[Federal Register: September 8, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 173)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 54561-54579]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr08se10-29]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R3-ES-2009-0009]
[MO 92210-0-0008-B2]
RIN 1018-AV94
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposed Rule To
List the Ozark Hellbender Salamander as Endangered
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose
endangered status under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended
(Act), for the Ozark hellbender (Cryptobranchus alleganiensis bishopi)
throughout its entire range. The species is found in southern Missouri
and northern Arkansas. If we finalize this proposed rule, it would
extend the Act's protection to the Ozark hellbender. However, we find
that designation of critical habitat is not prudent for the Ozark
hellbender at this time, because the increased threat to the species
from illegal collection and trade outweighs the benefits of designating
critical habitat. We seek data and comments from the public on this
proposed listing rule and prudency determination.
DATES: We will accept comments received on or before November 8, 2010.
We must receive requests for public hearings, in writing, at the
address shown in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by October
25, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments to Docket No. FWS-R3-
ES-2009-0009.
U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public Comments Processing,
Attn: Docket No. FWS-R3-ES-2009-0009; Division of Policy and Directives
Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive,
Suite 222; Arlington, VA 22203.
We will not accept e-mail or faxes. We will post all comments on
http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any
personal information you provide us (see the Public Comments section
below for more information).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles Scott, Field Supervisor, at
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Columbia Missouri Ecological
Services Field Office, 101 Park De Ville Dr., Suite A, Columbia, MO
65203 (telephone 573-234-2132). If you use a telecommunications device
for the deaf (TDD), please call the Federal Information Relay Service
(FIRS) at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Comments
We intend that any final action resulting from this proposal will
be as accurate and as effective as possible. Therefore, we request
comments or suggestions from the public, other concerned governmental
agencies, the scientific community, industry, or any other interested
party concerning this proposed rule to list the Ozark hellbender as
endangered. We particularly seek comments concerning:
(1) Population survey results for the Ozark hellbender, as well as
any studies that may show distribution, status, population size, or
population trends, including indications of recruitment.
(2) Pertinent aspects of life history, ecology, and habitat use of
the Ozark hellbender.
(3) Current and foreseeable threats faced by the Ozark hellbender
in relation to the five factors (as defined in section 4(a)(1) of the
Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)):
(a) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of the species' 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 and threats to the species or its habitat.
(4) Our determination of ``not prudent'' for critical habitat.
(5) Whether there is a need for us to consider developing a
``similarity of appearance'' listing for the eastern hellbender.
Section 4(e) of the Act (similarity of appearance cases) allows the
Secretary to treat any species as an endangered or threatened species
under the Act if he finds that: (A) It (in this case, the eastern
hellbender) closely resembles a listed species (in this case, the Ozark
hellbender) and enforcement personnel would have substantial difficulty
differentiating between the listed and unlisted species; (B) the effect
of this difficulty is an additional threat to the listed species: and
(C) such treatment of the unlisted species would substantially
facilitate enforcement of the Act for Ozark hellbender.
You may submit your comments and materials concerning this proposed
rule by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. We will not
accept comments sent by e-mail or fax or to an address not listed in
the ADDRESSES section.
We will post your entire comment--including your personal
identifying information--on http://www.regulations.gov. If you provide
personal identifying information in addition to the required items
specified in the previous paragraph, such as your street address, phone
number, or e-mail address, you may request at the top of your document
that we withhold this information from public review. However, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.
Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting
documentation we used in preparing this proposed rule, will be
available for public inspection on http://www.regulations.gov, or by
appointment, during normal business hours at the Columbia Missouri
Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section).
Background
Species Description
The Ozark hellbender is a large, strictly aquatic salamander
endemic to streams of the Ozark plateau in southern Missouri and
northern Arkansas. Its
[[Page 54562]]
dorso-ventrally flattened body form enables movements in the fast-
flowing streams it inhabits (Nickerson and Mays 1973a, p. 1). Ozark
hellbenders have a large, keeled tail and tiny eyes. An adult may
attain a total length of 11.4 to 22.4 inches (in) (29 to 57 centimeters
(cm)) (Dundee and Dundee 1965, pp. 369-370; Johnson 2000, p. 41).
Numerous fleshy folds along the sides of the body provide surface area
for respiration (Nickerson and Mays 1973a, pp. 26-28) and obscure their
poorly developed costal grooves (grooves in the inner border of the
ribs; Dundee 1971, p. 101.1). Ozark hellbenders are distinguishable
from eastern hellbenders (Cryptobranchus alleganiensis alleganiensis)
by their smaller body size, dorsal blotches, increased skin mottling,
heavily pigmented lower lip, smooth surfaced lateral line system, and
reduced spiracular openings (openings where water is expelled out of
the body) (Grobman 1943, p. 6; Dundee 1971, p. 101.3; Peterson et al.
1983, pp. 227-231; LaClaire 1993, pp. 1-2). Despite these
distinguishing characteristics, the two subspecies are not easily or
readily distinguishable absent the presence of both subspecies or when
encountered outside of their subspecies' range.
Taxonomy
The Ozark hellbender was originally described as Cryptobranchus
bishopi by Grobman (1943, pp. 6-9) from a specimen collected from the
Current River in Carter County, Missouri. Due to the small amount of
genetic variation in the genus Cryptobranchus (Merkle et al. 1977, pp.
550-552; Shaffer and Breden 1989, pp. 1017-1022), Dundee and Dundee
(1965, p. 370) referred to the Ozark hellbender as a subspecies of the
eastern hellbender, C. alleganiensis. This designation persisted until
Collins (1991, pp. 42-43) revived C. bishopi, due to the lack of
intergradation between the eastern and Ozark hellbenders because of the
allopatry (occurring in separate, nonoverlapping geographic areas) of
the populations (Dundee 1971, p. 101.1). Although Ozark hellbenders
have been shown to be phenotypically and genetically distinct from
eastern hellbenders (Grobman 1943, pp. 6-9; Dundee and Dundee 1965, p.
370; Dundee 1971, p. 101.1; Routman 1993, pp. 410-415; Kucuktas et al.
2001, p. 127), we will continue to use C. a. bishopi, which is the name
currently recognized by the Committee on Standard English and
Scientific Names (Crother et al. 2008, p. 15). Although discussion
continues over the taxonomic status of the Ozark hellbender, the
designation of the Ozark hellbender as a species or subspecies does not
affect its qualification for listing under the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.). Careful review of the Ozark hellbender's taxonomic information
confirms it is a valid subspecies.
Habitat and Life History
Eastern and Ozark hellbenders are similar in habitat selection,
movement, and reproductive biology (Nickerson and Mays 1973a, pp. 44-
55). Published works on the eastern hellbender provide insights into
Ozark hellbender ecology. Adult Ozark hellbenders are frequently found
beneath large rocks in moderate to deep (less than 3 feet (ft) to 9.8
ft (less than 1 meter (m) to 3 m)), rocky, fast-flowing streams in the
Ozark plateau (Johnson 2000, p. 42; Fobes and Wilkinson 1995, pp. 5-7).
In spring-fed streams, Ozark hellbenders will often concentrate
downstream of the spring, where there is little water temperature
change throughout the year (Dundee and Dundee 1965, p. 370). Adults are
nocturnal, remaining beneath cover during the day and emerging to
forage at night, primarily on crayfish. They are diurnal during the
breeding season (Nickerson and Mays 1973a, pp. 40-41; Noeske and
Nickerson 1979, p. 92 and p. 94). Ozark hellbenders are territorial and
will defend occupied cover from other hellbenders (Nickerson and Mays
1973a, pp. 42-43). This species migrates little throughout its life.
For example, one tagging study revealed that 70 percent of marked
individuals moved less than 100 ft (30 m) from the site of original
capture (Nickerson and Mays 1973b, p. 1165). Home ranges average 91.9
square (sq) ft (28 sq m) for females and 265.7 sq ft (81 sq m) for
males (Peterson and Wilkinson 1996, p. 126).
Hellbenders are habitat specialists that depend on consistent
levels of dissolved oxygen, temperature, and flow (Williams et al.
1981, p. 97). The lower dissolved-oxygen levels found in warm or
standing water do not provide for the hellbender's respiratory needs.
In fact, hellbenders have been observed rocking or swaying in still,
warm water (Williams et al. 1981, p. 97) to increase their exposure to
oxygen. Hutchison and Hill (1976, p. 327) found that the hellbender
exhibits a preferred mean water temperature of 11.6 [deg]C (52.9
[deg]F), 17.7 [deg]C (63.9 [deg]F), and 21.7 [deg]C (71.1 [deg]F) for
individuals acclimatized to temperatures of 5 [deg]C (41 [deg]F), 15
[deg]C (59 [deg]F), and 25 [deg]C (77 [deg]F), respectively. Hutchison
et al. (1973, p. 807) found the mean critical thermal maxima (the
temperature at which animals lose their organized locomotory ability
and are unable to escape from conditions that would promptly lead to
their death) of Ozark hellbenders was 32.7 [deg]C (90.9 [deg]F) at 5
[deg]C (41 [deg]F) acclimation, 32.9 [deg]C (91.2 [deg]F) at 15 [deg]C
(59 [deg]F), and 36.5 [deg]C (97.7 [deg]F) at 25 [deg]C (77[deg] F).
Typically, Ozark hellbender populations are dominated by older,
large adults (Nickerson and Mays 1973a, p. 1; Peterson et al. 1983, pp.
227-231; LaClaire 1993, p. 2). Hellbenders are long-lived, capable of
living 25 to 30 years in the wild (Peterson et al. 1983, p. 228).
Hellbenders may live up to 29 years in captivity (Nigrelli 1954, p.
297).
Individuals mature sexually at 5 to 8 years of age (Bishop 1941,
pp. 49-50; Dundee and Dundee 1965, p. 370), and males normally mature
at a smaller size and younger age than females. Female hellbenders are
reported to be sexually mature at a total length of 14.6 to 15.4 in (37
to 39 cm), or approximately 6 to 8 years (Nickerson and Mayes 1973a, p.
54; Peterson et al. 1983, p. 229; Taber et al. 1975, p. 638). Male
hellbenders have been reported to reach sexual maturity at a total
length of 11.8 in (30 cm), or approximately 5 years (Taber et al. 1975,
p. 638).
Breeding generally occurs between mid-September and early October
(Johnson 2000, p. 42). Males prepare nests beneath large flat rocks or
submerged logs. Ozark hellbenders mate via external fertilization, and
males will guard the fertilized eggs from predation by other
hellbenders (Nickerson and Mays 1973a, p. 42 and p. 48). Clutch sizes
vary from 138 to 450 eggs per nest (Dundee and Dundee 1965, p. 369),
and eggs hatch after approximately 80 days (Bishop 1941, p. 47).
Hatchlings and larvae are rarely collected during surveys due to low
detectability. Larvae and small individuals hide beneath small stones
in gravel beds (Nickerson and Mays 1973a, p. 12; LaClaire 1993, p. 2).
Although there is little information on the diet of larval hellbenders,
it is generally believed that aquatic insects comprise their primary
food source. In one of the few studies on larval diet, Pitt and
Nickerson (2006, p. 69) found that the stomach of a larval Eastern
hellbender from the Little River in Tennessee exclusively contained
aquatic insects.
During or shortly after eggs are laid, males and females may prey
upon their own and other individuals' clutches. Most hellbenders
examined during the breeding season contain between 15 and 25 eggs in
their stomachs (Smith 1907, p. 26). Males frequently regurgitate eggs
(King 1939, Pfingsten 1990 p. 548; Pfingsten 1990, p. 49), and females
sometimes eat their own eggs while ovipositing (laying) them (Nickerson
and Mays 1973a, p. 46). Topping and Ingersol (1981, p. 875) found that
up to 24 percent of the gravid (egg-bearing)
[[Page 54563]]
females examined from the Niangua River in Missouri retained their eggs
and eventually reabsorbed them.
Range
Ozark hellbenders are endemic to the White River drainage in
northern Arkansas and southern Missouri (Johnson 2000, pp. 40-41),
historically occurring in portions of the Spring, White, Black, Eleven
Point, and Current Rivers and their tributaries (North Fork White
River, Bryant Creek, and Jacks Fork) (LaClaire 1993, p. 3). Currently,
hellbenders are considered extirpated in the mainstem White, Black, and
Spring Rivers and Jacks Fork, and their range has been considerably
reduced in the remaining rivers and tributaries.
The other subspecies of hellbender, the eastern hellbender, occurs
in central and eastern Missouri (in portions of the Missouri drainage
in south-central Missouri and the Meramec (Mississippi drainage), but
its range does not overlap with that of the Ozark hellbender. The
eastern hellbender's range extends eastward to New York, Georgia, and
the States in between.
Population Estimates and Status
Evidence indicates Ozark hellbenders are declining throughout their
range (Wheeler et al. 2003, pp. 153 and 155), and no populations appear
to be stable. Declines have been evident throughout the range of the
eastern hellbender as well, which receives protective status in many
eastern States.
At the request of the Saint Louis Zoo's Wildcare Institute, the
Conservation Breeding Specialist Group (CBSG) facilitated a Population
and Habitat Viability Analysis (PHVA) for the Ozark and eastern
hellbender in August 2006. Thirty workshop participants explored
threats to hellbender populations and develop management actions aimed
at understanding and halting their decline. Using the software program
Vortex (v9.61), the CBSG team prepared and presented a baseline model
for hellbender populations and worked through the input parameters with
the participants to optimize the model and determine current and
projected mean population sizes for all current populations in 75 years
(Briggler et al. 2007, p. 8 and pp. 80-86). The results of the model
are presented in the river-specific population accounts below.
