Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 16, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 31955

regulations to substitute channel 22 for Federal Communications Commission. significant as originally determined and channel 7 at Hannibal. India Malcolm, are being adequately managed. DATES: Effective June 16, 2021. Assistant Bureau Chief for Management. Therefore, the species no longer meets the definition of an endangered or a FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Final Rule threatened species under the Joyce Bernstein, Media Bureau, at (202) For the reasons discussed in the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act), 418–1647 or [email protected]. preamble, the Federal Communications as amended. This determination is SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission amends 47 CFR part 73 as based on a thorough review of all proposed rule was published at 86 FR follows: available information, which indicates 16686 on March 31, 2021. The Licensee that this species’ populations and filed comments in support of the PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST distribution are much greater than were petition reaffirming its commitment to SERVICE known at the time of listing and that apply for channel 22. No other threats to this species have been ■ comments were filed. The Licensee 1. The authority citation for part 73 sufficiently minimized. continues to read as follows: states that VHF channels have certain DATES: This rule is effective July 16, propagation characteristics which may Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 155, 301, 303, 2021. 307, 309, 310, 334, 336, 339. cause reception issues for some viewers ADDRESSES: This final rule, the and that the reception of VHF signals ■ 2. In § 73.622(i), amend the Post- supporting documents we used in requires larger antennas generally not Transition Table of DTV Allotments, preparing this rule, and public well suited to the mobile applications under Missouri, by revising the entry for comments we received are available on expected under flexible use, relative to Hannibal to read as follows: the internet at http:// UHF channels. In addition, KHQA–TV www.regulations.gov at Docket No. has received numerous complaints from § 73.622 Digital television table of allotments. FWS–R6–ES–2018–0045. Persons who viewers unable to receive the Station’s use a telecommunications device for the over-the-air signal, despite being able to * * * * * deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Relay receive signals from other stations. (i) * * * Service at 800–877–8339. Moreover, there would be no loss of Community Channel No. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jodi service because the noise limited Bush, Office Supervisor, telephone: contour of the proposed channel 22 406–449–5225. Direct all questions or facility completely encompasses the ***** requests for additional information to: licensed channel 7 facility’s noise WATER HOWELLIA QUESTIONS, U.S. limited contour. MISSOURI Fish and Wildlife Service, Montana This is a synopsis of the Ecological Services Field Office, 585 Commission’s Report and Order, MB Shepard Way, Suite 1, Helena, MT Docket No. 21–71; RM–11887; DA 21– ***** Hannibal ...... 22 59601. Persons who use a TDD may call 601, adopted May 21, 2021, and the Federal Relay Service at 800–877– released May 21, 2021. The full text of ***** 8339. this document is available for download SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: at https://www.fcc.gov/edocs. To request [FR Doc. 2021–12049 Filed 6–15–21; 8:45 am] materials in accessible formats for BILLING CODE 6712–01–P Executive Summary people with disabilities (braille, large Why we need to publish a rule. Under print, electronic files, audio format), the Act, if a species is determined to no send an email to [email protected] or call DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR longer be an endangered or threatened the Consumer & Governmental Affairs species, we may reclassify the species or Bureau at 202–418–0530 (voice), 202– Fish and Wildlife Service remove it from the Federal Lists of 418–0432 (tty). Endangered and Threatened Wildlife This document does not contain 50 CFR Part 17 and Plants due to recovery. A species is information collection requirements [Docket No. FWS–R6–ES–2018–0045; an ‘‘endangered species’’ for purposes of subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act FXES11130900000–201–FF09E22000] the Act if it is in danger of extinction of 1995, Public Law 104–13. In addition, throughout all or a significant portion of therefore, it does not contain any RIN 1018–BC03 its range and is a ‘‘threatened species’’ proposed information collection burden if it is likely to become an endangered ‘‘for small business concerns with fewer Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Removing the Water species within the foreseeable future than 25 employees,’’ pursuant to the throughout all or a significant portion of Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of Howellia From the List of Endangered and Threatened Plants its range. The Act does not define the 2002, Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. term ‘‘foreseeable future.’’ However, we 3506(c)(4). Provisions of the Regulatory AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, consider ‘‘foreseeable future’’ as that Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601– Interior. period of time within which a 612, do not apply to this proceeding. ACTION: Final rule. reasonable prediction can be relied The Commission will send a copy of upon in making a determination about this Report and Order in a report to be SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and the future conservation status of a sent to Congress and the Government Wildlife Service (Service), are removing species. Water howellia is listed as Accountability Office pursuant to the water howellia (Howellia aquatilis) from threatened. We are removing this Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. the Federal List of Endangered and species from the Federal List of 801(a)(1)(A). Threatened Plants. The best available Endangered and Threatened Plants (i.e., scientific and commercial data indicate ‘‘delist’’ this species) because we have List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 that threats to water howellia identified determined that it is not likely to Television. at the time of listing in 1994 are not as become an endangered species now or

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:52 Jun 15, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM 16JNR1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES 31956 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 16, 2021 / Rules and Regulations

within the foreseeable future. Delisting species to maintain healthy populations (1 meter (m)) in depth. Some ponds a species can only be completed by that can withstand annual supporting water howellia are issuing a rule. environmental variation and stochastic dependent on complex ground and The basis for our action. Under the events. Redundancy is the ability of the surface water interactions. Snow melt Act, we can determine that a species is species to maintain an adequate number runoff is important in maintaining an endangered or threatened species and distribution of populations that can suitable conditions in the spring, while based on any one or more of the withstand catastrophic events. localized groundwater flow mitigates following five factors or the cumulative Representation is the ability of the water loss from evaporation and plant effects thereof: (A) The present or species to adapt to changing transpiration later in the summer threatened destruction, modification, or environmental conditions through (Reeves and Woessner 2004, pp. 7–9). curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) genetic, ecological, demographic, and The drying of water howellia habitat overutilization for commercial, behavioral diversity across its range. in late summer and autumn is important recreational, scientific, or educational Water howellia was first collected in because water howellia seeds only purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D) 1879, along the Columbia River in germinate when exposed to air (Lesica the inadequacy of existing regulatory Multnomah County, Oregon (Gray 1880, 1990). Upon air exposure, seeds either mechanisms; or (E) other natural or entire), and is native to the germinate in the fall and produce manmade factors affecting its continued northwestern United States. The seedlings that overwinter under existence. Based on an assessment of the taxonomy of water howellia as a full snowcover, or germinate the following best available information regarding the species in a monotypic genus is widely spring, with seeds lying on top of the status of and threats to water howellia, accepted as valid by the scientific soil through winter. Water howellia we have determined that the species no community (The Plant List 2013, seedlings that overwinter in soil resume longer meets the definition of an unpaginated; ITIS 2017). growth in spring in northern climates endangered or threatened species under Water howellia is an annual, aquatic (Mincemoyer 2005, p. 3) or begin the Act. herb in the bellflower family growing after fall germination in This final rule recognizes that based (Campanulaceae). The entire plant is southern climates (e.g., California) on the best available science, water smooth, possessing no hairs or (Johnson 2013, pers. comm.). Spring howellia has reached recovery. projections. The stems are fragile, growth in California and low-elevation Collaborative conservation efforts submerged and floating, reaching up to occurrences in western Washington including increased surveys, land 39 inches (in) (100 centimeters (cm)) in typically commence in early April, and transfers, and land management plans length. Stems branch several inches in eastern Washington, Idaho, and have all aided in the discovery of from the base, and each branch extends Montana by early May. Rangewide, additional occurrences of the species to the water surface. The numerous emergent (chasmogamous) flowers and provided for long-term protection of leaves are narrow and range from 1–2 in bloom soon after the stems reach the the species. (25–50 millimeters (mm)) long. water surface and are typically present Water howellia produce two types of from May through July. Seed dispersal Previous Federal Actions flowers: Cleistogamous (closed) and starts in June from submerged On October 7, 2019, we proposed to chasmogamous (showy, open for (cleistogamous) flowers and extends remove water howellia from the Federal pollination). Small cleistogamous until late summer from emergent List of Endangered and Threatened flowers are produced along the stem flowers (Shelly and Moseley 1988, p. 5). Plants (i.e., to ‘‘delist’’ the species) (84 below the water surface and are self- Decreased germination rates have FR 53380). For previous Federal actions fertilizing. Chasmogamous flowers are been documented for seeds residing in occurring before October 7, 2019, please produced on the water surface and the soil longer than 8 months (Lesica see the Previous Federal Actions section commonly self-pollinate (Lesica et al. 1992, pp. 415–416). However, of the proposed rule. 1988, p. 276; Shelly and Moseley 1988, monitoring data and observations from pp. 5–6). Montana (U.S. Forest Service (USFS) Species Description and Habitat Suitable water howellia habitat 2002, pp. 6–7; USFWS 1996, pp. 17–18) Information typically includes small, vernal and Washington (Gilbert 2008, pers. In this final rule, we discuss only freshwater wetlands and ponds with an comm.) show the presence of water those topics directly related to delisting annual cycle of filling with water in howellia after 2 consecutive years with water howellia. For more information spring and drying up in summer or no plant observations, suggesting seeds on the description, biology, ecology, and autumn (USFWS 1996, p. 14). These may remain viable for at least 3 years. habitat of water howellia, please refer to habitats can be glacial potholes or This life-history strategy likely provides the final listing rule published in the depressions (Shapley and Lesica 1997, a buffer against unfavorable growing Federal Register on July 14, 1994 (59 FR p. 8; U.S. Department of Defense conditions in consecutive years. 35860); the most recent 5-year review (USDOD) 2017a, p. 1) or river oxbows Composition and depth of substrates for water howellia completed in August (Lesica 1997, p. 366) in Montana and in vernal wetlands are also important of 2013 (USFWS 2013, entire); the draft western Washington, riverine meander characteristics of suitable water recovery plan for water howellia, scars (Idaho NHP 2017, p. 1; howellia habitat. Substrates composed completed in September 1996 (USFWS Wiechmann 2014a, p. 3) in Idaho, of both coarse organic and mineral 1996, entire); and the proposed delisting glacial-flood remnant wetlands (Robison sediments are correlated with presence rule published in the Federal Register 2007, p. 8) in eastern Washington, or of water howellia (Lesica 1992, p. 417). on October 7, 2019 (84 FR 53380). These landslide depressions (Johnson 2013, Similarly, water howellia growth in a documents are available as supporting pers. comm.) in California, but are all laboratory setting was highest in coarse materials on http://www.regulations.gov ephemeral (transitory) to some degree. organic substrate (Lesica 1992, p. 416). under Docket No. FWS–R6–ES–2018– Depending on annual patterns of However, mean depth of the organic 0045. We use concepts of resiliency, temperature and precipitation, the sediment layer was significantly less in redundancy, and representation (Smith drying of the ponds may be complete or ponds with water howellia, relative to et al. 2018) in considering the species’ partial by autumn; these sites are depth in ponds without water howellia viability. Resiliency is the ability of the usually shallow and less than 3 feet (ft) (Lesica 1992, p. 417). These results

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:52 Jun 15, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM 16JNR1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 16, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 31957

indicate a moderate amount of organic some plasticity to the effects of JBLM, Pierce County in western sediment (with some mineral soil) in disturbance on extent of canopy cover. Washington; and Turnbull National wetland substrates may be optimum for Range, Distribution, Abundance, and Wildlife Refuge (Turnbull Refuge), water howellia presence and growth. Trends of Water Howellia Spokane County in northeastern Water howellia occupies habitats Washington (see the figure, below). The across its range that vary in the extent The distribution of water howellia three metapopulations have enabled the of canopy cover, suggesting some before European settlement and modern species to remain viable across its range flexibility to potential effects of development in the Pacific Northwest is (Freckleton and Watkinson 2002, p. unknown. However, after European disturbance on canopy cover. Many 419). Small, isolated occurrences that settlement, water howellia is known water howellia occurrences are are not part of a metapopulation can be from the Pacific Northwest, with surrounded or nearly surrounded by more vulnerable to extirpation (Lesica forested vegetation (Mincemoyer 2005, historical occurrences documented in 1992, p. 420). Consequently, p. 7), with numerous observations California, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, identification of these metapopulations reporting water howellia occupying and Montana (Shelly and Moseley 1988, is important for directing conservation shaded portions of ponds and wetlands pp. 6, 9). The species still occurs in all (Isle 1997, p. 32; McCarten et al. 1998, five States. Since listing in 1994, new efforts toward the regional availability p. 4). Conversely, on the Joint Base occurrences of water howellia have been of suitable habitat (Freckleton and Lewis-McChord (JBLM) military base in documented in all five States, generally Watkinson 2002, p. 432). Currently, 258 Washington, occupied ponds were in areas within these States known of the 307 (84 percent) reported water historically surrounded by prairie historically to support the species. howellia occurrences are on lands vegetation and, as a result of years of At the time of Federal listing (1994), administered by the Federal fire suppression, are now surrounded by 107 water howellia occurrences were Government. There are 37 reported forest (Gilbert 2017, pers. comm.). known across the species’ range (59 FR occurrences of water howellia on Currently, water howellia is occurring 35860; July 14, 1994). In 2020, a private property; however, little is in portions of ponds that receive the minimum of 307 occurrences were known about them, as limited most light and least shade (Gilbert 2017, documented (see Table 1, below). The monitoring of these occurrences has pers. comm.). In Montana’s Swan majority of extant occurrences (91 taken place over the years. Two Valley, water howellia was present in 78 percent) are within three occurrences of water howellia are on percent of sites with prior disturbance metapopulations occupying distinct State land and the remaining (roads, fire, grazing, and/or vegetation geographic areas in Montana’s Swan occurrences exist in areas with several treatments) of vegetation surrounding Valley (Lake and Missoula Counties); jurisdictions (i.e., straddle public and the ponds (Pipp 2017, p. 6), indicating Department of Defense property at private lands).

TABLE 1—CURRENT NUMBER OF WATER HOWELLIA OCCURRENCES AND PERCENT OF TOTAL KNOWN OCCURRENCES BY STATE

Percent of State Number of total known occurrences occurrences

Montana ...... 220 72 Idaho ...... 7 2 Washington ...... 72 23 Oregon ...... 2 <1 California ...... 7 2

Total ...... 308 ......

BILLING CODE 4333–15–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:52 Jun 15, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM 16JNR1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES 31958 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 16, 2021 / Rules and Regulations

A .. ...• --

Figure of historical and extant occurrences of water howellia across the species' known range.

BILLING CODE 4333–15–C However, this may not necessarily has occurred at occupied sites (Fertig Population trends for water howellia indicate a positive population trend. 2019, pp. 40–45). Additionally, an are difficult to determine. Substantial Rather, this could indicate increased occurrence is broadly defined, and numbers of new occurrences have been efficiency at finding new occurrences. abundance of individual water howellia discovered since listing in 1994, and, Consistent, standardized monitoring has plants within occurrences fluctuates most recently, occurrences have been not occurred across the range of the widely. This is due, in part, to documented in Oregon, where the species, making it difficult to document environmental conditions of the species was thought to be extirpated. trends, even when repeat monitoring preceding autumn, which affect seed

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:52 Jun 15, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM 16JNR1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES ER16JN21.001 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 16, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 31959

germination rates. Nevertheless, based transporting seed or plant material howellia. More detailed information on the discovery of many new between water howellia population related to conservation efforts can be occurrences and few recent extirpations areas (Schierenbeck and Phipps 2010, found below under Summary of Factors of existing occurrences, distribution of pp. 6–7). A more robust sampling and Affecting the Species. the species appears to be currently genetic analysis of water howellia 1. Recovery criterion: Management stable. occurrences across the species’ range practices, in accordance with habitat Genetic variation among water would be necessary to support or refute management plans, have reduced and/or howellia occurrences is low. this hypothesis. Occurrences in California and Montana controlled anthropogenic threats, are genetically similar; however, Conservation Efforts thereby maintaining the species and its occurrences in Idaho and Washington A recovery plan for water howellia habitat integrity throughout the are more distantly related (Schierenbeck was drafted in 1996, but never finalized currently known range on public lands and Phipps 2010, p. 5). These data (USFWS 1996, entire). Despite having in five geographic areas for 10 years suggest that gene flow is occurring not been finalized, the draft recovery after the effective date of the final between occurrences separated by large plan constitutes the best available recovery plan (when finalized). geographic distances, albeit at a information on what objective, Monitoring will demonstrate the relatively low rate. A correlation measurable criteria should be met in effectiveness of management plans. between migratory waterfowl routes order to delist the species. Here, we Management plans will be in place for, with either genetic similarity or distance provide a summary of progress made on at a minimum, the occurrences listed in indicates that waterfowl may be the draft recovery criteria for water the following table:

TABLE 2—FORMALIZED MANAGEMENT PLANS PER GEOGRAPHIC AREA

Current Minimum number of number of occurrences occurrences covered by Years Geographic area identified management management in draft plans plans in place recovery plan (percent of total occurrences)

Montana ...... 67 191 (62) 22 Spokane County, Washington ...... 33 37 (12) 12 Pierce County, Washington ...... 5 19 (6) 16 Clark County, Washington ...... 4 4 (1) 9 Mendocino County, California ...... 5 7 (2) 24

Totals ...... 114 258 (84)

Progress: Despite the recovery plan recovery criterion recommends long- occurrence (Englund 2020, pers. not being finalized, management plans term conservation measures for the comm.). Two other occurrences of water are in place on Federal lands for the occurrence in Latah County, Idaho. howellia on the Coeur d’Alene minimum number of occurrences Progress: Long-term conservation Reservation in Idaho are being actively identified in Table 2, above. measures for water howellia have been managed under the direction of a tribal Monitoring indicates management established through land transfers, water howellia management plan (Green plans have been effective at maintaining conservation easements, and 2018, pp. 3–9). The Coeur d’Alene tribe the minimum number of occurrences by management plans on some private is planning to use active stream/wetland reducing or eliminating anthropogenic lands. In Montana’s Swan Valley, large- and floodplain restoration, riparian threats associated with land scale land transfers (67,000 acres (ac) buffering, and outplanting to conserve management activities (e.g., timber (27,000 hectares (ha)) for the benefit of existing water howellia occurrences and harvest, road construction, and many species have occurred, and land expand the distribution of the species maintenance) and other threats (e.g., supporting known water howellia into nearby potentially suitable habitat invasive species). Prior to formalized occurrences has been transferred from (Green 2018, entire). The Service is management plans, some conservation private to Federal ownership. These unaware of any information regarding efforts were occurring on Federal, State, occurrences are now protected under additional efforts to protect water and some private land. In addition, Federal agency management plans and howellia occurrences on private land in survey efforts have documented conservation strategies. One occurrence other parts of the species’ range. substantially more occurrences of water located on private land in Latah County, howellia rangewide than were known at Idaho, is protected under a conservation 3. Recovery criterion: A post-delisting the time of listing (Mincemoyer 2005, agreement, held in perpetuity by the strategy for monitoring the species’ pp. 4–5; Frymire 2017, pers. comm.; Palouse Land Trust. In the 5-year review population dynamics is in place. Gilbert 2017, pers. comm.; Johnson (USFWS 2013, p. 6), it was noted that, Progress: We have developed a post- 2017, pers. comm.; Lichthardt and Pekas in addition to the conservation delisting monitoring plan in cooperation 2017, p. 1; ORBIC 2017, unpaginated; agreement, a management plan for this with State, Federal, Tribal, and Rule 2017, pers. comm.). occurrence was being developed nongovernmental conservation partners. 2. Recovery criterion: Foster or (Trujillo 2017, pers. comm.). However, The final post-delisting monitoring plan promote the conservation of occurrences recent communications with Palouse is available for public review on http:// on lands not addressed by agency Land Trust indicate that a management www.regulations.gov under Docket No. management plans. Specifically, this plan still needs to be developed for this FWS–R6–ES–2018–0045.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:52 Jun 15, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM 16JNR1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES 31960 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 16, 2021 / Rules and Regulations

Additionally, the 5-year review (D) the inadequacy of existing made for the species. This time period recommended development of a regulatory mechanisms; or includes multiple generations of water memorandum of understanding (MOU) (E) other natural or manmade factors howellia. Additionally, various global with the USFS and U.S. Department of affecting its continued existence. climate models and emission scenarios Defense (USDOD) to ensure the We must consider these same five provide consistent predictions within continuation of existing conservation factors in delisting a species. For species that timeframe (IPCC 2014, p. 11). We measures currently benefitting water that are already listed as endangered or consider 30 years a relatively howellia. Although a formal MOU has threatened species, this analysis of conservative timeframe in view of the not been developed, both agencies have threats is an evaluation of both the long-term protections in place for 84 specific conservation strategies in place threats currently facing the species and percent of the species’ occupied habitat for the conservation of water howellia the threats that are reasonably likely to occurring on Federal land. (for specific conservation strategies, see affect the species in the foreseeable A recovered species has had threats discussion of land management effects future following the removal of the Act’s removed or reduced to the point that it under A. The Present or Threatened protections. According to 50 CFR no longer meets the Act’s definition of Destruction, Modification, or 424.11(e), we may delist a species if our an ‘‘endangered species’’ or a Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range, status review of the best available ‘‘threatened species.’’ A species is an below). scientific and commercial data indicates ‘‘endangered species’’ for purposes of that the species is neither endangered the Act if it is in danger of extinction Summary of Changes From the nor threatened for the following reasons: throughout all or a significant portion of Proposed Rule (1) The species is extinct; (2) the species its range and is a ‘‘threatened species’’ Based on public comments on our does not meet the definition of an if it is likely to become endangered October 7, 2019, proposed rule (84 FR endangered species or a threatened within the foreseeable future throughout 53380) and information provided to us species (e.g., due to recovery); or (3) the all or a significant portion of its range. by peer reviewers, we made updates or listed entity does not meet the statutory For the purposes of this analysis, we provided additional clarity on definition of a species. will evaluate whether or not the information concerning population Water howellia is currently listed as currently listed species, water howellia, threatened. Section 3(20) of the Act monitoring vs. surveying, predicted should continue to be listed as defines a ‘‘threatened species’’ as any effects of invasive species, regulatory threatened, based on the best scientific species which is likely to become an mechanisms, climate change, wetland/ and commercial information available. endangered species within the pond hydrology, genetic diversity, We use the term ‘‘threat’’ to refer in foreseeable future throughout all or a cumulative effects, post-delisting general to actions or conditions that are significant portion of its range. The Act monitoring, and metapopulation known to or are reasonably likely to does not define the term ‘‘foreseeable structure. We also made other minor negatively affect individuals of a future.’’ Our implementing regulations species. The term ‘‘threat’’ includes editorial clarifications and corrections at 50 CFR 424.11(d) set forth a actions or conditions that have a direct in this final rule. framework for evaluating the foreseeable impact on individuals (direct impacts), Summary of Factors Affecting the future on a case-by-case basis. The term as well as those that affect individuals Species ‘‘foreseeable future’’ extends only so far through alteration of their habitat or into the future as we can reasonably required resources (stressors). The term Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) determine that both the future threats ‘‘threat’’ may encompass—either and its implementing regulations (50 and the species’ responses to those together or separately—the source of the CFR part 424) set forth the procedures threats are likely. In other words, the action or condition or the action or for listing species, reclassifying species, foreseeable future is the period of time condition itself. or removing species from listed status. in which we can make reliable However, the mere identification of ‘‘Species’’ is defined by the Act as predictions. ‘‘Reliable’’ does not mean any threat(s) does not necessarily mean including any species or subspecies of ‘‘certain’’; it means sufficient to provide that the species meets the statutory fish or wildlife or plants, and any a reasonable degree of confidence in the definition of an ‘‘endangered species’’ or distinct vertebrate population segment prediction. Thus, a prediction is reliable a ‘‘threatened species’’ or that it should of fish or wildlife that interbreeds when if it is reasonable to depend on it when remain listed as such. In determining mature (16 U.S.C. 1532(16)). The Act making decisions. whether a species meets either defines an ‘‘endangered species’’ as a It is not always possible or necessary definition, we must evaluate all species that is ‘‘in danger of extinction to define foreseeable future as a identified threats by considering the throughout all or a significant portion of particular number of years. Analysis of species’ expected response and the its range,’’ and a ‘‘threatened species’’ as the foreseeable future uses the best effects of the threats—in light of those a species that is ‘‘likely to become an scientific and commercial data available actions and conditions that will endangered species within the and should consider the timeframes ameliorate the threats—on an foreseeable future throughout all or a applicable to the relevant threats and to individual, population, and species significant portion of its range.’’ The Act the species’ likely responses to those level. We evaluate each threat and its requires that we determine whether any threats in view of its life-history expected effects on the species, then species is an ‘‘endangered species’’ or a characteristics. Data that are typically analyze the cumulative effect of all of ‘‘threatened species’’ because of any of relevant to assessing the species’ the threats on the species as a whole. the following factors: biological response include species- We also consider the cumulative effect (A) The present or threatened specific factors such as lifespan, of the threats in light of those actions destruction, modification, or reproductive rates or productivity, and conditions that will have positive curtailment of its habitat or range; certain behaviors, and other effects on the species—such as any (B) overutilization for commercial, demographic factors. existing regulatory mechanisms or recreational, scientific, or educational For water howellia, we consider 30 conservation efforts. The Secretary purposes; years to be a reasonable period of time determines whether the species meets (C) disease or predation; within which reliable predictions can be the definition of an ‘‘endangered

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:52 Jun 15, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM 16JNR1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 16, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 31961

species’’ or a ‘‘threatened species’’ only increased distribution has not been fluctuating environmental conditions after conducting this cumulative detected recently (Shelly et al. 2016, than with the presence of suppression analysis and describing the expected entire; Shelly 2017, pers. comm.). effort (Lichthardt and Gray 2010, p. 9). effect on the species now and in the However, reed canarygrass invaded No suppression efforts to control or foreseeable future. Swan River Oxbow Preserve in the eradicate reed canarygrass on the The following analysis examines the Swan Valley in Montana, and water Turnbull NWR in Washington are factors currently affecting water howellia was subsequently extirpated at currently underway; the species is howellia or that are likely to affect it that site (Lesica 1997, pp. 367–368; present, but trends indicate variability within the foreseeable future. Lesica 2001, p. 2). In Idaho, monitoring in abundance with fluctuating Habitat-Based Threats efforts have not detected any decreases environmental conditions (Rule 2009, in pond size, which may act as a 2013a, 2017, pers. comm.). In Montana, At the time of listing (59 FR 35860; surrogate for reed canarygrass suppression efforts of reed canarygrass July 14, 1994), the following potential colonization; however, detailed have been somewhat successful in some habitat-based threats were identified for monitoring of the species has not been areas (Annen 2010, entire; Healy 2015 this species: (1) Invasive species, (2) conducted (Lichthardt and Pekas 2017, and references therein, entire) and not land management (primarily timber p. 6). Little is known about the extent successful in other areas (Lesica and harvest and road building), (3) of reed canarygrass invasion with regard Martin 2004, entire; Lesica 2001, entire). trampling by domestic livestock, (4) to water howellia occurrences in Sweet flag was identified by the State direct habitat loss from urbanization or Oregon. of Idaho as an invasive species that may dam construction, and (5) the narrow The mechanisms driving the invasive be displacing water howellia at one ecological requirements of the species. potential of reed canarygrass within location (Idaho Department of Fish and In the analysis that follows, we also water howellia habitats are unclear. The Game (IDFG) 2016, p. 3). Monitoring at considered climate change in the invasive potential may be due to some this location has been ongoing since context of the species’ narrow ecological sites being occupied by a native 1999, and water howellia has not been requirements. genotype of reed canarygrass and other observed since 2001 (Lichthardt and Invasive Species sites being occupied by a highly Pekas 2017, p. 2). However, we are invasive variety (Casler et al. 2009, unaware of any other water howellia In the final listing rule (59 FR 35860; entire; Lichthardt and Pekas 2017, p. 8; occurrences being affected by sweet flag. July 14, 1994), invasive plant species Wiechmann 2014a, p. 31; Jakubowski et As a result, sweet flag is unlikely to were identified as a threat to water al. 2013, entire; Merigliano and Lesica become a threat to water howellia. howellia in habitats where they overlap. 1998, entire). Density of reed Yellow flag iris is an invasive plant Invasive species, such as reed canarygrass is a better determinant of that has been identified in ponds canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), impact to water howellia occurrences occupied by water howellia on JBLM in sweet flag (Acorus calamus), and yellow than presence alone (Wiechmann 2014a, Washington. While it appears yellow flag iris (Iris pseudacorus), were pp. 31, 34, 38). Additionally, in some flag iris may have the ability to displace identified to have the capacity to ponds, reed canarygrass was found to be or outcompete water howellia in some outcompete water howellia, presumably dominant at shallower water depths and environments, the infestations on JBLM for nutrients and space (Lesica 1997, p. water howellia dominant at deeper occur in relatively small areas, and their 367; Clegg et al. 2000, p. 13; Lichthardt depths (Wiechmann 2014a, p. 32). spread has been controlled by and Pekas 2017, entire). These invasive Success of mechanical and chemical herbicides or mechanical removal (Clegg species may have the potential to treatment efforts to decrease the et al. 2000, p. 13; Gilbert 2019, pers. extirpate water howellia occurrences (59 abundance and distribution of reed comm.). FR 35860; July 14, 1994), and as a result, canarygrass have varied across the range Invasive plants can be aggressive and we focus our analysis on these species. of water howellia. In California, quickly displace native plants in some The best available information does not mechanical treatment has limited the situations. While there are some small indicate any potentially significant spread of reed canarygrass in ponds and sites that may have been completely or negative impacts to water howellia from wetlands adjacent to water howellia partially overtaken by invasive plants, any other invasive species. occurrences, and chemical treatment is water howellia metapopulations appear Reed canarygrass is present in water further reducing the size of reed to maintain viability in the face of howellia habitat in all States, except canarygrass patches (Johnson 2011, invasive species. This conclusion is California (Johnson 2017, pers. comm.), 2017, pers. comm.). Similarly, reinforced by reed canarygrass but the extent of invasion varies by site consistent suppression of reed coexisting with extant water howellia (Gilbert 2017, pers. comm.; Rule 2017, canarygrass at JBLM (military base) in occurrences; large-scale displacement of pers. comm.; Shelly 2017, pers. comm.; Washington has reduced patch sizes of water howellia by reed canarygrass is Lesica 1997, pp. 367–368). Abundance the plant in the past (TNC 2006, p. 65; not occurring in any of the of reed canarygrass in ponds occupied Engler 2008, pers. comm.; Gilbert 2008, metapopulations (Swan Valley, by water howellia on the Turnbull pers. comm.). Currently, no suppression Montana; Turnbull NWR and JBLM, National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) has efforts are underway at JBLM, due to Washington), even in the absence of fluctuated through time, with no little change in reed canarygrass suppression efforts. Given the absence definitive long-term trend (Rule 2017, distribution and the risk of harming of displacement of water howellia by pers. comm.; Rule 2020, in progress). water howellia plants in the process reed canarygrass within the three Abundance of reed canarygrass in ponds (Gilbert 2017, pers. comm.). In Idaho, metapopulations of water howellia, and occupied by water howellia on the the success of suppression efforts to the success of existing suppression JBLM has also fluctuated through time, limit abundance and distribution of reed efforts where they have been applied, with no definitive long-term trend canarygrass were mixed (Lichthardt and we do not consider reed canarygrass to (Gilbert 2017, pers. comm.; Gilbert 2020, Gray 2010, p. 9). However, once be a significant threat to water howellia. pers. comm.). In Montana, reed suppression efforts were stopped, The best available information does not canarygrass is present in many ponds distribution and abundance of reed indicate that any other invasive species occupied by water howellia, but canarygrass appeared to vary more with likely pose a threat to water howellia.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:52 Jun 15, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM 16JNR1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES 31962 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 16, 2021 / Rules and Regulations

Land Management Activities Timber harvest and prescribed fire were water howellia are still viable. In Idaho, Land management activities that not identified as potential threats to the Idaho Transportation Department cause disturbance to vegetation other water howellia occurrences in (ITD) avoids adverse effects to wetlands surrounding water howellia occurrences Washington (USDOD 2006, entire; during project implementation, and a were identified as a threat to the species USDOD 2012, entire; USDOD 2017a, Best Management Practices Manual in the final listing rule (59 FR 35860; entire; Anderson 2013, pers. comm.; identifies measures to minimize any July 14, 1994). Previous modeling efforts Gilbert 2013, 2017, pers. comm.), or potential effects during project suggested that these activities, occurrences in Oregon or Idaho (Currin implementation (ITD 2014, entire; ITD singularly or in combination, could 2013, pers. comm.; USFWS 2009, entire; 2017, p. 1). The State of Idaho identified result in a loss of vegetation at the pond IDFG 2016, entire). two water howellia occurrences within Some disturbance of vegetation fringe, disrupting the hydrological cycle 98 ft (30 m) of an established highway surrounding water howellia occurrences and negatively impacting the phenology and expressed concern about indirect from land management activities effects of road work resulting in of water howellia (Reeves and Woessner occurred historically, prior to existing sedimentation and, of less concern, 2004, pp. 10, 15). However, more recent guidelines and standards in Federal potential removal of shade (IDFG 2016, evidence indicates that effects from land land management plans. For example, p. 4). However, the best available management activities are no longer a in Montana’s Swan Valley, historical information does not indicate any threat to the species. disturbances caused from land Most land management activities that potential effects that road work may management activities (e.g., timber could disturb vegetation surrounding pose to this population. Roads were not harvest, timber thinning, prescribed fire, cited as a threat to water howellia water howellia occurrences on USFS road building, grazing) have occurred in occurrences in Washington or Oregon land are now prohibited or designed to vegetated buffers surrounding many of (USDOD 2006, entire; USDOD 2012, minimize impacts to water howellia. For the existing water howellia occurrences entire; USDOD 2017a, entire; USFWS example, land management activities on (Pipp 2017, p. 6). However, 79 percent 2007, entire; USFWS 2010; entire; the Flathead National Forest in Montana of existing water howellia occurrences Anderson 2013, pers. comm.; Currin must create a favorable physical in the Swan Valley have experienced at 2013, pers. comm.). environment that protects against least one historical disturbance event in Land management activities (e.g., hydrological changes that may adversely the surrounding vegetation and are still timber harvest, timber thinning, road impact water howellia (USDA 2018, pp. viable, indicating some tolerance of building, grazing, and prescribed fire) 45–46). These desired conditions and water howellia to buffer disturbance. In that disturb vegetation surrounding guidelines were incorporated as part of addition, abundance or distribution of water howellia occurrences were once the revised Flathead National Forest water howellia in the Swan Valley has considered a threat to the species. Plan in 2018. On the Mendocino remained stable, despite these historical However, most land management National Forest in California, activities disturbances from land management activities that have the potential to that could disturb vegetation within 300 activities (Pipp 2017, p. 14). disturb surrounding vegetation are ft (91 m) of water howellia occurrences Furthermore, despite experiencing a prohibited by land management plans or are typically not allowed because of stand-replacing fire in 2003, water other Federal or State policy. Some of standards and guidelines to protect the howellia occurrences in the affected these prohibitions were put in place as plant (USFS 1995, p. IV–32; Johnson area of the Swan Valley are stable; a result of the species being listed, but 2013, pers. comm.). Limited activities buffer vegetation appears to have will remain in effect for the duration of (including prescribed fire) may be recovered, and hydrology is adequately the land management plan or other allowed within the 300-ft (91-m) buffer, functioning (Pipp 2017, pp. 14–15). policy, even when the species is but only if needed to maintain the The effects of historical road building delisted. Where disturbance of integrity of the buffer (USDA 2018, pp. within vegetated buffers surrounding vegetation from land management 18–23, 44–46; Johnson 2013, pers. water howellia occurrences have largely activities has occurred, water howellia comm.). The 2018 revised Flathead been mitigated on Federal and State has shown some tolerance for National Forest Plan in Montana has lands. Guidance established in the disturbance and no downward trend in also incorporated the conservation revised Flathead National Forest Plan presence or distribution. Given that all strategy for water howellia, which was indicates that maintenance on roads three metapopulations currently have finalized in 1997 (USFS 1997, entire; for within 300 ft (92 m) of ponds providing conservation measures in place to avoid a more in-depth discussion of land habitat for water howellia should vegetative buffer disturbance from land management plans, see Existing maintain or improve hydrological management activities and that water Regulatory Mechanisms, below). As a integrity to protect habitat conditions howellia has shown some tolerance to result of these actions, abundance and (USDA 2018, pp. 45–46). No effects of disturbance when it occurs, we no distribution of water howellia have historical roads occurring within longer consider land management remained stable in Montana’s Swan vegetated buffers on water howellia in activities to be a significant threat to Valley from 1978 to 2014 (Pipp 2017, p. the Swan Valley were found in a recent water howellia. 14). analysis (Pipp 2017, p. 16). Similarly, in On State land in Montana, clear- California, small spur roads are being Trampling by Domestic Livestock cutting of timber and prescribed fire are closed and hydrologically stabilized in Trampling of water howellia by prohibited within defined buffers areas occupied by water howellia on the domestic livestock was cited as a threat surrounding waterbodies (Montana Mendocino National Forest to minimize in the final listing rule for the species Code Annotated 2019, title 77, chapter anthropogenic contribution to landscape (59 FR 35860; July 14, 1994). Direct 5, part 3, at 77–5–303). In Washington, instability per direction in the effects of plant crushing, seed bank buffer zones are established in wetlands Mendocino National Forest Plan (USFS disturbance, and alterations to substrate containing water howellia on Turnbull 1995, p. III–26; Johnson 2008, pers. are likely to occur when livestock enter NWR when mechanical thinning and comm.). These conservation measures and exit ponds and wetlands. In prescribed fire are used to treat conifer appear to be working in California, as addition, increased nutrient loading encroachment (Rule 2009, pers. comm.). six of the seven known occurrences of may be an indirect effect of livestock

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:52 Jun 15, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM 16JNR1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 16, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 31963

occupancy in and near water howellia current grazing levels because of urbanization, in forested buffers of a habitat. Some water howellia mitigation measures being minimum of 300 ft (91 m) from water occurrences are within habitats actively implemented, including riparian howellia occurrences. The State of used by livestock. However, the level of fencing, cattle guards, and timely Montana manages its timberlands for livestock-caused disturbance that water removal or relocation of livestock from long-term revenue and biodiversity howellia can withstand is not known sensitive pond and wetland habitats. (DNRC 1996, p. 2) and not for short-term and likely varies with site-specific The best available information does not revenue from selling timbered State conditions, as well as timing, severity, indicate that levels of livestock use (and lands and the potential urbanization and duration of livestock use of thus potential trampling) will increase that may follow. occupied water howellia habitat. beyond current levels in the future. The It is unknown if historical habitat loss The effects of trampling on water severity and frequency of trampling of occurred in California; however, most howellia occurrences on Federal and water howellia occurrences on private known occurrences of water howellia State land have largely been mitigated land are unknown, but as significantly are within USFS lands, including some by fencing, cattle barricades, fewer water howellia occurrences are within designated wilderness areas elimination of grazing in some areas known from private lands, any impacts (Johnson 2013, pers. comm.). Therefore, occupied by water howellia, or are likely not significant at the species no current or future threat of habitat loss limitations on the duration of time level and have not affected recovery, from urbanization is expected because livestock have access to sensitive pond which has been achieved based on any disturbance of vegetated buffers and wetland habitats (USFS 2002, p. 6; species viability on State and Federal surrounding water howellia ponds is Mincemoyer 2005, p. 11; Johnson 2008, lands. We conclude, based on the prohibited under the Mendocino 2013, pers. comm.; Frymire 2017, pers. available information, that trampling by National Forest Plan unless it is comm.). In Montana, analyses of domestic livestock is not a significant necessary to promote natural ecological monitoring data spanning nearly 30 threat to water howellia. and hydrological function (USFS 1995, years have concluded that despite some pp. IV–19, 35). It is unknown how grazing in occupied habitat, the Habitat Loss From Urbanization and Dam Construction urbanization has affected the 37 water presence of water howellia has not been howellia occurrences on private land, Habitat loss from urbanization and affected (Pipp 2017, p. 17). but because there are significantly fewer Although no causal link was made dam construction occurred historically, occurrences known from private lands between grazing levels and the particularly in Oregon, and was (12 percent of total known occurrences), probability of water howellia presence considered a threat to water howellia at these impacts are likely not significant in the Pipp (2017) analysis, it appears the time of listing in 1994. However, at the species’ level. that management actions such as additional habitat loss from fencing, cattle guards, and exclusion urbanization and dam construction is no In sum, habitat loss from urbanization implemented concurrently with grazing longer a threat to the species because and dam construction occurred have provided protections to water conservation strategies implemented historically, particularly in Oregon, but howellia habitat and allowed the following listing and increased Federal is no longer considered a significant species to be conserved in Montana’s ownership now provide additional threat. In Oregon, recent new Swan Valley (Pipp 2017, p. 17). In protections (see Conservation Efforts, discoveries of water howellia indicate California, specific grazing regimes near above). that the species has been able to remain five occupied ponds within an active Direct habitat loss from urbanization extant on the landscape where it was grazing allotment on National Forest and dam construction occurred along once considered extirpated. In areas land appear to be effective; monitoring the Columbia River in Oregon, and surrounding the extant, larger indicates no effects to water howellia water howellia was thought to be metapopulations, habitat loss from occurrences from livestock trampling extirpated from that area prior to 2015 urbanization and dam construction is (Johnson 2013, pers. comm.). Two other (USFWS 2017, entire; Norman 2010, not considered a threat to the species water howellia occurrences in California pers. comm.). However, since then, two because of conservation strategies and are within inactive grazing allotments, occurrences of water howellia have been land transfers implemented in Montana where livestock are not currently located in the Portland, Oregon, metro (USFS) and Washington (USDOD and present and not expected to be present area (ORBIC 2017, unpaginated). the Service). Furthermore, known in the future (Johnson 2013, 2017, pers. Most of the water howellia habitat in California is largely within comm.). Trampling is not reported as a occurrences on corporate or private USFS lands, including designated threat in Washington, Idaho, or Oregon lands in Montana were previously wilderness; thus, there is no significant (USDOD 2006, entire; USDOD 2017a, owned by Plum Creek Timber. In 2007, threat of habitat loss from urbanization entire; USFWS 2007, entire; USFWS approximately 67,000 ac (27,000 ha) of or dam construction in California. Plum Creek land in the Swan Valley 2010, entire; Currin 2013, pers. comm.; Summary of Habitat-Based Threats IDFG 2016, entire). It is unknown where were sold to The Nature Conservancy grazing may occur on the 37 (TNC) and Trust for Public Land; Based on the final listing rule (59 FR occurrences (12 percent of total known ownership was then transferred to either 35860; July 14, 1994), the following occurrences) on private property. the USFS or the State of Montana (Swan stressors warranted consideration as Therefore, the extent of trampling and Valley Connections 2017, entire). The possible current or future threats to other livestock-related alterations to 47 water howellia occurrences and water howellia: Invasive species, land water howellia habitat on these private potential habitat that were formerly on management activities, trampling by lands is unknown. However, potential Plum Creek land are now protected from domestic livestock, and direct habitat trampling effects from livestock on urbanization through either the Flathead loss from urbanization or dam Federal and State land have been largely National Forest Plan (USFS 1997, entire) construction. However, as described mitigated. or State agency direction for managing below, these stressors have not occurred Trampling of water howellia by timberlands (DNRC 1996, p. 1). The to the extent determined or anticipated domestic livestock is not a threat to the Flathead National Forest Plan mandates at the time of listing in 1994, or the species on Federal or State land at avoidance of disturbance, including stressors are being adequately managed,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:52 Jun 15, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM 16JNR1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES 31964 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 16, 2021 / Rules and Regulations

