31740 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 112 / Wednesday, June 11, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

September 8, 1995, except for condition 3. On page 328, first column, Lacey address (telephone 360/753– Nos. 9 pertaining to non-VOC and non- instruction 13 is corrected to read ‘‘13. 9440). NOX pollutants and expiration date of Section 101–38.401–1 is amended by SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: the plan approval. removing the introductory text, (ii) Additional Material. removing paragraph (b), redesignating Background (A) Remainder of the Commonwealth paragraph (c) as paragraph (b), and levisecta (golden of Pennsylvania’s December 8, 1995 revising paragraph (a) introductory text paintbrush) was first collected near Mill submittal. to read as follows:’’ Plain, , by Thomas Jefferson (B) Additional material submitted by Howell in 1880 and was described by Pennsylvania dated May 23, 1997, Dated: June 5, 1997. Jesse More Greenman in 1898 providing clarifying information related Sharon A. Kiser, (Greenman 1898). A perennial herb of to Pennzoil Products Company plan FAR Secretariat. the figwort family (Scrophulariaceae), C. approval. [FR Doc. 97–15229 Filed 6–10–97; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820±34±P levisecta typically has 1 to 15 erect to [FR Doc. 97–15102 Filed 6–10–97; 8:45 am] spreading unbranched stems, reaches a BILLING CODE 6560±50±P height of 30 centimeters (cm) (12 inches DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (in)), and is covered with soft, sticky hairs. The lower leaves are entire and GENERAL SERVICES Fish and Wildlife Service narrowly pointed; the upper leaves are ADMINISTRATION broader, usually with one to three pairs 50 CFR Part 17 of short lateral lobes on the distal end. 41 CFR Part 101±38 The flower, mostly hidden by the RIN 1018±AC52 [FPMR Amendment G±111] overlapping , has a calyx 15 to 18 millimeters (mm) (0.6 to 0.7 in) long and RIN 3090±AG26 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and ; Determination of deeply cleft, and a corolla 20 to 23 mm Motor Vehicles Threatened Status for Castilleja (0.8 to 0.9 in) long, with a slender galea levisecta (Golden Paintbrush) (concave upper lip) three to four times AGENCY: Office of Governmentwide the length of the unpouched lower lip Policy, GSA. AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, (Hitchcock and Cronquist 1973). It is ACTION: Final rule; correction. Interior. distinguished from the other Castilleja ACTION: Final rule. species within its range by brilliant SUMMARY: This document contains golden to yellow floral bracts. The SUMMARY: corrections to a final rule published in The U.S. Fish and Wildlife flowers from April to June. When not the Federal Register on Friday, January Service (Service) determines threatened flowering, the plant is less conspicuous. 3, 1997, 62 FR 322. FPMR Amendment status pursuant to the Endangered The species may be semi-parasitic like G–111, which governs the management Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act), other members of the genus Castilleja, of motor vehicles. for the plant Castilleja levisecta (golden possibly requiring a host plant for EFFECTIVE DATE: January 3, 1997. paintbrush). This species once occurred seedling development in its native from Oregon to in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: habitat (Heckard 1962, Sheehan and Sharon A. Kiser, Federal Acquisition British Columbia, Canada. Ten Sprague 1984). However, greenhouse Policy Division (202–501–216). populations of this plant now exist in experiments indicate it does not require open grasslands ranging from south of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In rule a host to survive and flower (Wentworth Olympia in Thurston County, document 97–52 appearing at 62 FR 1994). Washington, north through the Puget 322, GSA revised Part 101–38. This The plant tends to grow in clumps. Trough to southwest British Columbia, document corrects three errors. One genetic individual may consist of 1 Canada. Threats to the species include to 15 stems, making the determination Corrections competition with encroaching native of exact numbers of individual plants in and non-native plant species; habitat § 101.38 [Corrected] the field difficult. The number of stems modification through succession in the per plant varies site to site. In addition, 1. On page 324, second column, absence of fire; and grazing by ‘‘PART 101–38—MOTOR EQUIPMENT researchers have used a variety of . Direct human-caused threats census methods over the years. MANAGEMENT’’ is corrected to read include conversion of habitat for ‘‘PART 101–38—MOTOR VEHICLE Therefore, population estimates can residential and commercial vary and a consistent approach is MANAGEMENT.’’ development, conversion to agriculture, 2. On page 325, the table in 101– needed. Experimentally designed and possible damage associated with sampling surveys have been conducted 38.104(b)(3) is corrected by adding the road maintenance. This rule implements following footnotes. where individual plants were tagged the Federal protections afforded by the and counted (Wentworth 1994). Year to ‘‘1 Established by section 502 of the Act for this plant. year variation in population densities Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings EFFECTIVE DATE: July 11, 1997. Act (89 Stat. 902, 15 U.S.C. 2002) and the can be high (G. Douglas, Conservation Secretary of Transportation. ADDRESSES: The complete file for this Data Center, British Columbia Ministry 2 Established by the Secretary of rule is available for inspection, by of Environment, Lands and Parks, pers. Transportation and mandated by Executive appointment, during normal business comm. 1996; Wentworth 1994). Order 12003 through fiscal year 1981 and by hours at the Western Washington Office, Castilleja levisecta occurs in open Executive Order 12375 beginning in fiscal North Pacific Coast Ecoregion, U.S. Fish grasslands at elevations below 100 year 1982. and Wildlife Service, 510 Desmond meters (m) (328 feet (ft)) around the 3 Fleet average fuel economy for light Drive S.E., Suite 101, Lacey, trucks is the combined fleet average fuel periphery of the Puget Trough. Most economy for all 4x2 and 4x4 light trucks. Washington 98503–1273. populations occur on glacially derived 4 Requirements not yet established by the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: soils, either gravelly glacial outwash or Secretary of Transportation.’’ Dave Frederick, Supervisor, at the above clayey glacio-lacustrine sediments Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 112 / Wednesday, June 11, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 31741

(Sheehan and Sprague 1984, Gamon In British Columbia, Canada, 2 on a 0.04-ha (0.10-acre) site (Gamon 1995). Associated species include populations exist on islands off of the 1995). The population declined from , F. rubra, Camassia southern coast of Vancouver Island between 500 and 1,000 plants in the quamash, Holcus lanatus, Achillea (Ryan and Douglas 1994). A historic early 1980’s, to 120 plants in 1993 millefolium, Pteridium aquilinum, Vicia population at Beacon Hill in Victoria on (Gamon 1993; Fayette Krause, The spp., and Bromus spp. (Gamon 1995). Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Nature Conservancy, in litt., 1994), and Frequent, low intensity fires can be Canada, has been surveyed annually currently harbors about 230 individuals important in maintaining habitat for from 1991 through 1996. Three plants (Gamon 1995). This State-owned plant species such as C. levisecta. were observed in 1991 but subsequent historic site is managed as a park for Historically, periodic fires in the Puget surveys have not found any plants and recreational use (Ken Hageman, Fort Trough were instrumental in the site is presumed to be extirpated Casey State Park Manager, Washington maintaining native grassland habitat by (Gamon 1995; G. Douglas, pers. comm. Department of Parks, pers. comm. 1994). limiting successional encroachment of 1996). A third Whidbey Island population of trees and shrubs (Agee 1993, Kruckeberg The southernmost population of Castilleja levisecta occurs on and 1991, Sheehan and Sprague 1984). Castilleja levisecta occurs at the Rocky adjacent to the Bocker property. This Historically, Castilleja levisecta has Prairie site south of Olympia, in population consists of 3 colonies—1 been reported from over 30 sites in the Thurston County, Washington. The site colony is 60×150 m (197×492 ft) on the Puget Trough of Washington and British is owned by the Washington property, a second colony is adjacent to Columbia, and as far south as the Department of Natural Resources and is the property in a 4 m2 (43 ft2) area, and Willamette Valley of Oregon (Sheehan designated as a Natural Area Preserve a third colony is located near the and Sprague 1984, Gamon 1995). In that is managed primarily for protection ‘‘Admiral’s’’ house and covers an area of 1984, the Service granted funding to the of C. levisecta and Aster curtus (white- 4.5×9 m (15×30 ft). In 1996, 306 Washington Natural Heritage Program topped aster), and conservation of the individual plants existed (Wentworth, (Washington Department of Natural remnant native grasslands of Festuca pers. comm. 1996), down from an Resources) to conduct an assessment of idahoenis (Idaho fescue) (J. Gamon, estimated 1,200 plants in the mid-1980’s the status of the species throughout its pers. comm. 1996). In 1983, the time of (Krause, in litt. 1994). The property is range. The plant was found to be the last complete census, 15,000 plants owned by Seattle Pacific University and extirpated from more than 20 historic were sporadically distributed is used for environmental education sites (Sheehan and Sprague 1984, throughout the 15-hectare (ha) (37-acre) courses (Keith Ludemann, Gamon 1995). Many populations were site. A fire in 1985 reduced the Environmental Education Supervisor, found to be extirpated due to conversion southernmost patch of C. levisecta, and Bocker Environmental Preserve, pers. of habitat to agricultural, residential, in 1991 the total population was comm. 1992), but no covenants or other and commercial development. In estimated to be about 7,000 plants (R. restrictions on the property exist that Oregon, C. levisecta historically Schuller, pers. comm. 1991, 1996). prevent development. occurred in the grasslands and prairie of Five populations are located on the A fourth Whidbey Island population the Willamette Valley; the species has north half of Whidbey Island, Island occurs at Ebey’s Landing in a 10–20 m been extirpated from all of these sites as County, in . Three of these ×100 m (33–66 ft×328 ft) area. This the habitat has disappeared. The area populations are located within the population on private land was around the type locality at Mill Plain, administrative boundary of the Ebey’s estimated to be from 300 to 400 plants Washington, was converted to pasture Landing National Historic Reserve in 1984 (Sheehan and Sprague 1984) and orchards some time after the plant (Ebey’s Landing, Fort Casey, and Bocker and more than 4,000 individuals in was first collected there in 1880. property), and are managed by a private 1993 (Sheehan, in litt., 1994; Gamon Housing developments currently occupy landowner, Washington State Parks, and 1995). Differences in estimation the site (Sheehan and Sprague 1984, Seattle Pacific University, respectively. techniques, such as counting Gamon 1995). The largest of the Whidbey Island individuals rather than flowering stems Western Oregon and Washington (and populations occurs near Forbes Point at and estimates based on sampled southern Vancouver Island) have a Crescent Harbor and is owned by the population density are thought to maritime climate, characterized by wet, Department of Defense (Whidbey Island contribute to the differences in mild winters and cool, relatively dry Naval Air Station). A census conducted population estimates between 1984 and summers. Annual precipitation averages for Castilleja levisecta in 1985 counted 1993. 800 to 1350 mm (31 to 53 in) in the more than 10,000 flowering stems at the The fifth Whidbey Island population Puget-Willamette Trough (Sheehan and site (Clampitt 1985); the number of of Castilleja levisecta is located at West Sprague 1984). individual plants was not provided. The Beach, on a site less than 0.40 ha (1 Castilleja levisecta is now known population was monitored in 1990, acre) in size. The property is privately from 10 extant populations. Eight when it was estimated to be in the owned and is bisected by a county road. populations occur in Washington—1 thousands, and again in 1991, when a In 1991, the east side of the road population south of Olympia in reduction in density of about 25 percent supported 10 to 20 plants (M. Klope, Thurston County, 5 populations on was observed. A census was completed pers. comm. 1991), whereas the entire Whidbey Island in Island County, 1 in May 1995. The population numbered West Beach population was estimated at population on San Juan Island in San 1,346 plants with 5,243 stems; approximately 200 plants in 1984 Juan County, and 1 population on Lopez approximately 50 percent of the 1985 (Sheehan and Sprague 1984). A 1993 Island, Island County. The Lopez Island total (Gamon 1995). The site has been census of the site found 496 plants, population consisted of 4 plants in May mapped and measures about 20 by 60 m while the 1995 census counted 550 1996 (J. Wentworth, Washington Natural (66 by 197 ft) (Matt Klope, Whidbey plants west of the road (Gamon 1995). Heritage Program, Botanist, pers. comm. Island Naval Air Station, pers. comm. The apparent increase in this 1996). A population of fewer than five 1996). population may represent (1) a real individuals likely is not viable (J. A second population on Whidbey increase in the population, (2) natural Gamon, Washington Natural Heritage Island is located at Fort Casey State Park year-to-year fluctuation in population Program, scientist, pers. comm. 1996). where approximately 230 plants occur size, (3) differences in the way 31742 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 112 / Wednesday, June 11, 1997 / Rules and Regulations individual plants were determined of refugia is low due to reduction of originally scheduled to close on July 11, between 1993 and 1995, or (4) a more habitat. In addition, because the current 1994, was extended for 30 days in a July complete count was conducted in 1995. distribution of the species has been 7, 1994, Federal Register publication In a letter to the Island County engineer, greatly fragmented and reduced from (59 FR 34784) and closed on August 11, a citizen reported that roadside the historic distribution, the species is 1994. maintenance activities by the county vulnerable to other threats such as The processing of this final rule had resulted in the elimination of the interspecific competition with native conforms with the Service’s listing plants on the east side of the road (Steve and alien woody species, reduced vigor priority guidance published in the Erickson, Whidbey Environmental and reproductive potential due to Federal Register on December 5, 1996 Action Network, in litt., 1991). grazing by herbivores, and trampling or (61 FR 64475). The guidance clarifies Subsequent field inspection by collecting during public recreational use the order in which the Service will Washington Natural Heritage Program of sites. Five sites are vulnerable process rulemakings following two staff confirmed that the population on because they are zoned for residential related events—1) The lifting, on April the east side of the road had been development or commercial use. 26, 1996, of the moratorium on final reduced to about five plants; however, Previous Federal Action listings imposed on April 10, 1995 (Pub. the direct cause of the decline east of L. 104–6), and 2) the restoration of Federal action on this species began the road is unknown (Sheehan, in litt., funding for listing through passage of when the Service published a Notice of 1992; 1994). the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation law Review for plants on December 15, 1980 The population on San Juan Island on April 26, 1996, following severe (45 FR 82480). In this notice, Castilleja (San Juan County) is located on a funding constraints imposed by a levisecta was included as a category 1 privately owned parcel near the Mar number of continuing resolutions candidate. Category 1 candidates were Vista Resort at False Bay. The site is less between November 1995 and April formerly designated as those species for than 1 acre in size, and supports a 1996. The guidance calls for giving which the Service had on file population of 128 plants (Gamon 1995). highest priority to handling emergency The remaining population of substantial information on biological situations (Tier 1) and second highest Castilleja levisecta from the United vulnerability and threats to support priority (Tier 2) to resolving the listing States is on private land at Davis Point preparation of listing proposals, but for on Lopez Island, Island County, which listing proposals had not been status of the outstanding proposed Washington. When first discovered in prepared due to other higher priority listings. This final rule falls under Tier 1994, this occurrence consisted of a listing actions. Pending completion of 2. At this time there are no pending Tier single plant. A census conducted in updated status surveys, the status was 1 actions. This rule has been updated to May 1996 found four plants. The changed to category 2 in the November reflect any changes in distribution, viability of this population is 28, 1983, supplement to the Notice of status and threats since the effective questionable. Recently located Review (48 FR 53640). Category 2 date of the listing moratorium. This photographic evidence from within the candidates were formerly designated as additional information was not of a last 2 decades but prior to 1994, those species for which information in nature to alter the Service’s decision to indicates the population was possession of the Service indicated that list the species. historically larger, with an estimated proposing to list as endangered or Summary of Comments and population size of approximately 100 threatened was possibly appropriate, Recommendations plants. However, the area is now but for which conclusive data on dominated by non-native grasses that biological vulnerability and threat were In the May 10, 1994, proposed rule likely have outcompeted C. levisecta at not currently available to support a (59 FR 24106) and associated the site (Sheehan, in litt. 1994; J. proposed rule. Castilleja levisecta notifications, all interested parties were Wentworth, pers. comm. 1996). remained a category 2 candidate in the requested to submit factual reports or Two extant populations of Castilleja September 27, 1985, Notice of Review information that might contribute to the levisecta occur in British Columbia, for plants (50 FR 39526). In the February development of a final rule. Appropriate Canada, on small islands near Victoria. 21, 1990, Notice of Review (55 FR 6184), Federal and State agencies, county Historically, C. levisecta was C. levisecta was elevated to category 1 governments, scientific organizations, documented from nine sites on status, based on additional data The Nature Conservancy, and other southeastern Vancouver Island, and on collected by the Washington Natural interested parties were contacted and two adjacent islands. All but the two Heritage Program. The species remained requested to comment. The Service populations found on islands are in category 1 in the September 30, 1993, published newspaper notices in The extirpated or of unknown status but Notice of Review for plants. On May 10, Seattle Times, The Olympian, The likely have been extirpated (Ryan and 1994, the Service published in the Whidbey News Times, The Centralia Douglas 1994). One population is Federal Register (59 FR 24106) a Chronicle, and The Journal of the San located on Alpha Islet, consisting of proposal to list C. levisecta as Juan Islands on July 13, 1994, inviting 1,000 plants in an area of 100 m2 (33 by threatened. The Service noted that the general public comment. Eleven 33 ft), and is under the management of species was a proposed threatened comments, including those of one the Ministry of Parks (Ryan and Douglas species in the February 28, 1996, Notice Federal agency (National Park Service), 1994). A second population, estimated of Review for Plants and Animals (61 FR one State agency (Washington at 2,560 plants, in an area of about 0.5 7596). Department of Natural Resources ha (1.2 acre), is located on the Trial The 1994 proposal to list Castilleja Natural Heritage Program), one county Islands and is currently managed by the levisecta as threatened was based agency, three conservation Ministry of Parks as an Ecological primarily on information contained in organizations, one university, two Reserve (G. Douglas, pers. comm. 1996). status reports prepared by the Canadian agencies, and two individuals, Castilleja levisecta is threatened by Washington Natural Heritage Program were received during the open comment habitat modification through succession and on personal communications with period. All commenters supported the of grassland to shrub and forest habitat. knowledgeable resource scientists and listing of Castilleja levisecta under the Potential for expansion and persistence site managers. The comment period, Act. Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 112 / Wednesday, June 11, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 31743

Several commenters provided as destruction of habitat, and can Development for residential or information on the status of various provide greater potential for commercial use is a potential threat at populations of Castilleja levisecta that implementing conservation measures to five of the privately owned sites, False updated the information presented in benefit the plant. With half the Bay, Davis Point, Bocker property, the proposed rule. That information has populations containing significant Ebey’s Landing and West Beach. The been incorporated into the Background numbers of plants (i.e., 1,000 or greater), three sites on Whidbey Island (Bocker and Summary of Factors sections of this and the distribution spread across property, Ebey’s Landing and West final rule. The primary issue of concern several counties in the United States Beach) are zoned for residential raised by commenters is the Service’s and into southwestern Canada, the development (County Planning, Island intent to list this species as threatened Service believes that threatened status is Co. pers. comm. 1996). The site on San rather than endangered. The five appropriate for C. levisecta. Juan Island (False Bay) is designated rural (Planning Department, San Juan commenters that raised this issue all Peer Review believe that endangered designation Island County, pers. comm. 1996), more accurately reflects the status of C. The Service solicited the expert indicating that the area is dominated by levisecta. Several arguments were opinions of appropriate and agricultural, forestry and recreational expressed to support the contention that independent specialists regarding uses and can be used for the extraction endangered status is warranted for pertinent scientific or commercial data of sand, gravel, and mineral deposits. Castilleja levisecta. Commenters stated relating to the biological and ecological This designation also allows residential that few populations of this species can information for Castilleja levisecta. development. The Davis Point be considered secure, even though Comments provided by John Gamon and population on Lopez Island is several sites are designated as preserves Jane Wentworth, botanists with the ‘‘designated conservancy’’ (Planning or parks; the 2 populations at Fort Casey Washington Department of Natural Department, San Juan Island County, State Park and the Bocker property have Resources’ Natural Heritage Program pers. comm., 1996), which allows the documented declines; 5 privately were incorporated into the final rule. construction of homes and the owned sites (False Bay, Davis Point, Mr. Gamon and Ms. Wentworth management of resources on a Bocker property, Ebey’s Landing, and provided information supporting the sustained-yield basis. Although no West Beach) have the potential for position of the Service that C. levisecta plans for development have been development; populations in British was threatened by several factors at each initiated at these sites, the habitat for occurrence of the species found in Columbia, Canada, should not be these populations remains vulnerable to western Washington. Dr. George assumed to be secure because the threats from adjacent areas that receive Douglas, Director, Conservation Data Service has little if any influence over high human use (see Factor E for a more Center, Victoria, British Columbia, how these populations are managed; the detailed discussion), and to the provided information supporting the number of populations is down from at potential for development on these position of the Service that C. levisecta least 30 to only 10; and sites with fewer privately owned sites. was facing several threats at the two than 10 to 30 plants likely are not viable In recent history (since 1850), the occurrences found in British Columbia, populations. The Service responds to suppression of fire has played a critical Canada. the issue of preferred status as follows. role in the reduction of grassland habitat in the Puget Trough (Kruckeberg 1991) The Service considered several factors Summary of Factors Affecting the Species and, therefore, in the reduction in in proposing threatened status for numbers and sizes of Castilleja levisecta Castilleja levisecta, including the After a thorough review and populations. In contrast, a large, high number of populations, number of consideration of all information intensity fire at any of the remaining plants, rate of decline, distribution of available, the Service has determined sites where C. levisecta occurs may the populations, current management of that Castilleja levisecta should be eliminate populations, although the populations, and availability of classified as a threatened species. Service is unaware of permanent techniques for reversing the decline. Procedures found at section 4 of the extirpations of this species due to fire. Castilleja levisecta was historically Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. Loss of suitable habitat from either reported from more than 30 sites in 1533) and regulations implementing the encroachment of woody species or Washington, Oregon, and British listing provisions of the Act (50 CFR development in the areas surrounding Columbia; today 10 sites are extant. part 424) were followed. A species may the disjunct populations prevents These 10 sites are distributed in 3 be determined to be an endangered or expansion of the species and affords no counties in Washington and two islands threatened species due to one or more refugia in the case of catastrophic events in British Columbia, Canada. Five of the of the five factors described in section that affect existing populations. Because 10 extant populations contain 1,000 or 4(a)(1). These factors and their the grassland habitat in the areas more plants. Though 2 populations have application to C. levisecta Greenman surrounding the existing populations declined in number by over 50 percent (golden paintbrush) are as follows: has been lost, it is doubtful that the in the last decade, 2 populations contain A. The present or threatened populations would expand naturally. higher numbers of plants than reported destruction, modification, or Thus, the continued existence of in the proposed rule. Active curtailment of its habitat or range. Castilleja levisecta is threatened by the management to benefit C. levisecta is Historic loss of prairie and grassland absence of available habitat for occurring at 4 sites (, Fort habitat in the Puget Trough has reduced recruitment and colonization. Casey, Forbes Point and West Beach). the range of Castilleja levisecta, and B. Overutilization for commercial, The Service agrees that designation of habitat loss continues to be the primary recreational, scientific, or educational sites as preserves or parks does not in threat to remaining populations. purposes. Castilleja levisecta has no and of itself guarantee the reduction or Currently, encroachment by native and known commercial use. Because of its removal of threats to a species such as alien woody species, as discussed in showy golden-yellow bracts, C. levisecta C. levisecta. However, these more detail under Factor E, is the is vulnerable to picking and collection designations do afford some level of primary cause of this habitat at public sites. Fort Casey State Park, protection against certain threats such modification. Bocker property, and Forbes Point are 31744 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 112 / Wednesday, June 11, 1997 / Rules and Regulations sites with high levels of public use were known to prey on C. levisecta conditions of the native prairie habitat, where collection and/or trampling are (Sheehan and Sprague 1984, Evans et al. continued funding of restoration cannot threats (see Factor E). For example, Fort 1984), they are not believed to currently be assured. Additionally, efforts by the Casey State Park receives a high amount pose a threat (J. Wentworth, pers. comm. Washington Department of Natural of recreational use, and the potential for 1996). Resources to eliminate the invasive overcollection is considered a genuine Predation (grazing and seed (Scotch broom) and threat. Visitor use has increased within predation) by native species is one of Hieracium pilosella (mouse-ear the last decade, and park users have the natural pressures historically faced hawkweed) at this site are voluntary and been observed picking the flowering by Castilleja levisecta, but populations not statutorially required. This plant (K. Hageman, pers. comm. 1994). that have been reduced or stressed due population continues to face threats Once numbering over 500 plants to other factors are more vulnerable to from invasion of woody species. (Hageman, pers. comm. 1994; Krause, in decline and are less able to rebound Another publicly-owned population litt. 1994), the Fort Casey State Park after periods of heavy predation. occurs in Fort Casey State Park. Park population had declined to D. The inadequacy of existing managers have implemented vegetation approximately 230 individuals by 1995 regulatory mechanisms. Currently, no management measures (mowing, (J. Gamon 1995; Krause, in litt. 1994). regulatory mechanism provides for the clipping and removing vegetation) to Castilleja levisecta may become protection of Castilleja levisecta or its improve the conditions of the grassland vulnerable to collection by concerned habitat. Castilleja levisecta is listed as habitat, and protective measures citizens, amateur botanists and the endangered by the Washington Natural (fencing) to restrict trampling the general public as a result of increased Heritage Program (Washington Natural Castilleja levisecta plants. However, the publicity following publication of the Heritage Program 1994). However, no plant continues to be vulnerable to final rule. State Endangered Species Act exists for encroaching vegetation, picking (see C. Disease or predation. Disease is not plants in Washington and no legal Factor B), trampling, grazing and seed known to be a factor threatening protection is provided by the predation. Castilleja levisecta. Populations may Washington Natural Heritage Program The Forbes Point population occurs have been reduced from historical levels listing classification of endangered. The on Federal land at Whidbey Island by grazing by livestock and rabbits province of British Columbia uses The Naval Air Station. The Department of (Sheehan and Sprague 1984, Gamon Nature Conservancy’s rating system and Defense is participating in the 1995, J. Wentworth, pers. comm. 1996). has designated C. levisecta as a category Washington Registry of Natural Areas Grazing of the flowering stems of C. G1S1 species (critically imperilled due Program. A Navy staff biologist has levisecta, probably by rabbits