64856 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 20, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

change(s). We appreciate any and all 

comments, but those most useful and 

likely to influence decisions on the final 

regulations will be those that either 

involve personal experience or include 

citations to and analyses of SMCRA, its 

legislative history, its implementing 

regulations, case law, other pertinent 

State or Federal laws or regulations, 

technical literature, or other relevant 

publications. 

We cannot ensure that comments 

received after the close of the comment 

period (see DATES) or sent to an address 

other than those listed (see ADDRESSES) 

will be included in the docket for this 

rulemaking and considered. 

Public Availability of Comments 

Before including your address, phone 

number, email address, or other 

personal identifying information in your 

comment, you should be aware that 

your entire comment including your 

personal identifying information, may 

be made publicly available at any time. 

While you can ask us in your comment 

to withhold your personal identifying 

information from public review, we 

cannot guarantee that we will be able to 

do so. 

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 926 

State regulatory program approval, 

State-Federal cooperative agreement, 

required program amendments. 

David A. Berry, 

Regional Director, Unified Regions 5, 7–11. 

[FR Doc. 2023–20349 Filed 9–19–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–05–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

[Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2023–0103; 

FF09E21000 FXES1111090FEDR 234] 

RIN 1018–BG31 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Threatened Species Status 

With Section 4(d) Rule for the Miami 

Cave Crayfish 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), propose to 

list the Miami cave crayfish 

(Procambarus milleri), a crayfish species 

from Miami-Dade County, Florida, as a 

threatened species under the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (Act). This determination also 

serves as our 12-month finding on a 

petition to list the Miami cave crayfish. 

After a review of the best available 

scientific and commercial information, 

we find that listing the species is 

warranted. Accordingly, we propose to 

list the Miami cave crayfish as a 

threatened species with a rule issued 

under section 4(d) of the Act (‘‘4(d) 

rule’’). If we finalize this proposed rule, 

it would add this species to the List of 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and extend the Act’s protections to the 

species. 

DATES: We will accept comments 

received or postmarked on or before 

November 20, 2023. Comments 

submitted electronically using the 

Federal eRulemaking Portal (see 

ADDRESSES, below) must be received by 

11:59 p.m. eastern time on the closing 

date. We must receive requests for a 

public hearing, in writing, at the address 

shown in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT by November 6, 2023. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by one of the following methods: 

(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal: https://

www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, 

enter FWS–R4–ES–2023–0103, which is 

the docket number for this rulemaking. 

Then, click on the Search button. On the 

resulting page, in the panel on the left 

side of the screen, under the Document 

Type heading, check the Proposed Rule 

box to locate this document. You may 

submit a comment by clicking on 

‘‘Comment.’’ 

(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail 

to: Public Comments Processing, Attn: 

FWS–R4–ES–2023–0103, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, MS: PRB/3W, 5275 

Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041– 

3803. 

We request that you send comments 

only by the methods described above. 

We will post all comments on https:// 

www.regulations.gov. This generally 

means that we will post any personal 

information you provide us (see 

Information Requested, below, for more 

information). 

Availability of supporting materials: 

Supporting materials, such as the 

species status assessment report, are 

available at https://www.regulations.gov 

at Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2023–0103. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Lourdes Mena, Division Manager, 

Florida Classification and Recovery, 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Florida 

Ecological Services Field Office, 7915 

Baymeadows Way, Suite 200, 

Jacksonville, FL 32256–7517; telephone 

904–731–3134. Individuals in the 

United States who are deaf, deafblind, 

hard of hearing, or have a speech 

disability may dial 711 (TTY, TDD, or 

TeleBraille) to access 

telecommunications relay services. 

Individuals outside the United States 

should use the relay services offered 

within their country to make 

international calls to the point-ofcontact in the United States. For a 

summary of the proposed rule, please 

see the ‘‘rule summary document’’ in 

docket FWS–R4–ES–2023–0103 on 

https://www.regulations.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Executive Summary 

Why we need to publish a rule. Under 

the Act, a species warrants listing if it 

meets the definition of an endangered 

species (in danger of extinction 

throughout all or a significant portion of 

its range) or a threatened species (likely 

to become an endangered species within 

the foreseeable future throughout all or 

a significant portion of its range). If we 

determine that a species warrants 

listing, we must list the species 

promptly and designate the species’ 

critical habitat to the maximum extent 

prudent and determinable. We have 

determined that the Miami cave crayfish 

meets the definition of a threatened 

species; therefore, we are proposing to 

list it as such. Listing a species as an 

endangered or threatened species can be 

completed only by issuing a rule 

through the Administrative Procedure 

Act rulemaking process (5 U.S.C. 551 et 

seq.). 

What this document does. We 

propose to list the Miami cave crayfish 

as a threatened species with a rule 

under section 4(d) of the Act. 

The basis for our action. Under the 

Act, we may determine that a species is 

an endangered or threatened species 

because of any of five factors: (A) The 

present or threatened destruction, 

modification, or curtailment of its 

habitat or range; (B) overutilization for 

commercial, recreational, scientific, or 

educational purposes; (C) disease or 

predation; (D) the inadequacy of 

existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E) 

other natural or manmade factors 

affecting its continued existence. We 

have determined that the primary threat 

to Miami cave crayfish is saltwater 

intrusion caused by sea level rise as a 

result of climate change. 

Information Requested 

We intend that any final action 

resulting from this proposed rule will be 

based on the best scientific and 

commercial data available and be as 

accurate and as effective as possible. 

Therefore, we request comments or 

information from other governmental 

agencies, Native American Tribes, the 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 20, 2023 / Proposed Rules 64857 

scientific community, industry, or any 

other interested parties concerning this 

proposed rule. We particularly seek 

comments concerning: 

(1) The species’ biology, range, and 

population trends, including: 

(a) Biological or ecological 

requirements of the species, including 

habitat requirements for feeding, 

breeding, and sheltering; 

(b) Genetics and taxonomy; 

(c) Historical and current range, 

including distribution patterns and the 

locations of any additional populations 

of this species; 

(d) Historical and current population 

levels, and current and projected trends; 

and 

(e) Past and ongoing conservation 

measures for the species, its habitat, or 

both. 

(2) Threats and conservation actions 

affecting the species, including: 

(a) Factors that may be affecting the 

continued existence of the species, 

which may include habitat modification 

or destruction, overutilization, disease, 

predation, the inadequacy of existing 

regulatory mechanisms, or other natural 

or manmade factors. 

(b) Biological, commercial trade, or 

other relevant data concerning any 

threats (or lack thereof) to this species. 

(c) Existing regulations or 

conservation actions that may be 

addressing threats to this species. 

(3) Additional information concerning 

the historical and current status of this 

species. 

(4) Information on regulations that 

may be necessary and advisable to 

provide for the conservation of the 

Miami cave crayfish and that we can 

consider in developing a 4(d) rule for 

the species. In particular, information 

concerning the extent to which we 

should include any of the section 9 

prohibitions in the 4(d) rule or whether 

we should consider any additional 

exceptions from the prohibitions in the 

4(d) rule. 

(5) Information on sea level rise and 

saltwater intrusion future projections in 

the Biscayne Aquifer. 

Please include sufficient information 

with your submission (such as scientific 

journal articles or other publications) to 

allow us to verify any scientific or 

commercial information you include. 

Please note that submissions merely 

stating support for, or opposition to, the 

action under consideration without 

providing supporting information, 

although noted, do not provide 

substantial information necessary to 

support a determination. Section 

4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that 

determinations as to whether any 

species is an endangered or a threatened 

species must be made solely on the 

basis of the best scientific and 

commercial data available. 

You may submit your comments and 

materials concerning this proposed rule 

by one of the methods listed in 

ADDRESSES. We request that you send 

comments only by the methods 

described in ADDRESSES. 

If you submit information via https:// 

www.regulations.gov, your entire 

submission—including any personal 

identifying information—will be posted 

on the website. If your submission is 

made via a hardcopy that includes 

personal identifying information, you 

may request at the top of your document 

that we withhold this information from 

public review. However, we cannot 

guarantee that we will be able to do so. 

We will post all hardcopy submissions 

on https://www.regulations.gov. 

Comments and materials we receive, 

as well as supporting documentation we 

used in preparing this proposed rule, 

will be available for public inspection 

on https://www.regulations.gov. 

Our final determination may differ 

from this proposal because we will 

consider all comments we receive 

during the comment period as well as 

any information that may become 

available after this proposal. Based on 

the new information we receive (and, if 

relevant, any comments on that new 

information), we may conclude that the 

species is endangered instead of 

threatened, or we may conclude that the 

species does not warrant listing as either 

an endangered species or a threatened 

species. In addition, we may change the 

parameters of the prohibitions or the 

exceptions to those prohibitions in the 

4(d) rule if we conclude it is appropriate 

in light of comments and new 

information received. For example, we 

may expand the prohibitions to include 

prohibiting additional activities if we 

conclude that those additional activities 

are not compatible with conservation of 

the species. Conversely, we may 

establish additional exceptions to the 

prohibitions in the final rule if we 

conclude that the activities would 

facilitate or are compatible with the 

conservation and recovery of the 

species. In our final rule, we will clearly 

explain our rationale and the basis for 

our final decision, including why we 

made changes, if any, that differ from 

this proposal. 

Public Hearing 

Section 4(b)(5) of the Act provides for 

a public hearing on this proposal, if 

requested. Requests must be received by 

the date specified in DATES. Such 

requests must be sent to the address 

shown in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. We will schedule a public 

hearing on this proposal, if requested, 

and announce the date, time, and place 

of the hearing, as well as how to obtain 

reasonable accommodations, in the 

Federal Register and local newspapers 

at least 15 days before the hearing. We 

may hold the public hearing in person 

or virtually via webinar. We will 

announce any public hearing on our 

website, in addition to the Federal 

Register. The use of virtual public 

hearings is consistent with our 

regulations at 50 CFR 424.16(c)(3). 

Previous Federal Actions 

We received a petition from the 

Center for Biological Diversity, Alabama 

Rivers Alliance, Clinch Coalition, 

Dogwood Alliance, Gulf Restoration 

Network, Tennessee Forests Council, 

West Virginia Highlands Conservancy, 

Tierra Curry, and Noah Greenwald on 

April 20, 2010, to list 404 aquatic, 

riparian, and wetland species from the 

southeastern United States as threatened 

or endangered species and to designate 

critical habitat under the Endangered 

Species Act (Act). The Miami cave 

crayfish was included in this petition. 

On September 27, 2011, we published a 

90-day finding in the Federal Register 

(76 FR 59836), concluding that the 

petition presented substantial 

information that indicated listing the 

Miami cave crayfish may be warranted. 

This document serves as both our 12- 

month warranted petition finding and 

our proposed rule to list this species. 

Peer Review 

A species status assessment (SSA) 

team prepared an SSA report for the 

Miami cave crayfish. The SSA team was 

composed of Service biologists, in 

consultation with other species experts. 

The SSA report represents a 

compilation of the best scientific and 

commercial data available concerning 

the status of the species, including the 

impacts of past, present, and future 

factors (both negative and beneficial) 

affecting the species. 

In accordance with our joint policy on 

peer review published in the Federal 

Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), 

and our August 22, 2016, memorandum 

updating and clarifying the role of peer 

review of listing actions under the Act, 

we solicited independent scientific 

review of the information contained in 

the Miami cave crayfish SSA report. We 

sent the SSA report to four independent 

peer reviewers and received three 

responses. Results of this structured 

peer review process can be found at 

https://regulations.gov. In preparing this 

proposed rule, we incorporated the 

results of these reviews, as appropriate, 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
64858 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 20, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

into the SSA report, which is the 

foundation for this proposed rule. 

Summary of Peer Reviewer Comments 

As discussed in Peer Review above, 

we received comments from three peer 

reviewers on the draft SSA report. We 

reviewed all comments we received 

from the peer reviewers for substantive 

issues and new information regarding 

the contents of the SSA report. The peer 

reviewers generally concurred with our 

methods and conclusions and provided 

additional information, clarifications, 

and suggestions, including clarification 

on our methodology used to determine 

the quantity of habitat and other 

editorial suggestions. Two peer 

reviewers provided additional locations 

of Miami cave crayfish within the 

established range of the species that we 

incorporated into the SSA report. 

Otherwise, no substantive changes to 

our analysis and conclusions within the 

SSA report were deemed necessary, and 

peer reviewer comments are addressed 

in version 1.0 of the SSA report. 

I. Proposed Listing Determination 

Background 

A thorough review of the taxonomy, 

life history, and ecology of the Miami 

cave crayfish (Procambarus milleri) is 

presented in the SSA report (version 

1.1; Service 2022, pp. 3–18). 

The Miami cave crayfish is a 

relatively small, freshwater, 

subterranean crayfish endemic to 

southern and central Miami-Dade 

County, Florida. On an evolutionary 

timescale, the Miami cave crayfish is 

recently adapted to the belowground 

aquifer environment as is indicated by 

the presence of both pigment and eye 

facets in some individuals. Miami cave 

crayfish are opportunistic omnivores, 

primarily consuming surficial detritus 

that filters down through the porous 

limestone into their aquifer habitat 

(Radice and Loftus 1995, p. 114). 

Individuals may also consume 

amphipods and isopods found in the 

same habitat (Hobbs 1971, p. 114). 

The species was first described based 

on specimens collected from a 22-foot 

(ft; 6.7-meter (m)) deep well, south of 

Miami in 1968 (Hobbs 1971, entire). 

Additional confirmed reports of the 

species followed in 1992, 2000–2004, 

2009, and most recently in 2018. The 

species has been collected from wells 

7.9–36 ft (2.41–11 m) deep in the Miami 

Limestone and Fort Thompson 

Formation within the Biscayne Aquifer 

along the Atlantic Coastal Ridge. 

The Atlantic Coastal Ridge is a 

northeast-to-southwest-trending 

elevated feature, varying between 1.8– 

10 miles (mi) (3–16 kilometers (km)) in 

width and rising 3.2–28.2 ft (1–8.6 m) 

above sea level between Everglades 

National Park, Homestead, and North 

Miami (Fish and Stewart 1991, p. 4; 

Wacker et al. 2014, p. 26; Whitman and 

Yeboah-Forson 2015, pp. 782, 790; 

Meeder and Harlem 2019, pp. 560–561). 

The Miami Limestone and Fort 

Thompson Formation on the Atlantic 

Coastal Ridge are highly porous 

(containing large holes and cavities), 

resembling a sponge, whereas those 

same geologic layers in the surrounding 

area are partly or completely cemented 

with mud and sand. The Miami cave 

crayfish is adapted to the unique 

porosity of the Atlantic Coastal Ridge, 

which provides nutrient flow and 

subterranean space to inhabit. Miami 

cave crayfish likely occupy the Biscayne 

Aquifer from the top of the water table 

in the Miami Limestone to the bottom 

of the Fort Thompson Formation. The 

species has not been observed outside of 

the Atlantic Coastal Ridge, despite 

surveys done in the surrounding area. 

Regulatory and Analytical Framework 

Regulatory Framework 

Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) 

and the implementing regulations in 

title 50 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations set forth the procedures for 

determining whether a species is an 

endangered species or a threatened 

species, issuing protective regulations 

for threatened species, and designating 

critical habitat for endangered and 

threatened species. In 2019, jointly with 

the National Marine Fisheries Service, 

the Service issued a final rule that 

revised the regulations in 50 CFR part 

424 regarding how we add, remove, and 

reclassify endangered and threatened 

species and the criteria for designating 

listed species’ critical habitat (84 FR 

45020; August 27, 2019). On the same 

day, the Service also issued final 

regulations that, for species listed as 

threatened species after September 26, 

2019, eliminated the Service’s general 

protective regulations automatically 

applying to threatened species the 

prohibitions that section 9 of the Act 

applies to endangered species (84 FR 

44753; August 27, 2019). 

The Act defines an ‘‘endangered 

species’’ as a species that is in danger 

of extinction throughout all or a 

significant portion of its range, and a 

‘‘threatened species’’ as a species that is 

likely to become an endangered species 

within the foreseeable future throughout 

all or a significant portion of its range. 

The Act requires that we determine 

whether any species is an endangered 

species or a threatened species because 

of any of the following factors: 

(A) The present or threatened 

destruction, modification, or 

curtailment of its habitat or range; 

(B) Overutilization for commercial, 

recreational, scientific, or educational 

purposes; 

(C) Disease or predation; 

(D) The inadequacy of existing 

regulatory mechanisms; or 

(E) Other natural or manmade factors 

affecting its continued existence. 

These factors represent broad 

categories of natural or human-caused 

actions or conditions that could have an 

effect on a species’ continued existence. 

In evaluating these actions and 

conditions, we look for those that may 

have a negative effect on individuals of 

the species, as well as other actions or 

conditions that may ameliorate any 

negative effects or may have positive 

effects. 

We use the term ‘‘threat’’ to refer in 

general to actions or conditions that are 

known to or are reasonably likely to 

negatively affect individuals of a 

species. The term ‘‘threat’’ includes 

actions or conditions that have a direct 

impact on individuals (direct impacts), 

as well as those that affect individuals 

through alteration of their habitat or 

required resources (stressors). The term 

‘‘threat’’ may encompass—either 

together or separately—the source of the 

action or condition or the action or 

condition itself. 

However, the mere identification of 

any threat(s) does not necessarily mean 

that the species meets the statutory 

definition of an ‘‘endangered species’’ or 

a ‘‘threatened species.’’ In determining 

whether a species meets either 

definition, we must evaluate all 

identified threats by considering the 

species’ expected response and the 

effects of the threats—in light of those 

actions and conditions that will 

ameliorate the threats—on an 

individual, population, and species 

level. We evaluate each threat and its 

expected effects on the species, then 

analyze the cumulative effect of all of 

the threats on the species as a whole. 

We also consider the cumulative effect 

of the threats in light of those actions 

and conditions that will have positive 

effects on the species, such as any 

existing regulatory mechanisms or 

conservation efforts. The Secretary 

determines whether the species meets 

the definition of an ‘‘endangered 

species’’ or a ‘‘threatened species’’ only 

after conducting this cumulative 

analysis and describing the expected 

effect on the species now and in the 

foreseeable future. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 20, 2023 / Proposed Rules 64859 

The Act does not define the term 

‘‘foreseeable future,’’ which appears in 

the statutory definition of ‘‘threatened 

species.’’ Our implementing regulations 

at 50 CFR 424.11(d) set forth a 

framework for evaluating the foreseeable 

future on a case-by-case basis. The term 

‘‘foreseeable future’’ extends only so far 

into the future as we can reasonably 

determine that both the future threats 

and the species’ responses to those 

threats are likely. In other words, the 

foreseeable future is the period of time 

in which we can make reliable 

predictions. ‘‘Reliable’’ does not mean 

‘‘certain’’; it means sufficient to provide 

a reasonable degree of confidence in the 

prediction. Thus, a prediction is reliable 

if it is reasonable to depend on it when 

making decisions. 

It is not always possible or necessary 

to define the foreseeable future as a 

particular number of years. Analysis of 

the foreseeable future uses the best 

scientific and commercial data available 

and should consider the timeframes 

applicable to the relevant threats and to 

the species’ likely responses to those 

threats in view of its life-history 

characteristics. Data that are typically 

relevant to assessing the species’ 

biological response include speciesspecific factors such as lifespan, 

reproductive rates or productivity, 

certain behaviors, and other 

demographic factors. 

Analytical Framework 

The SSA report documents the results 

of our comprehensive biological review 

of the best scientific and commercial 

data regarding the status of the species, 

including an assessment of the potential 

threats to the species. The SSA report 

does not represent our decision on 

whether the species should be proposed 

for listing as an endangered or 

threatened species under the Act. 

However, it does provide the scientific 

basis that informs our regulatory 

decisions, which involve the further 

application of standards within the Act 

and its implementing regulations and 

policies. 

To assess Miami cave crayfish 

viability, we used the three conservation 

biology principles of resiliency, 

redundancy, and representation (Shaffer 

and Stein 2000, pp. 306–310). Briefly, 

resiliency is the ability of the species to 

withstand environmental and 

demographic stochasticity (for example, 

wet or dry, warm or cold years), 

redundancy is the ability of the species 

to withstand catastrophic events (for 

example, droughts, large pollution 

events), and representation is the ability 

of the species to adapt to both near-term 

and long-term changes in its physical 

and biological environment (for 

example, climate conditions, 

pathogens). In general, species viability 

will increase with increases in 

resiliency, redundancy, and 

representation (Smith et al. 2018, p. 

306). Using these principles, we 

identified the species’ ecological 

requirements for survival and 

reproduction at the individual, 

population, and species levels, and 

described the beneficial and risk factors 

influencing the species’ viability. 

The SSA process can be categorized 

into three sequential stages. During the 

first stage, we evaluated the individual 

species’ life-history needs. The next 

stage involved an assessment of the 

historical and current condition of the 

species’ demographics and habitat 

characteristics, including an 

explanation of how the species arrived 

at its current condition. The final stage 

of the SSA involved making predictions 

about the species’ responses to positive 

and negative environmental and 

anthropogenic influences. Throughout 

all of these stages, we used the best 

available information to characterize 

viability as the ability of a species to 

sustain populations in the wild over 

time. We use this information to inform 

our regulatory decision. 

The following is a summary of the key 

results and conclusions from the SSA 

report; the full SSA report can be found 

at Docket FWS–R4–ES–2023–0103 on 

https://www.regulations.gov and at 

https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9832. 

Summary of Biological Status and 

Threats 

In this discussion, we review the 

biological condition of the species and 

its resources, and the threats that 

influence the species’ current and future 

condition, in order to assess the species’ 

overall viability and the risks to that 

viability. 

Species Needs 

The SSA report contains a detailed 

discussion of the Miami cave crayfish 

individual and population requirements 

(Service 2022, pp. 23–27); we provide a 

summary here. Based upon the best 

available scientific and commercial 

information, and acknowledging 

existing ecological uncertainties, the 

resource and demographic needs for 

breeding, feeding, sheltering, and 

dispersal of the Miami cave crayfish are 

characterized as: 

• Sufficient freshwater quality and 

availability to support a suitable aquatic 

environment for movement and healthy 

individuals. 

• Sufficient quantities of mega-porous 

limestone to provide the structure 

needed for Miami cave crayfish 

movement and shelter. The Miami cave 

crayfish has adapted to these megaporous limestone layers in the Biscayne 

Aquifer, which provides them with 

structures through which juvenile and 

adult Miami cave crayfish can travel 

between areas within the aquifer 

system, facilitating connectivity; 

microhabitats in which individuals can 

shelter or hide from intra- and 

interspecific threats; and enhanced 

groundwater flow for improved water 

quality and food availability (Loftus and 

Trexler 2004, p. 49, Hobbs and Means 

1972, p. 401; Caine 1978, pp. 323, 325, 

Fish and Stewart 1991, p. 47; Wacker et 

al. 2014, pp. 27–40). 

• Sufficient quantities of detritus 

filtering from the surface into the 

subterranean aquifer to support both the 

Miami cave crayfish and the amphipods 

and isopods upon which the crayfish 

may also feed. 

Miami cave crayfish abundance is 

limited to the availability and condition 

of these resources in the Biscayne 

Aquifer along the Atlantic Coastal 

Ridge. While there is high confidence in 

these identified species needs, 

uncertainty exists as to the exact 

parameters and quantities needed for 

each of these factors, as no ecological or 

quantitative studies have been 

completed on them. 

Threats 

The main threats affecting the Miami 

cave crayfish are related to shifts in 

climate largely as a result of increasing 

greenhouse gas emissions. Saltwater 

intrusion into the Biscayne Aquifer as a 

result of sea level rise, more frequent 

tidal flooding (increase of tides above 

the mean high tide), and increasing 

intensity of storm events (such as 

hurricanes) are the predominant threats 

to the Miami cave crayfish and its 

habitat. Additional threats with greater 

uncertainty and likely less severity to 

the Miami cave crayfish include water 

quality degradation, groundwater 

pumping, and modification of surface 

cover resulting from urban 

development. We also evaluated 

existing ongoing conservation measures 

and regulatory mechanisms. In the SSA 

report, we considered additional threats: 

modification of subterranean limestone, 

competition and predation, disease, and 

overutilization. We concluded that, as 

indicated by the best available scientific 

and commercial information, these 

additional threats are currently having 

little to no impact on the Miami cave 

crayfish, and thus their overall effect 

now is expected to be minimal and the 

best available information does not 

indicate this will change in the future. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
64860 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 20, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

For full descriptions of all threats and 

how they impact the Miami cave 

crayfish, please see the SSA report 

(Service 2022, pp. 27–78). 

Saltwater Intrusion 

Although the salinity tolerance of 

Miami cave crayfish has not been 

assessed, surrogate species, such as the 

closely related Everglades crayfish 

(Procambarus alleni), indicate it is 

highly unlikely that the species could 

persist in the salinity levels found in 

areas affected by saltwater intrusion. 

Surface-dwelling crayfish are able to 

persist in saline environments in the 

short-term, but exposure to salinity 

levels above naturally occurring levels 

for long periods of time can cause 

inhibition of growth, limited to no 

reproduction, lower hatching success, 

and mortality (Vesely ́ et al. 2017, pp. 4– 

5). Additionally, when comparing the 

salinity levels found in the closely 

related, brackish-water-dwelling 

Everglades crayfish to salinity levels 

found in areas of the Biscayne Aquifer 

affected by saltwater intrusion, the 

salinity levels in areas affected by 

saltwater intrusion far exceeded 

tolerances of the Everglades crayfish 

(Hendrix and Loftus 2000, p. 194; 

Service 2022, p. 69). This indicates that 

a closely related, saline-tolerant species 

of crayfish would not be able to tolerate 

the salinity levels that the Miami cave 

crayfish would be experiencing in areas 

of saltwater intrusion. Therefore, we 

concluded the Miami cave crayfish 

likely cannot persist in areas affected by 

saltwater intrusion, because it needs 

sufficient freshwater in order to survive 

and reproduce. 

Saltwater intrusion occurs when 

saltwater enters into a freshwater 

aquifer system. Four main processes 

contribute to the intrusion of saltwater 

into aquifer systems like the Biscayne 

Aquifer: (1) the escape of saltwater that 

had been previously stored in 

sedimentary rocks, (2) the gradual 

advance of oceanwater along the base of 

the aquifer as a result of lowering 

freshwater levels within the aquifer and 

sea level rise, (3) seepage of hypersaline 

(extremely salty) water from coastal 

saltwater marshes, and (4) leakage of 

saltwater from canal systems that feed 

into the ocean (Prinos et al. 2014, pp. 

12–16). Processes two and four are of 

greatest concern to the Biscayne Aquifer 

within the range of Miami cave crayfish 

because of large sea level rise 

projections, the potential effects from 

the planned construction of a curtain 

wall west of the Atlantic Coastal Ridge 

(discussed below), and the extensive 

canal network in the area. Additionally, 

the area’s low altitude and topographic 

gradient, high permeability, and the 

bordering saltwater sources of the 

Atlantic Ocean, Biscayne Bay, and 

Florida Bay make it especially 

susceptible to saltwater intrusion 

(Prinos et al. 2014, p. 2). 

Sea level rise—Regional sea levels 

could rise between 1.41 ft (0.43 m) and 

4.53 ft (1.38 m) by 2070. Temperatures 

are predicted to rise as well, while dry 

seasons, droughts, and tropical storms 

are likely to become more extreme (IPCC 

2014, pp. 1452–1456; Infanti et al. 2020, 

entire; IPCC 2021, pp. 32, 33). The 

cumulation of all of these climatic 

factors is highly likely to result in the 

continued inland migration of the 

saltwater interface in the Biscayne 

Aquifer along the Atlantic Coastal 

Ridge. The loss of habitat along the 

eastern edge of the Atlantic Coastal 

Ridge is particularly impactful since 

these coastal areas exhibit the greatest 

aquifer depths and, thus, the greatest 

overall quantity of Miami cave crayfish 

habitat. 

Curtain wall—In the western range of 

the species, a project started in 2012 

that may impact saltwater intrusion is 

the construction of a 19- to 31-mile (31- 

to 50-kilometer) curtain wall west of the 

Atlantic Coastal Ridge. The curtain 

wall’s purpose is to manage waters 

within the Everglades wetland 

ecosystem and protect the coastal 

urbanized area of Miami-Dade County 

from flooding (Owosina 2020, 

unpaginated). The project is expected to 

be completed in five-to-10-mile 

increments within the next ten years if 

funding can be secured. The curtain 

wall will alter the superficial water flow 

that reaches the Miami-Dade area, but 

we are not certain of the level of effects 

or dynamics to the Biscayne Aquifer, 

particularly to the east of the structure 

on the Atlantic Coastal Ridge where 

water flow from the Everglades wetland 

ecosystem in the east may be reduced. 

Groundwater will still flow under the 

curtain wall. The recommended 

configuration for further study (a 27- 

mile South scenario) will include gaps 

in the curtain wall and is seeking to 

balance restoration and flood control 

while mitigating impacts to Biscayne 

Bay, Taylor Slough, and water supply 

(South Florida Water Management 

District 2023, p. 9–89–9–92). 

Currently, a general eastward and 

southeastward direction of groundwater 

flow along the Atlantic Coastal Ridge 

counters the encroachment of saltwater 

from the ocean (Prinos et al. 2014, p. 6). 

Weakening of this eastward and 

southeastward water flow may cause 

increased saltwater intrusion and 

subsequent loss of Miami cave crayfish 

habitat. In addition, any potential loss of 

freshwater recharge provided by the 

Everglades wetland ecosystem may drop 

the groundwater levels of the Biscayne 

Aquifer on the Atlantic Coastal Ridge, 

further contributing to saltwater 

intrusion. 

Canals—Modern water management 

and its impact on saltwater intrusion 

has a long history in the Miami area, 

beginning with the coordinated draining 

of the Everglades wetland ecosystem in 

1845. Historically, canals along the 

Atlantic Coastal Ridge aided in draining 

the adjacent wetland systems, which, 

along with groundwater pumping, led to 

a permanent drop of about 9.5 ft (2.9 m) 

in regional groundwater levels within 

the Biscayne Aquifer (Prinos et al. 2014, 

pp. 2, 64). As a result, saltwater 

intrusion began to expand inward from 

the coast (Prinos et al. 2014, p. 64). 

Concurrently, saltwater flowed up the 

expanded canal systems from the ocean 

and seeped into the surrounding aquifer 

system (Prinos et al. 2014, p. 64). 

Today’s water management system is 

operated by the South Florida Water 

Management District and includes a 

complex, interconnected network of 

water conservation areas, well-fields, 

water control structures, levees, pumps, 

and canals. Despite the installation of 

salinity control structures along most of 

the tidal canal system in Miami-Dade 

County, saltwater seepage from canals 

into the adjacent aquifer system is still 

one of the primary mechanisms by 

which saltwater intrusion occurs in the 

region (Prinos et al. 2014, pp. 42, 43, 

47–55, 66). 

In summary, saltwater intrusion is the 

primary threat to the Miami cave 

crayfish, because it causes complete loss 

of habitat and is projected to get worse 

in the future; and the species has no 

dispersal potential outside of its current, 

restricted range. 

Groundwater Pumping 

Residents of Miami-Dade County have 

been pumping freshwater out of the 

Biscayne Aquifer for residential, 

agricultural, industrial, municipal, and 

recreational use since the first public 

supply wells were drilled in 1899 

(Prinos et al. 2014, p. 18; Hughes and 

White 2016, pp. 27–29). As the 

population has grown, so too has the 

demand for freshwater. Public 

groundwater withdrawals increased in 

line with population growth until 2006 

when demand on the aquifer was 

mitigated by stricter water use 

regulations (Bradner et al. 2005, p. 1; 

Prinos et al. 2014, p. 7). 

Although 90 percent of the freshwater 

consumed by Miami-Dade County 

residents is pumped from the Biscayne 

Aquifer, these are not the only South 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 20, 2023 / Proposed Rules 64861 

Florida populations drawing from the 

aquifer’s groundwater reserves. Over 4 

million people in Broward and Palm 

Beach Counties also rely on the 

Biscayne Aquifer for their freshwater 

needs, and groundwater piped from the 

Biscayne Aquifer to the Florida Keys 

serves as the main source of potable 

water for all of Monroe County (Bradner 

et al. 2005, p. 1; Prinos et al. 2014, p. 

7). Consequently, the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

has designated the Biscayne Aquifer as 

a sole-source aquifer (i.e., the only 

viable groundwater source in the region; 

EPA 2016, entire). 

As mentioned in the Canals 

discussion above, groundwater pumping 

was part of what caused an estimated 

9.5-ft (2.9-m) drop in water levels 

compared to levels before the drainage 

of the Everglades (Prinos et al. 2014, p. 

17). This drop in water level roughly 

equates to an 11 percent loss in 

potential Miami cave crayfish habitat 

since the 1840s (Service 2022, pp. 53). 

An 11 percent loss in habitat from 

potential historical levels is significant 

because the species has an already 

limited range. 

In addition to causing direct loss of 

habitat, groundwater withdrawal can 

exacerbate the effects of saltwater 

intrusion. Lower freshwater levels as a 

result of groundwater withdrawal can 

cause saltwater intrusion to move 

further inland (Prinos et al. 2014, pp. 

12–16). Lower freshwater levels also act 

synergistically with sea level rise to 

increase the rate of saltwater intrusion 

encroachment into the aquifer. 

The most uncertain but potentially 

most impactful result of groundwater 

pumping is from the pumping process 

itself. Mortality events are possible for 

Miami cave crayfish that get sucked into 

a water pump system. In fact, the 

original specimens from which the 

species was first described were 

deceased individuals collected from a 

water pump trap (Hobbs 1971, p. 114). 

However, public water supply wells 

may have water pumps that are deep 

enough to avoid impacting the Miami 

cave crayfish. For example, the MiamiDade Water and Sewer Department 

Northwest Wellfield has wells 

constructed with 46 feet of casing, 

meaning water is being pumped deeper 

than 46 feet (Krupa et al. 2001, p. 3). 

The deepest Miami cave crayfish have 

been collected from is 36 feet deep. 

Therefore, public water supply wells 

may not have a significant effect on the 

species depending on the depth of the 

well. Private water supply, agricultural, 

or other types of wells that are 

shallower may have a more significant 

impact to the species. Overall, the 

extent of mortality resulting from water 

pumping is unknown but could be 

having ongoing impacts on the species. 

Water Quality Degradation 

The high permeability of the Biscayne 

Aquifer, particularly along the Atlantic 

Coastal Ridge, makes its groundwater 

vulnerable to contamination from 

surficial inputs, belowground septic 

tanks, and adjoining water bodies 

(Bradner et al. 2005, entire; Potter et al. 

2007, p. 1306; Florida Department of 

Environmental Protection 2019, entire). 

In particular, the sandy soils typical to 

the Atlantic Coastal Ridge contain 

relatively small amounts of soil organic 

matter and exhibit low water retention, 

increasing the potential for leaching of 

surface contaminants into groundwater 

below (Marchi et al 2016, pp. 237–238). 

Additionally, the high interconnectivity 

of the Biscayne Aquifer facilitates the 

relatively rapid and extensive spread of 

contaminants well beyond their point of 

origin (Harvey et al. 2008, entire; 

Shapiro et al. 2008, entire). 

Pharmaceuticals, pesticides, volatile 

organic compounds, excess nutrients, 

and excess trace elements are 

introduced into groundwater throughout 

Miami-Dade County by a variety of land 

uses associated with development, 

agriculture, and recreation. These 

contaminants are concentrated in canals 

and other water bodies from which they 

seep into the Biscayne Aquifer. A 

current and comprehensive regional 

assessment of groundwater 

contamination across the endemic range 

of Miami cave crayfish is not available; 

however, there are many sources of 

pollutants including human wastewater, 

agriculture, and golf courses, among 

others (Service 2022, pp. 59–61). 

Using other crayfish and crustaceans 

as analogues, we predict that Miami 

cave crayfish likely experience 

increased morbidity, mortality, and 

reproductive loss when exposed to 

anthropogenic contaminants (Service 

2022, p. 58). However, although 

pollutants may be a significant threat to 

the species, the scope and magnitude of 

this threat is not known because of the 

lack of information on the levels of 

pollutants across the range of the Miami 

cave crayfish. 

Modification of Surface Cover 

The subterranean communities 

supporting Miami cave crayfish are 

dependent on the influx of detritus from 

surficial sources. When surface 

vegetation is lost or is blocked by 

impermeable land cover from entering 

subterranean habitats, the food supply 

of the species can be compromised. The 

majority of the surface cover above 

Miami cave crayfish habitat is 

impermeable cover (greater than 85 

percent). Because of the large amount of 

impermeable cover above subterranean 

habitat, there is likely less detritus 

available for the Miami cave crayfish. 

However, the best available information 

does not indicate that the amount of 

detritus filtering down into Miami cave 

crayfish habitat has been significantly 

reduced because of impermeable cover. 

Summary of Threats 

The primary threat to the Miami cave 

crayfish is saltwater intrusion as a result 

of sea level rise, increased high tide 

flooding, increased intensity of storm 

events, groundwater pumping, and 

altered hydrologic flows. Saltwater 

intrusion results in a complete loss of 

habitat, which is significant because the 

Miami cave crayfish has a restricted 

range. Additional threats with greater 

uncertainty and likely less severity 

include mortality from groundwater 

pumps, water quality degradation, and 

impermeable surface cover limiting 

detritus flow into subterranean habitat. 

Current Conditions 

The current condition of the Miami 

cave crayfish is described in terms of 

population resiliency, redundancy, and 

representation across the species. The 

analysis of these conservation principles 

to understand the species’ current 

viability is described in more detail in 

the Miami cave crayfish SSA report 

(Service 2022, pp. 78–93). 

Historically, all Miami cave crayfish 

were likely part of one metapopulation 

that had some degree of connectivity. 

Currently, the Miami cave crayfish still 

exists in one population restricted to the 

Biscayne Aquifer along the Atlantic 

Coastal Ridge. However, a series of 

canals cross the Atlantic Coastal ridge 

reduce connectivity. For the purposes of 

this assessment, we divided the Atlantic 

Coastal Ridge into seven analysis units 

to assess resiliency of the Miami cave 

crayfish. Reduced connectivity from 

canals creates semi-isolated areas, 

which led us to delineating seven 

analysis units using the network of 

canals as boundaries (Service 2022, p. 

22). 

To determine the current resiliency 

for the seven analysis units, we assessed 

habitat metrics, such as freshwater 

availability, detritus availability, 

freshwater quality, and habitat quantity. 

For each metric if greater than 79 

percent of the measured factor is in a 

natural, anthropogenically unaltered 

state it ranked as a high condition, 51– 

79 percent ranked as a moderate 

condition, and 50 percent or less ranked 

as a low condition. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
64862 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 20, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

Freshwater Availability 

Saltwater intrusion is the primary 

threat to the Miami cave crayfish 

because it reduces the amount of 

freshwater available for the species’ 

habitat. Currently, saltwater intrusion is 

affecting six of the seven analysis units 

for the Miami cave crayfish (Service 

2022, p. 68; Prinos 2019, entire). Two 

units have greater than 50 percent of 

habitat affected by saltwater intrusion, 

four units have 17 to 26 percent of 

habitat affected, and two units have 0 to 

5 percent of habitat affected (Service 

2022, p. 88). Overall, a majority of 

Miami cave crayfish habitat is currently 

unaffected by saltwater intrusion and is 

considered to be in a high condition. 

Availability of Detritus and Freshwater 

Quality 

Currently, we have little to no 

information on whether the amount of 

detritus filtering down into Miami cave 

crayfish habitat has been significantly 

reduced because of impermeable cover; 

effects of pollution on water quality; or 

mortality resulting from groundwater 

pumping or subsurface modification 

activities, such as mining. While these 

stressors likely affect the resiliency of 

the Miami cave crayfish, we do not 

know the direct effects to the species 

and its needs. 

Because we do not know the direct 

effects impermeable cover, pollutants, 

and activities that cause mortality have 

on the Miami cave crayfish, we 

estimated the magnitude of these 

stressors on the species and its needs 

based on indirect measures. 

To assess the availability of detritus, 

we compared the amount of permeable 

cover currently above Miami cave 

crayfish habitat to the amount of 

permeable cover that was historically 

present. Each analysis unit has less than 

37 percent surface area remaining that is 

permeable cover (Service 2022, p. 85). 

Permeable cover is defined as surface 

cover with vegetation that provides 

detritus directly into the subterranean 

habitat. All analysis units are 

considered in a low condition for the 

quality of surface cover. We 

acknowledge that we do not know the 

amount of detritus needed by the Miami 

cave crayfish nor the current amount of 

available detritus in the Biscayne 

Aquifer; therefore, there is significant 

uncertainty in this metric. 

To assess water quality, we estimated 

the number of potential sources of 

pollution within the range of the 

species. We categorized different land 

use types, such as agriculture, by the 

pollutants they may be inputting into 

the Biscayne Aquifer. Then, we 

measured the amount of surface cover in 

each analysis unit that is likely 

inputting pollutants into the aquifer. 

Each analysis unit is in a low condition 

for water quality because of the large 

number of potential inputs of pollutants 

into Miami cave crayfish habitat. We 

acknowledge that we do not know the 

water quality parameters needed by the 

Miami cave crayfish nor the amount of 

pollution within the range of the 

species; therefore, there is significant 

uncertainty in this metric. 

Habitat Quantity 

To assess habitat quantity, we 

estimated the total physical volumetric 

habitat available to the species (i.e., the 

total subterranean karstic limestone that 

is submerged in the Biscayne aquifer). 

We used the most recent available data 

for the depth of the Biscayne Aquifer on 

the Atlantic Coastal Ridge (Hughes and 

White 2016, p. 26) and subtracted out 

certain land uses, like limestone mines, 

and sewer line infrastructure (MiamiDade County 2018, entire and MiamiDade County 2021a, entire). We then 

compared the amount of subterranean, 

karstic limestone aquifer habitat 

currently available to the amount that 

was historically present. All analysis 

units are in a high condition relative to 

habitat quantity (Service 2022, p. 80). 

Resiliency, Redundancy, and 

Representation 

Although we found overall resilience 

to be low in all analysis units, we 

determined the Miami cave crayfish 

currently has sufficient resiliency to 

withstand environmental and 

demographic stochasticity. A majority of 

the Miami cave crayfish range is in a 

high condition for freshwater 

availability and habitat quantity is in a 

high condition for all seven analysis 

units. Our measures of available detritus 

and water quality are in a low condition 

across the range. However, we put 

greater weight on the freshwater 

availability and habitat quantity metrics 

because they are direct measures of the 

species’ needs, whereas we put less 

weight on the availability of detritus 

and freshwater quality metrics because 

they are indirect measures of the 

species’ needs with significant 

assumptions. We then assessed the best 

available demographic data for the 

Miami cave crayfish. 

Surveys since 2000 indicate the 

species is present in all analysis units 

except for the one analysis unit most 

impacted by saltwater intrusion (Service 

2022, p. 21). The most comprehensive 

surveys were completed in the period 

2000–2004, confirming presence of the 

species distributed throughout the range 

(Service 2022, p. 21). Subsequently, one 

anecdotal observation in 2009 along 

with a survey effort in 2018 confirmed 

presence in a total of four analysis units 

spread throughout the range (Service 

2022, p. 21). The effects of impermeable 

land cover and pollution in the 

Biscayne Aquifer have been impacting 

the Miami cave crayfish for multiple 

decades; therefore, the continued 

presence of the species throughout the 

range indicates it currently has 

sufficient resiliency to these stressors. 

In summary, the Miami cave crayfish 

currently has sufficient resiliency to 

withstand environmental and 

demographic stochasticity because there 

is enough freshwater and habitat 

available. Despite our measures of 

available detritus and water quality 

being in low condition, the Miami cave 

crayfish has consistently been found 

throughout its range through multiple 

decades of impermeable land cover and 

pollution in the Biscayne Aquifer, 

indicating that it currently has sufficient 

resiliency to these stressors. We 

combined our habitat metric analysis 

with the best available information on 

the demographics of the species to 

determine that the Miami cave crayfish 

currently has sufficient resiliency to 

withstand environmental and 

demographic stochasticity. 

The Miami cave crayfish currently has 

limited ability to withstand catastrophic 

events and adapt to a changing 

environment because it has naturally 

low redundancy and representation due 

to its high level of endemism. The 

narrowly distributed, isolated nature of 

the single population of the species 

indicates it has limited ability to 

withstand stochastic or catastrophic 

events through dispersal. Because the 

species evolved in a unique 

subterranean aquifer system with little 

historical variation, we conclude that it 

has low potential to adapt to 

environmental changes to its habitat. As 

a single-aquifer endemic with no 

dispersal opportunities outside the 

current range, the species depends 

entirely on the continued availability of 

its habitat along the Atlantic Coastal 

Ridge. Even though redundancy and 

representation are inherently low for the 

Miami cave crayfish because of its 

endemism, they are both similar to 

historical levels. 

Future Condition 

In the SSA report, we analyzed four 

scenarios that incorporated changes in 

saltwater intrusion caused by sea level 

rise, urbanization, water quality 

condition caused by pollution, and 

water quantity condition caused by 

groundwater pumping. The main driver 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 20, 2023 / Proposed Rules 64863 

of the future condition of the species is 

the movement of saltwater intrusion 

further inland because of sea level rise. 

Urbanization, pollution levels, and 

groundwater pumping levels do not 

change significantly into the future 

because they are already at high levels 

and there is limited capacity for more 

development, though they may increase 

if the limited available land is 

developed. Subsequently, we focus on 

the future effects of saltwater intrusion 

in this document. Further discussion of 

future changes in urbanization, water 

quality condition, and water quantity 

condition can be found in the SSA 

report (Service 2022, pp. 94–100). 

As sea level rises, more Miami cave 

crayfish habitat will become unsuitable 

because saltwater will intrude further 

inland into the Biscayne Aquifer. The 

Biscayne Aquifer has varied depth, 

ranging from 50 ft (15 m) in the most 

inland extent of the range to 90 ft (27 

m) in the most coastal extent of the 

range (Hughes and White 2016, p. 26). 

Because the aquifer is deepest closer to 

the coast, there is more Miami cave 

crayfish habitat within this area. Coastal 

habitat will be increasingly impacted by 

saltwater intrusion, which is significant 

because the largest volume of habitat 

will be lost first. 

For our evaluation of future 

condition, we used modeled projections 

of sea level rise (Sweet et al. 2017, 

entire; Sweet et al. 2018, entire). We 

modeled threats to the year 2070, 

representing a 50-year time horizon, 

corresponding to the range of available 

urbanization and climate change model 

forecasts (Carr and Zwick 2016, entire; 

Sweet et al. 2017, entire; Sweet et al. 

2018, entire). In addition, 50 years 

represents an appropriate biological 

timeframe during which responses of 

the species to potential changes in 

habitat can be reasonably assessed. 

Although the lifespan and generation 

time for Miami cave crayfish are 

currently unknown, estimates for these 

measures based on those reported for 

other subterranean crayfish taxa (Taylor 

et al. 1996, p. 27; Huryn et al. 2008, pp. 