or the species is more tolerant of the appropriate habitat exists (Wiechmann variability of relevant quantities (i.e., stressor than was previously thought. 2014b, entire). Initially, a harvest of 5 to temperature, precipitation, wind) over • Land management plans and 7 soil plugs from other Idaho time (IPCC 2014, pp. 119–120). The conservation management strategies occurrences has been proposed. The term ‘‘climate change’’ thus refers to a have been adopted by Federal and State proposed project would be beneficial if change in the mean or variability of one agencies to mitigate the effects of land it created another occurrence of water or more measures of climate (e.g., management activities on water howellia in northern Idaho or had temperature or precipitation) that howellia and are in place for all three educational value. Recent persists for an extended period, metapopulations. These plans vary in communications with Valencia Wetland typically decades or longer, whether the duration, but are longer term (15+ years) Mitigation Bank indicate that they are change is due to internal processes or and are expected to continue to provide still interested in pursuing this project anthropogenic changes (IPCC 2014, p. protections to water howellia habitat (Collier 2020, pers. comm.). We are not 120). into the future because the plans (and aware of any other current or future Global climate projections are all future revisions to the plans) are plans for use of the species. Therefore, informative, and in some cases, the only mandated by Federal laws to conserve based on the available information, we or the best scientific information fish, wildlife, and plant species. For a find that there are no significant threats available for us to use. However, more in-depth discussion of land to water howellia related to projected changes in climate and related management plans and relevant Federal overutilization for commercial, impacts can vary substantially across laws, see Existing Regulatory recreational, scientific, or educational and within different regions of the Mechanisms, below. purposes. world (e.g., IPCC 2013c, 2014, entire) • Suppression efforts directed at reed and within the United States (Melillo et canarygrass have resulted in some Disease or Predation al. 2014, entire). Therefore, we use success. Furthermore, water howellia Predation (herbivory) on water ‘‘downscaled’’ projections when they occurrences are not currently being howellia by domestic livestock was are available and have been developed displaced by reed canarygrass, and the considered a threat in the final rule to through appropriate scientific best available data do not indicate that list the species (59 FR 35860; July 14, procedures, because such projections they are being displaced by other 1994). As described in more detail provide higher resolution information invasive species. above, grazing is limited within the that is more relevant to spatial scales • The installation of riparian fencing species’ habitat, and the occurrence of used for analyses of a given species (see and cattle barricades and the water howellia in ponds accessible to Glick et al. 2011, pp. 58–61, for a implementation of specific grazing livestock in the Swan Valley discussion of downscaling). routines have effectively mitigated the metapopulation has not been affected Climate change trends predicted for effects of trampling on water howellia. (Pipp 2017, p. 17). As a result, we the Pacific Northwest (Oregon, • The extant metapopulations, as well conclude that predation does not affect Washington, Idaho, and Montana) as most occurrences in California, are the species throughout its range at the broadly consist of an increase in annual largely managed by Federal agencies population or species level. The best average temperature; an increase in that have conservation strategies in available information does not indicate extreme precipitation events; and, with place. Therefore, neither urbanization that levels of livestock grazing will less certainty, variability in annual nor dam construction is a threat to water increase within known occurrences of precipitation (Dalton et al. 2013, pp. 31– howellia. water howellia in the future. The best 38, Figure 1.1; Snover et al. 2013, pp. 5– • Limited information is available available information also does not 1–5–4). Lee et al. (2015) describe regarding the 37 occurrences (12 percent indicate any issues or potential stressors potential hydrological changes in of known occurrences) that occur on regarding disease or insect predation. response to predicted climate change on private property. Due to the low number Therefore, based on the available montane wetlands in the Pacific of occurrences on private land relative information, we do not consider there to Northwest. These observations appear to to Federal and State land, impacts to be any significant threats to water vary with local conditions and include water howellia on private lands are howellia from disease or predation. earlier drawdown, more rapid drying likely not significant at the species out in the summer, and reduced level. Other Factors Affecting the Species minimum water levels. Therefore, based on the available In this section, we discuss: (1) The Yearly weather patterns influence information, we do not consider there to narrow ecological requirements of the abundance of water howellia. be any significant habitat-based threats species in the context of climate change, Abundance of water howellia is for water howellia. (2) small population size/low genetic typically lower if the preceding season diversity, and (3) the potential for had higher precipitation and/or cooler Overutilization of the Species cumulative effects of stressors. summer temperatures (Shelly et al. Overutilization, for any purpose, was 2016, entire). This decrease is likely due not considered a threat in the final rule Narrow Ecological Requirements/ to limited pond drying, which to list water howellia (59 FR 35860; July Climate Change negatively affects seed germination rates 14, 1994). The best available Here, we consider the narrow due to their need for air exposure to information does not indicate any ecological requirements of water germinate. Conversely, abundance of current use of water howellia for howellia in the context of observed or water howellia is typically higher if the commercial, recreational, scientific, or projected changes in climate. The July preceding season had lower educational purposes. Regarding future 14, 1994, listing rule (59 FR 35860) did precipitation and/or hotter summer utilization, interest has been expressed not discuss the potential impacts of temperatures (Shelly et al. 2016, entire), by the Valencia Wetland Mitigation climate change on water howellia. The due to more pond drying and increased Bank in Priest River, Idaho, to collect terms ‘‘climate’’ and ‘‘climate change’’ rates of seed germination. seed via soil plugs from vigorous water are defined by the Intergovernmental There is uncertainty regarding how howellia occurrences for use in Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The the predicted trends in precipitation establishing new occurrences where term ‘‘climate’’ refers to the mean and and air temperature due to climate

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:52 Jun 15, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM 16JNR1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 16, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 31965

change in the Pacific Northwest will limit the continued persistence of Montana and eastern Washington could influence water howellia. In western ephemeral ponds. This could provide an be more resilient to these processes than Montana, where all the known opportunity for expansion of reed other occurrences because of their statewide occurrences of water howellia canarygrass and other invasive species. distribution over a larger landscape with occur, regional climate data predict (1) On the other hand, amplified drying many separate occurrences. Increasing increasing average annual air may allow for increased germination temperatures combined with increased temperatures and (2) precipitation and expansion of water howellia. demand for ground and surface water increasing in winter, spring, and fall Another scenario with decreased for human development may compound and decreasing in summer (Montana precipitation is that the hydrological negative impacts to water howellia in 2017, pp. 40–63). These predicted cycles could be altered in a way that eastern Washington and northern Idaho. conditions are similar to those observed would favor water howellia. Ponds that Climate-induced effects on water to increase water howellia abundance were previously perennial could howellia may appear first in California, (e.g., increased pond drying with annual potentially become ephemeral in nature, as these occurrences are at the southern recharge in the winter, spring) in providing the wetting and drying cycle edge of the known range. However, Montana historically. Thus, future necessary for water howellia these effects may be buffered by the climate conditions may be favorable, on reproduction and, consequently, higher elevation (approximately 3,800 ft average, for water howellia. In additional habitat for the species to (1,158 m)) at which the California Washington, predicted increases in air occupy. Again, the site-specific occurrences are found compared to temperature and more rapid drying of conditions for each habitat would be an elsewhere in the range (western montane wetlands could be favorable to important factor. Washington: approximately 15 ft (5 m)). water howellia, assuming adequate Changes in precipitation from snow to Predicted environmental changes recharge in the winter and spring rain may also affect water howellia, resulting from climate change may have (Shelly et al. 2016, entire). The effects particularly in the southernmost both positive and negative effects on of predicted increased variability in occurrences (e.g., California) (California water howellia, depending on the extent precipitation on water howellia remains DWR 2013, p. 22). More precipitation and type of impact and depending on unclear. A potential increase in falling as rain rather than snow would site-specific conditions within each precipitation as a result of climate likely alter the hydrologic cycle within habitat type (Lee et al. 2015, p. 14). The change may affect the species in several these habitats. These alterations could primary predicted negative effect is the ways. First, increases in precipitation include faster drying of wetlands than alteration of hydrologic regimes (Lee et may increase the surface area of existing was observed historically, due to a lack al. 2015, p. 14) potentially resulting in ponds and wetlands, or create new ones. of spring run-off from snow fields and inconsistent growing seasons. This These new habitats would be available increased annual air temperature. More effect will likely be buffered by the for colonization by water howellia and frequent extreme precipitation events ability of water howellia to produce could increase the range and resiliency are predicted for California (California seeds during both early and late of the species. However, new habitats DWR 2013, p. 23). The effect of more seasons. Predicted environmental effects would also be available to invasive extreme precipitation events on water that may be positive for water howellia species such as reed canarygrass and howellia habitat in California is unclear, include increased habitat, seed may also promote their expansion on especially given the potential for dispersal, and species distribution in interactions among precipitation and some areas, including within the three the landscape. An important factor in other environmental variables predicted metapopulations due to predicted increased habitat would likely be the to change (e.g., reduced snowpack, increases in precipitation across the site-specific conditions within each increased annual air temperature). northern range of the species (IPCC habitat; new habitat with deeper water The ability of water howellia to self- 2014, p. 61). The intact nature and and longer periods of inundation would fertilize and produce seeds at both the current spatial arrangement likely preclude the establishment of early season submergent and later (geographically diverse and at varying reed canarygrass and be beneficial to season emergent forms may be an elevations) of the three large water howellia. Conversely, the creation advantage to surviving lengthened, metapopulations will likely provide of shallower habitat may favor reed shortened, or generally more more resilience to climate change than canarygrass. Another possible effect of inconsistent growing seasons than the smaller, isolated occurrences. Effects increased precipitation may be the occurred historically. Seed production of potential composition shifts in alteration of the hydrologic cycle of from both flower forms in one growing vegetation surrounding water howellia water howellia habitats. Specifically, season may increase the opportunity for occurrences as a result of climate these habitats may fill earlier (with surviving subsequent inclement years. It change are unknown. heavier spring rainfall) and dry later in is uncertain how increases in water In summary, climate change is the season than they did historically, temperature and increased evaporation affecting and will continue to affect thereby reducing the timing window for due to increased ambient temperatures temperature and precipitation events. air exposure needed for seed would affect growth and reproduction of The extent, duration, and impact of germination of water howellia in late water howellia; however, climate those changes are unknown, but could summer and autumn. conditions that restrict the dual seed potentially increase or decrease Alternatively, a potential decrease in production and seed banking could precipitation in some areas. Water precipitation as a result of climate reduce the ability of water howellia to howellia may experience climate change also may affect water howellia in sustain populations over time. change-related effects in the future, several ways. Decreases in precipitation Associated wetland vegetation that most likely at the individual or local may result in water levels that are too positively contributes to suitable population level. Regional occurrences low to support the submergent flower microclimates for water howellia could may experience some shifts. However, it production. Additionally, earlier be altered by predicted variance in is anticipated that the metapopulations drawdowns and the faster receding of temperatures and precipitation; the important to the viability of the species water in these wetlands as a result of effects of which are uncertain. would continue to be viable because of decreased precipitation may ultimately Occurrences of water howellia in resiliency due to geographic and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:52 Jun 15, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM 16JNR1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES 31966 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 16, 2021 / Rules and Regulations

elevational diversity rangewide and occurrences as a contributor to its water howellia; however, the best because some of the future predicted air vulnerability. Low genetic diversity available information indicates that the temperature and precipitation could limit a species’ or population’s potential effects from low genetic conditions are similar to the yearly ability to respond to novel changes in its diversity on water howellia’s viability weather conditions that promote larger environment, necessitating redundancy would not occur within the foreseeable abundances of water howellia (lower of occurrences across larger areas to future. In addition, the redundancy of precipitation and/or hotter summer increase the probability of survival. At smaller occurrences across the species’ temperatures). Available information the time of listing in 1994, the only range may help mitigate for reduced indicates that increased variability in genetic investigation of the species genetic plasticity within individual future climate conditions is likely, but showed very low genetic diversity occurrences because unfavorable that water howellia has some plasticity within and among occurrences in environmental conditions affecting one to environmental change as evidenced Washington and Montana (Lesica et al. or several occurrences may not affect by the species’ viability despite a 1988, p. 278). More current genetic other occurrences in different parts of changing climate and its life-history results indicate greater genetic diversity the range. The current spatial strategy of dual seed production and within and among occurrences than arrangement of multiple occurrences longer-term seed viability to buffer previously thought; however, diversity spread across 5 States is favorable to the against several consecutive years of is still relatively low (Brunsfeld and species’ long-term viability because unfavorable environmental conditions. Baldwin 1998, p. 2; Schierenbeck and these occurrences are at different Therefore, based upon the best available Phipps 2010, p. 5). Another genetic elevations and within varying climatic information, we conclude that climate investigation documented that all regimes rangewide (see discussion change is not a significant threat to occurrences are distantly related and under ‘‘Narrow Ecological water howellia. that gene flow is likely occurring Requirements/Climate Change,’’ above). Thus, we do not consider small Small Population Size and Low Genetic between the States (Schierenbeck and population size or low genetic diversity Diversity Phipps 2010, p. 6). However, it is also possible that these results indicate that to be a significant threat to water The final rule to list water howellia infrequent, long-distance dispersal howellia. (59 FR 35860; July 14, 1994) cited small events (likely facilitated by waterfowl) Cumulative Effects of All Stressors population size (i.e., limited extent of do occur, but actual gene flow is not Many of the stressors faced by water occupied habitat) as a contributor to its occurring or rarely occurring. vulnerability. Species that occupy howellia are interrelated and could limited amounts of habitat often have The effects of low genetic diversity of work in concert with each other, reduced viability because they may lack water howellia on adaptability to future resulting in a cumulative adverse effect resiliency to recover from stochastic climate conditions are unknown. Water on the species. For example, stressors events. Water howellia currently howellia is a self-pollinating species; discussed under Factor A that occupies about 400 acres of habitat thus, genetic diversity is expected to be individually do not rise to the level of rangewide, comprised of 307 lower, in general, than that for cross- a threat could together result in habitat occurrences with most occurrences pollinating species (Hamrick and Godt loss. Similarly, small population size in occupying less than 1 acre. While most 1996, entire). Water howellia combination with stressors discussed of the occurrences of water howellia are populations have remained stable under Factor A could present a potential small in areal extent, the arrangement of despite rapidly changing air concern. occupied habitat across 5 States is temperatures since the late 1990s Climate change is occurring across the advantageous to water howellia because (Snover et al. 2013, p. ES–3); however, range of the species, coinciding with all increased redundancy and it is unknown whether future air other identified stressors. As described representation increase the capacity of temperature trajectories will remain previously, variations in climatic water howellia to survive a catastrophic similar to those observed from the late conditions may favor or preclude event. Stochastic events still may affect 1990s to present. Another consideration invasive species, depending on site- individual occurrences, but the is the time scale on which genetic specific habitat factors. Also described widespread arrangement of the diversity operates. For example, there previously, climate change may alter occurrences increases redundancy and has been considerable debate about hydrological cycles. However, despite representation. Further, long-term what effective population size is changing climate conditions, water monitoring has shown that water adequate to conserve genetic diversity howellia has sustained populations howellia are more tolerant of natural and long-term adaptive potential (see across its range. Analysis of long-term stochasticity or manmade disturbance in Jamieson and Allendorf 2012 for review, datasets and observations indicate the buffer areas surrounding occupied p. 579). However, loss of genetic species has maintained viability even ponds than previously thought (Pipp diversity is typically not an immediate with climate change interacting with 2017, p. 6). In addition, the threat even in isolated populations other potential stressors (Gilbert 2017, documentation of 200 additional (Palstra and Ruzzante 2008, p. 3441), pers. comm.; Rule 2017, pers. comm.; occurrences of water howellia since but rather is a symptom of deterministic Pipp 2017, entire; Rule 2020, in 1994 has increased the redundancy and processes acting on the population progress). This indicates that water representation of habitats for water (Jamieson and Allendorf 2012, p. 580). howellia has some capacity to survive howellia rangewide. This increased In other words, loss of genetic diversity and reproduce, despite potential redundancy and representation of typically does not drive species to cumulative effects of climate change habitats increases the viability of water extinction (Jamieson and Allendorf and other stressors to date. howellia, relative to 1994, because of an 2012, entire); other processes, such as Nevertheless, we recognize that there increased buffer against stochastic and habitat degradation, have a more are uncertainties associated with future catastrophic events. immediate and greater impact on climate change predictions and The final rule to list water howellia species viability (Jamieson and potential cumulative effects. Ongoing (59 FR 35860; July 14, 1994) cited lack Allendorf 2012). We acknowledge the management and monitoring of water of genetic variation within and among documented low genetic diversity of howellia (via the post-delisting

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:52 Jun 15, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM 16JNR1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 16, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 31967

monitoring plan) is designed to detect threats to the species absent the determined case-by-case. Further, potential future changes in the species’ protections of the Act. Therefore, we Federal agencies are currently distribution and abundance. examine whether other regulatory considering removing isolated waters There may be locations of water mechanisms would remain in place if from CWA jurisdiction (82 FR 34899; howellia occurrences where invasive the species were delisted, and the extent July 27, 2017). Thus, the extent of water species are present, and cattle have to which those mechanisms will howellia receiving the protections of the access to occupied ponds. Grazing may continue to help ensure that future CWA now and in the future is limit the expansion of invasive species threats will be reduced or eliminated. uncertain. However, the protections of in these instances. Otherwise, we are In our previous discussion of threats, the CWA to water howellia habitat that not aware of particular locations within we evaluate the significance of threats is under CWA jurisdiction are expected water howellia occurrences where as mitigated by any conservation efforts to remain when the species is delisted multiple stressors occur. Also, we do and existing regulatory mechanisms. and the protections of the Act removed. not anticipate stressors to increase on Where threats exist, we analyze the Food Security Act: The Food Security federally managed lands, which afford extent to which conservation measures Act was designed, in part, to protect protection to the species in most of the and existing regulatory mechanisms wetlands by removing incentives for occupied habitat. Furthermore, the address the specific threats to the farmers to convert wetlands into crop documented new occurrences and species. Regulatory mechanisms, if they fields. The Food Security Act likely greater distribution of the species since exist, may reduce or eliminate the provides some indirect protection of it was listed in 1994 provide additional impacts from one or more identified potential water howellia habitats on resiliency, redundancy, and threats. private land, but not those on Federal or representation across the range of the Although inadequacy of existing State land. Although there are no data species, which is expected to increase regulatory mechanisms was not directly linking the Food Security Act the viability of the species in the face of specifically identified as a threat to and water howellia, historically, it has cumulative threats. Therefore, we water howellia at the time of listing in been demonstrated that the Food conclude, based on the available 1994, we did mention the very limited Security Act has had positive impacts information, that cumulative effects are number of protections that existed for on wetland function (Gleason et al. not a significant threat to water the species (59 FR 35860, July 14, 1994, 2011, p. S65). Although the future of the howellia. see p. 59 FR 35862). Specifically, we Food Security Act in its current form is discussed the designation of water uncertain, any protections afforded to Summary of Other Factors Affecting the howellia as a sensitive species by the wetlands would confer benefit to water Species USFS and referred to wetland protection howellia should the species be present. Given the lack of threats within water measures provided under section 404 of National Environmental Policy Act: howellia occurrences and increases in the Federal Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. Environmental review of potential the species’ known distribution since 1251 et seq.), title XII of the Food effects of Federal actions is mandated listing in 1994, we conclude that Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3801 et under the National Environmental climate change, small population size seq.), and some State laws. Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et and low genetic diversity, and seq.). When NEPA analysis reveals Federal cumulative effects are not significant significant environmental effects, the threats to water howellia. Clean Water Act: The Clean Water Act Federal agencies must disclose those (CWA) was designed, in part, to protect effects to the public and consider Existing Regulatory Mechanisms surface waters of the United States from mitigation that could offset the effects. We examined the stressors identified unregulated pollution from point These mitigations usually provide some within the other factors as ameliorated sources. The CWA provides some protections for listed species. However, or exacerbated by any existing benefit to water howellia through the the NEPA does not require that adverse regulatory mechanisms or conservation regulation of discharge into surface impacts be mitigated, only disclosed. efforts for water howellia. Section waters through a permitting process; Therefore, because NEPA is procedural, 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act requires the Service however, the historical threats to water it does not independently provide to take into account those efforts, if any, howellia habitat have not typically been protection for the species. being made by any State or foreign associated with point sources of National Forest Management Act: nation, or any political subdivision of a pollution, and current information does Federal activities on USFS lands are State or foreign nation, to protect not point to these as threats for subject to the National Forest endangered or threatened species. We occurrences today. Management Act of 1976 (NFMA; 16 consider relevant Federal, State, and Under section 404 of the CWA, the U.S.C. 1600 et seq.). The NFMA requires Tribal laws, regulations, and other such U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) the development and implementation of binding legal mechanisms that may regulates the discharge of fill material resource management plans that guide ameliorate or exacerbate any of the into waters of the United States, the maintenance of ecological threats we describe in the threats including wetlands. In general, the term conditions that support natural analysis or otherwise enhance the ‘‘wetland’’ refers to areas meeting the distributions and abundance of species conservation of the species. We give the USACE’s criteria of hydric soils, and not contribute to their extirpation. strongest weight to statutes and their hydrology (either sufficient annual In 2018, the Flathead National Forest implementing regulations and to flooding or water on the soil surface), in Montana revised its resource management direction that stems from and hydrophytic vegetation (plants management plan (often called a forest those laws and regulations; an example specifically adapted for growing in plan), and the Mendocino National is State governmental actions enforced wetlands). Some habitat occupied by Forest in California anticipates revising under a State statute or constitution or water howellia is considered isolated their forest plan in the near future. The Federal action under the statute. waters under the CWA. As a result of revised Flathead National Forest plan For currently listed species, we various Supreme Court decisions, the includes measures for conservation of consider the adequacy of existing CWA’s jurisdiction over isolated waters the known water howellia occurrences regulatory mechanisms to address has been uncertain and generally on USFS land in Montana by

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:52 Jun 15, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM 16JNR1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES 31968 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 16, 2021 / Rules and Regulations

incorporating the existing USFS the recovery of endangered and National Wildlife Refuge System conservation strategy for water howellia threatened species, conserve candidate Improvement Act (Pub. L. 105–57, 16 into the revised forest plan (USFS 2018, species and species proposed for listing, U.S.C. 668dd), Refuge managers have pp. 20, 45–46, 52, 99–100, 143–144; and maintain viable populations of the authority and responsibility to Shelly 2019, pers. comm.; USFS 1997, species of conservation concern within protect native ecosystems, fulfill the pp. 17–18). The inclusion of the the plan area. Thus, any future revisions purposes for which an individual refuge conservation strategy into the revised to the Flathead National Forest or was founded, and implement strategies forest plan is important, because in Mendocino National Forest plans will to achieve the goals and objectives addition to providing conservation provide some protections to water stated in management plans. For measures for known water howellia howellia and its habitat. example, Turnbull NWR (Spokane occurrences, it also provides for Federal Land Policy and Management County, Washington) includes extensive conservation of ponds that are suitable Act: Similar to NFMA, the Federal Land habitat for water howellia, including 35 habitat but are currently unoccupied. Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 known occupied sites. The NWR’s Guidance provided in the Mendocino U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) applies to the comprehensive conservation plan (CCP) National Forest plan has resulted in the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is a land management plan with a 15- use of buffer strips to protect riparian with regard to the conservation and use year term that directs protection of these species and function surrounding ponds of public lands under their habitats and identifies specific occupied by water howellia in management. Water howellia is given objectives relative to research and California. Both the Flathead National consideration as a federally listed monitoring, invasive species Forest plan and Mendocino National species by Federal agencies, and when management, and education regarding Forest plan are expected to continue to delisted, will likely be included on the water howellia (USFWS 2007, p. 2–22). be implemented when water howellia is sensitive species list for the BLM as it Given the 15-year timeframe of CCPs, delisted, based on discussions with the was at the time of listing (59 FR 35860; unless the CCPs are modified earlier, USFS (see Conservation Efforts and July 14, 1994). Special status species these protections will remain in place Habitat-based Threats, above) and the policies (BLM manual, section 6840, p. until at least 2022 regardless of water fact that these plans are longer term 37) detail the need to conserve these howellia’s Federal listing status. After (15+ years; NFMA, 16 U.S.C. 1600 et species and the ecosystems on which 2022, the Turnbull NWR can revise the seq.) forest planning documents. they depend using all methods and CCP, if needed. However, the likelihood Further, NFMA requires forest plans to procedures which are necessary to of future CCP revisions including provide protection for streams, stream improve the condition of special status conservation of water howellia are high, banks, shorelines, lakes, wetlands, and species and their habitats to a point because the National Wildlife Refuge other bodies of water from detrimental where their special status recognition is System Improvement Act mandates changes in water temperatures, no longer warranted. The one conservation of fish, wildlife, and blockages of water courses, and deposits occurrence of water howellia in plants, and their habitats within the of sediment, where tree harvests are Washington on BLM land is vulnerable Refuge System. In addition, the likely to seriously and adversely affect to localized actions. However, overarching goal of the National water conditions or fish habitat. Thus, application of best management Wildlife Refuge System is to manage any future revisions to the Flathead practices (BMPs) consistent with their lands and waters for the resource management plan (RMP) National Forest or Mendocino National conservation of fish, wildlife, and plant direction appears to have maintained Forest plans would still provide some resources and their habitats, further this occurrence since 1993 (Frymire protections to water howellia and its underscoring the high likelihood of 2017, pers. comm.). The implementation habitat. future protections for water howellia of BMPs is expected to continue in the and its habitat. Water howellia is given consideration absence of protections under the Act. as a Federal species at risk by Federal Sikes Act: Water howellia occurrences In 2010, Ridgefield NWR in western agencies under the 2012 National Forest and habitats on Federal military Washington finalized a CCP that System land management planning rule installations (JBLM in Pierce County, includes several conservation strategies (77 FR 21162; April 9, 2012). When Washington) are managed under an for water howellia. These strategies delisted, water howellia will be integrated natural resources include allowing natural flooding cycles evaluated for designation as a species of management plan (INRMP) (USDOD and various methods (e.g., mechanical, special concern and designated as such 2006, pp. 4–6) authorized by the Sikes biological, chemical) for invasive if there is substantial concern for its Act (16 U.S.C. 670a et seq.). Protections species control (USFWS 2010, pp. 2–37, viability in the plan area. The USFS for water howellia habitat in the INRMP 2–54). Given the 15-year timeframe of anticipates that water howellia will be include restrictions on motorized CCPs, protections outlined in the given the status of ‘‘species of equipment and military training Ridgefield NWR CCP for water howellia conservation concern’’ in both plans activities in wetlands occupied by water are expected to remain in place until at when the species is delisted (Shelly howellia. In concert with the INRMP, least 2025, regardless of water 2016, pers. comm.; Johnson 2017, pers. JBLM has developed an Endangered howellia’s Federal listing status. After comm.). If water howellia is not given Species Management Plan for water 2025, the Ridgefield NWR can revise the the status of ‘‘species of conservation howellia that establishes conservation CCP, if needed. However, the likelihood concern’’ upon delisting, the 2012 goals, management prescriptions, and of future CCP revisions including planning rule still requires any forest monitoring efforts (USDOD 2012, conservation of water howellia are high, plan to provide for the diversity of plant entire). These protections are expected because the National Wildlife Refuge and animal communities and the long- to continue when the species is delisted System Improvement Act mandates term persistence of native species in the because the Sikes Act mandates USDOD conservation of fish, wildlife, and plan area. Further, the planning rule to conserve and rehabilitate wildlife, plants, and their habitats within the also requires a forest plan to provide fish, and game on military reservations. Refuge System. In addition, the ecological conditions to keep common National Wildlife Refuge System overarching goal of the National native species common, contribute to Improvement Act: As directed by the Wildlife Refuge System is to manage

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:52 Jun 15, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM 16JNR1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 16, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 31969

their lands and waters for the and associated regulations and rules any future CCP revisions will include conservation of fish, wildlife, and plant (Revised Code of Washington, title 76, protections for water howellia because resources and their habitats, further chapter 76.09; Washington the mission of the National Wildlife underscoring the high likelihood of Administrative Code, title 222, chapter Refuge System is to manage their lands future protections for water howellia 222–08), provides protection of specifically for conservation of fish, and its habitat. wetlands from the fill and cutting that wildlife, and plant resources and their could result from commercial timber habitats; thus, water howellia and its State harvest operations. Minimum buffers of habitat on Refuge land are expected to Montana Streamside Management 25 ft (8 m) are designated around ponds be conserved into the future. In Zone Act: The Montana Streamside and wetlands inside timber sale Washington on JBLM, an Endangered Management Zone Act (SMZ), in part, boundaries, effectively prohibiting most Species Management Plan specifically designates vegetated buffer strips harvest and all heavy equipment used in speaks to the management of wetlands around surface waters, including these areas. These buffers protect water to benefit water howellia, and the Sikes wetlands adjacent to streams (and thus howellia habitat from disturbance and Act mandates wetland protection, potential water howellia habitat), within minimize impacts to water quality. As enhancement, and restoration, where the boundaries of timber harvest units State law, these protections are expected necessary for the support of fish, in Montana. The SMZ law covers to remain in place when we delist water wildlife, or plants, regardless of the Federal, State, and private commercial howellia. species’ status under the Act. Thus, all timber practices (Montana Code Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS), three metapopulations are protected by Annotated 2019, title 77, chapter 5, part Chapter 564: ORS 564 requires non- regulatory mechanisms that have been 3). The SMZ law specifically prohibits Federal public agencies to protect State- shown to be effective and are expected slash fill of wetlands, off-road vehicle listed plant species found on their to continue to be effective regardless of use, and clear cutting within 50 ft (15 lands. Any land action on Oregon non- the species’ status under the Act. m) of water bodies (Montana Code Federal public lands which results, or Consequently, we find that conservation Annotated 2019, title 77, chapter 5, part might result, in the taking of an measures, along with existing regulatory 3, at 77–5–303). There are no buffer endangered or threatened species mechanisms, are adequate to address strips designated for isolated wetlands requires consultation with the Oregon these specific stressors. (those not adjacent to a stream/river) Department of Agriculture (ODA) staff. under the SMZ and only voluntary Removal of Federal protections for Summary of Comments and restrictions on equipment travel through water howellia will remove State Recommendations isolated wetlands. Although unclear, protection of the species under this In the proposed rule published in the some water howellia occurrences in statute because water howellia was Federal Register on October 7, 2019 (84 Montana’s Swan Valley may occur in never formally listed by ODA. However, FR 53380), we requested that all isolated wetlands. Thus, the direct loss protections are expected to remain in interested parties submit written of habitat or plants for a small number place due to other rare, sensitive plant comments on our proposal to delist of occurrences from timber harvest species in the area inhabited by water water howellia by December 6, 2019. activities is a possibility if water howellia and the commitment of the We also contacted appropriate Federal howellia plants occupy isolated Metro (Portland-area regional and State agencies, scientific experts wetlands within a timber harvest unit. government) to protect the only known and organizations, and other interested However, audits of timber sale practices occurrences of water howellia in Oregon parties and invited them to comment on conducted by interdisciplinary review (Currin 2013, pers. comm.). the proposal. Newspaper notices teams have consistently documented inviting general public comment were few violations of the SMZ law and Summary of Existing Regulatory published in California (Times Standard generally high (greater than 90 percent) Mechanisms in Eureka and Mendocino Beacon in compliance with voluntary regulations As discussed above and under the Fort Bragg), Montana (Missoulian in in the recent past (Montana DNRC 2016, other factors, conservation measures Missoula and Interlake in Kalispell), entire). Thus, while there is potential for and existing regulatory mechanisms Oregon (Oregonian in Portland), and water howellia habitat to be lost for (such as Federal and State land Washington (News Tribune in Tacoma occurrences in isolated wetlands, the management plans and conservation and Spokesman Review in Spokane). magnitude of the stressor appears small. strategies) have ameliorated, or are We did not receive any requests for a As State law, the protections of the SMZ continuing to minimize, the previously public hearing. All substantive are expected to continue when we delist identified threats of invasive species, information provided during the water howellia. land management activities (primarily comment period was either Washington Natural Heritage Plan: timber harvest and road building), incorporated directly into this final rule Washington State’s Natural Heritage trampling by domestic livestock, and or is addressed below. Plan identifies priorities for preserving direct habitat loss from urbanization or natural diversity, including wetlands, in dam construction to all three water Peer Reviewer Comments Washington State (Washington howellia metapopulations. As indicated In accordance with our joint policy on Department of Natural Resources (DNR) above, the majority of these mechanisms peer review policy published on July 1, 2007, 2011, entire). The plan aids will remain in place regardless of the 1994 (59 FR 34270), and our August 22, Washington DNR in conserving key species’ Federal listing status. In 2016, memorandum updating and habitats that are currently imperiled or Montana, the existing conservation clarifying the role of peer review of expected to be in the future. The strategy for water howellia is now part listing actions under the Act (USFWS prioritization of conservation efforts of the Flathead National Forest Plan; 2016, entire), we solicited expert provided by this plan is expected to thus, the Montana metapopulation will opinion from nine knowledgeable remain in place when we delist water continue to receive protections individuals with scientific expertise and howellia. regardless of its status under the Act. In familiarity with water howellia, its Washington Forest Practices Act: Washington on National Wildlife habitat, its taxonomy, its biological Washington State’s Forest Practices Act, Refuges, there is a high likelihood that needs and potential threats, or

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:52 Jun 15, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM 16JNR1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES 31970 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 16, 2021 / Rules and Regulations

principles of conservation biology. We a species that is ‘‘likely to become an extinction throughout all of its range nor received responses from three peer endangered species within the is it likely to become so in the reviewers. foreseeable future throughout all or a foreseeable future throughout all of its We reviewed and addressed all significant portion of its range.’’ The Act range. comments we received from the peer requires that we determine whether a Status Throughout a Significant Portion reviewers for substantive issues and species meets the definition of of Its Range new information regarding the proposed ‘‘endangered species’’ or ‘‘threatened delisting of water howellia. The peer species’’ because of any of the following Under the Act and our implementing reviewers provided additional factors: (A) The present or threatened regulations, a species may warrant information, clarifications, and destruction, modification, or listing if it is in danger of extinction or suggestions to improve the final rule. curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) likely to become so in the foreseeable All changes suggested by peer reviewers overutilization for commercial, future throughout all or a significant are incorporated into the text of this recreational, scientific, or educational portion of its range. Having determined final rule. Such changes include purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D) that water howellia is not in danger of additional details and/or clarity the inadequacy of existing regulatory extinction or likely to become so in the concerning population monitoring vs. mechanisms; or (E) other natural or foreseeable future throughout all of its surveying, predicted effects of invasive manmade factors affecting its continued range, we now consider whether it may species, regulatory mechanisms, climate existence. be in danger of extinction or likely to change, wetland/pond hydrology, become so in the foreseeable future in Status Throughout All of Its Range genetic diversity, cumulative effects, a significant portion of its range––that post-delisting monitoring, and We have carefully assessed the best is, whether there is any portion of the metapopulation structure. We also made scientific and commercial information species’ range for which it is true that other minor editorial clarifications and available regarding the past, present, both (1) the portion is significant; and corrections in this final rule based on and future threats to water howellia, (2) the species is in danger of extinction peer reviewer comments. including invasive species (Factor A), now or likely to become so in the land management activities (Factor A), foreseeable future in that portion. Public Comments trampling by domestic livestock (Factor Depending on the case, it might be more We received six letters from the A), direct habitat loss from urbanization efficient for us to address the public that provided comments on the or dam construction (Factor A), ‘‘significance’’ question or the ‘‘status’’ proposed rule. Most of these predation (herbivory) by domestic question first. We can choose to address commenters either generally supported livestock (Factor C), narrow ecological either question first. Regardless of or generally opposed the delisting of the requirements of the species in the which question we address first, if we species without providing further context of climate change (Factor E), reach a negative answer with respect to information. small population size/low genetic the first question that we address, we do One commenter opposed our use of variation (Factor E), and cumulative not need to evaluate the other question 2013 data to support our proposed effects of stressors (Factor E). Based on for that portion of the species’ range. delisting action; this commenter argues the best available information, and as In undertaking this analysis for water that these data are outdated. We have described in our threats analysis, above, howellia, we choose to address the incorporated updated sources of the identified stressors fall into one or status question first—we consider information (118 instances of using data more of the following categories: information pertaining to the geographic more recent than 2013), where • Stressors that have not occurred to distribution of both the species and the applicable, in this rule and have not the extent anticipated at the time of threats that the species faces to identify relied solely on data from 2013 (32 listing and existing information any portions of the range where the instances of using data from 2013, indicates that this will not change in the species may be endangered or where appropriate). In accordance with future (trampling by domestic livestock, threatened. section 4(b)(1)(a) of the Act, we use the predation (herbivory), direct habitat loss For water howellia, we considered ‘‘best scientific and commercial from urbanization or dam construction). whether the threats are geographically information available,’’ regardless of its • Stressors that are adequately concentrated in any portion of the date, to inform our determinations managed and existing information species’ range at a biologically under section 4(a)(1) of the Act. indicates that this will not change in the meaningful scale. We examined the Another commenter provided future (invasive species, land following threats: substantive comments, mainly related to management activities). • Invasive species––Invasive species, the occurrences of water howellia in • Stressors for which the species is particularly reed canarygrass, are widely California. We incorporated the updated tolerant and existing information scattered throughout the species’ range, information provided by this public indicates that this will not change in the with no concentration in any particular commenter into this final rule. future (narrow ecological requirements area. Furthermore, water howellia of the species in the context of climate metapopulations appear to be able to Determination of Water Howellia’s change, small population size/low coexist with invasive species even in Status genetic variation, cumulative effects). the absence of suppression efforts. Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) Thus, our analysis of this information • Land management activities––On and its implementing regulations (50 indicates that these stressors are not of Federal lands (where 84 percent of CFR part 424) set forth the procedures sufficient imminence, intensity, or water howellia occurrences are), most for determining whether a species meets magnitude to indicate that water land management activities that could the definition of ‘‘endangered species’’ howellia is in danger of extinction or disturb vegetation surrounding water or ‘‘threatened species.’’ The Act defines likely to become so within the howellia are now either prohibited or an ‘‘endangered species’’ as a species foreseeable future throughout all of its designed to minimize impacts. On State that is ‘‘in danger of extinction range. Therefore, after assessing the best lands, clear-cutting of timber and throughout all or a significant portion of available information, we determine broadcast burning are either prohibited its range,’’ and a ‘‘threatened species’’ as that water howellia is not in danger of within defined buffers or not identified

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:52 Jun 15, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM 16JNR1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 16, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 31971

as threats. Therefore, adverse practices redundancy, representation, and the Post-Delisting Monitoring on Federal and State lands are very capacity to survive a catastrophic event. infrequent and are not concentrated in In addition, the documentation of 200 Section 4(g)(1) of the Act requires us, any particular area of the species’ range. additional occurrences of water in cooperation with the States, to • Trampling by domestic livestock–– howellia since 1994 has increased the implement a monitoring program for not Effects of trampling on water howellia redundancy and representation of less than 5 years for all species that have occurrences on Federal and State land habitats for water howellia rangewide. been delisted due to recovery. The have largely been mitigated with Small populations are not concentrated purpose of this requirement is to fencing, cattle barricades, elimination of in any particular area of the species’ develop a program that detects the grazing in some areas occupied by water range. failure of any delisted species to sustain howellia, or limitations on the duration • itself without the protective measures of time livestock have access to Cumulative effects––Analysis of long-term datasets indicates the species provided by the Act. If at any time sensitive pond and wetland habitats. during the monitoring period, data Therefore, effects from trampling on has maintained viability and has the capacity to survive and reproduce, indicate that protective status under the Federal and State lands are very Act should be reinstated, we can initiate infrequent and are not concentrated in despite potential cumulative effects of listing procedures, including, if any particular area of the species’ range. climate change and other stressors. • Direct habitat loss from Potential cumulative effects are not appropriate, emergency listing. urbanization or dam construction–– concentrated in any particular area of We are delisting water howellia based Further habitat loss from urbanization the species’ range. on new information we have received as and dam construction is no longer a We found no concentration of threats well as conservation actions taken. threat to the species because in any portion of the water howellia’s Since delisting is, in part, due to conservation strategies and increased range at a biologically meaningful scale. conservation taken by stakeholders, we Federal ownership now provide Therefore, no portion of the species’ have prepared a post-delisting additional protections. Consequently, range can provide a basis for monitoring (PDM) plan for water direct habitat loss from these activities determining that the species is in danger howellia. The PDM plan was drafted is minimal and is not concentrated in of extinction now or likely to become so collaboratively with stakeholders and any particular area of the species’ range. in the foreseeable future in a significant was reviewed by both peer and public • Predation (herbivory) by domestic portion of its range, and we find that the reviewers during the comment period livestock––Similar to trampling, the species is not in danger of extinction for the proposed delisting rule (84 FR effects from grazing are limited within now or likely to become so in the water howellia habitat, and the species 53380; October 7, 2019). The PDM plan foreseeable future throughout all of its has maintained viability in ponds discusses the current status of the taxon range. This is consistent with the court’s accessible to livestock. Therefore, its and describes the methods for effects on Federal and State lands and holding in Desert Survivors v. monitoring the taxon. The PDM plan: (1) are not concentrated in any particular Department of the Interior, No. 16–cv– Summarizes the status of water howellia area of the species’ range. 01165–JCS, 2018 WL 4053447 (N.D. Cal. at the time of delisting; (2) describes • Narrow ecological requirements of Aug. 24, 2018) and Center for Biological frequency and duration of monitoring; the species in the context of climate Diversity v. Jewell, 248 F. Supp. 3d, 946, (3) discusses monitoring methods and change––Metapopulations important to 959 (D. Ariz. 2017). sampling regimes; (4) defines what the viability of the species are expected Determination of Status potential triggers will be evaluated to to sustain occurrences because of address the need for additional resiliency due to geographic and Our review of the best available monitoring; (5) outlines reporting elevational diversity rangewide. Some scientific and commercial information requirements and procedures; (6) of the future predicted air temperature indicates that water howellia does not outlines a schedule for implementing and precipitation conditions are similar meet the definition of an endangered the PDM plan; and (7) defines to the yearly weather conditions that species or a threatened species in responsibilities. It is our intent to work promote larger abundances of water accordance with sections 3(6) and 3(20) with our partners towards maintaining howellia (lower precipitation and/or of the Act. Therefore, we are removing the recovered status of water howellia. hotter summer temperatures). Available water howellia from the List of The PDM plan is available on the information indicates that increased Endangered and Threatened Plants. variability in future climate conditions internet at http://www.regulations.gov at is likely, but water howellia has some Effects of This Rule Docket No. FWS–R6–ES–2018–0045. plasticity to environmental change as This rule revises 50 CFR 17.12(h) to Required Determinations evidenced by its viability despite a remove water howellia from the Federal changing climate and its life-history National Environmental Policy Act List of Endangered and Threatened strategy of dual seed production and Plants. Because no critical habitat was We have determined that longer-term seed viability to buffer ever designated for this species, this environmental assessments and against several consecutive years of rule does not affect 50 CFR 17.96. unfavorable environmental conditions. environmental impact statements, as Therefore, despite occurring throughout The prohibitions and conservation defined under the authority of the the species’ range, the potential effects measures provided by the Act, National Environmental Policy Act of are minimal and are not concentrated in particularly through sections 7 and 9, 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), need not any particular area of the species’ range. will no longer apply to this species. be prepared in connection with • Small population size/low genetic Federal agencies will no longer be regulations pursuant to section 4(a) of variation––Most occurrences of water required to consult with the Service the Act. We published a notice outlining howellia are small in areal extent; under section 7 of the Act in the event our reasons for this determination in the however, the arrangement of occupied that activities they authorize, fund, or Federal Register on October 25, 1983 habitat across five States increases carry out may affect water howellia. (48 FR 49244).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:52 Jun 15, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM 16JNR1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES 31972 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 16, 2021 / Rules and Regulations

Government-to-Government § 17.12 [Amended] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Relationship With Tribes ■ 2. Amend § 17.12(h) by removing the Executive Summary entry for ‘‘Howellia aquatilis’’ under In accordance with the President’s Why we need to publish a rule. Under FLOWERING PLANTS from the List of memorandum of April 29, 1994, the Act, a species may be delisted (i.e., Endangered and Threatened Plants. Government-to-Government Relations removed from the Federal Lists of with Native American Tribal Martha Williams, Endangered and Threatened Wildlife Governments (59 FR 22951), E.O. 13175, Principal Deputy Director, Exercising the and Plants (Lists)) if it is determined and the Department of the Interior’s Delegated Authority of the Director, U.S. Fish that the species has recovered and no manual at 512 DM 2, we readily and Wildlife Service. longer meets the definition of an acknowledge our responsibility to [FR Doc. 2021–12522 Filed 6–15–21; 8:45 am] endangered or threatened species. communicate meaningfully with BILLING CODE 4333–15–P Removing a species from the Lists can recognized Federal Tribes on a only be completed by issuing a rule. government-to-government basis. In What this document does. This rule accordance with Secretarial Order 3206 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR removes Lepanthes eltoroensis from the of June 5, 1997 (American Indian Tribal Federal List of Endangered and Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust Fish and Wildlife Service Threatened Plants, based on its Responsibilities, and the Endangered recovery. Species Act), we readily acknowledge 50 CFR Part 17 The basis for our action. We may our responsibilities to work directly [Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2019–0073; delist a species if we determine, after a with Tribes in developing programs for FF09E22000 FXES1113090FEDR 212] review of the best scientific and healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge that commercial data, that: (1) The species is Tribal lands are not subject to the same RIN 1018–BB83 extinct; (2) the species does not meet the controls as Federal public lands, to Endangered and Threatened Wildlife definition of an endangered species or a remain sensitive to Indian culture, and and Plants; Removal of Lepanthes threatened species; or (3) the listed to make information available to Tribes. eltoroensis From the Federal List of entity does not meet the statutory We are aware of two water howellia Endangered and Threatened Plants definition of a species (50 CFR occurrences that occur on Tribal lands; 424.11(e)). Here, we have determined we have notified the Tribes that may be AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, that the species may be delisted because affected by this rule and offered Interior. it no longer meets the definition of an government-to-government ACTION: Final rule. endangered species or a threatened consultation. species, as it has recovered. SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and References Cited Wildlife Service, are removing Previous Federal Actions A complete list of all references cited Lepanthes eltoroensis (no common On March 10, 2020, we published in in this rule is available on the internet name), an orchid species from Puerto the Federal Register (85 FR 13844) a at http://www.regulations.gov at Docket Rico, from the Federal List of proposed rule to remove Lepanthes No. FWS–R6–ES–2018–0045, or upon Endangered and Threatened Plants, due eltoroensis (no common name) from the request from the Montana Ecological to recovery. This determination is based Federal List of Endangered and Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER on a thorough review of the best Threatened Plants (List). Please refer to INFORMATION CONTACT). available scientific and commercial that proposed rule for a detailed information, which indicates that the description of previous Federal actions Authors threats to the species have been concerning this species. The proposed The authors of this final rule are staff eliminated or reduced to the point that rule and supplemental documents are members of the Montana Ecological the species no longer meets the provided at http://www.regulations.gov Services Field Office and field and definition of an endangered or under Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2019– regional offices in California, Colorado, threatened species under the 0073. Idaho, Oregon, and Washington. Endangered Species Act of 1973, as Species Status Assessment Report amended (Act). Accordingly, the List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 prohibitions and conservation measures A team of Service biologists, in Endangered and threatened species, provided by the Act will no longer consultation with other species experts, Exports, Imports, Reporting and apply to this species. prepared a species status assessment (SSA) report for Lepanthes eltoroensis. recordkeeping requirements, DATES: This rule is effective July 16, The SSA report represents a Transportation. 2021. compilation of the best scientific and Regulation Promulgation ADDRESSES: The proposed and final commercial data available concerning Accordingly, we amend part 17, rules, the post-delisting monitoring the status of the species, including the subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the plan, and the comments received on the impacts of past, present, and future Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth proposed rule are available on the factors (both negative and beneficial) below: internet at http://www.regulations.gov affecting the species. We solicited in Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2019–0073. independent peer review of the SSA PART 17—ENDANGERED AND FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: report by five individuals with expertise THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS Edwin Mun˜ iz, Field Supervisor, U.S. in L. eltoroensis or similar epiphytic Fish and Wildlife Service, Caribbean (i.e., a plant that grows on another plant ■ 1. The authority citation for part 17 Ecological Services Field Office (see for support but not for food) orchid continues to read as follows: ADDRESSES, above). If you use a species’ biology or habitat, or climate Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531– telecommunications device for the deaf change. The final SSA, which supports 1544; and 4201–4245, unless otherwise (TDD), please call the Federal Relay this final rule, was revised, as noted. Service at (800) 877–8339. appropriate, in response to the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:52 Jun 15, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM 16JNR1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES