April 7, 2000

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ms. Elizabeth Estill

Regional Forester

U.S. Forest Service, Southern Region

1720 Peachtree Road, NW.

Atlanta, Georgia 30367-9102

 

Dear Ms. Estill:

 

Subject:   Biological Assessment on the Effects of Implementing the Nantahala and Pisgah National Forests Land and Resource Management Plan, Amendment Five, on the Indiana Bat (Myotis sodalis)

 

This document transmits the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (Service) biological opinion based on our review of the subject biological assessment and its effect on the Indiana bat in accordance with section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).  We received your October 18, 1999, request for formal consultation on October 18, 1999.

 

This biological opinion is based on information provided in the October 18, 1999, biological assessment, supplemental information to the biological assessment (requested on December 15, 1999, received January 13, 2000), other available literature, personal communications with experts on the federally endangered Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis), and other sources of information.  A complete administrative record of this consultation is on file at this office.

 

CONSULTATION HISTORY

 

In 1994 the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) completed a biological assessment (BA) on the Nantahala and Pisgah National Forests Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan) for federally proposed, threatened, endangered, and candidate species, including the Indiana bat.  The Service concurred with the USFS’s determination of “not likely to adversely affect”^[1] for the Forest Plan (Service 1994).  The provisions of section 7 of the Act were met.  The “not likely to adversely affect” determination did not require formal consultation with the Service.

 

Until 1995, bat experts with most national forests in the Southeastern United States believed that southern forests (that did not have hibernacula) were not used by Indiana bats, particularly as summer maternity habitat.  However, in 1994 and 1995, reproductive female Indiana bats were captured between mid‑June and September on the Morehead Ranger District, Daniel Boone National Forest, Kentucky, providing the first indication that southern forests may be used as summer maternity habitat by Indiana bats.  Because of these new records, southern forests near winter hibernacula sites began reexamining the likelihood of having maternity colonies during summer months; many forests initiated summer mist‑net surveys of likely habitat.

 

The USFS began these mist‑net surveys, initially focusing on those portions of the national forests having the greatest likelihood of being occupied by reproductively active bats.  Factors used to determine the likelihood of occurrence included habitat characteristics and the proximity of USFS land to recent or historical hibernation records.  Mist‑net surveys were initiated on the Nantahala National Forest in late May 1999.

 

On July 25, 1999, two Indiana bats were netted in the upper Santeetlah Creek drainage in Graham County, North Carolina.  A postlactating adult female and a juvenile male were captured and banded.  A radio transmitter was attached to the female, and both bats were released at the capture site.  On July 26, 1999, research personnel found the adult bat’s roost site.

 

On the evening of July 26, 1999, a third Indiana bat, a juvenile female, was netted less than 100 yards from the initial capture site.  All three bats were captured within 25 miles (mi.) of White Oak Blowhole Cave (a Priority II Indiana bat hibernaculum) in Tennessee.  On July 27 and 28, 1999, additional field work verified the presence of a summer maternity colony of up to 28 bats roosting in a large, dead Canadian hemlock.  The capture of these Indiana bats on the Nantahala National Forest represents the first known summer maternity activity in western North Carolina.

 

Following the discovery of these Indiana bats in Graham County, the USFS began informal consultation with the Service.  Based on the new record, the Service advised the USFS that the species may be present anywhere in Graham County and, because of similar habitat, in adjacent counties (Macon, Swain, and Cherokee), and that the cutting of trees as small as 3.1 inches (in.) in diameter could impact the Indiana bat (Romme et al. 1995).  The USFS evaluated these risks and suspended activities involving the cutting of trees in the four‑county area until the effects of ongoing and proposed actions could be determined.  The USFS determined that the recent discovery of the Indiana bat maternity colony required a review of the effects of their proposed and ongoing projects on the Nantahala National Forest in Graham County and the adjoining counties.

 

On September 7, 1999, the Service received an Amendment to the Biological Evaluations for the Independence Day Storm Project, Barker/Belding Timber Sale, Poison Cove Timber Sale, and Tatham Gap Timber Sale, on the Cheoah Ranger District, Nantahala National Forest, Graham County, North Carolina, and Big Choga Timber Sale, on the Wayah Ranger District, Nantahala National Forest, Macon County, North Carolina, in which the USFS determined that the subject timber sales would not adversely affect the endangered Indiana bat.  These sales were part of those initially suspended when the Indiana bat was discovered on the Nantahala National Forest.

 

The Service agreed with the determination in the amended biological evaluations, which was based on additional mist‑netting and habitat evaluations, that the Indiana bat does not occur or is only present at undetectably low levels in those project areas.  The Service also agreed that, given the information provided in the biological evaluations, should the species be present at an undetectably low level or begin using the area in the future, an abundance of suitable habitat will be available after the subject projects are completed.  Therefore, the Service concurred with the USFS’s determination that the projects, as described, are not likely to adversely affect the Indiana bat (Service 1999a).

 

On September 16, 1999, the USFS amended the biological evaluation for the Tuni Gap Road construction project on the Wayah Ranger District, Nantahala National Forest, Macon County, North Carolina, and determined that the subject project would not adversely affect the endangered Indiana bat.  Because of the lack of snags (i.e., dead, standing trees) in the immediate project area and the quantity of suitable habitat immediately outside the project area, the Service concurred with the USFS’s “not likely to adversely affect” determination (Service 1999b).

 

On September 16, 1999, the Service also received an amendment to the biological evaluation for the Martin Easement (Whitner Bend Road), Tusquitee Ranger District, Nantahala National Forest, Cherokee County, North Carolina, in which the USFS determined that the subject project would not adversely affect the endangered Indiana bat.  Because there are only a few snags and only a handful of large trees in the project area, most of which are species not likely to provide suitable roosting habitat, the probability of an Indiana bat using the area or being affected by the proposed project is small.  Further, the direct loss of 1.3 acres (ac.) of forested habitat and possible indirect losses to home construction (though potentially suitable as Indiana bat habitat in the future) are not likely to affect Indiana bat use in the local area, given the thousands of acres of suitable habitat surrounding the project area.  Therefore, the Service concurred with the USFS’s determination that the project, as described, was not likely to adversely affect the Indiana bat (Service 1999c).

 

On September 30, 1999, the USFS amended the biological evaluation for the U.S. 19/74 turn lane and bridge replacement, Wayah Ranger District, Nantahala National Forest, Swain County, North Carolina, and determined that the subject project would not adversely affect the endangered Indiana bat.  Because of the lack of snags in the immediate project area, the fact that tree removal would occur while the bats were hibernating, and the abundance of suitable habitat immediately outside the project area, the Service concurred with the “not likely to adversely affect” determination (Service 1999d).

 

On October 18, 1999, the USFS completed the subject BA on the effects of implementing the Forest Plan on the Indiana bat.  As stated in the BA, “This new occurrence information, as well as a refinement of new knowledge of this species’ habitat requirements, prompted the need to reexamine the potential effects of continued implementation of the existing Forest Plan, as amended.  The verification of a summer maternity colony on the Nantahala National Forest increases the likelihood of other summer maternity colonies being present throughout the national forests.”  The following biological opinion is the Service’s analysis of this BA.

 

On October 19, 1999, the USFS amended the biological evaluation for the construction of a drain field to service a flush toilet in the Ferebee Memorial Picnic Area, Wayah Ranger District, Nantahala National Forest, Swain County, North Carolina, and determined that the subject project would not adversely affect the endangered Indiana bat.  Because of the lack of snags in the immediate project area, the timing of tree removal, and the quantity of suitable habitat immediately outside the project area, the Service concurred with the USFS’s “not likely to adversely affect” determination (Service 1999e).

 

 

BIOLOGICAL OPINION

 

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION

 

As defined in the Service’s section 7 regulations (50 CFR 402.02), “action” means “all activities or programs of any kind authorized, funded, or carried out, in whole or in part, by Federal agencies in the United States or upon the high seas.”  The “action area” is defined as “all areas to be affected directly or indirectly by the Federal action and not merely the immediate area involved in the action.”  The direct and indirect effects of the actions and activities must be considered in conjunction with the effects of other past and present Federal, State, or private activities, as well as the cumulative effects of reasonably certain future State or private activities within the action area.  This biological opinion (Opinion) addresses only those actions for which the Service believes adverse effects may occur.  In their BA, the USFS outlined those activities in the Forest Plan (and projects predicated upon it) that would affect the Indiana bat.  This Opinion addresses whether continued implementation of the Land and Resource Management Plan, Amendment Five, on the Nantahala and Pisgah National Forests (NPNFs) is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the Indiana bat.

