public awareness of
the effect of a proposed listing on
proposed and ongoing activities within
the range of the species proposed for
listing. Based on the best available
information, if we list this species, the
following actions are unlikely to result
in a violation of section 9, if these
activities are carried out in accordance
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
52807
with existing regulations and permit
requirements; this list is not
comprehensive:
(1) Normal agricultural and
silvicultural practices, including
herbicide and pesticide use, which are
carried out in accordance with any
existing regulations, permit and label
requirements, and best management
practices; and
(2) Normal residential landscape
activities.
Based on the best available
information, if we list this species, the
following activities may potentially
result in a violation of section 9 of the
Act; this list is not comprehensive:
(1) Unauthorized handling or
collecting of the species;
(2) Modification of the channel or
water flow of any stream in which the
Texas hornshell is known to occur;
(3) Livestock grazing that results in
direct or indirect destruction of stream
habitat; and
(4) Discharge of chemicals or fill
material into any waters in which the
Texas hornshell is known to occur.
Questions regarding whether specific
activities would constitute a violation of
section 9 of the Act should be directed
to the Texas Coastal Ecological Services
Field Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
Critical Habitat for the Texas Hornshell
Background
Critical habitat is defined in section 3
of the Act as:
(1) The specific areas within the
geographical area occupied by the
species, at the time it is listed in
accordance with the Act, on which are
found those physical or biological
features:
(a) Essential to the conservation of the
species, and
(b) Which may require special
management considerations or
protection; and
(2) Specific areas outside the
geographical area occupied by the
species at the time it is listed, upon a
determination that such areas are
essential for the conservation of the
species.
Conservation, as defined under
section 3 of the Act, means to use and
the use of all methods and procedures
that are necessary to bring an
endangered or threatened species to the
point at which the measures provided
pursuant to the Act are no longer
necessary. Such methods and
procedures include, but are not limited
to, all activities associated with
scientific resources management such as
research, census, law enforcement,
E:\FR\FM\10AUP1.SGM
10AUP1
52808
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
habitat acquisition and maintenance,
propagation, live trapping, and
transplantation, and, in the
extraordinary case where population
pressures within a given ecosystem
cannot be otherwise relieved, may
include regulated taking.
Critical habitat receives protection
under section 7 of the Act through the
requirement that Federal agencies
ensure, in consultation with the Service,
that any action they authorize, fund, or
carry out is not likely to result in the
destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat. The designation of
critical habitat does not affect land
ownership or establish a refuge,
wilderness, reserve, preserve, or other
conservation area. Such designation
does not allow the government or public
to access private lands. Such
designation does not require
implementation of restoration, recovery,
or enhancement measures by nonFederal landowners. Where a landowner
requests Federal agency funding or
authorization for an action that may
affect a listed species or critical habitat,
the consultation requirements of section
7(a)(2) of the Act would apply, but even
in the event of a destruction or adverse
modification finding, the obligation of
the Federal action agency and the
landowner is not to restore or recover
the species, but to implement
reasonable and prudent alternatives to
avoid destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat.
Section 4 of the Act requires that we
designate critical habitat on the basis of
the best scientific data available.
Further, our Policy on Information
Standards Under the Endangered
Species Act (published in the Federal
Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271)),
the Information Quality Act (section 515
of the Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act for
Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106–554; H.R.
5658)), and our associated Information
Quality Guidelines, provide criteria,
establish procedures, and provide
guidance to ensure that our decisions
are based on the best scientific data
available. They require our biologists, to
the extent consistent with the Act and
with the use of the best scientific data
available, to use primary and original
sources of information as the basis for
recommendations to designate critical
habitat.
Prudency Determination
Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as
amended, and implementing regulations
(50 CFR 424.12), require that, to the
maximum extent prudent and
determinable, the Secretary designate
critical habitat at the time the species is
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:58 Aug 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
determined to be endangered or
threatened. Our regulations (50 CFR
424.12(a)(1)) state that the designation
of critical habitat is not prudent when
one or both of the following situations
exist: (1) The species is threatened by
taking or other human activity, and
identification of critical habitat can be
expected to increase the degree of threat
to the species, or (2) such designation of
critical habitat would not be beneficial
to the species.
There is currently no imminent threat
of take attributed to collection or
vandalism under Factor B for the Texas
hornshell, and identification and
mapping of critical habitat is not likely
to increase any such threat. In the
absence of finding that the designation
of critical habitat would increase threats
to a species, if there are any benefits to
a critical habitat designation, then a
prudent finding is warranted. The
potential benefits of designation
include: (1) Triggering consultation
under section 7 of the Act in new areas
for actions in which there may be a
Federal nexus where it would not
otherwise occur because, for example, it
is or has become unoccupied or the
occupancy is in question; (2) focusing
conservation activities on the most
essential features and areas; (3)
providing educational benefits to State
or county governments or private
entities; and (4) preventing people from
causing inadvertent harm to the species.
Therefore, because we have determined
that the designation of critical habitat
will not likely increase the degree of
threat to these species and may provide
some measure of benefit, we find that
designation of critical habitat is prudent
for the Texas hornshell.
Critical Habitat Determinability
Having determined that designation is
prudent, under section 4(a)(3) of the Act
we must find whether critical habitat for
the species is determinable. Our
regulations at 50 CFR 424.12(a)(2) state
that critical habitat is not determinable
when one or both of the following
situations exist: (1) Information
sufficient to perform required analyses
of the impacts of the designation is
lacking, or (2) the biological needs of the
species are not sufficiently well known
to permit identification of an area as
critical habitat.
As discussed above, we have
reviewed the available information
pertaining to the biological needs of this
species and habitat characteristics
where this species is located. Because
the biological needs are not sufficiently
well known to permit identification of
critical habitat, we are seeking
additional information regarding
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
updated occurrence records for the
Texas hornshell, future climate change
effects on the species’ habitat, and other
analyses. Therefore, we conclude that
the designation of critical habitat is not
determinable for the Texas hornshell at
this time. We will make a determination
on critical habitat no later than 1 year
following any final listing
determination.
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:
(1) Be logically organized;
(2) Use the active voice to address
readers directly;
(3) Use clear language rather than
jargon;
(4) Be divided into short sections and
sentences; and
(5) 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 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.
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
(NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), 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).
References Cited
A complete list of references cited is
available in Appendix A of the SSA
Report (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
2016. Species status assessment report
for the Texas hornshell (Popenaias
popeii), Version 1.0. Albuquerque, NM),
available online at https://
www.regulations.gov, under Docket
Number FWS–R2–ES–2016–0077.
E:\FR\FM\10AUP1.SGM
10AUP1
52809
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 154 / Wednesday, August 10, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Authors
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
The primary authors of this proposed
rule are the staff members of the Texas
Coastal Ecological Services Field Office.
Accordingly, we propose to amend
part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title
50 of the Code of Federal Regulations,
as set forth below:
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species,
Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements,
Transportation.
Common name
*
PART 17—ENDANGERED AND
THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS
1. The authority citation for part 17
continues to read as follows:
*
2. Amend § 17.11(h) by adding an
entry for ‘‘Hornshell, Texas’’ to the List
of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
in alphabetical order under Clams:
■
§ 17.11 Endangered and threatened
wildlife.
*
■
Scientific name
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531–
1544; and 4201–4245, unless otherwise
noted.
*
*
(h) * * *
Where listed
*
*
Status
*
*
*
Listing citations and applicable
rules
*
*
CLAMS
*
*
Hornshell, Texas ........................
*
*
Popenaias popeii ......................
*
*
*
*
Wherever found ........................
*
*
*
[Federal Register citation
when published as a final
rule.]
E
*
*
Dated: July 21, 2016.
Stephen Guertin,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016–18816 Filed 8–9–16; 8:45 am]
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
BILLING CODE P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:58 Aug 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\10AUP1.SGM
10AUP1
*
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 154 (Wednesday, August 10, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 52796-52809]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-18816]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2016-0077; 4500030113]
RIN 1018-BB34
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Species
Status for Texas Hornshell
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose to
list the Texas hornshell (Popenaias popeii), a freshwater mussel
species from New Mexico and Texas, as an endangered species under the
Endangered Species Act (Act). If we finalize this rulemaking as
proposed, it would extend the Act's protections to this species.
DATES: We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before
October 11, 2016. 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 September 26, 2016.
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-R2-ES-2016-0077,
which is the docket number for this rulemaking. Then, in the Search
panel on the left side of the screen, under the Document Type heading,
click on the Proposed Rules link to locate this document. 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-R2-ES-2016-0077, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, MS: BPHC, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.
We request that you send comments only by 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 Public Comments, below, for more information).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chuck Ardizzone, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Texas Coastal Ecological Services Field Office, 17629
El Camino Real #211, Houston, TX 77058; by telephone 281-286-8282; or
by facsimile 281-488-5882. 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
Why we need to publish a rule. Under the Act, if a species is
determined to be an endangered or threatened species throughout all or
a significant portion of its range, we are required to promptly publish
a proposal in the Federal Register and make a determination on our
proposal within 1 year. Critical habitat shall be designated, to the
maximum extent prudent and determinable, for any species determined to
be an endangered or threatened species under the Act. Listing a species
as an endangered or threatened species and designations and revisions
of critical habitat can only be completed by issuing a rule.
This rulemaking proposes the listing of the Texas hornshell
(Popenaias popeii) as an endangered species. The Texas hornshell is a
candidate species for which we have on file sufficient information on
biological vulnerability and threats to support preparation of a
listing proposal, but for which development of a listing regulation has
been precluded by other higher priority listing activities. This
proposed rule reassesses all available information regarding the status
of and threats to the Texas hornshell.
