UNITED ST ATES ENV I RONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

W AS HI NGTON

. DC 20460

O FFI CE O F C H EM I CAL SA F E TY AN D P OLLUT I ON PR E V EN TIO N

PC Code: 128931

DP Barcodc: D 416416

, 420160, 420159, 420352,421434,42 1 723

Date: March 24

, 2016

MEMORANDUM

Subject :

To:

From:

Through: Addendum to Dicamba Diglycolamine Salt (DGA) and it s Degradate

, 3,6

- dichlorosalicylic ac i d (DCSA) Sect ion 3 Risk Assessme nt: R efined Endangered Species

Assessment for P ropose d New Uses on H erb i cide- T o l erant Soybean a nd Cotto n in 16

states (Arkansas

, Illin ois

, I owa , Indi a na , Kansas

, L o ui s iana

, Minnesota, Mississippi

, Missouri, Nebraska

, orth Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee

, and Wisconsin).

Grant R owland, Risk Manager Kay Montague

, Product Manager Team 23

Dan Kenny, Branch Ch i ef

Herbicid e Branch Registration Division (7505 P )

Office of Pesticide Programs /

Elizabeth Donovan

, M.S., Biologist

# ~**~/ ~;**  2 

## </

# I~ Michael Wagman

, M.S.

, Biologist

### ?VI.ft~ !:?'-I( 

### /6

Monica Wait, Ri sk Assessment Process**Leader ~** **\tJ~ ~**  

### / 2-4-/l 

### L:-

E

nvironm ental Risk B ran c h 6
Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P)

Office of Pesticide P rograms

Mark Corb in

, Branch Chief
Environme nt a l Risk Branch 6

E

nvir onme ntal Fate and Effects Division (7507P)

Office of Pesticide Programs

Pri o r to co ndu cti n g this refined Endangered Species Assessme nt

, the Environmental Fate and Effects
Division (EFED) performed a sc r eening l eve l ecologica l risk assessment for a Federal action involving proposed new uses of the diglycolamine sa lt of dicamba (d i camba DG A) on dicamba herbicide-to l erant soybean on March 8

, 201 1 (DP 3784 4 4) ; an amendment to the assessment vvas i ss u ed o n May 20

, 2014 (DP 4 04138

, 404806

, 405887

, 4 1 0802, and 41 1 382)

. Conc urr e nt with thi s r efined E ndan gered Species2 Assessment, a Section 3 New Use dicamba DGA salt on dicamba

- tolerant cotton screening

- level assessment (DP 404823) and a subsequent addendum for the use of dicamba DGA on dicamba

- tolerant soybean (DP 426789 ) that addresses multiple issues (risk to terrestrial invertebrates, spray drift buffers, runoff, and updated mammalian toxicological endpoints for parent dicamba and its degradate DCSA )
have been finalized

. As a result of the analyses i n the screening level risk assessment s and the new addendum (DP 426789) , p otential direct risk concerns could not be excluded for :

• mammals (chronic , from the soybean use only, due to residue s from dicamba’s metabolite,
DCSA, rather than from parent dicamba );

• birds (acute from parent dicamba for both soybean and cotton uses; chronic fro m DCSA residues only in soybean but not cotton )

, considered surrogates for reptiles, and terrestrial

- phase amphibians; and

• terrestrial plants (soybe an and cotton uses)

.

In the screening level risk assessment s , i ndirect effect risk concerns for all taxa were possible for any species that have dependencies (e.g., food, shelter, and habitat) on mammals, birds, reptiles, terrestrial

phase amphibians, or terrestrial plants. Additionally, t he screening level assessment showed that direct

risk concerns were unlikely ( i.e. l evels of concern were not exceeded) for :

• mammals (acute) and (chronic

— for the cotton use only) ;

• birds , reptiles, and terrestrial

- phase amphibians (chronic from parent dicamba or DCSA degradate from use on cotton ) ;

• terrestrial insects (acute and chronic) ;

• freshwater fish (acute and chronic) ;

• aquatic

- phase amphibians (acute and chronic) ;

• estuarine/ marine fish (acute and chronic);

• freshwater invertebrates (acute and chronic) ; estuarine/marine invertebrates (acute and chronic) ; and

• aquatic plants 1

The screening assessment for dicamba DGA on dicamba

- tolerant cotton (D404823) and the recent addendum to the screening level risk assessment for the use of dicamba DGA on dicamba

- tolerant soybean (D426789) used updated terrestrial mammal endpoints for dicamba and its metabolite, DCSA.

EPA has a specific process based on sound science that it follows when assessing risks to listed species for pesticides like dicamba that will be used on seeds that have been genetically modified to be tolerant to the pesticide

. The Agency begins with a screening level assessment that includes a basic ecological risk assessment based on its 2004 Overview of the Ecological Risk Assessment Process document. [ USEPA,
2004 , available at http://www.epa.gov/oppfead1/endanger/litstatus/riskasses.htm ]. That assessment uses broad default assumptions to establish estimated environmental concentrations of particular pesticides. If the screening level assessment res ults in a determination that no levels of concern are exceeded EPA concludes its analysis. On the other hand, where the screening level assessment does not rule out potential
effects (exceedances of the level of concern) based on the broad default assu mp tions , EPA then uses increasingly specific methods and exposure models to refine its estimated environmental exposures . At each screening step, EPA compares the more refined exposures to the toxicity of the pesticide active

1 The listed species LOC was exceeded for non

- vascular aquatic plants, however there are no listed species of this

taxa.3 ingredient to determine whether the pesticide exceeds levels of concern established for listed aquatic and terrestrial species. EPA determines that there is “no effect” on listed species if, at any step in the screening level assessment, no levels of concern are exceeded. If, after perf orming all of the steps in the screening level assessment, a pesticide still exceeds the Agency’s levels of concern for listed species, EPA then conducts a species

- specific refined assessment to make effects determinations for individual listed species. T he refined assessment, unlike the screening level assessment, takes account of species’ habitats and behaviors to determine whether any listed species may be affected by use of the pesticide.

The screening level ecological risk assessment generates a ser ies of taxonomic (e.g., mammals, birds, fish, etc.) risk quotients (RQs) that are the ratio of estimated exposures to acute and chronic effects endpoints. These RQs are then compared to EPA established levels of concern (LOCs) to determine if risks to any taxonomic group are of concern. The LOCs address risks for both acute and chronic effects. Acute effects LOCs range from 0.05 for aquatic animals that are Federally

- listed threatened or endangered species (listed species) to 0.5 for aquatic non

- listed a nimal species and 0.1 to 0.5 for
terrestrial animals for listed and non

- listed species. The LOC for chronic effects for all animal taxa (listed
and non

- listed) is 1. Plant risks are handled in a similar manner, but with different toxicity thresholds (NOA EC/EC 05 and EC 25, respectively) used in RQ calculation for listed and non

- listed species and an LOC of 1 used to interpret the RQ. When a given taxonomic RQ exceeds either the acute or chronic LOC

, a concern for direct toxic effects is identified for that particular taxon. If RQs fall below the LOC, a no effect determination is identified for the corresponding taxon.

The purpose of this document is to explain the refined risk assessment conducted for Federally

- listed threatened or endangered (listed) spec ies that could potentially be impacted by this pesticide registration.

The refined assessment was conducted based on the 2004 Overview document

, as discussed above. The assessment of risks to listed species posed by the use of Dicamba DGA has been conducte d in phases covering a specific set of states, assessing risk to all the listed species covered in those states. This
assessment covers the endangered species analysis for 16 states: Arkansas, Illinois, Iowa, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Minnesota, Missis sippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Wisconsin. Based on EFED’s LOCATES v.2.4.0 database and information from

the U

. S

. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)

, 18 3 species in the 1 6 states proposed for registration were identified as within the action area (at a preliminary county

- wide level of resolution) associated with the

new herbicide

- tolerant soybean and cotton uses. Table 1 presents a summary of th is assessment. Separate con current assessment phases cover the endangered species analysis for 7 states ( D 422305

, covering AL, GA, KY, MI, NC, SC, and TX ) and 11 states ( D425049

, covering AZ, CO, DE, FL, MD, NM, NJ, NY, PA, VA and WV).

EPA consulted U.S. Fish and Wildlife Servic e Recovery Plans to determine whether listed species in

these states would be expected to occur in an action area encompassing the treated soybean and corn

fields . The refined assessment was then conducted on those species that could not be excluded from the

action area. EPA also consulted the recovery plans in the refined assessment for additional habitat

information and incorporated species biological information regarding d ietary items (used to model

dicamba D G A residues in prey tissue) and b ody weight (used to determine food consumption rates and scale ecotoxicity data from the tested surrogate species , the bobwhite quail and rat, to the body weight of the listed species )

.

Table 1. Summary of species effects determinations and critical habitat modification determinations for Federally listed threatened or endangered species in AR, IL, IA, IN, KS, LA, MN, MS, MO, NE, ND, OH, OK, SD, TN, and WI for dicamba DGA use

on gene tically modified cotton and soybeans.4 Species Effects Determination Comments Spring Creek Bladderpod May Affect, Likely to Adversely Affect Found in Wilson Co., TN

All other species (terrestrial and aquatic) No Effect None

Critical Habitat Modification Determination Comments
All Critical Habitats No Modification None

Making an Effects Determination

The bullets below outline EFED’s process for making an effects determination for the Federal action:

• For listed individuals inside the action area but NOT part of an affected taxa NOR relying on the affected taxa for services (involving food, shelter, biological mediated resources necessary for survival/reproduction), use of a pesticide would be determined to have NO EFFECT.

• For listed individuals outsid e the action area, use of a pesticide would be determined to fall under NO

EFFECT.

• Listed individuals inside the action area may either fall into the NO EFFECT or MAY AFFECT (LIKELY or NOT LIKELY TO ADVERSELY AFFECT) categories depending upon their specifi c biological needs, circumstances of exposure, etc.

• LIKELY or NOT LIKELY TO ADVERSELY AFFECT determinations are made using the following criteria:

o Insignificant

- The level of the effect cannot be meaningfully related to a “take.”

o Highly Uncertain

- The effect is highly unlikely to occur.

o Wholly beneficial

- The effects are only good things.

Spray Drift Mitigation

EFED ’s refined endangered species risk assessment t ook into account the spray drift mitigation language

that was added to the most rec ent proposed label submitted by the registrant

. An accounting of federally

listed threatened or endangered species within the 16 s tates (covered in this assessment) proposed for

dicamba DGA use on genetically modified cotton and soybeans is included in Appendix 1 (183 species). Specifically, the spray drift mitigation language on the M1691 Herbicide Supplemental labels for the u se dicamba DGA salt on ROUNDUP READY 2 XTENDTM soybean and BOLLGARD II ® XTENDFLEX

cotton includes the following limitations: species action NO EFFECT NO EFFECT or MAY AFFECT

(LAA/NLAA ) MAY AFFECT5 • Specifying the use of a nozzle (Tee Jet® TTI11004) with ASABE S

- 572 ultra

- coarse and extremely coarse droplet spectra and a maximum operating pressure of 63 psi

.

• A maximum equipment ground speed of 15 miles per hour and ground boom height of 24 inches above the target pest or crop canopy.

• Restricting all applications when wind speeds are < 3 mph or > 15 mph and restricting applications when wind is blowing towards sensitive areas at > 10 mph

. Maintaining use of a
110 f oo t in

- field buffer for a 0.5 lb a.i./A application (220 foot in

- field buffer for a 1 lb a.i./A application) when the wind is blowing towards any areas that a re not fields in crop cultivation, paved areas, or areas covered by buildings and other structures.

• Applications done in low relative humidity conditions are to use equipment set to produce larger droplet spectra to compensate for evaporation.

• Applicat ions are not be conducted during temperature inversions.

• In order to prevent effects to non

- target susceptible plants, the label also includes the following language : “do not apply under circumstances where spray drift may occur to food, forage or other plantings that might be damaged or the crops thereof rendered unfit for sale, use or consumption

. A void contact of herbicide with foliage, green stems, exposed non

- woody roots of

cr ops, and desirable plants, including beans, cotton, flowers, fruit trees, grapes, ornamentals, peas, potato, soybean, sunflower, tobacco, tomato, and other broadleaf plants because severe injury or destruction may result, including plants in a greenhouse. Applicators are required to ensure that they are aware of the proximity to sensitive areas, and to avoid potential adverse
effects from the off

- target movement of M1691 Herbicide. The Applicator must survey the application site for neighboring sensitive areas prior to application

. The applicator also should consult sensitive crop registries for locating sensitive areas where available. ”

• Finally, i n order to prevent unintended damage from the drift of M1691 Herbicide, the label says not to apply this produ ct when the wind is blowing towards adjacent commercially grown sensitive crops.

The incorporation of the spray drift mitigation measures into the product labeling as outlined above would result in exposure to dicamba DGA from spray drift at a level whe re effects are expected only
within the confines of the treated field and so the action area is limited to the dicamba DGA treated field. Further, the incorporation of the “susceptible plants” spray drift mitigation language on the label is to avoid damag e to these plants (including adjacent crops). Because the risk assessment interprets the threshold for plant damage concern to be based on the most sensitive plant species tested and the screening level ecological risk assessment has demonstrated that thes e plant effects endpoints constitute the most conservative terrestrial organism levels of effect, it is concluded that the “susceptible plants” requirement requires a level of drift mitigation that would also prevent less sensitive organisms from being exp osed at levels of concern. Terrestrial species that are not expected to occur on treated fields under the provisions of the proposed label are not expected to be directly exposed to dicamba DGA, nor are their critical biologically mediated resources expec ted to be exposed to levels of the herbicide above any effects thresholds of concern. Additionally, as indicated in the screening level ecological risk assessments for cotton and soybean

, no aquatic receptor taxa are of concern for drift or runoff exposur e (LOCs were not exceeded for aquatic taxa)

. Consequently, all but 1 0 of the listed species originally identified as potentially at

- risk are determined to be given a “no effect” (NE) without further refinement because they are not expected to occur in an a ction area encompassing the treated soybean and co tton fields ( Appendix 2 ). The remaining 10 species are assessed using the refinements
set forth in the 20 0 4 Overview document referred to earlier in this assessment.6 Exposure through Runoff

The cotton screening

- level risk assessment and the concurrently issued soybean addendum characterized risk following exposure to dicamba residues in runoff and found that the predicted concentrations from modeling were lower than the most sensitive taxa’s endpoint (soybean plant height). Combining the predictions of this modeling, the toxicological endpoints and that most of the off

- site plant community would not experience foliar contact with dicamba DGA in runoff sheet flow, EFED concluded that all

avail able lines of evidence supported a “no effects” determination for runoff exposure for off

- field listed plants for the proposed labeled use of dicamba DGA. Additionally, rainfast mitigation on the label would also protect against the risk of exposure to li sted species off the treated field.

In addition to the spray drift and runoff mitigation measures contained in the proposed labeling, EFED analyzed s pecies

- specific biology, dicamba

- specific foliar residue data and dicamba application timing

information in th is refined endangered species assessment. An accounting of the federally

- listed

threatened or endangered species within the 16 states proposed for this registration showed 183 listed species as potentially at risk (direct or indirect effects) as a result of the screening

- level assessment ( Appendix 1 ). The spray drift mitigation label language cannot preclude listed species being exposed to

dicamba DGA salt or DCSA residues on treated fields, should a listed species utilize such areas as part of

its range and corresponding habitat. Of the 183 listed species within the 16 states (AR, IL, IN, IA, KS, LA, MN, MS, MO, NE, ND, OH, OK, SD, TN, WI) considered part of the proposed Federal decision, the following 1 0 species were reasonably expected to occur on soybean and cotton fields, which could potentially be treated with dicamba and therefore could not be assumed to be “no effect” solely on the

basis of occurrence outside the action area :

• gray wolf ( Canis lupis )

• Indiana bat ( Myotis sodalis )

• Ozark b at ( Corynorhinus townsendii ingens )

• Louisiana black bear ( Ursus americanus luteolus )

• whooping crane ( Grus americana )

• Mississippi sandhill crane ( Grus canadensis pulla )

• lesser prairie

- chicken ( Tympanuchus pallidicinctus )

• gopher tortoise ( Gopherus polyphemus )

• American burying beetle ( Nicrophorus americanus )

• Spring Creek bladderpod ( Lesquerella perforata )

Therefore, species specific biological information (e.g., body size, dietary requirements, and seasonality) and dicamba DGA use patterns were considered i n more depth to further refine the assessment and effects
determinations.

This assessment also uses the refined exposure values determined in the cotton screening level assessment

and the concurrently issued addendum to the soybean s creening level risk assessment document s compared to the initial exposure estimates from the soybean screening level assessment. This ESA assessment also evaluates chronic exposures from DCSA separately from the chronic exposure to parent7 dicamba. Dicamba exposure values wer e determined from the upper bound of the modeled T

- REX run for exposures following spray applications based on the Kenaga nomogram modified by Fletcher et al (1984), which is based on a large set of actual field residue data. Modeled dicamba exposure valu es were identical between the soybean addendum and the cotton screening level risk assessment (since the maximum application rates and minimum application intervals are the same).

Similar modeling of DCSA residues, which are formed inside the tolerant

- s oybean and tolerant

- cotton plants through plant metabolism

, is not feasible at this time due to a lack of sufficient data tracking DCSA residues in plant tissues over time to ascertain degradation rates . Therefore, in the soybean addendum and

the cotton s creening

- level risk assessment, EFED used the maximum empirical measured DCSA residue

concentrations in dicamba

- tolerant soybean (61.1 mg/kg (ppm) DCSA in broadleaf plants and 0.440 ppm in soybean seeds) and cotton plant tissues (6.29 ppm DCSA in cotton gi n byproducts and 0.27 ppm in undelinted cotton seed) to evaluate chronic exposures to DCSA for animals foraging on soybean and cotton plants. Residues in arthropods (as a dietary item for birds and mammals consuming insects that have consumed soybean /cott on tissues with DCSA residues) were assumed to follow the Kenaga nomogram relationship between broadleaf plants and arthropods for spray applications ( i.e. arthropod concentrations estimated to be approximately 70% of the concentrations in broadleaf plant tissues or 42.5 ppm DCSA in arthropods feeding on soybean plants and 4.4 ppm in arthropods feeding on cotton plants )

. The empirical residue data for cotton indicated that chronic exposures of birds and mammals to dicamba
or DCSA in cotton tissues would no t be above any levels of concern. Although the concurrently issued soybean addendum indicate s that chronic risk to mammals and birds was only a concern from DCSA residues in plant/prey tissues and not from residues of parent dicamba

, since the original so ybean screening

- level assessment (USEPA, 2011) indicated chronic risk to mammals, this assessment presents the estimated exposures and comparisons to threshold toxicity values for both dicamba and DCSA for

mammals , but evaluates them separately since their chronic toxicity and exposure profiles differ greatly. For birds, following the conclusions of the screening level assessments and the soybean addendum, only acute risk from dicamba exposures and chronic risk from DCSA exposures is evaluated.

Critical Habitat Analysis

In addition to the species

- specific effects determinations, EFED also conducted a critical habitat modification analysis ( Appendix 3) consistent with the Overview Document (USEPA, 2004) as discussed

earlier in this refined asses sment. The critical habitat modification analysis is based on an assessment of how dicamba DGA salt would affect the U.S. Fish and Wildlife or National Marine Fisheries Service (the Services) established principle constituent elements (PCE’s) of the design ated habitat as well as how direct species effects outcomes would impact critical habitat’s present and future utility for promoting the conservation of a particular listed species.

The following text discusses the lines of evidence and processes that were used to make effects determinations for listed species identified as potentially at

- risk in the screening level assessment.



### Refined ecological risk assessment for the remaining species potentially exposed to dicamba
and DCSA residues

For the effects determinations for whooping crane, sandhill crane, lesser prairie chicken, gopher tortoise, American burying beetle, spring creek bladderpod, Indiana bat, Ozark bat, gray wolf and Louisiana bear,8 a refined risk assessment approach was used to evaluate additional lines of evidence to determine whether the conservative generic assumptions in the screening risk assessment apply to a particular species of

interest ( e.g. the whooping crane ) . In the example of the whooping crane

, the refined ris k assessment investigated the impacts of more crane

- specific data related to:

1. Bird size (as the crane is larger than the 1000g large bird category used in the initial screen)

2. Bird food consumption tailored to:

a. The true weight of the bird

b. En ergy requirements of the crane

c. Improvement on the generic food intake model of the screen to assess energy content of the diet and the actual free living energy requirements of a bird the size of a crane

3. Toxicity endpoints were scaled from the weigh t of the tested surrogate species (bobwhite quail) to reflect the comparatively larger actual size of the whooping crane

. Using the whooping crane as the example to show how EPA made its effects determinations, EPA determined that the whooping crane could be feeding on arthropod prey in treated cotton and soybean fields during its migration from March to May. As stated above, for acute and chronic exposures to dicamba, EPA used the upper bound predicted concentrations of dicamba DGA salt found on arthropod s from T

- REX modeling

. F or chronic exposures to DCSA residues, EPA used the maximum measured concentrations found in broadleaf plants, modified by the Kenaga relationship between broadleaf plants and arthropods . This prey analysis is consistent with the preliminary risk concerns identified in the screening assessment. This analysis is conservative as it assumes 1) that 100% of the crane’s food

con sumption comes from exposed arthropods and 2) the level of dicamba DGA residues assumed to be on these prey a rthropods is based on the upper bound Kenaga residues expected for arthropods directly exposed to spray application s of dicamba DGA and for exposure to DCSA that residues in the arthropod prey item are based on the maximum measured values in broadleaf plan t tissues modified by the Kenaga relationship between residues in arthropods and broadleaf plants following spray applications

. EPA determined the field metabolic rate of the whooping crane through the use of a published peer reviewed allometric equation that relates bodyweight to energy requirements. From there the mass of prey consumed per day is determined by dividing the field metabolic rate (kcal/day) by the energy content of

the arthropod prey and a n assimilation factor that accounts for the ability of birds to absorb that energy
from the diet. Values were obtained from a published peer reviewed EPA document produced by the Office of Research and Development for Agency

- wide use in conduc ting ecological risk assessment ( Wildlife Expos ure Factors Hand book, USEPA, 1993)

. The mass of dicamba DGA in the insect diet is

determined from the T

- REX run found in the addendum to the soybean screening

- level risk assessment (USEPA, 2016a )

, issued concurrently with this risk assessment while the mass of DCSA in in sect diet was assumed to be 42.5 ppm (70% of the maximum measured residues in soybean hay of 61.1 ppm)

. The mass of prey consumed per day is then multiplied by the mass of dicamba or DCSA in the insect diet to

determine the mass of dicamba or DCSA in the crane’s daily diet in mg/day. Then the daily dose that the crane (considering its bodyweight) receives is determined by multiplying the mass of dicamba or DCSA in the daily diet of arthropods (assuming that is the only food item) times the mass of prey co nsumed per day divided by the bodyweight of the crane. Then EPA scaled the acute toxicity endpoint (based on the

most sensitive tested surrogate bird species, bobwhite quail’s default weight of 178 grams) to the bodyweight of the whooping crane to determin e the acute oral toxicity for the crane

. For exposures to9 DCSA residues , the chronic toxicity endpoint for the mallard (the most sensitive tested species) was modified by the relationship between the chronic dicamba and DCSA endpoints for rats (a 17x difference). The acute RQ for dicamba exposures is then calculated by dividing the daily dose of dicamba from consuming arthropods by the acute oral toxicity e ndpoint while the chronic RQ is calculated by dividing the daily dose of DCSA by the chronic toxicity endpoint . In this case the acute RQ for dicamba

was 0.0 3 , which is below the endangered species level of concern of 0.1

, while the chronic RQ for DCSA

was 0.11, which is below the listed and non

- listed species chronic LOC of 1.0. At this point, EPA was

able to conclude that dicamba and its metabolite DCSA would not have a direct e ffect on the whooping

crane.



### Birds

The screening

- level assessment s showed that birds could be at risk of mortality from acute exposures to

dicamba DGA on treated fields , but chronic risk to dicamba was not expected as no chronic RQs exceeded the Agency’s LOC (1.0) for chronic risk (USEPA 2011. D378444, p. 15)

. The concurrently issued soybean addendum did indicate that chronic exposures to DCSA residues in soybean could be a

concern , while the screening level cotton assessment indicated that chronic exposures to DCSA residues in cotton would not exceed the Agency’s L OC for chronic risk . Therefore, for listed species that could reasonably be expected to occur on treated soybean and cotton fields, EPA conducted a refined assessment for acute (dicamba only) and chronic (DCSA only, and only for soybean) exposures. Of the bird species identified as potentially at acute risk in the sixteen states, three are reasonably expected to occur on treated soybean and cotton fields. Therefore, species specific biological information and dicamba DGA use patterns were considered in mo re depth to further refine the assessment and effects determinations for those species.

Whooping crane

Dicamba Acute Effects Assessment

Whooping cranes migrate from Texas to Canada from March 25 th to May 1 st (Canadian Wildlife Service and USFWS, 2007). Whooping cranes are omnivorous and d uring migration may feed on a variety of foods including frogs, fish, plant tubers, crayfish, insects and agricultural grains . EFED considered the upper bound T

- REX predicted concentrations of DGA expected to be found on arthropods as a conservative pesticide load in the prey base. This is considered a conservative approach as modeled residues in arthropods are higher than for the other likely dietary items and 100% of the crane’s diet

would be consi dered to consist of exposed arthropods receiving the upper bound Kenaga nomogram
dicamba residues from the spray application. Alternative terrestrial vertebrate prey and agricultural grains are expected to have lower residues than those predicted for arthropods. A biologica lly representative

refinement to the screening assessment follows:

Field metabolic rate kcal/day = 1.146(5826) 0.749 = 757.6 kcal/day (USEPA 1993, body weight Dunning 1984)

Mass of prey consumed per day = 757.6 kcal/day/(1.7 kcal/gX0.72 AE) = 619 g/day

Mass of DGA i n insect diet 102.99 mg/kg

- b w from T

- REX run10 Mass of DGA in da ily diet mg = 619 g/day X 102.99 mg DGA/kg bird prey X 0.001 = 63.75 mg/day

Daily dose in crane = 63.75 mg DGA/day/5.826 kg = 10.94 mg/kg

- bw/day

Scaling the acute toxicity endpoint by bodyweight (per T

- REX methodology), the acute oral toxicity value for the crane is:

Crane LD50 mg/kg

- bw = 188 mg/kg

- bw (5826/178) (1.15

- 1) = 317.25mg/kg

- bw

RQ for daily acute exposure for three applications, p eak exposure number: RQ = 10.94 /3 17.25 =

0.03

.

An R Q of 0.03 does not exceed the acute LOC of 0.1; consequently a “no effect” determination is concluded for the whooping crane.

DCSA Assessment for Whooping Crane consuming prey that had previously consumed soybean forage

EFED considered DCSA residues in arthropods to be the maximum measured DCSA residues from broadleaf plants, modified by the Kenaga nomogram relationship between broadleaf plant and arthropods as a conservative pesticide load in the prey base. This is cons idered a conservative approach as the

estimated residues in arthropods are higher than for the other likely dietary items and 100% of the crane’s
diet would be considered to consist of exposed arthropods feeding on dicamba

- tolerant soybean plants

that had the highest measured DCSA residues. Alternative terrestrial vertebrate prey and agricultural grains are expected to have lower residues than those predicted for arthropods. A biologically representative refinement to the screening assessment follows:

Field metabolic rate kcal/day = 1.146(5826) 0.749 = 757.6 kcal/day (USEPA 1993, body weight Dunning 1984)

Mass of prey consumed per day = 757.6 kcal/day/(1.7 kcal/gX0.72 AE) = 619 g/day

Mass of DCSA in insect diet 42.5 mg/kg

- b w (conservative assumption o f Kenaga nomogram relationship between arthropod residues and broadleaf plant tissue residues based on 61.1 mg/kg maximum value from empirical data for soybean forage)

Mass of D CSA in daily diet mg = 619 g/day X 42.5 mg DCSA/kg bird prey X 0.001 = 26.31

m g/day

Daily dose in crane = 26.31 mg D CSA /day/5.826 kg = 4.52 mg/kg

- bw/day

Avian Chronic Endpoint of 695 mg/kg

- diet (from mallard duck study for parent dicamba) modified by ratio of parent dicamba to metabolite D CSA from chronic rat studies (17 x) results in

Avian chronic NOAEC of 40.88 mg/kg

- diet.

