56590 Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 20, 1999 / Rules and Regulations

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

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

FLOWERING PLANTS

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

*******

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

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

VerDate 12-OCT-99 13:14 Oct 19, 1999 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20OCR2.XXX pfrm03 PsN: 20OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 20, 1999 / Rules and Regulations 56591 population were initially fruitless tridentata), and plateau beardtongue proposals over 2 years old be (Barneby 1964, Welsh 1978a, 1978c) (Penstemon scariosus) (Franklin 1990). withdrawn, although proposals leading to a presumption of extinction The sole population of Astragalus published before the 1978 amendments’ (Ripley 1975, Welsh 1975, 1978b). desereticus consists of between 5,000 enactment could not be withdrawn However, on May 27, 1981, Elizabeth and 10,000 individuals that grow on an before the end of a 1-year grace period Neese discovered a population of A. area of less than 120 hectares (ha) (300 beginning on the enactment date. On desereticus on a sandstone outcrop acres (ac)) (Franklin 1990, Stone 1992). December 10, 1979, we published a above the town of Birdseye, Utah The species’ total range is notice of withdrawal (44 FR 70796) of County, Utah, less than 6.2 kilometers approximately 2.6 km (1.6 (mi)) long, that portion of the June 16, 1976, (km) (10 miles (mi)) from Indianola and 0.5 (km) (0.3 mi) across. Extensive proposal that had not been made final, (Welsh and Chatterley 1985). This searches of similar habitat in Utah and which included A. desereticus. population remains the only known Sanpete Counties, Utah, have failed to On December 15, 1980, we published occurrence of the species (Franklin identify any other populations (Franklin a revised notice of review for native 1990, 1991, Service 1991). It is possible 1991, Larry England, Service, pers. plants in the Federal Register (45 FR that this population is the one from comm. 1997). The land upon which A. 82480) designating Astragalus which Jones and/or Tidestrom made desereticus grows is owned by the State desereticus a category 1 species. At that their collections more than 70 years of Utah and three private land owners time, we defined category 1 candidates earlier (Franklin 1990, 1991, Welsh and (Franklin 1990, 1991; Chris Montague, as those taxa for which we had on file Chatterley 1985). The Nature Conservancy, 1992, 1997 sufficient information on biological Astragalus desereticus is a perennial, pers. comm.). Astragalus desereticus is vulnerability and threats to support herbaceous, sub-acaulescent (almost threatened by grazing and trampling by preparation of listing proposals. In stemless) plant in the bean family ungulates, alteration of its habitat due to addition, A. desereticus was identified (Fabaceae). Individual plants are residential development and road as a species that may have recently approximately 4–15 centimeters (cm) widening, and natural events, such as become extinct. In 1981, a population of (2–6 inches (in)) in height, and arise fire, due to its limited distribution. A. desereticus was discovered. On November 28, 1983, we published a from a caudex (the persistent base of an Previous Federal Action revised notice of review in the Federal otherwise annual herbaceous stem). Section 12 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 Stems are about 6 cm (2 in) tall. The Register (48 FR 53640) in which A. et seq.) directed the Secretary of the desereticus was included as a category pinnately compound leaves (feather-like Smithsonian Institution to prepare a 2 candidate species. Category 2 arrangement with leaflets displayed on report on those plants considered to be candidates were formally defined as a central stalk) are 4–11 cm (2–4 in) long endangered, threatened, or extinct. The taxa for which data on biological with 11–17 leaflets. The leaflets are Secretary presented this report, vulnerability and threats indicated that elliptic to ovate in shape, with a dense designated as House Document No. 94– listing was possibly appropriate, but for silvery gray pubescence (short hairs) on 51, to Congress on January 9, 1975. On which data were not sufficient to both sides. The species’ flowers are of July 1, 1975, we published a notice in support issuance of listing proposals. In the characteristic papilionaceous form the Federal Register (40 FR 27823) preparing the 1983 notice, we deemed it common to the bean family, 1.8–2.2 cm accepting the report as a petition to list appropriate to acquire additional (0.7–0.9 in) long, white in color with a those taxa named therein under section information on the distribution and purple tip on the keel, and borne on a 4(c)(2) of the Act (petition acceptance is abundance of A. desereticus before stalk of 5–10 flowers. The seed pods are now governed by section 4(b)(3) of the proposing the species for listing. We 1 to 2 cm (0.4–0.8 in) long, densely Act), and its intention to review the maintained A. desereticus as a category covered with lustrous hairs, and bear status of those plants. Astragalus 2 species in updated notices of review 14–16 ovules (a minute rudimentary desereticus was included in the July 1, published in the Federal Register on structure from which a plant seed 1975, notice on list ‘‘C,’’ indicating that September 27, 1985 (50 FR 39526), and develops after fertilization). Detailed the species was probably extinct. February 21, 1990 (55 FR 6184). As a descriptions of A. desereticus can be On June 16, 1976, we published a result of additional information found in Barneby (1964, Barneby in proposed rule in the Federal Register obtained in 1990 and 1991 status Cronquist et al. 1989), and in Welsh (41 FR 24523) to designate surveys (Franklin 1990 and Service (1978c, Welsh et al. 1987, 1993). approximately 1,700 vascular plant 1991), we reclassified A. desereticus as The only known population of species, including Astragalus a category 1 candidate in the September Astragalus desereticus occurs primarily desereticus, as endangered pursuant to 30, 1993, notice of review (58 FR on steep south- and west-facing slopes. section 4 of the Act. The Smithsonian 51144). Upon publication of the The plant grows on soils derived from Institution and the Service assembled February 28, 1996, Notice of Review, (61 a specific and unusual portion of the this list of 1,700 plant species on the FR 7596), we ceased using category geologic Moroni Formation. This basis of comments and data received in designations and included A. geologic feature is characterized by response to House Document No. 94–51 desereticus as a candidate species. coarse, crudely bedded conglomerate and the July 1, 1975, Federal Register Candidate species are those for which (Franklin 1990). The plant community publication. In the proposed rule, we the Service has on file sufficient in which A. desereticus occurs is also designated A. desereticus as a information on biological vulnerability dominated by pinon pine (Pinus edulis) species about which we were and threats to support proposals to list and Utah juniper (Juniperus particularly interested in obtaining any the species as threatened or endangered. osteosperma). Other associated plant new information on living specimens We maintained Astragalus desereticus species include: sagebrush (Artemisia and extant populations. General as a candidate in the September 19, tridentata), scrub oak (Quercus comments received in relation to the 1997, Notice of Review (62 FR 49398). gambelii), wild buckwheat (Eriogonum 1976 proposal are summarized in an Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act’s 1982 brevicaule), Indian ricegrass (Stipa April 26, 1978, Federal Register amendments required the Secretary of hymenoides), needle and thread grass publication (43 FR 17909). The 1978 the Interior to make findings on certain (Stipa comata), bitter brush (Purshia amendments to the Act required that all petitions within 1 year of their receipt.

VerDate 12-OCT-99 13:14 Oct 19, 1999 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20OCR2.XXX pfrm03 PsN: 20OCR2 56592 Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 20, 1999 / Rules and Regulations

Section 2(b)(1) of the Act’s 1982 Salt Lake Tribune and the Deseret News Summary of Factors Affecting the amendments further required that all on February 10, 1998, and the Daily Species petitions pending as of October 13, Herald on February 11, 1998. After a thorough review and 1982, be treated as having been newly In accordance with our policy consideration of all information submitted on that date. Because we published in the Federal Register on available, we have determined that accepted the 1975 Smithsonian report July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), we solicited Astragalus desereticus should be and the Service’s notices as petitions, the expert opinion of three appropriate classified as a threatened species. In we treated all the taxa contained in and independent specialists regarding making this determination we have those notices, including Astragalus pertinent scientific or commercial data followed the procedures set forth in desereticus, as having been newly and assumptions relating to the section 4(a)(1) of the Act and regulations petitioned on October 13, 1982. The implementing the listing provisions of deadline for a finding on such petitions, supportive biological and ecological the Act (50 CFR part 424). We may including that for A. desereticus, was information for Astragalus desereticus. determine a species to be an endangered October 13, 1983. Since that date, we The purpose of this review is to ensure or threatened species due to one or more made successive 1-year findings that that listing decisions are based on of the five factors described in section listing A. desereticus was warranted, but scientifically sound data, assumptions, 4(a)(1). These factors and their precluded by other listing actions of and analyses, including input of application to Astragalus desereticus higher priority. Our proposal to list A. appropriate experts and specialists. One Barneby (Deseret milk-vetch) are as desereticus as threatened on January 28, specialist responded in writing agreeing follows: 1998 (63 FR 4207), constituted the with our analysis and supporting the warranted 12-month finding for this proposed action, while two others A. The Present or Threatened species. responded verbally agreeing with our Destruction, Modification, or The processing of this final rule analysis. Curtailment of its Habitat or Range conforms to our Listing Priority During the comment period we Astragalus desereticus is known from Guidance for Fiscal Years 1998 and reviewed a total of three written one small population of about 5,000 1999 published in the Federal Register comments. We did not receive any reproducing individuals and several on May 8, 1998 (63 FR 25502). The comments on the issues raised in our thousand immature plants on less than guidance clarifies the order in which we discussion of the biology or threats to 120 ha (300 ac) (Franklin 1990, Stone will process rulemakings. Highest the species. Two commenters, including priority is processing emergency listing 1992). This species is endemic to one the respondent peer reviewer, concurred rules for any species determined to be unusual narrow geologic strata facing a significant and imminent risk to with our proposal to list Astragalus characterized by coarse, poorly sorted its well being (Tier 1). Second priority desereticus as threatened. The third conglomerate. Any conversion or (Tier 2) is processing final commenter stated that the Service destruction of A. desereticus habitat has determinations on proposed additions should not list A. desereticus because it the potential to jeopardize the species’ species to the lists of endangered and has no authority under the Act to list or limited population. Urban development threatened wildlife and plants; the regulate species that are not involved in of the Wasatch Front metropolitan area processing of new proposals to add interstate commerce. is rapidly spreading into the species to the lists; the processing of We believe that the application of the surrounding agricultural lands, administrative petition findings to add Act to Astragalus desereticus does not especially small communities in the drainages of the Provo, Spanish Fork, species to the lists, delist species, or exceed Congress’s Commerce Clause and Weber Rivers (Quality Growth reclassify listed species (petitions filed authority under the U.S. Constitution Efficiency Tools Technical Committee under section 4 of the Act); and a for the reasons given in Judge Wald’s 1997 (QETTC)). The population growth limited number of proposed or final opinion and Judge Henderson’s of this metropolitan area is expected to rules to delist or reclassify species. concurring opinion in National Third priority (Tier 3) is processing double by the year 2020. In addition, Association of Home Builders v. Babbitt, conversion of agricultural land to urban proposed or final rules designating 130 F.3d 1041 (D.C. Cir. 1997), cert. critical habitat. The processing of this use is expected to double in the same denied, 1185 S. Ct. 2340 (1998). That time period (QGETTC 1997). Highly final rule is a Tier 2 action. We have case involved a challenge to application updated this rule to reflect any changes accessible rural areas, such as Birdseye, of the Act’s prohibitions to protect the may grow in population at an even more in information concerning distribution, listed Delhi Sands flower-loving fly. As status, and threats since the publication rapid rate. Since the species’ with A. desereticus, the Delhi Sands of the proposed rule. rediscovery, one landowner has built a flower-loving fly is endemic to only one private residence within the species’ Summary of Comments and state. Judge Wald held that application occupied habitat. Prior to 1998, the Recommendations of the Act’s prohibitions against taking town of Birdseye contained about 20 In the January 28, 1998, proposed rule of endangered species to this fly was a homes. Since the publication of the and associated notifications, we proper exercise of Commerce Clause proposed rule, a 70-unit residential requested all interested parties to power to regulate: (1) Use of channels of subdivision began construction adjacent submit factual reports or information interstate commerce; and (2) activities to the south side of the species’ that might contribute to the substantially affecting interstate population. The entire A. desereticus development of a final rule. We commerce because it prevented loss of population is within 300 meters (m) contacted and requested comments from biodiversity and destructive interstate (1,000 feet (ft)) of U.S. Highway 89. The all appropriate Federal and State competition. Judge Henderson upheld nearest plants are within a few meters agencies, County governments, protection of the fly because doing so of the road. U.S. Highway 89 is scientific organizations, and other prevents harm to the development that currently a two-lane rural highway. interested parties. We published is part of interstate commerce. See Gibbs With increasing human population in newspaper notices requesting public v. Babbitt, 31 F.Supp.2d 531 (E.D.N.C. the general area of southern Utah comment on the proposed rule in The 1998). County and northern Sanpete County, it

VerDate 12-OCT-99 13:14 Oct 19, 1999 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20OCR2.XXX pfrm03 PsN: 20OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 20, 1999 / Rules and Regulations 56593 is likely that this road will be expanded alkaloids as metabolic byproducts. The perhaps this contributed to the species’ to four lanes. Such a highway widening known alkaloid producers as well as the presumed extinction (Welsh 1985, could destroy a significant portion of selenium accumulators are not closely Franklin 1990). Indianola, Utah, and the the species population (QGETTC 1997). related to A. desereticus. The third type species’ current known population near Astragalus desereticus is located on of poison found within Astragalus are Birdseye, Utah, are about 4.4 km (7 mi) highly accessible public and private various nitrotoxins. Ruminants in apart. The specific geological land that is currently used for cattle particular are highly susceptible to characteristics of A. desereticus habitat grazing and wildlife management nitrotoxin poisoning. Some species are uncommon within the Moroni (Franklin 1991, Stone 1992). The land closely related to A. desereticus contain Formation, though the formation is managed by the Utah Division of nitrotoxins (Barneby 1989). While A. exposed for a much larger area in Wildlife Resources is a wildlife desereticus may not be preferred forage southern Utah County and northern management area that also is used for for cattle or native ungulates, it is Sanpete County, Utah. Although it is cattle grazing (Franklin 1991). Cattle are palatable and may be inadvertently thought that some additional used by the Utah Division of Wildlife taken along with preferred forage in the populations of A. desereticus were Resources (DWR) in spring to encourage area. present at or near Indianola as reported plant growth for big game forage in the In surveys of habitat similar to that by Jones in 1893 and Tidestrom in 1909, winter. This grazing occurs within the occupied by Astragalus desereticus in there are no known populations existing habitat of A. desereticus (Stone 1992). Utah County, our personnel observed in that location today. Other unknown The cattle tend to concentrate primarily that overgrazing by domestic ungulates factors may affect the current on the upslope areas where forage has almost completely denuded the distribution and vitality of A. production is greater (Stone 1992). landscape (Service 1991). Similar desereticus populations. Erosion in these areas is exacerbated by grazing pressure is known from the cattle grazing and game trails. In current habitat of A. desereticus; A potential threat to Astragalus addition to the effects of erosion, therefore, the effects of grazing, desereticus is related to the populations trampling threatens A. desereticus particularly overgrazing, constitute a of ungulates in the area and their effect particularly at the southern end of the likely threat. This species is much less on pollinators. Other species in the population (Franklin 1991). As cattle abundant in the more heavily grazed genus Astragalus suffer from low and wildlife graze the habitat of A. southern portion of its habitat (Franklin numbers of pollinators due to the desereticus, the animals are likely to 1990, 1991), indicating that grazing may indirect effect that ungulates can have trample plants. Although mule deer be a significant threat. Cattle grazing on the pollinator’s nest sites (Stone numbers have stabilized in recent years, may be particularly harmful because it 1992). Bumblebees (Bombus spp.), Rocky Mountain elk populations are occurs during a critical period for A. which nest in abandoned rodent increasing. Although currently DWR has desereticus reproduction (i.e., flowering) burrows, are likely the primary no specific plans for the conservation of (Stone 1992). pollinators of A. desereticus. Land use A. desereticus, they are interested in There are no known insect parasites practices that increase grazing pressure developing guidelines for the or disease organisms that significantly may cause burrows to collapse, conservation of Deseret milkvetch to affect this species. destroying bumblebee nests (Stone work in concert with their primary goal 1992). Since bees have a low fecundity D. The Inadequacy of Existing of enhancing big game winter range. The (low capability of producing offspring), Regulatory Mechanisms DWR is interested in acquiring property their populations may not recover for interests in additional winter range Astragalus desereticus receives no many years, particularly if grazing by lands also occupied by A. desereticus. protection or consideration under any large ungulates is maintained. An Federal, State, or local law or regulation absence of effective pollinators would B. Overutilization for Commercial, other than that provided by the Act. Recreational, Scientific, or Educational probably reduce the fecundity of A. Purposes E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors desereticus. Overutilization is not known to be a Affecting Its Continued Existence In preparing this final rule we have threat to Astragalus desereticus. By virtue of the limited number of carefully reviewed the best scientific individuals and range of the remaining and commercial information available C. Disease or Predation population of Astragalus desereticus, regarding the past, present, and future In contrast to many species of this species is threatened with threats faced by Astragalus desereticus. Astragalus, A. desereticus appears to be extinction from naturally occurring Based on this evaluation, the preferred palatable to cattle. The genus Astragalus events. The probability that a natural action is to list A. desereticus as has the largest number of species in the event such as fire, drought, or disease threatened. Threatened status reflects Intermountain west, many of which are will cause extinction is greater for the vulnerability of this species to poisonous to grazing animals. Three species having a small population and factors that may negatively affect the types of poisonous compounds are highly restricted range (Stone 1992). species and its extremely limited found within the genus. Some species Rare species in the genus Astragalus habitat. While not in immediate danger within the genus concentrate the toxic have exhibited low levels of genetic of extinction, A. desereticus is likely to element selenium in their tissues; these diversity when compared to other more become an endangered species in the species are called selenophytes (Stone widespread, closely related species foreseeable future if present threats 1992). The fact that A. desereticus does (Stone 1992). Low genetic variability continue or increase. We have contacted not produce a ‘‘snake-like’’ odor typical makes it difficult for a species to the current land owners and although of other ‘‘snakeweeds,’’ as selenophytes respond to changes in the environment many are receptive in the near-term to are sometimes called, and the fact that thus making them more vulnerable to providing for passive protection, having no other selenophytes occur in the area, extinction. no immediate plans for development, in indicate that A. desereticus is not a The original locality description for the long-term they continue to have selenophyte (Stone 1992). Other Astragalus desereticus at Indianola is expectations for the future use and Astragalus species produce poisonous thought to be over-generalized and development of their properties.

VerDate 12-OCT-99 13:14 Oct 19, 1999 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20OCR2.XXX pfrm03 PsN: 20OCR2 56594 Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 20, 1999 / Rules and Regulations

Critical Habitat DWR managers and others involved in likely to jeopardize the continued Section 4(a)(3) of the Act and the management of the area. Therefore, existence of such a species or destroy or implementing regulations (50 CFR designation of critical habitat would adversely modify its critical habitat. If a 424.12) require that, to the maximum provide no benefit with respect to Federal action may affect a listed extent prudent and determinable, the notification. In addition, given the species or its critical habitat, the Secretary designate critical habitat at the species’ narrow distribution and responsible Federal agency must enter time a species is determined to be precarious status, virtually any into formal consultation with us. The single known population of endangered or threatened. Service conceivable adverse affect to the Astragalus desereticus is on State and regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)) state species’ habitat would very likely privately owned land. However, that designation of critical habitat is not jeopardize its continued existence. highway widening, which may prudent when one or both of the Designation of critical habitat for A. adversely affect A. desereticus, due to following situations exist: (1) the desereticus would, therefore, provide no benefit to the species apart from the the proximity of the plants to a major species is threatened by taking or other protection afforded by listing the plant highway project, may in part be funded human activity, and identification of as threatened. by the Federal Highway Administration critical habitat can be expected to Protection of the habitat of A. and involve consultation under section increase the degree of threat to the desereticus will be addressed through 7 of the Act. species, or (2) such designation of the section 4 recovery process and the The Act and its implementing critical habitat would not be beneficial section 7 consultation process. regulations set forth a series of general to the species. We have determined that Although this plant occurs only on trade prohibitions and exceptions that the designation of critical habitat for A. private and State land, it may be apply to all threatened plants. All desereticus is not prudent due to the affected by projects with Federal prohibitions of section 9(a)(2) of the Act, lack of benefit to the species. connections, including potential Federal implemented by 50 CFR 17.71 for Critical habitat receives consideration Highway Administration funding of threatened plants, apply. These under section 7 of the Act with regard road widening. We believe that prohibitions, in part, make it illegal for to actions carried out, authorized, or activities involving a Federal action any person subject to the jurisdiction of funded by a Federal agency (see which may affect A. desereticus can be the United States to import or export, ‘‘Available Conservation Measures’’ identified without designation of critical transport in the course of a commercial section). As such, designations of habitat, by providing Federal agencies activity, sell or offer for sale this species critical habitat may affect activities on with information on the location of in interstate or foreign commerce, or Federal lands and may affect activities occupied habitat and information on the remove and reduce the species to on non-Federal lands where such a kinds of activities which could affect possession from areas under Federal Federal nexus exists. Under section 7 of the species. For the reasons discussed jurisdiction. In addition, for plants the Act, Federal agencies are required to above, we find that the designation of listed as endangered, the Act prohibits ensure that their actions do not critical habitat for A. desereticus is not the malicious damage or destruction on jeopardize the continued existence of a prudent. areas under Federal jurisdiction and the listed species or result in destruction or removal, cutting, digging up, damaging, adverse modification of critical habitat. Available Conservation Measures or destruction of such plants in knowing However, both jeopardizing the Conservation measures provided to violation of any State law or regulation, continued existence of a species and species listed as endangered or or in the course of a violation of State adverse modification of critical habitat threatened under the Act include criminal trespass law. Section 4(d) of have similar standards and thus similar recognition, recovery actions, the Act allows for the provision of such thresholds for violation of section 7 of requirements for Federal protection, and protection to threatened species through the Act. In fact, biological opinions that prohibitions against certain practices. regulation. This protection may apply to conclude that a Federal agency action is Recognition through listing encourages this species in the future if such likely to adversely modify critical and results in conservation actions by regulations are promulgated. Seeds from habitat but not jeopardize the species for Federal, State, and private agencies, cultivated specimens of threatened which the critical habitat has been groups and individuals. The Act plants are exempt from these designated are extremely rare. Also, the provides for possible land acquisition prohibitions provided that their designation of critical habitat for the and cooperation with the State, and containers are marked ‘‘Of Cultivated purpose of informing Federal agencies requires that recovery actions be carried Origin.’’ Certain exceptions to the of the location of A. desereticus habitat out for all listed species. Such actions prohibitions apply to agents of the is not necessary because we can inform are initiated by the Service following Service and State conservation agencies. Federal agencies through other means. listing. The protection required of The Act and 50 CFR 17.72 also For these reasons, the designation of Federal agencies and the prohibitions provide for the issuance of permits to critical habitat for A. desereticus would against certain activities involving listed carry out otherwise prohibited activities provide no additional benefit to the plants are discussed, in part, below. involving threatened species under species beyond that conferred by listing, Section 7(a) of the Act, requires certain circumstances. Such permits are and, therefore, such designation is not Federal agencies to evaluate their available for scientific purposes and to prudent. actions with respect to any species that enhance the propagation or survival of Astragalus desereticus has an is proposed or listed as endangered or the species. For threatened plants, extremely narrow distribution in a threatened and with respect to its permits are also available for botanical sandstone outcrop, totaling about 120 ha critical habitat, if any is being and horticultural exhibition, (300 ac) in one population. At the designated. Regulations implementing educational purposes, or special reasons present time, no other site is known to this interagency cooperation provision consistent with the Act’s purposes. With be occupied or suitable for this plant. of the Act are codified at 50 CFR part respect to Astragalus desereticus, it is The private land owners at Birdseye are 402. Section 7(a)(2) requires Federal anticipated that few, if any, trade aware of the plant’s presence and agencies to ensure that activities they permits would be sought or issued since extremely limited habitat, as are the authorize, fund, or carry out are not the species is not common in the wild

VerDate 12-OCT-99 13:14 Oct 19, 1999 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20OCR2.XXX pfrm03 PsN: 20OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 20, 1999 / Rules and Regulations 56595 and is unknown in cultivation. Requests National Environmental Policy Act Nature Conservancy. Salt Lake City, for copies of the regulations regarding We have determined that Utah. 18 pp. listed species and inquiries about Environmental Assessments and Welsh, S.L. 1978a. Status Report prohibitions and permits may be Environmental Impact Statements, as Astragalus desereticus. Unpublished addressed to: Regional Director, U.S. defined under the authority of the report prepared for the U.S. Fish and Fish and Wildlife Service, P.O. Box National Environmental Policy Act of Wildlife Service. Denver, Colorado. 5 25486, Denver Federal Center, Denver, 1969, need not be prepared in pp. Colorado 80225. connection with regulations adopted Welsh, S.L. 1978b. Endangered and It is our policy, published in the pursuant to section 4(a) of the Act. A Threatened Plants of Utah: A Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR notice outlining the basis for this Reevaluation. Great Basin Naturalist 34272), to identify to the maximum determination was published in the 38(1)1–18. extent practicable those activities that Federal Register on October 25, 1983 Welsh, S.L. 1978c. Utah Flora: Fabaceae would or would not constitute a (48 FR 49244). (Leguminosae). Great Basin Naturalist violation of section 9 of the Act if the 38(3):225–367. Required Determinations species is listed. The intent of this Welsh, S.L., N.D. Atwood, and J.L. policy is to increase public awareness of This rule does not contain collections Reveal. 1975. Endangered, the effect of the listing on proposed and of information that require Office of Threatened, Extinct, Endemic, and ongoing activities within a species’ Management and Budget approval Rare or Restricted Utah Vascular range. This species is not known to be under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 Plants. Great Basin Naturalist located on areas under Federal U.S.C. 3501 et seq. An information 35(4):327–376. jurisdiction. We believe the actions collection related to the rule pertaining Welsh, S.L., N.D. Atwood, L.C. Higgins, listed below would not result in a to permits for endangered and and S. Goodrich. 1987. A Utah Flora. violation of section 9: threatened species has OMB approval Great Basin Naturalist Mem. No. 9, 1– (1) Activities authorized, funded, or and is assigned clearance number 1018– 897. carried out by Federal agencies (e.g., 0094. This rule does not alter that grazing management, agricultural Welsh, S.L., and L.M. Chatterley. 1985. information collection requirement. For Utah’s Rare Plants Revisited. Great conversions, range management, rodent additional information concerning control, mineral development, road Basin Naturalist 45:173–236. permits and associated requirements for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1991. construction, human recreation, threatened plants, see 50 CFR 17.72. pesticide application, controlled burns) Astragalus desereticus: Supplemental and construction/maintenance of References Cited Status Report. Salt Lake City, Utah. 4 projects (e.g., fences, power lines, Barneby, R.C. 1964. Atlas of North pp. pipelines, utility lines) when such American Astragalus. Mem. of The Author: The primary author of this activities are conducted according to all New York Botanical Gardens proposed rule is John L. England (see reasonable and prudent measures 13(II):597–1188. ADDRESSES section). provided by the Service under section 7 Barneby, R.C. in A. Cronquist, A.H. List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 of the Act; Holmgren, N.H. Holmgren, J.L. (2) Casual, dispersed human activities Reveal, and P.K. Holmgren. 1989. Endangered and threatened species, on foot (e.g., bird watching, sightseeing, Intermountain Flora, Volume 3, Part Exports, Imports, Reporting and photography, and hiking). B. Fabales. Columbia University recordkeeping requirements, The actions listed below may Press, New York, New York. 279 pp. Transportation. potentially result in a violation of Franklin, M.A. 1990. Report for 1990 Regulation Promulgation section 9; however, possible violations Challenge Cost Share Project, Manti- are not limited to these actions alone: LaSal National Forest. Target Species: Accordingly, amend part 17, (1) Unauthorized collecting of the Astragalus desereticus. Unpublished subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the species on Federal Lands; report prepared by the Utah Natural Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth (2) Application of herbicides in Heritage Program, Salt Lake City, below: violation of label restrictions; Utah. 5 pp + xiv. (3) Interstate or foreign commerce and Franklin, M.A. 1991. Deseret Milkvetch. PART 17Ð[AMENDED] import/export without previously Sego Lily, Newsletter of the Utah 1. The authority citation for part 17 obtaining an appropriate permit. Native Plant Society 15(2):6–8. continues to read as follows: Permits to conduct activities are Quality Growth Efficiency Tools available for scientific purposes, the Technical Committee. 1997. Baseline Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 16 U.S.C. enhancement of the propagation or Scenario. Report on file with the Utah 1531–1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201–4245; Pub. L. 99– survival, economic hardship, botanical Governors Office of Planning and 625, 100 Stat. 3500, unless otherwise noted. or horticultural exhibition, educational Budget. 58 pp. 2. Amend section 17.12(h) by adding purposes, or other activities consistent Ripley, S.D. 1975. Report on the following, in alphabetical order with the purposes and policy of the Act. Endangered and Threatened Species under ‘‘FLOWERING PLANTS,’’ to the Questions regarding whether specific of the United States. House Document List of Endangered and Threatened activities, such as changes in land use, 94–51. 200 pp. Reprinted in Federal Plants: would constitute a violation of section Register 40(127): 27824–27924. 9 should be directed to the Utah Stone, R.D. 1992. Element Stewardship § 17.12 Endangered and threatened plants. Ecological Services Field Office (see Abstract for Astragalus desereticus. * * * * * ADDRESSES section). Unpublished report prepared for The (h) * * *

VerDate 12-OCT-99 13:14 Oct 19, 1999 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20OCR2.XXX pfrm03 PsN: 20OCR2 56596 Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 20, 1999 / Rules and Regulations

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

FLOWERING PLANTS

******* Astragalus desereticus ...... Deseret milk-vetch ...... U.S.A. (UT) ...... T 668 NA NA

*******

Dated: September 30, 1999. actions already accomplished under this The species has a narrow head with Jamie Rappaport Clark, Agreement, have reduced the prominent dark markings on scale Director, Fish and Wildlife Service. imminence of the threats to the species pockets above the lateral line that [FR Doc. 99–27187 Filed 10–19–99; 8:45 am] sufficiently to justify a threatened produce a cross-hatched appearance BILLING CODE 4310±55±P designation. This action will implement when viewed from the top (Hubbs and Federal protection provided by the Act Brown 1956). for the Devils River minnow. We Little information is available on life DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR determine that designation of critical history characteristics, feeding patterns, habitat for the Devils River minnow is or reproductive behaviors of this Fish and Wildlife Service not prudent. species. However, based on their EFFECTIVE DATES: The effective date of extended intestinal tract, species of the 50 CFR Part 17 this rule is November 19, 1999. genus Dionda are considered to feed RIN 1018±AE 86 ADDRESSES: The complete file for this primarily on algae. Since Dionda rule is available for inspection, by episcopa, a closely related species, are Endangered and Threatened Wildlife appointment, during normal business broadcast spawners with nonadhesive and Plants; Final Rule To List the hours at the Austin Ecological Services eggs that sink to the substrate (Johnston Devils River Minnow as Threatened Field Office, 10711 Burnet Road, Suite and Page 1992), we believe Devils River AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 200, Austin, Texas, 78758. minnows are as well. Interior. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: General habitat associations for Devils River minnow have been described as ACTION: Final rule. Nathan Allan, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, at the above address, channels of fast-flowing, spring-fed SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and telephone 512/490–0057, or facsimile waters over gravel substrates (Harrell Wildlife Service, determine the Devils 512/490–0974. 1978). Although the species is closely River minnow (Dionda diaboli) to be a SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: associated with spring systems, it most threatened species under the authority often occurs where spring flow enters a of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, Background stream, rather than in the spring outflow as amended (Act). The Devils River The Devils River minnow (Dionda itself (Hubbs and Garrett 1990). The minnow is a small fish with a known diaboli Hubbs and Brown) is classified species is adapted to the hydrologic distribution limited to three locations in in the Cyprinidae (minnow) family. It variations inherent in desert river Val Verde and Kinney counties, Texas, was first collected from Las Moras systems (Harrell 1978), which are and one drainage in Coahuila, Mexico. Creek, near Brackettville, Texas, on characterized by extended droughts and The species’ range is significantly April 14, 1951. The species was extreme flash floods (USGS 1989). reduced and fragmented due to habitat described by Hubbs and Brown (1956) The Devils River minnow is part of a loss from dam construction, spring from specimens collected in the Devils unique fish fauna in west Texas streams dewatering, and other stream River at Baker’s Crossing (southern-most where a mixture of fishes occur, modifications. The numbers of Devils bridge crossing of State Highway 163) in including Mexican peripherals, local River minnows collected during fish 1951. The species occurs with similar endemics, and widespread North surveys over the past 25 years have minnows, such as the closely related American fishes (Hubbs 1957). About declined; once one of the most abundant manantial roundnose minnow (Dionda half of the native fishes of the fish in the Devils River, the minnow has argentosa) and is also related to the Chihuahuan Desert of Mexico and Texas now become one of the least abundant. more common roundnose minnow are considered by Hubbs as threatened The species’ decline in abundance in (Dionda episcopa). Devils River minnow (1990) and at least four species have the Devils River may be attributed to the is recognized as a distinct species by the been documented to be extinct (Miller et effects of both habitat modification and American Fisheries Society (Robins et al. 1989), primarily due to habitat possibly predation by smallmouth bass al. 1991) based on morphological destruction and introduced species. (Micropterus dolomieu), an introduced characteristics (Hubbs and Brown 1956), The Devils River minnow is native to game fish. genetic markers (Mayden et al. 1992), tributary streams of the Rio Grande in We originally proposed to list the and chromosome differences (Gold et al. Val Verde and Kinney counties, Texas, Devils River minnow as endangered. 1992). and Coahuila, Mexico. The known However, since publication of the The Devils River minnow is a small historical range of the species is based proposed rule, a Conservation fish, with adults reaching sizes of 25–53 on collections from the 1950’s and Agreement (Agreement) for the species millimeters (mm) (1.0–2.1 inches (in.)) 1970’s and includes the Devils River has been signed and specific milestones standard length. The fish has a wedge- from Beaver Lake downstream to near for conservation actions have been shaped caudal (near the tail) spot and its confluence with the Rio Grande; San agreed to by us, the Texas Parks and pronounced lateral stripe with double Felipe Creek from the springs in the Wildlife Department (TPWD), and the dashes extending through the eye to the headwaters to springs in Del Rio; City of Del Rio. We determine that the snout but not reaching the lower lip. Sycamore Creek; Las Moras Creek near

VerDate 12-OCT-99 13:14 Oct 19, 1999 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\20OCR2.XXX pfrm03 PsN: 20OCR2