Rule2022-27089
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for Florida Bristle Fern
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
December 22, 2022
Effective
January 23, 2023
Issuing agencies
Interior DepartmentFish and Wildlife Service
Abstract
We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), designate critical habitat for the Florida bristle fern (Trichomanes punctatum ssp. floridanum) under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act), as amended. In total, approximately 1,698 hectares (ha) (4,195 acres (ac)) fall within 10 units of critical habitat in Miami-Dade and Sumter Counties, Florida. This rule extends the Act's protections to the Florida bristle fern's designated critical habitat.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 87 Issue 245 (Thursday, December 22, 2022)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 245 (Thursday, December 22, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 78582-78610]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2022-27089]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2019-0068; FF09E21000 FXES1111090FEDR 234]
RIN 1018-BE12
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of
Critical Habitat for Florida Bristle Fern
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), designate
critical habitat for the Florida bristle fern (Trichomanes punctatum
ssp. floridanum) under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act), as
amended. In total, approximately 1,698 hectares (ha) (4,195 acres (ac))
fall within 10 units of critical habitat in Miami-Dade and Sumter
Counties, Florida. This rule extends the Act's protections to the
Florida bristle fern's designated critical habitat.
DATES: This rule is effective January 23, 2023.
ADDRESSES: This final rule is available on the internet at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. Comments and materials we received, as well as
supporting documentation we used in
[[Page 78583]]
preparing this rule, are available for public inspection at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. All of the comments, materials, and documentation
that we considered in this rulemaking are available by appointment,
during normal business hours, at: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Florida Ecological Services Field Office, 1339 20th Street, Vero Beach,
FL 32960; telephone 772-562-3909.
The coordinates or plot points or both from which the maps are
generated are included in the decision file for this critical habitat
designation and are available at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> at Docket
No. FWS-R4-ES-2019-0068, at <a href="https://www.fws.gov/office/florida-ecological-services/library">https://www.fws.gov/office/florida-ecological-services/library</a>, and at the Florida Ecological Services
Field Office at the Vero Beach address provided above. Any additional
tools or supporting information that we developed for this critical
habitat designation will be available at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service website and Field Office identified above and at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lourdes Mena, Classification and
Recovery Division Manager, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Florida
Ecological Services Field Office, 7915 Baymeadows Way, Suite 200,
Jacksonville, FL 32256; by telephone 904-731-3134; or by facsimile 904-
731-3045. Individuals in the United States who are deaf, deafblind,
hard of hearing, or have a speech disability may dial 711 (TTY, TDD, or
TeleBraille) to access telecommunications relay services. Individuals
outside the United States should use the relay services offered within
their country to make international calls to the point-of-contact in
the United States.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Summary
Why we need to publish a rule. Under section 4(a)(3) of the Act, if
we determine that a species is an endangered or threatened species, we
must designate critical habitat to the maximum extent prudent and
determinable. We published a final rule to list the Florida bristle
fern as an endangered species on October 6, 2015 (80 FR 60440).
Designations of critical habitat can be completed only by issuing a
rule through the Administrative Procedure Act rulemaking process.
What this document does. This rule finalizes a designation of
critical habitat for the Florida bristle fern (Trichomanes punctatum
ssp. floridanum) consisting of 10 units comprising approximately 1,698
ha (4,195 ac) in Miami-Dade and Sumter Counties, Florida.
The basis for our action. Section 4(a)(3) of the Act requires the
Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) to designate critical habitat
concurrent with listing to the maximum extent prudent and determinable.
Section 3(5)(A) of the Act defines critical habitat as (i) the specific
areas within the geographical area occupied by the species, at the time
it is listed, on which are found those physical or biological features
(I) essential to the conservation of the species and (II) which may
require special management considerations or protections; and (ii)
specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species at
the time it is listed, upon a determination by the Secretary that such
areas are essential for the conservation of the species. Section
4(b)(2) of the Act states that the Secretary must make the designation
of critical habitat on the basis of the best available scientific data
and 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 she determines that the benefits of such
exclusion outweigh the benefits of specifying such area as part of the
critical habitat, unless she determines, 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.
Economic analysis. In accordance with section 4(b)(2) of the Act,
we prepared an economic analysis of the impacts of designating critical
habitat for the Florida bristle fern. We published the announcement of,
and solicited public comments on, the draft economic analysis (DEA; 85
FR 10371, February 24, 2020). Because we received no comments on the
DEA, we adopted the DEA as a final version. The final economic analysis
(IEc 2020, entire) is available at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> under
Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2019-0068.
Peer review and public comment. In accordance with our joint policy
on peer review published in the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR
34270), and our August 22, 2016, memorandum updating and clarifying the
role of peer review of actions under the Act, we sought the expert
opinions of independent specialists with scientific expertise that
included familiarity with the species, the geographic regions in which
the species occurs, and conservation biology principles. The purpose of
peer review is to ensure that our designation is based on
scientifically sound data and analyses. We invited these peer reviewers
to comment on our specific assumptions and conclusions in the critical
habitat proposal during the public comment period for the February 24,
2020, proposed rule. We received responses from two peer reviewers on
our technical assumptions and analysis, and on whether or not we used
the best scientific data available. These peer reviewers generally
concurred with our methods and conclusions, and they provided
additional information, clarifications, and suggestions to improve this
final rule. Information we received from peer review is incorporated
into this final designation of critical habitat. We also considered all
comments and information we received from the public during the comment
period for the proposed designation of critical habitat for the Florida
bristle fern and the associated DEA (85 FR 10371; February 24, 2020).
Previous Federal Actions
On November 9, 2009, the Florida bristle fern was first recognized
as a candidate for possible future listing (74 FR 57804). On October 9,
2014, we proposed to list the Florida bristle fern as an endangered
species (79 FR 61136). On October 6, 2015, we finalized the listing for
the subspecies as an endangered species (80 FR 60440). On February 24,
2020, we proposed to designate critical habitat for the Florida bristle
fern (85 FR 10371). Please refer to the October 9, 2014 (79 FR 61136),
proposed listing rule for a more detailed description of Federal
actions regarding the Florida bristle fern.
Summary of Changes From the Proposed Rule
This final rule incorporates changes to our proposed rule (85 FR
10371; February 24, 2020) based on the comments and information we
received. As a result, the final designation of critical habitat
reflects the following changes from the February 24, 2020, proposed
rule (85 FR 10371):
1. We revised Matheson Hammock (SF 1) to include additional areas
as critical habitat. This unit was originally proposed as 16 ha (39 ac)
and now consists of approximately 22 ha (55 ac), which is an increase
of approximately 41 percent for this unoccupied unit.
2. We revised Snapper Creek (SF 2) to include additional areas as
critical habitat. This unit was originally proposed as 3 ha (8 ac) and
now consists of approximately 6 ha (15 ac),
[[Page 78584]]
which is an increase of approximately 88 percent for this unoccupied
unit.
3. We added Charles Deering Estate Hammock as a new unoccupied
critical habitat unit (SF 3). This unit consists of approximately 43 ha
(106 ac), which is an increase of approximately 3 percent of the total
proposed critical habitat acreage.
4. We revised Castellow and Ross Hammocks (proposed SF 3; now SF 4)
to include additional areas as critical habitat. This unit was
originally proposed as 38 ha (93 ac) and now consists of approximately
56 ha (139 ac), which is an increase of approximately 48 percent for
this occupied unit.
5. We revised the unit number for Silver Palm Hammock (proposed SF
4; now SF 5).
6. We revised Hattie Bauer Hammock (proposed SF 5; now SF 6) to
include additional areas as critical habitat. This unit was originally
proposed as 3 ha (8 ac) and now consists of approximately 6 ha (16 ac),
which is an increase of approximately 100 percent for this occupied
unit.
7. We revised Fuchs and Meissner Hammocks (proposed SF 6; now SF 7)
to remove 1.6 ha (4 ac) that do not contain the essential physical or
biological features for the Florida bristle fern and to include an
additional 0.4 ha (1 ac) as critical habitat. This unit now consists of
approximately 10 ha (25 ac), which is a decrease of approximately 8
percent of the proposed area for this occupied unit.
8. We revised the unit number for Royal Palm Hammock (proposed SF
7; now SF 8), and we updated the acreage for this unit. The proposed
rule reported the size of the unit as 60 ha (148 ac); in this rule, we
update the size of the unit to 61 ha (150 ac). The change is due to
using updated parcel data from Miami-Dade County (2021 data versus 2017
data).
9. We updated the coordinates or plot points from which the maps
were generated. The information is available at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> under Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2019-0068, at <a href="https://www.fws.gov/office/florida-ecological-services/library">https://www.fws.gov/office/florida-ecological-services/library</a>, and from the
Florida Ecological Services Field Office, Vero Beach.
10. Under Physical or Biological Features Essential to the
Conservation of the Species in this rule:
<bullet> We corrected the critical habitat unit name and occupancy
status where a long-term microclimate study occurred at Deering's
Cutler Slough from Deering Snapper Creek to Charles Deering Estate
Hammock.
<bullet> We changed ``underground'' to ``horizontal'' when
describing rhizomal stem growth.
<bullet> In the description of nonnative, invasive plants that
impact Florida bristle fern, we replaced love vine (Cassytha
filiformis) with the most common aroid vines in the Miami-Dade County
critical habitat units (golden pothos (Epipremnum pinnatum cv. aureum)
and arrowhead vine (Syngonium podophyllum)).
<bullet> We added that invasive vines have become an increasing
threat to hammocks in south Florida and can result in canopy collapse
during hurricanes or other high wind events.
11. Under Special Management Considerations or Protection in this
rule:
<bullet> We described the competitive interaction between native
bryophytes and Florida bristle fern.
<bullet> We added language to describe that most of the critical
habitat units are open to public access and that Florida bristle fern
may be at risk of collection, damage from people climbing on them, and
impacts to microclimate due to installation and improvements of trails.
<bullet> We added language discussing the potential short- to mid-
term benefits of sea level rise to the fern through lifting a
freshwater lens into previously drained areas or areas experiencing a
lowered water table, which may restore or preserve a favorable
microclimate for the subspecies.
12. We added the potential presence of gametophytes, the cryptic
reproductive stage of the fern, at historically occupied areas to our
reasoning for designating unoccupied critical habitat units in this
rule.
13. In the description of each critical habitat unit in this rule,
we removed language suggesting prescribed burning as an appropriate
management tool for Florida bristle fern conservation.
Summary of Comments and Recommendations
Our proposed rule to designate critical habitat for the Florida
bristle fern (85 FR 10371; February 24, 2020) opened a 60-day comment
period on the proposed action and associated DEA, ending April 24,
2020. We requested that all interested parties submit written comments
and we also contacted appropriate Federal and State agencies,
scientific experts and organizations, and other interested parties and
invited them to comment on the proposal. Newspaper notices inviting
general public comment were published in the Miami Herald and Orlando
Sentinel on March 4, 2020. During the comment period, we received two
comment letters from peer reviewers directly addressing the proposed
critical habitat designation and nine public comments. We did not
receive any requests for a public hearing, and we did not receive any
comments on the DEA. A majority of the comments supported the
designation; none opposed the designation; and the letters from the
peer reviewers included suggestions on how we could refine or improve
the designation. We received some comments outside the scope of the
designation (including information on recovery strategies) and,
although we noted these comments, we only respond to comments herein
that were within the scope of our action to designate critical habitat.
All substantive information provided to us during the comment period
has been incorporated directly into this final rule or is addressed
below.
Peer Reviewer Comments
(1) Comment: Both peer reviewers suggested adding the following
areas in Miami-Dade County to the critical habitat designation: Monkey
Jungle (also known as Cox Hammock), Smathers Four Fillies Farm
(contiguous to and formerly part of Snapper Creek Hammock), the Charles
Deering Estate Hammock (also known as Addison Hammock), and Timms
Hammock (within Camp Owaissa Bauer). The reviewers noted that these
areas contain one or more of the physical or biological features
defined in the proposed critical habitat rule and that Monkey Jungle,
Smathers Four Fillies Farm, and the Charles Deering Estate Hammock
contained documented historical records of the Florida bristle fern.
Timms Hammock (within Camp Owaissa Bauer) was not known to have
historical records but was noted to have excellent habitat for the
Florida bristle fern and is close to another occupied unit (Hattie
Bauer Hammock).
Our Response: All these areas, with the exception of Smathers Four
Fillies Farm, were included in the request for information in the
proposed critical habitat rule. We asked for information regarding
their occupancy status and habitat suitability, whether physical or
biological features essential to the conservation of the subspecies are
present, and whether they should be included in the designation and
why. After re-examining historical records, meeting with land managers,
and re-analyzing GIS data, we added Smathers Four Fillies Farm and
Charles Deering Estate Hammock to the critical habitat designation as
described in Summary of Changes from the Proposed Rule, above, because
we have determined they are
[[Page 78585]]
essential to the conservation of the species and meet the regulatory
criteria. Below, we describe our response for not including Monkey
Jungle and Timms Hammock to the critical habitat designation.
Monkey Jungle--The documented occurrence from Monkey Jungle (in
1989 by A. Cressler; Cressler 1991, entire) was unconfirmed due to no
collections or voucher records. Monkey Jungle is privately owned, and
researchers have not been permitted access to survey the entire area
for Florida bristle fern (Adimey 2013, pers. comm.; van der Heiden
2013a, pers. comm.; Possley 2021, pers. comm.), so occupancy by the
fern is unknown, although it was not found in the areas that were
surveyed. Even though this area may have one or more of the physical or
biological features essential to the conservation of the Florida
bristle fern, the area has a high number of invasive plant species
(Adimey 2013, pers. comm.; Possley 2020, pers. comm.), disturbance due
to development and management of the park, and potential herbivory by
monkeys (Adimey 2013, pers. comm.). Based on these factors, it is
unlikely that this area was occupied by the Florida bristle fern at the
time of listing or that it is essential for the conservation of the
subspecies. Therefore, we are not adding Monkey Jungle as unoccupied
critical habitat to the critical habitat designation.
Timms Hammock/Camp Owaissa Bauer--Timms Hammock is located within
Camp Owaissa Bauer, which is owned and managed by Miami-Dade County.
Even though this area contains some or all of the physical or
biological features essential to the conservation of the Florida
bristle fern, it does not contain historical or known extant
populations of Florida bristle fern nor is it contiguous to currently
or historically occupied areas. Because our methodology for determining
which unoccupied areas were essential for the conservation of the
species excludes areas that do not have historical records, regardless
of habitat suitability (see Criteria Used to Identify Critical Habitat,
below), Timms Hammock/Camp Owaissa Bauer does not meet the statutory
requirement that unoccupied critical habitat be essential for the
conservation of the species and is not included in the critical habitat
designation.
