Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a Petition to List Cirsium wrightii (Wright's Marsh Thistle) as Endangered or Threatened, 67925-67944 [2010-27740]
Download as PDF
67925
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 213 / Thursday, November 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 1—WASTES EXCLUDED FROM NON-SPECIFIC SOURCES—Continued
Facility
Address
Waste description
5. Reopener Language—(A) If, anytime after disposal of the delisted waste, Owosso possesses or is otherwise made aware of any data (including but not limited to leachate data
or groundwater monitoring data) relevant to the delisted waste indicating that any constituent is at a concentration in the leachate higher than the specified delisting concentration, or is in the groundwater at a concentration higher than the maximum allowable
groundwater concentration in paragraph (1), then Owosso must report such data, in writing,
to the Regional Administrator within 10 days of first possessing or being made aware of
that data. (B) Based on the information described in paragraph (A) and any other information received from any source, the Regional Administrator will make a preliminary determination as to whether the reported information requires Agency action to protect human
health or the environment. Further action may include suspending, or revoking the exclusion, or other appropriate response necessary to protect human health and the environment. (C) If the Regional Administrator determines that the reported information does require Agency action, the Regional Administrator will notify Owosso in writing of the actions
the Regional Administrator believes are necessary to protect human health and the environment. The notice shall include a statement of the proposed action and a statement providing Owosso with an opportunity to present information as to why the proposed Agency
action is not necessary or to suggest an alternative action. Owosso shall have 30 days
from the date of the Regional Administrator’s notice to present the information. (D) If after
30 days Owosso presents no further information or after a review of any submitted information, the Regional Administrator will issue a final written determination describing the
Agency actions that are necessary to protect human health or the environment. Any required action described in the Regional Administrator’s determination shall become effective immediately, unless the Regional Administrator provides otherwise.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2009–0060; MO
92210–0–0008]
The finding announced in this
document was made on November 4,
2010.
DATES:
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a
Petition to List Cirsium wrightii
(Wright’s Marsh Thistle) as
Endangered or Threatened
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 12-month petition
finding.
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, announce a 12-month
finding on a petition to list Cirsium
wrightii (Wright’s marsh thistle) as
endangered or threatened and to
designate critical habitat under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended. After review of all available
scientific and commercial information,
we find that listing C. wrightii as
endangered or threatened throughout its
range is warranted. Currently, however,
listing of C. wrightii is precluded by
higher priority actions to amend the
Lists of Endangered and Threatened
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
14:44 Nov 03, 2010
Jkt 223001
This finding is available on
the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov at Docket Number
FWS–R2–ES–2009–0060. Supporting
documentation we used in preparing
this finding is available for public
inspection, by appointment, during
normal business hours by contacting the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, New
Mexico Ecological Services Office, 2105
Osuna NE, Albuquerque, NM 87113.
Please submit any new information,
materials, comments, or questions
concerning this finding to the above
address.
ADDRESSES:
AGENCY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
*
Wildlife and Plants. Upon publication
of this 12-month petition finding, we
will add C. wrightii to our candidate
species list. We will develop a proposed
rule to list C. wrightii as our priorities
allow. We will make any determination
on critical habitat during development
of the proposed rule. In the interim
period, we will address the status of the
candidate taxon through our annual
Candidate Notice of Review.
*
[FR Doc. 2010–27886 Filed 11–3–10; 8:45 am]
SUMMARY:
*
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Wally ‘‘J’’ Murphy, Field Supervisor,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, New
Mexico Ecological Services Field Office
(see ADDRESSES); by telephone at 505–
346–4781; or by facsimile at 505–346–
2542. If you use a telecommunications
device for the deaf (TDD), please call the
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
*
*
Federal Information Relay Service
(FIRS) at 800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Endangered
Species Act (Act) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.) requires that, for any petition to
revise the List of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife that contains
substantial scientific and commercial
information that listing may be
warranted, we make a finding within
12 months of the date of 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 species are
threatened or endangered, and
expeditious progress is being made to
add or remove qualified species from
the Federal Lists of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife and Plants. Section
4(b)(3)(C) of the Act requires that we
treat a petition for which the requested
action is found to be warranted but
precluded as though resubmitted on the
date of such finding, that is, requiring a
subsequent finding to be made within
12 months. We must publish these
findings in the Federal Register.
Previous Federal Actions
On October 15, 2008, we received a
petition from the WildEarth Guardians,
dated October 9, 2008, requesting that
E:\FR\FM\04NOP1.SGM
04NOP1
67926
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 213 / Thursday, November 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
we list Cirsium wrightii (Wright’s marsh
thistle) as endangered or threatened
under the Act. Additionally, the
petitioner requested that critical habitat
be designated concurrent with listing of
C. wrightii. In a November 26, 2008,
letter to the petitioner, we responded
that we had reviewed the petition and
determined that an emergency listing
was not necessary. We also stated that,
to the maximum extent practicable, we
would address their petition within 90
days.
The petition asserted that water
diversion, habitat loss and degradation
through current livestock grazing,
inadequate regulatory mechanisms,
weed control, nonnative species,
drought, and climate change threaten C.
wrightii. During our review of the
petition, we found that the majority of
information cited in the petition was not
readily available to us. Therefore, on
December 18, 2008, we requested that
the petitioner provide references. On
February 13, 2009, the petitioner
provided additional references.
On September 10, 2009, we published
a 90-day finding in the Federal Register
that the petition presented substantial
information that listing C. wrightii may
be warranted. That document also
initiated a status review of the
subspecies (74 FR 46542). On February
11, 2010, WildEarth Guardians filed suit
against the Service for failure to issue a
12-month finding on the petition
(WildEarth Guardians v. Salazar, No.
10-cv-00122 BRB–DJS (D.N.M.)).
Pursuant to a stipulated settlement
agreement, the 12-month finding is due
to the Federal Register by October 31,
2010. This notice constitutes our 12month finding for the petition to list C.
wrightii as threatened or endangered
with critical habitat.
Species Information
Cirsium wrightii is a biennial (a plant
completing development in 2 years,
flowering its second year) or a weak
monocarpic perennial (a plant that
flowers, sets seed, then dies), in the
sunflower family (Asteraceae). The
plant is prickly with short black spines
and a 3- to 8-foot (ft) (0.9- to 2.4-meter
(m)) single stalk covered with succulent
leaves (Sivinski 1996, p. 1; Arizona
Game and Fish Department (AGFD)
2001, p. 1). Numerous slender flowering
branches emerge from the stalk, starting
about one-third up the length of the
plant. Branches are terminated by one or
a few small flowering heads, which
have numerous slender phyllaries (a
modified leaf associated with the
flower) (Sivinski 1996, p. 1). Flowers are
white to pale pink in areas of the
Sacramento Mountains of New Mexico,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:44 Nov 03, 2010
Jkt 223001
but are vivid pink in the Santa Rosa,
New Mexico, locality (Sivinski 1996, p.
1). In New Mexico, the species occurs in
wet, alkaline soils in spring seeps and
marshy edges of streams and ponds
between 3,450 and 7,850 ft (1,152 and
2,393 m) in elevation (Sivinski 1996, p.
1; 2005a, pp. 3–4; Worthington 2002a).
Cirsium wrightii is a wetland obligate
(occurs only in water-saturated soils)
that was originally collected in 1851 at
San Bernardino Cienaga, Cochise
County, Arizona (Gray 1853, p. 101;
Smithsonian 1849, p. 1). Historically,
the species was found in Arizona, New
Mexico, and Chihuahua, Mexico (Gray
1853, p. 101; Coulter 1891, p. 244;
Kearney and Peebles 1951, p. 952;
Correll and Johnston 1970, p. 1719; U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (Service)
1995, p. 1). Recently it was learned that
an occurrence of another sunflower,
Cirsium texanum (Texas thistle), in
Presidio County, Texas, had been
incorrectly identified as C. wrightii
(Poole 2010, p. 1). All of the previously
presumed specimens of C. wrightii from
Texas have now been correctly
identified as Cirsium texanum (Texas
thistle), rather than C. wrightii (Sivinski
1994a, p. 1; 1996, p. 2; 2006a, p. 1;
Worthington 2002a, p. 4). These species
are easily confused on herbarium sheets
(Sivinski 1996, p. 2). However, in the
field, C. wrightii differs from C. texanum
in physical appearance (New Mexico
Rare Plant Technical Council
(NMRPTC) 2009, p. 1)). The presumed
Texas specimens of C. wrightii that were
previously identified from herbarium
sheets, rather than field identification,
have been found to be C. texanum
(Sivinski 1996, p. 2).
In the New Mexico portion of the
species’ range, Cirsium wrightii appears
to be an obligate of seeps, springs, and
wetlands that have saturated soils with
surface or subsurface water flow
(Sivinski 1996; Service 1998;
Worthington 2002a, p. 2; NMRPTC
2009). Plants commonly found in areas
inhabited by this species include
Scirpus spp. (bulrush), Salix spp.
(willow), Baccharis glutinosa
(seepwillow), Helianthus paradoxus
(Pecos sunflower), Juncus spp. (rush),
and Typha spp. (cattail) (Sivinski 1996,
pp. 2–5; Sivinski and Bleakly 2004, p.
2; Worthington 2002a, pp. 1–2).
Distribution and Range
Cirsium wrightii currently occurs in
New Mexico; however, it has been
extirpated from all previously known
locations in Arizona (Sivinski 1996, pp.
1, 4, 9, 2006a, 2009a, p. 1; Worthington
2002a, p. 4), and was misidentified and
likely not ever present in Texas (Poole
1992; 2010; Sivinski 1996, p. 2). The
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
status of the species in Mexico is
uncertain, with few verified collections
of the plant. Numerous surveys of
potential habitat have been conducted
over the years with few new localities
documented (e.g., Poole 1992, 2010;
Sivinski 1994, 1996, 2005, 2009a;
Worthington 2002a).
Cirsium wrightii is ranked by
NatureServe as a G2 (imperiled) species.
It was changed from G3 (vulnerable) to
G2 in 2003 (NatureServe 2009, p. 1).
Similarly, its National Status ranking for
the United States is N2 (imperiled due
to a restricted range and very few
populations) (NatureServe 2009, p. 2).
Though these rankings do not provide
any regulatory protections, the
NatureServe designations do serve to
notify the public of the species’ status.
In New Mexico, there are eight
general confirmed locations of Cirsium
wrightii: Santa Rosa, Guadalupe County;
Bitter Lake National Wildlife Refuge
(BLNWR), Chaves County; Blue Spring,
Eddy County; La Luz Canyon, Karr
Canyon, Silver Springs, and Tularosa
Creek, Otero County; and Alamosa
Creek, Socorro County (Bridge 2001, p.
1; Sivinski and Bleakly 2004, p. 2;
NMRPTC 2009, p. 1; Sivinski 1994, p.
1; 1996, p. 2; 2005, p. 1; 2005a, pp. 3–
5; 2009, 2009a; Service 1998, p. 1;
Worthington 2002, p. 1; 2002a, pp. 1–3).
Four of the eight localities are clustered
within about 10 miles (mi) (16
kilometers (km)) of each other on the
west slope of the Sacramento
Mountains, Otero County, whereas the
remaining four localities are widely
disjunct, separated from the Sacramento
localities by about 75 to 140 mi (120 to
225 km) and from each other by about
75 to 215 mi (120 to 345 km). In the
Sacramento Mountains, two of these
four localities occur on the Lincoln
National Forest, one locality is on
private land and the remaining locality
is on the Mescalero Apache Reservation.
In the Pecos River Valley, one locality
is on public lands on the BLNWR,
Chaves County; one is on private land
near the Black River, Eddy County; and
one is in the vicinity of Santa Rosa,
Guadalupe County, on private,
municipal, and State lands. The
remaining locality is on private land on
Alamosa Creek, Socorro County.
Localities vary in relative population
size from less than 20 individuals
covering only about 50 square feet (ft2)
((5 square meters (m2)) at the Silver
Springs locality, to several thousand
individuals on BLNWR.
Within New Mexico, historic
localities from the City of Roswell land,
Chaves County, Lake Valley in Sierra
County, and La Luz and Haynes
Canyons in Otero County are extirpated
E:\FR\FM\04NOP1.SGM
04NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 213 / Thursday, November 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules
(NMRPTC 2009, p. 2; Sivinski 2005, p.
1; 2005a p. 4; 2009a, p. 2). Finally, a
Cirsium species at Rattlesnake Springs,
Eddy County, is thought to be a hybrid
between C. wrightii and C. texanum
(NMRPTC 2009, p. 2). This population
blooms in May rather than the typical
season of C. wrightii from August to
October (NMRPTC 2009, p. 2).
We are unaware of specific long-term
monitoring data on absolute abundance
estimates for Cirsium wrightii in New
Mexico, but have estimates of relative
abundance for most extant localities (see
also Sivinski 1996, 2005a, 2006a, 2009,
2009a). In 1996, Sivinski completed a
status assessment of C. wrightii in New
Mexico (Sivinski 1996). He
subsequently continued to survey and
monitor C. wrightii localities.
Worthington (2002a) conducted surveys
at 12 sites that contained suitable
habitat in Karr Canyon, the Rio Penasco
drainage, and in the vicinity of
Sacramento Lake in the Sacramento
Mountains on U.S. Forest Service
(Forest Service) land in 2002. Moreover,
he surveyed additional springs, but
found most springs were capped or
captured for municipal use by the City
of Alamogordo (Worthington 2002a, p.
3). No new C. wrightii populations were
found, although one possible new
locality with plants that lacked the
characteristic black tips and had
different looking leaves was noted
(Worthington 2002). However, the
locality was not photographed,
collected, or verified and the accuracy
of its identification is unknown.
In Arizona, the Service has similarly
contracted surveys of potential Cirsium
wrightii habitat to verify whether any
populations are extant. These will be
completed by October 2010. Below, we
present information on all of the known
historic and extant localities of C.
wrightii rangewide, including those that
have been extirpated.
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
New Mexico
Tularosa Creek
The Tularosa Creek, Otero County,
population of Cirsium wrightii occurs on
private land and the Mescalero Apache
Reservation. This population has
significantly declined since 1995, from
an estimated several thousand
individual plants along 3.5 mi (5.6 km)
of nearly continuous occupied marsh
and wet meadows, to four scattered
occupied locales of less than 50
individual flowering plants total along
the same stretch in 2009 (Sivinski 1996,
p. 3; 2009a, p. 2). In 1995, this was the
most extensive population in the
Sacramento Mountains, but it has
become drier and dominated by the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:44 Nov 03, 2010
Jkt 223001
invasive plant Phragmites australis
(common reed) since the 1995 survey
(Sivinski 1996, p. 3; 2009a, p. 2). This
population likely includes additional
small adjacent localities of scattered
individual plants on the Mescalero
Apache Reservation, but we were
unable to survey these Tribal lands (e.g.,
see Bridge 2001; Worthington 2002a).
Moreover, the possible new locality
found by Worthington (2002) occurs in
the area.
La Luz Canyon
The small La Luz Canyon population
of Cirsium wrightii that occurs within
about 540 ft2 (50 m2) of spring habitat
on Forest Service lands was stable at an
estimated 50 plants both in 1995 and
2005 (Sivinski 1996, p. 3; 2005a, p. 4).
However, an adjacent small population
of 10 plants in the same general area on
private land 3 mi (5.8 km) east of La Luz
Canyon was extirpated between 1995
and 2005, most likely from a severe
scouring flood and alteration of the
spring hydrology that led to the drying
of habitat (Sivinski 2005a, p. 4; 2009a,
p. 2).
Karr Canyon
The Karr Canyon/Haynes Creek
population of Cirsium wrightii
previously included a cluster of a
hundred plants within about 1000 ft2
(100 m2) of spring habitat within a
highway right-of-way that was stable
between 1995 and 2005 (Sivinski 1996,
p. 2, 2005a, p. 4). Nevertheless, a small
population of a few dozen mature plants
in the same general area on private land
was extirpated between 1995 and 2005
and replaced by Phragmites australis
(Sivinski 1996, p. 2, 2005a, p. 4; 2009a,
p. 2).
Silver Springs Canyon
The small Silver Springs Canyon
population of Cirsium wrightii occurs on
Forest Service land in a wet meadow
and was estimated at 16 mature plants
in 2002 (Worthington 2002, p. 4; 2002a,
p. 15). The population was observed in
July 2010 and appears to be
approximately the same size (Service
2010b, p. 1). This population is growing
within a seep and is adjacent to C.
vinaceum (Sacramento Mountains
thistle) (Worthington 2002, p. 4).
Bitter Lake National Wildlife Refuge
A large population of Cirsium wrightii
was found at BLNWR in 1998 and is
associated with cienagas (wet meadows)
and marshes in Units 3, 5, and 6 of the
refuge (Service 1998, p. 1; 2010, p. 1).
All known populations of C. wrightii on
BLNWR grow within designated critical
habitat of Helianthus paradoxus
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
67927
(Service 2010a, p. 6). When C. wrightii
was discovered on BLNWR, the
population was estimated between
1,680 and 2,130 flowering plants
(Service 1998, p. 1; 1999, p. 25).
Sivinski (2005a, p. 3) found there was
no change in this population’s
distribution and abundance between
1999 and 2005. In 2009, the population
was estimated to be thousands of
individuals, the largest known
population of C. wrightii (Sivinski
2009a, p. 2).
Roswell
Cirsium wrightii historically occurred
in North Spring, at the Roswell Country
Club, Roswell, New Mexico (Sivinski
1996, p. 4). However, the population has
been extirpated following the alteration
and loss of all vegetation, including C.
wrightii, as a result of the enclosure of
North Spring with bricks and cement
(Sivinski 1996, p. 4; New Mexico
Department of Game and Fish (NMDGF)
2005a, p. 18). Sivinski surveyed most of
the springs in the vicinity of Roswell in
1995 looking for C. wrightii populations
(Sivinski 1996, p. 4). All but one spring
had been capped and diverted for
domestic water, and no extant or new
populations were found (Sivinski 1996,
p. 4).
Santa Rosa Wetlands
The Santa Rosa area is a zone of karst
topography (an area of erosive
limestone), with numerous sinkhole
lakes and artesian springs (ground water
that is under pressure) within a 6-mi
(9.7-km) diameter circular depression.
The localities of C. wrightii are scattered
within some of the marshes, spring
seeps, and various sinkhole lakes, with
flowering plants generally rare and
occurring throughout 4 sections spread
out over 4 square miles (mi2) (10 square
kilometers (km2)) on a mixture of State,
private, and municipal lands, but the
total area occupied in this locality is
less than 5 acres (ac) (2 hectare (ha))
(Sivinski 1996, p. 4; Sivinski and
Bleakly 2004, pp. 1, 3; Service 2010c,
pp. 1–2). For example, the 116-ac (47ha) Blue Hole Cienaga locality, owned
by the State of New Mexico, is part of
the overall population and contains
sparse occurrences (i.e., not continuous
in distribution) of C. wrightii along a
spring-fed creek and an adjacent seep
(Sivinski and Bleakly 2004; Service
2010c). The other known localities in
the area include El Rito Creek, private
lands, ponds at a no-longer-used fish
hatchery, Bass Lake, and Perch Lake (a
large sinkhole that is partially
developed for fishing and picnicking)
(Sivinski 1996; 2005a; 2010a; Sivinski
and Bleakly 2004). Most of the
E:\FR\FM\04NOP1.SGM
04NOP1
67928
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 213 / Thursday, November 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules
municipal habitats are small, but have
been filled and developed for recreation.
This active filling of wetlands has led to
the loss of C. wrightii plants in recent
years (Service 2010c). These localities
support perhaps a few hundred C.
wrightii, but the remaining localities are
smaller, isolated occurrences (Sivinski
1996, p. 6, 2009a; 2010a, p. 1; Sivinski
and Bleakly 2004, p. 3). Between 1995
and 2005, the overall Santa Rosa
population was thought to be stable,
estimated at several thousand plants
(Sivinski 1996, p. 4; 2005a, p. 3).
Blue Spring
A new population of Cirsium wrightii
was discovered in 2009 at Blue Spring,
Eddy County, New Mexico (Sivinski
2009). This population was estimated at
several hundred to a few thousand
plants and occupies about 1 mi (1.6 km)
of riparian habitat (Sivinski 2009, p. 1).
Water flow at Blue Spring is generally
perennial along the 2.5-mi (4-km) run
that flows into the Black River (a
tributary of the Pecos) near Black River
Village, New Mexico (NMDGF 2007, p.
15). We have no other information on
this locality, as it was just discovered in
2009.
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Alamosa Springs
Another population of Cirsium
wrightii was discovered in 2005 at
Alamosa Springs, Socorro County, New
Mexico (Sivinski 2005, p. 1). There were
an estimated 500–1,000 flowering adults
and rosettes confined to a small, springfed wetland within the Alamosa Creek
Valley (a tributary of the Rio Grande),
but none of the plants occurred along
Alamosa Creek (Sivinski 2005, p. 1;
2010a, pp. 1–2). The remaining springs
in the Alamosa Creek Valley are on
private land and have not been
surveyed.
Lake Valley
A population of Cirsium wrightii was
historically located within Lake Valley,
Sierra County, New Mexico, but is
considered extirpated (Sivinski 2005).
This site is now an abandoned mining
settlement, but was historically a series
of marshes and cienagas. The area was
diked, channeled, and drained in the
early 1900s and converted to row-crop
agriculture (Sivinski 2005, p. 1). There
is no longer suitable habitat for C.
wrightii within the valley (Sivinski
2005, p. 1).
Arizona
San Bernardino Cienaga
The population at the type locality
(the place where the species was first
found) from San Bernardino Cienaga,
Arizona, has not been found again since
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:44 Nov 03, 2010
Jkt 223001
it was originally collected in 1851,
although the area was surveyed in 2006
by The Nature Conservancy (Sivinski
2006a, p. 1; 2009a, p. 1). The species is
likely extirpated from the State (ADGF
2001, p. 1; Sivinski 1996, p. 4; 2009a,
p. 1; Service 2009a, p. 1).
Texas
We found that Cirsium specimens
from Texas have been confused because
of the difficulty in distinguishing
Cirsium wrightii and C. texanum from
herbarium sheets (Sivinski 1994, p. 1;
1994a, p. 1; Sivinski 2006a, p. 1). All of
the collections from herbariums and
references identifying C. wrightii
localities in Texas are in error (Coulter
1881, p. 244; Correll and Johnson 1970,
p. 1719; Kearney and Peebles 1951, p.
952; Martin and Hutchins 1981, p. 2002;
Sivinski 1994, p. 1; 1996, p. 5; Texas
A&M University 1975, p. 89).
Furthermore, the presumed location
from Presidio, Texas, that we identified
in the 90-day finding (74 FR 46544), is
not C. wrightii, but most likely an
undescribed species from northern
Mexico (Poole 2010, p. 1).
Poole (1992) evaluated 74 cienagas in
Texas and conducted botanical surveys
at 33 of the locations within the highest
potential habitat (i.e., springs and
wetlands) for the Helianthus paradoxus,
which has similar habitat requirements
and sometimes overlaps with C.
wrightii. No C. wrightii locations were
found during these extensive botanical
surveys (Poole 1992). Similarly, we
reviewed information from and
contacted botanists who have surveyed
the Diamond Y Preserve, Pecos County,
Texas, owned by The Nature
Conservancy. This preserve shares some
of the same habitat characteristics, and
many of the imperiled species, found on
BLNWR, including Pecos assiminea
(Assiminea pecos), Pecos gambusia
(Gambusia nobilis), and Helianthus
paradoxus (Service 2005, pp. 4, 8; 2007,
p. 10; Poole 2010, p. 1). We found that
Diamond Y has been thoroughly
surveyed, and it does not appear that C.
wrightii occurs on the preserve. Because
we do not have any verified historic
collections or known extant populations
from any locations in Texas (Poole 2010,
p. 1; 2010a, p. 1), we conclude that C.
wrightii has never been present within
the State.
Mexico
We have not been able to obtain any
recent information on Cirsium wrightii
in Mexico. In fact, we have located only
three herbarium specimens that were
collected in Mexico. One specimen was
collected in 1982 at Cerro Angostura
Spring, Chihuahua, Mexico (Sivinski
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2009a, p. 1, 2010; CONABIO 2010). The
second collection from Los Azules,
Chihuahua, in 1998, was misidentified
and is not C. wrightii. The third
collection from Fronteras, Sonora, in
1890, has not yet been verified (Sivinski
2010, p. 1). As such, the status of the
species in Mexico is uncertain.
In summary, there are eight general
localities of Cirsium wrightii extant
within New Mexico. Additional
historical populations have been
extirpated, including at least two larger
and two smaller populations in New
Mexico, and there are no known extant
populations in Arizona. The population
at BLNWR is likely the most robust,
with several thousand individuals.
Santa Rosa contains mostly sparse
scattered localities throughout four
sections of land, and some of these have
been extirpated recently. The
population along Tularosa Creek has
undergone a significant reduction since
1995. The remaining populations in the
Sacramento Mountains are all small,
containing from 15 to perhaps several
hundred individuals. The populations
at Blue Spring and Alamosa Springs
were recently discovered, and there
have been no subsequent surveys to
determine whether these populations
are stable or declining. The collections
from Texas were misidentified, and we
conclude C. wrightii never occurred in
the State. Finally, there is only one
verified historic collection from Mexico,
and no recent information on the status
of the species from this population. For
these reasons, the status of this species
remains tenuous.
Summary of Information Pertaining to
the Five Factors for Cirsium wrightii
Section 4 of the Act and
implementing regulations (50 CFR part
424) set forth procedures for adding
species to the Federal Lists of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants. Under section 4(a)(1) of the
Act, a species may be determined to be
endangered or threatened based on any
of the following five factors:
(A) The present or threatened
destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range;
(B) Overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes;
(C) Disease or predation;
(D) The inadequacy of existing
regulatory mechanisms; or
(E) Other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence.
In making this finding, information
pertaining to Cirsium wrightii, in
relation to the five factors provided in
section 4(a)(1) of the Act, is discussed
below.
E:\FR\FM\04NOP1.SGM
04NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 213 / Thursday, November 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
In making our 12-month finding on a
petition to list Cirsium wrightii, we
considered and evaluated the best
available scientific and commercial
information. This information includes
the petition and associated documents,
data from the 1995 through 2009
surveys and recent reports (Sivinski
1996, 2005a, 2006a, 2009, 2009a; Forest
Service 2008b; Service 2010b, 2010c), as
well as other information available to
us. The following analysis examines the
five factors described in section 4(a)(1)
of the Act and those activities and
conditions currently affecting C.
wrightii, or are likely to affect the
species within the foreseeable future.
In considering what factors might
constitute threats to a species, we must
look beyond the exposure of the species
to a particular factor to evaluate whether
the species may respond to that factor
in a way that causes actual impacts to
the species. If there is exposure to a
factor and the species responds
negatively, the factor may be a threat
and, during the status review, we
attempt to determine how significant a
threat it is. The threat is significant if it
drives, or contributes to, the risk of
extinction of the species such that the
species warrants listing as endangered
or threatened as those terms are defined
in the Act. However, the identification
of factors that could impact a species
negatively may not be sufficient to
compel a finding that the species
warrants listing. The information must
include evidence sufficient to suggest
that these factors are operative threats
that act on the species to the point that
the species may meet the definition of
endangered or threatened under the Act.
A. Present or Threatened Destruction,
Modification, or Curtailment of the
Species’ Habitat or Range
The most significant threat to Cirsium
wrightii is the alteration of the
hydrology of its rare wetland habitat. In
fact, much of the habitat of C. wrightii
has been and continues to be severely
altered and degraded because of past
and present land and water management
practices including: agriculture and
urban development, diversion of
springs, and drought. As described
below, all of the extant localities may be
affected by long-term drought, whereas
four of the largest C. wrightii localities
at Blue Spring, BLNWR, Santa Rosa, and
Alamosa Creek have the potential to be
further modified by ongoing and future
water withdrawal. Changes in water
tables throughout the range of C.
wrightii have often resulted in
diminished discharge from springs or
complete loss of surface water.
Therefore, there has been a trend of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:44 Nov 03, 2010
Jkt 223001
diminishing habitat quantity and
excessive degradation of habitat quality
for the species throughout its range.
Availability of Water
Cirsium wrightii is found in
association with seeps, springs,
marshes, and wetlands that have
saturated soils with surface or
subsurface water flow (NMRPTC 2009;
Sivinski 1996, pp. 2–7; Service 1998, p.
2; Worthington 2002a, p. 2).
Southwestern riparian and aquatic
systems fluctuate due to seasonal and
longer term drought and wet periods,
floods, and fire. Habitats with
fluctuating water levels create
circumstances in which population
sizes may vary over time, and
populations may be periodically
extirpated. Because the species occurs
only in areas that are water-saturated,
populations have a high potential for
extirpation when habitat dries due to
ground and surface water depletion,
draining of wetlands, or drought. Loss of
water from C. wrightii habitat occurs
through changing precipitation patterns,
drought, or as a result of human impacts
from groundwater pumping
(withdrawal) or diversion of surface
water; this can lead to the degradation
and extirpation of Cirsium wrightii
habitat (Sivinski 1996, p. 5; 2005, p. 1;
Forest Service 2008, p. 19). Moreover,
the drying of C. wrightii habitat has led
to retractions of occurrence boundaries,
a reduction in the numbers of plants,
and, in some cases, a loss of all
individuals at several localities
(Sivinski 2005a, pp. 3–4). For example,
during the dry conditions from 1994 to
1996, many seeps and springs in the
Sacramento Mountains ceased flowing
and were completely dry (Sivinski
2006b, p. 12). Naturally occurring water
loss from changes in precipitation
patterns have affected the volume of
water flow at numerous springs in the
Sacramento Mountains (Forest Service
2003, p. 43).
Drought
The National Weather Service
Forecast Office and the U.S. Drought
Monitor for New Mexico indicate that
the Sacramento Mountains experienced
a severe to extreme drought from 2003
to 2008 (Forest Service 2008, p. 22).
This has led to unusually low stream or
spring flows and, in some instances, no
flow (e.g., see South Central Mountain
2002, p. 12; Shomaker 2006, p. 8;
Gardner and Thompson 2008, p. 2;
Newton et al. 2009; Sivinski 2005a, pp.
3–4, Forest Service 2003, pp. 53–54).
This is likely related to severe drought
conditions (Sivinski 2005a, pp. 1, 3–4).
Within New Mexico, monsoonal
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
67929
summer precipitation can be very
patchy, with some areas receiving
considerably less rainfall than others.
Newton et al. (2009) studied the
hydrogeology of the Sacramento
Mountains and found that the fractures
in the underlying geology exhibit
significant control on surface and
groundwater flow and possibly
groundwater recharge. Overall, their
data suggest that the recharge of water
wells and groundwater is correlated to
the amount of precipitation during
monsoon storms at all elevations
(Newton et al. 2009, p. 22). Wet periods
during summer months can significantly
contribute to recharge of the ground
water in the Sacramento Mountains, but
these are extremely rare events (Newton
et al. 2009). As such, drought has
impacted the recharge of ground water
tables throughout the Sacramento
Mountains (Forest Service 2008, p. 22).
For this reason, the seasonal
distribution of yearly precipitation can
result in temporary drought conditions
and reduced water availability for some
C. wrightii localities within this
mountain range.
In 1995 and 2005, Sivinski (2005a, pp.
3–4) monitored the relative size of
Cirsium wrightii localities rangewide to
document the relationship between
water availability in suitable habitat and
numbers and extent of plants. He found
that, when some localities dried, the
localities were either extirpated or much
reduced in size (Sivinski 2005a, pp. 3–
4). Moreover, drying of occupied habitat
also resulted in Typha latifolia (cattail)
being replaced by dense stands of
Phragmites australis (Sivinski 2005a,
pp. 3–4), which may outcompete native
vegetation including C. wrightii and
significantly increase the threat of
wildfire (see discussion below under
‘‘Phragmites australis’’).
Drought also affects the size of an
extant locality, even when the water
source does not dry out completely. The
most severe drought recorded in New
Mexico occurred between 1950 and
1956. If drought reduces the amount of
groundwater recharge regionally, spring
discharge or the areal extent of wetlands
could also be reduced. Prolonged
drought can lead to diminishment or
drying of springs, which would have a
negative impact on Cirsium wrightii or
its habitat. Comparing historical
discharges reported in the Black River
from 1952 to 1956 (daily mean flow of
15.4 cubic feet per second (cfs) (0.436
cubic meters per second (cms))) to
recent discharges (2002 to 2006, daily
mean flow of 10.1 cfs (0.286 cms)),
flows in the Black River are currently
lower than flows during the extreme
drought of the 1950s (NMDGF 2007, p.
E:\FR\FM\04NOP1.SGM
04NOP1
67930
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 213 / Thursday, November 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules
26). Prolonged drought could adversely
impact habitat conditions by reducing
hydrologic discharge through the
wetland system, thereby desiccating
riparian plant communities (e.g., see
NMDGF 2008, p. 33), including C.
wrightii. Because of the documented
extirpation and population reductions
of the species caused by drought and the
possibility of more widespread drought
accompanying climate change, we
conclude that drought constitutes a
threat to C. wrightii, both now and in the
foreseeable future.
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Ground and Surface Water Depletion
Habitat loss due to ground and surface
water depletion is a threat to Cirsium
wrightii. Sivinski (1994, pp. 1–2; 1996,
p. 4; 2005, p. 1; 2006, p. 4) reported loss
or degradation of habitat from water
diversion or draining of wetlands in
Chaves, Otero, and Sierra Counties, New
Mexico, areas that historically
supported Cirsium wrightii. Increased
water extraction in the last 100 years
has contributed to the dramatic decline
of most surface spring systems in the
Chihuahuan Desert (see Corps 2006, p.
4; Karges 2003 and references therein).
An historical population in Lake Valley,
Sierra County, New Mexico, was
extirpated when the wetlands were
drained and converted to agricultural
use (Sivinski 2005, p. 1; 2006a, p. 1).
Moreover, the appropriation of water
rights from springs for a ‘‘beneficial
use,’’ such as livestock water, farming,
domestic use, or recreational facilities,
typically uses points of diversion that
can curtail natural surface flows and
affect C. wrightii populations. For
example, aquifers in the Sacramento
Mountains, which contain half of all
known C. wrightii localities, are
susceptible to appropriation by existing
water rights and development of new
water rights, which may pose future
threats to the species (Service 2008, pp.
12, 23; Forest Service 2008, pp. 23–24).
The marshes, springs, and seeps within
La Luz Canyon of the Sacramento
Mountains are currently and were likely
historically diverted or drained for
irrigation and agricultural use (Sivinski
1996, p. 5; South Central Mountain
2002, p. 20). Many springs and streams
in the Sacramento Mountains that were
perennial during the 1900s have become
intermittent or have dried completely,
including La Luz Creek (Abercrombie
2003, p. 3). In this area, loss of water
flow from human activities related to
roads, trails, and the capture of spring
water for municipal use have also been
observed to affect the threatened species
Cirsium vinaceum (Forest Service 2003,
pp. 42–43). The same likely holds true
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:44 Nov 03, 2010
Jkt 223001
for C. wrightii, although it has not been
specifically investigated.
The severe decline in available
surface and ground water since the
1990s is due largely to drought and
human use (e.g., Shomaker 2006, pp. 8,
20, 26). Cirsium wrightii occurrences in
La Luz Canyon are within the municipal
supply watershed, where pipelines
divert water to the City of Alamogordo
(Shomaker 2006, pp. 20, 26; Forest
Service 2008, p. 21). The number of
water wells drilled on both private and
National Forest System lands within
this area has increased since the 1950s,
with the 1980s and 1990s being the
most active years for drilling of
domestic use wells (Forest Service 2008,
p. 22). The total permitted groundwater
extraction is approximately 2,400 acre
feet per year (300 hectare-meters per
year) (98,000,000 gallons per year)
(370,000,000 liters per year) from nearly
300 wells (Forest Service 2008, p. 22).
In 2002, the New Mexico State
Engineer declared the La Luz Canyon
watershed as a Critical Management
Area, which means no new groundwater
appropriations would be allowed for
nondomestic purposes (Forest Service
2008, p. 22). However, for domestic
purposes, the demand for water use
through surface diversion and ground
water withdrawals is expected to
increase as a result of the population
increase. The human population in
Alamogordo, Otero County, New
Mexico, increased from about 30,000 to
36,000 from 1995 to 2000, and is
expected to increase to about 56,000 by
2040 (South Central Mountain 2002, p.
11). An increasing human population
and its associated agricultural and
economic activities will require
additional water from this relatively dry
region.
Current New Mexico State law
provides that anyone may obtain a
permit for a domestic well, no matter
what the consequences for anyone else’s
water rights or the impact of water
resources for the area (e.g., see Belin et
al. 2003, p. 72). Between 2005 and 2045,
the City of Alamogordo’s water demand
is expected to increase from 7,140 acrefeet per year to 10,842 acre-feet per year
(881 hectare-meters per year to 1337
hectare-meters per year) (Shomaker
2006, pp. 43–44). By 2045, the City of
Alamogordo will likely have a projected
deficit of 6,258 acre-feet per year (772
hectare-meters per year) (more than 2
billion gallons per year) (more than 8
billion liters per year) (Shomaker 2006,
p. 44). Withdrawal and diversion of
water from wells located on Forest
Service and private lands would
continue to increase for the foreseeable
future and compound the effects of the
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
recent and ongoing drought, leading to
increased degradation of wetland and
riparian habitat (Forest Service 2008, p.
23), which contain Cirsium wrightii
localities. In the Sacramento Mountains,
C. wrightii occurrences have been and
will continue to be altered and
potentially degraded by the issuance of
a special use permit to maintain and
operate water withdrawal from Forest
Service lands (Forest Service 2008, p.
26). Development of additional water
rights will likely dewater C. wrightii
localities, constituting a threat to the
species in this area for the foreseeable
future.
Moreover, the Blue Spring and Santa
Rosa occurrences of Cirsium wrightii are
within areas where water is currently
drained from wetlands or diverted or
withdrawn for domestic use, which may
contribute to degradation and loss of its
habitat (Sivinski 1996, p. 5; 2009; 2009a;
NMDGF 2007, pp. 14, 17, 22).
Additionally, any activity that would
interrupt the flow of water from
Alamosa Creek has the potential to
impact C. wrightii. Currently, irrigation
and domestic use from about 50 farms
does not appear to have reduced the
baseflow of about 9 cfs (0.3 cms) from
this spring-fed system (Sierra Soil and
Water Conservation Service 2008, p. 2).
However, Alamosa Creek would likely
be negatively affected by long-term
drought.
The effects of ongoing and past
maintenance and operation of existing
water diversions can also limit the size
of Cirsium wrightii populations (Corps
2007, p. 29). For example, the C.
wrightii population on City of Roswell
lands has been extirpated at this
location since the habitat is no longer
suitable for the plant (NMDGF 2005, pp.
33–34; Sivinski 1996, pp. 4–5; 2006a, p.
5). Loss of springs and surface water
flow in streams resulting from human
use and drought have occurred
throughout the Roswell Artesian Basin
in New Mexico, often resulting in
diminished discharge from springs or
complete loss of surface water (Taylor
1983, 1987; NMDGF 2005, 2005a, p. 17;
Jones and Balleau 1996, pp. 4, 12).
Many of these spring systems could
have harbored populations of C.
wrightii; however, it is not possible to
determine the extent of the loss of C.
wrightii populations because many
springs went dry before surveys could
be conducted. Peak annual pumping of
the alluvial aquifer (a water-bearing
deposit of sand and gravel) in the
Roswell Basin occurred in the 1950s.
Since the 1950s, administration and
metering of groundwater extraction in
the basin by the New Mexico Office of
the State Engineer has resulted in
E:\FR\FM\04NOP1.SGM
04NOP1
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 213 / Thursday, November 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules
stabilization of groundwater levels
(NMDGF 2005a, p. 18).
As artesian wells were developed in
the area, discharge from the major
springs declined proportionately and
some of these springs cease to flow
(Jones and Balleau 1996, p. 4). Surface
water flow on BLNWR has also been
diminished by groundwater pumping,
as evidenced by the dead springs on Salt
Creek and documented reduction in
spring flows on the refuge (Jones and
Balleau 1996; p. 12). Aerial photos
which show a larger, meandering
channel for Bitter Creek are also
evidence that discharge from Bitter
Creek was once greater (Service 2005a;
70 FR 46312, August 9, 2005).
Additionally, BLNWR actively lowers
the water levels in wetlands during
spring and summer (Service 2006, p. 2).
It is unknown how C. wrightii responds
to these changing water levels on the
refuge, but if soils are not continuously
saturated throughout the growing
season, the species is likely impacted.
Information from other localities
suggests that populations likely contract
or habitat may become invaded by
Phragmites australis as water is
withdrawn and parts of the occupied
wetlands dry (e.g., Sivinski 2005a, pp.
3–4).
Surface diversions, primarily for
irrigation, and groundwater pumping for
domestic and commercial uses also
occurs at the Blue Spring locality
(NMDGF 2007, p. 22; Lusk 2008). Flow
in the Black River is sustained by
springs, including Rattlesnake and Blue
Springs, and is generally perennial in
the reaches around these springs
(NMDGF 2007, p. 15). Discharge at Blue
Spring has varied over the past 100
years: in 1907, it was recorded at 15.2
cfs (0.430 cms), with a minimum of
14.65 cfs (0.415 cms) (Bjorklund and
Motts 1959, pp. 251, 263); from 1952 to
1956, discharge varied from 8.5 to 14 cfs
(0.24 to 0.40 cms), with a mean of 12 cfs
(0.34 cms) (Bjorklund and Motts 1959,
p. 268); and from 2002 to 2006, the
mean was 11.75 cfs (0.333 cms), with a
range from 6.8 to 23 cfs (0.19 to 0.65
cms) (NMDGF 2007, p.15). Bjorklund
and Motts (1959, pp. 247, 263) first
reported that water levels within the
Black River Valley (including Blue
Spring) decline during the late summer
and during droughts, mostly from heavy
groundwater pumping and lack of
aquifer recharge. Based on flows
recorded in recent years (2000–2006) at
Blue Springs and in the Black River
above the Carlsbad Irrigation District
diversion, more surface water is
appropriated than is available in the
system (R. Turner, New Mexico Office
of the State Engineer, pers. comm., April
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:44 Nov 03, 2010
Jkt 223001
2007; cited in NMDGF 2007, p. 25). This
constitutes a significant threat to this
locality.
In summary, the alteration and loss of
habitat that currently supports C.
wrightii, due to groundwater and surface
water depletion, will continue and
likely increase in the foreseeable future.
Because this species is dependent on
water, we find that long-term drought in
combination with ground and surface
water withdrawal is currently a
significant threat to C. wrightii and its
habitat, and will continue to be in the
foreseeable future.
Climate Change
The Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) states that
warming of the climate system is
unequivocal, based on observations of
increases in global average air and ocean
temperatures, widespread melting of
snow and ice, and rising global average
sea level (2007a, p. 5). For the next two
decades, a warming of about 0.4 degrees
Fahrenheit (°F) (0.2 degrees Celsius (°C))
per decade is projected (IPCC 2007a, p.
12). Temperature projections for the
following years increasingly depend on
specific emission scenarios (IPCC 2007a,
p. 13). Various emissions scenarios
suggest that average global temperatures
are expected to increase by between 1.1
°F and 7.2 °F (0.6 °C and 4.0 °C) by the
end of the 21st century, with the
greatest warming expected over land
(IPCC 2007a, p. 13). Warming in western
mountains is projected to cause
decreased snowpack, more winter
flooding, and reduced summer flows,
exacerbating competition for overallocated water resources (IPCC 2007b,
p. 14). The IPCC reports that it is very
likely that hot extremes, heat waves,
and heavy precipitation and flooding
will increase in frequency (IPCC 2007b,
p. 18).
Based on current understanding of
climate change, air temperatures are
expected to rise and precipitation
patterns are expected to change in areas
occupied by Cirsium wrightii. Because
C. wrightii occupies relatively small
areas of spring or seep habitat in an arid
region plagued by drought and ongoing
aquifer withdrawals (e.g., in the Roswell
Basin), it may be vulnerable to climatic
changes that could decrease the
availability of water to suitable habitat.
For example, the most severe drought
recorded in New Mexico occurred
between 1950 and 1956. Based on the
discharges reported in the Black River
(fed by Blue Spring, the C. wrightii
locality, and other spring sources) from
1952 to 1956 (daily mean of 15.4 cfs
(0.436 cms)) compared to recent
discharges (2002 to 2006, daily mean of
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
67931
10.1 cfs (0.286 cms)), flows in the Black
River are currently lower than during
the drought of the 1950s (NMDGF 2007,
p. 31). Moreover, Sivinski (2005a, pp.
3–4) reports that springs and wet valleys
have been affected by drought in at least
three canyons of the Sacramento
Mountains, New Mexico, resulting in
reduced C. wrightii populations. Similar
water loss may occur within other C.
wrightii localities, as analyzed above. If
climate change leads to future drought,
additional dewatering and reduction of
C. wrightii habitat may occur.
Although the information available on
climate change indicates that New
Mexico will be impacted (New Mexico
Climate Change Advisory Group 2006,
p. 1), there is no information specific to
the effects of climate change on Cirsium
wrightii or its habitat. Reliable
predictive models have not been
developed for use at the local scale (i.e.,
the eight occupied localities), and there
is little certainty regarding the timing
and magnitude of the resulting impacts.
For example, the vulnerability of C.
wrightii habitats to a drying climate
depends, in large part, on the sources of
their water supply. The sources of water
to C. wrightii habitats are precipitation,
surface water, and groundwater.
Habitats that are sustained mainly by
precipitation are the most likely to be
affected in a drying climate.
Alternatively, localities that are
supplied primarily by groundwater will
likely have the greatest resistance to
climate change due to water stored in
aquifers (e.g., see Poff et al. 2002, pp.
18–19). However, based on projections
made by the IPCC, we consider climate
change to be a potential exacerbating
factor, worsening the impacts of other
known threats. These threats include
habitat degradation from prolonged
periods of drought and increased
temperature, and the allocation of water
for use by the human population and
agriculture as well as a number of
potential confounding effects. In
summary, we do not have evidence
indicating that climate change is
currently a factor affecting C. wrightii’s
existence, because the information
available on the subject is insufficiently
specific to the species or the possible
current or future effects of climate
change on the sources of their water
supply. However, we consider climate
change to be a potential exacerbating
factor and will continue to evaluate new
information on the subject as it becomes
available.
Introduced Plants
Introduced plants increase the
potential for habitat loss due to wildfire
and competition with Cirsium wrightii.
E:\FR\FM\04NOP1.SGM
04NOP1
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
67932
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 213 / Thursday, November 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules
Phragmites australis has recently
invaded half of the known C. wrightii
localities (BLNWR, Tularosa Creek,
Santa Rosa, and Karr Canyon), forming
dense stands in areas and increasing
fuel load and threat of wildfire.
Standing dead canes of P. australis and
associated litter often constitute twice as
much biomass as living shoots (Forest
Service 2010). The high productivity
and density of P. australis stands
provide fuel loads that are often high.
This abundant dead fuel carries fire
well, allowing stands to burn even when
the current year’s shoots are green
(Forest Service 2010).
As an example, on March 5, 2000, the
Sandhill fire burned 1,000 ac (405 ha)
of the western portion of the BLNWR,
including portions of Bitter Creek. The
fire burned through Dragonfly Spring,
eliminating the vegetation shading the
spring. Although Cirsium wrightii does
not occur immediately within the
burned area, the changes to wetland
vegetation exemplify how its habitat
might respond following wildfire. The
pre-fire dominant vegetation of
submerged aquatic plants and mixed
native grasses within the burned area
has been replaced by the invasive
Phragmites australis (NMDGF 2005,
p. 19–21). The P. australis present at
BLNWR is likely of European origin
(Service 2006, p. 5). Prior to the
wildfire, small patches of P. australis
occurred throughout Bitter Creek,
whereas post-fire, P. australis colonized
the burned area to form a continuous
dense stand (NMDGF 2005, pp. 19–21).
Stands of P. australis have also recently
become a dominant plant in other C.
wrightii localities (Sivinski 2005a, pp.
3–4; Sivinski and Bleakly 2004, p. 5).
Controlled burns have been
implemented on BLNWR to burn grass,
sedge, cattail, and nonnative vegetation
(e.g., Salsola spp. (Russian thistle and
tumbleweed)), in an attempt to reduce
the risk of large uncontrolled wildfires
by removing excessive amounts of
Salsola spp. and P. australis (Service
2006). This may temporarily reduce the
threat of wildfire in one area of BLNWR,
but repeated prescribed burns are likely
needed to continually suppress P.
australis growth (Service 2006, pp. 4–5).
No measures are being implemented
in the other localities to reduce P.
australis. Moreover, temperatures from
prescribed burns are rarely high enough
to be lethal to P. australis or to penetrate
deeply into the wet or moist soils
common in their habitat (Forest Service
2010 and references therein). Prescribed
fire burns above-ground parts of P.
australis, but below-ground rhizomes
usually survive and produce plants later
in the growing season or in subsequent
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:44 Nov 03, 2010
Jkt 223001
years (Forest Service 2010 and
references therein). Rarely is P. australis
abundance decreased by fire, and
postfire recovery is typically rapid. As
such, prescribed fire likely will do little
to reduce the long-term threat of P.
australis to C. wrightii.
In addition to increasing the potential
for wildfire, Phragmites australis can
also quickly invade a site and take over
a wetland, crowding out native plants
and changing hydrology (Plant
Conservation Alliance 2005, p. 1). The
dense plant growth blocks sunlight to
other plants growing in the immediate
area and occupies all available habitat,
turning many wetlands into dense
stands that support only P. australis
(Plant Conservation Alliance 2005, p. 1).
Two Cirsium wrightii localities have
recently been either extirpated (an
occurrence in Karr Canyon), or
significantly reduced in size (Tularosa
Creek), following an expansion of P.
australis (Sivinski 1996, p. 2, 2005a,
p. 4; 2009a, p. 2). P. australis is a
current threat and will likely be a
continuing threat for C. wrightii
localities through increased fire risk,
competition, and changes in hydrology,
especially when habitat is disturbed
through burning or drying.
Ungulate Grazing
Grazing likely impacts some localities
of Cirsium wrightii, but does not appear
to be a widespread threat to the species.
It is estimated that livestock grazing has
damaged approximately 80 percent of
stream and riparian ecosystems in the
western United States (Belsky et al.
1999, p. 419). The damage occurs from
increased sedimentation, decreased
water quality, and trampling and
overgrazing of stream banks where
succulent forage exists (Armour et al.
1994, p. 10; Belsky et al. 1999, p. 419;
Fleischner 1994, p. 631). Moreover,
many acres of marsh habitats at Santa
Rosa have also been plowed and
converted to Festuca pratensis (meadow
fescue) pasture for livestock grazing
(Service 2005, p. 10; Corps 2007, p. 25).
In the semi-arid southwestern United
States, wet marshes and other habitat of
C. wrightii attract ungulates because of
the availability of water and highquality forage (e.g., see Hendrickson and
Minckley 1984, p. 134). Similar to C.
vinaceum, dry periods likely increase
the effects of livestock trampling and
herbivory on C. wrightii when other
water and forage plants are not available
(75 FR 30761, June 2, 2010). Grazing
may be more concentrated within
habitats similar to those occupied by C.
wrightii during drought years, when
livestock are prone to congregate in
wetland habitats or where forage
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
production is greater than in adjacent
dry uplands (e.g., see Forest Service
2003). Although no studies specifically
related to the effects of livestock grazing
on C. wrightii have been conducted
(NMRPTC 2009, p. 2), livestock will
likely eat C. wrightii when other green
forage is scarce, and when the seedlings
or rosettes are developing and abundant.
The localities in the Sacramento
Mountains, Santa Rosa, Alamosa
Springs, and Blue Spring have the
potential to be subjected to trampling
and herbivory (75 FR 30762; NMDGF
2000, p. 2, 2004, p. 7, 2005, p. 47; Corps
2007, p. 25; Service 1994, p. 6, 2005c,
p. 2). For example, about three quarters
of C. wrightii were grazed at one locality
near Santa Rosa (Corps 2007, p. 25).
Additionally, much of the private wet
meadows and marsh habitats in the
Santa Rosa area have been severely
degraded by livestock grazing for many
years (Sivinski and Bleakly 2004).
Except for Blue Hole Cienaga, we are
not aware of any fences enclosing these
localities that would limit impacts to
the species. In the Sacramento
Mountains, for example, springs and
marshes provide a majority of the
watering sites for both livestock and
wildlife species, especially elk (75 FR
30762). These wet springs and marshes
are subject to trampling and hoof
damage, and receive especially heavy
use during drought periods, when
neither water nor green forage are
readily available elsewhere. Trampling
could easily result in damage to
seedlings, rosettes, and flowering stalks,
thereby preventing reproduction by
affected plants. It is possible that elk
and livestock grazing within and
adjacent to spring ecosystems could
alter or remove habitat or limit the
distribution of Cirsium wrightii;
however, we found little information to
support this possibility. Still, we believe
the observations of livestock and elk
herbivory and trampling that directly
affect C. vinaceum and its habitat likely
are also occurring in some of the C.
wrightii localities; however, it is
unknown whether these are localized or
widespread threats to the species.
In summary, while livestock activities
do not appear to be a widespread threat
at the current time, localized impacts
have been observed, and increased use
of wet springs and marshes during
drought conditions constitutes a threat
in the foreseeable future. We will
continue to monitor livestock grazing
and trampling to determine whether C.
wrightii is threatened.
Wetland Filling and Development
As described below, wetland filling
and development has impacted the
E:\FR\FM\04NOP1.SGM
04NOP1
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 213 / Thursday, November 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules
Santa Rosa locality, but does not appear
to be a threat to the species. A
substantial percentage of wetlands in
the Santa Rosa area have disappeared in
the last 50 to 80 years (Metric
Corporation et al. 2002, p. 5). Springs
that fed suitable habitat for Helianthus
paradoxus and likely also contained
Cirsium wrightii have been converted to
swimming pools and fishing ponds or
drained and filled for sports fields in the
towns of Roswell and Santa Rosa, New
Mexico (e.g., see Sivinski and Bleakly
2004, p. 1; Service 2005, p. 8).
Moreover, some springs and associated
wetlands where C. wrightii occurred
have been drained and developed, and
the potential for further development
exists (Metric Corporation 2001; Metric
Corporation et al. 2002; Sivinski 2009a,
p. 1; Sivinski and Bleakly 2004, p. 1;
Service 2008b, p. 42).
Some of the Cirsium wrightii
occurrences within the Santa Rosa
locality continue to be impacted
through filling and development and
regular mowing. C. wrightii occurs at the
Blue Hole fish hatchery ponds that are
owned by the City of Santa Rosa
(Sivinski 1996, p. 4). The City of Santa
Rosa plans to dredge and fill these
ponds for municipal use in the
foreseeable future (Service 2008b, p. 42),
which would undoubtedly impact the
species. A similar action occurred in
2001 when the C. wrightii population at
Power Dam Municipal Park in Santa
Rosa was extirpated when the reservoir
was drained (Sivinski 2005a, p. 3;
2009a, p. 1). Numerous wetlands in
Santa Rosa were also lost many years
ago to an impoundment, in which 17
ponds were created and used for a fish
hatchery. The fish hatchery has since
been abandoned, and all but four of the
ponds filled. The remaining adjacent
116 ac (47 ha) of the Blue Hole Cienaga
were purchased by the State of New
Mexico to protect habitat that includes
the Federally threatened Helianthus
paradoxus, C. wrightii, and the Stateendangered Spiranthes
magnicamporum (Great Plains lady’s
tresses) (New Mexico State Forestry
2008, p. 1). Although we are not aware
of any other specific residential or
commercial development plans at this
or other localities, actions that drain or
fill wetlands or other habitat occupied
by the species would impact C. wrightii.
Summary of Factor A
In summary, we found that past and
present alteration of rare desert springs,
seeps, and wetland habitats that support
Cirsium wrightii is a significant threat.
The four largest localities of C. wrightii
at Blue Spring, BLNWR, Santa Rosa, and
Alamosa Creek have the potential to be
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:44 Nov 03, 2010
Jkt 223001
further modified by ongoing and future
water withdrawal. Changes in water
tables throughout the range of C.
wrightii have also resulted in
diminished discharge from springs or
complete loss of surface water.
Therefore, there has been a trend of
diminishing habitat quantity and
excessive degradation of habitat quality
for the species throughout its range, as
a result of agriculture and urban
development, diversion of springs, and
drought. Moreover, the presence of and
effects from Phragmites australis
threatens C. wrightii localities through
increased fire risk, competition, and
changes in hydrology. On the basis of
the information presented above, we
find that Cirsium wrightii may be
threatened by the present or threatened
destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat, both now and
in the foreseeable future.
B. Overutilization for Commercial,
Recreational, Scientific, or Educational
Purposes
We do not have any evidence of risks
to Cirsium wrightii from overutilization
for commercial, recreational, scientific,
or educational purposes, and we have
no reason to believe this factor will
become a threat to the species in the
future. Therefore, we find
overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes does not threaten C. wrightii
now or in the foreseeable future.
C. Disease or Predation
Disease
Cirsium wrightii is not known to be
affected or threatened by any disease.
Therefore, we find that disease does not
threaten C. wrightii now or in the
foreseeable future.
Insect Predation
Native and nonnative insect
populations have the potential to impact
the condition, reproduction, and
distribution of Cirsium wrightii.
Observed seed predators on the similar
C. vinaceum in the Sacramento
Mountains include Paracantha gentilis,
a native specialist gall fly; Platyptilia
carduidactyla, the native artichoke
plume moth; Euphoria inda, a native
generalist bumble flower beetle;
Rhinocyllus conicus, an introduced
seed-head weevil; and Trichosirocalus
horridus, an introduced rosette weevil
(Sivinski 2008, pp. 1–11; Gardner 2010,
pp. 2–3). There have been intentional
releases of Rhinocyllus conicus to
control Carduus nutans (musk thistle)
(Sivinski 1994, p. 2; 2007, p. 6;
NMRPTC 2009, p. 2; Bridge 2001, p. 1;
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
67933
AGFD 2001, p. 2). This exotic weevil
has recently been found in habitat
occupied by C. wrightii, C. vinaceum,
and the exotic Carduus nutans at the
Silver Springs locality (Sivinski 2007,
p. 6; Gardner and Thompson 2008, p. 4).
It is not known where Trichosirocalus
horridus came from or whether they
were intentionally released (Gardner
2010, p. 3); however, this exotic rosette
weevil is also present in Carduus
nutans populations ranging from the
northern extent of the Mescalero
Apache reservation south to Agua
Chiquita canyon in the Sacramento
Mountains.
Rhinocyllus conicus is not host
specific to Carduus species and has
been found living on 22 of the North
American Cirsium species (Louda et al.
2003). This weevil is available from
commercial suppliers and is easily
gathered and transported from
established colonies. Breeding and egg
placement by R. conicus begins in midJune, peaks in early July, and continues
into August (Sivinski 2008, p. 5). Newly
hatched larvae bury into the flower head
and feed on the tissue. Most R. conicus
at the Silver Springs locality emerge
from the flower heads by early
September; however, some immature
larvae were still present in the flower
heads of C. vinaceum in September
(Sivinski 2008, p. 5). Flower heads of C.
wrightii grow during late July to early
August, which overlaps with developing
and feeding larvae of R. conicus. The
establishment of R. conicus beyond the
Silver Springs locality will likely occur
in the near future because stands of C.
nutans are common in many of the
drainages throughout the Sacramento
Mountains (Gardner and Thompson
2008, p. 4), and we are concerned that
it may spread to C. wrightii populations.
For these reasons, we intend to monitor
localities in the Sacramento Mountains
to determine whether C. wrightii could
be a potential host and possibly
threatened by R. conicus infestations.
Trichosirocalus horridus, feeds on
Carduus nutans during the rosette stage,
killing first-year rosettes and stopping
the growth of older plants. This weevil
is available from commercial suppliers
or can be gathered and transported from
established colonies (Flanders et al.
2001, p. 4; Jennings et al. 2010, pp. 4–
5). Moreover, T. horridus is capable of
spreading at least a mile (1.61 km) per
year on their own (Flanders et al. 2001,
p. 4). Adults emerge from summer
resting places in the fall. They lay eggs
in the midrib of thistle leaves, and
complete egg-laying in the spring. After
10 to 12 days, the eggs hatch, and the
young weevils tunnel from the midrib
into the rosette, feeding and causing
E:\FR\FM\04NOP1.SGM
04NOP1
67934
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 213 / Thursday, November 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules
damage or possibly killing the crown
tissue. The new adults emerge in May
and June, feed briefly, and pass the
summer in a period of inactivity
(Flanders et al. 2001, p. 3). We are
concerned about potential effects to C.
wrightii and intend to monitor C.
wrightii localities to determine if this
introduced rosette weevil threatens the
species.
Rhinocyllus conicus and a native
predator, the stem borer weevil (Lixus
pervestitus), caused a widespread
premature stem death to the flower
heads of the Silver Springs population
of the endangered C. vinaceum, which
co-occurs with C. wrightii (Sivinski
2007, pp. 8–12). These 2 insects
collectively damaged up to 99 percent of
C. vinaceum within the Silver Springs
locality, resulting in nearly complete
die-off of flowering stems (Sivinski
2008, p. 9, 2009b). Thus far, L.
pervestitus has not been found on C.
vinaceum outside of the Silver Springs
population, and little is known about
this insect species in New Mexico
(Sivinski 2008, pp. 10–11).
Nevertheless, the reproductive output of
the population of C. vinaceum at Silver
Springs was greatly reduced by these
insects. Similarly, it is unknown if these
weevils feed on C. wrightii or have the
same level of impact as that of C.
vinaceum.
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Summary of Factor C
In summary, it is not known at this
time whether insect predators would
decrease seed production and increase
the threat to the existence of C. wrightii
populations. The potential for insect
predators to become a threat to C.
wrightii in the future needs to be
monitored and evaluated. Therefore, we
intend to monitor populations,
especially in the Sacramento
Mountains, for impact due to insect
predation.
D. The Inadequacy of Existing
Regulatory Mechanisms
One primary cause of decline of
Cirsium wrightii is the loss, degradation,
and fragmentation of habitat due to
human activities. Federal and State laws
have been insufficient to prevent past
and ongoing losses of the limited habitat
of the species, and are unlikely to
prevent further declines.
Clean Water Act
Pursuant to section 404 of the Clean
Water Act (CWA) (33 U.S.C. 1344), the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)
regulates the discharge of dredged or fill
material into all waters of the United
States, including wetlands. In general,
the term ‘‘wetlands’’ refers to areas
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:44 Nov 03, 2010
Jkt 223001
meeting the Corps criteria of having
hydric (wet) soils, hydrology (either a
defined minimum duration of
continuous inundation or saturation of
soil during the growing season), and a
plant community that is predominantly
hydrophytic vegetation (plants
specifically adapted for growing in a
wetland environment). Much of the
habitat occupied by Cirsium wrightii
qualifies as wetlands.
Any discharge of dredged or fill
material into waters of the United
States, including wetlands, requires a
permit from the Corps. These include
individual permits, which would be
issued following a review of an
individual application, and general
permits that authorize a category or
categories of activities in a specific
geographical location or nationwide (33
CFR parts 320–330). General and special
permit conditions may vary among the
various general permits. Although the
use of any individual or general permit
requires compliance with the Act when
there are threatened or endangered
species present, only three (Santa Rosa,
BLNWR, and Silver Springs) of the eight
localities co-occur with either
Helianthus paradoxus or Cirsium
vinaceum, which are both listed under
the Act. Even at these three localities,
we are not aware of any protections that
have been provided by the CWA.
While the CWA provides a means for
the Corps to regulate the discharge of
dredged or fill material into waters and
wetlands of the United States, it does
not always provide adequate protection
of wetlands. Private and State
landowners of wetlands are often
unaware of this permitting requirement,
and may fill or drain their lands without
requesting determination of wetland
status or a permit (Service 2005, p. 22).
For example, in 2003, the New Mexico
Department of Transportation violated
the CWA in the right-of-way of Highway
91 in Santa Rosa within Helianthus
paradoxus habitat (Service 2008c, p. 12;
New Mexico Department of
Transportation 2003, pp. 1–2). In 2001,
the New Mexico Department of
Transportation also mowed Helianthus
paradoxus in the wetland within the
right-of-way of La Pradira Avenue (now
Blue Hole Road) and proposed to
destroy at least 20 C. wrightii plants in
conjunction with reconstruction of the
road (Metric Corporation 2001, pp. 12,
21). Many applicants are required to
provide compensation for wetlands
losses (i.e., no net loss), and many
smaller impact projects remain largely
unmitigated, unless specifically
required by other environmental laws
such as the Act. Specifically, we found
that C. wrightii localities are not
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
currently protected from the
construction and maintenance of
irrigation facilities and functionally
related structures, which are exempt
from Section 404 of the CWA, and
therefore, do not receive any general
protections that may have resulted from
status determination and permitting
process by the Corps (e.g., see Corps
2007). Finally, we are not aware of any
Corps permits that have been issued for
the habitat where this species occurs or
historically occurred, indicating that
there is little protection provided to C.
wrightii through the CWA.
Additionally, recent court cases limit
the Corps’ ability to utilize the CWA to
regulate the discharge of fill or dredged
material into the aquatic environment
within the current range of Cirsium
wrightii (Solid Waste Agency of
Northern Cook County v. U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, 531 U.S. 159 (2001)
(SWANCC)). Additionally, there may be
instances where wet marshes occupied
by C. wrightii lack sufficient connection
to waters of the United States for the
Corps to assert jurisdiction under the
authority of the CWA. For example, the
Corps frequently cites the SWANCC
decision as their reason for not taking
jurisdiction over water bodies that do
not meet the definition of waters of the
United States. For these reasons, we
conclude that regulation of wetland
filling by the Corps under the CWA is
inadequate to protect C. wrightii from
further decline.
State of New Mexico
The State of New Mexico lists Cirsium
wrightii as endangered under the New
Mexico Endangered Plant Species Act
(9–10–10 NMSA). As such, C. wrightii is
protected from unauthorized collection,
transport, or sale. This law prohibits the
taking, possession, transportation and
exportation, selling or offering for sale
of any listed plant species. Listed
species can be collected only under
permit from the State of New Mexico for
scientific studies and impact mitigation.
However, this law does not provide any
protection for C. wrightii habitat.
Moreover, there are no statutory
requirements under the jurisdiction of
the State of New Mexico that serve as an
effective regulatory mechanism for
reducing or eliminating the threats (see
Factors A and C above) that may
adversely affect C. wrightii or its habitat.
Nor are there any requirements under
the New Mexico State statutes to
develop a recovery plan that will restore
and protect existing habitat for the
species. Therefore, the species does not
have a recovery plan, conservation plan,
or conservation agreement. For these
reasons, we find that existing New
E:\FR\FM\04NOP1.SGM
04NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 213 / Thursday, November 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules
Mexico State regulatory mechanisms are
currently inadequate to protect C.
wrightii. As noted, these designations
provide no regulatory protection for the
habitat or the species to prevent further
decline.
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Other Federal Protections
Under the Federal Land Policy and
Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C.
1701 et seq.) and the National Forest
Management Act of 1976 (16 U.S.C.
1600 et seq.), the Forest Service is
directed to prepare programmatic-level
management plans to guide long-term
resource management decisions. Under
this direction, Cirsium wrightii is on the
Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species
List (Forest Service 2008a). The Forest
Service policy (FSM 2670.3) states that
biological evaluations must be
completed for sensitive species and
signed by a journey-level biologist or
botanist. The Lincoln National Forest
will continue developing biological
evaluation reports and conducting
analyses under the National
Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C.
4321 et seq.) for each project that will
affect Cirsium wrightii or its habitat.
Nevertheless, only 2 of the 8 general
localities occur on Forest Service lands,
and these are extremely small,
composed of less than 70 plants total.
Therefore, even if protections were
afforded to the species due to its Forest
Service sensitive-species status, the
number of localities are insufficient to
conserve C. wrightii rangewide.
Incidental Protections Resulting From
Association With Other Listed Species
BLNWR was established in 1937 as
wintering and breeding grounds for
migratory birds. Cirsium wrightii was
not known to occur on the refuge until
1998 (Service 1998). Consequently,
management was directed primarily at
creating dikes so that ponds could be
created and their water levels controlled
for the benefit of waterfowl. This likely
was beneficial to C. wrightii by
unknowingly creating more habitat.
Although current management of
BLNWR recognizes and includes
Federally listed species in its
maintenance and operations, because C.
wrightii is not a Federally threatened or
endangered species, we are aware of
only one project that has specifically
considered and incorporated measures
to limit impacts on the species or
specifically analyzed whether actions
proposed by the refuge would cause any
adverse effects (Service 2010a, p. 7).
Summary of Factor D
In summary, Cirsium wrightii receives
inadequate protection from the CWA.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:44 Nov 03, 2010
Jkt 223001
Similarly, the species lacks adequate
regulatory protection from its various
designations—a Forest Service sensitive
species, or endangered status by the
State of New Mexico, because these
designations only serve to notify the
public of the species’ status and do not
require conservation or management
actions. We are not aware of any other
existing regulatory mechanisms.
Cirsium wrightii is currently threatened
by the inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms. This will continue into the
foreseeable future.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors
Affecting the Species’ Continued
Existence
Hybridization
Cirsium wrightii is capable of
crossbreeding with other native Cirsium
species to produce hybrid offspring
(Correll and Johnston 1979, p. 1719;
NMRPTC 2009, p. 2; Worthington 2002).
For example, Cirsium species observed
at Rattlesnake Springs (Carlsbad
Caverns National Park), New Mexico,
show characteristics that are
intermediate between C. wrightii and C.
texanum (NMRPTC 2009, p. 2). This
Cirsium population blooms in May
rather than in August through October,
as is typical of C. wrightii. C. wrightii
sometimes occurs with the threatened C.
vinaceum in the Sacramento Mountains,
where a few hybrids between these rare
taxa have been observed; however,
hybrid plants are uncommon (Service
2008a, p. 13; Worthington 2002). While
hybridization between C. wrightii and
other Cirsium species has been
observed, it is uncommon, and does not
appear to be a threat to C. wrightii.
Herbicide Use
Cirsium wrightii is likely eliminated
from its habitat by individuals that
believe it is a noxious weed, due to its
large and conspicuous size (Sivinski
1996, p. 10). At least one locality in the
Sacramento Mountains is currently
susceptible to herbicide application or
mowing because it is found in
association with an introduced weed
(Arctium minus (burdock)) within the
highway right-of-way that is frequently
treated (Sivinski 1996, p. 6). Another
locality of C. wrightii in the Sacramento
Mountains is surrounded by dense
stands of Centaurea melitensis (Malta
star-thistle) that could also potentially
be treated with herbicides (Sivinski
1996, p. 6). If herbicides are applied to
other localities, C. wrightii could be
impacted. For example, in June 2007, on
Federal Highway 82 in Otero County, a
misapplication of herbicide by the State
of New Mexico Department of
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
67935
Transportation injured or killed C.
wrightii, as well as the Federally
threatened species C. vinaceum and
Argemone pleiacantha ssp. pinnatisecta
(Sacramento prickly poppy) (Tonne
2007). Additionally, in June 2010,
herbicide was applied to the highway 91
right-of-way in Santa Rosa, likely killing
or injuring C. wrightii and Helianthus
paradoxus (Service 2010c, p. 1).
The indirect effects of herbicide
application also have the potential to
affect the species. For example, in 2002,
shortly after application in upland
areas, heavy rains washed the common
herbicide tebuthiuron into Threemile
Draw, a tributary to the Black River, in
the vicinity of the Blue Spring locality
(NMDGF 2007, p. 24). Farmers
downstream in Malaga reported damage
to irrigated crops from this herbicide. It
is unknown whether this affected C.
wrightii, but demonstrates that indirect
effects from herbicide application on
upland areas may also impact riparian
vegetation. After reviewing this
information, we find that effects from
herbicide use have the potential to
impact C. wrightii, but are currently not
known to be impacting most localities.
Oil and Gas Development and Mining
Oil and gas development occurs in
some areas occupied by Cirsium
wrightii. Since 2001, there has been a
significant expansion of oil and gas
operations in Eddy County, especially
within the Black River watershed and,
in particular, around Blue Spring
(NMDGF 2007, pp. 18–19; NMDGF
2005, p. 35). Several low-water
crossings span the Black River. Transit
of heavy trucks carrying petroleumderived products could result in surface
water contamination from leakage or
accidents (NMDGF 2007a, p. 20).
Similarly, oil and gas development in
this area of southeastern New Mexico
has the potential to impact groundwater
(Goodbar 2007, pp. 213–214). As an
example, there is a history of oil and gas
industry operations on and adjacent to
BLNWR, which have resulted in the
spillage of oil and brine onto the refuge
(Service 2005a; NMDGF 2002, pp. 3–4).
Development of oil and gas wells is
anticipated to continue into the
foreseeable future in the proximity of C.
wrightii habitat (e.g., see Service 2005a,
p. 46306). Oil drilling also occurs
throughout the Roswell Basin and Eddy
County, New Mexico (NMDGF 2002, pp.
2–4, 2005a, pp. 25, 78; Service 2005a, p.
46315; Goodbar 2007). This activity and
associated actions can threaten the
water quality of the aquifer on which
this species depends. Petroleum
contamination has also been reported
from the Black River and areas adjacent
E:\FR\FM\04NOP1.SGM
04NOP1
67936
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 213 / Thursday, November 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
to BLNWR (NMDGF 2005a, pp. 18–19;
Richard 1989).
Additionally, a permit was recently
issued by the New Mexico Energy,
Minerals and Natural Resources
Department for subsurface drilling and
exploration of the mineral bertrandite
on Sullivan Ranch (New Mexico Mining
and Minerals Division 2010), near the C.
wrightii locality at Alamosa Springs,
Socorro County, New Mexico, which
has the potential to affect the species
(Sivinski 2009c; NMDGF 2000).
However, no specific assessment of
potential water quality threats has been
conducted, and it is unknown whether
a decrease in water quality from oil and
gas development or contamination from
exploration of minerals would affect the
growth or reproduction of C. wrightii to
such an extent as to constitute a
widespread threat to the species.
Nevertheless, oil and other
contaminants from development and
drilling activities throughout these areas
could enter the aquifer supplying the
springs and seeps inhabited by C.
wrightii when the limestone layers are
pierced by drilling activities. An
accidental oil spill or groundwater
contamination has the potential to
pollute water sources that support C.
wrightii and potentially threaten the
species in the foreseeable future,
although it is unclear whether these
impacts would be localized or
widespread threats to the species.
Invasive Plants
The potential impact of Phragmites
australis on Cirsium wrightii habitat has
been discussed in threat factor A, above.
The following additional invasive
terrestrial plant species have the
potential to affect C. wrightii at most
localities: Lythrum salicaria (purple
loosestrife), Elaeagnus angustifolia
(Russian olive), Tamarix ssp., Salsola
spp., Dipsacus fullonum (teasel),
Carduus nutans, Conium maculatum
(poison hemlock), Centaurea melitensis,
Cirsium arvense (Canada thistle), and
Cirsium vulgare (bull thistle). These
plants present unique challenges and
potential threats to the habitat of C.
wrightii. However, most of the exotic
plants cannot tolerate the continuously
saturated substrates that are typical in C.
wrightii habitats.
For example, Carduus nutans infests
much of the riparian habitat on Lincoln
National Forest (Gardner and Thompson
2008, pp. 1, 4), but does not appear to
impact C. wrightii through competition.
Sivinski (1996, p. 6) reports that
Tamarix spp. and E. angustifolia are
becoming dominant in many riparian
and wetland areas, but that these
species likely do not threaten C. wrightii
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:44 Nov 03, 2010
Jkt 223001
because C. wrightii grows in saturated
substrates that are not suitable habitat
for these exotic trees. Nevertheless, they
do invade wetlands when the area dries
(e.g., due to severe drought) and, once
they become established, can survive in
wet habitats when the moisture returns
(Sivinski 2007, p. 2). Still, Tamarix ssp.
may impact spring habitats primarily
through the amount of water it
consumes, and from the chemical
composition of the leaves it drops on
the ground and into the springs.
Tamarix ssp. leaves add salt to the soil
through its leaf litter (the leaves contain
salt glands) (Di Tomaso 1998). Because
Tamarix ssp. grow along the edge of
water courses, it is possible that this
could affect the soil chemistry of areas
inhabited by C. wrightii. However, no
research has been conducted
specifically on the effect of Tamarix ssp.
or E. angustifolia on C. wrightii.
Salsola spp. (Russian thistle;
tumbleweed) is another introduced
plant species that has the potential to
degrade spring ecosystems. Salsola spp.
is not a riparian species like Tamarix
spp. (salt cedar) or Phragmites australis;
however, the plant can accumulate in
spring channels following wind storms.
In 2005, BLNWR conducted an
emergency Intra-Service consultation
under section 7 of the Act for the
removal of Salsola spp. and Kochia
scoparia (tumbleweed) from a spring
ditch (Service 2005b). Wind had blown
these plants into the channel to a depth
of 3 to 4 ft (0.9 to 1.2 m), completely
shading the water and overloading the
small channel with organic material.
Noel (1954, p. 124) also reported Salsola
spp. accumulating in a spring near
Roswell. We are not aware of this
situation occurring at other localities,
but we have not regularly monitored all
Cirsium wrightii localities for Salsola
spp. occurrences. Therefore, it is
unknown whether this is a threat to the
species. Nevertheless, control of Salsola
spp. is an ongoing management activity
at BLNWR, and may occur within areas
occupied by C. wrightii.
The eight localities of Cirsium wrightii
generally lack large, aggressive, exotic
wetland weeds, such as Lythrum
salicaria (purple loosestrife), which
could dominate C. wrightii habitat.
Lythrum salicaria is a Eurasian species
that has been modifying wetlands and
outcompeting native species in North
America for many decades (Natural
Resources Conservation Service 2000,
pp. 1–2). Lythrum salicaria appeared in
New Mexico in the 1990s and is extant
in the Mimbres Mountains, Grant
County and Sandia Mountains,
Bernalillo County. The Sandia
Mountains occurrence of this invasive
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
weed covers an alkaline spring seep
similar to some of the C. wrightii
habitats in the Sacramento Mountains
(Sivinski 2006b, p. 15). If it also spreads
to any of the eight localities, this
aggressive wetland weed could impact
C. wrightii habitat.
We currently have no information that
these introduced plants are immediate
threats to Cirsium wrightii. However,
Carduus nutans may be serving as a
vector for Rhinocyllus conicus, the
exotic seed head weevil, discussed
under Factor C. Based on possible
interactions with water availability and
climate change, these exotic plants
could potentially threaten C. wrightii in
the future; however, we do not believe
they pose a current threat.
Summary of Factor E
In summary for Factor E, we do not
currently consider hybridization,
herbicide use, oil and gas development
and mining as threats to the species;
however, these may become threats in
the future. Similarly, except for
Phragmites australis, we do not
consider invasive plants as a significant
threat to the species now; however, they
could potentially threaten Cirsium
wrightii in the foreseeable future. We do
consider Phragmites australis to be a
threat to C. wrightii localities as a result
of the increased fire risk, competition,
and changes in hydrology its presence
causes.
Finding
We have carefully assessed the best
scientific and commercial information
available regarding the past, present,
and future threats to Cirsium wrightii.
Section 3(6) of the Act defines an
endangered species as ‘‘any species
which is in danger of extinction
throughout all or a significant portion of
its range,’’ and section 3(20) defines a
threatened species as ‘‘any species
which is likely to become an
endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range.’’ Under
the Act and our implementing
regulations, a species may warrant
listing if it is endangered or threatened
throughout all or a significant portion of
its range. The threats to C. wrightii occur
throughout its range and generally are
not restricted to any particular
significant portion of that range.
Accordingly, our assessment and
proposed determination applies to the
species throughout its entire range.
Cirsium wrightii faces threats from
present or threatened destruction,
modification, and curtailment of its
habitat, primarily from natural and
human-caused modifications of its
E:\FR\FM\04NOP1.SGM
04NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 213 / Thursday, November 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
habitat due to ground and surface water
depletion, drought, and invasion of
Phragmites australis (Factor A), and
from the inadequacy of existing
regulatory mechanisms (Factor D).
Cirsium wrightii occupies relatively
small areas of seeps, springs, and
wetland habitat in an arid region
plagued by drought and ongoing and
future water withdrawals. The species’
highly specific requirements of
saturated soils with surface or
subsurface water flow make it
particularly vulnerable to these threats
to an extent that the species may
become endangered within the
foreseeable future, depending primarily
on how much modification or drying of
its limited amount of habitat may occur.
We find that Cirsium wrightii is likely
to become endangered throughout all or
a significant portion of its range within
the foreseeable future based on the
threats described above. Therefore, on
the basis of the best available scientific
and commercial information, we find
that Cirsium wrightii meets the
definition of endangered or threatened
in accordance with sections 3(6) and
4(a)(1) of the Act and listing is
warranted. While we conclude that
listing C. wrightii is warranted, an
immediate proposal to list this species
is precluded by other higher priority
listings, which we address below.
Listing Priority Number
The Service adopted guidelines on
September 21, 1983 (48 FR 43098) to
establish a rational system for utilizing
available resources for the highest
priority species when adding species to
the Lists of Endangered or Threatened
Wildlife and Plants or reclassifying
species listed as threatened to
endangered status. These guidelines,
titled ‘‘Endangered and Threatened
Species Listing and Recovery Priority
Guidelines’’ address the immediacy and
magnitude of threats, and the level of
taxonomic distinctiveness by assigning
priority in descending order to
monotypic genera (genus with one
species), full species, and subspecies (or
equivalently, distinct population
segments of vertebrates).
As a result of our analysis of the best
available scientific and commercial
information, we have assigned Cirsium
wrightii a Listing Priority Number (LPN)
of 8, based on our finding that the
species faces threats that are of
moderate magnitude and are imminent.
These threats include the present or
threatened destruction, modification or
curtailment of its habitat; predation; and
the inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms. These threats are ongoing
and therefore considered imminent.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:44 Nov 03, 2010
Jkt 223001
Under the Service’s guidelines, the
magnitude of threat is the first criterion
we look at when establishing a listing
priority. The guidance indicates that
species with the highest magnitude of
threat are those species facing the
greatest threats to their continued
existence. These species receive the
highest listing priority. We consider the
threats that Cirsium wrightii faces to be
moderate in magnitude because the
major threats (habitat loss and
degradation due to alteration of the
hydrology of its rare wetland habitat),
while serious and occurring rangewide,
do not collectively rise to the level of
high magnitude, relative to other
species. The species occurs only in
areas that are water-saturated and
populations have a high potential for
extirpation when habitat dries due to
ground and surface water depletion,
draining of wetlands, or drought.
Under our LPN guidelines, the second
criterion we consider in assigning a
listing priority is the immediacy of
threats. This criterion is intended to
ensure that the species facing actual,
identifiable threats are given priority
over those for which threats are only
potential or that are intrinsically
vulnerable but are not known to be
presently facing such threats. We
consider all of the threats to be
imminent because we have factual
information that the threats are
identifiable and that the species is
currently facing them in many portions
of its range. Long-term drought, in
combination with ground and surface
water withdrawal, pose a current and
future threat to C. wrightii and its
habitat. These actual, identifiable
threats are covered in greater detail in
Factors A and D of this finding. All of
the threats are ongoing and therefore
imminent. In addition to their current
existence, we expect these threats to
continue and likely intensify in the
foreseeable future.
The third criterion in our Listing
Priority Number guidance is intended to
devote resources to those species
representing highly distinctive or
isolated gene pools as reflected by
taxonomy. Cirsium wrightii is a valid
taxon at the species level and, therefore,
receives a higher priority than
subspecies, but a lower priority than
species in a monotypic genus.
Therefore, we assigned Cirsium wrightii
an LPN of 8.
We will continue to monitor the
threats to Cirsium wrightii and the
species’ status on an annual basis, and
should the magnitude or the imminence
of the threats change, we will re-visit
our assessment of the LPN.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
67937
Work on a proposed listing
determination for Cirsium wrightii is
precluded by work on higher priority
listing actions with absolute statutory,
court-ordered, or court-approved
deadlines and final listing
determinations for those species that
were proposed for listing with funds
from previous fiscal years. This work
includes all the actions listed in the
tables below under expeditious
progress.
Preclusion and Expeditious Progress
Preclusion is a function of the listing
priority of a species in relation to the
resources that are available and
competing demands for those resources.
Thus, in any given fiscal year (FY),
multiple factors dictate whether it will
be possible to undertake work on a
proposed listing regulation or whether
promulgation of such a proposal is
warranted but precluded by higherpriority listing actions.
The resources available for listing
actions are determined through the
annual Congressional appropriations
process. The appropriation for the
Listing Program is available to support
work involving the following listing
actions: Proposed and final listing rules;
90-day and 12-month findings on
petitions to add species to the Lists of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants (Lists) or to change the status
of a species from threatened to
endangered; annual determinations on
prior ‘‘warranted but precluded’’ petition
findings as required under section
4(b)(3)(C)(i) of the Act; critical habitat
petition findings; proposed and final
rules designating critical habitat; and
litigation-related, administrative, and
program-management functions
(including preparing and allocating
budgets, responding to Congressional
and public inquiries, and conducting
public outreach regarding listing and
critical habitat). The work involved in
preparing various listing documents can
be extensive and may include, but is not
limited to: Gathering and assessing the
best scientific and commercial data
available and conducting analyses used
as the basis for our decisions; writing
and publishing documents; and
obtaining, reviewing, and evaluating
public comments and peer review
comments on proposed rules and
incorporating relevant information into
final rules. The number of listing
actions that we can undertake in a given
year also is influenced by the
complexity of those listing actions; that
is, more complex actions generally are
more costly. The median cost for
preparing and publishing a 90-day
finding is $39,276; for a 12-month
E:\FR\FM\04NOP1.SGM
04NOP1
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
67938
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 213 / Thursday, November 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules
finding, $100,690; for a proposed rule
with critical habitat, $345,000; and for
a final listing rule with critical habitat,
the median cost is $305,000.
We cannot spend more than is
appropriated for the Listing Program
without violating the Anti-Deficiency
Act (see 31 U.S.C. 1341(a)(1)(A)). In
addition, in FY 1998 and for each fiscal
year since then, Congress has placed a
statutory cap on funds which may be
expended for the Listing Program, equal
to the amount expressly appropriated
for that purpose in that fiscal year. This
cap was designed to prevent funds
appropriated for other functions under
the Act (for example, recovery funds for
removing species from the Lists), or for
other Service programs, from being used
for Listing Program actions (see House
Report 105–163, 105th Congress, 1st
Session, July 1, 1997).
Since FY 2002, the Service’s budget
has included a critical habitat subcap to
ensure that some funds are available for
other work in the Listing Program (‘‘The
critical habitat designation subcap will
ensure that some funding is available to
address other listing activities’’ (House
Report No. 107–103, 107th Congress, 1st
Session, June 19, 2001)). In FY 2002 and
each year until FY 2006, the Service has
had to use virtually the entire critical
habitat subcap to address courtmandated designations of critical
habitat, and consequently none of the
critical habitat subcap funds have been
available for other listing activities. In
FY 2007, we were able to use some of
the critical habitat subcap funds to fund
proposed listing determinations for
high-priority candidate species. In FY
2009, while we were unable to use any
of the critical habitat subcap funds to
fund proposed listing determinations,
we did use some of this money to fund
the critical habitat portion of some
proposed listing determinations so that
the proposed listing determination and
proposed critical habitat designation
could be combined into one rule,
thereby being more efficient in our
work. In FY 2010, we are using some of
the critical habitat subcap funds to fund
actions with statutory deadlines.
Thus, through the listing cap, the
critical habitat subcap, and the amount
of funds needed to address courtmandated critical habitat designations,
Congress and the courts have in effect
determined the amount of money
available for other listing activities.
Therefore, the funds in the listing cap,
other than those needed to address
court-mandated critical habitat for
already-listed species, set the limits on
our determinations of preclusion and
expeditious progress.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:44 Nov 03, 2010
Jkt 223001
Congress identified the availability of
resources as the only basis for deferring
the initiation of a rulemaking that is
warranted. The Conference Report
accompanying Public Law 97–304,
which established the current statutory
deadlines and the warranted-butprecluded finding, states that the
amendments were ‘‘not intended to
allow the Secretary to delay
commencing the rulemaking process for
any reason other than that the existence
of pending or imminent proposals to list
species subject to a greater degree of
threat would make allocation of
resources to such a petition [that is, for
a lower-ranking species] unwise.’’
Although that statement appeared to
refer specifically to the ‘‘to the
maximum extent practicable’’ limitation
on the 90-day deadline for making a
‘‘substantial information ’’ finding, that
finding is made at the point when the
Service is deciding whether or not to
commence a status review that will
determine the degree of threats facing
the species, and therefore the analysis
underlying the statement is more
relevant to the use of the warranted-butprecluded finding, which is made when
the Service has already determined the
degree of threats facing the species and
is deciding whether or not to commence
a rulemaking.
In FY 2010, expeditious progress is
that amount of work that can be
achieved with $10,471,000, which is the
amount of money that Congress
appropriated for the Listing Program
(that is, the portion of the Listing
Program funding not related to critical
habitat designations for species that are
already listed). However these funds are
not enough to fully fund all our courtordered and statutory listing actions in
FY 2010, so we are using $1,114,417 of
our critical habitat subcap funds in
order to work on all of our required
petition findings and listing
determinations. This brings the total
amount of funds we have for listing
actions in FY 2010 to $11,585,417. Our
process is to make our determinations of
preclusion on a nationwide basis to
ensure that the species most in need of
listing will be addressed first and also
because we allocate our listing budget
on a nationwide basis. The $11,585,417
is being used to fund work in the
following categories: compliance with
court orders and court-approved
settlement agreements requiring that
petition findings or listing
determinations be completed by a
specific date; section 4 (of the Act)
listing actions with absolute statutory
deadlines; essential litigation-related,
administrative, and listing program-
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
management functions; and highpriority listing actions for some of our
candidate species. In 2009, the
responsibility for listing foreign species
under the Act was transferred from the
Division of Scientific Authority,
International Affairs Program, to the
Endangered Species Program. Starting
in FY 2010, a portion of our funding is
being used to work on the actions
described above as they apply to listing
actions for foreign species. This has the
potential to further reduce funding
available for domestic listing actions.
Although there are currently no foreign
species issues included in our highpriority listing actions at this time,
many actions have statutory or courtapproved settlement deadlines, thus
increasing their priority. The allocations
for each specific listing action are
identified in the Service’s FY 2010
Allocation Table (part of our
administrative record).
Based on our September 21, 1983,
guidance for assigning an LPN for each
candidate species (48 FR 43098), we
have a significant number of species
with an LPN of 2. Using this guidance,
we assign each candidate an LPN of 1
to 12, depending on the magnitude of
threats (high vs. moderate to low),
immediacy of threats (imminent or
nonimminent), and taxonomic status of
the species (in order of priority:
monotypic genus (a species that is the
sole member of a genus); species; or part
of a species (subspecies, distinct
population segment, or significant
portion of the range)). The lower the
listing priority number, the higher the
listing priority (that is, a species with an
LPN of 1 would have the highest listing
priority). Because of the large number of
high-priority species, we have further
ranked the candidate species with an
LPN of 2 by using the following
extinction-risk type criteria:
International Union for the
Conservation of Nature and Natural
Resources (IUCN) Red list status/rank,
Heritage rank (provided by
NatureServe), Heritage threat rank
(provided by NatureServe), and species
currently with fewer than 50
individuals, or 4 or fewer populations.
Those species with the highest IUCN
rank (critically endangered), the highest
Heritage rank (G1), the highest Heritage
threat rank (substantial, imminent
threats), and currently with fewer than
50 individuals, or fewer than 4
populations, originally comprised a
group of approximately 40 candidate
species (‘‘Top 40’’). These 40 candidate
species have had the highest priority to
receive funding to work on a proposed
listing determination. As we work on
E:\FR\FM\04NOP1.SGM
04NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 213 / Thursday, November 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules
proposed and final listing rules for those
40 candidates, we apply the ranking
criteria to the next group of candidates
with an LPN of 2 and 3 to determine the
next set of highest priority candidate
species.
To be more efficient in our listing
process, as we work on proposed rules
for the highest priority species in the
next several years, we are preparing
multi-species proposals when
appropriate, and these may include
species with lower priority if they
overlap geographically or have the same
threats as a species with an LPN of 2.
In addition, available staff resources are
also a factor in determining highpriority species provided with funding.
Finally, proposed rules for
reclassification of threatened species to
endangered are lower priority, since as
listed species, they are already afforded
the protection of the Act and
implementing regulations. However, for
efficiency reasons, we may choose to
work on a proposed rule to reclassify a
species to endangered if we can
combine this with work that is subject
to a court-determined deadline.
As explained above, a determination
that listing is warranted but precluded
must also demonstrate that expeditious
progress is being made to add and
remove qualified species to and from
the Lists of Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife and Plants. As with our
‘‘precluded’’ finding, the evaluation of
whether progress in adding qualified
species to the Lists has been expeditious
is a function of the resources available
67939
for listing and the competing demands
for those funds. (Although we do not
discuss it in detail here, we are also
making expeditious progress in
removing species from the list under the
Recovery program in light of the
resource available for delisting, which is
funded by a separate line item in the
budget of the Endangered Species
Program. During FY 2010, we have
completed two proposed delisting rules
and two final delisting rules.) Given the
limited resources available for listing,
we find that we made expeditious
progress in FY 2010 in the Listing
Program. This progress included
preparing and publishing the following
determinations:
FY 2010 COMPLETED LISTING ACTIONS
Publication date
Title
Actions
10/08/2009 ...................
Listing Lepidium papilliferum (Slickspot
Peppergrass) as a Threatened Species
Throughout Its Range.
90-day Finding on a Petition to List the American Dipper in the Black Hills of South Dakota as Threatened or Endangered.
Status Review of Arctic Grayling (Thymallus
arcticus) in the Upper Missouri River System.
Listing the British Columbia Distinct Population Segment of the Queen Charlotte
Goshawk Under the Endangered Species
Act.
Listing the Salmon-Crested Cockatoo as
Threatened Throughout Its Range with
Special Rule.
Status Review of Gunnison Sage-grouse
(Centrocercus minimus).
12-Month Finding on a Petition To List the
Black-tailed Prairie Dog as Threatened or
Endangered.
90-Day Finding on a Petition To List
Sprague’s Pipit as Threatened or Endangered.
90-Day Finding on Petitions To List Nine Species of Mussels From Texas as Threatened
or Endangered With Critical Habitat.
Partial 90-Day Finding on a Petition To List
475 Species in the Southwestern United
States as Threatened or Endangered With
Critical Habitat.
12-month Finding on a Petition To Change
the Final Listing of the Distinct Population
Segment of the Canada Lynx To Include
New Mexico.
Listing Foreign Bird Species in Peru and Bolivia as Endangered Throughout Their
Range.
Listing Six Foreign Birds as Endangered
Throughout Their Range.
Withdrawal of Proposed Rule To List Cook’s
Petrel.
Final Rule To List the Galapagos Petrel and
Heinroth’s Shearwater as Threatened
Throughout Their Ranges.
Initiation of Status Review for Agave
eggersiana and Solanum conocarpum.
Final Listing Threatened ..................................
74 FR 52013–52064
Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Not substantial.
74 FR 55177–55180
Notice of Intent To Conduct Status Review for
Listing Decision.
74 FR 55524–55525
Proposed Listing Threatened ..........................
74 FR 56757–56770
Proposed Listing Threatened ..........................
74 FR 56770–56791
Notice of Intent to Conduct Status Review for
Listing Decision.
Notice of 12-month petition finding, Not warranted.
74 FR 61100–61102
Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial
74 FR 63337–63343
Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial
74 FR 66260–66271
Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Not substantial and Substantial.
74 FR 66865–66905
Notice of 12-month petition finding, Warranted
but precluded.
74 FR 66937–66950
Proposed Listing Endangered .........................
75 FR 605–649
Proposed Listing Endangered .........................
75 FR 286–310
Proposed rule, withdrawal ...............................
75 FR 310–316
Final Listing Threatened ..................................
75 FR 235–250
Notice of Intent to Conduct Status Review for
Listing.
75 FR 3190–3191
10/27/2009 ...................
10/28/2009 ...................
11/03/2009 ...................
11/03/2009 ...................
11/23/2009 ...................
12/03/2009 ...................
12/03/2009 ...................
12/15/2009 ...................
12/16/2009 ...................
12/17/2009 ...................
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
1/05/2010 .....................
1/05/2010 .....................
1/05/2010 .....................
1/05/2010 .....................
1/20/2010 .....................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:44 Nov 03, 2010
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\04NOP1.SGM
FR pages
04NOP1
74 FR 63343–63366
67940
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 213 / Thursday, November 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules
FY 2010 COMPLETED LISTING ACTIONS—Continued
Publication date
Title
Actions
2/09/2010 .....................
12-month Finding on a Petition To List the
American Pika as Threatened or Endangered.
12-Month Finding on a Petition To List the
Sonoran Desert Population of the Bald
Eagle as a Threatened or Endangered Distinct Population Segment.
Withdrawal of Proposed Rule To List the
Southwestern Washington/Columbia River
Distinct Population Segment of Coastal
Cutthroat Trout (Oncorhynchus clarki clarki)
as Threatened.
90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the Berry
Cave Salamander as Endangered.
90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the
Southern Hickorynut Mussel (Obovaria
jacksoniana) as Endangered or Threatened.
90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the
Striped Newt as Threatened.
12-Month Findings for Petitions To List the
Greater
Sage-Grouse
(Centrocercus
urophasianus) as Threatened or Endangered.
12-Month Finding on a Petition To List the
Tucson Shovel-Nosed Snake (Chionactis
occipitalis klauberi) as Threatened or Endangered with Critical Habitat.
90-Day Finding on a Petition To List Thorne’s
Hairstreak Butterfly as Endangered.
12-month Finding on a Petition To List the
Mountain Whitefish in the Big Lost River,
Idaho, as Endangered or Threatened.
90-Day Finding on a Petition To List a
Stonefly (Isoperla jewetti) and a Mayfly
(Fallceon eatoni) as Threatened or Endangered with Critical Habitat.
12-Month Finding on a Petition To Reclassify
the Delta Smelt From Threatened to Endangered Throughout Its Range.
Determination of Endangered Status for 48
Species on Kauai and Designation of Critical Habitat.
Initiation of Status Review of the North American Wolverine in the Contiguous United
States.
12-Month Finding on a Petition To List the
Wyoming Pocket Gopher as Endangered or
Threatened with Critical Habitat.
90-Day Finding on a Petition To List a Distinct Population Segment of the Fisher in
Its United States Northern Rocky Mountain
Range as Endangered or Threatened with
Critical Habitat.
Initiation of Status Review for Sacramento
Splittail (Pogonichthys macrolepidotus).
90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the Harlequin Butterfly as Endangered.
12-Month Finding on a Petition To List Susan’s Purse-making Caddisfly (Ochrotrichia
susanae) as Threatened or Endangered.
90-day Finding on a Petition To List the Mohave Ground Squirrel as Endangered with
Critical Habitat.
90-Day Finding on a Petition To List Hermes
Copper Butterfly as Threatened or Endangered.
90-Day Finding on a Petition To List
Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis.
12-month Finding on a Petition To List the
White-tailed Prairie Dog as Endangered or
Threatened.
Notice of 12-month petition finding, Not warranted.
75 FR 6437–6471
Notice of 12-month petition finding, Not warranted.
75 FR 8601–8621
Withdrawal of Proposed Rule To List .............
75 FR 8621–8644
Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial
75 FR 13068–13071
Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Not substantial.
75 FR 13717–13720
Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial
75 FR 13720–13726
Notice of 12-month petition finding, Warranted
but precluded.
75 FR 13910–14014
Notice of 12-month petition finding, Warranted
but precluded.
75 FR 16050–16065
Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial
75 FR 17062–17070
Notice of 12-month petition finding, Not warranted.
75 FR 17352–17363
Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Not substantial.
75 FR 17363–17367
Notice of 12-month petition finding, Warranted
but precluded.
75 FR 17667–17680
Final Listing Endangered .................................
75 FR 18959–19165
Notice of Initiation of Status Review for Listing Decision.
75 FR 19591–19592
Notice of 12-month petition finding, Not warranted.
75 FR 19592–19607
Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial
75 FR 19925–19935
Notice of Initiation of Status Review for Listing Decision.
Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial
75 FR 20547–20548
2/25/2010 .....................
2/25/2010 .....................
3/18/2010 .....................
3/23/2010 .....................
3/23/2010 .....................
3/23/2010 .....................
3/31/2010 .....................
4/5/2010 .......................
4/6/2010 .......................
4/6/2010 .......................
4/7/2010 .......................
4/13/2010 .....................
4/15/2010 .....................
4/15/2010 .....................
4/16/2010 .....................
4/20/2010 .....................
4/26/2010 .....................
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
4/27/2010 .....................
4/27/2010 .....................
5/4/2010 .......................
6/1/2010 .......................
6/1/2010 .......................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:44 Nov 03, 2010
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
FR pages
75 FR 21568–21571
Notice of 12-month petition finding, Not warranted.
75 FR 22012–22025
Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial
75 FR 22063–22070
Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial
75 FR 23654–23663
Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial
75 FR 30313–30318
Notice of 12-month petition finding, Not warranted.
75 FR 30338–30363
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\04NOP1.SGM
04NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 213 / Thursday, November 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules
67941
FY 2010 COMPLETED LISTING ACTIONS—Continued
Publication date
Title
Actions
6/9/2010 .......................
90-Day Finding on a Petition To List van
Rossem’s Gull-billed Tern as Endangered
or Threatened.
90-Day Finding on Five Petitions To List
Seven Species of Hawaiian Yellow-faced
Bees as Endangered.
12-Month Finding on a Petition To List the
Least Chub as Threatened or Endangered.
90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the Honduran Emerald Hummingbird as Endangered.
Listing Ipomopsis polyantha (Pagosa Skyrocket) as Endangered Throughout Its
Range, and Listing Penstemon debilis
(Parachute Beardtongue) and Phacelia
submutica (DeBeque Phacelia) as Threatened Throughout Their Range.
Listing the Flying Earwig Hawaiian Damselfly
and Pacific Hawaiian Damselfly As Endangered Throughout Their Ranges.
Listing the Cumberland Darter, Rush Darter,
Yellowcheek Darter, Chucky Madtom, and
Laurel Dace as Endangered Throughout
Their Ranges.
Listing the Mountain Plover as Threatened ....
Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial
75 FR 32728–32734
Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial
75 FR 34077–34088
Notice of 12-month petition finding, Warranted
but precluded.
Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial
75 FR 35398–35424
6/16/2010 .....................
6/22/2010 .....................
6/23/2010 .....................
6/23/2010 .....................
6/24/2010 .....................
6/24/2010 .....................
6/29/2010 .....................
7/20/2010 .....................
7/20/2010 .....................
7/20/2010 .....................
7/27/2010 .....................
7/27/2010 .....................
8/3/2010 .......................
8/4/2010 .......................
8/10/2010 .....................
8/17/2010 .....................
8/17/2010 .....................
8/24/2010 .....................
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
9/1/2010 .......................
9/8/2010 .......................
9/8/2010 .......................
9/9/2010 .......................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
90-Day Finding on a Petition To List Pinus
albicaulis (Whitebark Pine) as Endangered
or Threatened with Critical Habitat.
12-Month Finding on a Petition To List the
Amargosa Toad as Threatened or Endangered.
90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the Giant
Palouse
Earthworm
(Driloleirus
americanus) as Threatened or Endangered.
Determination on Listing the Black-Breasted
Puffleg as Endangered Throughout its
Range; Final Rule.
Final Rule to List the Medium Tree-Finch
(Camarhynchus pauper) as Endangered
Throughout Its Range.
Determination of Threatened Status for Five
Penguin Species.
90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the
Mexican Gray Wolf as an Endangered Subspecies With Critical Habitat.
90-Day Finding on a Petition To List
Arctostaphylos franciscana as Endangered
with Critical Habitat.
Listing Three Foreign Bird Species from Latin
America and the Caribbean as Endangered
Throughout Their Range.
90-Day Finding on a Petition To List Brian
Head Mountainsnail as Endangered or
Threatened with Critical Habitat.
90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the Oklahoma Grass Pink Orchid as Endangered or
Threatened.
12-Month Finding on a Petition To List the
White-Sided Jackrabbit as Threatened or
Endangered.
Proposed Rule To List the Ozark Hellbender
Salamander as Endangered.
Revised 12-Month Finding To List the Upper
Missouri River Distinct Population Segment
of Arctic Grayling as Endangered or Threatened.
12-Month Finding on a Petition To List the
Jemez Mountains Salamander (Plethodon
neomexicanus) as Endangered or Threatened with Critical Habitat.
14:44 Nov 03, 2010
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
FR pages
75 FR 35746–35751
Proposed Listing Endangered Proposed Listing Threatened.
75 FR 35721–35746
Final Listing Endangered .................................
75 FR 35990–36012
Proposed Listing Endangered .........................
75 FR 36035–36057
Reinstatement of Proposed Listing Threatened.
Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial
75 FR 37353–37358
75 FR 42033–42040
Notice of 12-month petition finding, Not warranted.
75 FR 42040–42054
Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial
75 FR 42059–42066
Final Listing Endangered .................................
75 FR 43844–43853
Final Listing Endangered .................................
75 FR 43853–43864
Final Listing Threatened ..................................
75 FR 45497–45527
Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial
75 FR 46894–46898
Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial
75 FR 48294–48298
Final Listing Endangered .................................
75 FR 50813–50842
Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Not substantial.
75 FR 50739–50742
Notice of 90-day Petition Finding, Substantial
75 FR 51969–51974
Notice of 12-month petition finding, Not warranted.
75 FR 53615–53629
Proposed Listing Endangered .........................
75 FR 54561–54579
Notice of 12-month petition finding, Warranted
but precluded.
75 FR 54707–54753
Notice of 12-month petition finding, Warranted
but precluded.
75 FR 54822–54845
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\04NOP1.SGM
04NOP1
67942
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 213 / Thursday, November 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules
FY 2010 COMPLETED LISTING ACTIONS—Continued
Publication date
Title
Actions
9/15/2010 .....................
12-Month Finding on a Petition To List
Sprague’s Pipit as Endangered or Threatened Throughout Its Range.
12-Month Finding on a Petition To List Agave
eggersiana (no common name) as Endangered.
Determination of Endangered Status for the
African Penguin.
Determination for the Gunnison Sage-grouse
as a Threatened or Endangered Species.
12-Month Finding on a Petition To List the
Pygmy Rabbit as Endangered or Threatened.
Notice of 12-month petition finding, Warranted
but precluded.
75 FR 56028–56050
Notice of 12-month petition finding, Warranted
but precluded.
75 FR 57720–57734
Final Listing Endangered .................................
75 FR 59645–59656
Notice of 12-month petition finding, Warranted
but precluded.
Notice of 12-month petition finding, Not warranted.
75 FR 59803–59863
9/22/2010 .....................
9/28/2010 .....................
9/28/2010 .....................
9/30/2010 .....................
Our expeditious progress also
includes work on listing actions that we
funded in FY 2010 but have not yet
been completed to date. These actions
are listed below. Actions in the top
section of the table are being conducted
under a deadline set by a court. Actions
in the middle section of the table are
being conducted to meet statutory
timelines, that is, timelines required
under the Act. Actions in the bottom
section of the table are high-priority
listing actions. These actions include
work primarily on species with an LPN
of 2, and selection of these species is
partially based on available staff
resources, and when appropriate,
include species with a lower priority if
FR pages
75 FR 60515–60561
they overlap geographically or have the
same threats as the species with the
high priority. Including these species
together in the same proposed rule
results in considerable savings in time
and funding, as compared to preparing
separate proposed rules for each of them
in the future.
ACTIONS FUNDED IN FY 2010 BUT NOT YET COMPLETED
Species
Action
Actions Subject to Court Order/Settlement Agreement
6 Birds from Eurasia .....................................................................................................................................
Flat-tailed horned lizard ................................................................................................................................
Mountain plover 4 ..........................................................................................................................................
6 Birds from Peru .........................................................................................................................................
Sacramento splittail ......................................................................................................................................
Pacific walrus ................................................................................................................................................
Wolverine ......................................................................................................................................................
Solanum conocarpum ...................................................................................................................................
Desert tortoise—Sonoran population ...........................................................................................................
Thorne’s Hairstreak butterfly 3 ......................................................................................................................
Hermes copper butterfly 3 .............................................................................................................................
Final listing determination.
Final listing determination.
Final listing determination.
Proposed listing determination.
12-month petition finding.
12-month petition finding.
12-month petition finding.
12-month petition finding.
12-month petition finding.
12-month petition finding.
12-month petition finding.
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Actions with Statutory Deadlines
Casey’s June beetle .....................................................................................................................................
Georgia pigtoe, interrupted rocksnail, and rough hornsnail .........................................................................
7 Bird species from Brazil ............................................................................................................................
Southern rockhopper penguin—Campbell Plateau population ....................................................................
5 Bird species from Colombia and Ecuador ................................................................................................
Queen Charlotte goshawk ............................................................................................................................
5 species southeast fish (Cumberland darter, rush darter, yellowcheek darter, chucky madtom, and laurel dace).
Salmon crested cockatoo .............................................................................................................................
CA golden trout .............................................................................................................................................
Black-footed albatross ..................................................................................................................................
Mount Charleston blue butterfly ...................................................................................................................
Mojave fringe-toed lizard 1 ............................................................................................................................
Kokanee—Lake Sammamish population 1 ...................................................................................................
Cactus ferruginous pygmy-owl 1 ...................................................................................................................
Northern leopard frog ...................................................................................................................................
Tehachapi slender salamander ....................................................................................................................
Coqui Llanero ...............................................................................................................................................
Dusky tree vole .............................................................................................................................................
3 MT invertebrates (mist forestfly (Lednia tumana), Oreohelix sp. 3, Oreohelix sp. 31) from 206 species
petition.
5 UT plants (Astragalus hamiltonii, Eriogonum soredium, Lepidium ostleri, Penstemon flowersii,
Trifolium friscanum) from 206 species petition.
2 CO plants (Astragalus microcymbus, Astragalus schmolliae) from 206 species petition ........................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:44 Nov 03, 2010
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\04NOP1.SGM
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
listing
listing
listing
listing
listing
listing
listing
determination.
determination.
determination.
determination.
determination.
determination.
determination.
Proposed listing determination.
12-month petition finding.
12-month petition finding.
12-month petition finding.
12-month petition finding.
12-month petition finding.
12-month petition finding.
12-month petition finding.
12-month petition finding.
12-month petition finding.
12-month petition finding.
12-month petition finding.
12-month petition finding.
12-month petition finding.
04NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 213 / Thursday, November 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules
67943
ACTIONS FUNDED IN FY 2010 BUT NOT YET COMPLETED—Continued
Species
Action
5 WY plants (Abronia ammophila, Agrostis rossiae, Astragalus proimanthus, Boechere (Arabis) pusilla,
Penstemon gibbensii) from 206 species petition.
Leatherside chub (from 206 species petition) ..............................................................................................
Frigid ambersnail (from 206 species petition) ..............................................................................................
Gopher tortoise—eastern population ............................................................................................................
Wrights marsh thistle ....................................................................................................................................
67 of 475 southwest species ........................................................................................................................
Grand Canyon scorpion (from 475 species petition) ...................................................................................
Anacroneuria wipukupa (a stonefly from 475 species petition) ...................................................................
Rattlesnake-master borer moth (from 475 species petition) ........................................................................
3 Texas moths (Ursia furtiva, Sphingicampa blanchardi, Agapema galbina) (from 475 species petition) ..
2 Texas shiners (Cyprinella sp., Cyprinella lepida) (from 475 species petition) .........................................
3 South Arizona plants (Erigeron piscaticus, Astragalus hypoxylus, Amoreuxia gonzalezii) (from 475
species petition).
5 Central Texas mussel species (3 from 475 species petition) ...................................................................
14 parrots (foreign species) ..........................................................................................................................
Berry Cave salamander 1 ..............................................................................................................................
Striped newt 1 ................................................................................................................................................
Fisher—Northern Rocky Mountain Range 1 .................................................................................................
Mohave ground squirrel 1 ..............................................................................................................................
Puerto Rico harlequin butterfly .....................................................................................................................
Western gull-billed tern .................................................................................................................................
Ozark chinquapin (Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis) .................................................................................
HI yellow-faced bees ....................................................................................................................................
Giant Palouse earthworm .............................................................................................................................
Whitebark pine ..............................................................................................................................................
OK grass pink (Calopogon oklahomensis) 1 .................................................................................................
Southeastern pop snowy plover & wintering pop. of piping plover 1 ...........................................................
Eagle Lake trout 1 .........................................................................................................................................
Smooth-billed ani 1 ........................................................................................................................................
Bay Springs salamander 1 ............................................................................................................................
32 species of snails and slugs 1 ...................................................................................................................
42 snail species (Nevada & Utah) ................................................................................................................
Red knot roselaari subspecies .....................................................................................................................
Peary caribou ................................................................................................................................................
Plains bison ..................................................................................................................................................
Spring Mountains checkerspot butterfly .......................................................................................................
Spring pygmy sunfish ...................................................................................................................................
Bay skipper ...................................................................................................................................................
Unsilvered fritillary ........................................................................................................................................
Texas kangaroo rat .......................................................................................................................................
Spot-tailed earless lizard ..............................................................................................................................
Eastern small-footed bat ...............................................................................................................................
Northern long-eared bat ...............................................................................................................................
Prairie chub ...................................................................................................................................................
10 species of Great Basin butterfly ..............................................................................................................
6 sand dune (scarab) beetles .......................................................................................................................
Golden-winged warbler .................................................................................................................................
Sand-verbena moth ......................................................................................................................................
404 Southeast species .................................................................................................................................
12-month petition finding.
12-month
12-month
12-month
12-month
12-month
12-month
12-month
12-month
12-month
12-month
12-month
petition
petition
petition
petition
petition
petition
petition
petition
petition
petition
petition
finding.
finding.
finding.
finding.
finding.
finding.
finding.
finding.
finding.
finding.
finding.
12-month petition finding.
12-month petition finding.
12-month petition finding.
12-month petition finding.
12-month petition finding.
12-month petition finding.
12-month petition finding
12-month petition finding.
12-month petition finding.
12-month petition finding.
12-month petition finding.
12-month petition finding.
12-month petition finding.
90-day petition finding.
90-day petition finding.
90-day petition finding.
90-day petition finding.
90-day petition finding.
90-day petition finding.
90-day petition finding.
90-day petition finding.
90-day petition finding.
90-day petition finding.
90-day petition finding.
90-day petition finding.
90-day petition finding.
90-day petition finding.
90-day petition finding
90-day petition finding.
90-day petition finding.
90-day petition finding.
90-day petition finding.
90-day petition finding.
90-day petition finding.
90-day petition finding.
90-day petition finding.
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
High-Priority Listing Actions 3
19 Oahu candidate species 2 (16 plants, 3 damselflies) (15 with LPN = 2, 3 with LPN = 3, 1 with LPN =
9).
19 Maui-Nui candidate species 2 (16 plants, 3 tree snails) (14 with LPN = 2, 2 with LPN = 3, 3 with LPN
= 8).
Dune sagebrush lizard (formerly Sand dune lizard) 3 (LPN = 2) .................................................................
2 Arizona springsnails 2 (Pyrgulopsis bernadina (LPN = 2), Pyrgulopsis trivialis (LPN = 2)) ......................
New Mexico springsnail 2 (Pyrgulopsis chupaderae (LPN = 2) ...................................................................
2 mussels 2 (rayed bean (LPN = 2), snuffbox No LPN) ...............................................................................
2 mussels 2 (sheepnose (LPN = 2), spectaclecase (LPN = 4)) ...................................................................
Altamaha spinymussel 2 (LPN = 2) ...............................................................................................................
8 southeast mussels (southern kidneyshell (LPN = 2), round ebonyshell (LPN = 2), Alabama pearlshell
(LPN = 2), southern sandshell (LPN = 5), fuzzy pigtoe (LPN = 5), Choctaw bean (LPN = 5), narrow
pigtoe (LPN = 5), and tapered pigtoe (LPN = 11)).
Proposed listing.
Proposed listing.
Proposed
Proposed
Proposed
Proposed
Proposed
Proposed
Proposed
1 Funds
listing.
listing.
listing.
listing.
listing.
listing.
listing.
for listing actions for these species were provided in previous FYs.
funds for these high-priority listing actions were provided in FY 2008 or 2009, due to the complexity of these actions and competing
priorities, these actions are still being developed.
3 Partially funded with FY 2010 funds; also will be funded with FY 2011 funds.
4 Funded with FY 2010 funds.
2 Although
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:44 Nov 03, 2010
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\04NOP1.SGM
04NOP1
67944
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 213 / Thursday, November 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
We have endeavored to make our
listing actions as efficient and timely as
possible, given the requirements of the
relevant law and regulations, and
constraints relating to workload and
personnel. We are continually
considering ways to streamline
processes or achieve economies of scale,
such as by batching related actions
together. Given our limited budget for
implementing section 4 of the Act, these
actions described above collectively
constitute expeditious progress.
Cirsium wrightii will be added to the
list of candidate species upon
publication of this 12-month finding.
We will continue to monitor the status
of this species as new information
becomes available. This review will
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:44 Nov 03, 2010
Jkt 223001
determine if a change in status is
warranted, including the need to make
prompt use of emergency listing
procedures.
We intend that any proposed listing
action for Cirsium wrightii will be as
accurate as possible. Therefore, we will
continue to accept additional
information and comments from all
concerned governmental agencies, the
scientific community, industry, or any
other interested party concerning this
finding.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited
in this finding is available on the
Internet at https://www.regulations.gov
or upon request from the Field
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
Supervisor, New Mexico Ecological
Services Office (see ADDRESSES section).
Authors
The primary authors of this rule are
the staff members of the New Mexico
Ecological Services Office.
Authority
The authority for this section is
section 4 of the Endangered Species Act
of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.).
Dated: October 13, 2010.
Daniel M. Ashe,
Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2010–27740 Filed 11–3–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
E:\FR\FM\04NOP1.SGM
04NOP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 213 (Thursday, November 4, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 67925-67944]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-27740]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2009-0060; MO 92210-0-0008]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Finding
on a Petition to List Cirsium wrightii (Wright's Marsh Thistle) as
Endangered or Threatened
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 12-month petition finding.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, announce a 12-month
finding on a petition to list Cirsium wrightii (Wright's marsh thistle)
as endangered or threatened and to designate critical habitat under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. After review of all
available scientific and commercial information, we find that listing
C. wrightii as endangered or threatened throughout its range is
warranted. Currently, however, listing of C. wrightii is precluded by
higher priority actions to amend the Lists of Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife and Plants. Upon publication of this 12-month petition
finding, we will add C. wrightii to our candidate species list. We will
develop a proposed rule to list C. wrightii as our priorities allow. We
will make any determination on critical habitat during development of
the proposed rule. In the interim period, we will address the status of
the candidate taxon through our annual Candidate Notice of Review.
DATES: The finding announced in this document was made on November 4,
2010.
ADDRESSES: This finding is available on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov at Docket Number FWS-R2-ES-2009-0060. Supporting
documentation we used in preparing this finding is available for public
inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours by contacting
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, New Mexico Ecological Services
Office, 2105 Osuna NE, Albuquerque, NM 87113. Please submit any new
information, materials, comments, or questions concerning this finding
to the above address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wally ``J'' Murphy, Field Supervisor,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, New Mexico Ecological Services Field
Office (see ADDRESSES); by telephone at 505-346-4781; or by facsimile
at 505-346-2542. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD), please call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-
877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) (16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.) requires that, for any petition to revise the List of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife that contains substantial scientific
and commercial information that listing may be warranted, we make a
finding within 12 months of the date of 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 species are threatened or endangered, and expeditious
progress is being made to add or remove qualified species from the
Federal Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. Section
4(b)(3)(C) of the Act requires that we treat a petition for which the
requested action is found to be warranted but precluded as though
resubmitted on the date of such finding, that is, requiring a
subsequent finding to be made within 12 months. We must publish these
findings in the Federal Register.
Previous Federal Actions
On October 15, 2008, we received a petition from the WildEarth
Guardians, dated October 9, 2008, requesting that
[[Page 67926]]
we list Cirsium wrightii (Wright's marsh thistle) as endangered or
threatened under the Act. Additionally, the petitioner requested that
critical habitat be designated concurrent with listing of C. wrightii.
In a November 26, 2008, letter to the petitioner, we responded that we
had reviewed the petition and determined that an emergency listing was
not necessary. We also stated that, to the maximum extent practicable,
we would address their petition within 90 days.
The petition asserted that water diversion, habitat loss and
degradation through current livestock grazing, inadequate regulatory
mechanisms, weed control, nonnative species, drought, and climate
change threaten C. wrightii. During our review of the petition, we
found that the majority of information cited in the petition was not
readily available to us. Therefore, on December 18, 2008, we requested
that the petitioner provide references. On February 13, 2009, the
petitioner provided additional references.
On September 10, 2009, we published a 90-day finding in the Federal
Register that the petition presented substantial information that
listing C. wrightii may be warranted. That document also initiated a
status review of the subspecies (74 FR 46542). On February 11, 2010,
WildEarth Guardians filed suit against the Service for failure to issue
a 12-month finding on the petition (WildEarth Guardians v. Salazar, No.
10-cv-00122 BRB-DJS (D.N.M.)). Pursuant to a stipulated settlement
agreement, the 12-month finding is due to the Federal Register by
October 31, 2010. This notice constitutes our 12-month finding for the
petition to list C. wrightii as threatened or endangered with critical
habitat.
Species Information
Cirsium wrightii is a biennial (a plant completing development in 2
years, flowering its second year) or a weak monocarpic perennial (a
plant that flowers, sets seed, then dies), in the sunflower family
(Asteraceae). The plant is prickly with short black spines and a 3- to
8-foot (ft) (0.9- to 2.4-meter (m)) single stalk covered with succulent
leaves (Sivinski 1996, p. 1; Arizona Game and Fish Department (AGFD)
2001, p. 1). Numerous slender flowering branches emerge from the stalk,
starting about one-third up the length of the plant. Branches are
terminated by one or a few small flowering heads, which have numerous
slender phyllaries (a modified leaf associated with the flower)
(Sivinski 1996, p. 1). Flowers are white to pale pink in areas of the
Sacramento Mountains of New Mexico, but are vivid pink in the Santa
Rosa, New Mexico, locality (Sivinski 1996, p. 1). In New Mexico, the
species occurs in wet, alkaline soils in spring seeps and marshy edges
of streams and ponds between 3,450 and 7,850 ft (1,152 and 2,393 m) in
elevation (Sivinski 1996, p. 1; 2005a, pp. 3-4; Worthington 2002a).
Cirsium wrightii is a wetland obligate (occurs only in water-
saturated soils) that was originally collected in 1851 at San
Bernardino Cienaga, Cochise County, Arizona (Gray 1853, p. 101;
Smithsonian 1849, p. 1). Historically, the species was found in
Arizona, New Mexico, and Chihuahua, Mexico (Gray 1853, p. 101; Coulter
1891, p. 244; Kearney and Peebles 1951, p. 952; Correll and Johnston
1970, p. 1719; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) 1995, p. 1).
Recently it was learned that an occurrence of another sunflower,
Cirsium texanum (Texas thistle), in Presidio County, Texas, had been
incorrectly identified as C. wrightii (Poole 2010, p. 1). All of the
previously presumed specimens of C. wrightii from Texas have now been
correctly identified as Cirsium texanum (Texas thistle), rather than C.
wrightii (Sivinski 1994a, p. 1; 1996, p. 2; 2006a, p. 1; Worthington
2002a, p. 4). These species are easily confused on herbarium sheets
(Sivinski 1996, p. 2). However, in the field, C. wrightii differs from
C. texanum in physical appearance (New Mexico Rare Plant Technical
Council (NMRPTC) 2009, p. 1)). The presumed Texas specimens of C.
wrightii that were previously identified from herbarium sheets, rather
than field identification, have been found to be C. texanum (Sivinski
1996, p. 2).
In the New Mexico portion of the species' range, Cirsium wrightii
appears to be an obligate of seeps, springs, and wetlands that have
saturated soils with surface or subsurface water flow (Sivinski 1996;
Service 1998; Worthington 2002a, p. 2; NMRPTC 2009). Plants commonly
found in areas inhabited by this species include Scirpus spp.
(bulrush), Salix spp. (willow), Baccharis glutinosa (seepwillow),
Helianthus paradoxus (Pecos sunflower), Juncus spp. (rush), and Typha
spp. (cattail) (Sivinski 1996, pp. 2-5; Sivinski and Bleakly 2004, p.
2; Worthington 2002a, pp. 1-2).
Distribution and Range
Cirsium wrightii currently occurs in New Mexico; however, it has
been extirpated from all previously known locations in Arizona
(Sivinski 1996, pp. 1, 4, 9, 2006a, 2009a, p. 1; Worthington 2002a, p.
4), and was misidentified and likely not ever present in Texas (Poole
1992; 2010; Sivinski 1996, p. 2). The status of the species in Mexico
is uncertain, with few verified collections of the plant. Numerous
surveys of potential habitat have been conducted over the years with
few new localities documented (e.g., Poole 1992, 2010; Sivinski 1994,
1996, 2005, 2009a; Worthington 2002a).
Cirsium wrightii is ranked by NatureServe as a G2 (imperiled)
species. It was changed from G3 (vulnerable) to G2 in 2003 (NatureServe
2009, p. 1). Similarly, its National Status ranking for the United
States is N2 (imperiled due to a restricted range and very few
populations) (NatureServe 2009, p. 2). Though these rankings do not
provide any regulatory protections, the NatureServe designations do
serve to notify the public of the species' status.
In New Mexico, there are eight general confirmed locations of
Cirsium wrightii: Santa Rosa, Guadalupe County; Bitter Lake National
Wildlife Refuge (BLNWR), Chaves County; Blue Spring, Eddy County; La
Luz Canyon, Karr Canyon, Silver Springs, and Tularosa Creek, Otero
County; and Alamosa Creek, Socorro County (Bridge 2001, p. 1; Sivinski
and Bleakly 2004, p. 2; NMRPTC 2009, p. 1; Sivinski 1994, p. 1; 1996,
p. 2; 2005, p. 1; 2005a, pp. 3-5; 2009, 2009a; Service 1998, p. 1;
Worthington 2002, p. 1; 2002a, pp. 1-3). Four of the eight localities
are clustered within about 10 miles (mi) (16 kilometers (km)) of each
other on the west slope of the Sacramento Mountains, Otero County,
whereas the remaining four localities are widely disjunct, separated
from the Sacramento localities by about 75 to 140 mi (120 to 225 km)
and from each other by about 75 to 215 mi (120 to 345 km). In the
Sacramento Mountains, two of these four localities occur on the Lincoln
National Forest, one locality is on private land and the remaining
locality is on the Mescalero Apache Reservation. In the Pecos River
Valley, one locality is on public lands on the BLNWR, Chaves County;
one is on private land near the Black River, Eddy County; and one is in
the vicinity of Santa Rosa, Guadalupe County, on private, municipal,
and State lands. The remaining locality is on private land on Alamosa
Creek, Socorro County. Localities vary in relative population size from
less than 20 individuals covering only about 50 square feet (ft\2\) ((5
square meters (m\2\)) at the Silver Springs locality, to several
thousand individuals on BLNWR.
Within New Mexico, historic localities from the City of Roswell
land, Chaves County, Lake Valley in Sierra County, and La Luz and
Haynes Canyons in Otero County are extirpated
[[Page 67927]]
(NMRPTC 2009, p. 2; Sivinski 2005, p. 1; 2005a p. 4; 2009a, p. 2).
Finally, a Cirsium species at Rattlesnake Springs, Eddy County, is
thought to be a hybrid between C. wrightii and C. texanum (NMRPTC 2009,
p. 2). This population blooms in May rather than the typical season of
C. wrightii from August to October (NMRPTC 2009, p. 2).
We are unaware of specific long-term monitoring data on absolute
abundance estimates for Cirsium wrightii in New Mexico, but have
estimates of relative abundance for most extant localities (see also
Sivinski 1996, 2005a, 2006a, 2009, 2009a). In 1996, Sivinski completed
a status assessment of C. wrightii in New Mexico (Sivinski 1996). He
subsequently continued to survey and monitor C. wrightii localities.
Worthington (2002a) conducted surveys at 12 sites that contained
suitable habitat in Karr Canyon, the Rio Penasco drainage, and in the
vicinity of Sacramento Lake in the Sacramento Mountains on U.S. Forest
Service (Forest Service) land in 2002. Moreover, he surveyed additional
springs, but found most springs were capped or captured for municipal
use by the City of Alamogordo (Worthington 2002a, p. 3). No new C.
wrightii populations were found, although one possible new locality
with plants that lacked the characteristic black tips and had different
looking leaves was noted (Worthington 2002). However, the locality was
not photographed, collected, or verified and the accuracy of its
identification is unknown.
In Arizona, the Service has similarly contracted surveys of
potential Cirsium wrightii habitat to verify whether any populations
are extant. These will be completed by October 2010. Below, we present
information on all of the known historic and extant localities of C.
wrightii rangewide, including those that have been extirpated.
New Mexico
Tularosa Creek
The Tularosa Creek, Otero County, population of Cirsium wrightii
occurs on private land and the Mescalero Apache Reservation. This
population has significantly declined since 1995, from an estimated
several thousand individual plants along 3.5 mi (5.6 km) of nearly
continuous occupied marsh and wet meadows, to four scattered occupied
locales of less than 50 individual flowering plants total along the
same stretch in 2009 (Sivinski 1996, p. 3; 2009a, p. 2). In 1995, this
was the most extensive population in the Sacramento Mountains, but it
has become drier and dominated by the invasive plant Phragmites
australis (common reed) since the 1995 survey (Sivinski 1996, p. 3;
2009a, p. 2). This population likely includes additional small adjacent
localities of scattered individual plants on the Mescalero Apache
Reservation, but we were unable to survey these Tribal lands (e.g., see
Bridge 2001; Worthington 2002a). Moreover, the possible new locality
found by Worthington (2002) occurs in the area.
La Luz Canyon
The small La Luz Canyon population of Cirsium wrightii that occurs
within about 540 ft\2\ (50 m\2\) of spring habitat on Forest Service
lands was stable at an estimated 50 plants both in 1995 and 2005
(Sivinski 1996, p. 3; 2005a, p. 4). However, an adjacent small
population of 10 plants in the same general area on private land 3 mi
(5.8 km) east of La Luz Canyon was extirpated between 1995 and 2005,
most likely from a severe scouring flood and alteration of the spring
hydrology that led to the drying of habitat (Sivinski 2005a, p. 4;
2009a, p. 2).
Karr Canyon
The Karr Canyon/Haynes Creek population of Cirsium wrightii
previously included a cluster of a hundred plants within about 1000
ft\2\ (100 m\2\) of spring habitat within a highway right-of-way that
was stable between 1995 and 2005 (Sivinski 1996, p. 2, 2005a, p. 4).
Nevertheless, a small population of a few dozen mature plants in the
same general area on private land was extirpated between 1995 and 2005
and replaced by Phragmites australis (Sivinski 1996, p. 2, 2005a, p. 4;
2009a, p. 2).
Silver Springs Canyon
The small Silver Springs Canyon population of Cirsium wrightii
occurs on Forest Service land in a wet meadow and was estimated at 16
mature plants in 2002 (Worthington 2002, p. 4; 2002a, p. 15). The
population was observed in July 2010 and appears to be approximately
the same size (Service 2010b, p. 1). This population is growing within
a seep and is adjacent to C. vinaceum (Sacramento Mountains thistle)
(Worthington 2002, p. 4).
Bitter Lake National Wildlife Refuge
A large population of Cirsium wrightii was found at BLNWR in 1998
and is associated with cienagas (wet meadows) and marshes in Units 3,
5, and 6 of the refuge (Service 1998, p. 1; 2010, p. 1). All known
populations of C. wrightii on BLNWR grow within designated critical
habitat of Helianthus paradoxus (Service 2010a, p. 6). When C. wrightii
was discovered on BLNWR, the population was estimated between 1,680 and
2,130 flowering plants (Service 1998, p. 1; 1999, p. 25). Sivinski
(2005a, p. 3) found there was no change in this population's
distribution and abundance between 1999 and 2005. In 2009, the
population was estimated to be thousands of individuals, the largest
known population of C. wrightii (Sivinski 2009a, p. 2).
Roswell
Cirsium wrightii historically occurred in North Spring, at the
Roswell Country Club, Roswell, New Mexico (Sivinski 1996, p. 4).
However, the population has been extirpated following the alteration
and loss of all vegetation, including C. wrightii, as a result of the
enclosure of North Spring with bricks and cement (Sivinski 1996, p. 4;
New Mexico Department of Game and Fish (NMDGF) 2005a, p. 18). Sivinski
surveyed most of the springs in the vicinity of Roswell in 1995 looking
for C. wrightii populations (Sivinski 1996, p. 4). All but one spring
had been capped and diverted for domestic water, and no extant or new
populations were found (Sivinski 1996, p. 4).
Santa Rosa Wetlands
The Santa Rosa area is a zone of karst topography (an area of
erosive limestone), with numerous sinkhole lakes and artesian springs
(ground water that is under pressure) within a 6-mi (9.7-km) diameter
circular depression. The localities of C. wrightii are scattered within
some of the marshes, spring seeps, and various sinkhole lakes, with
flowering plants generally rare and occurring throughout 4 sections
spread out over 4 square miles (mi\2\) (10 square kilometers (km\2\))
on a mixture of State, private, and municipal lands, but the total area
occupied in this locality is less than 5 acres (ac) (2 hectare (ha))
(Sivinski 1996, p. 4; Sivinski and Bleakly 2004, pp. 1, 3; Service
2010c, pp. 1-2). For example, the 116-ac (47-ha) Blue Hole Cienaga
locality, owned by the State of New Mexico, is part of the overall
population and contains sparse occurrences (i.e., not continuous in
distribution) of C. wrightii along a spring-fed creek and an adjacent
seep (Sivinski and Bleakly 2004; Service 2010c). The other known
localities in the area include El Rito Creek, private lands, ponds at a
no-longer-used fish hatchery, Bass Lake, and Perch Lake (a large
sinkhole that is partially developed for fishing and picnicking)
(Sivinski 1996; 2005a; 2010a; Sivinski and Bleakly 2004). Most of the
[[Page 67928]]
municipal habitats are small, but have been filled and developed for
recreation. This active filling of wetlands has led to the loss of C.
wrightii plants in recent years (Service 2010c). These localities
support perhaps a few hundred C. wrightii, but the remaining localities
are smaller, isolated occurrences (Sivinski 1996, p. 6, 2009a; 2010a,
p. 1; Sivinski and Bleakly 2004, p. 3). Between 1995 and 2005, the
overall Santa Rosa population was thought to be stable, estimated at
several thousand plants (Sivinski 1996, p. 4; 2005a, p. 3).
Blue Spring
A new population of Cirsium wrightii was discovered in 2009 at Blue
Spring, Eddy County, New Mexico (Sivinski 2009). This population was
estimated at several hundred to a few thousand plants and occupies
about 1 mi (1.6 km) of riparian habitat (Sivinski 2009, p. 1). Water
flow at Blue Spring is generally perennial along the 2.5-mi (4-km) run
that flows into the Black River (a tributary of the Pecos) near Black
River Village, New Mexico (NMDGF 2007, p. 15). We have no other
information on this locality, as it was just discovered in 2009.
Alamosa Springs
Another population of Cirsium wrightii was discovered in 2005 at
Alamosa Springs, Socorro County, New Mexico (Sivinski 2005, p. 1).
There were an estimated 500-1,000 flowering adults and rosettes
confined to a small, spring-fed wetland within the Alamosa Creek Valley
(a tributary of the Rio Grande), but none of the plants occurred along
Alamosa Creek (Sivinski 2005, p. 1; 2010a, pp. 1-2). The remaining
springs in the Alamosa Creek Valley are on private land and have not
been surveyed.
Lake Valley
A population of Cirsium wrightii was historically located within
Lake Valley, Sierra County, New Mexico, but is considered extirpated
(Sivinski 2005). This site is now an abandoned mining settlement, but
was historically a series of marshes and cienagas. The area was diked,
channeled, and drained in the early 1900s and converted to row-crop
agriculture (Sivinski 2005, p. 1). There is no longer suitable habitat
for C. wrightii within the valley (Sivinski 2005, p. 1).
Arizona
San Bernardino Cienaga
The population at the type locality (the place where the species
was first found) from San Bernardino Cienaga, Arizona, has not been
found again since it was originally collected in 1851, although the
area was surveyed in 2006 by The Nature Conservancy (Sivinski 2006a, p.
1; 2009a, p. 1). The species is likely extirpated from the State (ADGF
2001, p. 1; Sivinski 1996, p. 4; 2009a, p. 1; Service 2009a, p. 1).
Texas
We found that Cirsium specimens from Texas have been confused
because of the difficulty in distinguishing Cirsium wrightii and C.
texanum from herbarium sheets (Sivinski 1994, p. 1; 1994a, p. 1;
Sivinski 2006a, p. 1). All of the collections from herbariums and
references identifying C. wrightii localities in Texas are in error
(Coulter 1881, p. 244; Correll and Johnson 1970, p. 1719; Kearney and
Peebles 1951, p. 952; Martin and Hutchins 1981, p. 2002; Sivinski 1994,
p. 1; 1996, p. 5; Texas A&M University 1975, p. 89). Furthermore, the
presumed location from Presidio, Texas, that we identified in the 90-
day finding (74 FR 46544), is not C. wrightii, but most likely an
undescribed species from northern Mexico (Poole 2010, p. 1).
Poole (1992) evaluated 74 cienagas in Texas and conducted botanical
surveys at 33 of the locations within the highest potential habitat
(i.e., springs and wetlands) for the Helianthus paradoxus, which has
similar habitat requirements and sometimes overlaps with C. wrightii.
No C. wrightii locations were found during these extensive botanical
surveys (Poole 1992). Similarly, we reviewed information from and
contacted botanists who have surveyed the Diamond Y Preserve, Pecos
County, Texas, owned by The Nature Conservancy. This preserve shares
some of the same habitat characteristics, and many of the imperiled
species, found on BLNWR, including Pecos assiminea (Assiminea pecos),
Pecos gambusia (Gambusia nobilis), and Helianthus paradoxus (Service
2005, pp. 4, 8; 2007, p. 10; Poole 2010, p. 1). We found that Diamond Y
has been thoroughly surveyed, and it does not appear that C. wrightii
occurs on the preserve. Because we do not have any verified historic
collections or known extant populations from any locations in Texas
(Poole 2010, p. 1; 2010a, p. 1), we conclude that C. wrightii has never
been present within the State.
Mexico
We have not been able to obtain any recent information on Cirsium
wrightii in Mexico. In fact, we have located only three herbarium
specimens that were collected in Mexico. One specimen was collected in
1982 at Cerro Angostura Spring, Chihuahua, Mexico (Sivinski 2009a, p.
1, 2010; CONABIO 2010). The second collection from Los Azules,
Chihuahua, in 1998, was misidentified and is not C. wrightii. The third
collection from Fronteras, Sonora, in 1890, has not yet been verified
(Sivinski 2010, p. 1). As such, the status of the species in Mexico is
uncertain.
In summary, there are eight general localities of Cirsium wrightii
extant within New Mexico. Additional historical populations have been
extirpated, including at least two larger and two smaller populations
in New Mexico, and there are no known extant populations in Arizona.
The population at BLNWR is likely the most robust, with several
thousand individuals. Santa Rosa contains mostly sparse scattered
localities throughout four sections of land, and some of these have
been extirpated recently. The population along Tularosa Creek has
undergone a significant reduction since 1995. The remaining populations
in the Sacramento Mountains are all small, containing from 15 to
perhaps several hundred individuals. The populations at Blue Spring and
Alamosa Springs were recently discovered, and there have been no
subsequent surveys to determine whether these populations are stable or
declining. The collections from Texas were misidentified, and we
conclude C. wrightii never occurred in the State. Finally, there is
only one verified historic collection from Mexico, and no recent
information on the status of the species from this population. For
these reasons, the status of this species remains tenuous.
Summary of Information Pertaining to the Five Factors for Cirsium
wrightii
Section 4 of the Act and implementing regulations (50 CFR part 424)
set forth procedures for adding species to the Federal Lists of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. Under section 4(a)(1) of
the Act, a species may be determined to be endangered or threatened
based on any of the following five factors:
(A) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range;
(B) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes;
(C) Disease or predation;
(D) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or
(E) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued
existence.
In making this finding, information pertaining to Cirsium wrightii,
in relation to the five factors provided in section 4(a)(1) of the Act,
is discussed below.
[[Page 67929]]
In making our 12-month finding on a petition to list Cirsium
wrightii, we considered and evaluated the best available scientific and
commercial information. This information includes the petition and
associated documents, data from the 1995 through 2009 surveys and
recent reports (Sivinski 1996, 2005a, 2006a, 2009, 2009a; Forest
Service 2008b; Service 2010b, 2010c), as well as other information
available to us. The following analysis examines the five factors
described in section 4(a)(1) of the Act and those activities and
conditions currently affecting C. wrightii, or are likely to affect the
species within the foreseeable future.
In considering what factors might constitute threats to a species,
we must look beyond the exposure of the species to a particular factor
to evaluate whether the species may respond to that factor in a way
that causes actual impacts to the species. If there is exposure to a
factor and the species responds negatively, the factor may be a threat
and, during the status review, we attempt to determine how significant
a threat it is. The threat is significant if it drives, or contributes
to, the risk of extinction of the species such that the species
warrants listing as endangered or threatened as those terms are defined
in the Act. However, the identification of factors that could impact a
species negatively may not be sufficient to compel a finding that the
species warrants listing. The information must include evidence
sufficient to suggest that these factors are operative threats that act
on the species to the point that the species may meet the definition of
endangered or threatened under the Act.
A. Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment of
the Species' Habitat or Range
The most significant threat to Cirsium wrightii is the alteration
of the hydrology of its rare wetland habitat. In fact, much of the
habitat of C. wrightii has been and continues to be severely altered
and degraded because of past and present land and water management
practices including: agriculture and urban development, diversion of
springs, and drought. As described below, all of the extant localities
may be affected by long-term drought, whereas four of the largest C.
wrightii localities at Blue Spring, BLNWR, Santa Rosa, and Alamosa
Creek have the potential to be further modified by ongoing and future
water withdrawal. Changes in water tables throughout the range of C.
wrightii have often resulted in diminished discharge from springs or
complete loss of surface water. Therefore, there has been a trend of
diminishing habitat quantity and excessive degradation of habitat
quality for the species throughout its range.
Availability of Water
Cirsium wrightii is found in association with seeps, springs,
marshes, and wetlands that have saturated soils with surface or
subsurface water flow (NMRPTC 2009; Sivinski 1996, pp. 2-7; Service
1998, p. 2; Worthington 2002a, p. 2). Southwestern riparian and aquatic
systems fluctuate due to seasonal and longer term drought and wet
periods, floods, and fire. Habitats with fluctuating water levels
create circumstances in which population sizes may vary over time, and
populations may be periodically extirpated. Because the species occurs
only in areas that are water-saturated, populations have a high
potential for extirpation when habitat dries due to ground and surface
water depletion, draining of wetlands, or drought. Loss of water from
C. wrightii habitat occurs through changing precipitation patterns,
drought, or as a result of human impacts from groundwater pumping
(withdrawal) or diversion of surface water; this can lead to the
degradation and extirpation of Cirsium wrightii habitat (Sivinski 1996,
p. 5; 2005, p. 1; Forest Service 2008, p. 19). Moreover, the drying of
C. wrightii habitat has led to retractions of occurrence boundaries, a
reduction in the numbers of plants, and, in some cases, a loss of all
individuals at several localities (Sivinski 2005a, pp. 3-4). For
example, during the dry conditions from 1994 to 1996, many seeps and
springs in the Sacramento Mountains ceased flowing and were completely
dry (Sivinski 2006b, p. 12). Naturally occurring water loss from
changes in precipitation patterns have affected the volume of water
flow at numerous springs in the Sacramento Mountains (Forest Service
2003, p. 43).
Drought
The National Weather Service Forecast Office and the U.S. Drought
Monitor for New Mexico indicate that the Sacramento Mountains
experienced a severe to extreme drought from 2003 to 2008 (Forest
Service 2008, p. 22). This has led to unusually low stream or spring
flows and, in some instances, no flow (e.g., see South Central Mountain
2002, p. 12; Shomaker 2006, p. 8; Gardner and Thompson 2008, p. 2;
Newton et al. 2009; Sivinski 2005a, pp. 3-4, Forest Service 2003, pp.
53-54). This is likely related to severe drought conditions (Sivinski
2005a, pp. 1, 3-4). Within New Mexico, monsoonal summer precipitation
can be very patchy, with some areas receiving considerably less
rainfall than others. Newton et al. (2009) studied the hydrogeology of
the Sacramento Mountains and found that the fractures in the underlying
geology exhibit significant control on surface and groundwater flow and
possibly groundwater recharge. Overall, their data suggest that the
recharge of water wells and groundwater is correlated to the amount of
precipitation during monsoon storms at all elevations (Newton et al.
2009, p. 22). Wet periods during summer months can significantly
contribute to recharge of the ground water in the Sacramento Mountains,
but these are extremely rare events (Newton et al. 2009). As such,
drought has impacted the recharge of ground water tables throughout the
Sacramento Mountains (Forest Service 2008, p. 22). For this reason, the
seasonal distribution of yearly precipitation can result in temporary
drought conditions and reduced water availability for some C. wrightii
localities within this mountain range.
In 1995 and 2005, Sivinski (2005a, pp. 3-4) monitored the relative
size of Cirsium wrightii localities rangewide to document the
relationship between water availability in suitable habitat and numbers
and extent of plants. He found that, when some localities dried, the
localities were either extirpated or much reduced in size (Sivinski
2005a, pp. 3-4). Moreover, drying of occupied habitat also resulted in
Typha latifolia (cattail) being replaced by dense stands of Phragmites
australis (Sivinski 2005a, pp. 3-4), which may outcompete native
vegetation including C. wrightii and significantly increase the threat
of wildfire (see discussion below under ``Phragmites australis'').
Drought also affects the size of an extant locality, even when the
water source does not dry out completely. The most severe drought
recorded in New Mexico occurred between 1950 and 1956. If drought
reduces the amount of groundwater recharge regionally, spring discharge
or the areal extent of wetlands could also be reduced. Prolonged
drought can lead to diminishment or drying of springs, which would have
a negative impact on Cirsium wrightii or its habitat. Comparing
historical discharges reported in the Black River from 1952 to 1956
(daily mean flow of 15.4 cubic feet per second (cfs) (0.436 cubic
meters per second (cms))) to recent discharges (2002 to 2006, daily
mean flow of 10.1 cfs (0.286 cms)), flows in the Black River are
currently lower than flows during the extreme drought of the 1950s
(NMDGF 2007, p.
[[Page 67930]]
26). Prolonged drought could adversely impact habitat conditions by
reducing hydrologic discharge through the wetland system, thereby
desiccating riparian plant communities (e.g., see NMDGF 2008, p. 33),
including C. wrightii. Because of the documented extirpation and
population reductions of the species caused by drought and the
possibility of more widespread drought accompanying climate change, we
conclude that drought constitutes a threat to C. wrightii, both now and
in the foreseeable future.
Ground and Surface Water Depletion
Habitat loss due to ground and surface water depletion is a threat
to Cirsium wrightii. Sivinski (1994, pp. 1-2; 1996, p. 4; 2005, p. 1;
2006, p. 4) reported loss or degradation of habitat from water
diversion or draining of wetlands in Chaves, Otero, and Sierra
Counties, New Mexico, areas that historically supported Cirsium
wrightii. Increased water extraction in the last 100 years has
contributed to the dramatic decline of most surface spring systems in
the Chihuahuan Desert (see Corps 2006, p. 4; Karges 2003 and references
therein). An historical population in Lake Valley, Sierra County, New
Mexico, was extirpated when the wetlands were drained and converted to
agricultural use (Sivinski 2005, p. 1; 2006a, p. 1). Moreover, the
appropriation of water rights from springs for a ``beneficial use,''
such as livestock water, farming, domestic use, or recreational
facilities, typically uses points of diversion that can curtail natural
surface flows and affect C. wrightii populations. For example, aquifers
in the Sacramento Mountains, which contain half of all known C.
wrightii localities, are susceptible to appropriation by existing water
rights and development of new water rights, which may pose future
threats to the species (Service 2008, pp. 12, 23; Forest Service 2008,
pp. 23-24). The marshes, springs, and seeps within La Luz Canyon of the
Sacramento Mountains are currently and were likely historically
diverted or drained for irrigation and agricultural use (Sivinski 1996,
p. 5; South Central Mountain 2002, p. 20). Many springs and streams in
the Sacramento Mountains that were perennial during the 1900s have
become intermittent or have dried completely, including La Luz Creek
(Abercrombie 2003, p. 3). In this area, loss of water flow from human
activities related to roads, trails, and the capture of spring water
for municipal use have also been observed to affect the threatened
species Cirsium vinaceum (Forest Service 2003, pp. 42-43). The same
likely holds true for C. wrightii, although it has not been
specifically investigated.
The severe decline in available surface and ground water since the
1990s is due largely to drought and human use (e.g., Shomaker 2006, pp.
8, 20, 26). Cirsium wrightii occurrences in La Luz Canyon are within
the municipal supply watershed, where pipelines divert water to the
City of Alamogordo (Shomaker 2006, pp. 20, 26; Forest Service 2008, p.
21). The number of water wells drilled on both private and National
Forest System lands within this area has increased since the 1950s,
with the 1980s and 1990s being the most active years for drilling of
domestic use wells (Forest Service 2008, p. 22). The total permitted
groundwater extraction is approximately 2,400 acre feet per year (300
hectare-meters per year) (98,000,000 gallons per year) (370,000,000
liters per year) from nearly 300 wells (Forest Service 2008, p. 22).
In 2002, the New Mexico State Engineer declared the La Luz Canyon
watershed as a Critical Management Area, which means no new groundwater
appropriations would be allowed for nondomestic purposes (Forest
Service 2008, p. 22). However, for domestic purposes, the demand for
water use through surface diversion and ground water withdrawals is
expected to increase as a result of the population increase. The human
population in Alamogordo, Otero County, New Mexico, increased from
about 30,000 to 36,000 from 1995 to 2000, and is expected to increase
to about 56,000 by 2040 (South Central Mountain 2002, p. 11). An
increasing human population and its associated agricultural and
economic activities will require additional water from this relatively
dry region.
Current New Mexico State law provides that anyone may obtain a
permit for a domestic well, no matter what the consequences for anyone
else's water rights or the impact of water resources for the area
(e.g., see Belin et al. 2003, p. 72). Between 2005 and 2045, the City
of Alamogordo's water demand is expected to increase from 7,140 acre-
feet per year to 10,842 acre-feet per year (881 hectare-meters per year
to 1337 hectare-meters per year) (Shomaker 2006, pp. 43-44). By 2045,
the City of Alamogordo will likely have a projected deficit of 6,258
acre-feet per year (772 hectare-meters per year) (more than 2 billion
gallons per year) (more than 8 billion liters per year) (Shomaker 2006,
p. 44). Withdrawal and diversion of water from wells located on Forest
Service and private lands would continue to increase for the
foreseeable future and compound the effects of the recent and ongoing
drought, leading to increased degradation of wetland and riparian
habitat (Forest Service 2008, p. 23), which contain Cirsium wrightii
localities. In the Sacramento Mountains, C. wrightii occurrences have
been and will continue to be altered and potentially degraded by the
issuance of a special use permit to maintain and operate water
withdrawal from Forest Service lands (Forest Service 2008, p. 26).
Development of additional water rights will likely dewater C. wrightii
localities, constituting a threat to the species in this area for the
foreseeable future.
Moreover, the Blue Spring and Santa Rosa occurrences of Cirsium
wrightii are within areas where water is currently drained from
wetlands or diverted or withdrawn for domestic use, which may
contribute to degradation and loss of its habitat (Sivinski 1996, p. 5;
2009; 2009a; NMDGF 2007, pp. 14, 17, 22). Additionally, any activity
that would interrupt the flow of water from Alamosa Creek has the
potential to impact C. wrightii. Currently, irrigation and domestic use
from about 50 farms does not appear to have reduced the baseflow of
about 9 cfs (0.3 cms) from this spring-fed system (Sierra Soil and
Water Conservation Service 2008, p. 2). However, Alamosa Creek would
likely be negatively affected by long-term drought.
The effects of ongoing and past maintenance and operation of
existing water diversions can also limit the size of Cirsium wrightii
populations (Corps 2007, p. 29). For example, the C. wrightii
population on City of Roswell lands has been extirpated at this
location since the habitat is no longer suitable for the plant (NMDGF
2005, pp. 33-34; Sivinski 1996, pp. 4-5; 2006a, p. 5). Loss of springs
and surface water flow in streams resulting from human use and drought
have occurred throughout the Roswell Artesian Basin in New Mexico,
often resulting in diminished discharge from springs or complete loss
of surface water (Taylor 1983, 1987; NMDGF 2005, 2005a, p. 17; Jones
and Balleau 1996, pp. 4, 12). Many of these spring systems could have
harbored populations of C. wrightii; however, it is not possible to
determine the extent of the loss of C. wrightii populations because
many springs went dry before surveys could be conducted. Peak annual
pumping of the alluvial aquifer (a water-bearing deposit of sand and
gravel) in the Roswell Basin occurred in the 1950s. Since the 1950s,
administration and metering of groundwater extraction in the basin by
the New Mexico Office of the State Engineer has resulted in
[[Page 67931]]
stabilization of groundwater levels (NMDGF 2005a, p. 18).
As artesian wells were developed in the area, discharge from the
major springs declined proportionately and some of these springs cease
to flow (Jones and Balleau 1996, p. 4). Surface water flow on BLNWR has
also been diminished by groundwater pumping, as evidenced by the dead
springs on Salt Creek and documented reduction in spring flows on the
refuge (Jones and Balleau 1996; p. 12). Aerial photos which show a
larger, meandering channel for Bitter Creek are also evidence that
discharge from Bitter Creek was once greater (Service 2005a; 70 FR
46312, August 9, 2005). Additionally, BLNWR actively lowers the water
levels in wetlands during spring and summer (Service 2006, p. 2). It is
unknown how C. wrightii responds to these changing water levels on the
refuge, but if soils are not continuously saturated throughout the
growing season, the species is likely impacted. Information from other
localities suggests that populations likely contract or habitat may
become invaded by Phragmites australis as water is withdrawn and parts
of the occupied wetlands dry (e.g., Sivinski 2005a, pp. 3-4).
Surface diversions, primarily for irrigation, and groundwater
pumping for domestic and commercial uses also occurs at the Blue Spring
locality (NMDGF 2007, p. 22; Lusk 2008). Flow in the Black River is
sustained by springs, including Rattlesnake and Blue Springs, and is
generally perennial in the reaches around these springs (NMDGF 2007, p.
15). Discharge at Blue Spring has varied over the past 100 years: in
1907, it was recorded at 15.2 cfs (0.430 cms), with a minimum of 14.65
cfs (0.415 cms) (Bjorklund and Motts 1959, pp. 251, 263); from 1952 to
1956, discharge varied from 8.5 to 14 cfs (0.24 to 0.40 cms), with a
mean of 12 cfs (0.34 cms) (Bjorklund and Motts 1959, p. 268); and from
2002 to 2006, the mean was 11.75 cfs (0.333 cms), with a range from 6.8
to 23 cfs (0.19 to 0.65 cms) (NMDGF 2007, p.15). Bjorklund and Motts
(1959, pp. 247, 263) first reported that water levels within the Black
River Valley (including Blue Spring) decline during the late summer and
during droughts, mostly from heavy groundwater pumping and lack of
aquifer recharge. Based on flows recorded in recent years (2000-2006)
at Blue Springs and in the Black River above the Carlsbad Irrigation
District diversion, more surface water is appropriated than is
available in the system (R. Turner, New Mexico Office of the State
Engineer, pers. comm., April 2007; cited in NMDGF 2007, p. 25). This
constitutes a significant threat to this locality.
In summary, the alteration and loss of habitat that currently
supports C. wrightii, due to groundwater and surface water depletion,
will continue and likely increase in the foreseeable future. Because
this species is dependent on water, we find that long-term drought in
combination with ground and surface water withdrawal is currently a
significant threat to C. wrightii and its habitat, and will continue to
be in the foreseeable future.
Climate Change
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) states that
warming of the climate system is unequivocal, based on observations of
increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread
melting of snow and ice, and rising global average sea level (2007a, p.
5). For the next two decades, a warming of about 0.4 degrees Fahrenheit
([deg]F) (0.2 degrees Celsius ([deg]C)) per decade is projected (IPCC
2007a, p. 12). Temperature projections for the following years
increasingly depend on specific emission scenarios (IPCC 2007a, p. 13).
Various emissions scenarios suggest that average global temperatures
are expected to increase by between 1.1 [deg]F and 7.2 [deg]F (0.6
[deg]C and 4.0 [deg]C) by the end of the 21st century, with the
greatest warming expected over land (IPCC 2007a, p. 13). Warming in
western mountains is projected to cause decreased snowpack, more winter
flooding, and reduced summer flows, exacerbating competition for over-
allocated water resources (IPCC 2007b, p. 14). The IPCC reports that it
is very likely that hot extremes, heat waves, and heavy precipitation
and flooding will increase in frequency (IPCC 2007b, p. 18).
Based on current understanding of climate change, air temperatures
are expected to rise and precipitation patterns are expected to change
in areas occupied by Cirsium wrightii. Because C. wrightii occupies
relatively small areas of spring or seep habitat in an arid region
plagued by drought and ongoing aquifer withdrawals (e.g., in the
Roswell Basin), it may be vulnerable to climatic changes that could
decrease the availability of water to suitable habitat. For example,
the most severe drought recorded in New Mexico occurred between 1950
and 1956. Based on the discharges reported in the Black River (fed by
Blue Spring, the C. wrightii locality, and other spring sources) from
1952 to 1956 (daily mean of 15.4 cfs (0.436 cms)) compared to recent
discharges (2002 to 2006, daily mean of 10.1 cfs (0.286 cms)), flows in
the Black River are currently lower than during the drought of the
1950s (NMDGF 2007, p. 31). Moreover, Sivinski (2005a, pp. 3-4) reports
that springs and wet valleys have been affected by drought in at least
three canyons of the Sacramento Mountains, New Mexico, resulting in
reduced C. wrightii populations. Similar water loss may occur within
other C. wrightii localities, as analyzed above. If climate change
leads to future drought, additional dewatering and reduction of C.
wrightii habitat may occur.
Although the information available on climate change indicates that
New Mexico will be impacted (New Mexico Climate Change Advisory Group
2006, p. 1), there is no information specific to the effects of climate
change on Cirsium wrightii or its habitat. Reliable predictive models
have not been developed for use at the local scale (i.e., the eight
occupied localities), and there is little certainty regarding the
timing and magnitude of the resulting impacts. For example, the
vulnerability of C. wrightii habitats to a drying climate depends, in
large part, on the sources of their water supply. The sources of water
to C. wrightii habitats are precipitation, surface water, and
groundwater. Habitats that are sustained mainly by precipitation are
the most likely to be affected in a drying climate. Alternatively,
localities that are supplied primarily by groundwater will likely have
the greatest resistance to climate change due to water stored in
aquifers (e.g., see Poff et al. 2002, pp. 18-19). However, based on
projections made by the IPCC, we consider climate change to be a
potential exacerbating factor, worsening the impacts of other known
threats. These threats include habitat degradation from prolonged
periods of drought and increased temperature, and the allocation of
water for use by the human population and agriculture as well as a
number of potential confounding effects. In summary, we do not have
evidence indicating that climate change is currently a factor affecting
C. wrightii's existence, because the information available on the
subject is insufficiently specific to the species or the possible
current or future effects of climate change on the sources of their
water supply. However, we consider climate change to be a potential
exacerbating factor and will continue to evaluate new information on
the subject as it becomes available.
Introduced Plants
Introduced plants increase the potential for habitat loss due to
wildfire and competition with Cirsium wrightii.
[[Page 67932]]
Phragmites australis has recently invaded half of the known C. wrightii
localities (BLNWR, Tularosa Creek, Santa Rosa, and Karr Canyon),
forming dense stands in areas and increasing fuel load and threat of
wildfire. Standing dead canes of P. australis and associated litter
often constitute twice as much biomass as living shoots (Forest Service
2010). The high productivity and density of P. australis stands provide
fuel loads that are often high. This abundant dead fuel carries fire
well, allowing stands to burn even when the current year's shoots are
green (Forest Service 2010).
As an example, on March 5, 2000, the Sandhill fire burned 1,000 ac
(405 ha) of the western portion of the BLNWR, including portions of
Bitter Creek. The fire burned through Dragonfly Spring, eliminating the
vegetation shading the spring. Although Cirsium wrightii does not occur
immediately within the burned area, the changes to wetland vegetation
exemplify how its habitat might respond following wildfire. The pre-
fire dominant vegetation of submerged aquatic plants and mixed native
grasses within the burned area has been replaced by the invasive
Phragmites australis (NMDGF 2005, p. 19-21). The P. australis present
at BLNWR is likely of European origin (Service 2006, p. 5). Prior to
the wildfire, small patches of P. australis occurred throughout Bitter
Creek, whereas post-fire, P. australis colonized the burned area to
form a continuous dense stand (NMDGF 2005, pp. 19-21). Stands of P.
australis have also recently become a dominant plant in other C.
wrightii localities (Sivinski 2005a, pp. 3-4; Sivinski and Bleakly
2004, p. 5). Controlled burns have been implemented on BLNWR to burn
grass, sedge, cattail, and nonnative vegetation (e.g., Salsola spp.
(Russian thistle and tumbleweed)), in an attempt to reduce the risk of
large uncontrolled wildfires by removing excessive amounts of Salsola
spp. and P. australis (Service 2006). This may temporarily reduce the
threat of wildfire in one area of BLNWR, but repeated prescribed burns
are likely needed to continually suppress P. australis growth (Service
2006, pp. 4-5).
No measures are being implemented in the other localities to reduce
P. australis. Moreover, temperatures from prescribed burns are rarely
high enough to be lethal to P. australis or to penetrate deeply into
the wet or moist soils common in their habitat (Forest Service 2010 and
references therein). Prescribed fire burns above-ground parts of P.
australis, but below-ground rhizomes usually survive and produce plants
later in the growing season or in subsequent years (Forest Service 2010
and references therein). Rarely is P. australis abundance decreased by
fire, and postfire recovery is typically rapid. As such, prescribed
fire likely will do little to reduce the long-term threat of P.
australis to C. wrightii.
In addition to increasing the potential for wildfire, Phragmites
australis can also quickly invade a site and take over a wetland,
crowding out native plants and changing hydrology (Plant Conservation
Alliance 2005, p. 1). The dense plant growth blocks sunlight to other
plants growing in the immediate area and occupies all available
habitat, turning many wetlands into dense stands that support only P.
australis (Plant Conservation Alliance 2005, p. 1). Two Cirsium
wrightii localities have recently been either extirpated (an occurrence
in Karr Canyon), or significantly reduced in size (Tularosa Creek),
following an expansion of P. australis (Sivinski 1996, p. 2, 2005a, p.
4; 2009a, p. 2). P. australis is a current threat and will likely be a
continuing threat for C. wrightii localities through increased fire
risk, competition, and changes in hydrology, especially when habitat is
disturbed through burning or drying.
Ungulate Grazing
Grazing likely impacts some localities of Cirsium wrightii, but
does not appear to be a widespread threat to the species. It is
estimated that livestock grazing has damaged approximately 80 percent
of stream and riparian ecosystems in the western United States (Belsky
et al. 1999, p. 419). The damage occurs from increased sedimentation,
decreased water quality, and trampling and overgrazing of stream banks
where succulent forage exists (Armour et al. 1994, p. 10; Belsky et al.
1999, p. 419; Fleischner 1994, p. 631). Moreover, many acres of marsh
habitats at Santa Rosa have also been plowed and converted to Festuca
pratensis (meadow fescue) pasture for livestock grazing (Service 2005,
p. 10; Corps 2007, p. 25). In the semi-arid southwestern United States,
wet marshes and other habitat of C. wrightii attract ungulates because
of the availability of water and high-quality forage (e.g., see
Hendrickson and Minckley 1984, p. 134). Similar to C. vinaceum, dry
periods likely increase the effects of livestock trampling and
herbivory on C. wrightii when other water and forage plants are not
available (75 FR 30761, June 2, 2010). Grazing may be more concentrated
within habitats similar to those occupied by C. wrightii during drought
years, when livestock are prone to congregate in wetland habitats or
where forage production is greater than in adjacent dry uplands (e.g.,
see Forest Service 2003). Although no studies specifically related to
the effects of livestock grazing on C. wrightii have been conducted
(NMRPTC 2009, p. 2), livestock will likely eat C. wrightii when other
green forage is scarce, and when the seedlings or rosettes are
developing and abundant.
The localities in the Sacramento Mountains, Santa Rosa, Alamosa
Springs, and Blue Spring have the potential to be subjected to
trampling and herbivory (75 FR 30762; NMDGF 2000, p. 2, 2004, p. 7,
2005, p. 47; Corps 2007, p. 25; Service 1994, p. 6, 2005c, p. 2). For
example, about three quarters of C. wrightii were grazed at one
locality near Santa Rosa (Corps 2007, p. 25). Additionally, much of the
private wet meadows and marsh habitats in the Santa Rosa area have been
severely degraded by livestock grazing for many years (Sivinski and
Bleakly 2004). Except for Blue Hole Cienaga, we are not aware of any
fences enclosing these localities that would limit impacts to the
species. In the Sacramento Mountains, for example, springs and marshes
provide a majority of the watering sites for both livestock and
wildlife species, especially elk (75 FR 30762). These wet springs and
marshes are subject to trampling and hoof damage, and receive
especially heavy use during drought periods, when neither water nor
green forage are readily available elsewhere. Trampling could easily
result in damage to seedlings, rosettes, and flowering stalks, thereby
preventing reproduction by affected plants. It is possible that elk and
livestock grazing within and adjacent to spring ecosystems could alter
or remove habitat or limit the distribution of Cirsium wrightii;
however, we found little information to support this possibility.
Still, we believe the observations of livestock and elk herbivory and
trampling that directly affect C. vinaceum and its habitat likely are
also occurring in some of the C. wrightii localities; however, it is
unknown whether these are localized or widespread threats to the
species.
In summary, while livestock activities do not appear to be a
widespread threat at the current time, localized impacts have been
observed, and increased use of wet springs and marshes during drought
conditions constitutes a threat in the foreseeable future. We will
continue to monitor livestock grazing and trampling to determine
whether C. wrightii is threatened.
Wetland Filling and Development
As described below, wetland filling and development has impacted
the
[[Page 67933]]
Santa Rosa locality, but does not appear to be a threat to the species.
A substantial percentage of wetlands in the Santa Rosa area have
disappeared in the last 50 to 80 years (Metric Corporation et al. 2002,
p. 5). Springs that fed suitable habitat for Helianthus paradoxus and
likely also contained Cirsium wrightii have been converted to swimming
pools and fishing ponds or drained and filled for sports fields in the
towns of Roswell and Santa Rosa, New Mexico (e.g., see Sivinski and
Bleakly 2004, p. 1; Service 2005, p. 8). Moreover, some springs and
associated wetlands where C. wrightii occurred have been drained and
developed, and the potential for further development exists (Metric
Corporation 2001; Metric Corporation et al. 2002; Sivinski 2009a, p. 1;
Sivinski and Bleakly 2004, p. 1; Service 2008b, p. 42).
Some of the Cirsium wrightii occurrences within the Santa Rosa
locality continue to be impacted through filling and development and
regular mowing. C. wrightii occurs at the Blue Hole fish hatchery ponds
that are owned by the City of Santa Rosa (Sivinski 1996, p. 4). The
City of Santa Rosa plans to dredge and fill these ponds for municipal
use in the foreseeable future (Service 2008b, p. 42), which would
undoubtedly impact the species. A similar action occurred in 2001 when
the C. wrightii population at Power Dam Municipal Park in Santa Rosa
was extirpated when the reservoir was drained (Sivinski 2005a, p. 3;
2009a, p. 1). Numerous wetlands in Santa Rosa were also lost many years
ago to an impoundment, in which 17 ponds were created and used for a
fish hatchery. The fish hatchery has since been abandoned, and all but
four of the ponds filled. The remaining adjacent 116 ac (47 ha) of the
Blue Hole Cienaga were purchased by the State of New Mexico to protect
habitat that includes the Federally threatened Helianthus paradoxus, C.
wrightii, and the State-endangered Spiranthes magnicamporum (Great
Plains lady's tresses) (New Mexico State Forestry 2008, p. 1). Although
we are not aware of any other specific residential or commercial
development plans at this or other localities, actions that drain or
fill wetlands or other habitat occupied by the species would impact C.
wrightii.
Summary of Factor A
In summary, we found that past and present alteration of rare
desert springs, seeps, and wetland habitats that support Cirsium
wrightii is a significant threat. The four largest localities of C.
wrightii at Blue Spring, BLNWR, Santa Rosa, and Alamosa Creek have the
potential to be further modified by ongoing and future water
withdrawal. Changes in water tables throughout the range of C. wrightii
have also resulted in diminished discharge from springs or complete
loss of surface water. Therefore, there has been a trend of diminishing
habitat quantity and excessive degradation of habitat quality for the
species throughout its range, as a result of agriculture and urban
development, diversion of springs, and drought. Moreover, the presence
of and effects from Phragmites australis threatens C. wrightii
localities through increased fire risk, competition, and changes in
hydrology. On the basis of the information presented above, we find
that Cirsium wrightii may be threatened by the present or threatened
destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat, both now and
in the foreseeable future.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
We do not have any evidence of risks to Cirsium wrightii from
overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes, and we have no reason to believe this factor will
become a threat to the species in the future. Therefore, we find
overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes does not threaten C. wrightii now or in the
foreseeable future.
C. Disease or Predation
Disease
Cirsium wrightii is not known to be affected or threatened by any
disease. Therefore, we find that disease does not threaten C. wrightii
now or in the foreseeable future.
Insect Predation
Native and nonnative insect populations have the potential to
impact the condition, reproduction, and distribution of Cirsium
wrightii. Observed seed predators on the similar C. vinaceum in the
Sacramento Mountains include Paracantha gentilis, a native specialist
gall fly; Platyptilia carduidactyla, the native artichoke plume moth;
Euphoria inda, a native generalist bumble flower beetle; Rhinocyllus
conicus, an introduced seed-head weevil; and Trichosirocalus horridus,
an introduced rosette weevil (Sivinski 2008, pp. 1-11; Gardner 2010,
pp. 2-3). There have been intentional releases of Rhinocyllus conicus
to control Carduus nutans (musk thistle) (Sivinski 1994, p. 2; 2007, p.
6; NMRPTC 2009, p. 2; Bridge 2001, p. 1; AGFD 2001, p. 2). This exotic
weevil has recently been found in habitat occupied by C. wrightii, C.
vinaceum, and the exotic Carduus nutans at the Silver Springs locality
(Sivinski 2007, p. 6; Gardner and Thompson 2008, p. 4). It is not known
where Trichosirocalus horridus came from or whether they were
intentionally released (Gardner 2010, p. 3); however, this exotic
rosette weevil is also present in Carduus nutans populations ranging
from the northern extent of the Mescalero Apache reservation south to
Agua Chiquita canyon in the Sacramento Mountains.
Rhinocyllus conicus is not host specific to Carduus species and has
been found living on 22 of the North American Cirsium species (Louda et
al. 2003). This weevil is available from commercial suppliers and is
easily gathered and transported from established colonies. Breeding and
egg placement by R. conicus begins in mid-June, peaks in early July,
and continues into August (Sivinski 2008, p. 5). Newly hatched larvae
bury into the flower head and feed on the tissue. Most R. conicus at
the Silver Springs locality emerge from the flower heads by early
September; however, some immature larvae were still present in the
flower heads of C. vinaceum in September (Sivinski 2008, p. 5). Flower
heads of C. wrightii grow during late July to early August, which
overlaps with developing and feeding larvae of R. conicus. The
establishment of R. conicus beyond the Silver Springs locality will
likely occur in the near future because stands of C. nutans are common
in many of the drainages throughout the Sacramento Mountains (Gardner
and Thompson 2008, p. 4), and we are concerned that it may spread to C.
wrightii populations. For these reasons, we intend to monitor
localities in the Sacramento Mountains to determine whether C. wrightii
could be a potential host and possibly threatened by R. conicus
infestations.
Trichosirocalus horridus, feeds on Carduus nutans during the
rosette stage, killing first-year rosettes and stopping the growth of
older plants. This weevil is available from commercial suppliers or can
be gathered and transported from established colonies (Flanders et al.
2001, p. 4; Jennings et al. 2010, pp. 4-5). Moreover, T. horridus is
capable of spreading at least a mile (1.61 km) per year on their own
(Flanders et al. 2001, p. 4). Adults emerge from summer resting places
in the fall. They lay eggs in the midrib of thistle leaves, and
complete egg-laying in the spring. After 10 to 12 days, the eggs hatch,
and the young weevils tunnel from the midrib into the rosette, feeding
and causing
[[Page 67934]]
damage or possibly killing the crown tissue. The new adults emerge in
May and June, feed briefly, and pass the summer in a period of
inactivity (Flanders et al. 2001, p. 3). We are concerned about
potential effects to C. wrightii and intend to monitor C. wrightii
localities to determine if this introduced rosette weevil threatens the
species.
Rhinocyllus conicus and a native predator, the stem borer weevil
(Lixus pervestitus), caused a widespread premature stem death to the
flower heads of the Silver Springs population of the endangered C.
vinaceum, which co-occurs with C. wrightii (Sivinski 2007, pp. 8-12).
These 2 insects collectively damaged up to 99 percent of C. vinaceum
within the Silv