Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12 Month Findings on Petitions To List the Holiday Darter, Trispot Darter, and Bridled Darter; Threatened Species Status for Trispot Darter, 46183-46197 [2017-21350]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 4, 2017 / Proposed Rules
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2017–0063;
4500030113]
RIN 1018–BC16
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; 12 Month Findings on
Petitions To List the Holiday Darter,
Trispot Darter, and Bridled Darter;
Threatened Species Status for Trispot
Darter
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; 12-month
petition findings.
AGENCY:
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:17 Oct 03, 2017
Jkt 244001
Bill
Pearson, Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Alabama Ecological
Services Field Office, 1208 Main Street,
Daphne, AL 36526; telephone 251–441–
5181; or facsimile 251–441–6222.
Persons who use a telecommunications
device for the deaf (TDD) may call the
Federal Relay Service at 800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
12-month finding on a petition to list
three species, the holiday darter
(Etheostoma brevirostrum), the trispot
darter (Etheostoma trisella), and the
bridled darter (Percina kusha), all
freshwater fish native to Alabama,
Georgia, and Tennessee, as endangered
or threatened under the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act).
After review of the best available
scientific and commercial information,
we find that listing the trispot darter is
warranted. Accordingly, we propose to
list the trispot darter as a threatened
species under the Act. If we finalize this
rule as proposed, it would add the
trispot darter to the List of Endangered
and Threatened Wildlife and extend the
Act’s protections to the species. After
review of the best available scientific
and commercial information, we also
find that listing the holiday and bridled
darters is not warranted.
DATES: We will accept comments
received or postmarked on or before
December 4, 2017. 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 November 20, 2017.
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–R4–ES–2017–0063, 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, check the Proposed Rules
box to locate this document. You may
SUMMARY:
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–R4–ES–2017–
0063, 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).
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. 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 rule will propose the listing of
the trispot darter (Etheostoma trisella),
as a threatened species. This rule
summarizes our analysis regarding
status of and threats to the trispot darter.
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: (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 trispot darter
is a threatened species based on a loss
of habitat and connectivity (Factor A)
due to urbanization, land use patterns,
and drought.
Peer review. We have requested
comments from independent specialists
to ensure that we based our designation
on scientifically sound data,
assumptions, and analyses. Because we
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
46183
will consider all comments and
information received during the
comment period, our final
determinations may differ from this
proposal.
Supporting Documents
A species status assessment (SSA)
team prepared SSA reports for all three
darter species. The SSA team was
composed of Service biologists, in
consultation with other species experts.
The SSA reports represent a
compilation of the best scientific and
commercial data available concerning
the status of the species, including the
impacts of past, present, and future
factors (both negative and beneficial)
affecting each species. All three SSA
reports underwent independent peer
review by scientists with expertise in
fish or amphibian biology, habitat
management, and stressors (factors
negatively affecting the species). The
SSA reports and other materials relating
to this proposal can be found on the
Southeast Region Web site at https://
www.fws.gov/southeast/ and at https://
www.regulations.gov under Docket No.
FWS–R4–ES–2017–0063.
Information Requested for Proposed
Rule To List Trispot Darter
Public Comments
We intend that any final action
resulting from the 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:
(1) The trispot darter’s biology, range,
and population trends, including:
(a) Biological or ecological
requirements of trispot darter, including
habitat requirements for feeding,
breeding, and sheltering;
(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.
E:\FR\FM\04OCP1.SGM
04OCP1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
46184
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 4, 2017 / Proposed Rules
(3) Biological, commercial trade, or
other relevant data concerning any
threats (or lack thereof) to the 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 the
species, including the locations of any
additional populations of the species.
(5) Specific prohibitions and
exceptions to those prohibitions that
may be necessary and advisable for the
trispot darter’s conservation. We are
considering publishing a more tailored
proposed rule with provisions set forth
under section 4(d) of the Act for public
review and comment in the future.
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 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.) directs that determinations as to
whether any species is an endangered or
a 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, Alabama 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:17 Oct 03, 2017
Jkt 244001
received the dates specified above in
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.
DATES.
Peer Review
In accordance with our joint policy on
peer review published in the Federal
Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270),
and our August 22, 2016, memorandum
updating and clarifying the role of peer
review of listing actions under the Act,
we sought the expert opinions of
appropriate specialists regarding the
SSA report for each species, including
the report for the trispot darter that
informed this proposed rule. The
purpose of peer review is to ensure that
our listing determination is based on
scientifically sound data, assumptions,
and analyses. The peer reviewers have
expertise in fish biology, habitat, and
stressors to the species. We invite any
additional comment from the peer
reviewers during this public comment
period.
Previous Federal Actions
The trispot darter was one of 29 fish
species included in a March 18, 1975,
notice of review published by the
Service in the Federal Register (40 FR
12297). On December 30, 1982, the
Service announced in the Federal
Register (47 FR 58454) that the trispot
darter, along with 147 other fish species,
were being considered for possible
addition to the Endangered Species List.
On November 4, 1983, the Service
published a notice in the Federal
Register (48 FR 50909) that a status
review was being conducted for the
trispot darter to determine if the species
should be protected under the Act. On
November 21, 1991, we added the
trispot darter to the candidate list as a
category 2 species on the Candidate
Notice of Review (CNOR) (56 FR 58804).
The holiday darter was added to the
candidate list as a Category 2 species in
the CNOR on November 15, 1994 (59 FR
58997). Category 2 species were those
species for which listing as endangered
or threatened species was possibly
appropriate, but for which biological
information sufficient to support a
proposed rule was lacking. However,
the February 28, 1996, CNOR (61 FR
7596) discontinued recognition of
Category 2 species, so the trispot and
holiday darters were no longer
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
considered candidate species after that
date.
On April 20, 2010, we received a
petition from Center for Biological
Diversity and others to list 404 aquatic
species in the southeastern United
States, including the two
aforementioned species as well as the
bridled darter. In response to the
petition, we completed a partial 90-day
finding on September 27, 2011 (76 FR
59836), in which we announced our
finding that the petition contained
substantial information that listing may
be warranted for these three darter
species. We conducted a status review
for each species.
Background
Trispot Darter
A thorough review of the taxonomy,
life history, and ecology of the trispot
darter (Etheostoma trisella) is presented
in the SSA report.
The trispot darter is a freshwater fish
found in the Coosa River System in the
Ridge and Valley ecoregion of Alabama,
Georgia, and Tennessee. This fish has a
historical range from the middle to
upper Coosa River Basin with
collections in the mainstem Coosa,
Oostanaula, Conasauga, and
Coosawattee Rivers, and their
tributaries. All known records of the
trispot darter occur above the fall line in
the Ridge and Valley ecoregion.
Currently, the trispot darter is known to
occur in Little Canoe Creek and
tributaries (Coosa River), Ballplay Creek
tributaries (Coosa River), Conasauga
River and tributaries, and Coosawattee
River and one tributary.
The trispot darter is a small-bodied,
benthic fish ranging in size from 1.3 to
1.6 inches (in) (3.3 to 4.1 centimeters
(cm)) as adults. The darter has three
prominent black dorsal saddles, pale
undersurface, and a dark bar below the
eye. Scattered dark blotches exist on the
fins’ rays. During breeding season males
are a reddish-orange color and have
green marks along their sides and a red
band through their spiny dorsal fin.
The trispot darter is a migratory
species that utilizes distinct breeding
and non-breeding habitats. From
approximately April to October, the
species inhabits its non-breeding
habitat, which consists of small to
medium river margins and lower
reaches of tributaries with slower
velocities. It is associated with detritus,
logs, and stands of water willow, and
the substrate consists of small cobbles,
pebbles, gravel, and often a fine layer of
silt. During low flow periods, the darters
move away from the peripheral zones
and toward the main channel; edges of
E:\FR\FM\04OCP1.SGM
04OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 4, 2017 / Proposed Rules
water willow beds, riffles, and pools;
and mouths of tributaries. In late fall,
this migratory species shifts its habitat
preference and begins movement toward
spawning areas; this is most likely
stimulated by precipitation, but
temperature changes and decreasing
daylight hours may also provide queues
to begin migration. Migration into
spawning areas begins approximately
late November or early December with
fish moving from the main channels
into tributaries and eventually reaching
adjacent seepage areas where they will
congregate and remain for the duration
of spawning, approximately until late
April. Breeding sites are intermittent
seepage areas and ditches with little to
no flow; shallow depths (12 in (30 cm)
or less); moderate leaf litter covering
mixed cobble, gravel, sand, and clay; a
deep layer of soft silt over clay; and
emergent vegetation. Trispot darters
predominantly feed on mayfly nymphs
and midge larvae and pupae.
Trispot darters can live a maximum of
3 years, but most individuals die after
the end of their second year. Females
lay approximately 300 adhesive eggs
that attach to vegetation or rocky
substrate. Once laid, the eggs are
abandoned and incubate for 30 days.
Upon hatching, the trispot darter spends
approximately 41 days as larvae.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Holiday Darter
A thorough review of the taxonomy,
life history, and ecology of the holiday
darter (Etheostoma brevirostrum) is
presented in the SSA report.
The holiday darter is a small, 2-inlong (5-cm-long) snubnose darter, so
named because it is a colorful fish, with
notable red blotches surrounded by
white or yellow halos on the lower side
of the body. Unique from similar species
with which it co-occurs, the holiday
darter has a distinct median red band
across the generally blue-green anal fin
in males in spawning color. The holiday
darter is found in small creeks to
moderate-sized rivers above the fall line
in the Ridge and Valley, Blue Ridge, and
Piedmont ecoregions of Alabama,
Georgia, and Tennessee. Currently, the
holiday darter is known to occur in
parts of Shoal Creek, Conasauga River,
Talking Rock Creek, Mountaintown
Creek, tributaries of the Ellijay River,
Amicalola Creek, and the Etowah River.
The holiday darter prefers clear streams
with riffles and shallow areas of rivers
that contain boulders, cobble, and gravel
substrate. While no complete lifehistory studies of the species are
available, it is likely a benthic omnivore
that eats aquatic insect larvae and
microcrustaceans.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:17 Oct 03, 2017
Jkt 244001
Breeding behavior begins in April and
lasts through May. Females are followed
by males as they select suitable
spawning substrates of gravel, rock, or
wood on which the pair orients
vertically to spawn and attach eggs.
Females have the potential to produce
from 50–150 eggs over multiple
spawning sites, and those eggs are then
fertilized by the male, or multiple
different males. No studies have been
published on the lifespan of the holiday
darter, but similar species live
approximately 3 years.
Bridled Darter
A thorough review of the taxonomy,
life history, and ecology of the bridled
darter (Percina kusha) is presented in
the SSA report.
The bridled darter is a small
freshwater fish native to the upper
Coosa River basin in Georgia and
Tennessee. This fish’s current
distribution includes the main channel
of the Conasauga River in Murray and
Whitfield Counties, Georgia, and
Bradley and Polk Counties, Tennessee,
Etowah River in Dawson and Lumpkin
Counties, Georgia, Amicalola Creek in
Dawson County, Georgia, Long Swamp
Creek in Pickens County, Georgia, and
Talking Rock Creek in Pickens County,
Georgia. These are all considered small
rivers with good water quality. It was
also known to occur in short reaches of
several tributaries to both the Conasauga
and Etowah Rivers. Morphological
variation exists between the darters in
the Conasauga River and those in the
Etowah River, but genetic studies do not
conclude that they are separate species.
Adult bridled darters are about 3 in (4
cm) in length and are muted in color.
Dark oval blotches are fused to form a
lateral stripe. The lateral stripe merges
with a dark stripe behind the eye and
continues forward of the eye; these
stripes resemble a horse’s bridle and
lend the species its common name.
These darters are typically found in
flowing pools and backwaters adjacent
to runs in small rivers and lower
reaches of tributary creeks. They are
often found near submerged logs or
vegetation and prefer a substrate of
sand, gravel, cobble, and bedrock.
The bridled darter is a sight feeder
that has been observed to pluck food
from submerged objects as well as the
water column by drift-feeding. When
drift-feeding, it positions itself
downstream of rocks, away from fast
currents, and feeds on invertebrates that
are washed downstream and thrusted
upward by turbulence. Feeding peaks in
late afternoon before dusk. Stomach
contents for individuals from the
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
46185
Conasauga River contained small mayfly
nymphs and blackfly larvae.
Reproduction and spawning takes
place approximately mid-April through
mid-July. Spawning sites are selected by
females as they are followed by courting
males. Competitive behavior between
males for the site-selecting female has
been observed, with the larger males
attempting to chase away smaller males.
In the Conasauga River, sneaker males
(smaller males that join with a spawning
pair and mate with the female) have
been observed. Rapid quivering of the
pair during spawning helps to bury
fertilized eggs in sand. A spawning pair
may undertake multiple spawning
events at different locations. Females
have the potential to produce up to 75
eggs per year, and their lifespan has
been estimated to be approximately 3
years.
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. The SSA reports document
the results of our comprehensive
biological status review for the holiday,
bridled, and trispot darters, including
an assessment of the potential stressors
to the species. The SSA reports do not
represent a regulatory decision by the
Service on whether the species should
be proposed for listing as endangered or
threatened species under the Act. They
do, however, provide the scientific basis
that informs that decision, which
involves the further application of
standards within the Act and its
implementing regulations and policies.
The following is a summary of the key
results and conclusions from the SSA
reports; the full SSA reports can be
found on the Southeast Region Web site
at https://www.fws.gov/southeast/ and
at https://www.regulations.gov under
Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2017–0063.
Summary of Analysis
To assess viability for the holiday,
bridled, and trispot darters, we used the
three conservation biology principles of
resiliency, representation, and
redundancy (together, the 3Rs). Briefly,
resiliency supports the ability of the
species to withstand environmental and
demographic stochasticity (for example,
wet or dry, warm or cold years);
representation supports the ability of
the species to adapt over time to longterm changes in the environment (for
example, climate changes); and
redundancy supports the ability of the
species to withstand catastrophic events
(for example, droughts, hurricanes). In
E:\FR\FM\04OCP1.SGM
04OCP1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
46186
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 4, 2017 / Proposed Rules
general, the more redundant and
resilient a species is and the more
representation it has, the more likely it
is to sustain populations over time, even
under changing environmental
conditions. Using these principles, we
identified the species’ ecological
requirements for survival and
reproduction at the individual,
population, and species levels, and
described the factors influencing the
species’ viability.