RQ for chronic exposure: RQ = 4.52/40.88 = 0.1111 An RQ of 0.11 does not exceed the chronic LOC of 1.0 ; consequently a “no effect” determination is concluded for the whooping crane.

Mississippi sandhill crane

Sandhill cranes are known to feed on farms nearby the Mississippi Sandhill Crane National Wildlife Refuge that they inhabit (USFWS, 1991). Cranes feed on adult and larval insects, earthworms, crayfish, small reptiles, amphibians, roots, tubers, seeds, nu ts, fruits and leaves. EFED considered the upper bound

T

- REX predicted concentrations of DGA expected to be found on arthropods as a conservative pesticide load in the prey base. This is considered a conservative approach as modeled residues in arthropods are higher than for the other likely dietary items and 100% of the crane’s diet would be considered to consist

of exposed arthropods receiving the upper bound Kenaga nomogram dica mba residues from the spray application. Alternative terrestrial vertebrate prey are expected to have lower residues than those predicted for arthropods. A biologically representative refinement to the screening assessment follows:

Field metabolic rate kcal/day = 1.146(2500) 0.749 = 402.01 kcal/day (USEPA 1993, body weight Dunning 1984)

Mass of prey consumed per day = 402.01 kcal/day/(1.7 kcal/gX0.72 AE) = 328.44 g/day

M ass of DGA in insect diet 102.99 mg/kg

- w w from T

- REX run

Mass of DGA in daily diet mg = 328.44 g/day X 102.99 mg DGA/kg bird prey X 0.001 = 33.82 mg/day

Daily dose in crane = 33.82 mg DGA/day/2.5 kg = 13.53 mg/kg

- bw/day

Scaling the acute toxicity endpoint by bodyweight (per T

- REX methodology), the acute oral toxicity value for the cran e is:

Crane LD50 mg/kg

- bw = 188 mg/kg

- bw (2500/178) (1.15

- 1) = 279.44 mg/kg

- bw

RQ for daily acute exposure for three applications, p eak exposure number: RQ = 13.53 /279.44 =

0.05.

An RQ of 0.05 is less than the acute LOC of 0.1; consequently a “no effect ” determination is concluded for the Mississippi sandhill crane.

DCSA Assessment for Mississippi sandhill crane consuming prey that had previously fed on soybean forage

EFED considered DCSA residues in arthropods to be the maximum measured DCSA residues from broadleaf plants, modified by the Kenaga nomogram relationship between broadleaf plant and arthropods as a conservative pesticide load in the prey base. This is considered a conservative approach as the estimated residues in arthropods are higher tha n for the other likely dietary items and 100% of the crane’s

diet would be considered to consist of exposed arthropods feeding on dicamba

- tolerant soybean plants12 that had the highest measured DCSA residues. Alternative terrestrial vertebrate prey and agric ultural grains are expected to have lower residues than those predicted for arthropods. A biologically representative refinement to the screening assessment follows:

Field metabolic rate kcal/day = 1.146(2500) 0.749 = 402.01 kcal/day (USEPA 1993, body weight Dunning 1984)

Mass of prey consumed per day = 402.01 kcal/day/(1.7 kcal/gX0.72 AE) = 328.44 g/day

Mass of DCSA in insect diet 42.5 mg/kg

- b w (conservative assumption of Kenaga nomogram relationship between arthropod residues and broadleaf plant tis sue residues based on 61.1 mg/kg maximum value from empirical data for soybean forage)

Mass of DCSA in daily diet mg = 328.44 g/day X 42.5 mg DCSA/kg bird prey X 0.001 = 13.96 mg/day

Daily dose in crane = 13.96 mg DGA/day/2.5 kg = 5.58 mg/kg

- bw/day

Avia n Chronic Endpoint of 695 mg/kg

- diet (from mallard duck study for parent dicamba) modified by ratio of parent dicamba to metabolite DCSA from chronic rat studies ( 17 x) results in

Avian chronic NOAEC of 40.88 mg/kg

- diet.

RQ for chronic exposure: = 5.58/ 40 .88 = 0. 14

.

An RQ of 0. 14 does not exceed the chronic LOC of 1 .0 ; consequently a “no effect”

determination is conc luded for the Mississippi sandhill crane

Lesser prairie chicken

T he lesser prairie chicken makes use of agricultural fields at specific times of the year. However, as explained below, all available lines of evidence indicate the use of cotton and soy bean fields is limited temporally and that the agricultural field is no t an ideal habitat for the species because conversion of rangelands to cropland has reduced lesser prairie

- chicken populations greatly since the early 1900’s (Giesen 1998). An analysis of exposure potential for dicamba DGA use and lesser prairie chickens

focused on the seasonal use of soy bean and cotton fields by the birds as well as the likely food consumption during those periods.

Available information suggests that the birds do not use agricultural fields during the nesting and rearing cycle. Nesting lesser prairie chickens have been observed to establish nest sites deep within native prairie habitat and similar grass land that affords adequate cover and an understory that allows the young to move. Within these areas, nesting sites are observed to be situated far from edge areas (Jamison, 2000 and Hagen et al. 2007). A review of nesting and brood rearing habitat studies indicate s that hens nest in tall, residual grasses or under shrubs in native pasture avoiding shortgrass habitats and cultivated field s and transition to habitats for rearing brood that can be described as areas with abundant bare ground and approximately 25% canopy cover of shrubs, forbs, or grasses <30 cm in height (Jamison, 2000). In

Jamison’s review of almost a dozen studies of nesti ng and brood rearing habitat, cotton and soy fields are not included as habitat used by the birds. Similarly, spring and summer foraging habitat has been13 summarized as including grasses and forbs less than 80 cm in height (Jamison, 2000). In all studies of spring and summer habitat there is no inclusion of cotton or soy bean as a cover type utilized by the birds during nesting, brood rearing or foraging.

In contrast to the spring and summer months, the lesser prairie chicken in Finney County of southweste rn Kansas has been observed commonly foraging in agricultural fields such as harvested fields of irrigated corn during fall and winter (Jamison, 2000) and this pattern has been confirmed by a radiotelemetry study (Salter et al. 2005). Rob and Schroeder (2 005) report similar use of soybean fields by the birds as a fall and winter source of seed and Jamison (2000) cited 17 studies reporting the use of sorghum, corn and other grain fields as fall and winter foraging habitat in areas adjacent to prairie chicke n grassland habitat. This utilization of cropland during the fall and winter months for the present waste grain is further supported by Jamison et al. (2002) in their review of 25 habitat studies for the lesser prairie chicken (summarized in Appendix 5 ). Despite cropland comprising a cover type in many of these studies, observations of its actual use are confined to the fall and winter months and consumption of waste grain. The available information indicates that the lesser prairie chicken is attracted t o corn and soy bean fields in the fall and winter months, where the birds exploit waste seed as an important over

- wintering food source.

Based on the reports of over two dozen studies spanning multiple sites across the less er prairie chicken

established ra nge, it is reasonable to expect that utilization of co tton and soy bean by lesser prairie chickens occurs during the fall and winter months and is associated with the consumption of waste grain and seed in the fields. However, it is unlikely, given the tox ic gossypol content of cotton seed, that the plant provides similar resources as corn and soybean for the bird. This is supported by the position of Timmer (2012) which states that cotton is not considered habitat for this species. Consequently, the

expo sure refinement for the labeled dicamba DGA product use on soy bean and cotton should focus on the consumption of soybean seeds. This may still be considered conservative as 100% of the chicken’s diet

would be considered to consist of exposed seed receiving the upper bound Kenaga nomogram dicamba

residues from the spray application. A biologically representative refinement to the screening assessment
follows:

Field metabolic rate kcal/day = 1.146(730) 0.749 = 159.89 kcal/day (USEPA 1993, body weight The Birds of North America, No. 364, 1998)

Mass of seed consumed per day = 159.89 kcal/day/(4.6 kcal/gX0.59 AE) = 58.91 g/day

Mass of DGA in seed diet 16.43 mg/kg

- w w from T

- REX run

Mass of DGA in dai ly diet mg = 58.91 g/day X 16.43 mg DGA/kg bird prey X 0.001 = 0.97 mg/day

Daily dose in chicken = 0.97 mg DGA/day/0.73 kg = 1.33 mg/kg

- bw/day

Scaling the acute toxicity endpoint by bodyweight (per T

- REX methodology), the acute oral toxicity value for the chicken is:

Chicken LD50 mg/kg

- bw = 188 mg/k g

- bw (737/178) (1.15

- 1) = 232.32 mg/kg

- bw14 RQ for daily acute exposure for three applications, peak exposure number: RQ = 1.33 /232.66 =

0.01.

An RQ of 0.01 does not exceed the acute LOC of 0.1; consequently EPA make s a “no effect” determination for the lesser prairie chicken.

DCSA Assessment for lesser prairie chicken consuming soybean seeds

As above, the exposure for DCSA residues in soy bean and cotton should focus on the consumption of soybean seeds. This may still be considered conservative as 100% of the chicken’s diet would be

considered to consist of exposed seed receiving maximum measured residues in soybean seed. A biologically representative refinement to the screening assessment follows:

F ield metabolic rate kcal/day = 1.146(730) 0.749 = 159.89 kcal/day (USEPA 1993, body weight The Birds of North America, No. 364, 1998)

Mass of seed consumed per day = 159.89 kcal/day/(4.6 kcal/gX0.59 AE) = 58.91 g/day

Mass of DCSA in seed diet 0.44 mg/kg

- w w (max residues from empirical data on dicamba

tolerant soybean seed).

Mass of DCSA in dai ly diet mg = 58.91 g/day X 0.44 mg DCSA/kg bird prey X 0.001 = 0.026 mg/day

Da ily dose in chicken = 0.026 mg DCSA /day/0.73 kg = 0.036 mg/kg

- bw/day

Avian Chronic Endpoint of 695 mg/kg

- diet (from mallard duck study for parent dicamba) modified by ratio of parent dicamba to metabolite DCSA from chronic rat studies (34x) results in

Avian chronic NOAEC of 40.88 mg/kg

- diet.

RQ for chronic exposure for thr ee applications, peak exposure number: RQ = 0.036/ 40.88 =

< 0.0 1

.

An RQ of < 0.0 1 does not exceed the chronic LOC of 1 .0 ; consequently a “no effect”

determination is conc luded for the lesser prairie chicken

.



### Reptiles and amphibians

Using birds as a surrogate for reptiles and terrestrial

- phase amphibians , consistent with the Overview document (USEPA, 2004)

, t he screening level assessment suggests that reptiles and terrestrial

- phase amphibians could be at risk of effects from acute exposures to dicamba DGA or chronic exposures to

DCSA on treated fields. Of the reptile and amphibian species identified as potentially at risk in the sixteen states, one reptile is reasonably expected to occur on treated soybean and cotton fiel ds. Therefore, species specific biological information and dicamba DGA use patterns were considered in more depth to further refine the assessment and effects determinations for that species.15 Gopher tortoise

The gopher tortoise inhabits droughty, deep sand ridges, xeric communities, originally longleaf pine

scrub oak, and may also be found along fence rows, field edges, power lines, and in pastures (USFWS, 1990). The tortoise feeds on plant material, such as leaves and grass. EFED considers the maximum T

REX predicted concentrations of DGA expected to be found on short grass as a conservative pesticide load in the dietary items. This is considered conservative as it assumes 100% of the tortoise’s diet is exposed short grass (for which modeled T

- REX res idues are higher than any other dietary item) receiving the upper bound Kenaga nomogram dicamba residues from the spray application. A biologically representative refinement to the screening assessment follows:

Field metabolic rate kcal/day = 0.019(4500) 0. 841 = 22.44 kcal/day (USEPA 1993)

Mass of soybean plants consumed per day = 22.44 kcal/day/(1.3 kcal/gX0.47 AE) = 36.73 g/day

Mass o f DGA in short grass diet 262.94 mg/kg

- w w from T

- REX run
Mass of DGA in dail y diet mg = 36.73 g/day X 262.94 mg DGA/ kg tor toise prey X 0.001 = 9.66 mg/day

Daily dose in tortoise = 9.66 mg DGA/day/4.5 kg = 2.15 mg/kg

- bw/day

Appropriate scaling factors are not available for reptiles and amphibians so the acute toxicity value for the bobwhite quail (most sensitive avian specie s for which acute data are available)
serves as a surrogate (USEPA, 2004) toxicity value for the tortoise:

Tortoise LD50 mg/kg

- bw = 188 mg/kg

- bw RQ for daily acute exposure for three applications, peak exposure number: RQ = 2.15 /188 =

0.01.

An RQ of 0.01 less than the acute LOC of 0.1; consequently a “no effect” determination is concluded for the gopher tortoise.

DCSA Assessment for gopher tortoise consuming soybean forage

As above, t he tortoise feeds on plant material, such as leaves and grass. EFED considers the maximum

measured D CSA residues in soybean tissue as a conservative pesticide load in the dietary items. This is
considered conservative as it assumes 100% of the tortoise’s diet is exposed soybean leaves/stems, which would have the highest DCSA residues. A biologically representative refinement to the screening

assessment follows:

Field metabolic rate kcal/day = 0.019(4500) 0.841 = 22.44 kcal/day (USEPA 1993)

Mass of soybean plants consumed per day = 22.44 kcal/day/( 0.63 kc al/gX0.47 AE) = 75.79 g/day

Mass of DCSA in soybean forage (broadleaf plant) diet 61.1 mg/kg

- ww from max residues from empirical data on dicamba

- tolerant soybean forage)16 Mass of DCSA in daily diet m g = 75 .79 g/day X 61.1 mg DCSA / kg tortoise prey X 0.001 = 4.63 mg/day

Daily dose in tortoise = 4.63 mg DCSA /day/4.5 kg = 1.03 mg/kg

- bw/day

Avian Chronic Endpoint of 695 mg/kg

- diet (from mallard duck (surrogate for reptiles) for parent dicamba) modified by ratio of parent dicamba to metabolite DCSA from chronic rat studies (34x)

results in Avian chronic NOAEC of 40.88 mg/kg

- diet.

RQ for chron ic exposure : RQ = 1.03/ 40.88 = 0.0 3

.

An RQ of 0.0 3 less than the chronic LOC of 1.0 ; consequently a “no effect” determination is concluded for the gopher tortoise.



### Terrestrial Invertebrates

The screening

- level risk assessments (USEPA, 2011 D378444 and USEPA, 201 6 b D404823) did not identify risk concerns for terrestrial invertebrates . Additional analyse s in the first addendum to the soybean assessment (USEPA, 2014. D404138+) and the subsequent addendum issued concurrently with this ESA assessment ( USEPA, 2016 a ) indicate that using a screening approach and given the available empirical toxicological data for terrestrial invertebrates showing that dicamba is practically non

- toxic to honey bees, acute contact (from exposure to direct sprays of dicamba) and acute dietary (from exposure to dicamba residues in pollen and nectar) risks are not anticipated ( i.e. acute oral and dietary exposures were below LOCs) to arthropods under the proposed use patterns for dicamba on tolerant soybean and cotton. Though the chronic toxicity of dicamba to adult and larval honey bees is more uncertain, EPA’ s analysis from the concurrent soybean addendum and cotton assessment u sing chronic data for other invertebrates ( i.e. daphnids) also indicates that chronic toxicity to h oney bees and other terrestrial invertebrates is anticipated to be low. No other data has been submitted to the Agency for dicamba’s toxicity to other arthropods.

No data is available for the acute or chronic toxicity of dicamba’s degradate DCSA to hon ey bees or other pollinators

. Although EFED used the toxicity differential between the chronic mammalian studies with dicamba and DCSA to estimate a chronic endpoint for avian organisms, such an approach is not considered appropriate for terrestrial organi sms given the greater differences in species biology between arthropod taxa compared to birds and mammals. However, based on the available data including the low
DCSA residues measured in dicamba

- tolerant seeds (max measured residue of 0.440 ppm), exposures to honey bees and other pollinators from DCSA residues in pollen and nectar of dicamba

- tolerant soybean are anticipated to be low.

Despite the adden dum and screening

- level conclusions that direct risk from dicamba DGA to terrestrial

invertebrates is not anticipated

, EPA investigated whether there were any arthropod species on treated soybean and cotton fields that might be indirectly impacted by the e ffect of dicamba on plants on the

treated field. One arthropod is reasonably expected to occur on treated soybean and cotton fields. Therefore, species specific habitat information and dicamba DGA use patterns were considered in more depth to further ref ine the assessment and effects determinations for that species.17 American burying beetle

Habitat use and dependencies were explored to determine if any effects on plants would indirectly affect the burying beetle. Except where noted, the information wa s sourced from the Recovery Plan for the species (USFWS, 1991). The American burying beetle is a carnivorous species. Adults feed on a variety of carrion as well as live insects. The larvae are reared on cached (buried) carrion. Consequently, any

effec t of dicamba DGA would be mediated through the availability of vegetative cover for the species because direct toxic effects are not expected, and plants do not constitute a necessary food component. Variable habitat and wide soil types make its habitat d ifficult to describe in anything other than broad

terms.

The species exhibits broad vegetation tolerances (from large mowed and grazed fields to dense shrub thickets), though natural habitat may be mature forests. The species has been recorded in grassla nd, old field shrubland, and hardwood forests. For example, the Block Island population (Rhode Island) occurs on glacial moraine dominated by maritime scrub

- shrub community. Plant species include bayberry, shadbush, goldenrod, and various non

- native plan ts. Oklahoma habitats vary from deciduous oak

- hickory and coniferous forests atop ridges or hillsides to deciduous riparian corridors and pasturelands on valley
floors.

Based on the available data, there are no direct toxicological effects to the buryi ng beetle. Likely, t he only potential mechanism for an indirect effect from dicamba would be a reduction in cover provided by plants. The Recovery Plan (USFWS 1991) indicates that vegetative structure and soil types are unlikely to be limiting factors fo r the burying beetle given its broad historical geographic range. Furthermore, the apparent persistence of the beetle on Block Island suggests broad vegetation (landscape) tolerances. Given that applications of dicamba DGA will occur when the crop is int act, the field is expected to maintain sufficient vegetative cover for the burying beetle. Consequently, a “no effect” determination is concluded for the American burying beetle.



### Terrestrial Plants

The screening level risk assessment s howed that dicot plant species, but not monocots, would be at risk of adverse effects from dicamba applications. Of the terrestrial plant species identified as potentially at risk in the sixteen states, one plant species is reasonably expected to occur on treated soybean and cotton

fields

. Spring Creek Bladderpod

Dicamba is highly toxic to broadleaf plant species (most sensitive NOAEC of 0.000261 lbs a.i./A for non

tolerant soybean) and given a maximum single application rate of 1.0 lbs a.i./A, it is assumed that any

dicot s on the field at the time of application would be considered to be at risk. The Spring Creek bladderpod (a dicot in the B rassicaceae family), is found in northern Wilson County, Tennessee in the watersheds of Spring Creek, Bartons Creek, and Cedar Creek. It is located primarily in the floodplain, in agricultural fields, as well as pastures, glades, and disturbed areas. It is found mainly on newly disturbed sites and requires some degree of annual disturbance to complete its lifecycle (USFWS 2006).

This species is a winter annual that “germinates between September and early October, overwinters as a small rosette of leaves, and fully develops and flowers the following spring. Full sun is required for18 optimum growth. Flowering usually occurs in March and April. The fruit splits open upon maturity in late April and early May, and the enclosed seeds are dispersed and lie dormant until autumn,” when the cycle starts over again (USFWS, 2006). “If conditions are not suitable for germination the following fal l, the seeds can remain dormant (but viable) for several years” (USFWS 1996).

It is likely that the species is in flowering stage when dicamba DGA is applied to soybean and cotton fields in the early season. Consequently, EPA make s a “may effect, likely t o adversely affect”

determination for the Spring Creek bladderpod

.



### Mammals

The screening

- level assessment s indicated that acute risk to mammals was not expected as no acute RQs exceeded the Agency’s LOC (0.1) for acute risk (USEPA 2011. D378444, p. 15)

. However, the soybean screening

- level assessment (USEPA, 2011) indicated that mammals could be at reproductive risk from chronic exposures to dicamba DGA on treated fields , though the cotton screening level and concurrently issued soybean addendum (USEPA, 2016 a and USEPA, 2016b ) indicated that chronic exposures to dicamba DGA would be below the chronic LOC (1.0). This difference is due to soybean screening level risk assessment’s use of a chronic endpoint from the rat 2

- generation study (MRID 43137101), o f 45 mg/kg

- bw for the NOAEL, based on decreased pup weight at 136 mg/kg

- bw compared to the concurrent controls. HED recently reanalyzed the data from this study ( USEPA, 201 6 c ; D 431873 ) in comparison to the historical control database range and determined that the NOAEL and LOAEL should be raised to 136 and 450 mg/kg

- bw, respectively, as pup weights in each generation in the 136 mg/kg

- bw treatment group were within the historical control range and above the historical control mean for the F1, F2A and F2B

ge nerations. Therefore, the cotton screening level risk assessment, the concurrently issued soybean addendum and this refined endangered species risk assessment use this revised NOAEL for dicamba
DGA salt

.

The concurrently issued soybean addendum did ind icate that chronic exposures to dicamba’s metabolite, DCSA, residues in soybean could be a concern, while the screening level cotton assessment indicated that chronic exposures to DCSA residues in cotton would not exceed the Agency’s LOC for chronic risk. Therefore, EPA only conducted a refined assessment for chronic exposures to DCSA in soybeans for listed species that could reasonably be expected to occur on treated soybean fields.

Of the mammalian species identified as potentially a t risk in the sixteen states

, four are reasonably expected to occur on treated soybean fields . S pecies specific biological information and dicamba DGA use patterns were considered in more depth to further refine the assessment and effects determinations for

th e four sp ecies potentially expected to occur on treated soybean fields

.

Gray Wolf

According the USFWS Recovery Plan (USFWS 1982), g ray w olves are habitat generalists that live throughout the northern hemisphere. Gray wolves are a carnivorous species that typically feed on ungulate species, such as deer. While not likely to feed on agricultural fields themselves, the primary prey species of the gray wolf may be expected to feed on plant material within the field during the period of applications. Based on this information, it is reasonable to conclude that the gray wolf may be exposed to dicamba DGA residues in prey. A biologically representative modification to the screening assessment19 follows:

T he first step in the refinement proc ess is to calculate dicamba DGA residues in the prey species. Using the conservative assumptions that the prey species is represented by a 1000 g mammal that feeds exclusively on exposed short grass receiving the upper bound Kenaga residues from the spray application

of dicamba , EFED calculated the residues based on the following allometric equations (USEPA, 1993) :

1000 g mammal prey ingestion rate (dry) = 0.621(1000) 0.564 =30.56 g /day

1000 g mammal prey ingestion rate (wet) = 30.56/0.2 = 152.8 g/day

Dicamba DGA residue in prey eating short grass from T

- REX = 262.94 mg dicamba DGA/kg

food (ww) x 0.15 28 kg food/kg

- bw = 4 0.17 mg/kg

- bw/day

The next step is to calculate the expected daily dose for a typical 17.7 kg (17700 g) gray wolf , the adjusted NOAEL v alue and the chronic dose

- based RQ for the gray wolf based on the following allometric equations:

Food Intake (wet) = (0.235(17700) 0.822 )/(1

- 0.69)/1000 = 2.35 kg wet /day

Dose

- based EEC in wolf eating small mammal = 40.17 mg/kg wet x 2.35/(17700/1000) = 5.3 3 mg/kg

- bw/day

Adjusted NOAEL = 136 mg/kg

- bw (350/17700) (0.25) = 51

. 00 mg/kw

- bw

Chronic Dose

- Based RQ = 5.33 / 51.00 = 0. 10

An RQ of 0. 10 does not exceed the chronic LOC of 1.0; consequently a “no effect” determination is concluded for the Gray Wolf.

DCSA Assessment for Gray Wolf consuming prey that had previously consumed soybean forage

The first step in the refinement process is to calculate DCSA residues in the prey species. Using the assumption that the prey species is represented by a 1000 g mammal an d the conservative assumptions that the prey animal feeds exclusively on exposed soybean forage containing the maximum measured residues of 61.1 ppm, EFED calculated the residues based on the following allometric equations (USEPA, 1993):

1000 g mammal pr ey ingestion rate (dry) = 0.621(1000) 0.564 =30.56 g /day

1000 g mammal prey ingestion rate (wet) = 30.56/0.2 = 152.8 g/day

DCSA residue in prey eating soybean forage/hay 61 .1 mg DCSA/kg

- food (ww) x 0.1528 kg food/kg

- bw = 9.34 mg/kg

- bw/day

The next step is to calculate the expected daily dose for a typical 17.7 kg (17700 g) gray wolf, the adjusted NOAEL value and the chronic dose

- based RQ for the gray wolf based on the following allometric equations:

Food Intake (wet) = (0.235(17700) 0.822 )/(1

- 0.69)/1000 = 2.35 kg wet/day20 Dose

- based EEC in wolf eating small mammal= 9.47 mg/kg wet x 2.35/(17700/1000) = 1.24 mg/kg

- bw/day

Adjusted NOAEL = 8 mg/kg

- bw (350/17700) (0.25) = 3.00 mg/kw

- bw

Chronic Dose

- Based RQ = 1.25/ 3.00 = 0. 41

An RQ of 0. 41 does not exceed the chronic LOC of 1.0; consequently a “no effect” determination is concluded for the Gray Wolf.

Indiana Bat

The USFWS Recovery Plan (USFWS 2007) states that most Indiana bat maternity colonies have been found in agricultural areas with fragmented forests. According to the Recovery Plan there are some 235,000 individual bats within the hibernacula of the s t ates subject to the proposed Federal action. The Recovery Plan also indicates that the sex ratio of males to females is roughly equa l. Therefore, there are approximately 117,500 female bats within the hibernacula that are found in the states in this proposed

Federal action.

While bats may be associated with forested areas proximal to agricultural land, data on the extent and possibil ity of foraging over agricultural fields is limited. The Recovery Plan states that observations of light

- tagged animals and bats marked with reflective bands indicate that Indiana bats typically forage in

closed to semi

- open forested habitats and forest e dges and that radio

- tracking studies of adult males, adult females, and juveniles consistently indicate that foraging occurs preferentially in wooded areas, although type of forest varies with individual studies. The Recovery Plan states that Indiana bats hunt primarily around, not within, the canopy of trees, but they occasionally descend to sub

- canopy and shrub layers. However, the Recovery Plan also states that Indiana bats have been caught, observed, and radio

- tracked foraging in open habitats; analys es of habitats used by radio

- tracked adult females while foraging versus those habitats available for foraging have been performed in two states.

In Illinois, floodplain forest was the most preferred habitat, followed by ponds, old fields, row crops,

up land woods, and pastures. In Indiana, woodlands were used more often than areas of agriculture, low

density residential housing, and open water, and this latter group of habitats was used more than pastures, parkland, and heavily urbanized sites. Old fie lds and agricultural areas seemed important in both studies, but bats likely were foraging most often along forest

- field edges, rather than in the interior of fields, although errors inherent in determining the position of a rapidly moving animal through t elemetry made it impossible to verify this. The Recovery Plan remarks that visual observations suggest that foraging over open fields or bodies of water, more than 50 m (150 ft) from a forest edge, does occur, although less commonly than in forested sites or along edges. The Recovery Plan places feeding within agriculturally managed areas of lesser significance than forested areas and their immediate edges.

The Recovery Plan reports that in Illinois, 67 percent of the land near one colony was agricultu ral, and in Michigan, land cover consisted of 55 percent agricultural land. Recovery Plan discussion of available proportions of different land covers encompassing foraging habitat are limited, but the available literature suggests that foraging in agricu ltural lands relative to other habitats is variable with study. Sparks et al. (2005), in radio

- tracking bats in Indiana, found that the number of telemetry observations of foraging was closely associated with the availability of agricultural land within t he home range of the species and accounted for approximately 35 percent of observations. In contrast, Murray and Kurta (2004) radio

-21 tracked Indiana bats in Michigan and found that, despite the study area being over 60 percent agricultural land, the habita ts frequented by 12 of the 13 monitored bats was forest land. It should be noted that exact frequencies could not be established because triangulation of individual observation points precluded exact locations in different cover types with any confidence. Menzel et al. (2005) radio

- tracked bats in Illinois and found that bats foraged significantly closer to forest roads and riparian habitats than agricultural lands. A ranking of the foraging use of habitats suggested the following order of preference by bats in this study: roads> forests> riparian areas> grasslands>agricultural lands.

