**BIOLOGICAL OPINION**

**ON THE IMPACTS OF FOREST MANAGEMENT AND**

**OTHER ACTIVITIES TO THE INDIANA BAT**

**ON THE**

**CHEROKEE NATIONAL FOREST**

**TENNESSEE**

**Prepared by:**

**James C. Widlak**

**Ecological Services Field Office**

**446 Neal Street**

**Cookeville, Tennessee**

**January 1997**

**INTRODUCTION**

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed the biological
assessment for the forest-wide activities and their potential impacts to
the **Indiana bat (*Myotis* *sodalis*)** on the **Cherokee National
Forest** (CNF) located in **Carter, Cocke, Greene, Johnson, McMinn,
Monroe, Polk, Sullivan, Unicoi, and Washington Counties, Tennessee**.
Your September 4, 1996, request for formal consultation was received on
September 10, 1996. This document represents the Service=s biological
opinion on the effects of those actions on the federally endangered
Indiana bat in accordance with Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act
(ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

0 [Consultation History]{.underline}

Since it was listed as an endangered species, the Indiana bat has
presented Service biologists with unique problems with regard to Section
7 consultation. Until recently, little was known about the summer
habitat requirements of this species other than the fact that small
maternity colonies occurred in mature, primarily riparian, forest
habitat. New information regarding summer habitat, evidence indicating
that some Indiana bats may migrate much shorter distances than
originally thought, and the apparent wide dispersal of individuals
emerging from hibernation makes consultation and the development of
recommendations for protective measures problematic since any tract of
mature forest within the Indiana bat=s known range can now be considered
to contain potential maternity habitat, and any upland forest area
provides potential foraging habitat. Consequently, areas such as the
Cherokee National Forest which were once thought to have little
potential to contain Indiana bat summer colonies (because the bats that
hibernated in nearby caves were thought to migrate long distances to
summer maternity sites) are now considered to contain potentially
high-quality summer roosting and foraging habitat.

On April 4, 1996, Lee Barclay, the Service=s Cookeville Field Office
(CFO) Field Supervisor, and Jim Widlak, CFO Endangered Species
Specialist, hosted a meeting with Anne Zimmermann, Cherokee National
Forest Deputy Forest Supervisor; Laura Mitchell, CNF Forest Wildlife
Biologist; and Sam Brocato, CNF Timber/Wildlife/Fisheries Staff Officer
to discuss new information regarding summer habitat use by the Indiana
bat and the potential impacts that various management and development
activities conducted on the CNF might have on the species and its
habitat. At that time the Service indicated that, although there are no
current records for maternity or summer Indiana bat colonies on the CNF,
the CNF does contain suitable habitat for the species which may be used
by Indiana bats emerging from hibernation in a cave on the adjacent
Great Smoky Mountains National Park and other caves located to the west
of the CNF. The Service recommended that future biological evaluations
prepared by CNF biologists include an assessment of impacts to the
Indiana bat, and that the CNF initiate a programmatic formal
consultation with regard to its forest management activities as well as
other actions that alter or remove mature forest habitats. On June 19,
1996, Jim Widlak met with Laura Mitchell to discuss formal consultation
procedures and information needed by the Service to develop a biological
opinion. On October 9, 1996, Jim Widlak met with Sam Brocato, Laura
Mitchell, and Mary Dodson (CNF Zone Biologist) to discuss additional
information requested by the Service and incidental take issues.

This biological opinion is based on information provided in the
September 3, 1996, biological assessment; the meetings of April 4, June
19, and October 9, 1996; and other sources of information. A complete
administrative record of this consultation is on file in the Cookeville
Field Office, 446 Neal Street, Cookeville, Tennessee 38501; telephone
615/528-6481; fax 615/528-7075.

**BIOLOGICAL OPINION**

0 [Project Description]{.underline}

This biological opinion addresses a variety of actions and activities
carried out or approved by the Cherokee National Forest on lands under
its jurisdiction. These activities are implemented in accordance with
the provisions contained in the **Cherokee National Forest=s Land and
Resource Management Plan.**

Beginning in Fiscal Year 1997, and extending through the date of
completion of the CNF=s Land and Resource Management Plan revision, the
CNF plans to conduct a variety of timber harvest activities that could
impact potential Indiana bat summer habitat, including foraging and
maternity roosting habitat. Specific timber harvest actions include
regeneration timber sales (82 percent of projected activities), firewood
and salvage sales (8 percent), routine maintenance/permitting of small
clearings (6 percent), road construction (3 percent), and herbicide
application that could directly affect potential Indiana bat roost trees
(1 percent).

The total projected annual harvest on the CNF is estimated to be
approximately 2,000 acres, accomplished by the following methods:

**[Method Acres Percent]{.underline}**

Two-aged shelterwood 1,120 56

Clearcut 300 15

Thinning 200 10

Group Selection 200 10

Single Tree Selection 160 8

[Seed Tree 20 1]{.underline}

Of the 2,000 total acres harvested, the CNF in its biological assessment
estimates that approximately 1,300 acres of timber, containing a
predominance of large-diameter hardwood trees, will be removed or
disturbed by other activities (e.g., utility easements) annually. Review
of the projected acreages of oak/hickory (460 acres), mixed
hardwood/pine (400 acres), and cove hardwood (200 acres) habitat to be
harvested, however, indicates that only 1,060 acres of potential Indiana
bat roosting and foraging habitat will be affected by timber sale
activities on the CNF each year. This is estimated to comprise 53
percent of the total annual harvest and 0.2 percent of the total CNF
land base.

The objectives of salvage and firewood sales are to remove dead timber
along CNF roads and to clear CNF roads of downed trees across roads
after tornados, heavy storms (snow, ice), floods, and wind storms.
Actions included in these categories include collection of dead standing
and downed timber along roads on the CNF, and removal of trees that are
blocking CNF roads or those classed as hazard trees. These actions are
restricted to Forest Service roadways. While conducting these
activities, permitees are not authorized to operate vehicles off the
road, and they are not permitted to conduct firewood collection
activities along roads prohibited from such activities. Copies of maps
indicating roads along which firewood collection is authorized and
prohibited are issued to all permitees when permits are issued.

The primary purpose of the CNF road management program is to expand use
of existing corridors rather than to establish new roadways; however,
the CNF will continue to construct new roads consistent with established
forest objectives. There are currently 1,486 miles of Forest Development
Roads on the CNF, and the nine-year average road
construction/reconstruction mileage is estimated to be 46 miles per
year. New road construction on the CNF has a nine-year average of
approximately 19 miles per year. Current proposals call for maintenance
of the most recent two-year average of new construction (i.e., 10.5
mi./yr.), less than one-half of which are likely to be built in hardwood
or hardwood/pine forest habitat. Total potential Indiana bat habitat
likely to be affected by road construction activities is estimated to be
40 acres per year.

The CNF utilizes herbicides to accomplish several objectives. Herbicides
are infrequently applied to control species composition and density of
trees in particular stands, to implement non-commercial thinning, to
prepare a site prior to planting, or to release desirable overstory tree
species from competition. Treatment is also used to control undesirable
exotic tree species, to create snags or to release mast-producing trees,
to remove undesirable species that compete with rare/endangered plant
species, or to maintain desirable hydrologic regimes or community
composition in high elevation balds and bogs. Acreage on the CNF
containing potential Indiana bat roosting, foraging, and maternity
habitat that is treated annually with herbicides for the above-stated
purposes is estimated to be less than 50 acres. Herbicides used are only
those which have been evaluated, approved and included in the final
environmental impact statement for Vegetation Management in the
Appalachian Mountains. These chemicals are applied by streamline bark
treatment (basal stem), individual stem injection (cut surface), and
chainsaw slashdown and stump spray. Herbicides used include Imazapyr,
Glyphosate, and Triclopyr.

Another category of work conducted on the CNF occurs during the course
of normal operations and routine activities. These actions result in
creation of small forest openings which maintain and maximize benefits
of linear openings to wildlife, to maintain safe public access within
the CNF, to minimize damage to power transmission and utility lines, and
to allow for reasonable use of privately owned inholdings within the CNF
proclamation boundary. Activities included in this category are the
creation of wildlife openings which release cool or warm season grasses
from shading by woody vegetation; maintenance of road or powerline
rights-of-way (i.e., removal of hazard trees); maintenance of recreation
areas or trails; and permitting of clearing of private road/driveway or
utility line easements. Approximately twenty permits are issued annually
for the latter activity which affect approximately 40 acres. Recreation
area expansion, trail construction, and other routine recreational
developments affect approximately 25 acres per year.

To avoid impacts to Indiana bat hibernating and maternity colonies, the
CNF will coordinate with the Service to develop and implement a plan for
a systematic survey of caves on the CNF. If caves are found on the CNF
that contain hibernating colonies of Indiana bats, the CNF will explore
opportunities to prevent adverse effects to the hibernacula and the
hibernating bat colonies by evaluating the need to construct cave gates
or to acquire lands having potential hibernacula. As part of the project
evaluation process, the CNF will provide the Service with copies of
environmental assessments to demonstrate how forest-wide standards and
guidelines are being applied to specific projects. The CNF has
coordinated with the Service to modify its cutting unit cards to reflect
implementation of existing Standards and Guidelines contained in the
CNF=s Land and Resource Management Plan which minimize impacts to
potential roosting and foraging habitat; copies of these cards will be
provided to the Service after each timber sale is completed. In
addition, the CNF will institute an employee incentive award to those
employees providing information leading to discovery of endangered bats
on the CNF. The CNF will continue to implement Forest Service Manual
2631.3, R8 Supplement 36, which requires that snags be left at a rate of
one per two acres. In compliance with the Vegetation Management in the
Appalachian Mountains Environmental Impact Statement, the CNF will,
during site preparation, retain active and potential den tree clumps at
a minimum of one-half of an acre per 20 acres, if not provided in
adjacent stands. An average of at least 2 standing dead snags per acre
will be retained, in the form of large hardwood trees (larger than 12
inches dbh) where possible. Appropriate treatments will be used to
create snags where natural snags are lacking. Snags will not
intentionally be removed from sale units, however, snags determined to
be immediate safety hazards (e.g., those leaning over a road or trail or
public road that could fall at any time) can be removed (since all trees
classified as hazard trees are considered to be immediate threats to
public safety, all snags classified as hazards will be removed).
Foremost, the CNF will continue to implement and will strictly enforce
implementation of the existing standards and guidelines contained in its
Land and Resource Management Plan.

0 [Background Information]{.underline}

Indiana bat

The Indiana bat is a medium-sized member of the genus *Myotis*. Head and
body length of individuals ranges from 41 to 49 millimeters, and forearm
length is 35 to 41 millimeters (USFWS 1983). It is similar to the little
brown bat, but differs in several morphological characters. The Indiana
bat was listed as an endangered species on March 11, 1967. It is a
monotypic species that is known to occur in much of the eastern half of
the United States. Large hibernating populations are known to exist in
Indiana, Kentucky, and Missouri; however, smaller populations and
individual records are also known from Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut,
Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan,
Mississippi, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma,
Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin
(USFWS 1983). Bat Cave in Carter County, Kentucky; Coach Cave in
Edmonson County, Kentucky; White Oak Blowhole Cave in Blount County,
Tennessee; the Blackball Mine in LaSalle County, Illinois; Big Wyandotte
Cave, Crawford County, Indiana; Ray=s Cave, Greene County, Indiana; Cave
021, Crawford County, Missouri; Cave 009, Franklin County, Missouri;
Pilot Knob Mine, Iron County, Missouri; Bat Cave, Shannon County,
Missouri; Cave 029, Washington County, Missouri; and Hellhole Cave,
Pendleton County, West Virginia, have been designated as critical
habitat for the Indiana bat.

