68070 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

(i) Bid opening for sealed bid 

acquisitions; or 

(ii) Receipt of the special notification 

from the contracting officer (see 

15.503(a)(2)) that identifies the 

apparently successful offeror for 

negotiated acquisitions, including- 

(A) Partial set-asides and reserves of 

multiple-award IDIQ contracts; and 

(B) Orders that are set-aside under an 

unrestricted multiple-award IDIQ 

contract (except for orders and blanket 

purchase agreements placed under a 

Federal Supply Schedule contract (see 

8.405 and paragraph (d)(5) of this 

section)); or 

(iii) Receipt of notification using other 

communication means when written 

notification is not required. 

(2) A protest may be made orally if it 

is confirmed in writing and received by 

the contracting officer within the 5-day 

period or by letter postmarked no later 

than 1 business day after the oral 

protest. 

(3) A protest may be made in writing 

if it is delivered to the contracting 

officer by hand, mail, facsimile, email, 

express or overnight delivery service. 

(4) Except as provided in paragraph 

(d)(6) of this section, a protest filed by 

the contracting officer or SBA is always 

considered timely whether filed before 

or after award. 

(5) A protest under a Multiple Award 

Schedule will be timely if received by 

SBA at any time prior to the expiration 

of the contract period, including 

renewals. 

(6) A protest filed before bid opening, 

or notification to offerors of the 

selection of the apparent successful 

offeror, will be dismissed as premature 

by SBA. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Amend section 19.306 by revising 

paragraph (e)(1)(ii) and adding 

paragraph (e)(1)(iii) to read as follows: 

19.306 Protesting a firm’s status as a 

HUBZone small business concern. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(ii) For negotiated acquisitions, by the 

close of business on the fifth business 

day after notification by the contracting 

officer of the apparently successful 

offeror, including— 

(A) Orders placed under multipleaward indefinite-delivery indefinitequantity (IDIQ) contracts where the 

contracting officer requested 

rerepresentation for the order (see 13 

CFR 126.801(d)(1)); and 

(B) Orders set aside for HUBZone 

small businesses under multiple-award 

IDIQ contracts that are not partially or 

totally set aside or reserved for 

HUBZone small business concerns (see 

13 CFR 126.801(d)(1)), except for orders 

and blanket purchase agreements placed 

under a Federal Supply Schedule 

contract (see 8.405 and 19.302(d)(5)); or 

(iii) Receipt of notification using other 

communication means when written 

notification is not required. 

* * * * * 

■ 4. Amend section 19.307 by— 

■ a. Removing from paragraph (e)(1)(i) 

‘‘(in sealed bid acquisitions); or’’ and 

adding ‘‘for sealed bid acquisitions; or’’ 

in its place; 

■ b. Revising paragraph (e)(1)(ii); and 

■ c. Adding paragraph (e)(1)(iii). 

The revision reads as follows: 

19.307 Protesting a firm’s status as a 

service-disabled veteran-owned small 

business concern. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(ii) To be received by close of 

business on the fifth business day after 

notification by the contracting officer of 

the apparently successful offeror for 

negotiated acquisitions, including— 

(A) Orders placed under multipleaward IDIQ contracts where the 

contracting officer requested 

rerepresentation for the order (see 13 

CFR 134.1004(a)(3)(ii)); and 

(B) Orders set aside for servicedisabled veteran-owned small 

businesses under multiple-award IDIQ 

contracts that are not partially or totally 

set aside or reserved for service-disabled 

veteran-owned small business concerns 

(see 13 CFR 134.1004(a)(3)(i)), except for 

orders and blanket purchase agreements 

placed under a Federal Supply 

Schedule contract (see 8.405 and 

19.302(d)(5)); or 

(iii) Receipt of notification using other 

communication means when written 

notification is not required. 

* * * * * 

■ 5. Amend section 19.308 by— 

■ a. Removing from paragraph (e)(1)(i) 

‘‘(in sealed bid acquisitions); or’’ and 

adding ‘‘for sealed bid acquisitions; or’’ 

in its place; 

■ b. Revising paragraph (e)(1)(ii); and 

■ c. Adding paragraph (e)(1)(iii). 

The revision reads as follows: 

19.308 Protesting a firm’s status as an 

economically disadvantaged women-owned 

small business concern or women-owned 

small business concern eligible under the 

Women-Owned Small Business Program. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(ii) To be received by the close of 

business by the fifth business day after 

notification by the contracting officer of 

the apparent successful offeror for 

negotiated acquisitions including— 

(A) Orders placed under multipleaward IDIQ contracts where the 

contracting officer requested 

rerepresentation for the order (see 13 

CFR 127.603(c)(1)); and 

(B) Orders set aside for EDWOSB or 

WOSB concerns under multiple-award 

IDIQ contracts that are not partially or 

totally set aside or reserved for 

EDWOSB or WOSB concerns (see 13 

CFR 127.603(c)(1)), except for orders 

and blanket purchase agreements placed 

under a Federal Supply Schedule 

contract (see 8.405 and 19.302(d)(5)); or 

(iii) Receipt of notification using other 

communication means when written 

notification is not required. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2023–21317 Filed 10–2–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

[Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2023–0158; 

FF09E21000 FXES1111090FEDR 234] 

RIN 1018–BG40 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Threatened Species Status 

With Section 4(d) Rule for Short-Tailed 

Snake 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), propose to 

list the short-tailed snake (Lampropeltis 

extenuata), a snake species from 

peninsular 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 

short-tailed snake. 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 short-tailed snake as 

a threatened species with a rule issued 

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

rule’’). If we finalize this rule as 

proposed, 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 

December 4, 2023. Comments submitted 

electronically using the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules 68071 

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 17, 2023. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments: 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–2023–0158, 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–2023–0158, 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 on the Service’s website at 

https://www.fws.gov/office/floridaecological-services/library and at 

https://www.regulations.gov under 

Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2023–0158. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Lourdes Mena, Classification and 

Recovery Division Manager, U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, Florida Ecological 

Services Office, 7915 Baymeadows Way, 

Suite 200, Jacksonville, FL 32256–7517; 

telephone: 352–749–2462. 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 rule, please see the 

‘‘rule summary document’’ in docket 

FWS–R4–ES–2023–0158 on https://

www.regulations.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Executive Summary 

Why we need to publish a rule. Under 

the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), 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 short-tailed snake 

meets the Act’s 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 short-tailed snake as 

a threatened species with a rule issued 

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 short-tailed 

snake is a threatened species due to the 

following threats: loss and degradation 

of habitat from urbanization and other 

historical and ongoing land use changes 

(such as agriculture and mining) and 

lack of habitat management (such as 

lack of prescribed fire in an ecosystemappropriate interval). The effects of 

climate change are also likely to 

exacerbate the impact of other threats on 

the short-tailed snake. 

Section 4(a)(3) of the Act requires the 

Secretary of the Interior (Secretary), to 

the maximum extent prudent and 

determinable, to designate critical 

habitat concurrent with listing. Section 

3(5)(A) of the Act defines critical habitat 

as (i) the specific areas within the 

geographical area occupied by the 

species, at the time it is listed, on which 

are found those physical or biological 

features (I) essential to the conservation 

of the species and (II) which may 

require special management 

considerations or protections; and (ii) 

specific areas outside the geographical 

area occupied by the species at the time 

it is listed, upon a determination by the 

Secretary that such areas are essential 

for the conservation of the species. 

Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states that the 

Secretary must make the designation on 

the basis of the best scientific data 

available and after taking into 

consideration the economic impact, the 

impact on national security, and any 

other relevant impacts of specifying any 

particular area as critical habitat. 

We determined that designating 

critical habitat for the short-tailed snake 

is prudent but not determinable. We 

will coordinate with partners to obtain 

data sufficient to perform the required 

analysis of the impacts to inform our 

critical habitat designation. When 

critical habitat is not determinable, the 

Act allows the Service an additional 

year to publish a critical habitat 

designation (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(6)(C)(ii)). 

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 

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. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
68072 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

(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) The reasons why any habitat 

should or should not be determined to 

be critical habitat for the short-tailed 

snake as provided by section 4 of the 

Act, including physical or biological 

features within the areas that are 

occupied or specific areas outside the 

geographic areas that are occupied that 

are essential for the conservation of the 

species. 

(5) Whether we should consider 

evaluating populations of the shorttailed snake as distinct population 

segments. 

(6) Information on regulations that 

may be necessary and advisable to 

provide for the conservation of the 

short-tailed snake and that we can 

consider in developing a 4(d) rule for 

the species; in particular, we seek 

information concerning the extent to 

which we should include any of the 

Act’s section 9 prohibitions in the 4(d) 

rule or whether we should consider any 

additional exceptions from the 

prohibitions in the 4(d) rule. 

(7) Whether the measures outlined in 

the proposed 4(d) rule are necessary and 

advisable for the conservation of the 

short-tailed snake. We particularly seek 

comments concerning: 

(a) Whether we should include a 

provision excepting incidental take 

resulting from habitat management 

activities that maintain or restore shorttailed snake habitat including 

implementation of prescribed fire, 

actions to reduce the threat of invasive 

species including feral hogs, or other 

activities that result in more suitable 

habitat conditions for the species. 

(b) Whether we should include a 

provision excepting incidental take from 

silviculture practices and forestry 

activities that follow best management 

practices and how those practices 

should be described including spatial or 

temporal restrictions or determents, or 

additional best management practices. 

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, and section 

4(b)(2) of the Act directs that the 

Secretary shall designate critical habitat 

on the basis of the best scientific 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 the publication of 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 

On July 11, 2012, the Service received 

a petition from the Center for Biological 

Diversity and six individual petitioners, 

requesting that we list 53 species of 

reptiles and amphibians, including the 

short-tailed snake, as endangered or 

threatened species under the Act (CBD 

2012, entire). On September 18, 2015, 

we published in the Federal Register 

(80 FR 56423) a 90-day finding that the 

petition contained substantial 

information indicating that listing the 

short-tailed snake may be warranted. 

This document constitutes our 12- 

month finding on the July 11, 2012, 

petition to list the short-tailed snake 

under the Act. 

Peer Review 

A species status assessment (SSA) 

team prepared an SSA report for the 

short-tailed snake. The SSA team was 

composed of Service biologists and 

contracted assistance, 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 in listing actions under the Act, 

we solicited independent scientific 

review of the information contained in 

the short-tailed snake SSA report. We 

sent the SSA report to six independent 

peer reviewers and received three 

responses. Results of this structured 

peer review process can be found at 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules 68073 

https://www.regulations.gov. In 

preparing this proposed rule, we 

incorporated the results of these 

reviews, as appropriate, 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 

recommendations regarding the effects 

of temperature, impacts of feral hogs 

and silvicultural practices implemented 

without best management practices, and 

other editorial suggestions. 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. 

1. Proposed Listing Determination 

Background 

A thorough species description and 

review of the taxonomy, habitat and life 

history, and historical and current range 

and distribution of the short-tailed 

snake is presented in the SSA report 

(Service 2021, pp. 5–8). 