The basis for our action. Under the Act, we can determine that a
species is an endangered or threatened species based on any of five
factors, acting alone or in combination: (A) The present or threatened
destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range; (B)
overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D) the inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E) other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence. We have determined that the Texas
hornshell is in danger of extinction due to habitat loss from loss of
water flow, decreased water quality, and increased accumulation of fine
sediments (Factor A) and predation (Factor C).
We will seek peer review. We will seek comments from independent
specialists to ensure that our determination is based on scientifically
sound data, assumptions, and analyses. We will invite these peer
reviewers to comment on our listing proposal. Because we will consider
all comments and information we receive during the comment period, our
final determination may differ from this proposal.
We prepared a species status assessment report (SSA report) for the
Texas hornshell. The SSA report documents the results of the
comprehensive biological status review for the Texas hornshell and
provides an account of the species' overall viability through
forecasting of the species' condition in the future (Service 2016,
entire). We received feedback from four scientists with expertise in
freshwater mussel biology, ecology, and genetics as peer review of the
SSA report. The reviewers were generally supportive of our approach and
made suggestions and comments that strengthened our analysis. The SSA
report and other materials relating to this proposal can be found at
https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2016-0077.
Information Requested
Public Comments
We intend that any final action resulting from this proposed rule
will be based on the best scientific and commercial data available and
be as accurate and as effective as possible. Therefore, we request
comments or information from other concerned governmental agencies,
Native American tribes, the scientific community, industry, or any
other interested parties concerning this proposed rule. We particularly
seek comments concerning:
[[Page 52797]]
(1) The Texas hornshell's biology, range, and population trends,
including:
(a) Biological or ecological requirements of the species, including
habitat requirements for feeding and spawning;
(b) Genetics and taxonomy;
(c) Historical and current range, including distribution patterns;
(d) Historical and current population levels, and current and
projected trends; and
(e) Past and ongoing conservation measures for the species, its
habitat, or both.
(2) Factors that may affect the continued existence of the species,
which may include habitat modification or destruction, overutilization,
disease, predation, the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms,
or other natural or manmade factors.
(3) Biological, commercial trade, or other relevant data concerning
any threats (or lack thereof) to this species and existing regulations
that may be addressing those threats.
(4) Additional information concerning the historical and current
status, range, distribution, and population size of this species,
including the locations of any additional populations of this species,
particularly in Mexico.
(5) Information related to climate change within the range of the
Texas hornshell and how it may affect the species' habitat.
(6) The reasons why areas should or should not be designated as
critical habitat as provided by section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.)
(7) Specific information on:
(a) The amount and distribution of habitat for the Texas hornshell;
(b) What areas, that are currently occupied and that contain the
physical and biological features essential to the conservation of the
Texas hornshell, should be included in a critical habitat designation
and why;
(c) Special management considerations or protection that may be
needed for the essential features in potential critical habitat areas,
including managing for the potential effects of climate change; and
(d) What areas not occupied at the time of listing are essential
for the conservation of the species and why.
Please include sufficient information with your submission (such as
scientific journal articles or other publications) to allow us to
verify any scientific or commercial information you include.
Please note that submissions merely stating support for or
opposition to the action 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 an endangered or threatened
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.
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, Texas Coastal Ecological Services Field Office (see
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Public Hearing
Section 4(b)(5) of the Act provides for one or more public hearings
on this proposal, if requested. Requests must be received within 45
days after the date of publication of this proposed rule in the Federal
Register (see DATES, above). Such requests must be sent to the address
shown in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. We will schedule public
hearings on this proposal, if any are requested, and announce the
dates, times, and places of those hearings, as well as how to obtain
reasonable accommodations, in the Federal Register and local newspapers
at least 15 days before the hearing.
Peer Review
In accordance with our joint policy on peer review published in the
Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), we will seek the expert
opinions of five appropriate and independent specialists regarding this
proposed rule. The purpose of peer review is to ensure that our listing
determination is based on scientifically sound data, assumptions, and
analyses. We invite comment from the peer reviewers during the public
comment period on this proposed rule.
Previous Federal Actions
We identified the Texas hornshell as a Category 2 candidate species
in our January 6, 1989, Review of Vertebrate Wildlife (54 FR 554).
Category 2 candidates were defined as species for which we had
information that proposed listing was possibly appropriate, but
conclusive data on biological vulnerability and threats were not
available to support a proposed rule at the time. The species remained
a Category 2 candidate in subsequent annual candidate notices of review
(CNOR) (56 FR 58804, November 21, 1991, and 59 FR 58982, November 15,
1994). In the February 28, 1996, CNOR (61 FR 7596), we discontinued the
designation of Category 2 species as candidates; therefore, the Texas
hornshell was no longer a candidate species.
Subsequently, in 2001, the Texas hornshell was added to the
candidate list (66 FR 54808, October 30, 2001). Candidates are those
fish, wildlife, and plants for which we have on file sufficient
information on biological vulnerability and threats to support
preparation of a listing proposal, but for which development of a
listing rule is precluded by other higher priority listing activities.
The Texas hornshell was included in all of our subsequent annual CNORs
(67 FR 40657, June 13, 2002; 69 FR 24876, May 4, 2004; 70 FR 24870, May
11, 2005; 71 FR 53756, September 12, 2006; 72 FR 69034, December 6,
2007; 73 FR 75176, December 10, 2008; 74 FR 57804, November 9, 2009; 75
FR 69222, November 10, 2010; 76 FR 66370, October 26, 2011; 77 FR
69994, November 21, 2012; 78 FR 70104; November 22, 2013; 79 FR 72450,
December 5, 2014; and 80 FR 80584, December 24, 2015). On May 11, 2004,
we were petitioned to list the Texas hornshell, although no new
information was provided in the petition. Because we had already found
the species warranted listing, no further action was taken on the
petition.
On September 9, 2011, the Service entered into two settlement
agreements regarding species on the candidate list at that time
(Endangered Species Act Section 4 Deadline Litigation, No. 10-377
(EGS), MDL Docket No. 2165 (D.D.C. May 10, 2011)). This proposed
listing rule fulfills the requirements of those settlement agreements
for the Texas hornshell.
Background
A thorough review of the taxonomy, life history, ecology, and
overall viability of the Texas hornshell
[[Page 52798]]
(Popenaias popeii) is presented in the Species Status Assessment Report
for the Texas Hornshell (SSA report) (Service 2016; available at https://www.regulations.gov). The SSA report documents the results of the
comprehensive biological status review for the Texas hornshell and
provides an account of the species' overall viability through
forecasting of the species' condition in the future (Service 2016,
entire). In the SSA report, we summarized the relevant biological data
and a description of past, present, and likely future stressors and
conducted an analysis of the viability of the species. The SSA report
provides the scientific basis that informs our regulatory decision
regarding whether this species should be listed as an endangered or
threatened species under the Act. This decision involves the
application of standards within the Act, its implementing regulations,
and Service policies (see Determination, below). The SSA report
contains the risk analysis on which this determination is based, and
the following discussion is a summary of the results and conclusions
from the SSA report. We solicited peer review of the draft SSA report
from five qualified experts. We received responses from four of the
reviewers, and we modified the SSA report as appropriate.
Species Description
The Texas hornshell is a medium sized (3 to 4 inches long)
freshwater mussel with a dark brown to green, elongate, laterally
compressed shell (Howells et al. 1996, p. 93; Carman 2007, p. 2). The
Texas hornshell was described by Lea (1857, p. 102) from the Devils
River in Texas and Rio Salado in Mexico. Currently, the Texas hornshell
is classified in the unionid subfamily Ambleminae (Campbell et al.
2005, pp. 140, 144) and is considered a valid taxon by the scientific
community (Turgeon et al. 1998, p. 36).
Freshwater mussels, including the Texas hornshell, have a complex
life history. Males release sperm into the water column, which are
taken in by the female through the incurrent siphon (the tubular
structure used to draw water into the body of the mussel). The sperm
fertilizes the eggs, which are held during maturation in an area of the
gills called the marsupial chamber. The developing larvae remain in the
gill chamber until they mature and are ready for release. These mature
larvae, called glochidia, are obligate parasites (cannot live
independently of their hosts) on the gills, head, or fins of fishes
(Vaughn and Taylor 1999, p. 913). Glochidia die if they fail to find a
host fish, attach to a fish that has developed immunity from prior
infestations, or attach to the wrong location on a host fish (Neves
1991, p. 254; Bogan 1993, p. 599). Glochidia encyst (enclose in a cyst-
like structure) on the host's tissue, draw nutrients from the fish, and
develop into juvenile mussels weeks or months after attachment (Arey
1932, pp. 214-215).
For the Texas hornshell, spawning generally occurs from March
through August (Smith et al. 2003, p. 335), and fertilized eggs are
held in the marsupial chambers of females for 4 to 6 weeks (Smith et
al. 2003, p. 337). Glochidia are released in a sticky mucous net or
string (Carman 2007, p. 9); the host fish likely swim into the nets,
and the glochidia generally attach to the face or gills of the fish and
become encysted in its tissue (Levine et al. 2012, pp. 1858). The
glochidia will remain encysted for about a month through transformation
to the juvenile stage. Once transformed, the juveniles will excyst from
the fish and drop to the substrate. The known primary host fishes for
the Texas hornshell are river carpsucker (Carpiodes carpio), grey
redhorse (Moxostoma congestum), and red shiner (Cyprinella lutrensis)
(Levine et al. 2012, pp. 1857-1858).