In addition to White Oak Blowhole Cave, which is located on the Great
Smoky Mountains National Park approximately 16 miles from the CNF, there
are a number of other caves in Tennessee that support hibernating
colonies of Indiana bats. Hubbard=s Cave is in Warren County
approximately 70 miles from the CNF; Nickajack Cave is located in Marion
County approximately 55 miles from the CNF; Whiteoak Sink is in Blount
County approximately 16 miles from the CNF; Pearson Cave is located in
Hawkins County approximately 40 miles from the CNF; and Camps Gulf Cave
is located in Van Buren County approximately 60 miles from the CNF.
These caves all contain hibernating colonies of Indiana bats numbering
from approximately 100 to several thousands of individuals. To date,
there are no known records for Indiana bat maternity colonies in
Tennessee, and the CNF has no documented records for either summer or
winter colonies. However, the CNF is well within the migration range of
the Indiana bat colonies in the above-named caves and it contains
substantial acreages of suitable habitat that could potentially be used
by females during the maternity season.

Although Indiana bat populations are reported to be stable or increasing
in some portions of the species= range (e.g., the Indiana population),
numbers have continued to decline in most areas of Kentucky; and the
Missouri population has undergone a precipitous decline over the past
five years (USFWS 1983; John MacGregor, U.S. Forest Service, personal
communication). Causes of decline are not presently known and have
continued despite successful efforts to protect all of the known major
hibernacula (i.e., gating, fencing, etc.).

Male and female Indiana bats hibernate in limestone caves that provide
specific climatic conditions; preferred hibernacula have stable winter
temperatures below 10 degrees Celsius (optimal temperature is 4 to 8
degrees Celsius) and relative humidities above 74 percent. Few caves or
mine shafts provide these conditions; therefore, approximately 85
percent of the species hibernates in only seven caves or abandoned mine
shafts. Prior to hibernation, Indiana bats undergo Aswarming,@ an
activity consisting of congregation of bats around the hibernacula. The
swarming bats fly into and out of the cave, but roost in trees outside.
Swarming continues for several weeks, during which time the bats
replenish fat reserves prior to hibernation (USFWS 1983). Depending on
local weather conditions, swarming may continue through October, or
longer. In addition to replenishing fat reserves, mating occurs during
swarming, and the females enter directly into hibernation after mating.
Males remain active for some time after mating, but all males are
usually hibernating by late November (USFWS 1983). Indiana bats
hibernate in dense clusters, ranging in size from 300 to approximately
500 individuals per square foot (Clawson et al. 1980).

During the summer, Indiana bats utilize two distinct types of habitat.
Females emerge from hibernation first, generally in late March or early
April, followed by the males. Although most hibernating colonies leave
the hibernacula by late April, some males spend the summer in the
hibernacula. Those leaving the hibernacula migrate varying distances to
their summer habitats. Males generally spend the summer days in caves,
but individuals may roost for several days under loose bark or in
cavities of trees after nightly foraging activity.

Females become pregnant soon after emergence from hibernation and form
small maternity colonies under loose bark or in cavities of mature trees
in riparian or upland forest. Each female gives birth to a single young
in late June or early July and the young become volant in approximately
one month. By late August, the maternity colonies begin to disperse
(MacGregor, personal communication). The maternity site generally
consists of the actual maternity roost tree and several alternate
roosts. Studies have shown that adults in the maternity colony may use
as few as two, to as many as 27 alternate roosts (Humphrey et al. 1977;
Gardner et al. 1991a; Callahan 1993). These alternate roosts are also
large, mature trees (49 to 56 centimeters dbh, with 7 to 12 percent bark
coverage \[Callahan 1993\]) located in clusters within an area generally
less than three kilometers (ranging from 0.81 to 1.48 kilometers) from
the maternity tree (Callahan 1993). Snags (i.e., dead trees) exposed to
direct solar radiation were found to be used most frequently by Indiana
bats as maternal roosts, followed by snags not fully exposed to solar
radiation and live trees not fully exposed (Callahan 1993).

Until recently, most documented Indiana bat maternity colonies were
located in riparian or floodplain forest (Humphrey et al. 1977), but
recent studies and survey results indicate that mature upland forest may
provide important maternity habitat and that female Indiana bats exhibit
relatively strong loyalty to summer roosting and foraging habitat
(Bowles 1981; Gardner et al. 1991a, 1991b). It was also found that
Indiana bats occupy distinct home ranges during the summer (Gardner et
al. 1990). Home range sizes range from approximately 70 acres
(nonreproductive juvenile males) to over 525 acres (post-lactating adult
females). Roosts occupied by individuals ranged from 0.33 mile to over
1.6 miles from preferred foraging habitat, but are generally within 2
kilometers of water (e.g., stream, lake, pond, natural or manmade
water-filled depression).

A habitat suitability index model was recently developed for the Indiana
bat (Romme et al. 1995) which identifies nine variables that comprise
the components of summer habitat for the species. The model was
developed for use in southern Indiana, but may also be applicable in
other areas within the species= range. Five variables considered
important for roosting habitat include the amount of overstory canopy,
diameter of overstory trees, density of potential live roost trees,
density of snags, and the amount of understory cover. Variables
comprising foraging habitat include the amount of overstory canopy,
percentage of trees in the 5 to 12 centimeter dbh class, distance to
water, and percentage of the area with forest cover. The model also
classifies species of trees that may provide roosts (living trees and/or
dead snags) for Indiana bats. Class 1 trees include:

Silver maple Shagbark hickory Shellbark hickory

Bitternut hickory Green ash White ash

Eastern cottonwood Red oak Post oak

White oak Slippery elm American elm

Class 2 trees include sugar maple, shingle oak, and sassafras. Class 3
trees are all other hardwood species not included in the other two
classes.