A description of what we know about Ozark hellbender populations
follows (including current population estimates from the hellbender
PHVA (Briggler et al. 2007, pp. 83-84)).
White River - There are only two hellbender records from the main
stem of the White River. In 1997, a hellbender was recorded in Baxter
County, Arkansas (Irwin 2008, pers. comm.). No hellbenders were found
during a 2001 survey of the lower portion of the White River, but in
2003, an angler caught a specimen in Independence County, Arkansas
(Irwin 2008, pers. comm.). We do not know whether a viable population
exists (or whether hellbenders are able to exist) in the main stem of
the White River or if the individuals captured are members of a relic
population that was separated from the North Fork White River
population by Norfork Reservoir. Much of the potential hellbender
habitat (we do not know whether this habitat was historically occupied)
was destroyed by the series of dams constructed in the 1940s and 1950s
on the upper White River, including Beaver, Table Rock, Bull Shoals,
and Norfork Reservoirs.
North Fork White River - The North Fork White River (North Fork)
historically contained a considerable hellbender population. In 1973,
results of a mark-recapture study indicated approximately 1,150
hellbenders within a 1.7-mile (mi) (2.7-kilometer (km)) reach of the
North Fork in Ozark County, Missouri, with a density of one individual
per 26.2 to 32.8 sq ft (8 to 10 sq m; Nickerson and Mays 1973b, p.
1165). Ten years later, hellbender density in a 2.9-mi (4.6-km) section
of the North Fork in the same county remained high, with densities
between one per 19.7 sq ft (6 sq m) and one per 52.5 sq ft (16 sq m;
Peterson et al. 1983, p. 230). Individuals caught in this study also
represented a range of lengths from 6.8 to 21.7 in (172 to 551
millimeters (mm)), indicating that reproduction was occurring in this
population, and most individuals were sized between 9.8 and 17.7 in
(250 and 449 mm). In a 1992 qualitative study in Ozark County,
Missouri, 122 hellbenders were caught during 49 person-hours of
searching the North Fork (Ziehmer and Johnson 1992, p. 2). Those
individuals ranged in length from 10 to 18 in (254 to 457 mm), and no
average size was included in that publication.
Until the 1992 study, the North Fork population appeared to be
relatively healthy. However, in a 1998 study of the same reach of river
censused in 1983 (Peterson et al. 1983, pp. 225-231) and using the same
collection methods, only 50 hellbenders were captured (Wheeler et al.
1999, p. 18). These individuals ranged in length from 7.9 to 20.0 in
(200 to 507 mm), with most between 15.7 and 19.7 in (400 and 500 mm),
and were on average significantly longer than those collected 20 years
earlier (Wheeler 1999, p. 15). This shift in length distribution was
not a result of an increase in maximum length of individuals; instead,
there were fewer individuals collected in the smaller size classes. To
compare results between these qualitative and quantitative studies,
Wheeler et al. (1999, p. 4) converted historical hellbender collections
(Peterson et al. 1983, pp. 225-231) to numbers of individuals caught
per day. In addition, the other studies that were not included in that
conversion (Peterson et al. 1988, pp. 291-303; Ziehmer and Johnson
1992, pp. 1-5) have been converted here. For comparison purposes, one
search day is defined as 8 hours of searching by 3 people (24 person-
hours). The use of ``search day'' may be an underestimate of actual
effort, and this conservative estimate of effort will likely result in
a modest estimate of hellbender population declines. Therefore, in
1983, approximately 51 hellbenders were caught per search day (Peterson
et al. 1983, pp. 225-231). In 1992, 60 hellbenders per day were caught
(Ziehmer and Johnson 1992, p. 2), and, in 1998, 16 hellbenders per day
were caught (Wheeler 1999, p. 12).
The North Fork had been considered the stronghold of the species in
Missouri, and the populations inhabiting this river had been deemed
stable (Ziehmer and Johnson 1992, p. 3; LaClaire 1993, pp. 3-4).
However, these populations now appear to be experiencing declines
similar to those in other streams. The collection of young individuals
has become rare, indicating little recruitment. Although Briggler
(2008a, pers. comm.) did find some younger hellbenders in this river
during his 2005 surveys, he has not found any larvae despite extensive
effort. In species such as the hellbender, which are long lived and
mature at a relatively late age, detecting declines related to
recruitment can take many years, as recruitment under healthy
population conditions is typically low (Nickerson and Mays 1973a, p.
54). In 2006, hellbender experts (researchers and State herpetologists)
estimated the current population in the North Fork to be 200
individuals (Briggler et al. 2007, p. 83). In surveys conducted between
1969 and 1979, researchers caught from 8 to 12 hellbenders per hour
(Nickerson and Briggler 2007, p. 213). For comparison, surveys of the
same 15.5-mi (25-km) section of the North Fork in 2005 and 2006
averaged 0.5 hellbenders per hour (Nickerson and Briggler 2007, p.
213). Therefore, a dramatic decline is apparent in the North Fork.
Bryant Creek- Bryant Creek is a tributary of the North Fork in
Ozark County, Missouri, which flows into Norfork Reservoir. Ziehmer and
Johnson
[[Page 54564]]
(1992, p. 2) expected to find hellbenders in this stream during an
initial survey, but none were captured or observed after 22 person-
hours. This apparent lack of the species conflicted with reports from
Missouri Department of Conservation (MDC) personnel and an angler who
reported observations of fairly high numbers of hellbenders in Bryant
Creek during the winter months (Ziehmer and Johnson 1992, p. 3). A
subsequent survey of the creek resulted in the capture of six
hellbenders (Wheeler et al. 1999, p. 7), confirming the existence of a
population in this tributary. This population, however, is isolated
from the other North Fork White River populations by Norfork Reservoir,
which could contribute to this population's apparent small size. During
MDC surveys conducted in 2007, no individuals were found in areas where
the six individuals were found in 1998. However, five individuals were
found in areas of Bryant Creek not surveyed in 1998. This population
has been historically low and is not considered viable (Briggler 2008b,
pers. comm.).
Black River - There is one documented record of a hellbender in the
Black River above its confluence with the Strawberry River on the
Independence-Jackson County line (Arkansas) in 1978 (Irwin 2008, pers.
comm.). Portions of the Black River in Missouri were surveyed in 1999
by researchers at Arkansas State University, but no hellbenders were
observed (Wheeler et al. 1999, p. 18). Currently, the Black River does
not appear to have conditions suitable for hellbenders, although it may
have been occupied before intensive agricultural practices were begun
in the area (Irwin 2008, pers. comm.). The Black River is presumed to
be part of the historical range of the subspecies, because hellbenders
have been documented in several of its tributaries, including the
Spring, Current, and Eleven Point Rivers (Firschein 1951, p. 456;
Trauth et al. 1992, p. 83). In 2004, MDC surveyed areas in Missouri
that had been searched in 1999 (Wheeler et al. 1999, p. 18), as well as
areas not searched in 1999 that had anecdotal reports of hellbenders.
No hellbenders were found during this 2-day survey. The habitat was
considered less than ideal because it was predominantly composed of
igneous rocks, which lack the cracks and crevices necessary for
hellbender inhabitance. Parts of the Black River, with suitable
dolomite rock, might have contained a small population at one time
(Briggler 2008b, pers. comm.).
Spring River - The Spring River, a tributary of the Black River,
flows from Oregon County, Missouri, south into Arkansas. Hellbender
populations have been found in the Spring River near Mammoth Spring in
Fulton County, Arkansas (LaClaire 1993, p. 3). In the early 1980s, 370
individuals were captured during a mark-recapture study along 4.4 mi (7
km) of stream south of Mammoth Spring (Peterson et al. 1988, p. 293).
Hellbender density at each of the two surveyed sites was fairly high
(approximately one per 75.5 square (sq) ft (23 sq m) and one per 364 sq
ft (111 sq m)). These individuals were considerably larger than
hellbenders captured from other streams during the same time period,
with 74 percent of Spring River hellbenders having a total length of
more than 17.7 in (450 mm), with a maximum length of 23.6 in (600 mm)
(Peterson et al. 1988, p. 294). This may indicate that Spring River
populations are genetically distinct from other hellbender populations.
This speculation was upheld by the conclusions of a genetic study of
the Spring, Current, and Eleven Point River populations (Kucuktas et
al. 2001, pp. 131-135). In 1991, surveyors searched 10 sites for
hellbenders along a 16.2-mi (26-km) stream reach but observed only 20
individuals during 41 search-hours over a 6-month period (Trauth et al.
1992, p. 83). This 6-month survey included the two sites surveyed in
the early to mid-1980s in which surveyors captured 370 hellbenders,
along with eight additional sites upstream and downstream (Peterson et
al. 1988, pp. 291-303; Trauth et al. 1992, p. 83). No size class
information is available, although the large sizes of captures reported
in Peterson et al. (1988, p. 294) may be indicative of a population
experiencing little recruitment.
Researchers with Arkansas State University surveyed the Spring
River from autumn 2003 through spring 2004, performing 50 hours of
search effort and finding only four Ozark hellbenders. These animals
were removed from the river and were housed at the Mammoth Spring
National Fish Hatchery but have since died, most likely due to water
quality issues at the hatchery. Arkansas State University researchers
found four and one individual during 2005 and 2006 surveys,
respectively. Hellbenders have declined in this stream and have likely
succumbed to the threats of water quality degradation, aquatic
vegetation encroachment, and illegal commercial and scientific
collection (Irwin 2008, pers. comm.). Although experts estimated the
population in the Spring River to be at most 10 individuals, the
population in this river is considered extirpated and the possibility
of this stream being re-inhabited under present conditions is minimal
because of the magnitude of habitat degradation (Briggler et al. 2007,
p. 83; Irwin 2008, pers. comm.).
Eleven Point River - The Eleven Point River, a tributary of the
Black River that occurs in Missouri and Arkansas, has been surveyed
several times since the 1970s. Wheeler (1999, p. 10) analyzed
historical data. In 1978, 87 hellbenders were captured in Oregon
County, Missouri, over a 3-day period, yielding an average of 29
hellbenders per day. From 1980 to 1982, 314 hellbenders were captured
in the same area in 9 collection days, yielding an average of 35
hellbenders per day; hellbender body lengths over that period ranged
from 4.7 to 17.8 in (119 to 451 mm). In 1988, Peterson et al. (1988, p.
293) captured 211 hellbenders from the Eleven Point River and estimated
hellbender density to be approximately one per 65.6 sq ft (20 sq m).
Total lengths of these individuals ranged from 4.7 to 17.7 in (120 to
450 mm), with most between 9.8 and 13.8 in (250 and 350 mm). Although
the data were not analyzed for captures per day, it can be estimated
that approximately 40 hellbenders were caught per day during this
study.
In 1998, Wheeler (1999, p. 10) captured 36 hellbenders over 4 days
from the same localities as Peterson et al. (1988, p. 292), for an
average of nine hellbenders per day. These hellbenders were larger than
those captured previously, with total lengths of 12.8 to 18.0 in (324
to 457 mm), and there were considerably fewer individuals in the
smaller size classes. For comparison, a survey of Peterson et al.
(1988, p. 293) localities in 2005 resulted in a total of 31 hellbenders
captured, yielding an average of 2.6 hellbenders captured per day
(using the search day conversion method presented in the North Fork
White River discussion). Population declines and reduced recruitment in
the Eleven Point River in Missouri are indicated (through past survey
data), although hellbenders are consistently reported during surveys in
the Eleven Point River in Arkansas (Irwin 2008, pers. comm.).
Recently in Arkansas (2005 and 2007), however, no more than two or
three individuals were caught per day. Specifically, the catch per
person-hour in 2005 was 1.1 hellbenders and in 2007 was 0.9 hellbenders
for surveys conducted on the Eleven Point River in Arkansas (Irwin
2008, pers. comm.). Portions of the Eleven Point River watershed in
Missouri are owned by the Federal Government and managed to protect
stream and riparian areas from erosion. However, the watershed in
[[Page 54565]]
Arkansas is all privately owned with increased threat from stream bank
clearing and unrestricted cattle access, which have an increased effect
(through increased siltation and water quality degradation) on
remaining populations (Irwin 2008, pers. comm.). In 2006, hellbender
experts (researchers and State herpetologists) estimated the current
Eleven Point River population to be 200 individuals in Arkansas and 100
individuals in Missouri (Briggler et al. 2007, p. 83).
Current River - The Current River had not been surveyed extensively
until the 1990s. Nickerson and Mays (1973a, p. 63) reported a large
hellbender population in this stream, but no numbers were presented. In
1992, Ziehmer and Johnson (1992, p. 2) found 12 hellbenders in 60
person-hours in Shannon County, Missouri, or approximately 5
hellbenders per day using the same search day conversion as presently
used. These individuals ranged in length from 4.5 in (115 mm) to more
than 15.0 in (380 mm; maximum length was not reported), with most
between 13.0 and 15.0 in (330 and 380 mm). In 1999, 14 hellbenders were
collected over 3 collection days (approximately 5 hellbenders per day),
also in Shannon County, Missouri, and the individuals ranged from 14.8
to 20.3 in (375 to 515 mm), with most between 17.7 to 19.7 in (450 to
499 mm; Wheeler 1999, p. 12). The average size of individuals increased
by nearly 4 in (100 mm), indicating this population must have a lack of
recruitment. In 2005 and 2006, researchers found a total of 22
hellbenders throughout the Current River in a total of 100 hours spent
searching (equivalent to 1.8 hellbenders per day). In 2006, hellbender
experts estimated the current population in the Current River to be 80
individuals (Briggler et al. 2007, p. 83).
