[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 193 (Tuesday, October 6, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 60335-60348]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-25280]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2015-0142; 4500030113]
RIN 1018-BB09
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposed
Threatened Species Status for the Suwannee Moccasinshell
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; 12-month finding and status review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose to
list the Suwannee moccasinshell (Medionidus walkeri), a freshwater
mussel species from the Suwannee River Basin in Florida and Georgia, as
a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act). If we finalize this rule as proposed, it would extend
the Act's protections to this species. The effect of this regulation
will be to add this species to the List of Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife.
DATES: We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before
December 7, 2015. Comments submitted electronically using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES below) must be received by 11:59 p.m.
Eastern Time on the closing date. We must receive requests for public
hearings, in writing, at the address shown in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT by November 20, 2015.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter FWS-R4-ES-2015-0142,
which is the docket number for this rulemaking. Then, in the Search
panel on the left side of the screen, under the Document Type heading,
click on the Proposed Rules link to locate this document. You may
submit a comment by clicking on ``Comment Now!''
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R4-ES-2015-0142; U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service Headquarters, MS: BPHC, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA
22041-3803.
We request that you send comments only by the methods described
above. We will post all comments on http://www.regulations.gov. This
generally means that we will post any personal information you provide
us (see Public Comments below for more information).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Catherine T. Phillips, Project Leader,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Panama City Ecological Services Field
Office, 1601 Balboa Avenue, Panama City, FL 32405; by telephone 850-
769-0552; or by facsimile at 850-763-2177. If you use a
telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), please call the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Summary
Why we need to publish a rule. Under the Act, if we determine that
a species is an endangered or threatened species throughout all or a
significant portion of its range, we are required to promptly publish a
proposal in the Federal Register and make a determination on our
proposal within 1 year. Critical habitat shall be designated, to the
maximum extent prudent and determinable, for any species determined to
be an endangered or threatened species under the Act. Listing a species
as an endangered or threatened species and designations of critical
habitat can only be completed by issuing a rule.
This rule proposes the listing of the Suwannee moccasinshell
(Medionidus walkeri) as a threatened species. The Suwannee
moccasinshell is a candidate species for which we have on file
sufficient information on biological vulnerability and threats to
support
[[Page 60336]]
preparation of a listing proposal, but for which development of a
listing regulation has been precluded by other higher priority listing
activities. This rule reassesses all available information regarding
status of and threats to the Suwannee moccasinshell.
This rule does not propose critical habitat for the Suwannee
moccasinshell. We have determined that designation of critical habitat
is prudent, but not determinable at this time because:
While we have significant information on the habitat of
the species, we need more information on biological needs of the
species (i.e., specific habitat features on the landscape) in order to
identify specific areas appropriate for critical habitat designation.
In addition, as we have not determined the areas that may
qualify for designation, the information sufficient to perform a
required analysis of the impacts of the designation is lacking.
The basis for our action. Under the Act, we may determine that a
species is an endangered or threatened species based on any of five
factors: (A) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) overutilization for
commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes; (C)
disease or predation; (D) the inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms; or (E) other natural or manmade factors affecting its
continued existence. We have determined that this species is threatened
by degradation of its habitat due to polluted runoff from agricultural
lands, discharges from industrial and municipal wastewater sources and
mining operations, sedimentation, decreased flows due to groundwater
extraction and drought (Factor A); State and Federal water quality
standards that are inadequate to protect sensitive aquatic organisms
like mussels (Factor D); contaminant spills as a result of
transportation accidents or from industrial, agricultural, and
municipal facilities (Factor E); increased drought frequency as a
result of changing climatic conditions (Factor E); greater
vulnerability to certain threats because of small population size and
range (Factor E); and competition and disturbance from the introduced
Asian clam (Factor E).
We will seek peer review. We will seek comments from independent
specialists to ensure that our designation is based on scientifically
sound data, assumptions, and analyses. We will invite these peer
reviewers to comment on our listing proposal.
Because we will consider all comments and information received
during the comment period, our final determinations may differ from
this proposal.
Information Requested
Public Comments
We intend that any final action resulting from this proposed rule
will be based on the best scientific and commercial data available and
be as accurate and as effective as possible. Therefore, we request
comments or information from the public, other concerned governmental
agencies, Native American tribes, the scientific community, industry,
or any other interested parties concerning this proposed rule. We
particularly seek comments concerning:
(1) The Suwannee moccasinshell's biology, range, and population
trends, including:
(a) Biological or ecological requirements of the species, including
habitat requirements for feeding, breeding, and sheltering;
(b) Genetics and taxonomy;
(c) Historical and current range including distribution patterns;
(d) Historical and current population levels, and current and
projected trends; and
(e) Past and ongoing conservation measures for the species, its
habitat, or both.
(2) Factors that may affect the continued existence of the species,
which may include habitat modification or destruction, overutilization,
disease, predation, the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms,
or other natural or manmade factors.
(3) Biological, commercial trade, or other relevant data concerning
any threats (or lack thereof) to this species and existing regulations
that may be addressing those threats. In particular, we seek
information concerning the potential threats to the Suwannee
moccasinshell, including:
(a) The effects of pesticides and their ingredients and metabolites
on the species;
(b) The impact of diseases on the species;
(c) The impact of flood scour on the species and its habitat; and
(d) The impact of introduced flathead catfish on fishes needed by
the species to reproduce.
(4) Additional information concerning the historical and current
status, range, distribution, and population size of this species,
including the locations of any additional populations of this species.
Please include sufficient information with your submission (such as
scientific journal articles or other publications) to allow us to
verify any scientific or commercial information you include.
Please note that submissions merely stating support for or
opposition to the action under consideration without providing
supporting information, although noted, will not be considered in
making a determination, as section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that
determinations as to whether any species is a threatened or endangered
species must be made ``solely on the basis of the best scientific and
commercial data available.''
You may submit your comments and materials concerning this proposed
rule by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. We request that you
send comments only by the methods described in ADDRESSES.
If you submit information via http://www.regulations.gov, your
entire submission--including any personal identifying information--will
be posted on the Web site. If your submission is made via a hardcopy
that includes personal identifying information, you may request at the
top of your document that we withhold this information from public
review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We
will post all hardcopy submissions on http://www.regulations.gov.
Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting
documentation we used in preparing this proposed rule, will be
available for public inspection on http://www.regulations.gov, or by
appointment, during normal business hours, at the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Panama City Ecological Services Office (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Public Hearing
Section 4(b)(5) of the Act provides for one or more public hearings
on this proposal, if requested. Requests must be received within 45
days after the date of publication of this proposed rule in the Federal
Register. Such requests must be sent to the address shown in FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. We will schedule public hearings on this
proposal, if any are requested, and announce the dates, times, and
places of those hearings, as well as how to obtain reasonable
accommodations, in the Federal Register and local newspapers at least
15 days before the hearing.
Peer Review
In accordance with our joint policy on peer review published in the
Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), we are seeking the
expert opinions of three appropriate and independent specialists
regarding this proposed rule.
[[Page 60337]]
The purpose of peer review is to ensure that our listing determination
is based on scientifically sound data, assumptions, and analyses. The
peer reviewers have expertise in Suwannee moccasinshell biology,
habitat, physical or biological factors, etc., and are currently
reviewing the species status report, which will inform our
determination. We invite comment from the peer reviewers during this
public comment period.
Previous Federal Actions
We identified the Suwannee moccasinshell (Medionidus walkeri) as a
Category 2 species in the Candidate Notice of Review (CNOR) published
in the Federal Register of November 15, 1994 (59 FR 58982). Category 2
candidates were defined as species for which we had information that
proposed listing was possibly appropriate, but for which conclusive
data on biological vulnerability and threats were not available to
support a proposed rule at the time. In the February 28, 1996, CNOR (61
FR 7596), we discontinued the designation of Category 2 species as
candidates; therefore, the Suwannee moccasinshell was no longer a
candidate species.
In 2010, the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) petitioned the
Service to list 404 aquatic, riparian, and wetland species from the
southeastern United States under the Act. On September 27, 2011, the
Service published a substantial 90-day finding for 374 of the 404
species, including the Suwannee moccasinshell, soliciting information
about, and initiating status reviews for, those species (76 FR 59836).
In 2013, CBD filed a complaint against the Service for failure to
complete a 12-month finding for the Suwannee moccasinshell within the
statutory timeframe. In 2014, the Service entered into a settlement
agreement with CBD to address the complaint; the court-approved
settlement agreement specified that a 12-month finding for the Suwannee
moccasinshell would be delivered to the Federal Register by September
30, 2015.
Background
Taxonomy and Species Description
The Suwannee moccasinshell (Medionidus walkeri) is a freshwater
mussel of the family Unionidae. The species was originally described by
B.H. Wright in 1897; it was briefly considered a synonym of Medionidus
penicillatus (Clench and Turner 1956), but subsequently was recognized
as a valid species by Johnson (1977, p. 176). Its distinctiveness as a
separate species is recognized by recent authors (Williams and Butler
1994, p. 85; Williams et al. 2014, p. 278). Its sharp posterior ridge
and generally dark, rayless shell distinguishes it from other species
of Medionidus in Gulf drainages (Johnson 1977, p. 177; Williams and
Butler 1994, p. 86).
The Suwannee moccasinshell is a small mussel that rarely exceeds 50
millimeters (2.0 inches) in length. Its shell is oval in shape and
sculptured with corrugations extending along the posterior ridge,
although the corrugations are sometimes faint. The shell exterior
(periostracum) is greenish yellow to brown with green rays of varying
width and intensity in young individuals, and olive brown to brownish
black with rays often obscured in mature individuals (Williams et al.