In Southern Indiana where the habitat suitability index model was
developed, optimal Indiana bat roosting habitat consists of forested
areas with 60 to 80 percent overstory canopy, and overstory trees with
mean diameters at breast height (dbh) of 40 centimeters in densities of
40 or more per hectare; density of snags is 15 per hectare. Optimal
understory cover (i.e., from 2 meters above the forest floor to the
bottom of the overstory canopy) is estimated to be 35 percent or less.
In foraging habitat, optimal overstory canopy cover is 50 to 70 percent,
with 40 percent or less of the understory trees in the 5 to 12 inch dbh
size class, open water within one kilometer, and at least 30 percent of
the general area forested (Romme 1995). Although optimal values for
roosting and foraging habitat were developed for Indiana bat habitats in
southern Indiana, they may be applicable to habitats on the Cherokee
National Forest.

A number of factors have been identified that have likely contributed to
the decline of the Indiana bat throughout its range, the most serious of
which is human disturbance of hibernating bats and vandalism. Human
entry into a hibernaculum during the winter causes the bats to awaken.
Each time a bat awakens, it uses some portion of the stored fat reserves
it has accumulated. Frequent disturbance causes the bats to use up all
of their stored fat reserves. It would then be necessary for the bats to
leave the cave to search for food. If this occurred too early in the
year, they would likely die of starvation. Vandalism is also known to
have caused high mortality of bat populations. Many bat colonies have
been deliberately destroyed because these animals are often viewed by
the public as nuisances or threats to human health.

Other causes of decline of Indiana bat populations are natural
disasters, alteration of habitat, and pesticide poisoning. Caves
occupied by Indiana bats (and other bat species) occasionally flood or
collapse, killing from a few to thousands of bats. Timber harvest, water
quality degradation, stream channelization, and other actions can result
in destruction or alteration of habitat (although some methods of timber
harvest may actually improve conditions in bat foraging habitat). It is
not currently known how long or how far female Indiana bats will search
to find new roosting habitat if traditional habitats have been destroyed
or rendered unsuitable, however, this effort likely places additional
stress on the females at a time when they are already expending
significant amounts of energy.

The impacts of pesticide use on Indiana bats have not been studied, but
pesticides are thought to have contributed to the decline of other
insectivorous species of bats. The most likely route for adverse impacts
to these bats from pesticides is via biomagnification through the food
chain. Because they roost in trees, it is possible that the use of
pesticides could directly cause mortality to single male, female, or
entire maternity colonies of Indiana bats resulting from direct
application. Reduction in insect populations resulting from pesticide
use could have indirect impacts on the Indiana bat.

Indiscriminate collecting, handling, and banding of individuals by
biologists is also a likely cause of decline in bat population numbers,
including Indiana bats. During the winter, these activities cause
hibernating bats to awaken and utilize stored fat reserves; during the
summer, they disturb sensitive maternity colonies. Although gates and
fencing are designed to protect bat colonies, poorly designed and
installed cave gates alter air flow into caves, altering the climatic
conditions and rendering the cave unsuitable. Commercialization of caves
results in disturbance to summer or hibernating bat colonies, and
impoundment of streams often results in permanent or unseasonal flooding
of caves.

0 [Environmental Baseline]{.underline}

The Cherokee National Forest is located along the Tennessee/North
Carolina border and covers 632,348 acres in eastern Tennessee. The
northern boundary of the CNF is located on the Tennessee/Virginia line,
and the southern boundary is on the Tennessee/Georgia line. An
additional 327 acres in Ashe County, North Carolina, and 453 acres in
Washington County, Virginia, are managed by the CNF. The CNF is
comprised of six ranger districts, separated by the Great Smoky
Mountains National Park (three districts north of the Park and three to
the south). The majority of the CNF lies in the Blue Ridge Physiographic
Province, with a small section on the western side in the Ridge and
Valley Physiographic Province. Topography on the CNF is characterized by
steep slopes, narrow ridges, and narrow stream valleys; elevations range
from approximately 700 feet to over 6,000 feet above sea level.

There are approximately 750 miles of perennial streams on the Cherokee
National Forest, which produce approximately 14.2 million acre-feet of
water annually. Approximately 23,400 acres of riparian forest are
located adjacent to these streams. In addition, the CNF borders on large
portions of five major Tennessee Valley Authority reservoirs. Several
smaller impoundments, and 50 small ponds (each approximately 20 acres in
size), are scattered throughout the CNF.

Current data on forest stand conditions maintained by the CNF (i.e.,
Continuous Inventory of Stand Condition) indicates that approximately
212,960 acres (34 percent) contain hardwood or hardwood/pine, including
trees 41 to 80 years of age (i.e., 9 to 16 inches in diameter at breast
height \[dbh\]). Approximately 120,250 acres (19 percent) contain
hardwood or hardwood/pine with trees greater than 80 years of age (i.e.,
greater than 16 inches dbh). Of the total acreage on the CNF, 278,000
acres have been designated as unsuitable for timber harvest, and 180,040
acres have been identified as possible old growth forest.

Of the 356,000 acres of the CNF designated as suitable for forest
management activities, the average annual timber harvest of hardwood and
mixed hardwood stands is approximately 1,200 acres. Average stand
harvest size is 24 acres. Currently, regeneration is accomplished using
primarily the two-aged shelterwood method, leaving a typical residual
basal area of 15 to 35 square feet per acre, or approximately 40 to 60
trees per acre in a size class equal to or greater than 9 inches dbh.

The projected average annual natural mortality of trees on the CNF is
estimated to be 1,235 acres of dead/dying trees per year. These trees
are clustered primarily in areas that have been damaged by ice, snow, or
wind.

Approximately 12,664 acres (2 percent) on the CNF have been designated
as potential bear den old growth. This designation has resulted in some
of the lands which were designated as suitable for timber management
being re-designated as unsuitable. To achieve the black bear population
goal on the CNF, these areas were designated in: 30 percent white
oak/red oak/ hickory, 20 percent yellow poplar/white oak/red oak, 10
percent chestnut oak, 8.5 percent chestnut oak/scarlet oak, 7.8 percent
cove hardwoods/white pine/hemlock, 4.1 percent chestnut oak/scarlet
oak/yellow pine, and 3.2 percent upland hardwoods/white pine.

Karst formations are limited on the CNF, and are generally concentrated
along the extreme western edge of the CNF. Three known caves on the CNF
have been surveyed for possible use by bats. Two of the caves were found
to contain colonies of non-endangered bat species. A number of abandoned
mines are also known to exist on the CNF, and additional caves may exist
on the forest that have not yet been surveyed. The CNF has agreed to
conduct systematic surveys of caves on CNF lands to determine if summer
(bachelor) or winter colonies of Indiana bats are present.

Current forest-wide standards and guidelines for timber management
contained in the CNF=s Land and Resource Management Plan provide that 20
percent of each compartment within the CNF=s harvestable lands be in the
61+ year age class (all forest types); 9 percent in the 61+ year age
class (upland hardwood type); 4 percent of cove and upland hardwoods in
the 91+ year age class; and 5 percent of cove and upland hardwoods in
the 61+ year class. They require contractors to protect a minimum of
one-half of an acre of den tree clump per each 20-acre regeneration cut,
and at least two snags per acre (a snag is defined as a tree that is
dead or 50 percent dead), preferably large diameter hardwood snags.
These clumps are marked prior to letting of a sale contract.

Standards and guidelines have also been developed for each of the five
actively managed Management Areas identified on the CNF, which cover
approximately 80 percent of the CNF land base. On two of these areas,
the standards and guidelines emphasize late successional wildlife
species and thus maintenance of more mature forest (i.e., each
compartment in these areas is required to maintain certain percentages
of trees in the 20 to 91 year age class). Two areas emphasize early
successional wildlife species, but require that 25 percent of each
compartment be in the 20 year age class or older (one area requires that
41 percent of each compartment be in the 31 year age class or older).
The remaining management area addresses aquatic and riparian ecosystems.
Standards and guidelines for this area require maintenance of filter and
shade strips along roads, skid trails, log landings, perennial streams,
and other ground-disturbing activities. The width of these protective
strips is dependent upon the slope and erosion hazard at any particular
site.

In addition to cave surveys, CNF biologists have conducted additional
small mammal surveys. Surveys were conducted between May 1990 and June
1991 on the CNF=s northern districts, and between July 1991 and June
1992 on the southern districts to determine the distribution and status
of small mammals on the CNF (Harvey et al. 1991, 1992). Forty-one net
nights of mist netting for bats (32 on the southern districts and 9 on
the northern districts) were completed as part of these surveys. Species
collected during these surveys, and another five-night netting effort on
the Tellico Ranger District in August 1996, included hoary bats, eastern
red bats, northern long-eared bats, eastern pipistrelles, and little
brown bats. Another survey conducted in 1984 resulted in the first
capture of a Seminole bat in Tennessee (Kennedy et al. 1984). Also, John
MacGregor (personal communication) reported evidence of usage by bats of
a dark zone under a bridge on the Tellico District in 1996.

The CNF has consulted with the Service on numerous actions, primarily
for timber sales. Consultations were also conducted with regard to
development of various types of recreational facilities, repair of a
flood-damaged road along Citico Creek, introduction of bald eagles at
South Holston Lake, and construction of radio towers. These actions
could have affected the Indiana bat, but because no records exist for
this species on the CNF to date, this species was not considered in
project planning. Since June 1996, however, CNF biologists have included
evaluations of potential impacts of various activities to the Indiana
bat during preparation of biological evaluations because new information
about the summer habitat requirements of the species indicates that the
CNF contains suitable habitat that is potentially used by Indiana bats
for roosting and foraging.

0 [Direct/Indirect Effects]{.underline}

Forest management activities and other actions conducted on the CNF
could potentially have direct and indirect adverse effects on the
Indiana bat; however, some activities may result in beneficial impacts.
Although direct mortality to individuals might occur as a result of
cutting trees with maternity colonies or individually roosting bats
present, this effect is considered to be highly unlikely because of the
size and dispersal of Indiana bat maternity colonies, and the number of
potentially suitable roost trees present on the CNF. It should be noted
that timber harvest may improve conditions in areas potentially used by
the Indiana bat as foraging habitat. The habitat suitability index model
developed by Romme et al. (1995) indicates that optimal overstory canopy
cover for Indiana bat foraging habitat is 50 to 70 percent. As canopy
cover approaches 100 percent, suitability declines slightly, possibly
because the bats can not maneuver as well in dense cover. Therefore,
thinning of stands having more than 70 percent overstory canopy cover
could increase their suitability as foraging areas for Indiana bats.

Direct effects could also result from human activity during the winter
in caves containing hibernating Indiana bats. This activity awakens the
bats and causes them to use up some portion of the energy reserves that
they have stored for the winter. Mortality would occur if the bats
emerge from hibernation before insects were available.

Forest management activities and other activities on the CNF are far
more likely to have indirect adverse effects to the Indiana bat as a
result of destruction or alteration of the species= habitat. Removal of
mature forest habitat, if conducted without consideration for the
Indiana bat, may reduce its suitability as roosting or foraging habitat
for the Indiana bat as a result of removal of roosting sites and
excessive opening of the canopy. The subsequent growth of new vegetation
may, depending upon its capacity to support insect populations, provide
marginal or sub-optimal foraging habitat until the understory becomes
too dense for bats to maneuver through. As the harvest site succeeds
back to older-aged forest, its suitability as Indiana bat habitat
increases, however, this process may take 30 years or more. Direct and
indirect impacts to Indiana bats may be tempered to some degree,
however, if adequate roosting and foraging habitats are available in the
surrounding area.

Herbicide use will not have direct effects on Indiana bats because of
the methods of treatment described\--i.e., direct application to
individual stumps, basal stem treatment, hack and squirt, and cut
surface treatment. These application methods target individual stems and
do not result in general broadcasting of herbicides to the surrounding
area.

0 [Cumulative Effects]{.underline}

Cumulative effects include the effects of future State, local, or
private actions that are reasonably certain to occur in the action area
considered in this biological opinion. Future Federal actions that are
unrelated to the proposed action are not considered in this section
because they require separate consultation pursuant to Section 7 of the
ESA.

This biological opinion only addresses activities authorized, funded, or
carried out on the Cherokee National Forest, lands which are under the
jurisdiction of the U.S. Forest Service. Any future Federal, State,
local, or private actions that are reasonably certain to occur in the
action area considered in this biological opinion will either be carried
out by, or will require a permit from, the Forest Service and will
require compliance with Section 7 of the ESA. Therefore, cumulative
effects, as defined by the Endangered Species Act, will not occur.

0 [Conclusion]{.underline}

After reviewing the current status of the Indiana bat, the environmental
baseline for the action area, the effects of forest management and other
activities on the Cherokee National Forest, and the potential for
cumulative effects, it is the Service=s biological opinion that forest
management and other activities authorized, funded, or carried out on
the Cherokee National Forest, as proposed, are not likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of the Indiana bat, and are not likely to
destroy or adversely modify designated critical habitat for this
species. In the **Cookeville Office work area (Kentucky and Tennessee),
critical habitat for the Indiana bat has been designated at White Oak
Blowhole Cave in Blount County, Tennessee; Bat Cave in Carter County,
Kentucky; and Coach Cave in Edmonson County, Kentucky. The proposed
action does not affect any of those areas,** therefore, no destruction
or adverse modification of those critical habitats will occur as a
result of CNF management activities.

**INCIDENTAL TAKE**

Sections 4(d) and 9 of the ESA, as amended, prohibit taking (harass,
harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or
attempt to engage in any such conduct) of listed species of fish or
wildlife without a special exemption. Harm is further defined to include
significant habitat modification or degradation that results in death or
injury to listed species by significantly impairing behavioral patterns
such as breeding, feeding, or sheltering. Harass is defined as actions
that create the likelihood of injury to listed species to such an extent
as to significantly disrupt normal behavioral patterns which include,
but are not limited to, breeding, feeding, or sheltering. Incidental
take is any take of listed animal species that results from , but is not
the purpose of, carrying out an otherwise lawful activity conducted by
the Federal agency or the applicant. Under the terms of Section 7(b)(4)
and Section 7(o)(2), taking that is incidental to and not intended as
part of the agency action is not considered a prohibited taking provided
that such taking is in compliance with the terms and conditions of this
incidental take statement.

The measures described below are non-discretionary, and must be
implemented by the Forest Service (Cherokee National Forest) so that
they become binding conditions of any grant or permit issued to
applicants or contractors, as appropriate, in order for the exemption in
Section 7(o)(2) to apply. The Forest Service (Cherokee National Forest)
has a continuing duty to regulate the activities covered by this
incidental take statement. If the Forest Service (Cherokee National
Forest) (1) fails to require applicants or contractors to adhere, or
itself fails to adhere, to the terms and conditions of the incidental
take statement through enforceable terms that are added to permit or
grant documents, and/or (2) fails to retain oversight to ensure
compliance with these terms and conditions, the protective coverage of
Section 7(o)(2) may lapse.

0 [Amount or Extent of Incidental Take]{.underline}

The Service can not, at this time, anticipate how many Indiana bats
could be taken as a result of forest management activities or other
actions implemented on the CNF. However, any incidental take of Indiana
bats is expected to be in the form of killing, harming, or harassing.
Cutting trees during timber harvest or in preparation for other
activities may result in mortality to female and young Indiana bats, or
individually roosting Indiana bats, if a particular tree which is cut
contains a maternity colony or roosting bats. If the bats are not
killed, the colony (or roosting individuals) will be forced to find an
alternate roost. Clearing an area for road construction or recreational
development may also result in alteration of roosting or feeding by the
bats\--i.e., the bats may have to fly farther to forage, seek alternate
roosts, or they may be forced to abandon the area altogether. Treatment
of areas with herbicides is not expected to result in incidental take of
Indiana bats, provided that the methods of application described in the
biological assessment are the only application methods used. If methods
other than those described are to be used (e.g., aerial application,
spraying from ground-mounted equipment, etc.), the Service should be
contacted to determine if additional measures are needed to minimize the
potential for incidental take.

The Fish and Wildlife Service anticipates incidental take of Indiana
bats will be difficult to detect for the following reasons: Indiana bats
are relatively small and they form small colonies (i.e., 50 or fewer to
100 or more individuals) under loose bark or in cavities of trees, or a
particular tree may harbor a single roosting individual. Unless every
individual tree that contains suitable roosting habitat is inspected by
a knowledgeable biologist before timber harvest begins, it would be
impossible to know if a maternity colony or roosting Indiana bats are
present in an area proposed for harvest (although a biologist with
experience in surveying for bats could determine if a roosting bat or
colony is present in a tree, inspecting individual trees is not a
practical survey method and is not recommended as a means to avoid
incidental take). It would be equally impossible to evaluate the amount
of incidental take of Indiana bats unless a post-harvest inspection is
made of every tree that had been cut within a few hours of harvest.
However, the following level of take of this listed species can be
anticipated by loss of suitable roost trees or foraging habitat. The
Service believes that if a maternity colony or roosting individuals are
present in an area proposed for timber harvest or other disturbance,
loss of suitable roosting and/or foraging habitat would result in
incidental take of Indiana bats. Although the Service can not estimate
the amount of incidental take, **it is estimated that 1,300 acres of
potentially suitable Indiana bat habitat could be lost per year on the
CNF; all Indiana bats that might roost or form maternity colonies in
that area could be incidentally taken. This level of take may be offset
to some degree, however, because areas surrounding those harvested
likely provide suitable alternate roosting and foraging habitat.** It is
estimated that approximately 9,000 acres on the CNF reach the 81 to
90-year age class annually (Sam Brocato, Cherokee National Forest,
personal communication).

0 [Effect of the Take]{.underline}

In the accompanying biological opinion, the Service determined that
incidental take of Indiana bats on the CNF is not likely to result in
jeopardy to the Indiana bat or destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat. However, if the authorized level of incidental take of
Indiana bats is exceeded, the Service will conclude that the species has
been adversely affected. If this occurs, reevaluation of this incidental
take statement and discussion of the need for reinitiation of
consultation will be required.