Jacks Fork - Jacks Fork, a tributary of the Current River, was
surveyed for hellbenders for the first time in 1992 (Ziehmer and
Johnson 1992, p. 2). Four hellbenders were collected over 66 person-
hours, equating to roughly 2 hellbenders per day. The individuals were
large, ranging from 13.0 to 16.9 in (330 to 430 mm). No hellbenders
were found during investigations of Jacks Fork in 2003 and 2006.
Previous Federal Action
We first identified the Ozark hellbender as a candidate species in
a notice of review published in the Federal Register on October 30,
2001 (66 FR 54808). The Ozark hellbender was given a listing priority
number of 6 due to non-imminent threats of a high magnitude.
On May 11, 2004, we received a petition dated May 4, 2004, from The
Center for Biological Diversity to list 225 candidate species,
including the Ozark hellbender. We received another petition on
September 1, 2004 (dated August 24, 2004), from Missouri Coalition for
the Environment and Webster Groves Nature Study Society requesting
emergency listing of the Ozark hellbender. Based on information
presented in that petition, we determined that emergency listing was
not warranted at the time. We notified the petitioners by letter of
this determination in November 2004. Our finding on that petition was
included in a May 11, 2005, notice of review published in the Federal
Register (70 FR 24870).
In the May 11, 2005, notice of review we changed the listing
priority number (LPN) for the Ozark hellbender from 6 to 3, the highest
priority category for a subspecies, because of the increased immediacy
of threats since the Ozark hellbender was elevated to candidate status
in 2001. The threat of particular concern was the annual increases in
recreational pressures on Ozark hellbender rivers. Because collection
for trade is considered a primary threat, we coordinated with our
Division of Management Authority to develop, concurrent with this
proposal, a proposal to list the hellbender (both subspecies) in
Appendix III of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). Elsewhere in today's Federal
Register, the Service proposes to list the hellbender, including both
subspecies, in Appendix III of CITES.
Summary of Factors Affecting the Species
Section 4 of the Endangered Species Act and regulations (50 CFR
part 424) promulgated to implement the listing provisions of the Act
set forth the procedures for adding species to the Federal lists. A
species may be determined to be an endangered or threatened species due
to one or more of the five factors described in section 4(a)(1) as
follows: (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.
In the context of the Act, the term ``threatened species'' means
any species or subspecies or, for vertebrates, Distinct Population
Segment (DPS) that is likely to become an endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its
range. The term ``endangered species'' means any species, subspecies,
or for vertebrates, DPS, that is in danger of extinction throughout all
or a significant portion of its range. The Act does not define the term
``foreseeable future.''
The application of the five factors to the Ozark hellbender
(Cryptobranchus alleganiensis bishopi) is as follows:
A. The present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment
of its habitat or range.
One of the most likely causes of the decline of the Ozark
hellbender in the White River system in Missouri and Arkansas is
habitat degradation resulting from impoundments, ore and gravel mining,
sedimentation, nutrient runoff, and nest site disturbance from
recreational uses of the rivers (Williams et al. 1981, p. 99; LaClaire
1993, pp. 4-5). Hellbenders are habitat specialists that depend on
consistent levels of dissolved oxygen, temperature, and flow (Williams
et al. 1981, p. 97). Therefore, even minor alterations to stream
habitat are thought to be detrimental to hellbender populations.
Impoundments
Impoundments impact stream habitat in many ways. When a dam is
built on a free-flowing stream, riffle and run habitats are converted
to lentic (still), deep water habitat. As a result, surface water
temperatures tend to increase, and dissolved oxygen levels tend to
decrease (Allan and Castillo 2007, pp. 323-324 and pp. 97-98).
Hellbenders depend upon highly vascularized lateral skin folds for
respiration. Therefore, lakes and reservoirs are unsuitable habitat for
Ozark hellbenders, because these areas have lower oxygen levels and
higher water temperatures (Williams et al. 1981, p. 97; LaClaire 1993,
p. 5) than do fast-flowing, cool-water stream habitats. Impoundments
also fragment hellbender habitat, blocking the flow of immigration and
emigration between populations (Dodd 1997, p. 178). The resulting
small, isolated populations are more susceptible to environmental
perturbation and demographic stochasticity, both of which can lead to
local extinction (Wyman 1990, p. 351).
In the upper White River, construction of Beaver, Table Rock, Bull
Shoals, and Norfork dams in the 1940s and 1950s destroyed the potential
hellbender habitat upstream of Batesville, Arkansas, and effectively
isolated hellbender populations. Norfork Dam was constructed on the
North Fork in 1944 and has isolated
[[Page 54566]]
Ozark hellbender populations in Bryant Creek and the White River from
populations in the North Fork. Populations downstream of Beaver, Table
Rock, Bull Shoals, and Norfork dams were likely extirpated due to
hypolimnetic releases from the reservoir. Hypolimnetic releases are
cooler than normal stream temperatures because they are from a layer of
water that is below the thermocline, and the water from this layer is
typically reduced of oxygen because it is noncirculating or does not
``turn over'' to the surface. Additionally, the tailwater zones below
dams experience extreme water level fluctuations and scouring for many
miles downstream. This impacts hellbender populations by washing out
the pebbles and cobbles used as cover by juveniles and creating
unpredictable habitat conditions outside the Ozark hellbender's normal
range of tolerance.
Mining
Gravel mining, which has occurred in a number of streams within the
historical range of the Ozark hellbender, has directly contributed to
Ozark hellbender habitat alteration and loss. Dredging results in
stream instability both up and downstream of the dredged portion (Box
and Mossa 1999, pp. 103-104). Head cutting, in which the increase in
transport capacity of a dredged stream causes severe erosion and
degradation upstream, results in extensive bank erosion and increased
turbidity levels (Allan and Castillo 2007, p. 331). Reaches downstream
of the dredged stream reach often experience aggradation (raised stream
bed from build-up of sediment) as the sediment transport capacity of
the stream is reduced (Box and Mossa 1999, p. 104). Gravel mining
physically disturbs hellbender habitat in dredged areas, and associated
silt plumes can impact various aspects of the hellbender's life
requisites (nesting habitat, eggs, prey). In addition, these effects
reduce crayfish populations, which are the primary prey species for
Ozark hellbenders. Gravel dredging is widespread in the White River
systems in southern Missouri and northern Arkansas (LaClaire 1993, p.
4).
Portions of the Ozark plateau have a history of being major
producers of lead and zinc, and some mining activity still occurs in
the southeastern Ozarks, though at less than historical levels. Results
of a U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) water quality study conducted from
1992 to 1995 in the Ozark plateau (Peterson et al. 1998, pp. 12-13)
revealed that concentrations of lead and zinc in bed sediment and fish
tissue were substantially higher at sites with historical or active
mining activity. These concentrations were high enough to suggest
adverse biological effects, such as reduced enzyme activity or death of
aquatic organisms. Because hellbenders have highly permeable skin and
obtain most of their oxygen through subcutaneous respiration, they are
particularly susceptible to absorbing contaminants such as lead and
zinc. Furthermore, because Ozark hellbenders are long lived, they may
be at higher risk of bioaccumulation of harmful chemicals (Peterson et
al. 1998, pp. 12-13). Although mining for lead and zinc no longer
occurs within the range of the Ozark hellbender, Petersen et al. showed
elevated concentrations were still present in the streams where mining
occurred historically (1998, p. 12). Although it is possible for these
metals to be transported and diluted, they will not degrade over time;
therefore, it is likely that lead and zinc concentrations found over 10
years ago in these rivers would remain similar today (Mosby 2008, pers.
comm.). In addition, there are historical lead and zinc mining sites
that are near Ozark hellbender populations on the North Fork in Ozark
County (Mosby 2008, pers. comm.).
Increased lead and zinc contamination input to the Current River by
way of the active Sweetwater Mine on Adair Creek in Reynolds County,
Missouri, is a potential future risk. Adair Creek is a tributary of
Logan Creek, a losing stream (loses water as it flows downhill)
connected to Blue Spring, which discharges to the Current River.
Although lead and zinc contaminants have been found in Logan Creek,
there is no evidence that contaminants from Sweetwater mine have made
it to Blue Spring. However, if the current tailings dam on Adair Creek
fails, which could be ``a real possibility,'' large concentrations of
lead and zinc would be added to Blue Spring and the Current River
(Mosby 2008, pers. comm.).
Water Quality
Despite the claim by some that many Ozark streams outwardly appear
pristine, Harvey (1980, pp. 53-60) clearly demonstrated that various
sources of pollution exist in the ground water in the Springfield-Salem
Plateaus of southern Missouri. In comparing ground-water quality of
sites within the Ozark Plateaus (including Arkansas and Missouri) with
other National Water-Quality Assessment Program (NAWQA) sites, Petersen
et al. (1998, pp. 9-10) documented that nitrate concentrations in parts
of the Springfield Plateau aquifer were higher than in most other NAWQA
drinking-water aquifers, and could possibly affect hellbenders by
inhibiting their growth, impairing their immune systems, and overall
causing increased stress. Those study areas were within the current
distribution of Ozark hellbenders in Arkansas and Missouri.
Nitrogen and phosphorus are essential plant nutrients found
naturally in streams. Elevated concentrations of these nutrients,
however, cause increased growth of algae and aquatic plants in many
streams and are detrimental to aquatic biota (Petersen et al. 1998, p.
6). In the Ozark plateau, water is contaminated by nutrients from
increased human waste (in part due to rapid urbanization and increased
numbers of septic systems), fertilizers (including land application of
chicken litter (poultry manure, bedding material, and wasted feed)),
logging, and expanded industrial agricultural practices such as
concentrated animal feeding operations. A continuing source of
sedimentation and contamination is agriculture, which comprises a large
percentage of the land use within the range of the Ozark hellbender
(Wheeler et al. 2003, p. 155). Missouri is the second largest beef
cattle-producing State in the nation, with the majority of animal units
produced in the Ozarks. Both Arkansas and Missouri are leading States
in poultry production. The NAWQA data collected in the Ozarks in 1993-
1995 from wells and springs indicated that nitrate concentrations were
strongly associated with the percentage of agricultural land near the
wells or springs. Livestock wading in streams, poor agricultural
practices that degrade vegetated riparian areas, and faulty septic and
sewage treatment systems have resulted in elevated nitrate levels
(Petersen et al. 1998, pp. 6-8 and 15).
Increased recreational use (such as from canoeing, kayaking,
rafting, inner tube floating, and small horsepower motorboating) also
impacts the water and habitat quality in rivers inhabited by the Ozark
hellbender. In 2003, the Missouri Department of Natural Resources added
an 8-mi (13-km) stretch of the Jacks Fork River to the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Consolidated 2002 Missouri (303(d))
list of impaired waters for organic wastes (fecal coliform). Likely
sources of the contamination include runoff from a commercial horse
trail ride outfitter, horse stream crossings, and effluent from
campground pit-toilets (Davis and Richards 2002, pp. 1, 3, and 36).
The 303(d) list included additional rivers inhabited by Ozark
hellbenders. A 21-mi (34-km) stretch of the Eleven Point River was
listed as impaired due
[[Page 54567]]
to unacceptable levels of chlorine and atmospheric deposition of
mercury. Increased mercury levels have been implicated as a potential
cause in the decline of other aquatic amphibians, such as the northern
dusky salamander (Desmognathus fuscus fuscus; Bank et al. 2006, pp.
234-236). Water quality monitoring on both the North Fork White and
Eleven Point Rivers in Missouri detected 21 chemicals and elevated
levels of estrogen in male hellbenders collected during 2002 and 2003,
respectively (Huang 2004, pers. comm.). The Spring River has also
suffered from many water quality perturbations over recent decades. In
the late 1980s, the West Plains (Missouri) wastewater treatment plant
failed, depositing all stored waste into the Spring River. In addition,
the majority of the Ozarks region in Missouri and Arkansas is composed
of karst topography (caves, springs, sinkholes, and losing streams),
which further complicates transport of potential contaminants.
Siltation
Sediment inputs from land use activities have, and continue to,
significantly contribute to habitat degradation. Nickerson and Mays
(1973a, pp. 55-56) cite a personal communication from S. Minton in
which sediment accumulation is suspected of destroying eggs and
juvenile hellbenders. Hellbenders are intolerant of sedimentation and
turbidity (Nickerson and Mays 1973a, pp. 55-56), which can impact them
in several ways:
(1) Sediment deposition of cover rocks reduces or removes suitable
habitat for adults and can cover and suffocate eggs.
(2) Sediment fills interstitial spaces in pebble or cobble beds,
reducing suitable habitat for larvae and subadults (FISRWG 1998,
chapter 3, p. 19 and p. 25).
(3) Suspended sediment loads can cause water temperatures to
increase, as there are more particles to absorb heat, thereby reducing
dissolved oxygen levels (Allan and Castillo 2007, pp. 323-324).
(4) Sedimentation can impede the movement of individuals and
colonization of new habitat (Routman 1993, p. 412).
(5) The Ozark hellbender's highly permeable skin causes them to be
negatively affected by sedimentation. Various chemicals, such as
pesticides, bind to silt particles and become suspended in the water
column when flushed into a stream. The hellbender's permeable skin
provides little barrier to these chemicals, which can be toxic (Wheeler
et al. 1999, pp. 1-2).
(6) Sedimentation may result in a decline of prey abundance by
embedding cover rocks.
Timber harvest and associated activities (construction and
increased use of unpaved roads, skid trails, and fire breaks) are
prominent in many areas within the range of the Ozark hellbender and
increase terrestrial erosion and sedimentation into streams. Peak
stream flows often rise in watersheds with timber harvesting
activities, due in part to compacted soils resulting from construction
of roads and landings (where products are sorted and loaded for
transportation) and vegetation removal (Allan and Castillo 2007, p.
