Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for Physaria globosa (Short's bladderpod), Helianthus verticillatus (whorled sunflower), and Leavenworthia crassa (fleshy-fruit gladecress), 47059-47108 [2013-18456]

Download as PDF Vol. 78 Friday, No. 149 August 2, 2013 Part II Department of the Interior emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for Physaria globosa (Short’s bladderpod), Helianthus verticillatus (whorled sunflower), and Leavenworthia crassa (fleshy-fruit Gladecress); Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Status for Physaria globosa (Short’s bladderpod), Helianthus verticillatus (whorled sunflower), and Leavenworthia crassa (fleshy-fruit gladecress); Proposed Rules VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 47060 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 [Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2013–0086; 4500030114] RIN 1018–AZ60 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for Physaria globosa (Short’s bladderpod), Helianthus verticillatus (whorled sunflower), and Leavenworthia crassa (fleshy-fruit gladecress) Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, propose to designate critical habitat for Physaria globosa (Short’s bladderpod), Helianthus verticillatus (whorled sunflower), and Leavenworthia crassa (fleshy-fruit gladecress) under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). If we finalize this rule as proposed, it would extend the Act’s protections to the habitats of Physaria globosa (Short’s bladderpod), Helianthus verticillatus (whorled sunflower), and Leavenworthia crassa (fleshy-fruit gladecress) to conserve these habitats under the Act. DATES: We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before October 1, 2013. Comments submitted electronically using the Federal eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES section, below) must be received by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the closing date. We must receive requests for public hearings, in writing, at the address shown in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by September 16, 2013. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by one of the following methods: (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https:// www.regulations.gov. In the Search field, enter Docket No. FWS–R4–ES– 2013–0086, 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 ‘‘Comment Now!’’ (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public Comments Processing, Attn: FWS–R4–ES–2013– 0086; Division of Policy and Directives Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS 2042–PDM; Arlington, VA 22203. We request that you send comments only by the methods described above. We will post all comments on https:// www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any personal information you provide us (see the Information Requested section below for more information). The coordinates or plot points or both from which the maps are generated are included in the administrative record for this critical habitat designation and are available at https://www.fws.gov/ cookeville, at https:// www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2013–0086, and at the Tennessee Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). Any additional tools or supporting information that we may develop for this critical habitat designation will also be available at the Fish and Wildlife Service Web site and Field Office set out above, and may also be included in the preamble and/or at https://www.regulations.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary E. Jennings, Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Tennessee Ecological Services Fish and Wildlife Office, 446 Neal Street, Cookeville, TN 38501; telephone 931–528–6481. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800–877–8339. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Executive Summary Why we need to publish a rule. Critical habitat shall be designated, to the maximum extent prudent and determinable, for any species determined to be an endangered or threatened species under the Act. Designations and revisions of critical habitat can only be completed by issuing a rule. Elsewhere in today’s Federal Register, we propose to list Physaria globosa (Short’s bladderpod), Helianthus verticillatus (whorled sunflower), and Leavenworthia crassa (fleshy-fruit gladecress) as endangered species under the Act. This rule consists of a proposed critical habitat designation for Physaria globosa (Short’s bladderpod), Helianthus verticillatus (whorled sunflower), and Leavenworthia crassa (fleshy-fruit gladecress) under the Act. The basis for our action. Under the Act, to the maximum extent prudent and determinable, we must designate critical habitat for a species concurrently with listing the species as endangered or threatened. These three plant species are proposed for listing as PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 endangered, and therefore we also propose to: • Designate approximately 373 hectares (ha) (925.5 acres (ac)) of critical habitat for Short’s bladderpod in Posey County, Indiana; Clark, Franklin, and Woodford Counties, Kentucky; and Cheatham, Davidson, Dickson, Jackson, Montgomery, Smith, and Trousdale Counties, Tennessee. • Designate approximately 624 ha (1,542 ac) of critical habitat for whorled sunflower in Cherokee County, Alabama; Floyd County, Georgia; and Madison and McNairy Counties, Tennessee. • Designate approximately 8.4 ha (20.5 ac) of critical habitat for fleshyfruit gladecress in Lawrence and Morgan Counties, Alabama. We will seek peer review. We are seeking comments from independent specialists to ensure that our critical habitat proposal is based on scientifically sound data and analyses. We have invited these peer reviewers to comment on our specific assumptions and conclusions in this critical habitat proposal. Because we will consider all comments and information we receive during the comment period, our final determinations may differ from this proposal. 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 other concerned government agencies, the scientific community, industry, or any other interested party concerning this proposed rule. We particularly seek comments concerning: (1) The reasons why we should or should not designate habitat as ‘‘critical habitat’’ under section 4 of the Act including whether there are threats to the species from human activity, the degree of which can be expected to increase due to the designation, and whether that increase in threat outweighs the benefit of designation such that the designation of critical habitat may not be prudent. (2) Specific information on: (a) The amount and distribution of Short’s bladderpod, whorled sunflower, or fleshy-fruit gladecress habitat; (b) What areas, that were occupied at the time of listing (or are currently occupied) and that contain features essential to the conservation of the species, should be included in the designation and why; E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules (c) Special management considerations or protection that may be needed in critical habitat areas we are proposing, including managing for the potential effects of climate change; and (d) What areas not occupied at the time of listing are essential for the conservation of the species and why. (3) Land use designations and current or planned activities in the subject areas and their possible impacts on proposed critical habitat. (4) Information on the projected and reasonably likely impacts of climate change on Short’s bladderpod, whorled sunflower, fleshy-fruit gladecress, and proposed critical habitat. (5) Any probable economic, national security, or other relevant impacts of designating any area that may be included in the final designation; in particular, we seek information on any impacts on small entities or families, and the benefits of including or excluding areas that exhibit these impacts. (6) Whether any specific areas we are proposing for critical habitat designation should be considered for exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, and whether the benefits of potentially excluding any specific area outweigh the benefits of including that area under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. (7) Whether we could improve or modify our approach to designating critical habitat in any way to provide for greater public participation and understanding, or to better accommodate public concerns and comments. You may submit your comments and materials concerning this proposed rule by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. We request that you send comments only by the methods described in the ADDRESSES section. We will post your entire comment— including your personal identifying information—on https:// www.regulations.gov. You may request at the top of your document that we withhold personal information such as your street address, phone number, or email address from public review; however, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting documentation we used in preparing this proposed rule, will be available for public inspection on https://www.regulations.gov, or by appointment, during normal business hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Tennessee Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 Previous Federal Actions All previous Federal actions are described in the proposed rule to list Short’s bladderpod, whorled sunflower, and fleshy-fruit gladecress as endangered species under the Act, published elsewhere in today’s Federal Register. Background It is our intent to discuss below only those topics directly relevant to the designation of critical habitat for Short’s bladderpod, whorled sunflower, and the fleshy-fruit gladecress. For information related to the listing of these species, see the proposed rule to list these species as endangered, published elsewhere in today’s Federal Register. Critical Habitat Background Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the Act as: (1) The specific areas within the geographic 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, live trapping, and transplantation, and, in the extraordinary case where population pressures within a given ecosystem cannot be otherwise relieved, may include regulated taking. Critical habitat receives protection under section 7 of the Act through the requirement that Federal agencies 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 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 47061 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 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. Under the first prong of the Act’s definition of critical habitat, areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it was listed are included in a critical habitat designation if they contain physical or biological features (1) which are essential to the conservation of the species and (2) which may require special management considerations or protection. For these areas, critical habitat designations identify, to the extent known using the best scientific and commercial data available, those physical or biological features that are essential to the conservation of the species (such as space, food, cover, and protected habitat). In identifying those physical and biological features within an area, we focus on the principal biological or physical constituent elements (primary constituent elements such as roost sites, nesting grounds, seasonal wetlands, water quality, tide, soil type) that are essential to the conservation of the species. Primary constituent elements are those specific elements of the physical or biological features that provide for a species’ lifehistory processes and are essential to the conservation of the species. Under the second prong of the Act’s definition of critical habitat, we can designate critical habitat in areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is listed, upon a determination that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species. For example, an area currently occupied by the species but that was not occupied at the time of listing may be essential to the conservation of the species and may be included in the critical habitat designation. We designate critical habitat in areas outside the geographical area occupied by a species only when a designation E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 47062 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules limited to its range would be inadequate to ensure the conservation of the species. Section 4 of the Act requires that we designate critical habitat on the basis of the best scientific data available. Further, our Policy on Information Standards Under the Act (published in the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271)), the Information Quality Act (section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106–554; H.R. 5658)), and our associated Information Quality Guidelines, provide criteria, establish procedures, and provide guidance to ensure that our decisions are based on the best scientific data available. They require our biologists, to the extent consistent with the Act and with the use of the best scientific data available, to use primary and original sources of information as the basis for recommendations to designate critical habitat. When we are determining which areas should be designated as critical habitat, our primary source of information is generally the information developed during the listing process for the species. Additional information sources may include the recovery plan for the species, articles in peer-reviewed journals, conservation plans developed by States and counties, scientific status surveys and studies, biological assessments, other unpublished materials, or experts’ opinions or personal knowledge. Habitat is dynamic, and species may move from one area to another over time. Climate change will be a particular challenge for biodiversity because the interaction of additional stressors associated with climate change and current stressors may push species beyond their ability to survive (Lovejoy 2005, pp. 325–326). The synergistic implications of climate change and habitat fragmentation are the most threatening facet of climate change for biodiversity (Hannah and Lovejoy 2005, p. 4). Current climate change predictions for terrestrial areas in the Northern Hemisphere indicate warmer air temperatures, more intense precipitation events, and increased summer continental drying (Field et al. 1999, pp. 1–3; Hayhoe et al. 2004, p. 12422; Cayan et al. 2005, p. 6; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2007, p. 1181). Climate change may lead to increased frequency and duration of severe storms and droughts (Golladay et al. 2004, p. 504; McLaughlin et al. 2002, p. 6074; Cook et al. 2004, p. 1015). We recognize that critical habitat designated at a particular point in time VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 may not include all of the habitat areas that we may later determine are necessary for the recovery of the species. For these reasons, a critical habitat designation does not signal that habitat outside the designated area is unimportant or may not be needed for recovery of the species. Areas that are important to the conservation of the species, both inside and outside the critical habitat designation, will continue to be subject to: (1) Conservation actions implemented under section 7(a)(1) of the Act, (2) regulatory protections afforded by the requirement in section 7(a)(2) of the Act for Federal agencies to ensure their actions are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species, and (3) section 9 of the Act’s prohibitions on taking any individual of the species, including taking caused by actions that affect habitat. Federally funded or permitted projects affecting listed species outside their designated critical habitat areas may still result in jeopardy findings in some cases. These protections and conservation tools will continue to contribute to recovery of this species. Similarly, critical habitat designations made on the basis of the best available information at the time of designation will not control the direction and substance of future recovery plans, habitat conservation plans (HCPs), or other species conservation planning efforts if new information available at the time of these planning efforts calls for a different outcome. Prudency 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 shall designate critical habitat at the time the species is determined to be an endangered or threatened species. 