A total of 136 comments were received in writing by the Service in 

 response to the original proposal for endangered status and reproposal 

 for critical habitat. Of the comments, 105 supported the proposal, 

 including the Governors of Illinois and Missouri and the Directors of the 

 Illinois Department of Conservation, the Iowa Conservation Commission, and 

 the Missouri Department of Conservation, 3 opposed it, and ?8 commented 

 on some aspect of the biology of the turtle, such as its taxonomic status, 

 distribution, or ecology, but did not state an opinion as to whether the 

 subspecies should be added to the List of Endangered and Threatened Wild- 

 life and Plants. A number of individuals submitted multiple comments 

 during the course of the public comment period. 



Executive Order 12044, dated March 23, 1978, required that each 

 agency in the federal government establish criteria for identifying which 

 of its regulations were significant. The Department of the Interior 

 implemented this order by publishing its regulations in the Federal 

 Register of December 13, 1978. Consequently, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

 Service was required to document any impacts on state and local govern- 

 ments, acknowledge recordkeeping and recording burdens, document environ- 

 mental considerations, discuss impacts on the other federal agencies and 

 departmental programs, and analyze economic impacts of the reproposal of 

 critical habitat. After reviewing all available data, including submissions 

 by the Mason County recorder, the Southeast Iowa Area XVI Regional 

 Commission, the Bi-State Metropolitan Planning Commission, the Iowa 

 Department of Transportation, the Iowa Office of Planning and Programs, 

 the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Iowa-Illinois Gas and Electric Co., 

 and Monsanto Inc., the Service determined that the quantifiable economic 

 impact was expected to fall well below $10 million. Since this is less 

 than the $100 million considered as significant under departmental 

 procedures, a "Determination of Significance" was signed on September 14, 

 1979, by the Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks indicating 

 that the proposed rule to determine critical habitat for the Illinois mud 

 turtle was not a significant rule. 



CONTROVERSY AND MISUNDERSTANDING 



Given the highly visible nature of the Endangered Species Program 

 and the many misunderstandings surrounding the determination of critical 

 habitat, controversies involving the listing of endangered and threatened 

 species are not uncommon. However, few proposed listings have met such 

 opposition as the proposal to list the Illinois mud turtle as endangered. 

 This opposition stemmed from Monsanto Agricultural Products Co., owner 

 of about 20% of Big Sand Mound. Lipske (1980a, 1980b) provides some 

 additional information to that presented below. 



After K. f_. spooneri was proposed on July 6, 1978 (Dodd, 1978), 

 there was no indication to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) of 

 serious problems concerning the listing until July 27, 1979, when 