332; Box and Mossa 1999, pp. 102-103). The cumulative effects of timber
harvest on sedimentation rates may last for a couple of decades, even
after harvest practices have ceased in the area (Frissell 1997, pp.
102-104).
Improperly designed and maintained roads cause marginally stable
slopes to fail, and they also capture surface runoff and channel it
directly into streams (Allan and Castillo 2007, pp. 321-322 and 340).
Erosion from roads contributes more sediment than the land harvested
for timber (Box and Mossa 1999, p. 102).
Unrestricted cattle access to streams increases erosion and
subsequent sediment loads (Clary and Kinney 2002, p. 145). This is
particularly a concern for the Eleven Point River in Arkansas (Irwin
2008, pers. comm.). Riparian pasture ``retirement'' or exclusion of
grazing has proven to be an effective means of reducing surface runoff
pollutant loads to waterways. Runoff levels of sediment, in addition to
phosphorus, particulate- and nitrate-nitrogen concentrations, have been
found to be lower at retired riparian pasture than at currently grazed
riparian pasture sites (Hoorman and McCutcheon 2005, p. 9).
Disturbance
Habitat disturbance affects hellbender survival in several rivers.
Most rivers and streams inhabited by hellbenders are extremely popular
with canoeists, kayakers, rafters, inner tube floaters, or low-
horsepower motorboat operators. In fact, canoe, kayak, and motor and
jet boat traffic continues to increase on the Jacks Fork, Current,
Eleven Point, and North Fork Rivers. On the North Fork River, an
average of five canoes per weekday were observed in 1998, and in 2004,
that figure increased to 21 canoes per weekday (Pitt 2005, pers.
comm.). Due to the increasing popularity of these float streams, the
National Park Service is evaluating options that will reduce the number
of boats that can be launched daily by concessionaires (Poe 2004, pers.
comm.). Hellbenders encountered with gashes in their heads suggest that
watercraft traffic likely impact these animals. New roads, boat ramps,
and other river access points have been constructed, which lead to
increased river access and increased disturbance to hellbenders
(Briggler et al. 2007, p. 64). Off-road vehicle (ORV) recreation is
also widespread throughout the Ozarks region. ORVs frequently cross
rivers inhabited by hellbenders and are driven in riverbeds where the
water is shallow enough to enable this form of recreation. The force
delivered by a boat or ORV hitting a rock could easily injure or kill a
hellbender, in addition to destroying hellbender habitat. ORV activity
also increases erosion and sedimentation by exposing bare erodible
soils in areas with frequent activity.
The practice of removing large rocks and boulders (by hand,
machinery, or dynamite) to reduce damage to canoes is common on many
hellbender streams (Nickerson and Mays 1973a, p. 56; Wheeler et al.
1999, p. 4). Rocks are also removed by gardeners for landscaping. Rock
turning and flipping is also done by crayfish hunters and hobbyists and
independent researchers (Briggler et al. 2007, p. 61 and p. 66). The
areas under these large rocks are important habitat for cover and nest
sites; therefore, overturning or removing these rocks can diminish
available cover and nest sites for hellbenders.
Best Management Practices (BMPs)
Currently, a number of activities that can and do result in habitat
degradation are outside of regulatory oversight. There are no
regulatory requirements to implement BMPs to protect water quality from
timber management actions. Existing BMPs by the Arkansas Forestry
Commission and Missouri Department of Conservation lack mandatory
requirements for implementing methods to reduce aquatic resource
impacts associated with timber management. Timber harvest activities
(for example, logging decks, increased use of unpaved roads, improperly
designed and maintained roads, skid trails, fire breaks) result in
erosion and sedimentation. Additionally, there are no laws or
regulations that preclude livestock from grazing in riparian corridors
and loafing in streams and rivers.
[[Page 54568]]
Summary of Habitat Destruction and Modification
The threats to the Ozark hellbender from habitat destruction and
modification are occurring throughout the entire range of the
subspecies. These threats include impoundments, mining, water quality
degradation, siltation, and disturbance from recreational activities.
The effects of impoundments on Ozark hellbenders are significant
because impoundments alter habitat directly, isolate populations, and
change water temperatures and flows below reservoirs. Remaining Ozark
hellbender populations are small and isolated, in part due to increased
impoundments over time, making hellbenders vulnerable to individual
catastrophic events and reducing the likelihood of recolonization after
localized extirpations.
Habitat destruction and modification from siltation and water
quality degradation present a significant and immediate threat to the
Ozark hellbender. We believe these are the primary causes of the
population decline. Siltation and water quality degradation are caused
by industrialization, agricultural runoff, mine waste, and activities
related to timber harvesting. Increased siltation affects hellbenders
in a variety of ways, such as suffocating eggs, eliminating suitable
habitat for all life stages, reducing dissolved oxygen levels,
increasing contaminants (that bind to sediments), and reducing prey
populations. Increased nitrate levels and fecal coliform, along with a
variety of other contaminants from agricultural runoff and increased
urbanization, have been detected in hellbender streams, which not only
pose a threat directly to hellbenders but also to Ozark aquatic
ecosystems in general.
Recreational pressure (for example, boat traffic, horseback riding,
and ORV use) in streams inhabited by Ozark hellbenders has increased
substantially on an annual basis, directly disturbing the habitat. Most
hellbender rivers are popular with canoeists, kayakers, rafters, inner
tube floaters, and motorboat operators. Removing large rocks and
boulders to reduce damage to canoes is a common practice. Gardeners
remove rocks for use in landscaping. Crayfish hunters, hobbyists, and
independent researchers turn and flip rocks. This disturbance is
significant because areas under large rocks are important habitat for
cover and nest sites; therefore, overturning and removing these rocks
reduces available cover and nest sites for hellbenders. The threats of
rock removal and overturning are expected to continue or even increase
as these recreational activities grow in popularity.
B. Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes.
Anecdotal reports indicate that Ozark hellbenders have been
collected for commercial and scientific purposes (Trauth et al. 1992,
p. 85). Although commercial collections are currently illegal in both
Missouri and Arkansas, information provided by Nickerson and Briggler
(2007, pp. 207-212) indicates that Ozark hellbenders are sold for the
pet trade. Because of their protected status in Missouri and Arkansas,
any actions involving interstate or foreign commerce of Ozark
hellbenders collected from these states would be prohibited by the
Federal Lacey Act (16 U.S.C. 3371-3378).
In Arkansas, hellbenders may be collected with a scientific
collecting permit from the AGFC; however, no permits are being issued
currently or are anticipated to be issued in the future because the
State acknowledges the severely imperiled status of the subspecies
(Irwin 2008, pers. comm.). Missouri imposed a moratorium on hellbender
collecting from 1991 to 1996 and has since issued only limited numbers
of scientific collecting permits (Horner 2008, pers. comm.). Despite
these restrictions, illegal collecting for the pet trade has been
documented (Nickerson and Briggler 2007, pp. 208-209) and remains a
threat throughout the range Briggler (2008b, pers. comm.).
The illegal and legal collection of hellbenders for research
purposes, museum collections, zoological exhibits, and the pet trade
has undoubtedly been a contributing factor to hellbender declines.
Nickerson and Briggler (2007, pp. 208-211) documented the removal of
558 hellbenders (approximately 300 animals illegally) from the North
Fork White River from 1969 to 1989. Anecdotal information suggests
unauthorized collection of animals on the Spring River in Arkansas
contributed to the recent population crash, as reaches of the Spring
River that formerly contained 35 to 40 have had no individuals present
for more than 10 years (Irwin 2008, pers. comm.). The decline is linked
to unauthorized collecting because Ozark hellbenders were located in
one small, easily accessible area of the Spring River, and no other
event (such as a storm or chemical spill) had occurred in that area
that would explain such a rapid decline (Irwin 2008, pers. comm.). Such
amphibians as the hellbender (a relatively slow-moving, aquatic
species) may be collected with little effort, making them even more
susceptible to this threat.
The unauthorized collection of hellbenders, primarily for the pet
trade, remains a major concern. In 2001, an advertisement in a Buffalo,
New York, newspaper was selling hellbenders for $50 each (Mayasich et
al. 2003, p. 20). In 2003, a pet dealer in Florida posted an Internet
ad that offered ``top dollar'' for large numbers of hellbenders (wanted
in groups of at least 100; Briggler 2007, pers. comm.). Also in 2003, a
person in Pennsylvania had an Internet posting stating specifically
that an Ozark hellbender was wanted, no matter the price or regulatory
consequence (Briggler 2007, pers. comm.). At the 2005 Hellbender
Symposium, it was announced that U.S. hellbenders were found for sale
in Japanese pet stores, which is likely the largest market for this
species (Briggler, pers. comm. with Okada, 2005). In Japan, the
majority of hellbenders are sought for pets rather than for food
(Briggler, pers. comm. with Okada, 2005). As Ozark hellbenders become
rarer, their market value is likely to increase. In fact, listing the
subspecies as endangered may also enhance the subspecies potential
commercial value as the rarity of the subspecies is made public.
Few U.S. species listed under the Act have commercial value in
trade; however, the Ozark hellbender does. Due to the market demand and
the apparent willingness of individuals to collect hellbenders
illegally, we believe that any action that publicly discloses the
location of hellbenders (such as publication of specific critical
habitat maps or locations) puts the species in further peril. For
example, due to the threat of unauthorized collection and trade, the
Missouri Department of Conservation and Arkansas Game and Fish
Commission have implemented extraordinary measures to control and
restrict information on the locations of Ozark hellbenders and no
longer make location and survey information readily available to the
public.
Recreational fishing may also negatively impact Ozark hellbender
populations due to animosity towards hellbenders, which some anglers
believe to be poisonous and to interfere with fish production (Gates et
al. 1985, p. 18). In addition, there are unpublished reports of
hellbenders accidentally killed by frog or fish gigging (spearing),
when a hellbender may get speared inadvertently (Nickerson and Briggler
2007, pp. 209 and 212). The MDC reports that gigging popularity and
pressure have increased, which
[[Page 54569]]
increases a potentially significant threat to hellbenders during the
breeding season when they tend to move greater distances and congregate
in small groups where they are an easy target for giggers (Nickerson
and Briggler 2007, p. 212). The gigging season for suckers (fish mainly
in the Catostomidae family) spans the reproductive season of the Ozark
hellbender in the North Fork White River and overlaps that of the
hellbender in other river basins as well. The sucker gigging season
opens September 15, during the peak breeding period when hellbenders
are most active and, therefore, most exposed. Gigging is popular in
hellbender streams to such a degree that marks are often noticed on the
bedrock and the river bottom from giggers' spears (Briggler 2007, pers.
comm.). Although the chance of finding a gigged hellbender can be
limited (due to presence of scavengers and the fast decomposition rate
of amphibians), two gigged hellbenders were found along the stream bank
on the North Fork White River in 2004 (Huang 2007, pers. comm.). In
their studies of Missouri hellbenders, Nickerson and Mays (1973a, p.
56) found dead gigged specimens, and they reference data showing how
susceptible the species is to this threat. Ozark hellbenders are
sometimes unintentionally caught by anglers. However, catching
hellbenders while fishing is not a frequent occurrence and is not
believed to be a significant threat to the species, especially if
anglers follow instructions posted by the Missouri Department of
Conservation to remove the hook or cut the fishing line and return the
hellbender to the stream (Briggler 2009, pers. comm.).
Summary of Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
The Ozark hellbender is a rare and unique amphibian that has
experienced extensive collection from the wild for various reasons. Due
to the continued decline of the Ozark hellbender and history of its
collection, State agencies in Missouri and Arkansas have implemented
measures to reduce the threat of collection. These measures include
moratoriums on issuance of scientific collecting permits; prohibiting
the collection, possession, and sale of hellbender under appropriate
State wildlife statutes; and controlling information on the location of
hellbenders. The unauthorized collection of Ozark hellbenders for
commercial sale in the pet trade, however, continues to be a
significant threat.
C. Disease or predation
Disease (Chytridiomycosis)
Background -- Chytridiomycosis (also known as chytrid fungus), a
highly infectious amphibian disease caused by the pathogen
Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis, is recently recognized to have a
significant negative effect on the Ozark hellbender. B. dendrobatidis
has been demonstrated to infect and kill all life stages of an
increasing number of amphibian species worldwide (Berger et al. 1998,
pp. 9031-9036). The Ozark hellbender is now included on the ever-
increasing global list of amphibian species potentially affected by
this fatal pathogen (Speare and Berger 2005, pp. 1-9).
The chytrid fungus attacks the keratinized tissue of amphibians'
skin, which can lead to clinical signs of disease presence, such as
thickened epidermis, lesions, body swelling, lethargy, abnormal
posture, loss of righting reflex, and death (Daszak et al. 1999, pp.
737-738; Bosch et al. 2001, p. 331; Carey et al. 2003, p. 130). It is
believed that the amphibian chytrid fungus originated from Africa with
the African clawed frog (Xenopus laevis), used throughout the United
States in the 1930s and 1940s for pregnancy testing. This pathogen is
now found on all continents except Asia, where species are currently
being tested (Weldon et al. 2004, pp. 2100-2105; Speare and Berger
2005, pp. 1-9).
Currently, there are two theories on the development of the chytrid
fungus as a global amphibian pathogen. One theory is that the chytrid
fungus is not a new pathogen, but has increased in virulence or in host
susceptibility caused by other factors (Berger et al. 1998, p. 9036).
The other, more widely supported theory is that B. dendrobatidis is an
introduced species whose spread has been described as an epidemic
`wave-like' front (Lips et al. 2006, pp. 3166-3169; Morehouse et al.
