Vol. 76 Wednesday, No. 36 February 23, 2011

Part IV

Department of the Interior

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and ; 12-Month Finding on a Petition To List Astragalus hamiltonii, Penstemon flowersii, Eriogonum soredium, Lepidium ostleri, and as Endangered or Threatened; Rule

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 10166 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FWS–R6–ES–2010–0087. Supporting endangered or threatened. The petition documentation we used in preparing included the five species Fish and Wildlife Service this finding is available for public addressed in this finding. The petition inspection, by appointment, during incorporated all analysis, references, 50 CFR Part 17 normal business hours at the U.S. Fish and documentation provided by Docket No. [FWS–R6–ES–2010–0087; MO and Wildlife Service, Ecological NatureServe in its online database at 92210–0–008] Services Field Office, 2369 West Orton http://www.natureserve.org/. The Circle, Suite 50, West Valley City, UT document clearly identified itself as a Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 84119. Please submit any new petition and included the petitioners’ and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a information, materials, comments, or identification information, as required Petition To List Astragalus hamiltonii, questions concerning this finding to the in 50 CFR 424.14(a). We sent a letter to Penstemon flowersii, Eriogonum above address. the petitioners, dated August 24, 2007, soredium, Lepidium ostleri, and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: acknowledging receipt of the petition Trifolium friscanum as Endangered or Larry Crist, Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and stating that, based on preliminary Threatened and Wildlife Service, Utah Ecological review, we found no compelling Services Field Office, 2369 West Orton evidence to support an emergency AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Circle, Suite 50, West Valley City, UT listing for any of the species covered by Interior. 84119; by telephone at 801–975–3330; the petition. ACTION: Notice of 12-month petition or by facsimile at 801–975–3331mailto:. On March 19, 2008, WildEarth finding. If you use a telecommunications device Guardians filed a complaint (1:08–CV– 472–CKK) indicating that the Service SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and for the deaf (TDD), please call the failed to comply with its mandatory Wildlife Service (Service), announce a Federal Information Relay Service duty to make a preliminary 90-day 12-month finding on a petition to list (FIRS) at 800–877–8339. finding on their two multiple species Astragalus hamiltonii (Hamilton SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: petitions—one for mountain-prairie milkvetch), Penstemon flowersii Background species and one for southwest species. (Flowers penstemon), Eriogonum On June 18, 2008, we received a soredium (Frisco buckwheat), Lepidium Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the ESA of 1973, petition from WildEarth Guardians, ostleri (Ostler’s peppergrass), and as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), dated June 12, 2008, to emergency list Trifolium friscanum (Frisco ) as requires that, for any petition to revise 32 species under the Administrative threatened or endangered under the the Federal Lists of Endangered and Procedure Act and the ESA. Of those 32 Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA), Threatened Wildlife and Plants that species, 11 were included in the July 24, as amended. After review of all contains substantial scientific or 2007, petition to be listed on a available scientific and commercial commercial information that listing a nonemergency basis. Although the ESA information, we find that listing A. species may be warranted, we make a does not provide for a petition process hamiltonii and P. flowersii is not finding within 12 months of the date of for an interested person to seek to have warranted at this time. However, we ask receipt of the petition. In this finding, a species emergency listed, section the public to submit to us new we will determine that the petitioned 4(b)(7) of the ESA authorizes the Service information that becomes available action is: (a) Not warranted, (b) to issue emergency regulations to concerning the threats to A. hamiltonii warranted, or (c) warranted, but the temporarily list a species. In a letter and P. flowersii or their habitat at any immediate proposal of a regulation dated July 25, 2008, we stated that the time. We find that listing E. soredium, implementing the petitioned action is information provided in both the 2007 L. ostleri, and T. friscanum as precluded by other pending proposals to and 2008 petitions and in our files did threatened or endangered is warranted. determine whether species are not indicate that an emergency situation However, currently listing E. soredium, threatened or endangered, and existed for any of the 11 species. L. ostleri, and T. friscanum is precluded expeditious progress is being made to by higher priority actions to amend the add or remove qualified species from On February 5, 2009 (74 FR 6122), we Federal Lists of Endangered and the Federal Lists of Endangered and published a 90-day finding on 165 Threatened Wildlife and Plants. Upon Threatened Wildlife and Plants. Section species from the petition to list 206 publication of this 12-month petition 4(b)(3)(C) of the ESA requires that we species in the mountain-prairie region finding, we will add E. soredium, L. treat a petition for which the requested of the as endangered or ostleri, and T. friscanum to our action is found to be warranted but threatened under the ESA. We found candidate species list. We will develop precluded as though resubmitted on the that the petition did not present proposed rules to list E. soredium, L. date of such finding, that is, requiring a substantial scientific or commercial ostleri, and T. friscanum as our subsequent finding to be made within information indicating that listing was priorities allow. We will make 12 months. We must publish these 12- warranted for these species and, determinations on critical habitat during month findings in the Federal Register. therefore, did not initiate further status reviews in response to the petition. Two development of the proposed listing Previous Federal Actions rules. In the interim period, we will additional species were reviewed in a address the status of the candidate taxa On July 30, 2007, we received a concurrent 90-day finding and again, we through our annual Candidate Notice of petition dated July 24, 2007, from Forest found that the petition did not present Review. Guardians (now WildEarth Guardians), substantial scientific or commercial requesting that the Service: (1) Consider information indicating that listing was DATES: The finding announced in this all full species in our Mountain Prairie warranted for these species. Therefore document was made on February 23, Region ranked as G1 or G1G2 by the we did not consider these two species 2011. organization NatureServe, except those further. For the remaining 39 species, ADDRESSES: This finding is available on that are currently listed, proposed for we deferred our findings until a later the Internet at http:// listing, or candidates for listing; and date. One species of the 39 remaining www.regulations.gov at Docket Number (2) list each species as either species, Sphaeralcea gierischii (Gierisch

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:48 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 10167

mallow), was already a candidate Species Information—Astragalus The Utah Natural Heritage Program species for listing; therefore, 38 species hamiltonii (UNHP) designates 11 element occurrences for Astragalus hamiltonii remained for consideration. On March and Species Description 13, 2009, the Service and WildEarth (UNHP 2010a, entire). Element Guardians filed a stipulated settlement Astragalus hamiltonii is a bushy occurrences are the specific locations, or in the District of Columbia Court, perennial plant in the bean family sites, where plants are documented. agreeing that the Service would submit () that can grow up to 24 inches Distinct element occurrences are to the Federal Register a finding as to (in) (60 centimeters (cm)) tall (Welsh et identified if there is either 0.6 mi (1 km) whether WildEarth Guardians’ petition al. 2003, p. 374). It has several sparsely of unsuitable habitat or 1.2 mi (2 km) of presented substantial information leafed stems, with three to five unoccupied, suitable habitat separating indicating that the petitioned action (sometimes seven) leaflets per leaf, each them (NatureServe 2004, p. 14). 0.8 to 1.6 in (2 to 4 cm) long and 0.2 may be warranted for 38 mountain- Astragalus hamiltonii element to 0.4 in (5 to 10 millimeters (mm)) wide occurrences are based on collections of prairie species by August 9, 2009 (Heil and Melton 1995a, p. 6). The herbarium specimens. Two of the (WildEarth Guardians vs. Salazar 2009, terminal leaflet (at the tip of the leaf) is element occurrences identified by the case 1:08–CV–472–CKK). typically the largest leaflet (NatureServe UNHP were from and the On August 18, 2009, we published a 2009a, p. 3). In May and June, a single southeast corner of the Uinta Basin, but notice of 90-day finding (74 FR 41649) A. hamiltonii plant will produce many we believe these locations are likely on 38 species from the petition to list flowering stalks, with each stalk bearing A. lonchocarpus, based on leaf 206 species in the mountain-prairie 7 to 30 cream-colored flowers (Welsh et characteristics and geographic region of the United States as al. 2003, p. 374; NatureServe 2009a, distribution (NatureServe 2009a, p. 1; endangered or threatened under the p. 3). The fruits are hanging pods and Goodrich 2010a, entire), so they are not ESA. Of the 38 species, we found that usually mature by the end of June considered further in this finding. the petition presented substantial (NatureServe 2009a, p. 3). Hereafter, we base our analysis on the scientific and commercial information Astragalus hamiltonii was first remaining nine element occurrences for 29 species, indicating that listing described in 1952 (Porter 1952, pp. 159– (Table 1; Goodrich 2010b, entire). may be warranted for those 29 species. 160). Although it was once considered To determine the currently known The 5 species we address in this 12- a variety of A. lonchocarpus (Isely 1983, distribution of Astragalus hamiltonii, month finding were included in these p. 422), A. hamiltonii is currently we mapped the nine UNHP element 29 species. We initiated a status review accepted as a distinct species, based on occurrences (Figure 1). The UNHP of the 29 species to determine if listing leaflet characteristics and geographic records element occurrences using the public land survey system to the nearest was warranted. We also opened a 60- segregation (Barneby 1989, p. 72; Welsh et al. 2003, p. 374). quarter-quarter of the township, range, day public comment period to allow all and section (UNHP 2010a, entire). These Distribution and Population Status interested parties an opportunity to element occurrences were the basis for provide information on the status of the Astragalus hamiltonii occurs our ‘‘population areas,’’ but the 29 species. The public comment period generally west and southwest of Vernal, population areas’ boundaries were closed on October 19, 2009. We received Utah. The species is found on Bureau of expanded to the nearest quarter-quarter 224 public comments. Of these, two Land Management (BLM) land, the of the township, range, and section, to specifically addressed Astragalus Uintah and Ouray Indian Reservation encompass the location data from the hamiltonii, Penstemon flowersii, (hereafter ‘‘Tribal’’) lands, State of Utah 2010 surveys (Table 1; Goodrich 2010b, Eriogonum soredium, Lepidium ostleri, School and Institutional Trust Lands entire). This mapping approach resulted and Trifolium friscanum. All Administration (SITLA) lands, and in some of the newly created population information received has been carefully private lands across an approximate areas’ perimeters eventually abutting considered in this finding. This notice area 10 mile (mi) (16.1 kilometer (km)) adjacent population areas (Table 1; constitutes the 12-month finding on the by 20 mi (32.2 km) (Figure 1). We do not Figure 1). Large areas of potential July 24, 2007, petition to list five species have comprehensive survey information habitat remain unsurveyed, so it is (A. hamiltonii, P. flowersii, E. soredium, for A. hamiltonii. Therefore, we do not possible that the species is continuous L. ostleri, and T. friscanum) as know the full extent of the species’ across its range, or occurs outside of our endangered or threatened. distribution or if the distribution has identified population areas (Figure 1). changed over time. BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 10168 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

BILLING CODE 4310–55–C

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 ER23FE11.000 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 10169

TABLE 1—Astragalus hamiltonii PLANTS COUNTED IN 2010 SURVEYS

Percent land ownership Population area Number of Astragalus BLM SITLA Tribal Private hamiltonii plants

1 ...... 11 54 0 35 Not counted. 2 ...... 76 13 1 11 4,863. 3 ...... 44 56 0 0 544. 4 ...... 0 0 10 90 15. 5 ...... 0 0 89 11 60. 6 ...... 57 5 0 38 10. 7 ...... 0 0 52 48 345. 8 ...... 13 62 0 25 Not counted. 9 ...... 0 0 81 19 Not counted.

Total ...... 30 18 23 28 5,837.

We do not have long-term population flowers and fruit (Goodrich et al. 1999, factors provided in section 4(a)(1) of the count or trend information. The total p. 263). Therefore, we believe the ESA. population of Astragalus hamiltonii was species may be able to tolerate moderate In considering what factors might estimated at 10,000 to 15,000 plants in soil disturbances (Neese and Smith constitute threats to a species, we must 1995 (Heil and Melton 1995a, p. 13). 1982, p. 36; Goodrich et al. 1999, look beyond the exposure of the species However, we do not know how this p. 263). to a particular factor to evaluate whether estimate was derived. In 2010, the U.S. Life History the species may respond to that factor Forest Service (USFS) counted over in a way that causes actual impacts to 5,800 A. hamiltonii individuals on BLM Astragalus hamiltonii growth, the species. If there is exposure to a lands in areas west of Vernal in the seedling establishment, and juvenile factor and the species responds vicinity of six of the element mortality are probably correlated with negatively, the factor may be a threat occurrences (numbers 2 to 7) (Table 1; rainfall (Heil and Melton 1995a, p. 14). and, during the status review, we Goodrich 2010b, entire). These were We do not know the reproductive attempt to determine how significant a partial surveys that included revisits to system for this species, but it is assumed threat it is. The threat is significant if it six element occurrences. to reproduce mainly by outcrossing drives, or contributes to, the risk of Astragalus hamiltonii is distributed (cross-fertilization) (Heil and Melton extinction of the species such that the sparsely across the landscape at low 1995a, p. 14). Plants that are obligate species warrants listing as endangered densities, but in optimum habitat A. outcrossers are self-incompatible, or threatened as those terms are defined hamiltonii can grow at densities of one meaning they cannot fertilize in the ESA. However, the identification 2 to two plants per square yard (yd ) themselves and, therefore, rely on other of factors that could impact a species 2 (square meter (m )) (Heil and Melton individuals of differing genetic make-up negatively may not be sufficient to 1995a, p. 13). Because A. hamiltonii is to reproduce (Stebbins 1970, p. 310). compel a finding that the species scattered across the landscape with Summary of Information Pertaining to warrants listing. The information must unsurveyed, potential habitat between the Five Factors—Astragalus include evidence sufficient to suggest known sites, we believe the known hamiltonii that these factors are operative threats element occurrences may be linked by that act on the species to the point that Section 4 of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1533) contiguous habitat, and may either be the species may meet the definition of and implementing regulations (50 CFR one large population or a series of endangered or threatened under the part 424) set forth procedures for adding populations within a metapopulation. ESA. species to the Federal Lists of Habitat Endangered and Threatened Wildlife Factor A. The Present or Threatened Astragalus hamiltonii is a narrow and Plants. Under section 4(a)(1) of the Destruction, Modification, or endemic that grows on soils of the ESA, a species may be determined to be Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range Duchesne River formation (Heil and endangered or threatened based on any Melton 1995a, p. 10; Goodrich 2010c, of the following five factors: The following factors may affect the pp. 13, 15). Less frequently, it is found (A) The present or threatened habitat or range of Astragalus in Mowry Shale and Dakota formations destruction, modification, or hamiltonii: (1) Conversion to (Welsh et al. 2003, p. 374). A. hamiltonii curtailment of its habitat or range; agricultural use, (2) livestock grazing, is typically found on benches and steep (B) Overutilization for commercial, (3) recreational activities, (4) oil and gas slopes at elevations of 4,900 to 6,200 recreational, scientific, or educational exploration and development, (5) feet (ft) (1,500 to 1,900 meters (m)). A. purposes; nonnative invasive species, and (6) tar hamiltonii grows in red, erosive, sandy (C) Disease or predation; sands extraction. clay loam soils (Heil and Melton 1995a, (D) The inadequacy of existing (1) Conversion to Agricultural Use pp. 10, 16; NatureServe 2009a, p. 3; regulatory mechanisms; or Brunson 2010a, p. 1), and is associated (E) Other natural or manmade factors Astragalus hamiltonii grows on with low-density desert shrub and affecting its continued existence. private and Tribal lands that can be juniper communities (Goodrich et al. In making our 12-month finding on used for agriculture. Agricultural land 1999, p. 263; NatureServe 2009a, p. 3). the petition, we considered and conversion is a change in land use to an Astragalus hamiltonii grows in old evaluated the best available scientific agricultural use, including crops and road cuts and road beds, sometimes and commercial information pertaining pastures. The conversion to agricultural quite robustly and producing abundant to Astragalus hamiltonii for the five use results in the loss and fragmentation

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 10170 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

of native plant habitats, including negative effects from livestock trampling Energy exploration and development habitats of A. hamiltonii. within A. hamiltonii habitat. Therefore, occurs across Astragalus hamiltonii’s Conversion of natural lands to we do not believe that livestock grazing known range, but only in localized areas agriculture historically impacted is a threat to A. hamiltonii now or for with small numbers of wells (Utah populations of Astragalus hamiltonii the foreseeable future. Division of Oil, Gas, and (Heil and Melton 1995a, p. 16), (UDOGM) 2010, p. 1). Only one well is (3) Recreational Activities particularly in the four population areas producing in A. hamiltonii habitat, and where land ownership is private or Off-highway vehicle (OHV) and another well is currently being drilled. Tribal. However, most of this recreational trail use (e.g., mountain Seventeen wells were plugged and development was limited to lower-lying bikes and motorized bikes) may result in abandoned, most prior to 1976 (Gordon areas outside of A. hamiltonii habitat direct loss or damage to plants and their 2010a, pers. comm.; UDOGM 2010, p. (National Agriculture Imagery Program habitat through soil compaction, 1). Plugged and abandoned wells are no (NAIP) 2009, entire). It is likely that increased erosion, invasion of noxious longer in use and are usually most of the suitable land in Uintah weeds, and disturbance to pollinators recontoured and revegetated to match County, where irrigation water was and their habitat (Eckert et al. 1979, the surrounding landscape (Gordon available, was converted to agricultural entire; Lovich and Bainbridge 1999, p. 2010b, pers. comm.). Plugged and use by 1970 (Hilton 2010, p. 1). Major 316; Ouren et al. 2007, entire; BLM abandoned wells also do not receive changes in the amount of agricultural 2008a, pp. 4–94; Wilson et al. 2009, p. regular truck traffic like producing land in Uintah County are not expected 1). wells, so fugitive dust is less of an issue in the future (Hilton 2010, p. 2). The OHV and recreational trail use (Gordon 2010b, pers. comm.). Although historical conversion to occurs across the landscape where Occasionally, plugged and abandoned agricultural use may have negatively Astragalus hamiltonii grows. The OHV wells may be reopened, disturbing areas impacted A. hamiltonii, we have no use is largely limited to existing roads that were previously reclaimed. If all the evidence to indicate that this factor is a and trails on BLM lands, which account plugged and abandoned wells in A. threat to this species now or for the for approximately a third of A. hamiltonii habitat were reopened, this is foreseeable future. hamiltonii’s known range (Table 1) still a small number of wells throughout (BLM 2008b, p. 46). There are no OHV (2) Livestock Grazing the species’ range. restrictions on private or Tribal lands, Large portions of population areas 1, Livestock grazing may result in the but the species’ association with steep, 2, 3, 6, 7, and 8 (Table 1) are overlapped direct loss or damage to plants and their erosive hillsides likely minimizes OHV by oil and gas leases on state, Tribal, habitat through trampling, soil use in the species’ habitat. and BLM land. Two BLM oil and gas compaction, increased erosion, invasion Unauthorized off-road use occurs in leases in population area 2 overlap more of noxious weeds, and disturbance to Astragalus hamiltonii habitat in than 4,000 known Astragalus hamiltonii pollinators (Kauffman et al. 1983, p. population area 2 (Brunson 2010a, p. 3). individuals (UDOGM, 2010, p. 2). 684; Fleischner 1994, entire; Kearns et However, we observed plants growing However, no oil or gas is being al. 1998, p. 90; DiTomaso 2000, p. 257). directly next to these recreational trails produced under these leases (UDOGM All BLM lands where Astragalus (Brunson 2010a, p. 3). As previously 2010, p. 2). hamiltonii is documented are within described, A. hamiltonii grows along The lack of oil and gas development grazing allotments, including portions road cuts and other disturbed areas, in Astragalus hamiltonii habitat is most of population areas 1, 2, 3, 6, and 8 (see suggesting it can persist with some level likely because there is not enough of Table 1). In 2010, of all A. hamiltonii of disturbance. We do not believe that those products currently obtainable to counted, 5,417 individuals (93 percent) the observed unauthorized off-road use be economically feasible using current occur in existing grazing allotments. We is negatively impacting A. hamiltonii. extraction technology (Doyle 2010, pers. have no information on the extent of In summary, the species’ habitat comm.; Sparger 2010, pers. comm.) grazing on private or Tribal lands. preference for steep slopes, its ability to rendering dense energy developments We do not have any information grow in disturbed soils, and off-road unlikely in this area for the next 20 concerning how grazing may affect this restrictions on BLM lands minimize the years (BLM 2008c, p. 486). Although species. However, cattle tend to spend impacts of recreational use to Astragalus some oil and gas development may more time on gentle slopes (Van Buren hamiltonii. Thus, we do not believe that occur in A. hamiltonii habitat, we 1982 in Fleischner 1994, p. 637). recreational activities are a threat to A. would not expect it at densities that Astragalus hamiltonii grows on steep, hamiltonii now or for the foreseeable would significantly impact the species. erosive hillsides, and we believe this future. Furthermore, A. hamiltonii is adapted to habitat preference offers some at least some disturbance and may be (4) Oil and Gas Exploration and protection from livestock grazing and afforded additional protection by its trampling. In addition, the grazing Development tendency to grow on steep slopes that allotments that overlap A. hamiltonii The effects of oil and gas exploration may be unsuitable for energy sites on BLM land are fall and winter and development include increased development. Therefore, oil and gas allotments (BLM 2008a, Appendix J); vehicle traffic and removal of soil and development is unlikely to occur in the thus, A. hamiltonii is not actively vegetation when wells, roads, and foreseeable future at densities that growing or palatable when livestock are associated infrastructure are built (BLM would significantly impact the species. grazing these areas. 2008c, pp. 448–449). These disturbances In summary, there is little oil and gas In summary, the species occurs in can affect rare plant species through development within Astragalus areas that are subject to livestock habitat destruction, habitat hamiltonii habitat. Based on current grazing. However, the fall-winter season fragmentation, soil disturbance, spread technologies and low economic of grazing greatly reduces the chance of invasive weeds, and production of feasibility, we do not anticipate that the plants are eaten by livestock. fugitive dust (particulate matter substantial development in the Astragalus hamiltonii typically grows suspended in the air by wind and foreseeable future that would on steep slopes and can occur on human activities) (BLM 2008c, pp. 448– meaningfully impact the species. disturbed soils, which minimizes 449). Therefore, we do not believe that oil and

