52434 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 177 / Thursday, September 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

RIN 1018–AU01 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Establishment of 

Nonessential Experimental Population 

Status for 15 Freshwater Mussels, 1 

Freshwater Snail, and 5 Fishes in the 

Lower French Broad River and in the 

Lower Holston River, Tennessee 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife, Interior. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), in 

cooperation with the State of Tennessee 

and Conservation Fisheries, Inc., a 

nonprofit organization, plan to 

reintroduce 15 mussels listed as 

endangered under section 4 of the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (Act): Appalachian 

monkeyface (pearlymussel) (Quadrula 

sparsa), birdwing pearlymussel (Lemiox 

rimosus), cracking pearlymussel 

(Hemistena lata), Cumberland bean 

(pearlymussel) (Villosa trabalis), 

Cumberlandian combshell (Epioblasma 

brevidens), Cumberland monkeyface 

(pearlymussel) (Quadrula intermedia), 

dromedary pearlymussel (Dromus 

dromas), fanshell (Cyprogenia stegaria), 

fine-rayed pigtoe (Fusconaia cuneolus), 

orange-foot pimpleback (pearlymussel) 

(Plethobasus cooperianus), oyster 

mussel (Epioblasma capsaeformis), ring 

pink (mussel) (Obovaria retusa), rough 

pigtoe (Pleurobema plenum), shiny 

pigtoe (Fusconaia cor), and white 

wartyback (pearlymussel) (Plethobasus 

cicatricosus); 1 endangered aquatic 

snail: Anthony’s riversnail (Athearnia 

anthonyi); 2 endangered fishes: 

duskytail darter (Etheostoma 

percnurum) and pygmy madtom 

(Noturus stanauli); and 3 fishes listed as 

threatened under section 4 of the Act: 

slender chub (Erimystax cahni), spotfin 

chub (=turquoise shiner) (Erimonax 

monachus), and yellowfin madtom 

(Noturus flavipinnis). We published the 

proposed rule for this action on June 13, 

2006 (71 FR 34196). The species will be 

released into their historical habitat in 

the free-flowing reach of the French 

Broad River from below Douglas Dam to 

its confluence with the Holston River, 

Knox County, Tennessee, and in the 

free-flowing reach of the Holston River 

from below Cherokee Dam to its 

confluence with the French Broad River. 

Based on the evaluation of species 

experts, none of these 21 species 

currently exist in these river reaches or 

their tributaries. These species are being 

reintroduced under the authority of 

section 10(j) of the Act and would be 

classified as a nonessential 

experimental population (NEP). 

The geographic boundaries of the NEP 

would extend from the base of Douglas 

Dam (river mile (RM) 32.3 (51.7 

kilometers (km)) down the French Broad 

River, Knox and Sevier Counties, 

Tennessee, to its confluence with the 

Holston River and then up the Holston 

River, Knox, Grainger, and Jefferson 

Counties, Tennessee, to the base of 

Cherokee Dam (RM 52.3 (83.7 km)) and 

would include the lower 5 RM (8 km) 

of all tributaries that enter these river 

reaches. 

These reintroductions are recovery 

actions and are part of a series of 

reintroductions and other recovery 

actions that the Service, Federal and 

State agencies, and other partners are 

conducting throughout the species’ 

historical ranges. This rule provides a 

plan for establishing the NEP and 

provides for limited allowable legal take 

of these 16 mollusks and 5 fishes within 

the defined NEP area. We have decided 

to include all 21 species in a single 

rulemaking to allow us to restore the 

aquatic ecosystem as quickly as possible 

as we bring each of these species on line 

in the propagation facilities. We have 

reasons to believe all of these species 

co-existed in the past, and we also want 

the public to understand that all of these 

species will be reintroduced into the 

same stretch of river. We are not 

establishing 21 separate NEPs. 

DATES: The effective date of this rule is 

October 15, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: You may obtain copies of 

the final rule from the field office 

address above, by calling (931) 528– 

6481, or from our Web site at http:// 

cookeville.fws.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Geoff Call, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, at the above address (telephone 

931/528–6481, Ext. 213, facsimile 931/ 

528–7075, or e-mail at 

geoff_call@fws.gov). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

1. Legislative: Under section 10(j) of 

the Act, the Secretary of the Department 

of the Interior may designate 

reintroduced populations established 

outside the species’ current range, but 

within its historical range, as 

‘‘experimental.’’ Based on the best 

scientific and commercial data 

available, we must determine whether 

experimental populations are 

‘‘essential’’ or ‘‘nonessential’’ to the 

continued existence of the species. 

Regulatory restrictions are considerably 

reduced under a Non-essential 

Experimental Population (NEP) 

designation. 

Without the NEP designation, the Act 

provides that species listed as 

endangered or threatened are afforded 

protection primarily through the 

prohibitions of section 9 and the 

requirements of section 7. Section 9 of 

the Act prohibits the take of an 

endangered species. ‘‘Take’’ is defined 

by the Act as ‘‘harass, harm, pursue, 

hunt, shoot, wound, trap, capture, or 

collect, or attempt to engage in any such 

conduct.’’ Service regulations (50 CFR 

17.31) generally extend the prohibitions 

of take to threatened wildlife. Section 7 

of the Act outlines the procedures for 

Federal interagency cooperation to 

conserve federally listed species and 

protect designated critical habitat. It 

mandates that all Federal agencies use 

their existing authorities to further the 

purposes of the Act by carrying out 

programs for the conservation of listed 

species. It also states that Federal 

agencies will, in consultation with the 

Service, ensure that any action they 

authorize, fund, or carry out is not likely 

to jeopardize the continued existence of 

a listed species or result in the 

destruction or adverse modification of 

designated critical habitat. Section 7 of 

the Act does not affect activities 

undertaken on private land unless they 

are authorized, funded, or carried out by 

a Federal agency. 

A population designated as 

experimental is treated for the purposes 

of section 9 of the Act as threatened, 

regardless of the species’ designation 

elsewhere in its range. Threatened 

designation allows us greater discretion 

in devising management programs and 

special regulation for such a population. 

Section 4(d) of the Act allows us to 

adopt whatever regulations are 

necessary to provide for the 

conservation of a threatened species. In 

these situations, the regulations that 

generally extend most section 9 

prohibitions to threatened species do 

not apply to NEPs, although the special 

4(d) rule contains the prohibitions and 

exceptions necessary and appropriate to 

conserve that species. Regulations 

issued under section 4(d) for NEPs are 

usually more compatible with routine 

human activities in the reintroduction 

area. 

For the purposes of section 7 of the 

Act, we treat an NEP as a threatened 

species when the NEP is located within 

a National Wildlife Refuge or National 

Park, and section 7(a)(1) and the 

consultation requirements of section 

7(a)(2) of the Act apply. When NEPs are 

located outside a National Wildlife 


gechino on PROD1PC76 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 177 / Thursday, September 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 52435 

Refuge or National Park, we treat the 

population as proposed for listing and 

only two provisions of section 7 apply: 

Section 7(a)(1) and section 7(a)(4). In 

these instances, NEPs provide 

additional flexibility because Federal 

agencies are not required to consult 

with us under section 7(a)(2). Section 

7(a)(4) requires Federal agencies to 

confer (rather than consult) with the 

Service on actions that are likely to 

jeopardize the continued existence of a 

species proposed to be listed. The 

results of a conference are advisory in 

nature and do not restrict agencies from 

authorizing, funding, or carrying out 

activities. 

2. Biological Information: Prior to the 

impoundments, the lower French Broad 

and Holston Rivers historically 

supported a diverse fish, snail, and 

mussel fauna, possibly as many as 85 

mussel species and subspecies, or about 

65 percent of the mussel diversity once 

known from the entire Tennessee River 

system (Parmalee and Bogan 1998, pp. 

1–328; Ahlstedt 2004). Of this once-rich 

aquatic fauna, 7 mussel species are 

extinct, and 21 are federally listed 

species (i.e., 15 mussels, 1 aquatic snail, 

and 5 fishes, listed in the SUMMARY

section, above, are extirpated from these 

river reaches). The only federally listed 

mussel still occurring in the NEP area is 

the endangered pink mucket (Lampsilis 

abrupta), which still occurs in both the 

lower French Broad and lower Holston 

Rivers (Ahlstedt 2004; Layzer and Scott 

2005, p. 11). The pink mucket is not one 

of the 15 mussel species we are 

proposing to reintroduce under this 

NEP. 

Although much of the mussel fauna 

and some of the snail and fish fauna 

were eliminated from these river 

reaches, considerable suitable physical 

habitat remains, and various Federal 

(primarily the Tennessee Valley 

Authority (TVA)) and State natural 

resources agencies, industries, and 

municipalities have worked together to 

improve the water quality below the 

dams. Fish populations are rebounding 

(including the appropriate fish host 

species for mussel glochidia (larvae)) 

and snail populations are expanding in 

both rivers, and non-federally listed 

mussels and snails released into the 

lower French Broad River to test the 

area’s suitability for mollusk transplants 

are doing well. Based on the results of 

recent studies and observations by 

knowledgeable scientists (Rakes and 

Shute 1999, p. 5; Scott and Saylor 2004; 

Layzer and Ahlstedt 2004; Layzer and 

Scott 2005, pp. 14–15), these river 

reaches now provide suitable habitat for 

reintroductions to occur. 

Since the mid-1980s CFI, a nonprofit 

organization, with support from us, the 

Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency 

(TWRA), U.S. Forest Service, National 

Park Service, TVA, and Tennessee 

Aquarium, has successfully 

translocated, propagated, and 

reintroduced spotfin chubs, duskytail 

darters, yellowfin madtoms, and smoky 

madtoms into Abrams Creek, Great 

Smoky Mountains National Park, Blount 

County, Tennessee. These fish 

historically occupied Abrams Creek 

prior to an ichthyocide treatment in the 

1950s. An NEP designation for Abrams 

Creek was not needed since the entire 

watershed occurs on National Park 

Service land, section 7 of the Act 

applies regardless of the NEP 

designation, and existing human 

activities and public use are consistent 

with protection and take restrictions 

needed for the reintroduced 

populations. Natural reproduction by 

three of the four species in Abrams 

Creek has been documented (Rakes 

2007). The spotfin chub reintroductions 

appear to be the least successful in this 

capacity (Shute et al. 2006, p. 106; 

Rakes 2007). We have also worked with 

CFI to translocate, propagate, and 

reintroduce these same four fish into an 

NEP established for a section of the 

Tellico River, Monroe County, 

Tennessee (67 FR 52420, August 12, 

2002). Propagated fish of these four 

species were released into the Tellico 

River starting in 2003 and continuing 

yearly through 2007. Early indications 

show that these species are surviving 

and have had some success in spawning 

(Rakes 2007). It will take several more 

years of reintroductions to ensure future 

success similar to the Abrams Creek 

reintroductions. CFI has also 

successfully placed yellowfin madtoms 

in an existing NEP on the North Fork 

Holston River, Washington County, 

Virginia. This site is separated from the 

NEP on the lower Holston River by 

reservoirs, and the fish is not known 

from any of these reservoirs or 

intervening river sections. These 

reservoirs and river sections act as 

barriers to movement by the fish and 

assure that the North Fork Holston River 

population will remain geographically 

isolated and easily identifiable as a 

distinct population from the Lower 

Holston River population. 

3. Listing Information, Distribution, 

and Recovery Goals/Objectives: The 

Appalachian monkeyface 

(pearlymussel) (Quadrula sparsa) (Lea 

1841) was listed as an endangered 

species on June 14, 1976 (41 FR 24062). 

We finalized a recovery plan for the 

species in July 1984 (Service 1984a). It 

historically occurred in the Tennessee 

River and three of its tributaries: the 

Clinch, Holston, and Powell Rivers 

(Service 1984a, pp. 2–4). We are 

unaware of historical records of the 

species in the French Broad River, but 

archeological records (Parmalee and 

Bogan 1988, p. 168) of this species exist 

from the Little Pigeon River (a lower 

French Broad River tributary). The 

species may still survive in extremely 

low numbers in the Powell River in 

Tennessee and the Clinch River in 

Virginia (Parmalee and Bogan 1998, p. 

223). No downlisting (reclassification 

from endangered to threatened) criteria 

are provided in the recovery plan. The 

delisting objectives for the Appalachian 

monkeyface (Service1984a, pp. 19–20) 

are to: (1) Restore the viability of the 

Clinch and Powell River populations; 

(2) reestablish or discover viable 

populations in one additional river; (3) 

ensure that the species is protected from 

present and foreseeable threats to the 

continued existence of any population; 

and (4) determine that there are 

noticeable improvements in coal-related 

problems and substrate quality in the 

Powell River and that no increase in 

coal-related sedimentation has occurred 

in the Clinch River. 

The birdwing pearlymussel (Lemiox 

rimosus) (Conrad 1834) was listed as an 

endangered species on June 14, 1976 (41 

FR 24062). We finalized a recovery plan 

for the species in July 1984 (Service 

1984b). We also established an NEP for 

the birdwing pearlymussel and 15 other 

federally listed mussels for a section of 

the Tennessee River below the Wilson 

Dam in Colbert and Lauderdale 

Counties, Alabama, on June 14, 2001 (66 

FR 32250). Historical records exist for 

the species in 11 rivers in the Tennessee 

River system, and one record exists from 

an unknown location in the Cumberland 

River. Historically, the species occurred 

in the Tennessee River near the 

confluence of the French Broad and 

Holston Rivers, in the Holston River just 

upstream of its confluence with the 

French Broad River, and in the 

Nolichucky River (a French Broad River 

tributary) (Parmalee and Bogan 1998, p. 

146). Archeological records (Parmalee 

1988, p. 171) of this species exist from 

the Little Pigeon River, a lower French 

Broad River tributary. It now survives in 

the Clinch and Powell Rivers in 

Tennessee and Virginia and in the Duck 

and Elk Rivers in Tennessee (Service 

1984b, p. 2). No downlisting criteria are 

given in the recovery plan. The delisting 

objectives for the birdwing pearlymussel 

(Service 1984b, pp. 19–20) are to: (1) 

Restore the viability of the Clinch and 

Powell River populations, (2) reestablish 


gechino on PROD1PC76 with RULES
52436 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 177 / Thursday, September 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

or discover viable populations in two 

additional rivers; (3) ensure that the 

species is protected from present and 

foreseeable threats to the continued 

existence of any population; and (4) 

determine that noticeable improvements 

in coal-related problems and substrate 

quality have occurred in the Powell 

River and that no increase in coalrelated sedimentation has occurred in 

the Clinch River. 

The cracking pearlymussel 

(Hemistena lata) (Rafinesque 1820) was 

listed as an endangered species on 

September 28, 1989 (54 FR 39850). We 

finalized a recovery plan for the species 

in July 1991 (Service 1991a). We also 

established an NEP for the cracking 

pearlymussel and 15 other federally 

listed mussels for a section of the 

Tennessee River below the Wilson Dam 

in Colbert and Lauderdale Counties, 

Alabama, on June 14, 2001 (66 FR 

32250). This species historically 

occurred in the Ohio, Cumberland, and 

Tennessee River systems (Bogan and 

Parmalee 1983, pp. 44–45, Service 

1991a, pp. 2–5). It is extirpated 

throughout much of its range. Historical 

records exist from the Tennessee River 

near the confluence of the French Broad 

and Holston Rivers (Parmalee and 

Bogan 1998, p. 122). No historical 

records exist for the species in the 

French Broad system, but archaeological 

records (Parmalee 1988, pp. 168–169) of 

this species exist from the Little Pigeon 

River, a lower French Broad River 

tributary. It now survives at a few shoals 

in the Clinch and Powell Rivers in 

Tennessee and Virginia (Bogan and 

Parmalee 1983, p. 45; Neves 1991, p. 

277). It possibly survives in the Green 

River in Kentucky and in the Tennessee 

River, below Pickwick Dam, in 

Tennessee (Service 1991a). The 

downlisting objectives for the cracking 

pearlymussel (Service 1991a, p. 6) are 

to: (1) Reestablish/discover five viable 

populations; (2) ensure that one 

naturally produced year class exists 

within each population; (3) determine if 

recovery actions have been successful, 

as determined by an increase in 

population density and/or an increase 

in length of river inhabited; and (4) 

ensure there are no foreseeable threats 

to the continued existence of any 

population. The delisting objectives call 

for the reestablishment/discovery of 

eight viable populations and two 

naturally produced year classes within 

each population. 

The Cumberland bean (pearlymussel) 

(Villosa trabalis) (Conrad 1834) was 

listed as an endangered species on June 

14, 1976 (41 FR 24064). We finalized a 

recovery plan for the species in August 

1984 (Service 1984c). We also 

established an NEP for the Cumberland 

bean and 15 other federally listed 

mussels for a section of the Tennessee 

River below the Wilson Dam in Colbert 

and Lauderdale Counties, Alabama, on 

June 14, 2001 (66 FR 32250). This 

species historically occurred in 10 river 

systems in the Cumberland and 

Tennessee River basins (Service 1984c, 

pp. 2–3). No historical records exist in 

the French Broad River system, but 

archaeological records (Parmalee 1988, 

p. 172) of this species exist from the 

Little Pigeon River, a lower French 

Broad River tributary. The Cumberland 

bean now survives only in the Hiwassee 

River in Tennessee; in Buck Creek, the 

Little South Fork of the Cumberland 

River, and the Rockcastle River system 

in Kentucky; and in the Big South Fork 

of the Cumberland River in Tennessee 

and Kentucky (Service 1984c, pp. 2–6). 