The Recovery Plan indicates that the prey base for the Indiana bat consists primarily of flying insects, with only a very small amount of spiders (presumably ballooning individuals) included in the diet. Four orders of insects contribute most to the diet: Coleoptera, Diptera, Lepidoptera, and Trichoptera. The Recovery Plan concludes that the diet of Indiana bats, to a large degree, may reflect availability of preferred types of insects within the foraging areas that the bats happen to be using, again suggesting that they are selective opportunists.

Given the above information, it is reasonable to conclude that Indiana bats make use of agricultural land

as a source of prey and can reasonably be expected to roost in patches of fragmented forest that are adjacent to co tton and soybean fields. They are opportunistic foragers and are expected to forage over many different land covers, including agricultural land, on a broa d range of insects/arthropods. A survey

of insect populations in agricultural fields reveals a variety of flying, foliage and ground dwelling invertebrates comprising a large number of taxonomic groups that could provide on

- field prey sources for

bats for aging over these areas. However, the extent of foraging over agricultural land is expected to be less than the degree of foraging around the canopies of forested areas.

Initial screening level risk assessment results for the Indiana bat were refine d to account for the bat’s biology and contained the conservative assumption that bats would feed exclusively on exposed insects/arthropods having received the upper bound Kenaga residues from the spray application of

dicamba

.

Field metabolic rate kcal/day = 0.6167(5.4) 0.862 = 2.64 kcal/day (USEPA 1993, body weight reflects screening assumption for the Indiana bat)

Mass of prey consumed per day = 2.64 kcal/day /( 1.7 kcal/g ww X 0.87AE)= 1.78 g/day

Mass of DGA in insect diet 102.99 mg/kg

- ww from T

- REX run

Ma ss of DGA in daily diet = 1.78 g/day X 102.99 mg DGA /kg

- ww mammal prey X 0.001 = 0. 18 mg/day

Daily dose in bat = 0. 18 mg DGA /day/0.0054 = 33.95 mg/kg

- bw/day

Indiana Bat NOAEL mg/kg

- bw /day = 136 mg/kg

- bw ( 350 / 5.4 ) ( 0.25 ) = 385.88 mg/kg

- bw RQ for chronic exposure for three applications, peak exposure number: RQ = 33.95 / 385.88 = 0. 09

.

An RQ of 0. 09 does not exceed the chronic LOC of 1.0; consequently a “no effect”
determination is concluded for the Indiana Bat.22 DCSA Assessment for Indiana bat consuming prey that had previously consumed soybean forage

Initial screening level risk assessment results for the Indiana bat were refine d to account for the bat’s biology and contained the conservative assumption that bats would feed exclusively on exposed

insects /arthropods feeding on dicamba

- tolerant soybean plan t tissues that had the highest measured DCSA

residues

.

Field metabolic rate kcal/day = 0.6167(5.4) 0.862 = 2.64 kcal/day (USEPA 1993, body weight reflects screening assumption for the Indiana bat)

Mass of prey consumed per day = 2.64 kcal/day /( 1.7 kcal/g ww X 0.87AE)= 1.78 g/day

Mass of D CSA in insect diet 42.5 m g/kg

- ww (conservative assumption of Kenaga nomogram relationship between arthropod residues and broadleaf plant tissue residues based on 61.1 m g/kg maximum value from empirical data for soybean forage)

Mass of D CS A in daily diet = 1.78 g/day X 42.5 mg DCSA /kg

- ww insect prey X 0.001 = 0. 076 mg/day

Daily dose in bat = 0. 076 mg DCSA /day/0.0054 kg = 14.01 mg/kg

- bw/day

Indiana Bat NOAEL mg/kg

- bw/ day = 8 mg/kg

- bw (350/5.4) (0.25) = 22

. 70 mg/kg

- bw

RQ for chronic exposure : RQ = 8.00 / 22.70 = 0.62

An RQ of 0.62 does not exceed s the chronic LOC of 1.0; consequently a “ no effect ”
determination is concluded for the Indiana Bat.

Ozark Bat

The Ozark big

- eared bat inhabits caves and cliffs that can be found in large blocks of forest to small forest tracts interspersed with open areas. Land use of surrounding areas does not appear to influence location of occupied maternity caves and hibernacu la. The Recovery Plan (USFWS, 1995) indicates that the prey base for the Ozark bat consists primarily of lepidopterans and that edge habitat between forested and open areas is the preferred foraging area. Open areas allow for easy foraging because bats ar e not obstructed by branches while pursuing prey and are able to discriminate insects at greater distances. Based on this information, the Ozark bat cannot be precluded from foraging on agricultural fields.

Initial screening level risk assessment results for the Ozark bat were refined to account for the bat’s biology and contained the conservative assumption that bats would feed exclusively on exposed insects having received the upper bound Kenaga residues from the spray application of dicamba

.

Field metabolic rate kcal/day = 0.6167(7.0) 0.862 = 3.30kcal/day (USEPA 1993, body weight reflects screening assumption for the Ozark bat)

Mass of prey consumed per day = 3.30 kcal/day /( 1.7 kcal/g ww X 0.87AE)= 2.23 g/day

M ass of DGA in insect diet 102.99 mg/k g

- ww from T

- REX run23 Mass of DGA in daily diet = 2.23 g/day X 102.99 mg DGA/kg

- ww mammal prey X 0.001 = 0. 23 mg/day

Daily dose in bat = 0.23 mg DGA/day/0.007 = 32.81 mg/kg

- bw/day

Ozark Bat NOAEL mg/kg

- bw/day = 136 mg/kg

- bw (350/7.0) (0.25) = 361.64 mg/kg

- bw

RQ for chronic exposure for three applications, p eak exposure number: RQ = 32.81 / 361.64 = 0. 09

.

An RQ of 0. 09 does not exceed the chronic LOC of 1.0; consequently a “no effect”
determination is concluded for the Ozark Bat.

DCSA Assessment for Ozark Bat consuming prey that had previously consumed soybean forage

Initial screening level risk asse ssment results for the Oza rk bat were refine d to account for the bat’s biology and contained the conservative assumption that bats would feed exclusively on exposed insects/arthropods feeding on dicamba

- tolerant soybean plant tissues that had the highest measured DCSA

residues.

Field metabolic rate kcal/day = 0.6167(7.0) 0.862 = 3.30kcal/day (USEPA 1993, body weight reflects screening assumption for the Ozark b at)

Mass of prey consumed per day = 3.30 kcal/day /( 1.7 kcal/g ww X 0.87AE)= 2.23 g/day

Mass of DCSA in insect diet 42.5 mg/kg

- ww (conservative assumption of Kenaga nomogram relationship between arthropod residues and broadleaf plant tissue residues bas ed on 61.1 mg/kg maximum value from empirical data for soybean forage)

Mass of DCSA in daily diet = 2.23 g/day X 42.5 mg DCSA /k g

- ww mammal prey X 0.001 =

0.095 mg/day

Daily dose in bat = 0.095 mg DCSA /day/0.007 = 13.54 mg/kg

- bw/day

Ozark Bat NOAEL mg/kg

- bw/day = 8 mg/kg

- bw (350/7.0) (0.25) = 21.27 mg/kg

- bw

RQ for chronic exposure for three applications, p eak exposure number: RQ = 13.54 / 21.27 = 0.64

An RQ of 0.64 does not exceed the chronic LOC of 1.0; consequently a “ no effect ”

determination is concluded for the Ozark Bat.

Louisiana Black Bear

The Louisiana black bear inhabits bottomland hardwood forest communities, brackish and freshwater marshes, salt domes, wooded spoil levees along canals and bayous, and agricultural fields. Remoteness is an important spatial feature based on forest tract size and presence of roads (US FWS Recovery Plan, 1995). The Recovery Plan further describes black bears as opportunistic omnivores with their diet being24 determined by food availability and season. Diet in cludes: grasses, sedges, invertebrates (primarily beetles, grubs, and insects), carrion, garbage, and agricultural crops (including grain from soy bean and

corn , but consumption of cotton plant parts is unlikely ). Personal communication with Deborah Fuller of the USFWS (Fuller 2015) indicates that, by analogy to North Carolina black bears, Louisiana black bears can be expected to feed on cotton boll pests as well as grubs in the fields. The other potential attractive

food source in these fields would be so ybean grain

. On the basis of this information and the expectation that the modeled residues on arthropods (111.14 mg dicamba DGA/kg) would be much higher than modeled residues in soybean pods or seeds (17.74 mg dicamba DGA/kg), a refinement of the screenin g level assessment for the bear was initiated to reflect the conservative assumptions of exclusive consumption of exposed terrestrial invertebrates having received the upper bound Kenaga residues from the dicamba application in a treat ed field:

Field metabol ic rate kcal/day = 0.800 ( 92000 ) 0.8 13 = 8682.59 kcal/day (USEPA 1993, body weight reflects screening assumption for the Louisiana black bear)

Mass of prey consumed per day = 8682.59 kcal/day /(1. 7 kcal/g ww X 0. 87 AE )= 5870.58 g/day

Mass of DGA in t err estrial invertebrate diet 102.99 mg/kg

- ww from T

- REX run

Mass of DGA in daily diet = 5870.58 g/day X 102.99 mg DGA/kg

- ww mammal prey X 0.001 =

604. 6 1 mg/day

Daily dose in bear = 604.61 mg DGA/day/ 92 kg = 6.57 mg/kg

- bw/day

Louisiana Black Bear NOAEL m g/kg

- bw/day = 136 mg/kg

- bw (350/92000) (0.25) = 33.78 mg/kg

bw

RQ for chronic exposure for three applications, peak exposure number: RQ = 6.57 / 33.78 = 0. 19

.

A chronic RQ of 0. 1 9 does not exceed the chronic LOC of 1.0. C onsequently a “ no effect ”

determination is concluded for the Louisiana black bear.

DCSA Assessment for Louisiana Black Bear consuming prey that had previously consumed soybean forage

The screening level risk assessment found that DCSA residues in arthropods in cotton fields (based on the empirical residues in broadleaf plant tissues and extrapolated via the Kenaga nomogram to residues in arthropods) would not exceed any chronic levels of concern for mammals. The analysis of the Louisiana Black Bear’s recovery plan described above indicates that in soybean fields, the attractive food source in these fields would be soybean grain (seeds)

. On the basis of this information, the refinement of the soybean screening level assessment was initiated to reflect the conservative assumption of exclusive consumption of exposed soybean grain containing the maximum measured DCSA residues

.

Field met abolic rate kcal/day = 0.800(92000) 0.813 = 8682.59 kcal/day (USEPA 1993, body weight reflects screening assumption for the Louisiana black bear)25 Mass of soybean seeds consumed per day = 8682.59 kcal/day /( 0.51 kcal/g ww X 0.8 5 AE 0.43 )=

20029.0 g/day

Mass of DCSA in seed diet 0.440 mg/kg

- ww (conservative assumption using the maximum value from empirical data for soybean seeds )

Ma ss of DCSA in daily diet = 20029 g/day X 0.44 mg D CSA /kg

- ww mammal prey X 0.001 =

8.88 mg/day

Daily dose in bear = 8.8 mg DCSA /da y/92 kg = 0.10 mg/kg

- bw/day

Louisiana Black Bear NOAEL mg/kg

- bw/day = 8 mg/kg

- bw (350/92000) (0.25) = 1.99 mg/kg

- bw

RQ for chronic exposure for three applications, peak exposure number: RQ = 0.10 / 1 .99 = 0.05

A chronic RQ of 0.05 does not exceed the chronic LOC of 1.0. C onsequently a “ no effect ”

determination is concluded for the Louisiana black bear.

References

Benson, J.F. 2005. Ecology and Conservation of Loui si ana Black bears in the Tensas River Basin and Reintroduced Populations (Ma sters Thesis). Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College.

Benson, J.F. and M.J. Chamberlain 2006. Food Habits of Louisiana Black Bears ( Ursus americanus
luteolus ) in Two Subpopulations of the Tensas River Basin. The American Mid land Naturalist 156(1):118

- 127.

Canadian Wildlife Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007. International Recovery Plan for the Whooping Crane. Ottawa: Recover of Nationally Endangered Wildlife (RENEW), and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Albuquer que, New Mexico. 162 pp. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/recovery_plan/070604_v4.pdf

Dunning, J.B. 1984. Body weights of 686 species of North American birds. Western Bird Banding

Association Monograph 1.

Giesen, K. M. 1998. Lesser prairie

- chicken ( Tympanuchus pallidicinctus ). In The birds of North America, No. 364 (A. Poole and F. Gill, editors). The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Hagen, C.A., J. C. Pitman, R.J. Robel, T.M. Loughin, and R.D. Applegate. 2007. Niche Partitioning by

Lesser Prairie

- chicken Tympanuchus pallidicinctus and Ring

- necked Pheasant Phasianus colchicus in Southwestern Kansas. Wildlife Biology 13:34

- 41.

Jamison, B. E., J. A. Dechant, D. H. Johnson, L. D. Igl, C. M. Goldade, and B. R. Euliss. 2002. Effects of management practices on grassland birds: Lesser Prairie

- Chicken. Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center, Jamestown, ND. 29 pages.

Jamison, B. E. 2000. Les ser prairie

- chicken chick survival, adult survival, and habitat selection and movements of males in fragmented rangelands of southwestern Kansas. M.S. Thesis, Kansas State University, Manhattan.26 Jimenez, N. 1994. Crop Residue Study with Dicamba Formulatio ns on Grass Forage and Hay: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 480068: 128: DP/301489. Unpublished study prepared by ChemAlysis Inc.

MRID 43370701.

NAFTA, 2015 .Guidance for Evaluating and Calculating Degradation Kinetics in Environmental Media.

NAFTA Tech nical Working Group on Pesticides. http://www.epa.gov/oppfead1/international/naftatwg/guidance/degradation

- kin.pdf

Robb, L.A. and M.A. Schroeder. 2005. Lesser Prairie

- chicken. ( Tympanuchus pallidicinctus ): A Technical Conservation Assessment. Prepared for the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Project. http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/lesserprairiechicken.pdf

Salter , G.C., R.J Robel, and K.E. Kemp. 2005. Lesser Prairie

- chicken Use of Harvested Corn Fields during Fall and Winter in Southwestern Kansas. The Prairie Naturalist 37: 1

- 9.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1993. Wildlife Exposure Fact ors Handbook

EPA/600/R

- 93/187a, Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC.

USEPA, 2004. Overview of the Ecological Risk Assessment Process in the Office of Pesticide Programs, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Endangered and Threatened Speci es Effects Determinations. Office of Pesticide Programs, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances. Washington, D.C. January 23, 2004.

USEPA

, 2011. Ecological Risk Assessment for Dicamba and its Degradate, 3,6

- dichlorosalicylic acid (DCSA), for the Proposed New Use on Dicamba

- Tolerant Soybean (MON 87708). DP Barcode: 378444. Environmental Fate and Effects Division, Office of Pesticide Programs, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. March 8, 2011, Washington, D.C.

USEPA, 2013. A ddendum to the Environmental Fate and Ecological Risk Assessment for the Section 3

New Use of Dicamba

- Tolerant Soybean. DP Barcodes: 404138, 404806, 405887, 410802, 411382. Environmental Fate and Effects Division, Office of Pesticide Programs, Office of C hemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. May 20, 2013, Washington, D.C.

USEPA, 2016a. Dicamba DGA: Second Addendum to the Environmental Fate and Ecological Risk Assessment for Dicamba DGA salt and its Degradate, 3,6

- dichlorosalicylic acid (DCSA) for the Section 3

New Use on Dicamba

- Tolerant Soybean. D426789. Environmental Fate and Effects Division, Office of Pesticide Programs, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. Washington, DC. March 24,

2016

USEPA, 2016 b. Ecological Risk Assessment for Dicamba DGA Salt and its Degradate, 3,6

- dichlorosalicylic acid (DCSA), for the Propo sed New Use on Dicamba

- Tolerant Cotton (MON 87701). DP Barcodes: 404823. Environmental Fate and Effects Division, Office of Pesticide Programs, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. Washington, DC. March 24, 2016.

USEPA, 2016c. 3,6

- Diclor osalicyclic acid (DCSA): Benchmark Dose Analysis of a Reproduction Study. Health Effects Division. Office of Pesticide Programs, Washington D.C. March, 2, 2016.

D431873.27 USEPA, 201 6 d . Dicamba and Dicamba BAPMA salt: Human

- Health Risk Assessment for Proposed Section 3 New Uses on Dicamba. DP Barcodes: D378366, D402514, D402551, D404917 and D421306. Health Effects Division, Office of Pesticide Programs, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. Washington, DC. March, 2016

USEPA, 2016e. Addendum to Dicamba Diglycolamine (DGA) Salt and its Degradate, 3,6

- dichlorosalicylic acid (DCSA) Section 3 Risk Assessment: Refined Endangered Species Assessment for Proposed New Uses on Herbicide

- Tolerant Cotton and Soybean in 7 U.S. States (Alabama, Geo rgia, Kentucky, Michigan, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Texas) . D422305. Environmental Fate and Effects Division, Office of Pesticide Programs, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. Washington, DC. March 24, 2016

USEPA, 2016f. Addendu m to Dicamba Diglycolamine Salt (DGA) and its Degradate, 3,6

- dichlorosalicylic acid (DCSA) Section 3 Risk Assessment: Refined Endangered Species Assessment for Proposed New Uses on Herbicide

- Tolerant Soybean and Cotton in in 11 U.S. States: (Arizona, Color ado, Delaware, Florida, Maryland, New Mexico, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia). D425049. Environmental Fate and Effects Division, Office of Pesticide Programs, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. Washington, DC. March 24, 2016

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1982. Mexican Wolf Recovery Plan . U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Albuquerque, New Mexico. 103 pp. URL: http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/recovery_plan/820915_1.pdf

USFWS. 1990 . Gopher Tortoise Recovery Plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Jackson, Mississippi. 28 pp. URL: http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/r ecovery_plan/901226.pdf

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1991. American Burying Beetle (Nicrophorus americanus) Recovery Plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 5 . 81 pp. URL: http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/recovery_plan/910927.pdf

USFWS, 1991. Mississippi Sandhill Crane Recovery Plan. U. S . Fish and Wildlife Service, Atlanta, Georgia. 42 pp. URL: http://ecos. fws.gov/docs/recovery_plan/910906.pdf

USFWS, 1995. Louisiana Black Bear ( Ursus americanus luteolus ) Recovery Plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Southeast Region. Atlanta, Georgia. URL: http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/recovery_plan/950927.pdf

USFWS, 1995. Ozark Big

- E ared Bat Revised Recover Plan . U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 2. Tulsa, Oklahoma. URL: http://ecos.fws .gov/docs/recovery_plan/950328b.pdf

USFWS, 1996. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of Endangered Status for Lesquerella perforata (Spring Creek Bladderpod). Federal Register 61(247): 67493

— 67497. URL: http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/federal_register/fr3029.pdf

USFWS, 1996. Determination of Endangered Status for Lesquerella perforata (Spring Creek bladderpod), Final Rule. Federal Register 61(247 ): 67493

- 67497. URL: http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/federal_register/fr3029.pdf

. USFWS, 2006. Recovery Plan for Lesquerella perforata (Spring Creek Bladderpod). Atlanta, Georgia. 23 pp. URL: http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/recovery_plan/spring%20creek%20bladderpod%20rp.pdf28 USFWS, 2007. Indiana Bat ( Myotis sodalis ) Draft Recovery Plan: First Revision. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 3. Fort Snelling, Minnesota. URL: http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/recovery_plan/070416.pdf29 Appendix 1

Threatened and Endangered Species in Arkansas, Illinois, Iowa, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Wisconsin.

Animals

1. Acornshell, southern ( Epioblasma othcaloogensis )
2. Amphipod, Illinois cave ( Gammarus acherondytes )
3. Bat, gray ( Myotis grisescens )
4. Bat, Indiana ( Myotis sodalis )
5. Bat, Ozark Big

- Eared ( Corynorhinus (=plecotus) townsendii ingens )
6. Bean, Cumberland (pearlymussel) Populations ( Villosa trabalis )
7. Bean, purple ( Villosa perpurpurea )
8. Bean, rayed ( Villosa fabalis )
9. Be ar, Louisiana Black ( Ursus americanus luteolus )
10. Beatle, American Burying ( Nicrophorus americanus )
11. Blossom, green (pearlymussel) ( Epioblasma torulosa gubernaculum )
12. Blossom, tubercled (pearlymussel) ( Epioblasma torulosa torulosa )
13. Blossom, turgid (pearlymusse l) ( Epioblasma turgidula )
14. Blossom, yellow (pearlymussel) ( Epioblasma florentina florentina )
15. Butterfly, Karner blue ( Lycaeides melissa samuelis )
16. Butterfly, Mitchell's satyr ( Neonympha mitchellii mitchellii )
17. Catspaw, white (pearlymussel) ( Epioblasma obliquat a perobliqua )
18. Cavefish, Ozark ( Amblyopsis rosae )
19. Cavesnail, Tumbling Creek ( Antrobia culveri )
20. Chicken, Lesser

- Prairie ( Tympanuchus pallidicinctus )
21. Chub, slender ( Erimystax cahni )
22. Chub, spotfin ( Erimonax monachus )
23. Clubshell ( Pleurobema clava )
24. Clubshell, black ( Pleurobema curtum )
25. Clubshell, ovate ( Pleurobema perovatum )
26. Clubshell, southern ( Pleurobema decisum )
27. Combshell, Cumberlandian ( Epioblasma brevidens )
28. Combshell, southern ( Epioblasma penita )
29. Combshell, upland ( Epioblasma metastriata )
30. Crane, Mississippi Sandhill ( Grus canadensis pulla )
31. Crane, Whooping ( Grus americana )
32. Crayfish, cave ( Cambarus aculabrum )
33. Crayfish, cave ( Cambarus zophonastes )
34. Crayfish, Nashville ( Orconectes shoupi )
35. Dace, blackside ( Phoxinus cumberlandensis )
36. Dace, Laurel ( Chrosomus saylori )
37. Darter, amber ( Percina antesella )
38. Darter, bayou ( Etheostoma rubrum )
39. Darter, bluemask (=jewel) ( Etheostoma sp .)
40. Darter, boulder ( Etheostoma wapiti )
41. Darter, Cumberland ( Etheostoma susanae )
42. Darter, duskytail ( Etheostoma percnurum )30 43. Darter, leopard ( Percina pa ntherina )
44. Darter, Niangua ( Etheostoma nianguae )
45. Darter, slackwater ( Etheostoma boschungi )
46. Darter, snail Entire ( Percina tanasi )
47. Darter, yellowcheek ( Etheostoma moorei )
48. Dragonfly, Hine's emerald ( Somatochlora hineana )
49. Elktoe, Appalachian ( Alasmidonta ravene liana )
50. Elktoe, Cumberland ( Alasmidonta atropurpurea )
51. Fanshell ( Cyprogenia stegaria )
52. Fatmucket, Arkansas ( Lampsilis powellii )
53. Ferret, black

- footed ( Mustela nigripes )
54. Frog, dusky gopher ( Rana sevosa )
55. Heelsplitter, Alabama (=inflated) ( Potamilus inflatus )
56. Hellbender, Ozark ( Cryptobranchus alleganiensis bishopi )
57. Higgins eye (pearlymussel) ( Lampsilis higginsii )
58. Kidneyshell, fluted ( Ptychobranchus subtentum )
59. Kidneyshell, triangular ( Ptychobranchus greenii )
60. Lampmussel, Alabama ( Lampsilis virescens )
61. Lilliput, pa le (pearlymussel) ( Toxolasma cylindrellus )
62. Logperch, Conasauga ( Percina jenkinsi )
63. Lynx, Canada ( Lynx canadensis )
64. Madtom, chucky ( Noturus crypticus )
65. Madtom, Neosho Entire ( Noturus placidus )
66. Madtom, pygmy ( Noturus stanauli )
67. Madtom, Scioto ( Noturus trautmani )
68. Madtom, smoky ( Noturus baileyi )
69. Madtom, yellowfin ( Noturus flavipinnis )
70. Manatee, West Indian ( Trichechus manatus )
71. Mapleleaf, winged ( Quadrula fragosa )
72. Marstonia, royal (snail) ( Pyrgulopsis ogmorhaphe )
73. Moccasinshell, Alabama ( Medionidus acutissimus )
74. Moccas inshell, Coosa ( Medionidus parvulus )
75. Monkeyface, Appalachian (pearlymussel) ( Quadrula sparsa )
76. Monkeyface, Cumberland (pearlymussel) ( Quadrula intermedia )
77. Mucket, Neosho ( Lampsilis rafinesqueana )
78. Mucket, orangenacre ( Lampsilis perovalis )
79. Mucket, pink (pearl ymussel) Entire ( Lampsilis abrupta )
80. Mussel, oyster ( Epioblasma capsaeformis )
81. Mussel, scaleshell ( Leptodea leptodon )
82. Mussel, sheepnose ( Plethobasus cyphyus )
83. Mussel, snuffbox ( Epioblasma triquetra )
84. Pearlshell, Louisiana ( Margaritifera hembeli )
85. Pearlymussel, birdwing ( Lemiox rimosus )
86. Pearlymussel, cracking ( Hemistena lata )
87. Pearlymussel, Curtis ( Epioblasma florentina curtisii )
88. Pearlymussel, dromedary ( Dromus dromas )
89. Pearlymussel, littlewing ( Pegias fabula )
90. Pearlymussel, Slabside ( Pleuronaia dolabelloides )
91. Pigtoe, Cumberland ( Pleurobema gibberum )
92. Pigtoe, finerayed ( Fusconaia cuneolus )
93. Pigtoe, flat ( Pleurobema marshalli )31 94. Pigtoe, Georgia ( Pleurobema hanleyianum )
95. Pigtoe, rough ( Pleurobema plenum )
96. Pigtoe, shiny ( Fusconaia cor )
97. Pigtoe, southern ( Pleurobema georgi anum )
98. Pimpleback, orangefoot (pearlymussel) ( Plethobasus cooperianus )
99. Plover, piping except Great Lakes watershed ( Charadrius melodus )
100. Plover, piping Great Lakes watershed ( Charadrius melodus )
101. Pocketbook, fat ( Potamilus capax )
102. Pocketbook, Ouachita rock ( Ar kansia wheeleri )
103. Pocketbook, speckled ( Lampsilis streckeri )
104. Purple Cat's paw (=Purple Cat's paw pearlymussel) ( Epioblasma obliquata obliquata )
105. Rabbitsfoot ( Quadrula cylindrica cylindrica )
106. Rabbitsfoot, rough ( Quadrula cylindrica strigillata )
107. Riffleshell, no rthern ( Epioblasma torulosa rangiana )
108. Riffleshell, tan ( Epioblasma florentina walkeri (=E. walkeri ))
109. Ring pink (mussel) ( Obovaria retusa )
110. Riversnail, Anthony's ( Athearnia anthonyi )
111. Sawfish, smalltooth TX, FL ( Pristis pectinata )
112. Sculpin, grotto ( Cottus sp .)
113. Sea turtle, green ( Chelonia mydas )
114. Sea turtle, hawksbill ( Eretmochelys imbricata )
115. Sea turtle, Kemp's ridley ( Lepidochelys kempii )
116. Sea turtle, leatherback ( Dermochelys coriacea )
117. Sea turtle, loggerhead Northwest Atlantic DPS ( Caretta caretta )
118. Shiner, Arkans as River ( Notropis girardi )
119. Shiner, blue ( Cyprinella caerulea )
120. Shiner, Topeka ( Notropis topeka (=tristis) )
121. Snail, Iowa Pleistocene ( Discus macclintocki )
122. Snail, painted snake coiled forest ( Anguispira picta )
123. Snake, copperbelly water ( Nerodia erythrogaster n eglecta )
124. Spectaclecase (mussel) ( Cumberlandia monodonta )
125. Spider, spruce

- fir moss ( Microhexura montivaga )
126. Squirrel, Carolina northern flying ( Glaucomys sabrinus coloratus )
127. Stirrupshell ( Quadrula stapes )
128. Sturgeon, gulf ( Acipenser oxyrinchus desotoi )
129. Sturgeon , pallid ( Scaphirhynchus albus )
130. Tern, least interior pop. ( Sterna antillarum )
131. Tiger beetle, Salt Creek ( Cicindela nevadica lincolniana )
132. Tortoise, gopher ( Gopherus polyphemus )
133. Turtle, ringed map ( Graptemys oculifera )
134. Turtle, yellow

- blotched map ( Graptemys flavimaculata )
135. Vireo, black

- capped ( Vireo atricapilla )
136. Warbler, Kirtland’s ( Setophaga kirtlandii )
137. Wartyback, white (pearlymussel) ( Plethobasus cicatricosus )
138. Whale, finback ( Balaenoptera physalus )
139. Whale, humpback ( Megaptera novaeangliae )
140. Wolf, gray ( Canis lupus )
141. Woodpecker, red

- cockaded ( Picoides borealis )

Plants

142. Aster, decurrent false ( Boltonia decurrens )32 143. Aster, Ruth's golden ( Pityopsis ruthii )
144. Avens, spreading ( Geum radiatum )
145. bladderpod, Missouri ( Physaria filiformis )
146. Bladderpod, Spring Creek ( Lesquerell a perforata )
147. Bluet, Roan Mountain ( Hedyotis purpurea var. montana )
148. Bush

- clover, prairie ( Lespedeza leptostachya )
149. Butterfly plant, Colorado ( Gaura neomexicana var. coloradensis )
150. Chaffseed, American ( Schwalbea americana )
151. Clover, running buffalo ( Trifolium st oloniferum )
152. Daisy, Lakeside ( Hymenoxys herbacea )
153. Fern, American hart's

- tongue ( Asplenium scolopendrium var. americanum )
154. Geocarpon minimum (No common name)
155. Goldenrod, Blue Ridge ( Solidago spithamaea )
156. Goldenrod, Short’s ( Solidago shortii )
157. Grass, Tennessee ye llow

- eyed ( Xyris tennesseensis )
158. Ground

- plum, Guthrie's (=Pyne's) ( Astragalus bibullatus )
159. Harperella ( Ptilimnium nodosum )
160. Ir is, dwarf lake ( Iris lacustris )
161. Ladies'

- tresses, Ute ( Spiranthes diluvialis )
162. Lichen, rock gnome ( Gymnoderma lineare )
163. Lily, Minnesota dwarf trout ( Erythronium propullans )
164. Locoweed, Fassett's ( Oxytropis campestris var. chartacea )
165. Milkweed, Mead's ( Asclepias meadii )
166. Monkshood, northern wild ( Aconitum noveboracense )
167. Orchid, eastern prairie fringed ( Platanthera leucophaea )
168. Orchid, western prairie fringed ( Platanthera praeclara )
169. Penstemon, blowout ( Penstemon haydenii )
170. Pitcher

- plant, green ( Sarracenia oreophila )
171. Pogonia, small whorled ( Isotria medeoloides )
172. Pondberry ( Lindera melissifolia )
173. Potato

- bean, Price's ( Apios priceana )
174. Prairie

- clover, leafy ( Dalea foliosa )
175. Quillwort, Louisiana ( Isoetes louisianensis )
176. Rock

- cress, Braun's ( Arabis perstellata )
177. Rosemary, Cumberland ( Conradina verticillata )
178. Roseroot, Leedy's ( Rhodiola integrifolia ssp. leedyi )
179. Sandwort, Cumberland ( Arenaria cumberlandensis )
180. Skullcap, large

- flowered ( Scutellaria montana )
181. Sneezeweed, Virginia ( Helenium virginicum )
182. Spiraea, Virginia ( Spiraea virginiana )
183. Thistle, Pitcher's ( Cirsium pitcheri )33 Appendix 2

Listed Species Rationale for NO Effects When Action Area is Limited to Treated Agricultural Fi el d

– Accounting for Spray Drift and Runoff Mitigation La be ling Restrictions

The spray drift (in

- field buffer) and rainfast mitigations discussed in the cotton section 3 ecological risk

assessment (D404823) , the concurrently issued soybean addendum (D426789) and the beginning of this assessment are anticipated to restrict dicamba and DCSA residues above any threshold toxicity values to the agricultural field. Therefore, the following table describes the habitat and rationale for all listed species that were determined to not use cotton and soybean fields or resou rces that may overlap with the
dicamba DGA uses

.

Species Habitat Rationale Source

Animals

Acornshell,
southern (Epioblasma othcaloogensis) The southern acornshell is historically restricted
to shoals in small rivers
to small streams above
the Fall Line. It was
found on stable sand/gravel/cobble
substrate in moderate to swift currents (US FWS 2000, p. 57). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. US FWS. 2000. Recovery
Plan for Mobile River Basin Aquatic Ecosystem. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/001117.pdf

Amphipod,
Illinois cave (Gammarus
acheron dytes) The Illinois cave amphipod lives in streams primarily in the
dark zone of caves in parts of the Salem
Plateau of Illinois.
Little is known of the biology and habitat requirements of this species although it has
been collected in mainstream gravel
ri ffles, smaller tributary streams, rimstone pools,
and from streams with silt overlying bedrock. As a group, amphipods require cool water temperatures and are
intolerant of wide ranges in temperature (US FWS 2002) The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not

expec ted to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2002. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/020920.pdf34 Species Habitat Rationale Source
Bat, gray (Myo tis grisescens) Gray bats are year round cave dwellers, although they may also use mines. They
hibernate from as late
as November 10 to late March or early April. At other times, they forage from late afternoon through early morning within 12

- 20
miles of their caves,
most often within 4
miles of their caves. Foraging habitat is strongly correlated with open waters (rivers, lakes, reservoirs) (US FWS, 2009, pp. 6

- 7). Historically, rivers near caves provided both foraging habitat and riparian tree vegetat ion that provided cover.
Small lakes and
reservoirs where cover
is not too distant also provide foraging
habitat. Bats will opportunistically forage in riparian and upland areas, particularly when migrating (US FWS, 1982. pp. 6

- 7). The proposed dicamba
D GA uses are not expected to encompass caves or the forest/open
water areas where bats forage. USFWS. 1982. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/820701.pdf

USFWS. 2009. 5

- Year
Review. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_ year_review/doc2625.pdf35 Species Habitat Rationale Source
Bean,
Cumberland (pearlymussel) (Villosa trabalis) Restricted typically to tributary streams of the upper

re aches of the
Tennessee and
Cumberland Rivers. This species is most
often found associated with clean, fast flowing
water in stable substrate, which contains relatively firm rubble, gravel, and sand
swept

- free from siltation. Typically, V.
trabalis is found buried
in shallow riffle and shoal areas, often located under large
rocks that must be removed by hand to inspect the habitat
underneath. Ideal
habitat conditions are difficult to find; much
of the historical habitat for the species has likely been degrad ed and may be incapable of currently harboring the species (US FWS 2010, p. 7). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2010. 5 Year
Review. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_

year_r eview/doc3244.pdf

Bean, purple (Villosa perpurpurea) Inhabits small
headwater streams (Neves 1991) to
medium

- sized rivers (Gordon 1991). It is
found in moderate to
fast

- flowing riffles with sand, gravel, and cobble substrates (Neves 1991) and rarely occurs in deep pools or slack water (Ahlstedt 1991a).
It is sometimes found
out of the main current adjacent to water

willow bed s and under flat rocks (Ahlstedt The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2004. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/0 40524.pdf36 Species Habitat Rationale Source
1991a, Gordon 1991) (US FWS 2004, p. 19). Bean, rayed (Villosa fabalis) The rayed bean is generally known from smaller, headwater creeks, but occurrence
records exist from larger rivers (Cumming s and Mayer 1992, p. 142; Parmalee and Bogan 1998, p. 244). They are usually
found in or near shoal or riffle (short, shallow length of stream where
the stream flows more rapidly) areas, and in the shallow, wave

washed areas of glacial lakes, including Lak e Erie (West et al. 2000, p. 253). In Lake Erie, the species is generally
associated with islands in the western portion
of the lake. Preferred substrates typically include gravel and sand. The rayed bean is
oftentimes found among vegetation (water willow (Justicia americana) and water milfoil (Myriophyllum sp.)) in and adjacent to
riffles and shoals (Watters 1988b, p. 15; West et al. 2000, p. 253) (US FWS 2012, p. 8633). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks

, or other water bodies. US FWS 2012

- Federal Register Determination of Endangered Status. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pk g/FR

- 2012

- 02

- 14/pdf/2012

- 2940.pdf

Blossom, green (pearlymussel) (Epioblasma
torulosa gubernaculum) Cumberlandian
freshwater mussels are
most often observed in clean, fast

- flowing
water in substrates that contain relatively firm rubble, gravel, and sand substrates swept free
from siltation. The The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1984. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/060228.pdf

USFWS. 2007. 5 Year
Review. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_ year_review/doc1961.pdf37 Species Habitat Rationale Source

muss els are usually
found buried in the
substrate in shallow
riffle and shoal areas (US FWS 1984, p. 5)

The last known record for the green

- blossom pearly mussel was a
live individual collected in 1982 (US FWS 2007, p. 7). Blossom,
tubercled (pearlymussel) (Epioblasma
torulosa torulosa) Occurs only in
headwater tributaries of
the Tennessee River (US FWS 1985, p. 11). The proposed dica mba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1985. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/850125.pdf

Blossom, turgid (pearlymussel) (Epioblasma turgidula) The last known collection of the turgid

blossom pearly mussel
was a fresh

- dead specimen found in the Duck River, Tennessee, in 1965 (US FWS 2007, p. 7) The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not

e xpected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2007. 5 Year
Review. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_ year_review/doc1961.pdf

Blossom, yellow (pearlymussel) (Epioblasma
florentina florentina) The last known specimen of the yellow

blossom pearly mussel
was recorded in the
Little Tennessee River and Citico Creek, Tennessee in 1967 (US FWS 2007, p. 7) The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2007. 5 Year
Review. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_ year_review/doc1961.pdf

Butterfly,
Karner blue (Lycaeides
melissa samuelis) Habitat is successional areas with wild lupines, such as open areas in and near forest stands, along with old fields, highway and powerline rights

- of

- way, and
remnant barrens and savannas, having a
br oken or scattered tree or tall shrub canopy (US FWS, 2003. pp.28

- 30) The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with
successional areas with lupines or other
wildflowers. USFWS. 2003. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/030919.pdf38 Species Habitat Rationale Source Butterfly, Mitchell's satyr (Neonympha
mitchellii mitchellii) Mitchell’s satyr habitat
is best characterized as a sedge

- dominated fen community; Known
habitats are all peatlands but range along a continuum from prairie/bog fen to sedge meadow/swamp. However, certain
attributes at each site remain fairly constant.
All historical and active
habitats have a
herbaceous community which is dominated by sedges, usually Carex stricta, with scattered
deciduous and/or coniferous trees, most
often L. laricina or Juniperus virginiana (red cedar) (US FWS 1998, pp. 11

- 12). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with
wetlands or areas with sedge communities. USFWS 1998. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/980402.pdf

Catspaw, white (pearlymussel) (Epio blasma obliquata perobliqua) The white cat’s paw pearly mussel is currently known to exist in only a 3

- mile portion
of Fish Creek in Williams County in
northwest Ohio.
Museum records
indicate that it historically occurred in Indiana in the Wabash, White, Tippecanoe, Maumee, and St. Joseph rivers, and Ohio in the Maumee and St. Joseph
Rivers and Fish Creek.
It was last observed in 1999 (US FWS, 2009, p. 7). The Recovery
Plan indicates that the
habitat is unclear but appears to be riffle run
reaches of sma ll to moderately large rivers (US FWS, 1990, p. 16). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1990. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/900125.pdf39 Species Habitat Rationale Source
Cavefish, Ozark (Amblyopsis rosae) Cavefish occur in groundwater habitats (the Springfield Plateau Aquifer) within Boone and Burlington Formation limestones, especia lly in cave
streams with chert rubble substrate, and occasionally in wells and sinkholes, and even in the soil phreatic zone (Poulson, 1961, 1963; USFWS, 1986). Woods and Inger (1957) suggest cavefish dispersal occurs through phreatic cave passages. Noltie and Wicks (2001) suggests
that due to shale geologic confining units, Ozark cavefish
are distributed in near surface and epikarst habitats (US FWS 2011). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other wate r bodies. USFWS 2011. Five Year
Review. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_ year_review/doc3850.pdf

Cavesnail, Tumbling Creek (Antrobia culveri) Troglobitic creek

- Tu mbling Creek ranges
from 0.014 to 2.8 cubic meters per second (~ 0.5 to 100 cubic ft. per second); the mean
annual flow is between
0.08 to 0.14 cubic meters per second (~ 3 to 5 cubic feet per second). The stream contains many chert pebbles which have
been highly polished by
natural abrasion within
the cave...The land
surface above the cave includes a variety of woodland and glade
natural communities as well as pastures and/or The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2003. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/030922a.pdf40 Species Habitat Rationale Source open fields. (US FWS 2003, p. 10). Chub, slender (Erimystax cahni) The slender chub is restricted to the upper
Tennessee River drainage in Tennessee and Virginia (US FWS 2014, p. 6) The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2014. 5 Year
Review. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_ year_review/doc4357.pdf

Chub, spotfin (Erimonax monachus) The species is an insectivore, feeding diurnally presumably by both sight and taste
in benthic areas of slow
to swift current over
various substra tes with
little siltation. Streams may range from 15

- 60 m in width and, where occupied, 0.3

- 10.0 m in depth. Water temperature in their summer habitat usually reaches greater than 20°C, and submerged macrophytes are usually absent, occasionally
common. The species
has been observed associated with sand, gravel, rubble, boulder,
and bedrock substrates (Jenkins and Burkhead, 1982) (US FWS 1983, p. 15). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodi es. USFWS. 1983. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/831121.pdf

Clubshell (Pleurobema clava) Clubshell is generally found in clean, coarse
sand and gravel in runs, often just downstream of a riffle, and cannot
tolerate mud or
slackwater conditions (USFWS, 1994). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1994. Recovery
Pla n. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/940921.pdf

Clubshell, black (Pleurobema curtum) This species inhabits the Tombigbee River, which is a major
western trib utary of the
Mobile Basin. It is characterized by an The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1989. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/891114e.pdf41 Species Habitat Rationale Source increasing number of sand and gravel shoals and decreasing channel size (US FWS, 1989, p. 1) Clubshell, ovate (Pleurobema perovatum) Sand/gravel shoals and
runs of small rivers and large streams (US FWS 2000, p. 56) The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2000. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco

very _plan/001117.pdf

Clubshell,
southern (Pleurobema decisum) Sand/gravel shoals and
runs of small rivers and large streams (US FWS 2000, p. 58) The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2000. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/001117.pdf

Combshell,
Cumberlandian (Epioblasma brevidens) This species inhabits
medium

- sized streams to large rivers on shoals and riffles in coarse, sand, gravel, cobble,
and boulders. It is not
associated with small
stream habitats and
tends not to extend as far upstream in tributaries (US FWS 2004, p. 18). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2 004. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/040524.pdf

Combshell,
southern (Epioblasma penita) This species inhabits the Tombigbee River,
which is a major western tributary of the
Mobile Basin. It is characterized by an increasing number of sand and gravel shoals and decreasing channel size (US FWS, 1989, p. 1) The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,

o r other water bodies. USFWS. 1989. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/891114e.pdf

Combshell, upland (Epioblasma metastriata) Restricted to shoals in rivers and large streams
above the Fall Line. It
was found on stable sand/gravel/cobble
substrate in moderate to swift currents (US FWS, 2000, p. 61) The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2000. Five Year
Review. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_ year_review/doc4153.pdf42 Species Habitat Rationale Source Crayfish, cave (Cambarus aculabrum) This species inhabits trog lobitic Stream

- Along the walls of pools or along stream edges. They can be found on silt, gravel, rubble and bedrock, or even hiding underneath trash, such as an old discarded boot.; Logan Cave, Bear Hollow Cave, Elm Springs, and Old Pendergrass (US
FWS 2013, p. 7). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. US FWS. 2013. Five Year Recovery. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_ year_review/doc4153.pdf

Crayfish, Cave ( Cambarus zophonastes ) This species inhabits troglobitic stream

- muddy stream bottoms, cave stream walls, and
other in

- stream habitats; found in Hell Creek, Nesbitt Spring: groundwater upwelling
in Town Branch... approximately 40 miles
northwest of the other known sites, which are found near one another, suggesting a much
wider subterranean
distribution of the species. (6) The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. US FWS. Hell Creek Cave Crayfish 5

- Year Review.
h ttp://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_ year_review/doc4153.pdf

Crayfish,
Nashville (Orconectes shoupi) Much of the stream bank where this species occurs is vegetated with
trees and shrubs (Bouchard 1976). The Nashville crayfish has
been found in a wide range of e nvironments including gravel and cobble runs, pools with up to 10 centimeters (cm) of settled sediment, and under
slabrocks and other cover (the largest crayfish are usually under cover) (USFWS 1989). The species is The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1989. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/890208.pdf43 Species Habitat Rationale Source highly photosensitive and is usually fo und under cover during the day (Bouchard 1976). Canopy cover appears important, as O’Bara et al. (1985) reported that all sites they sampled had canopy cover of 60 to 90 percent. The species has been found in small pools where
the flow was intermittent (S tark 1986, Miller and Hartfield 1985). Gravel

cobble substrate provides good cover for juveniles (Stark 1986,
Miller and Hartfield 1985). Females seek out large slabrocks when they are carrying eggs and young. These secluded places are also
needed for molt ing (USFWS 1989). Dace, blackside (Phoxinus
cumberlandensi s) This species inhabits cool, small, upland
streams with moderate
flows. The fish is generally associated
with undercut stre am banks and large rocks, and it is usually found
within well

- vegetated watersheds with good riparian vegetation (US FWS 1988, p. 6). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 198 8. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/880817.pdf

Dace, Laurel (Chrosomus saylori) This species has most
often been collected from pools or slo w runs from undercut banks or
beneath slab

- rock boulders, typically in first or second order, clear, cool, streams. Substrates typically
consist of a mixture of The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2012. Federal Register Notice: Designated
Critical Habitat. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pk

g /FR

- 2012

- 10

- 16/pdf/2012

- 24468.pdf44 Species Habitat Rationale Source
cobble, rubble, and boulders, and the
streams tend to have a dense riparian zone consisting lar gely of mountain laural (US FWS, 2012, p. 63606) Darter, amber (Percina antesella) This species inhabits gentle riffle areas over sand, gravel, and cobble substrates. Aquatic vegetation that develops in riffles provides habitat for feeding and cover (US FWS, 1986, p. 6). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with
riv ers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1986. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/860620.pdf

Darter, bayou (Etheostoma rubrum) The portion of Bayou Pierre System serving
as habitat for this species is a meandering
stream with stable gravel riffles or sandstone exposures (US FWS, 1990, p. 3). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,

o r other water bodies. USFWS. 1990. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/900710.pdf

Darter,
bluemask (=jewel) (Etheostoma sp.) This species inhab its
slow to moderate
current over clean sand and fine gravel at depths of 4 to 20 inches; it typically occurs just downstream of riffles or along the margins of pools and runs (US FWS, 1997, Executive Summary). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1997. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/970725.pdf

Darter, bo ulder (Etheostoma wapiti) This species inhabits

warm

- water riverine
environments and has been found only in
moderate to fast current
over boulder/slab rock
substrate in water over 2 feet deep (US FWS, 1989, p. 2). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not

exp ected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1989. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/890727.pdf

Darter,
Cumbe rland (Etheostoma susanae) This species inhabits pools or shallow runs of
low to moderate gradient sections of
streams with stable The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to o verlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2012. Federal Register Notice: Designated
Critical Habitat.45 Species Habitat Rationale Source
sand, silt, or sand

covered bedrock substrates (US FWS, 2012, p. 63605). http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pk g/FR

- 2012

- 10

- 16/pdf/2012

- 24468.pdf

Darter, duskytail (Etheostoma percnurum) This species inhabits rocky areas in gently flowing shallow pools and runs in large creeks and moderately large
rivers in the Tennessee
and Cumberland River Systems (US FWS, 1994, Executi ve Summary). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1994. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/duskytaildarter_RP .pdf

Darter, leopard (Percina pantherina) The leopard darter typically inhabits pools having predominantly
rubble and boulder
substrates with current
velocities less than 48
centimeters/second (Jones 1984, Lechner et al. 1987). Preferred water depths are generally 20

- 102 cm (Jones et al. 1984; James 1989), although joint Service/U.S. Forest Service surveys over the past 10 years have observed leopard darters from depths

ov er 4.0 meters; large to
intermediate streams having relatively steep grade (US FWS 2012, p. 12). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2012. Five Year
Review. http://ecos.fws. gov/docs/five_ year_review/doc4107.2.12%2 0with%20signautres.pdf

Darter, Niangua (Etheostoma nianguae) Medium sized streams of the Salem Plateau, of order 3, 4, and 5, having gradients of 3 to 21 feet/mile, elevation
of stream bed =550

- 1050 ft, moderately clear upland creeks draining hilly topography underlain by bedrocks consisting principally of chert

The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1989. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/890717.pdf46 Species Habitat Rationale Source bearing dolomites (US FWS 1989, pp. 9

- 10).

Darter,
slackwater (Etheostoma boschungi) Nonbreeding habitat is small to moderately large streams. The current is usually slow,
and under normal conditions, the flo w ranges from still to 0.34 m/sec. In small streams,
the darters show no position preference; however, in large streams they seem to
confine themselves to
near the banks or to
undercuts in the banks. They also occur on gravel infiltrated with silt, on silt and mud, or
in a combination of these. The breeding habitat is seepage water in open fields and woods (US FWS, 1984, pp. 7

- 8). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1984. Reco very Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/840308.pdf

Darter, snail (Percina tanasi) This species occupies
seven of nine tributaries of the upper Tennesse e River in Alabama, Georgia and Tennessee (US FWS, 2013, p. 10). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2013. Five Year
Review. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_ year_review/doc4 136.pdf

Darter, yellowcheek (Etheostoma moorei) Devil’s, Middle, South, and Archey forks of the
Little Red River in Cleburne, Searcy, Stone, and Van Buren Counties... primarily
within the Boston
Mountains
subdivision of the
Ozark Plateau. Inhabits high

- gradient headwater The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodie s. USFWS 2012. Federal Register Notice: Designation
of Critical Habitat. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pk g/FR

- 2012

- 10

- 16/pdf/2012

- 24468.pdf47 Species Habitat Rationale Source

tributaries with clear
water; permanent flow; moderate to strong riffles; and gravel, cobble, and boulder substrates (Robison and Buchanan 1988, p. 429) (US FWS 2012, p. 63605). Dragonfly,
Hine's emerald ( Somatochlora hineana) The hine’s emerald dragonfly occupies grass marshes and sedge meadows fed primarily by water from
a mineral source or fens. Two important
characteristics of the habitat appear to be groundwater

- fed, shallow water slowly flowing throu gh vegetation, and underlying dolomitic or
limestone bedrock. Parts of the aquatic channels are typically covered by vegetation
such as cattails or sedges. Soils can range from organic muck to
mineral soils like marl. Two other important
components are areas of open vegetation for foraging and forests,
trees or shrubs that provide shaded areas for perching or roosting. Nearby adjacent forests may be deciduous (Illinois) or conifer (Wisconsin and Michigan).

Larvae are usually found in small flowing

st reamlets within cattail marshes, sedge meadows, and The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with grass marshes, sedge meadows, forested areas,
or other habitat where
the Hine’s emerald dragonfly is expected to
be found. USFWS. 2001. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/010927.pdf48 Species Habitat Rationale Source

hummocks. Places with silt, leaf litter, and decaying grasses as a
substrate are often used (US FWS, 2001, p. 15

- 16.).

Critical Habitat of 26,531 acres have been designated in Michigan, Illinois, Wiscon sin, and
Missouri. Almost half
of this is Mackinac County, MI. Elktoe, Appalachian (Alasmidonta raveneliana) This species has been reported from relatively
shallow medium

- sized
creeks and rivers with cool, well

- oxygenated,
and moderate

- to fast

flowing water. It has
been observed in gravelly substrata, often
mixed with cobble and boulders; in cracks in bedrock; a nd occasionally in relatively silt

- free, coarse, sandy substrata (US FWS, 1996, Executive Summary). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1996. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws .gov/docs/reco very_plan/960826.pdf

Elktoe,
Cumberland (Alasmidonta atropurpurea) This species inhabits
medium

- sized rivers and may extend into
headwater streams
where it is often the only mussel present (Gordon and Layzer 1989, Gordon 1991). Gordon and Layzer (1989) reported that the species appears to be most abundant in flats,
which were described as shallow pool areas lacking the bottom contour development of typical pools, with sand
and scattered The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2004. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco

very _plan/040524.pdf49 Species Habitat Rationale Source

cobble/boulder material, relatively shallow depths, and slow (almost imperceptible) currents. They also report the species from swifter

cu rrents and in areas with mud, sand, and gravel substrates (US FWS, 2004, p. 18).
Fanshell (Cyprogenia stegaria) The fanshell inhabits gravel substrates in medium to large rivers
of the Ohio River basin (US FWS, 1991,
Executive Summary). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1991. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/910709.pdf

fatmucket,
Arkansas (Lampsilis powellii) Four microhabitat types that include: 1) long pools with cobble and rock as primary substrate types, 2)
backwater areas
downstream of peninsulas or islands
covered with water

w illow ( Justicia
americana ) and with
cobble and sand as the dominant substrate, 3) slow moving pools upstream from water
willow islands with sand, gravel, and cobble substrate, and 4) overflow, secondary channel pools, and tributary confluence
areas with sa nd, cobble,
and some rock substrate (US FWS 2013, p. 5) The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2013. Five Year
Review. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pk g/FR

- 2011

- 09

- 27/pdf/2011

- 24046 .pdf

Ferret, black

footed (Mustela nigripes) The black

- footed ferret relies on prairie dog
colonies for both food
and shelter. The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with prairie dog colonies. USFWS. 2008. 5

- Year
Review. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_ year_review/doc2364.pdf

Frog, dusky gopher (Rana sevosa) Upland sandy habitats (forest dominated by longleaf pine (Pinus The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with USFWS. 2011. Federal Register Notice: Designation
of Critical Habitat.50 Species Habitat Rationale Source palustris)), wetlands (ephemeral ponds)
embedded within the
forest ...Adults and subadults spend the majority of their lives underground (in gopher

to rtoise (Gopherus polyphemus) and
mammal burrows and
holes under old stumps)...During the breeding season, Mississippi gopher frogs leave their
subterranean retreats in the uplands and migrate to their breeding sites during rains associated with passing col d fronts. Breeding sites are ephemeral (seasonally flooded) isolated ponds (not
connected to other water bodies) located in the uplands. Both forested uplands and isolated wetlands (see
further discussion of
isolated wetlands in ‘‘Sites for Breeding, Repro duction, and Rearing of Offspring’’ section) are needed to provide space for
individual and population growth and normal behavior. (US FWS 2011, p. 59777

- 59778) forested areas, wetlands, or ephemeral isolated ponds. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pk g/FR

- 2011

- 09

- 27/pdf/2011

- 24046.pdf51 Species Habitat Rationale Source Heelsplitter,
Alabama (=inflated) (Potamilus inflatus) This species prefers a soft, stable substrate in
slow to moderate
currents. It has been found in sand, mud, silt and sandy

- gravel, but not in large or armored gravel (US FWS , 1993, Executive Summary). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1993. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/930413.pdf

Hellbender,
Ozark (Cryptobranchu s alleganiensis bishopi) Cool, clear streams and rivers with many large
rocks...small
hellbenders hide beneath large rocks and
also small stones in gravel beds. Adults spend most of their life under large, flat rocks; typically limestone or dolomite [rocks], and in moderate to deep (less than 3 to 9.8 feet (less than 1 to 3 meters)), rocky, fast

- flowing
streams in the Ozark Plateau (Johnson 2000, p. 42; Fobes and
Wilki nson 1995, pp. 5

– 7). In spring

- fed streams, Ozark
Hellbenders will often
concentrate downstream of the spring, where
there is little water temperature change throughout the year (US FWS 2011, p. 61956). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to ove rlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2011. Federal Register Notice: Listing
Document. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pk g/FR

- 2011

- 10

- 06/pdf/2011

- 25690.pdf

Higgins eye (pearlymussel) (Lampsilis higginsii) The higgins eye pearlymussel is
characterized as an inhabitant of large
rivers with loose
substrates and low
velocit ies. Many of the largest populations are in the Mississippi River, and all are in its upper drainage (US FWS, 2004, p. 7

- 8). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2004. Reco very Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/040714.pdf52 Species Habitat Rationale Source Kidneyshell,
fluted (Ptychobranchu s subtentum) Associated with the
Cumberland and
Tennessee River drainages. Generally
live embedded in the
bottom of stable
streams and other bodies of water, and
within riffle areas of
sufficient current
velocities to remove
finer sediments and provide well oxygenated waters (US FWS, 2013, p. 59560) The proposed dicamb a DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2013. Federal Register Notice: Designation
of Critical Habitat. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pk g/FR

- 2013

- 09

- 26/pdf/2013

- 23357.pdf

Kidneyshell, triangular (Ptychobranchu s greenii) Sand/gravel shoals and
runs of small rivers and large streams (US FWS 2000, p. 60) The proposed dicamba
DGA uses ar e not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2000. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/850702.pdf

Lampm ussel,
Alabama (Lampsilis virescens) This species inhabits sand and gravel
substrates in small to
medium sized streams (US FWS, 1985, p. 9). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USF WS. 1985. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/850702.pdf

Lilliput, pale (pearlymussel) (Toxolasma cylindrellus) This species is observed in clean, fast

- flowing
water in substrates that contain relatively firm rubble, gravel, and sand substrates swept free
from siltation. These mussels are usually
found buried in the
substrate in shallow
riffle and shoal areas (US FW S, 1984, p. 5). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1984. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/840822.pdf

Logperch, Conasauga (Percina jenkinsi) This species has been collected in deep shuts and flowing pools with clear, clean gravel and
mixed rubble substrates
in areas with moderate to swift currents (US FWS, 1986, p. 8). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1986. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/860620.pdf53 Species Habitat Rationale Source Lynx, Canada ( Lynx
canadensis ) PCE: Boreal forest landscapes with large populations of
snowshoe hares.
Distribution and abundance of prey and
microclimate influence movement, hunting behavior, and den and resting site locations.
Areas with dense cover. The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with
boreal forests. The lynx’s prey, snowshoe hares, also do not overlap with the proposed dicamba DGA
use sites. USFWS. 2014. Federal Register Notice: Designation
of Critical Habitat

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pk g/FR

- 2014

- 09

- 12/pdf/2014

- 21013.pdf

Madtom, chucky Entire (Noturus crypticus) This species has been
found in stream runs
with slow to moderate current over pea gravel, cobble, or slab

- rock boulder substrates (US FWS, 2012, p. 63606) The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bod ies. USFWS. 2012. Federal Register Notice: Designation
of Critical Habitat. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pk g/FR

- 2012

- 10

- 16/pdf/2012

- 24468.pdf

Madtom,
Neosho (Noturus placidus) Benthic species inhabits shallow gravel substrates. The species remains primarily
inactive and hidden in bottom substrate during the day, and comes out at night to forage for aquatic invertebrates (Moss 1981). The majority of Neosho
madtom colle ctions are from areas with gravel substrates, primarily gravel in the size range of 0.5 to 2.5 inches (12

– 64 mm) in diameter.
Most collections are made in the Spring and
Neosho Rivers in shallow water, generally less than three feet deep (<1 m).
Within t hese systems, no significant
differences in madtom preferences for depth, velocity, and substrate
size were found but gravel riffles with
currents of one to four The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2013. Five Year
Review. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_ year_review/doc4140.pdf54 Species Habitat Rationale Source feet per second (<1.25 m/sec.) are preferred by adults (Moss 1981; Fuselier and Edds 1994;
Wil dhaber et al. 2000a) (US FWS 2013, pp. 6). Madtom, pygmy (Noturus stanauli) This species inhabits shallow shoals, where
the current is moderate to strong and where there is pea

- sized gravel or fine sand substrates,
in mod erately large
rivers of the Tennessee River system (US FWS, 1994, Executive Summary). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1994. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/940927a.pdf

Madtom, Scioto (Noturus trautmani) Only 18 individuals
have ever been collected, all found along one stretch of Big Darby Creek in Ohio (US FWS, 2009, p. 4).
The scioto madtom prefers stream riffles of
moderate current over gravel bottoms with high quality water that is free of suspended
sediments. The riffle
habitat where the 18
individual were
collected was comprised of glacial cobble, grav el, sand,
and silt substrate with some large boulders (US FWS, 2009, p. 5). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2009. Five Year
Review. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_

year_re view/doc3057.pdf

Madtom, smoky (Noturus baileyi) This species is
restricted to Citico Creek, primarily within
the Cherokee National Forest, Monroe County,
Tenness ee (US FWS, 1985,p. 1) The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1985. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/060313b.pdf55 Species Habitat Rationale Source
Madtom, yellowfin (Noturus flavipinnis) This species prefers pool habitats beneath
cobble and small
boulder substrates (Miller 2011). The strongest habitat models identified preferred pools for yellowfin madtoms as greater than 40 meters in length with gravel being the main
substrate beneath cover rocks (Miller 2011). (US FWS, 2012, p. 16). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2012. Five Year
Review. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_ year_review/doc4146.pdf

Manatee, West
Indian (Trichechus manatus) This species lives in freshwater, brack ish and marine habitats (US FWS, 2001, Executive Summary). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. US FWS. 2001. Recovery
Plan

- Third Revision. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/ 011030.pdf

Mapleleaf, winged (Quadrula fragosa) The general habitat is poorly known, although
it has been characterized as a large stream species. It has
been co llected on mud,
mud

- covered gravel, and gravel substrates.
In its current location in the St. Croix River, it
occurs in riffles with clean gravel, sand, or
rubbles substrates and
fast current. It was not
found in a natural impoundment of the river (US FW S, 1997, p. 5

- 6). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1997. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/970625.pdf

Marstonia, royal (snail) (Pyrgulopsis ogmorhaphe) This species is found in Blue Spring, which is in the water supply for the town of Jasper, Tennessee, and
downstrea m to the State Highway 64 bridge (US FWS, 1995, Executive Summary). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1995. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/950811.pd f56 Species Habitat Rationale Source
Moccasinshell,
Alabama (Medionidus acutissimus) Inhabits sand/gravel/cobble
shoals with moderate to strong currents in
streams and small rivers. (US FWS 2000,

p . 51) The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2000. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/001117.pdf

Moccasinshell,
Coosa (Medionidus parvulus) Inhabits sand/gravel/cobble
shoals with moderate to strong currents in
streams and small rivers. (US FWS 2000, p. 52) The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2000. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/001117.pdf

Monkeyface, Appalachian (pearlymussel) (Quadrula sparsa) This species is most
often observed in clean

fast

- flowing water in
substrates that contain relatively firm rubble, gravel, and sand substrates swept free
from siltation. These mussels are usually
found buried in the
substrate in shallow
riffle and shoal areas (US FWS, 1984, p. 7). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1984. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos .fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/840709.pdf

Monkeyface,
Cumberland (pearlymussel) (Quadrula intermedia) This species is most
often observed in clean

fast

- flowing water in
substrates that contain relatively firm rubble, gravel, and sand substrates swept free
from siltation. These mussels are usually
found buried in the
substrate in shallow
riffle and shoal ar eas (US FWS, 1984, p. 9). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1984. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/840709b.pdf

Mucket, Neosho (Lampsilis rafinesqueana) The Neosho mucket is
associated with shallow
riffles and runs comprising gravel
substrate and moderate
to swift currents. The species is most often
found in are as with swift current, but in The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overla p with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2012. Federal Register Notice: Proposed Listing Document. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pk g/FR

- 2012

- 10

- 16/pdf/2012

- 24151.pdf57 Species Habitat Rationale Source

Shoal Creek and the Illinois River it prefers

near

- shore areas or
areas out of the main current (Oesch 1984, p. 221; Obermeyer 2000, pp. 15

– 16) (US FWS 2012, p. 63443).

Mucket,

orangenacre (Lampsilis perovalis) Currently restricted to high quality stream and small river habitat, the species is found on
stable sand/gravel/cobble
substrate in moderate to swift currents (US FWS 2000, p. 55) The proposed d icamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2000. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/001117.pdf

Mucket, pink (pearlymussel) (Lampsilis abrupta) The pink mucket may
still exist in stretches of
the lower Ohio River (US FWS, 1985, p. 10).

The pink mucket habitat is large rivers at least 60 feet wide, where it occurs at depths up to 25 feet deep. Currents are typically moderate
to fast and substrates range from silt to boulders, rubble, gravel, and sand (US FWS, 1985, p. 11). The species seems to have adapted to living in impounded waters, at least in the upper
reaches where the water is flowing (US FWS, 1985, p. 10). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1985. Recovery
Plan. http://e cos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/pink%20mucket% 20rp.pdf

Mussel, oyster (Epioblasma capsaeformis) This species is generally adapted to live in the gravel shoals
of f ree

- flowing rivers and streams (US FWS, 2004, Executive Summary). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2004. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/040524.pdf58 Species Habitat Rationale Source
Mussel,
scaleshell (Leptodea leptodon) The scaleshell habitat is composed of riffles and runs in medium to large
rivers with low to medium gradients and
slow to moderate velocity of current. It inhabits a variety of substrates from gravel to mud, but riffles are primarily stable (US FWS, 2010, p.18). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USF WS. 2012. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/100407_v2.pdf

Mussel, sheepnose (Plethobasus cyphyus) The sheepnose is a larger

- stream species

oc curring primarily in
shallow shoal habitats
with moderate to swift

currents over coarse sand and gravel. Habitats with sheepnose may also have mud, cobble, and boulders. Sheepnose in larger rivers may occur at depths exceeding 6 m (US FWS, 2012, p 14916)

. The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2012. Federal Register Notice: Final Rule. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pk g/FR

- 2012

- 03

- 13/pdf/2012

- 5603.pdf

Mussel,
snuffbox (Epioblasma triquetra) The habitat is described
as swift currents and riffles, and shoals and

wave

- washed shores of lakes over gravel and
sand with occasional
cobble and boulders. They generally burrow deep into the substrate (US FWS, 2010, p 67554). This
constitutes a wide diversity of habitats. However, they do not occur in impounded
areas or reservoirs (except tailwaters) (US FWS, 2012, p 8652). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2010. Federal Register Notice: Listing. http:// www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pk g/FR

- 2010

- 11

- 02/pdf/2010

- 27413.pdf#page=2

USFWS. 2012. Federal Register Notice: Final Rule. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pk g/FR

- 2012

- 02

- 14/pdf/2012

- 2940.pdf59 Species Habitat Rationale Source
Pearlshell,
Louisiana (Margaritifera hembeli) Specific habitat requirements are not known. This species apparently requires a
free

- flowing stream (US FWS, 1990, Executive Summary). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1990. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/901203.pdf

Pearlymussel, birdwing (Lemiox rimosus) This species is most
often observed in clean
fast

- flowing water in
substrates that contain relatively firm rubble, gravel and sand substrates swept free
from siltation. It is usually found buried in
the substrate in shallow
riffle and shoal areas (US FWS, 1984, p. 6). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1984. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/060206a.pdf

Pearlymussel, cracking (Hemistena lata) The cracking pearlymussel has undergone a substantial range reduction. It was historically distributed in the Ohio, Cumberland, and
Tennessee River systems. The spe cies has been extirpated throughout much of its range. It was last
collected from Mussel Shoals, an 85 km reach
of the Tennessee River in Alabama, prior to 1925 and is presumed to be extirpated from the shoal. It is presently
known to survive at only a few shoals in the
Clinch and Powell
Rivers in Tennessee and Virginia, and it has likely been reduced to only three viable populations in these systems. The species possibly survives in the Green River, Kentucky, The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/life_
histories/F01X.html60 Species Habitat Rationale Source

and below Pickwick
Reservoir in the
Tennessee R iver,
Tennessee as well

Pearlymussel,
Curtis (Epioblasma
florentina curtisii) The Curtis’ pearlymussel has not
been seen alive in over
a decade. Limited to stream segments that
are transitional between
headwater and lowland
streams reaches

- shallow stable riffles (US FWS 2010, p. 3, 7). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2010. Five Year
Review. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/840709c.pdf

Pearlymussel, dromedary (Dromus dromas) This species is most often observed in clean,
fast

- flowing water in
substrates that contain relatively firm rubble, gravel an d sand substrates swept free
from siltation. These mussels are usually
found buried in the
substrate in shallow
riffle and shoal areas (US FWS, 1984, p. 8). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1984. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/840709c.pdf

Pearlymussel, littlewing (Pegias fabula) This species inhabits
small to medium, low turbidity, cool

- water, high to moderate gradient streams in the
Cumberland and
Tennessee River basins (US FWS, 1989, p. 5). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1989. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/890922.pdf

Pearlymussel,
Slabside (Pleuronaia dolabelloides) Associated with the
Cumberland a nd
Tennessee River drainages. Generally
live embedded in the
bottom of stable
streams and other bodies of water, and
within riffle areas of
sufficient current
velocities to remove The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2013. Federal Register Notice: Designation
of Critical Habitat. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pk g/FR

- 2013

- 09

- 26/pdf/2013

- 23357.pdf61 Species Habitat Rationale Source

finer sediments and provide well oxygenated waters (US FWS, 2013, p. 59560) Pigtoe,
Cumberland (Pleurobema gibberum) This species inhabits
medium

- sized rivers
with fast

- flowing water
in areas with predominately gravel,
sand and cobble substratum (US FWS, 1992, Executive Summary). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1992. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/920813.pdf

Pigtoe, finerayed (Fusconaia cuneolus) This species is typically a riffle species that
inhabits ford and shoal
areas in free

- flowing
streams of moderate gradient (US FWS, 1984, p. 7). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1984. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/fine%20rayed%20r ecov%20plan.pdf

Pigtoe, flat (Pleurobema marshalli) Habitat is the Tombigbee River, characterized by an increasing number of sand and gravel shoals and decreasing channel size in the upper portions (US F WS, 1989). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1989. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/891114e.pdf

Pigtoe, Georgia (Pleurobema hanleyianum) This species requires flowing water, stable
stream channels with
minimal sediment and algae growth, and adequate water quali ty. It also requires a host fish, which is currently unknown (US FWS, 2013, Executive Summary). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2013. Draft Recovery Plan. http://ecos.f ws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/Hartfield%20and%
20Powell%202013%20Draft
%20Three%20Mollusks%20 RP%20062813.pdf

Pigtoe, rough (Pleurobema plenum) The rough pigtoe
habitat is medium to large rivers, 60 feet or wider, in sand and gravel substrates. Very
limited collection information suggests it occurs below spillways, in transition zones, and The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1984. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/840806.pdf62 Species Habitat Rationale Source in sand and gravel substrates (US FWS, 1984, p. 8).

Pi gtoe, shiny
Entire (Fusconaia cor) This species is typically a riffle species, found along fords and shoals of clear, moderate to
fast

- flowing streams
and rivers with stable
substrate. It does not inhabit deep pools or impounded areas. This species is usually found
well

- buried in the
substr ate during most of the year and is more readily visible in early summer (US FWS, 1984, p. 8). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1984. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/d ocs/reco very_plan/840709d.pdf

Pigtoe, southern (Pleurobema georgianum) Sand/gravel shoals and
runs of small rivers and large streams (US FWS 2000, p. 59) The prop osed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2000. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/001117.pdf

Pimpleback, orangefoot (pearlymussel) (Plethobasus cooperianus) The 1984 Recovery
Plan indicated that the

orange

- foot pimpleback
was known from the Tennessee, Cumberland, and lower Ohio Rivers (US FWS, 1984. p. 2). The habitat
is descr ibed as medium to large rivers in sand and gravel substrates.
In the Ohio River it was
collected from 15

- 29 feet depths, but may
have lived in shallower riffles (US FWS, 1984, p. 6). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1984. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/840930b.pdf63 Species Habitat Rationale Source Plover, piping except Great
Lakes
watershe d (Charadrius melodus) The northern Great
Plains DPS of the piping plover utilizes four types of habitats for breeding: alkali lakes and wetlands, inland lakes (Lake of the Woods), reservoirs,
and rivers. Most breeding occurs along
alkali lakes and wetlands, where nesting sites are generally wide, gravelly, salt encrusted
beaches with minimal vegetation. At inland lakes, they use barren to sparsely vegetated islands, beaches, and peninsulas. Sparsely vegetated sandbars and
reservoir shorelines are preferred in riverine systems (US FWS, 2002, p. 57640). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with shorelines, beaches, and
sandbars of rivers and
alkali wetlands. USFWS. 2002. Federal Register Notice. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/feder

a l_register/fr3943.pdf

Plover, piping
Great Lakes
watershed (Charadrius melodus) The breeding habitat of
the Great Lakes DPS of the piping plover is well
defined b y the Critical Habitat designation.
Critical Habitat for this
DPS consists of approximately 200
miles of Great Lakes shoreline (extending 1640 ft inland) in 26 counties in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New
York. Additional
Critical Habitat for wintering populations
of this DPS are in the
southeastern United
States and other areas
that are outside the scope of this analysis The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with sparsely vegetated sandy
shorelines or islands of
the Great Lakes. USFWS. 2009. 5

- Year
Review. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_ year_review/doc3009.pdf

USFWS. 2000. Federal Register Notice http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/feder al_register/fr3648.pdf64 Species Habitat Rationale Source
(USFWS, 2000; USFWS, 2009, p.2).

Pocketbook, fat (Potamilus capax) The fat pocketbook is a large river species requiring flowing water and a stable substrate, which can vary widely
but is most likel y a mixture of sand, silt and clay. It occurs in water from a few inches deep
to at least 8 feet.
Habitat includes drainage ditches. (US FWS, 1989, p. 6). Populations have been found in larger rivers in the Ohio River system, and it may occur as deep as 20 feet (US FWS, 2012, p. 7

- 8). It can also tolerate periods of high suspended sediments (US FWS, 2012, p. 11). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1989. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/891114c.pdf

USFWS. 2012. Five Year
Review. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/891114c.pdf

Pocketbook,
Ouachita rock (Arkansia wheeleri) This species inhabits pools, backwaters, and
side channels of rivers and large creeks in or near the southern slope
of the Ouachita Uplift. This species occupies
stable substrates containing gravel, sand, and other materials (US FWS, 2004. Executive Summary). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USF WS. 2004. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/040602.pdf65 Species Habitat Rationale Source
Pocketbook, speckled (Lampsilis streckeri) Specific habitat requirements are not
known . The species is
found in coarse to muddy sand in depths up to 0.4 meters (1.3 feet) with a constant
flow of water. The
occurrence in areas of
constant water flow suggests a requirement
for well

- oxygenated conditions (US FWS 1992, p. 3). The proposed dicam ba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1992. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/920102.pdf

Purple Cat's paw (=Purple Cat's paw pearlymussel) (Epioblasma obliquata obliquata) Inhabits boulder to sandy substrates in large rivers of the Ohio River basin (US F WS 1992, Executive summary). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1992. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/920310.pdf

Rabbitsfoot (Quadrula cylindrica cylindrica) Primarily an inhabitant
of small to medium
sized streams and some larger rivers. It usually
occurs in shallow water areas along the bank and adjacent ru ns and
shoals with reduced water velocity. They have been reported in deep water runs up to 12 feet depth. "Bottom substrates generally include gravel and sand" (US FWS, 2012, p. 63446). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with
river s, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2012. Federal Register Notice. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pk g/FR

- 2012

- 10

- 16/pdf/2012

- 24151.pdf

Rabbitsfoot, rough (Quadrula cylindrica strigillata) Inhabits medium

- sized to large rivers in
moderate to swift
current but often exists in areas close to, but not in, the swiftest current (Gordon 1991). It is reported to live in silt, sand, gravel, or cobble
in eddies at the edge of
midstream currents and may be associated with T he proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. FWS. 2004. Recovery Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/040524.pdf66 Species Habitat Rationale Source macrophyte beds (Yeager and Neves 1986, Gordon 1991). The rough
rabbitsfoot seldom burrows; it generally
lies on its side on the stream bottom (Neves, pers. comm., 2003) (US FWS 2004, p. 19). Riffleshell,
northern (Epioblasma
torulosa rangiana) The habitat of the
riffleshell occurs in packed sand and gravel in riffles and runs, and
also in the western
basin of Lake Erie
where there is sufficient wave action to produce

co ntinuously moving water (US FWS, 1994, p. 18). FWS further
describes the habitat as medium to large rivers where they are often associated with high water velocities, although they have also
been documented in Lake Erie and in deep
more slow

- flowing
rive rs down to 20 feet (US FWS, 2009. p. 9). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1994. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/940921.pdf

USFWS. 2009. Five Year
Review. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_ year_review/doc3284.pdf

Riffleshell, tan (Epiobla sma florentina walkeri (=E. walkeri)) This species inhabits
streams described as
shallow and turbid with
numerous riffles and substrate consisting of loose rocks and gravel
bars with an abundance of water willow (US FWS, 1984. P, 7). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1984. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/tan%20riffleshell% 20rp.pdf

Ring pink (mussel) (Obovaria retusa) This species inhabits gravel and sandy substrates in large rivers
of the Ohio River basin (US FWS, 1991). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1991. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/910325.pdf67 Species Habitat Rationale Source
Riversnail, Anthony's (Athearnia anthonyi) This species is typically found in large streams on large submerged objects (e.g., rocks and logs) or gravelly substrata in relatively shallow, moderately to
fast

- flowing water (US FWS, 1997). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1997. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/970813.pdf

Sawfish,
smalltooth (Pristis pecti nata) Smalltooth sawfish are tropical marine and
estuarine fish that have
the northwestern
terminus of their Atlantic range in the
waters of the eastern
United States. In the United States,
smalltooth sawfish are generally a shallow
water fish of inshore
b ars, mangrove edges, and seagrass beds, but are occasionally found in deeper coastal waters. (US FWS NMFS, NOAA 2001, p. 19416) The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. NMFS, NOAA. 2001. Federal Register Notice: Proposed Endangered Status
for a DPS of Smalltooth
Sawfish. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/feder al_register/fr3741.pdf

Sea turtle, green (Chel onia mydas) Green turtles are primarily restricted to tropical and subtropical
waters. In U.S. Atlantic
and Gulf of Mexico waters, green turtles are
found from
Massachusetts to Texas and in the U.S. Virgin
Islands and Puerto Rico...Seagrasses are the princ ipal dietary component of juvenile and adult green turtles throughout the Wider Caribbean region (Bjorndal, 1995). (NMFS, NOAA 1998, p. 46694) The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with
coastal waters. NMFS, NOAA. 1998. Federal Register Notice: Designated critical habitat. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/feder al_register/fr3295.pdf68 Species Habitat Rationale Source Sculpin, grotto (Cottus sp.) Grotto sculpin occupy
cave streams,

resur gences (also known as ‘‘spring branches’’) (Vandike 1985, p. 10), springs,
and surface streams (Adams 2012, pers. comm.; Adams et al. 2013, pp. 491

– 493; Burr et al. 2001, p. 284). They occupy pools and riffles with
moderate flows and variable depths (4 to 33 centimeters (cm) (1.6 to 13 in)) (Burr et al. 2001, p. 284). Although grotto sculpin have
been documented to occur over a variety of substrates (for example, silt, gravel, cobble, rock rubble, and bedrock), the presence of cobble or pebble is necessary for spawning (Burr et al. 2001, p. 284; Adams et al. unpub. data; Adams et al. 2013, pp.
491

– 492) (US FWS 2013, p. 58928). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2013. Federal
R egister Notice: Designation of Critical Habitat (58938) http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pk g/FR

- 2013

- 09

- 25/pdf/2013

- 23182.pdf

Sea turtle,
hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata) The hawksbill turtle occurs in tropical and subtropical waters of the Atlantic, Pacific,
and Indian Oceans. Coral reefs, like those
found in the waters surrounding Mona and Monito Islands, are widely recognized as the primary foraging
habitat of juvenile, subadult, and adult
hawksbill turtles. This
habitat association is directly related to the species’ highly specific The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with
coastal waters. NMFS, NOAA. 1998. Federal Register Notice: Designated critical habitat. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/feder al_regis ter/fr3295.pdf69 Species Habitat Rationale Source diet of sponges (Meylan, 1988). Hawksbills depend on
coral reefs for food and shelter; therefore, the
condition of reefs directly affects the
hawksbill’s well

- being. (NMFS, NOAA 1998, p. 46695)

Sea turtle, Kemp's ridley (Lepidochelys kempii) This life history pattern is characterized by three basic ecosystem zones: (1) Terrestrial zone (su pralittoral)

- the nesting beach where both oviposition and embryonic development occur; (2) Neritic zone

- the nearshore (including bays and sounds)
marine environment (from the surface to the sea floor) where water depths do not exceed 200 meters, includ ing the continental shelf; and (3) Oceanic zone

- the vast open ocean environment (from the surface to the sea floor) where water depths are greater than 200 meters. (NMFS, NOAA 2011, p. I

- 8) The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with

c oastal waters. NMFS, NOAA. 2011. Bi

national recovery plan for the kemp's ridley sea turtle. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/090116.pdf70 Species Habitat Rationale Source
Sea turtle,
leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea) Leatherbacks are able to take advantage of a wide variety of marine ecosystems (reviewed by Saba 2013; see NOAA large marine ecosystem website: http://www.lme.noaa.go v/). Within these ecosystems, various
oceanic features such as
water temperature, downwelling, Ekman upwelling, sea surface height, chlorophyll

- a concentration, and
mesoscale eddies affect the presence of leatherbacks (Bailey et al. 2013; Benson et al. 2011). The physical
characteristics observed
within these marine ecosystems also affect
the distribution and
abundance of leatherback prey (reviewed by Saba 2013). (NFMS, NOAA 2013, p. 20

- 22). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with
coastal waters. NMFS, NOAA. 2013. Five
Year Review. http ://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/090116.pdf

Sea turtle, loggerhead
Northwest
Atlantic DPS (Caretta caretta) The three basic ecosystems in which loggerheads live are the:
1. Terrestrial zone (supralittoral)

- the nesting beach where both oviposition (egg laying) and embryonic development and hatching occur.
2. Neritic zone

- the
nearshore marine environment (from the surface to the sea floor) where water depths do
not exceed 200 meters.
The neritic zone generally includes the The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with
coastal waters. NMFS. NOAA. 2009.
Re covery Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/090116.pdf71 Species Habitat Rationale Source
continental shelf, but in
areas where the continental shelf is very narrow or nonexistent,
the neritic zone conventionally extends
to areas where water depths are less than 200

meters. 3. O ceanic zone

- the vast open ocean environment (from the surface to the sea floor) where water depths are greater than 200 meters. (NMFS, NOAA 2009, p. I

- 20) Shiner,
Arkansas River (Notropis girardi) Wilde et al. (2000)
found no obvious
selection for or avoidance of any particular habitat type (i.e., main channel, side channel, backwaters, and pools) by Arkansas
River shiner. Arkansas
River shiners did tend
to select side channels and backwaters slight ly more than expected based on the availability of these habitats (Wilde et al. 2000). Likewise, they appeared to make
no obvious selection for, or avoidance of, any particular substrate type. Substrates (i.e., the river bed) in the
Canadian River in New
M exico and Texas were predominantly sand, however, the Arkansas
River shiner was
observed to occur over silt slightly more than expected based on the availability of this substrate (Wilde et al. The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. US FWS. 2005. Federal Register Notice: Designation
of Critical Habitat. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/950830.pdf72 Species Habitat Rationale Source 2000) ; preferred habitat
for the Arkansas River
shiner is the mainstem of larger plains rivers... historically inhabited
the main channels of wide, shallow, sandy

bottomed rivers and larger streams of the
Arkansas River basin (Gilbert 1980). Adults are uncommon in quiet pools or backwaters lacking streamflow, and
al most never occurred in habitats having deep
water and bottoms of mud or stone (Cross 1967) (US FWS 2005). Shiner, blue (Cyprinella caerulea) The blue shiner primarily occupies
second to fourth order, moderate gradient
streams within the Ridge and Valley and Piedmont physiographic provinces of Alabama, Georgia, and Tennessee (Smith

- Vaniz 1968, Ramsey 1976, Krotzer 1984, Ramsey and Pierson 1986, Pierson and Krotzer 1987, Mayden 1989, Pie rson et al. 1989, Boschung 1992, Etnier and Starnes 1993, Dobson 1994). Most watersheds
where it is found are predominately forested, and agriculture and urban development are minimal. For example in Alabama, land cover
in the Choccolocco watershed is 66 p ercent forest, 20 percent pasture, and 13 percent agriculture...It prefers a The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. US FWS. 1995. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/950830.pdf73 Species Habitat Rationale Source sand or sand and gravel
substrate sometimes with cobble, low to moderate velocity current, and a depth of
about 0.15 to 1 meters (0.5 to 3 feet) (Gilbert et al. 1979; Krotzer
1984 , Pierson and Krotzer 1987, Dobson 1994) (US FWS 1995, p. 3

- 4)

Shiner, Topeka (Notropis topeka (=tristis)) Topeka shiners are typically found in small, low order, prairie streams with good water quality, relatively cool tempera tures, and low fish diversity. Although Topeka
shiners can tolerate a range of water temperatures, cooler, spring

- maintained systems are considered optimal. These streams generally maintain perennial flow but may
become intermittent during summer or peri ods of drought, as long as there are refuge
areas in headwaters springs or main channels of larger
streams that do not provide adequate year

round habitat. While headwaters, oxbows
and side channels provide the typical habitat, mainstem streams provide fo r dispersal as well as for The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2004. Federal Register Notice: Des ignation
of Critical Habitat. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_ year_review/doc2585.pdf74 Species Habitat Rationale Source drought refuge. The shiner is very often
associated with groundwater discharges. Substrates are typically clean gravel, cobble, or sand, but may include bedrock and clay hardpan covered by a thin layer of silt, or
coarse sand o verlain by
silt and detritus. Spawning is often over native sunfish nests (US FWS, 2004, pp, 44743

- 4).

Snail, Iowa
Pleistocene (Discus macclintocki) The Iowa Pleistocene snail only occurs on high quality algific (cold producing) talus slopes with temperatures ranging
from 35

- 45 degrees
Fahrenheit. Air flows through fractured bedrock, over frozen groundwater, and out

vents on steep slopes to

create a co ld
microclimate. These are talus covered slopes
with thin soil that makes them extremely fragile and sensitive to disturbance, and irreplaceable. This habitat is known only to
occur in the "driftless area" that overlaps
where the states of Illinois, Iowa

, Minnesota, and
Wisconsin come together (US FWS, 2009, p. 11). All
known areas are north

facing slopes, and the The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are no t expected to overlap with algific talus slopes. USFWS. 1984. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/840322.pdf

USFWS. 2009. Five Year
Review. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_ year_review/doc2585.pdf75 Species Habitat Rationale Source ground temperature
seldom exceeds 50 degrees Fahrenheit even
in the hottest summers (US FWS, 1984, p. 5).

Snail, painted
snake coiled
forest (Anguispira picta) This species is limited
to Buck Creek Cove. It
is foun d only in limestone outcrops in parts of the cove with good cover. The slopes of the cove are very steep with crock outcrops and sheer cliffs at intervals along
both sides of the creek (US FWS, 1982). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to over lap with creeks or stone outcrops along creeks. USFWS. 1982. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/060206.pdf

Snake, copperbelly water (Nerodia erythrogaster neglecta) Copperbellies are generally affiliated with wetlands and prefer shallow wetlands, such
as shrub

- scrub wetlands dominated by
buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis), emergent wetlands, or the margins of palustrine open water wetlands. Buttonbrush swamps are used as basking areas. Areas frequented by copperbellies generally have an open canopy, shallow water,
and short dense vegetation. Uplands are also important. (US FWS, 2008, p. 17

- 18).

Critical Habitat has not been designated for the
snake because of
concerns related to illegal collection (US FWS, 2008. p. 20). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with
wetlands. USFWS. 2008. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/081223.pdf76 Species Habitat Rationale Source Spectaclecase (mussel) (Cumberlandia monodonta) The spectaclecase generally inhabits large
rivers where it occurs in
microhabitats sheltered
from the main force of

c urrent. It occurs in a variety of substrates
from mud and sand to gravel, cobble, and boulders in relatively
shallow riffles and
shoals with a slow to
swift current. It is
most often found in firm mud between large rocks in quiet water very near the int erface with swift currents (US FWS, 2012, p 14916). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2012. Federal Register Notice: Final Rule.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pk g/FR

- 2012

- 03

- 13 /pdf/2012

- 5603.pdf

Spider, spruce

fir moss (Microhexura montivaga) Typical habitat appears
to be associated with moist, well

- drained moss mats growing on
rocks an d boulders in
well

- shaded situations in mature high

elevation conifer forests dominated by Fraser fir, Abiesfraseri, often with scattered red spruce, Picea rubens. (US FWS 1998, p. iii) The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with high

- e levation conifer
forests. US FWS, 1998, Recovery
Plan.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pk g/FR

- 2011

- 09

- 27/pdf/2011

- 24046.pdf

Squirrel,
Carolina northern flying (Glaucomys
sabrinus coloratus) Species composition of the occupied forest may vary in different locations, some
combination of
hardwoods and conifers (particularly spruce and fir) appears essential to support these
animals...Food sources
for the Carolina

n orthern flying squirrel include fungi, lichens, staminate cones, insects, and other animal matter (US FWS 1990, p. 6

- 7) The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with
hardwood and conifer
forests. USFWS. 1990. Recovery Plan for Appalachian Northern Flying Squirrels.
United States Fish and
Wildlife Service.77 Species Habitat Rationale Source Stirrupshell (Quadrula stapes) Habitat is the Tombigbee River, characterized by an
increasin g number of sand and gravel shoals and decreasing channel size in the upper portions (US FWS, 1989). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1989. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fw s.gov/docs/reco very_plan/891114e.pdf

Sturgeon, gulf (Acipenser oxyrinchus desotoi) The Gulf sturgeon is an
Anadromous fish which migrates from salt water into large coastal rivers to spawn and spend the
warm months. The majority of its life is spent in fresh water (US FWS, 1995). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1995. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/950922.pdf

Sturgeon, pallid (Scaphir hynchu s albus) Habitat is the bottom in swift waters of large, turbid, free

- flowing rivers, often over sand substrates, but other
substrates include at least gravel and rock. Sloughs, chutes, and
side channels that
transition from floodplain to the main

c hannels are apparently important as spawning, nursery, and feeding
areas. Within the subject states, this
habitat occurs in the Mississippi and Missouri rivers (US FWS, 1993, pp 6

- 7). Within this habitat, they
tend to select main
channel habitats in the
M ississippi River, and
main channel habitats
with islands or sand bars in the upper Missouri River (US FWS, 2007. p. 8). They do not typically occur in impounded areas due The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 2014. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/Pallid%20Sturgeon %20Recovery%20Plan%20Fi rst%20Revision%20signed%
20version%2 0012914_3.pdf

USFWS. 2007. Five Year
Review. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_ year_review/doc1059.pdf78 Species Habitat Rationale Source

to lower flows and other hydrologic factors, nor where
channel stabilization
has redu ced channel meandering and access to floodplain areas (US FWS, 2007, p. 38).

Tern, least interior pop. (Sterna antillarum) Species is a pi scivore, feeding in shallow waters of rivers, streams (USFWS, 1990, p. 20). Beaches, sand pits, sandbars, islands and peninsulas are the principal breeding
habitats of coastal areas and nesting can be close to water but is usually
between the dune
environ ment and the high tide line. Vegetation at coastal nesting areas is sparse,
scattered and short. Riverine nesting areas are sparsely vegetated sand and gravel bars
within a wide
unobstructed river channel, or salt flats along lake shorelines. Nesting oc curs along river banks (US FWS, 1990, p. 20). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with riparian areas, including
coastal areas. USFWS. 1990. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/900919a.pdf79 Species Habitat Rationale Source Tiger beetle,
Salt Cree k (Cicindela
nevadica lincolniana) Very specific habitat requirements and
occurs in saline
wetlands

— on exposed
saline mud flats or along mud banks of streams and seeps that contain salt deposits and are sparsely vegetated (Carter 1989; Spomer and Higley 1993; LaGrange 1997; Spomer et al. 2004a).
Larvae have been found only on moist salt flats
and salt

- encrusted
banks of Little Salt
Creek in northern Lancaster County (Spomer et al. 2004a)
and saline wetlands
associated with Rock
Creek in the southern margi n of Saunders County. Salt Creek tiger beetles require open,
barren salt flat areas (US FWS 2009, p. 2). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with
wetlands. US FWS, 2009, Recovery
Outline for the Salt Creek tiger beetle (2)

Turtle, ringed

map (Graptemys oculifera) Rivers and adjacent
white sand beaches with basking sites (brush, logs debris) (USACE) The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with
rivers or beaches. USACE. Ringed Map Turtle Species Profile. US Army Corps of Engineers, Engineer Research and Development Center, Environmental Laboratory. Turtle, yellow

blotched map (Graptemys flavimaculata) Rivers and large creeks, prefers moderate currents, abundant basking sites, and sandbars (US FWS 1993, p. 2) The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, creeks,
or other water bodies
and their associated
beaches. USFWS. 1993. Recovery
Plan for the Yellow

- blotched Map Turtle. United States
Fish and Wildlife Service

Vireo, black

capped (Vireo atricapilla) This species is an
insect

- eating, migratory songbird. They arrive in
Texas from mid

- March
to mid

- April, while
those in Oklaho ma arrive approximately 10 days later. Breeding The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with
shrublands associated with rocky gullies, edges of ravines, or eroded slopes. USFWS. 2007. Five Year
Review. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_ year_review/doc1073.pdf

USFWS. 1991. Recovery
Plan.80 Species Habitat Rationale Source habitat is quite variable across its range, but is generally shrublands
with a distinctive patchy structure. The shrub vegetation is mostly deciduous and generally extends from the ground to about six
feet ab ove ground and
covers about 30 to 60% of the total area. Open grassland separates the clumps of shrubs. (US FWS 2007, p. 7)
From Oklahoma through most of Texas, this type of vegetational configuration occurs most frequently on rocky substrates with
shall ow soils, in rocky gullies, on edges of ravines, and on eroded slopes. (US FWS 1991, p. 20) http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/910930h.pdf

Kirtland's
Warbler (Setophaga kirtlandii) Kirtland's warblers generally occupy jack pine stands that are 5

- 23 years old and at least
30 acres in size. Stands
with less than 20% canopy over are rarely used for nesting. Occupied stands usually occur on dry, excessively drained and nutrient poor glacial outwash sands. They are structurally homogenous with tr ees ranging from 1.7

- 5.0 m in height (US FWS, 2012, p. 24). Species is migratory and mobile species and breeding
areas are found in
Wisconsin. The proposed dicamba
DGA salt uses are not expected to overlap with jack pine stands. USFWS. 2012. 5

- Year
Revi ew. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_ year_review/doc4045.pdf81 Species Habitat Rationale Source Wartyback,
white (pearlymussel) (Plethobasus cicatricosus) The white wartyback has undergone a
substanti al range
reduction and is
considered to be possibly extinct. It was historically distributed in the Wabash, Ohio, Kanawha, Cumberland, Holston, and Tennessee Rivers of the Ohio, Cumberland, and
Tennessee River systems; however, no live specimens have
been recovered from these drainages since the early 1900s). The white wartyback may
still exist in a short
reach of the Tennessee
River below Pickwick Dam. No living populations have been
found in numerous surveys conducted in
the Tennessee River
since the 1960 s; however, fresh dead specimens were
collected in 1979 and
1982 below Pickwick Dam near Savannah,
Tennessee. If this species still exists, the viability of remaining populations is extremely threatened The white wartyback is a riffle species that is typi cally found in large rivers in gravel
substrates. The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with
coastal waters. USFWS, 1984, Recovery Plan White Warty

- backed Pearlymussel http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/060313h.pdf http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/life_
histories/F00M.html

Whale, finback (Balaenoptera physalus) Fin whales are found in deep, offshore waters of all major oceans, primarily in temperate to polar latitudes, and The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with
coastal waters. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ pr/ species/mammals/cetaceans/fi
nwhale.htm82 Species Habitat Rationale Source

less commonl y in the tropics. They occur

year

- round in a wide range of latitudes and longitudes, but the density of individuals in any one area changes seasonally. Whale, humpback (Megaptera novaeangliae) During migration, humpbacks stay near
the surface of the ocean.

While feeding and calving, humpbacks prefer shallow waters. During calving, humpbacks are usually
found in the warmest
waters available at that latitude. Calving grounds are commonly
near offshore reef systems, islands, or
continental shores.

Humpback feeding grounds a re in cold, productive coastal

waters. The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with
coastal waters. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/ species/mammals/cetaceans/h umpbackwhale.htm

Woodpecker,
red

- cockaded Entire (Picoides borealis) Habitat: Forest, Savannah (open pine
woodlands and savannahs with large old pines) (US FWS 2003, p. x)

Habitat size (home range): 116

– 357 acres (US FWS 2003, p. 49) Proposed dicamba DGA uses are not expected to overlap with forest or
savannah. USFWS. 2003. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws. gov/docs/reco very_plan/030320_2.pdf

Plants

Aster, decurrent false (Boltonia decurrens) The natural habitat of
the aster was the shores
of lakes and the banks of streams including the
Illinois River. It appears to require abundant light. It presently grows in such The p roposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with
the shores of
lakes/streams or other floodplain habitats where the aster may

occur. USFWS. 1990. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/900928c.pdf

USFWS. 2012. 5

- Year

Review.83 Species Habitat Rationale Source

habitats but is more
common in disturbed
lowland areas where it appears to be dependent on human activity for survival (US FWS, 1990, p. 3). It occupies unimpounded floodplain habitats along the Illinois River system; the plant relies on periodic flood pulses to maintain populations and suitable habitat (US FWS, 2012, p. 7). h ttp://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_ year_review/doc4044.pdf

Aster, Ruth's golden (Pityopsis ruthii) This species grows only
in the cracks or crevices found in phyllite o r graywacke boulders along the banks of or
within the Ocoee and Hiwassee Rivers (US FWS, 1992). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with
rivers. USFWS. 1992. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/920611.pdf

Avens, spreading (Geum radiatum) This species grows in
full sun on the shallow acidic soils of high

elevation cliffs, rocky outcrops, steep slopes, and on gravelly t alus (US FWS, 1993). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with high

- elevation cliffs, rocky outcrops, steep slopes or gravelly talus. USFWS. 1993. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/930428.pdf

bladderpod,
Missouri (Physaria filiformis) This species grows in
shallow soils on limestone glades and outcrops in pastures and rarely in rocky open
woods. Grows in
shallowest soils w ith
other annuals where
bare soil occurs and few perennials are present. Burlington limestone of Mississippian age (US FWS, 1998). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with pasture outcrops and rocky open wooded

areas. USFWS. 1998. Re covery Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/880407.pdf

Bluet, Roan
Mountain (Hedyotis

purpurea var. montana) This species grows in
shallow soils and
crevices of cliffs and outcrops and on thin rocky soils of grassy balds (US FWS, 1996). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with cliffs and outcrops. USFWS. 1996. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.f ws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/960513.pdf84 Species Habitat Rationale Source

Bush

- clover, prairie (Lespedeza leptostachya) The prairie bush clover
occurs on both
undisturbed and
disturbed sites over

san dy, loam, or gravelly
soils included at the thin margins near rock outcrops. Sites may have been previously mowed, burned or grazed (US FWS, 1988, p. 7

- 8). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with prairies. USFWS. 1988. Recovery
P lan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/881006.pdf

Butterfly plant,
Colorado (Gaura
neomexicana

var. coloradensis) This species requires early

- to mid

succession riparian habitat. It commonly occurs in habitat types that are usually
intermediate in moisture between wet,
streamside communities dominated by sedges, rushes, and cattails, and dry, upland short

- grass prair ie. Typically, Colorado butterfly plant habitat is open, without dense or overgrown vegetation (US FWS, 2010). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with riparian habitat or upland prairies. USFWS. 2010. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fw s.gov/docs/reco very_plan/Colorado%20Butte rfly%20Plant%20Recovery% 20Outline_Final_May%2020 10.pdf

Chaffseed,
American (Schwalbea americana) Habitats described as pi ne flatwoods, fire

maintained savannas,
ecotonal areas between peaty wetlands and xeric sandy soils, and other open grass

- sedge systems (US FWS, 1995). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with pine flatwoods, fire

maintained savannas, wetland or sedge dominated systems. USFWS. 1995. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/950929c.pdf

Clover, running
buffalo (Trifolium stoloniferum) Running buffalo clover
occurs in mesic habitats of partial to filtered sunlight, where there is a prolonged pattern of moderate periodic disturbance, such as mowing, trampling, or grazing. It is most often found in regions The proposed dicamba
D GA uses are not expected to overlap with
mesic habitats where the clover is expected to be
found. USFWS. 2007. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/070627.pdf85 Species Habitat Rationale Source

underlain with
lim estone or other
calcareous bedrock. Specific habitats
include mesic woodlands, savannahs, floodplains, stream banks, sandbars, grazed woodlots, mowed paths (e.g. cemeteries, parks), old logging roads, jeep trails, ATV trails, skid trails, mowed wildlife

o penings within mature forest, and steep
ravines. It has been suggested that the original habitat may have been open woods or savannah, and bison herbivory on associated species may have kept the habitats open (US FWS, 2007, p. 12.). Daisy, Lakeside (Hymenoxys herbacea) Although historical
habitats include outcrops of dolomite or limestone bedrock, dry, gravelly prairies on
terraces or hills associated with major river systems, rocky shores, sandy fields and alvars, th e Lakeside daisy in the U. S. is now restricted to dry,
thin

- soiled, degraded prairies in which
limestone or dolomite
bedrock is at or near the
surface. Habitats are alkaline, seasonally wet in spring and fall, and are moderately to extremely droughty in summer. Typically,
habitats have little topographic relief, are relatively open at the The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to ove rlap with quarries and dry prairies. USFWS. 1990. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/900919b.pdf86 Species Habitat Rationale Source ground surface, and vegetation density and diversity are relatively
low. Within these habitats, lakeside daisy occurs in open patches of ground, occupies the dry to me sic portions of
the soil moisture
continuum and has a highly aggregated
distribution. This species is either absent or infrequently found in shaded or densely vegetated areas (US FWS, 1990, pp. 20

- 21). Fern, American
hart's

- tongue (Asplenium scolopendrium

var. americanum) Early successional
habitats Northern populations occur in forests of secondary growth where canopy openings are abundant. New York populations
occur in conifer forests. Bryophyte beds are an important substrate. The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap early successional forests,
conifer forests or bryophyte beds where the species is found. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/930915.pdf

Geocarpon minimum (No common name) This species grows on sandstone glades and outcrops as well as bare, sparsely vegetated
areas where the soil contains relatively large amounts of magnesium and sodium salts (US FWS, 1993). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with the sandstone glades and outcrops where this species is expected to be
found. USFWS. 1993. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/930726.pdf

Goldenrod, Blue Ridge (Solidago spithamaea) This species grows on rock outcrops and
vertical to near vertical
cliffs in southern Appalachians of
western North Caroli na and extreme eastern TN. Rocky summits and cliffs usually appear as smaller

- scale patchy habitats embedded in larger forest consisting of The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rock outcrops and
vertical cliffs. USFWS. 1987. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/blueridge%20gold enrod%20rp.pdf87 Species Habitat Rationale Source

spruce

- fir or northern
hardwoods or occasionally high
elevation red oak forest (US FWS, 1987). Goldenrod,
Short’s (Solidago shortii) The habitat of Short's goldenrod is ope n areas in full sun or partial
shade. Known
occurrences are in limestone cedar glades, open eroded areas, edges, of open oak

hickory woods, cedar thickets, pastures, old fields, power line rights

- of

- way and rock ledges along rights

- of

way. Cedar glades a nd woodland edges appear
to be the natural habitat. Short's goldenrod was known historically and currently only from Kentucky when the Recovery Plan was written in 1988 (US FWS, pp. 3

- 4). An
Indiana occurrence was located in 2001 along
the Blue River in riparian habitat (US FWS, 2007, p. 6). The proposed dicamba
DGA salt uses are not expected to overlap with glades, woodland edges, pastures, or other habitat favorable for goldenrod growth. USFWS. 1988. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_pl an/shortsgrodRP.pdf

USFWS. 2007. 5

- Year
Review. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_ year_review/doc1609.pdf

Grass,
Tennessee yellow

- eyed (Xyris tennesseensis) Xyris tennessensis is a rare perennial monocot that is an obligate wetland plant that prefers relatively high pH seeps and
streambanks. An Obligate wetland plant
that is restricted to calcareous seeps, fens, and spring runs (US FWS, 2014). The proposed di camba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with
wetlands. USFWS. 2014. Five Year
Review. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_ year_review/doc4360.pdf

Ground

- plum,
Guth rie's (=Pyne's) This species is endemic to cedar glades (US FWS, 2011). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with cedar glades. USFWS. 2011. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/20110722b_Pyn es88 Species Habitat Rationale Source (Astragalus bibullatus) %20ground%20plum_RP_fin al_1.pdf Harperella (Ptilimnium nodosum) Harperella is known from only two locations
in North Carolina. One population occurs in the
Tar River in Granville County. Another population was
reintroduced to the Deep River recently after the original population known from that area disappeared. This p opulation occurs in Chatham County, but
the river serves as the
divide between
Chatham and Lee counties (US FWS, 1991). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with
river habitats. USFWS. 1991. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/r eco very_plan/910305b.pdf

Iris, dwarf lake (Iris lacustris) The dwarf lake iris grows along the
northern shorelines of lakes Michigan and Huron in Wisconsin,
Michi gan and Ontario, Canada. It typically
occurs in shallow soil
over moist calcareous sands, gravel and beach rubble. Sunlight is one
of the most critical factors to the growth and reproduction of the species and partly
shaded or sheltered forest edges are optimal for sexual reproduction.
Some form of
disturbance is also required to maintain the forest openings that provide these partial
shade conditions. The species is most often
associated with
shoreline coniferous forests dominated by The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with
shoreline coniferous
forests. USFWS. 2013 . Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/
DLI%20RP%20FINAL%20A UG2013_1.pdf89 Species Habitat Rationale Source

northern white ced ar and balsam fir. The principal limiting factor
for dwarf lake iris is the availability of this
suitable shoreline habitat (US FWS, 2013, pp. 6

- 7).

Ladies'

- tresses, Ute (Spiranthes diluvialis) Occurs in relatively low elevation riparian, spring, and lakeside
wetland meadows.
Endemic to mois soils
in mesic or wet meadows near springs, lakes, or perrenial
streams. Occur primarily in areas where the vegetation is relatively open and not overly dens e or overgrown, but some populations are found in riparian woodlands.
Observed to be shade

intolerant (US FWS, 1995).

Occurs in relatively low elevation riparian, spring, and lakeside
wetland meadows.
Endemic to moist soils
in mesic or wet
meadows near s prings, lakes, or perennial
streams. Occur primarily in areas where the vegetation is relatively open and not overly dense or overgrown, but some populations als found in T he proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with riverine, spring, or
lakeside wet meadows. USFWS. 1995. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/950921.pdf

USFW S. Species Profile Page. http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesPr ofile/profile/speciesProfile.act ion?spcode=Q2WA90 Species Habitat Rationale Source riparian woodlands.
Observed to be shade

intolerant (US FWS, Species Profile Page). Lichen, rock

gnome (Gymnoderma lineare) Rock gnome lichen is primarily limited to
vertical rock faces where seepage water
from forest soils above flows during (and only during) very wet times. It appears the species
needs a moderate amount of light, but that it cannot tolerate high

intensity solar radiation.
It d oes well on moist, generally open, sites,
with northern exposures, but needs at least partial canopy coverage where the aspect is southern or

western

Rock gnome lichen is
known from the Southern Appalachian
Mountains of North
Carolina and South Carolina, Tennessee, and Georgia, in areas of high humidity, either at high elevations, where it is frequently bathed in fog, or in deep gorges at lower
elevations. The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with high elevation vertical
rock faces whe re the species occurs. http://www.fws.gov/raleigh/s pecies/es_rock_gnome_lichen
.html

Lily, Minnesota
dwarf trout (Erythronium propullans) The Minnesota dwarf trout lily is most commonly found in the lower parts of wooded
north

- facing slopes, and on adjacent floodplains.
Sites are associated
either with streams or
abandoned stream
channe ls, dominated by deciduous trees. It may The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with
woodlands or floodplains. USFWS. 1987. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/060309c.pdf91 Species Habitat Rationale Source

be intolerant of shade (US FWS, 1987).

Locoweed,
Fassett's (Oxytropis campestris var. chartacea) Fassett’s locoweed grows along the shorelines of small, landlocked, hardwater
lakes where the bedrock
is ov erlain by sandy glacial drift. Nearly all
lakes with historical populations of the species are less than 15
ha in size and occur at approximately 350 m elevation. Dependent upon groundwater seepage for their water supply, most are shallow (maximum depth of a few meters) and subject to frequent, large fluctuations in
water level.

Fassett’s locoweed is found along the lakes on open shoreline and, to a lesser extent, on higher ground under the partial shade of adjacent vegetation. I t grows on gentle, sand gravel slopes and is absent from flat, low, mucky
shorelines dominated by cattails and
bulrushes. Because of periodic fluctuations in lake levels, the amount of exposed, open shoreline varies, from being virtually nonexistent during times of high water, t o about 30 m wide when
the water level is low. In all cases, Fassett’s
locoweed occurs in
areas which are The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expect ed to overlap with
the shorelines of lakes. USFWS. 1991. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/910329.pdf92 Species Habitat Rationale Source completely exposed to sunlight or receive only partial shade from other species. (US FWS, 1991, pp.4

- 5). Milkweed,
Mead's (Asclepias meadii) Mead’s milkweed occurs primarily in tallgrass prairie with a
late successional bunch

grass structure, but also occurs in hay meadows and in thin soil glades or barrens. This plant is essentially restricted to
sites that have never been plowed and only lig htly grazed, and hay
meadows that are cropped annually for hay (US FWS, 2003, p. 9). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with tallgrass prairies, hay meadows, or thing soil glades or barrens. USFWS. 2003. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos. fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/030922b.pdf

Monkshood,
northern wild (Aconitum noveboracense) Typical habitat is shaded to partially
shaded cliffs and talus slopes or in New York,
also occurs in semi

shaded seepage springs at high elevation
headwaters. Various bedrock types from
sandstones to dolomite
and others act as
substrates. All habitats
have a cold soil
environment associated
with active and
continuous cold air drainage or cold ground water flowage out of the nearby bedrock. Typically cliff and talus slope populations are
associated with openings or caves, often
ice

- filled, through
which the cold air emanates (US FWS, 1983, p. 18

- 20). The proposed dicamba
DGA u ses are not expected to overlap with cliffsides, rockfalls at cliff bases or springs
associated with cold air

or water. USFWS. 1983. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/830923.pdf93 Species Habitat Rationale Source
Orchid, eastern prairie fringed (Platanthera leucophaea) The eastern prairie fringed orchid occurs in a wide variety of habitats, from mesic prairie to wetland
communities such as sedge meadows, marsh edges and even fe ns and sphagnum bogs. It requires full sunlight for optimum growth and flowering, which restricts it to grass

- and sedge

- dominated plant
communities. The
substrate of the sites where it occurs ranges
from more or less neutral to mildly calcareous, typica lly glacial soils. It is often early successional, but
can be maintained in
mid

- to late
successional wetlands that remain open and sunny (US FWS, 1999, pp. 6

- 7). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with grass or sedge

dominated pla nt communities. USFWS. 1999. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/990929.pdf

Orchid, western prairie fringed (Platanthera praeclara) The western prairie

fringed orchid occurs primarily in tall grass prairies dominated by bluestem grass and in sedge meadows that are seasonally wet (US FWS, 1996, p. 6). They also may occur in
successional
communities such as borrow pits, old fields,
and road side ditches (US FWS, 1996, p. 4). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with prairie, meadow areas, roadside ditches, borrow pits or abandoned fields. USFWS. 1996. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/960930a.pdf

Penstemon,
blowout (Penstemon haydenii) This species grows in depressions in the topography caused by
wind erosion. Vegetation associated
with blowouts is distinctly different than The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with sandy slough slopes or
dunes. USFWS. 1992. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/920717.pdf94 Species Habitat Rationale Source vegetation associated with adjacent, non

eroding areas.

