# Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a Petition To List the Tehachapi Slender Salamander as Endangered or Threatened

> Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more.

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A2011-25522

## Record

- **Collection:** Federal Register
- **Document type:** Proposed Rule
- **Published:** October 11, 2011
- **Citation:** 76 FR 62900

## Text

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[FWS-R8-ES-2008-0087]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a Petition To List the Tehachapi Slender Salamander as Endangered or Threatened

AGENCY:

Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION:

Notice of 12-month petition finding.

SUMMARY:

We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce a 12-month finding on a petition to list the Tehachapi slender salamander (
Batrachoseps stebbinsi
) as threatened or endangered, under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). After review of all available scientific and commercial information, we find that listing the Tehachapi slender salamander is not warranted. However, we ask the public to submit to us any new information that becomes available concerning threats to the Tehachapi slender salamander or its habitat at any time.

DATES:

The finding announced in this document was made on October 11, 2011.

ADDRESSES:

This finding is available on the Internet at
http://www.regulations.gov
at Docket Number FWS-R8-ES-2008-0087 and at
http://www.fws.gov/ventura.
Supporting documentation we used in preparing this finding is available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office, 2493 Portola Road, Suite B, Ventura, CA 93003; telephone 805-644-1766; facsimile 805-644-3958. Please submit any new information, materials, or questions concerning this finding to the above address or via electronic mail (e-mail) at
tss@fws.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Michael McCrary, Listing and Recovery Program Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office (see
ADDRESSES
) by telephone at 805-644-7166; or by facsimile at 805-644-3958. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act) (16 U.S.C. 1531
et seq.
), requires that, for any petition to revise the Federal Lists of Endangered and Threatened Species that contains substantial scientific or commercial information that listing the species may be warranted, we make a finding within 12 months of the date of receipt of the petition. In this finding, we will determine that the petitioned action is: (1) Not warranted, (2) warranted, or (3) warranted, but the immediate proposal of a regulation implementing the petitioned action is precluded by other pending proposals to determine whether species are threatened or endangered, and expeditious progress is being made to add or remove qualified species from the Federal Lists of Endangered and Threatened Species. Section 4(b)(3)(C) of the Act requires that we treat a petition for which the requested action is found to be warranted but precluded as though resubmitted on the date of such finding, that is, requiring a subsequent finding to be made within 12 months. We must publish these 12-month findings in the
Federal Register
.

Previous Federal Actions

On February 28, 2006, we received a petition, dated February 17, 2006, from Mr. Jeremy Nichols of Denver, Colorado, requesting that the Tehachapi slender salamander (
Batrachoseps stebbinsi
) be listed as threatened or endangered in accordance with section 4 of the Act. The petition clearly identified itself as such and contained the name, address, and signature of the petitioning private citizen, as required in 50 CFR 424.14(a).

In response to the petition, we sent a letter to the petitioner dated April 20, 2006, explaining that we would not be able to address the petition until fiscal year 2007. The reason for this delay was that responding to existing court orders and settlement agreements for other listing actions expended our listing funding. We also concluded in our April 20, 2006, letter that emergency listing of the Tehachapi slender salamander was not warranted. We were delayed in responding to the petition until funding became available.

On April 22, 2009, the Service issued its 90-day finding (74 FR 18336), concluding that the petition presented substantial scientific or commercial information to indicate that listing the Tehachapi slender salamander may be warranted. We also announced the initiation of a status review to determine if listing the species is warranted and solicited information to be provided in connection with the status review.

We contracted with Robert Hansen, a recognized scientific expert on the Tehachapi slender salamander, editor of the Herpetological Review, and author of peer-reviewed papers on the species (Hansen 1980, pp. 1-50; Hansen and Stafford 1994, pp. 252-255; Hansen and Wake 2005, pp. 693-695), to develop a technical report (Hansen 2009, pp. 1-30) addressing the species' range and distribution relative to current and foreseeable land uses to assess effects of habitat alteration on the salamander. This notice constitutes our 12-month finding on the February 28, 2006, petition to list the Tehachapi slender salamander as threatened or endangered.

Species Description

Like others in the Family Plethodontidae (the lungless salamanders), the Tehachapi slender salamander breathes through its smooth, thin skin. Species in the
Batrachoseps
genus tend to have elongated bodies and tails, and shorter limbs. Compared to other species of attenuate
Batrachoseps,
the Tehachapi slender salamander has a relatively broad head, long legs, large feet, long toes, a robust body, and a short tail. Both front and hind feet contain four toes and are more webbed than other
Batrachoseps
species. The dorsal color may be dark red, brick red, or light or dark brown with light-tan or black patches that often form a band-like pattern. The Tehachapi slender salamander is characterized by 19 intercostal grooves on each side of the body (Brame and Murray 1968, p. 19). The Tehachapi slender salamander is sexually dimorphic. The average size of adult females is 2.24 inches (in) (57 millimeters (mm), and adult males average 2.13 in (54 mm) snout-to-vent length. Brame and Murray (1968, p. 18) first described the species in 1968.

The Tehachapi slender salamander belongs in the genus
Batrachoseps,
one of 25 genera in the subfamily Bolitoglossinae (Jockusch
in litt.
2009a, p. 2; Jockusch
in litt.
2009b, p. 1). The subgenus
Batrachoseps
(under the genus
Batrachoseps
) consists of four groups or clades (a nontaxonomic rank based on genetic or morphological comparisons) comprising 16 species and a few undescribed taxa all of which are adapted to fossorial (subterranean) and semifossorial existences (Jockusch and Wake 2002, pp. 362, 380). The four groups are
attenuatus, nigriventris,

pacificus,
and
relictus
(Jockusch
in litt.
2009a, p. 1). The Tehachapi slender salamander belongs in the
nigriventris
group, along with the black-bellied

slender salamander (
B. nigriventris
), gregarious slender salamander (
B. gregarious
), and Kern Canyon slender salamander (
B. simatus
) (Jockusch
in litt.
2009c, p. 1; Jockusch and Wake 2002, p. 363). Based on genetic studies, the Tehachapi slender salamander is considered to be closely related to the Kern Canyon slender salamander (Hansen and Stafford 1994, p. 252; Jockusch and Wake 2002, p. 364).

There are two known populations of Tehachapi slender salamander, the Caliente Canyon population and the Tehachapi Mountains population, both of which are described in detail below under the
Range and Distribution
section. We examined information suggesting that the two populations may represent separate species. We evaluated information discussed by Jockusch (1996, pp. 1-231) and Jockusch and Wake (2002, pp. 361-391), regarding the large amount of genetic and morphological differences between the two populations (Nichols 2006, p. 5). Hansen and Wake (2005, p. 694) also suggest that the two may eventually be classified as separate species based on genetic and morphological data. However, based on subsequent genetic research, Jockusch (
in litt.
2009d, p. 1) concluded that considering the two populations separate species was not warranted at this time. Hansen (2009a, pers. comm.) believes there are not enough differences between the two populations to classify them as separate species or subspecies. Therefore, we conclude at this time that the two populations of Tehachapi slender salamanders are a single species.

Biology and Natural History

Western species of plethodontid salamanders, including the Tehachapi slender salamander, are completely terrestrial amphibians and do not need standing or flowing water for any stage of their life cycle (Zug
et al.
2001, p. 383). Because their entire life cycle occurs on land, they are vulnerable to desiccation. Thus, the Tehachapi slender salamander, like other plethodontids, requires moist microhabitats. As such, its above-surface activity is greatly reduced outside of the rainy season (Feder 1983, pp. 295-296).

Peak periods of surface activity for the nocturnal Tehachapi slender salamander occur during the rainy season, typically February through March, but may occur earlier depending on the timing of late-fall/early-winter rains (Hansen and Wake 2005, p. 694; Hansen
in litt.
2009a, p. 2). During wetter years, peak activity may extend to April or early May at higher elevations (Hansen and Wake 2005, p. 694). These salamanders retreat to underground refugia (up to 3 feet (ft) (0.9 meters (m)) below the surface) during the warmer months or during periods of freezing temperatures and are believed to aestivate during this time (Hansen and Wake 2005, p. 694; Hansen
in litt.
2009b, p. 1; Hansen 2010 pers. comm.).

Specific information on the reproductive biology and behavior of the Tehachapi slender salamander is unknown. There is no reported information on the size and age at sexual maturity, nesting behavior, clutch size, or timing of egg hatching for the Tehachapi slender salamander (Hansen and Wake 2005, p. 694). However, Hansen and Wake (2005, p. 694) suggest that eggs are likely laid underground well below the talus and leaf litter material. The Tehachapi slender salamander cannot dig its own burrows, so it uses spaces dug in leaf litter or talus by other animals, or spaces that result from decaying vegetation (Hansen 2009b, pers. comm.; Hansen and Stafford 1994, p. 254). Jockusch and Mahoney (1997, p. 699) suggest that oviposition in Tehachapi slender salamanders occurs after the first rains in the fall or winter, and only once per season, based on their observations of oviposition occurring in November in the related black-bellied slender salamander.

Little is known about the behavior of
Batrachoseps
species, but feeding and reproduction are assumed to occur during brief periods of surface activity (Hansen
in litt.
2009b, p. 1). The low metabolic rate of plethodontid salamanders enables them to sustain themselves on their energy reserves when surface conditions are not suitable for foraging. They are believed to be inactive (
i.e.,
do not forage) while underground (Feder 1983, pp. 304-306). The Tehachapi slender salamander has been observed to capture prey, consisting of small terrestrial invertebrates, with its projectile tongue (Hansen and Wake 2005, p. 694). Hansen and Stafford suggest that the diet of the Tehachapi slender salamander is likely to be similar to other related
Batrachoseps,
consisting of small spiders, mites, and insects (Hansen and Stafford 1994, p. 254). Predators of this species are not well known. Other salamander species are known to be preyed upon by birds, such as American crows (
Corvus brachyrhynchos
), common ravens (
Corvus corax
), and jays, as well as raccoons (
Procyon lotor
), skunks, opossums (
Didelphis virginiana
), and snakes (HumboldtHerps 2010, p. 2; Kuchta 2005, p. 266). The only documented predator of the Tehachapi slender salamander that we know of is a ring-necked snake (
Diadophis punctatus
) (Burkhardt
et al.
2001, p. 245). We are not aware of any information about parasites or diseases affecting this species or information about symbiotic or mutualistic interactions with other organisms.

Habitat Characteristics

Tehachapi slender salamanders are restricted to seasonally mesic microhabitats on north-facing slopes in otherwise dry regions of the Tehachapi Mountains and the southern end of the Sierra Nevada Mountains (Hansen and Wake 2005, p. 694). Suitable habitat consists typically of shaded, north-facing slopes containing talus substrates or areas with considerable leaf litter or downed wood (Jockusch and Wake 2002, p. 362; Hansen and Wake 2005, p. 693; Hansen 2009, p. 2). These heavily shaded, north-facing slopes generally occur on the lower reaches of a hillside where sun exposure is the most limited (Hansen
in litt.
2010b, p. 1). The species has most often been found to occur on slopes with limestone talus, scattered rocks, fissured rock outcrops, fallen logs, leaf litter under tree canopy cover where moisture and humidity are high compared to nearby sites with reduced canopy cover or greater slope exposure (Hansen and Wake 2005, p. 694; CaliforniaHerps 2008, p. 2; Hansen 2009, p. 2). The species was also recently found on an atypical, more exposed north-facing slope in a new location (Silver Creek) in the northeast corner of its range under large rocks; talus mixed with soil; logs; and in some cases, dead
Yucca
spp. plants (family Asparagaceae) (see Figure 1) (Sweet
in litt.
2011, p. 1). Habitat that meets the requirements of the Tehachapi slender salamander in the two areas (Caliente Canyon and Tehachapi Mountains areas; see “Range and Distribution” section below) where the species occurs is sparse and patchily distributed. These patches of suitable habitat are dominated by
Aesculus californica
(California buckeye),
Platanus racemosa
(California sycamore), and
Quercus chrysolepis
(canyon live oak). Based on survey photographs (Sweet 2011, pp. 8-10), the atypical Silver Creek location in the northeast corner of the range also includes abundant junipers (
Juniperus californica
). The species has been documented to occur from 1,804 to 4,825 ft (550 to 1,471 m) in altitude throughout its range (Hansen 2009, p. 2; Sweet
in litt.
2011, p. 1).

Movement patterns, individual dispersal, and home range size of the

Tehachapi slender salamander are unknown. However, genetic studies of related
Batrachoseps
species (Jockusch 1996, p. 80; Hansen and Wake 2005, p. 694) indicate that female movement is limited (Jockusch and Wake 2002, p. 381). Jockusch (1996, p. 80) observed genetic differences over short geographic distances (ranging from 1.6 to 25 miles (mi) or 2.5 to 40 kilometers (km)) within a population of a closely related species, the black-bellied slender salamander, indicating that the females had not moved between populations for millions of years. No quantitative studies on movement patterns, individual dispersal, and home range size have been completed for species of
Batrachoseps
except for the California slender salamander (
Batrachoseps attenuatus
). Anderson (1960, p. 369) observed that the California slender salamander movements were limited to approximately 5 ft (2 m), and Maiorana (1978, p. 1020) observed that individuals of the same species stay within a 6.6-ft (2-m) area, on average. Based on the limited data on the California slender salamander, we infer that individual Tehachapi slender salamanders are likely to stay within an area of a few meters during their lifetime (Hansen
in litt.
2009b, p.1; Hansen
in litt.
2009c, p. 1).

Range and Distribution

The Tehachapi slender salamander is endemic to Kern County, California (Stebbins 2003, p. 185; Hansen and Wake 2005, p. 693). The general range of the species in the Tehachapi Mountains extends from the Piute Mountains in the north to Fort Tejon State Historic Park (SHP) in the south.

Since the publication of our 90-day finding (74 FR 18336; April 26, 2009), we have obtained additional data regarding the distribution of the Tehachapi slender salamander. In this finding, we have updated the description of the distribution of the Tehachapi slender salamander presented in the 90-day finding to reflect the best available scientific information. As stated above, we relied extensively on Hansen's technical report on the Tehachapi slender salamander in the preparation of this review because it provides the most comprehensive information on confirmed species occurrences throughout the species' range. An occurrence refers to a small patch of habitat (rather than a specific point location), where one or more individuals of the species was observed and verified. Hansen's 2009 report incorporates his past work, information gathered from the September 2008 habitat assessment, all vouchered museum specimen occurrences, and confirmed reports of occurrences from Jockusch and Wake (2002), other species experts, and the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB 2007). This report also documents current land uses and land ownership at sites where this species has been reported, assesses habitat quality, and reviews potential threats to the species based on its distribution and natural history. We also report new locations not included in any of the above that were recently found by Christopher Evelyn and Dr. Sam Sweet (University of California, Santa Barbara) in the northeastern portion of the species' range (Sweet 2011, pp. 8-10; Sweet
in litt.
2011, p. 1).

The current known range of the Tehachapi slender salamander consists of two disjunct areas that are separated by approximately 13 mi (21 km) of dry, rugged, mountainous terrain. We consider these two disjunct areas as separate populations, the Caliente Canyon and Tehachapi Mountains populations. The Caliente Canyon population is located northeast of State Highway 58 and west of the Piute Mountains, and lies in the southern foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountains, south of Kern Canyon. The Tehachapi Mountains population is located southwest of State Highway 58 and extends to Fort Tejon State Historic Park (SHP) (Hansen and Stafford 1994, p. 255). This population lies in the Tehachapi Mountains and the San Emigdio/Mount Pinos area of Kern County, on both sides of Interstate Highway 5. Until recently, the species was known from 21 occurrences (from northeast to southwest), 14 in Caliente Canyon, 6 in the Tehachapi Mountains (including 5 on Tejon Ranch and 1 on Fort Tejon SHP), and 1 near Highway 58 (Tehachapi Pass location, see Figure 1 below) (Hansen 2009, pp. 8-10; ICF Jones and Stokes 2009, p. 4.4-156 and Figure 4.4-8). The 21 previously known occurrence records span a period from 1957 through 2007; most recorded occurrences are on private land. In addition to the 21 previously known occurrences, Christopher Evelyn and Dr. Sam Sweet found 4 new locations in the northeastern portion of the species' range (Sweet 2011, pp. 1-13; Sweet
in litt.
2011, p. 1), bringing the total known occurrences to 25, including one that is extirpated.

We have defined the ranges of the two populations of the Tehachapi slender salamander as the canyons with known occurrences. Based on the presence of at least one known occurrence, we infer that the habitat up- and downcanyon from the occurrence is likely to be suitable and occupied. By using the best available aerial photographs, we determined the boundaries of each occupied segment based on the up- and downcanyon extent of vegetation that could support the species. We have not calculated the actual acreage of each canyon segment because we cannot determine the actual width of the suitable habitat, but in many cases it probably only extends about 50-100 ft (15-30 m) upslope from the canyon bottom. Instead, each occupied segment includes the approximate linear extent of contiguous suitable habitat within each canyon that has documented occurrences.

The known range of the Caliente Canyon population is based on 18 occurrences (including 4 newly discovered occurrences) and consists of 5 canyon segments totaling approximately 9 linear mi (14.5 km) (Figure 1), including: Caliente Canyon (14 occurrences, 7 linear mi (11.3-km)), Tollgate Canyon (1 occurrence, 0.8 linear mi (1.3 km)), Indian Creek (1 occurrence, 0.5 linear mi (0.8 km)), an unnamed canyon south of Indian Creek (1 occurrence, 0.4 linear mi (0.6 km)), and Silver Creek (1 occurrence, 0.3 linear mi (0.5 km)).

Tehahcapi slender salamanders were first discovered in Caliente Canyon in 1967 (Brame and Murray 1968, p. 18), and Hansen included Caliente Canyon is his 2008 habitat assessment (Hansen 2009, pp. 1-30). However, Hansen's 2009 report does not include any information on the four new occurrences outside Caliente Canyon, which were discovered in 2011. The 14 occurrences in Caliente Canyon closely follow Caliente Creek between the junction of Bealville Road and California Bodfish Road (10 mi (16 km) west of Loraine) and the unincorporated community of Loraine (see Figure 1). Caliente Canyon runs roughly from east to west and has a number of seasonally moist areas on the steep north-facing slopes bordering Caliente Canyon Road. Tehachapi slender salamander habitat in Caliente Canyon is patchily distributed and discontinuous because slope aspect throughout the canyon varies as a result of the natural bends in the canyon and the occurrence of side canyons. Twelve of the 14 occurrences (approximately 85 percent) in Caliente Canyon occur on private land and 2 (approximately 15 percent) occur on Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land (Hansen 2009, p. 3). Suitable habitat for the species may also occur on north-facing slopes of unnamed side canyons that stem from Caliente Canyon (Hansen 2008a, b, pers. comm.; Sweet
in litt.
2009, p. 2).

Information is limited for the four newly discovered occurrences of the Caliente Canyon population at this time. The new occurrences range from about 5.75 to 7 mi (9.3 to 11.3 km) south and southeast of the the easternmost occurrence in Caliente Canyon (Figure 1). Based on photos of the new areas taken when the species was first found there (Sweet 2011, pp. 1-13), the habitat in the vicinity of the occurrences in Tollgate Canyon, Indian Creek, and the unnamed canyon south of Indian Creek is typical of Tehachapi slender salamanders—steep, shaded, tree-covered, north-facing slopes, with talus and fallen logs. Although the Silver Creek occurrence is also on a north-facing slope, it is atypical for the species in that it is more exposed than other occurrences, with
Juniperus california
and
Pinus
spp. (pines) predominating instead of
Quercus chrysolepis
and
Aesculus californica.
Three of the four new occurrences for the Caliente Canyon population occur on private land and one occurs on BLM land.

EP11OC11.005

The Tehachapi slender salamander was reported along the Tehachapi Pass, 8 mi (13 km) southwest of Caliente Canyon in 1957, but has not been reported in that area since (Hansen 2009, p. 9). At the Tehachapi Pass location (see Figure 2), the species was observed on the north side of Black Mountain, between State Highway 58 and the Southern Pacific rail line (Hansen 2009, pp. 3, 21). We have no information to indicate whether surveys have been conducted for this species in this area since 1957. Because we do not have current information indicating that the species still occupies this area, whether that habitat still remains, or which population this occurrence belongs to, we do not discuss this historical occurrence further in this review.

The known range of the Tehachapi Mountains population, which is based on six occurrences (Dudek 2008, p. 5-14; Hansen 2009, pp. 9-10), consists of five canyon segments totaling approximately 10.2 linear mi (16.4 km). Four of the five occupied canyons (five of the known occurrences) within this region are on the privately owned Tejon Ranch (see Figure 2), and span from Tejon Canyon in the northeast, to Monroe Canyon 17.5 linear mi (28.2 km) to the southwest. The occupied canyons on Tejon Ranch are in Bear Trap Canyon (two occurrences; approximately 2.7 linear mi (4.3 km)); the Tejon Creek drainage of Tejon Canyon (one occurrence; approximately 5 linear mi (8 km)); an unnamed canyon near the Edmond G. Brown Tunnel between Bear Trap Canyon and Geghus Ridge (one occurrence; approximately 0.5 linear mi (0.8 km)); and the recently discovered occupied location (Dudek 2008, p. 5-14) at Monroe Canyon (one occurrence; approximately 1.5 linear mi (2.3 km). Hansen (2009, p. 4) described the occupied habitat on Tejon Ranch (Bear Trap Canyon specifically) as having moist, loamy soil on north-facing talus slopes with canyon live oak,
Quercus kelloggii
(black oak),
Q. wislizenii
(interior live oak),
Calocedrus decurrens
(incense cedar) and
Aesculus californica
(California buckeye).

The one confirmed occurrence in the Fort Tejon SHP area (approximately 0.5 linear mi (0.8 km)) is located on the west side of Interstate Highway 5, approximately 3 mi (4.8 km) northwest of the unincorporated community of Lebec, California (Hansen 2009, p. 10; CNDDB 1997).

EP11OC11.006

A few reports of Tehachapi slender salamanders have not been confirmed or have been determined to be other species of slender salamander. In 1973, Richman reported the presence of Tehachapi slender salamander in Tulare County (Richman 1973, p. 97). Richman stated that two adult specimens fitting the description of the Tehachapi slender salamander were found under a
Pinus jeffreyi
(Jeffrey pine) log on an east-facing slope in the Sequoia National Forest, Tulare County, California. In a 1980 report to the State of California Resources Agency, Hansen (1980, p. 38) disagreed with Richman's claim that the range of the Tehachapi slender salamander extended to Tulare County. Based on his own collections at the site described by Richman, Hansen (1980, p. 38) stated that the specimens are definitively not
Batrachoseps stebbinsi,
and later found that what Richman described was the first sighting of the Kern Plateau salamander (
B. robustus
) (AmphibiaWeb 2009, p. 4; Hansen and Wake 2005, p. 695; Wake
et al.
2002, p. 1016). BLM also reported the species occurring in Tulare County (BLM 2009, p. 1); however, this report could not be confirmed (Verner
in litt.
2008, p. 1). The U.S. Forest Service reported that there are no known occurrences of the species within the lands of the National Forest System (U.S. Forest Service 2009, p. 2). Based on this information, we currently do not believe that the range of the Tehachapi slender salamander extends beyond Kern County.

Potential Suitable Habitat

Although we do not include any potentially suitable habitat outside the canyons that are known to be occupied for the reasons described below, researchers have speculated that suitable habitat occurs in other canyons and that other canyons may be occupied. During his 2008 habitat assessment, Hansen (pers. comm. 2008b; 2009, pp. 5-6) identified additional areas of suitable habitat along Caliente Creek Road between the junction of Bodfish Road and the community of Loraine, and in the southwest reaches of the Fort Tejon SHP in Johnson Canyon, near the border with Los Padres National Forest. Hansen's report identified five general areas containing mesic north-facing slopes as potential habitat for the Tehachapi slender salamander, including: (1) Along Indian Creek Road, southeast of Loraine in Caliente Canyon; (2) drainages in Cummings and Bear Valleys; (3) canyons on Tejon Ranch connected to Clear, Sycamore, Cedar, Chanac, Tunis, and El Paso Creeks; (4) areas in Johnson Canyon within Fort Tejon SHP near the border with Los Padres National Forest; and (5) the northern slopes of the San Emigdio Mountains (
e.g.,
Black Bob Canyon) (Hansen 2009, pp. 5-6). Hansen (2009) did not provide a quantitative estimate of potential habitat. Subsequent to Hansen's 2009 report, Indian Creek has been found to be occupied by the salamander (Sweet
in litt.,
p. 1).

In addition to Hansen's work, Dr. Sweet identified suitable habitat in several tributary canyons extending south of Caliente Canyon (Sweet
in litt.
2009, pp. 1-2). Within this estimated 30-square-mile (7,770-ha) area, Sweet (
in litt.
2009, pp. 1-2) described the presence of steep, north-facing slopes containing patches of oak trees, springs and seepages, and areas containing talus. In his 2009 letter, Sweet (
in litt.
2009, p. 2) stated that he had seen the Tehachapi slender salamander in this area and suggested that they may be widespread in these tributary canyons stemming from Caliente Creek. However, at that time, Sweet was unable to provide the Service with specific occurrence information. Subsequently, Christopher Evelyn and Dr. Sweet verified that at least a few of these canyons are occupied (Sweet 2011, pp. 1-13).

Although other canyons may have some habitat characteristics similar to those that are known to be occupied, we are not speculating here as to either their suitability for Tehachapi slender salamanders or the likelihood that they may be occupied. Although not studied in detail, the species' habitat requirements appear to be highly specific (
e.g.,
specific soil type; narrow range of soil moisture and temperature; substrate type and density; over- and understory structure; presence of appropriate refugia) and habitat that may have the general appearance of being suitable (
e.g.,
north-facing slope with an overstory) may be lacking one or more essential components. Also, the species has seldom been found when these areas of apparently suitable habitat have been searched. For example, on April 5, 2009, as a followup to the 2009 report, Hansen (2009), with assistance from Service biologists, conducted a survey for Tehachapi slender salamanders in San Emigdio Canyon (within the privately owned Wind Wolves Preserve located on the south side of Interstate Highway 5 and northwest of Fort Tejon) and in Johnson Canyon of Fort Tejon SHP. Although these areas included north-facing slopes that visually appeared similar to habitat at known occurrences, no Tehachapi slender salamanders were found. Also, during an extensive study on Tejon Ranch, only one individual Tehachapi slender salamander was found in the 77 drainages surveyed (Dudek 2008, p. 6-5). The one individual that was found in Monroe Canyon is a new occurrence of the species.

The lack of success in finding salamanders in potentially suitable habitat may simply be a function of the species not being at the surface on the day the search was conducted. However, it is also likely that the habitat was not actually occupied because it only had the most general habitat requirements but was missing some important feature required by the species. Therefore, we believe that it is overly speculative to assume that suitable habitat can be readily identified and that habitat that appears to be suitable is in fact occupied.

Population Sizes and Trends

The populations of occupied canyons have not been determined, and we are not aware of any information on actual population trends. The best available information indicates that the number of occurrences has remained relatively stable (Hansen 2009, pp. 3-5, 11, 12). One occurrence (Tehachapi Pass) has been extirpated as a result of road construction, and five new occurrences (Monroe Canyon, Tollhouse Canyon, Indian Creek, an unnamed canyon south of Indian Creek, and Silver Creek) have been found.

Current Status

The Tehachapi slender salamander has been listed as threatened by the State of California since June 1971 (CDFG 2009, p. 7). The species has a global heritage ranking of G2, meaning that the species is classified by NatureServe as globally imperiled (NatureServe 2009, p. 1; Hansen 2009, p. 2). The Tehachapi slender salamander is considered sensitive by BLM (2006, p. 2) and the U.S. Forest Service (2005, p. 78).

Summary of Information Pertaining to the Five Factors

Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and implementing regulations at 50 CFR part 424 set forth procedures for adding species to the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. An “endangered species” is any species in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range. A “threatened species” is any species which is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. Under section 4(a)(1) of the ESA, a species may be determined to be endangered or threatened based on any of the following five factors:

(A) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range;

(B) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes;

(C) Disease or predation;

(D) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or

(E) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence.

In considering what factors might constitute threats, we must look beyond the exposure of the species to the factor to determine whether the species responds to the factor in a way that causes actual impacts to the species. If there is exposure and the species responds negatively, the factor may be a threat and we then attempt to determine how significant a threat it is. If the threat is significant, it may drive or contribute to the risk of extinction of the species such that the species warrants listing as endangered or threatened as those terms are defined by the Act.

In making our 12-month finding, we considered and evaluated all scientific and commercial information in our files, including information received during the public comment period that ended June 22, 2009.

Factor A: The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment of the Species' Habitat or Range

Under Factor A, we consider whether the Tehachapi slender salamander is threatened by the present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range by growth and development of human communities, road construction, mining, domestic livestock grazing, and flood control projects (Nichols 2006, p. 6). We will evaluate each of these threats for both the Caliente Canyon population and Tehachapi Mountains population of the Tehachapi slender salamander.

Like other plethodontids, Tehachapi slender salamanders require moisture to maintain the permeability of their skin for gas exchange for respiration (Feder 1983, p. 295). This physiological requirement limits the time during which they are active at the soil's surface to relatively brief, rainy periods between the late fall and early spring (Hansen 2009, p. 2; Hansen and Wake 2005, p. 694). These salamanders forage and breed during periods of surface activity (Feder 1983, p. 296). During the remainder of the year, they retreat into talus or rocky substrates, or deep under fallen logs or leaf litter, which provide refuge from the climatic extremes of the Tehachapi and Sierra Nevada Mountains (Hansen 2009, p. 2).

Given its physiology and life history, this species may be negatively affected by disturbances that remove or reduce surface and soil moisture, relative humidity, or suitable rocky and leafy substrates. Disturbances that reportedly impact Tehachapi slender salamanders through habitat removal and degradation include residential and commercial development, livestock grazing, road construction, mining, and flood control projects (Hansen and Wake 2005, p. 693; Hansen and Stafford 1994, pp. 254-255; Jennings 1996, pp. 928-929). Construction associated with residential and commercial development, new roads, and mines can remove habitat and can also cause erosion that washes away the substrates of talus, woody debris, and leaf litter that the Tehachapi slender salamander uses as refugia. The removal and degradation of habitat can also cause habitat fragmentation, which would require individuals to travel longer distances between suitable habitat patches during brief periods of suitable climate to find mates. In addition, these activities, along with flood control

projects, may alter the hydrology of the mesic environment upon which the species depends (Jennings 1996, pp. 928-929; Hansen and Wake 2005, p. 693; CNDDB 2007). Our evaluation of the extent and magnitude of potential effects caused by these activities is based on existing and expected land uses within the species' range.

Caliente Canyon Population

The main land use within the range of the Caliente Canyon population of the Tehachapi slender salamander is livestock grazing (mainly cattle). Seventeen of the 18 confirmed occurrences of the Caliente Canyon population of the Tehachapi slender salamander are on lands used primarily for livestock grazing. The remaining occurrence is on a 34-ac (13.8-ha) parcel with a private residence located at the base of a north-facing slope. In terms of land ownership, 15 occurrences are on private land, and 3 occurrences are on BLM land.

In 2008, Hansen conducted a habitat assessment of the 14 occurrences in Caliente Canyon (Hansen 2009, pp. 1-30) (Figure 1), which was prior to the discovery of the other 4 occurrences that make up the Caliente Canyon population. In his 2009 report, Hansen (pp. 11-12) noted moderate but localized impacts at 4 of the 14 occurrences in Caliente Canyon from one or more of the following: Cattle grazing, disturbance associated with a residence on a private parcel, or erosion from a nearby road (Hansen
in litt.
2010a, pp. 1-3). The other 10 occurrences show minor to low levels of disturbance from cattle grazing (Hansen
in litt.
2010a, pp. 1-5; Hansen 2009, p. 11). Hansen did point out that there was plenty of suitable habitat in good to fair condition at all 14 occurrences that would adequately function for the species (Hansen
in litt.
2010a, pp. 3-7; Hansen 2010 pers. comm.), and that overall, the habitat in the canyon had remained relatively stable since his first visit in 1979 (Hansen 2009, p. 3).

Livestock grazing could potentially impact Tehachapi slender salamander habitat through trampling and erosion. The degree of cattle-related degradation is directly related to the concentration of cattle in a given area (Hansen
in litt.
2010a, p. 3). Heavy trampling, particularly during moist conditions, could crush Tehachapi slender salamander burrows and individual salamanders during their surface activity, and could degrade habitat by displacing and removing talus, logs, and rocks that serve as critical components of cover and habitat for the species (Hansen 2010, 2008b, pers. comm.; Kuritsubo 2010 pers. comm.). Habitat cover consisting of talus, leaf litter, and woody debris can be displaced by cattle and further removed by wind and water erosion, potentially making the area less hospitable for the species to burrow and retain moisture for skin respiration. However, impacts from cattle within the range of the Caliente Canyon population of the Tehachapi slender salamander are typically localized, and are generally low to moderate in degree (Hansen
in litt.
2010a, pp. 1-7). In addition, Tehachapi slender salamander occurrences in Caliente Canyon have persisted for decades in areas grazed by cattle (Hansen 2009, pp. 3, 11). The same is likely true for the four newly discovered occurrences of the Caliente Canyon population.

Although livestock grazing (mainly cattle) occurs throughout Caliente Canyon, Hansen (2009) found a moderate and localized level of habitat degradation from livestock grazing in the vicinity of only 3 of the 14 occurrences in the canyon, but also noted that sufficient habitat in good-to-fair condition remained in these three areas to support the species. One of the three occurrences that show a moderate level of habitat degradation is on BLM land that has been designated as a BLM grazing allotment. BLM manages the allotment in Caliente Canyon for 74 animal unit months (AUMs) (
i.e.,
6 cows graze throughout the allotment year-round or 74 cows graze in the allotment for 1 month per year) on 470 ac (190 ha) within the Canyon (Kuritsubo
in litt.
2009b, p. 1). Although the other occurrence in Caliente Canyon on BLM land is also within the grazing allotment, it is considered to be in good condition (Hansen 2009, p. 11). The third occurrence affected by grazing is on private land (Hansen 2009, p. 11). The limited impact of cattle grazing on Tehachapi slender salamander habitat in Caliente Canyon and elsewhere may be because they are free ranging. Cattle tend to graze the grass to a certain height and move on, unless their movement is restricted to a corral or a fenced area. According to Hansen (
in litt.
2010a, p. 3; 2010 pers. comm.), cattle throughout the range of the species are free ranging, thus trampling and removal of vegetation to the point of exposing bare ground to such an extent that it reduces, fragments, or otherwise makes the habitat unsuitable for the Tehachapi slender salamander is not evident for any of the occurrences throughout the Caliente Canyon population's range.

The fourth occurrence in Caliente Canyon (of the four with visible disturbance) is located on private land near a residence. The area immediately surrounding the point where the species had originally been found showed moderate to high localized disturbance; however, Hansen (
in litt.
2010a, pp. 1-7; Hansen 2009, p. 11) indicated that sufficient undisturbed habitat remained in the area to support the species.

All of the confirmed occurrences in Caliente Canyon are adjacent to a two-lane, paved road. The impacts of roads on the Tehachapi slender salamander are varied. Road construction, such as construction of State Highway 58 (the section between the unincorporated communities of Keene and Monolith was constructed during the 1960s), Interstate Highway 5 (the section between Lebec and Fort Tejon was completed in 1964), and Caliente Creek Road (date of construction unknown), likely removed Tehachapi slender salamander habitat and likely caused some habitat fragmentation (Cismowski
in litt.
2010, p. 1; Hansen and Wake 2005, p. 693; Hansen 2009b pers. comm.). Further, road run-off from precipitation may contribute to erosion of the talus, leaf litter, and small rocks that comprise salamander habitat. Hansen noted that erosion was occurring, possibly from run-off from the roads, in the vicinity of 2 of the 14 occurrences in Caliente Canyon (Hansen 2009, p. 11). Erosion at one of the two occurrences is associated with the main paved road through the canyon, while the other is from a narrow, unpaved road (see below). The impact of erosion in the vicinity of these two occurrences was moderate and localized, with sufficient remaining habitat nearby to continue to support the species (Hansen
in litt.
2010a, p. 3). We are not aware of any new roads planned for construction within the range of this population.

Mining has occurred in the Caliente Creek region of Kern County since the late 1800s (SRK Consulting 2002, p. 6). The Zenda Gold Mine project is located on private land about 1 mi (1.6 km) from one of the occurrences of the Tehachapi slender salamander in Caliente Canyon (Hansen 2009, p. 11). Kern County issued a conditional use permit in 1990 to Equinox, the mine owner at the time, but the permit has since expired and has not been renewed (Kuritsubo 2009b pers. comm.). Although the Zenda Gold Mine is located on private land and is sufficiently distant not to be a threat to any occurrences, Equinox's mining claim also extends onto BLM land in the vicinity of one or more occurrences. Mining companies often hold claims for lands that they may not own that extend beyond what they are currently mining (Kuritsubo 2009c pers. comm.). For example, these areas may be included to

provide access to the actual mine site. Although Equinox's claim extends onto BLM land, they have not conducted any activity on the claim (Falcon
in litt.
2010, p. 1; SRK 2002, pp. 6-7). Although the claim is still in effect,the county permit for the mine has expired, and there are no mine plans filed with BLM or Kern County under the State Mining and Reclamation Action of 1975 (SMARA) (Falcon
in litt.
2010, p. 1; Kuritsubo 2009a pers. comm.). Based on the best information available to us, there are no active mines within the range of this population.

One of the two occurrences where erosion has occurred is downslope from Last Chance Canyon Road, a narrow, unpaved road leading to the Zenda gold mine. Hansen (2009, p.11) notes in his 2009 report that construction of this unpaved road eliminated some Tehachapi slender salamander habitat and is causing erosion of the remaining habitat in this area. Regardless of how much the Last Chance Canyon Road is traveled, its mere presence may degrade Tehachapi slender salamander habitat through erosion from wind and runoff from seasonal precipitation. Even so, Hansen (
in litt.
2010a, p. 1) describes the impacts to the habitat in the general vicinity of the occurrence as moderate and localized, but also noted that sufficient habitat in good-to-fair condition remained to support the species. There are no new mining roads planned within the range of the Caliente Canyon population.

The habitat at the four new occurences of the Caliente Canyon population has not been surveyed, and therefore the habitat assessment below is based on topographic maps, aerial photos, and survey photo records of each location (Sweet 2011, pp. 2-5 and 8-10). The habitat at the Tollgate Canyon occurrence appears to be in good condition, and although grazing likely occurs in the general area, there are no signs of disturbance from grazing. An unpaved road is near the occurrence, but there are many acres of contiguous salamander habitat surrounding the occurrence. There are no paved roads, buildings, mines, or other forms of activity in the area. The habitat at the unnamed canyon south of Indian Creek occurrence appears to be in good condition. This occurrence is on BLM land that is not part of a grazing allotment, and there are no signs of disturbance from grazing. There are no paved or unpaved roads, buildings, mines, or other forms of activity in the area. The habitat at the Indian Creek location appears to be in fair to good condition because grazing is more readily apparent near this occurrence than the two above occurrences. There is also an unpaved road in the vicinity of the occurrence. However, there are no paved roads, buildings, mines, or other forms of activity in the area. The habitat at the Silver Creek occurrence appears to be in fair to good condition because grazing occurs in the area. There is also a building and an unpaved road near this occurrence, but there are many acres of contiguous salamander habitat surrounding the occurrence.

In summary, grazing occurs on much of the private land and the BLM lands that are part of allotments in the range of the Caliente Canyon population of the Tehachapi slender salamander. Of the 14 occurrences in Caliente Canyon, 4 have experienced a moderate level of localized habitat disturbance. Of these four, one occurrence is moderately affected by cattle grazing; one on BLM land is moderately affected by cattle grazing and erosion from an adjacent paved road; one is moderately affected by grazing and erosion from an adjacent narrow, unpaved mine road; and one is moderately affected by a residence. Habitat with little or no disturbance is present in the same areas as these four occurrences. The other 10 occurrences show a minor-to-low level of disturbance from cattle grazing (Hansen
in litt.
2010a, pp. 1-4; Hansen 2009, p. 11). The only activity in the areas where the 4 new occurrences are located is cattle grazing, with the exception of a single building near one of the occurrences. One of the newly discovered occurrences appears to be in good condition, with little sign of grazing. Another, which is on BLM land that is not part of an allotment, appears to be in good condition. We classify the other two occurrences as being in fair to good condition because there are signs of cattle grazing in their immediate vicinity. There are no flood control projects occurring or planned within areas of known Tehachapi slender salamander occurrences in Caliente Canyon.

Based on the best information we have, there are no planned or proposed land use changes within the range of the Caliente Canyon population of the Tehachapi slender salamander. BLM's land use management plans are updated every 15 to 20 years. Although the BLM land containing three confirmed occurrences may be disposed of (meaning relinquished or sold) based on the current plan, we have no information to indicate that the land will be sold or developed, or that the current grazing practices will change within the next 15 to 20 years (Kuritsubo
in litt.
2008, p. 1; Kuritsubo 2009b pers. comm.). No new residential or commercial development projects planned on parcels with occupied Tehachapi slender salamander habitat are expected in the foreseeable future (Kern County
in litt.
2009, p. 9). No permit requests have been submitted to Kern County to restart mining activity in the foreseeable future. Therefore, the Caliente Canyon population of the Tehachapi slender salamander and its habitat are not threatened with destruction or curtailment now and are not likely to be threatened with destruction or curtailment in the future.

Tehachapi Mountains Population

For the reasons discussed above (see “Potential Suitable Habitat” section), we define the range of the Tehachapi Mountains population as consisting of five occupied canyon segments totaling 10.2 linear mi (16.4 km), which includes six known occurrences. Four of the canyon segments (five of the occurrences) are on the privately owned Tejon Ranch, and one is on Fort Tejon SHP. The main land uses that are presently occurring within the range of the Tehachapi Mountains population of the Tehachapi slender salamander are ranching, farming, and recreation (Hansen 2009, p. 12; ICF Jones and Stokes 2009, p. 1-4). Currently, specific land uses on the 270,365-ac (109,413-ha) Tejon Ranch include: farming and irrigation systems; livestock grazing and range management activities; film production (which may involve temporary construction and use of explosives); repair, maintenance, and use of roads; maintenance and construction of utilities; and fence construction and maintenance (Dudek 2008, pp. 2-5 through 2-8). There is an existing 2-in (5-cm) water pipeline that overlaps with one confirmed occurrence near Pastoria Creek (Miller
in litt.
2010b, p. 2). Because this pipeline is already in place, and it does not carry any dangerous substance, we do not find the presence of this pipeline to threaten the Tehachapi slender salamander or its habitat. The closest farming and irrigation activities are approximately 1,000 ft (305 m) from the occupied portion of any canyon, and are, therefore, far enough away not to negatively affect slopes known to be occupied by Tehachapi slender salamanders (Miller
in litt.
2010b, p. 4).

Possible impacts from cattle grazing are as discussed for the Caliente Canyon population of the Tehachapi slender salamander. There are approximately 14,500 head of cattle (Dudek 2008, p. 2-5) grazing on 255,000 ac (103,195 ha) (Miller
in litt.
2010b, p. 5) of Tejon Ranch. Cattle grazing on Tejon Ranch are managed by seasonal rotation,

following the availability of green pasture (Miller
in litt.
2010a, p. 1). While Tejon Ranch's livestock managers continually assess the availability of feed, cattle are allowed to “drift” through gates to different pastures where feed is available (Miller
in litt.
2010a, p. 1). This approach provides for active management of free-range cattle grazing and avoids depletion of vegetation and significant damage of the habitat.

In his 2000 Tehachapi slender salamander survey, Hansen documented that grazing, and to a limited extent logging, were evident in occupied Tehachapi slender salamander habitat (Hansen 2009, p. 12). Specifically, Hansen noted that grazing and logging activities were evident along Bear Trap Canyon in the area known to be occupied (Hansen 2009, p. 5). From 1989 through 1994, Tejon Ranch had a short-term timber harvesting operation targeting hardwoods for fuel on 367 ac (148.5 ha) in an area that includes Bear Trap Canyon (Vance
in litt.
2009a, pp. 2, 8). To the best of our knowledge, no commercial logging activities are currently in operation and none are proposed on Tejon Ranch (Brauer
in litt.
2009, p.1; Vance
in litt.
2009a, p. 1). Hansen reported that the habitat at all of the then known four occurrences on Tejon Ranch was in good condition, despite the presence of grazing (Hansen 2009, p. 12). The fifth, and most recently discovered occurrence in Monroe Canyon, is reported to be in habitat of good condition, with no evidence of disturbance by cattle (Miller
in litt.
2010b, p. 4).

Wild turkeys (
Meleagris gallopavo
) and pigs (
Sus scrofa
) were introduced on Tejon Ranch in 1989 and 1990, respectively (Miller
in litt.
2010b, p. 5; Dudek 2008, p. 3-4). There are approximately 1,200 turkeys and 5,000 pigs with free range on 255,000 ac (103,195 ha) on Tejon Ranch (Miller
in litt.
2010b, pp. 4-5). Similar to livestock grazing, wild pigs and turkeys could degrade and fragment Tehachapi slender salamander habitat by removing talus and leaf litter, thus damaging the soil cover while foraging (Dudek 2008, pp. 5-26, 6-6). Pigs are known to be particularly destructive because of their rooting and tilling behavior (Hansen 2009, p. 4; Dudek 2008, p. 3-4). Although turkeys and pigs overlap with the Tehachapi population of the Tehachapi slender salamander and have the potential to destroy habitat through scraping and rooting, we have no information to indicate that the Tehachapi slender salamander is being threatened by these nonnative species; and no damage from turkeys or pigs has been reported in occupied habitat. In fact, Tehachapi slender salamander habitat on the ranch is reported to be in good habitat condition (Miller
in litt.
2010b, p. 5; Hansen
in litt.
2010a, p. 3).

Activities involving ground disturbance associated with construction include film production; repair, maintenance, and use of roads; maintenance and construction of utilities; and fence construction and maintenance. All of these activities could result in the removal of habitat cover (talus, leaf litter, and vegetation), digging, and removal of soil. Such actions may result in habitat degradation, fragmentation, and the injury or mortality of the Tehachapi slender salamander. All of these activities occur on a sporadic and limited basis. We have no evidence that they occur in areas of known Tehachapi slender salamander occurrences.

Overall, current ranch-wide activities on Tejon Ranch have not removed or destroyed the Tehachapi slender salamander's habitat within the range of the Tehachapi Mountain population. Cattle ranching has been practiced since the late 1800s (Tejon Ranch 2011, p. 1), and the presence of cattle has not modified the habitat in any noticeable manner (Hansen 2009, p. 12). Fuel management (vegetation thinning and clearing) does not appear to have any visible effect on habitat. Wild turkeys and pigs cause localized habitat degradation, but apparently no degradation has been documented in this area. Finally, with the exception of one existing water pipeline, farming, irrigation, road repair and construction activities do not occur within occupied habitat.

Tejon Ranch plans to construct a residential and commercial development on their property called Tejon Mountain Village (TMV). The TMV development envelope consists of 7,860 ac (3,181 ha), within which a development footprint of up to 5,533 ac (2,239 ha) is proposed (Letterly
in litt
2010, p. 1). Although Tejon Ranch does not plan to exceed the 5,533-ac (2,239-ha) footprint, the exact location for construction could be anywhere within the 7,860-ac (3,181-ha) development envelope.

The TMV development would include a total of 3,624 dwelling units, 464,920 square feet (43,192 square meters) of commercial development, two golf courses, an equestrian center, up to 750 hotel rooms, and up to 350,000 square feet (32,516 square meters) of support uses (
e.g.,
hotel lobby support services, food and beverage service, golf clubhouses, equestrian facilities, private recreation facilities) (Dudek 2008, p. 2-11) that would be constructed over approximately 30 years. The TMV development envelope has been designed to completely avoid all occupied habitat (
i.e.,
occupied canyon segments that make up the range of the species) and all known occurrences of the Tehachapi slender salamander. Potentially, the closest development to occupied habitat (
i.e.,
the distance to the boundary of the development envelope) is about 0.5 mi (0.8 km) at Monroe Canyon; all other occupied habitat is a minimum 1 mi (1.6 ha) from any potential development. Therefore, because the species is confined to the identified canyon segments based on the biology of the species, and those canyon segments are outside of the proposed development envelope, we do not expect that construction of the TMV project will result in the loss of any occupied habitat.

The proposed TMV development is expected to reduce the area grazed on the ranch by approximately 2 percent (5,000 ac (2,023 ha) of the 255,000 ac (103,195 ha)), leaving approximately 250,000 ac (101,171.4 ha) available to cattle (Miller
in litt.
2010b, p. 5). The number of cattle grazing on the ranch would be commensurate with the reduction in area available for grazing, and the reduction in available feed (Miller
in litt.
2010b, p. 5). As a result, we do not anticipate grazing impacts to increase as a result of the proposed TMV development.

Tejon Ranch has submitted a habitat conservation plan (HCP) to the Service, in support of an application for an incidental take permit (ITP), that addresses 27 species, including the Tehachapi slender salamander, that potentially may be affected by the TMV project and current ranch-wide uses, such as grazing, proposed to be covered under the ITP. The HCP covers approximately 141,886 ac (57,419 ha) of the 270,365-ac (109,413-ha) ranch (Dudek 2008, p. 1-1). In addition to an HCP, a draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the HCP/ITP has been circulated for public comment in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). A Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) that focuses on the TMV project was certified by Kern County in 2009 to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Dudek, the consultants preparing the HCP for Tejon Ranch, developed a habitat suitability model to estimate impacts to each of the species addressed in the plan. Based on the model, Dudek estimates up to 3,797 ac (1,537 ha) of suitable habitat for the Tehachapi slender salamander may exist within the

141,886-ac (57,419-ha) HCP boundary (Dudek 2008, p. 5-14; ICF Jones and Stokes 2008, p. 3.1-15). However, both Tejon Ranch and Dudek point out that the habitat suitability model is constrained by broad assumptions and limited information on the species' habitat characteristics; thus, the model likely overestimates the presence of suitable habitat (Dudek 2008, pp. 5-14 and D-31). We concur with Dudek's assessment of the model, and also believe it greatly overestimates the amount of suitable habitat; therefore, the model should be considered a worst-case approach for determining the amount of potentially affected habitat.

As we discussed in the “Potential Suitable Habitat” section above, the species' habitat requirements are highly specific, and the Dudek model overgeneralizes suitable habitat. For example, we understand that the species is mostly found on north-facing slopes; however, the model includes east-facing (90 degree) and west-facing (270 degree) slopes (Dudek 2008, p. D-31). Further, information was not available for the model to account for the presence of talus or leaf litter that the species uses for refuge. The model also assumes uniform distribution of habitat, whereas in reality, the species and its habitat are patchily distributed in the landscape. As a result, suitable habitat identified in the model includes areas with unsuitable and inhospitable substrates for the species, and thus the model overgeneralizes and overestimates the amount of Tehachapi slender salamander habitat. For these reasons, we have based our analysis mainly on threats to the known occupied canyons. However, we also recognize the possibility that other suitable habitat exists beyond these canyons and that some of these areas could potentially be occupied, and, therefore, we have also considered the results of the Dudek suitability model as a worst-case approach to assessing the impacts of the TMV project.

Although the TMV development envelope avoids all habitat segments we consider to be occupied and all known occurrences within the Tehachapi Mountains population (
i.e.,
the discrete range of this portion of the species), the habitat suitability model for the Tehachapi slender salamander estimates that 108 ac (44 ha) (16 percent) of the 760 ac (308 ha) of potentially suitable habitat within the proposed TMV development envelope would be removed (ICF Jones and Stokes 2008, p. 4.1-31). The EIR for the proposed TMV project states that short-term and long-term impacts from construction, which would result in the loss of 16 percent of potentially suitable habitat in the project area without the proposed mitigation measures sited in the EIR (ICF Jones and Stokes 2009, pp. 4.4-102 and 4.4-156), could be significant to the Tehachapi slender salamander. However, we believe the EIR's conclusion overstates potential impacts to the Tehachapi slender salamander.. Our reasons are based on the following:

(1) The EIR for the proposed TMV project uses data from the Dudek habitat suitability model for the Tehachapi slender salamander to estimate potential impacts to the species, which as previously discussed, overestimates the amount of suitable habitat for the species on the ranch and likewise, overestimates the number of acres of suitable habitat potentially removed as a result of the project;

(2) the EIR analysis of impacts is based on the estimated number of acres of potentially suitable habitat within the boundaries of the proposed TMV development envelope, but the loss of 108 ac (44 ha) actually represents only 2.8 percent of the potentially suitable habitat within the HCP boundary on the ranch;

(3) we have no indication that the 108 ac (44 ha) is occupied by the species; and

(4) the development envelope does not overlap with occupied habitat or known occurrences of the species.

Although known occupied habitat will not be lost as a result of the proposed development, development will result in the fragmentation of potential modeled habitat in some canyons, and development will occur between some canyons. Although no salamanders were found in the canyons within the development envelope during surveys, (Dudek 2008, p. 6-5), if in fact these canyons are actually occupied (based on a worst-case scenario considering best available information currently identifies this area as unoccupied), salamander movement up- and down-canyon could be restricted in some areas. However, we do not believe salamanders are capable of moving from canyon to canyon because of the dry and rugged terrain that occurs between canyons. Therefore, we do not believe that the proposed development will result in any further isolation of occupied habitat and the effects of fragmentation would be limited to the loss of potential suitable habitat in some of the canyons that occur within the development envelope and would only constitute an impact to the species if those canyons were occupied.

A component of the TMV proposed project includes fuel management (vegetation thinning and clearing) to reduce threats of fire outbreaks and damage. Outside of the development areas, fuel management on 141,886 ac (57,419 ha) of the 270,365-ac (109,413-ha) ranch will consist primarily of cattle grazing, which is used to maintain vegetation at a certain height rather than denude areas to bare ground or involve the removal of shrubs, branches, or trees. In addition to the existing grazing program, fuel management activities in open space areas will include maintenance of the existing fuel break network (
e.g.,
dirt/gravel roads), coordination with State or local agencies for mowing or other fire protection measures along fire prone areas (
e.g.,
highways), and irrigation or vegetation clearing/mowing within 120 ft (36.6 m) surrounding existing structures (
e.g.,
hunting cabins and ranch structures). Within the TMV development envelope, fuel management zones in open space may extend 200 ft (61 m) from new structures and fuel management will be limited to thinning and nonirrigation treatment.

Fuel management may remove some vegetation cover that maintains soil moisture in the mesic microenvironments that provide suitable habitat for the Tehachapi slender salamander; however, it is not expected to affect any of the known occupied habitat or occurrences. Tejon Ranch proposes to develop a fuel management plan, as described in the HCP and Ranch-wide Land Use Agreement, which, if the HCP is approved, will be subject to Service review and approval to ensure consistency with the conservation measures described in the HCP (Dudek 2008, pp. 2-5, 2-6; Agreement 2008, pp. 4, 20). Even without the fuel management plan, fuel management activities are not expected to threaten the existence of the Tehachapi slender salamander now or in the foreseeable future because no occupied habitat is within 200 ft (61 m) of the TMV development.

If the TMV project is realized, new roads would be constructed to gain access to residential, commercial, and recreational areas. However, no new roads are planned near occupied habitat or known occurrences (ICF Jones and Stokes 2009, Figure 3-14). The TMV project does propose to implement road improvements, including an existing ranch road in Bear Trap Canyon, which is one of the canyons occupied by the salamander. This road may approach the very west end of occupied habitat in the canyon, but it is located entirely on the flat, dry terrain below the occupied

north-facing slope and veers entirely out of the canyon at that point. Any improvements to the existing road are expected to be limited because the road will be used only as an Emergency Access Road (ICF Jones and Stokes 2009, Figures 4.4-8 and 3-14; Marshall
in litt.
2009, p. 1), and any potential impact to the salamander would be at the very west end of occupied habitat. This information is also consistent with the proposed development envelope being situated away from known Tehachapi slender salamander occurrences. Although new roads or road improvements will not affect occupied habitat, they may cross potentially suitable habitat (modeled habitat) and may result in additional fragmentation of potentially suitable habitat.

Although there will be no direct impacts to the known range of the Tehachapi Mountains population (which is based on six occurrences and consists of five canyon segments totaling approximately 10.2 linear mi (16.4 km) of known occupied habitat) from the proposed development of the TMV project, the EIR lists the following potential indirect effects from construction as significant: Construction dust; increased human activity from construction workers; construction-related noise, vibration, and lighting; vehicle collisions, chemical releases, and hydrological modifications (ICF Jones and Stokes 2009, p. 4.4-156); and increased foot traffic and trail usage.

Given that this species is primarily nocturnal and spends most of the year up to 3 ft (0.9 m) underground (
i.e.,
during dry conditions), and given that impacts from construction dust would be limited to above-ground surfaces, it is unlikely to have a negative effect on the fossorial habitat of the species. Impacts from increased human activity, noise, vibrations, lighting, and vehicle collisions are not likely to have an effect on the species' population because they would be primarily limited to the development envelope (Hansen 2010 pers. comm.), which is at a minimum 0.5 mi (0.8 km) removed from any occupied Tehachapi slender salamander habitat and about 0.7 mi (1.1 km) from any known occurrence.

It is possible that chemical releases from a construction activity could affect habitat, depending on the location and time of year (
e.g.,
during the rainy season a release could be washed over a larger area, compared to a release in the dry season); however, chemical releases associated with construction are expected to be restricted to the development envelope and therefore, away from areas of occupied habitat. Even if under unusual circumstances, a chemical release was to move past the development envelope, the closest area to occupied habitat is about 0.5 mi (0.8 km), and we do not believe that any construction-related chemical release would be of sufficient quantity to extend that far.

Stormwater runoff resulting from residential and commercial development can increase water flows due to an increase in impervious surfaces and degrade water quality. Although new roads would be limited to the development envelope, and therefore at a sufficient distance from known occurrences as to not have direct effects on individual salamanders, we do not have information to accurately estimate the frequency and intensity of impacts from runoff that could potentially affect Tehachapi slender salamanders. According to the EIR, hydrological modifications from the TMV development involving stormwater runoff, siltation, and erosion are expected to be only minor (
e.g.,
less than 5 percent) (ICF Jones and Stokes 2009, p. 4.8-32; Letterly
in litt.
2011, p. 1).

Stormwater runoff from residential and commercial communities can degrade water quality. However, water quality is not expected to experience a noticeable change from existing levels of potential pollutants, including phosphorous, nitrates, ammonia, copper, lead, and zinc (ICF Jones and Stokes 2009, p. 4.8-26; Letterly
in litt.
2011, p. 1). Therefore, degradation of water quality from stormwater runoff is not expected to have a measurable impact on the Tehachapi slender salamander and its habitat.

In addition to the indirect effects identified in the TMV EIR, potential indirect effects to the Tehachapi slender salamander from increased human presence on TMV include edge effects, changes in microclimate, and increased predation. Terrestrial salamanders are impacted by edge effects. Microclimate conditions within forest edges of habitat often exhibit higher air and soil temperatures, lower soil moisture, and lower humidity compared to interior forested areas (Moseley
et al.
2009, p. 426). Due to the physiological nature of terrestrial salamanders, they are sensitive to these types of microclimate alterations, particularly to temperature and moisture changes (Moseley
et al.
2009, p. 426). Generally, more salamanders are observed with increasing distance from some edge types, which is attributed to reduced moisture and microhabitat quality (Moseley
et al.
2009, p. 426). However, edge effects from the proposed TMV development are expected to be at a sufficient distance from known occurrences as to not substantially impact the species. In addition, the Tehachapi slender salamander's semifossorial behavior further limits the negative impacts from edge effects, as the salamanders emerge to the surface during the rainy season.

Increased human residential, commercial, and recreational use of the area will likely increase the number of potential predators (
i.e.,
dogs, cats, crows, and raccoons) in developed areas. Domestic cats are known to kill amphibians although the proportion of amphibians killed by cats compared to other species is very small (Woods
et al.
2003, p. 1). Coyotes (
Canis latrans
) also occur in Kern County (see Ralls and White 1995, Cypher and Spencer 1998, Nature Alley 2010) and the Tejon Ranch (ICF Jones and Stokes 2009, p. 4.4-432), and the abundance of cats and raccoons has been found to be much lower where coyotes occur (Crooks and Soulé 1999, p. 563). Crooks and Soulé (1999, p. 565) also found that a large number of owners restrict their cats' outdoor activity when coyotes were present. In addition, the salamander's exposure to predation is very limited due to its short activity period above ground, thus we do not believe that the increased presence of predators would rise to the level of threatening the Tehachapi slender salamander now or in the foreseeable future.

Foot traffic, increased use of trails, and creation of new trails would also likely increase in the vicinity of residential development. Increased use of existing trails can result in erosion and new trails can eliminate habitat and cause erosion. The Tehachapi slender salamander habitat that would most likely be affected would be in Monroe Canyon, which is the closest to the development envelope (minimum of 0.5 mi (0.8 km)). However, foot traffic in this area and any area of potential suitable habitat would most likely be along existing dirt roads and the flatter terrain below or above the steep, talus-covered slopes occupied by the species.

The fifth occupied canyon (one occurrence) of the Tehachapi Mountains population of the Tehachapi slender salamander is Johnson Canyon on Fort Tejon SHP on the west side of the Interstate Highway 5, adjacent to a service road near the entrance to the Park (Hansen 2009, p. 28; CDPR 1989, p. 175). The habitat at this occurrence on Fort Tejon SHP shows minimal, if any, impacts. Fort Tejon SHP provides for passive recreational activities including hiking, picnicking, camping, wildlife viewing, and educational

programs; no livestock grazing is allowed. A narrow, paved road lies at the base of the occupied slope but does not cross any habitat, and there are no plans to widen or change this road. As such, we do not believe that impacts from the road (if any) threaten the existence of the species in the area. No future land use changes on Fort Tejon SHP are planned that would affect the Tehachapi slender salamander (Bylin
in litt.
2009, p. 1).

In summary, based on the best scientific and commercial information available, we conclude that current ranch-wide activities do not pose a threat to the Tehachapi Mountains population of the Tehachapi slender salamander and its habitat, nor do we anticipate such activities will pose a threat in the future. We also conclude that the proposed TMV development will avoid known occurrences of the species and all occupied habitat (
i.e.,
occupied canyon segments that make up the range of the species) on Tejon Ranch (see “Tehachapi Mountains Population” section under Factor A) and is not likely to cause any significant indirect impacts to the Tehachapi Mountains slender salamander or its habitat now or in the future.

Summary of Factor A

Livestock grazing occurs throughout the species' range (with the exception of Fort Tejon SHP), and depending on the intensity, grazing has the potential to degrade Tehachapi slender salamander habitat through trampling, soil scraping, and compaction, which can cause surface soil erosion and desiccation. However, habitat degradation in the range of the salamander is notable at only a few occurrences in Caliente Canyon. Road construction can destroy Tehachapi slender salamander habitat, but no new road construction is planned for either Caliente Canyon or the other occupied canyons that make up the Caliente Canyon population, and roads planned for the TMV project avoid occupied habitat. Erosion from existing roads through Caliente Canyon may be having a localized effect in a few areas in the occupied portion of the canyon, but the overall impact on the range of the Caliente Canyon population is at most minimal. There has been no mining activity within the Caliente Canyon area for almost 20 years, and there are no plans for mining to start again in the foreseeable future.

The one new residential and commercial development planned within the range of the species is proposed on Tejon Ranch. Tejon Ranch's proposed TMV development would remove 108 ac (44 ha) of potentially suitable habitat based on a habitat suitability model. However, the 108 ac (44 ha) are not known to be occupied by the species, and TMV is designed to avoid all occupied habitat and all known occurrences on Tejon Ranch. Indirect effects from development (
e.g.,
construction-associated impacts (lighting, noise, vibrations), increased human presence, predators, soil erosion, runoff, and edge effects) are not expected to rise to a point that would threaten the Tehachapi Mountains population of the species. We are also not aware of any existing or planned flood control projects within the range of the species. For these reasons, we conclude that cattle grazing, roads, mining, flood control projects, and commercial and residential development do not constitute a substantial threat to the Tehachapi slender salamander throughout its range now and are not likely to pose a substantial threat in the future. Therefore, we conclude that the Tehachapi slender salamander is not threatened or endangered throughout all of its range by the present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range.

Factor B: Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or Educational Purposes

We do not have any information that overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes is a threat to the Tehachapi slender salamander. Therefore, we have no information to suggest that the Tehachapi slender salamander is threatened or endangered throughout all of its range now, or within the future, by overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes.

Factor C: Disease or Predation

Little is known about predators of the Tehachapi slender salamander. The only known predator of the species is the ring-necked snake; although turkeys and pigs, present on Tejon Ranch, are known to consume amphibians. However, we have no evidence that turkeys and pigs are threatening Tehachapi slender salamanders on Tejon Ranch, and there is no evidence that they are affecting the salamanders' habitat; therefore, we do not consider them a threat to the species.

Potential indirect effects from residential and commercial development within or near Tehachapi slender salamander habitat could include an increase in human and introduced predator presence. This could potentially be the case for the Tehachapi Mountains population of the Tehachapi slender salamander, as indirect, long-term potential effects from the TMV project would include an increase in human and introduced predator presence on the Tejon Ranch. For example, there may be an increase in passive outdoor recreation by adults and children, and their pets (
e.g.,
cats). The increase in human presence may also increase the population of native amphibian predators, including raccoons (
Procyon lotor
) and various species of corvids (such as crows and jays). However, coyotes may also be more abundant near development, and as discussed previously, the abundance of cats and raccoons has been found to be much lower where coyotes occur (Crooks and Soulé 1999, p. 563). The species' nocturnal and subfossorial behavior may also reduce potential impacts from predation by corvids.

There are no reports of the Tehachapi slender salamander being infected with any disease. However, related species have been found to suffer from Chytridiomycosis, a skin infection. Chytridiomycosis is described as an epidermal infection of amphibians caused by the chytrid fungus (
Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis
). Chytridiomycosis has been implicated in mass mortalities, population declines, and extinctions of some amphibian species, but species appear to vary in their susceptibility to the disease (Blaustein
et al.
2005, p. 1460; Ouellet
et al.
2005, p. 1431). The chytrid fungus requires moisture for survival, and is most likely transmitted to amphibians by contact with infected water or other amphibians (Johnson and Speare 2003, p. 922). Chytridiomycosis was thought to be restricted to species using aquatic habitat and surface water; however, Cummer
et al.
(2005, p. 248) reported the first case of the chytrid fungus infecting a strictly terrestrial salamander. The infected Jemez Mountains salamander (
Plethodon neomexicanus
), a completely terrestrial species endemic to the Jemez Mountains of New Mexico, suggests that the chytrid fungus can survive in terrestrial habitats (Cummer
et al.
2005, p. 248). The authors note the origin of the pathogen is unknown, but hypothesize the Jemez Mountains salamander may have been directly or indirectly infected by a sympatric aquatic amphibian carrying the pathogen (Cummer
et al.
2005, p. 248). Further, these findings suggest that more amphibians are at risk of contracting the chytrid fungus than was previously believed.

Indirect effects from livestock activities may include the risk of aquatic disease transmission, such as chytrid,

from earthen stock ponds that create areas of standing surface water. Earthen stock tanks are often utilized by tiger salamanders (
Ambystoma tigrinum
) (Davidson
et al.
2003, pp. 601-607), western toads (
Bufo boreas),
Pacific treefrogs (
Hyla regilla),
and introduced bullfrogs (
Rana catesbeiana
), which are known to be vectors for disease (
i.e.,
they can carry and spread disease). It is possible that these species use adjacent upland areas and may transmit disease to the Tehachapi slender salamander in areas where they co-occur (Hansen
in litt.
2011, p. 1). However, we do not have enough information to draw conclusions on the extent or role western toads, Pacific tree frogs, and bullfrogs may play in disease transmission. Although some small-scale habitat modification is possible, livestock are managed to maintain a grassy habitat under the tree canopies, and the connection between earthen stock tanks for livestock and aquatic disease transmission is unclear. Therefore, we conclude that disease transmission from livestock is not a current threat to the salamander, nor do we believe it will be in the future.

A recent study from the University of California, Berkeley, has shown that the

chytrid fungus has infected the California slender salamander, Oregon slender salamander (
Batrachoseps wrighti
), Gabilan Mountains slender salamander (
B. gavilanensis
), and relictual slender salamander (
B. relictus
), all related species sharing the same genus as the Tehachapi slender salamander (Weinstein
in litt.
2008b, p. 1). Weinstein's study confirms that Chytridiomycosis causes California slender salamander mortality in the lab; however, individuals may fair better in the field because the population has remained stable, despite the presence of the pathogen in the wild population for a minimum of 35 years (Weinstein
in litt.
2008a, p. 1; Weinstein 2009, p. 1). Results showed that infected salamanders maintained in a dry environment in the lab were able to recover, whereas salamanders in a wet lab environment had high mortality rates (Weinstein, In press, p. 2). These findings not only confirm that the chytrid fungus can infect terrestrial species in the subgenus
Batrachoseps,
but also the possibility that salamanders may recover from the disease in dry environments.

We do not know whether the Tehachapi slender salamander has been, or will be, exposed to the chytrid fungus or that exposure would lead to transmission throughout its range. The likelihood of the Tehachapi slender salamander contracting the pathogen is lower than if it were closely associated with aquatic environments because this species is not associated with bodies of water, occurs in a characteristically dry environment, has limited chances of coming into contact with other amphibians due to its brief above-ground activity during intermittent periods during the year, and has limited dispersal abilities. To the best of our knowledge, no studies have been done to detect the pathogen in the Tehachapi slender salamander, or in the yellow-blotched salamander (also referred to as the yellow-blotched ensatina (
Ensatina eschscholtzii croceator
)) that co-occurs with both populations of the Tehachapi slender salamander (Jockusch
in litt.
2009d, pp. 1-2; Germano 2006, pp. 123-125; Hansen and Wake 2005, p. 694).

The black-bellied slender salamander, which is a close relative of the Tehachapi slender salamander and co-occurs with the Tehachapi Mountains population, is vulnerable to the chytrid fungus (Jockusch
in litt.
2009d, p. 1). Some of the black-bellied slender salamanders collected in San Luis Obispo County in the 1990s exhibited symptoms of Chytridiomycosis (Jockusch
in litt.
2009d, pp. 1-2). Weinstein later confirmed that those specimens indeed carried
Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis
(Jockusch
in litt.
2009d, p. 1). However, the infected black-bellied slender salamanders were collected in San Luis Obispo County, which is 110 mi (177 km) from the closest confirmed occurrence of the Tehachapi Mountains population of the Tehachapi slender salamander in Kern County. It is unlikely that infected black-bellied slender salamanders in San Luis Obispo County could infect individuals in Kern County due to the distance and the species' limited dispersal abilities. We do not have any evidence of infected black-bellied slender salamanders in Kern County that co-occur with the Tehachapi slender salamander.

Summary of Factor C

We have no evidence that predation is an impact to the Tehachapi slender salamander. Although there is potential for an increase in human and introduced predator presence within the vicinity of occupied salamander habitat that could result in indirect impacts to the salamander, we anticipate that the presence of coyotes and the species' nocturnal and subfossorial behavior will likely reduce potential impacts. We do not have any information to indicate that the chytrid fungus is present in either the Caliente Canyon or the Tehachapi Mountains population of the Tehachapi slender salamander or in co-occurring populations of other species that may carry this fungus. The chytrid fungus is known to have infected a closely related species, the black-bellied slender salamander. However, the infected black-bellied slender salamanders were 110 mi (177 km) from the closest confirmed occurrence of the Tehachapi slender salamander within the Tehachapi Mountains population. Although we do have information that the disease has infected other terrestrial and aquatic salamanders, we do not have any evidence that the disease is present in either the Tehachapi Mountains population or the Caliente Canyon population of the Tehachapi slender salamander, nor is there evidence that this or any other disease currently places this species at risk of extinction. In addition, we do not have any information in our files to suggest that this, or any other disease, will become a threat to either population of the Tehachapi slender salamander in the future. Therefore, we conclude that the Tehachapi slender salamander is not threatened or endangered throughout all of its range now, or in the future, by disease or predation.

Factor D: Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms

In determining whether the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms constitutes a threat to the Tehachapi slender salamander, we focused our analysis on existing Federal and State laws and regulations that apply to the species and its habitats, and that could potentially address any possible significant threats identified under the other Factors. If a threat is minor, listing may not be warranted even if existing regulatory mechanisms provide little or no protection to counter the threat. Regulatory mechanisms may preclude the need for listing if such mechanisms are judged to adequately address the threat(s) to the species such that listing is not warranted. Conversely, threats on the landscape are exacerbated when not addressed by existing regulatory mechanisms, or when the existing mechanisms are inadequate (or not adequately implemented or enforced).

Federal Protections

National Environmental Policy Act

The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321
et seq.
), as amended (NEPA), requires that all activities undertaken, authorized, or funded by Federal agencies be analyzed for potential impacts to the human environment prior to implementation. Under NEPA, all Federal agencies are

required to formally document and publicly disclose the environmental impacts of their actions and management decisions. Documentation for NEPA is provided in an environmental impact statement, an environmental assessment, or a categorical exclusion, and may be subject to administrative or judicial appeal. NEPA does not require that adverse impacts be mitigated. NEPA is required for projects with a Federal nexus (
i.e.,
projects that require a Federal permit, receive Federal funding, or are implemented by a Federal agency). Actions with no Federal nexus are not required to comply with this law. For actions with a Federal nexus, NEPA would apply regardless of the location of the action within the range of the species. Our review finds that there are no significant threats to the species on lands with a Federal nexus for any of the four other Factors.

Clean Air Act

The Clean Air Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 7401
et seq.
) directs the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to develop and enforce regulations to protect the general public from exposure to airborne contaminants that are known to be hazardous to human health. In 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that gases that cause global warming are pollutants under the Clean Air Act, and that the EPA has the authority to regulate carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases (
Massachusetts et al.
v.
EPA
2007 [Case No. 05-1120]).

The EPA published a regulation to require reporting of greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel suppliers and industrial gas suppliers, direct greenhouse gas emitters, and manufacturers of heavy-duty and off-road vehicles and engines (74 FR 56260; October 30, 2009). The rule, effective December 29, 2009, does not require control of greenhouse gases; rather it requires only that sources above certain threshold levels monitor and report emissions. On December 7, 2009, the EPA found under section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act that the current and projected concentrations of six greenhouse gases in the atmosphere threaten public health and welfare. EPA's finding itself does not impose requirements on any industry or other entities, but is a prerequisite for any future regulations developed by the EPA. At this time, it is not known what regulatory mechanisms will be developed in the future as an outgrowth of EPA's finding or how effective they would be in addressing climate change. Therefore, the Clean Air Act and its existing implementing regulations do not currently address climate change effects on wildlife, plants, and ecosystems. However, our status review did not reveal information that indicates that climate change is a significant threat to the Tehachapi slender salamander now or within the foreseeable future (see Factor E).

Federal Land Policy and Management Act

As noted earlier, three occurrences of the Caliente Canyon population of Tehachapi slender salamander are on BLM land, while there are no occurrences of the Tehachapi Mountains population on Federal land. Although strongly oriented toward multiple use, the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, which is BLM's organic act, requires that public lands be managed in a manner that will protect the quality of scientific, scenic, historical, ecological, environmental, air and atmospheric, water resource, and archeological values; that, where appropriate, will preserve and protect certain public lands in their natural condition; that will provide food and habitat for fish and wildlife and domestic animals; and that will provide for outdoor recreation, human occupancy and use. Typically, land management plans are renewed every 15 to 20 years (Kuritsubo
in litt.
2010a, p. 1). This law does not require specific protection for the Tehachapi slender salamander against potential threats that may occur on BLM land, such as impacts from grazing. One of the three occurrences on BLM land shows some moderate, localized habitat degradation from cattle trampling, as discussed under Factor A. However, our status review did not reveal information that indicates that livestock grazing is a significant threat to the Tehachapi slender salamander throughout its range (see Factor A).

Sensitive Species Designation by the Bureau of Land Management

As noted earlier, the Tehachapi slender salamander is classified by BLM as a sensitive species. As stated in BLM's Manual, Section 6840, BLM Sensitive Species are managed to promote their conservation and to minimize the likelihood and need for listing under the Act (Kuritsubo
in litt.
2009a, p. 1). BLM's Bakersfield, California Field Office implements BLM's National and State policy directives (California BLM Manual supplement 6840.2) by evaluating projects for potential Tehachapi slender salamander habitat prior to implementing or authorizing activities that may affect the species (Kuritsubo
in litt.
2009a, pp. 1-2). If potential habitat is present, then BLM designs the project or places stipulations on the authorization such that impacts to salamander habitat are avoided and/or minimized (Kuritsubo
in litt.
2007, p. 1). BLM has screened and surveyed for Tehachapi slender salamander habitat for several projects on their lands that fall within the range of the species as part of NEPA compliance.

Two of the three Tehachapi slender salamander occurrences located on BLM land are within an existing grazing allotment (Kuritsubo
in litt.
2010b, p. 1); the third location on BLM land is in an area that is not leased for grazing (BLM 2011, p. 1). BLM is required by Federal grazing regulations (43 CFR 4100) to periodically (approximately every 5 to 10 years) evaluate all grazing allotments. If grazing is determined to have adverse impacts to Tehachapi slender salamander habitat, BLM regulations require that BLM take action to modify the grazing management to ensure that the negative impact is addressed (Kuritsubo 2009b, pers. comm.). As described in Factor A, we did not find that cattle grazing and trampling are significant threats to the Caliente Canyon population of the Tehachapi slender salamander or its habitat. BLM's land use management plan for this area is in the process of being updated, and is still in draft. All alternatives in the draft plan include measures to provide habitat for sensitive species, including the Tehachapi slender salamander (Kuritsubo
in litt.
2010a, p. 1). There are no plans for the allotment to change within the next 15 to 20 years (Kuritsubo
in litt.
2010a, p. 1; Kuritsubo
in litt.
2009b, p. 1; Kuritsubo 2009b, 2010, pers. comm.).

BLM's organic act and designation of the Tehachapi slender salamander as a sensitive species provide some protection for the species where it occurs on BLM land. However, the benefits to the species are limited because BLM land within the range of the salamander is limited to the Caliente Canyon population and makes up only a small portion (3 of 24 occupied occurrences, or 12.5 percent) of the species' entire range.

State Protections in California

California Endangered Species Act

The Tehachapi slender salamander is listed as threatened under CESA (CDFG 2009, p. 7). CESA provides protections for the Tehachapi slender salamander both through the prohibition against take of State-listed species without authorization (
i.e.,
2081 incidental take permit) and the requirement that any

take authorized under the statute must be fully mitigated (14 CCR § 783.4). Under CESA, private landowners who wish to implement projects that would result in take of State-listed species must obtain a 2081 permit. Similar to section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Federal Endangered Species Act, 2081 permit applicants must develop an HCP that explains how the impacts of taking Tehachapi slender salamanders would be fully mitigated. HCPs developed to support a 2081 permit request would include conservation measures, often in the form of habitat conservation, to address the loss of Tehachapi slender salamanders. In our experience working with the CDFG in reviewing HCPs on private land in support of incidental take permit applications under CESA and the Federal Endangered Species Act, such plans require measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate the impacts of the taking, including mortality resulting from habitat removal.

CESA offers protections for the Tehachapi slender salamander on private and State-owned land, comprising the majority of lands that are known to be occupied by the species (
i.e.,
21 of the 24 occupied occurrences or 87.5 percent). CESA does not necessarily constrain activities on the small portion (12.5 percent) of occupied Tehachapi slender salamander habitat on Federal lands within the Caliente Canyon population. However, as noted above, regulations are in place that provide some protection to Tehachapi slender salamander habitat on BLM land.

California Environmental Quality Act

Another State law that may address threats to the Tehachapi slender salamander is the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). CEQA requires review of any project that is undertaken, funded, or permitted by the State or a local governmental agency. If significant effects are identified, the lead agency has the option of requiring mitigation through changes in the project or to decide that overriding considerations make mitigation infeasible (CEQA section 21002). In the latter case, projects may be approved that cause significant environmental impacts, including impacts to listed species and their habitat. Protection of listed species through CEQA is, therefore, dependent upon the discretion of the lead agency involved.

Tejon Ranch's proposed TMV project has undergone CEQA review. The TMV Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) found that construction activities could result in significant impacts to the Tehachapi Mountain population of the Tehachapi slender salamander without the implementation of specific species and habitat avoidance and mitigation measures (ICF Jones and Stokes 2009, pp. 4.4-102, 4.4-156) (see discussion under Factor A). However, based on our own analysis (described in Factor A) we do not concur with the EIR's conclusions regarding significant impacts to the species, and find that the project design avoids direct impacts, and any indirect impacts that may occur would not likely rise to a level that would threaten the species.

CEQA applies to the entire range of the species. As of the date of this finding, we are not aware of any other projects proposed or planned within the range of the Caliente Canyon population that would require CEQA analysis.

Summary of Factor D

Twenty of the known occupied occurrences of the Tehachapi slender salamander occur on privately owned land, three occur on BLM land and one occurs on State land. Almost all of the private land and two of the three areas on BLM lands (the third area is not part of a BLM allotment) are primarily used for grazing. We did not find that grazing poses a significant threat to the Tehachapi slender salamander or its habitat and thus do not consider existing regulatory mechanisms, including CEQA, CESA, NEPA, FLPMA, and BLM's classification of the Tehachapi slender salamander as a sensitive species, inadequate to address the impacts of grazing on the species and its habitat. If such threats were to emerge in the future due to a change in grazing intensity, then CEQA and CESA would apply on private land and require authorization for take of Tehachapi slender salamander. Additionally, NEPA, FLPMA, and BLM regulations and policies would apply on Federal land and require that potential impacts from grazing or any other development be identified and measures implemented to avoid or minimize such impacts.

The TMV project within Tejon Ranch is the one planned residential and commercial development proposed within the vicinity of known occurrences (5 out of 24 occupied occurrences or approximately 20.8 percent) in the foreseeable future (Kern County
in litt.
2009, pp. 1-9). The TMV project has been designed to avoid all known occurrences and occupied habitat of the Tehachapi slender salamander and to minimize any indirect effects on the species and its habitat.

In summary, we conclude that the threats to the Tehachapi slender salamander and its habitat on Federal, State, and private lands from grazing and other existing uses, and on private lands from proposed development are low. Existing Federal regulatory mechanisms provide protection for the species on the small portion of Tehachapi slender salamander habitat on BLM lands, and existing State laws provide protection on State and private lands from these threats. We did not find the current limitations of implementing the Clean Air Act to be a significant threat to the Tehachapi slender salamander. We did not find any threats to the Tehachapi slender salamander associated with Factors B or C that would warrant protection through a regulatory mechanism. Climate change and stochastic events pose potentially minor threats to the species (see Factor E); however, the current limitations of regulatory mechanisms addressing these potential threats do not pose a significant threat to the species now or in the foreseeable future. Therefore, we conclude that the species is not threatened now or in the future throughout its range by the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms.

Factor E: Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting the Continued Existence of the Species

Under Factor E, we consider whether climate change and stochastic events threaten the Tehachapi slender salamander. Stochastic events are rare, chance events such as epidemics; prolonged drought; and large, severe wildfires.

Climate Change

The term “climate” refers to an area's long-term average weather patterns, or more specifically as the mean and variation of surface variables such as temperature, precipitation, and wind, whereas “climate change” refers to any change in climate over time, whether due to natural variability or human activity (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2007, pp. 6, 871). Although changes in climate occur continuously over geological time, changes are now occurring at an accelerated rate. For example, at continental, regional, and ocean-basin scales, recent observed changes in long-term trends include: a substantial increase in precipitation in eastern parts of North America and South America, northern Europe, and northern and central Asia; declines in precipitation in the Mediterranean, southern Africa, and parts of southern Asia; and an increase in intense tropical cyclone activity in

the North Atlantic since about 1970 (IPCC 2007, p. 30). Examples of observed changes in the physical environment include an increase in global average sea level and declines in mountain glaciers and average snow cover in both the northern and southern hemispheres (IPCC 2007, p. 30).

The IPCC used Atmosphere-Ocean General Circulation Models and various greenhouse gas emissions scenarios to make projections of climate change globally and for broad regions through the 21st century (Meehl
et al.
2007, p. 753; Randall
et al.
2007, pp. 596-599). Highlights of these projections include: (1) It is virtually certain there will be warmer and more frequent hot days and nights over most of the earth's land areas; (2) it is very likely there will be increased frequency of warm spells and heat waves over most land areas, and the frequency of heavy precipitation events will increase over most areas; and (3) it is likely that increases will occur in the incidence of extreme high sea level (excludes tsunamis), intense tropical cyclone activity, and the area affected by droughts in various regions of the world (Solomon
et al.
2007, p. 8). More recent analyses using a different global model and comparing other emissions scenarios resulted in similar projections of global temperature change (Prinn
et al.
2011, pp. 527, 529).

As is the case with all models, there is uncertainty associated with projections due to assumptions used, data available, and features of the models. Despite this, however, under all models and emissions scenarios the overall surface air temperature trajectory is one of increased warming in comparison to current conditions (Meehl
et al.
2007, p. 762; Prinn
et al.
2011, p. 527). Climate models and associated assumptions, data, and analytical techniques continue to be refined, and thus projections are refined as more information becomes available (
e.g.,
Rahmstorf 2010 entire). For instance, observed actual emissions of greenhouses gases, which are a key influence on climate change, are tracking at the mid- to higher levels of the various scenarios used for making projections, and some expected changes in conditions (
e.g.,
melting of Arctic sea ice) are occurring more rapidly than initially projected (Raupach
et al.
2007, Figure 1, p. 10289; Comiso
et al.
2008, p. 1; Pielke
et al.
2008, entire; LeQuere
et al.
2009, Figure 1a, p. 2; Manning
et al.
2010, Figure 1, p. 377; Polyak
et al.
2010, p. 1797). In short, the best scientific and commercial data available indicates that increases in average global surface air temperature and several other changes are occurring and likely will continue for many decades and in some cases for centuries (
e.g.
Solomon
et al.
2007, pp. 822-829; Church 2010, p. 411).

Changes in climate can have a variety of direct and indirect impacts on species, and can exacerbate the effects of other threats. For instance, climate-associated environmental changes to the landscape, such as decreased stream flows, increased water temperatures, reduced snowpacks, and increased fire frequency, or other changes occurring individually or in combination, may affect species and their habitats. The vulnerability of a species to climate change impacts is a function of the species' sensitivity to those changes, its exposure to those changes, and its adaptive capacity (IPCC 2007, p. 883). As described above, in evaluating the status of a species the Service uses the best scientific and commercial data available, and this includes consideration of direct and indirect effects of climate change. As is the case with all other stressors we assess, if the status of a species is expected to be affected that does not necessarily mean it is a threatened or endangered species as defined under the Act.

We recognize that temperatures in southern California where the Tehachapi slender salamander occurs are likely to increase, which could potentially negatively affect the Tehachapi slender salamander. As discussed in the “Biology and Natural History” section, the Tehachapi slender salamander's surface activity, during which the species forages and likely finds mates, is limited to periods with high surface moisture and above freezing temperatures. Increased average surface temperatures could cause soils used by Tehachapi slender salamanders to become drier earlier in the year or for longer periods, which may further limit the amount of time they can remain at the surface. If the period when surface moisture is sufficient for activity becomes too short, then the habitat may no longer be suitable for the species.

It is especially difficult with currently available models to make meaningful predictions of climate change for specific, local areas such as the small portion of California where the Tehachapi slender salamander occurs (Parmesan and Matthews 2005, p. 354). However, a climate change stress report for the Tehachapi Mountains (TNC 2009) projects varying levels of drought stress by the end of the 21st Century. The following examples demonstrate possible changes in precipitation and temperature from averaging 15 global climate models (TNC 2009, no page numbers):

(1) The two most likely possibilities of precipitation change are a 40 percent projection that the area will see little (−1 to +1 in (−2.5 to 2.5 cm)) change in precipitation, and a 53 percent projection that the area will receive between 1 and 5 in (2.5 and 12.7 cm)) less precipitation.

(2) The two most likely possibilities of temperature change are a 53 percent projection that the temperature of the area will increase by greater than 10 degrees Fahrenheit (5.6 degrees Celcius), and a 27 percent projection that the temperature of the area will increase by 8 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit (4.4 to 5.6 degrees Celsuis).

On the other hand, Kelly and Goulden (2008, p. 11824) predict that the amount and duration of precipitation may increase for California (in general), and, if this occurs, surface moisture could be maintained despite the warmer temperatures that are predicted. In addition, warming may reduce the degree and duration of extreme cold at higher elevations. Under these conditions, the duration of surface activity for the Tehachapi slender salamander may remain the same.

Climate change can affect plants and animals in a number of ways, including changes in distribution, population size, behavior, and even changes in physiological and physical characteristics (Parmesan and Mathews 2005, p. 373). A number of published studies predict that temperature and precipitation trends may change in the near future, and some describe how biotic communities may respond to such changes (Parmesan and Mathews 2005, pp. 333-374; IPCC 2007a, pp. 1-21; IPCC 2007b, pp. 1-22; Kelly and Goulden 2008, pp. 11823-11826; Miller
et al.
2008, pp. 1-17; Loarie
et al.
2008, pp. 1-10; Jetz
et al.
2007, pp. 1211-1216). During a 30-year study in Southern California's Santa Rosa Mountains, Kelly and Goulden (2008, pp. 11823-11824) observed a geographic shift in plant distributions to higher elevations that was uniform across elevation gradients and that corresponded with an observed increase in surface temperatures and variability in precipitation over the same timeframe. Similarly, a study in California's Cascade and Sierra Nevada Ranges found that plant species tended to move towards higher elevations in response to increasing temperatures regardless of the presence of suitable habitat to the north or south (Loarie
et al.
2008, p. 3).

Based on the research on plant communities in montane habitats by Kelly and Goulden (2008, pp. 11823-11824) and Loarie
et al.
(2008, p. 3),

populations of Tehachapi slender salamanders may respond to climate change by attempting to shift to higher elevations to follow the shifting vegetation patterns. However, we cannot predict the consequences of any potential shift because there is likely a complex suite of indirect effects for any shift in distribution. For example, the mesic microclimates that define suitable Tehachapi slender salamander habitat are dependent on a combination of vegetation cover (providing shade), slope, and aspect (affecting the amount of sun exposure on a hillside). The more a hillside is exposed to sun, the more it experiences heat and evapotranspiration (and thus, desiccation). For example, steeper north-facing slopes experience less time in the sun than gradual south-facing slopes. In addition, the upper slopes of north-facing hillsides are exposed to sun for longer periods than north-facing canyon bottoms.

Populations of Tehachapi slender salamanders may be limited to shifting their range up-canyon to north-facing slopes at higher elevations. The ability of a population to shift up-canyon would depend on the availability of contiguous (or closely spaced) habitat patches that would provide a movement corridor. We do not expect that the species would be able to shift to different canyons at higher altitudes because of the limited dispersal ability of individuals and the presence of rugged and unsuitable habitat that occurs between most canyons. Also, shifting farther up the slopes that are currently occupied could be limited because the upper reaches of a hillside would be more exposed to sunlight, and thus to increased evapotranspiration and dry surface cover, which are considered unsuitable for Tehachapi slender salamander.

It is possible that some of the Tehachapi slender salamander's range could be reduced (
i.e.,
suitable habitat that is contiguous with the known occurrences could disappear from the lower elevations or from more mesic habitat patches), especially if both temperature increases and precipitation declines. Depending on the degree of temperature rise and precipitation decline, some loss of habitat and reduction in range is likely; however, potential loss of habitat or a range reduction could be compensated for in those areas where up-canyon shifts in distribution are possible.

Overall, the limited range of the Tehachapi slender salamander makes it vulnerable to potential climate change impacts such as habitat alteration (Jetz
et al.
2007, pp. 1211-1216; Parmesan and Mathews 2005, p. 373) or fragmentation. Habitat fragmentation resulting from warmer, drier conditions could make it difficult for Tehachapi slender salamanders to travel between habitat patches. If temperatures potentially increase and precipitation decreases in the forseeable future (as discussed above), one can expect changes in vegetation such as a shift in vegetation to higher elevations or a reduction of suitable habitat and possibly a reduction in the range of the species. Vegetation changes within the range of the Tehachapi slender salamander will likely be most prevalent in more open, montane habitat that is not representative of the vegetation on the lower, most heavily shaded portions of north-facing slopes where the salamander occurs (TNC 2009, p. 4). Thus, these lower, north-facing slopes may not be altered or fragmented to the degree that the open, montane habitat could be, resulting in the salamander's habitat (
i.e.,
the current known occurrences and the contiguous suitable habitat that makes up the range of the species) remaining relatively stable and acting as refugia for the salamander.

In summary, available climate models predict average temperatures in the Tehachapi Mountains are likely to increase in the future, although there is less certainty as to whether precipitation will remain the same or decrease. However, there is a great deal of uncertainty as to how these changes may affect the Tehachapi slender salamander. How the Tehachapi slender salamander may react to these changes will be the result of a complex array of factors including the degree of temperature increase, the decline in precipitation, if any; the degree to which the specific habitat requirements of the salamander (such as the timing and duration of soil moisture, and under- and overstory composition) will be affected; changes and shifts in plant diversity and abundance; and the ability and opportunity of salamander populations to shift over time.

It is possible that the range of some populations may be reduced, while others are able to shift up-canyon to higher slopes. It may also be that the vegetation on the cooler, lower portions of the north-facing slopes occupied by the salamander may not be subject to the same changes predicted for more open, warmer, and drier slopes. Because of these uncertainties, any prediction about the potential impact of climate change on the Tehachapi slender salamander will be highly speculative. However, with those uncertainties in mind, we believe that, although some loss of habitat in the more exposed portions of the canyons currently occupied by the salamander will occur because of climate change, habitat will remain in the lower, most-shaded portions to support the salamander and in some cases the salamander may be able to shift within the canyon in response to climate change.

In addition to the uncertainties discussed above, habitat loss due to potential future human encroachment could exacerbate the potential effects of climate change by both reducing the availability of suitable habitat the species can move to and increasing the distance between habitat patches (Jetz
et al.
2007, pp. 1211-1216; Parmesan and Mathews 2005, p. 373). As described under Factor A above and based on the best information currently available, TMV is the one development with County approval near Tehachapi slender salamander occurrences, and this project is not expected to impact the salamander's occurrences nor the adjacent contiguous suitable habitat that makes up the range of the Tehachapi Mountains population of the species. We do not anticipate significant impacts to the species across its range as a result of cumulative effects from human encroachment and climate change due to a combination of the ecology of the species (
e.g.,
its ability to retreat to underground refugia, minimal surface time during the moist periods of the year, generation time) and because the TMV development is designed to avoid all known occurrences and occupied habitat (see “Climate Change” discussion above under Factor E, “Tehachapi Mountains Population” discussion under Factor A, and the
Biology and Natural History
section).

Stochastic Events

Under Factor E, we also consider whether three risks, represented by demographic, genetic, and environmental stochastic events, are substantive enough to threaten the continued existence of the Tehachapi slender salamander.

In basic terms, demographic stochasticity is defined by chance changes in the population growth rate for the species (Gilpin and Soulé 1986, p. 27). Population growth rates are influenced by individual birth and death rates (Gilpin and Soulé 1986, p. 27), immigration and emigration rates, as well as changes in population sex ratios. Natural variation in the survival and reproductive success of individuals and chance disequilibrium of sex ratios may act in concert to contribute to demographic stochasticity (Gilpin and Soulé 1986, p. 27).

Genetic stochasticity is caused by changes in gene frequencies due to genetic drift, and diminished genetic diversity, and effects due to inbreeding (
i.e.,
inbreeding depression) (Lande 1995, p. 786). Inbreeding can have individual or population-level consequences either by increasing the phenotypic expression (the outward appearance, or observable structure, function, or behavior of a living organism) of recessive, deleterious alleles or by reducing the overall fitness of individuals in the population (Shaffer 1981, p. 131).

Environmental stochasticity is defined as the susceptibility of small, isolated populations of wildlife species to natural levels of environmental variability and related “catastrophic” events (
e.g.,
disease epidemics, prolonged drought, wildfire) (Young 1994, pp. 410-412; Mangel and Tier 1994, p. 612; Dunham
et al.
1999, p. 9). Each risk will be analyzed specifically for the Tehachapi slender salamander.

As a whole, the Tehachapi slender salamander is considered a naturally rare species, due to its restricted and endemic geographic distribution and specific habitat requirements and is likely vulnerable to the threat of genetic stochasticity. The two populations of the Tehachapi slender salamander have relatively small geographic ranges and limited dispersal abilities, and we do believe that any contact between the two populations is unlikely becau

[Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.]

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A2011-25522. Public record. Not legal advice.