Mussels are generally immobile but experience their primary
opportunity for dispersal and movement within the stream as glochidia
attached to a mobile host fish (Smith 1985, p. 105). Upon release from
the host, newly transformed juveniles drop to the substrate on the
bottom of the stream. Those juveniles that drop in unsuitable
substrates die because their immobility prevents them from relocating
to more favorable habitat. Juvenile freshwater mussels burrow into
interstitial substrates and grow to a larger size that is less
susceptible to predation and displacement from high flow events (Yeager
et al. 1994, p. 220). Throughout the rest of their life cycle, mussels
generally remain within the same small area where they excysted from
the host fish.
Life span is not known for the Texas hornshell, although two adult
individuals were captured and marked in the Black River in New Mexico
in 1997, and were recaptured 15 years later (Inoue et al. 2014, p. 5).
Species in the subfamily Ambleminae, which includes Texas hornshell,
commonly live more than 20 years (Carman 2007, p. 9), so we assume the
Texas hornshell can live at least 20 years.
Little is known about the specific feeding habits of Texas
hornshell. Like all adult freshwater mussels, Texas hornshell are
filter feeders, siphoning suspended phytoplankton and detritus from the
water column (Yeager et al. 1994, p. 221; Carman 2007, p. 8).
Habitat and Range
Adult Texas hornshell occur in medium to large rivers, in habitat
not typical for most mussel species: In crevices, undercut riverbanks,
travertine shelves, and under large boulders adjacent to runs (Carman
2007, p. 6; Randklev et al. 2015, p. 8), although in the Devils River,
the species is found in gravel beds at the heads of riffles and rapids
(Randklev et al. 2015, p. 8). Small-grained material, such as clay,
silt, or sand, gathers in these crevices and provides suitable
anchoring substrate. These crevices are considered to be flow refuges
from the large flood events that occur regularly in the rivers this
species occupies. Texas hornshell are able to use these flow refuges to
avoid being swept away as large volumes of water move through the
system, as there is relatively little particle movement in the flow
refuges, even during flooding (Strayer 1999, p. 472). Texas hornshell
are not known from lakes, ponds, or reservoirs.
The Texas hornshell historically ranged throughout the Rio Grande
drainage in the United States (New Mexico and Texas) and Mexico as well
as Mexican Gulf Coast streams south to the northern Mexican state of
Veracruz (Johnson 1999, p. 23). Currently, five known populations of
Texas hornshell remain in the United States: Black River (Eddy County,
New Mexico), Pecos River (Val Verde County, Texas), Devils River (Val
Verde County, Texas), Lower Canyons of the Rio Grande (Brewster and
Terrell Counties, Texas), and Lower Rio Grande near Laredo (Webb
County, Texas) (Map 1). They are described briefly below.
[[Page 52799]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10AU16.000
Black River: The Black River, in Eddy County, New Mexico,
originates from several groundwater-fed springs and flows approximately
30 miles (mi) (48 kilometers (km)) through the Chihuahuan Desert until
its confluence with the Pecos River (Inoue et al. 2014, p. 3) near
Malaga, New Mexico. Extensive population monitoring (Lang 2001, entire;
2006, entire; 2010, entire; 2011, entire) and a long-term mark-
recapture study (Inoue et al. 2014, entire) have yielded significant
information about the population size and extent. Texas hornshell occur
in approximately 8.7 mi (14.0 km) of the middle Black River, between
two low-head (small) dams (Lang 2001, p. 20). The total population size
has been estimated at approximately 48,000 individuals (95 percent
confidence interval: 28,849-74,127) (Inoue et al. 2014, p. 7), with a
diversity of size classes, primarily aggregated in flow refuges within
narrow riffles. The population remained relatively stable over the 15
year study period from 1997 to 2012 (Inoue et al. 2014, p. 6).
Pecos River: In the Pecos River, inundation from Amistad Reservoir
has resulted in the extirpation of Texas hornshell from the lower
reaches of the river. Additionally, salinity levels are too high for
freshwater mussel habitation in much of the Pecos River from the
confluence with the Black River in New Mexico, downstream to the
confluence with Independence Creek. However, three live Texas hornshell
were collected from a small section of the Pecos River downstream of
the confluence with Independence Creek and upstream of Amistad
Reservoir near Pandale in Val Verde County, Texas, as well as 37 shells
(Bosman et al. 2016, p. 6; Randklev et al. 2016, p. 9). Farther
downstream, only dead shells were found in 2016, although they were
numerous (Bosman et al. 2016, p. 6; Randklev et al. 2016, p. 9). Live
individuals had not been collected at this location since 1973
(Randklev et al. 2016, p. 4).
Because the sample size of live individuals is so small (three live
individuals found in recent months), it is difficult to draw many
conclusions about the population. The population appears to be
extremely small, and no evidence of reproduction was noted.
Devils River: Texas hornshell were historically found in the Devils
River and were known to occupy only the lower reaches of the river,
which are currently inundated by Amistad Reservoir (Neck 1984, p. 11;
Johnson 1999, p. 23; Burlakova and Karatayev 2014, p. 19). In recent
years, 11 individuals were collected from upstream in the Devils River
between 2008 and 2014 (Burlakova and Karatayev 2014, p. 16; Karatayev
et al. 2015, p. 4). More intensive surveys conducted in 2014 and 2015,
including 11 sites, have yielded 48 individuals at two sites: All from
The Nature Conservancy's Dolan Falls Preserve except for a singleton at
the Devils River State Natural Area's Dan A. Hughes Unit (formerly
known as the Big Satan Unit) (Randklev et al. 2015, pp. 6-7). Because
of the increased number of individuals collected in 2014 and 2105, it
is likely that the Devils River population is more numerous than
previously thought, although we do not expect that this
[[Page 52800]]
population is particularly large based on the limited number of
collections to date. Interestingly, Texas hornshell in the Devils River
occupy different habitats than those in the rest of the range; instead
of being found under rock slabs and in travertine shelves, they occupy
gravel beds at the heads of riffles or in clean-swept pools with
bedrock (Randklev et al. 2015, p. 8). Even though the number of
collected individuals is small, several young individuals were found,
as well as females brooding glochidia (gravid females) (Randklev et al.
2015, p. 8), indicating reproduction and recruitment (offspring survive
to join the reproducing population) are occurring in the Devils River
population.
Rio Grande--Lower Canyons: One of two remaining populations of
Texas hornshell in the Rio Grande is found in the Lower Canyons, just
downstream of Big Bend National Park, in Terrell County, Texas.
Burlakova and Karatayev (2014, p. 16) found the species in low density
(approximately 40 individuals per km) in this region of the Rio Grande.
Subsequent surveys by Randklev et al. (2015, entire) confirmed the
presence of Texas hornshell in approximately 18.5 mi (30 km) of the
Lower Canyons in two sections, finding that the species occupies
approximately 63 percent of sites with suitable (rocky) habitat. For
purposes of this analysis, we presume the entire section between these
collections, approximately 62 mi (100 km), is occupied. Sites in the
Rio Grande--Lower Canyons reach vary in density, with the densest sites
near Sanderson Canyon, Terrell County, Texas, and decreasing downstream
(Randklev et al. 2015, p. 13); the average density of Texas hornshell
at each site is lower compared to the Black River and Rio Grande--
Laredo (5 14 individuals per site). Texas hornshell may
occur between the known occupied sections, near the confluence with San
Francisco Creek (Howells 2001a, p. 6), but limited access has prevented
recent surveys from determining current occupancy of this reach. Young
individuals and gravid females have been found throughout the Lower
Canyons reach, indicating recruitment is occurring (Randklev et al.
2015, p. 8).
Rio Grande--Laredo: The largest Texas hornshell population occurs
from Laredo, Texas (near La Bota Ranch just northwest of Laredo),
upstream approximately 56 mi (90 km) (Randklev et al. 2015, p. 7). The
density in this reach is high, with some habitat patches containing
more than 8,000 individuals (Karatayev et al. 2015, p. 4) and 100
percent of surveyed patches of suitable habitat containing Texas
hornshell (Randklev et al. 2015, p. 7). Throughout this reach, the
density of Texas hornshell is estimated 170 131
individuals per suitable (rocky) habitat site (Randklev et al. 2015, p.
7). Young individuals and gravid females have been found throughout the
Laredo reach, indicating reproduction and recruitment are occurring
(Randklev et al. 2015, p. 8). No live Texas hornshell have been found
downstream of the city of Laredo in recent years.
Mexico: A large portion of the Texas hornshell's estimated
historical range is in Mexico. The species occurred in the Rio Salado
basin, which is a tributary to the Rio Grande in Mexico, and in
approximately 15 rivers that flow into the Gulf of Mexico. At one time,
one-half to two-thirds of the species' range may have been in Mexico.
Unfortunately, the most recent live collections of Texas hornshell in
Mexico occurred in the 1980s (Mussel Project 2015, entire), and we have
very few records of surveys with positive or negative collection data
since that time. We have no information on population size or extent
during those times of collection, and we also have no information on
whether populations of Texas hornshell still occur in one or more of
these streams; therefore, we have very low confidence in the species'
current condition throughout most of the Mexican range. One or more of
these populations may still be extant, or they may all be extirpated.
Species Needs
Texas hornshell need seams of fine sediment in crevices, undercut
riverbanks, travertine shelves, and large boulders in riverine
ecosystems with flowing water and periodic cleansing flows to keep the
substrate free of fine sediment accumulation. They need water quality
parameters to be within a suitable range (i.e., dissolved oxygen above
3 milligrams/liter (mg/L), salinity below 0.9 parts per thousand, and
ammonia below 0.7 mg/L (Sparks and Strayer 1998, p. 132; Augspurger et
al. 2003, p. 2574; Augspurger et al. 2007, p. 2025; Carman 2007, p. 6))
and phytoplankton as food. Finally, Texas hornshell need host fish to
be present during times of spawning.