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, collection, 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. There is currently no imminent threat of take attributed to collection or vandalism for any of these species (see the Factor B analysis in the proposed listing rule, published elsewhere in today’s Federal Register), and identification and mapping of critical habitat is not expected to initiate any PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 such threat. In the absence of finding that the designation of critical habitat would increase threats to a species, if there are any benefits to a critical habitat designation, then a prudent finding is warranted. Here, the potential benefits of designation include: (1) Triggering consultation under section 7 of the Act, in new areas for actions in which there may be a Federal nexus where it would not otherwise occur because, for example, it is or has become unoccupied or the occupancy is in question; (2) focusing conservation activities on the most essential features and areas; (3) providing educational benefits to State or county governments or private entities; and (4) preventing people from causing inadvertent harm to the species. Therefore, because we have determined that the designation of critical habitat will not likely increase the degree of threat to the species and may provide some measure of benefit, we find that designation of critical habitat is prudent for Short’s bladderpod, whorled sunflower, and fleshy-fruit gladecress. Critical Habitat Determinability Having determined that designation is prudent, under section 4(a)(3) of the Act we must find whether critical habitat for the three species is determinable. Our regulations at 50 CFR 424.12(a)(2) state that critical habitat is not determinable when one or both of the following situations exist: (i) Information sufficient to perform required analyses of the impacts of the designation is lacking, or (ii) The biological needs of the species are not sufficiently well known to permit identification of an area as critical habitat. We reviewed the available information pertaining to the biological needs of the species and habitat characteristics where these species are located. This and other information represent the best scientific data available and have led us to conclude that the designation of critical habitat is determinable for Short’s bladderpod, whorled sunflower, and fleshy-fruit gladecress. Physical or Biological Features In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) and 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act and regulations at 50 CFR 424.12, in determining which areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time of listing to designate as critical habitat, we consider the physical or biological features that are essential to the conservation of the species and which may require special management E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 considerations or protection. These include, but are not limited to: (1) Space for individual and population growth and for normal behavior; (2) Food, water, air, light, minerals, or other nutritional or physiological requirements; (3) Cover or shelter; (4) Sites for breeding, reproduction, or rearing (or development) of offspring; and (5) Habitats that are protected from disturbance or are representative of the historic geographical and ecological distributions of a species. We derive the specific physical or biological features required for Short’s bladderpod, whorled sunflower, and fleshy-fruit gladecress from studies of these species’ habitats, ecology, and life history as described below. Space for Individual and Population Growth and for Normal Behavior Short’s bladderpod. This species occurs in Kentucky and Tennessee on soils and outcrops of calcareous geologic formations along the mainstem or tributaries of the Kentucky and Cumberland Rivers, respectively. The calcareous bedrock formations on which Short’s bladderpod primarily is found are limestones of Mississippian, Silurian, or Ordivician age, with siltstone or shale interbedded at some occurrences (Kentucky Geological Survey, https://www.arcgis.com/home/ item.html?id=d32dc6edbf9 245cdbac3fd7e255d3974; Moore et al. 1967; Wilson 1972, 1975, 1979; Wilson et al. 1972, 1980; Marsh et al. 1973; Finlayson et al. 1980; Kerrigan and Wilson 2002). Soils where Short’s bladderpod occurs in the Kentucky and Cumberland River drainages have formed from weathering of the underlying calcareous bedrock formations, producing shallow or rocky, well-drained soils in which bedrock outcrops are common (USDA 1975, pp. 12–17; USDA 1981, pp. 46–47; USDA 1985, p. 64; USDA 2001, pp. 19–20, 28, 59, 64; USDA 2004a, pp. 22–23, 36–37, 83, 87; USDA 2004b, pp. 21, 75, 82). The species inhabits these outcrops and soils where they occur on steeply sloped bluffs or hillsides, primarily with a south- to west-facing aspect (Shea 1993, p. 16). The combination of calcareous outcrops and shallow soils, steep slopes, and hot and dry conditions present on south- to west-facing slopes regulates the encroachment of herbaceous and woody species that exclude Short’s bladderpod from vegetation communities present on more mesic sites. Where these conditions occur near the mainstem and tributaries of the VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 Kentucky River in Kentucky and Cumberland River in Tennessee, they provide space for Short’s bladderpod’s individual and population growth. Therefore, based on the above information, we identify steeply sloped hillsides or bluffs with calcareous outcrops or shallow or rocky, welldrained soils, typically on south- to west-facing aspects as an essential physical or biological feature for this species. Whorled sunflower. This species occurs in remnant prairie habitats found in uplands and swales of headwater streams in the Coosa River watershed in Georgia and Alabama and in the East Fork Forked Deer and Tuscumbia Rivers’ watersheds in Tennessee. The soil types are silt loams, silty clay loams, and fine sandy loams at the sites where whorled sunflower occurs. These soils share the characteristics of being strongly to extremely acidic and having low to moderate natural fertility and low to medium organic matter content (USDA 1997, pp. 73–76; USDA 1978a, pp. 24–54; USDA 1978b, p. 20; USDA 1978c, p. 44). The silt loams occupy various land forms ranging from broad upland ridges to low stream terraces. These soils formed from weathered limestone or shale (USDA 1978a, pp. 24–54) or in alluvium (clay, silt, sand, gravel, or similar material deposited by running water) derived from loess (predominantly silt-sized sediment, which is formed by the accumulation of wind-blown dust) and are moderately well-drained to well-drained. The silty clay loams formed in alluvium or weathered limestone on floodplains, stream terraces, or upland depressions and are poorly drained. The fine sandy loams are on floodplains and are occasionally flooded during winter and early spring. Where these physical features occur within the headwaters of the Coosa River in Alabama and Georgia and the East Fork Forked Deer and Tuscumbia Rivers in Tennessee, they provide space for the whorled sunflower’s individual and population growth. Therefore, based on the information above, we identify silt loam, silty clay loam, or fine sandy loam soils on land forms including broad uplands, depressions, stream terraces, and floodplains as an essential physical or biological feature for this species. Fleshy-fruit gladecress. This species is endemic to glade communities associated with limestone outcrops in Lawrence and Morgan Counties, Alabama (Rollins 1963). The terms glade and cedar glades refer to shallow-soiled, open areas that are dominated by herbaceous plants and characterized by PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 47063 exposed sheets of limestone or gravel, with Juniperus virginiana (eastern red cedar) frequently occurring in the deeper soils along their edges (Hilton 1997, p. 1; Baskin et al. 1986, p. 138; Baskin and Baskin 1985, p. 1). Much of the cedar glade habitat in northern Alabama is in a degraded condition, and populations of fleshy-fruit gladecress, in many cases, persist in glade-like remnants exhibiting various degrees of disturbance including pastures, roadside rights-of-way, and cultivated or plowed fields (Hilton 1997, p. 5). The limestone outcrops, gravel, and shallow soils present in cedar glades and gladelike remnants provide space for individual and population growth of fleshy-fruit gladecress by regulating the encroachment of herbaceous and woody vegetation that would exclude fleshyfruit gladecress from plant communities found on deeper soils. Therefore, based on the information above, we identify shallow-soiled, open areas with exposed limestone bedrock or gravel that are dominated by herbaceous plants as an essential physical or biological feature for this species. Food, Water, Air, Light, Minerals, or Other Nutritional or Physiological Requirements Short’s bladderpod. Within the physical settings described above and the atypical physical setting where the species occurs in Indiana, the most vigorous (Shea 1992, p. 24) and stable (TDEC 20098, p. 1) Short’s bladderpod occurrences are found in patches within forested sites where the canopy has remained relatively open over time. Overstory shading has been implicated as a factor contributing to the disappearance of Short’s bladderpod from four historically occupied sites and has been identified as a limiting factor at nearly one-fifth of remaining extant occurrences. Competition or shading from invasive, nonnative, herbaceous and shrub species is a documented threat to one-third of the extant Short’s bladderpod occurrences. Therefore, based on the information above, we identify forest communities with low levels of canopy closure or openings in the canopy, in which invasive, nonnative plants are absent or are present at sufficiently low levels of abundance that would not inhibit growth or reproduction of Short’s bladderpod plants, to be an essential physical or biological feature for this species. Whorled sunflower. This species is found in moist, prairie-like remnants, which in a more natural condition exist as openings in woodlands and along E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 47064 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules adjacent creeks. Today, these conditions are most often found in small remnant patches or old field habitats adjacent to roadsides, railroad rights-of-way, and streams bordered by agricultural lands. Whorled sunflower grows most vigorously where there is little to no forest canopy cover, plants receive full sunlight for most of the day (Schotz 2011, p. 5) and herbaceous species that are characteristic of moist-site prairie vegetation are found. Dominant grasses include Schizachyrium scoparium (little bluestem), Sorghastrum nutans (Indian grass), Andropogon gerardii (big bluestem), and Panicum virgatum (switch grass). Other common herbaceous associates include Bidens bipinnata (Spanish needles), Carex cherokeensis (Cherokee sedge), Hypericum sphaerocarpum (roundseed St. Johnswort), Helianthus angustifolius (swamp sunflower), Helenium autumnale (common sneezeweed), Lobelia cardinalis (cardinal flower), Pycnanthemum virginianum (Virginia mountainmint), Physostegia virginiana (obedient plant), Saccharum giganteum (sugarcane plumegrass), Silphium terebinthinaceum (prairie rosinweed), Sporobolus heterolepis (prairie dropseed), Symphyotrichum novaeangliae (New England aster), (Tennessee Division of Natural Areas 2008, p. 5; Matthews et al. 2002, p. 23; Schotz 2001, p. 3). Encroachment by woody vegetation is a threat to whorled sunflower populations when left unmanaged in old fields, transportation rights-of-way, and borders of agricultural field, as well as in densely shaded silvicultural plantations or forested sites. To prevent excessive shading or competition, these sites should be subjected to periodic disturbance or management to reduce or minimize encroachment of woody vegetation where a forest canopy is not present, or to provide low levels of canopy and midstory closure where they occur in woodlands. Therefore, based on the information above, we identify sites in old fields, woodlands, and along streams, which receive full or partial sunlight for most of the day and where vegetation characteristics of moist prairie communities is present, to be an essential physical or biological feature for this species. Fleshy-fruit gladecress. In Morgan, Lawrence, Franklin and Colbert Counties in northwestern Alabama, glades occur in association with outcrops of Bangor Limestone, typically as level areas with exposed sheets of limestone or limestone gravel interspersed with fingers of cedarhardwood vegetation. The Bangor Limestone is often near the soil surface, and can be seen in rocky cultivated fields and as small outcroppings at the base of low-lying forested hills (Hilton 1997). All species within the small genus Leavenworthia are adapted to the unique physical characteristics of glade habitats, perhaps the most important of these being a combination of shallow soil depth and the resulting tendency to maintain temporary high moisture content at or very near the surface (Rollins 1963, pp. 4–6). Typically, only a few centimeters of soil overlie the bedrock, or, in spots, the soil may be almost lacking and the surface barren. The glade habitats that support all Leavenworthia species are extremely wet during the late winter and early spring and become extremely dry in summer (Rollins 1963, p. 5). These glades can vary in size from as small as a few meters to larger than 1 square kilometer (km2) (0.37 square miles (mi2)) and are characterized as having an open, sunny aspect (lacking canopy) (Quarterman 1950, p. 1; Rollins 1963, p. 5). Fleshy-fruit gladecress populations are restricted to well-lighted portions of limestone outcroppings. Baskin and Baskin (1988, p. 837) indicated that a high light requirement was common among the endemic plants of rock outcrop plant communities in the unglaciated eastern United States. This obligate need for high light has been supported by field observations showing that these eastern outcrop endemics, such as fleshy-fruit gladecress, grow on well-lighted portion of the outcrops but not in adjacent shaded forests; photosynthesize best in full sun, with a reduction in the presence of heavy shading; and compete poorly with plants that shade them (Baskin and Baskin 1988, p. 837). The most vigorous populations of fleshy-fruit gladecress are located in areas which receive full, or near full, sunlight at the canopy level, and have limited herbaceous competition (Hilton 1997, p. 5). Under these conditions, herbaceous species commonly found in glades in association with fleshy-fruit gladecress are listed in Table 1. Shading and competition are potential threats at the two largest populations of fleshy-fruit gladecress (Hilton 1997, p. 68). Nonnative plants including Ligustrum vulgare (common privet) and Lonicera maackii (bush honeysuckle) are a significant threat in many glades due to the ever present disturbances that allow for their colonization (Hilton 1997, p. 68). TABLE 1—CHARACTERISTIC FLORA OF CEDAR GLADE HABITAT Scientific name Common name emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Primary Characteristic Herbs Astragalus tennesseensis ......................................................................... Leavenworthia alabamica ......................................................................... Leavenworthia uniflora ............................................................................. Petalostemum spp. ................................................................................... Delphinium tricorne ................................................................................... Arabis laevigata ........................................................................................ Schoenolirion croceum ............................................................................. Scutellaria parvula .................................................................................... Tennessee milkvetch. Alabama gladecress. Michaux’s gladecress. Prairie clover. Dwarf larkspur. Smooth rockcress. Yellow sunnybell. Small skullcap. Frequent Woody Species Juniperus virginiana .................................................................................. Therefore, based on the information above, we identify open, sunny exposures of limestone outcrops of the VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 Eastern red cedar. Bangor formation within glade plant communities that are characterized by the species listed in Table 1 and have PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 relatively thin, rocky soils that are classified within the Colbert or Talbot soils mapping units as an essential E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 physical or biological feature for this species. Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, or Rearing (or Development) of Offspring Short’s bladderpod. This species likely is self-incompatible, and nearly 50 percent of extant occurrences are threatened with adverse effects associated with small populations including loss of genetic variation, inbreeding depression, and reduced availability of compatible mates. For this reason, it is essential that habitat for pollinators be conserved in close proximity to known occurrences to increase the likelihood of pollen exchange among compatible mates. Where possible, habitat patches should be protected that would reduce fragmentation between multiple occurrences among which pollinator dispersal could facilitate gene flow. Pollinators specific to Short’s bladderpod have not been studied. Bees from the families Halictidae, Apidae, and Andrenidae were found to be the most common pollinators visiting four other species in the genus Physaria, and flies from the families Syrphidae, Tachinidae, and Conopidae also carried Physaria pollen (Edens-Meier et al. 2011, p. 293; Tepedino et al. 2012, pp. 143–145). In their study of pollinators of three species of Physaria, Tepedino et al. (2012, p. 144) estimated that maximum flight distance ranged from 100 m (330 ft) to 1.4 km (0.9 mi) for Andrenids and 40 to 100 m (130 to 330 ft) for Halictid bees. Because native, ground-nesting bees in the Andrenidae and Halictidae were the most reliable visitors and pollinators of the Physaria species they studied, Tepedino et al. (2012, p. 145) recommended avoiding physical disruption of the soil nesting substrate and its drainage patterns in sites harboring bee nests. Short’s bladderpod is thought to form soil seed banks (Dr. Carol Baskin, Professor, University of Kentucky, pers. comm., December 2012), and persistence of populations likely is dependent on formation and maintenance of this pool of dormant individuals. Sites where the species occurs should not be subjected to activities that would remove the soil seed bank. Moderate soil disturbance, however, could promote germination from the seed bank in locations where overstory shading and competition from herbaceous and shrub species have caused population declines. Positive responses have been observed following removal of competing vegetation and soil disturbance associated with grading of the roadside at the site where Short’s bladderpod occurs in Indiana. VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 Therefore, based on the information above, we identify reproduction sites containing extant occurrences of the species within habitat patches providing suitable pollinator habitat, and in which surface features and bladderpod seedbed are not subjected to heavy disturbance, to be an essential physical or biological feature for this species. Whorled sunflower. This species is self-incompatible, and the lack of compatible mates has been suggested as a possible cause of reduced achene production in one population (Ellis et al. 2009, p. 1840). Degraded habitat conditions also contribute to poor individual growth and reproductive output in whorled sunflower. Where woody vegetation encroaches on whorled sunflower populations, growth and flower production are reduced. While the species can produce new stems via shoot generation from rhizomes, the production of genetically distinct individuals needed to support population growth and maintain genetic variation within the species is dependent on flowering and outcrossing of compatible mates and production of viable achenes. Therefore, based on the information above, we identify the presence of compatible mates in sites which receive full or partial sunlight for most of the day to be an essential physical or biological feature for this species. Fleshy-fruit gladecress. Glades where fleshy-fruit gladecress grows have very shallow soils overlying horizontally bedded limestone. Precipitation tends to be very seasonal within the species’ geographic range, with wet weather concentrated in the winter and early spring and summer (Lyons and Antonovics 1991). Fleshy-fruit gladecress is an annual species, the seeds of which germinate in the fall, overwinter as rosettes, and commence a month-long flowering period beginning in mid-March. The first seeds mature in late April, and during most years, the plants dry and drop all of their seeds by the end of May. Leavenworthia species are dormant by early summer, helping them to survive the dry period as seed; this dormancy is likely one of the major evolutionary adaptations in this genus enabling its species to endure the extreme drought conditions of late summer (Quarterman 1950, p. 5). As an annual, this species’ long-term survival is dependent upon its ability to reproduce and reseed an area every year. Thus, populations decline and move toward extinction if conditions remain unsuitable for reproduction for many consecutive years. PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 47065 The most vigorous populations of fleshy-fruit gladecress are located in areas which receive full, or near full, sunlight at the canopy level and have limited herbaceous competition (Hilton 1997). Rollins (1963) documented the loss of fleshy-fruit gladecress individuals caused by invading weedy species in fallow agricultural fields in northern Alabama. Under natural conditions, glades are edaphically (related to or caused by particular soil conditions) maintained through processes of drought and erosion interacting with other processes that disrupt encroachment of competing vegetation. The shallow soil, exposed rock, and frequently hot, dry summers create xeric conditions that regulate competition and shading from encroaching vegetation (Hilton 1997, p. 5; McDaniel and Lyons 1987, p. 6; Baskin et al. 1986, p. 138; Rollins 1963, p. 5). Therefore, based on this information, we identify the presence of shallow soil and exposed rock that discourage competition and shading from encroaching vegetation to be an essential physical or biological feature for this species. Primary Constituent Elements Under the Act and its implementing regulations, we are required to identify the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of Short’s bladderpod, whorled sunflower, and fleshy-fruit gladecress in areas occupied at the time of listing, focusing on the features’ primary constituent elements (PCEs). We consider PCEs to be those specific elements of the physical or biological features and habitat characteristics required to sustain the species’ life-history processes and are essential to the conservation of the species. Based on our current knowledge of the physical or biological features and habitat characteristics required to sustain the species’ life-history processes, we determine that the PCEs described below are specific to these three plants. Short’s Bladderpod (1) PCE 1—Bedrock formations and outcrops of calcareous limestone, sometimes with interbedded shale or siltstone, in close proximity to the mainstem or tributaries of the Kentucky and Cumberland rivers. These outcrop sites or areas of suitable bedrock geology should be located on steeply sloped hillsides or bluffs, typically on south- to west-facing aspects. (2) PCE 2—Shallow or rocky, welldrained soils formed from the E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 47066 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules weathering of underlying calcareous bedrock formations, which are undisturbed or subjected to minimal disturbance, so as to retain habitat for ground-nesting pollinators and potential for maintenance of a soil seed bank. (3) PCE 3—Forest communities with low levels of canopy closure or openings in the canopy to provide adequate sunlight for individual and population growth. Invasive, nonnative plants must be absent or present in sufficiently low numbers to not inhibit growth or reproduction of Short’s bladderpod. Whorled Sunflower (1) PCE 1—Silt loam, silty clay loam, or fine sandy loam soils on land forms including broad uplands, depressions, stream terraces, and floodplains within the headwaters of the Coosa River in Alabama and Georgia and the East Fork Forked Deer and Tuscumbia rivers in Tennessee. (2) PCE 2—Sites in which forest canopy is absent, or where woody vegetation is present at sufficiently low densities to provide full or partial sunlight to whorled sunflower plants for most of the day, and which support vegetation characteristic of moist prairie communities. Invasive, nonnative plants must be absent or present in sufficiently low numbers to not inhibit growth or reproduction of whorled sunflower. (3) PCE 3—Occupied sites in which a sufficient number of compatible mates are present for outcrossing and production of viable achenes to occur. emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Fleshy-fruit Gladecress (1) PCE 1—Shallow-soiled, open areas with exposed limestone bedrock or gravel that are dominated by herbaceous vegetation characteristic of glade communities. (2) PCE 2—Open or well-lighted areas of exposed limestone bedrock or gravel that ensure fleshy-fruit gladecress plants remain unshaded for a significant portion of the day. (3) PCE 3—Glade habitat that is protected from both native and invasive, nonnative plants to minimize competition and shading of fleshy-fruit gladecress. Special Management Considerations or Protection When designating critical habitat, we assess whether the specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time of listing contain physical and biological features which are essential to the conservation of the species and which may require special management considerations or protection. We believe each unit VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 included in these designations requires special management and protections. Short’s Bladderpod The features essential to the conservation of Short’s bladderpod may require special management considerations or protection to reduce the following threats: (1) Actions that would directly result in removal of soils or indirectly cause their loss due to increased rates of erosion; (2) building, paving, or grazing of livestock within or upslope of Short’s bladderpod sites that alters water movement or causes soil erosion that results in sediment deposition in suitable habitat; (3) blasting or removal of hard rock and soil substrates; (4) dumping of trash and debris; (5) prolonged inundation of sites due to manipulation of regulated waters for flood control or other purposes; (6) indiscriminate maintenance of transportation rights-of-way, including grading, mowing, or herbicide application; and (8) shading and competition due to forest canopy closure and encroachment of invasive, nonnative plants. Management activities that could ameliorate these threats include, but are not limited to: (1) Avoiding areas located in or upslope of Short’s bladderpod sites when planning for location of commercial or residential development; maintenance, construction, or expansion of utility and transportation infrastructure; and access for livestock; (2) removing trash and debris that are dumped onto or upslope of Short’s bladderpod sites; (3) locating suitable habitat, determining presence or absence of Short’s bladderpod, and protecting or restoring as many sites or complexes of sites as possible; (4) evaluating the effects of flow regulation on Short’s bladderpod occurrences within the fluctuation zone of regulated river reaches and adjusting management to avoid or minimize prolonged periods of inundation; (5) reaching out to all landowners, including private, State, and Federal landowners, to raise awareness of the plant and its habitat; (5) providing technical or financial assistance to landowners to help in the design and implementation of management actions that protect the plant and its habitat; (6) managing, including reducing, canopy cover and competition from native and invasive, nonnative plants to maintain an intact native forest community with canopy openings or low levels of canopy closure. Whorled Sunflower The features essential to the conservation of whorled sunflower may PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 require special management considerations or protection to reduce the following threats: (1) Soil disturbance due to silvicultural site preparation, timber harvest, or cultivation of row crops; (2) indiscriminate herbicide use or mowing; (3) conversion of remnant prairie habitat to agricultural or industrial forestry uses; and (4) excessive shading or competition from native woody species or invasive, nonnative plants. Management activities that could ameliorate these threats include, but are not limited to: (1) Avoiding areas located in close proximity to whorled sunflower sites when planning for establishing new sites for agriculture or pulpwood and timber production; (2) ensuring that herbicide use or mowing does not occur in whorled sunflower sites during the species’ growing season; (3) locating suitable habitat, determining presence or absence of whorled sunflower, and protecting or restoring as many sites or complexes of sites as possible; (4) managing, including prescribed burning, mowing, and bushhogging, to reduce canopy cover, minimize competition from native and invasive, nonnative plants, and maintain characteristic moist prairie vegetation; (5) reaching out to all landowners, including private, State, and Federal landowners, to raise awareness of the plant and its habitat; and (6) providing technical or financial assistance to landowners to help in the design and implementation of management actions that protect the plant and its habitat. Fleshy-Fruit Gladecress The features essential to the conservation of fleshy-fruit gladecress may require special management considerations or protection to reduce the following threats: (1) Actions that remove the soils and alter the surface geology of the glades; (2) building or paving over the glades; (3) construction or excavation up slope that alters water movement (sheet flow or seepage) down slope to gladecress sites; (4) planting trees adjacent to the edges of an outcrop resulting in shading of the glade and accumulations of leaf litter and tree debris; (5) encroachment by nonnative and native invading trees, shrubs, and vines that shade the glade; (6) the use and timing of application of certain herbicides that can harm gladecress seedlings; and (7) access by cattle to gladecress sites where habitat and plants may be trampled. Management activities that could ameliorate these threats include (but are not limited to): (1) Avoiding limestone glades when planning development, E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules conversion to agriculture, and other disturbances to glade complexes; (2) avoiding above-ground construction and/or excavations in locations that would interfere with natural water movement to gladecress habitat sites; (3) locating suitable habitat and determining the presence or absence of the species and identifying areas with glade complexes and protecting or restoring as many complexes as possible; (4) reaching out to all landowners, including private and State landowners, to raise awareness of the plant and its specialized habitat; (5) providing technical or financial assistance to landowners to help in the design and implementation of management actions that protect the plant and its habitat; (6) avoiding pine tree plantings near glades; and (7) managing, including brush removal, to maintain an intact native glade vegetation community. More information on the special management considerations for each critical habitat unit is provided in the individual unit descriptions below. emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Criteria Used To Identify Critical Habitat As required by section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we use the best scientific data available to designate critical habitat. We review available information pertaining to the habitat requirements of the species. In accordance with the Act and its implementing regulation at 50 CFR 424.12(e), we also consider whether designating additional areas outside those occupied at the time of listing is necessary to ensure the conservation of the species. As discussed in more detail below, we are not currently proposing to designate any areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species because occupied areas are sufficient for the conservation of the species, and we have no evidence that these species existed beyond their current geographical ranges in habitat types that are not represented by the critical habitat units we propose below. Below we go into more detail about the criteria used to identify critical habitat for Short’s bladderpod, whorled sunflower, and fleshy-fruit gladecress. Areas Occupied by Short’s Bladderpod For the purpose of proposing critical habitat for Short’s bladderpod, we define the geographical area currently occupied by the species as required by section 3(5)(A)(i) of the Act. We considered those sites to be occupied where (1) Element Occurrence Records from State conservation agencies (INHDC 2012; KNHP 2012; TNHID VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 2012) indicate that the species was extant at the time of proposed listing rule (i.e., is considered currently extant), and (2) we determine that forest communities are present and no evidence of substantial ground disturbance is visible from inspection of aerial photography, available through Google Earth. Areas Not Occupied by Short’s Bladderpod We considered whether there were any specific areas outside the geographical area found to be occupied by Short’s bladderpod that are essential for the conservation of the species as required by section 3(5)(A)(i) of the Act. First, we considered whether there was sufficient area for the conservation of the species within the occupied areas determined above. In doing so, we evaluated whether protection or management of currently occupied sites and nearby suitable habitats would provide adequate representation, redundancy, and resiliency for Short’s bladderpod conservation. The 26 extant occurrences of Short’s bladderpod included in critical habitat units proposed below are distributed among habitats that are representative of those in which the species’ occurred in its historical geographic range and, if conserved, should provide adequate redundancy for the species to endure localized, stochastic disturbances. While populations are small at some of these occurrences, there is sufficient habitat available to support population growth; however, some management might be necessary to improve habitat conditions and population growth rates. Conserving or restoring habitat and viable populations at all occupied sites should provide conditions necessary for successful reproduction and population growth and resiliency for the species to recover from acute demographic effects of localized disturbances. Therefore, no areas outside of the currently occupied geographical areas would be essential for the conservation of the species, and we have not proposed any additional areas. Mapping Short’s Bladderpod Critical Habitat Once we determined the occupied areas, we next delineated proposed critical habitat unit boundaries based on the presence of primary constituent elements. We used data for geology (Kentucky Geological Survey, available online at https://www.arcgis.com/home/ item.html?id=d32dc6edbf9245cdbac3fd 7e255d3974; Moore I. 1967; Wilson 1972, 1975, 1979; Wilson I. 1972, 1980; Marsh I. 1973; Finlayson I. 1980; PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 47067 Kerrigan and Wilson 2002), soils (USDA, Soil Survey Geographic Database, available online at https://soild atamart.nrcs.usda.gov), topographic contours, and locations of sites occupied by Short’s bladderpod (INHDC 2012; KNHP 2012; TNHID 2012) as a basis for delineating units in ArcGIS. Additionally, we used aerial photography available through Google Earth to determine vegetation cover and for three-dimensional viewing of topographic features. We delineated units around occupied sites, with boundaries determined by the combined spatial arrangement of limestone bedrock, sometimes with interbedded shale or siltstone; shallow or rocky, well-drained soils; steeply sloped topography; and forest vegetation. In order to reduce threats from adjacent land uses, we extended unit boundaries from ridge tops or bluff lines above Short’s bladderpod occurrences downslope to either obvious breaks in slope gradient or to the edge of water bodies that form a unit boundary. These units typically include individual occupied sites; however, where appropriate we delineated units so that they encompass more than one occupied site and span intervening areas in which the primary constituent elements are present. We delineated units spanning multiple occupied sites in order to minimize fragmentation and provide areas for pollinator nesting and dispersal to promote gene flow among extant occurrences. Areas Occupied by Whorled Sunflower For the purpose of designating critical habitat for whorled sunflower, we defined the geographical area currently occupied by the species as required by section 3(5)(A)(i) of the Act. We define occupied areas in Georgia and Alabama as those areas where the species was present during site visits by the Service during 2012. The most recent survey data available from TNHID (2012) confirmed the presence of whorled sunflower during 2005 and 2009, at the Madison and McNairy County, Tennessee, populations, respectively. Based on inspection of aerial photography for these locations, available through Google Earth, habitat still is present at these sites and no evidence of substantial ground disturbance was apparent; thus, we consider these sites to still be occupied by whorled sunflower. Areas Not Occupied by Whorled Sunflower We considered whether there were any specific areas outside the geographical area found to be occupied E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 47068 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules by whorled sunflower that are essential for the conservation of the species as required by section 3(5)(A)(i) of the Act. First, we considered whether there was sufficient area for the conservation of the species within the occupied areas determined above. In doing so, we evaluated whether protection or management of currently occupied sites and nearby suitable habitats would provide adequate representation, redundancy, and resiliency for whorled sunflower’s conservation. The four extant populations of whorled sunflower are distributed among habitats that we believe are representative of those in which the species’ occurred in its historical geographic range and, if conserved, should provide adequate redundancy for the species to endure localized, stochastic disturbances. While populations are small at most of these occurrences, there is sufficient habitat available to support population growth; however, management will be necessary to improve habitat conditions and population growth rates. Conserving or restoring habitat and viable populations at all occupied sites should provide conditions necessary for successful reproduction and population growth and resiliency for the species to recover from acute demographic effects of localized disturbances. Therefore, no areas outside of the currently occupied geographical areas would be essential for the conservation of the species, and we have not proposed any additional areas. emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Mapping Whorled Sunflower Critical Habitat Once we determined the occupied areas, we next delineated proposed critical habitat unit boundaries based on the presence of primary constituent elements. We used data for soils (USDA, Soil Survey Geographic Database, available online at https:// soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov) and locations of sites occupied by whorled sunflower as a basis for delineating units in ArcGIS. Additionally, we used aerial photography available through Google Earth to determine vegetation cover and for three-dimensional viewing of topographic features. We delineated units around occupied sites, with boundaries determined by the spatial arrangement of suitable soils (described above in PCE 1 for whorled sunflower) and to provide opportunities for minimizing fragmentation among subpopulations by restoring characteristic prairie vegetation in areas currently used for agricultural or industrial forestry purposes. VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 Areas Occupied by Fleshy-Fruit Gladecress For the purpose of designating critical habitat for fleshy-fruit gladecress, we defined the geographical area currently occupied by the species as required by section 3(5)(A)(i) of the Act. We define occupied areas as those where recent surveys in 2011 confirmed the species was present (Shotz 2012, pers. comm.). Areas Not Occupied by Fleshy-Fruit Gladecress We considered whether there were any specific areas outside the geographical area found to be occupied by the fleshy-fruit gladecress that are essential for the conservation of the species as required by section 3(5)(A)(ii) of the Act. First, we evaluated whether there was sufficient area for the conservation of the species within the occupied areas determined as described above. To guide what would be considered needed for the species’ conservation, we evaluated the six sites where the species is known to occur. Currently occupied sites are distributed across the historical range of the species and are representative of the landscape settings and soil types that have been documented at gladecress occurrences. Five of the six units proposed within occupied areas contain suitable habitat (with special management) for natural expansion of existing populations or possible future augmentation if determined necessary during future recovery planning and implementation. Therefore, no areas outside of the currently occupied geographical areas would be essential for the conservation of the species, and we have not proposed any additional areas. Mapping Fleshy-Fruit Gladecress Critical Habitat Once we determined the occupied areas, we next delineated proposed critical habitat unit boundaries based on the presence of primary constituent elements. We used various GIS layers, soil surveys, aerial photography, and known locations of the extant and historical populations. We used ArcGIS to delineate units around occupied sites, encompassing adjacent areas where the primary constituent elements were present to provide suitable habitat for natural expansion of the populations. The six units in the proposed designation include the species’ entire historical range. All of the units contain the primary constituent elements essential for the conservation of fleshyfruit gladecress. When determining proposed critical habitat boundaries for all three species, PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 we made every effort to avoid including developed areas such as lands covered by buildings, pavement, and other structures because such lands lack physical or biological features necessary for the three plants. The scale of the maps we prepared under the parameters for publication within the Code of Federal Regulations may not reflect the exclusion of such developed lands. Any such lands inadvertently left inside critical habitat boundaries shown on the maps of this proposed rule have been excluded by text in the proposed rule and are not proposed for designation as critical habitat. Therefore, if the critical habitat is finalized as proposed, a Federal action involving these lands would not trigger section 7 consultation with respect to critical habitat and the requirement of no adverse modification unless the specific action would affect the physical or biological features in adjacent critical habitat. We are proposing for designation of critical habitat lands that we have determined are occupied at the time of listing and contain sufficient elements of physical or biological features to support life-history processes essential for the conservation of Short’s bladderpod, whorled sunflower, or fleshy-fruit gladecress. Some units contain all of the identified elements of physical or biological features and support multiple life-history processes. Some units contain only some elements of the physical or biological features necessary to support the use of that particular habitat by Short’s bladderpod, whorled sunflower, or fleshy-fruit gladecress. The critical habitat designation is defined by the map or maps, as modified by any accompanying regulatory text, presented at the end of this document in the Proposed Regulation Promulgation section. We include more detailed information on the boundaries of the critical habitat designation in the preamble of this document. We will make the coordinates or plot points or both on which each map is based available to the public on https:// www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2013–0086, on our Internet site at https://www.fws.gov/ cookeville, and at the field office responsible for the designation (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT above). Proposed Critical Habitat Designation Short’s Bladderpod We are proposing 20 units as critical habitat for Short’s bladderpod. The critical habitat areas we describe below constitute our current best assessment of E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules areas that meet the definition of critical habitat for Short’s bladderpod. All these units are occupied at the time of listing. The areas we propose as critical habitat are: (1) Kings and Queens Bluff, (2) Lock B Road, (3) Jarrel Ridge Road, (4) Cheatham Lake, (5) Harpeth River, (6) 47069 Owenton Road, (17) Little Benson Creek, (18) Boone Creek, (19) Delaney Ferry Road, and (20) Bonebank Road. The approximate area of each proposed critical habitat unit, broken down by land ownership, is shown in Table 20. Montgomery Bell Bridge, (7) Nashville and Western Railroad, (8) River Trace, (9) Old Hickory Lake, (10) ColemanWinston Bridge, (11) Cordell Hull Reservoir, (12) Funns Branch, (13) Wartrace Creek, (14) Camp Pleasant Branch, (15) Kentucky River, (16) TABLE 2—PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS FOR SHORT’S BLADDERPOD Critical habitat unit Private ha (ac) State/local ha (ac) Federal ha (ac) Size of unit ha (ac) 1. Kings and Queens Bluff .............................................................. 2. Lock B Road ................................................................................ 3. Jarrel Ridge Road ....................................................................... 4. Cheatham Lake ........................................................................... 5. Harpeth River .............................................................................. 6. Montgomery Bell Bridge .............................................................. 7. Nashville and Western Railroad .................................................. 8. River Trace .................................................................................. 9. Old Hickory Lake ......................................................................... 10. Coleman-Winston Bridge ........................................................... 11. Cordell Hull Reservoir ............................................................... 12. Funns Branch ............................................................................ 13. Wartrace Creek ......................................................................... 14. Camp Pleasant Branch ............................................................. 15. Kentucky River .......................................................................... 16. Owenton Road ........................................................................... 17. Little Benson Creek ................................................................... 18. Boone Creek .............................................................................. 19. Delaney Ferry Road .................................................................. 20. Bonebank Road ......................................................................... 7.6 (18.9) 10.1 (25.0) 5.2 (12.8) 19.1 (47.2) 8.2 (20.3) 2.1 (5.3) 20.8 (51.4) 42.8 (105.7) 1.9 (4.8) 4.1 (10.1) ............................ ............................ ............................ 17.4 (42.9) 83.7 (206.7) 1.3 (3.3) 9.4 (23.3) 5.0 (12.4) 0.6 (1.4) ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ 3.4 (8.3) ............................ ............................ 8.1 (20.0) ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ 9.4 (23.3) 1.5 (3.7) ............................ ............................ ............................ 1.7 (4.3) * 3.0 (7.3) * 0.3 (0.8) * 0.4 (1.1) 4.9 (12.0) 17.3 (42.8) 9.0 (22.3) 1.5 (3.8) * 5.6 (13.8) 2.9 (7.1) 3.3 (8.1) 12.3 (34.2) 20.8 (51.3) 37.5 (92.6) ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................ 7.6 (18.9) 10.1 (25.0) 5.2 (12.8) 27.3 (67.5) 25.5 (63.1) 11.2 (27.7) 30.5 (75.3) 42.8 (105.7) 4.8 (11.9) 7.4 (18.2) 12.3 (34.2) 20.8 (51.3) 37.5 (92.6) 17.4 (42.9) 93.1 (230.0) 2.8 (7.0) 9.4 (23.3) 5.0 (12.4) 0.6 (1.4) 1.7 (4.3) Total .......................................................................................... 239.3 (591.5) 24.1 (59.6) 118.8 (297.2) 373.0 (925.5) Note: Area sizes may not sum due to rounding. * Indicates U.S. Army Corps of Engineers easements, which are not added to Size of Unit because these lands are included in ha (ac) figure given for the private lands on which easements are held. We present brief descriptions of all units, and reasons why they meet the definition of critical habitat for Short’s bladderpod, below. All of the proposed critical habitat units are currently occupied and, except as specified below, contain all of the primary constituent elements of the physical and biological features essential to the conservation of the species. emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Unit 1: Kings and Queens Bluff Unit 1 consists of 7.6 ha (18.9 ac) of private land, but the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps of Engineers) holds flood easements on approximately 40 percent of this land. This unit is located in Montgomery County, Tennessee, on a bluff on the right descending bank of the Cumberland River within the city limits of Clarksville, approximately 0.16 km (0.10 mi) south of the intersection of State Route 12 (Ashland City Road) and Queens Bluff Way. Beginning approximately 0.28 km (0.18 mi) south of the easternmost intersection of Ashland City Road (US–41a Bypass) and Queens Bluff Road, this unit parallels the Cumberland River in a downstream direction for approximately 1.7 km (1.1 mi). VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 The features essential to the conservation of the species in this unit may require special management considerations or protection to address threats related to erosion or prolonged inundation due to water level manipulation; changes in land use, including residential or commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest vegetation or soils or soil loss due to erosion; and shading and competition due to encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative plants. Unit 2: Lock B Road Unit 2 consists of 10.1 ha (25.0 ac) of privately owned land, but the Corps of Engineers holds flood easements on approximately 3 percent of this land. This unit is located in Montgomery County, Tennessee, approximately 6.9 km (4.3 mi) south of the city limits of Clarksville, on a hillside that lies to the east and west of Lock B Road North, beginning approximately 0.8 km (0.5 mi) south of its junction with Gholson Road and continuing south for approximately 0.4 km (0.25 mi), at which point Lock B Road North veers to the southwest. From this point, this unit continues south for approximately 1.0 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 km (0.6 mi) along the hillside that is east of Lock B Road North. The features essential to the conservation of the species in this unit may require special management considerations or protection to address threats related to potential right-of-way construction or maintenance using herbicides or mechanized equipment along Lock B Road North or the Illinois Central Railroad, both of which traverse portions of the unit, and shading or competition due to encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative plants. Unit 3: Jarrel Ridge Road Unit 3 consists of 5.2 ha (12.8 ac) of privately owned lands, but the Corps of Engineers holds flood easements on approximately 8 percent of this land. This unit is located in Montgomery County, Tennessee, approximately 10 km south of the city limit of Clarksville, on a hillside that lies west and north of the southern terminus of Jarrel Ridge Road. The features essential to the conservation of the species in this unit may require special management considerations or protection to address threats related to erosion or prolonged E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 47070 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules inundation due to water level manipulation; changes in land use, including residential or commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest vegetation or soils or soil loss due to erosion; potential rightof-way construction or maintenance using herbicides or mechanized equipment along Jarrel Ridge Road at the unit boundary or the Illinois Central Railroad, which traverses the unit; and shading or competition due to encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative plants. emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Unit 4: Cheatham Lake Unit 4 consists of 27.3 ha (67.5 ac) of privately owned, local government, and federal lands. This unit is located in Cheatham County, Tennessee, approximately 9.0 km (5.6 mi) westnorthwest of the city limits of the town of Ashland City, on a series of hillsides that begins approximately 0.8 km (0.5 mi) northeast of the junction of Beech Grove Road and Cheatham Dam Road and arcs in a southeasterly direction for approximately 2.2 km (1.4 mi). Here, the unit crosses Cheatham Dam Road, and continues for approximately 2.2 km in a southeasterly arc to its eastern boundary on the right descending bank of the Cumberland River, approximately 0.18 km (0.11 mi) south of Kimbrough Road. The land within this unit is approximately 70 percent privately owned, 12 percent owned by Ashland City, and 18 percent owned by the Corps of Engineers. The features essential to the conservation of the species in this unit may require special management considerations or protection to address threats related to erosion or prolonged inundation due to water level manipulation; changes in land use, including residential or commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest vegetation or soils or soil loss due to erosion; potential rightof-way construction or maintenance using herbicides or mechanized equipment along the Illinois Central Railroad, which traverses the unit; and shading or competition due to encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative plants. Unit 5: Harpeth River Unit 5 consists of 25.5 ha (63.1 ac) of privately owned and federal land in Cheatham County, Tennessee. This unit is located approximately 5 km (3.1 mi) west of the city limits of the town of Ashland City, on the west slope of a hillside and associated bluffs that begin on the point of land formed by the confluence of Cumberland and Harpeth rivers and extend upstream along the VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 right descending bank of the Harpeth River, reaching the unit’s southernmost boundary approximately 0.6 km (0.4 mi) east of SR–49, where it crosses the Harpeth River. The land within this unit is approximately 32 percent privately owned, and 68 percent is owned by the Corps of Engineers. The features essential to the conservation of the species in this unit may require special management considerations or protection to address threats related to erosion or prolonged inundation due to water level manipulation; changes in land use, including residential or commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest vegetation or soils or soil loss due to erosion; and shading or competition due to encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative plants. Unit 6: Montgomery Bell Bridge Unit 6 consists of 11.2 ha (27.7 ac) of privately owned and federal land in Cheatham and Dickson Counties, Tennessee. This unit is located approximately 5.5 km (3.4 mi) west of the city limits of the town of Ashland City, on a hillside and bluffs on the left descending bank of the Harpeth River that begin approximately 0.4 km (0.27 mi) east of the Montgomery Bell Bridge, where SR–49 crosses the river and bisects the unit, and parallels the river in an upstream direction for approximately 1.8 km (1.1 mi). The land within this unit is approximately 19 percent privately owned, and 81 percent is owned by the Corps of Engineers. The features essential to the conservation of the species in this unit may require special management considerations or protection to address threats related to erosion or prolonged inundation due to water level manipulation; changes in land use, including residential or commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest vegetation or soils or soil loss due to erosion; and shading or competition due to encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative plants. Unit 7: Nashville and Western Railroad Unit 7 consists of 30.5 ha (75.3 ac) of privately owned, local government, and federal land in Cheatham County, Tennessee. This unit is located along the southwest city limit of the town of Ashland City, on hillsides and bluffs that begin approximately 0.26 km (0.16 mi) east of the confluence of Marrowbone Creek and the Cumberland River and extend upstream on the right descending bank of the Cumberland River for approximately 2.3 km (1.4 mi). Here, the unit continues in a southeasterly direction for PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 approximately 0.9 km (0.5 mi) from the point where the river veers away from the hillside and bluffs. The land within this unit is approximately 68 percent privately owned, 27 percent owned by the Cheatham County Rail Association, and 5 percent owned by the Corps of Engineers. The features essential to the conservation of the species in this unit may require special management considerations or protection to address threats related to erosion or prolonged inundation due to water level manipulation; changes in land use, including residential or commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest vegetation or soils or soil loss due to erosion; potential rightof-way construction or maintenance using herbicides or mechanized equipment along the Nashville and Western Railroad, which traverses the unit; and shading or competition due to encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative plants. Unit 8: River Trace Unit 8 consists of 42.8 ha (105.7 ac) of privately owned land, with the exception of the River Trace road rightof-way. The Corps of Engineers holds flood easements on approximately 13 percent of the lands within the unit. This unit is located in Davidson and Cheatham Counties, Tennessee, on hillsides and bluffs approximately 0.9 km (0.6 mi) southeast of the city limit of the town of Ashland City, beginning at the western extent of River Trace and extending along both sides of this road in a southeasterly direction for a distance of approximately 2.3 km (1.4 mi). Here, the unit leaves River Trace and continues along the hillside and bluffs on the right descending bank of the Cumberland River in an upstream direction for approximately 2.1 km (1.3 mi). The features essential to the conservation of the species in this unit may require special management considerations or protection to address threats related to erosion or prolonged inundation due to water level manipulation; changes in land use, including residential or commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest vegetation or soils or soil loss due to erosion; potential rightof-way construction or maintenance using herbicides or mechanized equipment along River Trace or the Nashville and Western Railroad, both of which traverse the unit; and shading or competition due to encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative plants. E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 47071 Unit 9: Old Hickory Lake Unit 11: Cordell Hull Reservoir Unit 13: Wartrace Creek Unit 9 consists of 4.8 ha (11.9 ac) of privately owned and federal lands in Trousdale County, Tennessee. This unit is located approximately 3.5 km (2.2 mi) west of the southern city limits of the town of Hartsville and 0.5 km (0.3 mi) south of Oldham Road, on a hillside and bluffs on the right descending bank of the Cumberland River. Beginning approximately 0.4 km (0.25 mi) downstream of the mouth of Second Creek, this unit parallels the Cumberland River in a downstream direction for approximately 0.7 km (0.4 mi). The land within this unit is approximately 40 percent privately owned, and 60 percent is owned by the Corps of Engineers. The features essential to the conservation of the species in this unit may require special management considerations or protection to address threats related to erosion or prolonged inundation due to water level manipulation; changes in land use, including residential or commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest vegetation or soils or soil loss due to erosion; and shading or competition due to encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative plants. Unit 11 consists of 12.3 ha (34.2 ac) of federal lands in Smith County, Tennessee. This unit is located approximately 4.3 km (2.7 mi) north of the city limits of the town of Carthage, on hillsides and bluffs on the right descending bank of the Cumberland River. Beginning approximately 2.0 km (1.25 mi) upstream of the Cordell Hull Dam, this unit parallels the river in an upstream direction for approximately 0.6 km (0.4 mi), where it crosses a 0.3km (0.2-mi) expanse of open water, and then continues paralleling the river for a distance of 1.2 km (0.7 mi). All of the land within this unit is owned by the Corps of Engineers, and the open water is not included in the area of the unit reported above. The features essential to the conservation of the species in this unit may require special management considerations or protection to address threats related to erosion or prolonged inundation due to water level manipulation; changes in land use, including residential or commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest vegetation or soils or soil loss due to erosion; and shading or competition due to encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative plants. Unit 13 consists of 37.5 ha (92.6 ac) of federal lands in Jackson County, Tennessee. This unit is located approximately 7.7 km (4.8 mi) west of the city limits of the town of Gainesboro, on hillsides and bluffs on the right descending bank of the Cumberland River. Beginning at the mouth of Indian Creek, this unit parallels the river in a downstream direction for approximately 1.6 km (1.0 mi), where it crosses the mouth of Wartrace Creek, and then continues paralleling the river for a distance of 2.5 km (1.5 mi). All of the land within this unit is owned by the Corps of Engineers, and areas of open water are not included in the area of the unit reported above. The features essential to the conservation of the species in this unit may require special management considerations or protection to address threats related to erosion or prolonged inundation due to water level manipulation; changes in land use, including residential or commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest vegetation or soils or soil loss due to erosion; and shading or competition due to encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative plants. Unit 12: Funns Branch Unit 14: Camp Pleasant Branch Unit 12 consists of 20.8 ha (51.3 ac) of federal lands in Jackson County, Tennessee. This unit is located approximately 12.1 km (7.5 mi) southwest of the city limits of the town of Gainesboro, on hillsides and bluffs on the right descending bank of the Cumberland River. Beginning approximately 0.4 km (0.2) mi upstream of the mouth of Funns Branch, this unit parallels the river in an upstream direction for approximately 1.0 km (0.65 mi) where it crosses a 0.3-km (0.2-mi) expanse of open water, and then continues paralleling the river for a distance of approximately 1.0 km (0.64 mi). All of the land within this unit is owned by the Corps of Engineers, and the open water is not included in the area of the unit reported above. The features essential to the conservation of the species in this unit may require special management considerations or protection to address threats related to erosion or prolonged inundation due to water level manipulation; changes in land use, including residential or commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest vegetation or soils or soil loss due to erosion; and shading or competition due to encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative plants. Unit 14 consists of 17.4 ha (42.9 ac) of privately owned lands in Franklin County, Kentucky. This unit is located approximately 8.3 km (5.8 mi) north of the city limits of Frankfort, on hillsides near Camp Pleasant Branch, a tributary to Elkhorn Creek. Beginning approximately 0.29 km (0.18 mi) west of the intersection of Indian Gap Road and Camp Pleasant Road, the unit begins in a hollow north of Indian Gap Road and extends to the east and north along hillsides above the right descending bank of Camp Pleasant Branch for approximately 0.75 km (0.5 mi) to the intersection of Camp Pleasant Road and Gregory Woods Road. Here the unit crosses Gregory Woods Road and extends north for a distance of approximately 0.58 km (0.36 mi), encompassing the hillside to the east of the road. The features essential to the conservation of the species in this unit may require special management considerations or protection to address threats related to changes in land use, including residential or commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest vegetation or soils or soil loss due to erosion; potential rightof-way construction or maintenance using herbicides or mechanized emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Unit 10: Coleman-Winston Bridge Unit 10 consists of 7.4 ha (18.2 ac) of privately owned and federal lands in Trousdale County, Tennessee. The unit is located at the southern city limit of the town of Hartsville, on a hillside and bluffs overlooking the Cumberland River. Beginning on the right descending bank approximately 0.5 km (0.3 mi) east of SR–141, which bisects the unit where it crosses the Cumberland River at the ColemanWinston Bridge, this unit parallels the river in a downstream direction for approximately 1.1 km (0.7 mi). The land within this unit is approximately 55 percent privately owned, and 45 percent is owned by the Corps of Engineers. The features essential to the conservation of the species in this unit may require special management considerations or protection to address threats related to erosion or prolonged inundation due to water level manipulation; changes in land use, including residential or commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest vegetation or soils or soil loss due to erosion; potential rightof-way construction or maintenance using herbicides or mechanized equipment along SR–141, which bisects the unit; and shading or competition due to encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative plants. VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 47072 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules equipment along Indian Gap Road, Camp Pleasant Road, or Gregory Woods Road, which are adjacent to the unit; and shading or competition due to encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative plants. Unit 15: Kentucky River This unit consists of 93.1 ha (230.0 ac) of privately owned and State land in Franklin County, Kentucky. This unit begins within the northwestern city limit of Frankfort, on a hillside that parallels U.S.-421 on its east side from approximately 0.21 km (0.13 mi) southeast of its junction with Clifty Drive to approximately 0.23 km (0.15 mi) northwest of its junction with U.S.127. Here the unit follows the topography of the hillside as it turns away from the road to the east, leaving the city limits, and then arcs to the northeast, before abruptly turning back in a westerly direction. From this point, the hillside and this unit extend in a westerly direction for approximately 0.7 km (0.4 mi) and then parallel the Kentucky River in a downstream direction in an arc approximately 5.3 km (3.3 mi) in length on its left descending bank, encompassing hillsides in two hollows that extend from the river to the west. Approximately 90 percent of the land in this unit is privately owned, and the Commonwealth of Kentucky owns approximately 10 percent, which is part of a State nature preserve. The features essential to the conservation of the species in this unit may require special management considerations or protection to address threats related to erosion or prolonged inundation due to water level manipulation; changes in land use, including residential or commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest vegetation or soils or soil loss due to erosion; potential rightof-way construction or maintenance using herbicides or mechanized equipment along U.S. -421, where it parallels the unit; and shading or competition due to encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative plants. emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Unit 16: Owenton Road Unit 16 consists of 2.8 ha (7.0 acres) of privately owned and City of Frankfort municipal park lands in Franklin County, Kentucky. The unit is located approximately 0.1 km (0.08 mi) north of the city limits of Frankfort on a hill that is adjacent to and west of U.S.-127 (Owenton Road), approximately 0.6 km (0.4 mi) north of the intersection of U.S.127 and U.S.-421. The land within this unit is approximately 46 percent VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 privately owned, and 54 percent is owned by the City of Frankfort. The features essential to the conservation of the species in this unit may require special management considerations or protection to address threats related to changes in land use, including residential or commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest vegetation or soils or soil loss due to erosion; potential rightof-way construction or maintenance using herbicides or mechanized equipment on U.S.–127; and shading or competition due to encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative plants. Unit 17: Little Benson Creek Unit 17 consists of 9.4 ha (23.3 ac) of privately owned lands in Franklin County, Kentucky, located within the city limits of Frankfort. Beginning approximately 1.1 km (0.7 mi) south of the intersection of Mills Lane and Ninevah Road, this unit lies on a hillside on the east side of Ninevah Road and extends to the south for approximately 0.5 km (0.3 mi), where it crosses Ninevah Road and follows a hillside that parallels Ninevah Road for approximately 1.0 km (0.65 mi) on its west side. The features essential to the conservation of the species in this unit may require special management considerations or protection to address threats related to changes in land use, including residential or commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest vegetation or soils or soil loss due to erosion; potential rightof-way construction or maintenance using herbicides or mechanized equipment on Ninevah Road; and shading or competition due to encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative plants. Unit 18: Boone Creek Unit 18 consists of 5.0 ha (12.4 ac) of privately owned lands in Clark County, Kentucky. This unit is located approximately 13.2 km (8.2 mi) southwest of the city limits of Winchester, and begins adjacent to Grimes Mill Road approximately 0.17 km north of the Fayette and Clark County line. From here, the unit extends on a hillside to the east for a distance of approximately 0.21 km (0.13 mi), where the unit and hillside then parallel a bend in Boone Creek on its left descending bank for a distance of approximately 0.68 km (0.42 mi). The features essential to the conservation of the species in this unit may require special management considerations or protection to address threats related to changes in land use, PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 including residential or commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest vegetation or soils or soil loss due to erosion; potential rightof-way construction or maintenance using herbicides or mechanized equipment on Grimes Road; and shading or competition due to encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative plants. Unit 19: Delaney Ferry Road Unit 19 consists of 0.6 ha (1.4 ac) of privately owned lands in Woodford County, Kentucky. This unit is located approximately 7.8 km (4.8 mi) south of the city of Versailles. Beginning approximately 2.1 km (1.3 mi) east of the intersection of Troy Pike and Delaney Ferry Road, this unit extends approximately 0.08 km (0.05 mi) northeast along Delaney Ferry Road, where the unit boundary turns to the northwest for approximately 0.08 km (0.05 mi). From this northeast corner of the unit, the boundary extends to the southwest approximately 0.05 km (0.03 mi), where it turns to the southeast, paralleling a driveway for 0.05 km (0.03 mi) before turning to the southwest for approximately 0.03 km (0.02 mi). From this point the unit boundary turns to the southeast for approximately 0.05 km (0.03 mi), returning to the starting point. The features essential to the conservation of the species in this unit may require special management considerations or protection to address threats of shading or competition due to encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative plants. The current landowner manages encroaching vegetation to prevent shading and competition where Short’s bladderpod occurs within the unit. Unit 20: Bonebank Road Unit 20 consists of 1.7 ha (4.3 ac) of lands in Posey County, Indiana, which are owned by the Indiana Department Natural Resources. This unit is located approximately 13 km (8.1 mi) southwest of the city limits of Mt. Vernon, beginning at the intersection of Graddy Road and Bonebank Road and paralleling Bonebank Road on its west side for a distance 0.73 km (0.45 mi) north of the intersection. The surface geology at this site—Quaternary glacial outwash—and soils are markedly different from other sites on calcareous geology throughout the rest of the species’ range. However, this site supports an occurrence that has numbered in the hundreds to more than a thousand individuals in the past, and the PCE of forest vegetation with canopy openings (PCE 3) is present at the road edge. E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 47073 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules The feature essential to the conservation of the species in this unit may require special management considerations or protection to address threats of shading or competition due to encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative plants. Whorled Sunflower We are proposing four units as critical habitat for whorled sunflower. The critical habitat areas we describe below constitute our current best assessment of areas that meet the definition of critical habitat for whorled sunflower. All these units are occupied at the time of listing. The four areas we propose as critical habitat are: (1) Mud Creek, (2) Coosa Valley Prairie, (2) Prairie Branch, and (4) Pinson. The approximate area of each proposed critical habitat unit is shown in Table 3. All of the proposed critical habitat units for this species are located entirely on privately owned land. TABLE 3—PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS FOR WHORLED SUNFLOWER. Critical habitat unit 1. 2. 3. 4. County, state Hectares Acres Mud Creek .................................................................... Coosa Valley Prairie ..................................................... Prairie Branch ............................................................... Pinson ........................................................................... Cherokee, Alabama ......................................................... Floyd, Georgia ................................................................. McNairy, Tennessee ........................................................ Madison, Tennessee ........................................................ 210.6 366.9 6.0 40.7 520.4 906.5 14.9 100.5 Total ........................................................................... .......................................................................................... 624.2 1,542.3 We present brief descriptions of all units, and reasons why they meet the definition of critical habitat for whorled sunflower, below. emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Unit 1: Mud Creek Unit 1 consists of 210.6 ha (520.4 ac) in Cherokee County, Alabama, located approximately 11.6 km (7.2 mi) southeast of the city limits of Cedar Bluff. The unit begins approximately 0.06 km (0.04 mi) north of the junction of CR–164 and CR–29 and extends in a northerly direction to encompass much of the drainage area of an unnamed tributary to Mud Creek and to the northeast to encompass much of the drainage area of a second unnamed tributary to Mud Creek. The easternmost boundary of this unit is adjacent to CR– 101, from approximately 1.0 km (0.6 mi) to 1.4 km (0.9 mi) north of its junction with CR–164. Silt loam and silty clay loam soils are present throughout the unit, spanning broad uplands, and terraces and flood plains of headwater streams in the Coosa River watershed (PCE 1). The features essential to the conservation of the species in this unit may require special management considerations or protection to address threats of soil disturbance due to silvicultural site preparation or timber harvest; indiscriminate herbicide use or mowing for silvicultural purposes or road right-of-way maintenance; conversion of remnant prairie habitat to agricultural or industrial forestry uses; and excessive shading or competition from native woody species or invasive, nonnative plants. Unit 2: Coosa Valley Prairie Unit 2 consists of 366.9 ha (906.5 ac) of privately owned lands in Floyd County, Georgia, located approximately VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 4.5 km (2.8 mi) northwest of the city limits of Cave Spring. This unit corresponds to the boundary of The Nature Conservancy’s conservation easement on lands owned by The Campbell Group, a site commonly referred to as the Coosa Valley Prairie. The northern boundary of this unit follows Jefferson Road for approximately 1.4 km (0.9 mi) in a southeasterly direction, beginning approximately 1.7 km (1.0 mi) east of the Alabama-Georgia State line. From the eastern extent on Jefferson Road, the unit boundary follows an unnamed dirt road south for a distance of approximately 1.5 km (0.9 mi), where the boundary turns to the west and south before turning back to the north and again to the west, reaching the Alabama-Georgia State line. Here, the unit follows the State line in a northwest direction for approximately 0.8 km (0.5 mi) before turning east and following an unnamed dirt road in a northeasterly direction for approximately 2.7 km (1.7 mi) and reuniting with the northern boundary on Jefferson Road. Silt loam and silty clay loam soils are present throughout the unit, spanning broad uplands, depressions, and terraces and flood plains of headwater streams in the Coosa River watershed (PCE 1). Prairie openings and woodlands with low levels of canopy cover (PCE 2) are present throughout much of the unit. While Ellis and McCauley (2009, pp. 1837–1838) found very few viable achenes and low germination rates at this site, whorled sunflower has responded favorably to habitat management efforts by increasing in numbers, and there likely are now a sufficient number of compatible mates for production of viable achenes (PCE 3) at this site. PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 The features essential to the conservation of the species in this unit may require special management considerations or protection to address threats of soil disturbance due to silvicultural site preparation or timber harvest; indiscriminate herbicide use or mowing for silvicultural purposes or road right-of-way maintenance; conversion of remnant prairie habitat to agricultural or industrial forestry uses, and excessive shading or competition from native woody species or invasive, nonnative plants. Unit 3: Prairie Branch Unit 3 consists of 6.0 ha (14.9 ac) of privately owned land in McNairy County, Tennessee, and is located approximately 0.6 km (0.5 mi) south of the easternmost city limit of Ramer. This unit is located along Prairie Branch, a tributary to Muddy Creek, beginning approximately 0.42 km (0.26 mi) upstream of the point where it passes under Mt. Vernon Road and extending downstream for approximately 2.0 km (1.2 mi). Within this reach, the critical habitat unit extends forms a buffer extending 15 m (50 ft) upslope from the tops of the banks on both sides of Prairie Branch. Sandy loam soils (PCE 1) are present throughout the unit, as are small patches of vegetation containing whorled sunflower and other wet prairie species (PCE 2). The features essential to the conservation of the species in this unit may require special management considerations or protection to address threats of soil disturbance due to agricultural practices; indiscriminate herbicide use or mowing for road or railroad right-of-way maintenance; conversion of remnant prairie habitat to E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 47074 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules agricultural uses; and competition from invasive, nonnative plants. Unit 4: Pinson Unit 4 consists of 40.7 ha (100.5 ac) of privately owned land in Madison County, Tennessee, and is located approximately 4.1 km (2.5 mi) northwest of the city limits of Henderson, Tennessee. Beginning approximately 0.7 km southeast of the junction of U.S.–45 and Bear Creek Road, this unit extends approximately 0.08 km (0.05 mi) northeast of U.S.–45, crossing a railroad track, and then turns in a southeasterly direction, paralleling the track for a distance of approximately 0.5 km (0.3 mi). From this corner, the unit boundary turns southwest for a distance of approximately 0.79 km (0.49 mi), and then turns to the northwest for a distance of approximately 0.65 km (0.4 mi). From this corner, the unit boundary turns to the northeast for a distance of approximately 0.63 km (0.39 mi). Silt loam soils (PCE 1) are present throughout the unit, small patches of vegetation containing whorled sunflower and wet prairie species (PCE 2) are present, and a sufficient number of compatible mates are present for the production of a limited number of viable achenes (PCE 3) (Ellis and McCauley 2009, p. 1838). The features essential to the conservation of the species in this unit may require special management considerations or protection to address threats of soil disturbance due to agricultural practices; indiscriminate herbicide use or mowing road or railroad right-of-way maintenance; conversion of remnant prairie habitat to agricultural uses; and excessive shading or competition from native woody species or invasive, nonnative plants. Much of the land within this unit has been converted to agricultural uses, but is included because of the potential for decreasing fragmentation among the subpopulations that are present in this unit by restoring suitable vegetation within previously converted lands. Fleshy-Fruit Gladecress We are proposing six units as critical habitat for fleshy-fruit gladecress. The critical habitat areas we describe below constitute our current best assessment of areas that meet the definition of critical habitat for fleshy-fruit gladecress. All these units are occupied at the time of listing. The six areas we propose as critical habitat are: (1) Bluebird Glades; (2) Stover Branch Glades; (3) Indian Tomb Hollow Glade; (4) Cedar Plains South; (5) Cedar Plains North; and (6) Massey Glade. The approximate area of each proposed critical habitat unit is shown in Table 4. TABLE 4—PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS FOR FLESHY-FRUIT GLADECRESS Critical habitat unit Ownership Bluebird Glades ..................................................... Stover Branch Glades ............................................ Indian Tomb Hollow Glade .................................... Cedar Plains South ................................................ Cedar Plains North ................................................ Massey Glade ........................................................ Lawrence ......................... Lawrence ......................... Lawrence ......................... Morgan ............................ Morgan ............................ Morgan ............................ Private ............................. Private ............................. Federal ............................ Private ............................. Private ............................. Private ............................. 0.2 3.2 0.5 0.04 1.7 2.75 0.5 7.8 1.1 0.1 4.2 6.8 Total .................................................................... 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. County .......................................... .......................................... 