Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for Limnanthes floccosa, 42490-42570 [2010-17324]

Agencies

• Fish and Wildlife Service
• DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 139 (Wednesday, July 21, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42490-42570]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-17324]



[[Page 42489]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Part II





Department of the Interior





-----------------------------------------------------------------------



Fish and Wildlife Service



-----------------------------------------------------------------------



50 CFR Part 17



Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical 
Habitat for Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora (Large-Flowered Woolly 
Meadowfoam) and Lomatium cookii (Cook's Lomatium); Final Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 21, 2010 / 
Rules and Regulations

[[Page 42490]]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2009-0046]
[MO 92210-0-0009 B4]
RIN 1018-AW21


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of 
Critical Habitat for Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora (Large-
Flowered Woolly Meadowfoam) and Lomatium cookii (Cook's Lomatium)

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), designate 
critical habitat for two plants, Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora 
(large-flowered woolly meadowfoam) and Lomatium cookii (Cook's 
lomatium, Cook's desert parsley) under the Endangered Species Act of 
1973, as amended (Act). We are designating 2,363 hectares (ha) (5,840 
acres (ac)) in Jackson County, Oregon, as critical habitat for 
Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora and 2,545 ha (6,289 ac) in Jackson 
and Josephine Counties, Oregon, as critical habitat for Lomatium 
cookii. Excluding overlapping critical habitat units for the two 
species, a total of approximately 4,018 ha (9,930 ac) located in 
Jackson and Josephine Counties, Oregon, fall within the boundaries of 
the critical habitat designation.

DATES: This final rule becomes effective on August 20, 2010.

ADDRESSES: This final rule and final economic analysis are available on 
the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov; maps of critical habitat 
are available at https://criticalhabitat.fws.gov. Supporting 
documentation we used in preparing this final rule is available for 
public inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours, at the 
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Oregon Fish and Wildlife Office, 2600 
SE 98\th\ Ave., Portland, OR 97266; telephone 503-231-6179; facsimile 
503-231-6195.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Henson, State Supervisor, U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service, Oregon Fish and Wildlife Office, 2600 SE 
98\th\ Avenue, Suite 100, Portland, OR 97266 (telephone 503-231-6179; 
facsimile 503-231-6195). If you use a telecommunications device for the 
deaf (TDD), call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-
877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    It is our intent to discuss only those topics directly relevant to 
the development and designation of critical habitat for Limnanthes 
floccosa ssp. grandiflora and Lomatium cookii in this final rule. For 
additional detailed information on the taxonomy, biology, and ecology 
of these species, please refer to the final listing rule published in 
the Federal Register on November 7, 2002 (67 FR 68004), and the Draft 
Recovery Plan for Listed Species of the Rogue Valley Vernal Pool and 
Illinois River Valley Wet Meadow Ecosystems (USFWS 2006, pp. II-1 to 
II-17). Information on the associated draft economic analysis for the 
proposed rule to designate critical habitat was published in the 
Federal Register on January 12, 2010 (75 FR 1568).
Species Description, Life History, Distribution, Ecology, and Habitat
    Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora, commonly known as large-
flowered woolly meadowfoam, and Lomatium cookii, commonly known as 
Cook's lomatium or Cook's desert parsley, are endemic to seasonal 
wetland habitats of southwestern Oregon. Limnanthes floccosa ssp. 
grandiflora is restricted to Jackson County in the Rogue River Valley, 
where it co-occurs with Lomatium cookii in several areas near White 
City in an area known as the Agate Desert (ONHP 1997, p. 3; Huddleston 
2001, p. 11). Lomatium cookii occurs in two disjunct locations: (1) In 
the Rogue River Valley, near the towns of Medford, White City, and 
Eagle Point; and (2) in the Illinois River Valley of Josephine County 
near the towns of Selma, Cave Junction, and O'Brien (ONHDB 1994, p. 5). 
The two locations are separated by approximately 48 kilometers (km) (30 
miles (mi)).
    Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora and Lomatium cookii are both 
associated with the remaining relatively undisturbed vernal pool-
mounded prairie habitat in the Middle Rogue River Basin's Agate Desert 
(Environmental Science Associates (ESA) 2007, p. 2-1; ONHP 1997, p. 3). 
Relative to the pools, the plants often occur in pool margins, or less 
often on both mound tops and depression bottoms of drier vernal pools.
    The substrate underlying the vernal pool topography in the Middle 
Rogue River Valley is primarily a Pleistocene outwash alluvium (mud, 
silt, and sand deposited by flowing water) deposited in what has become 
a deep bench or terrace above the current floodplain (Elliot and 
Sammons 1996). The alluvium is composed of a matrix of gravels and 
clay, which creates a hardpan or duripan layer (mineral soil horizons 
relatively impervious to water). During fall and winter rains, water 
collects in shallow depressions of the vernal pool-mounded prairie 
habitat. Downward percolation of water is prevented by the presence of 
the duripan layer located from 0.18 to 0.75 meters (m) (0.6 to 2.5 feet 
(ft)) below the soil surface (Keeley and Zedler 1998, p. 2; Huddleston 
2001, pp. 14-15). In areas north and northwest of Medford, the vicinity 
of White City, and north along low-elevation plains, Limnanthes 
floccosa ssp. grandiflora and Lomatium cookii occur on alluvial soils, 
primarily mapped as Agate-Winlo complex soils, but may also be found on 
mapped Coker clay and Provig-Agate complex soils with 0 to 3 percent 
slopes. Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora also occasionally occurs 
on soils mapped as Carney clay and Winlo, very gravelly loam in vernal 
pool habitat north of White City (USDA 2006b).
    In the Rogue River Valley, the two plants are associated with 
microhabitats occupied by mostly annual native forbs and graminoids 
(grass-like plants), including Alopecurus saccatus (Pacific foxtail), 
Deschampsia danthonioides (slender hairgrass), Eryngium petiolatum 
(Oregon coyote thistle), Trifolium depauperatum (poverty clover), 
Myosurus minimus (tiny mouse-tail), Navarretia leucocephala ssp. 
leucocephala (white-head navarretia), Lasthenia californica (California 
goldfields), Phlox gracilis (slender phlox), Plagiobothrys bracteatus 
(bracted popcornflower), and Triteleia hyacinthina (white brodiaea) 
(OSU 2007); USFWS 2006, p. II-6).
    Native bunchgrass communities that historically occurred in the 
Rogue River Valley and supported Lomatium cookii habitat included 
Achnatherum lemmonii (Lemmon's needlegrass), Festuca roemeri var. 
klamathensis (Klamath Roemer's fescue), and Poa secunda (rough 
bluegrass). The vernal pool habitat occupied by Limnanthes floccosa 
ssp. grandiflora in the Rogue River Valley ranges from 372 to 469 m 
(1,220 to 1,540 ft) in elevation (Huddleston 2001, p. 11; USGS 2002). 
The vernal pool habitat occupied by Lomatium cookii in the same basin 
area ranges from 372 to 411 m (1,220 to 1,350 ft) in elevation 
(Huddleston 2001, p. 11; USGS 2009).
    The habitats occupied by Lomatium cookii in the Illinois River 
Valley are more complex than those in the Rogue River Valley in both 
soil composition and soil depth. Lomatium cookii occurs on 17 mapped 
soil types in the Illinois

[[Page 42491]]

River Valley. The majority of Lomatium cookii occurrences in the 
Illinois River Valley are found on Brockman clay loam, Josephine 
gravelly loam, and Pollard loam (USDA 2008). Unlike the Middle Rogue 
River Basin soils, many of the Lomatium cookii-occupied soil types 
originate from stream-fed alluvium covering sedimentary or ultramafic 
rocks (ONHDB 1994, pp. 9-10). Ultramafic rock is the parent material 
for serpentine rock formations, once the rock has undergone excessive 
heat and pressure through geologic processes. The soils derived from 
serpentine rock give rise to unusual and rare associations of endemic 
plants that are tolerant of extremely toxic soil conditions. Serpentine 
rock is low in calcium and silica, low in many plant nutrients, and 
high in iron and magnesium (Brady et al. 2005, p. 246). Pollard loam 
and Speaker-Josephine gravelly loam soils originate from non-ultramafic 
sources, while Brockman soil and most others types originate from 
ultramafic parent material (Silvernail and Meinke 2008, pp. 9-10).
    Habitat occupied by Lomatium cookii in the Illinois River Valley 
includes seasonally wet grassland meadows, flats and slopes in mixed 
oak-conifer and oak-madrone forested meadows, streambanks, roadside 
edges, or forest openings. Such habitats are dominated by native 
grasses, including: Danthonia californica (California oatgrass), Poa 
secunda, Deschampsia cespitosa (tufted hairgrass), Festuca roemeri var. 
klamathensis, Achnatherum lemmonii, and Deschampsia danthonioides. 
Native forbs include Camassia spp. (camas), Ranunculus occidentalis 
(western buttercup), and Limnanthes gracilis var. gracilis (slender 
meadowfoam) (ONHDB 1994, p. 9). The seasonally wet meadows occupied by 
Lomatium cookii in the Illinois River Valley usually occur as part of 
bottomland Quercus garryana-Quercus kelloggii-Pinus ponderosa (Oregon 
white oak-California black oak-ponderosa pine) savannas. Lomatium 
cookii also occurs in shrubby habitat composed of Ceanothus cuneatus 
(wedge-leaf buckbrush) and Arctostaphylos viscida (whiteleaf 
manzanita). Widely spaced, large pine trees are characteristic of the 
open meadow habitat with mixed pine and oak woodlands occurring along 
seasonal creeks.
    Lomatium cookii populations are generally found in areas that still 
have relatively intact habitat components, although remnant populations 
are often found in areas with or adjacent to mining, agricultural 
development, residential or commercial development, and grazing 
activities (Oregon Natural Heritage Information Center (ONHIC) database 
2008).
    Land uses associated with the largest, more contiguous populations 
of Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora and Lomatium cookii are vernal 
pool habitats managed specifically for conservation or managed using 
compatible agricultural practices. Actions conducive to large 
population sizes of either of the two species may include prescribed 
burns, controlled grazing practices, or regular mowing. The Rogue 
Valley International-Medford Airport is an example of an area that is 
mowed regularly to meet Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) safety 
requirements and that supports a large and prolific Lomatium cookii 
population that extends over 2.3 ha (7 ac) (R. Russell, pers. comm. 
2004; S. Friedman, pers. obs. 2009). Within grazed properties, small, 
isolated patches of Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora often continue 
to persist, perhaps due to suppression of the thatch layer from 
invasive, nonnative grasses (Meyers 2008, pp. 1-48; Wildlands, Inc. 
2008, p. 1; Borgias 2004, p. 42).
    Sites occupied by Lomatium cookii that receive no management 
continue to support plant populations, but monitoring suggests that 
some of those populations are declining (Kaye and Thorpe 2008, pp. 16-
25). For example, Borgias (2004, p. 34) observed that, after several 
years without grazing or fire at The Nature Conservancy's Agate Desert 
Preserve, thatch accumulated and recruitment of young Lomatium cookii 
declined due to the increases of nonnative annual grasses. In the 
Illinois River Valley, other reports indicate that vegetative 
succession, herbivory by voles (Microtus spp.), or both, may be the 
cause of declining populations (Kaye and Thorpe 2008, pp. 16-25).
Threats
    Threats to Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora and Lomatium cookii 
in the Rogue River Valley include habitat impacts resulting from: 
residential, urban, and commercial development; aggregate and mineral 
mining; agricultural development (including leveling, ditching, 
tilling, and stock pond construction or water impoundments); road 
construction and maintenance; off-road vehicle (ORV) use that affects 
surface hydrology; vandalism (related to ORV use); incompatible grazing 
practices; and encroachment by nonnative plants (67 FR 68004, November 
7, 2002).
    The habitat impacts resulting from residential, urban, 
agricultural, mining, and commercial development resulted in an 
approximately 60 percent loss of the vernal pool landscape in the Rogue 
River Valley due to building construction, removal of habitat, altered 
hydrology, or altered topography (ONHP 1997, pp. 14-15; Wille and 
Petersen 2006, p. 1993).
    Ground-disturbing activities, such as development, mining, road 
construction and maintenance, or ORV use, can damage the clay pan layer 
and allow soil moisture to drain from the vernal pools or wet meadow 
habitats that the plants depend on for reproduction and survival. 
Incompatible agricultural practices, including some timber management 
and crop management, can alter hydrology, directly affect plants with 
equipment, allow nonnative thatch to accumulate due to excessive 
grazing rest, and stifle plant growth, or indirectly affect plants as a 
result of road construction. Road construction can fragment 
populations, alter hydrology, or cover plants with fill material, 
resulting in degradation of habitat and direct loss of plants.
    The effects of gold mining operations threaten approximately 10 
percent of the federally owned portion of Lomatium cookii habitat in 
the Illinois River Valley, and if existing mining claims on Bureau of 
Land Management (BLM) lands are pursued, habitat damage would increase 
beyond 20 percent. The effects of mining activities can result in 
direct habitat loss for the species and limit recovery. Indirect 
effects from mining operations could also occur due to off-site 
activities such as road construction, which are likely to alter 
hydrologic cycles at Lomatium cookii habitat sites. These changes could 
cause seasonally saturated soils to drain and could impede seed 
germination or lead to death of seedlings and mature plants (67 FR 
68004, November 7, 2002). However, remnant patches of Lomatium cookii 
do occasionally persist near mining sites.
    Under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (43 U.S.C. 1701 et 
seq.) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 
et seq.), the BLM requires permits and public review for ``Plan Level'' 
mining activities (greater than 5 ac (2 ha)) on Federal lands. The Code 
of Federal Regulations (43 CFR 3590) allows Federal agencies to deny a 
permit which could result in irreparable damages to significant 
resources (including endangered and threatened species) that cannot be 
mitigated. Several Lomatium cookii occurrences and suitable habitat 
occur on BLM Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs). There are 
several ACECs where we are designating critical habitat for Lomatium 
cookii, including:

[[Page 42492]]

Rough and Ready, French Flat, and portions of the new proposed Waldo 
Takilma ACEC. Any proposed mining actions in an ACEC requires a ``Plan 
Level'' operation plan, which receives public input through the NEPA 
process.
    Vandalism in the form of intentional disregard or dismantling of 
signage or fencing intended to protect certain wetland areas from 
unauthorized ORV use, and subsequent damage resulting from that use, 
can result in negative effects on the hydrology of the habitat for the 
two plant species (for example, by penetrating the duripan layer, 
resulting in drainage).
    The effect of grazing on suitable habitat depends on how the 
grazing is managed. There is conflicting information showing that 
certain grazing practices can affect native plant species' richness 
(Marty 2004, p. 1629). Marty's (2004, pp. 1629-1630) study indicates 
that wet season grazing resulted in a decrease of native forb species 
at vernal pool edge habitat, the habitat typically occupied by 
Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora. However, the study goes on to 
mention that continuous grazing was reported to increase species' 
richness and native plant cover in this edge habitat. In a grazing 
report prepared for the Service, Borgias (2004, p. 34) mentions that at 
one site in Jackson County, year-round cattle and horse grazing is 
practiced, and it appears to allow survival and even proliferation of 
Lomatium cookii. In their study of 17 to 25 sites, Hayes and Holl (2003 
p. 1697) indicate the number of native forb species was greater in 
ungrazed sites than grazed sites. Brock (1987, p. 30) contends that 
historical grazing practices fragmented and extirpated Lomatium cookii 
throughout much of the Rogue River Valley, based on his observations of 
the dominance of nonnative annual grasses in the area and the disparate 
occurrences of Lomatium cookii patches. There appear to be instances 
where some grazing practices can have both beneficial and negative 
impacts on suitable habitat for Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora 
and Lomatium cookii.
    Examples of incompatible grazing practices could include wet season 
grazing (Marty 2004, p. 1629), particularly during the plants' 
flowering and fruiting season, or grazing at such high density of 
livestock (ONHDB 1994, p. 11) that all grass and forbs are grazed to a 
height that prevents reproduction. Water diversion and water 
impoundment, when used in conjunction with livestock management (making 
water available for livestock), can also eliminate habitat for the two 
plant species.
    In the Illinois River Valley, herbivory by voles has resulted in 
mortality of individual plants, as well as an indirect decrease in 
reproduction for several Lomatium cookii occurrences (Kaye and Thorpe 
2009, p. 31).
    Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora and Lomatium cookii are also 
threatened by encroachment of nonnative annual herbs, including 
Centaurea solstitialis (yellow starthistle) and Cardaria draba (hoary 
cress), which may competitively exclude the two native species. 
Nonnative annual grasses, namely Hordeum marinum ssp. gussoneanum 
(Mediterranean barley) and Taeniantherum caput-medusae (medusahead), 
are also contributing to the degradation of the native plant community. 
Hordeum marinum ssp. gussoneanum encroaches on microhabitats occupied 
by both species, but T. caput-medusae occurs on adjacent upland mound 
habitats, occasionally interfering with Lomatium cookii germination and 
growth with its thatch output. Reproduction of both Lomatium cookii and 
Limnanthes floccosa spp. grandiflora is impaired by the presence of 
introduced annual grasses, as seeds of both native species are not able 
to germinate under the dense thatch produced by nonnative annual 
grasses. Recently introduced nonnative, invasive plants that have the 
potential to threaten Lomatium cookii in the Illinois River Valley are 
Alyssum murale (yellowtuft) and A. corsicum (alisso di Corsica). These 
two plants were recently introduced to meadow habitat with serpentine-
dervied soils as part of an experiment to test their ability to 
accumulate nickel (ODA and USFS 2008, pp. 1-3). The plants tend to 
outcompete some native plants and persist over time (ODA and USFS 2008, 
pp. 1-3). The plants were declared noxious weeds by the Oregon 
Department of Agriculture (ODA) and are illegal to plant in Oregon.
    Threats to Lomatium cookii in the Illinois River Valley include the 
habitat impacts resulting from aggregate and mineral mining, 
residential and urban development, timber harvesting practices, road 
construction and maintenance, ground disturbance by ORV use that 
affects surface hydrology, garbage dumping, succession of native woody 
vegetation due to fire suppression, incompatible grazing practices, and 
herbivory by voles. The dumping of garbage, especially such large items 
as old appliances, can directly affect populations by crushing or 
smothering them. Succession of native woody vegetation, although a 
natural process, is normally discouraged by fire. In the Illinois River 
Valley, the longer fire return intervals due to fire suppression have 
led to the encroachment of native woody vegetation (trees and shrubs) 
into the wet meadow habitats occupied by Lomatium cookii. Such native 
woody plants include Ceanothus cuneatus (buckbrush), Pinus ponderosa 
(Ponderosa pine), Pinus jeffreyi (Jeffrey pine), Pseudotsuga menziesii 
(Douglas-fir), and Toxicodendron diversiloba (poison oak). The 
succession of these species in Lomatium cookii habitat can isolate the 
species into small refuge pockets or cause widespread reduction of 
habitat suitability by reducing light availability (over-shading), 
limiting water and nutrient availability, fragmenting populations, and 
limiting space to grow.
    Individuals of Lomatium cookii growing in more shaded conditions, 
such as when surrounded by shrubs, tend to be smaller and less robust 
than plants growing in more open areas in association with lower 
growing grasses and forbs (ONHIC 2008). At four protected locations in 
the Rogue and Illinois River Valleys, long-term monitoring indicates 
that Lomatium cookii populations experienced declines (D. Borgias, 
pers. comm. 2006; Kaye and Thorpe 2008, pp. 16-25). The causes are not 
specifically known but appear to be due to encroachment and over-
shading from the natural succession of vegetation or increases in vole 
activity. At two of the declining Lomatium cookii populations, located 
at the French Flat ACEC, the Medford District of the BLM is planning to 
arrest this decline by reducing shrub and tree encroachment (S. Fritts, 
pers. comm. 2009). At two Lomatium cookii populations located on The 
Nature Conservancy's Agate Desert Preserve and Whetstone Savanna 
Preserve, planting of native bunchgrass, mowing, and grazing are being 
considered to address declining plant numbers (D. Borgias, pers. comm. 
2009).

Previous Federal Actions

    We listed Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora and Lomatium cookii 
as endangered on November 7, 2002 (67 FR 68004). For a discussion of 
additional information on previous Federal actions concerning 
Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora and Lomatium cookii, please refer 
to the final listing rule for the two species (67 FR 68004; November 7, 
2002).The recovery needs of these two species are addressed in the 
Draft Recovery Plan for Listed Species of the Rogue Valley Vernal Pool 
and Illinois River Valley Wet Meadow Ecosystems, published in 2006 
(USFWS 2006).
    On December 19, 2007, the Center for Biological Diversity filed a 
complaint

[[Page 42493]]

against the Service (Center for Biological Diversity v. Kempthorne, et 
al., 07-CV-2378 IEG, (S.D. CA)) for failure to designate critical 
habitat for four plant species, including Limnanthes floccosa ssp. 
grandiflora and Lomatium cookii (the other two species occur in 
different parts of the country). On April 11, 2008, the U.S. District 
Court for the Southern District of California entered an order 
approving a stipulated settlement of the parties requiring the Service 
to determine whether designation of critical habitat for Limnanthes 
floccosa ssp. grandiflora and Lomatium cookii is prudent, and if so, to 
submit a proposed rule for the designation of critical habitat to the 
Federal Register on or before July 15, 2009. The settlement also 
required the Service to submit a final rule designating critical 
habitat for Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora and Lomatium cookii to 
the Federal Register on or before July 15, 2010.
    We affirmed that designation of critical habitat for Limnanthes 
floccosa ssp. grandiflora and Lomatium cookii is prudent, and we 
published a proposal to designate critical habitat for the two plant 
species in the Federal Register on July 28, 2009 (74 FR 37314). We 
accepted public comments on this proposal for 60 days, ending September 
28, 2009. On January 12, 2010 (75 FR 1568), we announced the reopening 
of the public comment period for an additional 30 days (ending February 
11, 2010); the availability of a draft economic analysis and amended 
required determinations section of the proposal; and a public hearing 
on February 2, 2010, in Medford, Oregon. We invited the public to 
review and comment on any of the above actions associated with the 
proposed critical habitat designation at the scheduled public hearing 
or in writing (75 FR 1568).
    In 2003, we designated critical habitat for the endangered vernal 
pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi) in California and the Rogue 
River Valley of Oregon (68 FR 46683; August 6, 2003). The designated 
vernal pool fairy shrimp critical habitat in Oregon overlaps with 
approximately 1,964 ha (4,853 ac) of suitable habitat for Limnanthes 
floccosa ssp. grandiflora and 734 ha (1,815 ac) of suitable habitat for 
Lomatium cookii (68 FR 46683). The vernal pool fairy shrimp critical 
habitat designation resulted in additional regulatory review for 
habitats occupied by both Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora and 
Lomatium cookii in most of Jackson County due to the similarity and 
location of the vernal pool-mounded prairie habitat shared by these 
three species. In this final rule, we will note where designated 
critical habitat for the vernal pool fairy shrimp overlaps with that 
designated for Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora and Lomatium 
cookii.
    This final rule completes our obligations under the April 11, 2008, 
settlement agreement regarding Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora and 
Lomatium cookii.

Summary of Comments and Recommendations

    We requested written comments from the public on the proposed 
designation of critical habitat for Limnanthes floccosa ssp. 
grandiflora and Lomatium cookii during two comment periods. The first 
comment period, associated with the publication of the proposed rule, 
opened July 28, 2009 (74 FR 37314), and closed September 28, 2009. The 
second comment period, associated with the availability of the draft 
economic analysis, opened January 12, 2010 (75 FR 1568), and closed 
February 11, 2010. During the comment periods, we received two requests 
for a public hearing. Section 4(b)(5)(E) of the Act requires that we 
hold one public hearing on a proposed regulation if any person files a 
request for such a hearing within 45 days after the date of publication 
of a proposed rule. In response to these requests, we held a public 
hearing in Medford, Oregon, on February 2, 2010. We also contacted 
appropriate Federal, State, County, and local agencies; scientific 
organizations; and other interested parties and invited them to comment 
on the proposed rule to designate critical habitat for these species 
and the associated draft economic analysis.
    During the first comment period (July 28 - September 28, 2009), we 
received five comment letters directly addressing the proposed critical 
habitat designation. During the second comment period (January 12 - 
February 11, 2010), we received six comment letters addressing the 
proposed critical habitat designation or the draft economic analysis. 
During the February 2, 2010, public hearing, one individual provided 
comment on the designation of critical habitat for Lomatium cookii. All 
substantive information provided during both comment periods has either 
been incorporated directly into this final determination or is 
addressed below. Comments we received are addressed in the following 
summary and incorporated into the final rule as appropriate.

Peer Review

    In accordance with our policy published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 
34270), we solicited expert opinions from three knowledgeable 
individuals with scientific expertise including familiarity with the 
species, the geographic region in which the species occur, and 
conservation biology principles pertinent to the species. We received 
responses from all three peer reviewers.
    We reviewed all comments we received from peer reviewers for 
substantive issues and new information regarding critical habitat for 
Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora and Lomatium cookii. The peer 
reviewers generally concurred with our methods and conclusions, 
indicating the Service had used the most current scientific information 
available; had accurately described the species, their habitat 
requirements, the primary constituent elements (PCEs) for the species, 
the reasons for their decline, and threats to their habitat; and had 
done a thorough job of delineating critical habitat using the best 
available scientific information. Peer reviewer comments are addressed 
in the following summary and incorporated into the final rule as 
appropriate.

Peer Reviewer Comments

    (1) Comment: All three peer reviewers and several other commenters 
pointed out that Lomatium cookii populations are, in fact, found in 
habitat subject to mining, agricultural development, residential or 
commercial development, or grazing activities.
    Our Response: We agree that remnant Lomatium cookii populations can 
and do occur in areas subject to mining, agricultural development, 
residential or commercial development, or grazing activities. We 
revised the language in this rule to clarify this point.
    (2) Comment: One peer reviewer suggested that critical habitat for 
Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora and Lomatium cookii should include 
all population areas discovered after the 2002 final listing because 
all populations that are currently known, not just those found within 3 
years of listing, were almost certainly present at the time of listing. 
The peer reviewer commented that dispersal (for both species) is very 
limited and successful establishment after dispersal is likely to be 
infrequent. Therefore, designation of all known populations as critical 
habitat is warranted.
    Our Response: We concur that dispersal and establishment of the two 
species are infrequent and limited, such that, at this time, a recently 
documented population most likely existed at the time of the November 
2002 final listing.
    We include in critical habitat units only Limnanthes floccosa ssp.

[[Page 42494]]

grandiflora and Lomatium cookii populations and habitat areas that 
provide the physical or biological features essential for their 
conservation and that require special management considerations or 
protection. We do not include several populations within critical 
habitat units because those populations do not meet our selection 
criteria. For example, populations that have fewer than 10 individuals 
or that occur in areas that we determined lack the PCEs are not 
included in the critical habitat designation. We also revised some 
critical habitat units to incorporate new detailed information provided 
in the comments we received; these comments provided information on 
areas not considered in the proposed rule that may support the PCEs, as 
well as areas included in the proposed designation that may not support 
the PCEs for the species. All such information was ground-truthed, 
verified, and incorporated into this final rule, as appropriate.
    (3) Comment: Two peer reviewers pointed out that the proposed rule 
suggests that mining is not considered a significant threat for 
Lomatium cookii when in fact it should be considered the greatest 
threat in Josephine County.
    Our Response: We agree that mining should be considered one of the 
prominent threats to Lomatium cookii, especially in Josephine County. 
We clarified the information in the Background section and the Special 
Management Considerations section of this rule to reflect this.
    (4) Comment: One peer reviewer pointed out that incompatible 
grazing was not clearly defined and disagreed with an example provided 
in the proposed rule of an incompatible grazing practice whereby: 
``Heavy grazing, especially from October through April, would be an 
example of incompatible grazing.''
    Our Response: In the Background section of this rule we further 
defined ``incompatible grazing practices'' to address this concern, 
citing ONHDB (1994, p. 11). We revised examples of incompatible grazing 
to include flooding or grading of vernal pools to make water available 
for livestock, and further elaborated on grazing practices that may 
have both positive and negative effects on critical habitat for the two 
plant species. We also recognize that lack of grazing can have both 
negative and positive effects on habitats supporting Limnanthes 
floccosa ssp. grandiflora and Lomatium cookii.
    (5) Comment: One peer reviewer provided additional information 
about proposed Unit RV4 and commented that some of the inferences 
describing the habitat conditions were not well substantiated. For 
example, the reviewer indicated that the south part of the unit has 
been leveled, not grazed, and this more likely was the reason why 
Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora was not present in this area.
    Our Response: We revised the description of Unit RV4 to suggest the 
leveled habitat within the unit could have been one of the reasons why 
Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora was not present in the area. The 
unit is still occupied by the species both north and south of the 
leveled area and still functions as critical habitat due to the 
underlying hardpan (see Criteria Used To Identify Critical Habitat, 
below).
    (6) Comment: One peer reviewer provided information about an area 
near Unit RV9, currently unoccupied by Limnanthes floccosa ssp. 
grandiflora or Lomatium cookii, and suggested it be included in the 
critical habitat designation because the habitat appears to provide the 
habitat conditions necessary to support the species.
    Our Response: We appreciate the suggestion; however, the Act allows 
for areas that were not occupied by the species at the time of listing 
to be designated as critical habitat only if they are considered 
essential to the conservation of the species. We have no information 
indicating that this area has ever been occupied by the species. 
Furthermore, based on ground truthing and aerial photo interpretation, 
the site does not appear to have the habitat conditions necessary to 
support the two species, and therefore does not meet the critical 
habitat selection criteria.
    (7) Comment: One peer reviewer and a commenter suggested that we 
should expand critical habitat units to include the adjoining up-
gradient slopes that deliver water seasonally. They suggest the wet 
hydrology habitat occupied by Lomatium cookii in the Illinois River 
Valley is dependent on overland flow and through-flow from the adjacent 
up-gradient slopes, although the degree to which this hydrology is 
needed is not quantified.
    Our Response: Not all the upland slopes adjacent to the Illinois 
River Valley critical habitat units do not meet our selection criteria 
(see Criteria Used to Identify Critical Habitat, below); therefore, we 
did not include all of these features in this rule. Some of the 
critical habitat units in the Illinois River Valley do include some 
sloped, unoccupied habitat adjacent to occurrences, but this is 
intended to include habitat that we consider essential for species 
conservation. Any Federal actions that would occur on the adjacent 
slopes of designated critical habitat may have direct or indirect 
effects on critical habitat, and therefore could trigger consultation 
under section 7 of the Act.
    (8) Comment: A peer reviewer pointed out that in the proposed rule 
the habitat description in the Background section incorrectly implies 
that annual grasslands are the natural habitat for Limnanthes floccosa 
ssp. grandiflora and Lomatium cookii. The reviewer stated that native 
perennial bunchgrass communities, including such species as Achnatherum 
lemmonii, Festuca roemeri var. klamathensis, and Poa secunda, are the 
natural habitat for these two species in Jackson County's Agate Desert 
(Rogue River Valley). The reviewer's opinion is that livestock grazing 
has largely eradicated these grasses and has facilitated the invasion 
of nonnative annual grasses and forbs, so if habitat was restored to 
native grasses, grazing would not be helpful.
    Our Response: We revised some of the background information to 
reflect that the current typical grassland habitat occupying almost all 
of the upland areas in Jackson County's Agate Desert is composed of 
nonnative annual grasses. We point out that grazing can be an excellent 
tool for management of these grasses, but would not be an appropriate 
tool for management in native bunchgrass habitat.

Public Comments

    (9) Comment: One commenter stated that the Service didn't propose 
designation of large portions of the two plants' occupied ranges and 
many areas where one or both of these plant species are known to occur. 
The commenter points out that the proposed critical habitat units are 
too small and disjointed to offer meaningful protection of these 
wetland habitats.
    Our Response: We identified critical habitat units that met our 
selection criteria for critical habitat (USFWS 2009). To the best of 
our knowledge, we included only areas that provide the physical or 
biological features essential to the conservation of the species and 
that require special management considerations or protection. We did 
not include many areas of developed, previously modified, or unsuitable 
habitat that do not support, or would not contribute to, the species' 
continued existence or recovery (see Criteria Used To Identify Critical 
Habitat, below).
    (10) Comment: One commenter stated that there is a discrepancy 
between the recovery core areas that the Draft Recovery Plan for Listed 
Species of the Rogue Valley Vernal Pool and Illinois River Valley Wet 
Meadow Ecosystems deemed appropriate for recovery of the

[[Page 42495]]

two species and the critical habitat units delineated in the proposed 
rule.
    Our Response: Since the publication of the draft recovery plan in 
2006 (USFWS 2006), we received additional information about the 
critical habitat areas from recent ground surveys, updated aerial 
photographic imagery, and recent development activities on the 
landscape. The critical habitat units designated in this rule are very 
similar to the proposed recovery core areas. However, in the Illinois 
River Valley, five areas that were suggested as priority 3 core areas 
in the recovery plan are not included in the designated critical 
habitat because they do not support any occurrences of the listed 
plants and because, on closer inspection, we determined that these 
areas do not meet our selection criteria for critical habitat.
    (11) Comment: A commenter claimed that the statement in the 
proposed rule (74 FR 37334; July 28, 2009) that the Service ``will 
consider for exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the Act any existing 
management plans located within proposed critical habitat units'' is 
inconsistent with the letter and intent of the Act and that the 
Service's implementing regulations consider special management 
considerations important to the preservation of critical habitat.
    Our Response: The Secretary's authority to consider exclusions 
under section 4(b)(2) of the Act is separate from the statutory 
requirement under section 3(5)(A) of the Act that we designate critical 
habitat by identifying those specific areas on which are found those 
physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the 
species and which may require special management considerations or 
protection. As described in the Criteria Used to Identify Critical 
Habitat section of this final rule, we are designating critical habitat 
in areas occupied by the species at the time it was listed, that 
provide the physical or biological features essential to their 
conservation, and which may require special management considerations 
or protection. We did not receive any management plans from any public 
or private entities for consideration of exclusion based on section 
4(b)(2) of the Act, and did not exclude any habitat from the 
designation based on section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
    (12) Comment: A commenter asserted that the proposed rule 
constitutes a major Federal action with serious impacts on the human 
environment in the Rogue and Illinois River Valleys. As such, the 
commenter felt that the Service is required under NEPA to prepare a 
complete Environmental Impact Statement to analyze the possible effects 
and outcomes of designating critical habitat for the two species.
    Our Response: Outside the jurisdiction of the Tenth Circuit Court 
of Appeals, it is the Service's position that we do not need to prepare 
environmental analyses as defined by NEPA in connection with the 
designation of critical habitat under the Act. We published a notice 
outlining our reasons for this determination in the Federal Register on 
October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244), and our position was upheld in the 
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (Douglas County v. Babbitt, 48 F.3d 1495 
(9th Cir. 1995), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 1042 (1996)).
    (13) Comment: A commenter indicated that a portion of the 
commenter's property is already developed, some of which is recent, and 
the commenter is planning to expand development of a water treatment 
facility on their property. The commenter requested that the Service 
exclude portions of the property planned for development from critical 
habitat designation.
    Our Response: We carefully inspected updated aerial imagery and 
identified the recently developed area. We also conducted a site visit 
to the property to determine if the area in question provides the PCEs 
for either Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora or Lomatium cookii. We 
determined that suitable habitat was present on the property; however, 
upon closer inspection, we deemed it appropriate to modify the 
boundaries of Subunit RV6A to remove developed areas and a small area 
on the property that did not provide the PCEs. We are not able to 
eliminate areas that currently provide the PCEs for the species from 
critical habitat on the basis of anticipated future development, nor do 
such plans form the basis for an exclusion from critical habitat under 
the provisions of the Act. The total amount of designated critical 
habitat in the subunit decreased from 507 ha (759 ac) to 263 ha (650 
ac).
    (14) Comment: One commenter indicated that Lomatium cookii was 
improperly listed as endangered because it occurs on over 4,452 ha 
(11,000 ac) in the Illinois River Valley. The commenter suggested this 
indicates that the plant is flourishing and not in danger of 
extinction.
    Our Response: Technically, the listing status of the species is 
outside the scope of this rulemaking. However, Lomatium cookii was 
determined to have endangered status in the 2002 final listing rule (67 
FR 68004) because it occurs in a limited geographic range with few 
known occurrences, occupying a total of 108 ha (266 ac) overall or 61 
ha (150 ac) in the Illinois River Valley, and because it is threatened 
by destruction of its specialized habitat due to the effects of 
industrial and residential development, road and powerline construction 
and maintenance, agricultural conversion, certain grazing practices, 
off-road vehicle use, and competition with nonnative plants. The units 
included in the critical habitat designation include occupied sites 
that provide the PCEs and that met our selection criteria for size, 
connectivity, and other biological considerations. The critical habitat 
units represent habitat complexes, or functional ecosystem units, 
occupied by the species and that provide the PCEs essential for its 
conservation. In such habitat complexes, such as vernal pool-mounded 
prairie complex or a wet meadow or mixed conifer forest complex, 
Lomatium cookii may use different parts of its habitat over time 
depending on vegetation succession states, including areas that might 
be intermittently occupied or unoccupied when the abundance of the 
species oscillates such that parts of its habitat are not used during 
low population phases. We are designating 1,621 ha (4,007 ac) of 
critical habitat for Lomatium cookii in the Illinois Valley in this 
rule. This habitat includes areas presently occupied by the species as 
well as surrounding areas that contribute to the ecosystem function 
essential to the conservation of the species. The species does not 
fully occupy an area of 4,452 ha (11,000 ac) in the Illinois River 
Valley, as indicated by the commenter.
    (15) Comment: Lomatium cookii is not closely associated with 
serpentine soils and in fact grows well in non-serpentine-derived 
soils.
    Our Response: We only documented Lomatium cookii on a few locations 
with serpentine-derived soils in the Illinois River Valley. We agree 
that Lomatium cookii is not restricted to serpentine soils. In Jackson 
County, none of the Lomatium cookii occurrences are on serpentine 
soils. We clarify in the Background section of this rule that Lomatium 
cookii can occur in soil types other than serpentine-derived soils in 
the Illinois River Valley.
    (16) Comment: One commenter mentioned that surface disturbances do 
not pose a threat to Lomatium cookii because plant populations are 
healthier in disturbed ground such as wheel ruts, road cuts, recently 
graded areas, and mine tailings.
    Our Response: We are aware that Lomatium cookii has an ability to

[[Page 42496]]

persist in disturbed sites, such as graveled roadsides and wheel ruts, 
likely owing to its long tap root. However large-scale mining and 
development activities can completely remove or alter Lomatium cookii 
suitable habitat by removing large amounts of soil. We are not aware of 
Lomatium cookii occurring in mine tailings, but it would not be 
surprising provided the tailings were relatively shallow. We have no 
documentation of Lomatium cookii colonizing newly disturbed areas and 
surmise that Lomatium cookii occurred at the recently graded areas 
prior to the work.
    (17) Comment: One commenter said that the Lomatium cookii 
occurrences in Unit IV12 are nonnative and suggested that because they 
are found in both historical and recent placed mine tailings, it can be 
inferred that the plants did not originate at this site.
    Our Response: We have no evidence to suggest that the Lomatium 
cookii occurrences in Unit IV12 are not naturally occurring. 
Regardless, under section 3(5)(A) of the Act, the designation of 
critical habitat is not limited to sites that historically supported 
the species, but applies to geographic areas occupied at the time of 
listing or those that may have been unoccupied but are considered 
essential to the conservation of the species. Our information suggests 
that the geographic areas designated as critical habitat in Unit IV12 
were occupied at the time of listing. We reviewed long-term Lomatium 
cookii monitoring reports from BLM land in Unit IV12 (Thorpe and Kaye 
2009), which suggest these are well-established populations. Lomatium 
cookii only occurs in limited areas in Jackson and Josephine Counties, 
and populations appear to be dwindling in many of these locations.
    (18) Comment: One commenter objected to the assertion that Alyssum 
murale (yellowtuft) and Alyssum corsicum (alisso di Corsica) pose a 
threat to Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora and Lomatium cookii. The 
commenter stated that there has never been proof that the two Alyssum 
species can impact the two plant species.
    Our Response: Our proposed rule identified these two nonnative 
Alyssum species as potential threats to Lomatium cookii. According to 
the joint Forest Service (FS) and Oregon Department of Agriculture 
(ODA) 2008 assessment, the two Alyssum species appear to have escaped 
from various planted locations and are vigorously colonizing new areas 
within the Illinois River Valley on serpentine-derived soils. The 
authors of the report conclude that the dense concentrations of these 
invasive plants threaten to encroach upon and displace Lomatium cookii 
in the Illinois River Valley (ODA and USFS 2008, pp. 1-3). The ODA has 
determined that the Alyssum species are noxious weeds; therefore they 
can no longer be legally planted in Oregon. We consider the two Alyssum 
species to pose a general threat to Lomatium cookii in the Illinois 
River Valley.
Comments by Federal Agencies
    (19) Comment: The BLM commented that the Background section of our 
rule should clearly state that vernal pool fairy shrimp critical 
habitat units only overlie critical habitat units designated for 
Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora or Lomatium cookii in Jackson 
County.
    Our Response: We clarified in the Background section of this rule 
that vernal pool fairy shrimp critical habitat only overlies the 
Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora or Lomatium cookii critical 
habitat units in Jackson County.
    (20) Comment: The BLM pointed out that the PCE section describing 
the habitat characteristics for Lomatium cookii in the Illinois River 
Valley leaves out some suitable habitat types, in addition to wet 
meadows that occur in that area. The BLM suggests the description 
should also include mixed evergreen oak-madrone (Quercus-Arbutus), 
higher shrub cover, and sites in very small openings, road edges, and 
old road beds.
    Our Response: We revised the PCEs and included additional habitat 
descriptions for the Illinois River Valley based on the BLM 
suggestions, ground-truthing, and inspection of updated aerial 
photography. We do not include old road beds or graveled roadsides as 
one of the PCEs for the species because we do not consider these 
features to be essential to the conservation of the species.
    (21) Comment: BLM mentioned that the proposed rule appeared to 
describe the minimum size of critical habitat units as at least 12 ha 
(30 ac). However, they point out that a few populations of the two 
plant species that occur in patches less than 1 ac (0.4 ha) in size 
were included in the proposed critical habitat, seemingly in violation 
of our minimum size criterion. BLM suggested we clarify our description 
of the critical habitat units to explain that they represent a 
functional habitat complex, with some areas that are occupied and 
others that are presently unoccupied but still provide the essential 
physical or biological features required for the conservation of the 
species.
    Our Response: We agree with BLM's comment, and attempted to clarify 
in this rule that critical habitat boundaries are not drawn narrowly 
around present occurrences of the species, but are intended to 
encompass functional habitat complexes that support the species (that 
is, provide the PCEs). In our selection criteria, we determined that an 
isolated 8-ha (20-ac) area of habitat (where ``isolated'' is defined as 
meaning the next area of appropriate habitat is greater than 1 km (0.6 
mi) away) that is occupied by one of the plant species is the minimum 
area we will designate as a critical habitat unit for both the Rogue 
River Valley and the Illinois River Valley. This criterion is based on 
historical evidence (ONHIC 2008) that isolated habitats do not provide 
a hydrologically and ecologically functional system of vernal pool-
mounded prairie, streams, or slopes and wooded systems that surround 
and maintain seasonally wet alluvial meadows. Many small patches of 
plants less than 0.4 ha (1 ac) in size may occur within a single 
critical habitat unit, but in our selection process, we included areas 
of habitat between these patches that provide the PCEs for the species, 
considering them collectively as a complex. We expect plant occurrences 
could occur anywhere within the hydrologically and ecologically 
functional system of habitat provided within such a complex within a 
critical habitat unit.
    (22) Comment: BLM suggests that in the Special Management 
Considerations or Protections section of our rule we include a 
description of mining regulations on Federal lands in the Illinois 
River Valley.
    Our Response: We revised the Background and Special Management 
Considerations or Protections sections of this rule to include more 
information about mining rules, operational plan requirements, and the 
extra regulatory requirements at BLM ACECs.
    (23) Comment: BLM recommends that in the Criteria Used to Identify 
Critical Habitat section of our rule we provide a citation or rationale 
for why Lomatium cookii populations with fewer than 10 individuals 
should not be included in the critical habitat designation.
    Our Response: Our selection criteria specified that areas with 
fewer than 10 individual plants that are isolated (1 km (0.6 mi) 
distance from the next area of appropriate habitat) would not meet the 
definition of critical habitat because such areas do not provide the 
physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the 
species. We based this selection criterion on plant record evidence 
that Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora or Lomatium cookii plant 
occurrences below the 10-individual threshold appear to become 
extirpated

[[Page 42497]]

over time due to lack of habitat quality, available habitat space, or 
proximity to developmental activity (ONHIC 2008).
    (24) Comment: The BLM pointed out that the majority of occurrences 
of Lomatium cookii occur on Federal lands in the Illinois River Valley 
(Josephine County). They indicated that 33 sites, or 70 percent of the 
total number of known sites, occur on BLM lands. However, only 20 
percent of the proposed critical habitat occurs on Federal lands. BLM 
provided maps suggesting areas in the Illinois River Valley where 
critical habitat boundaries could be revised to include additional 
suitable habitat for Lomatium cookii on BLM lands and to remove areas 
with unsuitable habitat on private lands in the following critical 
habitat units: IV3, IV4, IV5, IV11, IV13, and IV14.
    Our Response: We reviewed new aerial photos and performed ground 
truthing in the BLM-managed areas proposed by BLM for inclusion in 
final Lomatium cookii critical habitat units in Josephine County, 
Oregon. We agree that some of these areas contain the physical or 
biological features essential for the conservation of Lomatium cookii. 
Out of the recommended areas, we determined 265 ha (654 ac) of these 
additional BLM lands contain the essential physical or biological 
features for Lomatium cookii and require special management or 
protection, and thus meet the definition of critical habitat. As these 
lands meet the selection criteria for critical habitat as described in 
our original proposal, and all fall within currently described critical 
habitat units, we consider the addition of these Federal lands to be 
within the scope of the original proposed critical habitat designation. 
In addition, we determined that including a portion of these areas 
within the critical habitat designation will not impact any timber 
sales, grazing leases, active mining claims, or other activities on 
these Federal lands, and will not alter the economic analysis of the 
proposed designation. The new areas recommended for inclusion in the 
designation by the BLM are all either designated as ACECs or proposed 
as ACECs. The information provided by the BLM further allowed us to 
refine the proposed critical habitat units and remove areas of private 
lands that do not provide the physical or biological features essential 
to the conservation of Lomatium cookii from the final designation. 
Therefore, upon the recommendation of the BLM, we increased the area of 
critical habitat in units IV3, IV4, IV5, IV11, and IV13 to include 
additional BLM lands in the Lomatium cookii critical habitat 
designation.
    (25) Comment: BLM suggests that Table 1 in the proposed rule and 
the critical habitat unit descriptions include occurrences of the two 
listed species. Also, the agency suggests our critical habitat 
discussion should describe which occurrences are on private, city, 
county, State, or Federal lands.
    Our Response: We provided more information in this rule regarding 
each of the occurrences and whether they occur on private, city, 
county, State, or Federal lands, but did not revise Tables 3-6 in an 
effort to maintain clarity.
Comments Related to the Economic Analysis
    (26) Comment: One commenter stated that the impacts to Jackson 
County associated with the Medford Airport runway expansion project in 
2015 should be quantified as incremental impacts due to the designation 
of critical habitat. This commenter suggested the runway expansion 
would not affect the known Lomatium cookii population located within 
the Airport and therefore mitigation would only be undertaken to offset 
impacts to critical habitat.
    Our Response: As described on pages 3-1 and 3-2 of the final 
economic analysis, all proposed critical habitat in Jackson County is 
vernal pool habitat over which the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) 
maintains jurisdiction. As such, any development project within vernal 
pool habitat in Jackson County must meet the USACE requirements for a 
section 404 permit under the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.); 
this requirement is in effect regardless of critical habitat 
designation.
    The final economic analysis concludes that conservation efforts 
taken to avoid adverse impacts to vernal pool habitat, as required by 
the USACE, will also benefit Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora and 
Lomatium cookii. Furthermore, the incremental impacts identified in the 
final economic analysis arose solely from administrative costs 
associated with the additional effort to address adverse modification 
during future section 7 consultations.
    Minimization and mitigation conservation efforts undertaken under 
section 404 of the Clean Water Act are not expected to change following 
the designation of critical habitat. The economic analysis quantifies 
the impacts of conservation and mitigation efforts for a section 404 
permit associated with the planned expansion of the Medford airport, 
and appropriately assigns these impacts to the baseline, as they would 
be required for the 404 permit even absent the designation of critical 
habitat. As described in section 3.4 of the final economic analysis, 
the Service considers the baseline conservation afforded the plants due 
to the USACE 404 permit mitigation requirements sufficient to avoid 
destruction or adverse modifications of critical habitat. Thus, the 
Service does not anticipate recommending additional conservation 
actions following the designation of critical habitat, and incremental 
impacts are limited to administrative costs of consultation to address 
adverse modification.
    (27) Comment: One commenter asserted that the potential effects of 
critical habitat designation on phytomining operations, or extraction 
of minerals from propagated plant material, should be considered in the 
economic analysis. The commenter mentioned that phytomining is 
beneficial to Lomatium cookii because it reduces competing grasses.
    Our Response: We did not include a discussion of the phytomining 
practice in the proposed rule because this practice is not known to be 
in operation within any of the proposed Illinois River Valley critical 
habitat units. The two native grasses that are associated with Lomatium 
cookii habitat in the Illinois River Valley (Deschampsia cespitosa and 
Danthonia californica) do not cause competition problems for the 
species. In addition, Lomatium cookii often occurs in non-serpentine 
derived soils that would not be desirable for phytomining operations.
    Section 6.6.3 of the final economic analysis describes phytomining 
operations in the vicinity of the proposed critical habitat. The two 
species used in phytomining operations (Alyssum murale and Alyssum 
corsicum) were listed as State noxious weeds by the Oregon Department 
of Agriculture in 2009, resulting in a Statewide prohibition against 
their import into Oregon and their transport, sale, and propagation. 
Under current State regulation, phytomining activities are prohibited 
Statewide, including within the designated critical habitat area. The 
designation of critical habitat is therefore not expected to affect 
phytomining operations.
Summary of Changes from Proposed Rule
    In preparing this critical habitat designation for Limnanthes 
floccosa ssp. grandiflora and Lomatium cookii, we reviewed and 
considered all comments received on the proposed designation of 
critical habitat published on July 28, 2009 (74 FR 37314), and comments 
on the draft economic analysis we made

[[Page 42498]]

available on January 12, 2010 (75 FR 1568). As a result of all comments 
we received on the proposed rule and the draft economic analysis, we 
made changes to our proposed designation. These changes are summarized 
as follows:

 In Jackson County, we adjusted the boundaries of some of the 
proposed critical habitat units to remove those areas that we 
determined do not provide the PCEs to either Limnanthes floccosa ssp. 
grandiflora or Lomatium cookii, resulting in reduced area in seven of 
the units (RV2, RV3, RV4, RV6, RV7, RV8, and RV9). The final critical 
habitat designation in Jackson County represents a reduction of 198 ha 
(487 ac) for Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora and a reduction of 
122 ha (307 ac) for Lomatium cookii from what we proposed.
 In Josephine County, we removed those areas from the proposed 
critical habitat units that we determined do not provide the PCEs to 
Lomatium cookii, resulting in a reduction in size in five of the units 
(IV1, IV2, IV6, IV8, and IV12). We included additional areas that we 
determined provide the PCEs for Lomatium cookii, resulting in the 
expansion of five of the units (IV3, IV4, IV5, IV11, and IV13); all 
area increases are entirely on Federal (BLM) lands. As mentioned in our 
response to Comment 24, the additional specific areas on BLM lands 
meets the selection criteria for critical habitat as described in our 
proposed rule, and the additional area falls within currently described 
critical habitat units; therefore, we consider the addition of these 
Federal lands to be within the scope of the proposed critical habitat 
designation. Through discussions with BLM and information provided by 
BLM, we determined that including a portion of these areas within the 
critical habitat designation will not impact any timber sales, grazing 
leases, active mining claims, or other activities on BLM lands, and 
will not alter the economic analysis of the proposed designation. The 
new areas recommended for inclusion in the designation by the BLM are 
all either designated as ACECs or proposed as ACECs.
    We eliminated Unit IV14, proposed critical habitat for Lomatium 
cookii, from the designation for two reasons: First, because we 
determined from BLM documentation that the habitat was not occupied by 
Lomatium cookii; second, after review of updated aerial photography and 
a recent site visit to the proposed unit, we found the habitat features 
do not meet our selection criteria. We incorporated one small portion 
of proposed Unit IV14 that does provide the PCEs for Lomatium cookii 
into Unit IV13. The final critical habitat designation for Lomatium 
cookii in Josephine County thus represents a reduction of 208 ha (514 
ac) from what we proposed.
    We are finalizing the following final critical habitat designation 
in accordance with section 4(b)(2) of the Act.

 Table 1--Final rule critical habitat unit changes in hectares (acres) for Limnanthes floccosa ssp. grandiflora
                                     in Jackson County (totals are rounded).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Units                   Proposed rule  ha (ac)     Final rule ha (ac)         Change ha (ac)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RV1                                    8 (20)                   8 (20)                   ......
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RV2                                    84 (207)                 69 (169)                 - 15 (38)
------------------