We describe the Texas hornshell's viability by characterizing the
status of the species in terms of its resiliency (ability of the
populations to withstand stochastic events), redundancy (ability of the
species to withstand large-scale, catastrophic events), and
representation (the ability of the species to adapt to changing
environmental conditions). Using various time frames and the current
and projected resiliency, redundancy, and representation, we describe
the species' level of viability over time. For the Texas hornshell to
maintain viability, its populations or some portion thereof must be
resilient. A number of factors influence the resiliency of Texas
hornshell populations, including occupied stream length, abundance, and
recruitment. Elements of Texas hornshell habitat that determine whether
Texas hornshell populations can grow to maximize habitat occupancy
influence those factors, thereby increasing the resiliency of
populations. These resiliency factors and habitat elements are
discussed here.
Occupied Stream Length: Most freshwater mussels, including Texas
hornshell, are found in aggregations, called mussel beds, that vary in
size from about 50 to greater than 5,000 square meters (m\2\) (540 to
greater than 53,800 square feet (ft\2\)), separated by stream reaches
in which mussels are absent or rare (Vaughn 2012, p. 983). Resilient
Texas hornshell populations must occupy stream reaches sufficient in
length such that stochastic events that affect individual mussel beds
do not eliminate the entire population. Repopulation by fish infested
with Texas hornshell glochidia from other mussel beds within the reach,
if present and connected, can allow the population to recover from
these events.
Abundance: Mussel abundance in a given stream reach is a product of
the number of mussel beds times the density of mussels within those
beds. For populations of Texas hornshell to be resilient, there must be
many mussel beds of sufficient density (~200 individuals per 150 m\2\
(1,614 ft\2\); see SSA report for more discussion) such that local
stochastic events do not necessarily eliminate the bed(s), allowing the
mussel bed and the overall population in the stream reach to recover
from any one event. We measure Texas hornshell abundance by the number
of beds within the population, and the estimated density of Texas
hornshell within each.
Reproduction: Resilient Texas hornshell populations must also be
reproducing and recruiting young individuals into the reproducing
population. Population size and abundance reflects previous influences
on the population and habitat, while reproduction and recruitment
reflect population trends that may be stable, increasing, or
decreasing. Detection of very young juvenile mussels during routine
abundance and distribution surveys happens extremely rarely due to
sampling bias; sampling for this species involves tactile searches, and
mussels below about 35 millimeters (mm) (1.4
[[Page 52801]]
inches (in)) are very hard to detect. Therefore, reproduction is
verified by repeatedly capturing small-sized individuals near the low
end of the detectable range size (about 35 mm (1.4 in)) over time and
by capturing gravid females during the reproductively active time of
year (generally, March through August (Smith et al. 2003, p. 335)).
Substrate: Texas hornshell occur in flow refuges such as crevices,
undercut riverbanks, travertine shelves, and large boulders. These
refuges must have seams of clay or other fine sediments within which
the mussels may anchor, but not so much excess sediment that the
mussels are smothered. Those areas with clean-swept substrate with
seams of fine sediments are considered to have suitable substrate, and
those with copious fine sediment both in crevices and on the stream
bottom are considered less suitable.
Flowing Water: Texas hornshell need flowing water for survival.
They are not found in lakes or in pools without flow, or in areas that
are regularly dewatered. River reaches with continuous flow are
considered suitable habitat, while those with little or no flow are
considered not suitable.
Water Quality: Freshwater mussels, as a group, are sensitive to
changes in water quality parameters such as dissolved oxygen, salinity,
ammonia, and pollutants (i.e., dissolved oxygen above 3 mg/L, salinity
below 0.9 parts per thousand, and ammonia below 0.7 mg/L (Sparks and
Strayer 1998, p. 132; Augspurger et al. 2003, p. 2574; Augspurger et
al. 2007, p. 2025; Carman 2007, p. 6)). Habitats with appropriate
levels of these parameters are considered suitable, while those
habitats with levels outside of the appropriate ranges are considered
less suitable.
Maintaining representation in the form of genetic or ecological
diversity is important to maintain the Texas hornshell's capacity to
adapt to future environmental changes. Texas hornshell populations in
the Rio Grande and Devils River (and, presumably, the Pecos River, due
to its proximity to Rio Grande populations) have distinct variation in
allele frequencies from those in the Black River (Inoue et al. 2015, p.
1916). We expect additional variation was present in Mexican
populations. Mussels, like Texas hornshell, need to retain populations
throughout their range to maintain the overall potential genetic and
life-history attributes that can buffer the species' response to
environmental changes over time (Jones et al. 2006, p. 531). The Texas
hornshell has likely lost genetic diversity as populations have been
extirpated. As such, maintaining the remaining representation in the
form of genetic diversity may be important to the capacity of the Texas
hornshell to adapt to future environmental change.
Finally, the Texas hornshell needs to have multiple resilient
populations distributed throughout its range to provide for redundancy,
the ability of the species to withstand catastrophic events. The more
populations, and the wider the distribution of those populations, the
more redundancy the species will exhibit. Redundancy reduces the risk
that a large portion of the species' range will be negatively affected
by a catastrophic natural or anthropogenic event at a given point in
time. Species that are well-distributed across their historical range
are considered less susceptible to extinction and have higher viability
than species confined to a small portion of their range (Carroll et al.
2010, entire; Redford et al. 2011, entire).
Summary of Biological Status and Threats
The Act directs us to determine whether any species is an
endangered species or a threatened species because of any factors
affecting its continued existence. We completed a comprehensive
assessment of the biological status of the Texas hornshell, and
prepared a report of the assessment, which provides a thorough account
of the species' overall viability. In this section, we summarize the
conclusions of that assessment, which can be accessed at Docket No.
FWS-R2-ES-2016-0077 on https://www.regulations.gov.
Risk Factors
We reviewed the potential risk factors (i.e., threats, stressors)
that could be affecting the Texas hornshell now and in the future. In
this proposed rule, we will discuss only those factors in detail that
could meaningfully impact the status of the species. Those risks that
are not known to have effects on Texas hornshell populations, such as
collection and disease, are not discussed here. The primary risk
factors (i.e., threats) affecting the status of the Texas hornshell
are: (1) Increased fine sediment (Factor A from the Act), (2) water
quality impairment (Factor A), (3) loss of flowing water (Factor A),
(4) barriers to fish movement (Factor E), and (5) increased predation
(Factor C). These factors are all exacerbated by climate change.
Finally, we reviewed the conservation efforts being undertaken for the
species.
Increased Fine Sediment
Texas hornshell require seams of fine sediment under boulders and
bedrock and in streambanks in order to anchor themselves into place on
the stream bottom; however, too much fine sediment can fill in these
crevices and smother any mussels within those spaces. Under natural
conditions, fine sediments collect on the streambed and in crevices
during low flow events, and they are washed downstream during high flow
events (also known as cleansing flows). However, the increased
frequency of low flow events (from groundwater extraction, instream
surface flow diversions, and drought), combined with a decrease in
cleansing flows (from reservoir management and drought), has caused
sediment to accumulate to some degree at all populations. When water
velocity decreases, which can occur from reduced streamflow or
inundation, water loses its ability to carry sediment in suspension;
sediment falls to the substrate, eventually smothering mussels that
cannot adapt to soft substrates (Watters 2000, p. 263). Sediment
accumulation can be exacerbated when there is a simultaneous increase
in the sources of fine sediments in a watershed. In the range of Texas
hornshell, these sources include streambank erosion from agricultural
activities, livestock grazing, and roads, among others.
Interstitial spaces (small openings between rocks and gravels) in
the substrate provide essential habitat for juvenile mussels. Juvenile
freshwater mussels burrow into interstitial substrates, making them
particularly susceptible to degradation of this habitat feature. When
clogged with sand or silt, interstitial flow rates and spaces may
become reduced (Brim Box and Mossa 1999, p. 100), thus reducing
juvenile habitat availability.
All populations of Texas hornshell face the risk of fine sediment
accumulation to varying degrees. Elimination of Texas hornshell from
mussel beds due to large amounts of sediment deposition has been
documented on the Black River in two locations in recent years. In the
future, we expect this may continue to occur sporadically. Fine
sediments are also accumulating at the Rio Grande--Laredo population.
Low water levels on the Devils River will likely lead to additional
sediment accumulation at this population, as well. In the future, we
expect lower flows to occur more often at all populations and for
longer periods due to climate change.
[[Page 52802]]
Water Quality Impairment
Water quality can be impaired through contamination or alteration
of water chemistry. Chemical contaminants are ubiquitous throughout the
environment and are a major reason for the current declining status of
freshwater mussel species nationwide (Augspurger et al. 2007, p. 2025).
Chemicals enter the environment through both point and nonpoint
discharges, including spills, industrial sources, municipal effluents,
and agricultural runoff. These sources contribute organic compounds,
heavy metals, pesticides, herbicides, and a wide variety of newly
emerging contaminants to the aquatic environment. Ammonia is of
particular concern below water treatment plants because freshwater
mussels have been shown to be particularly sensitive to increased
ammonia levels (Augspurger et al. 2003, p. 2569). It is likely for this
reason that Texas hornshell are not found for many miles downstream of
two wastewater treatment plants that discharge into the Rio Grande: at
Nuevo Laredo, Mexico, and at Eagle Pass, Texas (Karatayev et al. 2015,
p. 14).