The SSA process can be categorized
into three sequential stages. During the
first stage, we used the 3Rs to evaluate
individual life-history needs of all three
darters. In the next stage, we assessed
the historical and current condition of
each species’ demographics and habitat
characteristics, including an
explanation of how the species arrived
at their current conditions. In the final
stage of the SSA we made predictions
about the species’ responses to positive
and negative environmental and
anthropogenic influences. This process
used the best available information to
characterize viability as the ability of
each species to sustain populations in
the wild over time. We utilized this
information to inform our regulatory
decision in the 12-month findings.
To evaluate the current and future
viability of the three darters, we
assessed a range of conditions to allow
us to consider the species’ resiliency,
representation, and redundancy. U.S.
Geological Survey delineated all
watersheds within the United States at
several different scales (or units) using
a standardized system. Each hydrologic
unit is identified by a unique hydrologic
unit code (HUC) consisting of two to
twelve digits based on six different
levels of classification. For this analysis,
the 10-digit Hydrologic Unit Codes
(HUC 10s) were used as a spatial
framework to delineate areas within the
geographical range of each species for
further analysis. Field collections were
used to identify species presence within
HUC10 watersheds. For holiday and
bridled darters, populations were
defined as occupied HUC10 watersheds
and were used for analysis. Management
units (MUs) were described for the
trispot darter and are defined as one or
more HUC10 watersheds that the
species currently occupies. MUs were
grouped using population genetics
information and by expected
management requirements.
To qualitatively assess resilience, we
considered seven components that
broadly relate to either the physical
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:17 Oct 03, 2017
Jkt 244001
environment (‘‘Habitat Elements’’) or
characteristics about the population
specifically (‘‘Population Elements’’).
Habitat elements consisted of an
evaluation of physical habitat,
connectivity, water quality, and
hydrologic regime. Population elements
consisted of an estimation of
approximate abundance, the extent of
occurrence (total length of occupied
streams), and an assessment of
occurrence complexity. Representation
describes the ability of a species to
adapt to changing environmental
conditions over time. For these darters
to exhibit high representation, resilient
populations should occur in all
ecoregions to which they are native, and
maintain some level of connectivity
between populations. These occupied
physiographic provinces represent the
ecological setting in which the darters
have evolved. Redundancy for all three
darters is characterized by having
multiple resilient and representative
populations distributed throughout its
range. Furthermore, these populations
should maintain natural levels of
connectivity between them.
Connectivity allows for immigration and
emigration between populations and
increases the likelihood of
recolonization should a population
become extirpated. An overall resiliency
condition was estimated by combining
habitat and population elements.
Population elements were weighted two
times higher than habitat elements
because they are considered direct
indicators of population condition.
Conditions were classified as ‘‘Low’’,
‘‘Moderate’’, or ‘‘High’’.
After analyzing current conditions for
each species, we described how current
viability of the three darters may change
over a period of 50 years. As with
current conditions, we evaluated
species viability in terms of resiliency at
the population scale, and representation
and redundancy at the species scale. In
the SSA report, we described three
plausible future scenarios and whether
there will be a change, from current
conditions, to resiliency, representation,
or redundancy under each scenario.
These scenarios capture the range of
likely viability outcomes that the darters
will exhibit by the end of 2070. The
future scenarios differ in two main
elements of predicted change:
urbanization and climate. To forecast
future urbanization, we considered
future scenarios that incorporate the
SLEUTH (Slope, Land use, Excluded
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
area, Urban area, Transportation,
Hillside area) model. This model
simulates patterns of urban expansion
that are consistent with spatial
observations of past urban growth and
transportation networks. Regarding
climate, the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change utilized a suite of
alternative scenarios in the Fifth
Assessment Report to make near-term
and long-term climate projections. In
our assessments, we used these
projections to help understand how
climate may change in the future and
what effects may be observed that
impact the three darter species.
Trispot Darter
For our analysis we considered four
extant MUs: Little Canoe Creek Basin,
Ballplay Creek Basin, Conasauga River
Basin, and Coosawattee River Basin.
Genetic research has defined distinct
trispot darter populations in Little
Canoe Creek, Ballplay Creek, and
Conasauga River. It is unknown if
trispot darters in the Coosawattee River
basin are genetically distinct; however,
we analyzed it as a separate MU because
this river would require a distinct
management strategy due to
hydroelectric operations at Carters Dam.
Historical collections of the trispot
darter are known from Cowans Creek, a
tributary to Spring Creek, which is in
turn a tributary to the Coosa River, and
Johns and Woodward Creeks, tributaries
to the Oostanaula River. Currently, the
trispot darter occupies approximately 20
percent of its historically known range.
Current Condition of Trispot Darter
Of the four current MUs for the trispot
darter, one has resiliency ranked as
‘‘moderate,’’ and three have resiliency
ranked as ‘‘low’’ in the analysis (see
Table 2 below). For example, the Little
Canoe Creek MU is expected to have a
moderate resiliency to stochastic events
because water quality is low, the
abundance is qualitatively low, the
occurrence complexity is high, Coosa
River reservoirs remove connectivity to
other MUs, and the extent of the
occupied habitat is small. The
Conasauga River MU has ‘‘low’’
resiliency due to low water quality in
the middle and lower river, low
abundance of fish per collection record,
a small and reduced population, and
overall simple occurrence spatial
arrangement. A full analysis for each
unit’s resiliency can be found in the
SSA report.
E:\FR\FM\04OCP1.SGM
04OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 4, 2017 / Proposed Rules
46187
TABLE 2—CURRENT SPECIES RESILIENCY SUMMARY OF THE TRISPOT DARTER
Approximate
abundance
Little Canoe Creek .....
Ballplay Creek ............
Conasauga River .......
Coosawattee River .....
Low
Low
Low
Low
................
................
................
................
Occurrence
extent
Occurrence
complexity
Physical
habitat
Connectivity
Low
Low
Low
Low
High ...........
Low ............
Low ............
Low ............
Low ............
Low ............
Low ............
Moderate ....
Low ............
Low ............
Moderate ....
Moderate ....
Holiday Darter
For our analysis we considered seven
populations: Conasauga River, Talking
Rock Creek, Ellijay River,
Mountaintown Creek, Amicalola Creek,
Etowah River, and Shoal Creek.
Current Condition of Holiday Darter
Six of the seven populations for
holiday darter are estimated to have low
resiliency. The exception is Amicalola
Creek, where the fish is still found in 80
percent of the watershed that it
occupied historically, and because it is
known to occur in Amicalola Creek,
Little Amicalola Creek, Cochran Creek,
and Gab Creek, it has a moderate spatial
occurrence complexity. The habitat
elements were also ranked as moderate
for Amicalola Creek, giving that
population an overall condition of
moderate. By comparison, the habitat
elements were also moderate or high for
the Etowah River, but this population
had low population element rankings,
leading to an estimate of low overall
resiliency. A full analysis for each
population’s resiliency can be found in
the SSA report.
Connectivity is an important aspect of
representation because it provides for
the exchange of novel and beneficial
adaptations and migration to more
suitable habitat (should it be necessary).
Currently, all historically occupied
ecoregions continue to be occupied by
holiday darters, so we can conclude that
all known genetic, morphological, and
behavioral variability are still
............
............
............
............
represented across the range. However,
connectivity is reduced for the species
range-wide. Dams have completely
isolated the seven populations into four
groups. The upper Etowah RiverAmicalola Creek populations are
isolated by Alatoona Dam; the Talking
Rock Creek population is isolated by
Carters Re-regulation Dam; and the
Ellijay River and Mountaintown Creek
populations are isolated by Carters Dam.
The Conasauga River and Holly Creek
populations are prevented from
dispersing to the other populations by
those same dams. The Shoal Creek
population is isolated by large dams on
the Coosa River. Where dams do not
fragment habitat, long reaches of
unoccupied habitat are present between
populations, indicating that migration
between populations is uncommon or
unlikely. Finally, all populations of
holiday darter exist on the periphery of
the Coosa River basin and have likely
reached the upstream limits for the
species. It is unlikely that individuals
within a population will be able to
migrate further upstream if necessary
due to changes in environmental
conditions, further decreasing the
ability of the species to adapt to
changing environmental conditions.
We estimate that the holiday darter
currently may have low adaptive
potential due to limited representation
in six occupied watersheds, decreased
connectivity, and confinement to upper
reaches of occupied watersheds. Overall
representation is considered to be low.
Water
quality
Low
Low
Low
Low
............
............
............
............
Hydrologic
regime
Low
Low
Low
Low
............
............
............
............
Overall
condition
Moderate.
Low.
Low.
Low.
Redundancy is characterized by having
multiple resilient and representative
populations distributed throughout its
range. Because all but one population of
holiday darter exhibit low resiliency,
the species is considered to also have
low redundancy. All populations have
experienced some declines, may have
low numbers, or have low spatial
complexity. Redundancy is present
within the Coosawattee River, with
three populations still extant, but is still
classified as ‘‘low’’ due to low resiliency
of three populations.
In the occupied areas of the
Conasauga and Etowah Rivers, the
majority of the records for the species
are on U.S. Forest Service (USFS) land,
which is noted for having good water
quality and suitable habitat for holiday
darters. For our analysis, we gave
populations low resilience if they had
poor population elements, even if the
habitat elements were moderate or high.
Second, we declined to consider the
species to have better than low
representation and redundancy if the
populations didn’t have better than low
resiliency. Inconsistent survey
methodologies and lack of standard
collection records also creates
uncertainty in any analysis of trends or
the ability to compare data across years.
The best available data does not indicate
a declining trend in abundance, and it
is likely that the low abundance (and,
therefore, low resiliency) indicated in
our analysis is due to the species being
naturally rare and difficult to detect.
TABLE 3—CURRENT SPECIES RESILIENCY SUMMARY OF THE HOLIDAY DARTER
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Approximate
abundance
Conasauga River .......
Talking Rock Creek ....
Ellijay River ................
Mountaintown Creek ..
Amicalola Creek .........
Etowah River ..............
Shoal Creek ...............
Occurrence
extent
Occurrence
complexity
Low ................
Low ................
Low ................
Low ................
Moderate ........
Low ................
Low ................
Low ............
Low ............
Low ............
Low ............
Moderate ....
Low ............
Low ............
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Bridled Darter
For our analysis of the bridled darter
we considered six populations:
Conasauga River, Holly Creek, Talking
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:17 Oct 03, 2017
Jkt 244001
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
Physical
habitat
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Connectivity
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
Water
quality
Hydrologic
regime
High ...........
High ...........
Moderate ....
Moderate ....
Moderate ....
High ...........
Low ............
Moderate ....
Low ............
Low ............
Moderate ....
Moderate ....
Moderate ....
High ...........
Moderate ....
Moderate ....
Low ............
Moderate ....
Moderate ....
High ...........
Moderate ....
Rock Creek, Long Swamp Creek,
Amicalola Creek, and the Etowah River.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Overall
condition
Low.
Low.
Low.
Low.
Moderate.
Low.
Low.
Current Condition of Bridled Darter
All six populations of bridled darter
were classified as having low resiliency.
Although habitat conditions were
E:\FR\FM\04OCP1.SGM
04OCP1
46188
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 4, 2017 / Proposed Rules
moderate or high for many creeks, the
low population elements (abundance,
extent, and complexity) caused the
overall resiliency to be low. Currently,
all historically occupied ecoregions are
occupied, and all historically occupied
watersheds are considered extant.
Although populations that exhibit the
known genetic, morphological, and
behavioral variability are currently
extant, they do not exhibit high
resiliency, and representation is
therefore classified as low. Dams have
completely isolated the six populations
into three groups. The upper Etowah
River-Amicalola Creek-lower
Longswamp Creek populations are
isolated by Alatoona Dam, and the
Talking Rock Creek population is
isolated by Carters Re-regulation Dam.
The Conasauga River and Holly Creek
populations are prevented from
dispersing in to the other populations
by those same dams. Where dams do not
fragment habitat, long reaches of
unoccupied habitat are present between
populations, indicating that migration
between populations is uncommon or
unlikely. Redundancy for the bridled
darter is characterized by having
multiple resilient and representative
populations distributed throughout its
range. Because all populations of
bridled darter exhibit low resiliency, the
species is considered to also have low
redundancy. All populations have
experienced declines in extent of
occupied habitat, are found in low
numbers, or have low spatial
complexity with reduced connectivity.
In the occupied areas of the
Conasauga and Etowah Rivers, the
majority of the records for the species
are on USFS land, which is noted for
having good water quality and suitable
habitat for bridled darters. For our
analysis, we gave populations low
resilience if they had poor population
elements, even if the habitat elements
were moderate and high. Second, we
declined to consider the species to have
better than low representation and
redundancy if the populations didn’t
have better than low resiliency.
Inconsistent survey methodologies and
the lack of standard collection records
creates uncertainty in any analysis of
trends or the ability to compare data
across years. The best available data
does not indicate a declining trend in
abundance, and it is likely that the low
abundance (and, therefore, low
resiliency) indicated in our analysis is
due to the species being naturally rare
and difficult to detect.
TABLE 4—CURRENT SPECIES RESILIENCY SUMMARY OF THE BRIDLED DARTER
Approximate
abundance
Conasauga River .......
Holly Creek .................
Talking Rock Creek ....
Long Swamp Creek ...
Amicalola Creek .........
Etowah River ..............
Occurrence
extent
Occurrence
complexity
Low ................
Moderate ........
Low ................
Low ................
Moderate ........
Low ................
Low ............
Low ............
High ...........
Low ............
Low ............
Low ............
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Risk Factors Influencing Viability for
Trispot, Holiday, and Bridled Darters
As required by the Act, we considered
the five factors in assessing whether the
three species meet the definition of
threatened or endangered species. A
multitude of natural and anthropogenic
factors may impact the status of species
within aquatic systems. The largest
threats to the future viability of the
trispot, holiday, and bridled darters
involve habitat degradation from
stressors influencing four habitat
elements: Water quality, water quantity,
instream habitat, and habitat
connectivity (Factor A). All of these
factors are exacerbated by the effects of
climate change (Factor E). A brief
summary of these primary stressors is
presented below; for a full description,
refer to chapter 4 of the SSA reports for
each species.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Hydrologic Alteration
Hydrologic alteration in this system
has two components: Increases in storm
flow frequency and intensity and a
decrease in base flows, which together
create a ‘‘flashy’’ hydrologic regime.
Activities that lead to hydrologic
alteration include reservoir construction
and operation, water withdrawals, and
an increase in impervious surfaces. In a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:17 Oct 03, 2017
Jkt 244001
............
............
............
............
............
............
Physical
habitat
Connectivity
Water
quality
Hydrologic
regime
Moderate ....
Moderate ....
Moderate ....
Low ............
Moderate ....
Moderate ....
High ...........
High ...........
Low ............
Low ............
Moderate ....
High ...........
Low ............
Low ............
Low ............
Low ............
Moderate ....
Moderate ....
Moderate ....
Moderate ....
Moderate ....
Low ............
Moderate ....
High ...........
natural forested system, most rainfall
soaks into the soil and is carried into
nearby streams via subsurface flow.
Some evaporates or transpires, and a
relatively small amount becomes surface
runoff. In an urbanized system with
high levels of impervious cover, such as
roads, parking lots, and rooftops, this
cycle is altered; most stormwater hits
impervious surfaces and becomes
runoff, which then is channeled quickly
to streams via stormwater drain pipes or
ditches. Relatively little infiltrates into
the soil. As a result, storm flows in the
receiving stream are higher and more
frequent, although briefer in duration,
and base flows are lower. The storm
discharge of urban streams can be twice
that of rural streams draining a
watershed of similar size, and the
frequency of channel-forming events
can be ten times that of predevelopment conditions. These flashy
stream flows and frequent, smaller highflow events negatively affect structural
habitat on which the species depends.
Increases in flow frequency or intensity
can result in channel widening through
bank erosion or deepening to
accommodate the additional discharge.
This results in increased downstream
sedimentation and unstable beds, both
of which degrade channel complexity,
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Overall
condition
Low.
Low.
Low.
Low.
Low.
Low.
feeding, and refugia habitat for fish
species. Increased storm flows, in
addition, can cause physical washout of
eggs and larval fishes, stress on adults,
and negatively alter the stream’s food
web, affecting many fish species. There
is also a decrease in channel complexity
and a reduction in in-stream cover and
natural substrates like boulders, cobble,
and gravel. Hydrologic alteration can
also lead to other stressors that
negatively affect fish, such as
sedimentation and a loss of connected
suitable habitat.
Sedimentation
Sedimentation can affect fish species
by degrading physical habitat used for
foraging, sheltering, and spawning;
altering food webs and decreasing
stream productivity; forcing fish to
change their behaviors; and even
injuring or killing individual fish.
Chronic exposure to sediment has been
shown to have negative impacts to fish
gills, which in addition to causing gill
damage can possibly reduce growth
rates. Sedimentation causes reduced
visibility, impacting fishes’ abilities to
feed and communicate.
A wide range of activities can lead to
sedimentation within streams, including
agriculture, construction activities,
E:\FR\FM\04OCP1.SGM
04OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 4, 2017 / Proposed Rules
stormwater runoff, unpaved roads, some
forestry activities if certified best
management practices are not used,
utility crossings, and dredging.
Historical land use practices have
substantially altered hydrological and
geological processes such that
sediments continue to be input into
streams for several decades after those
activities cease. Examples of these
activities occurring with the range of
these species include: Urban impacts in
the Springville, Alabama, and Dalton,
Georgia, areas; agricultural practices in
the Conasauga River basin; and
livestock access to streams in the Little
Canoe Creek watershed.
Reduced Connectivity
Connectivity is a species’ ability to
disperse to and from habitat patches.
Excess groundwater withdrawal can
contribute to reduced connectivity if
sections of streams become dry for parts
of the year. Dams and reservoirs reduce
connectivity by creating a physical
barrier between fish populations and
changing habitat from flowing streams
to standing water, which is not suitable
habitat for these three darters. Road
crossings are also more prevalent in
highly populated urban areas, and some
road crossings have impassable culverts
that reduce connectivity.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Loss of Riparian Vegetation
Loss of riparian vegetation means the
removal of natural plant communities
from the riparian zone of rivers and
streams. Removal of riparian vegetation
can destabilize stream banks, increasing
sedimentation and turbidity; increase
the contaminants and nutrients that
enter the water from runoff; increase
water temperatures and light
penetration, which also increases algae
production; and alter available habitat
by reducing woody plant debris and leaf
litter, which in turn decreases overall
stream productivity. These fish have
adapted to occupy habitats that are
surrounded by vegetation, which
moderates temperature by blocking solar
radiation; provides a source for
terrestrial plant material that forms the
base of the food web and provides
shelter and foraging habitat for the
fishes; and helps to maintain clear,
clean water and substrate through
filtration. Loss of riparian vegetation
decreases habitat suitability for the
trispot, holiday, and bridled darters.
Removal of riparian vegetation has
occurred where urban and agricultural
activities are prevalent such as increases
in development in Dalton, Chatsworth,
and Ellijay, and row crop and pastures
in the Conasauga basin.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:17 Oct 03, 2017
Jkt 244001
Contaminants
Contaminants, including metals,
hydrocarbons, pesticides, and other
potentially harmful organic and
inorganic compounds, can be toxic to
fish and are common in urban streams
including those within the range of
these three darters. Pesticides are
frequently found in streams draining
agricultural lands, with herbicides being
the most commonly detected. Pesticides
also are heavily used in urban and
suburban areas, and many of these find
their way into streams and groundwater.
The contamination of the Coosa River
with polychlorinated biphenyl (PCBs)
has been attributed to the General
Electric facility in Rome, Georgia.
Although the facility closed in 1998,
contaminated sediments are still
documented there. In the Coosawattee
River, PCBs are also listed as a source
of impairment caused by nonpoint
sources. These chemicals have toxic
effects to the endocrine system, nervous
system, reproductive system, blood,
skin, and liver of animals and have
likely impacted these three darters in
the Coosa and Coosawattee Rivers.
Pesticides and herbicides are
frequently found in streams draining
agricultural land uses, with herbicides
being the most commonly detected.
Many agricultural streams still contain
dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethan (DDT)
and its degradation products.
Glyphosates and other inert ingredients
found in Roundup can be toxic to fish
and other aquatic organisms, causing
stress and reduced fitness; Roundup use
within the range of these species is
prevalent and increasing due to the
adoption of ‘‘Roundup Ready’’ crops.
Agriculture
Agriculture is another predominant
land use within the range of all three
darters. Livestock grazing is prevalent in
some areas, and poultry farming is also
common.
Poultry Litter: Poultry litter is a
mixture of chicken manure, feathers,
spilled food, and bedding material that
frequently is used to fertilize
pastureland or row crops. Each poultry
house has an estimated ability to
produce up to 100 tons of litter a year.
Surface-spreading of litter results in
runoff from heavy rains carrying
phosphorus and nitrogen from manure
into nearby streams. Additionally,
repeated or over application of poultry
litter can result in phosphorus buildup
in the soil. Excess phosphorus and
nitrogen in stream systems increases
blue-green algae and undesirable
aquatic plants that rob water of oxygen,
causing fish kills. Endocrine disruptors,
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
46189
such as estrogen, from poultry litter
have been identified as a significant
stressor to the Conasauga River basin.
Estrogens have been found in water and
sediment samples within the watershed
at concentrations high enough to be
disruptive to the endocrine system in
fish. Increased levels of estrogens affect
reproductive biology and result in
reduced breeding success In a recent
study of endocrine disruptors on fishes
in the Conasauga River, approximately
7.5 percent of male fishes surveyed were
found to have female cells in male
reproductive organs.
Livestock access to streams: On many
farms, livestock is grazed on pastures
adjacent to streams and rivers and
livestock is allowed free access to the
water. Livestock accessing riparian
buffers and, subsequently, the stream
proper, leads to habitat destruction and
decreased water quality. Livestock can
destabilize stream banks, which as
discussed above creates increased
sediment loads within these small
systems. Livestock farming is often
confined to the river valleys within the
upper Coosa River basin; therefore, on
many cattle farms, livestock is grazed on
pastures adjacent to streams and rivers,
and in some instances livestock is
allowed free access to the water.
Livestock is produced in every county
with streams occupied by the bridled
and holiday darters.
Urbanization
Urbanization refers to a change in
land cover and land use from forests or
agriculture to increased density of
residential and commercial
infrastructure. Urbanization includes a
wide variety of stressors on aquatic
systems that affect water quantity, water
quality, channel structure, and
connectivity. Therefore, urbanization is
anticipated to increase the magnitude of
nearly all other stressors, and
urbanization is expected to affect the
darters across their range due to their
known localities occurring in close
vicinity to the growing Atlanta
metropolitan area, Chattanooga,
Birmingham, and intervening areas with
growing human populations and
increasing development.
Weather Events
Weather events that affect stream
flows are considered to be most relevant
to these species. Broadly, these events
include extreme storms and droughts.
Increased flows can cause physical
washout of eggs and larval fishes, stress
on adults, and alter the production in a
stream. Within the range of these
darters, extreme flows associated with
hurricanes have been reported to have
E:\FR\FM\04OCP1.SGM
04OCP1
46190
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 4, 2017 / Proposed Rules
negative effects on stream fish
populations. Reduced baseflows due to
droughts can cause population declines,
habitat loss, reduced water quality
(decreased dissolved oxygen and
temperature alteration) leading to death,
crowding of individuals leading to
stress, and decreased reproduction in
stream fish populations. Climate models
for the southeastern United States
project that average annual temperatures
will increase, cold days will become
less frequent, the freeze-free season will
lengthen by up to a month, temperatures
exceeding 95 degrees Fahrenheit will
increase, heat waves will become
longer, and the number of category 5
hurricanes will increase. While these
climate models predict wide variability
in weather patterns into the future, they
suggest that the region will be subjected
to more frequent large storms
(hurricanes) as well as low flows from
droughts.
Other Stressors
In our analysis of the factors affecting
these species, we found no evidence of
population- or species-level impacts
from overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes. Also, there was no evidence
of any impacts due to disease or
predation.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Conservation Actions
Trispot Darter
The trispot darter is recognized by
Alabama, Georgia, and Tennessee as a
species of concern. This species is listed
as Priority 2/High Conservation Concern
by the State of Alabama, endangered by
the State of Georgia, and threatened by
the State of Tennessee. Priority
watersheds within the range of the
trispot darter have been designated as
Strategic Habit Units by the Alabama
Rivers and Streams Network. The
Strategic Habit Unit project was
developed for species restoration and
enhancement. Alabama is conducting an
analysis and the results are intended to
contribute to restoration projects that
will improve habitat and water quality
for at risk and listed species. The
Atlantic Coast Conservancy holds a tract
of land within Ballplay Creek that could
offer some protection in the watershed.
Natural Resources Conservation
Service’s Working Lands for Wildlife
partnership within the basin will help
farmers develop and implement
strategies to improve water quality.
Holiday Darter
The holiday darter is recognized by
Alabama, Georgia, and Tennessee as a
species of concern. It is listed as Priority
1/Highest Conservation Concern by the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:17 Oct 03, 2017
Jkt 244001
State of Alabama, endangered by the
State of Georgia, and threatened by the
State of Tennessee. In general,
protections accorded to the holiday
darter by the States prohibit direct
exploitation of the species.
Some populations of holiday darter
are known from watersheds in which a
substantial percentage of lands are
owned and managed by the USFS.
These populations are found in the
Conasauga River, upper Etowah River,
and Shoal Creek. In the Conasauga River
and Shoal Creek, the majority of current
records for the holiday darter are within
the boundary of USFS lands. Cherokee
National Forest in Tennessee,
Chattahoochee National Forest in
Georgia, and Talladega National Forest
in Alabama own and manage natural
resources in occupied watersheds in
those portions of the holiday darter’s
range. Management prescriptions
implemented by the USFS in areas that
overlap with the range of the holiday
darter are expected to benefit the
species. Specifically, 4.5 miles (mi) (7.2
kilometers (km)) of the Conasauga River
is eligible for Congressional Wild River
designation and is managed to protect
and perpetuate the features that led to
the eligibility status. The river is also
recognized for its aquatic biodiversity
by the USFS, and management strategies
employed by both Cherokee and
Chattahoochee National Forests within
the watershed include designated
wilderness areas, recommended wild
river, recommended recreational river,
black bear habitat management,
restoration and maintenance of rare
communities, restoration and
management of old growth
characteristics, and scenic corridors and
sensitive viewsheds. These management
strategies, which emphasize natural
forest communities and water quality
are expected to benefit holiday darter
within the Conasauga River watershed.
The Chattahoochee National Forest
management prescriptions within the
upper Etowah River also broadly
emphasize and promote natural plant
communities and so are expected to
benefit holiday darter within this
watershed. Standards outlined in the
Revised Land and Management Plan for
National Forests in Alabama (2004)
generally protect water and habitat
quality in streams. Direct observations
of Shoal Creek have found the stream to
have good water quality with high levels
of dissolved oxygen, stable pH levels,
and low sedimentation, confirming the
benefits of USFS management strategies
to holiday darter habitat.
Approximately 13.6 mi (21.9 km) of
Amicalola Creek are bounded by lands
owned and managed by the State of
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Georgia. Georgia’s stated goals for this
area are maintenance or enhancement of
populations of sensitive species and
management of riparian areas to benefit
water quality, aquatic resources, and
aesthetics. We expect that this provides
some benefit to holiday darters in that
location. Additionally, approximately
488 acres (ac) (197 hectares (ha)) of
these lands were purchased with the
assistance of a Recovery Land
Acquisition Grant that prioritized the
conservation of aquatic resources and
species. Therefore, it is anticipated that
State ownership and management
within the Amicalola Creek watershed
will benefit the long-term survival of
holiday darters.
Within the Conasauga River basin,
Natural Resources Conservation Service
has begun a Working Lands for Wildlife
project that provides technical and
financial assistance to help landowners
improve water quality and help
producers plan and implement a variety
of conservation activities or practices
that benefit aquatic species. Holiday
darter may benefit in the future from
water quality improvements in portions
of the Conasauga River that are affected
by agricultural practices as a result of
the Working Lands for Wildlife project.
Priority watersheds within the range
of the holiday darter have been
designated as Strategic Habit Units by
the Alabama Rivers and Streams
Network. The Strategic Habit Unit
project was developed for species
restoration and enhancement.
Watersheds occupied by holiday darter
that have been designated as Strategic
Habit Units are the Choccolocco Creek
watershed (which includes the Shoal
Creek populations) and the Oostanaula
River watershed (which includes the
Conasauga and Coosawattee River
populations).
Bridled Darter
The bridled darter is recognized by
Georgia and Tennessee as a species of
concern. It is listed as endangered by
the State of Georgia. In general,
protections accorded to species that are
listed by the States prohibit their direct
exploitation.
Some populations of bridled darter
are known from watersheds in which a
substantial percentage of lands are
owned and managed by the USFS.
These populations are found in the
Conasauga River and upper Etowah
River. In the Conasauga River, the
majority of current records for the
bridled darter are within the
proclamation boundary of USFS lands.
Cherokee National Forest in Tennessee
and Chattahoochee National Forest in
Georgia own and manage lands and
E:\FR\FM\04OCP1.SGM
04OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 4, 2017 / Proposed Rules
natural resources in occupied
watersheds in those portions of the
bridled darter’s range. Management
prescriptions implemented by the USFS
in areas that overlap with the range of
the holiday darter (see discussion
above) are also expected to benefit the
bridled darter.
Future Scenarios
For the purpose of this assessment,
we define viability as the ability of the
species to sustain populations in the
wild over time. To address uncertainty
associated with the degree and extent of
potential future stressors and their
impacts on species’ requisites, the 3Rs
were assessed using three plausible
future scenarios. These scenarios were
based, in part, on the results of
urbanization and climate models that
predict changes in habitat used by the
trispot, holiday, and bridled darters.
The models that were used to forecast
both urbanization and climate change
projected 50 years into the future. Using
the best available data to forecast
plausible future scenarios allows the
Service to determine if a species may
become an endangered species in the
foreseeable future. For more detailed
information on these models and their
projections, please see the SSA reports.
In the Status Quo scenario, current
environmental regulations and policy,
land use management techniques, and
conservation measures remain the same
over the next 50 years. We anticipate the
current trend in greenhouse gas
emissions to continue and moderate
impacts from extreme weather events
including intense drought, floods, and
storm events to occur. In this scenario,
rapid urbanization will continue at the
current estimated rate for the Piedmont
region of the southeastern United States,
which will increase demand for water
resources.
In the Best Case scenario, we predict
wider adoption of conservation
measures and policies, which involves
watershed-scale conservation plans
(Working Lands for Wildlife and
watershed habitat conservation plans)
and enacting a water policy for
Alabama. In this scenario, we still
expect rapid urban growth, albeit at a
slower rate than under the other two
scenarios. Under the Best Case scenario,
rapidly growing urban areas would
address environmental concerns and
implement water conservation measures
and green infrastructure. If
implemented, these actions should
lessen the demand on water resources
(requiring fewer drinking water supply
reservoirs) and minimize urban effects
on streams. While large numbers of
roads will still be constructed, under the
Best Case scenario road crossings will
be constructed that allow for fish
passage. In this scenario we expect
carbon emissions to peak before 2020
resulting in a lower probability of
extreme weather conditions negatively
affecting stream fishes, as compared to
the Status Quo or Worst Case scenarios.
In the Worst Case scenario, we
anticipate major negative effects in
aquatic ecosystems as a result of rapid
urbanization. In conjunction with rapid
urban growth, we project that there will
be a general lack of conservation
measures and policies being
implemented at the local, regional, or
national levels. Water demand will
increase with population, and new
reservoir construction will take place. In
addition to rapid urbanization, carbon
emissions are projected to continue to
increase above the current levels in this
scenario, resulting in a higher
probability of extreme weather events
that can negatively affect fish species. In
areas that remain in agricultural use,
there will be an increased amount of
herbicide and poultry litter spreading
and no protective measures
implemented to address water quality
46191
issues. Under this scenario, we
anticipate a general decline in available
suitable habitat, population size, and
abundance.
While we consider all three of these
scenarios to be plausible, we
acknowledge that each has a different
probability of materializing at different
times. A discrete range of probabilities
was used to describe the likelihood that
each scenario will occur. The Status
Quo scenario was seen as ‘‘very likely’’
to occur in 10 years and ‘‘likely’’ to
occur at 50 years. The Best Case and
Worst Case scenarios were seen as less
likely to occur (ranging from ‘‘unlikely,’’
‘‘as likely as not,’’ and ‘‘likely’’).
Although they were part of the analysis,
and the range of possibilities
considered, because of the significantly
lower probability of their occurrence
they are not discussed in detail below.
However, a table summarizing all
scenarios for each species is provided
below, and a full description of all three
analyses can be found in the SSA report
for each species.
Trispot Darter
In the Status Quo scenario, two
populations of trispot darter, Ballplay
Creek and Conasauga River, are
expected to become extirpated, while
the remaining two, Little Canoe Creek
and Coosawattee River, are projected to
persist in low resiliency condition.
Because of the loss of darters predicted
for Salacoa Creek, the fish will be found
only in the Coosawattee River mainstem
(no longer in any tributaries), making it
more vulnerable to catastrophic events.
Redundancy decreases to two
populations, which are completely
isolated from one another due to the
Weiss Dam. Genetic material will not be
exchanged, reducing adaptive potential
of the species. Summaries of the
analysis of all three scenarios are
provided in the table below.
TABLE 5—FUTURE CONDITION OF THE TRISPOT DARTER BY THE YEAR 2070 UNDER THREE FUTURE SCENARIOS
Status quo
Best case
Little Canoe .........................................
Ballplay ...............................................
Conasauga ..........................................
Coosawattee .......................................
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Management unit
Low ....................................................
Likely Extirpated ................................
Likely Extirpated ................................
Low ....................................................
Moderate ............................................
Low ....................................................
Moderate ............................................
Moderate ............................................
Holiday Darter
In the Status Quo scenario, three
extant populations of holiday darter are
expected to become extirpated, while
four populations will continue to be
extant 50 years in the future. This will
decrease overall redundancy for the
species as well as representation (the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:17 Oct 03, 2017
Jkt 244001
Coosawattee River will no longer be
represented with the extirpation of the
Talking Rock Creek, Ellijay River, and
Mountaintown Creek populations).
Physiographic representation is
projected to decline over the next 50
years because the holiday darter’s range
is expected to contract to the upstream
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Worst case
Likely
Likely
Likely
Likely
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
stream reaches that are owned and
managed by State and Federal agencies
within the Blue Ridge physiographic
province. Representation is projected to
remain within the Ridge and Valley of
Alabama. Summaries of the analysis of
all three scenarios are provided in the
table below.
E:\FR\FM\04OCP1.SGM
04OCP1
46192
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 4, 2017 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 6—FUTURE CONDITION OF THE HOLIDAY DARTER BY THE YEAR 2070 UNDER THREE FUTURE SCENARIOS
Population
Status quo
Best case
Conasauga River ................................
Talking Rock Creek ............................
Mountaintown Creek ...........................
Ellijay River .........................................
Amicalola Creek ..................................
Etowah River ......................................
Shoal Creek ........................................
Low ....................................................
Likely Extirpated ................................
Likely Extirpated ................................
Likely Extirpated ................................
Low ....................................................
Low ....................................................
Low ....................................................
Moderate ............................................
Likely Extirpated ................................
Likely Extirpated ................................
Low ....................................................
Moderate ............................................
Low ....................................................
Low ....................................................
Bridled Darter
In the Status Quo scenario, two
populations of bridled darter are
expected to become extirpated (Talking
Rock Creek and Long Swamp Creek).
This will decrease overall redundancy
for the species as well as representation
(the Coosawattee River will no longer be
represented with the extirpation of the
Talking Rock Creek population).
Physiographic representation is
projected to decline over the next 50
years because the bridled darter’s range
Worst case
Low.
Likely
Likely
Likely
Low.
Low.
Likely
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
Extirpated.
is expected to contract to upstream
stream reaches that are owned and
managed by state and federal agencies
within the Blue Ridge physiographic
province. Summaries of the analysis of
all three scenarios are provided in the
table below.
TABLE 7—FUTURE CONDITION OF THE BRIDLED DARTER BY THE YEAR 2070 UNDER THREE FUTURE SCENARIOS
Population
Status quo
Best case
Conasauga River ................................
Holly Creek .........................................
Talking Rock Creek ............................
Long Swamp Creek ............................
Amicalola Creek ..................................
Etowah River ......................................
Low ....................................................
Low ....................................................
Likely Extirpated ................................
Likely Extirpated ................................
Low ....................................................
Low ....................................................
Moderate ............................................
Low ....................................................
Low ....................................................
Low ....................................................
Moderate ............................................
Moderate ............................................
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Findings and Determination
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533),
and its implementing regulations at 50
CFR part 424, set forth the procedures
for adding species to the Federal Lists
of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants. Under section 4(a)(1) of the
Act, we may list a species based on: (A)
The present or threatened destruction,
modification, or curtailment of its
habitat or range; (B) overutilization for
commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes; (C) disease or
predation; (D) the inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E)
other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence. Listing
actions may be warranted based on any
of the above threat factors, singly or in
combination.
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.’’
As required by the Act, we considered
the five factors in assessing whether the
three species are endangered or
threatened throughout all of their
ranges. We examined the best scientific
and commercial information available
regarding the past, present, and future
threats faced by the species. We
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:17 Oct 03, 2017
Jkt 244001
reviewed the petition, information
available in our files, and other
available published and unpublished
information, and we consulted with
recognized fish experts and other
Federal and State agencies.
Bridled Darter
Stressors identified for the bridled
darter include destruction of habitat due
to urbanization, channel modification
and loss of riparian vegetation,
decreased water quality from
agricultural activities, severity of
climate events like storms and droughts,
contaminants, and reduced connectivity
from dams, road crossings, and culverts.
While the species may be exposed to
some or all of these stressors, it
continues to persist in all of the streams
it occupied historically. Our future
scenarios were developed using models
that predicted out 50 years; however,
the short lifespan of the species (2–3
years) and the lack of evidence of
threats directly impacting the species
creates uncertainty when predicting the
species’ response to threats into the
future. Forecasting beyond eight to ten
generations would be speculative, and
we do not have robust population data
that could predict how the bridled
darter may respond to threats beyond a
20-year timeframe. Accordingly, we
have concluded that 20 years is the
foreseeable future for the bridled darter.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Worst case
Low.
Likely Extirpated.
Likely Extirpated.
Likely Extirpated.
Low.
Low.
While our analysis indicates a low
abundance for the species currently, the
best available data do not indicate a
declining trend in abundance. Rather, it
is likely that the low abundance (and,
therefore, low resiliency) is due to the
species being naturally rare and difficult
to detect. The inconsistent survey
methodology and lack of standard
collection records also creates
uncertainty in any analysis of trends or
the ability to compare data across years.
More importantly, within the occupied
areas of the Conasauga and Etowah
Rivers, the majority of the records for
the species are on USFS land, which is
noted for having good water quality and
suitable habitat for bridled darters, and
we expect this situation to continue into
the foreseeable future. In fact, even 30
years beyond our foreseeable future
timeframe, under the most likely
scenario, we expect that the bridled
darter will still persist in four of six
populations (Conasauga River, Holly
Creek, Amicalola Creek, and Etowah
River).
Our review of the best available
scientific and commercial information
indicates that the bridled darter is not
in danger of extinction nor likely to
become endangered within the
foreseeable future throughout all of its
range.
Because we determined that the
bridled darter is not in danger of
extinction or likely to become so in the
E:\FR\FM\04OCP1.SGM
04OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 4, 2017 / Proposed Rules
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
foreseeable future throughout all of its
range, we will consider whether there
are any significant portions of its range
in which the bridled darter is in danger
of extinction or likely to become so. 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
37577, July 1, 2014). We evaluated
whether there is substantial information
indicating that there are any portions of
the species’ range: (1) That may be
‘‘significant,’’ and (2) where the species
may be in danger of extinction. In
practice, a key part of identifying
portions appropriate for further analysis
is whether the threats are geographically
concentrated. The threats affecting the
bridled darter are occurring throughout
its entire range; therefore, there is not a
meaningful geographical concentration
of threats. As a result, even if we were
to undertake a detailed ‘‘significant
portion of its range’’ analysis, there
would not be any portions of the
species’ range where the threats are
harming the species to a greater degree
such that it may be in danger of
extinction in that portion. Our review of
the best available scientific and
commercial information indicates that
the bridled darter is not in danger of
extinction or likely to become
endangered within the foreseeable
future throughout all or a significant
portion of its range. Therefore, we find
that listing the bridled darter as an
endangered or threatened species under
the Act is not warranted at this time.
Holiday Darter
Threats previously identified for the
holiday darter include destruction of
habitat due to urbanization, channel
modification and loss of riparian
vegetation, decreased water quality from
agricultural activities, severity of
climate events like storms and droughts,
contaminants, and reduced connectivity
from dams, road crossings, and culverts.
Our analysis shows that while the
species may be exposed to some or all
of these stressors, it continues to persist
in all of the streams it occupied
historically. While our future scenarios
were developed using models that
predicted out 50 years, the short
lifespan of the species (3 years) and the
lack of evidence of threats directly
impacting the species creates
uncertainty when predicting the
species’ response to threats into the
future. Forecasting beyond eight to ten
generations would be speculative, and
we do not have robust population data
to support a foreseeable future that
could predict how the holiday darter
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:17 Oct 03, 2017
Jkt 244001
may respond to threats beyond a 20-year
timeframe. Accordingly, we have
concluded that 20 years is the
foreseeable future for the holiday darter.
While our analysis indicates a low
abundance for the species, the best
available data do not indicate a
declining trend in abundance. Rather, it
is likely that the low abundance (and,
therefore, low resiliency) is due to the
species being naturally rare and difficult
to detect. The inconsistent survey
methodology and lack of standard
collection records also creates
uncertainty in any analysis of trends or
the ability to compare data across years.
For example, nearly half of the
collection records for holiday darters in
the Conasauga River did not provide
numeric data for the number of
individuals collected, so they represent
only presence data. In the occupied
areas of the Conasauga and Etowah
Rivers, the majority of the records for
the species are on USFS land, which is
noted for having good water quality and
suitable habitat for holiday darters, and
we expect this situation to continue into
the foreseeable future. We expect that,
for the foreseeable future, the holiday
darter will continue to have four to six
populations, with only the Talking Rock
Creek and Long Swamp Creek
populations projected to be extirpated.
We expect this scenario to continue
under the ‘status quo’ scenario to the 50year timeframe, 30 years beyond the
foreseeable future. Even under the
‘worst case’ scenario, three populations
are expected to remain extant into the
future.
Our review of the best available
scientific and commercial information
indicates that the holiday darter is not
in danger of extinction nor likely to
become endangered within the
foreseeable future, throughout all of its
range.
Because we determined that the
holiday darter is not in danger of
extinction or likely to become so in the
foreseeable future throughout all of its
range, we will consider whether there
are any significant portions of its range
in which the holiday darter is in danger
of extinction or likely to become so. 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
37577, July 1, 2014). We evaluated
whether there is substantial information
indicating that there are any portions of
the species’ range: (1) That may be
‘‘significant,’’ and (2) where the species
may be in danger of extinction. In
practice, a key part of identifying
portions appropriate for further analysis
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
46193
is whether the threats are geographically
concentrated. The threats affecting the
holiday darter are occurring throughout
its entire range; therefore, there is not a
meaningful geographical concentration
of threats. As a result, even if we were
to undertake a detailed ‘‘significant
portion of its range’’ analysis, there
would not be any portions of the
species’ range where the threats are
harming the species to a greater degree
such that it may be in danger of
extinction in that portion. Our review of
the best available scientific and
commercial information indicates that
the holiday darter is not in danger of
extinction or likely to become
endangered within the foreseeable
future throughout all or a significant
portion of its range. Therefore, we find
that listing the holiday darter as an
endangered or threatened species under
the Act is not warranted at this time.
Proposal To List the Trispot Darter
Our analysis of the trispot darter’s
current and future conditions, as well as
the conservation efforts discussed
above, show that the population and
habitat factors used to determine the
resiliency, representation, and
redundancy for trispot darter will
continue to decline such that it is likely
to become in danger of extinction
throughout all or a significant portion of
the range within the foreseeable future.
We considered whether the trispot
darter is presently in danger of
extinction and determined that
proposing endangered status is not
appropriate. The current conditions as
assessed in the trispot darter SSA report
show extant populations in four river
systems (MUs), including 39 river mi
(63 river km) of occupied habitat in the
Conasauga River and the Little Canoe
Creek population with moderate
resiliency. As with the other two darter
species, the best available data do not
indicate a declining trend in abundance,
and it is likely that the low abundance
(and, therefore, low resiliency)
indicated in our analysis is due to the
species being naturally rare and difficult
to detect. The inconsistent survey
methodology and lack of standard
collection records also creates
uncertainty in any analysis of trends or
the ability to compare data across years.
The trispot darter continues to exhibit
representation across its range, and
extant populations remain across the
range. While threats are currently acting
on the species and many of those threats
are expected to continue into the future,
we did not find that the species is
currently in danger of extinction
throughout all of its range.
E:\FR\FM\04OCP1.SGM
04OCP1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
46194
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 4, 2017 / Proposed Rules
After reviewing our analysis of
current and plausible future conditions
of the trispot darter, we concluded that
the resiliency, redundancy, and
representation are being impacted by
threats and the species has reduced
viability. While our future scenarios
were developed using models that
predicted out 50 years, the short
lifespan of the species (2–3 years) and
the lack of evidence of threats directly
impacting the species creates
uncertainty when predicting the
species’ response to threats into the
future. Forecasting beyond eight to ten
generations would be speculative, and
we do not have robust population data
to support a foreseeable future that
could predict how the trispot darter may
respond to threats beyond a 20-year
timeframe. Accordingly, we have
concluded that 20 years is the
foreseeable future for the bridled darter.
It is true that 30 years beyond our
foreseeable future timeframe, the Status
Quo scenario predicts the trispot darter
will persist in both the Little Canoe and
Coosawattee populations. However,
considering this species’ vulnerability to
a loss of connectivity between breeding
and non-breeding habitats and the effect
that situation has on reproductive
success, we expect negative impacts to
the resiliency, redundancy, and
representation of the species in the
foreseeable future. The trispot darter’s
unique reproductive strategy of utilizing
distinct areas of rivers and streams for
breeding and non-breeding habitats
makes the loss of connectivity
especially detrimental to viability. In
contrast to the holiday and bridled
darters, a lack of protected lands within
the current range of trispot darters
creates more uncertainty regarding land
use, threats, and the ability of these four
populations to withstand the expected
loss of one or two populations. This
expected reduction in both the number
and distribution of resilient populations
is likely to make the species vulnerable
to catastrophic disturbance, and thus
put the species at an increased risk of
extinction in the foreseeable future.
Therefore, on the basis of the best
available scientific and commercial
information, we find that listing the
trispot darter is warranted and propose
to list the species as threatened in
accordance with sections 3(20) and
4(a)(1) of the Act.
Under the Act and our implementing
regulations, a species may warrant
listing if it is endangered or threatened
throughout all or a significant portion of
its range. Because we have determined
that the trispot darter is threatened
throughout all of its range, no portion of
its range can be ‘‘significant’’ for
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:17 Oct 03, 2017
Jkt 244001
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 37577, July 1, 2014).
While it is the Service’s position under
this policy that undertaking no further
analysis of ‘‘significant portion of its
range’’ in this circumstance is consistent
with the language of the Act, we
recognize that the policy is currently
under judicial review, so we also took
the additional step of considering
whether there could be any significant
portions of the species’ range where the
species is in danger of extinction. We
evaluated whether there is substantial
information indicating that there are any
portions of the species’ range: (1) That
may be ‘‘significant,’’ and (2) where the
species may be in danger of extinction.
In practice, a key part of identifying
portions appropriate for further analysis
is whether the threats are geographically
concentrated. The threats affecting the
species are throughout its entire range;
therefore, there is not a meaningful
geographical concentration of threats.
As a result, even if we were to
undertake a detailed ‘‘significant
portion of its range’’ analysis, there
would not be any portions of the
species’ range where the threats are
harming the species to a greater degree
such that it may be in danger of
extinction in that portion.
Critical Habitat for Trispot Darter
Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as
amended, and implementing regulations
in 50 CFR 424.12, require that, to the
maximum extent prudent and
determinable, we designate critical
habitat at the time the species is
determined to be an endangered or
threatened species. 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 provisions of
section 4 of this 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 in
accordance with the provisions of
section 4 of this Act, upon a
determination by the Secretary of the
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Interior that such areas are essential for
the conservation of the species.
Our regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(1))
state that the designation of critical
habitat is not prudent when any 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. The regulations also
provide that, in determining whether a
designation of critical habitat would not
be beneficial to the species, the factors
that the Service may consider include
but are not limited to whether the
present or threatened destruction,
modification, or curtailment of a
species’ habitat or range is not a threat
to the species, or whether any areas
meet the definition of ‘‘critical habitat’’
(50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)(ii)).
As discussed above, we did not
identify any imminent threat of take
attributed to collection or vandalism for
the trispot darter, and there is no
indication that identification and
mapping of critical habitat is likely to
initiate any such threats. Therefore, in
the absence of finding that the
designation of critical habitat would
increase threats to the species, if there
are benefits to the species from a critical
habitat designation, a finding that
designation is prudent is appropriate.
The potential benefits of designation
may 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 unoccupied; (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 protected species. Because
designation of critical habitat would not
likely increase the degree of threat to the
species and may provide some measure
of benefit, designation of critical habitat
is prudent for the trispot darter.
Our regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(2))
further state that critical habitat is not
determinable when one or both of the
following situations exists: (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. For the trispot darter, a careful
assessment of the economic impacts that
may occur due to a critical habitat
designation is ongoing, and we are in
E:\FR\FM\04OCP1.SGM
04OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 4, 2017 / Proposed Rules
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
the process of working with the States
and other partners in acquiring the
complex information needed to perform
that assessment. Until these efforts are
complete, information sufficient to
perform a required analysis of the
impacts of the designation is lacking,
and, therefore, we find designation of
critical habitat for the trispot darter to
be not determinable at this time.
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, 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 reclassification from
endangered to threatened
(‘‘downlisting’’) or removal from the List
of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
or Plants (‘‘delisting’’), and methods for
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:17 Oct 03, 2017
Jkt 244001
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 outlines, draft
recovery plans, and the final recovery
plans will be available on our Web site
(https://www.fws.gov/endangered), or
from our Alabama 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
habitat restoration (e.g., restoration of
native vegetation), research, captive
propagation and reintroduction, and
outreach and education. The recovery of
many listed species cannot be
accomplished solely on Federal lands
because their range may occur primarily
or solely on non-Federal lands. To
achieve recovery of these species
requires cooperative conservation efforts
on private, State, and Tribal lands. If
this species is listed, funding for
recovery actions will be available from
a variety of sources, including Federal
budgets, State programs, and cost share
grants for non-Federal landowners, the
academic community, and
nongovernmental organizations. In
addition, pursuant to section 6 of the
Act, the States of Alabama, Georgia, and
Tennessee would be eligible for Federal
funds to implement management
actions that promote the protection or
recovery of the trispot darter.
Information on our grant programs that
are available to aid species recovery can
be found at: https://www.fws.gov/grants.
Although the trispot darter 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 these 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
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
46195
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
may include, but are not limited to,
management and any other landscapealtering activities on Federal lands
administered by the Service, USFS, 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.
Under section 4(d) of the Act, the
Service has discretion to issue
regulations that we find necessary and
advisable to provide for the
conservation of threatened species. The
Act and its implementing regulations set
forth a series of general prohibitions and
exceptions that apply to threatened
wildlife. The prohibitions of section
9(a)(1) of the Act, as applied to
threatened wildlife and codified at 50
CFR 17.31, 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) threatened 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 threatened wildlife under
E:\FR\FM\04OCP1.SGM
04OCP1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
46196
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 4, 2017 / Proposed Rules
certain circumstances. Regulations
governing permits are codified at 50
CFR 17.32. With regard to threatened
wildlife, a permit may be issued for the
following purposes: For scientific
purposes, to enhance the propagation or
survival of the species, for economic
hardship, for zoological exhibition, for
educational purposes, or for other
special purposes consistent with the
purposes of the Act. There are also
certain statutory exemptions from the
prohibitions, which are found in
sections 9 and 10 of the Act.
Section 4(d) of the Act specifies that,
for threatened species, the Secretary
shall issue such regulations as he deems
necessary and advisable to provide for
the conservation of the species. This
discretion includes authority to prohibit
by regulation with respect to a
threatened species any act prohibited by
section 9(a)(1) of the Act. At 50 CFR
17.31(a), the Service, by delegation from
the Secretary, exercised this discretion
to extend the take and other
prohibitions set forth in section 9(a)(1)
of the Act to all threatened species. The
provisions at 50 CFR 17.31(c), however,
also provide that the blanket
prohibitions included in § 17.31(a) do
not apply if the Service promulgates a
rule under section 4(d) of the Act
tailored to provide for the conservation
needs of a specific threatened species.
During the public comment period on
this proposed rule, we are seeking
comments on whether a section 4(d)
rule is appropriate for trispot darter.
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.
Activities that the Service believes
could potentially harm the trispot darter
and result in ‘‘take’’ include, but are not
limited to:
(1) Unauthorized handling or
collecting of the species;
(2) Destruction or alteration of the
species’ habitat by discharge of fill
material, dredging, snagging,
impounding, channelization, or
modification of stream channels or
banks;
(3) Destruction of riparian habitat
directly adjacent to stream channels that
causes significant increases in
sedimentation and destruction of
natural stream banks or channels;
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:17 Oct 03, 2017
Jkt 244001
(4) Discharge of pollutants into a
stream or into areas hydrologically
connected to a stream occupied by the
species;
(5) Diversion or alteration of surface
or ground water flow; and
(6) Pesticide/herbicide applications in
violation of label restrictions.
Questions regarding whether specific
activities would constitute a violation of
section 9 of the Act should be directed
to the Alabama Ecological Services
Field Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
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), 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).
Government-to-Government
Relationship With Tribes
In accordance with the President’s
memorandum of April 29, 1994
(Government-to-Government Relations
with Native American Tribal
Governments; 59 FR 22951), Executive
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Order 13175 (Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments), and the Department of
the Interior’s manual at 512 DM 2, we
readily acknowledge our responsibility
to communicate meaningfully with
recognized Federal Tribes on a
government-to-government basis. In
accordance with Secretarial Order 3206
of June 5, 1997 (American Indian Tribal
Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust
Responsibilities, and the Endangered
Species Act), we readily acknowledge
our responsibilities to work directly
with tribes in developing programs for
healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge that
tribal lands are not subject to the same
controls as Federal public lands, to
remain sensitive to Indian culture, and
to make information available to tribes.
There are no tribal lands located within
the range of this species.
References Cited
A complete list of references cited in
the SSA report is available on the
Internet at https://www.regulations.gov
and upon request from the Alabama
Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authors
The primary authors of this proposed
rule are the staff members of the Fish
and Wildlife Service’s Unified Listing
Team and the Alabama 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
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.
2. Amend § 17.11(h) by adding an
entry for ‘‘Darter, trispot’’ in
alphabetical order under FISHES to read
as set forth below:
■
§ 17.11 Endangered and threatened
wildlife.
*
*
*
(h) * * *
E:\FR\FM\04OCP1.SGM
04OCP1
*
*
46197
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 4, 2017 / Proposed Rules
Common name
Scientific name
*
Fishes
*
Darter, trispot ..................
*
*
*
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R5–ES–2017–0056;
4500030113]
RIN 1018–BC44
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Proposed Threatened
Species Status for the Candy Darter
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; 12-month
finding.
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
12-month finding on a petition to list
the candy darter (Etheostoma osburni)
as a threatened or endangered species
under the Endangered Species Act, as
amended (Act), and to designate critical
habitat. After review of the best
available scientific and commercial
information, we find that listing the
candy darter is warranted. Accordingly,
we propose to list the candy darter
(Etheostoma osburni), a freshwater fish
species from Virginia and West Virginia,
as a threatened species under Act. If we
finalize this rule as proposed, it would
extend the Act’s protections to this
species. The effect of this regulation will
be to add this species to the List of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife.
DATES: We will accept comments
received or postmarked on or before
December 4, 2017. 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
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
21:50 Oct 03, 2017
Jkt 244001
*
*
T
*
*
shown in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
by November 20, 2017.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by one of the following methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. In the Search box,
enter FWS–R5–ES–2017–0056, 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–R5–ES–2017–
0056; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Headquarters, 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: John
Schmidt, Project Leader, West Virginia
Ecological Services Field Office, 694
Beverly Pike, Elkins, WV 26241–9475;
by telephone 304–636–6586 or by
facsimile 304–636–7824. Persons who
use a telecommunications device for the
deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Relay
Service 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
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
*
*
*
[Federal Register citation when published as a
final rule.]
CONTACT
[FR Doc. 2017–21350 Filed 10–3–17; 8:45 am]
SUMMARY:
Listing citations and applicable rules
*
*
Wherever found ..............
*
Dated: September 7, 2017.
James W. Kurth,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
Status
*
*
*
Etheostoma trisella .........
*
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Where listed
*
*
revisions of critical habitat can be
completed only by issuing a rule.
This rule proposes adding the candy
darter (Etheostoma osburni) as a
threatened species to the List of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife in
title 50 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (50 CFR 17.11(h)).
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: (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 hybridization
(Factor E) with the variegate darter
(Etheostoma variatum) is the primary
threat to the candy darter.
Peer review. A team of Service
biologists prepared a Species Status
Assessment Report (SSA Report) for the
candy darter. The SSA Report
represents a compilation and
assessment of the best scientific and
commercial information available
concerning the status of the candy
darter, including the past, present, and
future factors influencing the species.
We solicited independent peer review of
the SSA Report by six individuals with
expertise in darters; fisheries,
population, or landscape ecology;
genetics and conservation genetics; and/
or speciation and conservation biology;
we received comments from four of the
six peer reviewers. The SSA Report can
be found in https://www.regulations.gov
under the FWS–R5–ES–2017–0056
docket; on the Southwest Virginia
Ecological Services Field Office Web
site at: https://www.fws.gov/northeast/
virginiafield/svfo/
southwesternvirginia.html; and on the
West Virginia Ecological Services Field
Office Web site at: https://www.fws.gov/
westvirginiafieldoffice/endangered
species.html.
E:\FR\FM\04OCP1.SGM
04OCP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 191 (Wednesday, October 4, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 46183-46197]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-21350]
[[Page 46183]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2017-0063; 4500030113]
RIN 1018-BC16
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12 Month Findings
on Petitions To List the Holiday Darter, Trispot Darter, and Bridled
Darter; Threatened Species Status for Trispot Darter
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; 12-month petition findings.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
12-month finding on a petition to list three species, the holiday
darter (Etheostoma brevirostrum), the trispot darter (Etheostoma
trisella), and the bridled darter (Percina kusha), all freshwater fish
native to Alabama, Georgia, and Tennessee, as endangered or threatened
under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). After
review of the best available scientific and commercial information, we
find that listing the trispot darter is warranted. Accordingly, we
propose to list the trispot darter as a threatened species under the
Act. If we finalize this rule as proposed, it would add the trispot
darter to the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and extend the
Act's protections to the species. After review of the best available
scientific and commercial information, we also find that listing the
holiday and bridled darters is not warranted.
DATES: We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before
December 4, 2017. 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 November 20, 2017.
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-R4-ES-2017-0063,
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,
check the Proposed Rules box 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-R4-ES-2017-0063, 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: Bill Pearson, Field Supervisor, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Alabama Ecological Services Field Office,
1208 Main Street, Daphne, AL 36526; telephone 251-441-5181; or
facsimile 251-441-6222. Persons who use a telecommunications device for
the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Relay Service 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. 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 rule will propose the listing of the trispot darter
(Etheostoma trisella), as a threatened species. This rule summarizes
our analysis regarding status of and threats to the trispot darter.
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: (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 trispot darter is a
threatened species based on a loss of habitat and connectivity (Factor
A) due to urbanization, land use patterns, and drought.
Peer review. We have requested comments from independent
specialists to ensure that we based our designation on scientifically
sound data, assumptions, and analyses. Because we will consider all
comments and information received during the comment period, our final
determinations may differ from this proposal.
Supporting Documents
A species status assessment (SSA) team prepared SSA reports for all
three darter species. The SSA team was composed of Service biologists,
in consultation with other species experts. The SSA reports represent a
compilation of the best scientific and commercial data available
concerning the status of the species, including the impacts of past,
present, and future factors (both negative and beneficial) affecting
each species. All three SSA reports underwent independent peer review
by scientists with expertise in fish or amphibian biology, habitat
management, and stressors (factors negatively affecting the species).
The SSA reports and other materials relating to this proposal can be
found on the Southeast Region Web site at https://www.fws.gov/southeast/ and at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R4-
ES-2017-0063.
Information Requested for Proposed Rule To List Trispot Darter
Public Comments
We intend that any final action resulting from the 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:
(1) The trispot darter's biology, range, and population trends,
including:
(a) Biological or ecological requirements of trispot darter,
including habitat requirements for feeding, breeding, and sheltering;
(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.
[[Page 46184]]
(3) Biological, commercial trade, or other relevant data concerning
any threats (or lack thereof) to the 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 the species,
including the locations of any additional populations of the species.
(5) Specific prohibitions and exceptions to those prohibitions that
may be necessary and advisable for the trispot darter's conservation.
We are considering publishing a more tailored proposed rule with
provisions set forth under section 4(d) of the Act for public review
and comment in the future.
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 (16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.) directs that determinations as to whether any species is
an endangered or a 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, Alabama 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 the dates
specified above in DATES. 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), and our August 22,
2016, memorandum updating and clarifying the role of peer review of
listing actions under the Act, we sought the expert opinions of
appropriate specialists regarding the SSA report for each species,
including the report for the trispot darter that informed this proposed
rule. The purpose of peer review is to ensure that our listing
determination is based on scientifically sound data, assumptions, and
analyses. The peer reviewers have expertise in fish biology, habitat,
and stressors to the species. We invite any additional comment from the
peer reviewers during this public comment period.
Previous Federal Actions
The trispot darter was one of 29 fish species included in a March
18, 1975, notice of review published by the Service in the Federal
Register (40 FR 12297). On December 30, 1982, the Service announced in
the Federal Register (47 FR 58454) that the trispot darter, along with
147 other fish species, were being considered for possible addition to
the Endangered Species List. On November 4, 1983, the Service published
a notice in the Federal Register (48 FR 50909) that a status review was
being conducted for the trispot darter to determine if the species
should be protected under the Act. On November 21, 1991, we added the
trispot darter to the candidate list as a category 2 species on the
Candidate Notice of Review (CNOR) (56 FR 58804). The holiday darter was
added to the candidate list as a Category 2 species in the CNOR on
November 15, 1994 (59 FR 58997). Category 2 species were those species
for which listing as endangered or threatened species was possibly
appropriate, but for which biological information sufficient to support
a proposed rule was lacking. However, the February 28, 1996, CNOR (61
FR 7596) discontinued recognition of Category 2 species, so the trispot
and holiday darters were no longer considered candidate species after
that date.
On April 20, 2010, we received a petition from Center for
Biological Diversity and others to list 404 aquatic species in the
southeastern United States, including the two aforementioned species as
well as the bridled darter. In response to the petition, we completed a
partial 90-day finding on September 27, 2011 (76 FR 59836), in which we
announced our finding that the petition contained substantial
information that listing may be warranted for these three darter
species. We conducted a status review for each species.
Background
Trispot Darter
A thorough review of the taxonomy, life history, and ecology of the
trispot darter (Etheostoma trisella) is presented in the SSA report.
The trispot darter is a freshwater fish found in the Coosa River
System in the Ridge and Valley ecoregion of Alabama, Georgia, and
Tennessee. This fish has a historical range from the middle to upper
Coosa River Basin with collections in the mainstem Coosa, Oostanaula,
Conasauga, and Coosawattee Rivers, and their tributaries. All known
records of the trispot darter occur above the fall line in the Ridge
and Valley ecoregion. Currently, the trispot darter is known to occur
in Little Canoe Creek and tributaries (Coosa River), Ballplay Creek
tributaries (Coosa River), Conasauga River and tributaries, and
Coosawattee River and one tributary.
The trispot darter is a small-bodied, benthic fish ranging in size
from 1.3 to 1.6 inches (in) (3.3 to 4.1 centimeters (cm)) as adults.
The darter has three prominent black dorsal saddles, pale undersurface,
and a dark bar below the eye. Scattered dark blotches exist on the
fins' rays. During breeding season males are a reddish-orange color and
have green marks along their sides and a red band through their spiny
dorsal fin.
The trispot darter is a migratory species that utilizes distinct
breeding and non-breeding habitats. From approximately April to
October, the species inhabits its non-breeding habitat, which consists
of small to medium river margins and lower reaches of tributaries with
slower velocities. It is associated with detritus, logs, and stands of
water willow, and the substrate consists of small cobbles, pebbles,
gravel, and often a fine layer of silt. During low flow periods, the
darters move away from the peripheral zones and toward the main
channel; edges of
[[Page 46185]]
water willow beds, riffles, and pools; and mouths of tributaries. In
late fall, this migratory species shifts its habitat preference and
begins movement toward spawning areas; this is most likely stimulated
by precipitation, but temperature changes and decreasing daylight hours
may also provide queues to begin migration. Migration into spawning
areas begins approximately late November or early December with fish
moving from the main channels into tributaries and eventually reaching
adjacent seepage areas where they will congregate and remain for the
duration of spawning, approximately until late April. Breeding sites
are intermittent seepage areas and ditches with little to no flow;
shallow depths (12 in (30 cm) or less); moderate leaf litter covering
mixed cobble, gravel, sand, and clay; a deep layer of soft silt over
clay; and emergent vegetation. Trispot darters predominantly feed on
mayfly nymphs and midge larvae and pupae.
Trispot darters can live a maximum of 3 years, but most individuals
die after the end of their second year. Females lay approximately 300
adhesive eggs that attach to vegetation or rocky substrate. Once laid,
the eggs are abandoned and incubate for 30 days. Upon hatching, the
trispot darter spends approximately 41 days as larvae.
Holiday Darter
A thorough review of the taxonomy, life history, and ecology of the
holiday darter (Etheostoma brevirostrum) is presented in the SSA
report.
The holiday darter is a small, 2-in-long (5-cm-long) snubnose
darter, so named because it is a colorful fish, with notable red
blotches surrounded by white or yellow halos on the lower side of the
body. Unique from similar species with which it co-occurs, the holiday
darter has a distinct median red band across the generally blue-green
anal fin in males in spawning color. The holiday darter is found in
small creeks to moderate-sized rivers above the fall line in the Ridge
and Valley, Blue Ridge, and Piedmont ecoregions of Alabama, Georgia,
and Tennessee. Currently, the holiday darter is known to occur in parts
of Shoal Creek, Conasauga River, Talking Rock Creek, Mountaintown
Creek, tributaries of the Ellijay River, Amicalola Creek, and the
Etowah River. The holiday darter prefers clear streams with riffles and
shallow areas of rivers that contain boulders, cobble, and gravel
substrate. While no complete life-history studies of the species are
available, it is likely a benthic omnivore that eats aquatic insect
larvae and microcrustaceans.
Breeding behavior begins in April and lasts through May. Females
are followed by males as they select suitable spawning substrates of
gravel, rock, or wood on which the pair orients vertically to spawn and
attach eggs. Females have the potential to produce from 50-150 eggs
over multiple spawning sites, and those eggs are then fertilized by the
male, or multiple different males. No studies have been published on
the lifespan of the holiday darter, but similar species live
approximately 3 years.
Bridled Darter
A thorough review of the taxonomy, life history, and ecology of the
bridled darter (Percina kusha) is presented in the SSA report.
The bridled darter is a small freshwater fish native to the upper
Coosa River basin in Georgia and Tennessee. This fish's current
distribution includes the main channel of the Conasauga River in Murray
and Whitfield Counties, Georgia, and Bradley and Polk Counties,
Tennessee, Etowah River in Dawson and Lumpkin Counties, Georgia,
Amicalola Creek in Dawson County, Georgia, Long Swamp Creek in Pickens
County, Georgia, and Talking Rock Creek in Pickens County, Georgia.
These are all considered small rivers with good water quality. It was
also known to occur in short reaches of several tributaries to both the
Conasauga and Etowah Rivers. Morphological variation exists between the
darters in the Conasauga River and those in the Etowah River, but
genetic studies do not conclude that they are separate species.
Adult bridled darters are about 3 in (4 cm) in length and are muted
in color. Dark oval blotches are fused to form a lateral stripe. The
lateral stripe merges with a dark stripe behind the eye and continues
forward of the eye; these stripes resemble a horse's bridle and lend
the species its common name. These darters are typically found in
flowing pools and backwaters adjacent to runs in small rivers and lower
reaches of tributary creeks. They are often found near submerged logs
or vegetation and prefer a substrate of sand, gravel, cobble, and
bedrock.
The bridled darter is a sight feeder that has been observed to
pluck food from submerged objects as well as the water column by drift-
feeding. When drift-feeding, it positions itself downstream of rocks,
away from fast currents, and feeds on invertebrates that are washed
downstream and thrusted upward by turbulence. Feeding peaks in late
afternoon before dusk. Stomach contents for individuals from the
Conasauga River contained small mayfly nymphs and blackfly larvae.
Reproduction and spawning takes place approximately mid-April
through mid-July. Spawning sites are selected by females as they are
followed by courting males. Competitive behavior between males for the
site-selecting female has been observed, with the larger males
attempting to chase away smaller males. In the Conasauga River, sneaker
males (smaller males that join with a spawning pair and mate with the
female) have been observed. Rapid quivering of the pair during spawning
helps to bury fertilized eggs in sand. A spawning pair may undertake
multiple spawning events at different locations. Females have the
potential to produce up to 75 eggs per year, and their lifespan has
been estimated to be approximately 3 years.
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. The SSA reports document the results
of our comprehensive biological status review for the holiday, bridled,
and trispot darters, including an assessment of the potential stressors
to the species. The SSA reports do not represent a regulatory decision
by the Service on whether the species should be proposed for listing as
endangered or threatened species under the Act. They do, however,
provide the scientific basis that informs that decision, which involves
the further application of standards within the Act and its
implementing regulations and policies. The following is a summary of
the key results and conclusions from the SSA reports; the full SSA
reports can be found on the Southeast Region Web site at https://www.fws.gov/southeast/ and at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket
No. FWS-R4-ES-2017-0063.
Summary of Analysis
To assess viability for the holiday, bridled, and trispot darters,
we used the three conservation biology principles of resiliency,
representation, and redundancy (together, the 3Rs). Briefly, resiliency
supports the ability of the species to withstand environmental and
demographic stochasticity (for example, wet or dry, warm or cold
years); representation supports the ability of the species to adapt
over time to long-term changes in the environment (for example, climate
changes); and redundancy supports the ability of the species to
withstand catastrophic events (for example, droughts, hurricanes). In
[[Page 46186]]
general, the more redundant and resilient a species is and the more
representation it has, the more likely it is to sustain populations
over time, even under changing environmental conditions. Using these
principles, we identified the species' ecological requirements for
survival and reproduction at the individual, population, and species
levels, and described the factors influencing the species' viability.
The SSA process can be categorized into three sequential stages.
During the first stage, we used the 3Rs to evaluate individual life-
history needs of all three darters. In the next stage, we assessed the
historical and current condition of each species' demographics and
habitat characteristics, including an explanation of how the species
arrived at their current conditions. In the final stage of the SSA we
made predictions about the species' responses to positive and negative
environmental and anthropogenic influences. This process used the best
available information to characterize viability as the ability of each
species to sustain populations in the wild over time. We utilized this
information to inform our regulatory decision in the 12-month findings.
To evaluate the current and future viability of the three darters,
we assessed a range of conditions to allow us to consider the species'
resiliency, representation, and redundancy. U.S. Geological Survey
delineated all watersheds within the United States at several different
scales (or units) using a standardized system. Each hydrologic unit is
identified by a unique hydrologic unit code (HUC) consisting of two to
twelve digits based on six different levels of classification. For this
analysis, the 10-digit Hydrologic Unit Codes (HUC 10s) were used as a
spatial framework to delineate areas within the geographical range of
each species for further analysis. Field collections were used to
identify species presence within HUC10 watersheds. For holiday and
bridled darters, populations were defined as occupied HUC10 watersheds
and were used for analysis. Management units (MUs) were described for
the trispot darter and are defined as one or more HUC10 watersheds that
the species currently occupies. MUs were grouped using population
genetics information and by expected management requirements.
To qualitatively assess resilience, we considered seven components
that broadly relate to either the physical environment (``Habitat
Elements'') or characteristics about the population specifically
(``Population Elements''). Habitat elements consisted of an evaluation
of physical habitat, connectivity, water quality, and hydrologic
regime. Population elements consisted of an estimation of approximate
abundance, the extent of occurrence (total length of occupied streams),
and an assessment of occurrence complexity. Representation describes
the ability of a species to adapt to changing environmental conditions
over time. For these darters to exhibit high representation, resilient
populations should occur in all ecoregions to which they are native,
and maintain some level of connectivity between populations. These
occupied physiographic provinces represent the ecological setting in
which the darters have evolved. Redundancy for all three darters is
characterized by having multiple resilient and representative
populations distributed throughout its range. Furthermore, these
populations should maintain natural levels of connectivity between
them. Connectivity allows for immigration and emigration between
populations and increases the likelihood of recolonization should a
population become extirpated. An overall resiliency condition was
estimated by combining habitat and population elements. Population
elements were weighted two times higher than habitat elements because
they are considered direct indicators of population condition.
Conditions were classified as ``Low'', ``Moderate'', or ``High''.
After analyzing current conditions for each species, we described
how current viability of the three darters may change over a period of
50 years. As with current conditions, we evaluated species viability in
terms of resiliency at the population scale, and representation and
redundancy at the species scale. In the SSA report, we described three
plausible future scenarios and whether there will be a change, from
current conditions, to resiliency, representation, or redundancy under
each scenario. These scenarios capture the range of likely viability
outcomes that the darters will exhibit by the end of 2070. The future
scenarios differ in two main elements of predicted change: urbanization
and climate. To forecast future urbanization, we considered future
scenarios that incorporate the SLEUTH (Slope, Land use, Excluded area,
Urban area, Transportation, Hillside area) model. This model simulates
patterns of urban expansion that are consistent with spatial
observations of past urban growth and transportation networks.
Regarding climate, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
utilized a suite of alternative scenarios in the Fifth Assessment
Report to make near-term and long-term climate projections. In our
assessments, we used these projections to help understand how climate
may change in the future and what effects may be observed that impact
the three darter species.
Trispot Darter
For our analysis we considered four extant MUs: Little Canoe Creek
Basin, Ballplay Creek Basin, Conasauga River Basin, and Coosawattee
River Basin. Genetic research has defined distinct trispot darter
populations in Little Canoe Creek, Ballplay Creek, and Conasauga River.
It is unknown if trispot darters in the Coosawattee River basin are
genetically distinct; however, we analyzed it as a separate MU because
this river would require a distinct management strategy due to
hydroelectric operations at Carters Dam. Historical collections of the
trispot darter are known from Cowans Creek, a tributary to Spring
Creek, which is in turn a tributary to the Coosa River, and Johns and
Woodward Creeks, tributaries to the Oostanaula River. Currently, the
trispot darter occupies approximately 20 percent of its historically
known range.
Current Condition of Trispot Darter
Of the four current MUs for the trispot darter, one has resiliency
ranked as ``moderate,'' and three have resiliency ranked as ``low'' in
the analysis (see Table 2 below). For example, the Little Canoe Creek
MU is expected to have a moderate resiliency to stochastic events
because water quality is low, the abundance is qualitatively low, the
occurrence complexity is high, Coosa River reservoirs remove
connectivity to other MUs, and the extent of the occupied habitat is
small. The Conasauga River MU has ``low'' resiliency due to low water
quality in the middle and lower river, low abundance of fish per
collection record, a small and reduced population, and overall simple
occurrence spatial arrangement. A full analysis for each unit's
resiliency can be found in the SSA report.
[[Page 46187]]
Table 2--Current Species Resiliency Summary of the Trispot Darter
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Occurrence
Approximate abundance Occurrence extent complexity Physical habitat Connectivity Water quality Hydrologic regime Overall condition
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Little Canoe Creek............. Low.................. Low............... High.............. Low............... Low............... Low............... Low.............. Moderate.
Ballplay Creek................. Low.................. Low............... Low............... Low............... Low............... Low............... Low.............. Low.
Conasauga River................ Low.................. Low............... Low............... Low............... Moderate.......... Low............... Low.............. Low.
Coosawattee River.............. Low.................. Low............... Low............... Moderate.......... Moderate.......... Low............... Low.............. Low.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Holiday Darter
For our analysis we considered seven populations: Conasauga River,
Talking Rock Creek, Ellijay River, Mountaintown Creek, Amicalola Creek,
Etowah River, and Shoal Creek.
Current Condition of Holiday Darter
Six of the seven populations for holiday darter are estimated to
have low resiliency. The exception is Amicalola Creek, where the fish
is still found in 80 percent of the watershed that it occupied
historically, and because it is known to occur in Amicalola Creek,
Little Amicalola Creek, Cochran Creek, and Gab Creek, it has a moderate
spatial occurrence complexity. The habitat elements were also ranked as
moderate for Amicalola Creek, giving that population an overall
condition of moderate. By comparison, the habitat elements were also
moderate or high for the Etowah River, but this population had low
population element rankings, leading to an estimate of low overall
resiliency. A full analysis for each population's resiliency can be
found in the SSA report.
Connectivity is an important aspect of representation because it
provides for the exchange of novel and beneficial adaptations and
migration to more suitable habitat (should it be necessary). Currently,
all historically occupied ecoregions continue to be occupied by holiday
darters, so we can conclude that all known genetic, morphological, and
behavioral variability are still represented across the range. However,
connectivity is reduced for the species range-wide. Dams have
completely isolated the seven populations into four groups. The upper
Etowah River-Amicalola Creek populations are isolated by Alatoona Dam;
the Talking Rock Creek population is isolated by Carters Re-regulation
Dam; and the Ellijay River and Mountaintown Creek populations are
isolated by Carters Dam. The Conasauga River and Holly Creek
populations are prevented from dispersing to the other populations by
those same dams. The Shoal Creek population is isolated by large dams
on the Coosa River. Where dams do not fragment habitat, long reaches of
unoccupied habitat are present between populations, indicating that
migration between populations is uncommon or unlikely. Finally, all
populations of holiday darter exist on the periphery of the Coosa River
basin and have likely reached the upstream limits for the species. It
is unlikely that individuals within a population will be able to
migrate further upstream if necessary due to changes in environmental
conditions, further decreasing the ability of the species to adapt to
changing environmental conditions.
We estimate that the holiday darter currently may have low adaptive
potential due to limited representation in six occupied watersheds,
decreased connectivity, and confinement to upper reaches of occupied
watersheds. Overall representation is considered to be low. Redundancy
is characterized by having multiple resilient and representative
populations distributed throughout its range. Because all but one
population of holiday darter exhibit low resiliency, the species is
considered to also have low redundancy. All populations have
experienced some declines, may have low numbers, or have low spatial
complexity. Redundancy is present within the Coosawattee River, with
three populations still extant, but is still classified as ``low'' due
to low resiliency of three populations.
In the occupied areas of the Conasauga and Etowah Rivers, the
majority of the records for the species are on U.S. Forest Service
(USFS) land, which is noted for having good water quality and suitable
habitat for holiday darters. For our analysis, we gave populations low
resilience if they had poor population elements, even if the habitat
elements were moderate or high. Second, we declined to consider the
species to have better than low representation and redundancy if the
populations didn't have better than low resiliency. Inconsistent survey
methodologies and lack of standard collection records also creates
uncertainty in any analysis of trends or the ability to compare data
across years. The best available data does not indicate a declining
trend in abundance, and it is likely that the low abundance (and,
therefore, low resiliency) indicated in our analysis is due to the
species being naturally rare and difficult to detect.
Table 3--Current Species Resiliency Summary of the Holiday Darter
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Approximate Occurrence Hydrologic Overall
abundance Occurrence extent complexity Physical habitat Connectivity Water quality regime condition
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conasauga River................ Low.................. Low............... Low............... Moderate.......... High.............. Moderate.......... Moderate......... Low.
Talking Rock Creek............. Low.................. Low............... Low............... Moderate.......... High.............. Low............... Moderate......... Low.
Ellijay River.................. Low.................. Low............... Low............... Moderate.......... Moderate.......... Low............... Low.............. Low.
Mountaintown Creek............. Low.................. Low............... Low............... Moderate.......... Moderate.......... Moderate.......... Moderate......... Low.
Amicalola Creek................ Moderate............. Moderate.......... Low............... Moderate.......... Moderate.......... Moderate.......... Moderate......... Moderate.
Etowah River................... Low.................. Low............... Low............... Moderate.......... High.............. Moderate.......... High............. Low.
Shoal Creek.................... Low.................. Low............... Low............... Moderate.......... Low............... High.............. Moderate......... Low.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bridled Darter
For our analysis of the bridled darter we considered six
populations: Conasauga River, Holly Creek, Talking Rock Creek, Long
Swamp Creek, Amicalola Creek, and the Etowah River.
Current Condition of Bridled Darter
All six populations of bridled darter were classified as having low
resiliency. Although habitat conditions were
[[Page 46188]]
moderate or high for many creeks, the low population elements
(abundance, extent, and complexity) caused the overall resiliency to be
low. Currently, all historically occupied ecoregions are occupied, and
all historically occupied watersheds are considered extant. Although
populations that exhibit the known genetic, morphological, and
behavioral variability are currently extant, they do not exhibit high
resiliency, and representation is therefore classified as low. Dams
have completely isolated the six populations into three groups. The
upper Etowah River-Amicalola Creek-lower Longswamp Creek populations
are isolated by Alatoona Dam, and the Talking Rock Creek population is
isolated by Carters Re-regulation Dam. The Conasauga River and Holly
Creek populations are prevented from dispersing in to the other
populations by those same dams. Where dams do not fragment habitat,
long reaches of unoccupied habitat are present between populations,
indicating that migration between populations is uncommon or unlikely.
Redundancy for the bridled darter is characterized by having multiple
resilient and representative populations distributed throughout its
range. Because all populations of bridled darter exhibit low
resiliency, the species is considered to also have low redundancy. All
populations have experienced declines in extent of occupied habitat,
are found in low numbers, or have low spatial complexity with reduced
connectivity.
In the occupied areas of the Conasauga and Etowah Rivers, the
majority of the records for the species are on USFS land, which is
noted for having good water quality and suitable habitat for bridled
darters. For our analysis, we gave populations low resilience if they
had poor population elements, even if the habitat elements were
moderate and high. Second, we declined to consider the species to have
better than low representation and redundancy if the populations didn't
have better than low resiliency. Inconsistent survey methodologies and
the lack of standard collection records creates uncertainty in any
analysis of trends or the ability to compare data across years. The
best available data does not indicate a declining trend in abundance,
and it is likely that the low abundance (and, therefore, low
resiliency) indicated in our analysis is due to the species being
naturally rare and difficult to detect.
Table 4--Current Species Resiliency Summary of the Bridled Darter
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Approximate Occurrence Hydrologic Overall
abundance Occurrence extent complexity Physical habitat Connectivity Water quality regime condition
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conasauga River................ Low.................. Low............... Low............... Moderate.......... High.............. Low............... Moderate......... Low.
Holly Creek.................... Moderate............. Low............... Low............... Moderate.......... High.............. Low............... Moderate......... Low.
Talking Rock Creek............. Low.................. High.............. Low............... Moderate.......... Low............... Low............... Moderate......... Low.
Long Swamp Creek............... Low.................. Low............... Low............... Low............... Low............... Low............... Low.............. Low.
Amicalola Creek................ Moderate............. Low............... Low............... Moderate.......... Moderate.......... Moderate.......... Moderate......... Low.
Etowah River................... Low.................. Low............... Low............... Moderate.......... High.............. Moderate.......... High............. Low.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Risk Factors Influencing Viability for Trispot, Holiday, and Bridled
Darters
As required by the Act, we considered the five factors in assessing
whether the three species meet the definition of threatened or
endangered species. A multitude of natural and anthropogenic factors
may impact the status of species within aquatic systems. The largest
threats to the future viability of the trispot, holiday, and bridled
darters involve habitat degradation from stressors influencing four
habitat elements: Water quality, water quantity, instream habitat, and
habitat connectivity (Factor A). All of these factors are exacerbated
by the effects of climate change (Factor E). A brief summary of these
primary stressors is presented below; for a full description, refer to
chapter 4 of the SSA reports for each species.
Hydrologic Alteration
Hydrologic alteration in this system has two components: Increases
in storm flow frequency and intensity and a decrease in base flows,
which together create a ``flashy'' hydrologic regime. Activities that
lead to hydrologic alteration include reservoir construction and
operation, water withdrawals, and an increase in impervious surfaces.
In a natural forested system, most rainfall soaks into the soil and is
carried into nearby streams via subsurface flow. Some evaporates or
transpires, and a relatively small amount becomes surface runoff. In an
urbanized system with high levels of impervious cover, such as roads,
parking lots, and rooftops, this cycle is altered; most stormwater hits
impervious surfaces and becomes runoff, which then is channeled quickly
to streams via stormwater drain pipes or ditches. Relatively little
infiltrates into the soil. As a result, storm flows in the receiving
stream are higher and more frequent, although briefer in duration, and
base flows are lower. The storm discharge of urban streams can be twice
that of rural streams draining a watershed of similar size, and the
frequency of channel-forming events can be ten times that of pre-
development conditions. These flashy stream flows and frequent, smaller
high-flow events negatively affect structural habitat on which the
species depends. Increases in flow frequency or intensity can result in
channel widening through bank erosion or deepening to accommodate the
additional discharge. This results in increased downstream
sedimentation and unstable beds, both of which degrade channel
complexity, feeding, and refugia habitat for fish species. Increased
storm flows, in addition, can cause physical washout of eggs and larval
fishes, stress on adults, and negatively alter the stream's food web,
affecting many fish species. There is also a decrease in channel
complexity and a reduction in in-stream cover and natural substrates
like boulders, cobble, and gravel. Hydrologic alteration can also lead
to other stressors that negatively affect fish, such as sedimentation
and a loss of connected suitable habitat.
Sedimentation
Sedimentation can affect fish species by degrading physical habitat
used for foraging, sheltering, and spawning; altering food webs and
decreasing stream productivity; forcing fish to change their behaviors;
and even injuring or killing individual fish. Chronic exposure to
sediment has been shown to have negative impacts to fish gills, which
in addition to causing gill damage can possibly reduce growth rates.
Sedimentation causes reduced visibility, impacting fishes' abilities to
feed and communicate.
A wide range of activities can lead to sedimentation within
streams, including agriculture, construction activities,
[[Page 46189]]
stormwater runoff, unpaved roads, some forestry activities if certified
best management practices are not used, utility crossings, and
dredging. Historical land use practices have substantially altered
hydrological and geological processes such that sediments continue to
be input into streams for several decades after those activities cease.
Examples of these activities occurring with the range of these species
include: Urban impacts in the Springville, Alabama, and Dalton,
Georgia, areas; agricultural practices in the Conasauga River basin;
and livestock access to streams in the Little Canoe Creek watershed.
Reduced Connectivity
Connectivity is a species' ability to disperse to and from habitat
patches. Excess groundwater withdrawal can contribute to reduced
connectivity if sections of streams become dry for parts of the year.
Dams and reservoirs reduce connectivity by creating a physical barrier
between fish populations and changing habitat from flowing streams to
standing water, which is not suitable habitat for these three darters.
Road crossings are also more prevalent in highly populated urban areas,
and some road crossings have impassable culverts that reduce
connectivity.
Loss of Riparian Vegetation
Loss of riparian vegetation means the removal of natural plant
communities from the riparian zone of rivers and streams. Removal of
riparian vegetation can destabilize stream banks, increasing
sedimentation and turbidity; increase the contaminants and nutrients
that enter the water from runoff; increase water temperatures and light
penetration, which also increases algae production; and alter available
habitat by reducing woody plant debris and leaf litter, which in turn
decreases overall stream productivity. These fish have adapted to
occupy habitats that are surrounded by vegetation, which moderates
temperature by blocking solar radiation; provides a source for
terrestrial plant material that forms the base of the food web and
provides shelter and foraging habitat for the fishes; and helps to
maintain clear, clean water and substrate through filtration. Loss of
riparian vegetation decreases habitat suitability for the trispot,
holiday, and bridled darters. Removal of riparian vegetation has
occurred where urban and agricultural activities are prevalent such as
increases in development in Dalton, Chatsworth, and Ellijay, and row
crop and pastures in the Conasauga basin.
Contaminants
Contaminants, including metals, hydrocarbons, pesticides, and other
potentially harmful organic and inorganic compounds, can be toxic to
fish and are common in urban streams including those within the range
of these three darters. Pesticides are frequently found in streams
draining agricultural lands, with herbicides being the most commonly
detected. Pesticides also are heavily used in urban and suburban areas,
and many of these find their way into streams and groundwater. The
contamination of the Coosa River with polychlorinated biphenyl (PCBs)
has been attributed to the General Electric facility in Rome, Georgia.
Although the facility closed in 1998, contaminated sediments are still
documented there. In the Coosawattee River, PCBs are also listed as a
source of impairment caused by nonpoint sources. These chemicals have
toxic effects to the endocrine system, nervous system, reproductive
system, blood, skin, and liver of animals and have likely impacted
these three darters in the Coosa and Coosawattee Rivers.
Pesticides and herbicides are frequently found in streams draining
agricultural land uses, with herbicides being the most commonly
detected. Many agricultural streams still contain
dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethan (DDT) and its degradation products.
Glyphosates and other inert ingredients found in Roundup can be toxic
to fish and other aquatic organisms, causing stress and reduced
fitness; Roundup use within the range of these species is prevalent and
increasing due to the adoption of ``Roundup Ready'' crops.
Agriculture
Agriculture is another predominant land use within the range of all
three darters. Livestock grazing is prevalent in some areas, and
poultry farming is also common.
Poultry Litter: Poultry litter is a mixture of chicken manure,
feathers, spilled food, and bedding material that frequently is used to
fertilize pastureland or row crops. Each poultry house has an estimated
ability to produce up to 100 tons of litter a year. Surface-spreading
of litter results in runoff from heavy rains carrying phosphorus and
nitrogen from manure into nearby streams. Additionally, repeated or
over application of poultry litter can result in phosphorus buildup in
the soil. Excess phosphorus and nitrogen in stream systems increases
blue-green algae and undesirable aquatic plants that rob water of
oxygen, causing fish kills. Endocrine disruptors, such as estrogen,
from poultry litter have been identified as a significant stressor to
the Conasauga River basin. Estrogens have been found in water and
sediment samples within the watershed at concentrations high enough to
be disruptive to the endocrine system in fish. Increased levels of
estrogens affect reproductive biology and result in reduced breeding
success In a recent study of endocrine disruptors on fishes in the
Conasauga River, approximately 7.5 percent of male fishes surveyed were
found to have female cells in male reproductive organs.
Livestock access to streams: On many farms, livestock is grazed on
pastures adjacent to streams and rivers and livestock is allowed free
access to the water. Livestock accessing riparian buffers and,
subsequently, the stream proper, leads to habitat destruction and
decreased water quality. Livestock can destabilize stream banks, which
as discussed above creates increased sediment loads within these small
systems. Livestock farming is often confined to the river valleys
within the upper Coosa River basin; therefore, on many cattle farms,
livestock is grazed on pastures adjacent to streams and rivers, and in
some instances livestock is allowed free access to the water. Livestock
is produced in every county with streams occupied by the bridled and
holiday darters.
Urbanization
Urbanization refers to a change in land cover and land use from
forests or agriculture to increased density of residential and
commercial infrastructure. Urbanization includes a wide variety of
stressors on aquatic systems that affect water quantity, water quality,
channel structure, and connectivity. Therefore, urbanization is
anticipated to increase the magnitude of nearly all other stressors,
and urbanization is expected to affect the darters across their range
due to their known localities occurring in close vicinity to the
growing Atlanta metropolitan area, Chattanooga, Birmingham, and
intervening areas with growing human populations and increasing
development.
Weather Events
Weather events that affect stream flows are considered to be most
relevant to these species. Broadly, these events include extreme storms
and droughts. Increased flows can cause physical washout of eggs and
larval fishes, stress on adults, and alter the production in a stream.
Within the range of these darters, extreme flows associated with
hurricanes have been reported to have
[[Page 46190]]
negative effects on stream fish populations. Reduced baseflows due to
droughts can cause population declines, habitat loss, reduced water
quality (decreased dissolved oxygen and temperature alteration) leading
to death, crowding of individuals leading to stress, and decreased
reproduction in stream fish populations. Climate models for the
southeastern United States project that average annual temperatures
will increase, cold days will become less frequent, the freeze-free
season will lengthen by up to a month, temperatures exceeding 95
degrees Fahrenheit will increase, heat waves will become longer, and
the number of category 5 hurricanes will increase. While these climate
models predict wide variability in weather patterns into the future,
they suggest that the region will be subjected to more frequent large
storms (hurricanes) as well as low flows from droughts.
Other Stressors
In our analysis of the factors affecting these species, we found no
evidence of population- or species-level impacts from overutilization
for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes.
Also, there was no evidence of any impacts due to disease or predation.
Conservation Actions
Trispot Darter
The trispot darter is recognized by Alabama, Georgia, and Tennessee
as a species of concern. This species is listed as Priority 2/High
Conservation Concern by the State of Alabama, endangered by the State
of Georgia, and threatened by the State of Tennessee. Priority
watersheds within the range of the trispot darter have been designated
as Strategic Habit Units by the Alabama Rivers and Streams Network. The
Strategic Habit Unit project was developed for species restoration and
enhancement. Alabama is conducting an analysis and the results are
intended to contribute to restoration projects that will improve
habitat and water quality for at risk and listed species. The Atlantic
Coast Conservancy holds a tract of land within Ballplay Creek that
could offer some protection in the watershed. Natural Resources
Conservation Service's Working Lands for Wildlife partnership within
the basin will help farmers develop and implement strategies to improve
water quality.
Holiday Darter
The holiday darter is recognized by Alabama, Georgia, and Tennessee
as a species of concern. It is listed as Priority 1/Highest
Conservation Concern by the State of Alabama, endangered by the State
of Georgia, and threatened by the State of Tennessee. In general,
protections accorded to the holiday darter by the States prohibit
direct exploitation of the species.
Some populations of holiday darter are known from watersheds in
which a substantial percentage of lands are owned and managed by the
USFS. These populations are found in the Conasauga River, upper Etowah
River, and Shoal Creek. In the Conasauga River and Shoal Creek, the
majority of current records for the holiday darter are within the
boundary of USFS lands. Cherokee National Forest in Tennessee,
Chattahoochee National Forest in Georgia, and Talladega National Forest
in Alabama own and manage natural resources in occupied watersheds in
those portions of the holiday darter's range. Management prescriptions
implemented by the USFS in areas that overlap with the range of the
holiday darter are expected to benefit the species. Specifically, 4.5
miles (mi) (7.2 kilometers (km)) of the Conasauga River is eligible for
Congressional Wild River designation and is managed to protect and
perpetuate the features that led to the eligibility status. The river
is also recognized for its aquatic biodiversity by the USFS, and
management strategies employed by both Cherokee and Chattahoochee
National Forests within the watershed include designated wilderness
areas, recommended wild river, recommended recreational river, black
bear habitat management, restoration and maintenance of rare
communities, restoration and management of old growth characteristics,
and scenic corridors and sensitive viewsheds. These management
strategies, which emphasize natural forest communities and water
quality are expected to benefit holiday darter within the Conasauga
River watershed. The Chattahoochee National Forest management
prescriptions within the upper Etowah River also broadly emphasize and
promote natural plant communities and so are expected to benefit
holiday darter within this watershed. Standards outlined in the Revised
Land and Management Plan for National Forests in Alabama (2004)
generally protect water and habitat quality in streams. Direct
observations of Shoal Creek have found the stream to have good water
quality with high levels of dissolved oxygen, stable pH levels, and low
sedimentation, confirming the benefits of USFS management strategies to
holiday darter habitat.
Approximately 13.6 mi (21.9 km) of Amicalola Creek are bounded by
lands owned and managed by the State of Georgia. Georgia's stated goals
for this area are maintenance or enhancement of populations of
sensitive species and management of riparian areas to benefit water
quality, aquatic resources, and aesthetics. We expect that this
provides some benefit to holiday darters in that location.
Additionally, approximately 488 acres (ac) (197 hectares (ha)) of these
lands were purchased with the assistance of a Recovery Land Acquisition
Grant that prioritized the conservation of aquatic resources and
species. Therefore, it is anticipated that State ownership and
management within the Amicalola Creek watershed will benefit the long-
term survival of holiday darters.
Within the Conasauga River basin, Natural Resources Conservation
Service has begun a Working Lands for Wildlife project that provides
technical and financial assistance to help landowners improve water
quality and help producers plan and implement a variety of conservation
activities or practices that benefit aquatic species. Holiday darter
may benefit in the future from water quality improvements in portions
of the Conasauga River that are affected by agricultural practices as a
result of the Working Lands for Wildlife project.
Priority watersheds within the range of the holiday darter have
been designated as Strategic Habit Units by the Alabama Rivers and
Streams Network. The Strategic Habit Unit project was developed for
species restoration and enhancement. Watersheds occupied by holiday
darter that have been designated as Strategic Habit Units are the
Choccolocco Creek watershed (which includes the Shoal Creek
populations) and the Oostanaula River watershed (which includes the
Conasauga and Coosawattee River populations).
Bridled Darter
The bridled darter is recognized by Georgia and Tennessee as a
species of concern. It is listed as endangered by the State of Georgia.
In general, protections accorded to species that are listed by the
States prohibit their direct exploitation.
Some populations of bridled darter are known from watersheds in
which a substantial percentage of lands are owned and managed by the
USFS. These populations are found in the Conasauga River and upper
Etowah River. In the Conasauga River, the majority of current records
for the bridled darter are within the proclamation boundary of USFS
lands. Cherokee National Forest in Tennessee and Chattahoochee National
Forest in Georgia own and manage lands and
[[Page 46191]]
natural resources in occupied watersheds in those portions of the
bridled darter's range. Management prescriptions implemented by the
USFS in areas that overlap with the range of the holiday darter (see
discussion above) are also expected to benefit the bridled darter.
Future Scenarios
For the purpose of this assessment, we define viability as the
ability of the species to sustain populations in the wild over time. To
address uncertainty associated with the degree and extent of potential
future stressors and their impacts on species' requisites, the 3Rs were
assessed using three plausible future scenarios. These scenarios were
based, in part, on the results of urbanization and climate models that
predict changes in habitat used by the trispot, holiday, and bridled
darters. The models that were used to forecast both urbanization and
climate change projected 50 years into the future. Using the best
available data to forecast plausible future scenarios allows the
Service to determine if a species may become an endangered species in
the foreseeable future. For more detailed information on these models
and their projections, please see the SSA reports.
In the Status Quo scenario, current environmental regulations and
policy, land use management techniques, and conservation measures
remain the same over the next 50 years. We anticipate the current trend
in greenhouse gas emissions to continue and moderate impacts from
extreme weather events including intense drought, floods, and storm
events to occur. In this scenario, rapid urbanization will continue at
the current estimated rate for the Piedmont region of the southeastern
United States, which will increase demand for water resources.
In the Best Case scenario, we predict wider adoption of
conservation measures and policies, which involves watershed-scale
conservation plans (Working Lands for Wildlife and watershed habitat
conservation plans) and enacting a water policy for Alabama. In this
scenario, we still expect rapid urban growth, albeit at a slower rate
than under the other two scenarios. Under the Best Case scenario,
rapidly growing urban areas would address environmental concerns and
implement water conservation measures and green infrastructure. If
implemented, these actions should lessen the demand on water resources
(requiring fewer drinking water supply reservoirs) and minimize urban
effects on streams. While large numbers of roads will still be
constructed, under the Best Case scenario road crossings will be
constructed that allow for fish passage. In this scenario we expect
carbon emissions to peak before 2020 resulting in a lower probability
of extreme weather conditions negatively affecting stream fishes, as
compared to the Status Quo or Worst Case scenarios.
In the Worst Case scenario, we anticipate major negative effects in
aquatic ecosystems as a result of rapid urbanization. In conjunction
with rapid urban growth, we project that there will be a general lack
of conservation measures and policies being implemented at the local,
regional, or national levels. Water demand will increase with
population, and new reservoir construction will take place. In addition
to rapid urbanization, carbon emissions are projected to continue to
increase above the current levels in this scenario, resulting in a
higher probability of extreme weather events that can negatively affect
fish species. In areas that remain in agricultural use, there will be
an increased amount of herbicide and poultry litter spreading and no
protective measures implemented to address water quality issues. Under
this scenario, we anticipate a general decline in available suitable
habitat, population size, and abundance.
While