2014, p. 278). The sexes can be distinguished, with female shells being
smaller and longer than the males (Johnson 1977, p. 177). The Suwannee
moccasinshell is easily distinguished from all other mussels in the
Suwannee River Basin by having an oval outline and sculpture on the
posterior slope (Williams et al. 2014, p. 279).
Evaluation of Listable Entity
Under the Act, the term ``species'' includes any subspecies of fish
or wildlife or plants, and any distinct population segment of any
species of vertebrate fish or wildlife which interbreeds when mature
(16 U.S.C. 1532(16)). Based on our review of the best available
scientific and commercial information (see Taxonomy and Species
Description above) the taxonomic entity that is known as Suwannee
moccasinshell (Medionidus walkeri) is a distinct species. Therefore, we
conclude that the Suwannee moccasinshell does meet the definition of a
species under section 3(16) of the Act, and that the petitioned entity
does constitute a listable entity and can be listed under the Act.
Habitat and Biology
Unionid mussels live in the bottom substrates of streams and lakes
where they generally burrow completely into the substrate and orient
themselves near the substrate surface to take in food and oxygen. The
Suwannee moccasinshell typically inhabits larger streams where it is
found in substrates of muddy sand or sand with some gravel, and in
areas with slow to moderate current (Williams and Butler 1994, p. 86;
Williams 2015, p. 2). Recent surveys by the Florida Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission (FFWCC) for the species in the Suwannee River
main channel found individuals at depths ranging from around 0.5 to 2.5
meters (1.6 to 8.2 ft) (FFWCC 2014 unpub. data). Based on stream
conditions in areas that still support the species, suitable Suwannee
moccasinshell habitat appears to be clear stream reaches along bank
margins with a moderate slope and stable sand substrates, where flow is
moderate and slightly depositional conditions exist. These are ideal
habitat conditions for most mussels in the main channel, and several
species occur in areas where the Suwannee moccasinshell is found. In
addition, the Suwannee moccasinshell is associated with large woody
material, and individuals are often found near embedded logs. These
attributes also likely indicate the habitat preferences of its host
fishes.
Adult mussels obtain food items both from the water column and from
the sediments. They filter feed by taking water in through the
incurrent siphon and across four gills that are specialized for
respiration and food collection. They can also move sediment material
into the shell by using cilia (hair-like structures) on the foot or
through currents created by cilia. Juvenile mussels typically burrow
completely beneath the substrate surface for the first several months
of their life. During this time, they feed primarily with their
ciliated foot, which they sweep through the sediment to extract
material, until the structures for filter feeding are more fully
developed. Mussels feed on a variety of microscopic food particles that
include algae, diatoms, bacteria, and fine detritus (disintegrated
organic debris) (McMahon and Bogan 2001, p. 331; Strayer et al. 2004,
pp. 430-431, Vaughn et al. 2008, p. 410).
Spawning in freshwater mussels general occurs from spring to late
summer (Haag 2012, p. 38). Water temperature appears to be the primary
cue for spawning (McMahon and Bogan 2001, p. 343; Galbraith and Vaughn
2009, p. 42). During spawning, males release sperm into the water
column, which females take in through their inhalant aperture during
feeding. Fertilization takes place inside the gills, and females brood
the fertilized eggs in modified portions of one or both pairs of gills
until they develop into mature larvae called glochidia. The timing and
duration of the brooding period varies by species, but can be
classified as either short term or long term. In short-term brooders,
glochidia are released as soon as they are mature, generally 2-6 weeks
after fertilization. In long-term brooders, the mature glochidia are
brooded over the winter and released the following spring or summer.
Reproduction in unionid mussels is remarkable in that the glochidia
of most
[[Page 60338]]
species must attach to a fish host in order to transform into a
juvenile mussel. Many mussel species use only one or a few specific
fish species as hosts, and have evolved lures to attract a particular
fish species or group of related fish species (Haag 2012, p. 42).
Females of some mussel species release their glochidia, either
individually (sometimes in mucus strands for suspension), in packets
termed conglutinates, which resemble fish food items, or in one large
mass known as a superconglutinate, which resembles a small fish
(Barnhart et al. 2008, pp. 374-379). In other species, female mussels
transmit glochidia directly to the host fish by using mantel flap lures
to entice an attack (Barnhart et al. 2008, p. 380) and expel glochidia
into the host's mouth.
The number of glochidia released by a female in one reproductive
cycle can range from several thousand to several million and is
extremely variable among species (Haag 2012, p. 196). The variation is
related to body size with larger females producing more eggs than
smaller individuals (Haag 2012, pp. 200-206). If the glochidia
encounter a fish, they attempt to clamp onto the gills, fins, or skin.
Glochidia that attach to a suitable host encyst in the tissues and
undergo a metamorphosis. The duration of the encystment varies by
mussel species, usually lasting from 2-4 weeks, but can last for
several months (Haag 2012, p. 42). When the metamorphosis is complete,
the juveniles drop from the host and sink to the bottom to begin life
as a free-living mussel.
Parasitism primarily serves as a means of upstream dispersal for
this relatively sedentary group of organisms (Haag 2012, p. 145). The
intimate relationship between freshwater mussels and their host fish
plays a major role in mussel distributions on both a landscape and
community scale. Haag and Warren (1998, p. 304) determined that mussel
community composition was more a function of fish community pattern
variability than of microhabitat variability, and that the type of
strategy used by mussels for infecting host fishes was the determining
factor.
An ongoing study has provided preliminary information about the
reproductive biology of the Suwannee moccasinshell. Females were found
gravid with mature glochidia from December to February, and also in
late May/early June (Johnson 2015 unpub. data). In laboratory trials,
Suwannee moccasinshell glochidia transformed primarily on the
blackbanded darter (Percina nigrofasciata) and to a lesser extent on
the brown darter (Etheostoma edwini) (Johnson 2015 unpub. data). Six
other fish species from 5 families were also tested but none
transformed moccasinshell larvae. This indicates that the Suwannee
moccasinshell is a host specialist and dependent on darters for
reproduction, and is consistent with other members of the genus
Medionidus, which also use only darters (Percidae) as hosts (Haag and
Warren 2003, p. 82; Fritts and Bringolf 2014, p. 54). To attract its
darter host, the moccasinshell uses a small mantel lure consisting of a
vibrant blue patch on the mantel interior that it flashes while
wiggling papillae on the mantel margin (Johnson 2015 unpub. data).
Darters are small, bottom-dwelling fish that generally do not move
considerable distances (Freeman 1995, pp. 363-365; Holt 2013, p. 657).
Thus, the exclusive use of darters as a host may limit the Suwannee
moccasinshell's ability to disperse, and to recolonize some areas from
which it has become extirpated.
Distribution and Abundance
The Suwannee moccasinshell is endemic to the Suwannee River Basin
in Florida and Georgia. The Suwannee River Basin is a unique river
system, characterized by blackwater streams in its headwaters and
numerous springs (over 300) in its middle and lower reaches. The river
originates in the Okefenokee Swamp and meanders more than 400
kilometers through south-central Georgia and north-central Florida
before emptying into the Gulf of Mexico. There are three large
tributaries to the Suwannee River--the Alapaha, Withlacoochee, and
Santa Fe Rivers. The Suwannee moccasinshell's historical range includes
the lower and middle Suwannee River proper, the Santa Fe River sub-
basin, and the lower reach of the Withlacoochee River (Williams 2015,
p. 7). There are no freshwater mussels in the upper Suwannee River
Basin (upstream of the mouth of Swift Creek) due to naturally low pH
and nutrient levels (Williams et al. 2014, p. 62). Within the Suwannee
River mainstem, the species is historically known from the mouth of
Manatee Springs run, upstream to the vicinity of the junction of the
Withlacoochee River. Within the Santa Fe sub-basin, the species is
known from several locations in the Santa Fe River, one location in the
New River (a headwater tributary), and one location in a small unnamed
tributary to the New River. In the Withlacoochee River, it is known
from three historical locations in the lower reach of the river.
There is a single record of the species from the Hillsborough River
Basin, a small river basin in Florida that empties into Tampa Bay,
collected by van Hyning in 1932 (Williams et al. 2014, p. 280).
However, recent information obtained while examining specimens in the
collection of the University of Michigan's Museum of Zoology calls the
record into question. There is a possibility that the specimen, along
with at least two other species, were actually collected from the
Suwannee River and mislabeled (Williams 2015a in litt.). Incorrect
locality data seems plausible considering that none of the three
species have been found in the basin before or since the van Hyning
collection (Williams 2015, p. 3; Williams 2015a in litt.). Therefore,
the Hillsborough River is not considered part of the Suwannee
moccasinshell's range at this time, and further research is under way
that may clarify this situation.
The Suwannee moccasinshell's range has declined in recent decades,
and it is presently known only from the Suwannee River main channel and
the lower Santa Fe River in Florida. Recent occurrence is based on
collections made from 2000 to 2015. Within the Suwannee mainstem, the
moccasinshell occurs intermittently throughout a 75-mile (121-
kilometer) reach of the lower and middle river from river mile (RM) 50
in Dixie/Gilchrist Counties, upstream to RM 125, near the Withlacoochee
River mouth. A shell fragment was collected in 2015 approximately 7
miles downstream of the mouth of Manatee Springs run (Williams 2015b in
litt.). The fragment was estimated to be several years old, and
additional survey work is needed; however, if the species is found to
occur in this area, its distribution would be extended downstream by
several miles. Within the Santa Fe sub-basin, the species is currently
known from four localities (two are shell material only) in a 28-mile
segment of the lower Santa Fe River downstream of the rise. The Santa
Fe River runs underground for about 5 miles and ``rises'' back to the
surface in Alachua County. The species was not detected in recent
surveys in the Withlacoochee River or in the upper Santa Fe sub-basin
(upstream of the rise), which includes its tributary, the New River.
The species has not been collected in the past 50 years in the
Withlacoochee River; however, the lower reach of the river continues to
support good mussel diversity (Williams 2015, p. 3), and additional
survey work is needed to verify if it is extirpated in this sub-basin.
Targeted surveys by FFWCC biologists in 2013 and 2014 show that
Suwannee moccasinshell numbers are low.
[[Page 60339]]
Experienced mussel biologists surveyed 96 sites, covering most of its
historical range, and collected a total of 67 live individuals at 21
sites, all from the Suwannee River main channel. Fourteen individuals
were collected at one location, but at most sites 3 or fewer
individuals were found (FFWCC 2014 unpub. data). At locations where the
species was detected, it comprised only 1 percent of the mussel sample.
In April of 2015, FFWCC biologists surveyed 14 sites in the lower Santa
Fe River, and encountered only 1 Suwannee moccasinshell out of 1,880
mussels collected during the survey (Holcomb 2015 in litt.). A summary
of occurrence, distribution, and abundance of Suwannee moccasinshell
populations by waterbody are shown in Table 1 below.
Table 1--Summary of Suwannee Moccasinshell Populations by Waterbody
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distribution and
Water body State and county Occurrence * abundance
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Suwannee River mainstem............. FL: Madison Suwannee, Recent................. Occurs in a 75-mile
Lafayette, Gilchrist, reach; 67 individuals
Dixie, Levy,. at 21 sites; abundance
low but population is
stable.
Santa Fe River...................... FL: Suwannee, Recent................. Occurs in 28-mile reach
Gilchrist, Columbia, in lower river; 2
Alachua, Union, individuals at 2 sites;
Bradford. drastic decline and
abundance very low.
New River, and unnamed trib. to New FL: Union, Alachua, Historical............. May be extirpated; last
River. Bradford. collected in system in
1996.
Withlacoochee River................. GA: Brooks, Lowndes; Historical............. May be extirpated; last
FL: Madison, Hamilton. collected in system in
1969.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Recent occurrence is based on collections made from 2000 to 2015; historical occurrence is based on
collections made prior to 2000.
Historical mussel collection data are often limited, making it
difficult to compare trends in abundance over time. Available
historical collection data seem to indicate that the species was more
abundant at one time as several museum lots contain 20 or more
individuals. However, it is difficult to compare historical collections
to recent collections, as survey efforts for these collections (and for
most early mussel collections) are unknown, and sometimes museum lots
are split or combined. It does seem clear from museum collections that
Suwannee moccasinshell numbers in the Santa Fe River sub-basin have
declined dramatically in recent decades. Three lots in the Florida
Museum of Natural History (4,133; 4,159; 4,160) collected from the
Santa Fe River in 1934 contain a total of 70 individuals. In
comparison, only two live moccasinshells have been collected in the
entire Santa Fe River sub-basin since 2000 (one in 2012 and another in
2015) despite considerable survey effort in areas where the species
historically occurred.
In summary, an evaluation of historical and recent collection data
show the Suwannee moccasinshell has undergone a reduction in range, and
may no longer persist at several locations where it historically
occurred. The species may be extirpated from the Withlacoochee River,
and its range and abundance have clearly declined in the Santa Fe River
system, where it is now found only in the lower portion of the Santa Fe
River mainstem in exceedingly low abundance. In addition, the species
may not be able to reestablish populations in some areas due to its
limited ability to disperse. The Suwannee moccasinshell continues to
occur throughout most of its known range in the Suwannee River
mainstem; however, its numbers are likely lower now than a few decades
ago. Despite its low abundance, populations in the Suwannee River
mainstem presently appear to be stable. We attribute its persistence in
this reach to the stability of the streambed and habitat due to the
prevalence of geomorphically stable limestone in the channel, and to
the absence of excessive sedimentation. Also, certain threats such as
contaminants and reduced flows are likely attenuated in the mainstem
due to the larger volume of water (threats are discussed in detail in
the following section).
Summary of Information Pertaining to the Five Factors
Section 4 of the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) (ESA, Act)
and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 424) set forth procedures for
adding species to the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife. Under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, we may determine that a
species is endangered or threatened based on any of the following five
factors:
(A) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range;
(B) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes;
(C) Disease or predation;
(D) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or
(E) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued
existence.
In making this finding, information pertaining to the Suwannee
moccasinshell in relation to the five factors provided in section
4(a)(1) of the Act is discussed below. In considering what factors
might constitute threats to this species, we must look beyond the
exposure of the species to a particular factor to evaluate whether the
species may respond to that factor in a way that causes actual impacts
to the species. If there is exposure to a factor and the species
responds negatively, the factor may be a threat and, during the status
review, we attempt to determine how significant a threat it is. The
threat is significant if it drives, or contributes to, the risk of
extinction of the species so that the species warrants listing as an
endangered or threatened species as those terms are defined in the Act.
However, the identification of factors that could impact a species
negatively may not be sufficient to compel a finding that the species
warrants listing. The information must include evidence sufficient to
suggest that these factors are threats that operate on the species to
the point that the species may meet the definition of an endangered or
threatened species under the Act.
Factor A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or
Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range
The stream habitats of freshwater mussels are vulnerable to
degradation and modification from a number of threats associated with
modern civilization. Within the Suwannee River Basin, a rapidly growing
human population and changing land use represent significant threats to
the aquatic ecosystem, primarily through pollution and water withdrawal
(Katz and Raabe 2005, p. 14). The Suwannee moccasinshell's habitat is
subject to degradation as a result of polluted runoff from croplands
and poultry and dairy operations, discharges from industries, mines,
and sewage treatment facilities, and from decreased flows due
[[Page 60340]]
to groundwater extraction (pumping) (Williams 2015, pp. 7-10). Based on
our current knowledge of the Suwannee moccasinshell and related mussel
species, the habitat characteristics needed to sustain healthy
populations generally include (1) stable stream channels and banks; (2)
stable bottom substrates that are free of excessive algae growth; (3)
flows that are adequate to maintain benthic habitats, provide food and
oxygen, transport sperm, and remove wastes; (4) good water quality
including normal temperature, conductivity, and pH ranges, and adequate
oxygen content; and (5) an environment free of toxic levels of
pollutants.
Pollution
Water quality in the basin has been impaired due to a number of
point and nonpoint sources of pollutants. As a group, mussels are more
sensitive to pollution than many other aquatic organisms, and are one
of the first species to respond to water quality impacts (Haag 2012, p.
355). Descriptions of localized mortality resulting from chemical
spills and other discrete point source discharges have been reported.
However, rangewide decreases in mussel density and diversity may result
from the more damaging effects of chronic, low-level contamination
(Newton 2003, p. 2,543; Newton et al. 2003, p. 2,554). There is no
specific information on the sensitivity of the Suwannee moccasinshell
to common agricultural, municipal, and industrial pollutants. A
multitude of bioassays conducted on other mussels show that freshwater
mussels, especially in early life stages, are more sensitive than
previously known to some pollutants including chlorine, ammonia,
copper, nickel, fungicides, and surfactants used in pesticides and
household products (Keller and Zam 1991, p. 542; Jacobson et al. 1993,
pp. 879-883; Jacobson et al. 1997, pp. 2,387-2,389; Augspurger et al.
2003, pp. 2,571-2,574; Wang et al. 2007, pp. 2,039-2,046; Gibson 2015,
pp. 90-91).
Ammonia poses a serious threat to mussels due to its ubiquity in
aquatic systems and its high toxicity to aquatic organisms. It
originates primarily from agricultural sources (from fertilizers, which
are often applied as ammonia and animal wastes), but also from
municipal and industrial wastewater, and atmospheric deposition.
Although ammonia may be taken up by plants or converted to less toxic
nitrates by naturally occurring nitrifying bacteria, nitrates also have
harmful effects on juvenile and adult mussels and may act as endocrine
disrupters (Bauer 1988, p. 244; Patzner and Muller 2001, pp. 330-333;
Pelley 2003, p. 162; Camargo and Alonso 2006, pp. 831-849). Moreover,
ammonia may occur in sediments at greater concentrations than the water
column (Frazier et al. 1996, pp. 92-99); such occurrences may go
undetected by common water quality monitoring methods, but may have
lethal or sublethal effects on mussels (Augspurger et al. 2003, pp.
2,571-2,574; Wang et al. 2007, pp. 2,039-2046), which burrow and feed
(with their foot) in sediments. The Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) recently revised its water quality standards to levels considered
protective of freshwater mollusks, but it will be several years before
facilities must comply with the new limits (see discussion under Factor
D).