An additional type of water quality impairment is alteration of
water quality parameters such as dissolved oxygen, temperature, and
salinity levels. Dissolved oxygen levels may be reduced from increased
nutrients in the water column from runoff or wastewater effluent, and
juveniles seem to be particularly sensitive to low dissolved oxygen
(Sparks and Strayer 1998, pp. 132-133). Increased water temperature
from climate change and from low flows during drought can exacerbate
low dissolved oxygen levels as well as have its own effects on both
juvenile and adult mussels. Finally, salinity appears to be
particularly limiting to Texas hornshell. The aquifer near Malaga, New
Mexico, contains saline water. As the saline water emerges from the
ground, it is diluted by surface flow. As surface flow decreases,
however, the concentration of salinity in the river increases.
Additionally, aquifers have become increasingly saline due to salinized
water recharge (Hoagstrom 2009, p. 35). Irrigation return flows
exacerbate salinity levels as salts build up on irrigated land and then
are washed into the riverway. The Pecos River from the confluence with
the Black River to the confluence with Independence Creek has become
particularly saline in the past few decades, with levels at 7 parts per
million (ppm) or higher, which is too high for freshwater mussel
habitation. Additionally, the Black River downstream of the Texas
hornshell population has had salinity levels in the range of 6 ppm,
which may be one reason the population has been extirpated from the
downstream reach.
Contaminant spills are also a concern. In particular, the Black
River population is vulnerable to spills from the high volume of truck
traffic crossing the river at low water access points (Bren School of
Environmental Management 2014, p. 26). Due to the topography and steep
slopes of these areas, spilled contaminants and contaminated soils
could directly enter the surface water of the river and negatively
impact the species (Boyer 1986, p. 300) and downstream habitat. For the
smaller populations (Black, Devils, Pecos rivers), a single spill could
eliminate the entire population.
A reduction in surface flow from drought, instream diversion, or
groundwater extraction concentrates contaminant and salinity levels,
increases water temperatures in streams, and exacerbates effects to
Texas hornshell.
Poor water quality affects most Texas hornshell populations
currently to some degree, and future water quality is expected to
decrease due to decreasing river flow and increasing temperatures. The
Pecos River experiences very high salinity levels upstream of the
existing population, and we expect that the observed high mortality of
the Pecos River population is due to salinity pulses. Rangewide, as
water flow is expected to decrease due to climate change, water quality
will decline.
Loss of Flowing Water
Texas hornshell populations need flowing water in order to survive.
Low flow events (including stream drying) and inundation can eliminate
appropriate habitat for Texas hornshell, and while the species can
survive these events if they last for a short time, populations that
experience these events regularly will not persist.
Inundation has primarily occurred upstream of dams, both large
(such as Amistad, Falcon, and Red Bluff Dams) and small (low water
crossings and diversion dams, such as those on the Black River).
Inundation causes an increase in sediment deposition, eliminating the
crevices this species inhabits. In large reservoirs, deep water is very
cold and often devoid of oxygen and necessary nutrients. Cold water
(less than 11 degrees Celsius ([deg]C) (52 degrees Fahrenheit
([deg]F))) has been shown to stunt mussel growth (Hanson et al. 1988,
p. 352). Because glochidial release may be temperature dependent, it is
likely that relict individuals living in the constantly cold
hypolimnion (deepest portion of the reservoir) in these reservoirs may
never reproduce, or reproduce less frequently. Additionally, the
effects of these reservoirs extend beyond inundation and fragmentation
of populations; the reservoirs are managed for flood control and water
delivery, and the resultant downstream releases rarely mimic natural
flow regimes, tempering the natural fluctuations in flow that flush
fine sediments from the substrate.
At the Rio Grande--Laredo population, a low-water weir has been
proposed for construction (Rio Grande Regional Water Planning Group
2016, p. 8-8). The dam would be located just downstream of the La Bota
area, which contains the largest known and most dense Texas hornshell
bed within the Rio Grande--Laredo population and rangewide. The
impounded area would extend approximately 14 mi (22.5 km) upstream,
effectively eliminating habitat for Texas hornshell from 25 percent of
the currently occupied area and likely leading to extirpation of the
densest sites within this population.
Very low water levels are detrimental to Texas hornshell
populations, as well. Effects of climate change have already begun to
affect the regions of Texas and New Mexico where the Texas hornshell
occurs, resulting in higher air temperatures, increased evaporation,
increased groundwater pumping, and changing precipitation patterns such
that water levels rangewide have already reached historic lows (Dean
and Schmidt 2011, p. 336; Bren School of Environmental Management 2014,
p. 50). The rivers inhabited by Texas hornshell have some resiliency to
drought because they are spring-fed (Black and Devils Rivers) and very
large (Rio Grande), but drought in combination with increased
groundwater pumping and regulated reservoir releases may lead to lower
river flows of longer duration than have been recorded in the past.
Streamflow in the Rio Grande downstream of the confluence with the Rio
Conchos (near the Rio Grande-Lower Canyons population) has been
declining since the 1980s (Miyazono et al. 2015, p. A-3), and overall
river discharge for the Rio Grande is projected to continue to decline
due to increased drought as a result of climate change (Nohara et al.
2006, p. 1087). The Rio Conchos contributes more than 90 percent of the
flow of the lower Rio Grande (Dean and Schmidt 2011, p. 4). However,
during times of drought (such as between 1994 and 2003), Mexico has
fallen short of its water delivery commitments, and so the contribution
of the Rio Conchos has fallen to as low as 40 percent (Carter et
[[Page 52803]]
al. 2015, p. 15). The Rio Grande--Lower Canyons population is
downstream of the confluence with the Rio Conchos and is at risk from
these reduced deliveries. The Rio Grande--Lower Canyons is very incised
(in other words, has vertical banks), and the population occurs in
crevices along the steep banks. Due to the habitat characteristics of
this population, reductions in discharge in this area may lead to a
higher proportion of the Texas hornshell population being exposed than
would be found in other populations experiencing similar flow
decreases.
In the Black River, surface water is removed from the river for
irrigation, including the Carlsbad Irrigation District's Black River
Canal at the diversion dam. Studies have shown that flows in the river
are affected by groundwater withdrawals, particularly those from the
Black River Valley. Groundwater in the Black River watershed is also
being used for hydraulic fracturing for oil and gas activities. Between
4.3 acre-feet (187,308 ft\3\ (5,304 m\3\)) and 10.7 acre-feet (466,091
ft\3\ (13,198 m3)) of water is used for each hydraulic fracturing job
(Bren School of Environmental Management 2014, p. 91). Overall, mean
monthly discharge has already declined since the mid-1990s, and mean
monthly temperatures have increased over the past 100 years (Inoue et
al. 2014, p. 7). In the Black River, survivorship is positively
correlated with discharge (Inoue et al. 2014, p. 9); as mean monthly
discharge decreases, we expect Texas hornshell survivorship to
decrease, as well. The Black River is expected to lose streamflow in
the future due to air temperature increases, groundwater extraction,
and reduced precipitation.
In the Devils River, future water withdrawals from aquifers that
support spring flows in the range of the Texas hornshell could result
in reduction of critical spring flows and river drying. In particular,
there have been multiple proposals to withdraw water from the nearby
aquifer and deliver the water to municipalities (e.g., Val Verde Water
Company 2013, pp. 1-2). To date, however, none have been approved.
As spring flows decline due to drought or groundwater lowering from
pumping, habitat for the Texas hornshell is reduced and could
eventually cease to exist. While Texas hornshell may survive short
periods of low flow, as low flows persist, mussels face oxygen
deprivation, increased water temperature, and, ultimately, stranding.
Barriers to Fish Movement
Two of the Texas hornshell's primary host fish species (river
carpsucker and red shiner) are known to be common, widespread species.
We do not expect the distribution of host fish to be a limiting factor
in Texas hornshell distribution. However, the barriers that prevent
fish movement upstream and downstream affect the viability of Texas
hornshell.
Texas hornshell were likely historically distributed throughout the
Rio Grande, Pecos River, Devils River, and Black River in Texas and New
Mexico, as well as throughout the rivers draining to the Gulf of Mexico
from which the species was known when few natural barriers existed to
prevent migration (via host species) among suitable habitats. The
species colonized new areas through movement of infested host fish, and
newly metamorphosed juveniles would excyst from host fish in new
locations. Today, the remaining populations are significantly isolated
from one another such that recolonization of areas previously
extirpated is extremely unlikely if not impossible due to existing
contemporary barriers to host fish movement. The primary reason for
this isolation is reservoir construction and unsuitable water quality.
The Black River is isolated from the rest of the populations by high
salinity reaches of the Pecos River, as well as Red Bluff Reservoir,
and is hundreds of river miles from the nearest extant population.
Amistad Reservoir separates the three Texas populations from each
other, isolating the Rio Grande--Lower Canyons, Devils River, and Rio
Grande--Laredo populations. There is currently no opportunity for
interaction among any of the five extant U.S. populations.
The overall distribution of mussels is, in part, a function of the
dispersal of their host fish. Small populations are more affected by
this limited immigration potential because they are susceptible to
genetic drift (random loss of genetic diversity) and inbreeding
depression. At the species level, populations that are eliminated due
to stochastic events cannot be recolonized naturally, leading to
reduced overall redundancy and representation.
Increased Predation
Predation on freshwater mussels is a natural ecological
interaction. Raccoons, snapping turtles, and fish are known to prey
upon Texas hornshell. Under natural conditions, the level of predation
occurring within Texas hornshell populations is not likely to pose a
significant risk to any given population. However, during periods of
low flow, terrestrial predators have increased access to portions of
the river that are otherwise too deep under normal flow conditions.