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 10171

gas exploration and development is a In summary, we know that invasive Summary of Factor A threat to A. hamiltonii now or in the species can impact plant communities Based on the best available foreseeable future. by increasing fire frequencies, information, we have concluded that outcompeting native species, and (5) Nonnative Invasive Species conversion to agricultural use, livestock altering pollinator behaviors. These grazing, recreational activities, The spread of nonnative invasive factors could be exacerbated by climate nonnative invasive species, oil and gas species is considered the second largest change patterns. However, invasive exploration and development, or tar threat to imperiled plants in the United species do not occur in high densities in sands extraction do not threaten States (Wilcove et al. 1998, p. 608). Astragalus hamiltonii habitat. Based on Astragalus hamiltonii now or in the Invasive plants—specifically exotic this fact and the limited amount of foreseeable future. Conversion to annuals—negatively affect native surface-disturbing activities within the agricultural use probably resulted in vegetation, including rare plants. One of species’ habitat, we do not anticipate historical loss of some A. hamiltonii the most substantial effects is the that nonnative invasive species habitat, but we do not anticipate change in vegetation fuel properties densities will increase significantly, ongoing conversions to agricultural use that, in turn, alter fire frequency, even with climate change. Therefore, we in the future. In addition, most intensity, extent, type, and seasonality do not believe nonnative invasive agricultural use occurs in low-lying (Menakis et al. 2003, pp. 282–283; species, or associated fires, are a threat areas outside of the species’ Brooks et al. 2004, p. 677; McKenzie et to A. hamiltonii now or for the distribution. A. hamiltonii is protected al. 2004, p. 898). Shortened fire return foreseeable future. from livestock grazing due to its habitat intervals make it difficult for native (6) Tar Sands Extraction preference for steep hillsides and the plants to reestablish or compete with fall-winter grazing season of the invasive plants (D’Antonio and Vitousek The Duchesne River Formation, associated allotments. Recreational use 1992, p. 73). where most known Astragalus is not a threat to A. hamiltonii because Invasive plants can exclude native hamiltonii individuals occur, would be BLM restricts off-trail use. Where off- plants and alter pollinator behaviors one of the formations targeted by tar trail use occurs on private, State, and (D’Antonio and Vitousek 1992, pp. 74– sands extraction (BLM 2008d, p. 9). Tar Tribal lands, the adaptation of A. 75; DiTomaso 2000, p. 257; Mooney and sands extraction disturbs the soil hamiltonii to steep slopes and disturbed Cleland 2001, p. 5449; Levine et al. surface and removes existing vegetation soils allows it to persist with moderate 2003, p. 776; Traveset and Richardson (BLM 2008d, p. 27). Impacts are similar habitat disturbance. A. hamiltonii soils 2006, pp. 211–213). For example, to those described above in the Oil and do not appear to support invasive plant outcompetes native Gas Exploration and Development species at densities needed to sustain species for soil nutrients and water section. Tar sands mining could result wildfires. We also do not anticipate (Melgoza et al. 1990, pp. 9–10; Aguirre in the loss of A. hamiltonii individuals increased surface disturbances that and Johnson 1991, pp. 352–353). and their habitats. could encourage the establishment of Bromus tectorum (cheatgrass) is a Tar sands leases are proposed for sale invasive species in A. hamiltonii particularly problematic nonnative on BLM and State Lands along Asphalt habitat. Although energy development invasive annual grass in the Ridge southwest of Vernal, Utah leases overlap A. hamiltonii habitat, it is Intermountain West. If already present (UDOGM 2010, p. 3). These lease unlikely that current technologies and in the vegetative community, B. parcels do not overlap known economic conditions will support oil tectorum increases in abundance after a Astragalus hamiltonii sites, but they and gas or tar sands development in this wildfire, increasing the chance for more overlap with unsurveyed potential area in the foreseeable future. Thus, the frequent fires (D’Antonio and Vitousek habitat within portions of population present or threatened destruction, 1992, pp. 74–75). In addition, B. area 1. modification, or curtailment of the tectorum invades areas in response to Tar sands leases are still in the habitat or range is not a threat to A. surface disturbances (Hobbs 1989, pp. proposal phase and there are currently hamiltonii now or in the foreseeable 389, 393, 395, 398; Rejmanek 1989, pp. no commercial tar sands operations on future. 381–383; Hobbs and Huenneke 1992, public lands in Utah (BLM 2008d, p. 4). pp. 324–325, 329, 330; Evans et al. High production costs and Factor B. Overutilization for 2001, p. 1308). B. tectorum is likely to environmental issues are barriers to tar Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or increase due to climate change (see sands development in the United States Educational Purposes Factor E) because invasive annuals (Bartis et al. 2005, pp. 15, 53; Engemann Astragalus hamiltonii is not a plant of increase biomass and seed production at and Owyang 2010, entire). Tar sands horticultural interest. We are not aware elevated levels of carbon dioxide extraction may be feasible if the cost of of any instances where A. hamiltonii (Mayeux et al. 1994, p. 98; Smith et al. crude oil becomes high enough in the was collected from the wild other than 2000, pp. 80–81; Ziska et al. 2005, p. future, but these high price projections as voucher specimens to document 1328). are not expected to be realized until at occurrences (UNHP 2010a, entire). Bromus tectorum occurs in Astragalus least 2030 (Engemann and Owyang Therefore, we do not consider hamiltonii habitat (Brunson 2010a, p. 1). 2010, p. 2), and even then the overutilization a threat to the species However, B. tectorum and other environmental issues will need to be now or in the foreseeable future. invasive species are uncommon in many resolved. of the erosive red soils that A. In summary, tar sands leases do not Factor C. Disease or Predation hamiltonii prefers (Brunson 2010a, p. 1; overlap a majority of Astragalus We do not have any information Goodrich 2010c, p. 59). We do not hamiltonii habitat. Large-scale, indicating that disease impacts anticipate a high degree of surface commercially viable development is not Astragalus hamiltonii. We also do not disturbances in A. hamiltonii habitats in anticipated in the foreseeable future. have information on the effects of the foreseeable future from other factors, Therefore, tar sands development is not herbivory (eating) by livestock (see the such as livestock grazing or oil and gas considered a threat to A. hamiltonii now Livestock Grazing section above), development (Factor A). or in the foreseeable future. wildlife, or insects. However, we do not

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 10172 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

believe herbivory from livestock is a 1993, entire; Wilcock and Neiland 2002, species now or for the foreseeable concern due to the steepness of the p. 275). Lower genetic diversity may, in future. terrain on which the plant is located turn, lead to even smaller populations (2) Climate Change and Drought and the time of year grazing occurs in by decreasing the species’ ability to A. hamiltonii habitat (see Factor A, adapt, thereby increasing the probability Climate change is likely to affect the Livestock Grazing). Based on the best of population extinction (Barrett and long-term survival and distribution of available information, we do not believe Kohn 1991, pp. 4, 28; Newman and native species, such as Astragalus A. hamiltonii is threatened by disease or Pilson 1997, p. 360). hamiltonii, through changes in predation now or for the foreseeable We do not believe small population temperature and precipitation. Hot future. size is a concern for Astragalus extremes, heat waves, and heavy hamiltonii. A. hamiltonii grows robustly precipitation will increase in frequency, Factor D. The Inadequacy of Existing and in high densities with many flowers with the Southwest experiencing the Regulatory Mechanisms and fruits (Goodrich 2010b, entire; greatest temperature increase in the There are no laws protecting plants on Goodrich 2010c, p. 26). Although the continental United States (Karl et al. private, State, or Tribal lands in Utah. species exists in a relatively small area 2009, pp. 28, 129). Approximately 20 to A third of Astragalus hamiltonii (known distribution is 200 square miles 30 percent of plant and animal species individuals are found on BLM land. A. (mi2) (518 square kilometers (km2)), it are at increased risk of extinction if hamiltonii is listed as a bureau sensitive occurs across its range in a scattered— increases in global average temperature plant for the BLM. Limited policy-level and potentially continuous— exceed 2.7 to 4.5 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) protection by the BLM is afforded distribution. There are also large areas (1.5 to 2.5 degrees Celsius (°C)) through the Special Status Species of suitable habitat that remain (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Management Policy Manual # 6840 unsurveyed, so the species may be more Change (IPCC) 2007, p. 48). In the which forms the basis for special status widely distributed. southwestern United States, average species management on BLM lands Astragalus hamiltonii’s scattered temperatures increased approximately (BLM 2008e, entire). distribution may contribute to its overall 1.5 °F (0.8 °C) compared to a 1960 to Despite the lack of regulatory viability and potential resilience 1979 baseline (Karl et al. 2009, p. 129). mechanisms to protect Astragalus (Goodrich 2010b, p. 89). For example, By the end of this century, temperatures hamiltonii, we found that there are no small-scale stochastic events, such as are expected to warm a total of 4 to 10 threats to the species (Factors A, B, C, the erosion of a hillside during a flood °F (2 to 5 °C) in the Southwest (Karl et and E) that require regulatory event, would probably destroy only a al. 2009, p. 129). mechanisms to protect the species. small portion of the known individuals Annual mean precipitation levels are Therefore, we do not consider the of A. hamiltonii. It is possible that a expected to decrease in western North inadequacy of regulatory mechanisms a landscape-level event, such as a America and especially the threat to this species now or for the wildfire, could destroy most known A. southwestern States by mid century foreseeable future. hamiltonii individuals, but the (IPCC 2007, p. 8; Seager et al. 2007, p. sparseness of the vegetation and the lack 1181). Throughout Astragalus Factor E. Other Natural or Manmade of fine fuels in A. hamiltonii habitat hamiltonii’s range, precipitation is Factors Affecting Its Continued makes this event unlikely (Wright and predicted to increase 10 to 15 percent in Existence Bailey 1982, p. 1; Olmstead 2010, pers. the winter, decrease 5 to 15 percent in Natural and manmade factors comm.). The lack of other surface- spring and summer, and remain affecting Astragalus hamiltonii include: disturbing threats (see Factor A) also unchanged in the fall under the highest (1) Small population size and (2) leads us to believe that the species’ emissions scenario (Karl et al. 2009, p. climate change and drought. current distribution and population size 29). The levels of aridity of recent will remain intact. drought conditions and perhaps those of (1) Small Population Size In the absence of information the 1950s drought years will become the We lack information on the identifying threats to the species and new climatology for the southwestern population genetics of Astragalus linking those threats to the rarity of the United States (Seager et al. 2007, p. hamiltonii, and as a probable outcrosser, species, we do not consider rarity alone 1181). Much of the Southwest remains this species could potentially be subject to be a threat. A species that has always in a 10-year drought, ‘‘the most severe to the negative effects of small been rare, yet continues to survive, western drought of the last 110 years’’ population size. As previously could be well equipped to continue to (Karl et al. 2009, p. 130). Although described (see Life History, above), exist into the future. This may be droughts occur more frequently in areas plants that are obligate outcrossers particularly true for Astragalus with minimal precipitation, even a cannot fertilize themselves and rely on hamiltonii, which is adapted to slight reduction from normal other individual plants of differing recolonize disturbed sites. Many precipitation may lead to severe genetic make-up to reproduce (Stebbins, naturally rare species have persisted for reductions in plant production. 1970, p. 310). Therefore, the fewer long periods within small geographic Therefore, the smallest change in plants that are located at a site (i.e., areas, and many naturally rare species environmental factors, especially small population size), the less chance exhibit traits that allow them to persist, precipitation, plays a decisive role in exists for sufficient cross-fertilization. despite their small population sizes. plant survival in arid regions (Herbel et Small populations and species with Consequently, the fact that a species is al. 1972, p. 1084). limited distributions are vulnerable to rare does not necessarily indicate that it Atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide relatively minor environmental may be in danger of extinction in the are expected to double before the end of disturbances (Given 1994, pp. 66–67). foreseeable future. the 21st century, which may increase Small populations also are at an Based on Astragalus hamiltonii’s the dominance of invasive grasses increased risk of extinction due to the apparently robust reproductive effort, leading to increased fire frequency and potential for inbreeding depression, loss scattered distribution, and lack of other severity across western North America of genetic diversity, and lower sexual threats, we believe that small (Brooks and Pyke 2002, p. 3; IPCC 2002, reproduction rates (Ellstrand and Elam population size is not a threat to this p. 32; Walther et al. 2002, p. 391).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 10173

Elevated levels of carbon dioxide lead to populations are likely an evolutionary information pertaining to the five increased invasive annual plant adaptation of this species. Climate factors, we find that the factors analyzed biomass, invasive seed production, and change and resulting drought may affect above are not of sufficient imminence, pest outbreaks (Smith et al. 2000, pp. A. hamiltonii’s growth and reproductive intensity, or magnitude to indicate that 80–81; IPCC 2002, pp. 18, 32; Ziska et success. However, A. hamiltonii is Astragalus hamiltonii is in danger of al. 2005, p. 1328) and will put adapted to a landscape where drought extinction (endangered), or likely to additional stressors on rare plants naturally occurs and is able to rapidly become endangered within the already suffering from the effects of colonize after disturbance. In addition, foreseeable future (threatened), elevated temperatures and drought. as described in Factor A, there are no throughout its range. Therefore, we find No population trend data are available threats to the species that would result that listing A. hamiltonii as a threatened for Astragalus hamiltonii, but drought in significant loss or fragmentation of or endangered species throughout its conditions led to a noticeable decline in available habitat, and thus there are no range is not warranted. survival, vigor, and reproductive output cumulative effects to exacerbate the Significant Portion of the Range of other rare plants in the Southwest threat of climate change. We currently during the drought years of 2001 lack sufficient information that other Having determined that Astragalus through 2004 (Anderton 2002, p. 1; Van natural or manmade factors rise to the hamiltonii does not meet the definition Buren and Harper 2002, p. 3; Van Buren level of a threat to A. hamiltonii now or of a threatened or endangered species, and Harper 2004, entire; Hughes 2005, for the foreseeable future. we must next consider whether there entire; Clark and Clark 2007, p. 6; Roth are any significant portions of the range 2008a, entire; Roth 2008b, pp. 3–4). Finding where A. hamiltonii is in danger of As discussed in the Life History As required by the ESA, we extinction or is likely to become section above, Astragalus hamiltonii conducted a review of the status of the endangered in the foreseeable future. seedling establishment is probably species and considered the five factors In determining whether a species is correlated with rainfall (Heil and in assessing whether Astragalus threatened or endangered in a Melton 1995a, p. 14); therefore, reduced hamiltonii is endangered or threatened significant portion of its range, we first precipitation may reduce seedling throughout all or a significant portion of identify any portions of the range of the establishment. Additionally, the its range. We examined the best species that warrant further relatively localized distribution of A. scientific and commercial information consideration. The range of a species hamiltonii may make this species more available regarding the past, present, can theoretically be divided into susceptible to landscape-level stochastic and future threats faced by A. portions an infinite number of ways. extinction events, such as regional hamiltonii. We reviewed the petition, However, there is no purpose to drought. Despite these potential information available in our files, and analyzing portions of the range that are vulnerabilities, A. hamiltonii appears other available published and not reasonably likely to be significant well-adapted to a dry climate and can unpublished information, and we and threatened or endangered. To quickly colonize after disturbance. consulted with recognized A. hamiltonii identify only those portions that warrant Plants growing in high-stress landscapes experts and other Federal, State, and further consideration, we determine are adapted to stress, and drought- Tribal agencies. whether there is substantial information adapted species may experience lower The primary factor potentially indicating that: (1) The portions may be mortality during severe droughts (Gitlin impacting Astragalus hamiltonii is significant, and (2) the species may be et al. 2006, pp. 1477, 1484). future energy development (oil, gas, and in danger of extinction there or likely to In summary, climate change is tar sands). However, energy become so within the foreseeable future. affecting and will affect temperature and development is not likely to occur on a In practice, a key part of this analysis is precipitation events in the future. We broad scale throughout this species’ whether the threats are geographically expect that Astragalus hamiltonii, like range in the foreseeable future. concentrated in some way. If the threats other narrow endemics, may be Furthermore, the best available to the species are essentially uniform negatively affected by climate change information shows that A. hamiltonii throughout its range, no portion is likely related drought. However, we believe can tolerate some habitat disturbances. to warrant further consideration. that A. hamiltonii’s adaptation to Other factors affecting A. hamiltonii— Moreover, if any concentration of growing in high-stress environments including land conversion to threats applies only to portions of the renders this species less susceptible to agricultural use, grazing, recreation, species’ range that are not significant, negative effects from climate change. nonnative invasive species, and small such portions will not warrant further Although we believe climate change population size—are either limited in consideration. will impact plants in the future, the scope, or we do not have evidence that If we identify portions that warrant available information is too speculative supports these factors adversely further consideration, we then to determine the likelihood of this impacting the species as a whole. We determine whether the species is potential threat to A. hamiltonii. have no evidence that overutilization, threatened or endangered in these Therefore, based on the best scientific disease, and predation are affecting this portions of its range. Depending on the and commercial information available, species. Although climate change will biology of the species, its range, and the we conclude that climate change is not likely impact plants in the future, we do threats it faces, the Service may address a threat to A. hamiltonii now or for the not have enough information to either the significance question or the foreseeable future. determine that climate change will elicit status question first. Thus, if the Service a species-level response from A. considers significance first and Summary of Factor E hamiltonii. Finally, because none of determines that a portion of the range is We assessed the potential risks of these factors rises to the level of a threat, not significant, the Service need not small population size, climate change, the inadequacy of regulatory determine whether the species is and drought to Astragalus hamiltonii. mechanisms does not negatively affect threatened or endangered there. There is no evidence that the species’ A. hamiltonii. Likewise, if the Service considers status small population size is a threat to A. Based on our review of the best first and determines that the species is hamiltonii. Rather, small, scattered available scientific and commercial not threatened or endangered in a

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 10174 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

portion of its range, the Service need not hamiltonii and encourage its Distribution and Population Status determine if that portion is significant. conservation. If an emergency situation However, if the Service determines that develops for A. hamiltonii, or any other Penstemon flowersii is found only in both a portion of the range of a species species, we will act to provide the Uinta Basin near Roosevelt, Utah. Its is significant and the species is immediate protection. distribution straddles the Duchesne- threatened or endangered there, the Uintah County line (Figure 2). The Species Information—Penstemon Service will specify that portion of the species occurs across an area flowersii range as threatened or endangered approximately 20 mi (32 km) by 4 mi under section 4(c)(1) of the ESA. Taxonomy and Species Description (6.4 km) from Bridgeview to Randlett, We have no evidence that any Utah, in seven element occurrences particular population or portion of the Penstemon flowersii is an herbaceous (UNHP 2010b, entire) (see Distribution range of Astragalus hamiltonii is critical plant in the figwort family and Population Status section for to the species’ survival. Although (Scrophulariaceae) (Welsh et al. 2003, Astragalus hamiltonii above for a population area 2 appears to have a p. 624). This perennial plant can grow complete definition of element majority of the known Astragalus up to 14 in (36 cm) tall, with many occurrence). These seven element hamiltonii individuals, this area has branches that bloom dusty pink in May occurrences are not numbered received a majority of the search effort. and June (Heil and Melton 1995b, pp. 6– consecutively because the UNHP A. hamiltonii may actually occur 7). It has dry, multi-part fruits less than combined previously disjunct element continuously across its known range, 0.4 in (1 cm) long that split open when occurrences based on available but range-wide surveys have not been mature to release seeds (Neese and information. As with A. hamiltonii, the done. The population areas delineated Welsh 1983, p. 429). P. flowersii has a element occurrences are recorded to the in this document were derived from poorly developed or absent basal rosette nearest quarter-quarter of the township, existing data and information; however, (a dense radiating cluster of leaves at the range, and section. This method of information on the species’ distribution base of the plant) and smooth, thick recording species locations gives the and numbers may change with more leaves (Heil and Melton 1995b, pp. 6– impression that element occurrences survey effort. Additionally, potential 7). either overlap or join to form a threats to the species are essentially Penstemon flowersii was first continuous population. However, uniform throughout its range. Therefore, described in 1983 by Neese and Welsh, comprehensive surveys have not been we do not find that A. hamiltonii is in and is an accepted taxonomic entity done for all suitable habitats within an danger of extinction now, nor is it likely (Welsh et al. 2003, p. 624). P. flowersii element occurrence, so we do not know to become endangered within the resembles other species in the if the population is continuous foreseeable future throughout all or a and is closest vegetatively to P. carnosus throughout the species’ range. significant portion of its range. (Heil and Melton 1995b, p. 8), but P. Penstemon flowersii was recently Therefore, listing A. hamiltonii as flowersii is distinguished by its smaller identified north of element occurrence 9 threatened or endangered under the stature and dusty pink flowers (Neese (Spencer 2010a, entire). We refer to this ESA is not warranted at this time. and Welsh 1983, pp. 429–431). P. location as the ‘‘new site’’ because it is We request that you submit any new flowersii is closely related to P. not yet assigned to an element information concerning the status of, or immanifestus, a species that grows occurrence. At this time, we are unsure threats to, Astragalus hamiltonii to our elsewhere in and Utah but has as to whether or not this new site will Utah Ecological Services Field Office a more prominently bearded staminode be designated as a new element (see ADDRESSES section) whenever such (sterile male reproductive part found in occurrence or if it will be included in information becomes available. New the flower) (Heil and Melton 1995b, p. an existing element occurrence. information will help us monitor A. 8). BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 10175

BILLING CODE 4310–55–C has changed over time because occurrence 19, which is on property Penstemon flowersii’s distribution is comprehensive surveys were not managed by the Utah Reclamation patchy, although some sites can have conducted for this species. Mitigation and Conservation moderately dense distribution with up Commission for the U.S. Bureau of to 10 plants in 1 yd2 (1 m2) (Heil and Penstemon flowersii is found almost Reclamation (BOR) (UNHP 2010b, Melton 1995b, pp. 12–14). We do not completely on private and Tribal lands know if the distribution of P. flowersii (Table 2), with the exception of element entire).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 ER23FE11.001 10176 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

TABLE 2—ESTIMATED NUMBER OF PENSTEMON FLOWERSII PLANTS

Percent land ownership Year of Element Number of penstemon flowersii plants last occurrence Private Tribal BOR survey

1 ...... 75 25 0 2,000–13,000...... 2001 5 ...... 94 6 0 101–1,000...... 1995 6 ...... 78 22 0 No count...... 1982 8 ...... 71 29 0 61–71...... 2004 9 ...... 91 9 0 51–100...... 2001 16 ...... 100 0 0 4...... 2001 19 ...... 44 21 35 552...... 2001 New site ...... 100 0 0 29 ...... 2010 Total ...... 79 19 2 2,798–14,756.

The total number of Penstemon include species of the order agricultural use by 1970 (NAIP 2009, p. flowersii individuals in Table 2 was Hymenoptera: Anthophora affabilis, A. 2; Hilton 2010, p.1). Major changes in derived from actual counts or estimates bomboides, and a species in the genus the amount of agricultural land in these provided for each element occurrence. Osmia (Tepedino 2007, pers. comm. in counties are not expected in the future However, these counts do not include Frates 2010, p. 32). (Hilton 2010, p. 2). Therefore, we would all known locations (e.g., private lands not expect future agricultural or BOR lands) for the species. The total Summary of Information Pertaining to conversion in these areas at a level that Penstemon number of P. flowersii individuals was the Five Factors— would threaten the species as a whole. flowersii previously estimated from 15,000 to The upper benches on private land 20,000 on private lands alone, not In making our 12-month finding on where Penstemon flowersii now grows including Tribal land (Heil and Melton the petition, we considered and appear as nonirrigated terrain in digital 1995b, p. 13; Franklin 2005, p. 131). We evaluated the best available scientific imagery (NAIP 2009, p. 2), and thus do not know how this estimate was and commercial information pertaining these areas are not likely used for derived. to Penstemon flowersii in relation to the agriculture. It is possible that most of We cannot make a more accurate five factors provided in section 4(a)(1) of these nonirrigated lands are used for estimate for the total number of the ESA (see the full description of rangeland grazing. Heavy grazing was Penstemon flowersii because many sites these five factors in the Summary of noted at one site (UNHP 2010b, entire), on private and Tribal lands are Information Pertaining to the Five and, as previously described, livestock inaccessible, and P. flowersii population Factors section for Astragalus can graze and trample plants (BLM numbers fluctuate widely from year to hamiltonii above). 2008c, p. 485). However, anecdotal year (Heil and Melton 1995b, p. 16; observations indicate that this plant is Factor A. The Present or Threatened Prevedel 2001 pers. comm. in Franklin not a preferred browse species by Destruction, Modification, or 2005, p. 131). Therefore, we do not have grazing livestock (Holmgren 2009 pers. Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range accurate population counts or trend comm. in Frates 2010, p. 35), and the information for this species. The following factors may affect the species can tolerate some level of soil habitat or range of Penstemon flowersii: disturbances (see Habitat). P. flowersii Habitat (1) Conversion to agricultural use/ was noted as thriving in pastures Penstemon flowersii is a narrow livestock grazing, (2) recreational (Holmgren 2009 pers. comm. in Frates endemic that grows in Atriplex activities, (3) oil and gas exploration 2010, p. 35), so it appears that livestock confertifolia (shadscale) communities and development, (4) nonnative grazing does not negatively impact the on semibarren, gravelly clay slopes of invasive species, and (5) rural species. In summary, we have no the Uinta Formation (Heil and Melton residential development. information suggesting that conversion 1995b, p. 9) at elevations ranging from of habitat to agricultural use or livestock (1) Conversion to Agricultural Use/ 4,890 to 5,410 ft (1,490 to 1,650 m) grazing are threats to P. flowersii now or (NatureServe 2009b, p. 2). It is found on Livestock Grazing for the foreseeable future. both disturbed and undisturbed sites For Penstemon flowersii, we (2) Recreational Activities (Heil and Melton 1995b, p. 10). combined two factors, conversion to agricultural use and livestock grazing, Recreational activities (e.g., mountain Life History into one discussion because both of bikes and motorized bikes) and OHV We know little of Penstemon these factors occur on private lands. use can impact Penstemon flowersii and flowersii’s life history. Plant growth, Historically, conversion of natural lands its habitat. The OHV use was seedling establishment, and juvenile to agricultural use likely impacted documented within three element mortality for this species are probably Penstemon flowersii populations (Heil occurrences of P. flowersii to varying correlated with rainfall (Heil and and Melton 1995b, pp. 8, 16), resulting degrees (UNHP 2010b, entire). Two of Melton 1995b, p. 14). Reproduction and in lower population numbers and these sites were listed in marginal recruitment were noted at multiple sites habitat fragmentation. We believe the condition, although plant vigor and across all element occurrences (UNHP species was historically distributed in reproduction at these sites was good 2010b, entire; Brunson 2010b, p. 1). One the low-lying areas because those areas (UNHP 2010b, entire). Disturbance site had an estimated age structure of 4 that were not converted to agricultural occurred at a third site in 1995, and a percent seedlings and 96 percent mature use still contain P. flowersii plants population decline for this site was adults, indicating that recruitment is (Franklin 2005, p. 131). attributed to OHV activity (Heil and occurring (UNHP 2010b, entire). Most of the suitable land in Duchesne Melton 1995b, p. 17). However, vigorous Pollinators observed visiting P. flowersii and Uintah Counties was converted to plants were observed at this site with

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 10177

ample flower production (UNHP 2010b, P. flowersii. Thus, oil and gas related business and industrial entire; Brunson 2010b, p. 1). The OHV exploration and development is not a development. use was not documented for the five threat to P. flowersii now or in the Duchesne and Uintah Counties, where remaining element occurrences or in the foreseeable future. Penstemon flowersii is found, had the new P. flowersii site, but this does not highest (3.6 percent) and fourth highest (4) Nonnative Invasive Species necessarily mean OHV use does not (1.8 percent) population growth rates in occur there. Additionally, no other We have limited information Utah from 2008 to 2009, respectively recreational uses were documented at P. regarding the distribution of nonnative (Utah Population Estimates Committee flowersii sites. invasive species in Penstemon flowersii 2009, p. 2). The average population In summary, OHV use may be habitat. We know that invasive species, increase across the state of Utah was 1.5 negatively affecting individual plants at particularly Bromus tectorum, occur percent over the same timeframe (Utah some sites, but this impact is localized within P. flowersii habitat (Frates 2010, Population Estimates Committee 2009, and not rangewide. We identified OHV pp. 29–30). However, we do not have p. 4). Roosevelt is the largest use in the species’ habitat, but the any information indicating that B. municipality that occurs near known P. plants are vigorous and retaining their tectorum or other nonnative invasive flowersii habitat, and two smaller ability to reproduce. Therefore, we species impact P. flowersii. municipalities, Ballard and Myton, are believe that recreational activities are Soil disturbances can increase nearby. The U.S. Census Bureau not threats to Penstemon flowersii now invasive species (see Astragalus estimates that the population of or for the foreseeable future. hamiltonii, Factor A, Nonnative Roosevelt increased approximately Invasive Species) (Evans et al. 2001, p. 12 percent from 2000 to 2009, with (3) Oil and Gas Exploration and 1308). As noted above, B. tectorum, a Ballard and Myton increasing 34 and 17 Development major invasive plant species in the percent, respectively (U.S. Census Oil and gas exploration and West, invades areas in response to Bureau 2010a, entire). Human development can impact Penstemon surface disturbances (Hobbs 1989, pp. population growth can destroy and flowersii plants and their habitat (BLM 389, 393, 395, 398; Rejmanek 1989, pp. fragment habitat as municipalities grow 2008c, pp. 448–449). Within all mapped 381–383; Hobbs and Huenneke 1992, and incorporate more of what was once element occurrences of P. flowersii, pp. 324–325, 329, 330; Evans et al. natural land. there are four plugged and abandoned 2001, p. 1308). Therefore, we assessed Over the next 50 years, Duchesne and wells. All existing wells were plugged the potential for soil disturbances to Uintah Counties are projected to grow at prior to 1999. As mentioned previously, increase nonnative invasive species in a slower rate of 1.1 percent (Utah plugged and abandoned wells involve the foreseeable future in Penstemon Governor’s Office of Planning and surface disturbance for roads and well flowersii habitat. Budget (Utah GOPB) 2008, entire). At pads when they are constructed and Agricultural use, livestock grazing, this growth rate, Daggett, Duchesne, and during operation, but when they are and oil and gas exploration and Uintah Counties (which are grouped abandoned they are reclaimed and do development are the predominant together by the Utah Population not receive regular traffic or disturbance activities that disturb soils across the Estimates Committee) are expected to (see Astragalus hamiltonii, Factor A, Oil range of Penstemon flowersii. We increase from a current total population and Gas Exploration and Development). determined that these activities are not of 49,707 to 80,319 by 2060 (Utah GOPB There are two new proposed well extensive enough to threaten P. flowersii 2008, entire). The City of Roosevelt locations within the species’ mapped now or in the foreseeable future (see projects a population of 6,600 by 2030, element occurrences—one well location Agricultural Use/Livestock Grazing and but they anticipate the population could that has an approved permit to drill and Oil and Gas Exploration and be higher (City of Roosevelt 2010, p. 7). one well location that is not yet Development). Thus, we also do not Much of the urban and rural approved. Approved permits allow for expect that these activities will increase development in the Uinta Basin is well drilling, which will have surface disturbance to the point where influenced by the boom and bust cycles associated negative impacts to invasive species will become of energy development, and another vegetation, and potentially P. flowersii, established and impact P. flowersii to a boom cycle could increase population during construction and drilling significant degree. At this time, we have growth over predictions. operations. These impacts have no information suggesting that Although municipalities are growing historically been localized and small in nonnative invasive species are a threat and are projected to increase near scale. We expect these impacts to to P. flowersii now or for the foreseeable Penstemon flowersii habitat, they are continue to be minimal, considering future. not likely to impact a substantial that oil and gas development has amount of the known habitat of this occurred only minimally in P. flowersii (5) Rural Residential Development species. The southern edge of habitat. Conversion of land for rural Roosevelt’s municipal boundary is The lack of oil and gas development residential development can result in approximately 0.2 mi (0.3 km) north of in Penstemon flowersii habitat is most the permanent loss and fragmentation of the northern boundary of element likely because there is not enough habitat for many species, including occurrence 1 (see Figure 2). The city product to be economically feasible Penstemon flowersii. Impacts include, limits of Ballard and Myton are with current technology (Doyle 2010, but are not limited to, crushed immediately adjacent to element pers. comm.; Sparger 2010, pers. comm.) vegetation, compacted soils, introduced occurrences 1 and 9, with Ballard city rendering dense energy developments exotic plant species, reduced available limits overlapping element occurrence unlikely in this area (BLM 2008c, p. habitat, and increased habitat 6. None of these municipalities overlap 486). Although oil and gas development fragmentation (Hansen et al. 2005, with known sites of P. flowersii. could potentially expand throughout P. entire). For the purpose of this analysis, Roosevelt will likely expand into an flowersii habitat, substantial we define rural residential development area already defined as an annexation development is not likely for the next 20 as the expansion of rural towns and area (City of Roosevelt 2010, p. 42), and years (BLM 2008c, p. 486), nor is it surrounding rural areas through low- this area is approximately 2 mi (3.2 km) likely to occur across the entire range of density housing construction and north of element occurrence 9 and the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 10178 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

new site of P. flowersii on private land. geographically near P. flowersii, is used make P. flowersii more vulnerable to the Roosevelt and Ballard city limits are horticulturally (Frates 2010, p. 75). impacts of small population size, constrained by geography and Tribal However, P. flowersii is more obscure, limiting its ability to survive periods of boundaries, and neither are likely to and we have no evidence that this low growth or recruitment. expand substantially southward toward species is sought out for horticultural The species’ biology, distribution, and known P. flowersii sites (Eschler 2010, purposes (Frates 2010, p. 75). Therefore, even our information gaps indicate that pers. comm.; Hyde 2010, pers. comm.). we do not consider overutilization a small population sizes may not In summary, rural residential threat to P. flowersii now or in the significantly impact Penstemon development is occurring now and is foreseeable future. flowersii. For example, P. flowersii likely to increase in the future, but most Factor C. Disease or Predation grows vigorously and in moderate of this development would occur densities with evidence of good outside of Penstemon flowersii known Disease and herbivory by insects, reproduction and recruitment (UNHP sites. Therefore, we do not believe rural wildlife, or livestock was documented 2010b, entire; Brunson 2010b, p. 1). residential development is a significant for Penstemon flowersii on only one Although we still consider P. flowersii a threat to the species now or in the occasion: Caterpillars were feeding on P. narrow endemic, it occurs across a foreseeable future. flowersii plants near Midview Reservoir relatively large range. In addition, there (Spencer 2010b, pers. comm.). We do Summary of Factor A are relatively large amounts of not know how widespread this unsurveyed potential habitat between Based on the best available herbivory was or if it had detrimental known sites that could result in an information, we do not believe that effects on P. flowersii; caterpillars expanded species distribution and conversion to agricultural use/livestock naturally feed on many plant species. range. grazing, recreational activities, The UNHP data did not note disease or Finally, we have not identified other nonnative invasive species, oil and gas herbivory for the species (UNHP 2010b, exploration and development, or rural surface-disturbing threats to this species entire). With no data indicating that would cumulatively increase the residential development threaten otherwise, we do not consider disease or Penstemon flowersii now or in the risk of small population size. As predation to be a threat to P. flowersii previously discussed under Factor E for foreseeable future. Conversion to now or in the foreseeable future. agricultural use most likely had an Astragalus hamiltonii (above), with no appreciable negative impact on P. Factor D. The Inadequacy of Existing threats linked to a species’ rarity, we do flowersii historically, but we have no Regulatory Mechanisms not consider rarity alone to be a threat. evidence that conversion to agricultural There are no Federal or State laws A species that has always been rare, yet use continues today at a level that that protect Penstemon flowersii. P. continues to survive, could be well threatens the species. Likewise, flowersii is found mostly on non- equipped to continue to exist into the livestock grazing is not widely noted Federal lands, where no known future. Many naturally rare species have across P. flowersii sites, and where it regulatory mechanisms exist. However, persisted for long periods within small occurs it does not appear to negatively we found that there are no threats to the geographic areas, and many naturally impact individuals. The OHV use, the species that warrant additional rare species exhibit traits that allow only documented recreational activity regulatory mechanisms (see Factors A, them to persist despite their small in P. flowersii’s habitat, is localized, and B, C, and E). Therefore, we do not population sizes. Consequently, the fact we do not have evidence that P. consider the inadequacy of existing that a species is rare does not flowersii is considerably compromised regulatory mechanisms as a threat to necessarily indicate that it may be in or threatened by OHV use. We do not this species now or in the foreseeable danger of extinction in the foreseeable have information to support that future. future. Thus, we believe that small nonnative invasive species are currently population size is not a threat to P. threatening P. flowersii or will be likely Factor E. Other Natural or Manmade flowersii. Factors Affecting Its Continued to do so in the foreseeable future. It is (2) Climate Change and Drought unlikely that current technologies and Existence economic conditions will support Natural and manmade threats to Potential impacts of climate change substantial oil and gas development Penstemon flowersii’s survival include: and drought to the geographic area are across P. flowersii habitat in the (1) Small population size and (2) characterized in the Climate Change and foreseeable future. Finally, rural climate change and drought. Drought section under Factor E for residential development is unlikely to Astragalus hamiltonii (above). (1) Small Population Size expand substantially into P. flowersii Penstemon flowersii occurs within the habitat. We find that the present or Penstemon flowersii grows across an same geographic vicinity as A. threatened destruction, modification, or area of 80 mi2 (207 km2). P. flowersii hamiltonii and, therefore, will be curtailment of its habitat or range is not individuals occur in well-defined exposed to similar changes in climate a threat to P. flowersii now or for the populations that are geographically and drought. foreseeable future. isolated from one another. Thus, this No trend data are available for species may be prone to the negative Penstemon flowersii that would Factor B. Overutilization for effects of small population size, in part elucidate the relationship between the Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or because historical fragmentation of species’ stability and climate variables. Educational Purposes habitat (e.g., agricultural use) may have We do not know what causes We are not aware of threats from resulted in small populations with fluctuations in P. flowersii abundance, overutilization or collection of limited gene flow. P. flowersii also but if it is due to environmental factors Penstemon flowersii for commercial, appears to have episodic growth like precipitation or temperature, recreational, scientific, or educational patterns with large fluctuations in climate change could negatively affect purposes, nor do we expect numbers from year to year (Franklin this species. However, because of the overutilization in the foreseeable future. 2005, p. 131; 2010, p. 79). This lack of available data, any predictions P. duchesnensis, which is fluctuation and patchy distribution may are speculative.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 10179

We expect that Penstemon flowersii, lands (Holmgren 2009 pers. comm. in distribution is incomplete and like other narrow endemics, may be Frates 2010, p. 35; Brunson 2010b, p. 1), population counts fluctuate widely, we negatively affected by climate change and we have little evidence that cannot determine that any one element and drought. However, despite climate conversion to agricultural use is an occurrence is more critical to the changes that have occurred over the past ongoing threat to this species. Livestock species’ survival (i.e., has a significant 30 years, we have no evidence that P. do not appear to forage on P. flowersii, portion of individuals) than another. flowersii populations are declining, and and the species occurs in grazing Additionally, potential threats to the we have no basis to predict how this pastures. Rural residential development species appear to be uniform throughout species will respond in the future to is another factor that could potentially P. flowersii’s range. Therefore, we do climate change. Over the past 30 years, destroy and fragment this species and not find that P. flowersii is in danger of plant health remains normal to its habitat in the future, but it is extinction now, nor is it likely to vigorous, and reproduction and unlikely to occur at a high level across become endangered within the recruitment continue to occur at some P. P. flowersii’s known range. Other factors foreseeable future throughout all or a flowersii element occurrences (UNHP affecting P. flowersii—including significant portion of its range. 2010b, entire). We have not identified recreational activities, nonnative Therefore, listing P. flowersii as other threats to this species, such as invasive species, oil and gas threatened or endangered under the mining, that would cumulatively development, and small population ESA is not warranted at this time. exacerbate the threat of climate change. size—are either limited in scope, or we We request that you submit any new Based upon the best available do not have evidence that supports information concerning the status of, or information, we do not believe that these factors adversely impacting the threats to, Penstemon flowersii to our climate change is a threat now or is species as a whole. We have no Utah Ecological Services Field Office likely to become one in the foreseeable evidence that overutilization, disease, (see ADDRESSES section) whenever such future. and predation are affecting this species. information becomes available. New Although climate change will likely information will help us monitor P. Summary of Factor E impact the species, we do not have any flowersii and encourage its We assessed the potential risks of information that indicates it threatens conservation. If an emergency situation small population size, climate change, the continued existence of P. flowersii. develops for P. flowersii, or any other and drought to Penstemon flowersii. Finally, because none of these factors species, we will act to provide There is no evidence that the species’ rises to the level of a threat that would immediate protection. small population size is a threat to P. warrant additional regulatory Species Information—Eriogonum flowersii. The species is adapted to a mechanisms, the inadequacy of landscape where drought naturally regulatory mechanisms does not soredium and Lepidium ostleri occurs, and we have no information negatively affect P. flowersii. Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium indicating that the species is threatened Based on our review of the best ostleri occur in the same habitat and by climate change. In addition, as available scientific and commercial have the same distribution. Therefore, described in Factor A, there are no information pertaining to the five we discuss these species together for threats to the species that would result factors, we find that the factors analyzed purposes of this finding. in significant loss or fragmentation of above are not of sufficient imminence, Taxonomy and Species Description available habitat, and thus there are no intensity, or magnitude to indicate that cumulative effects to exacerbate the Penstemon flowersii is in danger of Eriogonum soredium threat of climate change or small extinction (endangered), or likely to Eriogonum soredium is a low mound- population sizes. Therefore, based on become endangered within the forming perennial plant in the the best scientific and commercial foreseeable future (threatened) buckwheat family (Polygonaceae) that is information available at this time, we throughout all or a significant portion of 0.8 to 1.6 in (2 to 4 cm) tall and 3.9 to conclude that natural or manmade its range. Therefore, we find that listing 19.7 in (10 to 50 cm) across (Welsh et factors are not threats to P. flowersii now P. flowersii as threatened or endangered al. 2008, p. 588). The leaves are 0.08 to or for the foreseeable future. species is not warranted throughout its 0.2 in (2 to 5 mm) long, 0.03 to 0.08 in range. (0.7 to 2 mm) wide, round to oval, and Finding covered on both surfaces by short, As required by the ESA, we Significant Portion of the Range white, wooly hairs (Welsh et al. 2008, p. conducted a review of the status of the Having determined that Penstemon 588). The numerous flowers are species and considered the five factors flowersii does not meet the definition of arranged in tight clusters resembling in assessing whether Penstemon threatened or endangered species, we drumsticks. Individual flowers are flowersii is endangered or threatened must next consider whether there are white or partially pink and 0.08 to 0.12 throughout all or a significant portion of any significant portions of the range in (2 to 3 mm) long (Welsh et al. 2008, its range. We examined the best where P. flowersii is in danger of p. 588). Flowering generally occurs from scientific and commercial information extinction or are likely to become June to August. The seeds, which are available regarding the past, present, endangered in the foreseeable future. 0.08 to 0.10 in (2 to 2.5 mm) long, and future threats faced by P. flowersii. See the Significant Portion of the Range mature from July through September We reviewed the petition, information section under Astragalus hamiltonii (Welsh et al. 2008, p. 588). available in our files, other available (above) for a summary of our Eriogonum soredium was first published and unpublished interpretation of the meaning of ‘‘in described in 1981 by James Reveal information, and we consulted with danger of extinction throughout all or a based on a collection by Stan Welsh and recognized P. flowersii experts and other significant portion of its range.’’ Matt Chatterly (Reveal 1981, entire; Kass Federal, State, and Tribal agencies. We have no evidence that any 1992a, p. 1). E. soredium has not The factor with potentially the most particular population or portion of the undergone any taxonomic revisions impact on Penstemon flowersii was range of Penstemon flowersii is critical since it was originally described. historical agricultural development. Site to the species’ survival. Because our Therefore, we accept the current visits show plants persist in pasture understanding of the species’ taxonomy as an indication that the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 10180 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

species constitutes a listable entity L. ostleri has not undergone any Habitat section below) (Miller 2010g, p. under the ESA. taxonomic revisions since it was 6). Similarly, no additional populations originally described. We are accepting of either species were found during Lepidium ostleri the current taxonomy and consider L. surveys of the San Francisco Mountains Lepidium ostleri is a long-lived ostleri a listable entity under the ESA. and surrounding ranges (including the perennial herb in the mustard family Wah Wah Mountains, Crystal Peak, the Distribution and Population Status (Brassicaceae). It grows in dense Confusion Range, and the Mountain cushion-like tufts up to 2 in (5 cm) tall Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium Home Range) (Kass 1992a, p. 5; Kass (Welsh et al. 2008, p. 328). The grayish- ostleri are each known from four 1992b, p. 4; Evenden 1998, p. 5; green hairy leaves are 0.16 to 0.59 in (4 distinct, overlapping populations on Robinson 2004, p. 16; Miller 2010c, to 15 mm) long, generally linear, and private lands in the southern San entire; Roth 2010a, pp. 2–3). entire or with lobed basal leaves (Welsh Francisco Mountains in Beaver County, There were reports of two populations et al. 2008, p. 328). Flowering stalks are Utah—the Grampian Hill, Cupric Mine, of E. soredium in the Wah Wah approximately 0.39 in (1 cm) long with Copper Gulch, and Indian Queen Mountains; however, we do not believe 5 to 35 flowers that are white or have populations (Figure 3; Miller 2010g, p. these reports are accurate—one report a purple tint (Welsh et al. 2008, p. 328). 6; Roth 2010a, pp. 1–2). We are not appears to have incorrect location Flowering generally occurs from June to aware of any additional populations. information (Kass 1992a, p. 5; Franklin early July, followed by fruit set from Surveys were conducted on BLM lands 2005, p. 85) and the other report appears July to August (Welsh et al. 2008, p. adjacent to the known populations in to be a species misidentification 328). 2010, and no plants or habitat were (Robinson 2004, p. 16; Roth 2010a, p. 3). Lepidium ostleri was first described in found (Miller 2010g, Appendix B and p. Therefore, reports of these two 1980 by Stan Welsh and Sherel 6; Roth 2010a, pp. 1–3); these adjacent populations are thought to be erroneous Goodrich based on a collection by Stan areas do not contain Ordovician and are not discussed further in this Welsh and Matt Chatterly (Welsh and Limestone, the substrate that supports finding. Goodrich 1980, entire; Kass 1992b, p. 1). both E. soredium and L. ostleri (see BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 10181

BILLING CODE 4310–55–C occupied habitat ranged from 170 acres we now have more accurate global Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium (ac) (69 hectares (ha)) (Evenden 1998, positioning system information that ostleri are distributed across a total Appendix C) to 400 ac (160 ha) (Kass shows the two species’ total occupied range of less than 5 mi 2 (13 km 2). 1992a, pp. 7–8; 1992b, p. 7). However, habitat is approximately 52 ac (21 ha) Previous estimates of the species’ total

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 ER23FE11.002 10182 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

(based on Miller 2010g, Appendix B). We lack demographic information, approximate number of dead plants For both species, each of the four known which is measured by studying the size, (Miller 2010g, p. 4). populations are estimated to occupy distribution, composition, and changes No information is available on the life habitat ranging between 5 ac (2 ha) and within a specified population over time. history of Lepidium ostleri. 29 ac (12 ha), with localized high Habitat Summary of Information Pertaining to densities of plants (Evenden 1989, the Five Factors—Eriogonum Appendix C; Miller 2010g, Appendix B). Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium soredium Lepidium ostleri All known Eriogonum soredium and ostleri are narrow endemics restricted to and Lepidium ostleri populations are located soils derived from Ordovician limestone In making our 12-month finding on on private lands (Miller 2010g, p. 6; outcrops (Evenden 1998, p. 5). There are the petition, we considered and Roth 2010a, pp. 1–2). Their occurrence approximately 845 ac (342 ha) of evaluated the best available scientific on these private lands hinders our Ordovician limestone outcrops in the and commercial information pertaining ability to collect accurate long-term San Francisco Mountains (Miller 2010g, to Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium population count or trend information Appendix F). In addition, there are 719 ostleri in relation to the five factors because of access limitations. The ac (291 ha) of Cambrian dolomite provided in section 4(a)(1) of the ESA populations were visited sporadically substrates in the San Francisco (see the full description of these five over the last couple of decades; Mountains; there is the potential for factors in the Summary of Information however, we have no information on small ‘‘islands’’ of Ordovician limestone Pertaining to the Five Factors— sampling methods used by individual outcrops to occur within these Astragalus hamiltonii, above). E. surveyors. Common field techniques substrates (Miller 2010g, Appendix F, soredium and L. ostleri co-occur in the used to estimate population size tend to p. 7). same habitat and, therefore, are be highly subjective in the absence of Ordovician limestone is rare within a addressed together in the Five Factor actual population counts. Population 50-mi (80-km) radius of the San Analysis below. estimates also may be skewed by how Francisco Mountains (Miller 2010g, the species grow. Both species grow in Appendix F). Cambrian dolomite Factor A. The Present or Threatened low, mound-forming clusters, making it substrates are present in the Wah Wah Destruction, Modification, or difficult to distinguish individual Mountains to the west of the San Curtailment of Their Habitat or Range plants—some observers may assume Francisco Mountains (Miller 2010g, The following factors may affect the each cluster is one plant and other Appendix F). However, as previously habitat or range of Eriogonum soredium observers might apply a multiplier to described (see Distribution and and Lepidium ostleri: (1) Livestock each cluster to count them as multiple Population Status), there is no grazing, (2) recreational activities, (3) plants; therefore, using either of these indication that additional populations mining, and (4) nonnative invasive methods would greatly skew the of either species occur in these areas. species. resulting population estimate. We We do not know if there are other (1) Livestock Grazing believe these biases help explain the limiting factors associated with the seemingly large fluctuations in numbers limestone formations that restrict the Potential impacts of livestock grazing of plants observed during different habitat use and distribution of these to plants are discussed above in the surveys (see below); E. soredium and L. species—these species occupy only a Livestock Grazing section under Factor ostleri are robust, long-lived perennial fraction of the available habitat and are A for Astragalus hamiltonii. As plants that are unlikely to exhibit such known to occur on only 52 ac (21 ha), previously stated, all populations of extreme population fluctuations (Garcia or just 6 percent, of the available Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium et al. 2008, pp. 260–261). Ordovician limestone outcrops. ostleri occur on private lands. Accordingly, the available population Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium We have no information on livestock estimates are highly variable and ostleri are associated with pinion- grazing management on private lands, probably not accurate. For Eriogonum juniper and sagebrush communities but adjacent BLM lands belong to active soredium, available population between 6,200 and 7,228 ft (1,890 and grazing allotments (Galbraith 2010, pers. estimates range from a low of 10 to 100 2,203 m) in elevation. They are typically comm.). Adjacent private lands are plants in 2004 to a high of 76,000 to found on sparsely vegetated exposed subject to the same grazing practices as 81,000 individuals in 2010 (Kass 1992a, slopes with Ephedra sp. (Mormon tea), the allotted BLM land if they are not p. 8; Evenden 1998, Appendix C; (snakeweed), fenced (Galbraith 2010, pers. comm.). Robinson 2004, pp. 11–15; Miller 2010a, Cercocarpus intricatus (dwarf Private lands in the San Francisco pers. comm.; Miller 2010b, pers. comm.; mountain-mahogany), and Mountains are only partially fenced; Miller 2010c, pp. 2–5; Roth 2010a, p. 4). pumila (rock goldenrod). Associated hence, livestock may have access to For Lepidium ostleri, available rare species include Trifolium areas where E. soredium and L. ostleri population estimates range from a total friscanum. occur. However, impacts to E. soredium of 700 individuals (Kass 1992b, p. 8) to or L. ostleri from livestock grazing have Life History approximately 17,000 individuals in the not been documented (Kass 1992a and 1990s (Evenden 1998, Appendix C). We do not have a clear understanding 1992b, entire; Evenden 1998, entire; Currently, the total number of L. ostleri of the reproductive biology or life Miller 2010g, p. 5; Roth 2010a, p. 1). plants is estimated at approximately history of Eriogonum soredium, but Based on our review of the available 43,000 (Miller 2010a, pers. comm.; recruitment appears to be low or information, there is no indication that Miller 2010c, pp. 2–5; Roth 2010a, p. 4). perhaps episodic (Kass 1992a, p. 7; Roth grazing impacts the species now or will However, due to the aforementioned 2010a, p. 1). Juvenile plants and impact the species in the foreseeable survey inaccuracies, we are not able to seedlings have been observed in only future at a level that threatens E. determine accurate population estimates two of the four populations (Miller soredium or L. ostleri. or trends for either species. In 2010, 2010g, p. 4). In 2010, dead or partially both species were documented at all dead plants were found throughout all (2) Recreational Activities four known populations (Miller 2010g, populations, but we have no Potential impacts of recreational entire). information on the cause of death or the activities to plants are discussed above

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 10183

in the Recreational Activities section soredium and L. ostleri by removing soredium and Lepidium ostleri (Table 3; under Factor A for Astragalus habitat substrate, increasing erosion Kass 1992a, p. 10; Evenden 1998, p. 3; hamiltonii. There are no known impacts potential, fragmenting habitat through Roth 2010a, p. 2). of OHV use in Eriogonum soredium and access road construction, degrading The eastern part of the Grampian Hill Lepidium ostleri occupied habitats suitable habitat, and increasing invasive population surrounds old mine shafts (Miller 2010f, pers. comm.; Roth 2010a, plant species (Brock and Green 2003, associated with the King David Mine, pp. 1–2). Access to the majority of the p. 15; BLM 2008c, pp. 448–449). Impacts which is part of the historical Horn occupied habitat, which occurs on to E. soredium and L. ostleri individuals Silver Mine. The Horn Silver Mine was private lands, is posted as closed to all include crushing and removing plants, one of the largest silver mines in the vehicles, including OHVs (Miller 2010g, reducing plant vigor, and reducing country until it collapsed in 1885 p. 5). The OHV use does not appear to reproductive potential through (Murphy 1996, p. 1; Evenden 1998, p. 3). impact adjacent BLM lands in the San increased dust deposits, reduced Francisco Mountains (Pontarolo 2009, seedbank quantity and quality, and The Cupric Mine population is located pers. comm.). Therefore, we have no decreased pollinator availability and immediately above a mine shaft information indicating that recreational habitat (Brock and Green 2003, p. 15; associated with the Cupric Mine, a activities threaten E. soredium and L. BLM 2008c, pp. 448–449). historical copper mine. Old mine shafts ostleri now nor do we anticipate these The San Francisco Mountains have an are located within 0.3 mi (0.5 km) of the activities will become a threat in the extensive history of precious metal Copper Gulch population; these mine foreseeable future. mining activity (Evenden 1998, p. 3). All shafts are associated with the Cactus four of the known populations and Mine, also a historical copper mine. (3) Mining much of the species’ potential habitat Two mine shafts are located within the Mining activities occurred historically were impacted by precious metal Indian Queen population and three throughout the range of Eriogonum mining activities in the past, as additional mine shafts are located soredium and Lepidium ostleri and evidenced by a high density of mine immediately adjacent to this population. continue to impact these species. shafts, tailings, and old mining roads These mine shafts also are part of the Mining activities can impact E. throughout the habitat of Eriogonum historical Cactus Mine.

TABLE 3—MINING ACTIVITIES IN THE HABITAT OF Eriogonum Soredium AND Lepidium Ostleri

Mining activity Population Historical Current Future

Grampian Hill ...... silver, lead, copper, zinc (Horn Silver Mine) ... None ...... silver, lead, copper, zinc, landscape gravel quarrying. Cupric Mine ...... silver, lead, copper, zinc, gravel quarrying gravel quarrying ...... silver, lead, copper, zinc, landscape gravel (Cupric Mine). quarrying. Copper Gulch ...... silver, lead, copper, zinc, gravel quarrying gravel quarrying ...... silver, lead, copper, zinc, landscape gravel (Cactus Mine). quarrying. Indian Queen ...... silver, lead, copper, zinc, gravel quarrying gravel quarrying ...... silver, lead, copper, landscape gravel quar- (Cactus Mine). rying.

Large-scale precious metal mining market for silver is expected to grow in reasonable to assume that it will become ceased decades ago. However, all the future due to its high demand for important again, particularly given the precious metal mining claims in the industrial uses in solar panel ongoing exploration activities at the southern San Francisco Mountains are construction, wood preservatives, and mines. patented (a claim for which the Federal medical supplies (Ash 2010, p. 1). Since As previously described, Eriogonum Government has passed its title to the 2009, the value of copper increased soredium and Lepidium ostleri are claimant, making it private land) and more than 140 percent (Crigger 2010, endemic to soils derived from continued occasional explorations for pp. 1–2; Murdoch 2010, pp. 1–2). The Ordovician limestone. In addition to silver, zinc, and copper deposits are market for copper, one of the world’s precious metals, this formation is mined reported for the area (Bon and Gloyn most widely used industrial metals, is for crushed limestone. The limestone is 1998, p. 12; Franconia Minerals expected to increase in the future due to removed from quarry sites and sold for Corporation 2002, p. 1; Rupke 2010, demand for electrical wiring, plumbing, marble landscaping gravel. pers. comm.). In fact, in 1998 this area and car fabrication (Crigger 2010, pp. 1– Marble landscaping gravel quarries in was one of the most active precious 2; Murdoch 2010, pp. 1–2). In Utah, Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium metal exploration areas in the State (Bon precious metals accounted for ostleri’s range are open-pit mines that and Gloyn 1998, pp. 11–12). In addition, approximately 14 percent of the total result in the removal of the habitat exploration activities were reinitiated at value of minerals produced in 2009 (up substrate for these species. Four active the Horn Silver Mine in 2002, from 8 percent in 2008) (Utah GOPB limestone quarry sites occur within a confirming that extensive amounts of 2010, pp. 195–196). Utah’s precious couple hundred feet of three of the sphalerite (the major ore of zinc) remain metal gross production value increased species’ populations—Cupric Mine, in the mine (Franconia Minerals $221 million (57 percent) compared to Copper Gulch, and Indian Queen Corporation 2002, p. 1). 2008, due to increased production of populations (Table 3). We expect the demand for silver and both gold and silver (Utah GOPB 2010, A limestone quarry is considered copper to increase in the future (Crigger p. 196). Because the San Francisco active from the time quarrying begins 2010, pp. 1–2; Murdoch 2010, pp. 1–2). Mountains area was one of the most until the site is reclaimed. Generally, The price for silver nearly tripled over productive areas during the last large- gravel pits are maintained below 5 ac the last decade (Stoker 2010, p. 2). The scale precious metal mining efforts, it is (2 ha) of surface disturbance to avoid

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 10184 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

large mine status, which requires potential mitigation opportunities (see similarities and proximity, it is likely permitting (Munson 2010, pers. comm.). Factor D, Inadequacy of Existing that the plant occupied the entire 26 ac Hence, an area may contain many Regulatory Mechanisms). (11 ha) that are now being quarried. quarries at or below the 5-ac (2-ha) As stated in the Distribution and There are 23 ac (9 ha) of remaining threshold, all of which may be Population Status section above, occupied habitat in the three considered active (Munson 2010, pers. Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium populations (Table 4; Darnall et al. comm.). A mine also may stay below 5 ostleri occur in the same overlapping 2010, entire), but these areas are at risk ac (2 ha) as long as previously disturbed locations, each occupying a total of 52 of being impacted by the gravel pits. areas at the quarry site are reclaimed ac (21 ha) in four populations. We The only population not impacted by prior to expanding quarrying operations estimate the quarries at the three gravel pits—the Grampian Hill (Munson 2010, pers. comm.). The population sites (Cupric Mine, Copper population—is 29 ac (12 ha) in size. Cupric Mine, Copper Gulch, and Indian Gulch, and Indian Queen) historically Even so, the Grampian Hill population Queen populations of Eriogonum resulted in the loss of 26 ac (11 ha) of is only 1 mi (1.6 km) away from the soredium and Lepidium ostleri all have suitable habitat adjacent to currently nearest gravel pit and, as previously small individual gravel pits—resulting known plant locations (Table 4; Darnall discussed, it is impacted by precious in a lack of environmental analyses and et al. 2010, entire). Based on habitat metal mining.

TABLE 4—AREAS OF SURFACE DISTURBANCE ASSOCIATED WITH GRAVEL MINING IN THE VICINITY OF Eriogonum Soredium AND Lepidium Ostleri POPULATIONS

Adjacent surface Population Occupied area disturbance

Indian Queen ...... 9 ac (3.6 ha) ...... 14 ac (5.7 ha). Copper Gulch ...... 5 ac (2.0 ha) ...... 5 ac (2.0 ha). Cupric Mine ...... 9 ac (3.6 ha) ...... 7 ac (2.8 ha).

Total ...... 23 ac (9.2 ha) ...... 26 ac (10.5 ha).

Quarrying is occurring in the impacted, particularly given the ongoing Health Administration 2010, p. 1). In immediate vicinity of the Cupric Mine need for limestone gravel in nearby addition to regional distribution, population (Evenden 1998, p. 5; communities, as described below. crushed limestone quarried from the Robinson 2004, p. 8; Frates 2006, pers. Between 1995 and 2001, the vicinity of the Copper Gulch, Indian comm.; Roth 2010a, p. 2; Miller 2010e, production of building and landscaping Queen, and Cupric Mine populations is pers. comm.; Munson 2010, pers. stones in Utah jumped nearly 700 transported to a distribution center for comm.); we anticipate this mining percent (Stark 2008, p. 1). Construction the Home Depot in the nearby town of activity will continue to impact this sand, gravel, and crushed stone Milford, where it is packaged and population in the near future (Roth production rank as the second most shipped nationwide (Munson 2010, 2010a, p. 2). The estimated area of valuable commodity produced among pers. comm.). occupied habitat of the Cupric Mine industrial minerals in Utah (Bon and To summarize, mining throughout population in the vicinity of this gravel Krahulec 2009, p. 5). The use of Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium pit is 9 ac (4 ha) (Table 4; Darnall et al. landscape gravel will likely continue to ostleri’s range reduced available habitat 2010, entire), while gravel mining has increase in nearby Washington County, and impacted the species’ populations resulted in surface disturbance of which is one of the fastest growing in the past (Table 3; Table 4). All four approximately 7 ac (3 ha) (Table 4; counties in the United States and Utah populations of Eriogonum soredium and Darnall et al. 2010, entire). No quarrying (U.S. Census Bureau 2010b, entire; Utah Lepidium ostleri co-occur with precious activity was observed in the vicinity of GOPB 2010, p. 48). The Washington metal mining activities. For both the Copper Gulch and Indian Queen County population has doubled every species, three of the four populations— populations in 2010; however, the 10 years since 1970. In 2009, there were the Cupric Mine, Copper Gulch, and gravel pits are still considered active 145,466 people estimated to live in Indian Queen populations—co-occur and thus additional gravel mining could Washington County (Utah GOPB 2010, with active gravel mining pits. occur at any time. For both of these p. 49). Over 700,000 people are Available information suggests that all populations (Copper Gulch and Indian expected to live in Washington County populations are likely to be impacted by Queen), adjacent surface disturbance is by 2050 (Utah GOPB 2008, entire). precious metal and gravel mining in the equal to or greater than the remaining Based on the projected population foreseeable future based on mineral occupied habitat (Table 4; Darnall et al. growth for Washington County, we availability and market projections. 2010, entire). believe that the regional demand for Therefore, we have determined that It is important to note that all of the landscape gravel will continue to mining is a threat to E. soredium and L. active quarries are near or above the 5- increase in southwestern Utah in the ostleri now and in the foreseeable ac (2-ha) regulatory limit. Thus, we foreseeable future. future. anticipate that the operators will file for Much of the rock quarried in Utah large mine permits, partially restore the does not travel far because of the (4) Nonnative Invasive Species disturbed areas to be below the 5-ac associated high cost of transport (Stark Potential impacts of nonnative (2-ha) limit, or will begin new gravel 2008, p. 1). The quarries of the southern invasive species to native plants and pits (Munson 2010, pers. comm.). Under San Francisco Mountains are the closest their habitat are discussed above in the any of these scenarios, it is likely that quarries providing crushed limestone Nonnative Invasive Species section occupied habitats of Eriogonum for southwestern Utah, including under Factor A for Astragalus soredium and Lepidium ostleri will be Washington County (Mine Safety and hamiltonii. Bromus tectorum is

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 10185

considered the most ubiquitous invasive populations occupy relatively small metals and landscape rock based on the species in the Intermountain West due areas ranging between 5 ac (2 ha) and 29 economic outlook for these commodities to its ability to rapidly invade native ac (12 ha). A range fire could easily and the lack of alternative sources for dryland ecosystems and outcompete impact, or eliminate, one or all crushed limestone in southwestern Utah native species (Mack 1981, p. 145; Mack populations. Therefore, the potential which will result in increased impacts and Pyke, 1983, p. 88; Thill et al. 1984, expansion of invasive species and to E. soredium and L. ostleri and their p. 10). associated fire is a threat to the species, habitat. Bromus tectorum is a dominant especially when considering the limited Bromus tectorum is documented to species on the lower slopes of the distribution of the species and the high occur in all four populations of Grampian Hill population and is present potential of stochastic extinctions (as Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium in all populations of Eriogonum discussed in the Small Population Size ostleri. The threat of fire caused by soredium and Lepidium ostleri (Miller section under Factor E below). annual nonnative species invasions is 2010g, p. 5; Roth 2010a, p. 1). Surface In summary, nonnative invasive exacerbated by mining activities and disturbances can increase the species and fire are threats to both global climate change (see the Climate occurrence and densities of B. tectorum species. Bromus tectorum occurs in all Change and Drought section under (see Nonnative Invasive Species section four Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium Factor E). The small population sizes under Factor A for Astragalus ostleri populations. Given the and extremely limited distribution make hamiltonii). As previously described, ubiquitous nature of B. tectorum in the this species especially vulnerable to increased mining activities and Intermountain West and its ability to stochastic extinction events, including associated surface disturbances are rapidly invade dryland ecosystems localized mining activities and wildfires expected to occur in the occupied (Mack 1981, p. 145, Mack and Pyke, caused by increased invasions of habitat for E. soredium and L. ostleri, 1983, p. 88, Thill et al. 1984, p. 10), we nonnative species (see the Small (see Mining, above), providing expect it to increase in the future in conditions allowing B. tectorum to response to surface disturbances from Population Size section under Factor E, expand into and increase density within increased mining activities and global below). E. soredium and L. ostleri habitat. climate change (see the Climate Change Therefore, we find that Eriogonum Invasions of annual, nonnative and Drought section under Factor E for soredium and Lepidium ostleri are species, such as Bromus tectorum, are Astragalus hamiltonii). An increase in threatened by the present or threatened well documented to contribute to B. tectorum is expected to increase the destruction, modification, or increased fire frequencies (Brooks and frequency of fires in E. soredium and L. curtailment of the species’ habitat or Pyke 2002, p. 5; Grace et. al 2002, p. 43; ostleri’s habitat, and the species are range, now and in the foreseeable Brooks et. al 2003, pp. 4, 13, 15). The unlikely to survive increased wildfires future, based on impacts from mining disturbance caused by increased fire due to their small population sizes. activities and nonnative invasive frequencies creates favorable conditions Therefore, we determine that nonnative species. for increased invasion by B. tectorum. invasive species and associated Factor B. Overutilization for The end result is a downward spiral wildfires constitute a threat to all Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or where an increase in invasive species populations of E. soredium and L. ostleri Educational Purposes results in more fires, more fires create now and into the foreseeable future. more disturbances, and more Summary of Factor A Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium disturbances lead to increased invasive ostleri are considered attractive rock species densities. The risk of fire is At this time, based on best available garden plants. In particular, Eriogonum expected to increase from 46 to 100 information, we do not believe that soredium is considered ‘‘one of the most percent when the cover of B. tectorum grazing and recreational activities fantastic of its genus’’ by a major rock increases from 12 to 45 percent or more significantly threaten Eriogonum garden seed distributor (Alplains Seed (Link et al. 2006, p. 116). In the absence soredium and Lepidium ostleri now or Catalog 2010b, pp. 2 and 12). Seeds for of exotic species, it is generally in the foreseeable future. However, we both species are available commercially estimated that fire return intervals in determine that mining and nonnative and they are harvested from wild xeric sagebrush communities range from invasive species are threats to populations (Alplains Seed Catalog 100 to 350 years (Baker 2006, p. 181). E. soredium and L. ostleri. 2010b, pp. 2 and 12). In some areas of the Great Basin (Snake Mining activities impacted Eriogonum River Plain), fire return intervals due to soredium and Lepidium ostleri habitat Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium B. tectorum invasion are now between 3 in the past and continue to be a threat ostleri plants are located on private and 5 years (Whisenant 1990, p. 4). to the species and its habitat throughout lands, which may provide some Most plant species occurring within a its range. All of the populations and the protection from collectors, as access is sagebrush ecosystem are not expected to majority of habitat are located on private restricted on these private lands. be adapted to frequent fires, as lands with an extensive history and Despite the attractiveness of the two evidenced in the lack of evolutionary recent successful exploration activities species to horticultural enthusiasts, we adaptations found in other shrub- for precious metal mining. Three of the have no information indicating that dominated fire adapted ecosystems like four populations are located in the collection in the wild is a threat to the chaparral (Baker, in press, p. 17). immediate vicinity of gravel mining. species. In the absence of Bromus tectorum, Gravel mining is expected to continue In summary, overutilization for Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium and expand in the near future (Munson commercial purposes could be a ostleri grow in sparsely vegetated 2010, pers. comm.). Considering the concern to Eriogonum soredium and communities unlikely to carry fires (see small acreages of occupied habitat Lepidium ostleri due to their desirability Habitat section). Thus, the species are immediately adjacent to existing gravel to collectors; however, we do not have unlikely to be adapted to survive fires. pits, continued mining may result in the information that leads us to believe that As described in the distribution section, loss of these populations in the overutilization for commercial purposes the total range of these species are less foreseeable future. We anticipate an is a threat now or is likely to become than 5 mi2 (13 km2) and each of the four increase in the demand for precious one in the foreseeable future.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 10186 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

Factor C. Disease or Predation and federally listed species (Baker 2010, Despite the overall lack of information Disease and herbivory of the species pers. comm.). Eriogonum soredium and on the population ecology of Eriogonum are unknown. We do not have any Lepidium ostleri are not State listed but soredium and Lepidium ostleri, we information indicating that disease is are on the BLM sensitive species list. If know that small populations are at an impacting either Eriogonum soredium or UDOGM is made aware of these rare increased risk of extinction due to the Lepidium ostleri. We also do not have species being impacted by mining potential for inbreeding depression, loss any information indicating herbivory is activities, they could consider of genetic diversity, and lower sexual minimizing and mitigating impacts; reproduction rates (Ellstrand and Elam occurring from livestock (see the however, there is no requirement to 1993, entire; Wilcock and Neiland 2002, Livestock Grazing section under Factor address species that are not federally p. 275). We do not have a clear A), wildlife, or insects (Kass 1992a, p. listed in the mine permitting process understanding of the reproductive 9; Evenden 1998, entire; Miller 2010a, (Baker 2010, pers. comm.). biology of E. soredium and L. ostleri, but entire; Miller 2010b, entire; Miller In summary, the existing regulatory recruitment appears to be low or 2010c, entire; Roth 2010a, entire). Thus, mechanisms are not adequate to protect episodic for E. soredium (Kass 1992a, p. we do not consider disease and Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium 7; Roth 2010a, p. 1). Low levels of predation to be threats to these species. ostleri from becoming threatened or recruitment in small populations may Factor D. The Inadequacy of Existing endangered by gravel mining on private be due to inbreeding depression caused Regulatory Mechanisms lands. The active gravel pits are by the lack of genetic diversity and low approaching the 5-ac (2-ha) threshold There are no endangered species laws levels of genetic exchange between that would normally incur regulatory populations (Ellstrand and Elam 1993, protecting plants on private, State, or environmental impact assessments; entire; Wilcock and Neiland 2002, Tribal lands in Utah. Eriogonum however, no assessments are completed p. 275). soredium and Lepidium ostleri are listed for these mines. Even if an Mining, or a single random event such as bureau sensitive plants for the BLM. environmental impact assessment is as a wildfire (see Factor A), could Should the species be located on BLM completed for any of the mines, the extirpate an entire or substantial portion lands, limited policy-level protection by existing mining laws do not necessarily of a population given the small acreages the BLM is afforded through the Special apply to BLM sensitive species: They of occupied habitat. Species with Status Species Management Policy recommend, and do not mandate, limited ranges and restricted habitat Manual # 6840, which forms the basis species protection or mitigation. Thus, requirements also are more vulnerable for special status species management we find that the inadequacy of existing to the effects of global climate change on BLM lands (BLM 2008e, entire). mechanisms to regulate mining (see the Climate Change and Drought Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium activities on private lands is a threat to section below; IPCC 2002, p. 22; Jump ostleri are predominantly threatened by all populations of E. soredium and L. and Penuelas 2005, p. 1016; Machinski mining related activities (see Factor A). ostleri now and in the foreseeable et al. 2006, p. 226; Krause 2010, p. 79). Over 90 percent of the species’ known future. Overall, we consider small population potential habitat and all of the known size an intrinsic vulnerability to populations are located on lands with Factor E. Other Natural or Manmade Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium private, patented mining claims (Kass Factors Affecting Its Continued ostleri that may not rise to the level of 1992a, p. 9; Evenden 1998, p. 9; Roth Existence a threat on its own. However, the small 2010a, pp. 1–2). Mineral mining is Natural and manmade threats to population sizes rise to the level of a subject to the Utah Mined Land Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium threat because of the combined effects of Reclamation Act of 1975, which ostleri’s survival include: (1) Small small population sizes, limited includes mineral mining on State and population size and (2) climate change distribution, and narrow overall range, private lands, including lands with and drought. compounded by the effects of global patented mining claims (Utah Code climate change (see below) and the Title 40, Chapter 8). The ESA applies to (1) Small Population Size potential for stochastic extinction events all surface activities associated with the General potential impacts of small such as mining and invasive species exploration, development, and population sizes to plants are discussed (see Factor A). Therefore, we consider extraction of mineral deposits. above in the Small Population Size small localized population size, in The Utah Mined Land Reclamation section under Factor E for Astragalus combination with mining, invasive Act mandates the preparation of State hamiltonii. species, and climate change, to be a environmental impact assessments for As previously described (see the threat to both species now and in the large mining operations, which are Distribution and Population Status foreseeable future. defined as mining operations which section), the entire ranges of both create more than 5 ac (2 ha) of surface species are located in an area of less (2) Climate Change and Drought disturbance (UDOGM 2010b, p. 1). The than 5 mi2 (13 km2). Within this range, Potential impacts of climate change existing gravel mining activities within each of the four individual populations’ and drought to the geographic area are the range of Eriogonum soredium and occupied habitat areas are very small, characterized under Factor E for Lepidium ostleri (see Factor A, Mining) ranging from 5 ac (2 ha) to 29 ac (12 ha) Astragalus hamiltonii. As discussed are approaching the 5-ac (2-ha) (based on Miller 2010g, Appendix B). above, Eriogonum soredium and regulatory threshold. Thus, we Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium Lepidium ostleri have a limited anticipate that the operators will file for ostleri can be dominant in small areas distribution and populations are large mine permits, partially restore the of occupied habitat, containing localized and small. In addition, these disturbed areas to be below the 5-ac thousands of individuals. However, the populations are restricted to very (2-ha) limit, or will begin new gravel small areas of occupation and the specific soil types. Global climate pits (Munson 2010, pers. comm.). narrow overall range of the species change exacerbates the risk of extinction State environmental impact make it highly susceptible to stochastic for species that are already vulnerable assessments must address, at a extinction events and the effects of due to low population numbers and minimum, the potential effects on State inbreeding depression. restricted habitat requirements (see the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 10187

Climate Change and Drought section disturbances associated with mining Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium under Factor E for Astragalus activities also will likely increase the ostleri (see Factor A). Increased hamiltonii). extent and densities of nonnative nonnative species in the habitat of E. Predicted changes in climatic invasive species and with it the soredium and L. ostleri can increase fire conditions include increases in frequencies of fires (see Nonnative frequency and severity. Because E. temperature, decreases in rainfall, and Invasive Species section under Factor soredium and L. ostleri are not likely increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide A). Given the cumulative effects of the adapted to persist through fires, in the American Southwest (Walther et potential population reduction and wildfires can have a significant impact al. 2002, p. 389; IPCC 2007, p. 48; Karl habitat loss (of already small on these small populations. et al. 2009, p. 129). Although we have populations) associated with mining, Although small population size and no information on how Eriogonum invasive species, and fire, we are climate change make the species soredium and Lepidium ostleri will concerned about the impacts of future intrinsically more vulnerable, we are respond to effects related to climate climate change to Eriogonum soredium uncertain whether they would rise to change, persistent or prolonged drought and Lepidium ostleri. the level of threat by themselves. conditions are likely to reduce the In summary, we find it difficult to However, when combined with the frequency and duration of flowering and analyze the potential effects of global threats listed under Factor A (mining germination events, lower the climate change on Eriogonum soredium and nonnative invasive species), small recruitment of individual plants, and Lepidium ostleri in the absence of population size is likely to rise to the compromise the viability of demographic trend data for the species level of threat in the foreseeable future. populations, and impact pollinator which would allow us to analyze how At this time, we are uncertain of the availability (Tilman and El Haddi 1992, they respond to climate change over degree to which climate change p. 263; Harrison 2001, p. 78). The time. However, because of the threats of constitutes a threat to the species. smallest change in environmental mining, nonnative species, and small Finding factors, especially precipitation, plays a population size, the cumulative effects decisive role in plant survival in arid of climate change may be of concern for As required by the ESA, we regions (Herbel et al. 1972, p. 1084). these species in the future. At this time, conducted a review of the status of the Drought conditions led to a noticeable we believe that the state of knowledge species and considered the five factors decline in survival, vigor, and concerning the localized effects of in assessing whether Eriogonum reproductive output of other rare and climate change is too speculative to soredium and Lepidium ostleri are endangered plants in the Southwest determine whether climate change is a endangered or threatened throughout all during the drought years of 2001 threat to these species in the foreseeable or a significant portion of their range. through 2004 (Anderton 2002, p. 1; Van future. However, we will continue to We examined the best scientific and Buren and Harper 2002, p. 3; Van Buren assess the potential of climate change to commercial information available and Harper 2004, entire; Hughes 2005, threaten the species as better scientific regarding the past, present, and future entire; Clark and Clark 2007, p. 6; Roth information becomes available. threats faced by E. soredium and L. 2008a, entire; Roth 2008b, pp. 3–4). ostleri. We reviewed the petition, Similar responses are anticipated to Summary of Factor E information available in our files, and adversely affect the long-term We assessed the potential risks of other available published and persistence of E. soredium and L. ostleri. small population size, climate change, unpublished information, and we Climate change is expected to and drought to Eriogonum soredium and consulted with E. soredium and L. increase levels of carbon dioxide Lepidium ostleri populations. E. ostleri experts and other Federal and (Walther et al. 2002, p. 389; IPCC 2007, soredium and L. ostleri have a highly State agencies. p. 48; Karl et al. 2009, p. 129). Elevated restricted distribution and exist in four This status review identified threats levels of carbon dioxide lead to populations scattered over an area that to the species attributable to Factors A, increased invasive annual plant is less than 5 mi2 (13 km2). Individual D, and E. The primary threat to the biomass, invasive seed production, and populations occupy very small areas species is habitat destruction from pest outbreaks (Smith et al. 2000, pp. with large densities of plants. Even in precious metal and gravel mining on 80–81; IPCC 2002, pp. 18, 32; Ziska et the absence of information on genetic private lands (Factor A). All populations al. 2005, p. 1328) and will put diversity, inbreeding depression, and are located in the vicinity of historical additional stressors on rare plants reproductive effort, we believe a random precious metal mining activities, at already suffering from the effects of stochastic event could impact a which ongoing exploration activities elevated temperatures and drought. significant portion of a population. show the potential for continued mining The actual extent to which climate Small populations that are restricted by activities in the foreseeable future. change itself will impact Eriogonum habitat requirements also are more Three of the four populations are in the soredium and Lepidium ostleri is vulnerable to the effects of climate immediate vicinity of limestone unclear, mostly because we do not have change, such as prolonged droughts and quarries, all of which are considered long-term demographic information that increased fire frequencies. active. We expect an increase in would allow us to predict the species’ While naturally occurring droughts precious metal and limestone mining at responses to changes in environmental are not likely to impact the long-term these locations in the foreseeable future, conditions, including prolonged persistence of the species, an increase in with associated loss and fragmentation drought. Any predictions at this point periodic prolonged droughts due to of Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium on how climate change would affect climate change could impact the species ostleri populations. these species would be speculative. across their entire range in the future. Bromus tectorum occurs within all However, as previously described, the Global climate change, particularly four Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium species are threatened by mining when assessed cumulatively with small ostleri populations. It is a highly activities (see Mining, Factor A) which population sizes and threats from invasive nonnative species that spreads will likely result in the loss of large mining activities, could increase the quickly in response to surface numbers of individuals and maybe even density of invasive annual plants, which disturbances such as mining. As entire populations. Increased surface are already present in the habitat of previously discussed, both species

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 10188 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

occur in the immediate vicinity of being made to add or remove qualified listing priority. The guidance indicates precious metal and limestone mines— species from the Lists of Endangered that species with the highest magnitude mines inherently cause surface and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. of threat are those species facing the disturbances from excavation activities We reviewed the available greatest threats to their continued and the construction of roads and other information to determine if the existing existence. These species receive the infrastructure. Global climate change is and foreseeable threats render the highest listing priority. We consider the expected to increase drought conditions species at risk of extinction now such threats that Eriogonum soredium and in the Southwest and increase the that issuing an emergency regulation Lepidium ostleri face to be moderate in spread of nonnative invasive species. temporarily listing the species under magnitude because the major threats The biggest concern associated with the section 4(b)(7) of the ESA is warranted. (mining, nonnative species, small increase in invasive species is the threat We determined that issuing an population size, climate change, and of increased wildfire (Factor A), emergency regulation temporarily inadequacy of existing regulatory particularly when considering the small listing the species is not warranted at mechanisms), while serious and population sizes and small occupied this time because there is no emergency occurring rangewide, do not collectively habitat area associated with these posing a significant risk to the well- rise to the level of high magnitude. For species. being of Eriogonum soredium or example, active mining is currently The magnitude of the biological Lepidium ostleri. We do not believe that impacting only one of the four threats posed by the species’ small any of the potential threats are of such populations. population sizes and limited ranges are great immediacy and severity that The magnitude of Factor A is not well understood due to the lack of would threaten all of the known considered moderate, because, although information available on the ecology of populations with the imminent risk of we think that all populations have been Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium extinction. However, if at any time we impacted by mining in the past and ostleri. Future studies may provide us determine that issuing an emergency three of the four populations occur in with a more thorough understanding of regulation temporarily listing the immediate vicinity of gravel pits, threats posed by pollinator limitation, Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium mining activities are currently ongoing inbreeding depression, and the potential ostleri is warranted, we will initiate this in one of these gravel pits. Ongoing lack of genetic diversity over the action at that time. mining in the habitat of E. soredium and species’ range. However, the small areas Listing Priority Number L. ostleri is expected to increase the of occupied habitat make the species The Service adopted guidelines on density of Bromus tectorum, thereby highly vulnerable to habitat destruction facilitating the spread of fire. B. through mining-related activities as well September 21, 1983 (48 FR 43098), to establish a system for utilizing available tectorum is currently documented in all as random extinction events, including populations. invasive species (and the inherent risk resources for the highest priority species We considered the magnitude of of increased fires) and the potential when adding species to the Lists of Factor D to be moderate. All future effects of global climate change Endangered or Threatened Wildlife and (Factor E). Plants or reclassifying species listed as populations are located on private lands The existing regulatory mechanisms threatened to endangered status. These with patented mining claims, where are not adequate to protect Eriogonum guidelines, titled ‘‘Endangered and existing regulatory mechanisms are not soredium and Lepidium ostleri from the Threatened Species Listing and adequate to protect Eriogonum soredium primary threat of mining, particularly Recovery Priority Guidelines,’’ address and Lepidium ostleri from the impacts because both species occur entirely on the immediacy and magnitude of of mining. All populations have the private lands. The inadequacy of threats, as well as the level of taxonomic potential to be impacted by gravel and regulatory mechanisms (Factor D) on distinctiveness, by assigning priority in precious metal mining in the future; private land, combined with the descending order to monotypic genera however, because only one population economic and commercial value of the (genus with one species), full species, is currently impacted by gravel mining, limestone and precious metals, poses a and subspecies (or equivalently, DPS of we consider this threat to be moderate. serious threat to the continued existence vertebrates). We assigned Eriogonum We consider the magnitude of Factor of E. soredium and L. ostleri. Ongoing soredium and Lepidium ostleri each a E to be moderate, because although mining in the habitat of E. soredium and Listing Priority Number (LPN) of 8, small population size and climate L. ostleri has the potential to extirpate based on our finding that both species change make the species intrinsically one of the four populations in the near face threats of moderate magnitude that more vulnerable, we are uncertain of future; all populations have the are imminent. These threats include the whether they would rise to the level of potential to be extirpated by mining- present or threatened destruction, threat by themselves. However, when related activities in the foreseeable modification or curtailment of their collectively analyzed with the threats future (Factor A; Table 3). habitat, the inadequacy of existing listed under Factor A, they may rise to On the basis of the best scientific and regulatory mechanisms, and other the level of threat in the foreseeable commercial information available, we manmade factors affecting their future. Although we are uncertain about find that the petitioned action to list continued existence. These threats are the direct impacts of global climate Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium ongoing and, in some cases (such as change on Eriogonum soredium and ostleri as endangered or threatened is nonnative species), are considered Lepidium ostleri, we expect the species warranted. We will make a irreversible, because, in the case of to respond negatively to changed determination on the status of the nonnative species invasions, large-scale environmental conditions and drought, species as endangered or threatened invasions cannot be recovered to a primarily from an increase in nonnative when we do a proposed listing native functioning ecosystem. Our invasive species and wildfire (see Factor determination. However, as explained rationale for assigning E. soredium and A). The threats of nonnative invasive in more detail below, an immediate L. ostleri an LPN of 8 is outlined below. species and wildfire could result in the proposal of a regulation implementing Under the Service’s LPN Guidance, extirpation of all populations, especially this action is precluded by higher the magnitude of threat is the first because the populations are small in priority listing actions, and progress is criterion we look at when establishing a size.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 10189

Under our LPN Guidance, the second work on higher priority listing actions defined as occurrence records or criterion we consider in assigning a with absolute statutory, court-ordered, locations recorded by one or more listing priority is the immediacy of or court-approved deadlines and final researcher over time within an threats. This criterion is intended to listing determinations for those species individual population. Despite ensure that the species facing actual, that were proposed for listing with additional searches in the San Francisco identifiable threats are given priority funds from Fiscal Year (FY) 2010. This Mountains and surrounding areas over those for which threats are only work includes all the actions listed in (including the Wah Wah Mountains, the potential or that are intrinsically the tables included in the section on Confusion Range, the Mountain Home vulnerable but are not known to be Preclusion and Expeditious Progress, Range, and the Tunnel Springs presently facing such threats. We below. Mountains), no other populations are consider all of the threats to be known to occur (Kass 1992c, pp. 4–5; Species Information—Trifolium imminent because we have information Evenden 1998, pp. 6–7, Appendix C; friscanum that the threats are identifiable and that Evenden 1999, pp. 2–3; Miller 2010c, the species are currently facing them Taxonomy and Species Description pp. 1, 4; Miller 2010e, pers. comm.; across their entire range. These actual, Trifolium friscanum is a dwarf mat- Roth 2010a, p. 4). identifiable threats are covered in forming or tufted perennial herb in the The five populations occur within greater detail in Factors A, D, and E of legume family (Fabaceae). Plants have a three mountain ranges in southwestern this finding. The majority of threats are Utah (see Figure 4 and Table 5). The two ongoing and, therefore, imminent, taproot and thick woody stem. T. friscanum is up to 1.2 in (3 cm) tall and largest populations, the Grampian Hill although gravel mining is currently and San Francisco Populations, occur impacting only one of the populations. has silver hairy leaves composed of three leaflets (Welsh et al. 2008, p. 486). on the southern tip on the San Francisco In addition to their current existence, Mountains in Beaver County. East of the we expect these threats to continue and Its flowers resemble those of other clover species and are arranged in heads San Francisco Mountains are the Beaver likely intensify in the foreseeable future. Lake Mountains, where the Lime The third criterion in our LPN of four to nine reddish-purple flowers with pale wings (Welsh et al. 2008, p. Mountain Population occurs on Lime guidance is intended to devote Mountain. West and south of the San resources to those species representing 486). Flowering occurs from late May to Francisco Mountains are the Wah Wah highly distinctive or isolated gene pools June, followed by fruit set in June Mountains. Along the southeastern edge as reflected by taxonomy. Eriogonum through July (Welsh et al. 2008, p. 486). of the Wah Wah Mountains is the soredium and Lepidium ostleri are valid Trifolium friscanum was originally southernmost population, the Blue taxa at the species level and, therefore, described by Stanley Welsh as T. Mountain population, which occurs receive a higher priority than andersonii var. friscanum from along the Beaver–Iron County boundary subspecies, but a lower priority than specimens collected on Grampian Hill line on Blue Mountain. The Tunnel species in a monotypic genus. in the southern San Francisco Springs Population occurs on Tunnel Therefore, we assigned E. soredium and Mountains in Beaver County, Utah Springs Mountains in Millard County. L. ostleri an LPN of 8. (Welsh 1978, p. 355). The variety was We will continue to monitor the elevated to species level in 1993 (Welsh The Tunnel Springs Mountains are west threats to Eriogonum soredium and 1993, p. 407). We accept the current and north of the Wah Wah Mountains. Lepidium ostleri and the species’ status taxonomy and consider T. friscanum to Two of the five Trifolium friscanum on an annual basis, and should the be a valid species and a listable entity populations overlap to some degree magnitude or the imminence of the under the ESA. with the previously described Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium threats change, we will revisit our Distribution and Population Status assessment of the LPN. ostleri populations. The Grampian Hill While we conclude that listing Trifolium friscanum is a narrow populations of all three species occur on Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium endemic known from five small Grampian Hill on the southern tip of the ostleri is warranted, an immediate populations containing nine sites on San Francisco Mountains in the same proposal to list this species is precluded private, SITLA, BLM, and USFS lands habitat. The San Francisco population by other higher priority listings, which in Beaver and Millard Counties, Utah of T. friscanum overlaps with the Indian we address in the Preclusion and (Figure 4; Table 5; Kass 1992c, pp. 4– Queen populations of E. soredium and Expeditious Progress section below. 5; Evenden 1998, pp. 6–7, Appendix C; L. ostleri. The remaining three Because we have assigned Eriogonum Evenden 1999, pp. 2–3; Miller 2010c, populations of T. friscanum—Blue soredium and Lepidium ostleri an LPN pp. 1, 4; Miller 2010e, pers. comm.; Mountain, Lime Mountain, and Tunnel of 8, work on a proposed listing Roth 2010a, p. 4). Populations are Springs—are located in nearby determination for Eriogonum soredium defined as groups of sites located in the mountain ranges as described above. and Lepidium ostleri is precluded by same geographic vicinity. Sites are BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 10190 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

BILLING CODE 4310–55–C

TABLE 5—ESTIMATED NUMBER OF Trifolium friscanum Plants (Evenden 1998, Appendix C; Miller 2010a, pers. comm.; Miller 2010c, pp. 1, 4; 2010d, p. 1; Roth 2010a, p. 4).

Estimated number of Population Land ownership/sites Trifolium friscanum plants

Blue Mountain ...... SITLA (1 site) ...... 250.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 ER23FE11.003 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 10191

TABLE 5—ESTIMATED NUMBER OF Trifolium friscanum Plants—Continued (Evenden 1998, Appendix C; Miller 2010a, pers. comm.; Miller 2010c, pp. 1, 4; 2010d, p. 1; Roth 2010a, p. 4).

Estimated number of Population Land ownership/sites Trifolium friscanum plants

Grampian Hill ...... Private (1 site) ...... Many 1,000s. San Francisco ...... BLM (Copper Gulch) (1 site) ...... 1,000. Private (Cactus Mine) (1 site) ...... 300. Private (Indian Queen) (1 site) ...... 3,000. Lime Mountain ...... BLM (1 site) ...... at least 125. Tunnel Springs Mountains ...... BLM (1 site) ...... 500. USFS (2 sites)* ...... 2,000. ESTIMATED TOTAL ...... 13,000. * Last surveyed in 1992. All other survey data from 2010.

Trifolium friscanum populations believe that the variation in population of the species; the species occupies only extend about 40 mi (64 km) from the estimates reflects variation in a fraction of the available habitat. The San Francisco Mountains and stretch population sizes, but is rather an artifact two largest populations—Grampian Hill across 650 mi2 (1,684 km2) (Figure 4). in survey effort and methods used. and San Francisco—occupy an Within that area, the five populations Many of the sites occur on private lands estimated 35 ac (14 ha) (2.3 percent) of are scattered in small, disjunct areas of where access is restricted, so population the available limestone and dolomite occupied habitat (Figure 4; Table 5). counts are estimated from observations. outcrops (Darnall et al. 2010, entire). We The majority of plants (71 percent of Accordingly, the available population do not have occupied habitat area totals the estimated populations) are located estimates are highly variable and for the remaining three populations, but in the San Francisco and Grampian Hill probably not accurate. During the 1990s, we believe they are smaller, based on populations (Miller 2010g, Appendix B). population estimates ranged from 3,500 field evaluations and the lower number Total occupied habitat for these two individuals (Evenden 1998, Appendix of individuals in these populations populations (four sites) is approximately C) to approximately 6,000 individuals (Kass 1992c, p. 3; Miller 2010d, p. 1; 35 ac (14 ha), each site ranging between (Kass 1992c, p. 8). In 2010, the total Roth 2010a, pp. 1–2). approximately 1 ac (0.4 ha) and 12 ac number of plants was estimated at Trifolium friscanum is typically (5 ha) (Darnall et al. 2010, entire). The roughly 13,000 (Table 5; Miller 2010a, found within sparsely vegetated pinion- Blue Mountain population occupies an pers. comm.; Miller 2010c, pp. 1, 4; juniper-sagebrush communities between area of approximately 0.33 ac (0.13 ha) Miller 2010d, p. 1; Roth 2010a, p. 4). 5,640 and 8,440 ft (1,720–2,573 m) in (Darnall et al. 2010, entire). We do not Thus, we do not have accurate elevation. Associated species include have population estimates for the areas population estimates or trends for this Ephedra spp. (Mormon tea), Gutierrezia of occupied habitat for the Tunnel species. sarothrae (snakeweed), Cercocarpus Springs sites (Tunnel Springs intricatus (dwarf mountain-mahogany), Habitat population) or the Lime Mountain and Petradoria pumila (rock goldenrod). population, but we assume the area of Trifolium friscanum is a narrow Associated rare species in the southern occupied habitat to be similar to or endemic restricted to soils derived from San Francisco Mountains include smaller than the San Francisco, volcanic gravels, Ordovician limestone, Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium Grampian Hill, and Blue Mountain and dolomite outcrops. Soils are ostleri, which generally grow on the populations, because these populations shallow, with gravels, rocks, and same substrate in similar but more open contain fewer than or similar numbers boulders on the surface (Kass 1992c, habitats adjacent to T. friscanum. of plants as those estimated for the other p. 3; Miller 2010d, p. 1). Life History sites (Table 5). In the southern San Francisco No information is available on the life The total number of Trifolium Mountains, where the majority of plants history of this species. friscanum individuals in Table 5 was are located, there are 845 ac (342 ha) of derived from observational counts or Ordovician limestone and 719 ac (291 Summary of Information Pertaining to estimates. For the Grampian Hill ha) of dolomite outcrops (Darnall et al. the Five Factors—Trifolium population, the estimate was ‘‘many 2010, entire). Ordovician limestone is friscanum thousands’’ (Miller 2010a, pers. comm.). rare within a 50-mi (80-km) radius of In making our 12-month finding on For the purpose of this finding, ‘‘many the San Francisco Mountains, but the petition, we considered and thousands’’ is interpreted as dolomite outcrops are common in the evaluated the best available scientific approximately 5,000 individuals. Four Wah Wah Mountain Range to the west and commercial information pertaining of the 9 sites contain 500 or fewer plants (Miller 2010g, Appendix F). We have no to Trifolium friscanum in relation to the (Table 5). information on the extent of volcanic five factors provided in section 4(a)(1) of The population estimates were not gravels in the area. As previously the ESA (see the full description of based on actual counts of plants but on described (see Distribution and these five factors in the Summary of cursory observations with inherent Population Status), we are not aware of Information Pertaining to the Five observer biases. Similar to Eriogonum any additional populations of the Factors—Astragalus hamiltonii, above). sorenium and Lepidium ostleri, the species, despite additional potentially plants grow in dense mat-forming suitable habitats. Factor A. The Present or Threatened clusters, making it difficult to determine We do not know if there are other Destruction, Modification, or the number of individuals within a limiting factors associated with the Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range cluster. Because individual plants are limestone and dolomite formations that The following factors may affect the difficult to distinguish, we do not restrict the habitat use and distribution habitat or range of Trifolium friscanum:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 10192 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

(1) Livestock grazing, (2) recreational species now or will impact the species Lepidium ostleri, Factor A, Mining. This activities, (3) mining, and (4) nonnative in the foreseeable future at a level that analysis applies to the Grampian Hill invasive species. threatens Trifolium friscanum. and San Francisco populations of Trifolium friscanum, because the three (1) Livestock Grazing (2) Recreational Activities species co-occur (see Distribution and Potential impacts of livestock grazing Potential impacts of recreational Population Status). In addition, we to plants are discussed above in the activities to plants are discussed above evaluated mining activity and its Livestock Grazing section under Factor in the Recreational Activities Section, impacts to the remaining three A for Astragalus hamiltonii. Factor A, for Astragalus hamiltonii. populations of T. friscanum. All Trifolium friscanum populations Because we know that OHV use is widespread across the southwestern To review, precious metal mining in on BLM lands are located on active the southern San Francisco Mountains grazing allotments (Galbraith 2010, pers. landscape, we analyzed its occurrence is likely to impact the Grampian Hill comm.). Adjacent habitats on SITLA in Triolium friscanum’s habitat for this and San Francisco populations of and private lands are subject to the same finding. Trifolium friscanum (Table 6). The grazing practices as the allotted BLM Access to the majority of occupied Grampian Hill population is located in land if the habitats are not fenced habitat on private lands is closed to all the area of the King David Mine, which (Galbraith 2010, pers. comm.). The vehicles, including OHVs (Miller 2010g, is part of the historical Horn Silver SITLA and private lands are only p. 5). There are no known impacts of Mine. The San Francisco population partially fenced in these areas; thus we OHV use in Trifolium friscanum’s (which overlaps the Indian Queen can assume that grazing occurs. The occupied habitat on private lands population of Eriogonum soredium and USFS sites of the Tunnel Springs (Miller 2010f, pers. comm.; Roth 2010a, Lepidium ostleri) is in the vicinity of population are not grazed (Kitchen pp. 1–2). The OHV use also does not 2010, pers. comm.). appear to impact T. friscanum’s habitat mine shafts near the Cactus Mine, an on SITLA, BLM, or USFS lands historical copper mine (see E. soredium The Trifolium friscanum population (Pontarolo 2009, pers. comm.; 2010, on BLM lands in the Tunnel Springs and L. ostleri, Factor A, Mining). pers. comm.; Miller 2010f, pers. comm.; Mountains was likely impacted by the Although large-scale precious metal Roth 2010a, pp. 1–2). Therefore, we do construction of an allotment boundary mining in the area ceased decades ago, not believe that recreational activities fence 10 years ago (Evenden 1999, p. 7; we believe mining is likely to occur threaten T. friscanum now, nor do we Roth 2010a, p. 2). The fence runs along again in the foreseeable future due to anticipate that these activities will a ridge and through approximately 500 patent rights and ongoing exploration become a threat in the foreseeable ft (150 m) of T. friscanum habitat (Roth for silver, zinc, and copper deposits— future. 2010b, p.1). The construction of the including recent exploration activities at fence may have impacted approximately (3) Mining the Horn Silver Mine (see E. soredium and L. ostleri, Factor A, Mining). 10 percent of the species’ habitat in the As previously described (see area (Roth 2010b, p.1). Livestock and Precious metal mining in the vicinity of Distribution and Population Status), the Grampian Hill and San Francisco wildlife trailing occur along the fence, Trifolium friscanum occurs in five resulting in trampling of individual populations is of concern because these population areas: Blue Mountain, populations comprise the species’ plants and soil compaction (Roth 2010a, Grampian Hill, San Francisco, Lime largest known populations, containing p. 2). No plants occur within 100 ft (30 Mountain, and Tunnel Springs the vast majority of known individuals m) of either side of the fence (Roth Mountains. For purposes of the (9,300 individuals, or 71 percent of the 2010a, p. 2). following analysis, it is important to species’ estimated total population) Although much of the species’ habitat note that the Grampian Hill and San (Table 5). is accessible to livestock, we are not Francisco populations occur in the aware of any other disturbances or loss southern San Francisco Mountains in The Lime Mountain population has of plants from grazing (Kass 1992, the same vicinity and habitat as experienced precious metal mining entire; Evenden 1998, entire, Evenden Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium activity in the past (Table 6; Miller 1999, entire; Pontarolo 2009, pers. ostleri. The other three populations are 2010h, pp. 6–7). The last mining activity comm.; Miller 2010f, pers. comm.; Roth located in nearby mountain ranges. occurred in the early 1980s. We do not 2010a, p. 3). Available information The San Francisco Mountains have an anticipate additional mining, due to the suggests that livestock grazing is not extensive history of mining of precious small amounts of minerals that were occurring at a level that is impacting the metals and limestone gravel (Table 6; extracted (Miller 2010h, p. 7). We are species (Pontarolo 2009, pers. comm.; Evenden 1998, p. 3). We described this not aware of precious metal mining Miller 2010f, pers. comm.; Roth 2010a, mining history, the likelihood of future activities in the vicinity of the Blue p. 3). Therefore, we have no information mining activities, and effects to the Mountain or Tunnel Springs suggesting that grazing impacts the species under Eriogonum soredium and populations.

TABLE 6—MINING ACTIVITIES IN THE HABITAT OF Trifolium friscanum

Mining Activity Population Historical Current Future

Blue Mountain ...... gravel quarrying ...... active ...... gravel quarrying. Grampian Hill ...... silver, lead, copper, zinc (Horn Silver none ...... silver, lead, copper, zinc, landscape Mine). gravel quarrying. San Francisco ...... silver, lead, copper, zinc, gravel quar- active ...... silver, lead, copper, zinc, landscape rying (Cactus Mine). gravel quarrying.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 10193

TABLE 6—MINING ACTIVITIES IN THE HABITAT OF Trifolium friscanum—Continued

Mining Activity Population Historical Current Future

Lime Mountain ...... silver, lead, copper, zinc, native gold, none ...... unknown. iron (Skylark, Independence & Ga- lena Mines). Tunnel Springs Mountains ...... unknown ...... none ...... unknown.

Gravel mining is known to occur to the limited extent of the Ordovician available gravel pit operations on within the range of Trifolium friscanum, limestone deposits across the landscape surrounding Federal lands (Blackett and particularly in the San Francisco (see Habitat), it is plausible that mining Tripp 1999, p. 33). Thus, the Blue Mountains and Wah Wah Mountains. activities could occur at the Grampian Mountain population area could become Impacts to T. friscanum from gravel Hill population. Even if gravel mining a primary source of gravel for mining in the southern San Francisco does not occur at the Grampian Hill Washington County and other nearby Mountains is similar to those analyzed population, we previously established communities, especially because the for Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium that this population is likely to be pit’s location on SITLA lands limits the ostleri, because of their co-occurrence impacted by precious metal mining. need for environmental regulations. (see E. soredium and L. ostleri, Factor A, A similar overlap in habitat types and Overall, it is likely that an increasing Mining, above). gravel quarrying (Table 6) occurs for this human population growth in Gravel mining in the southern San species in the Blue Mountain Washington County (U.S. Census Francisco Mountains is likely to impact population. The Blue Mountain Bureau 2010b, entire; Utah GOPB 2010, the San Francisco population of T. population, which is less than 1 ac (0.4 p. 48) will result in an increased friscanum and possibly the Grampian ha) in size, is located on SITLA lands demand for the limestone and gravel Hill population (Table 6). We estimate within a couple hundred feet (meters) of resources at and nearby known that 19 ac (8 ha) of suitable habitat is a gravel pit (Evenden 1998, p. 9; Roth populations of T. friscanum. disturbed by gravel mining activities 2010a, p. 4). This mine is not reclaimed To summarize, mining throughout near the San Francisco population of and, therefore, is considered active large portions of Trifolium friscanum’s Trifolium friscanum. Two quarries are (Darnall et al. 2010, entire). Therefore, range has impacted available habitat. located within 1,000 ft (300 m) of two we assume that continued gravel mining Three of the five known populations are sites (Cactus Mine and Copper Gulch) of will ultimately impact this population if located at historical precious metal the San Francisco population of T. it has not already occurred. The need for mines or gravel mines on private and friscanum. Based on habitat similarities gravel sources is expected to increase, SITLA lands (Table 5; Table 6; see and proximity, we believe the plant may because an increasing human Factor D). Two of these populations have occupied these areas prior to the population growth (U.S. Census Bureau (San Francisco and Grampian Hill) mining activity. Gravel pits in this area 2010b, entire; Utah GOPB 2010, p. 48) comprise the vast majority (71 percent) are considered active because they are will result in the need for increased of the known estimated population of not reclaimed—given their close road construction and maintenance in T. friscanum (Table 5). Precious metal proximity to known T. friscanum the future. Although the gravel in the mining is likely to impact populations plants, these gravel pits could impact Blue Mountain is mined for road of T. friscanum in the foreseeable future, the remaining occupied habitat of the construction projects, the effects particularly in the vicinity of the large species through additional quarrying analysis under E. soredium and L. Grampian Hill and San Francisco activities (i.e., removal of the entire ostleri (see Factor A, Mining) is relevant; populations. Gravel mining is expected substrate) or when roads and other i.e., mining for gravel will lead to the to increase in the future in response to infrastructure are constructed. The San degradation and loss of suitable habitat increased population growth and Francisco population currently occupies for Trifolium friscanum. limited availability of active gravel pits only 15 ac (6 ha) of habitat, distributed As previously discussed (see in nearby Washington County (see E. in three sites (Copper Gulch, Cactus Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium soredium and L. ostleri, Factor A). Mine, and Indian Queen) (Table 5; ostleri, Factor A, Mining, above), Available information suggests that Darnall et al. 2010, entire). construction sand, gravel, and crushed three of five populations will be Gravel mining also may impact the stone together rank as the second most significantly impacted by either Grampian Hill population of Trifolium valuable commodity produced among precious metal or gravel mining in the friscanum in the future. Although gravel industrial minerals in Utah (Bon and foreseeable future (see E. soredium and mining is not actively occurring at Krahulec 2009, p. 5). Gravel, stone, and L. ostleri, Factor A, Mining). Therefore, Grampian Hill, gravel pits exist within rock are generally mined for local and we have determined that mining is a 1 mi (1.6 km) of this T. friscanum regional distribution due to the high threat to T. friscanum now and in the population—near the Cupric Mine (see cost of transport. The quarries in the foreseeable future. E. soredium and L. ostleri, Factor A, San Francisco Mountains are the closest Mining, above). We do not know if crushed limestone quarries to (4) Nonnative Invasive Species gravel mining will definitely occur at Washington County, one of the fastest Potential impacts of nonnative the Grampian Hill population. However, growing counties in Utah (see E. invasive species to native plants and mining operations are expected to either soredium and L. ostleri, Factor A). In their habitat are discussed above in expand from the vicinity of the Cupric general, there has been a net loss of Astragalus hamiltonii, Factor A, Mine or be moved to a new location local sand and gravel supply pits in the Nonnative Invasive Species. The annual within the species’ habitat in the near Washington County area due to ongoing nonnative invasive grass, Bromus future (Munson 2010, pers. comm.). Due urban development and the lack of tectorum, is considered the most

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 10194 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

ubiquitous invasive species in the expansion of invasive species and gravel in the future (Table 6). We Intermountain West due to its ability to associated fire is a threat to the species, anticipate an increase in the demand for rapidly invade native dryland especially when considering the limited precious metals and landscape rock ecosystems and outcompete native plant distribution of the species and the high based on the economic outlook for these species (Mack 1981, p. 145; Mack and potential of stochastic extinctions (as commodities, regional availability, and Pyke 1983, p. 88; Thill et al. discussed in the Small Population Size, the proximity of these gravel mines to 1984, p. 10). Factor E, below). As described in the a rapidly expanding urban area and, Bromus tectorum occurs in the habitat Distribution section, the majority of therefore, an increase in impacts to T. and vicinity of the Grampian Hill and plants are located within the Grampian friscanum. San Francisco Trifolium friscanum Hill and San Francisco populations, Bromus tectorum is documented to populations, which also is where the where occurrences of B. tectorum are occur in the two largest of the five majority of plants occur (Table 5; Miller documented. Occupied habitat in these populations of Trifolium friscanum. The 2010c, pp. 2–5; Roth 2010a, p. 1). We do populations ranges from 1 to 12 ac (0.4 threat of fire caused by annual not know whether B. tectorum occurs in to 5 ha). nonnative species invasions is the other three populations, but given In summary, Bromus tectorum occurs exacerbated by mining activities and the ubiquitous distribution of B. in the two largest Trifolium friscanum global climate change (see the Climate tectorum in the Intermountain West, we populations (Grampian Hill and San Change and Drought section under expect it occurs in the vicinity of all Francisco populations, Table 5). Given Factor E). Small population sizes and populations (Novack and Mack, 2001, the ability of B. tectorum to rapidly extremely limited distribution of this p. 115). invade dryland ecosystems (Mack 1981, species make it especially vulnerable to Surface disturbances increase the p. 145; Mack and Pyke, 1983, p. 88; stochastic extinction events, including occurrence and densities of B. tectorum Thill et al. 1984, p. 10), we expect it to mining activities and wildfires caused (see Eriogonum soredium and Lepidium increase in the future in response to by increased invasions of nonnative ostleri, Factor A, Nonnative Invasive surface disturbance from increased species (see the Small Population Size Species; Mack 1981, p. 145). As mining activities and global climate section under Factor E). previously described, increased mining change (see the Climate Change and Therefore, we find that Trifolium activities and associated surface Drought section under Factor E for friscanum is threatened by the present disturbances are expected to occur in Astragalus hamiltonii). An increase in or threatened destruction, modification, and adjacent to the occupied habitat for nonnative species is expected to or curtailment of the species’ habitat or T. friscanum in the San Francisco and increase the frequency of fires in range, now and in the foreseeable Blue Mountains (see Mining, above), T. friscanum’s habitat. Therefore, we future, based on impacts from mining consequently encouraging B. tectorum determine that nonnative invasive activities and nonnative invasive to expand into the species’ habitat. species are a threat to two of five species. Invasions of annual nonnative populations of T. frsicanum and the species, such as Bromus tectorum, are majority of individuals now, and may Factor B. Overutilization for well documented to contribute to impact all populations in the Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or increased fire frequencies (Brooks and foreseeable future when evaluated Educational Purposes Pyke 2002, p. 5; Grace et al. 2002, p. 43; cumulatively with mining activities Trifolium friscanum is not a plant of Brooks et al. 2003, pp. 4, 13, 15). The (and associated surface disturbances), horticultural interest. We are not aware risk of fire is expected to increase from climate change, and fire. of any overutilization or collection of T. 46 to 100 percent when the cover of Summary of Factor A friscanum. Therefore, overutilization for B. tectorum increases from 12 to 45 commercial, recreational, scientific, or percent or more (Link et al. 2006, p. At this time, based on best available educational purposes does not appear to 116). In the absence of exotic species, it information, we do not believe that pose a significant threat to the species is generally estimated that fire return grazing or recreational activities now nor is it likely to become a threat intervals in xeric sagebrush significantly threaten Trifolium in the foreseeable future. communities range from 100 to 350 friscanum now or in the foreseeable years (Baker 2006, p. 181). In some areas future. However, we determine that Factor C. Disease or Predation of the Great Basin (Snake River Plain), mining and nonnative invasive species Disease and herbivory on the species fire return intervals due to B. tectorum are threats to T. friscanum. are unknown. We do not have any invasion are now between 3 and 5 years Mining activities impacted Trifolium information indicating that disease is (Whisenant 1990, p. 4). Most plant friscanum habitat in the past and impacting Trifolium friscanum. We also species occurring within a sagebrush continue to be a threat to the species do not have any information indicating ecosystem are not expected to be and its habitat throughout large portions that herbivory is occurring from adapted to frequent fires, as evidenced of its range. Two of the five populations livestock (see the Livestock Grazing in the lack of evolutionary adaptations and the majority of individuals are section under Factor A), wildlife, or found in other shrub-dominated fire- located on lands with an extensive insects (Kass 1992c, p. 10; Evenden adapted ecosystems like chaparral. history of precious metal mining; 1998, entire; Evenden 1999, entire; Examples of such adaptation would ongoing exploration activities indicate Miller 2010a, p. 1; Miller 2010c, entire; include re-sprouting and heat- that precious metal mining is likely to Roth 2010a, entire). Thus, we do not stimulated seed germination (Baker, in threaten the species in the foreseeable consider disease or predation to be press, p. 17). future. The main threat to the majority threats to this species. In the absence of annual nonnative of T. friscanum plants is gravel mining species, T. friscanum grows in sparsely (Table 6). Three of the five populations Factor D. The Inadequacy of Existing vegetated communities that are unlikely are located in the vicinity of gravel pits Regulatory Mechanisms to carry fires (see Habitat section). Thus, that are mined for road and landscaping There are no endangered species laws T. friscanum is unlikely to be adapted gravel. The three populations located in protecting plants on private, State, or to fire and, therefore, unlikely to persist the vicinity of gravel mines contain the Tribal lands in Utah. The majority of through a fire. Therefore, the potential majority of plants and may be mined for individual plants are located on SITLA

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 10195

or private lands (Table 5). Trifolium we find that the inadequacy of existing size an intrinsic vulnerability to friscanum is listed as a bureau-sensitive mechanisms to regulate mining Trifolium friscanum, which may not plant for the BLM. Limited policy-level activities on private and State lands is rise to the level of a threat on its own. protection by the BLM is afforded a threat to three of five populations and However, the small population sizes rise through the Special Status Species the majority of individuals, and thus to to the level of a threat because of the Management Policy Manual # 6840, T. friscanum now and into the combined effects of having only five which forms the basis for special status foreseeable future. highly localized small populations with species management on BLM lands the effects of global climate change (see Factor E. Other Natural or Manmade (BLM 2008e, entire). The two sites on below) and the potential for stochastic Factors Affecting Its Continued USFS lands are located within the extinction events such as mining, and Existence Desert Experimental Range in the fire induced by invasive species (see Tunnel Springs Mountains (Tunnel Natural and manmade threats to Factor A). Therefore, we consider small Springs population) and appear to be Trifolium friscanum’s survival include: localized population size, in secure, although the population has not (1) Small population size and (2) combination with mining, invasive been visited since 1992 (Kass 1992c, p. climate change and drought. species, and climate change, to be a 11; Evenden 1998, Appendix C; (1) Small Population Size threat to the species now and in the Evenden 1999, p. 3). foreseeable future. This species is predominantly located General potential impacts of small on private or SITLA lands (Table 5), population sizes in plants are discussed (2) Climate Change and Drought where it is threatened by mining-related above in the Small Population Size Potential impacts of climate change activities (see Factor A). There are section under Factor E for Astragalus and drought to the geographic area are limited regulatory mechanisms in place hamiltonii. characterized in the Climate Change and that may protect Trifolium friscanum As previously discussed (see Drought section under Factor E for from mining on private or State lands. Distribution and Population Status, Astragalus hamiltonii. As discussed in As described under Eriogonum above), the entire species’ range is the Small Population Size section soredium and Lepidium ostleri, Factor restricted to highly specialized habitat above, Trifolium friscanum has a D, State environmental impact niches, distributed in 5 populations limited distribution and populations are assessments are required for large (and 9 sites) with a total population localized and small. In addition, these mining operations for all mineral estimate of 13,000 plants. Four of the 9 populations are restricted to very exploration, development, and sites contain 500 or fewer individuals specific soil types. Global climate extraction, including gravel pits and (Table 5). Only a fraction of the entire change exacerbates the risk of extinction precious metal mining (UDOGM 2010b, species’ range is occupied habitat. The for species that are already vulnerable p.1; Baker 2010, pers. comm.). T. majority of plants are located in two due to low population numbers and friscanum is not State listed, but it is on populations containing four sites of restricted habitat requirements (see the BLM sensitive species list. If occupied habitat, ranging from an Climate Change and Drought, Factor E UDOGM is made aware of impacts to estimated 1 ac (0.4 ha) to a maximum for Astragalus hamiltonii, above). these species, they could consider of 12 ac (5 ha) (Darnall et al. 2010, Predicted changes in climatic minimizing and mitigating impacts; entire; Miller 2010g, Appendix B). conditions include increases in however, there is no requirement to Despite the overall lack of information temperature, decreases in rainfall, and address species that are not federally on the population ecology of Trifolium increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide listed in the mine permitting process friscanum, we know that small in the American Southwest (Walther et (Baker 2010, pers. comm.). populations are at an increased risk of al. 2002, p. 389; IPCC 2007, p. 48; Karl The existing mining activities (see extinction due to the potential for et al. 2009, p. 129). Although we have Factor A, Mining) are under the 5-ac (2- inbreeding depression, loss of genetic no information on how Trifolium ha) regulatory threshold and, therefore, diversity, and lower sexual friscanum will respond to effects related not subject to permitting laws (Munson reproduction rates (Ellstrand and Elam to climate change, persistent or 2010, pers. comm.). A few of the gravel 1993, entire; Wilcock and Neiland 2002, prolonged drought conditions are likely mine pits almost exceed the 5-ac (2-ha) p. 275). No information is available on to reduce the frequency and duration of limit, and the operators may need to the population genetics, pollination, or flowering and germination events, lower apply for permits (Munson 2010, pers. reproductive effort and success of T. the recruitment of individual plants, comm.); however, they also could friscanum. However, the small areas of compromise the viability of choose to begin new gravel pits, or occupation and the narrow overall range populations, and impact pollinator reclaim portions of the existing pits to of the species make it highly susceptible availability (Tilman and El Haddi 1992, remain below the 5-ac (2-ha) limit to stochastic extinction events and the p. 263; Harrison 2001, p. 78). The (Munson 2010, pers. comm.). effects of inbreeding depression. smallest change in environmental In summary, the existing regulatory Mining or a single random event, such factors, especially precipitation, plays a mechanisms are not adequate to protect as a wildfire from invasive species (see decisive role in plant survival in arid T. friscanum from becoming threatened Factor A, Nonnative Invasive Species), regions (Herbel et al. 1972, p. 1084). or endangered by precious metal or could extirpate an entire or at least a Drought conditions led to a noticeable gravel mining on SITLA and private substantial portion of a population, decline in survival, vigor, and lands. The active gravel pits are below given the small areas of occupied reproductive output of other rare and the 5-ac (2-ha) threshold that would habitat. Species with limited ranges and endangered plants in the Southwest automatically trigger regulatory restricted habitat requirements also are during the drought years of 2001 environmental impact assessments. more vulnerable to the effects of global through 2004 (Anderton 2002, p. 1; Van Even if an environmental impact climate change (see Climate Change and Buren and Harper 2002, p. 3; Van Buren assessment is completed for any of the Drought, below) (IPCC 2002, p. 22; Jump and Harper 2004, entire; Hughes 2005, mines, the existing mining laws only and Penuelas 2005, p. 1016; Machinski entire; Clark and Clark 2007, p. 6; Roth recommend, and do not mandate, the et al. 2006, p. 226; Krause 2010, p. 79). 2008a, entire; Roth 2008b, pp. 3–4). species’ protection or mitigation. Thus, Overall, we consider small population Similar responses are anticipated to

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 10196 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

adversely affect the long-term Summary of Factor E species experts and other Federal and persistence of T. friscanum. We assessed the potential risks of State agencies. This status review identified threats Climate change is expected to small population size, climate change, to the species attributable to Factors A, increase levels of carbon dioxide and drought to Trifolium friscanum D, and E. The primary threat to the (Walther et al. 2002, p. 389; IPCC 2007, populations. T. friscanum has a highly species is habitat destruction from p. 48; Karl et al. 2009, p. 129). Elevated restricted distribution and is known precious metal and gravel mining on from five small, localized populations. levels of carbon dioxide lead to private and SITLA lands (Factor A). The Even in the absence of information on increased invasive annual plant largest populations containing the genetic diversity, inbreeding depression, biomass, invasive seed production, and majority of Trifolium friscanum plants and reproductive effort, a random pest outbreaks (Smith et al. 2000, p. 80– are located on private lands with active 81; IPCC 2002, pp. 18, 32; Ziska et al. stochastic event could impact a mining claims. These populations were 2005, p. 1328), and will put additional significant portion of a population. likely impacted by historical precious stressors on rare plants already suffering Small populations that are restricted by metal mining. Another population is from the effects of elevated temperatures habitat requirements are also more located on SITLA lands in the and drought. vulnerable to the effects of climate immediate vicinity of a gravel pit. We change, such as prolonged droughts and The actual extent to which climate expect an increase in precious metal increased fire frequencies. and gravel mining in the foreseeable change itself will impact Trifolium While naturally occurring droughts friscanum is unclear, mostly because we future, with the associated loss and are not likely to impact the long-term fragmentation of T. friscanum do not have long-term demographic persistence of the species, an increase in information that allows us to predict the populations. periodic prolonged droughts due to Bromus tectorum occurs in the species’ response to changes in climate change is likely to impact the environmental conditions, including vicinity of the two largest populations of species across its entire range in the the five known Trifolium friscanum prolonged drought. However, as future. Global climate change, previously described, the species is populations. It is a highly invasive particularly when assessed species and is expected to increase in threatened by mining activities (see cumulatively with small population size areas where surface disturbance such as Mining, Factor A, above), which will and threats from mining activities, is mining occurs. As previously discussed, likely result in the loss of large numbers expected to increase the density of the species occurs in the vicinity of of individuals or even entire invasive annual grasses, which are gravel and precious metal mines. Mines populations. Increased surface already present in the habitat of inherently cause surface disturbances disturbances associated with mining Trifolium friscanum within the from excavation activities and the activities also will likely increase the populations that contain the majority of construction of roads and other extent and densities of nonnative the plants (see Factor A). Increased infrastructure. Global climate change is invasive species and, with these, the nonnative species in the habitat of expected to increase drought conditions frequencies of fires (see Nonnative T. friscanum can increase fire frequency in the Southwest and increase the Invasive Species, Factor A, above). The and severity. Because T. friscanum is spread of nonnative invasive species. cumulative effects of the potential not likely adapted to persist through The biggest concern associated with the reduction in population numbers and fires, wildfires can have a significant increase in invasive species is the threat habitat loss (of already small impact on these small populations. of increased wildfire (Factor A), populations) associated with mining Although small population size and particularly when considering the small and increased invasive species (and fire) climate change make the species population sizes and small occupied are likely to increase the risk of the intrinsically more vulnerable, we are habitat acreages associated with the species being impacted by changes in uncertain whether they would rise to species. climate. the level of threat by themselves. The magnitude of the biological In summary, we find it difficult to However, when combined with the threats posed by the small population threats listed under Factor A, we believe size and limited species range are not analyze the potential effects of global that small population size is likely to well understood due to the lack of climate change on Trifolium friscanum rise to the level of threat in the information available on the ecology of in the absence of demographic trend foreseeable future. At this time, we are Trifolium friscanum. Future studies data for the species which would allow uncertain of the degree to which climate may provide us with a more thorough us to analyze how the species responds change constitutes a threat to the understanding of threats posed by to climate change through time. species. pollinator limitation, inbreeding However, the cumulative effects posed depression, and the potential lack of Finding by the threats of mining, nonnative genetic diversity over the species’ range. species and small population size may As required by the ESA, we Even without detailed knowledge on exacerbate the effects of climate change conducted a review of the status of the how small population sizes are on T. friscanum in the future. However, species and considered the five factors impacting the biology and ecology of at this time, we believe that the state of in assessing whether Trifolium T. friscanum, the small areas of knowledge concerning the localized friscanum is endangered or threatened occupied habitat make the species effects of climate change within the throughout all or a significant portion of highly vulnerable to habitat destruction habitat occupied by T. friscanum is too its range. We examined the best through mining-related activities as well speculative to determine whether scientific and commercial information as random extinction events, including climate change is a threat to this species available regarding the past, present, fires and the effects of global climate in the foreseeable future. We will and future threats faced by T. friscanum. change (Factor E). continue to assess the potential of We reviewed the petition, information The existing regulatory mechanisms climate change to threaten the species as available in our files, as well as other are not adequate to protect Trifolium better scientific information becomes available published and unpublished friscanum from the primary threat of available. information, and we consulted with mining, particularly because the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 10197

majority of individuals are located on habitat, the inadequacy of existing and the threat of increased mining private lands (Factor D). The regulatory mechanisms, and other activities. inadequacy of regulatory mechanisms natural or manmade factors affecting its Therefore, we consider the threats (Factor D) on private and State lands, continued existence. These threats are that Trifolium friscanum faces to be combined with the high economic and ongoing and, in some cases (such as moderate in magnitude because the commercial value of much of the nonnative species), are considered major threats (mining, nonnative substrate this species depends on, poses irreversible because large-scale invasive species, small population size, a serious threat to T. friscanum. A large invasions cannot be recovered to a plus inadequacy of existing regulatory portion of the species’ individuals have native functioning ecosystem. Our mechanisms), while serious and the potential to be extirpated by mining rationale for assigning T. friscanum an occurring rangewide, do not collectively activities in the foreseeable future LPN of 8 is outlined below. rise to the level of high magnitude. (Factor A; Table 6). Ongoing mining in Under the Service’s LPN guidance, Under our LPN guidance, the second the habitat of T. friscanum has the the magnitude of threat is the first criterion we consider in assigning a potential to extirpate three of the five criterion we look at when establishing a listing priority is the immediacy of populations in the foreseeable future, listing priority. The guidance indicates threats. This criterion is intended to two of which contain the majority of that species with the highest magnitude ensure that the species facing actual, plants (Factor A, Table 5). of threat are those species facing the identifiable threats are given priority On the basis of the best scientific and greatest threats to their continued over those for which threats are only commercial information available, we existence. These species receive the potential or those that are intrinsically find that the petitioned action to list highest listing priority. We consider the vulnerable but are not known to be Trifolium friscanum as endangered or magnitude of Factor A moderate. While presently facing such threats. We threatened is warranted. We will make current mining activities are ongoing in consider all of the threats to be a determination on the status of the the habitat of T. friscanum, they are not imminent because we have factual species as endangered or threatened ongoing in the immediate vicinity of information that the threats are when we do a proposed listing any of the populations. Mining in the identifiable and that the species is determination. However, as explained habitat of these populations is expected currently facing them in many portions in more detail below, an immediate to increase the density of B. tectorum, of its range. These actual, identifiable proposal of a regulation implementing thereby facilitating the spread of fire. B. threats are covered in greater detail in this action is precluded by higher tectorum occurs in two of the five Factors A, D, and E of this finding. The priority listing actions, and progress is populations, which also contain the majority of threats are ongoing and, being made to add or remove qualified largest number of individuals. We have therefore, imminent, although mining is species from the Lists of Endangered no documentation on the density of B. currently ongoing in the habitat of only and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. tectorum within these populations but one of the populations. In addition to We reviewed the available we are expecting it to increase in the their current existence, we expect these information to determine if the existing future. threats, except for inadequate and foreseeable threats render the We consider the magnitude of Factor regulations, to continue and likely species at risk of extinction now such D to be moderate. Three of the five intensify in the foreseeable future. that issuing an emergency regulation populations are located on private or The third criterion in our LPN temporarily listing the species under SITLA lands. The majority of guidance is intended to devote section 4(b)(7) of the ESA is warranted. individuals are located on private lands resources to those species representing We determined that issuing an with active patented mining claims. highly distinctive or isolated gene pools emergency regulation temporarily Existing regulatory mechanisms do not as reflected by taxonomy. Trifolium listing the species is not warranted at adequately protect Trifolium friscanum friscanum is a valid taxon at the species this time because there is no emergency from the impacts of mining on private level and, therefore, receives a higher posing a significant risk to the well lands. The majority of individuals (3 priority than subspecies, but a lower being of Trifolium friscanum. We do not populations) have the potential to be priority than species in a monotypic believe that any of the potential threats impacted by mining in the future. genus. Therefore, we assigned T. are of such great immediacy and However, because none of the friscanum an LPN of 8. severity that would threaten all of the populations are directly impacted by We will continue to monitor the known populations with the imminent current mining levels on SITLA or threats to Trifolium friscanum and the risk of extinction. However, if at any private lands, we consider threats under species’ status on an annual basis, and, time we determine that issuing an Factor D to be moderate at this time. should the magnitude or the imminence emergency regulation temporarily We consider the magnitude of Factor of the threats change, we will revisit our listing Trifolium friscanum is E moderate, because, although small assessment of the LPN. warranted, we will initiate this action at population size and climate change While we conclude that listing that time. make the species intrinsically more Trifolium friscanum is warranted, an vulnerable, we are uncertain of whether immediate proposal to list this species Listing Priority Number they would rise to the level of threat by is precluded by other higher priority Pursuant to our guidelines, titled themselves. However, when collectively listings, which we address in the ‘‘Endangered and Threatened Species analyzed with the threats listed under Preclusion and Expeditious Progress Listing and Recovery Priority Factor A, they may rise to the level of section below. Because we have Guidelines’’ (described above), we have threat in the foreseeable future. assigned T. friscanum an LPN of 8, work assigned Trifolium friscanum a Listing Although we are uncertain about the on a proposed listing determination for Priority Number (LPN) of 8, based on direct impacts of global climate change T. friscanum is precluded by work on our finding that the species faces threats on Trifolium friscanum, we expect the higher priority listing actions with that are of moderate magnitude and are species to respond negatively to absolute statutory, court-ordered, or imminent. These threats include the changed environmental conditions and court-approved deadlines and final present or threatened destruction, drought, especially when combined listing determinations for those species modification, or curtailment of its with the effects of small population size that were proposed for listing with

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 10198 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

funds from FY 2010. This work includes We cannot spend more than is Congress also recognized that the all the actions listed in the tables below appropriated for the Listing Program availability of resources was the key under expeditious progress. without violating the Anti-Deficiency element in deciding, when making a Act (see 31 U.S.C. 1341(a)(1)(A)). In 12-month petition finding, whether we Preclusion and Expeditious Progress addition, in FY 1998 and for each FY would prepare and issue a listing Preclusion is a function of the listing since then, Congress has placed a proposal or instead make a ‘‘warranted priority of a species in relation to the statutory cap on funds which may be but precluded’’ finding for a given resources that are available and expended for the Listing Program, equal species. The Conference Report competing demands for those resources. to the amount expressly appropriated accompanying Public Law 97–304, Thus, in any given fiscal year, multiple for that purpose in that FY. This cap which established the current statutory factors dictate whether it will be was designed to prevent funds deadlines and the warranted-but- possible to undertake work on a appropriated for other functions under precluded finding, states (in a proposed listing regulation or whether the ESA (for example, recovery funds discussion on 90-day petition findings promulgation of such a proposal is for removing species from the Lists), or that by its own terms also covers warranted but precluded by higher for other Service programs, from being 12-month findings) that the deadlines priority listing actions. used for Listing Program actions (see were ‘‘not intended to allow the The resources available for listing House Report 105–163, 105th Congress, Secretary to delay commencing the actions are determined through the 1st Session, July 1, 1997). rulemaking process for any reason other annual Congressional appropriations Recognizing that designation of than that the existence of pending or process. The appropriation for the critical habitat for species already listed imminent proposals to list species Services’ Listing Program is available to would consume most of the overall subject to a greater degree of threat support work involving the following Listing Program appropriation, Congress would make allocation of resources to listing actions: Proposed and final also put a critical habitat subcap in such a petition [that is, for a lower- listing rules; 90-day and 12-month place in FY 2002 and has retained it ranking species] unwise.’’ findings on petitions to add species to each subsequent year to ensure that In FY 2010, expeditious progress is the Lists of Endangered and Threatened some funds are available for other work that amount of work that can be Wildlife and Plants (Lists) or to change in the Listing Program: ‘‘The critical achieved with $10,471,000, which is the the status of a species from threatened habitat designation subcap will ensure amount of money that Congress appropriated for the Listing Program to endangered; annual determinations that some funding is available to (that is, the portion of the Listing on prior ‘‘warranted but precluded’’ address other listing activities’’ (House Program funding not related to critical petition findings as required under Report No. 107–103, 107th Congress, 1st habitat designations for species that are section 4(b)(3)(C)(i) of the ESA; critical Session, June 19, 2001). In FY 2002 and already listed). However, these funds habitat petition findings; proposed and each year until FY 2006, the Service has are not enough to fully fund all our final rules designating critical habitat; had to use virtually the entire critical court-ordered and statutory listing and litigation-related, administrative, habitat subcap to address court- actions in FY 2010, so we are using and program-management functions mandated designations of critical $1,114,417 of our critical habitat subcap (including preparing and allocating habitat, and consequently none of the funds in order to work on all of our budgets, responding to Congressional critical habitat subcap funds have been required petition findings and listing and public inquiries, and conducting available for other listing activities. In determinations. This brings the total public outreach regarding listing and FY 2007, we were able to use some of amount of funds we have for listing critical habitat). the critical habitat subcap funds to fund actions in FY 2010 to $11,585,417. The work involved in preparing proposed listing determinations for Starting in FY 2010, we also are using various listing documents can be high-priority candidate species. In FY our funds to work on listing actions for extensive and may include, but is not 2009, while we were unable to use any foreign species, because that work was limited to: Gathering and assessing the of the critical habitat subcap funds to transferred from the Division of best scientific and commercial data fund proposed listing determinations, Scientific Authority, International available and conducting analyses used we did use some of this money to fund Affairs Program, to the Endangered as the basis for our decisions; writing the critical habitat portion of some Species Program. Our process is to make and publishing documents; and proposed listing determinations so that our determinations of preclusion on a obtaining, reviewing, and evaluating the proposed listing determination and nationwide basis to ensure that the public comments and peer review proposed critical habitat designation species most in need of listing will be comments on proposed rules and could be combined into one rule, addressed first and also because we incorporating relevant information into thereby being more efficient in our allocate our listing budget on a final rules. The number of listing work. In FY 2010, we are using some of nationwide basis. The $11,585,417 is actions that we can undertake in a given the critical habitat subcap funds to fund being used to fund work in the year also is influenced by the actions with statutory deadlines. following categories: Compliance with complexity of those listing actions; that Thus, through the listing cap, the court orders and court-approved is, more complex actions generally are critical habitat subcap, and the amount settlement agreements requiring that more costly. For example, during the of funds needed to address court- petition findings or listing past several years the cost (excluding mandated critical habitat designations, determinations be completed by a publication costs) for preparing a Congress and the courts have in effect specific date; section 4 (of the ESA) 12-month finding, without a proposed determined the amount of money listing actions with absolute statutory rule, has ranged from approximately available for other listing activities. deadlines; essential litigation-related, $11,000 for one species with a restricted Therefore, the funds in the listing cap, administrative, and listing program- range and involving a relatively other than those needed to address management functions; and high- uncomplicated analysis to $305,000 for court-mandated critical habitat for priority listing actions for some of our another species that is wide ranging and already listed species, set the limits on candidate species. The allocations for involving a complex analysis. our petition finding determinations. each specific listing action are identified

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 10199

in the Service’s FY 2010 Allocation funding to work on a proposed listing and T. friscanum are species, we Table (part of our administrative determination. As we work on proposed assigned an LPN of 8 to each. Therefore, record). and final listing rules for these 40 work on a proposed listing In FY 2007, we had more than 120 candidates, we are applying the ranking determination for E. soredium, L. ostleri species with an LPN of 2, based on our criteria to the next group of candidates and T. friscanum is precluded by work September 21, 1983, guidance for with an LPN of 2 and 3 to determine the on higher priority candidate species assigning an LPN for each candidate next set of highest priority candidate (i.e., species with LPN of 7); listing species (48 FR 43098). Using this species. actions with absolute statutory, court guidance, we assign each candidate an To be more efficient in our listing ordered, or court-approved deadlines; LPN of 1 to 12, depending on the process, as we work on proposed rules and final listing determinations for magnitude of threats (high vs. moderate for these species in the next several those species that were proposed for to low), immediacy of threats (imminent years, we are preparing multi-species listing with funds from previous FYs. or nonimminent), and taxonomic status proposals when appropriate, and these This work includes all the actions listed of the species (in order of priority: may include species with lower priority in the tables below under expeditious monotypic genus (a species that is the if they overlap geographically or have progress. sole member of a genus); species; or part the same threats as a species with an As explained above, a determination of a species (subspecies, DPS, or LPN of 2. In addition, available staff that listing is warranted but precluded significant portion of the range)). The resources also are a factor in also must demonstrate that expeditious lower the listing priority number, the determining high-priority species progress is being made to add or remove higher the listing priority (that is, a provided with funding. Finally, qualified species to and from the Lists species with an LPN of 1 would have proposed rules for reclassification of of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife the highest listing priority). Because of threatened species to endangered are and Plants. (Although we do not discuss the large number of high-priority lower priority, since as listed species, it in detail here, we also are making species, we further ranked the candidate they are already afforded the protection expeditious progress in removing species with an LPN of 2 by using the of the ESA and implementing species from the Lists under the following extinction-risk type criteria: regulations. Recovery program, which is funded by International Union for the We assigned Eriogonum soredium, a separate line item in the budget of the Conservation of Nature and Natural Lepidium ostleri and Trifolium Endangered Species Program. As Resources (IUCN) Red list status/rank, friscanum an LPN of 8. This is based on explained above in our description of Heritage rank (provided by our finding that the species face the statutory cap on Listing Program NatureServe), Heritage threat rank immediate and moderate magnitude funds, the Recovery Program funds and (provided by NatureServe), and species threats from the present or threatened actions supported by them cannot be currently with fewer than 50 destruction, modification or curtailment considered in determining expeditious individuals, or 4 or fewer populations. of its habitat; the inadequacy of existing progress made in the Listing Program.) Those species with the highest IUCN regulatory mechanisms; and other As with our ‘‘precluded’’ finding, rank (critically endangered), the highest natural or man-made factors affecting expeditious progress in adding qualified Heritage rank (G1), the highest Heritage their continued existence. These threats species to the Lists is a function of the threat rank (substantial, imminent are ongoing and, in some cases (e.g., resources available and the competing threats), and currently with fewer than nonnative species), considered demands for those funds. Given that 50 individuals, or fewer than 4 irreversible. Under our 1983 Guidelines, limitation, we find that we are making populations, comprised a group of a ‘‘species’’ facing imminent moderate- progress in FY 2010 in the Listing approximately 40 candidate species magnitude threats is assigned an LPN of Program. This progress included (‘‘Top 40’’). These 40 candidate species 7, 8, or 9 depending on its taxonomic preparing and publishing the following have had the highest priority to receive status. Because E. soredium, L. ostleri determinations:

FY 2010 COMPLETED LISTING ACTIONS

Federal Register Publication date Title Actions pages

10/08/2009 ...... Listing Lepidium papilliferum (Slickspot Peppergrass) as a Threat- Final Listing, Threatened ...... 74 FR 52013–52064. ened Species Throughout Its Range. 10/27/2009 ...... 90-day Finding on a Petition To List the American Dipper in the Notice of 90-day Petition Find- 74 FR 55177–55180. Black Hills of SD as Threatened or Endangered. ing, Not substantial. 10/28/2009 ...... Status Review of Arctic Grayling (Thymallus arcticus) in the Notice of Intent to Conduct Sta- 74 FR 55524–55525. Upper Missouri River System. tus Review. 11/03/2009 ...... Listing the British Columbia DPS of the Queen Charlotte Gos- Proposed Listing Threatened ..... 74 FR 56757–56770. hawk Under the ESA: Proposed rule. 11/03/2009 ...... Listing the Salmon-Crested Cockatoo as Threatened Throughout Proposed Listing Threatened ..... 74 FR 56770–56791. Its Range with Special Rule. 11/23/2009 ...... Status Review of Gunnison sage-grouse (Centrocercus minimus) Notice of Intent to Conduct Sta- 74 FR 61100–61102. tus Review. 12/03/2009 ...... 12-Month Finding on a Petition to List the Black-tailed Prairie Dog Notice of 12-month petition find- 74 FR 63343–63366. as Threatened or Endangered. ing, Not warranted. 12/03/2009 ...... 90-Day Finding on a Petition to List Sprague’s Pipit as Threat- Notice of 90-day Petition Find- 74 FR 63337–63343. ened or Endangered. ing, Substantial. 12/15/2009 ...... 90-Day Finding on Petitions To List Nine Species of Mussels Notice of 90-day Petition Find- 74 FR 66260–66271. From TX as Threatened or Endangered With Critical Habitat. ing, Substantial. 12/16/2009 ...... Partial 90-Day Finding on a Petition to List 475 Species in the Notice of 90-day Petition Find- 74 FR 66865–66905. Southwestern U.S. as Threatened or Endangered With Critical ing, Not substantial & Sub- Habitat. stantial.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 10200 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

FY 2010 COMPLETED LISTING ACTIONS—Continued

Federal Register Publication date Title Actions pages

12/17/2009 ...... 12-month Finding on a Petition To Change the Final Listing of the Notice of 12-month petition find- 74 FR 66937–66950. DPS of the Canada Lynx To Include NM. ing, Warranted but precluded. 01/05/2010 ...... Listing Foreign Bird Species in Peru & Bolivia as Endangered Proposed Listing, Endangered ... 75 FR 605–649. Throughout Their Range. 01/05/2010 ...... Listing Six Foreign Birds as Endangered Throughout Their Range Proposed Listing, Endangered ... 75 FR 286–310. 01/05/2010 ...... Withdrawal of Proposed Rule to List Cook’s Petrel ...... Proposed rule, withdrawal ...... 75 FR 310–316. 01/05/2010 ...... Final Rule to List the Galapagos Petrel & Heinroth’s Shearwater Final Listing, Threatened ...... 75 FR 235–250. as Threatened Throughout Their Ranges. 01/20/2010 ...... Initiation of Status Review for Agave eggersiana & Solanum Notice of Intent to Conduct Sta- 75 FR 3190–3191. conocarpum. tus Review. 02/09/2010 ...... 12-month Finding on a Petition to List the American Pika as Notice of 12-month petition find- 75 FR 6437–6471. Threatened or Endangered. ing, Not warranted. 02/25/2010 ...... 12-Month Finding on a Petition To List the Sonoran Desert Popu- Notice of 12-month petition find- 75 FR 8601–8621. lation of the Bald Eagle as a Threatened or Endangered DPS. ing, Not warranted. 02/25/2010 ...... Withdrawal of Proposed Rule To List the Southwestern Wash- Withdrawal of Proposed Rule to 75 FR 8621–8644. ington/Columbia River DPS of Coastal Cutthroat Trout List. (Oncorhynchus clarki clarki) as Threatened. 03/18/2010 ...... 90-Day Finding on a Petition to List the Berry Cave Salamander Notice of 90-day Petition Find- 75 FR 13068–13071. as Endangered. ing, Substantial. 03/23/2010 ...... 90-Day Finding on a Petition to List the Southern Hickorynut Notice of 90-day Petition Find- 75 FR 13717–13720. Mussel (Obovaria jacksoniana) as Endangered or Threatened. ing, Not substantial. 03/23/2010 ...... 90-Day Finding on a Petition to List the Striped Newt as Threat- Notice of 90-day Petition Find- 75 FR 13720–13726. ened. ing, Substantial. 03/23/2010 ...... 12-Month Findings for Petitions to List the Greater Sage-Grouse Notice of 12-month petition find- 75 FR 13910–14014. (Centrocercus urophasianus) as Threatened or Endangered. ing, Warranted but precluded. 03/31/2010 ...... 12-Month Finding on a Petition to List the Tucson Shovel-Nosed Notice of 12-month petition find- 75 FR 16050–16065. Snake (Chionactis occipitalis klauberi) as Threatened or En- ing, Warranted but precluded. dangered with Critical Habitat. 04/05/2010 ...... 90-Day Finding on a Petition To List Thorne’s Hairstreak Butterfly Notice of 90-day Petition Find- 75 FR 17062–17070. as or Endangered. ing, Substantial. 04/06/2010 ...... 12-month Finding on a Petition To List the Mountain Whitefish in Notice of 12-month petition find- 75 FR 17352–17363. the Big Lost River, ID, as Endangered or Threatened. ing, Not warranted. 04/06/2010 ...... 90-Day Finding on a Petition to List a Stonefly (Isoperla jewetti) Notice of 90-day Petition Find- 75 FR 17363–17367. and a Mayfly (Fallceon eatoni) as Threatened or Endangered ing, Not substantial. with Critical Habitat. 04/07/2010 ...... 12-Month Finding on a Petition to Reclassify the Delta Smelt Notice of 12-month petition find- 75 FR 17667–17680. From Threatened to Endangered Throughout Its Range. ing, Warranted but precluded. 04/13/2010 ...... Determination of Endangered Status for 48 Species on Kauai & Final Listing, Endangered ...... 75 FR 18959–19165. Designation of Critical Habitat. 04/15/2010 ...... Initiation of Status Review of the North American Wolverine in the Notice of Initiation of Status Re- 75 FR 19591–19592. Contiguous U.S. view. 04/15/2010 ...... 12-Month Finding on a Petition to List the Pocket Go- Notice of 12-month petition find- 75 FR 19592–19607. pher as Endangered or Threatened with Critical Habitat. ing, Not warranted. 04/16/2010 ...... 90-Day Finding on a Petition to List a DPS of the Fisher in Its Notice of 90-day Petition Find- 75 FR 19925–19935. U.S. Northern Rocky Mountain Range as Endangered or ing, Substantial. Threatened with Critical Habitat. 04/20/2010 ...... Initiation of Status Review for Sacramento splittail (Pogonichthys Notice of Initiation of Status Re- 75 FR 20547–20548. macrolepidotus). view. 04/26/2010 ...... 90-Day Finding on a Petition to List the Harlequin Butterfly as En- Notice of 90-day Petition Find- 75 FR 21568–21571. dangered. ing, Substantial. 04/27/2010 ...... 12-Month Finding on a Petition to List Susan’s Purse-making Notice of 12-month petition find- 75 FR 22012–22025. Caddisfly (Ochrotrichia susanae) as Threatened or Endangered. ing, Not warranted. 04/27/2010 ...... 90-Day Finding on a Petition to List the Mohave Ground Squirrel Notice of 90-day Petition Find- 75 FR 22063–22070. as Endangered with Critical Habitat. ing, Substantial. 05/04/2010 ...... 90-Day Finding on a Petition to List Hermes Copper Butterfly as Notice of 90-day Petition Find- 75 FR 23654–23663. Threatened or Endangered. ing, Substantial. 06/01/2010 ...... 90-Day Finding on a Petition To List Castanea pumila var. Notice of 90-day Petition Find- 75 FR 30313–30318. ozarkensis. ing, Substantial. 06/01/2010 ...... 12-Month Finding on a Petition to List the White-tailed Prairie Notice of 12-month petition find- 75 FR 30338–30363. Dog as Endangered or Threatened. ing, Not warranted. 06/09/2010 ...... 90-Day Finding on a Petition To List van Rossem’s Gull-billed Notice of 90-day Petition Find- 75 FR 32728–32734. Tern as Endangered or Threatened. ing, Substantial.

Our expeditious progress also section of the table are being conducted under the ESA. Actions in the bottom includes work on listing actions that we under a deadline set by a court. Actions section of the table are high-priority funded in FY 2010 but have not yet in the middle section of the table are listing actions. These actions include been completed to date. These actions being conducted to meet statutory work primarily on species with an LPN are listed below. Actions in the top timelines, that is, timelines required of 2, and selection of these species is

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 10201

partially based on available staff same threats as the species with the and funding, as compared to preparing resources, and when appropriate, high priority. Including these species separate proposed rules for each of them include species with a lower priority if together in the same proposed rule in the future. they overlap geographically or have the results in considerable savings in time

ACTIONS FUNDED IN FY 2010 BUT NOT YET COMPLETED

Species Action

Actions Subject to Court Order/Settlement Agreement: 6 Birds from Eurasia ...... Final listing determination. Flat-tailed horned lizard ...... Final listing determination. Mountain plover ...... Final listing determination. 6 Birds from Peru ...... Proposed listing determination. Sacramento splittail ...... Proposed listing determination. Gunnison sage-grouse ...... 12-month petition finding. Wolverine ...... 12-month petition finding. Montana Arctic grayling ...... 12-month petition finding. Agave eggersiana ...... 12-month petition finding. Solanum conocarpum ...... 12-month petition finding. Mountain plover ...... 12-month petition finding. Thorne’s Hairstreak Butterfly ...... 12-month petition finding. Hermes copper butterfly ...... 12-month petition finding. Actions With Statutory Deadlines: Casey’s june beetle ...... Final listing determination. Georgia pigtoe, interrupted rocksnail, and rough hornsnail ...... Final listing determination. 2 Hawaiian damselflies ...... Final listing determination. African penguin ...... Final listing determination. 3 Foreign bird species (Andean flamingo, Chilean woodstar, St. Lucia forest thrush) ...... Final listing determination. 5 Penguin species ...... Final listing determination. Southern rockhopper penguin—Campbell Plateau population ...... Final listing determination. 5 Bird species from Colombia and Ecuador ...... Final listing determination. 7 Bird species from Brazil ...... Final listing determination. Queen Charlotte goshawk ...... Final listing determination. Salmon crested cockatoo ...... Proposed listing determination. Black-footed albatross ...... 12-month petition finding. Mount Charleston blue butterfly ...... 12-month petition finding. Least chub 1 ...... 12-month petition finding. Mojave fringe-toed lizard 1 ...... 12-month petition finding. Pygmy rabbit (rangewide) 1 ...... 12-month petition finding. Kokanee—Lake Sammamish population 1 ...... 12-month petition finding. Delta smelt (uplisting) ...... 12-month petition finding. Cactus ferruginous pygmy-owl 1 ...... 12-month petition finding. Northern leopard frog ...... 12-month petition finding. Tehachapi slender salamander ...... 12-month petition finding. Coqui Llanero ...... 12-month petition finding. White-sided jackrabbit ...... 12-month petition finding. Jemez Mountains salamander ...... 12-month petition finding. Dusky tree vole ...... 12-month petition finding. Eagle Lake trout 1 ...... 12-month petition finding. 29 of 206 species ...... 12-month petition finding. Desert tortoise—Sonoran population ...... 12-month petition finding. Gopher tortoise—eastern population ...... 12-month petition finding. Amargosa toad ...... 12-month petition finding. Pacific walrus ...... 12-month petition finding. Wrights marsh thistle ...... 12-month petition finding. 67 of 475 southwest species ...... 12-month petition finding. 9 Southwest mussel species ...... 12-month petition finding. 14 parrots (foreign species) ...... 12-month petition finding. Berry Cave salamander 1 ...... 12-month petition finding. Striped Newt 1 ...... 12-month petition finding. Fisher—Northern Rocky Mountain Range 1 ...... 12-month petition finding. Mohave Ground Squirrel 1 ...... 12-month petition finding. Puerto Rico Harlequin Butterfly ...... 12-month petition finding. Western gull-billed tern ...... 12-month petition finding. Ozark chinquapin (Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis) ...... 12-month petition finding. Southeastern population of snowy plover and wintering population of piping plover 1 ...... 90-day petition finding. Eagle Lake trout 1 ...... 90-day petition finding. Smooth-billed ani 1 ...... 90-day petition finding. Bay Springs salamander 1 ...... 90-day petition finding. 32 species of snails and slugs 1 ...... 90-day petition finding. Calopogon oklahomensis 1 ...... 90-day petition finding. White-bark pine ...... 90-day petition finding. 42 snail species (Nevada and Utah) ...... 90-day petition finding. HI yellow-faced bees ...... 90-day petition finding. Red knot roselaari subspecies ...... 90-day petition finding.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 10202 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

ACTIONS FUNDED IN FY 2010 BUT NOT YET COMPLETED—Continued

Species Action

Honduran emerald ...... 90-day petition finding. Peary caribou ...... 90-day petition finding. Plains bison ...... 90-day petition finding. Giant Palouse earthworm ...... 90-day petition finding. Mexican gray wolf ...... 90-day petition finding. Spring Mountains checkerspot butterfly ...... 90-day petition finding. Spring pygmy sunfish ...... 90-day petition finding. San Francisco manzanita ...... 90-day petition finding. Bay skipper ...... 90-day petition finding. Unsilvered fritillary ...... 90-day petition finding. Texas kangaroo rat ...... 90-day petition finding. Spot-tailed earless lizard ...... 90-day petition finding. Eastern small-footed bat ...... 90-day petition finding. Northern long-eared bat ...... 90-day petition finding. Prairie chub ...... 90-day petition finding. 10 species of Great Basin butterfly ...... 90-day petition finding. 6 sand dune (scarab) beetles ...... 90-day petition finding. Golden-winged warbler ...... 90-day petition finding. Sand-verbena moth ...... 90-day petition finding. Aztec (beautiful) gilia ...... 90-day petition finding. Arapahoe snowfly ...... 90-day petition finding. High-Priority Listing Actions: 3 19 Oahu candidate species 3 (16 plants, 3 damselflies) (15 with LPN = 2, 3 with LPN = 3, 1 with Proposed listing. LPN = 9). 17 Maui-Nui candidate species 3 (14 plants, 3 tree snails) (12 with LPN = 2, 2 with LPN = 3, 3 with Proposed listing. LPN = 8). Sand dune lizard 3 (LPN = 2) ...... Proposed listing. 2 springsnails 3 (Pyrgulopsis bernadina (LPN = 2), Pyrgulopsis trivialis (LPN = 2) ...... Proposed listing. 2 springsnails 3 (Pyrgulopsis chupaderae (LPN = 2), Pyrgulopsis thermalis (LPN = 11) Proposed listing. 2 mussels 3 (rayed bean (LPN = 2), snuffbox (No LPN) ...... Proposed listing. 2 mussels 3 (sheepnose (LPN = 2), spectaclecase (LPN = 4)) ...... Proposed listing. Ozark hellbender 2 (LPN = 3) ...... Proposed listing. Altamaha spinymussel 3 (LPN = 2) ...... Proposed listing. 5 southeast fish 3 (rush darter (LPN = 2), chucky madtom (LPN = 2), yellowcheek darter (LPN = 2), Proposed listing. Cumberland darter (LPN = 5), laurel dace (LPN = 5). 8 southeast mussels (southern kidneyshell (LPN = 2), round ebonyshell (LPN = 2), Alabama Proposed listing. pearlshell (LPN = 2), southern sandshell (LPN = 5), fuzzy pigtoe (LPN = 5), Choctaw bean (LPN = 5), narrow pigtoe (LPN = 5), & tapered pigtoe (LPN = 11)). 3 Colorado plants 3 (Pagosa skyrocket (Ipomopsis polyantha) (LPN = 2), Parchute beardtongue Proposed listing. (Penstemon debilis) (LPN = 2), Debeque phacelia (Phacelia submutica) (LPN = 8)). 2 Texas plants (Texas golden gladecress (Leavenworthia texana) (LPN = 2), Neches River rose Proposed listing. mallow (Hibiscus dasycalyx) (LPN = 5)). Florida bonneted bat (LPN = 2) ...... Proposed listing. Kittlitz’s murrelet (LPN = 2) ...... Proposed listing. 1 Funds for listing actions for these species were provided in previous FYs. 2 We funded a proposed rule for this subspecies with an LPN of 3 ahead of other species with LPN of 2, because the threats to the species were so imminent and of a high magnitude that we considered emergency listing if we were unable to fund work on a proposed listing rule in FY 2008. 3 Funds for these high-priority listing actions were provided in FY 2008 or 2009.

We have endeavored to make our finding. We will continue to monitor the References Cited listing actions as efficient and timely as status of these species as new possible, given the requirements of the information becomes available. This A complete list of references cited is relevant law and regulations, and review will determine if a change in available on the Internet at http:// constraints relating to workload and status is warranted, including the need www.regulations.gov or upon request personnel. We are continually to make prompt use of emergency listing from the Utah Ecological Services Field Office (see ADDRESSES section). considering ways to streamline procedures. processes or achieve economies of scale, We intend that any proposed listing Authors such as by batching related actions action for Eriogonum soredium, together. Given our limited budget for The primary authors of this notice are implementing section 4 of the ESA, Lepidium ostleri, and Trifolium the staff members of the Utah Ecological these actions described above friscanum will be as accurate as Services Field Office. collectively constitute expeditious possible. Therefore, we will continue to progress. accept additional information and Authority comments from all concerned Eriogonum soredium, Lepidium The authority for this section is governmental agencies, the scientific ostleri, and Trifolium friscanum will be section 4 of the Endangered Species Act community, industry, or any other added to the list of candidate species of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et upon publication of this 12-month interested party concerning this finding. seq.).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 10203

Dated: February 2, 2011. Rowan W. Gould, Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service. [FR Doc. 2011–3675 Filed 2–22–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:17 Feb 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\23FER4.SGM 23FER4 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES4