Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a Petition to List the Sand Mountain Blue Butterfly (Euphilotes pallescens ssp. arenamontana) as Threatened or Endangered with Critical Habitat, 24253-24263 [E7-8330]
Download as PDF
mmaher on DSK3CLS3C1PROD with $$_JOB
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules
standard, and prohibit wideband
operations on a going forward basis. The
public safety community expressed
broad support for a broadband
allocation to enable advanced
communications capabilities. The
availability of a contiguous block of
broadband spectrum, subject to a
nationwide interoperability standard,
would enable partnerships with
commercial licensees in adjacent
broadband spectrum. As a result, the
proposed band plan would ultimately
enable public safety entities to utilize
the 700 MHz spectrum in a more costeffective and spectrally efficient manner
to address their homeland security and
emergency response roles. Because the
Commission does not anticipate that the
proposal will impose additional
economic burdens on public safety, and
is in fact designed to reduce economic
burdens on public safety, the
Commission has taken steps to
minimize any adverse impact of the rule
changes.
114. The FNPRM also seeks comment
on its tentative conclusion to
consolidate the narrowband spectrum to
the top of the public safety band and
locate the broadband spectrum at the
bottom of the public safety band, in
light of the potentially significant
benefits such reconfiguration would
afford the public safety community. The
alternative would be to retain the
existing band plan. The FNPRM seeks
comment on how to implement
reconfiguration of the narrowband
channels with minimum disruption to
incumbent operations. The FNPRM
invites comment on an appropriate
transition mechanism, including how to
accommodate public safety operations
in the border areas with Canada and
Mexico, and the costs of relocation and
how such costs will be covered. The
Commission expects that the number of
entities impacted and expected cost of
reconfiguration should be relatively
minor. To assist the Commission in its
analysis, however, commenters are
requested to provide information
regarding the number of narrowband
radios that are deployed, as well as the
number of radios that are in active use,
and thus would be affected by the
proposed changes to the 700 MHz
public safety band plan as described in
the FNPRM. The FNPRM recognizes
that the public safety community’s
ability to fund the reconfiguration may
be limited. Thus, in addition to
considering whether public safety
should pay for its own relocation costs,
the FNPRM seeks comment on several
alternatives, including whether to
impose funding requirements on 700
VerDate Mar 15 2010
02:45 Aug 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
MHz commercial licensees, and whether
Federal or other grant monies could be
used. In the event the Commission
determines to license the broadband
allocation to a nationwide public safety
broadband licensee, the FNPRM also
invites comment on whether that
licensee should be assigned
responsibility for funding the
reconfiguration.
115. Although the economic burden
on public safety to effectuate
reconfiguration is expected to be
relatively small, the FNPRM will
develop a record on the true costs that
would be implicated. The Commission
remains open to considering
alternatives, however, should an
alternative be stated in comments that
would reach our objectives and
minimize the impact on public safety
entities.
116. Frontline Proposal. In the
FNPRM, the Commission seeks
comment on Frontline’s proposed
‘‘Public Safety Broadband Deployment
Plan.’’ Although Frontline proposes that
the Commission offer bidding credits to
applicants based on their status as a
small business, the Commission
tentatively concludes in the FNPRM
that it should not offer any bidding
preferences, such as bidding credits, to
applicants for the ‘‘E Block’’ license.
The FNPRM states, however, that the
public interest would not appear to
favor giving applicants a preference
when bidding for the ‘‘E Block’’ license
based on their limited financial
resources, as the Commission does
when it offers bidding credits to small
businesses in these circumstances. The
Commission stated that its concerns
regarding the capital needed to
implement a nationwide service are
especially acute in this instance,
because the ‘‘E Block’’ licensee would
be responsible for constructing a
network to meet the needs of critical
public safety providers. The
Commission seeks comment on this
tentative conclusion.
F. Federal Rules That May Duplicate,
Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed
Rules
117. None.
Ordering Clauses
118. It is further ordered pursuant to
Sections 1, 2, 4(i), 5(c), 7, 10, 201, 202,
208, 214, 301, 302, 303, 307, 308, 309,
310, 311, 314, 316, 319, 324, 332, 333,
336, 337, 614, 615, and 710 of the
Communications Act of 1934, as
amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i),
155(c), 157, 160, 201, 202, 208, 214, 301,
302, 303, 307, 308, 309, 310, 311, 314,
316, 319, 324, 332, 333, 336, and 337,
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
24253
that this further notice of proposed
rulemaking in WT Docket No. 06–150,
CC Docket No. 94–102, WT Docket No.
01–309, WT Docket No. 03–264, WT
Docket No. 06–169, WT Docket No. 96–
86 and PS Docket No. 06–229 IS
ADOPTED.
119. It is further ordered that pursuant
to applicable procedures set forth in § §
1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission’s
Rules, 47 CFR 1.415, 1.419, interested
parties may file comments on the
further notice of proposed rulemaking
on or before May 23, 2007 and reply
comments on or before May 30, 2007.
120. It is further ordered that the
Commission’s Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference
Information Center, SHALL SEND a
copy of this further notice of proposed
rulemaking, including the Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration.
121. It is further ordered that the
Commission shall send a copy of this
further notice of proposed rulemaking
in a report to be sent to Congress and
the General Accounting Office pursuant
to the Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7–8440 Filed 5–1–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a
Petition to List the Sand Mountain Blue
Butterfly (Euphilotes pallescens ssp.
arenamontana) as Threatened or
Endangered with Critical Habitat
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 12-month petition
finding.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce our
12-month finding on a petition to list
the Sand Mountain blue butterfly
(Euphilotes pallescens arenamontana)
as threatened or endangered under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act). After a thorough review
of all available scientific and
commercial information, we find that
the petitioned action is not warranted.
We ask the public to continue to submit
to us any new information concerning
E:\FEDREG\02MYP1.LOC
02MYP1
24254
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules
the status of, and threats to, this
subspecies. This information will help
us to monitor and encourage the
ongoing management of this subspecies.
DATES: The finding announced in this
document was made May 2, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Data, information,
comments, or questions regarding this
notice should be submitted to the Field
Supervisor, Nevada Fish and Wildlife
Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
1340 Financial Boulevard, Suite 234,
Reno, NV 89502. The complete
administrative file for this finding is
available for inspection, by appointment
and during normal business hours, at
the above address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert D. Williams, Field Supervisor,
Nevada Fish and Wildlife Office (see
ADDRESSES) (telephone 775/861–6300;
facsimile 775/861–6301).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
mmaher on DSK3CLS3C1PROD with $$_JOB
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that, for
any petition to revise the List of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants that contains substantial
scientific and commercial information
that listing may be warranted, we make
a finding within 12 months of the date
of our receipt of the petition on whether
the petitioned action is: (a) Not
warranted, (b) warranted, or (c)
warranted, but the immediate proposal
of a regulation implementing the
petitioned action is precluded by other
pending proposals to determine whether
any species is threatened or endangered,
and expeditious progress is being made
to add or remove qualified species from
the List of Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife and Plants. Such 12-month
findings are to be published promptly in
the Federal Register. Section 4(b)(3)(C)
of the Act requires that a petition for
which the requested action is found to
be warranted but precluded shall be
treated as though resubmitted on the
date of such finding (that is, requiring
a subsequent finding to be made within
12 months).
Previous Federal Action
We included the Sand Mountain blue
butterfly under the name Euphilotes rita
ssp. as a Category 2 candidate species in
our November 21, 1991 Candidate
Notice of Review (CNOR) (56 FR 58829).
Category 2 included taxa for which
information in our possession indicated
that a proposed listing rule was possibly
appropriate, but for which sufficient
data on biological vulnerability and
threats were not available to support a
proposed rule. The Sand Mountain blue
VerDate Mar 15 2010
02:45 Aug 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
butterfly remained a Category 2
candidate as Euphilotes rita ssp. in our
1994 CNOR (November 15, 1994; 59 FR
59020). In the CNOR published on
February 28, 1996 (61 FR 7596), we
adopted a single category of candidate
species defined as follows: ‘‘Those
species for which the Service has on file
sufficient information on biological
vulnerability and threat(s) to support
issuance of a proposed rule to list but
issuance of the proposed rule is
precluded.’’ In previous CNORs, species
matching this definition were known as
Category 1 candidates for listing. Thus
the Service no longer considered
Category 2 species as candidates, and
did not include them in the 1996 or any
subsequent CNORs. The decision to stop
considering Category 2 species as
candidates was designed to reduce
confusion about the status of these
species, and to clarify that we no longer
regarded these species as candidates for
listing. Since the Sand Mountain blue
butterfly was a Category 2 species, we
no longer recognized it as a candidate
species as of the February 28, 1996,
CNOR (61 FR 7457).
On April 23, 2004, we received a
formal petition, dated April 23, 2004,
from the Center for Biological Diversity,
Xerces Society, Public Employees for
Environmental Responsibility, and the
Nevada Outdoor Recreation Association,
requesting that the Sand Mountain blue
butterfly, currently recognized as
Euphilotes pallescens ssp.
arenamontana taxonomically, known
only from Sand Mountain, Nevada, be
listed as threatened or endangered in
accordance with section 4 of the Act,
and that critical habitat be designated
for the species concurrent with the
listing. The petition is available on the
Nevada Fish and Wildlife Office Web
site (go to https://www.fws.gov/nevada/
and click on the Nevada Species link,
then on Sand Mountain blue butterfly
link).
Action on this petition was precluded
by court orders and settlement
agreements for other listing actions that
required nearly all of our listing funds
for fiscal years 2004 and 2005. On
September 26, 2005, we received a 60day notice of intent to sue, and on
January 5, 2006, we received a
complaint regarding our failure to carry
out the 90-day finding on the petition to
list the Sand Mountain blue butterfly.
On April 20, 2006, we reached an
agreement with the plaintiffs to submit
to the Federal Register a completed 90day finding by July 28, 2006. The
agreement specified that if our 90-day
finding concluded that the petition
contained substantial information, we
would complete a 12-month finding by
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
April 26, 2007 (Center for Biological
Diversity et al. v. Norton, and U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (CV–00023–LKK–
GGH), (E.D. Cal)).
On August 8, 2006, we published our
90-day finding in the Federal Register
(71 FR 44988), in which we concluded
that the petition presented substantial
scientific or commercial information to
indicate that listing the Sand Mountain
blue butterfly may be warranted, we
initiated a status review of the taxon,
and we solicited comments and
information to be provided in
connection with the status review by
October 10, 2006. This notice
constitutes our 12-month finding and is
submitted in fulfillment of the April 20,
2006, stipulated settlement agreement.
On August 18, 2006, we became a
signatory to the multi-party Sand
Mountain Blue Butterfly Conservation
Plan (Conservation Plan), which became
effective September 21, 2006 (Lahontan
Valley Environmental Alliance (LVEA),
2006). For a further discussion of the
Conservation Plan, see the
‘‘Conservation Efforts’’ section below.
Biology and Distribution
The genus Euphilotes, in the family
Lycaenidae, is comprised of five species
of small, pale blue butterflies from
western North America that are
distinguished by discrete differences in
genitalia (Pratt 1994, p. 388). The genus
is noteworthy for its close relationship
with the plant genus Eriogonum (wild
buckwheat), a genus of about 250
species of shrubs, subshrubs, and herbs
largely from western North America
(Reveal 2005). Euphilotes taxa are
among the most specialized of the North
American butterflies in host plant
adaptations (Pratt 1988, p. 63). They
typically utilize species of Eriogonum
for mating, obtaining nectar, host
searching, and egg laying (Pratt 1994, p.
388). Many of the species and
subspecies within the genus have highly
restricted ranges, in part because of this
specialized relationship with
Eriogonum. The larvae (and to some
degree the adults) of Euphilotes
subspecies are known to specialize on
the flowers and seeds of specific
Eriogonum (Pratt 1988, p. 104). This
relationship has been the subject of
several studies on evolution (Shields
and Reveal 1988, pp. 51–93; Pratt 1988,
pp. 1–653; Pratt 1994, pp. 387–416).
The pale blue butterfly, Euphilotes
pallescens, was first described by Tilden
and Downey in 1955 under the name
Philotes pallescens based on specimens
collected in Tooele County, Utah (Pratt
1988, p. 18; Mattoni 1965, pp. 81, 94).
Mattoni (1965, p. 94) reduced the taxon
to a subspecies which he called Philotes
E:\FEDREG\02MYP1.LOC
02MYP1
mmaher on DSK3CLS3C1PROD with $$_JOB
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules
(=Euphilotes) rita ssp. pallescens, but he
only examined a pair of specimens
collected at the same time as the
original collection by Tilden and
Downey. Mattoni based his taxonomic
conclusion on the configuration of the
male genitalia, which was thought to be
the primary characteristic
distinguishing P. rita from all other
members of the genus (Mattoni 1965, p.
81; Shields 1977, p. 2), and his opinion
that ‘‘greater biological meaning arises
from a classification based upon
relationship rather than difference’’
(Mattoni 1965, p. 99).
In the first modern biosystematic
analysis of the genus, Pratt (1988, 1994)
used cladistic analysis, a method of
examining taxonomic relationships
among species using shared derived
characteristics (features possessed by
two or more taxa in common), to assess
its members of the genus Euphilotes. He
compared 79 morphological characters
and analyzed enzymes (proteins), allelic
variation (variation in genes coding for
same trait), and diapause (period of
suspended growth or development
similar to hibernation) intensity among
36 taxa of Euphilotes from western
North America (Pratt 1988, 1994). Based
on these analyses, he concluded that
Euphilotes pallescens should be
recognized as a full species (Pratt 1994,
pp. 401–402; Pratt and Emmel 1998, p.
209). The Sand Mountain blue butterfly
was first described as Euphilotes
pallescens ssp. arenamontana by Austin
in 1998 (1998, pp. 556–557); it is one of
seven named subspecies of the pallid
blue butterfly in Nevada (Murphy et al.
2006, p. 2). Prior to the 1998 publication
of this name, the Sand Mountain blue
butterfly had been considered a
potentially distinct subspecies of
Euphilotes rita (Austin 1985, p. 105),
the name under which it was previously
assigned a Federal Category 2 candidate
status (see Previous Federal Action
section).
The Sand Mountain blue butterfly is
small with pale blue coloration. Males
have a wingspan that ranges from 10.0
to 11.8 millimeters (mm) (0.39 to 0.46
inches (in)), with an average of 11.1 mm
(0.44 in). The dorsum (back) is pale
bluish violet, often whitish distally,
with a narrow (0.5 mm (0.002 in)) black
outer margin. There is usually a series
of dots on the hindwing, but sometimes
no more than a terminal line on the
forewing. There is generally an
indistinct pinkish to pale orange aurora
of moderate width on the posterior
hindwing. At the vein tips on the
posterior of both wings, there are fringes
of white with indistinct gray checkering.
The bottom surface of the male
abdomen is chalky white. Macules
VerDate Mar 15 2010
02:45 Aug 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
(patches of different coloration) are
small, often nearly obsolete on the
hindwing. Females have a wingspan
that ranges from 10.0 to 11.9 mm (0.39
to 0.46 in), with an average of 10.9 mm
(0.43 in). The female dorsum (back) is
brown to tan, and usually pale bluishgray basally on both wings. The
forewing has a faint brown cell-end bar,
while the hindwing has marginal dots.
The forewing apex is usually whitish.
The hindwing aurora is pale orange to
pale pink, usually grading to nearly
white distally and not strongly
contrasting (Austin 1998, p. 556).
The Sand Mountain blue butterfly is
the palest of all Euphilotes. The ground
color of both sexes is considerably paler
than that of E. pallescens ssp.
pallescens. The pinkish aurora is unlike
that of any other Euphilotes. The pale
bluish-gray wing bases of the female do
not contrast with the distal area of the
wing as they do on E. pallescens ssp.
pallescens. The black macules of E.
pallescens ssp. arenamontana tend to be
smaller than those of E. pallescens ssp.
pallescens (Austin 1998, p. 557).
The species Euphilotes pallescens is
distributed discontinuously from
southern and central California (east of
the Sierra Nevada) through the Great
Basin of central Nevada and across
central and southern Utah (Pratt 1994,
p. 402; Shields 1977). The subspecies
known as the Sand Mountain blue
butterfly is known only from Sand
Mountain, Churchill County, Nevada,
where it is dependent on its host plant,
Eriogonum nummulare (Kearney
buckwheat) (Austin 1998, p. 557;
Shields 1977, p. 3), a long-lived,
perennial shrub with numerous
branches (Reveal 2002, p. 1), that occurs
in scattered sandy locations in several
western States (Welsh et al. 1993, p.
547). Searches have been conducted
within 60 miles (mi) (100 kilometers
(km)) of Sand Mountain in an effort to
determine the presence or absence of
Kearney buckwheat occurrences on
sand dunes that might be able to sustain
occurrences of Sand Mountain blue
butterflies; to date, no additional
populations of Kearney buckwheat have
been found (Funari 2004; Caicco 2006a,
2006b). Kearney buckwheat was
reported in 1981 to occur in small
numbers along the eastern edge of
Blowsand Mountain, which lies about
12 mi (19.2 km) southwest of Sand
Mountain (The Nature Conservancy
2004), but no plants were observed
during three reconnaissance surveys in
2003 and 2004 (Funari 2004). Many
butterflies in the family Lycaenidae
have very limited dispersal distances
that revolve intimately around their
patchily distributed host plants
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
24255
(Peterson 1996, p. 1990). Dispersal of
the Sand Mountain blue butterfly has
not been studied, but in another species
in the same genus, Euphilotes enoptes,
most adults were found to move less
than 1,640 feet (ft) (500 meters (m)) and
their dispersal distance rarely exceeded
0.6 mi (1 km) (Arnold 1983 and
Peterson 1994, as cited in Peterson
1996, p. 1990).
Isolated sand dunes are common
throughout the Great Basin, often
associated with depositional areas for
windborne sediments derived from the
now dry beds of Pleistocene Epoch
lakes; these geologic features are
referred to as pluvial lakes, indicating
their origins during the periods of
greater precipitation and lower
evaporation typical of the Pleistocene
climate of the Great Basin. Studies of
dispersal of the sand dune-obligate
beetle, Eusattus muricatus, widely
distributed throughout the Great Basin
and Mojave Deserts, have shown that
populations on dunes separated by
approximately 60 mi (100 km) generally
exchange very few migrants, even
among dunes within the same pluvial
basin (Britten and Rust 1996, p. 651).
Based on these data, the authors of this
study recommended that all duneobligate populations in the Great Basin
separated by 60 mi (100 km) or more
from the nearest dune within the same
pluvial lake basin be considered
genetically isolated (Britten and Rust
1996, p. 651). In fact, taxonomic
distinctions made within Euphilotes
pallescens are generally consistent with
this approach, with E. p. ssp. calneva
described from sand dunes in the Honey
Lake area of northeastern California and
near Sand Pass, in adjacent Nevada
(Emmel and Emmel, pp. 277–282;
Brussard 2006, p. 1; Murphy 2006a),
and E. p. ssp. ricei, known only from the
Silver State Sand Dunes, which are
north of Winnemucca, Nevada (Austin
et al. 2000, p. 3; Brussard 2006, p. 1;
Murphy 2006a); each of these sand dune
areas lies within the Lahontan pluvial
basin at a minimum distance of about
120 mi (192 km) from Sand Mountain.
We conclude that it is highly unlikely
that the Sand Mountain blue butterfly
occurs at other sites within 60 mi (100
km). Areas within 60 mi (100 km) have
been surveyed to various extents with
no reported observations of the
butterfly’s host plant, Kearney
buckwheat. We also conclude that the
subspecies is unlikely to be found at
sites located more than 60 mi (100 km)
from Sand Mountain. Any population of
Euphilotes pallescens found at any sites
at distances greater than 60 mi (100 km)
is most likely to be another subspecies
of Euphilotes pallescens, based on the
E:\FEDREG\02MYP1.LOC
02MYP1
mmaher on DSK3CLS3C1PROD with $$_JOB
24256
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules
current accepted taxonomy of the
species and the likely genetic isolation
of E. pallescens ssp. arenamontana due
to its life history, ecology, and limited
dispersal ability. Based on satellite
imagery used to identify dune shrub
habitat (BLM 2003, 2004), we estimate
that the current range of the subspecies
is approximately 1000 acres (405 ha),
within which Kearney buckwheat is
scattered in patches and is a dominant
or co-dominant shrub on approximately
500–600 ac (202–243 ha) (BLM 2006b).
Thus, while Sand Mountain blue
butterflies may be present anywhere
within their entire 1,000 ac (405 ha)
range, only 50 to 60 percent of this
range is thought to have the Kearney
buckwheat shrubs on which they
depend.
All Euphilotes larvae are believed to
diapause by burying into the soil 12.7 to
38.1 inches (in) (5 to 15 centimeters
(cm)) prior to pupation, which may be
delayed for up to 6 years depending on
climatic conditions (Pratt 1988, p. 319).
When this period of diapause is broken,
the pupae begin development and
eventually emerge as adults from
beneath the soil. The ability of larvae to
suspend growth for varying periods of
time may be part of the reason that the
genus Euphilotes has high genetic
diversity (Pratt 1988, pp. 427–428),
presumably because it increases the
likelihood for random mating.
Because of the small size of the Sand
Mountain blue butterfly and the
frequent high winds typical of the Sand
Mountain area, it is likely that adult
butterflies spend most of their life
sheltered within the canopy of Kearney
buckwheat plants (Murphy 2006a).
Males of the genus exhibit a type of
mate-searching behavior known as
patrolling, which involves active
searching for potential mates (Pratt
1988, p. 371).
Kearney buckwheat typically occurs
at Sand Mountain as a dominant or codominant with other shrubs on less
active, smaller vegetated dunes around
the periphery of the main dune (The
Nature Conservancy 2004, pp. 24–26).
Kearney buckwheat flowers and seeds
are the sole food source for the larvae
(Pratt 1988, p. 64) and an important
nectar source for adults during their
flight period (Murphy et al. 2006, p. 1).
The flowering period of the Kearney
buckwheat at Sand Mountain begins in
late June to early July and continues
through September (Reveal 2002, p. 2).
Like many species of wild buckwheat
(Meyer 2006), individual Kearney
buckwheat plants may be in continuous
flower for well over a month (Caicco
2006c). Individual flowers within a
cluster bloom in succession so that after
VerDate Mar 15 2010
02:45 Aug 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
the initial bloom, both seeds and
flowers are present for extended periods
(Caicco 2006c).
The Sand Mountain blue butterfly has
one brood from mid July to midSeptember (Austin 1998, p. 557; Shields
1977, p. 5), a period that coincides with
the flowering/fruiting period of Kearney
buckwheat. During the summer of 2006,
scientists from the University of Nevada
initiated a research effort to determine
the distributional relationship between
the butterfly, its host plant, and the
dune shrub community. Sand Mountain
blue butterflies were counted along a
17,061 ft (5,200 m) transect, with five
surveys made between July 15 and
August 9, 2006 (Murphy et al. 2006, p.
4). The number of Sand Mountain blue
butterflies counted along the transects
increased over the duration of the
sampling period; because no decline
was detected in the number of
butterflies counted over that time
period, researchers were unable to
determine the precise length of the 2006
flight season (Murphy et al. 2006, p. 5
and Figure 2).
The researchers found that butterflies
occurred across the entire extent of their
study area, although, regardless of the
sampling date, butterflies were always
more abundant in the northeastern
portions of the study than in the
southwestern areas (Murphy et al. 2006,
Figure 2). The researchers reported that
‘‘as the season matured, multiple [Sand
Mountain blue] butterflies were
observed flying around nearly every
buckwheat plant at nearly every site on
nearly every site visit. Even individual
buckwheat shrubs, which were isolated
from others by as many as hundreds of
meters due to devegetation from vehicle
activities, were visited by [Sand
Mountain] blue butterflies’’ (Murphy et
al. 2006, pp. 5–6).
The abundance of the butterfly was
closely correlated with Kearney
buckwheat flower phenology and
abundance. Early in the flight season,
many flowers were unopened; flowers
sequentially opened as the sampling
period progressed toward August,
although some unopened buds
remained after sampling was terminated
(Murphy et al. 2006, p. 6). Butterfly
abundance was strongly correlated with
both the number of buckwheat
inflorescences (flowers) and the
abundance of the Kearney buckwheat
itself (Murphy et al. 2006, p. 6 and
Figure 6).
The researchers also found that the
abundance of Kearney buckwheat varies
considerably throughout the dune shrub
habitat, with higher host plant and
butterfly densities in some areas. At a
number of their sample locations,
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Kearney buckwheat was the most
abundant shrub in the dune shrub
community (Murphy et al. 2006, p. 6
and Figure 5). The buckwheat was
usually among the dominant shrub
species both along the transect itself and
within individual plots (Murphy et al.
2006, p. 6 and Figure 6).
The scientists made three conclusions
from the data they collected during the
2006 flight season of the Sand Mountain
blue butterfly. First, there was a large
number of Sand Mountain blue
butterflies—‘‘perhaps hundreds of
thousands’’—a number ‘‘substantially
above a level that would indicate a need
to carry out in situ or other actions to
enhance population size above a critical
minimum’’ (Murphy et al. 2006, p. 7).
Second, the butterfly appears to cooccur with its host plant across the
entirety of the shrub’s range at Sand
Mountain, and the habitat quality for
the butterfly increases in parallel with
the shrub density from southwest to
northeast across the site (Murphy et al.
2006, pp. 7–8). Third, the Kearney
buckwheat occurs in a dune shrub
community with abundant Atriplex
canescens (four-wing saltbush) at lower
elevations that transitions into a
community with a more diverse
assemblage of shrub species at higher
elevations (Murphy et al. 2006, Figure
5). Along this gradient, the abundance
of the Kearney buckwheat and,
therefore, the density of butterflies
varied in parallel (Murphy et al. 2006,
p. 8).
Conservation Efforts
On August 18, 2004, the Lahontan
Valley Environmental Alliance (LVEA),
at the request of its board of directors,
initiated a public planning effort to
develop a conservation plan for the
Sand Mountain blue butterfly. The
LVEA was created in 1993 by an
agreement among local governments
and agencies to educate the public and
coordinate efforts to protect the natural
resources and agricultural-based
economy of the communities in
Churchill County. Over the past 13
years, the LVEA has worked with
various interests to build knowledge
and to improve communications among
the communities, stakeholder groups,
local governments, and State and
Federal agencies involved in, or affected
by, the natural resources issues of the
region (LVEA 2006, p. 1).
Through the public planning effort
described above, the LVEA organized
and facilitated a working group to
identify and address the needs of the
Sand Mountain blue butterfly. This
working group met regularly over the
subsequent 21 months. In accordance
E:\FEDREG\02MYP1.LOC
02MYP1
mmaher on DSK3CLS3C1PROD with $$_JOB
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules
with the Nevada Open Meeting Law
(Nevada Revised Statute, Chapter 241),
all meetings were open to the public
and noticed in advance with agendas
posted in public facilities (Nevada Open
Meeting Law Manual 2005). Meeting
notes are posted on the LVEA Web site
(go to https://www.lvea.org/workgrp.htm
and click on the link for this species and
then click on the link for meeting notes).
Participants in the working group
included representatives from the
LVEA, the Bureau of Land Management
(BLM), the Service, the City of Fallon,
Churchill County, the Fallon Paiute
Shoshone Tribe (Tribe), the Friends of
Sand Mountain (FOSM), the California
Off-Road Vehicle Association (CORVA),
the United States Naval Air Station
Fallon, and private citizens (LVEA 2006,
pp. 1–2).
The purpose of this effort was to
develop a Conservation Plan to provide
long term protection for the Sand
Mountain blue butterfly and its habitat,
particularly, its host plant, Kearney
buckwheat (Eriogonum nummulare).
Final agreement on the Conservation
Plan was reached on May 3, 2006, and
it was signed by representatives of the
BLM, the Service, the Tribe, CORVA,
FOSM, and Churchill County in August
and September, 2006. The Conservation
Plan identifies specific actions that are
necessary to: (1) Eliminate or reduce
known threats, (2) incorporate species
conservation measures into planning
and management activities, (3) educate
permittees and recreation users, and (4)
monitor species status trends and
habitat quality and requirements.
A designated route system, a
conservation action identified in the
Conservation Plan (LVEA 2006, pp. 14–
19), has been implemented by the BLM
at Sand Mountain to protect the habitat
of the Sand Mountain blue butterfly
from further damage and destruction by
off-road vehicles (72 FR 12187, March
15, 2007). We used criteria specified in
our Policy for Evaluation of
Conservation Efforts When Making
Listing Decisions (PECE) (68 FR 15100–
15115, March 28, 2003) to evaluate the
certainty of effectiveness of this
designated route system and determined
there is a high level of certainty of
effectiveness of the designated route
system; consequently, we can consider
this action in making a determination as
to whether the Sand Mountain blue
butterfly meets the Service’s definition
of a threatened or endangered species
(Service 2007).
Summary of Factors Affecting the
Species
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533)
and implementing regulations at 50 CFR
VerDate Mar 15 2010
02:45 Aug 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
Part 424 set forth procedures for adding
species to the Federal List of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. In
making this finding, we summarize
below information regarding the status
of this species in relation to the five
factors provided in section 4(a)(1) of the
Act. In making our 12-month finding,
we have considered and evaluated all
scientific and commercial information
in our files, including relevant
information received during the
comment period that ended October 10,
2006 (71 FR 44988).
Factor A: The Present or Threatened
Destruction, Modification, or
Curtailment of the Species’ Habitat or
Range
The Sand Mountain blue butterfly is
known only from Sand Mountain in
Churchill County, Nevada, where it is
dependent on its larval host plant,
Kearney buckwheat (Austin 1998). The
entire Sand Mountain dune system is
estimated to extend over 2,581 ac (1,044
ha), but Kearney buckwheat is not
evenly distributed throughout this
entire area; Kearney buckwheat plants
are typically found on peripheral, more
vegetated dunes, and are particularly
common on the smaller dunes to the
northeast of the main dune (BLM 2006a,
Map 1). In most areas, Kearney
buckwheat is a component of a diverse
dune shrub habitat comprised of up to
13 shrub species (BLM 2004). An
estimated 1,000 ac (405 ha) of dune
shrub habitat with varying amounts of
Kearney buckwheat existed in 2003
(BLM 2006b, p. 2). The current
distribution of the shrubs, as described
above, reflects both their natural
adaptation to specific site conditions
and the cumulative effect of 25 years of
off-road vehicle use.
A portion of the Sand Mountain dune
system lies within the Sand Mountain
Recreation Area (SMRA), a BLM
designation that encompasses 4,795 ac
(1,940 ha), and is about 1.0 mi (1.6 km)
wide and 3.5 mi (5.6 km) long. The
specific BLM designation of the SMRA
for recreational use does not limit offroad or other forms of recreation only to
this area. Furthermore, the BLM
designation restricts non-recreation type
activities, such as mineral mining, from
occurring within the boundary of the
designation.
The recreational use designation for
the SMRA was first established in 1968
(BLM 1985, p. 4). By 1973, recreational
use had reached 32,254 visitors
annually (BLM 1985, p. 5). The first
approved management plan for the area
was developed more than a decade later
(BLM 1985). Based on BLM information,
we estimate that 40 percent, or 400 ac
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
24257
(162 ha) of the total of 1,000 ac (405 ha),
of the Kearney buckwheat habitat occurs
within the designated boundary of the
SMRA (BLM 2006a, Map 1). The
remaining estimated 60 percent of the
Kearney buckwheat habitat occurs on
BLM land outside of the eastern SMRA
boundary. Until recently, off-road
vehicle use was limited on only about
40 ac (16 ha) of the SMRA; no Kearney
buckwheat plants occur in this limiteduse area. The rest of the SMRA was
open to unrestricted off-road vehicle
use, as were all adjacent areas of the
dune system.
As early as 1985, motorized recreation
by motorcycles, four-wheel drive
vehicles, three wheelers, and dune
buggies, accounted for over 90 percent
of the total visits to the SMRA (BLM
1985). Annual visitor use at the SMRA
increased from about 16,000 persons in
1981 to about 65,000 persons in 2005
and was expected to increase again in
2006 (BLM 2006c). Visitation tends to
peak on holiday weekends; for example,
more than 5,000 people were present
over the Labor Day weekend in 2006
(Nevada Appeal 2006, p. 1). In recent
years, however, there has been a pattern
of increased use on non-holiday
weekends (BLM 2006c).
The BLM’s Carson City Field Office
has documented the expansion of an offroad vehicle route system based on an
analysis of satellite imagery from 1978,
1994, 1999, and 2002; the route system
has grown from about 20 mi (32 km) of
off-road vehicle trails in 1981 to about
200 mi (320 km) in 2003 (BLM 2003).
In addition to documenting the overall
proliferation of off-road vehicle routes,
the imagery clearly shows an increase in
the amount of habitat fragmentation and
an expansion of the off-road vehicle
route system from the more accessible
southern end of the main dune into
dune shrub habitat adjacent to the
SMRA toward the north and east that
had been relatively undisturbed as
recently as 1994 (BLM 2003).
Based on the trail proliferation visible
in the satellite imagery from 1978 to
2003 (BLM 2003, 2004), we estimate
that the shrub habitat on which the
Sand Mountain blue butterfly depends
may have been reduced by as much as
50 percent over the past 25 years. At
most, 1,000 ac (405 ha) of dune shrub
habitat remains, and within that area
500 ac (202 ha) to 600 ac (243 ha) may
have Kearney buckwheat as a dominant
or co-dominant shrub (BLM 2006c). We
consider the entire 1,000 ac (405 ha) of
dune shrub habitat to be the current
range of the Sand Mountain blue
butterfly; this includes non-Kearney
buckwheat habitat through which the
species passes, including areas devoid
E:\FEDREG\02MYP1.LOC
02MYP1
mmaher on DSK3CLS3C1PROD with $$_JOB
24258
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules
of vegetation such as trails, as well as
areas that support the Kearney
buckwheat shrubs on which the
butterfly depends for completion of its
life cycle. Because the amount of
Kearney buckwheat within a patch of
dune shrub habitat varies, no precise
data on the total number of individual
Kearney buckwheat shrubs is available.
We also have no reliable estimate of the
historical distribution of the Kearney
buckwheat at Sand Mountain other than
an anecdotal report of a minor amount
of vegetation having been lost along the
periphery of the dune (Guiliani 1977);
therefore, we consider the existing
estimate of 1,000 ac (405 ha) of dune
shrub habitat to approximate the
historic range of the Sand Mountain
blue butterfly.
The Sand Mountain dune system was
included in an initial conservation
assessment of blowing sand mountains
prepared by The Nature Conservancy
(2004). This conservation assessment
ranked the long-term (defined as greater
than 100 years) viability of the Sand
Mountain dune ecosystem based on
size, condition, and landscape context,
using information from the existing
literature and expert opinion (The
Nature Conservancy 2004, p. 29). Each
of these factors had the potential to be
ranked as very good, good, fair, or poor
based on specific viability criteria (The
Nature Conservancy 2004, p. 35). Size
was ranked as good if there was 1,236
ac-2,471 ac (500–1,000 ha) of connected
habitat outside of the area heavily
affected by off-road vehicle use (The
Nature Conservancy 2004, p. 35). The
condition rank was based on three
criteria: (1) Whether invasive plants
were present that could artificially
stabilize dune dynamics; (2) whether
other alterations affecting dune
mobility, such as vegetation mortality or
artificial mobilization of stable sands,
were occurring; and (3), whether there
was natural recruitment by key plant
species. The condition was assigned a
fair rank based on the fact that only the
criterion regarding the presence of
invasive plants was met (The Nature
Conservancy 2004, p. 35). The
landscape context was ranked very good
based on the fact that the connection to
the current sand source remained intact
(The Nature Conservancy 2004, p. 35).
Overall, the long-term viability of the
Sand Mountain dune system was ranked
marginally good, but it was noted that
the ‘‘rapid trend towards an increasingly
degraded condition of this area is of
considerable concern’’ (The Nature
Conservancy 2004, p. 35). The
assessment noted that the condition of
the area was primarily affected by off-
VerDate Mar 15 2010
02:45 Aug 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
road vehicle use, which was of
particular concern because of the small
overall size of the area and the
likelihood of increasing use levels at the
SMRA (The Nature Conservancy 2004,
p. 36). It should be emphasized that this
ranking was for the Sand Mountain
dune ecosystem as a whole and none of
the viability criteria evaluated
specifically addressed either the status
of the Sand Mountain blue butterfly or
the Kearney buckwheat. The relevance
of this report to the dune shrub habitat
lies in its assessment that the process
that supplies the source of sand to the
ecosystem remains intact, and the
corroboration that it provides of the
threats posed by off-road vehicles and
invasive weeds.
There have been several observations
over the past 25 years on the effects of
off-road vehicles on the Sand Mountain
dune shrub habitat, on the Kearney
buckwheat, and on the relationship
between the buckwheat habitat and the
Sand Mountain blue butterfly. These
include: (1) A letter documenting the
extirpation of all plant life from an area
150 ft (46 m) wide along the edge of the
main dune over a period of several years
(Giuliani 1977); (2) a memorandum from
the Service to the BLM reporting that up
to half of 58 individual Kearney
buckwheat plants inspected on the
south side of the mountain had been
crushed and broken off at the ground
surface and were either dead or in the
process of resprouting from the
rootstocks (Service 1994); (3) a mid1990’s report to the Service from a
research scientist at the University of
Nevada, Reno, stating that ‘‘as long as
the foodplant remains as abundant as it
is now in the overall dune area, we saw
no particular threat to the continued
existence of the butterfly’’ (Brussard
1995).
In our 90-day finding on the petition
to list the Sand Mountain blue butterfly
(71 FR 44988, August 8, 2006), we
concluded that the petition provided
substantial information to support the
assertion that off-road vehicle use at
Sand Mountain presents direct and
indirect threats to the dune shrub
habitat with Kearney buckwheat on
which the Sand Mountain blue butterfly
depends. In particular, we based our
conclusion on the following—data
provided by the petitioners that reliably
documented a progressive loss of dune
shrub habitat within the past 25 years,
continuing fragmentation of dune shrub
habitat, and an ongoing expansion of the
route system into dune shrub habitat
previously considered secure for the
butterfly (BLM 2003); data that
documents annual visitor use has more
than doubled and the route system has
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
expanded from 20 mi (32 km) to over
200 mi (320 km) over this time period
(BLM 2003); an estimate that 1,000 to
1,600 ac (405 to 647 ha) of dune shrub
habitat remained in which Kearney
buckwheat is a component (BLM 2004,
p. 4); and our estimate, based on
satellite imagery prepared by BLM
(2003), that about 50 percent of the dune
shrub habitat within the species current
range may have been destroyed or
altered over this 25-year time span.
The scientific literature documents
the effects of off-road vehicles on
terrestrial habitats in arid environments,
including sand dunes. Effects include
significant reductions in the number,
density, and cover of plants, including
shrubby perennials (Bury and
Luckenbach 1983) and direct impacts on
desert vegetation (Stebbins 1995;
Lathrop 1983; Lathrop and Rowlands
1983). While none of these citations
provides specific evidence of a direct
significant threat to the Sand Mountain
blue butterfly, the papers by Bury and
Luckenbach (1983, pp. 211–213),
Lathrop (1983, pp. 157–164), Lathrop
and Rowlands (1983, pp. 138–141, 144–
146), and Stebbins (1995, pp. 471–472)
do provide documentation that off-road
vehicles can damage and destroy plants
and result in significant decreases in
plant numbers, density, and cover,
including shrubby perennials at various
sites in the western North American
deserts. Specific observations of such
impacts at Sand Mountain have been
reported previously (Guiliani 1977;
Service 1994; The Nature Conservancy
2004, p. 36; BLM 2006e).
The scientific literature provides
documentation that natural recovery
rates of perennial vegetative cover
damaged by off-road vehicles in arid
environments can take decades and, in
some cases, may require centuries
(Lathrop and Rowlands 1983;
Kockelman 1983; Webb and Wilshire
1983). The papers by Lathrop and
Rowlands (1983, p. 143) and Kockelman
(1983, p. 3) provide a timeframe for
understanding natural recovery rates of
habitats damaged by off-road vehicle
use in arid environments. We
previously found that these studies
provided reliable documentation that
even if off-road vehicle use were to be
eliminated from Sand Mountain, natural
recovery of the Kearney buckwheat
habitat may take decades, a timeframe
that might pose an indirect threat to the
long-term viability of an obligate
butterfly species that must reproduce
annually and relies on the buckwheat as
a host plant. We now have evidence,
however, from the first comprehensive
assessment of the status of the Sand
Mountain blue butterfly to indicate that
E:\FEDREG\02MYP1.LOC
02MYP1
mmaher on DSK3CLS3C1PROD with $$_JOB
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules
a large viable population of the species
exists despite the past loss of habitat;
moreover, the presence of butterflies at
even small, relatively isolated patches of
Kearney buckwheat suggests that the
butterfly is not particularly sensitive to
habitat fragmentation (Murphy et al.
2006, pp. 5–6).
Furthermore, as noted in the Biology
and Distribution section, since the
publication of the 90-day finding, we
have obtained new information on the
abundance and status of the Sand
Mountain blue butterfly and the
potential threats of habitat loss and
fragmentation to the species.
Researchers collected data along several
permanent transects installed
throughout the distribution of the dune
shrub habitat at Sand Mountain from
July 15 through August 9, 2006 (Murphy
et al. 2006, pp. 4–5). The scientists
estimated that hundreds of thousands of
adult Sand Mountain blue butterflies
may have emerged during the 2006
flight season (Murphy et al. 2006, p. 7).
Adult butterflies were associated with
nearly all Kearney buckwheat shrubs
along the transects and butterflies were
distributed across the entire available
habitat area, even with individual
buckwheat shrubs isolated from others
by hundreds of meters (Murphy et al.
2006, p. 6).
The scientists concluded the Sand
Mountain blue butterfly numbers were
‘‘substantially above a level that would
indicate a need to carry out in situ or
other actions to enhance population size
above a critical minimum’’ (Murphy et
al. 2006, p. 7). Annual population
numbers may vary considerably
depending on local weather conditions,
and the researchers note that the large
population in 2006 may represent an
atypical spike in the butterfly
population (Murphy et al. 2006, p. 9).
However, even if this number represents
an upper population estimate, we
believe that the very large number of
butterflies observed during the recent
survey clearly shows that the remaining
Kearney buckwheat habitat is currently
sufficient to support a viable population
of the Sand Mountain blue butterfly.
Although sufficient habitat remains to
support a robust population of the Sand
Mountain blue butterfly (Murphy et al.
2006, p. 7), researchers have cautioned
that ‘‘the sizable Sand Mountain blue
population notwithstanding, continued
degradation of the shrub community
and losses of Kearney buckwheat will
ultimately lead to the elimination of the
butterfly’’ (Murphy et al. 2006, p. 9). To
reduce the significance of the threat
posed to the Sand Mountain blue
butterfly by continued degradation of
the shrub community and losses of
VerDate Mar 15 2010
02:45 Aug 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
Kearney buckwheat, on December 12,
2006, the BLM implemented an
emergency restriction on motorized use
on 3,985 ac (1,612 ha) of land to prevent
further adverse effects on the habitat of
the Sand Mountain blue butterfly (BLM
2006b); the closure notice was
published in the Federal Register on
March 15, 2007 (72 FR 12187). This
action, which reduces the route system
both within and outside of the SMRA
from an estimated 200 mi (320 km) to
21.5 mi (34.4 km), has returned the
route mileage to about the 1980 level.
The route designation system adopted
by BLM is consistent with the
Conservation Plan (LVEA 2006) and the
restrictions are described by BLM as
necessary to prevent further adverse
effects to the habitat of the Sand
Mountain blue butterfly (72 FR 12187).
The route designation system is
specifically designed to reduce threats
from recreational use, weed infestation,
fire, and the reduction of site potential,
thereby furthering the objectives of
eliminating off-road vehicle incursions
into dune shrub and butterfly habitat;
preventing route increases in dune
shrub habitat; minimizing shrub damage
and loss; and allowing for habitat
regeneration and restoration (LVEA
2006, p. 15). The emergency restriction
will remain in effect until the Resource
Management Plan (RMP) has been
updated to address the long-term
management of the wildlife, cultural,
vegetation, and recreational resources in
the area or until the Field Office
Manager determines it is no longer
needed (BLM 2006b, p. 1; 72 FR 12187,
March 15, 2007). Every indication we
have from the BLM at both the field
office and state office level is that the
emergency restriction will remain in
place until made permanent through an
amendment to the RMP. The RMP must
be updated in compliance with the
Federal Land Management and Policy
Act, the National Environmental Policy
Act, and other applicable laws and
policies which have, among other
requirements, opportunity for public
and agency review and comment. Under
the terms of the Conservation Plan
monitoring of compliance with the
designated route system will continue
and results will be reviewed every six
months; areas in which non-compliance
exceeds a specified threshold will be
fenced (LVEA 2006, p. 60).
The Conservation Plan also includes
increased law enforcement to ensure
compliance in the use of the designated
route system, especially on heavy use
weekends and randomly at other times.
Through an agreement with Churchill
County, which is a party to the Plan,
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
24259
local law enforcement staff will be used
in the camping areas to allow BLM Park
Rangers to patrol the route system and
other areas (LVEA 2006, p. 20). Further,
any person who fails to comply with the
BLM restriction order may be subject to
imprisonment for not more than 12
months or a fine in accordance with the
applicable provisions of 18 U.S.C. 3571,
or both (BLM 2006b, p. 3; 72 FR 12187,
March 15, 2007). A handout was given
to recreational users over Labor Day
weekend, 2006, informing them of the
completion and approval of the
Conservation Plan, the upcoming
mandatory route system, and the
importance of demonstrating success in
protecting the habitat for the Sand
Mountain blue butterfly (BLM 2006d). A
variety of additional public education
activities are provided for in the
Conservation Plan, including
interpretive, cautionary and regulatory
signage throughout the SMRA and dune
system, as well as education pamphlets,
brochures, and information available on
Web sites and other forms of media
(LVEA 2006, p. 21–24).
Implementation of the limited offroad vehicle route system is already
occurring. We have evaluated the
certainty of effectiveness of the
designated route system using criteria
specified in PECE (68 FR 15115, March
28, 2003). Based on our evaluation, we
have determined that this conservation
action satisfies all of the PECE criteria
for the certainty of effectiveness (Service
2007). We conclude that the off-road
vehicle route system is sufficiently
certain to be implemented and effective
so as to have reduced the present and
future threat of destruction,
modification, or curtailment of the
habitat or range of the Sand Mountain
blue butterfly to a level such that offroad vehicle impacts to habitat are not
a basis for finding that listing is
warranted.
Other components of the
Conservation Plan have also been
initiated related to research (LVEA
2006, pp. 27–28). These include
mapping of current Kearney buckwheat
and invasive weeds distribution; remote
sensing of habitat characteristics, trends,
and route analyses; studies of the Sand
Mountain blue butterfly population
status and habitat requirements;
population dynamics of the Kearney
buckwheat; and Kearney buckwheat
propagation and transplantation studies.
Kearney buckwheat habitat and invasive
weeds mapping and remote sensing
analysis of habitat characteristics,
trends, and route analyses have been in
progress for several years. The BLM has
secured funding through grants to
purchase additional imagery to continue
E:\FEDREG\02MYP1.LOC
02MYP1
mmaher on DSK3CLS3C1PROD with $$_JOB
24260
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules
the trend analysis in 2006, 2009, and
2012 (LVEA 2006, p. 28). Research on
the population status of the butterfly
was initiated during the 2006 adult
flight season by scientists from the
University of Nevada, Reno, with
funding through the Nevada
Biodiversity Initiative; these data
provide a baseline against which future
fluctuations in the butterfly population
can be compared (Murphy et al. 2006).
Pilot studies of the population dynamics
of the Kearney buckwheat have been
initiated (LVEA 2006, p. 27), and seed
of the Kearney buckwheat has
previously been collected through the
BLM Seeds of Success program.
Propagation studies using these seeds,
and other seeds to be collected on site,
are to be conducted by the Natural
Resource Conservation Service’s newly
established Fallon Plant Materials
Center, which will also conduct
transplantation studies of propagated
seedlings into disturbed habitats at Sand
Mountain (Tonenna 2006). While we
did not rely on them making this
finding, we recognized that these
research components will both inform
and facilitate efforts to recover damaged
butterfly habitat at Sand Mountain as
well as contribute to sound scientific
data for future management actions.
In our 90-day finding, we addressed
the claim by the petitioners that the
constant disruption of the soil surface
makes it difficult or impossible for seeds
of the Kearney buckwheat to germinate
and for seedlings to establish and
concluded that the petitioners had
provided no documentation for this
claim (71 FR 44991). The Service has
since made field visits to Sand
Mountain and, while we have no
quantitative data on this matter, we
observed an absence of Kearney
buckwheat seedlings in areas of high
off-road vehicle use. We also observed
numerous Kearney buckwheat seedlings
in areas that received little, if any, offroad vehicle use (Caicco 2006c). These
observations are consistent with
previous reports (Tonenna 2003 as cited
in The Nature Conservancy 2004, p. 37).
We believe, based on these observations,
that the constant disruption of the sand
surface in heavily used areas may
interfere with the establishment of
Kearney buckwheat and could
potentially pose a long-term threat to
shrub regeneration and, therefore, to the
long-term viability of the butterfly itself.
However, the restriction of off-road
vehicle recreation to the designated
route system substantially reduces the
magnitude and imminence of the threat
to the regeneration of Kearney
buckwheat. As described above,
VerDate Mar 15 2010
02:45 Aug 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
sufficient habitat remains at Sand
Mountain to support a large population
of the Sand Mountain blue butterfly,
and the reduction in the level of threat
due to the designated route system, over
the long-term, ensures that natural
shrub regeneration and/or active
restoration will maintain sufficient
habitat to ensure the viability of the
Sand Mountain blue butterfly.
Although not identified as a threat by
the petitioners, trampling or grazing of
buckwheat plants and/or seedlings by
livestock was identified by the working
group as a potential threat to the habitat
of the butterfly, although it was
acknowledged that more information
was needed to determine the level of
threat (LVEA 2006, pp. 11–12). Dune
shrub habitat with and without Kearney
buckwheat occurs within portions of
two range allotments, where it
comprises 1,357 ac (549 ha), or 2
percent, of the Salt Wells Allotment,
and 331 ac (134 ha), or 0.5 percent, of
the Frenchmen Flat Allotment. The
stocking values are set at 270 cattle and
1,626 animal unit months (AUMS) from
October 15 through April 15 for Salt
Wells and 403 cattle and 2,001 AUMS
from October 15 through April 15 for
Frenchmen Flat. We are not aware of
any evidence that supports trampling or
grazing as a significant threat to the
Kearney buckwheat.
Summary of Factor A
Biological data on the Sand Mountain
blue butterfly collected by researchers
document that hundreds of thousands
may have been present during the 2006
adult flight season. These data show
that a large, robust population of the
Sand Mountain blue butterfly remains
despite the estimated loss of as much as
50 percent of its habitat. The only
known threat of potential significance in
the foreseeable future is the destruction
by off-road vehicles of the dune shrub
habitat containing the Kearney
buckwheat, upon which the butterfly
depends for its survival. Habitat
destruction is a gradual and cumulative
process that affects not only mature
shrubs, but also likely disrupts their
reproductive capacity by constant
disturbance of the sand surface, thereby
preventing seedling establishment. The
shrubs, however, are long-lived and the
habitat remains sufficiently extensive
such that the threat to the butterfly does
not cause it to be in danger of extinction
nor likely to become in danger of
extinction in the foreseeable future.
Further, an emergency restriction on
motorized use on 3,985 ac (1,613 ha) to
protect the habitat of the butterfly went
into effect on December 12, 2006 and a
closure notice regarding these
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
restrictions was published in the
Federal Register on March 15, 2007 (72
FR 12187). The implementation of this
emergency restriction, and the high
level of certainty of its effectiveness, has
substantially reduced the magnitude
and significance of any long-term threat
posed by off-road vehicles to the habitat
and viability of the Sand Mountain blue
butterfly. Therefore, we conclude that
the Sand Mountain blue butterfly is not
now, or in the foreseeable future,
threatened by destruction, modification,
or curtailment of its habitat or range.
Factor B: Overutilization for
Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
We are not aware of any scientific or
commercial data that indicate
overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes poses a threat to the species.
Factor C: Disease or Predation
We are not aware of any scientific or
commercial data that indicates either
disease or predation poses a threat to
the species.
Factor D: Inadequacy of Existing
Regulatory Mechanisms
In our 90-day finding on the petition
to list the Sand Mountain blue butterfly,
we found that the petitioners had
provided substantial information that
existing regulatory mechanisms may be
inadequate to prevent the progressive
decline of the habitat on which the
butterfly depends (page 44991 of 71 FR
44988, August 8, 2006). We based our
determination on evidence that the
public had raised the issue of the
potential impacts of off-road
recreational use on the invertebrate
fauna of the dune system over 25 years
ago (Hardy 1978); the inactivity of a
monitoring plan initiated in the mid1990’s after personnel changes in both
the BLM and Service; the lack of action
on a 2002 proposed closure of 1,000 ac
(405 ha) of dune shrub habitat by a
group comprised of BLM and Service
staff, representatives from conservation
and off-road vehicle groups, and
representatives of the Fallon-Paiute
Shoshone Tribe; and the lack of
compliance with a voluntary route
system implemented by the BLM in
2004 that was intended to protect and
restore the sand dune ecosystem.
The inadequacy of the voluntary offroad vehicle route system is well
documented in a monitoring report on
compliance with the encouraged route
system for the period 2003–2006 (BLM
2006e). High levels of noncompliance
occurred from the onset of
implementation of the voluntary system,
E:\FEDREG\02MYP1.LOC
02MYP1
mmaher on DSK3CLS3C1PROD with $$_JOB
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules
and the number of incursions into
habitat outside of the encouraged routes
increased in 2006 (BLM 2006e, pp. 3–
4). Multiple incursions into habitat
outside of the encouraged route system
typically occurred at any given point, so
that the cumulative impacts were
considered to be four times greater than
the number of noncompliance points
(BLM 2006e, p. 6.). BLM’s information
also indicates a strong relationship
between the number of visitors and the
number of noncompliance points (BLM
2006e, p. 7). Moreover, about 50 percent
of all noncompliance points occurred at
or near red carsonite posts installed to
alert riders that travel was discouraged
in areas behind the posts (BLM 2006e,
p. 8). Overall, under the voluntary
system 98 percent of all existing routes
continued to be used and new routes
were created, indicating an ongoing
expansion of habitat degradation with
little or no restoration of previously
degraded areas (BLM 2006e, p. 13).
On December 12, 2006, the BLM
implemented an emergency restriction
on motorized use on 3,985 ac (1,613 ha)
of land to prevent further adverse effects
on the habitat of the Sand Mountain
blue butterfly (BLM 2006b; 72 FR 12187,
March 15, 2007). This action, which
reduced the route system from an
estimated 200 mi (320 km) to 21.5 mi
(34.4 km), has returned the designated
route mileage to about the 1980 level.
The emergency restriction affects certain
public lands within Sections 13, 14, 16,
21 through 24, 28, 29, 32, and 33, of
Township 17 North, Range 32 East (Mt.
Diablo Meridian) (72 FR 12187). This
action restricts motorized vehicle use to
selected existing routes that generally
lie on the periphery of the Sand
Mountain blue butterfly habitat,
although several existing routes remain
open to motorized use that cross
between existing patches of dune shrub
habitat; the designated routes were
selected to prevent further adverse
effects to the habitat of the Sand
Mountain blue butterfly while
maintaining recreational use at the
SMRA. This action is consistent with
the Conservation Plan (LVEA 2006) and
is specifically designed to address
threats from recreational use, weed
infestation, fire, and the reduction of
site potential, thereby furthering the
objectives of eliminating or reducing the
number of off-road vehicle incursions
into dune shrub and butterfly habitat;
eliminate route increase in dune shrub
habitat; eliminate shrub damage and
loss; and allow for habitat regeneration
(LVEA 2006, p. 15). The emergency
restriction will remain in effect until the
Resource Management Plan has been
VerDate Mar 15 2010
02:45 Aug 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
updated to address the long-term
management of the wildlife, cultural,
vegetation, and recreational resources in
the area or until the Field Office
Manager determines it is no longer
needed (BLM 2006b, p. 1; 72 FR 12187,
March 15, 2007). Every indication we
have from the BLM at both the field
office and state office level is that the
emergency restriction will remain in
place until made permanent through an
amendment to the RMP.
The Conservation Plan also provides
for increased law enforcement,
especially on heavy use weekends and
randomly at other times; through an
agreement with Churchill County,
which is a party to the Plan, local law
enforcement staff will be used in the
camping areas to allow BLM Park
Rangers to patrol the route system and
other areas (LVEA 2006, p. 20). In
addition, any person who fails to
comply with this restriction order may
be subject to imprisonment for not more
than 12 months or a fine in accordance
with the applicable provisions of 18
U.S.C. 3571, or both (BLM 2006b, p. 3;
72 FR 12187, March 15, 2007). A
handout was given to recreational users
over Labor Day weekend, 2006,
informing them of the completion and
approval of the Conservation Plan, the
upcoming mandatory route system, and
the importance of demonstrating
success in protecting the habitat for the
Sand Mountain blue butterfly (BLM
2006d).
The Conservation Plan includes
provisions for regular reporting on
progress of implementation and
effectiveness of various actions taken
pursuant to the plan (LVEA 2006, p. 30).
This includes provisions for regularly
scheduled meetings of the parties to the
plan, at which an evaluation of the
implementation progress and
effectiveness of the plan (including the
route system and its enforcement) will
be reviewed and, if necessary,
modifications made and adaptive
management actions initiated. The first
meeting of the parties since the closure
notice was put into effect occurred on
March 15, 2007. Implementation
progress was reviewed, the signage and
fencing strategy and funding
considerations were discussed, and the
next meeting was scheduled for May 10,
2007. The agenda for the latter meeting
will include further discussion of the
fencing strategy and the scheduling of a
site visit to discuss fence placement
along key route segments. At every sixmonth meeting, the implementation
success of the conservation actions will
be evaluated, the success or failure of
the objectives of each strategy will be
determined and an adaptive
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
24261
management plan will be triggered, if
appropriate. At annual meetings, the
long-term monitoring will be analyzed
and continuation or modification of the
plan will be determined, based on the
triggers for overall plan success. We
note also that BLM has demonstrated
their commitment to monitor the
situation and to take appropriate action,
as illustrated by BLM’s adoption of the
mandatory route system based on
monitoring of the voluntary route
system that previously was in place.
As described above (see discussion of
Factor A), we reviewed the route system
in accordance with PECE and found that
all of the criteria for certainty of
effectiveness are met, and concluded
there is a high level of certainty of
effectiveness of the route system
(Service 2007). We conclude that the
emergency restriction on motorized
vehicle use has established an adequate
regulatory mechanism to protect the
existing Kearney buckwheat habitat
which, as noted above, remains
sufficient to support a large, viable
population of the Sand Mountain blue
butterfly (Murphy et al. 2007, p. 7).
Summary of Factor D
Unrestricted off-road vehicle
recreation at Sand Mountain has been
the primary cause of the gradual process
of destruction and modification of the
dune shrub habitat of the Sand
Mountain blue butterfly over the past
two decades and remains the only threat
of potential significance to the species
in the foreseeable future. However, we
have determined that the
implementation and effectiveness of a
mandatory, enforceable route system
that restricts travel within the dune
shrub habitat adequately addresses this
potential threat by eliminating or greatly
reducing further habitat deterioration
and allowing for habitat recovery within
closed areas. We believe that the
strengthened regulatory approach and
increased emphasis on encouraging
compliance with the mandatory route
system has substantially reduced the
magnitude and imminence of the threat
of off-road recreational use to the
Kearney buckwheat habitat, which
currently remains sufficient to support a
large, viable population of the Sand
Mountain blue butterfly. Therefore, we
have determined that the inadequacy of
existing mechanisms does not currently
constitute a threat to the Sand Mountain
blue butterfly.
Factor E: Other Natural or Manmade
Factors Affecting the Continued
Existence of the Species
Several other natural or manmade
factors have been identified as potential
E:\FEDREG\02MYP1.LOC
02MYP1
mmaher on DSK3CLS3C1PROD with $$_JOB
24262
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules
threats to the Sand Mountain blue
butterfly, including invasive weeds
(LVEA 2006, p. 10; The Nature
Conservancy 2004, pp. 49–52; Murphy
et al. 2006, p. 7 and Figure 7), wildfire
(LVEA 2006, pp. 13–14; Murphy et al.
2006, p. 9); climate change (LVEA 2006,
p. 14; Murphy et al. 2006, p. 9), camping
(LVEA 2006, p. 11), hiking (LVEA 2006,
p. 14), horseback riding (LVEA 2006, p.
14), pollution (LVEA 2006, p. 14), and
military action (LVEA 2006, p. 14). In
addition, in our 90-day petition finding,
we acknowledged that while large
fluctuations in size typical of insect
populations may make a species with an
extremely limited distribution, such as
the Sand Mountain blue butterfly, more
susceptible to extinction (Ehrlich 1992),
we are aware of no information that
large population fluctuations have
occurred, or are likely to occur for this
species. (71 FR 44992, August 8, 2006).
Although researchers have
acknowledged that the large population
observed in 2006 may have been an
anomaly, which could have obscured
normal patterns of butterfly distribution
that might suggest a more significant
threat to the species than is indicated by
the 2006 field observation (Murphy et
al. 2006, p. 9), they also concluded that
the Sand Mountain blue butterfly
numbers were ‘‘substantially above a
level that would indicate a need to carry
out in situ or other actions to enhance
population size above a critical
minimum’’ (Murphy et al. 2006, p. 7).
Based on this assessment, we believe
that the population will remain viable
into the foreseeable future.
Of the potential threats cited above,
we consider the interrelated factors of
invasive weeds and fire to be the most
significant. The primary invasive weeds
of concern at Sand Mountain are Salsola
tragus (Russian thistle) and Bromus
tectorum (cheatgrass). Large patches of
both species are present in areas along
the periphery of the sand dunes,
principally in areas where livestock
water tanks and camping are
permanently located (LVEA 2006, p.
10). Researchers did not find cheatgrass
to be a dominant species along transects
in 2006 (Murphy et al. 2006, Figure 5).
The seeds of these invasive weeds can
be spread by wind, cattle, and off-road
vehicle transport (LVEA 2006, p. 11).
There is no evidence that these annual
weeds are capable of artificially
stabilizing the dune systems at Sand
Mountain (The Nature Conservancy
2004, p. 53), and we do not consider
artificial stabilization of the dune
system to be a significant threat to the
habitat of the Sand Mountain blue
butterfly. We are unable to assess the
VerDate Mar 15 2010
02:45 Aug 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
significance of off-road vehicles as a
vector for weed transport because of
lack of data, although they likely
facilitate weed establishment through
surface disturbance.
Because both cheatgrass and Russian
thistle are annual plants, we do not
believe that they pose a significant
direct competitive threat to the Kearney
buckwheat, a long-lived shrub.
Cheatgrass and Russian thistle,
however, do create a substantial fuel
load that may increase both the
likelihood and frequency of wildfire.
Wildfires have not occurred over the
past 25 years of record at Sand
Mountain (LVEA 2006, p. 13), and
wildfires likely have a low natural
frequency in sparsely vegetated dune
ecosystems. The Sand Mountain
ecosystem was rated in fair condition
based on the absence of known dunestabilizing invasive plants (The Nature
Conservancy 2004, p. 35). After a
subsequent visit by a few assessment
team members, however, it was noted
that the abundance of invasive plants
was much higher than assumed by the
team during the analysis, and it was
possible that they might have
downgraded the rating to poor if they
had been aware of this information (The
Nature Conservancy 2004, p. 37).
Vegetation data collected along transects
by researchers during the 2006 field
season, however, show that both the
presence and abundance of Russian
thistle vary spatially, and the invasive
weed is absent in many areas;
nevertheless, the researchers found
fewer butterflies where Russian thistle
was abundant (Murphy et al. 2006, p. 7,
Figure 7). This observation clearly
derives from the strong correlation
between numbers of the butterfly and
the number of buckwheat shrubs and
their inflorescences (Murphy et al. 2006,
Figure 4). Transect data presented by
the researchers appear to show that
greater abundance of Russian thistle
(and lesser abundance of Kearney
buckwheat) also correlates with a
greater abundance of several other
plants, including four-wing saltbush,
Oenothera deltoides (desert eveningprimrose), Rumex venosus (winged
dock), and an unidentified species of
wild buckwheat (Murphy et al. 2006,
Figure 5). None of these plants are
abundant in areas along the transects
where the Kearney buckwheat is
abundant (Murphy et al. 2006, Figure 5),
suggesting the possibility that the
particular habitats where these species,
including Russian thistle, are dominant
may not provide suitable habitat for the
Kearney buckwheat.
We conclude, therefore, that annual
invasive weeds, the combustible fuels
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
they create, and the potential for
wildfires to occur and increase in
frequency, thereby promoting the
increase and establishment of invasive
weeds, all pose risks to at least some of
the habitat of the Sand Mountain blue
butterfly. The extent and magnitude of
the risks, however, is unclear because
we have no quantitative information on
the overall distribution and abundance
of invasive weeds, nor are any data
available on the response of the Kearney
buckwheat to fire. The occurrence of the
buckwheat in a habitat in which fire is
naturally rare suggests that it is not firetolerant; the species, however, has an
extensive branching caudex (root
crown) from a deep woody taproot
(Reveal 2002, p. 1), from which it has
been observed to resprout after physical
damage to its above-ground shoot
(Service 1994). It may, therefore, be
intolerant of fire but capable of
surviving it. At this time, therefore, we
are aware of no substantial evidence
that invasive plants or fire currently
pose a significant threat to the habitat or
viability of the Sand Mountain blue
butterfly.
Of the remaining potential threats to
the Sand Mountain blue butterfly,
camping was identified as such
primarily because it constitutes an
additional source of invasive weeds
(LVEA 2006, p. 11) and is subject to the
same considerations discussed above. In
addition, the only campground is
located in an area where Kearney
buckwheat once occurred and the
butterfly was first discovered (Austin
1998), but neither the buckwheat nor
the butterfly occur there today so the
campground itself no longer poses a
direct threat to the species. Climate
change is also a potential threat to the
species (LVEA 2006, p. 14; Murphy et
al. 2006, p. 9), but there is no available
evidence to evaluate the imminence or
magnitude of this threat. There is also
no evidence that pollution or military
action pose a significant threat to the
species or its habitat, and their level was
considered so low that they were not
considered in the Conservation Plan
(LVEA 2006, p. 14).
Summary of Factor E
Annual invasive weeds, the
combustible fuels they create, and the
potential for wildfires to occur and
increase in frequency, thereby
promoting the increase and
establishment of invasive weeds all pose
a threat to at least some of the habitat
of the Sand Mountain blue butterfly.
The extent and magnitude of this threat,
however, is unclear because we have no
quantitative information on the overall
distribution and abundance of invasive
E:\FEDREG\02MYP1.LOC
02MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 84 / Wednesday, May 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules
mmaher on DSK3CLS3C1PROD with $$_JOB
weeds, nor are there any data available
on the response of the Kearney
buckwheat to fire. No substantial
evidence exists to support a conclusion
that annual weeds or fire currently pose
a significant threat to the habitat or
viability of the Sand Mountain blue
butterfly.
Finding
We assessed the best available
scientific and commercial information
regarding threats faced by the Sand
Mountain blue butterfly. We have
reviewed the petition, information
available in our files, and information
submitted to us during the public
comment period following our 90-day
petition finding (71 FR 44988; August 8,
2006). We also consulted with
recognized butterfly experts and Federal
land managers, and arranged for
researchers to initiate field studies to
assess the status of the subspecies and
establish baseline data against which
future changes in the butterfly
population can be compared.
Based on counts made during the
2006 flight season, hundreds of
thousands of adult Sand Mountain blue
butterflies may have been present, a
number sufficiently large for us to find
that habitat loss to date does not pose
a significant threat to the subspecies.
The only known threat of potential
future significance to the habitat of the
Sand Mountain blue butterfly is the
gradual destruction by off-road vehicles
of the dune shrub habitat containing
Kearney buckwheat, on which the
butterfly depends, and associated
impacts to the reproductive success of
the shrub the constant disruption of the
sand surface which interferes with
seedling establishment. The magnitude
and imminence of the threat posed by
off-road vehicle recreation to the habitat
of the butterfly, however, has been
reduced by an emergency restriction
that limits motorized vehicles to a
designated route system that went into
effect on December 12, 2006. We believe
that implementation of this emergency
restriction ensures that further habitat
destruction is prevented and, over the
long-term, natural shrub regeneration
and active restoration will ensure that
the Sand Mountain blue butterfly
remains viable. There is no evidence
that, based on the available information,
other factors identified as potential
threats, including large population
fluctuations, invasive weeds, wildfire,
VerDate Mar 15 2010
02:45 Aug 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
climate change, camping, hiking,
horseback riding, pollution, and
military activities pose a significant
threat to the Sand Mountain blue
butterfly.
The butterfly exists in only one
population, and we consider the entire
1,000 ac (405 ha) of dune shrub habitat
to be the current range of the Sand
Mountain blue butterfly; this includes
non-Kearney buckwheat habitat through
which the species passes, including
areas devoid of vegetation such as trails,
as well as areas that support the
Kearney buckwheat shrubs on which
the butterfly depends for completion of
its life cycle. As described above,
researchers have found the butterfly
appears to co-occur with its host plant,
Kearney buckwheat, across the entirety
of the shrub’s distribution at Sand
Mountain, even within small, relatively
isolated patches of the shrub (Murphy et
al. 2006, pp. 5–8). We believe, therefore,
that the current range of the Sand
Mountain blue butterfly approximates
its historical range, although only 50 to
60 percent of the entire area of dune
shrub habitat is estimated to support
substantial numbers of the Kearney
buckwheat on which the butterfly
depends for completion of its life cycle.
Because the area in which the
population exists is so small, and there
are no unique features of the area, there
are no areas within the species’ range
that are significant portions of the range.
In addition, the threats to the species are
being addressed across its range, as
described above, such that no area
continues to face significant threats.
Therefore, we find that the Sand
Mountain blue butterfly is not
threatened or endangered in all or a
significant portion of its range, and
listing it under the Endangered Species
Act is not warranted at this time.
We will continue to assess the status
of the butterfly by working with the
BLM, other parties to the Conservation
Plan, research scientists, and other
individuals or groups interested in
contributing to the conservation of this
species. We will particularly focus on
the designated route system and the
effectiveness of this conservation action
in eliminating and reducing the threats
identified to the butterfly over the
foreseeable future. In particular, we will
closely follow the monitoring results of
recreational user compliance with the
designated route system.
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
24263
As specified in PECE (68 FR 15114):
‘‘If we make a decision not to list a
species or to list the species based in
part on the contributions of a formalized
conservation effort, we will track the
status of the effort including the
progress of implementation and
effectiveness of the conservation effort.
If any of the following occurs: (1) A
failure to implement the conservation
effort in accordance with the
implementation schedule; (2) a failure
to achieve objectives; (3) a failure to
modify the conservation effort to
adequately address an increase in the
severity of a threat or to address other
new information on threats; or (4) we
receive any other new information
indicating a possible change in the
status of the species, then we will
reevaluate the status of the species and
consider whether initiating the listing
process is necessary. Initiating the
listing process may consist of
designating the species as a candidate
species and assigning a listing priority,
issuing a proposed rule to list, issuing
a proposed rule to reclassify, or issuing
an emergency listing rule.’’
We request that you submit any new
information concerning the status of, or
threats to, this species to our Nevada
Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES
section) whenever it becomes available.
New information will help us monitor
the species and encourage its
conservation. If an emergency situation
develops for this or any other species,
we will act to provide immediate
protection.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited
herein is available, upon request, from
the Nevada Fish and Wildlife Office (see
ADDRESSES section).
Author
The primary author of this notice is
the Nevada 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: April 26, 2007.
Randall B. Luthi,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
[FR Doc. E7–8330 Filed 5–1–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
E:\FEDREG\02MYP1.LOC
02MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 84 (Wednesday, May 2, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24253-24263]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-8330]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Finding
on a Petition to List the Sand Mountain Blue Butterfly (Euphilotes
pallescens ssp. arenamontana) as Threatened or Endangered with Critical
Habitat
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 12-month petition finding.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce our
12-month finding on a petition to list the Sand Mountain blue butterfly
(Euphilotes pallescens arenamontana) as threatened or endangered under
the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). After a thorough
review of all available scientific and commercial information, we find
that the petitioned action is not warranted. We ask the public to
continue to submit to us any new information concerning
[[Page 24254]]
the status of, and threats to, this subspecies. This information will
help us to monitor and encourage the ongoing management of this
subspecies.
DATES: The finding announced in this document was made May 2, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Data, information, comments, or questions regarding this
notice should be submitted to the Field Supervisor, Nevada Fish and
Wildlife Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1340 Financial
Boulevard, Suite 234, Reno, NV 89502. The complete administrative file
for this finding is available for inspection, by appointment and during
normal business hours, at the above address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert D. Williams, Field Supervisor,
Nevada Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES) (telephone 775/861-
6300; facsimile 775/861-6301).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires
that, for any petition to revise the List of Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife and Plants that contains substantial scientific and commercial
information that listing may be warranted, we make a finding within 12
months of the date of our receipt of the petition on whether the
petitioned action is: (a) Not warranted, (b) warranted, or (c)
warranted, but the immediate proposal of a regulation implementing the
petitioned action is precluded by other pending proposals to determine
whether any species is threatened or endangered, and expeditious
progress is being made to add or remove qualified species from the List
of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. Such 12-month
findings are to be published promptly in the Federal Register. Section
4(b)(3)(C) of the Act requires that a petition for which the requested
action is found to be warranted but precluded shall be treated as
though resubmitted on the date of such finding (that is, requiring a
subsequent finding to be made within 12 months).
Previous Federal Action
We included the Sand Mountain blue butterfly under the name
Euphilotes rita ssp. as a Category 2 candidate species in our November
21, 1991 Candidate Notice of Review (CNOR) (56 FR 58829). Category 2
included taxa for which information in our possession indicated that a
proposed listing rule was possibly appropriate, but for which
sufficient data on biological vulnerability and threats were not
available to support a proposed rule. The Sand Mountain blue butterfly
remained a Category 2 candidate as Euphilotes rita ssp. in our 1994
CNOR (November 15, 1994; 59 FR 59020). In the CNOR published on
February 28, 1996 (61 FR 7596), we adopted a single category of
candidate species defined as follows: ``Those species for which the
Service has on file sufficient information on biological vulnerability
and threat(s) to support issuance of a proposed rule to list but
issuance of the proposed rule is precluded.'' In previous CNORs,
species matching this definition were known as Category 1 candidates
for listing. Thus the Service no longer considered Category 2 species
as candidates, and did not include them in the 1996 or any subsequent
CNORs. The decision to stop considering Category 2 species as
candidates was designed to reduce confusion about the status of these
species, and to clarify that we no longer regarded these species as
candidates for listing. Since the Sand Mountain blue butterfly was a
Category 2 species, we no longer recognized it as a candidate species
as of the February 28, 1996, CNOR (61 FR 7457).
On April 23, 2004, we received a formal petition, dated April 23,
2004, from the Center for Biological Diversity, Xerces Society, Public
Employees for Environmental Responsibility, and the Nevada Outdoor
Recreation Association, requesting that the Sand Mountain blue
butterfly, currently recognized as Euphilotes pallescens ssp.
arenamontana taxonomically, known only from Sand Mountain, Nevada, be
listed as threatened or endangered in accordance with section 4 of the
Act, and that critical habitat be designated for the species concurrent
with the listing. The petition is available on the Nevada Fish and
Wildlife Office Web site (go to https://www.fws.gov/nevada/ and click on
the Nevada Species link, then on Sand Mountain blue butterfly link).
Action on this petition was precluded by court orders and
settlement agreements for other listing actions that required nearly
all of our listing funds for fiscal years 2004 and 2005. On September
26, 2005, we received a 60-day notice of intent to sue, and on January
5, 2006, we received a complaint regarding our failure to carry out the
90-day finding on the petition to list the Sand Mountain blue
butterfly. On April 20, 2006, we reached an agreement with the
plaintiffs to submit to the Federal Register a completed 90-day finding
by July 28, 2006. The agreement specified that if our 90-day finding
concluded that the petition contained substantial information, we would
complete a 12-month finding by April 26, 2007 (Center for Biological
Diversity et al. v. Norton, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (CV-
00023-LKK-GGH), (E.D. Cal)).
On August 8, 2006, we published our 90-day finding in the Federal
Register (71 FR 44988), in which we concluded that the petition
presented substantial scientific or commercial information to indicate
that listing the Sand Mountain blue butterfly may be warranted, we
initiated a status review of the taxon, and we solicited comments and
information to be provided in connection with the status review by
October 10, 2006. This notice constitutes our 12-month finding and is
submitted in fulfillment of the April 20, 2006, stipulated settlement
agreement.
On August 18, 2006, we became a signatory to the multi-party Sand
Mountain Blue Butterfly Conservation Plan (Conservation Plan), which
became effective September 21, 2006 (Lahontan Valley Environmental
Alliance (LVEA), 2006). For a further discussion of the Conservation
Plan, see the ``Conservation Efforts'' section below.
Biology and Distribution
The genus Euphilotes, in the family Lycaenidae, is comprised of
five species of small, pale blue butterflies from western North America
that are distinguished by discrete differences in genitalia (Pratt
1994, p. 388). The genus is noteworthy for its close relationship with
the plant genus Eriogonum (wild buckwheat), a genus of about 250
species of shrubs, subshrubs, and herbs largely from western North
America (Reveal 2005). Euphilotes taxa are among the most specialized
of the North American butterflies in host plant adaptations (Pratt
1988, p. 63). They typically utilize species of Eriogonum for mating,
obtaining nectar, host searching, and egg laying (Pratt 1994, p. 388).
Many of the species and subspecies within the genus have highly
restricted ranges, in part because of this specialized relationship
with Eriogonum. The larvae (and to some degree the adults) of
Euphilotes subspecies are known to specialize on the flowers and seeds
of specific Eriogonum (Pratt 1988, p. 104). This relationship has been
the subject of several studies on evolution (Shields and Reveal 1988,
pp. 51-93; Pratt 1988, pp. 1-653; Pratt 1994, pp. 387-416).
The pale blue butterfly, Euphilotes pallescens, was first described
by Tilden and Downey in 1955 under the name Philotes pallescens based
on specimens collected in Tooele County, Utah (Pratt 1988, p. 18;
Mattoni 1965, pp. 81, 94). Mattoni (1965, p. 94) reduced the taxon to a
subspecies which he called Philotes
[[Page 24255]]
(=Euphilotes) rita ssp. pallescens, but he only examined a pair of
specimens collected at the same time as the original collection by
Tilden and Downey. Mattoni based his taxonomic conclusion on the
configuration of the male genitalia, which was thought to be the
primary characteristic distinguishing P. rita from all other members of
the genus (Mattoni 1965, p. 81; Shields 1977, p. 2), and his opinion
that ``greater biological meaning arises from a classification based
upon relationship rather than difference'' (Mattoni 1965, p. 99).
In the first modern biosystematic analysis of the genus, Pratt
(1988, 1994) used cladistic analysis, a method of examining taxonomic
relationships among species using shared derived characteristics
(features possessed by two or more taxa in common), to assess its
members of the genus Euphilotes. He compared 79 morphological
characters and analyzed enzymes (proteins), allelic variation
(variation in genes coding for same trait), and diapause (period of
suspended growth or development similar to hibernation) intensity among
36 taxa of Euphilotes from western North America (Pratt 1988, 1994).
Based on these analyses, he concluded that Euphilotes pallescens should
be recognized as a full species (Pratt 1994, pp. 401-402; Pratt and
Emmel 1998, p. 209). The Sand Mountain blue butterfly was first
described as Euphilotes pallescens ssp. arenamontana by Austin in 1998
(1998, pp. 556-557); it is one of seven named subspecies of the pallid
blue butterfly in Nevada (Murphy et al. 2006, p. 2). Prior to the 1998
publication of this name, the Sand Mountain blue butterfly had been
considered a potentially distinct subspecies of Euphilotes rita (Austin
1985, p. 105), the name under which it was previously assigned a
Federal Category 2 candidate status (see Previous Federal Action
section).
The Sand Mountain blue butterfly is small with pale blue
coloration. Males have a wingspan that ranges from 10.0 to 11.8
millimeters (mm) (0.39 to 0.46 inches (in)), with an average of 11.1 mm
(0.44 in). The dorsum (back) is pale bluish violet, often whitish
distally, with a narrow (0.5 mm (0.002 in)) black outer margin. There
is usually a series of dots on the hindwing, but sometimes no more than
a terminal line on the forewing. There is generally an indistinct
pinkish to pale orange aurora of moderate width on the posterior
hindwing. At the vein tips on the posterior of both wings, there are
fringes of white with indistinct gray checkering. The bottom surface of
the male abdomen is chalky white. Macules (patches of different
coloration) are small, often nearly obsolete on the hindwing. Females
have a wingspan that ranges from 10.0 to 11.9 mm (0.39 to 0.46 in),
with an average of 10.9 mm (0.43 in). The female dorsum (back) is brown
to tan, and usually pale bluish-gray basally on both wings. The
forewing has a faint brown cell-end bar, while the hindwing has
marginal dots. The forewing apex is usually whitish. The hindwing
aurora is pale orange to pale pink, usually grading to nearly white
distally and not strongly contrasting (Austin 1998, p. 556).
The Sand Mountain blue butterfly is the palest of all Euphilotes.
The ground color of both sexes is considerably paler than that of E.
pallescens ssp. pallescens. The pinkish aurora is unlike that of any
other Euphilotes. The pale bluish-gray wing bases of the female do not
contrast with the distal area of the wing as they do on E. pallescens
ssp. pallescens. The black macules of E. pallescens ssp. arenamontana
tend to be smaller than those of E. pallescens ssp. pallescens (Austin
1998, p. 557).
The species Euphilotes pallescens is distributed discontinuously
from southern and central California (east of the Sierra Nevada)
through the Great Basin of central Nevada and across central and
southern Utah (Pratt 1994, p. 402; Shields 1977). The subspecies known
as the Sand Mountain blue butterfly is known only from Sand Mountain,
Churchill County, Nevada, where it is dependent on its host plant,
Eriogonum nummulare (Kearney buckwheat) (Austin 1998, p. 557; Shields
1977, p. 3), a long-lived, perennial shrub with numerous branches
(Reveal 2002, p. 1), that occurs in scattered sandy locations in
several western States (Welsh et al. 1993, p. 547). Searches have been
conducted within 60 miles (mi) (100 kilometers (km)) of Sand Mountain
in an effort to determine the presence or absence of Kearney buckwheat
occurrences on sand dunes that might be able to sustain occurrences of
Sand Mountain blue butterflies; to date, no additional populations of
Kearney buckwheat have been found (Funari 2004; Caicco 2006a, 2006b).
Kearney buckwheat was reported in 1981 to occur in small numbers along
the eastern edge of Blowsand Mountain, which lies about 12 mi (19.2 km)
southwest of Sand Mountain (The Nature Conservancy 2004), but no plants
were observed during three reconnaissance surveys in 2003 and 2004
(Funari 2004). Many butterflies in the family Lycaenidae have very
limited dispersal distances that revolve intimately around their
patchily distributed host plants (Peterson 1996, p. 1990). Dispersal of
the Sand Mountain blue butterfly has not been studied, but in another
species in the same genus, Euphilotes enoptes, most adults were found
to move less than 1,640 feet (ft) (500 meters (m)) and their dispersal
distance rarely exceeded 0.6 mi (1 km) (Arnold 1983 and Peterson 1994,
as cited in Peterson 1996, p. 1990).
Isolated sand dunes are common throughout the Great Basin, often
associated with depositional areas for windborne sediments derived from
the now dry beds of Pleistocene Epoch lakes; these geologic features
are referred to as pluvial lakes, indicating their origins during the
periods of greater precipitation and lower evaporation typical of the
Pleistocene climate of the Great Basin. Studies of dispersal of the
sand dune-obligate beetle, Eusattus muricatus, widely distributed
throughout the Great Basin and Mojave Deserts, have shown that
populations on dunes separated by approximately 60 mi (100 km)
generally exchange very few migrants, even among dunes within the same
pluvial basin (Britten and Rust 1996, p. 651). Based on these data, the
authors of this study recommended that all dune-obligate populations in
the Great Basin separated by 60 mi (100 km) or more from the nearest
dune within the same pluvial lake basin be considered genetically
isolated (Britten and Rust 1996, p. 651). In fact, taxonomic
distinctions made within Euphilotes pallescens are generally consistent
with this approach, with E. p. ssp. calneva described from sand dunes
in the Honey Lake area of northeastern California and near Sand Pass,
in adjacent Nevada (Emmel and Emmel, pp. 277-282; Brussard 2006, p. 1;
Murphy 2006a), and E. p. ssp. ricei, known only from the Silver State
Sand Dunes, which are north of Winnemucca, Nevada (Austin et al. 2000,
p. 3; Brussard 2006, p. 1; Murphy 2006a); each of these sand dune areas
lies within the Lahontan pluvial basin at a minimum distance of about
120 mi (192 km) from Sand Mountain.
We conclude that it is highly unlikely that the Sand Mountain blue
butterfly occurs at other sites within 60 mi (100 km). Areas within 60
mi (100 km) have been surveyed to various extents with no reported
observations of the butterfly's host plant, Kearney buckwheat. We also
conclude that the subspecies is unlikely to be found at sites located
more than 60 mi (100 km) from Sand Mountain. Any population of
Euphilotes pallescens found at any sites at distances greater than 60
mi (100 km) is most likely to be another subspecies of Euphilotes
pallescens, based on the
[[Page 24256]]
current accepted taxonomy of the species and the likely genetic
isolation of E. pallescens ssp. arenamontana due to its life history,
ecology, and limited dispersal ability. Based on satellite imagery used
to identify dune shrub habitat (BLM 2003, 2004), we estimate that the
current range of the subspecies is approximately 1000 acres (405 ha),
within which Kearney buckwheat is scattered in patches and is a
dominant or co-dominant shrub on approximately 500-600 ac (202-243 ha)
(BLM 2006b). Thus, while Sand Mountain blue butterflies may be present
anywhere within their entire 1,000 ac (405 ha) range, only 50 to 60
percent of this range is thought to have the Kearney buckwheat shrubs
on which they depend.
All Euphilotes larvae are believed to diapause by burying into the
soil 12.7 to 38.1 inches (in) (5 to 15 centimeters (cm)) prior to
pupation, which may be delayed for up to 6 years depending on climatic
conditions (Pratt 1988, p. 319). When this period of diapause is
broken, the pupae begin development and eventually emerge as adults
from beneath the soil. The ability of larvae to suspend growth for
varying periods of time may be part of the reason that the genus
Euphilotes has high genetic diversity (Pratt 1988, pp. 427-428),
presumably because it increases the likelihood for random mating.
Because of the small size of the Sand Mountain blue butterfly and
the frequent high winds typical of the Sand Mountain area, it is likely
that adult butterflies spend most of their life sheltered within the
canopy of Kearney buckwheat plants (Murphy 2006a). Males of the genus
exhibit a type of mate-searching behavior known as patrolling, which
involves active searching for potential mates (Pratt 1988, p. 371).
Kearney buckwheat typically occurs at Sand Mountain as a dominant
or co-dominant with other shrubs on less active, smaller vegetated
dunes around the periphery of the main dune (The Nature Conservancy
2004, pp. 24-26). Kearney buckwheat flowers and seeds are the sole food
source for the larvae (Pratt 1988, p. 64) and an important nectar
source for adults during their flight period (Murphy et al. 2006, p.
1).
The flowering period of the Kearney buckwheat at Sand Mountain
begins in late June to early July and continues through September
(Reveal 2002, p. 2). Like many species of wild buckwheat (Meyer 2006),
individual Kearney buckwheat plants may be in continuous flower for
well over a month (Caicco 2006c). Individual flowers within a cluster
bloom in succession so that after the initial bloom, both seeds and
flowers are present for extended periods (Caicco 2006c).
The Sand Mountain blue butterfly has one brood from mid July to
mid-September (Austin 1998, p. 557; Shields 1977, p. 5), a period that
coincides with the flowering/fruiting period of Kearney buckwheat.
During the summer of 2006, scientists from the University of Nevada
initiated a research effort to determine the distributional
relationship between the butterfly, its host plant, and the dune shrub
community. Sand Mountain blue butterflies were counted along a 17,061
ft (5,200 m) transect, with five surveys made between July 15 and
August 9, 2006 (Murphy et al. 2006, p. 4). The number of Sand Mountain
blue butterflies counted along the transects increased over the
duration of the sampling period; because no decline was detected in the
number of butterflies counted over that time period, researchers were
unable to determine the precise length of the 2006 flight season
(Murphy et al. 2006, p. 5 and Figure 2).
The researchers found that butterflies occurred across the entire
extent of their study area, although, regardless of the sampling date,
butterflies were always more abundant in the northeastern portions of
the study than in the southwestern areas (Murphy et al. 2006, Figure
2). The researchers reported that ``as the season matured, multiple
[Sand Mountain blue] butterflies were observed flying around nearly
every buckwheat plant at nearly every site on nearly every site visit.
Even individual buckwheat shrubs, which were isolated from others by as
many as hundreds of meters due to devegetation from vehicle activities,
were visited by [Sand Mountain] blue butterflies'' (Murphy et al. 2006,
pp. 5-6).
The abundance of the butterfly was closely correlated with Kearney
buckwheat flower phenology and abundance. Early in the flight season,
many flowers were unopened; flowers sequentially opened as the sampling
period progressed toward August, although some unopened buds remained
after sampling was terminated (Murphy et al. 2006, p. 6). Butterfly
abundance was strongly correlated with both the number of buckwheat
inflorescences (flowers) and the abundance of the Kearney buckwheat
itself (Murphy et al. 2006, p. 6 and Figure 6).
The researchers also found that the abundance of Kearney buckwheat
varies considerably throughout the dune shrub habitat, with higher host
plant and butterfly densities in some areas. At a number of their
sample locations, Kearney buckwheat was the most abundant shrub in the
dune shrub community (Murphy et al. 2006, p. 6 and Figure 5). The
buckwheat was usually among the dominant shrub species both along the
transect itself and within individual plots (Murphy et al. 2006, p. 6
and Figure 6).
The scientists made three conclusions from the data they collected
during the 2006 flight season of the Sand Mountain blue butterfly.
First, there was a large number of Sand Mountain blue butterflies--
``perhaps hundreds of thousands''--a number ``substantially above a
level that would indicate a need to carry out in situ or other actions
to enhance population size above a critical minimum'' (Murphy et al.
2006, p. 7). Second, the butterfly appears to co-occur with its host
plant across the entirety of the shrub's range at Sand Mountain, and
the habitat quality for the butterfly increases in parallel with the
shrub density from southwest to northeast across the site (Murphy et
al. 2006, pp. 7-8). Third, the Kearney buckwheat occurs in a dune shrub
community with abundant Atriplex canescens (four-wing saltbush) at
lower elevations that transitions into a community with a more diverse
assemblage of shrub species at higher elevations (Murphy et al. 2006,
Figure 5). Along this gradient, the abundance of the Kearney buckwheat
and, therefore, the density of butterflies varied in parallel (Murphy
et al. 2006, p. 8).
Conservation Efforts
On August 18, 2004, the Lahontan Valley Environmental Alliance
(LVEA), at the request of its board of directors, initiated a public
planning effort to develop a conservation plan for the Sand Mountain
blue butterfly. The LVEA was created in 1993 by an agreement among
local governments and agencies to educate the public and coordinate
efforts to protect the natural resources and agricultural-based economy
of the communities in Churchill County. Over the past 13 years, the
LVEA has worked with various interests to build knowledge and to
improve communications among the communities, stakeholder groups, local
governments, and State and Federal agencies involved in, or affected
by, the natural resources issues of the region (LVEA 2006, p. 1).
Through the public planning effort described above, the LVEA
organized and facilitated a working group to identify and address the
needs of the Sand Mountain blue butterfly. This working group met
regularly over the subsequent 21 months. In accordance
[[Page 24257]]
with the Nevada Open Meeting Law (Nevada Revised Statute, Chapter 241),
all meetings were open to the public and noticed in advance with
agendas posted in public facilities (Nevada Open Meeting Law Manual
2005). Meeting notes are posted on the LVEA Web site (go to https://www.lvea.org/workgrp.htm and click on the link for this species and
then click on the link for meeting notes). Participants in the working
group included representatives from the LVEA, the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM), the Service, the City of Fallon, Churchill County,
the Fallon Paiute Shoshone Tribe (Tribe), the Friends of Sand Mountain
(FOSM), the California Off-Road Vehicle Association (CORVA), the United
States Naval Air Station Fallon, and private citizens (LVEA 2006, pp.
1-2).
The purpose of this effort was to develop a Conservation Plan to
provide long term protection for the Sand Mountain blue butterfly and
its habitat, particularly, its host plant, Kearney buckwheat (Eriogonum
nummulare). Final agreement on the Conservation Plan was reached on May
3, 2006, and it was signed by representatives of the BLM, the Service,
the Tribe, CORVA, FOSM, and Churchill County in August and September,
2006. The Conservation Plan identifies specific actions that are
necessary to: (1) Eliminate or reduce known threats, (2) incorporate
species conservation measures into planning and management activities,
(3) educate permittees and recreation users, and (4) monitor species
status trends and habitat quality and requirements.
A designated route system, a conservation action identified in the
Conservation Plan (LVEA 2006, pp. 14-19), has been implemented by the
BLM at Sand Mountain to protect the habitat of the Sand Mountain blue
butterfly from further damage and destruction by off-road vehicles (72
FR 12187, March 15, 2007). We used criteria specified in our Policy for
Evaluation of Conservation Efforts When Making Listing Decisions (PECE)
(68 FR 15100-15115, March 28, 2003) to evaluate the certainty of
effectiveness of this designated route system and determined there is a
high level of certainty of effectiveness of the designated route
system; consequently, we can consider this action in making a
determination as to whether the Sand Mountain blue butterfly meets the
Service's definition of a threatened or endangered species (Service
2007).
Summary of Factors Affecting the Species
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and implementing regulations
at 50 CFR Part 424 set forth procedures for adding species to the
Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. In making this
finding, we summarize below information regarding the status of this
species in relation to the five factors provided in section 4(a)(1) of
the Act. In making our 12-month finding, we have considered and
evaluated all scientific and commercial information in our files,
including relevant information received during the comment period that
ended October 10, 2006 (71 FR 44988).
Factor A: The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or
Curtailment of the Species' Habitat or Range
The Sand Mountain blue butterfly is known only from Sand Mountain
in Churchill County, Nevada, where it is dependent on its larval host
plant, Kearney buckwheat (Austin 1998). The entire Sand Mountain dune
system is estimated to extend over 2,581 ac (1,044 ha), but Kearney
buckwheat is not evenly distributed throughout this entire area;
Kearney buckwheat plants are typically found on peripheral, more
vegetated dunes, and are particularly common on the smaller dunes to
the northeast of the main dune (BLM 2006a, Map 1). In most areas,
Kearney buckwheat is a component of a diverse dune shrub habitat
comprised of up to 13 shrub species (BLM 2004). An estimated 1,000 ac
(405 ha) of dune shrub habitat with varying amounts of Kearney
buckwheat existed in 2003 (BLM 2006b, p. 2). The current distribution
of the shrubs, as described above, reflects both their natural
adaptation to specific site conditions and the cumulative effect of 25
years of off-road vehicle use.
A portion of the Sand Mountain dune system lies within the Sand
Mountain Recreation Area (SMRA), a BLM designation that encompasses
4,795 ac (1,940 ha), and is about 1.0 mi (1.6 km) wide and 3.5 mi (5.6
km) long. The specific BLM designation of the SMRA for recreational use
does not limit off-road or other forms of recreation only to this area.
Furthermore, the BLM designation restricts non-recreation type
activities, such as mineral mining, from occurring within the boundary
of the designation.
The recreational use designation for the SMRA was first established
in 1968 (BLM 1985, p. 4). By 1973, recreational use had reached 32,254
visitors annually (BLM 1985, p. 5). The first approved management plan
for the area was developed more than a decade later (BLM 1985). Based
on BLM information, we estimate that 40 percent, or 400 ac (162 ha) of
the total of 1,000 ac (405 ha), of the Kearney buckwheat habitat occurs
within the designated boundary of the SMRA (BLM 2006a, Map 1). The
remaining estimated 60 percent of the Kearney buckwheat habitat occurs
on BLM land outside of the eastern SMRA boundary. Until recently, off-
road vehicle use was limited on only about 40 ac (16 ha) of the SMRA;
no Kearney buckwheat plants occur in this limited-use area. The rest of
the SMRA was open to unrestricted off-road vehicle use, as were all
adjacent areas of the dune system.
As early as 1985, motorized recreation by motorcycles, four-wheel
drive vehicles, three wheelers, and dune buggies, accounted for over 90
percent of the total visits to the SMRA (BLM 1985). Annual visitor use
at the SMRA increased from about 16,000 persons in 1981 to about 65,000
persons in 2005 and was expected to increase again in 2006 (BLM 2006c).
Visitation tends to peak on holiday weekends; for example, more than
5,000 people were present over the Labor Day weekend in 2006 (Nevada
Appeal 2006, p. 1). In recent years, however, there has been a pattern
of increased use on non-holiday weekends (BLM 2006c).
The BLM's Carson City Field Office has documented the expansion of
an off-road vehicle route system based on an analysis of satellite
imagery from 1978, 1994, 1999, and 2002; the route system has grown
from about 20 mi (32 km) of off-road vehicle trails in 1981 to about
200 mi (320 km) in 2003 (BLM 2003). In addition to documenting the
overall proliferation of off-road vehicle routes, the imagery clearly
shows an increase in the amount of habitat fragmentation and an
expansion of the off-road vehicle route system from the more accessible
southern end of the main dune into dune shrub habitat adjacent to the
SMRA toward the north and east that had been relatively undisturbed as
recently as 1994 (BLM 2003).
Based on the trail proliferation visible in the satellite imagery
from 1978 to 2003 (BLM 2003, 2004), we estimate that the shrub habitat
on which the Sand Mountain blue butterfly depends may have been reduced
by as much as 50 percent over the past 25 years. At most, 1,000 ac (405
ha) of dune shrub habitat remains, and within that area 500 ac (202 ha)
to 600 ac (243 ha) may have Kearney buckwheat as a dominant or co-
dominant shrub (BLM 2006c). We consider the entire 1,000 ac (405 ha) of
dune shrub habitat to be the current range of the Sand Mountain blue
butterfly; this includes non-Kearney buckwheat habitat through which
the species passes, including areas devoid
[[Page 24258]]
of vegetation such as trails, as well as areas that support the Kearney
buckwheat shrubs on which the butterfly depends for completion of its
life cycle. Because the amount of Kearney buckwheat within a patch of
dune shrub habitat varies, no precise data on the total number of
individual Kearney buckwheat shrubs is available. We also have no
reliable estimate of the historical distribution of the Kearney
buckwheat at Sand Mountain other than an anecdotal report of a minor
amount of vegetation having been lost along the periphery of the dune
(Guiliani 1977); therefore, we consider the existing estimate of 1,000
ac (405 ha) of dune shrub habitat to approximate the historic range of
the Sand Mountain blue butterfly.
The Sand Mountain dune system was included in an initial
conservation assessment of blowing sand mountains prepared by The
Nature Conservancy (2004). This conservation assessment ranked the
long-term (defined as greater than 100 years) viability of the Sand
Mountain dune ecosystem based on size, condition, and landscape
context, using information from the existing literature and expert
opinion (The Nature Conservancy 2004, p. 29). Each of these factors had
the potential to be ranked as very good, good, fair, or poor based on
specific viability criteria (The Nature Conservancy 2004, p. 35). Size
was ranked as good if there was 1,236 ac-2,471 ac (500-1,000 ha) of
connected habitat outside of the area heavily affected by off-road
vehicle use (The Nature Conservancy 2004, p. 35). The condition rank
was based on three criteria: (1) Whether invasive plants were present
that could artificially stabilize dune dynamics; (2) whether other
alterations affecting dune mobility, such as vegetation mortality or
artificial mobilization of stable sands, were occurring; and (3),
whether there was natural recruitment by key plant species. The
condition was assigned a fair rank based on the fact that only the
criterion regarding the presence of invasive plants was met (The Nature
Conservancy 2004, p. 35). The landscape context was ranked very good
based on the fact that the connection to the current sand source
remained intact (The Nature Conservancy 2004, p. 35). Overall, the
long-term viability of the Sand Mountain dune system was ranked
marginally good, but it was noted that the ``rapid trend towards an
increasingly degraded condition of this area is of considerable
concern'' (The Nature Conservancy 2004, p. 35). The assessment noted
that the condition of the area was primarily affected by off-road
vehicle use, which was of particular concern because of the small
overall size of the area and the likelihood of increasing use levels at
the SMRA (The Nature Conservancy 2004, p. 36). It should be emphasized
that this ranking was for the Sand Mountain dune ecosystem as a whole
and none of the viability criteria evaluated specifically addressed
either the status of the Sand Mountain blue butterfly or the Kearney
buckwheat. The relevance of this report to the dune shrub habitat lies
in its assessment that the process that supplies the source of sand to
the ecosystem remains intact, and the corroboration that it provides of
the threats posed by off-road vehicles and invasive weeds.
There have been several observations over the past 25 years on the
effects of off-road vehicles on the Sand Mountain dune shrub habitat,
on the Kearney buckwheat, and on the relationship between the buckwheat
habitat and the Sand Mountain blue butterfly. These include: (1) A
letter documenting the extirpation of all plant life from an area 150
ft (46 m) wide along the edge of the main dune over a period of several
years (Giuliani 1977); (2) a memorandum from the Service to the BLM
reporting that up to half of 58 individual Kearney buckwheat plants
inspected on the south side of the mountain had been crushed and broken
off at the ground surface and were either dead or in the process of
resprouting from the rootstocks (Service 1994); (3) a mid-1990's report
to the Service from a research scientist at the University of Nevada,
Reno, stating that ``as long as the foodplant remains as abundant as it
is now in the overall dune area, we saw no particular threat to the
continued existence of the butterfly'' (Brussard 1995).
In our 90-day finding on the petition to list the Sand Mountain
blue butterfly (71 FR 44988, August 8, 2006), we concluded that the
petition provided substantial information to support the assertion that
off-road vehicle use at Sand Mountain presents direct and indirect
threats to the dune shrub habitat with Kearney buckwheat on which the
Sand Mountain blue butterfly depends. In particular, we based our
conclusion on the following--data provided by the petitioners that
reliably documented a progressive loss of dune shrub habitat within the
past 25 years, continuing fragmentation of dune shrub habitat, and an
ongoing expansion of the route system into dune shrub habitat
previously considered secure for the butterfly (BLM 2003); data that
documents annual visitor use has more than doubled and the route system
has expanded from 20 mi (32 km) to over 200 mi (320 km) over this time
period (BLM 2003); an estimate that 1,000 to 1,600 ac (405 to 647 ha)
of dune shrub habitat remained in which Kearney buckwheat is a
component (BLM 2004, p. 4); and our estimate, based on satellite
imagery prepared by BLM (2003), that about 50 percent of the dune shrub
habitat within the species current range may have been destroyed or
altered over this 25-year time span.
The scientific literature documents the effects of off-road
vehicles on terrestrial habitats in arid environments, including sand
dunes. Effects include significant reductions in the number, density,
and cover of plants, including shrubby perennials (Bury and Luckenbach
1983) and direct impacts on desert vegetation (Stebbins 1995; Lathrop
1983; Lathrop and Rowlands 1983). While none of these citations
provides specific evidence of a direct significant threat to the Sand
Mountain blue butterfly, the papers by Bury and Luckenbach (1983, pp.
211-213), Lathrop (1983, pp. 157-164), Lathrop and Rowlands (1983, pp.
138-141, 144-146), and Stebbins (1995, pp. 471-472) do provide
documentation that off-road vehicles can damage and destroy plants and
result in significant decreases in plant numbers, density, and cover,
including shrubby perennials at various sites in the western North
American deserts. Specific observations of such impacts at Sand
Mountain have been reported previously (Guiliani 1977; Service 1994;
The Nature Conservancy 2004, p. 36; BLM 2006e).
The scientific literature provides documentation that natural
recovery rates of perennial vegetative cover damaged by off-road
vehicles in arid environments can take decades and, in some cases, may
require centuries (Lathrop and Rowlands 1983; Kockelman 1983; Webb and
Wilshire 1983). The papers by Lathrop and Rowlands (1983, p. 143) and
Kockelman (1983, p. 3) provide a timeframe for understanding natural
recovery rates of habitats damaged by off-road vehicle use in arid
environments. We previously found that these studies provided reliable
documentation that even if off-road vehicle use were to be eliminated
from Sand Mountain, natural recovery of the Kearney buckwheat habitat
may take decades, a timeframe that might pose an indirect threat to the
long-term viability of an obligate butterfly species that must
reproduce annually and relies on the buckwheat as a host plant. We now
have evidence, however, from the first comprehensive assessment of the
status of the Sand Mountain blue butterfly to indicate that
[[Page 24259]]
a large viable population of the species exists despite the past loss
of habitat; moreover, the presence of butterflies at even small,
relatively isolated patches of Kearney buckwheat suggests that the
butterfly is not particularly sensitive to habitat fragmentation
(Murphy et al. 2006, pp. 5-6).
Furthermore, as noted in the Biology and Distribution section,
since the publication of the 90-day finding, we have obtained new
information on the abundance and status of the Sand Mountain blue
butterfly and the potential threats of habitat loss and fragmentation
to the species. Researchers collected data along several permanent
transects installed throughout the distribution of the dune shrub
habitat at Sand Mountain from July 15 through August 9, 2006 (Murphy et
al. 2006, pp. 4-5). The scientists estimated that hundreds of thousands
of adult Sand Mountain blue butterflies may have emerged during the
2006 flight season (Murphy et al. 2006, p. 7). Adult butterflies were
associated with nearly all Kearney buckwheat shrubs along the transects
and butterflies were distributed across the entire available habitat
area, even with individual buckwheat shrubs isolated from others by
hundreds of meters (Murphy et al. 2006, p. 6).
The scientists concluded the Sand Mountain blue butterfly numbers
were ``substantially above a level that would indicate a need to carry
out in situ or other actions to enhance population size above a
critical minimum'' (Murphy et al. 2006, p. 7). Annual population
numbers may vary considerably depending on local weather conditions,
and the researchers note that the large population in 2006 may
represent an atypical spike in the butterfly population (Murphy et al.
2006, p. 9). However, even if this number represents an upper
population estimate, we believe that the very large number of
butterflies observed during the recent survey clearly shows that the
remaining Kearney buckwheat habitat is currently sufficient to support
a viable population of the Sand Mountain blue butterfly.
Although sufficient habitat remains to support a robust population
of the Sand Mountain blue butterfly (Murphy et al. 2006, p. 7),
researchers have cautioned that ``the sizable Sand Mountain blue
population notwithstanding, continued degradation of the shrub
community and losses of Kearney buckwheat will ultimately lead to the
elimination of the butterfly'' (Murphy et al. 2006, p. 9). To reduce
the significance of the threat posed to the Sand Mountain blue
butterfly by continued degradation of the shrub community and losses of
Kearney buckwheat, on December 12, 2006, the BLM implemented an
emergency restriction on motorized use on 3,985 ac (1,612 ha) of land
to prevent further adverse effects on the habitat of the Sand Mountain
blue butterfly (BLM 2006b); the closure notice was published in the
Federal Register on March 15, 2007 (72 FR 12187). This action, which
reduces the route system both within and outside of the SMRA from an
estimated 200 mi (320 km) to 21.5 mi (34.4 km), has returned the route
mileage to about the 1980 level. The route designation system adopted
by BLM is consistent with the Conservation Plan (LVEA 2006) and the
restrictions are described by BLM as necessary to prevent further
adverse effects to the habitat of the Sand Mountain blue butterfly (72
FR 12187). The route designation system is specifically designed to
reduce threats from recreational use, weed infestation, fire, and the
reduction of site potential, thereby furthering the objectives of
eliminating off-road vehicle incursions into dune shrub and butterfly
habitat; preventing route increases in dune shrub habitat; minimizing
shrub damage and loss; and allowing for habitat regeneration and
restoration (LVEA 2006, p. 15). The emergency restriction will remain
in effect until the Resource Management Plan (RMP) has been updated to
address the long-term management of the wildlife, cultural, vegetation,
and recreational resources in the area or until the Field Office
Manager determines it is no longer needed (BLM 2006b, p. 1; 72 FR
12187, March 15, 2007). Every indication we have from the BLM at both
the field office and state office level is that the emergency
restriction will remain in place until made permanent through an
amendment to the RMP. The RMP must be updated in compliance with the
Federal Land Management and Policy Act, the National Environmental
Policy Act, and other applicable laws and policies which have, among
other requirements, opportunity for public and agency review and
comment. Under the terms of the Conservation Plan monitoring of
compliance with the designated route system will continue and results
will be reviewed every six months; areas in which non-compliance
exceeds a specified threshold will be fenced (LVEA 2006, p. 60).
The Conservation Plan also includes increased law enforcement to
ensure compliance in the use of the designated route system, especially
on heavy use weekends and randomly at other times. Through an agreement
with Churchill County, which is a party to the Plan, local law
enforcement staff will be used in the camping areas to allow BLM Park
Rangers to patrol the route system and other areas (LVEA 2006, p. 20).
Further, any person who fails to comply with the BLM restriction order
may be subject to imprisonment for not more than 12 months or a fine in
accordance with the applicable provisions of 18 U.S.C. 3571, or both
(BLM 2006b, p. 3; 72 FR 12187, March 15, 2007). A handout was given to
recreational users over Labor Day weekend, 2006, informing them of the
completion and approval of the Conservation Plan, the upcoming
mandatory route system, and the importance of demonstrating success in
protecting the habitat for the Sand Mountain blue butterfly (BLM
2006d). A variety of additional public education activities are
provided for in the Conservation Plan, including interpretive,
cautionary and regulatory signage throughout the SMRA and dune system,
as well as education pamphlets, brochures, and information available on
Web sites and other forms of media (LVEA 2006, p. 21-24).
Implementation of the limited off-road vehicle route system is
already occurring. We have evaluated the certainty of effectiveness of
the designated route system using criteria specified in PECE (68 FR
15115, March 28, 2003). Based on our evaluation, we have determined
that this conservation action satisfies all of the PECE criteria for
the certainty of effectiveness (Service 2007). We conclude that the
off-road vehicle route system is sufficiently certain to be implemented
and effective so as to have reduced the present and future threat of
destruction, modification, or curtailment of the habitat or range of
the Sand Mountain blue butterfly to a level such that off-road vehicle
impacts to habitat are not a basis for finding that listing is
warranted.
Other components of the Conservation Plan have also been initiated
related to research (LVEA 2006, pp. 27-28). These include mapping of
current Kearney buckwheat and invasive weeds distribution; remote
sensing of habitat characteristics, trends, and route analyses; studies
of the Sand Mountain blue butterfly population status and habitat
requirements; population dynamics of the Kearney buckwheat; and Kearney
buckwheat propagation and transplantation studies. Kearney buckwheat
habitat and invasive weeds mapping and remote sensing analysis of
habitat characteristics, trends, and route analyses have been in
progress for several years. The BLM has secured funding through grants
to purchase additional imagery to continue
[[Page 24260]]
the trend analysis in 2006, 2009, and 2012 (LVEA 2006, p. 28). Research
on the population status of the butterfly was initiated during the 2006
adult flight season by scientists from the University of Nevada, Reno,
with funding through the Nevada Biodiversity Initiative; these data
provide a baseline against which future fluctuations in the butterfly
population can be compared (Murphy et al. 2006). Pilot studies of the
population dynamics of the Kearney buckwheat have been initiated (LVEA
2006, p. 27), and seed of the Kearney buckwheat has previously been
collected through the BLM Seeds of Success program. Propagation studies
using these seeds, and other seeds to be collected on site, are to be
conducted by the Natural Resource Conservation Service's newly
established Fallon Plant Materials Center, which will also conduct
transplantation studies of propagated seedlings into disturbed habitats
at Sand Mountain (Tonenna 2006). While we did not rely on them making
this finding, we recognized that these research components will both
inform and facilitate efforts to recover damaged butterfly habitat at
Sand Mountain as well as contribute to sound scientific data for future
management actions.
In our 90-day finding, we addressed the claim by the petitioners
that the constant disruption of the soil surface makes it difficult or
impossible for seeds of the Kearney buckwheat to germinate and for
seedlings to establish and concluded that the petitioners had provided
no documentation for this claim (71 FR 44991). The Service has since
made field visits to Sand Mountain and, while we have no quantitative
data on this matter, we observed an absence of Kearney buckwheat
seedlings in areas of high off-road vehicle use. We also observed
numerous Kearney buckwheat seedlings in areas that received little, if
any, off-road vehicle use (Caicco 2006c). These observations are
consistent with previous reports (Tonenna 2003 as cited in The Nature
Conservancy 2004, p. 37). We believe, based on these observations, that
the constant disruption of the sand surface in heavily used areas may
interfere with the establishment of Kearney buckwheat and could
potentially pose a long-term threat to shrub regeneration and,
therefore, to the long-term viability of the butterfly itself. However,
the restriction of off-road vehicle recreation to the designated route
system substantially reduces the magnitude and imminence of the threat
to the regeneration of Kearney buckwheat. As described above,
sufficient habitat remains at Sand Mountain to support a large
population of the Sand Mountain blue butterfly, and the reduction in
the level of threat due to the designated route system, over the long-
term, ensures that natural shrub regeneration and/or active restoration
will maintain sufficient habitat to ensure the viability of the Sand
Mountain blue butterfly.
Although not identified as a threat by the petitioners, trampling
or grazing of buckwheat plants and/or seedlings by livestock was
identified by the working group as a potential threat to the habitat of
the butterfly, although it was acknowledged that more information was
needed to determine the level of threat (LVEA 2006, pp. 11-12). Dune
shrub habitat with and without Kearney buckwheat occurs within portions
of two range allotments, where it comprises 1,357 ac (549 ha), or 2
percent, of the Salt Wells Allotment, and 331 ac (134 ha), or 0.5
percent, of the Frenchmen Flat Allotment. The stocking values are set
at 270 cattle and 1,626 animal unit months (AUMS) from October 15
through April 15 for Salt Wells and 403 cattle and 2,001 AUMS from
October 15 through April 15 for Frenchmen Flat. We are not aware of any
evidence that supports trampling or grazing as a significant threat to
the Kearney buckwheat.
Summary of Factor A
Biological data on the Sand Mountain blue butterfly collected by
researchers document that hundreds of thousands may have been present
during the 2006 adult flight season. These data show that a large,
robust population of the Sand Mountain blue butterfly remains despite
the estimated loss of as much as 50 percent of its habitat. The only
known threat of potential significance in the foreseeable future is the
destruction by off-road vehicles of the dune shrub habitat containing
the Kearney buckwheat, upon which the butterfly depends for its
survival. Habitat destruction is a gradual and cumulative process that
affects not only mature shrubs, but also likely disrupts their
reproductive capacity by constant disturbance of the sand surface,
thereby preventing seedling establishment. The shrubs, however, are
long-lived and the habitat remains sufficiently extensive such that the
threat to the butterfly does not cause it to be in danger of extinction
nor likely to become in danger of extinction in the foreseeable future.
Further, an emergency restriction on motorized use on 3,985 ac (1,613
ha) to protect the habitat of the butterfly went into effect on
December 12, 2006 and a closure notice regarding these restrictions was
published in the Federal Register on March 15, 2007 (72 FR 12187). The
implementation of this emergency restriction, and the high level of
certainty of its effectiveness, has substantially reduced the magnitude
and significance of any long-term threat posed by off-road vehicles to
the habitat and viability of the Sand Mountain blue butterfly.
Therefore, we conclude that the Sand Mountain blue butterfly is not
now, or in the foreseeable future, threatened by destruction,
modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range.
Factor B: Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
We are not aware of any scientific or commercial data that indicate
overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes poses a threat to the species.
Factor C: Disease or Predation
We are not aware of any scientific or commercial data that
indicates either disease or predation poses a threat to the species.
Factor D: Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
In our 90-day finding on the petition to list the Sand Mountain
blue butterfly, we found that the petitioners had provided substantial
information that existing regulatory mechanisms may be inadequate to
prevent the progressive decline of the habitat on which the butterfly
depends (page 44991 of 71 FR 44988, August 8, 2006). We based our
determination on evidence that the public had raised the issue of the
potential impacts of off-road recreational use on the invertebrate
fauna of the dune system over 25 years ago (Hardy 1978); the inactivity
of a monitoring plan initiated in the mid-1990's after personnel
changes in both the BLM and Service; the lack of action on a 2002
proposed closure of 1,000 ac (405 ha) of dune shrub habitat by a group
comprised of BLM and Service staff, representatives from conservation
and off-road vehicle groups, and representatives of the Fallon-Paiute
Shoshone Tribe; and the lack of compliance with a voluntary route
system implemented by the BLM in 2004 that was intended to protect and
restore the sand dune ecosystem.
The inadequacy of the voluntary off-road vehicle route system is
well documented in a monitoring report on compliance with the
encouraged route system for the period 2003-2006 (BLM 2006e). High
levels of noncompliance occurred from the onset of implementation of
the voluntary system,
[[Page 24261]]
and the number of incursions into habitat outside of the encouraged
routes increased in 2006 (BLM 2006e, pp. 3-4). Multiple incursions into
habitat outside of the encouraged route system typically occurred at
any given point, so that the cumulative impacts were considered to be
four times greater than the number of noncompliance points (BLM 2006e,
p. 6.). BLM's information also indicates a strong relationship between
the number of visitors and the number of noncompliance points (BLM
2006e, p. 7). Moreover, about 50 percent of all noncompliance points
occurred at or near red carsonite posts installed to alert riders that
travel was discouraged in areas behind the posts (BLM 2006e, p. 8).
Overall, under the voluntary system 98 percent of all existing routes
continued to be used and new routes were created, indicating an ongoing
expansion of habitat degradation with little or no restoration of
previously degraded areas (BLM 2006e, p. 13).
On December 12, 2006, the BLM implemented an emergency restriction
on motorized use on 3,985 ac (1,613 ha) of land to prevent further
adverse effects on the habitat of the Sand Mountain blue butterfly (BLM
2006b; 72 FR 12187, March 15, 2007). This action, which reduced the
route system from an estimated 200 mi (320 km) to 21.5 mi (34.4 km),
has returned the designated route mileage to about the 1980 level. The
emergency restriction affects certain public lands within Sections 13,
14, 16, 21 through 24, 28, 29, 32, and 33, of Township 17 North, Range
32 East (Mt. Diablo Meridian) (72 FR 12187). This action restricts
motorized vehicle use to selected existing routes that generally lie on
the periphery of the Sand Mountain blue butterfly habitat, although
several existing routes remain open to motorized use that cross between
existing patches of dune shrub habitat; the designated routes were
selected to prevent further adverse effects to the habitat of the Sand
Mountain blue butterfly while maintaining recreational use at the SMRA.
This action is consistent with the Conservation Plan (LVEA 2006) and is
specifically designed to address threats from recreational use, weed
infestation, fire, and the reduction of site potential, thereby
furthering the objectives of eliminating or reducing the number of off-
road vehicle incursions into dune shrub and butterfly habitat;
eliminate route increase in dune shrub habitat; eliminate shrub damage
and loss; and allow for habitat regeneration (LVEA 2006, p. 15). The
emergency restriction will remain in effect until the Resource
Management Plan has been updated to address the long-term management of
the wildlife, cultural, vegetation, and recreational resources in the
area or until the Field Office Manager determines it is no longer
needed (BLM 2006b, p. 1; 72 FR 12187, March 15, 2007). Every indication
we have from the BLM at both the field office and state office level is
that the emergency restriction will remain in place until made
permanent through an amendment to the RMP.
The Conservation Plan also provides for increased law enforcement,
especially on heavy use weekends and randomly at other times; through
an agreement with Churchill County, which is a party to the Plan, local
law enforcement staff will be used in the camping areas to allow BLM
Park Rangers to patrol the route system and other areas (LVEA 2006, p.
20). In addition, any person who fails to comply with this restriction
order may be subject to imprisonment for not more than 12 months or a
fine in accordance with the applicable provisions of 18 U.S.C. 3571, or
both (BLM 2006b, p. 3; 72 FR 12187, March 15, 2007). A handout was
given to recreational users over Labor Day weekend, 2006, informing
them of the completion and approval of the Conservation Plan, the
upcoming mandatory route system, and the importance of demonstrating
success in protecting the habitat for the Sand Mountain blue butterfly
(BLM 2006d).
The Conservation Plan includes provisions for regular reporting on
progress of implementation and effectiveness of various actions taken
pursuant to the plan (LVEA 2006, p. 30). This includes provisions for
regularly scheduled meetings of the parties to the plan, at which an
evaluation of the implementation progress and effectiveness of the plan
(including the route system and its enforcement) will be reviewed and,
if necessary, modifications made and adaptive management actions
initiated. The first meeting of the parties since the closure notice
was put into effect occurred on March 15, 2007. Implementation progress
was reviewed, the signage and fencing strategy and funding
considerations were discussed, and the next meeting was scheduled for
May 10, 2007. The agenda for the latter meeting will include further
discussion of the fencing strategy and the scheduling of a site visit
to discuss fence placement along key route segments. At every six-month
meeting, the implementation success of the conservation actions will be
evaluated, the success or failure of the objectives of each strategy
will be determined and an adaptive management plan will be triggered,
if appropriate. At annual meetings, the long-term monitoring will be
analyzed and continuation or modification of the plan will be
determined, based on the triggers for overall plan success. We note
also that BLM has demonstrated their commitment to monitor the
situation and to take appropriate action, as illustrated by BLM's
adoption of the mandatory route system based on monitoring of the
voluntary route system that previously was in place.
As described above (see discussion of Factor A), we reviewed the
route system in accordance with PECE and found that all of the criteria
for certainty of effectiveness are met, and concluded there is a high
level of certainty of effectiveness of the route system (Service 2007).
We conclude that the emergency restriction on motorized vehicle use has
established an adequate regulatory mechanism to protect the existing
Kearney buckwheat habitat which, as noted above, remains sufficient to
support a large, viable population of the Sand Mountain blue butterfly
(Murphy et al. 2007, p. 7).
Summary of Factor D
Unrestricted off-road vehicle recreation at Sand Mountain has been
the primary cause of the gradual process of destruction and
modification of the dune shrub habitat of the Sand Mountain blue
butterfly over the past two decades and remains the only threat of
potential significance to the species in the foreseeable future.
However, we have determined that the implementation and effectiveness
of a mandatory, enforceable route system that restricts travel within
the dune shrub habitat adequately addresses this potential threat by
eliminating or greatly reducing further habitat deterioration and
allowing for habitat recovery within closed areas. We believe that the
strengthened regulatory approach and increased emphasis on encouraging
compliance with the mandatory route system has substantially reduced
the magnitude and imminence of the threat of off-road recreational use
to the Kearney buckwheat habitat, which currently remains sufficient to
support a large, viable population of the Sand Mountain blue butterfly.
Therefore, we have determined that the inadequacy of existing
mechanisms does not currently constitute a threat to the Sand Mountain
blue butterfly.
Factor E: Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting the Continued
Existence of the Species
Several other natural or manmade factors have been identified as
potential
[[Page 24262]]
threats to the Sand Mountain blue butterfly, including invasive weeds
(LVEA 2006, p. 10; The Nature Conservancy 2004, pp. 49-52; Murphy et
al. 2006, p. 7 and Figure 7), wildfire (LVEA 2006, pp. 13-14; Murphy et
al. 2006, p. 9); climate change (LVEA 2006, p. 14; Murphy et al. 2006,
p. 9), camping (LVEA 2006, p. 11), hiking (LVEA 2006, p. 14), horseback
riding (LVEA 2006, p. 14), pollution (LVEA 2006, p. 14), and military
action (LVEA 2006, p. 14). In addition, in our 90-day petition finding,
we acknowledged that while large fluctuations in size typical of insect
populations may make a species with an extremely limited distribution,
such as the Sand Mountain blue butterfly, more susceptible to
extinction (Ehrlich 1992), we are aware of no information that large
population fluctuations have occurred, or are likely to occur for this
species. (71 FR 44992, August 8, 2006). Although researchers have
acknowledged that the large population observed in 2006 may have been
an anomaly, which could have obscured normal patterns of butterfly
distribution that might suggest a more significant threat to the
species than is indicated by the 2006 field observation (Murphy et al.
2006, p. 9), they also concluded that the Sand Mountain blue butterfly
numbers were ``substantially above a level that would indicate a need
to carry out in situ or other actions to enhance population size above
a critical minimum'' (Murphy et al. 2006, p. 7). Based on this
assessment, we believe that the population will remain viable into the
foreseeable future.
Of the potential threats cited above, we consider the interrelated
factors of invasive weeds and fire to be the most significant. The
primary invasive weeds of concern at Sand Mountain are Salsola tragus
(Russian thistle) and Bromus tectorum (cheatgrass). Large patches of
both species are present in areas along the periphery of the sand
dunes, principally in areas where livestock water tanks and camping are
permanently located (LVEA 2006, p. 10). Researchers did not find
cheatgrass to be a dominant species along transects in 2006 (Murphy et
al. 2006, Figure 5). The seeds of these invasive weeds can be spread by
wind, cattle, and off-road vehicle transport (LVEA 2006, p. 11). There
is no evidence that these annual weeds are capable of artificially
stabilizing the dune systems at Sand Mountain (The Nature Conservancy
2004, p. 53), and we do not consider artificial stabilization of the
dune system to be a significant threat to the habitat of the Sand
Mountain blue butterfly. We are unable to assess the significance of
off-road vehicles as a vector for weed transport because of lack of
data, although they likely facilitate weed establishment through
surface disturbance.
Because both cheatgrass and Russian thistle are annual pla