DOCSLIB.ORG

90-Day Finding on a Petition to Delist the Sacramento

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
90-Day Finding on a Petition to Delist the Sacramento Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 233 / Tuesday, December 5, 2006 / Proposed Rules 70479 part of the vehicle; these items are not amend the standards prior to the DATES: The finding in this document necessarily located in the rear cargo completion of this research would be was made on December 5, 2006. To be area. A ‘‘seat performance failure’’ premature. Additionally, other areas of considered in the 5-year review, includes seat hardware failure, seat concern identified by the petitioners comments and information should be deformed by intrusion or occupant would require substantial research to submitted to us (see ADDRESSES section) impact or other failure mechanism. We address. While the agency may in the on or before March 5, 2007. However, identified one case where an AIS 3+ future consider adding additional we will continue to accept new injury was reported from contact with dummies or unrestrained cargo to its information about any listed species at ‘‘interior loose objects’’ and there was a frontal crash test and/or other programs, any time. ‘‘seat performance failure.’’ We then it is not appropriate to consider ADDRESSES: Data, comments, manually reviewed the individual case rulemaking at this time. In accordance 5 information, or questions concerning file for accuracy in the reporting and with 49 CFR part 552, this completes this petition finding and 5-year review relevancy to the frontal crash test the agency’s review of the petition. should be submitted to the Field procedure proposed. After a careful Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, Supervisor, New Mexico Ecological review of the relevant case file, it was 30117 and 30162; delegation of authority at Services Field Office, 2105 Osuna Road concluded that this was not an incident 49 CFR 1.50. NE, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87113. where loose cargo from the luggage area You may send your comments by of the vehicle compromised the seat Issued on: November 29, 2006. electronic mail (e-mail) directly to the performance, intruded into the Stephen R. Kratzke, Service at [email protected]. passenger compartment, and caused a Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. The petition, supporting data, and direct injury to the occupants in a [FR Doc. E6–20487 Filed 12–4–06; 8:45 am] comments will be made available for frontal crash. This is not to say that BILLING CODE 4910–59–P there are not anecdotal cases that occur public inspection, by appointment, in the real world. However, our query of during normal business hours at the five years of NASS data yielded no cases above address. matching the above criteria. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Field Supervisor, New Mexico C. Analysis of Petition Fish and Wildlife Service Ecological Services Field Office (see Analysis of the available real world ADDRESSES above) (telephone 505–346– data does not indicate that the 50 CFR Part 17 2525, facsimile 505–346–2542). incidences and severity of motor vehicle SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: occupants injured from unrestrained Endangered and Threatened Wildlife cargo as a direct result of a seat and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a Background performance failure in motor vehicle Petition To Delist the Sacramento crashes is a safety problem that would Mountains Thistle (Cirsium vinaceum) Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act (16 warrant an amendment to the Federal and Initiation of 5-Year Status Review U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that we standard at this time. While there may make a finding on whether a petition to AGENCY: be anecdotal cases of displaced cargo Fish and Wildlife Service, list, delist, or reclassify a species intruding into the passenger Interior. presents substantial scientific or compartment and injuring occupants, ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition commercial information indicating that the agency has not been able to quantify finding and initiation of 5-year status the petitioned action may be warranted. the safety problem beyond a review of review. We are to base this finding on the NASS data. More research would be information provided in the petition. To needed to substantiate a correlation SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and the maximum extent practicable, we are between cargo intrusion and occupant Wildlife Service (Service), announce a to make this finding within 90 days of safety resulting from seat deformation or 90-day finding on a petition to remove our receipt of the petition, and publish failure. The petitioners also did not the threatened Sacramento Mountains our notice of this finding promptly in provide any field data demonstrating thistle (Cirsium vinaceum) (thistle) from the Federal Register. such a problem. Furthermore, for the the Federal List of Threatened and Our 90-day finding under section agency to pursue a rulemaking adopting Endangered Plants, under the 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act and § 424.14(b) of the ECE 17 requirement, considerable Endangered Species Act of 1973, as our regulations is limited to a research and testing would be needed amended (Act). We find the petition determination of whether the on the effectiveness of a seat back does not present substantial information information in the petition meets the deflection measurement to reduce indicating that delisting of the thistle ‘‘substantial information’’ threshold. occupant injury and the design and cost may be warranted. Therefore, we will ‘‘Substantial information’’ is defined in of potential countermeasures beyond not initiate a further 12-month status 50 CFR 424.14(b) as ‘‘that amount of the current requirements specified in review in response to this petition information that would lead a FMVSS No. 207. The petitioners did not under section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act. reasonable person to believe that the provide such information. However, we are initiating a 5-year measure proposed in the petition may review of this species under section be warranted.’’ Petitioners need not IV. Conclusion 4(c)(2)(A) of the Act to consider prove that the petitioned action is After carefully considering all aspects information that has become available warranted to support a ‘‘substantial’’ of the petitions, the agency has decided since we listed the species as threatened finding; instead, the key consideration to deny them. As stated above, the on June 16, 1987 (52 FR 22933). This in evaluating whether or not a petition agency has undertaken research in some will provide the public an opportunity presents ‘‘substantial’’ information areas of concern identified by the to submit new information on the status involves demonstration of the reliability petitioners. Making a determination to of the species. We invite all interested and adequacy of the information parties to submit comments or supporting the action advocated by the 5 NASS–CDS case reference: 2004–049–105. information regarding this species. petition. VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:17 Dec 04, 2006 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\05DEP1.SGM 05DEP1 ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS 70480 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 233 / Tuesday, December 5, 2006 / Proposed Rules We have to satisfy the Act’s flow. Waters at these sites are rich in determined that grazing and disturbance requirement that we use the best calcium carbonate that often no longer threaten the species, and that available scientific and commercial precipitates out to create large areas of logging has never impacted the thistle. information to make our decisions. travertine (calcium carbonate) deposits, The petition also cites a biological However, we do not conduct additional which occasionally become large bluffs assessment prepared by the Forest research at this point, nor do we subject or hills. Travertine deposits are the most Service (Forest Service 2003, pp. 41–68) the petition to rigorous critical review. common habitats of the thistle. that indicates the thistle’s abundance Rather, at the 90-day finding stage, we On June 16, 1987, we listed the thistle and range have increased since the accept the petitioner’s sources and as a threatened species based on threats species was listed. characterizations of the information, to from water development, grazing, the extent that they appear to be based recreation, logging, and the invasion of Finally, the petitioner disagrees with on accepted scientific principles (such exotic plants (52 FR 22933). A recovery the Recovery Plan’s strategy of as citing published and peer reviewed plan for the species was finalized on encouraging the State of New Mexico to articles, or studies done in accordance September 27, 1993 (Service 1993, pp. adopt water law standards that with valid methodologies), unless we 1–23). recognize the need for preservation of in-stream flow to benefit plants, fish, have specific information to the Review of the Petition contrary. Our finding considers whether and other wildlife (Service 1993, p. 9). the petition states a reasonable case for For this finding, the Service evaluated The petitioner suggests that proactive delisting on its face. Thus, our 90-day the statements and information in the watershed restoration would be a more finding expresses no view as to the petition by comparing these with effective strategy to insure the ultimate issue of whether the species information contained in our files. The availability of water at the springs and should no longer be classified as a Act identifies the five factors to be bogs which provide habitat for the threatened species. We make no considered, either singly or in species. The Petitioner also suggests that determinations as to the currency, combination, to determine whether a the availability of water, air, and accuracy, completeness, or veracity of species may be threatened or sunshine are aspects of the natural the petition. The contents of this finding endangered or whether a listed species world which do not need to be summarize that information that was should be reclassified or removed from guaranteed by the Service before a available to us at the time of the petition the list.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Literature Cited
    Literature Cited Robert W. Kiger, Editor This is a consolidated list of all works cited in volumes 19, 20, and 21, whether as selected references, in text, or in nomenclatural contexts. In citations of articles, both here and in the taxonomic treatments, and also in nomenclatural citations, the titles of serials are rendered in the forms recommended in G. D. R. Bridson and E. R. Smith (1991). When those forms are abbre- viated, as most are, cross references to the corresponding full serial titles are interpolated here alphabetically by abbreviated form. In nomenclatural citations (only), book titles are rendered in the abbreviated forms recommended in F. A. Stafleu and R. S. Cowan (1976–1988) and F. A. Stafleu and E. A. Mennega (1992+). Here, those abbreviated forms are indicated parenthetically following the full citations of the corresponding works, and cross references to the full citations are interpolated in the list alphabetically by abbreviated form. Two or more works published in the same year by the same author or group of coauthors will be distinguished uniquely and consistently throughout all volumes of Flora of North America by lower-case letters (b, c, d, ...) suffixed to the date for the second and subsequent works in the set. The suffixes are assigned in order of editorial encounter and do not reflect chronological sequence of publication. The first work by any particular author or group from any given year carries the implicit date suffix “a”; thus, the sequence of explicit suffixes begins with “b”. Works missing from any suffixed sequence here are ones cited elsewhere in the Flora that are not pertinent in these volumes.
    [Show full text]
  • Milk Thistle
    Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Biological Control BIOLOGY AND BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF EXOTIC T RU E T HISTL E S RACHEL WINSTON , RICH HANSEN , MA R K SCH W A R ZLÄNDE R , ER IC COO M BS , CA R OL BELL RANDALL , AND RODNEY LY M FHTET-2007-05 U.S. Department Forest September 2008 of Agriculture Service FHTET he Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team (FHTET) was created in 1995 Tby the Deputy Chief for State and Private Forestry, USDA, Forest Service, to develop and deliver technologies to protect and improve the health of American forests. This book was published by FHTET as part of the technology transfer series. http://www.fs.fed.us/foresthealth/technology/ On the cover: Italian thistle. Photo: ©Saint Mary’s College of California. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at 202-720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call 202-720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. The use of trade, firm, or corporation names in this publication is for information only and does not constitute an endorsement by the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • FR Doc 2010-27740
    Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 213 / Thursday, November 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules 67925 TABLE 1—WASTES EXCLUDED FROM NON-SPECIFIC SOURCES—Continued Facility Address Waste description 5. Reopener Language—(A) If, anytime after disposal of the delisted waste, Owosso pos- sesses or is otherwise made aware of any data (including but not limited to leachate data or groundwater monitoring data) relevant to the delisted waste indicating that any con- stituent is at a concentration in the leachate higher than the specified delisting concentra- tion, or is in the groundwater at a concentration higher than the maximum allowable groundwater concentration in paragraph (1), then Owosso must report such data, in writing, to the Regional Administrator within 10 days of first possessing or being made aware of that data. (B) Based on the information described in paragraph (A) and any other informa- tion received from any source, the Regional Administrator will make a preliminary deter- mination as to whether the reported information requires Agency action to protect human health or the environment. Further action may include suspending, or revoking the exclu- sion, or other appropriate response necessary to protect human health and the environ- ment. (C) If the Regional Administrator determines that the reported information does re- quire Agency action, the Regional Administrator will notify Owosso in writing of the actions the Regional Administrator believes are necessary to protect human health and the envi- ronment. The notice shall include a statement of the proposed action and a statement pro- viding Owosso with an opportunity to present information as to why the proposed Agency action is not necessary or to suggest an alternative action.
    [Show full text]
  • 19 BULL THISTLE (SPEAR THISTLE) PEST STATUS of WEED Nature Of
    In: Van Driesche, R., et al., 2002, Biological Control of Invasive Plants in the Eastern United States, USDA Forest Service Publication FHTET-2002-04, 413 p. 19 BULL THISTLE (SPEAR THISTLE) L.-T. Kok1 and A. Gassmann2 1Department of Entomology, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia 24061-0319, USA; 2CABI Bioscience Centre Switzerland, Delémont, Switzerland trast to those of Canada thistle. Leaves are covered PEST STATUS OF WEED with coarse hairs on the upper surface of the leaf Bull thistle, Cirsium vulgare (Savi) Tenore, is an in- blade, and are woolly below. Long spines extend from vasive thistle from Eurasia, found throughout the the leaf blade at the midrib and at each lobe. The leaf United States and in Canada from Newfoundland to bases extend downward on the stem forming long British Columbia. It is capable of invading fields, pas- wings. tures, wastelands and along roadsides, but will not Biology survive in cultivated fields. Bull thistle is a biennial species that reproduces by Nature of Damage seed. The root system consists of several primary Economic damage. Bull thistle occurs in overgrazed roots each with several smaller lateral roots. It does pastures, where heavy infestations can exclude live- not reproduce by vegetative means. Bull thistle is erect stock from infested areas. It also is common along and bushy in appearance, up to 2 m high, and has roadside and vacant fields. many spreading branches (Fig. 1). Stems are erect, Ecological damage. Although bull thistle is a stout, often branched, and hairy. Leaves are green on problem predominantly in disturbed areas, it also can the upper side, with woolly gray hairs on the under- be found in natural areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Insights from a Rare Hemiparasitic Plant, Swamp Lousewort (Pedicularis Lanceolata Michx.)
    University of Massachusetts Amherst ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst Open Access Dissertations 9-2010 Conservation While Under Invasion: Insights from a rare Hemiparasitic Plant, Swamp Lousewort (Pedicularis lanceolata Michx.) Sydne Record University of Massachusetts Amherst, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/open_access_dissertations Part of the Plant Biology Commons Recommended Citation Record, Sydne, "Conservation While Under Invasion: Insights from a rare Hemiparasitic Plant, Swamp Lousewort (Pedicularis lanceolata Michx.)" (2010). Open Access Dissertations. 317. https://scholarworks.umass.edu/open_access_dissertations/317 This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It has been accepted for inclusion in Open Access Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CONSERVATION WHILE UNDER INVASION: INSIGHTS FROM A RARE HEMIPARASITIC PLANT, SWAMP LOUSEWORT (Pedicularis lanceolata Michx.) A Dissertation Presented by SYDNE RECORD Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Massachusetts Amherst in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY September 2010 Plant Biology Graduate Program © Copyright by Sydne Record 2010 All Rights Reserved CONSERVATION WHILE UNDER INVASION: INSIGHTS FROM A RARE HEMIPARASITIC PLANT, SWAMP LOUSEWORT (Pedicularis lanceolata Michx.) A Dissertation Presented by
    [Show full text]
  • Candidates for the Biological Control of Teasel, Dipsacus Spp
    Candidates for the biological control of teasel, Dipsacus spp. René Sforza1 Summary Dipsacus fullonum L., wild teasel, and D. laciniatus L., cut-leaf teasel (Dipsacaceae), native to Eurasia, were introduced into North America in the 1700s. Primarily cultivated for its seedheads, D. fullonum escaped from cultivation and colonized waterways, waste ground, fallow fields and pastures, outcom- peting native plants. This study reports on foreign exploration for biological control agents against teasel in its native range. Countries from France to Russia were surveyed, with a particular emphasis on insects feeding either on rosettes or seedheads. Two potential candidates were collected, namely the checkerspot butterfly, Euphydryas aurinia (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae), and the leaf beetle, Galeruca pomonae (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). This is the first report of these two insect species feeding on teasel. Both were collected in the same locations in northern Turkey, and may feed concurrently on the same plants. Galeruca pomonae was also collected from south-eastern Russia. Preliminary host-choice and no-choice test experiments showed that G. pomonae can complete its entire development on teasel but does not feed on carrot, radish, cabbage, or lettuce. Euphydryas aurinia populations from Turkey were parasitized by a tachinid fly, Erycia furibunda. Ecological considerations and host specificity are discussed for potential biological control programs. Keywords: Biocontrol, Chrysomelidae, Dipsacaceae, Endothenia, Euphydryas, Galeruca, invasion, Nymphalidae, teasel, Tortricidae, weeds. Introduction 1975b). This plant belongs to the Dipsacaceae family (300 species worldwide) divided into three tribes, Teasel is an invasive species in North America. which comprise only 12 North American species Research on herbivores of Dipsacus fullonum and among the genera Dipsacus, Knautia, Succisella, closely related species has been conducted since 2000.
    [Show full text]
  • Petition to List the Wright's Marsh
    PETITION TO LIST THE WRIGHT’S MARSH THISTLE (Cirsium wrightii) UNDER THE U.S. ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT © Robert Sivinski In the Office of Endangered Species U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service United States Department of Interior Petitioner: WildEarth Guardians 312 Montezuma Ave. Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501 (505) 988-9126 October 9, 2008 WildEarth Guardians Petition to List 1 Wright’s Marsh Thistle Under the ESA Executive Summary The Wright’s marsh thistle (Cirsium wrightii), faces extinction or endangerment in the foreseeable future and therefore warrants federal protection under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). While it historically occurred in Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, and northern Mexico, it is currently known only from five locations in New Mexico. Remaining populations face threats from habitat loss and degradation, weed control, and non-native species. The historical range and total population of Wright’s marsh thistle has been reduced as the eastern and western periphery of its range has shrunk. The westernmost range of the Wright’s marsh thistle was believed to be in Yuma County, Arizona and populations in Trans-Pecos Texas were considered the eastern most expanse. The reduction in the range of Wright’s marsh thistle is due to misidentification of voucher specimens and to the extirpation of confirmed populations. Populations identified as Wright’s marsh thistle present in Yuma County, Arizona and throughout the Trans-Pecos area of west Texas are now known to have been C. texanum. One population of Wright’s marsh thistle is thought to be present in Presidio County, Texas, but information is contradictory on this point.
    [Show full text]
  • Field Guide for Managing Teasel in the Southwest
    United States Department of Agriculture Field Guide for Managing Teasel in the Southwest Forest Southwestern Service Region TP-R3-16-26 September 2014 Cover Photos Top right: Ohio State Weed Lab, Ohio State University, Bugwood.org Top left: David Cappaert, Michigan State University, Bugwood.org Bottom: The Nature Conservancy, Bugwood.org The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TTY). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Printed on recycled paper Teasel (Dipsacus fullonum L.) Teasel family (Dipsacaceae) Teasel is an invasive plant that has been listed as a noxious and elongated stem have downward pointing prickles. weed in New Mexico. This field guide serves as the U.S. • Flowers occur from early summer until early fall; Forest Service’s recommendations for management of teasel oval-shaped flower heads with rings of small, densely in forests, woodlands, and rangelands associated with its packed lavender flowers.
    [Show full text]
  • Comments Processing Attn: FWS-R2-ES-2008-0114 Division of Policy and Directives Management U.S
    December 9, 2008 Via Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov Public Comments Processing Attn: FWS-R2-ES-2008-0114 Division of Policy and Directives Management U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Suite 222 Arlington, VA 22203 Re: Comments on the 90-Day Finding on a Petition to Delist the Sacramento Mountains Thistle (Cirsium vinaceum) (Federal Register: November 6, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 216)). Greetings: Please accept these comments submitted on behalf of The Center for Biological Diversity on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (“FWS”) 90-day petition finding and initiation of status review for the Sacramento Mountains Thistle (Cirsium vinaceum) (“the Thistle” or “CIVI”) (Federal Register: November 6, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 216)). Based upon the best available scientific information, delisting of the Sacramento Mountains Thistle is not warranted because: 1) an increase in the number of known plants does not represent species recovery, 2) recovery criteria have not been met, 3) threats to the species have not been alleviated, and 4) threats would be magnified were the species to be delisted. Cirsium vinaceum continues to need the effective protection of the Endangered Species Act to ensure its survival. Table of Contents I. Delisting of Cirsium vinaceum is not warranted because an increase in the number of known plants does not represent species recovery . 3 II. Delisting of Cirsium vinaceum is not warranted because Recovery Criteria have not been met . 3 A. The first recovery criterion has not been met . 4 B. The second recovery criterion has not been met . 4 1.
    [Show full text]
  • State of NEW MEXICO 2014 Wetland Plant List
    4/2/14 & n s p State of NEW MEXICO 2014 Wetland Plant List Lichvar, R.W., M. Butterw ick, N.C. Melvin, and W.N. Kirchner. 2014. The National Wetland Plant List: 2014 Update of Wetland Ratings. Phytoneuron 2014-41: 1-42. http://wetland_plants.usace.army.mil/ Sisyrinchium demissum Greene (Stif f Blue-Ey ed-Grass) Photo: Lewis E. Epple User Notes: 1) Plant species not listed are considered UPL for w etland delineation purposes. 2) A few UPL species are listed because they are rated FACU or w etter in at least one Corps region. 3) Some state boundaries lie w ithin tw o or more Corps Regions. If a species occurs in one region but not the other, its rating w ill be show n in one column and the other column w ill be BLANK. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. 1/24 4/2/14 State of NEW MEXICO 2014 Wetland Plant List Total Species = 1506 AW GP WMVC OBL 273 266 266 FACW 337 330 320 FAC 338 329 345 FACU 450 390 430 UPL 100 126 116 Regional Totals 1498 1441 1477 Scientific Name Authorship AW GP WMVC Common Name Abies bifolia A. Murr. FACU FACU Rocky Mountain Alpine Fir Abutilon theophrasti Medik. UPL UPL FACU Velv etleaf Acer glabrum Torr. FAC FAC FACU Rocky Mountain Maple Acer grandidentatum Nutt. FACU FAC FACU Cany on Maple Acer negundo L. FACW FAC FAC Ash-Leaf Maple Acer saccharinum L. FAC FAC FAC Silv er Maple Achillea millefolium L. FACU FACU FACU Common Yarrow Achnatherum hymenoides (Roemer & J.A.
    [Show full text]
  • NM Thistle Identification Guide
    NEW MEXICO THISTLE IDENTIFICATION GUIDE Native Plant Society of New Mexico Foreword The State of New Mexico is home to twelve native thistle species in the genus Cirsium. All are ecologically important for pollinators and herbivores and are innocuous in their natural habitats. Two of our native thistles are wetland plants that are federally and state listed as threatened or endangered species. None of these showy, indigenous wildflowers should ever be classified or treated as weeds in the wild. New Mexico also has two introduced, non-native species of Cirsium and an additional two species in the plumeless thistle genera Carduus and Onopordum that are noxious weeds. These four exotic thistles can occasionally become problematic for land managers or landown- ers and elicit a most extreme hatred of any plant with the word “thistle” in its common name—regardless of its origin. Eradication efforts with the spade, chemical herbicides, local ordinances, and re- lease of non-native insects have received great amounts of publicity and support. This intense focus on killing noxious thistles may result Parry’s thistle with Hunt’s Bumblebee and small Halictid bee near Cloudcroft in some local control of exotic thistles, but has also caused the unnec- essary destruction of native thistle plants and populations. Years of experience with ranchers and mountain home owners digging up na- tive thistles, NM Department of Transportation spraying herbicide on hundreds of individual New Mexico thistle along Highway 60 near By Robert Sivinski Magdalena and the endangered Sacramento Mountains thistle on Highway 82 near Cloudcroft, and other unnecessary native thistle de- 2016 struction have shown us the need for a thistle identification guide.
    [Show full text]
  • Wright's Marsh Thistle, (Cirsium Wrightii), and Mescalero Milkwort (Polygala Rimulicola Var
    Species Status Assessment Report for Cirsium wrightii (Wright’s Marsh Thistle) Version 1.0 Photo courtesy of Robert Sivinski, 2012. October 2017 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 2 Albuquerque, NM This document was prepared by Patricia Zenone, Susan Pruitt, Ron Vandervort, and Susan Oetker with assistance from Julie Crawford and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Wright’s Marsh Thistle Listing Recommendation Team (Ted Koch, Susan Jacobsen, Shawn Sartorius, Jodie Smithem, Susan Millsap, and Steve Spangle). We also received assistance from species experts Robert Sivinski (retired) and Daniela Roth of New Mexico State Forestry. We appreciate their input and comments, which resulted in a more robust status assessment and final report. Also, we wish to thank Dr. Robert Sivinski for the use of his photographs in this SSA. With appreciation, in memoriam, to Dr. Patricia Zenone, biologist, ornithologist, and dedicated conservationist. Suggested reference: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2017. Species status assessment report for Cirsium wrightii (Wright’s Marsh Thistle), Version 1.0. October 2017. Albuquerque, NM. Cirsium wrightii SSA Report ii October 2017 WRIGHT’S MARSH THISTLE SPECIES STATUS ASSESSMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This species status assessment reports the results of the comprehensive status review for Cirsium wrightii (Wright’s marsh thistle (Gray 1853, p. 101)) and provides a thorough account of the species’ overall viability and extinction risk. Depending on environmental conditions, C. wrightii can exhibit life history characteristics of a biennial plant (a plant completing development in two years, and producing flowers in its second year) or a weak monocarpic perennial (a plant that lives two or more years, then flowers, sets seed, and dies).
    [Show full text]