1, 12–15; Longshaw and Stebbing 2016, 

p. 68) suggest that three generations of 

the species would likely be represented 

in a 50-year time span. 

No projections currently exist that 

predict the extent of saltwater intrusion 

into the Biscayne Aquifer by 2070, so 

we estimated the inland movement of 

the saltwater interface from its 2018 

position (Prinos 2019, unpaginated) 

based on the projections of regional sea 

level rise, the degree of aquifer 

drawdown, and anthropogenic 

interventions potentially altering 

saltwater intrusion. The regional sea 

level rise scenarios adopted from Sweet 

et al. (2017 and 2018) (e.g., 

Intermediate, Intermediate High, and 

Extreme scenarios) encompass the 

extent of sea level rise predicted by the 

low-end and high-end likely ranges for 

the representative concentration 

pathway (RCP) 4.5 and RCP 8.5 

emissions scenarios for future global 

temperatures projected by the 

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate 

Change assessment report 5 (Sweet et al. 

2018, p. 24). 

After we had completed our SSA, 

version 1.0, new sea level rise 

projections were made publicly 

available (Sweet et al. 2022, entire). We 

compared the Sweet et al. (2017, entire) 

sea level rise projections to the new 

updated Sweet et al. (2022, entire) 

projections and added this comparison 

summary as an appendix to the SSA 

report (Service 2023, version 1.1). The 

Sweet et al. (2022, entire) sea level rise 

scenarios project lower sea level rise in 

2070 when compared to projections 

from Sweet et al. (2017, entire). 

However, including the additional 

effects of high tide flooding, similar loss 

of habitat would be expected as seen in 

our projections using Sweet et al. 2017. 

The intermediate sea level rise 

scenario (1.41-ft (0.43-m) regional sea 

level rise projection) is represented in 

the SSA report by scenario 4; the 

intermediate-high sea level rise scenario 

(2.49-ft (0.76-m) regional sea level rise 

projection) is represented in the SSA 

report by scenarios 1 and 2; and the 

extreme sea level rise scenario (4.53-ft 

(1.38-m) regional sea level rise 

projection) is represented by scenario 3 

(Sweet et al. 2017 and 2018, entire). 

In scenario 4, saltwater intrusion will 

cause increased habitat loss in the two 

analysis units in a low condition and 

the one analysis unit in a moderate 

condition, while also causing one high 

condition unit to drop to a moderate 

condition (Service 2022, pp. 106–107; 

table 1). In scenarios 1 and 2, saltwater 

intrusion will cause two units to 

decrease from a high to moderate 

condition, one unit will decrease from 

a moderate to a low condition, and one 

unit will decrease from a low to 

extirpated condition. In scenario 3, 

saltwater intrusion will cause three 

units to be completely extirpated and 

the remaining four units to drop to a 

low condition, meaning over 50 percent 

of the habitat in those units would be 

lost (Service 2022, pp. 104–105; table 1). 

In all of our future scenarios, a 

significant loss of habitat would result 

from saltwater intrusion (table 1). 

TABLE 1—CONDITION OF FRESHWATER AVAILABILITY FOR THE CURRENT CONDITION AND THE FUTURE CONDITION FOR

EACH SCENARIO FOR EACH ANALYSIS UNIT OF THE MIAMI CAVE CRAYFISH

Analysis unit Current condition: 

freshwater availability 

Scenario 4: 1

freshwater 

availability 

Scenario 1: 2

freshwater 

availability 

Scenario 2: 2

freshwater 

availability 

Scenario 3: 3

freshwater 

availability 

1 .................... High ............................. High ............................. Moderate ...................... Moderate ...................... Low. 

2 .................... High ............................. High ............................. Moderate ...................... Moderate ...................... Low. 

3 .................... High ............................. Moderate ...................... Moderate ...................... Low .............................. Low. 

4 .................... High ............................. High ............................. High ............................. High ............................. Low. 

5 .................... Low .............................. Low .............................. Extirpated ..................... Extirpated ..................... Extirpated. 

6 .................... Moderate ...................... Moderate ...................... Low .............................. Low .............................. Extirpated. 

7 .................... Low .............................. Low .............................. Low .............................. Low .............................. Extirpated. 

Scenarios 4 and 3 represent the upper and lower bounds of projected scenarios for the future condition of the species: 

1Scenario 4: Intermediate sea level rise scenario (1.41-ft (0.43-m) regional sea level rise). 

2Scenarios 1 and 2: Intermediate-high sea level rise scenario (2.49-ft (0.76-m) regional sea level rise). 

3Scenario 3: Extreme sea level rise scenario (4.53-ft (1.38-m) regional sea level rise). 

Resiliency, redundancy, and 

representation would all be reduced in 

the future because of habitat loss due to 

saltwater intrusion. With less habitat 

available, Miami cave crayfish 

abundance would likely decline. Fewer 

Miami cave crayfish in the aquifer and 

less available habitat reduces the ability 

of the species to withstand 

environmental and demographic 

stochasticity and also its ability to 

withstand catastrophic events. A lower 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
64864 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 20, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

population size also reduces the genetic 

diversity of the species, further limiting 

its adaptive capacity. Additionally, the 

Miami cave crayfish has no ability to 

disperse outside of its current range, 

also limiting its ability to adapt to 

changing conditions. Overall, the Miami 

cave crayfish will likely be significantly 

more vulnerable to stressors in the 

future because of habitat loss due to 

increased impacts of saltwater intrusion 

due to sea level rise. 

We note that, by using the SSA 

framework to guide our analysis of the 

scientific information documented in 

the SSA report, we have analyzed the 

cumulative effects of identified threats 

and conservation actions on the species. 

To assess the current and future 

condition of the species, we evaluate the 

effects of all the relevant factors that 

may be influencing the species, 

including threats and conservation 

efforts. Because the SSA framework 

considers not just the presence of the 

factors, but to what degree they 

collectively influence risk to the entire 

species, our assessment integrates the 

cumulative effects of the factors and 

replaces a standalone cumulative effects 

analysis. 

Conservation Efforts and Regulatory 

Mechanisms 

Regulations that help to protect 

Miami cave crayfish habitat include 

water management regulations that 

reduce groundwater withdrawal and 

pollution. 

The South Florida Water Management 

District is responsible for water 

management in Miami-Dade County and 

regulates water use and production 

throughout the region. In 2007, the 

South Florida Water Management 

District passed a rule that prevents 

water consumers from sourcing new or 

additional supplies of freshwater that 

are recharged by the Everglades 

ecosystem. Water users are now 

required to use alternative sources, such 

as recycled water, treated wastewater 

pumped into the Biscayne Aquifer for 

recharge purposes, groundwater 

reserves in the Floridan aquifer system, 

or general water conservation practices 

(South Florida Water Management 

District 2008, entire; Hughes and White 

2016, pp. 2–3). The measure has already 

resulted in decreased rates of public 

water withdrawal from the Biscayne 

Aquifer (Bradner et al. 2005, p. 1; Prinos 

et al. 2014, p. 7). 

Another key regulation adopted by 

the South Florida Water Management 

District that counters freshwater 

withdrawal from the Biscayne Aquifer is 

its year-round landscape watering 

restrictions (Chapter 40E–24, Florida 

Administrative Code). These restrictions 

stipulate specific times that landscape 

watering is permitted, thus restricting 

the amount of groundwater that can be 

withdrawn from those using public or 

privately owned water utility systems or 

wells. However, some large sources of 

water consumption are exempted by 

these regulations, namely athletic play 

areas (e.g., golf courses, sports facilities, 

equestrian and livestock arenas), 

agricultural operations with 

consumptive use permits, and water 

users practicing hand watering (e.g., 

with hoses) (South Florida Water 

Management District 2021a, 

unpaginated). 

Biscayne Aquifer groundwater has 

limited protective benefits from 

pollution under Federal, State, and 

county regulations. Most regulatory 

protections focus on surface water 

quality, which offers indirect benefits to 

the quality of freshwater within the 

Biscayne Aquifer system. The primary 

laws and ordinances pertaining to water 

quality protection that directly or 

indirectly affect groundwater quality in 

the endemic range of Miami cave 

crayfish include (but are not limited to): 

• Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation, and Liability 

Act of 1980 (the Superfund law) (42 

U.S.C. 9601 et seq.): identifies, 

evaluates, and cleans up sites 

contaminated with hazardous 

substances. 

• Resource Conservation and 

Recovery Act (42 U.S.C., ch. 82, sec. 

6901 et seq.): establishes standards for 

the treatment, storage, and disposal of 

hazardous waste from municipal and 

industrial sources, including that 

contained in underground storage tanks. 

• Safe Drinking Water Act (42 U.S.C. 

300f): establishes national primary 

drinking water regulations for 

contaminants that may cause adverse 

public health effects, including 

mandatory requirements related to 

maximum contaminant levels and 

treatments. 

• Clean Water Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 

1251 et seq.): indirectly benefits 

groundwater quality by protecting the 

quality of surficial waters. 

• The Everglades Forever Act 

(Section 373.4592(4)(f), F.S.): establishes 

best management practices in the 

Everglades Agricultural Area, which is 

underlaid by the Biscayne Aquifer that 

indirectly benefits from these 

regulations. 

• The Grizzle-Figg Statute (Section 

403.086, F.S.): outlines requirements for 

safe sewage disposal facilities and 

treatment of discharges from these 

sewage facilities. 

• Identification of Impaired Surface 

Waters (Section 62–303, F.S.): 

establishes water quality standards and 

protocols by which Florida assesses, 

lists, and delists impaired surface 

waters, which indirectly protects 

adjacent aquifer systems. 

• Miami-Dade County Ordinance for 

Florida-Friendly Fertilizer Use for 

Urban Landscapes: regulates fertilizer 

application and use in the incorporated 

and unincorporated areas of the county. 

• Miami-Dade County Wellfield 

Protection Regulations: prohibits or 

limits activities that use or store 

hazardous materials, generate hazardous 

waste, excavate to any depth, or require 

the installation of septic tanks within a 

wellfield protection area. 

Currently, there are no conservation 

efforts specific to the Miami cave 

crayfish. 

The Miami cave crayfish is listed in 

the State Wildlife Action Plan as a 

species of greatest concern (Florida Fish 

and Wildlife Conservation Commission 

2019, p. 163). 

Determination of Miami Cave Crayfish 

Status 

Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) 

and its implementing regulations (50 

CFR part 424) set forth the procedures 

for determining whether a species meets 

the definition of an endangered species 

or a threatened species. The Act defines 

an ‘‘endangered species’’ as a species in 

danger of extinction throughout all or a 

significant portion of its range, and a 

‘‘threatened species’’ as a species likely 

to become an endangered species within 

the foreseeable future throughout all or 

a significant portion of its range. The 

Act requires that we determine whether 

a species meets the definition of an 

endangered species or a threatened 

species because of any of the following 

factors: (A) The present or threatened 

destruction, modification, or 

curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) 

overutilization for commercial, 

recreational, scientific, or educational 

purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D) 

the inadequacy of existing regulatory 

mechanisms; or (E) other natural or 

manmade factors affecting its continued 

existence. 

Status Throughout All of Its Range 

After evaluating threats to the species 

and assessing the cumulative effect of 

the threats under the Act’s section 

4(a)(1) factors, we found that impacts 

from saltwater intrusion caused by 

rising sea levels is the most substantial 

threat to the Miami cave crayfish 

viability. In the foreseeable future, we 

anticipate that saltwater intrusion will 

continue to move inland as climateVerDate Sep<11>2014 16:23 Sep 19, 2023 Jkt 259001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20SEP1.SGM 20SEP1

lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 20, 2023 / Proposed Rules 64865 

change-induced sea level rise continues, 

causing the loss of Miami cave crayfish 

habitat and having the greatest influence 

on Miami cave crayfish viability. We 

also considered the effects of 

development, pollution in the Biscayne 

Aquifer, activities that can cause 

mortality, and minor threats including 

modification of subterranean limestone, 

competition and predation, disease, and 

overutilization for their cumulative 

effects. 

