Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of Endangered Status for the Hine's Emerald Dragonfly (Somatochlora hineana)

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

50 CFR Part 17

RIN 1018-AC09

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of

Endangered Status for the Hine's Emerald Dragonfly (Somatochlora

hineana)

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior Department.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) determines the

Hine's emerald dragonfly (Somatochlora hineana) to be an endangered

species pursuant to the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as

amended. Historically, this dragonfly was reported from sites in

Indiana and Ohio. Recent reports indicate that it is currently present

at only seven small sites within Cook, DuPage, and Will Counties in

Illinois, and at six sites in Door County, Wisconsin. This species is

threatened primarily by habitat loss and modification. This rule

implements the Federal protection provisions afforded by the Act to the

Hine's emerald dragonfly.

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 26, 1995.

[[Page 5268]] ADDRESSES: The complete file for this rule is available

for inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Regional Office, Division of Endangered

Species, Bishop Henry Whipple Federal Building, One Federal Drive, Fort

Snelling, Minnesota 55111-4056.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Carlita Shumate (see ADDRESSES

section) or by telephone (612/725-3276).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The Hine's emerald dragonfly, also known as the Ohio emerald

dragonfly, was described in 1931 from seven adults collected June 7 and

14, 1929, and July 4, 1930, near Indian Lake, Logan County, Ohio

(Williamson 1931). It is a dragonfly (class Insecta, order Odonata)

with bright, emerald-green eyes, body size ranging 60-65 mm (ca. 2.5

inches) in length, and wing span of 80-85 mm (ca. 3.3 inches). The

adult is distinguished from other adults in the genus Somatochlora by

its metallic green color with two distinct creamy-yellow lateral

stripes, the clasper-like appendages at the end of the abdomen in the

male, and the shape of the vulvar lamina in the female.

Cashatt and Vogt (1990) indicated that the Illinois habitat of the

Hine's emerald dragonfly consists of complex wetlands with small,

calcareous or underlying limestone bedrock, and shallow, spring-fed

streams that drain into wet meadows and cattail marshes. These marshes

are found primarily along the Des Plaines River drainage in Illinois.

Wisconsin habitat consists of small, calcareous, marshy streams and

associated cattail marshes on dolomite bedrock.

Price (1958) reported collecting a total of 21 specimens in

Williams County, Ohio from Mud Lake in 1949 (now Mud Lake State Nature

Preserve) and Bridgewater Township in 1956; and from the Toledo Oak

Openings Metropark in 1952, 1953, and 1956 (referred to as Oak Openings

State Park by Price) Lucas County, Ohio. Until recently, the species

was reported only from Ohio and Indiana (Montgomery 1953, Bick 1983).

Recent investigations indicate that the species has apparently been

extirpated from Ohio. The species' status in Indiana is currently

uncertain. An adult male was documented to be the last collected

specimen from Gary, Indiana, on June 22, 1945 (Montgomery 1953, Bick

1983, Cashatt and Sims 1993).

No additional information on the distribution of this species was

available until 1990, when the Service supported investigations in

Wisconsin by Vogt and Cashatt (1990), in Illinois by Cashatt and Vogt

(1990), and in Michigan by Vogt (1991). These investigations confirmed

the presence of remnant populations in Wisconsin and Illinois. In

Wisconsin, Vogt and Cashatt (1990) surveyed 27 potential sites in nine

eastern counties. They found the species at six sites in Door County,

and the sites are roughly on about one-third of private, State, and

private (non-profit) conservation lands. Twenty-one sites were surveyed

in Michigan with no new occurrences found. In Illinois, Cashatt and

Vogt (1990) surveyed 28 potential sites in five counties and reported

the dragonfly present at five sites in Cook, DuPage, and Will Counties.

Within these three counties, two sites are on private lands and the

remaining sites are on public lands. The Service also supported

additional investigations in Illinois by Cashatt and Vogt (1991),

Cashatt, Sims, and Wiker (1992), and in Wisconsin by Vogt and Cashatt

(1991), and Smith (1993). Cashatt and Sims (1993) conducted further

surveys and located two relatively small sites in Cook County, Illinois

with one site each on private and public land, bringing the total

number of Illinois sites to seven.