(2) Comment: One peer reviewer suggested expanding the size of five
units in Miami-Dade County (Matheson Hammock, Snapper Creek, Castellow
and Ross Hammocks, Hattie Bauer Hammock, and Fuchs and Meissner
Hammocks) to include contiguous pieces of hammock that seemed to be
excluded despite meeting all habitat criteria. The reviewer noted that
many of these parcels are under active forest management by public and
private entities (private through a property tax incentive program and/
or a local regulatory requirement). All parcels that meet forest and
substrate characteristics and that are contiguous to the proposed
critical habitat units were considered by the reviewer to provide
habitat critical to the survival of Florida bristle fern.
Our Response: To clarify which parcels the reviewer was suggesting
adding to the units, we held several discussions with the peer reviewer
and the landowners or managers of each parcel to get more information
about the suitability of each parcel. We only considered adding parcels
to proposed units that met the criteria for designating occupied or
unoccupied critical habitat units (see Criteria Used to Identify
Critical Habitat, below). After re-examining historical records,
meeting with land managers, and re-analyzing GIS data, we added
contiguous hammock parcels to Unit SF 1 (Matheson Hammock), Unit SF 2
(Snapper Creek), Unit SF 3 (now SF 4; Castellow and Ross Hammocks),
Unit SF 5 (now SF 6; Hattie Bauer Hammock), and Unit SF 6 (now SF 7;
Fuchs and Meissner Hammocks) as described in Summary of Changes from
the Proposed Rule, above, because we have determined they meet the
statutory and regulatory criteria for critical habitat.
(3) Comment: One peer reviewer suggested adding the following areas
to the critical habitat designation: Camp Redlands, Bill Sadowski Park,
Whispering Pines Hammock, Black Creek Forest, Harden Hammock, Silver
Palm Groves, Camp Owaissa Bauer, Lucille Hammock, Loveland Hammock, and
Holiday Hammock in Miami-Dade County. The reviewer noted that these
areas contain one or more of the physical or biological features
essential to the conservation of Florida bristle fern as defined in the
proposed critical habitat rule. The reviewer analyzed relative
elevation, presence of limestone outcroppings, presence of surrogate
ferns (Asplenium verecundum and Tectaria fimbriata), canopy cover, and
hydrology connection when suggesting areas to add to the critical
habitat designation. The reviewer noted that identifying rare fern
presence as a surrogate for habitat appropriateness was similar to how
the proposed listing considered potential habitat in central Florida.
Our Response: While these areas contain one or more of the physical
or biological features essential to the conservation of the Florida
bristle fern, they do not contain historical or known extant
populations of Florida bristle fern nor are they contiguous to
currently or historically occupied areas. Also, the proposed rule did
not consider rare fern presence as a surrogate for habitat
appropriateness when designating critical habitat units in central or
south Florida. Because our methodology for designating unoccupied
critical habitat excludes any areas that do not have historical
records, regardless of habitat suitability (see Criteria Used to
Identify Critical Habitat, below), these areas do not meet our criteria
for determining that unoccupied areas are essential for the
conservation of Florida bristle fern and are not included in the final
critical habitat designation.
Comments From States
Section 4(b)(5)(A)(ii) of the Act requires the Service to give
actual notice of any designation of lands that are considered to be
critical habitat to the appropriate agency of each State in which the
species is believed to occur and invite each such agency to comment on
the proposed regulation. Section 4(i) of the Act states that the
Secretary shall submit to the State agency a written justification for
her failure to adopt regulations consistent with the agency's comments
or petition. We did not receive any written comments from the State of
Florida on the proposed critical habitat designation for the Florida
bristle fern.
Public Comments
(4) Comment: One commenter urged the Service to add more clear
reasoning behind our decision for each unoccupied area included.
Our Response: We have added language to the rule to provide more
clarity for each unoccupied area. This information further supports
including currently unoccupied, but historically occupied, areas to the
critical habitat designation. Further information about our rationale
for why unoccupied critical habitat is needed for the subspecies can be
found in Areas Outside the Geographic Area Occupied at the Time of
Listing, below. In addition, information is provided in each unit
description below with the rationale for each unit.
Background
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and the implementing
regulations in title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations set forth
the procedures for
[[Page 78586]]
determining whether a species is an endangered species or a threatened
species, issuing protective regulations for threatened species, and
designating critical habitat for threatened and endangered species. In
2019, jointly with the National Marine Fisheries Service, the Service
issued final rules that revised the regulations in 50 CFR parts 17 and
424 regarding how we add, remove, and reclassify threatened and
endangered species and the criteria for designating listed species'
critical habitat (84 FR 45020 and 84 FR 44752; August 27, 2019). At the
same time the Service also issued final regulations that, for species
listed as threatened species after September 26, 2019, eliminated the
Service's general protective regulations automatically applying to
threatened species the prohibitions that section 9 of the Act applies
to endangered species (collectively, the 2019 regulations).
As with the proposed rule, we are applying the 2019 regulations for
this final rule because the 2019 regulations are the governing law just
as they were when we completed the proposed rule. Although there was a
period in the interim--between July 5, 2022, and September 21, 2022--
when the 2019 regulations became vacated and the pre-2019 regulations
therefore governed, the 2019 regulations are now in effect and govern
listing and critical habitat decisions (see Center for Biological
Diversity v. Haaland, No. 4:19-cv-05206-JST, Doc. 168 (N.D. Cal. July
5, 2022) (CBD v. Haaland) (vacating the 2019 regulations and thereby
reinstating the pre-2019 regulations)); In re: Cattlemen's Ass'n, No.
22-70194 (9th Cir. Sept. 21, 2022) (staying the district court's order
vacating the 2019 regulations until the district court resolved a
pending motion to amend the order); Center for Biological Diversity v.
Haaland, No. 4:19-cv-5206-JST, Doc. Nos. 197, 198 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 16,
2022) (granting plaintiffs' motion to amend July 5, 2022 order and
granting government's motion for remand without vacatur).
Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the Act as:
(1) The specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the
species, at the time it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which
are found those physical or biological features
(a) Essential to the conservation of the species, and
(b) Which may require special management considerations or
protection; and
(2) Specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the
species at the time it is listed, upon a determination that such areas
are essential for the conservation of the species.
Our regulations at 50 CFR 424.02 define the geographical area
occupied by the species as an area that may generally be delineated
around species' occurrences, as determined by the Secretary (i.e.,
range). Such areas may include those areas used throughout all or part
of the species' life cycle, even if not used on a regular basis (e.g.,
migratory corridors, seasonal habitats, and habitats used periodically,
but not solely by vagrant individuals).
Conservation, as defined under section 3 of the Act, means to use
and the use of all methods and procedures that are necessary to bring
an endangered or threatened species to the point at which the measures
provided pursuant to the Act are no longer necessary. Such methods and
procedures include, but are not limited to, all activities associated
with scientific resources management such as research, census, law
enforcement, habitat acquisition and maintenance, propagation, live
trapping, and transplantation, and, in the extraordinary case where
population pressures within a given ecosystem cannot be otherwise
relieved, may include regulated taking.
Critical habitat receives protection under section 7 of the Act
through the requirement that 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 does not allow the government
or public to access private lands. Such designation does not require
implementation of restoration, recovery, or enhancement measures by
non-Federal landowners. 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 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).
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
only consider unoccupied areas to be essential 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 on
the basis of the best scientific data available. Further, our Policy on
Information Standards Under the Endangered Species Act (published in
the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271)), the Information
Quality Act (section 515 of the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106-554; H.R. 5658)),
and our associated Information Quality Guidelines provide criteria,
establish procedures, and provide guidance to ensure that our decisions
are based on the best scientific data available. They require our
biologists, to the extent consistent with the Act and with the use of
the best scientific data available, to use primary and original sources
of information as the basis for
[[Page 78587]]
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 developed during the listing process for the species.
Additional information sources may include any generalized conservation
strategy, criteria, or outline that may have been developed for the
species; the recovery plan for the species; articles in peer-reviewed
journals; conservation plans developed by States and counties;
scientific status surveys and studies; biological assessments; other
unpublished materials; or experts' opinions or personal knowledge.
Habitat is dynamic, and species may move from one area to another
over time. We recognize that critical habitat designated at a
particular point in time may not include all of the habitat areas that
we may later determine are necessary for the recovery of the species.
For these reasons, a critical habitat designation does not signal that
habitat outside the designated area is unimportant or may not be needed
for recovery of the species. Areas that are important to the
conservation of the species, both inside and outside the critical
habitat designation, will continue to be subject to: (1) Conservation
actions implemented under section 7(a)(1) of the Act; (2) regulatory
protections afforded by the requirement in section 7(a)(2) of the Act
for Federal agencies to ensure their actions are not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened
species; and (3) the prohibitions found in section 9 of the Act.
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 this 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 these planning efforts calls for a
different outcome.
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 life-
history 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 early-
successional 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 life-history 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.
Space for Individual and Population Growth and for Normal Behavior
Florida bristle fern occurs exclusively in upland hardwood forest
hammock habitats that support the climate (stable humidity and
temperature), hydrology, canopy cover, and limestone substrates
necessary for the subspecies to persist, grow, and reproduce. Upland
hardwood forests consist of a mosaic of natural hammock and hardwood
communities primarily characterized as mesic, hydric, and rockland
hammocks, or intermixed hammock strands, with associated transitional
wetland matrix/hydric and upland communities (Florida Natural Areas
Inventory [Inventory] 2010, pp. 16-28). The hammock habitats occur
within and as part of larger matrices of hydric or pine rockland
communities (Inventory 2010, pp. 16-28). Detailed descriptions of these
natural communities can be found in Natural Communities of Florida
(Inventory 2010, pp. 16-28) and in the final listing rule for Florida
bristle fern (80 FR 60440; October 6, 2015). Natural communities
include both wetland and upland communities having intact vegetation
(i.e., not cleared).
The current range of Florida bristle fern includes two
metapopulations, one in south Florida (Miami-Dade County) and one in
central Florida (Sumter County). The south Florida metapopulation is
currently composed of four known populations, and the central Florida
metapopulation is composed of two known populations. The south Florida
populations of Florida bristle fern occur in communities characterized
by primarily rockland hammock or closed tropical hardwood hammocks
occurring within a larger matrix of pine rockland on the Miami Rock
Ridge. In central Florida, the populations of the subspecies occur in
predominantly mesic hammocks situated in a mosaic of hydric hammock and
mixed wetland hardwoods. These internal or inter-mixed strands of
hammock within the forested communities are characterized by fairly
dense to extremely dense canopy cover, which prevents drastic changes
in temperature and humidity and the desiccation of the fern from direct
sunlight and drying winds.
The matrix of landscapes associated with the hammocks or the
intermixed strands of these communities support the suitable conditions
necessary for the growth and reproduction of Florida bristle fern.
Suitable habitat quality and size are necessary to ensure the
maintenance of the microclimate conditions (stable temperature, high
humidity, moisture, canopy shade, and shelter) essential to the
subspecies' survival and conservation. These combined factors establish
the fern's microclimate: (a) The level of protection/exposure the fern
experiences given its location in a
[[Page 78588]]
solution hole (a limestone solution feature; in the Miami Rock Ridge,
they consist of steep-sided pits, varying in size, formed by
dissolution of subsurface limestone followed by a collapse above
(Snyder et al. 1990, p. 236)) or on an exposed boulder; (b) the quality
of the solution hole or exposed boulder substrate; and (c) the amount
of canopy cover. The surrounding vegetation is a key component in
producing and supporting this microclimate. There are differences in
vegetation and substrate characteristics between the two geographically
distant metapopulations that can account for differences in the amount
of habitat needed to support the fern. For example, Florida bristle
fern in south Florida occurs in a tropical climate and attaches to the
interior walls of well-protected and insulated solution holes. By
comparison, in central Florida, Florida bristle fern occurs in a more
temperate climate and is found more exposed by attaching to a substrate
that is above the surface. The size and quality of the intact habitat
surrounding the exposed substrate can play a greater role in providing
and supporting the stable, shaded, and wind-protected microclimate
conditions the fern needs. Therefore, the microclimate conditions
(stable temperature, high humidity, canopy shade, and shelter) have the
potential to be maintained (and the plant is able to persist) within
smaller areas in south Florida than those needed to support the
microclimate conditions in central Florida. For both metapopulations,
intact upland hardwood forest and associated hammock habitat is an
essential feature to the conservation of this subspecies, and
sufficient habitat is needed to ensure the maintenance of the fern's
microclimate and life processes (growth, dispersal).
Therefore, we identify upland hardwood forest hammock habitats of
sufficient quality and size to sustain the necessary microclimate and
life processes for Florida bristle fern to be a physical or biological
feature essential to the conservation of this subspecies.
Food, Water, Air, Light, Minerals, or Other Nutritional or
Physiological Requirements
Substrate and Soils
Florida bristle fern is generally epipetric (grows on rocks) or
epiphytic (grows non-parasitically upon another plant). In combination
with the habitat characteristics discussed above, the subspecies
requires exposed limestone substrate to provide suitable growing
conditions for anchoring, nutrients, pH, and proper drainage (van der
Heiden 2016, p. 1). Florida bristle fern prefers substrate having
exposed oolitic (composed of minute, rounded concretions resembling
fish eggs) limestone or limestone solution features (solution holes)
filled with a thin layer of highly organic soil and standing water for
part or all of the year. The limestone substrate occurs primarily as
solution holes in south Florida and exposed limestone boulders in
central Florida.
In south Florida, Florida bristle fern is currently found growing
in rocky outcrops of rockland hammocks, in oolitic limestone solution
holes, and, occasionally, on tree roots in limestone-surrounded areas
(Nauman 1986, p. 181; Possley 2013a, pers. comm.). These rockland
habitats are outcrops primarily composed of marine limestone
representing the distinct geological formation of the Miami Rock Ridge,
a feature that encompasses a broad area from Miami to Homestead,
Florida, and narrows westward through the Long Pine Key area of
Everglades National Park (Snyder et al. 1990, pp. 233-234). The
limestone solution holes are considered specialized habitat within
these hammock areas that host Florida bristle fern (Snyder et al. 1990,
p. 247). The solution-hole features that dominate the rock surface in
the Miami Rock Ridge are steep-sided pits formed by dissolution of
subsurface limestone followed by the eventual collapse of the surface
above (Snyder et al. 1990, p. 236). The limestone solution holes often
have complex internal topography and vary in size and depth, from
shallow holes a few centimeters deep to those that are several meters
in size and up to several meters deep (Snyder et al. 1990, p. 238;
Kobza et al. 2004, p. 154). The bottoms of most solution holes are
filled with organic soils, while deeper solution holes penetrate the
water table and have (at least historically) standing water for part of
the year (Snyder et al. 1990, pp. 236-237; Rehage et al. 2014, pp.