0 [Reasonable and Prudent Measures]{.underline}

The Service believes the following reasonable and prudent measures are
necessary and appropriate to minimize take of Indiana bats:

> 1\. The CNF will continue to evaluate potential impacts of proposed
> actions to the Indiana bat.
>
> 2\. Timber sales and other proposed actions will be planned and
> implemented with protection of the Indiana bat and its habitat in
> mind.
>
> 3\. Opportunities will be sought to maintain, improve, or enhance
> Indiana bat habitat on the CNF.

0 [Terms and Conditions]{.underline}

In order to be exempt from the prohibitions of Section 9 of the ESA, the
Forest Service (Cherokee National Forest) must comply with the following
terms and conditions, which implement the reasonable and prudent
measures described above. These terms and conditions are
non-discretionary.

> 1\. The CNF will continue to prepare biological evaluations and
> environmental assessments with resultant determinations of Ano
> effect,@ Amay affect,@ Amay affect, not likely to adversely affect,@
> or Amay affect, likely to adversely affect@ the Indiana bat for
> individual proposed actions. Those future actions for which Amay
> affect@ or Amay affect, likely to adversely affect@ determinations are
> made and those actions not consistent with this Biological Opinion
> will be submitted to the Service for the appropriate consultation. If
> a Ano effect@ determination is made, no consultation with the Service
> is required. All proposed actions which could affect potential Indiana
> bat habitat and are consistent with the Cherokee National Forest Land
> and Resource Management Plan=s Standards and Guidelines and this
> Biological Opinion, and that are expected to have beneficial,
> insignificant, or discountable effects to the Indiana bat will have a
> A may affect, not likely to adversely affect@ determination. In such
> situations, this Biological Opinion will constitute written
> concurrence with the Section 7 consultation requirements. As new
> information about the Indiana bat and its habitat becomes available,
> including results of surveys on the CNF, this condition may require
> modification.
>
> 2\. If Indiana bat maternity colonies are found on the CNF, removal of
> known Indiana bat roost trees will be avoided. If removal of a known
> roost tree is unavoidable, such removal will be conducted during the
> non-maternity season\--i.e., August 31 through March 31. Trees
> identified as immediate threats to public safety (e.g., trees leaning
> over a trail or public road that could fall at any time) may, however,
> be removed at any time. The CNF and the Service will coordinate
> implementation of this condition if and when the presence of maternity
> colonies is confirmed.
>
> 3\. Work involving perennial streams or other water sources will
> include measures to prevent water quality degradation or excessive
> disturbance to riparian vegetation.
>
> 4\. The CNF will submit copies of cutting unit cards to the Cookeville
> Office after timber sales are completed. The purpose of this condition
> is to ensure that timber sale activities are in compliance with the
> CNF Land and Resource Management Plan=s existing standards and
> guidelines, and to demonstrate that provisions for protection of
> Indiana bat roosting and foraging habitat were included and
> implemented.
>
> 5\. Timber sale unit layout (i.e., stand shape) will be implemented in
> a manner that enhances potential forested travel corridors between the
> harvest area and surrounding areas. Specifically, CNF Land and
> Resource Management Plan=s Standards and Guidelines regarding den tree
> clumps, riparian filter and shade strips, and visual quality
> objectives will be implemented. This condition will be implemented
> particularly in units in which 70 percent or more of the overstory
> canopy will be removed during timber harvest. As new information
> becomes available, this condition may require modification.
>
> 6\. Live Class 1 trees (e.g., shagbark hickory, shellbark hickory,
> white oak, red oak, etc.) larger than 9 inches dbh will be left in
> two-aged shelterwood harvest areas at a rate of 15 to 35 BA (typically
> 40 to 60 trees per acre, depending on the size of leave trees). If
> this condition can not be met with Class I trees, Class II trees will
> be substituted.
>
> 7\. Opportunities will be sought to include the creation of drinking
> water sources into project plans whenever possible in areas where no
> reliable sources of drinking water are available.
>
> 8\. The CNF will coordinate with the Service and develop a plan to
> make reasonable efforts to determine if the CNF is used by Indiana
> bats during the hibernation or maternity seasons. The plan should
> contain provisions for conducting further surveys of caves and
> abandoned mines on the CNF to document winter use by Indiana bats. In
> addition, efforts will be made to determine if Indiana bat maternity
> colonies exist on the CNF. Mist netting will be conducted in areas
> identified by qualified bat biologists, and in coordination with the
> Cookeville Office, to have the highest potential to support maternity
> colonies. Mist netting will commence during the 1997 maternity season.
>
> 9\. The CNF will meet with the Service and other appropriate parties
> annually to review and discuss activities conducted on the CNF during
> the year, results of surveys, the need to modify provisions of this
> biological opinion, and other issues regarding the Indiana bat. If
> significant issues arise during the course of a year that warrant
> immediate attention or discussion, additional meetings may be
> necessary.

Upon locating a dead, injured, or sick specimen of an endangered or
threatened species, initial notification must be made to the nearest
Fish and Wildlife Service Law Enforcement Office (Mike Elkins, Senior
Resident Agent, Nashville, Tennessee; telephone 615/736-5532). Care
should be taken in handling sick or injured specimens to ensure
effective treatment and care and in handling dead specimens to preserve
biological materials in the best possible state for later analysis of
cause of death. In conjunction with the care of sick or injured
endangered species or preservation of biological materials from a dead
animal, the finder has the responsibility to ensure that evidence
intrinsic to the specimen is not unnecessarily disturbed.

The reasonable and prudent measures, with their implementing terms and
conditions, are designed to minimize incidental take that might
otherwise result from the proposed actions. With implementation of these
measures, the Service believes that no more than one maternity colony
will be incidentally taken annually (a maternity colony is considered to
be the females and young in the maternal roost); and in addition, no
more than six individually roosting male or female Indiana bats will be
incidentally taken annually. Also, no more than 1,300 acres of hardwood
or hardwood/pine habitat with a predominance of large hardwoods (i.e., 9
inches dbh, or larger) will be harvested or otherwise removed from CNF
lands on an annual basis.

