56582 Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 20, 1999 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR specimen as Helianthus petiolaris Flaveria chloraefolia, Scirpus olneyi (prairie sunflower) (Sitgreaves 1853). It (Olney bulrush), Phragmites australis Fish and Wildlife Service was not until 1958 that Dr. Charles (common reed), Distichlis sp. (saltgrass), Heiser named Helianthus paradoxus as Sporobolus airoides (alkali sacaton), 50 CFR Part 17 a new species citing two known Muhlenbergia asperifolia (alkali muhly), RIN 1018±AE88 specimens, the type specimen collected Juncus mexicanus (Mexican rush), September 11, 1947, by H.R. Reed west Suaeda calceoliformis (Pursh Endangered and Threatened Wildlife of Fort Stockton in Pecos County, Texas, seepweed), and Tamarix spp. (saltcedar) and Plants; Determination of and the Woodhouse specimen collected (Poole 1992, Sivinski 1995). All of these Threatened Status for the Plant in New Mexico (Heiser 1958). species are good indicators of saline Helianthus paradoxus (Pecos Heiser’s (1965) hybridization studies soils. Van Auken and Bush (1995) did Sunflower) helped resolve doubts about the validity studies that show Pecos sunflower of Pecos sunflower as a true species. grows in saline soils, but seeds AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Prior to Heiser’s studies there was some germinate and establish best when high Interior. speculation the plant was a hybrid water tables reduce salinities near the ACTION: Final rule. between Helianthus annuus (common soil’s surface. sunflower) and the prairie sunflower. Until 1990, Pecos sunflower was SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife Heiser’s studies demonstrated that known from only three extant sites. Two Service (Service) determine Helianthus Pecos sunflower is a fertile plant that sites were in Pecos County, Texas, and paradoxus (Pecos or puzzle sunflower) breeds true. Heiser was able to produce one site was in Chaves County, New to be a threatened species under the hybrids between Pecos sunflower and Mexico (Seiler et al. 1981). Searches of authority of the Endangered Species Act both common sunflower and prairie suitable habitats in Pecos, Reeves, and of 1973, as amended (Act). This species sunflower, but these hybrids were of Culbertson counties, Texas, during 1991 is dependent on desert wetlands for its low fertility. These results support the failed to locate any new Texas sites survival. It is known from 22 sites in validity of Pecos sunflower as a true (Poole 1992). However, searches in New Cibola, Valencia, Guadalupe, and species. In 1990, Rieseberg et al. Mexico from 1991 through 1994 located Chaves counties, New Mexico, and from published the results of molecular tests a significant number of new sites 3 sites in Pecos and Reeves counties, on the hypothesized hybrid origin of (Sivinski 1995). In Texas one new site Texas. Threats to this species include Pecos sunflower, using electrophoresis was reported in 1998 (Kargas 1998). drying of wetlands from groundwater to test enzymes and restriction-fragment Pecos sunflower is presently known depletion, alteration of wetlands (e.g. analysis to test ribosomal and from 25 sites that occur in 5 general wetland fills, draining, impoundment chloroplast DNA. This work identified areas. These areas are Pecos and Reeves construction), competition from non- Pecos sunflower as a true species of counties, Texas, in the vicinity of Fort native plant species, excessive livestock ancient hybrid origin with the most Stockton and Balmorhea; Chaves grazing, mowing, and highway likely hybrid parents being common County, New Mexico, from Dexter to maintenance. This rule implements the sunflower and prairie sunflower. just north of Roswell; Guadalupe Federal protection and recovery Pecos sunflower is an annual member County, New Mexico, in the vicinity of programs of the Act for this plant. of the sunflower family (Asteraceae). It Santa Rosa; Valencia County, New DATES: This rule is effective November grows 1.3–2.0 meters (m) (4.25–6.5 feet Mexico, along the lower part of the Rio 19, 1999. (ft)) tall and is branched at the top. The San Jose; and Cibola County, New leaves are opposite on the lower part of Mexico, in the vicinity of Grants. There ADDRESSES: The complete file for this the stem and alternate at the top. The are 3 sites in the Fort Stockton- rule is available for public inspection, leaves are lance-shaped with three Balmorhea area, 11 in the Dexter to by appointment, during normal business prominent veins, and up to 17.5 Roswell area, 8 in the Santa Rosa area, hours at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife centimeters (cm) (6.9 inches (in)) long 1 along the lower Rio San Jose, and 2 Service, New Mexico Ecological by 8.5 cm (3.3 in) wide. The stem and in the Grants area. Services Field Office, 2105 Osuna Road, leaf surfaces have a few short stiff hairs. Most of the Pecos sunflower sites are NE, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87113. The flower heads are 5.0–7.0 cm (2.0– limited to less than 2.0 hectares (ha) (5.0 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 2.8 in) in diameter with bright yellow acres (ac)) of wetland habitat with some Charlie McDonald, Botanist, at the rays. Flowering is from September to being only a fraction of a hectare. Two above address (telephone 505–346–2525 November. Pecos sunflower looks much sites, one near Fort Stockton and one ext. 112; facsimile 505–346–2542). like the common sunflower seen along near Roswell, are considerably more SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: roadsides throughout the west, but extensive. The number of plants per site differs from common sunflower in varies from less than 100 to several Background having narrower leaves, fewer hairs on hundred thousand for the 2 more Dr. S.W. Woodhouse, physician and the stems and leaves, slightly smaller extensive sites. Because Pecos naturalist, was the first person to collect flower heads, and flowers later. sunflower is an annual, the number of Pecos sunflower on August 26, 1851, Pecos sunflower grows in plants per site can fluctuate greatly from while on the Sitgreaves expedition to permanently saturated soils. Areas with year to year with changes in water explore the Zuni River and the Lower these conditions are most commonly conditions. Pecos sunflower is totally Colorado. The location was given as desert wetlands (cienegas) associated dependent on the persistence of its ‘‘Nay Camp, Rio Laguna’’ (Sitgreaves with springs, but may also include wetland habitat for even large 1853). The collection site is probably stream and lake margins. When plants populations will disappear if the located somewhere near the Rio Laguna grow around lakes, the lakes are usually wetland dries out. (now called the Rio San Jose) between impounded natural cienega habitats. Various Federal, State, Tribal, Laguna Pueblo and Bluewater in Cibola Plants commonly associated with Pecos municipal, and private interests own County, New Mexico. Dr. John Torrey, sunflower include Limonium limbatum and manage the Pecos sunflower sites. a botanical expert at the New York (Transpecos sealavender), Samolus Managing Federal agencies include the Botanical Garden, identified this cuneatus (limewater brookweed), Service, Bureau of Land Management,

VerDate 12-OCT-99 13:14 Oct 19, 1999 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20OCR2.XXX pfrm03 PsN: 20OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 20, 1999 / Rules and Regulations 56583 and National Park Service. Plants are from hybrids could affect the genetic amendments further requires that all located on one New Mexico State park. integrity of small Pecos sunflower petitions pending on October 13, 1982, Plants are located on municipal populations. be treated as though they were newly property within the cities of Roswell submitted on that date. This was the Previous Federal Action and Santa Rosa. The Laguna Indian case for Helianthus paradoxus because Tribe owns and manages one site. Seven Federal government actions on Pecos of the acceptance of the 1975 different private individuals or sunflower began with section 12 of the Smithsonian report as a petition. On organizations own sites or parts of sites. Act, which directed the Secretary of the October 13, 1983, we made a petition Some plants grow on State or Federal Smithsonian Institution to prepare a finding that the listing of Helianthus highway rights-of-way. report on plants considered to be paradoxus was warranted, but Five sites are on property managed endangered, threatened, or extinct in the precluded by other pending listing principally for wildlife and endangered United States. The presentation of this actions, in accordance with section species conservation. Two major sites report, designated as House Document 4(b)(3)(B)(iii) of the Act. Notice of this are on Bitter Lake National Wildlife No. 94–51, occurred on January 9, 1975. finding was published on January 20, Refuge near Roswell, New Mexico. The On July 1, 1975, we published a notice 1984 (49 FR 2485). A warranted but refuge has a series of 6 spring-fed in the Federal Register (40 FR 27823) precluded finding requires that the impoundments totaling about 300 ha accepting the report as a petition within petition be recycled pursuant to section (750 ac). These impoundments are the context of section 4(c)(2) (now 4(b)(3)(C)(i) of the Act. This finding was managed with high water levels in section 4(b)(3)(A)) of the Act and reviewed annually from 1984 through winter followed by a spring and summer announcing our intent to review the 1997. Publication of a proposed rule in drawdown that simulates a natural status of the plants in the report. As a the Federal Register on April 1, 1998 water cycle. This regime provides consequence of this review, we (63 FR 15808), to designate Helianthus abundant habitat for Pecos sunflower published a proposed rule in the paradoxus as a threatened species that grows in almost solid stands at the Federal Register on June 16, 1976 (41 constituted the final 1-year finding for edge of some impoundments. There is a FR 24523), to designate approximately the petitioned action. small site with less than 100 plants on 1,700 vascular plants as endangered On June 15, 1998, we published a Dexter National Fish Hatchery near species. A final rule on the proposal had notice in the Federal Register (63 FR Dexter, New Mexico. Plants first not been published in 1978 when new 32635) announcing the reopening the appeared here several years ago after amendments to the Act required that all comment period and the location of saltcedar was removed to restore a proposals over 2 years old be withdrawn public hearings on the proposal. We wetland. with a 1-year grace period provided for held public hearings on July 8, 9, and The Nature Conservancy of Texas proposals already over 2 years old. We 13, 1998. owns and manages two sites, one near published a Federal Register notice on The processing of this final rule Fort Stockton, Texas, and the other near December 10, 1979 (44 FR 70796), conforms with our Listing Priority Balmorhea, Texas. Large desert springs withdrawing the June 16, 1976, Guidance for Fiscal Years 1998 and are the principal features of both proposed rule in addition to four other 1999, published on May 8, 1998 (63 FR preserves. The spring near Fort Stockton previously expired proposals. 25502). The guidance clarifies the order harbors two species of endangered fish On December 15, 1980 (45 FR 82480), in which we will process rulemakings and three species of endemic snails, we published an updated notice of giving highest priority (Tier 1) to plus a large Pecos sunflower population review of plants being considered for processing emergency rules to add that extends for about 1.2 kilometers endangered or threatened designation. species to the Lists of Endangered and (km) (0.75 miles (mi)) along the spring This notice included Helianthus Threatened Wildlife and Plants (Lists); run. Two springs near Balmorhea, paradoxus as a category 1 species, second priority (Tier 2) to processing purchased in 1997, harbor a species of which are those species for which we final determinations on proposals to add endangered fish and a population of had on file substantial information on species to the Lists, processing new several thousand Pecos sunflowers biological vulnerability and threats to listing proposals, processing (Karges 1998). support proposals to designate them as administrative findings on petitions (to The loss or alteration of wetland endangered or threatened. We retained add species to the Lists, delist species, habitats is the main threat to Pecos Helianthus paradoxus as a category 1 or reclassify listed species), and sunflower. The lowering of water tables species in subsequent notice of review processing a limited number of through aquifer withdrawals for of plants published in the Federal proposed and final rules to delist or irrigated agriculture; diversion of water Register on September 27, 1985 (50 FR reclassify species; and third priority from wetlands for irrigation, livestock, 39526), February 21, 1990 (55 FR 6184), (Tier 3) to processing proposed and final or other uses; wetland filling; and and September 30, 1993 (58 FR 51143). rules designating critical habitat. invasion of saltcedar and other non- Beginning with our February 28, 1996, Processing this final rule is a Tier 2 native species continues to destroy or candidate notice of review (61 FR 7596), action. degrade desert wetlands. Mowing of we discontinued the designation of some municipal properties and highway multiple categories of candidates, and Summary of Comments and rights-of-way regularly destroys some only those taxa meeting the definition of Recommendations plants. Livestock will eat Pecos former category 1 candidates are now In our April 1, 1998, proposed rule sunflowers, particularly if other green considered candidates for listing and associated notifications, we forage is scarce. There was some purposes. We retained Helianthus solicited interested parties to submit unregulated commercial sale of Pecos paradoxus as a candidate species in our factual reports or information to sunflowers in the past and some plant September 19, 1997, candidate notice of contribute to the development of a final collection for breeding programs to review (62 FR 49398). rule. In addition, contacts were made improve commercial sunflowers. Pecos Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act requires and we solicited comments from sunflower will naturally hybridize with the Secretary to make findings on appropriate State and Federal agencies common sunflower. There is concern pending petitions within 12 months of and representatives, Tribal about the extent to which backcrosses their receipt. Section 2(b)(1) of the 1982 governments, county governments,

