WASHINGTON -- A proposed critical habitat designation for two freshwater mussels in Arkansas should consider how landowners and businesses will be affected, dozens of people have said in public comments to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
RELATED ARTICLE
http://www.arkansas…">6 in D.C. on board to edit habitat law
The designation would cover 769 miles of streams and rivers in Arkansas. It was first proposed more than two years ago and has pitted the Fish and Wildlife Service against landowners, business and government groups, and several Arkansas elected officials who want a smaller protection zone for the less-than-6-inch-long mussels.
Comments can still be submitted until 10:59 p.m. local time Monday.
The Neosho mucket is found in Benton and Washington counties, as well as parts of Kansas, Missouri and Oklahoma. The dark-brown, kidney-shaped mussel is 4 to 6 inches long, according to the Oklahoma Wildlife Department. Arkansas is home to 26 miles of its proposed protected habitat.
The greater concern is the rabbitsfoot mussel, which is found in 31 of the state's 75 counties and parts of 12 other states. The rectangular, olive-colored mussel is covered with small, dark-green or black triangles and is commonly less than 5 inches long, according to the Kansas Department of Wildlife, Parks and Tourism.
Much of the concern centers on local frustration about what economic factors the federal government considers when it makes a designation.
In 2013, the Fish and Wildlife Service finalized a rule that it will consider only the "incremental" economic effects of a critical habitat designation. This means it primarily will look at the cost of the time other federal agencies must take to consult with the wildlife agency before authorizing activities within critical habitat and will ignore the other economic effects.
Arkansas' delegation has filed legislation to change the Endangered Species Act and require more detailed economic study.
Arkansas Farm Bureau President Randy Veach said it is reasonable for farmers and businesses to know what the designation will mean for them financially.
"Any time that we are going to have an endangered species critical habitat designation, there should be and must be a full economic impact [study] about how it's going to affect lives and livelihood," he said.
Veach said farmers and ranchers along the waterways are still concerned about whether the designation will open them to lawsuits from conservation groups and whether it will make life harder for people involved in agriculture.
Veach said the 31 counties affected include thousands of farms, millions of acres of farmland and billions of dollars worth of crops.
"You can see how important this is and how broad the impact is," Veach said.
Many of the comments raise concerns about whether the designation will affect how people can use their land. The service maintains the designation will do little to restrict landowners, Arkansas field office endangered species coordinator Chris Davidson said.
"Critical habitat has no effect on private land use or activities," he said. The only time landowners should notice any thing is if they need help from the federal government, such as a permit, he said.
Most concerned landowners probably aren't even aware there are other protected mussels, such as the winged mapleleaf mussel or ring pink mussel, already living in the rivers the service wants to designate, Davidson said. Those mussels are not covered by a critical habitat designation.
"The rivers that are being proposed as critical habitat have other listed mussels in those rivers and have for two or three decades," Davidson said. "Adding another mussel ... is not going to add additional conservation measures. More than likely you've been doing whatever activities you do on your property for decades."
WHAT IT MEANS
The U.S. recognizes 1,535 endangered or threatened species. Some of those designations have sparked opposition.
An endangered species is one in danger of extinction, according to the service's website. A threatened species is likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future. The Endangered Species Act of 1973 put the Wildlife Service in charge of conserving the ecosystems of endangered and threatened species and preventing the extinction of plants and animals. The service's website lists 24 endangered or threatened species in Arkansas, including several types of fish, crayfish and bats.
Fewer than half of endangered or threatened species -- 692 -- have a designated critical habitat, according to the service. Two, the leopard darter and the yellowcheek darter fish, are in Arkansas.
Critical habitat is defined as a specific geographic area that contains features essential for the conservation of a threatened or endangered species and that may require special management and protection, according to the service. Critical habitat may include an area where the species is not currently found, but that will be needed for its recovery.
Biologists consider what physical and biological features are needed for the species to live and reproduce, including shelter, food and breeding sites.
When a critical habitat is designated, other federal agencies are required to consult with the service on actions they carry out, fund or authorize to ensure that their actions don't destroy or modify critical habitats.
THE COMMENTS
The Fish and Wildlife Service has had four public comment periods since listing the mussels on the endangered species list in September 2012. It also had public meetings in Batesville and Benton earlier in the summer.
"Because of the controversy in Arkansas, we're providing the public with more opportunity to comment," Davidson said. "We've not seen much controversy in any of the other 11 states [affected]."
Nearly half of the 1,655 miles of land touching the waterways affected by the rabbitsfoot mussel designation are in Arkansas and are privately owned, according to the service's environmental assessment.
He said it's not normal for the service to have four comment periods or so much interest in freshwater mussels.
Once the public comment period ends, the comments are reviewed by staff at the local Fish and Wildlife branch, the Atlanta office and then in Washington, D.C., Davidson said. A final decision on the rule likely will come by early December, he said.
As of Friday afternoon, the service had received 68 comments on the designation since the designation was proposed in October 2012. The comments are posted online as they are received.
Those wanting to comment can go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov and search for docket FWS-R4-ES-2013-0007.
Early comments about the designation are positive or involve technical questions. Many of those comments come from state government agencies. By October 2013, commenters started to ask about how it will affect them economically.
Sam Torn, owner of Camp Ozark in Mount Ida, wrote in a comment posted Oct. 29, 2013, that he was concerned the designation would keep the camp from expanding and would keep visitors from playing in the Ouachita River.
Vicky Bonds of Conway wrote July 8 to say she would prefer an economic study that also looked at how property owners and businesses would be affected by the designation.
Robert Griffin, who provided no identifying information, wrote June 13 that the mussels shouldn't be allowed to affect agricultural production.
"Someone in Washington with no knowledge of the river or farming methods can propagate regulations to harm sustainable farming practices and threaten the livelihood of our most important species, mankind," he wrote. "As a farmer, father, husband, community oriented and ecologically minded person, I urge that no rules be placed upon the use of the river that might impede the normal historical production practices of agricultural. The most critical species on earth is man and any attempt to threaten the food production of mankind must be stopped."
On May 20, Jane Stein-kraus, 56, of Fayetteville submitted one of the few Arkansas comments supporting the designation. She wrote about how mussels filter and clean water, excrete nutrients other plants and animals eat, and stabilize river beds.
Steinkraus said by phone that her interest comes from the time she spent living near a shell-button factory in Canton, Mo., as a child. She said the buttons, made of mussel shells, helped lead to "an utter collapse of the mussel population."
Waldron City Alderman John Luttrell wrote June 9 that people in Scott County feel the designation is a federal government overreach that will harm them.
"We are all against this move and very concerned that anyone, especially our own government would put the property rights and livelihood of Arkansas citizens behind some mussels," he said.
Metro on 07/13/2014