Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Petition Finding and Proposed Listing of Arctostaphylos franciscana as Endangered, 55623-55638 [2011-22990]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 174 / Thursday, September 8, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Avenue, SE., Mail Stop 10, Washington,
DC 20590 (telephone: 202–493–0138),
matthew.navarrete@dot.gov.
The
purpose of the hearing is to receive oral
comments in response to a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) proposing
regulations that would require certain
railroads to implement systems for
telephonic notification of unsafe
conditions at highway-rail and pathway
grade crossings. See 76 FR 11992–12012
(March 4, 2011). Interested parties are
invited to present oral statements and to
proffer information and views at the
hearing. The hearing will be informal
and will be conducted by a
representative designated by FRA in
accordance with FRA’s Rules of Practice
(49 CFR 211.25). The hearing will be a
non-adversarial proceeding; therefore,
there will be no cross examination of
persons presenting statements or
proffering evidence. An FRA
representative will make an opening
statement outlining the scope of the
hearing. After all initial statements have
been completed; those persons wishing
to make a brief rebuttal will be given the
opportunity to do so in the same order
in which the initial statements were
made. Additional procedures, as
necessary for the conduct of the hearing,
will be announced at the hearing. A
transcript of the discussions will be
made part of the public docket in this
proceeding.
Public Participation Procedures. Any
person wishing to participate in the
public hearing should notify the Docket
Clerk by mail or at the address or fax
number provided in the Attendance
section of this notice at least five
working days prior to the date of the
hearing and submit three copies of the
oral statement that he or she intends to
make at the proceeding. The notification
should identify the party the person
represents, the particular subject(s) the
person plans to address, and the time
requested. The notification should also
provide the Docket Clerk with the
participant’s mailing address and other
contact information. FRA reserves the
right to limit participation in the
hearing of persons who fail to provide
such notification. FRA reserves the right
to limit the duration of presentations if
necessary to afford all persons with the
opportunity to speak.
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
(Secretary) to issue a regulation,
requiring railroads to establish a
telephonic notification system for the
public to report unsafe conditions at
highway-rail and pathway grade
crossings. While the statute vests certain
responsibilities with the Secretary,
those responsibilities have been
delegated to the FRA Administrator. See
49 CFR 1.49(oo); 74 FR 26981 (June 5,
2009); see also 49 U.S.C. 103(g).
In an NPRM issued on March 4, 2011,
FRA proposed various amendments to
its regulations on grade crossing safety.
The primary amendments proposed
would require a railroad that dispatches
a train through a public or private
highway-rail or pathway grade crossing
to establish and maintain a system that
allows a member of the public to call
the railroad and report an emergency or
other unsafe condition at the crossing.
Upon receiving such a report, the
railroad may be required to warn all
trains authorized to operate through the
crossing of the reported unsafe
condition, inform local law enforcement
of the reported unsafe condition, and
must either investigate the report itself
or request that the railroad with
maintenance responsibility for the
crossing investigate the report. If the
report is substantiated, the railroad with
maintenance responsibility for the
crossing would be required to take
certain actions to remedy the condition
found. The purpose of the hearing is to
receive oral comments in response to
the requirements related to a telephonic
notification system as proposed in the
NPRM.
FRA encourages all interested persons
to participate in the hearing, at the
addresse noted above. We encourage
participants wishing to make oral
statements to plan on attending the
entire hearing, since FRA may not be
able to accommodate competing
requests to appear at specific times.
Issued in Washington, DC, on September 2,
2011.
Robert Lauby,
Deputy Associate Administrator for
Regulatory and Legislative Operations,
Federal Railroad Administration.
[FR Doc. 2011–23008 Filed 9–7–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–06–P
Background
In section 205 of the Rail Safety
Improvement Act of 2008, Public Law
110–432, 122 Stat. 4872 (Oct. 16, 2008)
(codified at 49 U.S.C. 20152)
(hereinafter RSIA), Congress directed
the Secretary of Transportation
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:33 Sep 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
55623
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2010–0049; MO
92210–0–0008–B2]
RIN 1018–AX89
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; 12-Month Petition Finding
and Proposed Listing of
Arctostaphylos franciscana as
Endangered
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; 12-month
finding.
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
12-month finding on a petition to list
Arctostaphylos franciscana (Franciscan
manzanita), as endangered under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act), and to designate critical
habitat. After review of all available
scientific and commercial information,
we find that listing A. franciscana as an
endangered species under the Act is
warranted. Accordingly, we herein
propose to list A. franciscana as an
endangered species pursuant to the Act.
This proposed rule, if made final, would
extend the Act’s protections to this
species. We believe that critical habitat
is not determinable at this time due to
lack of knowledge of what physical and
biological features are essential to the
conservation of the species, or what
other areas outside the site that is
currently occupied, may be essential for
the conservation of the species. The
Service seeks data and comments from
the public on this proposed listing rule
and whether the designation of critical
habitat for the species is prudent and
determinable.
DATES: We will accept comments
received or postmarked on or before
November 7, 2011. We must receive
requests for public hearings, in writing,
at the address shown in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT by October 24,
2011.
ADDRESSES: (1) Electronically: Go to the
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. In the Keyword
box, enter FWS–R8–ES–2010–0049,
which is the docket number for this
rulemaking. Then, in the Search panel
on the left side of the screen, under the
Document Type heading, click on the
Proposed Rules link to locate this
document. You may submit a comment
by clicking on ‘‘Send a Comment or
Submission.’’
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM
08SEP1
55624
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 174 / Thursday, September 8, 2011 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail
or hand-delivery to: Public Comments
Processing, Attn: FWS–R8–ES–2010–
0049; Division of Policy and Directives
Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS
2042–PDM; Arlington, VA 22203.
We will post all information received
on https://www.regulations.gov. This
generally means that we will post any
personal information you provide us
(see the Information Requested section
below for more details).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Karen Leyse, Listing Coordinator,
Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office,
2800 Cottage Way, Room W–2605,
Sacramento, CA 95825; by telephone at
916–414–6600; or by facsimile at 916–
414–6712. If you use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD), please call the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at
800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Information Requested
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 the public, other
concerned governmental agencies,
Native American tribes, the scientific
community, industry, or any other
interested parties concerning this
proposed rule. We particularly seek
comments concerning:
(1) Additional information concerning
the historical and current status, range,
distribution, and population size of this
species, including the locations of any
additional populations of this species.
(2) Any information on the biological
or ecological requirements of the
species, and ongoing conservation
measures for the species and its habitat.
(3) Biological, commercial trade, or
other relevant data concerning any
threats (or lack thereof) to this species
and regulations that may be addressing
those threats.
(4) Current or planned activities in the
areas occupied by the species and
possible impacts of these activities on
this species.
(5) Additional information regarding
the threats in the five listing factors:
(a) The present or threatened
destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range;
(b) Overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes;
(c) Disease or predation;
(d) The inadequacy of existing
regulatory mechanisms; and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:33 Sep 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
(e) other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence.
We are particularly interested in
information regarding threats from
vandalism, disease (particularly
transmission of Phytophthora sp.),
climate change, collection of cuttings
and seeds by the public, and regulations
that may be addressing those threats.
(6) What physical or biological
features are essential to the conservation
of the species.
(7) The reasons why areas should or
should not be designated as critical
habitat as provided by section 4 of the
Act (16 U.S.C. 1531, et seq.), including
the possible risks or benefits of
designating critical habitat, including
vandalism, Phytophthora sp. being
brought in by hikers and recreationists,
collection of seeds and cuttings, and any
other risks associated with publication
of maps designating any area on which
this plant may be located, now or in the
future, as critical habitat.
(8) Specific information on:
(a) The amount and distribution of
habitat for the Arctostaphylos
franciscana;
(b) What areas, that were occupied at
the time of listing (or are currently
occupied) and that contain features
essential to the conservation of this
species, should be included in a critical
habitat designation and why;
(c) Special management
considerations or protection that may be
needed in critical habitat areas,
including managing for the potential
effects of climate change; and
(d) What areas not occupied at the
time of listing are essential for the
conservation of this species and why.
(9) Information on the projected and
reasonably likely impacts of changing
environmental conditions resulting from
climate change on Arctostaphylos
franciscana and its habitat.
Please note that submissions merely
stating support for or opposition to the
action under consideration without
providing supporting information,
although noted, will not be considered
in making a determination, as section
4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that
determinations as to whether any
species is a threatened or endangered
species must be made ‘‘solely on the
basis of the best scientific and
commercial data available.’’
You may submit your comments and
materials concerning this proposed rule
by one of the methods listed in
ADDRESSES. If you submit information
via https://www.regulations.gov, your
entire submission—including any
personal identifying information—will
be posted on the Web site. If your
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
submission is made via a hardcopy that
includes personal identifying
information, you may request at the top
of your document that we withhold this
information from public review.
However, we cannot guarantee that we
will be able to do so. We will post all
hardcopy submissions on https://www.
regulations.gov. Please include
sufficient information with your
comments to allow us to verify any
scientific or commercial information
you include.
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, Sacramento Fish and Wildlife
Office 2800 Cottage Way, Room W–
2605, Sacramento, California 95825 (see
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires
that, for any petition to revise the
Federal Lists of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife and Plants that
contains substantial scientific or
commercial information that listing a
species may be warranted, we make a
finding within 12 months of the date of
receipt of the petition on whether the
petitioned action is: (a) Not warranted;
(b) warranted; or (c) warranted, but the
immediate proposal of a regulation
implementing the petitioned action is
precluded by other pending proposals to
determine whether any species is
threatened or endangered, and
expeditious progress is being made to
add or remove qualified species from
the Federal Lists of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife and Plants. In this
rule, we have determined that the
petitioned action to list Arctostaphylos
franciscana is warranted, and we are
proceeding with publishing a proposed
rule to list the species.
Previous Federal Actions
On December 23, 2009, we received a
petition dated December 14, 2009, from
the Wild Equity Institute, the Center for
Biological Diversity, and the California
Native Plant Society, requesting that
Arctostaphylos franciscana be listed as
endangered on an emergency basis
under the Act and that critical habitat be
designated. Included in the petition was
supporting information regarding the
species’ taxonomy and ecology,
historical and current distribution,
present status, and actual and potential
causes of decline. On January 26, 2010,
we acknowledged the receipt of the
petition in a letter to Wild Equity
E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM
08SEP1
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 174 / Thursday, September 8, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Institute. In that letter we responded
that we had reviewed the information
presented in the petition and
determined that issuing an emergency
rule temporarily listing the species as
per section 4(b)(7) of the Act was not
warranted. Our rationale for this
determination was that, although only a
single plant of this species remained in
the wild, the individual had recently
been transplanted to a new location on
Federal land.
The transplanted plant is considered
to be the single remaining plant in the
wild, despite having been transplanted
on the Presidio of San Francisco (the
Presidio), a unit of the National Park
Service’s system, on the San Francisco
peninsula. Additionally, a conservation
plan (Chasse et al., 2009, pp. 1–44) and
associated Memorandum of Agreement
(MOA) (referred to herein as California
Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
et al. 2009) signed by five Federal and
State wildlife and land management
agencies (conservation partners),
successfully addressed the concerns
raised by the petition to the extent that
none of those concerns constituted an
‘‘emergency posing a significant risk to
the well-being of the species’’ (50 CFR
424.20(a)). The Federal agencies
participating in these efforts were the
National Park Service (NPS) and the
Service. The State of California was
represented by Caltrans and the
California Department of Fish and Game
(CDFG). The Presidio Trust, a wholly
owned government corporation that
jointly manages the Presidio with the
NPS, also participated (71 FR 10608;
March 2, 2006; NPS 2006).
The original habitat of the plant was
threatened by the ongoing
redevelopment of Doyle Drive, but that
threat was removed by the translocation
of the plant to a new location. Potential
immediate threats applicable to the new
location, including the danger that the
plant might not survive the move and
transplantation, were addressed by
provisions in the conservation plan for
collecting and propagating rooted
clones, seeds, and cuttings from the
original plant. The conservation plan
provides for the long-term propagation,
and eventual reestablishment in wild
populations, of all remaining genetic
lines, including those from the
surviving wild plant and from
individuals surviving in botanical
gardens. It also includes long-term
monitoring provisions. While these
provisions did not remove the need for
further review of the species’ status,
they appeared to be effective for
protecting the species in the short term.
We also indicated that we would make
an initial finding in Fiscal Year 2010
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:33 Sep 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
regarding whether the petition
presented substantial information to
indicate that listing may be warranted.
The 90-day finding was published on
August 10, 2010 (75 FR 48294). This
notice constitutes the 12-month finding
on the December 23, 2009, petition to
list Arctostaphylos franciscana as
endangered.
Arctostaphylos franciscana was
originally proposed for listing as an
endangered species under the Act in
1976 (41 FR 24524; June 16, 1976). In
1980, it was included in the list of
Category 1 candidates for listing, as one
of the taxa retaining a high priority for
addition to the list subject to
confirmation of extant populations. At
the time, the species was thought to be
extinct in the wild although known to
be extant in cultivation (45 FR 82480;
December 15, 1980). It is included as a
‘‘species of concern’’ in the Recovery
Plan for Coastal Plants of the Northern
San Francisco Peninsula (Service 2003,
p. 95). In October 2009, 62 years after
the loss of the last known wild plants,
one individual A. franciscana plant was
located in the wild on the Presidio. The
Presidio is under joint management by
the Golden Gate National Recreation
Area (GGNRA), a part of the NPS, and
by the Presidio Trust. The A.
franciscana plant is located in the
portion of the Presidio that is managed
by the Presidio Trust. The plant is
considered to be wild because it has
been moved to an undeveloped area of
the Presidio that is managed as natural
habitat. Although the plant is currently
receiving care associated with its
transplantation, it is not receiving the
level of protection, water, and nutrients
that plants in a botanical garden may
receive.
The Arctostaphylos franciscana
plants that exist in cultivation fall into
three categories: (a) Cuttings and rooted
specimens that were collected from the
Laurel Hill Cemetery and transplanted
to various managed botanical gardens in
San Francisco, Berkeley, and Claremont
prior to 1947; (b) specimens currently
being propagated in greenhouses from
cuttings and layers taken from the wild
plant in 2010; and (c) specimens of
unknown origin that are sold in the
nursery trade or have been transplanted
into home gardens. We consider the
single wild plant and plants identified
in (a) and (b) above to be the listable
entity under the Act. Our rationale for
not including plants identified in item
(c) above is outlined below.
The Arctostaphylos franciscana
plants found in botanical gardens may
represent from one to six genetically
distinct plants, other than the single
wild plant (Vasey 2011b, pp. 2, 3;
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
55625
Chasse 2011a, p. 1; Chasse 2011b, p. 1;
Chasse et al. 2009, p. 7) and may
contribute genetic material in the form
of cuttings for efforts to expand the
number of wild plants. The botanical
garden plants are not considered part of
the wild population and, therefore, are
not being addressed in this 12-month
finding and proposed rule although they
will be considered to be listed if this
proposed rule becomes final. The
cuttings and layers that were collected
from the wild plant currently being
propagated in greenhouses will be used
to establish additional populations of
the species by being planted with plants
propagated from the botanical garden A.
franciscana specimens. We have
concluded that the third category of
plants, those cultivated for private or
commercial uses, will not aid in the
conservation or the recovery of the
species in the wild because cultivated
plants may be hybrids and bred for
landscape use and thus offer minimal
conservation contribution.
Species Information
Species Biology
Arctostaphylos franciscana is a low,
spreading-to-ascending evergreen shrub
in the heath family (Ericaceae) that may
reach 0.6 to 0.9 meters (m) (2 to 3 feet
(ft)) in height when mature (Chasse et al.
2009, p. 5). Its leaves are about 1.5 to 2
centimeters (cm) (0.59 to 0.79 inches
(in)) long, are isofacial (have the same
type of surface on both sides), and are
oblanceolate (longer than they are wide
and wider towards the tip) (Eastwood
1905, p. 201; Chasse et al. 2009, p. 39).
Its mahogany brown fruits are about 6
to 8 millimeters (mm) (0.24 to 0.32 in)
wide, while its urn-shaped flowers
measure about 5 to 7 mm (0.2 to 0.28
in) long (Wallace 1993, p. 552; Service
2003, p. 57).
A closely related species,
Arctostaphylos montana ssp. ravenii
(Raven’s manzanita), listed as federally
endangered, looks similar but has a
more prostrate growth habit, more
rounded leaves, smaller and less
reddish fruits, and smaller and more
spherical flowers (Service 2003, pp. 55,
57). Another somewhat similar
appearing species, though not as closely
related, is A. uva-ursi (bearberry), which
can be distinguished by its lack of
isofacial leaves (Chasse et al. 2009, p.
39).
In the wild, Arctostaphylos
franciscana is an obligate-seeding
species (it reproduces primarily from
seed after a fire or other disturbance
rather than from burls) (Vasey 2010, p.
1). Arctostaphylos species are members
of the chaparral plant community,
E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM
08SEP1
55626
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 174 / Thursday, September 8, 2011 / Proposed Rules
which have a variety of triggers for seed
germination including heat, smoke, and
light (Keeley 1987, p. 434). The
germination requirements for A.
franciscana have not yet been studied;
however, other Arctostaphylos species
have germinated after being exposed to
charate (ground charred wood) (Keeley
1987, pp. 435, 440).
The seeds of Arctostaphylos are
dispersed primarily by mammals,
including coyotes, foxes, and rodents (T.
Parker pers. comm., 2011; Vasey 2011a,
p. 1). Animals such as coyotes and foxes
eat the Arctostaphylos fruit and may
travel long distances before depositing
their scat. Any undigested fruit left in
the scat can then be harvested by
rodents and either eaten or buried.
Parker (2010b, p. 1) found that 70
percent of the fruits buried by rodents
were located deeper than 2 centimeters
(cm) (0.78 inch (in)), which is the
maximum soil depth at which seeds are
typically killed by wildfire.
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Genetics and Taxonomy
At one point Arctostaphylos
franciscana and A. montana ssp.
ravenii, along with A. montana ssp.
montana (Mount Tamalpais manzanita),
were considered to be subspecies of A.
hookeri (Hooker’s manzanita). However,
recent taxonomic revisions have
established A. montana ssp. ravenii and
A. franciscana as separate species.
These revisions have been based
primarily on genetic comparisons,
including the fact that A. franciscana is
diploid (with 13 pairs of chromosomes)
while A. montana ssp. ravenii is
tetraploid (with 26 chromosome pairs)
(Service 2003, p. 95; Parker et al. 2007,
pp. 149, 150; Chasse et al. 2009, p. 6).
Distribution and Habitat
Known historical occurrences and
collections of Arctostaphylos
franciscana are from serpentine
maritime chaparral, a plant community
dominated by Arctostaphylos
(manzanita) and Ceanothus (California
lilac) species, on the San Francisco
Peninsula. This area is part of a region
that Willis Linn Jepson named the
Franciscan Area, one of 10 areas that he
considered to have the highest
concentration of endemic plant species
in California (Jepson 1925, pp. 11–14).
An endemic species is one that is native
to and restricted to a particular
geographical area. Native habitats have
been largely converted to urban areas of
the City of San Francisco and habitat
that might support A. franciscana is
now mostly lost to development (Chasse
2010, p. 2; Gluesenkamp 2010, p. 7).
Chasse (2009, pp. 6, 7) has noted that
information on the plant community
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:33 Sep 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
that historically included
Arctostaphylos franciscana is largely
missing from the literature. Early
records describe the species as growing
‘‘on rocky ground’’ (Eastwood 1905, p.
202), on ‘‘bare, stony bluff’’ (Brandegee
1908, as cited in Chasse 2009, p. 6) and
with coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia),
coast blue blossom (Ceanothus
thyrsiflorus), and coyote brush
(Baccharis pilularis) (Wieslander 1938,
cited in Service 2003, p. 95).
Arctostaphylos franciscana was also
observed ‘‘forming flat masses over
serpentine outcroppings and humusfilled gravel and flopping down over the
sides of gray and chrome rocks.
Ericameria, Baccharis, Ferns,
Buckwheats, and Golden Yarrow grow
among it; and over it stand Toyons and
Live Oaks.’’ Additionally, A. montana
ssp. ravenii was found at nearly all A.
franciscana locations. These
observations, along with the geology
and climate of historical sites, indicate
that the species’ community likely
consisted of a mosaic of coastal scrub,
barren serpentine maritime chaparral,
perennial grassland, with occasional
woodland of coast live oak and toyon
shrubs and small trees (Chasse 2009, pp.
6, 7).
Parker (2007, pp. 8–11) examined the
prehistoric distribution of
Arctostaphylos in California and the
geologic changes that helped lead to the
number and location of Arctostaphylos
species present today. Arctostaphylos
evolved at least 15 million years ago
during the Miocene epoch,
corresponding with an earlier period of
global warming; however, only during
the last 1.5 million years have large
numbers of new fossil types of the genus
appeared. Currently there are at least 95
species and subspecies of
Arctostaphylos within California. The
large number of species is thought to be
a response to significant changes in
climate and physical geography that
occurred approximately 1.5 million
years ago. Tectonic changes in the
landscape resulted in a diversity of new
niches that selected for new species.
Additionally, glacial advances and
retreats during the last 2 million years
have impacted the distribution of plants
as well as created two possible paths of
Arctostaphylos evolution.
One potential path is that populations
of Arctostaphylos species moved in
response to climatic changes but also
left behind remnant populations of
formerly more widespread species that
persisted in isolated areas. Secondly,
new species could have resulted from
hybridization between rapidly migrating
species and the remnant populations of
other Arctostaphylos species. The San
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Francisco Bay area was a forested river
valley during the last glacial period. At
the end of the last glacial period, the
climate became warmer and drier, and
conditions became more favorable for
Arctostaphylos. The area from San
Francisco Bay to Monterey now
contains 42 species or subspecies of
Arctostaphylos, 32 of which are narrow
endemics. Researchers have accepted
that the obligate-seeder life history also
promotes a more rapid rate of speciation
in contrast to the vegetative regeneration
of burl-sprouting species (Wells 1969, p.
264), which is evidenced by the fact that
nearly all of the 32 narrow endemics in
the San Francisco Bay to Monterey area
are obligate-seeders.
Arctostaphylos franciscana is
considered to be endemic to the San
Francisco peninsula, California, and
historically occurred in areas with
serpentine soils and bedrock outcrops,
greenstone, and mixed Franciscan rock,
typically growing in mixed populations
with A. montana ssp. ravenii (Service
2003, pp. 95, 96; Chasse et al. 2009, p.
6). The Doyle Drive site was comprised
of disturbed soil over serpentinite
(Chasse et al. 2009, p. 3). Serpentine soil
restricts the growth of many plants due
to its high nickel and magnesium
concentrations, and thus tends to
support unique plant communities
(Brooks 1987, pp. 19, 53; Service 2003,
p. 16) because relatively few plant
species can tolerate such soil
conditions. Such conditions generally
result in semibarren soil and a lack of
competing plants that benefits
serpentine-tolerant plants such as A.
franciscana (Bakker 1984, p. 79).
The coastal upland habitat of
Arctostaphylos franciscana is
influenced by cool, humid conditions
and frequent summer fog. The
serpentine chaparral plant community,
of which A. franciscana is a part, may
have been present historically in the
southeastern portion of the San
Francisco area (for example, in Potrero
Hill, Bayview Hill) but the cumulative
effects of burning by native Americans,
grazing during the Spanish/Mexican
period and later, more grazing and
gathering of firewood during the U.S.
military period may have converted the
maritime chaparral to grassland or
depauperate coastal scrub (Chasse 2010,
p. 2). Prior to 1947, A. franciscana was
known from three locations: the
Masonic and Laurel Hill Cemeteries in
San Francisco’s Richmond district, and
Mount Davidson in the south-central
part of San Francisco (Service 2003, pp.
16, 62, 95; Chasse et al. 2009, p. 4).
Unconfirmed sightings were also noted
at a possible fourth location near Laguna
and Haight Streets. By 1947, the
E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM
08SEP1
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 174 / Thursday, September 8, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Masonic and Laurel Hill Cemetery sites
were removed and the grounds
destroyed in preparation for commercial
and urban development (Chasse et al.
2009, p. 7). The Mount Davidson and
the Laguna and Haight Streets locations
were lost to urbanization as well. Until
October 2009, A. franciscana had not
been seen in the wild since 1947
(Chasse et al. 2009, pp. 3, 7), although
no systematic surveys are known to
have taken place to search for potential
remaining individuals (Chasse 2010, p.
1).
Between 1930 and 1947, prior to the
loss of the wild plants, botanists
collected cuttings and rooted specimens
from confirmed wild Arctostaphylos
franciscana plants representing possibly
one to six distinct individuals, and
propagated them in botanical gardens
(Vasey 2011b, p. 2; Chasse 2011a, p. 1;
Chasse 2011b, p. 1; Service 2003, p. 96;
Chasse et al. 2009, p. 7). The number of
distinct individuals depends on
whether more than one of the botanical
garden specimens were started from
cuttings of the same individual (which
would mean multiple plants would
have identical genotypes) or whether all
the specimens originated from separate
plants (in which case all the specimens
would have different genotypes) (Vasey
2011b, pp. 2, 3; Chasse 2011a, p. 1;
Chasse 2011b, p. 1). Genotype is defined
as the genetic constitution of an
individual.
Accession records for the botanical
garden specimens indicate that some
specimens collected and planted prior
to 1947 did not survive and that others
are duplicates of original collections
leaving only three specimens confirmed
to have been original plants
transplanted from Laurel Hill (Chasse
2011b, p. 1). Further genetic work will
verify whether plants with differing
morphological features prove to be
additional A. franciscana individuals.
Although some of the botanical garden
specimens may have different
genotypes, which is the result of sexual
reproduction (sprouting from seed)
rather than clonal reproduction, all of
the botanical garden specimens are
currently considered to be A.
franciscana until further genetic work
can be conducted. The number of
existing distinct individuals cannot
currently be determined because a
suitable genetic sampling technique has
not yet been developed (Chasse 2011a,
p. 1). Modern collections of this plant at
East Bay Regional Park District’s
Botanical Garden at Tilden Regional
Park, Strybing Arboretum, Rancho Santa
Ana Botanic Garden, Claremont, and UC
Berkeley Botanical Garden include some
of the original specimens from Laurel
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:33 Sep 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
Hill, as well as specimens propagated
vegetatively after the species was
thought to have been extinct in the wild
(Chasse et al. 2009, pp. 6–8).
In October 2009, an ecologist
identified a plant growing in a concretebound median strip along Doyle Drive
in the Presidio as Arctostaphylos
franciscana (Chasse et al. 2009 pp. 3, 4;
Gluesenkamp 2010, p. 7). The plant’s
location was directly in the footprint of
a roadway improvement project
designed to upgrade the seismic and
structural integrity of the south access to
the Golden Gate Bridge (Caltrans et al.
2009, p. 1; Chasse et al. 2009, p. 10).
The identification of the plant as A.
franciscana has since been confirmed
with 95 percent confidence based on
morphological characteristics (Chasse et
al. 2009 pp. 3, 4; Vasey and Parker 2010,
pp. 1, 5). Additional tests of ploidy level
indicate that the plant is diploid,
consistent with A. franciscana (Vasey
and Parker 2010, p. 6). Molecular
genetic data also indicate that the plant
is A. franciscana (Parker 2010a). Based
on the best available scientific
information, we consider the individual
found along Doyle Drive in October
2009 to be A. franciscana (Vasey and
Parker 2010, pp. 1, 5–7
Several agencies, including the
Service, established an MOA and
conservation plan for the species (see
Previous Federal Actions section above).
The conservation partners concluded
that leaving the plant undisturbed at its
original site would compromise public
safety and cultural resources by the
potential curtailment or redesign of the
roadway improvement project (Chasse
et al. 2009, pp. 9, 10).
The conservation plan evaluated
potential translocation sites, established
procedures for preparation of the new
site and for the translocation itself, and
called for management and monitoring
(both short- and long-term) of the
translocated plant and all newly
propagated plants, with the goal of
eventually establishing self-sustaining
populations of the species in the wild
(Chasse et al. 2009, pp. 23–27, 29–30).
Following recommendations in the
conservation plan, the Arctostaphylos
franciscana plant was moved
successfully to a new site within the
Presidio in January 2010. Subsequent
monitoring reports indicate the
translocated plant continues to do well
at its new location (Yam 2010, pp. 1, 3–
14, Young 2010a, p. 1).
Cuttings from the plant, both from
nonrooted stems and from layering
stems (stems that have rooted at their
leaf nodes), were taken for vegetative
propagation prior to its translocation in
January 2010 (Chasse et al. 2009, pp.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
55627
10–16, 40–42, Young 2010a, p. 1). This
material was distributed to seven
locations including UC Berkeley Botanic
Garden, Regional Parks Botanic Garden,
UC Santa Cruz Botanical Garden, San
Francisco Botanical Garden, Cal Flora
Nursery, Presidio Nursery, and the
Presidio Trust Forester (Young, 2011). A
total of 1,346 seeds were collected in
July and August, 2010, from the plant
(Young 2010a, p. 1; Frey 2010, p. 1).
The plan calls for eventual
propagation of seeds (including seeds
collected from the soil around the
plant’s original location), and for genetic
testing of resulting plants. Seeds
fertilized in the wild could result from
cross-pollination by pollen from another
individual Arctostaphylos franciscana
or a closely related species and would
produce a genetically unique individual
(Chasse et al. 2009, p. 13). Additionally,
because the roots of most
Arctostaphylos individuals establish a
mutually beneficial association with
species of mycorrhizal fungi living in
the soil, the conservation plan
established means by which the soil for
propagating cuttings and seeds should
be inoculated with spores from such
fungi (Chasse et al. 2009, p. 9).
Propagation of A. franciscana seed and
inoculation of seeds and cuttings by
mycorrhizal fungi have not yet
occurred. Soil surrounding the wild
plant is being examined for presence of
a seedbank but no A. franciscana seed
has yet been found (Young 2011, p. 1).
Propagation methods for A. franciscana
seed will be developed using seed of a
surrogate species, A. montana ssp.
montana, which was collected from
Mount Tamalpais in 2010 (Young 2011,
p. 1). Outplanting of two rooted A.
franciscana cuttings took place at the
UC Santa Cruz Arboretum in January
2011 (Kriegar 2011, unpaginated)
Summary of Information Pertaining to
the Five Factors
Section 4 of the Act and its
implementing regulations (50 CFR 424)
set forth the procedures for adding
species to the Federal Lists of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants. A species may be
determined to be an endangered or
threatened species due to one or more
of the following five factors described in
section 4(a)(1) of the Act: (A) The
present or threatened destruction,
modification, or curtailment of its
habitat or range; (B) overutilization for
commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes; (C) disease or
predation; (D) the inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms; and (E)
other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence. Listing
E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM
08SEP1
55628
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 174 / Thursday, September 8, 2011 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
actions may be warranted based on any
of the above threat factors, singly or in
combination. Each of these factors is
discussed below.
In considering what factors might
constitute threats to a species, we must
look beyond the exposure of the species
to a particular factor to evaluate whether
the species may respond to that factor
in a way that causes actual impacts to
the species. If there is exposure to a
factor and the species responds
negatively, the factor may be a threat
and, during our review, we attempt to
determine how significant a threat it is.
The threat is significant if it drives, or
contributes to, the risk of extinction of
the species such that the species
warrants listing as endangered or
threatened as those terms are defined in
the Act. However, the identification of
factors that could impact a species
negatively may not be sufficient to
compel a finding that the species
warrants listing. The information must
include evidence sufficient to suggest
that these factors are operative threats
that act on the species to the point that
the species may meet the definition of
endangered or threatened under the Act.
Factor A. The Present or Threatened
Destruction, Modification, or
Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range
All known habitat originally occupied
by Arctostaphylos franciscana has been
lost to urban development (Chasse et al.
2009, pp. 4, 7). The range of the species
is now limited to a single transplanted
plant on the Presidio. In January 2010,
after the newly discovered wild plant
was moved to the Presidio, the plant’s
habitat at Doyle Drive was destroyed as
part of a Caltrans highway improvement
project. The loss of the plant’s native
serpentine chaparral habitat to
development and the curtailment of the
species’ range restrict the species’
current and future ability to naturally
reproduce and expand its range.
The remaining area of potential
habitat for the species on the San
Francisco peninsula has not yet been
determined but is very limited as a
result of past urban development.
Although areas of greenstone or
serpentine soils remain on the
peninsula, the residual effects of
urbanization (primarily habitat
fragmentation and degradation) have
resulted in reducing the remaining
greenstone/serpentine soils into areas of
about 0.4 hectare (ha) (1 acre (ac)) or
less in size with some up to 2.4 ha (6
ac). These small remnant areas may no
longer be suitable for reestablishment of
A. franciscana due to factors such as
dominance by other plant species
(Chasse pers. comm., 2011). Currently,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:33 Sep 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
these small, isolated parcels are subject
to ‘‘edge effects’’ such as increased
invasion of weed species that would
compete with A. franciscana for limited
resources (water, nutrients, space).
Small isolated parcels have also been
shown to be dryer than larger parcels
and the habitat on these smaller parcels
has become desiccated due to lack of
surrounding vegetation, thus potentially
leading to increased plant stress (Murcia
1995, p. 58). Urban barriers such as
streets and buildings have been found to
impose a high degree of isolation on
chaparral species and to result in trends
for decreased numbers of native plant
species and concurrent increased
numbers of nonnative plant species in
habitat fragments over time (Soule et al.
1992, pp. 41–43); Alberts et al. (unpubl.)
as cited in Soule et al. 1992, p. 41).
These effects of the urbanization of the
San Francisco peninsula are expected to
continue to affect these remnant parcels
into the future and to pose a threat to
establishment of additional A.
franciscana.
Additionally, nitrogen deposition
poses a current and continuing threat to
remnant habitat that might otherwise be
found to be suitable for Arctostaphylos
franciscana. Weiss and Luth (2003, p. 1)
have conducted research on the effects
of nitrogen deposition in a serpentine
grassland south of the San Franciscan
peninsula, which has bearing on threats
to A. franciscana. Weiss and Luth found
that nitrogen deposition from
automobiles on Highway 280 was
responsible for higher nitrogen levels in
the soil within 400 m (1,312 ft) on the
west side and 100 m (328 ft) on the east
side of the roadway. Grass cover was
higher in these areas. Native species
within this zone are thought to be at
long-term risk from invasions of
nitrogen-loving grasses and other weedy
plant species. The entire northern San
Francisco peninsula, with the exception
of the Presidio and Golden Gate Park,
has been urbanized, and four major
highways travel across the peninsula
(Highways 1, 101, 280, and 480). Urban
areas and roadways are a continuous
source of nitrogen deposition from
automobiles, trucks, and industrial and
home heating (Weiss 1999, p. 1477).
Invasions of nitrogen-loving plants into
nitrogen-limited grasslands and
shrublands appears to be a common
response to atmospheric nitrogen
deposition (Weiss and Luth 2003, p. 1)
and may partly explain why the
ecosystem that existed on the San
Francisco peninsula has been so altered.
The one remaining wild plant is
subject to multiple threats. The Presidio
Trust’s Vegetation Management Plan
provides for the protection and
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
management of rare plants on the
Presidio (further discussed in Factor D).
However, in some cases when the Trust
has acted as a project proponent on the
Presidio, direct project impacts to
federally listed species and their habitat
have resulted. For example, actions by
the Presidio Trust and NPS related to
management and remediation of former
Army landfills on the Presidio have
impacted federally listed plant species,
including the Lessingia germanorum
(San Francisco lessingia), and their
habitat. Remediation of a large landfill
near the transplanted Arctostaphylos
franciscana plant is ongoing (M. Frey,
pers. comm., 2011a) and has the
potential to impact the plant and its
habitat due to their close proximity to
the remediation site. The remaining
remediation activities involve the use of
heavy equipment to complete final
recontouring and to bring in soil to the
site, followed by installation of plants,
and restoration of original habitat
features at the landfill (Presidio Trust
2011a, p. 2, M. Frey, pers. comm.,
2011b).
We are not aware of any specific
proposals by the Presidio Trust for other
activities in or near the habitat of the
remaining wild A. franciscana plant.
However, the Presidio Trust Act
contains a sunset clause that could
result in the transfer of Presidio
holdings to the General Services
Administration for disbursement, if the
Trust operations are not self-sufficient
by 2013. The Presidio Trust Act is
discussed under Factor D below;
however, the potential that lands could
be transferred and become available for
development presents a threat that
additional habitat loss could occur
within the foreseeable future.
Based on the best scientific and
commercial information available, we
consider the present or threatened
destruction, modification, or
curtailment of the species habitat or
range to be a high-magnitude and
ongoing (imminent) threat to the wild
population of Arctostaphylos
franciscana. The current fragmented
and degraded condition of most
remaining serpentine/greenstone soil
habitat on the San Francisco peninsula
threatens the ability of the species to
expand its range. The threats of possible
development and change in
management of the habitat may further
limit the species’ propagation and
expansion, and could potentially
threaten the only remaining wild plant
in the foreseeable future.
E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM
08SEP1
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 174 / Thursday, September 8, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Factor B. Overutilization for
Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
Overutilization of the species is
possible due to the popularity of
Arctostaphylos franciscana for
landscape use, as evidenced by the
widespread use of cultivars of this
species in the commercial nursery trade.
Arctostaphylos franciscana is
specifically recommended for use in
erosion control on steep slopes
(Theodore Payne Foundation 2009, p. 1;
Sierra Club 2011, p. 1).
The attention and media coverage
generated by the discovery of a species
thought to be extinct may result in
efforts by the public to visit the plant
and possibly collect cuttings or seed.
Although the location of the
transplanted plant has not been
disclosed, it was planted in a heavily
used area in the Presidio near commonuse trails with unrestricted access by the
public. The Presidio is a National Park
and is part of the Golden Gate National
Recreation Area; the Presidio is open to
the public 24 hours a day, every day of
the week and receives 5 million visitors
annually. Because of the Presidio’s
proximity to the City of San Francisco
and because the Park has no entrance
fees and contains restaurants, trails, and
businesses that can be accessed by car,
foot, or public transport, it receives
heavy use. The Presidio Trust and NPS
are making serious efforts not to
disclose the location of the translocated
plant. The Presidio Trust and NPS are
concerned that public knowledge of the
plant’s location would lead to
authorized and unauthorized group
tours by plant enthusiasts that would
overwhelm the Arctostaphylos
franciscana and compact the soil (T.
Thomas, pers. comm., 2011).
No damage to the plant has been
observed to date; however, trampling or
the taking of cuttings could occur if the
identification and location of the plant
become known. Similarly, another
extremely rare plant, Arctostaphylos
montana ssp. ravenii is also located on
the Presidio. Its location has not been
revealed to the public by NPS in order
to protect the plant from vandalism
although it was federally listed as
endangered in 1979.
Based on the best scientific and
commercial information available, we
consider the overutilization for
commercial and recreational purposes
to be a high-magnitude and ongoing
(imminent) threat to wild
Arctostaphylos franciscana plants.
Although captively propagated A.
franciscana are available to residents for
use in private gardens, collection of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:33 Sep 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
wild individuals is a threat to the
species, and we expect it may be a
threat in the foreseeable future,
particularly if the location of the plant
becomes known to the public.
Factor C. Disease or Predation
Transplantation of the single wild
Arctostaphylos franciscana plant may
have caused stress to the plant, and
thereby made the plant more susceptible
to predation and disease. In this case,
stress and root damage may result from
a number of sources including
compaction of soil from foot traffic
around the plant (Hammitt and Cole
1998, p. 52), too little or too much
water, and improper planting depth. A
fungal infection called twig blight is
also a potential concern, particularly
during wet years (Service 2003, p. 69).
Some twig blight was observed in the
wild plant during winter of 2009–2010,
but it subsided during the dry summer
months (Chasse 2010, p. 2).
The soil-borne pathogen,
Phytophthora cinnamomi, has long been
known as a world-wide threat to
commercial and ornamental plants.
Phytophthora cinnamomi is a funguslike organism most closely related to
diatoms and kelp (Kingdom
Stramenopila) rather than to the true
fungi (Kingdom Fungi or Eumycota). It
is an introduced exotic pathogen in
North America whose native range is
unknown, but is suspected to be
southeast Asia. Human-related
activities, including the international
plant trade have facilitated spread of P.
cinnamomi into many habitats
worldwide (Swiecki et al. in press, p. 3).
Phytophthora cinnamomi was
introduced to California early in the
20th century and recently has been
identified as a serious threat to the
State’s native plants and their habitats
(Swiecki et al. in press, p. 3).
Phytophthora cinnamomi has been
the cause of the decline and death of
rare Arctostaphylos species, including
the federally threatened A. pallida
(pallid manzanita) in the Oakland Hills
of the East San Francisco Bay region,
and federally threatened A. myrtifolia
(Ione manzanita) near Ione in the Sierra
Nevada foothills, and of other woody
native species in the San Francisco Bay
area (Swiecki et al. in press, pp. 3–5).
This organism causes root decay but can
also kill above-ground portions of some
plants (Swiecki et al. in press, p. 3).
Phytophthora cinnamomi is persistent
in soil, and once introduced to native
habitat, it cannot be eradicated (Swiecki
et al. in press, p. 3). Phytophthora
cinnamomi is transmitted by
contaminated shoes, tools, and infested
soil clinging to tires, and by using
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
55629
contaminated nursery stock, including
native plant stock. Many areas showing
plant mortality caused by P. cinnamomi
are associated with hiking trails,
landscaping with ornamental plants,
and, in one case at the Apricum Hill
Preserve, with use by visitors including
researchers, agency personnel, and
students (Swiecki et al. in press, p. 4).
This pathogen poses a significant
threat in the foreseeable future to A.
franciscana through the potential for
infestation by the public and by staff
who regularly work with the plant. It is
not possible to predict when the
pathogen might infect the single plant
since the disease is generally
transmitted directly or indirectly by
humans or human activity. The
pathogen could be introduced from soil
on contaminated shoes and tools, or
from cuttings of A. franciscana plants
that are currently being grown in a
number of nurseries in the San
Francisco Bay area that could become
contaminated. Swiecki et al. (in press, p.
6) tested A. menziesii plants purchased
from four nurseries and found them to
be infested with four Phytophthora
species that cause root infections or
stem cankers, including P. cinnamomi.
Crown rot, which is caused by P.
cinnamomi, is known to occur in A.
myrtifolia and A. viscida (Swiecki et al.
in press, p. 3), and is a concern when
outplanting nursery-grown plants to
wild locations (Chasse et al. 2009, p.
17). However, crown rot has not been
observed in the wild plant (Chasse 2010,
p. 2).
Arctostaphylos franciscana cuttings
are proposed to be planted with the
transplanted A. franciscana to facilitate
cross-pollination of the different
genotypes. Should the wild plant
become contaminated with P.
cinnamomi, the result would be the
decline and death of the wild plant and
the permanent contamination of the soil
and seedbank beneath the plant. Any
seedlings that germinate from this
seedbank would also very likely be
contaminated and not survive. Any
cuttings that become contaminated will
also die of the pathogen. The Golden
Gate National Parks Conservancy staff in
charge of propagation and care of A.
franciscana cuttings are aware of the
threat of contamination and rigorously
follow clean procedures to prevent
infection to the cuttings or the wild
plant; however, a risk of contamination
continues to exist because current
fungicides do not eradicate 100 percent
of Phytophthora spores (Young 2010b,
p. 1). The cuttings and layers have been
dispersed to seven different locations
and growers, which, while decreasing
the risk of complete loss of plant
E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM
08SEP1
55630
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 174 / Thursday, September 8, 2011 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
material, also increases the risk of
exposure to disease.
After being transplanted, the wild
plant became severely infested with the
larvae of a native leaf roller moth
(Argyrotaenia franciscana) (Estelle
2010, p. 1). Treatment for the infestation
was hand removal of the larvae and all
infected leaves, which resulted in the
removal of some of the new growth on
the plant (Young 2010a, p. 1; Estelle
2010, p. 1). A parasitic wasp emerged
from one leaf roller moth larva that had
been captured, indicating that the moth
has natural enemies (M. Frey 2010, p.
2). The moth has not been known to kill
plants and does not appear to be a
serious threat at this time; however, the
moth species was found to have five
overlapping generations in a year
(Estelle 2010, p. 1), so monthly removal
of moth larvae and pupae is planned
(Frey 2010, p. 2). The leaf roller moth
infestation in early 2010 did not
permanently damage the plant; new
growth has been observed, and the plant
began blooming in November 2010 (Frey
2010, p. 2).
We conclude that the best scientific
and commercial information available
indicates that Arctostaphylos
franciscana is threatened by disease and
predation. We consider predation to be
a relatively minor (low magnitude) but
ongoing (imminent) threat to the wild
population of the species. Although the
leaf roller moth has not been known to
kill Arctostaphylos species, the moth
produces five overlapping generations
per year and severely damaged the
leaves in 2010. We consider infection of
the plant by P. cinnamomi to be a highmagnitude and ongoing (imminent)
threat to A. franciscana because only
one plant occurs in the wild and the
disease is easily and quickly spread by
multiple vectors.
Factor D. The Inadequacy of Existing
Regulatory Mechanisms
Regulatory mechanisms protecting
Arctostaphylos franciscana derive
primarily from the location of the single
known wild plant on Golden Gate
National Recreation Area lands on the
Presidio, which are administered by the
Presidio Trust. The Presidio Trust was
established by the Presidio Trust Act of
1996 to manage the leasing,
maintenance, rehabilitation, repair, and
improvement of property within the
Presidio (Presidio Trust Act, as
amended, Section 104(a)). The Presidio
Trust is directed to preserve the natural,
scenic, cultural, and recreational
resources on the Presidio, but also is
directed to ensure that the Presidio
becomes financially self-sufficient by
2013 (Presidio Trust 2002, pp. 1, 2, 12).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:33 Sep 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
The Presidio Trust Act directed that the
Presidio Trust design a management
program to reduce expenditures of the
NPS and increase revenues to the
Federal Government to the maximum
extent possible (Presidio Trust Act, pp.
5, 6). The Presidio Trust Management
Plan was published in May 2002.
Federal regulations at the Presidio,
which offer some protection to
Arctostaphylos franciscana, include
regulations that prohibit disturbing,
injuring, removing, possessing, digging,
defacing, or destroying from its natural
state, any plant or parts thereof.
Unauthorized introduction of plants and
plant seeds is also prohibited, offering
limited protection against invasive
nonnative species. Additional
regulations require that special events
be permitted by the Trust, and provide
for restricting visitor use to address
resource conflicts (36 CFR, part 1002).
The Presidio Trust and the NPS have
developed a Vegetation Management
Plan for the Presidio. For special status
plants, the plan provides an objective to
preserve and enhance rare plant habitats
by evaluating species-specific habitat
needs and giving high priority to actions
that preserve and enhance those habitats
(Presidio Trust 2001, Chapter 3,
unpaginated).
Future management of the Presidio,
and of Arctostaphylos franciscana and
its habitat, are uncertain because of
differences in the missions of the
Presidio Trust and NPS. The Presidio
Trust is a new model for National Park
management in that the Trust is directed
to preserve the natural, scenic, cultural,
and recreational resources on the
Presidio, and at the same time ensure
that the Presidio becomes financially
self-sufficient by 2013 (Presidio Trust
2002, pp. 1, 12), which means that
generation of revenue is a consideration
for its activities as well as resource
protection. The cost of operation and
care are higher for this park than for
most National Parks because of the
Presidio’s large number of structures
and cultivated landscapes (Presidio
Trust 2011, unpaginated). In 2002, the
Trust adopted a management program
designed to reduce expenditures of the
NPS and to increase revenues to the
Federal Government to the maximum
extent possible (Presidio Trust 2002, p.
1; Presidio Trust Act, as amended 2001,
p. 6). The mission of NPS on the
Presidio as stated in the Golden Gate
National Recreation Area Act (16 U.S.C.
460bb), although similar to the Presidio
Trust Act regarding the protection of
natural, historic, scenic, and
recreational values, does not include the
mandate to ensure that the Presidio
becomes financially self-sufficient.
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
The future status of the Presidio as
National Park land is uncertain, as
explained in the Presidio Trust Act,
Section 104(o) Reversion, which states:
If, at the expiration of 15 years, the
Trust has not accomplished the goals
and objectives of the plan required in
section 105(b) of the Presidio Trust Act,
then all property under the
administrative jurisdiction of the Trust
pursuant to section 103(b) of this Act
shall be transferred to the Administrator
of the General Services Administration
to be disposed of in accordance with the
procedures outlined in the Defense
Authorization Act of 1990 (104 Stat.
1809) and any real property so
transferred shall be deleted from the
boundary of the Golden Gate National
Recreation Area. In the event of such
transfer, the terms and conditions of all
agreements and loans regarding such
lands and facilities entered into by the
Trust shall be binding on any successor
in interest (Presidio Trust Act, Section
104(o), p. 9). This clause indicates that
lands currently considered National
Parks lands could be disbursed to the
private sector and subject to
development within the near future.
The Presidio Trust is subject to
section 7 consultation under the Act,
which would confer protections to the
plant should it be listed under the Act.
For example, actions by the Presidio
Trust and NPS related to management
and remediation of former Army
landfills on the Presidio have impacted
federally listed plant species including
the federally endangered Lessingia
germanorum (San Francisco lessingia)
and federally endangered Clarkia
franciscana (Presidio clarkia). Because
those plant species are federally listed,
the Presidio Trust has consulted with
the Service to minimize such impacts.
Arctostaphylos franciscana does not
currently have these protections.
The species is not listed under the
California Endangered Species Act. The
conservation plan and MOA are not
regulatory in nature, and are not legally
enforceable by third parties (Caltrans
2009, p. 8; Chasse et al. 2009, p. 3),
limiting their usefulness in enforcing
protections for the plant. Although
general protections are provided for
plants on National Parks, existing
regulatory mechanisms are inadequate
to protect the last known wild specimen
of Arctostaphylos franciscana, or any
other such wild specimens that may be
established or found to exist.
Based on the best scientific and
commercial information available, we
consider the inadequacy of existing
regulatory mechanisms to be a threat of
moderate-to-low magnitude to the
species. We expect this threat to
E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM
08SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 174 / Thursday, September 8, 2011 / Proposed Rules
continue into the future unless the
species is listed under the Act, and thus
we consider the threat to be ongoing
(imminent).
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Factor E. Other Natural or Manmade
Factors Affecting Its Continued
Existence
Potential threats to the species
include changes in environmental
conditions resulting from climate
change, trampling, or disturbance by
people visiting the Presidio, change in
fire frequency, loss of genetic diversity,
and stochastic (chance) events.
Climate Change
Changes in environmental conditions
resulting from climate change may
cause presently suitable habitat to
become unsuitable for endemic
California plants in general, due to
projected changes in temperature and
rainfall (Loarie et al. 2008, pp. 1–2). A
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) study in
National Park lands in northern
California and Oregon is being
conducted to examine trends in climate,
ocean conditions, and other features
(Madej et al. 2010, p. 7). In these
National Park lands, variation in abiotic
factors (for example, precipitation, fog,
and air and ocean temperatures)
regulates many ecological processes,
including the distribution of vegetation
and frequency of disturbance from fires,
floods, landslides, and pest species. The
preliminary results of the USGS study
show an increase in average maximum
summer air temperatures at Golden Gate
National Recreation Area, located near
the Presidio, and a reduction statewide
in fog frequency (Madej et al. 2010, p
24; Johnstone and Dawson, 2010, p.
4535).
Summer fog is important to upland
coastal vegetation and partly determines
the distribution of coastal species
(Johnstone and Dawson 2010, p. 4533).
Besides serpentine soil and cool air
temperatures, (Parker 2010c, p. 1),
summer fog is one of the primary habitat
requirements for Arctostaphylos
franciscana (Vasey 2010, p. 1). Summer
fog results from the presence of two
phenomena that may be affected by
changes in environmental conditions
resulting from climate change:
Upwelling of cold, coastal ocean water
and a temperature inversion of hot air
flowing toward the ocean over a cool,
humid marine air layer below (Vasey
2010, p. 1; Johnstone and Dawson 2010,
p. 4533). Fog reduces sunlight and air
temperature, and raises humidity.
Summer fog provides a source of water
for plants, including Arctostaphylos
species, by condensing in the plant
canopy and falling directly as water to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:33 Sep 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
the soil and being taken up by the
plant’s roots or by being taken up
directly by leaves (Johnstone and
Dawson 2010, p. 4533; Vasey 2010, p.1).
Fog frequency is highest in north and
central California and declines in
Oregon and Southern California. Mean
fog frequency in the California region,
quantified by cloud ceiling height
measured at airports, has decreased
since 1951 (Johnstone and Dawson
2010; p. 4535). Research by Vasey
suggests that most coastal endemic
Arctostaphylos species are more
vulnerable to drought stress than those
found in interior California and could
be threatened by a decrease in coastal
summer fog (Vasey 2010, p. 1). Vasey
has found that obligately seeding
Arctostaphylos species, such as A.
franciscana, are better hydrated in areas
that receive fog. He also found that
obligately seeding species are more
vulnerable to vascular cavitation (air
bubbles forming in water vessels in the
plant) when the rate of
evapotranspiration of water through the
leaves becomes too great (Vasey 2010, p.
1). This disruption of water flow can
lead to branch death and possible death
of the entire plant (Vasey 2010, p. 1).
Reduced soil moisture from loss of
summer fog may also result in a
reduction of seed germination and
seedling survival. Additionally, the
ability of A. franciscana to track future
climate changes by establishing new
plants in new habitat may be limited
because of its association with
serpentine and greenstone bedrock
outcrops (Service 2003, pp. 95, 96) and
because remaining soils derived from
serpentine and greenstone bedrock on
the peninsula are limited in area and
largely fragmented (Chasse 2010, p. 1).
If the trend towards a warmer, drier
climate continues as shown in data from
Madej et al. (2010, p. 24) and Johnstone
and Dawson (2010, p. 4535), the climate
may become too warm or dry to support
A. franciscana. Natural movement of the
species by seed dispersal to reach
cooler, moister areas to the north would
be blocked by barriers such as the San
Francisco Bay.
Alteration of the Natural Fire Regime
Fire, in addition to soil type and
climate, plays an important role in the
determination of plant distribution
(Keeley 2007, p. 19). The chaparral
plant community, of which
Arctostaphylos is an important member,
is adapted to specific fire regimes that
vary in different areas in California. In
the San Francisco East Bay region, the
current fire rotation interval is estimated
at about 100 years (Keeley 2007, p. 20).
Factors that affect the fire frequency in
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
55631
the San Francisco Bay area are a short
fire season, moist climate, the local
human population density, and changes
in human behavior. Due to prevailing
ocean winds and frequent fogs, the
average relative humidity along the
coast is moderate to high throughout the
year. The exceptions typically occur in
the fall, when changing prevailing
weather patterns allow dry northeasterly
winds from the State’s interior to reduce
humidity in the coastal area to around
20 percent, thereby creating dry and
windy conditions that typify high fire
danger (GGNRA 2005, pp. 136, 140).
Fire frequency in the San Francisco
Bay area has varied substantially in the
last several thousand years. Not only
have fire regimes changed with
changing climate, fire regimes have
changed as patterns of human
utilization of the landscape have
changed. Disturbances by fire occurred
at long intervals in the pre-human
period, then at shorter intervals during
the late Native American and SpanishMexican period, at moderate intervals
during the European settlement period,
and have generally returned to long
intervals in the modern period (GGNRA
2005, pp. 144–147). The natural fire
regime has been heavily altered by the
urbanization of San Francisco and the
fragmentation of remaining
undeveloped lands. The City of San
Francisco is essentially built out, with
the exception of small isolated parcels
and undeveloped hilltops. Lands
administered by the NPS and the
Presidio Trust are surrounded by other
land uses and close to the wildlandurban boundary where landscape plants
and nonnative plants contribute to
vegetative buildup (GGNRA 2005, pp.
130–131) that can increase fire danger.
In addition, fire suppression has been
prevalent during the last 100 years. This
altered fire regime has led to an increase
in crown and surface fuels, contributing
to high-intensity fires (GGNRA 2005, p.
147). These administered lands could
eventually be identified as suitable for
outplanting Arctostaphylos franciscana
seedlings, but the specific habitat
characteristics for the species are not
known at this time.
Two opposing types of changes in fire
frequency can threaten Arctostaphylos
franciscana. First, ‘‘senescence risk’’
occurs when too little fire leads to the
loss of a species that is dependent on
fire for regeneration from seeds or
sprouts. The second is ‘‘immaturity
risk,’’ which is a threat especially to
obligate-seeding species. In this case,
wildfires that occur too frequently will
kill plants before they can reach
reproductive maturity and produce seed
(Keeley 2007, p. 18). Wildfire can
E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM
08SEP1
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
55632
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 174 / Thursday, September 8, 2011 / Proposed Rules
substantially reduce the number of live
seeds in the soil (Odion and Tyler 2002,
p. 1). Odion and Tyler (2002 p. 1) found
that a controlled burn in a 40-year-old
stand of A. morroensis (Morro
manzanita) substantially reduced the
seedbank to 33 percent of that which
had accumulated in the soil since the
previous burn 40 years earlier. Three
years after the burn, the new population
of A. morroensis that had germinated
from the seedbank was less than half the
size of the original population (Odion
and Tyler 2002, p. 1). Odion and Tyler
(2002 p. 2) concluded that if viable seed
densities in the soil are too low because
fires are too frequent to allow seeds to
accumulate in the soil, the population
may risk extinction.
The fire return interval for this
general area, and, therefore, for this
species, is currently approximately 100
to 125 years (T. Parker pers. comm.,
2011, Vasey 2011a, p. 1). The long fire
return interval is not thought to be a
threat to the mature Arctostaphylos
franciscana plant at the Presidio or to
future seedlings that are likely to be
outplanted in the future as a result of
efforts by the NPS and the Presidio
Trust. Infrequent fire would allow the
mature plant at the Presidio to produce
seed to build up a sufficiently large
seedbank to withstand seed loss from
wildfire, and would allow the growth of
outplantings. However, if fire continues
to be excluded from these areas and the
fire return interval greatly exceeds the
natural return interval, over time the
loss of fire may also result in the loss
of the mature plant and individual
outplanted seedlings due to competition
by plants, including nonnative plants,
that could encroach upon the
manzanita.
Other aspects of the altered fire
regime within the remaining
undeveloped lands of San Francisco
pose greater threats to the species.
Alteration of the fire regime has led to
an increase in crown and surface fuels
in some areas, leading NPS fire planners
to conclude that it is difficult to predict
where the changed fire regime will
ultimately lead, given the trend to
warmer and drier climate conditions
(Madej et al. 2010, p. 24; Johnstone and
Dawson, 2010, p. 4535), and the
climatic correlation with fire frequency
(GGNRA 2005, pp. 147, 148). In the
past, large fires have occurred within
areas that are typically subject to
maritime climatic conditions. Such fires
include the 1923 Berkeley Fire; the
October 1991 Oakland Fire (Keeley
2005, p. 286) that burned 607 ha (1,500
ac); the October 1995 fire at Point Reyes
National Seashore that burned 4,999 ha
(12,354 ac) (GGNRA 2005, p. 151); and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:33 Sep 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
the 1,133-ha (2,800-ac) 2009 Lockheed
Fire north of the City of Santa Cruz (The
Associated Press 2009). On the Presidio,
fire history data show that 17 fires
occurred between 2000 and 2009, with
no fires in some years and as many as
5 fires in other years. All fires were
contained at 0.04 ha (0.1 ac) or less (A.
Forrestel, pers. comm., 2011a, 2011b). In
the same period, approximately four
wildfires occurred in the Marin
Headlands, directly to the north of the
Presidio across the Golden Gate, while
recent fire history records for all areas
of the GGNRA show the potential for
larger wildfires in the maritime zone
(GGNRA 2005, pp. 150–155).
Although the Presidio is located
within a highly urbanized setting,
substantial areas of open space within
the Presidio itself and within the
adjacent GGNRA lands harbor an
interspersed mixture of vegetative types,
including native vegetation, landscaped
grounds, and forest (GGNRA 2005, pp.
190–199; Presidio Trust 2011,
unpaginated). Grasslands are now
dominated by nonnative annual grasses
and forbs, which burn with greater
intensity and have a more rapid rate of
spread (GGNRA 2005, p. 192). A fire
model prepared by the GGNRA
indicates that areas managed by the
GGNRA on the western and
southwestern borders of Presidio Trust
lands present a moderate and moderatehigh fire hazard (GGNRA 2005, p. E–7).
As a result of the altered fire regime,
infrequent fires may burn larger and
hotter than previously occurred,
potentially increasing the loss of
seedbanks when such fires do occur. As
a result of the altered fire regime, the
incidence of wildfire may also increase,
which would be detrimental to
Arctostaphylos franciscana by killing
mature plants, seedlings, and seeds in
the seedbank. In obligate-seeding
species, such as A. franciscana, fire
normally kills the adult plants, which
are then replaced by plants that
germinate from seed in the soil
seedbank after the fire. A wildfire that
would kill the single wild A.
franciscana would be an especially
serious threat to the future of the species
because no A. franciscana seedbank has
been found in soil collected from the
area beneath the wild plant (Young
2011, p. 1).
Trampling
Trampling by people could impact the
wild plant, and its offspring, or any
herbarium-raised plants that are
restored to the wild, if they are placed
in areas subject to regular foot traffic.
The translocated wild plant has been
planted in an active native plant
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
management area that receives heavy
public use; however, it is protected by
a cable and post fence from public
access and is monitored (Chasse et al.
2009, pp. 20–28). The post and cable
fence was placed along an adjacent trail
so that people do not enter the
immediate area around the plant. The
fence currently appears to be working
well (Young 2010a, p. 1); however, a
single trampling event could result in
damage or the death of the wild plant.
As noted under Factor B, the Presidio
Trust and NPS have made continuous
efforts not to reveal the location of
Arctostaphylos franciscana. They are
concerned that public knowledge of the
A. franciscana location would attract
large numbers of plant enthusiasts who
may damage the A. franciscana and
compact the soil (T. Thomas, pers.
comm., 2011).
Roots grow into soil to maintain
stability and to extract water and
nutrients; however, soil compaction
from trampling increases the resistance
of the soil to root penetration and thus
diminishes the plant’s ability to extract
sufficient water and nutrients. Soil
compaction also reduces water
infiltration rates from rainfall and
reduces soil aeration by collapsing the
larger pores in the soil. Reduced soil
oxygen levels from loss of soil pores
also can reduce root growth, which
further reduces water and nutrient
uptake (Hammitt and Cole 1998, p. 52).
Soil compaction also inhibits seed
germination and establishment of new
plants. Smooth, dense soil makes it
difficult for the radicle (the seedling’s
primary root) to penetrate the soil for
stability, water, and nutrients (Hammitt
and Cole 1998, p. 52). Trampling has
also been found to cause considerable
damage to mycorrhizal fungi in seedling
roots (Waltert et al. 2002, p. 1). As noted
in the Distribution and Habitat section,
most Arctostaphylos species form strong
symbiotic associations with soil
mycorrhizal fungi, which form an
external sheath surrounding the plant’s
roots; all water and nutrients pass
through this sheath to the plant’s roots
rather than directly from the soil to the
plant’s roots (Chasse 2009, p. 12).
Damage from trampling will not only
impact the wild plant by reducing its
ability to take up water and nutrients,
but will also reduce the ability of any
seedlings germinating near the wild
plant to survive.
Vandalism
The location of the Arctostaphylos
franciscana plant within the Presidio is
near common-use trails and an area that
is available for rent for private and
public events. Threats to A. franciscana
E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM
08SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 174 / Thursday, September 8, 2011 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
include damage from vandalism and
interested visitors. Vandalism to trees
was reported in the Presidio in the early
2000’s (T. Thomas pers. comm. 2011).
Severe vandalism was observed in
Golden Gate Park, located
approximately 1.5 mi (2.4 km) south of
the Presidio, in summer 2010 where
more than 40 trees and 30 rose bushes
were killed by unknown persons for
unknown reasons (King 2010,
unpaginated, Gordon 2010,
unpaginated). The post and cable fence
protecting A. franciscana in the Presidio
is approximately 30 ft (9.1 m) from the
plant and is not constructed to
completely exclude visitors.
Loss of Genetic Diversity
Any new population starting from the
single wild plant is likely to have
reduced genetic variation compared to
historical populations. The generation
with the smallest number of individuals
has the greatest effect on the genetic
variation of subsequent generations.
Even if the number of plants is
expanded, it may not reverse the
previous genetic loss known as the
‘‘bottleneck effect’’ (Allendorf and
Luikart 2007, p. 158). Bottlenecks
generally have a greater and more
lasting effect on the loss of genetic
variation in species that have slow
growth rates (long-lived species with
few offspring) (Allendorf and Luikart
2007, p. 133). The age of the single wild
A. franciscana plant is estimated at 60
years, and no other A. franciscana
plants or seedlings were found
associated with the wild plant.
Reduced genetic variation may result
in the plant’s offspring not being able to
adapt to changes in habitat such as
those noted above in the discussion on
climate change (decrease in fog and
increase in temperature), or loss of
pollinators (see pollinator discussion
below). Arctostaphylos franciscana may
be capable of self-pollination. In
general, self-pollination results in a
decrease in genetic variation in the
offspring of a plant (Allendorf and
Luikart, 2007, p. 123); therefore, a loss
of genetic variation is expected if A.
franciscana is dependent on selfpollination to produce seed. In a study
on the effects of habitat fragmentation
on a non-self-pollinating plant
(Lennartsson 2002, pp. 3065, 3066,
3068), the author found that fragmented
populations exhibited dramatically
reduced seed set and population
viability, both caused by a reduction in
number of pollinators. Threats
associated with reduced seed
production are discussed further in the
following section on Stochastic Events
and Small Population Size.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:33 Sep 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
Stochastic Events and Small Population
Size
Chance events constitute a serious
threat to the species. Because the known
population of Arctostaphylos
franciscana in the wild is currently
limited to a single plant, the species is
extremely vulnerable to stochastic
events—normal but damaging
environmental perturbations and
catastrophes such as droughts, storm
damage, and fires, from which large,
wide-ranging populations can generally
recover, but which may lead to
extirpation of small, isolated
populations (Gilpin and Soule 1986, pp.
25–31). Suitable pollinators may be
critical for seed production for this
obligately seeding species. If pollinators
are not present or are in insufficient
numbers, viable seeds may not be
produced to develop and maintain the
seedbank. Pollinators have been
observed on the wild plant; however, no
surveys have yet taken place to identify
the most important pollinators. The
most frequent pollinators seen have
been bees and bumblebees; however,
hummingbirds and butterflies have also
been seen visiting the A. franciscana
flowers, likely because few other plants
are blooming during the winter months
when A. franciscana blooms (M. Vasey,
pers. comm. 2010). Although the loss of
the seed produced in a single year
would not likely lead to the extirpation
of the species, a continued reduction of
the seed crop or dependence on selfpollination would reduce the seedbank,
the genetic variation, and the potential
for expansion of the population.
The wild plant is also threatened by
the Allee effect, which is a decline in
population growth rate due to declining
plant density (Akcakaya et al. 1999, p.
¸
86). For the wild plant, the Allee effect
may result from a lack of other available
Arctostaphylos franciscana plants with
which to cross-pollinate and produce
viable seed. The wild plant is the single
remaining individual of its species in
the wild and is currently dependent on
its potential ability to self-pollinate,
which may be limited, and the efforts of
researchers and Presidio staff to provide
additional plants of different genotypes
from botanical garden specimens (if
they are proven to be A. franciscana) to
cross-pollinate with the wild plant to
produce new plants and populations.
Hybridization
Cultivars of Arctostaphylos
franciscana are used in the commercial
nursery trade. The cultivars are likely
descended from some of the last wild A.
franciscana plants known to exist in the
1940s and are located in at least four
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
55633
botanical gardens (Chasse et al. 2009,
pp. 7, 8). Since hybridization between
diploid species of manzanita is well
recognized (Chasse et al. 2009, p. 5),
there is a good chance that many of
these commercially available specimens
have resulted from hybridization.
Because of the threat of crosspollination from hybrids or other
species (Allendorf et al. 2001, pp. 613,
618–621), any propagation or
reintroduction programs for A.
franciscana must account for
subsequent contamination and
swamping of the A. franciscana gene
pool. The conservation plan does take
this into account by recommending that
future outplantings of nursery-raised
plants avoid areas that could facilitate
cross-pollination (Chasse et al. 2009, p.
31). Appropriate outplanting areas will
be determined by A. franciscana experts
in conjunction with the NPS, the
Presidio Trust, and the Golden Gate
National Parks Conservancy (Chasse et
al. 2009, p. 31). Although crosspollination of the wild plant with
hybrids is possible, we do not know the
magnitude of this threat.
We conclude that the best scientific
and commercial information available
indicate that A. franciscana is
threatened by other natural or manmade
factors affecting its continued existence,
and that these factors include changes
in environmental conditions resulting
from climate change, change in fire
frequency, trampling, vandalism, loss of
genetic diversity, loss of pollinators,
stochastic events, effects of small
population size, and hybridization.
Cumulatively, we consider these threats
to be of high magnitude and imminent.
Finding
As required by the Act, we conducted
a review of the status of the species and
considered the five factors in assessing
whether Arctostaphylos franciscana is
endangered or threatened throughout all
or a significant portion of its range. We
examined the best scientific and
commercial information available
regarding the past, present, and future
threats faced by the A. franciscana. We
reviewed the petition, information
available in our files, and other
available published and unpublished
information, and we consulted with A.
franciscana experts and other Federal
and State agencies.
This status review identified threats
to Arctostaphylos franciscana
attributable to each of the five listing
factors identified in section 4(a)(1) of
the Act. The primary threat to A.
franciscana is from the present or
threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of the species’ habitat or
E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM
08SEP1
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
55634
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 174 / Thursday, September 8, 2011 / Proposed Rules
range (Factor A). All original occupied
habitat of the species has been lost, and
its current range has been reduced to a
single location supporting a single A.
franciscana plant. The last wild plant
was moved from its habitat, which was
subsequently destroyed during a
highway construction project, and
transplanted to the Presidio in San
Francisco. Remaining potential habitat
for the species on the San Francisco
peninsula has not yet been determined
or surveyed. It is unknown whether
there is sufficient suitable habitat to
support a viable population of the
species. Although greenstone and
serpentine soils remain on the
peninsula, the majority of this land has
been fragmented into areas of 0.40 ha (1
ac) with a few approximately 2.4 ha (6
ac) in size. Additionally, potential
disparity in the mission of the Presidio
Trust and NPS and the possible transfer
of Presidio lands to the General Services
Administration and the private sector
may result in potential future loss or
modification of the plant and its habitat.
Overutilization (Factor B) is a threat
because the current known wild
population consists of one individual
plant, and manzanita plants are popular
for landscaping and other horticultural
purposes. Arctostaphylos franciscana is
thus highly vulnerable to removal from
the wild as a result of collection or
damage from people collecting cuttings
or seeds.
The species is threatened to a lesser
degree by disease and predation (Factor
C). Stress from transplanting of the wild
plant may have weakened the plant and
made it more susceptible to disease and
predation. The plant was heavily
infested with a native leaf roller moth
after being transplanted; however, the
caterpillars and damaged foliage were
removed, and the plant has produced
new foliage and flowers. Twig blight, a
fungal infection, was observed on the
plant during the winter of 2009–2010,
but the infection subsided during the
dry season. A serious and lethal
problem among Arctostaphylos species
in the wild and in the native plant
nursery trade is the pathogen
Phytophthora cinnamomi, which cannot
be controlled once introduced to a plant
or habitat. Many of the A. franciscana
cuttings are being grown in commercial
or university nurseries for outplanting
with the wild plant. Although the use of
clean propagation techniques has been
requested by the staff in charge of the
project, the risk of infection of the
cuttings and wild plant by P.
cinnamomi is still a threat.
Existing regulatory mechanisms
(Factor D) afford certain protections for
Arctostaphylos franciscana because the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:33 Sep 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
plant is located on lands administered
by the NPS Golden Gate National
Recreation Area and the Presidio Trust.
However, as mentioned above, these
protections are not guaranteed into the
future because the Presidio Trust Act
dictates that, if the goals and objectives
of the Presidio Trust Management Plan
are not met by 2013, property shall be
transferred to the Administrator of the
General Services Administration to be
disposed of in accordance with
procedures outlined in the Defense
Authorization Act. Therefore, lands on
the Presidio could be disbursed to the
private sector and subject to
development. We, therefore, consider
existing regulatory mechanisms to be
inadequate to protect A. franciscana.
The species is also threatened by
other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence (Factor
E). These factors include changes in
environmental conditions resulting from
climate change, changes in fire
frequency, trampling, loss of genetic
diversity, stochastic events, small
population size, and hybridization.
Effects of changes in environmental
conditions resulting from climate
change on the plant’s habitat are
expected to include increased air
temperature and reduced summer fog,
both resulting in warmer and drier
conditions than those to which the plant
is adapted. A shift in the timing of
flowering of the Arctostaphylos
franciscana and availability of suitable
pollinators or loss of pollinators due to
climate change could affect the plants’
ability to set seed. Warming and drying
of the plant’s habitat would likely also
increase the frequency of wildfire that
would result in death of the wild plant
and its future seedlings if fire occurs
before the plants are able to produce
viable seeds.
Loss of mature Arctostaphylos plants
to fire is a natural phenomenon;
however, this species is currently
represented by a single mature plant.
Therefore, to our knowledge, the loss of
the plant would result in extinction of
the species in the wild. Loss of genetic
diversity has likely already occurred
due to the reduction of the species to a
single wild plant and may continue by
limiting this generally outcrossing
species to self-pollination. Reduced
genetic diversity may also limit the
species’ ability to adapt to changes in
habitat such as those resulting from
climate change (decrease in fog and
increase in temperature) or loss of
pollinators. The species is extremely
vulnerable to stochastic environmental
events such as droughts, storm damage,
and fires, from which large, wideranging populations can generally
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
recover, but which would likely drive a
species consisting of a single plant to
extinction.
Based on our evaluation of all
scientific and commercial information
available regarding the past, present,
and future threats faced by
Arctostaphylos franciscana, we have
determined that the continued existence
of A. franciscana is threatened by
residual effects from habitat loss,
climate change, loss of genetic diversity,
change in fire frequency, vandalism,
predation, and inadequate regulatory
mechanisms. Because the species faces
these threats throughout its extremely
limited range, we find that A.
franciscana is warranted for listing
throughout its range and, therefore, find
it unnecessary to analyze whether it is
endangered or threatened in a
significant portion of its range.
Status Evaluation
The Act defines an endangered
species as one that is in danger of
extinction throughout all or a significant
portion of its range. A threatened
species is one that is likely to become
an endangered species in the foreseeable
future throughout all or a significant
portion of its range. The species A.
franciscana currently exists as a single
plant on the San Francisco Presidio.
Because the range of the species is
restricted to a single plant, the risks
presented by the threats noted in
Factors A through E are more intensified
than they would be were the species
more widespread or numerous.
The species is affected primarily by
small area of remaining suitable habitat
and loss of natural disturbance regime,
as a result of past urban development
and ongoing changes in environmental
conditions resulting from climate
change, as well as loss of genetic
diversity. Additionally, the species is
threatened by factors including
collection or vandalism, disease,
predation, loss of pollinators, and
inadequate regulatory mechanisms.
These interrelated factors have and will
continue to result in threats to the
continued existence of the species.
Based on our evaluation of the best
available scientific and commercial
information and given the current
population size (one plant), and
severely limited distribution throughout
its historical range, we have determined
the species is in danger of extinction
throughout all of its range and thus
meets the definition of an endangered
species. Because the species is in danger
of extinction now, as opposed to in the
foreseeable future, A. franciscana meets
the definition of an endangered species
rather than a threatened species.
E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM
08SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 174 / Thursday, September 8, 2011 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
On the basis of our careful evaluation
of the best available scientific and
commercial information regarding the
past, present, and future threats to the
species as discussed above relative to
the listing factors, we have determined
that listing is warranted, and we
propose to list Arctostaphylos
franciscana as an endangered species
throughout its range.
Available Conservation Measures
Conservation measures provided to
species listed as endangered or
threatened under the Act include
recognition, recovery actions,
requirements for Federal protection, and
prohibitions against certain practices.
Recognition through listing results in
public awareness and conservation by
Federal, State, Tribal, and local
agencies, private organizations, and
individuals. The Act encourages
cooperation with the States and requires
that recovery actions be carried out for
all listed species. The protection
required by Federal agencies and the
prohibitions against certain activities
are discussed, in part, below.
The primary purpose of the Act is the
conservation of endangered and
threatened species and the ecosystems
upon which they depend. The ultimate
goal of such conservation efforts is the
recovery of these listed species, so that
they no longer need the protective
measures of the Act. Subsection 4(f) of
the Act requires the Service to develop
and implement recovery plans for the
conservation of endangered and
threatened species. The recovery
planning process involves the
identification of actions that are
necessary to halt or reverse the species’
decline by addressing the threats to its
survival and recovery. The goal of this
process is to restore listed species to a
point where they are secure, selfsustaining, and functioning components
of their ecosystems.
Recovery planning includes the
development of a recovery outline
shortly after a species is listed,
preparation of a draft and final recovery
plan, and revisions to the plan as
significant new information becomes
available. The recovery outline guides
the immediate implementation of urgent
recovery actions and describes the
process to be used to develop a recovery
plan. The recovery plan identifies sitespecific management actions that will
achieve recovery of the species,
measurable criteria that determine when
a species may be downlisted or delisted,
and methods for monitoring recovery
progress. Recovery plans also establish
a framework for agencies to coordinate
their recovery efforts and provide
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:33 Sep 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
estimates of the cost of implementing
recovery tasks. Recovery teams
(comprising species experts, Federal
and State agencies, nongovernmental
organizations, and stakeholders) are
often established to develop recovery
plans. When completed, the recovery
outline, draft recovery plan, and the
final recovery plan will be available on
our Web site (https://www.fws.gov/
endangered), or from our Sacramento
Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Implementation of recovery actions
generally requires the participation of a
broad range of partners, including other
Federal agencies, States, Tribes,
nongovernmental organizations,
businesses, and private landowners.
Examples of recovery actions include
habitat restoration (e.g., restoration of
native vegetation), research, captive
propagation and reintroduction, and
outreach and education. The recovery of
many listed species cannot be
accomplished solely on Federal lands
because their range may also occur on
non-Federal lands. To achieve recovery
of these species requires cooperative
conservation efforts on private, State,
and Tribal lands.
If this species is listed, funding for
recovery actions will be available from
a variety of sources, including Federal
budgets, State programs, and cost share
grants for non-Federal landowners, the
academic community, and
nongovernmental organizations. In
addition, pursuant to section 6 of the
Act, the State of California would be
eligible for Federal funds to implement
management actions that promote the
protection and recovery of
Arctostaphylos franciscana. Information
on our grant programs that are available
to aid species recovery can be found at:
https://www.fws.gov/grants.
Section 7(a) of the Act requires
Federal agencies to evaluate their
actions with respect to any species that
is proposed or listed as endangered or
threatened and with respect to its
critical habitat, if any is designated.
Regulations implementing this
interagency cooperation provision of the
Act are codified at 50 CFR part 402.
Section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires
Federal agencies to confer with the
Service on any action that is likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of a
species proposed for listing or result in
destruction or adverse modification of
proposed critical habitat. If a species is
listed subsequently, section 7(a)(2) of
the Act requires Federal agencies to
ensure that activities they authorize,
fund, or carry out are not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of
the species or destroy or adversely
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
55635
modify its critical habitat. If a Federal
action may affect a listed species or its
critical habitat, the responsible Federal
agency must enter into formal
consultation with the Service.
Federal agency actions within the
species habitat that may require
conference or consultation, or both, as
described in the preceding paragraph
include management and any other
landscape-altering activities on Federal
lands administered by the National Park
Service or Presidio Trust; issuance of
section 404 Clean Water Act permits by
the Army Corps of Engineers; permitting
of construction and management of gas
pipeline and power line rights-of-way
by the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission; and construction and
maintenance of roads or highways by
the Federal Highway Administration.
The Act and its implementing
regulations set forth a series of general
prohibitions and exceptions that apply
to endangered plants. If Arctostaphylos
franciscana were listed, the last wild
specimen (including any plants
propagated from the wild plant) and the
botanical garden specimens (i.e., those
plants previously collected from the
wild and subsequently propagated)
would be protected by all prohibitions
of section 9(a)(2) of the Act, which
protects listed plants in areas of Federal
jurisdiction such as the Presidio. Plants
of unknown origin that have been or are
being sold in the nursery trade or have
been transplanted into home gardens
would not be considered part of the
listed entity. These prohibitions, in part,
make it illegal for any person subject to
the jurisdiction of the United States to
import or export, transport in interstate
or foreign commerce in the course of a
commercial activity, sell or offer for sale
in interstate or foreign commerce, or
remove and reduce the species to
possession from areas under Federal
jurisdiction. In addition, for plants
listed as endangered, the Act prohibits
the malicious damage or destruction on
areas under Federal jurisdiction and the
removal, cutting, digging up, or
damaging or destroying of such plants
in knowing violation of any State law or
regulation, including State criminal
trespass law. Certain exceptions to the
prohibitions apply to agents of the
Service and State conservation agencies.
Arctostaphylos franciscana has not been
listed by the State of California,
therefore, State laws do not apply.
Listing would also require Federal
agencies to avoid actions that might
jeopardize the species (16 U.S.C.
1536(a)(2)), and would provide
opportunities for funding of
conservation measures and land
acquisition that would not otherwise be
E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM
08SEP1
55636
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 174 / Thursday, September 8, 2011 / Proposed Rules
available to them (16 U.S.C. 1534,
1535(d)).
We may issue permits to carry out
otherwise prohibited activities
involving endangered and threatened
wildlife species under certain
circumstances. Regulations governing
permits are codified at 50 CFR 17.22 for
endangered species, and at 17.32 for
threatened species. With regard to
endangered wildlife, a permit must be
issued for the following purposes: For
scientific purposes, to enhance the
propagation or survival of the species,
and for incidental take in connection
with otherwise lawful activities.
Questions regarding whether specific
activities would constitute a violation of
section 9 of the Act should be directed
to the Sacramento Fish and Wildlife
Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT). Requests for copies of the
regulations concerning listed plants and
general inquiries regarding prohibitions
and permits may be addressed to the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Endangered Species Permits,
Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office,
2800 Cottage Way, Room W–2605,
Sacramento, California 95825
(telephone 916–414–6600; facsimile
916–414–6712).
Critical Habitat
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
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.
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, and transplantation.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:33 Sep 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
Critical habitat receives protection
under section 7 of the Act through the
requirement that Federal agencies
ensure, 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) of the
Act 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
that 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 or biological
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.
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
Endangered Species 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,
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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.
Critical Habitat Determination
Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as
amended, and implementing regulations
(50 CFR 424.12), require that, to the
maximum extent prudent and
determinable, the Secretary designate
critical habitat at the time the species is
determined to be endangered or
threatened. Our regulations (50 CFR
424.12(a)(1)) state that the designation
of critical habitat is not prudent when
one or both of the following situations
exist: (1) The species is threatened by
taking or other human activity, and
identification of critical habitat can be
expected to increase the degree of threat
to the species; or (2) such designation of
critical habitat would not be beneficial
to the species.
Our regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(2))
further state that critical habitat is not
determinable when one or both of the
following situations exist: (1)
Information sufficient to perform
required analysis of the impacts of the
designation is lacking, or (2) the
biological needs of the species are not
sufficiently well known to permit
identification of an area as critical
habitat.
We have done a preliminary
evaluation to determine if the
designation of critical habitat for
Arctostaphylos franciscana is prudent
and determinable at this time. On the
basis of that evaluation, we have
determined that the designation of
critical habitat may not be prudent for
this species due to an increased degree
of threat.
If the designation of critical habitat
would increase threats to a species or if
there are no benefits to a critical habitat
designation, then a not prudent finding
is warranted. A critical habitat
designation may result in increased
awareness of the specific area where the
individual Arctostaphylos franciscana
plant is likely to occur, which may
result in increased threats for a species
with such an extremely limited
distribution—a single plant. Manzanitas
are popular ornamental plants for
landscaping and horticulture, and
manzanita cuttings are easily
propagated. Its rarity would make A.
franciscana especially desirable to
certain individuals who may try to take
E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM
08SEP1
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 174 / Thursday, September 8, 2011 / Proposed Rules
cuttings or collect seeds from the A.
franciscana plant (see Factor B).
Vandalism of shrubs and trees has
occurred recently within the Presidio
and in Golden Gate Park (see Factor E);
greater awareness of the specific
location of where the individual A.
franciscana plant occurs may result in
increased risk of vandalism of the plant.
Also, increased visitation of the
individual plant that may result from
critical habitat designation may result in
increased risk of trampling and disease
transmission of soil-borne pathogens to
A. franciscana (see Factor C).
Because of the potential increased
threats that may result from the
identification of the specific areas
containing features essential to the
conservation of the species or specific
essential areas as critical habitat, we
have preliminarily determined that the
designation of critical habitat for
Arctostaphylos franciscana may not be
prudent at this time. However we have
not made our final determination and
we are, therefore, seeking information
from the public regarding threats to the
species and its habitat and whether the
risks of designation of critical habitat
would outweigh the benefits of this
determination. Please see Information
Requested above for specific
information we are seeking for making
our determination whether the
designation of critical habitat would be
prudent at this time.
Further, we are currently unable to
identify the physical or biological
features for Arctostaphylos franciscana,
because information on the full range of
the physical or biological features that
are considered essential to the
conservation of this species is not
known at this time. Little information is
available on the historical populations
that existed prior to habitat alteration
from grazing and burning by EuroAmerican settlers (Keeley 2005, p. 285;
Cooper 1922, p. 76) and prior to
development of the city of San
Francisco. We cannot be sure that the
historical records of extirpated
occurrences and the currently known
record of A. franciscana represent the
full extent of the species’ predisturbance
range and habitat (Chasse 2010, p. 1).
Some records are available as noted in
the Distribution and Habitat section of
this rule; however, they may simply be
the only locations that were recorded
rather than being representative of
optimum habitat.
The single remaining wild plant was
found on a previously disturbed
highway median, which was highly
unlikely to represent natural habitat
conditions. The remaining greenstone/
serpentine habitat on the San Francisco
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:26 Sep 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
peninsula, which is highly fragmented
and not occupied by A. franciscana,
may not be suitable for supporting
populations of the species. Because of
the limited information available related
to the species’ physical or biological
requisites, we are not currently able to
identify the specific areas that contain
the appropriate physical or biological
features essential to the conservation of
A. franciscana or otherwise identify
areas that may be essential for its
conservation without additional
information. Therefore, since the
physical or biological requirements of
the species are not sufficiently known,
we find that critical habitat for A.
franciscana is not determinable at this
time.
We are, therefore, seeking information
from the public regarding which
physical or biological features or
specific areas may be essential to the
conservation of Arctostaphylos
franciscana. Please see Information
Requested section for specific
information we are seeking to assist us
in trying to identify the biological
requirements for A. franciscana.
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 determination of status for this
species is based on scientifically sound
data, assumptions, and analyses. We
have invited these peer reviewers to
comment during the public comment
period on our specific assumptions and
conclusions regarding the proposal to
list Arctostaphylos franciscana as
endangered and our proposed finding
regarding critical habitat for this
species.
We will consider all comments and
information received during the
comment period on this proposed rule
during preparation of a final
determination. Accordingly, the final
decision may differ from this proposal.
Public Hearings
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 proposal in the
Federal Register. Such requests must be
sent to the address shown in ADDRESSES.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
55637
Federal Register and local newspapers
at least 15 days before the hearing.
Required Determinations
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 ADDRESSES. 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
This rule does not contain any new
collections of information that require
approval by Office of Management and
Budget (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
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
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)).
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited
is available on the Internet at https://
E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM
08SEP1
55638
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 174 / Thursday, September 8, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 16 U.S.C.
1531–1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201–4245; Pub. L. 99–
625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted.
www.regulations.gov and upon request
from the Field Supervisor, Sacramento
Fish and Wildlife Office (see
ADDRESSES).
recordkeeping requirements,
Transportation.
Author(s)
The primary authors of this notice are
the staff members of the Sacramento
Fish and Wildlife Office (see
ADDRESSES).
Accordingly, we propose to amend
part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title
50 of the Code of Federal Regulations,
as set forth below:
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species,
Exports, Imports, Reporting and
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
PART 17—[AMENDED]
§ 17.12
1. The authority citation for part 17
continues to read as follows:
*
Species
Historic range
Scientific name
2. Amend § 17.12(h) by adding an
entry for ‘‘Arctostaphylos franciscana
(Franciscan manzanita)’’ to the List of
Endangered and Threatened Plants in
alphabetical order under FLOWERING
PLANTS to read as follows:
Status
Family
Common name
Endangered and threatened plants.
*
*
(h) * * *
*
When listed
*
Critical
habitat
Special
rules
Flowering Plants
*
Arctostaphylos
franciscana.
*
Franciscan
manzanita.
*
*
U.S.A. (CA) ..............
*
*
Dated: August 27, 2011.
Gregory E. Siekaniec,
Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a
Petition To List the Snowy Plover and
Reclassify the Wintering Population of
Piping Plover
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition
finding.
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
90-day finding on a petition to list the
snowy plover (Charadrius alexandrinus)
as endangered or threatened and to
reclassify the wintering population of
piping plover (Charadrius melodus) as
endangered under the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act).
We find that the petition does not
present substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that
the petitioned actions may be
warranted. This finding is based on our
determination that the petition did not
identify listable entities. Therefore, we
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
Jkt 223001
This finding is also
available on the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov at Docket Number
FWS–R4–ES–2011–0059. Supporting
documentation we used in preparing
this finding is available for public
inspection, by appointment, during
normal business hours at the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, Panama City Field
Office, 1601 Balboa Avenue, Panama
City, FL 32405. Please submit any new
information, materials, comments, or
questions concerning this finding to the
above address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Don
Imm, Project Leader, Panama City Field
Office (see ADDRESSES), by telephone at
850–769–0552 ext. 238, or by facsimile
to 850–763–2177. If you use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD), please call the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at
800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), requires that we
make a finding on whether a petition to
list, delist, or reclassify a species
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
*
XXX
*
ADDRESSES:
[Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2011–0059; MO
92210–0–0008]
18:43 Sep 07, 2011
*
are not initiating a status review for
either species in response to this
petition. However, we ask the public to
submit to us any new information that
becomes available concerning the status
of, or threats to, the snowy plover or the
piping plover or their respective
habitats at any time.
DATES: The finding announced in this
document was made on September 8,
2011.
[FR Doc. 2011–22990 Filed 9–7–11; 8:45 am]
VerDate Mar<15>2010
*
*
Ericaceae ................. E
Sfmt 4702
*
*
NA
NA
*
presents substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that
the petitioned action may be warranted.
We are to base this finding on
information provided in the petition,
supporting information submitted with
the petition, and information otherwise
available in our files at the time that the
petition was submitted to us. To the
maximum extent practicable, we are to
make this finding within 90 days of our
receipt of the petition, and to publish
our notice of the finding promptly in the
Federal Register.
Our standard for substantial scientific
or commercial information within the
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) with
regard to a 90-day petition finding is
‘‘that amount of information that would
lead a reasonable person to believe that
the measure proposed in the petition
may be warranted’’ (50 CFR 424.14(b)).
If we find that substantial scientific or
commercial information was presented,
we are required to promptly conduct a
species status review, which we
subsequently summarize in a 12-month
finding.
Petition History
On September 5, 2000, we received a
petition dated September 4, 2000, from
Robert R. Reid, Jr., on behalf of the
Alabama Audubon Council, Alabama
Environmental Council, and Alabama
Ornithological Society (petitioners),
requesting that the snowy plover be
listed as threatened or endangered, and
that the wintering population of piping
plover be reclassified from threatened to
endangered under the Act, and that
critical habitat be designated under the
E:\FR\FM\08SEP1.SGM
08SEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 174 (Thursday, September 8, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 55623-55638]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-22990]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2010-0049; MO 92210-0-0008-B2]
RIN 1018-AX89
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Petition
Finding and Proposed Listing of Arctostaphylos franciscana as
Endangered
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; 12-month finding.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
12-month finding on a petition to list Arctostaphylos franciscana
(Franciscan manzanita), as endangered under the Endangered Species Act
of 1973, as amended (Act), and to designate critical habitat. After
review of all available scientific and commercial information, we find
that listing A. franciscana as an endangered species under the Act is
warranted. Accordingly, we herein propose to list A. franciscana as an
endangered species pursuant to the Act. This proposed rule, if made
final, would extend the Act's protections to this species. We believe
that critical habitat is not determinable at this time due to lack of
knowledge of what physical and biological features are essential to the
conservation of the species, or what other areas outside the site that
is currently occupied, may be essential for the conservation of the
species. The Service seeks data and comments from the public on this
proposed listing rule and whether the designation of critical habitat
for the species is prudent and determinable.
DATES: We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before
November 7, 2011. We must receive requests for public hearings, in
writing, at the address shown in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by
October 24, 2011.
ADDRESSES: (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov. In the Keyword box, enter FWS-R8-ES-2010-
0049, which is the docket number for this rulemaking. Then, in the
Search panel on the left side of the screen, under the Document Type
heading, click on the Proposed Rules link to locate this document. You
may submit a comment by clicking on ``Send a Comment or Submission.''
[[Page 55624]]
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R8-ES-2010-0049; Division of Policy and
Directives Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax
Drive, MS 2042-PDM; Arlington, VA 22203.
We will post all information received on https://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any
personal information you provide us (see the Information Requested
section below for more details).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen Leyse, Listing Coordinator,
Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office, 2800 Cottage Way, Room W-2605,
Sacramento, CA 95825; by telephone at 916-414-6600; or by facsimile at
916-414-6712. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD), please call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-
877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Information Requested
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 the public, other concerned governmental
agencies, Native American tribes, the scientific community, industry,
or any other interested parties concerning this proposed rule. We
particularly seek comments concerning:
(1) Additional information concerning the historical and current
status, range, distribution, and population size of this species,
including the locations of any additional populations of this species.
(2) Any information on the biological or ecological requirements of
the species, and ongoing conservation measures for the species and its
habitat.
(3) Biological, commercial trade, or other relevant data concerning
any threats (or lack thereof) to this species and regulations that may
be addressing those threats.
(4) Current or planned activities in the areas occupied by the
species and possible impacts of these activities on this species.
(5) Additional information regarding the threats in the five
listing factors:
(a) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range;
(b) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes;
(c) Disease or predation;
(d) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; and
(e) other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued
existence.
We are particularly interested in information regarding threats from
vandalism, disease (particularly transmission of Phytophthora sp.),
climate change, collection of cuttings and seeds by the public, and
regulations that may be addressing those threats.
(6) What physical or biological features are essential to the
conservation of the species.
(7) The reasons why areas should or should not be designated as
critical habitat as provided by section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531,
et seq.), including the possible risks or benefits of designating
critical habitat, including vandalism, Phytophthora sp. being brought
in by hikers and recreationists, collection of seeds and cuttings, and
any other risks associated with publication of maps designating any
area on which this plant may be located, now or in the future, as
critical habitat.
(8) Specific information on:
(a) The amount and distribution of habitat for the Arctostaphylos
franciscana;
(b) What areas, that were occupied at the time of listing (or are
currently occupied) and that contain features essential to the
conservation of this species, should be included in a critical habitat
designation and why;
(c) Special management considerations or protection that may be
needed in critical habitat areas, including managing for the potential
effects of climate change; and
(d) What areas not occupied at the time of listing are essential
for the conservation of this species and why.
(9) Information on the projected and reasonably likely impacts of
changing environmental conditions resulting from climate change on
Arctostaphylos franciscana and its habitat.
Please note that submissions merely stating support for or
opposition to the action under consideration without providing
supporting information, although noted, will not be considered in
making a determination, as section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that
determinations as to whether any species is a threatened or endangered
species must be made ``solely on the basis of the best scientific and
commercial data available.''
You may submit your comments and materials concerning this proposed
rule by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. If you submit
information via https://www.regulations.gov, your entire submission--
including any personal identifying information--will be posted on the
Web site. If your submission is made via a hardcopy that includes
personal identifying information, you may request at the top of your
document that we withhold this information from public review. However,
we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We will post all
hardcopy submissions on https://www.regulations.gov. Please include
sufficient information with your comments to allow us to verify any
scientific or commercial information you include.
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, Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office 2800 Cottage Way,
Room W-2605, Sacramento, California 95825 (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT).
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires that, for any petition to
revise the Federal Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and
Plants that contains substantial scientific or commercial information
that listing a species may be warranted, we make a finding within 12
months of the date of receipt of the petition on whether the petitioned
action is: (a) Not warranted; (b) warranted; or (c) warranted, but the
immediate proposal of a regulation implementing the petitioned action
is precluded by other pending proposals to determine whether any
species is threatened or endangered, and expeditious progress is being
made to add or remove qualified species from the Federal Lists of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. In this rule, we have
determined that the petitioned action to list Arctostaphylos
franciscana is warranted, and we are proceeding with publishing a
proposed rule to list the species.
Previous Federal Actions
On December 23, 2009, we received a petition dated December 14,
2009, from the Wild Equity Institute, the Center for Biological
Diversity, and the California Native Plant Society, requesting that
Arctostaphylos franciscana be listed as endangered on an emergency
basis under the Act and that critical habitat be designated. Included
in the petition was supporting information regarding the species'
taxonomy and ecology, historical and current distribution, present
status, and actual and potential causes of decline. On January 26,
2010, we acknowledged the receipt of the petition in a letter to Wild
Equity
[[Page 55625]]
Institute. In that letter we responded that we had reviewed the
information presented in the petition and determined that issuing an
emergency rule temporarily listing the species as per section 4(b)(7)
of the Act was not warranted. Our rationale for this determination was
that, although only a single plant of this species remained in the
wild, the individual had recently been transplanted to a new location
on Federal land.
The transplanted plant is considered to be the single remaining
plant in the wild, despite having been transplanted on the Presidio of
San Francisco (the Presidio), a unit of the National Park Service's
system, on the San Francisco peninsula. Additionally, a conservation
plan (Chasse et al., 2009, pp. 1-44) and associated Memorandum of
Agreement (MOA) (referred to herein as California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans) et al. 2009) signed by five Federal and State
wildlife and land management agencies (conservation partners),
successfully addressed the concerns raised by the petition to the
extent that none of those concerns constituted an ``emergency posing a
significant risk to the well-being of the species'' (50 CFR 424.20(a)).
The Federal agencies participating in these efforts were the National
Park Service (NPS) and the Service. The State of California was
represented by Caltrans and the California Department of Fish and Game
(CDFG). The Presidio Trust, a wholly owned government corporation that
jointly manages the Presidio with the NPS, also participated (71 FR
10608; March 2, 2006; NPS 2006).
The original habitat of the plant was threatened by the ongoing
redevelopment of Doyle Drive, but that threat was removed by the
translocation of the plant to a new location. Potential immediate
threats applicable to the new location, including the danger that the
plant might not survive the move and transplantation, were addressed by
provisions in the conservation plan for collecting and propagating
rooted clones, seeds, and cuttings from the original plant. The
conservation plan provides for the long-term propagation, and eventual
reestablishment in wild populations, of all remaining genetic lines,
including those from the surviving wild plant and from individuals
surviving in botanical gardens. It also includes long-term monitoring
provisions. While these provisions did not remove the need for further
review of the species' status, they appeared to be effective for
protecting the species in the short term. We also indicated that we
would make an initial finding in Fiscal Year 2010 regarding whether the
petition presented substantial information to indicate that listing may
be warranted. The 90-day finding was published on August 10, 2010 (75
FR 48294). This notice constitutes the 12-month finding on the December
23, 2009, petition to list Arctostaphylos franciscana as endangered.
Arctostaphylos franciscana was originally proposed for listing as
an endangered species under the Act in 1976 (41 FR 24524; June 16,
1976). In 1980, it was included in the list of Category 1 candidates
for listing, as one of the taxa retaining a high priority for addition
to the list subject to confirmation of extant populations. At the time,
the species was thought to be extinct in the wild although known to be
extant in cultivation (45 FR 82480; December 15, 1980). It is included
as a ``species of concern'' in the Recovery Plan for Coastal Plants of
the Northern San Francisco Peninsula (Service 2003, p. 95). In October
2009, 62 years after the loss of the last known wild plants, one
individual A. franciscana plant was located in the wild on the
Presidio. The Presidio is under joint management by the Golden Gate
National Recreation Area (GGNRA), a part of the NPS, and by the
Presidio Trust. The A. franciscana plant is located in the portion of
the Presidio that is managed by the Presidio Trust. The plant is
considered to be wild because it has been moved to an undeveloped area
of the Presidio that is managed as natural habitat. Although the plant
is currently receiving care associated with its transplantation, it is
not receiving the level of protection, water, and nutrients that plants
in a botanical garden may receive.
The Arctostaphylos franciscana plants that exist in cultivation
fall into three categories: (a) Cuttings and rooted specimens that were
collected from the Laurel Hill Cemetery and transplanted to various
managed botanical gardens in San Francisco, Berkeley, and Claremont
prior to 1947; (b) specimens currently being propagated in greenhouses
from cuttings and layers taken from the wild plant in 2010; and (c)
specimens of unknown origin that are sold in the nursery trade or have
been transplanted into home gardens. We consider the single wild plant
and plants identified in (a) and (b) above to be the listable entity
under the Act. Our rationale for not including plants identified in
item (c) above is outlined below.
The Arctostaphylos franciscana plants found in botanical gardens
may represent from one to six genetically distinct plants, other than
the single wild plant (Vasey 2011b, pp. 2, 3; Chasse 2011a, p. 1;
Chasse 2011b, p. 1; Chasse et al. 2009, p. 7) and may contribute
genetic material in the form of cuttings for efforts to expand the
number of wild plants. The botanical garden plants are not considered
part of the wild population and, therefore, are not being addressed in
this 12-month finding and proposed rule although they will be
considered to be listed if this proposed rule becomes final. The
cuttings and layers that were collected from the wild plant currently
being propagated in greenhouses will be used to establish additional
populations of the species by being planted with plants propagated from
the botanical garden A. franciscana specimens. We have concluded that
the third category of plants, those cultivated for private or
commercial uses, will not aid in the conservation or the recovery of
the species in the wild because cultivated plants may be hybrids and
bred for landscape use and thus offer minimal conservation
contribution.
Species Information
Species Biology
Arctostaphylos franciscana is a low, spreading-to-ascending
evergreen shrub in the heath family (Ericaceae) that may reach 0.6 to
0.9 meters (m) (2 to 3 feet (ft)) in height when mature (Chasse et al.
2009, p. 5). Its leaves are about 1.5 to 2 centimeters (cm) (0.59 to
0.79 inches (in)) long, are isofacial (have the same type of surface on
both sides), and are oblanceolate (longer than they are wide and wider
towards the tip) (Eastwood 1905, p. 201; Chasse et al. 2009, p. 39).
Its mahogany brown fruits are about 6 to 8 millimeters (mm) (0.24 to
0.32 in) wide, while its urn-shaped flowers measure about 5 to 7 mm
(0.2 to 0.28 in) long (Wallace 1993, p. 552; Service 2003, p. 57).
A closely related species, Arctostaphylos montana ssp. ravenii
(Raven's manzanita), listed as federally endangered, looks similar but
has a more prostrate growth habit, more rounded leaves, smaller and
less reddish fruits, and smaller and more spherical flowers (Service
2003, pp. 55, 57). Another somewhat similar appearing species, though
not as closely related, is A. uva-ursi (bearberry), which can be
distinguished by its lack of isofacial leaves (Chasse et al. 2009, p.
39).
In the wild, Arctostaphylos franciscana is an obligate-seeding
species (it reproduces primarily from seed after a fire or other
disturbance rather than from burls) (Vasey 2010, p. 1). Arctostaphylos
species are members of the chaparral plant community,
[[Page 55626]]
which have a variety of triggers for seed germination including heat,
smoke, and light (Keeley 1987, p. 434). The germination requirements
for A. franciscana have not yet been studied; however, other
Arctostaphylos species have germinated after being exposed to charate
(ground charred wood) (Keeley 1987, pp. 435, 440).
The seeds of Arctostaphylos are dispersed primarily by mammals,
including coyotes, foxes, and rodents (T. Parker pers. comm., 2011;
Vasey 2011a, p. 1). Animals such as coyotes and foxes eat the
Arctostaphylos fruit and may travel long distances before depositing
their scat. Any undigested fruit left in the scat can then be harvested
by rodents and either eaten or buried. Parker (2010b, p. 1) found that
70 percent of the fruits buried by rodents were located deeper than 2
centimeters (cm) (0.78 inch (in)), which is the maximum soil depth at
which seeds are typically killed by wildfire.
Genetics and Taxonomy
At one point Arctostaphylos franciscana and A. montana ssp.
ravenii, along with A. montana ssp. montana (Mount Tamalpais
manzanita), were considered to be subspecies of A. hookeri (Hooker's
manzanita). However, recent taxonomic revisions have established A.
montana ssp. ravenii and A. franciscana as separate species. These
revisions have been based primarily on genetic comparisons, including
the fact that A. franciscana is diploid (with 13 pairs of chromosomes)
while A. montana ssp. ravenii is tetraploid (with 26 chromosome pairs)
(Service 2003, p. 95; Parker et al. 2007, pp. 149, 150; Chasse et al.
2009, p. 6).
Distribution and Habitat
Known historical occurrences and collections of Arctostaphylos
franciscana are from serpentine maritime chaparral, a plant community
dominated by Arctostaphylos (manzanita) and Ceanothus (California
lilac) species, on the San Francisco Peninsula. This area is part of a
region that Willis Linn Jepson named the Franciscan Area, one of 10
areas that he considered to have the highest concentration of endemic
plant species in California (Jepson 1925, pp. 11-14). An endemic
species is one that is native to and restricted to a particular
geographical area. Native habitats have been largely converted to urban
areas of the City of San Francisco and habitat that might support A.
franciscana is now mostly lost to development (Chasse 2010, p. 2;
Gluesenkamp 2010, p. 7).
Chasse (2009, pp. 6, 7) has noted that information on the plant
community that historically included Arctostaphylos franciscana is
largely missing from the literature. Early records describe the species
as growing ``on rocky ground'' (Eastwood 1905, p. 202), on ``bare,
stony bluff'' (Brandegee 1908, as cited in Chasse 2009, p. 6) and with
coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), coast blue blossom (Ceanothus
thyrsiflorus), and coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis) (Wieslander 1938,
cited in Service 2003, p. 95). Arctostaphylos franciscana was also
observed ``forming flat masses over serpentine outcroppings and humus-
filled gravel and flopping down over the sides of gray and chrome
rocks. Ericameria, Baccharis, Ferns, Buckwheats, and Golden Yarrow grow
among it; and over it stand Toyons and Live Oaks.'' Additionally, A.
montana ssp. ravenii was found at nearly all A. franciscana locations.
These observations, along with the geology and climate of historical
sites, indicate that the species' community likely consisted of a
mosaic of coastal scrub, barren serpentine maritime chaparral,
perennial grassland, with occasional woodland of coast live oak and
toyon shrubs and small trees (Chasse 2009, pp. 6, 7).
Parker (2007, pp. 8-11) examined the prehistoric distribution of
Arctostaphylos in California and the geologic changes that helped lead
to the number and location of Arctostaphylos species present today.
Arctostaphylos evolved at least 15 million years ago during the Miocene
epoch, corresponding with an earlier period of global warming; however,
only during the last 1.5 million years have large numbers of new fossil
types of the genus appeared. Currently there are at least 95 species
and subspecies of Arctostaphylos within California. The large number of
species is thought to be a response to significant changes in climate
and physical geography that occurred approximately 1.5 million years
ago. Tectonic changes in the landscape resulted in a diversity of new
niches that selected for new species. Additionally, glacial advances
and retreats during the last 2 million years have impacted the
distribution of plants as well as created two possible paths of
Arctostaphylos evolution.
One potential path is that populations of Arctostaphylos species
moved in response to climatic changes but also left behind remnant
populations of formerly more widespread species that persisted in
isolated areas. Secondly, new species could have resulted from
hybridization between rapidly migrating species and the remnant
populations of other Arctostaphylos species. The San Francisco Bay area
was a forested river valley during the last glacial period. At the end
of the last glacial period, the climate became warmer and drier, and
conditions became more favorable for Arctostaphylos. The area from San
Francisco Bay to Monterey now contains 42 species or subspecies of
Arctostaphylos, 32 of which are narrow endemics. Researchers have
accepted that the obligate-seeder life history also promotes a more
rapid rate of speciation in contrast to the vegetative regeneration of
burl-sprouting species (Wells 1969, p. 264), which is evidenced by the
fact that nearly all of the 32 narrow endemics in the San Francisco Bay
to Monterey area are obligate-seeders.
Arctostaphylos franciscana is considered to be endemic to the San
Francisco peninsula, California, and historically occurred in areas
with serpentine soils and bedrock outcrops, greenstone, and mixed
Franciscan rock, typically growing in mixed populations with A. montana
ssp. ravenii (Service 2003, pp. 95, 96; Chasse et al. 2009, p. 6). The
Doyle Drive site was comprised of disturbed soil over serpentinite
(Chasse et al. 2009, p. 3). Serpentine soil restricts the growth of
many plants due to its high nickel and magnesium concentrations, and
thus tends to support unique plant communities (Brooks 1987, pp. 19,
53; Service 2003, p. 16) because relatively few plant species can
tolerate such soil conditions. Such conditions generally result in
semibarren soil and a lack of competing plants that benefits
serpentine-tolerant plants such as A. franciscana (Bakker 1984, p. 79).
The coastal upland habitat of Arctostaphylos franciscana is
influenced by cool, humid conditions and frequent summer fog. The
serpentine chaparral plant community, of which A. franciscana is a
part, may have been present historically in the southeastern portion of
the San Francisco area (for example, in Potrero Hill, Bayview Hill) but
the cumulative effects of burning by native Americans, grazing during
the Spanish/Mexican period and later, more grazing and gathering of
firewood during the U.S. military period may have converted the
maritime chaparral to grassland or depauperate coastal scrub (Chasse
2010, p. 2). Prior to 1947, A. franciscana was known from three
locations: the Masonic and Laurel Hill Cemeteries in San Francisco's
Richmond district, and Mount Davidson in the south-central part of San
Francisco (Service 2003, pp. 16, 62, 95; Chasse et al. 2009, p. 4).
Unconfirmed sightings were also noted at a possible fourth location
near Laguna and Haight Streets. By 1947, the
[[Page 55627]]
Masonic and Laurel Hill Cemetery sites were removed and the grounds
destroyed in preparation for commercial and urban development (Chasse
et al. 2009, p. 7). The Mount Davidson and the Laguna and Haight
Streets locations were lost to urbanization as well. Until October
2009, A. franciscana had not been seen in the wild since 1947 (Chasse
et al. 2009, pp. 3, 7), although no systematic surveys are known to
have taken place to search for potential remaining individuals (Chasse
2010, p. 1).
Between 1930 and 1947, prior to the loss of the wild plants,
botanists collected cuttings and rooted specimens from confirmed wild
Arctostaphylos franciscana plants representing possibly one to six
distinct individuals, and propagated them in botanical gardens (Vasey
2011b, p. 2; Chasse 2011a, p. 1; Chasse 2011b, p. 1; Service 2003, p.
96; Chasse et al. 2009, p. 7). The number of distinct individuals
depends on whether more than one of the botanical garden specimens were
started from cuttings of the same individual (which would mean multiple
plants would have identical genotypes) or whether all the specimens
originated from separate plants (in which case all the specimens would
have different genotypes) (Vasey 2011b, pp. 2, 3; Chasse 2011a, p. 1;
Chasse 2011b, p. 1). Genotype is defined as the genetic constitution of
an individual.
Accession records for the botanical garden specimens indicate that
some specimens collected and planted prior to 1947 did not survive and
that others are duplicates of original collections leaving only three
specimens confirmed to have been original plants transplanted from
Laurel Hill (Chasse 2011b, p. 1). Further genetic work will verify
whether plants with differing morphological features prove to be
additional A. franciscana individuals. Although some of the botanical
garden specimens may have different genotypes, which is the result of
sexual reproduction (sprouting from seed) rather than clonal
reproduction, all of the botanical garden specimens are currently
considered to be A. franciscana until further genetic work can be
conducted. The number of existing distinct individuals cannot currently
be determined because a suitable genetic sampling technique has not yet
been developed (Chasse 2011a, p. 1). Modern collections of this plant
at East Bay Regional Park District's Botanical Garden at Tilden
Regional Park, Strybing Arboretum, Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden,
Claremont, and UC Berkeley Botanical Garden include some of the
original specimens from Laurel Hill, as well as specimens propagated
vegetatively after the species was thought to have been extinct in the
wild (Chasse et al. 2009, pp. 6-8).
In October 2009, an ecologist identified a plant growing in a
concrete-bound median strip along Doyle Drive in the Presidio as
Arctostaphylos franciscana (Chasse et al. 2009 pp. 3, 4; Gluesenkamp
2010, p. 7). The plant's location was directly in the footprint of a
roadway improvement project designed to upgrade the seismic and
structural integrity of the south access to the Golden Gate Bridge
(Caltrans et al. 2009, p. 1; Chasse et al. 2009, p. 10). The
identification of the plant as A. franciscana has since been confirmed
with 95 percent confidence based on morphological characteristics
(Chasse et al. 2009 pp. 3, 4; Vasey and Parker 2010, pp. 1, 5).
Additional tests of ploidy level indicate that the plant is diploid,
consistent with A. franciscana (Vasey and Parker 2010, p. 6). Molecular
genetic data also indicate that the plant is A. franciscana (Parker
2010a). Based on the best available scientific information, we consider
the individual found along Doyle Drive in October 2009 to be A.
franciscana (Vasey and Parker 2010, pp. 1, 5-7
Several agencies, including the Service, established an MOA and
conservation plan for the species (see Previous Federal Actions section
above). The conservation partners concluded that leaving the plant
undisturbed at its original site would compromise public safety and
cultural resources by the potential curtailment or redesign of the
roadway improvement project (Chasse et al. 2009, pp. 9, 10).
The conservation plan evaluated potential translocation sites,
established procedures for preparation of the new site and for the
translocation itself, and called for management and monitoring (both
short- and long-term) of the translocated plant and all newly
propagated plants, with the goal of eventually establishing self-
sustaining populations of the species in the wild (Chasse et al. 2009,
pp. 23-27, 29-30). Following recommendations in the conservation plan,
the Arctostaphylos franciscana plant was moved successfully to a new
site within the Presidio in January 2010. Subsequent monitoring reports
indicate the translocated plant continues to do well at its new
location (Yam 2010, pp. 1, 3-14, Young 2010a, p. 1).
Cuttings from the plant, both from nonrooted stems and from
layering stems (stems that have rooted at their leaf nodes), were taken
for vegetative propagation prior to its translocation in January 2010
(Chasse et al. 2009, pp. 10-16, 40-42, Young 2010a, p. 1). This
material was distributed to seven locations including UC Berkeley
Botanic Garden, Regional Parks Botanic Garden, UC Santa Cruz Botanical
Garden, San Francisco Botanical Garden, Cal Flora Nursery, Presidio
Nursery, and the Presidio Trust Forester (Young, 2011). A total of
1,346 seeds were collected in July and August, 2010, from the plant
(Young 2010a, p. 1; Frey 2010, p. 1).
The plan calls for eventual propagation of seeds (including seeds
collected from the soil around the plant's original location), and for
genetic testing of resulting plants. Seeds fertilized in the wild could
result from cross-pollination by pollen from another individual
Arctostaphylos franciscana or a closely related species and would
produce a genetically unique individual (Chasse et al. 2009, p. 13).
Additionally, because the roots of most Arctostaphylos individuals
establish a mutually beneficial association with species of mycorrhizal
fungi living in the soil, the conservation plan established means by
which the soil for propagating cuttings and seeds should be inoculated
with spores from such fungi (Chasse et al. 2009, p. 9). Propagation of
A. franciscana seed and inoculation of seeds and cuttings by
mycorrhizal fungi have not yet occurred. Soil surrounding the wild
plant is being examined for presence of a seedbank but no A.
franciscana seed has yet been found (Young 2011, p. 1). Propagation
methods for A. franciscana seed will be developed using seed of a
surrogate species, A. montana ssp. montana, which was collected from
Mount Tamalpais in 2010 (Young 2011, p. 1). Outplanting of two rooted
A. franciscana cuttings took place at the UC Santa Cruz Arboretum in
January 2011 (Kriegar 2011, unpaginated)
Summary of Information Pertaining to the Five Factors
Section 4 of the Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 424)
set forth the procedures for adding species to the Federal Lists of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. A species may be
determined to be an endangered or threatened species due to one or more
of the following five factors described in section 4(a)(1) of the Act:
(A) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment
of its habitat or range; (B) overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational purposes; (C) disease or
predation; (D) the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; and
(E) other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence.
Listing
[[Page 55628]]
actions may be warranted based on any of the above threat factors,
singly or in combination. Each of these factors is discussed below.
In considering what factors might constitute threats to a species,
we must look beyond the exposure of the species to a particular factor
to evaluate whether the species may respond to that factor in a way
that causes actual impacts to the species. If there is exposure to a
factor and the species responds negatively, the factor may be a threat
and, during our review, we attempt to determine how significant a
threat it is. The threat is significant if it drives, or contributes
to, the risk of extinction of the species such that the species
warrants listing as endangered or threatened as those terms are defined
in the Act. However, the identification of factors that could impact a
species negatively may not be sufficient to compel a finding that the
species warrants listing. The information must include evidence
sufficient to suggest that these factors are operative threats that act
on the species to the point that the species may meet the definition of
endangered or threatened under the Act.
Factor A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or
Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range
All known habitat originally occupied by Arctostaphylos franciscana
has been lost to urban development (Chasse et al. 2009, pp. 4, 7). The
range of the species is now limited to a single transplanted plant on
the Presidio. In January 2010, after the newly discovered wild plant
was moved to the Presidio, the plant's habitat at Doyle Drive was
destroyed as part of a Caltrans highway improvement project. The loss
of the plant's native serpentine chaparral habitat to development and
the curtailment of the species' range restrict the species' current and
future ability to naturally reproduce and expand its range.
The remaining area of potential habitat for the species on the San
Francisco peninsula has not yet been determined but is very limited as
a result of past urban development. Although areas of greenstone or
serpentine soils remain on the peninsula, the residual effects of
urbanization (primarily habitat fragmentation and degradation) have
resulted in reducing the remaining greenstone/serpentine soils into
areas of about 0.4 hectare (ha) (1 acre (ac)) or less in size with some
up to 2.4 ha (6 ac). These small remnant areas may no longer be
suitable for reestablishment of A. franciscana due to factors such as
dominance by other plant species (Chasse pers. comm., 2011). Currently,
these small, isolated parcels are subject to ``edge effects'' such as
increased invasion of weed species that would compete with A.
franciscana for limited resources (water, nutrients, space).
Small isolated parcels have also been shown to be dryer than larger
parcels and the habitat on these smaller parcels has become desiccated
due to lack of surrounding vegetation, thus potentially leading to
increased plant stress (Murcia 1995, p. 58). Urban barriers such as
streets and buildings have been found to impose a high degree of
isolation on chaparral species and to result in trends for decreased
numbers of native plant species and concurrent increased numbers of
nonnative plant species in habitat fragments over time (Soule et al.
1992, pp. 41-43); Alberts et al. (unpubl.) as cited in Soule et al.
1992, p. 41). These effects of the urbanization of the San Francisco
peninsula are expected to continue to affect these remnant parcels into
the future and to pose a threat to establishment of additional A.
franciscana.
Additionally, nitrogen deposition poses a current and continuing
threat to remnant habitat that might otherwise be found to be suitable
for Arctostaphylos franciscana. Weiss and Luth (2003, p. 1) have
conducted research on the effects of nitrogen deposition in a
serpentine grassland south of the San Franciscan peninsula, which has
bearing on threats to A. franciscana. Weiss and Luth found that
nitrogen deposition from automobiles on Highway 280 was responsible for
higher nitrogen levels in the soil within 400 m (1,312 ft) on the west
side and 100 m (328 ft) on the east side of the roadway. Grass cover
was higher in these areas. Native species within this zone are thought
to be at long-term risk from invasions of nitrogen-loving grasses and
other weedy plant species. The entire northern San Francisco peninsula,
with the exception of the Presidio and Golden Gate Park, has been
urbanized, and four major highways travel across the peninsula
(Highways 1, 101, 280, and 480). Urban areas and roadways are a
continuous source of nitrogen deposition from automobiles, trucks, and
industrial and home heating (Weiss 1999, p. 1477). Invasions of
nitrogen-loving plants into nitrogen-limited grasslands and shrublands
appears to be a common response to atmospheric nitrogen deposition
(Weiss and Luth 2003, p. 1) and may partly explain why the ecosystem
that existed on the San Francisco peninsula has been so altered.
The one remaining wild plant is subject to multiple threats. The
Presidio Trust's Vegetation Management Plan provides for the protection
and management of rare plants on the Presidio (further discussed in
Factor D). However, in some cases when the Trust has acted as a project
proponent on the Presidio, direct project impacts to federally listed
species and their habitat have resulted. For example, actions by the
Presidio Trust and NPS related to management and remediation of former
Army landfills on the Presidio have impacted federally listed plant
species, including the Lessingia germanorum (San Francisco lessingia),
and their habitat. Remediation of a large landfill near the
transplanted Arctostaphylos franciscana plant is ongoing (M. Frey,
pers. comm., 2011a) and has the potential to impact the plant and its
habitat due to their close proximity to the remediation site. The
remaining remediation activities involve the use of heavy equipment to
complete final recontouring and to bring in soil to the site, followed
by installation of plants, and restoration of original habitat features
at the landfill (Presidio Trust 2011a, p. 2, M. Frey, pers. comm.,
2011b).
We are not aware of any specific proposals by the Presidio Trust
for other activities in or near the habitat of the remaining wild A.
franciscana plant. However, the Presidio Trust Act contains a sunset
clause that could result in the transfer of Presidio holdings to the
General Services Administration for disbursement, if the Trust
operations are not self-sufficient by 2013. The Presidio Trust Act is
discussed under Factor D below; however, the potential that lands could
be transferred and become available for development presents a threat
that additional habitat loss could occur within the foreseeable future.
Based on the best scientific and commercial information available,
we consider the present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of the species habitat or range to be a high-magnitude and
ongoing (imminent) threat to the wild population of Arctostaphylos
franciscana. The current fragmented and degraded condition of most
remaining serpentine/greenstone soil habitat on the San Francisco
peninsula threatens the ability of the species to expand its range. The
threats of possible development and change in management of the habitat
may further limit the species' propagation and expansion, and could
potentially threaten the only remaining wild plant in the foreseeable
future.
[[Page 55629]]
Factor B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
Overutilization of the species is possible due to the popularity of
Arctostaphylos franciscana for landscape use, as evidenced by the
widespread use of cultivars of this species in the commercial nursery
trade. Arctostaphylos franciscana is specifically recommended for use
in erosion control on steep slopes (Theodore Payne Foundation 2009, p.
1; Sierra Club 2011, p. 1).
The attention and media coverage generated by the discovery of a
species thought to be extinct may result in efforts by the public to
visit the plant and possibly collect cuttings or seed. Although the
location of the transplanted plant has not been disclosed, it was
planted in a heavily used area in the Presidio near common-use trails
with unrestricted access by the public. The Presidio is a National Park
and is part of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area; the Presidio
is open to the public 24 hours a day, every day of the week and
receives 5 million visitors annually. Because of the Presidio's
proximity to the City of San Francisco and because the Park has no
entrance fees and contains restaurants, trails, and businesses that can
be accessed by car, foot, or public transport, it receives heavy use.
The Presidio Trust and NPS are making serious efforts not to disclose
the location of the translocated plant. The Presidio Trust and NPS are
concerned that public knowledge of the plant's location would lead to
authorized and unauthorized group tours by plant enthusiasts that would
overwhelm the Arctostaphylos franciscana and compact the soil (T.
Thomas, pers. comm., 2011).
No damage to the plant has been observed to date; however,
trampling or the taking of cuttings could occur if the identification
and location of the plant become known. Similarly, another extremely
rare plant, Arctostaphylos montana ssp. ravenii is also located on the
Presidio. Its location has not been revealed to the public by NPS in
order to protect the plant from vandalism although it was federally
listed as endangered in 1979.
Based on the best scientific and commercial information available,
we consider the overutilization for commercial and recreational
purposes to be a high-magnitude and ongoing (imminent) threat to wild
Arctostaphylos franciscana plants. Although captively propagated A.
franciscana are available to residents for use in private gardens,
collection of wild individuals is a threat to the species, and we
expect it may be a threat in the foreseeable future, particularly if
the location of the plant becomes known to the public.
Factor C. Disease or Predation
Transplantation of the single wild Arctostaphylos franciscana plant
may have caused stress to the plant, and thereby made the plant more
susceptible to predation and disease. In this case, stress and root
damage may result from a number of sources including compaction of soil
from foot traffic around the plant (Hammitt and Cole 1998, p. 52), too
little or too much water, and improper planting depth. A fungal
infection called twig blight is also a potential concern, particularly
during wet years (Service 2003, p. 69). Some twig blight was observed
in the wild plant during winter of 2009-2010, but it subsided during
the dry summer months (Chasse 2010, p. 2).
The soil-borne pathogen, Phytophthora cinnamomi, has long been
known as a world-wide threat to commercial and ornamental plants.
Phytophthora cinnamomi is a fungus-like organism most closely related
to diatoms and kelp (Kingdom Stramenopila) rather than to the true
fungi (Kingdom Fungi or Eumycota). It is an introduced exotic pathogen
in North America whose native range is unknown, but is suspected to be
southeast Asia. Human-related activities, including the international
plant trade have facilitated spread of P. cinnamomi into many habitats
worldwide (Swiecki et al. in press, p. 3). Phytophthora cinnamomi was
introduced to California early in the 20th century and recently has
been identified as a serious threat to the State's native plants and
their habitats (Swiecki et al. in press, p. 3).
Phytophthora cinnamomi has been the cause of the decline and death
of rare Arctostaphylos species, including the federally threatened A.
pallida (pallid manzanita) in the Oakland Hills of the East San
Francisco Bay region, and federally threatened A. myrtifolia (Ione
manzanita) near Ione in the Sierra Nevada foothills, and of other woody
native species in the San Francisco Bay area (Swiecki et al. in press,
pp. 3-5). This organism causes root decay but can also kill above-
ground portions of some plants (Swiecki et al. in press, p. 3).
Phytophthora cinnamomi is persistent in soil, and once introduced to
native habitat, it cannot be eradicated (Swiecki et al. in press, p.
3). Phytophthora cinnamomi is transmitted by contaminated shoes, tools,
and infested soil clinging to tires, and by using contaminated nursery
stock, including native plant stock. Many areas showing plant mortality
caused by P. cinnamomi are associated with hiking trails, landscaping
with ornamental plants, and, in one case at the Apricum Hill Preserve,
with use by visitors including researchers, agency personnel, and
students (Swiecki et al. in press, p. 4).
This pathogen poses a significant threat in the foreseeable future
to A. franciscana through the potential for infestation by the public
and by staff who regularly work with the plant. It is not possible to
predict when the pathogen might infect the single plant since the
disease is generally transmitted directly or indirectly by humans or
human activity. The pathogen could be introduced from soil on
contaminated shoes and tools, or from cuttings of A. franciscana plants
that are currently being grown in a number of nurseries in the San
Francisco Bay area that could become contaminated. Swiecki et al. (in
press, p. 6) tested A. menziesii plants purchased from four nurseries
and found them to be infested with four Phytophthora species that cause
root infections or stem cankers, including P. cinnamomi. Crown rot,
which is caused by P. cinnamomi, is known to occur in A. myrtifolia and
A. viscida (Swiecki et al. in press, p. 3), and is a concern when
outplanting nursery-grown plants to wild locations (Chasse et al. 2009,
p. 17). However, crown rot has not been observed in the wild plant
(Chasse 2010, p. 2).
Arctostaphylos franciscana cuttings are proposed to be planted with
the transplanted A. franciscana to facilitate cross-pollination of the
different genotypes. Should the wild plant become contaminated with P.
cinnamomi, the result would be the decline and death of the wild plant
and the permanent contamination of the soil and seedbank beneath the
plant. Any seedlings that germinate from this seedbank would also very
likely be contaminated and not survive. Any cuttings that become
contaminated will also die of the pathogen. The Golden Gate National
Parks Conservancy staff in charge of propagation and care of A.
franciscana cuttings are aware of the threat of contamination and
rigorously follow clean procedures to prevent infection to the cuttings
or the wild plant; however, a risk of contamination continues to exist
because current fungicides do not eradicate 100 percent of Phytophthora
spores (Young 2010b, p. 1). The cuttings and layers have been dispersed
to seven different locations and growers, which, while decreasing the
risk of complete loss of plant
[[Page 55630]]
material, also increases the risk of exposure to disease.
After being transplanted, the wild plant became severely infested
with the larvae of a native leaf roller moth (Argyrotaenia franciscana)
(Estelle 2010, p. 1). Treatment for the infestation was hand removal of
the larvae and all infected leaves, which resulted in the removal of
some of the new growth on the plant (Young 2010a, p. 1; Estelle 2010,
p. 1). A parasitic wasp emerged from one leaf roller moth larva that
had been captured, indicating that the moth has natural enemies (M.
Frey 2010, p. 2). The moth has not been known to kill plants and does
not appear to be a serious threat at this time; however, the moth
species was found to have five overlapping generations in a year
(Estelle 2010, p. 1), so monthly removal of moth larvae and pupae is
planned (Frey 2010, p. 2). The leaf roller moth infestation in early
2010 did not permanently damage the plant; new growth has been
observed, and the plant began blooming in November 2010 (Frey 2010, p.
2).
We conclude that the best scientific and commercial information
available indicates that Arctostaphylos franciscana is threatened by
disease and predation. We consider predation to be a relatively minor
(low magnitude) but ongoing (imminent) threat to the wild population of
the species. Although the leaf roller moth has not been known to kill
Arctostaphylos species, the moth produces five overlapping generations
per year and severely damaged the leaves in 2010. We consider infection
of the plant by P. cinnamomi to be a high-magnitude and ongoing
(imminent) threat to A. franciscana because only one plant occurs in
the wild and the disease is easily and quickly spread by multiple
vectors.
Factor D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
Regulatory mechanisms protecting Arctostaphylos franciscana derive
primarily from the location of the single known wild plant on Golden
Gate National Recreation Area lands on the Presidio, which are
administered by the Presidio Trust. The Presidio Trust was established
by the Presidio Trust Act of 1996 to manage the leasing, maintenance,
rehabilitation, repair, and improvement of property within the Presidio
(Presidio Trust Act, as amended, Section 104(a)). The Presidio Trust is
directed to preserve the natural, scenic, cultural, and recreational
resources on the Presidio, but also is directed to ensure that the
Presidio becomes financially self-sufficient by 2013 (Presidio Trust
2002, pp. 1, 2, 12). The Presidio Trust Act directed that the Presidio
Trust design a management program to reduce expenditures of the NPS and
increase revenues to the Federal Government to the maximum extent
possible (Presidio Trust Act, pp. 5, 6). The Presidio Trust Management
Plan was published in May 2002.
Federal regulations at the Presidio, which offer some protection to
Arctostaphylos franciscana, include regulations that prohibit
disturbing, injuring, removing, possessing, digging, defacing, or
destroying from its natural state, any plant or parts thereof.
Unauthorized introduction of plants and plant seeds is also prohibited,
offering limited protection against invasive nonnative species.
Additional regulations require that special events be permitted by the
Trust, and provide for restricting visitor use to address resource
conflicts (36 CFR, part 1002).
The Presidio Trust and the NPS have developed a Vegetation
Management Plan for the Presidio. For special status plants, the plan
provides an objective to preserve and enhance rare plant habitats by
evaluating species-specific habitat needs and giving high priority to
actions that preserve and enhance those habitats (Presidio Trust 2001,
Chapter 3, unpaginated).
Future management of the Presidio, and of Arctostaphylos
franciscana and its habitat, are uncertain because of differences in
the missions of the Presidio Trust and NPS. The Presidio Trust is a new
model for National Park management in that the Trust is directed to
preserve the natural, scenic, cultural, and recreational resources on
the Presidio, and at the same time ensure that the Presidio becomes
financially self-sufficient by 2013 (Presidio Trust 2002, pp. 1, 12),
which means that generation of revenue is a consideration for its
activities as well as resource protection. The cost of operation and
care are higher for this park than for most National Parks because of
the Presidio's large number of structures and cultivated landscapes
(Presidio Trust 2011, unpaginated). In 2002, the Trust adopted a
management program designed to reduce expenditures of the NPS and to
increase revenues to the Federal Government to the maximum extent
possible (Presidio Trust 2002, p. 1; Presidio Trust Act, as amended
2001, p. 6). The mission of NPS on the Presidio as stated in the Golden
Gate National Recreation Area Act (16 U.S.C. 460bb), although similar
to the Presidio Trust Act regarding the protection of natural,
historic, scenic, and recreational values, does not include the mandate
to ensure that the Presidio becomes financially self-sufficient.
The future status of the Presidio as National Park land is
uncertain, as explained in the Presidio Trust Act, Section 104(o)
Reversion, which states: If, at the expiration of 15 years, the Trust
has not accomplished the goals and objectives of the plan required in
section 105(b) of the Presidio Trust Act, then all property under the
administrative jurisdiction of the Trust pursuant to section 103(b) of
this Act shall be transferred to the Administrator of the General
Services Administration to be disposed of in accordance with the
procedures outlined in the Defense Authorization Act of 1990 (104 Stat.
1809) and any real property so transferred shall be deleted from the
boundary of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area. In the event of
such transfer, the terms and conditions of all agreements and loans
regarding such lands and facilities entered into by the Trust shall be
binding on any successor in interest (Presidio Trust Act, Section
104(o), p. 9). This clause indicates that lands currently considered
National Parks lands could be disbursed to the private sector and
subject to development within the near future.
The Presidio Trust is subject to section 7 consultation under the
Act, which would confer protections to the plant should it be listed
under the Act. For example, actions by the Presidio Trust and NPS
related to management and remediation of former Army landfills on the
Presidio have impacted federally listed plant species including the
federally endangered Lessingia germanorum (San Francisco lessingia) and
federally endangered Clarkia franciscana (Presidio clarkia). Because
those plant species are federally listed, the Presidio Trust has
consulted with the Service to minimize such impacts. Arctostaphylos
franciscana does not currently have these protections.
The species is not listed under the California Endangered Species
Act. The conservation plan and MOA are not regulatory in nature, and
are not legally enforceable by third parties (Caltrans 2009, p. 8;
Chasse et al. 2009, p. 3), limiting their usefulness in enforcing
protections for the plant. Although general protections are provided
for plants on National Parks, existing regulatory mechanisms are
inadequate to protect the last known wild specimen of Arctostaphylos
franciscana, or any other such wild specimens that may be established
or found to exist.
Based on the best scientific and commercial information available,
we consider the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms to be a
threat of moderate-to-low magnitude to the species. We expect this
threat to
[[Page 55631]]
continue into the future unless the species is listed under the Act,
and thus we consider the threat to be ongoing (imminent).
Factor E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued
Existence
Potential threats to the species include changes in environmental
conditions resulting from climate change, trampling, or disturbance by
people visiting the Presidio, change in fire frequency, loss of genetic
diversity, and stochastic (chance) events.
Climate Change
Changes in environmental conditions resulting from climate change
may cause presently suitable habitat to become unsuitable for endemic
California plants in general, due to projected changes in temperature
and rainfall (Loarie et al. 2008, pp. 1-2). A U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS) study in National Park lands in northern California and Oregon
is being conducted to examine trends in climate, ocean conditions, and
other features (Madej et al. 2010, p. 7). In these National Park lands,
variation in abiotic factors (for example, precipitation, fog, and air
and ocean temperatures) regulates many ecological processes, including
the distribution of vegetation and frequency of disturbance from fires,
floods, landslides, and pest species. The preliminary results of the
USGS study show an increase in average maximum summer air temperatures
at Golden Gate National Recreation Area, located near the Presidio, and
a reduction statewide in fog frequency (Madej et al. 2010, p 24;
Johnstone and Dawson, 2010, p. 4535).
Summer fog is important to upland coastal vegetation and partly
determines the distribution of coastal species (Johnstone and Dawson
2010, p. 4533). Besides serpentine soil and cool air temperatures,
(Parker 2010c, p. 1), summer fog is one of the primary habitat
requirements for Arctostaphylos franciscana (Vasey 2010, p. 1). Summer
fog results from the presence of two phenomena that may be affected by
changes in environmental conditions resulting from climate change:
Upwelling of cold, coastal ocean water and a temperature inversion of
hot air flowing toward the ocean over a cool, humid marine air layer
below (Vasey 2010, p. 1; Johnstone and Dawson 2010, p. 4533). Fog
reduces sunlight and air temperature, and raises humidity. Summer fog
provides a source of water for plants, including Arctostaphylos
species, by condensing in the plant canopy and falling directly as
water to the soil and being taken up by the plant's roots or by being
taken up directly by leaves (Johnstone and Dawson 2010, p. 4533; Vasey
2010, p.1).
Fog frequency is highest in north and central California and
declines in Oregon and Southern California. Mean fog frequency in the
California region, quantified by cloud ceiling height measured at
airports, has decreased since 1951 (Johnstone and Dawson 2010; p.
4535). Research by Vasey suggests that most coastal endemic
Arctostaphylos species are more vulnerable to drought stress than those
found in interior California and could be threatened by a decrease in
coastal summer fog (Vasey 2010, p. 1). Vasey has found that obligately
seeding Arctostaphylos species, such as A. franciscana, are better
hydrated in areas that receive fog. He also found that obligately
seeding species are more vulnerable to vascular cavitation (air bubbles
forming in water vessels in the plant) when the rate of
evapotranspiration of water through the leaves becomes too great (Vasey
2010, p. 1). This disruption of water flow can lead to branch death and
possible death of the entire plant (Vasey 2010, p. 1).
Reduced soil moisture from loss of summer fog may also result in a
reduction of seed germination and seedling survival. Additionally, the
ability of A. franciscana to track future climate changes by
establishing new plants in new habitat may be limited because of its
association with serpentine and greenstone bedrock outcrops (Service
2003, pp. 95, 96) and because remaining soils derived from serpentine
and greenstone bedrock on the peninsula are limited in area and largely
fragmented (Chasse 2010, p. 1). If the trend towards a warmer, drier
climate continues as shown in data from Madej et al. (2010, p. 24) and
Johnstone and Dawson (2010, p. 4535), the climate may become too warm
or dry to support A. franciscana. Natural movement of the species by
seed dispersal to reach cooler, moister areas to the north would be
blocked by barriers such as the San Francisco Bay.
Alteration of the Natural Fire Regime
Fire, in addition to soil type and climate, plays an important role
in the determination of plant distribution (Keeley 2007, p. 19). The
chaparral plant community, of which Arctostaphylos is an important
member, is adapted to specific fire regimes that vary in different
areas in California. In the San Francisco East Bay region, the current
fire rotation interval is estimated at about 100 years (Keeley 2007, p.
20). Factors that affect the fire frequency in the San Francisco Bay
area are a short fire season, moist climate, the local human population
density, and changes in human behavior. Due to prevailing ocean winds
and frequent fogs, the average relative humidity along the coast is
moderate to high throughout the year. The exceptions typically occur in
the fall, when changing prevailing weather patterns allow dry
northeasterly winds from the State's interior to reduce humidity in the
coastal area to around 20 percent, thereby creating dry and windy
conditions that typify high fire danger (GGNRA 2005, pp. 136, 140).
Fire frequency in the San Francisco Bay area has varied
substantially in the last several thousand years. Not only have fire
regimes changed with changing climate, fire regimes have changed as
patterns of human utilization of the landscape have changed.
Disturbances by fire occurred at long intervals in the pre-human
period, then at shorter intervals during the late Native American and
Spanish-Mexican period, at moderate intervals during the European
settlement period, and have generally returned to long intervals in the
modern period (GGNRA 2005, pp. 144-147). The natural fire regime has
been heavily altered by the urbanization of San Francisco and the
fragmentation of remaining undeveloped lands. The City of San Francisco
is essentially built out, with the exception of small isolated parcels
and undeveloped hilltops. Lands administered by the NPS and the
Presidio Trust are surrounded by other land uses and close to the
wildland-urban boundary where landscape plants and nonnative plants
contribute to vegetative buildup (GGNRA 2005, pp. 130-131) that can
increase fire danger. In addition, fire suppression has been prevalent
during the last 100 years. This altered fire regime has led to an
increase in crown and surface fuels, contributing to high-intensity
fires (GGNRA 2005, p. 147). These administered lands could eventually
be identified as suitable for outplanting Arctostaphylos franciscana
seedlings, but the specific habitat characteristics for the species are
not known at this time.
Two opposing types of changes in fire frequency can threaten
Arctostaphylos franciscana. First, ``senescence risk'' occurs when too
little fire leads to the loss of a species that is dependent on fire
for regeneration from seeds or sprouts. The second is ``immaturity
risk,'' which is a threat especially to obligate-seeding species. In
this case, wildfires that occur too frequently will kill plants before
they can reach reproductive maturity and produce seed (Keeley 2007, p.
18). Wildfire can
[[Page 55632]]
substantially reduce the number of live seeds in the soil (Odion and
Tyler 2002, p. 1). Odion and Tyler (2002 p. 1) found that a controlled
burn in a 40-year-old stand of A. morroensis (Morro manzanita)
substantially reduced the seedbank to 33 percent of that which had
accumulated in the soil since the previous burn 40 years earlier. Three
years after the burn, the new population of A. morroensis that had
germinated from the seedbank was less than half the size of the
original population (Odion and Tyler 2002, p. 1). Odion and Tyler (2002
p. 2) concluded that if viable seed densities in the soil are too low
because fires are too frequent to allow seeds to accumulate in the
soil, the population may risk extinction.
The fire return interval for this general area, and, therefore, for
this species, is currently approximately 100 to 125 years (T. Parker
pers. comm., 2011, Vasey 2011a, p. 1). The long fire return interval is
not thought to be a threat to the mature Arctostaphylos franciscana
plant at the Presidio or to future seedlings that are likely to be
outplanted in the future as a result of efforts by the NPS and the
Presidio Trust. Infrequent fire would allow the mature plant at the
Presidio to produce seed to build up a sufficiently large seedbank to
withstand seed loss from wildfire, and would allow the growth of
outplantings. However, if fire continues to be excluded from these
areas and the fire return interval greatly exceeds the natural return
interval, over time the loss