Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the Mussentuchit Gilia as Threatened or Endangered, 4337-4341 [E6-947]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 17 / Thursday, January 26, 2006 / Proposed Rules
• After analyzing the public
comments, the FAR Council withdrew
the proposed definition. In
recommending withdrawal of the rule,
the June 26, 2003 report of the FAR Part
31 Streamlining Committee noted the
following:
Upon further review, the Committee
recommends that the proposed definition of
catastrophic losses be deleted from the final
rule. The Committee continues to believe that
the proposed definition is consistent with the
intent of the promulgators of the current
language, as evidenced by the March 19,
1979 Committee report underlying DAR Case
78–400–7.
The intent of the proposed coverage was to
distinguish catastrophic losses as used in the
cost principle from the type of catastrophic
loss anticipated by the illustration at CAS
416.60(h). In that illustration, motor vehicle
liability losses in excess of a specified
amount were absorbed by the home office
and reallocated to all segments. In the
particular case described, the specified
amount was too low based on loss experience
to be considered catastrophic under the
provisions of CAS 416. However, the
illustration appears to anticipate losses that
may be catastrophic to a particular segment
of a company but not necessarily catastrophic
in a more general sense. The Committee does
not believe the drafters of the cost principle
intended to disallow self-insurance charges
for the type of loss anticipated by the CAS
illustration. However, since CAS does not
include a definition of catastrophic loss,
defining the term in FAR could cause
confusion by the users of these regulations.
As to the commenter’s recommendation
that self-insurance charges for catastrophic
losses should be allowable, the Committee
disagrees. As was noted in the report on DAR
Case 78–400–7, the Government should not
allow self-insurance charges for catastrophic
losses, such as earthquakes, which have a
very small likelihood of occurring for any
particular contractor.
erjones on PROD1PC68 with PROPOSALS
Key Questions for Consideration
The CAS Board is soliciting
comments on this issue from interested
parties. In particular, the Board is
interested in comments related to the
following questions:
1. Do contractors and contracting
agencies currently interpret the term
‘‘catastrophic losses’’ differently when
applying CAS 416.50(b)(1) and FAR
31.205–19(e)? If so, how does the use of
the term differ between the two
applications?
2. Under CAS 416.50(b)(1), the
contractor is required to assign
insurance costs on the basis of the
projected average loss. Actual losses
cannot be used unless they approximate
the projected average loss. FAR 31.205–
19(c)(4) disallows self-insurance costs
for catastrophic losses. Thus, if the term
‘‘catastrophic losses’’ is interpreted as
having the same meaning in both CAS
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:54 Jan 25, 2006
Jkt 208001
and FAR, how does a contractor recover
amounts related to catastrophic losses,
since the costs cannot be assigned based
on actual costs under CAS (and
therefore are not allowable as actual
costs), and the costs are unallowable as
self-insurance charges under FAR?
3. How does the insurance industry
use the term ‘‘catastrophic losses?’’
4. How does the insurance industry’s
use of the term ‘‘catastrophic losses’’
differ from its use in CAS and FAR, if
any?
5. Have there been problems in the
implementation of CAS 416.50(b)(1) as
a result of the use of the term
‘‘catastrophic?’’
6. Provide any examples of instances
where the use of the term ‘‘catastrophic’’
has resulted in contract disputes. For
each example provided, include the
nature of the dispute and the resolution.
7. Provide any comments as to
whether the language at CAS
416.50(b)(1) should be revised. If the
recommendation is to revise the
language, please provide suggested
revisions.
8. Provide any comments regarding
use of the term ‘‘extraordinary item’’ as
used in Generally Accepted Accounting
Principles in lieu of the term
‘‘catastrophic insurance.’’
[FR Doc. E6–975 Filed 1–25–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3110–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a
Petition To List the Mussentuchit Gilia
as Threatened or Endangered
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition
finding.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
90-day finding on a petition to list the
Mussentuchit gilia (Gilia [=Aliciella]
tenuis) as threatened or endangered
under the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended. We find the petition
does not provide substantial
information indicating that listing Gilia
[=Aliciella] tenuis may be warranted.
Therefore, we will not be initiating a
further status review in response to this
petition. The public may submit to us
any new information that becomes
available concerning the status of the
species or threats to it.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
4337
The finding announced in this
document was made on January 19,
2006. You may submit new information
concerning this species for our
consideration at any time.
ADDRESSES: The complete file for this
finding is available for public
inspection, by appointment, during
normal business hours at the Utah Fish
and Wildlife Office, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, 2369 West Orton
Circle, Suite 50, West Valley City, Utah
84119. Submit new information,
materials, comments, or questions
concerning this species to us at the
above address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Henry Maddux, Field Supervisor, Utah
Fish and Wildlife Office (see
ADDRESSES) (telephone 801–975–3330,
extension 124; facsimile 801–975–3331).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DATES:
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Endangered
Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), requires that we
make a finding on whether a petition to
list, delist, or reclassify a species
presents substantial scientific or
commercial information to indicate that
the petitioned action may be warranted.
We are to base this finding on
information provided in the petition
and other information that is readily
available to us (e.g., in our files). To the
maximum extent practicable, we are to
make this finding within 90 days of our
receipt of the petition, and publish our
notice of this finding promptly in the
Federal Register.
Our standard for substantial scientific
information within the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) with regard to a 90day petition finding is ‘‘that amount of
information that would lead a
reasonable person to believe that the
measure proposed in the petition may
be warranted’’ (50 CFR 424.14(b)). If we
find that substantial scientific
information was presented, we are
required to commence a review of the
status of the species.
In making this finding, we relied on
information provided by the petitioners,
and readily available in our files, and
evaluated that information in
accordance with 50 CFR 424.14(b). Our
process of coming to a 90-day finding
under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act and
section 424.14(b) of our regulations is
limited to a determination of whether
the information in the petition meets the
‘‘substantial scientific information’’
threshold.
We added Aliciella tenuis to our list
of candidate species on September 30,
1993, as a category 2 candidate species
E:\FR\FM\26JAP1.SGM
26JAP1
4338
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 17 / Thursday, January 26, 2006 / Proposed Rules
erjones on PROD1PC68 with PROPOSALS
(58 FR 51144). In the February 28, 1996,
Notice of Review (61 FR 7595), we
discontinued the use of multiple
candidate categories and considered the
former category 1 candidates as simply
‘‘candidates’’ for listing purposes. The
A. tenuis was removed from the
candidate list at that time. This species
currently has no Federal regulatory
status.
On March 10, 2004, we received a
formal petition, dated March 9, 2004,
from the Southern Utah Wilderness
Alliance, Center for Native Ecosystems,
and Utah Native Plant Society,
requesting that the Mussentuchit gilia
(Gilia [=Aliciella] tenuis) found in Utah
be listed as threatened or endangered
pursuant to section 4 of the Act. This
petition was identical to a petition
submitted on May 19, 2003, to which,
due to funding limitations, we were
unable to respond during Fiscal Year
(FY) 2003. In addition, all FY 2004
listing funds were allocated to activities
in response to court-approved
settlements.
When we first receive a petition, we
evaluate it in order to determine if an
emergency exists such that an
emergency listing may be warranted. In
a response letter to the petitioners,
dated March 16, 2004, we stated that
‘‘the petitioned plant lives primarily on
Federal lands, including Capitol Reef
National Park, and we know of no clear
imminent threat to the species.
Therefore, we see no evidence that
would lead us to conclude that
emergency reclassification of this
species is appropriate.’’
On May 19, 2005, the petitioners filed
a complaint in Utah Federal District
Court alleging our failure to complete
90-day or 12-month findings on their
petition. On August 26, 2005, the court
approved a stipulated settlement
agreement and dismissed the case,
based on our agreement to submit to the
Federal Register by January 19, 2006, a
completed 90-day finding.
Species Information
Aliciella tenuis is an herbaceous
perennial vascular plant in the family
Polemoniaceae. The plant grows from a
multi-branched woody base, 2–14
inches (in) (5–35 centimeters (cm)) in
height. Stems have fine hairs with sticky
glands, to which sand usually adheres.
The inflorescence is paniculately
cymose (a loose arrangement of flowers
where the central or terminal flowers
generally flower first). Flowers are
usually solitary, growing from branched
ends. Blooming begins in May and often
continues through July (Porter 1998).
The species was first collected as a
botanical specimen in 1932 but
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:54 Jan 25, 2006
Jkt 208001
remained obscure until the 1980s. The
species was described in the scientific
literature in 1989 (Smith and Neese
1989) as Gilia tenuis and subsequently
included in the resurrected genus
Aliciella in 1998 (Porter 1998). We
accept the name Aliciella tenuis as the
valid name for Mussentuchit gilia.
Aliciella tenuis is a rare, edaphically
restricted plant in southwestern Emery,
southeastern Sevier, and northern
Wayne Counties, Utah. The species’
range spans about 45 miles (mi) (72
kilometers (km)) from its South Desert
population in Waterpocket Fold within
Capitol Reef National Park to its Secret
Mesa population in the San Rafael
Swell. The species has been delineated
into 7 populations, with 1 to 8 separate
sites in each population, for a total of 39
sites (Clark 2005). Based on Dr. Johnson
(2005, memo to Clark), DNA studies
between these populations indicate four
genetic groups. The species’ known
population is estimated at 15,400
individuals (9,774 counted) on
approximately 353 acres (ac) (143
hectares (ha)) (Clark 2005).
The largest concentrations of Aliciella
tenuis are restricted to sandstone
(including mudstone and siltstone)
ledges and cracks with interbedded
gypsum deposits, and on talus slopes
derived from those sandstone
formations. The species is found on
several named geologic formations
including the Curtis, Carmel, Dakota,
Entrada, Navajo (contact with Carmel),
and Summerville (contact with Curtis)
formations. Most population sites are
difficult to access due to steep
treacherous terrain.
Threats Analysis
Pursuant to section (4) of the Act, a
species may be determined to be an
endangered and threatened species on
the basis of any of the following five
factors: (A) Present or threatened
destruction, modification, or
curtailment of habitat or range; (B)
overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D)
inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms; or (E) other natural or
manmade factors affecting its continued
existence. In making this finding, we
evaluated whether the petition
presented substantial scientific or
commercial information to determine
that listing Aliciella tenuis as threatened
or endangered may be warranted. The
Act identifies the five factors to be
considered, either singly or in
combination, to determine whether a
species may be threatened or
endangered. Our evaluation of these
threats, based on information provided
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
in the petition and readily available in
our files, is presented below.
A. Present or Threatened Destruction,
Modification, or Curtailment of the
Species’ Habitat or Range
The petition claims that there are 17
populations of Aliciella tenuis, and that
the species is threatened mainly by
activities surrounding oil, gas, and
mineral extraction; livestock trampling;
off-road vehicle (ORV) use; recreational
activities; and weed invasions.
Oil, Gas, and Mineral Extraction
The petition cites general information
on oil, gas, and mineral extraction. The
petition asserts that 3 of 17 populations
are in areas under lease for oil and gas
development. Petitioners claim that oil,
gas, and mineral exploration involve
construction of well pads, roads,
pipelines, and other associated
facilities, which permanently reduce
and fragment habitat. They assert that:
(1) Infrastructure activities may lead to
removing rock outcrops; (2) mineral
development increases recreation
activities, such as ORV use; (3) ground
disturbance also may introduce noxious
weeds and destroy biological soil crusts;
and (4) seismic exploration also has
long-lasting effects that provide similar
ground-disturbing impacts.
Additionally, the petitioners state that
an increasing number of leases and
permits for oil and gas will threaten
known and unknown populations.
The petition contends that mining
and associated facilities threaten
Aliciella tenuis habitats. The petition
states that the potential range of the
plant corresponds to areas that have a
high potential for gypsum occurrences.
Additionally, it is stated that an active
bentonite and zeolite mine owned by
Western Clay Company is immediately
adjacent to areas known to contain the
species.
Evaluation of Information in the
Petition
The petition asserts that there are 17
populations of Aliciella tenuis. More
recent information readily available in
our files indicates that there are 7
Aliciella tenuis populations with 39
sites; these are the figures we use
throughout this finding.
The petition provides some
information regarding oil and gas
production in the San Rafael Swell
generally, but it does not present
substantial information that this
development has resulted in losses or
threatens to result in actual losses of
Aliciella tenuis. The species is not
distributed uniformly across its range.
The petition asserts that 3 of 17
E:\FR\FM\26JAP1.SGM
26JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 17 / Thursday, January 26, 2006 / Proposed Rules
erjones on PROD1PC68 with PROPOSALS
populations are in areas under lease for
oil and gas development. Currently,
known sites of A. tenuis are not located
in areas targeted for oil, gas, and seismic
exploration (Debra Clark, Interagency
Botanist, pers. comm. 2003; Fish and
Wildlife Service 2006). The mine owned
by Western Clay Company referred to in
the petition is near 3 of the 17 A. tenuis
populations in the petition, but these
sites are not in the vicinity of the mine
and are not being disturbed by mining
activities (D. Clark, pers. comm. 2003).
Much of the information in the petition
identifies potential impacts rather than
actual impacts, and there is no evidence
presented in the petition or in our files
to indicate that known populations are
impacted by oil, gas, and mineral
extraction. A. tenuis generally occurs on
steep slopes, in rock cracks, or on ridges
away from trail or road use. Most sites
are very difficult to access, and therefore
there is a low likelihood of disturbance
from these activities.
The petitioners provide general
characterizations of oil, gas, and mineral
extraction impacts. They do not provide
substantial information that documents
that these activities occur in the areas
where Aliciella tenuis is found. Also,
the petition does not present substantial
information on the magnitude and the
extent of degradation and loss of habitat
to oil, gas, and mineral extraction such
that we can conclude that these
activities threaten the continued
existence of the A. tenuis.
Livestock Grazing/Trampling
The petition identifies livestock
grazing as an important factor in habitat
destruction and alteration in Aliciella
tenuis habitat. The petition asserts that
livestock grazing affects vegetation
communities by altering species
composition through direct loss of
vegetation, and also by habitat
degradation due to associated factors
that may affect plant succession,
wildlife use, time and length of plant
flowering (and its effects on pollinators),
native plant species presence, and the
presence of invasive exotic plant species
(especially annual weeds and grasses).
Trampling of plants and soil may cause
damage to soil crusts, reduce
mycorrhizal fungi, increase erosion, and
contribute to nonnative plant
introductions. In addition, the petition
claims that grazing management is of
concern due to overgrazing or untimely
grazing.
Evaluation of Information in the
Petition
The petition describes various
impacts associated with livestock and
grazing management that could affect
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:54 Jan 25, 2006
Jkt 208001
Aliciella tenuis, and cites general
information where impacts to vegetative
communities similar to those in
southern Utah have resulted from these
practices. The petition alleges that 5 of
17 A. tenuis populations are on Bureau
of Land Management (BLM) grazing
allotments. The petition does not
provide evidence of actual damage to A.
tenuis by grazing. Cattle cannot access
the majority of occupied sites
(approximately 85 percent) and
trampling has not been recorded at
known sites (D. Clark, pers. comm.
2003; Clark 2005; Lenhart and Clark
2005).
The petitioners did not provide
substantial information that documents
that areas impacted by grazing
management practices are also those in
which Aliciella tenuis is found. Also,
the petition does not present substantial
information on the magnitude and the
extent of degradation and loss of habitat
to livestock grazing such that we could
conclude that grazing practices threaten
the continued existence of the A. tenuis.
Recreational Activities
The petition contends that recreation,
especially ORV use, threatens to destroy
Aliciella tenuis habitats.
Evaluation of Information in the
Petition
The information provided by the
petitioners does not provide substantial
information demonstrating that
recreational activities present a threat to
Aliciella tenuis. Aliciella tenuis plants
are mostly located on steep side-slopes,
in rock cracks, or on ridges away from
trail or road use. Most sites are very
difficult to access, and the petition
acknowledges that the BLM’s Resource
Management Plan (RMP) limits ORV use
to designated roads and trails. Human
disturbance, such as human footprints
and all-terrain vehicle tracks, are
recorded only at 4 of 39 sites; however,
these sites are still occupied by A.
tenuis (Lenhart and Clark 2005).
Furthermore, only six of the known sites
are in areas accessible by the general
public, due to terrain (Lenhart and Clark
2005). In light of the information above,
we conclude that the petition does not
provide substantial information to
indicate that recreational activities
threaten the continued existence of A.
tenuis.
Invasive Plants
The petition maintains that the spread
of weeds by several factors (grazing,
ORV use, and mining/drilling
operations) across the arid West will
result in the degradation of Aliciella
tenuis habitat, thereby increasing
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
4339
endangerment of the relatively slowreproducing A. tenuis.
Evaluation of Information in the
Petition
Information presented in the petition
is speculative. The petitioners provide
information about weed invasions
within western arid ecosystems. The
petitioners did not provide substantial
information that documents that areas
impacted by invasive species are the
areas where Aliciella tenuis is found.
Native plants are the dominant species
found at A. tenuis sites, and highly
associated plant species are not exotic
weeds or grasses (Lenhart and Clark
2005). Furthermore, the petitioners do
not provide substantial information on
the magnitude and the extent of habitat
impacts by invasive weeds such that we
might conclude that they may threaten
the continued existence of A. tenuis.
B. Overutilization for Commercial,
Recreational, Scientific, or Educational
Purposes
The petition claims that other gilia
species are ornamental cultivars and
sought after by rock-garden enthusiasts.
The petition also claims that many of
the threats identified under Factor A
also represent overutilization for
commercial, recreational, scientific or
educational purposes. Since Factor B
refers to ‘‘overutilization’’ of the species,
and because we have already addressed
these threats under Factor A, we will
not reevaluate those claims here.
Evaluation of Information in the
Petition
The petitioners provide information
indicating that gilias are ornamental and
collectable. Petitioners refer to the
collection of a different, rare gilia
species and conclude that Mussentuchit
gilia (Aliciella tenuis) will likely be
sought after when it is more widely
known. However, no documentation of
A. tenuis collection is provided, nor do
we or the Interagency Botanist (D. Clark,
pers. comm. 2005) know of any
evidence of such collection.
Furthermore, the majority of sites are in
remote, difficult to access locations,
with only 6 of 39 known sites
considered readily accessible by the
general public (Lenhart and Clark 2005).
The petition provides only speculative
information regarding threats presented
by collection. Therefore, we cannot
conclude that there is substantial
information that this practice threatens
the continued existence of A. tenuis.
C. Disease or Predation
The petition does not identify disease
or predation as threats to Aliciella
E:\FR\FM\26JAP1.SGM
26JAP1
4340
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 17 / Thursday, January 26, 2006 / Proposed Rules
tenuis. Additionally, the information in
our files provides no instances where
disease or predation has been
documented to occur to A. tenuis plants
(Porter and Heil 1994; Clark 2000; Clark
2001; Clark 2002; Grobner et al 2004;
Clark 2004; Clark 2005; Lenhart and
Clark 2005).
D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory
Mechanisms
The petition contends that existing
land use designations and regulatory
mechanisms are insufficient to protect
populations of Aliciella tenuis, and also
alleges that State and Federal agencies
have failed to conduct monitoring for
the species in most of its range and to
protect it from impacts associated with
energy exploration and development,
livestock grazing, recreation, and exotic
weeds (see Factor A).
erjones on PROD1PC68 with PROPOSALS
Federal Agencies
The petitioners claim that nearly all
known populations of Aliciella tenuis
occur on BLM lands. They acknowledge
that BLM has designated A. tenuis as a
special status species and that 9 of 17
populations of the species occur within
Areas of Critical Environmental Concern
(ACEC) and within BLM Wilderness
Study Areas (WSA). The petition also
acknowledges the existence of certain
in-place management restrictions which
serve to protect A. tenuis sites.
However, the petition questions
whether these designations and other
mechanisms to regulate and control
various activities, such as grazing and
mining (see factor A), are sufficient to
prevent harm to the A. tenuis in a
significant portion of its range. They
claim that 3 populations are not covered
by a BLM RMP. Additionally, they
claim that Federal agencies have failed
to conduct comprehensive monitoring
of the species.
Evaluation of Information in the
Petition
The primary concern expressed by the
petitioners is that the existing BLM
special status designation and
occurrence within BLM WSAs and
ACECs is insufficient to provide
adequate conservation for Aliciella
tenuis. However, BLM special status
designation does include BLM policy
direction. The BLM ‘‘special status
plants’’ include all of the following: (1)
Federally-listed and proposed species;
(2) Federal candidate species; (3) Statelisted species; and (4) BLM sensitive
species. BLM sensitive plants are those
species that do not occur on Federal or
State lists, but which are designated by
the BLM State Director for special
management consideration.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:54 Jan 25, 2006
Jkt 208001
BLM Manual 6840 provides policy
direction that BLM sensitive plant
species are to be managed as if they
were candidate species for Federal
listing so that they do not become listed,
while also fulfilling other Federal law
mandates. The BLM has a policy of
entering into conservation agreements
and other conservation measures to
protect both State- and BLM-listed
species. Capitol Reef National Park (NP)
similarly lists A. tenuis as a sensitive
species.
Sensitive species designation by both
BLM and Capitol Reef NP is important
because the majority of the Aliciella
tenuis population occurs on agencymanaged lands. Seven Aliciella tenuis
populations (39 sites) are known (Clark
2005). One population (7 sites) occurs in
Capitol Reef National Park and is fully
protected by applicable National Park
System laws and regulations (Clark
2005). Twenty-six of 32 sites in the
other 6 populations are on BLMmanaged lands. Of the remaining 6 sites,
1 is on State lands, while ownership of
the other 5 is documented as shared
between BLM and the State of Utah
(Clark 2005). Concerning the 3
populations that the petitioners claim
are not covered by an RMP, only a very
small number of A. tenuis sites are
potentially affected by this, and the
mere absence of explicit coverage under
an RMP does not leave the populations
wholly unprotected.
Despite the fact that few if any threats
to the species are documented, both the
BLM and NPS have continued to
develop and implement conservation
efforts for the species to ensure
continued long-term protection and
population monitoring. The Interagency
Rare Plant Team was established in
1999 to direct conservation measures for
listed and sensitive plant species
endemic to central Utah sandstone
habitats, including Aliciella tenuis. The
team has conducted surveys for listed
and sensitive plants on lands managed
by Richfield and Price Field Offices of
the BLM, Capitol Reef National Park,
Fishlake National Forest, and the
Teasdale District of Dixie National
Forest. From 2000 to 2005,
approximately 10,500 ac (4,249 ha) have
been surveyed for A. tenuis on Capitol
Reef National Park, BLM, and State
lands (Lenhart and Clark 2005). During
this period, approximately 2,650
person-hours were allocated by the
Interagency Rare Plant Team for A.
tenuis surveys (Lenhart and Clark 2005).
In addition, the species is included in
conservation planning documents such
as the 1996 Gilia caespitosa [A. tenuis]
Conservation Agreement and Strategy
and the soon to be completed Central
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Utah Navajo Sandstone Endemics
Conservation Strategy and Agreement
(CAS), a multi-year joint project by
BLM, NPS, U.S. Forest Service, and the
Service (Clark, pers. comm. 2005).
Thus, we conclude that the petition
does not present substantial information
to indicate that Aliciella tenuis may be
threatened by the inadequacy of existing
Federal regulatory mechanisms across
all or a significant portion of its range.
Interagency cooperation for this species
is high and all Federal agencies across
the species’ range will be signatory
parties to the CAS.
State Agencies
The petition claims that lack of State
policies leaves the species inadequately
protected.
Evaluation of Information in the
Petition
The petition states that 3 of 17
populations are on State lands, and
acknowledges that 2 of these overlap
populations on BLM lands. The petition
also acknowledges that the species is
currently monitored by the Utah Natural
Heritage Program. The information in
our files indicates that there are 7
populations with 39 sites; 1 site is on
State lands, while 5 sites are
documented as shared between BLM
and the State of Utah (Clark 2005). No
documentation indicates that habitat
reduction is occurring on State or
private lands. There is no evidence that
existing regulatory mechanisms are
inadequate to prevent harm to Aliciella
tenuis populations on State lands.
Therefore, the information presented in
the petition regarding threats to A.
tenuis populations on State lands is
speculative and does not present
substantial information to indicate that
listing these populations may be
warranted due to inadequate State
regulatory mechanisms.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors
Affecting the Species’ Continued
Existence
The petition contends that several
other factors negatively impact Aliciella
tenuis populations. They state that the
small size of A. tenuis populations
(many populations with fewer than 25
individuals) makes them vulnerable to
extirpation because of a variety of
environmental factors, such as
stochastic events, drought, climate
change, and potential disruption of
plant-pollinator interactions.
Evaluation of Information in the
Petition
While the petition provides
information on the effects of these
E:\FR\FM\26JAP1.SGM
26JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 17 / Thursday, January 26, 2006 / Proposed Rules
environmental factors on plant species
in general, no substantial scientific or
commercial information regarding
Aliciella tenuis was provided. Drought,
flood, climate change, and plantpollinator interactions may have the
potential to affect small populations.
However, we find no indication of longterm species decline for A. tenuis due to
these or any other factors. Most A.
tenuis sites have greater than 100
individuals and, as more recent studies
indicate, most populations have several
hundred to several thousand
documented individuals (Clark 2005).
Such populations possess greater
resiliency to the threats identified in the
petition.
A few sites are in active floodplains
where plants are periodically washed
away (Clark 2005); however, seed source
for recolonization of these sites is
provided by larger sites found at higher
elevations in the landscape (D. Clark,
pers. comm. 2005).
The information presented in the
petition regarding climate change and
its potential impact on Aliciella tenuis
is speculative.
Finding
We have reviewed the information as
it is cited in the petition, along with
other pertinent literature and
information readily available in our
files. After this review and evaluation,
we find the petition does not present
substantial scientific information to
indicate that listing Aliciella tenuis may
be warranted at this time. Most of the
threats described in the petition are
speculative in nature, and petitioners
admit that only a few populations are
susceptible to the threats raised.
We will not be commencing a status
review in response to this petition. We
encourage interested parties to continue
to gather data that will assist with the
conservation of the species. If you wish
to provide information regarding
Aliciella tenuis, you may submit your
information or materials to the Field
Supervisor, Utah Fish and Wildlife
Office (see ADDRESSES).
erjones on PROD1PC68 with PROPOSALS
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited
herein is available, upon request, from
the Utah Fish and Wildlife Office (see
ADDRESSES).
Author
The primary author of this notice is
Heather Barnes, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Utah Fish and Wildlife Office
(see ADDRESSES).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:54 Jan 25, 2006
Jkt 208001
Authority
The authority for this action is section
4 of the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.).
Dated: January 19, 2006.
Thomas O. Melius,
Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. E6–947 Filed 1–25–06; 8:45 am]
4341
petition, supporting data, and comments
will be available for public inspection,
by appointment, during normal business
hours, at the above address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pete
Gober, Field Supervisor, South Dakota
Ecological Services Office at the above
address (telephone 605–224–8693;
facsimile 605–224–9974).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
Background
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; 90-day Finding on a
Petition To List the American Dipper in
the Black Hills of South Dakota as
Threatened or Endangered
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition
finding.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
90-day finding on a petition to list the
distinct vertebrate population segment
(DPS) of American dipper (Cinclus
mexicanus unicolor) in the Black Hills
of South Dakota as threatened or
endangered under the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act).
We find that the petition and other
readily available information do not
provide substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that
listing the American Dipper in the Black
Hills of South Dakota may be warranted.
This finding is based on our
determination that the American Dipper
in the Black Hills of South Dakota does
not constitute a valid DPS and,
therefore, cannot be considered a
listable entity pursuant to section 3(15)
of the Act. Therefore, we will not
initiate a status review to determine if
listing this species is warranted in
response to this petition. However, the
public may submit to us new
information concerning the species, its
status or threats to it at any time.
DATES: The finding announced in this
document was made on January 19,
2006.
ADDRESSES: Information, data,
comments, or questions concerning this
petition and our finding should be
submitted to the Field Supervisor,
South Dakota Ecological Services Office,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 420
South Garfield Avenue, Suite 400,
Pierre, South Dakota 57501. The
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), requires that we
make a finding on whether a petition to
list, delist, or reclassify a species
presents substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that
the petitioned action may be warranted.
We are to base this finding on
information provided in the petition
and other information that is readily
available to us (e.g., in our files). To the
maximum extent practicable, we are to
make this finding within 90 days of our
receipt of the petition, and publish our
notice of this finding promptly in the
Federal Register.
Our standard for substantial scientific
information within the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) with regard to a 90day petition finding is ‘‘that amount of
information that would lead a
reasonable person to believe that the
measure proposed in the petition may
be warranted’’ (50 CFR 424.14(b)). If we
find that substantial scientific
information was presented, we are
required to commence a review of the
status of the species.
In making this finding, we relied on
information provided by the petitioners
and information in our files, and
evaluated that information in
accordance with 50 CFR 424.14(b). Our
process of coming to a 90-day finding
under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act and
§ 424.14(b) of our regulations is limited
to a determination of whether the
information in the petition meets the
‘‘substantial scientific information’’
threshold.
We do not conduct additional
research to make a 90-day finding, nor
do we subject the petition to rigorous
critical review. Rather, as the Act and
regulations contemplate, in coming to a
90-day finding, we acknowledge the
petitioner’s sources and
characterizations of the information
unless we have specific information to
the contrary.
Our 90-day findings consider whether
the petition states a reasonable case for
listing on its face. Thus, our finding
expresses no view as to the ultimate
issue of whether the species should be
listed. We reach a conclusion on that
E:\FR\FM\26JAP1.SGM
26JAP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 17 (Thursday, January 26, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 4337-4341]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-947]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding on
a Petition To List the Mussentuchit Gilia as Threatened or Endangered
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition finding.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
90-day finding on a petition to list the Mussentuchit gilia (Gilia
[=Aliciella] tenuis) as threatened or endangered under the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended. We find the petition does not provide
substantial information indicating that listing Gilia [=Aliciella]
tenuis may be warranted. Therefore, we will not be initiating a further
status review in response to this petition. The public may submit to us
any new information that becomes available concerning the status of the
species or threats to it.
DATES: The finding announced in this document was made on January 19,
2006. You may submit new information concerning this species for our
consideration at any time.
ADDRESSES: The complete file for this finding is available for public
inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the Utah
Fish and Wildlife Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2369 West
Orton Circle, Suite 50, West Valley City, Utah 84119. Submit new
information, materials, comments, or questions concerning this species
to us at the above address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Henry Maddux, Field Supervisor, Utah
Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES) (telephone 801-975-3330,
extension 124; facsimile 801-975-3331).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), requires that we make a finding on
whether a petition to list, delist, or reclassify a species presents
substantial scientific or commercial information to indicate that the
petitioned action may be warranted. We are to base this finding on
information provided in the petition and other information that is
readily available to us (e.g., in our files). To the maximum extent
practicable, we are to make this finding within 90 days of our receipt
of the petition, and publish our notice of this finding promptly in the
Federal Register.
Our standard for substantial scientific information within the Code
of Federal Regulations (CFR) with regard to a 90-day petition finding
is ``that amount of information that would lead a reasonable person to
believe that the measure proposed in the petition may be warranted''
(50 CFR 424.14(b)). If we find that substantial scientific information
was presented, we are required to commence a review of the status of
the species.
In making this finding, we relied on information provided by the
petitioners, and readily available in our files, and evaluated that
information in accordance with 50 CFR 424.14(b). Our process of coming
to a 90-day finding under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act and section
424.14(b) of our regulations is limited to a determination of whether
the information in the petition meets the ``substantial scientific
information'' threshold.
We added Aliciella tenuis to our list of candidate species on
September 30, 1993, as a category 2 candidate species
[[Page 4338]]
(58 FR 51144). In the February 28, 1996, Notice of Review (61 FR 7595),
we discontinued the use of multiple candidate categories and considered
the former category 1 candidates as simply ``candidates'' for listing
purposes. The A. tenuis was removed from the candidate list at that
time. This species currently has no Federal regulatory status.
On March 10, 2004, we received a formal petition, dated March 9,
2004, from the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, Center for Native
Ecosystems, and Utah Native Plant Society, requesting that the
Mussentuchit gilia (Gilia [=Aliciella] tenuis) found in Utah be listed
as threatened or endangered pursuant to section 4 of the Act. This
petition was identical to a petition submitted on May 19, 2003, to
which, due to funding limitations, we were unable to respond during
Fiscal Year (FY) 2003. In addition, all FY 2004 listing funds were
allocated to activities in response to court-approved settlements.
When we first receive a petition, we evaluate it in order to
determine if an emergency exists such that an emergency listing may be
warranted. In a response letter to the petitioners, dated March 16,
2004, we stated that ``the petitioned plant lives primarily on Federal
lands, including Capitol Reef National Park, and we know of no clear
imminent threat to the species. Therefore, we see no evidence that
would lead us to conclude that emergency reclassification of this
species is appropriate.''
On May 19, 2005, the petitioners filed a complaint in Utah Federal
District Court alleging our failure to complete 90-day or 12-month
findings on their petition. On August 26, 2005, the court approved a
stipulated settlement agreement and dismissed the case, based on our
agreement to submit to the Federal Register by January 19, 2006, a
completed 90-day finding.
Species Information
Aliciella tenuis is an herbaceous perennial vascular plant in the
family Polemoniaceae. The plant grows from a multi-branched woody base,
2-14 inches (in) (5-35 centimeters (cm)) in height. Stems have fine
hairs with sticky glands, to which sand usually adheres. The
inflorescence is paniculately cymose (a loose arrangement of flowers
where the central or terminal flowers generally flower first). Flowers
are usually solitary, growing from branched ends. Blooming begins in
May and often continues through July (Porter 1998).
The species was first collected as a botanical specimen in 1932 but
remained obscure until the 1980s. The species was described in the
scientific literature in 1989 (Smith and Neese 1989) as Gilia tenuis
and subsequently included in the resurrected genus Aliciella in 1998
(Porter 1998). We accept the name Aliciella tenuis as the valid name
for Mussentuchit gilia.
Aliciella tenuis is a rare, edaphically restricted plant in
southwestern Emery, southeastern Sevier, and northern Wayne Counties,
Utah. The species' range spans about 45 miles (mi) (72 kilometers (km))
from its South Desert population in Waterpocket Fold within Capitol
Reef National Park to its Secret Mesa population in the San Rafael
Swell. The species has been delineated into 7 populations, with 1 to 8
separate sites in each population, for a total of 39 sites (Clark
2005). Based on Dr. Johnson (2005, memo to Clark), DNA studies between
these populations indicate four genetic groups. The species' known
population is estimated at 15,400 individuals (9,774 counted) on
approximately 353 acres (ac) (143 hectares (ha)) (Clark 2005).
The largest concentrations of Aliciella tenuis are restricted to
sandstone (including mudstone and siltstone) ledges and cracks with
interbedded gypsum deposits, and on talus slopes derived from those
sandstone formations. The species is found on several named geologic
formations including the Curtis, Carmel, Dakota, Entrada, Navajo
(contact with Carmel), and Summerville (contact with Curtis)
formations. Most population sites are difficult to access due to steep
treacherous terrain.
Threats Analysis
Pursuant to section (4) of the Act, a species may be determined to
be an endangered and threatened species on the basis of any of the
following five factors: (A) Present or threatened destruction,
modification, or curtailment of habitat or range; (B) overutilization
for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes; (C)
disease or predation; (D) inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms;
or (E) other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued
existence. In making this finding, we evaluated whether the petition
presented substantial scientific or commercial information to determine
that listing Aliciella tenuis as threatened or endangered may be
warranted. The Act identifies the five factors to be considered, either
singly or in combination, to determine whether a species may be
threatened or endangered. Our evaluation of these threats, based on
information provided in the petition and readily available in our
files, is presented below.
A. Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment of
the Species' Habitat or Range
The petition claims that there are 17 populations of Aliciella
tenuis, and that the species is threatened mainly by activities
surrounding oil, gas, and mineral extraction; livestock trampling; off-
road vehicle (ORV) use; recreational activities; and weed invasions.
Oil, Gas, and Mineral Extraction
The petition cites general information on oil, gas, and mineral
extraction. The petition asserts that 3 of 17 populations are in areas
under lease for oil and gas development. Petitioners claim that oil,
gas, and mineral exploration involve construction of well pads, roads,
pipelines, and other associated facilities, which permanently reduce
and fragment habitat. They assert that: (1) Infrastructure activities
may lead to removing rock outcrops; (2) mineral development increases
recreation activities, such as ORV use; (3) ground disturbance also may
introduce noxious weeds and destroy biological soil crusts; and (4)
seismic exploration also has long-lasting effects that provide similar
ground-disturbing impacts. Additionally, the petitioners state that an
increasing number of leases and permits for oil and gas will threaten
known and unknown populations.
The petition contends that mining and associated facilities
threaten Aliciella tenuis habitats. The petition states that the
potential range of the plant corresponds to areas that have a high
potential for gypsum occurrences. Additionally, it is stated that an
active bentonite and zeolite mine owned by Western Clay Company is
immediately adjacent to areas known to contain the species.
Evaluation of Information in the Petition
The petition asserts that there are 17 populations of Aliciella
tenuis. More recent information readily available in our files
indicates that there are 7 Aliciella tenuis populations with 39 sites;
these are the figures we use throughout this finding.
The petition provides some information regarding oil and gas
production in the San Rafael Swell generally, but it does not present
substantial information that this development has resulted in losses or
threatens to result in actual losses of Aliciella tenuis. The species
is not distributed uniformly across its range. The petition asserts
that 3 of 17
[[Page 4339]]
populations are in areas under lease for oil and gas development.
Currently, known sites of A. tenuis are not located in areas targeted
for oil, gas, and seismic exploration (Debra Clark, Interagency
Botanist, pers. comm. 2003; Fish and Wildlife Service 2006). The mine
owned by Western Clay Company referred to in the petition is near 3 of
the 17 A. tenuis populations in the petition, but these sites are not
in the vicinity of the mine and are not being disturbed by mining
activities (D. Clark, pers. comm. 2003). Much of the information in the
petition identifies potential impacts rather than actual impacts, and
there is no evidence presented in the petition or in our files to
indicate that known populations are impacted by oil, gas, and mineral
extraction. A. tenuis generally occurs on steep slopes, in rock cracks,
or on ridges away from trail or road use. Most sites are very difficult
to access, and therefore there is a low likelihood of disturbance from
these activities.
The petitioners provide general characterizations of oil, gas, and
mineral extraction impacts. They do not provide substantial information
that documents that these activities occur in the areas where Aliciella
tenuis is found. Also, the petition does not present substantial
information on the magnitude and the extent of degradation and loss of
habitat to oil, gas, and mineral extraction such that we can conclude
that these activities threaten the continued existence of the A.
tenuis.
Livestock Grazing/Trampling
The petition identifies livestock grazing as an important factor in
habitat destruction and alteration in Aliciella tenuis habitat. The
petition asserts that livestock grazing affects vegetation communities
by altering species composition through direct loss of vegetation, and
also by habitat degradation due to associated factors that may affect
plant succession, wildlife use, time and length of plant flowering (and
its effects on pollinators), native plant species presence, and the
presence of invasive exotic plant species (especially annual weeds and
grasses). Trampling of plants and soil may cause damage to soil crusts,
reduce mycorrhizal fungi, increase erosion, and contribute to nonnative
plant introductions. In addition, the petition claims that grazing
management is of concern due to overgrazing or untimely grazing.
Evaluation of Information in the Petition
The petition describes various impacts associated with livestock
and grazing management that could affect Aliciella tenuis, and cites
general information where impacts to vegetative communities similar to
those in southern Utah have resulted from these practices. The petition
alleges that 5 of 17 A. tenuis populations are on Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) grazing allotments. The petition does not provide
evidence of actual damage to A. tenuis by grazing. Cattle cannot access
the majority of occupied sites (approximately 85 percent) and trampling
has not been recorded at known sites (D. Clark, pers. comm. 2003; Clark
2005; Lenhart and Clark 2005).
The petitioners did not provide substantial information that
documents that areas impacted by grazing management practices are also
those in which Aliciella tenuis is found. Also, the petition does not
present substantial information on the magnitude and the extent of
degradation and loss of habitat to livestock grazing such that we could
conclude that grazing practices threaten the continued existence of the
A. tenuis.
Recreational Activities
The petition contends that recreation, especially ORV use,
threatens to destroy Aliciella tenuis habitats.
Evaluation of Information in the Petition
The information provided by the petitioners does not provide
substantial information demonstrating that recreational activities
present a threat to Aliciella tenuis. Aliciella tenuis plants are
mostly located on steep side-slopes, in rock cracks, or on ridges away
from trail or road use. Most sites are very difficult to access, and
the petition acknowledges that the BLM's Resource Management Plan (RMP)
limits ORV use to designated roads and trails. Human disturbance, such
as human footprints and all-terrain vehicle tracks, are recorded only
at 4 of 39 sites; however, these sites are still occupied by A. tenuis
(Lenhart and Clark 2005). Furthermore, only six of the known sites are
in areas accessible by the general public, due to terrain (Lenhart and
Clark 2005). In light of the information above, we conclude that the
petition does not provide substantial information to indicate that
recreational activities threaten the continued existence of A. tenuis.
Invasive Plants
The petition maintains that the spread of weeds by several factors
(grazing, ORV use, and mining/drilling operations) across the arid West
will result in the degradation of Aliciella tenuis habitat, thereby
increasing endangerment of the relatively slow-reproducing A. tenuis.
Evaluation of Information in the Petition
Information presented in the petition is speculative. The
petitioners provide information about weed invasions within western
arid ecosystems. The petitioners did not provide substantial
information that documents that areas impacted by invasive species are
the areas where Aliciella tenuis is found. Native plants are the
dominant species found at A. tenuis sites, and highly associated plant
species are not exotic weeds or grasses (Lenhart and Clark 2005).
Furthermore, the petitioners do not provide substantial information on
the magnitude and the extent of habitat impacts by invasive weeds such
that we might conclude that they may threaten the continued existence
of A. tenuis.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
The petition claims that other gilia species are ornamental
cultivars and sought after by rock-garden enthusiasts. The petition
also claims that many of the threats identified under Factor A also
represent overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific or
educational purposes. Since Factor B refers to ``overutilization'' of
the species, and because we have already addressed these threats under
Factor A, we will not reevaluate those claims here.
Evaluation of Information in the Petition
The petitioners provide information indicating that gilias are
ornamental and collectable. Petitioners refer to the collection of a
different, rare gilia species and conclude that Mussentuchit gilia
(Aliciella tenuis) will likely be sought after when it is more widely
known. However, no documentation of A. tenuis collection is provided,
nor do we or the Interagency Botanist (D. Clark, pers. comm. 2005) know
of any evidence of such collection. Furthermore, the majority of sites
are in remote, difficult to access locations, with only 6 of 39 known
sites considered readily accessible by the general public (Lenhart and
Clark 2005). The petition provides only speculative information
regarding threats presented by collection. Therefore, we cannot
conclude that there is substantial information that this practice
threatens the continued existence of A. tenuis.
C. Disease or Predation
The petition does not identify disease or predation as threats to
Aliciella
[[Page 4340]]
tenuis. Additionally, the information in our files provides no
instances where disease or predation has been documented to occur to A.
tenuis plants (Porter and Heil 1994; Clark 2000; Clark 2001; Clark
2002; Grobner et al 2004; Clark 2004; Clark 2005; Lenhart and Clark
2005).
D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
The petition contends that existing land use designations and
regulatory mechanisms are insufficient to protect populations of
Aliciella tenuis, and also alleges that State and Federal agencies have
failed to conduct monitoring for the species in most of its range and
to protect it from impacts associated with energy exploration and
development, livestock grazing, recreation, and exotic weeds (see
Factor A).
Federal Agencies
The petitioners claim that nearly all known populations of
Aliciella tenuis occur on BLM lands. They acknowledge that BLM has
designated A. tenuis as a special status species and that 9 of 17
populations of the species occur within Areas of Critical Environmental
Concern (ACEC) and within BLM Wilderness Study Areas (WSA). The
petition also acknowledges the existence of certain in-place management
restrictions which serve to protect A. tenuis sites. However, the
petition questions whether these designations and other mechanisms to
regulate and control various activities, such as grazing and mining
(see factor A), are sufficient to prevent harm to the A. tenuis in a
significant portion of its range. They claim that 3 populations are not
covered by a BLM RMP. Additionally, they claim that Federal agencies
have failed to conduct comprehensive monitoring of the species.
Evaluation of Information in the Petition
The primary concern expressed by the petitioners is that the
existing BLM special status designation and occurrence within BLM WSAs
and ACECs is insufficient to provide adequate conservation for
Aliciella tenuis. However, BLM special status designation does include
BLM policy direction. The BLM ``special status plants'' include all of
the following: (1) Federally-listed and proposed species; (2) Federal
candidate species; (3) State-listed species; and (4) BLM sensitive
species. BLM sensitive plants are those species that do not occur on
Federal or State lists, but which are designated by the BLM State
Director for special management consideration.
BLM Manual 6840 provides policy direction that BLM sensitive plant
species are to be managed as if they were candidate species for Federal
listing so that they do not become listed, while also fulfilling other
Federal law mandates. The BLM has a policy of entering into
conservation agreements and other conservation measures to protect both
State- and BLM-listed species. Capitol Reef National Park (NP)
similarly lists A. tenuis as a sensitive species.
Sensitive species designation by both BLM and Capitol Reef NP is
important because the majority of the Aliciella tenuis population
occurs on agency-managed lands. Seven Aliciella tenuis populations (39
sites) are known (Clark 2005). One population (7 sites) occurs in
Capitol Reef National Park and is fully protected by applicable
National Park System laws and regulations (Clark 2005). Twenty-six of
32 sites in the other 6 populations are on BLM-managed lands. Of the
remaining 6 sites, 1 is on State lands, while ownership of the other 5
is documented as shared between BLM and the State of Utah (Clark 2005).
Concerning the 3 populations that the petitioners claim are not covered
by an RMP, only a very small number of A. tenuis sites are potentially
affected by this, and the mere absence of explicit coverage under an
RMP does not leave the populations wholly unprotected.
Despite the fact that few if any threats to the species are
documented, both the BLM and NPS have continued to develop and
implement conservation efforts for the species to ensure continued
long-term protection and population monitoring. The Interagency Rare
Plant Team was established in 1999 to direct conservation measures for
listed and sensitive plant species endemic to central Utah sandstone
habitats, including Aliciella tenuis. The team has conducted surveys
for listed and sensitive plants on lands managed by Richfield and Price
Field Offices of the BLM, Capitol Reef National Park, Fishlake National
Forest, and the Teasdale District of Dixie National Forest. From 2000
to 2005, approximately 10,500 ac (4,249 ha) have been surveyed for A.
tenuis on Capitol Reef National Park, BLM, and State lands (Lenhart and
Clark 2005). During this period, approximately 2,650 person-hours were
allocated by the Interagency Rare Plant Team for A. tenuis surveys
(Lenhart and Clark 2005).
In addition, the species is included in conservation planning
documents such as the 1996 Gilia caespitosa [A. tenuis] Conservation
Agreement and Strategy and the soon to be completed Central Utah Navajo
Sandstone Endemics Conservation Strategy and Agreement (CAS), a multi-
year joint project by BLM, NPS, U.S. Forest Service, and the Service
(Clark, pers. comm. 2005).
Thus, we conclude that the petition does not present substantial
information to indicate that Aliciella tenuis may be threatened by the
inadequacy of existing Federal regulatory mechanisms across all or a
significant portion of its range. Interagency cooperation for this
species is high and all Federal agencies across the species' range will
be signatory parties to the CAS.
State Agencies
The petition claims that lack of State policies leaves the species
inadequately protected.
Evaluation of Information in the Petition
The petition states that 3 of 17 populations are on State lands,
and acknowledges that 2 of these overlap populations on BLM lands. The
petition also acknowledges that the species is currently monitored by
the Utah Natural Heritage Program. The information in our files
indicates that there are 7 populations with 39 sites; 1 site is on
State lands, while 5 sites are documented as shared between BLM and the
State of Utah (Clark 2005). No documentation indicates that habitat
reduction is occurring on State or private lands. There is no evidence
that existing regulatory mechanisms are inadequate to prevent harm to
Aliciella tenuis populations on State lands. Therefore, the information
presented in the petition regarding threats to A. tenuis populations on
State lands is speculative and does not present substantial information
to indicate that listing these populations may be warranted due to
inadequate State regulatory mechanisms.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting the Species' Continued
Existence
The petition contends that several other factors negatively impact
Aliciella tenuis populations. They state that the small size of A.
tenuis populations (many populations with fewer than 25 individuals)
makes them vulnerable to extirpation because of a variety of
environmental factors, such as stochastic events, drought, climate
change, and potential disruption of plant-pollinator interactions.
Evaluation of Information in the Petition
While the petition provides information on the effects of these
[[Page 4341]]
environmental factors on plant species in general, no substantial
scientific or commercial information regarding Aliciella tenuis was
provided. Drought, flood, climate change, and plant-pollinator
interactions may have the potential to affect small populations.
However, we find no indication of long-term species decline for A.
tenuis due to these or any other factors. Most A. tenuis sites have
greater than 100 individuals and, as more recent studies indicate, most
populations have several hundred to several thousand documented
individuals (Clark 2005). Such populations possess greater resiliency
to the threats identified in the petition.
A few sites are in active floodplains where plants are periodically
washed away (Clark 2005); however, seed source for recolonization of
these sites is provided by larger sites found at higher elevations in
the landscape (D. Clark, pers. comm. 2005).
The information presented in the petition regarding climate change
and its potential impact on Aliciella tenuis is speculative.
Finding
We have reviewed the information as it is cited in the petition,
along with other pertinent literature and information readily available
in our files. After this review and evaluation, we find the petition
does not present substantial scientific information to indicate that
listing Aliciella tenuis may be warranted at this time. Most of the
threats described in the petition are speculative in nature, and
petitioners admit that only a few populations are susceptible to the
threats raised.
We will not be commencing a status review in response to this
petition. We encourage interested parties to continue to gather data
that will assist with the conservation of the species. If you wish to
provide information regarding Aliciella tenuis, you may submit your
information or materials to the Field Supervisor, Utah Fish and
Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES).
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited herein is available, upon
request, from the Utah Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES).
Author
The primary author of this notice is Heather Barnes, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Utah Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES).
Authority
The authority for this action is section 4 of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: January 19, 2006.
Thomas O. Melius,
Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. E6-947 Filed 1-25-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
