Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 49945 

CONTACT section of this document for 

alternate instructions. 

We accept anonymous comments. All 

comments received will be posted 

without change to https://

www.regulations.gov and will include 

any personal information you have 

provided. For more about privacy and 

submissions in response to this 

document, see DHS’s eRulemaking 

System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, 

March 11, 2020). 

Documents mentioned in this NPRM 

as being available in the docket, and all 

public comments, will be in our online 

docket at https://www.regulations.gov 

and can be viewed by following that 

website’s instructions. Additionally, if 

you go to the online docket and sign up 

for email alerts, you will be notified 

when comments are posted or a final 

rule is published. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100 

Marine safety, Navigation (water), 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Waterways. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard is proposing 

to amend 33 CFR part 100 as follows: 

PART 100—SAFETY OF LIFE ON 

NAVIGABLE WATERS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 100 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70041; 33 CFR 1.05– 

1. 

■ 2. Add § 100.T08–0679 to read as 

follows: 

§ 100.T08–0679 Tennessee River MM 462.7 

to 465.5 

(a) Regulated area. The regulations in 

this section apply to the following area: 

Tennessee River MM 462.7 to 465.5 

extending the entire width of the river. 

(b) Regulations. (1) All nonparticipants are prohibited from 

entering, transiting through, anchoring 

in, or remaining within the regulated 

area described in paragraph (a) of this 

section unless authorized by the Captain 

of the Port Sector Ohio Valley (COTP) 

or their designated representative. 

(2) To seek permission to enter, 

contact the COTP or the COTP’s 

representative by phone at 502–779– 

5422. Those in the regulated area must 

comply with all lawful orders or 

directions given to them by the COTP or 

the designated representative. 

(3) The COTP will provide notice of 

the regulated area through advanced 

notice via broadcast notice to mariners 

and local notice to mariners. 

(c) Enforcement period. This section 

will be enforced from 7 a.m. to 9 a.m. 

on October 23, 2021. 

Dated: August 27, 2021. 

A.M. Beach, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port Sector Ohio Valley. 

[FR Doc. 2021–19104 Filed 9–3–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

[Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2021–0053; 

FF09E21000 FXES11110900000 212] 

RIN 1018–BF38 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Designation of Critical 

Habitat for the Miami Tiger Beetle 

(Cicindelidia Floridana) 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), propose to 

designate critical habitat for the Miami 

tiger beetle (Cicindelidia floridana) 

under the Endangered Species Act (Act). 

In total, approximately 1,977 acres (ac) 

(800 hectares (ha)) in Miami-Dade 

County, Florida, fall within the 

boundaries of the proposed critical 

habitat designation. If we finalize this 

rule as proposed, it would extend the 

Act’s protections to this species’ critical 

habitat. We also announce the 

availability of a draft economic analysis 

of the proposed designation of critical 

habitat for the Miami tiger beetle. 

DATES: We will accept comments 

received or postmarked on or before 

November 8, 2021. Comments submitted 

electronically using the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES, 

below) must be received by 11:59 p.m. 

Eastern Time on the closing date. We 

must receive requests for a public 

hearing, in writing, at the address 

shown in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT by October 22, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by one of the following methods: 

(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal: http://

www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, 

enter FWS–R4–ES–2021–0053, which is 

the docket number for this rulemaking. 

Then, click on the Search button. On the 

resulting page, in the Search panel on 

the left side of the screen, under the 

Document Type heading, check the 

Proposed Rule box to locate this 

document. You may submit a comment 

by clicking on ‘‘Comment.’’ 

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

to: Public Comments Processing, Attn: 

FWS–R4–ES–2021–0053, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, MS: PRB/3W, 5275 

Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041– 

3803. 

We request that you send comments 

only by the methods described above. 

We will post all comments on http://

www.regulations.gov. This generally 

means that we will post any personal 

information you provide us (see 

Information Requested, below, for more 

information). 

Availability of supporting materials: 

For the critical habitat designation, the 

coordinates or plot points or both from 

which the maps are generated are 

included in the decision file for this 

rulemaking and are available at http:// 

www.regulations.gov under Docket No. 

FWS–R4–ES–2021–0053 and at 

www.fws.gov/verobeach/. Any 

supporting information that we 

developed for this critical habitat 

designation will be available on the 

Service’s website or at http://

www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Roxanna Hinzman, Field Supervisor, 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Florida 

Ecological Services Field Office, 1339 

20th Street, Vero Beach, FL 32960; 

telephone 772–562–3909. Persons who 

use a telecommunications device for the 

deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Relay 

Service at 800–877–8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Executive Summary 

Why we need to publish a rule. Under 

the Endangered Species Act, any species 

that is determined to be a threatened or 

endangered species requires critical 

habitat to be designated, to the 

maximum extent prudent and 

determinable. Designations and 

revisions of critical habitat can only be 

completed by issuing a rule. 

What this document does. We 

propose the designation of critical 

habitat for the Miami tiger beetle, which 

is listed as endangered. 

The basis for our action. Section 

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

as (i) the specific areas within the 

geographical area occupied by the 

species, at the time it is listed, on which 

are found those physical or biological 

features (I) essential to the conservation 

of the species and (II) which may 

require special management 

considerations or protections; and (ii) 

specific areas outside the geographical 

area occupied by the species at the time 

it is listed, upon a determination by the 

Secretary that such areas are essential 

for the conservation of the species. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
49946 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

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

Secretary must make the designation on 

the basis of the best scientific data 

available and after taking into 

consideration the economic impact, the 

impact on national security, and any 

other relevant impacts of specifying any 

particular area as critical habitat. 

Draft economic analysis of the 

proposed designation of critical habitat. 

In order to consider the economic 

impacts of critical habitat for the Miami 

tiger beetle, we compiled information 

pertaining to the potential incremental 

economic impacts for this proposed 

critical habitat designation. The 

information we used in determining the 

economic impacts of the proposed 

critical habitat is summarized in this 

proposed rule (see Consideration of 

Economic Impacts) and is available at 

http://www.regulations.gov at Docket 

No. FWS–R4–ES–2021–0053 and at the 

Florida Ecological Services Field Office 

at http://ww.fws.gov/verobeach/ (see 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). We 

are soliciting public comments on the 

economic information provided and any 

other potential economic impact of the 

proposed designation. We will continue 

to reevaluate the potential economic 

impacts between this proposal and our 

final designation. 

Public comment. We are seeking 

comments and soliciting information 

from the public on our proposed 

designation to make sure we consider 

the best scientific and commercial 

information available in developing our 

final designation. Because we will 

consider all comments and information 

we receive during the comment period, 

our final determination may differ from 

this proposal. We will respond to and 

address comments received in our final 

rule. 

We will seek peer review. We are 

seeking comments from independent 

specialists to ensure that our proposal is 

based on scientifically sound data and 

analyses. We have invited these peer 

reviewers to comment on our specific 

assumptions and conclusions in this 

critical habitat proposal. 

Information Requested 

We intend that any final action 

resulting from this proposed rule will be 

based on the best scientific and 

commercial data available and be as 

accurate and as effective as possible. 

Therefore, we request comments or 

information from other governmental 

agencies, Native American Tribes, the 

scientific community, industry, or any 

other interested parties concerning this 

proposed rule. We particularly seek 

comments concerning: 

(1) The reasons why we should or 

should not designate habitat as ‘‘critical 

habitat’’ under section 4 of the Act (16 

U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), including 

information to inform the following 

factors that the regulations identify as 

reasons why designation of critical 

habitat may be not prudent: 

(a) The species is threatened by taking 

or other human activity and 

identification of critical habitat can be 

expected to increase the degree of such 

threat to the species; 

(b) The present or threatened 

destruction, modification, or 

curtailment of a species’ habitat or range 

is not a threat to the species, or threats 

to the species’ habitat stem solely from 

causes that cannot be addressed through 

management actions resulting from 

consultations under section 7(a)(2) of 

the Act; 

(c) Areas within the jurisdiction of the 

United States provide no more than 

negligible conservation value, if any, for 

a species occurring primarily outside 

the jurisdiction of the United States; or 

(d) No areas meet the definition of 

critical habitat. 

(2) Specific information on: 

(a) The amount and distribution of 

Miami tiger beetle habitat; 

(b) What areas, that were occupied at 

the time of listing and that contain the 

physical or biological features essential 

to the conservation of the species, 

should be included in the designation 

and why; 

(c) Any additional areas occurring 

within the range of the species, in 

Miami-Dade County, that should be 

included in the designation because 

they (i) are occupied at the time of 

listing and contain the physical or 

biological features that are essential to 

the conservation of the species and that 

may require special management 

considerations, or (ii) are unoccupied at 

the time of listing and are essential for 

the conservation of the species; 

(d) Special management 

considerations or protection that may be 

needed in critical habitat areas we are 

proposing, including managing for the 

potential effects of climate change; and 

(e) What areas not occupied at the 

time of listing are essential for the 

conservation of the species. We 

particularly seek comments: 

(i) Regarding whether occupied areas 

are adequate for the conservation of the 

species; 

(ii) Providing specific information 

regarding whether or not unoccupied 

areas would, with reasonable certainty, 

contribute to the conservation of the 

species and contain at least one physical 

or biological feature essential to the 

conservation of the species; and 

(iii) Explaining whether or not 

unoccupied areas fall within the 

definition of ‘‘habitat’’ at 50 CFR 424.02 

and why. 

(iv) We have identified 14 units in 

this proposal that were unoccupied at 

the time of listing that we find are 

essential to the conservation of the 

Miami tiger beetle. Please provide 

specific comments and information on: 

• Whether each of these units are 

essential to the conservation of the 

Miami tiger beetle and should be 

included in critical habitat, 

• whether there are specific units that 

are not essential and should not be 

included in critical habitat and why, 

and 

• whether there are any other specific 

areas not currently proposed that are 

essential to the conservation of the 

Miami tiger beetle that should be 

included in critical habitat. 

(3) Any additional areas occurring 

within the range of the species, i.e., 

South Florida, that should be included 

in the designation because they (a) are 

occupied at the time of listing and 

contain the physical and biological 

features that are essential to the 

conservation of the species and that may 

require special management 

considerations, or (b) are unoccupied at 

the time of listing and are essential for 

the conservation of the species. 

(4) Land use designations and current 

or planned activities in the subject areas 

and their possible impacts on proposed 

critical habitat. 

(5) Information on the projected and 

reasonably likely impacts of climate 

change on Miami tiger beetle and 

proposed critical habitat. 

(6) Information on the extent to which 

the description of probable economic 

impacts in the draft economic analysis 

is a reasonable estimate of the likely 

economic impacts; any probable 

economic, national security, or other 

relevant impacts of designating any area 

that may be included in the final 

designation, in particular, any impacts 

on small entities or families; and the 

benefits of including or excluding areas 

that exhibit these impacts. 

(7) Whether any specific areas we are 

proposing for critical habitat 

designation should be considered for 

exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the 

Act, and whether the benefits of 

potentially excluding any specific area 

outweigh the benefits of including that 

area under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. In 

particular for those for which you think 

we should exclude any additional areas, 

please provide credible information 

regarding the existence of a meaningful 

economic or other relevant impact 

supporting a benefit of exclusion. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 49947 

(8) Whether we could improve or 

modify our approach to designating 

critical habitat in any way to provide for 

greater public participation and 

understanding, or to better 

accommodate public concerns and 

comments. 

Please include sufficient information 

with your submission (such as scientific 

journal articles or other publications) to 

allow us to verify any scientific or 

commercial information you include. 

Please note that submissions merely 

stating support for, or opposition to, the 

action under consideration without 

providing supporting information, 

although noted, will not be considered 

in making a final critical habitat 

determination 

You may submit your comments and 

materials concerning this proposed rule 

by one of the methods listed in 

ADDRESSES. We request that you send 

comments only by the methods 

described in ADDRESSES. 

If you submit information via http:// 

www.regulations.gov, your entire 

submission—including any personal 

identifying information—will be posted 

on the website. If your submission is 

made via a hardcopy that includes 

personal identifying information, you 

may request at the top of your document 

that we withhold this information from 

public review. However, we cannot 

guarantee that we will be able to do so. 

We will post all hardcopy submissions 

on http://www.regulations.gov. 

Comments and materials we receive, 

as well as supporting documentation we 

used in preparing this proposed rule, 

will be available for public inspection 

on http://www.regulations.gov. 

Because we will consider all 

comments and information we receive 

during the comment period, our final 

designation may differ from this 

proposal. Based on the new information 

we receive (and any comments on that 

new information), our final designation 

may not include all areas proposed, may 

include some additional areas that meet 

the definition of critical habitat, and 

may exclude some areas if we find the 

benefits of exclusion outweigh the 

benefits of inclusion. 

Public Hearing 

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

a public hearing on this proposal, if 

requested. Requests must be received by 

the date specified in DATES. Such 

requests must be sent to the address 

shown in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. We will schedule a public 

hearing on this proposal, if requested, 

and announce the date, time, and place 

of the hearing, as well as how to obtain 

reasonable accommodations, in the 

Federal Register and local newspapers 

at least 15 days before the hearing. For 

the immediate future, we will provide 

these public hearings virtually using 

webinars that will be announced on the 

Service’s website, in addition to the 

Federal Register. The use of these 

virtual public hearings is consistent 

with our regulation at 50 CFR 

424.16(c)(3). 

Previous Federal Actions 

On December 22, 2015, we proposed 

to list the Miami tiger beetle as an 

endangered species under the Act (80 

FR 79533) in the Federal Register. On 

October 5, 2016, we published our final 

determination in the Federal Register 

(81 FR 68985) and added the Miami 

tiger beetle as an endangered species to 

the List of Endangered and Threatened 

Wildlife at 50 CFR 17.11(h). At the time 

of our proposal we determined that 

critical habitat was prudent, but not 

determinable because we lacked specific 

information on the impacts of our 

designation. In our final listing rule, we 

stated we were in the process of 

obtaining information on the impacts of 

the designation. All previous Federal 

actions are described in detail in the 

proposal to list the Miami tiger beetle as 

an endangered species under the Act (80 

FR 79533, December 22, 2015). 

Additional information may be found in 

the final rule to list the Miami tiger 

beetle as an endangered species (81 FR 

68985, October 5, 2016). 

Critical Habitat 

Background 

Critical habitat is defined in section 3 

of the Act as: 

(1) The specific areas within the 

geographical area occupied by the 

species, at the time it is listed in 

accordance with the Act, on which are 

found those physical or biological 

features 

(a) Essential to the conservation of the 

species, and 

(b) Which may require special 

management considerations or 

protection; and 

(2) Specific areas outside the 

geographical area occupied by the 

species at the time it is listed, upon a 

determination that such areas are 

essential for the conservation of the 

species. 

Our regulations at 50 CFR 424.02 

define the geographical area occupied 

by the species as an area that may 

generally be delineated around species’ 

occurrences, as determined by the 

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

include those areas used throughout all 

or part of the species’ life cycle, even if 

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

migratory corridors, seasonal habitats, 

and habitats used periodically, but not 

solely, by vagrant individuals). 

Additionally, our regulations at 50 CFR 

424.02 define the word ‘‘habitat’’ as 

follows: ‘‘for the purposes of designating 

critical habitat only, habitat is the 

abiotic and biotic setting that currently 

or periodically contains the resources 

and conditions necessary to support one 

or more life processes of a species.’’ 

Conservation, as defined under 

section 3 of the Act, means to use and 

the use of all methods and procedures 

that are necessary to bring an 

endangered or threatened species to the 

point at which the measures provided 

pursuant to the Act are no longer 

necessary. Such methods and 

procedures include, but are not limited 

to, all activities associated with 

scientific resources management such as 

research, census, law enforcement, 

habitat acquisition and maintenance, 

propagation, live trapping, and 

transplantation, and, in the 

extraordinary case where population 

pressures within a given ecosystem 

cannot be otherwise relieved, may 

include regulated taking. 

Critical habitat receives protection 

under section 7 of the Act through the 

requirement that Federal agencies 

ensure, in consultation with the Service, 

that any action they authorize, fund, or 

carry out is not likely to result in the 

destruction or adverse modification of 

critical habitat. The designation of 

critical habitat does not affect land 

ownership or establish a refuge, 

wilderness, reserve, preserve, or other 

conservation area. Such designation also 

does not allow the government or public 

to access private lands. Such 

designation does not require 

implementation of restoration, recovery, 

or enhancement measures by nonFederal landowners. Where a landowner 

requests Federal agency funding or 

authorization for an action that may 

affect a listed species or critical habitat, 

the Federal agency would be required to 

consult with the Service under section 

7(a)(2) of the Act. However, even if the 

Service were to conclude that the 

proposed activity would result in 

destruction or adverse modification of 

the critical habitat, the Federal action 

agency and the landowner are not 

required to abandon the proposed 

activity, or to restore or recover the 

species; instead, they must implement 

‘‘reasonable and prudent alternatives’’ 

to avoid destruction or adverse 

modification of critical habitat. 

Under the first prong of the Act’s 

definition of critical habitat, areas 

within the geographical area occupied 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
49948 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

by the species at the time it was listed 

are included in a critical habitat 

designation if they contain physical or 

biological features (1) which are 

essential to the conservation of the 

species and (2) which may require 

special management considerations or 

protection. For these areas, critical 

habitat designations identify, to the 

extent known using the best scientific 

and commercial data available, those 

physical or biological features that are 

essential to the conservation of the 

species (such as space, food, cover, and 

protected habitat). In identifying those 

physical or biological features that occur 

in specific occupied areas, we focus on 

the specific features that are essential to 

support the life-history needs of the 

species, including, but not limited to, 

water characteristics, soil type, 

geological features, prey, vegetation, 

symbiotic species, or other features. A 

feature may be a single habitat 

characteristic or a more complex 

combination of habitat characteristics. 

Features may include habitat 

characteristics that support ephemeral 

or dynamic habitat conditions. Features 

may also be expressed in terms relating 

to principles of conservation biology, 

such as patch size, distribution 

distances, and connectivity. 

Under the second prong of the Act’s 

definition of critical habitat, we can 

designate critical habitat in areas 

outside the geographical area occupied 

by the species at the time it is listed, 

upon a determination that such areas 

are essential for the conservation of the 

species. The implementing regulations 

at 50 CFR 424.12(b)(2) further delineate 

unoccupied critical habitat by setting 

out three specific parameters: (1) When 

designating critical habitat, the 

Secretary will first evaluate areas 

occupied by the species; (2) the 

Secretary will consider unoccupied 

areas to be essential only where a 

critical habitat designation limited to 

geographical areas occupied by the 

species would be inadequate to ensure 

the conservation of the species; and (3) 

for an unoccupied area to be considered 

essential, the Secretary must determine 

that there is a reasonable certainty both 

that the area will contribute to the 

conservation of the species and that the 

area contains one or more of those 

physical or biological features essential 

to the conservation of the species. 

Section 4 of the Act requires that we 

designate critical habitat based on the 

best scientific data available. Further, 

our Policy on Information Standards 

Under the Endangered Species Act 

(published in the Federal Register on 

July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271)), the 

Information Quality Act (section 515 of 

the Treasury and General Government 

Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 

(Pub. L. 106–554; H.R. 5658)), and our 

associated Information Quality 

Guidelines provide criteria, establish 

procedures, and provide guidance to 

ensure that our decisions are based on 

the best scientific data available. They 

require our biologists, to the extent 

consistent with the Act and with the use 

of the best scientific data available, to 

use primary and original sources of 

information as the basis for 

recommendations to designate critical 

habitat. 

When we are determining which areas 

should be designated as critical habitat, 

our primary source of information is 

generally the information from the 

listing process for the species. 

Additional information sources may 

include any generalized conservation 

strategy, criteria, or outline that may 

have been developed for the species; the 

recovery plan for the species; articles in 

peer-reviewed journals; conservation 

plans developed by States and counties; 

scientific status surveys and studies; 

biological assessments; other 

unpublished materials; or experts’ 

opinions or personal knowledge. 

As the regulatory definition of 

‘‘habitat’’ reflects (50 CFR 424.02), 

habitat is dynamic, and species may 

move from one area to another over 

time. We recognize that critical habitat 

designated at a particular point in time 

may not include all of the habitat areas 

that we may later determine are 

necessary for the recovery of the 

species. For these reasons, a critical 

habitat designation does not signal that 

habitat outside the designated area is 

unimportant or may not be needed for 

recovery of the species. Areas that are 

important to the conservation of the 

species, both inside and outside the 

critical habitat designation, will 

continue to be subject to: (1) 

Conservation actions implemented 

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

regulatory protections afforded by the 

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

for Federal agencies to ensure their 

actions are not likely to jeopardize the 

continued existence of any endangered 

or threatened species; and (3) section 9 

of the Act’s prohibitions on taking any 

individual of the species, including 

taking caused by actions that affect 

habitat. Federally funded or permitted 

projects affecting listed species outside 

their designated critical habitat areas 

may still result in jeopardy findings in 

some cases. These protections and 

conservation tools will continue to 

contribute to recovery of the species. 