The short-tailed snake is a small 

colubrid (the most common family of 

snakes) with an average length ranging 

from 31–53 centimeters (cm) (12–21 

inches (in)) that occurs in xeric uplands 

(e.g., sandhill, scrub, and xeric 

hammock) associated with central ridge 

formations in central peninsular 

Florida. Prior to 2000, the species was 

known to occur in 17 Florida counties. 

It has been documented in 11 of those 

counties since 2000. 

Information regarding the short-tailed 

snake’s natural history, life history, and 

habitat use is limited. The short-tailed 

snake is a fossorial species (i.e., it lives 

primarily underground) that requires 

loose, well-drained, sandy soils 

associated with xeric uplands that 

include an open canopy of widely 

spaced trees and shrubs with ample 

areas of exposed soils. These habitat 

features allow the species to burrow and 

live underground. The short-tailed 

snake requires sufficient prey that 

includes small snakes, such as the 

Florida crowned snake (Tantilla relicta); 

the Florida worm lizard (Rhineura 

floridana); and skink species. Each of 

the species’ populations needs a 

sufficient number of individuals within 

habitat patches of adequate area and 

quality, and all the populations need 

connectivity for genetic exchange. 

Connectivity requires suitable habitat 

that is relatively unfragmented by roads 

and characterized by wide, undisrupted 

habitat corridors. Unfragmented habitat 

allows for long-distance dispersal over 

time (generations) that could contribute 

to the maintenance of gene flow across 

the range. A lack of periodic gene flow 

between populations can exacerbate 

impacts of various stressors and reduce 

the genetic diversity necessary for 

adaptation. Dispersal of individual 

short-tailed snakes is not well known; 

however, long-distance dispersal 

(greater than 5 kilometers (km) (3.1 

miles (mi))) is likely rare (Enge 2021a, 

pers. comm.; Moler 2021, pers. comm.). 

Movement across areas of unsuitable 

habitat is thought to be limited to 1 km 

(0.6 mi). 

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. 

The Act does not define the term 

‘‘foreseeable future,’’ which appears in 

the statutory definition of ‘‘threatened 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
68074 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

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 short-tailed snake 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, which we then used 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–2023–0158 on 

https://www.regulations.gov and at 

https://www.fws.gov/office/floridaecological-services/library. 

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, to assess the species’ overall 

viability and the risks to that viability. 

We analyze these factors both 

individually and cumulatively to 

determine the current condition of the 

species and project the future condition 

of the species under several plausible 

future scenarios. 

Species Needs 

We assessed the best available 

information to identify the physical and 

biological needs to support all life stages 

for the short-tailed snake. We identified 

the specific ecological needs for 

individuals to survive and reproduce, as 

well as needs to support viable 

populations (see table 1, below). Much 

of the life history and habitat needs of 

the short-tailed snake are unknown or 

assumed to be similar to genus or family 

characteristics. We determined the main 

elements essential to the survival and 

reproductive success of short-tailed 

snake individuals: sandy soils, cover, 

and adequate prey. Populations require 

the same elements as individuals, and 

connectivity between populations is 

important for breeding and dispersal, 

even though individuals are otherwise 

limited in longer distance movements. 

TABLE 1—THE ECOLOGICAL REQUISITES FOR SURVIVAL AND REPRODUCTIVE SUCCESS OF SHORT-TAILED SNAKE

INDIVIDUALS AND POPULATIONS

Life stage 

Survival and 

reproductive 

requisites 

Resource function 

(BFSD) 1 Description 

Egg, Juvenile, Adult ............... Sandy soils ........................... All ........................... Supports burrowing and fossorial characteristics. 

Juvenile, Adult ....................... Cover .................................... All ........................... Provides refuge from predation, creates needed microclimate conditions; supports prey species. The type of 

habitat and cover used changes seasonally. 

Juvenile, Adult ....................... Adequate prey ...................... F ............................. Adult 2: Small snakes (e.g., Florida crowned snake) and 

lizards. Juvenile 2: unknown, but likely invertebrates. 

Adult ....................................... Connectivity between suitable habitats.B, D ........................ Supports genetic exchange. 

1The function of each resource or circumstance is indicated (Breeding—B; Feeding—F; Sheltering—S; Dispersal—D). 

2 Juveniles are snakes less than 30 centimeters (cm) in length, and adults are those 30 cm or longer. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules 68075 

Factors Influencing Species Viability 

The following discussion provides a 

summary of the primary factors that 

affect or may affect the current and 

future condition of the short-tailed 

snake. The best available information 

indicates that the loss and degradation 

of habitat from urbanization and other 

land use changes, such as agriculture 

and mining, is the primary threat to the 

species. Below, we address this primary 

threat and the individual and 

cumulative effects of potential threats, 

while also considering conservation 

measures that may provide protections 

to the species. 

Urbanization 

Human population growth in an area 

leads to increased commercial and 

residential development. Population 

growth in Florida is not evenly 

distributed, and predicted land use 

change from undeveloped (e.g., 

agriculture and natural areas) to 

developed is most significant in central 

Florida (Carr and Zwick 2016, p. 5). 

Between 1980 and 2020, all Florida 

counties within the known range of the 

short-tailed snake have experienced 

significant growth in human 

populations, with the largest increases 

occurring in Hernando, Lake, Gilchrist, 

and Orange Counties (331, 250, 212, and 

201 percent, respectively), and this 

growth is expected to continue in the 

future, with increases ranging between 1 

and 70 percent by 2045. The largest 

increases are anticipated in Highlands, 

Lake, Orange, and Pasco Counties 

within the species’ range (70, 46, 39, 

and 32 percent, respectively) (Florida 

Office of Economic and Demographic 

Research (FEDR) 2020, entire). 

Compared to historical conditions, 

Florida’s xeric upland natural 

communities are extensively reduced, 

altered, and, in many areas, isolated. 

This is particularly evident in longleaf 

pine-dominated sandhills and scrub 

communities on the ridges of central 

Florida and the Gulf Coast of Florida 

(Kautz et al. 1993, p. 141; Enge et al. 

2003, p. 11; Kautz et al. 2007, p. 21). In 

1987, sandhills covered approximately 

2.4 percent of Florida, which reflects an 

88 percent loss from an estimated 

coverage of 20 percent in 1936. Scrub 

communities declined 59 percent in 

coverage during the same period (Kautz 

et al. 1993, p. 143). In a 14-year period 

from 1989 to 2003, 11 percent of 

sandhill and 10 percent of scrub natural 

communities were lost to urbanization 

or other land uses, with 4 percent of 

each of these habitats lost to agriculture 

(Kautz et al. 2007, p. 19). Future losses 

of sandhill and scrub habitats where the 

short-tailed snake occurs are expected 

as Florida’s human population 

continues to increase and development 

expands (Carr and Zwick 2016, entire). 

Road construction and expansion and 

the resulting traffic associated with 

urbanization and development can 

cause direct mortality of short-tailed 

snakes. Although road mortality affects 

individuals and populations of shorttailed snakes adjacent to roads, 

individual short-tailed snakes typically 

move short distances, making it more 

likely that individuals immediately 

adjacent to roads would be susceptible 

to vehicular mortality, particularly 

during seasonal periods of high surface 

activity (Florida Fish and Wildlife 

Conservation Commission (FWC) 2011, 

p. 5; FWC 2013, p. 5). Most short-tailed 

snake populations are not adjacent to 

roadways, and given the species’ mostly 

short-distance movements, effects of 

roads are likely limited. We primarily 

focus our analyses on the threat of 

habitat fragmentation from roads. 

Observed short-tailed snake mortality 

on roadways indicates that roads may 

act as a barrier to dispersal. Roads are 

prominent features of urbanized and 

developing areas and contribute to the 

isolation and fragmentation of snake 

populations even when road use is 

avoided by snakes. As urbanization and 

development increase, snakes may be 

more likely to attempt road crossings as 

pressures to disperse increase, habitat 

patch sizes decrease, and urban edge to 

habitat area ratios increase (Breininger 

et al. 2004, 2011, and 2012, entire). 

Urbanization also creates conditions 

favorable to the establishment and 

spread of nonnative, invasive species in 

areas adjacent to and nearby short-tailed 

snake habitat. Nonnative, invasive 

plants have the potential to alter and 

degrade natural communities and 

influence short-tailed snakes through 

habitat degradation. Sandhills in some 

areas of the species’ range are impacted 

by the invasion of the nonnative cogon 

grass (Imperata cylindrica). Predation 

from nonnative species, such as red 

imported fire ants (Solenopsis invicta), 

feral hogs (Sus scrofa), and domestic 

dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) and cats 

(Felis catus), is known to cause direct 

mortality to reptiles and likely impacts 

short-tailed snake individuals or 

populations. Short-tailed snakes occur 

in areas of urbanization where suitable, 

connected habitat remains. However, we 

do not have information on whether the 

species can persist in urbanized areas 

where suitable habitat has been altered 

or information on the long-term trend of 

the species’ occurrences in urbanized 

areas (FWC 2013, p. 5; Enge 2021a, pers. 

comm.). 

In sum, urbanization impacts many 

wildlife species through the loss and 

fragmentation or degradation of habitat 

(including encroachment, succession, 

and invasive species), increased road 

mortality, increased human persecution, 

and increased predation by domestic 

animals (such as feral and free-roaming 

cats and dogs). While research is lacking 

to quantify the effects of urbanization on 

the short-tailed snake, continued 

urbanization is expected to continue to 

drive habitat loss and degradation in the 

species’ range. Highly urbanized areas 

are not likely to support healthy 

populations of the short-tailed snake 

(Enge et al. 2003, p. 11; Enge 2016, p. 

4; FWC 2019, p. 3); however, this 

species has been observed in 

subdivisions within xeric uplands that 

retain some natural ground cover 

components likely to support 

populations of prey species, such as the 

Florida crowned snake (Campbell and 

Moler 1992, p. 153; FWC 2013, p. 24; 

FWC 2019, p. 2). There are also records 

of short-tailed snake observations from 

roadways, carports, woodsheds, 

foundation excavations, driveways, 

yards (e.g., pools), and within a home in 

a developed area (Krysko et al. 2019, pp. 

473–475; FWC 2020, unpaginated; Enge 

2021b, pers. comm.). 

Land Use and Management 

Short-tailed snakes are unlikely to 

maintain viability in areas affected by 

the removal of native landcover, 

reduction of prey, or the alteration of 

soil characteristics (e.g., loose, sandy 

soil) required for fossorial species. 

Therefore, changes in land use and 

management impact short-tailed snakes 

at the individual level and, to some 

degree, at the population level as 

discussed further below. 

Agriculture 

Agriculture is a significant portion of 

Florida’s economy, and agricultural 

land use includes cattle grazing, 

improved pasture, row cropping, and 

citrus and hay production. Between 

1989 and 2003, the intensification of 

agricultural land use in central Florida 

was notable, particularly the conversion 

of natural and semi-natural land cover 

types to agriculture (Kautz et al. 2007, 

pp. 21–22). As of 2020, approximately 

24 percent of Florida (3.9 million 

hectares (ha) (9.7 million acres (ac))) 

was in agricultural production, 

consisting of 47,400 commercial farms 

(e.g., cropland and ranchland) with an 

average farm size of 205 acres (USDA 

2022, unpaginated). A large portion of 

the short-tailed snake’s range includes 

areas of improved pasture and cropland/ 

pasture landcover types. The level of 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
68076 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

historical impacts of these cover types 

and associated land uses on the shorttailed snake are uncertain, but likely 

reduced the availability and 

connectivity of suitable upland habitat. 