Hine's emerald dragonfly is listed as endangered by the

International Union for the Conservation of Nature, is on the Illinois

State endangered species list, will be proposed for listing as

endangered in Wisconsin, and has been assigned Global Element Rank of

G1G2 (critically imperiled globally) by The Nature Conservancy.

Previous Federal Action

On May 22, 1984, the Service published in the Federal Register

Notice of Review (49 FR 21664) its first list of invertebrate animal

species being considered for listing under the Act. Hine's emerald

dragonfly (under the common name of Ohio emerald dragonfly) was

designated a category 2* species with its range consisting of Ohio and

Indiana. Category 2 includes those taxa for which proposing to list as

endangered or threatened is possibly appropriate, but for which

substantial data on biological vulnerability and threats are not

currently available to support proposed rules. The asterisk indicated

that authentic records had not been obtained since 1963 and that some

of the taxa in this category were possibly extinct. The January 6,

1989, Notice of Review (54 FR 554) assigned Hine's emerald dragonfly to

category 2, and on November 21, 1991, (56 FR 58804) the dragonfly was

reassigned to category 1. Category 1 includes species for which the

Service now possesses sufficient information to support a listing as

threatened or endangered.

On October 4, 1993, the Service published (58 FR 51604) a proposal

to list Hine's emerald dragonfly as an endangered species. A notice (58

FR 64927) extending the public comment period and public hearing

request deadline was published on December 10, 1993, to provide

sufficient time for submission of comments and requests for public

hearings. A notice of a public hearing and reopening of the comment

period was published May 12, 1994 (59 FR 24678), and the public hearing

was held May 25, 1994. Based on status surveys, documentation

addressing the fragmented habitat, the small size and disjunct

distribution of the remnant populations, and the immediacy of threats

to the remnant populations, the Service determines that the species

warrants protection under the Act.

Summary of Comments and Recommendations

In the October 4, 1993, proposed rule (58 FR 51604) and associated

notifications, all interested parties were invited to submit factual

reports or information that may contribute to the development of a

final rule. The comment period was reopened and extended until January

3, 1994, (58 FR 64927) to accommodate submission of comments and

requests for public hearings. Appropriate State agencies, county

governments, Federal agencies, scientific organizations, and other

interested parties were contacted and invited to comment. Newspaper

notices inviting general public comment were published in the Chicago

Tribune (Chicago, Illinois) on November 10, 1993, and the Green Bay

Press Gazette (Green Bay, Wisconsin) on November 10 and December 9,

1993.

A total of 50 comments, including four State agencies, one county

representative, ten industrial and pest control companies, six

scientific organizations and environmental group representatives, and

29 individuals, were received; 33 of those comments supported, none

opposed, and 17 were neutral on the proposed action. One of the

supporting comments had seven signatures, and three of the supporting

comments had two signatures each.

A public hearing was requested on December 20, 1993, by Mr. Jerome

M. Viste, representing the Door County Environmental Council,

Incorporated, and Mr. George M. Reynolds, representing Reynolds &

Company. Notices announcing the hearing were published in the Green Bay

Press Gazette (Wisconsin) on May 12, 1994, the Chicago Tribune

(Illinois) and the [[Page 5269]] Door County Advocate (Sturgeon Bay,

Wisconsin) on May 13, 1994. The hearing was held in the General Meeting

Room (A150) of the Door County Courthouse, 421 Nebraska Street,

Sturgeon Bay, Wisconsin on May 25, 1994, with 27 attendees. Fifteen

comments were received during the hearing. Two comments were in

opposition to the listing, ten were supportive, and three were neutral.

The hearing consisted of brief overviews of the Act as it pertained to

the listing process, prohibited activities, permit requirements, and

the status, distribution and biology of Hine's emerald dragonfly; a

statement session by 13 attendees; and a question and answer session

that raised 12 issues regarding the proposed listing.

Thirteen written comments were received following the Federal

Register notice that reopened the comment period to accommodate the

public hearing. Ten comments supporting, three neutral, and none

opposing the listing proposal were received.

Comments updating the data presented in Summary, Background and

Summary of Factors Affecting the Species are incorporated in those

sections of this final rule. Written comments presented at the public

hearing and those received during the comment periods with the

Service's response to each are discussed in the following summary.