If, during the course of the action, these minimized levels of
incidental take are exceeded, such incidental take represents new
information requiring review of the reasonable and prudent measures
provided. The Forest Service (Cherokee National Forest) must immediately
provide an explanation of the causes of the taking and review with the
Service the need for possible modification of the reasonable and prudent
measures.

**CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS**

Section 7(a)(1) of the ESA directs Federal agencies to utilize their
authorities to further the purposes of the ESA by carrying out
conservation programs for the benefit of endangered and threatened
species. Conservation recommendations are discretionary agency
activities to minimize or avoid adverse effects of a proposed action on
listed species or critical habitat, to help implement recovery plans, or
to develop information.

We believe that this provision of the ESA places an obligation on all
Federal agencies to implement positive programs to benefit listed
species, and a number of recent court cases appear to support that
belief. Agencies have some discretion in [choosing]{.underline}
conservation programs, but Section 7(a)(1) places a mandate on agencies
to implement some type of programs.

The Service therefore recommends that the Cherokee National Forest
implement the following conservation measures for the benefit of the
Indiana bat:

> 1\. Cherokee National Forest biologists should continue to conduct
> training for new employees regarding bats in the Southeast. Training
> should include sections on bat identification, biology, habitat
> requirements, and sampling techniques.
>
> 2\. Informational/educational displays located in District Ranger
> Offices on the CNF should be expanded to include materials about bats.
> Such displays are invaluable in informing the public about the benefit
> of protecting a misunderstood and often disliked group of animals.
>
> 3\. If Indiana bat maternity colonies are found to exist on the CNF,
> district biologists should conduct habitat suitability studies, using
> the HSI model developed by Romme et al. (1995). These studies would
> contribute toward validation of the model, or would reveal the need to
> modify some variables. The results might then be used by biologists
> during biological evaluations conducted for future actions.

In order for the Service to be kept informed of actions minimizing or
avoiding adverse effects or benefitting listed species or their
habitats, the Service requests notification of the implementation of any
conservation recommendations.

**REINITIATION NOTICE**

This concludes formal consultation on the forest management and other
activities outlined in the Forest Service=s formal consultation request.
This biological opinion will remain in effect and will constitute
compliance with the Section 7 consultation requirements for all future
individual actions carried out prior to revision of the Cherokee
National Forest=s Land and Resource Management Plan, provided that those
actions are carried out in compliance with the requirements and
conditions contained in this biological opinion, or until one or more of
the following conditions arises. As provided in 50 CFR Sec. 402.16,
reinitiation of formal consultation is required where discretionary
Federal agency involvement or control over an action has been retained
(or is authorized by law) and if: (1) the amount or extent of incidental
take is exceeded; (2) new information reveals effects of the agency
action that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner or
to an extent not considered in this biological opinion; (3) the agency
action is subsequently modified to include activities that cause an
effect to the listed species or critical habitat not considered in this
biological opinion; or (4) a new species is listed or critical habitat
designated that may be affected by the action. In instances where the
amount or extent of incidental take is exceeded, any operations causing
such take must cease pending reinitiation.

**REFERENCES**

Bowles, J.B. 1981. Ecological Studies on the Indiana Bat in Iowa.
Central Coll, Pella, IA.

Callahan, E.V., III. 1993. Indiana Bat Summer Habitat Requirements.
Master of Science Thesis. Univ. of MO. Columbia.

Clawson, R.L., R.K. LaVal, M.L. LaVal, and W. Caire. 1980. Clustering
behavior of hibernating *Myotis* *sodalis* in Missouri. J. of Mammalogy,
61: 245-253.

Gardner, J.E., J.D. Garner, and J.E. Hofmann. 1990. Combined progress
reports: 1989 and 1990 investigations of *Myotis* *sodalis* (Indiana
bat) distribution, habitat use, and status in Illinois. Progress Report
for U.S. DOI, Fish and Wild Service, Twin Cities, MN.

Gardner, J.E., J.D. Garner, and J.E. Hofmann. 1991a. Summer roost
selection and roosting behavior of *Myotis* *sodalis* (Indiana bat) in
Illinois. Final Report. IL Nat. Hist Surv, IL Dept of Cons. Champaign.

Gardner, J.E., J.D. Garner, and J.E. Hofmann. 1991b. Summary of *Myotis*
*sodalis* summer habitat studies in Illinois: with recommendations for
impact assessment. Special Report. IL Nat. Hist Surv, IL Dept of Cons.
Champaign.

Harvey, M.J., C.S. Chaney, and M.D. McGimsey. 1991. Distribution,
status, and ecology of small mammals of the Cherokee National Forest,
Tennessee (Southern Districts). TN Techn. Univ., Dept. of Biol. and
Center for the Manage., Utilization, and Prot. of Water Resour. Rep.
submitted to Cherokee Nat. For.

Harvey, M.J., M.D. McGimsey, and C.S. Chaney. 1992. Distribution,
status, and ecology of small mammals of the Cherokee National Forest,
Tennessee (Northern Districts). TN Techn. Univ., Dept. of Biol. and
Center for the Manage., Utilization, and Prot. of Water Resour. Rep.
submitted to Cherokee Nat. For.

Humphrey, S.R., A.R. Richter, and J.B. Cope. 1977. Summer habitat and
ecology of the endangered Indiana bat, *Myotis* *sodalis*. J. of
Mammalogy. 58: 334-346.

Kennedy, M.L., P.K. Kennedy, and G.D. Baumgardner. 1984. First record of
the Seminole bat (*Lasiurus* *seminolus*) in Tennessee. J. of the TN
Acad of Science. 59:89-90.

Romme, R.C., K. Tyrell, and V. Brack, Jr. 1995. Literature summary and
habitat suitability index model: components of summer habitat for the
Indiana bat, *Myotis* *sodalis*. Report submitted to IN Dept of Nat.
Resour., Div. of Wild., Bloomington.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1983. Recovery Plan for the Indiana Bat.
Twin Cities, MN.