Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Removal of Erigeron maguirei, 3029-3044 [2011-1044]
Download as PDF
3029
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997).
This final rule does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB
approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq., nor does it require any special
considerations under Executive Order
12898, entitled Federal Actions to
Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that
are established on the basis of a petition
under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as
the tolerance in this final rule, do not
require the issuance of a proposed rule,
the requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) do not apply.
This final rule directly regulates
growers, food processors, food handlers,
and food retailers, not States or Tribes,
nor does this action alter the
relationships or distribution of power
and responsibilities established by
Congress in the preemption provisions
of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. As such,
the Agency has determined that this
action will not have a substantial direct
effect on States or Tribal governments,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States or Tribal
governments, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian
Tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132,
entitled Federalism (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999) and Executive Order
13175, entitled Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments (65 FR 67249, November
9, 2000) do not apply to this final rule.
In addition, this final rule does not
impose any enforceable duty or contain
any unfunded mandate as described
under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Pub. L.
104–4).
This action does not involve any
technical standards that would require
Agency consideration of voluntary
consensus standards pursuant to section
12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, section
12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VII. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report to each House of
the Congress and to the Comptroller
General of the United States. EPA will
submit a report containing this rule and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:01 Jan 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
other required information to the U.S.
Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to
publication of this final rule in the
Federal Register. This final rule is not
a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: January 7, 2011.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office
of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
PART 180—[AMENDED]
Parts per
million
Commodity
Cattle, fat ....................................
Cattle, meat byproducts .............
Goat, fat ......................................
Goat, meat byproducts ...............
Horse, fat ....................................
Horse, meat byproducts .............
Sheep, fat ...................................
Sheep, meat byproducts ............
*
*
*
*
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
*
[FR Doc. 2011–1019 Filed 1–18–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R6–ES–2008–0001;
92220–1113–0000–C6]
RIN 1018–AU67
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. Section 180.574 is amended by
alphabetically adding the following
commodities to the table in paragraph
(a)(1), and by adding paragraph (a)(3) to
read as follows:
■
§ 180.574 Fluazinam; tolerances for
residues.
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Removal of Erigeron
maguirei (Maguire Daisy) From the
Federal List of Endangered and
Threatened Plants; Availability of Final
Post-Delisting Monitoring Plan
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service/USFWS), are
removing the plant Erigeron maguirei
Parts per
Commodity
(commonly referred to as Maguire daisy)
million
from the List of Endangered and
Threatened Plants. The best scientific
Apple .........................................
2.0
and commercial data available indicate
Apple, wet pomace ...................
5.0
that this species has recovered and no
longer meets the definition of
*
*
*
*
*
Carrot, roots ..............................
0.70 endangered or threatened under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (ESA). Our review of the
*
*
*
*
*
status of this species shows that
populations are stable, threats are
*
*
*
*
*
addressed, and adequate regulatory
(3) Tolerances are established for
mechanisms are in place so that the
residues of fluazinam (3-chloro-N-[3species is not currently, and is not likely
chloro-2,6-dinitro-4to again become, an endangered species
(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]-5within the foreseeable future in all or a
(trifluoromethyl)-2-pyridinamine),
significant portion of its range. Finally,
including its metabolites and
degradates, in or on the commodities in we announce the availability of the final
post-delisting monitoring plan for
the table below. Compliance with the
tolerance levels specified below is to be Maguire daisy.
DATES: This rule becomes effective on
determined by measuring only
fluazinam, AMPA (2-(6-amino-3-chloro- February 18, 2011.
a,a,a-trifluoro-2-nitro-p-toluidino)-3ADDRESSES: Copies of the final postchloro-5-(trifluoromethyl) pyridine),
delisting monitoring plan are available
DAPA (3-chloro-2-(2,6-diamino-3by request from the Utah Field Office
chloro-a,a,a.-trifluoro-p-toluidino)-5(see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT)
(trifluoromethyl)pyridine), and their
or online at: https://www.fws.gov/
sulfamate conjugates.
mountain-prairie/species/plants/
PO 00000
(a) General. (1) * * *
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
3030
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
maguiredaisy/or at: https://www.
regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Larry Crist, Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, Utah Field Office,
2369 West Orton Circle, West Valley
City, UT 84119 (telephone 801/975–
3330; facsimile 801/975–3331). Persons
who use a telecommunications device
for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800/
877–8339, 24 hours a day, 7 days a
week.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Previous Federal Action
Section 12 of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531
et seq.) directed the Secretary of the
Smithsonian Institution to prepare a
report on those plants considered
endangered, threatened, or extinct. On
July 1, 1975, we published a notice in
the Federal Register (40 FR 27824)
accepting the Smithsonian report as a
petition to list taxa named therein under
section 4(c)(2) (now section 4(b)(3)) of
the ESA and announced our intention to
review the status of those plants.
Erigeron maguirei was included in that
report (40 FR 27824, July 1, 1975).
Maguire daisy is the common name for
E. maguirei; however, we will primarily
use the scientific name of this species
throughout this rule.
On June 16, 1976, we published a
proposed rule in the Federal Register
(41 FR 24524) to designate
approximately 1,700 vascular plant
species, including Erigeron maguirei, as
endangered under section 4 of the ESA.
The 1978 amendments to the ESA
required that all proposals over 2 years
old be withdrawn. On December 10,
1979, we published a notice of
withdrawal (44 FR 70796) of that
portion of the June 16, 1976, proposal
that had not been made final, which
included the endangered status
determination for E. maguirei.
On December 15, 1980, we published
in the Federal Register a revised notice
of review for native plants that
designated Erigeron maguirei as a
candidate species (45 FR 82480).
Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the ESA requires
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:01 Jan 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
that, for any petition to revise the
Federal Lists of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife and Plants that
contains substantial scientific or
commercial information that listing the
species may be warranted, we make a
finding within 12 months of the date of
receipt of the petition. In addition,
section 2(b)(1) of the Public Law 97–304
(the 1982 amendments to the ESA)
required that all petitions pending as of
October 13, 1982, be treated as if newly
submitted on that date. Since the 1975
Smithsonian report was accepted as a
petition, all the taxa contained in those
notices, including E. maguirei, were
treated as being newly petitioned as of
October 13, 1982. On October 13, 1983,
we made a 12-month finding that the
petition to list E. maguirei var. maguirei
was warranted but precluded by higher
priority actions to amend the Lists of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants. Notification of this finding
was published in the Federal Register
on November 28, 1983 (48 FR 53640).
On July 27, 1984, we published a
proposed rule to designate Erigeron
maguirei var. maguirei as an endangered
species (49 FR 30211). The final rule
designating the variety of the species as
endangered was published on
September 5, 1985 (50 FR 36089).
In 1983, Erigeron maguirei var.
harrisonii was described as a separate
variety of E. maguirei. On September 27,
1985, we published a notice of review
for plants which added E. maguirei var.
harrisonii as a candidate species (50 FR
39526). E. maguirei var. harrisonii
remained as a candidate through the
revised plant notice of review published
on September 30, 1993 (58 FR 51144).
On September 7, 1994 (59 FR 46219),
we proposed to accept a taxonomic
revision that combined two varieties,
Erigeron maguirei var. maguirei and E.
maguirei var. harrisonii, into one
species, E. maguirei. The taxonomic
revision was based on new genetic
information (Van Buren 1993, p. 1; Van
Buren and Harper 2002, p. 1). Due in
part to the taxonomic revision, we also
proposed reclassifying E. maguirei from
endangered to threatened because the
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
population numbers and distribution
range of the newly described species, E.
maguirei, were larger than either of the
two varieties. The taxonomic revision
and reclassification of E. maguirei was
finalized on June 19, 1996 (61 FR
31054).
On May 16, 2008, we published a
proposed rule to remove Erigeron
maguirei from the List of Endangered
and Threatened Plants, provided notice
of the availability of a draft postdelisting monitoring plan, and opened a
60-day public comment period (73 FR
28410). On May 19, 2008, we finalized
a 5-year review, initiated on April 7,
2006 (71 FR 17900), which confirmed
that the best scientific and commercial
data available indicated that this species
has recovered and no longer meets the
definition of endangered or threatened
under the ESA.
Species Information
A member of the sunflower family,
Erigeron maguirei is a perennial herb
with a branched woody base. Its stems
are decumbent (lying on the ground
with the tip ascending) to sprawling or
erect. Its basal leaves are spatulateshaped to oblanceolate (the shape of the
leaf is longer than it is wide with the
broadest portion of the leaf at the tip
and narrower at the base). Its leaves and
stems are covered with abundant stiff,
coarse, white hairs. Bits of sand
commonly cling to the hairs of the
leaves and stems. Its flowers are dimesized with white or pinkish-white
petals. The species is further described
in our June 19, 1996, final rule
reclassifying the species as threatened
(61 FR 31054).
The range of the species is estimated
at 390 square miles (1,010 square
kilometers) and extends from the San
Rafael Swell south through the
Waterpocket Fold of Capitol Reef
National Park (see Figure 1) (Heil 1987,
p. 5; 1989, p. 23; Kass 1990, p. 23;
Harper and Van Buren 1998, pp. 1–2;
Clark 2001, p. 2; 2002, p. 12; Clark et
al. 2005, pp. 7–8; Clark et al. 2006, pp.
7–8).
BILLING CODE 4310–55–C
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
Erigeron maguirei occurs from 5,200
to 8,600 feet (1,585 to 2,621 meters) in
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:01 Jan 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
elevation (Clark et al. 2006, pp. 9–11).
The highest plant densities occur on
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
3031
mesa tops between 6,000 and 7,000 feet
(1,829 and 2,134 meters) in elevation
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
ER19JA11.046
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
3032
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
(Kass 1990, p. 23; USFWS 1995, p. 2;
Clark 2001, p. 3; Clark et al. 2006, pp.
9–11).
The distribution of Erigeron maguirei
includes 10 populations (containing 128
sites) composing 5 meta-populations
(Clark et al. 2006, p. 8; Ivory 2009a, p.
1; 2009b, p. 1; Clark 2010a, p. 1; Truman
2010, p. 1; Robinson 2010, entire),
distributed across the species’ range (see
Figure 1 above). Populations are defined
as groups of occurrence records (sites)
located in the same geographic vicinity
(Clark 2006b, p. 5; Figure 1). Sites are
defined as occurrence locations
recorded by one or more researchers
over time within an individual
population (Clark 2006b, p. 5). Every
site is documented by at least one of the
following: (1) A herbarium collection
record; (2) field survey forms completed
by researchers; or (3) a record from the
Utah Natural Heritage Program. Metapopulations are comprised of a number
of individual populations less than 1.5
miles (2.4 kilometers) apart, typically
linked by continuous suitable habitat
(Clark 2006b, p. 5; Clark 2006c).
Populations within a meta-population
interact at some level. For E. maguirei,
the interaction may be from pollinators
traveling between the populations or by
wind carrying seeds to other
populations. Table 1 provides
population size estimates, number of
sites, and land ownership of each
population.
TABLE 1—ERIGERON MAGUIREI POPULATION INFORMATION
Meta-population
Minimum population estimate
(number of known sites) per land owner*
Population
BLM
Capitol Reef ..........................
NPS
Calf Canyon** .......
Sids Hole ..............
Coal Wash ............
Secret Mesa .........
Link Flats ..............
John’s Hole ...........
Segers Hole ..........
Deep Creek ..........
Capitol Reef ..........
Waterpocket Fold
500(10)
60(1)
100(6)
9,000(9)
200(4)
300(3)
100(2)
....................
....................
....................
87(2)
....................
***unkown
1,000(2)
50(1)
***unkown
***unkown
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
1,500(2)
....................
....................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
100,000(29)
30,000(15)
20,000(42)
587(12)
60(1)
100(6)
10,000(11)
250(5)
300(3)
100(2)
101,500(31)
30,000(15)
20,000(42)
0.36
0.04
0.06
6.14
0.15
0.18
0.06
62.31
18.42
12.28
10,260(35)
1,137(5)
1,500(2)
150,000(86)
162,897(128)
100.00
Percent .................
Southern San Rafael Swell ...
USFS
Totals ....................
Northern San Rafael Swell ...
Cottonwood Draw .................
Central San Rafael Swell ......
SITLA
Total
Percent
6.30
0.70
0.92
92.08
100.00
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
* BLM = Bureau of Land Management; SITLA = State of Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration; USFS = U.S. Department of
Agriculture Forest Service; NPS = National Park Service.
** The Calf Canyon population is the type locality population.
*** Although suitable habitat exists, these SITLA lands have not been surveyed.
The three largest Erigeron maguirei
populations (Deep Creek, Capitol Reef,
and Waterpocket Fold) comprise the
Capitol Reef meta-population.
Collectively, these three populations
contain 93 percent of the known plants
including ninety-two percent within
Capitol Reef National Park and 1
percent on U.S. Forest Service (USFS)
lands (Fishlake National Forest).
The other seven populations (Calf
Canyon, Sids Hole, Coal Wash, Secret
Mesa, Link Flats, John’s Hole, and
Segers Hole) are managed primarily by
the Bureau of Land Management (BLM).
Portions of three of these seven
populations (Calf Canyon, Secret Mesa,
and Link Flats) occur on State of Utah
School and Institutional Trust Lands
Administration (SITLA) lands. The Calf
Canyon population is the sole
population in the Northern San Rafael
Swell meta-population; the Sids Hole
population is the sole population in the
Cottonwood Draw meta-population;
Coal Wash, Secret Mesa, and Link Flats
comprise the Central San Rafael Swell
meta-population; and John’s Hole and
Seger’s Hole populations comprise the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:40 Jan 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
Southern San Rafael Swell metapopulation.
Erigeron maguirei occurs primarily on
sandstone domes on mesa tops and in
cracks and crevices of domes and cliffs
in the Navajo Sandstone formation
(Clark et al. 2006, p. 12). It also occurs
within steep, narrow, dry, rocky, and
sandy canyon or wash bottoms
(Cronquist 1947, p. 165; Anderson 1982,
pp. 1–2; Heil 1989, pp. 25–26; Kass
1990, p. 22; Harper and Van Buren
1998, p. 1). Populations within canyon
bottoms are established from seeds
dispersed by wind or overland flow
from source populations on the mesa
tops (Heil 1989, p. 25; Kass 1990, p. 27;
USFWS 1995, p. 2). These canyon
populations are generally small
compared with those on the mesa tops
(Heil 1989, p. 25; Kass 1990, p. 27;
USFWS 1995, p. 2).
Erigeron maguirei grows primarily in
the Dwarf Mountain Mahogany
Slickrock plant community, a
community endemic to the Colorado
Plateau Region (Heil 1989, p. 23; Clark
2001, pp. 15–16; Clark et al. 2006, p.
15). E. maguirei also is associated with
pinyon juniper-tall shrub, ponderosa
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
pine-tall shrub slickrock pockets, mesic
canyon bottoms, mountain shrub, and
intermittent riparian communities (Kass
1990, p. 22; Harper and Van Buren
1998, p. 1; Clark 2002, pp. 15–16; Clark
et al. 2005, p. 7; Clark et al. 2006, p. 15).
Flowering occurs from May to June
and takes 4 to 6 weeks to go from the
small green ‘‘button’’ bud stage to
completion of anthesis, when the flower
is no longer open and functional (Alston
and Tepedino 2005, p. 54; Clark et al.
2006, p. 17). It appears that Erigeron
maguirei lacks self-compatibility, and
that pollinators are necessary for cross
pollination to occur (Alston and
Tepedino 2005, p. 61). Because of the
open nature of the flower head, E.
maguirei is visited by opportunistic
insects searching for nectar (Alston and
Tepedino 2005, p. 60). Pollinators
include various flies, wasps, and bees
(Alston and Tepedino 2005, p. 60).
The species is long-lived, has a low
mortality rate, and has the ability to
replace individuals at a rate that
compensates for mortality (Van Buren
and Harper 2002, pp. 2–5). Populations
are stable (Van Buren and Harper 2002,
p. 2).
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
Recovery
Recovery plans are not regulatory
documents and are instead intended to
provide guidance to the Service, States,
and other partners on methods to
minimize threats to listed species,
establish goals for long-term
conservation of listed species, and
define criteria that may be used to
determine when recovery is achieved.
There are many paths to accomplishing
recovery of a species, and recovery may
be achieved without all criteria being
fully met. For example, one or more
criteria may be exceeded while other
criteria may not yet be accomplished. In
that instance, we may determine that
the threats are minimized sufficiently
and the species is robust enough to
reclassify from endangered to
threatened or to delist. In other cases,
recovery opportunities may be
discovered that were not known when
the recovery plan was finalized. These
opportunities may be used instead of
methods identified in the recovery plan.
Likewise, information on the species
may be learned that was not known at
the time the recovery plan was
finalized. The new information may
change the extent that criteria need to be
met for recognizing recovery of the
species. Recovery of a species is a
dynamic process requiring adaptive
management that may, or may not, fully
follow the guidance provided in a
recovery plan.
We approved the Maguire Daisy
(Erigeron maguirei) Recovery Plan
(hereafter referred to as the Recovery
Plan) on August 15, 1995 (USFWS 1995,
entire). The Recovery Plan outlined
three delisting criteria. These criteria,
and the status of the species relative to
these criteria, are outlined below.
Delisting Criterion One: Locate or
establish additional populations.
Maintain 20 populations that have been
demonstrated to be above minimum
viable population levels. Until
minimum viable population levels are
determined, it is assumed that the
minimum viable population level will
be about 500 individuals (USFWS 1995,
p. ii). At the time the Recovery Plan was
written, the species was known from 7
populations (32 sites) with a total
population of 5,000 individuals
(USFWS 1995, p. 2). To achieve this
criterion, the Recovery Plan
recommended that land managers
inventory suitable habitat to determine
with a reasonable degree of accuracy the
species’ population and distribution
(USFWS 1995, pp. ii, 6, 7, 12).
In 1999, the BLM, USFS, and the
National Park Service (NPS) entered
into an interagency agreement to direct
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:01 Jan 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
conservation measures for listed and
sensitive plant species endemic to
central Utah, including Erigeron
maguirei (BLM et al. 1999, entire; Clark
2002, p. 3). The agencies committed
funding to survey and monitor E.
maguirei throughout its range (Clark
2002, p. 3). From 1999 to 2002,
approximately 3,521 hectares (8,700
acres) were surveyed for E. maguirei on
NPS, BLM, and USFS lands (Clark and
Clark 1999, p. 45; Clark 2002, p. 13).
The recovery criterion of maintaining
20 viable populations was based on our
earlier assumption that the species was
distributed in a scattered, disconnected
pattern (Clark 2006c, entire). However,
the survey efforts identified broader
plant distributions and larger
population sizes that are evenly
distributed across the landscape (Harper
and Van Buren 1998, p. 2; Clark and
Clark 1999, p. 47; Clark 2001, p. 3; 2002,
pp. 13–14; Clark et al. 2005, p. 17; Clark
et al. 2006, p. 17).
We currently know of 10 populations
(128 sites) comprising 5 metapopulations, with a total population of
162,897 Erigeron maguirei individuals
(see Figure 1 and Table 1 above) (Clark
et al. 2006, p. 16; Ivory 2009a, p. 1;
2009b, p. 1; Clark 2010a, p. 1; Robinson
2010, entire). As previously described,
the range of the species covers 390
square miles (1,010 square kilometers)
and extends from the San Rafael Swell
south through the Waterpocket Fold of
Capitol Reef (see Figure 1 above) (Clark
et al. 2006, p. 17; Clark 2010a, p. 1;
Truman 2010, p. 1; Robinson 2010,
entire). All three E. maguirei
populations within the Capitol Reef
Meta-Population are linked by
contiguous suitable habitat (Clark et al.
2006, p. 24). A similar situation exists
between populations in each of the
three meta-populations within the San
Rafael Swell area; suitable habitats are
separated by short distances, effectively
linking populations (Clark et al. 2006, p.
24).
In 2010, the fifth meta-population
(Cottonwood Draw) was discovered east
of the Central San Rafael Swell metapopulation and south of the Northern
San Rafael Swell population (see Figure
1 above) (Clark 2010a, p. 1; Truman
2010, p. 1). The Cottonwood Draw metapopulation is currently comprised of a
single population (Sids Hole). This area
was discovered through recent
implementation of the post-delisting
monitoring protocol. The area has not
been fully surveyed or evaluated and
may include additional populations or
sites, but is generally viewed as less
ideal for the species with patchy areas
of suitable habitat that currently appear
isolated from other sites or populations.
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
3033
While not adding much to the species’
overall viability, recent discoveries
(since the 2008 proposed rule), such as
this one, provide added support for our
conclusion regarding the species’
overall status.
Overall, the available information
demonstrates large, sufficiently
connected, and evenly distributed
populations and suitable habitats that
provide and will continue to provide for
the desired long-term species’ viability
intended by the Recovery Plan. In fact,
the 10 populations have more desirable
biological attributes than the originally
suggested 20 populations in the
Recovery Plan. For example, the
recovery goal of 20 populations was
based on the assumption that the
populations were small and widely
scattered. The 10 current populations
are well connected within 5 metapopulations, and these metapopulations are distributed throughout
the range of the species (see Figure 1
and Table 1 above). The habitat is
contiguous between populations,
thereby increasing the species’
robustness. Furthermore, the Recovery
Plan called for 20 populations of 500
individuals. This suggests recovery at
about 10,000 plants. Today, we know of
162,897 Erigeron maguirei individuals,
far surpassing the implied numeric
target in the Recovery Plan. In addition,
the species’ population is stable (see
Species Information). Therefore, the
available data demonstrate that the
intent of this recovery criterion has been
met or exceeded.
Delisting Criteria Two and Three:
Establish formal land management
designations for these populations that
provide long-term, undisturbed habitat
for Maguire daisy (USFWS 1995, p. ii).
Ensure that Maguire daisy and its
habitat are protected from loss of
individuals and environmental
degradation (USFWS 1995, p. ii). To
achieve these criteria, the Recovery Plan
recommended we work with our
partners to document the presence of, or
establish formal land management
designations that provide for long-term
protection for, Maguire daisy and its
habitat (USFWS 1995, pp. ii, 6, 9, 12).
Approximately 85 percent of the
species’ range occurs on Federal lands
with substantial protective measures in
place (see Table 2 and Factor D below).
For example, the NPS General
Management Plan designated Primitive
and Threshold Management Zones
(Capitol Reef 1998, pp. 27–31); these
land designations afford protection to
the three largest Erigeron maguirei
populations by limiting surface
disturbance and construction activities.
The BLM designated Wilderness Study
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
3034
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
Areas (WSAs), Instant Study Areas
(ISA), and Areas of Critical
Environmental Concern (ACECs) in the
approved 2008 Price Field Office
Resource Management Plan (RMP) (BLM
2008c, Maps R–5, R–28, and R–29).
These land designations afford
protection to six E. maguirei
populations by minimizing habitat
degradation and surface disturbances
from grazing, mining, mineral lease
uses, and right-of-way grants (see Factor
D) (BLM 2008c, pp. 41, 129, 131, and
135–137; BLM 2009, entire; Stephens
2009, p. 1). Similarly, off-highway
vehicle (OHV) use also is effectively
managed to minimize disturbances to
plants by eliminating cross-country
travel on USFS and BLM lands (USFS
2006b, pp. 123, 260–263; 2008, Tile
K11; 2009, Map). OHVs are not allowed
in Capitol Reef National Park, which
represents the majority of the species’
range (see Factor D). More information
regarding the protection of E. maguirei
through land management designations
is contained in the Factor D discussion
of the Summary of Factors Affecting the
Species.
TABLE 2—PERCENT OF EACH ERIGERON MAGUIREI POPULATION WITH PROTECTIVE LAND MANAGEMENT DESIGNATIONS
BASED ON GIS ANALYSIS
Population
Land
ownership
Calf Canyon ............................
BLM .......
70
Sids Hole ................................
Coal Wash ..............................
SITLA .....
BLM .......
BLM .......
SITLA .....
BLM .......
30
**
95
5
95
SITLA .....
BLM .......
SITLA .....
BLM .......
SITLA .....
BLM .......
SITLA .....
NPS .......
USFS .....
NPS .......
NPS .......
5
80
20
95
5
95
5
95
5
100
100
Secret Mesa ...........................
Link Flats ................................
John’s Hole .............................
Segers Hole ............................
Deep Creek ............................
Capitol Reef ............................
Waterpocket Fold ...................
% of range per
landowner*
Land management designations
San Rafael Canyon ACEC, Mexican Mountain WSA, Sids
Mountain WSA.
None .......................................................................................
None .......................................................................................
I–70 Scenic ACEC, Sids Mountain WSA ...............................
None .......................................................................................
I–70 Scenic ACEC, Devils Canyon WSA, Sids Mountain
WSA.
None .......................................................................................
Lucky Strike ACEC, Devils Canyon WSA, Link Flats ISA .....
None .......................................................................................
Muddy Creek ACEC, Muddy Creek WSA ..............................
None .......................................................................................
Segers Hole ACEC, Muddy Creek WSA ...............................
None .......................................................................................
Primitive & Threshold Management Zone .............................
Proposed Botanical Area .......................................................
Primitive & Threshold Management Zone .............................
Primitive & Threshold Management Zone .............................
% of landowner
range within
protective
designations
97
0
0
96
0
88
0
36
0
100
0
79
0
100
100
100
100
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
* Populations’ ranges within BLM lands were provided by Ivory (2006 and 2007) with the exception of Calf Canyon and Sids Hole; the remaining populations’ ranges were estimated based on GIS analysis.
** Unknown.
Additionally, the Interagency Rare
Plant Team developed the Central Utah
Navajo Sandstone Endemics
Conservation Agreement and Strategy
(hereafter referred to as the
Conservation Strategy) (USFS et al.
2006, entire). Although we do not base
our delisting decision on the existence
of the Conservation Strategy, we believe
it will provide for the continued
conservation of the species. The
Conservation Strategy, signed by the
USFS, BLM, NPS, and the Service in
September 2006, outlines the procedural
provisions under which the Federal
agencies will manage Erigeron maguirei
through 2016 (USFS et al. 2006, pp. 24–
25). In addition, the Conservation
Strategy documents the conservation
actions needed to mitigate any potential
factors impacting the species and to
promote the conservation and
perpetuation of E. maguirei (USFS et al.
2006, pp. 38–47). The Conservation
Strategy can be viewed in its entirety at:
https://mountain-prairie.fws.gov/species/
plants/maguiredaisy/. Copies also can
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:01 Jan 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
be obtained from the Utah Field Office
(see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
In summary, Federal land
management agencies have worked
collaboratively to provide for the longterm protection of Erigeron maguirei
and its habitat. Land management plans,
policies, and regulations are in place
that provide protection to E. maguirei.
Based on the above, the intent of
Criteria 2 and 3 have been met.
Based on the best available data, we
have determined that the intent of all
three recovery criteria is met.
Summary of Comments and
Recommendations
In our proposed rule (73 FR 28410,
May 16, 2008), we requested that all
interested parties submit data,
comments, new information, or
suggestions concerning: (1) Biological
information concerning this species;
(2) Relevant data concerning any current
or likely future threats (or lack thereof)
to this species, including the extent and
adequacy of Federal and State
protection and management that would
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
be provided to the Erigeron maguirei as
a delisted species; (3) Additional
information concerning the range,
distribution, population size, and
population trends of this species,
including the locations of any
additional populations of this species;
(4) Current or planned activities in the
subject area and their possible impacts
on this species; and (5) Our draft postdelisting monitoring plan. We accepted
comments for 60 days, ending July 15,
2008 (73 FR 28410, May 16, 2008).
During the comment period, we
received two comment letters
representing three organizations.
In accordance with our peer review
policy published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR
34270) and the Office of Management
and Budget’s (OMB) December 16, 2004,
Final Information Quality Bulletin for
Peer Review, we solicited independent
opinions from 10 knowledgeable
individuals who have expertise with the
species, who are within the geographic
region where the species occurs, or who
are familiar with the principles of
conservation biology. We received
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
comments from four of the peer
reviewers, all of whom are or were
employed by Federal agencies.
Although we solicited non-Federal
academic peer reviewers, these parties
did not respond. Peer reviewers
provided new information, management
guidance recommendations, editorial
changes, and clarifications to the
species’ description.
We reviewed all comments received
from the peer reviewers and the public
for substantive issues and new
information regarding the proposed
delisting of Erigeron maguirei.
Substantive comments received during
the comment period are addressed
below and, where appropriate,
incorporated directly into this final rule
and the post-delisting monitoring plan.
Issue 1: One commenter expressed
concern that SITLA lands are managed
for minerals, grazing and recreation, and
not for conservation of Erigeron
maguirei. Isolated SITLA parcels are
generally managed in conjunction with
the BLM lands for grazing. These SITLA
lands also are open for cross-country
travel and do not fall into any
designated route plan.
Response: Less than 1 percent of the
species’ plants occur on lands owned
and managed by SITLA. Therefore,
special management designations on
SITLA lands, such as travel route
designations, are not essential for the
conservation of the species and are not
necessary to support the delisting of the
species.
Issue 2: One commenter expressed
concern with how the post-delisting
monitoring plan for the Maguire daisy
characterized the status of several of the
remote populations. The commenter
believed that these small remote sites
(less than or near 50 plants) would be
seriously impacted by delisting. The
commenter also stated that the Calf
Canyon population of 50 plants was last
visited in 1982, and it is unknown if it
still exists.
Response: The draft post-delisting
monitoring plan contained information
regarding a number of monitoring sites
within populations. We believe that the
draft post-delisting monitoring plan was
confusing with regard to the definitions
and use of the terms ‘‘population,’’ ‘‘site,’’
and ‘‘element occurrence.’’ We have now
clarified our terminology and have
thoroughly reviewed the document to
ensure we used the terms properly and
consistently throughout the final postdelisting monitoring plan.
Even though some sites contain fewer
than 50 individuals, we have little
reason to believe these sites are likely to
be seriously impacted by delisting. Most
of these sites have persisted for long
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:01 Jan 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
periods of time without noteworthy
negative changes in status. The species
is long-lived, has a low mortality rate,
and has the ability to replace
individuals at a rate that compensates
for mortality (Van Buren and Harper
2002, pp. 2–5). Populations are stable
(Van Buren and Harper 2002, p. 2).
Additionally, the species’ preferred
habitat (cliffs, rock crevices, and
sandstone domes on mesa tops) is
subject to few threats (see Summary of
Factors Affecting the Species below).
Collectively this suggests these sites are
unlikely to be lost.
Even if some sites do suffer negative
effects, many of these sites are
connected to neighboring sites as part of
a larger population and metapopulation. For example, the Link Flats
population is comprised of a number of
sites totaling approximately 250
individuals and is within the San Rafael
Swell area, where most suitable habitat
occurrences are separated by short
distances (Clark et al. 2006, p. 24). Metapopulation dynamics indicate that
although individual sites may be lost,
they can be recolonized by seed
dispersed from other neighboring sites.
As an added safeguard, land managers
plan to carefully monitor one site within
each population including some small
sites (Service 2010, pp. 7–10). If impacts
are observed, population trend
monitoring will be expanded to include
human impact monitoring (Service
2010, pp. 14–15). If a 40 percent or more
decline is observed in a 2-year period at
any of the monitoring plots, cooperators
will evaluate possible causes of the
apparent decline and determine the
most appropriate response (Service
2010, p. 16). We believe this is sufficient
to ensure few, if any, sites are at serious
risk of extirpation.
Furthermore, even if we lost some or
many of these small sites, we do not
believe the species would qualify as an
endangered species (in danger of
extinction throughout all or a significant
portion of its range) or a threatened
species (likely to become endangered
within the foreseeable future throughout
all or a significant portion of its range).
Erigeron maguirei is estimated at
162,897 individuals over a range of
about 390 square miles (1,010 square
kilometers) with 10 populations
(containing 128 sites) composing 5
meta-populations (see Figure 1 and
Table 1 above) (Clark et al. 2006, p. 16;
Ivory 2009a, p. 1; 2009b, p. 1). In our
view, these large, connected, and evenly
distributed populations and suitable
habitats provide for the species’ longterm viability. Thus, even in the
unlikely event that some or many of
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
3035
these small sites were lost, it would not
change our determination.
Regarding the Calf Canyon
population, the area was resurveyed in
2009 and again in 2010. These surveys
identified 10 sites with at least 500
plants total (Ivory 2009a, p. 1; Ivory
2009b, p. 1; Robinson 2010, entire). The
majority of the plants were located on
a mesa top in the vicinity of the canyon
bottom populations where the species
was first described. As the final postdelisting monitoring plan was signed
prior to the majority of these sites being
known, we are making a minor
amendment to the plan to reflect the
latest information.
Issue 3: One commenter
recommended including a specific due
date for the annual post-delisting
monitoring report, such as December 1
of each year. The commenter further
recommended that we provide a brief
and concise summary to the agencies
(NPS, BLM, and the USFS) regarding the
status and adequacy of the monitoring
efforts each year.
Response: We have incorporated these
recommendations into the final postdelisting monitoring plan.
Issue 4: One commenter noted that
many of the protections provided by
ACECs and WSA designations on BLM
lands are for the protection and
management of lands in general and not
specifically for Erigeron maguirei
populations and habitat. These
management restrictions would be in
place whether E. maguirei is listed or
not.
Response: We acknowledge that many
land management designations are in
place for other resources; however,
Erigeron maguirei will benefit from
habitat being protected in these areas.
We have incorporated language into this
final rule to address this comment (see
Factor D).
Issue 5: One commenter believed that
the proposed rule did not fully
recognize tar sands development as a
threat to this species and does not
disclose the number of plants in the Calf
Canyon, Secret Mesa, and Link Flats
areas within designated tar sands areas.
The commenter expressed concern that
delisting the species would open up the
area for development, and that it
appears that we were writing off the
populations in this area.
Response: Since the proposed rule
was published, the BLM has finalized
the Record of Decision and Approved
RMP, and the Record of Decision for Oil
Shale and Tar Sands Resources to
Address Land Use Allocations in
Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming and Final
Programmatic Environmental Impact
Statement (BLM 2008a, entire; 2008c,
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
3036
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
entire). The final rule fully discloses the
percentages of each population that are
susceptible to tar sands development
(Calf Canyon (0 percent); Secret Mesa
(about 1 percent of the population); and
Link Flats (almost 37 percent of the
population)). The Link Flats population
contains less than 1 percent of all
known individuals of the entire E.
maguirei population. Although tar sands
development will affect individuals, the
effects are expected to be localized and
not reach the level that would
compromise the species’ viability. Tar
sands development is further addressed
under Factor A below.
Issue 6: One commenter expressed
concern with potential loss of genetic
variation through potential impacts
from tar sands development in the
eastern and northernmost portions of
the range.
Response: The potential for genetic
isolation is analyzed in this final rule.
Based on the close proximity of known
populations, connecting habitat between
most populations, and available genetic
research, the species is not considered
threatened by reduced genetic viability.
Given the locations of potential
development relative to the known
distribution of Erigeron maguirei
populations, we expect impacts to the
species to be localized and minor (see
Factor A discussion below).
Issue 7: One commenter was
concerned that the Conservation
Strategy was relied upon as justification
for delisting. The commenter opined
that the Conservation Strategy is not
legally binding and was prepared
behind closed doors with no public
input whatsoever.
Response: The commenter is correct
that the Conservation Strategy is not
legally binding. Future implementation
of conservation actions is contingent
upon funding availability of each
Federal entity. However, our decision to
remove Erigeron maguirei from the List
of Endangered and Threatened Plants is
not dependent on future actions
associated with the Conservation
Strategy. Our decision to remove E.
maguirei from the List of Endangered
and Threatened Plants is based on
conservation actions already completed,
current population levels and their
management, and our analysis of threats
to the species. The commenter is correct
that public input was not sought in the
development of the Conservation
Strategy; however, public input was not
required. The Conservation Strategy is a
management guidance document that
was prepared and will be implemented
by the involved land management
agencies. Although public input was not
required during developing the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:01 Jan 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
Conservation Strategy, implementing
specific on-the-ground actions must
comply with National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.) regulations, which include public
comment and public disclosure.
Issue 8: One commenter stated that
seven of the nine populations of
Erigeron maguirei are open to oil and
gas development.
Response: Seven of the 10
populations are open to oil and gas
leasing (USFS et al. 2006, p. 56). The
three largest populations (Deep Creek,
Capitol Reef, and Waterpocket Fold) on
Capitol Reef National Park contain 92
percent of the individuals and occur on
lands withdrawn from all mineral
exploration and development activities
(see Table 1 above and Factor D below;
USFS et al. 2006, p. 56). Six of the
remaining seven populations occur
predominantly within the Navajo
Sandstone formation, which has low
potential for oil and gas development
(USFS et al. 2006, pp. 37 and 56); the
newest population occurs in an area that
is atypical, where habitat is disjunct
(Clark 2010a, p. 1). We have concluded
that oil and gas development within
Erigeron maguirei habitat is unlikely
due to the low potential throughout the
majority of the occupied habitats. Factor
A presents additional analysis of the
potential for energy development to
affect the species.
Issue 9: One commenter stated that
populations within Capitol Reef
National Park are not necessarily
protected because National Parks are not
wildlife or plant sanctuaries, nor are
they managed with objectives that are
consistent with the protection of rare
elements.
Response: More than 92 percent of the
individual plants occur within Capitol
Reef National Park (see Table 1 above).
All Erigeron maguirei plants within
Capitol Reef National Park are within
Capitol Reef Primitive and Threshold
Management Zones. These land
management designations will provide
protection to the species for the
foreseeable future. Factor D presents our
analysis of how these land management
designations will specifically afford
protection to the species.
Issue 10: One commenter was
concerned that the delisting proposal
downplays the significance of the effects
of human and livestock trampling. The
commenter believes that Erigeron
maguirei should not be delisted unless
cattle grazing is prohibited in the
species’ habitat.
Response: Eight of the 10 Erigeron
maguirei populations occur within
cattle allotments. However, the plants
inhabit areas that are inaccessible to
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
cattle due to steep terrain. Cattle have
trailed through one population
approximately once every 5 years for the
past 100 years. Although cattle trailing
can impact individual plants, the
population where this activity occurs is
stable (Clark et al. 2006, pp. 21, 25), and
its viability is not affected by this level
of impact. The newest population is
near a reservoir used by cattle as a
watering hole. Although the area
experiences impacts from cattle grazing,
this population is persisting without
special management considerations
affording it protection from grazing
activities.
At the time of downlisting, we stated
that livestock trampling was known to
adversely impact individual plants (61
FR 31054; June 19, 1996). Livestock
trampling negatively impacts
individuals of Erigeron maguirei
growing in accessible wash bottoms.
However, the threat to the species is low
because E. maguirei prefers cliffs and
rock crevices that are inaccessible to
livestock (Clark et al. 2006, p. 21). Due
to habitat preferences of the species,
livestock use is no longer a threat (Clark
et al. 2006, p. 21).
The impact of grazing is analyzed in
this final rule. The best available
scientific data indicate that grazing does
not pose a threat to the species and is
unlikely to become a threat in the
foreseeable future (Clark et al. 2006, p.
21).
Issue 11: One commenter claimed it is
disingenuous to conclude that the
species is recovered. If the species were
to be delisted, it would be because of
additional information and
investigation, not because it was
recovered.
Response: We recognize that this
delisting is supported by new
information. However, none of this
information would be available had it
not been due to the recovery efforts of
the Interagency Rare Plant Team. The
Federal partners that make up the
Interagency Rare Plant Team deserve
credit for implementing extensive
recovery actions that allow us to remove
the species from the List of Endangered
and Threatened Plants. Without these
actions, this species would still be
listed.
Also of note, but not critical to our
‘‘delisting due to recovery’’
determination, only species delisted due
to recovery are subject to the postdelisting monitoring requirement. We
believe such a monitoring period is
desirable in that it allows us to track any
changes in status post-delisting and
respond accordingly.
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
Summary of Factors Affecting the
Species
In making this final determination, we
have considered all scientific and
commercial information available,
which includes information received
during our 5-year review (71 FR 17900,
April 7, 2006) and the public comment
period on our proposed delisting rule
(73 FR 28410, May 16, 2008); additional
survey data collected in 2008, 2009, and
2010 (Ivory 2008, pp. 1–2; Ivory 2009a,
entire; Ivory 2009b, entire; Clark 2010a,
p. 1; Truman 2010, p. 1; Robinson 2010,
entire); the final BLM RMP; the Final
Oil Shale and Tar Sands RMP
Amendments to Address Land Use
Allocations in Colorado, Utah, and
Wyoming and Programmatic
Environmental Impact Statement; and
additional scientific information from
ongoing species’ surveys and studies.
Section 4 of the ESA and its
implementing regulations (50 CFR 424)
set forth the procedures for listing
species, reclassifying species, or
removing species from listed status.
‘‘Species’’ is defined by the ESA as
including any species or subspecies of
fish or wildlife or plants, and any
distinct vertebrate population segment
of fish or wildlife that interbreeds when
mature (16 U.S.C. 1532(16)). We may
delist a species according to 50 CFR
424.11(d) if the best available scientific
and commercial data indicate that the
species is neither endangered nor
threatened for the following reasons:
(1) The species is extinct; (2) the species
has recovered and is no longer
endangered or threatened (as is the case
with Erigeron maguirei); or (3) the
original scientific data used at the time
the species was classified were in error.
A recovered species is one that no
longer meets the ESA’s definition of
endangered or threatened. Determining
whether a species is recovered requires
consideration of the same five categories
of threats specified in section 4(a)(1) of
the ESA. For species that are already
listed as endangered or threatened, this
analysis of threats is an evaluation of
both the threats currently facing the
species and the threats that are
reasonably likely to affect the species in
the foreseeable future following the
delisting or downlisting and the
removal or reduction of the ESA’s
protections.
A species is ‘‘endangered’’ for
purposes of the ESA if it is in danger of
extinction throughout all or a significant
portion of its range and is ‘‘threatened’’
if it is likely to become endangered
within the foreseeable future throughout
all or a significant portion of its range.
The ‘‘foreseeable future’’ is the period of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:01 Jan 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
time over which events or effects
reasonably can or should be anticipated,
or trends reasonably extrapolated.
The following analysis examines the
five factors affecting, or likely to affect,
Erigeron maguirei within the foreseeable
future.
A. The Present or Threatened
Destruction, Modification, or
Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range
When the species was originally
listed, the main threat was loss of
habitat due to mining claims for
uranium, energy exploration, and offroad vehicle (ORV) recreation (50 FR
36089, September 5, 1985). We address
these threats to Erigeron maguirei
below.
Mineral Exploration and Development
Overview
Mineral exploration and development
were listed as threats in the Erigeron
maguirei listing rule, the Recovery Plan,
and the downlisting rule (50 FR 36089,
September 5, 1985; USFWS 1995, p. 5;
61 FR 31054, June 19, 1996). The
original listing (when the population
was estimated at 7 individuals) and
subsequent downlisting (when the
population was estimated at 3,000
individuals) noted as threats existing
uranium mining claims, the potential
for extraction to begin when market
forces change, and mining activities and
associated surface disturbances that
could directly or indirectly destroy
plants or render the habitat unsuitable
for the species (50 FR 36089, September
5, 1985; 61 FR 31054, June 19, 1996).
Uranium
Uranium mining began in the western
United States in 1871 (Ringholz 1994, p.
2). In 1952, the first noteworthy deposits
of uranium ore in Utah were located
(Ringholz 1994, p. 2). By the end of
1962, Utah had produced approximately
nine million tons of ore (Ringholz 1994,
p. 2). The Atomic Energy Commission
held ample uranium ore reserves by
1970 and stopped buying uranium
(Ringholz 1994, p. 3). When nuclear
power plants came on-line in the mid1970s, a brief second uranium boom
was experienced (Ringholz 1994, p. 3).
However, foreign competition, Federal
regulations, and nuclear fears virtually
put an end to domestic uranium mining
(Ringholz 1994, p. 3). Substantial ore
remains deep underground in Utah, and
should prices rise, mining could be
resurrected (Ringholz 1994, p. 3). In
2007, uranium prices increased as did
mining activity (Hargreaves 2007, pp. 1–
2).
Five uranium districts, areas
depicting uranium resource
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
3037
development potential, overlap Erigeron
maguirei populations; three of these
districts have low potential, and two
have moderate potential (Gloyn et al.
2005, Map 216; Clark et al. 2006, p. 9).
We assume the highest potential
districts will be developed first,
allowing us to work proactively with
other Federal agencies to minimize
threats to the species and prevent
relisting. A small portion of the Link
Flats population (9 percent), a small
portion of the Coal Wash population (16
percent), and a large portion (85
percent) of the Segers Hole population
overlap uranium districts with moderate
potential (Gloyn et al. 2005, Map 216;
Clark et al. 2006, p. 9). Thirteen known
uranium mineral locations, specific
locations where mining claims exist,
overlap the mapped E. maguirei
populations (Clark et al. 2006, p. 16;
Utah Geological Survey 2007, Map).
Only the Lucky Strike Mine is active
(Utah Geological Survey 2007, Map).
This mine occurs along the southern
edge of the mapped Link Flats
population (Central San Rafael Swell
Meta-Population) (Clark et al. 2006, p. 9;
Utah Geological Survey 2007, Map).
Operation of the mine will not adversely
impact this population because it is
located on the periphery of the
population and is accessed via an
existing road. Of the remaining 12
locations, 7 locations never produced
uranium, and 5 locations only reached
small production levels (Utah
Geological Survey 2007, Map). Eleven of
these locations occur on the periphery
of the mapped E. maguirei populations
(Clark et al. 2006, p. 16; Utah Geological
Survey 2007, Map). The only location
that occurs within a mapped population
is within the Calf Canyon population
(Clark et al. 2006, p. 16; Utah Geological
Survey 2007, Map). Recent surveys
extended the population to encapsulate
the area around the mining location
(Robinson 2010, p. 7); we were
previously unaware of plants occurring
in this area.
Uranium is restricted to geologic
formations such as the Moss Back
Member, Monitor Butte Member, and
the Mottled Siltstone Unit of the Chinle
Formation. Erigeron maguirei does not
occur in these formations (Clark et al.
2006, p. 20). In addition, most of the E.
maguirei individuals occur on lands
managed by Capitol Reef National Park
(92 percent) which are withdrawn from
mining exploration and development
activities (see Factor D) (Clark et al.
2006, p. 21; USFS et al. 2006, p. 56). In
addition, historic mining activities
proved there was not enough ore within
Capitol Reef National Park to be worth
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
3038
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
mining (NPS 2009, p. 2). If uranium
mining were to have any impact on E.
maguirei, impacts would likely be
limited to those associated with the
access routes to the desired geologic
formation (Clark et al. 2006, p. 20; Utah
Geological Survey 2007, Map). Existing
roads would likely be utilized. The most
substantial affects of such use would be
impacts to pollinators and impacts from
road dust. We believe such impacts, if
they occurred at all, would likely occur
along the periphery of existing
populations, would impact only small
portions of known populations and,
overall, would not likely impacts on the
viability of individual populations or
the species. Based on the locations of
past exploration, the geologic
distribution of uranium, and the limited
overlap with the habitat requirements of
E. maguirei, we do not foresee
substantial future impacts from uranium
mining to E. maguirei.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Gypsum
We did not previously identify
gypsum mining as a threat to the
species. Only the Deep Creek
population in Capitol Reef National
Park has a known gypsum occurrence
(Utah Geological Survey 2007, Map).
However, lands within Capitol Reef
National Park are permanently
withdrawn from mining exploration and
development activities (see Factor D)
(Clark et al. 2006, p. 21; USFS et al.
2006, p. 56). In addition, this gypsum
occurrence is located on the periphery
of the mapped Erigeron maguirei
population and within the Primitive
Management Zone (Capitol Reef 1998, p.
27; Utah Geological Survey 2007, Map).
Travel through this Management Zone is
limited to cross-country hiking or
horseback riding on unimproved trails
and routes (Capitol Reef 1998, pp. 27–
29). Based on the lack of gypsum mining
occurring in the range of the species,
coupled with the land management
designations in place affording
protection to the species, we do not
foresee gypsum mining adversely
affecting the species in the foreseeable
future.
Oil Shale and Tar Sands Development
Oil shale and tar sands development
is not a threat to the species (USFS et
al. 2006, p. 37). The most geologically
prospective oil shale resources do not
occur within the range of Erigeron
maguirei (Clark et al. 2006, p. 9; BLM
2008a, p. 11). The most geologically
prospective oil shale resources occur in
the Uinta Basin of Utah, a distance of
approximately 60 air miles (97
kilometers) from the closest population,
Calf Canyon (Clark et al. 2006, p. 9;
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:01 Jan 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
BLM 2008a, p. 11). Thus, we do not
consider oil shale development a threat
to the species. The rest of this section
will focus on tar sands resources within
the range of the species.
There are 11 Special Tar Sand Areas
in Utah (45 FR 76800, November 20,
1980; 46 FR 6077, January 21, 1981;
BLM 2008a, p. 23). Of these, only the
San Rafael Swell Special Tar Sands
Area occurs within the range of Erigeron
maguirei (Clark et al. 2006, p. 9; BLM
2008b, p. 2–49).
Typically, strip mining is the most
efficient method of tar sands extraction,
but other approaches include the
injection of steam or solvents to reduce
the oil’s viscosity and allow the oil to
be pumped out of the well. Erigeron
maguirei could be impacted as a result
of vegetation clearing, habitat
fragmentation, alteration of topography,
changes in drainage patterns, erosion,
sedimentation from runoff, oil and
contaminant spills, fugitive dust, injury
or mortality of individual plants, human
collection, increased human access,
spread of invasive plant species, and air
pollution (BLM 2008b, pp. 5–62, 5–84,
5–85, 5–98). In addition, we believe the
loss and fragmentation of habitat due to
the development of tar sands may
negatively impact pollinator species.
Portions of the Erigeron maguirei
mapped populations of Calf Canyon,
Sids Hole, Secret Mesa, and Link Flats
occur within the San Rafael Swell
Special Tar Sand Area (Clark et al. 2006,
p. 9; BLM 2008b, p. 2–49; BLM 2008d,
Map R–23). However, less than 2
percent of the entire species’ mapped
population areas overlaps lands
available for leasing for commercial tar
sands development (Clark et al. 2006, p.
9; BLM 2008a, entire; 2008b, p. 2–49).
In addition, a substantial amount of
suitable habitat for the species occurs
throughout the three San Rafael Swell
meta-populations that has not been
surveyed and may be occupied by E.
maguirei, or may provide additional
linkage habitats within these metapopulations (Clark et al. 2006, p. 24).
Overall, we do not believe that the
possible loss or degradation of the small
amount of occupied (less than 2
percent) or other suitable habitat would
negatively impact the viability of the
species.
In summary, we do not anticipate tar
sands development to be a threat to
Erigeron maguirei in the foreseeable
future. There is little overlap between
leasable lands and the species’
distribution. Based on the small amount
of area within the species’ range (less
than 2 percent) that are available for
leasing for commercial tar sands
development, we do not anticipate that
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
tar sands development will impact the
species as a whole in the foreseeable
future.
Oil and Gas Exploration and
Development
Oil and gas exploration and
development were identified as threats
in the Erigeron maguirei listing rule, the
Recovery Plan, and the downlisting rule
(50 FR 36089, September 5, 1985;
USFWS 1995, p. 5; 61 FR 31054, June
19, 1996). Oil and gas development
includes exploration, drilling,
production, and reclamation phases
(Tribal Energy and Environmental
Information Clearinghouse 2010, entire).
Surface disturbance may occur
throughout all phases of oil and gas
development (Tribal Energy and
Environmental Information
Clearinghouse 2010, entire). Impacts to
plant species from surface disturbance
may include the direct effects of
crushing and reduction in seed bank.
Indirect effects to plant species include
increased dust and airborne particulates
(well pad and road construction),
increased habitat fragmentation,
changes in pollinator-plant interactions,
and increased invasive species
composition within and adjacent to
suitable habitats.
Lands within Capitol Reef National
Park are withdrawn from oil and gas
exploration and development (see
Factor D) (USFS et al. 2006, p. 56). The
surrounding BLM and USFS lands are
open to oil and gas leasing, but the
potential for oil and gas is low in the
Navajo Sandstone formation where
Erigeron maguirei occurs (USFS et al.
2006, p. 34).
Oil and gas leases that were issued
prior to the 2008 BLM Price Field Office
RMP are managed under stipulations
that were in effect when the leases were
issued (BLM 2008c, pp. 24, 170). Leases
issued after the RMP was signed will
have the appropriate oil and gas lease
stipulations and best management
practices applied to prevent, minimize,
or mitigate resource impacts (BLM
2008c, pp. 31, 40–42, 128, Appendix R–
3, Appendix R–14, Map R–8).
On BLM-administered lands, portions
of Erigeron maguirei populations occur
within the San Rafael Canyon, Interstate
70, Muddy Creek, and Segers Hole
ACECs (see Table 2 above) (Clark et al.
2006, pp. 9–11; BLM 2008d, Map R–29).
All of these ACECs are open to leasing
subject to ‘‘no surface occupancy’’
constraints (BLM 2008c, pp. 135–137).
Leasing with ‘‘no surface occupancy’’
means that there will be no
development or disturbance whatsoever
of the land surface, including
establishment of wells or well pads, and
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
construction of roads, pipelines, or
powerlines. There are no exceptions to
the ‘‘no surface occupancy’’ stipulation
within these ACECs (BLM 2008c,
Appendix R–3, pp. 1–4). The WSAs
with E. maguirei populations, including
the Sids Mountain, Devils Canyon, and
Muddy Creek WSAs, are unavailable to
leasing with the exception of mineral
lease uses that existed before or on
October 21, 1976; however, there are no
active leases within these populations
in these WSAs (BLM 2008c, pp. 41, 129,
and 131; 2009, entire; Stephens 2009,
entire).
While limited exploration has
occurred, no known oil or gas fields
exist within the known Erigeron
maguirei populations, and the potential
for development is low (Automated
Geographic Reference Center 2001,
database; Clark et al. 2006, p. 21; Utah
Division of Oil, Gas, and Mining 2006b,
Map; USFS et al. 2006, p. 34). The only
gas field in the vicinity of E. maguirei
is the Last Chance Gas Field located
approximately 7 miles (11 kilometers)
west of the Segers Hole population and
6 miles (10 kilometers) north of the
Deep Creek population (Automated
Geographic Reference Center 2001,
database; Chidsey et al. 2005, Map
203DM; Clark et al. 2006, p. 16; Utah
Division of Oil, Gas, and Mining 2006b,
Map). Seven exploratory wells were
sited within the mapped E. maguirei
Secret Mesa and Coal Wash
populations, but all of the wells have
been plugged and abandoned (Clark et
al. 2006, p. 9; Utah Division of Oil, Gas,
and Mining 2006a, database).
Based on the lack of supporting
evidence of viable oil and gas fields
within the vicinity of Erigeron maguirei
and the land management designations
that afford protections to the species, oil
and gas exploration and development is
no longer a threat within the foreseeable
future.
Recreational Use
Recreational use, including ORVs and
human foot traffic, was previously
identified as a threat to the species (50
FR 36089, September 5, 1985; USFWS
1995, p. 5; 61 FR 31054, June 19, 1996).
At the time of listing, the species was
thought to occur primarily in canyon
bottoms and was estimated to have a
population of seven individuals (50 FR
36089, September 5, 1985). At the time
of downlisting, recreation was still a
concern due to overall limited
abundance (an estimated 3,000
individual plants) (61 FR 31054, June
19, 1996).
Potential impacts from recreational
use include trampling and crushing of
plants, soil compaction, introduction of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:01 Jan 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
exotic species, increased erosion, and
increased dust deposition on plants.
However, Erigeron maguirei is not prone
to human recreational disturbance
because it grows primarily in cliff
crevices and on the sandstone domes on
mesa tops (Clark 2002, p. 16). Of 60 E.
maguirei sites in Capitol Reef evaluated
for signs of human impacts (Clark 2002,
pp. 12–16), only 2 showed signs of
human impacts (in both cases foot
traffic was observed at the site) (Clark
2002, pp. 12–16).
More than 92 percent of known
Erigeron maguirei individuals occur in
Capitol Reef National Park, which is
closed to ORV use (Clark et al. 2006, p.
16). The Fishlake National Forest
prohibits cross-country vehicle travel
forest-wide (USFS 2006b, p. 263; 2009,
p. 2). E. maguirei habitat does not occur
within 0.5 mile (0.8 kilometer) of
classified or potentially designated
motorized routes on Fishlake National
Forest lands (USFS 2006b, pp. 123, 260–
263).
Only 6 percent of all known Erigeron
maguirei plants occur on lands
administered by the BLM. Of these,
approximately 89 percent of the mapped
population occurs within an ACEC,
WSA, or ISA (Kass 1990, p. 23; Clark et
al. 2006, p. 18; Ivory 2006; BLM 2008d,
Map R–29; Robinson 2010, entire) (see
Table 2 above). The ISAs are managed
the same as WSAs (see discussion under
Factor D below) (BLM 1995, p. 1). The
ACECs, ISAs, and WSAs that contain E.
maguirei are either closed to motorized
vehicles or use is limited to designated
roads and trails (Clark et al. 2006, p. 20;
BLM 2008c, pp. 132, 135–139, Map R–
17).
In summary, we do not believe that
recreational use is a threat to the
species. The plant’s preferred habitat of
cliff crevices and domes naturally
separates it from most human use areas.
In addition, ORV restrictions across
much of the species’ range reduce the
potential for recreational vehicles to
impact plants.
Summary of Factor A: Mineral
exploration and development and
recreational use were listed as threats to
Erigeron maguirei in the species’ listing
rule, the Recovery Plan, and the
downlisting rule (50 FR 36089,
September 5, 1985; USFWS 1995, p. 5;
61 FR 31054, June 19, 1996). The
species occurs predominantly within
the Navajo Sandstone formation, which
has low potential for oil and gas
development and uranium mining
(USFS et al. 2006, p. 37). Most mineral
resources (like gypsum, tar sands, and
oil shale) occur on the periphery of
mapped E. maguirei populations and,
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
3039
therefore, are not likely to meaningfully
impact any of the populations.
Recreational use, particularly hiking
and motorized vehicle use, occurs
throughout the species’ range. However,
land management protections are in
place throughout most of the species’
range, with the primary result of
restricting vehicle use to designated
roads and trails, thus minimizing
impacts to the plants and their habitat.
In addition, we now know (see Species
Information) that Erigeron maguirei
grows primarily in crevices and on
domes, away from the majority of
recreational traffic.
While potential impacts to
individuals could occur when either
accessing the mineral resources or
during recreational use, these activities
are considered unlikely to materialize in
a meaningful way in the foreseeable
future, would be limited to small
periphery portions of populations, and
therefore would not reduce the longterm viability of any of the populations.
In addition, land management
designations, which have been
discussed briefly in this section and will
be discussed later under Factor D, will
continue to provide protections for
Erigeron maguirei and its habitat in the
foreseeable future.
B. Overutilization for Commercial,
Recreational, Scientific, or Educational
Purposes
Erigeron maguirei is not a highly
collected or sought after species. We
know of only one group that propagated
E. maguirei for private use by rock
garden enthusiasts (USFS et al. 2006, p.
35; Clark 2007, p. 1), but this group is
no longer offering plants for sale
(Megown 2007, p. 1). Unauthorized
plant and seed collection has not been
documented for this species (USFS et al.
2006, p. 35). We do not believe
overutilization is a current or
foreseeable threat to the species.
C. Disease or Predation
No diseases are known to impact
Erigeron maguirei. Therefore, disease is
not a current or foreseeable threat to the
species.
At the time of listing, we believed that
predation due to cattle grazing (or
herbivory) had reduced the species’
distribution (50 FR 36089, September 5,
1985; 61 FR 31054, June 19, 1996;
Harper and Van Buren 1998, p. 2). At
that time, only a few Erigeron maguirei
were known to occur at the upper ends
of canyons on sandstone ledges or
among boulders. Because the species
had historically been documented in
canyon bottoms, the plants found on
ledges and boulders were thought to be
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
3040
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
remnants within marginal habitats. It
was thought that grazing in the canyon
bottoms had reduced the distribution of
the plant to these marginal habitats (50
FR 36089, September 5, 1985).
However, we now know that Erigeron
maguirei plants are much more widely
distributed (see Species Information).
Preferred habitat includes cliffs, rock
crevices, and sandstone domes on mesa
tops that are inaccessible to livestock
(Kass 1990, p. 27; USFWS 1995, p. 2;
Clark 2001, p. 15; Clark et al. 2005, pp.
12, 22, 24; Clark et al. 2006, pp. 21–22;
USFS et al. 2006, p. 56).
The majority of Erigeron maguirei
populations are thus relatively secure
from predation by livestock grazing due
to their known habitat preferences (Kass
1990, p. 28; USFWS 1995, p. 5; 61 FR
31054, June 19, 1996). Although 8 of the
10 E. maguirei populations occur within
cattle allotments, 7 of these populations
are inaccessible to cattle grazing due to
terrain conditions (USFS et al. 2006, p.
56). The eighth population is the newly
discovered population at Sids Hole.
Cattle use a nearby reservoir as a
watering hole. Although the area
experiences impacts from cattle grazing,
this population is persisting without
special management considerations that
afford it protection from grazing
activities. Of the two populations that
are not within an allotment, the
Waterpocket Fold population in Capitol
Reef, estimated at approximately 20,000
individuals on 42 sites, has a history of
cattle trailing (USFS et al. 2006, p. 56).
Cattle trailing, or moving cattle through
the area, occurred at this site about once
every 5 years for the past 100 years
(Clark et al. 2006, pp. 21, 25). Cattle
trailing has impacted, and is expected to
continue to impact, only a few
individual plants (Clark et al. 2006, pp.
21, 25); however, those impacts are not
at a level that effects the species’
viability.
In summary, grazing is no longer a
threat to the species, nor is it likely to
become one within the foreseeable
future. The species has a much broader
distribution than originally thought, and
the plant prefers cliffs, crevices, and
sandstone domes on mesa tops that are
generally inaccessible to livestock.
D. The Inadequacy of Existing
Regulatory Mechanisms
Prior to the species’ 1985 listing, no
Federal or State laws protected Erigeron
maguirei (50 FR 36089, September 5,
1985), and its known distribution was
limited to Calf Canyon, Utah, and its
two side canyons. As previously
described, implementation of specific
recovery actions and surveys have
resulted in and documented many more
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:01 Jan 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
E. maguirei individuals, sites, and
populations than were previously
known. Substantial land management
protections are in place across the vast
majority of the species’ range.
Over 99 percent of known Erigeron
maguirei plants occur on Federal lands
managed by Capitol Reef National Park
(more than 92 percent), BLM Price Field
Office (6 percent), and Fishlake National
Forest (1 percent) (see Table 1 above)
(Clark et al. 2006, p. 16). All three of
these agencies have land management
designations in place that afford the
species protection. Less than 1 percent
of the known population occurs on
lands administered by SITLA, where no
protections for E. maguirei exist (Clark
et al. 2006, p. 16).
National Parks are administered
under the provisions of the Organic Act
of 1916 (16 U.S.C. 1, 2, 3, and 4), as
amended and supplemented. The
Organic Act specifies that the NPS will
‘‘promote and regulate the use of the
Federal areas known as national parks,
monuments, and reservations * * *
which purpose is to conserve the
scenery and the natural and historic
objects and the wild life therein and to
provide for the enjoyment of the same
in such manner and by such means as
will leave them unimpaired for the
enjoyment of future generations.’’
As discussed above under Factor A,
mineral exploration and development,
recreational use, and grazing were listed
as threats in the Erigeron maguirei
listing rule, the Recovery Plan, and the
downlisting rule (50 FR 36089,
September 5, 1985; USFWS 1995, p. 5;
61 FR 31054, June 19, 1996). Capitol
Reef National Park, which contains
more than 92 percent of the Erigeron
maguirei individuals, has land
management policies in place that
afford protection to the species. The
1976 Mining in the Parks Act (16 U.S.C.
1901 et seq.), the Federal Land Policy
and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C.
1701 et seq.), and the Clean Air Act of
1977, as amended, (42 U.S.C. 7401 et
seq.) provided tools for parks to remove
and prevent mining and drilling
ventures (NPS 2002, p. 14). All mining
claims within Capitol Reef National
Park were either declared invalid or
were nullified by 1986 (NPS 2002, p. 2).
By the end of the 1980s, oil and gas
leases were also either eliminated or
suspended (NPS 2002, p. 2). All
national parks are now closed to new
federal mineral leasing (NPS 2006, p.
118). Capitol Reef’s 1998 Final General
Management Plan Development Concept
Plan designates Primitive and Threshold
Management Zones within the Park
(Capitol Reef 1998, pp. 27–31). All
Capitol Reef E. maguirei sites are
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
located within these Management Zones
(Clark 2006a, entire). No off-road or offtrail recreational use is allowed within
the Park within these zones. In addition,
grazing is not allowed within either of
these zones (Capitol Reef 1998, pp. 28–
31). In order for Capitol Reef National
Park lands to be made available for
activities that were removed (i.e.,
mining and grazing), Congress would
have to change the laws which currently
govern Capitol Reef National Park.
The Federal Land Policy and
Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C.
1701 et seq.) is the primary Federal law
governing most land uses on BLM lands.
Section 102(a)(8) of the Federal Land
Policy and Management Act states
public lands will be managed, in part,
to provide protection to ecological and
environmental resources. The BLM
Manual 6840 directs BLM to manage
habitat for sensitive species in a manner
that will ensure that all actions
authorized, funded, or carried out by the
BLM do not contribute to the need for
the species to become listed (BLM
2008c, p. 80). Typically, this means the
impacts to these species are considered
during project planning stages and
conservation measures may be included
at the discretion of agency biologists.
The BLM’s RMPs are the basis for all
of its actions and authorizations
involving BLM-administered lands and
resources. The RMPs establish allowable
resource uses, general management
practices, program constraints, and
other parameters of project design (43
CFR 1601.0–5(n)). These plans provide
a framework and programmatic
guidance for site-specific activity plans.
The approved RMP also incorporates
resource protection measures and
recommended ‘‘Best Management
Practices’’ to maintain, protect, and
enhance habitats that will support a
diversity of non-listed sensitive fish,
wildlife, and plant species (BLM 2008c,
p. 34). These measures vary between
State and field offices.
The BLM Price Field Office RMP was
approved in October 2008 (BLM 2008c).
Erigeron maguirei is provided
protection from mineral exploration and
development, and recreational use,
through land use planning decisions in
this RMP (BLM 2008c). A total of 6
percent of all E. maguirei populations
occur on BLM lands. Of these,
approximately 89 percent are within
WSAs, ISAs, and/or ACECs (see Table 2
above) (Kass 1990, p. 23; Clark et al.
2005, pp. 16 and 19; Ivory 2006, entire;
2007, entire; BLM 2008d, Map R–28).
On BLM lands, WSAs are managed
according to the Interim Management
Policy for Lands under Wilderness
Review (BLM 1995, entire; BLM 1976,
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
entire) until Congress either designates
them into the National Wilderness
Preservation System or releases them
from wilderness study for other
purposes (BLM 1976, p. 1; 2008c, p.
131). The WSAs must be managed so as
not to impair their suitability for
preservation as wilderness (BLM 1976,
p. 2). The WSAs are unavailable to
leasing with the exception of mineral
lease uses that existed before or on
October 21, 1976; however, as discussed
under Factor A, there are no active
leases within these populations in these
WSAs (BLM 2008c, pp. 41, 129, and
131; 2009, entire; Stephens 2009,
entire). With the exception of four
routes within Sids Mountain WSA, all
WSAs are closed to motorized travel
(BLM 2008c, pp. 22, 132). All E.
maguirei individuals and habitat within
these areas will be afforded protection
from recreational use.
Although these ACECs were not
identified specifically to protect
Erigeron maguirei, their associated land
use management provides indirect
protection for the plant. For example,
the San Rafael Canyon, Interstate 70,
and Segers Hole ACECs were designated
for their scenic values (BLM 2008c, pp.
135, 137, 139); Muddy Creek ACEC was
designated for cultural, historic, and
scenic values (BLM 2008c, p. 136); and
the Lucky Strike ACEC was designated
for its historic value (BLM 2008c, p.
141). The management prescriptions for
each of these ACECs are discussed
below.
The ACECs are open to leasing subject
to ‘‘no surface occupancy’’ constraints
(BLM 2008c, pp. 135–137). Leasing with
‘‘no surface occupancy’’ means that there
will be no development or disturbance
whatsoever of the land surface,
including establishment of wells or well
pads, and construction of roads,
pipelines, or powerlines. There are no
exceptions to the ‘‘no surface
occupancy’’ stipulation within these
ACECs (BLM 2008c, Appendix R–3, pp.
1–4). The ACECs also are either closed
to OHV use or OHV use is limited to
existing routes and trails. Although
these ACECs were not specifically
designated for protecting E. maguirei,
the species will be benefited by the
restrictions on surface disturbances (see
discussion under Factor A above).
The National Forest Management Act
of 1976 (16 U.S.C. 1600 et seq.) directs
national forests to manage habitat to
maintain viable populations of existing
native and desired nonnative vertebrate
species in habitat distributed
throughout their geographic range on
National Forest System lands (USFS
1976, entire). In 1983, the U.S.
Department of Agriculture Departmental
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:01 Jan 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
Regulation 9500–4 provided further
direction to the USFS, expanding the
protection requirements of the National
Forest Management Act to include plant
species (USDA 1983, p. 2).
Erigeron maguirei was not known to
occur on USFS lands in 1986. Thus, the
existing Fishlake Land Management
Plan does not identify E. maguirei as
occurring within the National Forest
(USFS 1986). E. maguirei was
discovered on USFS lands in 1999
(Clark 2010b, p. 1). Less than 1 percent
of all known E. maguirei plants occur on
USFS lands. Approximately 33 percent
of the current mapped range of E.
maguirei on USFS lands is designated as
a Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized. The
Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized
designation means that recreational use
is limited to non-motorized access, such
as hiking or horseback riding. This
designation, although not specifically
designated for protecting E. maguirei,
will benefit the species by limiting
recreational use impacts (see discussion
under Factor A above). In December
2006, the Fishlake National Forest
finalized their Off-Highway Vehicle
Route Designation Project, providing
protections for the area in which
Erigeron maguirei occurs (USFS 2006a).
Under this plan, motorized routes on
Fishlake National Forest lands cannot
occur within 0.5 mile (0.8 kilometer) of
the Deep Creek population (USFS
2006b, pp. 123, 260–263). The Fishlake
National Forest prohibits cross-country
vehicle travel forest-wide. This
prohibition provides protection to E.
maguirei from recreational use as
described above under Factor A (USFS
2006b, p. 263; 2009, p. 2).
The portion of the species’ range
owned by SITLA does not have any
special management to benefit Erigeron
maguirei. The SITLA’s mission is to
administer their land to provide funding
for Utah’s educational system and other
State beneficiaries (SITLA 2009, p. 4).
They do not manage their lands for the
conservation benefit of rare species.
However, less than 1 percent of known
E. maguirei plants occur on SITLA lands
(see Table 2). Known sites on SITLA
lands are in suitable habitats adjacent to
populations on Federal lands and make
up a small portion of known
populations (see Table 2). Therefore, we
do not believe that the lack of
management on SITLA lands is a threat
to the species.
Summary of Factor D: We find that
regulatory mechanisms related
specifically to land management are
sufficient for avoiding or mitigating the
few potential factors that could impact
Erigeron maguirei individuals
(population-level impacts are unlikely
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
3041
from any factor), as discussed above
under Factors A and C. Federal land
management agencies have worked
collaboratively since the species’ listing
to provide for the long-term protection
of E. maguirei and its habitat. Land
management plans, policies, and
regulations providing protection to E.
maguirei include: (1) Capitol Reef
Primitive and Threshold Management
Zones; (2) BLM WSAs, ISAs, and
ACECs; and (3) USFS Semi-Primitive
Non-motorized designation. These land
management designations have
adequately protected E. maguirei
individuals and habitat in the past, and
are expected to continue to do so in the
foreseeable future, by limiting and
eliminating surface disturbing activities.
While less than 1 percent of the species
occurs on private land where there are
no protections, the species continues to
persist in those areas. The threat due to
inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms is no longer applicable.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors
Affecting the Species’ Continued
Existence
The 1985 final listing rule postulated
that the genetic viability of Erigeron
maguirei was greatly reduced due to the
species’ small population size,
geographic separation, and reproductive
isolation (50 FR 36089, September 5,
1985). The June 19, 1996, final rule
reclassifying E. maguirei to threatened
identified inbreeding and loss of genetic
variability as potential threats because
of the species’ small, reproductively
isolated populations (61 FR 31054, June
19, 1996).
As discussed previously,
implementation of recovery actions,
specifically survey efforts, have
increased our knowledge of the species’
population status and distribution. We
now know that Erigeron maguirei is
widely distributed and occurs in much
greater numbers than previously
thought (see Species Information).
Newly discovered sites indicate that
there is substantial habitat and
population connectivity across the
species’ range, thus reducing
reproductive isolation and inbreeding
threats (50 FR 36089, September 5,
1985; USFWS 1995, p. 5; 61 FR 31054,
June 19, 1996; Clark et al. 2006, p. 24;
Ivory 2009a, p. 1; 2009b, p. 1; Clark
2010a, p.1; Truman 2010, p. 1; Robinson
2010, entire). For example, populations
in the Capitol Reef and San Rafael areas
are separated by short distances and
connected by contiguous habitat,
allowing genetic interchange across the
species’ range (Van Buren 1993, p. 1;
Van Buren and Harper 2002, p. 1; Clark
et al. 2006, p. 24). Due to the number
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
3042
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
of populations and individuals of E.
maguirei found and the interconnectivity of the habitat, the species
is no longer considered threatened by a
loss of genetic variability.
Pesticide use occurs within Capitol
Reef National Park’s Fruita Rural
Historic District, a cultural area on the
National Register of Historic Places
(Alston and Tepedino 2005, p. 10).
Management includes spraying apple
and pear trees with the pesticide
Phosmet to control the codling moth
(Cydia pomonella) (Alston and
Tepedino 2005, p. 10). This pesticide
does not appear to affect productivity of
Erigeron maguirei plants (Alston and
Tepedino 2005, pp. 11, 61). No other
routine pesticide use is known to occur
within the range of E. maguirei. Thus,
the best scientific data available indicate
the current use of the pesticides is not
a threat to E. maguirei.
When the Recovery Plan was written,
the demographic stability of the various
populations was not known (USFWS
1995, p. 5). Studies have since
concluded that Erigeron maguirei is
relatively long-lived with low mortality
(Van Buren and Harper 2002, p. 2).
Furthermore, the available science
indicates that the species has the ability
to replace individuals at a rate that
compensates for mortality (Van Buren
and Harper 2002, p. 5). Thus, the
available data alleviate the concern for
demographic stability.
According to the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (IPCC
2007, p. 2), ‘‘[w]arming of the climate
system is unequivocal, as is now
evident from observations of increases
in global average air and ocean
temperatures, widespread melting of
snow and ice, and rising global average
sea level.’’ Average Northern
Hemisphere temperatures during the
second half of the 20th century were
very likely higher than during any other
50-year period in the last 500 years and
likely the highest in at least the past
1,300 years (IPCC 2007, p. 2).
The IPCC (2007, p. 7) predicts that
changes in the global climate system
during the 21st century will be larger
than those observed during the 20th
century. For the next 2 decades a
warming of about 0.2 °C (0.4 °F) per
decade is projected (IPCC 2007, p. 7).
Afterward, temperature projections
increasingly depend on specific
emission scenarios (IPCC 2007, p. 7).
Various emissions scenarios suggest that
by the end of the 21st century, average
global temperatures are expected to
increase 0.6 to 4.0 °C (1.1 to 7.2 °F),
with the greatest warming expected over
land (IPCC 2007, p. 8). The IPCC says
it is very likely hot extremes, heat
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:01 Jan 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
waves, and heavy precipitation will
increase in frequency (IPCC 2007, p. 8).
However, the confidence in predicting
changes in precipitation is less than that
for predicting changes in temperature
(IPCC 2007, p. 600). The confidence in
predicting accurate changes in
precipitation levels is further reduced
when applying the model to small,
localized areas (IPCC 2007, pp. 601,
697). Therefore, although many semiarid areas like the western United States
will suffer a decrease in water resources
due to climate change, we cannot be
certain at this time how the change will
occur over the range of Erigeron
maguirei (IPCC 2007, pp. 8, 601, 697).
Below we analyze possible impacts,
given these uncertainties, to the extent
we understand them and are able to
reasonably project.
Climate change could potentially
impact Erigeron maguirei or its
pollinators, although the specific
impacts of altered temperature and
precipitation regimes are unknown.
Rare plants in the Southwest tend to
have fewer individuals during droughtrelated circumstances (Hughes 2009,
entire). Long-term demographic
monitoring produced conflicting results;
some monitoring plots experienced
higher mortality rates during drought
years while others did not (Van Buren
and Harper 2002, pp. 2–6). While we do
not know the long-term response of the
species to changes in climatic
conditions, we believe impacts will be
minimal as E. maguirei is a desert plant
adapted to hot temperatures and little
rainfall based on the life history and
habitat requirements of the species. The
Interagency Plant Team will continue to
monitor the species and be able to
identify climate change concerns in the
future, if they occur. If additional trend
monitoring is warranted past the initial
10-year period to address potential
impacts from climate change,
monitoring frequency and intensity may
be reduced (USFWS 2010, pp. 13–14)).
Two of four Capitol Reef sites
monitored between 1992 and 2001
experienced flash flood events (Van
Buren and Harper 2002, p. 1). At one
site, a flash flood event likely resulted
in 48 plants being lost (Van Buren and
Harper 2002, p. 2). However, the species
is long-lived and shows an ability to
replace individuals lost to periodic
flooding (Van Buren and Harper 2002,
pp. 4–5). The species occurs primarily
on sandstone domes on mesa tops and
in cracks and crevices of domes and
cliffs (Clark et al. 2006, p. 12). The
primary habitat of the species is not
prone to flooding. Individuals that are
susceptible to flooding occur in canyon
bottoms, like the two sites mentioned
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
above, which were established from
seeds dispersed by wind or overland
flow from source populations on the
mesa tops (Heil 1989, p. 25; Kass 1990,
p. 27; USFWS 1995, p. 2). Flooding may
affect these individuals; however,
canyon populations are small compared
to those on the mesa tops (Heil 1989, p.
25; Kass 1990, p. 27; USFWS 1995, p.
2). Therefore, flood events possessing
the potential to meaningfully impact
Erigeron maguirei populations are
unlikely in the foreseeable future.
Summary of Factor E: Based on the
available information, reduced genetic
variability, inbreeding posed by
geographic separation and reproductive
isolation, the use of Phosmet as an
insecticide in the Capitol Reef’s Fruita
Rural Historic District, climate change,
and flooding events do not threaten
Erigeron maguirei in all or a significant
portion of the range currently or within
the foreseeable future.
Conclusion of Five-Factor Analysis
As required by the ESA, we
considered the five potential threat
factors to assess whether Erigeron
maguirei is endangered or threatened
throughout all or a significant portion of
its range. When considering the listing
status of the species, the first step in the
analysis is to determine whether the
species is in danger of extinction
throughout all of its range. If this is the
case, then the species is listed or
remains listed in its entirety. For
instance, if the threats to a species are
acting only on a portion of its range, but
they are at such a large scale that they
place the entire species in danger of
extinction, we would list or continue to
list the entire species.
We carefully assessed the best
scientific and commercial data available
and determined there is no information
to suggest the species is either in danger
of extinction throughout all of its range
or likely to become endangered in the
foreseeable future throughout all its
range. Recovery efforts have identified
approximately 162,897 Erigeron
maguirei individuals over an estimated
range of 390 square miles (1,010 square
kilometers) with 10 populations
(containing 128 sites) composing 5
meta-populations (see Figure 1 and
Table 1 above) (Clark et al. 2006, p. 16;
Ivory 2009a, p. 1; 2009b, p. 1; Clark
2010a, p. 1; Truman 2010, p. 1;
Robinson 2010, entire). This represents
a substantial increase from the time of
listing in 1985, when the species was
known from 7 individuals in the Calf
Canyon population (50 FR 36089,
September 5, 1985), and from 1996
when the species was downlisted to
threatened and had a population
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
estimate of approximately 3,000 plants
(61 FR 31054, June 19, 1996). Today, the
species occurs in large, connected, and
well-distributed populations within
substantial suitable habitat. Current
populations appear stable, threats to the
species are not likely to impact the
species in a meaningful way, and land
management protections are in place.
We believe the species’ long-term
viability is assured. Thus, the species is
not currently and is not likely to again
become endangered or threatened in all
of its range.
Having determined that Erigeron
maguirei does not meet the definition of
endangered or threatened throughout all
of its range, we must next consider
whether there are any significant
portions of its range that are in danger
of extinction or are likely to become
endangered in the foreseeable future. A
portion of a species’ range is significant
if it is important to the conservation of
the species because it contributes
meaningfully to the representation,
resiliency, or redundancy of the species.
The contribution must be at a level such
that its loss would result in a decrease
in the ability to conserve the species.
Applying the definition described
above, we first address whether any
portions of the range of Erigeron
maguirei warranted further
consideration. We evaluated E.
maguirei’s range in the context of
whether any potential threats are
concentrated in one or more areas of the
range, such that if there were
concentrated impacts, those populations
might be threatened, and further,
whether any such population might
constitute a significant portion of the
range. The potential threat factors we
evaluated for possible geographic
concentration were the most substantial
factor(s) affecting the species. In this
case, we evaluated mineral exploration
and development and recreational use.
We noted that, as discussed above
under Factor A, there are several small
geographic areas where localized
mineral extraction activities remain as a
potential threat in the foreseeable
future. However, we concluded that
these areas do not warrant further
consideration because such activities
are unlikely to materialize in a
meaningful way and if they do, would
be limited to small areas on the
periphery of populations. Therefore,
there is no substantial information that
Erigeron maguirei in these areas are
likely to become in danger of extinction
in the foreseeable future. These areas are
too small to impact the viability of the
individual populations, metapopulations, or the species.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:01 Jan 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
As discussed above under Factor A,
recreational use, particularly hiking and
motorized vehicle use, occurs
throughout the species’ range. However,
land management protections are in
place throughout most of the species’
range, with the primary result of
restricting vehicle use to designated
roads and trails, thus minimizing
impacts to the plants and their habitat.
We concluded that impacts from
recreational use are not likely to
materialize in a meaningful way in the
foreseeable future, would be limited to
small periphery portions of populations
(e.g., SITLA lands), and would not
reduce the long-term viability of any of
the populations. Therefore, there is no
substantial information that Erigeron
maguirei is being impacted in any area
to the extent that population is in
danger of extinction in the foreseeable
future.
In summary, we have determined that
none of the existing or potential threats,
either alone or in combination with
others, are likely to cause Erigeron
maguirei to become in danger of
extinction within the foreseeable future
throughout all or any significant portion
of its range. On the basis of this
evaluation, we are removing E. maguirei
from the List of Endangered and
Threatened Plants (50 CFR 17.12).
Effect of This Rule
This rule will revise 50 CFR 17.12(h)
to remove Erigeron maguirei from the
List of Endangered and Threatened
Plants. Because no critical habitat was
ever designated for this species, this
rule will not affect 50 CFR 17.96. Once
this species is removed from the List of
Endangered and Threatened Plants, ESA
protection will no longer apply.
Removal of E. maguirei from the List of
Endangered and Threatened Plants will
relieve Federal agencies from the need
to consult with us to insure that any
action they authorize, fund, or carry out
is not likely to jeopardize the continued
existence of this species. Delisting E.
maguirei is expected to have positive
effects in terms of management
flexibility for the State and Federal
governments. Federal agencies will
continue to implement management
plans to conserve E. maguirei and its
habitat.
Post-Delisting Monitoring
Section 4(g)(1) of the ESA requires us
to monitor for at least 5 years species
that are delisted due to recovery. Postdelisting monitoring refers to activities
undertaken to verify that a species
delisted due to recovery remains secure
from the risk of extinction after the
protections of the ESA no longer apply.
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
3043
The primary goal of post-delisting
monitoring is to monitor the species so
that its status does not deteriorate, and
if a decline is detected, to take measures
to halt the decline so that proposing it
as endangered or threatened is not again
needed. If at any time during the
monitoring period, data indicate that
protective status under the ESA should
be reinstated, we can initiate listing
procedures, including, if appropriate,
emergency listing.
Section 4(g) of the ESA explicitly
requires cooperation with the States in
development and implementation of
post-delisting monitoring programs. In
early 2007, we asked the State of Utah
to be a cooperator in post-delisting
monitoring. In a letter dated March 6,
2007, the State suggested their
participation in post-delisting
monitoring was unnecessary (Harja
2007). We agree with the State’s
conclusion as the vast majority of the
known individual plants (over 99
percent) occur on Federal land.
We have finalized a Post-Delisting
Monitoring Plan (Plan) for Erigeron
maguirei (USFWS 2010, entire). The
Plan: (1) Summarizes the species’ status
at the time of delisting; (2) defines
thresholds or triggers for potential
monitoring outcomes and conclusions;
(3) lays out frequency and duration of
monitoring; (4) articulates monitoring
methods including sampling
considerations; (5) outlines data
compilation and reporting procedures
and responsibilities; and (6) depicts a
post-delisting monitoring
implementation schedule, including
timing and responsible parties. The Plan
was modeled after the Conservation
Strategy and incorporated the Maguire
Daisy Survey Protocol developed and
tested by the Interagency Rare Plant
Team (Clark 2006b, entire).
Although section 4(g)(1) of the ESA
requires us to monitor the species for a
period of only 5 years, signatories to the
Plan have committed to monitor the
species for a period of at least 10 years.
After 10 years of monitoring following
protocols stated in the Plan, all available
data on this species will be reviewed to
determine whether there are any data
gaps that need to be addressed. If
significant data gaps are found, the
Interagency Rare Plant Team will
recommend to USFWS management
whether demographic monitoring or
additional population trend monitoring
would be valuable.
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)
We have determined that an
Environmental Assessment or an
Environmental Impact Statement, as
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
3044
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
defined under the authority of the NEPA
of 1969, need not be prepared in
connection with regulations adopted
pursuant to section 4(a) of the ESA. We
published a notice outlining our reasons
for this determination in the Federal
Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR
49244).
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)
The OMB regulations at 5 CFR part
1320 implement provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.). The OMB regulations at
5 CFR 1320.3(c) define a collection of
information as the obtaining of
information by or for an agency by
means of identical questions posed to,
or identical reporting, recordkeeping, or
disclosure requirements imposed on, 10
or more persons. Furthermore, 5 CFR
1320.3(c)(4) specifies that ‘‘ten or more
persons’’ refers to the persons to whom
a collection of information is addressed
by the agency within any 12-month
period. For purposes of this definition,
employees of the Federal government
are not included. We may not conduct
or sponsor, and you are not required to
respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number.
This rule does not contain any
collections of information that require
approval by OMB under the Paperwork
Reduction Act. As proposed under the
Post-Delisting Monitoring section above,
Erigeron maguirei populations will be
monitored by Capitol Reef, Fishlake
National Forest, and the BLM Price field
office in accordance with the
Conservation Strategy. We do not
anticipate a need to request data or
other information from 10 or more
persons during any 12-month period to
satisfy monitoring information needs. If
it becomes necessary to collect
information from 10 or more nonFederal individuals, groups, or
organizations per year, we will first
obtain information collection approval
from the OMB.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited
in this document is available upon
request from the Field Supervisor, Utah
Field Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authors
The primary authors of this document
are staff members located at the Utah
Field Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, West Valley City, Utah (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species,
Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements,
Transportation.
Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we hereby amend part
17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of
the Code of Federal Regulations, as set
forth below:
PART 17—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 17
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 16 U.S.C.
1531–1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201–4245; Pub. L. 99–
625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted.
§ 17.12
[Amended]
2. Amend § 17.12(h) by removing the
entry for ‘‘Erigeron maguirei’’ under
‘‘FLOWERING PLANTS’’ from the List of
Endangered and Threatened Plants.
■
Dated: January 3, 2011.
Gregory E. Siekaniec,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
[FR Doc. 2011–1044 Filed 1–18–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 0910131362–0087–02]
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Executive Order 13211
RIN 0648–XA156
On May 18, 2001, the President issued
an Executive Order 13211 on
regulations that significantly affect
energy supply, distribution, and use.
Executive Order 13211 requires agencies
to prepare Statements of Energy Effects
when undertaking certain actions. As
this rule is not expected to significantly
affect energy supplies, distribution, or
use, this action is not a significant
energy action and no Statement of
Energy Effects is required.
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic
Zone Off Alaska; Sculpins, Sharks,
Squid, and Octopus in the Gulf of
Alaska
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:01 Jan 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Temporary rule; closure.
AGENCY:
NMFS is prohibiting directed
fishing for sculpins, sharks, squid, and
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
octopus in the Gulf of Alaska (GOA).
This action is necessary to prevent
exceeding the 2011 total allowable catch
(TAC) of sculpins, sharks, squid, and
octopus in the GOA.
DATES: Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local
time (A.l.t.), January 13, 2011, through
2400 hrs, A.l.t., December 31, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Josh
Keaton, 907–586–7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS
manages the groundfish fishery in the
GOA exclusive economic zone
according to the Fishery Management
Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of
Alaska (FMP) prepared by the North
Pacific Fishery Management Council
under authority of the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act. Regulations governing
fishing by U.S. vessels in accordance
with the FMP appear at subpart H of 50
CFR part 600 and 50 CFR part 679.
The 2011 TAC of sculpins, sharks,
squid, and octopus in the GOA is 4,500
metric tons (mt) as established by the
final 2010 and 2011 harvest
specifications for groundfish of the GOA
(75 FR 11749, March 12, 2010).
In accordance with § 679.20(d)(1)(i)
and (d)(1)(ii)(B), the Regional
Administrator has determined that the
2011 TAC of sculpins, sharks, squid and
octopus in the GOA will be taken as
incidental catch in directed fishing for
other species. Therefore, the Regional
Administrator is establishing a directed
fishing allowance for sculpins, sharks,
squid and octopus of 0 mt. In
accordance with 679.20(d)(1)(iii), the
Regional Administrator finds that this
directed fishing allowance has been
reached. Consequently, NMFS is
prohibiting directed fishing for sculpins,
sharks, squid and octopus in the GOA.
After the effective date of this closure
the maximum retainable amounts at
§ 679.20(e) and (f) apply at any time
during a trip.
Classification
This action responds to the best
available information recently obtained
from the fishery. The Assistant
Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA
(AA), finds good cause to waive the
requirement to provide prior notice and
opportunity for public comment
pursuant to the authority set forth at 5
U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is
impracticable and contrary to the public
interest. This requirement is
impracticable and contrary to the public
interest as it would prevent NMFS from
responding to the most recent fisheries
data in a timely fashion and would
delay the closure of sculpins, sharks,
squid, and octopus in the GOA. NMFS
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 12 (Wednesday, January 19, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3029-3044]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-1044]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R6-ES-2008-0001; 92220-1113-0000-C6]
RIN 1018-AU67
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Removal of
Erigeron maguirei (Maguire Daisy) From the Federal List of Endangered
and Threatened Plants; Availability of Final Post-Delisting Monitoring
Plan
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service/USFWS), are
removing the plant Erigeron maguirei (commonly referred to as Maguire
daisy) from the List of Endangered and Threatened Plants. The best
scientific and commercial data available indicate that this species has
recovered and no longer meets the definition of endangered or
threatened under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA).
Our review of the status of this species shows that populations are
stable, threats are addressed, and adequate regulatory mechanisms are
in place so that the species is not currently, and is not likely to
again become, an endangered species within the foreseeable future in
all or a significant portion of its range. Finally, we announce the
availability of the final post-delisting monitoring plan for Maguire
daisy.
DATES: This rule becomes effective on February 18, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the final post-delisting monitoring plan are
available by request from the Utah Field Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT) or online at: https://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/
species/plants/
[[Page 3030]]
maguiredaisy/or at: https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Crist, Field Supervisor, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Utah Field Office, 2369 West Orton Circle,
West Valley City, UT 84119 (telephone 801/975-3330; facsimile 801/975-
3331). Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD)
may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800/877-8339,
24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Previous Federal Action
Section 12 of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) directed the
Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution to prepare a report on those
plants considered endangered, threatened, or extinct. On July 1, 1975,
we published a notice in the Federal Register (40 FR 27824) accepting
the Smithsonian report as a petition to list taxa named therein under
section 4(c)(2) (now section 4(b)(3)) of the ESA and announced our
intention to review the status of those plants. Erigeron maguirei was
included in that report (40 FR 27824, July 1, 1975). Maguire daisy is
the common name for E. maguirei; however, we will primarily use the
scientific name of this species throughout this rule.
On June 16, 1976, we published a proposed rule in the Federal
Register (41 FR 24524) to designate approximately 1,700 vascular plant
species, including Erigeron maguirei, as endangered under section 4 of
the ESA. The 1978 amendments to the ESA required that all proposals
over 2 years old be withdrawn. On December 10, 1979, we published a
notice of withdrawal (44 FR 70796) of that portion of the June 16,
1976, proposal that had not been made final, which included the
endangered status determination for E. maguirei.
On December 15, 1980, we published in the Federal Register a
revised notice of review for native plants that designated Erigeron
maguirei as a candidate species (45 FR 82480). Section 4(b)(3)(B) of
the ESA requires that, for any petition to revise the Federal Lists of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants that contains substantial
scientific or commercial information that listing the species may be
warranted, we make a finding within 12 months of the date of receipt of
the petition. In addition, section 2(b)(1) of the Public Law 97-304
(the 1982 amendments to the ESA) required that all petitions pending as
of October 13, 1982, be treated as if newly submitted on that date.
Since the 1975 Smithsonian report was accepted as a petition, all the
taxa contained in those notices, including E. maguirei, were treated as
being newly petitioned as of October 13, 1982. On October 13, 1983, we
made a 12-month finding that the petition to list E. maguirei var.
maguirei was warranted but precluded by higher priority actions to
amend the Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants.
Notification of this finding was published in the Federal Register on
November 28, 1983 (48 FR 53640).
On July 27, 1984, we published a proposed rule to designate
Erigeron maguirei var. maguirei as an endangered species (49 FR 30211).
The final rule designating the variety of the species as endangered was
published on September 5, 1985 (50 FR 36089).
In 1983, Erigeron maguirei var. harrisonii was described as a
separate variety of E. maguirei. On September 27, 1985, we published a
notice of review for plants which added E. maguirei var. harrisonii as
a candidate species (50 FR 39526). E. maguirei var. harrisonii remained
as a candidate through the revised plant notice of review published on
September 30, 1993 (58 FR 51144).
On September 7, 1994 (59 FR 46219), we proposed to accept a
taxonomic revision that combined two varieties, Erigeron maguirei var.
maguirei and E. maguirei var. harrisonii, into one species, E.
maguirei. The taxonomic revision was based on new genetic information
(Van Buren 1993, p. 1; Van Buren and Harper 2002, p. 1). Due in part to
the taxonomic revision, we also proposed reclassifying E. maguirei from
endangered to threatened because the population numbers and
distribution range of the newly described species, E. maguirei, were
larger than either of the two varieties. The taxonomic revision and
reclassification of E. maguirei was finalized on June 19, 1996 (61 FR
31054).
On May 16, 2008, we published a proposed rule to remove Erigeron
maguirei from the List of Endangered and Threatened Plants, provided
notice of the availability of a draft post-delisting monitoring plan,
and opened a 60-day public comment period (73 FR 28410). On May 19,
2008, we finalized a 5-year review, initiated on April 7, 2006 (71 FR
17900), which confirmed that the best scientific and commercial data
available indicated that this species has recovered and no longer meets
the definition of endangered or threatened under the ESA.
Species Information
A member of the sunflower family, Erigeron maguirei is a perennial
herb with a branched woody base. Its stems are decumbent (lying on the
ground with the tip ascending) to sprawling or erect. Its basal leaves
are spatulate-shaped to oblanceolate (the shape of the leaf is longer
than it is wide with the broadest portion of the leaf at the tip and
narrower at the base). Its leaves and stems are covered with abundant
stiff, coarse, white hairs. Bits of sand commonly cling to the hairs of
the leaves and stems. Its flowers are dime-sized with white or pinkish-
white petals. The species is further described in our June 19, 1996,
final rule reclassifying the species as threatened (61 FR 31054).
The range of the species is estimated at 390 square miles (1,010
square kilometers) and extends from the San Rafael Swell south through
the Waterpocket Fold of Capitol Reef National Park (see Figure 1) (Heil
1987, p. 5; 1989, p. 23; Kass 1990, p. 23; Harper and Van Buren 1998,
pp. 1-2; Clark 2001, p. 2; 2002, p. 12; Clark et al. 2005, pp. 7-8;
Clark et al. 2006, pp. 7-8).
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
[[Page 3031]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR19JA11.046
Erigeron maguirei occurs from 5,200 to 8,600 feet (1,585 to 2,621
meters) in elevation (Clark et al. 2006, pp. 9-11). The highest plant
densities occur on mesa tops between 6,000 and 7,000 feet (1,829 and
2,134 meters) in elevation
[[Page 3032]]
(Kass 1990, p. 23; USFWS 1995, p. 2; Clark 2001, p. 3; Clark et al.
2006, pp. 9-11).
The distribution of Erigeron maguirei includes 10 populations
(containing 128 sites) composing 5 meta-populations (Clark et al. 2006,
p. 8; Ivory 2009a, p. 1; 2009b, p. 1; Clark 2010a, p. 1; Truman 2010,
p. 1; Robinson 2010, entire), distributed across the species' range
(see Figure 1 above). Populations are defined as groups of occurrence
records (sites) located in the same geographic vicinity (Clark 2006b,
p. 5; Figure 1). Sites are defined as occurrence locations recorded by
one or more researchers over time within an individual population
(Clark 2006b, p. 5). Every site is documented by at least one of the
following: (1) A herbarium collection record; (2) field survey forms
completed by researchers; or (3) a record from the Utah Natural
Heritage Program. Meta-populations are comprised of a number of
individual populations less than 1.5 miles (2.4 kilometers) apart,
typically linked by continuous suitable habitat (Clark 2006b, p. 5;
Clark 2006c). Populations within a meta-population interact at some
level. For E. maguirei, the interaction may be from pollinators
traveling between the populations or by wind carrying seeds to other
populations. Table 1 provides population size estimates, number of
sites, and land ownership of each population.
Table 1--Erigeron maguirei population information
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimum population estimate (number of known sites) per land owner*
Meta-population Population -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BLM SITLA USFS NPS Total Percent
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Northern San Rafael Swell............... Calf Canyon**............. 500(10) 87(2) ........... .............. 587(12) 0.36
Cottonwood Draw......................... Sids Hole................. 60(1) ........... ........... .............. 60(1) 0.04
Central San Rafael Swell................ Coal Wash................. 100(6) ***unkown ........... .............. 100(6) 0.06
Secret Mesa............... 9,000(9) 1,000(2) ........... .............. 10,000(11) 6.14
Link Flats................ 200(4) 50(1) ........... .............. 250(5) 0.15
Southern San Rafael Swell............... John's Hole............... 300(3) ***unkown ........... .............. 300(3) 0.18
Segers Hole............... 100(2) ***unkown ........... .............. 100(2) 0.06
Capitol Reef............................ Deep Creek................ ........... ........... 1,500(2) 100,000(29) 101,500(31) 62.31
Capitol Reef.............. ........... ........... ........... 30,000(15) 30,000(15) 18.42
Waterpocket Fold.......... ........... ........... ........... 20,000(42) 20,000(42) 12.28
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals.................... 10,260(35) 1,137(5) 1,500(2) 150,000(86) 162,897(128) 100.00
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent................... 6.30 0.70 0.92 92.08 100.00
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* BLM = Bureau of Land Management; SITLA = State of Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration; USFS = U.S. Department of Agriculture
Forest Service; NPS = National Park Service.
** The Calf Canyon population is the type locality population.
*** Although suitable habitat exists, these SITLA lands have not been surveyed.
The three largest Erigeron maguirei populations (Deep Creek,
Capitol Reef, and Waterpocket Fold) comprise the Capitol Reef meta-
population. Collectively, these three populations contain 93 percent of
the known plants including ninety-two percent within Capitol Reef
National Park and 1 percent on U.S. Forest Service (USFS) lands
(Fishlake National Forest).
The other seven populations (Calf Canyon, Sids Hole, Coal Wash,
Secret Mesa, Link Flats, John's Hole, and Segers Hole) are managed
primarily by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Portions of three of
these seven populations (Calf Canyon, Secret Mesa, and Link Flats)
occur on State of Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands
Administration (SITLA) lands. The Calf Canyon population is the sole
population in the Northern San Rafael Swell meta-population; the Sids
Hole population is the sole population in the Cottonwood Draw meta-
population; Coal Wash, Secret Mesa, and Link Flats comprise the Central
San Rafael Swell meta-population; and John's Hole and Seger's Hole
populations comprise the Southern San Rafael Swell meta-population.
Erigeron maguirei occurs primarily on sandstone domes on mesa tops
and in cracks and crevices of domes and cliffs in the Navajo Sandstone
formation (Clark et al. 2006, p. 12). It also occurs within steep,
narrow, dry, rocky, and sandy canyon or wash bottoms (Cronquist 1947,
p. 165; Anderson 1982, pp. 1-2; Heil 1989, pp. 25-26; Kass 1990, p. 22;
Harper and Van Buren 1998, p. 1). Populations within canyon bottoms are
established from seeds dispersed by wind or overland flow from source
populations on the mesa tops (Heil 1989, p. 25; Kass 1990, p. 27; USFWS
1995, p. 2). These canyon populations are generally small compared with
those on the mesa tops (Heil 1989, p. 25; Kass 1990, p. 27; USFWS 1995,
p. 2).
Erigeron maguirei grows primarily in the Dwarf Mountain Mahogany
Slickrock plant community, a community endemic to the Colorado Plateau
Region (Heil 1989, p. 23; Clark 2001, pp. 15-16; Clark et al. 2006, p.
15). E. maguirei also is associated with pinyon juniper-tall shrub,
ponderosa pine-tall shrub slickrock pockets, mesic canyon bottoms,
mountain shrub, and intermittent riparian communities (Kass 1990, p.
22; Harper and Van Buren 1998, p. 1; Clark 2002, pp. 15-16; Clark et
al. 2005, p. 7; Clark et al. 2006, p. 15).
Flowering occurs from May to June and takes 4 to 6 weeks to go from
the small green ``button'' bud stage to completion of anthesis, when
the flower is no longer open and functional (Alston and Tepedino 2005,
p. 54; Clark et al. 2006, p. 17). It appears that Erigeron maguirei
lacks self-compatibility, and that pollinators are necessary for cross
pollination to occur (Alston and Tepedino 2005, p. 61). Because of the
open nature of the flower head, E. maguirei is visited by opportunistic
insects searching for nectar (Alston and Tepedino 2005, p. 60).
Pollinators include various flies, wasps, and bees (Alston and Tepedino
2005, p. 60).
The species is long-lived, has a low mortality rate, and has the
ability to replace individuals at a rate that compensates for mortality
(Van Buren and Harper 2002, pp. 2-5). Populations are stable (Van Buren
and Harper 2002, p. 2).
[[Page 3033]]
Recovery
Recovery plans are not regulatory documents and are instead
intended to provide guidance to the Service, States, and other partners
on methods to minimize threats to listed species, establish goals for
long-term conservation of listed species, and define criteria that may
be used to determine when recovery is achieved. There are many paths to
accomplishing recovery of a species, and recovery may be achieved
without all criteria being fully met. For example, one or more criteria
may be exceeded while other criteria may not yet be accomplished. In
that instance, we may determine that the threats are minimized
sufficiently and the species is robust enough to reclassify from
endangered to threatened or to delist. In other cases, recovery
opportunities may be discovered that were not known when the recovery
plan was finalized. These opportunities may be used instead of methods
identified in the recovery plan. Likewise, information on the species
may be learned that was not known at the time the recovery plan was
finalized. The new information may change the extent that criteria need
to be met for recognizing recovery of the species. Recovery of a
species is a dynamic process requiring adaptive management that may, or
may not, fully follow the guidance provided in a recovery plan.
We approved the Maguire Daisy (Erigeron maguirei) Recovery Plan
(hereafter referred to as the Recovery Plan) on August 15, 1995 (USFWS
1995, entire). The Recovery Plan outlined three delisting criteria.
These criteria, and the status of the species relative to these
criteria, are outlined below.
Delisting Criterion One: Locate or establish additional
populations. Maintain 20 populations that have been demonstrated to be
above minimum viable population levels. Until minimum viable population
levels are determined, it is assumed that the minimum viable population
level will be about 500 individuals (USFWS 1995, p. ii). At the time
the Recovery Plan was written, the species was known from 7 populations
(32 sites) with a total population of 5,000 individuals (USFWS 1995, p.
2). To achieve this criterion, the Recovery Plan recommended that land
managers inventory suitable habitat to determine with a reasonable
degree of accuracy the species' population and distribution (USFWS
1995, pp. ii, 6, 7, 12).
In 1999, the BLM, USFS, and the National Park Service (NPS) entered
into an interagency agreement to direct conservation measures for
listed and sensitive plant species endemic to central Utah, including
Erigeron maguirei (BLM et al. 1999, entire; Clark 2002, p. 3). The
agencies committed funding to survey and monitor E. maguirei throughout
its range (Clark 2002, p. 3). From 1999 to 2002, approximately 3,521
hectares (8,700 acres) were surveyed for E. maguirei on NPS, BLM, and
USFS lands (Clark and Clark 1999, p. 45; Clark 2002, p. 13).
The recovery criterion of maintaining 20 viable populations was
based on our earlier assumption that the species was distributed in a
scattered, disconnected pattern (Clark 2006c, entire). However, the
survey efforts identified broader plant distributions and larger
population sizes that are evenly distributed across the landscape
(Harper and Van Buren 1998, p. 2; Clark and Clark 1999, p. 47; Clark
2001, p. 3; 2002, pp. 13-14; Clark et al. 2005, p. 17; Clark et al.
2006, p. 17).
We currently know of 10 populations (128 sites) comprising 5 meta-
populations, with a total population of 162,897 Erigeron maguirei
individuals (see Figure 1 and Table 1 above) (Clark et al. 2006, p. 16;
Ivory 2009a, p. 1; 2009b, p. 1; Clark 2010a, p. 1; Robinson 2010,
entire). As previously described, the range of the species covers 390
square miles (1,010 square kilometers) and extends from the San Rafael
Swell south through the Waterpocket Fold of Capitol Reef (see Figure 1
above) (Clark et al. 2006, p. 17; Clark 2010a, p. 1; Truman 2010, p. 1;
Robinson 2010, entire). All three E. maguirei populations within the
Capitol Reef Meta-Population are linked by contiguous suitable habitat
(Clark et al. 2006, p. 24). A similar situation exists between
populations in each of the three meta-populations within the San Rafael
Swell area; suitable habitats are separated by short distances,
effectively linking populations (Clark et al. 2006, p. 24).
In 2010, the fifth meta-population (Cottonwood Draw) was discovered
east of the Central San Rafael Swell meta-population and south of the
Northern San Rafael Swell population (see Figure 1 above) (Clark 2010a,
p. 1; Truman 2010, p. 1). The Cottonwood Draw meta-population is
currently comprised of a single population (Sids Hole). This area was
discovered through recent implementation of the post-delisting
monitoring protocol. The area has not been fully surveyed or evaluated
and may include additional populations or sites, but is generally
viewed as less ideal for the species with patchy areas of suitable
habitat that currently appear isolated from other sites or populations.
While not adding much to the species' overall viability, recent
discoveries (since the 2008 proposed rule), such as this one, provide
added support for our conclusion regarding the species' overall status.
Overall, the available information demonstrates large, sufficiently
connected, and evenly distributed populations and suitable habitats
that provide and will continue to provide for the desired long-term
species' viability intended by the Recovery Plan. In fact, the 10
populations have more desirable biological attributes than the
originally suggested 20 populations in the Recovery Plan. For example,
the recovery goal of 20 populations was based on the assumption that
the populations were small and widely scattered. The 10 current
populations are well connected within 5 meta-populations, and these
meta-populations are distributed throughout the range of the species
(see Figure 1 and Table 1 above). The habitat is contiguous between
populations, thereby increasing the species' robustness. Furthermore,
the Recovery Plan called for 20 populations of 500 individuals. This
suggests recovery at about 10,000 plants. Today, we know of 162,897
Erigeron maguirei individuals, far surpassing the implied numeric
target in the Recovery Plan. In addition, the species' population is
stable (see Species Information). Therefore, the available data
demonstrate that the intent of this recovery criterion has been met or
exceeded.
Delisting Criteria Two and Three: Establish formal land management
designations for these populations that provide long-term, undisturbed
habitat for Maguire daisy (USFWS 1995, p. ii). Ensure that Maguire
daisy and its habitat are protected from loss of individuals and
environmental degradation (USFWS 1995, p. ii). To achieve these
criteria, the Recovery Plan recommended we work with our partners to
document the presence of, or establish formal land management
designations that provide for long-term protection for, Maguire daisy
and its habitat (USFWS 1995, pp. ii, 6, 9, 12).
Approximately 85 percent of the species' range occurs on Federal
lands with substantial protective measures in place (see Table 2 and
Factor D below). For example, the NPS General Management Plan
designated Primitive and Threshold Management Zones (Capitol Reef 1998,
pp. 27-31); these land designations afford protection to the three
largest Erigeron maguirei populations by limiting surface disturbance
and construction activities. The BLM designated Wilderness Study
[[Page 3034]]
Areas (WSAs), Instant Study Areas (ISA), and Areas of Critical
Environmental Concern (ACECs) in the approved 2008 Price Field Office
Resource Management Plan (RMP) (BLM 2008c, Maps R-5, R-28, and R-29).
These land designations afford protection to six E. maguirei
populations by minimizing habitat degradation and surface disturbances
from grazing, mining, mineral lease uses, and right-of-way grants (see
Factor D) (BLM 2008c, pp. 41, 129, 131, and 135-137; BLM 2009, entire;
Stephens 2009, p. 1). Similarly, off-highway vehicle (OHV) use also is
effectively managed to minimize disturbances to plants by eliminating
cross-country travel on USFS and BLM lands (USFS 2006b, pp. 123, 260-
263; 2008, Tile K11; 2009, Map). OHVs are not allowed in Capitol Reef
National Park, which represents the majority of the species' range (see
Factor D). More information regarding the protection of E. maguirei
through land management designations is contained in the Factor D
discussion of the Summary of Factors Affecting the Species.
Table 2--Percent of Each Erigeron Maguirei Population With Protective Land Management Designations Based on GIS
Analysis
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% of landowner
% of range per Land management range within
Population Land ownership landowner* designations protective
designations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Calf Canyon..................... BLM............. 70 San Rafael Canyon ACEC, 97
Mexican Mountain WSA,
Sids Mountain WSA.
SITLA........... 30 None.................... 0
Sids Hole....................... BLM............. ** None.................... 0
Coal Wash....................... BLM............. 95 I-70 Scenic ACEC, Sids 96
Mountain WSA.
SITLA........... 5 None.................... 0
Secret Mesa..................... BLM............. 95 I-70 Scenic ACEC, Devils 88
Canyon WSA, Sids
Mountain WSA.
SITLA........... 5 None.................... 0
Link Flats...................... BLM............. 80 Lucky Strike ACEC, 36
Devils Canyon WSA, Link
Flats ISA.
SITLA........... 20 None.................... 0
John's Hole..................... BLM............. 95 Muddy Creek ACEC, Muddy 100
Creek WSA.
SITLA........... 5 None.................... 0
Segers Hole..................... BLM............. 95 Segers Hole ACEC, Muddy 79
Creek WSA.
SITLA........... 5 None.................... 0
Deep Creek...................... NPS............. 95 Primitive & Threshold 100
Management Zone.
USFS............ 5 Proposed Botanical Area. 100
Capitol Reef.................... NPS............. 100 Primitive & Threshold 100
Management Zone.
Waterpocket Fold................ NPS............. 100 Primitive & Threshold 100
Management Zone.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Populations' ranges within BLM lands were provided by Ivory (2006 and 2007) with the exception of Calf Canyon
and Sids Hole; the remaining populations' ranges were estimated based on GIS analysis.
** Unknown.
Additionally, the Interagency Rare Plant Team developed the Central
Utah Navajo Sandstone Endemics Conservation Agreement and Strategy
(hereafter referred to as the Conservation Strategy) (USFS et al. 2006,
entire). Although we do not base our delisting decision on the
existence of the Conservation Strategy, we believe it will provide for
the continued conservation of the species. The Conservation Strategy,
signed by the USFS, BLM, NPS, and the Service in September 2006,
outlines the procedural provisions under which the Federal agencies
will manage Erigeron maguirei through 2016 (USFS et al. 2006, pp. 24-
25). In addition, the Conservation Strategy documents the conservation
actions needed to mitigate any potential factors impacting the species
and to promote the conservation and perpetuation of E. maguirei (USFS
et al. 2006, pp. 38-47). The Conservation Strategy can be viewed in its
entirety at: https://mountain-prairie.fws.gov/species/plants/maguiredaisy/. Copies also can be obtained from the Utah Field Office
(see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
In summary, Federal land management agencies have worked
collaboratively to provide for the long-term protection of Erigeron
maguirei and its habitat. Land management plans, policies, and
regulations are in place that provide protection to E. maguirei. Based
on the above, the intent of Criteria 2 and 3 have been met.
Based on the best available data, we have determined that the
intent of all three recovery criteria is met.
Summary of Comments and Recommendations
In our proposed rule (73 FR 28410, May 16, 2008), we requested that
all interested parties submit data, comments, new information, or
suggestions concerning: (1) Biological information concerning this
species; (2) Relevant data concerning any current or likely future
threats (or lack thereof) to this species, including the extent and
adequacy of Federal and State protection and management that would be
provided to the Erigeron maguirei as a delisted species; (3) Additional
information concerning the range, distribution, population size, and
population trends of this species, including the locations of any
additional populations of this species; (4) Current or planned
activities in the subject area and their possible impacts on this
species; and (5) Our draft post-delisting monitoring plan. We accepted
comments for 60 days, ending July 15, 2008 (73 FR 28410, May 16, 2008).
During the comment period, we received two comment letters representing
three organizations.
In accordance with our peer review policy published on July 1, 1994
(59 FR 34270) and the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) December
16, 2004, Final Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review, we
solicited independent opinions from 10 knowledgeable individuals who
have expertise with the species, who are within the geographic region
where the species occurs, or who are familiar with the principles of
conservation biology. We received
[[Page 3035]]
comments from four of the peer reviewers, all of whom are or were
employed by Federal agencies. Although we solicited non-Federal
academic peer reviewers, these parties did not respond. Peer reviewers
provided new information, management guidance recommendations,
editorial changes, and clarifications to the species' description.
We reviewed all comments received from the peer reviewers and the
public for substantive issues and new information regarding the
proposed delisting of Erigeron maguirei. Substantive comments received
during the comment period are addressed below and, where appropriate,
incorporated directly into this final rule and the post-delisting
monitoring plan.
Issue 1: One commenter expressed concern that SITLA lands are
managed for minerals, grazing and recreation, and not for conservation
of Erigeron maguirei. Isolated SITLA parcels are generally managed in
conjunction with the BLM lands for grazing. These SITLA lands also are
open for cross-country travel and do not fall into any designated route
plan.
Response: Less than 1 percent of the species' plants occur on lands
owned and managed by SITLA. Therefore, special management designations
on SITLA lands, such as travel route designations, are not essential
for the conservation of the species and are not necessary to support
the delisting of the species.
Issue 2: One commenter expressed concern with how the post-
delisting monitoring plan for the Maguire daisy characterized the
status of several of the remote populations. The commenter believed
that these small remote sites (less than or near 50 plants) would be
seriously impacted by delisting. The commenter also stated that the
Calf Canyon population of 50 plants was last visited in 1982, and it is
unknown if it still exists.
Response: The draft post-delisting monitoring plan contained
information regarding a number of monitoring sites within populations.
We believe that the draft post-delisting monitoring plan was confusing
with regard to the definitions and use of the terms ``population,''
``site,'' and ``element occurrence.'' We have now clarified our
terminology and have thoroughly reviewed the document to ensure we used
the terms properly and consistently throughout the final post-delisting
monitoring plan.
Even though some sites contain fewer than 50 individuals, we have
little reason to believe these sites are likely to be seriously
impacted by delisting. Most of these sites have persisted for long
periods of time without noteworthy negative changes in status. The
species is long-lived, has a low mortality rate, and has the ability to
replace individuals at a rate that compensates for mortality (Van Buren
and Harper 2002, pp. 2-5). Populations are stable (Van Buren and Harper
2002, p. 2). Additionally, the species' preferred habitat (cliffs, rock
crevices, and sandstone domes on mesa tops) is subject to few threats
(see Summary of Factors Affecting the Species below). Collectively this
suggests these sites are unlikely to be lost.
Even if some sites do suffer negative effects, many of these sites
are connected to neighboring sites as part of a larger population and
meta-population. For example, the Link Flats population is comprised of
a number of sites totaling approximately 250 individuals and is within
the San Rafael Swell area, where most suitable habitat occurrences are
separated by short distances (Clark et al. 2006, p. 24). Meta-
population dynamics indicate that although individual sites may be
lost, they can be recolonized by seed dispersed from other neighboring
sites.
As an added safeguard, land managers plan to carefully monitor one
site within each population including some small sites (Service 2010,
pp. 7-10). If impacts are observed, population trend monitoring will be
expanded to include human impact monitoring (Service 2010, pp. 14-15).
If a 40 percent or more decline is observed in a 2-year period at any
of the monitoring plots, cooperators will evaluate possible causes of
the apparent decline and determine the most appropriate response
(Service 2010, p. 16). We believe this is sufficient to ensure few, if
any, sites are at serious risk of extirpation.
Furthermore, even if we lost some or many of these small sites, we
do not believe the species would qualify as an endangered species (in
danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its
range) or a threatened species (likely to become endangered within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its
range). Erigeron maguirei is estimated at 162,897 individuals over a
range of about 390 square miles (1,010 square kilometers) with 10
populations (containing 128 sites) composing 5 meta-populations (see
Figure 1 and Table 1 above) (Clark et al. 2006, p. 16; Ivory 2009a, p.
1; 2009b, p. 1). In our view, these large, connected, and evenly
distributed populations and suitable habitats provide for the species'
long-term viability. Thus, even in the unlikely event that some or many
of these small sites were lost, it would not change our determination.
Regarding the Calf Canyon population, the area was resurveyed in
2009 and again in 2010. These surveys identified 10 sites with at least
500 plants total (Ivory 2009a, p. 1; Ivory 2009b, p. 1; Robinson 2010,
entire). The majority of the plants were located on a mesa top in the
vicinity of the canyon bottom populations where the species was first
described. As the final post-delisting monitoring plan was signed prior
to the majority of these sites being known, we are making a minor
amendment to the plan to reflect the latest information.
Issue 3: One commenter recommended including a specific due date
for the annual post-delisting monitoring report, such as December 1 of
each year. The commenter further recommended that we provide a brief
and concise summary to the agencies (NPS, BLM, and the USFS) regarding
the status and adequacy of the monitoring efforts each year.
Response: We have incorporated these recommendations into the final
post-delisting monitoring plan.
Issue 4: One commenter noted that many of the protections provided
by ACECs and WSA designations on BLM lands are for the protection and
management of lands in general and not specifically for Erigeron
maguirei populations and habitat. These management restrictions would
be in place whether E. maguirei is listed or not.
Response: We acknowledge that many land management designations are
in place for other resources; however, Erigeron maguirei will benefit
from habitat being protected in these areas. We have incorporated
language into this final rule to address this comment (see Factor D).
Issue 5: One commenter believed that the proposed rule did not
fully recognize tar sands development as a threat to this species and
does not disclose the number of plants in the Calf Canyon, Secret Mesa,
and Link Flats areas within designated tar sands areas. The commenter
expressed concern that delisting the species would open up the area for
development, and that it appears that we were writing off the
populations in this area.
Response: Since the proposed rule was published, the BLM has
finalized the Record of Decision and Approved RMP, and the Record of
Decision for Oil Shale and Tar Sands Resources to Address Land Use
Allocations in Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming and Final Programmatic
Environmental Impact Statement (BLM 2008a, entire; 2008c,
[[Page 3036]]
entire). The final rule fully discloses the percentages of each
population that are susceptible to tar sands development (Calf Canyon
(0 percent); Secret Mesa (about 1 percent of the population); and Link
Flats (almost 37 percent of the population)). The Link Flats population
contains less than 1 percent of all known individuals of the entire E.
maguirei population. Although tar sands development will affect
individuals, the effects are expected to be localized and not reach the
level that would compromise the species' viability. Tar sands
development is further addressed under Factor A below.
Issue 6: One commenter expressed concern with potential loss of
genetic variation through potential impacts from tar sands development
in the eastern and northernmost portions of the range.
Response: The potential for genetic isolation is analyzed in this
final rule. Based on the close proximity of known populations,
connecting habitat between most populations, and available genetic
research, the species is not considered threatened by reduced genetic
viability. Given the locations of potential development relative to the
known distribution of Erigeron maguirei populations, we expect impacts
to the species to be localized and minor (see Factor A discussion
below).
Issue 7: One commenter was concerned that the Conservation Strategy
was relied upon as justification for delisting. The commenter opined
that the Conservation Strategy is not legally binding and was prepared
behind closed doors with no public input whatsoever.
Response: The commenter is correct that the Conservation Strategy
is not legally binding. Future implementation of conservation actions
is contingent upon funding availability of each Federal entity.
However, our decision to remove Erigeron maguirei from the List of
Endangered and Threatened Plants is not dependent on future actions
associated with the Conservation Strategy. Our decision to remove E.
maguirei from the List of Endangered and Threatened Plants is based on
conservation actions already completed, current population levels and
their management, and our analysis of threats to the species. The
commenter is correct that public input was not sought in the
development of the Conservation Strategy; however, public input was not
required. The Conservation Strategy is a management guidance document
that was prepared and will be implemented by the involved land
management agencies. Although public input was not required during
developing the Conservation Strategy, implementing specific on-the-
ground actions must comply with National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) regulations, which include public
comment and public disclosure.
Issue 8: One commenter stated that seven of the nine populations of
Erigeron maguirei are open to oil and gas development.
Response: Seven of the 10 populations are open to oil and gas
leasing (USFS et al. 2006, p. 56). The three largest populations (Deep
Creek, Capitol Reef, and Waterpocket Fold) on Capitol Reef National
Park contain 92 percent of the individuals and occur on lands withdrawn
from all mineral exploration and development activities (see Table 1
above and Factor D below; USFS et al. 2006, p. 56). Six of the
remaining seven populations occur predominantly within the Navajo
Sandstone formation, which has low potential for oil and gas
development (USFS et al. 2006, pp. 37 and 56); the newest population
occurs in an area that is atypical, where habitat is disjunct (Clark
2010a, p. 1). We have concluded that oil and gas development within
Erigeron maguirei habitat is unlikely due to the low potential
throughout the majority of the occupied habitats. Factor A presents
additional analysis of the potential for energy development to affect
the species.
Issue 9: One commenter stated that populations within Capitol Reef
National Park are not necessarily protected because National Parks are
not wildlife or plant sanctuaries, nor are they managed with objectives
that are consistent with the protection of rare elements.
Response: More than 92 percent of the individual plants occur
within Capitol Reef National Park (see Table 1 above). All Erigeron
maguirei plants within Capitol Reef National Park are within Capitol
Reef Primitive and Threshold Management Zones. These land management
designations will provide protection to the species for the foreseeable
future. Factor D presents our analysis of how these land management
designations will specifically afford protection to the species.
Issue 10: One commenter was concerned that the delisting proposal
downplays the significance of the effects of human and livestock
trampling. The commenter believes that Erigeron maguirei should not be
delisted unless cattle grazing is prohibited in the species' habitat.
Response: Eight of the 10 Erigeron maguirei populations occur
within cattle allotments. However, the plants inhabit areas that are
inaccessible to cattle due to steep terrain. Cattle have trailed
through one population approximately once every 5 years for the past
100 years. Although cattle trailing can impact individual plants, the
population where this activity occurs is stable (Clark et al. 2006, pp.
21, 25), and its viability is not affected by this level of impact. The
newest population is near a reservoir used by cattle as a watering
hole. Although the area experiences impacts from cattle grazing, this
population is persisting without special management considerations
affording it protection from grazing activities.
At the time of downlisting, we stated that livestock trampling was
known to adversely impact individual plants (61 FR 31054; June 19,
1996). Livestock trampling negatively impacts individuals of Erigeron
maguirei growing in accessible wash bottoms. However, the threat to the
species is low because E. maguirei prefers cliffs and rock crevices
that are inaccessible to livestock (Clark et al. 2006, p. 21). Due to
habitat preferences of the species, livestock use is no longer a threat
(Clark et al. 2006, p. 21).
The impact of grazing is analyzed in this final rule. The best
available scientific data indicate that grazing does not pose a threat
to the species and is unlikely to become a threat in the foreseeable
future (Clark et al. 2006, p. 21).
Issue 11: One commenter claimed it is disingenuous to conclude that
the species is recovered. If the species were to be delisted, it would
be because of additional information and investigation, not because it
was recovered.
Response: We recognize that this delisting is supported by new
information. However, none of this information would be available had
it not been due to the recovery efforts of the Interagency Rare Plant
Team. The Federal partners that make up the Interagency Rare Plant Team
deserve credit for implementing extensive recovery actions that allow
us to remove the species from the List of Endangered and Threatened
Plants. Without these actions, this species would still be listed.
Also of note, but not critical to our ``delisting due to recovery''
determination, only species delisted due to recovery are subject to the
post-delisting monitoring requirement. We believe such a monitoring
period is desirable in that it allows us to track any changes in status
post-delisting and respond accordingly.
[[Page 3037]]
Summary of Factors Affecting the Species
In making this final determination, we have considered all
scientific and commercial information available, which includes
information received during our 5-year review (71 FR 17900, April 7,
2006) and the public comment period on our proposed delisting rule (73
FR 28410, May 16, 2008); additional survey data collected in 2008,
2009, and 2010 (Ivory 2008, pp. 1-2; Ivory 2009a, entire; Ivory 2009b,
entire; Clark 2010a, p. 1; Truman 2010, p. 1; Robinson 2010, entire);
the final BLM RMP; the Final Oil Shale and Tar Sands RMP Amendments to
Address Land Use Allocations in Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming and
Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement; and additional scientific
information from ongoing species' surveys and studies.
Section 4 of the ESA and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 424)
set forth the procedures for listing species, reclassifying species, or
removing species from listed status. ``Species'' is defined by the ESA
as including any species or subspecies of fish or wildlife or plants,
and any distinct vertebrate population segment of fish or wildlife that
interbreeds when mature (16 U.S.C. 1532(16)). We may delist a species
according to 50 CFR 424.11(d) if the best available scientific and
commercial data indicate that the species is neither endangered nor
threatened for the following reasons: (1) The species is extinct; (2)
the species has recovered and is no longer endangered or threatened (as
is the case with Erigeron maguirei); or (3) the original scientific
data used at the time the species was classified were in error.
A recovered species is one that no longer meets the ESA's
definition of endangered or threatened. Determining whether a species
is recovered requires consideration of the same five categories of
threats specified in section 4(a)(1) of the ESA. For species that are
already listed as endangered or threatened, this analysis of threats is
an evaluation of both the threats currently facing the species and the
threats that are reasonably likely to affect the species in the
foreseeable future following the delisting or downlisting and the
removal or reduction of the ESA's protections.
A species is ``endangered'' for purposes of the ESA if it is in
danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its
range and is ``threatened'' if it is likely to become endangered within
the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its
range. The ``foreseeable future'' is the period of time over which
events or effects reasonably can or should be anticipated, or trends
reasonably extrapolated.
The following analysis examines the five factors affecting, or
likely to affect, Erigeron maguirei within the foreseeable future.
A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment
of Its Habitat or Range
When the species was originally listed, the main threat was loss of
habitat due to mining claims for uranium, energy exploration, and off-
road vehicle (ORV) recreation (50 FR 36089, September 5, 1985). We
address these threats to Erigeron maguirei below.
Mineral Exploration and Development Overview
Mineral exploration and development were listed as threats in the
Erigeron maguirei listing rule, the Recovery Plan, and the downlisting
rule (50 FR 36089, September 5, 1985; USFWS 1995, p. 5; 61 FR 31054,
June 19, 1996). The original listing (when the population was estimated
at 7 individuals) and subsequent downlisting (when the population was
estimated at 3,000 individuals) noted as threats existing uranium
mining claims, the potential for extraction to begin when market forces
change, and mining activities and associated surface disturbances that
could directly or indirectly destroy plants or render the habitat
unsuitable for the species (50 FR 36089, September 5, 1985; 61 FR
31054, June 19, 1996).
Uranium
Uranium mining began in the western United States in 1871 (Ringholz
1994, p. 2). In 1952, the first noteworthy deposits of uranium ore in
Utah were located (Ringholz 1994, p. 2). By the end of 1962, Utah had
produced approximately nine million tons of ore (Ringholz 1994, p. 2).
The Atomic Energy Commission held ample uranium ore reserves by 1970
and stopped buying uranium (Ringholz 1994, p. 3). When nuclear power
plants came on-line in the mid-1970s, a brief second uranium boom was
experienced (Ringholz 1994, p. 3). However, foreign competition,
Federal regulations, and nuclear fears virtually put an end to domestic
uranium mining (Ringholz 1994, p. 3). Substantial ore remains deep
underground in Utah, and should prices rise, mining could be
resurrected (Ringholz 1994, p. 3). In 2007, uranium prices increased as
did mining activity (Hargreaves 2007, pp. 1-2).
Five uranium districts, areas depicting uranium resource
development potential, overlap Erigeron maguirei populations; three of
these districts have low potential, and two have moderate potential
(Gloyn et al. 2005, Map 216; Clark et al. 2006, p. 9). We assume the
highest potential districts will be developed first, allowing us to
work proactively with other Federal agencies to minimize threats to the
species and prevent relisting. A small portion of the Link Flats
population (9 percent), a small portion of the Coal Wash population (16
percent), and a large portion (85 percent) of the Segers Hole
population overlap uranium districts with moderate potential (Gloyn et
al. 2005, Map 216; Clark et al. 2006, p. 9). Thirteen known uranium
mineral locations, specific locations where mining claims exist,
overlap the mapped E. maguirei populations (Clark et al. 2006, p. 16;
Utah Geological Survey 2007, Map). Only the Lucky Strike Mine is active
(Utah Geological Survey 2007, Map). This mine occurs along the southern
edge of the mapped Link Flats population (Central San Rafael Swell
Meta-Population) (Clark et al. 2006, p. 9; Utah Geological Survey 2007,
Map). Operation of the mine will not adversely impact this population
because it is located on the periphery of the population and is
accessed via an existing road. Of the remaining 12 locations, 7
locations never produced uranium, and 5 locations only reached small
production levels (Utah Geological Survey 2007, Map). Eleven of these
locations occur on the periphery of the mapped E. maguirei populations
(Clark et al. 2006, p. 16; Utah Geological Survey 2007, Map). The only
location that occurs within a mapped population is within the Calf
Canyon population (Clark et al. 2006, p. 16; Utah Geological Survey
2007, Map). Recent surveys extended the population to encapsulate the
area around the mining location (Robinson 2010, p. 7); we were
previously unaware of plants occurring in this area.
Uranium is restricted to geologic formations such as the Moss Back
Member, Monitor Butte Member, and the Mottled Siltstone Unit of the
Chinle Formation. Erigeron maguirei does not occur in these formations
(Clark et al. 2006, p. 20). In addition, most of the E. maguirei
individuals occur on lands managed by Capitol Reef National Park (92
percent) which are withdrawn from mining exploration and development
activities (see Factor D) (Clark et al. 2006, p. 21; USFS et al. 2006,
p. 56). In addition, historic mining activities proved there was not
enough ore within Capitol Reef National Park to be worth
[[Page 3038]]
mining (NPS 2009, p. 2). If uranium mining were to have any impact on
E. maguirei, impacts would likely be limited to those associated with
the access routes to the desired geologic formation (Clark et al. 2006,
p. 20; Utah Geological Survey 2007, Map). Existing roads would likely
be utilized. The most substantial affects of such use would be impacts
to pollinators and impacts from road dust. We believe such impacts, if
they occurred at all, would likely occur along the periphery of
existing populations, would impact only small portions of known
populations and, overall, would not likely impacts on the viability of
individual populations or the species. Based on the locations of past
exploration, the geologic distribution of uranium, and the limited
overlap with the habitat requirements of E. maguirei, we do not foresee
substantial future impacts from uranium mining to E. maguirei.
Gypsum
We did not previously identify gypsum mining as a threat to the
species. Only the Deep Creek population in Capitol Reef National Park
has a known gypsum occurrence (Utah Geological Survey 2007, Map).
However, lands within Capitol Reef National Park are permanently
withdrawn from mining exploration and development activities (see
Factor D) (Clark et al. 2006, p. 21; USFS et al. 2006, p. 56). In
addition, this gypsum occurrence is located on the periphery of the
mapped Erigeron maguirei population and within the Primitive Management
Zone (Capitol Reef 1998, p. 27; Utah Geological Survey 2007, Map).
Travel through this Management Zone is limited to cross-country hiking
or horseback riding on unimproved trails and routes (Capitol Reef 1998,
pp. 27-29). Based on the lack of gypsum mining occurring in the range
of the species, coupled with the land management designations in place
affording protection to the species, we do not foresee gypsum mining
adversely affecting the species in the foreseeable future.
Oil Shale and Tar Sands Development
Oil shale and tar sands development is not a threat to the species
(USFS et al. 2006, p. 37). The most geologically prospective oil shale
resources do not occur within the range of Erigeron maguirei (Clark et
al. 2006, p. 9; BLM 2008a, p. 11). The most geologically prospective
oil shale resources occur in the Uinta Basin of Utah, a distance of
approximately 60 air miles (97 kilometers) from the closest population,
Calf Canyon (Clark et al. 2006, p. 9; BLM 2008a, p. 11). Thus, we do
not consider oil shale development a threat to the species. The rest of
this section will focus on tar sands resources within the range of the
species.
There are 11 Special Tar Sand Areas in Utah (45 FR 76800, November
20, 1980; 46 FR 6077, January 21, 1981; BLM 2008a, p. 23). Of these,
only the San Rafael Swell Special Tar Sands Area occurs within the
range of Erigeron maguirei (Clark et al. 2006, p. 9; BLM 2008b, p. 2-
49).
Typically, strip mining is the most efficient method of tar sands
extraction, but other approaches include the injection of steam or
solvents to reduce the oil's viscosity and allow the oil to be pumped
out of the well. Erigeron maguirei could be impacted as a result of
vegetation clearing, habitat fragmentation, alteration of topography,
changes in drainage patterns, erosion, sedimentation from runoff, oil
and contaminant spills, fugitive dust, injury or mortality of
individual plants, human collection, increased human access, spread of
invasive plant species, and air pollution (BLM 2008b, pp. 5-62, 5-84,
5-85, 5-98). In addition, we believe the loss and fragmentation of
habitat due to the development of tar sands may negatively impact
pollinator species.
Portions of the Erigeron maguirei mapped populations of Calf
Canyon, Sids Hole, Secret Mesa, and Link Flats occur within the San
Rafael Swell Special Tar Sand Area (Clark et al. 2006, p. 9; BLM 2008b,
p. 2-49; BLM 2008d, Map R-23). However, less than 2 percent of the
entire species' mapped population areas overlaps lands available for
leasing for commercial tar sands development (Clark et al. 2006, p. 9;
BLM 2008a, entire; 2008b, p. 2-49). In addition, a substantial amount
of suitable habitat for the species occurs throughout the three San
Rafael Swell meta-populations that has not been surveyed and may be
occupied by E. maguirei, or may provide additional linkage habitats
within these meta-populations (Clark et al. 2006, p. 24). Overall, we
do not believe that the possible loss or degradation of the small
amount of occupied (less than 2 percent) or other suitable habitat
would negatively impact the viability of the species.
In summary, we do not anticipate tar sands development to be a
threat to Erigeron maguirei in the foreseeable future. There is little
overlap between leasable lands and the species' distribution. Based on
the small amount of area within the species' range (less than 2
percent) that are available for leasing for commercial tar sands
development, we do not anticipate that tar sands development will
impact the species as a whole in the foreseeable future.
Oil and Gas Exploration and Development
Oil and gas exploration and development were identified as threats
in the Erigeron maguirei listing rule, the Recovery Plan, and the
downlisting rule (50 FR 36089, September 5, 1985; USFWS 1995, p. 5; 61
FR 31054, June 19, 1996). Oil and gas development includes exploration,
drilling, production, and reclamation phases (Tribal Energy and
Environmental Information Clearinghouse 2010, entire). Surface
disturbance may occur throughout all phases of oil and gas development
(Tribal Energy and Environmental Information Clearinghouse 2010,
entire). Impacts to plant species from surface disturbance may include
the direct effects of crushing and reduction in seed bank. Indirect
effects to plant species include increased dust and airborne
particulates (well pad and road construction), increased habitat
fragmentation, changes in pollinator-plant interactions, and increased
invasive species composition within and adjacent to suitable habitats.
Lands within Capitol Reef National Park are withdrawn from oil and
gas exploration and development (see Factor D) (USFS et al. 2006, p.
56). The surrounding BLM and USFS lands are open to oil and gas
leasing, but the potential for oil and gas is low in the Navajo
Sandstone formation where Erigeron maguirei occurs (USFS et al. 2006,
p. 34).
Oil and gas leases that were issued prior to the 2008 BLM Price
Field Office RMP are managed under stipulations that were in effect
when the leases were issued (BLM 2008c, pp. 24, 170). Leases issued
after the RMP was signed will have the appropriate oil and gas lease
stipulations and best management practices applied to prevent,
minimize, or mitigate resource impacts (BLM 2008c, pp. 31, 40-42, 128,
Appendix R-3, Appendix R-14, Map R-8).
On BLM-administered lands, portions of Erigeron maguirei
populations occur within the San Rafael Canyon, Interstate 70, Muddy
Creek, and Segers Hole ACECs (see Table 2 above) (Clark et al. 2006,
pp. 9-11; BLM 2008d, Map R-29). All of these ACECs are open to leasing
subject to ``no surface occupancy'' constraints (BLM 2008c, pp. 135-
137). Leasing with ``no surface occupancy'' means that there will be no
development or disturbance whatsoever of the land surface, including
establishment of wells or well pads, and
[[Page 3039]]
construction of roads, pipelines, or powerlines. There are no
exceptions to the ``no surface occupancy'' stipulation within these
ACECs (BLM 2008c, Appendix R-3, pp. 1-4). The WSAs with E. maguirei
populations, including the Sids Mountain, Devils Canyon, and Muddy
Creek WSAs, are unavailable to leasing with the exception of mineral
lease uses that existed before or on October 21, 1976; however, there
are no active leases within these populations in these WSAs (BLM 2008c,
pp. 41, 129, and 131; 2009, entire; Stephens 2009, entire).
While limited exploration has occurred, no known oil or gas fields
exist within the known Erigeron maguirei populations, and the potential
for development is low (Automated Geographic Reference Center 2001,
database; Clark et al. 2006, p. 21; Utah Division of Oil, Gas, and
Mining 2006b, Map; USFS et al. 2006, p. 34). The only gas field in the
vicinity of E. maguirei is the Last Chance Gas Field located
approximately 7 miles (11 kilometers) west of the Segers Hole
population and 6 miles (10 kilometers) north of the Deep Creek
population (Automated Geographic Reference Center 2001, database;
Chidsey et al. 2005, Map 203DM; Clark et al. 2006, p. 16; Utah Division
of Oil, Gas, and Mining 2006b, Map). Seven exploratory wells were sited
within the mapped E. maguirei Secret Mesa and Coal Wash populations,
but all of the wells have been plugged and abandoned (Clark et al.
2006, p. 9; Utah Division of Oil, Gas, and Mining 2006a, database).
Based on the lack of supporting evidence of viable oil and gas
fields within the vicinity of Erigeron maguirei and the land management
designations that afford protections to the species, oil and gas
exploration and development is no longer a threat within the
foreseeable future.
Recreational Use
Recreational use, including ORVs and human foot traffic, was
previously identified as a threat to the species (50 FR 36089,
September 5, 1985; USFWS 1995, p. 5; 61 FR 31054, June 19, 1996). At
the time of listing, the species was thought to occur primarily in
canyon bottoms and was estimated to have a population of seven
individuals (50 FR 36089, September 5, 1985). At the time of
downlisting, recreation was still a concern due to overall limited
abundance (an estimated 3,000 individual plants) (61 FR 31054, June 19,
1996).
Potential impacts from recreational use include trampling and
crushing of plants, soil compaction, introduction of exotic species,
increased erosion, and increased dust deposition on plants. However,
Erigeron maguirei is not prone to human recreational disturbance
because it grows primarily in cliff crevices and on the sandstone domes
on mesa tops (Clark 2002, p. 16). Of 60 E. maguirei sites in Capitol
Reef evaluated for signs of human impacts (Clark 2002, pp. 12-16), only
2 showed signs of human impacts (in both cases foot traffic was
observed at the site) (Clark 2002, pp. 12-16).
More than 92 percent of known Erigeron maguirei individuals occur
in