High levels of predation during drought have been observed on the
Devils River, and muskrat predation has also been reported on the Black
River. As drought and low flow conditions are predicted to occur more
often and for longer periods due to the effects of climate change, the
Black and Devils Rivers are expected to experience additional predation
pressure into the future. Predation is expected to be less of a concern
for the Rio Grande populations, as the river is significantly larger
than the Black and Devils Rivers and Texas hornshell are less likely to
be found in exposed or very shallow portions of the stream.
Effects of Climate Change
Climate change in the form of the change in timing and amount of
precipitation and air temperature increase is occurring, and continued
greenhouse gas emissions at or above current rates will cause further
warming (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2013, pp. 11-
12). Warming in the Southwest is expected to be greatest in the summer
(IPCC 2013, pp. 11-12), and annual mean precipitation is very likely to
decrease in the Southwest (Ray et al. 2008, p. 1; IPCC 2013, pp. 11-
12). In Texas, the number of extreme hot days (high temperatures
exceeding 95 [deg]F (35 [deg]C) are expected to double by around 2050
(Kinniburgh et al. 2015, p. 83), and Texas is considered one of the
``hotspots'' of climate change in North America; west Texas is an area
expected to show greater responsiveness to the effects of climate
change (Diffenbaugh et al. 2008, p. 3). Even if precipitation and
groundwater recharge remain at current levels, increased groundwater
pumping and resultant aquifer shortages due to increased temperatures
are nearly certain (Loaiciga et al. 2000, p. 193; Mace and Wade 2008,
pp. 662, 664-665; Taylor et al. 2012, p. 3). Increased water
temperature can cause stress to individuals, decrease dissolved oxygen
levels, and increase toxicity of contaminants. Effects of climate
change, such as air temperature increases and an increase in drought
frequency and intensity, have been shown to be occurring throughout the
range of Texas hornshell (Kinniburgh et al. 2015, p. 88), and these
effects are expected to exacerbate several of the stressors discussed
above, such as water temperature and flow loss (Wuebbles et
[[Page 52804]]
al. 2013, p. 16). As we projected the future condition of the Texas
hornshell and which stressors are likely to occur, we considered
climate change to be an exacerbating factor in the increase of fine
sediments, changes in water quality, and loss of flowing water.
Due to the effects of ongoing climate change, we expect the
frequency and duration of cleansing flows to decrease, leading to the
increase in fine sediments and reduced water levels at all populations.
More extreme climate change projections lead to further increases in
fine sediment within the populations. Similarly, as lower water levels
concentrate contaminants and cause unsuitable temperature and dissolved
oxygen levels, we expect water quality to decline to some degree in the
future.
Conservation Actions and Regulatory Mechanisms
About 7 percent of known occupied habitat for the Texas hornshell
is in New Mexico, and the Service is collaborating with water users,
oil and gas developers, landowners, and other partners to develop
candidate conservation agreements (CCAs) for the species on State,
Federal, and private lands. These agreements are currently under
development, and the potential purpose is to provide voluntary
conservation that would reduce threats to the species while improving
physical habitat and water quality. The key conservation measures in
the agreements will be designed to limit oil and gas development to
areas outside of the Black and Delaware River floodplains, minimize
erosion, and maintain minimum water flows in the rivers. Along with
these measures, the partners to the agreement are evaluating
alternatives to the multiple low water crossings on the Black River.
Partners are considering alternate crossing locations, which could
include bridges designed to allow host fishes to pass through in
addition to decreasing potential contamination events. Because these
agreements have not been completed, we are not considering the
conservation actions in our present evaluation of the status of Texas
hornshell.
The New Mexico Department of Game and Fish has begun Texas
hornshell reintroduction efforts into the Delaware River, which is
within the historical range of the species. Adults and infested host
fish were released in suitable habitat in the Delaware River in 2013
and 2015. Many of the released adults have been subsequently located,
and success of the reintroduction will be determined in the coming
years. We expect the reintroduction effort to continue over the next
several years, but we are not considering the action to have been
successful to date.
In Texas, The Nature Conservancy and Texas Parks and Wildlife
Department manage lands under their purview in the Devils River
watershed for native communities, including Texas hornshell. The large
amount (over 200,000 acres) of land in conservation management in the
Devils River watershed reduces the risks to Texas hornshell from
sediment inputs and contaminants.
In the Rio Grande, we are not aware of any management actions for
Texas hornshell. The Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts has
established an Endangered Species Task Force and has funded much of the
recent research in Texas on Texas hornshell, which has led to greater
understanding of the species' distribution in the State.
Current Condition
Overall, there are five known remaining populations of Texas
hornshell, comprising approximately 15 percent of the species'
historical range in the United States (see Map 1, above). Historically,
most Texas hornshell populations were likely connected by fish
migration throughout the Rio Grande, upstream through the Pecos River,
and throughout the tributaries, but due to impoundments and river
reaches with unsuitable water quality (for example, high salinity) they
are currently isolated from one another, and repopulation of extirpated
locations is unlikely to occur without human assistance. Here we
discuss the current condition of each known population, taking into
account the risks to those populations that are currently occurring, as
well as management actions that are currently occurring to address
those risks. We consider low levels of climate change to be currently
occurring, resulting in reduced timing and amount of streamflow,
increased stream temperatures, and increased accumulation of fine
sediments.
Black River: The Black River population is quite dense and
recruitment appears to be high, but the short size (8.7 mi (14.0 km))
of the occupied reach limits this population's resiliency. Accumulation
of fine sediment in the substrate has already occurred due to increased
sediment input into the river from road crossings, culverts, and cattle
grazing, combined with a decreased frequency of cleansing river flows.
The current level of climate change will continue to reduce flow in the
river from groundwater extraction and drought, resulting in fewer
cleansing flows and increased fine sediments. The distribution of Texas
hornshell in the Black River will remain small, and the risk of a
contaminant spill will remain high, resulting in a high likelihood that
water quality will become unsuitable and reduce abundance of Texas
hornshell significantly. Therefore, taking into account the current
threats to the population and its distribution within the river, the
Texas hornshell population in the Black River has low resiliency.
Pecos River: The Pecos River population is extremely small and
exhibits no evidence of reproduction. The few number of live
individuals among the very high number of dead shells indicates a
population in severe decline; this is likely due to high salinity
levels in the river upstream of the population. There is a high
likelihood this population will be extirpated in the near future due to
water quality alone. Therefore, the Pecos River population of Texas
hornshell has very low resiliency.
Devils River: The Devils River population has low abundance and has
exhibited some evidence of reproduction. The current level of climate
change will continue to reduce flow in the Devils River due to
groundwater extraction and drought. The low flows this population
experiences during dry times will continue to become more frequent and
prolonged. Because Texas hornshell in the Devils River occur at the
heads of riffles, they are vulnerable to complete flow loss when water
levels drop. The reduction in cleansing flows will also result in the
accumulation of fine sediments, reducing substrate quality. Low flows
will also affect water quality parameters such as temperature and
dissolved oxygen, causing them to become unsuitable for Texas
hornshell. Additionally, the species is already vulnerable to predation
from terrestrial predators during times of low flow; predation will
occur more frequently as periods of low flow become more common.
Overall, because the population is currently small and would be
unlikely to grow, the Devils River population has low resiliency.
Rio Grande--Lower Canyons: The Lower Canyons population has
relatively high abundance and evidence of recruitment. Drought and
groundwater extraction resulting from currently observed levels of
climate change will continue to lower water levels in the Rio Grande--
Lower Canyons population of Texas hornshell. We expect that Mexico's
management of the Rio Conchos will continue to be an
[[Page 52805]]
unreliable source of water. This section of the Rio Grande is
relatively deep and incised, and the population of Texas hornshell
primarily occurs in crevices along the banks. Water flow reductions
would expose a high proportion of the existing population; therefore,
this reduction in flow will likely have a larger effect on the
population size than in other populations, although at a small to
moderate decrease in water flow we still expect abundance to be
maintained at moderate levels. Overall, the Rio Grande--Lower Canyons
population exhibits moderate resiliency.
Rio Grande--Laredo: Similar to the Lower Canyons population, the
Laredo population has numerous mussel beds with high Texas hornshell
abundance and evidence of reproduction. However, drought and upstream
water management will continue to reduce flows in the Rio Grande. Water
quality will continue to decrease due to lower flows, and fine
sediments will accumulate. Declining water flow will cause fine
sediments to accumulate and water quality to decline, leading to a
decline in population abundance. Overall, the Rio Grande--Laredo has
moderate resiliency.
Mexico: We have low confidence in the species' current condition
throughout most of the Mexican range. One or more of these populations
may still be extant, or they may all be extirpated. We have no recent
data on the species' occurrence in Mexico; the last live recordings are
from the mid-1980s. Because of this uncertainty, we did not rely on the
Texas hornshell's distribution in Mexico when evaluating the viability
of the species.
Future Condition
As part of the SSA, we also developed multiple future condition
scenarios to capture the range of uncertainties regarding future
threats and the projected responses by the Texas hornshell. Our
scenarios included a status quo scenario, which incorporated the
current risk factors continuing on the same trajectory that they are on
now. We also evaluated four additional future scenarios that
incorporated varying levels of increasing risk factors with elevated
negative effects on hornshell populations. However, because we
determined that the current condition of the Texas hornshell and the
associated status quo projections were consistent with an endangered
species (see Determination, below), we are not presenting the results
of the other future scenarios in this proposed rule. The additional
future scenarios project conditions that are worse for the Texas
hornshell. Since the status quo scenario was determined to be
endangered, other projected scenarios would also be endangered, as they
forecast conditions that are more at risk of extinction than the status
quo. Please refer to the SSA report (Service 2016) for the full
analysis of future scenarios.
