[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 201 (Friday, October 17, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 54028-54035]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-27549]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

RIN 1018-AE41


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposal to List 
the St. Andrew Beach Mouse as Endangered

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) proposes endangered 
status for the St. Andrew Beach Mouse (Peromyscus polionotus 
peninsularis) pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 
amended (Act). This subspecies is restricted to coastal sand dunes and 
had a historic distribution that included the northeast Florida 
panhandle from Gulf County into portions of Bay County. Its current 
range is limited to a portion of the St. Joseph Peninsula in Gulf 
County. Habitat impacts causing loss of mice and the species' local 
capability to recover from such impacts are primarily responsible for 
the range curtailment. Threats to beach mouse habitat include severe 
storms, coastal land development and its associated activities, and 
non-storm related, natural shoreline erosion. Additional threats 
include predation by free-ranging domestic cats and displacement by 
house mice. This proposal, if made final, would implement the 
protection provisions provided by the Act for this beach mouse.

DATES: Comments from all interested parties must be received by 
December 16, 1997. Public hearing requests must be received by December 
1, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments and materials concerning this proposal should be 
sent to Michael M. Bentzien, Assistant Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service, 6620 Southpoint Drive South, Suite 310, Jacksonville, 
Florida 32216. Comments and materials received will be available for 
public inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the 
above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Michael M. Bentzien, at the above 
address (telephone 904/232-2580, ext. 106; facsimile 904/232-2404).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The oldfield mouse (Peromyscus polionotus) occurs in northeastern 
Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, and Florida. Beach mice 
are coastal subspecies of the oldfield mouse restricted to beach and 
sand dune habitat. Hall (1981) recognized eight coastal subspecies 
whose common distinguishing characteristics include white feet, large 
ears, and large black eyes. Their fur is variously patterned in shades 
of white, yellow, brown, and grey. The head, back, and rump are darkly 
patterned, though to a lighter and less extensive degree than inland 
oldfield mice. The all-white underparts extend higher up to the sides 
than on the inland subspecies (Sumner 1926, Bowen 1968). Howell (1939) 
described the type (original) specimen of the St. Andrew beach mouse as 
having a very pale, buff-colored head and back with extensive white 
coloration underneath and along the sides. Bowen (1968) noted two 
distinct rump color pigmentations, one a tapered and the other a 
squared pattern, which extended to the thighs. Head and body lengths 
average 75 millimeters (mm) (2.95 inches (in)), tail mean length 52 mm 
(2.05 in), and hind foot mean length 18.5 mm (0.73 in) (James 1992).
    Beach mice subspecies historically occurred on both the Atlantic 
Coast of Florida from St. Johns through Broward counties and the 
eastern Gulf of Mexico from Gulf County, Florida, to Baldwin County, 
Alabama (Ivey 1949, Bowen 1968, James 1992, Stout 1992, Gore and 
Schaefer 1993). The St. Andrew beach mouse is the easternmost of the 
five Gulf coast subspecies. Howell (1939) collected the type specimen 
at St. Andrew Point on Crooked Island, Tyndall Air Force Base, Bay 
County, Florida (type locality). Other historic collection records for 
the subspecies include nine additional specimens from the type 
locality, seven mice from St. Joseph Point and four mice from Cape San 
Blas on the St. Joseph Peninsula in Gulf County, 48 individuals at or 
near the town of Port St. Joe located on the central Gulf County 
coastal mainland, and four specimens near Money Bayou in eastern Gulf 
County (Bowen 1968). Based on these records, Bowen (1968) and James 
(1992) described the former range of the St. Andrew beach mouse as 
likely extending from the St. Joseph Spit (Peninsula) northwest along 
the coastal mainland adjacent to St. Joseph Bay, to Crooked Island at 
the East Pass of St. Andrews Bay. This range also included about 0.6 
kilometer (km) (1 mile (mi)) of mainland sand dune habitat east of the 
landward end of the St. Joseph Peninsula to Money Bayou on the Gulf of 
Mexico. The absence of past collection records and lack of beach mouse 
sign and trapping success in the area east of Money Bayou to the 
southeastern corner of Gulf County (James 1987; J. Gore, Florida Game 
and Fresh Water Fish Commission, in litt. 1994) suggest that this area 
may not be part of the subspecies' historic range.
    Coastal tidal marsh and upland habitat between the mainland city of 
Port St. Joe and the St. Joseph Peninsula naturally divided the former 
range of the St. Andrew beach mouse into two segments. Initial genetic 
analysis of a small sample of mice from these segments and another 
subspecies, the Choctawhatchee beach mouse (P. polionotus allophrys), 
from nearby habitat found similarities between the Crooked Island and 
St. Joseph Peninsula samples at one gene location (locus). The Crooked 
Island sample was distinctly different from the Choctawhatchee beach 
mouse sample at the same locus. Additional work is needed to determine 
if these patterns are consistent at several loci (Moyers 1997).
    Typical beach mouse habitat generally consists of several rows of 
sand dunes paralleling the shoreline. Prevailing wind, beach sand, and 
vegetation combine to form and shape coastal dunes. A common complex of 
animal species, vegetation, and habitat types characterize the coastal 
sand dune ecosystem. The types and amount of animals, vegetation, and 
habitat may differ, however, among specific sites. The common types of 
sand dune habitat include frontal dunes, primary dunes, secondary 
dunes, inter and intradunal swales, and scrub dunes. Frontal dunes and 
primary dunes are those closest to

[[Page 54029]]

the shoreline, most recently formed, and highly dynamic. The foreslope 
of primary dunes grades into the developing frontal dunes on the open 
beach. Frontal dunes on the Gulf Coast are sparsely vegetated, usually 
by sea oats (Uniola paniculata), bluestem (Schizachyrium maritimum), 
beach grass (Panicum amarum), and sea rocket (Cakile constricta). 
Primary dunes also support stands of these species and include other 
broad-leaved plants such as seaside pennywort (Hydrocotyle 
bonariensis), seashore elder (Iva imbricata), and beach morning glory 
(Ipomea stolonifera) (Clewell 1985). Secondary dunes consist of one or 
more dune lines landward of the primary dune with a similar though 
denser vegetative cover. Interdunal swales are wet or dry depressions 
between primary and secondary dunes while intradunal swales occur 
within primary dunes as a result of wave action, storm surges, and wind 
erosion. Wet swales are those whose water table is at or near the 
surface. Swale vegetation includes plants found on primary and 
secondary dunes as well as salt meadow cordgrass (Spartina patens), 
rushes (Juncus sp.), sedges (Cyperus sp.), and saltgrass (Distichlis 
spicata). Scrub dunes are the oldest of the dune habitat types and are 
dominated by woody plants including saw palmetto (Serenoa repens), 
myrtle oak (Quercus myrtifolia), sand live oak (Q. geminata), sand pine 
(Pinus clausa), slash pine (P. elliottii), seaside rosemary (Ceratiola 
ericoides), greenbrier (Smilax sp.), and bush goldenrod (Chrysoma 
pauciflosculosa). Reindeer moss (Cladonia leporina) often covers 
otherwise bare dune surfaces. Some primary and secondary dune 
vegetation is also present but at reduced densities (Blair 1951, Gibson 
and Looney 1992). Size and density of understory and overstory 
vegetation may vary.
    Trap surveys at Crooked Island and on the St. Joseph Peninsula 
documented the presence of St. Andrew beach mouse on frontal dunes, as 
well as on primary and secondary dunes (James 1987; Gore in litt. 1990, 
1994; Bates 1992, Moyers et al. 1996, Mitchell et al. 1997). These 
results supported other surveys which found that the greatest 
concentration of most other beach mice subspecies occurred in these 
habitat types (Blair 1951, Hill 1989, Frank and Humphrey 1992, Holler 
1992). This concentration is due in part to a predominance of plants 
whose seeds and fruits are important seasonal constituents of beach 
mouse diets (Moyers 1996).
    Although beach mice occur on interdunal and intradunal swales, 
studies of other beach mouse subspecies indicate that, in general, they 
use this habitat type less frequently when compared to frontal, 
primary, and secondary dunes (Blair 1951, Hill 1989, Gore and Schaefer 
1993, Novak 1997). James (1987) only rarely observed St. Andrew beach 
mouse tracks in the interdunal areas within St. Joseph Peninsula State 
Park (SJPSP), located within the northern 15 km (9 mi) of the 
peninsula.
    Various researchers have also documented the occurrence of other 
beach mouse subspecies within scrub dunes (Extine and Stout 1987, Hill 
1989, Rave and Holler 1992, Gore and Schaefer 1993, Swilling et al. 
1996, Moyers et al. 1996, Novak 1997). Blair (1951) believed that the 
scrub dunes on Santa Rosa Island offered abundant food and cover for 
the Santa Rosa beach mouse (P. p. leucocephalus). Scrub dunes may also 
function as refugia during and after storms and as a source for 
recolonization of storm-damaged dunes (Moyers et al. 1996, Swilling et 
al. 1996). Their use by the St. Andrew beach mouse is not well 
documented. James (1987) noted the absence of tracks in scrub dunes 
within SJPSP, although she did collect mice in 1986 from well-vegetated 
back dunes on Crooked Island (James 1992). Moyers et al. (1996) 
captured beach mice within SJPSP in secondary dunes immediately 
adjacent to scrub dunes.
    Based on a study of other Gulf coast subspecies that included 
habitat conditions following Hurricane Frederick, Meyers (1983) 
reported that the minimum post-storm area needed to allow beach mice to 
persist was 50 hectares (ha) (124 acres (ac)). He also determined that 
a habitat size from 100 to 200 ha (247 to 494 ac) supporting a 
population of 127 mice was optimal for that population to recover from 
habitat impacts produced by a storm of comparable intensity. Meyer's 
figures should be used with caution, however, since he did not know 
pre-storm habitat conditions or population numbers within the study 
area.
    Beach mouse populations can at times undergo great seasonal 
variations in numbers (Bowen 1968, Extine and Stout 1987). Prior to 
human disturbance, hurricanes and tropical storms likely were the 
dominant factors producing rapid and possible widespread impacts on 
beach mice and their habitat. Because the St. Andrew beach mouse 
evolved under adverse weather conditions, the subspecies developed the 
capability to survive and recover from these periodic severe impacts to 
its numbers and habitat. During this century, however, more rapid land 
development, dune encroachment by pedestrians and vehicles, and 
military activities began to contribute to these impacts (James 1992). 
Bowen (1968) was unable to collect beach mice from one or more historic 
sites during a 1961 field trip. Hurricane Eloise split Crooked Island 
into east and west segments in 1975, and multiple attempts to collect 
beach mice from the western segment during the early and mid-1980's 
were unsuccessful (Gore in litt. 1987). During this same period, trap 
surveys collected small numbers of beach mice on the eastern segment. 
Limited trap and track surveys during the late 1980's found no evidence 
of beach mice within undeveloped coastal mainland habitat between 
Crooked Island and Money Bayou, as well as on the St. Joseph Peninsula 
from near the southern border of SJPSP through Cape San Blas to the 
northeastern end of the peninsula (Gore in litt. 1990, James 1987). 
Both surveys revealed that mice still existed on Crooked Island East 
and also occurred within SJPSP. Gore collected 3.6 mice per 100 trap 
nights during his 1989 survey within the park. Based on her survey 
results, James (1992) estimated the Crooked Island East population at 
150 mice and the population within SJPSP at 500 mice. Gore speculated 
that the range wide population at its lowest contained several hundred 
mice.
    Extensive surveying of primary, secondary, and scrub dune habitat 
on Crooked Island East during the 1990's revealed that the beach mouse 
population there no longer existed (Gore in litt. 1994, Holler in litt. 
1994). Similar efforts at Cape San Blas on Eglin Air Force Base and 
U.S. Coast Guard properties yielded no mice (Gore in litt. 1994). Bates 
(1992) did capture 338 separate individuals within SJPSP at a rate of 
26.64 mice per 100 trap nights. In 1993 and 1994, Gore (in litt. 1994) 
again sampled habitat between SJPSP and Cape San Blas and trapped nine 
beach mice for a capture rate of 7.56 mice per 100 trap nights. Based 
on the survey findings to date, Gore (in litt 1994, 1995) assumed that 
the St. Andrew beach mouse was then restricted to the northern 20 to 25 
km (12.5 to 15.5 mi) of the St. Joseph Peninsula.
    In October 1995, Hurricane Opal caused extensive coastal damage to 
the Florida panhandle. Habitat impacts within the St. Joseph Peninsula 
appeared more extensive outside SJPSP boundaries (Gore in litt. 1995). 
Using an average density estimate of 2.5 mice per hectare, Gore (in 
litt. 1995) calculated that the total population of St. Andrew beach 
mice remaining after the storm was around 190 individuals. Moyers et 
al. (1996) trapped a total of about 5.25 km (3 mi) of habitat 
throughout SJPSP

[[Page 54030]]

in December 1995 and captured 62 individuals for a rate of 3.44 mice 
per 100 trap nights. They estimated the population size within the 
sampled area at 127, a figure which compared favorably to Gore's post-
hurricane estimate. Moyers (1996a) later collected an additional 11 
mice on William J. Rish State Park and on some private parcels within 
the St. Joseph Peninsula immediately south of SJPSP. The most recent 
trap survey within SJPSP (February 1997) collected 117 mice for a 
capture rate of 9.00 mice per 100 trap nights (Mitchell et al. 1997). 
They estimated that SJPSP currently may support between 300 and 500 
mice. The estimate represents a significant increase over the 1995 
post-Hurricane Opal survey and is comparable to the last pre-Hurricane 
Opal survey within the park (Bates 1992).
    In addition to habitat impacts, other factors believed to 
potentially threaten the continued existence of the St. Andrew beach 
mouse are predation, particularly by free-ranging domestic cats (Felis 
silvestris) and non-native coyotes (Canis latrans), and displacement by 
house mice (Mus musculus).

Previous Federal Action

    The Service included the St. Andrew beach mouse as a category 2 
species in its September 18, 1985, notice of review of vertebrate 
wildlife (50 FR 37958). At that time, category 2 species were defined 
as those for which information in possession of the Service indicated 
that proposing to list as endangered or threatened was possibly 
appropriate, but for which conclusive data on biological vulnerability 
and threat(s) were not currently available to support a proposed rule. 
The Service published an updated, combined animal notice of review 
(ANOR) on January 6, 1989, which retained the species' category 2 
classification (54 FR 554). In the November 21, 1991, ANOR update, the 
St. Andrew beach mouse was designated a candidate for listing (56 FR 
58804). The Service retained this classification in the November 15, 
1994, ANOR (59 FR 59020) and in the most recent notice of review 
published on February 28, 1996 (61 FR 7596).
    The processing of this proposed rule conforms with the Service's 
fiscal year 1997 listing priority guidance published in the Federal 
Register on December 5, 1996 (61 FR 64475). The guidance calls for 
giving highest priority to handling emergency situations (Tier 1) and 
second highest priority (Tier 2) to resolving the status of outstanding 
proposed listings. Third priority (Tier 3) is given to resolving the 
conservation status of candidate species and processing administrative 
findings on petitions to add species to the lists or reclassify 
threatened species to endangered status. The processing of this 
proposed rule falls under Tier 3. At this time, the Southeast Region 
has no pending Tier 1 actions and is near completion of its pending 
Tier 2 actions. Additionally, the guidance states that ``effective 
April 1, 1997, the Service will concurrently undertake all of the 
activities included in Tiers 1, 2, and 3'' (61 FR 64480).

Summary of Factors Affecting the Species

    Section 4 of the Endangered Species 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 may be determined to be an endangered or threatened species due 
to one or more of the five factors described in section 4(a)(1). These 
factors and their application to the St. Andrew beach mouse (Peromyscus 
polionotus peninsularis) are as follows:

A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment 
of Its Habitat or Range

    Using historic topographic maps and their habitat references, the 
Service calculated that 66 km (41 mi) of the estimated 86 km (53.5 mi) 
of linear area within the historic range of the St. Andrew beach mouse 
contained sand dune habitat. From field surveys, Gore (in litt. 1994, 
1995) estimated the amount of recently occupied habitat to be between 
20 and 23 km (14.3 to 12.5 mi), all within the northern two-thirds of 
the St. Joseph Peninsula. This represents up to a 68 percent 
curtailment of historic sand dune habitat within the subspecies' former 
range.
    Natural events and manmade activities that have impacted the St. 
Andrew beach mouse and its habitat include severe storms, land 
development, military exercises on Crooked Island, dune encroachment by 
vehicles and pedestrians, and non-storm related shoreline erosion. 
Between 1871 and 1995, nearly 50 hurricanes or tropical storms occurred 
within 90 mi of St. Joe Bay, which is about midway within the historic 
range of the species. In this century, storm strength, proximity to the 
historic range, and degree of habitat impact have been especially 
intense during the last 30 years (Doehring et al. 1994). In 1975, 
Hurricane Eloise breached Crooked Island, dividing it into two segments 
and severely eroding and fragmenting dunes, particularly within the 
newly-formed western segment (R. Bates, pers. comm. 1995). In 1985, 
Hurricane Kate scoured dunes within the entire range of the St. Andrew 
beach mouse. These storms caused extensive blowouts in the high dunes 
throughout the St. Joseph Peninsula (James 1992). In 1995, Hurricane 
Opal, which made landfall 85 mi west of St. Joe Bay, severely damaged 
and fragmented frontal and primary sand dunes within the historic range 
of the beach mouse. The most seriously impacted areas were the 
unoccupied habitat from Crooked Island to Mexico Beach. Gore (in litt. 
1995) estimated an average loss of 52 percent of occupied area within 
the St. Joseph Peninsula, with the greatest impacts occurring south of 
SJPSP. Although the population within the SJPSP has since recovered, 
the Service believes that, coupled with additional land development, 
consecutive years of severe weather or a single season of intense 
storms over or in close proximity to currently occupied habitat may 
result in extinction of the subspecies.
    Land development has been primarily responsible for the permanent 
loss of St. Andrew beach mouse habitat. Historic maps suggest that 
earlier construction of State Road 98 and incorporated development from 
the vicinity of Port St. Joe to Mexico Beach occurred within one or 
more types of coastal sand dune habitat. Little or no suitable habitat 
currently occurs at the seaward side of some of these incorporated 
areas (J. Danford, Gulf County Division of Solid Waste, pers. comm. 
1997). This density of development also tends to fragment remaining 
undeveloped habitat. Meyers (1983) believed that intense development 
could act as a barrier to migration, isolating mice within these 
habitat segments and making them more vulnerable to local extinction 
from one or more threats. Neither Gore (in litt. 1990) nor James (1987) 
found evidence of beach mice within these fragmented parcels located 
along the coast between Port St. Joe and Mexico Beach. The current 
status of beach mice within these parcels is unknown.
    Gore (in litt. 1994) ranked continued habitat loss on the St. 
Joseph Peninsula as one of the most serious long-term threats to the 
St. Andrew beach mouse outside of the State parks. He attributed beach 
mouse presence in the area between SJPSP and Cape San Blas in 1994 to 
the relatively low density of housing compared to mainland areas, and 
the apparent low threat from free-ranging domestic cats, which he 
believed was related to the primary use

[[Page 54031]]

of the residences as vacation homes. In addition, most structures are 
set back from the frontal and primary dune lines. Since 1994, 
additional construction has occurred in this area, as well as within 
unoccupied habitat on the remainder of the peninsula (J. Danford, pers. 
comm. 1997). The construction has proceeded despite the unavailability 
of federally financed loans or flood insurance (see factor D). The 
Service believes that continued construction may result in intense 
development of secondary and scrub dunes, resulting in the severe 
fragmentation or loss of these habitat types. These areas are known to 
be important to other beach mice subspecies (see ``Background'' 
section). Intense impacts to these habitat types, coupled with severe 
storms affecting frontal and primary dunes, may contribute to the 
extinction of the St. Andrew beach mouse. Gulf County has constructed 
snow fencing and planted dune vegetation to restore frontal and primary 
dunes on the St. Joseph Peninsula and elsewhere damaged as a result of 
Hurricane Opal (J. Danford, pers. comm. 1997).
    Other human activities impact beach mouse habitat. Gore (in litt. 
1994) described the sand dunes east of Cape San Blas as having little 
vegetation and generally in poor quality. He attributed this situation 
to a combination of storm damage exacerbated by vehicular traffic on 
the beach. Although Gulf County has updated its beach driving ordinance 
in an attempt to eliminate dune impacts on the St. Joseph Peninsula 
(Gulf County Commission 1997), some areas continue to have problems 
with dune encroachment by all-terrain vehicles (D. Wibberg, Office of 
the Gulf County Board of Commissioners, pers. comm. 1997). Prior to 
1985, trial exercises with military hovercraft contributed to habitat 
degradation on Crooked Island (James 1992). The Department of Defense 
has since discontinued this practice (R. Bates, Tyndall Air Force Base, 
pers. comm. 1995) and is restoring dune habitat and funding 
translocation of beach mice onto Crooked Island.
    Severe natural erosion within a section of beach north of Cape San 
Blas, primarily within U.S. Coast Guard property on the St. Joseph 
Peninsula, has resulted in the loss of frontal, primary, and secondary 
dunes (Gore in litt. 1994). Sporadic natural shoreline erosion of 
frontal and primary dunes is also occurring north of this area to 
SJPSP, as well as between Cape San Blas and Money Bayou. The principal 
effect in the area of severe erosion has been to isolate occupied 
habitat on the northern peninsula from unoccupied habitat between Cape 
San Blas and Money Bayou. The additional natural erosion has resulted 
in some habitat fragmentation.

B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or 
Educational Purposes

    This factor is not now known to be applicable.

C. Disease or Predation

    The impact of parasites and pathogens on beach mice populations and 
their potential contribution to the decline of the St. Andrew beach 
mouse are unknown. Significant adverse impacts from these factors might 
occur when combined with or as a function of other threats. Studies and 
observations by various researchers strongly suggest that predation, 
especially by free-ranging domestic cats, is an important factor 
contributing to the loss of mice from local habitat within or adjacent 
to developed areas (Blair 1951, Humphrey and Barbour 1981, Holliman 
1983, Humphrey et al. 1987). Bowen (1968) provided an anecdotal report 
on the complete absence of beach mouse sign on a 3.2 km (2 mi) stretch 
of beach having abundant cat tracks. Frank and Humphrey (1992) noted a 
reduction of cat sign on dunes and an increase in Anastasia Island 
beach mouse (P. p. phasma) numbers and mean survivorship following 
removal of 15 to 20 cats from the camping area at Anastasia State 
Recreation Area. Gore and Schaeffer (1993) found a significant inverse 
relationship between the ratio of Santa Rosa beach mice to cat tracks 
on sample transects within developed and undeveloped dune areas on 
Santa Rosa Island. Their median transects in the developed areas 
contained no mouse tracks and 13 cat tracks. Bates (1992) found that 
predators in SJPSP did not appear to concentrate near dunes and the 
infrequent house cat tracks observed occurred mainly near structures. 
Although Bates failed to capture beach mice in dunes adjacent to the 
camping areas, Moyers et al. (1996) did capture mice and observe tracks 
in these areas. Gore (in litt. 1994) believed that the house cat 
population then on private lands south of SJPSP was less of a problem 
than other developed areas because the residences there served mainly 
as seasonal vacation homes. He nevertheless believed further 
introductions associated with additional land development could pose a 
serious threat to beach mouse populations.
    Other mammalian predators occurring on sand dunes within SJPSP 
include fox, bobcat, raccoon, and coyote (Bates 1992). Coyotes are 
relatively recent migrants to SJPSP and Crooked Island, where they have 
become predators on sea turtle nests (S. Shea, Tyndall Air Force Base, 
pers. comm. 1994; J. Bente, Florida Department of Environmental 
Protection, pers. comm. 1995).

D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms

    The Federal Coastal Barrier Resources Act of 1982 and the Coastal 
Barrier Improvement Act of 1990 (CBRA) prohibit most new Federal 
expenditures and financial assistance within Coastal Barrier Resources 
System (CBRS) units. CBRA also prohibits the sale of new Federal flood 
insurance for new construction or substantial improvements within 
otherwise protected areas. There are two CBRS units and one otherwise 
protected area within the historic range of the St. Andrew beach mouse. 
The Cape San Blas Unit (P30) covers all of the St. Joseph Peninsula, 
while the otherwise protected area (P30P) corresponds with the 
boundaries of St. Joseph Peninsula State Park. Habitat west of the city 
of Mexico Beach, including Crooked Island East and West, are part of 
the St. Andrew Complex Unit (P31). CBRA does not prohibit use of non-
Federal or private funds to finance or insure projects within CBRS 
units or otherwise protected areas. As a result, coastal construction 
may still proceed within all remaining undeveloped parcels within the 
subspecies' historic range.
    Eglin Air Force Base currently allows beach driving through its 
Cape San Blas property and adjacent property it leases from and manages 
for the U.S. Coast Guard. However, the agreement with Gulf County 
prohibits vehicles and pedestrians from encroaching on or near sand 
dunes. Strict enforcement of this provision has been difficult due to 
the distance of Eglin's main base from the Cape San Blas unit and the 
lack of onsite enforcement personnel. The distance also hampers efforts 
at evaluating and taking action on potential problems associated with 
free-ranging domestic cats.
    State laws protect sea oats, a critical component of the dune 
vegetative community, from being picked on public land but do not 
prohibit this activity on private land nor their destruction during 
construction activities. State-regulated Coastal Construction Control 
Lines (CCCL) correspond to the limits of the coastal high hazard 100-
year storm event impact area. Construction seaward of the CCCL requires 
permits whose stringent requirements generally result in protection of 
beach, frontal dune, and primary dune habitats (G. Chelicki, Florida 
Department of Environmental

[[Page 54032]]

Protection, pers. comm. 1997). The same protections are not afforded to 
secondary and scrub dune habitats occurring landward of the CCCL. The 
State has designated Crooked Island East and West as critical wildlife 
areas, which would protect plants and animals from take or disturbance 
by pedestrians, vehicles, and dogs, but this designation does not 
address habitat protection (S. Shea in litt. 1997).
    The St. Andrew beach mouse is listed as a State endangered species. 
Chapter 39-27.002 of the Florida Administrative Code prohibits the 
take, possession, or sale of endangered species except as authorized by 
specific permit for the purpose of enhancing the survival potential of 
the species. The law does not provide for the protection or 
conservation of a listed species' habitat.
    Bay County, Florida, restricts beach driving to permitted vendors. 
State parks on the St. Joseph Peninsula do not permit beach driving 
within their boundaries. Gulf County regulates beach driving on the 
peninsula between Indian Pass and SJPSP by ordinance and permits. The 
ordinances restrict the number of vehicle access points and prohibits 
driving in, on, or over sand dunes or vegetated areas. They do not 
address pedestrian encroachment. The most recent revised ordinance 
creates a 7.6 meter (25 foot) dune buffer zone within a portion of the 
St. Joseph Peninsula, in which beach driving and parking are prohibited 
(Misty Nabers, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, pers. 
comm. 1997). This revision does not apply to the section of the 
peninsula between about 3.2 km (2 mi) northwest of Cape San Blas to 
Money Bayou (D. Wibberg, pers. comm. 1997).
    Gulf County does not have any ordinances relating to the ownership, 
control, and handling of free-ranging domestic cats.

E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting its Continued Existence

    In addition to severe storms, other widespread climatic conditions 
that can occur within the range of the St. Andrew beach mouse include 
periods of drought and freezing weather. The extent of any direct or 
indirect impacts of these factors on beach mouse survival, either alone 
or in combination with manmade threats, is not known.
    Storms and residential and commercial development can fragment and 
isolate beach mouse habitat. This isolation precludes movement and gene 
flow among other habitat blocks. In smaller blocks, the lack of gene 
flow may result in a loss of genetic diversity, which can reduce the 
population's fitness. Increased predation pressure and competition for 
available food and cover may further weaken populations through direct 
mortality and reduced reproductive success. The combined threats may 
result in severe decline leading to extinction of these isolated 
populations (Caughley and Gunn 1996).
    The ecological similarity of house mice and oldfield mice (Gentry 
1966, Briese and Smith 1973) suggests that competition and aggression 
may occur between these species. An inverse relationship appears to 
exist between the population densities of the house mouse and inland 
oldfield mice (Caldwell 1964, Caldwell and Gentry 1965, Gentry 1966). 
Humphrey and Barbour (1981) documented mutually exclusive distribution 
patterns of house mice and other Gulf coast beach mice, a pattern 
similar to that observed by Frank and Humphrey (1992) for the Anastasia 
Island beach mouse, and by Gore (in litt. 1987, 1990, 1994) and Holler 
(in litt. 1994) for the St. Andrew beach mouse. The significance of 
competition to the observed patterns is not clear. In general, the 
observations suggest that where conditions favor one of the two 
species, that species will predominate or exclude the other species. 
Briese and Smith (1973) noted that house mice primarily invade 
disturbed areas, such as when development occurs, and are able to 
establish themselves in these and adjacent habitats occupied by low 
densities of oldfield mice. They also noted that house mice seem to be 
less affected by predation from house cats than oldfield mice.
    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 to propose this 
rule. Based on this evaluation, the preferred action is to list the St. 
Andrew beach mouse (Peromyscus polionotus peninsularis) as endangered. 
The primary threats to the continued existence of the species are 
habitat impacts from periodic severe weather and land development, 
which result in direct loss of mice and the capability of remaining 
mice to recover from such impacts. Other potentially significant 
threats include predation by free-ranging domestic cats and possible 
competitive displacement by the house mouse. The Service considers the 
threat of extinction of high magnitude and imminent because of the more 
than two-thirds estimated range curtailment, the species' restriction 
to a single land unit, and the recent high frequency of severe storms 
occurring within or in close proximity to the species' historic range.

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 are 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 determined to be threatened or endangered. The Service 
finds that designation of critical habitat is not prudent for the St. 
Andrew beach mouse at this time. Service regulations (50 CFR 
424.12(a)(1)) state that designation of critical habitat is not prudent 
when one or both of the following situations exist--(1) The species is 
threatened by taking or other human activity, and identification of 
critical habitat can be expected to increase the degree of threat to 
the species, or (2) such designation of critical habitat would not be 
beneficial to the species.
    Designated critical habitat is protected by the Act only under 
section 7(a)(2), which provides that activities that are federally 
funded, permitted, or carried out may not destroy or adversely modify 
critical habitat. However, section 7(a)(2), which also prohibits 
Federal activities likely to jeopardize listed species, provides 
substantial protection to the habitat of listed species, even if 
critical habitat is not designated. Section 7(a)(4) 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 the destruction or adverse modification of proposed critical 
habitat. For most species, including the St. Andrew beach mouse, the 
protection afforded the species' habitat through application of the no 
jeopardy standard is so strong, the Service believes there would be no 
direct net conservation benefit from designating critical habitat.
    Regulations (50 CFR part 402.02) define ``jeopardize the continued

[[Page 54033]]

existence of'' as meaning to engage in an action that would reasonably 
be expected, directly or indirectly, to reduce appreciably the 
likelihood of both the survival and recovery of a listed species in the 
wild by reducing the reproduction, numbers, or distribution of that 
species. ``Destruction or adverse modification'' is defined as a direct 
or indirect alteration that appreciably diminishes the value of 
critical habitat for both the survival and recovery of a listed 
species. The St. Andrew beach mouse is restricted to coastal sand dunes 
that consist of several rows paralleling the shoreline. The common 
types of sand dune habitat include frontal dunes, primary dunes, 
secondary dunes, inter and intradunal swales, and scrub dunes. Beach 
mice occur mostly in frontal, primary, and secondary dunes due in part 
to the predominance of plants whose seeds and fruits are important 
seasonal constituents of beach mouse diets. Further, scrub dunes may 
function as refugia during and after storms and as a source for 
recolonization of storm-damaged dunes. Because of the highly precarious 
status of the St. Andrew beach mouse, destruction or adverse 
modification of any of these habitat features to the point of 
appreciably diminishing habitat value for recovery and survival would 
also jeopardize the species' continued existence by reducing its 
reproduction, numbers, or distribution.
    For the St. Andrew beach mouse, the Service, therefore, has 
determined that designation of critical habitat would not add any 
protection over that afforded by the jeopardy standard. Any appreciable 
diminishment of habitat sufficient to appreciably reduce the value of 
the habitat for survival and recovery would also appreciably reduce the 
likelihood of survival and recovery by reducing reproduction, numbers, 
or distribution. The Service has found this to be the case for several 
listed species, for which an appreciable reduction in habitat value 
would trigger the jeopardy standard, for example the Appalachian elktoe 
mussel, listed as endangered on November 23, 1994 (59 FR 60324), and 
three Texas aquatic invertebrates, listed as endangered on June 5, 1995 
(60 FR 29537).
    Within unoccupied lands under Federal management, both Eglin and 
Tyndall Air Force bases are actively involved in conservation of sand 
dune habitat. Eglin Air Force Base does not allow dune encroachment by 
vehicles and pedestrians within its Cape San Blas unit boundaries and 
closely reviews mission-related activities for potential habitat 
impacts (R. McWhite, Eglin Air Force Base, pers. comm. 1997). Eglin 
recently completed an ecological survey of Cape San Blas that will 
assist them in deciding how best to manage the natural resources within 
the unit. On Crooked Island, Tyndall Air Force Base restricts beach 
access on both east and west segments to pedestrians and authorized 
vehicles, and also prohibits dune encroachment. Natural resource 
personnel review all requests for military operations to minimize or 
eliminate potential habitat disturbances. Because of these current 
conditions, the Service believes that a designation of Crooked Island 
or Cape San Blas as critical habitat is not prudent because it would 
not result in any additional benefit to the species.
    Based on the above discussion, the Service has determined that the 
lack of additional conservation benefit from critical habitat 
designation for this species makes such designation not prudent.

Available Conservation Measures

    Conservation measures provided to species listed as endangered or 
threatened under the Endangered Species Act include recognition, 
recovery actions, requirements for Federal protection, and prohibition 
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) requires Federal agencies to confer with the 
Service on any action that is likely to jeopardize the continued 
existence of a species proposed for listing or result in the 
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 the species or 
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.
    Federal agency actions that are expected to require conference and/
or consultation as described in the preceding paragraph include 
mission-related activities authorized or carried out by Tyndall Air 
Force Base on Crooked Island and by Eglin Air Force Base at the Cape 
San Blas unit, following any translocation of beach mice to these 
locations. The Service's experience with other beach mice indicates 
that, with planning, beach mouse conservation and military activities 
are compatible.
    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) provides flood 
insurance for completed structures through the National Flood Insurance 
Program. Section 7 of the Act normally would require FEMA to consider 
conference or consultation with the Service where the agency provides 
flood insurance to private landowners with structures located in 
occupied habitat. In this case, private property occupied by the beach 
mouse within the St. Joseph Peninsula is also located within a CBRS 
unit and subject to the CBRA prohibitions against the acquisition of 
new federally-funded coastal flood insurance for new construction or 
substantial improvements (see factor D under ``Summary of Factors 
Affecting the Species''). The Service, therefore, believes the proposed 
listing will have no additional impact on the application of FEMA's 
flood insurance program.
    U.S. Army Corps of Engineers involvement in the section 7 
consultation process may result from the issuance of permits for the 
filling of wet interdunal swales subject to section 404 of the Clean 
Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344 et seq.). Conference or consultation will be 
required should the Corps determine that such permit issuance may 
affect the St. Andrew beach mouse.
    The Service may undertake internal consultations when carrying out 
recovery activities such as dune restoration and construction of 
pedestrian crossovers or when reviewing incidental take permit 
applications under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act.
    The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration administers the 
Coastal Energy Impact Program (CEIP). CEIP is a Federal assistance 
program providing grant and loan assistance for use in planning 
studies, public works construction, land acquisition, and environmental 
loss mitigation projects, all associated with energy-related facility 
siting. Such a siting, however unlikely, within

[[Page 54034]]

occupied or potentially occupied habitat might result in some 
modification that minimizes or avoids impacts to the species. The great 
majority of section 7 consultations traditionally result either in no 
project changes or modifications rather than curtailment of the 
affected Federal activity.
    Actions taken and in progress for the St. Andrew beach mouse 
include updated status surveys within a portion of the historic range, 
a population genetics analysis, and population viability modeling. 
Future actions include a translocation of some mice from the St. Joseph 
Peninsula to Crooked Island East through the cooperation and support of 
Tyndall Air Force Base. The Service plans to continue pursuing 
conservation actions it believes will be effective in measurably 
reducing the threats to the species' continued existence.
    The Act and its implementing regulations set forth a series of 
general prohibitions and exceptions that apply to all endangered 
wildlife. The prohibitions, codified at 50 CFR 17.21, in part, make it 
illegal for any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States 
to take (includes harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, 
capture, 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 any foreign commerce any listed 
species. It is also 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.
    Should this rule be finalized, the prohibitions of section 9 will 
not apply to St. Andrew Beach mice which were held in captivity or a 
controlled environment on the date of the final rulemaking, provided 
that such holding and any subsequent holding of such mice was not in 
the course of a commercial activity.
    Permits may be issued to carry out otherwise prohibited activities 
involving endangered wildlife under certain circumstances. Regulations 
governing permits are codified 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 the course of 
otherwise lawful activities.
    It is the policy of the Service, published in the Federal Register 
on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34272), to identify to the maximum extent 
practicable at the time a species is listed, those activities that 
would or would not constitute a violation of section 9 of the Act. The 
intent of this policy is to increase public awareness of the effect of 
this listing on proposed and ongoing activities within the species' 
range. The Service believes that, based on the best available 
information, the following actions will not result in a violation of 
section 9:
    (1) Beneficial activities whose implementation does not result in 
take of beach mice. Such activities include, but are not limited to, 
boardwalk construction on or over dunes, use of snow fencing and 
planting of local, native dune vegetation to accelerate dune 
restoration, and dune reconstruction using beach quality sand.
    (2) Normal residential activities on unoccupied habitat that would 
not result in take of beach mice, such as, landscape maintenance, 
private development and dune access by vehicles and pedestrians.
    (3) Activities authorized, funded, or carried out by a Federal 
agency when the action is conducted in accordance with section 7 of the 
Act.
    Potential activities involving the St. Andrew beach mouse that the 
Service believes will likely be considered a violation of section 9 
include, but are not limited to, the following:
    (1) Take of St. Andrew beach mouse without a permit.
    (2) Possession, sale, delivery, carrying, transportation, or 
shipping of illegally taken St. Andrew beach mice.
    (3) Destruction or alteration of occupied habitat that results in 
the death of or injury to the St. Andrew beach mouse through the 
significant impairment of essential behaviors including breeding, 
feeding, or sheltering.
    Questions regarding whether specific activities will constitute a 
violation of section 9 or to obtain approved guidelines for actions 
within beach mouse habitat, contact the Field Supervisor of the 
Service's Panama City Field Office, 1612 June Avenue, Panama City, 
Florida 32405-3721 (telephone 850/769-0552). Requests for copies of the 
regulations concerning listed animals and inquiries regarding 
prohibitions and permits may be addressed to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service, Ecological Services, Permit Coordinator, 1875 Century 
Boulevard, Suite 200, Atlanta, Georgia 30345 (telephone 404/679-7110; 
facsimile 404/679-7081).

Public Comments Solicited

    The Service intends that any final action resulting from this 
proposal will be as accurate and as effective as possible. Therefore, 
comments or suggestions from the public, other concerned governmental 
agencies, the scientific community, industry, or any other interested 
party concerning this proposed rule are hereby solicited. Comments 
particularly are sought concerning:
    (1) Biological, commercial trade, or other relevant data concerning 
any threat (or lack thereof) to this species;
    (2) The location of any additional populations of this species and 
the reasons why any habitat should or should not be determined to be 
critical habitat pursuant to section 4 of the Act;
    (3) Additional information concerning the range, distribution, and 
population size of this species; and
    (4) Current or planned activities in the subject area and their 
possible impacts on this species.
    Final promulgation of the regulations on this species will take 
into consideration the comments and any additional information received 
by the Service, and such communications may lead to a final regulation 
that differs from this proposal.
    The Act provides for one or more public hearings on this proposal, 
if requested. Requests must be received within 45 days of the date of 
publication of the proposal in the Federal Register. Such requests must 
be made in writing and be addressed to the Jacksonville Field Office 
(see ADDRESSES section).

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. A notice outlining the Service's reasons for this 
determination was published in the Federal Register on October 25, 1983 
(48 FR 49244).

Required Determinations

    The Service has examined this regulation under the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995 and found it to contain no information collection 
requirements.

References Cited

    A complete list of all references cited herein, as well as others, 
is available upon request from the Jacksonville Field Office (see 
ADDRESSES section).
    Author: The primary author of this document is John Milio (see 
ADDRESSES section).

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

    Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and

[[Page 54035]]

recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.

Proposed Regulation Promulgation

    Accordingly, the Service hereby proposes to amend part 17, 
subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, 
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 MAMMALS, to the List of Endangered and 
Threatened Wildlife to read as follows:


Sec. 17.11  Endangered and threatened wildlife.

* * * * *
    (h) * * *

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Species                                                    Vertebrate                                                           
--------------------------------------------------------                        population where                                  Critical     Special  
                                                            Historic range       endangered or         Status      When listed    habitat       rules   
           Common name                Scientific name                              threatened                                                           
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mammals                                                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                                        
                   *                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *                  
Mouse, St. Andrew beach..........  Peromyscus            U.S.A.(FL).........  Entire.............  E               ...........           NA           NA
                                    polionotus                                                                                                          
                                    peninsularis.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                                        
                   *                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *                  
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dated: October 2, 1997.

Jamie Rappaport Clark,
Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 97-27549 Filed 10-16-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P