Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 18 / Wednesday, January 28, 1998 / Proposed Rules 4207 with the Commission’s minimum DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR initially fruitless (Barneby 1964; Welsh distance separation requirements at city 1978a, 1978c), leading to a presumption reference coordinates. The coordinates Fish and Wildlife Service of extinction (Ripley 1975; Welsh 1975, for Channel 234C3 at Manson are North 1978b). However, a population of A. Latitude 47–53–18 and West Longitude 50 CFR Part 17 desereticus was discovered by Elizabeth 120–09–18. Since Manson is located RIN 1018±AE57 Neese on May 27, 1981, on a sandstone within 320 kilometers (200 miles) the outcrop above the town of Birdseye, U.S.-Canadian border, concurrence of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife Utah County, Utah, less than 16 the Canadian government has been and Plants; Proposed Threatened kilometers (km) (10 miles (mi)) from requested. Status for the Plant Astragalus Indianola (Welsh and Chatterley 1985). Desereticus (Deseret milk-vetch) This population remains the only DATES: Comments must be filed on or known occurrence of this species before March 16, 1998, and reply AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, (Franklin 1990, 1991; U.S. Fish and comments on or before March 31, 1998. Interior. Wildlife Service (USFWS) 1991). It is ADDRESSES: Federal Communications ACTION: Proposed rule. possible that this population is the one Commission, Washington, DC 20554. In from which Jones and/or Tidestrom SUMMARY: addition to filing comments with the The U.S. Fish and Wildlife made their collections more than 70 FCC, interested parties should serve the Service (Service) proposes to determine years earlier (Franklin 1990, 1991; petitioner, his counsel, or consultant, as a Utah plant species, Astragalus Welsh and Chatterley 1985). follows: Duane J. Polich, Manson desereticus (Deseret milk-vetch), to be a Astragalus desereticus is a perennial, Broadcasting, P.O. Box 70, Oak Harbor, threatened species under the authority herbaceous plant in the bean family Washington 98277 (Petitioner). of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, (Fabaceae). Individual plants are as amended (Act). Astragalus approximately 4 to 15 centimeters (cm) FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: desereticus, considered extinct for 72 (2 to 6 inches (in)) in height, with stems Sharon P. McDonald, Mass Media years prior to 1981, exists as one small about 6 cm (2 in) tall. The pinnately Bureau, (202) 418–2180. population in Utah County, Utah. compound leaves are 4 to 11 cm (2 to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a Threats to the plant include residential 4 in) long with 11 to 17 leaflets. The synopsis of the Commission’s Notice of development, livestock grazing, leaflets are elliptic to ovate in shape, Proposed Rule Making, MM Docket No. livestock and wildlife trampling, and with dense silvery gray hairs on both 98–3, adopted January 14, 1998, and threats associated with small population sides. The flowers are 1.8 to 2.2 cm (0.7 released January 23, 1998. The full text size. This proposal, if made final, would to 0.9 in) long, white in color with a of this Commission decision is available implement Federal protection provided purple tip on the keel, and borne on a for inspection and copying during by the Act. The Service seeks data and stalk of 5 to 10 flowers. The seed pods normal business hours in the FCC comments from the public on this are 1 to 2 cm (0.4 to 0.8 in) long, Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M proposal. covered with lustrous hairs, and bear 14 Street, NW., Washington, DC. The DATES: Comments from all interested to 16 ovules (Barneby 1964; Barneby in complete text of this decision may also parties must be received by March 30, Cronquist et al. 1989; Welsh 1978c; be purchased from the Commission’s 1998. Public hearing requests must be Welsh et al. 1987). copy contractor, International received by March 16, 1998. Astragalus desereticus occurs primarily on steep south- and west- Transcription Service, Inc., (202) 857– ADDRESSES: Comments and materials 3800, 1231 20th Street, NW., concerning this proposal should be sent facing slopes. The plant grows on soils derived from a specific and unusual Washington, DC 20036. to the Field Supervisor, Utah Ecological portion of the geologic Moroni Services Field Office, U.S. Fish and Provisions of the Regulatory Formation. This geologic feature is Wildlife Service, Lincoln Plaza Suite Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to characterized by coarse, crudely bedded 404, 145 East 1300 South, Salt Lake this proceeding. conglomerate (Franklin 1990). The plant City, Utah 84115. Comments and Members of the public should note community in which A. desereticus materials received will be available for that from the time a Notice of Proposed occurs is dominated by pinon pine public inspection, by appointment, Rule Making is issued until the matter (Pinus edulis) and Utah juniper during normal business hours at the is no longer subject to Commission (Juniperus osteosperma). Other above address. consideration or court review, all ex associated plant species include: parte contacts are prohibited in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata), scrub Commission proceedings, such as this L. England at the above address oak (Quercus gambelii), and wild one, which involve channel allotments. (telephone: 801/524–5001, ext. 138). buckwheat (Eriogonum brevicaule) See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: (Franklin 1990). The only known population of governing permissible ex parte contacts. Background For information regarding proper Astragalus desereticus consists of filing procedures for comments, see 47 Marcus E. Jones collected a distinctive between 5,000 and 10,000 individuals CFR 1.415 and 1.420. Astragalus from ‘‘below Indianola,’’ a growing in an area of less than 120 town in Sanpete County, Utah, on June hectares (ha) (300 acres (ac)) (Franklin List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 2, 1893. The same species was again 1990, Stone 1992). The species’ total collected by Ivar Tidestrom from ‘‘near range is approximately 2.6 km (1.6 mi) Radio broadcasting. Indianola’’ on June 17, 1909. Specimens long and 0.5 km (0.3 mi) across. Federal Communications Commission. from these two collections lay in Extensive searches of similar habitat in John A. Karousos, obscurity in various herbaria until other parts of Utah have not revealed Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules Rupert Barneby recognized their any other populations (Franklin 1991; Division, Mass Media Bureau. uniqueness and described them as Larry England, USFWS, pers. comm., [FR Doc. 98–2032 Filed 1–27–98; 8:45 am] Astragalus desereticus (Barneby 1964). 1997). The land upon which A. BILLING CODE 6712±01±P Efforts to relocate the species were desereticus grows is owned by the State 4208 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 18 / Wednesday, January 28, 1998 / Proposed Rules of Utah and three private landowners species. Category 1 candidates were resolutions between November 1995 (Franklin 1990, 1991; Chris Montague, defined as those taxa for which the and April 1996. Based on biological The Nature Conservancy, pers. comms., Service had on file information on considerations, this guidance 1992, 1997). This plant species is biological vulnerability and threats to establishes a ‘‘multi-tiered approach threatened by grazing and trampling by support the preparation of listing that assigns relative priorities, on a ungulates, alteration of its habitat due to proposals. In addition, A. desereticus descending basis, to actions to be residential development and road was identified as a species that may carried out under section 4 of the Act’’ widening, and naturally occurring have recently become extinct. In 1981, (61 FR 64479). The guidance calls for events such as fire, due to its limited a population of A. desereticus was giving highest priority to handling distribution. discovered. On November 28, 1983, the emergency situations (Tier 1) and second highest priority (Tier 2) to Previous Federal Action Service published a revised notice of review in the Federal Register (48 FR resolving the listing status of the Section 12 of the Act directed the 53640) in which A. desereticus was outstanding proposed listings. Tier 3 Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution included as a category 2 candidate includes the processing of new to prepare a report on those plants species. Category 2 candidates were proposed listings for species facing high considered to be endangered, formerly defined as taxa for which data magnitude threats. This proposed rule threatened, or extinct. This report, on biological vulnerability and threats for Astragalus desereticus falls under designated as House Document No. 94– indicated that listing was possibly Tier 3. The guidance states that 51, was presented to Congress on appropriate, but for which data were not ‘‘effective April 1, 1997, the Service will January 9, 1975. On July 1, 1975, the sufficient to support issuance of listing concurrently undertake all of the Service published a notice in the proposals. In preparing the 1983 notice, activities presently included in Tiers 1, Federal Register (40 FR 27823) the Service deemed it appropriate to 2, and 3’’ (61 FR 64480). The Service accepting the report as a petition to list acquire additional information on the has thus begun implementing a more those taxa named therein under section distribution and abundance of A. balanced listing program, including 4(c)(2) (now 4(b)(3)) of the Act, and its desereticus before proposing the species processing more Tier 3 activities. The intention to review the status of those for listing. The Service maintained A. completion of this Tier 3 activity (a plants. Astragalus desereticus was desereticus as a category 2 species in proposal for a species with high- included in the July 1, 1975, notice on updated notices of review published on magnitude, imminent threats) follows list ‘‘C,’’ indicating that the species was September 27, 1985 (50 FR 39526), and those guidelines. probably extinct. February 21, 1990 (55 FR 6184). As a On June 16, 1976, the Service Summary of Factors Affecting the result of additional information published a proposed rule in the Species obtained in 1990 and 1991 status Federal Register (41 FR 24523) to Section 4 of the Act and regulations surveys (Franklin 1990, USFWS 1991), designate approximately 1,700 vascular (50 CFR part 424) promulgated to the Service reclassified A. desereticus as plant species, including Astragalus implement the listing provisions of the a category 1 candidate in the September desereticus, as endangered pursuant to Act set forth the procedures for adding 30, 1993, notice of review (58 FR section 4 of the Act. The list of those species to the Federal lists. A species 51144). In the February 28, 1996, notice 1,700 plant species was assembled on may be determined to be endangered or the basis of comments and data received of review (61 FR 7596), the Service threatened due to one or more of the by the Smithsonian Institution and the discontinued the designation of category five factors described in section 4(a)(1). Service in response to House Document 2 candidates. Astragalus desereticus These factors and their application to No. 94–51 and the July 1, 1975, Federal was included as a candidate in the Astragalus desereticus Barneby (Deseret Register publication. In the proposed February 28, 1996 (61 FR 7596), and milk-vetch) are as follows: rule, the Service also designated A. September 19, 1997, notices of review desereticus as a species about which the (62 FR 49398). A. The Present or Threatened Service was particularly interested in The processing of this proposed rule Destruction, Modification, or obtaining any new information on living conforms with the Service’s final listing Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range specimens and extant populations. priority guidance for fiscal year 1997, Astragalus desereticus is located on General comments received in relation published in the Federal Register on highly accessible public and private to the 1976 proposal are summarized in December 5, 1996 (61 FR 64475). In a land that is used for cattle grazing and an April 26, 1978, Federal Register Federal Register notice published on wildlife management (Franklin 1991, publication (43 FR 17909). The 1978 October 23, 1997 (62 FR 55628), the Stone 1992). The land managed by the amendments to the Act required that all guidance was extended beyond fiscal State of Utah Division of Wildlife proposals over 2 years old be year 1997 until new guidance is Resources (DWR) is a wildlife withdrawn, although proposals published following passage of the fiscal management area that is also used for published before the 1978 amendments’ year 1998 appropriations bill for the cattle grazing (Franklin 1991). Cattle are enactment could not be withdrawn Department of the Interior. The fiscal used by DWR in the spring to encourage before the end of a 1-year grace period year 1997 guidance clarifies the order in plant growth for big game forage in the beginning on the enactment date. On which the Service will process winter. This grazing occurs within the December 10, 1979, the Service rulemakings following two related habitat of A. desereticus (Stone 1992). published a notice of withdrawal (44 FR events: (1) The lifting on April 26, 1996, The cattle tend to concentrate primarily 70796) of that portion of the June 16, of the moratorium on final listings on the upslope areas where forage 1976, proposal that had not been made imposed on April 10, 1995 (Public Law production is greater (Stone 1992). final, which included A. desereticus. 104–6), and (2) the restoration of Erosion in these areas is exacerbated by On December 15, 1980, the Service significant funding for listing through cattle grazing and game trails. In published a revised notice of review for passage of the Omnibus Budget addition to the effects of erosion, native plants in the Federal Register (45 Reconciliation Act on April 26, 1996, trampling threatens A. desereticus, FR 82480) designating Astragalus following severe funding constraints particularly at the southern end of the desereticus a category 1 candidate imposed by a number of continuing range (Franklin 1991). As cattle and Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 18 / Wednesday, January 28, 1998 / Proposed Rules 4209 wildlife graze the habitat of A. C. Disease or Predation (Stone 1992). Low genetic variability desereticus, the animals are likely to In contrast to many species of may make it difficult for a species to trample plants as they forage. Whereas Astragalus, A. desereticus appears to be respond to changes in the environment mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) have palatable to cattle. Many Astragalus and thus places it at greater risk to maintained stable numbers recently, species concentrate the toxic element extinction or additional range reduction. Rocky Mountain elk (Cervas elephas) selenium in their tissues; these species, The Service has carefully assessed the populations are increasing. Erosion and called selenophytes, poison grazing best scientific and commercial trampling by cattle and wildlife cattle (Stone 1992). The fact that A. information available regarding the past, constitute threats to A. desereticus. desereticus does not produce a present, and future threats faced by Development in the Wasatch Front ‘‘snakelike’’ odor typical of other Astragalus desereticus in determining to metropolitan area is spreading into the ‘‘snakeweeds,’’ as selenophytes are propose this rule. Grazing and trampling surrounding agricultural lands, sometimes called, and the fact that no by ungulates, residential development, especially small communities in the other selenophytes occur in the area, road widening, and naturally occurring drainages of the Provo, Spanish Fork, indicate that A. desereticus is not a events such as fire variously threaten and Weber rivers (Utah Governor’s selenophyte (Stone 1992). While A. this species. Based on this evaluation, Office of Planning and Budget (UGOPB) desereticus may not be preferred forage the preferred action is to list A. 1997). Areas such as Birdseye are for cattle or native ungulates, it is desereticus as threatened. Threatened predicted to be rezoned residential palatable and may be inadvertently status reflects the vulnerability of this within a short time. The population taken along with preferred forage in the species to factors that may negatively growth of the metropolitan area is area. affect the species and its limited habitat. expected to nearly double by the year In habitat similar to that occupied by While not in immediate danger of 2020. In addition, conversion of Astragalus desereticus in Utah County extinction, A. desereticus is likely to agricultural land to urban use is also that has been surveyed by Service become an endangered species in the expected to nearly double in the same personnel, overgrazing by domestic foreseeable future if present threats continue or increase. Critical habitat is time period (UGOPB 1997). The entire ungulates has almost completely not being proposed for this species for Astragalus desereticus population is denuded the landscape (USFWS 1991). reasons discussed in the ‘‘Critical within 300 meters (1,000 feet) of U.S. Similar grazing pressure has been Habitat’’ section of this proposal. Highway 89 and is within the area known from the current habitat of A. proposed for future development desereticus; therefore, the effects of Critical Habitat (UGOPB 1997). Transportation needs of grazing, particularly overgrazing, Critical habitat is defined in section 3 the expanding population will also constitute a likely threat. This species is of the Act as: (i) The specific areas require roads to be widened or much less abundant in the more heavily within the geographical area occupied improved. U.S. Highway 89 is currently grazed southern portion of its habitat by a species, at the time it is listed in a two-lane rural highway that will likely (Franklin 1990, 1991), indicating that accordance with the Act, on which are be expanded when residential grazing may be a significant threat. found those physical or biological development expands into southern Cattle grazing may be particularly features (I) essential to the conservation Utah County and northern Sanpete harmful because it occurs during a of the species and (II) that may require County. Such highway widening and critical period for A. desereticus special management considerations or the concomitant residential reproduction (i.e., flowering) (Stone protection and; (ii) specific areas development could destroy a significant 1992). outside the geographical area occupied portion of the remaining habitat of A. There are no known insect parasites by the species at the time it is listed, desereticus. or disease organisms that significantly affect this species. upon determination that such areas are A potential threat to Astragalus essential for the conservation of the desereticus is related to the populations D. The Inadequacy of Existing species. ‘‘Conservation’’ means the use of ungulates in the area and their effect Regulatory Mechanisms of all methods and procedures needed on pollinators. Other species in the Astragalus desereticus presently to bring the species to the point at genus Astragalus have suffered from receives no protection or consideration which listing under the Act is no longer low numbers of pollinators due to the under any Federal, State or local law or necessary. indirect effects ungulates may have on regulation. Section 4(a)(3) of the Act and the pollinators’ nest sites (Stone 1992). implementing regulations (50 CFR Bumblebees (Bombus sp.), which nest in E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors 424.12) require that, to the maximum abandoned rodent burrows, are likely Affecting Its Continued Existence extent prudent and determinable, the the primary pollinators of A. By virtue of the limited number of Secretary designate critical habitat at the desereticus. Land use practices which individuals and range of the single time a species is determined to be increase grazing pressure may cause remaining population of Astragalus endangered or threatened. Service burrows to collapse, destroying desereticus, this species may be regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)) state bumblebee nests (Stone 1992). Since threatened with extinction from that designation of critical habitat is not bees have low fecundity, their naturally occurring events. The prudent when one or both of the populations may not recover for many probability that a natural event such as following situations exist: (1) The years, particularly if grazing by large a fire, drought, or disease will cause species is threatened by taking or other numbers of ungulates is maintained. extinction is greater for species having human activity, and identification of B. Overutilization for Commercial, a small population size and highly critical habitat can be expected to Recreational, Scientific, or Educational restricted range (Stone 1992). Rare increase the degree of threat to the Purposes species in the genus Astragalus have species, or (2) such designation of exhibited low levels of genetic diversity critical habitat would not be beneficial Overutilization is not known to be a when compared to other more to the species. The Service determines threat to Astragalus desereticus. widespread, closely related species that designation of critical habitat for 4210 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 18 / Wednesday, January 28, 1998 / Proposed Rules

Astragalus desereticus is not prudent private and State land, it may be highway, could be partially funded by due to lack of benefit to the species. affected by projects with Federal the Federal Highway Administration, Critical habitat receives consideration connections, including potential Federal thereby providing an avenue for section under section 7 of the Act with regard Highway Administration funding of 7 consultation. to actions carried out, authorized, or road widening. The Service believes The Act and its implementing funded by a Federal agency (see that activities involving a Federal action regulations set forth a series of general Available Conservation Measures which may affect A. desereticus can be prohibitions and exceptions that apply section). As such, designation of critical identified without designating critical to all threatened plants. All prohibitions habitat may affect activities on Federal habitat, by providing Federal agencies of section 9(a)(2) of the Act, lands and may affect activities on non- with information on the location of implemented by 50 CFR 17.71 for Federal lands where such a Federal occupied habitat and information on the threatened plants, apply. These nexus exists. Under section 7 of the Act, kinds of activities which could affect prohibitions, in part, make it illegal for Federal agencies are required to ensure the species. For the reasons discussed any person subject to the jurisdiction of that their actions do not jeopardize the above, the Service finds that the the United States to import or export, continued existence of a species or designation of critical habitat for A. transport in interstate or foreign result in destruction or adverse desereticus is not prudent. commerce in the course of a commercial modification of critical habitat. activity, sell or offer for sale in interstate However, both jeopardizing the Available Conservation Measures or foreign commerce, or remove and continued existence of a species and Conservation measures provided to reduce the species to possession from adverse modification of critical habitat species listed as endangered or areas under Federal jurisdiction. In have similar standards and thus similar threatened under the Act include addition, for plants listed as thresholds for violation of section 7 of recognition, recovery actions, endangered, the Act prohibits malicious the Act. In fact, biological opinions that requirements for Federal protection, and damage or destruction on areas under conclude that a Federal agency action is prohibitions against certain practices. Federal jurisdiction, and the removal, likely to adversely modify critical Recognition through listing results in cutting, digging up, or damaging or habitat but not jeopardize the species for public awareness and conservation destroying of such plants in knowing which the critical habitat has been actions by Federal, State and local violation of any State law or regulation, designated are extremely rare. Also, the agencies, private organizations, and including State criminal trespass law. designation of critical habitat for the individuals. The Act provides for Section 4(d) of the Act allows for the purpose of informing Federal agencies possible land acquisition and provision of such protection to of the locations of Astragalus cooperation with the States and requires threatened species through regulation. desereticus habitat is not necessary that recovery actions be carried out for This protection may apply to this because the Service can inform Federal all listed species. The protection species in the future if such regulations agencies through other means. For these required of Federal agencies and the are promulgated. Seeds from cultivated reasons, the designation of critical prohibitions against certain activities specimens of threatened plants are habitat for A. desereticus would provide involving listed plants are discussed, in exempt from these prohibitions no additional benefit to the species part, below. provided that their containers are beyond that conferred by listing, and Section 7(a) of the Act requires marked ‘‘Of Cultivated Origin.’’ Certain therefore, such designation is not Federal agencies to evaluate their exceptions to the prohibitions apply to prudent. actions with respect to any species that agents of the Service and State Astragalus desereticus has an is proposed or listed as endangered or conservation agencies. extremely narrow distribution in a threatened and with respect to its The Act and 50 CFR 17.72 also sandstone outcrop, totaling about 120 ha critical habitat, if any is designated. provide for the issuance of permits to (300 ac) in one population. At the Regulations implementing this carry out otherwise prohibited activities present time, no other site is known to interagency cooperation provision of the involving threatened species under be occupied by or suitable for this plant. Act are codified at 50 CFR part 402. certain circumstances. Such permits are The private landowners at Birdseye are Section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires available for scientific purposes and to aware of the plant’s presence and Federal agencies to confer with the enhance the propagation or survival of extremely limited habitat, as are the Service on any action that is likely to the species. For threatened plants, DWR managers and others involved in jeopardize the continued existence of a permits are also available for botanical management of the area. Therefore, proposed species or result in and horticultural exhibition, designation of critical habitat would destruction or adverse modification of educational purposes, or special reasons provide no benefit with respect to proposed critical habitat. If a species is consistent with the Act’s purposes. With notification. In addition, given the listed subsequently, section 7(a)(2) respect to Astragalus desereticus, it is species’ narrow distribution and requires Federal agencies to ensure that anticipated that few, if any, trade precarious status, virtually any activities they authorize, fund, or carry permits would be sought or issued, conceivable adverse effect to the out are not likely to jeopardize the since the species is not common in the species’ habitat would very likely continued existence of such a species or wild and is unknown in cultivation. jeopardize its continued existence. to destroy or adversely modify its Requests for copies of the regulations Designation of critical habitat for A. critical habitat. If a Federal action may regarding listed species and inquiries desereticus would, therefore, provide no affect a listed species or its critical about prohibitions and permits may be benefit to the species apart from the habitat, the responsible Federal agency addressed to: Regional Director, U.S. protection afforded by listing the plant must enter into formal consultation with Fish and Wildlife Service, P.O. Box as threatened. the Service. The single known 25486, Denver Federal Center, Denver, Protection of the habitat of Astragalus population of Astragalus desereticus is Colorado 80225. desereticus will be addressed through on State and privately owned land. It is the policy of the Service, the section 4 recovery process and the However, highway widening, which published in the Federal Register on section 7 consultation process. could adversely affect A. desereticus July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34272), to identify Although this plant occurs only on due to the proximity of the plants to the to the maximum extent practicable Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 18 / Wednesday, January 28, 1998 / Proposed Rules 4211 those activities that would or would not threat (or lack thereof) to Astragalus Required Determinations constitute a violation of section 9 of the desereticus; Act if a species is listed. The intent of (2) The location of any additional This rule does not contain collections this policy is to increase public populations of this species and the of information that require approval by awareness of the effect of a proposed reasons why any habitat should or the Office of Management and Budget listing on proposed and ongoing should not be determined to be critical under 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. activities within a species’ range. This habitat as provided by section 4 of the References Cited species is not located on areas under Act; Federal jurisdiction. Collection, damage, (3) Additional information concerning A complete list of all references cited or destruction of this species on Federal the range, distribution, and population herein is available upon request from lands is prohibited (although in size of this species; and the Field Supervisor, Utah Ecological appropriate cases a Federal endangered (4) Current or planned activities in the Services Field Office (see ADDRESSES species permit may be issued to allow subject area and their possible impacts section). collection for scientific or recovery on this species. Author: The primary author of this purposes). Such activities on areas not A final determination of whether to proposed rule is John L. England, Utah under Federal jurisdiction would list this species will take into Ecological Services Field Office (see constitute a violation of section 9 if consideration the comments and any ADDRESSES section). additional information received by the conducted in knowing violation of State List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 law or regulations, or in violation of Service. Such communications may lead State criminal trespass law. Normal to a final decision document that differs Endangered and threatened species, highway maintenance, fence from this proposal. Exports, Imports, Reporting and maintenance, and recreational hunting The Act provides for one or more recordkeeping requirements, are among the activities that would be public hearings on this proposal, if Transportation. unlikely to violate section 9. Questions requested. Requests for hearings must be Proposed Regulation Promulgation regarding whether specific activities received within 45 days of the date of would constitute a violation of section the publication of the proposal in the Accordingly, the Service hereby 9, should this species be listed, should Federal Register. Such requests must be proposes to amend part 17, subchapter be directed to the Field Supervisor, made in writing and be addressed to the B of chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Utah Ecological Services Field Office Field Supervisor, Utah Ecological Federal Regulations, as set forth below: (see ADDRESSES section). Services Field Office (see ADDRESSES section). PART 17Ð[AMENDED] Public Comments Solicited National Environmental Policy Act 1. The authority citation for part 17 The Service intends that any final The Fish and Wildlife Service has continues to read as follows: action resulting from this proposal will determined that Environmental Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 16 U.S.C. be as accurate and effective as possible. Assessments and Environmental Impact Therefore, comments or suggestions 1531–1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201–4245; Pub. L. 99– Statements, as defined under the 625, 100 Stat. 3500, unless otherwise noted. from the public, other concerned authority of the National Environmental governmental agencies, the scientific Policy Act of 1969, need not be 2. Amend section 17.12(h) by adding community, industry, or any other prepared in connection with regulations the following, in alphabetical order interested party concerning this adopted pursuant to section 4(a) of the under Flowering Plants, to the List of proposed rule are hereby solicited. In Endangered Species Act of 1973, as Endangered and Threatened Plants: particular, comments are sought amended. A notice outlining the concerning: Service’s reasons for this determination § 17.12 Endangered and threatened plants. (1) Biological, commercial trade, or was published in the Federal Register * * * * * other relevant data concerning any on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244). (h) * * *

Species Historic range Family Status When listed Critical Special Scientific name Common name habitat rules

FLOWERING PLANTS

******* Astragalus Deseret milk-vetch .. U.S.A. (UT) ...... Fabaceae ...... T ...... NA NA desereticus.

******* 4212 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 18 / Wednesday, January 28, 1998 / Proposed Rules

Dated: December 30, 1997. Background Creek and Corte Madera Creek. Jamie Rappaport Clark, On October 31, 1996, NMFS Proposed critical habitat for the Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. published its determination to list the Southern Oregon/Northern California [FR Doc. 98–2012 Filed 1–27–98; 8:45 am] Central California Coast Evolutionarily Coast ESU encompasses accessible reaches of all rivers (including estuarine BILLING CODE 4310±55±P Significant Unit (ESU) of coho salmon as threatened under the ESA (61 FR areas and tributaries) between the 41514). Subsequently, on May 6, 1997, Mattole River in California and the Elk DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NMFS published its determination to River in Oregon, inclusive. list the Southern Oregon/Northern The areas described in the proposed National Oceanic and Atmospheric California Coast coho salmon ESU as rule represent the current freshwater Administration threatened under the ESA (62 FR and estuarine range of the listed species. 24588). On November 25, 1997 (62 FR Marine habitats are also vital to the 50 CFR Part 226 62741), NMFS published a proposed species and ocean conditions are [I.D. No. 101097A] rule identifying critical habitat for each believed to have a major influence on ESU and identified a 90-day comment coho salmon survival. However, there Designated Critical Habitat; Central period (which ends January 26, 1998) to does not appear to be a need for special California Coast and Southern Oregon/ solicit information relevant to the management consideration or protection Northern California Coast Coho proposal. During the comment period, of this habitat. Therefore, NMFS is not Salmon three public hearings were held between proposing to designate critical habitat in marine areas at this time. For both AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries December 8–11, 1997 in Gold Beach, ESUs, critical habitat includes all Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Oregon; Eureka, California; and Santa waterways, substrate, and adjacent Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Rosa, California. riparian zones below longstanding, Commerce. Requests for an extension of the public comment period have been naturally impassable barriers (i.e., ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of received from a California Congressional natural waterfalls in existence for at comment period. representative, as well as several county least several hundred years). NMFS has SUMMARY: NMFS is reopening the public and private organizations and private identified twelve dams in the range of comment period on proposed citizens in northern California and these ESUs (see proposed rule) that regulations to designate critical habitat southern Oregon. Reasons given for currently block access to habitats for Central California Coast and these requests included additional time historically occupied by coho salmon. Southern Oregon/Northern California required under state law to assemble However, NMFS has not designated Coast coho salmon (Oncorhynchus county governments for a review of the these inaccessible areas as critical kisutch). These proposals were made on proposal, and time needed to assess the habitat because areas downstream are November 25, 1997, under provisions of scope and impact of the proposed rule. believed to be sufficient for the the Endangered Species Act of 1973 NMFS finds the requests to be conservation of the ESUs. The economic (ESA). NMFS has received several reasonable and hereby reopens the and other impacts resulting from this requests for additional time to complete comment period. critical habitat designation are expected the review and compilation of Critical habitat is defined as the to be minimal. information. NMFS finds the requests to specific areas within the geographical NMFS is soliciting information, be reasonable and hereby reopens the area occupied by the species, on which comments and/or recommendations on comment period until April 26, 1998. are found those physical and biological any aspect of this proposal from all features essential to the conservation of DATES: Comments on the proposed rule concerned parties (see ADDRESSES); must be received on or before April 26, the species and which may require comments must be received by April 26, 1998. special management considerations or 1998. In particular, NMFS is requesting protections (ESA section 3(5)(A)(I)). any data, maps, or reports describing ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent Critical habitat shall not include the to: Garth Griffin, NMFS, Protected areas that currently or historically entire geographical area occupied by the supported coho salmon populations and Resources Division, 525 NE Oregon St. species unless failure to designate such - Suite 500, Portland, OR 97232–2737; that may require special management areas would result in the extinction of considerations. NMFS will consider all or Craig Wingert, NMFS, Southwest the species. Region, Protected Species Management information received before reaching a Proposed critical habitat for the final decision. Division, 501 W. Ocean Blvd., Suite Central California Coast ESU 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802–4213. encompasses accessible reaches of all Date: January 22, 1998. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: rivers (including estuarine areas and Patricia A. Montanio, Garth Griffin at (503) 231–2005, Craig tributaries) between Punta Gorda and Deputy Director, Office of Protected Wingert at (562) 980–4021, or Joe Blum the San Lorenzo River (inclusive) in Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. at (301) 713–1401. California. Also included are two rivers [FR Doc. 98–2074 Filed 1–27–98; 8:45 am] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: entering San Francisco Bay: Mill Valley BILLING CODE 3510±22±F