The stressor of agriculture is expected to 

be ongoing and affect the species in the 

future, but to a lesser extent as much of 

the prime upland agricultural land has 

already been developed. Within the 

range of the short-tailed snake, 

conversion to cropland is projected to 

make up small proportion of the 

projected habitat loss (2 to 3 percent) 

(Service 2021, p. 64). 

The high, dry natural communities 

needed by the short-tailed snake also are 

favorable for citrus production 

(Campbell and Moler 1992, p. 152). 

Approximately 262,000 ha (648,000 ac) 

of citrus are identified within the range 

of the short-tailed snake. While the 

presence of citrus groves results in 

habitat loss (Florida Natural Areas 

Inventory (FNAI) 2001, p. 2), it is 

possible that short-tailed snakes can 

persist in groves where pockets of 

natural cover and soil conditions are 

present or where higher quality habitat 

is adjacent. Additionally, overall citrus 

production has declined over the last 19 

years in Florida, with citrus-bearing 

grove area declining from more than 

750,000 acres in 2000 to around 381,000 

acres in 2020, primarily due to losses 

associated with disease (Court et al. 

2021, pp. 4, 23) and pressure from 

residential and commercial 

development. Citrus groves have been 

converted to residential and commercial 

development within the range of the 

species and the potential for future 

conversion of citrus land to 

development exists, as does the 

potential for citrus groves to lie fallow. 

Although we do not have information to 

spatially or temporally project the 

extent and magnitude of citrus grove 

conversion, the impact on the species is 

expected to be negative where shorttailed snakes occur in citrus groves that 

are converted to more urbanized 

landscapes. 

Mining 

Mining occurs in the range of the 

short-tailed snake and contributes to 

localized habitat fragmentation and loss. 

Phosphate, limestone, sand, gravel, and 

heavy minerals are mined extensively in 

Florida, and these practices are 

expected to continue. Mining activities 

include the removal of vegetation. The 

top 15 to 30 feet of earth (e.g., 

overburden) is removed, followed by 

extraction of the mineral or ore-bearing 

layer that often contains a heavy sand 

component (Florida Department of 

Environmental Protection (FDEP) 2021, 

unpaginated). Mining practices in 

general remove vegetation, alter soil 

profiles, and destroy habitat (Volk et al. 

2017, p. 58), and areas where these 

practices occur no longer support the 

short-tailed snake. Within the range of 

the species, mining of sand and gravel 

is expected to continue into the future 

with some additional mining of 

limestone, phosphate, and heavy 

minerals in the short-tailed snake’s 

range. Although mining may affect the 

habitat and individuals or populations 

of short-tailed snake, the loss of suitable 

habitat due to mining practices 

rangewide is expected to be limited (1 

to 2 percent of expected suitable habitat 

loss). 

While sand mining is likely to 

continue to increase with urbanization 

(sand is the principal component in 

concrete and glass building materials), 

expansion of sand mining in some 

counties (e.g., Lake County) is restricted 

(Beiser 2019, p. 3; Silvas 2021, 

unpaginated). In addition, the Green 

Swamp area within Polk and Lake 

Counties is designated as an ‘‘Area of 

Critical State Concern,’’ a designation 

that provides protections to valuable 

hydrologic functions in the area (FDEP 

2020, unpaginated). Phosphate mines 

occupy more than 182,108 ha (450,000 

ac) within the State, and phosphate 

mining occurs on the margin of the 

known range of the short-tailed snake, 

with the largest phosphate mines within 

the short-tailed snake’s range occurring 

in Polk and Hillsborough Counties. 

Although we do not have information 

that mining practices have resulted in 

the extirpation of short-tailed snake 

occurrences, areas within the shorttailed snake’s range that have been 

mined using earth removal techniques 

do not meet the species’ life-history 

requirements and are not expected to 

support the species. 

Silviculture 

Many areas of natural and planted 

pine and hardwood forests in Florida 

are managed for the production of a 

wide variety of forest products. The 

State has approximately 7 million ha (17 

million ac) of forestland, representing 

50 percent of its total land area; 

approximately two-thirds of these 

forestlands are in private ownership 

(Florida Department of Agriculture and 

Consumer Services (FDACS) 2021, p. 8). 

Forestlands managed for timber and 

other forest products are most typically 

represented by pine plantations (e.g., 

pineland cover type). A comparison of 

pineland cover type between 1989 and 

2003 shows a loss of some pineland 

areas to urbanization but otherwise 

minimal change in overall extent (Kautz 

et al. 2007, pp. 18–19, 22). Projected 

future increases in silvicultural land 

uses are expected to impact an 

additional 2,100 ha (5,200 ac) of shorttailed snake habitat as calculated using 

data derived from the FOREcasting 

SCEnarios of Land Use Change model 

(FORE–SCE; described in chapter 5 of 

the SSA report (Service 2021, pp. 58– 

60)). 

Little is known about the impacts of 

silvicultural activities (e.g., thinning, 

clear cuts, site treatments, selected tree 

species, tree densities, and rotation 

length) on the short-tailed snake. 

Typically, forest management practices 

in working forests incorporate best 

management practices. Although some 

management activities may cause shortterm habitat degradation, many 

management regimes may also enhance 

short-tailed snake habitat (e.g. long 

rotation, frequent fire return intervals). 

Habitat Management 

Habitat management practices 

incompatible with the short-tailed 

snake’s needs include absent or 

infrequent fire management; mechanical 

activities that disturb soil; and 

management objectives that favor heavy 

shrub layers, closed canopy conditions, 

or excessive leaf litter accumulations. 

These activities have the potential to 

alter or degrade short-tailed snake 

habitat. The best available information 

indicates that these threats are acting at 

the population level and impacting the 

overall species (Service 2021, pp. 30– 

32). 

Effects of Climate Change 

The primary climate-related threat to 

the short-tailed snake is alteration and 

loss of habitat. Sea level rise in coastal 

areas will displace the human 

population to higher elevation areas. 

This displacement will potentially 

exacerbate habitat destruction for 

upland species, such as the short-tailed 

snake, through further urbanization and 

development. 

Vegetation communities 

representative of short-tailed snake 

habitat (e.g., sandhill, scrub, and xeric 

hammock) are expected to respond to 

rising temperatures, variable 

precipitation patterns, and subsequent 

alteration to fire regimes with a shift in 

natural community structure over time 

(U.S. Federal Government 2021, 

unpaginated). Additionally, there likely 

will be a more limited burn window for 

fire management due to rising 

temperatures and declining fuel 

moisture, particularly during the 

growing season (Kupfer et al. 2020, pp. 

774–775). A more limited burn window 

may result in less prescribed fire 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules 68077 

(habitat management) implemented in 

short-tailed snake habitat, leading to 

detrimental succession and more closed 

canopy and accumulated leaf litter 

conditions. 

Natural fire return intervals associated 

with short-tailed snake habitat vary 

among natural community types, with 

the fire frequency in intact sandhill 

communities in Florida ranging between 

1 and 3 years (FNAI 2010, pp. 9, 47). 

The fire return frequency in scrub 

natural community variants (e.g., oak 

scrub, rosemary scrub, and sand pine 

scrub) ranges between 3 and 70 years 

with the longer intervals being 

associated with sand pine scrub (FNAI 

2010, pp. 9, 51). In the absence of 

naturally occurring fires, active habitat 

management actions (such as the 

application of prescribed fire, 

mechanical vegetation management, and 

herbicide use) are necessary for the 

restoration, maintenance, and 

conservation of these communities. In 

sandhill communities, the germination 

and/or flowering of fire-dependent plant 

species (e.g., longleaf pine, wiregrass) 

would be impacted by the changes in 

fire frequency and timing (Shappell and 

Koontz 2015, p. 351; Baruzzi et al. 2021, 

p. 7). Additionally, a reduction or lack 

of prescribed fire as a result of a reduced 

burn window coupled with increased 

evapotranspiration rates from increased 

temperatures could lead to excessive 

accumulations of fuel and result in more 

frequent and intense wildfires. Direct 

mortality from high-intensity fires in 

scrub habitat are a concern of species’ 

experts (Enge 2021a, pers. comm.); highintensity fires could become more 

prevalent with the expected effects of 

climate change. 

Rising temperatures and shifting 

precipitation patterns can alter shorttailed snake habitat independent of 

alterations to the fire regime. Drought 

and heat stress caused by increased 

temperatures can promote insect 

outbreaks and plant mortality. In pine 

communities, such as sandhills, higher 

winter air temperatures promote overwintering success in southern pine 

beetle larvae, and higher annual air 

temperatures can result in more 

generations of the southern pine beetle 

per year (Hain et al. 2011, pp. 16–17). 

Additionally, severe drought stress 

reduces resin production in coniferous 

trees and greatly increases the 

susceptibility of trees to beetle 

infestation. Nonnative, invasive species 

(e.g., cogon grass, red imported fire ant) 

are often more tolerant of drought and 

heat stress. The nonnative species’ 

ranges are expected to expand with 

climate change, increasing their 

potential to alter and degrade shorttailed snake habitat (Chen et al. 2014, p. 

5; Hamidavi et al. 2021, p. 383). 

Climate change could also have more 

direct impacts on short-tailed snakes. As 

a fossorial species, extreme weather 

events and associated flooding events 

can cause direct mortality (e.g., 

drowning) of individuals. Additionally, 

climate change could alter the 

distribution and abundance of preferred 

prey species, as well as alter substrate 

and soil conditions that may become 

unsuitable (e.g., too wet or too dry) or 

unavailable (e.g., flooded) for shorttailed snakes. Poor habitat conditions, 

including altered soil conditions or 

limited prey items, may cause 

individuals of the species to experience 

reduced fitness, mating and clutch 

failure, and increased risk of predation. 

Catastrophic flooding has the potential 

to displace or extirpate local 

populations, making recolonization 

difficult in fragmented landscapes 

(Tupy 2021, pers. comm.). Additionally, 

the sex of offspring is often determined 

by nest temperature for many reptile 

species. It has not been documented if 

sex determination is temperaturedependent for the short-tailed snake. If 

the species’ sex determination is 

temperature-dependent, increasingly 

warming temperatures have the 

potential to skew sex ratios, resulting in 

low reproductive rates, inbreeding 

depression, or both (Mitchell and Janzen 

2010, p. 131; Tupy 2021, pers. comm.). 

Additional Considerations 

Small, Isolated Populations 

Short-tailed snake occurrence records 

indicate patchy and fragmented 

distribution in suitable upland habitats 

(e.g., sandhills, scrub, and xeric 

hammock) in peninsular Florida. The 

available information indicates the 

species does not occur in large 

populations, and the apparently small 

populations may be inherent to the 

species based on its life-history 

characteristics and needs. In many 

species, small population size along 

with population isolation often leads to 

reduced genetic diversity as a result of 

inbreeding, which, in turn, results in 

increased susceptibility to disease and 

parasites, reduced reproductive fitness, 

reduced evolutionary potential, and 

reduction in the overall ability to 

withstand stochastic events (Frankham 

1995, p. 309; Frankham 2005, pp. 132– 

135). These deleterious effects 

associated with small population size 

can exacerbate the negative influences 

of habitat degradation and further 

impact resiliency. However, there is no 

genetic information available to suggest 

that small population is currently 

influencing short-tailed snake viability. 

Collection and Intentional Killing 

As with all snakes, humans kill 

snakes maliciously or out of fear, and 

these losses can contribute to 

population declines (FWC 2011, p. 5). 

Short-tailed snake interactions with 

humans are more likely where the snake 

is found in residential areas with 

sufficient groundcover but are limited 

compared to interactions with species 

active in the daytime (the fossorial 

nature of the short-tailed snake means it 

rarely appears above ground and does so 

even more rarely during the day) (FWC 

2011, p. 4). The best available 

information does not indicate that 

illegal collection of short-tailed snakes 

for pets is occurring or that there are 

impacts to the species from intentional 

killing. 

Cumulative and Synergistic Effects 

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 

Below, we summarize the known 

conservation measures and existing 

regulatory mechanisms affecting the 

short-tailed snake or its habitat (Service 

2021, pp. 38–40). 

Existing Protections 

The short-tailed snake is listed by the 

State of Florida as a threatened species, 

and, as such, no person may take (e.g., 

harm or harass), possess, or sell shorttailed snakes or parts of their nests or 

eggs without a permit (Florida 

Administrative Code, chapter 68A–27) 

(FWC 2016, p. 78; FWC 2021, p. 7, 11). 

Additionally, through the abovereferenced State rule, the FWC has 

incorporated species’ conservation 

measures and developed permitting 

guidelines to provide information on the 

species’ range and intentional and 

incidental take (FWC 2019, entire). 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
68078 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

Through the tracking of permits 

involving the short-tailed snake, we are 

aware of the occurrences and level of 

take of the species in Florida. 

Land Protection and Stewardship 

Short-tailed snake habitat occurs on 

lands in public and private ownership 

with varying levels of habitat 

management. An estimated 48 percent 

of potential short-tailed snake habitat 

(e.g., habitat identified as suitable for 

the species in an FWC habitat suitability 

model (Enge et al. 2016, entire); for 

more information on habitat modeling, 

see Service 2021, pp. 18–19) occurs on 

protected lands under Federal, State, or 

local government ownership or lands 

subject to conservation easements. 

Protected lands are less likely to 

experience threats associated with 

urbanization and other land uses (e.g., 

agriculture, mining, and intensive 

silviculture that does not implement 

best management practices) than lands 

in private ownership. In addition, 

protected lands are often more likely to 

receive increased habitat management 

compared to private lands. 

The short-tailed snake occurs on 

Federal lands (e.g., Ocala National 

Forest), in State parks, in preserves and 

geological sites (e.g., Wekiwa Springs, 

Ichetucknee Spring, San Felasco 

Hammock, Devil’s Millhopper) 

(Hammerson 2016, pp. 10–11), and in 

State forests (e.g., Withlacoochee) where 

land management occurs in accordance 

with area management plans. Habitat 

management on military installations 

(e.g., Avon Park Air Force Range), in 

National Forests (e.g., Ocala National 

Forest), and in National Wildlife 

Refuges (e.g., Lake Wales Ridge National 

Wildlife Refuge) is implemented in 

accordance with integrated natural 

resources management plans (INRMP), 

forest plans, and comprehensive 

conservation plans, respectively. 

Although management plans do not 

manage specifically for short-tailed 

snake, habitat management actions 

including control of invasive plants and 

application of prescribed fire at 

appropriate intervals in sandhill and 

scrub habitats are expected to benefit 

the species’ habitat and short-tailed 

snakes that occur in the area (USAF 

Park INRMP 2004, pp. 61–62, 68; USDA 

2017, pp. 7, 14). Additionally, shorttailed snake habitat occurs in county 

and city parks and preserves. 

Not all habitat management practices 

implemented on protected lands benefit 

the short-tailed snake (e.g., silviculture 

that does not implement best 

management practices or improperly 

implements best management practices) 

(Hammerson 2016, pp. 10–11). 

Conservation Measures on Private Lands 

Privately owned lands account for 

approximately 52 percent (259,674 ha 

(641,668 ac)) of short-tailed snake 

habitat. In Florida, the FWC’s 

Landowner Assistance Program 

provides technical and financial 

assistance to private landowners to 

implement conservation practices for 

wildlife on their lands (FWC 2013, p. 

14). The Service’s Partners for Fish and 

Wildlife (PFW) program provides 

similar incentives to private landowners 

for the conservation of wildlife and 

associated habitat. Where conservation 

practices occur in sandhill and scrub 

habitat within the short-tailed snake’s 

range, benefits to the species are 

expected. Between 2010 and 2021, the 

PFW program alone funded 

approximately 3,400 ha (8,500 ac) of 

habitat restoration and management 

projects in sandhill and scrub 

communities within the species’ range. 

In 2015, FDACS and FWC 

collaboratively developed Florida’s 

Agriculture Wildlife Best Management 

Practices for State Imperiled Species to 

promote sound agricultural land use 

and natural resource conservation and 

to reduce the potential for incidental 

take of State-imperiled species (FDACS 

2015, p. ii). As of 2021, approximately 

28 landowners in counties where the 

short-tailed snake occurs submitted 

notices of intent to implement 

conservation practices on approximately 

172,004 ha (425,031 ac) of privately 

owned land (FDACS 2020, p. 1). The 

spatial information needed to assess the 

overlap of the area where the 

conservation practices will occur and 

short-tailed snake populations is not 

available. Therefore, we are not able to 

accurately project the extent to which 

these best management practices will 

influence the short-tailed snake or its 

habitat, but nonetheless encourage the 

implementation of conservation actions 

in silviculture and agriculture in 

Florida. 

Current Condition 

For the purposes of the SSA, we 

delineated analysis units based on the 

FWC’s habitat suitability index (HSI) 

(Enge et al. 2016, pp. 12–15, 17–20), 

historical and current species’ 

occurrences, and barriers to dispersal 

and movement. We included contiguous 

habitat within 5 km (3.1 mi) of 

occurrence records. A total of 245 

records (136 historical (pre-2000) and 

109 recent (2000–2021)) for the shorttailed snake were provided by FWC 

(FWC 2020, unpaginated) and were used 

to build the HSI. New records (e.g., 

2021) conveyed to the Service during 

the SSA process were manually added 

to this database; these very recent 

records are included in the summary of 

records presented here. We also relied 

on FWC’s HSI to delineate the extent 

and condition of suitable habitat within 

the range of the short-tailed snake. Some 

areas of identified suitable habitat 

contain very few records of occurrence; 

however, we rely on identified suitable 

habitat in our analysis and note that 

lack of occurrences may not preclude 

presence given the species’ highly 

cryptic and fossorial nature and its 

small size, as well as the lack of 

established survey methods. 

The delineation process resulted in 19 

analysis units, with 8 units containing 

only historical (pre-1973) records and 

categorized as likely extirpated (see 

figure 1, below). We also identified 30 

analysis units that contain only suitable 

habitat with no occurrence records, and 

we categorized these as unknown status. 

We do not include these units in our 

analysis but identified them in the 

delineation process to inform potential 

future conservation or recovery efforts. 

We conducted our analyses of current 

and future condition on the 11 

delineated current analysis units and 

the 8 likely extirpated units. 

To assess the current viability of the 

short-tailed snake, we considered the 

species’ life-history needs and habitat 

requirements. Population estimates for 

the short-tailed snake are not available, 

but assessments of short-tailed snake 

habitat loss and degradation note a 

greater than 30 percent decline in the 

overall area of suitable habitat from 

approximately 1989 to 2003 (FWC 2011, 

p. 10). Our assessment of current 

species’ resiliency includes the best 

available information regarding the 

species’ population characteristics and 

the condition of the physical 

environment where the species occurs. 

We made qualitative assessments of the 

current resiliency of each analysis unit 

by evaluating a demographic factor 

(combined occupancy and timing of 

records) and four habitat factors 

(fragmentation, habitat quantity, habitat 

quality, and extent of protected lands) 

(see table 2, below). The occupancy 

factor categorizes each of the 245 

occurrence records based on number of 

records in the analysis unit and the 

timing of those records as an indication 

of our confidence that the record 

represents continued presence of the 

species. Road density refers to the 

density of primary and secondary roads 

in a unit and addresses the level of 

fragmentation of the habitat by the 

threat of roads and associated mortality. 

Habitat quality includes the current area 

of habitat ranked as either moderate or 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules 68079 

high quality in the existing FWC HSI 

model and serves as a baseline for future 

projections (change in habitat metrics 

from current condition). We remove 

currently urbanized areas from the HSI 

as fossorial species can be driven to the 

surface in unsuitable habitat (e.g., 

concrete pads, human dwellings, 

roadways, areas with significant root 

structure), resulting in observations in 

largely unsuitable areas. Therefore, we 

expect metrics related to habitat are the 

most appropriate to assess current 

condition and provide a necessary 

baseline for future condition 

projections. We anticipate the protected 

lands in a unit have preserved habitat 

conditions in the past, affecting shorttailed snake resiliency, and are expected 

to provide a reduced level of threat of 

urbanization and development. 

TABLE 2—DEMOGRAPHIC AND HABITAT RESILIENCY FACTORS USED TO ASSESS CURRENT RESILIENCY FOR SHORTTAILED SNAKE ANALYSIS UNIT

[Each analysis unit was scored as high (4), medium (3), low (2), or very low (1) for each population factor and habitat factor]

Parameter 

Condition categories 

Very low (1) Low (2) Moderate (3) High (4) 

Demographic Factors 

Occupancy ......................... Likely extirpated or unknown.One or more records pre2000, or a single record 

2000–2021.

One or more records 

2000–2010 and a single 

record 2011–2021.

Records 2000–2011 and 

records 2011–2021. 

Habitat Factors 

Road Density (km of 

roads/1,960 ha).

More than 0.5 .................... 0.5–0.31 ............................ 0.3–0.11 ............................ Less than or equal to 0.1. 

Habitat Quantity (ha) ......... Less than 10,000 .............. 10,000–50,000 .................. 50,001–100,000 ................ More than 100,000. 

Habitat Quality (percent of 

unit area).

Less than 50 of area in 

moderate or high condition.

50–69 ................................ 70–89 ................................ Greater than or equal to 

90. 

Protection (percent of unit 

area).

Less than 5 ....................... 5–24 .................................. 25–50 ................................ Greater than 50. 

We developed resiliency condition 

scores for each short-tailed snake 

analysis unit to assess the species’ 

current condition across its range. We 

weighted the demographic factor 

equally with the combined four habitat 

factors to reflect the importance of 

species presence and the lack of 

available information regarding the 

species’ precise requirements for 

optimal habitat condition. 

In our assessment of current viability, 

2 of 11 analysis units exhibit high 

resiliency, 4 analysis units exhibit 

moderate resiliency, 4 analysis units 

exhibit low resiliency, and 1 exhibits 

very low resiliency (see figure 1, below). 

The two highly resilient analysis units 

occur in the central portion of the 

known range with one moderately 

resilient unit interposed. Analysis units 

exhibiting low or very low current 

resiliency generally occur in the 

periphery of the range. Moderate and 

highly resilient analysis units comprise 

379,804 ha (938,516 ac), or 76 percent 

(31 and 45 percent, respectively), of the 

total current habitat extent. The 

proportion of protected lands (lands in 

public ownership or management or in 

conservation easements) varies across 

the analysis units. The highest 

proportion of protected lands occurs in 

Units 1 and 3, with 53 and 17 percent 

of rangewide protected lands, 

respectively (see table 3, below). 

Therefore, Units 1 and 3, combined, 

include approximately 70 percent of the 

rangewide protected lands, and these 

units exhibit high current resiliency. 

TABLE 3—ANALYSIS UNITS, RESILIENCY, AREAL EXTENT OF HABITAT, THE PROPORTION OF THE OVERALL SPECIES’ 

RANGE EACH UNIT REPRESENTS, AND THE PROPORTION OF RANGEWIDE PROTECTED LANDS THAT OCCUR IN EACH UNIT

Unit No. Name Resiliency score Total habitat 

(ha) 

Percentage of 

range 

(percent) 

Percentage of 

rangewide 

protected 

lands 

(percent) 

7 ..................... Bell Ridge and Sante Fe River .................... Moderate ............................... 57,652 11 3 

4 ..................... Brooksville Ridge North ............................... Moderate ............................... 64,801 13 4 

3 ..................... Brooksville Ridge South ............................... High ...................................... 85,215 17 17 

12 ................... Fairfield Hills NE .......................................... Moderate ............................... 7,141 1 2 

14 ................... Fairfield Hills NW ......................................... Very Low ............................... 5,667 1 0 

22 ................... Hillsborough River NW ................................. Moderate ............................... 155 0 0 

6 ..................... Lake Wales Ridge South ............................. Low ....................................... 47,138 9 6 

10 ................... Manatee River .............................................. Low ....................................... 10,921 2 2 

1 ..................... Mount Dora Ridge ........................................ High ...................................... 139,348 28 53 

8 ..................... Ocala Hill ...................................................... Moderate ............................... 25,492 5 2 

5 ..................... Trail Ridge .................................................... Low ....................................... 59,631 12 10 

15 ................... Unnamed ...................................................... Extirpated .............................. * 37 ........................ ........................

30 ................... Unnamed ...................................................... Extirpated .............................. * 72 ........................ ........................

31 ................... Unnamed ...................................................... Extirpated .............................. * 11 ........................ ........................


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
68080 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 3—ANALYSIS UNITS, RESILIENCY, AREAL EXTENT OF HABITAT, THE PROPORTION OF THE OVERALL SPECIES’ 

RANGE EACH UNIT REPRESENTS, AND THE PROPORTION OF RANGEWIDE PROTECTED LANDS THAT OCCUR IN EACH

UNIT—Continued 

Unit No. Name Resiliency score Total habitat 

(ha) 

Percentage of 

range 

(percent) 

Percentage of 

rangewide 

protected 

lands 

(percent) 

45 ................... Tarpon Springs ............................................. Extirpated .............................. * 1 ........................ ........................

47 ................... St. Petersburg .............................................. Extirpated .............................. * 0 ........................ ........................

48 ................... Unnamed ...................................................... Extirpated .............................. * 0 ........................ ........................

49 ................... Unnamed ...................................................... Extirpated .............................. * 0 ........................ ........................

2 ..................... Unnamed ...................................................... Extirpated .............................. * 0 ........................ ........................

Total ........ ....................................................................... ............................................... 503,161 100 100 

Note: Total numbers may not sum due to rounding. 

* Habitat in likely extirpated analysis units is not included in the total identified suitable habitat. 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–P 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules 68081 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–C 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP03OC23.007</GPH>

0 

I 

I ' 

0 

T 

Short-tailed Snake 

Current Condition 

Figure 1. Distribution of 19 short-tailed snake analysis units and current resiliency class. The 11 

delineated units with suitable habitat and occurrences since 1973 are numbered, and the 8 

delineated units with pre-1973 occurrences are categorized as "likely extirpated" for the purposes 

of our analysis. 
68082 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

To gauge the extent of suitable habitat 

rangewide, we also assessed the relative 

proportion of suitable habitat as 

identified in the FWC HSI (Service 

2021, pp. 18–19). Rangewide, 45 percent 

of the area in the 11 delineated current 

analysis units (i.e., not including the 8 

likely extirpated units) was identified as 

being highly suitable in the FWC HSI. 

Additionally, 31 percent of analysis unit 

area was moderately suitable, 23 percent 

was in a low suitability class, and 1 

percent was in a very low suitability 

class. The proportion of suitable habitat 

in each analysis unit was assessed as a 

parameter in our current resiliency 

analysis, but rangewide, 76 percent of 

identified habitat is highly or 

moderately suitable for the species 

based on the FWC model. 

Current Redundancy and 

Representation 

Species-level redundancy for the 

short-tailed snake is likely reduced from 

historical levels due to range 

contraction. However, 6 of 11 units are 

in moderate or high current resiliency, 

and units are distributed across the 

historical and current range of the 

species. We have determined that 

current redundancy is moderate and 

sufficient to support species’ viability. 

Current representation for the species is 

also likely reduced from historical 

levels due to range contraction and loss 

of populations. The short-tailed snake 

occurs in a variety of ecological habitats 

(e.g., sandhill, scrub, and xeric 

hammock) and is characterized by 

morphologically distinct groupings. 

Although information regarding genetic 

variation in the species is limited, we 

expect that the distributional and 

morphological variation is indicative of 

the species’ ability to adapt to changing 

environmental condition (adaptive 

capacity). We have determined that 

species-level current representation for 

the short-tailed snake is also moderate 

and sufficient to support current 

species’ viability. 

Future Condition 

We assessed the short-tailed snake’s 

future viability under three future 

scenarios. We modeled these scenarios 

at 2050 and 2070 based on confidence 

in models and projections of factors 

influencing the species’ viability, and 

certainty in predictions of the species’ 

response to those factors. In addition, 

these timesteps encompass several 

estimated lifespans of the species 

(estimated at 10 years, generation time 

of 6 years), giving the species sufficient 

time to respond to impacts to 

reproduction, genetic effects, and 

fragmentation of habitat. 

Changes from the current habitat 

condition are expected in the future 

from urbanization and development and 

from conversion of suitable habitat to 

less suitable landcover use (i.e., 

cropland and mining). We anticipate 

those changes to habitat condition will 

impact the resiliency of the short-tailed 

snake. We lack demographic data for the 

short-tailed snake and are unable to 

project future demographic condition 

based on the available occurrence 

records for the species. We evaluated 

projected changes to two habitat factors 

(habitat quality and habitat quantity) 

and the species’ likely responses to 

those changes. To project the threat of 

urbanization and impacts to short-tailed 

snake, we used the SLEUTH model 

(SLEUTH is an acronym for the spatial 

inputs used in the model, which are 

slope, land cover, excluded regions, 

urban land cover, transportation, and 

hill shade) to determine the probability 

of urbanization. Areas with a higher 

probability of being developed (we 

selected 90 percent) will likely be 

urbanized under even the lowest impact 

scenario (almost sure to be developed), 

while areas with a lower probability of 

urbanization (20 percent) are expected 

to be developed under a high impact 

scenario. Similarly, we used the FORE– 

SCE model to project land use in the 

future, specifically landcover types that 

are most likely to exclude occurrences 

of short-tailed snake (cropland and 

mining). The two FORE–SCE projection 

storylines incorporated in our analysis 

include the A2 storyline (reflective of 

representative concentration pathway 

(RCP) 8.5 and a higher emissions 

scenario) and B2 (reflective of RCP 4.5 

and a lower emissions scenario) 

(Nakic ́enovic ́ et al. 2000, entire; Sohl et 

al. 2014, entire). To encompass a range 

of plausible climate change scenarios, 

we provide a high and low climate 

change-related land use projection 

based on the RCP 8.5/special report 

emissions scenario (SRES) A2 and RCP 

4.5/SRES B1 scenarios, respectively. In 

presenting this range, our purpose is to 

provide bounds on the range of 

plausible outcomes, and we do not 

imply that an outcome in the middle of 

the range is the most likely outcome. 

For each of our time points (years 2050 

and 2070) in the low and moderate 

development scenario we assess SRES 

B1 and assess SRES A2 under the high 

development scenario. To project 

habitat quality and quantity in the 

future, we recalculated the areas of 

suitable habitat in each analysis unit by 

removing from the current condition 

those areas projected to be urbanized or 

to be converted into cropland or mining 

use. 

We weighted the factor of habitat 

quantity to account for expected 

increases in road density related to 

urbanization. This resulted in a weight 

of 2 for habitat quantity compared to 1 

for habitat quality. We categorized 

resiliency class using the same scale as 

the current resiliency analysis. The 

three future scenarios included: 

(Scenario A) low development, 

(Scenario B) moderate development, 

and (Scenario C) high development 

(Table 4). The species’ representation 

and redundancy were predicted under 

the three future scenarios and two 

timesteps by assessing the resiliency, 

number, and distribution of short-tailed 

snake analysis units across the species’ 

range. 

TABLE 4—THREE PLAUSIBLE FUTURE SCENARIOS USED TO PROJECT SHORT-TAILED SNAKE RESILIENCY AND THE LEVELS

OF HABITAT QUANTITY AND HABITAT QUALITY FACTORS IN EACH SCENARIO

Resiliency factor 

(weight) Scenario A: low development Scenario B: moderate development Scenario C: high development 

Habitat Quantity (2) .............. Habitat removed from current habitat suitability index based on: Habitat removed from current habitat suitability index based on: Habitat removed from current habitat suitability index based on: 

Greater than or equal to 90 percent 

probability of urbanization 

(SLEUTH).

Greater than or equal to 50 percent 

probability of urbanization 

(SLEUTH).

Greater than or equal to 20 percent 

probability of urbanization 

(SLEUTH). 

Conversion to cropland or mining 

(FORE–SCE SRES B1).

Conversion to cropland or mining 

(FORE–SCE SRES B1).

Conversion to cropland or mining 

(FORE–SCE SRES A2). 

Habitat Quality (1) ................ Percent of high or moderate quality 

habitat in the analysis unit.

Percent of high or moderate quality 

habitat in the analysis unit.

Percent of high or moderate quality 

habitat in the analysis unit. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules 68083 

For these projections, high condition 

analysis units were defined as those 

with high resiliency at the end of the 

predicted time horizon (at years 2050 

and 2070). Units in high resiliency are 

expected to persist into the future and 

sustain populations, beyond year 2050 

or 2070, and can withstand 

demographic and environmental 

stochastic events. Units in moderate 

resiliency were defined as having lower 

resiliency than those in high condition 

but are still expected to persist beyond 

year 2050 or 2070 and sustain 

populations in the wild. Units in 

moderate condition typically have 

smaller habitat extents or have lower 

habitat conditions than those in high 

condition or both (table 5). Finally, 

those units in low to very low condition 

were defined as having low resiliency 

and are less likely to withstand 

stochastic events. As a result, low to 

very low condition units were 

characterized as less likely to be able to 

sustain populations in the wild beyond 

either 30 or 50 years. 

TABLE 5—HABITAT CONDITIONS CHARACTERISTIC OF MODERATE AND HIGHLY RESILIENT ANALYSIS UNITS

Parameter 

Habitat condition 

Moderate High 

Connectivity (km of roads/1,960 ha of analysis unit suitable habitat).0.3–0.11 km/1,960 ha ............................... Less than or equal to 0.1 km/1,960 ha. 

Habitat Extent (ha of suitable habitat in analysis unit) ..... 50,001–100,000 ha ................................... Greater than 100,000 ha. 

Habitat Quality (Percent of analysis unit in moderate or 

highly suitable habitat in HSI).

70–89 percent ........................................... 90 percent or greater. 

Protected Lands (Percent of Analysis Unit Area) ............. 25–50 percent ........................................... Greater than 50 percent. 

Under all future scenarios and in both 

future time horizons, we expect the 

resiliency of analysis units and the 

representation and redundancy of the 

species to decline. The resiliency of 

short-tailed snake analysis units 

declines across all scenarios by year 

2050, with habitat loss continuing at a 

slower rate through year 2070. However, 

in the three future scenarios and both 

timesteps, one analysis unit is projected 

to exhibit high resiliency (Unit 1, Mount 

Dora Ridge) and one is projected to 

exhibit moderate resiliency (Unit 3, 

Brooksville Ridge South) (see figures 2 

and 3, below). The two units projected 

to remain in high and moderate 

resiliency encompass the majority of 

protected lands in the range of the 

species. Nine of the 11 analysis units are 

projected to exhibit low or very low 

resiliency in all future scenarios at both 

timesteps. However, 55 to 68 percent of 

current suitable habitat is projected to 

remain on the landscape in the species’ 

range. The analysis unit projected to 

remain in high resiliency (Unit 1) 

composes 36–42 percent of this spatial 

habitat extent depending on the 

scenario and timestep. Similarly, the 

unit projected to remain in moderate 

resiliency (Unit 3) composes 17–18 

percent of future suitable habitat. Our 

future condition analysis did not project 

additional analysis unit extirpation, 

although the eight extirpated units are 

expected to remain extirpated as no 

suitable habitat remains in these areas. 

The number of analysis units in low or 

very low resiliency is comparable across 

future scenarios and timesteps, with the 

expected impacts to the species 

(primarily urbanization) occurring 

under all three scenarios by the earlier 

timestep of 2050. Under scenarios A and 

B, in 2050 and 2070, our future 

condition analysis projects one unit will 

remain in high resiliency, one high 

resiliency unit will shift to moderate 

resiliency, four units will exhibit low 

resiliency, and five units will exhibit 

very low resiliency. Under Scenario C 

(higher impact scenario) in 2050 and 

2070, our future condition analysis 

projects one unit will remain in high 

resiliency, one high resiliency unit will 

shift to moderate resiliency, three units 

will exhibit low resiliency, and six units 

will exhibit very low resiliency. 

We expect declines in representation 

in the future due to fragmentation of 

suitable habitat and decreased 

connectivity within and among analysis 

units. Similarly, we expect declines in 

redundancy as resiliency decreases in 

the future. Although no analysis unit 

extirpations are projected, the 

contributions of analysis units in low 

and very low resiliency to species-level 

redundancy is limited in the future. 

Representation and redundancy are 

projected to be reduced compared to 

current levels. 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–P 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
68084 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP03OC23.008</GPH>

t 

0 20 

I 

j I 

0 20 

40 Kilometers 

I 

I 

40Milei; 

Short-tailed Snake 

Future Condition 

Resiliency (2050 

Scenarios A&B) 

- Hlgh(1) 

- Moderate(!) 

- Low(4) 

Very Low(S) 

Likely Extirpated (8) 

Counties 

Figure 2. Short-tailed snake analysis unit resiliency at year 2050 under scenarios A (low 

development) and B (moderate development). Analysis unit resiliency classes are not 

projected to change in 2070, although the trend in habitat loss continues in all scenarios. 
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules 68085 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–C Determination of Short-Tailed Snake’s 

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 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP03OC23.009</GPH>

l 

0. 

o 20 40 Kilometera 

l I I 

I 

20 

I 

40 Miles. 

Short-tailed Snake 

Future Condition 

Resiliency (2050 

Scenario C) 

-High(l) 

- Moderate (I.) 

-low{3) 

Very Low (6) 

Likely Extirpated (8) 

Counties 

Figure 3. Short-tailed snake analysis unit resiliency at year 2050 under Scenario C (high 

development). Analysis unit resiliency classes are not projected to change in 2070, 

although the trend in habitat loss continues. 
68086 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

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 the shorttailed snake does not meet the 

definition of an endangered or 

threatened species throughout all of its 

range. In our assessment of viability for 

the short-tailed snake, we considered 

the impacts of habitat loss and 

degradation (Factor A); habitat 

management (Factor A); nonnative, 

invasive species (Factors A and C); 

climate change (Factor E); disease 

(Factor C); collection (Factor B); 

intentional killing (Factor E); and small, 

isolated populations (Factor E). 

Furthermore, we considered the existing 

regulatory mechanisms (Factor D) and 

conservation measures and their effect 

on the identified threats and the status 

of the species. Of the threats considered, 

habitat loss and degradation were 

identified as the primary threats 

impacting populations and the species 

now and into the future. Urbanization 

and associated development, including 

roads, is the key driver of habitat loss 

and degradation and landcover change 

within the species’ range. Urbanization 

and development are expected to 

increase within the range of the species 

in Florida as the human population 

increases there in the future. Sandhill 

and scrub habitats that do not 

experience habitat management (or 

natural fire) experience succession and 

become less suitable for short-tailed 

snake. Invasive species encroachment 

on suitable habitat where the shorttailed snake occurs negatively impacts 

the species as well. The effects of 

climate change act to exacerbate the 

effect of other threats. The individual 

and synergistic negative impacts to the 

short-tailed snake are expected to 

increase in the future, including 

fragmentation of suitable habitat, 

increased road density, reduced habitat 

management actions (prescribed fire), 

and increased nonnative and invasive 

species. The effects of climate change on 

short-tailed snake are unclear, but 

include effects to vegetation, natural 

and prescribed fire, prey species, and 

perhaps reproduction through skewed 

sex ratios. The effects of climate change 

are expected to increase in the future. 

The species’ current representation 

has likely decreased from its historical 

representation as evidenced by the loss 

of eight analysis units across the range 

of the species. However, the species 

occurs in a variety of habitats (including 

sand and scrub) and exhibits 

morphologically distinct groupings 

across its range. We expect that these 

ecological and morphological variations 

indicate sufficient adaptive capacity in 

the species. Due to the species’ 

behavioral characteristics (fossorial and 

limited dispersal and its need for loose 

sandy soils), the short-tailed snake may 

be limited in its capacity to shift in 

space in a changing environment. The 

species is currently represented by six 

analysis units that exhibit moderate or 

high resiliency, and these six units are 

distributed across the range of the 

species. Despite the reductions from 

historical condition with extirpations of 

very small units, we have determined 

that the species’ current representation 

and redundancy are moderate, and the 

species has sufficient ability to adapt to 

changing environmental conditions 

(representation) and withstand 

catastrophic events (redundancy). 

As discussed above, the primary 

threat to the species is the loss and 

degradation of habitat (e.g., urbanization 

and other land use changes, such as 

agriculture and mining), and this 

impacts the current resiliency of the 

species across its range. Although the 

species is negatively impacted by the 

loss and degradation of habitat within 

our assessment of current resiliency, 2 

of 11 analysis units exhibit high 

resiliency, 4 analysis units exhibit 

moderate resiliency, 4 analysis units 

exhibit low resiliency, and 1 analysis 

unit exhibits very low resiliency. The 

two high resiliency analysis units 

encompass a large area (224,563 ha 

(554,907 ac)) in the center of the known 

range of the short-tailed snake, and 

these two units encompass 70 percent of 

the protected lands in the species’ 

range. Further, the areal extent of 

moderate and high resilience analysis 

units encompasses approximately 32 

percent and 46 percent, respectively, of 

the total identified current habitat. The 

analysis units exhibiting low (4 analysis 

units) or very low (1 analysis unit) 

resiliency occur at the periphery of the 

species’ range, are generally smaller in 

size, and encompass less suitable 

habitat than the remaining analysis 

units. 

Although the species is impacted by 

threats rangewide, the short-tailed snake 

exhibits sufficient resiliency, 

redundancy, and representation to 

support species’ viability. Overall, no 

current threat is acting at an extent or 

severity such that the short-tailed snake 

is at risk of extinction throughout all of 

its range. Thus, after assessing the best 

available information, we conclude that 

the short-tailed snake is not in danger of 

extinction throughout all of its range. 

Therefore, we proceed with 

determining whether the short-tailed 

snake is likely to become endangered 

within the foreseeable future throughout 

all of its range. Under three analyzed 

plausible future scenarios and in both 

future time horizons of 2050 and 2070, 

we expect habitat quantity and quality 

to decline. We rely on established 

models of projected landcover change, 

urbanization, and climate change to 

inform our future condition analysis. 

Declining habitat conditions are 

expected to negatively affect the shorttailed snake, although we do not have 

information available to accurately 

project the demographic condition of 

the species in the future. As described 

above, resiliency of 9 of 11 analysis 

units is projected to decline, and the 

species-level representation and 

redundancy are expected to decline as 

a result. The impacts of urbanization 

and development and other threats are 

projected to occur across the range by 

year 2050, with habitat loss continuing 

at a slower rate through year 2070. 

However, in all future scenarios and 

both timesteps, one analysis unit is 

projected to remain in high resiliency 

(Unit 1, Mount Dora Ridge), and another 

is projected to exhibit moderate 

resiliency (Unit 3, Brooksville Ridge 

South). The two analysis units projected 

in high and moderate resiliency 

encompass 45 percent of current 

identified suitable habitat and 53 to 60 

percent of projected suitable habitat in 

the foreseeable future (depending on 

scenario and timestep). The two very 

large, high and moderately resilient 

analysis units also encompass 70 

percent of the protected lands in the 

species’ range, where the threat of 

urbanization and development is 

somewhat reduced. Our future 

condition analysis did not project 

analysis unit extirpation. 

Although the resiliency of short-tailed 

snake analysis units is expected to be 

negatively affected by the threat of 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules 68087 

habitat loss, degradation, and 

fragmentation in the foreseeable future, 

the species will maintain high and 

moderate resiliency in an area that 

encompasses almost half of the current 

suitable habitat now and in the future. 

Representation and redundancy are 

projected to be reduced compared to 

current levels but sufficient to support 

species’ viability in the future. After 

assessing the best available information, 

we conclude that the short-tailed snake 

is not likely to become endangered 

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 within the 

foreseeable future throughout all or a 

significant portion of its range. 

Therefore, we proceed to evaluating 

whether the species is an endangered or 

threatened species 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. 

In undertaking this analysis for shorttailed snake, 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 shorttailed snake to determine if the species 

is in danger of extinction now in any 

portion of its range (i.e., if it meets the 

Act’s definition of an endangered 

species) or is likely to become an 

endangered species within the 

foreseeable future in any portion of its 

range (i.e., if it meets the Act’s 

definition of a threatened species). 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 Act’s definition 

of an endangered or threatened species. 

As discussed above and in our SSA 

report, we have information on eight 

analysis units with short-tailed snake 

occurrences before 1972 with little or no 

associated suitable habitat that we have 

determined are likely extirpated. For the 

purposes of considering portions of the 

short-tailed snake’s range, we reviewed 

the analysis units we identified in the 

SSA report. We did not consider the 

eight likely extirpated analysis units in 

our future scenario modeling, as we do 

not anticipate that these units will 

contribute to the future viability of the 

species. Accordingly, when conducting 

our analysis to determine whether the 

species may be in danger of extinction 

in a significant portion of its range, we 

consider these very small (121 ha) likely 

extirpated units to be lost historical 

range and do not consider areas of lost 

historical range to be a significant 

portion of the range. We already take 

into account the effects that the loss of 

these units have on the current and 

future viability of short-tailed snake in 

our rangewide determination. This is 

consistent with our Final Policy on 

Interpretation of the Phrase ‘‘Significant 

Portion of Its Range’’ in the Endangered 

Species Act’s Definitions of 

‘‘Endangered Species’’ and ‘‘Threatened 

Species’’ (79 FR 37577). 

For the short-tailed snake, we first 

considered whether there are any 

portions of the species’ current range 

that may have a different status. We first 

considered whether the species may be 

in danger of extinction in a significant 

portion of its range. As discussed under 

Status Throughout all of Its Range, 

above, the primary current threats to the 

short-tailed snake are habitat 

destruction or modification from 

urbanization and other incompatible 

land uses, such as cropland and mining. 

We examined those threats along with 

the effects from climate change, disease, 

and cumulative effects, and we 

considered whether conservation efforts 

and regulatory mechanisms ameliorated 

any of the effects. These factors and 

threats influence the short-tailed snake 

rangewide; however, we identified five 

analysis units as a portion where the 

species is currently in low or very low 

resiliency condition (e.g., analysis units 

5, 6, 10, 14, and 22) and that may have 

a different status than the remainder of 

the range. These units comprise 11.9, 

9.4, 2.2, 1.1, and 0.03 percent of the 

geographic area of the short-tailed 

snake’s range respectively, and 25 

percent of the range collectively. These 

analysis units are currently in lower 

resiliency conditions than other units 

throughout the species’ range due to 

impacts from increased habitat loss (e.g., 

urbanization and incompatible land use) 

and habitat fragmentation (e.g., 

increased road density). The impacts to 

the short-tailed snake and the species’ 

response to the threats described have 

led to low or very low resiliency in 

these analysis units. The best scientific 

and commercial information indicates 

that these analysis units may have a 

different status than those in the 

remainder of the species’ range. 

We then proceeded to the significance 

question, asking whether this portion of 

the range (i.e., ‘‘5 analysis units 

portion’’; analysis units 5, 6, 10, 14, and 

22) is significant. The Service’s most 

recent definition of ‘‘significant’’ within 

agency policy guidance has been 

invalidated by court order (see Desert 

Survivors v. U.S. Department of the 

Interior, 321 F. Supp. 3d 1011, 1070–74 

(N.D. Cal. 2018)). In undertaking this 

analysis for the short-tailed snake, we 

considered whether the 5 analysis units 

portion of the species’ range may be 

significant based on its biological 

importance to the overall viability of the 

short-tailed snake. Therefore, for the 

purposes of this analysis, when 

considering whether this portion is 

significant, we considered whether the 

portion may (1) occur in a unique 

habitat or ecoregion for the species; (2) 

contain high-quality or high-value 

habitat relative to the remaining 

portions of the range, for the species’ 

continued viability in light of the 

existing threats; (3) contain habitat that 

is essential to a specific life-history 

function for the species and that is not 

found in the other portions (for 

example, the principal breeding ground 

for the species); or (4) contain a large 

geographic portion of the suitable 

habitat relative to the remaining 

portions of the range for the species. 

Individually, the five units that make 

up the identified portion are generally 

small and occur on the periphery of the 

range where the habitat conditions are 

less suitable. Collectively, the portion of 

the range containing the 5 analysis units 

portion does not make up a large 

geographic portion of the suitable 

habitat (25 percent) relative to the 

remaining portions of the range. In 

addition, this portion does not have any 

areas of habitat that are unique or 

contain high-quality or high-value 

habitat relative to the remaining 

portions of the range. The 5 analysis 

units portion does not contain habitat 

that is essential to a specific life-history 

function. Overall, we found no 

substantial information that would 

indicate that the 5 analysis units portion 

constitutes a portion of the range that 

may be significant in terms of its overall 

contribution to the species’ resiliency, 

redundancy, and representation, or that 

it is significant in terms of high-quality 

habitat or otherwise important for the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
68088 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

species’ life history. As a result, we 

determined that the 5 analysis units 

portion does not constitute a significant 

portion of the range where the species 

is endangered. Accordingly, the shorttailed snake is not in danger of 

extinction within a significant portion 

of its range and does not meet the 

definition of an endangered species. 

We next considered whether the 

short-tailed snake is likely to become an 

endangered species within the 

foreseeable future in a significant 

portion of its range (i.e., if it meets the 

Act’s definition of a threatened species). 

As described under Status Throughout 

All of Its Range, above, urbanization and 

development have impacted the shorttailed snake’s viability through habitat 

loss and degradation and the associated 

reduced ability to effectively manage or 

maintain suitable habitat. The risks to 

the species associated with the negative 

effects of land use change on its habitat 

are likely to continue into the 

foreseeable future. These factors and 

threats influence the short-tailed snake 

rangewide; however, the threats are 

projected to have a more pronounced 

effect in 9 of the 11 non-extirpated 

analysis units such that they may have 

a different status than the remainder of 

the range within the foreseeable future. 

This geographic area (north/south 

portion) includes the nine areas 

delineated in the SSA report as Units 4 

through 8, 10, 12, 14, and 22 (all nonextirpated units except Units 1 and 3) 

(Service 2021, entire). Although threats 

are similar throughout the species’ 

range, the species’ future response 

appears more pronounced in the nine 

analysis units in the northwest portion. 

For example, future resiliency for all 

nine analysis units is projected to be 

low or very low in all scenarios at both 

timesteps in the future. These units 

exhibit a greater decline of resiliency 

than the remaining portions of the 

range. The nine analysis units in the 

north/south portion generally have a 

lower proportion of moderate or highly 

suitable habitat in the future, as well as 

a lower proportion of protected areas 

within the analysis unit. The nine units 

in the north/south portion of the range 

are projected to have a higher degree of 

habitat degradation and habitat loss due 

to urbanization. Given the projected 

decline in resiliency in predicted future 

conditions within these nine analysis 

units, the best available scientific and 

commercial information indicates that 

the north/south portion, including 

analysis units 4 through 8, 10, 12, 14, 

and 22, is a portion that is likely to be 

in danger of extinction within the 

foreseeable future. The reductions in 

resiliency across these units will also 

affect the species’ ability to recover from 

future catastrophic events (redundancy) 

and the species’ capacity to adapt to 

future expected environmental changes 

(representation). 

We then proceeded to the significance 

question, asking whether this portion of 

the range (i.e., north/south portion 

including analysis units 4 through 8, 10, 

12, 14, and 22) is significant. As 

discussed above, the Service’s most 

recent definition of ‘‘significant’’ within 

agency policy guidance has been 

invalidated by court order (see Desert 

Survivors v. U.S. Department of the 

Interior, 321 F. Supp. 3d 1011, 1070–74 

(N.D. Cal. 2018)). In undertaking this 

analysis for the short-tailed snake, we 

considered whether the north/south 

portion of the species’ range may be 

significant based on its biological 

importance to the overall viability of the 

short-tailed snake. Therefore, for the 

purposes of this analysis, when 

considering whether this portion is 

significant, we considered whether the 

portion may (1) occur in a unique 

habitat or ecoregion for the species; (2) 

contain high-quality or high-value 

habitat relative to the remaining 

portions of the range, for the species’ 

continued viability in light of the 

existing threats; (3) contain habitat that 

is essential to a specific life-history 

function for the species and that is not 

found in the other portions (for 

example, the principal breeding ground 

for the species); or (4) contain a large 

geographic portion of the suitable 

habitat relative to the remaining 

portions of the range for the species. 

The north/south portion, consisting of 

nine analysis units, constitutes 

approximately 55 percent of the 

identified current suitable habitat across 

the short-tailed snake’s range (278,599 

of 503,161 hectares); and therefore is a 

large geographic area relative to the 

remaining portions of the range. 

Therefore, having assessed the north/ 

south portion’s biological significance 

in terms of the habitat considerations 

described above, we find the best 

available information indicates this 

portion is significant to the short-tailed 

snake. 

Accordingly, having determined that 

the north/south portion of the species’ 

range is (1) significant, and (2) likely to 

become in danger of extinction within 

the foreseeable future, we find that the 

short-tailed snake is likely to become an 

endangered species within the 

foreseeable future in a significant 

portion of its range. Accordingly, it 

meets the Act’s definition of a 

threatened species. This is consistent 

with the courts’ holding in Desert 

Survivors v. Department of the Interior, 

321 F. Supp. 3d 1011 (N.D. Cal. 2018), 

and Center for Biological Diversity v. 

Jewell, 248 F. Supp. 3d, 946, 959 (D. 

Ariz. 2017). 

Determination of Status 

Our review of the best available 

scientific and commercial information 

indicates that the short-tailed snake 

meets the Act’s definition of a 

threatened species. Therefore, we 

propose to list the short-tailed snake 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 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules 68089 

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:// 

www.fws.gov/program/endangeredspecies), 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 short-tailed 

snake. Information on our grant 

programs that are available to aid 

species recovery can be found at: 

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

Although the short-tailed snake 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 (see 50 CFR 

402.14(a)), unless the Service concurs in 

writing that the action is not likely to 

adversely affect listed species or critical 

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 that 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) of the 

Act. 

Examples of discretionary actions for 

the short-tailed snake that may be 

subject to conference and consultation 

procedures under section 7 of the Act 

are land management or other 

landscape-altering activities on Federal 

lands administered by the Department 

of Defense, U.S. Forest Service, and U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, 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 Service, 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 

issued under section 4(d) of the Act 

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, for the short-tailed 

snake, 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 

the proposed prohibitions and 

exceptions that would be established by 

protective regulation under section 4(d) 

of the Act (see II. Proposed Rule Issued 

Under Section 4(d) of the Act, below). 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
68090 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

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 

short-tailed snake by encouraging 

management of the habitat for the 

species in ways that facilitate 

conservation for the species. The 

provisions of this proposed rule are one 

of many tools that we would use to 

promote the conservation of the shorttailed snake. This proposed 4(d) rule 

would apply only if and when we make 

final the listing of the short-tailed snake 

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 

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). 

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 short-tailed 

snake’s conservation needs. As 

discussed previously in Summary of 

Biological Status and Threats, we have 

concluded that the short-tailed snake is 

likely to become in danger of extinction 

within the foreseeable future primarily 

due to habitat loss and degradation as a 

result of urbanization, development, 

and other land use changes (e.g., 

agriculture and mining) and a lack of 

habitat management (e.g., lack of 

prescribed fire in an ecosystemappropriate fire interval and 

encroachment of invasive species). 

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 short-tailed snake. 

The protective regulations we are 

proposing for the short-tailed snake 

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 

protective regulation would provide for 

the conservation of the short-tailed 

snake by including all of these 

prohibitions because the short-tailed 

snake is at risk of extinction within the 

foreseeable future and putting these 

prohibitions in place would help to 

prevent further declines and preserve 

the species’ remaining populations. 

In particular, this proposed 4(d) rule 

would provide for the conservation of 

the short-tailed snake by prohibiting the 

following activities, unless they fall 

within specific exceptions or are 

otherwise authorized or permitted: 

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. 

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 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules 68091 

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’ remaining populations, slow 

their rate of decline, and decrease 

cumulative effects from other ongoing or 

future threats. Therefore, we propose to 

prohibit take of the short-tailed snake, 

except for take resulting from those 

actions and activities specifically 

excepted by the 4(d) rule. 

The exceptions to the prohibition on 

take for the short-tailed snake would 

include all of the general exceptions to 

the prohibition on take of endangered 

wildlife, as set forth at 50 CFR 

17.21(c)(2) through (4), along with other 

standard exceptions to the prohibitions 

(see Proposed Regulation Promulgation, 

below). The statute also contains certain 

exemptions from the prohibitions, 

which are found in sections 9 and 10 of 

the Act. 

We are also considering additional 

exceptions to prohibitions including 

incidental take resulting from habitat 

management activities that maintain or 

restore short-tailed snake habitat 

including implementation of prescribed 

fire, actions to reduce the threat of 

invasive species such as feral hogs, or 

other activities that result in more 

suitable habitat conditions for the 

species. We are also considering a 

provision excepting incidental take from 

silviculture practices and forestry 

activities that follow best management 

practices. As described in Information 

Requested, we are soliciting comments 

from the public regarding specific 

prohibitions and exceptions to 

prohibitions of take of the short-tailed 

snake that we may consider in 

developing the final 4(d) rule for the 

species. 

Despite the 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 (see 50 CFR 17.32). 

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 short-tailed snake that may 

result in otherwise prohibited take 

without additional authorization. 

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 shorttailed snake. 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. 

Our regulations at 50 CFR 424.02 

define the geographical area occupied 

by the species as an area that may 

generally be delineated around species’ 

occurrences, as determined by the 

Secretary (i.e., range). Such areas may 

include those areas used throughout all 

or part of the species’ life cycle, even if 

not used on a regular basis (e.g., 

migratory corridors, seasonal habitats, 

and habitats used periodically, but not 

solely by vagrant individuals). 

Conservation, as defined under 

section 3 of the Act, means to use and 

the use of all methods and procedures 

that are necessary to bring an 

endangered or threatened species to the 

point at which the measures provided 

pursuant to the Act are no longer 

necessary. Such methods and 

procedures include, but are not limited 

to, all activities associated with 

scientific resources management such as 

research, census, law enforcement, 

habitat acquisition and maintenance, 

propagation, live trapping, and 

transplantation, and, in the 

extraordinary case where population 

pressures within a given ecosystem 

cannot be otherwise relieved, may 

include regulated taking. 

Critical habitat receives protection 

under section 7 of the Act through the 

requirement that each Federal action 

agency ensure, in consultation with the 

Service, that any action they authorize, 

fund, or carry out is not likely to result 

in the destruction or adverse 

modification of designated critical 

habitat. The designation of critical 

habitat does not affect land ownership 

or establish a refuge, wilderness, 

reserve, preserve, or other conservation 

area. Such designation also does not 

allow the government or public to 

access private lands. Such designation 

does not require implementation of 

restoration, recovery, or enhancement 

measures by non-Federal landowners. 

Rather, designation requires that, where 

a landowner requests Federal agency 

funding or authorization for an action 

that may affect an area designated as 

critical habitat, the Federal agency 

consult with the Service under section 

7(a)(2) of the Act. If the action may 

affect the listed species itself (such as 

for occupied critical habitat), the 

Federal agency would have already been 

required to consult with the Service 

even absent the designation because of 

the requirement to ensure that the 

action is not likely to jeopardize the 

continued existence of the species. Even 

if the Service were to conclude after 

consultation that the proposed activity 

is likely to result in destruction or 

adverse modification of the critical 

habitat, the Federal action agency and 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
68092 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

the landowner are not required to 

abandon the proposed activity, or to 

restore or recover the species; instead, 

they must implement ‘‘reasonable and 

prudent alternatives’’ to avoid 

destruction or adverse modification of 

critical habitat. 

Under the first prong of the Act’s 

definition of critical habitat, areas 

within the geographical area occupied 

by the species at the time it was listed 

are included in a critical habitat 

designation if they contain physical or 

biological features (1) which are 

essential to the conservation of the 

species and (2) which may require 

special management considerations or 

protection. For these areas, critical 

habitat designations identify, to the 

extent known using the best scientific 

data available, those physical or 

biological features that are essential to 

the conservation of the species (such as 

space, food, cover, and protected 

habitat). 

Under the second prong of the Act’s 

definition of critical habitat, we can 

designate critical habitat in 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. 

Section 4 of the Act requires that we 

designate critical habitat on the basis of 

the best scientific data available. 

Further, our Policy on Information 

Standards Under the Endangered 

Species Act (published in the Federal 

Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271)), 

the Information Quality Act (section 515 

of the Treasury and General 

Government Appropriations Act for 

Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106–554; H.R. 

5658)), and our associated Information 

Quality Guidelines provide criteria, 

establish procedures, and provide 

guidance to ensure that our decisions 

are based on the best scientific data 

available. They require our biologists, to 

the extent consistent with the Act and 

with the use of the best scientific data 

available, to use primary and original 

sources of information as the basis for 

recommendations to designate critical 

habitat. 

When we are determining which areas 

should be designated as critical habitat, 

our primary source of information is 

generally the information from the SSA 

report and information developed 

during the listing process for the 

species. Additional information sources 

may include any generalized 

conservation strategy, criteria, or outline 

that may have been developed for the 

species; the recovery plan for the 

species; articles in peer-reviewed 

journals; conservation plans developed 

by States and counties; scientific status 

surveys and studies; biological 

assessments; other unpublished 

materials; or experts’ opinions or 

personal knowledge. 

Habitat is dynamic, and species may 

move from one area to another over 

time. We recognize that critical habitat 

designated at a particular point in time 

may not include all of the habitat areas 

that we may later determine are 

necessary for the recovery of the 

species. For these reasons, a critical 

habitat designation does not signal that 

habitat outside the designated area is 

unimportant or may not be needed for 

recovery of the species. Areas that are 

important to the conservation of the 

species, both inside and outside the 

critical habitat designation, will 

continue to be subject to: (1) 

Conservation actions implemented 

under section 7(a)(1) of the Act; (2) 

regulatory protections afforded by the 

requirement in section 7(a)(2) of the Act 

for Federal agencies to ensure their 

actions are not likely to jeopardize the 

continued existence of any endangered 

or threatened species; and (3) the 

prohibitions found in the 4(d) rule. 

Federally funded or permitted projects 

affecting listed species outside their 

designated critical habitat areas may 

still result in jeopardy findings in some 

cases. These protections and 

conservation tools will continue to 

contribute to recovery of the species. 

Similarly, critical habitat designations 

made on the basis of the best available 

information at the time of designation 

will not control the direction and 

substance of future recovery plans, 

habitat conservation plans, or other 

species conservation planning efforts if 

new information available at the time of 

those planning efforts calls for a 

different outcome. 

Critical Habitat Determinability 

We determine that critical habitat is 

prudent. Our regulations at 50 CFR 

424.12(a)(2) state that critical habitat is 

not determinable when one or both of 

the following situations exist: 

(i) Data sufficient to perform required 

analyses are lacking, or 

(ii) The biological needs of the species 

are not sufficiently well known to 

identify any area that meets the 

definition of ‘‘critical habitat.’’ 

When critical habitat is not 

determinable, the Act allows the Service 

an additional year to publish a critical 

habitat designation (16 U.S.C. 

1533(b)(6)(C)(ii)). 

We reviewed the available 

information pertaining to the biological 

needs of the species and habitat 

characteristics where this species is 

located. For the short-tailed snake, the 

species’ needs can be inferred from 

habitat where it occurs but are not well 

known. In addition, a careful 

assessment of the economic impacts that 

may occur due to a critical habitat 

designation is ongoing. Until these 

efforts are complete, information 

sufficient to perform a required analysis 

of the impacts of the designation is 

lacking. Therefore, we conclude that the 

designation of critical habitat for the 

short-tailed snake is prudent, but not 

determinable at this time. The Act 

allows the Service an additional year to 

publish a critical habitat designation 

that is not determinable at the time of 

listing (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(6)(C)(ii)). 

Required Determinations 

Clarity of the Rule 

We are required by Executive Orders 

(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) 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 3, 2023 / Proposed Rules 68093 

(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 Secretary’s 

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. We coordinated with 

Tribes in the SSA development process 

and prior to the publication of this 

proposed rule. We will continue to work 

with Tribal entities during the 

development of a proposed rule for the 

designation of critical habitat for the 

short-tailed snake. 

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, in paragraph (h), amend 

the List of Endangered and Threatened 

Wildlife by adding an entry for ‘‘Snake, 

short-tailed’’ in alphabetical order under 

REPTILES to read as follows: 

§ 17.11 Endangered and threatened 

wildlife. 

* * * * * 

(h) * * * 

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

*******

REPTILES

* * * * * * * 

Snake, short-tailed ............ Lampropeltis extenuata .... Wherever found ................ T [Federal Register citation when published as a final rule]; 50 CFR 

17.42(r).4d

* * * * * * * 

■ 3. As proposed to be amended at 85 

FR 61700 (September 30, 2020), 86 FR 

18014 (April 7, 2021), 86 FR 62434 

(November 9, 2021), 86 FR 66624 

(November 23, 2021), and 87 FR 58648 

(September 27, 2022), § 17.42 is further 

amended by adding paragraph (r) to 

read as follows: 

§ 17.42 Special rules—reptiles. 

* * * * * 

(r) Short-tailed snake (Lampropeltis 

extenuata). 

(1) Prohibitions. The following 

prohibitions that apply to endangered 

wildlife also apply to short-tailed snake. 

Except as provided under paragraph 

(r)(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 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 (c)(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. 

Janine Velasco, 

Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2023–21667 Filed 10–2–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–P 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1