S160-S161). A direct relationship has been found between the length of
time a solution hole contains water (hydroperiod length) and the
habitat quality (vegetative cover) of the solution hole (Rehage et al.
2014, p. S161).
Oolitic limestone occurs in south Florida (and other locations in
the world), but it does not occur in central Florida. In central
Florida, Florida bristle fern resides on limestone substrate in high-
humidity hammocks (van der Heiden 2013a, pers. comm.; van der Heiden
2016, p. 1). In the mesic hammocks on the Jumper Creek Tract of the
Withlacoochee State Forest, the subspecies has been observed growing on
exposed limestone rocks as small as 0.1 meters (m) (0.3 feet (ft)) tall
as well as on larger boulders with tall, horizontal faces, and occurs
alongside numerous other plant species, including rare State-listed
species (e.g., hemlock spleenwort (Asplenium cristatum) and widespread
polypody (Pecluma dispersa)) (van der Heiden 2013b, pers. comm.; van
der Heiden and Johnson 2014, pp. 7-8). Rock outcrops may also provide
suitable substrate where the underlying Ocala limestone (a geologic
formation of exposed limestone near Ocala, Florida) is near the
surface.
Therefore, based on the information above, we identify exposed
substrate derived from oolitic limestone, Ocala limestone, or exposed
limestone boulders, which provide anchoring and nutritional
requirements, to be a physical or biological feature essential to the
conservation of Florida bristle fern.
Climate and Hydrology
Florida bristle fern is considered strongly hygrophilous (i.e.,
growing or adapted to damp or wet conditions) and is generally
perceived as restricted to constantly humid microhabitat (Kr[ouml]mer
and Kessler 2006, p. 57; Proctor 2012, pp. 1024-1025). Features that
allow for proper ecosystem functionality and a suitable microhabitat
required for the growth and reproduction of the subspecies include a
canopy cover of suitable density (i.e., average canopy closure more
than 75 percent) and humidity and moisture of sufficient levels and
stability (on average, above approximately 90 percent relative
humidity) (van der Heiden and Johnson 2014, p. 8; Possley 2015, pers.
comm.; van der Heiden 2016, p. 18).
The relationship between moist habitats and the Hymenophyllaceae
Family of ferns (filmy ferns), to which the Trichomanes species
belongs, has been long observed and documented (Shreve 1911, pp. 187,
189; Proctor 2003, entire; Proctor 2012, p. 1024). In a tropical rain
forest system, the diversity and number of filmy fern species is shown
to have a direct relation to the air moisture (relative humidity)
(Gehrig-Downie et al. 2012; pp. 40-42). While not in the same fern
Family as the Florida bristle fern, a study of the rare temperate
woodland fern, Braun's hollyfern (Polystichum braunii), found air
humidity to be a key factor in species health, with stronger plant
productivity occurring in higher humidity levels (Schwerbrock and
Leuschner 2016, p. 5). Although a minimum suitable humidity level, or
threshold, for Florida bristle fern has not been quantified for either
[[Page 78589]]
metapopulation of the subspecies, information from field studies
indicates conditions of high and stable relative humidity are essential
to the subspecies. Minor drops in ambient humidity may limit
reproduction of the subspecies and can negatively impact overall health
of the existing metapopulations, as well as inhibit the growth of new
plants, impacting long-term viability (Possley 2013b, pers. comm.; van
der Heiden 2013a, pers. comm.). This relationship was observed in
Sumter County, where small drops (approximately 1 to 2 percent) in
relative humidity associated with colder weather resulted in observed
declines in the health of some clusters of Florida bristle fern within
the local population (van der Heiden and Johnson 2014, p. 9).
The average relative humidity for hammocks in Sumter County
remained near 95 percent for the duration of a September-November 2013
study (van der Heiden and Johnson 2014, pp. 8-9). Further, the minimum
and maximum monthly average relative humidity from September 2013 to
March 2015 for the two central Florida hammocks supporting Florida
bristle fern were 88 and 99 percent and 89 and 100 percent,
respectively (van der Heiden 2016, p. 18). The lowest monthly average
relative humidity in each of the hammocks was 65 and 69 percent,
respectively. In comparison, the minimum and maximum monthly average
relative humidity documented outside of the hammock (from June 2014 to
March 2015) was 68 and 93 percent, respectively, with a low monthly
relative humidity of 51 percent. In summary, similar and consistently
high average humidity values occurred between and within the two
hammocks supporting the subspecies, and consistently higher relative
humidity values were recorded in the hammocks compared to outside the
hammocks.
Likewise, in south Florida, 8 years of data-log monitoring of
Deering's Cutler Slough (the location of a known extirpated population,
Charles Deering Estate Hammock, of Florida bristle fern) recorded an
average of 90 percent relative humidity occurring within a solution
hole compared to the 84 percent average relative humidity documented in
the slough outside of the solution hole during the same time period
(Possley et al. 2009, pp. 4-6; Possley 2015, pers. comm.).
The hammock environments are high or slightly elevated grounds that
do not regularly flood but are dependent on a high water table to keep
humidity levels high (Inventory 2010, pp. 19-28). The subspecies is
affected by humidity at two spatial scales: the larger hammock
community-scale and the smaller substrate (boulder/solution hole)
microclimate-scale (van der Heiden and Johnson 2014, pp. 9-10).
Moisture (precipitation and low evaporation) and humidity levels are
likely factors limiting the occurrence of Florida bristle fern (Shreve
1911, p. 189; Proctor 2003, p. 726; Gehrig-Downie et al. 2012, p. 40).
The high humidity levels discussed above and stable temperatures,
moisture, and shading (cover) are all features considered essential to
the subspecies and produced by the combination of:
(1) Solution hole or boulder microclimate;
(2) Organic, moisture-retaining soils (high soil moisture
conditions);
(3) Hydrology of the surrounding or adjacent wetlands; and
(4) Protective shelter of the surrounding habitat minimizing
effects from drying winds and/solar radiation.
Solution holes provide the limestone substrate and produce the
necessary humid and moist microclimate needed by the subspecies in
south Florida. In central Florida, the fern occurs in the more
northerly portion of the hammocks and northern aspect of the limestone
boulders, obtaining greater shading and moist conditions compared to
the sunnier and drier south-facing portions of the hammocks and sides
of boulders (van der Heiden and Johnson 2014, pp. 7, 31). Variances
within hammocks, such as slight structural differences or proximity to
water, also play an important part in where suitable microhabitat
occurs in the hammock habitats. Intact hydrology and the connectivity
of substrates to surface water and streams may play a role in spore and
vegetative fragment dispersal for the subspecies (we provide more
detail about this below, under Sites for Reproduction, Germination, and
Spore Production and Dispersal). Soils associated with the hammock
ecosystems consist of sands mixed with organic matter, which produce
better drained soils than soils of surrounding or adjacent wetland
communities. Soils in habitats of extant Florida bristle fern
populations in south Florida consist of an uneven layer of highly
organic soil and moderately well-drained, sandy, and very shallow soils
(classified as Matecumbe muck). Soils in habitats of the central
Florida metapopulation are predominantly sand and Okeelanta muck (80 FR
60440; October 6, 2015). For both metapopulations, a relatively high
soil-moisture content and high humidity are maintained by dense litter
accumulation, ground cover, and heavy shade produced by the dense
canopy (Service 1999, pp. 3-99).
In addition, the protected hammock habitats are slightly higher in
elevation than the surrounding habitat, which combined with the
limestone substrate, leaf litter, and sandy soils, create a hydrology
that differs from lower elevation habitats. It is this combination of
hammock ecosystem characteristics (i.e., closed canopy, limestone
substrate, humid climate, higher elevation) occurring in hardwood
forested upland communities as described earlier that are essential to
the conservation of the subspecies.
Therefore, based on the information above, we identify a constantly
humid microhabitat climate consisting of dense canopy cover, moisture,
stable high temperature, and stable monthly average relative humidity
of 90 percent or higher, with intact hydrology within hammocks and the
surrounding and adjacent wetland communities, to be a physical or
biological feature essential to the conservation of Florida bristle
fern.
Cover and Shelter
Florida bristle fern occurs exclusively in hardwood hammock
habitats having dense canopy, which provides shade necessary to support
suitable microhabitat for the subspecies to persist, grow, and
reproduce. In south Florida (Miami-Dade County), the extant populations
of Florida bristle fern occur in communities classified as rockland
hammocks on the Miami Rock Ridge. In central Florida (Sumter County),
the extant populations of the subspecies occur in mesic hammocks, often
situated in a mosaic of natural communities including hydric hammock
and mixed wetland hardwoods.
The dense canopies of the hammock systems (including rockland and
mesic hammocks) contribute to maintaining suitable temperature and
humidity levels within this microclimate. The dense canopies found in
these habitats minimize temperature fluctuations by reducing soil
warming during the day and heat loss at night, thereby helping to
prevent frost damage to hammock interiors (Inventory 2010, p. 25). In
areas with greater temperature variations, as in central Florida, these
benefits afforded by the dense canopy of both the mesic hammock and
surrounding habitat combined are important to maintaining suitable
conditions for Florida bristle fern. The rounded canopy profile of
hammocks helps maintain mesic (moist) conditions by deflecting winds,
thereby limiting desiccation (extreme dryness) during dry periods and
reducing interior storm damage (Inventory 2010, p. 25). Changes
[[Page 78590]]
in the canopy can impact humidity and evaporation rates, as well as the
amount of light available to the understory. Both known extant
metapopulations of Florida bristle fern live in dense canopy habitat,
with shady conditions, which may be obligatory due to the poikilohydric
(i.e., possess no mechanism to prevent desiccation) nature of some fern
species including the Florida bristle fern (Kr[ouml]mer and Kessler
2006, p. 57).
While the proper amount of canopy is critical to the persistence of
Florida bristle fern, the lower limit of acceptable canopy density has
yet to be quantified for either metapopulation. Field observations in
south Florida have found clusters of Florida bristle fern desiccated
when the immediate canopy above plants was destroyed or substantially
reduced, allowing high amounts of light into the understory (Possley
2019, entire); however, over the course of many months, these clusters
eventually recovered. In addition, this dense, closed canopy may serve
as a shield for Florida bristle fern to inhibit the growth of other
plant species on the same part of an inhabited rock area (van der
Heiden and Johnson 2014, p. 9). In central Florida, the average canopy
closure where Florida bristle fern occurs has been estimated to be more
than 75 percent (van der Heiden and Johnson 2014, p. 9). Although there
are several occurrences in these mesic hammocks where sunlight can be
observed through the canopy, generally the habitat is shaded throughout
the year, with the lowest canopy cover recorded at 64 percent in
December (van der Heiden and Johnson 2014, pp. 8, 20). This information
was obtained from a study of short duration (September-December 2013),
and it is likely that percent canopy cover and consequently shading
would be greater in summer months when foliage is densest (van der
Heiden and Johnson 2014, p. 8).
Surrounding habitat that minimizes the effects from drying winds
and solar radiation and provides a stable and protective shelter is
necessary for this fern to survive. A suitable habitat size and quality
is necessary to provide a functioning canopy cover that maintains the
microclimate conditions (humidity, moisture, temperature, and shade)
essential to the conservation of the subspecies. Field observations of
Florida bristle fern in central Florida found more robust and healthy
ferns in an interior hammock with approximately 300 m (985 ft) of
surrounding habitat between it and cleared pastureland. This was
compared to ferns in a hammock that had only 100 m (328 ft) of
surrounding habitat separating it from the edge of cleared pasture. The
ferns located nearer the edge (i.e., approximately within 100 m (328
ft)) of the adjacent cleared pasture had visible signs of stress, and
these ferns appeared desiccated and had fewer reproductive bristles
than the ferns in the hammock and with 300 m (985 ft) of surrounding
vegetation (van der Heiden 2016, p. 3). These observations are
consistent with findings that documented edge effects on ferns up to
200 m (656 ft) into the forest (Hylander et al. 2013, pp. 559-560).
Edge effects included loss of individual plants, loss of percent canopy
cover, and increased temperature, sunlight, and wind on the
microclimate (Hylander et al. 2013, pp. 559-560; Silva and Schmitt
2015, pp. 227-228). There are no similar studies for the fern in Miami-
Dade County, though it is assumed their occurrence in solution holes
provides some protection from the edge effects of the hammock habitat.
Therefore, based on the information above, we identify dense canopy
cover of surrounding native vegetation (at least 300 m (985 ft) as
measured from the edge of and surrounding the boulder substrate for
central Florida) that consists of the upland hardwood forest hammock
habitats and provides shade, shelter, and moisture to be a physical or
biological feature essential to the conservation of Florida bristle
fern.
Sites for Reproduction, Germination, and Spore Production and Dispersal
Growth and reproduction of Florida bristle fern can occur through
spore dispersal, rhizome (horizontal stem) growth, and clonal
vegetative fragments (80 FR 60440; October 6, 2015). The habitats
identified above provide plant communities, which require a self-
maintaining closed canopy and climate-controlled interior, an adequate
space for the rhizomal growth, dispersal of seeds, sporophyte and
gametophyte survival, and recruitment of plant fragments.
While specific information on spore dispersal distances is largely
unknown for this subspecies, the microclimate is found to be essential
for spore germination and survival. Dispersal of spores, gametophytes,
and vegetative fragments may take place via water-based methods,
animals, and, to a lesser extent, wind-driven opportunities. In the
Hymenophyllaceae Family of ferns, spores lack the capacity to withstand
desiccation, are not known to be dispersed long distance through the
wind, and depend upon the moist microclimate for growth and survival
(Mohammad Rosli 2014, p. 21).
In terms of protecting the subspecies' genetic components, a recent
study of Florida bristle fern chloroplast DNA found little genetic
differentiation between the two metapopulations, which can indicate
that both metapopulations are recently established from a single source
or that there is a favoring of a genetic sequence (Hughes 2015,
entire). Lower genetic variation in a population produces a lower
effective population (the number of individuals that can undergo cross-
fertilization). In such small populations, such as with Florida bristle
fern, any loss of individuals may also be a loss of genetic information
and a reduction of subspecies fitness (Fernando et al. 2015, pp. 32-
34). Therefore, ensuring space for reproduction, germination, spore
production, and dispersal of the subspecies helps ensure the
conservation of genetic information and subspecies fitness.
Adequate space and the maintenance of the stable microclimate
habitat support clonal growth as well as the reproductive stages of
Florida bristle fern. The rare American hart's tongue fern (Asplenium
scolopendrium var. americanum) is a species like the Florida bristle
fern that relies on the specific microclimate conditions of high
humidity, moisture, and shelter. In a study of the American hart's
tongue fern, the presence of these microclimate habitat conditions
determined the success of the fern's life-history processes (growth,
reproduction, and spore production) (Fernando et al. 2015, p. 33).
Interior condition of the hammock microclimate (e.g., humidity,
temperature) are influenced by the hammock's own canopy and hydrology
and the vegetative structure and hydrology of the surrounding habitat.
For example, in south Florida, the pre-settlement landscape of the
rockland hammocks on the Miami Rock Ridge occurred as ``small islands''
in a sea of pine rockland and seasonally flooded prairies, or
transverse glades (shallow channels through the Miami Rock Ridge that
had wet prairie vegetation and moved water out of the Everglades Basin
toward the coast). It has been estimated that originally more than 500
hammocks occurred in this area, ranging in size from 0.1 ha (0.2 ac) to
over 40 ha (100 ac) (Craighead 1972, p. 153). The vast majority of
these hammocks have been destroyed, and those that remain are
significantly reduced in size. In addition, the habitats surrounding
the remaining rockland hammocks have been drastically altered or
destroyed, primarily through urban and agricultural development, and,
in many
[[Page 78591]]
cases, no longer function as effective or efficient buffers to protect
rockland hammocks from the impacts of changes in temperature and
humidity, or extreme weather or natural stochastic events (e.g., frost,
high winds, and hurricanes/tropical storms). This fragmentation and
distance between hammocks can hinder water-based dispersal and the
recruitment of new plants and gametophytes. Fragmentation may reduce
the stable, protected microclimate conditions and the survivability of
spores within that microclimate. Thus, the hammock microhabitat
supporting the subspecies must be of a suitable minimum size with
sufficiently dense canopy, substrate, and understory vegetation within
a hammock's interior, and there must also be intact surrounding habitat
of sufficient amount, distribution, and space to support appropriate
growing conditions for Florida bristle fern across its range.
The central Florida metapopulation of Florida bristle fern occurs
in two mesic hammocks, which exist as part of a wetland matrix of
hydric hammock, mixed wetland hardwoods, cypress/tupelo floodplain
swamp, and freshwater marsh. The surrounding existing suitable habitat
and substrate are essential to providing space for growth,
reproduction, and dispersal of the existing populations.
Therefore, we identify the habitats described as physical or
biological features above that also provide suitable microhabitat
conditions, hydrology, and connectivity that can support the
subspecies' growth, distribution, and population expansion (including
rhizomal growth, spore dispersal, and sporophyte and gametophyte growth
and survival) to be a physical or biological feature essential to the
conservation of Florida bristle fern.
Habitats Protected From Disturbance
Florida bristle fern can be outcompeted by other native, as well as
nonnative, invasive species. Nonnative plants and native weeds,
including a few of the most common invasive plants such as golden
pothos (Epipremnum pinnatum cv. aureum), arrowhead vine (Syngonium
podophyllum), Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius), and Burma
reed (Neyraudia reynaudiana), compete with Florida bristle fern for
space, light, water, and nutrients; limit the subspecies' growth and
abundance; and can make habitat conditions unsuitable for the
subspecies. Nonnative plant species have affected hammock habitats
where Florida bristle fern occurs, and as identified in the final
listing rule (80 FR 60440; October 6, 2015), are considered one of the
threats to the subspecies (Snyder et al. 1990, p. 273; Gann et al.
2002, pp. 552-554; Inventory 2010, pp. 22, 26). Invasive vines such as
golden pothos, arrowhead vine, Philodendron spp., and Monstera spp.,
have become an increasing threat to hammocks in south Florida and can
result in canopy collapse during hurricanes or other high wind events
(Duncan 2020, pers. comm.). Nonnative plants can outcompete and
displace Florida bristle fern in solution holes, and can blanket
existing occurrences, blocking out all light and smothering the fern
(Possley 2013c, pers. comm.). Native bryophytes, especially leafy
liverworts such as Neckeropsis undulata, also compete with Florida
bristle fern and gain the advantage in higher light levels (Possley
2019, pp. 3-4). In addition to the negative impacts of nonnative and
native invasive plants, feral hogs can impact substrate and vegetation
(directly) and habitat suitability (indirectly). Rooting from hogs can
destroy existing habitat by displacing smaller rocks where the
subspecies grows and potentially damage or eliminate a cluster of the
fern (Werner 2013, pers. comm.). In the Withlacoochee State Forest,
damaged areas from feral hogs are also more susceptible to invasion
from nonnative plant species (Werner 2013, pers. comm.).
Therefore, based on the information above, we identify a plant
community of predominantly native vegetation that is minimally
disturbed or free from human-related disturbance, with either no
competitive nonnative, invasive plant species, or such species in
quantities low enough to have minimal effect on Florida bristle fern,
to be a physical or biological feature essential to the conservation of
Florida bristle fern.
Summary of Essential Physical or Biological Features
We derive the specific physical or biological features essential to
Florida bristle fern conservation from studies of the species' habitat,
ecology, and life history as described above, in the final listing rule
(80 FR 60440; October 6, 2015), and the proposed critical habitat rule
(85 FR 10371; February 24, 2020). We have determined that the following
physical or biological features are essential to Florida bristle fern
conservation:
(1) Upland hardwood forest hammock habitats of sufficient quality
and size to sustain the necessary microclimate and life processes for
Florida bristle fern.
(2) Exposed substrate derived from oolitic limestone, Ocala
limestone, or exposed limestone boulders, which provide anchoring and
nutritional requirements.
(3) Constantly humid microhabitat consisting of dense canopy cover,
moisture, stable high temperature, and stable monthly average humidity
of 90 percent or higher, with intact hydrology within hammocks and the
surrounding and adjacent wetland communities.
(4) Dense canopy cover of surrounding native vegetation that
consists of the upland hardwood forest hammock habitats and provides
shade, shelter, and moisture.
(5) Suitable microhabitat conditions, hydrology, and connectivity
that can support Florida bristle fern's growth, distribution, and
population expansion (including rhizomal growth, spore dispersal, and
sporophyte and gametophyte growth and survival).
(6) Plant community of predominantly native vegetation that is
minimally disturbed or free from human-related disturbance, with either
no competitive nonnative, invasive plant species, or such species in
quantities low enough to have minimal effect on Florida bristle fern.
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 Florida
bristle fern may require special management considerations or
protections to reduce threats related to habitat modification and
destruction primarily due to development, agricultural conversion,
hydrologic alteration, nonnative and invasive species, public use, and
sea level rise. For more information on threats to Florida bristle
fern, please refer to the final listing rule (80 FR 60440; October 6,
2015).
The four known populations of the south Florida metapopulation
occur on County-managed conservation lands at Castellow Hammock, Hattie
Bauer Hammock, Fuchs Hammock, and Meissner Hammock. However, these
areas are still vulnerable to the effects of activities in the
surrounding areas, including agricultural clearing and hydrologic
alterations. In addition, these areas are vulnerable to threats from
nonnative, invasive species, especially if current control efforts are
discontinued or decreased. The small amount of rockland hammock or
mixed
[[Page 78592]]
rockland/mesic hammock is vulnerable to impacts related to urban and
agricultural development, including hydrologic alterations, and threats
by nonnative, invasive species (especially as such areas are often not
actively managed for nonnative species). Also, these areas are open to
public access, and Florida bristle fern may be at risk of collection,
damage from people climbing on them, and impacts to microclimate due to
installation and improvements of trails (Duncan 2020, pers. comm.). We
expect these hammock communities in south Florida to be further
degraded due to sea level rise and the increase in the number of flood
events, which would fully or partially inundate some rockland hammocks
along the coast and in the southern portion of Miami-Dade County and in
Everglades National Park. In the short to mid-term, sea level rise may
benefit the fern by lifting a freshwater lens into previously drained
areas or areas experiencing a lowered water table, which may restore or
preserve a favorable microclimate for the subspecies (Duncan 2020,
pers. comm.). Over the long term, however, sea level rise is expected
to increase the salinity of the water table and soils, resulting in
vegetation shifts across the Miami Rock Ridge.
The two known populations of the central Florida metapopulation
both occur on State-owned land in the Jumper Creek Tract of the
Withlacoochee State Forest. Land clearing and hydrological alterations
on private lands adjacent to the Jumper Creek Tract continue to be
threats to the subspecies' populations and habitat. In addition, while
the Withlacoochee State Forest is generally considered public
conservation land, it is managed by the Florida Forest Service and is
subject to logging in certain areas. Logging is less likely to occur on
the Jumper Creek Tract due to the existing matrix of hammocks and
pinelands (versus a predominantly pineland community). This area is
also subject to impacts from nonnative, invasive species, although
forest management on the Jumper Creek Tract currently includes
nonnative plant control. Moisture and humidity levels of the fern
habitat are also dependent upon the hydrology of the surrounding or
adjacent wetlands. Alterations in the natural hydrologic regime within
the hammock and these adjacent habitats affect these physical or
biological features. Draining, ditching, and excessive pumping of
groundwater can lower the water table in hammocks, causing reduced
moisture and humidity levels. In such cases, mesic hammocks, for
example, may undergo shifts in species composition toward xeric hammock
composition. These impacts to hammock systems may ultimately reduce or
eliminate suitable habitat for the subspecies. A lowered water table or
dewatering of hammocks can also render the habitat vulnerable to
catastrophic fire.
Special management considerations and protections that will address
these threats include increased coordination and conservation of the
subspecies and its habitat (including preventing impacts to hammock
hydrology, canopy cover, microclimate, and substrate) on Federal lands
and, with the cooperation of State, County, and private landowners, on
non-Federal lands. Habitat restoration and management efforts
(including nonnative plant treatments) of high-priority sites will be
emphasized. At this time, the subspecies does not occur on Federal
lands for either metapopulation, but reintroduction is being explored
for Royal Palm Hammock in Everglades National Park in south Florida.
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.
The current distribution of Florida bristle fern is reduced from
its historical distribution to a level where it is in danger of
extinction. We anticipate that recovery will require continued
protection of existing populations and habitat, as well as establishing
sites that more closely approximate its historical distribution, in
order to ensure there are adequate numbers of Florida bristle fern in
stable populations and that these populations occur over a wide
geographic area within both metapopulations. This strategy will help to
ensure that catastrophic events, such as fire, cannot simultaneously
affect all known populations. Rangewide recovery considerations, such
as maintaining existing genetic diversity and striving for
representation of all major portions of the subspecies' historical
range, were considered in formulating this critical habitat
designation.
The amount and distribution of the designated critical habitat are
designed to provide:
(1) The processes that maintain the physical or biological features
that are essential to the conservation of the subspecies;
(2) Sufficient quality and size of habitat to support the
persistence of the physical or biological features for the subspecies
(hammock microclimate, humidity, temperature, substrate, canopy cover,
native plant community);
(3) Habitat to expand the distribution of Florida bristle fern into
historically occupied areas;
(4) Space to increase the size of each population to a level where
the threats of genetic, demographic, and normal environmental
uncertainties are diminished; and
(5) Additional space to improve the ability of the subspecies to
withstand local or regional-level environmental fluctuations or
catastrophes.
For Florida bristle fern, we are designating critical habitat in
areas within the geographical area occupied by the subspecies at the
time of listing. For those areas, we determined that they were of
suitable habitat within the known historical range, with current
occurrence records, contain one or more of the physical or biological
features essential to the conservation of the subspecies, and require
special management considerations or protection. We are also
designating specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by
the subspecies 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 subspecies. For those unoccupied areas, we have
determined that it is reasonably certain that the unoccupied areas will
contribute to the conservation of the subspecies and that the areas
contain one or more of the physical or biological features that are
essential to the conservation of the subspecies.
Sources of Data To Identify Critical Habitat Boundaries
To determine the general extent, location, and boundaries of the
designated critical habitat, we used the following sources of
information:
(1) Historical and current records of Florida bristle fern
occurrence and distribution found in publications, reports, personal
communications, and associated voucher specimens housed at museums and
private collections;
(2) Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission (Commission), Inventory,
Institute for Regional Conservation (Institute), and Fairchild
geographic
[[Page 78593]]
information system (GIS) data showing the location and extent of
documented occurrences of Florida bristle fern;
(3) Reports and databases prepared by the Institute and Fairchild;
(4) ESRI ArcGIS online basemap aerial imagery (December 2010) and
historical aerial imagery (1938 for Miami-Dade County; 1941 for Sumter
County); and
(5) GIS data depicting land cover (Commission and Inventory
Cooperative Land Cover Map, version 3.3) within Miami-Dade and Sumter
Counties, and the location and habitat boundaries of rockland hammocks
in Miami-Dade County (Institute et al. 2005; Institute 2009; Miami-Dade
County Information Technology Department 2021; Florida Geographic Data
Library 2017; Commission and Inventory 2020; Sumter County 2019).
The presence of the physical or biological features was determined
using the above sources of information as well as site visits by
biologists and botanists (Possley 2019, entire) through field surveys,
habitat mapping, and substrate mapping by the Institute (van der Heiden
and Johnson 2014, entire; Possley 2015, pers. comm.; van der Heiden
2016, entire), and follow-up discussions with Miami-Dade County,
Fairchild staff, and private landowners.
Areas Occupied at the Time of Listing
The occupied critical habitat units were delineated around the
documented extant populations and the existing physical or biological
features that require special management considerations or protection.
We have determined that all currently known occupied habitat for
Florida bristle fern was also occupied by the subspecies at the time of
listing, and that these areas contain the physical or biological
features essential to the conservation of the subspecies and which may
require special management considerations or protection. We are
designating these areas as occupied habitat.
Occupied Habitat--South Florida Metapopulation (Miami-Dade County)
Occupied habitat, which for the south Florida metapopulation occurs
in rockland hammock habitat, was identified based on available
occurrence data for Florida bristle fern. Rockland hammock boundaries
were delineated using the Institute's 2009 rockland hammock GIS layer.
Based on our assessment of rockland hammocks on the Miami Rock Ridge
(see above, under Sites for Reproduction, Germination, and Spore
Production and Dispersal), we included all of the remaining rockland
hammocks currently occupied by Florida bristle fern within the critical
habitat assessment. Next, we grouped rockland hammocks, where
appropriate, to form units. Rockland hammocks in close proximity to one
another provide connectivity and allow spore dispersal (water-based,
animal, or wind-driven dispersal) from occupied to adjacent habitat,
which is important for establishing new clusters of plants to increase
population resiliency and subspecies redundancy. In addition, based on
the Act's implementing regulations (50 CFR 424.12(d)), when habitats
are in close proximity to one another, an inclusive area may be
designated. Although the population historically observed in Ross
Hammock has been reported as extirpated, we combined Ross Hammock with
Castellow Hammock into a single occupied unit (unit South Florida 4 [SF
4]) because: (1) The subspecies is exceedingly hard to find even by
species experts and, therefore, may be present even though it has been
reported as extirpated; (2) gametophytes, the very cryptic reproductive
stage of the fern, are not recognizable in the field and could still be
present on site even if the sporophytes, the recognizable plant form,
have been extirpated; (3) there is the likelihood that spores could
travel between occupied and adjacent habitat, particularly during high-
water events; and (4) habitat directly adjacent to known occurrences
(e.g., separated only by a road) can also be occupied if habitat
conditions are suitable. Three occupied units (Castellow and Ross,
Hattie Bauer, and Fuchs and Meissner hammocks) totaling 73 ha (180 ac)
are designated as critical habitat for the south Florida
metapopulation.
Occupied Critical Habitat--Central Florida Metapopulation (Sumter
County)
For the central Florida populations, habitat was identified as the
intersection of mesic, hydric, and elevated hydric hammocks that
contain boulder substrate (van der Heiden 2016, p. 3).
On the Jumper Creek Tract, known extant populations of Florida
bristle fern occur in two small mesic hammocks located within and
supported by a matrix of hydric hammock and mixed wetland hardwood
communities. The mesic hammocks are approximately 0.18 ha (0.44 ac) and
0.11 ha (0.28 ac) in size and difficult to differentiate from the
surrounding forested vegetation. Our evaluation of occurrence data for
this metapopulation also included historical observations of the
Florida bristle fern south of the Jumper Creek Tract where the
subspecies was formerly known to occur near Battle Slough (near the
existing town of Wahoo) and located in close proximity to the extant
populations. In this area, habitat types include mixed wetland
hardwoods surrounded by freshwater marsh, cypress/tupelo, and mixed
hardwood-coniferous forest. Using the information mentioned above on
current and historical occurrences and habitat type and applying the
data for suitable substrate (boulders), we delineated a contiguous unit
of occupied habitat for Florida bristle fern.
As discussed in Physical or Biological Features Essential to the
Conservation of the Species, above, suitable hammock micro-conditions
in this landscape (specifically the high humidity, stable temperatures,
moisture, and shade) required by Florida bristle fern are supported by
the surrounding vegetation, which minimizes drastic changes in
temperature or humidity at the microclimate scale. Generally, forest
edges receive more light, are prone to greater desiccation, and have a
reduced biodiversity compared to the forest interiors. Pronounced edge
effects from adjacent land clearing and fragmentation, such as with
agricultural lands, reduce the quality of forested habitat and
detrimentally affect the interior microclimate.
To most accurately represent suitable habitat for Florida bristle
fern within these central Florida communities and ensure the
persistence of the necessary microclimate, we consider natural
communities within 300 m (985 ft) as measured from the edge of and
surrounding the boulder substrate (equivalent to 9.3 ha (23 ac)) to be
habitat essential to the conservation of the subspecies (van der Heiden
2014, pers. comm.; van der Heiden 2016, p. 3) in protecting the habitat
from edge effects. The suitable habitat communities and the
distribution of exposed limestone substrate (boulder) in these
communities were delineated with the use of ground survey and satellite
imagery data (van der Heiden and Johnson 2014, pp. 6-7; van der Heiden
2016, p. 3). Site-level data of vegetative communities produced from
aerial photography (Commission and Inventory 2020) and feedback from
species experts and local biologists on habitat and substrate
occurrence in this area were also used.
Thus, using the best available data, one occupied unit totaling 742
ha (1,834 ac) is designated as critical habitat for the central Florida
metapopulation. This critical habitat designation consists of a
contiguous unit within and adjacent to Jumper Creek Tract of intact
vegetation (i.e., not cleared) in mesic or hydric hammocks and mixed
wetland hardwood communities having exposed
[[Page 78594]]
limestone substrate (boulders), which have, at minimum, a 300-m (985-
ft) radius of surrounding intact vegetation.
Areas Outside the Geographic Area Occupied at the Time of Listing
To consider for designation areas not occupied by the subspecies at
the time of listing, we must determine that these areas are essential
for the conservation of Florida bristle fern. In south Florida,
occupied critical habitat for the subspecies is within a relatively
small amount of highly fragmented habitat and occupied patches are
generally isolated from one another within the landscape. In addition,
the extent of the geographic area in south Florida (Miami-Dade County)
that is currently occupied by the plant is substantially (nearly 80
percent) smaller than its historical range. In central Florida, the two
known existing populations are in very close proximity and also in a
much smaller area than the known historical range. Because of this
fragmentation and loss of range, both metapopulations have lower
resiliency under these current conditions compared to historical
occurrences, and, therefore, the subspecies' adaptive capacity
(representation) and redundancy has been reduced.
Based on these factors in relation to the threats to Florida
bristle fern, we have determined that designation of unoccupied areas
are needed to conserve the species; thus, additional habitat is
essential to provide a sufficient amount of habitat (total area and
number of patches) and connectivity for the long-term conservation of
the plant. Therefore, we have identified and are designating as
critical habitat specific areas outside the geographical area occupied
by the subspecies at the time of listing that are essential for the
conservation of the subspecies. This will ensure enough sites and
individuals exist for each metapopulation of Florida bristle fern to
recover. We used habitat and historical occurrence data and the
physical or biological features described earlier to identify
unoccupied habitat essential for the conservation of the Florida
bristle fern. As discussed in more detail below, the unoccupied areas
we selected are essential for the conservation of the subspecies
because they:
(1) Consist of a documented historical, but now extirpated,
occurrence of the subspecies;
(2) Could still have Florida bristle fern gametophytes on site;
(3) Provide areas of sufficient size to support ecosystem
processes;
(4) Provide suitable habitat (that contains some or all of the
physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the
subspecies) that allow for growth and expansion; and
(5) Occur in the known historical range of the subspecies.
These unoccupied areas provide sufficient space for growth and
reproduction for the subspecies within the historical range and will
provide ecological diversity so that the subspecies has the ability to
evolve and adapt over time (representation) and ensure that the
subspecies has an adequate level of redundancy to guard against future
catastrophic events. These areas also represent the areas within the
historical range with the best potential for recovery of the subspecies
due to their current conditions, provide habitat and space to support
spore dispersal and new growth, and are likely suitable for
reintroductions. Also, the areas with historical occurrences of Florida
bristle fern have a high likelihood of gametophyte presence, the very
cryptic reproductive stage of the fern (Possley 2020, pers. comm.),
that could develop into sporophytes (the recognizable mature plant)
under the proper conditions (80 FR 60440; October 6, 2015). For these
reasons, we have reasonable certainty that the unoccupied areas will
contribute to the conservation of the species.
Unoccupied Habitat--South Florida Metapopulation (Miami-Dade County)
The existing suitable habitat for the south Florida metapopulation
consists of a patchwork of small parcels. Therefore, we must ensure the
integrity of the solution hole and canopy cover, which is responsible
for maintaining the stable damp, humid, and shaded microclimate
identified as a physical or biological feature for the subspecies.
Using the Institute's 2009 rockland hammock GIS layer, the
Commission and Inventory's Cooperative Land Cover site-level data for
rockland hammocks, the Institute et al.'s 2015 Natural Forest Community
GIS layer for hammocks, and site visit information from Service staff
biologists and botanists from Fairchild and Miami-Dade County, we
evaluated all unoccupied sites within rockland hammock habitats,
including mixed rockland/mesic hammock and rockland hammock with
connecting mixed wetland hardwood habitat, in Miami-Dade County.
Specifically, we reviewed available historical aerial photography of 20
rockland hammocks historically occupied, but now unoccupied, by the
subspecies. Ten additional potential sites were visited by Service
staff. Also, specific information provided by Miami-Dade County and
Fairchild on four additional areas was reviewed. A site was considered
in the evaluation for unoccupied critical habitat if it is within the
historical range of the subspecies and:
(1) Holds a documented historical occurrence;
(2) Contains one or more of the physical or biological features
essential to the conservation of the subspecies;
(3) Provides viable habitat for introductions or could be restored
to support Florida bristle fern;
(4) Occurs at the edge of the range and provides areas that would
allow for growth and expansion; or
(5) Occurs near an occupied site (for potential recruitment).
Each site will, in conjunction with occupied areas of designated
critical habitat, support the conservation of the subspecies. Based on
our review, we identified four unoccupied rockland hammock units on the
Miami Rock Ridge outside of Everglades National Park (see table 1,
below). These four units represent the units with documented, but now
extirpated, historical occurrences with intact rockland hammock within
the historical range of the subspecies outside of the Everglades
National Park. Within the Everglades National Park, we identified a
fifth unit, the Royal Palm Hammock, for inclusion in the designated
critical habitat. This hammock was also historically occupied by the
subspecies but was not occupied at the time of listing. The resulting
five unoccupied designated units consist of 136 ha (335 ac) and are
considered essential for the conservation of Florida bristle fern
because they protect habitat needed to recover the subspecies and
reestablish wild populations within the known historical range of the
subspecies in Miami-Dade County. The unoccupied units each contain one
or more of the physical or biological features essential to the
conservation of the subspecies and are likely to provide for the
conservation of the subspecies. The majority of four of the unoccupied
units are on lands managed by Miami-Dade County, and the fifth
unoccupied unit is on land managed by Everglades National Park.
Unoccupied Habitat--Central Florida Metapopulation (Sumter County)
For the central Florida metapopulation, criteria for determining
unoccupied critical habitat included units that:
(1) Hold a documented historical occurrence;
(2) Contain one or more of the physical or biological features
essential to the conservation of the subspecies;
[[Page 78595]]
(3) Provide space for growth and recovery (to add resiliency to a
small population);
(4) Provide viable habitat for introductions; and
(5) Provide connectivity across the range of the subspecies.
Unoccupied habitat was delineated based on documented historical
occurrences, existing suitable habitat (as defined by the physical or
biological features), and evaluation of the habitat and substrate
delineation mapping (van der Heiden 2016, pp. 5-7) with data obtained
through field surveys and satellite mapping. The one unoccupied unit
designated as critical habitat consists of approximately 747 ha (1,846
ac) (see table 1, below). It consists of documented historically
occupied (now extirpated) habitat with suitable wetland and upland
communities having intact vegetation (i.e., not cleared) and hammocks
and exposed limestone boulders with at least a 300-m (985-ft) radius or
greater of surrounding native vegetation (van der Heiden 2014, pers.
comm.; van der Heiden 2016, p. 3). Its size was based on the conditions
necessary to maintain the physical or biological features essential to
the conservation of the subspecies. It is considered essential for the
conservation of Florida bristle fern because it protects habitat needed
to recover the subspecies and reestablish wild populations within the
known historical range of the subspecies in Sumter County. The
unoccupied unit contains one or more of the physical or biological
features essential to the conservation of the subspecies and is likely
to provide for the conservation of the subspecies.
Critical Habitat Maps
When determining 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 the physical or
biological features necessary for Florida bristle fern. 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 rule have been excluded by
text in the rule and are not included for designation as critical
habitat. Therefore, a Federal action involving these lands would not
trigger section 7 consultation under the Act with respect to critical
habitat and the requirement of no adverse modification unless the
specific action would affect the physical or biological features in the
adjacent critical habitat.
The critical habitat designation is defined by the map or maps, as
modified by any accompanying regulatory text, presented at the end of
this document under Regulation Promulgation. We include more detailed
information on the boundaries of the critical habitat designation in
the discussion of individual units below. We will make the coordinates
or plot points or both on which each map is based available to the
public at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> under Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2019-
0068, at <a href="https://www.fws.gov/office/florida-ecological-services/library">https://www.fws.gov/office/florida-ecological-services/library</a>, and at the Florida Ecological Services Field Office, Vero
Beach (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, above).
Final Critical Habitat Designation
We are designating approximately 1,698 ha (4,195 ac) in 10 units in
Miami-Dade and Sumter Counties, Florida, as critical habitat for
Florida bristle fern. The designated critical habitat consists of units
identified for the south and central Florida metapopulations and are
delineated in (1) south Florida by rockland/tropical hammocks of Miami-
Dade County (208 ha (515 ac)); and (2) central Florida by Withlacoochee
State Forest, Jumper Creek Tract, and adjacent lands in Sumter County
(1,489 ha (3,680 ac)). Four of the units are currently occupied by the
subspecies and contain those physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the subspecies but may require special
management considerations or protection. Six of the units are currently
unoccupied by the subspecies but are essential for the conservation of
the subspecies. Table 1 shows the name, occupancy, area, and land
ownership of each unit within the critical habitat designation for
Florida bristle fern. Land ownership within the entire designated
critical habitat consists of Federal (4 percent), State (91 percent),
County (3 percent), and private (2 percent) ownership.
Table 1--Name, Occupancy, Area, and Land Ownership of Designated Critical Habitat Units for Florida Bristle Fern (Trichomanes punctatum ssp. floridanum)
[Area estimates reflect all land within critical habitat unit boundaries. All areas are rounded to the nearest whole hectare (ha) and acre (ac).
Ownership information is based on Miami-Dade County data (2021) and Sumter County data (2019).]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal ha Private/other
Unit Occupancy (ac) State ha (ac) County ha (ac) ha (ac) Total ha (ac)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rockland/Tropical Hammocks of South Florida, Miami-Dade County
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Matheson Hammock (SF 1)................ Unoccupied..................... 0 0 21 (51) 2 (4) 22 (55)
Snapper Creek Hammock (SF 2)........... Unoccupied..................... 0 3 (8) 0 3 (7) 6 (15)
Charles Deering Estate Hammock (SF 3).. Unoccupied..................... 0 43 (106) 0 0 43 (106)
Castellow and Ross Hammocks (SF 4)..... Occupied....................... 0 17 (43) 25 (63) 13 (32) 56 (139)
Silver Palm Hammock (SF 5)............. Unoccupied..................... 0 4 (10) 0 0 4 (10)
Hattie Bauer Hammock (SF 6)............ Occupied....................... 0 0 4 (10) 2 (6) 6 (16)
Fuchs and Meissner Hammocks (SF 7)..... Occupied....................... 0 2 (5) 8 (19) 0 (1) 10 (25)
Royal Palm Hammock (SF 8).............. Unoccupied..................... 61 (150) 0 0 0 61 (150)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
South Florida Total................ ............................... 61 (150) 70 (172) 58 (144) 20 (50) 208 (515)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Withlacoochee State Forest, Jumper Creek Tract, and adjacent lands of Central Florida, Sumter County
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CF 1................................... Occupied....................... 0 726 (1,795) 0 16 (39) 742 (1,834)
CF 2................................... Unoccupied..................... 0 747 (1,846) 0 0 747 (1,846)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Central Florida Total.............. ............................... 0 1,473 (3,641) 0 16 (39) 1,489 (3,680)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 78596]]
Total South and Central Florida ............................... 61 (150) 1,543 (3,813) 58 (144) 36 (89) 1,698 (4,195)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Area sizes may not sum due to rounding.
We present brief descriptions of all units, and reasons why they
meet the definition of critical habitat for Florida bristle fern,
below.
Rockland/Tropical Hammocks of South Florida, Miami-Dade County, Florida
The designated critical habitat for the south Florida
metapopulation is composed of eight units (SF 1-SF 8) consisting of
approximately 208 ha (515 ac) located between South Miami and eastern
Everglades National Park in central and southern Miami-Dade County,
Florida.
SF 1--Matheson Hammock
We identified this area as essential for the conservation of the
Florida bristle fern. SF 1 consists of approximately 22 ha (55 ac) of
habitat in Matheson Hammock in and around Matheson Hammock Park in
Miami-Dade County, Florida. This unit is composed of 20.6 ha (51.1 ac)
of County-owned land that is primarily managed cooperatively by Miami-
Dade County's Environmentally Endangered Lands (EEL) program and
Natural Areas Management (NAM) division. The remaining 1.5 ha (3.7 ac)
are privately owned and managed by the landowners through the EEL
Covenant Program and/or are protected from development through Miami-
Dade County's designation as Natural Forest Communities. Matheson
Hammock is within the historical range of Florida bristle fern but was
not occupied by the subspecies at the time of listing.
Although it is currently considered unoccupied, Florida bristle
fern was documented here in the past (80 FR 60440; October 6, 2015),
and it is possible that the site still contains the fern's gametophytes
(the very cryptic reproductive stage of the fern) (Possley 2020, pers.
comm.) that could develop into sporophytes (the recognizable mature
plant) under the proper conditions (80 FR 60440; October 6, 2015).
Also, this unit contains some or all of the physical or biological
features essential to the conservation of the subspecies. Unit SF 1
possesses those characteristics as described by the first identified
physical or biological feature (upland hardwood forest hammock habitats
of sufficient quality and size to sustain the necessary microclimate
and life processes for Florida bristle fern) and the second identified
physical or biological feature (exposed substrate derived from oolitic
limestone, Ocala limestone, or exposed limestone boulders, which
provide anchoring and nutritional requirements). The third through
sixth identified physical or biological features are degraded in this
unit, but with appropriate management and restoration actions (such as
removal of invasive plant species), these physical or biological
features can be restored. Based upon the presence of key habitat needs
and the conditions of the site, this unit constitutes habitat for the
Florida bristle fern.
This unit will serve to protect habitat needed to recover the
subspecies and reestablish wild populations within the historical range
in Miami-Dade County. Re-establishing a population in this unit would
increase redundancy in the South Florida metapopulation. It would also
provide habitat for recolonization in the case of stochastic events
(such as hurricanes), should other areas of suitable habitat be
destroyed, or should Florida bristle fern be extirpated from one of its
currently occupied locations. This unit is essential for the
conservation of the subspecies because it will provide habitat for
range expansion in known historical habitat that is necessary to
increase viability of the subspecies by increasing its resiliency,
redundancy, and representation.
We are reasonably certain that this unit will contribute to the
conservation of the subspecies because the need for conservation
efforts is recognized and is being discussed by our conservation
partners, and methods for restoring habitat and reintroducing the
subspecies are being developed for this unit. As stated previously, the
majority of this unit is composed of County-owned land and primarily
managed cooperatively by Miami-Dade County's EEL program and NAM
division. The EEL program's focus is on the ``protection and
conservation of endangered lands,'' and these EEL areas are managed for
restoration and conservation through actions such as invasive plant
removal. In addition, State and County partners have shown interest in
reintroduction efforts for the Florida bristle fern in this area. The
privately owned portions of this unit are either enrolled in the
County's EEL Covenant Program, a 10-year commitment to restore and
manage the property as a natural area in exchange for tax incentives,
or designated as a Natural Forest Community under Miami-Dade County's
Code of Ordinances (chapter 24, article IV, division 2, section 24-
49.2), which limits development of rockland hammocks to no more than 10
percent of the site.
SF 2--Snapper Creek
We identified this area as essential for the conservation of the
subspecies. SF 2 consists of approximately 6 ha (15 ac) of habitat in
Snapper Creek Hammock adjacent to R. Hardy Matheson Preserve in Miami-
Dade County, Florida. This unit consists of 3.2 ha (8 ac) of State-
owned land that is primarily managed cooperatively by Miami-Dade
County's EEL program and NAM division and 2.6 ha (7 ac) of University
of Miami-owned land that is managed in cooperation with Fairchild.
Snapper Creek is within the historical range of Florida bristle fern
but was not occupied by the subspecies at the time of listing.
Although it is currently considered unoccupied, Florida bristle
fern was documented here in the past (80 FR 60440; October 6, 2015),
and it is possible that the site still contains the fern's gametophytes
(the very cryptic reproductive stage of the fern) (Possley 2020, pers.
comm.) that could develop into sporophytes (the recognizable mature
plant) under the proper conditions (80 FR 60440; October 6, 2015).
Also, this unit contains some or all of the physical or biological
features essential to the conservation of the subspecies. Unit SF 2
possesses those characteristics as described by the first
[[Page 78597]]
identified physical or biological feature (upland hardwood forest
hammock habitats of sufficient quality and size to sustain the
necessary microclimate and life processes for Florida bristle fern) and
the second identified physical or biological feature (exposed substrate
derived from oolitic limestone, Ocala limestone, or exposed limestone
boulders, which provide anchoring and nutritional requirements). The
third through sixth identified physical or biological features are
degraded in this unit, but with appropriate management and restoration
actions (such as removal of invasive plant species), these physical or
biological features can be restored. Based upon the presence of key
habitat needs and the conditions of the site, this unit constitutes
habitat for the Florida bristle fern.
This unit will serve to protect habitat needed to recover the
subspecies and reestablish wild populations within the historical range
in Miami-Dade County. Re-establishing a population in this unit would
increase the subspecies' redundancy in the South Florida
metapopulation. It will also provide habitat for recolonization in the
case of stochastic events (such as hurricanes), should other areas of
suitable habitat be destroyed, or should Florida bristle fern be
extirpated from one of its currently occupied locations. This unit is
essential for the conservation of the subspecies because it will
provide habitat for range expansion in known historical habitat that is
necessary to increase viability of the subspecies by increasing its
resiliency, redundancy, and representation.
We are reasonably certain that this unit will contribute to the
conservation of the subspecies because the need for conservation
efforts is recognized and is being discussed by our conservation
partners, and methods for restoring habitat and reintroducing the
subspecies are being developed for this unit. As stated previously,
this unit is composed of State-owned land that is primarily managed
cooperatively by Miami-Dade County's EEL program and NAM division and
University of Miami-owned land that is cooperatively managed with
Fairchild. The EEL program's focus is on the ``protection and
conservation of endangered lands,'' and these EEL areas are managed for
restoration and conservation through actions such as invasive plant
removal. In addition, State, County, and private partners have shown
interest in reintroduction efforts for the Florida bristle fern in this
area.
SF 3--Charles Deering Estate Hammock
We identified this area as essential for the conservation of the
Florida bristle fern. SF 3 consists of approximately 43 ha (106 ac) of
habitat in the Charles Deering Estate in Miami-Dade County, Florida.
This unit is composed of State-owned land that is primarily managed
cooperatively by Miami-Dade County's EEL program and NAM division.
Charles Deering Estate Hammock is within the historical range of
Florida bristle fern but was not occupied by the subspecies at the time
of listing.
Although it is currently considered unoccupied, Florida bristle
fern was documented here in the past (80 FR 60440; October 6, 2015),
and it is possible that the site still contains the fern's gametophytes
(the very cryptic reproductive stage of the fern) (Possley 2020, pers.
comm.) that could develop into sporophytes (the recognizable mature
plant) under the proper conditions (80 FR 60440; October 6, 2015).
Also, this unit contains all of the physical or biological features
essential to the conservation of the subspecies. Based upon the
presence of key habitat needs and the conditions of the site, this unit
constitutes habitat for the Florida bristle fern.
This unit will serve to protect habitat needed to recover the
subspecies and reestablish wild populations within the historical range
in Miami-Dade County. Re-establishing a population in this unit would
increase the subspecies' redundancy in the South Florida
metapopulation. It will also provide habitat for recolonization in the
case of stochastic events (such as hurricanes), should other areas of
suitable habitat be destroyed, or should Florida bristle fern be
extirpated from one of its currently occupied locations. This unit is
essential for the conservation of the subspecies because it will
provide habitat for range expansion in known historical habitat that is
necessary to increase viability of the subspecies by increasing its
resiliency, redundancy, and representation.
We are reasonably certain that this unit will contribute to the
conservation of the subspecies because the need for conservation
efforts is recognized and is being discussed by our conservation
partners, and methods for reintroducing the subspecies are being
developed for this unit. As stated previously, this unit is composed
entirely of State-owned land and is primarily managed cooperatively by
Miami-Dade County's EEL program and NAM division. The EEL program's
focus is on the ``protection and conservation of endangered lands,''
and these EEL areas are managed for restoration and conservation
through actions such as invasive plant removal. In addition, State and
County partners have shown interest in reintroduction efforts for the
Florida bristle fern in this area.
SF 4--Castellow and Ross Hammocks
SF 4 consists of approximately 56 ha (139 ac) of habitat in
Castellow and Ross Hammocks in and around Castellow Hammock Preserve in
Miami-Dade County, Florida. This unit consists of 17.5 ha (43.3 ac) of
State-owned and 25.6 ha (63.4 ac) of County-owned lands that are
primarily managed cooperatively by Miami-Dade County's EEL program and
NAM division. The remaining 13 ha (32.3 ac) are privately owned and
managed by the landowners through the EEL Covenant Program and/or are
protected from development through Miami-Dade County's designation as
Natural Forest Communities. This unit is occupied by the subspecies and
contains some or all of the physical or biological features essential
to its conservation.
Special management considerations or protection may be required to
address threats of commercial, residential, or agricultural
development; hydrological alterations; competition with nonnative
species; human use and recreation; and sea level rise. In some cases,
these threats are being addressed or coordinated with our partners and
landowners to implement needed actions. Such actions include removal of
invasive species, review of County development plans, and review of
projects considering land use changes.
SF 5--Silver Palm Hammock
We identified this area as essential for the conservation of the
subspecies. SF 5 consists of approximately 4 ha (10 ac) of habitat in
Silver Palm Hammock in Miami-Dade County, Florida. This unit consists
of State-owned land that is primarily managed cooperatively by Miami-
Dade County's EEL program and NAM division. Silver Palm Hammock is
within the historical range of Florida bristle fern but was not
occupied by the subspecies at the time of listing.
Although it is currently considered unoccupied, Florida bristle
fern was documented here in the past (80 FR 60440; October 6, 2015),
and it is possible that the site still contains the fern's gametophytes
(the very cryptic reproductive stage of the fern) (Possley 2020, pers.
comm.) that could develop into sporophytes (the recognizable mature
plant) under the proper conditions (80 FR 60440; October 6, 2015).
Also, this unit contains some or all of the physical or biological
features
[[Page 78598]]
essential to the conservation of the subspecies. Unit SF 5 possesses
those characteristics as described by the first identified physical or
biological feature (upland hardwood forest hammock habitats of
sufficient quality and size to sustain the necessary microclimate and
life processes for Florida bristle fern); the second identified
physical or biological feature (exposed substrate derived from oolitic
limestone, Ocala limestone, or exposed limestone boulders, which
provide anchoring and nutritional requirements); the third identified
physical or biological feature (constantly humid microhabitat
consisting of dense canopy cover, moisture, stable high temperature,
and stable monthly average humidity of 90 percent or higher, with
intact hydrology within hammocks and the surrounding and adjacent
wetland communities); the fourth identified physical or biological
feature (dense canopy cover of surrounding native vegetation that
consists of the upland hardwood forest hammock habitats and provides
shade, shelter, and moisture); and the fifth identified physical or
biological feature (suitable microhabitat conditions, hydrology, and
connectivity that can support Florida bristle fern's growth,
distribution, and population expansion (including rhizomal growth,
spore dispersal, and sporophyte and gametophyte growth and survival)).
The sixth identified physical or biological feature is degraded in this
unit, but with appropriate management and restoration actions (such as
removal of invasive plant species), this feature can be restored. Based
upon the presence of key habitat needs and the conditions of the site,
this unit constitutes habitat for the Florida bristle fern.
This unit will serve to protect habitat needed to recover the
subspecies and reestablish wild populations within the historical range
in Miami-Dade County. Re-establishing a population in this unit would
increase the subspecies' redundancy in the South Florida
metapopulation. It will also provide habitat for recolonization in the
case of stochastic events (such as hurricanes), should other areas of
suitable habitat be destroyed, or should Florida bristle fern be
extirpated from one of its currently occupied locations. This unit is
essential for the conservation of the subspecies because it will
provide habitat for range expansion in known historical habitat that is
necessary to increase viability of the subspecies by increasing its
resiliency, redundancy, and representation.
We are reasonably certain that this unit will contribute to the
conservation of the subspecies because the need for conservation
efforts is recognized and is being discussed by our conservation
partners, and methods for restoring habitat are being developed for
this unit. As stated previously, this unit is entirely composed of
State-owned land and is primarily managed cooperatively by Miami-Dade
County's EEL program and NAM division. The EEL program's focus is on
the ``protection and conservation of endangered lands,'' and these EEL
areas are managed for restoration and conservation through actions such
as invasive plant removal. In addition, State and County partners have
shown interest in reintroduction efforts for the Florida bristle fern
in this area.
SF 6--Hattie Bauer Hammock
SF 6 consists of approximately 6 ha (16 ac) of habitat in Hattie
Bauer Hammock in and around Hattie Bauer Hammock Preserve in Miami-Dade
County, Florida. This unit consists of 4 ha (10 ac) of County-owned
land that is primarily managed cooperatively by Miami-Dade County's EEL
program and NAM division. The remaining 2 ha (6 ac) are privately owned
and managed by the landowners through the EEL Covenant Program and/or
are protected from development through Miami-Dade County's designation
as Natural Forest Communities. This unit is occupied by the subspecies
and contains some or all of the physical or biological features
essential to its conservation.