Pesticides are other widespread contaminants that have long been
implicated in mussel declines. Pesticides have been linked to
freshwater mussel die-offs (Fleming et al. 1995, pp. 877-879), and lab
studies show that mussel glochidia and juveniles are particularly
sensitive to common pesticides (Conners and Black 2004, pp. 362-371;
Bringolf et al. 2007a, pp. 2,089-2,093). A surfactant (MON 0818) used
in the common herbicide Roundup[supreg] was found to be severely toxic
to juvenile mussels and glochidia (Bringolf et al. 2007b, pp. 2,096-
2,097). The potential role of pesticides in mussel declines has
received more attention in recent years, but the full range of long-
term effects of pesticides, and their ingredients and metabolites,
remain unknown (Haag 2012, pp. 374-379).
An emerging category of contaminant threats to aquatic species is
pharmaceuticals, including birth control drugs, antidepressants, and
livestock growth hormones originating from municipal, agricultural, and
industrial wastewater sources. These chemicals may act as endocrine
disrupters and can affect mussel reproduction in a number of ways,
including causing feminization of male mussels (Gagne et al. 2001, pp.
260-268; Gagne et al. 2011, pp. 99-106).
High levels of nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus may
indirectly impact mussels by stimulating algae growth. In excess, these
nutrients lead to algal blooms, which deplete oxygen and can also cause
dense mats of filamentous algae to form that can entrain juvenile
mussels (Hartfield and Hartfield 1996, p. 373). Juveniles may be
particularly sensitive to hypoxic (oxygen-deprived) and eutrophic
(nutrient-rich) conditions since they inhabit interstitial spaces in
stream substrates rather than the sediment surfaces occupied by adults
(Sparks and Strayer 1998, pp. 132-133).
As discussed under Factor D below, State and Federal regulatory
mechanisms have helped to reduce the negative effects of point source
discharges since the 1970s, yet discharges continue to impact water
quality in the Suwannee River Basin. There are 246 National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitted facilities within the
basin; most of them discharge into streams that ultimately flow into
the middle and lower Suwannee River main channel where the majority of
the moccasinshell population occurs. According to 2014 monitoring data,
the top pollutants discharged into the Suwannee River Basin by weight
were (in decreasing order of value) total suspended solids, nitrogen,
phosphorus, fluoride, and ammonia (EPA 2014). Additionally, the toxic-
weighted pound equivalent (TWPE), used to compare the potential toxic
nature of one pollutant to another, indicates that the most hazardous
pollutants discharged into the Suwannee River Basin are (in decreasing
order of toxicity) toxaphene (a pesticide), fluoride, chlorine, iron,
and ammonia (EPA 2014). In previous years, top toxicants discharged
into the basin also included copper and cyanide.
Facilities permitted to discharge substantial amounts of wastewater
into areas that may affect Suwannee moccasinshell populations include
the Valdosta wastewater treatment plant (WWTP), which is permitted to
discharge 12 million gallons per day (mgd) to the Withlacoochee River
in Lowndes County, GA; Packaging Corp. of America, which is permitted
to discharge 55 mgd to the Withlacoochee River in Lowndes County, GA;
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc., which is permitted to discharge 200 mgd to
creeks that flow to the Suwannee River in Hamilton County, FL; Florida
Power Corp., which is permitted to discharge 342 mgd to the Suwannee
River in Suwannee County, FL; and Pilgrim's Pride Poultry Processing
Facility, which is permitted to discharge 1.5 mgd to the Suwannee River
in Suwannee County, FL (EPA 2014).
Pollutants released by these facilities in 2014, and considered
significant (either because of the amount or potential to affect
mussels) include total suspended solids, nitrogen, phosphorus, ammonia,
fluoride, iron, and copper (EPA 2014). In addition, spills of municipal
wastewater at the treatment plant in Valdosta, GA, have leaked
untreated sewage into the Withlacoochee River on multiple
[[Page 60341]]
occasions. This facility has been a source of periodic releases of
millions of gallons of untreated sewage, the most recent occurring in
the summer of 2013 (Williams 2015, p. 8). This issue is currently being
addressed by the City of Valdosta, which is making numerous
improvements, including a new WWTP, which is scheduled for completion
in 2016. PCS Phosphate Company, Inc., is a large phosphate strip mining
and fertilizer manufacturing operation near White Springs, FL. The
facility is currently permitted to discharge effluent into creeks that
flow to the Suwannee River, but surface runoff and periodic overflow of
settling ponds as a result of heavy rain events may have resulted in
inputs of total suspended solids, phosphorus, and ammonia into the
river (Williams 2015, p. 8).
Nonpoint source pollution is another significant threat throughout
the Suwannee Basin, entering the system by surface runoff or through
groundwater. Nonpoint source impacts are attributable primarily to the
conversion of forests and wetlands to agricultural lands; agriculture
accounts for most of the developed land uses within the basin, and
includes silviculture, row crops, and pasture (Katz and Raabe 2005, p.
9). Surface runoff from these lands may transport numerous pollutants
including pesticides, fertilizers, metals, sediments, and pathogens
into stream channels. Surface drainage is more prevalent in the upper
two-thirds of the basin and the upper Santa Fe River sub-basin where
the soils are resistant to infiltration (Katz and Raabe 2005, p. 5).
Pollutants can also enter stream channels via groundwater inflow.
The Suwannee River Basin has the highest density of springs globally
(FDEP 2003, p. 29). The majority of flow in the middle Suwannee River
Basin originates from groundwater sources, as the region is highly
connected to the underlying Floridan aquifer (FDEP 1985, p. iv). This
is evidenced by the relative lack of surface water bodies in the middle
Suwannee River Basin since most water flows through the overlying karst
features and directly into the aquifer (FDEP 2003, p. 27). For these
reasons, the middle and lower portions of the Basin are particularly
vulnerable to groundwater contamination. Katz et al. (1999, pp. 49-50)
observed groundwater nitrate levels that were seven times greater than
background levels in areas dominated by cropland, and estimate that it
may take several decades for nitrogen concentrations to return to their
original state. Additionally, all nine springs in the basin monitored
by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) from 2012-
2013 exceeded the nitrate criterion for spring vents (FDEP 2014a, p.
228), suggesting that contamination is persistent and widespread in the
central and lower Suwannee River Basin.
Trends suggest that certain nonpoint source pollutants are becoming
more abundant in the Suwannee River Basin. According to FDEP (2003, pp.
76, 83) nitrates are by far the biggest water quality concern in the
middle and lower portions of the Suwannee Basin. Total estimated
nitrogen increased continuously from 1955 to 1997 in Gilchrist and
Lafayette counties (Katz et al. 1999, pp. 45-48). Nitrates have been
monitored at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) monitoring site at
Branford, FL, since 1954 and the overall trend is increasing (Thom et
al. 2015, p. 100). Of seven Florida surface water quality stations
monitored by FDEP in the basin during 1999-2012, increases in total
nitrogen were observed at four sites, levels of algae and nitrates
increased at three sites, and phosphorus and fecal coliform increased
at two sites (FDEP 2014a, pp. 106-123). Nitrogen levels in the Suwannee
River Basin have likely increased due to nonpoint sources such as
runoff from croplands, dairy farms, and poultry facilities (Katz et al.
1999, p. 49). Fertilizer use in the area probably peaked in the late
1970s (FDEP 2008, pp. 95-100), yet fertilizer-based nitrogen inputs
remain high and have increased in parts of the Suwannee River Basin
(Katz et al. 1999, pp. 49-50; FDEP 2014a, pp. 106-123).
For the 2000 water year, the FDEP determined that the middle
Suwannee and lower Santa Fe watersheds contributed more than three-
quarters of the basin-wide nitrate-nitrogen load, although these
watersheds comprise less than 20 percent of the drainage area (FDEP
2003, p. 35). In 2007, the FDEP (2008, pp. 40-41) found that more than
40 percent of total nitrogen in the middle and lower Suwannee River
Basin originates from fertilizer inputs, but also that dairy, poultry,
and beef production are prominent nitrogen contributors in the area.
The same report showed that atmospheric deposition contributed less
than 20 percent of total nitrogen in the area (FDEP 2008, pp. 40-41),
suggesting that modern nitrogen concentrations in the basin greatly
surpass historical background levels. In addition, the area is also
naturally rich in phosphorus, and active and inactive phosphate mining
operations exist in the central part of the basin. Historically,
discharges from phosphate-fertilizer production have been correlated
with major changes in physiochemical properties of basin waters. Spikes
in total phosphorus, fluoride, and soluble inorganic nitrogen, as well
as depressed dissolved oxygen (DO) levels, were observed immediately
downstream of the mouth of Swift Creek, a tributary accepting phosphate
mine effluent (FDEP 1985, pp. iv-19).
Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.)
requires States to identify waters that do not fully support their
designated use classification. These impaired waters are placed on the
State's 303(d) list, and a total maximum daily load (TMDL) must be
developed for the pollutant of concern. A TMDL is an estimate of the
total load of pollutants that a segment of water can receive without
exceeding applicable water quality criteria. The Georgia Environmental
Protection Division's (GEPD) draft 303(d) list for 2014 identifies a
total of 64 impaired stream segments (a total of 695 stream miles)
within the Suwannee River Basin (GEPD 2014, pp. 263-273). The list of
causes of impairment with established TMDLs in Georgia include mercury,
lead, low dissolved oxygen (DO), fecal coliform, pH, algae, and
condition of the macroinvertebrate community (GEPD 2014, pp. 263-273).
The potential sources of these violations are primarily attributed to
nonpoint or unknown sources but also to municipal facilities and urban
runoff. FDEP's 303(d) list identifies 52 impaired stream segments or
water bodies in the Suwannee River Basin. Florida's list identifies
coliform bacteria, specific conductance, dissolved oxygen, nutrients,
and unionized ammonia as impaired parameters (FDEP 2014b). Impairments
within the range of the Suwannee moccasinshell include mercury in the
lower Suwannee River, and DO and nutrients (algal mats) in the lower
Santa Fe River (FDEP 2003 pp. 138-139).
Water Withdrawals
Perhaps the most significant threat to the Suwannee moccasinshell
is flow reduction due to the withdrawal of groundwater for agricultural
purposes. Stream flows in the Suwannee River Basin are heavily
dependent on groundwater contributions. Sufficient groundwater flows
are essential for maintaining good mussel habitat in the Basin
(Williams et al. 2014, p. 46). In the past 25 years, center pivot
irrigation has increased in the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint (ACF)
River Basin which borders the Suwannee River Basin to the northwest
(Torak et al. 2010, p. 2). Most of the groundwater used for irrigation
in the ACF Basin is withdrawn from the Upper Floridan aquifer.
Increased pumping in the ACF Basin has lowered groundwater levels
[[Page 60342]]
along the boundary with neighboring Ochlockonee and Suwannee River
Basins by more than 24 feet. In southeastern Colquitt County, GA, the
aquifer has experienced unprecedented 40- to 50-foot declines since
1969 (Torak et al. 2010, p. 44). Periods of extreme dry conditions
causing insufficient recharging flows into the Upper Floridan aquifer
occurred in the 1980s-2000s (Torak et al. 2010, p. 47). The lower
aquifer levels reduced the hydraulic gradient, thus the amount of
groundwater flowing south and east into the Suwannee Basin (Torak et
al. 2010, pp. 2, 40).
Declines in groundwater levels have the potential to lower stream
base flows by decreasing the amount groundwater discharged to streams.
This may also reduce high-magnitude flows (10,000-15,000-cubic feet per
second), which could decrease floodplain connectivity and the transfer
of matter and energy from overbank to riverine systems (Light et al.
2002, p. 85; Pringle 2003, entire). Mean annual flow discharge in the
lower Suwannee River near Wilcox, FL, has declined more than 30 percent
between 1942 and 2012 (USGS 2014). Similar discharge declines of
approximately 30 percent have been observed in the Santa Fe River near
Fort White between 1928 and 2013 (USGS 2014). Reductions in flow can
alter hydraulically mediated sediment sorting throughout the river,
which may displace or otherwise alter habitat for Suwannee
moccasinshell and its host fishes. Groundwater pumping during long
periods of drought can result in extremely reduced flow rates. The
upper reaches of the Santa Fe River mainstem and the New River, a major
tributary, have ceased to flow due to groundwater pumping during
drought (Williams 2015, p. 9). Biologists conducting mussel surveys on
the Santa Fe River near Worthington Springs during a dry period in June
2011 observed that a section of the channel was completely dewatered
(FFWCC 2011a, p. 2). While pumping does not completely dewater the
Withlacoochee River, flow rates are greatly reduced (Williams 2015 p.
9). Reduced flows may exacerbate drought conditions (elevating
temperature, pH, and pollutant concentrations (causing biotic die-off,
and reducing DO), which in turn may have lethal or other harmful
effects (prematurely aborting glochidia, reduced growth rates) to the
species, or may cause stranding mortality.
Sedimentation
Numerous potential sources of sand and silt sediments occur
throughout the basin, and include development, silviculture, livestock
grazing, croplands, and unpaved roads. Habitat may be degraded or
destroyed in localized areas where sediments accumulate, and suspended
fine particles can increase turbidity levels for considerable distances
downstream. High levels of suspended sediments may reduce mussel
feeding and respiratory efficiency (Dennis 1984, pp. 207-212; Brim Box
and Mossa 1999, pp. 101-102). Highly turbid conditions may also affect
mussel recruitment by impeding the ability of sight-feeding fishes to
find glochidia and mussel lures. The Suwannee moccasinshell uses small
mantel lures to attract its darter host fish (see Habitat and Biology
section above) and, therefore, is reliant on good water clarity during
times that it is reproducing. Another important issue related to
sedimentation is that it may serve as a vehicle for pollutants (like
pesticides and surfactants) to enter streams (Haag 2012, p. 378).
The Suwannee River main channel is relatively unimpacted by
sedimentation, where inputs are generally low and impacts are mostly
localized; however, sedimentation is a problem in the Santa Fe River
sub-basin. Surface drainage is more prevalent in the Santa Fe
watershed, which is more developed because of its proximity to
Gainesville, FL, and several other incorporated areas (FDEP 2003, p.
23). Excessive silt sediment has been cited as a reason for the decline
of mussel populations in the Santa Fe sub-basin (FFWCC 2011b, p. 14)
and is considered a factor in the decline of the Suwannee moccasinshell
in that system.
Conservation Efforts To Reduce Habitat Destruction, Modification, or
Curtailment of Its Range
We are not aware of any conservation efforts that may help
ameliorate threats specific to the Suwannee moccasinshell. However, the
moccasinshell may be indirectly benefited by Federal, State, local, and
private programs that acquire or manage lands within the basin,
particularly along stream corridors. Florida's Suwannee River Water
Management District (SRWMD) owns, manages, or co-manages a significant
portion of the basin's riparian lands (more than 48,000 acres, CBI
2010) adjacent to or upstream of Suwannee moccasinshell habitats.
Tracts are managed to maintain adequate water supply and water quality
for natural systems by preserving riparian habitats and restricting
development (SRWMD 2014, p. 3). The SRWMD also established minimum
flows and levels for the river channel in the lower basin, downstream
of Fanning Springs. Minimum flow and level criteria were not designed
with specific consideration for freshwater mussels, but do establish a
limit at which further withdrawals would be detrimental to water
resources, taking into consideration fish and wildlife habitats, the
passage of fish, sediment loads, and water quality, among others (SRWMD
2005, pp. 6-8).
Summary of Factor A
Habitat degradation is occurring throughout the entire range of the
Suwannee moccasinshell and is due primarily to pollutants discharged
from municipal and industrial facilities, polluted runoff from
agricultural areas, and reduced flows as a result of groundwater
pumping and drought. In portions of the species' range, sedimentation
has also impacted the species' habitat. These threats are greater in
the two tributary systems, as evidenced by the species' possible
disappearance from the Withlacoochee River, and its dramatic decline in
the Santa Fe River sub-basin. Currently, nearly the entire population
resides in the middle and lower reach of the Suwannee River main
channel. The two greatest threats to the species, pollutants and
reduced flows, are somewhat attenuated in the main channel, where flows
are generally sustained and pollutant concentrations may be diluted by
higher flow volumes. While there are programs in place that may
indirectly alleviate some detrimental impacts on aquatic habitats,
there currently are no conservation efforts designed specifically to
protect or recover Suwannee moccasinshell populations. Therefore, we
conclude that habitat degradation is presently a significant threat to
Suwannee moccasinshell populations in the Withlacoochee and Santa Fe
River sub-basins, and a moderate threat to populations in the Suwannee
River main channel. This threat is expected to continue into the future
and, because it is linked to human activities, is expected to increase
as the human population within the Suwannee River Basin grows.
Factor B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
The Suwannee moccasinshell is not a commercially valuable species,
and the Suwannee River is not subject to commercial mussel harvesting
activities. Suwannee moccasinshell individuals have been taken for
scientific and private collections in the past, but collecting is not
considered a factor in its decline. Collection interest may increase as
the Suwannee moccasinshell becomes an interest of scientific study, and
as its rarity becomes better known.
[[Page 60343]]
However, individuals are very difficult to locate because the species
occurs in a large mainstem river in low abundance. Therefore, we do not
consider overutilization to be a threat to the Suwannee moccasinshell
at this time.
Factor C. Disease or Predation
Juvenile and adult mussels are preyed upon by several aquatic
predators (for example, dragonfly larvae, crayfishes, turtles, and some
fishes), and are prey items for some terrestrial species (for example,
raccoon, otter, feral hogs, and birds) (summarized in Hart and Fuller
1974, pp. 225-240; and in Williams et al. 2014, pp. 90-91). Although
predation by native predators is a natural occurrence, it may
exacerbate declines in mussel populations already diminished by other
threats (Neves and Odom 1989, p. 940). However, we have no specific
information indicating that predation is negatively impacting Suwannee
moccasinshell populations.
Mussels commonly are hosts for a variety of parasites, including
trematodes, copepods, and water mites, and also harbor bacteria and
viruses (Grizzle and Brunner 2007, p. 4; Haag 2012, pp. 382-383). Heavy
infestations by mites and trematodes have shown to adversely affect
mussel reproductive and physiological fitness (Gangloff 2008, pp. 28-
30). In addition, exposure to stressors like pollutants can weaken
mussel immune systems, making them more prone to diseases. However, the
role of diseases in mussel declines has received little attention, and
diseases of freshwater mussels remain largely unstudied (Grizzle and
Bruner 2007, p. 6; Haag 2012, p. 382). We have no specific information
indicating that disease is negatively impacting Suwannee moccasinshell
populations. Therefore, we do not consider disease or predation to be
threats to the Suwanee moccasinshell at this time.
Factor D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
Point source discharges within the range of the Suwannee
moccasinshell have been reduced since the inception of the Clean Water
Act, but this statute still may not provide adequate protection for
sensitive aquatic organisms like freshwater mussels, which can be
impacted by extremely low levels of pollutants. Municipal wastewater
plants continue to discharge large amounts of effluent and, in some
circumstances, in excess of permitted levels (see discussion under
Factor A). There is no specific information on the sensitivity of the
Suwannee moccasinshell to common industrial and municipal pollutants,
and very little information on other freshwater mussel species. Current
State and Federal regulations regarding pollutants are designed to be
protective of aquatic organisms; however, freshwater mollusks may be
more susceptible to some pollutants than the test organisms commonly
used in bioassays. Additionally, water quality criteria may not
incorporate data available for freshwater mussels (March et al. 2007,
pp. 2,066-2,067). A multitude of bioassays conducted on 16 mussel
species (summarized by Augspurger et al. 2007, pp. 2025-2028) show that
freshwater mollusks are more sensitive than previously known to some
chemical pollutants, including chlorine, ammonia, copper, fungicides,
and herbicide surfactants. Another study found that nickel and chlorine
were toxic to a federally threatened mussel species at levels below the
current criteria (Gibson 2015, pp. 90-91). The study also found the
mussel was sensitive to SDS (sodium dodecyl sulfate), a surfactant
commonly used in household detergents, for which water quality criteria
do not currently exist.
Several studies have demonstrated that the criteria for ammonia
developed by EPA in 1999 were not protective of freshwater mussels
(Augspurger et al. 2003, p. 2,571; Newton et al. 2003, pp. 2,559-2,560;
Mummert et al. 2003, pp. 2,548-2,552). However, in 2013 EPA revised its
recommended criteria for ammonia. The new criteria are more stringent
and reflect new toxicity data on sensitive freshwater mollusks (78 FR
52192, August 22, 2013; p. 2). Georgia and Florida have not yet adopted
the new ammonia criteria. Although Florida's next triennial review will
occur in 2015 and Georgia's in 2016, NPDES permits are valid for 5
years, so even after the new criteria are adopted, it could take
several years before facilities must comply with the new limits.
In summary, despite existing authorities such as the Clean Water
Act, pollutants continue to impair the water quality throughout the
current range of the Suwannee moccasinshell. State and Federal
regulatory mechanisms have helped reduce the negative effects of point
source discharges since the 1970s, yet these regulations are difficult
to implement and regulate. While new water quality criteria are being
developed that take into account more sensitive aquatic species, most
criteria currently do not. Thus, we conclude that existing regulatory
mechanisms do not adequately protect the Suwannee moccasinshell.
Factor E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued
Existence
Catastrophic Weather Events
The Gulf coastal region is prone to extreme hydrologic events.
Extended droughts result from persistent high-pressure systems, which
inhibit moisture from the Gulf of Mexico from reaching the region
(Jeffcoat et al. 1991, pp. 163-170). Warm, humid air from the Gulf of
Mexico can produce strong frontal systems and tropical storms resulting
in heavy rainfall events that cause severe flooding (Jeffcoat et al.
1991, pp. 163-170). Although floods and droughts are a natural part of
the hydrologic processes that occur in these river systems, these
events may exacerbate the decline of mussel populations suffering the
effects of other threats. During high flows, flood scour can dislodge
mussels (particularly juveniles) where they may be injured, buried, or
swept into unsuitable habitats, or mussels may be stranded and perish
when flood waters recede (Vannote and Minshall 1982, p. 4,105; Tucker
1996, p. 435; Hastie et al. 2001, pp. 107-115; Peterson et al. 2011,
unpaginated). Flood scour generally is attenuated in larger stream
channels but can radically alter smaller streams and cause mussel
mortality (Hastie et al. 2001, pp. 107-115; Peterson et al. 2011,
unpaginated).
During drought, stream channels may be dewatered entirely, or
become disconnected pools where mussels are exposed to higher water
temperatures, lower dissolved oxygen levels, and predators. Johnson et
al. (2001, p. 6) monitored mussel responses during a severe drought in
2000 in tributaries of the lower Flint River in Georgia, and found that
most mortality occurred when dissolved oxygen levels dropped below 5
mg/L. Increased demand for surface and ground water resources for
irrigation and human consumption during drought can cause drastic
reductions in stream flows and alterations to hydrology (Golladay et
al. 2004, p. 504; Golladay et al. 2007 unpaginated). Extended periods
of drought have occurred in the region during the last two decades
(Torak et al. 2010, p. 47). Substantial declines in mussel diversity
and abundance as a direct result of drought have been documented in
smaller southeastern streams; however, assemblages in larger streams
may be relatively unaffected (Golladay et al. 2004, pp. 494-503; Haag
and Warren 2008, p. 1165). Reduced flows as a result of drought and
water consumption has been cited as a factor negatively affecting
mussels in the
[[Page 60344]]
Suwannee River Basin (FFWCC 2011b, p. 14), and has been identified as a
threat to Suwannee moccasinshell populations in the Withlacoochee and
Santa Fe Rivers (Williams 2015, p. 9)
Contaminant Spills
The linear nature of the Suwannee moccasinshell's habitat and its
reduced range makes it vulnerable to contaminant spills. Spills as a
result of transportation accidents are a constant potential threat to
the species, as numerous highways and railroads traverse the basin.
Spills emanating from industrial, agricultural, and municipal
facilities are a threat as numerous potential sources are present
within the basin, and these spills have occurred in the past. As
discussed under Factor A, spills at the municipal WWTP in Valdosta, GA,
have leaked raw sewage into the Withlacoochee River on multiple
occasions, and the PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. mining operation has had
periodic overflows of effluent ponds. Nearly the entire moccasinshell
population resides within the Suwannee River main channel; therefore, a
spill has the potential to impact a large portion of the population,
depending on the type of contaminant and its concentration, amount, and
location. In addition, because the species has limited ability to
disperse, it may not be able recolonize areas after conditions have
improved.
Climate Change
Our analyses under the Act include consideration of ongoing and
projected changes in climate. The terms ``climate'' and ``climate
change'' are defined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC). ``Climate'' refers to the mean and variability of different
types of weather conditions over time, with 30 years being a typical
period for such measurements, although shorter or longer periods also
may be used (IPCC 2007, p. 78). The term ``climate change'' thus refers
to a change in the mean or variability of one or more measures of
climate (e.g., temperature or precipitation) that persists for an
extended period, typically decades or longer, whether the change is due
to natural variability, human activity, or both (IPCC 2007, p. 78).
Various types of changes in climate can have direct or indirect effects
on species. These effects may be positive, neutral, or negative and
they may change over time, depending on the species and other relevant
considerations, such as the effects of interactions of climate with
other variables (e.g., habitat fragmentation) (IPCC 2007, pp. 8-14, 18-
19). In our analyses, we use our expert judgment to weigh relevant
information, including uncertainty, in our consideration of various
aspects of climate change.
There is a growing concern that climate change may lead to
increased frequency of severe storms and droughts (McLaughlin et al.
2002, p. 6,074; Golladay et al. 2004, p. 504; Cook et al. 2004, p.
1,015). The present conservation status, complex life histories, and
specific habitat requirements of freshwater mussels suggest that they
may be quite sensitive to climate change (Hastie et al. 2003, p. 45).
Specific effects of climate change to mussels, their habitat, and their
fish hosts could include changes in hydrologic and temperature regimes,
the timing and levels of precipitation causing more frequent and severe
floods and droughts, and alien species introductions.
Mussel distributions seem to be closely associated with complex
hydraulic metrics (Morales et al. 2006 pp. 669-673; Zigler et al. 2008,
p. 358) that may be altered by climate change. Mussels are particularly
vulnerable to these changes since they are generally sessile and
restricted in their ability to adjust their range in response to
hydrology and physiochemical alterations mediated by climate change
(Strayer 2008, p. 30). Additionally, increases in temperature and
reductions in flow may lower dissolved oxygen levels in interstitial
habitats, which can be lethal to juveniles (Sparks and Strayer 1998,
pp. 131-133). Effects to mussel populations from these environmental
changes could include reduced abundance and biomass, altered species
composition, and host fish considerations (Galbraith et al. 2010, pp.
1,180-1,182). Since ammonia concentrations may increase with increasing
temperatures and low stream flow (Cherry et al. 2005, p. 378; Cooper et
al. 2005, p. 381), nitrogen-mediated threats may be intensified by
climate change. In addition, saltwater encroachment, as a result of
rising sea levels, has the potential to impact freshwater habitats in
the lower reaches of coastal rivers.
Long-term sea level trends available from the Cedar Key tide gage
suggest the local sea level is rising about 1.8 mm (0.7 inches) per
year based on data from 1914 to 2006 (Thom et al. 2015, pp. 47-48). At
this rate, this is equivalent to 0.14 meters (0.46 feet) by 2100.
However, all indications are that sea level rise (SLR) is accelerating
(Thom et al. 2015, p. 47), and, although there is a range of estimates,
recent studies suggest that global mean sea level will rise at least
0.2 meters (0.66 ft) and no more than 2.0 meters (6.6 ft) by 2100
(Parris et al. 2012, pp. 1-2).
The effects of climate change may amplify stressors currently
impacting the Suwannee moccasinshell, including the prospect of more
frequent and intense droughts and increased temperatures, which would
further reduce flows, increase pollutant toxicity levels, and
exacerbate current problems of low DO and excessive algae growth (see
discussions under Factor A). Saltwater encroachment also has the
potential to impact moccasinshell populations in the lower river,
especially during times of low flow conditions. The variables related
to climate change are complex, and it is difficult to predict all of
the possible ways climate change will affect Suwannee moccasinshell
populations and habitat. However, information available is sufficient
to indicate that climate change is a significant threat to the Suwannee
moccasinshell in the future, as it will likely exacerbate certain
stressors already affecting the species, such as reduced flows and
degraded water quality.
Small Population Size
The Suwannee moccasinshell's reduced range and small population
size may increase its vulnerability to many threats. Species with small
ranges, few populations, and small or declining population sizes are
the most vulnerable to extinction (Primack 2008, p. 137). The effects
of certain environmental pressures, particularly habitat degradation
and loss, catastrophic weather events, and introduced species, are
greater when population size is small (Soul[eacute] 1980, pp. 33, 71;
Primack 2008, pp. 133-137, 152). Suwannee moccasinshell populations are
small and declining and are vulnerable to habitat degradation,
droughts, and competition from the introduced Asian clam. In addition,
its current range is relatively small, consisting of a stream channel
segment of about 103 miles in length (see Distribution and Abundance
discussion).
Nonindigenous Species
The Asian clam (Corbicula fluminea) was first detected in eastern
Gulf drainages in the early 1960s and is presently widespread in the
Suwannee River Basin. Anecdotal observations suggest that, when the
Asian clam became established in other Gulf coast drainages, native
mussel abundance declined drastically (Heard 1975, p. 2; Shelton 1995,
p. 4). It is unknown, however, if the Asian clam competitively excluded
the native mussels, are tolerant of whatever caused
[[Page 60345]]
them to disappear, or, as Haag (2012, p. 371) suggests, the Asian clam
is a poor competitor and can only become dense after a decline in
mussel abundance. Mechanisms by which the Asian clam may negatively
affect mussels include as a competitor for food and space; by ingesting
mussel sperm, glochidia, and newly metamorphosed juveniles; and by
displacing newly metamorphosed mussels from the substrate, causing them
to be washed downstream (Neves and Widlak 1987, p. 6; Leff et al. 1990,
p. 415; Strayer 1999, p. 82; Yeager et al. 2000, pp. 255-257). Although
the specific interaction between the Asian clam and native mussels is
not well understood, enough information exists to conclude that dense
Asian clam populations would negatively affect juvenile mussel survival
(Haag 2012, p. 370). Surveys within the range of the Suwannee
moccasinshell found Asian clam densities varied from relatively low in
some areas to relatively high in other areas (S. Pursifull 2014 pers.
obs.). The introduced Asian clam is negatively affecting the Suwannee
moccasinshell, although we consider this threat to be low at present.
The flathead catfish (Pylodictis olivaris) has been introduced to
the Suwannee River Basin and may be adversely impacting native fish
populations. As discussed in the Habitat and Biology section above, the
Suwannee moccasinshell requires a fish host in order to complete its
life cycle, and the blackbanded darter and the brown darter were found
to serve as larval hosts for the moccasinshell. The flathead catfish is
a large predator native to the central United States, and since its
introduction outside its native range, it has altered the composition
of native fish populations through predation (Boschung and Mayden 2004,
p. 350). Many feeding studies have found that flathead catfish prey
heavily on other fishes, especially sunfishes (Centrarchidae) (Weller
and Robbins 1999, p. 40; Pine et al. 2005, p. 904). One study in the
Flint River system in Georgia found that young-of-the-year flatheads
consumed several fish species including darters (Etheostoma spp.)
(Quinn 1988, p. 88). The loss or reduction of darters, which are
essential during the moccasinshell's parasitic larval stage, would
affect the Suwannee moccasinshell's ability to recruit and disperse.
However, it is not known if the specific darter species needed by this
mussel to reproduce are being predated by introduced flatheads;
therefore, it is difficult for us to evaluate this potential threat at
this time.
In summary, the Suwannee moccasinshell is adversely affected by
other natural or manmade factors including droughts that (along with
groundwater consumption) cause reduced flows, past and future
contaminant spills, and the introduced Asian clam. In addition,
numerous future impacts associated with changing climatic patterns
(increased drought frequency, altered water quality, saltwater
encroachment) are anticipated, some of which could intensify stressors
currently affecting the species, including reduced flows and low DO.
For this reason, problems related to reduced flows and degraded water
quality are expected to increase in the future. Finally, the Suwannee
moccasinshell's small population size and restricted range makes it
more vulnerable to certain threats. Therefore, we find that these
threats, as a whole, pose a significant threat to the Suwannee
moccasinshell, both now and continuing into the future. The Suwannee
moccasinshell may also be affected by flood events, and predation of
its host fishes by introduced flathead catfish. However, we do not have
information indicating that these are currently acting on the species
at this time.
Proposed Determination
We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial
information available regarding the past, present, and future threats
to the Suwannee moccasinshell. The primary reason for the Suwannee
moccasinshell's decline is the degradation of its habitat due to
polluted runoff from agricultural lands, discharges from industrial and
municipal wastewater sources and from mining operations, and decreased
flows due to groundwater extraction and drought (Factor A). These
threats occur throughout its range, but are more intense in the two
tributaries, the Withlacoochee and Santa Fe River systems. In portions
of its range, sedimentation has also impacted its habitat. Other
threats to the species include State and Federal water quality
standards that are inadequate to protect sensitive aquatic organisms
like mussels (Factor D); contaminant spills as a result of
transportation accidents or from industrial, agricultural, and
municipal facilities (Factor E); increased drought frequency as a
result of changing climatic conditions (Factor E); greater
vulnerability to certain threats because of small population size and
range (Factor E); and competition and disturbance from the introduced
Asian clam (Factor E). These threats have resulted in the decline of
the species throughout its range, and pose the highest risk to
populations in the two tributary systems, as evidenced by the species'
decline and possible disappearance in the Withlacoochee River, and its
decline in the Santa Fe River sub-basin. In addition, the species
likely has a limited ability to disperse and, therefore, may not be
able recolonize areas from which it has been extirpated. Currently,
nearly the entire population resides in the middle and lower reach of
the Suwannee River main channel, where the two greatest threats,
pollutants and reduced flows, are attenuated by higher flow volumes.
Therefore, Suwannee moccasinshell populations in the Withlacoochee and
Santa Fe River sub-basins are presently facing threats that are high in
magnitude, and populations in the Suwannee River main channel are
presently facing threats that are moderate in magnitude. Most of these
threats, including reduced flows, pollutants, droughts, and climate
change, are expected to increase in the future.
The Act defines an endangered species as any species that is ``in
danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its
range'' and a threatened species as any species ``that is likely to
become endangered throughout all or a significant portion of its range
within the foreseeable future.'' We find that the Suwannee
moccasinshell is likely to become endangered throughout all or a
significant portion of its range within the foreseeable future based on
the overall severity and immediacy of threats currently impacting the
species. The Suwannee moccasinshell's range and abundance have been
reduced, and its remaining habitat and populations are threatened by a
variety of factors acting in combination to reduce the overall
viability of the species. The risk of becoming endangered is high
because remaining Suwannee moccasinshell populations in the main
channel are small and numerous threats impact those populations.
However, we find that endangered species status is not appropriate,
because despite low population densities and numerous threats, the
populations in the main channel, which are the largest, appear to be
stable, which has been attributed to the threats being attenuated and
the streambed habitat being stable. Therefore, on the basis of the best
available scientific and commercial information, we propose listing the
Suwannee moccasinshell as threatened in accordance with sections 3(6)
and 4(a)(1) of the Act.
[[Page 60346]]
Significant Portion of the Range
Under the Act and our implementing regulations, a species may
warrant listing if it is endangered or threatened throughout all or a
significant portion of its range. Because we have determined that the
Suwannee moccasinshell is threatened throughout all of its range, no
portion of its range can be ``significant'' for purposes of the
definitions of ``endangered species'' and ``threatened species.'' See
the Final Policy on Interpretation of the Phrase ``Significant Portion
of Its Range'' in the Endangered Species Act's Definitions of
``Endangered Species'' and ``Threatened Species'' (79 FR 37578; July 1,
2014).
Critical Habitat
Section 3(5)(A) of the Act defines critical habitat as (i) the
specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the species, at
the time it is listed on which are found those physical or biological
features (I) essential to the conservation of the species and (II)
which may require special management considerations or protection; and
(ii) specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the
species at the time it is listed upon a determination by the Secretary
that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species.
Section 3(3) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1532(3)) also defines the terms
``conserve,'' ``conserving,'' and ``conservation'' to mean to use and
the use of all methods and procedures which are necessary to bring any
endangered species or threatened species to the point at which the
measures provided pursuant to this chapter Act are no longer necessary.
Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as amended, and implementing
regulations (50 CFR 424.12), require that, to the maximum extent
prudent and determinable, the Secretary shall designate critical
habitat at the time the species is determined to be an endangered or
threatened species. Our regulations in title 50 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)) state that the designation of
critical habitat is not prudent when one or both of the following
situations exist:
(1) The species is threatened by taking or other human activity,
and identification of critical habitat can be expected to increase the
degree of threat to the species, or
(2) Such designation of critical habitat would not be beneficial to
the species.
There is currently no imminent threat of take attributed to
collection or vandalism under Factor B for this species, and
identification and mapping of critical habitat is not expected to
initiate any such threat. In the absence of finding that the
designation of critical habitat would increase threats to a species, if
there are any benefits to a critical habitat designation, a finding
that designation is prudent is warranted. Here, the potential benefits
of designation include: (1) Triggering consultation under section 7 of
the Act, in new areas for actions in which there may be a Federal nexus
where it would not otherwise occur because, for example, it is
unoccupied; (2) focusing conservation activities on the most essential
features and areas; (3) providing educational benefits to State or
county governments or private entities; and (4) preventing people from
causing inadvertent harm to the species.
Because we have determined that the designation of critical habitat
will not likely increase the degree of threat to the species and may
provide some measure of benefit, we determine that designation of
critical habitat is prudent for the Suwannee moccasinshell.
Our regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(2)) further state that critical
habitat is not determinable when one or both of the following
situations exists: (1) Information sufficient to perform required
analysis of the impacts of the designation is lacking; or (2) the
biological needs of the species are not sufficiently well known to
permit identification of an area as critical habitat.
Delineation of critical habitat requires, within the geographical
area occupied by the Suwannee moccasinshell, identification of the
physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the
subspecies. While we have significant information on the habitat of the
species, we need more information on biological needs of the species
(i.e., specific habitat features on the landscape) in order to identify
specific areas appropriate for critical habitat designation. In
addition, as we have not determined the areas that may qualify for
designation, the information sufficient to perform a required analysis
of the impacts of the designation is lacking. Accordingly, we find
designation of critical habitat to be not determinable at this time.
Available Conservation Measures
Conservation measures provided to species listed as endangered or
threatened under the Act include recognition, recovery actions,
requirements for Federal protection, and prohibitions against certain
practices. Recognition through listing results in public awareness, and
conservation by Federal, State, Tribal, and local agencies, private
organizations, and individuals. The Act encourages cooperation with the
States and other countries and calls for recovery actions to be carried
out for listed species. The protection required by Federal agencies and
the prohibitions against certain activities are discussed, in part,
below.
The primary purpose of the Act is the conservation of endangered
and threatened species and the ecosystems upon which they depend. The
ultimate goal of such conservation efforts is the recovery of these
listed species, so that they no longer need the protective measures of
the Act. Subsection 4(f) of the Act calls for the Service to develop
and implement recovery plans for the conservation of endangered and
threatened species. The recovery planning process involves the
identification of actions that are necessary to halt or reverse the
species' decline by addressing the threats to its survival and
recovery. The goal of this process is to restore listed species to a
point where they are secure, self-sustaining, and functioning
components of their ecosystems.
Recovery planning includes the development of a recovery outline
shortly after a species is listed and preparation of a draft and final
recovery plan. The recovery outline guides the immediate implementation
of urgent recovery actions and describes the process to be used to
develop a recovery plan. Revisions of the plan may be done to address
continuing or new threats to the species, as new substantive
information becomes available. The recovery plan also identifies
recovery criteria for review of when a species may be ready for
downlisting or delisting, and methods for monitoring recovery progress.
Recovery plans also establish a framework for agencies to coordinate
their recovery efforts and provide estimates of the cost of
implementing recovery tasks. Recovery teams (composed of species
experts, Federal and State agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and
stakeholders) are often established to develop recovery plans. If this
species is listed as proposed, a recovery outline, draft recovery plan,
and the final recovery plan would be made available on our Web site
(http://www.fws.gov/endangered), or from our Panama City Ecological
Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Implementation of recovery actions generally requires the
participation of a broad range of partners, including other Federal
agencies, States, Tribes, nongovernmental organizations, businesses,
and private landowners. Examples of recovery actions include
[[Page 60347]]
habitat restoration (e.g., restoration of native vegetation), research,
captive propagation and reintroduction, and outreach and education. The
recovery of many listed species cannot be accomplished solely on
Federal lands because their range may occur primarily or solely on non-
Federal lands. To achieve recovery of these species requires
cooperative conservation efforts on private, State, and Tribal lands.
If this species is listed, funding for recovery actions will be
available from a variety of sources, including Federal budgets, State
programs, and cost share grants for non-Federal landowners, the
academic community, and nongovernmental organizations. In addition,
pursuant to section 6 of the Act, the States of Florida and Georgia
would be eligible for Federal funds to implement management actions
that promote the protection or recovery of the Suwannee moccasinshell.
Information on our grant programs that are available to aid species
recovery can be found at: http://www.fws.gov/grants.
Although the Suwannee moccasinshell is only proposed for listing
under the Act at this time, please let us know if you are interested in
participating in conservation efforts for this species. Additionally,
we invite you to submit any new information on this species whenever it
becomes available and any information you may have for conservation
planning purposes (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Section 7(a) of the Act requires Federal agencies to evaluate their
actions with respect to any species that is proposed or listed as an
endangered or threatened species and with respect to its critical
habitat, if any is designated. Regulations implementing this
interagency cooperation provision of the Act are codified at 50 CFR
part 402. Section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires Federal agencies to
confer with the Service on any action that is likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of a species proposed for listing or result in
destruction or adverse modification of proposed critical habitat. If a
species is listed subsequently, section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires
Federal agencies to ensure that activities they authorize, fund, or
carry out are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the
species or destroy or adversely modify its critical habitat. If a
Federal action may affect a listed species or its critical habitat, the
responsible Federal agency must enter into consultation with the
Service.
Federal agency actions within the species' habitat that may require
conference or consultation or both as described in the preceding
paragraph include management and any other landscape-altering
activities on Federal lands administered by the Service and the U.S.
Department of Agriculture's (USDA) U.S. Forest Service; issuance of
section 404 Clean Water Act permits by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers; construction and maintenance of roads, highways, or bridges
by the U.S. Department of Transportation's Federal Highway
Administration; and funding assistance for various projects
administered by USDA's Natural Resources Conservation Service and the
Federal Emergency Management Agency.
Under section 4(d) of the Act, the Service has discretion to issue
regulations that we find necessary and advisable to provide for the
conservation of threatened species. The Act and its implementing
regulations set forth a series of general prohibitions and exceptions
that apply to threatened wildlife. The prohibitions of section 9(a)(1)
of the Act, as applied to threatened wildlife and codified at 50 CFR
17.31, make it illegal for any person subject to the jurisdiction of
the United States to take (which includes harass, harm, pursue, hunt,
shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect; or to attempt any of
these) threatened wildlife within the United States or on the high
seas. In addition, it is unlawful to import; export; deliver, receive,
carry, transport, or ship in interstate or foreign commerce in the
course of commercial activity; or sell or offer for sale in interstate
or foreign commerce any listed species. It is also illegal to possess,
sell, deliver, carry, transport, or ship any such wildlife that has
been taken illegally. Certain exceptions apply to employees of the
Service, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National
Marine Fisheries Service, other Federal land management agencies, and
State conservation agencies.
We may issue permits to carry out otherwise prohibited activities
involving threatened wildlife under certain circumstances. Regulations
governing permits are codified at 50 CFR 17.32. With regard to
threatened wildlife, a permit may be issued for the following purposes:
for scientific purposes, to enhance the propagation or survival of the
species and for incidental take in connection with otherwise lawful
activities. There are also certain statutory exemptions from the
prohibitions, which are found in sections 9 and 10 of the Act.
It is our policy, as published in the Federal Register on July 1,
1994 (59 FR 34272), to identify to the maximum extent practicable at
the time a species is listed, those activities that would or would not
constitute a violation of section 9 of the Act. The intent of this
policy is to increase public awareness of the effect of a proposed
listing on proposed and ongoing activities within the range of species
proposed for listing. Based on the best available information, the
following activities may potentially result in a violation of section 9
the Act; this list is not comprehensive:
Activities that the Service believes could potentially harm the
Suwannee moccasinshell and result in ``take,'' include, but are not
limited to:
(1) Unauthorized handling or collecting of the species;
(2) Destruction or alteration of the species' habitat by discharge
of fill material, dredging, snagging, impounding, channelization, or
modification of stream channels or banks;
(3) Discharge of pollutants into a stream or into areas
hydrologically connected to a stream occupied by the species; and
(4) Diversion or alteration of surface or ground water flow.
Questions regarding whether specific activities would constitute a
violation of section 9 of the Act should be directed to the Panama City
Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Required Determinations
Clarity of the Rule
We are required by Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule we publish must:
(1) Be logically organized;
(2) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
(3) Use clear language rather than jargon;
(4) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
(5) Use lists and tables wherever possible.
If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us
comments by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To better help us
revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as possible. For
example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections or paragraphs
that are unclearly written, which sections or sentences are too long,
the sections where you feel lists or tables would be useful, etc.
National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)
We have determined that environmental assessments and
[[Page 60348]]
environmental impact statements, as defined under the authority of the
National Environmental Policy Act, need not be prepared in connection
with listing a species as an endangered or threatened species under the
Act. We published a notice outlining our reasons for this determination
in the Federal Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244).
References Cited
A complete list of references cited in this rulemaking is available
on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov
and upon request from the
Panama City Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authors
The primary authors of this proposed rule are the staff members of
the Panama City Ecological Services Field Office.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we propose to amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter
I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below:
PART 17--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 1531-1544; 4201-4245; unless
otherwise noted.
0
2. In Sec. 17.11(h), add an entry for ``Moccasinshell, Suwannee'' to
the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife in alphabetical order
under CLAMS to read as set forth below:
Sec. 17.11 Endangered and threatened wildlife.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species
Vertebrate
--------------------------------------------------------
population where Critical
Special
Historic
range endangered or Status When listed habitat
rules
Common name Scientific name
threatened
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* *
* * * * *
Clams
* *
* * * * *
Moccasinshell, Suwannee.......... Medionidus walkeri.. U.S.A. (FL,
GA).... NA................. T XX NA
NA
* *
* * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*
* * * *
Dated: September 9, 2015.
Stephen Guertin,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-25280 Filed 10-5-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P