No downlisting criteria are given in the 

recovery plan. The delisting objectives 

for the Cumberland bean (Service 1984c, 

pp. 18–19) are to: (1) Restore the 

viability of populations in Buck Creek, 

the Rockcastle River, and the Little 

South Fork River in Kentucky; (2) 

reestablish or discover viable 

populations in two additional rivers; (3) 

ensure that the species is protected from 

present and foreseeable threats to the 

continued existence of any population, 

and (4) determine that noticeable 

improvements in coal-related problems 

and substrate quality have occurred in 

the upper Cumberland and Tennessee 

drainages and that no increase in coalrelated sedimentation exists in streams 

containing this species. 

The Cumberlandian combshell 

(Epioblasma brevidens) (Lea 1831) was 

listed as an endangered species on 

January 10, 1997 (62 FR 1647). Critical 

habitat was designated for this species 

on August 31, 2004 (69 FR 53136). We 

finalized a recovery plan for the species 

in May 2004 (Service 2004). We also 

established an NEP for the 

Cumberlandian combshell and 15 other 

federally listed mussels for a section of 

the Tennessee River below the Wilson 

Dam in Colbert and Lauderdale 

Counties, Alabama, on June 14, 2001 (66 

FR 32250). This mussel was historically 

distributed throughout much of the 

Cumberlandian Region of the Tennessee 

and Cumberland River drainages in 

Alabama, Kentucky, Tennessee, and 

Virginia (Gordon 1991, p. 2). Currently, 

populations survive in a few river 

reaches in both river systems (Gordon 

1991, p. 2). It historically occurred in 

the lower Holston River and a French 

Broad River tributary (Nolichucky 

River) (Parmalee and Bogan 1998, p. 84). 

Archaeological records (Parmalee 1988, 

p. 171) of this species exist from the 

Little Pigeon River, a lower French 

Broad River tributary. The downlisting 

objectives for the Cumberlandian 

combshell (Service 2004, pp. 65–68) call 

for the reestablishment/discovery of six 

viable populations and one naturally 

reproducing year class within each 

viable population. The delisting 

objectives are to: (1) Reestablish or 

discover viable populations in nine 

distinct streams, including three in the 

Cumberland River system, four in the 

upper Tennessee River system, and two 

in the lower Tennessee River system; (2) 

ensure that the species is protected from 

present and foreseeable threats to the 

continued existence of any population; 

and (3) two distinct naturally 

reproducing year classes exist within 

each of the viable populations. 

The Cumberland monkeyface 

(pearlymussel) (Quadrula intermedia) 

(Conrad 1836) was listed as an 

endangered species on June 14, 1976 (41 

FR 24062). We completed a recovery 

plan for the species in July 1984 

(Service 1984d). We also established an 

NEP for the Cumberland monkeyface 

and 15 other federally listed mussels for 

a section of the Tennessee River below 

the Wilson Dam in Colbert and 

Lauderdale Counties, Alabama, on June 

14, 2001 (66 FR 32250). It historically 

occurred in 11 rivers in the Tennessee 

River system (Service 1984d, pp. 2–3). 

Based on collections from aboriginal 

shell middens, Parmalee and Bogan 

(1998, pp. 214–215) stated that the 

species once occurred at the confluence 

of the French Broad and Holston Rivers. 

The species now survives at a few 

shoals in the Powell River in Tennessee 

and Virginia and the Elk and Duck 

Rivers in Tennessee (Service 1984d, p. 

21). No downlisting criteria are given in 

the recovery plan. The delisting 

objectives for the Cumberland 

monkeyface (Service 1984d, pp. 21–22) 

are to: (1) Restore the viability of the 

Powell and Elk River populations; (2) 

reestablish or discover viable 

populations in two additional rivers; (3) 

ensure that the species is protected from 

present and foreseeable threats to the 

continued existence of any population; 

and (4) determine that noticeable 

improvements in coal-related problems 

and substrate quality have occurred in 

the Powell River and that no increase in 

coal-related sedimentation occurs in the 

Clinch River. 

The dromedary pearlymussel (Dromus 

dromas) (Lea 1845) was listed as an 

endangered species on June 14, 1976 (41 

FR 24062). We completed a recovery 

plan for the species in July 1984 

(Service 1984e). We also established an 

NEP for the dromedary pearlymussel 


gechino on PROD1PC76 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 177 / Thursday, September 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 52437 

and 15 other federally listed mussels for 

a section of the Tennessee River below 

the Wilson Dam in Colbert and 

Lauderdale Counties, Alabama, on June 

14, 2001 (66 FR 32250). It was 

historically widespread in the 

Cumberland and Tennessee River 

systems (Bogan and Parmalee 1983, p. 

16). Parmalee and Bogan (1998, p. 71) 

reported that the species historically 

occurred in the lower Holston River in 

Knox and Grainger Counties. 

Archaeological records of this species 

exist from the Little Pigeon River, a 

lower French Broad River tributary 

(Parmalee 1988, p. 172). It survives at a 

few shoals in the Powell and Clinch 

Rivers in Tennessee and Virginia and 

possibly in the Cumberland River in 

Tennessee (Service 1984e, pp. 3–8; 

Neves 1991, p. 293). No downlisting 

criteria are given in the recovery plan. 

The delisting objectives for the 

dromedary pearlymussel (Service 1984e, 

pp. 20–21) are to: (1) Restore the 

viability of the Clinch and Powell River 

populations; (2) reestablish or discover 

viable populations in three additional 

rivers; (3) ensure that the species is 

protected from present and foreseeable 

threats to the continued existence of any 

population; and (4) determine that 

noticeable improvements in coal-related 

problems and substrate quality have 

occurred in the Powell River and that no 

increase in coal-related sedimentation 

occurs in the Clinch River. 

The fanshell (Cyprogenia stegaria) 

(Rafinesque 1820) was listed as an 

endangered species on June 21, 1990 (55 

FR 25591). We completed a recovery 

plan for the species in July 1991 

(Service 1991b). It historically occurred 

in the Ohio River and many of its large 

tributaries in Pennsylvania, West 

Virginia, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, 

Kentucky, Alabama, Virginia, and 

Tennessee (Service 1991b). Ortmann 

(1918, p. 565) reported it from the lower 

Holston River, and Parmalee and Bogan 

(1998, p. 70) reported it from 

archaeological sites in the lower French 

Broad River and its tributary, the Little 

Pigeon River. Presently, the fanshell is 

believed to be reproducing in three 

rivers: the Green and Licking Rivers in 

Kentucky and the Clinch River in 

Tennessee and Virginia. Additionally, 

based on the collection of a few old 

specimens in the 1980s, small, 

apparently nonreproducing, populations 

may still persist in the Muskingum and 

Walhonding Rivers in Ohio, the 

Kanawha River in West Virginia, the 

Wabash River system in Illinois and 

Indiana, the Barren River and Tygarts 

Creek in Kentucky, and the Tennessee 

and Cumberland Rivers in Tennessee 

(Service 1991b, pp. 2–4). The 

downlisting objectives for the fanshell 

(Service 1991b, pp. 6–7) are to: (1) 

Protect existing populations, reestablish 

historical populations, and/or discover 

new populations so that at least nine 

distinct viable populations exist; (2) 

ensure that one naturally reproduced 

year class exists within each of the nine 

populations; and (3) ensure that studies 

of the species’ biological and ecological 

requirements are complete and that any 

required recovery measures are 

beginning to succeed. The delisting 

objectives are to: (1) Protect existing 

populations, reestablish historical 

populations, and/or discover new 

populations so that at least 12 distinct 

viable populations exist; (2) ensure that 

two distinct naturally reproduced year 

classes exist within each viable 

population; (3) ensure that studies of the 

species’ biological and ecological 

requirements are complete and that any 

required recovery measures are 

successful; (4) ensure that no 

foreseeable threats exist that would 

likely impact the species’ survival over 

a significant portion of its range; and (5) 

ensure that noticeable improvements in 

water and substratum quality have 

occurred where habitat has been 

degraded. 

The fine-rayed pigtoe (Fusconaia 

cuneolus) (Lea 1840) was listed as an 

endangered species on June 14, 1976 (41 

FR 24062). We finalized a recovery plan 

for the species in September 1984 

(Service 1984f). We also established an 

NEP for the fine-rayed pigtoe and 15 

other federally listed mussels for a 

section of the Tennessee River below 

the Wilson Dam in Colbert and 

Lauderdale Counties, Alabama, on June 

14, 2001 (66 FR 32250). It historically 

occurred in 15 Tennessee River 

tributaries (including the lower Holston 

River) and is currently known from 7 

rivers (including the Nolichucky River, 

a French Broad River tributary, above 

the backwaters of Douglas Reservoir) 

(Service 1984f, pp. 2–4, Parmalee and 

Bogan 1998, pp. 115–116). No 

downlisting criteria are given in the 

recovery plan. The delisting objectives 

for the fine-rayed pigtoe (Service 1984f, 

pp. 22–24) are to: (1) Restore viable 

populations to the Clinch, Powell, and 

North Fork Holston Rivers, to the Little 

River and Copper Creek (Clinch River 

tributaries), and to the Elk River 

(Tennessee), Sequatchie River 

(Tennessee), and the Paint Rock River 

(Alabama); (2) reestablish or discover 

one viable population in an additional 

river; (3) ensure that the species is 

protected from present and foreseeable 

threats to the continued existence of any 

population, and (4) determine that 

noticeable improvements in coal-related 

problems and substrate quality have 

occurred in the Powell River and that no 

increase in coal or other energy-related 

impacts occurs in the Clinch River. 

The orangefoot pimpleback 

(pearlymussel) (Plethobasus 

cooperianus) (Lea 1834) was listed as an 

endangered species on June 14, 1976 (41 

FR 24062). We completed a recovery 

plan for the species in August 1984 

(Service 1984g). It historically occurred 

in the Ohio, Cumberland, and 

Tennessee River systems, including the 

lower French Broad and Holston Rivers 

(Parmalee and Bogan 1998, p. 174). The 

species persists in the lower Ohio, 

Tennessee, and Cumberland Rivers 

(Service 1984g, pp. 2–6). In 2005, three 

adults were taken from the Ohio River 

and moved to the Kentucky Department 

of Fish and Wildlife Resources’

propagation facility in Frankfort, 

Kentucky (Leroy Koch 2005). No 

downlisting criteria are given in this 

recovery plan. The delisting objectives 

for the orangefoot pimpleback (Service 

1984g, pp. 13–14) are to ensure that: (1) 

One viable population exists in the 

Tennessee, Cumberland, and Ohio 

Rivers and these populations are 

dispersed throughout each river so that 

it would be unlikely for any one event 

to cause the total loss of any population; 

(2) viable populations are reestablished 

or discovered in two additional rivers; 

(3) three year classes, including one year 

class 10 years old or older, have 

naturally produced in each population; 

(4) no foreseeable threats exist that 

would interfere with the survival of any 

population; and (5) noticeable 

improvements in water and substratum 

quality have occurred where habitat has 

been degraded. 

The oyster mussel (Epioblasma 

capsaeformis) (Lea 1834) was listed as 

an endangered species on January 10, 

1997 (62 FR 1647). Critical habitat was 

designated for this species on August 

31, 2004 (69 FR 53136). We finalized a 

recovery plan for the species in May 

2004 (Service 2004). We also established 

an NEP for the oyster mussel and 15 

other federally listed mussels for a 

section of the Tennessee River below 

the Wilson Dam in Colbert and 

Lauderdale Counties, Alabama, on June 

14, 2001 (66 FR 32250). This mussel 

historically occurred throughout much 

of the Cumberlandian Region of the 

Tennessee and Cumberland River 

drainages (Gordon 1991, pp. 2–3). Small 

populations now survive in a few river 

reaches in both river systems (Gordon 

1991, pp. 2–3). It was historically taken 

in the lower French Broad River near its 

confluence with the Holston, and a 


gechino on PROD1PC76 with RULES
52438 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 177 / Thursday, September 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

population still survives in the 

Nolichucky River, a French Broad River 

tributary, above Douglas Reservoir 

(Parmalee and Bogan 1998, p. 86). 

Archaeological records (Parmalee 1988, 

pp. 170–171) of this species exist from 

the Little Pigeon River, a lower French 

Broad River tributary. The downlisting 

objectives for the oyster mussel (Service 

2004, pp. 65–68) call for the 

reestablishment/discovery of six viable 

populations and one naturally 

reproducing year class within each 

viable population. The delisting 

objectives are to: (1) Reestablish or 

discover viable populations in nine 

distinct streams in the Cumberland 

River system, upper Tennessee River 

system, and/or lower Tennessee River 

system; (2) ensure that the species is 

protected from present and foreseeable 

threats to the continued existence of any 

population; and (3) ensure that two 

distinct naturally reproducing year 

classes exist within each of the viable 

populations. 

The ring pink (mussel) (Obovaria 

retusa) (Lamark 1819) was listed as an 

endangered species on September 29, 

1989 (54 FR 40109). We completed a 

recovery plan for the species in March 

1991 (Service 1991c). It historically 

occurred in the Ohio River and many of 

its large tributaries in Pennsylvania, 

West Virginia, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, 

Kentucky, Alabama, and Tennessee 

(Service 1991c, pp. 2–3). Ortmann 

(1918, p. 567) and Parmalee and Bogan 

(1998, p. 166) reported it from the lower 

Holston River, and it has been taken 

from an archeological site on the lower 

French Broad River (Ahlstedt 1998). It 

likely still survives in very low numbers 

in the Green River in Kentucky, the 

Tennessee River in Tennessee and 

Kentucky, and the Cumberland River in 

Tennessee (Service 1991c, pp. 2–3, 

Parmalee and Bogan 1998, p. 166). In 

2004 and 2005, three juveniles and one 

adult male were found in the Green 

River (Leroy Koch 2005). The adult male 

was taken to the Kentucky Department 

of Fish and Wildlife Resources’

(KDFWR) propagation facility in 

Frankfort, Kentucky. KDFWR plans to 

propagate this species to augment 

existing populations and establish new 

ones, such as the lower French Broad 

and lower Holston Rivers. The 

downlisting objectives for the ring pink 

(Service 1991c, pp. 4–5) are to: (1) 

Protect existing populations, reestablish 

historical populations, and/or discover 

new populations so that at least six 

distinct populations exist and (2) ensure 

that studies of the species’ biological 

and ecological requirements are 

complete and that any required recovery 

measures developed and implemented 

from these studies are beginning to 

succeed. The delisting objectives are to: 

(1) Protect existing populations, 

reestablish historical populations, and/ 

or discover new populations so that at 

least nine distinct populations exist; (2) 

ensure that studies of the species’

biological and ecological requirements 

are complete and that any required 

recovery measures developed and 

implemented from these studies are 

successful; (3) ensure that no 

foreseeable threats exist that would 

likely impact the species’ survival over 

a significant portion of its range; and (4) 

ensure that noticeable improvements in 

water and substratum quality have 

occurred where habitat has been 

degraded. 

The rough pigtoe (Pleurobema 

plenum) (Lea 1840) was listed as an 

endangered species on June 14, 1976 (41 

FR 24062). We completed a recovery 

plan for the species in August 1984 

(Service 1984h). This widespread 

species was historically known from 22 

rivers in the Mississippi and Ohio River 

systems (Service 1984h, pp. 2–3), 

including the lower French Broad and 

Holston Rivers (Parmalee and Bogan 

1998, p. 189). Archaeological records 

(Parmalee 1988, p. 169) of this species 

exist from the Little Pigeon River (a 

lower French Broad River tributary). It 

is currently known from the Green, 

Barren, Cumberland, Tennessee, and 

Clinch Rivers (Parmalee and Bogan 

1998, p. 189, Service 1984h, pp. 3–7). 

No downlisting criteria are given in this 

recovery plan. The delisting objectives 

for the rough pigtoe (Service 1984h, pp. 

14–15) are to: (1) Protect existing 

populations, reestablish historical 

populations, and/or discover new 

populations so that at least six distinct 

populations exist; (2) ensure that these 

populations are dispersed throughout 

each river so it would be unlikely for 

any one event to cause the total loss of 

any population; (3) ensure that three 

year classes, including one year class 10 

years old or older, have naturally 

produced in each population; (4) ensure 

that no foreseeable threats exist that 

would interfere with the survival of any 

population; and (5) ensure that 

noticeable improvements in water and 

substratum quality have occurred where 

habitat has been degraded. 

The shiny pigtoe (Fusconaia cor) 

(Conrad 1834) was listed as an 

endangered species on June 14, 1976 (41 

FR 24062). We completed a recovery 

plan for the species in July 1984 

(Service 1984i). We also established an 

NEP for the shiny pigtoe and 15 other 

federally listed mussels for a section of 

the Tennessee River below the Wilson 

Dam in Colbert and Lauderdale 

Counties, Alabama, on June 14, 2001 (66 

FR 32250). It historically occurred in the 

Tennessee River and 10 of its tributaries 

(Service 1984i, pp. 2–4). It is currently 

known from five river systems: the 

Clinch, Powell, North Fork Holston, Elk, 

and Paint Rock (Service 1984i, pp. 4–8). 

It was historically reported from the 

Tennessee River around the mouth of 

the Holston and French Broad Rivers, 

and it still occurs in the North Fork 

Holston River (a Holston River tributary) 

above Cherokee Reservoir (Service 

1984i, pp. 2–4, Parmalee and Bogan 

1998, p. 113). No downlisting criteria 

are given in the recovery plan. The 

delisting objectives for the shiny pigtoe 

(Service 1984i, pp. 23–25) are to: (1) 

Restore viable populations to the 

Clinch, Elk, Powell, North Fork Holston, 

and Paint Rock Rivers and to Copper 

Creek; (2) reestablish or discover one 

viable population in one additional 

river or two river corridors; (3) ensure 

that the species is protected from 

present and foreseeable threats to the 

continued existence of any population, 

and (4) determine that noticeable 

improvements in coal-related problems 

and substrate quality have occurred in 

the Powell River and that no increase in 

coal or other energy-related impacts 

occurs in the Clinch River. 

The white wartyback (pearlymussel) 

(Plethobasus cicatricosus) (Say 1829) 

was listed as an endangered species on 

June 14, 1976 (41 FR 24062). We 

completed a recovery plan for the 

species in September 1984 (Service 

1984j). It occurred in the Ohio, 

Cumberland, and Tennessee River 

systems, including the lower Holston 

River (Parmalee and Bogan 1998, p. 

172). It still persists in the middle 

reaches of the Tennessee River (Service 

1984j, pp. 4–5). No downlisting criteria 

are given in this recovery plan. The 

delisting objectives for the white 

wartyback (Service 1984j, pp. 12–13) are 

to ensure that: (1) A viable population 

exists in the Tennessee River; (2) viable 

populations are discovered or 

reestablished in two additional rivers; 

(3) these populations are dispersed so it 

is unlikely for any one event to cause 

the total loss of the species from that 

river system; (4) three year classes, 

including one year class 10 years old or 

older, have been produced in each 

reestablished population; and (5) no 

foreseeable threats exist that would 

interfere with the survival of any 

population. 

Anthony’s riversnail (Athearnia 

anthonyi) (Budd in Redfield 1854) was 

listed as an endangered species on April 

15, 1994 (59 FR 17994). We completed 

a recovery plan for the species in 


gechino on PROD1PC76 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 177 / Thursday, September 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 52439 

August 1997 (Service 1997). We also 

established an NEP for Anthony’s 

riversnail and 16 federally listed 

mussels for a section of the Tennessee 

River below the Wilson Dam in Colbert 

and Lauderdale Counties, Alabama, on 

June 14, 2001 (66 FR 32250). This snail 

was historically found in the Tennessee 

River and the lower reaches of some of 

its tributaries from Muscle Shoals, 

Colbert and Lauderdale Counties, 

Alabama, upstream into the lower 

French Broad River (Bogan and 

Parmalee 1983, pp. 81–82, Service 1997, 

pp. 1–2). Currently, two populations are 

known: one in Limestone Creek in 

Limestone County, Alabama, and one in 

the Tennessee River and the lower 

portion of the Sequatchie River (a 

tributary to this reach of the Tennessee 

River) in Tennessee and Alabama 

(Service 1997, p. 2). The downlisting 

objectives for Anthony’s riversnail 

(Service 1997, p. 5–6) are to ensure that: 

(1) Four viable populations exist; (2) 

two naturally produced year classes 

exist in all four populations; (3) 

biological studies on the species are 

completed and recovery measures are 

beginning to succeed; (4) noticeable 

improvements in water and substratum 

quality have occurred where habitat is 

degraded; (5) each population is 

protected from present and foreseeable 

threats; and (6) all four populations 

remain stable or increase over a 10-year 

period. The delisting objectives call for 

the establishment of six viable 

populations in addition to criteria (2) 

through (5) above. Additionally, all six 

populations should remain stable or 

increase over a 15-year period. 

The duskytail darter (Etheostoma 

percnurum) (Jenkins 1994) was listed as 

an endangered species on April 27, 1993 

(58 FR 25758). We completed a recovery 

plan for the species in March 1994 

(Service 1994a). We also established an 

NEP for the duskytail darter and three 

other federally listed fishes for a section 

of the Tellico River in Monroe County, 

Tennessee, on August 12, 2002 (67 FR 

52420). Although likely once more 

widespread in the upper Tennessee and 

middle Cumberland River systems, 

duskytail darters were historically 

known from six populations: Little 

River and Abrams Creek, Blount 

County, Tennessee; Citico Creek, 

Monroe County, Tennessee; Big South 

Fork Cumberland River, Scott County, 

Tennessee, and McCreary County, 

Kentucky; Copper Creek and the Clinch 

River (this is one population), Scott 

County, Virginia; and the South Fork 

Holston River, Sullivan County, Virginia 

(Service 1994a, pp. 3–6). The South 

Fork Holston River population is 

apparently extirpated (Service 1994a, p. 

4). The Little River, Copper Creek/ 

Clinch River, and Big South Fork 

Cumberland River populations are 

extant but small and their viability is 

uncertain (Service 1994a, pp. 4–5). The 

Citico Creek population is healthy and 

viable (Shute 2005). CFI has 

reintroduced the species into Abrams 

Creek in Tennessee, and there are 

indications that it is becoming 

reestablished (Rakes et al. 2005, p. 106). 

No historical records exist for the fish in 

the lower French Broad or lower 

Holston Rivers. However, we and others 

believe it is likely that the species once 

inhabited these waters (Rakes and Shute 

1999, p. 5). Our conclusion is based on 

the following facts: (1) The species was 

once likely much more widespread in 

the Tennessee River system, (2) the 

French Broad and Holston Rivers are 

tributaries to the Tennessee River 

between existing and historical 

populations, (3) both river reaches 

appear to contain suitable habitat for the 

species, and (4) there were no physical 

barriers that would have prevented the 

species from inhabiting these waters. 

The downlisting objectives for the 

duskytail darter (Service 1994a, pp. 7–

8) are to: (1) Protect and enhance 

existing populations and reestablish a 

population so at least three distinct 

viable duskytail darter populations 

exist; (2) ensure that studies of the 

species’ biological and ecological 

requirements are complete and that any 

required recovery measures developed 

and implemented from these studies are 

beginning to succeed; and (3) ensure 

that no foreseeable threats exist that 

would likely threaten the continued 

existence of the three aforementioned 

viable populations. The delisting 

objectives are to: (1) Protect and 

enhance existing populations and 

reestablish populations so at least five 

distinct viable duskytail darter 

populations exist; (2) ensure that studies 

of the species’ biological and ecological 

requirements are complete and that any 

required recovery measures developed 

and implemented from these studies are 

successful; and (3) ensure that no 

foreseeable threats exist that would 

likely impact the survival of the five 

aforementioned viable populations. 

The pygmy madtom (Noturus 

stanauli) (Etnier and Jenkins 1980) was 

listed as an endangered species on April 

27, 1993 (58 FR 25758). We completed 

a recovery plan for the species in 

September 1994 (Service 1994b). The 

pygmy madtom, which was likely more 

widespread in the Tennessee River 

system, has been found, and still exists, 

in only two short reaches of the Duck 

and Clinch Rivers in Tennessee. These 

river reaches are about 600 river miles 

apart. No historical records exist for the 

fish in the lower French Broad or lower 

Holston Rivers. However, we and others 

believe it is likely that it once inhabited 

these waters (Rakes and Shute 1999, p. 

5). Our conclusion is based on the same 

facts outlined above for the duskytail 

darter. The downlisting objectives for 

the pygmy madtom (Service 1994b, p. 5) 

are to: (1) Protect and enhance existing 

populations so that at least two distinct 

viable populations exist; (2) ensure that 

studies of the species’ biological and 

ecological requirements are complete 

and that any required recovery measures 

developed and implemented from these 

studies are beginning to succeed; and (3) 

ensure that no foreseeable threats exist 

that would likely impact the survival of 

the two aforementioned viable 

populations. No delisting criteria are 

given in this recovery plan. 

The slender chub (Erimystax cahni) 

(Hubbs and Crowe 1956) was listed as 

a threatened species on September 9, 

1977, with critical habitat and a special 

rule (42 FR 45526). We completed a 

recovery plan for the species in July 

1983 (Service 1983a). It was historically 

known from the Clinch, Powell, and 

Holston Rivers (Service 1983a, pp. 2–3). 

The Holston River site is now under the 

Cherokee Reservoir. The species has not 

been found recently in the Powell River, 

and its continued existence in the 

Clinch River is represented by only one 

specimen taken in recent years (Rakes 

and Shute 2006, p. 1). However, 

collections made over the years have 

generally shown that specimens can 

often be taken only sporadically and in 

very small numbers. There was an effort 

to survey for the slender chub in 2004 

and 2005. No slender chubs were found, 

but the surveyors felt confident that at 

least a few individuals may still survive 

in the Clinch River and a propagation 

program could succeed (Rakes and 

Shute 2006, p. 5). Additional surveys for 

slender chubs are planned for 2007. 

Although the species has never been 

collected from the lower French Broad 

system, we and others believe the 

species once likely inhabited these 

waters (Rakes and Shute 1999, pp. 3–5). 

Our conclusion is based on the same 

facts outlined above for the duskytail 

darter. The delisting objectives for the 

slender chub (Service 1983a, pp. 8–9) 

are to: (1) Protect and enhance existing 

populations and/or reestablish 

populations so that viable populations 

exist in the Clinch and Powell Rivers; 

(2) ensure, through reintroductions and/ 

or the discovery of new populations, 

that one other viable population exists; 


gechino on PROD1PC76 with RULES
52440 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 177 / Thursday, September 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

(3) ensure that noticeable improvements 

in coal-related problems and substrate 

quality have occurred in the Powell 

River and that there is no increase in 

coal-related sedimentation in the Clinch 

River; and (4) protect the species from 

threats that may adversely affect the 

survival of the populations. 

The spotfin chub (Erimonax 

monachus) (Cope 1868) was listed as a 

threatened species on September 9, 

1977, with critical habitat and a special 

rule (42 FR 45526). The critical habitat 

map was corrected on September 22, 

1977 (42 FR 47840). We completed a 

recovery plan for the species in 

November 1983 (Service 1983b). Two 

NEPs have been established for the 

spotfin chub. The first was established 

for the spotfin chub and three other 

federally listed fishes for a section of the 

Tellico River in Monroe County, 

Tennessee, on August 12, 2002 (67 FR 

52420). The second was established for 

the spotfin chub and the boulder darter 

(Etheostoma wapiti) for a section of 

Shoal Creek (a tributary to the 

Tennessee River), Lauderdale County, 

Alabama, and Lawrence County, 

Tennessee, on April 8, 2005 (70 FR 

17916). This once-widespread species 

was historically known from 24 streams 

in the upper and middle Tennessee 

River system. Currently, it is extant in 

only four rivers/river systems (Service 

1983b, pp. 2–4; P. Shute 2004; TVA 

2004). CFI has reintroduced the species 

into Abrams Creek in Tennessee, and 

there are indications that it has become 

reestablished (Rakes et al. 2005, p. 106). 

Historical records exist for the species 

in the upper French Broad and upper 

Holston River systems, and the species 

still exists in the Holston River system 

above the Cherokee Reservoir (Service 

1983b, pp. 2–14). We and our partners 

believe the species once likely inhabited 

the waters of the lower French Broad 

and lower Holston Rivers. Our 

conclusion is based on the same facts 

outlined above for the duskytail darter. 

The delisting objectives for the spotfin 

chub (Service 1983b, pp. 19–20) are to: 

(1) Protect and enhance existing 

populations and/or reestablish 

populations so that viable populations 

exist in the Buffalo River system, upper 

Little Tennessee River, Emory River 

system, and lower North Fork Holston 

River; (2) ensure, through reintroduction 

and/or the discovery of two new 

populations, that viable populations 

exist in two other rivers; and (3) ensure 

that no present or foreseeable threats 

exist that would likely impact the 

survival of any populations. 

The yellowfin madtom (Noturus 

flavipinnis) (Taylor 1969) was listed as 

a threatened species on September 9, 

1977, with critical habitat and a special 

rule (42 FR 45526). The critical habitat 

map was corrected on September 22, 

1977 (42 FR 47840). We completed a 

recovery plan for the species in June 

1983 (Service 1983c). Two NEPs have 

been established for the yellowfin 

madtom. The first NEP was established 

for a section of the North Fork Holston 

River in Washington County, Virginia, 

on August 4, 1988 (53 FR 29335). The 

second NEP was established for the 

yellowfin madtom and three other 

federally listed fishes for a section of the 

Tellico River in Monroe County, 

Tennessee, on August 12, 2002 (67 FR 

52420). It was historically known from 

only seven streams (Service 1983c, p. 2). 

Four small extant populations still exist, 

one each in Citico Creek, Copper Creek, 

Clinch River, and the Powell River 

(Rakes and Shute 2006a, pp. 2, 6). The 

species was reintroduced into Abrams 

Creek, and the population is becoming 

reestablished (Shute et al. 2005, p. 106). 

Reintroductions into the NEP section of 

the Tellico River are ongoing and early 

results are promising (Rakes and Shute 

2005, p. 13). Although there are no 

historical records from the lower 

Holston River or French Broad River 

system, we and others believe that the 

species once likely inhabited these river 

reaches (Rakes and Shute 1999). Our 

conclusion is based on the same facts 

outlined above for the duskytail darter. 

The delisting objectives for the 

yellowfin madtom (Service 1983c, pp. 

8–10) are to: (1) Protect and enhance 

existing populations and/or reestablish 

populations so that viable populations 

exist in Copper Creek, Citico Creek, and 

the Powell River; (2) reestablish or 

discover viable populations in two 

additional rivers; (3) ensure that 

noticeable improvements in coal-related 

problems and substrate quality have 

occurred in the Powell River; and (4) 

ensure that each population is protected 

from present and foreseeable threats. 

The recovery objectives in the 

recovery plans for all of the 21 species 

generally agree that, to reach recovery: 

(1) Existing populations should be 

restored to viable levels; (2) the species 

should be protected from threats to their 

continued existence; and (3) viable 

populations should be reestablished in 

historical habitat. The number of secure, 

viable populations needed to achieve 

recovery (existing and restored) varies 

from species to species, depending on 

the extent of the species’ probable 

former range (i.e., historically 

widespread species require a greater 

number of populations for recovery than 

species with historically more restricted 

distributions). However, the 

reestablishment of historical 

populations is a critical component in 

the recovery of all these species. 

4. Reintroduction Site: At the request 

of the TVA and the TWRA, biologists 

from the Service, TVA, USGS, TWRA, 

and Alabama Game and Fish Division 

evaluated Tennessee River basin rivers 

for mollusk recovery potential. The 

biologists rated the French Broad River 

downstream of Douglas Dam as having 

a high potential for mollusk recovery 

and the Holston River below Cherokee 

Dam as having a medium potential 

primarily due to water quality and flow 

improvements to the tailwaters. In 

letters dated May 28, 1998, and June 29, 

1998, the TWRA’s Executive Director 

recommended that we consider 

reintroducing endangered mussels into 

the French Broad River below Douglas 

Dam and the Holston River below 

Cherokee Dam under NEP status. In an 

October 30, 1998, letter, the TWRA 

provided us with a list of mussel species 

(compiled by Tennessee mussel experts) 

that historically or probably occurred in 

these river reaches. In a December 9, 

1998, letter to us, the TVA (the 

managers of the dams above the NEP for 

hydroelectric power, flood control, and 

recreation) expressed support for mussel 

recovery efforts in the Tennessee River 

valley streams and tailwaters. 

Based on successes in Abrams Creek 

and CFI’s intimate knowledge of 

nongame fishes and their habitat needs, 

we contracted with them to survey the 

lower French Broad River and 

determine if we could expand our listed 

fish recovery efforts into this major 

Tennessee River tributary. CFI 

determined that the lower French Broad 

River contains potential suitable habitat 

for the reintroduction of the duskytail 

darter, pygmy madtom, spotfin chub, 

and yellowfin madtom (Rakes and Shute 

1999, pp. 2–4). Additionally, Rakes and 

Shute (2004) stated that the lower 

Holston River below Cherokee Dam 

could potentially support a 

reintroduced population of these fishes 

and that both river reaches contain 

potential habitat for slender chub 

reintroductions. 

In a May 17, 1999, letter to us, the 

TWRA’s Executive Director stated that 

he concurred with the conclusions in 

the report prepared by Rakes and Shute 

(1999). He recommended that we 

consider designating NEP status in the 

lower French Broad and Holston Rivers 

for the eventual reintroduction of these 

five fish species. 

We previously established NEPs for 

the birdwing pearlymussel, cracking 

pearlymussel, Cumberland bean, 

Cumberlandian combshell, Cumberland 

monkeyface, fine-rayed pigtoe, oyster 


gechino on PROD1PC76 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 177 / Thursday, September 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 52441 

mussel, shiny pigtoe, and Anthony’s 

riversnail in the free-flowing reach of 

the Tennessee River below the Wilson 

Dam in Colbert and Lauderdale 

Counties, Alabama (66 FR 32250, June 

14, 2001). In October 2003, 80 each of 

birdwing pearlymussels, oyster mussels, 

and dromedary mussels (dromedary 

mussels are not part of the Lower 

French Broad/Lower Holston NEP) and 

2,370 Anthony’s riversnails were placed 

in the NEP area below Wilson Dam. The 

status of these reintroduced mussels 

was checked during the summer of 2004 

and 2005. While it is too early to 

determine whether or not the 

reintroduced individuals will become 

an established population, a significant 

number of them have survived thus far, 

indicating that the reintroduction has a 

good chance of being successful. 

Establishment of viable populations of 

these species in both the Tennessee 

River below the Wilson Dam under the 

existing regulation and in the lower 

French Broad and lower Holston Rivers, 

through this regulation, is an objective 

in the recovery of these species. 

However, it will take several years of 

monitoring to fully evaluate if 

populations of these species (and the 

other species) have become established 

and remain viable in these historic river 

reaches. 

Based on the presence of suitable 

physical habitat, the positive response 

of endemic aquatic species to habitat 

improvements, improved quality of the 

water being released from the dams, the 

recommendations of the TWRA’s 

Executive Director, and the evaluation 

of biologists familiar with the lower 

French Broad and Holston Rivers, we 

believe the French Broad River 

(downstream of Douglas Dam) and the 

Holston River (downstream of Cherokee 

Dam) appear suitable for the 

reintroduction of these 21 species with 

NEP status. 

We plan to reintroduce these 21 

species into historical habitat in the 

free-flowing reach of the French Broad 

River from RM 22.3 (35.7 km) 

(approximately 10 RM (16 km) below 

Douglas Dam), Knox and Sevier 

Counties, Tennessee, to the backwaters 

of Fort Loudoun Reservoir, upstream of, 

but near the confluence with the 

Holston River, Knox County, Tennessee, 

and in the free-flowing reach of the 

Holston River, Knox, Grainger, and 

Jefferson Counties, Tennessee, from 

above the backwaters of Fort Loudoun 

Reservoir just upstream of its 

confluence with the French Broad River, 

upstream to RM 42.3 (67.7 km) 

(approximately 10 RM (16 km) below 

Cherokee Dam). These river reaches 

contain the most suitable habitat for the 

reintroductions. None of these 21 

species are known to currently exist in 

these river reaches, in tributaries to 

these reaches, or have free access to 

these reaches. 

5. Reintroduction Procedures: The 

dates for these reintroductions, the 

actual number of individuals to be 

released, and the specific release sites 

cannot be determined at this time. 

Mussel propagation and juvenile 

rearing technology are currently being 

refined (Jones et al. 2005). Genetic 

management guidelines for captive 

propagation of freshwater mussels have 

also recently been developed (Jones et 

al. 2006). Juvenile mussels of some 

species could be available for 

reintroduction soon after this NEP rule 

is finalized. Individual endangered 

mussels that would be used for these 

reintroductions will be primarily 

artificially propagated juveniles. 

However, it is possible that wild adult 

stock of some mussels could also be 

released into the area. The parent stock 

for mussel propagation will come from 

existing wild populations in the 

Tennessee, Cumberland, and Ohio 

Rivers, and in most cases, adults will be 

returned to the capture site. Under some 

circumstances, adult endangered 

mussels could be permanently relocated 

(i.e., kept in captivity for their entire 

life) to propagation facilities or moved 

directly into the NEP area after being 

used for propagation purposes. A permit 

under section 10 of the ESA would be 

needed for handling and maintaining 

threatened and endangered species in 

captivity. 

Anthony’s riversnails will likely be 

collected for the reintroductions from a 

large naturally reproducing population 

located in Limestone Creek, Limestone 

County, Alabama, and relocated directly 

into the NEP. 

Individual fishes that would be used 

for these reintroductions will be 

primarily artificially propagated 

juveniles. However, it is possible that 

wild adult stock of some fishes could 

also be released into the NEP area. 

Propagation and juvenile rearing 

technology is available for the spotfin 

chub, slender chub, and duskytail 

darter. Limited numbers of yellowfin 

madtom juveniles can be reared using 

eggs and larvae taken from the wild, and 

some pygmy madtoms can be 

propagated. However, madtom 

propagation technology, which is 

needed to produce large numbers of 

juvenile madtoms, needs further 

development. The parental stock for fish 

propagation and reintroductions will 

come from wild populations. Duskytail 

darters will likely come from Little 

River in Tennessee. Yellowfin madtoms 

will likely come from the Powell River 

in Tennessee. Spotfin chubs will likely 

come from upstream in the Holston 

River system above Cherokee Dam in 

Tennessee. Pygmy madtoms will come 

from the Clinch River in Tennessee. 

Slender chubs will come from the upper 

Tennessee River basin in Tennessee and 

Virginia. In some cases, the parents will 

be returned to the wild population from 

which they were taken. However, in 

most cases, adult fishes will be 

permanently relocated to propagation 

facilities. 

To help ensure the genetic integrity of 

the reintroduced species and to match 

as closely as possible the genetic 

composition of the historical 

populations, we will observe the 

following guidelines: (1) To reduce 

homozygosity, at least 10 gravid female 

mussels, 10 fishes, and 10 snails, 

whenever possible, will be used as 

parental stock over the life of the 

reintroduction project (if this number 

cannot be obtained for very rare species, 

we will use whatever number is 

available) and (2) to match as closely as 

possible the genetic composition of the 

species that once existed in the lower 

French Broad and Holston Rivers, the 

adults and brood stock for the 

reintroductions will be collected using 

the following criteria (in order of 

decreasing importance): (a) Donor 

animals will be collected from 

populations in adjacent stream/tributary 

systems in the same physiographic 

province, (b) donor animals will be 

collected from populations in adjacent 

stream/tributary systems in an adjacent 

physiographic province, and (c) donor 

animals will be collected from the only 

population with a sufficient number of 

adults to produce progeny. 

The permanent removal of adults 

(mollusks and fishes) from the wild for 

their use in reintroduction efforts is 

allowable when the following 

conditions exist: (1) Sufficient numbers 

of adults are available within a donor 

population to sustain the loss without 

jeopardizing the species; (2) the species 

must be removed from an area because 

of an imminent threat that is likely to 

eliminate the population or specific 

individuals present in an area; or (3) 

when the population is not reproducing 

(see 50 CFR § 17.22). For these 21 

species, it is most likely that adults will 

be permanently removed because of the 

first condition. However, fewer adults 

will be needed for propagation than for 

actually moving individuals from a 

donor population to the NEP. An 

enhancement of propagation or survival 

permit under section 10(a)(1)(A) of the 

Act must be issued before any take 

occurs. We will coordinate these actions 


gechino on PROD1PC76 with RULES
52442 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 177 / Thursday, September 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

with the Service’s appropriate lead 

regions and State natural resources 

agencies. 

6. Status of Reintroduced 

Populations: Previous translocations, 

propagations, and reintroductions of 

many of these species have not affected 

their wild populations. The use of 

artificially propagated juveniles will 

further reduce the potential effects on 

wild populations since fewer adults 

would be needed from the donor 

population. If any of the reintroduced 

populations become established and are 

subsequently lost, the likelihood of the 

species’ survival in the wild would not 

be appreciably reduced because either 

the reintroduced individuals will be 

from propagated stock or the donor 

population will be of sufficient size to 

handle movement of adults. Therefore, 

we have determined that the 

reintroduced populations of these 21 

species in the lower French Broad and 

Holston Rivers are not essential to the 

continued existence of these species. 

We will ensure, through our section 10 

permit authority and the section 7 

consultation process, that the use of 

animals from any donor population for 

these reintroductions is not likely to 

jeopardize the continued existence of 

the species. 

7. Location of Reintroduced 

Population: The NEP area, which 

encompasses all the sites for the 

reintroductions, will extend from the 

base of Douglas Dam down the French 

Broad River, Knox and Sevier Counties, 

Tennessee, to its confluence with the 

Holston River and then up the Holston 

River, Knox, Grainger, and Jefferson 

Counties, Tennessee, to the base of 

Cherokee Dam and also will include the 

lower 5 RM (8 km) of all tributaries that 

enter these river reaches. Section 10(j) of 

the Act requires that an experimental 

population be geographically separate 

from other wild populations of the same 

species. The NEP area is totally isolated 

from existing populations of these 

species by large reservoirs, and none of 

these species are known to occur in, or 

are likely to move through, large 

reservoir habitat. Therefore, these 

reservoirs will act as barriers to the 

expansion of these species into other 

sections of the Tennessee River basin 

and will ensure that the NEPs remain 

geographically isolated and easily 

distinguishable from existing wild 

populations. Based on the habitat 

requirements of these mollusks and 

fishes, we do not expect them to become 

established outside the NEP area. 

However, if any of the reintroduced 

species move outside the designated 

NEP area, then the animals would be 

considered to have come from the NEP 

area. In that case, we may propose to 

amend this rule and enlarge the 

boundaries of the NEP area to include 

the entire range of the expanded 

population(s). 

The designated NEP area for the 

duskytail darter, spotfin chub, and 

yellowfin madtom in the Tellico River 

(67 FR 52420, August 12, 2002) does not 

overlap or interfere with this NEP area 

for the lower French Broad and lower 

Holston Rivers in Tennessee because 

they are geographically separated river 

reaches. The designated NEP for the 

spotfin chub in Shoal Creek, Tennessee, 

(67 FR 17916) does not overlap or 

interfere with this NEP area for the 

lower French Broad and lower Holston 

Rivers in Tennessee because they are 

geographically separated river reaches. 

Similarly, the NEP for the yellowfin 

madtom in the North Fork Holston River 

(53 FR 29335, August 4, 1998) is 

separated by reservoirs and long 

stretches of river that do not contain 

yellowfin madtoms or their habitat and 

act as effective barriers between madtom 

populations in the North Fork Holston 

River and the NEP in the lower Holston 

River. 

The designated NEP area for the 

birdwing pearlymussel, cracking 

pearlymussel, Cumberland bean, 

Cumberlandian combshell, Cumberland 

monkeyface, dromedary pearlymussel, 

fine-rayed pigtoe, oyster mussel, shiny 

pigtoe, tubercled blossom, and 

Anthony’s riversnail in the Tennessee 

River below the Wilson Dam (66 FR 

32250, June 14, 2001) in Alabama does 

not overlap or interfere with this NEP 

area for the lower French Broad and 

lower Holston Rivers in Tennessee 

because they are geographically 

separated river reaches with several 

reservoirs between them. 

Critical habitat has been designed for 

Cumberlandian combshell and oyster 

mussel (69 FR 53136, August 31, 2004), 

and the slender chub, spotfin chub, and 

yellowfin madtom (42 FR 45526, 

September 9, 1977); however, none of 

these designations include the NEP area. 

Critical habitat has not been designated 

for the 16 other species identified in this 

rule. Section 10(j)(2)(C)(ii) of the Act 

states that critical habitat shall not be 

designated for any experimental 

population that is determined to be 

nonessential. Accordingly, we cannot 

designate critical habitat in areas where 

we have already established, by 

regulation, a nonessential experimental 

population. 

8. Management: The aquatic resources 

in the reintroduction area are managed 

by the TWRA and the TVA. Multipleuse management of these waters will not 

change as a result of the NEP 

designation. The NEP designation will 

not require the TWRA or the TVA to 

specifically manage for reintroduced 

species in the NEP area. Private 

landowners within the NEP area will 

still be allowed to continue all legal 

agricultural and recreational activities. 

Because of the substantial regulatory 

relief provided by NEP designations, we 

do not believe these reintroductions will 

conflict with existing human activities 

or hinder public use of the NEP area. 

The Service, State, TVA, and CFI staff 

will all be involved in the management 

of the reintroductions. They will closely 

coordinate on reintroductions, 

monitoring, coordination with 

landowners and land managers, and 

public awareness, among other tasks 

necessary to ensure successful 

reintroductions of these species. 

(a) Mortality: The regulations 

implementing the Act define 

‘‘incidental take’’ as take that is 

incidental to, and not the purpose of, 

the carrying out of an otherwise lawful 

activity (50 CFR 17.3) such as recreation 

(e.g., fishing, boating, wading, trapping, 

or swimming), forestry, agriculture, and 

other activities that are in accordance 

with Federal, Tribal, State, and local 

laws and regulations. A person may take 

a listed species within the experimental 

population area provided that the take 

is unintentional and is not due to 

negligent conduct. However, when we 

have evidence of knowing (i.e., 

intentional) take of the listed species 

within the NEP, we will refer matters to 

the authorities, which in most cases for 

these reintroduced species would be the 

State agency, TWRA, for appropriate 

action. We expect levels of incidental 

take to be low since the reintroduction 

is compatible with existing human use 

activities and practices for the area. 

(b) Special Handling: Service 

employees and authorized agents acting 

on their behalf may handle these 21 

species for scientific purposes; to 

relocate them to avoid conflict with 

human activities; for recovery purposes; 

to relocate them to other reintroduction 

sites; to aid sick or injured individuals; 

and to salvage dead individuals. 

(c) Coordination with landowners and 

land managers: The Service and 

cooperators identified issues and 

concerns associated with the 

reintroduction of these 21 species before 

preparing this rule. The reintroduction 

also has been discussed with potentially 

affected State agencies, businesses, and 

landowners within the release area. 

Affected State agencies, businesses, 

landowners, and land managers, 

including the TWRA and TVA, have 

indicated support for the reintroduction, 

if the species released in the 


gechino on PROD1PC76 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 177 / Thursday, September 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 52443 

experimental population area are 

established as an NEP and if aquatic 

resource activities in the experimental 

population area are not constrained. 

(d) Potential for conflict with human 

activities: We do not believe these 

reintroductions will conflict with 

existing or human activities or hinder 

public use of the NEP area within the 

French Broad and Holston Rivers. 

Experimental population special rules 

contain all the prohibitions and 

exceptions regarding the taking of 

individual animals. These special rules 

are compatible with routine human 

activities in the reintroduction area. 

(e) Monitoring: After the initial 

stocking of these species, we will 

monitor annually their presence or 

absence and document any spawning 

behavior or young-of-the-year that might 

be present. This monitoring will be 

conducted primarily by snorkeling or 

seining and will be accomplished by 

contracting with the appropriate species 

experts. Annual reports will be 

produced detailing the stocking rates 

and monitoring activities that took place 

during the previous year. We will also 

fully evaluate these reintroduction 

efforts after 5 and 10 years to determine 

whether to continue or terminate the 

reintroduction efforts. 

(f) Public awareness and cooperation: 

On January 12, 1999, we mailed letters 

to 47 potentially affected congressional 

offices, Federal and State agencies, local 

governments, and interested parties to 

notify them that we were considering 

proposing NEP status in the lower 

French Broad and Holston Rivers for the 

16 mollusks (at the time of this letter, 

we had not yet decided to propose the 

fish reintroductions). We received one 

written response. The Tennessee 

Department of Environment and 

Conservation supported the 

reintroduction of the mollusks under 

NEP status. It stated that NEP status 

represents an appropriate step toward 

promoting the species’ recovery while 

protecting the rights and privileges of 

Tennessee’s citizens. 

We did not circulate a similar notice 

regarding the potential of proposing 

NEP status for the five fishes. The report 

on the area’s suitability for fish 

reintroductions (Rakes and Shute 1999) 

was not available when the mollusk 

notice was circulated. However, since 

we received only one comment on the 

mollusk notice, the TWRA and the TVA 

both support the mollusk and fish 

reintroductions under NEP status, and 

the inclusion of these fishes in the 

proposal would not result in any 

additional impact to public or 

government agency use of the river, we 

did not believe it was necessary to 

circulate a separate notice regarding 

these fishes. In any case, through the 

proposed rule, the public was given the 

opportunity to comment on the NEP 

designation for these fishes (see 

Summary of Comments and 

Recommendations Section below). 

We have informed the general public 

of the importance of this reintroduction 

project in the overall recovery of these 

21 species. The designation of the NEP 

for these reaches of the French Broad 

and Holston Rivers will provide greater 

flexibility in the management of these 

reintroduced species. The NEP 

designation is necessary to secure 

needed cooperation of the States, Tribes, 

landowners, agencies, and other 

interests in the affected area. 

Finding 

Based on the above information, and 

using the best scientific and commercial 

data available (in accordance with 50 

CFR 17.81), the Service finds that 

releasing the Appalachian monkeyface, 

birdwing pearlymussel, cracking 

pearlymussel, Cumberland bean, 

Cumberlandian combshell, Cumberland 

monkeyface, dromedary pearlymussel, 

fanshell, fine-rayed pigtoe, orange-foot 

pimpleback, oyster mussel, ring pink, 

rough pigtoe, shiny pigtoe, white 

wartyback, Anthony’s riversnail, 

duskytail darter, pygmy madtom, 

slender chub, spotfin chub, and 

yellowfin madtom into the lower French 

Broad and lower Holston Rivers 

Experimental Population Area under an 

NEP designation will further the 

conservation of these species. 

Other Changes to the Regulations 

In addition, we are making a minor 

technical correction to the existing 

regulation regarding the birdwing 

pearlymussel. The birdwing 

pearlymussel was listed on June 14, 

1976 (41 FR 24062), under the scientific 

name of Conradilla caelata. The current 

list of endangered and threatened 

species at 50 CFR 17.11(h) uses the 

scientific name of Conradilla caelata for 

the birdwing pearlymussel. In the latest 

edition of the Common and Scientific 

Names of Aquatic Invertebrates from the 

United States and Canada published by 

the American Fisheries Society, the 

scientific name has been changed to 

Lemiox rimosus (Turgeon et al. 1998). 

This name change has occurred in a 

peer-reviewed publication and has 

acceptance in the scientific community. 

Therefore, we are correcting the text for 

the current list of endangered and 

threatened species at 50 CFR 17.11(h) 

and the existing experimental 

population in the free-flowing reach of 

the Tennessee River below Wilson Dam 

in Alabama at 50 CFR 17.85 by changing 

the scientific name for the birdwing 

pearlymussel from Conradilla caelata to 

Lemiox rimosus (see Regulation 

Promulgation section below). 

We are also making editorial changes 

to 50 CFR 17.84(m) and 17.84(o). These 

paragraphs currently provide NEP 

information for multiple species; 

§ 17.84(m) sets forth the Tellico River 

NEP area for spotfin chub, duskytail 

darter, and smoky madtom, while 

§ 17.84 (o) sets forth the Shoal Creek 

NEP area for spotfin chub and boulder 

darter. In this final rule, we reformat 

this information into species-specific 

paragraphs, so that each fish species has 

its own NEP paragraph. These changes 

are nonsubstantive; no existing NEP 

areas would change as a result of the 

reformatting. The changes are simply for 

clarity and consistency, and to make 

information easier for the public to find. 

Finally, we are also making editorial 

changes to replace the introductory text 

at 50 CFR 17.85(a) with a table for 

clarity. Again, this is a nonsubstantive 

change; no existing NEP areas would 

change as a result of the reformatting. 

Summary of Comments and 

Recommendations 

In the June 13, 2006, proposed rule 

(71 FR 34196), we requested that all 

interested parties submit comments or 

information concerning the proposed 

NEP. We contacted appropriate Federal, 

State, and local agencies, county 

governments, elected officials, scientific 

organizations, and other interested 

parties and invited them to comment on 

the proposed NEP. We also provided 

notification of this document through 

email, telephone calls, letters, and news 

releases faxed and/or mailed to affected 

elected officials, media outlets, local 

jurisdictions, and interested groups. We 

provided the document on the Service’s 

Cookeville Field Office Internet site 

following its release. 

During the public comment period, 

we received comments from four 

parties: One federal agency and three 

universities. All four parties supported 

the NEP. The three university parties 

were peer reviewers (see below). The 

federal agency, Tennessee Valley 

Authority, operates the two dams on the 

lower French Broad and lower Holston 

Rivers. TWRA did not provide 

comments during the public comment 

period but remain supportive of this 

effort. 

In conformance with our policy on 

peer review, published on July 1, 1994 

(59 FR 34270), we solicited independent 

opinions from four knowledgeable 

individuals who have expertise with 

these species within the geographic 


gechino on PROD1PC76 with RULES
52444 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 177 / Thursday, September 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

region where the species occur, and/or 

familiarity with the principles of 

conservation biology. We received 

comments from three of the four peer 

reviewers. These are included in the 

summary below and incorporated into 

this final rule. 

We reviewed all comments received 

from the peer reviewers and the public 

for substantive issues and new 

information regarding the proposed 

NEP. Substantive comments received 

during the comment period have either 

been addressed below or incorporated 

directly into this final rule. The 

comments are grouped below as either 

peer review or public comments. 

Peer Review Comments 

(1) Comment: A recent publication 

entitled ‘‘Restoration and colonization 

of freshwater mussels and fish in a 

southeastern United States tailwater’’ by 

Layzer and Scott (2005) should be cited 

in lieu of some of the personal 

communications. 

Response: We have added this 

citation to the document where 

appropriate. 

(2) Comment: Continued operation of 

the dams as peaking hydroelectric 

projects will further hinder 

recolonization of the mid-water fish 

species and reduce the likelihood of 

establishing populations of some of the 

mussel species that rely on them as 

glochidial hosts. 

Response: TVA continues to improve 

the conditions of the tailwaters below 

the two dams. We acknowledge that 

more work needs to be done to reduce 

the peak flows in both intensity and 

duration. We will continue to work with 

TVA to accomplish that goal. In the 

meantime, mussel species that use 

benthic fishes as glochidial hosts, such 

as the oyster mussel and birdwing 

pearlymussel, can be reintroduced as 

soon as this rule becomes final, since 

their glochidial host fish species are 

abundant in both rivers. 

(3) Comment: A recent publication 

entitled ‘‘Genetic management 

guidelines for captive propagation of 

freshwater mussels (Unionoidea)’’ by 

Jones et al. (2006) should provide a 

citation for all genetic management 

issues related to either translocation or 

propagation of endangered freshwater 

mollusks. 

Response: We have added this 

citation to the document where 

appropriate. 

(4) Comment: Under 50 CFR 17.85, 

Special rules—invertebrates, there are a 

couple of extinct species listed in the 

table of NEP’s in the Tennessee River. 

This may be very confusing to the 

public and perhaps be interpreted as 

contradictory to the ‘‘best available 

science.’’

Response: The table lists all the 

mollusk species that are included in the 

existing NEP below Wilson Dam in the 

Tennessee River (66 FR 32250, June 14, 

2001). We realize that some of these 

species (in particular the tubercled 

blossom, turgid blossom, and yellow 

blossom pearlymussels) have not been 

found alive in 20 years or longer and 

that many experts believe that they may 

indeed be extinct. On the other hand, 

mussels can be found after a long time 

of not being seen in collection records 

and, presently, the Service has not 

declared any of these species extinct. 

These mussels are not part of this final 

action being set forth for the lower 

French Broad and lower Holston Rivers. 

However, the Service has initiated 5- 

year reviews for each of these mussels 

(70 FR 55157, September 20, 2005) and 

is in the process of assessing the 

mussels’ listed status under the Act. If 

a change in status is recommended 

based on the review conducted, the 

Service would be required to go through 

a separate rulemaking process to 

formally change a species’ listed status. 

At that time, the Service would consider 

associated existing regulations for the 

respective species and determine if 

corrections are necessary. 

Public Comments 

(5) Comment: The ‘‘accidental and 

incidental take’’ provision should be 

expanded to state that any take as a 

result of TVA’s operation of its 

multipurpose dams and associated 

works (e.g., fluctuation of flows, 

adjustment of aeration systems) would 

be considered a permissible incidental 

take. 

Response: The rule clearly states that 

section 10(j) of the Act can provide 

regulatory relief with regard to the 

taking of reintroduced species within an 

NEP area. The rule allows for the taking 

of these reintroduced species when such 

take is incidental to an otherwise legal 

activity that is in accordance with 

Federal, State, and local laws and 

regulations. This rule applies to any 

legal activity TVA might undertake. 

(6) Comment: The upstream limits of 

the NEP should be reconsidered since 

areas immediately downstream of the 

dams and for some distance 

downstream do not provide suitable 

habitat for any of these species due to 

dam operations. 

Response: We acknowledge that 

presently the conditions below both 

dams (Cherokee and Douglas) are not 

sufficient to sustain viable populations 

of these listed species. However, 

particularly with the fish species, there 

could be some movement in and out of 

these areas. In order to provide 

regulatory relief, should any of these 

species move into these areas, we would 

have to designate the area as being part 

of the NEP. For this reason, we are going 

to leave the limits of the NEP as 

originally drafted to include the freeflowing reach of the French Broad River 

below Douglas Dam to its confluence 

with the Holston River and the freeflowing reach of the Holston River 

below Cherokee Dam to its confluence 

with the French Broad River. 

Required Determinations 

Regulatory Planning and Review (E.O. 

12866) 

In accordance with the criteria in 

Executive Order 12866, this rule to 

designate NEP status for and 

reintroduce 15 endangered mussels, 1 

endangered aquatic snail, 2 endangered 

fishes, and 3 threatened fishes in the 

free-flowing reach of the French Broad 

River below Douglas Dam to its 

confluence with the Holston River, 

Knox County, Tennessee, and in the 

free-flowing reach of the Holston River 

below Cherokee Dam to its confluence 

with the French Broad River is not a 

significant regulatory action subject to 

Office of Management and Budget 

review. This rule will not have an 

annual economic effect of $100 million 

or more on the economy and will not 

have an adverse effect on any economic 

sector, productivity, competition, jobs, 

the environment, or other units of 

government. The area affected by this 

rule consists of a very limited and 

discrete geographic segment of the 

lower French Broad River (about 32 RM 

(51 km)) and the lower Holston River 

(about 52 RM (83 km)) in eastern 

Tennessee. Therefore, a cost-benefit and 

economic analysis will not be required. 

We do not expect this rule to have 

significant impacts to existing human 

activities (e.g., hydroelectric power 

generation, flood control, agricultural 

activities, fishing, boating, wading, 

swimming, trapping) in the watershed. 

These rivers already have populations of 

the federally listed threatened snail 

darter (Percina tanasi) and endangered 

pink mucket mussel (Lampsilis 

abrupta), both of which require Federal 

agencies to consult with us under 

section 7 of the Act if their activities 

may adversely affect these species. The 

reintroduction of these federally listed 

species, which will be accomplished 

under NEP status with its associated 

regulatory relief, is not expected to 

impact Federal agency actions. Because 

of the substantial regulatory relief, we 

do not believe the reintroduction of 


gechino on PROD1PC76 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 177 / Thursday, September 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 52445 

these species will conflict with existing 

or proposed human activities or hinder 

public use of the French Broad or 

Holston Rivers. 

This rule will not create 

inconsistencies with other agencies’

actions or otherwise interfere with an 

action taken or planned by another 

agency. Federal agencies most interested 

in this rulemaking are primarily the 

Environmental Protection Agency and 

TVA. Both Federal agencies support the 

proposal. 

This rule will not materially affect 

entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan 

programs, or the rights and obligations 

of their recipients. Because there are no 

expected impacts or restrictions to 

existing human uses of the French 

Broad and Holston Rivers as a result of 

this rule, no entitlements, grants, user 

fees, loan programs, or the rights and 

obligations of their recipients are 

expected to occur. 

This rule does not raise novel legal or 

policy issues. Since 1984, we have 

promulgated section 10(j) rules for many 

other listed species in various localities. 

Such rules are designed to reduce the 

regulatory burden that would otherwise 

exist when reintroducing listed species 

to the wild. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Department of the Interior 

certifies that this document will not 

have a significant economic effect on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Although most of the 

identified entities are small businesses 

engaged in activities along the affected 

reaches of these rivers, this rulemaking 

is not expected to have any significant 

impact on private activities in the 

affected area. The designation of a NEP 

in this rule will significantly reduce the 

regulatory requirements regarding the 

reintroduction of these species, will not 

create inconsistencies with other 

agencies’ actions, and will not conflict 

with existing or proposed human 

activity, or Federal, State, or public use 

of the land or aquatic resources. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

This rule is not a major rule under 5 

U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. 

This rule will not have an annual effect 

on the economy of $100 million or 

more. It will not cause a major increase 

in costs or prices for consumers, 

individual industries, Federal, State, or 

local government agencies, or 

geographical regions. This rule does not 

have significant adverse effects on 

competition, employment, investment, 

productivity, innovation, or the ability 

of United States-based enterprises to 

compete with foreign-based enterprises. 

The intent of this special rule is to 

facilitate and continue the existing 

commercial activity while providing for 

the conservation of species through 

reintroduction into suitable habitat. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

The NEP designation will not place 

any additional requirements on any city, 

county, or other local municipality. The 

TWRA, which manages the fishes and 

mollusks in the French Broad and 

Holston Rivers, requested that we 

consider these reintroductions under a 

NEP designation. However, they will 

not be required to specifically manage 

for any reintroduced species. 

Accordingly, this rule will not 

‘‘significantly or uniquely’’ affect small 

governments. A Small Government 

Agency Plan is not required since this 

rulemaking does not require any action 

to be taken by local or State government 

or private entities. We have determined 

and certify pursuant to the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act, 2, U.S.C. 1502 et. 

seq., that this rulemaking will not 

impose a cost of $100 million or more 

in any given year on local or State 

governments or private entities (i.e., it is 

not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

under the Unfunded Mandates Reform 

Act). 

Takings (E.O. 12630) 

In accordance with Executive Order 

12630, the rule does not have significant 

takings implications. When 

reintroduced populations of federally 

listed species are designated as NEPs, 

the Act’s regulatory requirements 

regarding the reintroduced listed 

species within the NEP are significantly 

reduced. Section 10(j) of the Act can 

provide regulatory relief with regard to 

the taking of reintroduced species 

within an NEP area. For example, this 

rule allows for the taking of these 

reintroduced mollusks and fishes when 

such take is incidental to an otherwise 

legal activity, such as recreation (e.g., 

fishing, boating, wading, trapping, 

swimming), forestry, agriculture, and 

other activities that are in accordance 

with Federal, State, and local laws and 

regulations. Because of the substantial 

regulatory relief provided by NEP 

designations, we do not believe the 

reintroduction of these species will 

conflict with existing or proposed 

human activities or hinder public use of 

the French Broad and Holston River 

systems. 

A takings implication assessment is 

not required because this rule (1) Will 

not effectively compel a property owner 

to suffer a physical invasion of property 

and (2) will not deny all economically 

beneficial or productive use of the land 

or aquatic resources. This rule will 

substantially advance a legitimate 

government interest (conservation and 

recovery of listed freshwater mussel, 

snail, and fish species) and will not 

present a barrier to all reasonable and 

expected beneficial use of private 

property. 

Federalism (E.O. 13132) 

In accordance with Executive Order 

13132, this rule does not have 

significant Federalism effects to warrant 

the preparation of a Federalism 

Assessment. This rule will not have 

substantial direct effects on the States, 

in the relationship between the Federal 

Government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. We have 

coordinated extensively with the State 

of Tennessee on the reintroduction of 

these species into the French Broad and 

Holston River systems. The State 

wildlife agency in Tennessee (TWRA) 

requested that we undertake this 

rulemaking in order to assist the State 

in the restoration and recovery of its 

native aquatic fauna. Achieving the 

recovery goals for these species will 

contribute to their eventual delisting 

and their return to State management. 

No intrusion on State policy or 

administration is expected; roles and 

responsibilities of Federal or State 

governments will not change; and fiscal 

capacity will not be substantially 

directly affected. The special rule 

operates to maintain the existing 

relationship between the States and the 

Federal government and is being 

undertaken at the request of a State 

agency (TWRA). We have cooperated 

with the TWRA in the preparation of 

this rule. Therefore, this rule does not 

have significant Federalism effects or 

implications to warrant the preparation 

of a Federalism Assessment pursuant to 

the provisions of Executive Order 

13132. 

Civil Justice Reform 

In accordance with Executive Order 

12988, the Office of the Solicitor has 

determined that this rule does not 

unduly burden the judicial system and 

that it meets the requirements of 

sections (3)(a) and (3)(b)(2) of the Order. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) regulations at 5 CFR part 1320, 

which implement provisions of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 

3501 et seq.) require that Federal 


gechino on PROD1PC76 with RULES
52446 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 177 / Thursday, September 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

agencies obtain approval from OMB 

before collecting information from the 

public. An agency may not conduct or 

sponsor, and a person is not required to 

respond to, a collection of information 

unless it displays a currently valid 

control number. This rule does not 

include any new collections of 

information that require approval by 

OMB under the Paperwork Reduction 

Act. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) 

We have determined that the issuance 

of this rule is categorically excluded 

from National Environmental Policy Act 

requirements (516 DM 6, Appendix 1.4 

B(6)). 

Government-to-Government 

Relationship With Tribes 

In accordance with the President’s 

memorandum of April 29, 1994, 

‘‘Government-to-Government Relations 

with Native American Tribal 

Governments’’ (59 FR 229511), 

Executive Order 13175, and the 

Department of the Interior Manual 

Chapter 512 DM 2, we have evaluated 

possible effects on federally recognized 

Indian tribes and have determined that 

there are no effects. 

Energy Supply, Distribution or Use (E.O. 

13211) 

On May 18, 2001, the President issued 

Executive Order 13211 on regulations 

that significantly affect energy supply, 

distribution, and use. Executive Order 

13211 requires agencies to prepare 

Statements of Energy Effects when 

undertaking certain actions. This rule is 

not expected to significantly affect 

energy supplies, distribution, and use. 

Therefore, this action is not a significant 

energy action and no Statement of 

Energy Effects is required. 

References Cited 

A complete list of all references cited 

herein is available, upon request, from 

the Cookeville, TN Field Office (see 

ADDRESSES section). 

Author 

The principal author of this rule is 

Timothy Merritt, Cookeville Field Office 

(see ADDRESSES section). 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 

Endangered and threatened species, 

Exports, Imports, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, and 

Transportation. 

Final Regulation Promulgation 

■ Accordingly, we amend part 17, 

subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations as set forth 

below: 

PART 17—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 17 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 16 U.S.C. 

1531–1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201–4245; Pub. L. 99–

625, 100 Stat. 3500, unless otherwise noted. 

■ 2. Amend § 17.11(h), the List of 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife, as 

follows: 

■ a. Under the heading ‘‘FISHES,’’ by 

revising the entries for ‘‘Chub, slender’’; 

‘‘Chub, spotfin’’; ‘‘Darter, duskytail’’; 

‘‘Madtom, pygmy’’; ‘‘Madtom, smoky’’; 

and ‘‘Madtom, yellowfin’’ to read as set 

forth below; 

■ b. Under the heading ‘‘CLAMS,’’ by 

revising the entries for ‘‘Bean, 

Cumberland (pearlymussel)’’; ‘‘Blossom, 

tubercled (pearlymussel)’’; ‘‘Blossom, 

turgid (pearlymussel)’’; ‘‘Blossom, 

yellow (pearlymussel)’’; ‘‘Catspaw 

(purple cat’s paw pearlymussel)’’; 

‘‘Clubshell’’; ‘‘Combshell, 

Cumberlandian’’; ‘‘Fanshell’’; 

‘‘Lampmussel, Alabama’’; ‘‘Mapleleaf, 

winged (mussel)’’; ‘‘Monkeyface, 

Appalachian (pearlymussel)’’; 

‘‘Monkeyface, Cumberland 

(pearlymussel)’’; ‘‘Mussel, oyster’’; 

‘‘Pearlymussel, birdwing’’; 

‘‘Pearlymussel, cracking’’; 

‘‘Pearlymussel, dromedary’’; ‘‘Pigtoe, 

fine-rayed’’; ‘‘Pigtoe, rough’’; ‘‘Pigtoe, 

shiny’’; ‘‘Pimpleback, orangefoot 

(pearlymussel)’’; ‘‘Pink, ring (mussel)’’; 

and ‘‘Wartyback, white (pearlymussel)’’

to read as set forth below; and 

■ c. Under the heading ‘‘SNAILS,’’ by 

revising the entry for ‘‘Riversnail, 

Anthony’s’’ to read as set forth below. 

§ 17.11 Endangered and threatened 

wildlife. 

* * * * * 

(h) * * * 

Species Historic 

range 

Vertebrate population where endangered or threatened 

Status When 

listed 

Critical 

habitat 

Special 

rules Common name Scientific name 

* * * * * * * 

FISHES

* * * * * * * 

Chub, slender .......... Erimystax cahni ...... U.S.A. (TN, VA) ...... Entire, except where 

listed as an experimental population.

T 28 17.95(e) 17.44(c) 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (TN—specified portions of 

the French Broad 

and Holston Rivers; see 

17.84(s)(1)(i)).

XN .................... NA 17.84(sr) 

* * * * * * * 

Chub, spotfin 

(=turquoise shiner).

Erimonax monachus U.S.A. (AL, GA, NC, 

TN, VA).

Entire, except where 

listed as an experimental population.

T 28 17.95(e) 17.44(c) 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (TN—specified portions of 

the Tellico River; 

see 

17.84(m)(1)(i)).

XN 732 NA 17.84(m) 


gechino on PROD1PC76 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 177 / Thursday, September 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 52447 

Species Historic 

range 

Vertebrate population where endangered or threatened 

Status When 

listed 

Critical 

habitat 

Special 

rules Common name Scientific name 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (AL, TN—

specified portions 

of Shoal Creek; 

see 

17.84(m)(1)(ii)).

XN 747 NA 17.84(m) 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (TN—specified portions of 

the French Broad 

and Holston Rivers; see 

17.84(m)(1)(iii)).

XN .................... NA 17.84(m) 

* * * * * * * 

Darter, duskytail ....... Etheostoma 

percnurum.

U.S.A. (TN, VA) ...... Entire, except where 

listed as an experimental population.

E 502 NA NA 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (TN—specified portions of 

the Tellico River; 

see 17.84(p)(1)(i)).

XN 732 NA 17.84(q) 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (TN—specified portions of 

the French Broad 

and Holston Rivers; see 

17.84(q)(1)(ii)).

XN .................... NA 17.84(q) 

* * * * * * * 

Madtom, pygmy ....... Noturus stanauli ..... U.S.A. (TN) ............. Entire, except where 

listed as an experimental population.

E 502 NA NA 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (TN—specified portions of 

the French Broad 

and Holston Rivers; see 

17.84(t)(1)(i)).

XN .................... NA 17.84(t) 

* * * * * * * 

Madtom, smoky ....... Noturus baileyi ........ U.S.A. (TN) ............. Entire, except where 

listed as an experimental population.

E 163 17.95(e) NA 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (TN—specified portions of 

the Tellico River; 

see 17.84(r)(1)(i)).

XN 732 NA 17.84(r) 

* * * * * * * 

Madtom, yellowfin .... Noturus flavipinnis .. U.S.A. (TN, VA) ...... Entire, except where 

listed as an experimental population.

T 28 17.95(e) 17.44(c) 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (TN, VA—

specified portions 

of the Holston 

River and watershed; see 

17.84(e)(1)(i)).

XN 317 NA 17.84(e) 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (TN—specified portions of 

the Tellico River; 

see 

17.84(e)(1)(ii)).

XN 732 NA 17.84(e) 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (TN—specified portions of 

the French Broad 

and Holston Rivers; see 

17.84(e)(1)(iii)).

XN .................... NA 17.84(e) 


gechino on PROD1PC76 with RULES
52448 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 177 / Thursday, September 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

Species Historic 

range 

Vertebrate population where endangered or threatened 

Status When 

listed 

Critical 

habitat 

Special 

rules Common name Scientific name 

* * * * * * * 

CLAMS

* * * * * * * 

Bean, Cumberland 

(pearlymussel).

Villosa trabalis ........ U.S.A. (AL, KY, TN, 

VA).

NA ........................... E 15 NA NA 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (AL—specified portions of 

the Tennessee 

River; see 

17.85(a)(1)).

XN 709 NA 17.85(a) 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (TN—specified portions of 

the French Broad 

and Holston Rivers; see 

17.85(b)(1)).

XN .................... NA 17.85(b) 

* * * * * * * 

Blossom, tubercled 

(pearlymussel).

Epioblasma torulosa 

torulosa.

U.S.A. (AL, IL, IN, 

KY, TN, WV).

NA ........................... E 15 NA NA 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (AL—specified portions of 

the Tennessee 

River; see 

17.85(a)(1)).

XN 709 NA 17.85(a) 

Blossom, turgid 

(pearlymussel).

Epioblasma 

turgidula.

U.S.A. (AL, TN) ...... NA ........................... E 15 NA NA 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (AL—specified portions of 

the Tennessee 

River; see 

17.85(a)(1)).

XN 709 NA 17.85(a) 

Blossom, yellow 

(pearlymussel).

Epioblasma 

florentina 

florentina.

......do ...................... NA ........................... E 15 NA NA 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (AL—specified portions of 

the Tennessee 

River; see 

17.85(a)(1)).

XN 709 NA 17.85(a) 

Catspaw, (=purple 

cat’s paw 

pearlymussel).

Epioblasma ............. U.S.A. (AL, IL, IN, 

KY, OH, TN).

NA ........................... E 394 NA NA 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (AL—specified portions of 

the Tennessee 

River; see 

17.85(a)(1)).

XN 709 NA 17.85(a) 

Clubshell .................. Pleurobema clava ... U.S.A. (AL, IL, IN, 

KY, MI, OH, PA, 

TN, WV).

NA ........................... E 488 NA NA 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (AL—specified portions of 

the Tennessee 

River; see 

17.85(a)(1)).

XN 709 NA 17.85(a) 

* * * * * * * 

Combshell, 

Cumberlandian.

Epioblasma 

brevidens.

U.S.A. (AL, KY, MS, 

TN, VA).

NA ........................... E 602 17.95(f) NA 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (AL—specified portions of 

the Tennessee 

River; see 

17.85(a)(1)).

XN 709 NA 17.85(a) 


gechino on PROD1PC76 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 177 / Thursday, September 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 52449 

Species Historic 

range 

Vertebrate population where endangered or threatened 

Status When 

listed 

Critical 

habitat 

Special 

rules Common name Scientific name 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (TN—specified portions of 

the French Broad 

and Holston Rivers; see 

17.85(b)(1).

XN .................... NA 17.85(b) 

* * * * * * * 

Fanshell ................... Cyprogenia stegaria 

(=irrorata).

U.S.A. (AL, IL, IN, 

KY, OH, PA, TN, 

VA, WV).

NA ........................... E 391 NA NA 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (TN—specified portions of 

the French Broad 

and Holston Rivers; see 

17.85(b)(1)).

XN .................... NA 17.85(b) 

Lampmussel, Alabama.Lampsilis virescens U.S.A. (AL, TN) ...... NA ........................... E 15 NA NA 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (AL—specified portions of 

the Tennessee 

River; see 

17.85(a)(1)).

XN 709 NA 17.85(a) 

* * * * * * * 

Mapleleaf, winged 

(mussel).

Quadrula fragosa .... U.S.A. (AL, IA, IL, 

IN, KY, MN, MO, 

NE, OH, OK, TN, 

WI).

NA ........................... E 426 NA NA 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (AL—specified portions of 

the Tennessee 

River; see 

17.85(a)(1)).

XN 709 NA 17.85(a) 

* * * * * * * 

Monkeyface, Appalachian 

(pearlymussel).

Quadrula sparsa ..... U.S.A. (TN, VA) ...... NA ........................... E 15 NA NA 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (TN—specified portions of 

the French Broad 

and Holston Rivers; see 

17.85(b)(1)).

XN .................... NA 17.85(b) 

Monkeyface, Cumberland 

(pearlymussel).

Quadrula intermedia U.S.A. (AL, TN, VA) NA ........................... E 15 NA NA 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (AL—specified portions of 

the Tennessee 

River; see 

17.85(a)(1)).

XN 709 NA 17.85(a) 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (TN—specified portions of 

the French Broad 

and Holston Rivers; see 

17.85(b)(1)).

XN .................... NA 17.85(b) 

* * * * * * * 

Mussel, oyster ......... Epioblasma 

capsaeformis.

U.S.A. (AL, GA, KY, 

MS, NC, TN, VA).

NA ........................... E 602 17.95(f) NA 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (AL—specified portions of 

the Tennessee 

River; see 

17.85(a)(1)).

XN 709 NA 17.85(a) 


gechino on PROD1PC76 with RULES
52450 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 177 / Thursday, September 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

Species Historic 

range 

Vertebrate population where endangered or threatened 

Status When 

listed 

Critical 

habitat 

Special 

rules Common name Scientific name 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (TN—specified portions of 

the French Broad 

and Holston Rivers; see 

17.85(b)(1)).

XN .................... NA 17.85(b) 

* * * * * * * 

Pearlymussel, 

birdwing.

Lemiox rimosus ...... U.S.A. (AL, TN, VA) NA ........................... E 15 NA NA 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (AL—specified portions of 

the Tennessee 

River; see 

17.85(a)(1)).

XN 709 NA 17.85(a) 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (TN—specified portions of 

the French Broad 

and Holston Rivers; see 

17.85(b)(1)).

XN .................... NA 17.85(b) 

Pearlymussel, cracking.Hemistena lata ....... U.S.A. (AL, IL, IN, 

KY, OH, TN, VA).

NA ........................... E 366 NA NA 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (AL—specified portions of 

the Tennessee 

River; see 

17.85(a)(1)).

XN 709 NA 17.85(a) 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (TN—specified portions of 

the French Broad 

and Holston Rivers; see 

17.85(b)(1)).

XN .................... NA 17.85(b) 

* * * * * * * 

Pearlymussel, dromedary.Dromus dromas ...... U.S.A. (AL, KY, TN, 

VA).

NA ........................... E 15 NA NA 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (AL—specified portions of 

the Tennessee 

River; see 

17.85(a)(1)).

XN 709 NA 17.85(a) 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (TN—specified portions of 

the French Broad 

and Holston Rivers; see 

17.85(b)(1)).

XN .................... NA 17.85(b) 

* * * * * * * 

Pigtoe, fine-rayed .... Fusconaia cuneolus U.S.A. (AL, TN, VA) NA ........................... E 15 NA NA 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (AL—specified portions of 

the Tennessee 

River; see 

17.85(a)(1)).

XN 709 NA 17.85(a) 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (TN—specified portions of 

the French Broad 

and Holston Rivers; see 

17.85(b)(1)).

XN .................... NA 17.85(b) 

* * * * * * * 

Pigtoe, rough ........... Pleurobema plenum U.S.A. (AL, IN, KY, 

PA, TN, VA).

NA ........................... E 15 NA NA 


gechino on PROD1PC76 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 177 / Thursday, September 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 52451 

Species Historic 

range 

Vertebrate population where endangered or threatened 

Status When 

listed 

Critical 

habitat 

Special 

rules Common name Scientific name 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (TN—specified portions of 

the French Broad 

and Holston Rivers; see 

17.85(b)(1)).

XN .................... NA 17.85(b) 

Pigtoe, shiny ............ Fusconaia cor ......... U.S.A. (AL, TN, VA) NA ........................... E 15 NA NA 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (AL—specified portions of 

the Tennessee 

River; see 

17.85(a)(1)).

XN 709 NA 17.85(a) 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (TN—specified portions of 

the French Broad 

and Holston Rivers; see 

17.85(b)(1)).

XN .................... NA 17.85(b) 

* * * * * * * 

Pimpleback, 

orangefoot 

(pearlymussel).

Plethobasus 

cooperianus.

U.S.A. (AL, IA, IL, 

IN, KY, OH, PA, 

TN).

NA ........................... E 15 NA NA 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (TN—specified portions of 

the French Broad 

and Holston Rivers; see 

17.85(b)(1)).

XN .................... NA 17.85(b) 

* * * * * * * 

Pink, ring (mussel) ... Obovaria retusa ...... U.S.A. (AL, IL, IN, 

KY, OH, PA, TN, 

WV).

NA ........................... E 369 NA NA 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (TN—specified portions of 

the French Broad 

and Holston Rivers; see 

17.85(b)(1)).

XN .................... NA 17.85(b) 

* * * * * * * 

Wartyback, white 

(pearlymussel).

Plethobasus 

cicatricosus.

U.S.A. (AL, IL, IN, 

KY, TN).

NA ........................... E 15 NA NA 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (TN—specified portions of 

the French Broad 

and Holston Rivers; see 

17.85(b)(1)).

XN .................... NA 17.85(b) 

* * * * * * * 

SNAILS

* * * * * * * 

Riversnail, Anthony’s Athearnia anthonyi U.S.A. (AL, GA, TN) NA ........................... E 538 NA NA 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (AL—specified portions of 

the Tennessee 

River; see 

17.85(a)(1)).

XN 709 NA 17.85(a) 

Do ..................... ......do ...................... ......do ...................... U.S.A. (TN—specified portions of 

the French Broad 

and Holston Rivers; see 

17.85(b)(1)).

XN .................... NA 17.85(b) 

* * * * * * * 


gechino on PROD1PC76 with RULES
52452 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 177 / Thursday, September 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

■ 3. Amend § 17.84 as follows: 

■ a. Revise paragraphs (e), (m), and (o) 

to read as set forth below; and 

■ b. Add new paragraphs (q), (r), (s), and 

(t) to read as set forth below. 

§ 17.84 Special rules—vertebrates. 

* * * * * 

(e) Yellowfin madtom (Noturus 

flavipinnis). (1) Where is the yellowfin 

madtom designated as a nonessential 

experimental population (NEP)? We 

have designated three populations of 

this species as NEPs: the North Fork 

Holston River Watershed NEP, the 

Tellico River NEP, and the French 

Broad River and Holston River NEP. 

(i) The North Fork Holston River 

Watershed NEP area is within the 

species’ historic range and is defined as 

follows: The North Fork Holston River 

watershed, Washington, Smyth, and 

Scott Counties, Virginia; South Fork 

Holston River watershed upstream to Ft. 

Patrick Henry Dam, Sullivan County, 

Tennessee; and the Holston River from 

the confluence of the North and South 

Forks downstream to the John Sevier 

Detention Lake Dam, Hawkins County, 

Tennessee. This site is totally isolated 

from existing populations of this species 

by large Tennessee River tributaries and 

reservoirs. As the species is not known 

to inhabit reservoirs and because 

individuals of the species are not likely 

to move 100 river miles through these 

large reservoirs, the possibility that this 

population could come in contact with 

extant wild populations is unlikely. 

(ii) The Tellico River NEP area is 

within the species’ historic range and is 

defined as follows: The Tellico River, 

between the backwaters of the Tellico 

Reservoir (approximately Tellico River 

mile 19 (30.4 kilometers) and Tellico 

River mile 33 (52.8 kilometers), near the 

Tellico Ranger Station, Monroe County, 

Tennessee. This species is not currently 

known to exist in the Tellico River or 

its tributaries. Based on its habitat 

requirements, we do not expect this 

species to become established outside 

this NEP area. However, if individuals 

of this population move upstream or 

downstream or into tributaries outside 

the designated NEP area, we would 

presume that they came from the 

reintroduced population. We would 

then amend this regulation to enlarge 

the boundaries of the NEP area to 

include the entire range of the expanded 

population. 

(iii) The French Broad River and 

Holston River NEP area is within the 

species’ historic range and is defined as 

follows: the French Broad River, Knox 

and Sevier Counties, Tennessee, from 

the base of Douglas Dam (river mile 

(RM) 32.3 (51.7 km)) downstream to the 

confluence with the Holston River; then 

up the Holston River, Knox, Grainger, 

and Jefferson Counties, Tennessee, to 

the base of Cherokee Dam (RM 52.3 

(83.7 km)); and the lower 5 RM (8 km) 

of all tributaries that enter these river 

reaches. This species is not known to 

exist in any of the tributaries to the freeflowing reaches of the French Broad 

River below Douglas Dam, Knox and 

Sevier Counties, Tennessee, or of the 

Holston River below the Cherokee Dam, 

Knox, Grainger, and Jefferson Counties, 

Tennessee. Based on its habitat 

requirements, we do not expect this 

species to become established outside 

this NEP area. However, if individuals 

of this population move upstream or 

downstream or into tributaries outside 

the designated NEP area, we would 

presume that they came from the 

reintroduced population. We would 

then amend this regulation to enlarge 

the boundaries of the NEP area to 

include the entire range of the expanded 

population. 

(iv) We do not intend to change the 

NEP designations to ‘‘essential 

experimental,’’ ‘‘threatened,’’ or 

‘‘endangered’’ within the NEP areas. 

Additionally, we will not designate 

critical habitat for these NEPs, as 

provided by 16 U.S.C. 1539(j)(2)(C)(ii). 

(2) What activities are not allowed in 

the NEP areas? (i) Except as expressly 

allowed in paragraph (e)(3) of this 

section, all the prohibitions of § 17.31(a) 

and (b) apply to the yellowfin madtom. 

(ii) Any manner of take not described 

under paragraph (e)(3) of this section is 

prohibited in the NEP area. We may 

refer unauthorized take of this species to 

the appropriate authorities for 

prosecution. 

(iii) You may not possess, sell, 

deliver, carry, transport, ship, import, or 

export by any means whatsoever any of 

the identified fishes, or parts thereof, 

that are taken or possessed in violation 

of paragraph (e)(2) of this section or in 

violation of the applicable State fish and 

wildlife laws or regulations or the Act. 

(iv) You may not attempt to commit, 

solicit another to commit, or cause to be 

committed any offense defined in 

paragraph (e)(2) of this section. 

(3) What take is allowed in the NEP 

area? Take of this species that is 

accidental and incidental to an 

otherwise legal activity, such as 

recreation (e.g., fishing, boating, wading, 

trapping, or swimming), forestry, 

agriculture, and other activities that are 

in accordance with Federal, State, and 

local laws and regulations, is allowed. 

(4) How will the effectiveness of these 

reintroductions be monitored? We will 

prepare periodic progress reports and 

fully evaluate these reintroduction 

efforts after 5 and 10 years to determine 

whether to continue or terminate the 

reintroduction efforts. 

(5) Note: Map of the NEP area for the 

yellowfin madtom in the Tellico River, 

Tennessee, appears immediately 

following paragraph (m)(5) of this 

section. 

(6) Note: Map of the NEP area for the 

yellowfin madtom in the French Broad 

River and Holston River, Tennessee, 

appears immediately following 

paragraph (m)(7) of this section. 

* * * * * 

(m) Spotfin chub (=turquoise shiner) 

(Erimonax monachus). (1) Where is the 

spotfin chub designated as a 

nonessential experimental population 

(NEP)? We have designated three 

populations of this species as NEPs: the 

Tellico River NEP, the Shoal Creek NEP, 

and the French Broad River and Holston 

River NEP. This species is not currently 

known to exist in the Tellico River or 

its tributaries, the Shoal Creek or its 

tributaries, or any of the tributaries to 

the free-flowing reaches of the French 

Broad River below Douglas Dam, Knox 

and Sevier Counties, Tennessee, or of 

the Holston River below the Cherokee 

Dam, Knox, Grainger, and Jefferson 

Counties, Tennessee. Based on its 

habitat requirements, we do not expect 

this species to become established 

outside the NEP areas. However, if 

individuals move upstream or 

downstream or into tributaries outside 

any of the designated NEP areas, we 

would presume that those individuals 

came from the closest reintroduced 

population. We would then amend this 

regulation and enlarge the boundaries of 

the NEP area to include the entire range 

of the expanded population. 

(i) The Tellico River NEP area is 

within the species’ probable historic 

range and is defined as follows: The 

Tellico River, between the backwaters of 

the Tellico Reservoir (approximately 

Tellico River mile 19 (30.4 kilometers 

(km)) and Tellico River mile 33 (52.8 

km), near the Tellico Ranger Station, 

Monroe County, Tennessee. 

(ii) The Shoal Creek NEP area is 

within the species’ historic range and is 

defined as follows: Shoal Creek (from 

Shoal Creek mile 41.7 (66.7 km)) at the 

mouth of Long Branch, Lawrence 

County, TN, downstream to the 

backwaters of Wilson Reservoir (Shoal 

Creek mile 14 (22 km)) at Goose Shoals, 

Lauderdale County, AL, including the 

lower 5 miles (8 km) of all tributaries 

that enter this reach. 

(iii) The French Broad River and 

Holston River NEP area is within the 

species’ historic range and is defined as 

follows: the French Broad River, Knox 


gechino on PROD1PC76 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 177 / Thursday, September 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 52453 

and Sevier Counties, Tennessee, from 

the base of Douglas Dam (river mile 

(RM) 32.3 (51.7 km)) downstream to the 

confluence with the Holston River; then 

up the Holston River, Knox, Grainger, 

and Jefferson Counties, Tennessee, to 

the base of Cherokee Dam (RM 52.3 

(83.7 km)); and the lower 5 RM (8 km) 

of all tributaries that enter these river 

reaches. 

(iv) We do not intend to change the 

NEP designations to ‘‘essential 

experimental,’’ ‘‘threatened,’’ or 

‘‘endangered’’ within the NEP area. 

Additionally, we will not designate 

critical habitat for these NEPs, as 

provided by 16 U.S.C. 1539(j)(2)(C)(ii). 

(2) What activities are not allowed in 

the NEP area? (i) Except as expressly 

allowed in paragraph (m)(3) of this 

section, all the provisions of § 17.31(a) 

and (b) apply to the spotfin chub. 

(ii) Any manner of take not described 

under paragraph (m)(3) of this section is 

prohibited in the NEP area. We may 

refer unauthorized take of this species to 

the appropriate authorities for 

prosecution. 

(iii) You may not possess, sell, 

deliver, carry, transport, ship, import, or 

export by any means whatsoever any of 

the identified fishes, or parts thereof, 

that are taken or possessed in violation 

of paragraph (m)(2) of this section or in 

violation of the applicable State fish and 

wildlife laws or regulations or the Act. 

(iv) You may not attempt to commit, 

solicit another to commit, or cause to be 

committed any offense defined in 

paragraph (m)(2) of this section. 

(3) What take is allowed in the NEP 

area? Take of this species that is 

accidental and incidental to an 

otherwise legal activity, such as 

recreation (e.g., fishing, boating, wading, 

trapping, or swimming), forestry, 

agriculture, and other activities that are 

in accordance with Federal, State, and 

local laws and regulations, is allowed. 

(4) How will the effectiveness of these 

reintroductions be monitored? (i) In the 

Tellico River NEP area, we will prepare 

periodic progress reports and fully 

evaluate these reintroduction efforts 

after 5 and 10 years to determine 

whether to continue or terminate the 

reintroduction efforts. 

(ii) In the Shoal Creek NEP area, after 

the initial stocking of fish, we will 

monitor annually their presence or 

absence and document any spawning 

behavior or young-of-the-year fish that 

might be present. This monitoring will 

be conducted primarily by snorkeling or 

seining and will be accomplished by 

contracting with the appropriate species 

experts. We will produce annual reports 

detailing the stocking rates and 

monitoring activities that took place 

during the previous year. We will also 

fully evaluate these reintroduction 

efforts after 5 and 10 years to determine 

whether to continue or terminate the 

reintroduction efforts. 

(iii) In the Lower French Broad and 

Lower Holston Rivers NEP area, after the 

initial stocking of these species, we will 

monitor annually their presence or 

absence and document any spawning 

behavior or young-of-the-year that might 

be present. This monitoring will be 

conducted primarily by snorkeling or 

seining and will be accomplished by 

contracting with the appropriate species 

experts. Annual reports will be 

produced detailing the stocking rates 

and monitoring activities that took place 

during the previous year. We will also 

fully evaluate these reintroduction 

efforts after 5 and 10 years to determine 

whether to continue or terminate the 

reintroduction efforts. 

(5) Note: Map of the Tellico River NEP 

area for spotfin chub, dusky darter, 

smoky madtom, and yellowfin madtom 

in Tennessee follows: 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 


gechino on PROD1PC76 with RULES
52454 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 177 / Thursday, September 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

(6) Note: Map of the Shoal Creek NEP 

area for spotfin chub and boulder darter 

in Tennessee and Alabama follows: 


gechino on PROD1PC76 with RULESER13SE07.000</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 177 / Thursday, September 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 52455 

(7) Note: Map of the French Broad 

River and Holston River NEP area for 

spotfin chub, slender chub, duskytail 

darter, pygmy madtom, and yellowtail 

madtom in Tennessee follows: 


gechino on PROD1PC76 with RULESER13SE07.001</GPH>
52456 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 177 / Thursday, September 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–C 


gechino on PROD1PC76 with RULESER13SE07.002</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 177 / Thursday, September 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 52457 

* * * * * 

(o) Boulder darter (Etheostoma 

wapiti). 

(1) Where is the boulder darter 

designated as a nonessential 

experimental population (NEP)? (i) The 

NEP area for the boulder darter is within 

the species’ historic range and is 

defined as follows: Shoal Creek (from 

Shoal Creek mile 41.7 (66.7 km)) at the 

mouth of Long Branch, Lawrence 

County, TN, downstream to the 

backwaters of Wilson Reservoir (Shoal 

Creek mile 14 (22 km)) at Goose Shoals, 

Lauderdale County, AL, including the 

lower 5 miles (8 km) of all tributaries 

that enter this reach. 

(ii) The boulder darter is not currently 

known to exist in Shoal Creek or its 

tributaries. Based on the habitat 

requirements of this fish, we do not 

expect it to become established outside 

the NEP area. However, if any 

individuals of the species move 

upstream or downstream or into 

tributaries outside the designated NEP 

area, we would presume that they came 

from the reintroduced population. We 

would then amend this rule through our 

normal rulemaking process in order to 

enlarge the boundaries of the NEP area 

to include the entire range of the 

expanded population. 

(iii) We do not intend to change the 

NEP designations to ‘‘essential 

experimental,’’ ‘‘threatened,’’ or 

‘‘endangered’’ within the NEP area. 

Additionally, we will not designate 

critical habitat for these NEPs, as 

provided by 16 U.S.C. 1539(j)(2)(C)(ii). 

(2) What activities are not allowed in 

the NEP area? (i) Except as expressly 

allowed in paragraph (o)(3) of this 

section, all the provisions of § 17.31(a) 

and (b) apply to the boulder darter. 

(ii) Any manner of take not described 

under paragraph (o)(3) of this section is 

prohibited in the NEP area. We may 

refer unauthorized take of these species 

to the appropriate authorities for 

prosecution. 

(iii) You may not possess, sell, 

deliver, carry, transport, ship, import, or 

export by any means whatsoever any of 

the identified fishes, or parts thereof, 

that are taken or possessed in violation 

of paragraph (o)(2) of this section or in 

violation of the applicable State fish and 

wildlife laws or regulations or the Act. 

(iv) You may not attempt to commit, 

solicit another to commit, or cause to be 

committed any offense defined in 

paragraph (o)(2) of this section. 

(3) What take is allowed in the NEP 

area? Take of this species that is 

accidental and incidental to an 

otherwise legal activity, such as 

recreation (e.g., fishing, boating, wading, 

trapping, or swimming), forestry, 

agriculture, and other activities that are 

in accordance with Federal, State, and 

local laws and regulations, is allowed. 

(4) How will the effectiveness of these 

reintroductions be monitored? After the 

initial stocking of fish, we will monitor 

annually their presence or absence and 

document any spawning behavior or 

young-of-the-year fish that might be 

present. This monitoring will be 

conducted primarily by snorkeling or 

seining and will be accomplished by 

contracting with the appropriate species 

experts. We will produce annual reports 

detailing the stocking rates and 

monitoring activities that took place 

during the previous year. We will also 

fully evaluate these reintroduction 

efforts after 5 and 10 years to determine 

whether to continue or terminate the 

reintroduction efforts. 

(5) Note: Map of the NEP area for the 

boulder darter in the Shoal Creek, 

Tennessee and Alabama, appears 

immediately following paragraph (m)(6) 

of this section. 

* * * * * 

(q) Duskytail darter (Etheostoma 

percnurum). (1) Where is the duskytail 

darter designated as a nonessential 

experimental population (NEP)? We 

have designated two populations of this 

species as NEPs: The Tellico River NEP 

and the French Broad River and Holston 

River NEP. This species is not currently 

known to exist in the Tellico River or 

its tributaries or in any of the tributaries 

to the free-flowing reaches of the French 

Broad River below Douglas Dam, Knox 

and Sevier Counties, Tennessee, or of 

the Holston River below the Cherokee 

Dam, Knox, Grainger, and Jefferson 

Counties, Tennessee. Based on its 

habitat requirements, we do not expect 

this species to become established 

outside these NEP areas. However, if 

individuals move upstream or 

downstream or into tributaries outside 

either of the designated NEP areas, we 

would presume that these individuals 

came from the reintroduced population. 

We would then amend this rule and 

enlarge the boundaries of the NEP area 

to include the entire range of the 

expanded population. 

(i) The Tellico River NEP area is 

within the species’ historic range and is 

defined as follows: The Tellico River, 

between the backwaters of the Tellico 

Reservoir (approximately Tellico River 

mile 19 (30.4 kilometers) and Tellico 

River mile 33 (52.8 kilometers), near the 

Tellico Ranger Station, Monroe County, 

Tennessee. 

(ii) The French Broad River and 

Holston River NEP area is within the 

species’ historic range and is defined as 

follows: the French Broad River, Knox 

and Sevier Counties, Tennessee, from 

the base of Douglas Dam (river mile 

(RM) 32.3 (51.7 km)) downstream to the 

confluence with the Holston River; then 

up the Holston River, Knox, Grainger, 

and Jefferson Counties, Tennessee, to 

the base of Cherokee Dam (RM 52.3 

(83.7 km)); and the lower 5 RM (8 km) 

of all tributaries that enter these river 

reaches. 

(iii) We do not intend to change the 

NEP designations to ‘‘essential 

experimental,’’ ‘‘threatened,’’ or 

‘‘endangered’’ within the NEP area. 

Additionally, we will not designate 

critical habitat for these NEPs, as 

provided by 16 U.S.C. 1539(j)(2)(C)(ii). 

(2) What activities are not allowed in 

the NEP area? (i) Except as expressly 

allowed in paragraph (q)(3) of this 

section, all the prohibitions of § 17.31(a) 

and (b) apply to the duskytail darter. 

(ii) Any manner of take not described 

under paragraph (q)(3) of this section is 

prohibited in the NEP area. We may 

refer unauthorized take of this species to 

the appropriate authorities for 

prosecution. 

(iii) You may not possess, sell, 

deliver, carry, transport, ship, import, or 

export by any means whatsoever any of 

the identified fishes, or parts thereof, 

that are taken or possessed in violation 

of paragraph (q)(2) of this section or in 

violation of the applicable State fish and 

wildlife laws or regulations or the Act. 

(iv) You may not attempt to commit, 

solicit another to commit, or cause to be 

committed any offense defined in 

paragraph (q)(2) of this section. 

(3) What take is allowed in the NEP 

area? Take of this species that is 

accidental and incidental to an 

otherwise legal activity, such as 

recreation (e.g., fishing, boating, wading, 

trapping, or swimming), forestry, 

agriculture, and other activities that are 

in accordance with Federal, State, and 

local laws and regulations, is allowed. 

(4) How will the effectiveness of these 

reintroductions be monitored? We will 

prepare periodic progress reports and 

fully evaluate these reintroduction 

efforts after 5 and 10 years to determine 

whether to continue or terminate the 

reintroduction efforts. 

(5) Note: Map of the NEP area for the 

duskytail darter in the Tellico River, 

Tennessee, appears immediately 

following paragraph (m)(5) of this 

section. 

(6) Note: Map of the NEP area for the 

duskytail darter in the French Broad 

River and Holston River, Tennessee, 

appears immediately following 

paragraph (m)(7) of this section. 

(r) Smoky madtom (Noturus baileyi). 

(1) Where is the smoky madtom 


gechino on PROD1PC76 with RULES
52458 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 177 / Thursday, September 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

designated as a nonessential 

experimental population (NEP)? 

(i) The NEP area for the smoky 

madtom is within the species’ probable 

historic range and is defined as follows: 

The Tellico River, between the 

backwaters of the Tellico Reservoir 

(approximately Tellico River mile 19 

(30.4 kilometers) and Tellico River mile 

33 (52.8 kilometers), near the Tellico 

Ranger Station, Monroe County, 

Tennessee. 

(ii) The smoky madtom is not 

currently known to exist in the Tellico 

River or its tributaries. Based on the 

habitat requirements of this fish, we do 

not expect it to become established 

outside the NEP area. However, if any 

individuals of the species move 

upstream or downstream or into 

tributaries outside the designated NEP 

area, we would presume that they came 

from the reintroduced population. We 

would then amend paragraph (r)(1)(i) of 

this section and enlarge the boundaries 

of the NEP area to include the entire 

range of the expanded population. 

(iii) We do not intend to change the 

NEP designations to ‘‘essential 

experimental,’’ ‘‘threatened,’’ or 

‘‘endangered’’ within the NEP area. 

Additionally, we will not designate 

critical habitat for this NEP, as provided 

by 16 U.S.C. 1539(j)(2)(C)(ii). 

(2) What activities are not allowed in 

the NEP area? (i) Except as expressly 

allowed in paragraph (r)(3) of this 

section, all the prohibitions of § 17.31(a) 

and (b) apply to the smoky madtom. 

(ii) Any manner of take not described 

under paragraph (r)(3) of this section is 

prohibited in the NEP area. We may 

refer unauthorized take of this species to 

the appropriate authorities for 

prosecution. 

(iii) You may not possess, sell, 

deliver, carry, transport, ship, import, or 

export by any means whatsoever any of 

the identified fishes, or parts thereof, 

that are taken or possessed in violation 

of paragraph (r)(2) of this section or in 

violation of the applicable State fish and 

wildlife laws or regulations or the Act. 

(iv) You may not attempt to commit, 

solicit another to commit, or cause to be 

committed any offense defined in 

paragraph (r)(2) of this section. 

(3) What take is allowed in the NEP 

area? Take of this species that is 

accidental and incidental to an 

otherwise legal activity, such as 

recreation (e.g., fishing, boating, wading, 

trapping, or swimming), forestry, 

agriculture, and other activities that are 

in accordance with Federal, State, and 

local laws and regulations, is allowed. 

(4) How will the effectiveness of these 

reintroductions be monitored? We will 

prepare periodic progress reports and 

fully evaluate these reintroduction 

efforts after 5 and 10 years to determine 

whether to continue or terminate the 

reintroduction efforts. 

(5) Note: Map of the NEP area for the 

smoky madtom in the Tellico River, 

Tennessee, appears immediately 

following paragraph (m)(6) of this 

section. 

(s) Slender chub (Erimystax cahni). 

(1) Where is the slender chub designated 

as a nonessential experimental 

population (NEP)? 

(i) The NEP area for the slender chub 

is within the species’ historic range and 

is defined as follows: the French Broad 

River, Knox and Sevier Counties, 

Tennessee, from the base of Douglas 

Dam (river mile (RM) 32.3 (51.7 km)) 

downstream to the confluence with the 

Holston River; then up the Holston 

River, Knox, Grainger, and Jefferson 

Counties, Tennessee, to the base of 

Cherokee Dam (RM 52.3 (83.7 km)); and 

the lower 5 RM (8 km) of all tributaries 

that enter these river reaches. 

(ii) The slender chub is not known to 

exist in any of the tributaries to the freeflowing reaches of the French Broad 

River below Douglas Dam, Knox and 

Sevier Counties, Tennessee, or of the 

Holston River below the Cherokee Dam, 

Knox, Grainger, and Jefferson Counties, 

Tennessee. Based on its habitat 

requirements, we do not expect this 

species to become established outside 

this NEP area. However, if individuals 

of this population move upstream or 

downstream or into tributaries outside 

the designated NEP area, we would 

presume that they came from the 

reintroduced population. We would 

then amend this regulation to enlarge 

the boundaries of the NEP area to 

include the entire range of the expanded 

population. 

(iii) We do not intend to change the 

NEP designations to ‘‘essential 

experimental,’’ ‘‘threatened,’’ or 

‘‘endangered’’ within the NEP area. 

Additionally, we will not designate 

critical habitat for this NEP, as provided 

by 16 U.S.C. 1539(j)(2)(C)(ii). 

(2) What activities are not allowed in 

the NEP area? (i) Except as expressly 

allowed in paragraph (s)(3) of this 

section, all the prohibitions of § 17.31(a) 

and (b) apply to the slender chub. 

(ii) Any manner of take not described 

under paragraph (s)(3) of this section is 

prohibited in the NEP area. We may 

refer unauthorized take of this species to 

the appropriate authorities for 

prosecution. 

(iii) You may not possess, sell, 

deliver, carry, transport, ship, import, or 

export by any means whatsoever any of 

the identified fishes, or parts thereof, 

that are taken or possessed in violation 

of paragraph (s)(2) of this section or in 

violation of the applicable State fish and 

wildlife laws or regulations or the Act. 

(iv) You may not attempt to commit, 

solicit another to commit, or cause to be 

committed any offense defined in 

paragraph (s)(2) of this section. 

(3) What take is allowed in the NEP 

area? Take of this species that is 

accidental and incidental to an 

otherwise legal activity, such as 

recreation (e.g., fishing, boating, wading, 

trapping, or swimming), forestry, 

agriculture, and other activities that are 

in accordance with Federal, State, and 

local laws and regulations, is allowed. 

(4) How will the effectiveness of these 

reintroductions be monitored? We will 

prepare periodic progress reports and 

fully evaluate these reintroduction 

efforts after 5 and 10 years to determine 

whether to continue or terminate the 

reintroduction efforts. 

(5) Note: Map of the NEP area for the 

slender chub in the French Broad River 

and Holston River, Tennessee, appears 

immediately following paragraph (m)(7) 

of this section. 

(t) Pygmy madtom (Noturus stanauli). 

(1) Where is the pygmy madtom 

designated as a nonessential 

experimental population (NEP)? 

(i) The NEP area for the pygmy 

madtom is within the species’ historic 

range and is defined as follows: the 

French Broad River, Knox and Sevier 

Counties, Tennessee, from the base of 

Douglas Dam (river mile (RM) 32.3 (51.7 

km)) downstream to the confluence with 

the Holston River; then up the Holston 

River, Knox, Grainger, and Jefferson 

Counties, Tennessee, to the base of 

Cherokee Dam (RM 52.3 (83.7 km)); and 

the lower 5 RM (8 km) of all tributaries 

that enter these river reaches. 

(ii) The pygmy madtom is not known 

to exist in any of the tributaries to the 

free-flowing reaches of the French Broad 

River below Douglas Dam, Knox and 

Sevier Counties, Tennessee, or of the 

Holston River below the Cherokee Dam, 

Knox, Grainger, and Jefferson Counties, 

Tennessee. Based on its habitat 

requirements, we do not expect this 

species to become established outside 

this NEP area. However, if individuals 

of this population move upstream or 

downstream or into tributaries outside 

the designated NEP area, we would 

presume that they came from the 

reintroduced population. We would 

then amend this regulation to enlarge 

the boundaries of the NEP area to 

include the entire range of the expanded 

population. 

(iii) We do not intend to change the 

NEP designations to ‘‘essential 

experimental,’’ ‘‘threatened,’’ or 

‘‘endangered’’ within the NEP area. 


gechino on PROD1PC76 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 177 / Thursday, September 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 52459 

Additionally, we will not designate 

critical habitat for this NEP, as provided 

by 16 U.S.C. 1539(j)(2)(C)(ii). 

(2) What activities are not allowed in 

the NEP area? (i) Except as expressly 

allowed in paragraph (t)(3) of this 

section, all the prohibitions of § 17.31(a) 

and (b) apply to the pygmy madtom. 

(ii) Any manner of take not described 

under paragraph (t)(3) of this section is 

prohibited in the NEP area. We may 

refer unauthorized take of this species to 

the appropriate authorities for 

prosecution. 

(iii) You may not possess, sell, 

deliver, carry, transport, ship, import, or 

export by any means whatsoever any of 

the identified fishes, or parts thereof, 

that are taken or possessed in violation 

of paragraph (t)(2) of this section or in 

violation of the applicable State fish and 

wildlife laws or regulations or the Act. 

(iv) You may not attempt to commit, 

solicit another to commit, or cause to be 

committed any offense defined in 

paragraph (t)(2) of this section. 

(3) What take is allowed in the NEP 

area? Take of this species that is 

accidental and incidental to an 

otherwise legal activity, such as 

recreation (e.g., fishing, boating, wading, 

trapping, or swimming), forestry, 

agriculture, and other activities that are 

in accordance with Federal, State, and 

local laws and regulations, is allowed. 

(4) How will the effectiveness of these 

reintroductions be monitored? We will 

prepare periodic progress reports and 

fully evaluate these reintroduction 

efforts after 5 and 10 years to determine 

whether to continue or terminate the 

reintroduction efforts. 

(5) Note: Map of the NEP area for the 

pygmy madtom in the French Broad 

River and Holston River, Tennessee, 

appears immediately following 

paragraph (m)(7) of this section. 

■ 4. Amend § 17.85 by revising 

paragraph (a) introductory text and 

adding a new paragraph (b) to read as 

follows: 

§ 17.85 Special rules—invertebrates. 

(a) Seventeen mollusks in the 

Tennessee River. The species in the 

following table comprise nonessential 

experimental populations (NEPs): 

Common name Scientific name 

Cumberland bean 

(pearlymussel).

Villosa trabalis 

tubercled blossom 

(pearlymussel).

Epioblasma 

torulosa torulosa 

turgid blossom 

(pearlymussel).

Epioblasma 

turgidula 

yellow blossom 

(pearlymussel).

Epioblasma 

florentina 

florentina 

Common name Scientific name 

catspaw (purple 

cat’s paw 

pearlymussel).

Epioblasma 

obliquata 

obliquata 

clubshell ................ Pleurobema clava 

Cumberlandian 

combshell.

Epioblasma 

brevidens 

Alabama 

lampmussel.

Lampsilis 

virescens 

winged mapleleaf 

(mussel).

Quadrula fragosa 

Cumberland 

monkeyface 

(pearlymussel).

Quadrula intermedia 

oyster mussel ........ Epioblasma 

capsaeformis 

birdwing 

pearlymussel.

Lemiox rimosus 

cracking 

pearlymussel.

Hemistena lata 

dromedary 

pearlymussel.

Dromus dromas 

fine-rayed pigtoe ... Fusconaia 

cuneolus 

shiny pigtoe ........... Fusconaia cor 

Anthony’s riversnail Athearnia anthonyi 

* * * * * 

(b) Sixteen mollusks in the French 

Broad and Holston Rivers. The species 

in the following table comprise 

nonessential experimental populations 

(NEP): 

Common name Scientific name 

Cumberland bean 

(pearlymussel).

Villosa trabalis 

Cumberlandian 

combshell.

Epioblasma brevidens 

fanshell ...................... Cyprogenia stegaria 

Appalachian 

monkeyface 

(pearlymussel).

Quadrula sparsa 

Cumberland 

monkeyface 

(pearlymussel).

Quadrula intermedia 

oyster mussel ............ Epioblasma 

capsaeformis 

birdwing pearlymussel Lemiox rimosus 

cracking pearlymussel Hemistena lata 

dromedary 

pearlymussel.

Dromus dromas 

fine-rayed pigtoe ....... Fusconaia cuneolus 

rough pigtoe .............. Pleurobema plenum 

shiny pigtoe ............... Fusconaia cor 

orange-foot 

pimpleback 

(pearlymussel).

Plethobasus 

cooperianus 

ring pink (mussel) ..... Obovaria retusa 

white wartyback 

(pearlymussel).

Plethobasus 

cicatricosus 

Anthony’s riversnail ... Athearnia anthonyi 

(1) Where are these mollusks 

designated as NEPs? (i) The NEP area 

for these mollusks is within the species’

historical range and is defined as 

follows: The French Broad River, Knox 

and Sevier Counties, Tennessee, from 

the base of Douglas Dam (river mile 

(RM) 32.3 (51.7 kilometers (km)) 

downstream to the confluence with the 

Holston River; then up the Holston 

River, Knox, Grainger, and Jefferson 

Counties, Tennessee, to the base of 

Cherokee Dam (RM 52.3 (83.7 km)); and 

the lower 5 RM (8 km) of all tributaries 

that enter these river reaches. None of 

the species identified in paragraph (b) 

are known to exist in any of the 

tributaries to the free-flowing reaches of 

the French Broad River below Douglas 

Dam, Knox and Sevier Counties, 

Tennessee, or of the Holston River 

below the Cherokee Dam, Knox, 

Grainger, and Jefferson Counties, 

Tennessee. Based on their habitat 

requirements, we do not expect these 

species to become established outside 

this NEP area. However, if any 

individuals are found upstream or 

downstream or into tributaries outside 

the designated NEP area, we would 

presume that they came from the 

reintroduced populations. We would 

then amend paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this 

section to enlarge the boundaries of the 

NEP area to include the entire range of 

the expanded population. 

(ii) Another NEP area for 10 of these 

mollusks (Cumberland bean, 

Cumberlandian combshell, Cumberland 

monkeyface, oyster mussel, birdwing 

pearlymussel, cracking pearlymussel, 

dromedary pearlymussel, fine-rayed 

pigtoe, shiny pigtoe, and Anthony’s 

riversnail) is provided in paragraph (a) 

of this section. 

(iii) We do not intend to change the 

NEP designations to ‘‘essential 

experimental,’’ ‘‘threatened,’’ or 

‘‘endangered’’ within the NEP area. 

Additionally, we will not designate 

critical habitat for these NEPs, as 

provided by 16 U.S.C. 1539(j)(2)(C)(ii). 

(2) What activities are not allowed in 

the NEP area? (i) Except as expressly 

allowed in paragraph (b)(3) of this 

section, all the prohibitions of § 17.31(a) 

and (b) apply to the mollusks identified 

in paragraph (b) of this section. 

(ii) Any manner of take not described 

under paragraph (b)(3) of this section 

will not be allowed in the NEP area. We 

may refer the unauthorized take of these 

species to the appropriate authorities for 

prosecution. 

(iii) You may not possess, sell, 

deliver, carry, transport, ship, import, or 

export by any means whatsoever any of 

the identified mollusks, or parts thereof, 

that are taken or possessed in violation 

of paragraph (b)(2) of this section or in 

violation of the applicable State fish and 

wildlife laws or regulations or the Act. 

(iv) You may not attempt to commit, 

solicit another to commit, or cause to be 

committed any offense defined in 

paragraph (b)(2) of this section. 

(3) What take is allowed in the NEP 

area? Take of these species that is 


gechino on PROD1PC76 with RULES
52460 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 177 / Thursday, September 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

accidental and incidental to an 

otherwise legal activity, such as 

recreation (e.g., fishing, boating, wading, 

trapping, or swimming), forestry, 

agriculture, and other activities that are 

in accordance with Federal, State, and 

local laws and regulations, is allowed. 

(4) How will the effectiveness of these 

reintroductions be monitored? We will 

prepare periodic progress reports and 

fully evaluate these reintroduction 

efforts after 5 and 10 years to determine 

whether to continue or terminate the 

reintroduction efforts. 

(5) Note: Map of the NEP area in 

Tennessee for the 16 mollusks listed in 

paragraph (b) of this section follows: 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 


gechino on PROD1PC76 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 177 / Thursday, September 13, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 52461 

* * * * * Dated: August 8, 2007. 

David M. Verhey, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and 

Wildlife and Parks. 

[FR Doc. 07–4320 Filed 9–12–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–C 


gechino on PROD1PC76 with RULESER13SE07.003</GPH>