Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for Ipomopsis polyantha (Pagosa skyrocket), Penstemon debilis (Parachute beardtongue), and Phacelia submutica (DeBeque phacelia), 45078-45128 [2011-18428]
Download as PDF
45078
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R6–ES–2011–0040; MO
92210–0–0009]
RIN 1018–AX75
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Designation of Critical
Habitat for Ipomopsis polyantha
(Pagosa skyrocket), Penstemon debilis
(Parachute beardtongue), and Phacelia
submutica (DeBeque phacelia)
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), propose to
designate critical habitat for Ipomopsis
polyantha (Pagosa skyrocket),
Penstemon debilis (Parachute
beardtongue), and Phacelia submutica
(DeBeque phacelia) under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act). Approximately 9,894
acres (4,004 hectares) are being
proposed for designation as critical
habitat for I. polyantha. Approximately
19,155 acres (7,752 hectares) are being
proposed for designation as critical
habitat for P. debilis. Approximately
24,987 acres (10,112 hectares) are being
proposed for designation as critical
habitat for P. submutica. In total,
approximately 54,036 acres (21,868
hectares) are being proposed for
designation as critical habitat for the
three species. The proposed critical
habitat is located in Archuleta, Garfield,
and Mesa Counties, Colorado.
DATES: We will accept comments
received or postmarked on or before
September 26, 2011. We must receive
requests for public hearings, in writing,
at the address shown in the ADDRESSES
section by September 12, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by one of the following methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. In the Enter
Keyword or ID box, enter Docket No.
FWS–R6–ES–2011–0040, which is the
docket number for this rulemaking.
Then, in the Search panel at the top of
the screen, under the Document Type
heading, check the box next to Proposed
Rules to locate this document. You may
submit a comment by clicking on
‘‘Submit a Comment.’’
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail
or hand-delivery to: Public Comments
Processing, Attn: FWS–R6–ES–2011–
0040; Division of Policy and Directives
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS
2042–PDM; Arlington, VA 22203.
We will not accept e-mail or faxed
comments. We will post all comments
on https://www.regulations.gov. This
generally means that we will post any
personal information you provide us
(see the Public Comments section below
for more information).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Allan Pfister, Western Colorado
Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Western Colorado Ecological
Services Office, 764 Horizon Drive,
Suite B, Grand Junction, CO 81506–
3946; telephone 970–243–2778;
facsimile 970–245–6933. If you use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD), call the Federal Information
Relay Service (FIRS) at 800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Comments
We intend that any final action
resulting from this proposed rule will be
based on the best scientific and
commercial data available and be as
accurate and as effective as possible.
Therefore, we request comments or
information from other concerned
government agencies, the scientific
community, industry, or any other
interested party concerning this
proposed rule. We particularly seek
comments concerning:
(1) The reasons why we should or
should not designate habitat as ‘‘critical
habitat’’ under section 4 of the Act (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) including whether
there are threats to the species from
human activity, the degree of which can
be expected to increase due to the
designation, and whether that increase
in threat outweighs the benefit of
designation such that the designations
of critical habitat may not be prudent;
(2) Specific information on:
(a) The amount and distribution of
Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon
debilis, and Phacelia submutica habitat;
(b) What areas, that are occupied and
that contain features essential to the
conservation of these species, should be
included in the designation and why;
(c) Special management
considerations or protection that may be
needed in critical habitat areas we are
proposing, including managing for the
potential effects of climate change;
(d) What areas not occupied at the
time of listing are essential for the
conservation of the species and why;
and
(e) Means to quantify the amount of
natural and human-caused disturbance
these species prefer or can tolerate.
(3) Land use designations and current
or planned activities in the subject areas
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
and their possible impacts on proposed
critical habitat.
(4) Information on the projected and
reasonably likely impacts of climate
change on Ipomopsis polyantha,
Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia
submutica and proposed critical habitat.
(5) Any probable economic, national
security, or other relevant impacts of
designating any area that may be
included in the final designation; in
particular, any impacts on small entities
or families, and the benefits of including
or excluding areas that exhibit these
impacts.
(6) Whether any specific areas we are
proposing for critical habitat
designation should be considered for
exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the
Act, especially the Mount Callahan and
Mount Callahan Saddle Natural Areas
for Penstemon debilis, and whether the
benefits of potentially excluding any
specific area outweigh the benefits of
including that area under section 4(b)(2)
of the Act.
(7) Whether we could improve or
modify our approach to designating
critical habitat in any way to provide for
greater public participation and
understanding, or to better
accommodate public concerns and
comments.
You may submit your comments and
materials concerning this proposed rule
by one of the methods listed in the
ADDRESSES section. We will not accept
comments sent by e-mail or fax or to an
address not listed in the ADDRESSES
section. We will post your entire
comment—including your personal
identifying information—on https://
www.regulations.gov. You may request
at the top of your document that we
withhold personal information such as
your street address, phone number, or email address from public review;
however, we cannot guarantee that we
will be able to do so.
Comments and materials we receive,
as well as supporting documentation we
used in preparing this proposed rule,
will be available for public inspection
on https://www.regulations.gov, or by
appointment, during normal business
hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Western Colorado Ecological
Services Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
Background
It is our intent to discuss only those
topics directly relevant to the
designation of critical habitat in this
proposed rule. For more information on
Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon
debilis, and Phacelia submutica, refer to
the proposed rule published in the
Federal Register on June 23, 2010 (75
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
FR 35721) or the final listing rule that
is published in the Rules and
Regulations section of today’s Federal
Register. See also the discussion of
habitat in the ‘‘Physical and Biological
Features’’ section below. Please note
that we have used scientific names for
rare species, because oftentimes these
names are better known than the
common names; and, we have used
common names for species that are
better known and where the common
name may be easier for the reader to
understand. In this rule we used
scientific names for rare species,
because where a common name is less
standardized, the scientific name avoids
confusion.
Ipomopsis polyantha is a biennial
(living only 2 years) or short-lived
perennial (living for more than 2 years)
herb in the Polemoniaceae (phlox)
family that has white flowers flecked
with purple dots; it flowers only once
before dying. Penstemon debilis is a
long-lived perennial herb in the
Plantaginaceae (plantain) family that
grows along the ground and has purple
flowers. Phacelia submutica is a very
small annual (living only one season)
herb in the Hydrophyllaceae (waterleaf)
family with small white flowers that are
hidden within the leaves of the plant.
Geographic Range, Habitat, and Threats
Ipomopsis polyantha is known from
only two populations in Archuleta
County, Colorado. A minimum convex
polygon (enclosing all the points to
create a convex polygon with no
concave areas) around both populations
encloses an area of 13,825 acres (ac)
(5,595 hectares (ha)) and measures 13
miles (mi) (21 kilometers km)) in length
and 3 mi (5 km) in width. The total
footprint of area actually occupied by
plants is 388.4 ac (157.1 ha), of which
86.4 percent is on private lands, 9.1
percent is on highway right-of-ways
(ROWs), 1.9 percent is on lands
managed by the Town of Pagosa
Springs, and 2.5 percent is on lands
managed by the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) (Service 2011a, p.
2). Between the actual occupied areas
there are interspaces of unoccupied
habitat, so the acreage occupied by the
species including these interspaces is
larger than the acres listed above. We
roughly estimate there are roughly
340,000 I. polyantha individuals
(Service 2011b, p. 1). The plant is
specific to Mancos shale soils at
elevations of 6,725 to 7,776 feet (ft)
(2,050 to 2,370 meters (m)) () (Service
2011c, p. 1). Plants are found in sparsely
vegetated areas along the margins of
Pinus ponderosa (Ponderosa pine)
forests and extending into the adjacent
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
grassland or shrublands. The species’
highly restricted soil requirements and
geographic range make it particularly
susceptible to extinction at any time due
to commercial, municipal, and
residential development; associated
road and utility improvements and
maintenance; heavy livestock use;
inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms; fragmented habitat; and
prolonged drought. Eighty-six percent of
the species’ occupied habitat is on
private land with no limits on
development.
Penstemon debilis is known from only
six populations on the Roan Plateau
escarpment in Garfield County,
Colorado. A minimum convex polygon
around all six populations encloses an
area of 7,161 ac (2,898 ha) and measures
18 mi (29 km) in length and 1 mi (2 km)
in width. The total footprint of area
actually occupied by the plants is 91.8
ac (37.2 ha), of which 66.6 percent is on
private lands, and 33.3 percent is on
lands managed by the BLM (Service
2011a, p. 3). Between the actual
occupied areas there are interspaces of
unoccupied habitat, so the acreage
occupied by the species including these
interspaces is quite a bit larger than the
acres listed above. We roughly estimate
there are 4,100 P. debilis individuals
(Service 2011b, p. 2). The plant is
specific to oil shale cliffs of the
Parachute Creek Member and the Lower
Part of the Green River Formation at
elevations of 5,600 to 9,229 ft (1,707 to
2,813 m) (Service 2011c, p. 2; Tweto
1979). Plants are found on unstable
shale soils with little other vegetation.
The other vegetation comprises
primarily other plant species endemic
(known only) to the oil shale. Extremely
low numbers and a highly restricted
geographic range make the species
particularly susceptible to becoming
endangered in the forseeable future.
Threats to the species and its habitat
include energy development, road
maintenance, inadequacy of existing
regulatory mechanisms, and stochastic
events.
Phacelia submutica is known from 9
populations (and 22 occurrences)
centered on the town of DeBeque in
Mesa and Garfield Counties, Colorado.
A minimum convex polygon around all
nine populations encloses an area of
82,231 ac (34,896 ha) and measures 19
mi (30 km) in length and 11 mi (17 km)
in width. The total footprint of area
actually occupied by the plants is 625.9
ac (253.3 ha), of which 80.9 percent is
on lands managed by the BLM, 11.9
percent is on private lands, 6.4 percent
is on lands managed by the U.S. Forest
Service (USFS), and 0.7 percent is on
lands managed by the Colorado Division
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
45079
of Wildlife (CDOW) (Service 2011a, pp.
6–7). Between the actual occupied areas
there are interspaces of unoccupied
habitat, so the acreage occupied by the
species including these interspaces is
quite a bit larger than the acres listed
above. We estimate there may be as
many as 68,000 P. submutica
individuals in years when climatic
conditions are favorable (Service 2011b,
p. 4). The plant is known only from clay
soils on the Atwell and Shire members
of the Wasatch Formation at elevations
of 5,080 to 7,100 ft (1,548 to 2,157 m)
(Service 2011c, p. 3). The plants are
found on clay barrens with little other
vegetation. Surrounding these barren
areas is a landscape of Juniperus spp.
(juniper), Artemisia spp. (sagebrush),
Atriplex spp. (saltbush), and nonnative
invasive Bromus tectorum (cheatgrass).
The current range of P. submutica is
subject to human-caused modifications
from natural gas exploration and
production with associated expansion of
pipelines, roads, and utilities;
development within the Westwide
Energy Corridor; increased access to the
habitat by off-highway vehicles (OHVs);
soil and seed disturbance by livestock
and other disturbances; and the
inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms.
Previous Federal Actions
A complete description of previous
Federal actions for Ipomopsis
polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and
Phacelia submutica is included in the
final listing rule published concurrently
with this proposal to designate critical
habitat. On June 23, 2010, we proposed
to list I. polyantha as an endangered
species and we proposed to list P.
debilis and P. submutica as threatened
species under the Act (75 FR 35721).
Critical Habitat
Background
Critical habitat is defined in section 3
of the Act as:
(1) The specific areas within the
geographical area occupied by the
species, at the time it is listed in
accordance with the Act, on which are
found those physical or biological
features.
(a) Essential to the conservation of the
species and
(b) Which may require special
management considerations or
protection; and
(2) Specific areas outside the
geographical area occupied by the
species at the time it is listed, upon a
determination that such areas are
essential for the conservation of the
species.
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
45080
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Conservation, as defined under
section 3 of the Act, means to use and
the use of all methods and procedures
that are necessary to bring an
endangered or threatened species to the
point at which the measures provided
pursuant to the Act are no longer
necessary. Such methods and
procedures include, but are not limited
to, all activities associated with
scientific resources management such as
research, census, law enforcement,
habitat acquisition and maintenance,
propagation, live trapping, and
transplantation, and, in the
extraordinary case where population
pressures within a given ecosystem
cannot be otherwise relieved, may
include regulated taking.
Critical habitat receives protection
under section 7 of the Act through the
requirement that Federal agencies
insure, in consultation with the Service,
that any action they authorize, fund, or
carry out is not likely to result in the
destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat. The designation of
critical habitat does not affect land
ownership or establish a refuge,
wilderness, reserve, preserve, or other
conservation area. Such designation
does not allow the government or public
to access private lands. Such
designation does not require
implementation of restoration, recovery,
or enhancement measures by nonFederal landowners. Where a landowner
seeks or requests Federal agency
funding or authorization for an action
that may affect a listed species or
critical habitat, the consultation
requirements of section 7(a)(2) would
apply, but even in the event of a
destruction or adverse modification
finding, the obligation of the Federal
action agency and the landowner is not
to restore or recover the species, but to
implement reasonable and prudent
alternatives to avoid destruction or
adverse modification of critical habitat.
For inclusion in a critical habitat
designation, the habitat within the
geographical area occupied by the
species at the time it was listed must
contain physical and biological features
which are essential to the conservation
of the species and which may require
special management considerations or
protection. Critical habitat designations
identify, to the extent known using the
best scientific and commercial data
available, those physical and biological
features that are essential to the
conservation of the species (such as
space, food, cover, and protected
habitat), focusing on the principal
biological or physical constituent
elements (primary constituent elements)
within an area that are essential to the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
conservation of the species (such as
roost sites, nesting grounds, seasonal
wetlands, water quality, tide, soil type).
Primary constituent elements are the
elements of physical and biological
features that, when laid out in the
appropriate quantity and spatial
arrangement to provide for a species’
life-history processes, are essential to
the conservation of the species.
Under the Act, we can designate
critical habitat in areas outside the
geographical area occupied by the
species at the time it is listed, upon a
determination that such areas are
essential for the conservation of the
species. We designate critical habitat in
areas outside the geographical area
occupied by a species only when a
designation limited to its current range
would be inadequate to ensure the
conservation of the species. When the
best available scientific data do not
demonstrate that the conservation needs
of the species require such additional
areas, we will not designate critical
habitat in areas outside the geographical
area occupied by the species. An area
currently occupied by the species but
that was not occupied at the time of
listing may, however, be essential to the
conservation of the species and may be
included in the critical habitat
designation.
Section 4 of the Act requires that we
designate critical habitat on the basis of
the best scientific and commercial data
available. Further, our Policy on
Information Standards under the Act
(published in the Federal Register on
July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271)), the
Information Quality Act (section 515 of
the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001
(Pub. L. 106–554; H.R. 5658)), and our
associated Information Quality
Guidelines, provide criteria, establish
procedures, and provide guidance to
ensure that our decisions are based on
the best scientific data available. They
require our biologists, to the extent
consistent with the Act and with the use
of the best scientific data available, to
use primary and original sources of
information as the basis for
recommendations to designate critical
habitat.
When we are determining which areas
should be designated as critical habitat,
our primary source of information is
generally the information developed
during the listing process for the
species. Additional information sources
may include the recovery plan for the
species, articles in peer-reviewed
journals, conservation plans developed
by States and counties, scientific status
surveys and studies, biological
evaluations or National Environmental
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Policy Act documents, or other
unpublished materials and expert
opinion or personal knowledge. In this
case, we do not yet have recovery plans
for these species.
Habitat is dynamic, and species may
move from one area to another over
time. Climate change will be a particular
challenge for biodiversity because the
interaction of additional stressors
associated with climate change and
current stressors may push species
beyond their ability to survive (Lovejoy
2005, pp. 325–326). The synergistic
implications of climate change and
habitat fragmentation are the most
threatening facet of climate change for
biodiversity (Hannah et al. 2005, p. 4).
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC) was established in 1988
by the World Meteorological
Organization and the United Nations
Environment Program in response to
growing concerns about climate change
and, in particular, the effects of global
warming. The IPCC has concluded that
the warming of the climate system is
unequivocal, as evidenced from
observations of increases in global
average air and ocean temperatures,
widespread melting of snow and ice,
and rising global average sea level (IPCC
2007, pp. 6, 30; Karl et al. 2009, p. 17).
Changes in the global climate system
during the 21st century are likely to be
larger than those observed during the
20th century (IPCC 2007, p. 19). Several
scenarios are virtually certain or very
likely to occur in the 21st century
including: (1) Over most land, there will
be warmer and fewer cold days and
nights, and warmer and more frequent
hot days and nights; (2) areas affected by
drought will increase; and (3) the
frequency of warm spells and heat
waves over most land areas will likely
increase (IPCC 2007, pp. 13, 53).
The IPCC predicts that the resiliency
of many ecosystems is likely to be
exceeded this century by an
unprecedented combination of climate
change, associated disturbances (e.g.,
flooding, drought, wildfire, and insects),
and other global drivers (IPCC 2007, pp.
31–33). With medium confidence, IPCC
predicts that approximately 20 to 30
percent of plant and animal species
assessed by the IPCC so far are likely to
be at an increased risk of extinction if
increases in global average temperature
exceed 3 to 5 °Fahrenheit (F) (1.5 to 2.5
ßCelsius (C)) (IPCC 2007, p. 48). Plant
species with restricted ranges that also
are climatically limited may experience
population declines as a result of
climate change (Schwartz and Brigham
2003, p. 11).
Regional projections indicate the
Southwest, including western Colorado,
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
45081
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
may experience the greatest temperature
increase of any area in the lower 48
States (IPCC 2007, p. 30). Drought
probability is predicted to increase in
the Southwest (Karl et al. 2009, pp. 129–
134), with summers warming more than
winters, and annual temperature
increasing approximately 4 °F (2.2 °C)
by 2050 (Ray et al. 2008, p. 29).
Additionally, the number of days over
90 °F (32 °C) could double by the end
of the century (Karl et al. 2009, p. 34).
Projections also show declines in
snowpack across the West with the most
dramatic declines at lower elevations
(below 8,200 ft (2,500 m)) (Ray et al.
2008, p. 29). A 10 to 30 percent decrease
in precipitation in mid-latitude western
North America is projected by the year
2050, based on an ensemble of 12
climate models (Milly et al. 2005, p. 1).
Overall, future projections for the
Southwest include increased
temperatures; more intense and longerlasting heat waves; and increased
probability of drought exacerbated by
higher temperatures, heavier
downpours, increased flooding, and
increased erosion (Karl et al. 2009, pp.
129–134).
To obtain climate projections specific
to the range of the three plant species of
interest, we used a statistically
downscaled model from the National
Center for Atmospheric Research
(NCAR) for a region covering western
Colorado. The resulting projections
indicate that temperature could increase
an average of 4.5 °F (2.5 °C) by 2050
with the following seasonal increases:
Summer (July to September) + 5.0 °F
(2.8 °C); fall (October to December) + 4.0
°F (2.2 °C); winter (January to March) +
4.1 °F (2.3 °C); and spring (April to June)
+ 4.5 °F (2.5 °C) (University Corporation
of Atmospheric Research (UCAR) 2009,
pp. 1–14). In western Colorado, multimodel averages show a shift toward
increased winter precipitation and
decreased spring and summer
precipitation by the end of the century
(Ray et al. 2008, p. 34; Karl et al. 2009,
p. 30). Similarly, the NCAR results show
the highest probability of a 7.5 percent
increase in average winter precipitation;
an 11.4 percent decrease in average
spring precipitation; a 2.1 percent
decrease in average summer
precipitation; and a 1.3 percent increase
in average fall precipitation with an
overall very slight decrease in 2050
(UCAR 2009, pp. 1–14).
Over the past 30 years, annual average
temperature in west-central Colorado
has increased by 0.9 °C (1.6 °F) and in
the greater Pagosa Springs area
temperature has increased 1.1 °C (1.9 °F)
(Ray et al. 2008, p. 10). In Colorado,
high variability in annual precipitation
(because of the extreme changes in
elevation) precludes detection of longterm trends at the local levels (Ray et al.
2008, p. 5). Only general assumptions
and predictions can be made from these
data. To examine local climate trends,
we gathered temperature and
precipitation data from the last 100
years at five weather stations (High
Plains Regional Climate Center 2011,
pp. 1–34; Service 2011d, pp. 1–72) in
the vicinity of the three plant species
(table 1). These data appear to be
consistent with local trends in
temperature discussed in the models
above. Change in temperature averaged
across the weather stations is
approximately 1.68 °F (0.93 °C); change
in temperature per century averaged
across the weather stations is
approximately 2.06 °F (1.14 °C). As
noted previously, precipitation is
variable across these weather stations
and trend cannot be reasonably
determined.
TABLE 1—CLIMATE TRENDS AT SELECT WEATHER STATIONS
[1890s–2010].
Altenbern
Parachute
(Grand Valley)
Palisade
Pagosa
springs
Penstemon
debilis;
Phacelia
submutica
Species in Vicinity ........................................................................
Collbran
Phacelia
submutica
Penstemon debilis;
Phacelia submutica
Penstemon
debilis;
Phacelia
submutica
Ipomopsis
polyantha
1904–1914; 1965–
1981
1911–2010
+.76
+.97
+2.9
+2.9
1906–1917;
1928–1932;
1934–1998
+1.48
+1.59
1904–1914; 1965–
1981
1911–1919;
1922–2010
¥4.06
¥5.2
+1.77
+1.77
TEMPERATURE (≥F)
Data
Period(s)1
............................................................................
1958–2010
Change in Average Annual Temperature (°F) ............................
Approximate Change in Temperature per Century (°F) ..............
+1.79
+3.37
1900–1966;
1970–1976;
1978–1999
+1.45
+1.46
PRECIPITATION (inches)
Data Period(s)1 ............................................................................
1947–2010
Change in Average Annual Precipitation (inches) .......................
Approximate Change in Precipitation per Century (inches) ........
+1.76
+2.84
1893–1966;
1970–1976;
1978–1999
+1.49
+1.41
1906–1917;
1928–1932;
1934–1998
¥2.59
¥2.79
1 As
indicated by time periods, data gaps exist for some weather stations.
for some years is partial (less than 12 months of data); e.g., data collection may have begun in September, or weather station was nonfunctioning for a period of time.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
2 Data
Recent analyses of long-term data sets
show accelerating rates of climate
change over the past 2 or 3 decades,
indicating that the extension of plant
and animal species’ geographic range
boundaries towards the poles or to
higher elevations by progressive
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
establishment of new local occurrences
will become increasingly apparent in
the short term (Hughes 2000, p. 60).
Climate change may exacerbate the
frequency and intensity of droughts in
this area and result in reduced species’
viability as the dry years become more
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
common. Under drought conditions,
plants generally are less vigorous and
less successful in reproduction and may
require several years to recover
following drought (Weltzin et al. 2003,
p. 946). With small populations and
their inherent risk of genetic
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
45082
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
complications, lowered reproduction
could result in reduced population
viability (Newman and Pilson 1997, pp.
354–362).
Climate modeling at this time has not
been refined to a level that we can
predict the amount of temperature and
precipitation change locally within the
limited range of Ipomopsis polyantha,
Penstemon debilis, or Phacelia
submutica. Therefore, we generally
address what could happen based on
current climate predictions for the
region.
The limited geographic range of the
Mancos shale substrate that underlies
the entire Ipomopsis polyantha habitat
likely limits the ability of the species to
adapt by shifting its range in response
to climatic conditions. I. polyantha is
sensitive to the timing and amount of
moisture due to its biennial life history.
Thus, if climate change results in local
drying, the species could experience a
reduction in its reproductive output. In
the ‘‘Physical and Biological Features’’
section below, we have conservatively
adjusted to known elevations occupied
by the species upward and downward
328 ft (100 m) in an attempt to account
for climate change.
It is unknown how Penstemon debilis
responds to drought; however, for most
plant species that grow in arid regions,
plant numbers decrease during drought
years, but recover in subsequent seasons
that are less dry (Lauenroth et al. 1987,
pp. 117–124; McDowell et al. 2008, pp.
719–739). Drought years could result in
a loss of plants. The limited geographic
range of the oil shale substrate that
makes up the entire P. debilis habitat
could limit the ability of the species to
adapt to changes in climatic conditions
by progressive establishment of new
populations. In the ‘‘Physical and
Biological Features’’ section below, we
have conservatively adjusted to known
elevations occupied by the species
upward and downward 328 ft (100 m)
in an attempt to account for climate
change.
Climate change is likely to affect
Phacelia submutica because seed
germination, seed dormancy, and
persistence of the seed bank are all
directly dependent on precipitation and
temperature patterns (Levine et al. 2008,
p. 805). Future changes in the timing of
the first major spring rains each year,
and temperatures associated with these
rains, may more strongly affect
germination and persistence of
ephemeral annual plants than changes
in season-long rainfall (barring severe
droughts) (Levine et al. 2008, p. 805).
Increasing environmental variance
might decrease extinction risk for rare
desert ephemeral plants, because these
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
plants typically rely on extremely good
years to restock the persistent seed bank
while extremely bad years have little
impact (Meyer et al. 2006, p. 901). A
persistent seed bank enables the species
to survive drought. However, extremely
long droughts resulting from climate
change, with no good years for
replenishing the seed bank, would
likely cause P. submutica to become
endangered.
Because the soil can remain bare of
Phacelia submutica plants for several
years, it is difficult to identify and
protect the seemingly unoccupied
habitat that occurs in small, isolated
patches that are easily destroyed by
small-scale disturbances, and can be
overlooked during habitat assessments.
The longer the species remains dormant,
the less likely it is that we will know if
an area is occupied, reducing our ability
to avoid impacts to the species and
protect it from becoming endangered.
While current climate change
predictions are not reliable enough at
the local level for us to draw
conclusions about its effects on P.
submutica, it is likely that there will be
drying trends in the future and the seeds
will remain dormant for long periods.
This would make it increasingly
difficult to detect occupied habitat and
avoid destruction of habitat. In the
‘‘Physical and Biological Features’’
section below, we have conservatively
adjusted to known elevations occupied
by the species upward and downward
328 ft (100 m) in an attempt to account
for climate change.
We recognize that critical habitat
designated at a particular point in time
may not include all of the habitat areas
that we may later determine are
necessary for the recovery of the
species. For these reasons, a critical
habitat designation does not signal that
habitat outside the designated area is
unimportant or may not be required for
recovery of these three species. Areas
that are important to the conservation of
the species, both inside and outside the
critical habitat designation, will
continue to be subject to: (1)
Conservation actions implemented
under section 7(a)(1) of the Act, (2)
regulatory protections afforded by the
requirement in section 7(a)(2) of the Act
for Federal agencies to insure their
actions are not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of any endangered
or threatened species, and (3) the
penalties and enforcement provisions of
section 11 of the Act if the prohibitions
of section 9 of the Act have been
violated. Federally funded or permitted
projects affecting listed species outside
their designated critical habitat areas
may still result in jeopardy findings in
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
some cases. These protections and
conservation tools will continue to
contribute to recovery of this species.
Similarly, critical habitat designations
made on the basis of the best available
information at the time of designation
will not control the direction and
substance of future recovery plans,
habitat conservation plans (HCPs), or
other species conservation planning
efforts if new information available at
the time of these planning efforts calls
for a different outcome.
Physical and Biological Features
In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i)
and 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act and regulations
at 50 CFR 424.12, in determining which
areas within the geographical area
occupied at the time of listing to
designate as critical habitat, we consider
the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
species and which may require special
management considerations or
protection. These include, but are not
limited to:
(1) Space for individual and
population growth and for normal
behavior;
(2) Food, water, air, light, minerals, or
other nutritional or physiological
requirements;
(3) Cover or shelter;
(4) Sites for breeding, reproduction, or
rearing (or development) of offspring;
and
(5) Habitats that are protected from
disturbance or are representative of the
historical, geographical, and ecological
distributions of a species.
We derive the specific physical and
biological features required for
Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon
debilis, and Phacelia submutica from
studies of these species’ habitat,
ecology, and life history as described
below. Additional information on these
species’ habitats, ecology, and life
histories can be found in the final listing
rule published in today’s Federal
Register.
Ipomopsis polyantha
We have determined that Ipomopsis
polyantha requires the following
physical and biological features:
Space for Individual and Population
Growth
Plant Community and Competitive
Ability—Ipomopsis polyantha is found
on barren shales, or in the open
montane grassland (primarily Festuca
arizonica (Arizona fescue)) understory
at the edges of open Pinus ponderosa
(Ponderosa pine), Pinus ponderosa and
Juniperus scopulorum (Rocky Mountain
juniper), or J. osteosperma (Utah
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
juniper) and Quercus gambellii (oak)
plant communities (Anderson 2004, p.
20). Within these plant communities,
the plant is found in open or more
sparsely vegetated areas where plant
cover is less than 5 or 10 percent,
although these interspaces can be small
within the greater plant community
(less than 100 ft2 (10 m2)). Because the
plant is found in these open areas it is
thought to be a poor competitor. Dense
stands of nonnative invasive grasses
such as Bromus inermis (smooth brome)
appear to almost totally exclude the
species (Anderson 2004, p. 36).
Complexity in I. polyantha plant
communities is important because
pollinator diversity at I. polyantha sites
is higher at more vegetatively diverse
sites (Collins 1995, p. 107). The
importance of pollinators for I.
polyantha is further discussed under
‘‘Reproduction’’ below. Therefore, based
on the information above, we identify
sparsely vegetated, barren shales,
Ponderosa pine margins, Ponderosa
pine and juniper, or juniper and oak
plant communities to be a physical or
biological feature for this plant. Given
that much of the area where I. polyantha
currently exists has already been altered
to some degree, these plant
communities may be historical. For
example, the adjacent forest that would
have naturally occurred in I. polyantha
habitat may have been thinned or
removed. In another example, forage
species may have been planted in
habitat that was once more suitable for
I. polyantha.
Elevation—Known populations of
Ipomopsis polyantha are found from
6,750 to 7,775 ft (2,050 to 2,370 m)
(Service 2011c, p. 1). Because plants
have not been identified outside of this
elevation band and because growing
conditions frequently change across
elevation gradients, we have identified
elevations from 6,400 to 8,100 ft (1,950
to 2,475 m) to be a physical or biological
feature for this plant. We have extended
the elevation range 328 ft (100 m)
upward and downward in an attempt to
provide areas where the plant could
migrate, given shifting climates
(Callaghan et al. 2004, pp. 418–435;
Crimmins et al. 2011, pp. 324–327). We
consider this 328 ft (100 m) to be a
conservative allowance since studies
elsewhere on climate change elevational
shifts have found more dramatic
changes even in the last century: 95 ft
(29 m) upward per decade (Lenoir et al.