The Miami cave crayfish exists in one 

population restricted to the Biscayne 

Aquifer along the Atlantic Coastal 

Ridge. Pollution and impermeable 

surface cover may be negatively 

affecting resiliency of the species by 

decreasing water quality and limiting 

the detritus filtering into the aquifer. 

However, these impacts are highly 

uncertain, so we put the greatest weight 

on habitat availability and available 

survey data. Currently, two analysis 

units are significantly (greater than 50 

percent) affected by saltwater intrusion 

with five analysis units not significantly 

(0 to 26 percent) affected by saltwater 

intrusion. Overall, a majority of the 

Miami cave crayfish range is currently 

unaffected by saltwater intrusion and is 

considered to be in a high condition. 

Additionally, survey data indicate the 

Miami cave crayfish is present 

throughout the range despite multidecadal threats impacting the species. 

We conclude that there is sufficient 

habitat available to the species and the 

Miami cave crayfish is still distributed 

throughout its range; therefore, it 

currently has a sufficient level of 

resiliency. 

Based on its limited geographical 

range, redundancy and representation 

are inherently low for the Miami cave 

crayfish and likely similar to historical 

levels. Redundancy has been slightly 

reduced from historical levels because 

saltwater intrusion has reduced the 

available habitat near the coast, 

negatively impacted the ability of the 

species to withstand catastrophic 

events. Similarly, current representation 

has been slightly reduced from 

historical levels because habitat loss 

reduces the population size of the 

species, decreasing the amount of 

potential genetic diversity. Overall, 

redundancy and representation remain 

similar to historical levels. Given the 

current resiliency, redundancy, and 

representation of the Miami cave 

crayfish across its range, we conclude 

that the species is not currently in 

danger of extinction throughout its 

range. 

We next considered whether the 

species is likely to become in danger of 

extinction within the foreseeable future 

throughout all of its range. In 

considering the foreseeable future for 

the Miami cave crayfish, we analyzed 

expected changes in sea level rise and 

the resulting inland movement of 

saltwater intrusion out to 2070 (Service 

2022, pp. 100–107). We determined that 

this timeframe represents a period for 

which we can reliably predict both the 

threats to the species and the species’ 

response to those threats. 

By 2070, the Miami cave crayfish is 

projected to lose significant amounts of 

habitat as saltwater encroaches further 

inland into the Biscayne Aquifer. 

Projected habitat losses range from 

losing close to 50 percent of the habitat 

in one additional analysis unit in the 

intermediate sea level rise scenario 

(scenario 4), to losing greater than 50 

percent of all available habitat in the 

extreme sea level rise scenario (scenario 

3). Intermediate scenarios 1 and 2 are 

projected to have only one remaining 

analysis unit in a high condition, one 

extirpated unit, and the remaining units 

being in either a moderate or low 

condition, meaning a majority of the 

habitat would be affected by saltwater 

intrusion. The Miami cave crayfish 

already has a limited range with 

naturally low redundancy and 

representation levels, ultimately making 

it completely dependent on the 

availability of its habitat. Therefore, the 

projected loss of habitat in the 

foreseeable future would leave the 

species extremely vulnerable to 

stochastic or catastrophic events. 

Additionally, the Miami cave crayfish 

has no ability to disperse outside of its 

current range and is unlikely to be able 

to adapt to a saltwater environment. 

Thus, after assessing the best available 

information, we conclude that the 

Miami cave crayfish is not currently in 

danger of extinction but is likely to 

become in danger of extinction within 

the foreseeable future throughout all of 

its range. 

Status Throughout a Significant Portion 

of Its Range 

Under the Act and our implementing 

regulations, a species may warrant 

listing if it is in danger of extinction or 

likely to become so in the foreseeable 

future throughout all or a significant 

portion of its range. The court in Center 

for Biological Diversity v. Everson, 435 

F. Supp. 3d 69 (D.D.C. 2020) (Everson), 

vacated the provision of the Final Policy 

on Interpretation of the Phrase 

‘‘Significant Portion of Its Range’’ in the 

Endangered Species Act’s Definitions of 

‘‘Endangered Species’’ and ‘‘Threatened 

Species’’ (hereafter ‘‘Final Policy’’; 79 

FR 37578, July 1, 2014) that provided if 

the Services determine that a species is 

threatened throughout all of its range, 

the Services will not analyze whether 

the species is endangered in a 

significant portion of its range. 

Therefore, we proceed to evaluating 

whether the species is endangered in a 

significant portion of its range—that is, 

whether there is any portion of the 

species’ range for which both (1) the 

portion is significant; and (2) the species 

is in danger of extinction in that 

portion. Depending on the case, it might 

be more efficient for us to address the 

‘‘significance’’ question or the ‘‘status’’ 

question first. We can choose to address 

either question first. Regardless of 

which question we address first, if we 

reach a negative answer with respect to 

the first question that we address, we do 

not need to evaluate the other question 

for that portion of the species’ range. 

Following the court’s holding in 

Everson, we now consider whether there 

are any significant portions of the 

species’ range where the species is in 

danger of extinction now (i.e., 

endangered). In undertaking this 

analysis for the Miami cave crayfish, we 

choose to address the status question 

first—we consider information 

pertaining to the geographic distribution 

of both the species and the threats that 

the species faces to identify portions of 

the range where the species may be 

endangered. 

We evaluated the range of the Miami 

cave crayfish to determine if the species 

is in danger of extinction now in any 

portion of its range. The range of a 

species can theoretically be divided into 

portions in an infinite number of ways. 

We focused our analysis on portions of 

the species’ range that may meet the 

definition of an endangered species. For 

the Miami cave crayfish, we considered 

whether the threats or their effects on 

the species are greater in any 

biologically meaningful portion of the 

species’ range than in other portions 

such that the species is in danger of 

extinction now in that portion. 

We examined the following threats: 

saltwater intrusion, water quality 

degradation, groundwater pumping, and 

modification of surface cover resulting 

from urban development, including 

cumulative effects. The primary threat 

to the Miami cave crayfish is saltwater 

intrusion caused by rising sea levels, 

which is affecting the coastal analysis 

units the most currently. The other 

threats of water quality degradation, 

groundwater pumping, and 

modification of surface cover are largely 

having an effect across the range of the 

species. Therefore, we focused our 

evaluation on the threat of saltwater 

intrusion. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
64866 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 20, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

In considering whether the threats or 

their effects on the species are greater in 

any biologically meaningful portion of 

the species’ range, there are two analysis 

units affected by saltwater intrusion 

more than the other units. Currently, 

these two analysis units (portion) are 

significantly (greater than 50 percent) 

affected by saltwater intrusion and the 

other five analysis units are not 

significantly (0 to 26 percent) affected 

by saltwater intrusion. We determined 

this portion may have a different status 

than the rest of the range and then 

considered whether this portion may be 

significant. 

This portion is small in size relative 

to the entire range of the species; it 

represents less than 25 percent of the 

range. In addition, the habitat in this 

portion is neither unique or better 

quality compared to the rest of the range 

and most Miami cave crayfish have been 

observed farther inland. Therefore, we 

do not find this portion to be significant. 

Therefore, no portion of the species’ 

range provides a basis for determining 

that the species is in danger of 

extinction in a significant portion of its 

range, and we determine that the 

species is likely to become in danger of 

extinction within the foreseeable future 

throughout all of its range. This does not 

conflict with the courts’ holdings in 

Desert Survivors v. U.S. Department of 

the Interior, 321 F. Supp. 3d 1011, 

1070–74 (N.D. Cal. 2018) and Center for 

Biological Diversity v. Jewell, 248 F. 

Supp. 3d 946, 959 (D. Ariz. 2017) 

because, in reaching this conclusion, we 

did not apply the aspects of the Final 

Policy, including the definition of 

‘‘significant’’ that those court decisions 

held to be invalid. 

Determination of Status 

Our review of the best available 

scientific and commercial information 

indicates that the Miami cave crayfish 

meets the definition of a threatened 

species. Therefore, we propose to list 

the Miami cave crayfish as a threatened 

species in accordance with sections 

3(20) and 4(a)(1) of the Act. 

Available Conservation Measures 

Conservation measures provided to 

species listed as endangered or 

threatened species under the Act 

include recognition as a listed species, 

planning and implementation of 

recovery actions, requirements for 

Federal protection, and prohibitions 

against certain practices. Recognition 

through listing results in public 

awareness, and conservation by Federal, 

State, Tribal, and local agencies, private 

organizations, and individuals. The Act 

encourages cooperation with the States 

and other countries and calls for 

recovery actions to be carried out for 

listed species. The protection required 

by Federal agencies, including the 

Service, and the prohibitions against 

certain activities are discussed, in part, 

below. 

The primary purpose of the Act is the 

conservation of endangered and 

threatened species and the ecosystems 

upon which they depend. The ultimate 

goal of such conservation efforts is the 

recovery of these listed species, so that 

they no longer need the protective 

measures of the Act. Section 4(f) of the 

Act calls for the Service to develop and 

implement recovery plans for the 

conservation of endangered and 

threatened species. The goal of this 

process is to restore listed species to a 

point where they are secure, selfsustaining, and functioning components 

of their ecosystems. 

The recovery planning process begins 

with development of a recovery outline 

made available to the public soon after 

a final listing determination. The 

recovery outline guides the immediate 

implementation of urgent recovery 

actions while a recovery plan is being 

developed. Recovery teams (composed 

of species experts, Federal and State 

agencies, nongovernmental 

organizations, and stakeholders) may be 

established to develop and implement 

recovery plans. The recovery planning 

process involves the identification of 

actions that are necessary to halt and 

reverse the species’ decline by 

addressing the threats to its survival and 

recovery. The recovery plan identifies 

recovery criteria for review of when a 

species may be ready for reclassification 

from endangered to threatened 

(‘‘downlisting’’) or removal from 

protected status (‘‘delisting’’), and 

methods for monitoring recovery 

progress. Recovery plans also establish 

a framework for agencies to coordinate 

their recovery efforts and provide 

estimates of the cost of implementing 

recovery tasks. Revisions of the plan 

may be done to address continuing or 

new threats to the species, as new 

substantive information becomes 

available. The recovery outline, draft 

recovery plan, final recovery plan, and 

any revisions will be available on our 

website as they are completed (https:// 

ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9832), or from 

our Florida Ecological Services Field 

Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT). 

Implementation of recovery actions 

generally requires the participation of a 

broad range of partners, including other 

Federal agencies, States, Tribes, 

nongovernmental organizations, 

businesses, and private landowners. 

Examples of recovery actions include 

habitat restoration (e.g., restoration of 

native vegetation), research, captive 

propagation and reintroduction, and 

outreach and education. The recovery of 

many listed species cannot be 

accomplished solely on Federal lands 

because their range may occur primarily 

or solely on non-Federal lands. To 

achieve recovery of these species 

requires cooperative conservation efforts 

on private, State, and Tribal lands. 

If this species is listed, funding for 

recovery actions will be available from 

a variety of sources, including Federal 

budgets, State programs, and cost-share 

grants for non-Federal landowners, the 

academic community, and 

nongovernmental organizations. In 

addition, pursuant to section 6 of the 

Act, the State of Florida would be 

eligible for Federal funds to implement 

management actions that promote the 

protection or recovery of the Miami cave 

crayfish. Information on our grant 

programs that are available to aid 

species recovery can be found at: 

https://www.fws.gov/service/financialassistance. 

Although the Miami cave crayfish is 

only proposed for listing under the Act 

at this time, please let us know if you 

are interested in participating in 

recovery efforts for this species. 

Additionally, we invite you to submit 

any new information on this species 

whenever it becomes available and any 

information you may have for recovery 

planning purposes (see FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT). 