 

The proposed action, as defined in the BA, is “the continued implementation of the Nantahala and Pisgah Land and Resource Management Plan, Amendment Five, and projects predicated upon it.”  The proposed action includes likely future site‑specific projects.  The purpose of the USFS’s programmatic BA is to document the potential effects of the continued implementation of the existing Forest Plan for the NPNFs, specifically those measures that deal with the management and monitoring of populations and habitat of the federally endangered Indiana bat.

 

The stated objectives of the BA are to:

 

(1)   Comply with the requirements of the Act so that actions by Federal agencies (in this case the NPNFs) do not jeopardize the existence of this species or adversely modify its critical habitat;

 

(2)   Assess the implementation of the current Forest Plan, which describes the USFS’s likely future actions and standards and guidelines and the effects implementation will have on the federally endangered Indiana bat;

 

(3)   Document standards and guidelines implemented on the NPNFs that benefit this species; and

 

(4)   Provide biological input to ensure USFS compliance with the National Forest Management Act, Forest Service Manual 2670, and the Act.

 

Action Area

 

The action area for this opinion is the NPNFs in North Carolina.  The NPNFs lie within the Blue Ridge Province of the Appalachian Mountains.  Elevations range from about 1,000 feet (ft.) to more than 6,000 ft. above sea level.  The Appalachian Mountains were formed by many complex geologic processes over the last 1.8 billion years.  The Blue Ridge Mountains are primarily comprised of igneous and metamorphic rock types.  Soils are dominated by Ochrepts and Udults and are generally moderately deep and of medium texture.  Soils receive adequate moisture for growth of vegetation throughout the year.

 

There are five active mines and leases on the NPNFs, ranging from 3‑158 ac. in size.  There are no current oil, gas, geothermal, or other energy mineral mines or leases on or within the periphery of the NPNFs.

 

Water

 

The region has a high density of small to medium‑sized perennial streams and rivers.  About 4,431 mi. of perennial streams and about 300 mi. of cool‑ and warm‑water rivers occur on the NPNFs.  The largest rivers include the French Broad and Little Tennessee rivers.  No natural lakes exist; however, there are about 36,000 ac. of manmade lakes and reservoirs.  Of this area, approximately 35,900 ac. are reservoirs maintained by other agencies and private companies for flood control and/or hydroelectric power generation.

 

Average precipitation ranges from 31‑50 in. in most of the action area but is higher on the highest mountain peaks.  The eastern three ranger districts average the lowest annual rainfall amounts across the NPNFs.  Along parts of the southern Blue Ridge escarpment bordering the Southern Appalachian Piedmont Section, rainfall averages over 80 in.  Mean annual temperature is 50 -62 F and ranges from 38 F in January to 76 F in July.

 

Disturbance Regimes

Fire, wind, ice, and precipitation are the principal causes of natural disturbance.  Indications are that Native Americans used fire for many purposes, especially at low elevations in the drier intermountain basin.  Lightning‑caused fire is more predominant along the eastern sections of the Blue Ridge Mountains, and on dry xeric aspects dominated by yellow pine and oaks.  Although tornadoes are uncommon, localized microbursts of intense winds have the potential to cause small patches of trees to be uprooted occasionally in the area.  Winter ice storms are common at mid‑ to high elevations and can cause extensive damage to tree crowns.  The American chestnut blight caused broad‑scale disturbance and conversion of the original tree species composition to more oak‑dominated composition.  The gypsy moth has affected localized sections of the NPNFs.  The potential for major gypsy moth defoliation is high due to the predominance of oak species in forested stands.  Other forest pests threaten the American hemlock, flowering dogwood, Fraser fir, butternut, and other important forest species.

 

Vegetation

 

Vegetation in the area consists of Appalachian oak forest, southeastern spruce‑fir forest, and northern hardwoods (McNabb and Avers 1994).  The dominant vegetation is montane, cold‑deciduous, and broad‑leaved forest dominated by the genus Quercus.  Black (Q. velutina), white (Q. alba), and chestnut oak (Q. montana) dominate the drier mountain slopes, with pitch pine (Pinus rigida) representing a major component along ridge tops.  Mesophytic species, such as yellow poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), red maple (Acer rubrum), northern red oak (Q. rubra), and sweet birch (Betula lenta), dominate the moister valley sites and slopes.  Hardwood‑pine cover types, consisting of scarlet (Q. coccinea), white, blackjack (Q. marilandica), and post oak (Q. stellata) and shortleaf (P. echinata) and Virginia pine (P. virginiana), are dominant in the intermontane basins.  Table mountain pine (P. pungens) is common on xeric ridge tops, where fire most likely was historically more frequent.  Mesic sites at higher elevations (more than 4,500 ft.) are commonly occupied by northern hardwoods such as basswood (Tilia sp.), sugar maple (Acer saccharum), and buckeye (Aesculus sp.), with northern red oak more dominant on drier sites.  Red spruce (Picea rubra) and Fraser fir (Abies fraseri) can often be found at altitudes above 5,000 ft.