Similarly, critical habitat designations 

made on the basis of the best available 

information at the time of designation 

will not control the direction and 

substance of future recovery plans, 

habitat conservation plans (HCPs), or 

other species conservation planning 

efforts if new information available at 

the time of those planning efforts calls 

for a different outcome. 

Prudency Determination 

Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as 

amended, and implementing regulations 

(50 CFR 424.12) require that, to the 

maximum extent prudent and 

determinable, the Secretary shall 

designate critical habitat at the time the 

species is determined to be an 

endangered or threatened species. Our 

regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)) state 

that the Secretary may, but is not 

required to, determine that a 

designation would not be prudent in the 

following circumstances: 

(i) The species is threatened by taking 

or other human activity and 

identification of critical habitat can be 

expected to increase the degree of such 

threat to the species; 

(ii) The present or threatened 

destruction, modification, or 

curtailment of a species’ habitat or range 

is not a threat to the species, or threats 

to the species’ habitat stem solely from 

causes that cannot be addressed through 

management actions resulting from 

consultations under section 7(a)(2) of 

the Act; 

(iii) Areas within the jurisdiction of 

the United States provide no more than 

negligible conservation value, if any, for 

a species occurring primarily outside 

the jurisdiction of the United States; 

(iv) No areas meet the definition of 

critical habitat; or 

(v) The Secretary otherwise 

determines that designation of critical 

habitat would not be prudent based on 

the best scientific data available. 

As discussed in the final listing rule 

published on October 5, 2016 (81 FR 

68985), there is currently imminent 

threat of take attributed to collection or 

vandalism identified under Factor B for 

this species. However, we have 

determined that the identification and 

mapping of critical habitat is not 

expected to increase any such threat 

because the location of the two extant 

populations of the Miami tiger beetle are 

currently known to the scientific 

community and public. Further, in our 

proposed listing determination for this 

species, we determined that the present 

or threatened destruction, modification, 

or curtailment of habitat or range is a 

threat, and that those threats in some 

way can be addressed by section 7(a)(2) 

consultation measures. Also, the species 

occurs wholly in the jurisdiction of the 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 49949 

United States, and we are able to 

identify areas that meet the definition of 

critical habitat. Therefore, because none 

of the circumstances enumerated in our 

regulations at 50 CFR 424.12(a)(1) have 

been met and because the Secretary has 

not identified other circumstances for 

which this designation of critical habitat 

would be not prudent, we have 

determined that the designation of 

critical habitat is prudent for the Miami 

tiger beetle. 

Physical or Biological Features 

Essential to the Conservation of the 

Species 

In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) 

of the Act and regulations at 50 CFR 

424.12(b), in determining which areas 

we will designate as critical habitat from 

within the geographical area occupied 

by the species at the time of listing, we 

consider the physical or biological 

features that are essential to the 

conservation of the species and that may 

require special management 

considerations or protection. The 

regulations at 50 CFR 424.02 define 

‘‘physical or biological features essential 

to the conservation of the species’’ as 

the features that occur in specific areas 

and that are essential to support the lifehistory needs of the species, including, 

but not limited to, water characteristics, 

soil type, geological features, sites, prey, 

vegetation, symbiotic species, or other 

features. A feature may be a single 

habitat characteristic or a more complex 

combination of habitat characteristics. 

Features may include habitat 

characteristics that support ephemeral 

or dynamic habitat conditions. Features 

may also be expressed in terms relating 

to principles of conservation biology, 

such as patch size, distribution 

distances, and connectivity. For 

example, physical features essential to 

the conservation of the species might 

include gravel of a particular size 

required for spawning, alkaline soil for 

seed germination, protective cover for 

migration, or susceptibility to flooding 

or fire that maintains necessary earlysuccessional habitat characteristics. 

Biological features might include prey 

species, forage grasses, specific kinds or 

ages of trees for roosting or nesting, 

symbiotic fungi, or a particular level of 

nonnative species consistent with 

conservation needs of the listed species. 

The features may also be combinations 

of habitat characteristics and may 

encompass the relationship between 

characteristics or the necessary amount 

of a characteristic essential to support 

the life history of the species. 

In considering whether features are 

essential to the conservation of the 

species, we may consider an appropriate 

quality, quantity, and spatial and 

temporal arrangement of habitat 

characteristics in the context of the lifehistory needs, condition, and status of 

the species. These characteristics 

include, but are not limited to, space for 

individual and population growth and 

for normal behavior; food, water, air, 

light, minerals, or other nutritional or 

physiological requirements; cover or 

shelter; sites for breeding, reproduction, 

or rearing (or development) of offspring; 

and habitats that are protected from 

disturbance. 

We derive the specific physical or 

biological features essential for the 

Miami tiger beetle from studies of this 

species’ habitat, ecology, and life history 

as described below. Additional 

information can be found in the final 

listing rule published in the Federal 

Register on October 5, 2016 (81 FR 

68985). 

Space for Individual and Population 

Growth and for Normal Behavior 

The Miami tiger beetle is endemic to 

pine rockland habitat within the 

Northern Biscayne Pinelands of the 

Miami Rock Ridge in Miami-Dade 

County in South Florida. Descriptions of 

this habitat and its associated native 

plant species are provided in the 

proposed listing rule published on 

December 22, 2015 (80 FR 79533) (see 

Habitat section). Additional discussion 

may be found in the final listing rule 

published on October 5, 2016 (81 FR 

68985). The Miami tiger beetle requires 

open or sparsely vegetated sandy areas 

within pine rockland habitat for 

thermoregulation (regulation of body 

temperature), foraging, reproduction, 

and larval development. 

As a group, tiger beetles (Coleoptera: 

Cicindelidae) occupy ephemeral 

habitats where local extinction from 

habitat loss or degradation is common, 

so dispersal to establish new 

populations in distant habitat patches is 

a likely life history strategy for most 

species (Knisley 2015a, p. 10). 

Therefore, individuals of the species 

must be sufficiently abundant and occur 

within an appropriate dispersal distance 

to adjacent suitable habitat so they can 

repopulate areas following local 

extirpations. Barriers to dispersal can 

disrupt otherwise normal 

metapopulation dynamics and 

contribute to imperilment. 

Development and agriculture have 

reduced pine rockland habitat by 90 

percent in mainland south Florida. Pine 

rockland habitat decreased from 

approximately 183,000 ac (74,000 ha) in 

the early 1900s to only 3,707 ac (1,500 

ha) in 2014 (Possley et al. 2014, p. 154). 

The largest remaining intact pine 

rockland (approximately 5,716 ac (2,313 

ha)) is Long Pine Key in Everglades 

National Park (Everglades). Outside of 

the Everglades, less than 2 percent of 

pine rocklands on the Miami Rock 

Ridge remain, and much of what is left 

are small remnants scattered throughout 

the Miami metropolitan area, isolated 

from other natural areas (Herndon 1998, 

p. 1; URS Corporation Southern 2007, p. 

1). 

The extreme rarity of high-quality 

pine rockland habitats supporting the 

Miami tiger beetle elevates the 

importance of remnant sites that still 

retain some pine rockland species. We 

consider pine rockland habitat to be the 

primary habitat for the Miami tiger 

beetle. 

We do not have specific information 

regarding a minimum viable population 

size for the Miami tiger beetle or the 

amount of habitat needed to sustain a 

viable population. Recovery plans for 

Cicindela puritana (Puritan tiger beetle) 

and C. dorsalis dorsalis (Northeastern 

beach tiger beetle) consider a minimum 

viable population size to be at least 500– 

1,000 adults (Hill and Knisley 1993, p. 

23; Hill and Knisley 1994, p. 31). A 

minimum viable population size of 500 

adults was estimated for the Salt Creek 

tiger beetle (Cicindela nevadica 

lincolniana) (79 FR 26014, May 6, 

2014). The best available data regarding 

the minimum area and number of 

individuals necessary for a viable 

population for the Miami tiger beetle 

come from information regarding the 

closely related Highlands tiger beetle 

(Cicindelidia highlandensis); the 

information describes estimates of a 

minimum of 100 adult Highlands tiger 

beetles in an area of at least 2.5–5.0 ac 

(1.0–2.0 ha) (Knisley and Hill 2013, p. 

42). This estimate is based on 

observations of population stability for 

the Highlands tiger beetle, as well as 

survey data and literature from other 

tiger beetle species (Knisley and Hill 

2013, p. 42). 

The Miami tiger beetle requires open 

or sparsely vegetated sandy areas within 

pine rockland habitat to meet their lifehistory requirements, as well as adjacent 

undeveloped habitat to facilitate 

dispersal and protect core habitat. 

Therefore, based on the information in 

the previous paragraph, we identify 

pine rockland habitats of at least 2.5–5.0 

ac (1.0–2.0 ha) in size as a necessary 

physical feature for this species. 

Food, Water, Air, Light, Minerals, or 

Other Nutritional or Physiological 

Requirements 

Food—Miami tiger beetles are active 

diurnal predators that use their keen 

vision to detect movement of small 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
49950 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

arthropods and run quickly to capture 

prey with their well-developed jaws 

(mandibles). Although we do not have 

specific information on Miami tiger 

beetle diets, observations by various 

entomologists indicate small 

arthropods, especially ants, are the most 

common prey for tiger beetles. Over 30 

kinds of insects from many families 

have been identified as prey for tiger 

beetles, and scavenging is also common 

in some species (Knisley and Schultz 

1997, pp. 39, 103; Willis 1967, pp. 196– 

197). Ants were the most common prey 

of tiger beetles in Florida (Choate 1996, 

p. 2). Miami tiger beetle larvae are 

sedentary sit-and-wait predators that 

capture small prey passing over or near 

(within a few inches (in) (centimeters 

(cm)) their burrows on the soil surface. 

Larvae prey on small arthropods, similar 

to adults. Alterations or reductions in 

the prey base through pesticide 

exposure could affect foraging in of 

Miami tiger beetles. 

Water—The Miami tiger beetle 

requires inland sandy pine rockland 

habitat that has moderately drained to 

well-drained terrain. Rainfall varies 

from an annual average over 64 in (163 

cm) in the northwest portion of MiamiDade County to between 48 and 56 in 

(122 and 143 cm), respectively, in the 

rest of the county (Service 1999, p. 3– 

167). The water table in the Miami Rock 

Ridge outside of the Everglades seldom 

reaches the surface (Service 1999, p. 3– 

167). The existence of larvae in shallow 

permanent burrows throughout their 

development makes them susceptible to 

changes in groundwater levels. The 

effects of climate change and sea level 

rise, which predict higher intensity 

storms, more erratic rainfall (i.e., 

alterations to the amount and 

seasonality and rainfall) and especially 

changes in water levels due to storm 

surge and salinization of the water table, 

could result in vegetation shifts that 

may impact the species. Based on this, 

we identify water (particularly 

appropriate hydrological regimes) as a 

necessary feature for the Miami tiger 

beetle to carry out its life processes. 

Light—The Miami tiger beetle 

requires open areas of pine rockland 

habitat with ample sunlight for 

behavioral thermoregulation, so they 

can successfully perform their normal 

activities, such as foraging, mating, and 

oviposition. Vegetation encroachment 

and lack of adequate pine rockland 

management threatens the amount of 

light necessary for the Miami tiger 

beetle. We identify light as a necessary 

feature for the Miami tiger beetle to 

carry out its life processes. 

Soil—The Miami tiger beetle is 

endemic to pine rockland habitat within 

the Miami Rock Ridge. The Miami Rock 

Ridge has oolitic limestone (composed 

of spherical grains packed tightly) at or 

very near the surface and solution holes 

occasionally from where the surface 

limestone is dissolved by organic acids. 

There is typically very little soil 

development, consisting primarily of 

accumulations of low-nutrient sand, 

marl, clayey loam, and organic debris 

found in solution holes, depressions, 

and crevices on the limestone surface 

(Florida Natural Areas Inventory (FNAI) 

2010, p. 62). However, sandy pockets 

can be found at the northern end of the 

Miami Rock Ridge (Northern Biscayne 

Pinelands), beginning from 

approximately North Miami Beach and 

extending south to approximately SW 

216th Street (Service 1999, p. 3–162). 

These sandy substrates provide the 

appropriate nutrients, moisture regime, 

and soil chemistry necessary for Miami 

tiger beetle reproduction. Burrows in 

the sand are used for eggs and 

developing larvae. In addition these 

sandy areas support a community of 

insect prey that allows the species to 

persist. Soil compaction could impact 

the species and its habitat. Therefore, 

we identify substrates derived from 

calcareous limestone that provide 

habitat for the Miami tiger beetle to 

carry out its life processes to be a 

necessary feature for the Miami tiger 

beetle. 

Summary—Based on the best 

available information, we conclude that 

the Miami tiger beetle requires open 

sandy areas in pine rockland habitat 

with little to no vegetation for 

thermoregulation, foraging, egg-laying, 

and larval development. We identify 

these characteristics as necessary 

physical and biological features for the 

species. 

Cover or Shelter 

The life cycle of the Miami tiger 

beetle occurs entirely within pine 

rocklands. Females place a single egg 

into a shallow burrow dug into the soil. 

The egg hatches, apparently after 

sufficient soil moisture, and the first 

instar larva digs a burrow at the site of 

oviposition (egg-laying). Larvae are 

closely associated with their burrows, 

which provide cover and shelter for 

anywhere from 2 months to 1 year or 

more, depending on climate, food 

availability, and the number of cohorts 

per year (Knisley 2015b, p. 28). Larvae 

remain in their burrows until they are 

adults, only extending beyond the 

burrow entrance to subdue arthropod 

prey. The adult flight period for the 

Miami tiger beetle lasts approximately 5 

months (mid-May to mid-October) 

(Knisley 2015b, p. 27). Both larvae and 

adults are visual predators and require 

open habitat to locate prey. Open areas 

with dense vegetation no longer provide 

suitable habitat. However, vegetation 

adjacent to open sandy areas may also 

be important, as it may provide thermal 

refugia for the beetles to escape from 

high ground temperatures (Knisley 

2014, p. 1). Miami tiger beetle habitat 

can also be impacted from trampling, 

which causes soil compaction and can 

lead to lethal impacts to adults or larvae 

or impacts to their habitat. 

Based on the best available 

information, we conclude that the 

Miami tiger beetle requires pine 

rocklands, specifically those containing 

open or sparsely vegetated sandy 

patches. 

Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, or 

Rearing (or Development) of Offspring 

Miami tiger beetle reproduction and 

larval development occurs entirely 

within pine rocklands. Both larvae and 

adults occupy the same habitats—open 

sandy patches interspersed with 

vegetation. Vegetation encroachment 

into the open sandy habitat patches, 

barriers to dispersal, trampling of the 

surface soil, reductions in prey base, 

and collection of beetles are factors that 

may reduce the reproductive potential 

of the species. Therefore, based on the 

information above, we identify pine 

rockland habitats that can support the 

species growth, distribution, and 

population expansion as required for 

this species. 

Habitats Representative of the 

Historical, Geographical, and Ecological 

Distributions of the Species 

The Miami tiger beetle continues to 

occur in pine rockland habitats that are 

protected from incompatible humanuse, but these areas are only partially 

representative of the species’ historical, 

geographical, and ecological 

distribution because its range within 

these habitats has been reduced. The 

species is still found in pine rockland 

habitats, with open sandy areas of at 

least 2.5–5.0 ac (1.0–2.0 ha) in size. 

Representative pine rocklands are 

located on Federal, local, and private 

conservation lands that implement 

conservation measures benefitting the 

beetle. 

Pine rockland is dependent on some 

degree of disturbance, most importantly 

from natural or prescribed fires (Loope 

and Dunevitz 1981, p. 5; Snyder et al. 

2005, p. 1; Bradley and Saha 2009, p. 4; 

Saha et al. 2011, pp. 169–184; FNAI 

2010, p. 62). These fires are a vital 

component in maintaining native 

vegetation and creating or maintaining 

open or sparsely vegetated sandy areas, 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 49951 

within this ecosystem. Fires have 

historically burned in intervals of 

approximately 3 to 7 years (FNAI 2010, 

p. 3) typically started by lightning 

strikes during the frequent summer 

thunderstorms (FNAI 2010, p. 3). 

Without fire, successional climax from 

tropical pineland to rockland hammock 

is rapid, and the open areas required by 

the species are encroached with 

vegetation and leaf litter. In addition, 

displacement of native species by 

invasive, nonnative plants often occurs. 

Mechanical control or thinning of 

pine rockland vegetation may be 

another means of maintaining pine 

rockland habitat, but it cannot entirely 

replace fire because it does not have the 

same benefits related to removal of leaf 

litter and nutrient cycling. In addition, 

it may lead to trampling of adult or 

larval tiger beetles. Natural and 

prescribed fire remains the primary and 

ecologically preferred method for 

maintaining pine rockland habitat. 

Hurricanes and other significant 

weather events can contribute to 

openings in the pine rockland habitat 

(FNAI 2010, p. 62) needed by the Miami 

tiger beetle; however, they can also be 

a source of significant and direct risk to 

the species. Given the few, isolated 

populations of the Miami tiger beetle 

within a location prone to storm 

influences (located approximately 5 

miles (8 kilometers) from the coast), the 

species is at substantial risk from 

stochastic environmental events such as 

hurricanes, storm surges, and other 

extreme weather that can affect 

recruitment, population growth, and 

other population parameters. The 

substantial reduction in the historical 

range of the beetle in the past 80 years, 

and the few remaining populations, 

make the species less resilient to 

impacts than when its distribution was 

more widespread. 

Therefore, based on the information 

above, we identify pine rockland 

management through natural or 

prescribed fire, or other disturbance 

regimes that maintain pine rockland 

habitat, such as weather events, to be 

necessary for this species. 

Summary of Essential Physical or 

Biological Features 

We derive the specific physical or 

biological features essential to the 

conservation of Miami tiger beetle from 

studies of the species’ habitat, ecology, 

and life history. We have determined 

that the following physical or biological 

features are essential to the conservation 

of Miami tiger beetle: 

1. South Florida pine rockland habitat 

of at least 2.5 ac (1 ha) in size that is 

maintained by natural or prescribed fire 

or other disturbance regimes; and 

2. Open sandy areas within or directly 

adjacent to the south Florida pine 

rockland habitat with little to no 

vegetation that allows for or facilitates 

normal behavior and growth such as 

thermoregulation, foraging, egg-laying, 

larval development, and habitat 

connectivity, which promotes the 

overall distribution and expansion of 

the species. 

Special Management Considerations or 

Protection 

When designating critical habitat, we 

assess whether the specific areas within 

the geographical area occupied by the 

species at the time of listing contain 

features which are essential to the 

conservation of the species and which 

may require special management 

considerations or protection. The 

features essential to the conservation of 

this species may require special 

management considerations or 

protection to reduce the following 

threats: Vegetation encroachment of 

pine rockland habitat; loss of pine 

rockland habitat due to development 

that further fragments or degrades the 

few remaining pine rockland parcels in 

Miami-Dade County; collection of the 

species; climate change and sea level 

rise; pesticide exposure; and 

demographic and environmental 

stochasticity. These threats are 

exacerbated by having only two small 

populations in a restricted geographic 

range, making this species particularly 

susceptible to extinction in the 

foreseeable future. For a detailed 

discussion of threats, see Summary of 

Factors Affecting the Species in our 

proposed listing rule published in the 

Federal Register on December 22, 2015 

(80 FR 79533). Additional information 

may be found in the final listing rule 

published on October 5, 2016 (81 FR 

68985). 

Some of these threats can be 

addressed by special management 

considerations or protection while 

others (e.g., sea level rise, hurricanes, 

storm surge) are beyond the control of 

landowners and managers. However, 

even when landowners or land 

managers may not be able to control all 

the threats directly, they may be able to 

address the impacts of those threats. 

Destruction of rock pinelands for 

economic development has reduced 

pine rockland habitat on the Miami 

Rock Ridge outside of the Everglades by 

over 98 percent, and remaining habitat 

in this area is highly fragmented. The 

Miami tiger beetle occurs on a mix of 

privately and publicly owned lands, 

only some of which are managed for 

conservation. Any occurrences of the 

beetle on private land or nonconservation public land are vulnerable 

to the effects of habitat degradation if 

natural disturbance regimes are 

disrupted, because the species requires 

active management to keep the habitat 

functional in the absence of such 

disturbances. Prolonged lack of fire in 

pine rockland habitat leads to vegetation 

encroachment into the open or sparsely 

vegetated sandy areas that are required 

by the beetle. Further development and 

degradation of pine rocklands increases 

fragmentation and decreases the 

conservation value of the remaining 

functioning pine rockland habitat. In 

addition, pine rocklands are expected to 

be further degraded and fragmented due 

to anticipated sea level rise, which 

would fully or partially inundate some 

pine rocklands within the Miami Rock 

Ridge and cause increases in the salinity 

of the water table and soils resulting in 

vegetation shifts. Also, portions of the 

Richmond Pine Rocklands are proposed 

for commercial development and some 

existing pine rockland areas are 

projected to be developed for housing as 

the human population grows and 

adjusts to changing sea levels. 

Pesticides used in and around pine 

rockland habitat are a potential threat to 

the Miami tiger beetle through direct 

exposure to adults and larvae, 

secondary exposure from insect prey, 

overall reduction in availability of adult 

and larval prey, thus limiting foraging 

opportunities, or any combination of 

these factors. Based on Miami-Dade 

Mosquito Control’s implementation of 

spray buffers around pine rocklands 

occupied by the Miami tiger beetle, 

mosquito control pesticides are not 

considered a current threat for the 

species. However, if these buffers were 

to change or Miami tiger beetles were 

found in habitat without restrictions of 

pesticide applications, then the threat of 

exposure would need to be reevaluated. 

The features essential to the 

conservation of the Miami tiger beetle 

(i.e., open or sparsely vegetated areas of 

pine rockland habitat that are at least 

2.5–5.0 ac (1.0–2.0 ha) in size) may 

require special management 

considerations or protection to reduce 

threats. Actions that could ameliorate 

threats include, but are not limited to: 

(1) Restoration and management of 

existing and potential Miami tiger beetle 

habitats throughout the Miami Rock 

Ridge using prescribed fire and control 

of invasive, nonnative plants; 

(2) Protection of habitat adjacent to 

existing and new occurrences of the 

species to provide dispersal corridors, 

support the prey base, protect core 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
49952 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

habitat, and allow for appropriate 

habitat management; 

(3) Use of pesticide spray buffers to 

prevent potential exposure to the 

species and probable limitation of 

foraging opportunities; and 

(4) Establishment of additional 

populations within the Miami Rock 

Ridge through captive rearing and 

translocation of laboratory-reared 

individuals from wild populations. 

Criteria Used To Identify Critical 

Habitat 

As required by section 4(b)(2) of the 

Act, we use the best scientific data 

available to designate critical habitat. In 

accordance with the Act and our 

implementing regulations at 50 CFR 

424.12(b), we review available 

information pertaining to the habitat 

requirements of the species and identify 

specific areas within the geographical 

area occupied by the species at the time 

of listing and any specific areas outside 

the geographical area occupied by the 

species to be considered for designation 

as critical habitat. We are proposing to 

designate critical habitat in areas within 

the geographical area occupied by the 

species at the time of listing in 2016. We 

also are proposing to designate specific 

areas outside the geographical area 

occupied by the species at the time of 

listing because we have determined that 

a designation limited to occupied areas 

would be inadequate to ensure the 

conservation of the species. Although 

we do not have definitive information 

that these areas were historically or are 

currently occupied by the Miami tiger 

beetle, they are within the historical 

range of the species, contain remnant 

south Florida pine rockland habitat and 

the essential physical or biological 

features, and have been determined to 

be essential for the conservation of the 

species, as further discussed below. We 

have determined that it is reasonably 

certain that the unoccupied areas will 

contribute to the conservation of the 

species and contain one or more of the 

physical or biological features that are 

essential to the conservation of the 

species. We have also determined that 

the unoccupied areas fall within the 

regulatory definition of ‘‘habitat’’ at 50 

CFR 424.02 since they have the abiotic 

and biotic features that currently or 

periodically contain the resources and 

conditions necessary to support one or 

more life processes of the Miami tiger 

beetle. 

The historical range of the Miami tiger 

beetle is limited to Miami-Dade County, 

Florida, specifically within the Northern 

Biscayne Pinelands of the Miami Rock 

Ridge. Over 98 percent of the Miami 

Rock Ridge pine rocklands outside of 

the Everglades has been lost to 

development, reducing the current 

range of the Miami tiger beetle to the 

southern portion of the Northern 

Biscayne Pinelands, in the Richmond 

Pine Rocklands and Nixon Smiley 

Pineland Preserve. 

We anticipate that recovery will 

require not only continued protection of 

the remaining extant populations and 

remnant pine rockland habitat but also 

establishment of populations in 

additional areas of Miami-Dade County 

to ensure there are adequate numbers of 

beetles and stable populations occurring 

over the entire geographic range of the 

Miami tiger beetle. This will help to 

reduce the chance that catastrophic 

events, such as storms, will 

simultaneously affect all known 

populations. 

The two extant Miami tiger beetle 

populations are small and at risk of 

adverse effects from reduced genetic 

variation, an increased risk of 

inbreeding depression, and reduced 

reproductive output. In addition, the 

two populations are isolated from each 

other, decreasing the likelihood that 

they could be naturally reestablished if 

extirpation from one location would 

occur. 

In selecting areas to propose for 

critical habitat designation, we used the 

conservation principles of the ‘‘three 

R’s’’: Resiliency, redundancy, and 

representation (Shaffer and Stein 2000, 

entire) for conserving imperiled species. 

Resiliency is the ability to sustain 

populations through the natural range of 

favorable and unfavorable conditions. 

Redundancy ensures an adequate 

number of sites with resilient 

populations such that the species has 

the ability to withstand catastrophic 

events. Representation ensures adaptive 

capacity within a species and allows it 

to respond to environmental changes. 

This can be facilitated by conserving not 

just genetic diversity, but also the 

species’ associated habitat type 

variation. Implementation of this 

methodology has been widely accepted 

as a reasonable conservation strategy 

(Tear et al. 2005, p. 841). 

In order to ensure sufficient 

representation for the Miami tiger 

beetle, we described the physical and 

biological features (as discussed above) 

and identified areas of habitat that 

contain at least one or more of the 

features to provide for reintroduction 

and expansion of the Miami tiger beetle. 

Redundancy is currently low as only 

two populations remain, both on 

remnant pine rockland sites. 

Redundancy can be improved through 

the introduction of additional 

populations of the Miami tiger beetle at 

other pine rockland sites. However, 

throughout the species’ range, the 

amount of suitable remaining pine 

rockland is limited (low resiliency), and 

much of the remaining habitat may be 

significantly altered due to the effects of 

climate change over the next century. 

Therefore, we reviewed available sites 

containing pine rockland habitat within 

the historical range of the species and 

evaluated each site for its potential 

conservation contribution based on 

quality of habitat, spatial arrangement 

relative to the two extant populations 

and each other, and existing protections 

and management of the habitat and sites 

to determine additional areas that are 

essential for the Miami tiger beetle’s 

conservation. 

Sources of Data To Identify Critical 

Habitat Boundaries 

We have determined that the areas 

known to be occupied at the time of 

listing should be proposed for critical 

habitat designation. However, 

recognizing that occupied habitat alone 

is not adequate for the conservation of 

the Miami tiger beetle, we also used 

habitat and historical occurrence data to 

identify the historical range of the 

species and necessary habitat features to 

help us determine which unoccupied 

habitat areas are essential for the 

conservation of the species. To 

determine the general extent, location, 

and boundaries of critical habitat, the 

Service used Esri ArcGIS mapping 

software for mapping and calculating 

areas (Albers Conical Equal Area 

(Florida Geographic Data Library), North 

American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83) High 

Accuracy Reference Network (HARN)) 

along with the following spatial data 

layers: 

(1) Historical and current records of 

Miami tiger beetle occurrences and 

distributions found in publications, 

reports, personal communications, and 

associated voucher specimens housed at 

museums and private collections 

(Knisley 2015b, entire); 

(2) Geographic information system 

(GIS) data showing the location and 

extent of documented occurrences of 

pine rockland habitat (Cooperative Land 

Cover Version 3.3. FWC and FNAI, 

2018); 

(3) Aerial imagery (Esri ArcGIS online 

basemap World Imagery. South Florida 

Water Management District GIS 

Services, Earthstar Geographics, MiamiDade County, Florida Department of 

Environmental Protection, Esri, HERE, 

Garmin, SafeGraph, Ministry of 

Economy, Trade, and Industry of Japan 

and the U.S. National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration, U.S. Geological 

Survey, Environmental Protection 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 49953 

Agency, National Park Service, U.S. 

Department of Agriculture (USDA). 

2019.; and 

(4) GIS data depicting soils and to 

determine the presence of physical or 

biological features (U.S. Department of 

Agriculture 2020). 

When designating critical habitat, we 

consider future recovery efforts and 

conservation of the species. We have 

determined that all currently known 

occupied habitat should be proposed for 

critical habitat designation because any 

further degradation or loss of the extant 

populations or occupied habitat would 

increase the Miami tiger beetle’s 

susceptibility to local extirpation and 

ultimately extinction. The species 

occurs in two populations, Richmond 

and Nixon Smiley, separated from each 

other by approximately 3.1 mi (5 km) of 

urban development. 

We are also including pine rockland 

habitat within the Richmond Pine 

Rocklands directly adjacent to sites with 

documented occurrences in the 

Richmond population. Due to their 

proximity to documented occurrences, 

the continuity of habitat, and presence 

of all of the physical or biological 

features, we have included these acres 

as part of the occupied habitat complex 

for this unit in accordance with 50 CFR 

424.12(d). Additionally, we have 

determined these areas are essential for 

the conservation of the species because 

they protect the occupied sites within 

the Richmond population, provide 

dispersal corridors for the Richmond 

population, provide potential habitat for 

population expansion, and support 

prey-base populations. These areas are 

important to ensure redundancy for the 

species, and they improve the species’ 

viability. 

Lastly, we are including other suitable 

or potentially suitable pine rockland 

fragments outside of the Richmond Pine 

Rocklands and Nixon Smiley Pineland 

Preserve that are located within the 

beetle’s historical range along the 

Northern Biscayne Pinelands of the 

Miami Rock Ridge but are not known to 

be currently occupied by the species. 

With only two known occupied areas, 

we have determined that these areas are 

essential for the conservation of the 

species because they will enable the 

establishment of new populations in 

additional areas that more closely 

approximate its historical distribution. 

Establishment of new populations will 

help ensure that there are adequate 

numbers of beetles in multiple 

populations over a wide geographic 

area, so that catastrophic events, such as 

storms, would be less likely to 

simultaneously affect all known 

populations. 

The best available data regarding the 

minimum area and number of 

individuals necessary for a viable 

population come from information 

regarding the Highlands tiger beetle; the 

information describes estimates of a 

minimum of 100 adult Highlands tiger 

beetles in an area of at least 2.5–5.0 ac 

(1.0–2.0 ha) (Knisley and Hill 2013, p. 

42). This estimate is based on 

observations of population stability for 

the Highlands tiger beetle, as well as 

survey data and literature from other 

tiger beetle species. From the remaining 

suitable or potentially suitable pine 

rockland fragments that were delineated 

for the Miami Rock Ridge, we excluded 

fragments below the 2.5-ac (1.0-ha) 

minimum area for a viable population. 

As such we evaluated the remaining 

unoccupied pine rockland habitat 

within and directly adjacent to the 

Northern Biscayne Pinelands of the 

Miami Rock Ridge to identify remnant 

pine rocklands with the highest quality 

habitat potential (i.e., actively managed 

to support pine rocklands) and of 

sufficient size (patches at least 2.5 ac 

(1.0 ha)) to provide for the conservation 

of the Miami tiger beetle. 

Areas Occupied at the Time of Listing 

The two occupied critical habitat 

units were delineated around the only 

remaining extant Miami tiger beetle 

populations. They include the mapped 

extent of the populations that contain 

the physical or biological features 

essential to the conservation of the 

Miami tiger beetle. The two occupied 

units account for approximately 1,572 

ac (636 ha) or 80 percent of the 

proposed designation of critical habitat 

for the Miami tiger beetle. 

The delineation of proposed critical 

habitat included the area containing the 

extant populations based on occurrence 

records as well as all suitable habitat 

directly adjacent to those areas to allow 

for the continued protection and 

management of pine rockland habitat 

and to meet the needs of the species. 

Given the Miami tiger beetle’s 

dependence on disturbance (i.e., fires, 

storms, or mechanical treatments) to 

maintain optimal habitat, the amount 

and location of optimal habitat is 

temporally and spatially dynamic. 

Areas Outside of the Geographical 

Range at the Time of Listing 

The Miami tiger beetle has been 

extirpated from its type-locality (the 

place where the species was first 

discovered) in North Miami and is 

historically unknown from any other 

locations. In addition to including areas 

of the two extant populations 

(Richmond Pine Rocklands and Nixon 

Smiley Pineland Preserve) in proposed 

critical habitat, we are proposing 14 

unoccupied critical habitat units that we 

have determined are essential to the 

conservation of the Miami tiger beetle. 

These areas contain pine rockland 

habitat within the historical range in the 

Northern Biscayne Pinelands on the 

Miami Rock Ridge and encompass 

approximately 405 ac (164 ha) or 20 

percent of proposed critical habitat. As 

discussed above, we have determined 

that recovery requires additional 

populations be established in high 

quality pine rockland habitat that is 

protected and actively managed. 

Following a review of available sites 

containing pine rockland habitat within 

the historical range of the species, we 

evaluated each site for its potential 

conservation contribution based on 

quality of habitat, spatial arrangement 

relative to the two extant populations 

and each other, and existing protections 

and management. This review led to our 

determination that the most viable sites 

for introduction and conservation of the 

Miami tiger beetle are the 14 

unoccupied sites identified in this 

proposal. As a result, we concluded that 

these 14 sites, which each contain all of 

the physical or biological features, have 

the highest probability for the 

conservation of the species and are 

essential to the conservation of the 

species. Thus, we are proposing them as 

critical habitat for the Miami tiger 

beetle. 

We used the best available data to 

delineate existing pine rockland habitat 

units that are of sufficient size to 

support introduced populations of 

Miami tiger beetles and that are 

spatially configured to support 

metapopulation dynamics and to 

minimize adverse impacts from 

stochastic events. In identifying these 

areas, we considered the following 

refining criteria: 

(1) Areas of sufficient size to support 

ecosystem processes for populations of 

the Miami tiger beetle. The best 

available information indicates that 

appropriately sized units should be at a 

minimum 2.5–5.0 ac (1.0–2.0 ha). Large 

contiguous parcels of habitat are more 

likely to be resilient to ecological 

processes of disturbance and are more 

likely to support a viable population of 

the Miami tiger beetle. The unoccupied 

areas selected ranged from 7 ac (3 ha) 

in size to 89 ac (36 ha). 

(2) Areas to maintain connectivity of 

habitat to allow for population 

expansion. Isolation of habitat can 

prevent recolonization of the Miami 

tiger beetle and result in local 

extirpation and ultimately extinction. 

To ameliorate the dangers associated 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
49954 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

with small populations or limited 

distributions, we have identified areas 

of critical habitat that will allow for the 

natural expansion of populations or 

support reintroductions. 

(3) Restored pine rockland habitats 

may allow the Miami tiger beetle to 

disperse, recolonize, or expand from 

areas already occupied by the beetle. 

These restored areas generally are 

habitats within or adjacent to pine 

rocklands that have been affected by 

natural or anthropogenic factors but 

retain the essential physical or 

biological features that make them 

suitable for the beetle. These areas 

would help offset the anticipated loss 

and degradation of habitat occurring or 

expected from natural succession in the 

absence of disturbance, effects of 

climate change (such as sea level rise), 

or development. 

Summary 

In summary, for areas within the 

geographical area occupied by the 

species at the time of listing, we 

delineated critical habitat unit 

boundaries using the following criteria: 

(1) Evaluated habitat suitability of 

pine rockland habitat within the 

geographical area occupied at the time 

of listing (current), and selected those 

areas that contain all of the physical or 

biological features to support lifehistory functions essential for 

conservation of the species; 

(2) Identified open sandy areas 

directly adjacent to occupied areas and 

with little to no vegetation that allow for 

or facilitate normal behavior and growth 

of the Miami tiger beetle, such as 

thermoregulation, foraging, egg-laying, 

larval development, and habitat 

connectivity, and which promote the 

overall distribution and expansion of 

the species. 

The result was the inclusion of two 

units of critical habitat occupied by the 

Miami tiger beetle. Approximately 1,052 

ac (426 ha) or 73 percent of the 

occupied units are existing critical 

habitat for other species. 

For areas outside the geographical 

area occupied by the species at the time 

of listing, we delineated critical habitat 

unit boundaries using the following 

criteria: 

(1) Areas with pine rockland habitat 

that contained the essential physical or 

biological features and were of sufficient 

size to support introduced populations 

of Miami tiger beetles; 

(2) Areas that are spatially configured 

to support metapopulation dynamics, 

minimize adverse impacts from 

stochastic events, and maintain 

representation of the historical range of 

the species. 

The result was the inclusion of 14 

units of critical habitat not occupied by 

the Miami tiger beetle at the time of 

listing. These 14 units encompass 

approximately 405 ac (164 ha) or 20 

percent of proposed critical habitat. All 

14 units are either publicly owned or 

privately owned conservation lands 

(i.e., Porter Pineland Preserve, which is 

owned and managed by the Audubon 

Society). 

When determining proposed critical 

habitat boundaries, we made every 

effort to avoid including developed 

areas such as lands covered by 

buildings, pavement, and other 

structures because such lands lack 

physical or biological features necessary 

for the Miami tiger beetle. The scale of 

the maps we prepared under the 

parameters for publication within the 

Code of Federal Regulations may not 

reflect the exclusion of such developed 

lands. Any such lands inadvertently left 

inside critical habitat boundaries shown 

on the maps of this proposed rule have 

been excluded by text in the proposed 

rule and are not proposed for 

designation as critical habitat. 

Therefore, if the critical habitat is 

finalized as proposed, a Federal action 

involving these lands would not trigger 

section 7 consultation with respect to 

critical habitat and the requirement of 

no adverse modification unless the 

specific action would affect the essential 

physical or biological features in the 

adjacent critical habitat. 

We are proposing for designation as 

critical habitat those lands that we have 

determined are occupied at the time of 

listing and which contain the physical 

or biological features to support lifehistory processes essential to the 

conservation of the species, and lands 

outside of the geographical area 

occupied at the time of listing that we 

have determined are essential for the 

conservation of the Miami tiger beetle. 

The critical habitat designation is 

defined by the maps, as modified by any 

accompanying regulatory text, presented 

at the end of this document in the rule 

portion. We include more detailed 

information on the boundaries of the 

critical habitat designation in the 

preamble of this document. We will 

make shapefiles of the critical habitat 

units available to the public on http:// 

www.regulations.gov at Docket No. 

FWS–R4–ES–2021–0053, and on our 

internet site www.fws.gov/verobeach/. 

Proposed Critical Habitat Designation 

We are proposing 16 units as critical 

habitat for the Miami tiger beetle. The 

critical habitat areas we describe below 

constitute our current best assessment of 

areas that meet the definition of critical 

habitat for the Miami tiger beetle. Table 

1 shows each critical habitat unit, its 

occupancy by the Miami tiger beetle at 

the time it was listed under the Act, and 

the extent of overlap with critical 

habitat previously designated for other 

federally listed species. 

TABLE 1—PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS FOR THE MIAMI TIGER BEETLE, INCLUDING OCCUPANCY AND EXTENT OF

OVERLAPPING CRITICAL HABITAT FOR OTHER FEDERALLY LISTED SPECIES

Unit 

No. 

Unit 

name 

Occupancy 

at time of 

listing 

Total area 

(ac (ha)) 

Area of overlap 

with existing 

critical habitat 

(ac (ha)) 

Area exclusive 

to Miami tiger 

beetle 

(ac (ha)) 

1 ................................ Trinity Pineland ............................................ No .................. 10 (4) 10 (4) 0 (0) 

2 ................................ Rockdale Pineland ....................................... No .................. 39 (16) 38 (15) 1 (<1) 

3 ................................ Deering Estate South Edition ...................... No .................. 16 (6) 15 (6) 1 (<1) 

4 ................................ Ned Glenn Nature Preserve ........................ No .................. 11 (5) 11 (5) 0 (0) 

5 ................................ Deering Estate at Cutler .............................. No .................. 89 (36) 84 (34) 5 (2) 

6 ................................ Silver Palm Groves Pineland ....................... No .................. 25 (10) 22 (9) 3 (1) 

7 ................................ Quail Roost Pineland ................................... No .................. 48 (19) 47 (19) 1 (<1) 

8 ................................ Eachus Pineland .......................................... No .................. 17 (7) 17 (7) 0 (0) 

9 ................................ Bill Sadowski Park ....................................... No .................. 20 (8) 19 (8) 1 (<1) 

10 .............................. Tamiami Pineland Complex Addition ........... No .................. 21 (8) 19 (8) 2 (<1) 

11 .............................. Pine Shore Pineland Preserve .................... No .................. 8 (3) 8 (3) 0 (0) 

12 .............................. Nixon Smiley Pineland Preserve ................. Yes ................. 117 (47) 115 (47) 2 (<1) 

13 .............................. Camp Matecumbe ........................................ No .................. 81 (33) 77 (31) 3 (1)


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 49955 

TABLE 1—PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS FOR THE MIAMI TIGER BEETLE, INCLUDING OCCUPANCY AND EXTENT OF

OVERLAPPING CRITICAL HABITAT FOR OTHER FEDERALLY LISTED SPECIES—Continued 

Unit 

No. 

Unit 

name 

Occupancy 

at time of 

listing 

Total area 

(ac (ha)) 

Area of overlap 

with existing 

critical habitat 

(ac (ha)) 

Area exclusive 

to Miami tiger 

beetle 

(ac (ha)) 

14 .............................. Richmond Pine Rocklands ........................... Yes ................. 1,455 (589) 937 (379) 518 (210) 

15 .............................. Calderon Pineland ....................................... No .................. 14 (6) 14 (6) 0 (0)

16 .............................. Porter Pineland Preserve ............................. No .................. 7 (3) 7 (3) 0 (0) 

Total ................... ...................................................................... ........................ 1,977 (800) 1,440 (583) 537 (217) 

Note: Area sizes may not sum due to rounding. 

Approximately 73 percent (1,440 ac 

(583 ha)) of the critical habitat proposed 

for the Miami tiger beetle overlaps with 

currently designated Federal critical 

habitat for the Carter’s small-flowered 

flax (Linum carteri var. carteri), the 

Florida brickell-bush (Brickellia 

mosieri), Bartram’s scrub-hairstreak 

butterfly (Strymon acis bartrami), and 

the Florida leafwing butterfly (Anaea 

troglodyta floridalis). Further, 

approximately 4 percent (17 ac (7 ha)) 

of unoccupied critical habitat proposed 

is unique to the Miami tiger beetle, i.e., 

does not overlap with existing 

designated Federal critical habitat. 

Please refer to Table 1 above for the area 

of overlap with other federally 

designated critical habitat and to 

specific unit descriptions below for 

which currently designated Federal 

critical habitat overlaps with each 

proposed critical habitat unit for the 

Miami tiger beetle. 

Tables 2 and 3 below show the 

approximate land ownership for each 

critical habitat unit and the proportion 

of critical habitat for each 

landownership category, respectively. 

All but 1 ac (0.6 ha) of the area proposed 

for designation is either publicly or 

privately owned for conservation. 

TABLE 2—PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS FOR THE MIAMI TIGER BEETLE BY LAND OWNERSHIP

Critical 

habitat unit 

Area 

(ac (ha)) 

Land 

ownership 

Federal State County Private 

1—Trinity Pineland ............................................................... 10 (4) ........................ 10 (4) ........................ ........................

2—Rockdale Pineland ......................................................... 39 (16) ........................ 38 (15) 1 (<1) ........................

3—Deering Estate South Edition ......................................... 16 (6) ........................ 16 (6) ........................ ........................

4—Ned Glenn Nature Preserve ........................................... 11 (5) ........................ ........................ 11 (5) ........................

5—Deering Estate at Cutler ................................................. 89 (36) ........................ ........................ 89 (36) ........................

6—Silver Palm Groves Pineland ......................................... 25 (10) ........................ 20 (8) 5 (2) ........................

7—Quail Roost Pineland ..................................................... 48 (19) ........................ 48 (19) ........................ ........................

8—Eachus Pineland ............................................................ 17 (7) ........................ ........................ 17 (7) ........................

9—Bill Sadowski Park .......................................................... 20 (8) ........................ ........................ 20 (8) ........................

10—Tamiami Pineland Complex Addition ........................... 21 (8) ........................ 21 (8) ........................ ........................

11—Pine Shore Pineland Preserve ..................................... 8 (3) ........................ ........................ 8 (3) ........................

12—Nixon Smiley Pineland Preserve .................................. 117 (47) ........................ ........................ 117 (47) ........................

13—Camp Matecumbe ........................................................ 81 (33) ........................ 76 (31) 5 (2) ........................

14—Richmond Pine Rocklands ........................................... 1,455 (589) 488 (198) ........................ 844 (341) 123 (50) 

15—Calderon Pineland ........................................................ 14 (6) ........................ ........................ 14 (6) ........................

16—Porter Pineland Preserve ............................................. 7 (3) ........................ ........................ ........................ 7 (3) 

Total .............................................................................. 1,977 (800) 488 (198) 229 (93) 1,130 (457) 131 (53) 

Note: Area sizes may not sum due to rounding. 

TABLE 3—PROPORTIONMENT OF LAND OWNERSHIP FOR PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT FOR THE MIAMI TIGER BEETLE

Land ownership Area 

(ac (ha)) 

Percent 

ownership 

Federal ......................................................................................................................... 488 (197) .................................................. 25 

State ............................................................................................................................. 229 (93) .................................................... 12 

County .......................................................................................................................... 1,130 (457) ............................................... 57 

Private .......................................................................................................................... 131 (53) .................................................... 7 

Total ...................................................................................................................... 1,977 (800) ............................................... ........................

Note: Area sizes may not sum due to rounding. 

In addition, over half of the proposed 

critical habitat for the Miami tiger beetle 

(1,219 ac (493 ha) or 62 percent) is 

under a Miami-Dade County Natural 

Forest Communities (NFC) designation. 

Miami-Dade County’s NFC designation 

enacts regulations on habitat alterations 

to minimize damage to and protect 

environmentally sensitive forest lands, 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
49956 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

including pine rocklands. NFC 

regulations are designed to prevent 

clearing or destruction of native 

vegetation within preserved areas. 

Please see the unit descriptions below 

for the specific amount of each unit that 

is enrolled in the NFC program. 

We present brief descriptions of each 

proposed critical habitat units and the 

justification for why each meets the 

definition of critical habitat for the 

Miami tiger beetle, below. 

Unit 1: Trinity Pineland 

Unit 1 consists of approximately 10 ac 

(4 ha) of State-owned land in MiamiDade County. The unit is within the 

historical range of the Miami tiger 

beetle, although we are not aware of any 

records of historical occupancy of the 

unit. This unit includes pine rockland 

habitat within the Northern Biscayne 

Pinelands of the Miami Rock Ridge. 

This unit includes all the physical or 

biological features essential for the 

conservation of the species and is 

protected and actively managed to 

maintain a healthy pine rockland 

habitat. 

This unit is currently unoccupied by 

the Miami tiger beetle but is essential 

for the conservation of the species 

because it serves to protect habitat 

needed to recover the species, 

reestablish wild populations within the 

historical range of the species, and 

maintain populations throughout the 

historical distribution of the species in 

Miami-Dade County. It also provides 

habitat for recovery in the case of 

stochastic events, should the Miami 

tiger beetle be extirpated from one of its 

current locations. Given this unit 

contains essential habitat features (all of 

the physical or biological features), is 

protected and actively managed, and 

has an appropriate spatial distribution 

falling within the range of the species, 

we are reasonably certain that the lands 

and habitat within this unit will 

contribute to the conservation of the 

Miami tiger beetle. 

The Natural Areas Management 

Division of Miami-Dade County Parks, 

Recreation and Open Spaces 

Department conducts nonnative species 

control, prescribed fire, and mechanical 

vegetation treatments on lands owned or 

managed by Miami-Dade County, 

including this unit. These actions help 

improve habitat that could support the 

Miami tiger beetle. 

The entirety of Unit 1 overlaps with 

designated critical habitat for Carter’s 

small-flowered flax and Florida brickellbush. Additionally, approximately 8 ac 

(3 ha) or 80 percent of Unit 1 is enrolled 

in the NFC program. 

Unit 2: Rockdale Pineland 

Unit 2 consists of approximately 39 ac 

(16 ha) of State (38 ac (15 ha)) and 

county (1 ac (<1 ha)) owned lands in 

Miami-Dade County. The unit is within 

the historical range of the Miami tiger 

beetle, although we are not aware of any 

records of historical occupancy of the 

unit. This unit includes remnant pine 

rockland habitat within the Northern 

Biscayne Pinelands of the Miami Rock 

Ridge. This unit includes all the 

physical or biological features essential 

to the conservation of the species 

identified for the Miami tiger beetle and 

is protected and actively managed to 

maintain healthy pine rockland habitat. 

This unit is currently unoccupied by 

the Miami tiger beetle but is essential 

for the conservation of the species 

because it serves to protect habitat 

needed to recover the species, 

reestablish wild populations within the 

historical range of the species, and 

maintain populations throughout the 

historical distribution of the species in 

Miami-Dade County. It also provides 

habitat for recovery in the case of 

stochastic events, should the Miami 

tiger beetle be extirpated from one of its 

current locations. Given this unit 

contains essential habitat features (all of 

the physical or biological features), is 

protected and actively managed, and 

has an appropriate spatial distribution 

falling within the range of the species, 

we are reasonably certain that the lands 

and habitat within this unit will 

contribute to the conservation of the 

Miami tiger beetle. 

The Natural Areas Management 

Division of Miami-Dade County Parks, 

Recreation and Open Spaces 

Department conducts nonnative species 

control, prescribed fire, and mechanical 

vegetation treatments on lands owned 

by Miami-Dade County. The actions 

help improve habitat that could support 

the Miami tiger beetle. 

All but 1 ac (<1 ha) of Unit 2 overlaps 

with designated critical habitat for 

Carter’s small-flowered flax and Florida 

brickell-bush. Additionally, 

approximately 28 ac (11 ha) or 72 

percent of Unit 2 are enrolled in the 

NFC program. 

Unit 3: Deering Estate South Edition 

Unit 3 consists of approximately 16 ac 

(6 ha) of State-owned land in MiamiDade County. The unit is within the 

historical range of the Miami tiger 

beetle, although we are not aware of any 

records of historical occupancy of the 

unit. This unit includes remaining pine 

rockland habitat within the Northern 

Biscayne Pinelands of the Miami Rock 

Ridge. This unit includes all the 

physical or biological features essential 

for the conservation of the species and 

is protected and actively managed to 

maintain healthy pine rockland habitat. 

This unit is currently unoccupied by 

the Miami tiger beetle but is essential 

for the conservation of the species 

because it serves to protect habitat 

needed to recover the species, 

reestablish wild populations within the 

historical range of the species, and 

maintain populations throughout the 

historical distribution of the species in 

Miami-Dade County. It also provides 

habitat for recovery in the case of 

stochastic events, should the Miami 

tiger beetle be extirpated from one of its 

current locations. Given this unit 

contains essential habitat features (all of 

the physical or biological features), is 

protected and actively managed, and 

has an appropriate spatial distribution 

falling within the range of the species, 

we are reasonably certain that the lands 

and habitat within this unit will 

contribute to the conservation of the 

Miami tiger beetle. 

The Natural Areas Management 

Division of Miami-Dade County Parks, 

Recreation and Open Spaces 

Department conducts nonnative species 

control, prescribed fire, and mechanical 

vegetation treatments on lands owned or 

managed by Miami-Dade County, 

including this unit. The actions help 

improve habitat that could support the 

Miami tiger beetle. 

All but 1 ac (<1 ha) of Unit 3 overlaps 

with designated critical habitat for 

Carter’s small-flowered flax and Florida 

brickell-bush. Additionally, 

approximately 15 ac (6 ha) or 94 percent 

of Unit 3 is enrolled in the NFC 

program. 

Unit 4: Ned Glenn Nature Preserve 

Unit 4 consists of approximately 11 ac 

(5 ha) of county-owned land in MiamiDade County. The unit is within the 

historical range of the Miami tiger 

beetle, although we are not aware of any 

records of historical occupancy of the 

unit. This unit includes remaining pine 

rockland habitat within the Northern 

Biscayne Pinelands of the Miami Rock 

Ridge. This unit includes all the 

physical or biological features essential 

to the conservation of the species and is 

protected and actively managed to 

maintain healthy pine rockland habitat. 

This unit is currently unoccupied by 

the Miami tiger beetle but is essential 

for the conservation of the species 

because it serves to protect habitat 

needed to recover the species, 

reestablish wild populations within the 

historical range of the species, and 

maintain populations throughout the 

historical distribution of the species in 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 49957 

Miami-Dade County. It also provides 

habitat for recovery in the case of 

stochastic events, should the Miami 

tiger beetle be extirpated from one of its 

current locations. Given this unit 

contains essential habitat features (all of 

the physical or biological features), is 

protected and actively managed, and 

has an appropriate spatial distribution 

falling within the range of the species, 

we are reasonably certain that the lands 

and habitat within this unit will 

contribute to the conservation of the 

Miami tiger beetle. 

The Natural Areas Management 

Division of Miami-Dade County Parks, 

Recreation and Open Spaces 

Department conducts nonnative species 

control, prescribed fire, and mechanical 

vegetation treatments on lands owned 

by Miami-Dade County. The actions 

help improve habitat that could support 

the Miami tiger beetle. 

The entirety of Unit 4 overlaps with 

designated critical habitat for Carter’s 

small-flowered flax and Florida brickellbush. Additionally, approximately 11 ac 

(4 ha) or 100 percent of Unit 4 is 

enrolled in the NFC program. 

Unit 5: Deering Estate at Cutler 

Unit 5 consists of approximately 89 ac 

(36 ha) of county-owned land in MiamiDade County. The unit is within the 

historical range of the Miami tiger 

beetle, although we are not aware of any 

records of historical occupancy of the 

unit. This unit includes remaining pine 

rockland habitat within the Northern 

Biscayne Pinelands of the Miami Rock 

Ridge. This unit includes all the 

physical or biological features essential 

to the conservation of the species and is 

protected and actively managed to 

maintain healthy pine rockland habitat. 

This unit is currently unoccupied by 

the Miami tiger beetle but is essential 

for the conservation of the species 

because it serves to protect habitat 

needed to recover the species, 

reestablish wild populations within the 

historical range of the species, and 

maintain populations throughout the 

historical distribution of the species in 

Miami-Dade County. It also provides 

habitat for recovery in the case of 

stochastic events, should the Miami 

tiger beetle be extirpated from one of its 

current locations. Given this unit 

contains essential habitat features (all of 

the physical or biological features), is 

protected and actively managed, and 

has an appropriate spatial distribution 

falling within the range of the species, 

we are reasonably certain that the lands 

and habitat within this unit will 

contribute to the conservation of the 

Miami tiger beetle. 

The Natural Areas Management 

Division of Miami-Dade County Parks, 

Recreation and Open Spaces 

Department conducts nonnative species 

control, prescribed fire, and mechanical 

vegetation treatments on lands owned 

by Miami-Dade County. The actions 

help improve habitat that could support 

the Miami tiger beetle. 

All but 5 ac (2 ha) of Unit 5 overlaps 

with designated critical habitat for 

Carter’s small-flowered flax and Florida 

brickell-bush. Additionally, 

approximately 84 ac (34 ha) or 94 

percent of Unit 5 is enrolled in the NFC 

program. 

Unit 6: Silver Palm Groves Pineland 

Unit 6 consists of approximately 25 ac 

(10 ha) of State (20 ac (8 ha)) and county 

(5 ac (2 ha)) owned lands in MiamiDade County. The unit is within the 

historical range of the Miami tiger 

beetle, although we are not aware of any 

records of historical occupancy of the 

unit. This unit includes remaining pine 

rockland habitat within the Northern 

Biscayne Pinelands of the Miami Rock 

Ridge. This unit includes all the 

physical or biological features essential 

to the conservation of the species and is 

protected and actively managed to 

maintain healthy pine rockland habitat. 

This unit is currently unoccupied by 

the Miami tiger beetle but is essential 

for the conservation of the species 

because it serves to protect habitat 

needed to recover the species, 

reestablish wild populations within the 

historical range of the species, and 

maintain populations throughout the 

historical distribution of the species in 

Miami-Dade County. It also provides 

habitat for recovery in the case of 

stochastic events, should the Miami 

tiger beetle be extirpated from one of its 

current locations. Given this unit 

contains essential habitat features (all of 

the physical or biological features), is 

protected and actively managed, and 

has an appropriate spatial distribution 

falling within the range of the species, 

we are reasonably certain that the lands 

and habitat within this unit will 

contribute to the conservation of the 

Miami tiger beetle. 

The Natural Areas Management 

Division of Miami-Dade County Parks, 

Recreation and Open Spaces 

Department conducts nonnative species 

control, prescribed fire, and mechanical 

vegetation treatments on lands owned 

by Miami-Dade County. The actions 

help improve habitat that could support 

the Miami tiger beetle. 

All but 3 ac (1 ha) of Unit 6 overlaps 

with designated critical habitat for 

Bartram’s scrub-hairstreak butterfly, 

Carter’s small-flowered flax, and Florida 

brickell-bush. Additionally, 

approximately 18 ac (7 ha) or 72 percent 

of Unit 6 is enrolled in the NFC 

program. 

Unit 7: Quail Roost Pineland 

Unit 7 consists of approximately 48 ac 

(19 ha) of State-owned land in MiamiDade County. The unit is within the 

historical range of the Miami tiger 

beetle, although we are not aware of any 

records of historical occupancy of the 

unit. This unit includes remaining pine 

rockland habitat within the Northern 

Biscayne Pinelands of the Miami Rock 

Ridge. This unit includes all the 

physical or biological features essential 

to the conservation of the species and is 

protected and actively managed to 

maintain healthy pine rockland habitat. 

This unit is currently unoccupied by 

the Miami tiger beetle but is essential 

for the conservation of the species 

because it serves to protect habitat 

needed to recover the species, 

reestablish wild populations within the 

historical range of the species, and 

maintain populations throughout the 

historical distribution of the species in 

Miami-Dade County. It also provides 

habitat for recovery in the case of 

stochastic events, should the Miami 

tiger beetle be extirpated from one of its 

current locations. Given this unit 

contains essential habitat features (all of 

the physical or biological features), is 

protected and actively managed, and 

has an appropriate spatial distribution 

falling within the range of the species, 

we are reasonably certain that the lands 

and habitat within this unit will 

contribute to the conservation of the 

Miami tiger beetle. The Natural Areas 

Management Division of Miami-Dade 

County Parks, Recreation and Open 

Spaces Department conducts nonnative 

species control, prescribed fire, and 

mechanical vegetation treatments on 

lands owned or managed by MiamiDade County, including this unit. The 

actions help improve habitat that could 

support the Miami tiger beetle. 

All but 1 ac (<1 ha) of Unit 7 overlaps 

with designated critical habitat for 

Bartram’s scrub-hairstreak butterfly, 

Carter’s small-flowered flax, and Florida 

brickell-bush. Additionally, 

approximately 32 ac (13 ha) or 67 

percent of Unit 7 is enrolled in the NFC 

program. 

Unit 8: Eachus Pineland 

Unit 8 consists of approximately 17 ac 

(7 ha) of county lands in Miami-Dade 

County. The unit is within the historical 

range of the Miami tiger beetle, although 

we are not aware of any records of 

historical occupancy of the unit. This 

unit includes remaining pine rockland 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
49958 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

habitat in the Northern Biscayne 

Pinelands of the Miami Rock Ridge. 

This unit includes all the physical or 

biological features essential to the 

conservation of the species and is 

protected and actively managed to 

maintain healthy pine rockland habitat. 

This unit is currently unoccupied by 

the Miami tiger beetle but is essential 

for the conservation of the species 

because it serves to protect habitat 

needed to recover the species, 

reestablish wild populations within the 

historical range of the species, and 

maintain populations throughout the 

historical distribution of the species in 

Miami-Dade County. It also provides 

habitat for recovery in the case of 

stochastic events, should the Miami 

tiger beetle be extirpated from one of its 

current locations. Given this unit 

contains essential habitat features (all of 

the physical or biological features), is 

protected and actively managed, and 

has an appropriate spatial distribution 

falling within the range of the species, 

we are reasonably certain that the lands 

and habitat within this unit will 

contribute to the conservation of the 

Miami tiger beetle. 

The Natural Areas Management 

Division of Miami-Dade County Parks, 

Recreation and Open Spaces 

Department conducts nonnative species 

control, prescribed fire, and mechanical 

vegetation treatments on lands owned 

by Miami-Dade County. The actions 

help improve habitat that could support 

the Miami tiger beetle. 

The entirety of Unit 8 overlaps with 

designated critical habitat for Carter’s 

small-flowered flax and Florida brickellbush. Additionally, approximately 14 ac 

(6 ha) or 82 percent of Unit 8 is enrolled 

in the NFC program. 

Unit 9: Bill Sadowski Park 

Unit 9 consists of approximately 20 ac 

(8 ha) of county-owned lands in MiamiDade County. The unit is within the 

historical range of the Miami tiger 

beetle, although we are not aware of any 

records of historical occupancy of the 

unit. This unit includes remaining pine 

rockland habitat within the Northern 

Biscayne Pinelands of the Miami Rock 

Ridge. This unit includes all the 

physical or biological features essential 

to the conservation of the species and is 

protected and actively managed to 

maintain healthy pine rockland habitat. 

This unit is currently unoccupied by 

the Miami tiger beetle but is essential 

for the conservation of the species 

because it serves to protect habitat 

needed to recover the species, 

reestablish wild populations within the 

historical range of the species, and 

maintain populations throughout the 

historical distribution of the species in 

Miami-Dade County. It also provides 

habitat for recovery in the case of 

stochastic events, should the Miami 

tiger beetle be extirpated from one of its 

current locations. Given this unit 

contains essential habitat features (all of 

the physical or biological features), is 

protected and actively managed, and 

has an appropriate spatial distribution 

falling within the range of the species, 

we are reasonably certain that the lands 

and habitat within this unit will 

contribute to the conservation of the 

Miami tiger beetle. 

The Natural Areas Management 

Division of Miami-Dade County Parks, 

Recreation and Open Spaces 

Department conducts nonnative species 

control, prescribed fire, and mechanical 

vegetation treatments on lands owned 

by Miami-Dade County. The actions 

help improve habitat that could support 

the Miami tiger beetle. 

All but 1 ac (<1 ha) of Unit 9 overlaps 

with designated critical habitat for 

Carter’s small-flowered flax and Florida 

brickell-bush. Additionally, 

approximately 19 ac (8 ha) or 95 percent 

of Unit 9 is enrolled in the NFC 

program. 

Unit 10: Tamiami Pineland Complex 

Addition 

Unit 10 consists of approximately 21 

ac (8 ha) of State-owned lands in MiamiDade County. The unit is within the 

historical range of the Miami tiger 

beetle, although we are not aware of any 

records of historical occupancy of the 

unit. This unit includes remaining pine 

rockland habitat within the Northern 

Biscayne Pinelands of the Miami Rock 

Ridge. This unit includes all the 

physical or biological features essential 

to the conservation of the species and is 

protected and actively managed to 

maintain healthy pine rockland habitat. 

This unit is currently unoccupied by 

the Miami tiger beetle but is essential 

for the conservation of the species 

because it serves to protect habitat 

needed to recover the species, 

reestablish wild populations within the 

historical range of the species, and 

maintain populations throughout the 

historical distribution of the species in 

Miami-Dade County. It also provides 

habitat for recovery in the case of 

stochastic events, should the Miami 

tiger beetle be extirpated from one of its 

current locations. Given this unit 

contains essential habitat features (all of 

the physical or biological features), is 

protected and actively managed, and 

has an appropriate spatial distribution 

falling within the range of the species, 

we are reasonably certain that the lands 

and habitat within this unit will 

contribute to the conservation of the 

Miami tiger beetle. 

The Natural Areas Management 

Division of Miami-Dade County Parks, 

Recreation and Open Spaces 

Department conducts nonnative species 

control, prescribed fire, and mechanical 

vegetation treatments on lands owned or 

managed by Miami-Dade County, 

including this unit. The actions help 

improve habitat that could support the 

Miami tiger beetle. 

All but 2 ac (<1 ha) of Unit 10 

overlaps with designated critical habitat 

for Bartram’s scrub-hairstreak butterfly, 

Carter’s small-flowered flax, and Florida 

brickell-bush. Additionally, 

approximately 18 ac (7 ha) or 86 percent 

of Unit 10 is enrolled in the NFC 

program. 

Unit 11: Pine Shore Pineland Preserve 

Unit 11 consists of approximately 8 ac 

(3 ha) of county-owned lands in MiamiDade County. The unit is within the 

historical range of the Miami tiger 

beetle, although we are not aware of any 

records of historical occupancy of the 

unit. This unit includes remaining pine 

rockland habitat within the Northern 

Biscayne Pinelands of the Miami Rock 

Ridge. This unit includes all the 

physical or biological features essential 

to the conservation of the species and is 

protected and actively managed to 

maintain healthy pine rockland habitat. 

This unit is currently unoccupied by 

the Miami tiger beetle but is essential 

for the conservation of the species 

because it serves to protect habitat 

needed to recover the species, 

reestablish wild populations within the 

historical range of the species, and 

maintain populations throughout the 

historical distribution of the species in 

Miami-Dade County. It also provides 

habitat for recovery in the case of 

stochastic events, should the Miami 

tiger beetle be extirpated from one of its 

current locations. Given this unit 

contains essential habitat features (all of 

the physical or biological features), is 

protected and actively managed, and 

has an appropriate spatial distribution 

falling within the range of the species, 

we are reasonably certain that the lands 

and habitat within this unit will 

contribute to the conservation of the 

Miami tiger beetle. 

The Natural Areas Management 

Division of Miami-Dade County Parks, 

Recreation and Open Spaces 

Department conducts nonnative species 

control, prescribed fire, and mechanical 

vegetation treatments on lands owned 

by Miami-Dade County. The actions 

help improve habitat that could support 

the Miami tiger beetle. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 49959 

The entirety of Unit 11 overlaps with 

designated critical habitat for Carter’s 

small-flowered flax and Florida brickellbush. Additionally, approximately 7 ac 

(3 ha) or 86 percent of Unit 11 is 

enrolled in the NFC program. 

Unit 12: Nixon Smiley Pineland 

Preserve 

Unit 12 consists of approximately 117 

ac (47 ha) of county-owned lands in 

Miami-Dade County. This unit was 

occupied at the time of listing and is 

currently occupied by the Miami tiger 

beetle. While surveys of this site have 

been inconsistent in level of effort, 

timing, and frequency, they have 

primarily focused on the habitat 

previously known to be occupied: The 

open, sandy areas on the western half of 

the property. 

This occupied habitat contains all of 

the physical or biological features, 

including pine rockland habitat (of 

sufficient size) with open or sparsely 

vegetated sandy areas that allow for 

thermoregulation, foraging, egg-laying, 

larval development, species dispersal, 

and population expansion, and natural 

or artificial disturbance regimes. The 

physical or biological features in this 

unit are protected and actively managed 

to maintain healthy pine rockland 

habitat. They may require additional 

special management considerations or 

protection to address threats of habitat 

loss and fragmentation, inadequate fire 

management, vegetation encroachment, 

collection, small population size, and 

sea level rise. In some cases, there are 

management actions being implemented 

to reduce some of these threats, and 

continued coordination with our 

partners and landowners are ongoing to 

implement needed actions. This unit is 

occupied by one of two extant 

populations of Miami tiger beetle, 

contains essential habitat features (all of 

the physical or biological features), is 

protected and actively managed, and 

has an appropriate spatial distribution 

falling within the range of the species. 

The Natural Areas Management 

Division of Miami-Dade County Parks, 

Recreation and Open Spaces 

Department conducts nonnative species 

control, prescribed fire, and mechanical 

vegetation treatments on lands owned 

by Miami-Dade County. The actions 

help improve habitat that could support 

the Miami tiger beetle. 

All but 2 ac (<1 ha) of Unit 12 

overlaps with designated critical habitat 

for Bartram’s scrub-hairstreak butterfly, 

Carter’s small-flowered flax, and Florida 

brickell-bush. Additionally, 

approximately 112 ac (47 ha) or 96 

percent of Unit 12 is enrolled in the 

NFC program. 

Unit 13: Camp Matecumbe 

Unit 13 consists of approximately 81 

ac (33 ha) of State (76 ac (31 ha)) and 

county (5 ac (2 ha)) owned lands in 

Miami-Dade County. The unit is within 

the historical range of the Miami tiger 

beetle, although we are not aware of any 

records of historical occupancy of the 

unit. This unit includes remaining pine 

rockland habitat in the Northern 

Biscayne Pinelands of the Miami Rock 

Ridge. This unit includes all the 

physical or biological features essential 

to the conservation of the species and is 

protected and actively managed to 

maintain healthy pine rockland habitat. 

This unit is currently unoccupied by 

the Miami tiger beetle but is essential 

for the conservation of the species 

because it serves to protect habitat 

needed to recover the species, 

reestablish wild populations within the 

historical range of the species, and 

maintain populations throughout the 

historical distribution of the species in 

Miami-Dade County. It also provides 

habitat for recovery in the case of 

stochastic events, should the Miami 

tiger beetle be extirpated from one of its 

current locations. Given this unit 

contains essential habitat features (all of 

the physical or biological features), is 

protected and actively managed, and 

has an appropriate spatial distribution 

falling within the range of the species, 

we are reasonably certain that the lands 

and habitat within this unit will 

contribute to the conservation of the 

Miami tiger beetle. 

The Natural Areas Management 

Division of Miami-Dade County Parks, 

Recreation and Open Spaces 

Department conducts nonnative species 

control, prescribed fire, and mechanical 

vegetation treatments on lands owned 

by Miami-Dade County. The actions 

help improve habitat that could support 

the Miami tiger beetle. 

All but 4 ac (1 ha) of Unit 13 overlaps 

with designated critical habitat for 

Bartram’s scrub-hairstreak butterfly, 

Carter’s small-flowered flax, and Florida 

brickell-bush. Additionally, 

approximately 62 ac (25 ha) or 77 

percent of Unit 13 is enrolled in the 

NFC program. 

Unit 14: Richmond Pine Rocklands 

Unit 14 consists of approximately 

1,455 ac (589 ha) in Miami-Dade 

County. Landownership in this unit is 

split among Federal (488 ac (198 ha)), 

county (844 ac (341 ha)), and private 

(123 ac (50 ha)). This unit is currently 

occupied by the Miami tiger beetle, 

which has been documented from four 

contiguous parcels within the 

Richmond Pine Rocklands: Zoo Miami 

Pine Rockland Preserve (Zoo Miami), 

Larry and Penny Thompson Park, U.S. 

Coast Guard, and University of Miami’s 

Center for Southeastern Tropical 

Advanced Remote Sensing property 

(CSTARS). Miami tiger beetles within 

the four contiguous occupied parcels in 

the Richmond population are within 

close proximity to each other with 

connecting patches of habitat with few 

or no barriers between parcels. Given 

the contiguous habitat with few barriers 

to dispersal, frequent adult movement 

among individuals is likely, and the 

occupied Richmond parcels probably 

represent a single population (Knisley 

2015b, p. 10). 

The unit also includes areas of pine 

rockland habitat containing all of the 

physical and biological features 

essential to the conservation of the 

species that are adjacent to sites with 

documented occurrences. The complex, 

including these parcels, contains all of 

the essential features (physical or 

biological features)—including pine 

rockland habitat (of sufficient size) with 

open or sparsely vegetated sandy areas 

that allow for thermoregulation, 

foraging, egg-laying, larval development, 

species dispersal, and population 

expansion, and natural or artificial 

disturbance regimes. The complex as a 

whole protects the occupied sites within 

the Richmond population, provides 

dispersal corridors for the Richmond 

population, provides potential habitat 

for population expansion, and supports 

prey-base populations. Being only one 

of two sites known to be currently 

occupied by the Miami tiger beetle, this 

complex is important to the Miami tiger 

beetle to ensure redundancy for the 

species and to contribute to the species’ 

viability. 

The physical or biological features in 

this unit may require additional special 

management considerations or 

protection to address threats of habitat 

loss and fragmentation, inadequate fire 

management, vegetation encroachment, 

collection, small population size, and 

sea level rise. In some cases, these 

threats are being addressed or 

coordinated with our partners and 

landowners to implement needed 

actions. 

Approximately 776 ac (314 ha) or 53 

percent of Unit 14 is enrolled in the 

NFC program. In addition, of the 

approximately 1,455 ac (589 ha) of 

critical habitat proposed for the Miami 

tiger beetle in Unit 14, about 937 ac (379 

ha) overlap with designated critical 

habitat for Bartram’s scrub-hairstreak 

butterfly, Florida leafwing butterfly, 

Carter’s small-flowered flax, and Florida 

brickell-bush. Therefore, approximately 

518 ac (210 ha) of proposed critical 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
49960 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

habitat in Unit 14 is unique to the 

Miami tiger beetle. 

Unit 15: Calderon Pineland 

Unit 15 consists of approximately 14 

ac (6 ha) of county-owned lands in 

Miami-Dade County. The unit is within 

the historical range of the Miami tiger 

beetle, although we are not aware of any 

records of historical occupancy of the 

unit. This unit includes remaining pine 

rockland habitat in the Northern 

Biscayne Pinelands of the Miami Rock 

Ridge. This unit includes all the 

physical or biological features essential 

to the conservation of the species and is 

protected and actively managed to 

maintain healthy pine rockland habitat. 

This unit is currently unoccupied by 

the Miami tiger beetle but is essential 

for the conservation of the species 

because it serves to protect habitat 

needed to recover the species, 

reestablish wild populations within the 

historical range of the species, and 

maintain populations throughout the 

historical distribution of the species in 

Miami-Dade County. It also provides 

habitat for recovery in the case of 

stochastic events, should the Miami 

tiger beetle be extirpated from one of its 

current locations. Given this unit 

contains essential habitat features (all of 

the physical or biological features), is 

protected and actively managed, and 

has an appropriate spatial distribution 

falling within the range of the species, 

we are reasonably certain that the lands 

and habitat within this unit will 

contribute to the conservation of the 

Miami tiger beetle. 

The Natural Areas Management 

Division of Miami-Dade County Parks, 

Recreation and Open Spaces 

Department conducts nonnative species 

control, prescribed fire, and mechanical 

vegetation treatments on lands owned 

by Miami-Dade County. The actions 

help improve habitat that could support 

the Miami tiger beetle. 

The entirety of Unit 15 overlaps with 

designated critical habitat for Florida 

brickell-bush. Additionally, 

approximately 9 ac (4 ha) or 64 percent 

of Unit 15 is enrolled in the NFC 

program. 

Unit 16: Porter Pineland Preserve 

Unit 16 consists of approximately 7 ac 

(3 ha) of privately owned lands in 

Miami-Dade County. The unit is within 

the historical range of the Miami tiger 

beetle, although we are not aware of any 

records of historical occupancy of the 

unit. This unit includes remaining pine 

rockland habitat in the Northern 

Biscayne Pinelands of the Miami Rock 

Ridge. This unit includes all the 

physical or biological features essential 

to the conservation of the species and is 

protected and actively managed to 

maintain healthy pine rockland habitat. 

This unit is currently unoccupied by 

the Miami tiger beetle but is essential 

for the conservation of the species 

because it serves to protect habitat 

needed to recover the species, 

reestablish wild populations within the 

historical range of the species, and 

maintain populations throughout the 

historical distribution of the species in 

Miami-Dade County. It also provides 

habitat for recovery in the case of 

stochastic events, should the Miami 

tiger beetle be extirpated from one of its 

current locations. Given this unit 

contains essential habitat features (all of 

the physical or biological features), is 

protected and actively managed, and 

has an appropriate spatial distribution 

falling within the range of the species, 

we are reasonably certain that the lands 

and habitat within this unit will 

contribute to the conservation of the 

Miami tiger beetle. 

The Audubon Society, with the help 

of volunteers and other conservation 

groups, conduct nonnative species 

control, prescribed fire, and mechanical 

vegetation treatments on this privately 

owned parcel. The actions help improve 

habitat that could support the Miami 

tiger beetle. 

The entirety of Unit 16 overlaps with 

designated critical habitat for Carter’s 

small-flowered flax and Florida brickellbush. Additionally, approximately 6 ac 

(2 ha) or 86 percent of Unit 16 is 

enrolled in the NFC program. 

Effects of Critical Habitat Designation 

Section 7 Consultation 

Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires 

Federal agencies, including the Service, 

to ensure that any action they fund, 

authorize, or carry out is not likely to 

jeopardize the continued existence of 

any endangered species or threatened 

species or result in the destruction or 

adverse modification of designated 

critical habitat of such species. In 

addition, section 7(a)(4) of the Act 

requires Federal agencies to confer with 

the Service on any agency action which 

is likely to jeopardize the continued 

existence of any species proposed to be 

listed under the Act or result in the 

destruction or adverse modification of 

proposed critical habitat. 

We published a final rule revising the 

definition of destruction or adverse 

modification on August 27, 2019 (84 FR 

44976). Destruction or adverse 

modification means a direct or indirect 

alteration that appreciably diminishes 

the value of critical habitat as a whole 

for the conservation of a listed species. 

If a Federal action may affect a listed 

species or its critical habitat, the 

responsible Federal agency (action 

agency) must enter into consultation 

with us. Examples of actions that are 

subject to the section 7 consultation 

process are actions on State, Tribal, 

local, or private lands that require a 

Federal permit (such as a permit from 

the Corps under section 404 of the Clean 

Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) or a 

permit from the Service under section 

10 of the Act) or that involve some other 

Federal action (such as funding from the 

Federal Highway Administration, 

Federal Aviation Administration, or the 

Federal Emergency Management 

Agency). Federal actions not affecting 

listed species or critical habitat—and 

actions on State, Tribal, local, or private 

lands that are not federally funded, 

authorized, or carried out by a Federal 

agency—do not require section 7 

consultation. 

Compliance with the requirements of 

section 7(a)(2) is documented through 

our issuance of: 

(1) A concurrence letter for Federal 

actions that may affect, but are not 

likely to adversely affect, listed species 

or critical habitat; or 

(2) A biological opinion for Federal 

actions that may affect, and are likely to 

adversely affect, listed species or critical 

habitat. 

When we issue a biological opinion 

concluding that a project is likely to 

jeopardize the continued existence of a 

listed species and/or destroy or 

adversely modify critical habitat, we 

provide reasonable and prudent 

alternatives to the project, if any are 

identifiable, that would avoid the 

likelihood of jeopardy and/or 

destruction or adverse modification of 

critical habitat. We define ‘‘reasonable 

and prudent alternatives’’ (at 50 CFR 

402.02) as alternative actions identified 

during consultation that: 

(1) Can be implemented in a manner 

consistent with the intended purpose of 

the action, 

(2) Can be implemented consistent 

with the scope of the Federal agency’s 

legal authority and jurisdiction, 

(3) Are economically and 

technologically feasible, and 

(4) Would, in the Service Director’s 

opinion, avoid the likelihood of 

jeopardizing the continued existence of 

the listed species and/or avoid the 

likelihood of destroying or adversely 

modifying critical habitat. 

Reasonable and prudent alternatives 

can vary from slight project 

modifications to extensive redesign or 

relocation of the project. Costs 

associated with implementing a 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 49961 

reasonable and prudent alternative are 

similarly variable. 

Regulations at 50 CFR 402.16 set forth 

requirements for Federal agencies to 

reinitiate formal consultation on 

previously reviewed actions. These 

requirements apply when the Federal 

agency has retained discretionary 

involvement or control over the action 

(or the agency’s discretionary 

involvement or control is authorized by 

law) and, if subsequent to the previous 

consultation: (1) If the amount or extent 

of taking specified in the incidental take 

statement is exceeded; (2) if new 

information reveals effects of the action 

that may affect listed species or critical 

habitat in a manner or to an extent not 

previously considered; (3) if the 

identified action is subsequently 

modified in a manner that causes an 

effect to the listed species or critical 

habitat that was not considered in the 

biological opinion; or (4) if a new 

species is listed or critical habitat 

designated that may be affected by the 

identified action. In such situations, 

Federal agencies sometimes may need to 

request reinitiation of consultation with 

us, but the regulations also specify some 

exceptions to the requirement to 

reinitiate consultation on specific land 

management plans after subsequently 

listing a new species or designating new 

critical habitat. See the regulations for a 

description of those exceptions. 

Application of the ‘‘Destruction or 

Adverse Modification’’ Standard 

The key factor related to the 

destruction or adverse modification 

determination is whether 

implementation of the proposed Federal 

action directly or indirectly alters the 

designated critical habitat in a way that 

appreciably diminishes the value of the 

critical habitat as a whole for the 

conservation of the listed species. As 

discussed above, the role of critical 

habitat is to support physical or 

biological features essential to the 

conservation of a listed species and 

provide for the conservation of the 

species. 

Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us 

to briefly evaluate and describe, in any 

proposed or final regulation that 

designates critical habitat, activities 

involving a Federal action that may 

violate section 7(a)(2) of the Act by 

destroying or adversely modifying such 

habitat, or that may be affected by such 

designation. 

Activities that the Service may, 

during a consultation under section 

7(a)(2) of the Act, consider likely to 

destroy or adversely modify critical 

habitat, or activities that may affect 

critical habitat, when carried out, 

funded, or authorized by a Federal 

agency, should result in consultation for 

the Miami tiger beetle. These activities 

include, but are not limited to: 

(1) Actions that would significantly 

alter the hydrology or substrate, such as 

ditching or filling. Such activities may 

include, but are not limited to, road 

construction or maintenance, and 

residential, commercial, or recreational 

development. 

(2) Actions that would significantly 

alter vegetation structure or 

composition, such as preventing the 

ability to conduct prescribed burns, 

residential and commercial 

development, and recreational facilities 

and trails. 

(3) Actions that would introduce 

chemical pesticides into the pine 

rockland ecosystem in a manner that 

impacts the Miami tiger beetle. Such 

activities may include but are not 

limited to mosquito control and 

agricultural pesticide applications. 

(4) Actions that would introduce 

nonnative species that would 

significantly alter vegetation structure or 

composition or the life history of the 

Miami tiger beetle. Such activities may 

include, but are not limited to, release 

of parasitic or predator species (flies or 

wasps) for use in agriculture-based 

biological control programs. 

Exemptions 

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

Section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act (16 

U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(B)(i)) provides that: 

‘‘The Secretary shall not designate as 

critical habitat any lands or other 

geographical areas owned or controlled 

by the Department of Defense (DoD), or 

designated for its use, that are subject to 

an integrated natural resources 

management plan (INRMP) prepared 

under section 101 of the Sikes Act (16 

U.S.C. 670a), if the Secretary determines 

in writing that such plan provides a 

benefit to the species for which critical 

habitat is proposed for designation.’’ No 

DoD lands with a completed INRMP are 

within the proposed critical habitat 

designation. 

We are not aware of any DoD lands 

within the boundaries of the proposed 

designation or that would be directly 

affected by the designation if finalized 

as proposed. We have determined that 

the Corps, a branch of the DoD, retains 

ownership over a 121-ac (49-ha) parcel 

proposed for designation of critical 

habitat in Unit 14; of this parcel, 85 ac 

(34 ha) are forested but not managed for 

preservation of natural resources. These 

Corps lands are not considered a 

military instillation under the Sikes Act 

subject to an INRMP, so they do not 

meet the standards of section 

4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act. As a result, we 

are not exempting any lands from this 

designation of critical habitat for the 

Miami tiger beetle pursuant to section 

4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act. 

Consideration of Impacts Under Section 

4(b)(2) of the Act 

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

the Secretary shall designate and make 

revisions to critical habitat on the basis 

of the best available scientific data after 

taking into consideration the economic 

impact, national security impact, and 

any other relevant impact of specifying 

any particular area as critical habitat. 

The Secretary may exclude an area from 

critical habitat if we determine that the 

benefits of such exclusion outweigh the 

benefits of specifying such area as part 

of the critical habitat, unless we 

determine, based on the best scientific 

data available, that the failure to 

designate such area as critical habitat 

will result in the extinction of the 

species. In making that determination, 

the statute on its face, as well as the 

legislative history, are clear that the 

Secretary has broad discretion regarding 

which factor(s) to use and how much 

weight to give to any factor. Under 

section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we may 

exclude an area from designated critical 

habitat based on economic impacts, 

impacts on national security, or any 

other relevant impacts. In considering 

whether to exclude a particular area 

from the designation, we identify the 

benefits of including the area in the 

designation, identify the benefits of 

excluding the area from the designation, 

and evaluate whether the benefits of 

exclusion outweigh the benefits of 

inclusion. If the analysis indicates that 

the benefits of exclusion outweigh the 

benefits of inclusion, the Secretary may 

exercise discretion to exclude the area 

only if such exclusion would not result 

in the extinction of the species. We have 

not proposed any areas for exclusion 

from critical habitat for the Miami tiger 

beetle. However, the final decision on 

whether to exclude any areas will be 

based on the best scientific data 

available at the time of the final 

designation, including information 

obtained during the comment period 

and information about the economic 

impact of designation. Accordingly, we 

have prepared a draft economic analysis 

concerning the proposed critical habitat 

designation, which is available for 

review and comment (see ADDRESSES). 

We describe below the process that we 

undertook for taking into consideration 

each category of impacts and our 

analyses of the relevant impacts. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
49962 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

Consideration of Economic Impacts 

Section 4(b)(2) of the Act and its 

implementing regulations require that 

we consider the economic impact that 

may result from a designation of critical 

habitat. To assess the probable 

economic impacts of a designation, we 

must first evaluate specific land uses or 

activities and projects that may occur in 

the area of the critical habitat. We then 

must evaluate the impacts that a specific 

critical habitat designation may have on 

restricting or modifying specific land 

uses or activities for the benefit of the 

species and its habitat within the areas 

proposed. We then identify which 

conservation efforts may be the result of 

the species being listed under the Act 

versus those attributed solely to the 

designation of critical habitat for this 

particular species. The probable 

economic impact of a proposed critical 

habitat designation is analyzed by 

comparing scenarios both ‘‘with critical 

habitat’’ and ‘‘without critical habitat.’’ 

The ‘‘without critical habitat’’ 

scenario represents the baseline for the 

analysis, which includes the existing 

regulatory and socio-economic burden 

imposed on landowners, managers, or 

other resource users potentially affected 

by the designation of critical habitat 

(e.g., under the Federal listing as well as 

other Federal, State, and local 

regulations). Therefore, the baseline 

represents the costs of all efforts 

attributable to the listing of the species 

under the Act (i.e., conservation of the 

species and its habitat incurred 

regardless of whether critical habitat is 

designated). The ‘‘with critical habitat’’ 

scenario describes the incremental 

impacts associated specifically with the 

designation of critical habitat for the 

species. The incremental conservation 

efforts and associated impacts would 

not be expected without the designation 

of critical habitat for the species. In 

other words, the incremental costs are 

those attributable solely to the 

designation of critical habitat, above and 

beyond the baseline costs. These are the 

costs we use when evaluating the 

benefits of inclusion and exclusion of 

particular areas from the final 

designation of critical habitat should we 

choose to conduct a discretionary 

4(b)(2) exclusion analysis. 

For this particular designation, we 

developed an incremental effects 

memorandum (IEM) considering the 

probable incremental economic impacts 

that may result from this proposed 

designation of critical habitat. The 

information contained in our IEM was 

then used to develop a screening 

analysis of the probable effects of the 

designation of critical habitat for the 

Miami tiger beetle (IEc 2021, entire). We 

began by conducting a screening 

analysis of the proposed designation of 

critical habitat in order to focus our 

analysis on the key factors that are 

likely to result in incremental economic 

impacts. The purpose of the screening 

analysis is to filter out the geographic 

areas in which the critical habitat 

designation is unlikely to result in 

probable incremental economic impacts. 

In particular, the screening analysis 

considers baseline costs (i.e., absent 

critical habitat designation) and 

includes any probable incremental 

economic impacts where land and water 

use may already be subject to 

conservation plans, land management 

plans, best management practices, or 

regulations that protect the habitat area 

as a result of the Federal listing status 

of the species. 

If the proposed critical habitat 

designation contains any unoccupied 

units, the screening analysis filters out 

particular areas of critical habitat that 

are already subject to such protections 

and are, therefore, unlikely to incur 

incremental economic impacts. 

Ultimately, the screening analysis 

allows us to focus our analysis on 

evaluating the specific areas or sectors 

that may incur probable incremental 

economic impacts as a result of the 

designation. If the proposed critical 

habitat designation contains any 

unoccupied units, the screening 

analysis assesses whether units are 

unoccupied because they require 

additional management or conservation 

efforts that may incur incremental 

economic impacts. This screening 

analysis combined with the information 

contained in our IEM constitute what 

we consider to be our draft economic 

analysis of the proposed critical habitat 

designation for the Miami tiger beetle 

and is summarized in the narrative 

below. 

Executive Orders (E.O.) 12866 and 

13563 direct Federal agencies to assess 

the costs and benefits of available 

regulatory alternatives in quantitative 

(to the extent feasible) and qualitative 

terms. Consistent with the E.O. 

regulatory analysis requirements, our 

effects analysis under the Act may take 

into consideration impacts to both 

directly and indirectly affected entities, 

where practicable and reasonable. If 

sufficient data are available, we assess 

to the extent practicable the probable 

impacts to both directly and indirectly 

affected entities. As part of our 

screening analysis, we considered the 

types of economic activities that are 

likely to occur within the areas likely 

affected by the critical habitat 

designation. 

In our evaluation of the probable 

incremental economic impacts that may 

result from the proposed designation of 

critical habitat for the Miami tiger 

beetle, first we identified, in the IEM 

dated April 28, 2021, probable 

incremental economic impacts 

associated with the following categories 

of activities: (1) Federal lands 

management (U.S. Coast Guard, Corps, 

FBP, and NOAA); (2) roadway and 

bridge construction; (3) agriculture; (4) 

dredging; (5) storage and distribution of 

chemical pollutants; (6) commercial or 

residential development; and (7) 

recreation (including construction of 

recreation infrastructure). We 

considered each industry or category 

individually. Additionally, we 

considered whether their activities have 

any Federal involvement. Critical 

habitat designation generally will not 

affect activities that do not have any 

Federal involvement; under the Act, 

designation of critical habitat only 

affects activities conducted, funded, 

permitted, or authorized by Federal 

agencies. In areas where the Miami tiger 

beetle is present, Federal agencies 

already are required to consult with the 

Service under section 7 of the Act on 

activities they fund, permit, or 

implement that may affect the species. 

If we finalize this proposed critical 

habitat designation, our consultation 

would include an evaluation of 

measures to avoid the destruction or 

adverse modification of critical habitat. 

In our IEM, we attempted to clarify 

the distinction between the effects that 

will result from the species being listed 

and those attributable to the critical 

habitat designation (i.e., difference 

between the jeopardy and adverse 

modification standards) for the Miami 

tiger beetle’s critical habitat. Because 

the designation of critical habitat for the 

Miami tiger beetle is being proposed 

several years following the listing of the 

species, data, such as from consultation 

history, is available to help us discern 

which conservation efforts are 

attributable to the species being listed 

and those which will result solely from 

the designation of critical habitat. The 

following specific circumstances help to 

inform our evaluation: (1) The essential 

physical or biological features identified 

for critical habitat are the same features 

essential for the life requisites of the 

species and (2) any actions that would 

result in sufficient harm or harassment 

to constitute jeopardy to the Miami tiger 

beetle would also likely adversely affect 

the essential physical or biological 

features of critical habitat. The IEM 

outlines our rationale concerning this 

limited distinction between protections 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 49963 

or economic impacts associated with 

listing and incremental impacts of the 

designation of critical habitat for this 

species. This evaluation of the 

incremental effects has been used as the 

basis to evaluate the probable 

incremental economic impacts of this 

proposed designation of critical habitat. 

The proposed critical habitat 

designation for the Miami tiger beetle 

totals approximately 1,977 ac (800 ha) 

in 16 units in Miami-Dade County, 

Florida. Two of the 16 units are 

currently occupied by the Miami tiger 

beetle; the remaining 14 units are within 

the beetle’s historical range but were not 

occupied at the time the species was 

listed in 2016 and are not known to be 

currently occupied. As previously 

stated, the 14 unoccupied critical 

habitat units encompass approximately 

405 ac (164 ha) or 20 percent of 

proposed critical habitat for the Miami 

tiger beetle, of which only 17 ac (7 ha) 

or 4 percent are not currently designated 

as critical habitat for other federally 

listed species. Tables 1 through 3, 

above, set forth specific information 

concerning each unit, including 

occupancy, land ownership, and extent 

of overlap with existing Federal critical 

habitat (see Proposed Critical Habitat 

Designation). 

Because the majority (80 percent) of 

the area designated is occupied, most 

actions that may affect the species or its 

habitat would also affect designated 

critical habitat, and it is unlikely that 

any additional conservation efforts 

would be recommended to address the 

adverse modification standard over and 

above those recommended as necessary 

to avoid jeopardizing the continued 

existence of the Miami tiger beetle. 

Therefore, only administrative costs are 

expected in approximately 80 percent of 

the proposed critical habitat 

designation. While the analysis for 

adverse modification of critical habitat 

will require time and resources by both 

the Federal action agency and the 

Service, it is believed that, in most 

circumstances, these costs would 

predominantly be administrative in 

nature and would not be significant. 

The remaining designated area is 

unoccupied and mostly (96 percent of 

the unoccupied area) overlaps with 

existing designated critical habitat for 

other pine rockland habitat species, 

including Carter’s small-flowered flax, 

Florida brickell-bush, Bartram’s scrub 

hairstreak butterfly, and the Florida 

leafwing butterfly. As a result, 

consultations for other listed species 

and critical habitats are likely to have 

already resulted in protections absent 

the critical habitat designation for the 

Miami tiger beetle, and 

recommendations for those species are 

anticipated to be sufficient to protect the 

Miami tiger beetle critical habitat. 

Further, any consultation requirements 

for listed species and resulting costs 

would be at least partially split among 

each overlapped species with not one 

species being the sole source of the 

entire costs. Accordingly, in these 

unoccupied areas, any conservation 

efforts or associated probable impacts 

would be considered incremental effects 

attributed to the critical habitat 

designation. 

The probable incremental economic 

impacts of the Miami tiger beetle critical 

habitat designation are expected to be 

limited to additional administrative 

effort as well as minor costs of 

conservation efforts resulting from a 

small number of future section 7 

consultations. This is due to two factors: 

(1) A large portion of proposed critical 

habitat is considered to be occupied by 

the species (80 percent), and 

incremental economic impacts of 

critical habitat designation, other than 

administrative costs, are unlikely; and 

(2) in proposed areas that are not 

occupied by the Miami tiger beetle (20 

percent), nearly all is designated critical 

habitat for other pine rockland species 

and the designation is not likely to 

result in additional or different project 

modifications from those that would 

already be anticipated absent the Miami 

tiger beetle designation. Because of the 

relatively small size of the critical 

habitat designation, the volume of lands 

that are State, county, or privately 

owned, and the substantial amount of 

lands that are already being managed for 

conservation, the numbers of section 7 

consultations expected annually are 

modest (approximately 2 formal, 12 

informal, and 14 technical assistance 

efforts annually across the designation). 

Some potential private property value 

effects are possible due to public 

perception of impacts to private lands. 

The designation of critical habitat may 

cause some developers or landowners to 

perceive that private lands will be 

subject to use restrictions or litigation 

from third parties, resulting in costs. 

However, less than seven percent of the 

proposed critical habitat designation is 

privately owned land, leading to 

nominal incremental costs arising from 

changes in public perception of lands 

included in the designation. 

Critical habitat designation for the 

Miami tiger beetle is unlikely to 

generate costs or benefits exceeding 

$100 million in a single year. Therefore, 

this rule is unlikely to meet the 

threshold for an economically 

significant rule, with regard to costs, 

under E.O. 12866. In fact, the total 

annual incremental costs of critical 

habitat designation for the Miami tiger 

beetle is anticipated to be less than 

$48,000 per year, and economic benefits 

are also anticipated to be small. 

As we stated earlier, we are soliciting 

data and comments from the public on 

the draft economic analysis, as well as 

on all aspects of the proposed rule and 

our amended required determinations. 

During the development of a final 

designation, we will consider the 

information presented in the draft 

economic analysis and any additional 

information on economic impacts we 

receive during the public comment 

period to determine whether any 

specific areas should be excluded from 

the final critical habitat designation 

under authority of section 4(b)(2) and 

our implementing regulations at 50 CFR 

17.90. If we receive credible information 

regarding the existence of a meaningful 

economic or other relevant impact 

supporting a benefit of exclusion, we 

will conduct an exclusion analysis for 

the relevant area or areas. We may also 

exercise the discretion to evaluate any 

other particular areas for possible 

exclusion. Furthermore, when we 

conduct an exclusion analysis based on 

impacts identified by experts in, or 

sources with firsthand knowledge about, 

impacts that are outside the scope of the 

Service’s expertise, we will give weight 

to those impacts consistent with the 

expert or firsthand information unless 

we have rebutting information. We may 

exclude an area from critical habitat if 

we determine that the benefits of 

excluding the area outweigh the benefits 

of including the area, provided the 

exclusion will not result in the 

extinction of this species. 

Consideration of National Security 

Impacts 

Section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act may 

not cover all DoD lands or areas that 

pose potential national-security 

concerns (e.g., a DoD installation that is 

in the process of revising its INRMP for 

a newly listed species or a species 

previously not covered). If a particular 

area is not covered under section 

4(a)(3)(B)(i), then national-security or 

homeland-security concerns are not a 

factor in the process of determining 

what areas meet the definition of 

‘‘critical habitat.’’ However, the Service 

must still consider impacts on national 

security, including homeland security, 

on those lands or areas not covered by 

section 4(a)(3)(B)(i), because section 

4(b)(2) requires the Service to consider 

those impacts whenever it designates 

critical habitat. Accordingly, if DoD, 

Department of Homeland Security 

(DHS), or another Federal agency has 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
49964 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

requested exclusion based on an 

assertion of national-security or 

homeland security concerns, or we have 

otherwise identified national security or 

homeland-security impacts from 

designating particular areas as critical 

habitat, we generally have reason to 

consider excluding those areas. 

However, we cannot automatically 

exclude requested areas. When DoD, 

DHS, or another Federal agency requests 

exclusion from critical habitat on the 

basis of national-security or homelandsecurity impacts, we must conduct an 

exclusion analysis if the Federal 

requester provides credible information, 

including a reasonably specific 

justification of an incremental impact 

on national security that would result 

from the designation of that specific 

area as critical habitat. That justification 

could include demonstration of 

probable impacts, such as impacts to 

ongoing border-security patrols and 

surveillance activities, or a delay in 

training or facility construction, as a 

result of compliance with section 7(a)(2) 

of the Act. If the agency requesting the 

exclusion does not provide us with a 

reasonably specific justification, we will 

contact the agency to recommend that it 

provide a specific justification or 

clarification of its concerns relative to 

the probable incremental impact that 

could result from the designation. If we 

conduct an exclusion analysis because 

the agency provides a reasonably 

specific justification or because we 

decide to exercise the discretion to 

conduct an exclusion analysis, we will 

defer to the expert judgment of DoD, 

DHS, or another Federal agency as to: 

(1) Whether activities on its lands or 

waters, or its activities on other lands or 

waters, have national-security or 

homeland-security implications; (2) the 

importance of those implications; and 

(3) the degree to which the cited 

implications would be adversely 

affected in the absence of an exclusion. 

In that circumstance, in conducting a 

discretionary section 4(b)(2) exclusion 

analysis, we will give great weight to 

national-security and homeland-security 

concerns in analyzing the benefits of 

exclusion. 

DHS Land Parcel 

We have determined that some lands 

within Unit 14 of the proposed 

designation of critical habitat for the 

Miami tiger beetle are owned, managed, 

or used by the U.S. Coast Guard, which 

is part of the DHS. 

As discussed in the Richmond Pine 

Rocklands (Unit 14) description above, 

the U.S. Coast Guard property is 

separated into two main areas: The 

COMMSTA Miami and the CEU. The 

COMMSTA houses transmitting and 

receiving antennas. The CEU plans and 

executes projects at regional shore 

facilities, such as construction and postdisaster assessments. 

The U.S. Coast Guard parcel contains 

approximately 100 ac (40 ha) of 

standing pine rocklands. The remainder 

of the site, outside of the developed 

areas, is made up of scraped pine 

rocklands that are mowed three to four 

times per year for maintenance of a 

communications antenna field. While 

disturbed, this scraped area maintains 

sand substrate and many native pine 

rockland species, including documented 

occurrences of the Miami tiger beetle. 

The U.S. Coast Guard parcel has a draft 

management plan that includes 

management of pine rockland habitats, 

including vegetation control and 

prescribed fire and protection of lands 

from further development or 

degradation. In addition, the standing 

pine rockland area is partially managed 

through an active recovery grant to the 

Institute for Regional Conservation. 

Under this grant, up to 39 ac (16 ha) of 

standing pine rocklands will undergo 

invasive vegetation control. 

Based on a review of the specific 

mission of the U.S. Coast Guard facility 

in conjunction with the measures and 

efforts set forth in the draft management 

plan to preserve pine rockland habitat 

and protect sensitive and listed species, 

we have made a preliminary 

determination that it is unlikely that the 

critical habitat, if finalized as proposed, 

would negatively impact the facility or 

its operations. As a result, we do not 

anticipate any impact on national 

security. However, if through the public 

comment period we receive credible 

information regarding impacts on 

national security or homeland security 

from designating particular areas as 

critical habitat, then as part of 

developing the final designation of 

critical habitat, we will conduct a 

discretionary exclusion analysis to 

determine whether to exclude those 

areas under authority of section 4(b)(2) 

and our implementing regulations at 50 

CFR 17.90. 

DoD Land Parcel 

As discussed above, we have 

determined that the Corps, a branch of 

the DoD, retains ownership over a 121– 

ac (49–ha)-parcel in Unit 14 of the 

proposed designation of critical habitat 

for the Miami tiger beetle. Over 85–ac 

(34–ha) of this parcel are forested but 

not managed for preservation of natural 

resources. The Corps does not have any 

specific management plan for the Miami 

tiger beetle or its habitat covering these 

lands. Activities conducted on this site 

are unknown, but we do not anticipate 

any impact on national security. 

However, if through the public 

comment period we receive credible 

information regarding impacts on 

national security or homeland security 

from designating particular areas as 

critical habitat, then as part of 

developing the final designation of 

critical habitat, we will conduct a 

discretionary exclusion analysis to 

determine whether to exclude those 

areas under authority of section 4(b)(2) 

and our implementing regulations at 50 

CFR 17.90. 

Consideration of Other Relevant 

Impacts 

Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we 

consider any other relevant impacts, in 

addition to economic impacts and 

impacts on national security discussed 

above. Other relevant impacts may 

include, but are not limited to, impacts 

to Tribes, States, local governments, 

public health and safety, community 

interests, the environment (such as 

increased risk of wildfire or pest and 

invasive species management), Federal 

lands, and conservation plans, 

agreements, or partnerships. To identify 

other relevant impacts that may affect 

the exclusion analysis, we consider a 

number of factors, including whether 

there are permitted conservation plans 

covering the species in the area—such 

as HCPs, safe harbor agreements (SHAs), 

or candidate conservation agreements 

with assurances (CCAAs)—or whether 

there are non-permitted conservation 

agreements and partnerships that may 

be impaired by designation of, or 

exclusion from, critical habitat. In 

addition, we look at whether Tribal 

conservation plans or partnerships, 

Tribal resources, or government-togovernment relationships of the United 

States with Tribal entities may be 

affected by the designation. We also 

consider any State, local, public-health, 

community-interest, environmental, or 

social impacts that might occur because 

of the designation. 

When analyzing other relevant 

impacts of including a particular area in 

a designation of critical habitat, we 

weigh those impacts relative to the 

conservation value of the particular 

area. To determine the conservation 

value of designating a particular area, 

we consider a number of factors, 

including, but not limited to, the 

additional regulatory benefits that the 

area would receive due to the protection 

from destruction or adverse 

modification as a result of actions with 

a Federal nexus, the educational 

benefits of mapping essential habitat for 

recovery of the listed species, and any 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 49965 

benefits that may result from a 

designation due to State or Federal laws 

that may apply to critical habitat. 

In the case of Miami tiger beetle, the 

benefits of critical habitat include 

public awareness of the presence of 

Miami tiger beetle and the importance 

of habitat protection, and, where a 

Federal nexus exists, increased habitat 

protection for Miami tiger beetle due to 

protection from destruction or adverse 

modification of critical habitat. 

Continued implementation of an 

ongoing management plan that provides 

conservation equal to or more than the 

protections that result from a critical 

habitat designation would reduce those 

benefits of including that specific area 

in the critical habitat designation. 

We evaluate the existence of a 

conservation plan when considering the 

benefits of inclusion. We consider a 

variety of factors, including, but not 

limited to, whether the plan is finalized; 

how it provides for the conservation of 

the essential physical or biological 

features; whether there is a reasonable 

expectation that the conservation 

management strategies and actions 

contained in a management plan will be 

implemented into the future; whether 

the conservation strategies in the plan 

are likely to be effective; and whether 

the plan contains a monitoring program 

or adaptive management to ensure that 

the conservation measures are effective 

and can be adapted in the future in 

response to new information. 

After identifying the benefits of 

inclusion and the benefits of exclusion, 

we carefully weigh the two sides to 

evaluate whether the benefits of 

exclusion outweigh those of inclusion. 

If our analysis indicates that the benefits 

of exclusion outweigh the benefits of 

inclusion, we then determine whether 

exclusion would result in extinction of 

the species. If exclusion of an area from 

critical habitat will result in extinction, 

we will not exclude it from the 

designation. 

Private or Other Non-Federal 

Conservation Plans or Agreements and 

Partnerships, in General 

HCPs for incidental take permits 

under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act 

provide for partnerships with nonFederal entities to minimize and 

mitigate impacts to listed species and 

their habitat. In some cases, HCP 

permittees agree to do more for the 

conservation of the species and their 

habitats on private lands than 

designation of critical habitat would 

provide alone. We place great value on 

the partnerships that are developed 

during the preparation and 

implementation of HCPs. 

CCAAs and SHAs are voluntary 

agreements designed to conserve 

candidate and listed species, 

respectively, on non-Federal lands. In 

exchange for actions that contribute to 

the conservation of species on nonFederal lands, participating property 

owners are covered by an ‘‘enhancement 

of survival’’ permit under section 

10(a)(1)(A) of the Act, which authorizes 

incidental take of the covered species 

that may result from implementation of 

conservation actions, specific land uses, 

and, in the case of SHAs, the option to 

return to a baseline condition under the 

agreements. The Service also provides 

enrollees assurances that we will not 

impose further land-, water-, or 

resource-use restrictions, or require 

additional commitments of land, water, 

or finances, beyond those agreed to in 

the agreements. 

When we undertake a discretionary 

section 4(b)(2) exclusion analysis based 

on permitted conservation plans such as 

CCAAs, SHAs, and HCPs, we consider 

the following three factors: 

(i) Whether the permittee is properly 

implementing the conservation plan or 

agreement; 

(ii) Whether the species for which 

critical habitat is being designated is a 

covered species in the conservation plan 

or agreement; and 

(iii) Whether the conservation plan or 

agreement specifically addresses the 

habitat of the species for which critical 

habitat is being designated and meets 

the conservation needs of the species in 

the planning area. 

The proposed critical habitat 

designation includes areas that are 

covered by the following permitted plan 

providing for the conservation of Miami 

tiger beetle: Coral Reef Commons 

Habitat Conservation Plan. 

Coral Reef Commons Habitat 

Conservation Plan 

In preparing this proposal, we have 

determined that lands associated with 

the Coral Reef Commons HCP within 

the Richmond Pine Rocklands (Unit 14) 

are included within the boundaries of 

the proposed critical habitat. 

As discussed in the Richmond Pine 

Rocklands (Unit 14) description above, 

Coral Reef Commons is a mixed-use 

community, which consists of 900 

apartments, retail stores, restaurants, 

and parking. In 2017, an HCP and 

associated permit under section 10 of 

the Act was developed and issued for 

the Coral Reef Commons development. 

As part of the HCP and permit, an 

approximately 51-ac (21-ha) onsite 

preserve (same as the area for proposed 

critical habitat designation) was 

established under a conservation 

encumbrance that will be managed in 

perpetuity for pine rockland habitat and 

sensitive and listed species, including 

the Miami tiger beetle. In addition, an 

additional approximately 51-ac (21-ha) 

of the CSTARS site (discussed above) is 

an offsite mitigation area for Coral Reef 

Commons. Both the onsite preserve and 

the offsite mitigation area are being 

managed to maintain healthy pine 

rockland habitat through the use of 

invasive, exotic plant management, 

mechanical treatment, and prescribed 

fire, addressing both the habitat and 

conservation needs of the species. Since 

initiating the Coral Reef Commons HCP, 

pine rockland restoration efforts have 

been conducted within all of the 

management units in both the onsite 

preserve and the offsite mitigation area. 

A second round of prescribed fire began 

in February 2021. Currently, the onsite 

preserve meets or exceeds the success 

criteria described for proper 

implementation of the HCP. 

Critical habitat within Unit 14 that is 

associated with the Coral Reef 

Commons HCP is limited to the onsite 

preserve and offsite mitigation area. 

Based on our review of the HCP and 

proposed critical habitat for the Miami 

tiger beetle, we do not anticipate 

requesting any additional conservation 

measures for the species beyond those 

that are currently in place. The Coral 

Reef Commons HCP covers the Miami 

tiger beetle; addresses the specific 

habitat of the species and meets the 

conservation needs of the species; and 

is currently being implemented 

properly. Therefore, at this time, we are 

considering excluding those specific 

lands associated with the Coral Reef 

Commons HCP that are in the preserve 

and offsite mitigation area from the final 

designation of critical habitat for the 

Miami tiger beetle. However, we will 

more thoroughly review the HCP, its 

implementation of the conservation 

measures for the Miami tiger beetle and 

its habitat therein, and public comment 

on this issue prior to finalizing critical 

habitat, and if appropriate, exclude from 

critical habitat for the Miami tiger beetle 

those lands associated with the Coral 

Reef Commons HCP that are in the 

preserve and offsite mitigation area. 

We have further determined that there 

are no additional HCPs or other 

management plans for the Miami tiger 

beetle within the proposed critical 

habitat designation. 

Tribal Lands 

Several Executive Orders, Secretarial 

Orders, and policies concern working 

with Tribes. These guidance documents 

generally confirm our trust 

responsibilities to Tribes, recognize that 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
49966 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

Tribes have sovereign authority to 

control Tribal lands, emphasize the 

importance of developing partnerships 

with Tribal governments, and direct the 

Service to consult with Tribes on a 

government-to-government basis. There 

are no Tribal lands within the 

designated critical habitat for Miami 

tiger beetle. 

During the development of a final 

designation, we will consider any 

additional information received through 

the public comment period regarding 

other relevant impacts to determine 

whether any specific areas should be 

excluded from the final critical habitat 

designation under authority of section 

4(b)(2) and our implementing 

regulations at 50 CFR 17.90. 

Required Determinations 

Clarity of the Rule 

We are required by Executive Orders 

12866 and 12988 and by the 

Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 

1998, to write all rules in plain 

language. This means that each rule we 

publish must: 

(1) Be logically organized; 

(2) Use the active voice to address 

readers directly; 

(3) Use clear language rather than 

jargon; 

(4) Be divided into short sections and 

sentences; and 

(5) Use lists and tables wherever 

possible. 

If you feel that we have not met these 

requirements, send us comments by one 

of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To 

better help us revise the rule, your 

comments should be as specific as 

possible. For example, you should tell 

us the numbers of the sections or 

paragraphs that are unclearly written, 

which sections or sentences are too 

long, the sections where you feel lists or 

tables would be useful, etc. 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

(Executive Orders 12866 and 13563) 

Executive Order 12866 provides that 

the Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of 

Management and Budget will review all 

significant rules. OIRA has determined 

that this rule is not significant. 

Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the 

principles of E.O. 12866 while calling 

for improvements in the nation’s 

regulatory system to promote 

predictability, to reduce uncertainty, 

and to use the best, most innovative, 

and least burdensome tools for 

achieving regulatory ends. The 

executive order directs agencies to 

consider regulatory approaches that 

reduce burdens and maintain flexibility 

and freedom of choice for the public 

where these approaches are relevant, 

feasible, and consistent with regulatory 

objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes 

further that regulations must be based 

on the best available science and that 

the rulemaking process must allow for 

public participation and an open 

exchange of ideas. We have developed 

this proposed rule in a manner 

consistent with these requirements. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 

et seq.) 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(RFA; 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), as amended 

by the Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 

(SBREFA; 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), 

whenever an agency is required to 

publish a notice of rulemaking for any 

proposed or final rule, it must prepare 

and make available for public comment 

a regulatory flexibility analysis that 

describes the effects of the rule on small 

entities (i.e., small businesses, small 

organizations, and small government 

jurisdictions). However, no regulatory 

flexibility analysis is required if the 

head of the agency certifies the rule will 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities. The SBREFA amended the RFA 

to require Federal agencies to provide a 

certification statement of the factual 

basis for certifying that the rule will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

According to the Small Business 

Administration, small entities include 

small organizations such as 

independent nonprofit organizations; 

small governmental jurisdictions, 

including school boards and city and 

town governments that serve fewer than 

50,000 residents; and small businesses 

(13 CFR 121.201). Small businesses 

include manufacturing and mining 

concerns with fewer than 500 

employees, wholesale trade entities 

with fewer than 100 employees, retail 

and service businesses with less than $5 

million in annual sales, general and 

heavy construction businesses with less 

than $27.5 million in annual business, 

special trade contractors doing less than 

$11.5 million in annual business, and 

agricultural businesses with annual 

sales less than $750,000. To determine 

if potential economic impacts to these 

small entities are significant, we 

considered the types of activities that 

might trigger regulatory impacts under 

this designation as well as types of 

project modifications that may result. In 

general, the term ‘‘significant economic 

impact’’ is meant to apply to a typical 

small business firm’s business 

operations. 

Under the RFA, as amended, and as 

understood in light of recent court 

decisions, Federal agencies are required 

to evaluate the potential incremental 

impacts of rulemaking only on those 

entities directly regulated by the 

rulemaking itself; in other words, the 

RFA does not require agencies to 

evaluate the potential impacts to 

indirectly regulated entities. The 

regulatory mechanism through which 

critical habitat protections are realized 

is section 7 of the Act, which requires 

Federal agencies, in consultation with 

the Service, to ensure that any action 

authorized, funded, or carried out by the 

agency is not likely to destroy or 

adversely modify critical habitat. 

Therefore, under section 7, only Federal 

action agencies are directly subject to 

the specific regulatory requirement 

(avoiding destruction and adverse 

modification) imposed by critical 

habitat designation. Consequently, it is 

our position that only Federal action 

agencies would be directly regulated if 

we adopt the proposed critical habitat 

designation. The RFA does not require 

evaluation of the potential impacts to 

entities not directly regulated. 

Moreover, Federal agencies are not 

small entities. Therefore, because no 

small entities would be directly 

regulated by this rulemaking, the 

Service certifies that, if made final as 

proposed, the proposed critical habitat 

designation will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. 

In summary, we have considered 

whether the proposed designation 

would result in a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. For the above reasons and 

based on currently available 

information, we certify that, if made 

final, the proposed critical habitat 

designation would not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small business entities. 

Therefore, an initial regulatory 

flexibility analysis is not required. 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use— 

Executive Order 13211 

Executive Order 13211 (Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use) requires agencies 

to prepare Statements of Energy Effects 

when undertaking certain actions. In 

our economic analysis, we did not find 

that the designation of this proposed 

critical habitat will significantly affect 

energy supplies, distribution, or use. We 

do not foresee any energy development 

projects, supply distribution or use that 

may affect the proposed critical habitat 

units for the Miami tiger beetle. Further, 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 49967 

in our evaluation of potential economic 

impacts, we did not find that this 

proposed critical habitat designation 

would significantly affect energy 

supplies, distribution, or use. Therefore, 

this action is not a significant energy 

action, and no Statement of Energy 

Effects is required. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 

U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) 

In accordance with the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et 

seq.), we make the following finding: 

(1) This proposed rule would not 

produce a Federal mandate. In general, 

a Federal mandate is a provision in 

legislation, statute, or regulation that 

would impose an enforceable duty upon 

State, local, or Tribal governments, or 

the private sector, and includes both 

‘‘Federal intergovernmental mandates’’ 

and ‘‘Federal private sector mandates.’’ 

These terms are defined in 2 U.S.C. 

658(5)–(7). ‘‘Federal intergovernmental 

mandate’’ includes a regulation that 

‘‘would impose an enforceable duty 

upon State, local, or Tribal 

governments’’ with two exceptions. It 

excludes ‘‘a condition of Federal 

assistance.’’ It also excludes ‘‘a duty 

arising from participation in a voluntary 

Federal program,’’ unless the regulation 

‘‘relates to a then-existing Federal 

program under which $500,000,000 or 

more is provided annually to State, 

local, and Tribal governments under 

entitlement authority,’’ if the provision 

would ‘‘increase the stringency of 

conditions of assistance’’ or ‘‘place caps 

upon, or otherwise decrease, the Federal 

Government’s responsibility to provide 

funding,’’ and the State, local, or Tribal 

governments ‘‘lack authority’’ to adjust 

accordingly. At the time of enactment, 

these entitlement programs were: 

Medicaid; Aid to Families with 

Dependent Children work programs; 

Child Nutrition; Food Stamps; Social 

Services Block Grants; Vocational 

Rehabilitation State Grants; Foster Care, 

Adoption Assistance, and Independent 

Living; Family Support Welfare 

Services; and Child Support 

Enforcement. ‘‘Federal private sector 

mandate’’ includes a regulation that 

‘‘would impose an enforceable duty 

upon the private sector, except (i) a 

condition of Federal assistance or (ii) a 

duty arising from participation in a 

voluntary Federal program.’’ 

The designation of critical habitat 

does not impose a legally binding duty 

on non-Federal Government entities or 

private parties. Under the Act, the only 

regulatory effect is that Federal agencies 

must ensure that their actions do not 

destroy or adversely modify critical 

habitat under section 7. While nonFederal entities that receive Federal 

funding, assistance, or permits, or that 

otherwise require approval or 

authorization from a Federal agency for 

an action, may be indirectly impacted 

by the designation of critical habitat, the 

legally binding duty to avoid 

destruction or adverse modification of 

critical habitat rests squarely on the 

Federal agency. Furthermore, to the 

extent that non-Federal entities are 

indirectly impacted because they 

receive Federal assistance or participate 

in a voluntary Federal aid program, the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act would 

not apply, nor would critical habitat 

shift the costs of the large entitlement 

programs listed above onto State 

governments. 

(2) We do not believe that this rule 

will significantly or uniquely affect 

small governments because the 

government lands being proposed for 

critical habitat designation are owned 

by the Federal Government, including 

the U.S. Coast Guard (DHS), U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers (DoD), NOAA, and 

FBP; or are State or local governments 

such as the State of Florida, and MiamiDade County. None of these government 

entities fit the definition of ‘‘small 

governmental jurisdiction.’’ Therefore, a 

Small Government Agency Plan is not 

required. 

Takings—Executive Order 12630 

In accordance with E.O. 12630 

(Government Actions and Interference 

with Constitutionally Protected Private 

Property Rights), we have analyzed the 

potential takings implications of 

designating critical habitat for the 

Miami tiger beetle in a takings 

implications assessment. The Act does 

not authorize the Service to regulate 

private actions on private lands or 

confiscate private property as a result of 

critical habitat designation. Designation 

of critical habitat does not affect land 

ownership, or establish any closures or 

restrictions on use of or access to the 

designated areas. Furthermore, the 

designation of critical habitat does not 

affect landowner actions that do not 

require Federal funding or permits, nor 

does it preclude development of habitat 

conservation programs or issuance of 

incidental take permits to permit actions 

that do require Federal funding or 

permits to go forward. However, Federal 

agencies are prohibited from carrying 

out, funding, or authorizing actions that 

would destroy or adversely modify 

critical habitat. A takings implications 

assessment has been completed for the 

proposed designation of critical habitat 

for the Miami tiger beetle and concludes 

that, if adopted, this designation of 

critical habitat does not pose significant 

takings implications for lands within or 

affected by the designation. 

Federalism—Executive Order 13132 

In accordance with E.O. 13132 

(Federalism), this proposed rule does 

not have significant Federalism effects. 

A federalism summary impact statement 

is not required. In keeping with 

Department of the Interior and 

Department of Commerce policy, we 

requested information from, and 

coordinated development of this 

proposed critical habitat designation 

with, appropriate State resource 

agencies. From a federalism perspective, 

the designation of critical habitat 

directly affects only the responsibilities 

of Federal agencies. The Act imposes no 

other duties with respect to critical 

habitat, either for States and local 

governments, or for anyone else. As a 

result, the proposed rule does not have 

substantial direct effects either on the 

States, or on the relationship between 

the national government and the States, 

or on the distribution of powers and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. The proposed 

designation may have some benefit to 

these governments because the areas 

that contain the features essential to the 

conservation of the species are more 

clearly defined, and the physical or 

biological features of the habitat 

necessary for the conservation of the 

species are specifically identified. This 

information does not alter where and 

what federally sponsored activities may 

occur. However, it may assist State and 

local governments in long-range 

planning because they no longer have to 

wait for case-by-case section 7 

consultations to occur. 

Where State and local governments 

require approval or authorization from a 

Federal agency for actions that may 

affect critical habitat, consultation 

under section 7(a)(2) of the Act would 

be required. While non-Federal entities 

that receive Federal funding, assistance, 

or permits, or that otherwise require 

approval or authorization from a Federal 

agency for an action, may be indirectly 

impacted by the designation of critical 

habitat, the legally binding duty to 

avoid destruction or adverse 

modification of critical habitat rests 

squarely on the Federal agency. 

Civil Justice Reform—Executive Order 

12988 

In accordance with Executive Order 

12988 (Civil Justice Reform), the Office 

of the Solicitor has determined that the 

rule would not unduly burden the 

judicial system and that it meets the 

requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) 

of the Order. We have proposed 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
49968 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

designating critical habitat in 

accordance with the provisions of the 

Act. To assist the public in 

understanding the habitat needs of the 

species, this proposed rule identifies the 

physical or biological features essential 

to the conservation of the species. The 

proposed areas of critical habitat are 

presented on maps, and the proposed 

rule provides several options for the 

interested public to obtain more 

detailed location information, if desired. 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) 

This rule does not contain 

information collection requirements, 

and a submission to the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) under 

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) is not required. 

We may not conduct or sponsor and you 

are not required to respond to a 

collection of information unless it 

displays a currently valid OMB control 

number. 

National Environmental Policy Act (42 

U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) 

It is our position that, outside the 

jurisdiction of the U.S. Court of Appeals 

for the Tenth Circuit, we do not need to 

prepare environmental analyses 

pursuant to the National Environmental 

Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et 

seq.) in connection with regulations 

adopted pursuant to section 4(a) of the 

Act. We published a notice outlining 

our reasons for this determination in the 

Federal Register on October 25, 1983 

(48 FR 49244). This position was upheld 

by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 

Ninth Circuit (Douglas County v. 

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

cert. denied 516 U.S. 1042 (1996)). 

Government-to-Government 

Relationship With Tribes 

In accordance with the President’s 

memorandum of April 29, 1994 

(Government-to-Government Relations 

with Native American Tribal 

Governments; 59 FR 22951), Executive 

Order 13175 (Consultation and 

Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments), and the Department of 

the Interior’s manual at 512 DM 2, we 

readily acknowledge our responsibility 

to communicate meaningfully with 

recognized Federal Tribes on a 

government-to-government basis. In 

accordance with Secretarial Order 3206 

of June 5, 1997 (American Indian Tribal 

Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust 

Responsibilities, and the Endangered 

Species Act), we readily acknowledge 

our responsibilities to work directly 

with Tribes in developing programs for 

healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge that 

Tribal lands are not subject to the same 

controls as Federal public lands, to 

remain sensitive to Indian culture, and 

to make information available to Tribes. 

We determined that there are no 

Tribal lands that were occupied by the 

Miami tiger beetle at the time of listing 

that contain the features essential for 

conservation of the species, and no 

Tribal lands unoccupied by the Miami 

tiger beetle that are essential for the 

conservation of the species. Therefore, 

we are not proposing to designate 

critical habitat for the Miami tiger beetle 

on Tribal lands. As a result, there are no 

Tribal lands affected by the proposed 

designation of critical habitat for this 

species. 

References Cited 

A complete list of references cited in 

this rulemaking is available on the 

internet at http://www.regulations.gov. 

Authors 

The primary authors of this proposed 

rule are the staff members of the Fish 

and Wildlife Service’s Florida 

Ecological Services Field Office. 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 

Endangered and threatened species, 

Exports, Imports, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, 

Transportation. 

Proposed Regulation Promulgation 

Accordingly, we propose to amend 

part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 

50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, 

as set forth below: 

PART 17—ENDANGERED AND 

THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 17 

continues to read as follows: 

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

1544; and 4201–4245, unless otherwise 

noted. 

■ 2. In § 17.11(h), revise the entry for 

‘‘Beetle, Miami tiger’’ under ‘‘Insects’’ in 

the List of Endangered and Threatened 

Wildlife to read as follows: 

§ 17.11 Endangered and threatened 

wildlife. 

* * * * * 

(h) * * * 

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

*******

INSECTS

* * * * * * * 

Beetle, Miami tiger ................. Cicindelidia floridana ............. U.S.A. (FL) ....... E 81 FR 68985; 10/5/2016; 50 CFR 

17.95(i).CH

* * * * * * * 

■ 3. In § 17.95, amend paragraph (i) by 

adding an entry for ‘‘Miami Tiger Beetle 

Cicindelidia floridana’’ after the entry 

for ‘‘Helotes Mold Beetle Batrisodes 

venyivi)’’, to read as follows: 

§ 17.95 Critical habitat—fish and wildlife. 

* * * * * 

(i) Insects. 

* * * * * 

Miami Tiger Beetle (Cicindelidia 

floridana) 

(1) Critical habitat units are depicted 

for Miami-Dade County, Florida, on the 

maps in this entry. 

(2) Within these areas, the physical or 

biological features essential to the 

conservation of the Miami tiger beetle 

consist of one or more of the following 

components: 

(i) South Florida pine rockland 

habitat of at least 2.5 ac (1 ha) in size 

that is maintained by natural or 

prescribed fire or other disturbance 

regimes; and 

(ii) Open sandy areas within or 

directly adjacent to the south Florida 

pine rockland habitat with little to no 

vegetation that allows for or facilitates 

normal behavior and growth such as 

thermoregulation, foraging, egg-laying, 

larval development, and habitat 

connectivity, which promotes the 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 49969 

overall distribution and expansion of 

the species. 

(3) Critical habitat does not include 

manmade structures (such as buildings, 

aqueducts, runways, roads, and other 

paved areas) and the land on which they 

are located existing within the legal 

boundaries on the effective date of this 

rule. 

(4) Critical habitat map units. Data 

layers defining map units were created 

using Esri ArcGIS mapping software. 

The projection used was Albers Conical 

Equal Area (Florida Geographic Data 

Library), NAD 1983 HARN. The maps in 

this entry, as modified by any 

accompanying regulatory text, establish 

the boundaries of the critical habitat 

designation. The spatial data used to 

create the critical habitat unit maps are 

available to the public at the Service’s 

internet site, http://www.fws.gov/ 

verobeach/, or http://

www.regulations.gov at Docket No. 

FWS–R4–ES–2021–0053. 

(5) Note: Index map of all critical 

habitat units for Miami tiger beetle 

follows: 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–P 

(6) Unit 1: Trinity Pineland, MiamiDade County, Florida. 

(i) Unit 1 consists of approximately 10 

ac (4 ha). The unit is located between 

SW 72nd Street to the north, SW 80th 

Street to the south, South Dixie 

Highway to the east, and Palmetto 

Expressway to the west. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP07SE21.004</GPH>

Index of Critical Habitat Units for 

Miami Tiger Beetle {Cicihdelidia floridana) 

Eadlus· Pliielai'ld 11 

Ci!ldel'6n P!!\elahd I 

QuailROOit ...,;•. Pineland ~ 

Silva'Patm I 

Groves P111eland 

Pine 

Shore 

Pineland Pineland 

- Preseive. 

• c:rltl!:lll Habitat M1amlTrger Beetle 

0 I 2 4~ 

It I l I It 
49970 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

(ii) Map of Unit 1 follows: 

(7) Unit 2: Rockdale Pineland, MiamiDade County, Florida. (i) Unit 2 consists of approximately 39 

ac (16 ha). The unit is located directly 

west of South Dixie Highway, between 

SW 144th Street to the north and SW 

152nd Street to the south. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP07SE21.005</GPH>

Critical Habitat Unit for Miami Tiger Beetle {Cicindelidia flor!dana) 

Unit 1: Trinity Pineland, Miami-Dade county, Florida 

"-. 

... 

Miami•Dade County, Florida 

Trinity Pineland 

• Critical Habitat Miami Tiger Beetle 

- Major Highways 

a-canals 

0 0.07 0.1$ 0.3-~ t I I I I I I_ I 1 

0 (l,07 M5 O.JMite. 
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 49971 

(ii) Map of Unit 2 follows: 

(8) Unit 3: Deering Estate South 

Edition, Miami-Dade County, Florida. 

(i) Unit 3 consists of approximately 16 

ac (6 ha). This unit is located just east 

of Old Cutler Road and south of 168th 

Street. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP07SE21.006</GPH>

Critical Habitat Unit for Miami Tiger Beetle (Cicindelidia floridana) 

Unit 2: Rockdale Pineland, Miami-Dade County, Florida 

... 

Miami-Dade County, Fklrlda 

• Critical Habitat Miami Tiger Beetle 

- Major Highways 

,J,., Canals 

0 0.2 0,4 

0,2 0,4 o,a Mil-es 
49972 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

(ii) Map of Unit 3 follows: 

(9) Unit 4: Ned Glenn Nature 

Preserve, Miami-Dade County, Florida. 

(i) Unit 4 consists of approximately 11 

ac (4 ha). The unit is located directly 

west of SW 87th Avenue, between 184th 

Street to the north, Old Cutler Road to 

the south, and Franjo Road to the west. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP07SE21.007</GPH>

Critical Habitat Unit for Miami Tiger Beetle (Cicindelidia floridana) 

Unit 3: Deering Estate South Edition, Miami-Dade County, Florida 

.fl 

... 

Mlaml·Dade County, Florida 

Deering Estate 

South Edition 

• Critical Habitat Miami Tiger Beetle 

- Major Highways 

Canals 

0 0.05 0.1 0.2 Kilometers 

I I I I 11 t t I 

0 0,05 0,1 0.2 Miles 
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 49973 

(ii) Map of Unit 4 follows: 

(10) Unit 5: Deering Estate at Cutler, 

Miami-Dade County, Florida. 

(i) Unit 5 consists of approximately 89 

ac (36 ha). The unit is located southeast 

of SW 152nd Street and Old Cutler 

Road. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP07SE21.008</GPH>

Critical Habitat Unit for Miami Tiger Beetle (Cicindelidia floridana) 

Unit 4: Ned Glenn Nature Preserve, Miami-Dade County, Florida 

Sadowski l

~· Park 

---~ 

Miami-Dade County, Florida 

Nature Preserve 

• 

• Critical Habitat Miami Tiger Beetle 

- Major Highways 

,~c• Canals 

0 0.2 0.4 0:8 Kilometers 

0.17 0.35 0.7 Miles 
49974 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

(ii) Map of Unit 5 follows: 

(11) Unit 6: Silver Palm Groves 

Pineland, Miami-Dade County, Florida. 

(i) Unit 6 consists of approximately 25 

ac (10 ha). This unit is located just north 

of SW 232nd Street, between SW 216th 

Street to the north, South Dixie 

Highway to the east, and SW 147th 

Avenue to the west. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP07SE21.009</GPH>

Critical Habitat Unit for Miami Tiger Beetle (Cicindelidia floridana) 

Unit 5: Deering Estate at Cutler, Miami-Dade County, Florida 

' ... 

... 

Mlaml·Dade County, Florida 

Deering Estate 

at Cutler 

• Critical Habitat Miami Tiger Beetle 

- Major Highways 

•a,. canals 

c:::J County Boundary 

0 0.2$ 0.5 1 Kilometers 

0.25 0.5 
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 49975 

(ii) Map of Unit 6 follows: 

(12) Unit 7: Quail Roost Pineland, 

Miami-Dade County, Florida. 

(i) Unit 7 consists of approximately 48 

ac (19 ha). This unit is located between 

SW 200th Street to the north, SW 127th 

Avenue to the east, SW 216th Street to 

the south, and SW 147th Avenue to the 

west. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP07SE21.010</GPH>

Critical Habitat Unit for Miami Tiger Beetle (Cicindelidia floridana) 

Unit 6: Silver Palm Groves Pineland, Miami-Dade County, Florida 

' Silver Palm 

Groves Pineland 

, 

-. 

.fl 

.. 

EJ 

Miami-Dade County, Florida 

• Critical Habitat Miami Tiger Beetle 

- Major Highways 

Canals 

0 0.13 0.25 

0,13 0,25 

0.5 Kilometers 

0.5 Miles 
49976 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

(ii) Map of Unit 7 follows: 

(13) Unit 8: Eachus Pineland, MiamiDade County, Florida. 

(i) Unit 8 consists of approximately 17 

ac (7 ha). This unit is located between 

SW 180th Street to the north, SW 137th 

Avenue to the east, SW 184th Street to 

the south and SW 142th Avenue to the 

east. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP07SE21.011</GPH>

Critical Habitat Unit for Miami Tiger Beetle (Cicindelidia floridana) 

Unit 7: Quail Roost Pineland, Miami-Dade County, Florida 

I calderon 

Pineland 

i,· . ~ . . . . . . Quail·R.oost 

~. Pineland 

l,.._ ....... .,,.C·-!0-2 

• Critical Habitat Miami Tiger Beetle 

- Major Highways 

.fl 

8. 

Miami-Dade County, Rorida 

,z,.. canals 

0 0.2 

I I I 

0 0.2 

0.4 0.8 Kilon-ieters: t I I I I I 

0.4 0.8 MIies 
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 49977 

(ii) Map of Unit 8 follows: 

(14) Unit 9: Bill Sadowski Park, 

Miami-Dade County, Florida. 

(i) Unit 9 consists of approximately 20 

ac (8 ha). This unit is located south of 

168th Street, west of Old Cutler Road, 

north of SW 184th Street, and east of 

SW 87th Avenue. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP07SE21.012</GPH>

Critical Habitat Unit for Miami Tiger Beetle (Cicindelidia floridana) 

Unit 8: Eachus Pineland, Miami-Dade County, Florida 

MiamH:>ade County, Ronda· 

Eachus 

Pineland 

Calderon 

Pineland 

Richmond Pine 

Roddands 

• Critical Habitat Miami Tiger Beetle 

- Major Highways 

a,.canals 

0 0:1. 0.2 0.4Ki!Ometers t ' I I I I I ' 0.1 0.2 0.4 Mites 
49978 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

(ii) Map of Unit 9 follows: 

(15) Unit 10: Tamiami Pineland 

Complex Addition, Miami-Dade County, 

Florida. 

(i) Unit 10 consists of approximately 

21 ac (8 ha). This unit is located south 

of 128th Street, west of Florida’s 

Turnpike, north of SW 136th Street, and 

east of SW 127th Avenue. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP07SE21.013</GPH>

Critical Habitat Unit for Miami Tiger Beetle (Cicindelidia floridana) 

Unit 9: Bill Sadowski Park, Miami-Dade County, Florida 

' -. 

.fl 

Miami-Dade County, FIOrlda 

Deering Estate 

south Ed it ion 

• Critical Habitat Miami Tiger Beetle 

- Major Highways 

'<:!,,· canals 

c:::J County Boundary 

0 0.1 0.2 0.4 Kilometers 

0.1 0.2 0.4 Miles 
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 49979 

(ii) Map of Unit 10 follows: 

(16) Unit 11: Pine Shore Pineland 

Preserve, Miami-Dade County, Florida. 

(i) Unit 11 consists of approximately 

8 ac (3 ha). This unit is located 

southwest of the Don Shula Expressway, 

west of SW 107th Avenue, and north of 

SW 128th Street. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP07SE21.014</GPH>

Critical Habitat Unit for Miami Tiger Beetle (Cicindelidia floridana) 

Unit 10: Tamiami Pineland Complex Addition, Miami-Dade County, Florida 

Nixon Smiley 

Piooland Preserve 

Tamiami Pineland 

Complex Addition 

,,, \ 

}I ·.·\} • Critical Habitat Miami Tiger Beetle 

- Major Highways 

&canals 

0 o_ts os· o_£Kirorneters t • I 

Miami-Dade ~ty, Florida ( 

i I I I i I I i 

0.15 0.3 0.6 Miles 
49980 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

(ii) Map of Unit 11 follows: 

(17) Unit 12: Nixon Smiley Pineland 

Preserve, Miami-Dade County, Florida. 

(i) Unit 12 consists of approximately 

117 ac (47 ha). This unit is located 

between SW 120 Street to the north, SW 

127th Avenue to the east, SW 128th 

Street to the south, and SW 137th 

Avenue to the west. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP07SE21.015</GPH>

Critical Habitat Unit for Miami Tiger Beetle (Cicindelidia floridana) 

Unit 11: Pine Shore Pineland Preserve, Miami-Dade County, Florida 

.fl 

.. 

Miami-Dade County, Aortda 

Pine • Shore 

Pineland Preserve 

• Critical Habitat Miami Tiger Beetle 

- Major Highways 

Canals 

0 0.1 0.2 

0,1 0,2 

0.4 KHometers 

0.4MII .. 
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 49981 

(ii) Map of Unit 12 follows: 

(18) Unit 13: Camp Matecumbe, 

Miami-Dade County, Florida. 

(i) Unit 13 consists of approximately 

81 ac (33 ha). This unit is between SW 

104th Street to the north, SW 137th 

Avenue to the east, SW 12th Street to 

the south, and SW 147th Avenue to the 

west. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP07SE21.016</GPH>

Critical Habitat Unit for Miami Tiger Beetle (Ocindelidia floridana} 

Unit 12: Nixon Smiley Pineland Preserve,, Miami-Dade County, Florida 

Camp. 

Matect:imbe 

8· 

.fl . 

Nixon Srnitey 

Pineland Preserve 

Tarriiamt l'!neiarid 

Complex Addition 

• Criti.cal Habitat Miami Tiger Beetle 

- Major Highways 

2,..cana1s 

o:e~ I "i flt.,: t I I 

I I ' i I I· i 1 

0 0.15 lt3 0.6 Mlleii 
49982 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

(ii) Map of Unit 13 follows: 

(19) Unit 14: Richmond Pine 

Rocklands, Miami-Dade County, 

Florida. 

(i) Unit 14 consists of approximately 

1,455 ac (589 ha). This unit is located 

between SW 152nd Street to the north, 

SW 117th Avenue to the east, SW 185th 

Street to the south, and SW 137th 

Avenue to the west. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP07SE21.017</GPH>

Critical Habitat Unit for Miami Tiger Beetle (Cicindelidia floridana) 

Unit 13: Camp Matecumbe, Miami-Dade County, Florida 

l 

v 

.. Mlaml•Dade County, Florida 

N ··-••• QR 

~mp, 

Matecumbe 

Nixon Smiley 

Pineland 

Preserve 

• Critical Habitat Miami Tiger Beetle 

- Major Highways 

Z--·Canals 

0 0.3 0.6 1.:2 K!lomet~11·s 

0.3 0.6 
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 49983 

(ii) Map of Unit 14 follows: 

(20) Unit 15: Calderon Pineland, 

Miami-Dade County, Florida. 

(i) Unit 15 consists of approximately 

14 ac (6 ha). This unit is located 

between SW 184th Street to the south, 

SW 137th Avenue to the east, SW 200th 

Street to the south, and SW 147th 

Avenue to the west. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP07SE21.018</GPH>

Critical Habitat Unltfor Miami Tiger. Beetle (Odndelldia florldana) 

Unit 14: Richmond Pine Roddands, Miami-Dade County, Rorida 

• Critk;al Habitat Miami Tiger Beetle 

- Major Highways. 

~•Canals 

0 
49984 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

(ii) Map of Unit 15 follows: 

(21) Unit 16: Porter Pineland Preserve, 

Miami-Dade County, Florida. 

(i) Unit 16 consists of approximately 

7 ac (3 ha). This unit is located to the 

south of SW 216th Street, to the west of 

South Dixie Highway, to the north of 

SW 232nd Street, and to the east of SW 

147th Avenue. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP07SE21.019</GPH>

Critical Habitat Unit for Miami Tiger Beetle (Odnde!idia florldana) 

lh:\it 15: Ccildeton: Pineland, MlamH>ade County, Florida 

Eachus 

Plnelarid 

I 

Calderon Pineland 

R~hmond 

Pine 

Rocldarnls 

•Critk:al Habitat Miami Tiger Beetle 

-· Major Highways 

~canals 

o o+ ol li.4~ t -, t l ·1 r ~· ·, , 
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules 49985 

(ii) Map of Unit 16 follows: 

* * * * * 

Martha Williams 

Principal Deputy Director Exercising the 

Delegated Authority of the Director, U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, 

[FR Doc. 2021–19088 Filed 9–3–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–C 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

[Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2021–0011; 

FF09E21000 FXES11110900000 212] 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a 

Petition To Revise Critical Habitat for 

the Jaguar 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notification of 90-day petition 

finding. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), announce our 

90-day finding in response to a petition 

to revise critical habitat for the jaguar 

(Panthera onca) pursuant to the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (Act). The petition requests 

the Service to revise the existing critical 

habitat designation by removing 

approximately 20,234 hectares (50,000 

acres) of land in the northern Santa Rita 

Mountains in Arizona and an adjoining 

critical habitat subunit, including land 

containing the proposed Rosemont 

Mine. Our 90-day finding is that the 

petition does not present substantial 

scientific information indicating that the 

requested revision to the critical habitat 

designation may be warranted. 

DATES: The finding announced in this 

document was made on September 7, 

2021. 

ADDRESSES: This finding is available on 

the internet at http://

www.regulations.gov at Docket No. 

FWS–R2–ES–2021–0011. Information 

and supporting documentation that we 

received and used in preparing this 

finding is available for public inspection 

pursuant to current COVID–19 

restrictions. You may contact the 

Arizona Ecological Services Field Office 

at 9828 North 31st Ave. C3, Phoenix, AZ 

85051–2517 (telephone 602–242–0210) 

for further information about these 

restrictions. Please submit any new 

information, materials, comments, or 

questions concerning this finding to the 

above mailing address. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff 

Humphrey, Arizona Ecological Services 

Field Office (see ADDRESSES); telephone 

602–242–0210. Persons who use a 

telecommunications device for the deaf 

(TDD) may call the Federal Relay 

Service at 800–877–8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Section 3(5)(A) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 

1531 et seq.) defines critical habitat as 

(i) the specific areas within the 

geographical area occupied by the 

species, at the time it is listed, on which 

are found those physical or biological 

features (I) essential to the conservation 

of the species and (II) which may 

require special management 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP07SE21.020</GPH>

Critical Habitat Unit for Miami Tiger Beetle (Cicindelidia floridana) 

Unit 16: Porter Pineland Preserve, Miami-Dade County, Florida 

, 

-. 

.fl 

.... □ 

Miami-Dade County, Florida 

Porter Pineland 

Preserve 

• 

• Critical Habitat Miami Tiger Beetle 

- Major Highways 

Canals 

0 0.07 0.15 0.3 Kilometers 

I I! 1 Ir I I 

0.07 0.15 0,3 MIies