VerDate 12-OCT-99 13:14 Oct 19, 1999 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20OCR2.XXX pfrm03 PsN: 20OCR2 56584 Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 20, 1999 / Rules and Regulations municipal governments, scientific Response: The sunflowers are in a collections and the localities provided organizations, and other interested large genus with species distributed with the specimens are imprecise. parties. We published legal notices throughout North America. The However, several of the specimens soliciting comments in five taxonomy and distribution of these collected in Pecos County, Texas, newspapers—Albuquerque Journal on species has always attracted strongly indicate Pecos sunflower once April 6, 1998, Cibola County Beacon, considerable interest, particularly the grew in places where it no longer Grants, New Mexico, on April 8, 1998, annual species most closely related to occurs. The site 11 kilometers (or 7 Santa Rosa News on April 8, 1998, commercial sunflowers. Dr. Charles miles (mi)) west of Fort Stockton where Roswell Daily Record on April 6, 1998, Heiser and his colleagues thoroughly the type specimen (location of the and The Pioneer, Fort Stockton, Texas, investigated the annual sunflowers, population from which the plant was on April 8, 1998. In response to these examining thousands of specimens from first described as a species) was notices we received several requests for 41 herbaria in the United States and collected in 1947 was reported to still a public hearing. On June 15, 1998 (63 Canada (Heiser et al. 1969). They found have a remnant population in 1980 FR 32635), we published a notice in the no specimens of Pecos sunflower other (Seiler et al. 1981), but since that time Federal Register announcing the dates than those from near Fort Stockton, there are no reported findings of Pecos and times for three scheduled public Texas, and the Rio San Jose in New sunflowers. A specimen from ‘‘Fort hearings, and notifying the public of the Mexico. Other investigators such as Dr. Stockton’’ collected in 1943, is thought extension of the comment period until Gerald Seiler of the U.S. Department of to be from around Comanche Springs, August 13, 1998. Newspaper notices Agriculture, Dr. R.C. Jackson of Texas which is now dry and incapable of announcing the public hearings and Tech University, and Dr. Loren supporting Pecos sunflower. Although extended comment period appeared in Rieseberg of Indiana University studied there is a reported collection from the five newspapers listed above sunflowers throughout North America Escondido Creek occurring in the 1800s, between June 24 and 26, 1998. for years without finding Pecos the springs feeding this creek have been We received 14 written comments on sunflower beyond its present known dry for many years, are no longer the proposal. Seven commentors range. Our present knowledge of the suitable habitat, and are no longer supported the proposed listing; these distribution and abundance of Pecos marked on topographic maps. One of included two peer reviewers who also sunflower relies, in part, on the work of the public hearing attendees who provided pertinent information these earlier investigators. ranches in the Diamond Y area gave his included within this final rule, two The Pecos sunflower is a large plant recollection from 1949 of seeing a State agencies, and three individuals. with bright yellow flowers that often continuous stand of Pecos sunflowers Seven commentors opposed the grows in patches of thousands. Because along the then spring-fed draw (natural proposed listing; these included one its habitat is very specific and limited, drainage basin) that runs into Diamond State agency, one Indian Tribe, two it is unlikely that significant Y draw. The draw is now dry except for populations still remain unsurveyed private organizations, and three intermittent flows and Pecos sunflowers after recent intensive efforts to survey individuals. are absent. for this species. However, even if other These records and statements provide We received requests to hold a public populations are found, they are likely to good evidence the distribution and hearing requests from the New Mexico be subject to the same threats as the abundance of Pecos sunflower has Farm and Livestock Bureau; New known populations. declined in West Texas with the loss of Mexico County Farm and Livestock Issue 2: Listing is unwarranted until spring-fed wetlands. The collection Bureaus in Colfax, Cibola-McKinley, a determination is made regarding the record is inadequate to document and Santa Fe counties; Production species’ population ecology, pollinators, similar declines in New Mexico, but Credit Association of New Mexico; seed dispersers, seed viability, seed they are likely due to the alteration and Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers germination, and seed bank. loss of wetlands. Association; and Davis Mountains Response: While a comprehensive Issue 4: There is no data indicating Trans-Pecos Heritage Association. We understanding of the life history and that livestock grazing is contributing to held hearings on the proposed rule on ecology of a species is useful when the decline of this species. The July 8, 9, and 13, 1998, at Fort Stockton, available, that level of knowledge is not population on private land at Diamond Texas; Roswell, New Mexico; and required for listing. Listing a species as Y Spring is grazed showing Pecos Grants, New Mexico at which a total of threatened or endangered is based on sunflower can co-exist with grazing. 34 people attended. Of the five oral the five factors given in section 4(a)(1) Response: In the proposed rule we statements presented at the hearings, of the Act. These factors and their identified livestock gazing as a threat to one statement supported the listing, two application to Pecos sunflower are Pecos sunflower by stating, ‘‘Livestock opposed the listing, and two were discussed in the ‘‘Summary of Factors will eat Pecos sunflowers, particularly neutral. Affecting the Species’’ section of this when other green forage is scarce.’’ In The following summary contains our final rule. the only study of grazing effects on the response to the written comments we Issue 3: Evidence indicates that Pecos species, Bush and Van Auken (1997) received during the comment period sunflower has always been a rare found no significant differences and to oral statements made during the species with numbers that fluctuate between plants inside and outside cattle public hearings. Comments on a similar with yearly water conditions. There is exclosures during a 1-year study. topic are grouped by general issues. no documentation that the species is However, they are also careful to note Issue 1: Survey efforts were either significantly increasing or that ‘‘This experiment was completed inadequate to find all Pecos sunflower declining in the region as a whole. during a relatively wet year, and populations. Because Pecos sunflower is Listing is unwarranted until a perhaps there was enough forage a species of hybrid origin, survey efforts determination is made on the status of available for the herbivores. In should encompass the entire range the species. subsequent years during times of where the two parental species overlap, Response: Declines in rare plant drought, we have observed severe which includes the plains region from species can be difficult to document herbivory of H. paradoxus and extreme Canada to Mexico. when there are relatively few historical differences in the stem length and