In Wyoming, blowout penstemon is found primarily on the rim and lee slopes of blowouts, or the rim and steep faces of sandy slough slopes. These deposits are
found at the base of

mou ntains or ridges, which represent topographic barriers. Shifting sand dunes are prevented from becoming fully
stabilized and overgrown because of wind and gravity. The dunes may be 60 to 120 feet high (US FWS, 1992).
Pitcher

- plant,

green (Sarracenia oreophila) Habitats for this species can be generally grouped into two types:
stream banks (considered ephemeral) and upland bogs. Upland bogs, fire dependent, range from open to forested, underlain by semi

imper vious clay layers (US FWS, 1994). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with stream banks or upland bogs. USFWS. 1994. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/941212.pdf

Pogonia, small whorled (Isotria medeoloides) The small whorled pogonia occurs on upland sites in mixed

deciduous or mixed
deciduous/coniferous
forests that are generally in second

- or third

- growth
successional s tages. It occurs on both fairly young and maturing
forest stands. Most The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with
mixed
deciduous/coniferous
fo rests. USFWS. 1992. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/921113b.pdf95 Species Habitat Rationale Source

occurrences include sparse to moderate ground cover in the species’ microhabitat, a relatively open understory canopy, and proximity to features that create long persisting breaks in the forest canopy. Soils at most sites are highly
acidic and nutrient poor, with moderately high soil moisture values. Light availability could be a limiting factor for this species. The one
Illinois site is unusual in being on a dry, steep, thinly fore sted slope atop a vertical
sandstone bluff. The one Ohio site is along
the Ohio River in a typical Appalachian

type forest association (US FWS, 1992, pp.
23

- 24). Pondberry (Lindera melissifolia) Associated with seasonally flooded
wetlands. Found on wet edges of sandy sinks, ponds, and swampy depressions. Shade tolerant (US FWS, 1993). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with
wetlands. USFWS. 1993. Recovery
Plan. http://e cos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/930923a.pdf

Potato

- bean, Price's (Apios priceana) Found in open forests along the edges of forests, creeks, and rivers (US FWS, 199 3, p. executive summary). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with forests, or water bodies. USFWS. 1993. Recovery
Plan http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/930210.pdf

Prairie

- clover, leafy (Dalea foliosa) Leafy prairie

- clover is found only in open limestone cedar glades, limestone barrens, and dolomite prairies which have shallow, silt to silty clay loam soils The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with prairies or areas with
visible bedrock. USFWS. 1996. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/900919b.pdf96 Species Habitat Rationale Source

over flat and often highly fractured, horizontally bedded
limestone or dolomite with frequent expanses of exposed bedrock at
surface. Elevations are typically between 550
and 700 feet. These habitats experience high
surfac e and soil temperatures, generally
have low soil moisture but are wet in the spring
and fall and become droughty in summer.
The distribution of glade, barren, and dry to wet dolomite prairie at any particular site
varies and leads to a
mosaic of soils and their associated plant communities (USFWS, 1996, p.13). Quillwort,
Louisiana (Isoetes louisianensis) This species grows in sandy soils and gravel
bars in or near shallow
blackwater streams and
overflow channels in riparian woodland. bayhead forests of fine flatwoods and upland longleaf pine (US FWS, 1996). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with streams, overflow channels, or riparian
woodlands. USFWS. 1996. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_pl an/960930b.pdf

Rock

- cress, Braun's (Arabis perstellata) Braun’s rockcress occurs on the slopes of calcareous mesophytic
and sub

- xeric forest types. The occurrence of this species does not appear to be limited to a particular slope aspect, elevation, or moisture regime within the slope forests. It is, however,

s un intolerant and always occurs in at least partial shade. The The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with calcareous mesophytic
and s ub

- xeric forested systems. USFWS. 1997. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/970722.pdf97 Species Habitat Rationale Source largest and most vigorous populations
occur on moist mid

- to upper slope sites. Plants
are often found around rock outcrops, protected sites on the downslope side of tree bases, and
sites of na tural disturbance, such as talus slopes and animal trails. It is rarely found growing among the
Leaf litter and
herbaceous cover of the forest floor (US FWS, 1997). Rosemary,
Cumberland (Conradina verticillata) This species is found on rocky river bars composed of unsorted boulders, cobbles, gravel and sand, with the largest populations occurring in open,
washed

- out areas near the centers of these
bars. The essential habitat requirements of this species are: open to barely shaded sites; moderately deep, sandy,
well

- drained soils with no visible organic matter; periodic forceful flooding to maintain openness; topographic features to
enhance sand deposition; and, perhaps, periods of
inundation of at least
two weeks to induce rooting at the lower nodes (pg. 8) (US FWS, 2011). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with
rivers. USFWS. 2011. Five Year
Review. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/five_ year_review/doc3629.pdf

Roseroot, Leedy's (Rhodiola New York populations occur on cliffs along the
western shore of Seneca lake. In Minnesota, The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with
cliffs. USFWS. 1998. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/98092 5.pdf98 Species Habitat Rationale Source integrifolia ssp. leedyi) populations occur on moderate cliffs, which are cooled by air exiting underground passages in the karst topography (US FWS, 1998). Sandwort,
Cumberland (Arenaria
cumberlandensi s) This species is
restricted to sandstone rock houses, ledges, and solution pockets on sandstone rock faces;
T he species is found on the sandy floors of rock houses, in solution pockets on the face of sandstone cliffs, and on ledges beneath overhanging sandstone (pg. 4) (US FWS, 1996). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with
sandstone rock houses, ledges, or rock faces. USFWS. 1996. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/960620.pdf

Skullcap, large

flowered (Scutellaria montana) This species occurs in slope, ravine, and

stream

- bottom forests in northwestern Georgia and adjacent
southeastern Tennessee.
Habitat loss and lack of
information on appropriate management are the factors limiting the
number of viable populations (US FWS,
1 996). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with
ravine and stream

bottom forests. USFWS. 1996. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/960515.pdf

Sneezeweed, Virginia (Helenium virginicum) Seasonal wetlands, sink hole ponds varying from forest settings to farm pond margins. The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap sink hole ponds and seasonal
wetlands. http://e cos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/001002.pdf99 Species Habitat Rationale Source Spiraea, Virginia (Spiraea virginiana) Spiraea virginiana is found along the banks of high gradient
sections of second and third order streams, or
on meander scrolls and point bars, natural levees, and other
braided features of lower reaches (often near the stream mouth).
The habitat is in oft

disturbed early

s uccessional areas.
Occasional flood scouring reduces shading and seems to be essential, although the spiraea can tolerate some overstory growth (US FWS, 1992, pp.17

- 18.). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with rivers, streams, cree ks,
or other water bodies. USFWS. 1992. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/921113a.pdf

Thistle,
Pitcher's (Cirsium pitcheri) It occurs on non

forested sand dunes of several types (grassland dunes, simple linear beach foredunes,
continuous and
discontinuous dune complexes), sand beaches, and sandy blowouts, primarily occurring around the Great Lakes (US FWS, 2002, p. 23

- 27). The proposed dicamba
DGA uses are not expected to overlap with sand dunes, sand beaches, or sandy
blowouts. USFWS. 2002. Recovery
Plan. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/reco very_plan/020920b.pdf100 Appendix 3. Designated Critical Habitat Modification Determinations

In addition to the species

- specific effects determinations, EFED also conducted a critical habitat modification analysis consistent with the Overview Document (USEPA, 2004) as discussed earlier in this

refined assessment

. The critical habitat modification analysis is based on an assessment of how dicamba

DGA salt would affect the U

. S

. Fish and Wildlife or National Marine Fisheries Service (the Services) established principle constituent elements (PCE’s) of the designated habitat as well as how direct species

effects ou tcomes would impact critical habitat’s present and future utility for promoting the conservation of a particular listed species. The Agency will conclude ‘modification’ of designated critical habitat if the range of designated critical habitat co

- occurs w ith the states subject to the Federal action and one or more of the following conditions exist:

1. The available Services’ information indicates that cotton or soybean fields are habitat for the species and there is a “may affect” determination for the spe cies associated with exposure to Dicamba

DGA salt or its degradate DCSA , as labeled.

2. The available Services’ information indicates that the species uses cotton or soybean fields and one or more effects on taxonomic groups predicted for dicamba DGA salt or its degradate DCSA, on

co tton or soybean fields would modify one or more of the designated PCEs.

If the above conditions are not met, EPA concludes ‘no modification.’

Results of Analysis

Of the 18 3 listed species wi thin the 16 states there are 17 3 speci es identified in the effects determinations as not using cotton or soybean fields and 1 0 species using these fields. Critical habitats have b een designated for 59 of the 183 species. Fifty

- three species with critical habitat were judged to not use

cotton or soybean fields and so the critical habitat determination for these was no modification. The remaining 6 species with critical habitat designations were assumed to use cotton or soybean fields and so the previous listed species effects determinations w ere consulted to ascertain if any were determined to be at risk for direct adverse effects. None of the species were determined to be at risk for direct adverse effects, so the PCE’s listed in the Services’ critical habitat designations were consulted to determine if, in light of the screening assessment risk findings, they would be impacted by on

- field exposure to dicamba DGA salt. For all but one of these species, the PCE’s are not relatable to agricultural fields and so a

determination of no modificati on has been made for these 5 species.

The only species using cotton or soybean fields and with critical habitat PCE’s relatable to agricultural fields was the whooping crane, for which agricultural fields were discussed as providing waste grain as a
poten tial food source for migratory cranes. The potential pathway for applications of dicamba DGA salt

to affect this PCE is by making grain potentially toxic to the birds. Because there is unlikely to be any edible waste grain remaining following cotton har vesting, it is unlikely that the proposed dicamba DGA

salt use on cotton could affect this PCE . H owever , the proposed use on soybean could affect this PCE by making waste soybean grain potentially toxic.

The Health Effect Division summarized available soy bean grain residues of dicamba in the Human Health Risk Assessment for the Registration Eligibility Decision for Dicamba and Associated Salts (DP317703). Based on the soybean trials results, maximum residues of dicamba were 0.04 ppm in hay, 0.097 ppm in

fo rage, and 8.13 ppm in seed 6

- 8 days post treatment (MRIDs 43814101 and 44089307). These measured values were used to set the tolerance value of 10 ppm for soybean seeds. The measured residues are not101 reasonably expected to be at a level raising a concern for direct effects to the whooping crane because the direct effects assessment for this species (presented on page s 9

- 10 of this assessment) did not establish a concern for residues in other dietary items at much higher (~ 1 order of magnitude) concentrati ons than
would occur at the maximum measured residues in seed or if residues were present even at the tolerance level of 10.0 ppm. Because this analysis shows no direct effects of dicamba at levels that would be expected in the fields as waste grain, an indirect effect, there is no modification of critical habitat. Similarly, measured DCSA residues in waste soy b ean grain (0.44 ppm) would be well below the

estimated DCSA c oncentrations in arthropods (42.5 ppm) used in the direct effects assessment for this species (pp 9

- 10). Therefore

, whooping crane critical habitat within the 16 states would not be modified.

Summary of Determinations for Critical Habitat

The Agency has determined that the proposed labeled use of dicamba DGA salt on cotton and soybeans

wi ll not modify designated critical habitat for the 59 species for which such habitats have been designated in AR, IL, IN, IA, KS, LA, MN, MS, MO, NE, ND, OH, OK, SD, TN, and WI.

Summary of listed species identified as not being on agricultural fields with and without critical habitat designations for the first 16 states assessed for dicamba DGA salt

Critical Habitat Designation Species Name

Species with Critical Habitat Designations (5 3 Species) 2 Bean, Purple ( Villosa perpurpurea ) Butterfly Plant, Colorado ( Gaura n eomexicana var. coloradensis ) Butterfly, Karner Blue ( Lycaeides melissa samuelis ) Cavesnail, Tumbling Creek ( Antrobia culveri ) Chub, Slender ( Erimystax cahni ) Chub, Spotfin ( Erimonax monachus ) Clubshell, Ovate ( Pleurobema perovatum ) Clubshell, Southern ( Pleurobema decisum ) Combshell, Cumberlandian ( Epioblasma brevidens ) Combshell, Upland ( Epioblasma metastriata ) Dace, Laurel ( Chrosomus sa ylori ) Darter, Amber ( Percina antesella ) Darter, Cumberland ( Eth eostoma susanae ) Darter, Leopard ( Percina pantherina ) Darter, Niangua ( Etheostoma nianguae ) Darter, Slackwater ( Etheostoma boschungi ) Darter, Snail ( Percina tanasi ) Darter, Yellowcheek ( Etheostoma moorei ) Dragonfly, Hine's Emerald ( Somatochlora hineana ) Elktoe, Appal achian ( Alasmidonta raveneliana ) Elktoe, Cumberland ( Alasmidonta atropurpurea ) Frog, Dusky Gopher ( Rana sevosa ) Kidneyshell, Fluted ( Ptychobranchus subtentum ) Kidneyshell, Triangular ( Ptychobranchus greenii ) Logperch, Conasauga ( Percina jenkinsi ) Lynx, Canada ( Lynx canadensis )

2 Critical habitat designation status determined using U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service’s Environmental Conservation Online System (ECOS) species profiles.102 Critical Habitat Designation Species Name Madtom, Chucky ( Noturus crypticus ) Madtom, Smoky ( Noturus baileyi ) Madtom, Yellowfin ( Noturus flavipinni s ) Manatee, West Indian ( Trichechus manatus ) Moccasinshell, Alabama ( Medionidus acutissimus ) Moccasinshell, Coosa ( Medionidus parvulus ) Mucket, Neosho ( Lampsilis rafinesqueana ) Mucket, Orangenacre ( Lampsilis perovalis ) Mussel, Oyster ( Epioblasma capsaeformis ) Pearlymussel, Slabside ( Pleuronaia dolabelloides ) Pigtoe, Georgia ( Pleurobema hanleyianum ) Pigtoe, Southern ( Pleurobema georgianum ) Plover, Piping (Great Lakes DPS, Northern Great Plains DPS) ( Charadrius melodus ) Rabbitsfoot ( Quadrula cylindrica cylindrica ) Rabbitsfoot, Ro ugh ( Quadrula cylindrica strigillata )
Rock

- Cress, Braun's ( Arabis perstellata ) Sculpin, Grotto ( Cottus sp. ) Sea Turtle, Green ( Chelonia mydas ) Sea Turtle, Hawksbill ( Eretmochelys imbricata ) Sea Turtle, Kemp's Rid ley ( Lepidochelys kempii ) Sea Turtle, Leatherback ( Dermochelys coriacea ) Sea Turtle, Loggerhead Northwest Atlantic DPS ( Caretta

caretta )
Shine r, Arkansas River ( Notropis girardi ) Shiner, Topeka ( Notropis topeka (=tristis )) Spruce

- Fir Moss Spider ( Microhexura montivaga ) Sturgeon, Gulf ( Acipenser oxyrinchus desotoi ) Tiger Beetle, Salt Creek ( Cicindela nevadica lincolniana )

Species without Critical Habitat Designations (123 speci es) Acornshell, Southern ( Epioblasma othcaloogensis ) Amphipod, Illinois Cave ( Gammarus acherondytes ) Aster, Decurrent False ( Boltonia decurrens ) Aster, Ruth's Golden ( Pit yopsis ruthii ) Avens, Spreading ( Geum radiatum ) Bat, Gray ( Myotis grisescens ) Bean, Cumberland (pearlymussel) ( Villosa trabalis ) Bladderpod, Missouri ( Physaria filiformis ) Blossom, Green (pearlymussel) ( Epioblasma torulosa gubernaculum ) Blossom, Tubercled (pearlymussel) ( Epioblasma torulosa
torulosa ) Blossom, Turgid (pearlymussel) ( Epioblasma turgidula ) Blossom, Yellow (pearlymussel) ( Epioblasma florentina florentina ) Bluet, Roan Mountain ( Hedyotis purpurea var. montana )
Bush

- Clover, Prairie ( Lespedeza leptostachya ) Butterfly, Mitchell's Satyr ( Neonympha mitchellii mitchellii ) Catspaw , White ( Epioblasma obliquata perobliqua )103 Critical Habitat Designation Species Name Cavefish, Ozark ( Amblyopsis rosae ) Chaffseed, American ( Schwalbea americana ) Clover, Running Buffalo ( Tr ifolium stoloniferum ) Clubshell ( Pleurobema clava ) Clubshell, Black ( Pleurobema curtum ) Combshell, Southern ( Epioblasma penita ) Crayfish, Cave ( Cambarus acul abrum ) Crayfish, Cave ( Cambarus zophonastes ) Crayfish, Nashville ( Orconectes shoupi ) Dace, Blackside ( Phoxinus cumberlandensis ) Daisy, Lakeside ( Hymeno xys acaulis var. glabra (herbacea) ) Darter, Bayou ( Etheostoma rubrum ) Darter, Bluemask (=jewel) ( Etheostoma sp. ) Darter, Boulder ( Etheostoma wapiti ) Darter, Duskytail ( Etheostoma percnurum ) Disc, Iowa Pleistocene ( Discus macclintocki ) Fanshell ( Cyprogenia stegaria ) Fatmucket, Arkansas ( Lampsilis powellii ) Fern, American Hart's

- Tongue ( Asplenium scolopendrium var. americanum ) Ferret, Black

- Footed ( Mustela nigripes ) Geocarpon minimum (No common name) Goldenrod, Blue Ridge ( Solidago sp ithamaea ) Goldenrod, Short's ( Solidago shortii ) Grass, Tennessee Yellow

- Eyed ( Xyris tennesseensis )
Ground

- Plum, Guthrie's (=Pyne's) ( Astragalus bibullatus ) Harperella ( Ptilimnium nodosum ) Heelsplitter, Alabama (=inflated) ( Potamilus inflatus ) Hellbender, Oz ark ( Cryptobranchus alleganiensis bishopi ) Higgins Eye Pearlymussel ( Lampsilis higginsii ) Iris, Dwarf Lake ( Iris lacustris ) Lampmussel, Alabama ( Lampsilis virescens ) Lichen, Rock Gnome ( Gymnoderma lineare ) Lilliput, Pa le (pearlymussel) ( Toxolasma cylindrellus ) Lily, Minnesota Dwarf Trout ( Erythronium propullans ) Locoweed , Fassett's ( Oxytropis campestris var. chartacea ) Madtom, Neosho ( Noturus placidus ) Madtom, Pygmy ( Noturus stanauli ) Madtom, Scioto ( Noturus trautmani ) Marstonia, Royal (snail) ( Pyrgulopsis ogmorhaphe ) Milkweed, Mead's ( Asclepias meadii ) Monkeyface, Appalachian (pearlymussel) ( Quadrula sparsa ) Monkeyface, Cumberland (pearlymussel) ( Quadrula
intermedia ) Monkshood, Northern Wild ( Aconitum novoboarense ) Mucket, Pink (pearlymussel) ( Lampsilis abrupta ) Mussel, Mapleleaf Winged ( Quadrula fragosa ) Mussel, Scaleshell ( Leptodea leptodon )104 Critical Habitat Designation Species Name Mussel, Sheepnose ( Plethobasus cyphyus ) Mussel, Snuffbox ( Epioblasma triquetra ) Orchid , Western Prairie White

- fringed ( Platanthera praeclara ) Orchid, Eastern Prairie White

- fringed ( Platanthera leucophaea ) Pearlshell, Louisiana ( Mar garitifera hembeli ) Pearlymussel, Birdwing ( Lemiox rimosus )

Pear lymussel, Cracking ( Hemistena lata ) Pearlymussel, Curtis ( Epioblasma florentina curtisii ) Pearlymussel, Dromedary ( Dromus dromas ) Pearlymussel, Fat Pocketbook ( Potamilus capax ) Pearlymussel, Littlewing ( Pegias fabula ) Penstemon, Blowout ( Penstemon haydenii ) Pigtoe, Cumberland ( Pleurobema gibberum ) Pigtoe, Finerayed ( Fusconaia cuneolus ) Pigtoe, Flat ( Pleurobema marshalli ) Pigtoe, Rough ( Pleurobema plenum ) Pigtoe, Shiny ( Fusconaia cor ) Pimpleback, Orangefoot ( Plethobasus cooperianus )
Pitcher

- Plant, Green ( Sarracenia oreophila ) Pocketbook, Ouachita Rock ( Arkansia wheeleri ) Pocketbook, Speckled ( Lampsilis streckeri ) Pogonia, Small Whorled ( Isotria medeoloides ) Pondberry ( Lindera melissifolia )

Potato

- Bean, Price's ( Apios priceana )
Prairie

- Clover, Leafy ( Dalea foliosa ) Purple Cat's Paw ( Epioblasma obliquata obliquata ) Quillwort, Louisiana ( Isoetes louisianens is ) Rayed Bean ( Vilosa fabalis ) Riffleshell, Northern ( Epioblasma torulosa rangiana ) Riffleshell, Tan ( Epioblasma florentina walkeri (=E. walkeri )) Ring Pink (mussel) ( Obovaria retusa ) Riversnail, Anthony's ( Athearnia anthonyi ) Rosemary, Cumberland ( Conradina verticillata ) Roseroot, Leedy's ( Rhodiola integrifolia ssp. leedyi ) Sandwort, Cumberland ( Arenaria cumberlandensis ) Sawfish, Smalltooth ( Pristis pectinata ) Shiner, Blue ( Cyprinella caerulea ) Skullcap, Large

- Flowered ( Scutellaria montana ) Snail, Painted Snake C oiled Forest ( Anguispira picta ) Sneezeweed, Virginia ( Helenium virginicum ) Spectaclecase Mussel ( Cumberlandia monodonta ) Spiraea, Virginia ( Spiraea virgin iana ) Squirrel, Carolina Northern Flying ( Glaucomys sabrinus
coloratus ) Stirrupshell ( Quadrula stapes ) Sturgeon, Pallid ( Scaphirhynchus albus )105 Critical Habitat Designation Species Name Tern, Least ( Sterna antillarum ) Thistle, Pitcher's ( Cirsium pitcheri ) Turtle, Ringed Map ( Graptemys oculifera ) Turtle, Yellow

- Blotched Map ( Graptemys flavimaculata ) Ute, Ladies'

- Tr esses, ( Spiranthes diluvialis ) Vireo, Black

- Capped ( Vireo atricapilla ) Warbler, Kirtland's ( Dendroica kirtlandii ) Wartyback, White (pearlymussel) ( Plethobasus cicatricosus ) Watersnake, Northern Copperbelly ( Nerodia erythrogaster neglecta ) Whale, Finback ( Balaenoptera physalus ) Whale, Humpback ( Megaptera novaeangliae ) Woodpecker, Red

- Cockaded ( Picoides borealis )

Summary of listed species identified as being on agricultural fields with and without critical habitat designations for the first 16 states assessed for dicamba DGA salt:

Species Name Primary Constituent Elements (PCE) Source Species with Critical Habitat Designations ( 6 Species) 3
Bat, Indiana ( Myotis sodalis ) PCE: Shelter during winter hibernation. Critical habitat designations are either mines or caves. http://ecos.fws.gov/doc s/federal_register/fr161 .pdf http://ecos.fws.gov/doc s/federal_r egister/fr83. pdf Bat, Ozark ( Corynorhinus townsendii ingens ) PCE: Not specified. Critical habitat designations are caves. http://ecos.fws.gov/doc s/federal_register/fr171 .pd f Bear, Louisiana
Black ( Ursus
americanus
luteolus ) PCE: Habitat components that provide: (i) Breeding habitat (i.e., within or contiguous to the home range of females in a core breeding population) consisting of hardwood forest areas having a diversity of age class and species and containing sources of hard mast (acorns and nuts) produced by such species as mature oaks, hickories, and pecan, and that may include one or more of the following: (A) Areas containing soft mast provided by a diversity of plan t species, including, but not limited to, blackberry, grape, mulberry, sassafras, paw paw, etc., occurring primarily in forest openings, on spoil banks, and in areas adjacent to forested habitat. (B) Areas within forested habitat providing protein

sources consisting of beetles and other colonial insects found in rotting and decaying wood found on the forest
floor. http://www.gpo.gov/fds ys/pkg/FR

- 2009

- 03

- 10/pdf/E9

- 4536.pdf#page=1

3 Critical habitat designation status determined using U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service’s Environmental Conservation Online System (ECOS) species profiles.106 Species Name Primary Constituent Elements (PCE) Source (C) Grasses and sedges found in forest openings, on spoil banks with open canopies, and in vegetated areas adjacent to forested habitats. (D) Sec ure areas for reproduction, winter dormancy, day bedding, and escape. These include areas with den trees (e.g., bald cypress, overcup oak, American sycamore, etc.); areas with a thick understory, shrub

scrub habitat, openings along spoil banks, vegetated a reas adjacent to forests, or any vegetation that provides cover, limits visibility, slows foot travel, or creates noise when traversed; early successional forests (0 to 12 years) with an open canopy and dense understory of shrubs, vines, and saplings; or a reas with vegetation such as palmetto, greenbriars, blackberry, dewberry, and
downed trees. (ii) Corridors consisting of: (A) Habitat patches 12 acres (5 hectares) or greater in size; or (B) Forested areas greater than 150 feet (46 meters) wide along water ways and sloughs and having a diversity of plant species and age

- classes of sufficient area, quality, and configuration, as described in paragraph (2)(i) of this entry, to provide dispersal habitat between breeding populations to maintain genetic variabili ty and promote stable or increasing populations, and to provide habitat supporting safe movement, foraging, and denning. Crane, Mississippi
Sandhill ( Grus canadensis pulla ) PCE: Not specified. http://ecos.fws.gov/doc s/federal_register/fr150 .pdf

Crane, Whooping ( Grus Americana ) PCE: All areas proposed in this rule would provide food, water, and other nutritional or physiological needs of the whooping crane during spring or fall migration. (1) Insects, crayfish, frogs, small fish, and
other small animals as well as some aquatic vegetation and some cereal crops in adjacent croplands appear to be major items taken during the migration period. Consumption of some cereal crops in adjacent croplands during migration period. (2) Require an open expanse for nightly rooting, esp ecially sand and gravel bars or very shallow water in rivers and lakes. (3) Whooping cranes are territorial and require several acres of undisturbed wetlands. (4) Potential nesting
habitat. http://ecos.fws.gov/doc s/federal_register/fr237 .pdf

http://ecos.fws.gov/doc s/federal_register/fr214 .pdf

Wolf, Gray ( Canis lupis ) PCE: Not specified. http://ecos.fws.gov/doc s/federal_register/fr186 .pdf107 Species Name Primary Constituent Elements (PCE) Source

Species without critical habitat designations (4 species) Beetle, American burying ( Nicrophorus
americanus ) No critical habitat rules have been published. n/a

Bladderpod, Spring Creek ( Lesquerella perforata ) 4 No critical habitat rules have been published. n/a

Prairie

- chicken,
Lesser ( Tympanuchus pallidicinctus ) No critical habitat rules have been published. n/a

Tortoise, Gopher ( Gopherus polyphemus ) No critical habitat rules have been published. n/a

4 Bold text indicates assessed species with “may effect, likely to adversely affect” determination.108 Appendix 4 . Foliar Half

- Life Calculations

Table A 4

- 1. Foliar half

- life v alues calculated from residue data as presented in the HED
review of Jimenez 1994 (MRID 43370701; DP Barcode 207649).
Dicamba
Salt Sample
Location Post
Treatment
Measurement Interval (d) Residue
Value Best Fit E quation (based on Degradation Kinetics
Guidance 1 ) F ol iar
Half

Life (d)

0.5 lb/A application

DMA+
Salt FL 0 71 SFO 8.98

FL 7 35

FL 14 26

FL 28 11

FL 56 0.53

GA 0 78 TR IORE 2.89

GA 7 10

GA 14 7.1

GA 28 1.5

GA 56 0.3

IN 0 69 TR IORE 8.46

IN 7 15

IN 14 16

IN 28 4.6

IN 56 3

KS 0 81 TR IORE 6.16

KS 7 25

KS 14 11

KS 28 6.5

KS 56 2.5

MI 0 27 TR IORE 4.69

MI 7 6.9

MI 14 3

MI 28 1

MI 56 0.8

MO 0 20 SFO 7.03

MO 7 10

MO 14 4.2

MO 28 2.6

MO 56 1.8

NE 0 28 SFO 5.13

NE 7 12

NE 14 2.7109 Table A 4

- 1. Foliar half

- life v alues calculated from residue data as presented in the HED
review of Jimenez 1994 (MRID 43370701; DP Barcode 207649).
Dicamba
Salt Sample
Location Post
Treatment
Measurement Interval (d) Residue
Value Best Fit E quation (based on Degradation Kinetics
Guidance 1 ) F ol iar
Half