2008, pp. 1768–1770), or an average of
279 ft (85 m) downward since the 1930s
(Crimmins et al. 2011, pp. 324–327). We
do not have information specific to I.
polyantha elevational shifts. The above
studies were done in different areas,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
western Europe and California, and
looking at different species. Mancos
shale habitats extend into these higher
and lower elevations.
Food, Water, Air, Light, Minerals, or
Other Nutritional or Physiological
Requirements
Soils—Ipomopsis polyantha is found
on Mancos shale soils from the Upper
Cretaceous period. These shales
comprise a heavy gray clay loam
alluvium (loose, unconsolidated)
derived from shale, sandstone, clay, and
residuum that is unconsolidated,
weathered mineral material that has
accumulated as consolidated rock and
disintegrated in place (Collins 1995, pp.
2–4). These shale soils do not retain soil
moisture and are difficult for plant
survival. I. polyantha seeds grow best
when germinated in these Mancos shale
soils (Collins 1995, p. 87). We assume
the soils where I. polyantha are found
are among the harshest local sites for
plant growth because of the lack of
vegetation at occupied sites, and
because the soils are heavy, droughty,
and deficient in nutrients. Species that
occupy such sites have been called
‘‘stress-tolerators’’ (Grime 1977, p.
1196). Because I. polyantha plants are
found only on Mancos shale soils, and
because greenhouse trials have found
that seedlings grow best in Mancos
shale soils, we have identified these
Mancos shale soils as a physical or
biological feature for this plant.
Climate—Average annual rainfall in
Pagosa Springs is 20 inches (in.) (51
centimeters (cm)) (Anderson 2004, p.
21). Winters are cold with snow cover
commonly present throughout the
winter months. Winter snow is
important for preventing severe frost
damage to some plants during the
winter months (Bannister et al. 2005,
pp. 250–251) and may be important for
Ipomopsis polyantha. Freezing
temperatures can occur into June and
even July, indicating that I. polyantha
can tolerate frost because it grows and
blooms during this time (Anderson
2004, p. 21). May and June, when I.
polyantha blooms, are on average the
driest months of the year (Anderson
2004, p. 21; Service 2011d, p. 52).
Because I. polyantha has evolved in
these climatic conditions, we have
roughly identified suitable
precipitation; cold, dry springs; and
winter snow as physical or biological
features for this plant. These climatic
conditions are influenced, in part, by
elevation.
Cover or Shelter
While Ipomopsis polyantha seeds and
seedlings certainly require ‘‘safe sites’’
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
45083
for their germination and establishment,
these microclimates are too small to be
considered or managed here as a
physical or biological feature for this
plant. Safe sites are those where the
appropriate conditions for seedling
germination and growth exist. We
believe these features are encompassed
in the ‘‘Plant Community and
Competitive Ability’’ and ‘‘Soils’’
sections discussed above.
Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, or
Rearing (or Development) of Offspring
Reproduction—Ipomopsis polyantha
sets far less fruit when self-pollinated (2
to 9 percent fruit set [self-pollinated]
versus 47 percent fruit set in the
presence of pollinator[s]) (Collins 1995,
p. 36). Also, male and female
reproductive parts are separated both
spatially and temporally (Collins 1995,
pp. 34–35). Therefore, we conclude that
pollinators are necessary for the longterm successful reproduction and
conservation of the plant. Over 30
different insects have been collected
visiting I. polyantha flowers (Collins
1995, pp. 47–74). The primary
pollinators are all bee species; these
include the nonnative honeybee (Apis
mellifera) and native bees that nest in
the ground or twigs including species of
Augochlorella (a type of Halictid or
sweat bee), Anthophora (digger bees),
Bombus (bumblebee), Dialictus (another
type of Halictid or sweat bee), Megachile
(leafcutter bees), and Lasioglossum
(another type of Halictid or sweat bee)
(Collins 1995, p. 71). Most of these
pollinators are solitary and do not live
communally, with the exception of the
honeybee. Pollinator diversity was
higher at I. polyantha sites with more
complex plant communities (Collins
1995, p. 107). Because the evidence
presented above demonstrates that
pollinators are necessary for pollination
of I. polyantha, we have identified
pollinators and their associated habitats
as an essential biological feature for this
plant.
Habitats Protected From Disturbance or
Representative of the Historical,
Geographical, and Ecological
Distributions of the Species
Disturbance Regime—The native
habitat of Ipomopsis polyantha has been
extensively modified (Anderson 2004,
p. 28). The species is considered a
ruderal species, which means it is one
of the first plant species to colonize
disturbed lands. Seeds are not thought
to disperse far. Plants are able to
colonize nearby disturbed areas quickly.
The species is found in light to
moderately disturbed areas, such as rills
(small, narrow, shallow incisions in
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
45084
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
topsoil layers caused by erosion by
overland flow or surface runoffs), areas
that are only occasionally disturbed, or
areas with previous disturbances that
have been colonized and not
subsequently disturbed (i.e., previously
cleared areas that have had some time
to recover) (Anderson 2004, p. 23; 75 FR
35724–35726). Some of these
disturbances are now maintained or
created by human activities (such as
light grazing or the recolonization of
Mancos shale substrate roads that are no
longer used) that mimic the constant
erosion that occurs on the highly erosive
Mancos shale soils and seem to
maintain I. polyantha at a site. I.
polyantha sites with constant or
repetitive disturbance, especially sites
with constant heavy grazing or repeated
mowing, have been lost (Mayo 2008, pp.
1–2). Fire also may have played a role
in maintaining open habitats and
disturbances for I. polyantha in the past
(Anderson 2004, p. 22), as it historically
did in all Ponderosa pine forests across
the West (USFS 2000, p. 97).
Interestingly, Ipomopsis polyantha
individuals at newly disturbed sites
were slightly more likely to selfpollinate than were plants in later
successional areas (Collins 1995, p. 99),
demonstrating that disturbance is
important enough to I. polyantha that it
may influence reproductive success
(self-pollinated individuals are less
reproductively successful) and possibly
genetic diversity (self-pollination leads
to lowered genetic diversity). Managing
for an appropriate disturbance type and/
or level can be difficult since we lack
research to better quantify these
measures. In this document we use
qualitative terms, but specifically solicit
further input on methods or
mechanisms that can better quantify or
describe these measures. Because I.
polyantha is found only within areas
with light to moderate or discontinuous
disturbances, we have identified the
disturbance regime to be a physical or
biological feature for this plant.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Penstemon debilis
We have determined that Penstemon
debilis requires the following physical
and biological features:
Space for Individual and Population
Growth
Plant Community and Competitive
Ability—Penstemon debilis is found on
steep, constantly shifting shale cliffs
with little vegetation. The decline or
loss of several populations has been
attributed to encroaching vegetation;
therefore, it is assumed that P. debilis is
a poor competitor (McMullen 1998, p.
72). The areas where P. debilis are found
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
are characterized as ‘‘Rocky Mountain
cliff and canyon’’ (Southwest Regional
Gap Analysis Project 2004). The plant
community where P. debilis is found is
unique, because instead of being
dominated by one or two common
species as most plant communities are,
it has a high diversity of uncommon
species that also are oil shale endemics
(McMullen 1998, p. 5). These
uncommon species include Mentzelia
rhizomata (Roan Cliffs blazingstar),
Thalictrum heliophilum (sun-loving
meadowrue), Astragalus lutosus (dragon
milkvetch), and the somewhat more
common Lesquerella parviflora
(Piceance bladderpod), Penstemon
osterhoutii (Osterhout’s beardtongue),
and Festuca dasyclada (Utah or oil shale
fescue) (McMullen 1998, p. 5). More
common species include Holodiscus
discolor (oceanspray), Penstemon
caespitosus (Mat penstemon),
Cercocarpus montanus (Mountain
mahogany), and Chrysothamnus
viscidiflorus (Yellow rabbitbrush)
(O’Kane & Anderson 1987, p. 415;
McMullen 1998, p. 5). We consider
sparse vegetation (with less than 10
percent plant cover), assembled of other
oil shale specific plants and not
dominated by any one species, to be a
physical or biological feature for this
plant.
Elevation—Known populations of
Penstemon debilis are found from 5,600
to 9,250 ft (1,700 to 2,820 m) in
elevation (Service 2011c, p. 3). Because
plants have not been identified outside
of this elevation band and because
growing conditions frequently change
across elevation gradients, we have
identified elevations from 5,250 to 9,600
ft (1,600 to 2,920 m) to be a physical or
biological feature for this plant. We have
extended the elevation range 328 ft (100
m) upward and downward in an attempt
to provide areas where the plant could
migrate, given shifting climates
(Callaghan et al. 2004, pp. 418–435;
Crimmins et al. 2011, pp. 324–327). We
consider this 328 ft (100 m) to be a
conservative allowance since studies on
climate change elevational shifts have
found more dramatic changes even in
the last century: 95 ft (29 m) upward per
decade (Lenoir et al. 2008, pp. 1768–
1770), or an average of 279 ft (85 m)
downward since the 1930s (Crimmins et
al. 2011, pp. 324–327). We do not have
information specific to P. debilis
elevational shifts. The above studies
were done in different areas, western
Europe and California, and looking at
different species. Oil shale habitats
extend into these higher and lower
elevations.
Slope—Penstemon debilis is generally
found only on steep slopes (mean of 37
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
percent slope) and between cliff bands
where the oil shale is constantly shifting
and moving downhill (Service 2011c, p.
2). The plant also can be found on
relatively flat sites, although nearby
habitats are often steep. In general, the
plant is found on steep, constantly
eroding slopes; therefore, we identify
moderate to steep slopes, generally over
15 percent slope, to be a physical or
biological feature for this plant.
Food, Water, Air, Light, Minerals, or
Other Nutritional or Physiological
Requirements
Soils—Penstemon debilis is known
only from oil shale cliffs on the Roan
Plateau escarpment and was previously
described as occurring only on the
Parachute Creek Member of the Green
River Formation (McMullen 1998, p.
57). Our mapping exercises have found
that the plant also is found on the Lower
Part of the Green River Formation
(Tweto 1979, pp. 1, 4). Populations are
generally located either directly above
or below the geologic feature known as
the Mahogany Ledge (McMullen 1998,
p. 63). All occupied sites are similar in
soil morphology (form and structure)
and are characterized by a surface layer
of small to moderate shale channers
(small flagstones) that shift continually
due to the steep slopes (McMullen 1998,
p. 64). Below the channers is a weakly
developed calcareous, sandy to loamy
layer with 40 to 90 percent coarse
material.
Toxic elements in the soil such as
arsenic and selenium accumulate in the
tissues of P. debilis (McMullen 1998, p.
65) and may allow P. debilis to grow in
areas that are more toxic to other species
thereby reducing plant competition.
Toxic elements in the soil vary between
populations. In a greenhouse setting, P.
debilis plants were grown easily in
potting soil. Soil may not directly
influence P. debilis’ distribution, but
may instead have an indirect effect on
the plant’s distribution by limiting the
establishment of other vegetation
(McMullen 1998, p. 67). Soil
morphology, rather than soil chemistry,
appears to better explain the plant’s
distribution (McMullen 1998, p. 74).
Because the plant is only found on the
Parachute Creek Member and Lower
Part of the Green River Formation and
because of the consistent soil
morphology between sites, we are
identifying these geologic formations as
a physical or biological feature for the
plant. We also looked at soil type as
discussed below in ‘‘Criteria Used to
Identify Critical Habitat’’ but do not
include it here as a physical or
biological feature because it is a
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
component of the soil characteristics
already described.
Climate—The average annual
precipitation in the area where
Penstemon debilis is found ranges from
12 to 18 in. (30 to 46 cm) (McMullen
1998, p. 63). Winters are cold (averaging
roughly 30 °F (¥1 °C) with snow
staying on the ground in flatter areas,
and summers are warmer (averaging
roughly 65 °F (18 °C). Because P. debilis
has evolved under these climatic
conditions, we have identified suitable
precipitation and suitable temperatures
as physical or biological features for this
plant. These climatic conditions are
likely influenced, in part, by elevation.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Cover or Shelter
While Penstemon debilis seed and
seedlings certainly require ‘‘safe sites’’
for their germination and establishment,
these microclimates are too small to be
considered or managed here as a
physical or biological feature for this
plant. We believe these features are
encompassed in the ‘‘plant community
and competitive ability’’ and ‘‘soils’’
sections discussed above.
Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, or
Rearing (or Development) of Offspring
Reproduction—Penstemon debilis
requires insect pollinators for
reproduction and is twice as
reproductively successful if pollen
comes from another plant (McMullen
1998, pp. 25, 43). Over 40 species of
pollinators have been collected from P.
debilis; the primary pollinators include
four Osmia (mason bee) species,
Atoposmia elongata (a close relative of
Osmia), several Bombus (bumblebee)
species, and a native wasp
Pseudomasaris vespoides. All of these
pollinators are ground or twig nesting.
None of these pollinators are rare, nor
are they specialists on P. debilis,
although some of these pollinators, such
as Osmia, are specialists within the
genus Penstemon (McMullen 1998, p.
11). The number and type of pollinators
differ between P. debilis sites
(McMullen 1998, p. 27). Fruit set is not
limited by inadequate numbers of
pollinators (McMullen 1998, p. 27).
Because the evidence presented above
demonstrates that pollinators are
necessary for pollination of P. debilis,
we have identified pollinators and their
associated habitats as a physical or
biological feature for this plant.
Habitats Protected From Disturbance or
Representative of the Historical,
Geographical, and Ecological
Distributions of the Species
Disturbance Regime—Penstemon
debilis is found on steep oil shale slopes
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
that are constantly shifting. The plant
has underground stems (rhizomes) that
are an adaptation to this constant
shifting (McMullen 1998, p. 58). As the
shale shifts downward, the underground
stems and clusters of leaves emerge
downhill. A single plant may actually
appear as many different plants that are
connected by these underground stems
(McMullen 1998, p. 58). In sites where
the soils have stabilized and vegetation
has encroached, P. debilis has been
extirpated (lost) (McMullen 1998, p. 72).
Managing for an appropriate
disturbance type and/or level can be
difficult since we lack research to better
quantify these measures. In this
document we use qualitative terms, but
specifically solicit further input on
methods or mechanisms that can better
quantify or describe these measures. For
these reasons, we consider these
unstable and slow to moderate levels of
constantly shifting shale slopes to be a
physical or biological feature for the
species.
Phacelia submutica
We have determined that Phacelia
submutica requires the following
physical and biological features:
Space for Individual and Population
Growth
Plant Community and Competitive
Ability—Predominant vegetation
classifications within the occupied
range of Phacelia submutica include
clay badlands, mixed salt desert scrub,
and Artemisia tridentata (big sagebrush)
shrubland, within the greater Pinus
edulis (pinyon)–Juniperus spp. (juniper)
woodlands type (O’Kane 1987, pp. 14–
15; Ladyman 2003, pp. 14–16). Within
these vegetated areas, P. submutica is
found on sparsely vegetated barren areas
with total plant cover generally less
than 10 percent (Burt and Spackman
1995, p. 20). On these barren areas, P.
submutica can be found alone or in
association with other species.
Associated plant species at sites
occupied by P. submutica include: the
nonnative Bromus tectorum (cheatgrass)
and native species Grindelia fastigiata
(pointed gumweed), Eriogonum gordonii
(Gordon’s buckwheat), Monolepis
nuttalliana (Nuttall’s povertyweed), and
Oenothera caespitosa (tufted evening
primrose) (Burt and Spackman 1995, p.
20; Ladyman 2003, pp. 15–16). Many of
these associated species also are annuals
(growing for only 1 year). Because of the
harshness and sometimes the steepness
of occupied sites, these areas are
maintained in an early successional
state (Ladyman, 2003, p. 18). Therefore,
the species found in these habitats are
regarded as pioneers that are
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
45085
continually colonizing these bare areas
and then dying (O’Kane 1987, p. 15).
Pioneer species are often assumed to be
poor competitors (Grime 1977, p. 1169).
For the reasons discussed above, we
identify barren clay badlands with less
than 20 percent cover of other plant
species to be a physical or biological
feature for this plant. We have adjusted
the relative plant cover upwards to
capture the potential plant cover in
moist years when other species may be
somewhat more abundant.
Elevation—Known populations of
Phacelia submutica occur within a
narrow range of elevations from about
5,000 to 7,150 ft (1,500 to 2,175 m)
(Service 2011c, p. 3). Elevation is a key
factor in determining the temperature
and moisture microclimate of this
species. Because plants have not been
identified outside of this elevation band
and because growing conditions
frequently change across elevation
gradients, we have identified elevations
from 4,600 to 7,450 ft (1,400 to 2,275 m)
to be a physical or biological feature for
this plant. We have extended the
elevation range 328 ft (100 m) upward
and downward in an attempt to provide
areas where the plant could migrate,
given shifting climates (Callaghan et al.
2004, pp. 418–435; Crimmins et al.
2011, pp. 324–327). We consider this
100 meters to be a conservative
allowance since studies on climate
change elevational shifts have found
more dramatic changes even in the last
century: 95 ft (29 m) upward per decade
(Lenoir et al. 2008, pp. 1768–1770), or
an average of 279 ft (85 m) downward
since the 1930s (Crimmins et al. 2011,
pp. 324–327). We do not have
information specific to P. submutica
elevational shifts. The above studies
were done in different areas, western
Europe and California, and looking at
different species. Suitable habitats
extend into these higher and lower
elevations.
Topography (surface shape)—
Phacelia submutica is found on slopes
ranging from almost flat to 42 degrees,
with the average around 14 degrees
(Service 2011c, p. 3). Plants are
generally found on moderately steep
slopes, benches, and ridge tops adjacent
to valley floors (Ladyman 2003, p. 15).
The relative position of P. submutica is
consistent from site to site; therefore, we
recognize appropriate topography
(suitable slopes, benches and ridge tops,
or moderately steep slopes adjacent to
valley floors) as a physical or biological
feature for the plant.
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
45086
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Food, Water, Air, Light, Minerals, or
Other Nutritional or Physiological
Requirements
Soils—Phacelia submutica grows only
on barren clay soils derived from the
Atwell Gulch and Shire members of the
Eocene and Paleocene Wasatch
geological formation (Donnell 1969, pp.
M13–M14; O’Kane 1987, p. 10). The
Atwell Gulch member is found below
the bluish gray Molina member, and the
Shire member is found above the
Molina member (Decker et al. 2005, p.
3). The plant is found in unique, very
small areas (from 10 to 1,000 ft2 (1 to
100 m2)) on colorful exposures of
chocolate to purplish brown, dark
charcoal gray, and tan clay soils (Burt
and Spackman 1995, pp. 15, 20;
Ladyman 2003, p. 15; Grauch 2011,
pers. comm.). We do not fully
understand why P. submutica is limited
to the small areas where it is found, but
the plant usually grows on the one
unique small spot of shrink-swell clay
that shows a slightly different texture
and color than the similar surrounding
soils (Burt and Spackman 1995, p. 15).
Ongoing species-specific soil analyses
have found that the alkaline soils (with
specific pH ranging from 7 to 8.9) where
P. submutica are found have higher clay
content than nearby unoccupied soils,
although there is some overlap (Grauch
2011, pers. comm.). The shrink-swell
action of these clay soils and the cracks
that are formed upon drying appear
essential to maintenance of the species’
seed bank since the cracks capture the
seeds and maintain the seed bank on
site (O’Kane 1988, p. 462; Ladyman
2003, pp 16–17). Based on the
information above, we consider the
small soil inclusions where P.
submutica is found that are
characterized by shrink-swell alkaline
clay soils within the Atwell Gulch and
Shire members of the Wasatch
Formation to represent a physical or
biological feature for P. submutica.
Climate—Phacelia submutica
abundance varies considerably from
year to year. In 1 year almost no plants
may emerge at a site, and in another
year at the same site, hundreds or even
thousands of individuals may grow
(Burt and Spackman 1995, p. 24). We do
not understand what environmental
factors (temperature, rainfall, or
snowfall) affect these dramatic changes
in abundance from 1 year to the next,
but it is assumed they are climatic in
nature (Burt and Spackman 1885, p. 24).
Wetter years seem to produce more
individuals (O’Kane 1987, p. 16).
However, without the right combination
of precipitation and temperature within
a short window of time in the spring,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
the species may produce very few
seedlings or mature plants, sometimes
for several consecutive years. We
believe it is necessary to conserve
habitat across the entire range of the
species to account for the variation in
local weather events, to allow for plants
to grow at some sites and not others on
an annual basis. Because climatic
factors dramatically influence the
number of P. submutica individuals that
are produced in a given year, we
identify climate as a physical or
biological feature for the plant; however,
we recognize that we are unable to
identify exactly what these climatic
factors encompass except that the
amount of moisture and its timing is
critical. Climatic data from four weather
stations (Table 1) indicate that average
annual precipitation is between 10 to 16
in. (25 and 41 cm), with less
precipitation generally falling in June
(as well as December–February) than
other months, and with cold winters
(sometimes with snow cover) and
warmer summers.
Cover or Shelter
While Phacelia submutica seed and
seedlings certainly require ‘‘safe sites’’
for their germination and establishment,
these microclimates are too small to be
considered or managed here as a
physical or biological feature for this
plant. We believe these features are
encompassed in the ‘‘plant community
and competitive ability’’ and ‘‘soils’’
sections discussed above.
Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, or
Rearing (or Development) of Offspring
Reproduction and Seed Banks—We
do not yet understand the pollination
and seed dispersal mechanisms of
Phacelia submutica. Pollinators have
not been observed visiting the flowers of
P. submutica. Currently it is believed
that pollinators may not be required for
reproduction because of the minute
flower size, a lack of obvious
pollinators, and because the
reproductive parts are hidden within
the petals. We also do not understand
how seeds are dispersed. Seed banks are
established where seeds fall into the
cracks of shrink-swell clay (O’Kane
1988, p. 462). We recognize that habitat
conducive for successful reproduction is
a physical or biological feature for P.
submutica but do not understand more
specifically what features are important
for this reproduction. In addition, seed
banks are especially important for
annual species that may not emerge
when climatic conditions are
unfavorable (Levine et al. 2008, pp.
795–806; Meyer et al. 2005, pp. 15–16,
21). For this reason, we identify boom
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
years at regular intervals such that the
seed bank is maintained as a physical or
biological feature for P. submutica. We
lack further information on how longlived seeds are in the seed bank and at
what intervals the seed bank needs to be
replenished to provide specifics but are
hopeful that ongoing research will assist
in answering some of these questions.
Habitats Protected From Disturbance or
Representative of the Historical,
Geographical, and Ecological
Distributions of the Species
Disturbance Regime—The steeper clay
barrens where Phacelia submutica is
sometimes found experience some
erosion, and the shrinking and swelling
of clay soils creates a continuous
disturbance (Ladyman 2003, p. 16).
Phacelia submutica has adapted to these
light to moderate disturbances, although
occasionally plants are pushed out of
the shrinking or swelling soils and die
(O’Kane 1987, p. 20). Clay soils are
relatively stable when dry but are
extremely vulnerable to disturbances
when wet (Rengasmy et al. 1984, p. 63).
P. submutica has evolved with some
light natural disturbances, mostly in the
form of erosion and shrink-swell
process. Heavy disturbances, and even
light disturbances when soils are wet,
could impact the species and its seed
bank. These disturbances can include
OHV use, livestock and wild ungulate
grazing, and activities associated with
oil and gas development. Managing for
an appropriate disturbance type and/or
level can be difficult since we lack
research to better quantify these
measures. In this document we use
qualitative terms, but specifically solicit
further input on methods or
mechanisms that can better quantify or
describe these measures. For the reasons
discussed above, we identify an
environment free from moderate to
heavy disturbances when soils are dry
and free from all disturbances when
soils are wet to be a physical or
biological feature for P. submutica.
Primary Constituent Elements for
Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon
debilis, and Phacelia submutica
Under the Act and its implementing
regulations, we are required to identify
the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of
Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon
debilis, and Phacelia submutica in
geographic areas occupied at the time of
listing, focusing on the features’ primary
constituent elements. We consider
primary constituent elements to be the
elements of physical and biological
features that provide for a species’ life-
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
history processes and are essential to
the conservation of the species.
Ipomopsis polyantha
Based on our current knowledge of
the physical or biological features and
habitat characteristics required to
sustain the species’ life-history
processes, we determine that the
primary constituent elements specific to
Ipomopsis polyantha are:
(i) Mancos shale soils.
(ii) Elevation and climate. Elevations
from 6,400 to 8,100 ft (1,950 to 2,475m)
and current climatic conditions similar
to those that historically occurred
around Pagosa Springs, Colorado.
Climatic conditions include suitable
precipitation; cold, dry springs; and
winter snow.
(iii) Plant Community.
a. Suitable native plant communities
(as described in b. below) with small
(less than 100 ft 2 (10 m 2) or larger
(several hectares or acres) barren areas
with less than 20 percent plant cover in
the actual barren areas.
b. Appropriate native plant
communities, although these
communities may not be like they were
historically because they have already
been altered. Therefore, the species can
be found in areas where only the
potential for the appropriate native
plant community exists. For example,
Ponderosa pine forests may have been
cut or areas that had native vegetation
may have been scraped. Native habitats
and plants are desirable; however,
because of the state of the habitat,
altered habitats including some
nonnative invasive species should not
be discounted. These plant communities
include:
i. Barren shales,
ii. Open montane grassland (primarily
Arizona fescue) understory at the edges
of open Ponderosa pine, or
iii. Clearings within the ponderosa
pine and Rocky Mountain juniper and
Utah juniper and oak communities.
(iv) Habitat for pollinators. Please see
‘‘Special Management Considerations’’
for further discussions of habitat
fragmentation and pollinator habitats
and foraging ranges.
a. Pollinator ground and twig nesting
areas. Habitats suitable for a wide array
of pollinators and their life history and
nesting requirements. A mosaic of
native plant communities generally
would provide for this diversity.
b. Connectivity between areas
allowing pollinators to move from one
site to the next within each population.
c. Availability of other floral
resources; this would include other
flowering plant species that provide
nectar and pollen for pollinators. Grass
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
species do not provide resources for
pollinators.
d. To conserve and accommodate
these pollinator requirements, we have
identified a 3,280-ft (1,000-m) area
beyond occupied habitat to conserve the
pollinators essential for reproduction.
(v) Appropriate disturbance regime.
Please see ‘‘Physical and Biological
Features’’ above for a further discussion
of the qualitative terms discussed
below.
a. Appropriate disturbance levels—
Light to moderate, or intermittent or
discontinuous.
b. Naturally maintained disturbances
through soil erosion or human
maintained disturbances that can
include light grazing, occasional ground
clearing, and other disturbances that are
not severe or continual.
With this proposed designation of
critical habitat, we intend to identify the
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
species through the identification of the
primary constituent elements sufficient
to support the life-history processes of
the species. Two units proposed to be
designated as critical habitat are
currently occupied by Ipomopsis
polyantha and contain the primary
constituent elements to support the lifehistory needs of the species.
Because two populations do not offer
adequate redundancy for the survival
and recovery of Ipomopsis polyantha,
we have determined that unoccupied
areas are essential for the conservation
of the species. Two additional units
proposed to be designated as critical
habitat are currently unoccupied by I.
polyantha. We consider these units
essential for the conservation of the
species, as discussed below under
‘‘Special Management Considerations.’’
In addition, we believe the unoccupied
units contain the primary constituent
elements in the appropriate quantity
and spatial arrangement sufficient to
support the life-history needs of the
species.
Penstemon debilis
Based on our current knowledge of
the physical or biological features and
habitat characteristics required to
sustain the species’ life-history
processes, we determine that the
primary constituent elements specific to
Penstemon debilis are:
(i) Suitable Soils and Geology.
a. Parachute Member and the Lower
part of the Green River Formation,
although soils outside these formations
would be suitable for pollinators (see
High levels of natural disturbance
below).
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
45087
b. Appropriate soil morphology
characterized by a surface layer of small
to moderate shale channers (small
flagstones) that shift continually due to
the steep slopes and below a weakly
developed calcareous, sandy to loamy
layer with 40 to 90 percent coarse
material.
(ii) Elevation and climate. Elevations
from 5,250 to 9,600 ft (1,600 to 2,920 m).
Climatic conditions similar to those of
the Mahogany Bench, including suitable
precipitation and temperatures.
(iii) Plant Community.
a. Barren areas with less than 10
percent plant cover.
b. Presence of other oil shale
endemics, including Mentzelia
rhizomata, Thalictrum heliophilum,
Astragalus lutosus, Lesquerella
parviflora, Penstemon osterhoutii, and
Festuca dasyclada.
(iv) Habitat for pollinators. Please see
‘‘Special Management Considerations’’
for further discussions of habitat
fragmentation and pollinator habitats
and foraging ranges.
a. Pollinator ground and twig nesting
habitats. Habitats suitable for a wide
array of pollinators and their life history
and nesting requirements. A mosaic of
native plant communities generally
would provide for this diversity (see
Plant Community above). These habitats
can include areas outside of the soils
identified in Suitable Soils and Geology.
b. Connectivity between areas
allowing pollinators to move from one
population to the next within units.
c. Availability of other floral
resources. This would include other
flowering plant species that provide
nectar and pollen for pollinators. Grass
species do not provide resources for
pollinators.
d. To conserve and accommodate
these pollinator requirements, we have
identified a 3,280-ft (1,000-m) area
beyond occupied habitat to conserve the
pollinators essential for reproduction.
(v) High levels of natural disturbance.
Please see ‘‘Physical and Biological
Features’’ above for a further discussion
of the qualitative terms discussed
below.
a. Very little or no soil formation.
b. Slow to moderate, but constant,
downward motion of the oil shale that
maintains the habitat in an early
successional state.
With this proposed designation of
critical habitat, we intend to identify the
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
species through the identification of the
primary constituent elements sufficient
to support the life-history processes of
the species. Two units proposed to be
designated as critical habitat are
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
45088
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
currently occupied by Penstemon
debilis and contain the primary
constituent elements to support the lifehistory needs of the species. Two
additional units proposed to be
designated as critical habitat are
currently unoccupied by P. debilis.
Currently occupied areas do not
adequately provide for the conservation
of the species, because of a lack of
redundancy. We consider these units
essential for the conservation of the
species, as discussed below under
‘‘Special Management Considerations.’’
In addition, we believe the unoccupied
units contain the primary constituent
elements to support the life-history
needs of the species.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Phacelia submutica
Based on our current knowledge of
the physical or biological features and
habitat characteristics required to
sustain the species’ life-history
processes, we determine that the
primary constituent elements specific to
Phacelia submutica are:
(i) Suitable Soils and Geology.
a. Atwell Gulch and Shire members of
the Wasatch formation.
b. Within these larger formations,
small areas (from 10 to 1,000 ft 2 (1 to
100 m 2)) on colorful exposures of
chocolate to purplish brown, light to
dark charcoal gray, and tan clay soils are
especially important. These small areas
are slightly different in texture and color
than the similar surrounding soils.
Occupied sites are characterized by
alkaline (pH range from 7 to 8.9) soils
with higher clay content than similar
nearby unoccupied soils.
c. Clay soils that shrink and swell
dramatically upon drying and wetting
and are likely important in the
maintenance of the seed bank.
(ii) Topography. Moderately steep
slopes, benches, and ridge tops adjacent
to valley floors. Occupied slopes range
from 2 to 42 degrees with an average of
14 degrees.
(iii) Elevation and climate.
a. Elevations from 4,600 to 7,450 ft
(1,400 to 2,275 m).
b. Climatic conditions similar to those
around DeBeque, Colorado, including
suitable precipitation and temperatures.
Annual fluctuations in moisture (and
probably temperature) greatly influences
the number of Phacelia submutica
individuals that grow in a given year
and are thus able to set seed and
replenish the seed bank.
(iv) Plant Community.
a. Small (from 10 to 1,000 ft2 (1 to 100
m2)) barren areas with less than 20
percent plant cover in the actual barren
areas.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
b. Presence of appropriate associated
species that can include (but are not
limited to) the natives Grindelia
fastigiata, Eriogonum gordonii,
Monolepis nuttalliana, and Oenothera
caespitosa. If sites become dominated
by Bromus tectorum or other invasive
nonnative species, they should not be
discounted because Phacelia submutica
may still be found there.
c. Appropriate plant communities
within the greater pinyon–juniper
woodlands that include:
(i) Clay badlands within the mixed
salt desert scrub, or
(ii) Clay badlands within big
sagebrush shrublands.
(v) Maintenance of the Seed Bank and
Appropriate Disturbance Levels. Please
see ‘‘Physical and Biological Features’’
above for a further discussion of the
qualitative terms discussed below.
a. Within suitable soil and geologies
(see Suitable Soils and Geology above),
undisturbed areas where seed banks are
left undamaged.
b. Areas with light disturbance when
dry and no disturbance when wet. Clay
soils are relatively stable when dry but
are extremely vulnerable to disturbances
when wet.
Phacelia submutica has evolved with
some light natural disturbances,
including erosional and shrink-swell
processes. However, human
disturbances that are either heavy or
light when soils are wet could impact
the species and its seed bank. Because
we do not understand how the seed
bank may respond to disturbances, more
heavily disturbed areas should be
evaluated, over the course of several
years, for the species’ presence.
With this proposed designation of
critical habitat, we intend to identify the
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
species through the identification of the
primary constituent elements sufficient
to support the life-history processes of
the species. All units and subunits
proposed to be designated as critical
habitat are currently occupied by
Phacelia submutica and contain the
primary constituent elements sufficient
to support the life-history needs of the
species.
Special Management Considerations or
Protection
When designating critical habitat, we
assess whether the physical and
biological features within the
geographical area occupied by the
species at the time of listing contain
features which are essential to the
conservation of the species and which
may require special management
considerations or protection. All areas
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
proposed for designation as critical
habitat will require some level of
management to address the current and
future threats to the physical and
biological features essential to the
conservation of the three plants. In all
units, special management will be
required to ensure that the habitat is
able to provide for the growth and
reproduction of the species.
A detailed discussion of threats to
Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon
debilis, and Phacelia submutica and
their habitat can be found in the final
listing rule elsewhere in today’s Federal
Register. The primary threats impacting
the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of I.
polyantha, P. debilis, and P. submutica
that may require special management
considerations or protection within the
proposed critical habitat include, but
are not limited to, the following:
Ipomopsis polyantha
The features essential to the
conservation of this species (plant
community and competitive ability,
elevation, soils, climate, reproduction,
and disturbance regime) may require
special management considerations or
protection to reduce threats. Ipomopsis
polyantha’s highly restricted soil
requirements and geographic range
make it particularly susceptible to
extinction at any time from commercial,
municipal, and residential
development; associated road and
utility improvements and maintenance;
heavy livestock use; inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms;
fragmented habitat; and prolonged
drought. Over 86 percent of the species’
occupied habitat is on private land with
no limits on development (75 FR 35740;
June 23, 2010).
Special management considerations
or protections are required within
critical habitat areas to address these
threats. Management activities that
could ameliorate these threats include
(but are not limited to): Introducing new
Ipomopsis polyantha populations;
establishing permanent conservation
easements or land acquisition to protect
the species on private lands; developing
zoning regulations that could serve to
protect the species; establishing
conservation agreements on private and
Federal lands to identify and reduce
threats to the species and its features;
eliminating the use of smooth brome
and other competitive species in areas
occupied by the species; promoting/
encouraging habitat restoration;
developing other regulatory
mechanisms to further protect the
species; placing roads and utility lines
away from the species; minimizing
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
heavy use of habitat by livestock; and
minimizing habitat fragmentation.
These management activities would
protect the primary constituent
elements for the species by preventing
the loss of habitat and individuals,
maintaining or restoring plant
communities and natural levels of
competition, protecting the plant’s
reproduction by protecting its
pollinators, and managing for
appropriate levels of disturbance.
Penstemon debilis
The features essential to the
conservation of this species (plant
community and competitive ability,
elevation, slope, soils, climate,
reproduction, and disturbance regime)
may require special management
considerations or protection to reduce
threats. Extremely low numbers and a
highly restricted geographic range make
Penstemon debilis particularly
susceptible to becoming endangered in
the foreseeable future. Threats to the
species and its habitat include energy
development, road maintenance, and
inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms (75 FR 35740; June 23,
2010).
Special management considerations
or protections are required within
critical habitat areas to address these
threats. Management activities that
could ameliorate these threats include
(but are not limited to): the introduction
of new Penstemon debilis populations;
the establishment of permanent
conservation easements or land
acquisition to protect the species on
private lands; regulations and/or
agreements that balance conservation
with energy development in areas that
would affect the species and its
pollinators; the designation of protected
areas with specific provisions and
protections for the plant; the
elimination or avoidance of activities
that alter the morphology and status of
the shale slopes; and avoidance of
placing roads in habitats that would
affect the plant or its pollinators.
These management activities would
protect the primary constituent
elements for the species by preventing
the loss of habitat and individuals,
maintaining or restoring plant
communities and natural levels of
competition, protecting the plant’s
reproduction by protecting its
pollinators, and managing for
appropriate levels and types of
disturbance.
Phacelia submutica
The features essential to the
conservation of this species (plant
community and competitive ability,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
elevation, topography, soils, climate,
reproduction and seed bank, and
disturbance regime) may require special
management considerations or
protection to reduce threats. The current
range of Phacelia submutica is subject
to human-caused modifications from
natural gas exploration and production
with associated expansion of pipelines,
roads, and utilities; development within
the Westwide Energy Corridor;
increased access to the habitat by OHVs;
soil and seed disturbance by livestock
and other human-caused disturbances;
nonnative invasive species including
Bromus tectorum and Halogeton
glomeratus (halogeton); and inadequate
regulations (75 FR 35741; June 23,
2010).
Special management considerations
or protections are required within
critical habitat areas to address these
threats. Management activities that
could ameliorate these threats include
(but are not limited to): Development of
regulations and/or agreements to
balance conservation with energy
development and minimize its effects in
areas where the species resides;
minimization of OHV use; placement of
roads and utility lines away from the
species and its habitat; minimization of
livestock use or other human-caused
disturbances that disturb the soil or
seeds; and the minimization of habitat
fragmentation.
These management activities would
protect the primary constituent
elements for the species by preventing
the loss of habitat and individuals,
protecting the plant’s habitat and soils,
and managing for appropriate levels of
disturbance.
Criteria Used To Identify Critical
Habitat
As required by section 4(b)(1)(A) of
the Act, we use the best scientific and
commercial data available to designate
critical habitat. We review all available
information pertaining to the habitat
requirements of the species.
When determining proposed critical
habitat boundaries, we made every
effort to avoid including developed
areas such as lands covered by
buildings, pavement, and other
structures because such lands lack
physical and biological features
essential for the conservation of
Penstemon debilis and Phacelia
submutica. The scale of the maps we
prepared under the parameters for
publication within the Code of Federal
Regulations may not reflect the
exclusion of such developed lands. In
the case of Ipomopsis polyantha,
because the plant is often found growing
on partially developed sites, around
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
45089
buildings, or immediately adjacent to
roads, we did not attempt to exclude
buildings, pavement, and other
structures. For all three species, any
developed lands left inside critical
habitat boundaries shown on the maps
of this proposed rule are not proposed
for designation as critical habitat as per
regulation. Therefore, if the critical
habitat is finalized as proposed, a
Federal action involving these lands
would not trigger section 7
consultations with respect to critical
habitat and the requirement of no
adverse modification unless the specific
action would affect the physical and
biological features essential to the
conservation of the species within
adjacent critical habitat.
All units are proposed for designation
based on sufficient elements of physical
and biological features being present to
support Ipomopsis polyantha,
Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia
submutica life-history processes. Some
units contain all of the identified
elements of physical and biological
features and supported multiple lifehistory processes. Unoccupied units
contain only the elements of the
physical and biological features
necessary to support the species’
particular use of that habitat but not the
multiple life-history processes since
they are unoccupied.
Small populations and plant species
with limited distributions, like those of
Ipomopsis polyantha and Penstemon
debilis, are vulnerable to relatively
minor environmental disturbances
(Given 1994, pp. 66–67; Frankham 2005,
pp. 135–136), and are subject to the loss
of genetic diversity from genetic drift,
the random loss of genes, and
inbreeding (Ellstrand and Elam 1993,
pp. 217–237; Leimu et al. 2006, pp.
942–952). Plant populations with
lowered genetic diversity are more
prone to local extinction (Barrett and
Kohn 1991, pp. 4, 28). Smaller plant
populations generally have lower
genetic diversity, and lower genetic
diversity may in turn lead to even
smaller populations by decreasing the
species’ ability to adapt, thereby
increasing the probability of population
extinction (Newman and Pilson 1997, p.
360; Palstra and Ruzzante 2008, pp.
3428–3447). Because of the dangers
associated with small populations or
limited distributions, the recovery of
many rare plant species includes the
creation of new sites or reintroductions
to ameliorate these effects.
Genetic analysis of Ipomopsis
polyantha has not been conducted;
therefore, we do not understand the
genetic diversity of this species. Given
the species’ limited extent and presence
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
45090
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
in only two populations, we expect the
species may be suffering from low
genetic diversity or could in the future.
Genetic research on Penstemon
debilis has found that there is more
genetic diversity in larger populations
than smaller populations, that the
northeastern populations are more
closely related to one another than to
the southwestern populations, that
inbreeding is common within each
population, and that genetic diversity
for the species is low when compared
with other species of plants with similar
life history traits (Wolfe 2010, p. 1).
Small population sizes with few
individuals are a problem for this
species, as supported by this research.
When designating critical habitat for a
species, we attempt to consider the
species’ survival and recoverability, as
outlined in the destruction or adverse
modification standard. Realizing that
the current occupied habitat is not
enough for the survival and recovery of
Ipomopsis polyantha and Penstemon
debilis, we worked with species’ experts
to identify unoccupied habitat essential
for the conservation of these two
species. The justification for why
unoccupied habitat is essential to the
conservation of these species and
methodology used to identify the best
unoccupied areas for consideration for
inclusion is described under ‘‘Criteria
Used to Identify Critical Habitat’’
section below.
Habitat fragmentation can have
negative effects on biological
populations, especially rare plants, and
affect survival and recovery (Aguilar et
al. 2008, pp. 5177–5188). Fragments are
often not of sufficient size to support the
natural diversity prevalent in an area
and thus exhibit a decline in
biodiversity (Noss and Cooperrider
1994, pp. 50–54). Habitat fragments are
often functionally smaller than they
appear because edge effects (such as
increased nonnative invasive species or
wind speeds) impact the available
habitat within the fragment (Lienert and
Fischer 2003, p. 597). Habitat
fragmentation has been shown to
disrupt plant-pollinator interactions and
predator-prey interactions (SteffanDewenter and Tscharntke 1999, pp.
432–440), alter seed germination
percentages (Menges 1991, pp. 158–
164), and result in low fruit set
(Cunningham 2000, pp. 1149–1152).
Extensive habitat fragmentation can
result in dramatic fluxes in available
solar radiation, water, and nutrients
(Saunders et al. 1991, pp. 18–32).
Shaffer and Stein (2000) identify a
methodology for conserving imperiled
species known as the three Rs:
Representation, resiliency, and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
redundancy. Representation, or
preserving some of everything, means
conserving not just a species but its
associated plant communities,
pollinators, and pollinator habitats.
Resiliency and redundancy ensure there
is enough of a species so it can survive
into the future. Resiliency means
ensuring that the habitat is adequate for
a species and its representative
components. Redundancy ensures an
adequate number of sites and
individuals. This methodology has been
widely accepted as a reasonable
conservation methodology (Tear et al.
2005, p. 841).
We have addressed representation
through our primary constituent
elements for each species (as discussed
above) and by providing habitat for
pollinators of Ipomopsis polyantha and
Penstemon debilis (as discussed further
under ‘‘Ipomopsis polyantha’’ below).
For Phacelia submutica, we believe that
the occupied habitat provides for both
resiliency and redundancy and that
with conservation of these areas, the
species should be conserved and
sustained into the future. For I.
polyantha, there are only two known
populations, both with few or no
protections in place (low resiliency). For
adequate resiliency, we believe it is
necessary for the survival and recovery
of I. polyantha that additional
populations with further protections be
established. Therefore, we have
identified two unoccupied areas as
proposed critical habitat units (CHUs)
for I. polyantha. For P. debilis, there are
only approximately 4,000 known
individuals (low redundancy) and all
within two concentrated areas (low
resiliency). For adequate redundancy
and resiliency, we believe it is necessary
for survival and recovery that additional
populations of P. debilis be established.
Therefore, we have identified two
unoccupied areas as proposed CHUs for
P. debilis.
Ipomopsis polyantha
In accordance with the Act and its
implementing regulation at 50 CFR
424.12(e), we consider whether
designating additional areas—outside
those currently occupied as well as
those occupied at the time of listing—
are necessary to ensure the conservation
of the species. For Ipomopsis polyantha,
we are proposing to designate critical
habitat in areas within the geographical
area occupied by the species at the time
of listing in 2011. We also are proposing
to designate specific areas outside the
geographical area occupied by the
species at the time of listing, because
such areas are essential for the
conservation of the species.
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Occupied critical habitat was
identified by delineating all known sites
within a population (Colorado Natural
Heritage Program (CNHP) 2010b, p. 1),
placing a minimum convex polygon
around the perimeter of all sites, and
then adding an additional 3,280-ft
(1,000-m) area for pollinator habitat.
The distance that pollinators can travel
is significant to plants including
Ipomopsis polyantha because pollen
transfer and seed dispersal are the only
mechanisms for genetic exchange. Both
pollen and seed dispersal can vary
widely by plant species (Ellstrand 2003,
p. 1164). In general, pollinators will
focus on small areas where floral
resources are abundant; however,
occasional longer distance pollination
will occur, albeit infrequently. No
research has been conducted on flight
distances of I. polyantha’s pollinators.
Therefore, we rely on general pollinator
travel distances described in the
literature.
Typically, pollinators fly distances
that are in relation to their body sizes,
with smaller pollinators flying shorter
distances than larger pollinators
(Greenleaf et al. 2007, pp. 589–596). If
a pollinator can fly long distances,
pollen transfer is also possible across
these distances. The largest pollinators
of Ipomopsis polyantha are bumblebee
species (Bombus spp.). In one study, the
buff-tailed bumblebee (Bombus
terrestris) flew a maximum distance of
2,037 ft (621 m) (Osborne et al. 1999,
pp. 524–526). The bumblebee-pollinated
plant species, Scabiosa columbaria
(dove pincushions), experienced
decreased pollen flow at a patch
isolation distance of 82 ft (25 m), and
little to no pollen transfer when patches
were isolated by 656 ft (200 m)
(Velterop 2000, p. 65).
In contrast, another study found that
displaced buff-tailed bumblebee
individuals were able to return to their
nests from distances over 5.6 mi (9 km)
(Goulson and Stout 2001, p. 108).
Another study found that buff-tailed
bumblebee workers (resource collectors)
were recaptured while foraging on
super-abundant resources at distances of
1.1 mi (1.75 km) from the nest (WaltherHellwig and Frankl 2000, p. 303). These
studies suggest variability in the
distances over which pollen transfer
may occur and over which bumblebee
species can travel. Ipomopsis polyantha
sites within populations can be
separated by more than 3,280 ft (1000
m) making conservation of these large
pollinators especially important for
genetic exchange between sites. In the
interest of protecting Ipomopsis
polyantha’s pollinators, we have
identified a 3,280-ft (1,000-m) wide
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
pollinator area. This area has the added
benefit of providing more habitat for I.
polyantha to potentially expand into, in
the future.
A recovery plan has not yet been
written for Ipomopsis polyantha.
However, as described above, with only
two known populations of I. polyantha,
both of which are located largely on
private lands with few protections, we
expect that future recovery efforts will
include efforts to improve resiliency by
increasing the number of populations;
therefore, we also are proposing to
designate unoccupied habitat. We
determined that not all potential habitat
(Mancos shale soil layer near the town
of Pagosa Springs) for I. polyantha was
essential to the conservation of the
species, and in keeping with section
3(5)(C) of the Act, which states that
critical habitat may not include the
entire geographical area which can be
occupied by the species, we carefully
refined the area proposed for
designation.
To assist us in determining which
specific areas may be essential to the
conservation of the species and
considered for inclusion in this
proposal, we not only evaluated the
biological contribution of an area, but
also evaluated the conservation
potential of the area through the overlay
of a designation of critical habitat.
While we recognize that there is an
education value to designating an area
as critical habitat, the more prevailing
benefit is consultation under section 7
of the Act on activities that may affect
critical habitat on Federal lands or
where a Federal action may exist. Thus,
in evaluating the potential conservation
value of an unoccupied area for
inclusion in critical habitat, we first
focused on lands that are biologically
important to the species and then
considered which of those lands were
under Federal ownership or likely to
have a Federal action occur on them. If
the inclusion of areas that met those
criteria were not sufficient to conserve
the species, we then evaluated other
specific areas on private lands that were
not likely to have a Federal action on
them. Unoccupied critical habitat was
identified by overlaying the Mancos
shale soil layer around Pagosa Springs
with Federal ownership (Service 2011e,
p. 1). As little overlap occurred where
Mancos shale soils and Federal lands
intersected with habitat supporting the
appropriate plant communities for
future I. polyantha introductions,
habitat is somewhat limited in suitable
areas. Upon discussions with local
species and area experts as well as land
managers, we identified two areas on
USFS lands as potential recovery or
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
introduction areas for I. polyantha.
These two areas include the O’Neal Hill
Special Botanical Area and Eight Mile
Mesa, both managed by USFS. These
areas contain the primary constituent
elements sufficient to support the lifehistory needs of the species, including
Mancos shale soils and appropriate
plant communities, and when added to
the proposed occupied areas would
provide sufficient resiliency,
redundancy, and representation for the
conservation of the species.
We delineated the critical habitat unit
(CHU) boundaries for Ipomopsis
polyantha using the following steps:
(1) In determining what areas were
occupied by Ipomopsis polyantha, we
used data collected by the CNHP
(O’Kane 1985, maps; Lyon 2002, p. 3;
Lyon and Mayo 2005, pp. 2–7; CNHP
2008; 2010a, pp. 1–8), BLM (Brinton
2010, pers. comm.), USFS (Brinton
2010, pers. comm.), the Service (Mayo
2005, pp. 1–35; Glenne and Mayo 2009,
spatial data; Langton and Mayo 2010,
spatial data), research efforts (Collins
1995, maps), and consulting firms (JGB
Consulting 2005, pp. 2–7) to map
specific locations of I. polyantha. These
data were input into ArcMap 9.3.1.
Based on criteria developed by the
CNHP, sites were classified into discrete
populations if they were within 2 mi (3
km) of each other and were not
separated by unsuitable habitat (CNHP
2010b, p. 1).
(2) For currently occupied CHUs, we
delineated proposed critical habitat
areas by creating minimum convex
polygons around each population and
adding a 3,280-ft- (1,000-m)-wide area
for pollinator habitat as previously
described.
(3) For currently unoccupied CHUs,
we identified two areas where the
Mancos shale (Tweto 1979, spatial data)
was intersected with Federal ownership
(COMaP version 8—Theobald et al.
2010, spatial data). COMaP version 8 is
the most updated geospatial data layer
available for land ownership in
Colorado. We delineated these areas by
following the Federal land management
boundary, and identifying suitable
habitats based on species and area
experts’ input and aerial imagery. Our
reasoning for identifying unoccupied
units is further described above.
We are proposing for designation of
critical habitat lands that we have
determined are occupied at the time of
listing and contain sufficient elements
of physical and biological features to
support life-history processes essential
for the conservation of the species, as
well as lands outside of the geographical
area occupied at the time of listing that
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
45091
we have determined are essential for the
conservation of Ipomopsis polyantha.
Penstemon debilis
In accordance with the Act and its
implementing regulation at 50 CFR
424.12(e), we consider whether
designating additional areas—outside
those currently occupied as well as
those occupied at the time of listing—
are necessary to ensure the conservation
of the species. We are proposing to
designate critical habitat in areas within
the geographical area occupied by the
species at the time of listing in 2011. We
also are proposing to designate specific
areas outside the geographical area
occupied by the species at the time of
listing, because such areas are essential
for the conservation of the species.
Occupied critical habitat was
identified by delineating all known sites
within a population (CNHP 2010b, p. 6),
placing a minimum convex polygon
around the perimeter of all these sites,
and then adding a 3,280-ft (1,000-m)
area for pollinator habitat as previously
described. Like Ipomopsis polyantha,
Penstemon debilis’ largest pollinators
are the bumblebee species (Bombus sp.)
(discussed above under I. polyantha).
A recovery plan has not yet been
written for Penstemon debilis. With
only 4,100 known individuals of P.
debilis concentrated in two areas, we
conclude that future recovery efforts
will necessitate actions to improve
redundancy by increasing the number of
individuals and sites. Therefore, we also
are proposing to designate unoccupied
habitat as critical habitat. Unoccupied
critical habitat was delineated by
identifying potential habitat on large
contiguous areas of Federal ownership
(see Number 3 below) (Service 2011e, p.
2). Occupied areas were expanded into
adjacent areas containing this same
potential habitat, as delineated and
described below. This roughly doubled
the size of these occupied units,
providing more potential habitat for
future recovery and introduction efforts.
We determined that not all potential
habitat (as defined below) for P. debilis
was essential to the conservation of the
species, and in keeping with section
3(5)(C) of the Act, which states that
critical habitat may not include the
entire geographical area which can be
occupied by the species, we carefully
refined the area proposed for
designation.
To assist us in determining which
specific areas may be essential to the
conservation of the species and
considered for inclusion in this
proposal, we not only evaluated the
biological contribution of an area, but
also evaluated the conservation
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
45092
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
potential of the area through the overlay
of a designation of critical habitat.
While we recognize that there is an
education value to designating an area
as critical habitat, the more prevailing
benefit is consultation under section 7
of the Act on activities that may affect
critical habitat on Federal lands or
where a Federal action may exist. Thus,
in evaluating the potential conservation
value of an unoccupied area for
inclusion in critical habitat, we first
focused on lands that are biologically
important to the species and then
considered which of those lands were
under Federal ownership or likely to
have a Federal action occur on them. If
the inclusion of areas that met those
criteria were not sufficient to conserve
the species, we then evaluated other
specific areas on private lands that were
not likely to have a Federal action on
them. Upon discussions with local
species and area experts, as well as land
managers, we identified two areas on
BLM lands as potential recovery or
introduction areas for P. debilis. These
two areas include Brush Mountain and
Cow Ridge, both managed by BLM.
These areas contain the primary
constituent elements sufficient to
support the life-history needs of the
species, including oil shale soils and
appropriate plant communities.
We delineated the CHU boundaries
for Penstemon debilis using the
following steps:
(1) In determining what areas were
occupied by Penstemon debilis, we used
data collected by the CNHP (O’Kane and
Anderson 1986, p. 1; Spackman et al.
1996, p. 7; CNHP 2010a, spatial data),
the BLM (Scheck and Kohls 1997, p. 3;
DeYoung et al. 2010, p. 1; DeYoung
2011, pers. comm.), CNAP (CNAP 2006,
maps, pp. 4–7), the Service (Ewing
2009, spatial data and map), and a
consulting firm (Graham 2009, spatial
data) to map populations using ArcMap
9.3.1. These locations were classified
into discrete element occurrences
(populations) by CNHP (2010b, p. 6).
(2) We delineated preliminary units
by creating minimum convex polygons
around each population and adding a
3,280-ft- (1,000-m)-wide area for
pollinator habitat as described above.
(3) We then identified potential
habitat (Service 2011e, p. 2) in ArcMap
9.3.1 by intersecting the following
criteria: The Parachute Creek Member
and the Lower part of the Green River
Formation geological formations (Tweto
1979), with elevations between 6,561 to
9,350 ft (2,000 and 2,850 m), with
suitable soil types that included five soil
series (Irigul-Starman channery loams,
Happle-Rock outcrop association, Rock
outcrop-Torriorthents
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
complec,Torriorthents-CamborthidsRock outcrop complex, and Tosca
channery loam) which represented 89
percent of all known Penstemon debilis
sites (Service 2011c, p. 2; NRCS 2010,
spatial data), and with the ‘‘Rocky
Mountain cliff and canyon’’ landcover
classification SW ReGAP 2004, spatial
data). We chose the ‘‘Rocky Mountain
cliff and canyon’’ landcover
classification because 75 percent of all
the known P. debilis locations fall
within this mapping unit (and all sites
outside are either on artificially created
habitats or are directly below this
classification where both oil shale
substrate and P. debilis seed dispersal
down drainage constantly occurs. We
did not include the lower elevations
currently occupied by Penstemon
debilis in our minimum convex polygon
edges that we used for delineating
pollinator habitat (step 2) or in our
potential habitat analysis (step 3),
because there are few plants in these
more ephemeral wash-out habitat types
and because these unusual habitat types
do not seem to represent the species’
typical habitat requirements. However,
it should be noted that these unusual
sites are still included within the
boundaries of Unit 3 (as delineated by
step 2).
(4) From this potential habitat
analysis (as delineated in step 3), we
took the two continuous bands of
potential habitat that include the areas
where Penstemon debilis is currently
found and added them to our existing
polygons, including pollinator habitat
(as delineated in step 2). We did this by
again creating a minimum convex
polygon. This condensed all known
populations into two currently occupied
CHUs (Units 3 and 4).
(5) For currently unoccupied CHUs,
we identified two areas where our
potential habitat was intersected with
Federal ownership (COMaP version 8—
Theobald et al. 2010, spatial data).
COMaP version 8 is the most updated
geospatial data layer available for land
ownership in Colorado. The boundaries
are clipped to our potential habitat layer
and the Federal ownership layer. Our
reasoning for identifying unoccupied
units is further described above.
We are proposing for designation of
critical habitat lands that we have
determined are occupied at the time of
listing and contain sufficient elements
of physical and biological features to
support life-history processes essential
for the conservation of the species, and
lands outside of the geographical area
occupied at the time of listing that we
have determined are essential for the
conservation of Penstemon debilis.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Phacelia submutica
In accordance with the Act and its
implementing regulation at 50 CFR
424.12(e), we consider whether
designating additional areas—outside
those currently occupied as well as
those occupied at the time of listing—
are necessary to ensure the conservation
of the species. We are not currently
proposing to designate any areas outside
the geographical area occupied by the
species because occupied areas are
sufficient for the conservation of the
species if the threats are addressed with
appropriate management.
Occupied critical habitat was
identified by delineating all known sites
within a population (CNHP 2010b, p.
11), and placing a minimum convex
polygon around the perimeter of all
these sites. We then added a 328-ft(100-m)-wide area to account for
indirect effects from factors such as edge
effects from roads, nonnative species,
dust impacts, and others (as discussed
above).
Phacelia submutica has a large
enough range (sufficient representation
and resiliency), enough populations
(sufficient redundancy), and enough
individuals (sufficient redundancy) that
we felt that the occupied habitat alone,
if protected from threats, would be
adequate for the future survival and
recovery of the species. Therefore, no
unoccupied habitat was included in this
critical habitat designation.
We delineated the CHU boundaries
for Phacelia submutica using the
following steps:
(1) In determining what areas were
occupied by Phacelia submutica, we
used data collected by CNHP (CNHP
1982, pp. 1–17; Burt and Spackman
1995, pp. 10–14; Burt and Carston 1995,
p. 3; Spackman and Fayette 1996, p. 5;
Lyon 2008, spatial data; 2009, spatial
data; Lyon and Huggins 2009a, p. 3;
Lyon and Huggins 2009b, p. 3; Lyon
2010, pers. comm.; CNHP 2010a, spatial
data), the Colorado Native Plant Society
(Colorado Native Plant Society [CNPS]
1982, pp. 1–9), the BLM (BLM pers.
comm. 2010, spatial data; DeYoung
2009, pers. comm.), USFS (Johnston
2010, pers. comm.; Kirkpatrick 2011,
pers. comm.; Potter 2010, spatial data;
Proctor 2010, pers. comm.), CNAP
(Wenger 2008; 2009; 2010, spatial data),
the Service (Ewing and Glenne 2009,
spatial data; Langton 2010, spatial data),
and consulting firms (Ellis and Hackney
1982, pp. 7–8; WestWater Engineering
[WWE] 2007a, spatial data; 2007b,
spatial data; 2010, pp. 17–19, maps and
spatial data) to map specific locations of
P. submutica using ArcMap 9.3.1. These
locations were classified into discrete
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
45093
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
element occurrences or populations if
they were within 1.2 mi (2 km) and
were not separated by unsuitable
habitat, based on criteria developed by
CNHP (CNHP 2010b, p. 11). Then, we
used 2009 aerial imagery (NAIP 2009,
spatial data) to look at all sites that were
considered historically occupied
because they had not been revisited in
the last 20 years. Based on our analysis,
we determined all historically occupied
sites were suitable habitat and
considered these sites still in existence
and occupied at the time of listing.
(2) We delineated proposed critical
habitat areas by creating minimum
convex polygons around each
population and buffering the polygons
by 328 ft (100 m) to account for indirect
effects as described immediately above.
(3) We then modified these proposed
critical habitat polygon boundaries to
exclude unsuitable habitat as defined by
a potential habitat model (Decker et al.
2005, p. 9). From this modeling
exercise, we chose the more restrictive
of the two habitat models (the envelope
model) to further refine our critical
habitat polygons. This model was
developed by comparing occupied areas
with environmental variables, such as
elevation, slope, precipitation,
temperature, geology, soil type, and
vegetation type. The environmental
variables with the highest predictive
abilities influence the potential habitat
the model then identifies.
We are proposing for designation of
critical habitat lands that we have
determined are occupied at the time of
listing and contain sufficient elements
of physical and biological features to
support life-history processes essential
for the conservation of Phacelia
submutica.
polyantha. The four units we propose as
critical habitat are: (1) Dyke, (2) O’Neal
Hill Special Botanical Area, (3) Pagosa
Springs, and (4) Eight Mile Mesa. Table
2 shows the proposed units.
Proposed Critical Habitat Designation
The approximate area of each
proposed CHU is shown in table 3.
Ipomopsis polyantha
TABLE 2—OCCUPANCY OF Ipomopsis
polyantha BY PROPOSED CRITICAL
HABITAT UNITS
Currently
occupied?
Unit
1. Dyke .....................................
2. O’Neal Hill Special Botanical
Area.
3. Pagosa Springs ....................
4. Eight Mile Mesa ...................
Yes.
No.
Yes.
No.
We are proposing four units as critical
habitat for Ipomopsis polyantha. The
CHUs we describe below meet the
definition of critical habitat for I.
TABLE 3—PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS (CHUS) FOR Ipomopsis polyantha
[Area estimates reflect all land within CHU boundaries]
Critical habitat unit
Land ownership
1. Dyke .................................................
4. Eight Mile Mesa ...............................
BLM ..................................................................................................................
Private ...............................................................................................................
Archuleta County (County Road ROWs) .........................................................
Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) .............................................
Total for Dyke Unit ...........................................................................................
USFS–San Juan National Forest .....................................................................
Town of Pagosa Springs ..................................................................................
CDOW ..............................................................................................................
Private ...............................................................................................................
State Land Board .............................................................................................
Archuleta County (County Road ROWs) .........................................................
CDOT (Highway ROWs) ..................................................................................
Total for Pagosa Spring Unit ............................................................................
USFS–San Juan National Forest .....................................................................
42 ac (17 ha).
1,415 ac (573 ha).
5 ac (2 ha).
13 ac (5 ha).
1,475 ac (597 ha).
784 ac (317 ha).
599 ac (242 ha).
28 ac (11 ha).
5,652 ac (2,288 ha).
110 ac (44 ha).
18 ac (7 ha).
50 ac (20 ha).
6,456 ac (2,613 ha).
1,180 ac (478 ha).
Total ..............................................
......................................................................................................................
9,894 ac (4,004 ha).
2. O’Neal Hill Special Botanical Area ..
3. Pagosa Springs ...............................
Note: Area sizes may not sum due to
rounding.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
We present brief descriptions of all
units included in this proposed critical
habitat designation and reasons why
they meet the definition of critical
habitat for Ipomopsis polyantha. The
units are listed in order geographically
west to east.
Unit 1. Dyke
Unit 1, the Dyke Unit, consists of
1,475 ac (597 ha) of Federal and private
lands. The Unit is located at the
junction of U.S. Hwy 160 and Cat Creek
Road (County Road 700) near the
historic town of Dyke in Archuleta
County, Colorado. Ninety-seven percent
of this Unit is on private lands; of these
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
private lands, 1 percent is within
highway ROWs. Three percent is on
Federal land managed by the BLM,
through the Pagosa Springs Field Office
of the San Juan Public Lands Center.
This Unit is currently occupied.
This Unit currently has all the
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
species including a collection of all
three communities (barren shales, open
montane grassland (primarily Arizona
fescue) understory at the edges of open
Ponderosa pine, or clearings within the
ponderosa pine and Rocky Mountain
juniper and Utah juniper and oak
communities), pockets of shale with
little to no competition from other
species, suitable elevational ranges from
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Size of unit
6,720 to 7,285 ft (2,048 to 2,220 m),
Mancos shale soils, suitable climate,
pollinators and habitat for these
pollinators, and areas where the correct
disturbance regime is present. Lands
within this Unit are largely agricultural
although some housing is present
within the Unit. A large hunting ranch
also falls within this Unit. While these
lands currently have the physical and
biological features essential to the
conservation of Ipomopsis polyantha,
because of a lack of cohesive
management and protections, special
management will be required to
maintain these features in this Unit.
Threats to Ipomopsis polyantha in
this Unit include highway maintenance
and disturbance (several hundred plants
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
45094
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
have been documented along Highway
160 (CNHP 2010a, p. 5)), grazing,
agricultural use, Bromus inermis
encroachment, potential development,
and a new road that was constructed
through the I. polyantha population.
These threats should be addressed as
detailed above in the ‘‘Special
Management Considerations or
Protection’’ section.
Unit 2. O’Neal Hill Special Botanical
Area
Unit 2, the O’Neal Hill Botanical Area
consists of 784 ac (317 ha) of USFS land
that is managed by the San Juan Public
Lands Center. The Unit is north of
Pagosa Springs, roughly 13 mi (21 km)
north along Piedra Road. Roughly half
the acreage of this Unit (308 ac (125 ha))
falls within the O’Neal Hill Special
Botanical Area that was designated to
protect another Mancos shale endemic,
Lesquerella pruinosa (Pagosa
bladderpod). Because L. pruinosa is
sometimes found growing with I.
polyantha, we believe the site has high
potential for introduction of I.
polyantha. This Unit is not currently
occupied.
This Unit currently has all the
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
species including a collection of all
three plant communities, pockets of
shale with little to no competition from
other species, suitable elevational
ranges from 7,640 to 8,360 ft (2,330 to
2,550 m), Mancos shale soils, suitable
climate, habitat for pollinators (although
we do not know if Ipomopsis polyantha
pollinators are found here), and areas
where the correct disturbance regime is
present. Because of the presence of
these features, we believe this may make
a good introduction area for Ipomopsis
polyantha in the future and is needed to
ensure conservation of the species.
Threats to Ipomopsis polyantha in
this Unit include road maintenance and
disturbance, low levels of recreation,
some hunting, deer and elk use, and a
utility corridor and related maintenance
(Brinton 2011, pers. comm). The threats
should be addressed as detailed above
in the ‘‘Special Management
Considerations or Protection’’ section.
Ipomopsis polyantha is known from
only two populations, both with few or
no protections (little resilience). For
adequate resiliency and protection we
believe it is necessary for survival and
recovery that additional populations
with further protections be established.
Because this area receives low levels of
use and because it is already partially
protected through the special botanical
area, the area would make an ideal site
for future introductions of I. polyantha.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
Therefore, we have identified this Unit
as a proposed CHU for I. polyantha.
Unit 3. Pagosa Springs
Unit 3, the Pagosa Springs Unit, is the
largest of the four Ipomopsis polyantha
CHUs and consists of 6,456 ac (2,613 ha)
of municipal, State, and private lands.
The Unit is located at the junction of
Highways 160 and 84, south along
Highway 84, west along County Road
19, and east along Mill Creek Road.
Ownership of the land in Unit 3 is
divided as follows: 87.7 percent is
under private ownership, 9.2 percent is
owned by the Town of Pagosa Springs,
1.7 percent is owned and operated by
the Colorado State Land Board, 0.8
percent falls within the Colorado
Department of Transportation (CDOT)
ROWs, 0.4 percent is found on CDOW
lands, and 0.3 percent is located on
Archuleta County ROWs. This Unit is
currently occupied and contains the
majority of I. polyantha individuals.
This Unit currently has all the
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
species, including a collection of all
three plant communities, pockets of
shale with little to no competition from
other species, suitable elevational
ranges from 6,960 to 7,724 ft (2,120 to
2,350 m), Mancos shale soils, suitable
climate, pollinators and habitat for these
pollinators, and areas where the correct
disturbance regime is present. Lands
within this Unit fall into a wide array
of land management scenarios,
including agricultural use, junkyards,
urban areas, small residential lots, and
large 30- to 40-ac (12- to 16-ha)
residential parcels. While these lands
currently have the physical and
biological features essential to the
conservation of Ipomopsis polyantha,
because of a lack of cohesive
management and protections, special
management will be required to
maintain these features in this Unit.
Since almost 88 percent of this Unit
is under private ownership, the primary
threat to the species in this Unit is
agricultural or urban development.
Other threats include highway ROW
disturbances, Bromus inermis and other
nonnative invasive species, excessive
livestock grazing, and mowing. These
threats should be addressed as detailed
above in the ‘‘Special Management
Considerations or Protection’’ section.
Unit 4: Eight Mile Mesa
Unit 4, Eight Mile Mesa, consists of
1,180 ac (478 ha) of USFS lands that are
managed by the Pagosa Springs Field
Office of the San Juan Public Lands
Center. This Unit is located roughly 6.5
mi (10.5 km) south of the intersections
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
of Highways 160 and 84 in Pagosa
Springs, Colorado, and on the western
side of Highway 84. This Unit is not
currently occupied.
This Unit currently has all the
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
species including a collection of all
three plant communities, pockets of
shale with little to no competition from
other species, suitable elevational
ranges from 7,320 to 7,858 ft (2,230 to
2,395 m), Mancos shale soils, suitable
climate, habitat for pollinators, and
areas where the correct disturbance
regime is present. Because there are so
few Mancos shale sites on Federal
lands, and because this site has an array
of habitat types, it provides the best
potential area for introduction of I.
polyantha in the future.
Threats to Ipomopsis polyantha in
this Unit include a road running
through the site, recreational use,
horseback riding, dispersed camping
and hunting, and firewood gathering.
The Unit has some dense Ponderosa
pine stands, and several small wildfires,
that are actively suppressed, occur every
year. There is a vacant grazing allotment
at this Unit, and noxious weeds are
being actively controlled (Brinton 2011,
pers. comm.). These threats should be
addressed as detailed above in the
‘‘Special Management Considerations or
Protection’’ section.
Ipomopsis polyantha is known from
only two populations, both with few or
no protections (little resilience). For
adequate resiliency and protection we
believe it is necessary for survival and
recovery that additional populations
with further protections be established.
Therefore, we have identified this Unit
and one other unoccupied area as
proposed CHUs for I. polyantha.
Penstemon debilis
We are proposing four units as critical
habitat for Penstemon debilis. The
CHUs we describe below constitute our
current best assessment of locations that
meet the definition of critical habitat for
P. debilis. The four units we propose as
critical habitat are: (1) Brush Mountain,
(2) Cow Ridge, (3) Mount Callahan, and
(4) Anvil Points. Table 4 shows the
occupancy of the units.
TABLE 4—OCCUPANCY OF Penstemon
debilis BY PROPOSED CRITICAL
HABITAT UNIT
Unit
1. Brush Mountain ....................
2. Cow Ridge ............................
3. Mount Callahan ....................
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
Currently
occupied?
No.
No.
Yes.
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
45095
The approximate area of each
TABLE 4—OCCUPANCY OF Penstemon
debilis BY PROPOSED CRITICAL proposed CHU is shown in table 5.
HABITAT UNIT—Continued
Currently
occupied?
Unit
4. Anvil Points ...........................
Yes.
TABLE 5—PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS (CHUS) FOR Penstemon debilis
[Area estimates reflect all land within CHU boundaries.]
Land ownership by type
Critical habitat unit
Size of unit
Federal
Private
1. Brush Mountain ....................................
1,437 ac (582 ha) ....................................
.............................................................
2. Cow Ridge ...........................................
4,819 ac (1,950 ha) .................................
.............................................................
3. Mount Callahan ....................................
4,338 ac (1,756 ha) .................................
3,675 ac (1,487 ha) .................................
4. Anvil Points ..........................................
3,424 ac (1,386 ha) .................................
1,461 ac (591 ha) ....................................
Total ..................................................
13,888 ac (5,621 ha) ...............................
4,824 ac (1,952 ha) .................................
Note: Area sizes may not sum due to
rounding.
We present brief descriptions of all
units included in the proposed critical
habitat designation and reasons why
they meet the definition of critical
habitat for Penstemon debilis. The units
are listed in order geographically west
to east, and north to south.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Unit 1. Brush Mountain
Unit 1, the Brush Mountain Unit,
consists of 1,437 ac (582 ha) of federally
owned lands, managed by BLM through
the Grand Junction Field Office. It is
located approximately 16 mi (26 km)
northwest of the town of DeBeque in
Garfield County, Colorado. It is
northwest of the intersection of Roan
Creek Road (County Road 204) and
Brush Creek Road (County Road 209).
This Unit is not currently occupied.
This Unit has all the physical and
biological features essential to the
conservation of the species, including
the Rocky Mountain Cliff and Canyon
plant community (SW ReGAP 2004,
spatial data) with less than 10 percent
plant cover, suitable elevational ranges
of 6,234 to 8,222 ft (1,900 to 2,506 m),
outcrops of the Parachute Creek Member
of the Green River Formation, steep
slopes of these soil outcrops that lend to
the appropriate disturbance levels,
pollinator habitat, and a climate with
between 12 to 18 in. (30 and 46 cm) in
annual rainfall and winter snow.
Because of the presence of these
features, we believe this may make a
good introduction area for Penstemon
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
debilis in the future and is needed to
ensure conservation of the species.
The primary threat to Penstemon
debilis in this Unit is energy
development. This threat should be
addressed as detailed above in the
‘‘Special Management Considerations or
Protection’’ section. P. debilis consists
of only 4,100 known individuals (little
redundancy), and all occur within two
concentrated areas (little resilience). For
adequate redundancy and resiliency, we
believe it is necessary for survival and
recovery that additional populations be
established. Therefore, we have
identified this Unit as a proposed CHU
for P. debilis.
Unit 2. Cow Ridge
Unit 2, the Cow Ridge Unit, is 4,819
ac (1,950 ha) of federally owned lands
managed by BLM through the Grand
Junction Field Office. It is located
approximately 8 mi (13 km) northwest
of the town of DeBeque in Garfield
County, Colorado, and north of Dry Fork
Road. This Unit is not currently
occupied.
This Unit has all the physical and
biological features essential to the
conservation of the species, including
the Rocky Mountain Cliff and Canyon
plant community (SW ReGAP 2004,
spatial data) with less than 10 percent
cover, suitable elevational ranges of
6,273 to 8,284 ft (1,912 to 2,525 m),
outcrops of the Parachute Creek Member
of the Green River Formation, steep
slopes of these soil outcrops that lend to
the appropriate disturbance levels,
habitat for pollinators, and a climate
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
1,437 ac (582
ha).
4,819 ac
(1,950 ha).
8,013 ac
(3,243 ha).
4,885 ac
(1,977 ha).
19,155 ac
(7,752 ha).
with between 12 to 18 in. (30 and 46
cm) in annual rainfall and winter snow.
Because of the presence of these
features, we believe this may make a
good introduction area for Penstemon
debilis in the future and is needed to
ensure conservation of the species.
The primary threat to Penstemon
debilis in this Unit is energy
development. This threat should be
addressed as detailed above in the
‘‘Special Management Considerations or
Protection’’ section. P. debilis consists
of only 4,100 known individuals (little
redundancy) and all within 2
concentrated areas (low resilience). For
adequate redundancy and resiliency, we
believe it is necessary for survival and
recovery that additional populations be
established. Therefore, we have
identified this Unit as a proposed CHU
for P. debilis.
Unit 3. Mount Callahan
Unit 3, the Mount Callahan Unit,
consists of 8,013 ac (3,243 ha) of Federal
and private land. It is located
approximately 2 mi (3 km) west of the
town of Parachute on the south-facing
slopes of Mount Callahan and westward
along the cliffs of the Roan Plateau.
Fifty-four percent of Unit 3 is managed
by the BLM under the management of
two field offices: 80 percent of these
Federal lands are managed by the
Colorado River Valley Field Office and
20 percent are managed by the Grand
Junction Field Office. Eight percent of
this Unit (674 ac (273 ha)) has been
designated as two Colorado Natural
Areas (Mount Callahan and Mount
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
45096
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Callahan Saddle). These privately
owned lands are currently protected
from energy development, but are in
close proximity to oil wells and
associated infrastructure. We are
considering these two Natural Areas for
exclusion from this CHU. These
exclusions are discussed in further
detail below under ‘‘Exclusions—
Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the
Act.’’ Thirty-five percent of this Unit
falls on private lands with no
protections. This Unit is currently
occupied.
This Unit currently has all the
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of
Penstemon debilis, including the Rocky
Mountain Cliff and Canyon plant
community (SW ReGAP 2004, spatial
data) with less than 10 percent cover,
suitable elevational ranges of 5,413 to
8,809 ft (1,650 to 2,685 m), outcrops of
the Parachute Creek Member of the
Green River Formation, suitable
pollinators and habitat for these
pollinators, steep slopes of these soil
outcrops that lend to the appropriate
disturbance levels, and a climate with
between 12 to 18 in. (30 and 46 cm) in
annual rainfall and winter snow.
The primary threat to Penstemon
debilis and its habitat in this Unit is
energy development. This threat should
be addressed as detailed above in the
‘‘Special Management Considerations or
Protection’’ section.
Unit 4. Anvil Points
Unit 4, the Anvil Points Unit, consists
of 4,885 ac (1,977 ha) of Federal and
private land. It is located approximately
1 mi (2 km) north of the town of Rulison
in Garfield County, Colorado. Seventy
percent of this Unit is managed by the
BLM, Colorado River Valley Field
Office. Twenty-three percent of the Unit
(1,102 ac (446 ha)) is within several
potential BLM Areas of Critical
Environmental Concern (ACECs). If
these become ACECs, they would have
several stipulations to protect
Penstemon debilis, particularly from oil
and gas development. These areas are
discussed further in the proposed (75
FR 35732; June 23, 2010) and final
listing rules (in today’s Rules and
Regulations section of the Federal
Register). Thirty percent of this Unit is
on private lands. This Unit is currently
occupied.
This Unit currently has all the
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of
Penstemon debilis, including the Rocky
Mountain Cliff and Canyon plant
community (SW ReGAP 2004, spatial
data) with less than 10 percent plant
cover, suitable elevational ranges of
6,318 to 9,288 ft (1,926 to 2,831 m),
outcrops of the Parachute Creek Member
of the Green River Formation, suitable
pollinators and habitat for these
pollinators, steep slopes of these soil
outcrops that lend to the appropriate
disturbance levels, and a climate with
between 12 to 18 in. (30 and 46 cm) in
annual rainfall and winter snow.
Threats to Penstemon debilis and its
habitat in this Unit is primarily energy
development. This threat should be
addressed as detailed above in the
‘‘Special Management Considerations or
Protection’’ section.
Phacelia submutica
We are proposing nine units as
critical habitat for Phacelia submutica.
The critical habitat areas we describe
below constitute our current best
assessment of areas that meet the
definition of critical habitat for P.
submutica. The nine units we propose
as critical habitat are: (1) Sulphur
Gulch, (2) Pyramid Rock, (3) Roan
Creek, (4) DeBeque, (5) Mount Logan, (6)
Ashmead Draw, (7) Baugh Reservoir, (8)
Horsethief Mountain, and (9) Anderson
Gulch. Table 6 shows the proposed
critical habitat units.
TABLE 6—PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS (CHUS) FOR Phacelia submutica
[Area estimates reflect all land within CHU boundaries.]
Land ownership by type
Unit #/Unit name
Size of unit
Federal
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Sulphur Gulch .....................
Pyramid Rock .....................
Roan Creek .........................
DeBeque .............................
Mount Logan .......................
Ashmead Draw ...................
Baugh Reservoir .................
Horsethief Mountain ............
Anderson Gulch ..................
Total .................................
State
Private
1,046 ac (423 ha) .................
15,429 ac (6,244 ha) ............
2 ac (1 ha) ............................
401 ac (162 ha) ....................
242 ac (98 ha) ......................
1,046 ac (423 ha) .................
19 ac (8 ha) ..........................
3,614 ac (1,463 ha) ..............
...............................................
21,800 ac (8,822 ha) ............
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
173 ac (70 ha) ...
173 ac (70 ha) ...
...............................................
1,892 ac (766 ha) .................
52 ac (21 ha) ........................
129 ac (52 ha) ......................
35 ac (14 ha) ........................
174 ac (71 ha) ......................
10 ac (4 ha) ..........................
594 ac (240 ha) ....................
128 ac (52 ha) ......................
3,014 ac (1,220 ha) ..............
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Note: Area sizes may not sum due to
rounding.
We present brief descriptions of all
units included in the proposed critical
habitat designation and reasons why
they meet the definition of critical
habitat for Phacelia submutica. The
units are listed in order geographically
west to east.
Unit 1. Sulphur Gulch
Unit 1, the Sulphur Gulch Unit,
consists of 1,046 ac (423 ha) of federally
owned land. The Unit is located
approximately 7.7 mi (12.5 km)
southwest of the town of DeBeque in
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
Mesa County, Colorado. This Unit is
managed by BLM, through the Grand
Junction Field Office. This Unit is
currently occupied.
This Unit currently has all the
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
species including barren clay badlands
with less than 20 percent plant/
vegetation cover, suitable elevational
ranges of 5,480 to 6,320 ft (1,670 to
1,926 m), appropriate topography, and
shrink-swell alkaline clay soils within
the Atwell Gulch and Shire members of
the Wasatch Formation. All lands
within this Unit are leased as grazing
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
1,046 ac (423 ha).
17,321 ac (7,010 ha).
54 ac (22 ha).
530 ac (215 ha).
277 ac (112 ha).
1,220 ac (494 ha).
28 ac (12 ha).
4,209 ac (1,703 ha).
301 ac (122 ha).
24,987 ac (10,112 ha).
allotments, and less than 1 percent is
managed as an active pipeline ROW by
the BLM. While these lands currently
have the physical and biological
features essential to the conservation of
Phacelia submutica, because of a lack of
cohesive management and protections,
special management will be required to
maintain these features in this Unit.
Threats to Phacelia submutica and its
habitat in this Unit include energy
development, recreation (especially
OHVs), domestic and wild ungulate
grazing and use, and nonnative invasive
species, such as Bromus tectorum.
These threats should be addressed as
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
detailed above in the ‘‘Special
Management Considerations or
Protection’’ section.
Unit 2. Pyramid Rock
Unit 2, the Pyramid Rock Unit, is the
largest Unit we are proposing and
consists of 17,321 ac (7,010 ha) of
federally and privately owned lands in
Mesa and Garfield Counties, Colorado.
This Unit is approximately 1.6 mi (2.6
km) west of the town of DeBeque. The
eastern boundary borders Roan Creek,
and Dry Fork Creek runs through the
northern quarter of the Unit. Eighty-nine
percent is managed by BLM through the
Grand Junction Field Office, and 11
percent is under private ownership.
Three percent of this Unit is within the
Pyramid Rock Natural Area and
Pyramid Rock ACEC that was
designated, in part, to protect the
species as discussed in the proposed (75
FR 35739; June 23, 2010) and final
listing rules (in the Rules and
Regulations section of today’s Federal
Register). This Unit is currently
occupied.
This Unit currently has all the
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
species including barren clay badlands
with less than 20 percent plant/
vegetation cover, suitable elevational
ranges of 4,960 to 6,840 ft (1,512 to
2,085 m), the appropriate topography,
and shrink-swell alkaline clay soils
within the Atwell Gulch and Shire
members of the Wasatch Formation.
Ninety-four percent of this Unit is
managed as a grazing allotment by the
BLM. Additionally, 11 percent of this
Unit is managed as an active pipeline
ROW. While these lands currently have
the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of Phacelia
submutica, because of a lack of cohesive
management and protections, special
management will be required to
maintain these features in this Unit.
Threats to Phacelia submutica and its
habitat in this Unit include energy
development, recreation (especially
OHV use), livestock and wild ungulate
grazing and use, and nonnative invasive
species including Bromus tectorum and
Halogeton glomeratus. The Westwide
Energy corridor runs through this Unit.
The corridor covers almost 10 percent of
this Unit (Service 2011a, p. 9). These
threats should be addressed as detailed
above in the ‘‘Special Management
Considerations or Protection’’ section.
Unit 3. Roan Creek
Unit 3, the Roan Creek Unit, consists
of 54 ac (22 ha) of Federal and privately
owned lands in Garfield County,
Colorado. The Unit is located 3.3 mi (5.4
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
km) north of the town of DeBeque and
for 1.7 mi (2.7 km) along both sides of
County Road 299. Ninety-seven percent
of this Unit is privately owned. Three
percent of this Unit is managed by BLM
through the Grand Junction Field Office.
This Unit is currently occupied.
This Unit currently has all the
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
species including barren clay badlands
with less than 20 percent cover, suitable
elevational ranges of 5,320 to 5,420 ft
(1,622 to 1,652 m), the appropriate
topography, and shrink-swell alkaline
clay soils within the Atwell Gulch and
Shire members of the Wasatch
Formation. The entire Unit is within a
grazing allotment. While these lands
currently have the physical and
biological features essential to the
conservation of Phacelia submutica,
because of a lack of cohesive
management and protections, special
management will be required to
maintain these features in this Unit.
Threats to Phacelia submutica and its
habitat in this Unit include recreation
(especially OHV use), livestock and
wild ungulate grazing and use, invasion
by nonnative invasive species including
Bromus tectorum and Halogeton
glomeratus, and a lack of protections on
private lands. These threats should be
addressed as detailed above in the
‘‘Special Management Considerations or
Protection’’ section.
Unit 4. DeBeque
Unit 4, the DeBeque Unit, consists of
530 ac (215 ha) of Federal and private
lands in Mesa County, Colorado. This
Unit is located 0.25 mile north of
DeBeque between Roan Creek Road and
Cemetery Road. Seventy-six percent of
this Unit is managed by BLM through
the Grand Junction Field Office. This
Unit is currently occupied.
This Unit currently has all the
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
species including barren clay badlands
with less than 20 percent plant/
vegetation cover, suitable elevational
ranges of 5,180 to 5,400 ft (1,579 to
1,646 m), the appropriate topography,
and shrink-swell alkaline clay soils
within the Atwell Gulch and Shire
members of the Wasatch Formation.
While these lands currently have the
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of Phacelia
submutica, because of a lack of cohesive
management and protections, special
management will be required to
maintain these features in this Unit.
Threats to Phacelia submutica and its
habitat in this Unit include energy
development, residential development,
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
45097
recreation (especially OHV use),
livestock and wild ungulate grazing and
use, and nonnative invasive species
including Bromus tectorum and
Halogeton glomeratus. Since 24 percent
of the Unit is privately owned and
borders the north of the town of
DeBeque, this Unit is threatened by
potential urban or agricultural
development. The Westwide Energy
corridor runs through this Unit. The
corridor covers almost 66 percent of this
Unit (Service 2011a, p. 9). These threats
should be addressed as detailed above
in the ‘‘Special Management
Considerations or Protection’’ section.
Unit 5. Mount Logan
Unit 5, the Mount Logan Unit,
consists of 277 ac (112 ha) of Federal
and private lands in Garfield County,
Colorado. The Unit is located 2.7 mi (4.4
km) north, northeast of the town of
DeBeque, Colorado, and 0.5 mi (0.8 km)
west of Interstate 70. Eighty-eight
percent of this Unit is managed by BLM
through the Grand Junction Field Office.
The remainder of this Unit is privately
owned. This Unit is currently occupied.
This Unit currently has all the
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
species including barren clay badlands
with less than 20 percent plant/
vegetation cover, suitable elevational
ranges of 4,960 to 5,575 ft (1,512 to
1,699 m), the appropriate topography,
and shrink-swell alkaline clay soils
within the Atwell Gulch and Shire
members of the Wasatch Formation.
Eighty-eight percent of this Unit is
managed as a grazing allotment by BLM,
and 53 percent is managed as an active
pipeline ROW. An access road runs
through the Unit connecting several oil
wells and associated infrastructure.
While these lands currently have the
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of Phacelia
submutica, because of a lack of cohesive
management and protections, special
management will be required to
maintain these features in this Unit.
Threats to Phacelia submutica and its
habitat in this Unit include energy
development, recreation (especially
OHV use), livestock and wild ungulate
grazing and use, and nonnative invasive
species, including Bromus tectorum and
Halogeton glomeratus. These threats
should be addressed as detailed above
in the ‘‘Special Management
Considerations or Protection’’ section.
Unit 6. Ashmead Draw
Unit 6, the Ashmead Draw Unit,
consists of 1,220 ac (494 ha) of both
Federal and private lands in Mesa
County, Colorado. The Unit is located
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
45098
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
1.5 mi (2.5 km) southeast of the town of
DeBeque, Colorado, and east of 45.5
Road (DeBeque Cut-off Road). Eighty-six
percent of this Unit is managed by BLM
through the Grand Junction Field Office.
This Unit is currently occupied.
This Unit currently has all the
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
species including barren clay badlands
with less than 20 percent plant/
vegetation cover, suitable elevational
ranges of 4,940 to 5,808 ft (1,506 to
1,770 m), the appropriate topography,
and shrink-swell alkaline clay soils
within the Atwell Gulch and Shire
members of the Wasatch Formation. A
network of access roads runs through
the Unit. Eighty eight percent of this
Unit is within a BLM grazing allotment,
and 84 percent is within the Grand
Junction Field Office’s designated
energy corridor. Thirty percent of the
Unit is managed as an active pipeline
ROW. While these lands currently have
the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of Phacelia
submutica, because of a lack of cohesive
management and protections, special
management will be required to
maintain these features in this Unit.
Threats to Phacelia submutica and its
habitat in this Unit include energy
development, recreation (especially
OHV use), livestock and wild ungulate
grazing and use, and nonnative invasive
species, including Bromus tectorum and
Halogeton glomeratus. The Westwide
Energy corridor runs through this Unit.
The corridor covers almost 84 percent of
this Unit (Service 2011a, p. 9). These
threats should be addressed as detailed
above in the ‘‘Special Management
Considerations or Protection’’ section.
Unit 7. Baugh Reservoir
Unit 7, the Baugh Reservoir Unit,
consists of 29 ac (12 ha) of Federal and
private lands in Mesa County, Colorado.
The Unit is located 6 mi (10 km) south
of DeBeque, Colorado, near Kimball
Mesa and Horse Canyon Road. Sixty-six
percent is managed by BLM through the
Grand Junction Field Office, and the
remaining 34 percent is on private
lands. This Unit is currently occupied.
This Unit currently has all the
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
species, including barren clay badlands
with less than 20 percent plant/
vegetation cover, a suitable elevational
range of 5,400 to 5,700 ft (1,646 to 1,737
m), the appropriate topography, and
shrink-swell alkaline clay soils within
the Atwell Gulch and Shire members of
the Wasatch Formation. An access road
runs through the Unit, close to the
occurrence of Phacelia submutica.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
While these lands currently have the
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of P.
submutica, because of a lack of cohesive
management and protections, special
management will be required to
maintain these features in this Unit.
Threats to Phacelia submutica and its
habitat in this Unit include energy
development, recreation, livestock and
wild ungulate grazing and use, and
nonnative invasive species including
Bromus tectorum and Halogeton
glomeratus. The Westwide Energy
corridor runs through this Unit. The
corridor covers almost 66 percent of this
Unit (Service 2011a, p. 9). These threats
should be addressed as detailed above
in the ‘‘Special Management
Considerations or Protection’’ section.
Unit 8. Horsethief Mountain
Unit 8, the Horsethief Mountain Unit,
consists of 4,209 ac (1,703 ha) of Federal
and private lands in Mesa County,
Colorado. It is located approximately 3.5
mi (5.6 km) southeast of DeBeque,
Colorado, and along the eastern side of
Sunnyside Road (V Road). Thirty-four
percent is managed by BLM through the
Grand Junction Field Office, 29 percent
by the White River National Forest, 23
percent by the Grand Mesa
Uncompahgre National Forest, and 14
percent is on private lands. This Unit is
currently occupied.
This Unit currently has all the
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
species, including barren clay badlands
with less than 20 percent plant/
vegetation cover, a suitable elevational
range of 5,320 to 6,720 ft (1,622 to 2,048
m), the appropriate topography, and
shrink-swell alkaline clay soils within
the Atwell Gulch and Shire members of
the Wasatch Formation. While these
lands currently have the physical and
biological features essential to the
conservation of Phacelia submutica,
because of a lack of cohesive
management and protections, special
management will be required to
maintain these features in this Unit.
Threats to Phacelia submutica and its
habitat in this Unit include energy
development, recreation (especially
OHV use), livestock and wild ungulate
grazing and use, and nonnative invasive
species, including Bromus tectorum and
Halogeton glomeratus. These threats
should be addressed as detailed above
in the ‘‘Special Management
Considerations or Protection’’ section.
Unit 9. Anderson Gulch
Unit 9, the Anderson Gulch Unit,
consists of 301 ac (122 ha) of State and
private lands in Mesa County, Colorado.
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
It is located 11 mi (17 km) southeast of
DeBeque, Colorado, and 3.5 mi (5.5 km)
north of the town of Molina, Colorado.
Within the Unit, 57 percent of the lands
are managed by CDOW, within the
Plateau Creek State Wildlife Area, and
43 percent is private. This Unit is
currently occupied.
This Unit currently has all the
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
species, including barren clay badlands
with less than 20 percent plant/
vegetation cover, a suitable elevational
range of 5,860 to 6,040 ft (1,786 to 1,841
m), the appropriate topography, and
shrink-swell alkaline clay soils within
the Atwell Gulch and Shire members of
the Wasatch Formation. Forty-two
percent of the Unit is a pending pipeline
ROW. While these lands currently have
the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of Phacelia
submutica, because of a lack of cohesive
management and protections on State
and private land, special management
may be required to maintain these
features in this Unit.
Threats to Phacelia submutica and its
habitat in this Unit include energy
development, recreation (especially
from OHVs), livestock and wild
ungulate grazing and use, and nonnative
invasive species, including Bromus
tectorum and Halogeton glomeratus.
These threats should be addressed as
detailed above in the ‘‘Special
Management Considerations or
Protection’’ section.
Effects of Critical Habitat Designation
Section 7 Consultation
Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires
Federal agencies, including the Service,
to ensure that any action they fund,
authorize, or carry out is not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of
any endangered species or threatened
species or result in the destruction or
adverse modification of designated
critical habitat of such species. In
addition, section 7(a)(4) of the Act
requires Federal agencies to confer with
the Service on any agency action which
is likely to jeopardize the continued
existence of any species proposed to be
listed under the Act or result in the
destruction or adverse modification of
proposed critical habitat.
Decisions by the 5th and 9th Circuit
Courts of Appeals have invalidated our
regulatory definition of ‘‘destruction or
adverse modification’’ (50 CFR 402.02)
(see Gifford Pinchot Task Force v. U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, 378 F. 3d
1059 (9th Cir. 2004) and Sierra Club v.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service et al., 245
F. 3d 434, 442 (5th Cir. 2001)), and we
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
do not rely on this regulatory definition
when analyzing whether an action is
likely to destroy or adversely modify
critical habitat. Under the statutory
provisions of the Act, we determine
destruction or adverse modification on
the basis of whether, with
implementation of the proposed Federal
action, the affected critical habitat
would continue to serve its intended
conservation role for the species.
If a Federal action may affect a listed
species or its critical habitat, the
responsible Federal agency (action
agency) must enter into consultation
with us. Examples of actions that are
subject to the section 7 consultation
process are actions on State, tribal,
local, or private lands that require a
Federal permit (such as a permit from
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under
section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33
U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) or a permit from the
Service under section 10 of the Act) or
that involve some other Federal action
(such as funding from the Federal
Highway Administration, Federal
Aviation Administration, or the Federal
Emergency Management Agency).
Federal actions not affecting listed
species or critical habitat, and actions
on State, tribal, local, or private lands
that are not federally funded or
authorized, do not require section 7
consultation.
As a result of section 7 consultation,
we document compliance with the
requirements of section 7(a)(2) through
our issuance of:
(1) A concurrence letter for Federal
actions that may affect, but are not
likely to adversely affect, listed species
or critical habitat; or
(2) A biological opinion for Federal
actions that may affect, and are likely to
adversely affect, listed species or critical
habitat.
When we issue a biological opinion
concluding that a project is likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of a
listed species and/or destroy or
adversely modify critical habitat, we
provide reasonable and prudent
alternatives to the project, if any are
identifiable, that would avoid the
likelihood of jeopardy and/or
destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat. We define ‘‘reasonable
and prudent alternatives’’ (at 50 CFR
402.02) as alternative actions identified
during consultation that:
(1) Can be implemented in a manner
consistent with the intended purpose of
the action,
(2) Can be implemented consistent
with the scope of the Federal agency’s
legal authority and jurisdiction,
(3) Are economically and
technologically feasible, and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
(4) Would, in the Director’s opinion,
avoid the likelihood of jeopardizing the
continued existence of the listed species
and/or avoid the likelihood of
destroying or adversely modifying
critical habitat.
Reasonable and prudent alternatives
can vary from slight project
modifications to extensive redesign or
relocation of the project. Costs
associated with implementing a
reasonable and prudent alternative are
similarly variable.
Regulations at 50 CFR 402.16 require
Federal agencies to reinitiate
consultation on previously reviewed
actions in instances where we have
listed a new species or subsequently
designated critical habitat that may be
affected and the Federal agency has
retained discretionary involvement or
control over the action (or the agency’s
discretionary involvement or control is
authorized by law). Consequently,
Federal agencies sometimes may need to
request reinitiation of consultation with
us on actions for which formal
consultation has been completed, if
those actions with discretionary
involvement or control may affect
subsequently listed species or
designated critical habitat.
Application of the ‘‘Adverse
Modification’’ Standard
As we described above, we do not
currently have a valid regulation that
defines adverse modification. The key
factor related to the adverse
modification determination is whether,
with implementation of the proposed
Federal action, the affected critical
habitat would continue to serve its
intended conservation role for the
species. Activities that may destroy or
adversely modify critical habitat are
those that alter the physical and
biological features essential to the
conservation of these species to an
extent that appreciably reduces the
conservation value of critical habitat for
Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon
debilis, and Phacelia submutica. As
discussed above, the role of critical
habitat is to support life-history needs of
the species and provide for the
conservation of the species.
Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us
to briefly evaluate and describe, in any
proposed or final regulation that
designates critical habitat, activities
involving a Federal action that may
destroy or adversely modify such
habitat, or that may be affected by such
designation.
Activities that may affect critical
habitat, when carried out, funded, or
authorized by a Federal agency, should
result in consultation for Ipomopsis
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
45099
polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and
Phacelia submutica.
For Ipomopsis polyantha these
activities include, but are not limited to:
(1) Actions that would lead to the
destruction or alteration of the plants or
their habitat; or actions that would
result in continual or excessive
disturbance or prohibit overland soil
erosion on Mancos shale soils. Such
activities could include, but are not
limited to, removing soils to a depth
that the seed bank has been removed,
repeatedly scraping areas, repeated
mowing, excessive grazing, continually
driving vehicles across areas, permanent
developments, the construction or
maintenance of utility or road corridors,
and ditching. These activities could
remove the seed bank, reduce plant
numbers by prohibiting reproduction,
impede or accelerate beyond historical
levels the natural or artificial erosion
processes on which the plant relies (as
described above in ‘‘Physical and
Biological Features’’), or lead to the total
loss of a site.
(2) Actions that would result in the
loss of pollinators or their habitat, such
that reproduction could be diminished.
Such activities could include, but are
not limited to, destroying ground or
twig nesting habitat, habitat
fragmentation that prohibits pollinator
movements from one area to the next,
spraying pesticides that will kill
pollinators, and eliminating other plant
species on which pollinators are reliant
for floral resources (this could include
replacing native species that provide
floral resources with grasses, which do
not provide floral resources for
pollinators). These activities could
result in reduced fruit production for
Ipomopsis polyantha, or increase the
incidence of self-pollination, thereby
reducing genetic diversity and seed
production.
(3) Actions that would result in
excessive plant competition at
Ipomopsis polyantha sites. Such
activities could include, but are not
limited to, revegetation efforts that
include competitive nonnative invasive
species such as Bromus inermis,
Medicago sativa (alfalfa), Meliotus spp.
(sweetclover); planting native species,
such as Pinus ponderosa, into open
areas where the plant is found; and
creating disturbances that allow
nonnative invasive species to invade.
These activities could cause I.
polyantha to be outcompeted and
subsequently either lost at sites, or
reduced in numbers of individuals.
For Penstemon debilis these activities
include, but are not limited to:
(1) Actions that would lead to the
destruction or alteration of the plants or
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
45100
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
their habitat. Such activities could
include, but are not limited to, activities
associated with oil shale mining,
including the mines themselves,
pipelines, roads, and associated
infrastructure; activities associated with
oil and gas development, including
pipelines, roads, well pads, and
associated infrastructure; activities
associated with reclamation activities,
utility corridors, or infrastructure; and
road construction and maintenance.
These activities could lead to the loss of
individuals, fragment the habitat,
impact pollinators, cause increased dust
deposition, introduce nonnative
invasive species, and alter the habitat
such that important downhill movement
or the shale erosion no longer occurs.
(2) Actions that would alter the highly
mobile nature of the sites. Such
activities could include, but are not
limited to, activities associated with oil
shale mining, including pipelines,
roads, and associated infrastructure;
activities associated with oil and gas
development, including pipelines,
roads, well pads, and associated
infrastructure; activities associated with
reclamation activities, utility corridors,
or infrastructure; and road construction
and maintenance. These activities could
lead to increased soil formation and a
subsequent increase in vegetation,
alterations to the soil morphology, the
loss of Penstemon debilis plants and
habitat.
(3) Actions that would result in the
loss of pollinators or their habitat, such
that reproduction could be diminished.
Such activities could include, but are
not limited to, destroying ground or
twig nesting habitat; habitat
fragmentation that prohibits pollinator
movements from one area to the next;
spraying pesticides that will kill
pollinators; and eliminating other plant
species on which pollinators are reliant
for floral resources. These activities
could result in reduced fruit production
for Penstemon debilis, or increase the
incidence of self-pollination, thereby
further reducing genetic diversity and
reproductive potential.
For Phacelia submutica these
activities include, but are not limited to:
(1) Actions that would lead to the
destruction or alteration of the plants,
their seed bank, or their habitat, or
actions that would destroy the fragile
clay soils where Phacelia submutica is
found. Such activities could include,
but are not limited to, activities
associated with oil and gas
development, including pipelines,
roads, well pads, and associated
infrastructure; utility corridors or
infrastructure; road construction and
maintenance; excessive OHV use; and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
excessive livestock grazing. Clay soils
are most fragile when wet, so activities
that occur when soils are wet are
especially harmful. These activities
could lead to the loss of individuals,
fragment the habitat, impact pollinators,
cause increased dust deposition, and
alter the habitat such that important
erosional processes no longer occur.
(2) Actions that would result in
excessive plant competition at Phacelia
submutica sites. Such activities could
include, but are not limited to, using
highly competitive species in
restoration efforts, or creating
disturbances that allow nonnative
invasive species, such as Bromus
tectorum and Halogeton glomeratus, to
invade. These activities could cause P.
submutica to be outcompeted and
subsequently either lost or reduced in
numbers of individuals.
Exemptions
Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the Act
The Sikes Act Improvement Act of
1997 (Sikes Act) (16 U.S.C. 670a)
required each military installation that
includes land and water suitable for the
conservation and management of
natural resources to complete an
integrated natural resources
management plan (INRMP) by
November 17, 2001. An INRMP
integrates implementation of the
military mission of the installation with
stewardship of the natural resources
found on the base. Each INRMP
includes:
(1) An assessment of the ecological
needs on the installation, including the
need to provide for the conservation of
listed species;
(2) A statement of goals and priorities;
(3) A detailed description of
management actions to be implemented
to provide for these ecological needs;
and
(4) A monitoring and adaptive
management plan.
Among other things, each INRMP
must, to the extent appropriate and
applicable, provide for fish and wildlife
management; fish and wildlife habitat
enhancement or modification; wetland
protection, enhancement, and
restoration where necessary to support
fish and wildlife; and enforcement of
applicable natural resource laws.
The National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Pub. L. 108–
136) amended the Act to limit areas
eligible for designation as critical
habitat. Specifically, section 4(a)(3)(B)(i)
of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(B)(i))
now provides: ‘‘The Secretary shall not
designate as critical habitat any lands or
other geographical areas owned or
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
controlled by the Department of
Defense, or designated for its use, that
are subject to an integrated natural
resources management plan prepared
under section 101 of the Sikes Act (16
U.S.C. 670a), if the Secretary determines
in writing that such plan provides a
benefit to the species for which critical
habitat is proposed for designation.’’
No Department of Defense lands occur
within any of the proposed critical
habitat designations.
Exclusions
Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states that
the Secretary must designate and revise
critical habitat on the basis of the best
available scientific data after taking into
consideration the economic impact,
national security impact, and any other
relevant impact of specifying any
particular area as critical habitat. The
Secretary may exclude an area from
critical habitat if he/she determines that
the benefits of such exclusion outweigh
the benefits of specifying such area as
part of the critical habitat, unless he/she
determines, based on the best scientific
data available, that the failure to
designate such area as critical habitat
will result in the extinction of the
species. In making that determination,
the statute on its face, as well as the
legislative history are clear that the
Secretary has broad discretion regarding
which factor(s) to use and how much
weight to give to any factor.
Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we
may exclude an area from designated
critical habitat based on economic
impacts, impacts on national security,
or any other relevant impacts. In
considering whether to exclude a
particular area from the designation, we
must identify the benefits of including
the area in the designation, identify the
benefits of excluding the area from the
designation, and determine whether the
benefits of exclusion outweigh the
benefits of inclusion. If, based on this
analysis, we make this determination,
then we can exclude the area only if
such exclusion would not result in the
extinction of the species.
When identifying the benefits of
inclusion for an area, we consider the
additional regulatory benefits that area
would receive from the protection from
adverse modification or destruction as a
result of actions with a Federal action;
the educational benefits of mapping
essential habitat for recovery of the
listed species; and any benefits that may
result from a designation due to State or
Federal laws that may apply to critical
habitat.
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
When identifying the benefits of
exclusion, we consider, among other
things, whether exclusion of a specific
area is likely to result in conservation;
the continuation, strengthening, or
encouragement of partnerships; or
implementation of a management plan
that provides equal to or more
conservation than a critical habitat
designation would provide.
In the case of Ipomopsis polyantha,
Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia
submutica, the benefits of critical
habitat include public awareness of
their presence and the importance of
habitat protection, and in cases where a
Federal nexus exists, increased habitat
protection for I. polyantha, P. debilis,
and P. submutica due to the protection
from adverse modification or
destruction of critical habitat. We are
not currently proposing or considering
any exclusions from critical habitat for
I. polyantha or P. submutica, but we are
considering two exclusions on private
lands for P. debilis and are requesting
public input on whether these areas
should be excluded. For these three
species, all of which are plants that do
not receive protection from take under
the Act, the primary impact and benefit
of designating critical habitat will be on
Federal lands or in instances where
there is a Federal nexus for projects on
private lands.
When we evaluate the existence of a
conservation plan when considering the
benefits of exclusion, we consider a
variety of factors, including but not
limited to, whether the plan is finalized;
how it provides for the conservation of
the essential physical and biological
features; whether there is a reasonable
expectation that the conservation
management strategies and actions
contained in a management plan will be
implemented into the future; whether
the conservation strategies in the plan
are likely to be effective; and whether
the plan contains a monitoring program
or adaptive management to ensure that
the conservation measures are effective
and can be adapted in the future in
response to new information.
After identifying the benefits of
inclusion and the benefits of exclusion,
we carefully weigh the two sides to
determine whether the benefits of
exclusion outweigh those of inclusion.
If we determine that they do, we then
determine whether exclusion would
result in extinction. If exclusion of an
area from critical habitat will result in
extinction, we will not exclude it from
the designation.
Based on the information provided by
entities seeking exclusion, as well as
any additional public comments
received, we will evaluate whether
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
certain lands in the proposed
Penstemon debilis CHU 3 (Mount
Callahan) are appropriate for exclusion
from the final designation pursuant to
section 4(b)(2) of the Act. If our analysis
results in a determination that the
benefits of excluding lands from the
final designation outweigh the benefits
of designating those lands as critical
habitat, then we will exclude the lands
from the final designation, provided we
find that the failure to designate such
areas as critical habitat will not result in
the extinction of the species.
The only exclusions we are
considering are for the two Natural
Areas that fall within Penstemon debilis
Unit 3, Mount Callahan (see Map 7).
These two areas are designated as the
Mount Callahan Natural Area and the
Mount Callahan Saddle Natural Area
(CNAP 2010a, pp. 1–11). These two
State Natural Areas were designated
specifically to allow the CNAP to assist
the landowner in protecting P. debilis.
The Natural Areas have a long list of
activities that can and cannot take place
and best management practices also
have been developed for these areas (see
‘‘Mount Callahan Natural Area and
Mount Callahan Saddle Natural Area
Articles of Designation and
accompanying Best Management
Practices’’ below) designed to conserve
the species and protect the essential
physical and biological features (CNAP
2010a, pp. 4–6 and Exhibit B; CNAP
2010b, pp. 1–4). Although these
agreements can be terminated at any
time, we do not believe they will be,
since the Mount Callahan Natural Area
has been in existence since 1987, and
was recently expanded to include the
Mount Callahan Saddle Natural Area.
Extensive time and care has been taken
to protect P. debilis in these areas.
Providing incentives to private
landowners for voluntary conservation
actions is one of the factors we are
considering for these exclusions. This
issue is discussed in further detail
under ‘‘Exclusions Based on Other
Relevant Impacts’’ below. We are
seeking public input on the inclusion or
exclusion of these Natural Areas in our
critical habitat designation.
After considering the following areas
under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we are
considering excluding them from the
critical habitat designation for
Penstemon debilis:
The Mount Callahan Natural Area
The Mount Callahan Saddle Natural
Area
We are considering excluding the
areas described above because we
believe that:
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
45101
(1) Their value for conservation will
be preserved for the foreseeable future
by existing protective actions, and
(2) They are appropriate for exclusion
under the ‘‘other relevant factor’’
provisions of section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
However, we specifically solicit
comments on the inclusion or exclusion
of such areas. In the paragraphs below,
we provide a detailed analysis of our
exclusion of these lands under section
4(b)(2) of the Act.
Exclusions Based on Economic Impacts
Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we
consider the economic impacts of
specifying any particular area as critical
habitat. In order to consider economic
impacts, we are preparing an analysis of
the economic impacts of the proposed
critical habitat designation and related
factors. Many of the CHUs, as proposed,
include private lands. Federal lands
with oil and gas leases, grazing permits,
and recreational uses also are included.
Several State parcels are included where
hunting or recreational activities occur.
We will announce the availability of
the draft economic analysis as soon as
it is completed, at which time we will
seek public review and comment. At
that time, copies of the draft economic
analysis will be available for
downloading from the Internet at
https://www.regulations.gov, or by
contacting the Western Colorado
Ecological Services Office directly (see
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section). During the development of a
final designation, we will consider
economic impacts, public comments,
and other new information, and areas
may be excluded from the final critical
habitat designation under section 4(b)(2)
of the Act and our implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 424.19.
Exclusions Based on National Security
Impacts
Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we
consider whether there are lands owned
or managed by the Department of
Defense (DOD) where a national security
impact might exist. In preparing this
proposal, we have determined that the
lands within the designation of critical
habitat for Ipomopsis polyantha,
Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia
submutica are not owned or managed by
the Department of Defense, and,
therefore, we anticipate no impact on
national security. Consequently, the
Secretary does not propose to exert his
discretion to exclude any areas from the
proposed designation based on impacts
on national security.
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
45102
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Exclusions Based on Other Relevant
Impacts
Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we
consider any other relevant impacts, in
addition to economic impacts and
impacts on national security. We
consider a number of factors including
whether the landowners have developed
any HCPs or other management plans
for the area, or whether there are
conservation partnerships that would be
encouraged by designation of, or
exclusion from, critical habitat. In
addition, we look at any tribal issues,
and consider the government-togovernment relationship of the United
States with tribal entities (none of the
proposed critical habitat units contain
any tribal lands). We also consider any
social impacts that might occur because
of the designation.
Land and Resource Management Plans,
Conservation Plans, or Agreements
Based on Conservation Partnerships
We consider a current land
management or conservation plan (HCPs
as well as other types) to provide
adequate management or protection if it
meets the following criteria:
(1) The plan is complete and provides
the same or better level of protection
from adverse modification or
destruction than that provided through
a consultation under section 7 of the
Act;
(2) There is a reasonable expectation
that the conservation management
strategies and actions will be
implemented for the foreseeable future,
based on past practices, written
guidance, or regulations; and
(3) The plan provides conservation
strategies and measures consistent with
currently accepted principles of
conservation biology.
We believe that the Mount Callahan
Natural Area and the Mount Callahan
Saddle Natural Area fulfill the above
criteria, and we are considering the
exclusion of the non-Federal lands
covered by this plan that provide for the
conservation of Penstemon debilis. We
are requesting comments on the benefits
to P. debilis from the Mount Callahan
Natural Area and the Mount Callahan
Saddle Natural Area and their potential
exclusion from critical habitat.
Mount Callahan Natural Area and
Mount Callahan Saddle Natural Area
Articles of Designation and
Accompanying Best Management
Practices
The Mount Callahan Natural Area was
designated in 1987, shortly after the
discovery of Penstemon debilis (CNAP
1987, pp. 1–7). The Mount Callahan
Saddle Natural Area was designated in
2008 (CNAP 2008, pp. 1–11). Both
Natural Areas were designated primarily
to protect P. debilis. The agreement
(both areas are in the same agreement)
is between the CNAP and OXY USA.
The articles of designation (for both
areas) identify the following
conservation measures: Camping is
prohibited, noxious weed management
is conducted to minimize damage to P.
debilis, grazing is limited to preserve
natural qualities, and motorized vehicle
use is prohibited. The best management
practices that apply within 328 ft (100
m) of occupied habitat provide
guidelines for surveys, limit surface
disturbance, address the protection of
pollinators, limit projects that will affect
storm water flows, limit undercutting,
provide fencing stipulations for
disturbances within 328 ft (100 m),
address dust abatement activities, and
address monitoring (CNAP 2008a, pp.
8–11). Ongoing management of the
Mount Callahan Natural Area since
1987, consistent with the conservation
measures and best management
practices, demonstrates a long-term
commitment by both parties.
Furthermore, the Mount Callahan
Saddle Natural Area was added in 2008,
demonstrating an expansion of and
commitment to conservation efforts.
Table 7 provides approximate areas of
lands that meet the definition of critical
habitat or are under our consideration
for possible exclusion under section
4(b)(2) of the Act from the final critical
habitat rule. Table 7 also provides our
reasons for proposed exclusions.
TABLE 7—EXEMPTIONS AND AREAS CONSIDERED FOR EXCLUSION BY CRITICAL HABITAT UNIT FOR Penstemon debilis
Unit
Specific area
Basis for exclusion/exemption
Areas meeting definition
of critical habitat
3 ............
Mount Callahan Natural Area ........
Mount Callahan Saddle Natural
Area.
4(b)(2)—Natural Area Designation
4(b)(2)—Natural Area Designation
7,571 ac (3,064 ha) .....................
......................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Peer Review
In accordance with our joint policy on
peer review published in the Federal
Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270),
we will seek the expert opinions of at
least three appropriate and independent
specialists regarding this proposed rule.
The purpose of peer review is to ensure
that our critical habitat designation is
based on scientifically sound data,
assumptions, and analyses. We have
invited these peer reviewers to comment
during this public comment period on
our specific assumptions and
conclusions in this proposed
designation of critical habitat.
We will consider all comments and
information we receive during this
comment period on this proposed rule
during our preparation of a final
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
determination. Accordingly, the final
decision may differ from this proposal.
Public Hearings
Section 4(b)(5) of the Act provides for
one or more public hearings on this
proposal, if requested. Requests must be
received within 45 days after the date of
publication of this proposed rule in the
Federal Register. Such requests must be
sent to the address shown in the
ADDRESSES section. We will schedule
public hearings on this proposal, if any
are requested, and announce the dates,
times, and places of those hearings, as
well as how to obtain reasonable
accommodations, in the Federal
Register and local newspapers at least
15 days before the hearing.
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Areas considered for
possible exclusion
357 ac (144 ha).
317 ac (128 ha).
Required Determinations
Our draft economic analysis will be
completed after this proposed rule is
published. Therefore, we will defer our
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
et seq.), Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use—Executive Order 13211, Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et
seq.), and Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA),
findings until after this analysis is done.
Regulatory Planning and Review—
Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has determined that this rule is
not significant and has not reviewed
this proposed rule under Executive
Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and
Review). The OMB bases its
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
determination upon the following four
criteria:
(1) Whether the rule will have an
annual effect of $100 million or more on
the economy or adversely affect an
economic sector, productivity, jobs, the
environment, or other units of the
government.
(2) Whether the rule will create
inconsistencies with other Federal
agencies’ actions.
(3) Whether the rule will materially
affect entitlements, grants, user fees,
loan programs, or the rights and
obligations of their recipients.
(4) Whether the rule raises novel legal
or policy issues.
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
et seq.)
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(RFA; 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) as amended
by the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of
1996 (5 U.S.C 801 et seq.), whenever an
agency publishes a notice of rulemaking
for any proposed or final rule, it must
prepare and make available for public
comment a regulatory flexibility
analysis that describes the effects of the
rule on small entities (small businesses,
small organizations, and small
government jurisdictions). However, no
regulatory flexibility analysis is required
if the head of the agency certifies the
rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The SBREFA
amended the RFA to require Federal
agencies to provide a certification
statement of the factual basis for
certifying that the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
At this time, we lack the available
economic information necessary to
provide an adequate factual basis for the
required RFA finding. Therefore, we
defer the RFA finding until completion
of the draft economic analysis prepared
under section 4(b)(2) of the Act and
Executive Order 12866. This draft
economic analysis will provide the
required factual basis for the RFA
finding. Upon completion of the draft
economic analysis, we will announce its
availability in the Federal Register and
reopen the public comment period for
the proposed designation. We will
include with this announcement, as
appropriate, an initial regulatory
flexibility analysis or a certification that
the rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities accompanied
by the factual basis for that
determination.
Land use sectors that could be
affected by this proposed rule include:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
Federal land managers, private
landowners with lands that have a
Federal nexus within proposed CHUs,
commercial or residential developers
with lands or activities that have a
Federal nexus within proposed CHUs,
oil and gas or oil shale companies with
Federal leases that fall within proposed
CHUs, livestock owners with permits
that fall within proposed CHUs, and
OHV users that may or are utilizing
proposed CHUs.
We have concluded that deferring the
RFA finding until completion of the
draft economic analysis is necessary to
meet the purposes and requirements of
the RFA. Deferring the RFA finding in
this manner will ensure that we make a
sufficiently informed determination
based on adequate economic
information and provide the necessary
opportunity for public comment.
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use—
Executive Order 13211
Executive Order 13211 (Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use) requires agencies
to prepare Statements of Energy Effects
when undertaking certain actions.
Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon
debilis, and Phacelia submutica all
occur in areas where utility corridors
are or may affect populations. In
addition, both P. debilis and P.
submutica are in areas with extensive
oil and gas activity. Well pads and their
existing infrastructure are within
proposed CHUs. On Federal lands,
entities conducting oil and gas related
activities as well as power companies
will need to consult within areas
designated as critical habitat. Although
we do not believe these impacts will
rise to the level of significant, we are
deferring our finding until the draft
economic analysis has been completed.
We will further evaluate this issue as we
conduct our economic analysis, and
review and revise this assessment as
warranted.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2
U.S.C. 1501 et seq.)
In accordance with the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et
seq.), we make the following findings:
(1) This rule will not produce a
Federal mandate. In general, a Federal
mandate is a provision in legislation,
statute, or regulation that would impose
an enforceable duty upon State, local, or
tribal governments, or the private sector,
and includes both ‘‘Federal
intergovernmental mandates’’ and
‘‘Federal private sector mandates.’’
These terms are defined in 2 U.S.C.
658(5)–(7). ‘‘Federal intergovernmental
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
45103
mandate’’ includes a regulation that
‘‘would impose an enforceable duty
upon State, local, or tribal governments’’
with two exceptions. It excludes ‘‘a
condition of Federal assistance.’’ It also
excludes ‘‘a duty arising from
participation in a voluntary Federal
program,’’ unless the regulation ‘‘relates
to a then-existing Federal program
under which $500,000,000 or more is
provided annually to State, local, and
tribal governments under entitlement
authority,’’ if the provision would
‘‘increase the stringency of conditions of
assistance’’ or ‘‘place caps upon, or
otherwise decrease, the Federal
Government’s responsibility to provide
funding,’’ and the State, local, or tribal
governments ‘‘lack authority’’ to adjust
accordingly. At the time of enactment,
these entitlement programs were:
Medicaid; Aid to Families with
Dependent Children work programs;
Child Nutrition; Food Stamps; Social
Services Block Grants; Vocational
Rehabilitation State Grants; Foster Care,
Adoption Assistance, and Independent
Living; Family Support Welfare
Services; and Child Support
Enforcement. ‘‘Federal private sector
mandate’’ includes a regulation that
‘‘would impose an enforceable duty
upon the private sector, except (i) A
condition of Federal assistance or (ii) a
duty arising from participation in a
voluntary Federal program.’’
The designation of critical habitat
does not impose a legally binding duty
on non-Federal Government entities or
private parties. Under the Act, the only
regulatory effect is that Federal agencies
must ensure that their actions do not
destroy or adversely modify critical
habitat under section 7. While nonFederal entities that receive Federal
funding, assistance, or permits, or that
otherwise require approval or
authorization from a Federal agency for
an action, may be indirectly impacted
by the designation of critical habitat, the
legally binding duty to avoid
destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat rests squarely on the
Federal agency. Furthermore, to the
extent that non-Federal entities are
indirectly impacted because they
receive Federal assistance or participate
in a voluntary Federal aid program, the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act would
not apply, nor would critical habitat
shift the costs of the large entitlement
programs listed above onto State
governments.
(2) We do not believe that this rule
will significantly or uniquely affect
small governments because only a small
percentage of the total land ownership
fall on small government lands such as
the Town of Pagosa Springs, Archuleta
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
45104
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
County, and lands owned and operated
by the State of Colorado. Therefore, a
Small Government Agency Plan is not
required. We do not believe that this
rule would significantly or uniquely
affect small governments because it will
not produce a Federal mandate of $100
million or greater in any year, that is, it
is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
under the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act. However, we will further evaluate
this issue as we conduct our economic
analysis, and review and revise this
assessment if appropriate.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Takings—Executive Order 12630
In accordance with Executive Order
12630 (Government Actions and
Interference with Constitutionally
Protected Private Property Rights), we
have analyzed the potential takings
implications of designating critical
habitat for Ipomopsis polyantha,
Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia
submutica in a takings implications
assessment. Critical habitat designation
does not affect landowner actions that
do not require Federal funding or
permits, nor does it preclude
development of habitat conservation
programs or issuance of incidental take
permits to permit actions that do require
Federal funding or permits to go
forward. The takings implications
assessment concludes that this
designation of critical habitat for I.
polyantha, P. debilis, and P. submutica
does not pose significant takings
implications for lands within or affected
by the designation.
Federalism—Executive Order 13132
In accordance with Executive Order
13132 (Federalism), this proposed rule
does not have significant Federalism
effects. A Federalism assessment is not
required. In keeping with Department of
the Interior and Department of
Commerce policy, we requested
information from, and coordinated
development of, this proposed critical
habitat designation with appropriate
State resource agencies in Colorado. The
designation of critical habitat in areas
currently occupied by the Ipomopsis
polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and
Phacelia submutica may impose
nominal additional regulatory
restrictions to those currently in place
and, therefore, has little incremental
impact on State and local governments
and their activities. The designation
may have some benefit to these
governments because the areas that
contain the physical and biological
features essential to the conservation of
the species are more clearly defined,
and the elements of the features of the
habitat necessary to the conservation of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
the species are specifically identified.
This information does not alter where
and what federally sponsored activities
may occur. However, it may assist local
governments in long-range planning
(rather than having them wait for caseby-case section 7 consultations to
occur).
Where State and local governments
require approval or authorization from a
Federal agency for actions that may
affect critical habitat, consultation
under section 7(a)(2) would be required.
While non-Federal entities that receive
Federal funding, assistance, or permits,
or that otherwise require approval or
authorization from a Federal agency for
an action, may be indirectly impacted
by the designation of critical habitat, the
legally binding duty to avoid
destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat rests squarely on the
Federal agency.
seq.) in connection with designating
critical habitat under the Act. We
published a notice outlining our reasons
for this determination in the Federal
Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR
49244). This position was upheld by the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth
Circuit (Douglas County v. Babbitt, 48
F.3d 1495 (9th Cir. 1995), cert. denied
516 U.S. 1042 (1996)). However, when
the range of the species includes States
within the Tenth Circuit, such as that of
Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon
debilis, and Phacelia submutica, under
the Tenth Circuit ruling in Catron
County Board of Commissioners v. U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, 75 F.3d 1429
(10th Cir. 1996), we will undertake
NEPA analysis for critical habitat
designation and notify the public of the
availability of the draft environmental
assessment for this proposal when it is
finished.
Civil Justice Reform—Executive Order
12988
In accordance with Executive Order
12988 (Civil Justice Reform), the Office
of the Solicitor has determined that the
rule does not unduly burden the judicial
system and that it meets the
requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of the Order. We have proposed
designating critical habitat in
accordance with the provisions of the
Act. This proposed rule uses standard
property descriptions and identifies the
elements of physical and biological
features essential to the conservation of
the Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon
debilis, and Phacelia submutica within
the designated areas to assist the public
in understanding the habitat needs of
the species.
Clarity of the Rule
We are required by Executive Orders
12866 and 12988 and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1,
1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule we
publish must:
(1) Be logically organized;
(2) Use the active voice to address
readers directly;
(3) Use clear language rather than
jargon;
(4) Be divided into short sections and
sentences; and
(5) Use lists and tables wherever
possible.
If you feel that we have not met these
requirements, send us comments by one
of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES
section. To better help us revise the
rule, your comments should be as
specific as possible. For example, you
should tell us the numbers of the
sections or paragraphs that are unclearly
written, which sections or sentences are
too long, the sections where you feel
lists or tables would be useful, etc.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)
This rule does not contain any new
collections of information that require
approval by OMB under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.). This rule will not impose
recordkeeping or reporting requirements
on State or local governments,
individuals, businesses, or
organizations. An agency may not
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of
information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
National Environmental Policy Act (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)
It is our position that, outside the
jurisdiction of the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the Tenth Circuit, we do not need to
prepare environmental analyses
pursuant to the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Government-to-Government
Relationship With Tribes
In accordance with the President’s
memorandum of April 29, 1994
(Government-to-Government Relations
with Native American Tribal
Governments; 59 FR 22951), Executive
Order 13175 (Consultation and
Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments), and the Department of
the Interior’s manual at 512 DM 2, we
readily acknowledge our responsibility
to communicate meaningfully with
recognized Federal Tribes on a
government-to-government basis. In
accordance with Secretarial Order 3206
of June 5, 1997 (American Indian Tribal
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
45105
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust
Responsibilities, and the Endangered
Species Act), we readily acknowledge
our responsibilities to work directly
with Tribes in developing programs for
healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge that
tribal lands are not subject to the same
controls as Federal public lands, to
remain sensitive to Indian culture, and
to make information available to Tribes.
We determined that there are no tribal
lands that were occupied by Ipomopsis
polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and
Phacelia submutica at the time of listing
that contain the features essential for
conservation of the species, and no
tribal lands unoccupied by the I.
polyantha, P. debilis, and P. submutica
that are essential for the conservation of
the species. Therefore, we are not
proposing to designate critical habitat
for I. polyantha, P. debilis, and P.
submutica on tribal lands.
References Cited
A complete list of references cited is
available on the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov and upon request
from the Western Colorado Ecological
Services Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authors
The primary authors of this package
are the staff members of the Western
Colorado Ecological Services Office.
PART 17—ENDANGERED AND
THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS
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; Public Law
99–625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise
noted.
Endangered and threatened species,
Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements,
Transportation.
2. In § 17.12(h), revise the entry for
‘‘Ipomopsis polyantha,’’ ‘‘Penstemon
debilis,’’ and ‘‘Phacelia submutica’’
under ‘‘Flowering Plants’’ in the List of
Endangered and Threatened Plants to
read as follows:
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
§ 17.12
Accordingly, we propose to amend
part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title
*
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Species
Historic
range
Family
Common name
*
Ipomopsis polyantha
*
*
Pagosa skyrocket ..........
U.S.A. (CO)
*
Penstemon debilis ...
*
*
Parachute beardtongue
*
Phacelia submutica
*
*
DeBeque phacelia .........
Scientific name
50 of the Code of Federal Regulations,
as set forth below:
Endangered and threatened plants.
*
*
(h) * * *
*
*
Status
When listed
Critical
habitat
*
*
Polemoniaceae ..............
E
*
792 ............
17.96(a) .....
U.S.A. (CO)
*
*
Plantaginaceae ..............
T
*
792 ............
17.96(a) .....
U.S.A. (CO)
*
*
Hydrophyllaceae ............
T
*
792 ............
Special
rules
17.96(a) .....
Flowering Plants:
*
*
*
3. In § 17.96, amend paragraph (a) by
adding entries for ‘‘Phacelia submutica
(DeBeque phacelia)’’ in alphabetical
order under Family Hydrophyllaceae,
‘‘Penstemon debilis (Parachute
penstemon)’’ in alphabetical order
under Family Plantaginaceae, and
‘‘Ipomopsis polyantha (Pagosa
skyrocket)’’ in alphabetical order under
Family Polemoniaceae to read as
follows:
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
§ 17.96
Critical habitat—plants.
(a) Flowering plants.
*
*
*
*
*
Family Hydrophyllaceae: Phacelia
submutica (DeBeque phacelia)
(1) Critical habitat units are
designated for Garfield and Mesa
Counties, Colorado.
(2) Within these areas, the primary
constituent elements (PCEs) of the
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of Phacelia
submutica consist of five components:
(i) Suitable soils and geology.
(A) Atwell Gulch and Shire members
of the Wasatch formation.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
*
*
(B) Within these larger formations,
small areas (from 10 to 1,000 ft2 (1 to
100 m2)) on colorful exposures of
chocolate to purplish brown, light to
dark charcoal gray, and tan clay soils.
These small areas are slightly different
in texture and color than the similar
surrounding soils. Occupied sites are
characterized by alkaline (pH range
from 7 to 8.9) soils with higher clay
content than similar nearby unoccupied
soils.
(C) Clay soils that shrink and swell
dramatically upon drying and wetting
and are likely important in the
maintenance of the seed bank.
(ii) Topography. Moderately steep
slopes, benches, and ridge tops adjacent
to valley floors. Occupied slopes range
from 2 to 42 degrees with an average of
14 degrees.
(iii) Elevation and climate.
(A) Elevations from 4,600 ft (1,400 m)
to 7,450 ft (2,275 m).
(B) Climatic conditions similar to
those around DeBeque, Colorado,
including suitable precipitation and
temperatures. Annual fluctuations in
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
*
*
NA
*
NA
*
NA
*
moisture (and probably temperature)
greatly influences the number of
Phacelia submutica individuals that
grow in a given year and are thus able
to set seed and replenish the seed bank.
(iv) Plant community.
(A) Small (from 10 to 1,000 ft2 (1 to
100 m2)) barren areas with less than 20
percent plant cover in the actual barren
areas.
(B) Presence of appropriate associated
species that can include (but are not
limited to) the natives Grindelia
fastigiata, Eriogonum gordonii,
Monolepis nuttalliana, and Oenothera
caespitosa. If sites become dominated
by Bromus tectorum or other invasive
nonnative species, they should not be
discounted because Phacelia submutica
may still be found there.
(C) Appropriate plant communities
within the greater pinyon-juniper
woodlands that include:
(1) Clay badlands within the mixed
salt desert scrub; or
(2) Clay badlands within big
sagebrush shrublands.
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
45106
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
(v) Maintenance of the seed bank and
appropriate disturbance levels.
(A) Within suitable soil and geologies
(see paragraph (2)(i) of this entry),
undisturbed areas where seed banks are
left undamaged.
(B) Areas with light disturbance when
dry and no disturbance when wet. Clay
soils are relatively stable when dry but
are extremely vulnerable to disturbances
when wet. While Phacelia submutica
has evolved with some light natural
disturbances including erosional and
shrink-swell processes, human
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
disturbances that are either heavy or
light when soils are wet could impact
the species and its seed bank. More
heavily disturbed areas should be
evaluated over the course of several
years for the species’ presence.
(3) Critical habitat does not include
manmade structures (such as buildings,
aqueducts, runways, roads, and other
paved areas) and the land on which they
are located existing within the legal
boundaries on the effective date of this
rule.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(4) Critical habitat map units. Data
layers defining map units were created
on a base of both satellite imagery (NAIP
2009) as well as USGS geospatial
quadrangle maps and were mapped
using NAD 83 Universal Transverse
Mercator (UTM), zone 13N coordinates.
Location information came from a wide
array of sources. A habitat model
prepared by the Colorado Natural
Heritage Program also was utilized.
(5) Note: Index map of critical habitat
for Phacelia submutica follows:
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
(6) Unit 1: Mesa County, Colorado.
BILLING CODE 4310–55–C
(i) Land bounded by the following
UTM NAD83, zone 13 N coordinates
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
(E,N): 206056.41, 4354673.68;
206059.46, 4354708.47; 206068.50,
4354742.21; 206083.26, 4354773.87;
206103.29, 4354802.48; 206127.99,
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
45107
4354827.18; 206156.61, 4354847.21;
206188.26, 4354861.97; 206214.13,
4354868.90; 208172.81, 4355368.77;
208189.62, 4355371.81; 208221.50,
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
EP27JY11.006
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
45108
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
4355372.48; 211387.70, 4355153.18;
211410.39, 4355151.28; 211445.58,
4355146.74; 211486.68, 4355135.00;
211547.06, 4355091.87; 211556.23,
4355027.68; 211558.18, 4354988.68;
211544.57, 4354945.59; 211505.83,
4354878.16; 211464.05, 4354854.86;
210208.15, 4354271.78; 210182.91,
4354265.02; 210158.47, 4354262.88;
206249.74, 4354473.91; 206222.00,
4354476.34; 206188.26, 4354485.38;
206156.60, 4354500.14; 206127.99,
4354520.17; 206103.29, 4354544.87;
206083.26, 4354573.48; 206068.50,
4354605.14; 206059.46, 4354638.88; and
returning to 206056.41, 4354673.68.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 1 of critical
habitat for Phacelia submutica is
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
provided at paragraph (7)(ii) of this
entry.
(7) Unit 2: Garfield and Mesa
Counties, Colorado.
(i) Land bounded by the following
UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates
(E,N): 212167.61, 4358240.79;
212181.41, 4358305.17; 216874.61,
4369051.20; 216886.19, 4369076.04;
216906.22, 4369104.65; 216930.92,
4369129.35; 216959.53, 4369149.38;
216988.08, 4369162.70; 217007.08,
4369169.20; 217052.79, 4369178.50;
217098.42, 4369178.50; 217147.50,
4369168.62; 217185.45, 4369148.30;
217228.09, 4369111.07; 217246.04,
4369073.00; 217374.92, 4368485.88;
217316.01, 4367553.09; 218906.65,
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
4364145.98; 219044.12, 4362859.72;
220022.38, 4362778.06; 220029.81,
4362750.34; 220754.51, 4358989.62;
220756.77, 4358963.78; 220763.05,
4358652.76; 220758.37, 4358594.29;
219463.44, 4356169.16; 219454.46,
4356156.34; 219441.47, 4356143.35;
219429.06, 4356134.66; 218497.76,
4355625.60; 218409.92, 4355581.68;
218172.63, 4355513.88; 215567.84,
4354836.96; 215521.83, 4354844.15;
213794.77, 4355190.30; 213727.43,
4355250.15; and returning to 212167.61,
4358240.79.
(ii) Note: Map of Units 1 and 2 of
critical habitat for Phacelia submutica
follows:
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
(8) Unit 3: Garfield County, Colorado.
(i) Land bounded by the following
UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates
(E,N): 221791.53, 4364704.92;
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
221793.82, 4364731.04; 221800.60,
4364756.36; 221811.68, 4364780.12;
221826.71, 4364801.59; 221845.25,
4364820.12; 221866.72, 4364835.16;
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
45109
221890.48, 4364846.24; 221915.80,
4364853.02; 221941.92, 4364855.31;
221968.03, 4364853.02; 221993.35,
4364846.24; 222017.11, 4364835.16;
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
EP27JY11.007
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
45110
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
222038.58, 4364820.12; 222057.11,
4364801.59; 222070.52, 4364782.44;
222216.47, 4364510.68; 222225.04,
4364492.29; 222231.83, 4364466.97;
222234.11, 4364440.85; 222232.54,
4364422.94; 222216.07, 4364254.88;
222209.42, 4364230.07; 222198.34,
4364206.31; 222183.30, 4364184.84;
222164.77, 4364166.30; 222143.30,
4364151.27; 222119.54, 4364140.19;
222094.22, 4364133.40; 222068.10,
4364131.12; 222041.99, 4364133.40;
222016.67, 4364140.19; 221992.91,
4364151.27; 221971.44, 4364166.30;
221952.90, 4364184.84; 221937.87,
4364206.31; 221927.38, 4364228.80;
221798.70, 4364660.60; 221793.82,
4364678.81; and returning to 221791.53,
4364704.92.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 3 of critical
habitat for Phacelia submutica is
provided at paragraph (10)(ii) of this
entry.
(9) Unit 4: Mesa County, Colorado.
(i) Land bounded by the following
UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates
(E,N): 221750.44, 4360417.57;
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
221910.53, 4360544.11; 222011.30,
4360532.40; 224377.86, 4359858.22;
224479.87, 4359777.31; 224505.92,
4359669.86; 224162.67, 4359105.67;
224121.94, 4359039.96; 224061.14,
4358997.20; 223982.52, 4358972.67;
223916.23, 4358974.09; 223647.66,
4358996.02; 221914.01, 4359996.02;
221888.97, 4360013.55; 221864.27,
4360038.25; 221844.24, 4360066.86;
221829.48, 4360098.52; 221822.43,
4360124.80; and returning to 221750.44,
4360417.57.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 4 of critical
habitat for Phacelia submutica is
provided at paragraph (10)(ii) of this
entry.
(10) Unit 5: Garfield County,
Colorado.
(i) Land bounded by the following
UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates
(E,N): 224674.62, 4362880.00;
224676.90, 4362906.11; 224683.69,
4362931.43; 224694.77, 4362955.19;
224709.80, 4362976.66; 224723.94,
4362990.81; 225361.43, 4363566.66;
225380.81, 4363580.23; 225404.57,
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
4363591.31; 225429.89, 4363598.10;
225456.00, 4363600.38; 225476.05,
4363598.63; 226724.37, 4363422.10;
226741.36, 4363417.55; 226799.80,
4363398.33; 226821.01, 4363388.44;
226842.49, 4363373.40; 226861.02,
4363354.87; 226876.06, 4363333.40;
226887.14, 4363309.64; 226893.92,
4363284.32; 226896.21, 4363258.20;
226893.92, 4363232.09; 226887.14,
4363206.77; 226876.06, 4363183.01;
226861.02, 4363161.54; 226842.49,
4363143.01; 226821.01, 4363127.97;
226797.26, 4363116.89; 226777.13,
4363111.50; 224847.74, 4362731.61;
224825.00, 4362729.62; 224798.89,
4362731.90; 224773.57, 4362738.69;
224749.81, 4362749.77; 224728.34,
4362764.80; 224709.80, 4362783.34;
224694.77, 4362804.81; 224683.69,
4362828.57; 224676.90, 4362853.89; and
returning to 224674.62, 4362880.00.
(ii) Note: Map of Units 3, 4, and 5 of
critical habitat for Phacelia submutica
follows:
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
BILLING CODE 4310–55–C
(11) Unit 6: Mesa County, Colorado.
(i) Land bounded by the following
UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates
(E,N): 224130.10, 4355992.22;
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
224137.33, 4356027.59; 224164.10,
4356079.43; 225800.48, 4358995.39;
225813.35, 4359013.77; 225831.89,
4359032.31; 225853.36, 4359047.34;
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
45111
225877.12, 4359058.42; 225902.44,
4359065.20; 225928.55, 4359067.49;
225954.67, 4359065.20; 225979.99,
4359058.42; 226003.74, 4359047.34;
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
EP27JY11.008
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
45112
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
226025.22, 4359032.31; 226043.75,
4359013.77; 226058.79, 4358992.30;
226069.86, 4358968.54; 226076.65,
4358943.22; 226078.93, 4358917.11;
226076.86, 4358893.40; 224608.12,
4352128.37; 224602.98, 4352109.18;
224591.90, 4352085.43; 224576.87,
4352063.95; 224558.33, 4352045.42;
224536.86, 4352030.38; 224513.10,
4352019.30; 224487.78, 4352012.52;
224467.81, 4352010.77; 224347.33,
4352006.47; 224323.80, 4352008.53;
224298.48, 4352015.31; 224274.72,
4352026.39; 224253.25, 4352041.43;
224234.71, 4352059.96; 224219.68,
4352081.44; 224208.60, 4352105.19;
224201.81, 4352130.52; 224199.99,
4352151.35; 224629.91, 4354119.91; and
returning to 224130.10, 4355992.22.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 6 of critical
habitat for Phacelia submutica is
provided at paragraph (14)(ii) of this
entry.
(12) Unit 7: Mesa County, Colorado.
(i) Land bounded by the following
UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates
(E,N): 222895.27, 4348972.58;
222897.80, 4349033.20; 222915.05,
4349089.21; 222986.91, 4349165.50;
223071.80, 4349165.50; 223127.84,
4349151.49; 223191.28, 4349133.16;
223258.08, 4349099.76; 223289.13,
4349042.83; 223296.46, 4348986.16;
223281.88, 4348879.74; 223202.51,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
4348825.62; 223135.45, 4348812.21;
223082.26, 4348808.17; 223046.13,
4348816.20; 222983.74, 4348834.55;
222946.47, 4348871.83; 222913.76,
4348920.89; and returning to 222895.27,
4348972.58.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 7 of critical
habitat for Phacelia submutica is
provided at paragraph (14)(ii) of this
entry.
(13) Unit 8: Mesa County, Colorado.
(i) Land bounded by the following
UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates
(E,N): 227287.92, 4353124.64;
227363.29, 4353992.27; 227486.10,
4355236.26; 227494.99, 4355269.46;
227509.75, 4355301.11; 227529.79,
4355329.72; 227554.49, 4355354.42;
227580.17, 4355372.41; 229695.80,
4356548.43; 229713.96, 4356556.90;
229769.67, 4356573.00; 229791.21,
4356573.00; 229846.71, 4356568.20;
229895.06, 4356513.86; 229901.97,
4356503.99; 230681.73, 4355125.75;
228988.56, 4353080.54; 228569.46,
4352091.46; 229156.20, 4351102.39;
233728.76, 4349562.63; 233736.17,
4349546.74; 234244.43, 4348051.25;
234244.43, 4347992.84; 234223.25,
4347925.78; 234136.83, 4347851.71;
234053.14, 4347868.45; 234019.56,
4347882.27; 228869.43, 4350285.62;
228801.70, 4350322.67; 228248.13,
4350668.17; 228218.86, 4350689.66;
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
227621.62, 4351711.59; 227402.60,
4352451.12; 227394.12, 4352487.23;
227348.70, 4352740.95; and returning to
227287.92, 4353124.64.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 8 of critical
habitat for Phacelia submutica is
provided at paragraph (14)(ii) of this
entry.
(14) Unit 9: Mesa County, Colorado.
(i) Land bounded by the following
UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates
(E,N): 236060.14, 4347594.28;
236061.74, 4347612.58; 236066.50,
4347630.33; 236074.26, 4347646.98;
236084.79, 4347662.02; 236097.78,
4347675.01; 236112.83, 4347685.55;
236129.48, 4347693.31; 236147.22,
4347698.07; 236160.44, 4347699.22;
238599.07, 4347734.44; 238748.35,
4347678.56; 238818.30, 4347624.15;
238813.83, 4347530.21; 238505.71,
4347090.68; 238427.01, 4347093.30;
236169.29, 4347430.50; 236154.51,
4347434.46; 236137.86, 4347442.23;
236122.81, 4347452.76; 236109.83,
4347465.75; 236099.29, 4347480.80;
236094.26, 4347491.59; 236065.90,
4347560.46; 236061.74, 4347575.99; and
returning to 236060.14, 4347594.28.
(ii) Note: Map of Units 6, 7, 8, and 9
of critical habitat for Phacelia
submutica follows:
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
BILLING CODE 4310–55–C
*
*
*
*
*
Family Plantaginaceae: Penstemon
debilis (Parachute penstemon)
(1) Critical habitat units are
designated for Garfield County,
Colorado.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
(2) Within these areas, the primary
constituent elements (PCEs) of the
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of
Penstemon debilis consist of five
components:
(i) Suitable soils and geology.
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
45113
(A) Parachute Member and the Lower
Part of the Green River Formation,
although soils outside these formations
would be suitable for pollinators (see
paragraph (2)(v) of this regulation).
(B) Appropriate soil morphology
characterized by a surface layer of small
to moderate shale channers (small
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
EP27JY11.009
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
45114
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
flagstones) that shift continually due to
the steep slopes and below a weakly
developed calcareous, sandy to loamy
layer with 40 to 90 percent coarse
material.
(ii) Elevation and climate. Elevations
from 5,250 to 9,600 ft (1,600 to 2,920 m)
in elevation. Climatic conditions similar
to those of the Mahogany Bench,
including suitable precipitation and
temperatures.
(iii) Plant community.
(A) Barren areas with less than 10
percent plant cover.
(B) Other oil shale endemics, which
can include: Mentzelia rhizomata,
Thalictrum heliophilum, Astragalus
lutosus, Lesquerella parviflora,
Penstemon osterhoutii, and Festuca
dasyclada.
(iv) Habitat for pollinators.
(A) Pollinator ground and twig
nesting habitats. Habitats suitable for a
wide array of pollinators and their life-
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
history and nesting requirements. A
mosaic of native plant communities
generally would provide for this
diversity (see paragraph (2)(iii) of this
regulation). These habitats can include
areas outside of the soils identified in
paragraph (2)(i) of this regulation.
(B) Connectivity between areas
allowing pollinators to move from one
population to the next within units.
(C) Availability of other floral
resources such as other flowering plant
species that provide nectar and pollen
for pollinators. Grass species do not
provide resources for pollinators.
(D) To conserve and accommodate
these pollinator requirements, we have
identified a 3,280-ft (1,000-meter) area
beyond occupied habitat to conserve the
pollinators essential for reproduction.
(v) High levels of natural disturbance.
(A) Very little to no soil formation.
(B) Slow to moderate but constant
downward motion of the oil shale that
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
maintains the habitat in an early
successional state.
(3) Critical habitat does not include
manmade structures (such as buildings,
aqueducts, runways, roads, and other
paved areas) and the land on which they
are located existing within the legal
boundaries on the effective date of this
rule.
(4) Critical habitat map units. Data
layers defining map units were created
on a base of both satellite imagery (NAIP
2009) as well as USGS geospatial
quadrangle maps and were mapped
using NAD 83 Universal Transverse
Mercator (UTM), zone 13N coordinates.
Location information came from a wide
array of sources. Geology, soil, and
landcover layers also were utilized.
(5) Note: Index map of critical habitat
for Penstemon debilis follows:
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
BILLING CODE 4310–55–C
(6) Unit 1: Garfield County, Colorado.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
(i) Land bounded by the following
UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates
(E,N): 202906.15, 4381320.29;
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
45115
203687.82, 4381249.23; 203711.51,
4380870.24; 206127.56, 4380775.50;
206151.24, 4381130.80; 206743.41,
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
EP27JY11.010
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
45116
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
4381059.74; 207481.34, 4379882.89;
207546.04, 4379737.88; 207579.46,
4379590.78; 207560.32, 4379461.09;
207478.37, 4379389.00; 207474.54,
4379385.64; 207331.18, 4379313.30;
207242.86, 4379310.27; 205522.68,
4379335.39; 205374.75, 4379343.44;
203884.46, 4379765.47; 203832.32,
4379794.30; 203128.54, 4380665.06;
202917.56, 4380968.75; 202914.21,
4381113.81; and returning to 202906.15,
4381320.29.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 1 of critical
habitat for Penstemon debilis is
provided at paragraph (7)(ii) of this
entry.
(7) Unit 2: Garfield County, Colorado.
(i) Land bounded by the following
UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates
(E,N): 200037.93, 4369152.60;
200064.07, 4369235.93; 200561.00,
4370149.00; 200968.81, 4370359.43;
202579.41, 4370903.05; 203616.76,
4371206.04; 204719.41, 4370944.44;
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
213659.95, 4368221.51; 213580.99,
4367281.93; 208401.49, 4367866.21;
206696.04, 4368647.87; 205938.06,
4369097.92; 205132.71, 4369500.59;
202432.42, 4369595.34; 201153.33,
4369263.73; 200171.00, 4369099.00; and
returning to 200037.93, 4369152.6.
(ii) Note: Map of Units 1 and 2 of
critical habitat for Penstemon debilis
follows:
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
BILLING CODE 4310–55–C
(8) Unit 3: Garfield County, Colorado.
(i) Land bounded by the following
UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates
(E,N): 223794.63, 4365442.99;
226421.38, 4369052.84; 226846.74,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
4369360.71; 231279.92, 4371117.43;
231538.71, 4371188.86; 231847.17,
4371187.49; 233083.49, 4371030.55;
234022.16, 4370823.43; 234684.25,
4370657.01; 233636.51, 4369246.26;
231875.03, 4367395.93; 228564.25,
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
45117
4365920.22; 225627.45, 4365376.45;
224031.96, 4365135.93; and returning to
223794.63, 4365442.99.]
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 3 of critical
habitat for Penstemon debilis follows:
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
EP27JY11.011
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
(9) Unit 4: Garfield County, Colorado
(i) Land bounded by the following
UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates
(E,N): 242721.77, 4377480.02;
243191.00, 4378729.00; 245443.06,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
4380986.80; 245458.93, 4381002.66;
245475.49, 4381017.80; 245509.28,
4381047.32; 245532.34, 4381066.29;
249608.89, 4384223.08; 249636.03,
4384243.26; 249649.77, 4384253.12;
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
249662.66, 4384262.04; 249667.22,
4384265.16; 249676.38, 4384271.35;
249699.98, 4384286.36; 249738.49,
4384309.37; 249778.00, 4384330.63;
249818.42, 4384350.10; 249838.85,
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
EP27JY11.012
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
45118
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
4384359.38; 249859.67, 4384367.73;
249901.68, 4384383.50; 249922.86,
4384390.91; 249944.35, 4384397.36;
249987.59, 4384409.30; 250031.33,
4384419.28; 250075.48, 4384427.29;
250138.32, 4384436.98; 250178.44,
4384442.24; 250223.13, 4384446.26;
250245.51, 4384447.77; 250267.95,
4384448.27; 250312.81, 4384448.27;
250335.24, 4384447.77; 250357.63,
4384446.26; 250402.32, 4384442.24;
250426.41, 4384439.48; 250430.89,
4384438.85; 250459.56, 4384434.76;
250479.91, 4384431.42; 250520.47,
4384423.91; 250562.42, 4384414.26;
250605.67, 4384402.32; 250648.34,
4384388.46; 250690.34, 4384372.69;
250711.17, 4384364.34; 250731.60,
4384355.06; 250772.02, 4384335.59;
250792.01, 4384325.41; 250811.53,
4384314.33; 250850.04, 4384291.32;
250887.49, 4384266.60; 250923.78,
4384240.23; 250941.63, 4384226.64;
250958.86, 4384212.26; 250992.65,
4384182.74; 251025.07, 4384151.74;
251056.08, 4384119.31; 251076.49,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
4384096.62; 251086.93, 4384084.27;
251092.10, 4384078.05; 251109.95,
4384056.24; 251118.88, 4384045.00;
251136.41, 4384022.27; 251157.79,
4383992.34; 251182.51, 4383954.89;
251201.82, 4383923.11; 251216.21,
4383897.34; 251223.21, 4383884.35;
251236.10, 4383859.56; 251239.59,
4383852.72; 251246.47, 4383838.98;
251259.13, 4383811.66; 251276.77,
4383770.40; 251285.12, 4383749.58;
251292.53, 4383728.40; 251306.40,
4383685.73; 251315.85, 4383652.83;
251321.59, 4383629.94; 251324.33,
4383618.47; 251331.27, 4383587.73;
251333.50, 4383577.32; 251337.75,
4383556.47; 251343.27, 4383523.86;
251349.29, 4383479.40; 251353.31,
4383434.72; 251355.32, 4383389.90;
251355.83, 4383367.46; 251355.32,
4383345.03; 251353.31, 4383300.21;
251349.29, 4383255.53; 251343.27,
4383211.07; 251336.94, 4383174.60;
251330.90, 4383146.08; 251327.68,
4383131.86; 251319.74, 4383099.14;
251317.83, 4383091.52; 251313.89,
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
45119
4383076.30; 251305.40, 4383047.21;
251291.54, 4383004.54; 251280.41,
4382973.76; 251272.78, 4382954.63;
251268.86, 4382945.10; 251257.95,
4382919.32; 251253.09, 4382908.20;
251243.09, 4382886.07; 251227.77,
4382855.08; 251206.51, 4382815.57;
251195.43, 4382796.06; 251183.50,
4382777.06; 251158.78, 4382739.62;
251132.41, 4382703.32; 251104.44,
4382668.24; 251090.06, 4382651.02;
251071.10, 4382629.21; 251042.63,
4382596.73; 251011.62, 4382564.31;
250979.20, 4382533.30; 250945.41,
4382503.78; 250928.19, 4382489.40;
250910.33, 4382475.81; 247067.01,
4379599.29; 247053.05, 4379588.99;
247024.77, 4379568.88; 245278.56,
4378356.07; 243539.79, 4377302.88;
243299.65, 4377257.84; 242735.72,
4377245.93; and returning to 242721.77,
4377480.02]
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 4 of critical
habitat for Penstemon debilis follows:
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
BILLING CODE 4310–55–C
*
*
*
*
*
Family Polemoniaceae: Ipomopsis
polyantha (Pagosa skyrocket)
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
(1) Critical habitat units are
designated for Archuleta County,
Colorado.
(2) Within these areas, the primary
constituent elements (PCEs) of the
physical and biological features
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
essential to the conservation of
Ipomopsis polyantha consist of five
components:
(i) Mancos shale soils.
(ii) Elevation and climate. Elevations
from 6,400 to 8,100 ft (1,950 to 2,475 m)
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
EP27JY11.013
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
45120
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
and current climatic conditions similar
to those that historically occurred
around Pagosa Springs, Colorado.
Climatic conditions include suitable
precipitation; cold, dry springs; and
winter snow.
(iii) Plant community.
(A) Suitable native plant communities
(as described in paragraph (2)(iii)(B) of
this entry) with small (less than 100 ft2
(10 m2)) or larger (several hectares or
acres) barren areas with less than 20
percent plant cover in the actual barren
areas.
(B) Appropriate potential native plant
communities, although these
communities may not be like they were
historically because they have already
been altered. Therefore, there only
needs to be the potential for the
appropriate native plant community.
For example, Ponderosa pine forests
may have been cut, or areas that had
native vegetation may have been
scraped. Native habitats and plants
would be preferred to habitats
dominated by nonnative invasive
species. These plant communities
include:
(1) Barren shales;
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
(2) Open montane grassland
(primarily Arizona fescue) understory at
the edges of open Ponderosa pine; or
(3) Clearings within the ponderosa
pine/Rocky Mountain juniper and Utah
juniper/oak communities.
(iv) Habitat for pollinators.
(A) Pollinator ground and twig
nesting areas. Habitats suitable for a
wide array of pollinators and their lifehistory and nesting requirements. A
mosaic of native plant communities
generally would provide for this
diversity.
(B) Connectivity between areas
allowing pollinators to move from one
site to the next within each population.
(C) Availability of other floral
resources, such as other flowering plant
species that provide nectar and pollen
for pollinators. Grass species do not
provide resources for pollinators.
(D) To conserve and accommodate
these pollinator requirements, we have
identified a 3,280-ft (1,000-m) area
beyond occupied habitat to conserve the
pollinators essential for reproduction.
(v) Appropriate disturbance regime.
(A) Appropriate disturbance levels—
Light to moderate, or intermittent or
discontinuous.
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
45121
(B) Naturally maintained disturbances
through soil erosion or humanmaintained disturbances that can
include light grazing, occasional ground
clearing, and other disturbances that are
not severe or continual.
(3) Critical habitat does not include
manmade structures (such as buildings,
aqueducts, runways, roads, and other
paved areas) and the land on which they
are located existing within the legal
boundaries on the effective date of this
rule. However, because Ipomopsis
polyantha is found along the edges of
roads and buildings, the edges of roads
and edges of structures are included in
the designation.
(4) Critical habitat map units. Data
layers defining map units were created
on a base of both aerial imagery (NAIP
2009) as well as USGS geospatial
quadrangle maps and were mapped
using NAD 83 Universal Transverse
Mercator (UTM), zone 13N coordinates.
Location information came from a wide
array of sources.
(5) Note: Index map of critical habitat
for Ipomopsis polyantha follows:
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
(6) Unit 1: Archuleta County,
Colorado.
(i) Land bounded by the following
UTM NAD83, zone 13 coordinates (E,N):
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
303791.32, 4122535.03; 303793.45,
4122922.32; 304096.00, 4123362.40;
304369.56, 4123552.58; 304559.79,
4123642.82; 305688.95, 4123978.43;
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
306091.12, 4123810.03; 306288.11,
4123711.53; 306854.07, 4123177.90;
306682.38, 4122356.39; 306421.31,
4121926.16; 305629.19, 4121491.52;
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
ep27jy11.014
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
45122
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
45123
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
ep27jy11.015
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
305085.53, 4121418.90; 304527.32,
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 1 of critical
4121406.59; 303782.83, 4121898.71; and habitat for Ipomopsis polyantha follows:
returning to 303791.32, 4122535.03.
45124
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
BILLING CODE 4310–55–C
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
(7) Unit 2: Archuleta County,
Colorado.
(i) Land bounded by the following
UTM NAD83, zone 13 coordinates (E,N):
306215.91, 4143150.27; 306228.72,
4143313.61; 307003.79, 4143989.39;
307211.97, 4144018.22; 307840.95,
4143816.88; 308210.39, 4143809.74;
308215.75, 4143886.66; 308293.59,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
4143872.46; 308346.60, 4143847.52;
309004.29, 4143385.20; 309534.52,
4142892.90; 309558.00, 4142861.72;
309548.26, 4142623.97; 309546.44,
4142621.82; 309498.44, 4142571.81;
309318.44, 4142432.81; 309132.45,
4142298.80; 309124.45, 4142295.80;
309054.45, 4142279.80; 309046.45,
4142278.80; 309016.45, 4142278.80;
308991.49, 4142282.38; 307639.65,
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
4142712.29; 307518.06, 4142804.69;
307308.93, 4142897.10; 307090.07,
4143115.96; 306885.80, 4143091.64;
306798.26, 4143140.28; 306666.95,
4143154.87; 306667.03, 4143009.21; and
returning to 306215.91, 4143150.27.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 2 of critical
habitat for Ipomopsis polyantha follows:
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
(8) Unit 3: Archuleta County,
Colorado.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
(i) Land bounded by the following
UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
45125
(E,N): 321192.95, 4123901.22;
321219.78, 4124232.82; 321945.28,
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
ep27jy11.016
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
45126
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
4127008.59; 322719.45, 4127682.22;
323501.91, 4127905.25; 325613.28,
4127099.77; 326316.06, 4126714.67;
326499.78, 4125923.28; 325267.71,
4122561.16; 324767.28, 4121430.82;
324009.92, 4120447.34; 322039.88,
4121949.02; 321275.11, 4123556.12; and
returning to 321192.95, 4123901.22.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 3 of critical
habitat for Ipomopsis polyantha is
provided at paragraph (9)(ii) of this
entry.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
(9) Unit 4: Archuleta County,
Colorado.
(i) Land bounded by the following
UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates
(E,N): 325341.89, 4116396.61;
325387.72, 4117588.25; 326991.87,
4117571.07; 326986.14, 4116780.45;
328223.62, 4116654.41; 328223.62,
4116287.75; 327816.85, 4116316.40;
327799.67, 4115921.09; 327392.90,
4115932.55; 327369.98, 4114758.09;
326957.49, 4114763.82; 326963.22,
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
4115164.85; 326567.91, 4115187.77;
326562.18, 4115588.81; 326172.61,
4115594.53; 326161.15, 4115204.96;
325777.30, 4115210.69; 325576.78,
4115199.23; 325737.20, 4115554.43;
325754.39, 4115795.05; 325668.45,
4115886.72; 325324.70, 4115995.57; and
returning to 325341.89, 4116396.61.
(ii) Note: Map of Units 3 and 4 of
critical habitat for Ipomopsis polyantha
follows:
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
45127
ep27jy11.017
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
45128
*
*
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
*
*
Dated: July 12, 2011.
Eileen Sobeck,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and
Parks.
*
[FR Doc. 2011–18428 Filed 7–26–11; 8:45 am]
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
BILLING CODE 4310–55–C
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:29 Jul 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\27JYP3.SGM
27JYP3
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 144 (Wednesday, July 27, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 45078-45128]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-18428]
[[Page 45077]]
Vol. 76
Wednesday,
No. 144
July 27, 2011
Part IV
Department of the Interior
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fish and Wildlife Service
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical
Habitat for Ipomopsis polyantha (Pagosa skyrocket), Penstemon debilis
(Parachute beardtongue), and Phacelia submutica (DeBeque phacelia);
Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 45078]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R6-ES-2011-0040; MO 92210-0-0009]
RIN 1018-AX75
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of
Critical Habitat for Ipomopsis polyantha (Pagosa skyrocket), Penstemon
debilis (Parachute beardtongue), and Phacelia submutica (DeBeque
phacelia)
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose to
designate critical habitat for Ipomopsis polyantha (Pagosa skyrocket),
Penstemon debilis (Parachute beardtongue), and Phacelia submutica
(DeBeque phacelia) under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended
(Act). Approximately 9,894 acres (4,004 hectares) are being proposed
for designation as critical habitat for I. polyantha. Approximately
19,155 acres (7,752 hectares) are being proposed for designation as
critical habitat for P. debilis. Approximately 24,987 acres (10,112
hectares) are being proposed for designation as critical habitat for P.
submutica. In total, approximately 54,036 acres (21,868 hectares) are
being proposed for designation as critical habitat for the three
species. The proposed critical habitat is located in Archuleta,
Garfield, and Mesa Counties, Colorado.
DATES: We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before
September 26, 2011. We must receive requests for public hearings, in
writing, at the address shown in the ADDRESSES section by September 12,
2011.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. In the Enter Keyword or ID box, enter Docket No.
FWS-R6-ES-2011-0040, which is the docket number for this rulemaking.
Then, in the Search panel at the top of the screen, under the Document
Type heading, check the box next to Proposed Rules to locate this
document. You may submit a comment by clicking on ``Submit a Comment.''
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R6-ES-2011-0040; Division of Policy and
Directives Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax
Drive, MS 2042-PDM; Arlington, VA 22203.
We will not accept e-mail or faxed comments. We will post all
comments on https://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we
will post any personal information you provide us (see the Public
Comments section below for more information).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Allan Pfister, Western Colorado
Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Western Colorado Ecological
Services Office, 764 Horizon Drive, Suite B, Grand Junction, CO 81506-
3946; telephone 970-243-2778; facsimile 970-245-6933. If you use a
telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Comments
We intend that any final action resulting from this proposed rule
will be based on the best scientific and commercial data available and
be as accurate and as effective as possible. Therefore, we request
comments or information from other concerned government agencies, the
scientific community, industry, or any other interested party
concerning this proposed rule. We particularly seek comments
concerning:
(1) The reasons why we should or should not designate habitat as
``critical habitat'' under section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.) including whether there are threats to the species from human
activity, the degree of which can be expected to increase due to the
designation, and whether that increase in threat outweighs the benefit
of designation such that the designations of critical habitat may not
be prudent;
(2) Specific information on:
(a) The amount and distribution of Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon
debilis, and Phacelia submutica habitat;
(b) What areas, that are occupied and that contain features
essential to the conservation of these species, should be included in
the designation and why;
(c) Special management considerations or protection that may be
needed in critical habitat areas we are proposing, including managing
for the potential effects of climate change;
(d) What areas not occupied at the time of listing are essential
for the conservation of the species and why; and
(e) Means to quantify the amount of natural and human-caused
disturbance these species prefer or can tolerate.
(3) Land use designations and current or planned activities in the
subject areas and their possible impacts on proposed critical habitat.
(4) Information on the projected and reasonably likely impacts of
climate change on Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia
submutica and proposed critical habitat.
(5) Any probable economic, national security, or other relevant
impacts of designating any area that may be included in the final
designation; in particular, any impacts on small entities or families,
and the benefits of including or excluding areas that exhibit these
impacts.
(6) Whether any specific areas we are proposing for critical
habitat designation should be considered for exclusion under section
4(b)(2) of the Act, especially the Mount Callahan and Mount Callahan
Saddle Natural Areas for Penstemon debilis, and whether the benefits of
potentially excluding any specific area outweigh the benefits of
including that area under section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
(7) Whether we could improve or modify our approach to designating
critical habitat in any way to provide for greater public participation
and understanding, or to better accommodate public concerns and
comments.
You may submit your comments and materials concerning this proposed
rule by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. We will not
accept comments sent by e-mail or fax or to an address not listed in
the ADDRESSES section. We will post your entire comment--including your
personal identifying information--on https://www.regulations.gov. You
may request at the top of your document that we withhold personal
information such as your street address, phone number, or e-mail
address from public review; however, we cannot guarantee that we will
be able to do so.
Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting
documentation we used in preparing this proposed rule, will be
available for public inspection on https://www.regulations.gov, or by
appointment, during normal business hours, at the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Western Colorado Ecological Services Office (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Background
It is our intent to discuss only those topics directly relevant to
the designation of critical habitat in this proposed rule. For more
information on Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia
submutica, refer to the proposed rule published in the Federal Register
on June 23, 2010 (75
[[Page 45079]]
FR 35721) or the final listing rule that is published in the Rules and
Regulations section of today's Federal Register. See also the
discussion of habitat in the ``Physical and Biological Features''
section below. Please note that we have used scientific names for rare
species, because oftentimes these names are better known than the
common names; and, we have used common names for species that are
better known and where the common name may be easier for the reader to
understand. In this rule we used scientific names for rare species,
because where a common name is less standardized, the scientific name
avoids confusion.
Ipomopsis polyantha is a biennial (living only 2 years) or short-
lived perennial (living for more than 2 years) herb in the
Polemoniaceae (phlox) family that has white flowers flecked with purple
dots; it flowers only once before dying. Penstemon debilis is a long-
lived perennial herb in the Plantaginaceae (plantain) family that grows
along the ground and has purple flowers. Phacelia submutica is a very
small annual (living only one season) herb in the Hydrophyllaceae
(waterleaf) family with small white flowers that are hidden within the
leaves of the plant.
Geographic Range, Habitat, and Threats
Ipomopsis polyantha is known from only two populations in Archuleta
County, Colorado. A minimum convex polygon (enclosing all the points to
create a convex polygon with no concave areas) around both populations
encloses an area of 13,825 acres (ac) (5,595 hectares (ha)) and
measures 13 miles (mi) (21 kilometers km)) in length and 3 mi (5 km) in
width. The total footprint of area actually occupied by plants is 388.4
ac (157.1 ha), of which 86.4 percent is on private lands, 9.1 percent
is on highway right-of-ways (ROWs), 1.9 percent is on lands managed by
the Town of Pagosa Springs, and 2.5 percent is on lands managed by the
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) (Service 2011a, p. 2). Between the
actual occupied areas there are interspaces of unoccupied habitat, so
the acreage occupied by the species including these interspaces is
larger than the acres listed above. We roughly estimate there are
roughly 340,000 I. polyantha individuals (Service 2011b, p. 1). The
plant is specific to Mancos shale soils at elevations of 6,725 to 7,776
feet (ft) (2,050 to 2,370 meters (m)) () (Service 2011c, p. 1). Plants
are found in sparsely vegetated areas along the margins of Pinus
ponderosa (Ponderosa pine) forests and extending into the adjacent
grassland or shrublands. The species' highly restricted soil
requirements and geographic range make it particularly susceptible to
extinction at any time due to commercial, municipal, and residential
development; associated road and utility improvements and maintenance;
heavy livestock use; inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms;
fragmented habitat; and prolonged drought. Eighty-six percent of the
species' occupied habitat is on private land with no limits on
development.
Penstemon debilis is known from only six populations on the Roan
Plateau escarpment in Garfield County, Colorado. A minimum convex
polygon around all six populations encloses an area of 7,161 ac (2,898
ha) and measures 18 mi (29 km) in length and 1 mi (2 km) in width. The
total footprint of area actually occupied by the plants is 91.8 ac
(37.2 ha), of which 66.6 percent is on private lands, and 33.3 percent
is on lands managed by the BLM (Service 2011a, p. 3). Between the
actual occupied areas there are interspaces of unoccupied habitat, so
the acreage occupied by the species including these interspaces is
quite a bit larger than the acres listed above. We roughly estimate
there are 4,100 P. debilis individuals (Service 2011b, p. 2). The plant
is specific to oil shale cliffs of the Parachute Creek Member and the
Lower Part of the Green River Formation at elevations of 5,600 to 9,229
ft (1,707 to 2,813 m) (Service 2011c, p. 2; Tweto 1979). Plants are
found on unstable shale soils with little other vegetation. The other
vegetation comprises primarily other plant species endemic (known only)
to the oil shale. Extremely low numbers and a highly restricted
geographic range make the species particularly susceptible to becoming
endangered in the forseeable future. Threats to the species and its
habitat include energy development, road maintenance, inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms, and stochastic events.
Phacelia submutica is known from 9 populations (and 22 occurrences)
centered on the town of DeBeque in Mesa and Garfield Counties,
Colorado. A minimum convex polygon around all nine populations encloses
an area of 82,231 ac (34,896 ha) and measures 19 mi (30 km) in length
and 11 mi (17 km) in width. The total footprint of area actually
occupied by the plants is 625.9 ac (253.3 ha), of which 80.9 percent is
on lands managed by the BLM, 11.9 percent is on private lands, 6.4
percent is on lands managed by the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), and 0.7
percent is on lands managed by the Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW)
(Service 2011a, pp. 6-7). Between the actual occupied areas there are
interspaces of unoccupied habitat, so the acreage occupied by the
species including these interspaces is quite a bit larger than the
acres listed above. We estimate there may be as many as 68,000 P.
submutica individuals in years when climatic conditions are favorable
(Service 2011b, p. 4). The plant is known only from clay soils on the
Atwell and Shire members of the Wasatch Formation at elevations of
5,080 to 7,100 ft (1,548 to 2,157 m) (Service 2011c, p. 3). The plants
are found on clay barrens with little other vegetation. Surrounding
these barren areas is a landscape of Juniperus spp. (juniper),
Artemisia spp. (sagebrush), Atriplex spp. (saltbush), and nonnative
invasive Bromus tectorum (cheatgrass). The current range of P.
submutica is subject to human-caused modifications from natural gas
exploration and production with associated expansion of pipelines,
roads, and utilities; development within the Westwide Energy Corridor;
increased access to the habitat by off-highway vehicles (OHVs); soil
and seed disturbance by livestock and other disturbances; and the
inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms.
Previous Federal Actions
A complete description of previous Federal actions for Ipomopsis
polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia submutica is included in the
final listing rule published concurrently with this proposal to
designate critical habitat. On June 23, 2010, we proposed to list I.
polyantha as an endangered species and we proposed to list P. debilis
and P. submutica as threatened species under the Act (75 FR 35721).
Critical Habitat
Background
Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the Act as:
(1) The specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the
species, at the time it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which
are found those physical or biological features.
(a) Essential to the conservation of the species and
(b) Which may require special management considerations or
protection; and
(2) Specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the
species at the time it is listed, upon a determination that such areas
are essential for the conservation of the species.
[[Page 45080]]
Conservation, as defined under section 3 of the Act, means to use
and the use of all methods and procedures that are necessary to bring
an endangered or threatened species to the point at which the measures
provided pursuant to the Act are no longer necessary. Such methods and
procedures include, but are not limited to, all activities associated
with scientific resources management such as research, census, law
enforcement, habitat acquisition and maintenance, propagation, live
trapping, and transplantation, and, in the extraordinary case where
population pressures within a given ecosystem cannot be otherwise
relieved, may include regulated taking.
Critical habitat receives protection under section 7 of the Act
through the requirement that Federal agencies insure, in consultation
with the Service, that any action they authorize, fund, or carry out is
not likely to result in the destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat. The designation of critical habitat does not affect
land ownership or establish a refuge, wilderness, reserve, preserve, or
other conservation area. Such designation does not allow the government
or public to access private lands. Such designation does not require
implementation of restoration, recovery, or enhancement measures by
non-Federal landowners. Where a landowner seeks or requests Federal
agency funding or authorization for an action that may affect a listed
species or critical habitat, the consultation requirements of section
7(a)(2) would apply, but even in the event of a destruction or adverse
modification finding, the obligation of the Federal action agency and
the landowner is not to restore or recover the species, but to
implement reasonable and prudent alternatives to avoid destruction or
adverse modification of critical habitat.
For inclusion in a critical habitat designation, the habitat within
the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it was listed
must contain physical and biological features which are essential to
the conservation of the species and which may require special
management considerations or protection. Critical habitat designations
identify, to the extent known using the best scientific and commercial
data available, those physical and biological features that are
essential to the conservation of the species (such as space, food,
cover, and protected habitat), focusing on the principal biological or
physical constituent elements (primary constituent elements) within an
area that are essential to the conservation of the species (such as
roost sites, nesting grounds, seasonal wetlands, water quality, tide,
soil type). Primary constituent elements are the elements of physical
and biological features that, when laid out in the appropriate quantity
and spatial arrangement to provide for a species' life-history
processes, are essential to the conservation of the species.
Under the Act, we can designate critical habitat in areas outside
the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is listed,
upon a determination that such areas are essential for the conservation
of the species. We designate critical habitat in areas outside the
geographical area occupied by a species only when a designation limited
to its current range would be inadequate to ensure the conservation of
the species. When the best available scientific data do not demonstrate
that the conservation needs of the species require such additional
areas, we will not designate critical habitat in areas outside the
geographical area occupied by the species. An area currently occupied
by the species but that was not occupied at the time of listing may,
however, be essential to the conservation of the species and may be
included in the critical habitat designation.
Section 4 of the Act requires that we designate critical habitat on
the basis of the best scientific and commercial data available.
Further, our Policy on Information Standards under the Act (published
in the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271)), the Information
Quality Act (section 515 of the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106-554; H.R. 5658)),
and our associated Information Quality Guidelines, provide criteria,
establish procedures, and provide guidance to ensure that our decisions
are based on the best scientific data available. They require our
biologists, to the extent consistent with the Act and with the use of
the best scientific data available, to use primary and original sources
of information as the basis for recommendations to designate critical
habitat.
When we are determining which areas should be designated as
critical habitat, our primary source of information is generally the
information developed during the listing process for the species.
Additional information sources may include the recovery plan for the
species, articles in peer-reviewed journals, conservation plans
developed by States and counties, scientific status surveys and
studies, biological evaluations or National Environmental Policy Act
documents, or other unpublished materials and expert opinion or
personal knowledge. In this case, we do not yet have recovery plans for
these species.
Habitat is dynamic, and species may move from one area to another
over time. Climate change will be a particular challenge for
biodiversity because the interaction of additional stressors associated
with climate change and current stressors may push species beyond their
ability to survive (Lovejoy 2005, pp. 325-326). The synergistic
implications of climate change and habitat fragmentation are the most
threatening facet of climate change for biodiversity (Hannah et al.
2005, p. 4). The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was
established in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization and the
United Nations Environment Program in response to growing concerns
about climate change and, in particular, the effects of global warming.
The IPCC has concluded that the warming of the climate system is
unequivocal, as evidenced from observations of increases in global
average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice,
and rising global average sea level (IPCC 2007, pp. 6, 30; Karl et al.
2009, p. 17). Changes in the global climate system during the 21st
century are likely to be larger than those observed during the 20th
century (IPCC 2007, p. 19). Several scenarios are virtually certain or
very likely to occur in the 21st century including: (1) Over most land,
there will be warmer and fewer cold days and nights, and warmer and
more frequent hot days and nights; (2) areas affected by drought will
increase; and (3) the frequency of warm spells and heat waves over most
land areas will likely increase (IPCC 2007, pp. 13, 53).
The IPCC predicts that the resiliency of many ecosystems is likely
to be exceeded this century by an unprecedented combination of climate
change, associated disturbances (e.g., flooding, drought, wildfire, and
insects), and other global drivers (IPCC 2007, pp. 31-33). With medium
confidence, IPCC predicts that approximately 20 to 30 percent of plant
and animal species assessed by the IPCC so far are likely to be at an
increased risk of extinction if increases in global average temperature
exceed 3 to 5 [deg]Fahrenheit (F) (1.5 to 2.5 [ordm]Celsius (C)) (IPCC
2007, p. 48). Plant species with restricted ranges that also are
climatically limited may experience population declines as a result of
climate change (Schwartz and Brigham 2003, p. 11).
Regional projections indicate the Southwest, including western
Colorado,
[[Page 45081]]
may experience the greatest temperature increase of any area in the
lower 48 States (IPCC 2007, p. 30). Drought probability is predicted to
increase in the Southwest (Karl et al. 2009, pp. 129-134), with summers
warming more than winters, and annual temperature increasing
approximately 4 [deg]F (2.2 [deg]C) by 2050 (Ray et al. 2008, p. 29).
Additionally, the number of days over 90 [deg]F (32 [deg]C) could
double by the end of the century (Karl et al. 2009, p. 34). Projections
also show declines in snowpack across the West with the most dramatic
declines at lower elevations (below 8,200 ft (2,500 m)) (Ray et al.
2008, p. 29). A 10 to 30 percent decrease in precipitation in mid-
latitude western North America is projected by the year 2050, based on
an ensemble of 12 climate models (Milly et al. 2005, p. 1). Overall,
future projections for the Southwest include increased temperatures;
more intense and longer-lasting heat waves; and increased probability
of drought exacerbated by higher temperatures, heavier downpours,
increased flooding, and increased erosion (Karl et al. 2009, pp. 129-
134).
To obtain climate projections specific to the range of the three
plant species of interest, we used a statistically downscaled model
from the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) for a region
covering western Colorado. The resulting projections indicate that
temperature could increase an average of 4.5 [deg]F (2.5 [deg]C) by
2050 with the following seasonal increases: Summer (July to September)
+ 5.0 [deg]F (2.8 [deg]C); fall (October to December) + 4.0 [deg]F (2.2
[deg]C); winter (January to March) + 4.1 [deg]F (2.3 [deg]C); and
spring (April to June) + 4.5 [deg]F (2.5 [deg]C) (University
Corporation of Atmospheric Research (UCAR) 2009, pp. 1-14). In western
Colorado, multi-model averages show a shift toward increased winter
precipitation and decreased spring and summer precipitation by the end
of the century (Ray et al. 2008, p. 34; Karl et al. 2009, p. 30).
Similarly, the NCAR results show the highest probability of a 7.5
percent increase in average winter precipitation; an 11.4 percent
decrease in average spring precipitation; a 2.1 percent decrease in
average summer precipitation; and a 1.3 percent increase in average
fall precipitation with an overall very slight decrease in 2050 (UCAR
2009, pp. 1-14).
Over the past 30 years, annual average temperature in west-central
Colorado has increased by 0.9 [deg]C (1.6 [deg]F) and in the greater
Pagosa Springs area temperature has increased 1.1 [deg]C (1.9 [deg]F)
(Ray et al. 2008, p. 10). In Colorado, high variability in annual
precipitation (because of the extreme changes in elevation) precludes
detection of long-term trends at the local levels (Ray et al. 2008, p.
5). Only general assumptions and predictions can be made from these
data. To examine local climate trends, we gathered temperature and
precipitation data from the last 100 years at five weather stations
(High Plains Regional Climate Center 2011, pp. 1-34; Service 2011d, pp.
1-72) in the vicinity of the three plant species (table 1). These data
appear to be consistent with local trends in temperature discussed in
the models above. Change in temperature averaged across the weather
stations is approximately 1.68 [deg]F (0.93 [deg]C); change in
temperature per century averaged across the weather stations is
approximately 2.06 [deg]F (1.14 [deg]C). As noted previously,
precipitation is variable across these weather stations and trend
cannot be reasonably determined.
Table 1--Climate Trends at Select Weather Stations
[1890s-2010].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parachute (Grand Pagosa
Altenbern Collbran Valley) Palisade springs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species in Vicinity..................... Penstemon Phacelia Penstemon debilis; Penstemon Ipomopsis
debilis; submutica Phacelia submutica debilis; polyantha
Phacelia Phacelia
submutica submutica
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TEMPERATURE ([deg]F)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Data Period(s)\1\....................... 1958-2010 1900-1966; 1904-1914; 1965- 1911-2010 1906-1917;
1970-1976; 1981 1928-1932;
1978-1999 1934-1998
Change in Average Annual Temperature +1.79 +1.45 +.76 +2.9 +1.48
([deg]F)...............................
Approximate Change in Temperature per +3.37 +1.46 +.97 +2.9 +1.59
Century ([deg]F).......................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRECIPITATION (inches)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Data Period(s)\1\....................... 1947-2010 1893-1966; 1904-1914; 1965- 1911-1919; 1906-1917;
1970-1976; 1981 1922-2010 1928-1932;
1978-1999 1934-1998
Change in Average Annual Precipitation +1.76 +1.49 -4.06 +1.77 -2.59
(inches)...............................
Approximate Change in Precipitation per +2.84 +1.41 -5.2 +1.77 -2.79
Century (inches).......................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ As indicated by time periods, data gaps exist for some weather stations.
\2\ Data for some years is partial (less than 12 months of data); e.g., data collection may have begun in
September, or weather station was nonfunctioning for a period of time.
Recent analyses of long-term data sets show accelerating rates of
climate change over the past 2 or 3 decades, indicating that the
extension of plant and animal species' geographic range boundaries
towards the poles or to higher elevations by progressive establishment
of new local occurrences will become increasingly apparent in the short
term (Hughes 2000, p. 60). Climate change may exacerbate the frequency
and intensity of droughts in this area and result in reduced species'
viability as the dry years become more common. Under drought
conditions, plants generally are less vigorous and less successful in
reproduction and may require several years to recover following drought
(Weltzin et al. 2003, p. 946). With small populations and their
inherent risk of genetic
[[Page 45082]]
complications, lowered reproduction could result in reduced population
viability (Newman and Pilson 1997, pp. 354-362).
Climate modeling at this time has not been refined to a level that
we can predict the amount of temperature and precipitation change
locally within the limited range of Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon
debilis, or Phacelia submutica. Therefore, we generally address what
could happen based on current climate predictions for the region.
The limited geographic range of the Mancos shale substrate that
underlies the entire Ipomopsis polyantha habitat likely limits the
ability of the species to adapt by shifting its range in response to
climatic conditions. I. polyantha is sensitive to the timing and amount
of moisture due to its biennial life history. Thus, if climate change
results in local drying, the species could experience a reduction in
its reproductive output. In the ``Physical and Biological Features''
section below, we have conservatively adjusted to known elevations
occupied by the species upward and downward 328 ft (100 m) in an
attempt to account for climate change.
It is unknown how Penstemon debilis responds to drought; however,
for most plant species that grow in arid regions, plant numbers
decrease during drought years, but recover in subsequent seasons that
are less dry (Lauenroth et al. 1987, pp. 117-124; McDowell et al. 2008,
pp. 719-739). Drought years could result in a loss of plants. The
limited geographic range of the oil shale substrate that makes up the
entire P. debilis habitat could limit the ability of the species to
adapt to changes in climatic conditions by progressive establishment of
new populations. In the ``Physical and Biological Features'' section
below, we have conservatively adjusted to known elevations occupied by
the species upward and downward 328 ft (100 m) in an attempt to account
for climate change.
Climate change is likely to affect Phacelia submutica because seed
germination, seed dormancy, and persistence of the seed bank are all
directly dependent on precipitation and temperature patterns (Levine et
al. 2008, p. 805). Future changes in the timing of the first major
spring rains each year, and temperatures associated with these rains,
may more strongly affect germination and persistence of ephemeral
annual plants than changes in season-long rainfall (barring severe
droughts) (Levine et al. 2008, p. 805). Increasing environmental
variance might decrease extinction risk for rare desert ephemeral
plants, because these plants typically rely on extremely good years to
restock the persistent seed bank while extremely bad years have little
impact (Meyer et al. 2006, p. 901). A persistent seed bank enables the
species to survive drought. However, extremely long droughts resulting
from climate change, with no good years for replenishing the seed bank,
would likely cause P. submutica to become endangered.
Because the soil can remain bare of Phacelia submutica plants for
several years, it is difficult to identify and protect the seemingly
unoccupied habitat that occurs in small, isolated patches that are
easily destroyed by small-scale disturbances, and can be overlooked
during habitat assessments. The longer the species remains dormant, the
less likely it is that we will know if an area is occupied, reducing
our ability to avoid impacts to the species and protect it from
becoming endangered. While current climate change predictions are not
reliable enough at the local level for us to draw conclusions about its
effects on P. submutica, it is likely that there will be drying trends
in the future and the seeds will remain dormant for long periods. This
would make it increasingly difficult to detect occupied habitat and
avoid destruction of habitat. In the ``Physical and Biological
Features'' section below, we have conservatively adjusted to known
elevations occupied by the species upward and downward 328 ft (100 m)
in an attempt to account for climate change.
We recognize that critical habitat designated at a particular point
in time may not include all of the habitat areas that we may later
determine are necessary for the recovery of the species. For these
reasons, a critical habitat designation does not signal that habitat
outside the designated area is unimportant or may not be required for
recovery of these three species. Areas that are important to the
conservation of the species, both inside and outside the critical
habitat designation, will continue to be subject to: (1) Conservation
actions implemented under section 7(a)(1) of the Act, (2) regulatory
protections afforded by the requirement in section 7(a)(2) of the Act
for Federal agencies to insure their actions are not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened
species, and (3) the penalties and enforcement provisions of section 11
of the Act if the prohibitions of section 9 of the Act have been
violated. Federally funded or permitted projects affecting listed
species outside their designated critical habitat areas may still
result in jeopardy findings in some cases. These protections and
conservation tools will continue to contribute to recovery of this
species. Similarly, critical habitat designations made on the basis of
the best available information at the time of designation will not
control the direction and substance of future recovery plans, habitat
conservation plans (HCPs), or other species conservation planning
efforts if new information available at the time of these planning
efforts calls for a different outcome.
Physical and Biological Features
In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) and 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act and
regulations at 50 CFR 424.12, in determining which areas within the
geographical area occupied at the time of listing to designate as
critical habitat, we consider the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the species and which may require
special management considerations or protection. These include, but are
not limited to:
(1) Space for individual and population growth and for normal
behavior;
(2) Food, water, air, light, minerals, or other nutritional or
physiological requirements;
(3) Cover or shelter;
(4) Sites for breeding, reproduction, or rearing (or development)
of offspring; and
(5) Habitats that are protected from disturbance or are
representative of the historical, geographical, and ecological
distributions of a species.
We derive the specific physical and biological features required
for Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia submutica from
studies of these species' habitat, ecology, and life history as
described below. Additional information on these species' habitats,
ecology, and life histories can be found in the final listing rule
published in today's Federal Register.
Ipomopsis polyantha
We have determined that Ipomopsis polyantha requires the following
physical and biological features:
Space for Individual and Population Growth
Plant Community and Competitive Ability--Ipomopsis polyantha is
found on barren shales, or in the open montane grassland (primarily
Festuca arizonica (Arizona fescue)) understory at the edges of open
Pinus ponderosa (Ponderosa pine), Pinus ponderosa and Juniperus
scopulorum (Rocky Mountain juniper), or J. osteosperma (Utah
[[Page 45083]]
juniper) and Quercus gambellii (oak) plant communities (Anderson 2004,
p. 20). Within these plant communities, the plant is found in open or
more sparsely vegetated areas where plant cover is less than 5 or 10
percent, although these interspaces can be small within the greater
plant community (less than 100 ft\2\ (10 m\2\)). Because the plant is
found in these open areas it is thought to be a poor competitor. Dense
stands of nonnative invasive grasses such as Bromus inermis (smooth
brome) appear to almost totally exclude the species (Anderson 2004, p.
36).
Complexity in I. polyantha plant communities is important because
pollinator diversity at I. polyantha sites is higher at more
vegetatively diverse sites (Collins 1995, p. 107). The importance of
pollinators for I. polyantha is further discussed under
``Reproduction'' below. Therefore, based on the information above, we
identify sparsely vegetated, barren shales, Ponderosa pine margins,
Ponderosa pine and juniper, or juniper and oak plant communities to be
a physical or biological feature for this plant. Given that much of the
area where I. polyantha currently exists has already been altered to
some degree, these plant communities may be historical. For example,
the adjacent forest that would have naturally occurred in I. polyantha
habitat may have been thinned or removed. In another example, forage
species may have been planted in habitat that was once more suitable
for I. polyantha.
Elevation--Known populations of Ipomopsis polyantha are found from
6,750 to 7,775 ft (2,050 to 2,370 m) (Service 2011c, p. 1). Because
plants have not been identified outside of this elevation band and
because growing conditions frequently change across elevation
gradients, we have identified elevations from 6,400 to 8,100 ft (1,950
to 2,475 m) to be a physical or biological feature for this plant. We
have extended the elevation range 328 ft (100 m) upward and downward in
an attempt to provide areas where the plant could migrate, given
shifting climates (Callaghan et al. 2004, pp. 418-435; Crimmins et al.
2011, pp. 324-327). We consider this 328 ft (100 m) to be a
conservative allowance since studies elsewhere on climate change
elevational shifts have found more dramatic changes even in the last
century: 95 ft (29 m) upward per decade (Lenoir et al. 2008, pp. 1768-
1770), or an average of 279 ft (85 m) downward since the 1930s
(Crimmins et al. 2011, pp. 324-327). We do not have information
specific to I. polyantha elevational shifts. The above studies were
done in different areas, western Europe and California, and looking at
different species. Mancos shale habitats extend into these higher and
lower elevations.
Food, Water, Air, Light, Minerals, or Other Nutritional or
Physiological Requirements
Soils--Ipomopsis polyantha is found on Mancos shale soils from the
Upper Cretaceous period. These shales comprise a heavy gray clay loam
alluvium (loose, unconsolidated) derived from shale, sandstone, clay,
and residuum that is unconsolidated, weathered mineral material that
has accumulated as consolidated rock and disintegrated in place
(Collins 1995, pp. 2-4). These shale soils do not retain soil moisture
and are difficult for plant survival. I. polyantha seeds grow best when
germinated in these Mancos shale soils (Collins 1995, p. 87). We assume
the soils where I. polyantha are found are among the harshest local
sites for plant growth because of the lack of vegetation at occupied
sites, and because the soils are heavy, droughty, and deficient in
nutrients. Species that occupy such sites have been called ``stress-
tolerators'' (Grime 1977, p. 1196). Because I. polyantha plants are
found only on Mancos shale soils, and because greenhouse trials have
found that seedlings grow best in Mancos shale soils, we have
identified these Mancos shale soils as a physical or biological feature
for this plant.
Climate--Average annual rainfall in Pagosa Springs is 20 inches
(in.) (51 centimeters (cm)) (Anderson 2004, p. 21). Winters are cold
with snow cover commonly present throughout the winter months. Winter
snow is important for preventing severe frost damage to some plants
during the winter months (Bannister et al. 2005, pp. 250-251) and may
be important for Ipomopsis polyantha. Freezing temperatures can occur
into June and even July, indicating that I. polyantha can tolerate
frost because it grows and blooms during this time (Anderson 2004, p.
21). May and June, when I. polyantha blooms, are on average the driest
months of the year (Anderson 2004, p. 21; Service 2011d, p. 52).
Because I. polyantha has evolved in these climatic conditions, we have
roughly identified suitable precipitation; cold, dry springs; and
winter snow as physical or biological features for this plant. These
climatic conditions are influenced, in part, by elevation.
Cover or Shelter
While Ipomopsis polyantha seeds and seedlings certainly require
``safe sites'' for their germination and establishment, these
microclimates are too small to be considered or managed here as a
physical or biological feature for this plant. Safe sites are those
where the appropriate conditions for seedling germination and growth
exist. We believe these features are encompassed in the ``Plant
Community and Competitive Ability'' and ``Soils'' sections discussed
above.
Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, or Rearing (or Development) of
Offspring
Reproduction--Ipomopsis polyantha sets far less fruit when self-
pollinated (2 to 9 percent fruit set [self-pollinated] versus 47
percent fruit set in the presence of pollinator[s]) (Collins 1995, p.
36). Also, male and female reproductive parts are separated both
spatially and temporally (Collins 1995, pp. 34-35). Therefore, we
conclude that pollinators are necessary for the long-term successful
reproduction and conservation of the plant. Over 30 different insects
have been collected visiting I. polyantha flowers (Collins 1995, pp.
47-74). The primary pollinators are all bee species; these include the
nonnative honeybee (Apis mellifera) and native bees that nest in the
ground or twigs including species of Augochlorella (a type of Halictid
or sweat bee), Anthophora (digger bees), Bombus (bumblebee), Dialictus
(another type of Halictid or sweat bee), Megachile (leafcutter bees),
and Lasioglossum (another type of Halictid or sweat bee) (Collins 1995,
p. 71). Most of these pollinators are solitary and do not live
communally, with the exception of the honeybee. Pollinator diversity
was higher at I. polyantha sites with more complex plant communities
(Collins 1995, p. 107). Because the evidence presented above
demonstrates that pollinators are necessary for pollination of I.
polyantha, we have identified pollinators and their associated habitats
as an essential biological feature for this plant.
Habitats Protected From Disturbance or Representative of the
Historical, Geographical, and Ecological Distributions of the Species
Disturbance Regime--The native habitat of Ipomopsis polyantha has
been extensively modified (Anderson 2004, p. 28). The species is
considered a ruderal species, which means it is one of the first plant
species to colonize disturbed lands. Seeds are not thought to disperse
far. Plants are able to colonize nearby disturbed areas quickly. The
species is found in light to moderately disturbed areas, such as rills
(small, narrow, shallow incisions in
[[Page 45084]]
topsoil layers caused by erosion by overland flow or surface runoffs),
areas that are only occasionally disturbed, or areas with previous
disturbances that have been colonized and not subsequently disturbed
(i.e., previously cleared areas that have had some time to recover)
(Anderson 2004, p. 23; 75 FR 35724-35726). Some of these disturbances
are now maintained or created by human activities (such as light
grazing or the recolonization of Mancos shale substrate roads that are
no longer used) that mimic the constant erosion that occurs on the
highly erosive Mancos shale soils and seem to maintain I. polyantha at
a site. I. polyantha sites with constant or repetitive disturbance,
especially sites with constant heavy grazing or repeated mowing, have
been lost (Mayo 2008, pp. 1-2). Fire also may have played a role in
maintaining open habitats and disturbances for I. polyantha in the past
(Anderson 2004, p. 22), as it historically did in all Ponderosa pine
forests across the West (USFS 2000, p. 97).
Interestingly, Ipomopsis polyantha individuals at newly disturbed
sites were slightly more likely to self-pollinate than were plants in
later successional areas (Collins 1995, p. 99), demonstrating that
disturbance is important enough to I. polyantha that it may influence
reproductive success (self-pollinated individuals are less
reproductively successful) and possibly genetic diversity (self-
pollination leads to lowered genetic diversity). Managing for an
appropriate disturbance type and/or level can be difficult since we
lack research to better quantify these measures. In this document we
use qualitative terms, but specifically solicit further input on
methods or mechanisms that can better quantify or describe these
measures. Because I. polyantha is found only within areas with light to
moderate or discontinuous disturbances, we have identified the
disturbance regime to be a physical or biological feature for this
plant.
Penstemon debilis
We have determined that Penstemon debilis requires the following
physical and biological features:
Space for Individual and Population Growth
Plant Community and Competitive Ability--Penstemon debilis is found
on steep, constantly shifting shale cliffs with little vegetation. The
decline or loss of several populations has been attributed to
encroaching vegetation; therefore, it is assumed that P. debilis is a
poor competitor (McMullen 1998, p. 72). The areas where P. debilis are
found are characterized as ``Rocky Mountain cliff and canyon''
(Southwest Regional Gap Analysis Project 2004). The plant community
where P. debilis is found is unique, because instead of being dominated
by one or two common species as most plant communities are, it has a
high diversity of uncommon species that also are oil shale endemics
(McMullen 1998, p. 5). These uncommon species include Mentzelia
rhizomata (Roan Cliffs blazingstar), Thalictrum heliophilum (sun-loving
meadowrue), Astragalus lutosus (dragon milkvetch), and the somewhat
more common Lesquerella parviflora (Piceance bladderpod), Penstemon
osterhoutii (Osterhout's beardtongue), and Festuca dasyclada (Utah or
oil shale fescue) (McMullen 1998, p. 5). More common species include
Holodiscus discolor (oceanspray), Penstemon caespitosus (Mat
penstemon), Cercocarpus montanus (Mountain mahogany), and Chrysothamnus
viscidiflorus (Yellow rabbitbrush) (O'Kane & Anderson 1987, p. 415;
McMullen 1998, p. 5). We consider sparse vegetation (with less than 10
percent plant cover), assembled of other oil shale specific plants and
not dominated by any one species, to be a physical or biological
feature for this plant.
Elevation--Known populations of Penstemon debilis are found from
5,600 to 9,250 ft (1,700 to 2,820 m) in elevation (Service 2011c, p.
3). Because plants have not been identified outside of this elevation
band and because growing conditions frequently change across elevation
gradients, we have identified elevations from 5,250 to 9,600 ft (1,600
to 2,920 m) to be a physical or biological feature for this plant. We
have extended the elevation range 328 ft (100 m) upward and downward in
an attempt to provide areas where the plant could migrate, given
shifting climates (Callaghan et al. 2004, pp. 418-435; Crimmins et al.
2011, pp. 324-327). We consider this 328 ft (100 m) to be a
conservative allowance since studies on climate change elevational
shifts have found more dramatic changes even in the last century: 95 ft
(29 m) upward per decade (Lenoir et al. 2008, pp. 1768-1770), or an
average of 279 ft (85 m) downward since the 1930s (Crimmins et al.
2011, pp. 324-327). We do not have information specific to P. debilis
elevational shifts. The above studies were done in different areas,
western Europe and California, and looking at different species. Oil
shale habitats extend into these higher and lower elevations.
Slope--Penstemon debilis is generally found only on steep slopes
(mean of 37 percent slope) and between cliff bands where the oil shale
is constantly shifting and moving downhill (Service 2011c, p. 2). The
plant also can be found on relatively flat sites, although nearby
habitats are often steep. In general, the plant is found on steep,
constantly eroding slopes; therefore, we identify moderate to steep
slopes, generally over 15 percent slope, to be a physical or biological
feature for this plant.
Food, Water, Air, Light, Minerals, or Other Nutritional or
Physiological Requirements
Soils--Penstemon debilis is known only from oil shale cliffs on the
Roan Plateau escarpment and was previously described as occurring only
on the Parachute Creek Member of the Green River Formation (McMullen
1998, p. 57). Our mapping exercises have found that the plant also is
found on the Lower Part of the Green River Formation (Tweto 1979, pp.
1, 4). Populations are generally located either directly above or below
the geologic feature known as the Mahogany Ledge (McMullen 1998, p.
63). All occupied sites are similar in soil morphology (form and
structure) and are characterized by a surface layer of small to
moderate shale channers (small flagstones) that shift continually due
to the steep slopes (McMullen 1998, p. 64). Below the channers is a
weakly developed calcareous, sandy to loamy layer with 40 to 90 percent
coarse material.
Toxic elements in the soil such as arsenic and selenium accumulate
in the tissues of P. debilis (McMullen 1998, p. 65) and may allow P.
debilis to grow in areas that are more toxic to other species thereby
reducing plant competition. Toxic elements in the soil vary between
populations. In a greenhouse setting, P. debilis plants were grown
easily in potting soil. Soil may not directly influence P. debilis'
distribution, but may instead have an indirect effect on the plant's
distribution by limiting the establishment of other vegetation
(McMullen 1998, p. 67). Soil morphology, rather than soil chemistry,
appears to better explain the plant's distribution (McMullen 1998, p.
74). Because the plant is only found on the Parachute Creek Member and
Lower Part of the Green River Formation and because of the consistent
soil morphology between sites, we are identifying these geologic
formations as a physical or biological feature for the plant. We also
looked at soil type as discussed below in ``Criteria Used to Identify
Critical Habitat'' but do not include it here as a physical or
biological feature because it is a
[[Page 45085]]
component of the soil characteristics already described.
Climate--The average annual precipitation in the area where
Penstemon debilis is found ranges from 12 to 18 in. (30 to 46 cm)
(McMullen 1998, p. 63). Winters are cold (averaging roughly 30 [deg]F
(-1 [deg]C) with snow staying on the ground in flatter areas, and
summers are warmer (averaging roughly 65 [deg]F (18 [deg]C). Because P.
debilis has evolved under these climatic conditions, we have identified
suitable precipitation and suitable temperatures as physical or
biological features for this plant. These climatic conditions are
likely influenced, in part, by elevation.
Cover or Shelter
While Penstemon debilis seed and seedlings certainly require ``safe
sites'' for their germination and establishment, these microclimates
are too small to be considered or managed here as a physical or
biological feature for this plant. We believe these features are
encompassed in the ``plant community and competitive ability'' and
``soils'' sections discussed above.
Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, or Rearing (or Development) of
Offspring
Reproduction--Penstemon debilis requires insect pollinators for
reproduction and is twice as reproductively successful if pollen comes
from another plant (McMullen 1998, pp. 25, 43). Over 40 species of
pollinators have been collected from P. debilis; the primary
pollinators include four Osmia (mason bee) species, Atoposmia elongata
(a close relative of Osmia), several Bombus (bumblebee) species, and a
native wasp Pseudomasaris vespoides. All of these pollinators are
ground or twig nesting. None of these pollinators are rare, nor are
they specialists on P. debilis, although some of these pollinators,
such as Osmia, are specialists within the genus Penstemon (McMullen
1998, p. 11). The number and type of pollinators differ between P.
debilis sites (McMullen 1998, p. 27). Fruit set is not limited by
inadequate numbers of pollinators (McMullen 1998, p. 27). Because the
evidence presented above demonstrates that pollinators are necessary
for pollination of P. debilis, we have identified pollinators and their
associated habitats as a physical or biological feature for this plant.
Habitats Protected From Disturbance or Representative of the
Historical, Geographical, and Ecological Distributions of the Species
Disturbance Regime--Penstemon debilis is found on steep oil shale
slopes that are constantly shifting. The plant has underground stems
(rhizomes) that are an adaptation to this constant shifting (McMullen
1998, p. 58). As the shale shifts downward, the underground stems and
clusters of leaves emerge downhill. A single plant may actually appear
as many different plants that are connected by these underground stems
(McMullen 1998, p. 58). In sites where the soils have stabilized and
vegetation has encroached, P. debilis has been extirpated (lost)
(McMullen 1998, p. 72). Managing for an appropriate disturbance type
and/or level can be difficult since we lack research to better quantify
these measures. In this document we use qualitative terms, but
specifically solicit further input on methods or mechanisms that can
better quantify or describe these measures. For these reasons, we
consider these unstable and slow to moderate levels of constantly
shifting shale slopes to be a physical or biological feature for the
species.
Phacelia submutica
We have determined that Phacelia submutica requires the following
physical and biological features:
Space for Individual and Population Growth
Plant Community and Competitive Ability--Predominant vegetation
classifications within the occupied range of Phacelia submutica include
clay badlands, mixed salt desert scrub, and Artemisia tridentata (big
sagebrush) shrubland, within the greater Pinus edulis (pinyon)-
Juniperus spp. (juniper) woodlands type (O'Kane 1987, pp. 14-15;
Ladyman 2003, pp. 14-16). Within these vegetated areas, P. submutica is
found on sparsely vegetated barren areas with total plant cover
generally less than 10 percent (Burt and Spackman 1995, p. 20). On
these barren areas, P. submutica can be found alone or in association
with other species. Associated plant species at sites occupied by P.
submutica include: the nonnative Bromus tectorum (cheatgrass) and
native species Grindelia fastigiata (pointed gumweed), Eriogonum
gordonii (Gordon's buckwheat), Monolepis nuttalliana (Nuttall's
povertyweed), and Oenothera caespitosa (tufted evening primrose) (Burt
and Spackman 1995, p. 20; Ladyman 2003, pp. 15-16). Many of these
associated species also are annuals (growing for only 1 year). Because
of the harshness and sometimes the steepness of occupied sites, these
areas are maintained in an early successional state (Ladyman, 2003, p.
18). Therefore, the species found in these habitats are regarded as
pioneers that are continually colonizing these bare areas and then
dying (O'Kane 1987, p. 15). Pioneer species are often assumed to be
poor competitors (Grime 1977, p. 1169). For the reasons discussed
above, we identify barren clay badlands with less than 20 percent cover
of other plant species to be a physical or biological feature for this
plant. We have adjusted the relative plant cover upwards to capture the
potential plant cover in moist years when other species may be somewhat
more abundant.
Elevation--Known populations of Phacelia submutica occur within a
narrow range of elevations from about 5,000 to 7,150 ft (1,500 to 2,175
m) (Service 2011c, p. 3). Elevation is a key factor in determining the
temperature and moisture microclimate of this species. Because plants
have not been identified outside of this elevation band and because
growing conditions frequently change across elevation gradients, we
have identified elevations from 4,600 to 7,450 ft (1,400 to 2,275 m) to
be a physical or biological feature for this plant. We have extended
the elevation range 328 ft (100 m) upward and downward in an attempt to
provide areas where the plant could migrate, given shifting climates
(Callaghan et al. 2004, pp. 418-435; Crimmins et al. 2011, pp. 324-
327). We consider this 100 meters to be a conservative allowance since
studies on climate change elevational shifts have found more dramatic
changes even in the last century: 95 ft (29 m) upward per decade
(Lenoir et al. 2008, pp. 1768-1770), or an average of 279 ft (85 m)
downward since the 1930s (Crimmins et al. 2011, pp. 324-327). We do not
have information specific to P. submutica elevational shifts. The above
studies were done in different areas, western Europe and California,
and looking at different species. Suitable habitats extend into these
higher and lower elevations.
Topography (surface shape)--Phacelia submutica is found on slopes
ranging from almost flat to 42 degrees, with the average around 14
degrees (Service 2011c, p. 3). Plants are generally found on moderately
steep slopes, benches, and ridge tops adjacent to valley floors
(Ladyman 2003, p. 15). The relative position of P. submutica is
consistent from site to site; therefore, we recognize appropriate
topography (suitable slopes, benches and ridge tops, or moderately
steep slopes adjacent to valley floors) as a physical or biological
feature for the plant.
[[Page 45086]]
Food, Water, Air, Light, Minerals, or Other Nutritional or
Physiological Requirements
Soils--Phacelia submutica grows only on barren clay soils derived
from the Atwell Gulch and Shire members of the Eocene and Paleocene
Wasatch geological formation (Donnell 1969, pp. M13-M14; O'Kane 1987,
p. 10). The Atwell Gulch member is found below the bluish gray Molina
member, and the Shire member is found above the Molina member (Decker
et al. 2005, p. 3). The plant is found in unique, very small areas
(from 10 to 1,000 ft\2\ (1 to 100 m\2\)) on colorful exposures of
chocolate to purplish brown, dark charcoal gray, and tan clay soils
(Burt and Spackman 1995, pp. 15, 20; Ladyman 2003, p. 15; Grauch 2011,
pers. comm.). We do not fully understand why P. submutica is limited to
the small areas where it is found, but the plant usually grows on the
one unique small spot of shrink-swell clay that shows a slightly
different texture and color than the similar surrounding soils (Burt
and Spackman 1995, p. 15). Ongoing species-specific soil analyses have
found that the alkaline soils (with specific pH ranging from 7 to 8.9)
where P. submutica are found have higher clay content than nearby
unoccupied soils, although there is some overlap (Grauch 2011, pers.
comm.). The shrink-swell action of these clay soils and the cracks that
are formed upon drying appear essential to maintenance of the species'
seed bank since the cracks capture the seeds and maintain the seed bank
on site (O'Kane 1988, p. 462; Ladyman 2003, pp 16-17). Based on the
information above, we consider the small soil inclusions where P.
submutica is found that are characterized by shrink-swell alkaline clay
soils within the Atwell Gulch and Shire members of the Wasatch
Formation to represent a physical or biological feature for P.
submutica.
Climate--Phacelia submutica abundance varies considerably from year
to year. In 1 year almost no plants may emerge at a site, and in
another year at the same site, hundreds or even thousands of
individuals may grow (Burt and Spackman 1995, p. 24). We do not
understand what environmental factors (temperature, rainfall, or
snowfall) affect these dramatic changes in abundance from 1 year to the
next, but it is assumed they are climatic in nature (Burt and Spackman
1885, p. 24). Wetter years seem to produce more individuals (O'Kane
1987, p. 16). However, without the right combination of precipitation
and temperature within a short window of time in the spring, the
species may produce very few seedlings or mature plants, sometimes for
several consecutive years. We believe it is necessary to conserve
habitat across the entire range of the species to account for the
variation in local weather events, to allow for plants to grow at some
sites and not others on an annual basis. Because climatic factors
dramatically influence the number of P. submutica individuals that are
produced in a given year, we identify climate as a physical or
biological feature for the plant; however, we recognize that we are
unable to identify exactly what these climatic factors encompass except
that the amount of moisture and its timing is critical. Climatic data
from four weather stations (Table 1) indicate that average annual
precipitation is between 10 to 16 in. (25 and 41 cm), with less
precipitation generally falling in June (as well as December-February)
than other months, and with cold winters (sometimes with snow cover)
and warmer summers.
Cover or Shelter
While Phacelia submutica seed and seedlings certainly require
``safe sites'' for their germination and establishment, these
microclimates are too small to be considered or managed here as a
physical or biological feature for this plant. We believe these
features are encompassed in the ``plant community and competitive
ability'' and ``soils'' sections discussed above.
Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, or Rearing (or Development) of
Offspring
Reproduction and Seed Banks--We do not yet understand the
pollination and seed dispersal mechanisms of Phacelia submutica.
Pollinators have not been observed visiting the flowers of P.
submutica. Currently it is believed that pollinators may not be
required for reproduction because of the minute flower size, a lack of
obvious pollinators, and because the reproductive parts are hid