VerDate 12-OCT-99 13:14 Oct 19, 1999 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20OCR2.XXX pfrm03 PsN: 20OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 20, 1999 / Rules and Regulations 56585 number of flowers (unpublished). replace former natural spring-fed Federal agency policies that protect Therefore, the effects of large grazers of wetlands and still rely on those springs candidate species. H. paradoxus may be dependent on the for water. There is a high probability Response: While these measures are availability of moisture and its effects that Pecos sunflowers grew around the important for conservation, the threats on the grazers preferred forage plants.’’ springs before the refuge impoundments to the species have not been reduced or This agrees with our (the Service’s) were built. removed so that listing is no longer observations of grazing on Pecos Issue 9: Hybridization is a natural necessary. We find that enough Pecos sunflower. It is possible to have grazing event and should not be considered a sunflower populations lack sufficient at Pecos sunflower populations, as threat. protection to warrant listing the species evidenced by the Diamond Y Spring Response: Hybridization between as threatened. site, but good grazing management is Pecos sunflower and common sunflower Issue 12: There are many conservation still needed to prevent or reduce may not be a totally natural occurrence. measures for Pecos sunflower that can damage to the populations. Substantial increases in the habitat of be implemented without the need for Issue 5: In addition to grazing by common sunflower can result from Federal listing and these measures livestock, consider the effects of human land disturbances and the would be more effective than the predation from wildlife species and construction of road ditches. These protections provided under the Act. insects. Additional studies are needed disturbances have made it possible for These include: State listing in Texas to determine elk damage to riparian common sunflower to grow much closer under chapter 88 of the Texas Parks and areas in New Mexico. to Pecos sunflower than was possible in Wildlife Code; funding to hire a botanist Response: Although we have not seen the past. Because of concerns about to do surveys, develop a conservation significant wildlife or insect predation hybridization, personnel from the Texas strategy, and work with local on Pecos sunflower, such impacts are Parks and Wildlife Department have landowners; horticultural propagation possible. Insects and their damage to been removing common sunflowers of Pecos sunflowers for introduction maturing seeds can go undetected from the road ditches near the Pecos into unoccupied suitable habitats; because the plants may otherwise sunflower population at Texas Highway purchase of lands through the New appear perfectly normal. Elk in New 18 north of Fort Stockton. Even if such Mexico Natural Lands Protection Act or Mexico usually occur at much higher hybridization was completely natural, the Federal Land and Water elevations than the Pecos sunflower we still must consider the effects of Conservation Fund; development of a populations. Pecos sunflower potentially hybridizing regional water plan for West Texas Issue 6: Pecos sunflower can survive with other species under Factor E of the through recently passed State periods of natural drought. Threats ‘‘Summary of Factors Affecting the legislation; and conservation in the Rio associated with problem years having Species’’ section of this final rule. Puerco watershed in New Mexico little or no rainfall should be attributed Issue 10: Because listing may increase through a recently funded multi-agency to natural causes. collecting and vandalism through watershed initiative. Response: We agree droughts occur heightened attention to the species and Response: We must base our listing naturally and contribute to poor because Pecos sunflowers will not be determinations on current threats. For growing conditions for Pecos sunflower protected from collecting or destruction example, the general obligation bond to during some years. We consider natural on private lands, listing will increase provide funding for the New Mexico factors affecting the species under risks to the species rather than reducing Lands Protection Act was defeated in a Factor E of the ‘‘Summary of Factors them. recent general election leaving no funds Affecting the Species’’ section of this Response: We believe the for land acquisition. Listing the species final rule. The Act directs us to consider conservation measures for listed species as threatened and the subsequent both natural factors and human-caused described in the ‘‘Available drafting of a recovery plan will increase threats in determining whether a species Conservation Measures’’ section of this the likelihood that agencies, is endangered or threatened. final rule greatly outweigh any risks organizations, and individuals will be Issue 7: The statement that Pecos associated with listing. We are also able to accomplish conservation sunflowers grow on the dams of man- minimizing those potential risks measures for this species. We encourage made impoundments appears to through our ‘‘not prudent’’ finding for further implementation of conservation contradict the statement that the species the designation of critical habitat (see measures for the Pecos sunflower, and is dependent on wetlands. discussion under Critical Habitat, we will consider delisting the species Response: We acknowledge that the below) and through outreach and when it becomes sufficiently protected statement that Pecos sunflowers plants education directed towards individual and recovered to ensure its continued grow on dams does need some private landowners. survival. clarification. Plants found on dams grow Issue 11: Listing is not warranted Issue 13: Because of the many actions in saturated soils either at the shoreline because other management and on Tribal lands that are authorized, or where there is seepage through the protection measures are already funded, or carried out by the Bureau of dam. Pecos sunflowers do not grow on removing threats to the species Indian Affairs, listing this species will the dry upland portion of a dam. including: protective management on place the largest section 7 consultation Issue 8: The focus on the loss of The Nature Conservancy’s preserves and burden on the Laguna Tribe. This is natural wetlands appears misplaced, Bitter Lake National Wildlife Refuge, the contrary to the intent of Secretarial especially when one of the largest presence of several federally listed fish Order 3206 and Executive Order 13084 known populations occupies created species at some sites that already serve that strive to ensure Indian Tribes do wetlands at Bitter Lake National to protect the essential habitat, not bear a disproportionate burden for Wildlife Refuge. protection in New Mexico through State the conservation of listed species. Response: Our discussion emphasizes listing, a management agreement Response: Because only one of the 25 the loss of natural wetlands because between the Texas Department of known sites for Pecos sunflower occurs these losses exceed the rate of wetland Transportation and the Texas Parks and on Tribal lands, we anticipate that most creation. The wetlands created at Bitter Wildlife Department for the population activities for the conservation of Pecos Lake National Wildlife Refuge simply on Texas Highway 18, and various sunflower will be undertaken by other

VerDate 12-OCT-99 13:14 Oct 19, 1999 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20OCR2.XXX pfrm03 PsN: 20OCR2 56586 Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 20, 1999 / Rules and Regulations agencies, organizations, and A. The Present or Threatened withdrawals taking place in the vicinity individuals. The one site on Tribal Destruction, Modification, or of the other Pecos sunflower sites in lands probably occupies only a few Curtailment of its Habitat or Range New Mexico. The introduction of non-native acres and is in a remote undeveloped Wetland habitats in the desert species, particularly saltcedar, is a major part of the reservation. It is unlikely Southwest are both ecologically factor in the loss and degradation of there will be many actions at this site important and economically valuable. Southwestern wetlands. Several species that will require section 7 consultation. Wetlands cover only about 195,000 ha of saltcedar were introduced into the If consultation is needed, we will seek (482,000 ac) (0.6 percent) of New United States for ornamental purposes to find ways to both conserve the listed Mexico (Fretwell et al. 1996). This is a as windbreaks, and as stream bank species and complete the action. Our reduction of about 33 percent from the stabilization in the 1800s. Saltcedar and hope is that we can help Pecos wetland acreage that existed 200 years other non-native vegetation invaded sunflower to recover through voluntary ago (Dahl 1990). Wetlands in Texas many western riverine systems from the efforts and cooperation with other cover 3,077,000 ha (7,600,000 ac), a Federal agencies, States, local and 1890s to the 1930s and increased decline of about 52 percent from the rapidly from the 1930s to the 1950s, by Tribal governments and private State’s original wetland acreage (Dahl landowners and conservation groups. which time they occupied most of the 1990). The loss of springs in western available and suitable habitat in New Issue 14: Listing Pecos sunflower will Texas may be a better indicator of Mexico and western Texas (Horton have negative economic impacts on the wetland losses that affect Pecos 1977). farmers, ranchers, and communities sunflower than estimates for the State as Saltcedar will out-compete and where it occurs. a whole. Within the historical range of displace native wetland vegetation, Response: We believe the listing of Pecos sunflower in Pecos and Reeves including Pecos sunflower. At Dexter the Pecos sunflower as threatened will counties, only 13 of 61 (21 percent) National Fish Hatchery, Pecos not force private landowners to change springs remain flowing (Brune 1981 in sunflower appeared for the first time in any existing land practices. We Poole 1992). the summer of 1996 after saltcedar was anticipate that any economic impacts of The lowering of water tables due to removed to rehabilitate a wetland listing will be minimal due to the small groundwater withdrawals for irrigated (Radke 1997). Saltcedar affects 2,000 ha number of populations that are agriculture, municipalities, and other (5,000 ac) at Bitter Lake National involved. The Act requires listing uses has reduced available habitat for Wildlife Refuge where the most determinations to be made solely on the Pecos sunflower, particularly in Texas. extensive Pecos sunflower population basis of the best available scientific and Beginning around 1946, groundwater occurs (Service 1996). Although there commercial information regarding the levels fell as much as 120 m (400 ft) in have been many projects on refuges to species’ status without reference to Pecos County and 150 m (500 ft) in remove saltcedar, these projects are possible economic or other impacts of Reeves County due to heavy pumping labor intensive and reinvasion of the determination. Economic for irrigation. As a result, most of the saltcedar is a continuing problem. considerations may only be considered springs in these counties have gone dry. We know that some wetlands where in the designation of critical habitat and Groundwater pumping has lessened in Pecos sunflower occurs have either been in recovery planning and recent decades due to the higher cost of filled or impounded. Part of a wetland implementation. removing water from deeper aquifers in near Grants, New Mexico, was filled for the ground, but rising water tables or Issue 15: Designation of critical real estate development along a major resumption of spring flows are not habitat would help farmers and ranchers highway. The development predated expected (Brune 1981 in Poole 1992). manage the species by showing them knowledge that Pecos sunflower grows Diamond Y Spring, which has a large where it occurs. in the area, so it is unknown if any Pecos Sunflower population, remains plants were actually destroyed. Present Response: As with every Federal flowing largely because it comes from a development in this area that could listing, we conduct intensive outreach saline strata unsuitable for agricultural affect Pecos sunflower includes to inform landowners if the species or municipal uses. construction of a discount department occurs on their land. We believe that Texas water law provides no store and other smaller shops, and information about the location of protection for remaining springs. The reconstruction of a highway overpass. populations is best handled through law is based on the right of first capture Wetlands in Santa Rosa were lost direct contact with individual that lets any water user pump as much many years ago to impoundment created landowners. The reasons for our ‘‘not groundwater as can be put to a for a fish hatchery that has since been prudent’’ finding for the designation of beneficial use without regard to overall abandoned. Pecos sunflowers grow in critical habitat are given in the ‘‘Critical effects on the aquifer. Recently passed wet soils on some impoundment dams. Habitat’’ section of this final rule. Texas legislation directs the Because the extent of this former Summary of Factors Affecting the development of regional water plans in wetland habitat is unknown, it is Species the State, but it is too soon to know if uncertain whether these impoundments this planning effort will have any have actually increased or decreased Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 beneficial effects for Pecos sunflower. sunflower habitat. et seq.) and regulations (50 CFR part Groundwater pumping affected Pecos Alteration of habitat is occurring by 424) promulgated to implement the sunflower habitats in Chaves County, mowing on some highway rights-of-way listing provisions of the Act set forth the New Mexico, but water tables are now and some municipal properties where procedures for adding species to the rising due to State-directed efforts at Pecos sunflower occurs. In Santa Rosa, Federal lists. We determine a species to monitoring and conservation. These the weeds and some Pecos sunflowers be endangered or threatened due to one efforts are the result of a court ruling are often mowed around some of the old or more of the five factors described in that requires New Mexico to deliver fish hatchery ponds now used for section 4(a)(1). These factors and their larger volumes of Pecos River water to recreational fishing. In another part of application to Helianthus paradoxus Texas than in the past. There are town an open boggy area is mowed Heiser (Pecos sunflower) are as follows: presently no major groundwater when dry enough. In years when it is

VerDate 12-OCT-99 13:14 Oct 19, 1999 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20OCR2.XXX pfrm03 PsN: 20OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 20, 1999 / Rules and Regulations 56587 too wet to mow, a stand of Pecos their jurisdictions (Sivinski and intensive livestock grazing, and the sunflowers develops. Mowing of Lightfoot 1995). The penalty for invasion of saltcedar and other non- highway rights-of-way in Santa Rosa violating NMSA is a misdemeanor native plants into many wetlands has and near Grants may be destroying some carrying a fine of not more than $1,000 significantly reduced the habitat of this plants. In Texas, the only population in and/or incarceration for not more than species. Most remaining populations are a highway right-of-way was fenced 120 days; by comparison, the criminal vulnerable because these and other several years ago to protect it from penalty for violation of the Federal Act activities continue to destroy habitat or mowing and other activities. carries a fine of not more than $50,000 keep it in a degraded condition. While and/or imprisonment for not more than not in immediate danger of extinction, B. Overutilization for Commercial, 1 year, a much greater deterrent than the Pecos sunflower is likely to become Recreational, Scientific, or Educational that available under State law. In an endangered species in the foreseeable Purposes general, State listing fails to generate the future if present trends continue. Some commercial trade in Pecos level of recognition or promote the Critical Habitat sunflower has occurred in the past opportunities for conservation that (Poole, Texas Parks and Wildlife result through Federal listing. Most Section 3 of the Act defines critical Department, Austin, in litt. 1991). This importantly, NMSA lacks the habitat as—(i) The specific areas within trade was undertaken by an organization interagency coordination and the geographical area occupied by a interested in preserving rare species of conservation requirements found in species, at the time it is listed in indigenous crop plants through their section 7 of the Federal Act. Pecos accordance with the Act, on which are distribution and cultivation. There was sunflower is not listed as an found those physical or biological also some collecting for crop breeding endangered, threatened, or as a features (I) essential to the conservation research (Seiler et al. 1981). With its protected plant under the Texas of the species and (II) that may require tolerance for high salinity, Pecos Endangered Plant Species Act. special management consideration or sunflower is considered a good protection; and (ii) specific areas candidate for the introduction of salt E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors outside the geographical area occupied tolerance into cultivated sunflowers. Affecting Its Continued Existence by a species at the time it is listed, upon Some Pecos sunflower sites are both Natural hybrids between Pecos a determination that such areas are small and easily accessible. Repeated sunflower and common sunflower can essential for conservation of the species. uncontrolled collecting may harm these occur and are known from sites in both ‘‘Conservation’’ means the use of all sites. Texas and New Mexico. Habitat for methods and procedures needed to common sunflower is increased by bring the species to the point at which C. Disease or Predation human activities and the two listing under the Act is no longer Livestock eat Pecos sunflowers, sunflowers may be in greater contact necessary. particularly when other green forage is than in the past. Natural hybrids have Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as scarce. Livestock tend to pull off the low fertility, but are not completely amended, and implementing regulations flower heads. If an area is heavily grazed sterile (Heiser 1965). A measure of (50 CFR 424.12) require that, to the for several years in succession when isolation between the two species is maximum extent prudent and plants are flowering, the soil seed bank provided by the different flowering determinable, we designate critical may diminish and the population will times for Pecos sunflower and common habitat at the time the species is eventually decline. There are several sunflower. Hybrids are likely to be determined to be endangered or examples of Pecos sunflowers being intermediate between the two species in threatened. We find that designation of absent from habitat that is heavily flowering time and may serve as a critical habitat is not prudent for Pecos grazed, but growing in similar nearby bridge for gene flow between the sunflower. Our regulations (50 CFR habitat that is protected from grazing. In species. Once a bridge is established, 424.12(a)(1)) state that designation of these instances, grazing is the most the genetic swamping of small Pecos critical habitat is not prudent when one likely cause of the plant’s absence from sunflower populations could occur or both of the following situations otherwise suitable habitat. There are rapidly. exist—(1) The species is threatened by also examples of Pecos sunflower Natural droughts are common in the taking or other human activity, and populations persisting in areas grazed desert regions where Pecos sunflower identification of critical habitat can be for many years. Apparently the type and occurs. These droughts combined with expected to increase the degree of threat intensity of grazing has much to do with the effects of wetland alterations and to the species, or (2) such designation of the persistence of Pecos sunflower in losses could extirpate some small critical habitat would not be beneficial these areas. There have been no populations. The present distribution of to the species. observations of wildlife grazing or insect Pecos sunflower coincides with areas Critical habitat designation for Pecos damage on Pecos sunflower. having large reliable springs and this sunflower is not prudent for both of the may in part be a response to the effects above reasons. There has been some D. The Inadequacy of Existing of natural droughts. commercial trade in Pecos sunflower, Regulatory Mechanisms We have carefully assessed the best which was due largely to its rarity (See Pecos sunflower is listed as a New scientific and commercial information Factor B of the ‘‘Summary of Factors Mexico State endangered plant species available regarding the past, present, Affecting the Species’’ section). There in NMNRD Rule 85–3 of the State and future threats faced by this species are several documented instances of Endangered Plant Species Act (9–10–10 in determining to issue this final rule. other species of commercially valuable NMSA). The scientific collection, Based on this evaluation, our preferred rare plants being collected when their commercial transport, and sale of Pecos action is to list Pecos sunflower as a localities became known. In 1995, at sunflower is already regulated by threatened species. The drying of least 48 plants of the endangered NMSA. However, NMSA does not springs due to ground water pumping, Pediocactus knowltonii (Knowlton protect habitat on private land or the diversion of water for agriculture cactus) were taken from a monitoring require collecting permits for Federal and other uses, the filling of wetlands, plot at the species’ only known locality employees working on lands within the degradation of wetlands from (Sivinski, New Mexico Forestry

VerDate 12-OCT-99 13:14 Oct 19, 1999 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20OCR2.XXX pfrm03 PsN: 20OCR2 56588 Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 20, 1999 / Rules and Regulations

