[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 158 (Wednesday, August 15, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 48934-48947]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-19970]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R5-ES-2012-0056; 4500030113]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding on
a Petition To List the Bicknell's Thrush (Catharus bicknelli) as
Endangered or Threatened
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of petition finding and initiation of status review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
90-day finding on a petition to list the Bicknell's thrush (Catharus
bicknelli) as endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act
of 1973, as amended (Act), and to designate critical habitat. Based on
our review, we find that the petition presents substantial scientific
or commercial information indicating that listing this species may be
warranted. Therefore, with the publication of this notice, we will be
initiating a review of the status of the species to determine if
listing the Bicknell's thrush is warranted. To ensure that our status
review is comprehensive, we are requesting scientific and commercial
data and other information regarding this species. Based on the results
of our status review, we will issue a 12-month finding on the petition,
which will address whether the petitioned action is warranted, as
provided in section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act.
DATES: We request that we receive information on or before October 15,
2012. The deadline for submitting an electronic comment using the
Federal eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES section below) is 11:59 p.m.
Eastern Time on this date. After October 15, 2012, you must submit
information directly to the Division of Policy and Directives
Management (see ADDRESSES section below). Please note that we might not
be able to address or incorporate information that we receive after the
above requested date.
ADDRESSES: You may submit information by one of the following methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. In the Search field, enter FWS-R5-ES-2012-0056,
which is the docket number for this action. Then click on the Search
button. You may submit a comment by clicking on ``Comment Now!.'' If
your submission will fit in the provided comment box, please use this
feature of http://www.regulations.gov, as it is most compatible with
our information collection procedures. If you attach your submission as
a separate document, our preferred file format is Microsoft Word. If
you attach multiple documents (such as form letters), our preferred
format is a spreadsheet in Microsoft Excel.
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R5-ES-2012-0056; Division of Policy and
Directives Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax
Drive, MS 2042-PDM; Arlington, VA 22203.
This finding is available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov at Docket Number FWS-R5-ES-2012-0056. Supporting
documentation we used in preparing this finding is
[[Page 48935]]
available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal business
hours at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, New England Field Office,
70 Commercial Street, Suite 300, Concord, New Hampshire 03301.
We will post all information we receive on http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any
personal information you provide us (see the Request for Information
section below for more details).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas R. Chapman, Supervisor, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, New England Field Office, 70 Commercial
Street, Suite 300, Concord, New Hampshire 03301; by telephone at 603-
223-2541. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD),
please call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-
8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Information
When we make a finding that a petition presents substantial
information indicating that listing a species may be warranted, we are
required to promptly initiate review of the status of the species
(status review). For the status review to be complete, and based on the
best available scientific and commercial information, we request
information on the Bicknell's thrush from governmental agencies, Native
American tribes, the scientific community, industry, and any other
interested parties. We seek information on:
(1) The species' biology, range, and population trends, including:
(a) Habitat requirements for feeding, breeding, and sheltering;
(b) Genetics and taxonomy;
(c) Historical and current range, including distribution patterns;
(d) Historical and current population levels, and current and
projected trends; and
(e) Past and ongoing conservation measures for the species, its
habitat, or both.
(2) The factors that are the basis for making a listing
determination for a species under section 4(a) of the Act (16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.), which are:
(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.
(3) Information regarding the potential impacts to the species
resulting from climate change, such as data, analyses, and predictions
related to:
(a) The loss of spruce-fir forested habitat where the species
breeds, including the projected impacts to the Canadian portion of the
species' breeding range;
(b) Impacts to forest habitats in the Caribbean that provide
important wintering habitat for the species; and
(c) Alterations to the cycling and productivity in balsam fir cone
production that may alter population dynamics in red squirrels, a major
predator of nestling Bicknell's thrush.
(4) Information regarding the ongoing and projected impacts of
ground-level ozone emissions on spruce and fir in the northeastern
United States and Maritime Provinces of Canada.
(5) Behavioral, survival, and reproductive consequences of various
mercury accumulation levels in insectivorous songbirds.
(6) Impacts to the species resulting from the construction and
operation of commercial wind turbines and transmission lines in
breeding habitat, including habitat loss, mortality, productivity, and
avoidance of turbines as a result of blade movements or noise.
(7) Existing regulatory mechanisms that may be protective of the
Bicknell's thrush and its habitat, particularly on its wintering
grounds in the Greater Antilles.
If, after the status review, we determine that listing the
Bicknell's thrush is warranted, we will propose critical habitat (see
definition in section 3(5)(A) of the Act) under section 4 of the Act,
to the maximum extent prudent and determinable at the time we propose
to list the species. Therefore, we also request data and information
on:
(1) What may constitute ``physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species,'' within the geographical range
currently occupied by the species;
(2) Where these features are currently found;
(3) Whether any of these features may require special management
considerations or protection;
(4) Specific areas outside the geographical area currently occupied
by the species that are ``essential for the conservation of the
species''; and
(5) What, if any, critical habitat you think we should propose for
designation if the species is proposed for listing, and why such
habitat meets the requirements of section 4 of the Act.
Please include sufficient information with your submission (such as
scientific journal articles or other publications) to allow us to
verify any scientific or commercial information you include.
Submissions merely stating support for or opposition to the action
under consideration without providing supporting information, although
noted, will not be considered in making a determination. Section
4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that determinations as to whether any
species is an endangered or threatened species must be made ``solely on
the basis of the best scientific and commercial data available.''
You may submit your information concerning this status review by
one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. If you submit
information via http://www.regulations.gov, your entire submission--
including any personal identifying information--will be posted on the
Web site. If your submission is made via a hardcopy that includes
personal identifying information, you may request at the top of your
document that we withhold this personal identifying information from
public review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do
so. We will post all hardcopy submissions on http://www.regulations.gov.
Information and supporting documentation that we received and used
in preparing this finding is available for you to review at http://www.regulations.gov, or by appointment, during normal business hours,
at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, New England Field Office (see
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires that we make a finding on
whether a petition to list, delist, or reclassify a species presents
substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the
petitioned action may be warranted. We are to base this finding on
information provided in the petition, supporting information submitted
with the petition, and information otherwise available in our files. To
the maximum extent practicable, we are to make this finding within 90
days of our receipt of the petition and publish our notice of the
finding promptly in the Federal Register.
Our standard for substantial scientific or commercial information
within the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) with regard to a 90-day
petition finding is ``that amount of information that would lead a
reasonable person to believe that the measure proposed in the petition
may be warranted'' (50 CFR 424.14(b)). If we find that substantial
scientific or commercial information was presented, we are required to
promptly initiate a
[[Page 48936]]
species status review. The status review and 12-month petition finding
are combined in a single Federal Register notice.
Petition History
On August 26, 2010, we received a petition, dated August 24, 2010,
from Mollie Matteson, Center for Biological Diversity (CBD or
petitioner), Northeast Field Office, requesting that the Bicknell's
thrush be listed as threatened or endangered and that critical habitat
be designated under the Act. The petition clearly identified itself as
such and included the requisite identification information for the
petitioner, required at 50 CFR 424.14(a). In a September 9, 2010,
letter to the petitioner, we responded that we would review the
information presented in the petition and determine if listing of the
Bicknell's thrush was warranted. This finding addresses the petition.
Previous Federal Actions
In 1994, the Bicknell's thrush was determined to be a category 2
species of concern and we announced that finding in the Animal
Candidate Review for Listing as Endangered or Threatened Species (59 FR
58982). Category 2 was defined as including taxa for which the Service
had information indicating that proposing to list as endangered or
threatened is possibly appropriate, but for which persuasive data on
biological vulnerability and threat are not currently available to
support proposed rules. In 1996, the Service discontinued the list of
category 2 candidate species, resulting in the removal of the
Bicknell's thrush from candidate status (61 FR 64481).
Although the Bicknell's thrush was removed from the list of
candidate species in 1996, the species was identified by the North
American Bird Conservation Initiative as one of the Highest Priority
Landbirds in the Atlantic Northern Forest (Dettmers 2006, p. 21), and
the Service's New England Field Office has continued to amass
information related to the species and to support conservation of the
species.
On September 9, 2011, the U.S. District Court for the District of
Columbia approved two settlement agreements: one agreement between the
Service and CBD and a second agreement between the Service and
WildEarth Guardians (WEG). The agreements enable the Service to
systematically, over a period of 6 years, review and address the needs
of more than 250 species listed on the 2010 Candidate Notice of Review
(75 FR 69222). The agreements also include additional scheduling
commitments for a small subset of the actions in the 6-year work plan
that are consistent with the Service's objectives and biological
priorities. For the Bicknell's thrush, the settlement agreement with
WEG specifies that we will complete a 90-day petition finding by the
end of fiscal year 2012.
Species Information
The Bicknell's thrush (Catharus bicknelli) is the smallest of North
American Catharus thrushes in the family Turdidae, which includes all
birds related to the robins (Rimmer et al. 2001, p. 2). Rimmer et al.
(2001, pp. 1-28) provides a comprehensive overview of the species'
biology. Field identification of the Bicknell's thrush is difficult,
because of close similarities in appearance with the gray-cheeked (C.
minimus) and the Swainson's (C. ustulatus) thrushes (Wallace 1939, p.
217; Rimmer et al. 2001, p. 2). The total population of Bicknell's
thrush is estimated to be 95,000 to 126,000 birds (International
Bicknell's Thrush Conservation Group (IBTCG) 2010, p. 6).
The Bicknell's thrush was considered a subspecies of the gray-
cheeked thrush until 1993. Ornithologists carefully evaluated the
species' morphology, range, song, behavior, habitat, and genetic
divergences and detected significant differences between the taxa. This
evaluation subsequently led to the recommendation that the Bicknell's
thrush be elevated to a full species (Ouellet 1993, p. 568). The
American Ornithologist Union (1995, p. 824) recognizes the Bicknell's
thrush as a species, and the Service concurs with that taxonomic
change.
The Bicknell's thrush is a migratory species, meaning it travels
between different geographical areas to fulfill life-history functions
like breeding and raising its young. The species feeds predominantly on
insects, but during migration and on its wintering grounds, the species
can shift its diet almost entirely to the consumption of several
varieties of small fruits (Beal 1915 in Wallace 1939, p. 295; Rimmer et
al. 2001, pp. 9-10; Townsend et al. 2010, p. 517). Bicknell's thrush
forages for food among trees, feeding among the branches or hawking
(pursuit in flight); however, most foraging activity takes place on or
near the ground through litter pecking or gleaning (Wallace 1939, p.
295; Sabo 1980, p. 251; Rimmer et al. 2001, pp. 9-10).
The Bicknell's thrush breeds in portions of the northeastern United
States and eastern and southern Canada and winters in the Greater
Antilles. On its way between the breeding and wintering grounds, the
Bicknell's thrush flies along the Atlantic coast and may stop in
certain areas for resting and feeding. The breeding range of the
species extends from the northern Saint Lawrence area of Quebec and the
Maritime Canadian Provinces south through New England and New York to
that State's Catskill Mountains (Wallace 1939, pp. 258-259; Ouellet
1993, pp. 563-564; Rimmer et al. 2001, p. 1). Breeding habitat for the
Bicknell's thrush is described as dense tangles of both living and dead
``stunted'' trees that are predominately balsam fir (Abies balsamea)
with lesser amounts of red spruce (Picea rubens) and white birch
(Betula papyrifera var. cordifolia) (Wallace 1939, p. 285; Rimmer et
al. 2001, p. 7; Ouellet 1993, p. 561). Depending upon location, white
spruce (P. glauca) or an occasional black spruce (P. mariana) can also
provide breeding habitat, as can pin cherry (Prunus pennsylvanica),
mountain ash (Sorbus americanus), shadbush (Amelanchier spp.), and
other deciduous species (Wallace 1939, pp. 285-286; Sabo 1980, p. 242;
Ouellet 1993, p. 561; Rimmer et al. 2001, p. 7). Except in the case of
the Maritime Provinces, where the species can be found at lower
elevations using regenerating industrial forests, the species breeds
mostly in stunted high elevation, or montane spruce-fir forests located
close to, but below, timberline, which usually occurs at elevations in
excess of 900 meters (m) (3,000 feet (ft)) elevation (Wallace 1939, pp.
248 and 286; Ouellet 1993, pp. 560, 561; Atwood et al. 1996, p. 652;
Rimmer et al. 2001, p. 7).
The montane spruce-fir forests that this species prefers for
breeding are typical of chronically disturbed areas associated with
altered growing conditions resulting from human activities (e.g., ski
trails) and natural processes. Natural disturbances include `terrific'
winds, which can exceed 45 meters per second (mps) (100 miles per hour
(mph)), and heavy rime ice accumulation that occurs when supercooled
water droplets undergo rapid freezing upon contact with a cold surface
(Wallace 1939, p. 282; Rimmer et al. 2001, p. 7). As a result of these
conditions, trees are stunted and the mean canopy height in areas where
the Bicknell's thrush is found in the White Mountains of New Hampshire
is 4.8 m (15.7 ft) (Sabo 1980, p. 250). Habitats of this type provide
approximately 100,000 to 150,000 hectares (ha) (247,105 to 370,658
acres (ac)) of Bicknell's thrush nesting habitat for the United States'
breeding population, which is estimated to be between 57,000 and 77,000
birds
[[Page 48937]]
and represents approximately 60 percent of the global population
(Atwood et al. 1996, p. 654; IBTCG 2010, p. 6).
The remaining global population of the Bicknell's thrush, or 37,000
to 49,000 birds, breeds in Canada (IBTCG 2010, p. 6). While Bicknell's
thrush can be found in Canadian habitats associated with industrial
forests at elevations as low as 175 m (574 ft), most are found in
montane spruce-fir forests at elevations exceeding 600 m (1968 ft)
(Ouellet 1993, pp. 560-563; Nixon et al. 2001, p. 38). Bird densities
in lower elevation habitats range from 16 to 40 pairs per 100 ha (247
ac), which is much lower than the 90 to 100 pairs per 100 ha (247 ac)
densities measured during a 4-year study in montane habitat on
Vermont's Mount Mansfield (Nixon et al. 2001, p. 38; Rimmer et al.
1996, p. 641).
Although the Bicknell's thrush exhibits some flexibility in the
elevation of breeding habitats used, the species demonstrates a strong
preference for a specific vegetation structure. Breeding habitats in
montane habitats or in lower elevation areas are characterized by dense
vegetation (Rimmer et al. 2001, pp. 7-8).
Breeding occurs in June, with males singing to attract a mate
(Wallace 1939, p. 311; Rimmer et al. 2001, p. 12). Both males and
females will mate with multiple partners, resulting in multiple
paternity within the same nest (Rimmer et al. 2001, p. 13). Nest
building and egg incubation is the sole responsibility of the female,
but both males and females feed the chicks (Wallace 1939, pp. 323-325;
Rimmer et al. 2001, pp. 15-17). Fledging occurs at 9 to 14 days, at
which time the young either stay in the vicinity of the nest or depart
to other areas, including down-slope, hardwood-dominated habitats
(Rimmer et al. 2001, p. 18). The sex ratio of Bicknell's thrush
nestlings can vary from 1 male:1.5 females to 2 males:1 female (Rimmer
et al. 2001, p. 13; Townsend et al. 2009, pp. 92-93).
By the end of September, the Bicknell's thrush departs its breeding
grounds (Wallace 1939, p. 259). Migration patterns are poorly known
(Ouellet 1993, p. 564; Rimmer et al. 2001, pp. 6-7); however, fall
migration progresses at a ``leisurely'' pace with most birds usually
remaining at some stop-over locations for a day or two and some
documented to stay for as long as 7 days (Wallace 1939, p. 259; Rimmer
et al. 2001, p. 7). Fall migration follows a coastal route, south to
the mid-Atlantic coast where it is thought that most birds depart land
and fly across the ocean, finally arriving in the Greater Antilles by
early November (Ouellet 1993, p. 564; Rimmer et al. 2001, pp. 6-7).
Wintering occurs exclusively in the Greater Antilles, with the
majority of birds on the island of Hispaniola, in Haiti and the
Dominican Republic. The species can also be found on the islands of
Cuba, Jamaica, and Puerto Rico (Rimmer et al. 2001, pp. 3-4), although
it is considered an uncommon migrant in Hispaniola; a rare migrant to
the Bahamas, Cuba, and Jamaica; and a vagrant on Puerto Rico and the
Virgin Islands (Raffaele et al. 1998, p. 376). In the Dominican
Republic, the Bicknell's thrush can be found from sea level to 2,200 m
(7,200 ft), although most occur in mesic to wet broadleaf montane
forests in excess of 1,000 m (3,300 ft) elevation (Rimmer et al. 2001,
p. 8). The Bicknell's thrush can also be found in dry, pine-dominated
forests (Rimmer et al. 2001, p. 6). The species prefers dense thicket
vegetation similar to habitats selected during the breeding season
(Townsend et al. 2010, p. 520), and individuals (both males and
females) defend and maintain exclusive territories where conspecifics
(members of the same species) are excluded (Townsend et al. 2010, p.
517).
In spring, the birds leave the Greater Antilles, probably by late
April (Rimmer et al. 2001, p. 5). They first appear in Florida, and by
the end of May they can be found back in the mountains of New England
and Canada (Wallace 1939, p. 259; Rimmer et al. 2001, p. 5). Males
typically arrive sooner than the females (Rimmer et al. 2001, p. 5).
Population Trends
Conducting comprehensive surveys for the Bicknell's thrush is
difficult because of the species' patchy distribution. As a result,
Bicknell's thrush is under-represented in the United States' historical
Breeding Bird Survey data, making detection of long-term trends
difficult (Bystrak 1981, p. 38). However, several local extirpations
from former breeding habitat have been detected (Rimmer et al. 2001, p.
4). For example, in Massachusetts, the Bicknell's thrush breeding
population on Mount Greylock gradually declined from 10 pairs in 1950
to 0 pairs in 1973, and visits to Saddle Ball Mountain during the
period 1992 to 1995 failed to detect the species (Atwood et al. 1996,
p. 657). This same survey also failed to detect the Bicknell's thrush
where it had historically occurred in Vermont on Glebe and Molly Stark
Mountains, as well as Mounts Aeolus and Ascutney. In New Hampshire,
Bicknell's thrush was not found on Mounts Pemigewasset, Monadnock, and
Sunapee, as well as North Moat Mountain, where the species had been
previously located.
In Canada, the species has disappeared from Seal and Mud Islands in
Nova Scotia (Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada
(COSEWIC) 2009, p. 9), despite being relatively common at the time of
Wallace's writing (1939, p. 331), when at least a dozen nests were
found on Seal Island. Bicknell's thrush has also been absent from
formerly occupied habitats on Cape Breton Island and Cape Forchu, Nova
Scotia (COSEWIC 2009, p. 9; Rimmer et al. 2001, p. 4). In Quebec, the
Bicknell's thrush has not been observed in the last 10 years in the
following previously occupied locations: Montagne Noire; Monts Sir-
Wilfrid, des [Eacute]boulements, Comi, and St-Pierre; at some
previously occupied sites in the zec des Martres; M[eacute]tis-sur-Mer;
and on Bonaventure and Magdalen Islands (COSEWIC 2009, p. 9). In New
Brunswick since the 1980s, the species has apparently become absent as
a breeder from the southern half of the province, including from Grand
Manan Island and the Rapidy Brook area (COSEWIC 2009, p. 9).
To obtain better information on the population status of all birds
occupying high-elevation spruce-fir habitat in New Hampshire's White
Mountains, a comprehensive survey was conducted during the period of
1993 to 2003 (King et al. 2008). This survey effort involved annual
bird counts at 768 points on 42 transects located along hiking trails.
The results revealed that in a 10-year period (1993 to 2003), the
Bicknell's thrush population had declined by 7 percent (Lambert et al.
2008, p. 607) in the survey area. However, results from this study may
not be indicative of Bicknell's thrush populations rangewide,
especially when considering that the combined trend data from across
the United States' breeding range have been stable for the period 2001
to 2009, with local abundance increasing in the Adirondack Mountains
(New York), while remaining the same in the Catskills (New York), the
Green Mountains (Vermont), and the White Mountains (New Hampshire)
(IBTCG 2010, p. 7). Conversely, survey data from Canada demonstrate a
17 percent annual decline in New Brunswick and a 15 percent annual
decline in Nova Scotia (IBTCG 2010, p. 7). On Mont Gosford, there were
60 percent fewer individuals detected in 2007 than in 2001 (IBTCG 2010,
p. 7). Long-term Canadian Breeding Bird Survey data for the period of
1966 to 2008 show a 9 percent decline (IBTCG 2010, p. 7).
In summary, the readily available current population trend
information
[[Page 48938]]
seems to indicate a static or slightly declining Bicknell's thrush
breeding population from historical population levels. However, there
is no information readily available to the Service about the species'
wintering population. Further information about the species' overall
population numbers and trends will be gathered during the status
review.
Evaluation of Information for This Finding
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and its implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 424 set forth the procedures for adding a species
to, or removing a species from, the Federal Lists of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife and Plants. 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) of the Act:
(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 considering what factors might constitute threats, we must look
beyond the mere exposure of the species to the factor to determine
whether the species responds to the factor in a way that causes actual
impacts to the species. If there is exposure to a factor, but no
response, or only a positive response, that factor is not a threat. If
there is exposure and the species responds negatively, the factor may
be a threat, and we then attempt to determine how significant a threat
it is. If the threat is significant, it may drive or contribute to the
risk of extinction of the species such that the species may warrant
listing as threatened or endangered as those terms are defined by the
Act. This does not necessarily require empirical proof of a threat. The
combination of exposure and some corroborating evidence of how the
species is likely impacted could suffice. The mere identification of
factors that could impact a species negatively may not be sufficient to
compel a finding that listing may be warranted. The information shall
contain evidence sufficient to suggest that these factors may be
operative threats that act on the species to the point that the species
may meet the definition of threatened or endangered under the Act.
In making this 90-day finding, we evaluated whether information
regarding threats to the Bicknell's thrush, as presented in the
petition and other information available in our files, is substantial,
thereby indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted. Our
evaluation of this information is presented below.
A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment
of Its Habitat or Range
Information Provided in the Petition
The petitioner asserts that the ``primary threat to the long-term
persistence of the Bicknell's thrush is habitat loss'' (Center for
Biological Diversity 2010 petition (Petition), p. 24). The petitioner
concludes that ``montane ecosystems that host populations of the
Bicknell's thrush are small and fragmented, heightening their
vulnerability to a number of complex, interrelated threats'' (Petition,
p. 24). ``Foremost among these threats is global climate change,'' the
petitioner asserts, that will result in disappearance of montane
forests from the species' current breeding range (Petition, p. 24). In
addition to direct and indirect impacts of climate change, the petition
also describes other factors that contribute to the loss of important
breeding and wintering Bicknell's thrush habitat, including: (1) Acid
rain deposition; (2) ground-level ozone and nitrogen atmospheric
deposition; (3) recreational, telecommunication, and wind energy
development activities; and (4) timber extraction that results in the
conversion of breeding habitat to other land uses (Petition, pp. 6,
24).
Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition and Available in
Service Files
Climate Change--Impacts to Breeding and Wintering Habitat
The petitioner states that ``Climate change represents the gravest
threat to the long-term survival of the Bicknell's thrush'' (Petition,
p. 24). The petition provides an overview of global climate change
research, including past, present, and predicted future climate change
conditions (Petition, pp. 24-28). Following this overview of the
scientific basis of global climate change, the petitioner discusses
observed and predicted impacts to Bicknell's thrush habitat. The
petitioner asserts that the predicted global climate change will result
in increased July temperatures that could lead to a reduction in the
amount of spruce-fir habitat for the Bicknell's thrush by over 95
percent (Petition, p. 29), as well as increase the frequency of erratic
and severe weather events. The petition also cites references that
indicate that climate change will result in drying trends for the
Caribbean Basin that may reduce the suitability of important wintering
habitats, as well as an increase in the frequency of tropical storms
that may destroy habitat (Petition, pp. 31, 33).
Regarding climate change-induced increased summer temperatures in
the Northeast, several studies provide relevant information. For
example, the petitioner asserts that the Fourth Assessment Report:
Climate Change 2007 (hereafter referred to as AR4), prepared by the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) presents the best
available science on global climate change. We concur that the
information on global climate change contained within AR4 is reliable.
The IPCC concludes that warming of the climate system is unequivocal,
as is now evident from observations of increase in global average air
and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice, and rising
global average sea level (IPCC 2007, p. 2). Further, they attribute the
warming to a 70 percent increase in greenhouse gas (mostly
CO2) emissions from human activities during the period 1970
to 2004, and those emissions result in a marked increase in global
concentration of contributing gases, as evidenced by ice core samples
(IPCC 2007, p. 5). In conclusion, the IPCC expresses a ``very high
confidence'' that the net effect of recent human activities has been
one of warming (IPCC, p. 5).
This warming trend is expected to continue as a result of a
projected increase of global greenhouse gas emissions by 25 to 90
percent between 2000 and 2030, which would be greater than the change
observed during the 20th century (IPCC, p. 7). Although there is some
uncertainty regarding the mechanics of climate change and how much
temperatures will change, the projected global average surface
temperature increase is estimated to range from 1.1 [deg]C to 6.4
[deg]C (2.0 [deg]F and 11.5 [deg]F) in 2090 to 2099, over the
temperatures observed during the 19-year period of 1980 to 1999 (IPCC
2007, p. 8). Consistent with this increase in global average
temperatures, at a regional scale, average annual temperatures in the
northeastern United States are also projected to rise by 2.9 [deg]C to
5.3 [deg]C (5.0 [deg]F to 10.0 [deg]F) by 2070 to 2099, in comparison
to the period of 1961 to 1990 (Hayhoe et al. 2007, p. 388).
The petition presents research, supported by readily available
information in our files, which demonstrates that climate change-
induced habitat loss has occurred
[[Page 48939]]
within the range of the Bicknell's thrush. The spruce-fir/deciduous
ecotone is correlated with elevation areas that have a mean July
temperature of approximately 17 [deg]C (63 [deg]F); consequently,
montane spruce-fir forests are restricted to upper elevations (Cogbill
and White 1991, pp. 169 and 171). During the period of 1964 to 2004,
analysis of forest plots in Vermont's Green Mountains indicates a 19
percent increase in the dominance of northern hardwood species in the
northern hardwood-boreal forest ecotone, at the expense of red spruce,
balsam fir, and montane paper birch (Beckage et al. 2008, p. 4197).
This tree species shift is corroborated by remotely sensed data from
1962 to 2005 that indicates a 92-m (302-ft) and 119-m (390-ft) upslope
movement in the northern hardwood to boreal ecotone on two mountains:
Mount Abraham, which supports a breeding population of the Bicknell's
thrush (Rimmer et al. 2005a, p. 27) and Camels Hump. This change
coincides with an increase of 1.1 [deg]C (2 [deg]F) in annual
temperature during the same period, and the authors propose that this
climate change promotes the growth and recruitment of northern
hardwoods at higher elevations (Beckage et al. 2008, p. 4201). The
authors then suggest that the increase in northern hardwood species is
made possible by vacancies left by boreal forest species that have,
possibly, succumbed to the effects of acid rain depositions, to which
red spruce mortality has been attributed (Beckage et al. 2008, p.
4201). In conclusion, the authors suggest ``that high-elevation forests
may be jeopardized by climate change * * *'' (Beckage et al. 2008, p.
4197). Similar information also exists from other Vermont sites
(Friedland 1989, pp. 240-241) and from New York (Cook 1985 and Johnston
et al. 1988 in Friedland 1989, p. 242).
The montane spruce-fir forests of New York and northern New England
provide breeding habitat for approximately 60 percent of the world's
estimated Bicknell's thrush population (IBTCG 2010, p. 6). Rodenhouse
et al. (2008, p. 525) suggest that because the occurrence of this
habitat type is primarily controlled by climate, projected warming has
the potential to alter the distribution and abundance of the Bicknell's
thrush. To evaluate the consequences of climate change to Bicknell's
thrush habitat, Rodenhouse et al. (2008, p. 525) evaluate the potential
impacts of a warming climate on modeled Bicknell's thrush habitat. The
authors argue a warming climate will enable northern hardwoods to
encroach on red spruce and balsam fir, causing the montane spruce fir
forest to shift out of Bicknell's thrush habitat suitability
(Rodenhouse et al. 2008, p. 525). Based on their results, regional
warming of 1 [deg]C (1.8 [deg]F) will reduce Bicknell's thrush habitat
by more than one-half, while an increase of 2 [deg]C (3.6 [deg]F) may
result in the elimination of all breeding sites from the Catskill
Mountains and most of Vermont. Furthermore, with an increase of 3
[deg]C (5.4 [deg]F), most Bicknell's thrush will be eliminated from the
northeastern United States. With an increase of 5 [deg]C (9 [deg]F),
nearly all the habitat will be eliminated, but some small habitat
patches may persist (Rodenhouse et al. 2008, p. 526). This information
is relevant, because the average annual temperatures in the
northeastern United States are projected to rise by 2.9 [deg]C to 5.3
[deg]C (5.0 [deg]F to 10.0 [deg]F) by 2070 to 2099, above those of the
period 1961 to 1990 (Hayhoe et al. 2007, p. 388).
The petitioner indicates that she is unaware of any climate
modeling for Canadian highland forests used by Bicknell's thrush
(Petition, p. 31). This will be further investigated during our 12-
month status review.
In regard to increasing frequency of storms, the petitioner also
indicates that climate change will cause ``more erratic and severe
weather events'' but acknowledges that how or to what extent the bird's
breeding habitat will be impacted is unknown (Petition, p. 33). There
is no information readily available to the Service specific to the
expected frequency or intensity of storms that may impact montane
spruce-fir breeding habitat, but this will be further investigated
during our 12-month status review.
In addition to climate change impacts to breeding habitat, the
petitioner asserts that the quality of wintering habitat for the
Bicknell's thrush in the Greater Antilles will be reduced by climate
change-induced drought (Petition, p. 31) and more intense and frequent
El Ni[ntilde]o Southern Oscillation events (Petition, p. 33). By 2050,
the observed significant drying trends in the Caribbean are expected to
reduce water resources (Neelin et al. 2006, p. 6110; IPCC 2007, p. 52).
The impacts of these drought conditions or flooding that may result
from El Ni[ntilde]o events on the Bicknell's thrush and its habitat are
unclear. There is no information readily available to the Service on
climate change in this area, but this will be further investigated
during our 12-month status review.
Climate Change--Changing Dynamic of Forest Pests and Disease
The petition suggests that climate change may alter the disturbance
dynamics of native forest insects and diseases, as well as facilitate
the establishment and spread of nonindigenous species (Hunt et al.
2006, pp. 6-7). In addition to the direct degradation of breeding
habitat, these pests may facilitate invasion of montane spruce-fir
forests by northern hardwoods (Beckage et al. 2008, p. 4201), as
discussed below.
The spruce budworm (Choristoneura fumiferana) is the most important
native pest of spruce and fir in the Northeast and is capable of
substantially modifying large areas of boreal forest (Fleming and
Candau 1998, p. 236). The spruce budworm is a naturally outbreaking
insect that can be extremely abundant for periods of 5 to 15 years,
with populations reaching 10\8\ fourth instar larvae per ha (> 40
million per ac). This level of abundance can kill most trees in dense,
mature balsam fir stands (Fleming and Candau 1998, pp. 236, 237; Gitay
et al. 2001, p. 291). These periods of abundance can be followed by
periods of up to 60 years when the budworm is relatively rare. Budworm
outbreaks frequently follow droughts or hot, dry summers. This event
sequencing may lead to increased egg production and disruptions in the
timing of budworm and several of its parasitoid predators, thereby
increasing population growth potential in the budworm (Gitay et al.
2001, p. 291). Therefore, the environmental changes resulting from
climate change could affect spruce budworm populations by altering any
of the relationships among host tree species, the budworm, and its
natural enemies (Fleming and Candau 1998, p. 236).
Local extinction of balsam fir is one potential outcome of climate
change-induced intensification of spruce budworm outbreaks (Fleming and
Candau 1998, p. 246). However, a potential benefit of this change is
that the Bicknell's thrush is known to use regenerating forests
disturbed by spruce budworm infestations (COSEWIC 2009, p. 10; Bredin
and Whittam 2009, p. 13). As we describe above in the Species
Information section, Bicknell's thrush feed on many insects, including
species of lepidopteran larvae (Wallace 1939, p. 295), which may
include the spruce budworm.
The balsam woolly adelgid (Adelges piceae) is another insect that
the petitioner discusses as a threat to Bicknell's thrush habitat. The
balsam woolly adelgid is an exotic pest of fir
[[Page 48940]]
trees, introduced from central Europe, and is impacting large stands of
fir in the southern Appalachians (Iverson et al. 1999, p. 176;
Ragenovich and Mitchell 2006). Weather is an important factor in the
survival of this insect, because in cold winters, only those adelgids
below the snowline will survive temperatures below -1 [deg]C (30
[deg]F) (Ragenovich and Mitchell 2006, p. 9). Furthermore, only the
first instar can survive the winter. In montane spruce-fir habitats,
the season may be too short for this insect to complete a second
generation, which affords some protection to high elevation Bicknell's
thrush breeding habitat (Ragenovich and Mitchell 2006, p. 9). There is
the potential, however, for the balsam woolly adelgid to have
deleterious effects on the Bicknell's thrush breeding habitat quality
(Lambert et al. 2005, p. 7; IBTCG 2010, p. 14) if overall temperatures
rise as modeled by the IPCC.
Summary of Climate Change--Results of the empirical studies we
discuss above suggest that breeding habitat within the United States,
and possibly in Canada, may decrease with a warming climate. Although
the impacts of a warming climate on the species' wintering range have
not been quantified, habitat modeling indicates that continued warming
may lead to the complete loss of the species' breeding habitat within
the United States by the end of the 21st century. In addition, the
predicted warming trends may result in more favorable conditions for
forest pests such as the spruce budworm and balsam woolly adelgid.
Therefore, information presented in the petition and readily available
in our files indicates that environmental impacts associated with
climate change may be a threat to the Bicknell's thrush.
Atmospheric Acid and Nitrogen Deposition and Ground-Level Ozone
The petition asserts that deposition of acid and nitrogen poses a
serious threat to Bicknell's thrush habitat throughout its high-
elevation habitat (Petition 2010, pp. 33-36). Acid deposition, commonly
referred to as acid rain, is mostly derived from the burning of fossil
fuels, such as coal and gas, that results in the production of sulfur
dioxide and nitrogen oxides that in turn react with atmospheric water,
oxygen, and other chemicals to form various acidic compounds (U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 2012, http://www.epa.gov/acidrain/). The deposition of these acidic compounds in high-elevation
montane habitats occurs in either rain or cloud water. The pH values
for these waters have been measured at 2.1, which is extremely acidic
(DeHayes et al. 1999, p. 789). Air pollution also results in the
deposition and accumulation of sulfur and nitrogen (nitrates or ammonia
or both) in forest soils, which can impact soil health (Driscoll et al.
2001, p. 12; Driscoll et al. 2003, p. 357, ITBCG 2010, p. 13).
Regulations have been passed to reduce acid deposition, and while the
Acid Rain Program, established under Title IV of the 1990 Clean Air Act
Amendments, has reduced sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions and
average ambient concentrations, high levels of acid deposition continue
in the northeastern United States (EPA 2009, p. 1; Driscoll et al.
2001, p. 6).
Information in our files suggests that deposition of acid may have
several implications for the Bicknell's thrush and its habitat. First,
deposition of acidic ions is known to reduce soil calcium, which likely
leads to calcium deficiencies that render red spruce needles vulnerable
to freezing damage. This damage reduces a tree's tolerance to low
temperatures and increases the occurrence of winter injury and
subsequent mortality (DeHayes et al. 1999, p. 798). Second, acidic
deposition may also increase soil aluminum availability, which may
limit the ability of red spruce trees to take up water and nutrients
through their roots (Cumming and Brown 1994, p. 597).
Information in our files also suggests that deposition of nitrogen,
a major plant nutrient, may also affect Bicknell's thrush habitat when
the nitrogen deposition acts in concert with increased spruce-fir
mortality resulting from deposition of acid; deposition of nitrogen, a
major plant nutrient, may also affect Bicknell's thrush habitat. In
high elevation spruce-fir forests, nutrient cycling is naturally low
due to slower decomposition and low biological nitrogen demand;
however, high-elevation areas receive greater amounts of atmospheric
nitrogen than do low-elevation areas (McNulty et al. 1991, p. 16).
Several research studies document a shift in species vegetation that
favors hardwood tree species when montane spruce-fir stands were
exposed to naturally occurring and artificially manipulated levels of
atmospheric nitrogen (McNulty et al. 2005, p. 290; McNulty et al. 1996,
p. 109; Beckage et al. 2008, p. 4201). The resulting vegetation shift
towards more hardwoods may decrease the quality of foraging or nesting
areas for the Bicknell's thrush (IBTCG 2010, p. 13).
The petition goes on to suggest, without providing any supporting
references, high spruce mortality, as a result of acid and nitrogen
deposition, provides a more open canopy and may expose adult Bicknell's
thrush to greater risk of predation. The petitioner states the increase
in exposure requires resident thrushes to spend more time being
vigilant for predators instead of spending more time and energy on
other vital life functions (Petition, p. 33). There is no evidence
presented with the petition to support this concern. In fact,
information in our files indicates that Bicknell's thrush frequently
sing from exposed perches atop dead snags (Rimmer et al. 2001, p. 12).
Furthermore, Rimmer et al. (2004, pp. 27, 30) found no significant
differences in adult survivorship or breeding productivity of
Bicknell's thrush between ski areas, which provide greater openings
than would a solitary red spruce snag, and more natural areas. This
study suggests that there is little risk of increased predation of
Bicknell's thrush in the presence of red spruce snags, as a result of
increased spruce mortality, and a more open canopy (Rimmer et al. 2004.
pp. 22-27).
The petition suggests that ground-level ozone is another air
pollutant that is putting Bicknell's thrush habitat at risk of long-
term and potentially irreversible decline (Petition, p. 35). Ozone is
the product of a reaction of sunlight on nitrogen oxide and
hydrocarbons, which can cause foliage damage and lead to reduced growth
in plants (Lovett and Tear 2008, pp. 4-5). To support this position,
the petition provides information regarding the impacts that ground-
level ozone has had on western conifers (Petition, p. 35). However, the
petition acknowledges that ozone impacts to montane red spruce and
balsam fir are not described. Likewise, we are also unaware of any
information suggesting that ground-level ozone is impacting Bicknell's
thrush habitat.
Summary of Atmospheric Deposition and Ground-Level Ozone--The
results of the studies we discuss above suggest that Bicknell's thrush
breeding habitat within the United States may decrease as a result of
atmospheric acid and nitrogen deposition. Researchers have suggested
that this deposition contributes to declines in red spruce and balsam
fir in montane habitats, and may facilitate the establishment of
hardwood species. Also, atmospheric deposition of acid and nitrogen is
occurring throughout the species' breeding range. Therefore,
information presented in the petition and readily available in our
files indicates that the present or threatened destruction,
modification, or curtailment of its range by impacts caused by
atmospheric deposition of acid and nitrogen may be
[[Page 48941]]
a threat to the Bicknell's thrush. Conversely, information provided by
the petitioner and readily available information in our files does not
indicate that the present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its range by ground-level ozone may be a threat to
Bicknell's thrush. However, the potential for ground-level ozone to
threaten habitat for the Bicknell's thrush will be further investigated
during our 12-month status review.
Recreational, Telecommunication, and Wind Energy Development
The petitioner asserts that development for recreation (i.e., ski
areas), especially the cumulative effect of multiple ski areas,
directly results in the loss and fragmentation of Bicknell's thrush
breeding habitat (Petition, pp. 35-36). Information in our files
demonstrates that this concern is shared by others; however, the
cumulative effects of these threats across the range of the Bicknell's
thrush are poorly known (Rimmer et al. 2001, p. 21; Bredin and Whittam
2009, pp. 12, 13; COSEWIC 2009, p. 32), and the assessment of this
threat is typically based on localized studies.
In Vermont, 13 mountains that are greater than 915 m (3,000 ft)
elevation are developed for recreational skiing, and many of these ski
areas offer mountain bike activities during the Bicknell's thrush
breeding season (Rimmer et al. 2001, p. 21). Similar pressures may
occur in New Hampshire and Maine, but less so in the Catskills and
Adirondacks in New York (Rimmer et al. 2001, p. 21) and in Canada
(COSEWIC 2009, p. 32). In the short term, construction of these
recreational developments resulted in the loss of some amounts of
Bicknell's thrush habitat (Rimmer et al. 2001, p. 21). For example, the
proposed expansion of the Whiteface Mountain trail system in New York's
Adirondack Mountains was expected to remove up to 4.8 ha (11.8 ac) of
the Bicknell's thrush breeding habitat and isolate an additional 1.8 ha
(4.4 ac) (Rimmer et al. 2004, p. 8). This loss constitutes up to 0.26
percent of the suitable habitat in the Adirondack Park's Whiteface
Mountain Habitat Unit that includes high-elevation songbird habitat on
Whiteface Mountain, Little Whiteface Mountain, Esther Mountain, Lookout
Mountain, and Baldwin Hill, and less than 0.001 percent of the total
breeding habitat available in the northeastern United States (Rimmer et
al. 2004, p. 10).
Information in our files provides variable data on these
developments' long-term impacts on local populations of the Bicknell's
thrush. For example, research at the Stowe Mountain Resort on Mount
Mansfield and the Stratton Mountain Resort in Vermont demonstrates that
there are few differences in various Bicknell's thrush population and
reproductive parameters (including nest predation, nest success,
parental care, movement patterns, survivorship, or productivity)
between habitat patches at the ski areas and natural forests on each of
the respective resorts' mountains (Rimmer et al. 2004, p. 2). Radio
telemetry data reveals that adult thrushes avoid trail crossings wider
than 50 m (164 ft), while trails 35 to 40 m (115 ft to 131 ft) in width
exhibit some restrictions on the movement of Bicknell's thrush (Rimmer
et al. 2004, p. 2). Yet, in a different study, Glennon and Karasin's
(2004, p. 1) investigations of existing ski trails and glades on
Whiteface Mountain in New York show no statistical differences in
abundance of Bicknell's thrush. We interpret Glennon and Karasin's
(2004) study to mean that, although the species may not cross some
wider ski trails, Bicknell's thrush still successfully reproduces in
the surrounding habitat. Therefore, these results suggest that while
the construction of ski areas produces an immediate loss of Bicknell's
thrush habitat, the birds may be able to adapt by shifting to reproduce
in adjacent habitat if the ski trails do not completely fragment
habitat to a degree that adult Bicknell's thrush movements are
inhibited.
In addition to ski area development, the petitioner asserts that
infrastructure development for telecommunication and wind energy
projects poses a threat to Bicknell's thrush habitat (Petition, p. 37).
Wind and telecommunications structures are often placed on exposed
high-elevation areas (Petition, p. 37), which may include areas of
suitable Bicknell's thrush breeding habitat. Information in our files
indicates that construction of wind and telecommunication facilities
potentially impacts the species through habitat removal.
Limited information is available from existing or proposed wind
turbine sites (MacFarland et al. 2008, p. 5). In some instances,
construction of these facilities, including their associated
infrastructure (e.g., roads), can directly impact Bicknell's thrush
habitat (Rimmer et al. 2001, p. 21; MacFarland et al. 2008, p. 1;
COSEWIC 2009, p. 32). For example, Noble Environmental Power (2008, in.
litt) calculates that their Granite Reliable wind power project,
located on Owlhead Mountain and Mount Kelsey in New Hampshire, will
result in the removal of approximately 23.5 ha (58 ac) of high-
elevation spruce and spruce-fir forest, some of which is known to be
occupied by Bicknell's thrush. In addition, several wind power projects
are located within Bicknell's thrush habitat in Quebec and New
Brunswick (COSEWIC 2009, p. 32). Although these projects result in the
direct loss of habitat due to removal, secondary impacts may also be
caused by these projects, including habitat fragmentation and possibly
behavioral impacts, such as avoidance of turbine sites due to noise
(COSEWIC 2009, p. 32).
There are few examples of completed wind turbine construction
projects in Bicknell's thrush habitat, but MacFarland et al. (2008, p.
8) assess the relationship of Bicknell's thrush breeding habitat to
available wind resources. The authors determine that nearly 94 percent
of the potential Bicknell's thrush habitat found in the Northeastern
Highlands region of Vermont overlaps areas of Class 4 (> 7 mps (15.7
mph)) or higher wind power, which are considered good resources for
generating wind power with large turbines. However, the area of overlap
between Bicknell's thrush habitat and Class 4 or higher wind areas
represents only 7 percent of the total available high-value wind
resource area. The MacFarland et al. (2008, p. 8) analysis suggests
that a large portion (93 percent) of the potentially suitable wind
power terrain could be developed without directly impacting Bicknell's
thrush habitat. A visual comparison of modeled Bicknell's thrush
habitat with wind resource data from throughout the Bicknell's range
yields a similar assessment as MacFarland et al.'s (2008) regional
study (A. Tur, pers. comm. 2012). Loss of Bicknell's thrush habitat
from wind power development may be a threat to the species if the
development sites do not occur outside the area of overlap discussed
above.
Summary of Recreational, Telecommunication, and Wind Energy
Development--Development of recreational areas (including ski areas),
wind turbines, and telecommunication facilities and their associated
infrastructure (i.e., roads) has resulted in the loss and fragmentation
of Bicknell's thrush habitat (IBTCG 2010, p. 12). The Bicknell's thrush
may show some ability to adapt and persist in the vicinity of ski
resorts (Rimmer et al. 2004, p. 1). The species may adapt similarly to
the construction of wind turbines. Information presented in the
petition and readily available in our files indicates that the present
or threatened destruction, modification, or
[[Page 48942]]
curtailment of its range by impacts attributed to recreational,
telecommunication, and wind energy development may be a threat to the
Bicknell's thrush.
Logging and Forest Fragmentation
The petition asserts that logging in Canada and northern Maine is
``a prime threat'' to Bicknell's thrush breeding habitat (Petition, pp.
37-39). Specifically, the petitioner suggests that dramatic drops in
Bicknell's thrush presence at Canadian monitoring sites over the last 1
to 2 decades provide a clear indication that logging damages habitat
and threatens the long-term survival of the species. However,
information in our files suggests that the Bicknell's thrush is often
found in managed forests, and it is unclear how forestry practices
alter the amount and suitability of breeding habitat in Canada and
northern Maine (IBTCG 2010, p. 11).
Throughout the industrial highlands of Canada and northern Maine,
the practice of clearcutting may impact Bicknell's thrush by
temporarily removing forest habitat. But, the petitioner acknowledges,
and information in our files suggests, that regeneration of balsam fir
and spruce in these areas is known to result in the creation of
breeding habitat (Ouellet 1993, p. 566; Chisholm and Leonard 2008, p.
218; COSEWIC 2009, p. 31; IBTCG 2010, p. 11; Petition 2010, p. 38).
Following clearcutting, dense regeneration of spruce and fir often
follows, resulting in the creation of suitable Bicknell's thrush
breeding habitat (Nixon et al. 2001, p. 34; Chisholm and Leonard 2009,
p. 218; IBTCG 2010, p. 11). Although Bicknell's thrush occupy 25- to
40-year-old second growth stands, optimal conditions for Bicknell's
thrush occur in 5- to 12-year-old clear cuts that have high densities
of the 5- to 10-cm-diameter (2 to 4 inches (in.)) stem class (Nixon et
al. 2001, p. 39; Connolly et al. 2002, p. 338; Chisholm and Leonard
2008, p. 222). Despite the species' presence in managed forests, it is
difficult to assess the immediate impacts of clearcutting on Bicknell's
thrush because little work has been done to determine the extent to
which the species makes use of mature forest habitat prior to the
implementation of forestry practices (COSEWIC 2009, p. 31).
Information in our files suggests other forestry practices may also
impact Bicknell's thrush habitat. Specifically, precommercial thinning
that reduces stem densities to maximize growth in remaining trees
results in the reduced abundance of Bicknell's thrush (Chisholm and
Leonard 2008, p. 222). Precommercial thinning could also directly
destroy Bicknell's thrush nests because thinning is often conducted
during the bird's nesting season (Makepeace and Aubry, unpubl. data in
COSEWIC 2009, p. 31).
In addition to the petitioner's discussion of the impacts of
forestry practices on breeding range habitat, information in our files
indicates an ongoing loss and degradation of important forested
wintering habitat through logging, subsistence farming, and human-
caused fires (Rimmer et al. 2001, p. 4; Rimmer et al. 2005b, p. 228;
Townsend and Rimmer 2006, p. 454; COSEWIC 2009, p. 32). As discussed
above in the Species Information section, the Bicknell's thrush winters
exclusively in the Greater Antilles. The overall loss of winter forest
habitat, including the Bicknell's thrush preferred montane forests, has
been severe (Rimmer et al. 2001, p. 4), and this loss may impact the
species despite its flexibility in selection of wintering habitat types
and elevation. For example, there is some evidence in the Dominican
Republic that Bicknell's thrush exhibits sexual segregation based on
geography and the segregation may be the result of birds moving from
areas of disturbed habitat (Rimmer et al. 2001, p. 9). Indeed, less
than 1.5 percent of original montane forest habitat remains in Haiti,
and about 10 percent remains in the Dominican Republic (Rimmer et al.
2001, p. 4). Jamaica has lost 75 percent of its original forest, and
Cuba has lost 80 to 85 percent (Rimmer et al. 2001, p. 4). While the
Dominican Government has established a number of areas to protect
important forest habitat (Latta et al. 2003, p. 180), habitat loss due
to illegal logging and slash-and-burn agriculture continues both there
and in Haiti (Rimmer et al. 2005b, p. 1; Rimmer et al. 2005d,
unnumbered page; Townsend and Rimmer 2006, p. 452; IBTCG 2010, p. 12).
Furthermore, subsistence farming, involving free-ranging cattle and the
presence of feral pigs, severely damages forest understory growth at
some wintering sites in Hispaniola and degrades Bicknell's thrush
wintering habitat quality (IBTCG 2010, p. 12).
Summary of Logging and Forest Fragmentation--Forestry practices may
result in the loss and fragmentation of important Bicknell's thrush
breeding habitat, particularly in the Canadian portion of the species
range. Clearcutting may be beneficial by creating additional breeding
habitat for the species, but this is difficult to assess because of a
lack of information regarding habitat use of these forests prior to
timber management (IBTCG 2010, p. 12). There is evidence that
precommercial thinning occurring in occupied breeding habitat renders
the area immediately unsuitable for nesting, thereby contributing to
the loss of habitat. On the wintering grounds, habitat loss may be a
serious concern, due to the species' restricted wintering habitat, as
well as the historical and continuing loss of habitat to logging,
subsistence farming, and fire (IBTCG 2010, p. 12). Therefore,
information presented in the petition and readily available in our
files indicates that the present or threatened destruction,
modification, or curtailment of its range by logging and forest
fragmentation may be a threat to the Bicknell's thrush.
Summary of Factor A--Information presented in the petition and
readily available in our files indicates that the present or threatened
destruction, modification, or curtailment of the Bicknell's thrush
range caused by: (1) Climate change; (2) atmospheric deposition of acid
and nitrogen; (3) recreational (ski areas), telecommunication, and wind
energy development; and (4) logging and forest fragmentation may be a
threat to the Bicknell's thrush. Information presented in the petition
and readily available in our files does not indicate that the present
or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of the species'
range as a result of ground-level ozone may be a threat to the
Bicknell's thrush. However, the potential for ground-level ozone to
threaten habitat for the Bicknell's thrush will be further investigated
during our 12-month status review.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
Information Provided in the Petition
The petitioner did not present information suggesting that
overutilization is affecting Bicknell's thrush populations.
Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition and Available in
Service Files
One reference in our files indicates that 3 of 108 Vermont nests
monitored during the period of 1992 to 2000 were abandoned and that
abandonment may be caused by researcher disturbance (Rimmer et al.
2001, p. 21). This appears to be an isolated circumstance, and we are
unaware of any other instances of overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational purposes.
[[Page 48943]]
Summary of Factor B--Information presented in the petition and
readily available in our files does not indicate that overutilization
for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes may
be a threat to the Bicknell's thrush. However, whether this factor is a
threat to the species will be further investigated during our 12-month
status review.
C. Disease or Predation
Information Provided in the Petition
Disease
The petitioner asserts that disease (e.g., avian malaria) could
have a substantial effect on the population viability of the Bicknell's
thrush (Petition, p. 40).
Predation
The petitioner states that climate change may increase predation of
the Bicknell's thrush by altering environmental conditions currently
limiting the distribution of predators, and allowing ``novel
predators'' to access the bird's habitat (Petition, pp. 39-40). The
petitioner also states that the red squirrel (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus),
a known Bicknell's thrush nest predator, may become more abundant as a
result of climate change, which the petitioner suggests will bring
about increased production of balsam fir cones (Petition, p. 40). The
petitioner asserts that red squirrel populations are closely tied to
balsam fir cone crop production. As climate change progresses cyclical
production of heavy cone crops is expected to increase in frequency.
This may result in increasing numbers of squirrels and, with it,
increasing depredation of the Bicknell's thrush eggs and nestlings
(Petition, p. 40).
Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition and Available in
Service Files
Disease
The petitioner asserts that disease (e.g., avian malaria) could
have a substantial effect on the population viability of the Bicknell's
thrush (Petition, p. 40). While the petitioner provides information
regarding the presence of avian malaria in New England and some bird
species, the petitioner acknowledges that ``bird populations have
largely adapted to malarial parasites'' and provides no information
indicating that avian malaria or other diseases may be a threat to the
Bicknell's thrush. In addition, we are unaware of any information that
may substantiate this speculation. Therefore, the information presented
in the petition and readily available in our files does not indicate
that disease may be a threat to the Bicknell's thrush. However, disease
impacts to the Bicknell's thrush will be further investigated as part
of our 12-month status review.
Predation
Documented predation of adult Bicknell's thrush is limited to only
a few predators. Of 8 depredation events on radio-tagged breeding
adults, 7 were attributed to the sharp-shinned hawk (Accipiter
striatus) and 1 to the long-tailed weasel (Mustela frenata) (Rimmer et
al. 2001, pp. 13-14). On the wintering grounds, of 53 radio-tagged
individuals, 5 were depredated by introduced Norway (Rattus norvegicus)
and black (Rattus rattus) rats, presumably while the birds were
sedentary on their nocturnal roosts (Townsend et al. 2009a, p. 565).
The available information suggests that predation of adult Bicknell's
thrush is not a threat to the species on a population level, although
it may influence winter roost site selection (Townsend et al. 2009a, p.
568).
The sharp-shinned hawk, American marten (Martes americana), long-
tailed weasel, deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus), and blue jay
(Cyanocitta cristata) are known to be predators of bird eggs and
nestlings. The red squirrel is the only predator known to have a major
impact on the demographic characteristics of the Bicknell's thrush
(Wallace 1949, p. 216; COSEWIC 2009, p. 19; IBTCG 2010, p. 6). Wallace
(1949, p. 215) suggests that high mortality and low breeding rate
contribute to the restricted distribution of the Bicknell's thrush. He
notes that 9 of 13 observed nests on Vermont's Mount Mansfield failed,
while only 2 of the remaining nests were fully successful. While
acknowledging the limitations of his small, 1-year sample size, Wallace
(1949, p. 215) at the time concludes that the Bicknell's thrush
population is either no more than stable or more likely declining
because the production of 0.85 young fledged per pair constitutes a
rate at which adults are unable to replace themselves during two
seasons.
Since Wallace's observations, additional evidence demonstrates a
somewhat loose 2-year (biennial) cycle in nest survival rates on
Stratton Mountain and Mount Mansfield, Vermont (Rimmer et al. 2001, p.
19). This Bicknell's thrush biennial pattern is attributed to the
biennial pattern of balsam fir cone crop production and red squirrel
abundance. A fall season with abundant cone production is followed by a
spring and summer with high numbers of red squirrels, and results in
high nest predation rates and low productivity in Bicknell's thrush. In
some years, no Bicknell's thrush young are produced (COSEWIC 2009, p.
17). The second part of the biennial cycle is explained when years of
abundant cone production are followed by years when few cones are
produced; accordingly, red squirrel numbers drop, along with nest
predation rates, and Bicknell's thrush nesting success can reach as
high as 90 percent (Rimmer et al. 2001, p. 19).
The petitioner asserts, with no supporting information, climate
change may alter this biennial cycle of balsam fir cone production and
red squirrel abundance (Petition, p. 40). Information in our files
suggests balsam fir cone production has been linked to climatic
variables (Messaoud et al. 2007). For example, two variables that may
be associated with increased balsam fir reproduction potential are the
number of growing degree days greater than 5 [deg]C (41 [deg]F) and the
maximum temperature of the warmest month in the year prior to cone
production (Messaoud et al. 2007, p. 753). As a consequence, it may be
reasonable to assume that increased temperatures attributed to climate
change may lead to increased cone production. However, we have no
information to suggest that taking that assumption further, to link the
increase in balsam fir cone production to an increase in squirrel
densities and a resulting decrease in Bicknell's thrush productivity
throughout the bird's breeding range, is reasonable, because it is
unclear if or when this climate change-induced alteration of the
biennial cycle may occur.
In addition to biennial cycle disruptions, the petition also
asserts that climate change will allow ``novel'' predators (i.e.,
previously unknown), such as the raccoon (Procyon lotor), to move into
previously unoccupied habitat as vegetation types shift (Petition, p.
40). Information in our files indicates that the red fox (Vulpes
vulpes), coyote (Canis latrans), bobcat (Lynx rufus), and raccoon have
all been observed in Bicknell's thrush breeding habitat, and no
predation by these species is mentioned (Wallace 1949, p. 215; Rimmer
et al. 2001, p. 14). These observations do not suggest that climate
change may increase exposure of Bicknell's thrush to novel predators.
Summary of predation--We have no information to suggest that adult
Bicknell's thrush predation or predation by novel predators may be a
threat to the species. In addition, there is no information to suggest
existing nest
[[Page 48944]]
predation by red squirrels may increase to a level impacting the
species throughout its breeding range if climate change-induced warmer
temperatures result in an increase in balsam fir cone production and
subsequent red squirrel numbers. However, we will fully investigate
predation in our 12-month status review.
Summary of Factor C--Information presented in the petition and
readily available in our files does not indicate that disease or
predation may be a threat to the Bicknell's thrush.
D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
Information Provided in the Petition
The petition states that existing Federal, state, or international
regulatory mechanisms protecting the Bicknell's thrush or its habitat
are inadequate. More specifically, the petition states that existing
international and U.S. regulatory mechanisms to reduce global
greenhouse gas emissions are inadequate to safeguard the Bicknell's
thrush against extinction resulting from climate change (Petition, p.
40).
Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition and Available in
Service Files
Species-Specific Regulatory Mechanisms
The petitioner cites national and international regulatory
mechanisms that are generic to migratory birds, as well as some that
are specific to the Bicknell's thrush (Petition, pp. 41-42, 44). For
example, the petitioner asserts that existing Federal regulatory
mechanisms, including the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918, as amended
(MBTA), do not protect habitat for migratory birds, including the
Bicknell's thrush. In the United States, under the MBTA, it is unlawful
to take, capture, kill, or possess migratory birds, their nests, eggs,
and young. The MBTA was not crafted to specifically protect habitat,
although it may provide indirect benefits to migratory bird habitat,
and, therefore, cannot be considered an inadequate existing regulatory
mechanism for habitat protection. In addition, the petitioner further
states that the Migratory Bird Conservation Act, the Neotropical
Migratory Bird Conservation Act, and the identification of birds of
management concern through the Birds of Conservation Concern apply to
the Bicknell's thrush. These various actions are intended to foster
proactive conservation, are nonregulatory (Petition, pp. 41-42; USFWS
2008, p. 30) and, therefore, cannot be considered inadequate existing
regulatory mechanisms.
As for international regulatory mechanisms, the Bicknell's thrush
is protected in Canada under the Migratory Birds Convention Act of
1994. In addition, the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife
in Canada designated the bird as threatened in Quebec, New Brunswick,
and Nova Scotia (COSEWIC 2009, pp. iii, vi). The COSEWIC is a panel of
species experts who evaluate the conservation status of Canadian
species according to a set of criteria and recommend which species
should be protected under Canada's Species at Risk Act (SARA). While
COSEWIC has evaluated the Bicknell's thrush as a threatened species,
the Minister of Environment has not yet added the species to SARA's
Schedule 1 (threatened and endangered wildlife). Bicknell's thrush is
considered a SARA Schedule 3 Species of Concern, which means the
Schedule 1 protection and conservation provisions of SARA do not apply.
With regard to the Dominican Republic and Haiti, the petitioner asserts
that current protections are minimal and confined to the designation of
several national parks that provide limited protection to a small
portion of the bird's wintering habitat where habitat degradation due
to human activities continues (Petition, pp. 55-56). Although not
specifically stated by the petition under Factor D, the petition
asserts in Factor E that wintering habitat in Cuba is inadequately
managed (Petition, p. 56). We have no readily available information in
our files that addresses the regulatory mechanisms that may or may not
be protective of Bicknell's thrush in Canada or the Greater Antilles.
We will further investigate Canadian and Greater Antilles regulations
during our 12-month status review.
The petitioner provides no information regarding any action taken
by a state or provincial entity that specifically protects the
Bicknell's thrush under existing authorities for threatened or
endangered wildlife, but does provide information on how forested
habitat, which may be occupied by Bicknell's thrush, is managed in each
state (Petition, pp. 47-54). Information in our files indicates that
the Bicknell's thrush has been identified as a species of special
concern in Maine, New York, Vermont, and New Hampshire (IBTCG 2010, p.
7). Species afforded this designation receive no legal status under
existing state endangered species statutes. Similarly, the species is
considered ``vulnerable'' in Nova Scotia and ``may be at risk'' in New
Brunswick and Quebec, but these designations provide little to no
additional protection (IBTCG 2010, p. 7; Petition, p. 44).
In the Puerto Rican portion of its wintering range, the Bicknell's
thrush is protected under the MBTA, as described previously. The
petitioner provides no information, and we are not aware of any
information, regarding the legal status of Bicknell's thrush in the
Dominican Republic, Haiti, Jamaica, or Cuba. In addition, we have no
readily available information, either from the petition or in our
files, on any existing regulatory mechanisms that would provide
specific protections for the Bicknell's thrush in the national parks of
Hispaniola.
Summary of Species-Specific Regulatory Mechanisms--We will further
investigate whether inadequate regulatory mechanisms that result in
habitat loss in its wintering range may be a threat to the Bicknell's
thrush during our 12-month status review.
Atmospheric Acid, Nitrogen Deposition, Mercury, and Ground-Level Ozone
Regulatory Mechanisms
The petitioner asserts that amendments to the Clean Air Act in 1990
have strengthened regulations to control the emission of airborne
pollutants, but it has not been effective in alleviating the harmful
effects of mercury, acid deposition, ground-level ozone, or nitrogen
nutrification in Bicknell's thrush habitat (Petition, p. 42).
Specifically, the petitioner asserts that EPA has delayed regulating
mercury emissions as a result of legal actions against the agency,
while regulations to control acid deposition have not been ambitious
enough to address the problem (Petition, p. 43). Furthermore, the
petitioner asserts that, while the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments have
helped reduce nitrogen dioxide emissions that lead to ozone pollution,
greater reductions are needed to prevent ongoing ozone pollution that
the petitioner states is damaging the habitat of Bicknell's thrush
(Petition, p. 43). The petitioner also states that an international
agreement to regulate mercury pollution is being developed, but has not
yet been implemented (Petition, p. 44).
As discussed above in Factor A, information presented in the
petition and readily available in our files does not indicate that
ground-level ozone may be threat to the Bicknell's thrush. Therefore,
ground-level ozone may be adequately regulated.
Summary of Atmospheric Acid, Nitrogen Deposition, Mercury, and
Ground-Level Ozone Regulatory Mechanisms--As discussed in Factor A,
deposition of acid precipitation and
[[Page 48945]]
nitrogen nutrification may be threats to the species' habitat. As
discussed in Factor E, deposition of mercury may also be a threat to
the species. While the Clean Air Act amendments have reduced the
overall levels of mercury, acid deposition, and ground-level ozone, the
Clean Air Act amendments have not alleviated the harmful effects of
those pollutants on the Bicknell's thrush and its habitat (see Factors
A and E). Therefore, the information presented in the petition and
readily available in our files indicates that inadequate regulatory
mechanisms for atmospheric acid, nitrogen deposition, and mercury
impacts to the Bicknell's thrush habitat may be a threat to the bird.
However, information presented in the petition and readily available in
our files does not indicate that inadequate regulatory mechanisms for
ground-level ozone may be a threat to the Bicknell's thrush.
Climate Change Regulatory Mechanisms
Finally, the petitioner states that the effect of climate change on
the montane habitat of the Bicknell's thrush is the most serious threat
to its continued existence, and that existing international and U. S.
regulatory mechanisms to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions are
clearly inadequate (Petition, pp. 40, 44). The petitioner argues that
national and international reductions in emissions are urgently needed
to safeguard the Bicknell's thrush against extinction resulting from
climate change.
The Clean Air Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.), as amended,
requires the EPA to develop and enforce regulations to protect the
general public from exposure to airborne contaminants that are known to
be hazardous to human health. In 2007, the Supreme Court ruled that
gases that cause global warming are pollutants under the Clean Air Act,
and that the EPA has the authority to regulate carbon dioxide and other
heat trapping gases (Massachusetts et al. v. EPA 2007 [Case No. 05-
1120]). The EPA published a regulation to require reporting of
greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel suppliers and industrial gas
suppliers, direct greenhouse gas emitters, and manufacturers of heavy
duty and off-road vehicles and engines (74 FR 56260; October 30, 2009).
The rule, effective December 29, 2009, does not require control of
greenhouse gases; rather it requires only that sources above certain
threshold levels monitor and report emissions (74 FR 56260; October 30,
2009). On December 7, 2009, the EPA found under section 202(a) of the
Clean Air Act that the current and projected concentrations of six
greenhouse gases in the atmosphere threaten public health and welfare.
The finding itself does not impose requirements on any industry or
other entities but is a prerequisite for any future regulations
developed by the EPA.
As of August 24, 2010, the time of the petition's receipt, it was
not known what regulatory mechanisms would be developed in the future
as an outgrowth of EPA's finding that the Clean Air Act is insufficient
to regulate greenhouse gases or how effective they would be in
addressing climate change. Climate change regulations, and to what
extent they adequately address threats to Bicknell's thrush and its
habitat, will be investigated in our 12-month status review.
Summary of Factor D--The inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms for (1) Factor A--the present or threatened destruction,
modification, or curtailment of the species' habitat caused by climate
change; atmospheric deposition of acid and nitrogen; and recreational
(ski areas), telecommunication, and wind energy development; and (2)
Factor E (see discussion below)--other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence resulting from: Atmospheric mercury
deposition; decreased dietary calcium; increased interspecific
competition facilitated by climate change; and collision with
stationary and moving structures may be a threat to Bicknell's thrush.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued Existence
Information Provided in the Petition
The petitioner asserts that mercury exposure and accumulation,
decreased dietary calcium due to acid deposition, direct mortality
caused by climate change, increased interspecific competition caused by
climate change, and disturbance by recreationists are all threats to
the Bicknell's thrush.
Evaluation of Information Provided in the Petition and Available in
Service Files
Mercury
The petitioner discusses information regarding the atmospheric
deposition of mercury, a potent neurotoxin, and the process by which it
accumulates in the Bicknell's thrush (Petition, pp. 56-58). According
to the petition, mercury originating mostly from coal-fired power
plants accumulates in wildlife and is influencing some wildlife
populations. The petitioner recognizes documentation of methylmercury
burdens, the toxic form of mercury, in terrestrial montane songbirds is
a recent discovery (Petition, p. 57). Among four evaluated songbirds,
the Bicknell's thrush had the highest blood mercury concentrations,
with birds in the southern portion of the species' range having higher
loads than in northern areas. In addition, atmospheric deposition of
mercury is two to five times higher in montane areas than in adjacent
low-elevation areas (Petition, p. 57).
Elevated levels of toxic mercury have been found in Bicknell's
thrush tissue and may be cause for concern (IBTCG 2010, p. 13). Mercury
in the northeastern United States and eastern Canada is derived from
local, regional, and global emissions; however, most estimates show
that approximately 60 percent of mercury in this area is derived from
sources located within the United States (Evers 2005, p. 5). Mercury
toxicity is largely dependent upon whether it is converted to the
bioavailable toxic form known as methylmercury, as well as an
organism's trophic position (e.g., its level in the food chain).
Trophic position influences mercury exposure due to the processes of
bioaccumulation (increase in the body over time) and biomagnification
(increase in concentration from one trophic level to another) (Evers
2005, p. 6). Generally, a species that is higher in the food chain has
a greater exposure to mercury if its prey has mercury in its body when
consumed as food.
Mercury deposition is highest on high mountain summits in
comparison to other landscape positions primarily as a result of the
summits' greater exposure to cloud-based mercury sources (Miller et al.
2005, p. 63). Compounding this problem, evergreen foliage generally
exhibits higher mercury concentrations than deciduous foliage at the
same site. These higher concentrations are due to the longer retention
time of mercury in needles as compared to leaves, which are typically
shed annually (Miller et al. 2005, p. 62). Consequently, the high-
elevation montane insectivores, such as songbirds, that consume insects
feeding on this vegetation contain relatively high levels of mercury
when compared with other songbirds from low-elevation habitats. Of
those montane insectivores, the Bicknell's thrush has the highest
concentrations of mercury, ranging from 0.08 to 0.38 micrograms/gram
across 21 distinct breeding sites (Rimmer et al. 2005c, pp. 227, 232).
Although no clear pattern in mercury levels was observed, mercury
concentrations in the blood and feathers of Bicknell's thrush from
southern portions of the species' breeding range were highest, which
implies greater atmospheric deposition
[[Page 48946]]
rates (Rimmer et al. 2005c, p. 235). In addition, blood mercury
concentrations in wintering birds were generally 2 to 3 times higher
than in birds sampled on their breeding sites (Rimmer et al. 2005c, p.
230). The authors state that this result is unexpected and counter to
what they would have expected given the lack of local or regional
industrial sources of mercury in the wintering range (Rimmer et al.
2005c, p. 235). Further studies of the Bicknell's thrush biochemical
processes may illuminate the reason behind the higher mercury level in
the wintering range. Although we do not know the exact cause of the
elevated blood mercury levels, the information indicates that there may
be a differing level of exposure between the breeding and wintering
grounds, and that the source of the exposure mechanism, as well as the
elevated blood mercury level itself, may pose a threat to the species.
The specific pathway by which the Bicknell's thrush consumes
mercury and the effects that the burden has on the birds is unknown
(Rimmer et al. 2005c, p. 237; Evers 2005, p. 16). Although species-
specific responses to mercury concentrations make direct comparisons
unreliable, studies of aquatic birds (e.g., mallard ducks and common
loons) indicate changes in behavior, reproduction, and body chemistry
are possible (Evers 2005, p. 6; IBTCG 2010, p. 13).
Summary of Mercury Effects--Information presented in the petition
and readily available in our files indicates that atmospheric
deposition of mercury may be a threat to the Bicknell's thrush.
Decreased Dietary Calcium
The petitioner asserts that acid deposition impacts the habitat of
the Bicknell's thrush by reducing calcium availability that has been
shown to influence survival of red spruce. The petitioner also asserts
that acid deposition can directly alter calcium availability for
breeding songbirds that may impact eggshell production (DeHayes et al.
1999, p. 798; Petition, p. 58; IBTCG 2010, p. 13). Acid deposition
leaches calcium from red spruce forest soils, including soils from many
Bicknell's thrush breeding sites (DeHayes et al. 1999, p. 798; Driscoll
et al. 2001, p. 11). This reduction in the availability of calcium has
been linked to declines in the calcium levels in some invertebrate prey
items and reduced dietary calcium for songbirds, including the wood
thrush in the eastern United States, through the bioaccumulation and
biomagnifications processes mentioned above (Mand et al. 2000, p. 64;
Hames et al. 2002, pp. 11238-11239). As discussed above in the Species
Information section, insects are the primary food source for the
Bicknell's thrush in its breeding range (Beal 1915 in Wallace 1939, p.
295; Rimmer et al. 2001, pp. 9-10). Although it has not been confirmed,
calcium depletion and lower availability may affect egg formation and
productivity in the Bicknell's thrush, as has been suggested for the
wood thrush, especially in ``highland areas with thin and poorly
buffered soils'' (King et al. 2008, p. 2697).
Summary of decreased dietary calcium--Information presented in the
petition and readily available in our files indicates that decreased
dietary calcium from soil leaching by acid precipitation may be a
threat to the Bicknell's thrush.
Direct Mortality Due to Climate Change
The petitioner asserts that increased storm frequency and intensity
have the potential to increase mortality in the Bicknell's thrush
(Petition, p. 58). Information in our files suggest most Bicknell's
thrush nesting failures are attributed to predation, but climate change
scenarios predict increases in the frequency of wind and precipitation
that may result in additional nest failures (Hayhoe et al. 2007, p.
389; IBTCG 2010, p. 14). In addition, more frequent tropical storms and
increasing erratic weather caused by climate change (Angeles et al.
2007, p. 567) may increase mortality of migrating Bicknell's thrush
(IBTCG 2010, p. 14; Petition, p. 58). The sources of information in the
petition and our files do not contain an analysis or modeling of storm
events to determine the extent to which the storm events may be a
threat to the Bicknell's thrush species as a whole. We do not have
information regarding whether mortality is occurring, or if it is
occurring, whether impacts to individual Bicknell's thrushes relates to
impacts to the species as a whole.
Summary of direct mortality--Information presented in the petition
and readily available in our files does not indicate that direct
mortality resulting from climate change may be a threat to the
Bicknell's thrush. However, we will fully investigate direct mortality
resulting from climate change during our 12-month status review.
Increased Interspecific Competition With Climate Change
The petitioner asserts that climate change will increase
encroachment of the Bicknell's thrush by competitors that were formerly
restricted to lower elevations (Petition, p. 58). The petition
acknowledges that the Swainson's thrush (Catharus ustulatus) is the
only potential competitor that has been discussed in the scientific
literature (Petition, p. 58). The Bicknell's and Swainson's thrushes
generally inhabit mutually exclusive elevation ranges. There are slight
overlaps in the lower elevation portion of the Bicknell's thrush
breeding range (Able and Noon 1976, p. 287), as well as in regenerating
stands following commercial forestry operations in New Brunswick (Nixon
et al. 2001, p. 34). Swainson's and Bicknell's thrushes may compete for
nesting territories, and observations of the two species demonstrate
occasional agonistic encounters on the breeding grounds, including
chases and displacement from song-posts (Able and Noon 1976, p. 287;
Rimmer et al. 2001, p. 13).
The Bicknell's thrush is considered to be better adapted to colder
environments than is the Swainson's thrush (Holmes and Sawyer 1975 in
Nixon et al. 2001, p. 38). Lambert et al. (2005, p. 7) suggest that a
rise in summer temperatures could reduce separation between the two
species by nullifying Bicknell's thrush's greater tolerance for cold,
thereby facilitating the establishment of Swainson's thrush at higher
elevations. Information in our files indicates that temperatures may be
an important factor in the distribution of these two thrush species
(Holmes and Sawyer 1975 in Nixon et al. 2001, p. 38), and climate
change may allow Swainson's thrush to breed at higher elevations.
Summary of increased interspecific competition--Information
presented in the petition and readily available in our files indicates
that increased interspecific competition from Swainson's thrush as a
result of increasing temperatures associated with climate change may be
a threat to the Bicknell's thrush.
Disturbance by Recreationists
The petitioner asserts that recreational use (hiking and biking) in
Bicknell's thrush habitat poses a threat to the species (Petition, p.
59; IBTCG 2010, p. 12). The petitioner states that the backcountry
areas of the White Mountain National Forest in New Hampshire, including
the high-elevation spruce-fir habitat occupied by the Bicknell's
thrush, received about 31,400 visitors in 2005 (Petition, p. 59; King
et al. 2008, p. 2698). Similar visitation is expected in New York's
Adirondack Park (IBTCG, p. 12). Research suggests that nesting
Bicknell's thrush are able to tolerate high or moderate levels of
[[Page 48947]]
human activity by becoming habituated to nearby disturbance, while
females in undisturbed areas demonstrate greater sensitivity to
disturbance (Rimmer et al. 2001, p. 21). Off-trail excursions by hikers
into vegetation that may contain a Bicknell's thrush is unlikely, given
the thick habitat preferred by the species (Wallace 1939, p. 285). As a
result, most recreational use is confined to the existing trails (A.
Tur, pers. observation 2012). Hiking trails impact a very small portion
of the available Bicknell's thrush nesting habitat, and, therefore, it
seems unlikely that recreational activities in the Bicknell's thrush
breeding habitat may be a significant threat.
The petitioner cites Rimmer et al. (2001) as a source of research
information regarding disturbance of nesting Bicknell's thrush by
bicyclists. However, Rimmer et al. (2001, p. 21) merely acknowledge
that mountain biking occurs on ski area trails during the summer
months. The authors do not provide any analysis of whether mountain
bike use causes disturbance to the species, and we have no other
information to suggest that mountain biking may be a threat to the
Bicknell's thrush.
Summary of disturbance by recreationists--Information presented in
the petition and readily available in our files does not indicate that
recreational disturbance may be a threat to the Bicknell's thrush.
However, the role of recreational activities as a potential threat to
the species will be further investigated during our 12-month status
review.
Collision With and Disturbance by Stationary and Moving Structures
As previously described above in Factor A and as indicated in the
petition, construction of telecommunications structures (stationary
structures) and wind turbines (moving structures) on exposed high-
elevation areas (Petition, p. 37) can directly impact Bicknell's thrush
habitat (Rimmer et al. 2001, p. 21; MacFarland et al. 2008, p. 1;
COSEWIC 2009, p. 32). In addition to habitat impacts, information in
our files suggests that construction and operation of these facilities
may also impact the species by increasing injury and direct mortality
of individuals through take of Bicknell's thrush nests if construction
occurs in occupied breeding habitat, and collisions occur with
telecommunication towers and, if present, the guy wires used to support
them (Rimmer et al. 2001, p. 20; MacFarland et al. 2008, p. 3).
Mortality of birds resulting from collision with wind turbines has also
been documented (Johnson et al. 2002, p. 879; USFWS 2003, p. 1),
including thrush species (Erickson et al. 2001, pp. 59, 61; Jain et al.
2007, pp. 43-44). While we have no information on specific injury or
mortality to Bicknell's thrush, we find that documented injury and
mortality of similar species indicates that collision with stationary
and moving structures may be a threat to the Bicknell's thrush.
Information in our files suggests that individual Bicknell's thrush
may be disturbed by wind towers and exhibit avoidance of wind turbine
areas in response to noise and movement from the spinning blades
(MacFarland et al. 2008, p. 5). However, the impact of turbine
construction and operation to Bicknell's thrush in the vicinity of
these structures has not been assessed by the authors (MacFarland et
al. 2008, p. 5) as a threat to the species as a whole, only a mention
that some individuals may avoid turbines. Therefore, information
presented in the petition and readily available in our files does not
indicate that disturbance, as discussed above as active avoidance of
wind turbine areas due to noise, may be a threat to the Bicknell's
thrush.
Summary of collision with and disturbance by stationary and moving
structures--Information presented in the petition and readily available
in our files indicates that collision with stationary and moving
structures may be a threat to the Bicknell's thrush, but does not
indicate that disturbance from wind turbines may be a threat to the
bird.
Summary of Factor E--Information presented in the petition and
readily available in our files indicates that other natural or manmade
factors affecting the Bicknell's thrush continued existence resulting
from: atmospheric mercury deposition; decreased dietary calcium;
increased interspecific competition facilitated by climate change; and
collision with stationary and moving structures, may be threats to the
bird. Information presented in the petition and readily available in
our files does not indicate that other natural or manmade factors
affecting the Bicknell's thrush continued existence resulting from more
frequent storms caused by climate change, disturbance by
recreationists, and disturbance by wind turbines, may be threats to the
bird.
Finding
On the basis of our determination under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the
Act, we determine that the petition presents substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that listing the Bicknell's thrush
throughout its entire range may be warranted. This finding is based on
information provided under factors A, D, and E. We determine that the
information provided under factors B and C is not substantial.
Because the petition presents substantial information indicating
that listing the Bicknell's thrush may be warranted, we will be
initiating a status review to determine whether listing the Bicknell's
thrush under the Act is warranted.
The ``substantial information'' standard for a 90-day finding
differs from the Act's ``best scientific and commercial data'' standard
that applies to a status review to determine whether a petitioned
action is warranted. A 90-day finding does not constitute a status
review under the Act. In a 12-month finding, we will determine whether
a petitioned action is warranted after we have completed a thorough
status review of the species, which is conducted following a
substantial 90-day finding. Because the Act's standards for 90-day and
12-month findings are different, as described above, a substantial 90-
day finding does not mean that the 12-month finding will result in a
warranted finding.
References Cited
A complete list of references cited is available on the Internet at
http://www.regulations.gov and upon request from the New England Field
Office (NEFO) (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Author
The primary authors of this notice are the staff members of the
NEFO.
Authority: The authority for this action is the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: July 31, 2012.
Daniel M. Ashe,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-19970 Filed 8-14-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P