Special management considerations or protection may be required to
address threats of commercial, residential, or agricultural
development; hydrological alterations; competition with nonnative
species; human use and recreation; and sea level rise. In some cases,
these threats are being addressed or coordinated with our partners and
landowners to implement needed actions. Such actions include removal of
invasive species, review of County development plans, and review of
projects considering land use changes.
SF 7--Fuchs and Meissner Hammocks
SF 7 consists of approximately 10 ha (25 ac) of habitat in Fuchs
and Meissner Hammocks in and around Fuchs and Meissner Hammock
Preserves in Miami-Dade County, Florida. This unit consists of 2 ha (5
ac) of State-owned and 7.6 ha (19 ac) of County-owned lands that are
primarily managed cooperatively by Miami-Dade County's EEL program and
NAM division. The remaining 0.4 ha (1 ac) are privately owned and
managed by the landowners through the EEL Covenant Program and/or are
protected from development through Miami-Dade County's designation as
Natural Forest Communities. This unit is occupied by the subspecies and
contains some or all of the physical or biological features essential
to its conservation.
Special management considerations or protection may be required to
address threats of commercial, residential, or agricultural
development; hydrological alterations; competition with nonnative
species; human use and recreation; and sea level rise. In some cases,
these threats are being addressed or coordinated with our partners and
landowners to implement needed actions. Such actions include removal of
invasive species, review of County development plans, and review of
projects considering land use changes.
SF 8--Royal Palm Hammock
We identified this area as essential for the conservation of the
subspecies. SF 8 consists of approximately 61 ha (150 ac) of habitat in
Royal Palm Hammock in Everglades National Park, which is federally
owned land, in Miami-Dade County, Florida. Royal Palm Hammock is within
the historical range of Florida bristle fern but was not occupied by
the subspecies at the time of listing.
Although it is currently considered unoccupied, Florida bristle
fern was documented here in the past (80 FR 60440; October 6, 2015),
and it is possible that the site still contains the fern's gametophytes
(the very cryptic reproductive stage of the fern) (Possley 2020, pers.
comm.) that could develop into sporophytes (the recognizable mature
plant) under the proper conditions (80 FR 60440; October 6, 2015).
Also, this unit contains all of the physical or biological features
essential to the conservation of the subspecies. Based upon the
presence of key habitat needs and the conditions of the site, this unit
constitutes habitat for the Florida bristle fern.
This unit will serve to protect habitat needed to recover the
subspecies and reestablish wild populations within the historical range
in Miami-Dade County. Re-establishing a population in this unit would
increase the subspecies' redundancy in the South Florida
metapopulation. It will also provide habitat for recolonization in the
case of stochastic events (such as hurricanes), should other areas of
suitable habitat be destroyed, or should Florida bristle fern be
extirpated from one of its currently occupied locations. This unit is
essential for the conservation of the subspecies because it will
provide habitat for range expansion in known historical habitat that is
necessary to increase viability of the subspecies by increasing its
resiliency, redundancy, and representation.
[[Page 78599]]
We are reasonably certain that this unit will contribute to the
conservation of the subspecies because the need for conservation
efforts is recognized and is being discussed by our conservation
partners, and habitat maintenance in this unit is ongoing. This unit is
entirely composed of federally owned Everglades National Park land, and
the National Park Service has responsibilities under section 7(a)(1) of
the Act to carry out programs for the conservation of federally listed
endangered and threatened species. The Everglades National Park General
Management Plan (Plan), approved in 2015, prior to the published final
listing rule for Florida bristle fern, guides the National Park
Service's management of Everglades National Park, including
conservation of endangered and threatened species. The 2015 Plan
identifies the Florida bristle fern as extirpated from Everglades
National Park (Royal Palm Hammock), and, therefore, specific
conservation measures were not discussed for the subspecies (National
Park Service 2015, p. 226). However, Everglades National Park continues
to conduct nonnative plant species control in Royal Palm Hammock, which
helps maintain the physical or biological features essential to the
conservation of the Florida bristle fern.
Withlacoochee State Forest, Jumper Creek Tract, and Adjacent Lands of
Central Florida, Sumter County
The designated critical habitat for the central Florida
metapopulation is composed of two units (CF 1 and CF 2) consisting of
approximately 1,489 ha (3,680 ac) located within and adjacent to the
Jumper Creek Tract of the Withlacoochee State Forest in Sumter County,
Florida.
CF 1
CF 1 consists of approximately 742 ha (1,834 ac) of habitat in
Sumter County, Florida. This unit consists of 726 ha (1,795 ac) of
State-owned land within the Jumper Creek Tract of the Withlacoochee
State Forest and 16 ha (39 ac) of privately owned land directly
adjacent to the two locations where Florida bristle fern is currently
observed. The State-owned land is managed by the Florida Forest
Service. This unit is occupied by the subspecies and contains all of
the physical or biological features essential to its conservation.
Special management considerations or protection may be required to
address threats of residential and agricultural development, land
clearing, logging, cattle grazing, hydrological alteration, competition
with nonnative species, human use and recreation, and impacts related
to climate change. In some cases, these threats are being addressed or
coordinated with our partners and landowners to implement needed
actions.
CF 2
We identified this area as essential for the conservation of the
subspecies. CF 2 consists of approximately 747 ha (1,846 ac) of habitat
on State-owned land within the Jumper Creek Tract of the Withlacoochee
State Forest, Sumter County, Florida. This is within the historical
range of Florida bristle fern but was not occupied by the subspecies at
the time of listing.
Although it is currently considered unoccupied, Florida bristle
fern was documented here in the past (80 FR 60440; October 6, 2015),
and it is possible that the site still contains the fern's gametophytes
(the very cryptic reproductive stage of the fern) (Possley 2020, pers.
comm.) that could develop into sporophytes (the recognizable mature
plant) under the proper conditions (80 FR 60440; October 6, 2015).
Also, this unit contains all of the physical or biological features
essential to the conservation of the subspecies. Based upon the
presence of key habitat needs and the conditions of the site, this unit
constitutes habitat for the Florida bristle fern.
This unit will serve to protect habitat needed to recover the
subspecies and reestablish wild populations within the historical range
in Sumter County. Re-establishing at least one historical population in
this unit would increase the subspecies' redundancy in the Central
Florida metapopulation. It will also provide habitat for recolonization
in the case of stochastic events (such as hurricanes), should other
areas of suitable habitat be destroyed, or should Florida bristle fern
be extirpated from one of its currently occupied locations. This unit
is essential for the conservation of the subspecies because it will
provide habitat for range expansion in known historical habitat that is
necessary to increase viability of the subspecies by increasing its
resiliency, redundancy, and representation.
We are reasonably certain that this unit will contribute to the
conservation of the subspecies because the need for conservation
efforts is recognized and is being discussed by our conservation
partners, and habitat maintenance in this unit is ongoing. This unit is
entirely composed of State-owned land that is part of the Withlacoochee
State Forest. The Ten-Year Resource Management Plan for the
Withlacoochee State Forest (Management Plan), approved in 2015, prior
to the published final listing rule for Florida bristle fern, guides
the Florida Forest Service's management, including protection of
endangered and threatened species found on the Withlacoochee State
Forest. The Management Plan lists the Florida bristle fern as occurring
in the Forest, but specific conservation measures are not discussed for
the subspecies. However, the Withlacoochee State Forest conducts
nonnative species control (Florida Department of Agriculture and
Consumer Services 2015, p. 34), which helps maintain the physical or
biological features essential to the conservation of Florida bristle
fern. The Florida Forest Service has shown interest in reintroduction
efforts for Florida bristle fern in this area.
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.
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
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) or a permit from the Service under section 10
of the Act) or that involve some other Federal action (such as funding
from the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Aviation
Administration, or the Federal Emergency Management Agency). Federal
agency actions within the subspecies' habitat that may require
consultation include management and any other landscape-altering
activities on Federal lands administered by the Service, Army National
Guard, U.S. Forest Service, and National Park Service; issuance of
section 404 Clean
[[Page 78600]]
Water Act permits by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; and construction
and maintenance of roads or highways by the Federal Highway
Administration. 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 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,
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
designation, or that may be affected by such designation.
Activities that we may, during a consultation under section 7(a)(2)
of the Act, consider likely to destroy or adversely modify critical
habitat include, but are not limited to:
(1) Actions that would significantly alter native vegetation
structure or composition within the upland hardwood forest hammock
habitat consisting of rockland or closed tropical hardwood hammock
(south Florida) or mesic, hydric, or intermixed hammock strands
(central Florida) ecosystems as defined as a physical or biological
feature essential to the conservation of the Florida bristle fern in
the designated critical habitat. Such activities could include, but are
not limited to, land conversion or clearing related to residential,
commercial, agricultural, or recreational development, including
associated infrastructure; logging; introduction of nonnative plant
species; or improper fire management. These activities could result in
loss, modification, and fragmentation of rockland/mesic hammock
habitat, thereby eliminating or reducing the habitat necessary for the
growth and reproduction of the subspecies.
(2) Actions that would significantly alter microhabitat for Florida
bristle fern within the rockland or closed tropical hardwood hammock
(in south Florida) or mesic, hydric, or intermixed hammock strands (in
central Florida) ecosystems, including significant alterations to the
substrate within the rockland/mesic-hydric hammocks or to the canopy or
hydrology within the rockland/mesic-hydric hammocks or surrounding
upland hardwood forest vegetation as identified as a physical or
biological feature essential to the conservation of the Florida bristle
fern in the designated critical habitat. Such activities could include,
but are not limited to, residential, commercial, agricultural, or
recreational development, including associated infrastructure; land
conversion or clearing; logging; introduction of nonnative species,
including invasive plants or feral hogs; ground or surface water
withdrawals; and ditching. These activities could result in changes to
temperature, humidity, light, and existing water levels, thereby
eliminating or reducing the microhabitat necessary for the growth and
reproduction of the subspecies.
(3) Actions that would significantly alter the hydrology of the
upland forested hammock ecosystems as defined as a physical or
biological feature essential to the conservation of the Florida bristle
fern in the designated critical habitat, including significant
alterations to the hydrology of surrounding wetland habitat and the
underlying water table. Such activities could include, but are not
limited to, regional drainage efforts, ground or surface water
withdrawals, and ditching. These activities could result in changes to
existing water levels and humidity levels within the hammocks, thereby
eliminating or reducing the habitat necessary for the growth and
reproduction of the subspecies.
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
[[Page 78601]]
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 Improvement Act of 1997 (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. There are no
DoD lands with a completed INRMP within the final critical habitat
designation.
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 she determines
that the benefits of such exclusion outweigh the benefits of specifying
such area as part of the critical habitat, unless she determines, 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 the determination to exclude a particular area, 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.
The first sentence in section 4(b)(2) of the Act requires that we
take into consideration the economic, national security, or other
relevant impacts of designating any particular area as critical
habitat. We describe below the process that we undertook for taking
into consideration each category of impacts and our analyses of the
relevant impacts.
On December 18, 2020, we published a final rule in the Federal
Register (85 FR 82376) revising portions of our regulations pertaining
to exclusions of critical habitat. These final regulations became
effective on January 19, 2021, and applied to critical habitat rules
for which a proposed rule was published after January 19, 2021.
Consequently, these new regulations do not apply to this final rule
because the rule proposing critical habitat for Florida bristle fern
published on February 24, 2020. In addition, this regulation was
rescinded (87 FR 43433; July 21, 2022) and no longer applies to any
designations of critical habitat. Therefore, for this final rule
designating critical habitat for the Florida bristle fern, we apply the
regulations at 424.19 and the 2016 Joint Policy on 4(b)(2) exclusions
(81 FR 7226; February 11, 2016).
Exclusions Based on 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. In order to consider economic impacts, we prepared
an incremental effects memorandum (IEM) and screening analysis which,
together with our narrative and interpretation of effects, we consider
our economic analysis of the critical habitat designation and related
factors (IEc 2020, entire). The analysis, dated January 30, 2020, was
made available for public review from February 24, 2020, through April
24, 2020 (85 FR 10371). The economic analysis addressed probable
economic impacts of critical habitat designation for Florida bristle
fern. Following the close of the comment period, we reviewed and
evaluated all information submitted during the comment period that may
pertain to our consideration of the probable incremental economic
impacts of this critical habitat designation. Additional information
relevant to the probable incremental economic impacts of critical
habitat designation for the Florida bristle fern is summarized below
and available in the screening analysis for the species (IEc 2020,
entire), available at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> under Docket No. FWS-
R4-ES-2019-0068 or by contacting the Florida Ecological Services Field
Office, Vero Beach (see ADDRESSES).
We did not receive any public comments on the DEA. Based on peer
review comments and changes that we made to the critical habitat units
(see Summary of Changes from the Proposed Rule, above), the IEM was
revised to reflect the areas added to the final critical habitat
designation. Due to the small amount of area added to the final
critical habitat designation, it was determined that the screening
analysis did not need to be revised.
In our evaluation of the probable incremental economic impacts that
may result from the designation of critical habitat for Florida bristle
fern, first we identified, in the IEM dated April 2021, probable
incremental economic impacts associated with the following categories
of activities: (1) Commercial or residential development; (2) roadway
and bridge construction; (3) utility-related activities; (4)
agriculture, including land clearing; (5) grazing; (6) groundwater
pumping; (7) surface water withdrawals and diversions; (8) forest
management; (9) fire management; (10) conservation and restoration
activities, including nonnative species control; and (11) recreation.
Additionally, we considered whether the 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
Florida bristle fern 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 subspecies. When
this final critical habitat designation rule becomes effective,
consultations to avoid the destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat will be incorporated into the existing consultation
process.
In our IEM, we attempted to clarify the distinction between the
effects that will result from the subspecies being listed and those
attributable to the critical habitat designation (i.e., the difference
between the jeopardy and adverse modification standards) for Florida
bristle fern. The following considerations helped 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 subspecies, and (2) any actions that would
result in sufficient harm or harassment to constitute jeopardy to
Florida bristle fern would also likely adversely affect the essential
physical or biological features of critical habitat. The IEM outlines
our rationale concerning this limited distinction between baseline
conservation efforts and incremental impacts of the designation of
critical habitat for this subspecies. This evaluation of the
incremental effects has been used as the basis to evaluate the probable
incremental economic impacts of this designation.
The final critical habitat designation for Florida bristle fern
totals approximately 1,698 ha (4,195 ac) in Miami-Dade and Sumter
Counties, Florida, and includes both occupied and unoccupied units.
Within the occupied units, any actions that may affect critical habitat
would also affect the subspecies, 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 Florida
bristle fern. Therefore, the economic impacts of
[[Page 78602]]
implementing the rule through section 7 of the Act will most likely be
limited to additional administrative effort to consider adverse
modification.
Within the unoccupied units, incremental section 7 costs will
include both the administrative costs of consultation and the costs of
developing and implementing conservation measures needed to avoid
adverse modification of critical habitat. Therefore, this analysis
focuses on the likely impacts to activities occurring in unoccupied
units of the final critical habitat designation. This analysis
considers the potential need to consult on development, transportation,
and other activities authorized, undertaken, or funded by Federal
agencies within unoccupied habitat. The total annual incremental
section 7 costs associated with the designation were estimated to be
$210,000 in 2019 dollars (IEC 2020, p. 12). The increase in size of the
unoccupied units from the proposed to the final critical habitat
designation is minor (52 ha (129 ac)) and is not anticipated to
significantly increase the annual incremental section 7 costs
associated with the designation. Accordingly, we conclude that these
costs will not reach the threshold of ``significant'' under E.O. 12866.
We considered the economic impacts of the critical habitat
designation. The Secretary is not exercising her discretion to exclude
any areas from this designation of critical habitat for the Florida
bristle fern based on economic impacts.
Exclusions Based on Impacts on National Security and Homeland Security
In preparing this rule, we have determined that the lands within
the final designation of critical habitat for the Florida bristle fern
are not owned or managed by the DoD or Department of Homeland Security,
and, therefore, we anticipate no impact on national security or
homeland security. We did not receive any additional information during
the public comment period for the proposed designation regarding
impacts of the designation on national security or homeland security
that would support excluding any specific areas from the final critical
habitat designation under authority of section 4(b)(2) and our
implementing regulations at 50 CFR 424.19. Consequently, the Secretary
is not exercising her discretion to exclude any areas from the final
designation based on impacts on national security.
Exclusions Based on 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 as discussed above. We consider a number of factors, including
whether there are permitted conservation plans covering the species in
the area such as habitat conservation plans (HCPs), safe harbor
agreements, or candidate conservation agreements with assurances, or
whether there are non-permitted conservation agreements and
partnerships that would be encouraged by designation of, or exclusion
from, critical habitat. In addition, we look at the existence of Tribal
conservation plans and partnerships and consider the government-to-
government relationship of the United States with Tribal entities. We
also consider any social impacts that might occur because of the
designation.
In preparing this final rule, we have determined that there are
currently no HCPs or other management plans for Florida bristle fern,
and the designation does not include any Tribal lands or trust
resources. We anticipate no impact on Tribal lands, partnerships, HCPs,
or permitted or non-permitted plans or agreements from this critical
habitat designation. We did not receive any additional information
during the public comment period for the proposed rule regarding other
relevant impacts to support excluding any specific areas from the final
critical habitat designation under authority of section 4(b)(2) and our
implementing regulations at 50 CFR 424.19. Accordingly, the Secretary
is not exercising her discretion to exclude any areas from the final
designation based on other relevant impacts.
Required Determinations
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 (OMB)
will review all significant rules. OIRA has determined that this rule
is not significant.
Executive Order (E.O.) 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 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 whether 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.
[[Page 78603]]
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 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 will be directly
regulated by this designation. There is no requirement under the RFA to
evaluate the potential impacts to entities not directly regulated.
Moreover, Federal agencies are not small entities.
During the development of this final rule, we reviewed and
evaluated all information submitted during the comment period that may
pertain to our consideration of the probable incremental economic
impacts of this critical habitat designation. Based on this
information, we affirm our certification that this final critical
habitat designation will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities, and a 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. OMB has provided guidance for implementing this E.O.
that outlines nine outcomes that may constitute ``a significant adverse
effect'' when compared to not taking the regulatory action under
consideration. Our economic analysis finds that none of these criteria
is relevant to this analysis. Thus, based on information in the
economic analysis, energy-related impacts associated with Florida
bristle fern conservation activities within critical habitat are not
expected. As such, the designation of critical habitat is not expected
to 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 findings:
(1) This rule will 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 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. 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 it will not produce a Federal mandate
of $100 million or greater in any year; that is, it is not a
``significant regulatory action'' under the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act. The economic analysis concludes that incremental impacts may
primarily occur due to administrative costs of section 7 consultations
for development and transportation projects, and for other activities
primarily related to land and facility management, cultural resource,
research, and conservation activities in Everglades National Park;
however, these are not expected to significantly affect small
governments. Incremental impacts stemming from various species
conservation and development control activities are expected to be
borne by the Federal Government, State of Florida, and Miami-Dade
County, which are not considered small governments. Consequently, we do
not believe that the critical habitat designation will significantly or
uniquely affect small government entities. As such, 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 Florida bristle fern in a takings implications assessment.
The Act does not authorize us 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
[[Page 78604]]
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
and concludes that this designation of critical habitat for Florida
bristle fern 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 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 critical habitat designation with, the
appropriate State resource agencies in Florida. We did not receive
comments from the State of Florida. 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 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 designation may have some benefit to these governments because the
areas that contain the features essential to the conservation of the
subspecies are more clearly defined, and the physical or biological
features of the habitat necessary to the conservation of the subspecies
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) will 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 does not
unduly burden the judicial system and that it meets the requirements of
sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of the Order. We are designating critical
habitat in accordance with the provisions of the Act. To assist the
public in understanding the habitat needs of the subspecies, this rule
identifies the physical or biological features essential to the
conservation of the subspecies. The designated areas of critical
habitat are presented on maps, and the 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 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 designating
critical habitat under 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. As discussed above (see Exclusions
Based on Other Relevant Impacts), we have determined that no Tribal
lands will be affected by this designation.
References Cited
A complete list of references cited in this rule is available on
the internet at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> under Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-
2019-0068 and upon request from the Florida Ecological Services Field
Office, Vero Beach (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authors
The primary authors of this rule are the staff members of the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Florida Ecological Services Field Office
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Plants,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Transportation, Wildlife.
Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50
of the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below:
PART 17--ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS
0
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.
0
2. Amend Sec. 17.12(h) in the List of Endangered and Threatened Plants
under Ferns and Allies by removing the entry for ``Trichomanes
punctatumssp. floridanum'' and adding in its place an entry for
``Trichomanes punctatum ssp. floridanum'' to read as follows:
17.12 Endangered and threatened plants.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
[[Page 78605]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Listing citations and
Scientific name Common name Where listed Status applicable rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Ferns and Allies
* * * * * * *
Trichomanes punctatum ssp. Florida bristle Wherever found.... E 80 FR 60440, 10/6/2015;
floridanum. fern. 50 CFR
17.96(b)(1).\CH\
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
3. Amend Sec. 17.96 by adding paragraph (b) to read as follows:
17.96 Critical habitat--plants.
* * * * *
(b) Conifers, ferns and allies, and lichens. (1) Family
Hymenophyllaceae: Trichomanes punctatum ssp. floridanum (Florida
bristle fern).
(i) Critical habitat units are depicted for Miami-Dade and Sumter
Counties, Florida, on the maps in this entry.
(ii) Within these areas, the physical or biological features
essential to the conservation of Florida bristle fern consist of the
following components:
(A) Upland hardwood forest hammock habitats of sufficient quality
and size to sustain the necessary microclimate and life processes for
Florida bristle fern.
(B) Exposed substrate derived from oolitic limestone, Ocala
limestone, or exposed limestone boulders, which provide anchoring and
nutritional requirements.
(C) Constantly humid microhabitat consisting of dense canopy cover,
moisture, stable high temperature, and stable monthly average humidity
of 90 percent or higher, with intact hydrology within hammocks and the
surrounding and adjacent wetland communities.
(D) Dense canopy cover of surrounding native vegetation that
consists of the upland hardwood forest hammock habitats and provides
shade, shelter, and moisture.
(E) Suitable microhabitat conditions, hydrology, and connectivity
that can support Florida bristle fern's growth, distribution, and
population expansion (including rhizomal growth, spore dispersal, and
sporophyte and gametophyte growth and survival).
(F) Plant community of predominantly native vegetation that is
minimally disturbed or free from human-related disturbance, with either
no competitive nonnative, invasive plant species, or such species in
quantities low enough to have minimal effect on Florida bristle fern.
(iii) 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
January 23, 2023.
(iv) Data layers defining map units were created using ESRI ArcGIS
mapping software along with various spatial data layers. ArcGIS was
used to calculate the size of habitat areas. The projection used in
mapping and calculating distances and locations within the units was
North American Albers Equal Area Conic, NAD 83 Geographic. The maps in
this entry, as modified by any accompanying regulatory text, establish
the boundaries of the critical habitat designation. The coordinates or
plot points or both on which each map is based are available to the
public at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> under Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2019-
0068, <a href="https://www.fws.gov/office/florida-ecological-services/library">https://www.fws.gov/office/florida-ecological-services/library</a>,
and at the Florida Ecological Services Field Office, Vero Beach. You
may obtain field office location information by contacting one of the
Service regional offices, the addresses of which are listed at 50 CFR
2.2.
(v) Index map follows:
Figure 1 to Family Hymenophyllaceae: Trichomanes punctatum ssp.
floridanum (Florida bristle fern) paragraph (b)(1)(v)
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
[[Page 78606]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22DE22.006
(vi) SF 1--Matheson Hammock, SF 2--Snapper Creek Hammock, and SF
3--Charles Deering Estate Hammock, Miami-Dade County, Florida.
(A) SF 1 consists of approximately 22 hectares (ha) (55 acres (ac))
in Matheson Hammock in and around Matheson Hammock Park. This unit is
composed of 20.6 ha (51.1 ac) of County-owned land that is primarily
managed cooperatively by Miami-Dade County's Environmentally Endangered
Lands (EEL) program and Natural Areas Management division. The
remaining 1.5 ha (3.7 ac) are privately owned and managed by the
landowners through the County's EEL Covenant Program and/or are
protected from development through the County's designation as Natural
Forest Communities.
(B) SF 2 consists of approximately 6 ha (15 ac) in Snapper Creek
Hammock adjacent to R. Hardy Matheson Preserve.
[[Page 78607]]
This unit consists of 3.2 ha (8 ac) of State-owned land that is
primarily managed cooperatively by Miami-Dade County's EEL program and
Natural Areas Management division and 2.8 ha (7 ac) of University of
Miami-owned land that is managed in cooperation with Fairchild Tropical
Botanical Gardens.
(C) SF 3 consists of approximately 43 ha (106 ac) in Charles
Deering Estate. This unit is comprised of State-owned land that is
primarily managed by the Miami-Dade County EEL program and Natural
Areas Management division.
(D) Map of SF 1, SF 2, and SF 3 follows:
Figure 2 to Family Hymenophyllaceae: Trichomanes punctatum ssp.
floridanum (Florida bristle fern) paragraph (b)(1)(vi)(D)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22DE22.007
(vii) SF 4--Castellow and Ross Hammocks, SF 5--Silver Palm Hammock,
SF 6--Hattie Bauer Hammock, and SF 7--Fuchs and Meissner Hammocks,
Miami-Dade County, Florida.
(A) SF 4 consists of approximately 56 ha (139 ac) in Castellow and
Ross Hammocks in and around Castellow Hammock Preserve. This unit
consists of 17.5 ha (43.3 ac) of State-owned and 25.6 ha (63.4 ac) of
County-owned lands that are primarily managed cooperatively by the
Miami-Dade County EEL program and Natural Areas Management division.
The remaining 13 ha (32.3 ac) are privately owned and managed by the
landowners through the EEL Covenant Program and/or are protected from
development through Miami-Dade County's designation as Natural Forest
Communities.
(B) SF 5 consists of approximately 4 ha (10 ac) in Silver Palm
Hammock. This unit comprises State-owned land that is primarily managed
cooperatively by the Miami-Dade County EEL program and Natural Areas
Management division.
(C) SF 6 consists of approximately 6 ha (16 ac) in Hattie Bauer
Hammock in and around Hattie Bauer Hammock Preserve. This unit consists
of 4 ha (10 ac) of County-owned land that is primarily managed
cooperatively by the Miami-Dade County EEL program and Natural Areas
Management division. The remaining 2 ha (6 ac) are privately owned and
managed by the landowners through the EEL Covenant Program and/or are
protected from development through Miami-Dade County's designation as
Natural Forest Communities.
(D) SF 7 consists of approximately 10 ha (25 ac) in Fuchs and
Meissner Hammocks in and around Fuchs and Meissner Hammock Preserves.
This unit consists of 2 ha (5 ac) of State-owned and 7.6 ha (19 ac) of
County-owned lands that are primarily managed cooperatively by the
Miami-Dade County EEL program and Natural Areas Management division.
The remaining 0.4 ha (1 ac) are privately owned and managed by the
landowners through the EEL Covenant Program and/or are protected from
development through Miami-Dade County's designation as Natural Forest
Communities.
(E) Map of SF 4, SF 5, SF 6, and SF 7 follows:
[[Page 78608]]
Figure 3 to Family Hymenophyllaceae: Trichomanes punctatum ssp.
floridanum (Florida bristle fern) paragraph (b)(1)(vii)(E)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22DE22.008
(viii) SF 8--Royal Palm Hammock, Miami-Dade County, Florida.
(A) SF 8 consists of approximately 61 ha (150 ac) in Royal Palm
Hammock in Everglades National Park.
(B) Map of SF 8 follows:
[[Page 78609]]
Figure 4 to Family Hymenophyllaceae: Trichomanes punctatum ssp.
floridanum (Florida bristle fern) paragraph (b)(1)(viii)(B)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22DE22.009
(ix) CF 1 and CF 2, Sumter County, Florida.
(A) CF 1 consists of approximately 742 ha (1,834 ac) of State-owned
land (726 ha (1,795 ac)) within the Jumper Creek Tract of the
Withlacoochee State Forest and of privately owned land (16 ha (39 ac))
directly adjacent to Withlacoochee State Forest. The State-owned land
is managed by the Florida Forest Service.
(B) CF 2 consists of approximately 747 ha (1,846 ac) of State-owned
land within the Jumper Creek Tract of the Withlacoochee State Forest.
(C) Map of CF 1 and CF 2 follows:
[[Page 78610]]
Figure 5 to Family Hymenophyllaceae: Trichomanes punctatum ssp.
floridanum (Florida bristle fern) paragraph (b)(1)(ix)(C)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22DE22.010
(2) [Reserved]
Martha Williams,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-27089 Filed 12-21-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-C
</pre></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on December 22, 2022.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.