Life (d)

NE 28 1.3

NE 56 0.64

OK 1 0 41 SFO 2.98

OK 1 7 8

OK 1 14 1.7

OK 1 28 0.79

OK 1 56 0.75

OK 2 0 61 TR IORE 5.58

OK 2 7 15

OK 2 14 11

OK 2 28 1.8

OK 2 56 1.2

OR 0 31 TR IORE 1.14

OR 7 2

OR 14 3.6

OR 28 3.7

OR 56 1.3

TN 0 20 TR IORE 3.18

TN 7 2.2

TN 14 2.5

TN 28 0.71

TN 56 0.74

TX 0 35 SFO 4.42

TX 7 11

TX 14 4.5

TX 28 1.9

TX 56 3.2

WI 0 39 TR IORE 4.3

WI 7 9

WI 14 4.3

WI 28 1

WI 56 0.74

DGA+
Salt GA 0 55 TR IORE 3.18

GA 7 6.3

GA 14 7.7

GA 28 1.1110 Table A 4

- 1. Foliar half

- life v alues calculated from residue data as presented in the HED
review of Jimenez 1994 (MRID 43370701; DP Barcode 207649).
Dicamba
Salt Sample
Location Post
Treatment
Measurement Interval (d) Residue
Value Best Fit E quation (based on Degradation Kinetics
Guidance 1 ) F ol iar
Half

Life (d)

GA 56 0.21

MO 0 22

MO 7 10

MO 14 5.8

MO 28 5.9

MO 56 1.4

OK 1 0 32 TR IORE 1.84

OK 1 7 2.6

OK 1 14 2.8

OK 1 28 1.3

OK 1 56 0.34

OR 0 20 SFO 3.77

OR 7 1.6

OR 14 8

OR 28 2.2

OR 56 0.59

WI 0 45 TR IORE 2.53

WI 7 5.5

WI 14 2.4

WI 28 1.2

WI 56 0.45

Na+ Salt GA 0 57 SFO 6.9

GA 7 41

GA 14 4.3

GA 28 1.4

GA 56 1

MO 0 25 TR IORE 11

MO 7 9.3

MO 14 6.6

MO 28 3.4

MO 56 0.92

OK 1 0 23 TR IORE 7.23

OK 1 7 9.2

OK 1 14 4.1

OK 1 28 2.4

OK 1 56 0.33111 Table A 4

- 1. Foliar half

- life v alues calculated from residue data as presented in the HED
review of Jimenez 1994 (MRID 43370701; DP Barcode 207649).
Dicamba
Salt Sample
Location Post
Treatment
Measurement Interval (d) Residue
Value Best Fit E quation (based on Degradation Kinetics
Guidance 1 ) F ol iar
Half

Life (d)

OR 0 29 TR IORE 2.84

OR 7 3.5

OR 14 5.5

OR 28 2.8

OR 56 3.3

WI 0 42 TR IORE 2.67

WI 7 5.2

WI 14 3.1

WI 28 0.68

WI 56 0.38

DMA+
Salt FL 0 76 SFO 12.3

FL 7 36

FL 14 38

FL 28 19

FL 56 1.6

GA 0 87 TR IORE 4.08

GA 7 18

GA 14 8.1

GA 28 4.3

GA 56 0.4

IN 0 102

IN 7 306

IN 14 48

IN 28 16

IN 56 2.6

KS 0 49 TR IORE 12.1

KS 7 28

KS 14 18

KS 28 8.6

KS 56 2.4

MI 0 44 TR IORE 4.75

MI 7 11

MI 14 3.7

MI 28 3.1

MI 56 1.2

MO 0 42 TR IORE 6.93112 Table A 4

- 1. Foliar half

- life v alues calculated from residue data as presented in the HED
review of Jimenez 1994 (MRID 43370701; DP Barcode 207649).
Dicamba
Salt Sample
Location Post
Treatment
Measurement Interval (d) Residue
Value Best Fit E quation (based on Degradation Kinetics
Guidance 1 ) F ol iar
Half

Life (d)

MO 7 5.7

MO 14 5.8

MO 28 4.5

MO 56 2.2

NE 0 54 TR IORE 3.84

NE 7 12

NE 14 4.5

NE 28 1.4

NE 56 0.74

OK 1 0 47 SFO 5.02

OK 1 7 20

OK 1 14 4

OK 1 28 1.7

OK 1 56 0.36

OK 2 0 101 TR IORE 5.77

OK 2 7 30

OK 2 14 15

OK 2 28 6.8

OK 2 56 0.88

OR 0 11 SFO 35.2

OR 7 5.6

OR 14 3.2

OR 28 7.7

OR 56 2.9

TN 0 5

TN 7 5.9

TN 14 3.5

TN 28 3.2

TN 56 0.96

TX 0 77 TR IORE 6.67

TX 7 21

TX 14 11

TX 28 6.9

TX 56 2.9

WI 0 571 TR IORE 1.11

WI 7 21113 Table A 4

- 1. Foliar half

- life v alues calculated from residue data as presented in the HED
review of Jimenez 1994 (MRID 43370701; DP Barcode 207649).
Dicamba
Salt Sample
Location Post
Treatment
Measurement Interval (d) Residue
Value Best Fit E quation (based on Degradation Kinetics
Guidance 1 ) F ol iar
Half

Life (d)

WI 14 4.2

WI 28 4.1

WI 56 0.82

DGA+
Salt FL 0 65 TR IORE 4.38

FL 7 14

FL 14 8.5

FL 28 1.8

FL 56 0.069

MI 0 29 TR IORE 17.3

MI 7 9.7

MI 14 9.8

MI 28 3.3

MI 56 2.7

NE 0 36 TR IORE 5.92

NE 7 14

NE 14 6

NE 28 2.1

NE 56 0.078

OK 2 0 9.1 SFO 28.9

OK 2 7 5.3

OK 2 14 4.1

OK 2 28 5.3

OK 2 56 2.2

TX 0 99 SFO 2.83

TX 7 18

TX 14 2.5

TX 28 4.6

TX 56 0.81

Na+ Salt FL 0 60 TR IORE 4.81

FL 7 18

FL 14 7.1

FL 28 2.5

FL 56 0.26

MO 0 51 TR IORE 8.43

MO 7 7.1

MO 14 8.9114 Table A 4

- 1. Foliar half

- life v alues calculated from residue data as presented in the HED
review of Jimenez 1994 (MRID 43370701; DP Barcode 207649).
Dicamba
Salt Sample
Location Post
Treatment
Measurement Interval (d) Residue
Value Best Fit E quation (based on Degradation Kinetics
Guidance 1 ) F ol iar
Half

Life (d)

MO 28 4.3

MO 56 3.4

OK 1 0 62 SFO 7

OK 1 7 29

OK 1 14 7.8

OK 1 28 21

OK 1 56 0.93

OR 0 14 SFO 14.9

OR 7 7.2

OR 14 4.1

OR 28 6

OR 56 2.3

WI 0 110 SFO 2.89

WI 7 21

WI 14 1.2

WI 28 1.4

WI 56 0.4 1.0 lb/A application

Dicamba
acid FL 0 120 TR IORE 10.3

FL 7 33

FL 14 26

FL 28 19

FL 56 0.72

GA 0 88 TR IORE 4.18

GA 7 21

GA 14 8.6

GA 28 3

GA 56 0.46

IN 0 116 TR IORE 9.81

IN 7 41

IN 14 27

IN 28 17

IN 56 1.4

KS 0 116 TR IORE 9.37

KS 7 30

KS 14 24115 Table A 4

- 1. Foliar half

- life v alues calculated from residue data as presented in the HED
review of Jimenez 1994 (MRID 43370701; DP Barcode 207649).
Dicamba
Salt Sample
Location Post
Treatment
Measurement Interval (d) Residue
Value Best Fit E quation (based on Degradation Kinetics
Guidance 1 ) F ol iar
Half

Life (d)

KS 28 14

KS 56 3.4

MI 0 75 SFO 4.74

MI 7 29

MI 14 6.5

MI 28 3.3

MI 56 1.6

MO 0 53 TR IORE 14.8

MO 7 25

MO 14 14

MO 28 11

MO 56 3.6

NE 0 34 SFO 5.36

NE 7 15

NE 14 3.9

NE 28 1.6

NE 56 0.8

OK 1 0 81 TR IORE 2.74

OK 1 7 10

OK 1 14 6.8

OK 1 28 1.2

OK 1 56 0.88

OK 2 0 119 TR IORE 5.25

OK 2 7 30

OK 2 14 17

OK 2 28 6.3

OK 2 56 1.1

OR 0 43 SFO 3.37

OR 7 5.1

OR 14 12

OR 28 7.4

OR 56 3

TN 0 78 TR IORE 1.87

TN 7 7.4

TN 14 2.4

TN 28 2.5116 Table A 4

- 1. Foliar half

- life v alues calculated from residue data as presented in the HED
review of Jimenez 1994 (MRID 43370701; DP Barcode 207649).
Dicamba
Salt Sample
Location Post
Treatment
Measurement Interval (d) Residue
Value Best Fit E quation (based on Degradation Kinetics
Guidance 1 ) F ol iar
Half

Life (d)

TN 56 1.6

TX 0 84 SFO 4.06

TX 7 25

TX 14 8

TX 28 2.6

TX 56 3.1

WI 0 64 TR IORE 5.15

WI 7 16

WI 14 9.5

WI 28 2.5

WI 56 0.9 2.0 lb/A application

DMA+

Salt FL 0 206 SFO 11.5

FL 7 163

FL 14 81

FL 28 35

FL 56 1.6

FL 0 487 TR IORE 9.75

FL 7 155

FL 14 138

FL 28 53

FL 56 4.6

GA 0 251 TR IORE 4.49

GA 7 52

GA 14 36

GA 28 6.6

GA 56 0.51

GA 0 310 TR IORE 4.28

GA 7 63

GA 14 39

GA 28 10

GA 56 0.58

IN 0 240 SFO 10.2

IN 7 131

IN 14 83

IN 28 57117 Table A 4

- 1. Foliar half

- life v alues calculated from residue data as presented in the HED
review of Jimenez 1994 (MRID 43370701; DP Barcode 207649).
Dicamba
Salt Sample
Location Post
Treatment
Measurement Interval (d) Residue
Value Best Fit E quation (based on Degradation Kinetics
Guidance 1 ) F ol iar
Half

Life (d)

IN 56 5

IN 0 477 SFO 7.17

IN 7 67

IN 14 220

IN 28 110

IN 56 6.1

KS 0 273 TR IORE 4.82

KS 7 50

KS 14 35

KS 28 18

KS 56 4.6

KS 0 245 TR IORE 8.84

KS 7 72

KS 14 49

KS 28 28

KS 56 8.1

MI 0 96 SFO 8.56

MI 7 85

MI 14 15

MI 28 3.8

MI 56 1.8

MI 0 202 SFO 3.53

MI 7 54

MI 14 6.3

MI 28 8.2

MI 56 2.1

MO 0 82 SFO 16.4

MO 7 57

MO 14 34

MO 28 33

MO 56 8

MO 0 136 SFO 9.85

MO 7 63

MO 14 47

MO 28 33

MO 56 14118 Table A 4

- 1. Foliar half

- life v alues calculated from residue data as presented in the HED
review of Jimenez 1994 (MRID 43370701; DP Barcode 207649).
Dicamba
Salt Sample
Location Post
Treatment
Measurement Interval (d) Residue
Value Best Fit E quation (based on Degradation Kinetics
Guidance 1 ) F ol iar
Half

Life (d)

NE 0 115 SFO 3.91

NE 7 35

NE 14 6.4

NE 28 2.8

NE 56 2.1

NE 0 227 TR IORE 2.49

NE 7 26

NE 14 15

NE 28 6.5

NE 56 2.2

OK 1 0 131 TR IORE 3.64

OK 1 7 18

OK 1 14 18

OK 1 28 2.5

OK 1 56 2.3

OK 1 0 174 TR IORE 5.75

OK 1 7 64

OK 1 14 28

OK 1 28 7

OK 1 56 5.5

OK 2 0 138 SFO 8.69

OK 2 7 53

OK 2 14 64

OK 2 28 12

OK 2 56 2.6

OK 2 0 412 TR IORE 4.98

OK 2 7 77

OK 2 14 57

OK 2 28 26

OK 2 56 6.3

OR 0 71 SFO 5.52

OR 7 16

OR 14 23

OR 28 12

OR 56 4.9

OR 0 33119 Table A 4

- 1. Foliar half

- life v alues calculated from residue data as presented in the HED
review of Jimenez 1994 (MRID 43370701; DP Barcode 207649).
Dicamba
Salt Sample
Location Post
Treatment
Measurement Interval (d) Residue
Value Best Fit E quation (based on Degradation Kinetics
Guidance 1 ) F ol iar
Half

Life (d)

OR 7 28

OR 14 32

OR 28 44

OR 56 19

TN 0 99 TR IORE 1.22

TN 7 7.9

TN 14 4.1

TN 28 5.5

TN 56 2

TN 0 82 TR IORE 4.09

TN 7 12

TN 14 8.8

TN 28 5.5

TN 56 2.4

TX 0 64 SFO 12.3

TX 7 78

TX 14 19

TX 28 6.3

TX 56 9

TX 0 346 SFO 4.64

TX 7 120

TX 14 39

TX 28 28

TX 56 5.5

WI 0 98 SFO 4.59

WI 7 35

WI 14 10

WI 28 3.8

WI 56 2.6

WI 0 116 SFO 10.5

WI 7 138

WI 14 14

WI 28 16

WI 56 4

DGA+

Salt GA 0 244 TR IORE 3.55

GA 7 45120 Table A 4

- 1. Foliar half

- life v alues calculated from residue data as presented in the HED
review of Jimenez 1994 (MRID 43370701; DP Barcode 207649).
Dicamba
Salt Sample
Location Post
Treatment
Measurement Interval (d) Residue
Value Best Fit E quation (based on Degradation Kinetics
Guidance 1 ) F ol iar
Half

Life (d)

GA 14 22

GA 28 5.2

GA 56 0.42

GA 0 509 TR IORE 2.64

GA 7 61

GA 14 39

GA 28 12

GA 56 1

MO 0 75 SFO 19.3

MO 7 79

MO 14 52

MO 28 23

MO 56 10

MO 0 132 TR IORE 23.3

MO 7 38

MO 14 48

MO 28 23

MO 56 6.8

OK 1 0 123 SFO 3.03

OK 1 7 24

OK 1 14 6.2

OK 1 28 8.6

OK 1 56 2.4

OK 1 0 231 SFO 6.19

OK 1 7 126

OK 1 14 30

OK 1 28 7.5

OK 1 56 0.92

OR 0 69 SFO 4.23

OR 7 8

OR 14 24

OR 28 18

OR 56 2.6

OR 0 49

OR 7 29

OR 14 27121 Table A 4

- 1. Foliar half

- life v alues calculated from residue data as presented in the HED
review of Jimenez 1994 (MRID 43370701; DP Barcode 207649).
Dicamba
Salt Sample
Location Post
Treatment
Measurement Interval (d) Residue
Value Best Fit E quation (based on Degradation Kinetics
Guidance 1 ) F ol iar
Half

Life (d)

OR 28 37

OR 56 12

WI 0 98 TR IORE 5.24

WI 7 27

WI 14 13

WI 28 5.1

WI 56 1.6

WI 0 287 SFO 3.17

WI 7 64

WI 14 8

WI 28 15

WI 56 2.7

Na+ Salt GA 0 358

GA 7 8.2

GA 14 47

GA 28 6.4

GA 56 0.17

GA 0 559 TR IORE 2.39

GA 7 62

GA 14 36

GA 28 9.3

GA 56 0.1

MO 0 92 SFO 11.2

MO 7 54

MO 14 28

MO 28 28

MO 56 7.3

MO 0 134 SFO 7.61

MO 7 39

MO 14 56

MO 28 17

MO 56 15

OK 1 0 131 TR IORE 9.49

OK 1 7 28

OK 1 14 28

OK 1 28 14122 Table A 4

- 1. Foliar half

- life v alues calculated from residue data as presented in the HED
review of Jimenez 1994 (MRID 43370701; DP Barcode 207649).
Dicamba
Salt Sample
Location Post
Treatment
Measurement Interval (d) Residue
Value Best Fit E quation (based on Degradation Kinetics
Guidance 1 ) F ol iar
Half

Life (d)

OK 1 56 4.7

OK 1 0 206 SFO 4.75

OK 1 7 71

OK 1 14 31

OK 1 28 3

OK 1 56 3.9

OR 0 94 TR IORE 8.24

OR 7 9.4

OR 14 16

OR 28 15

OR 56 1

OR 0 44 SFO 43.7

OR 7 38

OR 14 11

OR 28 50

OR 56 7.7

WI 0 99 TR IORE 4.41

WI 7 19

WI 14 13

WI 28 3.9

WI 56 0.72

WI 0 342 TR IORE 2.83

WI 7 45

WI 14 23

WI 28 14

WI 56 1.4

Mean 7.272828

Standard Deviation 6.580145

n 99

Maximum 43.7

Minimum 1.11 Upper 90% CI on the mean 8.360618

1 2012 Memorandum from the Fate Tech Team: Release of NAFTA Guidance for Evaluating and Calculating Degradation Kinetics in Environmental Media.123 Appendix 5

. Lesser Prairie

- Chicken habitat characteristics identified by Jamison et al. (2002)

.

Study Location(s) Habitat(s) Studied Species

- Specific Habitat Characteristics

1 New Mexico Cropland, idle, shinnery oak ( Quercus
havardii ) pasture, shortgrass pasture, tame pasture Hens with broods preferred shinnery oak pasture over cropland, fallow cropland, shortgrass, and tame pastures; broods used sites characterized by 25% canopy cover of vegetation, canopy height of about 30 cm, 24

- 39% basal composition of shrubs,
47

- 60% grasses, and 13

- 26% basal composition of forbs; adults used grain sorghum fields during
autumn and winter

2 Kansas Cropland, sand sagebrush ( Artemisia filifolia ) pasture Nested in sand sagebrush pasture and foraged in cropland during winter

3 Oklahoma Burned shinnery oak pasture, burned tame pasture, shinnery oak pasture Continued to display at a lek in burned pasture;
males relocated from an unburned lek to a historical site in a burned weeping lovegrass ( Eragrostis curvula ) pasture and initia ted display at a new site in burned shinnery oak/bluestem ( Andropogon ) pasture

4 Oklahoma Sand sagebrush pasture, shinnery oak pasture Densities of birds in shinnery oak pasture were positively correlated with grass cover and grass frequency along transec ts, and with percent of grassland cover types identified from satellite imagery; in sand sagebrush pasture, numbers of birds were positively correlated with percent cover of shrubs and grass frequency along transects, but were not associated with percentag es of cover types identified from satellite imagery

5 Oklahoma Cropland, mixed

- grass pasture, sand sagebrush pasture, shinnery oak pasture Nested in residual grasses and shinnery oak; raised broods in shinnery oak thickets; foraged in cropland (food plots) during winter

6 Texas Honey mesquite ( Prosopis glandulosa )/shortgrass pasture, shinnery oak pasture Preferred pastures dominated by shinnery oak and sand bluestem ( Andropogon hallii ); avoided honey mesquite/shortgrass areas; nested more
successfull y in residual sand bluestem than in other vegetation types; selected nest sites with north or northeast aspects, more litter and less bare ground than elsewhere in the habitat, and taller vegetation than the average vegetation height within 3 m; broods pre ferred shinnery oak/sand bluestem pasture and avoided mesquite/shortgrass habitat; broods foraged at sites with a minimum vegetation height of 24 cm and lower grass124 Study Location(s) Habitat(s) Studied Species

- Specific Habitat Characteristics

abundance and greater shrub abundance than generally was available

7 Oklahoma Cropland, na tive
pasture Displayed on sparsely vegetated, flat

- topped ridges overlooking expansive areas of native pasture and on slightly raised knolls that provided unobstructed views of broad valleys

8 Oklahoma Sand sagebrush pasture, shinnery oak pasture More individuals were encountered in phenoxy
herbicide

- treated shinnery oak and phenoxy
herbicide

- treated sand sagebrush pastures than in untreated habitats of the same types

9 Colorado Sand sagebrush
pasture Nested among taller grasses (36 vs. 27 cm), forbs ( 21 vs. 16 cm), and shrubs (48 vs. 38 cm), and denser vegetation (32 vs. 20 cm) compared to areas within 5 m; nested mostly under sand sagebrush and yucca ( Yucca glauca ); at 29 nest sites, tallest vegetation averaged 51 cm, sand sagebrush plant density was 3471 plants/ha, sand sagebrush cover was 7.2%, grass cover was 29.4%, forb cover was 1.4%, and bare ground was
69.5%

10 Texas Shinnery oak/sand sagebrush pasture Selected untreated shinnery oak pastures for nesting over tebuthiuron

- treated pastures of the same type; eight of 10 females that were captured
in tebuthiuron

- treated areas later nested in untreated shinnery oak; 13 nests were in residual grasses with 42% overhead cover, average plant height of 45 cm, and average visual obstruction of
61

- 80% in th e first 33 cm above ground; vegetation was dominated by purple three

- awn ( Aristida purpurea ) at nine nest sites, little bluestem ( Schizachyrium scoparium ) at three nests, and sand bluestem at one nest

11 Colorado Cropland, mixed

- grass pasture, sand sagebrush pasture Males displayed at lek sites on slightly elevated terrain or on level flats; foraged in cropland during
winter

12 Texas Cropland, sand sagebrush pasture, shinnery oak pasture Used pastures vegetated by sand sagebrush, chickasaw plum ( Pru nus angustifolia ), fragrant sumac ( Rhusaromatica var. trilobata ), shinnery oak, sand bluestem, little bluestem, sand lovegrass ( Eragrostis trichodes ), sand dropseed ( Sporobolus cryptandrus ), thin paspalum ( Paspalum

setaceum ), switchgrass ( Panicum virgatum )

, Indiangrass ( Sorghastrum nutans ), and various forbs; foraged in cropland during winter125 Study Location(s) Habitat(s) Studied Species

- Specific Habitat Characteristics

13 Kansas Cropland, sand sagebrush pasture Males preferred habitats vegetated by sand sagebrush, blue grama ( Bouteloua gracilis ), sideoats grama ( Bouteloua curtipendu la ), paspalum ( Paspalum sp.), bluestem, western ragweed ( Ambrosia psilostachya ), sunflowers ( Helianthus spp.), Russian

- thistle ( Salsola
iberica ), prickly pear ( Opuntia sp.), and yucca and used cultivated fields, tallgrass and CRP, and other grassland habit ats less than expected; median sizes of areas used by males were 12

- 140 ha in April and May, 77

- 144 ha from June through September, and 229

- 409 ha in October and
November

14 Oklahoma Sand sagebrush/mixed

grass pasture Displayed in areas dominated by buffalograss; raised broods in areas with 22.8% sand sagebrush and 15.7% western ragweed; foraged in mixed

grass, rested among shrubs, and nested in residual grasses; broods also used shrubs; on a year

- round basis, foraged mostly in grass, especially mixed

grass 25

- 80 cm in height; tallgrass, shortgrass, and shrub vegetation were used equally; sixweeks fescue ( Festuca octoflora ) and fragrant sumac were important food items; during spring, used shrubs <80 cm tall; used grasses and forbs 25

- 80 cm in height du ring summer, and grasses 25

- 80 cm tall during autumn; in winter, used tallgrass (specific heights of tallgrass species were not given)

15 New Mexico Cropland, shinnery oak/sand sagebrush
pasture Used pastures vegetated by shinnery oak, bluestem grasses, s and sagebrush, sunflower, honey mesquite, plum, yucca, dropseed, black grama ( Bouteloua eriopoda ), blue grama, and sideoats grama; foraged in grain sorghum and corn fields from fall through spring

16 New Mexico, Oklahoma,
Texas Cropland, shinnery oak past ure, shinnery
oak/little bluestem pasture Annual rates of habitat change were greater around leks with declining populations than at leks with stable populations (1.14% vs. 0.21% annually)

17 New Mexico Shinnery oak pasture, shortgrass pasture Displayed o n oil pads and in native pasture

18 New Mexico Cropland, oldfield, shinnery oak pasture, shortgrass pasture,
tame pasture Nested in shinnery oak habitats with little bluestem, sand bluestem, and purple three

- awn; avoided weeping lovegrass, cultivated, oldfield, and shortgrass habitats126 Study Location(s) Habitat(s) Studied Species

- Specific Habitat Characteristics

19 New Mexico,
Texas Shinnery oak/sand sagebrush pasture Occurred in similar densities in tebuthiuron

treated and untreated shinnery oak pastures

20 New Mexico Shinnery oak pasture, shortgrass pasture Nested in shinnery oak habitats dominated by sand bluestem; vegetation was taller at 10 successful than 26 unsuccessful nests (67 vs. 35 cm); percent composition of shrubs was similar at successful and unsuccessful nests (basal composition 31

- 66%); 22 autumn foraging sites w ere 63% grasses and 37% shrubs, 50 winter sites were 59% grasses and 41% shrubs (forbs were rare); broods foraged
in 25

- cm tall shinnery oak and three

- awn ( Aristida sp.), bare ground at 12 sites averaged 63%, basal composition of vegetation was 43% grass, 42% shrubs, and 15% forbs; daily movements of 40 prenesting females were 390 m/day within 231

- ha ranges; 12 nesting hens moved 250 m/day, and ranges averaged 92 ha; three hens with broods moved an average of 280 m/day within 119

- ha ranges; movements of 19 females without broods was 220 m/day within 73

- ha ranges

22 New Mexico Shinnery oak/sand sagebrush pasture Hens generally used habitats with large unstable sand dunes, abundant shinnery oak, low grass cover, and low structural density; nested in sand sagebrush, residual grasses, and shinnery oak; five of eight nests were under sand sagebrush, two nests were in purple three

- awn, and one nest was in shinnery oak; visual obstruction and canopy cover of sand sagebrush were significantly higher
at nest site s than in surrounding habitat (specific values for visual obstruction, canopy cover, and canopy height were not given)

23 Texas Cropland, oldfield, shinnery oak pasture, shortgrass pasture, tame pasture Prenesting and nesting hens preferred shinnery
oak h abitat characterized by rolling dunes and dominated primarily by shinnery oak, habitat dominated by little bluestem and sand bluestem, or habitat dominated by three

- awn and shinnery oak; canopy coverage of grasses within 3 m of nest
sites was 3.1

- 13.2%, sh rub canopy was 21.4

- 28.3%, and canopy coverage of all vegetation was
31.4

- 38.4%; nests in grasses were more successful (4 of 5 successful) than those under shrubs (3 of 10 successful)

24 New Mexico Cropland, oldfield, shinnery oak pasture, shortgrass past ure, tame pasture Prenesting and nesting hens preferred shinnery oak habitat characterized by rolling dunes and dominated primarily by shinnery oak, habitat dominated by little bluestem and sand bluestem, or127 Study Location(s) Habitat(s) Studied Species

- Specific Habitat Characteristics

habitat dominated by three

- awn and shinnery oak; canopy coverage of grasses within 3 m of nest
sites was 3.1

- 13.2%, shrub canopy was 21.4

- 28.3%, and canopy coverage of all vegetation was
31.4

- 38.4%; nests in grasses were more successful (4 of 5 successful) than those under shrubs (3 of 10 successful)

2 5 New Mexico, Oklahoma,
Texas Cropland, shinnery oak pasture, shinnery
oak/little bluestem pasture Populations stabilized or increased in landscapes (7238

- ha areas) in which low

- density shrubland composed 79.% of the total area and declined in landscapes with 43.2% low

- density shrubland; total shrubland composed 81.9% around leks that did not decline and 63.4% of the landscape around declining leks; declined in areas where landscapes were unstable (e.g., experienced frequent changes
from one landcover to a nother); population trends were positively correlated with loss of total
shrubland