Comments of a similar nature or point are grouped into a number of

general issues.

Issue 1--How is the range of the species determined? Since recent

surveys extended the range, the listing may be premature until

additional habitats and additional localities are surveyed to make

certain there are no additional populations.

Service Response--The range of the Hine's emerald dragonfly was

determined based on the best scientific and commercial data available.

The Service, in cooperation with the States of Illinois, Indiana,

Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin, conducted several studies to determine

the status of the dragonfly. The scientists who conducted these studies

first examined historical records on the distribution of the dragonfly

to identify sites that were known to support the dragonfly. These sites

were re-visited to determine if they still supported Hine's emerald

dragonflies. Status surveys were also conducted in other midwestern

States, like Michigan, that were outside of the historic range of the

dragonfly, but supported potentially suitable habitat. To date, status

surveys have been conducted throughout the historical range of the

Hine's emerald dragonfly and elsewhere in the midwest that had similar

habitat. The Service will continue searching for the dragonfly in new

locations; however, based on the best scientific and commercial data

available, any new populations are likely to be small and located in

highly fragmented or degraded habitats and would not change the current

recommendation to list this species as endangered.

Issue 2--If listed, collection is prohibited. Listing any insect is

counterproductive for those trained in dragonfly identification; a

specimen is needed when gathering information on the species.

Service Response--The Act prohibits ``take'' of an endangered

species, which includes a prohibition against collecting endangered

species. However, the Act allows the Service to issue permits that

allow collection for scientific purposes or to enhance the propagation

or survival of listed species. The Service will work with the

scientific community to develop survey techniques that do not require

voucher specimens, but can issue permits to authorize voucher specimens

as part of studies that contribute to improving the status of the

Hine's emerald dragonfly. Procedures for obtaining such permits are

found in 50 CFR 17.22 (see ``Available Conservation Measures'').

Issue 3--How does the Service justify spending dollars to list and

enforce the endangered species activity for the Hine's emerald

dragonfly which has already survived many other adverse elements? Tax

dollars should be used in creating more apartments, jobs and helping

the homeless.

Service Response--Although the Hine's emerald dragonfly may have

survived a lot of environmental change during its history, its

continued existence is now threatened by human actions that are

altering the environment much faster than the environmental change the

dragonfly would have experienced in the past. The Hine's emerald

dragonfly depends on wetlands and spring-fed streams that feed larger

bodies of water in its range; it is endangered by the destruction of

those habitats and water quality degradation. Efforts to recover this

species will focus on protecting its habitat and improving the quality

of the water that flows into its habitat. By following Congress'

direction to conserve the ecosystems on which this species depends, the

Service will try to protect and improve the quality of waters in

habitats that support the dragonfly. The Service believes that any such

improvements in water quality will benefit not only the dragonfly, but

any human populations that live near or depend on those waters as a

source of drinking water, recreational opportunity, or esthetic

pleasure.

Issue 4--Designate critical habitat throughout its range and

especially in the Three Springs watershed.

Service Response--Designated critical habitat are areas of habitat,

land, water and air space essential to listed species for survival and

recovery. On the basis of the best scientific and commercial data

available, the Service must prepare an analysis that considers the

economic and other impacts of any proposed designated areas. Through

review of this information, the Service will conclude whether critical

habitat designation is prudent and determinable. The available data has

not allowed the Service to identify proposed critical habitat at this

time.

Issue 5--Immediately draft a recovery plan.

Service Response--Recovery plans, in accordance with section 4(f)

of the Act, are developed subsequent to a species being listed.

Issue 6--Listing would impact a State mandated mission to control

mosquitoes in Illinois.

Service Response--The Service will work with State and other

Federal agencies to establish guidelines and measures to avoid and

minimize adverse affects to allow mosquito control programs to proceed.

Issue 7--The Service should implement an emergency rule to list the

Hine's emerald dragonfly as endangered since the one metapopulation in

Illinois will be compromised if listing would take a year to complete.

Service Response--Emergency listing is considered only if

significant take or habitat destruction will occur prior to completing

the normal listing process. A review of the existing threats to the

dragonfly does not indicate that significant take or habitat

destruction will occur before the effective date of this listing.