Section 7 of the Act is titled 

Interagency Cooperation and mandates 

all Federal action agencies to use their 

existing authorities to further the 

conservation purposes of the Act and to 

ensure that their actions are not likely 

to jeopardize the continued existence of 

listed species or adversely modify 

critical habitat. Regulations 

implementing section 7 are codified at 

50 CFR part 402. 

Section 7(a)(2) states that each Federal 

action agency shall, in consultation with 

the Secretary, 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. Each 

Federal agency shall review its action at 

the earliest possible time to determine 

whether it may affect listed species or 

critical habitat. If a determination is 

made that the action may affect listed 

species or critical habitat, formal 

consultation is required (50 CFR 

402.14(a)), unless the Service concurs in 

writing that the action is not likely to 

adversely affect listed species or critical 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 20, 2023 / Proposed Rules 64867 

habitat. At the end of a formal 

consultation, the Service issues a 

biological opinion, containing its 

determination of whether the Federal 

action is likely to result in jeopardy or 

adverse modification. 

In contrast, section 7(a)(4) of the Act 

requires Federal agencies to confer with 

the Service on any action which is likely 

to jeopardize the continued existence of 

any species proposed to be listed under 

the Act or result in the destruction or 

adverse modification of critical habitat 

proposed to be designated for such 

species. Although the conference 

procedures are required only when an 

action is likely to result in jeopardy or 

adverse modification, action agencies 

may voluntarily confer with the Service 

on actions that may affect species 

proposed for listing or critical habitat 

proposed to be designated. In the event 

that the subject species is listed or the 

relevant critical habitat is designated, a 

conference opinion may be adopted as 

a biological opinion and serve as 

compliance with section 7(a)(2). 

Examples of discretionary actions for 

the Miami cave crayfish that may be 

subject to conference and consultation 

procedures under section 7 are land 

management or other landscape-altering 

activities on Federal lands administered 

by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 

U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Department of 

Transportation, and U.S. Department of 

Housing and Urban Development as 

well as actions on State, Tribal, local, or 

private lands that require a Federal 

permit (such as a permit from the U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers under section 

404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 

1251 et seq.) or a permit from the 

Service under section 10 of the Act) or 

that involve some other Federal action 

(such as funding from the Federal 

Highway Administration, Federal 

Aviation Administration, or the Federal 

Emergency Management Agency). 

Federal actions not affecting listed 

species or critical habitat—and actions 

on State, Tribal, local, or private lands 

that are not federally funded, 

authorized, or carried out by a Federal 

agency—do not require section 7 

consultation. Federal agencies should 

coordinate with the local Service Field 

Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT) with any specific questions on 

section 7 consultation and conference 

requirements. 

It is the policy of the Services, as 

published in the Federal Register on 

July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34272), to identify 

to the extent known at the time a 

species is listed, specific activities that 

will not be considered likely to result in 

violation of section 9 of the Act. To the 

extent possible, activities that will be 

considered likely to result in violation 

will also be identified in as specific a 

manner as possible. The intent of this 

policy is to increase public awareness of 

the effect of a proposed listing on 

proposed and ongoing activities within 

the range of the species proposed for 

listing. Although most of the 

prohibitions in section 9 of the Act 

apply to endangered species, sections 

9(a)(1)(G) and 9(a)(2)(E) of the Act 

prohibit the violation of any regulation 

under section 4(d) pertaining to any 

threatened species of fish or wildlife, or 

threatened species of plant, 

respectively. Section 4(d) of the Act 

directs the Secretary to promulgate 

protective regulations that are necessary 

and advisable for the conservation of 

threatened species. As a result, we 

interpret our policy to mean that, when 

we list a species as a threatened species, 

to the extent possible, we identify 

activities that will or will not be 

considered likely to result in violation 

of the protective regulations under 

section 4(d) for that species. 

At this time, we are unable to identify 

specific activities that will or will not be 

considered likely to result in violation 

of section 9 of the Act beyond what is 

already clear from the descriptions of 

prohibitions and exceptions established 

by protective regulation under section 

4(d) of the Act. 

Questions regarding whether specific 

activities would constitute violation of 

section 9 of the Act should be directed 

to the Florida Ecological Services Field 

Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT). 

II. Proposed Rule Issued Under Section 

4(d) of the Act 

Background 

Section 4(d) of the Act contains two 

sentences. The first sentence states that 

the Secretary shall issue such 

regulations as she deems necessary and 

advisable to provide for the 

conservation of species listed as 

threatened species. The U.S. Supreme 

Court has noted that statutory language 

similar to the language in section 4(d) of 

the Act authorizing the Secretary to take 

action that she ‘‘deems necessary and 

advisable’’ affords a large degree of 

deference to the agency (see Webster v. 

Doe, 486 U.S. 592, 600 (1988)). 

Conservation is defined in the Act to 

mean the use of all methods and 

procedures which are necessary to bring 

any endangered species or threatened 

species to the point at which the 

measures provided pursuant to the Act 

are no longer necessary. Additionally, 

the second sentence of section 4(d) of 

the Act states that the Secretary may by 

regulation prohibit with respect to any 

threatened species any act prohibited 

under section 9(a)(1), in the case of fish 

or wildlife, or section 9(a)(2), in the case 

of plants. Thus, the combination of the 

two sentences of section 4(d) provides 

the Secretary with wide latitude of 

discretion to select and promulgate 

appropriate regulations tailored to the 

specific conservation needs of the 

threatened species. The second sentence 

grants particularly broad discretion to 

the Service when adopting one or more 

of the prohibitions under section 9. 

The courts have recognized the extent 

of the Secretary’s discretion under this 

standard to develop rules that are 

appropriate for the conservation of a 

species. For example, courts have 

upheld, as a valid exercise of agency 

authority, rules developed under section 

4(d) that included limited prohibitions 

against takings (see Alsea Valley 

Alliance v. Lautenbacher, 2007 WL 

2344927 (D. Or. 2007); Washington 

Environmental Council v. National 

Marine Fisheries Service, 2002 WL 

511479 (W.D. Wash. 2002)). Courts have 

also upheld 4(d) rules that do not 

address all of the threats a species faces 

(see State of Louisiana v. Verity, 853 

F.2d 322 (5th Cir. 1988)). As noted in 

the legislative history when the Act was 

initially enacted, ‘‘once an animal is on 

the threatened list, the Secretary has an 

almost infinite number of options 

available to [her] with regard to the 

permitted activities for those species. 

[She] may, for example, permit taking, 

but not importation of such species, or 

[she] may choose to forbid both taking 

and importation but allow the 

transportation of such species’’ (H.R. 

Rep. No. 412, 93rd Cong., 1st Sess. 

1973). 

The provisions of this proposed 4(d) 

rule would promote conservation of the 

Miami cave crayfish by encouraging 

projects and activities that would 

prevent increased saltwater intrusion 

into Miami cave crayfish habitat, 

improve water quality in the aquifer, 

and promote surface cover permeability. 

The provisions of this proposed rule are 

one of many tools that we would use to 

promote the conservation of the Miami 

cave crayfish. This proposed 4(d) rule 

would apply only if and when we make 

final the listing of the Miami cave 

crayfish as a threatened species. 

As mentioned previously in Available 

Conservation Measures, section 7(a)(2) 

of the Act requires Federal agencies, 

including the Service, to ensure that any 

action they authorize, fund, or carry out 

is not likely to jeopardize the continued 

existence of any endangered species or 

threatened species or result in the 

destruction or adverse modification of 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
64868 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 20, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

designated critical habitat of such 

species. In addition, even before the 

listing of any species or the designation 

of its critical habitat is finalized, section 

7(a)(4) of the Act requires Federal 

agencies to confer with the Service on 

any agency action which is likely to 

jeopardize the continued existence of 

any species proposed to be listed under 

the Act or result in the destruction or 

adverse modification of critical habitat 

proposed to be designated for such 

species. 

These requirements are the same for 

a threatened species with a speciesspecific 4(d) rule. For example, as with 

an endangered species, if a Federal 

agency determines that an action is ‘‘not 

likely to adversely affect’’ a threatened 

species, it will require the Service’s 

written concurrence (50 CFR 402.13(c)). 

Similarly, if a Federal agency 

determinates that an action is ‘‘likely to 

adversely affect’’ a threatened species, 

the action will require formal 

consultation with the Service and the 

formulation of a biological opinion (50 

CFR 402.14(a)). 

Provisions of the Proposed 4(d) Rule 

Exercising the Secretary’s authority 

under section 4(d) of the Act, we have 

developed a proposed rule that is 

designed to address the Miami cave 

crayfish’s conservation needs. As 

discussed previously in Summary of 

Biological Status and Threats, we have 

concluded that the Miami cave crayfish 

is likely to become in danger of 

extinction within the foreseeable future 

primarily due to saltwater intrusion 

caused by sea level rise. Section 4(d) 

requires the Secretary to issue such 

regulations as she deems necessary and 

advisable to provide for the 

conservation of each threatened species 

and authorizes the Secretary to include 

among those protective regulations any 

of the prohibitions that section 9(a)(1) of 

the Act prescribes for endangered 

species. We find that, if finalized, the 

protections, prohibitions, and 

exceptions in this proposed rule as a 

whole satisfy the requirement in section 

4(d) of the Act to issue regulations 

deemed necessary and advisable to 

provide for the conservation of the 

Miami cave crayfish. 

The protective regulations we are 

proposing for the Miami cave crayfish 

incorporate prohibitions from section 

9(a)(1) to address the threats to the 

species. Section 9(a)(1) prohibits the 

following activities for endangered 

wildlife: importing or exporting; take; 

possession and other acts with 

unlawfully taken specimens; delivering, 

receiving, carrying, transporting, or 

shipping in interstate or foreign 

commerce in the course of commercial 

activity; or selling or offering for sale in 

interstate or foreign commerce. This 

proposed protective regulation includes 

all of these prohibitions because the 

Miami cave crayfish is at risk of 

extinction in the foreseeable future and 

putting these prohibitions in place will 

help to prevent further degradation of 

habitat and decrease synergistic, 

negative effects from other ongoing or 

future threats. 

In particular, this proposed 4(d) rule 

would provide for the conservation of 

the Miami cave crayfish by prohibiting 

the following activities, unless they fall 

within specific exceptions or are 

otherwise authorized or permitted: 

importing or exporting; take (as set forth 

at 50 CFR 17.21(c)(1) with exceptions as 

discussed below); possession and other 

acts with unlawfully taken specimens; 

delivering, receiving, carrying, 

transporting, or shipping in interstate or 

foreign commerce in the course of 

commercial activity; or selling or 

offering for sale in interstate or foreign 

commerce. 

Under the Act, ‘‘take’’ means to 

harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, 

wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or 

to attempt to engage in any such 

conduct. Some of these provisions have 

been further defined in regulations at 50 

CFR 17.3. Take can result knowingly or 

otherwise, by direct and indirect 

impacts, intentionally or incidentally. 

Regulating take would help preserve the 

species’ one population and decrease 

synergistic, negative effects from other 

ongoing or future threats. Therefore, we 

propose to prohibit take of the Miami 

cave crayfish, except for take resulting 

from those actions and activities 

specifically excepted by the 4(d) rule. 

Exceptions to the prohibition on take 

would include all of the general 

exceptions to the prohibition on take of 

endangered wildlife, as set forth in 50 

CFR 17.21 and additional exceptions, as 

described below. 

The proposed 4(d) rule would also 

provide for the conservation of the 

species by allowing exceptions that 

incentivize conservation actions or that, 

while they may have some minimal 

level of take of the Miami cave crayfish, 

are not expected to rise to the level that 

would have a negative impact (i.e., 

would have only de minimis impacts) 

on the species’ conservation. The 

proposed exceptions to these 

prohibitions include activities that will 

prevent further saltwater intrusion into 

the Biscayne Aquifer and water 

management activities that improve 

water quality or enhance natural 

infiltration into the Biscayne Aquifer: 

(1) Activities that will prevent further 

saltwater intrusion into the Biscayne 

Aquifer include coastal resiliency 

projects and canal maintenance or 

construction that prevent backflow of 

salt water, and 

(2) Water management activities or 

coastal wetland restoration projects that 

improve freshwater and estuarine 

habitats; improve salinity distribution 

and reestablish productive nursery 

habitat along the shoreline; restore the 

quantity, quality, timing, and 

distribution of freshwater to Biscayne 

Bay and Biscayne National Park; restore 

the spatial extent of natural coastal 

glades habitat; or enhance natural 

infiltration into the Biscayne Aquifer. 

Despite these prohibitions regarding 

threatened species, we may under 

certain circumstances issue permits to 

carry out one or more otherwiseprohibited activities, including those 

described above. The regulations that 

govern permits for threatened wildlife 

state that the Director may issue a 

permit authorizing any activity 

otherwise prohibited with regard to 

threatened species. These include 

permits issued for the following 

purposes: for scientific purposes, to 

enhance propagation or survival, for 

economic hardship, for zoological 

exhibition, for educational purposes, for 

incidental taking, or for special 

purposes consistent with the purposes 

of the Act (50 CFR 17.32). The statute 

also contains certain exemptions from 

the prohibitions, which are found in 

sections 9 and 10 of the Act. 

We recognize the special and unique 

relationship with our State natural 

resource agency partners in contributing 

to conservation of listed species. State 

agencies often possess scientific data 

and valuable expertise on the status and 

distribution of endangered, threatened, 

and candidate species of wildlife and 

plants. State agencies, because of their 

authorities and their close working 

relationships with local governments 

and landowners, are in a unique 

position to assist us in implementing all 

aspects of the Act. In this regard, section 

6 of the Act provides that we must 

cooperate to the maximum extent 

practicable with the States in carrying 

out programs authorized by the Act. 

Therefore, any qualified employee or 

agent of a State conservation agency that 

is a party to a cooperative agreement 

with us in accordance with section 6(c) 

of the Act, who is designated by his or 

her agency for such purposes, would be 

able to conduct activities designed to 

conserve the Miami cave crayfish that 

may result in otherwise prohibited take 

without additional authorization. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 20, 2023 / Proposed Rules 64869 

Nothing in this proposed 4(d) rule 

would change in any way the recovery 

planning provisions of section 4(f) of the 

Act, the consultation requirements 

under section 7 of the Act, or our ability 

to enter into partnerships for the 

management and protection of the 

Miami cave crayfish. However, 

interagency cooperation may be further 

streamlined through planned 

programmatic consultations for the 

species between us and other Federal 

agencies, where appropriate. We ask the 

public, particularly State agencies and 

other interested stakeholders that may 

be affected by the proposed 4(d) rule, to 

provide comments and suggestions 

regarding additional guidance and 

methods that we could provide or use, 

respectively, to streamline the 

implementation of this proposed 4(d) 

rule (see Information Requested, above). 

III. Critical Habitat 

Background 

Critical habitat is defined in section 3 

of the Act as: 

(1) The specific areas within the 

geographical area occupied by the 

species, at the time it is listed in 

accordance with the Act, on which are 

found those physical or biological 

features 

(a) Essential to the conservation of the 

species, and 

(b) Which may require special 

management considerations or 

protection; and 

(2) Specific areas outside the 

geographical area occupied by the 

species at the time it is listed, upon a 

determination that such areas are 

essential for the conservation of the 

species. 

We have found critical habitat to be 

prudent and determinable for the Miami 

cave crayfish and have developed a 

proposed critical habitat rule for this 

species. On August 29, 2023, we were 

informed that the Office of Information 

and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) determined that our proposed 

critical habitat rule is significant under 

Executive Order 12866. Therefore, we 

will publish a proposed critical habitat 

rule for the Miami cave crayfish 

following interagency review of the 

proposed critical habitat rule. 

Required Determinations 

Clarity of the Rule 

We are required by E.O.s 12866 and 

12988 and by the Presidential 

Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write 

all rules in plain language. This means 

that each rule we publish must: 

(1) Be logically organized; 

(2) Use the active voice to address 

readers directly; 

(3) Use clear language rather than 

jargon; 

(4) Be divided into short sections and 

sentences; and 

(5) Use lists and tables wherever 

possible. 

If you feel that we have not met these 

requirements, send us comments by one 

of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To 

better help us revise the rule, your 

comments should be as specific as 

possible. For example, you should tell 

us the numbers of the sections or 

paragraphs that are unclearly written, 

which sections or sentences are too 

long, the sections where you feel lists or 

tables would be useful, etc. 

National Environmental Policy Act (42 

U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) 

Regulations adopted pursuant to 

section 4(a) of the Act are exempt from 

the National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and do 

not require an environmental analysis 

under NEPA. We published a notice 

outlining our reasons for this 

determination in the Federal Register 

on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244). This 

includes listing, delisting, and 

reclassification rules, as well as critical 

habitat designations and speciesspecific protective regulations 

promulgated concurrently with a 

decision to list or reclassify a species as 

threatened. The courts have upheld this 

position (e.g., Douglas County v. 

Babbitt, 48 F.3d 1495 (9th Cir. 1995) 

(critical habitat); Center for Biological 

Diversity v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service., 2005 WL 2000928 (N.D. Cal. 

Aug. 19, 2005) (concurrent 4(d) rule)). 

Government-to-Government 

Relationship With Tribes 

In accordance with the President’s 

memorandum of April 29, 1994 

(Government-to-Government Relations 

with Native American Tribal 

Governments; 59 FR 22951), E.O. 13175 

(Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribal Governments), and the 

Department of the Interior’s manual at 

512 DM 2, we readily acknowledge our 

responsibility to communicate 

meaningfully with federally recognized 

Tribes on a government-to-government 

basis. In accordance with Secretaries’ 

Order 3206 of June 5, 1997 (American 

Indian Tribal Rights, Federal-Tribal 

Trust Responsibilities, and the 

Endangered Species Act), we readily 

acknowledge our responsibilities to 

work directly with Tribes in developing 

programs for healthy ecosystems, to 

acknowledge that Tribal lands are not 

subject to the same controls as Federal 

public lands, to remain sensitive to 

Indian culture, and to make information 

available to Tribes. 

References Cited 

A complete list of references cited in 

this rulemaking is available on the 

internet at https://www.regulations.gov 

and upon request from the Florida 

Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). 

Authors 

The primary authors of this proposed 

rule are the staff members of the Fish 

and Wildlife Service’s Species 

Assessment Team and the Florida 

Ecological Services Field Office. 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 

Endangered and threatened species, 

Exports, Imports, Plants, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, 

Transportation, Wildlife. 

Proposed Regulation Promulgation 

Accordingly, we propose to amend 

part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 

50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, 

as set forth below: 

PART 17—ENDANGERED AND 

THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 17 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531– 

1544; and 4201–4245, unless otherwise 

noted. 

■ 2. In § 17.11, amend paragraph (h) by 

adding an entry for ‘‘Crayfish, Miami 

cave’’ to the List of Endangered and 

Threatened Wildlife in alphabetical 

order under CRUSTACEANS to read as 

follows: 

§ 17.11 Endangered and threatened 

wildlife. 

* * * * * 

(h) * * * 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
64870 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 20, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

Common name Scientific name Where listed Status Listing citations and applicable rules 

*******

CRUSTACEANS

* * * * * * * 

Crayfish, Miami cave ......... Procambarus milleri .......... Wherever found ................ T [Federal Register citation when published as a final rule]; 50 CFR 

17.46(e); 4d

* * * * * * * 

■ 3. Amend § 17.46 by adding 

paragraph (e) to read as follows: 

§ 17.46 Special rules—crustaceans. 

* * * * * 

(e) Miami cave crish (Procambarus 

milleri). 

(1) Prohibitions. The following 

prohibitions that apply to endangered 

wildlife also apply to the Miami cave 

crayfish. Except as provided under 

paragraph (e)(2) of this section and 

§§ 17.4 and 17.5, it is unlawful for any 

person subject to the jurisdiction of the 

United States to commit, to attempt to 

commit, to solicit another to commit, or 

cause to be committed, any of the 

following acts in regard to this species: 

(i) Import or export, as set forth at 

§ 17.21(b) for endangered wildlife. 

(ii) Take, as set forth at § 17.21(c)(1) 

for endangered wildlife. 

(iii) Possession and other acts with 

unlawfully taken specimens, as set forth 

at § 17.21(d)(1) for endangered wildlife. 

(iv) Interstate or foreign commerce in 

the course of a commercial activity, as 

set forth at § 17.21(e) for endangered 

wildlife. 

(v) Sale or offer for sale, as set forth 

at § 17.21(f) for endangered wildlife. 

(2) Exceptions from prohibitions. In 

regard to this species, you may: 

(i) Conduct activities as authorized by 

a permit under § 17.32. 

(ii) Take, as set forth at § 17.21(c)(2) 

through (4) for endangered wildlife. 

(iii) Take, as set forth at § 17.31(b). 

(iv) Possess and engage in other acts 

with unlawfully taken wildlife, as set 

forth at § 17.21(d)(2) for endangered 

wildlife. 

(v) Take incidental to an otherwise 

lawful activity caused by: 

(A) Activities that will prevent further 

saltwater intrusion into the Biscayne 

Aquifer, such as coastal resiliency 

projects and canal maintenance or 

construction that prevent backflow of 

salt water; or 

(B) Water management activities or 

coastal wetland restoration projects that 

improve freshwater and estuarine 

habitats; improve salinity distribution 

and reestablish productive nursery 

habitat along the shoreline; restore the 

quantity, quality, timing, and 

distribution of freshwater to Biscayne 

Bay and Biscayne National Park; restore 

the spatial extent of natural coastal 

glades habitat; or enhance natural 

infiltration into the Biscayne Aquifer. 

Martha Williams, 

Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

[FR Doc. 2023–20293 Filed 9–19–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

[FF09E21000 FXES1111090FEDR 234] 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; One Species Not 

Warranted for Delisting and Six 

Species Not Warranted for Listing as 

Endangered or Threatened Species 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notification of findings. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), announce 

findings that one species is not 

warranted for delisting and six species 

are not warranted for listing as 

endangered or threatened species under 

the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (Act). After a thorough review 

of the best available scientific and 

commercial information, we find that it 

is not warranted at this time to delist the 

southern sea otter (Enhydra lutris 

nereis). We also find that is not 

warranted at this time to list the 

Cascades frog (Rana cascadae), plains 

spotted skunk (Spilogale interrupta, 

formerly recognized as one of three 

subspecies of eastern spotted skunk 

(Spilogale putorius interrupta)), 

sicklefin chub (Macrhybopsis meeki), 

sturgeon chub (Macrhybopsis gelida), 

Tennessee cave salamander 

(Gyrinophilus palleucus), and Yazoo 

crayfish (Faxonius hartfieldi, formerly 

Orconectes hartfieldi). However, we ask 

the public to submit to us at any time 

any new information relevant to the 

status of any of the species mentioned 

above or their habitats. 

DATES: The findings in this document 

were made on September 20, 2023. 

ADDRESSES: Detailed descriptions of the 

bases for these findings are available on 

the internet at https://

www.regulations.gov under the 

following docket numbers: 

Species Docket No. 

Cascades frog .......... FWS–R1–ES–2023– 

0127. 

Plains spotted skunk FWS–R3–ES–2023– 

0128. 

Sicklefin chub ........... FWS–R6–ES–2023– 

0130. 

Southern sea otter .... FWS–R8–ES–2023– 

0132. 

Sturgeon chub .......... FWS–R6–ES–2023– 

0131. 

Tennessee cave salamander.FWS–R4–ES–2023– 

0133. 

Yazoo crayfish .......... FWS–R4–ES–2023– 

0134. 

Those descriptions are also available 

by contacting the appropriate person as 

specified under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. Please submit any 

new information, materials, comments, 

or questions concerning this finding to 

the appropriate person, as specified 

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Species Contact information 

Cascades frog ................................. Jeff Dillon, Endangered Species Division Manager, Oregon Fish and Wildlife Office, jeffrey_dillon@fws.gov, 

503–231–6179. 

Plains spotted skunk ....................... John Weber, Field Supervisor, Missouri Field Office, John_S_Weber@fws.gov, 573–825–6048. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1