and/or to extreme rarity or because of undertaken measures to evaluate the deer, has been observed at the Bocker vulnerability to , and with status of the population. Efforts have property. Though the effect is unknown, typically less than 5 occurrences) (G. also been made to eradicate some presumably grazing affects seed number Douglas, pers. comm. 1996). Four sites invasive non-native species. A fence has and reproductive viability (K. are included among the Natural Heritage been constructed to restrict people Ludemann, pers. comm. 1991; J. Program’s Registry of Natural Areas trampling or picking the plants and to Wentworth, pers. comm. 1996)). (Laura Smith, Associate Director, The keep rabbits from browsing Castilleja Livestock and exotic feral rabbits also Nature Conservancy, Washington State levisecta; however, rodents still enter graze the False Bay population (Sheehan Office, pers. comm. 1996). All of these the fenced area and consume seed (M. and Sprague 1984). In 1990 and 1991 at designations are important because they Klope, pers. comm. 1996). Signs have the Forbes Point site, Klope (pers. recognize the sensitive status of the been erected designating the site as a comm. 1996) observed heavy predation species and encourage private land research area, but the Navy does not on herbaceous material and seeds by owners and management agencies to prohibit public use of this site, which rodents. Grazing also was noted at consider the species in management receives occasional foot traffic Forbes Point in 1984 and 1985 (Clampitt plans; however, they provide no legal associated with a nearby popular beach 1985), which may be reducing the protection. Therefore, changing land (M. Klope, pers. comm. 1996). reproductive potential at that site. At management priorities or inadequate The populations of Castilleja levisecta Fort Casey State Park, all flowering funding for protection could leave the at Ebey’s Landing and the Bocker stems of a small colony of C. levisecta species vulnerable at several of the sites. property are also listed on the were eaten by rabbits during the spring The Rocky Prairie Natural Area Washington Registry of Natural Areas. of 1996, thus eliminating seed set and Preserve population has the highest Ebey’s Landing is on private property reproduction for the current year (J. level of protection of the 10 sites. This within the designated boundary of Wentworth, pers. comm. 1996). State-owned site has been actively Ebey’s Landing National Historic The Rocky Prairie Natural Area managed to eliminate alien species, Reserve. The Bocker property, owned by Preserve population of Castilleja including the use of prescribed burning Seattle Pacific University, is currently levisecta has historically harbored a and hand removal of invasive plants. managed as a natural area used for population of the Whulge checkerspot Seven acres of the encroaching Douglas- education purposes with no active butterfly (Euphydryas editha taylori), a fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) were management to retain grassland habitat. State sensitive species that is a potential directionally felled and removed from The Bocker property is also located seed predator. Because C. levisecta is Rocky Prairie during the winter of 1996. within the designated boundary of not a specific host and no individual This effort was accomplished through a Ebey’s Landing National Historic butterflies were observed at the site in cooperative agreement between the Reserve. Although C. levisecta is 1991, the threat is likely low (M. Service’s Washington State considered in the current management Sheehan, pers. comm. 1991; F. Krause, Conservation Program and the of the Historic Reserve, management is The Nature Conservancy, pers. comm. Washington Department of Natural not specifically directed toward the 1996). Insect larvae have been observed Resource’s Natural Heritage Program. long-term conservation of the plant. As feeding on (flowering Despite these efforts to restore prairie a result, the population is threatened by parts) of C. levisecta (Gamon 1995). composition and structure by reducing predation and invasion of native Although several species of caterpillar shade onto the site and improve the Douglas-fir and alien woody plants. Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 112 / Wednesday, June 11, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 31745

Ebey’s Landing, Bocker property, West In summary, most populations occur blackberry, Vicia sp. (vetch), and Beach, Davis Point, and False Bay in areas designated as reserves or parks; Trifolium sp. (clover). Invasive shrubs populations of the species are on private 4 sites receive active management to and Douglas-fir, which shades out C. property and receive no legal protection. benefit the species and help prevent levisecta, are competing with C. The Ebey’s Landing National Historic . However, habitat levisecta at the Bocker property site. Reserve was established by the management for Castilleja levisecta is Numbering over 1,200 individuals in combined efforts of the local land not assured nor coordinated among the 1984, the population had declined to owners, the National Park Service, and various population sites. 295 individuals by 1995 (J. Gamon the U.S. Congress to give recognition to E. Other natural or manmade factors 1995). the local land owners for maintaining affecting its continued existence. While fire may improve the grassland their dwellings and landscapes in a Grassland habitat has historically been habitat for Castilleja levisecta, the specific historic fashion. The Historic maintained by periodic fires that impacts associated with fire prevention Reserve designation serves as a form of prevented encroachment of woody plant may be a threat. An example of this took covenants that restrict the type of species (Sheehan and Sprague 1984; J. place August 9–11, 1996, in Thurston landscaping and architectural design Agee, pers. comm. 1996). Fire County, Washington. A fire was ignited used for the maintenance or remodeling suppression in recent years has led to from the spark of a train that runs of any existing structures or the invasion of grasslands by native species adjacent to Rocky Prairie. The fire construction of new structures within such as Douglas-fir, Rosa sp. (wild rose), burned grasses and shrubs for greater Ebey’s Landing National Historic and Berberis aquifolium (barberry). than 10 miles of the railroad right-of- Reserve. The National Historic Reserve Encroachment by alien species such as way and emergency vehicles were designation does not prohibit Cytisus scoparius and Hieracium activated to suppress the fire. To access development or extraction of natural pilosella also occurs. These species are the fire adjacent to Rocky Prairie, the resources and provides no protection for invasive and can dominate some areas fence surrounding Rocky Prairie Natural biological resources. The National Park and compete with Castilleja levisecta for Area Preserve was cut at two locations Service’s jurisdiction over Ebey’s space, light, and nutrients. to allow access of fire prevention Interspecific competition is a serious Landing National Historic Reserve is vehicles. Vehicles ran directly over a threat to the continued existence of only advisory in nature and is limited portion of the C. levisecta population, Castilleja levisecta. Loss of grassland to providing technical assistance to breaking and compacting individual habitat due, in part, to invasion of plants. Damage to plants and habitat are State and local governments and local woody species threatens the plant at the often the result of the fire suppression land owners in the management, Rocky Prairie Natural Area Preserve (J. activities associated with protection, and interpretation of the Wentworth, pers. comm. 1996; Krause, (James Agee, pers. comm. 1996). Historic Reserve (Gretchen Luxenberg, in litt. 1994; Sheehan, in litt. 1994), Trampling by recreationists may National Park Service, pers. comm. Bocker property (K. Ludemann, pers. threaten the plant at Fort Casey State 1997; Curt Soper, Director of Agency comm. 1991; Krause, in litt. 1994; Park on Whidbey Island where paths Relations, The Nature Conservancy, Sheehan, in litt. 1994; J. Wentworth, had been worn into the soil and pass pers. comm. 1997; Stacey Tucker, Island pers. comm. 1996), Ebey’s Landing (Jim directly through a Castilleja levisecta County Planning and Community Larson, Chief, Division of Natural population. A decorative fence erected Development Department, pers. comm. Resources, National Park Service, pers. in 1995 partially restricts foot traffic 1997). comm. 1991; J. Gamon pers. comm. through the C. levisecta population and The Castilleja levisecta populations in 1996), West Beach (M. Mills, pers. trampling by the public at this site has Canada receive no regulatory protection. comm. 1996; Krause, in litt. 1994; been reduced (J. Gamon, pers. comm. Legislation to protect endangered Sheehan, in litt. 1994), and Forbes Point 1996), although invasion by wild rose species has been proposed to the British (M. Klope, pers. comm. 1996; Krause, in remains a threat. The few plants that Columbia government, but currently no litt. 1994; Sheehan, in litt. 1994) sites. formerly occurred in Beacon Hill Federal or Provincial law protects Castilleja levisecta cannot survive under Municipal Park in Victoria were located sensitive species. The Trial Islands, a closed canopy, such as that formed by in a heavily used area of the park. offshore from the city of Victoria, are Douglas-fir, wild rose, barberry and the Trampling by the public may have designated as an Ecological Reserve by alien Cytisus scoparius. Those species contributed to the species extirpation at the British Columbia Ministry of Parks. may also outcompete C. levisecta for Beacon Hill (G. Douglas, pers. comm. The small population at Alpha Islet also root space and nutrients (Sheehan and 1996). is located within a designated Sprague 1984). The species appears to None of the private ownerships have Ecological Reserve. Ecological Reserves be unable to compete successfully been fenced or are otherwise protected. are protected areas that generally against species that tend toward The West Beach occurrence of Castilleja require permits for entry and do not monoculture (J. Gamon, pers. comm. levisecta is surrounded by beach front allow consumptive activities, like plant 1996). homes and foot traffic passes through collection or other activities destructive Four populations of Castilleja the population to access the beach. to resources (L. Ramsey, Conservation levisecta on Whidbey Island (Fort Casey Adjacent property owners maintain Data Center, Ministry of Environment, State Park, Forbes Point, Bocker their lawns with fertilizers and Lands and Parks, British Columbia, property, and West Beach) are also herbicides. Aerial drift from these pers. comm. 1997). However, the threatened with tree and/or shrub chemical treatments that come in Ecological Reserve designation does not succession. If left unchecked, contact with C. levisecta is a potential require specific management encroachment of wild rose and Rubus threat. Across Fort Casey Road from recommendations for the plant. Because sp. (blackberry) will eliminate the several new homes, the population on this designation is an administrative population at the West Beach site (M. the Bocker property is threatened by one, it could potentially be reversed by Mills, pers. comm. 1996). Clampitt foot traffic. At False Bay, several foot administrative decision, and the site (1985) noted the encroachment of paths have been established through the could be used for other purposes (G. several aggressive plants into C. population and individual plants have Douglas, pers. comm. 1996). levisecta habitat at Forbes Point, like been trampled. The only access to the 31746 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 112 / Wednesday, June 11, 1997 / Rules and Regulations beach from the resort at False Bay is above under Factor B in the Summary section 7 consultation processes. through the population. At Davis Point, of Factors Affecting the Species, C. Therefore, the Service finds that C. levisecta is found on a small patch levisecta is vulnerable to collecting. designation of critical habitat for within a 30-acre overgrown lot; pasture Publication of precise maps and critical Castilleja levisecta is not prudent at this grasses and wild rose are abundant and habitat descriptions in the Federal time, because a designation would threaten to overtake C. levisecta. This Register would be likely to increase the increase the threat posed by taking (i.e., site has not been managed and the C. degree of threats from collecting and vandalism, collection) and other human levisecta population has declined from vandalism, and would increase activities, and because the designation about 100 plants prior to 1994 to 4 enforcement problems. of critical habitat would not be individuals in 1996 (Wentworth 1996). Critical habitat protections apply only beneficial to the species. The Ebey’s Landing occurrence is to Federal actions and, therefore, critical Available Conservation Measures adjacent to a road on a steep hillslope habitat provides no protection for overlooking the ocean. Erosion and populations occurring on State or Conservation measures provided to slumping have occurred on the slope private land absent a Federal nexus. In species listed as endangered or and potentially threaten the species at addition, even where such a nexus threatened under the Act include this location. Ebey’s Landing is a occurs, designation of critical habitat recognition, recovery actions, recreation area with foot paths leading generally provides no additional requirements for Federal protection, and to the plants and trampling has been protection beyond that provided by prohibitions against certain activities. documented (Jane Wentworth, pers. listing. In particular, even though three Recognition through listing can comm. 1997). populations of Castilleja levisecta encourage and result in conservation The Service has carefully assessed the located within the administrative actions by Federal, State, and private best scientific and commercial boundary of Ebey’s Landing National agencies, groups, and individuals. information available regarding the past, Historic Reserve (the first population is Recovery efforts encourage present, and future threats faced by this on private property, the second communication and cooperative efforts species in determining to list Castilleja population is on State park land, and among various land managers and levisecta as threatened. Threats to C. the third population is owned by Seattle owners. The Act provides for possible levisecta include habitat modification Pacific University), the enabling land acquisition and cooperation with through succession of prairie and legislation (National Parks and the State and requires that recovery grassland habitats to shrub and forest Recreation Act, 1978, P.L. 95–625, actions be carried out for all listed lands; development of property for section 508) that established Ebey’s species. Funding may be available commercial, residential and agricultural Landing National Historic Reserve does through section 6 of the Act for the State use; low potential for expansion and not provide the National Park Service to conduct recovery activities. This may refugia due to constriction of habitat; the authority to manage biological assist in protection and recovery efforts recreational picking; and herbivory. resources on the private or State at Rocky Prairie Natural Area Preserve Several of the sites are designated as property within this National Historic and Fort Casey State Park, sites owned preserves or afforded some level of Reserve. The National Park Service’s by the State of Washington. The protection from certain threats through jurisdiction over Ebey’s Landing protection required by Federal agencies current management efforts, and 50 National Historic Reserve is only and prohibitions against certain percent of the populations contain 1,000 advisory in nature (G. Luxenberg, activities involving listed plants are or more individuals. The Service, National Park Service, pers. comm. discussed, in part, below. therefore, believes the species is not 1997). Section 7(a) of the Act, as amended, currently in danger of extinction. Critical habitat receives consideration requires Federal agencies to evaluate However, because the remaining under section 7 of the Act with regard their actions with respect to any species populations are threatened by the to actions carried out, authorized, or that is proposed or listed as endangered chronic factors described above, like funded by a Federal agency. As such, or threatened. Regulations successional modification and potential designation of critical habitat may affect implementing this interagency development of its habitat, Castilleja non-Federal lands only where such a cooperation provision of the Act are levisecta is likely to become endangered Federal nexus exists. Federal agencies codified at 50 CFR part 402. Section within the foreseeable future throughout must insure that their actions do not 7(a)(2) of the Act requires Federal all or a significant portion of its range. result in destruction or adverse agencies to insure that activities they The species, therefore, fits the definition modification of critical habitat. Aside authorize, fund, or carry out are not of threatened as defined by the Act. from this added consideration under likely to jeopardize the continued Critical habitat is not being proposed for section 7, the Act does not provide any existence of a listed species. If a Federal this species for reasons discussed in the additional protection to lands action may affect a listed species, Critical Habitat section of this rule. designated as critical habitat. regardless of whether the activity occurs Designating critical habitat does not on Federal or non-Federal lands, the Critical Habitat create a management plan for the areas responsible Federal agency must enter Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as where the listed species occurs; does into formal consultation with the amended, requires that, to the maximum not establish numerical population Service. The population of Castilleja extent prudent and determinable, the goals or prescribe specific management levisecta at Forbes Point occurs on Secretary designate critical habitat actions (inside or outside of critical Federal land at Whidbey Island Naval concurrently with determining a species habitat); and does not have a direct Air Station. Federal actions there would to be endangered or threatened. The effect on areas not designated as critical be subject to section 7 requirements. Service finds that designation of critical habitat. The National Park Service administers habitat is not prudent for this species. In addition, all involved parties and Ebey’s Landing National Historic Such a determination would provide no landowners have been notified of the Reserve, where three populations of C. additional protection to Castilleja importance of the species’ habitat. levisecta are located on private lands. levisecta and could increase the degree Protection of its habitat can be The National Park Service’s jurisdiction of threat to the species. As discussed addressed through the recovery and over the Reserve is advisory in nature. Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 112 / Wednesday, June 11, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 31747

However, in the event the National Park impacts of a species’ listing on proposed Evans, S., R. Schuller, and E. Augenstein. Service funded or carried out any and ongoing activities within the range 1984. A report on Castilleja levisecta activities that may affect the species, it of the species. In the case of Castilleja Greenman at Rocky Prairie, Thurston would be required to consult with the levisecta, unauthorized collection at County, Washington. Unpubl. Report to Service. In addition, sections 2(c)(1) and Forbes Point would constitute a The Nature Conservancy, Washington 7(a)(1) of the Act require Federal violation of section 9 because this site Field Office, Seattle, Washington. 56pp. Gamon, J. G. 1995. Report on the status of agencies to utilize their authorities in is under Federal jurisdiction; collection Castilleja levisecta (Greenman). furtherance of the purposes of the Act occuring under a Federal threatened Washington Natural Heritage Program, to carry out conservation programs for species permit for scientific or recovery Department of Natural Resources, endangered and threatened species. purposes would not result in a violation Olympia, Washington. 55pp. The Act and implementing of section 9. Collection or destruction of Gamon, J. 1993. Castilleja levisecta Within regulations found at 50 CFR 17.71 and C. levisecta on private or other non- Ebey’s Landing National Historic 17.72 set forth a series of general Federal lands are not a violation of Reserve: A report on the current status of prohibitions and exceptions that apply section 9. However, when a project the species, including preliminary to all threatened plants. With respect to occurring on non-Federal lands requires management recommendations. Castilleja levisecta, all trade Federal authorization, funding or Washington Natural Heritage Program, prohibitions of section 9(a)(2) of the Act, permiting and the project may affect Department of Natural Resources, implemented by 50 CFR 17.61, would listed species, including listed plants, Olympia, Washington. 7pp. apply. These prohibitions, in part, make the action agency must consult with the Goodman, D. 1987. The demography of it illegal any for any person subject to Service under section 7 of the Act to chance extinction. Pages 11–34 in M.E. Soule’, editor. Viable populations for the jurisdiction of the United States to ensure that the Federal action (e.g., import or export endangered or conservation. Cambridge University issuance of a Federal permit) will not Press, Cambridge, England. threatened plants; transport any such jeopardize the survival of the species. Greenman, J.M. 1898. Some new and other plant in interstate or foreign commerce Absent a Federal action, the Act does noteworthy plants of the Pacific in the course of a commercial activity; not provide protection to threatened Northwest. Bot. Gaz. 25:261–269. sell or offer for sale such species in plants on private lands. Questions Heckard, L.R. 1962. Root parasitism in interstate or foreign commerce; remove regarding whether specific activities Castilleja. Bot. Gaz. 124:21–29. and reduce such species to possession will constitute a violation of section 9 Hitchcock, C.L., and A. Cronquist. 1973. from areas under Federal jurisdiction. should be directed to the Supervisor, Flora of the . Univ. of Seeds from cultivated specimens of Western Washington Office, North Washington Press, Seattle. threatened plant species are exempt Pacific Coast Ecoregion, U.S. Fish and Kruckeberg, A.R. 1991. The Natural History from these prohibitions provided that a Wildlife Service, 510 Desmond Drive, of the Puget Sound Country. University statement of ‘‘cultivated origin’’ appears S.E., Suite 101, Lacey, Washington of Washington Press, Seattle, on their containers. Certain exceptions 98503–1273, telephone 360/753–9440. Washington. apply to agents of the Service and State Requests for copies of the regulations Ryan, M. and G. W. Douglas. 1994. Status conservation agencies. The Act and 50 on plants and inquiries regarding them, report on the golden paintbrush CFR 17.62, 17.63 and 17.72 also provide including permits, may be addressed to Castilleja levisecta Greenm. for the issuance of permits to carry out the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Unpublished, draft report prepared by the British Columbia Ministry of otherwise prohibited activities Ecological Services, Endangered Species Environment, Lands and Parks. Victoria, involving endangered and threatened Permits, 911 NE 11th Avenue, Portland, B.C. plant species under certain Oregon 97232–4181, telephone 503/ Sheehan, M., and N. Sprague. 1984. Report circumstances. It is anticipated that few 231–2063. on the status of Castilleja levisecta. trade permits would ever be sought or Required Determinations Unpubl. Report submitted to the U.S. issued because the species is not Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, common in cultivation or in the wild. The Fish and Wildlife Service has Oregon. 82pp. The proposal incorrectly stated that determined that Environmental Washington Natural Heritage Program. 1994. the Act prohibits any person from Assessments and Environmental Impact Endangered, threatened and sensitive removing, cutting, digging up, Statements, as defined under the vascular plants of Washington. damaging, or destroying any endangered authority of the National Environmental Department of Natural Resources, or threatened plant on areas that are not Policy Act of 1969, need not be Olympia. Second printing. 52pp. under Federal jurisdiction in knowing prepared in connection with regulations Wentworth, Jane. 1994. The demography and violation of any State law or regulation adopted pursuant to section 4(a) of the population dynamics of Castilleja or in the course of any violation of a Endangered Species Act. A notice levisecta, an endangered perennial. outlining the Service’s reasons for this Unpublished Master’s thesis. University State criminal trespass law. This of Washington. 53pp. prohibition under section 9(a)(2)(B) determination was published in the Federal Register on October 25, 1983 Wentworth, J. 1996. Conservation currently applies only to plant species recommendations for Castilleja levisecta listed as endangered. Section 4(d) of the (48 FR 49244). The Service has examined this in Washington. Washington Natural Act allows for the provision of such Heritage Program, Washington regulation under the Paperwork protection to threatened plants through Department of Natural Resources, regulation. This protection may apply to Reduction Act of 1995 and found it to Olympia, Washington. threatened plants including Castilleja contain no information collection levisecta in the future if regulations are requirements. Authors: promulgated. References Cited It is the policy of the Service (59 FR The authors of this final rule are 34272) to identify to the maximum Agee, J.K. 1993. Fire Ecology of Pacific Leslie Propp and Ted Thomas, U.S. Northwest Forests. Island Press. 493 pp. extent practicable at the time a species Clampitt, C. 1985. Report: Census of is listed those activities that would or Castilleja levisecta population at Forbes would not constitute a violation of Point. Prepared for L. Smith, The Nature section 9 of the Act. Such information Conservancy, Washington Field Office, is intended to clarify the potential Seattle, Washington. 4pp. 31748 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 112 / Wednesday, June 11, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

Fish and Wildlife Service (see Regulations, is amended as set forth order under Flowering Plants, to the List ADDRESSES section). below: of Endangered and Threatened Plants, to read as follows: List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 PART 17Ð[AMENDED] Endangered and threatened species, § 17.12 Endangered and threatened plants. 1. The authority citation for part 17 Exports, Imports, Reporting and continues to read as follows: * * * * * recordkeeping requirements, (h) * * * Transportation. Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531–1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201–4245; Pub. L. 99– Regulation Promulgation 625, 100 Stat. 3500, unless otherwise noted. Accordingly, part 17, subchapter B of 2. Section 17.12(h) is amended by chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal adding the following, in alphabetical

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

FLOWERING PLANTS

******* Castilleja levisecta ... Golden paintbrush .. U.S.A. (OR, WA), Scrophulariaceae .... T 615 NA NA Canada (B.C.).

*******

Dated: May 16, 1997. appointment, during normal business (Petersen 1980, Troy and Johnson 1987, Jay L. Gerst, hours at the Ecological Services Metzner 1993). Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Fairbanks Field Office, U.S. Fish and During the breeding season, Steller’s Service. Wildlife Service, 101 12th Avenue, Box eiders move inland in coastal areas, [FR Doc. 97–15245 Filed 6–10–97; 8:45 am] 19, Fairbanks, Alaska, 99701, telephone where they nest adjacent to shallow BILLING CODE 4310±55±P (907) 456–0441 or facsimile (907) 456– ponds or within drained lake basins 0208. (King and Dau 1981, Flint et al. 1984, Quakenbush and Cochrane 1993). In FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ted DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR inland areas, their diet includes aquatic Swem, Wildlife Biologist, at the above insects (primarily chironomid larvae), Fish and Wildlife Service address (telephone (907) 456–0441). plant materials, crustaceans, and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: mollusks (Cottam 1939, Quakenbush 50 CFR Part 17 and Cochrane 1993). Background RIN 1018±AC19 The current breeding distribution of The Steller’s eider is the smallest of the Steller’s eider encompasses the Endangered and Threatened Wildlife four eider species. It was first described arctic coastal regions of northern Alaska and Plants; Threatened Status for the by Pallas in 1769 as Anas stelleri and from Wainwright to Prudhoe Bay up to Alaska Breeding Population of the was subsequently grouped with the 90 kilometers (km)(54 miles) inland Steller's Eider other eiders in the genus Somateria. The (King and Brackney 1993), and Russia Steller’s eider is now recognized as a from the Chukotsk Peninsula west to the AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Taimyr, Gydan and Yamal peninsulas Interior. monotypic genus, Polysticta stelleri (American Ornithologists’ Union 1983). (American Ornithologists’ Union 1983, ACTION: Final rule. Yesou and Lappo 1992). Actual The adult male Steller’s eider has a numbers nesting in Alaska and Russia SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife white head with a greenish tuft and a are unknown but the majority of Service (Service) determines the Alaska small black eye patch, a black back, Steller’s eiders nest in arctic Russia breeding population of the Steller’s white shoulders, and a chestnut breast (Palmer 1976, Bellrose 1980). eider (Polysticta stelleri) to be and belly with a black spot on each side. After the nesting season, Steller’s threatened pursuant to the Endangered Adult females and juveniles are mottled eiders return to marine habitats where Species Act of 1973, as amended. This dark brown. Both adult sexes have a they molt (Jones 1965; Petersen 1980, determination is based upon a blue wing speculum with a white 1981). Concentrations of molting substantial decrease in the species’ border. The Inupiat Eskimo name for Steller’s eiders have been noted in nesting range in Alaska, a reduction in this eider is Iginikkauktuk and Yupik Russia (Gerasimov in Kistchinski 1973), the number of Steller’s eiders nesting in Eskimos call them Anarnissaguq. The near St. Lawrence Island in the Bering Alaska, and the resulting increased Siberian Yupik name used by residents Sea (Fay 1961), and along the northern vulnerability of the remaining breeding of St. Lawrence Island is Aglekesegak. shore of the Alaska Peninsula (Jones population to extirpation. This rule Steller’s eiders are sea ducks that 1965; Petersen 1980, 1981). In some implements the Federal protection and spend the majority of the year in years, groups of tens of thousands may recovery provisions of the Act for this shallow, near-shore marine waters molt in the bays and lagoons along the species. Critical habitat is not being where they feed by diving and dabbling Alaska Peninsula, in particular Nelson designated at this time. for molluscs and crustaceans (Petersen Lagoon and Izembek Lagoon (Petersen EFFECTIVE DATE: July 11, 1997. 1980). Principal foods in marine areas 1980). In other years, many of the birds ADDRESSES: The complete file for this include bivalves, crustaceans, complete their molt before arriving on rule is available for inspection, by polychaete worms, and molluscs the Peninsula (Jones 1965). Band