Comment on FR Doc # 2010-08698

May 17, 2010 COMMENTS: WOLVERINE STATUS REVIEW AND REQUEST FOR NEW INFORMATION Submitted via the Federal eRulemaking Portal http://www.regulations.gov Docket “FWS–R6–ES–2008–0029” Center for Native Ecosystems respectfully submits the following comments in response to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (FWS) notice announcing the initiation of its status review of the North American Wolverine (Gulo gulo luscus). 75 Fed. Reg. 19,591 (April 15, 2010). The main purpose of these comments is to make sure that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service does not overlook the importance of the Southern Rockies Region both when considering where to list wolverine in the lower 48 states and when considering critical habitat and recovery planning for wolverines. Wolverines have historically been and are currently present in the Southern Rocky Mountains of Colorado, Utah, southern Wyoming, and northern New Mexico Historically, wolverines have ranged as far south as Colorado, and perhaps even into northern New Mexico (Frey and Yates 1996, Banci 1994, Aubry et al. 2007). For an elusive species like the wolverine, occurrence records can be hard to find. Aubry et al. (2007) discuss their review of wolverine occurrence records and report numbers in the Southern Rockies that are similar to or higher than numbers in areas like Montana where more recent numbers are higher due to the availability of recent trapping records (trapping is still legal in Montana, and has been illegal in Colorado since 1971), and greater research efforts in those areas. Therefore, historical reporting methods may have underreported wolverine numbers throughout its range. Records of the species in the states of the Southern Rocky Mountains include, but are not limited to the following: Colorado: In their research of historical literature, Nead et al. (1985) found 22 reports based on wolverine carcasses documenting at least 25 animals between 1871 and 1919. Through a project initiated in 1978 to gather information on the current status of wolverine, the Colorado Division of Wildlife collected 3 positive, 18 probable and 36 possible wolverine reports (Nead et al. 1985). Unfortunately, Colorado records are muddled by the escape of 6 wolverines from the Cheyenne Mountain Zoo from 1964 to 1986 (CDOW et al. 1997) and the release of a male and female wolverine by Stouffer Productions near Aspen in 1978 (Nead et al. 1985). It is believed that at least three of the escaped wolverines were recaptured (Byrne 1997 cited in CDOW et al. 1997). Though uncertain whether a viable population exists, Nead et al. (1985) reported that they believe “wolverines continue to exist in Colorado.” Natural heritage records exist for the following counties in Colorado: Archuleta, Boulder, Delta, Dolores, Eagle, Garfield, Grand, Gunnison, Hinsdale, Huerfano, Jackson, La Plata, Larimer, Mineral, Ouray, Park, Pitkin, Pueblo, Rio Blanco, Routt, Saguache, San Miguel and Summit (NatureServe 2009). Aubry et al. (2007) documented 34 records in Colorado from 1801 to 1960. In 2009, M56, a wolverine collared as part of the Wildlife Conservation Society’s Greater Yellowstone Wolverine program in northwest Wyoming, traveled over 500 miles into Colorado. M56 spent his first few months in and around Rocky Mountain National Park in north central Colorado. At the time of these comments, he is still in the state and has traveled south of Interstate 70 and was last reported near Leadville, Colorado (Wildlife Conservation Society 2010). Utah: In March 1979, an adult male was shot just west of the Utah-Colorado (in Utah) (Nead et al. 1985). Natural heritage records exist for the following counties in Utah: Beaver, Cache, Daggett, Duchesne, Garfield, Morgan, Piute, Salt Lake, San Juan, Sanpete, Summit, Uintah, Utah, Wasatch, Wayne and Weber (NatureServe 2009). Aubry et al. (2007) found 10 records in Utah from 1801 to 1960. Prompted by recent reports of lynx and wolverine, the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources and the Uinta-Wasatch-Cache and Ashley National Forests are starting to survey the Uinta Mountains for sign of Canada lynx and wolverine (http://www.fs.fed.us/r4/ashley/news/2010/10.02.12%20USFS_Lynx%20survey.pdf). Southern Wyoming: In April 1996, an adult male was trapped 18 miles north of Cheyenne, Wyoming (CDOW et al. 1997). Though most wolverines occurrences are in the northwest part of the state, Beauvais and Johnson (2004) state in a report prepared for the Bureau of Land Management that a small population may occur in southern Wyoming. Northern New Mexico According to the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, “[w]olverines almost certainly occured (sic) in [New Mexico] in the San Juan and Sangre de Cristo Mountains but there are no known specimens or verified records (Frey, 1999). The wolverine may have formerly occurred in New Mexico, but was extirpated before it could be verified (Frey and Yates, 1996).” Aubry et al. (2007) documented 1 verifiable record in New Mexico from 1801 to 1960 and state that northern New Mexico may likely be the southern extent of the wolverine’s range. The Southern Rocky Mountains of Colorado, Utah, southern Wyoming, and northern New Mexico may prove to be an important refugia to wolverines in light of climate change The fact that M56 is still in Colorado after almost a year is evidence that Colorado and the Southern Rocky Mountains have suitable habitat for the species (Wildlife Conservation Society 2010). Wolverines are generally associated with landscapes that are remote from humans and human development (Aubry et al. 2007, Beauvais and Johnson 2004). The species have very low population densities and reproductive rates which make the wolverine highly sensitive to human encroachment and human-caused mortality (Beauvais and Johnson 2004). Colorado alone has almost 4 million acres as designated wilderness (Colorado Wilderness). Almost two million more acres are being proposed by various citizen groups and state representatives in Colorado (i.e. Hidden Gems Wilderness Campaign, the Citizens’ Wilderness Proposal (embodied by the DeGette Wilderness Bill), San Juan Mountains Wilderness Act, etc.). Thus, the protected lands in the Southern Rocky Mountains could prove to be very important to wolverines now and in the future. Historically, threats to wolverines and their habitat have included trapping, poisoning, habitat fragmentation from roadways and human development. Use of poison baits such as strychnine and 1080 (sodium monofluoroacetate) probably had severe impacts on wolverine populations in the Southern Rockies (CDOW et al. 1997). Some of these practices, such as trapping and poisoning, were made illegal through the closure of the trapping season in Colorado in 1971 and an amendment to the state constitution in 1996. However, some threats such as habitat fragmentation and climate change are still very real, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service should do everything in their power to protect wolverines against these pressures. In order to ensure wolverine future survival, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service needs to protect the species under the Endangered Species Act as well as ensure protection of important habitat and movement corridors. This will include habitat in areas where wolverines are currently not as common, but where suitable habitat exists, such as the Southern Rocky Mountains. According to Dr. Healy Hamilton at the California Academy of Sciences, “preliminary climatic envelope modeling, using a large number of recent climate models, indicates that the areas of Southern Rockies in Colorado, Utah, southern Wyoming and northern New Mexico could be important refugia for wolverine in the lower 48 states. Protecting habitat and movement corridors throughout the region could prove vital to the survival and persistence of the species,” (H. Hamilton, pers. comm., May 7, 2010). Wolverines likely exist as a metapopulation in the contiguous United States. The FWS should carefully consider how immigration and emigration of wolverines between the Southern Rockies region and wolverine populations in other regions may contribute to long-term persistence of the wolverine metapopulation in the contiguous United States. Even exchange of small numbers of individuals between populations may help to lower the risk of extinction due to genetic, demographic and environmental stochasticity. The FWS should consider how maintenance and recovery of wolverines in the Southern Rockies might contribute to the long-term persistence and recovery of the metapopulation in the contiguous United States, and whether listing and designation of critical habitat in the Southern Rockies is necessary to adequately address the concepts of representation, redundancy and resilience. This is especially important given the small effective population size of wolverines in the contiguous United States, and the uncertainty regarding how wolverine habitat in different regions will change due to changes in climate. Recent research indicates that wolverines are reliant on persistent spring snow coverage and temperatures below 22 degrees Celsius (Copeland et al. 2010). Studies have predicted that the snowline will rise (Beniston 2003) and that snow accumulation will especially by affected at elevations at or below 4921 ft. (Martin and Durand 1998). The Southern Rockies region has a higher mean elevation than other areas where wolverine currently exist: Colorado (6,800 ft), Wyoming (6,500 ft), Utah (6,100 ft), New Mexico (5,700 ft) as compared to Montana (3,400 ft), Idaho (5,000 ft), and Washington (1,700 ft) (U.S. Census 2010). Some projections suggest that rising temperatures may result in a substantial decline in lower-elevation snowpack (below 8200 ft./2500 m.) by the mid-21st century, with more modest declines at elevations above 8200 ft. The combined results of several studies suggest that elevation is a factor in changes in snowpack, and that increases in rain vs. snow, reduction in snow water equivalent, and decreases in snowpack, will be of smaller magnitude at elevations above 8200 ft. (Knowles et al. 2006, Regonda et al. 2005, Udall and Bates 2007, Mote et al. 2005, Mote 2006, Pierce et al. 2008, Jain 2008, Christenson and Lettenmaier 2006, Ray et al. 2008). The FWS should consider whether the higher elevation habitat in the Southern Rockies might provide a refugia for wolverines in the face of climate change. Conclusion Thank you for your consideration of these comments in the preparation of your status review of wolverines in the lower-48 states. Please contact us for any additional information pertaining to our comments. Sincerely, Megan Mueller, Senior Staff Biologist Center for Native Ecosystems (303) 546-0214 x 6 http://nativeecosystems.org Paige Bonaker, Staff Biologist/GIS Specialist Center for Native Ecosystems (303) 546-0214 x 7 http://nativeecosystems.org Citations: Aubry, K.B., K.S. McKelvey, and J.P. Copeland. 2007. Distribution and Broadscale Habitat Relations of the Wolverine in the Contiguous United States. Journal of Wildlife Management 71(7): 2147-2158. Available http://ddr.nal.usda.gov/bitstream/10113/8128/1/IND43988515.pdf (Accessed: May 16, 2010). Banci, V. 1994. Wolverine. Pages 99-127 in L.F. Ruggiero, K.B. Aubry, S.W. Buskirk, L.J. Lyon, and W.J. Zielinski, editors. The scientific basis for conserving forest carnivores: American marten, fisher, lynx, and wolverine in the western United States. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report RM 254. Available http://www.fs.fed.us/rm/pubs_rm/rm_gtr254.pdf (Accessed: May 17, 2010) Beauvais, G.P. and L. Johnson. 2004. Species Assessment for Wolverine (Gulo gulo) in Wyoming. Report prepared for the United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Wyoming State Office, Cheyenne, Wyoming. Available http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/wy/wildlife/animal-assessmnts.Par.90309.File.dat/Wolverine.pdf (Accessed: May 17, 2010). Beniston, M. 2003. Climatic Change in Mountain Regions: A Review of Possible Impacts. Climatic Change 59: 5-31. Colorado Division of Wildlife, U.S. Forest Service, National Park Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, New Mexico Game and Fish Department, Wyoming Game and Fish Department. 1997. Draft strategy for the conservation and reestablishment of lynx and wolverine in the southern Rocky Mountains. Unpubl. rpt., Colorado Division of Wildlife, Carbondale, CO. Colorado Wilderness. “Colorado Wilderness Areas” Available http://www.coloradowilderness.com/cowildareas.html (Accessed: May 17, 2010). Copeland, J. P., K.S. McKelvey, K.B. Aubry, A. Landa, J. Persson, R.M. Inman, J. Krebs, E. Lofroth, H. Golden, J.R. Squires, A. Magoun, M.K. Schwartz, J. Wilmot, C.L. Copeland, R.E. Yates, I. Kojola, and R. May (2010). "The bioclimatic envelope of the wolverine (Gulo gulo): do climatic constraints limit its geographic distribution?" Canadian Journal of Zoology 88: 233-246. Christensen, N., and D. P. Lettenmaier, 2006: A mul¬timodel ensemble approach to assessment of cli¬mate change impacts on the hydrology and water resources of the Colorado River basin. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences Discussion, 3, 1-44. Frey, Jennifer K. and Terry L. Yates. 1996. Mammalian Diversity in New Mexico. New Mexico Journal of Science. Vol.36:4-37. Available http://web.nmsu.edu/~jfrey/19%20Frey%20and%20Yates%201996%20Mammalian%20Diversity%20NMJS.pdf (Accessed: May 16, 2010). Jain, S., and J. K. Eischeid, 2008: What a difference a century makes: Understanding the changing hy¬drologic regime and storage requirements in the Upper Colorado River basin, Geophys. Res. Lett., doi:10.1029/2008GL034715, in press. Knowles, N., M. D. Dettinger, and D. R. Cayan, 2006: Trends in snowfall versus rainfall in the western United States. J. Clim., 4545-4559. Martin, E. and Y. Durand. 1998. Precipitation and snow cover variability in the French Alps. Chapter 5 in Beniston, M. and J.L. Innes. The Impacts of Climate Variability on Forests. Lecture Notes in Earth Sciences, vol. 74. NatureServe. 2009. “Wolverine.” NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://www.natureserve.org/explorer (Accessed: May 16, 2010 ). Nead, D.M., J.C. Halfpenny, and S. Bissell. 1985. The status of wolverines in Colorado. Northwest Science 58:286-289. New Mexico Department of Game and Fish. “Wolverine.” Biota Information System of New Mexico. Available http://www.bison-m.org/booklet.aspx?id=050870 (Accessed: May 16, 2010). Pierce, D.W., T.P. Barnett, H.G. Hidalgo, T. Das, C. Bonfils, B.D. Santer, G. Bala, M.D. Dettinger, D.R. Cayan, A. Mirin, A.W. Wood, and T. No¬zawa, 2008: Attribution of Declining Western U.S. Snowpack to Human Effects. J. Climate, 21, 6425-6444. Ray, A.J., J.J. Barsugli, K.B Averyt, K.Wolter, M. Ho¬erling, 2008: Colorado Climate Change: A Syn¬thesis To Support Water Resource Management and Adaptation, a report for the Colorado Water Conservation Board by the NOAA-CU Western Water Assessment, available at: www.cwcb.state. co.us Regonda, S. K., B. Rajagopalan, M. Clark, and J. Pitlick, 2005: Sea¬sonal cycle shifts in hydro¬climatology over the western United States. J. Clim., 18, 372-384. Udall, B., and G. Bates, 2007: Climatic and hydrolog¬ic trends in the Western U.S.: A Review of recent peer-reviewed research. Intermountain West Cli¬mate Summary, (January), 2. Available online at: http://wwa.colorado.edu/forecasts_and_outlooks/ docs/wwa_jan_2007_feature.pdf. U.S. Census Bureau, Statistical Abstract of the United States: 2010 (129th Edition) Washington, DC, 2009. Available http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/ (Accessed May 17, 2010) Wildlife Conservation Society. 2010. “Wolverine Goes AWOL”. May 7, 2010. Available http://www.wcs.org/new-and-noteworthy/wolverine-goes-awol.aspx (Accessed: May 16, 2010).