Determination
Section 4 of the Act, and its implementing regulations at 50 CFR
part 424, set forth the procedures for adding species to the Federal
Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. Under section
4(b)(1)(a), the Secretary is to make endangered or threatened
determinations required by subsection 4(a)(1) solely on the basis of
the best scientific and commercial data available to her after
conducting a review of the status of the species and after taking into
account conservation efforts by States or foreign nations. The
standards for determining whether a species is endangered or threatened
are provided in section 3 of the Act. An endangered species is any
species that is ``in danger of extinction throughout all or a
significant portion of its range.'' A threatened species is any species
that is ``likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable
future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.'' Per
section 4(a)(1) of the Act, in reviewing the status of the species to
determine if it meets the definition of endangered or of threatened, we
determine whether any species is an endangered species or a threatened
species because of any of the following five factors: (A) The present
or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat
or range; (B) overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific,
or educational purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D) the inadequacy
of existing regulatory mechanisms; and (E) other natural or manmade
factors affecting its continued existence. Listing actions may be
warranted based on any of the above threat factors, singly or in
combination.
The fundamental question before the Service is whether the species
warrants protection as an endangered or threatened species under the
Act. To make this determination, we evaluated extinction risk,
described in terms of the current condition of populations and their
distribution (taking into account the risk factors (i.e., threats,
stressors) and their effects on those populations). For any species, as
population conditions decline and distribution shrinks, the species'
overall viability declines and extinction risk increases.
We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial
information available regarding the past, present, and future threats
to the Texas hornshell. Our analysis of the past, current, and future
influences on what the Texas hornshell needs for long-term viability
revealed that there are five influences that may pose a meaningful risk
to the viability of the species. These are primarily related to habitat
changes (Factor A from the Act): The accumulation of fine sediments,
the loss of flowing water, and impairment of water quality, all of
which are exacerbated by the effects of climate change. Predation
(Factor C) is also affecting those populations already experiencing low
stream flow, and barriers to fish movement (Factor E) prevent
recolonization after stochastic events.
The Texas hornshell has declined significantly in overall
distribution and abundance, with the species currently occupying
approximately 15 percent of its historical range in the United States.
Between one-half and two-thirds of the Texas hornshell's historical
range occurred in Mexico; we have very low confidence in the species'
current condition throughout most of the Mexican range. The resulting
remnant populations occupy shorter reaches compared to presumed
historical populations, and they are all isolated from one another.
The primary historical reason for this reduction in range was
reservoir construction and unsuitable water quality. Large reservoirs
have been constructed on the Rio Grande and Pecos River, and much of
the Pecos River upstream of the confluence with Independence Creek now
has salinity levels too high for mussel habitation (Hoagstrom 2009, p.
28). The effects of these reservoirs extend beyond fragmentation of
populations; the resultant downstream water releases do not mimic
natural flow regimes, and the change in timing and frequency of
cleansing flows results in increases in fine sediments, increases in
predation, and decreases in water quality. Add to this the exacerbating
effects of climate change--increased temperature and decreased stream
flow--and the remaining Texas hornshell populations face moderate to
high levels of risk of extirpation currently. For the populations
occupying the smaller reaches (such as the Black River, Devils River,
and Pecos River populations), a single stochastic event such as
contaminant spill or drought could eliminate an entire population of
Texas hornshell. These effects are heightened at the species level
because the isolation of the populations prohibits natural
recolonization from host fish carrying Texas hornshell glochidia, which
likely
[[Page 52806]]
happened in the past and allowed for the species to ebb and flow from
suitable areas.
Populations in both large and small reaches face risks from natural
and anthropogenic sources. Climate change has already begun to affect
the regions of Texas and New Mexico where Texas hornshell occurs,
resulting in higher air temperatures, increased evaporation, increased
groundwater pumping, and changing precipitation patterns such that
water levels rangewide have already reached historic lows. These low
water levels put the populations at risk of habitat loss from increased
fine sediments, poor water quality, and increased predation risk.
These risks, alone or in combination, are expected to result in the
extirpation of additional populations, further reducing the overall
redundancy and representation of the species. Historically, the
species, with a large range of interconnected populations, would have
been resilient to stochastic events such as drought and sedimentation
because even if some populations were extirpated by such events, they
could be recolonized over time by dispersal from nearby surviving
populations. This connectivity would have made for a highly resilient
species overall. However, under current conditions, connectivity is
prevented due to large reservoirs and unsuitably high salinity levels
between populations. As a consequence of these current conditions, the
viability of the Texas hornshell now primarily depends on maintaining
the remaining isolated populations.
Of the five remaining isolated populations, three are small in
abundance and occupied stream length and have low to no resiliency. The
remaining two are larger, with increased abundance and occupied stream
length; however, flow reduction, water quality decline, and habitat
loss from sedimentation reduce the abundance and distribution of those
populations. We have no information on population status in Mexico.
Therefore, the Texas hornshell has no populations that are currently
considered highly resilient. The high risk of extirpation of these
populations leads to low levels of redundancy (few populations will
persist to withstand catastrophic events) and representation (little to
no ecological or genetic diversity will persist to respond to changing
environmental conditions). Overall, these low levels of resiliency,
redundancy, and representation result in the Texas hornshell having low
viability, and the species currently faces a high risk of extinction.
The Act defines an endangered species as any species that is ``in
danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its
range'' and a threatened species as any species ``that is likely to
become endangered throughout all or a significant portion of its range
within the foreseeable future.'' We find that the Texas hornshell is
presently in danger of extinction throughout its entire range based on
the severity and immediacy of threats currently impacting the species.
The overall range has been significantly reduced, and the remaining
habitat and populations are threatened by a multitude of factors acting
in combination to reduce the overall viability of the species. The risk
of extinction is high because the remaining populations have a high
risk of extirpation, are isolated, and have limited potential for
recolonization. Therefore, on the basis of the best available
scientific and commercial information, we propose listing the Texas
hornshell as endangered in accordance with sections 3(6) and 4(a)(1) of
the Act. We find that a threatened species status is not appropriate
for the Texas hornshell because of the currently contracted range (loss
of 85 percent of its historic range in the United States, and likely
more in Mexico), because the threats are occurring across the entire
range of the species, and because the threats are ongoing currently and
are expected to continue or worsen into the future. Because the species
is already in danger of extinction throughout its range, a threatened
status is not appropriate.
Under the Act and our implementing regulations, a species may
warrant listing if it is endangered or threatened throughout all or a
significant portion of its range. Because we have determined that the
Texas hornshell is endangered throughout all of its range, no portion
of its range can be ``significant'' for purposes of the definitions of
``endangered species'' and ``threatened species.'' See the Final Policy
on Interpretation of the Phrase ``Significant Portion of Its Range'' in
the Endangered Species Act's Definitions of ``Endangered Species'' and
``Threatened Species'' (79 FR 37578; July 1, 2014).
Available Conservation Measures
Conservation measures provided to species listed as endangered or
threatened species under the Act include recognition, recovery actions,
requirements for Federal protection, and prohibitions against certain
practices. Recognition through listing results in public awareness, and
conservation by Federal, State, Tribal, and local agencies; private
organizations; and individuals. The Act encourages cooperation with the
States and other countries and calls for recovery actions to be carried
out for listed species. The protection required by Federal agencies and
the prohibitions against certain activities are discussed, in part,
below.
The primary purpose of the Act is the conservation of endangered
and threatened species and the ecosystems upon which they depend. The
ultimate goal of such conservation efforts is the recovery of these
listed species, so that they no longer need the protective measures of
the Act. Subsection 4(f) of the Act calls for the Service to develop
and implement recovery plans for the conservation of endangered and
threatened species. The recovery planning process involves the
identification of actions that are necessary to halt or reverse the
species' decline by addressing the threats to its survival and
recovery. The goal of this process is to restore listed species to a
point where they are secure, self-sustaining, and functioning
components of their ecosystems.
Recovery planning includes the development of a recovery outline
shortly after a species is listed and preparation of a draft and final
recovery plan. The recovery outline guides the immediate implementation
of urgent recovery actions and describes the process to be used to
develop a recovery plan. Revisions of the plan may be done to address
continuing or new threats to the species, as new substantive
information becomes available. The recovery plan also identifies
recovery criteria for review of when a species may be ready for
downlisting or delisting, and methods for monitoring recovery progress.
Recovery plans also establish a framework for agencies to coordinate
their recovery efforts and provide estimates of the cost of
implementing recovery tasks. Recovery teams (composed of species
experts, Federal and State agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and
stakeholders) are often established to develop recovery plans. When
completed, the recovery outline, draft recovery plan, and the final
recovery plan will be available on our Web site (https://www.fws.gov/endangered), or from our Texas Coastal Ecological Services Field Office
(see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Implementation of recovery actions generally requires the
participation of a broad range of partners, including other Federal
agencies, States, Tribes, nongovernmental organizations, businesses,
and private landowners. Examples of recovery actions include
[[Page 52807]]
habitat restoration (e.g., restoration of native vegetation), research,
captive propagation and reintroduction, and outreach and education. The
recovery of many listed species cannot be accomplished solely on
Federal lands because their ranges may occur primarily or solely on
non-Federal lands. To achieve recovery of these species requires
cooperative conservation efforts on private, State, and Tribal lands.
If this species is listed, funding for recovery actions will be
available from a variety of sources, including Federal budgets, State
programs, and cost share grants for non-Federal landowners, the
academic community, and nongovernmental organizations. In addition,
pursuant to section 6 of the Act, the States of Texas and New Mexico
would be eligible for Federal funds to implement management actions
that promote the protection or recovery of the Texas hornshell.
Information on our grant programs that are available to aid species
recovery can be found at: https://www.fws.gov/grants.
Although the Texas hornshell is only proposed for listing under the
Act at this time, please let us know if you are interested in
participating in recovery efforts for this species. Additionally, we
invite you to submit any new information on this species whenever it
becomes available and any information you may have for recovery
planning purposes (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Section 7(a) of the Act requires Federal agencies to evaluate their
actions with respect to any species that is proposed or listed as an
endangered or threatened species and with respect to its critical
habitat, if any is designated. Regulations implementing this
interagency cooperation provision of the Act are codified at 50 CFR
part 402. Section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires Federal agencies to
confer with the Service on any action that is likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of a species proposed for listing or result in
destruction or adverse modification of proposed critical habitat. If a
species is listed subsequently, section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires
Federal agencies to ensure that activities they authorize, fund, or
carry out are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the
species or destroy or adversely modify its critical habitat. If a
Federal action may affect a listed species or its critical habitat, the
responsible Federal agency must enter into consultation with the
Service.
Federal agency actions within the species' habitat that may require
conference or consultation or both as described in the preceding
paragraph include management and any other landscape-altering
activities on Federal lands administered by the Bureau of Land
Management, Bureau of Reclamation, and National Park Service; issuance
of section 404 Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) permits by the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; and construction and maintenance of roads
or highways by the Federal Highway Administration.
The Act and its implementing regulations set forth a series of
general prohibitions and exceptions that apply to endangered wildlife.
The prohibitions of section 9(a)(1) of the Act, codified at 50 CFR
17.21, make it illegal for any person subject to the jurisdiction of
the United States to take (which includes harass, harm, pursue, hunt,
shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect; or to attempt any of
these) endangered wildlife within the United States or on the high
seas. In addition, it is unlawful to import; export; deliver, receive,
carry, transport, or ship in interstate or foreign commerce in the
course of commercial activity; or sell or offer for sale in interstate
or foreign commerce any listed species. It is also illegal to possess,
sell, deliver, carry, transport, or ship any such wildlife that has
been taken illegally. Certain exceptions apply to employees of the
Service, the National Marine Fisheries Service, other Federal land
management agencies, and State conservation agencies.
We may issue permits to carry out otherwise prohibited activities
involving endangered wildlife under certain circumstances. Regulations
governing permits are codified at 50 CFR 17.22. With regard to
endangered wildlife, a permit may be issued for the following purposes:
For scientific purposes, to enhance the propagation or survival of the
species, and for incidental take in connection with otherwise lawful
activities. There are also certain statutory exemptions from the
prohibitions, which are found in sections 9 and 10 of the Act.
It is our policy, as published in the Federal Register on July 1,
1994 (59 FR 34272), to identify to the maximum extent practicable at
the time a species is listed, those activities that would or would not
constitute a violation of section 9 of the Act. The intent of this
policy is to increase public awareness of the effect of a proposed
listing on proposed and ongoing activities within the range of the
species proposed for listing. Based on the best available information,
if we list this species, the following actions are unlikely to result
in a violation of section 9, if these activities are carried out in
accordance with existing regulations and permit requirements; this list
is not comprehensive:
(1) Normal agricultural and silvicultural practices, including
herbicide and pesticide use, which are carried out in accordance with
any existing regulations, permit and label requirements, and best
management practices; and
(2) Normal residential landscape activities.
Based on the best available information, if we list this species,
the following activities may potentially result in a violation of
section 9 of the Act; this list is not comprehensive:
(1) Unauthorized handling or collecting of the species;
(2) Modification of the channel or water flow of any stream in
which the Texas hornshell is known to occur;
(3) Livestock grazing that results in direct or indirect
destruction of stream habitat; and
(4) Discharge of chemicals or fill material into any waters in
which the Texas hornshell is known to occur.
Questions regarding whether specific activities would constitute a
violation of section 9 of the Act should be directed to the Texas
Coastal Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT).
Critical Habitat for the Texas Hornshell
Background
Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the Act as:
(1) The specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the
species, at the time it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which
are found those physical or biological features:
(a) Essential to the conservation of the species, and
(b) Which may require special management considerations or
protection; and
(2) Specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the
species at the time it is listed, upon a determination that such areas
are essential for the conservation of the species.
Conservation, as defined under section 3 of the Act, means to use
and the use of all methods and procedures that are necessary to bring
an endangered or threatened species to the point at which the measures
provided pursuant to the Act are no longer necessary. Such methods and
procedures include, but are not limited to, all activities associated
with scientific resources management such as research, census, law
enforcement,
[[Page 52808]]
habitat acquisition and maintenance, propagation, live trapping, and
transplantation, and, in the extraordinary case where population
pressures within a given ecosystem cannot be otherwise relieved, may
include regulated taking.
Critical habitat receives protection under section 7 of the Act
through the requirement that Federal agencies ensure, in consultation
with the Service, that any action they authorize, fund, or carry out is
not likely to result in the destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat. The designation of critical habitat does not affect
land ownership or establish a refuge, wilderness, reserve, preserve, or
other conservation area. Such designation does not allow the government
or public to access private lands. Such designation does not require
implementation of restoration, recovery, or enhancement measures by
non-Federal landowners. Where a landowner requests Federal agency
funding or authorization for an action that may affect a listed species
or critical habitat, the consultation requirements of section 7(a)(2)
of the Act would apply, but even in the event of a destruction or
adverse modification finding, the obligation of the Federal action
agency and the landowner is not to restore or recover the species, but
to implement reasonable and prudent alternatives to avoid destruction
or adverse modification of critical habitat.
Section 4 of the Act requires that we designate critical habitat on
the basis of the best scientific data available. Further, our Policy on
Information Standards Under the Endangered Species Act (published in
the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271)), the Information
Quality Act (section 515 of the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106-554; H.R. 5658)),
and our associated Information Quality Guidelines, provide criteria,
establish procedures, and provide guidance to ensure that our decisions
are based on the best scientific data available. They require our
biologists, to the extent consistent with the Act and with the use of
the best scientific data available, to use primary and original sources
of information as the basis for recommendations to designate critical
habitat.
Prudency Determination
Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as amended, and implementing
regulations (50 CFR 424.12), require that, to the maximum extent
prudent and determinable, the Secretary designate critical habitat at
the time the species is determined to be endangered or threatened. Our
regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)) state that the designation of
critical habitat is not prudent when one or both of the following
situations exist: (1) The species is threatened by taking or other
human activity, and identification of critical habitat can be expected
to increase the degree of threat to the species, or (2) such
designation of critical habitat would not be beneficial to the species.
There is currently no imminent threat of take attributed to
collection or vandalism under Factor B for the Texas hornshell, and
identification and mapping of critical habitat is not likely to
increase any such threat. In the absence of finding that the
designation of critical habitat would increase threats to a species, if
there are any benefits to a critical habitat designation, then a
prudent finding is warranted. The potential benefits of designation
include: (1) Triggering consultation under section 7 of the Act in new
areas for actions in which there may be a Federal nexus where it would
not otherwise occur because, for example, it is or has become
unoccupied or the occupancy is in question; (2) focusing conservation
activities on the most essential features and areas; (3) providing
educational benefits to State or county governments or private
entities; and (4) preventing people from causing inadvertent harm to
the species. Therefore, because we have determined that the designation
of critical habitat will not likely increase the degree of threat to
these species and may provide some measure of benefit, we find that
designation of critical habitat is prudent for the Texas hornshell.
Critical Habitat Determinability
Having determined that designation is prudent, under section
4(a)(3) of the Act we must find whether critical habitat for the
species is determinable. Our regulations at 50 CFR 424.12(a)(2) state
that critical habitat is not determinable when one or both of the
following situations exist: (1) Information sufficient to perform
required analyses of the impacts of the designation is lacking, or (2)
the biological needs of the species are not sufficiently well known to
permit identification of an area as critical habitat.
As discussed above, we have reviewed the available information
pertaining to the biological needs of this species and habitat
characteristics where this species is located. Because the biological
needs are not sufficiently well known to permit identification of
critical habitat, we are seeking additional information regarding
updated occurrence records for the Texas hornshell, future climate
change effects on the species' habitat, and other analyses. Therefore,
we conclude that the designation of critical habitat is not
determinable for the Texas hornshell at this time. We will make a
determination on critical habitat no later than 1 year following any
final listing determination.
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:
(1) Be logically organized;
(2) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
(3) Use clear language rather than jargon;
(4) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
(5) 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 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.
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 (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), 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).
References Cited
A complete list of references cited is available in Appendix A of
the SSA Report (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2016. Species status
assessment report for the Texas hornshell (Popenaias popeii), Version
1.0. Albuquerque, NM), available online at https://www.regulations.gov,
under Docket Number FWS-R2-ES-2016-0077.
[[Page 52809]]
Authors
The primary authors of this proposed rule are the staff members of
the Texas Coastal Ecological Services Field Office.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we propose to amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter
I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below:
PART 17--ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS
0
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 1531-1544; and 4201-4245, unless
otherwise noted.
0
2. Amend Sec. 17.11(h) by adding an entry for ``Hornshell, Texas'' to
the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife in alphabetical order
under Clams:
Sec. 17.11 Endangered and threatened wildlife.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Listing citations
Common name Scientific name Where listed Status and applicable
rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Clams
* * * * * * *
Hornshell, Texas................. Popenaias popeii.... Wherever found..... E [Federal Register
citation when
published as a
final rule.]
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dated: July 21, 2016.
Stephen Guertin,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-18816 Filed 8-9-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P