Issue 8--Will qualified, expert taxonomists be used to confirm the

presence and extent of the dragonfly, so that decisions regarding the

listing and protection of the dragonfly will be based on good data?

Service Response--Yes. The Service has supported investigations in

Wisconsin and Illinois conducted by Dr. Everett Cashatt (Illinois State

Museum) and Mr. Tim Vogt (The Nature Conservancy), who are both

recognized as qualified entomologists with expertise in Odonata. They

have conducted several extensive surveys and provided the Service with

data that support this final rule. Additional information has also been

obtained from Mr. Bill Smith of the Wisconsin [[Page 5270]] Department

of Natural Resources' Bureau of Endangered Resources, as well as other

qualified biologists.

Issue 9--What determines the extent of the area that will be

covered by the listing? It would seem that the area should be defined

as narrowly as reasonable to protect the dragonfly but not overly broad

so that mosquito and other insect control work could continue as usual.

This would be especially important in a large urban area like Chicago

and its suburbs with its wide diversity.

Service Response--This listing will protect the Hine's emerald

dragonfly in those areas it currently occurs. Within that distribution,

the specific areas that need to be protected will be determined on a

case-by-case basis. The Service will work with State and local insect

control agencies to determine how the listing will affect their

activities.

Issue 10--It is unclear what mosquito control strategies could be

used within the protected habitat areas. It would be important that

restrictions on the use of various pesticides and other control methods

be specific and narrow, enough to protect the dragonfly but not so

broad as to prevent control of mosquitoes. In particular, Bacillus

thuringiensis ssp. israelensis (Bti) and methoprene have been shown to

control mosquitoes with little effect on non-target organisms. It is

our hope that materials like Bti, methoprene, and others with little

non-target effects could continue to be used in protected habitats, and

that materials be restricted only if they have a proven detrimental

effect on the dragonfly nymph.

Service Response--Mosquito control measures that are known to

affect only target organisms are not likely to be affected by this

listing. Control measures that are not known to affect dragonflies in

the Order Odonata are also not likely to be affected by this listing.

Other measures will have to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. The

Service will work with State and local insect control agencies to

determine how the listing will affect their activities.

Issue 11--In the event of a public health emergency, like a St.

Louis encephalitis (SLE) outbreak, it would be important for escalated

mosquito control measures to be instituted. These would likely include

restricted measures such as mosquito adulticiding. Could some

restrictions be temporarily lifted to maintain the public's health? If

so, who would make those decisions and how would they be made?

Service Response--The Act includes provisions for handling

emergencies. The Service will work with the Environmental Protection

Agency and appropriate States and local government agencies to outline

those provisions and to establish procedures for handling emergencies

that might arise.

Issue 12--What effect will the regulations have on agricultural

practices?

Service Response--One practice that may be affected is pesticide

use in apple and cherry orchards near the Hine's emerald dragonfly

habitat. The Service, in consultation with the Environmental Protection

Agency, will need to evaluate the effects of pesticide use on the

Hine's emerald dragonfly.

Issue 13--This is the largest land grab in Door County, Wisconsin.

Not opposed with preservation measures for the dragonfly, but it

amounts to extraterritorial zoning, i.e., control of the use of another

person's land without compensation.

Service Response--The Hine's emerald dragonfly is known to occur on

six sites in Door County, Wisconsin. Two of those sites are currently

managed by the State of Wisconsin, two of those sites are private lands

managed for conservation purposes by non-profit agencies, and the

remaining two sites are under private ownership. All of the sites

represent aquatic habitats that are currently under the jurisdiction of

the Federal Clean Water Act and State water quality law, which are

intended to protect these aquatic habitats from water quality

degradation and activities like dredging or filling. This listing does

not change current land ownership patterns and is not likely to create

additional constraints on the activities of private land owners.

Instead the listing focuses attention on improvements that might be

made to existing regulations. The listing will allow the Service to

work with other Federal agencies to ensure that their activities do not

further jeopardize the continued existence of the Hine's emerald

dragonfly.

