[Federal Register: August 27, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 166)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 55063-55099]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr27au02-25]
[[Page 55063]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part II
Department of the Interior
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fish and Wildlife Service
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical
Habitat for Nine Bexar County, Texas, Invertebrate Species; Proposed
Rule
[[Page 55064]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
RIN 1018-AI47
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of
Critical Habitat for Nine Bexar County, Texas, Invertebrate Species
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose
designation of critical habitat for nine endangered karst-dwelling
invertebrate species pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act). The proposed critical habitat consists of 25 units (a
total of approximately 9,516 acres) in Bexar County, Texas, each
encompassing one or more caves or other karst features known to contain
one or more of the listed species. ``Karst'' is a type of terrain that
is formed by the slow dissolution of calcium carbonate from limestone
bedrock by mildly acidic groundwater. This process creates numerous
cave openings, cracks, fissures, fractures, and sinkholes and the
bedrock resembles a honeycomb (USFWS 1994). Critical habitat identifies
areas that are essential to the conservation of a listed species and
that may require special management considerations or protection.
If this proposal is made final, section 7 of the Act requires
Federal agencies to ensure that actions they fund, authorize, or carry
out do not destroy or adversely modify critical habitat to the extent
that the action appreciably diminishes the value of the critical
habitat for the conservation of the species. Section 4 of the Act
requires us to consider economic and other impacts of specifying any
particular area as critical habitat. We solicit data and comments from
the public on all aspects of this proposal, including data on economic
and other impacts of the designation.
DATES: We will accept comments until the close of business on November
25, 2002. Public hearing requests must be received by October 11, 2002.
ADDRESSES: If you wish to comment, you may submit your comments and
materials concerning this proposal by the date given above to the
Acting Field Supervisor, Austin Ecological Services Field Office, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, 10711 Burnet Road, Suite 200, Austin, Texas
78758.
You may also hand-deliver written comments to our U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service's Austin Ecological Services Field Office at the
address given above.
You may view comments and materials received, as well as supporting
documentation used in the preparation of this proposed rule, by
appointment, during normal business hours in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service's Austin Ecological Services Field Office at the above address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bill Seawell, Acting Field Supervisor,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Austin Ecological Services Field
Office, at the above address (telephone: 512/490-0057; facsimile: 512/
490-0974).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The following nine Bexar County, Texas, invertebrate species were
listed as endangered on December 26, 2000 (65 FR 81419): Rhadine exilis
(ground beetle, no common name); Rhadine infernalis (ground beetle, no
common name); Batrisodes venyivi (Helotes mold beetle); Texella
cokendolpheri (Cokendolpher cave harvestman); Cicurina baronia (Robber
Baron Cave meshweaver); Cicurina madla (Madla Cave meshweaver);
Cicurina venii (Braken Bat Cave meshweaver); Cicurina vespera
(Government Canyon Bat Cave meshweaver); and Neoleptoneta microps
(Government Canyon Bat Cave spider). All of these species are karst
dwelling species of local distribution in north and northwest Bexar
County. They spend their entire lives underground.
During the course of climatic changes two million to ten thousand
years ago, certain creatures retreated into the more stable cave
environments, while their respective surface relatives either emigrated
or became extinct (Barr 1968; Mitchell and Reddell 1971; Elliott and
Reddell 1989). Cave species (troglobites) survived and colonized the
caves and other subterranean voids. Through faulting and canyon
downcutting, the karst terrain along the Balcones Fault Zone became
increasingly dissected, creating ``islands'' of karst and barriers to
dispersal. These ``islands'' isolated troglobitic populations from each
other, probably resulting in speciation.
Individuals of the listed species are small, ranging in length from
1 millimeter (0.039 inch (in)) to 1 centimeter (0.39 in). They are
eyeless or essentially eyeless and most lack pigment. Adaptations to
cave life may include adaptations to the low quantities of food in
caves, including low metabolism, long legs for efficient movement, and
loss of eyes, possibly as an energy-saving trade-off (Howarth 1983).
They may be able to survive from months to years existing on little or
no food (Howarth 1983). Adult Cicurina spiders have survived in
captivity without food for about 4 months (James Cokendolpher, pers.
comm., 2002).
While the life span of listed Texas troglobitic invertebrates is
unknown, they are believed to live more than a year based, in part, on
the amount of time some juveniles have been kept in captivity without
maturing (Veni and Associates 1999; James Reddell, Texas Memorial
Museum, pers. comm., 2000). James Cokendolpher (pers. comm., 2002)
maintained a juvenile troglobitic Cicurina spider from May 1999 through
April 2002. Reproductive rates of troglobites are typically low
(Poulson and White 1969; Howarth 1983). Based on surveys conducted by
Culver (1986), Elliott (1994a), and Hopper (2000), population sizes of
troglobitic invertebrates are typically low, with most species known
from only a few specimens (Culver et al. 2000).
The primary habitat requirements of these species include: (1)
Subterranean spaces in karst with stable temperatures, high humidities
(near saturation) and suitable substrates (for example, spaces between
and underneath rocks suitable for foraging and sheltering), and (2) a
healthy surface community of native plants and animals that provide
nutrient input and, in the case of native plants, act to buffer the
karst ecosystem from adverse effects (for example, non-native species
invasions, contaminants, and fluctuations in temperature and humidity).
Since sunlight is absent or only present in extremely low levels in
caves, most karst ecosystems depend on nutrients derived from the
surface either directly (organic material brought in by animals, washed
in, or deposited through root masses) or indirectly through feces, eggs
and carcasses of trogloxenes (species that regularly inhabit caves for
refuge, but return to the surface to feed) and troglophiles (species
that may complete their life cycle in the cave, but may also be found
on the surface) (Barr 1968; Poulson and White 1969; Howarth 1983;
Culver 1986). Primary sources of nutrients include leaf litter, cave
crickets, small mammals and other vertebrates that defecate or die in
the cave.
The continuing expansion of the San Antonio metropolitan area in
karst terrain constitutes the primary threat to the species through
destruction and/or deterioration of habitat by construction; filling of
caves and karst features and loss of permeable cover; contamination
[[Page 55065]]
from septic effluent, sewer leaks, run-off, pesticides, and other
sources; exotic species (especially nonnative fire ants); and
vandalism.
Subsurface Environment
These karst invertebrates require stable temperatures and constant,
high humidity (Barr 1968; Mitchell 1971a) because they have lost the
adaptations needed to prevent desiccation in drier habitat (Howarth
1983) and/or the ability to detect or cope with more extreme
temperatures (Mitchell 1971). Temperatures in caves are typically the
average annual surface temperature with little variation (Howarth 1983;
Dunlap 1995). Relative humidity is typically near 100% in caves that
support troglobitic invertebrates (Elliott and Reddell 1989).
During temperature extremes, the listed species may retreat into
small interstitial spaces (human-inaccessible) connected to the cave,
where the physical environment provides the required humidity and
temperature levels (Howarth 1983). These species may spend the majority
of their time in such retreats, only leaving them to forage in the
larger cave passages (Howarth 1987).
The northern portion of Bexar County is located on the Edwards
Plateau, a broad, flat expanse of Cretaceous carbonate rock that ranges
in elevation from 335.5 meters (m) (1,100 feet (ft)) to 579.5 m (1,900
ft) (Veni 1988; Soil Conservation Service 1962). This portion of the
Plateau is dissected by numerous small streams and is drained by Cibolo
Creek and Balcones Creek. To the southeast of the Plateau lies the
Balcones Fault Zone, a 25-km-wide fault zone that extends from the
northeast corner of the County to the western County line. The many
streams and karst features of this zone recharge the Edwards Aquifer.
The principal cave-containing rock units of the Edwards Plateau are
the upper Glen Rose Formation, Edwards Limestone, Austin Chalk, and
Pecan Gap Chalk (Veni 1988). The Edwards Limestone accounts for one-
third of the cavernous rock in Bexar County, and contains 60% of the
caves, making it the most cavernous unit in the County. The Austin
Chalk outcrop is second to the Edwards in total number of caves. In
Bexar County, the outcrop of the upper member of the Glen Rose
Formation accounts for approximately one-third of the cavernous rock,
but only 12.5% of Bexar County caves (Veni 1988). In Bexar County, the
Pecan Gap Chalk, while generally not cavernous, has a greater than
expected density of caves and passages (Veni 1988).
Veni (1994) delineated six karst areas (hereafter referred to as
karst fauna regions) within Bexar County: Stone Oak, UTSA (University
of Texas at San Antonio), Helotes, Government Canyon, Culebra
Anticline, and Alamo Heights. These karst fauna regions are bounded by
geological or geographical features that may represent obstructions to
the movement (on a geologic time scale) of troglobites which has
resulted in the present-day distribution of endemic (restricted to a
given region) karst invertebrates in the Bexar County area.
These areas have been delineated by Veni (1994) into five zones
that reflect the likelihood of finding a karst feature that will
provide habitat for the endangered invertebrates based on geology,
distribution of known caves, distribution of cave fauna, and primary
factors that determine the presence, size, shape, and extent of caves
with respect to cave development. These five zones are defined as:
Zone 1: Areas known to contain one or more of the nine endangered
karst invertebrates;
Zone 2: Areas having a high probability of suitable habitat for the
invertebrates;
Zone 3: Areas that probably do not contain the invertebrates;
Zone 4: Areas that require further research but are generally
equivalent to zone 3, although they may include sections that could be
classified as zone 2 or zone 5; and
Zone 5: Areas that do not contain the invertebrates.
Endangered Karst Invertebrate Distribution
By 2000, about 400 caves were known from Bexar County (SWCA 2000).
Of these 400 caves, 57 were known to contain one or more of the nine
endangered invertebrates at the time the species were listed.
Currently, we are aware of 69 caves in Bexar County that contain one or
more of the listed species (Table 1).
Rhadine exilis (Ground beetle--No Common Name)
The ground beetle Rhadine exilis (Coleoptera: Carabidae) was first
collected in 1959. The species was described by Barr and Lawrence
(1960) as Agonum exile and later assigned to the genus Rhadine Barr
(1974). The species is currently known from 44 caves: 3 in the
Government Canyon karst fauna region; 5 in the Helotes karst fauna
region; 9 in the UTSA karst fauna region; and 27 in the Stone Oak karst
fauna region (Table 1).
Rhadine infernalis (Ground Beetle--No Common Name)
Rhadine infernalis (Coleoptera: Carabidae) was first collected in
1959. The species was initially described by Barr and Lawrence (1960)
as Agonum infernale, but later assigned to the genus Rhadine (Barr
1974). Scientists have recognized three subspecies (Rhadine infernalis
ewersi, Rhadine infernalis infernalis, Rhadine infernalis ssp.) (Barr
1974; Barr and Lawrence 1960; Reddell 1998).
Table 1.--Caves Known To Contain One or More of the Nine Listed Bexar County, Texas Karst Invertebrates
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species ( of caves) Cave name Karst fauna region
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rhadine exilis (44)............................................ 40 mm Cave....................... Stone Oak.
B-52 Cave.
Backhole.
Black Cat Cave.
Boneyard Pit.
Bunny Hole.
Cross the Creek Cave.
Dos Viboras Cave.
Eagle's Nest Cave.
Hairy Tooth Cave.
Headquarters Cave.
Hilger Hole.
Hold-Me-Back Cave.
Hornet's Last Laugh Pit.
[[Page 55066]]
Isocow Cave.
Kick Start Cave.
MARS Pit.
MARS Shaft.
Pain in the Glass Cave.
Platypus Pit.
Poor Boy Baculum Cave.
Ragin' Cajun Cave.
Root Canal Cave.
Root Toupee Cave.
Springtail Crevice.
Strange Little Cave.
Up the Creek Cave.
Christmas Cave................... Helotes.
Helotes Blowhole.
Helotes Hilltop Cave.
Logan's Cave.
Unnamed cave \1/2\ mile N. of
Helotes.
Government Canyon Bat Cave....... Government Canyon.
San Antonio Ranch Pit.
Tight Cave.
Hills and Dales Pit.............. UTSA.
John Wagner Ranch Cave No. 3.
Kamikazi Cricket Cave.
La Cantera Cave No. 1.
La Cantera Cave No. 2.
Mastodon Pit.
Robber's Cave.
Three Fingers Cave.
Young Cave No. 1.
R. infernalis (6) (subspecies not indicated)................... Canyon Ranch Pit................. Government Canyon.
Fat Man's Nightmare Cave.
Scenic Overlook Cave.
Pig Cave.
San Antonio Ranch Pit.
Obvious Little Cave.............. Culebra Anticline.
R. infernalis ewersi (3)....................................... Flying Buzzworm Cave............. Stone Oak.
Headquarters Cave.
Low Priority Cave.
R. infernalis new subspecies (6)............................... Caracol Creek Coon Cave.......... Culebra Anticline.
Game Pasture Cave No. 1.
Isopit.
King Toad Cave.
Stevens Ranch Trash Hole Cave.
Wurzbach Bat Cave.
R. infernalis infernalis (16).................................. Bone Pile Cave................... Government Canyon.
Government Canyon Bat Cave.
Lithic Ridge Cave.
Surprise Sink.
Christmas Cave................... Helotes.
Helotes Blowhole.
Logan's Cave.
Madla's Cave.
Madla's Drop Cave.
Genesis Cave..................... Stone Oak.
John Wagner Ranch Cave No. 3..... UTSA.
Kamikazi Cricket Cave.
Mattke Cave.
Robber's Cave.
Scorpion Cave.
Three Fingers Cave.
Batrisodes venyivi (6)......................................... Scenic Overlook Cave............. Government Canyon.
San Antonio Ranch Pit.
Christmas Cave................... Helotes.
Unnamed cave \1/2\ mile N of
Helotes.
Helotes Hilltop Cave.
Unnamed cave 5 miles NE of UTSA.
Helotes.
Texella cokendolpheri (1)...................................... Robber Baron Cave................ Alamo Heights.
C. baronia (1)................................................. Robber Baron Cave................ Alamo Heights.
Cicurina madla (8)............................................. Christmas Cave................... Helotes.
Madla's Cave.
[[Page 55067]]
Madla's Drop Cave.
Helotes Blowhole.
Headquarters Cave................ Stone Oak.
Hills and Dales Pit.............. UTSA.
Robber's Cave.
Lost Pothole..................... Government Canyon.
C. venii (1)................................................... Braken Bat Cave.................. Culebra Anticline.
C. vespera (2)................................................. Government Canyon Bat Cave....... Government Canyon.
Unnamed cave 5 miles NE of UTSA.
Helotes.
Neoleptoneta microps (2)....................................... Government Canyon Bat Cave....... Government Canyon.
Surprise Sink.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rhadine infernalis ewersi is known from three caves in the Stone
Oak karst fauna region. Rhadine infernalis infernalis is known from 16
caves: one in the Stone Oak karst fauna region, four in the Government
Canyon karst fauna region, five in the Helotes karst fauna region, and
six in the UTSA karst fauna region. The unnamed subspecies is known
from six caves in the Culebra Anticline karst fauna region. We are also
aware of six additional caves that contain Rhadine infernalis (not
identified to subspecies): one in the Culebra Anticline karst fauna
region and five in the Government Canyon karst fauna region.
Helotes Mold Beetle
The Helotes mold beetle, Batrisodes venyivi (Coleoptera:
Pselaphidae), was first collected in 1984 and described by Chandler
(1992). The species is currently known from six caves: three in the
Helotes karst fauna region, two in the Government Canyon karst fauna
region, and one in the UTSA karst fauna region (Table 1). The location
of one of the caves located in the Helotes karst fauna region referred
to as ``unnamed cave \1/2\ mile north of Helotes'' is unknown. It is an
original record from Barr's (1974) description of Rhadine exilis. Due
to the number of caves in the general area, the location of this cave
cannot be positively identified (George Veni, George Veni & Associates,
pers. comm. 2002). The location of the cave in the UTSA karst fauna
region referred to as a cave ``5 miles NE of Helotes'' is also unknown,
but based on its descriptive name, is assumed to be within the UTSA
karst fauna region. It is possible that this cave may not be a separate
location, but may be an existing cave listed by the collector under the
alternative name ``5 miles NE of Helotes''.
The common names for the following six arachnid species have been
changed as a result of a meeting of the Committee on Common Names of
Arachnids of the American Arachnological Society in 2000. Accordingly,
the common names of the species currently in the list of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife (50 CFR 17.11) as: Robber Baron Cave harvestman,
Robber Baron cave spider, Madla's cave spider, vesper cave spider,
Government Canyon cave spider, and one with no common name (Cicurina
venii), have been changed to: Cokendolpher cave harvestman, Robber
Baron Cave meshweaver, Madla Cave meshweaver, Government Canyon Bat
Cave meshweaver, Government Canyon Bat Cave spider, and Braken Bat Cave
meshweaver, respectively.
Cokendolpher Cave Harvestman
The Cokendolpher cave harvestman, Texella cokendolpheri
(Opilionida: Phalangodidae), was collected in 1982 and described by
Ubick and Briggs (1992). Currently, this species, along with the Robber
Baron Cave meshweaver, is only known from Robber Baron Cave (Table 1).
Robber Baron Cave Meshweaver
The Robber Baron Cave meshweaver, Cicurina baronia (Araneae:
Dictynidae), was first collected in Robber Baron Cave in the Alamo
Heights karst fauna region February 28, 1969, by R. Bartholomew
(Reddell 1993) and described by Gertsch (1992). The Robber Baron Cave
meshweaver (a spider) is only known from Robber Baron Cave in the Alamo
Heights karst fauna region (Table 1).
Madla Cave Meshweaver
The Madla Cave meshweaver, Cicurina madla (Araneae: Dictynidae),
was first collected in October 4, 1963, by J. Reddell and D. McKenzie
(Reddell 1993) and described by Gertsch (1992). The Madla Cave
meshweaver is currently known from eight caves: one in the Stone Oak
karst fauna region; one in the Government Canyon karst fauna region;
two in the UTSA karst fauna region; and four in the Helotes karst fauna
region (Table 1).
The Service is aware of eleven additional caves from which
immature, eyeless troglobitic Cicurina spiders have been collected
(SWCA 2001). Eight of these are in caves that have other listed species
and are either included in proposed critical habitat areas or areas
proposed for exclusion due to the provision of special management. The
remaining three are in caves where authorization for take of C. madla
was granted to La Cantera under a section 10(a)(1)(B) permit.
Braken Bat Cave Meshweaver
The Braken Bat Cave meshweaver, Cicurina venii (Araneae:
Dictynidae), was first collected on November 22, 1980, by G. Veni and
described by Gertsch (1992). Braken Bat Cave in the Culebra Anticline
karst fauna region remains the only location known to contain this
species (Table 1).
Government Canyon Bat Cave Meshweaver
The Government Canyon Bat Cave meshweaver, Cicurina vespera
(Araneae: Dictynidae), was first collected on August 11, 1965, by J.
Reddell and J. Fish (Reddell 1993), and described by Gertsch (1992).
The species is currently known from Government Canyon Bat Cave in the
Government Canyon karst fauna region and an unnamed cave referred to as
``5 miles northeast of Helotes'' (Table 1). However, the specimen
collected from the latter cave has been tentatively identified as a new
species (Cokendolpher, in press).
Government Canyon Bat Cave Spider
The Government Canyon Bat Cave spider, Neoleptoneta microps
(Araneae: Leptonetidae), was first collected on August 11, 1965, by J.
Reddell and J. Fish (Reddell 1993). The species was originally
described by Gertsch (1974) as Leptoneta microps and later
[[Page 55068]]
reassigned to Neoleptoneta following Brignoli (1977) and Platnick
(1986). The species is known from two caves in the Government Canyon
karst fauna region (Table 1).
Animal Community
Cave Crickets
Cave crickets are a critical source of nutrient input for karst
ecosystems (Barr 1968; Reddell 1993). Cave crickets in the genus
Ceuthophilus occur in most caves in Texas (Reddell 1966). Being
sensitive to temperature extremes and drying, cave crickets forage on
the surface at night and roost in the cave during the day. Cave
crickets lay their eggs in the cave, providing food for a variety of
other species (Mitchell 1971b). Some cave species also feed on cave
cricket feces (Barr 1968; Poulson et al. 1995) as well as on adults and
nymphs directly (Cokendolpher, in press; Elliott 1994a). Cave crickets
are scavengers or detritivores, feeding on dead insects, carrion and
some fruits, but not on foliage (Elliott 1994a).
Based on analysis of cave cricket data collected at Lakeline Cave
in northwest Travis County, Texas by William Elliott and Peter Sprouse
from 1993 to 1999, cave cricket numbers in Lakeline Cave underwent a
major decline following the construction of Lakeline Mall. Under a
section 10(a)(1)(B) permit, 0.9 ha (2.3 ac) of land was left
undeveloped around the cave, and effects of the development were
monitored. Protected areas were established around Temples of Thor, Red
Crevice Cave, and Testudo Tube. During the monitoring period, the
undeveloped area around Lakeline Cave comprised about 3.2 ha (8 ac) of
woodland and grassland surrounded by roads and parking lots. The
protected areas around Temples of Thor Cave and Testudo Tube Cave are
42.5 and 10.5 ha, respectively (105 and 26 ac), and one surrounded by
additional undeveloped land. We analyzed cave cricket numbers from data
collected from 1993 to 1999 at Lakeline Cave, Temples of Thor, and
Testudo Tube. The analysis indicated that cave cricket numbers in
Lakeline Cave declined while numbers at the other two caves remained
stable. Cave cricket numbers at Lakeline Cave declined and were
significantly correlated with time (r\2\ = 0.3872) whereas cricket
numbers from Temples of Thor and Testudo Tube, which are in larger
preserves (105 and 26 acres respectively, although the surrounding
undeveloped area made the effective area larger) remained stable (r\2\
= 0.0007 and 0.0018 respectively). These results are consistent with
reports of declines and extinctions of several invertebrates and small
mammals (due to lower survivorship, higher emigration, and/or lower
immigration) from habitat patches ranging in size from 2 to 7 ha (5-17
ac) (Mader 1984; Tscharntke 1992; Keith et al. 1993; Lindenmayer and
Possingham 1995; Hill et al. 1996).
Elliott (1994a) stated that cave crickets generally forage within
50 m (164 ft) of caves and other karst features, but have been found up
to 60 m (197 ft) away. He also stated that cave crickets may use small,
unnoticeable passages from the cave to the surface in addition to the
main cave entrance.
Cave cricket populations may have a metapopulation (an assemblage
of local populations, called subpopulations, that interact via the
dispersal of individuals from one subpopulation to others) or a source-
sink population structure and, therefore, it may be important to
protect multiple karst features that support cave crickets in a karst
ecosystem. ``Source'' populations are those that generate a flow of
migrants to other habitat patches. Population ``sinks'' are patches
where losses of individuals are not replaced by reproduction alone, but
rely on continued immigration from source populations (Ehrlich and
Ehrlich 1996). Metapopulation dynamics require movement among patches,
and persistence requires interacting patches that undergo local
extinctions and establishment of new subpopulations in areas previously
devoid of individuals (Hanski 1999).
Most information on the population structure of cave cricket
species is from studies in the eastern United States and in Europe.
Allegrucci et al. (1997) found that a cave cricket (Dolichopoda
schiavazzii) endemic to Tuscany, Italy, had a metapopulation structure.
They found that populations of cave crickets from two caves 20 km (12
mi) apart but connected by moist woodlands had 54 migrants per
generation and probably exchanged individuals.
Cockley et al. (1977) studied a cave cricket (Ceuthophilus
gracilipes) in the eastern United States. This species is limited to
humid, dark, and stable habitats and is found both in caves and in the
forest under logs and loose bark. They found limited genetic
differentiation of the cave crickets in caves over a 1000 km2 (386
mile2) area and suggested that ``the forest populations may serve as
genetic bridges'' between caves.
Caccone and Sbordoni (1987) studied nine species of North American
cave crickets from sites in North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania,
Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia, Kentucky, and Alabama. Seven of the
species were obligate cave-dwelling species that emerged at night to
feed. Through genetic analyses of the cave-dwelling species, they found
that species or groups of populations inhabiting areas where the
limestone is continuous and highly fissured are genetically less
differentiated than are populations occurring in regions where the
limestone distribution is more fragmented. This suggests that cave-
dwelling species occurring within continuous limestone blocks migrate
through the subsurface environment.
Helf et al. (1995) suggested that populations of an eastern species
of cave cricket (Hadenoecus subterraneus) may be at risk because they
do not recover quickly after events such as drought, floods, and
temperature extremes that preclude or diminish foraging opportunities.
These cave cricket populations may have source-sink population
dynamics, with some karst features acting as sources and the majority
of karst features acting as sinks, but Helf et al. (1995) recommend
that even sink populations should be protected because their emigrants
can ``rescue'' source populations that experience local decimation.
These studies suggest that it is important to protect geologically
connected caves and maintain vegetated corridors between caves.
Other Surface Animals
Many central Texas caves with endangered invertebrate species are
frequented by mammals and several species of reptiles and amphibians
(Reddell 1967). Although there are no studies establishing the role of
mammals in central Texas cave ecology, the presence of a large amount
of mammal related materials (scat, nesting materials, and dead bodies)
indicates they are probably important. An important source of nutrients
for the cave species may be the fungus, microbes, and/or other
troglophiles and troglobites that grow or feed on feces (Elliott 1994b;
Gounot 1994).
For predatory troglobites, invertebrates that accidently occur in
the cave, may be an important nutrient source (Hopper 2000). Documented
accidental species include snails, earthworms, terrestrial isopods
(commonly known as pillbugs or potato bugs), scorpions, spiders, mites,
collembola (primitive wingless insects that are commonly known as
springtails), thysanura (commonly known as bristletails and
silverfish), harvestmen (commonly known as daddy-long-legs), ants,
leafhoppers, thrips, beetles, weevils, moths, and flies (Reddell 1965;
Reddell 1966; Reddell 1999).
[[Page 55069]]
Vegetation Community
The vegetative community provides nutrient input to the karst
ecosystem through plant debris washed in and possibly through roots;
supports the animal communities that contribute nutrients to the karst
ecosystem (such as cave crickets, small mammals, and other
vertebrates); buffers the subsurface environment against drastic
changes in the temperature and moisture regime; helps filter pollutants
(Biological Advisory Team 1990; Veni & Associates 1988); and helps
control certain exotics (such as fire ants) (Porter et al. 1988) that
may compete with or prey upon the listed species and other karst fauna.
Tree roots have been found to provide a major energy source in
shallow lava tubes and limestone caves in Hawaii (Howarth 1981, cited
in Howarth 1983). Jackson et al. (1999) investigated rooting depth in
21 caves on the Edwards Plateau to assess the below ground vegetational
community structure and the functional importance of roots. They
observed roots penetrating up to 25 m (82 ft) into the interior of
twenty of the caves, with roots of six tree species common to the
plateau penetrating to below 5 m (16.4 ft). They speculated that the
caves may provide water and nutrients for the trees.
Along with providing nutrients to the karst ecosystem, directly and
indirectly, a healthy vegetative community may also help control the
spread of exotic species. The imported red fire ant (Solenopsis
invicta) is an aggressive predator, which has had a devastating and
long-lasting impact on native ant populations and other arthropod
communities (Vinson and Sorenson 1986; Porter and Savignano 1990) and
is a threat to the karst invertebrates (Elliott 1994b; USFWS 1994).
Fire ants have been observed building nests both within and near cave
entrances as well as foraging in caves, especially during the summer.
Shallow caves inhabited by listed karst invertebrates makes them
especially vulnerable to invasion by fire ants and other exotic
species. Fire ants have been observed preying on several cave species
(Elliott 1994b). Karst fauna that are most vulnerable to fire ant
predation are the slower-moving adults, nymphs, and eggs (James
Reddell, pers. comm., 1994). The presence of fire ants in and around
karst areas could have a drastic detrimental effect on the karst
ecosystem through loss of both surface and subsurface species that are
critical links in the food chain.
The invasion of fire ants is known to be aided by ``any disturbance
that clears a site of heavy vegetation and disrupts the native ant
community'' (Porter et al. 1988). Porter et al. (1991) state that
control of fire ants in areas greater than 5 ha (12 ac) may be more
effective than in smaller areas since multiple queen fire ant colonies
reproduce primarily by ``budding,'' where queens and workers branch off
from the main colony and form new sister colonies. Maintaining large,
undisturbed areas of native vegetation may also help sustain the native
ant communities (Porter et al. 1988; 1991).
Woodland-Grassland Community
The woodland-grassland mosaic community typical of the Edwards
Plateau is a patchy environment composed of many different plant
species. To replicate natural processes, patchy environments require
larger minimum areas for conservation than do more homogeneous
environments (Lovejoy and Oren 1981). To maintain a viable vegetative
community, including woodland and grassland species, a buffer area is
needed to shield the core habitat from impacts associated with
fragmentation, isolation, edge effects, and other factors.
Enough individuals of each plant species must be present for
successful reproduction over the long-term. Viable population size is
influenced by needs for satisfactory germination (Menges 1995), genetic
variation (Bazzaz 1983; Menges 1995; Young 1995) and pollinator
effectiveness (Groom 1998; Jennersten 1995; Bigger 1999). Pavlik (1996)
stated that long-lived, woody, self-fertilizing plants with high
fecundity would be expected to have minimum viable population sizes in
the range of 50-250 reproductive individuals. Fifty reproductive
individuals is a reasonable minimum figure for one of the dominant
species of the community (juniper) based on reproductive profiles for
these species (Van Auken et al. 1979; Van Auken et al. 1980; Van Auken
et al. 1981). This figure would likely be an underestimate for other
woody species present in central Texas woodlands as subdominant and
understory species, because they are more sensitive to environmental
changes and do not meet several of the life history criteria needed for
the lowest minimal viable population size. Although these species may
require population sizes at the higher end of Pavlik's (1996) range
(that is, nearer 250 individuals) to be viable, we do not have the data
to support that contention. Therefore, we have considered a minimum
viable population size for species composing a typical oak/juniper
woodland found in central Texas, including both dominant, subdominant,
and understory species, to be 80 individuals per species (Dr. Kathryn
Kennedy, Center for Plant Conservation, pers. comm., 2002). This is a
judgement based on the perception that this habitat type as a whole is
fairly mature and the species are relatively long-lived and
reproductively successful.
Based on analysis of recorded densities for dominant and important
woody species by Van Auken et al. (1979; 1980; 1981), we extrapolated
the area needed to support 80 reproductive individuals for the
dominant, subdominant, and other important woody species in the
southern Edwards Plateau. We used observed density per unit area,
corrected for non-reproductive individuals, then calculated the area
needed to support 80 mature reproductive individuals per species. We
found about a third of the ecologically important woody species typical
of the Edwards Plateau needed core areas of approximately 32 ha (80 ac)
to sustain self-reproducing populations of at least 80 mature
individuals.
Maintaining viable grasslands is challenging because many grass
species use wind to disperse their seeds and these distances may be
small. The process of expansion through rhizomes (underground stems) is
slow and clonal, which reduces genetic variability. Primary recruitment
of new individuals in grasslands is from seedling establishment. Seed
dispersal, soil texture, and suitable soil moisture profiles at
critical times are important factors for maintaining viability (Coffin
et al. 1993).
While grassland may be important to maintaining the karst
community, we lack adequate information to factor this information into
surface habitat patch size requirements. We believe maintaining the 32
ha core areas will provide the native grasslands needed to support the
diversity and nutrients needed for a viable karst ecosystem.
The presence of water in the subsurface environment is important
for maintaining the humid conditions, stable temperatures, and natural
airflow in the cave. Since soil depth is shallow over the limestone
plateau, water collects as sheet flow on the surface following rain and
enters the subsurface environment through cave openings, fractures, and
solutionally-enlarged bedding planes. This direct, rapid transport of
water through the karst allows for little or no purification (USFWS
1994), allowing contaminants and sediments to enter directly into the
subsurface environment. As a result, karst features and karst dependent
invertebrates are vulnerable to the
[[Page 55070]]
adverse effects of pollution from contaminated ground and surface
water. Maintaining stable environmental conditions and protecting
groundwater quality and quantity, requires managing surface habitat to
avoid threats to the surface and subsurface drainage area of known
occupied caves. This includes not only the humanly-accessible cave
entrances but also sinks, depressions, fractures and fissures which may
serve as subsurface conduits into the cave and to the interstitial
spaces used by the invertebrates.
Buffer Areas
Plant and animal communities are affected by ``edge effects'' or
changes to the floral and faunal communities where different habitats
meet. The length and width of the edge, as well as the contrast between
the vegetational communities, all contribute to edge effects (Smith
1990; Harris 1984). Edge effects include: increases in solar radiation,
changes in soil moisture due to elevated levels of evapotranspiration,
wind buffeting (Ranny et al. 1981), changes in nutrient cycling and the
hydrological cycle (Saunders et al. 1990), and changes in the rate of
leaf litter decomposition (Didham 1998). Edge effects alter the plant
communities, which in turn impact the associated animal species. The
changes caused by edge effects can occur rapidly. For example,
vegetation 2 m (6.6 ft) from a newly created edge can be altered within
days (Lovejoy et al. 1986).
When plant species composition is altered due to edge effects,
changes also occur in the surface animal communities (Lovejoy and Oren
1981; Harris 1984; Mader 1984; Thompson 1985; Lovejoy et al. 1986;
Yahner 1988; Fajer et al. 1989; Kindvall 1992; Tscharntke 1992; Keith
et al. 1993; Hanski 1995; Lindenmayer and Possingham 1995; Bowers et
al. 1996; Hill et al. 1996; Kozlov 1996; Kuussaari et al. 1996; Turner
1996; Mankin and Warner 1997; Burke and Nol 1998; Didham 1998; Suarez
et al. 1998; Crist and Ahern 1999; Kindvall 1999). These changes in
plant and animal species composition that result from edge effects may
unnaturally change the nutrient cycling processes required to support
cave and karst ecosystem dynamics. To minimize edge effects, the core
area must have a sufficient buffer area.
There are two types of edges, hard and soft. ``Hard'' edges, also
called inherent edges, are drastic differences in habitat types, such
as grassland to road, forest to clearcut, and are generally long-term
or permanent changes. Hard edges can be the result of a sudden natural
disruption such as a storm event (Smith 1990), or man-made disturbances
such as clearcuts or urbanization. ``Soft'' edges, also called induced
edges, are subtle differences in habitat type. Soft edges can also be
abrupt such as where a pine forest abuts a pine plantation, but soft
edges occur more often as successional changes or gradual transitions
in the vegetative or faunal communities (Smith 1990).
Hard edges can act as a barrier to distribution and dispersal
patterns of birds and mammals (Yahner 1988; Hansson 1998). Invertebrate
species are affected by edges. Mader et al. (1990) found that carabid
beetles and lycosid spiders avoided crossing unpaved roads that were
even smaller than 3 m (9 ft) wide. Saunders et al. (1990) suggested
that as little as 100 m (328 ft) of agricultural fields may be a
complete barrier to dispersal for small organisms such as invertebrates
and some species of birds. In general, for animal communities, species
need buffers of 50 to 100 m (164-328 ft) or greater to ameliorate edge
effects (Lovejoy et al. 1986; Wilcove et al. 1986; Laurance 1991;
Laurance and Yensen 1991; Kapos et al. 1993; Andren 1995; Reed et al.
1996; Burke and Nol 1998; Didham 1998; Suarez et al. 1998).
Non-native fire ants are known to be harmful to many species of
invertebrates and vertebrates. In coastal southern California, Suarez
et al. (1998) found that densities of the exotic Argentine ant
(Linepithema humile), which has a life history similar to the fire ant,
are greatest near disturbed areas. Native ant communities tended to be
more abundant in native vegetation and less abundant in disturbed
areas. Based on the association of the Argentine ant and distance to
the nearest edge in urban areas, core areas may only be effective at
maintaining natural populations of native ants when there is a buffer
area of at least 200 m (656 ft) (Suarez et al. 1998).
Both hard and soft edges may allow invasive plant species to gain a
foothold where the native vegetation had previously prevented their
spread (Saunders et al. 1990; Kotanen et al. 1998; Suarez et al. 1998;
Meiners and Steward 1999). A general rule for protecting forested areas
from edge effects that are in proximity to clear-cut areas is to use
the ``three tree height'' rule (Harris 1984) for estimating the width
of the buffer area needed. We used this general rule to estimate the
width of buffer areas needed to protect the habitat core areas. The
average height of native mature trees in the Edwards woodland
association in Texas ranges from 3 to 9 m (10 to 30 ft) (Van Auken et
al. 1979). Applying the general rule, and using the average value of
6.6 m for tree height, we estimated a buffer width of at least 20 m (66
ft) is needed around a core habitat area to protect the vegetative
community from edge effects.
Patch Configuration
Shape
The more edge a habitat fragment or patch has, the larger the patch
or fragment size should be to protect the core area from deleterious
edge effects (Ranny et al. 1981; Lovejoy et al. 1986; Yahner 1988;
Laurance 1991; Laurance and Yensen 1991; Kelly and Rotenberry 1993;
Holmes et al. 1994; Reed et al. 1996; Turner 1996; Suarez et al. 1998).
Designing a habitat area that minimizes edge effects means keeping the
edge to area ratio low by increasing the patch size (Holmes et al.
1994) and/or using optimal shapes. Circular habitat areas, or ones that
are contiguous with other protected habitat areas, are preferable
(Diamond 1975; Wilcove et al. 1986; Kelly and Rotenberry 1993; Wigley
and Roberts 1997; Kindvall 1999). A habitat area with a circular
configuration will have less edge than a habitat area of equal size
with any other configuration.
Fragmentation
Haskell (2000) examined the effect of habitat fragmentation by
unpaved roads through otherwise contiguous forest in the southern
Appalachian Mountains and found reduced soil macroinvertebrate species
abundance up to 100 m (328 ft) from the road and declines in faunal
richness up to 15 m (50 ft) from the road. Haskell (2000) pointed out
that ``these changes may have additional consequences for the
functioning of the forest ecosystem and the biological diversity found
within this system. The macroinvertebrate fauna of the leaf litter
plays a pivotal role in the ability of the soil to process energy and
nutrients.'' Haskell further points out that these changes may in turn
affect the distribution and abundance of other organisms, particularly
plants. Changes in abundance in litter dwelling macroinvertebrates may
also affect ground-foraging vertebrate fauna (Haskell 2000).
Invertebrate biomass per unit area has been found to be less in
small fragmented habitats, which may result in reduced food available
for cave crickets. Burke and Nol (1998), working in southern Ontario,
Canada, found a greater biomass of leaf litter invertebrates in large
([ge]20 ha (49 ac)) versus smaller forested areas. Zanette et
[[Page 55071]]
al. (2000) in New South Wales, Australia, reported the biomass of
ground dwelling invertebrates was 1.6 times greater in large
(400 ha (988 ac)) versus smaller ([sim]55 ha (136 ac))
forested areas.
The ability of individuals to move between preferred habitat
patches is essential for colonization and population viability (Eber
and Brandl 1996; Fahrig and Merriam 1994; Hill et al. 1996; Kattan et
al. 1994; Kindvall 1999; Kozlov 1996; Kuussaari et al. 1996; Turner
1996). Patch shapes that allow connection with the most number of
neighboring patches increase the likelihood that a neighboring patch
will be occupied (Fahrig and Merriam 1994; Kindvall 1999; Kuussaari et
al. 1996; Tiebout and Anderson 1997). If movement among populations is
restricted and a population is isolated, the habitat patch size must be
large enough to ensure that the population can survive (Fahrig and
Merriam 1994).
It is likely that many cave systems are connected throughout the
subsurface geologic formation even though this may not be readily
apparent from surface observations. The extent to which listed species
use interstitial spaces and passages is not fully known. Troglobitic
species may retreat into these small interstitial spaces where the
physical environment is more stable (Howarth 1983) and may spend the
majority of their time in such retreats, only leaving them during
temporary forays into the larger cave passages to forage (Howarth
1987).
Summary
The recovery of the endangered karst invertebrates depends on a
self-sustaining karst ecosystem; surface and subsurface drainage basins
to maintain adequate levels of moisture; and a viable surface animal
and plant community for nutrient input and protection of the subsurface
from adverse impacts. The area needed to conserve such an ecosystem
includes a core area buffered from the impacts associated with
fragmentation, isolation, edge effects, and other factors that may
threaten ecosystem stability. Depending on the size and shape of these
core habitat areas or patches, to remain viable, they may also require
connections to other habitat patches.
In summary, around known caves we believe an area approximately 36
ha (90 ac) that includes a core habitat area of 32 ha (80 ac)
surrounded by a buffer 20 m (66 ft) wide, comprising about 4 ha (10
ac), is needed to protect and maintain the area flora, fauna, and
nutrient base. The amount of area in the buffer will be larger if the
core habitat area is irregularly shaped. Where possible, these areas
should be continuous to minimize fragmentation.
Previous Federal Action
On January 16, 1992, we received a petition submitted by
representatives of the Helotes Creek Association, the Balcones
Canyonlands Conservation Coalition, the Texas Speleological
Association, the Alamo Group of the Sierra Club, and the Texas Cave
Management Association to add the nine invertebrates to the List of
Threatened and Endangered Wildlife. On December 1, 1993, we announced
in the Federal Register (58 FR 63328) a 90-day finding that the
petition presented substantial information that listing may be
warranted.
On November 15, 1994, we added eight of the nine invertebrates to
the Animal Notice of Review as category 2 candidate species in the
Federal Register (59 FR 58982). We intended to include Rhadine exilis
in the notice of review, but an oversight occurred and it did not
appear in the published notice. Category 2 candidates, a classification
since discontinued, were those taxa for which we had data indicating
that listing was possibly appropriate, but for which we lacked
substantial data on biological vulnerability and threats to support
proposed listing rules.
On December 30, 1998, we published a proposed rule to list the nine
Bexar County karst invertebrates as endangered (63 FR 71855).
Incorporating comments and new information received during the public
comment period on the proposed rule, we published a final rule to list
the nine Bexar County karst invertebrate species as endangered in the
Federal Register on December 26, 2000 (65 FR 81419).
In the proposed rule, we indicated that designation of critical
habitat was not prudent for the nine invertebrates because the
publication of precise species locations and maps and descriptions of
critical habitat in the Federal Register would make the nine
invertebrates more vulnerable to incidents of vandalism through
increased recreational visits to their cave habitat and through
purposeful destruction of the caves. We also indicated that designation
of critical habitat was not prudent because it would not provide any
additional benefits beyond that provided through listing the species as
endangered.
Based on recent court decisions, (for example, Natural Resources
Defense Council v. U.S. Department of the Interior 113 F. 3d 1121 (9th
Cir. 1997); Conservation Council for Hawaii v. Babbitt, 2 F. Supp. 2d
1280 (D. Hawaii 1998)) and the standards applied in those judicial
opinions, we reexamined the question of whether critical habitat for
the nine invertebrates would be prudent. After reexamining the
available evidence for the nine invertebrates, we did not find specific
evidence of collection or trade of these or any similarly situated
species and found that ``by designating critical habitat in a manner
that does not identify specific cave locations, the threat of vandalism
by recreational visits to the cave or purposeful destruction by unknown
parties should not be increased'' (65 FR 81419).
In the final rule to list the species as endangered (65 FR 81419),
we determined that critical habitat designation was prudent as we did
not find specific evidence of increased vandalism. Also, we found that
there may also be some educational or informational benefit to
designating critical habitat. Therefore, we found that the benefits of
designating critical habitat for the nine karst invertebrate species
outweighed the benefits of not designating critical habitat.
The Final Listing Priority Guidance for FY 2000 (64 FR 57114)
stated that we would undertake critical habitat determinations and
designations during FY 2000 as allowed by our funding allocation for
that year. As explained in detail in the Listing Priority Guidance, our
listing budget was insufficient to allow us to immediately complete all
of the listing actions required by the Act during FY 2000. We stated
that we would propose designation of critical habitat in the future at
such time when our available resources and priorities allowed.
On November 1, 2000, the Center for Biological Diversity (Center)
filed a complaint against the Service alleging that the Service
exceeded its one-year deadline to publish a final rule listing and
designating critical habitat for the nine Bexar County cave
invertebrates. Subsequent to the Service publishing the final rule to
list these nine species as endangered on December 26, 2000, the Center
agreed to dismiss its claim regarding the listing of the species. The
Center and the Service reached a settlement on the designation of
critical habitat where the Service agreed to submit a proposed critical
habitat determination for publication in the Federal Register on or by
June 30, 2002, and a final determination by January 25, 2003. Sixty-day
extensions on the deadlines to submit both the proposed and final
critical habitat determinations to the Federal Register were approved
by the court and the new deadlines are
[[Page 55072]]
August 31, 2002, and March 25, 2003, respectively.
On February 28, 2002, we mailed letters to the Texas Parks and
Wildlife Department and the Texas Natural Resource Conservation
Commission informing them that we were in the process of designating
critical habitat for the nine Bexar County karst invertebrates. We
requested any additional available information on the listed species,
including: Biology; life history; habitat requirements; distribution,
including geologic controls to species distribution; current threats;
and management activities, current or in the foreseeable future. The
letters contained a current list of Bexar County caves known to contain
listed species, a map showing the general distribution of these species
within each karst fauna region and a list of the references pertaining
to these species and their distribution as we know it. We requested
their review and comments on our current information and asked their
assistance in providing any additional available information.
We also mailed approximately 300 pre-proposal letters to interested
parties and cave biologists on March 20, 2002, informing them that we
were in the process of designating critical habitat for the nine listed
karst invertebrates. The letters contained a copy of the final rule to
list these Bexar County invertebrate species as endangered, a map
showing the general distribution of these species, a list of literature
about these species and their habitats, and a brief summary with
questions and answers on critical habitat. We requested comments on (1)
the reasons why any habitat should or should not be determined to be
critical habitat as provided by section 4 of the Act, including whether
the benefits of excluding areas will outweigh the benefits of including
areas; (2) land use practices and current or planned activities in the
subject areas and their possible impacts on possible critical habitat;
(3) any foreseeable economic or other impacts resulting from the
proposed designation of critical habitat, in particular, any impacts on
small entities or families; and (4) economic and other benefits
associated with designating critical habitat for the Bexar County karst
invertebrates.
Critical Habitat
Critical habitat is defined in section 3, paragraph (5)(A) of the
Act as--(i) the specific areas within the geographic area occupied by a
species, at the time it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which
are found those physical or biological features (I) essential to the
conservation of the species and (II) that may require special
management considerations or protection; and, (ii) specific areas
outside the geographic area occupied by a species at the time it is
listed, upon a determination that such areas are essential for the
conservation of the species. ``Conservation,'' as defined by the Act,
means the use of all methods and procedures that are necessary to bring
an endangered or a threatened species to the point at which listing
under the Act is no longer necessary.
Critical habitat receives protection under section 7 of the Act
through the prohibition against destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat with regard to actions carried out, funded, or
authorized by a Federal agency. Section 7 also requires conferences on
Federal actions that are likely to result in the destruction or adverse
modification of proposed critical habitat. Destruction or adverse
modification is direct or indirect alteration that appreciably
diminishes the value of critical habitat for both the survival and
recovery of a listed species. Such alterations include, but are not
limited to, alterations adversely modifying any of those physical or
biological features that were the basis for determining the habitat to
be critical. Consultation under section 7 of the Act does not apply to
activities on private or other non-Federal lands that do not involve a
Federal nexus.
Critical habitat provides non-regulatory benefits to the species by
informing the public and private sectors of areas that are important
for species recovery and where conservation actions would be most
effective. Designation of critical habitat can help focus conservation
activities for a listed species by identifying areas that contain the
physical and biological features that are essential for the
conservation of that species, and can alert the public and land-
managing agencies to the importance of those areas.
To be included in a critical habitat designation, the habitat must
be ``essential to the conservation of the species.'' Critical habitat
designations identify, to the extent known and using the best
scientific and commercial data available, habitat areas that provide
essential life cycle needs of the species (such as areas on which are
found the primary constituent elements, as defined at 50 CFR
424.12(b)). Section 3(5)(C) of the Act states that not all areas that
can be occupied by a species should be designated as critical habitat
unless the Secretary determines that all such areas are essential to
the conservation of the species. Our regulations (50 CFR 424.12(e))
also state that, ``'The Secretary shall designate as critical habitat
areas outside the geographic area presently occupied by the species
only when a designation limited to its present range would be
inadequate to ensure the conservation of the species.'''
Section 4 (b)(2) of the Act requires that we take into
consideration the economic impact, and any other relevant impact, of
specifying any particular areas as critical habitat. We may exclude
areas from critical habitat designation when the benefits of exclusion
outweigh the benefits of including the areas within critical habitat,
provided the exclusion will not result in extinction of the species.
Our Policy on Information Standards Under the Endangered Species
Act, published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271), provides criteria,
establishes procedures, and provides guidance to ensure that decisions
made by the Service represent the best scientific and commercial data
available. It requires that our biologists, to the extent consistent
with the Act and with the use of the best scientific and commercial
data available, use primary and original sources of information as the
basis for recommendations to designate critical habitat. When
determining which areas are critical habitat, a primary source of
information should be the listing rule for the species. Additional
information may be obtained from a recovery plan, articles in peer-
reviewed journals, conservation plans developed by States and counties,
scientific status surveys and studies, and biological assessments or
other unpublished reports.
Section 4 of the Act requires that we designate critical habitat
based on what we know at the time of designation. Since much of the
cave-forming rock is located on private property in areas that have
been inadequately surveyed, additional populations for some of these
species are likely to exist and may be discovered over time. We
recognize that designation of critical habitat for these species likely
does not include all of the habitat areas that may eventually be
determined to be necessary for the recovery of the species. For these
reasons, this critical habitat designation does not signal that habitat
outside the designation is unimportant or may not be required for
recovery. Habitat areas outside the critical habitat designation will
continue to be subject to conservation actions that may be implemented
under section 7(a)(1) of the Act and to the regulatory protections
afforded by the section 7(a)(2) jeopardy standard, and the section 9
take prohibition, as determined on the basis of the best available
information at the
[[Page 55073]]
time of the action. It is possible that federally funded or assisted
projects affecting listed species outside their designated critical
habitat areas could jeopardize those species. Similarly, critical
habitat designations made on the basis of the best available
information at the time of designation may not totally coincide with
the direction and substance of future recovery plans, habitat
conservation plans (HCP), or other species conservation planning and
recovery efforts if new information shows changes are needed.
Methods
As required by the Act and regulations (section 4(b)(2) and 50 CFR
424.12), we used the best scientific and commercial information
available to determine critical habitat areas that contain the physical
and biological features that are essential for the conservation of
these nine species. This information included: (1) Peer-reviewed
scientific publications; (2) the final listing rule for the nine Bexar
County karst invertebrate species (65 FR 81419); (3) unpublished field
data collected by Service biologists; (4) unpublished survey reports,
notes and communications with other qualified biologists or experts;
(5) published descriptions of the regional geology (Veni 1988; Soil
Conservation Service 1962; Veni 1994); (6) the Endangered Species
Recovery Plan for Endangered Karst Invertebrates in Travis and
Williamson Counties, Texas, (USFWS 1994); and (7) digital
orthophotographs flown in March 2001 obtained from the Bexar County
Appraisal District.
In determining the areas in Bexar County that are essential to the
conservation of the listed invertebrates, we considered all karst
features currently known to be occupied and the surrounding surface
ecosystem on which the species depend. We believe that other occupied
karst features likely exist in Bexar County that are essential to
species survival, especially for those species known from only a few
locations (such as Cicurina vespera, Cicurina venii, Batrisoides
venyivi, and Neoleptoneta microps). However, we do not currently know
where these locations are and therefore cannot include them in this
critical habitat designation.
Primary Constituent Elements
We are required to consider those physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of these nine karst invertebrates that
may require special management considerations and protection. These
features are termed primary constituent elements. Primary constituent
elements include but are not limited to: space for individual and
population growth and for normal behavior; food, water, air, minerals
and other nutritional or physiological requirements; cover or shelter;
and habitats that are protected from disturbance and represent the
historic geographical and ecological distributions of the species.
The primary constituent elements required by the nine karst
invertebrates consist of: (1) The physical features of karst-forming
rock containing subterranean spaces with stable temperatures, high
humidities (near saturation) and suitable substrates (for example,
spaces between and underneath rocks suitable for foraging and
sheltering), and (2) the biological features of a healthy surface
community of native plants (for example, juniper-oak woodland) and
animals (for example, cave crickets) surrounding the karst feature that
provides nutrient input and buffers the karst ecosystem from adverse
effects (from, for example, non-native species invasions, contaminants,
and fluctuations in temperature and humidity).
The areas proposed as critical habitat for the nine karst
invertebrates are designed to incorporate what is essential for their
conservation. Habitat components that are essential for these species
meet the primary biological needs of foraging, reproduction and refugia
from human induced or other environmental threats. Karst ecosystems
surrounded by a vegetative community that supports cave crickets and
other trogloxenes and troglophiles; where water quality and quantity in
the surface and subsurface drainage basin are protected; and that are
protected from unrestricted human-entry and other threats (such as fire
ants) are essential for the conservation of viable populations of these
endangered karst invertebrates.
Criteria Used To Delineate Critical Habitat
We used several criteria to identify and delineate lands for
designation as critical habitat: caves known to contain one or more of
the nine endangered karst invertebrates; the footprint of the known
occupied cave, including the known and estimated subsurface extent;
contiguous karst deposits; and at least 36 ha (90 ac) of vegetation
surrounding each known occupied cave or complex of caves essential to
the functioning of a healthy ecosystem.
Species location information was obtained from presence/absence
survey reports submitted during project consultations with the Service,
annual reports on research and recovery activities conducted under a
section 10(a)(1)(A) scientific permit, section 6 species status
reports, and literature published in peer reviewed journals. Survey
reports and scientific permit annual reports also contained cave
location information, typically in the form of a cave location
indicated on a U.S. Geological Survey topographic maps, and a map of
the cave footprint. We submitted a request to the Texas Speleological
Survey (TSS) for any available digital location data (UTM coordinates)
for Bexar County caves known to contain one or more of the nine
endangered species. TSS is a non-profit corporation established in 1961
to collect, organize, and maintain information on Texas caves and karst
for scientific, educational, and conservation purposes, and to support
safe and responsible cave exploration, and is affiliated with the Texas
Memorial Museum, the Texas Speleological Association, and the National
Speleological Society. TSS provided all available digital location
data, and reviewed and confirmed our location data for caves where no
digital information was available. The precision of the locations for
which digital location data were available ranged from 1 m to 10 m (3ft
to 33 ft) and data documented on topographic maps was estimated to be
accurate to within 10 m to 20 m (33 ft to 66 ft). This variability in
precision was taken into account when delineating proposed boundaries.
The TSS provided digital location information to us based on our
agreement that the information would only be accessible to the Austin
Ecological Services Field Office staff and would not be released. We
further agreed that any requests for such information would be directed
to TSS as owners of the data. The location of the known occupied caves
within each unit is not specified in order to protect these caves from
vandalism.
We referred to Veni's 1994 karst zones maps to ensure that the
majority of the lands within each proposed unit overlaid a contiguous
deposit of karst-bearing rock either known to contain the listed
species (Zone 1) and/or having a high probability of suitable habitat
for the listed species (Zone 2) in order to maintain subsurface
connectivity for species movement throughout the contiguous karst
deposit. Since the 1994 report, a significant amount of additional
information has become available, either as a result of the discovery
of new caves containing the listed species, or additional biological
surveys conducted in previously
[[Page 55074]]
mapped caves and/or as a result of the release of information not
available at the time of the 1994 report. As a result, some of these
caves for which critical habitat is being proposed are depicted as
occurring within Zone 2. These areas of Zone 2 now meet the definition
of Zone 1. See the previous ``Subsurface Environment'' section for
definitions of Veni's karst zones.
Where possible, the proposed critical habitat units contain at
least 36 ha (90 ac) of self-reproducing native vegetated area
surrounding each known occupied cave or complex of caves. This
vegetated area includes a core vegetative community, cave cricket
foraging area; and buffer areas that protect the core habitat from
impacts associated with fragmentation, isolation, and edge effects.
This area also includes the local surface and subsurface drainage
areas, to the extent known.
We consulted recent digital orthophotographs (March 2001) and
parcel maps (generated in early 2002) obtained from the Bexar County
Appraisal District to determine the current status of habitat
surrounding the known occupied caves and the extent of fragmentation
caused by existing development within and adjacent to each habitat
area. Several units were enlarged to encompass undisturbed vegetated
areas to compensate for internal fragmentation due to existing
development. Where possible, boundary lines were drawn along
identifiable landmarks including roads, named creeks and rivers, and
property boundaries. Several units were described as a circular area
encompassed within a square or rectangle bounded by corner points given
in Texas State Plane (South Central) in feet, referenced to North
American Horizontal Datum 1983 (NAD 83). Coordinates were derived from
the 2001 digital orthophotographs. A description of each unit and the
current status of the lands in and around the unit are presented below
under ``Proposed Critical Habitat Unit Descriptions''.
Existing human-constructed, above ground, impervious structures and
associated landscaping within the boundaries of mapped units do not
contain the primary constituent elements and are not considered to be
critical habitat. Such features and structures include but are not
limited to buildings and paved roads. However, areas below ground under
these structures and vegetation are considered to be critical habitat
since subterranean spaces containing these species and/or transmitting
moisture and nutrients through the karst ecosystem extend, in some
cases, underneath these existing human-constructed structures and
landscaped areas.
Critical Habitat Proposal
Lands proposed as critical habitat for the nine karst invertebrates
occur in 25 separate units with a total area of approximately 3,857 ha
(9,516 ac). The lands within the proposed units are under private,
city, State, and Federal ownership. Table 2 below lists the known
occupied caves, the karst fauna region, the total area, land ownership,
and the listed species that occur within each proposed unit.
Table 2.--Known Occupied Caves, the Karst Fauna Region (KFR), Total Area (Hectares (ha), Acres (ac)), Land Ownership and Listed Species That Occur
Within Each Proposed Critical Habitat Unit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit and known caves in unit KFR Total area of unit Ownership Listed species in unit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1a. Bone Pile Cave........... Government Canyon................. 76 ha, 188 ac........... State............................ N. microps.
Surprise Sink............ R. infernalis.
1b. Government Canyon Bat Government Canyon................. 47 ha, 116 ac........... State............................ C. vespera.
Cave. N. microps.
R. exilis.
R. infernalis.
1c. Lost Pothole............. Government Canyon................. 47 ha, 116 ac........... State............................ C. madla.
1d. Lithic Ridge Cave........ Government Canyon................. 47 ha, 116 ac........... State............................ R. infernalis.
1e. Canyon Ranch Pit *....... Government Canyon................. 341 ha, 842 ac.......... Private, State................... R. infernalis.
Fat Man's Nightmare Cave R. exilis.
*. B. venyivi.
Pig Cave.................
San Antonio Ranch Pit
Scenic Overlook Cave *
Tight Cave
2. Logan's Cave.............. Helotes........................... 99 ha, 245 ac........... Private.......................... C. madla.
Madla's Drop Cave........ R.infernalis.
R. exilis.
3. Helotes Blowhole *........ Helotes........................... 63 ha, 154 ac........... Private.......................... B. venyivi.
Helotes Hilltop *........ C. madla.
R. infernalis.
R. exilis.
4. Kamikazi Cricket Cave..... UTSA.............................. 63 ha, 154 ac........... Private.......................... R. infernalis.
R. exilis.
5. Christmas Cave............ Helotes........................... 47 ha, 116 ac........... Private.......................... B. venyivi.
C. madla.
R. infernalis.
R. exilis.
6. John Wagner Ranch Cave No. UTSA.............................. 45 ha, 111 ac........... Private.......................... R. infernalis.
3 *. R. exilis.
7. Young Cave No. 1.......... UTSA.............................. 50 ha, 123 ac........... Private.......................... R. exilis.
8. Hills and Dales Pit *..... UTSA.............................. 174 ha, 428 ac.......... Private.......................... C. madla.
Robber's Cave............ R. infernalis.
Three Fingers Cave....... R. exilis.
9. Mastodon Pit.............. UTSA.............................. 71 ha, 175 ac........... State, Private................... R. exilis.
10. Flying Buzzworm Cave..... Stone Oak......................... 367 ha, 906 ac.......... Federal, City, Private........... C. madla.
Headquarters Cave........ R. infernalis.
Low Priority Cave........ R. exilis.
[[Page 55075]]
11. 40 mm Cave............... Stone Oak......................... 1,273 ha, 3,143 ac...... Federal.......................... R. exilis.
B-52 Cave
Backhole
Boneyard Pit
Bunny Hole
Cross the Creek Cave
Dos Viboras Cave
Eagle's Nest Cave
Hilger Hole
Hold-Me-Back Cave
Isocow Cave
MARS Pit
MARS Shaft
Pain in the Glass Cave
Platypus Pit
Poor Boy Baculum Cave
Root Canal Cave
Root Toupee Cave
Strange Little Cave
Up the Creek Cave
12. Hairy Tooth Cave......... Stone Oak......................... 105 ha, 258 ac.......... Private.......................... R. exilis.
Ragin' Cajun Cave
13. Black Cat Cave........... Stone Oak......................... 51 ha, 125 ac........... Private.......................... R. exilis.
14. Game Pasture Cave No. 1.. Culebra Anticline................. 173 ha, 426 ac.......... Private.......................... R. infernalis.
King Toad Cave...........
Stevens Ranch Trash
15. Braken Bat Cave.......... Culebra Anticline................. 195 ha, 481 ac.......... Private.......................... C. venii.
Isopit................... R. infernalis.
Obvious Little Cave
Wurzbach Bat Cave
16. Caracol Creek Coon Cave.. Culebra Anticline................. 61 ha, 152 ac........... Private.......................... R. infernalis.
17. Madla's Cave *........... Helotes........................... 48 ha, 118 ac........... Private.......................... C. madla.
R. infernalis.
18. Mattke Cave.............. UTSA.............................. 40 ha, 100 ac........... Private.......................... R. nfernalis.
Scorpion Cave
19. Genesis Cave............. Stone Oak......................... 59 ha, 146 ac........... Private.......................... R. infernalis.
20. Robber Baron Cave........ Alamo Heights..................... 160 ha, 395 ac.......... Private.......................... C. baronia.
T. cokendolpheri.
21. Hornet's Last Laugh Pit.. Stone Oak......................... 155 ha, 382 ac.......... Private.......................... R. exilis.
Kick Start Cave
Springtail Crevice
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals:
25 57 3,857 ha, 9,516 ac .....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Indicates caves and their associated preserve lands that have special management under La Cantera's Section 10 permit and have therefore not been
included in the proposed critical habitat designation. These caves and their associated preserve lands were not included in the totals in this table.
The lands within the proposed critical habitat units, with the
exception of Units 19 and 20, provide the full range of primary
constituent elements needed by the nine karst invertebrates including
(1) the physical features of karst-forming rock containing subterranean
spaces with stable temperatures, high humidities (near saturation) and
suitable substrates (for example, spaces between and underneath rocks
suitable for foraging and sheltering), and (2) the biological features
of a healthy surface community of native plants (for example, juniper-
oak woodland) and animals (for example, cave crickets) surrounding the
karst feature that provide nutrient input and buffers the karst
ecosystem from adverse effects (from, for example, non-native species
invasions, contaminants, and fluctuations in temperature and humidity).
Lands within Units 19 and 20 are heavily urbanized and intensive
management may be required to provide nutrients and water to the listed
species within these units. See ``Proposed Critical Habitat Unit
Descriptions'' below for detailed descriptions of all units.
Twelve caves known to contain one or more of the listed species
were not included in the proposed critical habitat designation. The
caves referred to as ``unnamed cave \1/2\ mile N of Helotes'' and ``5
miles NE of Helotes'' were not specifically included because their
precise locations are unknown.
La Cantera Cave No. 1 and La Cantera Cave No. 2 were also not
included in this proposed critical habitat designation. La Cantera
received a section 10(a)(1)(B) permit for take of the listed species in
La Cantera Cave No. 1 and La Cantera Cave No. 2. After evaluating the
HCP and associated information, we determined that a sufficient number
of caves containing these species remained so that take of the species
within these two caves would not preclude recovery of the species.
Therefore, La Cantera Cave No. 1 and La Cantera Cave No. 2 were not
included in this designation because
[[Page 55076]]
they are not considered essential to the conservation of the species.
The decision to issue the permit was also based on La Cantera's
proposal to mitigate for take of the species within these caves by
purchasing and managing eight caves known to contain one or more of the
listed species for which take was being permitted and their associated
preserve lands. These mitigation caves are Canyon Ranch Pit, Fat Man's
Nightmare Cave, and Scenic Overlook Cave and the surrounding
approximately 30 ha (75 ac) (within Unit 1e); Helotes Blowhole and
Helotes Hilltop caves and the surrounding approximately 10 ha (25 ac)
(within Unit 3); John Wagner Cave No. 3 and the surrounding
approximately 1.6 ha (4 ac) (within Unit 6); Hills and Dales Pit and
the surrounding approximately 28 ha (70 ac) (within Unit 8); and
Madla's Cave and the surrounding approximately 2 ha (5 ac) (within Unit
17). La Cantera recently completed their purchase of these karst
preserves through conservation easement and/or fee simple title and has
agreed to protect and manage them in perpetuity in accordance with the
conservation needs of the species. Since these areas do not require
additional special management beyond that provided for through the HCP
and do not meet the definition of critical habitat, these caves and
their associated preserve lands were also excluded from this proposed
critical habitat designation.
Proposed Critical Habitat Unit Descriptions
Units 1a, 1b, 1c, 1d
Units 1a, 1b, 1c, and 1d are located on Government Canyon State
Natural Area (GCSNA), an approximately 2,688-ha (6,643-ac) area owned
and managed by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD). GCSNA
was purchased in 1993 and is not currently accessible to the public.
The projected opening is late 2003 or early 2004. Lands within the four
proposed units are undeveloped, with several one-lane, unpaved roads
which will serve primarily as pedestrian trails once the facility
opens. Unauthorized public vehicular traffic will not be allowed
(George Kegley, TPWD, pers. comm. 2002). An unpaved road/trail crosses
Units 1a, 1b, and 1c. Unit 1a contains two known occupied caves and
Units 1b, 1c, and 1d each contain one cave known to contain listed
species (Table 2).
These units were delineated to encompass at least 36 ha (90 ac) of
vegetation around the known occupied caves, overlying a contiguous
deposit of karst-bearing rock. The majority of GCSNA, including the
proposed units, are defined by Veni's 1994 karst zone maps as occurring
within Zone 2. Since lands within this unit are primarily undeveloped
and the property is under one ownership, we were unable to delineate
the boundaries of the units using roads or parcel boundaries, and
instead delineated the units as squares encompassing approximately 36-
ha circular areas containing the endangered species cave habitat.
Unit 1e
The majority of Unit 1e consists of large tracts of privately owned
land that is primarily undeveloped with the exception of several small
private and/or county roads. A small corner of GCSNA also occurs in
this unit. No highways or major roadways occur within the unit. This
unit contains six caves known to contain listed species (Table 2).
Three of the caves are located on an approximately 162-ha (400-ac)
privately-owned, undeveloped, property bordered by GCSNA to the west
and south, La Cantera's 30-ha (75-ac) Canyon Ranch preserve to the
north, and by the City of San Antonio's Iron Horse Canyon property on
the east. The 162-ha (400-ac) property also contains four caves that
may contain suitable habitat for one or more of the listed species, but
require additional surveys during suitable environmental conditions
(Kemble White, SWCA, pers.comm. 2002). Three of these caves are within
the 36-ha (90-ac) habitat area of a known occupied cave on the
property.
Three of the six known occupied caves within this unit and their
associated preserve lands have been excluded from this critical habitat
designation. The 30-ha (75-ac) Canyon Ranch Preserve contains Canyon
Ranch Pit, Fat Man's Nightmare Cave, and Scenic Overlook Cave and has
been acquired by La Cantera under their Section 10(a)(1)(B) permit,
which also requires that these caves and the surrounding preserve lands
be managed in perpetuity for the conservation of the species. Since
these lands do not require special additional management, they have
been excluded from critical habitat designation.
The City of San Antonio's Iron Horse Canyon property is
approximately 241 ha (595 ac). Two caves containing listed species
occur on the property (Kemble White, SWCA, pers. comm. 2002). However,
the surveys were conducted in these caves prior to the species' listing
and to date, we have not been able to obtain a copy of the survey
report with cave names and precise locations.
This unit was delineated to encompass at least 36 ha of vegetation
around each of the six known occupied caves overlying contiguous
deposits of karst-bearing rock. Unit 1e is defined by Veni's 1994 karst
zone maps as occurring within Zone 2. This unit was enlarged to include
the City of San Antonio's Iron Horse Canyon property, which contains
two known occupied caves. Since we are unsure about the location of
these caves, the entire property was included within the critical
habitat designation. This unit may be modified depending on additional
location information about these two caves obtained during the public
comment period for this proposed rule. The unit was also enlarged to
include one of the four caves on the 162-ha (400-ac) property, which is
believed to contain suitable habitat for one or more of the listed
species, and a 36-ha habitat area around the cave. This unit may be
modified depending on the results of additional species surveys that
may be conducted in this cave during the public comment period for this
proposed rule. The unit boundaries were delineated following roads and
parcel boundaries.
Unit 2
Unit 2 consists of large, wooded tracts which appear to be
undeveloped with the exception of several buildings. The unit contains
two or three small private or county roads, but no highways or major
roadways. Two caves known to contain listed species occur within Unit 2
(Table 2).
This unit was delineated to encompass at least 36 ha (90 ac) of
vegetation around each of the two known occupied caves overlying a
contiguous deposit of karst-bearing rock. Unit 2 is defined by Veni's
1994 karst zone maps as occurring within Zone 2. The unit was enlarged
to encompass undisturbed, unfragmented woodland to compensate for
internal fragmentation due to several small roads, buildings and an
area from which the majority of the woodland has been removed. The unit
boundaries were delineated primarily along existing roads and parcel
boundaries.
Unit 3
Unit 3 consists of relatively large, wooded tracts. The tracts
along the northern side of the unit have been developed with homes, but
it appears that the remainder of the properties within the unit are
undeveloped. The unit contains several small residential roads, but no
major roadways or
[[Page 55077]]
highways. The unit is bordered by Bandera Road, a four-lane divided
roadway, and by two-lane residential roads. The unit contains two known
occupied caves (Table 2) which, along with their associated preserve
lands, have been excluded from this critical habitat designation.
Helotes Blowhole and Helotes Hilltop Cave and the approximately 10 ha
(25 ac) surrounding the caves has been acquired by La Cantera under
their Section 10(a)(1)(B) permit which requires that these caves and
the surrounding preserve lands be managed in perpetuity for the
conservation of the species. Since these lands do not require
additional special management, they have been excluded from critical
habitat designation.
This unit was delineated to encompass at least 36 ha (90 ac) of
vegetation around the two known occupied caves overlying contiguous
deposits of karst-bearing rock. The majority of Unit 3 is defined by
Veni's 1994 karst zone maps as occurring within Zone 1. The unit was
delineated to encompass the majority of the contiguous Zone 1 karst
deposit associated with the two known occupied caves while maximizing
the amount of undisturbed, unfragmented woodland surrounding the cave.
The unit was enlarged to include additional woodland areas to
compensate for internal fragmentation due to several small roads,
buildings and an area from which the majority of the woodland has been
removed. The unit boundaries were delineated along existing roads.
Unit 4
Unit 4 consists of relatively large wooded tracts subdivided for
residential development, of which few appear to be developed. The unit
contains several residential roads, but no major roadways or highways.
Lands surrounding Unit 4 consist of relatively large subdivided
residential tracts that appear to be largely undeveloped. One cave
known to contain listed species occurs within Unit 4 (Table 2).
This unit was delineated to encompass at least 36 ha (90 ac) of
vegetation around the known occupied cave, overlying a contiguous
deposit of karst-bearing rock. The majority of Unit 4 is defined by
Veni's 1994 karst zone maps as occurring within Zone 1. The unit was
delineated to encompass the majority of the contiguous Zone 1 karst
deposit associated with the known occupied cave while maximizing the
amount of undisturbed, unfragmented vegetation in the unit. The unit
was enlarged to include additional woodland to compensate for internal
fragmentation due to several residential roads and residential
development that occur within the unit. We were unable to delineate the
boundaries of the unit using roads or parcel boundaries due to their
configuration and instead delineated the unit as a square encompassing
an approximately 36-ha circular area containing the endangered species
cave habitat.
Unit 5
Unit 5 consists of a large tract of undeveloped, woodland and
several smaller, wooded tracts developed with homes and an associated
residential road. The unit is bordered to the north and northwest by
large tracts of undeveloped woodland and bordered on the remaining
sides by smaller tracts with some residential development. One cave
known to contain listed species occurs within Unit 5 (Table 2).
This unit was delineated to encompass at least 36 ha (90 ac) of
vegetation around the known occupied cave, overlying a contiguous
deposit of karst-bearing rock. The majority of Unit 5 is defined by
Veni's 1994 karst zone maps as occurring within Zones 1 and 2. The unit
was delineated to encompass the majority of the contiguous Zone 1 and 2
karst deposits associated with the known occupied cave while maximizing
the amount of undisturbed, unfragmented woodland surrounding the cave.
We were unable to delineate the boundaries of the unit using roads or
parcel boundaries due to their configuration and instead delineated the
unit as a square encompassing an approximately 36-ha circular area
containing the endangered species cave habitat.
Unit 6
Unit 6 consists primarily of relatively large tracts of undeveloped
woodland with several smaller tracts developed with homes. The unit is
bordered to the east by large, wooded, undeveloped tracts and to the
west by a residential development. The unit contains one known occupied
cave (Table 2) which along with its associated preserve lands have been
excluded from this critical habitat designation. John Wagner Ranch Cave
No. 3 and the approximately 1.6 ha (4 ac) surrounding the cave has been
acquired by La Cantera under their Section 10(a)(1)(B) permit which
requires that the cave and the surrounding preserve lands be managed in
perpetuity for the conservation of the species. Since these lands do
not require additional special management, they have been excluded from
critical habitat designation.
This unit was delineated to encompass at least 36 ha (90 ac) of
vegetation around the known occupied cave, overlying a contiguous
deposit of karst-bearing rock. The majority of Unit 6 is defined by
Veni's 1994 karst zone maps as occurring within Zone 1. The unit was
delineated to encompass the majority of the contiguous Zone 1 karst
deposit associated with the known occupied cave while maximizing the
amount of undisturbed, unfragmented woodland surrounding the cave. We
were unable to delineate the boundaries of the unit using roads or
parcel boundaries due to their configuration and instead delineated the
unit as a square encompassing an approximately 36-ha circular area
containing the endangered species cave.
Unit 7
Unit 7 consists of relatively large, wooded tracts, several of
which have been developed with homes. The unit contains several
residential roads, but no highways or major roadways. One cave known to
contain listed species occurs within Unit 7 (Table 2).
This unit was delineated to encompass at least 36 ha (90 ac) of
vegetation around the known occupied cave, overlying a contiguous
deposit of karst-bearing rock. The majority of Unit 7 is defined by
Veni's 1994 karst zone maps as occurring within Zone 1. The unit was
delineated to encompass the majority of the contiguous Zone 1 karst
deposit associated with the known occupied cave while also maximizing
the amount of undisturbed, unfragmented woodland surrounding the cave.
We were unable to delineate the boundaries of the unit using roads or
parcel boundaries due to their configuration and instead delineated the
unit as a square encompassing an approximately 36-ha circular area
containing the endangered species cave.
Unit 8
The majority of the lands within Unit 8 consist of large tracts of
primarily undeveloped woodland. The southeastern portion of the unit
has been subdivided and developed with homes. Part of this area has
been developed with residential roads, but currently contains no homes.
The unit contains three known occupied caves (Table 2). One of the
caves along with its associated preserve lands, have been excluded from
this critical habitat designation. Hills and Dales Pit and
approximately 28 ha (70 ac) surrounding the cave have been acquired by
La Cantera under their Section 10(a)(1)(B) permit which requires that
the cave and the
[[Page 55078]]
surrounding preserve lands be managed in perpetuity for the
conservation of the species. Since these lands do not require
additional special management, they have been excluded from critical
habitat designation.
This unit was delineated to encompass at least 36 ha (90 ac) of
vegetation around each of the three known occupied caves, overlying
contiguous deposits of karst-bearing rock. The majority of Unit 8 is
defined by Veni's 1994 karst zone maps as occurring within Zones 1 and
2. The unit was delineated to encompass the majority of the contiguous
Zone 1 and 2 karst deposits associated with the known occupied caves
while maximizing the amount of undisturbed, unfragmented woodland
surrounding the cave. The unit was enlarged to include additional
woodland to compensate for internal fragmentation due to several small
roads and residential development within the unit. The unit boundaries
were primarily delineated along existing roads and parcel boundaries.
Unit 9
Unit 9 consists of a large tract of undeveloped, woodland. The unit
is bordered to the north by Loop 1604, a major highway, and to the
south by a two-lane roadway. The unit is bordered to the west by the
University of Texas at San Antonio campus and to the east by some
commercial development. This unit contains one cave known to contain
listed species (Table 2).
This unit was delineated to encompass at least 36 ha (90 ac) of
vegetation around the known occupied cave, overlying a contiguous
deposit of karst-bearing rock. Roughly half of Unit 9 is defined by
Veni's 1994 karst zone maps as occurring within Zone 1. The unit was
delineated to encompass the majority of the contiguous Zone 1 karst
deposit associated with the known occupied cave while maximizing the
amount of undisturbed, unfragmented woodland surrounding the cave. The
unit boundaries were delineated along existing roads and a named creek.
Unit 10
Unit 10 consists of several large tracts of woodland. Most of Unit
10 is undeveloped. Roughly half of this unit consists of lands owned
and operated by the Department of Defense's (DOD) Camp Bullis. The
majority of the DOD-owned area within this unit is not extensively
developed with structures or major roadways, but does contain areas
used for some types of military training maneuvers. The other half of
the unit consists of Eisenhower Park, owned by the City of San Antonio,
and a privately-owned tract that is currently undeveloped. Three caves
known to contain listed species occur within Unit 10 (Table 2).
This unit was delineated to encompass at least 36 ha (90 ac) of
vegetation around each of the three known occupied caves, overlying
contiguous deposits of karst-bearing rock. The majority of Unit 10 is
defined by Veni's 1994 karst zone maps as occurring within Zones 1 and
2. The unit was delineated to encompass the majority of the contiguous
Zone 1 and 2 karst deposits associated with the known occupied caves
while maximizing the amount of undisturbed, unfragmented vegetation
within the unit. The unit was enlarged to include additional woodland
to compensate for internal fragmentation due to several roads and
buildings, as well as potential impacts due to military training
maneuvers. The unit boundaries were delineated along existing roads and
parcel boundaries.
Unit 11
Unit 11 consists of the southeastern portion of the DOD's Camp
Bullis. The area is not extensively developed with structures or major
roadways, but does contain areas used for some types of military
training maneuvers and contains large areas where the woodland
vegetation was cleared at some point in the past. Less than half of the
known occupied caves are located within woodland areas. Lands to the
east and south of the unit are undergoing rapid suburban development.
This unit contains 20 caves containing listed species (Table 2).
This unit was delineated to encompass at least 36 ha (90 ac) of
vegetation around each of the 20 known occupied caves, overlying
contiguous deposits of karst-bearing rock. The majority of Unit 11 is
defined by Veni's 1994 karst zone maps as occurring within Zone 2. The
unit was delineated to encompass the majority of the contiguous Zone 2
karst deposit associated with the known occupied caves while maximizing
the amount of undisturbed and unfragmented woodland surrounding the
cave. The unit was enlarged to include additional woodland to
compensate for internal fragmentation due to several roads and
developed areas, and potential impacts associated with military
training maneuvers. The unit boundaries were delineated primarily along
existing roads and parcel boundaries.
Unit 12
The majority of Unit 12 consists of lands that have been subdivided
for residential development. Single-family homes have been constructed
on roughly half of the subdivided lots. Several residential roads and
one major roadway occur within the unit. The unit is bordered to the
east by U.S. Highway 281, to the south by a quarry and to the west by a
school and some residential development. Several relatively large
tracts of undeveloped land occur within and to the north of the unit.
Two caves known to contain listed species occur within Unit 12 (Table
2).
This unit was delineated to encompass at least 36 ha (90 ac) of
vegetation around each of the two known occupied caves, overlying
contiguous deposits of karst-bearing rock. The majority of Unit 12 is
defined by Veni's 1994 karst zone maps as occurring within Zone 2. The
unit was delineated to encompass the majority of the contiguous Zone 2
karst deposit associated with the known occupied caves while maximizing
the amount of undisturbed and unfragmented woodland surrounding the
cave. The unit was enlarged to include additional woodland to
compensate for internal fragmentation due to existing residential
development within the unit. The unit boundaries were primarily
delineated along existing roads and a named creek.
Unit 13
Unit 13 consists primarily of large, currently undeveloped wooded
tracts with several smaller tracts developed with homes. Bulverde Road,
a major roadway, bisects the western portion of the unit. The unit is
bordered by dense residential development on the northwest and
significantly less dense residential development on the northeast. The
lands to the south, southeast, and southwest consist of large,
undeveloped, wooded, tracts. One cave containing listed species occurs
within this unit (Table 2).
This unit was delineated to encompass at least 36 ha (90 ac) of
vegetation around the known occupied cave, overlying a contiguous
deposit of karst-bearing rock. The majority of Unit 13 is defined by
Veni's 1994 karst zone maps as occurring within Zones 1 and 2. The unit
was delineated to encompass the majority of the contiguous Zone 1 and 2
karst deposits associated with the known occupied caves while
maximizing the amount of undisturbed, unfragmented woodland surrounding
the cave. The unit was enlarged to include additional woodland to
compensate for internal
[[Page 55079]]
fragmentation due to existing residential development and the presence
of a major roadway within the unit. The unit boundaries were primarily
delineated along parcel boundaries and existing roads.
Unit 14
Unit 14 consists of several large tracts of undeveloped woodland
with no major roadways or highways. Three caves known to contain listed
species occur within Unit 14 (Table 2).
This unit was delineated to encompass at least 36 ha (90 ac) of
vegetation around each of the three known occupied caves, overlying
contiguous deposits of karst-bearing rock. Unit 14 is defined by Veni's
1994 karst zone maps as occurring within Zones 1 and 2. The unit was
delineated to encompass the majority of the contiguous Zone 1 and 2
karst deposits associated with the known occupied caves while
maximizing the amount of undisturbed, unfragmented woodland surrounding
the cave. We were unable to delineate the boundaries of the unit using
roads or parcel boundaries due to their configuration and instead
delineated the unit as a rectangle encompassing an approximately 36-ha
area around each of the three known occupied caves.
Unit 15
The majority of the lands within Unit 15 are within a subdivision.
Tracts in the subdivision are relatively large and still contain wooded
vegetation. Two large, wooded, undeveloped tracts are located east of
the subdivision. The unit contains several residential roads, but no
major roadways or highways. Unit 15 contains four caves known to
contain listed species (Table 2).
This unit was delineated to encompass at least 36 ha (90 ac) of
vegetation around each of the four known occupied caves, overlying
contiguous deposits of karst-bearing rock. The majority of Unit 15 is
defined by Veni's 1994 karst zone maps as occurring within Zone 1. The
unit was delineated to encompass the majority of the contiguous Zone 1
karst deposit associated with the known occupied caves while maximizing
the amount of undisturbed, unfragmented woodland surrounding the cave.
The unit was enlarged to include additional woodland to compensate for
internal fragmentation due to existing residential development within
the unit. The unit boundaries were delineated along parcel boundaries
and existing roads.
Unit 16
Unit 16 contains several large, primarily undeveloped tracts of
woodland. However, Loop 1604, a major highway, bisects the eastern half
of the unit. One cave known to contain endangered species occurs within
Unit 16 (Table 2).
This unit was delineated to encompass at least 36 ha (90 ac) of
vegetation around the known occupied cave, overlying a contiguous
deposit of karst-bearing rock. Unit 16 is defined by Veni's 1994 karst
zone maps as occurring almost entirely within Zone 1. The unit was
delineated to encompass the majority of the contiguous Zone 1 karst
deposit associated with the known occupied cave while maximizing the
amount of undisturbed, unfragmented woodland surrounding the cave. The
unit was enlarged to include additional woodland to compensate for
internal fragmentation due to Loop 1604. We were unable to delineate
the boundaries of the unit using roads or parcel boundaries due to
their configuration and instead delineated the unit as a rectangle
encompassing an approximately 36-ha area around the known occupied
cave.
Unit 17
Unit 17 consists of relatively large tracts of undeveloped woodland
with only a few small private or county roads. Lands adjacent to the
unit are also undeveloped and wooded. The unit contains one known
occupied cave (Table 2) which, along with its associated preserve
lands, has been excluded from this critical habitat designation.
Madla's Cave and approximately 2 ha (5 ac) surrounding the cave have
been acquired by La Cantera under their Section 10(a)(1)(B) permit
which requires that the cave and the surrounding preserve lands be
managed in perpetuity for the conservation of the listed species. Since
these lands do not require additional special management, they have
been excluded from critical habitat designation.
This unit was delineated to encompass at least 36 ha (90 ac) of
vegetation around the known occupied cave, overlying a contiguous
deposit of karst-bearing rock. Roughly half of Unit 17 is defined by
Veni's 1994 karst zone maps as occurring within Zone 1. The unit was
delineated to encompass the majority of the contiguous Zone 1 karst
deposit associated with the known occupied caves while maximizing the
amount of undisturbed, unfragmented woodland surrounding the cave. The
unit boundaries were delineated along parcel boundaries.
Unit 18
The northern portion of Unit 18 consists of relatively large,
wooded tracts subdivided for residential development, the majority of
which appear to be undeveloped. The southern portion of the unit is
lined with developed residential lots. Unit 18 is bisected by one
residential road. Adjacent lands to the west consist of relatively
large residential tracts that appear to be currently undeveloped. The
remaining sides are bordered by developed residential and commercial
properties. Two caves known to contain listed species occur within Unit
18 (Table 2).
This unit was delineated to encompass at least 36 ha (90 ac) of
vegetation around the two known occupied caves, overlying contiguous
deposits of karst-bearing rock. About half of Unit 18 is defined by
Veni's 1994 karst zone maps as occurring within Zone 1. The unit was
delineated to encompass the majority of the contiguous Zone 1 karst
deposit associated with the known occupied caves while maximizing the
amount of undisturbed, unfragmented woodland in the unit. The unit was
enlarged to include additional woodland to compensate for internal
fragmentation due to existing residential development within the unit.
The unit boundaries were delineated along parcel boundaries and
existing roads.
Unit 19
The majority of the land within Unit 19 has been developed for
residential and/or commercial uses. Unit 19 is bordered to the east by
Stone Oak Road, a major roadway, and to the south by Loop 1604, also a
major roadway. However, several undeveloped areas exist on lands
adjacent to the unit to the northwest. Genesis Cave, the only known
occupied cave within this unit (Table 1), is the deepest explored cave
in Bexar County, extending below the water table, and has been mapped
down to 78 m (256 ft) (Veni 1988).
The majority of Unit 19 is defined by Veni's 1994 karst zone maps
as occurring within Zone 1. The unit was delineated to encompass the
majority of the contiguous Zone 1 karst deposit associated with the
known occupied cave. The unit boundaries were delineated along parcel
boundaries and existing roads.
Surface vegetation within Unit 19 has been significantly reduced
and degraded as a result of urban development, and intensive management
may be needed to
[[Page 55080]]
provide nutrients and water to the listed species in this cave. Lands
within this unit do not contain the primary constituent element of a
healthy surface community of native vegetation. Therefore, this unit is
being designated as critical habitat based on the presence of an intact
subsurface environment.
Unit 20
Numerous residential roads and one major roadway, Nacogdoches Road,
occur within and/or cross Unit 20. This unit contains one known
occupied cave, Robber Baron Cave (Table 2). This cave is by far the
longest cave in Bexar County consisting of approximately 1.51 km (0.94
mi) of passages known within a square area approximately 100 m (328 ft)
on each side (Veni 1988). Prior to the extensive development that has
occurred in the area, the cave's footprint was estimated to extend at
least 100 m (328 ft) farther east to a water well, 600 m (1,969 ft)
southwest to a now-sealed, extensive maze cave and about 1.2 km (0.75
mi) to the southwest to another well (Veni 1988). The estimated
footprint of the cave now extends underneath numerous residential and
commercial developments. Intensive management may be needed to provide
nutrients and water to the two listed species found in this cave which
are only known from Robber Baron Cave, making it essential to the
conservation of these species. The Texas Cave Management Association
(TCMA) now owns and manages the cave and about 0.2 ha (0.5 ac)
surrounding the opening. TCMA, in cooperation with the Service's
Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program, is currently working to replace
the existing cave gate, which consists of a concrete bunker created to
deter access, with a new gate that will facilitate exchange of air and
nutrients into the cave as well as restrict access. TCMA also plans to
restore the grounds immediately surrounding Robber Baron Cave to a more
natural state and repair the perimeter fence to regulate access.
The majority of Unit 20 is defined by Veni's 1994 karst zone maps
as occurring within Zone 1. The unit was delineated to encompass the
estimated extent of the cave's subsurface drainage according to Veni
(1997) and a majority of the contiguous Zone 1 karst deposit associated
with Robber Baron Cave. The unit boundaries were delineated along
parcel boundaries and existing roads.
Surface vegetation within Unit 20 has been significantly reduced
and degraded as a result of urban development. Lands within this unit
do not contain the primary constituent element of a healthy surface
community of native vegetation. Therefore, this unit is being
designated as critical habitat based on the presence of an intact
subsurface environment.
Unit 21
Unit 21 consists of several large tracts of undeveloped land and
several smaller tracts developed with homes and several residential
roads. Mud Creek runs through the unit. Three caves known to contain
listed species occur with Unit 21 (Table 2).
This unit was delineated to encompass at least 36 ha (90 ac) of
vegetation around the three known occupied caves, overlying contiguous
deposits of karst-bearing rock. Unit 21 is defined by Veni's 1994 karst
zone maps as occurring within Zone 2. The unit was delineated to
encompass the majority of the contiguous karst deposit associated with
the known occupied caves while maximizing the amount of undisturbed,
unfragmented woodland surrounding the cave. The unit was enlarged to
include additional woodland to compensate for internal fragmentation
due to existing residential development within the unit. We were unable
to delineate the boundaries of the unit using roads or parcel
boundaries due to their configuration and instead delineated the unit
as a rectangle encompassing an approximately 36-ha area around each of
the three known occupied caves.
Effects of Critical Habitat Designation
Section 7 Consultation
Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires Federal agencies, including the
Service, to ensure that actions they fund, authorize, or carry out do
not destroy or adversely modify critical habitat. Destruction or
adverse modification occurs when a Federal action directly or
indirectly alters critical habitat to the extent that it appreciably
diminishes the value of the critical habitat for both the survival and
recovery of the species. Individuals, organizations, States, local
governments, and other non-Federal entities are affected by the
designation of critical habitat only if their actions occur on Federal
lands, require a Federal permit, license, or other authorization, or
involve Federal funding.
Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires Federal agencies to evaluate
their actions with respect to any species that is proposed or listed as
endangered or threatened and with respect to its critical habitat, if
any is designated or proposed. Activities on Federal lands that may
affect the listed karst invertebrates or their proposed critical
habitat will require section 7 consultation with the Service. Actions
on private or State lands receiving funding or requiring a permit from
a Federal agency also will be subject to the section 7 consultation
process if the action may affect proposed critical habitat. Federal
actions not affecting the species or its proposed critical habitat, as
well as actions on non-Federal lands that are not federally funded or
permitted will not require section 7 consultation. Regulations
implementing this interagency cooperation provision of the Act are
codified at 50 CFR part 402.
Section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires Federal agencies to confer on
any action likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a species
proposed for listing or result in destruction or adverse modification
of proposed critical habitat. Conference reports provide conservation
recommendations to assist the agency in eliminating conflicts that may
be caused by the proposed action. The conservation recommendations are
advisory. We may issue a formal conference report, if requested by the
Federal action agency. Formal conference reports include an opinion
that is prepared according to 50 CFR 402.14, as if the species was
listed or critical habitat was designated. We may adopt the formal
conference report as the biological opinion when the species is listed
or critical habitat is designated, if no substantial new information or
changes in the action alter the content of the opinion (see 50 CFR
402.10(d)).
If a species is listed or critical habitat is designated, section
7(a)(2) of the Act requires Federal agencies to ensure that actions
they authorize, fund, or carry out are unlikely to jeopardize the
continued existence of such a species or destroy or adversely modify
its critical habitat. If a Federal action may affect a listed species
or its critical habitat, the responsible Federal agency (action agency)
must enter into consultation with us. Through this consultation, the
Federal agency would ensure that the permitted actions do not destroy
or adversely modify critical habitat.
If we issue a biological opinion, resulting from a section 7
consultation, concluding that a Federal action is likely to result in
the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat, we would
also provide reasonable and prudent alternatives to the action, if any
are identifiable. Reasonable and prudent alternatives are defined at 50
CFR 402.02 as alternative actions identified during consultation that
can be implemented in a manner consistent with the intended purpose of
the action, that are consistent with the scope of the
[[Page 55081]]
Federal agency's legal authority and jurisdiction, that are
economically and technologically feasible, and that the Service's
Director believes would avoid destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat.
Regulations at 50 CFR 402.16 require Federal agencies to reinitiate
consultation on previously reviewed actions in instances where critical
habitat is subsequently designated and the Federal agency has retained
discretionary involvement or control over the action or such
discretionary involvement or control is authorized by law.
Consequently, some Federal agencies may request reinitiation of
consultation with us on actions for which formal consultation has been
completed if those actions may affect designated critical habitat.
Activities on Federal lands that may adversely affect any of the
nine karst invertebrates or their critical habitat will require section
7 consultation. Activities on private or State lands requiring a permit
from a Federal agency, such as a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (ACOE) under section 404 of the Clean Water Act or a
Construction General permit from the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, or some other Federal action, including funding (for example,
from the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Aviation
Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Natural
Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), or Housing and Urban Development
(HUD)) will also continue to be subject to the section 7 consultation
process. Federal actions not adversely affecting listed species or
critical habitat and actions on non-Federal lands that are not
federally funded or permitted do not require section 7 consultation.
Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us to evaluate briefly in any
proposed or final regulation that designates critical habitat those
activities involving a Federal action that may adversely modify such
habitat or that may be affected by such designation. Activities that
may result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical
habitat include those that alter the primary constituent elements to an
extent that the value of critical habitat for the survival and recovery
of any of the nine karst invertebrates is appreciably reduced.
Activities that may directly or indirectly adversely affect critical
habitat for these karst invertebrates include, but are not limited to:
(1) Removing, thinning, or destroying perennial surface vegetation,
with the exception of landscaping associated with existing human-
constructed, above ground, impervious structures, occurring in any
critical habitat unit, whether by burning, mechanical, chemical, or
other means (for example, wood cutting, grading, overgrazing,
construction, road building, mining, herbicide application);
(2) Alteration of the surface topography or subsurface geology
within any critical habitat unit that results in significant disruption
of ecosystem processes that sustain the cave environment. This may
include, but is not limited to, such activities as filling cave
entrances or otherwise reducing airflow, which limits oxygen
availability; modifying cave entrances, or creating new entrances that
increases airflow and results in drying; altering natural drainage
patterns (surface or subsurface) that alters the amount of water
entering the cave or karst feature; removal or disturbance of native
surface vegetation; soil disturbance that results in increased
sedimentation in the karst environment; increasing impervious cover
within any critical habitat unit; and altering the entrance or opening
of the cave or karst feature in a way that would disrupt movements of
raccoons, opossums, cave crickets, or other animals that provide
nutrient input; or otherwise negatively altering the movement of
nutrients into the cave or karst feature;
(3) Discharge or dumping of chemicals, silt, pollutants, household
or industrial waste, or other harmful material into or near critical
habitat units that may affect surface plant and animal communities that
support karst ecosystems;
(4) Pesticide or fertilizer application in or near critical habitat
units that drain into these karst features or that affect surface plant
and animal communities that support karst ecosystems. Careful use of
pesticides in the vicinity of karst features may be necessary in some
instances to control nonnative fire ants. Guidelines for controlling
fire ants in the vicinity of karst features are available from us (see
ADDRESSES section);
(5) Activities within caves that lead to soil compaction, changes
in atmospheric conditions, abandonment of the cave by bats or other
fauna; and
(6) Activities that attract or increase access for fire ants,
cockroaches, or other invasive predators, competitors or potential
vectors for diseases or parasites into caves or karst features within
the critical habitat units (for example, dumping of garbage in or
around caves or karst features).
Not all of the identified activities will necessarily result in the
adverse modification of critical habitat, however, they indicate the
potential types of activities that will require section 7 consultation
in the future and, therefore, that may be affected by the proposed
designation of critical habitat. To properly portray the effects of
critical habitat designation, we must compare the section 7
requirements for actions that may affect critical habitat with the
requirements for actions that may affect a listed species. All of the
areas proposed as critical habitat units are known to contain one or
more caves occupied by one or more of the listed karst invertebrates.
Therefore, all of the actions described above as potentially adversely
affecting critical habitat are also likely to adversely affect the
listed species. Federal agencies are already required to consult with
us on activities in areas where the species may be affected to ensure
that their actions do not jeopardize the continued existence of the
species. Therefore, we do not expect that the proposed designation of
critical habitat will result in a significant regulatory burden above
that already in place due to the presence of the listed species.
If you have questions regarding whether specific activities would
constitute adverse modification of critical habitat, please contact the
Acting Field Supervisor, Austin Ecological Services Field Office (see
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section). Requests for copies of
the regulations on listed wildlife and plants, and inquiries about
prohibitions and permits, should be directed to the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Endangered Species Act Section 10 Program (see
ADDRESSES section).
Exclusions Under Section 3(5)(A) Definition
Critical habitat is defined in section 3, paragraph (5)(A) of the
Act as--(i) the specific areas within the geographic area occupied by a
species, at the time it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which
are found those physical or biological features (I) essential to the
conservation of the species and (II) that may require special
management considerations or protection; and, (ii) specific areas
outside the geographic area occupied by a species at the time it is
listed, upon a determination that such areas are essential for the
conservation of the species. Special management and protection are not
required if adequate management and protection are already in place.
Adequate special management or protection is provided by a legally
operative plan/agreement that addresses the maintenance and improvement
of the primary constituent elements
[[Page 55082]]
important to the species and manages for the long-term conservation of
the species. If any areas containing the primary constituent elements
are currently being managed to address the conservation needs of any of
the nine karst invertebrate species and do not require additional
management or protection, we may exclude such areas from the proposed
rule because they would not meet the definition of critical habitat in
section 3(5)(A)(i) of the Act.
We will use the following three guidelines to determine if a plan
provides adequate management or protection--(1) A current plan
specifying the management actions must be complete and provide
sufficient conservation benefit to the species; (2) the plan must
provide assurances that the conservation management strategies will be
implemented; and (3) the plan must provide assurances that the
conservation management strategies will be effective.
In determining if management strategies are likely to be
implemented, we will consider whether: (1) A management plan or
agreement exists that specifies the management actions being
implemented or to be implemented; (2) there is a timely schedule for
implementation; (3) there is a high probability that the funding
source(s) or other resources necessary to implement the actions will be
available; and (4) the party(ies) have the authority and long-term
commitment to the agreement or plan to implement the management
actions, as demonstrated, for example, by a legal instrument providing
enduring protection and management of the lands.
In determining whether an action is likely to be effective, we will
consider whether: (1) The plan specifically addresses the management
needs, including reduction of threats to the species; (2) such actions
have been successful in the past; (3) there are provisions for
monitoring and assessment of the effectiveness of the management
actions; and (4) adaptive management principles have been incorporated
into the plan.
Adequate reduction of the threat from non-native invasive species
(for example, non-native fire ants), that are already present, adjacent
to, and/or within some caves may, to some extent, require different
management activities. Although difficult for managers to control at
this time, control of non-native fire ant populations is one
requirement in determining whether an area is being adequately managed
such that it does not meet the definition of critical habitat.
In selecting areas to be designated as critical habitat, we
attempted to exclude areas that have a plan that addresses the
conservation needs of any of the nine karst invertebrate species and
that meets the guidelines described above. We determined that the five
karst preserves established by La Cantera as required by their section
10(a)(1)(B) permit should be excluded based on the guidelines given
above. These karst preserves include Canyon Ranch preserve (including
Canyon Ranch Pit, Fat Man's Nightmare Cave, and Scenic Overlook Cave
and the surrounding approximately 30 ha (75 ac) (within Unit 1e);
Helotes Blowhole and Helotes Hilltop caves and the surrounding
approximately 10 ha (25 ac) (within Unit 3); John Wagner Cave No. 3 and
the surrounding approximately 1.6 ha (4 ac) (within Unit 6); Hills and
Dales Pit and the surrounding approximately 28 ha (70 ac) (within Unit
8); and Madla's Cave and the surrounding approximately 2 ha (5 ac)
(within Unit 17). As required under their permit, La Cantera purchased
these lands through conservation easement and/or fee simple title and
will ensure that they will be protected in perpetuity and managed in
accordance with the conservation needs of the species.
We did not exclude areas that do not have a plan that provides
adequate management or protection as described under the guidelines
above. Camp Bullis submitted a draft management plan to the Service for
the 23 caves on DOD property that are known to contain listed species.
These 23 caves are included within 2 proposed critical habitat units
(Units 10 and 11). The Service is currently working with Camp Bullis to
determine management needed to adequately protect the species and its
habitat. Therefore, caves on Camp Bullis were not excluded from the
proposed critical habitat designation. It is our understanding that the
proposed management plan is currently being revised.
If a management plan for Camp Bullis or other areas proposed as
critical habitat (for example, Government Canyon State Natural Area),
that addresses the above requirements, can be completed and approved by
us prior to the end of the public comment period for this proposed
rule, these areas will not be included in the final critical habitat
designation.
We are unaware of any other lands within the proposed critical
habitat units that have a written plan for the conservation of these
species that could have been evaluated for exclusion under section
3(5)(A) of the Act.
Exclusions Under Section 4(b)(2)
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act requires that we designate critical
habitat on the basis of the best scientific and commercial information
available, and that we consider the economic and other relevant impacts
of designating a particular area as critical habitat. We may exclude
areas from critical habitat designation if the benefits of exclusion
outweigh the benefits of designation, provided the exclusion will not
result in the extinction of the species. We will conduct an economic
analysis for this proposal prior to making a final determination. When
completed, we will announce the availability of the draft economic
analysis with a notice in the Federal Register, and we will provide at
least a 30-day public comment period on the draft economic analysis
which may fall during or after the 90-day comment period for this
proposed rule.
Public Comments Solicited
We intend that any final action resulting from this proposal be as
accurate and as effective as possible. Therefore, we solicit comments
or suggestions from the public, other concerned governmental agencies,
the scientific community, industry, or any other interested party
concerning this proposed rule. We are particularly interested in
comments concerning:
(1) The reasons why any area should or should not be determined to
be critical habitat as provided by section 4 of the Act, including
whether the benefits of designation will outweigh any threats to the
species due to designation;
(2) Specific information on the distribution of each of the nine
karst invertebrates, and what areas are essential to the conservation
of these species and why;
(3) Whether lands within proposed critical habitat units are
currently being managed to address the conservation needs of these
listed species
(4) Land use practices and current or planned activities in the
subject areas and their possible impacts on proposed critical habitat;
(5) Any foreseeable economic or other impacts resulting from the
proposed designation of critical habitat, in particular, any impacts on
small entities or families;
(6) Economic and other values associated with designating critical
habitat for the nine karst invertebrates, such as those derived from
non-consumptive uses (such as, hiking, sight-seeing, enhanced watershed
protection, improved air quality,
[[Page 55083]]
increased soil retention, ``existence values,'' and reductions in
administrative costs).
If you wish to comment, you may submit your comments and materials
concerning this proposal by any one of several methods (see ADDRESSES
section).
Our practice is to make comments, including names and home
addresses of respondents, available for public review during regular
business hours. Respondents may request that we withhold their home
address, which we will honor to the extent allowable by law. If you
wish us to withhold your name and/or address, you must state this
request prominently at the beginning of your comment. However, we will
not consider anonymous comments. To the extent consistent with
applicable law, we will make all submissions from organizations or
businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as
representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, available
for public inspection in their entirety. Comments and materials
received will be available for public inspection, by appointment,
during normal business hours at the Austin Ecological Services Field
Office, Austin, Texas (see ADDRESSES section).
Peer Review
In accordance with our policy published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR
34270), we will seek the expert opinions of at least three appropriate
and independent individuals regarding this proposed rule. The purpose
of such review is to ensure critical habitat decisions are based on
scientifically sound data, assumptions, and analyses. We will send
copies of this proposed rule to peer reviewers immediately following
publication in the Federal Register. We will invite peer reviewers to
comment, during the public comment period, on the specific assumptions
and conclusions regarding the proposed designation of critical habitat.
We will consider all comments and data received during the 90-day
comment period on this proposed rule during preparation of final
rulemaking. Accordingly, the final decision may differ from this
proposal.
Clarity of the Rule
Executive Order 12866 requires each agency to write regulations and
notices that are easy to understand. We invite your comments on how to
make this proposed rule easier to understand, including answers to
questions such as the following: (1) Are the requirements in the
proposed rule clearly stated? (2) Does the proposed rule contain
technical language or jargon that interferes with the clarity? (3) Does
the format of the proposed rule (grouping and order of sections, use of
headings, paragraphing, etc.) aid or reduce its clarity? (4) Is the
description of the proposed rule in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of the preamble helpful in understanding the document? (5) Is
the background information useful and is the amount appropriate? (6)
What else could we do to make the proposed rule easier to understand?
Send a copy of any comments that concern how we could make this
notice easier to understand to: Office of Regulatory Affairs,
Department of the Interior, Room 7229, 1849 C Street, NW., Washington,
DC 20240. You may also e-mail comments to exsec@ios.doi.gov.
Required Determinations
Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Order 12866
In accordance with Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, this document is a
significant rule and has been reviewed by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) in accordance with the four criteria discussed below. We
are preparing a draft economic analysis of this proposed action, which
will be available for public comment, to determine the economic
consequences of designating specific areas as critical habitat. The
availability of the draft economic analysis will be announced in the
Federal Register so that it is available for public review and comment.
(a) While we will prepare an economic analysis to assist us in
considering whether areas should be excluded from critical habitat
designation pursuant to section 4 of the Act, we do not believe this
rule will have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more
or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, jobs, the environment, public health or safety,
or State, local or tribal communities. Therefore, we do not believe a
cost benefit and economic analysis pursuant to E.O. 12866 is required.
Under the Act, critical habitat may not be adversely modified by a
Federal agency action; critical habitat does not impose any
restrictions on non-Federal persons unless they are conducting
activities funded or otherwise sponsored or permitted by a Federal
agency. Section 7 of the Act requires Federal agencies to ensure that
they do not jeopardize the continued existence of the species.
Accordingly, we do not expect the designation of areas as critical
habitat that are within the geographical range occupied by the species
to have any incremental impacts on what actions may or may not be
conducted by Federal agencies or non-Federal persons that receive
Federal authorization or funding. The designation of areas as critical
habitat where section 7 consultations would not have occurred but for
the critical habitat designation may have impacts on what actions may
or may not be conducted by Federal agencies or non-Federal persons who
receive Federal authorization or funding that are not attributable to
the species listing. We will evaluate any impact through our economic
analysis (under section 4 of the Act: see the ``Exclusions Under
Section 4(b)(2)'' section of this rule). Non-Federal persons who do not
have a Federal sponsorship of their actions are not restricted by the
designation of critical habitat.
(b) We do not believe this rule would create inconsistencies with
other agencies' actions. As discussed above, Federal agencies have been
required to ensure that their actions not jeopardize the continued
existence of the nine karst invertebrates since their listing on
December 26, 2000. We will evaluate any additional impact through our
economic analysis. Because of the potential for impacts on other
Federal agencies activities, we will continue to review this proposed
action for any inconsistencies with other Federal agencies actions.
(c) We do not believe this rule, if made final, would materially
affect entitlements, grants, user fees, loan programs, or the rights
and obligations of their recipients. Federal agencies are currently
required to ensure that their activities do not jeopardize the
continued existence of a listed species, and, as discussed above, we
will evaluate any additional impacts through an economic analysis.
(d) OMB has determined that this rule raises novel legal or policy
issues and, as a result, this rule has undergone OMB review.
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
(SBREFA) of 1996), whenever an agency is required to publish a notice
of rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must prepare and make
available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis that
[[Page 55084]]
describes the effects of the rule on small entities (such as, small
businesses, small organizations, and small government jurisdictions).
However, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head of
the agency certifies the rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. SBREFA amended the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) to require Federal agencies to provide
a statement of the factual basis for certifying that the rule will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. SBREFA also amended the RFA to require a certification
statement. In today's rule, we are certifying that the rule will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The following discussion explains our rationale.
According to the Small Business Association, small entities include
small organizations, such as independent non-profit organizations, and
small governmental jurisdictions, including school boards and city and
town governments that serve fewer than 50,000 residents, as well as
small businesses. Small businesses include manufacturing and mining
concerns with fewer than 500 employees, wholesale trade entities with
fewer than 100 employees, retail and service businesses with less than
$5 million in annual sales, general and heavy construction businesses
with less than $27.5 million in annual business, special trade
contractors doing less than $11.5 million in annual business, and
agricultural businesses with annual sales less than $750,000. To
determine if potential economic impacts to these small entities are
significant, we consider the types of activities that might trigger
regulatory impacts under this rule as well as the types of project
modifications that may result. In general, the term significant
economic impact is meant to apply to a typical small business firm's
business operations.
To determine if the rule would affect a substantial number of small
entities, we consider the number of small entities affected within
particular types of economic activities (for example, housing
development, grazing, oil and gas production, timber harvesting, etc.).
We apply the ``substantial number'' test individually to each industry
to determine if certification is appropriate. In some circumstances,
especially with proposed critical habitat designations of very limited
extent, we may aggregate across all industries and consider whether the
total number of small entities affected is substantial. In estimating
the numbers of small entities potentially affected, we also consider
whether their activities have any Federal involvement; some kinds of
activities are unlikely to have any Federal involvement and so will not
be affected by critical habitat designation.
Designation of critical habitat only affects activities conducted,
funded, or permitted by Federal agencies; non-Federal activities may be
affected to the extent that there is a Federal nexus associated with
the non-Federal activity. An example of this nexus would be if a non-
Federal activity required a Federal permit. In areas where the species
is present, Federal agencies are already required to consult with us
under section 7 of the Act on activities that they fund, permit, or
implement that may affect any of the nine karst invertebrates. If this
critical habitat designation is finalized, Federal agencies must also
consult with us if their activities may affect designated critical
habitat. However, we do not believe this will result in any additional
regulatory burden on Federal agencies or their applicants where
consultation would already be required due to the presence of the
listed species, because the duty to avoid adverse modification of
critical habitat would not likely trigger additional regulatory impacts
beyond the duty to avoid jeopardizing the species.
Even if the duty to avoid adverse modification does not trigger
additional regulatory impacts in areas where the species is present,
designation of critical habitat could result in an additional economic
burden on small entities due to the requirement to conduct a
reinitiation of a past section 7 consultation to conduct an adverse
modification analysis. Since the species were listed on December 26,
2000, the only formal section 7 consultation has been an intra-Service
consultation on the La Cantera HCP. However, we did not include the
caves that La Cantera received take coverage for under their section 10
permit in the proposed critical habitat designation, so reinitiation of
the intra-Service section 7 consultation as a result of this proposed
designation is not necessary.
In areas where the species is not present, designation of critical
habitat could trigger additional review of Federal activities under
section 7 of the Act. Since the species were listed on December 26,
2000, the only formal section 7 consultation has been an intra-Service
consultation on the La Cantera HCP. For the purposes of this review and
certification under the RFA, we are assuming that any future
consultations in the area proposed as critical habitat will be due to
the listing of the species and the critical habitat designation.
One of the proposed critical habitat units (Unit 11) and a portion
of another (Unit 10) are located on Federal lands. Units 1a, 1b, 1c and
1d are located on GCSNA which is owned and managed by TPWD and Unit 9
is owned by the University of Texas at San Antonio (Table 2). On State
lands, activities with no Federal involvement would not be affected by
the critical habitat designation.
Sixteen of the twenty-five units in the proposed designation
consist entirely of privately-owned lands and four include some private
lands within the unit (Table 2). On private lands, activities that lack
Federal involvement would not be affected by the critical habitat
designation.
In Texas, previous consultations under section 7 of the Act between
us and other Federal agencies most frequently involve the U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), the ACOE, and the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA).
In general, two different mechanisms in section 7 consultations
could lead to additional regulatory requirements. First, if we conclude
in a biological opinion that a proposed action is likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of a species or adversely modify its critical
habitat, we can offer ``reasonable and prudent alternatives.''
Reasonable and prudent alternatives are alternative actions that can be
implemented in a manner consistent with the scope of the Federal
agency's legal authority and jurisdiction, that are economically and
technologically feasible, and that would avoid jeopardizing the
continued existence of listed species or resulting in adverse
modification of critical habitat. A Federal agency and an applicant may
elect to implement a reasonable and prudent alternative associated with
a biological opinion that has found jeopardy or adverse modification of
critical habitat. An agency or applicant could alternatively choose to
seek an exemption from the requirements of the Act or proceed without
implementing the reasonable and prudent alternative. However, unless an
exemption were obtained, the Federal agency or applicant would be at
risk of violating section 7(a)(2) of the Act if it chose to proceed
without implementing the reasonable and prudent alternatives. Secondly,
if we find that a proposed action is not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of a listed animal species, we may identify
reasonable and prudent measures designed to minimize the amount or
extent of take and require the Federal agency or applicant to
[[Page 55085]]
implement such measures through non-discretionary terms and conditions.
We may also identify discretionary conservation recommendations
designed to minimize or avoid the adverse effects of a proposed action
on listed species or critical habitat, help implement recovery plans,
or develop information that could contribute to the recovery of the
species.
Based on our experience with section 7 consultations for all listed
species, virtually all projects-including those that, in their initial
proposed form, would result in jeopardy or adverse modification
determinations in section 7 consultations-can be implemented
successfully with, at most, the adoption of reasonable and prudent
alternatives. These measures, by definition, must be economically
feasible and within the scope of authority of the Federal agency
involved in the consultation.
In summary, we have considered whether this proposed rule would
result in a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities and find that it would not. The entire designation
involves approximately 3,857 ha (9,516 ac) within 25 units, of which
approximately 1,620 ha (4,000 ac) is under federal ownership and
approximately 284 ha (700 ac) is under State ownership. The majority of
the remaining acreage is under private ownership, but includes City of
San Antonio park lands, and City, County and State right of ways,
roads, and municipal lands. However, probable future land uses in these
areas are expected to have a Federal nexus or require section 7
consultation (for example, road and utility development projects, water
crossings, etc.). These projects may require Federal permits. In these
areas, Federal involvement--and thus section 7 consultations, the only
trigger for economic impact under this rule--would be limited to a
subset of the area proposed. The most likely Federal involvement would
be associated with activities involving the DOD, Federal Highways
Administration (FHA), DOT, the EPA, ACOE, or the FEMA. This rule may
result in project modifications when proposed Federal activities would
destroy or adversely modify critical habitat. While this may occur, it
is not expected frequently enough to affect a substantial number of
small entities. Even when it does occur, we do not expect it to result
in a significant economic impact since we expect that most proposed
projects, with or without modification, can be implemented in such a
way as to avoid adversely modifying critical habitat, as the measures
included in reasonable and prudent alternatives must be economically
feasible and consistent with the proposed action. We are certifying
that the proposed designation of critical habitat for the nine
endangered Bexar County invertebrate species will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
and that this proposed rule does not meet the criteria under SBREFA as
a major rule: Therefore an initial regulatory flexibility analysis is
not required.
Executive Order 13211
On May 18, 2001, the President issued Executive Order 13211 on
regulations that significantly affect energy supply, distribution, and
use. Executive Order 13211 requires agencies to prepare Statements of
Energy Effects when undertaking certain actions. Although this rule is
a significant action under Executive Order 12866, it is not expected to
significantly affect energy supplies, distribution, or use since the
majority of the lands being proposed as critical habitat occur on
privately owned lands that are primarily developed for agricultural and
residential uses, and not energy production or distribution. Therefore,
this action is not a significant energy action and no Statement of
Energy Effects is required.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.)
In accordance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501
August 25, 2000 et seq.):
a. This rule, as proposed, will not ``significantly or uniquely''
affect small governments. A Small Government Agency Plan is not
required. Small governments will be affected only to the extent that
any programs having Federal funds, permits, or other authorized
activities must ensure that their actions will not adversely affect the
critical habitat. However, as discussed above, these actions are
currently subject to equivalent restrictions through the listing
protections of the species, and no further restrictions are anticipated
to result from critical habitat designation of occupied areas. In our
economic analysis, we will evaluate any impact of designating areas
where section 7 consultations would not have occurred but for the
critical habitat designation.
b. This rule, as proposed, will not produce a Federal mandate on
State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector of $100
million or greater in any year; that is, it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. The
designation of critical habitat imposes no obligations on State or
local governments.
Takings
In accordance with Executive Order 12630 (``Government Actions and
Interference with Constitutionally Protected Private Property
Rights''), we have analyzed the potential takings implications of the
proposed listing and designation of critical habitat for these nine
karst invertebrates. The takings implications assessment concludes that
this proposed rule does not pose significant takings implications. A
copy of this assessment is available by contacting the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Austin Ecological Services Field Office (see
ADDRESSES section).
Federalism
In accordance with Executive Order 13132, the rule does not have
significant Federalism effects. A Federalism assessment is not
required. As discussed above, the designation of critical habitat in
areas currently occupied by the nine endangered karst invertebrates
would have little incremental impact on State and local governments and
their activities. The designations may have some benefit to these
governments in that the areas essential to the conservation of these
species are more clearly defined, and the primary constituent elements
of the habitat necessary to the survival of the species are identified.
While this designation does not alter where and what federally
sponsored activities may occur, it may assist these local governments
in long-range planning rather than waiting for case-by-case section 7
consultation to occur.
Civil Justice Reform
In accordance with E.O. 12988, the Department of the Interior's
Office of the Solicitor has determined that this proposed rule does not
unduly burden the judicial system and meets the requirements of
sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of the Order. We propose to designate
critical habitat in accordance with the provisions of the Act, and will
plan public hearings on the proposed designation during the comment
period, if requested. We plan to hold at least one public hearing and
the date for this hearing will be published in separate notice. We also
plan to hold an informational meeting in Bexar County on September 10,
2002. This meeting will take place from 6 pm to 7:30 pm at the Great
Northwest Library, 9050 Wellwood, San Antonio, Texas. We will send
letters inviting all interested individuals to attend and will
advertise the meeting in the area newspaper. The
[[Page 55086]]
rule uses standard property descriptions and identifies the primary
constituent elements within the designated areas to assist the public
in understanding the habitat needs of the nine endangered karst
invertebrates.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)
This rule does not contain any information collection requirements
for which OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act is required.
Information collections associated with Endangered Species permits are
covered by an existing OMB approval, which is assigned control number
1018-0094 and which expires on July 31, 2004. An agency may not conduct
or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of
information unless it displays a valid OMB Control Number.
National Environmental Policy Act
We have determined that an Environmental Assessment or an
Environmental Impact Statement as defined by the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 need not be prepared in connection with regulations
adopted pursuant to section 4(a) of the Endangered Species Act as
amended. A notice outlining our reason for this determination was
published in the Federal Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244).
This proposed rule does not constitute a major Federal action
significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.
Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes
In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994,
``Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal
Governments'' (59 FR 22951), Executive Order 13175, and 512 DM 2, we
readily acknowledge our responsibility to communicate meaningfully with
recognized Federal Tribes on a Government-to-Government basis. The
proposed designation of critical habitat for the nine karst
invertebrates does not contain any Tribal lands or lands that we have
identified as impacting Tribal trust resources.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited in this proposed rule is
available, upon request, from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Austin Ecological Services Field Office (see ADDRESSES section).
Author
This rule was prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Austin Ecological Services Field Office (see ADDRESSES section).
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.
Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the
Code of Federal Regulations, is amended as set forth below:
PART 17--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for Part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; 16 U.S.C.
4201-4245; Pub. L. 99-625, 100 Stat. 3500, unless otherwise noted.
2. In Sec. 17.11(h) revise the entries for Beetle, Helotes mold;
Beetle [no common name] (Rhadine exilis); and Beetle [no common name]
(Rhadine infernalis) under ``INSECTS'; remove the entries for
Harvestman, Robber Baron Cave; Spider, Government Canyon Cave; Spider,
Madla's Cave; Spider [no common name] (Cicurina venii); Spider, Robber
Baron Cave; and Spider, vesper cave; and add entrees for Harvestman,
Cokendolpher cave; Meshweaver, Braken Bat Cave; Meshweaver, Government
Canyon Bat Cave; Meshweaver, Madla Cave; Meshweaver, Robber Baron Cave;
and Spider, Government Canyon Bat Cave under ``ARACHNIDS'' to read as
follows:
Sec. 17.11 Endangered and threatened wildlife.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species
-------------------------------------------------------------------------- Historic range Vertebrate Status When Critical Special
Common name Scientific name \1\ listed habitat rules
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * * *
INSECTS
* * * * * * * *
Beetle, Helotes mold...................... Batrisodes venyivi........... U.S.A. (TX) NA E 706 19.95(i) NA
* * * * * * * *
Beetle, [no common name].................. Rhadine exilis............... U.S.A. (TX) NA E 706 19.95(i) NA
Beetle, [no common name].................. Rhadine infernalis........... U.S.A. (TX) NA E 706 19.95(i) NA
* * * * * * * *
ARACHNIDS
* * * * * * * *
Harvestman, Cokendolpher Cave............. Texella cokendolpher......... U.S.A. (TX) NA E 706 19.95(g) NA
Meshweaver, Braken Bat Cave............... Cicurina venii............... U.S.A. (TX) NA E 706 19.95(g) NA
Meshweaver, Government Canyon Bat Cave.... Cicurina vespera............. U.S.A. (TX) NA E 706 19.95(g) NA
Meshweaver, Madia Cave.................... Cicurina madla............... U.S.A. (TX) NA E 706 19.95(g) NA
Meshweaver, Robber Baron Cave............. Cicurina baronia............. U.S.A. (TX) NA E 706 19.95(g) NA
* * * * * * * *
Spider, Government Canyon Bat Cave........ Neoleptoneta microps......... U.S.A. (TX) NA E 706 19.95(g) NA
* * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Vertebrate population where endangered or threatened.
[[Page 55087]]
3. Amend Sec. 17.95 by adding, in the same alphabetical order as
these species occur in Sec. 17.11(h):
a. In paragraph (g), critical habitat for the Cokendolpher cave
harvestman (Texella cokendolpheri);
b. In paragraph (g), critical habitat for the Robber Baron Cave
meshweaver (Cicurina baronia);
c. In paragraph (g), critical habitat for the Madla Cave meshweaver
(Cicurina madla);
d. In paragraph (g), critical habitat for the Braken Bat Cave
meshweaver (Cicurina venii);
e. In paragraph (g), critical habitat for the Government Canyon Bat
Cave meshweaver (Cicurina vespera);
f. In paragraph (g), critical habitat for the Government Canyon Bat
Cave spider (Neoleptoneta microps);
g. In paragraph (i), critical habitat for the ground beetle (no
common name), (Rhadine exilis);
h. In paragraph (i), critical habitat for the ground beetle (no
common name), (Rhadine infernalis); and
i. In paragraph (i), critical habitat for the Helotes mold beetle
(Batrisodes venyivi).
Sec. 17.95 Critical habitat--fish and wildlife.
* * * * *
(g) Arachnids. * * *
Braken Bat Cave Meshweaver (Cicurina venii)
(1) Critical habitat for the Braken Bat Cave meshweaver in Bexar
County, Texas, occurs in Unit 15 which is described in the text and
depicted on Maps 1 and 7 under the ground beetle (Rhadine infernalis).
The primary constituent elements and the exclusion of existing
structures and associated landscaping as described in paragraphs (2)
and (3) under the ground beetle Rhadine exilis are identical for this
species.
Cokendolpher Cave Harvestman (Texella cokendolpheri)
(1) Critical habitat for the Cokendolpher cave harvestman occurs in
Unit 20 as described below and depicted on Map 1 found under the ground
beetle (Rhadine exilis) and Map 8 below. The primary constituent
elements and exclusion of existing structures and associated
landscaping as described in paragraphs (2) and (3) under the ground
beetle Rhadine exilis are identical for this species.
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
[[Page 55088]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27AU02.000
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
[[Page 55089]]
(2) Surface vegetation within Unit 20 has been significantly
reduced and degraded as a result of urban development. Lands within
this unit do not contain the primary constituent element of a healthy
surface community of native vegetation. Therefore, this unit is being
designated as critical habitat based solely on the presence of an
intact subsurface environment.
(3) Unit 20--(160 ha (395 ac)): From a point at the intersection of
Basse Road and Peter Baque Road (2136763, 13728730), north along the
east side of Peter Baque Road, then east along the south side of Lorenz
Road, then north along the east side of Broadway, and continuing east
along the south side of East Sunset Road to a point at 2139684,
13732380. From this point, north to Court Circle and continuing north
along the east side of Court Circle, then east along the south side of
Lawndale Avenue to New Braunfels and continuing north along the east
side of New Braunfels to Oakhurst. From this point, east along the
south side of Oakhurst to Nacogdoches, then north along the east side
of Nacogdoches to Country and continuing east along the south side of
Country to a point at 2142805, 13734290. From this point, south to a
point at Woodridge Drive (2142796, 13733617), then continuing south
along the west side of Woodridge Drive to Oakleaf Drive, then west
along the north side of Oakleaf Drive to Woodbine, then continuing
south along the west side of Woodbine to Larkwood Drive and continuing
west along the north side of Larkwood to New Braunfels. From this
point, south along the west side of New Braunfels to Robinhood Place
and west along the north side of Robinhood Place to La Sombra, then
continuing south on the west side of La Sombra to Claywell Drive. From
this point, west along the north side of Claywell Drive to Nacogdoches
and north along the east side of Nacogdoches to Basse Road, then
continuing west along the north side of Basse Road to the point of
origin.
Government Canyon Bat Cave Meshweaver (Cicurina vespera)
(1) Critical habitat for the Government Canyon Bat Cave meshweaver
in Bexar County, Texas, occurs in unit 1b which is described in the
text and depicted on Maps 1 and 2 under the ground beetle (Rhadine
exilis). The primary constituent elements and the exclusion of existing
structures and associated landscaping as described in paragraphs (2)
and (3) under the ground beetle Rhadine exilis are identical for this
species.
Government Canyon Bat Cave Spider (Neoleptoneta microps)
(1) Critical habitat for the Government Canyon Bat Cave Spider
(Neoleptoneta microps) in Bexar County, Texas, occurs in units 1a and
1b which are described in the text and depicted on Maps 1 and 2 under
the ground beetle (Rhadine infernalis). The primary constituent
elements and the exclusion of existing structures and associated
landscaping as described in paragraphs (2) and (3) under the ground
beetle Rhadine exilis are identical for this species.
Madla Cave Meshweaver (Cicurina madla)
(1) Critical habitat for the Madla Cave meshweaver in Bexar County,
Texas, occurs in units 2, 3, 5, 8, and 10 which are described under the
ground beetle (Rhadine exilis) and Unit 17 which is described under the
ground beetle (Rhadine infernalis). In addition, critical habitat for
the Madla Cave meshweaver occurs in Unit 1c as described below. These
units are depicted on Maps 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 found under the ground
beetle (Rhadine exilis). The primary constituent elements, the
exclusion of existing structures and associated landscaping, and the
exclusion of lands that do not meet the definition of critical habitat
as described in paragraphs (2) and (3) under the ground beetle Rhadine
exilis and paragraph (2) under the ground beetle Rhadine infernalis are
identical for this species.
(2) Unit 1c (47 ha (116 ac)): Unit consists of four boundary points
with the following coordinates in Texas State Plane (South Central) in
feet, referenced to North American Horizontal Datum 1983 (NAD 83):
2049690.24023, 13758634.2779; 2047438.24023, 13758634.2779;
2049690.24023, 13756382.2779; 2047438.24023, 13756382.2779.
Robber Baron Cave Meshweaver (Cicurina baronia)
(1) Critical habitat for the Robber Baron Cave meshweaver in Bexar
County, Texas, occurs in Unit 20 which is described in the text and
depicted in Map 8 found under the Cokendolpher cave harvestman as well
as Map 1 found under the ground beetle (Rhadine exilis). The criteria
upon which Unit 20 was designated as described in paragraph (2) under
Cokendolpher cave harvestman is identical for this species. The primary
constituent elements and the exclusion of existing structures and
associated landscaping as described in paragraphs (2) and (3) under the
ground beetle (Rhadine exilis) are identical for this species.
* * * * *
(i) Insects. * * *
Ground Beetle (No Common Name), (Rhadine exilis)
(1) Critical habitat for the ground beetle (Rhadine exilis) in
Bexar County, Texas, occurs in units 1b, 1e, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9,
10, 11, 12, 13, and 21 as described below and as depicted on Maps 1, 2,
3, 4, 5, and 6 below. All coordinates are given in Texas State Plane
(South Central) in feet, referenced to North American Horizontal Datum
1983 (NAD 83). Coordinates were derived from recent digital
orthophotographs.
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
[[Page 55090]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27AU02.001
[[Page 55091]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27AU02.002
[[Page 55092]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27AU02.003
[[Page 55093]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27AU02.004
[[Page 55094]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27AU02.005
[[Page 55095]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27AU02.006
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
[[Page 55096]]
(2) Within these areas the primary constituent elements include:
(a) the physical features of karst-forming rock containing subterranean
spaces with stable temperatures, high humidities (near saturation) and
suitable substrates (for example, spaces between and underneath rocks
suitable for foraging and sheltering), and (b) the biological features
of a healthy surface community of native plants (for example, juniper-
oak woodland) and animals (for example, cave crickets) surrounding the
karst feature that provides nutrient input and buffers the karst
ecosystem from adverse effects (from, for example, non-native species
invasions, contaminants, and fluctuations in temperature and humidity).
(3) Existing human-constructed, above ground, impervious structures
and associated landscaping within the boundaries of mapped units do not
contain the primary constituent elements and are not considered to be
critical habitat. Such features and structures include but are not
limited to buildings, paved roads, and lawns. However, areas below
ground under these structures and associated landscaping are considered
to be critical habitat since subterranean spaces containing these
species and/or transmitting moisture and nutrients through the karst
ecosystem extend, in some cases, underneath these existing human-
constructed structures.
(4) Seven caves and their associated preserve lands established
under the La Cantera section 10(a)(1)(B) permit were excluded from the
proposed critical habitat designation. These include Canyon Ranch Pit,
Fat Man's Nightmare Cave, and Scenic Overlook Cave and the surrounding
approximately 30 ha (75 ac) (within Unit 1e); Helotes Blowhole and
Helotes Hilltop caves and the surrounding approximately 10 ha (25 ac)
(within Unit 3); John Wagner Cave No. 3 and the surrounding
approximately 4 acres (within Unit 6); Hills and Dales Pit and the
surrounding approximately 28 ha (70 ac) (within Unit 8). As required
under their permit, La Cantera purchased these karst preserves through
conservation easement and/or fee simple title and will ensure that they
will be preserved in perpetuity and managed in accordance with the
conservation needs of the species.
(5) Unit 1b--(47 ha (116 ac)): Unit consists of four boundary
points with the following coordinates in Texas State Plane (South
Central) in feet, referenced to North American Horizontal Datum 1983
(NAD 83): 2043579.74934, 13754314.707; 2041327.74934, 13754314.707;
2043579.74934, 13752062.707; 2041327.74934, 13752062.707.
(6) Unit 1e--(341 ha (842 ac)): From a point at 2050035, 13759440
at the western corner of property number 902601605 east along the
northern side of this property to a point at 2053120, 13760090 the
continuing northwest along the west side of property numbers 902601605,
323075421, and 323075422 to at point at 2051713, 13762282. From this
point, northeast along the north side of property numbers 323075422 and
902601659 at a point at 2052904, 13763744 then east to a point at
2057992, 13761497. From this point, along the east side of property
number 323075422 it its intersection with property number 902601607 at
point 2055759, 13761684 and continuing along the north and east sides
of this property to its intersection with property number 328074996 a
point at 2056900, 13756956. From this point, west across property
number 328074996 to a point at 2054491, 13756784, then southwest to a
point at 2053656, 13755987 then continuing south along the east side of
property number 902601605 to a point at 2053217, 13753954. From this
point, along the west side of property number 902601605 and continuing
to the point of origin.
(7) Unit 2--(99 ha (245 ac)): From a point northeast of Bandera
Road at 2056212, 13772285 and along the northwest boundary of parcel
numbers 102700035,102700038 and 304031966 to a point at 2059148.29808,
13775208.8182. From this point, southeast to a point at 2060764.66944,
13773969.8333 then along the eastern boundaries of parcel numbers
314033835, 327077286, 327077287, 102800425, and 102700316 to a point at
2057993.6191, 13770481.7691. From this point, northwest to the point of
origin.
(8) Unit 3--(63 ha (154 ac)): From the southeastern corner of the
intersection of Bandera Road and Whip-O-Will Way (2064533, 13762115)
along the south side of Whip-O-Will Way to its intersection with Scenic
Loop Road (2067284, 13762583), then continuing south along the west,
northwest side of Scenic Loop Road to its intersection with Bandera
Road (2066368, 13759105). From this point, north along the east side of
Bandera Road to the point of origin.
(9) Unit 4--(63 ha (154 ac): Unit consists of four boundary points
with the following coordinates in Texas State Plane (South Central) in
feet, referenced to North American Horizontal Datum 1983 (NAD 83):
2070429.51759, 13763548.8939; 2067696.85493, 13763518.531;
2070444.69905, 13761074.316; 2067706.57475, 13761075.054.
(10) Unit 5--(47 ha (116 ac): Unit consists of four boundary points
with the following coordinates in Texas State Plane (South Central) in
feet, referenced to North American Horizontal Datum 1983 (NAD 83):
2067655.77864, 13771578.6572; 2065403.77864, 13771578.6572;
2067655.77864, 13769326.6572; 2065403.77864, 13769326.6572.
(11) Unit 6--(45 ha (111 ac): Unit consists of four boundary points
with the following coordinates in Texas State Plane (South Central) in
feet, referenced to North American Horizontal Datum 1983 (NAD 83):
2072498.41982, 13770816.0997; 2070213.53298, 13770816.0997;
2072523.11604, 13768630.4844; 2070213.53298, 13768630.4844.
(12) Unit 7--(50 ha (123 ac): Unit consists of four boundary points
with the following coordinates in Texas State Plane (South Central) in
feet, referenced to North American Horizontal Datum 1983 (NAD 83):
2075042.48817, 13777212.4498; 2072740.24441, 13777212.4498;
2075042.48817, 13774888.2263; 2072720.54786, 13774894.8227.
(13) Unit 8--(174 ha (428 ac): From a point 2079943.53971,
13767755.6785 along the east side of Kyle Seale Parkway to a point at
2082440.28711, 13767779.6857, south to a point at 2082429.79996,
13767253.8126 then east to a point at 2082818.17238, 13767241.1953.
From this point, along the northern side of parcel number 309072242
southeast to a point at 2084641.50301, 13765539.4201, south to a point
at 2084605.03639, 13764652.0659 then west to a point at 2083790.61538,
13764615.5992. From this point south along the west side of White Fawn
Drive and continuing southwest along the north side of Wild Eagle Road
to its intersection with Cotton Tail. From this point, west to a point
at 2079949.46553, 13762062.9364 then continuing north to the point of
origin.
(14) Unit 9--(71 ha (175 ac): From at point at 2090191, 13761607,
roughly the intersection of an unnamed tributary of Leon Creek and the
south side of the Loop 1604 access road, to the intersection of the
access road and Regency Boulevard (2093082, 13762048). From this point,
south along the west side of Regency Boulevard to its intersection with
UTSA Boulevard (2092690, 13758365), then west along the north side of
UTSA Boulevard to a point at 2091449, 13758365, roughly the
intersection of UTSA Boulevard and the
[[Page 55097]]
unnamed tributary of Leon Creek. From this point, north along the
unnamed tributary to the point of origin.
(15) Unit 10--(367 ha (906 ac)): From a point at 2098282, 13772161
at the southwest corner of parcel number 900200036 north along the
western boundary of this parcel and parcel number 308042407 to its
intersection with Camp Bullis Road then continuing east along the south
side of Camp Bullis Road/Military Road to a point at 2105279, 13775376.
From this point, in a straight line southwest to a point at 2100600,
13772093 and continuing west along a straight line to the point of
origin.
(16) Unit 11--(1,273 ha (3,143 ac)): From a point at 2109871,
13786962 east to its intersection with Blanco Road (2120517, 13787010),
then south along the west side of Blanco Road to a point at 2121336,
13775793. From this point west to the southeast corner of parcel number
308042407, then west along this parcel boundary to a point at 2107371,
13776670, then north to Davis (2107420, 13778177). From this point,
north, northeast along Davis to the point of origin.
(17) Unit 12--(105 ha (258 ac)): From a point at 2140092, 13777425
at the west side of U.S. 281 northwest in a straight line to a point at
2139015, 13777798 and continuing northwest in a straight line to a
point at 2137707, 13778176 at the southwest corner of parcel number
311074749. From this point, continuing along the southwest boundary of
this parcel across Cactus Bluff and along the southwest boundary of
parcel number 311074761 to a point at 2137298, 13778787 at the west
side of Mud Creek and continuing northeast along the west side of Mud
Creek to a point at 2138316, 13780237. From this point, crossing parcel
number 308040085 and Evans Road to a point at 2138477, 13780521. From
this point, northeast along a straight line to a point at 2139612,
13782045, then southeast to a point at 2141858, 13781138 on the west
side of U.S. 281 then continuing southwest along straight line to the
point of origin.
(18) Unit 13--(51 ha (125 ac)): From a point at 2151154.85239,
13781383.2606 on the west side of the right-of-way of Bulverde Road,
east along the south side of Ridgeway Drive to a point at
2151768.28065, 13781397.6942 then southeast to a point at 2152129.1208,
13780885.3011. From this point, east along the north side of parcel
number 327077436 to a point at 2153655.9118, 13781029.8389, south at a
point at 2153780.292, 13779672.9217 then south west to a point at
2150481.68089, 13778900.3523. From this point, north to a point at
2150462.0393, 13780127.5368, northeast to a point at 2150916.69789,
13780416.209, northwest to a point at 2150815.66265, 13780618.2794 then
northeast to a point at 2151140.41879, 13780827.5667 and continuing
north to the point of origin.
(19) Unit 21--(155 ha (382 ac)): Unit consists of four boundary
points with the following coordinates in Texas State Plane (South
Central) in feet, referenced to North American Horizontal Datum 1983
(NAD 83): 2138699.75321, 13788566.4781; 2135213.28358, 13788585.4663;
2138699.75321, 13783861.5804; 2135213.28358, 13783753.9781.
Ground Beetle (No Common Name), (Rhadine infernalis)
(1) Critical habitat for the ground beetle (Rhadine infernalis) in
Bexar County, Texas, occurs in units 1b, 1e, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, and 10
which are described under the ground beetle (Rhadine exilis). In
addition, critical habitat for the ground beetle (Rhadine infernalis)
occurs in units 1a, 1d, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19, as described below.
These units are depicted on Maps 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 found under the
ground beetle (Rhadine exilis) and on Map 7 below. The primary
constituent elements, the exclusion of existing structures and
associated landscaping, and the exclusion of lands that do not meet the
definition of critical habitat as described in paragraphs (2), (3), and
(4) under the ground beetle Rhadine exilis are identical for this
species.
BILLING CODE 4310-55--P
[[Page 55098]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27AU02.007
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
[[Page 55099]]
(2) Within Unit 17, one cave and its surrounding preserve area
(Madla's Cave and the surrounding approximately 2 ha (5 ac)) was
excluded from the proposed critical habitat designation. As required by
their section 10(a)(1)(B) permit, La Cantera purchased this karst
preserve and will ensure that it will be preserved in perpetuity and
managed in accordance with the conservation needs of the species.
(3) Surface vegetation within Unit 19 has been significantly
reduced and degraded as a result of urban development. Lands within
this unit do not contain the primary constituent element of a healthy
surface community of native vegetation. Therefore, this unit is being
designated as critical habitat based solely on the presence of an
intact subsurface environment.
(4) Unit 1a--(76 ha (188 ac)): Unit consists of four boundary
points with the following coordinates in Texas State Plane (South
Central) in feet, referenced to North American Horizontal Datum 1983
(NAD 83): 2046534.1202, 13761922.7115; 2043576.6972, 13761922.7116;
2046534.1202, 13759160.7825; 2043576.6972, 13759144.7312.
(5) Unit 1d--(47 ha (116 ac)): Unit consists of four boundary
points with the following coordinates in Texas State Plane (South
Central) in feet, referenced to North American Horizontal Datum 1983
(NAD 83): 2051979.54342, 13753424.1693; 2049727.54342, 13753424.1693;
2051979.54342, 13751172.1693; 2049727.54342, 13751172.1693.
(6) Unit 14--(173 ha (426 ac)): Unit consists of four boundary
points with the following coordinates in Texas State Plane (South
Central) in feet, referenced to North American Horizontal Datum 1983
(NAD 83): 2037495.68795, 13714343.6913; 2033513.40946, 13714379.0476;
2037458.92845, 13709675.2356; 2033521.81129, 13709675.2356.
(7) Unit 15--(195 ha (481 ac)): From a point at 2044508, 13704550
and continuing along the east side of Rolling View to a point at
2042620, 13705900. From this point, north along a straight line to a
point at 2042634, 13706518 at the south end of Honey Oaks and
continuing along the east side of Honey Oaks to Sleepy Oaks then along
the south side of Sleepy Oaks to its intersection with Oak Village.
From this point, continuing north along the east side of Oak Village to
Pheasant Drive, then northeast along a straight line to a point at
2043413, 13708727 and continuing along the same line to a point at
2047835, 13708557 on the west side of Talley Road, and continuing south
along the west side of Talley Road to a point at 2048750, 13704509 and
continuing west along a straight line to the point of origin.
(8) Unit 16--(61 ha (152 ac)): Unit consists of four boundary
points with the following coordinates in Texas State Plane (South
Central) in feet, referenced to North American Horizontal Datum 1983
(NAD 83): 2061031.60542, 13714210.5326; 2057866.88036, 13714211.0248;
2061031.60542, 13712132.5655; 2057845.30553, 13712123.6599.
(9) Unit 17--(48 ha (118 ac)): From a point 2063406, 13766153 and
continuing along the western boundary of parcel numbers 102800326 and
307020398 and along the west and north boundaries of parcel number
102800384 to a point at the northeast corner of parcel number 102800384
(2064828, 13768192). From this point, continuing along the northern
boundary of parcel numbers 327075063 and 327075065 to the northeast
corner of parcel number 327075065 (2066218, 13768044), then south along
the east boundary of parcel numbers 327075065, 102800456, and 102800326
to a point at 2065992, 13765864, then continuing west across parcel
number 102800326 to the point of origin.
(10) Unit 18--(40 ha (100 ac)): From the intersection of Old Scenic
Loop Road and Scenic Loop Road (2067675, 13760046), northeast along the
northern boundary of parcel number 507100487 to the intersection on
Monarch Drive and Cash Mountain (2068346, 13760229), then along the
southern side of Cash Mountain to the point at 2069624, 13761023. From
this point, southeast along a straight line to the intersection with
Rafter South Trail at a point at 2070338, 13759988, then along the
north side of Rafter South Trail to its intersection with Bar X Trail.
From this point, southwest along a straight line to a point at 2067849,
13758117, then northwest to Old Scenic Loop Road (2067231, 13758743)
and continuing north along the southeast side of the road to the point
of origin.
(11) Unit 19--(59 ha (146 ac)): From a point at 2125364, 13769352
where the Loop 1604 access road intersects Panther Springs Creek, north
along Panther Springs Creek to a point at 2127295, 13770776, then
continuing northeast along a straight line to a point at 2127967,
13771448 at the southern end of Sonterra Boulevard. From this point,
north and east along the east side of Sonterra Boulevard to its
intersection with Stone Oak Parkway (2129268, 13771861), then
continuing south along the west side of Stone Oak Parkway to its
intersection with the Loop 1604 access road and continuing west along a
straight line to the point of origin.
Helotes mold beetle (Batrisodes venyivi)
(1) Critical habitat for the Helotes mold beetle in Bexar County,
Texas, occurs in units 1e, 3, and 5 which are described in the text and
depicted on Maps 1, 2, and 3 found under the ground beetle (Rhadine
exilis). The primary constituent elements, the exclusion of existing
structures and associated landscaping, and the exclusion of lands that
do not meet the definition of critical habitat as described in
paragraphs (2), (3), and (4) under the ground beetle Rhadine exilis are
identical for this species.
* * * * *
Dated: August 3, 2002.
Craig Manson,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 02-21477 Filed 8-26-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P