 

The USFS used their Forest Continuous Information of Stand Condition (CISC) database for the NPNFs to group forest habitats into six major forest groups (Table 1 and Appendix D).  The Upland Hardwood Group occupies the greatest acreage on the NPNFs (45.6% of total forest acreage and 47.9% of forested acreage).  Hardwood‑dominated forest types comprise more than 83% of forested acreage on the NPNFs (805,012 ac.).

Table 1.  Composition of Forest Groupings on the Nantahala and Pisgah National Forests (1999).
Forest Groups	Acres	Percent Composition	Percent of Forest
Conifer	83,782	8.2	8.6
White Pine-Hardwood	43,556	4.3	4.5
Yellow Pine-Hardwood	37,702	3.7	3.9
Cove Hardwood	289,442	28.5	29.8
Upland Hardwood	464,156	45.6	47.9
Northern Hardwood	51,414	5.0	5.3
Non-Forest	25,231	2.3	-
Other Uninventoried	23,425	2.3	-

 

For both forests, approximately 88% of the forested acreage is more than 40 years old, with 65% equal to or greater than 70 years.  More than 18% of forested acres are over 100 years old.  For hardwood‑dominated forest types, more than 76% of these forest types are greater than 40 years old, and 59% are over 70 years old (Table 2).

 

Table 2.  Forest Age‑class Distribution (1999) (percent of each forest group total).
Age‑Class	Conifer	White Pine-Hardwood	Yellow Pine-Hardwood	Cove Hardwood	Upland Hardwood	Northern Hardwood	Total
0-10 years	6.0	5.3	2.0	2.2	1.4	0.7	2.2
11-39 years	35.8	19.1	6.1	8.0	5.8	5.7	9.6
40-69 years	11.9	19.0	17.3	28.3	14.9	34.2	19.9
70-99 years	34.5	43.1	52.3	53.4	52.8	38.4	50.2
100+ years	11.8	13.5	22.3	8.1	25.2	21.1	18.1

 

Of the approximately 1,025,000 ac. of national forest land administered by the NPNFs, roughly 71% (730,328 ac.) are classified as unsuitable for commercial timber production (Pages E‑10 and E‑11 of the Forest Plan).

 

This Opinion addresses a variety of management directions and associated activities that are planned, funded, executed, or permitted by the USFS on the NPNFs.  These activities are implemented in accordance with the provisions contained in the Forest Plan.  The Forest Plan is a general programmatic planning document that provides management goals, objectives, and standards and guidelines under which project‑level activities (e.g., timber sales, wildlife habitat management, road construction, special uses, etc.) may be planned and implemented to carry out the management direction of the NPNFs.  Additional management direction and guidelines are included in the Forest Plan for specific management areas.  Land‑use allocations are made and outputs are projected based on the direction established in the Forest Plan.  All project‑level activities undergo National Environmental Policy Act review by appropriate USFS personnel when proposed, as well as an assessment of project effects on federally listed species in compliance with section 7 of the Act.  The Forest Plan establishes multiple‑use management area prescriptions (including associated standards and guidelines) for future decision making that are adjustable (via monitoring and evaluation) by amendment and revision.

 

The BA did not contemplate or assess North Carolina Department of Transportation/Federal Highway Administration activities on the NPNFs.  These activities are not included in this Opinion and will be subject to separate consultation(s) pursuant to section 7 of the Act.  In addition, USFS activities proposed at levels higher than those projected in the BA (see Table 3) will require further consultation with the Service.

 

Management Actions:  Types and Amounts of Activities

 

There are many ongoing and planned activities on the NPNFs that could affect Indiana bats or their habitat.  The BA details the expected management actions, as described below, and the anticipated levels of activity (summarized in Table 3).

 

Prescribed Fire - Fire is prescribed to create and maintain desired vegetative composition (for scenic vistas, for wildlife habitat, to reduce fire hazards, and to control forest pests) and to accomplish other forest management objectives such as site preparation.  Prescribed burns for wildlife generally fall into two categories:  (1) burning existing wildlife openings to help maintain early successional habitat (typically grass fires conducted in the late winter or early spring) and (2) burning understory in a forested area, usually between the fall and early spring, to create or maintain areas with open or reduced understory conditions.

 

Trail Construction - New trails are built to accommodate a variety of uses and experience levels while complementing forestwide and management area objectives.  The use of these trails could include hiking, horseback riding, mountain biking, and off‑road vehicles.

 

Recreation Site Construction - Construction of new recreational sites or support facilities at new or existing recreational sites.

 

Facilities - Construction of or additions to administrative buildings or support facilities at USFS offices and work centers.

 

Regeneration by Selection Method - Regeneration occurs in small openings large enough to provide conditions necessary to regenerate species that are shade intolerant or intermediate in shade tolerance.  In the Appalachians, the diameter of the group opening is defined as one and a half to two times the mature tree height for the stand.  This usually results in openings of 1/4‑1 ac., depending on the desired species, tree height, and topography.  The resulting stand structure will be uneven‑aged, with a mosaic of age‑class groups.  Most often, regeneration will be from sprouts, seedlings or advanced reproduction.  To eliminate competition with the new age‑class, site preparation may include cutting down competing vegetation or treating it with herbicides.  Both methods may be used either before or after the regeneration cut.

 

 

Regeneration by Even‑aged Methods

 

Clearcut - A method of regenerating stands in which new production develops in fully exposed environmental conditions after removal of most or all of the existing trees.  Reproduction may originate naturally from seedlings, seedling sprouts, and sprouts from stumps and roots.  Reproduction may also be introduced artificially by planting or direct seeding.  The new stand originating on a clearcut area is even‑aged regardless of the age structure before clearcutting.

Shelterwood - In this regeneration method, the stand is removed in two or more cuts, and the new stand is established through natural or artificial reproduction before the overstory is removed.  The overstory is removed within 10‑20 years (normally within one‑fifth of the rotation age).  The result is an even‑aged stand with a structure and composition similar to the clearcut method.  Site preparation may include the control of competing vegetation by cutting, treating with herbicides, or combining the two methods, depending on the site‑specific objectives and needs.

 

Regeneration by Two‑aged Method - The mature stand is partially cut and a new age‑class is established either by natural or artificial methods.  The residual overstory is left in place until mid‑rotation of the new stand or later (40+ years).  The overstory often remains until the new age‑class reaches rotation age.  With the development and growth of the new stand in the understory, along with the continued growth of the overstory, the stand takes on a two‑aged structure.

 

Timber Harvest for Salvage and Other Purposes - Timber is salvaged to recover the value from timber damaged from weather and insect and disease infestations.  Typically in the mountains, weather damage is a result of high‑wind events, ice storms, and snowstorms.  Insect infestations include southern pine beetle, other boring insects, and gypsy moth.  Disease infestations include oak decline and root diseases.  Other activities include the clearing of road rights‑of‑way and the removal of the overstory in shelterwood harvests.

 

Thinning - A timber harvest method to reduce stand density in immature stands, primarily to recover potential mortality and/or to improve the growth of the residual trees.  Thinning operations may be commercial or noncommercial.

 

Road Construction - Most of the roads constructed on the NPNFs are constructed to the lowest traffic service level with a clearing width of 25 ft. or less.  Roads are constructed primarily to support timber harvest operations.  New roads may remain open, or be closed to the public, depending on the open road density requirements and the management objectives for an area.

 

Road Reconstruction - Road reconstruction involves bringing old roads up to current standards that meet designated management objectives.  Activities may include tree removal, reshaping and/or widening, culvert replacement, and placement of gravel.

 

Road Decommissioning - Roads that are being permanently closed and revegetated.

 

Wildlife Opening Construction - Wildlife openings are generally constructed to provide early successional habitat (permanent grass/forb) in areas lacking such habitat.  Openings are beneficial to many wildlife species, such as Neotropical migratory birds, butterflies and other insects, small mammals, birds of prey, white‑tailed deer, and eastern wild turkey.  Most openings are less than 5 ac. in size, with a majority averaging about 1 ac.  Wildlife openings are usually constructed by cutting trees in an area, clearing the area of stumps and debris, and planting the area with a seed mixture desirable for wildlife purposes.  Wildlife openings are often constructed in areas previously used as log landings in timber sales.

 

Landline Location/Surveying - Boundary line location and surveying is done to relocate existing lines that are no longer visible and to mark new lines on recently acquired property.  This work is necessary to avoid trespasses and to protect resources on national forest land.  The work is usually accomplished in the fall and winter, during leaf‑off season, when lines are easier to find.  Crews normally work in a 3‑ to 5‑ft corridor in which they may cut underbrush and small trees (generally no greater than 6 in. in diameter at breast height [dbh]).  Boundary lines are surveyed using surveying instruments, and the lines are marked by blazing trees and posting aluminum signs.  Boundary corners are marked by driving 1‑in aluminum poles into the ground and capping them with a surveying monument about 6 in. above the ground.

 

Road Easements - Road easements are granted across USFS land to access private property in cases where the only access is across public land or in cases where access across USFS property is in the best interest of the government.

 

Special Use Permits - These permits are granted across USFS land to allow individuals or private companies to use Federal land..  These activities include power line rights‑of‑way, seed orchards, parking areas, and other uses.

 

Timber Forest Products Permits - These permits are issued to individuals for the collection of forest products, such as locust poles, firewood, and small amounts of timber.

 

Other Activities That Could Potentially Affect Indiana Bat Habitat

 

Land Exchanges - The USFS exchanges land within its proclamation boundaries to provide or improve protection within a wilderness, protection of Wild and Scenic River corridors, protection of the Appalachian Trail and its corridor, access opportunities (administrative and public), wildlife and fish management opportunities, recreation management opportunities, timber resource management, efficiency of management, and protection of ecologically significant areas.  The NPNF’s land exchange program involves 100‑2,000 ac. per year.  Over the past 5 years, the NPNFs exchanged an average of 450 ac. per year and acquired 625 ac. per year.

 

Land Acquisitions - The USFS purchases land for the same reasons discussed for land exchanges.  The USFS can only purchase land outright under special authorizations such as Land and Water Conservation Funds or other specially designated funds.  Land acquisitions are averaging about 550 ac. per year.  Because land exchanges and acquisitions involve different areas and circumstances unique to each transaction, the effects of such exchanges and acquisitions on Indiana bat habitat will be evaluated on a site‑specific basis.

 

 

The Nantahala and Pisgah Land and Resource Management Plan

 

The decision to implement the Forest Plan was approved in 1987.  In 1989, the Chief of the Forest Service remanded part of the 1987 Forest Plan for further analysis.  The reanalysis began in 1989, culminating in the current Forest Plan (Amendment Five) in 1994.  The existing Forest Plan was developed after extensive involvement and review by other Federal agencies, State agencies, private conservation groups, and the public.  The current Forest Plan deviates from the traditional compartmentalized approach, relying instead on a more holistic, integrated approach.

 

The Forest Plan allocates areas to specific land units called “management areas,” with each management area established to meet specific long‑term management objectives, associated resource outputs, and desired conditions.  Management areas have been established to achieve different desired conditions, to emphasize different activities, permit different uses of the NPNFs, and to emphasize differing wildlife species and landscape features.  The NPNFs have been allocated to 18 management areas (Table 4 and Pages III‑54 to III‑56 in the Forest Plan).  Prescriptions have been established to provide direction to achieve specific management area goals and objectives.  An overriding goal in the allocation of management areas was to use an ecosystem management approach that provides for a full range of public uses and functioning ecosystems, from old‑growth to early successional habitats.

 

Standards and guidelines are included, both at the forest level as well as at the management area level, to ensure that activities are implemented in a manner consistent with forest goals and objectives.  The Forest Plan emphasizes standards and guidelines that work toward maintaining and/or enhancing plant and animal diversity and viability.  Amendment Five supplements the forest management objectives, with specific direction for threatened and endangered species.

 

CURRENT USFS INDIANA BAT CONSERVATION MEASURES

 

Conservation measures represent actions pledged in the project description that the action agency will implement to further the recovery of the species under review.  Such measures should be closely related to the action and should be achievable within the authority of the action agency.  The beneficial effects of conservation measures are taken into consideration in the Service’s conclusion of a jeopardy versus a nonjeopardy opinion and in the analysis of incidental take.  However, such measures must minimize impacts to listed species within the action area in order to be factored into the Service’s analyses.  The proposed actions subject to consultation on the NPNFs also include ongoing conservation measures implemented through standards and guides outlined in the Forest Plan to reduce or minimize the adverse effects of actions on the Indiana bat.

Table 4.  Nantahala and Pisgah National Forest Acreage by Management Area.
Management Area	Acreage
1.   B.   Emphasize a sustainable supply of timber and provide motorized access into the forest for traditional forest uses.	38,498
2.   A.  Provides for visually pleasing scenery.  Timber production is permitted but is modified to meet visual quality objectives.  Roads are generally open. C.    Provides for visually pleasing scenery.  Not suitable for timber production.  Roads are generally open.	40,642
3.   B.   Emphasize a sustainable supply of timber but with few open roads and limited disturbance associated with motorized vehicles.	232,873
4.   A.  Permits timber production that is modified to emphasize visual quality and wildlife habitat. C.    Scenic areas and older forests. D.    Wildlife habitat for species requiring older forests.	55,604   179,992 160,080
5.   Roadless Areas.	119,685
6.   Wilderness Study Areas.	8,419
7.   Wilderness.	66,550
8.   Experimental Forests.	12,520
9.   Roan Mountain.	7,900
10.   Research Natural Areas.	1,460
11.   Cradle of Forestry.	6,540
12.   Developed Recreation Areas.	3,030
13.   Special Interest Areas.	10,370
14.   Appalachian Trail and Corridor.	12,450
15.   Wild and Scenic Rivers Corridors.	2,050
16.   Administrative Facilities Sites.	1,260
17.   Balds.	3,880
18.   Riparian Areas.	101,530

 

Although the Forest Plan indicates “The Indiana bat uses summer foraging and maternity habitats across the Forests,” there are no standards and guidelines designed specifically to protect, maintain, or enhance summer or winter Indiana bat habitat or prevent impacts to Indiana bats roosting in trees^[2].  However, impacts to Indiana bats resulting from the implementation of various land management activities (e.g., timber harvesting), may be coincidentally reduced through forestwide standards and/or the implementation of standards and guidelines specific to those activities.  For example, impacts to potential Indiana bat roosting and foraging habitat may be minimized by carrying out the “snag and den tree retention” standards, “riparian filter strip” standards, and guidelines for timber harvesting (Appendix A).

 

Forestwide standards may minimize negative impacts to, or, in some cases, potentially improve Indiana bat habitat.  These standards and guidelines were developed to meet specific resource objectives, to serve as mitigation measures, and to provide for population viability for native wildlife species.  The standards and guidelines that likely pertain to the Indiana bat are listed in Appendix A, referenced with Forest Plan page numbers.

 

STATUS OF THE SPECIES/CRITICAL HABITAT

 

Federal Status

 

The Indiana bat was listed as an endangered species on March 11, 1967 (32 FR 4001), under the Endangered Species Preservation Act of October 15, 1966 (80 Stat. 926; 16 U.S.C. 668aa(c)).  It is currently included as an endangered species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended.  Critical habitat was designated on September 24, 1976 (41 FR 41914), and included caves in Kentucky, Tennessee, Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, and West Virginia.

 

Based on censuses taken at hibernacula between 1995 and 1997, the total, known Indiana bat population was estimated to number about 353,000 bats; this represents a decline of about 60% since surveys began in the 1960s.  Although the 1997 data were incomplete, the trend continues downward.  The most severe declines were in Kentucky and Missouri, where 180,000 and 250,000 bats were lost, respectively, between 1960 and 1997.  In Indiana, however, populations dropped by 50,000 between the earliest censuses and 1980 but have rebounded to former levels in recent years.  Currently, half the known Indiana bats winter in Indiana.

 

The Service (1999) completed an agency draft of a revised recovery plan for the Indiana bat.  The recovery plan is being revised to:  (1) update information on the life history and ecology of the Indiana bat, especially information on summer ecology gathered since 1983; (2) highlight the continued and accelerated decline of the species; (3) continue site protection and monitoring efforts at hibernacula; and (4) focus new recovery efforts toward research in determining the factor or factors causing population declines.  The main recovery actions identified in the revised recovery plan are to:

 

    Conduct research necessary for the survival and recovery of the Indiana bat, including studies on ecology and life history; summer habitat requirements; genetics; potential chemical contamination; and assessments of temperature profiles and hibernation microclimates of major hibernacula.

 

                    Obtain information on population distribution, status, and trends.

 

                    Protect and maintain Indiana bat populations.

 

 

                    Provide information and technical assistance outreach.

 

                    Coordinate and implement the conservation and recovery of the Indiana bat.

 

Indiana Bat Biology

 

Description

 

The Indiana bat is a medium‑sized monotypic species (no subspecies) of the genus Myotis.  It is migratory and occurs over much of the eastern half of the United States.  Head and body length ranges from 1 5/8‑1 7/8 in., and forearm length ranges from 1 3/8‑1 5/8 in. (Service 1983).  This species is similar in appearance to both the little brown bat (M. lucifugus) and the northern long‑eared bat (M. septentrionalis) but has several distinct morphological characteristics (Barbour and Davis 1969, Hall 1981).

 

General Life History Chronology

 

Typically, Indiana bats hibernate from October through April (see “Hibernation”), depending on local weather conditions (see Figure 1 for a depiction of the annual cycle).  Upon arrival at hibernating caves from August through September, Indiana bats “swarm,” a behavior in which “large numbers of bats fly in and out of cave entrances from dusk to dawn, while relatively few roost in the caves during the day” (Cope and Humphrey 1977).  Swarming continues for several weeks, and mating occurs during the latter part of the period (see “Fall Roost and ‘Swarming’”).  A majority of bats of both sexes hibernate by the end of November.

 

 

 

Figure 1.  Indiana Bat Annual Chronology (from Service 1999f).

 

 

JAN     FEB     MAR     APR     MAY     JUN     JUL     AUG     SEP     OCT     NOV     DEC

Both sexes:

                     Hibernation                                                                                Hibernation          

Females:                          Emerge   Pregnant                     Swarming     

     "                                                              Lactating

Young:                                                        Born Flying

Males:                                   Emerge                                 Swarming   

JAN     FEB     MAR     APR     MAY     JUN     JUL     AUG     SEP     OCT     NOV     DEC

 

 

Adult females store sperm through the winter and become pregnant via delayed fertilization soon after emergence from hibernation.  Young female bats can mate in their first autumn and have offspring the following year, whereas males may not mature until the second year.  Limited mating activity occurs throughout the winter and in late April as the bats leave hibernation (Hall 1962).

 

Females emerge from hibernation ahead of males; most wintering populations leave by early May.  Females may arrive in their summer habitats as early as April 15 in Illinois (Gardner et al. 1991a, Brack 1979).  Humphrey et al. (1977) determined that Indiana bats first arrived at their maternity roost in early May in Indiana, with substantial numbers arriving in mid‑May.  Birth occurs in late June and early July (Easterla and Watkins 1969, Humphrey et al. 1977), and the young are able to fly between mid‑July and early August (Mumford and Cope 1958, Cope et al. 1974, Humphrey et al. 1977, Clark et al. 1987, Gardner et al. 1991a, Kurta et al. 1996).

 

Survivorship

 

Humphrey and Cope (1977) determined that female survivorship in an Indiana population of Indiana bats was 76% for ages 1 to 6 years, and 66% for ages 6 to 10 years; for males, survivorship was 70% for ages 1 to 6 years, and 36% for ages 6 to 10 years.  The maximum age for banded individuals was 15 years for females and 14 years for males.  Mortality between birth and weaning has been estimated at 8% (Humphrey et al. 1977).  By extending the expected survivorship rates beyond 10 years (Humphrey and Cope 1977) so that the same rate of survivorship found between ages 6 and 10 is extended to their estimated maximum ages (see l_x in Appendix B), the survivorship between birth and 1 year can be estimated at about 50% by using a standard life table and assuming a stable population (Appendix B).  Current research has yet to determine when (or why), in the Indiana bat’s life, that survivorship has decreased and resulted in the current rate of decline.

 

Food Habits

 

Indiana bats feed strictly on flying insects, with prey items reflecting the environment in which they forage (most often terrestrial insects).  Indiana bats typically feed in the subcanopy of forests with 60%‑80% canopy cover (Garner and Gardner 1992, Romme et al. 1995), especially in riparian woodlands (Brack 1983, Gardner et al. 1991b, Humphrey et al. 1977, LaVal et al. 1977), though they also feed in upland areas.  Diet varies seasonally and differs with age, sex, and reproductive status (Belwood 1979, Lee 1993).  Reproductively active females and juveniles exhibit the greatest dietary diversity, likely because of increased energy needs.  Reproductively active females consume more aquatic insects than males or juveniles (Lee 1993).