Summary of Factors Affecting the Species

Section 4(a)(1) of the Act and regulations (50 CFR part 424)

promulgated to implement the listing provisions of the Act set forth

the procedures for adding species to the Federal lists. A species

determined to be an endangered or threatened species may be endangered

or threatened due to one or more of the five factors described in

Section 4(a)(1). These factors and their application to Hine's emerald

dragonfly are as follows:

A. The present or threatened destruction, modification, or

curtailment of its habitat or range. Populations of Hine's emerald

dragonfly are apparently extirpated from its historic range in Ohio and

Indiana (see ``Background''). No new populations were found during a

1991 status survey in Michigan. Although populations have been found in

Illinois and Wisconsin, the habitats are restricted and very

fragmented.

The greatest threat to the species in Illinois and Wisconsin is

habitat destruction and degradation. In Wisconsin's Door County, land

development by agricultural, tourist, and recreational interests pose

various threats to Hine's emerald dragonfly sites. Pesticide drift and

run-off from Door County's apple and cherry orchards is a potential

threat. Contaminated groundwater-to-surface recharge and contaminated

surface runoff may carry pesticides and other contaminants to the

species' sites. Gypsy moth control has been instituted in Door County

and the control measures include mass trapping and spraying of Bacillus

thuringensis. Although detrimental effects of these measures are not

presently known, they could affect Hine's emerald dragonfly

populations. There is an open highway salt storage area within 100 feet

that could affect one Hine's emerald dragonfly stream site in Door

County. A solid waste transfer station is being considered for

development near another site. Beaver are common in both Door County

and Illinois, and their impoundments may possibly alter the

microhabitat of the aquatic dragonfly nymphs. Studies will need to be

conducted to determine the impacts.

In Illinois, the remaining sites for the Hine's emerald dragonfly

are located in Cook, DuPage, and Will Counties. These three counties

are in the Chicago metropolitan area and represent the fastest-growing

counties in that area. The sites in these counties are already highly

fragmented and are further threatened by urban and industrial

development. Industrial development in the immediate vicinity of the

sites includes a petroleum refinery, a sewage treatment plant, rock

quarries, an electrical power plant, and an asphalt plant. These types

of facilities have the potential to degrade surface water, ground

water, and air quality in the vicinity of Hine's emerald dragonfly

sites. Degraded ground water quality is a particular concern because

the sites that support the dragonfly receive water from seeps and

springs. A proposed quarrying operation that would eliminate an entire

population, the proposed highway FAP-340 (an extension of Interstate

355), and other roadway expansion activities in the Hine's emerald

dragonfly foraging sites [[Page 5271]] in Illinois also threaten the

species' habitat. A variety of other developments in this rapidly-

growing area are in various stages of planning and execution that

threaten the dragonfly's habitat.

B. Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or

educational purposes. Overutilization is not believed to be a factor in

the species' continued existence, but the Federal protection under the

Act will prohibit unauthorized collection of individuals of the

species. Protection from collection may become important because

collectors may seek the species.

C. Disease or predation. The importance of these factors is

presently unknown.

D. The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms. The stream and

aquatic habitat of the Hine's emerald dragonfly is within the

jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act that established various regulatory

mechanisms to protect surface and ground water from the effects of

point and non-point discharges. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act,

which is administered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in

conjunction with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, established

a regulatory program to protect waters of the United States from the

adverse effects of filling. The States of Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, and

Wisconsin administer similar programs to protect surface and ground

water quality. Despite these Federal and State regulatory mechanisms,

the aquatic habitat of the Hine's emerald dragonfly was apparently

extirpated in Ohio and Indiana, although the dragonfly may have been

extirpated prior to the creation of these programs. Nevertheless,

Federal and State regulations appear to be only partially effective in

preventing the loss and degradation of the aquatic habitats of the

Hine's emerald dragonfly. This listing will enhance the level of

protection those aquatic habitats and the dragonfly receive through

those programs.

E. Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued

existence. Automobile impact is a threat where sites occur near

roadways due to adult dragonflies hovering, and in some areas the

dragonflies are known to fly across roadways to reach foraging habitat.

The Service has carefully assessed the best scientific and

commercial information available regarding the past, present, and

future threats faced by this species in determining this final rule.

Based on this evaluation, the preferred action is to list Hine's

emerald dragonfly as endangered.

Critical Habitat

Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the Act as: (i) The

specific areas within the geographical area occupied by a species, at

the time it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which are found

those physical or biological features (I) essential to the conservation

of the species and (II) that may require special management

considerations or protection and; (ii) specific areas outside the

geographical area occupied by a species at the time it is listed, upon

a determination that such areas essential for the conservation of the

species. ``Conservation'' means the use of all methods and procedures

needed to bring the species to the point at which listing under the Act

is no longer necessary.

Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as amended, and implementing

regulations (50 CFR 424.12) require that, to the maximum extent prudent

and determinable, the Secretary designate critical habitat at the time

the species is endangered or threatened. Service regulations (50 CFR

424.12 (a)) state that critical habitat is not determinable if

information sufficient to perform required analysis of the impacts of

the designation is lacking or if the biological needs of the species

are not sufficiently well known to permit identification of an area as

critical habitat. Section 4(b)(2) of the Act requires the Service to

consider economic and other relevant impacts of designating a

particular area as critical habitat on the basis of the best scientific

data available. The Secretary may exclude any area from critical

habitat if he determines that the benefits of such exclusion outweigh

the conservation benefits, unless to do such would result in the

extinction of the species.

The Service finds that designation of critical habitat for the

Hine's emerald dragonfly is not determinable at this time. When a ``not

determinable'' finding is made, the Service must, within two years of

the publication date of the original proposed rule, designate critical

habitat, unless the designation is found to be not prudent (50 CFR

424.17(b)(2)).

The Service will initiate a concerted effort to obtain the

information needed to determine critical habitat for the Hine's emerald

dragonfly. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources is willing to work

closely with the Service to conduct studies to evaluate if designation

of critical habitat is determinable. A proposed rule for critical

habitat designation must be published in the Federal Register, and the

notification process and public comment provisions parallel those for a

species listing. In addition, the Service will evaluate the economic

and other relevant impacts of the critical habitat designation, as

required under Section 4(b)(2) of the Act.

The presently known populations of this species are located on

fragmented and degraded wetland habitats. The size, location, area,

spatial configuration, and composition of specific areas essential to

the conservation of the Hine's emerald dragonfly or which may require

special management considerations or protection cannot be determined

without further study.

Available Conservation Measures

Conservation measures provided to species listed as endangered or

threatened under the Act include recognition, recovery actions,

requirements for Federal protection, and prohibitions against certain

practices. Recognition through listing results in public awareness and

conservation actions by Federal, State, and local agencies, private

organizations, and individuals. The Act provides for possible land

acquisition and cooperation with the States and requires that recovery

actions be carried out for all listed species. The protection required

of Federal agencies and the prohibitions against taking and harm are

discussed, in part, below.

Section 7(a) of the Act, as amended, requires Federal agencies to

evaluate their actions with respect to any species that is proposed or

listed as endangered or threatened and with respect to its critical

habitat, if any is being designated. Regulations implementing this

interagency cooperation provision of the Act are codified at 50 CFR

part 402. Section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires Federal agencies to

confer informally with the Service on any action that is likely to

jeopardize the continued existence of a proposed species or result in

destruction or adverse modification of proposed critical habitat. If a

species is listed subsequently, section 7(a)(2) requires Federal

agencies to ensure that activities they authorize, fund, or carry out

are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of such a species

or to destroy or adversely modify its critical habitat. If a Federal

action may affect a listed species or its critical habitat, the

responsible Federal agency must enter into formal consultation with the

Service.

The Act and implementing regulations found at 50 CFR 17.21 set

forth a series of general prohibitions and exceptions that apply to all

endangered wildlife. These prohibitions, in part, [[Page 5272]] make it

illegal for any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States

to take (including capture, harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound,

kill, trap, or collect; or to attempt any of these), import or export,

ship in interstate commerce in the course of commercial activity, or

sell or offer for sale in interstate or foreign commerce any listed

species. It also is illegal to possess, sell, deliver, carry,

transport, or ship any such wildlife that has been taken illegally.

Certain exceptions apply to agents of the Service and State

conservation agencies.

The July 1, 1994, policy of the Service (59 FR 34272) requires

identification of those activities that would or would not constitute a

violation of section 9 of the Act, to the maximum extent practicable at

the time a species is listed. The intent of this policy is to increase

public awareness of the effect of the listing on proposed and ongoing

activities within a species' range.

The Service believes that, based on the best available information,

the following are actions that will not result in a violation of

section 9:

(1) Possession of legally acquired Hine's emerald dragonflies; and

(2) Federally approved projects that include, but are not limited

to, activities, such as discharge of fill material, draining, ditching,

tiling, pond construction, stream channelization or diversion, or

diversion or alteration of surface or ground water flow into or out of

wetlands (i.e., due to roads, impoundments, discharge pipes, stormwater

detention basins, etc.)--when such activity is conducted in accordance

with section 7 of the Act.

Activities that the Service believes could potentially harm the

Hine's emerald dragonfly and result in ``take'', include, but are not

limited to:

(1) Unauthorized collecting or handling of the species;

(2) Unauthorized destruction/alteration of the species' habitat

(i.e., discharge of fill material, draining, ditching, tiling, pond

construction, stream channelization or diversion, or diversion or

alteration or contamination of surface or ground water flow into or out

of wetlands (i.e., due to roads, impoundments, discharge pipes,

stormwater retention basins, etc.);

(3) Burning, cutting or mowing of wetland vegetation, if conducted

in an untimely or inappropriate manner (e.g., when dragonflies would be

killed or injured or their occupied habitat would be degraded or

rendered unsuitable);

(4) Pesticide application in or near occupied wetland that results

in the destruction, alteration or contamination of the species' aquatic

habitat;

(5) Herbicide or fertilizer application in or near occupied

wetlands that results in the destruction or alteration of existing

wetland vegetation--that is, which kills vegetation upon which the

Hine's emerald dragonfly depends, or causes nutrient enrichment which

encourages the growth of invasive exotic plants;

(6) Discharges or dumping of toxic chemicals, silt, or other

pollutants (i.e., sewage, oil and gasoline) into waters used by the

species; and

(7) Interstate and foreign commerce (commerce across State and

international boundaries) and import/export (as discussed earlier in

this section) without prior obtainment of an endangered species permit.

Permits may be issued to carry out otherwise prohibited activities

involving endangered wildlife species under certain circumstances.

Regulations governing permits are at 50 CFR 17.22 and 17.23. Such

permits are available for scientific purposes, to enhance the

propagation or survival of the species, and/or for incidental take in

connection with otherwise lawful activities.

Questions regarding whether specific activities, such as

collecting, burning, mowing or pesticide application, will constitute a

violation of section 9 should be directed to the Field supervisor of

the appropriate Service, Ecological Services Field office as follows:

in Illinois, the Chicago Field Office, 1000 Hart Road, Suite 180,

Barrington, Il 60010 (708/381-2253); and, in Wisconsin, the Green Bay

Field Office, 1015 Challenger Court, Green Bay, WI 54311 (414/433-

3803). Requests for copies of the regulations regarding listed

wildlife, and inquiries about prohibitions and permits may be addressed

to Chief, Division of Endangered Species (see Addresses section).

The known Hine's emerald dragonfly populations are threatened by a

highway project and a proposed quarrying operation in Illinois, and

potentially threatened by commercial development and orchard pesticide

spraying in Wisconsin. Due to the need to make Federal funding,

protection, and other measures immediately available to protect this

species and its habitat, the Service finds good cause in accordance

with 5 U.S.C. 553 (d)(3), to make this final rule effective upon

publication.

National Environmental Policy Act

The Fish and Wildlife Service has determined that Environmental

Assessments and Environmental Impact Statements, as defined under the

authority of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, need not be

prepared in connection with regulations adopted pursuant to Section

4(a) of the Act, as amended. A notice outlining the Service's reasons

for this determination was published in the Federal Register on October

25, 1983 (48 FR 49244).

References Cited

Bick, G.H. 1983. Odonata at Risk in the Conterminous United States

and Canada. Odonatologica 12: 209-226.

Cashatt, E.D., and B.G. Sims. 1993. Illinois 1993 Critical Habitat

and Recovery Investigations for the Hine's Emerald Dragonfly

(Somatochlora hineana Williamson). Report prepared for the U.S. Fish

and Wildlife Service by the Illinois State Museum, Springfield, IL.

11pp.

Cashatt, E.D., et. al. 1992. Illinois 1992 Critical Habitat and

Recovery Investigations for the Hine's Emerald Dragonfly. Report

prepared for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by the Illinois

State Museum, Springfield, IL. 20pp. + Appendix.

Cashatt, E.D. 1991. A Vulnerable species: The Ohio Emerald

Dragonfly. The Living Museum 53(2):29-30.

Cashatt, E.D., and T.E. Vogt. 1990. The Illinois 1990 Status Survey

for the Ohio Emerald Dragonfly (Somatochlora hineana Williamson).

Report prepared for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by the

Illinois State Museum, Springfield, IL. 20pp.

Cashatt, E.D., and T.E. Vogt. 1991. The Illinois 1991 Survey for the

Hine's Emerald Dragonfly (Somatochlora hineana Williamson). Prepared

for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by the Illinois State Museum,

Springfield, IL, and Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources,

Bureau of Endangered Resources, Madison, WI. 13pp.

Montgomery, B.E. 1953. Notes and Records of Indiana Odonata, 1951-

1952. Proceeding of the Indiana Academy of Science. 62: 200-202.

Price, H.F. 1958. Additional Notes on the Dragonflies of

Northwestern Ohio. Ohio Journal of Science. 58: 50-62.

Smith, W. 1993. Wisconsin Endangered and Threatened Species

Investigation. Report prepared for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of

Endangered Species, Madison, WI. 13pp.

Vogt, T.E. 1991. Results of 1991 Status Survey for Somatochlora

hineana Williamson in Michigan. Report prepared for Michigan Natural

Features Inventory, Mason Building, Lansing, Michigan, and the U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service by the Wisconsin Department of Natural

Resources, Bureau of Endangered Species, Madison, WI. 24pp.

[[Page 5273]]

Vogt, T.E., and E.D. Cashatt. 1990. The 1990 Wisconsin Status Survey

for the Ohio Emerald Dragonfly (Somatochlora hineana Williamson).

Report prepared for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by Wisconsin

Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Endangered Species,

Madison, WI. 14pp.

Vogt, T.E., and E.D. Cashatt. 1991. The Wisconsin 1991 Status Survey

for the Hine's Emerald Dragonfly (Somatochlora hineana Williamson).

Report prepared for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by the

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Endangered

Resources, Madison, WI and the Illinois State Museum, Springfield,

IL. 11pp.

Williamson, E.B. 1931. A new North American Somatochlora (Odonata:

Corduliidae). Occasional Papers of the Museum of Zoology. University

of Michigan. 225: 1-8.

Author

The primary author of this final rule is Carlita Shumate (see

ADDRESSES section). This final rule was edited by Amelia Orton-Palmer,

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services Field Office, 1000

Hart Road, Suite 180, Barrington, Illinois 60010, (708) 381-2253 and

Catherine Carnes, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services

Field Office, 1015 Challenger Court, Green Bay, Wisconsin 54311, (414)

433-3803. Everett D. Cashatt, Zoology Section, Illinois State Museum,

Springfield, Illinois 62706, (217) 782-6689 and Timothy E. Vogt, The

Nature Conservancy, Rte.1, Box 53E, Ullin, Illinois 62992 (618) 634-

9445, provided substantial information.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements, and Transportation.

Regulation Promulgation

Accordingly, part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the

Code of Federal Regulations, is amended as set forth below:

PART 17--[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; 16 U.S.C.

4201-4245; Pub L. 99-625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted.

2. Section 17.11(h) is amended by adding the following, in

alphabetical order under Insects to the List of Endangered and

Threatened Wildlife:

Sec. 17.11 Endangered and threatened wildlife.

* * * * *

(h) * * *

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Species Vertebrate population

-------------------------------------------------- Historic range where endangered or Status When listed Critical Special

Common name Scientific name threatened habitat rules

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * * * *

Insects

* * * * * * *

Hine's emerald (Ohio Somatochlora hineana .. U.S.A. (IL, IN, OH, & NA..................... E 573 NA NA

emerald dragonfly). WI).

* * * * * * *

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: January 6, 1995.

Mollie H. Beattie,

Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

[FR Doc. 95-1983 Filed 1-25-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-55-P