Division, Santa Fe, in litt. 1996). In the critical habitat would also likely Water Act, the Natural Resources early 1990s, the rediscovery of Salvia jeopardize the species’ continued Conservation Service that provides penstemonoides (big red sage) in Texas existence. Designation of critical habitat private landowner planning and led to the collection of thousands of for Pecos sunflower on Federal lands, assistance for various soil and water seeds at the single rediscovery site therefore, is not prudent because it conservation projects, the Federal (Poole, in litt. 1991). would provide no additional benefit to Highway Administration for highway Listing contributes to the risk of over the species beyond that conferred by construction and maintenance projects collecting because the rarity of a plant listing. that receive funding from the is made known to far more people than Department of Transportation, the Available Conservation Measures were aware of it previously. Designating Bureau of Indian Affairs that has trust critical habitat, including the required Conservation measures provided to responsibilities for certain activities on disclosure of precise maps and species listed as endangered or Indian lands, and various agencies of descriptions of critical habitat, would threatened under the Act include the Department of Housing and Urban further advertise the rarity of Pecos recognition, recovery actions, Development that undertake sunflower and provide a road map to requirements for Federal protection, and homeowner mortgage insurance and occupied sites causing even greater prohibitions against certain activities. community development programs. threat to this plant from vandalism or Recognition through listing encourages We considered the potential impacts unauthorized collection. Many of the and results in conservation actions by of designating Pecos sunflower as a Pecos sunflower sites are small, have Federal, State, and private agencies, threatened plant species in relation to few individuals, and are easily groups, and individuals. The elevated the compliance of this action with accessible. These sites would be profile Federal listing affords enhances Secretarial Order 3206. That order was particularly susceptible to the likelihood that conservation issued to clarify the responsibilities of indiscriminate collection if publication activities will be undertaken. The Act the component agencies, bureaus, and of critical habitat maps made their exact provides for possible land acquisition offices of the Department of the Interior locations known. and cooperation with the States and and the Department of Commerce, when Critical habitat designation, by requires that recovery actions be carried actions taken under authority of the Act definition, directly affects only Federal out for all listed species. The protection and associated implementing agency actions. Private interests own 13 required of Federal agencies and the regulations affect, or may affect, Indian of the 25 Pecos sunflower sites. For the prohibitions against certain activities lands, Tribal trust resources, or the most part, activities constituting threats involving listed plants are discussed, in exercise of American Indian Tribal to the species on these lands, including part, below. rights. In keeping with the trust alterations of wetland hydrology, Section 7(a) of the Act requires responsibility and government-to- competition from non-native vegetation, Federal agencies to evaluate their government relationships, we recognize grazing, and agricultural and urban actions with respect to species that are our responsibility to consult with development, are not subject to the listed or proposed for listing as affected Tribes and provide written Federal review process under section 7. endangered or threatened and with notice to them as far in advance as Designation of critical habitat on private respect to those species’ designated or practicable of conservation restrictions lands provides no benefit to the species proposed critical habitat, if any. that we consider necessary to protect when only non-Federal actions are Regulations implementing this listed species. involved. interagency cooperation provision of the Secretarial Order 3206 states that, ‘‘If Activities on Federal lands and some Act are codified at 50 CFR part 402. a proposed conservation restriction is activities on private lands require Section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires directed at a Tribal activity that could Federal agencies to consult with us Federal agencies to confer with us on raise the potential issue of direct under section 7. There are few known any action that is likely to jeopardize (directed) take under the Act, then sites for Pecos sunflower and habitat for the continued existence of a proposed meaningful government-to-government the species is limited. Given these species or result in destruction or consultation shall occur, in order to circumstances, any activity that would adverse modification of proposed strive to harmonize the Federal trust adversely modify designated critical critical habitat. If a species is listed responsibility to Tribes, Tribal habitat would likely also jeopardize the subsequently, section 7(a)(2) requires sovereignty and the statutory missions species’ continued existence. Thus, in Federal agencies to ensure that activities of the Department of Interior and this case, the Federal agency prohibition they authorize, fund, or carry out are not Commerce.’’ The term ‘‘take’’ as defined against adverse modification of critical likely to jeopardize the continued in the Act means to harass, harm, habitat would provide no additional existence of such a species or to destroy pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, benefit beyond the prohibition against or adversely modify its critical habitat. capture, or collect, or to attempt to jeopardizing the species. If a Federal action may adversely engage in any such conduct. The Act Occupied habitat for Pecos sunflower affect a listed species or its critical has no prohibitions against take for occurs on a National Wildlife Refuge habitat, the responsible Federal agency listed plants; instead, regulations for and a National Fish Hatchery, which we must enter into formal consultation with threatened plants found at 50 CFR 17.71 administer; a National Monument the us. Federal agencies that manage prohibit their removal or reduction to National Park Service administers, and occupied Pecos sunflower habitat are possession from areas under Federal public lands the Bureau of Land the ones most likely to have activities jurisdiction. For threatened plants, there Management administers. Because these that involve section 7 consultation. are no prohibitions against their occupied habitats are well known to These agencies are the Bureau of Land removal and reduction to possession these Federal land managers, no adverse Management, National Park Service, and from areas outside Federal jurisdiction modification of this habitat is likely to Fish and Wildlife Service. Other or against their damage or destruction in occur without consultation under agencies with potential section 7 any area when no removal and section 7 of the Act. Because of the involvement include the U.S. Army reduction to possession are involved. small size of the species’ habitat, any Corps of Engineers through its permit We know of no instance where Indian adverse modification of the species’ authority under section 404 of the Clean Tribal members collect (i.e. remove and

VerDate 12-OCT-99 13:14 Oct 19, 1999 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20OCR2.XXX pfrm03 PsN: 20OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 20, 1999 / Rules and Regulations 56589 reduce to possession) Pecos sunflowers Listing Pecos sunflower will require special purposes consistent with the for cultural, spiritual, religious, or us to development a recovery plan to purposes of the Act. economic reasons. Therefore, we do not help coordinate Federal, State, and Pecos sunflower is uncommon both in believe the prohibition against removal private efforts to conserve this species. cultivation or in the wild, and there was or reduction to possession from areas The plan will establish a framework for only limited commercial trade in the under Federal jurisdiction will affect agencies to coordinate activities and species. Therefore, it is anticipated few Indian lands, Tribal trust resources, or cooperate in conservation efforts. The trade permits will ever be sought or the exercise of American Indian Tribal plan will set recovery priorities, issued. You should direct requests for rights. estimate costs of various tasks, and copies of the regulations concerning the We met with representatives of the describe site-specific management trade of listed plants and general Laguna Tribe on March 12, 1998, prior actions necessary to achieve inquiries regarding prohibitions and to publication of the listing proposal to conservation and survival of the species. permits to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife discuss our intention to propose Pecos Additionally, under section 6 of the Act, Service (see ADDRESSES section). sunflower for protection under the Act. we will be able to grant funds to the Information collections associated with We discussed with them range-wide states of New Mexico and Texas for these permits are approved under the threats to the species, conservation management actions promoting the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. measures listing would initiate, protection and recovery of Pecos 3501 et seq., and assigned Office of prohibitions that would result from sunflower. Management and Budget clearance listing, Tribal activities that occur in the Because many of the known Pecos number 1018–0094. For additional area where the sunflower grows on sunflower sites are on private land, we information about these permits and Tribal lands, and the role of Federal will pursue conservation easements and associated requirements, see 50 CFR agencies (especially the BIA) in insuring conservation agreements with willing 17.72. that activities they authorize, fund, or private landowners to help maintain It is our policy (59 FR 34272; July 1, carry out do not jeopardize the and/or enhance habitat for the plant. 1997) to identify to the maximum extent continued existence of listed species. Under a cooperative program between practicable at the time we list a species We discussed the value of monitoring to us and the State of New Mexico, those activities that would or would not assess conservation needs and indicated contacts were made with all private constitute a violation of the section 9 we would provide whatever assistance landowners and the importance of Pecos prohibitions of the Act. The intent of we could for monitoring and a sunflower and the consequences for the this policy is to increase public conservation program on Tribal lands. private landowner of having it listed awareness of the effect of this listing on Subsequently, we were contacted by a under the Act explained. To date, no proposed and ongoing activities within Tribal representative to provide agreements are established but several the species’ range. You may take the whatever information we had landowners indicate a willingness to following actions, without violation of concerning Pecos sunflower. We went continue with discussions. section 9, when carried out in through our files with the representative The Act and its implementing accordance with existing regulations and supplied those documents thought regulations found at 50 CFR 17.71 and and permit requirements: useful to the Tribe. We kept the Tribe 17.72 set forth a series of general (1) Activities authorized, funded, or informed during the listing proposal prohibitions and exceptions that apply carried out by Federal agencies (e.g., process with notifications about to all threatened plants. All trade wetland modification; the construction proposal comment requests and public prohibitions of Section 9(a)(2) of the or maintenance of drainage ditches, hearings. Act, implemented by 50 CFR 17.71, construction of impoundments or other A question was raised concerning the apply. These prohibitions, in part, make livestock watering facilities, power line potential effect listing this plant might it illegal for any person subject to the construction, maintenance, and have on future Indian water rights jurisdiction of the United States to improvement; highway construction, claims. The Pecos sunflower on Tribal import or export, transport in interstate maintenance, and improvement; lands occurs at springs adjacent to the or foreign commerce in the course of a mineral exploration and mining,) when Rio San Jose. These springs, although commercial activity, sell or offer for sale such activity is conducted in near the river, are not dependent on it this species in interstate or foreign accordance with any reasonable and for their flows. If upstream water rights commerce, or to remove and reduce to prudent measures given by us according claims reduced flows in the Rio San possession the species from areas under to section 7 of the Act. These activities Jose, the sunflower would likely be Federal jurisdiction. Seeds from may require Federal, State, and/or local unaffected. The area where the springs cultivated specimens of threatened approval under other laws or occur is presently used for grazing. The plants are exempt from these regulations. Tribe indicates no planned land use prohibitions provided that their (2) Normal agricultural practices, changes that would create new demands containers are marked ‘‘Of Cultivated including mowing or clearing, and light on water from the springs. Finally, if Origin.’’ Certain exceptions to the to moderate livestock grazing, and any water use changes led to loss of the prohibitions apply to agents of the pesticide and herbicide use, carried out sunflower on Tribal lands it would not Service and State conservation agencies. in accordance with any existing violate any of the limited prohibitions The Act and 50 CFR 17.72 also regulations, permit and label applicable to threatened plants given in provide for the issuance of permits to requirements, and best management section 9 of the Act or in 50 CFR 17.71. carry out otherwise prohibited activities practices. Water use changes occurring on non- involving threatened plant species (3) Clearing a defensible space for fire Federal lands and having no Federal under certain circumstances. Such protection and normal landscape nexus would also not be subject to the permits are available for scientific activities around one’s personal requirements of section 7 of the Act. purposes and to enhance the residence. Given these conditions, we cannot propagation or survival of the species. We believe that the following might foresee a circumstance where listing For threatened plants, permits are also potentially result in a violation of Pecos sunflower as a threatened plant available for botanical or horticultural section 9; however, possible violations would affect Indian water rights claims. exhibition, educational purposes, or are not limited to these actions alone:

VerDate 12-OCT-99 13:14 Oct 19, 1999 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20OCR2.XXX pfrm03 PsN: 20OCR2 56590 Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 20, 1999 / Rules and Regulations

(1) Removal, cutting, digging up, Environmental Impact Statements, as List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 damaging, or destroying threatened defined under the authority of the plants on non-Federal land if conducted National Environmental Policy Act of Endangered and threatened species, in knowing violation of State law or 1969, need not be prepared in Exports, Imports, Reporting and regulation or in violation of State connection with regulations adopted recordkeeping requirements, criminal trespass law. pursuant to section 4(a) of the Transportation. (2) Interstate or foreign commerce and Endangered Species Act of 1973, as Regulation Promulgation import/export without previously amended. We published a notice obtaining an appropriate permit. outlining our reasons for this PART 17Ð[AMENDED] (3) The unauthorized removal, determination in the Federal Register reducing to possession or collection of on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244). Accordingly, the Service amends part this species from areas under Federal 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of Required Determinations jurisdiction. the Code of Federal Regulations, as In appropriate cases, permits could be This rule does not contain collections follows: issued to allow collection for scientific of information that require Office of 1. The authority citation for part 17 or recovery purposes, for horticultural Management and Budget approval or botanical exhibition, for educational continues to read as follows: under 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. purposes, or for special purposes Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 16 U.S.C. consistent with the purposes of the Act. References Cited 1531–1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201–4245; Pub. L. 99– You should direct questions regarding 625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted. whether specific activities may A complete list of all references cited constitute a violation of section 9 to the herein is available on request from the 2. In § 17.12(h) add the following to Field Supervisor of the New Mexico U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, New the List of Endangered and Threatened Ecological Services Field Office (see Mexico Ecological Services Field Office Plants in alphabetical order under ADDRESSES ADDRESSES section). (see section). FLOWERING PLANTS: Author: The primary author of this § 17.12 Endangered and threatened plants. National Environmental Policy Act final rule is Charlie McDonald, New We have determined that Mexico Ecological Services Field Office * * * * * Environmental Assessments and (see ADDRESSES section). (h) * * *

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

FLOWERING PLANTS

******* Helianthus paradoxus ..... Pecos sunflower (=puzzle U.S.A. (NM, TX) ... Asteraceae ...... T 667 NA NA sunflower, paradox sun- flower).

*******

Dated: September 14, 1999. John G. Rogers, Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service. [FR Doc. 99–27186 Filed 10–19–99; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310±55±P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Endangered Species Act of 1973, as East 1300 South, Salt Lake City, Utah amended (Act). Astragalus desereticus, 84115. Fish and Wildlife Service considered extinct until its rediscovery FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John in 1981, exists in one small population 50 CFR Part 17 L. England at the above address in Utah County, Utah. Threats to the (telephone: 801/524–5001). RIN 1018±AE57 plant include residential development, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: highway widening, livestock grazing Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and trampling, and other impacts to its Background and Plants; Final Rule to List limited habitat. This plant receives no Marcus E. Jones collected a distinctive Astragalus desereticus (Deseret milk- protection under State or local laws or Astragalus from ‘‘below Indianola,’’ a vetch) as Threatened regulations. This rule implements town in Sanpete County, Utah, on June Federal protection provided by the Act AGENCY: 2, 1893. This same plant was again Fish and Wildlife Service, for this plant. Interior. collected by Ivar Tidestrom from ‘‘near EFFECTIVE DATE: November 19, 1999. ACTION: Final rule. Indianola’’ on June 17, 1909. Specimens ADDRESSES: The complete file for this from these two collections laid in SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and rule is available for public inspection, obscurity in various herbaria until Wildlife Service (Service), determine by appointment, during normal business Rupert Barneby recognized their the plant species, Astragalus desereticus hours at the Utah Ecological Services uniqueness and described them as (Deseret milk-vetch), to be a threatened Field Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Astragalus desereticus (Barneby 1964). species under the authority of the Service, Lincoln Plaza Suite 404, 145 Efforts to relocate the species’

VerDate 12-OCT-99 13:14 Oct 19, 1999 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20OCR2.XXX pfrm03 PsN: 20OCR2