2003, p. 400).
B. dendrobatidis lives in aquatic systems in which it `swims'
(using spores) through the water and reproduces asexually. B.
dendrobatidis develops most rapidly at 73.4 [deg]F (23 [deg]C) in
culture, with slower growth rate at 82.4 [deg]F (28 [deg]C) and
reversible stop of growth at 84.2 [deg]F (29 [deg]C; Daszak et al.
1999, p. 741). The temperatures in Ozark streams are ideal for the
spread and persistence of this pathogen. Based on U.S. Geological
Survey water data from 1996-2006, the maximum temperature of these
hellbender streams is 77.0 to 80.6 [deg]F (25 to 27 [deg]C), although
the average water temperature over 1 year (for Eleven Point, Current,
and North Fork White River) is approximately 59.0 to 60.8 [deg]F (15 to
16 [deg]C; Barr 2008, pers. comm.) .
Persistence of the chytrid fungus may be further enhanced by
saprophytic development (obtaining nourishment from dead or decaying
material in water; Daszak et al. 1999, p. 740). Johnson and Speare
(2003, pp. 923-924) found that B. dendrobatidis can survive
saprophytically outside the amphibian host for up to 7 weeks in lake
water and 3 to 4 weeks in tap water. Further, Carey et al. (2003, p.
130) found that amphibians can be infected when placed either in water
containing zoospores that were placed specifically in the water, or in
water from which infected animals have been recently removed. The
possibility that B. dendrobatidis can develop for even a short period
of time outside the amphibian host may greatly increase its impact and
accelerate host population declines (Carey et al. 2003, p. 130). Also,
the possibility of long-term survival of B. dendrobatidis as a
saprophyte may explain the lack of recolonization of streams from which
amphibians, such as the Ozark hellbender, have been extirpated (Daszak
et al. 1999, p. 740). Moreover, hellbenders that are not already
infected with the pathogen are continually at risk because temperatures
are ideal for the persistence of the chytrid fungus in the water
(without a host) for a long period.
Habitat specializations and a variety of underlying predisposing
environmental factors may make an animal more vulnerable to exposure to
the pathogen, especially for species such as the Ozark hellbender that
carry out their life cycle in aquatic rather than terrestrial habitats
(Carey et al. 2003, p. 131). Since the Ozark hellbender lives in an
aquatic system throughout its entire life, there is no possibility for
relief from this pathogen. Climate change is one of the environmental
factors that has been indicated as a key promoter in the spread of the
B. dendrobatidis pathogen (Pounds et al. 2006, pp. 161-167). Rachowicz
et al. (2006, pp. 1676-1682) found that chytridiomycosis was implicated
in the local extirpations of two species of frog, and they conclude
with high confidence that large-scale warming was the key factor in the
disappearances of these two species. Although environmental factors
(for example, increased UV-B, chemical pollution, climate change) may
predispose amphibian populations to pathogens, evidence suggests that
cofactors are not required for chytridiomycosis to cause mass amphibian
deaths (Daszak et al. 1999, p. 741).
[[Page 54570]]
Overall, chytridiomycosis has been implicated in local population
extirpations, sustained population declines, and possibly species
extinctions for many amphibian species (Berger et al. 1998, pp. 9031-
9036; Bosch et al. 2001, pp. 331-337). Chytrid fungi are the best
supported pathogen related to amphibian declines, with over 93 species
worldwide affected as of 2005 (Collins and Storfer 2003, pp. 89-98;
Daszak et al. 2003, pp. 141-150; Speare and Berger 2005, p. 1). For
example, in surveys conducted by Lips et al. (2006, pp. 3165-3166) in
Costa Rica and Panama, over only a few months of surveying, frog and
salamander species richness and amphibian density declined by more than
60 percent and 90 percent, respectively.
Disease in captive hellbenders -- The St. Louis Zoo maintains a
captive population of Ozark and eastern hellbenders. In March 2006,
there was a power outage in the Zoo's herpetarium, including the area
where the hellbenders are held. Soon after the power outage (which may
have stressed the hellbenders and reduced their immunity), several
hellbenders were observed ``with substrate (rocks) sticking to the skin
and many were floating'' (Duncan 2007, pers. comm.). More than 75
percent of the captive population whose death occurred from March 2006
through April 2007 (59 individuals) likely resulted directly from B.
dendrobatidis. As Randall Junge, Doctor of Veterinary Medicine,
Director of Animal Health and Nutrition at the St. Louis Zoo (2007,
pers. comm.) stated, ``* * * in our captive [hellbender] population, it
[chytridiomycosis] is the leading cause of mortality. In my opinion, if
this disease becomes established throughout the hellbender range, it
will have a significant [further] impact on the population.'' Deaths
relating to chytridiomycosis continue as the zoo staff searches for an
effective way to treat infected animals (Utrup 2007, pers. comm.).
Disease in wild hellbenders -- As a result of the incident of B.
dendrobatidis in the St. Louis Zoo hellbender population, in 2006 the
Missouri Department of Conservation began testing wild hellbenders in
Missouri for infection by the pathogen. All Ozark hellbender streams
surveyed had individual hellbenders that tested positive for the
pathogen (Briggler 2008b, pers. comm.). Data from 2006 and 2007 show
that, for the presence of B. dendrobatidis within the Current River, 20
percent of the population is positive (heavily positive in a few
locations); within the Eleven Point River (Missouri and Arkansas), 16
percent is positive (positives spread throughout river); and within the
North Fork of the White River, 15 percent is positive (positives spread
throughout river) (Briggler 2008b, pers. comm.). These results indicate
the minimum number of infected individuals since polymerase chain
reaction (PCR) tests for B. dendrobatidis may produce false negative
results if the infection is localized in different tissues than were
analyzed (Beard and O'Neill 2005, p. 594). The only Ozark hellbender
river not surveyed for the pathogen was the Spring River, where the
subspecies is believed to be extirpated (Irwin 2008, pers. comm.).
During future surveys, all animals encountered (new and re-captures)
will be tested for the presence of B. dendrobatidis. Researchers view
the presence of B. dendrobatidis as one of the most, if not the most,
challenging factors affecting the survival of this subspecies (Briggler
et al. 2007, p. 83).
Since there is clear evidence that chytridiomycosis, a fatal
disease in captive Ozark hellbenders, also has been documented in the
wild Ozark hellbender population, it is crucial that we not only
research techniques to combat this disease, but also address all other
threats that may be linked to susceptibility (degraded environmental
conditions). The immediacy of this threat has been significantly
heightened since this pathogen has been found to occur in all remaining
populations of the Ozark hellbender. Researchers are in agreement that
this subspecies will have little chance of survival if factors
significantly affecting the hellbender are not ameliorated to some
degree, especially in light of the additional severe threat of
chytridiomycosis (Utrup 2008, pers. comm.).
Abnormalities
Wheeler et al. (2003, pp. 250-251) investigated morphological
aberrations in the hellbender over a 10-year period. They obtained
deformity data from salamanders that were examined during population
and distributional surveys in the Eleven Point River, North Fork of the
White River, and Spring River dating back to 1990. They found a variety
of abnormal limb structures, including missing toes, feet, and limbs.
Additional abnormalities encountered include epidermal lesions,
blindness, missing eyes, and bifurcated limbs. Three hellbenders were
documented with tumors on their bodies in the Spring River in Arkansas.
Currently, we are unable to evaluate the importance of these
abnormalities in light of the recent precipitous decline in hellbenders
observed in these rivers. Briggler (2007, pers. comm.) is evaluating
and compiling additional information on these abnormalities and
lesions, including the frequency of occurrence. Several hellbenders
with these abnormalities were x-rayed and are being analyzed by Jeff
Briggler, Missouri Department of Conservation. One hellbender with
extreme abnormalities (all limbs missing) was sacrificed and sent to
U.S. Geological Survey's (USGS) Wildlife Disease Lab in Madison,
Wisconsin, for necropsy, where the conclusive cause for the
individual's missing limbs and digits could not be determined.
In 2004, 72 percent of Ozark hellbenders captured had abnormalities
present. For reference, 49 percent of eastern hellbenders captured in
Missouri had abnormalities (Briggler 2007, pers. comm.). In 2006, 90
percent of Ozark hellbenders surveyed from the Eleven Point River
(Missouri), 73 percent from the Current River, and 67 percent from the
North Fork of the White River had abnormalities (Briggler 2007, pers.
comm.). In general, abnormalities in Ozark hellbenders are becoming
increasingly common and severe, often to a level that the animals are
near death (for example, missing digits on all or most limbs, missing
all or most limbs; Briggler 2007, pers. comm.). Most, if not all,
hellbenders collected in the past decade from the Spring River have had
some type of major malformity or lesions (Davidson 2008, pers. comm.).
In fact, a hellbender found in the Spring River in 2004 was missing all
four feet and was covered in lesions and a fungal growth externally and
inside its mouth; this animal died within 15 minutes of capture
(Davidson 2008, pers. comm.). Although these abnormalities have not
been linked conclusively with the presence of B. dendrobatidis,
considering the types of abnormalities documented (for example,
lesions, digit and appendage loss, epidermal sloughing), there may be a
connection (Briggler 2007, pers. comm.).
Predation
Trout stocking has increased in recent years both in Missouri and
Arkansas. In Missouri, both nonnative brown trout (Salmo trutta) and
nonnative rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) have been sporadically
introduced into Ozark area waters for recreational fishing purposes
since the 1800s. The 2003 MDC Trout Management Plan calls for increased
levels of stocking as well as increasing the length of cold water
streams that will be stocked with brown and rainbow trout (Missouri
Department of Conservation 2003, pp. 31-32). Nonnative trout are
stocked in all rivers
[[Page 54571]]
that historically and currently contain hellbenders (rainbow trout:
Niangua, Gasconade, Big Piney, Current, North Fork White, Eleven Point,
and Spring rivers; brown trout: Niangua, Gasconade, North Fork White,
and Current Rivers) in Missouri (Missouri Department of Conservation
2003, pp. 24-26). In Arkansas, the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission is
currently working with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to improve cold
water releases from mainstem dams along the White River, to improve
conditions for trout below the reservoirs (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
2008, pp. 1-40).
Introduced fishes have had dramatic negative effects on populations
of amphibians throughout North America (Bradford 1989, pp. 776-778;
Funk and Dunlap 1999, pp. 1760-1766; Gillespie 2001, pp. 192-196;
Pilliod and Peterson 2001, pp. 326-331; Vredenburg 2004, pp. 7648-
7649). Rainbow trout and brown trout are considered opportunists in
diet, varying their diet with what is available, including larval
amphibians (Smith 1985, p. 231; Pflieger 1997, pp. 224-225). Brown
trout grow bigger and tolerate a wider range of habitats than rainbow
trout and, therefore, may be a more serious threat to hellbenders,
particularly at the larval stage. Dunham et al. (2004, pp. 19-24)
assessed the impacts of nonnative trout in headwater ecosystems in
western North America. The authors documented at least eight amphibian
species that exhibited negative associations with nonnative trout in
mountain lakes, specifically regarding the occurrence or abundance of
larval life stages of native amphibians. Also, salamander species, such
as the long-toed salamander (Ambystoma macrodactylum), have been
extirpated from waterbodies in high-elevation lakes in western North
America due to stocked nonnative trout (Pilliod and Peterson 2001, p.
330).
Preliminary data suggest that larval hellbenders from declining
populations in Missouri do not recognize brown trout as dangerous
predators. In contrast, larvae from more stable southeastern (U.S.)
populations that co-occur with native trout show ``fright'' responses
to brown trout (Mathis 2008a, pers. comm.). A recent study conducted by
Gall (2008, pp. 1-86) confirmed results found with this preliminary
data on Missouri hellbender populations.
Gall (2008, p. 3) examined hellbender (Ozark and eastern) predator-
prey interactions by (1) studying the foraging behavior of predatory
fish species (native and nonnative (trout)) in response to the presence
of hellbender secretion (a potentially noxious chemical cue produced by
stressed hellbenders), (2) comparing the number of secretion-soaked
food pellets consumed by rainbow and brown trout, and (3) comparing the
response of larval hellbenders to chemical stimuli from native and
nonnative predatory fishes. Gall (2008, p. 23, pp. 30-31) found that
brown trout were attracted to the secretion emitted by hellbenders, and
hellbender secretions were more palatable to brown trout than to
rainbow trout. Also, although hellbenders exhibited only weak fright
responses when exposed to trout stimuli, they responded with strong
fright responses to native predatory fish.
Gall (2008, p. 63) suggests that the limited evolutionary history
between salmonids (brown and rainbow trout) and hellbenders in Missouri
is likely responsible for the weak fright behavior exhibited by
hellbenders in response to trout stimuli. Although brown and rainbow
trout are a threat to hellbenders, results from this study indicate
that rainbow trout are less of an immediate concern than brown trout
(Gall, pp. 63-64). This may be due to the difference in diet of the two
species; rainbow trout maintain a predominately invertebrate diet
throughout their lives and brown trout switch from predominately
invertebrate prey to predominately vertebrate prey (including
salamanders) at about 8.7 in (22 cm) in length (Gall 2008, p. 60).
Overall, this study found evidence that predation by introduced trout
cannot be ruled out as a factor affecting the Ozark hellbender and
possibly contributes to the decline of both Ozark and eastern
hellbender populations in Missouri (Gall 2008, p. 63).
In addition to brown trout, walleye (Stizostedion vitreum),
although a native species, have been stimulated to approach prey more
often and faster in the presence of hellbender secretions (Gall 2008,
pp. 23-24). This may be a concern if walleye are further stocked in
hellbender streams, because walleye share similar activity periods with
hellbenders (Mathis 2008b, pers. comm.).
Summary of Disease or Predation
The discovery of the presence of Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis
(chytridiomycosis) in 2006 within all remaining populations of the
Ozark hellbender has made increased protection even more important to
the persistence of this subspecies (Utrup 2007, pers. comm.). This
pathogen occurs throughout the entire range of the Ozark hellbender and
is determined to be a significant threat to the subspecies. The threat
from chytridiomycosis is significant and immediate because: (1) It is
proven to be a fatal pathogen to Ozark hellbenders in captivity, and
(2) in the wild, all streams with extant Ozark hellbender populations
have individuals that tested positive for the pathogen (Briggler 2008b,
pers. comm.). In addition, although it is unclear if there is a
connection to chytridiomycosis, abnormalities found on Ozark
hellbenders are increasingly severe, often to a level that the animal
is approaching death (Briggler 2008a, pers. comm.). Researchers view
chytridiomycosis as one of the most serious threats to the survival of
this subspecies (Briggler et al. 2007, p. 83).
Nonnative trout are stocked in all rivers that historically and
currently contain hellbenders in Missouri. Predation of larval
hellbenders by nonnative trout possibly contributes to the decline of
Ozark hellbender populations in Missouri and may be a growing concern
if predatory fish continue to be stocked (or are stocked in larger
numbers) in hellbender streams.
D. The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms.
In Arkansas, hellbenders may be collected with a scientific
collecting permit from the AGFC; however, no permits are anticipated to
be issued now or in the future because the State acknowledges the
severely imperiled status of the subspecies (Irwin 2008, pers. comm.).
Although Arkansas does not have a State endangered and threatened
species list, the State considers the Ozark hellbender a nongame
species and prohibits collection without a permit. The Ozark hellbender
is a State-endangered species in Missouri, which prohibits importation,
exportation, transportation, sale, purchase, taking, and possession of
the species without a permit. MDC placed a moratorium on hellbender
collecting from 1991 to 1996 and has since allowed only limited numbers
of collecting permits (Horner 2008, pers. comm.). Despite receiving
maximum protection by both States, continued unauthorized collecting
for the pet trade has been documented and remains a threat throughout
the range.
Clean Water Act
Although the Clean Water Act of 1972 (CWA (Pub. L. 92-500))
resulted in an overall gain in water quality in streams, degraded water
quality still is a significant factor affecting such highly sensitive
aquatic organisms as the Ozark hellbender. Non-point pollution sources
(for example, animal and human waste, agricultural practices, increased
road construction) may be causing much of
[[Page 54572]]
the degraded water quality throughout the Ozark hellbender's range.
This is more apparent in stretches of rivers that are not within
federally or State protected lands (Irwin 2008, pers. comm.).
The court's decision in American Mining Congress v. U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers (D.D.C. 1997) resulted in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
deregulating gravel removal activities under section 404 of the CWA.
The court found that ``de-minimus'' or incidental fallback of sand and
gravel into the stream from which it was being excavated did not
constitute the placement of fill by the mining operation. Hence, the
court ruled that the Army Corps of Engineers had exceeded their
authority in requiring a permit for this activity. Although these
activities no longer require a Clean Water Act 404 permit, commercial
operations in Missouri must apply for a State permit through the
Missouri Department of Natural Resources Land Reclamation Program.
Modifications of stream channels associated with gravel mining, as well
as the removal of pebbles and cobble that are important microhabitat
for larvae and subadults, contribute to the decline of Ozark
hellbenders in these systems.
Lacey Act
State regulations for gigging and for trout stocking do not protect
the Ozark hellbender. The gigging season for suckers (fish mainly in
the Catostomidae family) spans the reproductive season of the Ozark
hellbender in the North Fork White River and overlaps that of the
hellbender in other river basins as well. The sucker gigging season
opens annually on September 15, during the peak breeding period when
hellbenders are most active and, therefore, most exposed. The 2003 MDC
Trout Management Plan calls for increased levels of stocking as well as
increasing the length of cold water streams that will be stocked with
brown and rainbow trout (Missouri Department of Conservation 2003, pp.
31-32). In Arkansas, the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission is currently
working with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to improve cold water
releases from mainstem dams along the White River to improve conditions
for trout below the reservoirs (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 2008, pp.
1-40).
Under section 3372(a)(1) of the Lacey Act Amendments of 1981 (16
U.S.C. 3371-3378), it is unlawful to import, export, transport, sell,
receive, acquire, or purchase any wildlife taken, possessed,
transported, or sold in violation of any law, treaty, or regulation of
the United States. This prohibition of the Lacey Act would apply in
instances where a person engages in a prohibited act with an Ozark
hellbender unlawfully collected from Federal lands, such as those
Federal lands within the range of the Ozark hellbender that are owned
and managed by the U.S. Forest Service or the National Park Service. It
is unlawful under section 3372(a)(2)(A) of the Lacey Act Amendments of
1981 to import, export, transport, sell, receive, acquire, or purchase
in interstate or foreign commerce any wildlife taken, possessed,
transported, or sold in violation of any law or regulation of any
State.
Because it is a violation of Missouri and Arkansas laws and
regulations to sell, purchase, or engage in any actions relating to the
commercial trade of Ozark hellbenders (for example, import, export,
ship, or transport), any interstate or foreign commerce of the Ozark
hellbender would result in a violation of the Lacey Act Amendments of
1981. However, if an Ozark hellbender is not declared as the subspecies
but rather as hellbender or eastern hellbender, then it would be
difficult for the wildlife inspector to identify it as the prohibited
subspecies. Although the prohibitions and penalties of the Lacey Act
Amendments of 1981 provide some protection for the Ozark hellbender,
this law, by itself, does not adequately prevent or reduce the illegal
commercial trade of hellbenders.
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna
and Flora (CITES)
The unauthorized collection and trade of Ozark hellbenders within
the United States and internationally is of growing concern,
particularly as rarity increases and, consequently, commercial value
increases. The Ozark hellbender is not listed on the appendices of
CITES. CITES is an international agreement between governments with the
purpose of ensuring that international trade in wild animals and plants
does not threaten their survival. CITES listing of the Ozark hellbender
would aid in curbing unauthorized international trade of hellbenders.
Elsewhere in today's Federal Register, the Service is proposing to
include the hellbender (both the eastern and Ozark subspecies) in
Appendix III of CITES. CITES can list species in one of three
appendices. Appendix I includes species threatened with extinction that
are or may be affected by international trade. Appendix II includes
species that, although not necessarily threatened with extinction now,
may become so unless the trade is strictly controlled. Appendix II also
includes species that CITES must regulate so that trade in other listed
species may be brought under effective control (for example, because of
similarity of appearance between listed species and other species).
Appendix III includes native species identified by any Party country
that needs to be regulated to prevent or restrict exploitation; under
Appendix III, that Party country requests the help of other Parties to
monitor and control the trade of that species. Based on the criteria
described in 50 CFR 23.90, the eastern and the Ozark hellbenders
qualify for listing in CITES Appendix III. Listing all hellbenders in
Appendix III is necessary to allow us to adequately monitor
international trade in the taxa; to determine whether exports are
occurring legally, with respect to State law; and to determine whether
further measures under CITES or other laws are required to conserve
this species and its subspecies. Appendix-III listings will lend
additional support to State wildlife agencies in their efforts to
regulate and manage hellbenders, improve data gathering to increase our
knowledge of trade in hellbenders, and strengthen State and Federal
wildlife enforcement activities to prevent poaching and illegal trade.
Summary of the Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
Some existing regulatory mechanisms provide protection for the
Ozark hellbender and its habitat. Existing Federal and State water
quality laws can be applied to protect water quality in streams
occupied by the hellbender. The requirement for a U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers dredge and fill permit under section 404 of the Clean Water
Act has resulted in an overall gain in water quality. However, ongoing
gravel mining in hellbender streams is no longer regulated by the Corps
of Engineers under section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Although the
Lacey Act provides some protection, the current regulatory mechanisms
are not adequate to protect Ozark hellbenders from unauthorized
collection for commercial sale in the pet trade. The Service has also
proposed, but not finalized, listing the eastern and Ozark hellbender
in Appendix III of CITES. Nonetheless, even if the CITES listing is
finalized, it would only apply to the export of hellbenders from the
United States.
[[Page 54573]]
E. Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence.
Small, Isolated Populations - The small size and isolation of
remaining populations of the Ozark hellbender make it vulnerable to
extinction due to genetic drift, inbreeding depression, and random or
chance changes to the environment (Smith 1990, pp. 311-321) that can
significantly impact hellbender habitat. Inbreeding depression can
result in death, decreased fertility, smaller body size, loss of vigor,
reduced fitness, and various chromosome abnormalities (Smith 1990, pp.
311-321). Despite any evolutionary adaptations for rarity, habitat loss
and degradation increase a species' vulnerability to extinction (Noss
and Cooperrider 1994, pp. 58-62). Numerous authors (such as Noss and
Cooperrider 1994, pp. 58-62; Thomas 1994, p. 373) have indicated that
the probability of extinction increases with decreasing habitat
availability. Although changes in the environment may cause populations
to fluctuate naturally, small and low-density populations are more
likely to fluctuate below a minimum viable population (the minimum or
threshold number of individuals needed in a population to persist in a
viable state for a given interval; Gilpin and Soule 1986, pp. 25-33;
Shaffer 1981, p. 131; Shaffer and Samson 1985, pp. 148-150).
The loss of genetic diversity in Ozark hellbenders is illustrated
by Routman's (1993, p. 410-415) study, in which hellbender populations
from different rivers showed very little within-population variability,
and relatively high between-population variability. Due to this
population fragmentation, local extirpations cannot be naturally
repopulated. Current factors negatively affecting the habitat of the
Ozark hellbender may exacerbate potential problems associated with its
low population numbers and the isolation of those small populations
from each other, which increases the chances of this species going
extinct.
Recruitment and Reproductive Capability - The hellbender's late
sexual maturity leads to a higher risk of death prior to reproduction
and lengthened generation times (Congdon et al. 1993, pp. 831-832).
Hellbender specimens less than 5 years of age are uncommon (Taber et
al. 1975, pp. 636-637; Pfingsten 1990, p. 49), and recent research has
indicated that the age structure has shifted, resulting in the
prevalence of older individuals (Pfingsten 1990, p. 49; Wheeler et al.
2003, p. 153 and p. 155).
Because hellbenders are long-lived, a population may not be highly
dependent on recruitment to remain extant (Mayasich et al. 2003, p.
22). Empirical and theoretical evidence suggests, however, that the
amount of generation overlap within a population (high survivorship
among juveniles) is necessary to maintain stable populations (Congdon
et al. 1993, pp. 830-832; Ellner and Hairston 1994, pp. 413-415). Lack
of sufficient recruitment may be limiting the population stability and
the ability of hellbender populations to maintain genetic diversity as
their habitat is altered (Wheeler et al. 2003, p. 155). Pfingsten
(1990, p. 49) also cautions, however, that lack of larvae detection
could mean that the larvae occupy a microhabitat that has yet to be
surveyed.
Unger (2003, pp. 30-36) compared several measures of sperm
production between male Ozark and eastern hellbenders in Missouri and
eastern hellbender males from more stable populations in North Carolina
and Georgia. Sperm counts were significantly lower for males from both
tested Missouri populations than for males from southeastern
populations. Populations were not significantly different with respect
to sperm viability and motility. The sperm of Missouri males had
proportionally smaller heads for their tail lengths; this difference
was relatively small, but was statistically significant. There is a
clear need to direct resources toward determining the cause of the
apparent reduction in sperm counts for males from declining populations
in Missouri. Because motility and viability appeared unaffected,
artificial insemination might be a viable conservation technique,
although limited efforts to date have been successful (Unger 2003, pp.
65-66).
The extremely low number or lack of juveniles in most Ozark
hellbender populations is a significant sign that little reproduction
has occurred in these populations for several years. Late age of
reproductive maturity, when paired with a long lifespan, can disguise
population declines resulting from activities that occurred years
earlier until the adults begin dying and numbers begin declining from
lack of recruitment. The present distribution and status of Ozark
hellbender populations in the White River system in Arkansas and
Missouri are exhibiting such a decline (Wheeler et al. 2003, p. 155).
Genetic studies have repeatedly demonstrated very low genetic diversity
in hellbender populations, which may be a factor in the decline of the
species (Routman 1993, Kucuktas et al. 2001). The current combination
of population fragmentation, disease, and habitat degradation will
prohibit this species from recovering without the intervention of
conservation measures designed to facilitate hellbender recovery.
Summary of Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued
Existence
The small size and isolation of Ozark hellbender populations and
loss of genetic diversity could exacerbate other factors negatively
affecting the subspecies and accelerate possible extinction. These
factors are particularly detrimental when combined with the factors
affecting the hellbender, such as of habitat loss, water quality
degradation, chytridiomycosis, and unauthorized collection and trade.
Proposed Determination
Although no clear estimates exist for how many Ozark hellbenders
historically inhabited Missouri and Arkansas, surveys over recent years
have documented a severe decline in all populations. To illustrate this
decline, consider the current total range-wide population estimate of
590 (Briggler et al. 2007, p. 83) compared to the results of one 1973
study indicating approximately 1,150 hellbenders within less than 1.2
mi (2 km) of one occupied river (Nickerson and Mays 1973b, p. 1165).
In addition to the severe population declines, the known factors
negatively affecting and subsequent threats to the Ozark hellbender
have continued to increase since we elevated the species to candidate
status in 2001 (66 FR 54808; October 30, 2001). In particular, the
discovery of the presence of Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis
(chytridiomycosis) in 2006 within all remaining populations of the
Ozark hellbender has made increased protection even more important to
persistence of this subspecies (Utrup 2007, pers. comm.). Researchers
view chytridiomycosis as one of the most serious threats to the
survival of this subspecies, which has a total estimated population
size of 590 individuals (Briggler et al. 2007, p. 83).
The decrease in Ozark hellbender population size and the shift in
age structure are likely caused in part by a variety of historical and
ongoing activities. It is believed that one of the primary causes of
these trends is habitat destruction and modification from siltation and
water quality degradation. The sources include industrialization,
agricultural runoff, mine waste, and activities related to timber
harvesting. Increased siltation affects hellbenders in a variety of
ways, such as suffocating eggs, eliminating suitable habitat for all
[[Page 54574]]
life stages, reducing dissolved oxygen levels, increasing contaminants
(that bind to sediments), and reducing prey populations. Increased
nitrate levels and fecal coliform, along with a variety of other
contaminants from agricultural runoff and increased urbanization, have
been detected in hellbender streams, which not only negatively affects
hellbenders directly but also the Ozark aquatic ecosystems in general.
Impoundments alter habitat directly, isolate populations, and change
water temperatures and flows below reservoirs. Remaining Ozark
hellbender populations are small and isolated, in part due to increased
impoundments over time, making hellbenders vulnerable to individual
catastrophic events and reducing the likelihood of recolonization after
localized extirpations.
Recreational pressure (for example, boat traffic, horseback riding,
and ORV use) in streams inhabited by Ozark hellbenders has increased
substantially on an annual basis, directly disturbing the habitat. Fish
and frog gigging popularity and pressure continue to increase,
presenting a significant threat to hellbenders during the breeding
season (Nickerson and Briggler 2007, pp. 209-211). Trout stocking
continues to occur on hellbender streams both in Missouri and Arkansas.
The lack of larval and sub-adult hellbenders present may be attributed
to predation by nonnative stocked trout. The increase in number or size
of recreational boats and tubes, commercial horse trail ride
outfitters, and ORV use has increased disturbance and contamination
(for example, fecal coliform).
The unauthorized collection of hellbenders, especially for the pet
trade, remains a major concern, particularly with market values
continually increasing. Existing regulations targeting this significant
threat, including State laws, have not been completely successful in
preventing the unauthorized collection and trade of Ozark hellbenders.
The combined impact of degraded environmental conditions, along
with the increased susceptibility to chytridiomycosis due to these
threats, has created a situation in which the Ozark hellbender is
likely to become functionally extinct (populations no longer viable)
within the next couple decades. Researchers and managers agree that,
while a solution is being reached to directly address the presence of
the chytrid fungus within Ozark hellbender populations, all other
factors significantly affecting the hellbender must be ameliorated to
prevent the imminent extinction of this subspecies.
Projections from the August 2006 PHVA model concluded that the
Ozark hellbender metapopulations are expected to decline by more than
50 percent in 12 to 16 years, viability of all individual populations
will be low after 20 to 25 years (total individuals equaled fewer than
100 and genetic diversity was less than 90 percent), and risk of
metapopulation extinction is high within 40 to 50 years. These
projections may be optimistic because they are based on best-case
density estimates and assume that hellbender populations within each
river system are continuous and did not account for the prevalence of
chytrid fungus and its possible effects on hellbenders. Hellbenders do
not travel great distances, however, and subpopulations within each
river system are often separated by miles (kilometers) of unsuitable
habitat resulting in fragmented populations. These models projected the
Ozark hellbender subspecies to be functionally extinct within 20 years
(Briggler et al. 2007, pp. 88-90 and 97).
We determine foreseeable future on a case-by-case basis, taking
into consideration a variety of species-specific factors such as
lifespan, genetics, breeding behavior, demography, threat-projection
timeframes, and environmental variability. Based on the observed
population decline in the subspecies and the threats as discussed, we
find that the Ozark hellbender is in danger of extinction throughout
all of its range. One information source (Briggler et al. 2007, pp. 88-
90 and p. 97) estimates that the subspecies may be functionally extinct
by 2026 (less than 20 years) if we do not take actions to slow or
reverse the downward trajectory.
We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial
information available regarding past, present, and future threats to
the Ozark hellbender. The population numbers continue to decline as a
result of the multiple threats impacting this subspecies, increasing
extinction risk. Based on the immediacy and ongoing significant threats
to the subspecies throughout its entire range, we find the subspecies
to be in danger of extinction throughout all of its range. Therefore,
on the basis of the best -scientific and commercial information
available, we are proposing to list the Ozark hellbender as an
endangered species. Because we find that this subspecies meets the
definition of an endangered species (in danger of extinction)
throughout all of its range, it is unnecessary to analyze its status in
a significant portion of its range.
Critical Habitat
Background
Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the Act as:
(i) The specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the
species, at the time it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which
are found those physical or biological features
(I) essential to the conservation of the species and
(II) which may require special management considerations or
protection; and
(ii) specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the
species at the time it is listed, upon a determination that such areas
are essential for the conservation of the species.
Conservation, as defined under section 3 of the Act, means to use
and the use of all methods and procedures that are necessary to bring
an endangered or threatened species to the point at which the measures
provided pursuant to the Act are no longer necessary. Such methods and
procedures include, but are not limited to, all activities associated
with scientific resources management such as research, census, law
enforcement, habitat acquisition and maintenance, propagation, live
trapping, and transplantation, and, in the extraordinary case where
population pressures within a given ecosystem cannot be otherwise
relieved, may include regulated taking.
Critical habitat receives protection under section 7 of the Act
through the prohibition against Federal agencies carrying out, funding,
or authorizing the destruction or adverse modification of critical
habitat. Section 7(a)(2) requires consultation on Federal actions that
may affect critical habitat. The designation of critical habitat does
not affect land ownership or establish a refuge, wilderness, reserve,
preserve, or other conservation area. Such designation does not allow
the government or public to access private lands. Such designation does
not require implementation of restoration, recovery, or enhancement
measures by non-Federal landowners. Where a landowner seeks or requests
Federal agency funding or authorization for an action that may affect a
listed species or critical habitat, the consultation requirements of
section 7(a)(2) of the Act would apply, but even in the event of a
destruction or adverse modification finding, Federal action agency's
and the applicant's obligation is not to restore or recover the
species, but to implement
[[Page 54575]]
reasonable and prudent alternatives to avoid destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat.
For inclusion in a critical habitat designation, the habitat within
the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it was listed
must contain the physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of the species, and be included only if those features may
require special management considerations or protection. Critical
habitat designations identify, to the extent known using the best
scientific and commercial data available, habitat areas that provide
essential life cycle needs of the species (areas on which are found the
physical and biological features (PBFs) laid out in the appropriate
quantity and spatial arrangement for the conservation of the species).
Under the Act and regulations at 50 CFR 424.12, we can designate
critical habitat in areas outside the geographical area occupied by the
species at the time it is listed only when we determine that those
areas are essential for the conservation of the species and that
designation limited to those areas occupied at the time of listing
would be inadequate to ensure the conservation of the species.
Section 4 of the Act requires that we designate critical habitat on
the basis of the best scientific and commercial data available.
Further, our Policy on Information Standards Under the Endangered
Species Act (published in the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR
34271)), the Information Quality Act (section 515 of the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L.
106-554; H.R. 5658)), and our associated Information Quality
Guidelines, provide criteria, establish procedures, and provide
guidance to ensure that our decisions are based on the best scientific
data available. They require our biologists, to the extent consistent
with the Act and with the use of the best scientific data available, to
use primary and original sources of information as the basis for
recommendations to designate critical habitat.
When we are determining which areas should be designated as
critical habitat, our primary source of information is generally the
information developed during the listing process for the species.
Additional information sources may include the recovery plan for the
species, articles in peer-reviewed journals, conservation plans
developed by States and counties, scientific status surveys and
studies, biological assessments, or other unpublished materials and
expert opinion or personal knowledge.
Habitat is often dynamic, and species may move from one area to
another over time. Furthermore, we recognize that critical habitat
designated at a particular point in time may not include all of the
habitat areas that we may later determine are necessary for the
recovery of the species. For these reasons, a critical habitat
designation does not signal that habitat outside the designated area is
unimportant or may not be required for recovery of the species.
Areas that are important to the conservation of the species, but
are outside the critical habitat designation, will continue to be
subject to conservation actions we implement under section 7(a)(1) of
the Act. Areas that support populations are also subject to the
regulatory protections afforded by the section 7(a)(2) jeopardy
standard, as determined on the basis of the best available scientific
information at the time of the agency action. Federally funded or
permitted projects affecting listed species outside their designated
critical habitat areas may still result in jeopardy findings in some
cases. Similarly, critical habitat designations made on the basis of
the best available information at the time of designation will not
control the direction and substance of future recovery plans, habitat
conservation plans (HCPs), or other species conservation planning
efforts if new information available at the time these planning efforts
calls for a different outcome.
Prudency Determination
Background
Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as amended, and implementing
regulations (50 CFR 424.12), require that, to the maximum extent
prudent and determinable, we designate critical habitat at the time the
species is determined to be endangered or threatened. Our regulations
(50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)) state that the designation of critical habitat is
not prudent when one or both of the following circumstances 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. We have determined that
both circumstances apply to the Ozark hellbender. This determination
involves a weighing of the expected increase in threats associated with
a critical habitat designation against the benefits gained by a
critical habitat designation. An explanation of this ``balancing''
evaluation follows.
Increased Threat to the Taxon by Designating Critical Habitat
The unauthorized collection of Ozark hellbenders for the pet trade
is a factor contributing to hellbender declines (Nickerson and Briggler
2007, p. 214) and remains a significant threat today, particularly with
increasing international market values. For a detailed discussion on
the threat of commercial collection, see factor B (Overutilization for
commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes).
The process of designating critical habitat would increase human
threats to the Ozark hellbender by increasing the vulnerability of this
species to unauthorized collection and trade through public disclosure
of its locations. Designation of critical habitat requires the
publication of maps and a very specific narrative description of
critical habitat areas in the Federal Register. The degree of detail in
those maps and boundary descriptions is far greater than the general
location descriptions provided in this proposal to list the species as
endangered. Furthermore, a critical habitat designation normally
results in the news media publishing articles in local newspapers and
special interest websites, usually with maps of the critical habitat.
We believe that the publication of maps and descriptions outlining the
locations of this critically imperiled taxon will further facilitate
unauthorized collection and trade, as collectors will know the exact
locations where Ozark hellbenders occur. Ozark hellbenders are easily
collected because they are slow moving and have extremely small home
ranges. Therefore, publishing specific location information would
provide a high level of assurance that any person going to a specific
location would be able to successfully locate and collect specimens
given the species site fidelity and ease of capture once located.
Due to the threat of unauthorized collection and trade, the
Missouri Department of Conservation and the Arkansas Game and Fish
Commission have implemented extraordinary measures to control and
restrict information on the locations of Ozark hellbenders. These
agencies have expressed to the Service serious concerns with publishing
maps and boundary descriptions of Ozark hellbender areas associated
with critical habitat designation (Briggler and Irwin 2008, pers.
comm.). The agencies believe that designating critical habitat
[[Page 54576]]
could negate their efforts to restrict access to location information
that could significantly affect future efforts to control the threat of
unauthorized collection and trade of Ozark hellbenders.
Benefits to the Species from Critical Habitat Designation
Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires Federal agencies, including the
Service, to ensure that actions they fund, authorize, or carry out are
not likely to destroy or adversely modify critical habitat. Decisions
by the 5\th\ and 9\th\ Circuit Court of Appeals have invalidated our
definition of ``destruction or adverse modification'' (50 CFR 402.02)
(see Gifford Pinchot Task Force v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 378
F. 3d 1059 (9\th\ Cir. 2004) and Sierra Club v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service et al., 245 F.3d 434, 442F (5\th\ Cir. 2001)), and we do not
rely on this regulatory definition when analyzing whether an action is
likely to destroy or adversely modify critical habitat. Under the
statutory provisions of the Act, we determine destruction or adverse
modification on the basis of whether, with implementation of the
proposed Federal action, the affected critical habitat would remain
functional (or retain those PBFs that relate to the ability of the area
to periodically support the species) to serve its intended conservation
role for the species.
Critical habitat only provides protections where there is a Federal
nexus, that is, those actions that come under the purview of section 7
of the Act. Critical habitat designation has no application to actions
that do not have a Federal nexus. Section 7(a)(2) of the Act mandates
that Federal agencies, in consultation with the Service, evaluate the
effects of its proposed action on any designated critical habitat.
Similar to the Act's requirement that a Federal agency action not
jeopardize the continued existence of listed species, Federal agencies
have the responsibility not to implement actions that would destroy or
adversely modify designated critical habitat. Critical habitat
designation alone, however, does not require that a Federal action
agency implement specific steps toward species recovery.
Ozark hellbenders primarily occur on non-Federal lands. The species
occurs exclusively on private lands in Arkansas and predominately on
private lands in Missouri. In Missouri, Ozark hellbenders do occur on
lands managed by the National Park Service (Ozark National Scenic
Riverway) and U.S. Forest Service (Mark Twain National Forest). We
anticipate that some actions on non-Federal lands will have a Federal
nexus (for example, requirement for a permit to discharge dredge and
fill material from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) for an action that
may adversely affect the hellbender. There is also the potential that
some proposed actions by the National Park Service and U.S. Forest
Service may adversely affect the hellbender. However, both of these
Federal agencies are implementing measures to ensure the conservation
and recovery of the hellbender on lands they manage, including active
involvement in the Ozark Hellbender Working Group.
In those circumstances where it has been determined that a Federal
action (including actions involving non-Federal lands) may affect the
hellbender, the action would be reviewed under section 7(a)(2) of the
Act. We anticipate that the following Federal actions are some of the
actions that could adversely impact the Ozark hellbender: Instream
dredging, channelizing, impounding water, streambank clearing, moving
large rocks within or from streams, discharging fill material into the
stream, or discharging or dumping toxic chemicals or other pollutants
into a hellbender stream system. Under section 7(a)(2) of the Act,
project impacts would be analyzed and the Service would determine if
the Federal action would jeopardize the continued existence of the
hellbender. The designation of critical habitat would ensure that a
Federal action would not result in the destruction or adverse
modification of the designated critical habitat. Consultation with
respect to critical habitat will provide additional protection to a
species only if the agency action would result in the destruction or
adverse modification of the critical habitat but would not jeopardize
the continued existence of the species. In the absence of critical
habitat, areas that support the Ozark hellbender will continue to be
subject to conservation actions implemented under section 7(a)(1) of
the Act and to the regulatory protections afforded by the section
7(a)(2) jeopardy standard, as appropriate. Federal actions affecting
the hellbender even in the absence of designated critical habitat areas
will still benefit from consultation pursuant to section 7(a)(2) of the
Act and may still result in jeopardy findings.
Another potential benefit to the Ozark hellbender from designating
critical habitat is that such a designation serves to educate
landowners, State and local governments, and the public regarding the
potential conservation value of an area. Generally, providing this
information helps focus and promote conservation efforts by other
parties by clearly delineating areas of high conservation value for the
affected species. Simply publicizing the proposed listing of the
species also serves to notify and educate landowners, State and local
governments, and the public regarding important conservation values.
Furthermore, the Ozark Hellbender Working Group has developed a
comprehensive outreach and education program that targets a diverse
audience, including public and private landowners, organizations, and
the media (Ozark Hellbender Working Group 2008, Outreach and Education
Chapter).
The Ozark Hellbender Working Group, formed in 2001, is composed of
personnel from Federal and State agencies, academia, zoos, non-profit
organizations, and private individuals. The Ozark hellbender outreach
actions implemented to date include producing and distributing
stickers, posters, and videos; publishing magazine articles; working
with media outlets (newspaper and television) on hellbender stories;
giving presentations to local County Commissioners and other community
groups; providing a profile of the Ozark hellbender in the Missouri
Department of Conservation's Fishing Regulations Pamphlet; and
providing annual technical assistance to volunteers like the Missouri
Department of Conservation's Stream Teams working in hellbender
streams. In view of the extensive, ongoing efforts to outreach and
promote Ozark hellbender conservation, we believe that the designation
of critical habitat would provide limited additional outreach value.
Increased Threat to the Species Outweighs the Benefits of Critical
Habitat Designation
Upon reviewing the available information, we have determined that
the designation of critical habitat would increase the threat to Ozark
hellbenders from unauthorized collection and trade. We believe that the
risk of increasing this significant threat by publishing location
information in a critical habitat designation outweighs the benefits of
designating critical habitat.
A limited number of U.S. species listed under the Act have
commercial value in trade. The Ozark hellbender would be one of them.
Due to the market demand and willingness of individuals to collect
hellbenders without authorization, we believe that any action that
publicly discloses the location of hellbenders (such as critical
[[Page 54577]]
habitat) puts the species in further peril. The Ozark hellbender is
critically imperiled, requiring a focused and comprehensive approach to
reducing threats. Several measures are currently being implemented to
address the threat of unauthorized collection and trade of hellbenders,
and additional measures will be implemented if the species is listed
under the Act. One of the basic measures to protect hellbenders from
unauthorized collection and trade is restricting access to information
pertaining to the location of Ozark hellbenders. Publishing maps and
narrative descriptions of Ozark hellbender critical habitat would
significantly affect our ability to reduce the threat of unauthorized
collection and trade.
Therefore, based on our determination that critical habitat
designation would increase the degree of threats to the Ozark
hellbender and, at best, provide nominal benefits for this taxon, we
find that the increased threat to the Ozark hellbender from the
designation of critical habitat significantly outweighs any benefit of
designation.
Summary of Prudency Determination
We have determined that the designation of critical habitat would
increase unauthorized collection and trade threats to the Ozark
hellbender. The Ozark hellbender is valued in the pet trade, and that
value is likely to increase as the species becomes rarer. Critical
habitat designation may provide some benefits to the conservation of
the Ozark hellbender, for example, by identifying areas important for
conservation. However, we have determined that the benefits of
designating critical habitat for the Ozark hellbender are minimal. We
have concluded that, even if some benefit from designation may exist,
the increased threat to the species from unauthorized collection and
trade outweighs any benefit to the taxon. A determination to not
designate critical habitat also supports the measures taken by the
States to control and restrict information on the locations of Ozark
hellbenders and to no longer make location and survey information
readily available to the public. We have, therefore, determined that it
is not prudent to designate critical habitat for the Ozark hellbender.
Available Conservation Measures
Conservation measures provided to species listed as endangered or
threatened under the Act include recognition of the species and its
status by the public, landowners, and other agencies; recovery actions;
requirements for Federal protection; and prohibitions against certain
practices. Recognition through listing results in public awareness of
the conservation status of the species and encourages conservation
actions by Federal and State governments, private agencies and groups,
and individuals. The Act provides for possible land acquisition and
cooperation with the States and calls for recovery actions to be
carried out. The protection required of Federal agencies and the
prohibitions against taking and harm are discussed, in part, below.
Section 7(a) of the Act, as amended, requires Federal agencies to
evaluate their actions with respect to any species that is listed as
endangered or threatened and with respect to its critical habitat, if
any is designated. Regulations implementing this interagency
cooperation provision of the Act are codified at 50 CFR part 402.
Section 7(a)(4) requires Federal agencies to confer informally with us
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) requires Federal agencies, including the
Service, to ensure that activities they authorize, fund, or carry out
are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the species or
to destroy or adversely modify its critical habitat if any has been
designated. If a Federal action may affect a listed species or its
critical habitat, the responsible Federal agency must enter into formal
consultation with us.
Federal agency actions that may require conference or consultation
for the Ozark hellbender as described in the preceding paragraph
include, but are not limited to: stream alterations, development of new
waste water facilities that may impact water quality, stream bank
clearing, timber harvesting, construction of recreational trails and
facilities adjacent to streams, water withdrawal projects, pesticide
registration and usage, agricultural assistance programs, mining, road
and bridge construction, and Federal loan programs. Activities will
trigger consultation under section 7 of the Act if they may affect the
Ozark hellbender addressed in this rule.
The listing of the Ozark hellbender would subsequently lead to
development of a recovery plan for this species. A recovery plan
establishes a framework for interested parties to coordinate activities
and to cooperate with each other in conservation efforts. The plan will
set recovery priorities, identify responsibilities, and estimate the
costs of the tasks necessary to accomplish the priorities. It will also
describe site-specific management actions necessary to conserve the
Ozark hellbender. Additionally, under section 6 of the Act, we would be
able to grant funds to the States of Missouri and Arkansas for
management actions promoting the conservation of the Ozark hellbender.
The Act and implementing regulations set forth a series of general
prohibitions and exceptions that apply to all endangered and threatened
wildlife. As such, these prohibitions would be applicable to the Ozark
hellbender. The prohibitions, under 50 CFR 17.21 and 17.31, in part,
make it illegal for any person subject to the jurisdiction of the
United States to take (includes harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot,
wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect; or to attempt any of these),
import or export, deliver, receive, carry transport, or ship in
interstate or foreign commerce in the course of commercial activity, or
sell or offer for sale in interstate or foreign commerce any listed
species. It also is illegal to possess, sell, deliver, carry,
transport, or ship any such wildlife that has been taken illegally.
Further, it is illegal for any person to attempt to commit, to solicit
another person to commit, or to cause to be committed, any of these
acts. Certain exceptions apply to our agents and State conservation
agencies.
We may issue permits to carry out otherwise prohibited activities
involving threatened and endangered wildlife under certain
circumstances. We codified the regulations governing permits for
endangered and threatened species at 50 CFR 17.22 and 17.32. Such
permits are available for scientific purposes, to enhance the
propagation or survival of the species, and for incidental take in the
course of otherwise lawful activities.
It is our policy, published in the Federal Register on July 1, 1994
(59 FR 34272), to identify, to the maximum extent practicable at the
time a species is listed, those activities that would or would not
constitute a violation of section 9 of the Act and associated
regulations at 50 CFR 17.31. The intent of this policy is to increase
public awareness of the effect of this proposed listing on proposed and
ongoing activities within a species' range. We believe that the
following activities are unlikely to result in a violation of section 9
of the Act:
(1) Activities authorized, funded, or carried out by Federal
agencies, when such activities are conducted in accordance with an
incidental take
[[Page 54578]]
statement issued by us under section 7 of the Act;
(2) Any action carried out for scientific research or to enhance
the propagation or survival of Ozark hellbenders that is conducted in
accordance with the conditions of a 50 CFR 17.22 permit;
(3) Any incidental take of Ozark hellbenders resulting from an
otherwise lawful activity conducted in accordance with the conditions
of an incidental take permit issued under 50 CFR 17.22. Non-Federal
applicants may design a habitat conservation plan (HCP) for the species
and apply for an incidental take permit. HCPs may be developed for
listed species and are designed to minimize and mitigate impacts to the
species to the maximum extent practicable.
We believe the following activities would be likely to result in a
violation of section 9; however, possible violations are not limited to
these actions alone:
(1) Unauthorized killing, collecting, handling, or harassing of
individual Ozark hellbenders at any life stage;
(2) Sale or offer for sale of any Ozark hellbender as well as
delivering, receiving, carrying, transporting, or shipping any Ozark
hellbender in interstate or foreign commerce and in the course of a
commercial activity;
(3) Unauthorized destruction or alteration of the species habitat
(for example, instream dredging, channelizing, impounding of water,
streambank clearing, removing large rocks from or flipping large rocks
within streams, discharging fill material) that actually kills or
injures individual Ozark hellbenders by significantly impairing their
essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding, or
sheltering;
(4) Violation of any discharge or water withdrawal permit within
the species' occupied range that results in the death or injury of
individual Ozark hellbenders by significantly impairing their essential
behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding, or sheltering; and
(5) Discharge or dumping of toxic chemicals or other pollutants
into waters supporting the species that actually kills or injures
individual Ozark hellbenders by significantly impairing their essential
behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding, or sheltering.
We will review other activities not identified above on a case-by-
case basis to determine whether they may be likely to result in a
violation of section 9 of the Act. We do not consider these lists to be
exhaustive and provide them as information to the public.
You should direct questions regarding whether specific activities
may constitute a future violation of section 9 of the Act to the Field
Supervisor of the Service's Columbia Field office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section). You may request copies of the regulations
regarding listed wildlife from and address questions about prohibitions
and permits to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services
Division, Henry Whipple Federal Building, 1 Federal Drive, Fort
Snelling, MN 55111; Phone 612-713-5350; Fax 612-713-5292).
Peer Review
In accordance with our policy, ``Notice of Interagency Cooperative
Policy for Peer Review in Endangered Species Act Activities,'' that was
published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), we will seek the expert
opinion of at least three appropriate independent specialists regarding
this proposed rule. The purpose of such review is to ensure listing
decisions are based on scientifically sound data, assumptions, and
analysis. We will send copies of this proposed rule to the peer
reviewers immediately following publication in the Federal Register.
We will consider all comments and information we receive during
this comment period on this proposed rule during our preparation of a
final determination. Accordingly, our final decision may differ from
this proposal.
Public Hearings
The Act provides for one or more public hearings on this proposal,
if we receive any requests for hearings. We must receive your request
for a public hearing within 45 days after the date of this Federal
Register publication. Send your request to the address shown in the
ADDRESSES section. We will schedule public hearings on this proposal,
if any are requested, and announce the dates, times, and places of
those hearings, as well as how to obtain reasonable accommodations, in
the Federal Register and local newspapers at least 15 days before the
first hearing.
Required Determinations
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
We have determined that environmental assessments and environmental
impact statements, as defined under the authority of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), need not be
prepared in connection with regulations adopted under section 4(a) of
the Act. We published a notice outlining our reasons for this
determination in the Federal Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR
49244).
Clarity of Rule
We are required by Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule we publish must:
(a) Be logically organized;
(b) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
(c) Use clear language rather than jargon;
(d) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
(e) Use lists and tables wherever possible.
If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us
comments by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. To
better help us revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as
possible. For example, you should tell us the 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.
References Cited
A list of the references used to develop this proposed rule is
available upon request (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section).
Authors
The primary authors of this proposed rule are the staff members of
the Columbia (Missouri) Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section).
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we propose to amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter
I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:
PART 17-[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; 16 U.S.C.
4201-4245; Pub. L. 99-625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted.
2. Amend Sec. 17.11(h) by adding an entry for ``Hellbender,
Ozark'' in alphabetical order under AMPHIBIANS to the List of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife as follows:
[[Page 54579]]
Sec. 17.11 Endangered and threatened wildlife.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Vertebrate
------------------------------------------------ population where Critical
Historic range endangered or Status When listed habitat Special rules
Common name Scientific name threatened
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Amphibians
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hellbender, Ozark Cryptobranchus AR, MO Entire E NA NA
alleganiensis
bishopi
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dated: August 19, 2010.
Wendi Weber,
Acting Deputy Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-22249 Filed 9-7-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S