8.4 20.5 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 We present brief descriptions of all units, and reasons why they meet the definition of critical habitat for fleshyfruit gladecress, below. disturbances, exotic species, most notably Chinese privet and Japanese honeysuckle, threaten this site (Schotz 2009, pp. 13–14). Unit 1: Bluebird Glades Unit 1 consists of 0.2 ha (0.5 ac) of privately owned land located in southeast Lawrence County, Alabama. The unit contains two subpopulations and is located along Alabama State Route 157 approximately 3.5 km (2.2 mi) southeast of the intersections of State Routes 36 and 157, approximately 3.7 km (2.3 mi) southwest of Danville, Alabama. These plants are located within a highly disturbed, limestone glade within a former mobile home site. Well-lighted, open areas (PCE 2), with shallow soils and exposed limestone bedrock or gravel that are dominated by characteristic glade vegetation (PCE 1), are present within the unit. The features essential to the conservation of the species in this unit may require special management considerations or protection to address threats of the invasion of exotic species into open glades and possible changes in land use, including road widening or development. Due to human-derived Unit 2: Stover Branch Glades Unit 2 consists of 3.2 ha (7.8 ac) of privately owned land located in southeast Lawrence County, Alabama. The unit contains two subpopulations; one subpopulation is located on the southwest side of County Road 203 approximately 1.4 km (0.9 mi) southsoutheast of Alabama State Route 157, and one subpopulation is located along the southwest side of State Route 157, approximately 1.6 to 2.1 km (1 to 1.3 mi) southeast of State Route 36, in Speake, Alabama. These subpopulations are located within a pasture and are actively maintained by livestock grazing. Well-lighted, open areas (PCE 2), with shallow soils and exposed limestone bedrock or gravel that are dominated by characteristic glade vegetation (PCE 1), are present within the unit. The features essential to the conservation of the species in this unit may require special management considerations or protection to address VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 Hectares Acres threats of invasive species into open glades and incompatible livestock grazing. Invasive species encroachment and continuous livestock grazing during the plant’s reproductive cycle constitute ongoing threats to this site (Schotz 2009, pp. 15–16). Unit 3: Indian Tomb Hollow Glade Unit 3 consists of 0.5 ha (1.1 ac) of federally owned land located within the Bankhead National Forest in Lawrence County, Alabama. The unit is located on the west and northwest side of County Road 86 at a point roughly 4.5 km (2.8 mi) south of State Route 36 near Speake, Alabama. Habitat in this unit consists of a relatively small glade characterized by a flat limestone outcrop that is heavily buffered by nearly impenetrable tangles of eastern red cedar and upland swamp privet. Well-lighted, open areas (PCE 2), with shallow soils and exposed limestone bedrock or gravel that are dominated by characteristic glade vegetation (PCE 1), are present within the unit. The U.S. Forest Service provides management to control encroachment of invasive species (PCE 3). E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules The features essential to the conservation of the species in this unit may require special management considerations or protection to address threats of the invasion of exotic species into open glade and damage from vehicles. Moderate encroachment of exotic species, most notably Chinese privet and Japanese honeysuckle, threatens this site along the glade periphery (Schotz 2009, pp. 18–19). This site also shows minimal incidence of trash disposal and damage from recreational vehicles. Unit 4: Cedar Plains South Unit 4 consists of 0.04 ha (0.1 ac) of privately owned land located in Morgan County, Alabama. This unit is located on Cedar Plains Road, 1.2 km (0.75 mi) south of County Road 55 and approximately 8 km (5 mi) west of the junction of U.S. Highway 31 and County Road 55 in Falkville. This population represents an excellent landscape context but contains the smallest number of plants of any of the known occurrences. Habitat in this unit consists of a well-lighted limestone glade opening (PCE 2) located within a limestone forest primarily comprised of eastern red cedar and various other hardwoods. Herbaceous vegetation characteristic of glade communities is present within the well-lighted glade (PCE 1), and competition and shading from native and invasive, nonnative plants are currently not a threat to the habitat in this unit (PCE 3). The features essential to the conservation of the species in this unit may require special management considerations or protections to prevent future adverse effects due to competition and shading caused by encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative plants. emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Unit 5: Cedar Plains North Unit 5 consists of 1.7 ha (4.2 ac) of privately owned land located in Morgan County, Alabama. This unit is located on Cedar Plains Road, from 0.6 to 1 km (0.4 to 0.6 mi) north of County Road 55, approximately 8 km (5 mi) west of the junction of U.S. Highway 31 and County Road 55 in Falkville. These populations are located within a pasture and are actively maintained by livestock grazing. Well-lighted, open areas (PCE 2), with shallow soils and exposed limestone bedrock or gravel that are dominated by characteristic glade vegetation (PCE 1), are present within the unit. This glade complex, although subjected to ongoing agricultural interests, represents the greatest concentration of plants currently known for the species. VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 The features essential to the conservation of the species in this unit may require special management considerations or protection to address threats of invasive species into open glades and incompatible livestock grazing. Invasive species encroachment and continuous livestock grazing during the plant’s reproductive cycle constitute ongoing threats to this site (Schotz 2009, pp. 23–24). Unit 6: Massey Glade Unit 6 consists of 2.75 ha (6.8 ac) of privately owned land located in Morgan County, Alabama. This unit is located on County Road 55, 0.3 to 0.6 km (0.2 to 0.4 mi) west of Cedar Plains Road, approximately 8.3 km (5.2 mi) west of the junction of U.S. Highway 31 and County Road 55 in Falkville. This population is located within a highly disturbed complex of limestone pavement barrens scattered in an actively utilized pasture and within the yards and fields of nearby homes. Welllighted, open areas (PCE 2), with shallow soils and exposed limestone bedrock or gravel that are dominated by characteristic glade vegetation (PCE 1), are present within the unit. The features essential to the conservation of the species in this unit may require special management considerations or protection to address threats of invasive species into open glades and incompatible livestock grazing. Invasive species encroachment and continuous livestock grazing during the plant’s reproductive cycle constitute ongoing threats to this site (Schotz 2009, pp. 25–26). Effects of Critical Habitat Designation Section 7 Consultation Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires Federal agencies, including the Service, to ensure that any action they fund, authorize, or carry out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered species or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat of such species. In addition, section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires Federal agencies to confer with the Service on any agency action which is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any species proposed to be listed under the Act or result in the destruction or adverse modification of proposed critical habitat. Decisions by the 5th and 9th Circuit Courts of Appeals have invalidated our regulatory definition of ‘‘destruction or adverse modification’’ (50 CFR 402.02) (see Gifford Pinchot Task Force v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 378 F.3d 1059 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 47075 (9th Cir. 2004) and Sierra Club v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 245 F.3d 434 (5th Cir. 2001)), and we do not rely on this regulatory definition when analyzing whether an action is likely to destroy or adversely modify critical habitat. Under the statutory provisions of the Act, we determine destruction or adverse modification on the basis of whether, with implementation of the proposed Federal action, the affected critical habitat would continue to serve its intended conservation role for the species. If a Federal action may affect a listed species or its critical habitat, the responsible Federal agency (action agency) must enter into consultation with us. Examples of actions that are subject to the section 7 consultation process are actions on State, tribal, local, or private lands that require a Federal permit (such as a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) or a permit from the Service under section 10 of the Act) or that involve some other Federal action (such as funding from the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Aviation Administration, or the Federal Emergency Management Agency). Federal actions not affecting listed species or critical habitat, and actions on State, tribal, local, or private lands that are not federally funded or authorized, do not require section 7 consultation. As a result of section 7 consultation, we document compliance with the requirements of section 7(a)(2) through our issuance of: (1) A concurrence letter for Federal actions that may affect, but are not likely to adversely affect, listed species or critical habitat; or (2) A biological opinion for Federal actions that may affect and are likely to adversely affect, listed species or critical habitat. When we issue a biological opinion concluding that a project is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species and/or destroy or adversely modify critical habitat, we provide reasonable and prudent alternatives to the project, if any are identifiable, that would avoid the likelihood of jeopardy and/or destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. We define ‘‘reasonable and prudent alternatives’’ (at 50 CFR 402.02) as alternative actions identified during consultation that: (1) Can be implemented in a manner consistent with the intended purpose of the action, E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 47076 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 (2) Can be implemented consistent with the scope of the Federal agency’s legal authority and jurisdiction, (3) Are economically and technologically feasible, and (4) Would, in the Director’s opinion, avoid the likelihood of jeopardizing the continued existence of the listed species and/or avoid the likelihood of destroying or adversely modifying critical habitat. Reasonable and prudent alternatives can vary from slight project modifications to extensive redesign or relocation of the project. Costs associated with implementing a reasonable and prudent alternative are similarly variable. Regulations at 50 CFR 402.16 require Federal agencies to reinitiate consultation on previously reviewed actions in instances where we have listed a new species or subsequently designated critical habitat that may be affected and the Federal agency has retained discretionary involvement or control over the action (or the agency’s discretionary involvement or control is authorized by law). Consequently, Federal agencies sometimes may need to request reinitiation of consultation with us on actions for which formal consultation has been completed, if those actions with discretionary involvement or control may affect subsequently listed species or designated critical habitat. Application of the ‘‘Adverse Modification’’ Standard The key factor related to the adverse modification determination is whether, with implementation of the proposed Federal action, the affected critical habitat would continue to serve its intended conservation role for the species. Activities that may destroy or adversely modify critical habitat are those that alter the physical or biological features to an extent that appreciably reduces the conservation value of critical habitat for Short’s bladderpod, whorled sunflower, or fleshy-fruit gladecress. As discussed above, the role of critical habitat is to support life-history needs of the species and provide for the conservation of the species. Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us to briefly evaluate and describe, in any proposed or final regulation that designates critical habitat, activities involving a Federal action that may destroy or adversely modify such habitat, or that may be affected by such designation. Activities that may affect critical habitat, when carried out, funded, or authorized by a Federal agency, should VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 result in consultation for Short’s bladderpod, whorled sunflower, or fleshy-fruit gladecress. These activities include, but are not limited to: Short’s Bladderpod (1) Actions that would remove, severely alter, or inundate portions of bedrock formations or outcrops of calcareous limestones and interbedded shales or siltstones (geologic substrates). Actions that could remove or severely alter geologic substrates include, but are not limited to, construction of bridges, buildings, quarries, roads, railroad tracks, or interstate pipelines and associated structures. These actions could directly remove or result in alteration of geologic substrates due to blasting with explosive charges and removal or disturbance by heavy machinery. Construction of new dams or raising elevations of existing dams downstream of a critical habitat unit could inundate geologic substrates. (2) Actions that would remove, severely alter, or increase erosion of soils. Such activities could include construction of bridges, buildings, quarries, roads, railroad tracks, or interstate pipelines and associated structures; maintenance of transportation rights-of-way; removal of woody vegetation; and reservoir management. Construction activities could directly remove soils during the course of grading and site preparation. Establishing a quarry would involve removal of the overburden, including soils, prior to excavating the geologic substrate for a quarry. Transportation right-of-way maintenance that involved grading or use of heavy equipment to remove vegetation could cause removal, alteration, or erosion of soils. Removal of woody vegetation, if done excessively, could result in soil erosion on the steeply sloped sites in most critical habitat units. Reservoir management that caused frequent changes in reservoir stage could lead to soil erosion, especially at lower elevations of hillside and bluff habitats. Removal or erosion of soils could lead to the loss or reduction of seed banks formed by Short’s bladderpod. Soil alteration due to grading or other disturbance could cause soils to be overturned, resulting in burial of seed banks formed by Short’s bladderpod. (3) Actions that would result in removal of forest communities, promote development of woody vegetation with high stocking densities that cause excessive shading and a lack of forest gaps, or introduce invasive, nonnative plants into critical habitat. Such activities could include timber harvest that severely reduces or completely PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 removes forest canopy; mechanical or chemical vegetation management for transportation right-of-way maintenance; and introduction of invasive, nonnative herbaceous and woody plants. Timber harvest that severely reduces or completely removes forest canopy cover would promote forest regeneration characterized by high stem densities and lack of a diverse age structure, which could cause excessive shading. Mechanical or chemical vegetation management for transportation right-of-way maintenance potentially could be beneficial for Short’s bladderpod if well-planned and carefully executed. However, indiscriminate use of chemical or mechanical methods for vegetation control could cause complete removal of the forest canopy, which would promote regeneration characterized by high stem densities and lack of a diverse age structure, potentially leading to excessive shading. Introducing invasive, nonnative herbaceous and woody plants could lead to excessive shading and competition. Such species include, but are not limited to Lonicera maackii (bush honeysuckle), L. japonica (Japanese honeysuckle), Ailanthus altissima (tree-of-heaven), Ligustrum vulgare and L. sinense (privet), Lespedeza cuneata (sericea lespedeza), and Lespedeza bicolor (bicolor lespedeza). The effects of the activities described above would eventually prevent Short’s bladderpod from receiving adequate light for growth and reproduction. Whorled Sunflower (1) Actions that would remove, severely alter, or increase erosion of soils. Such activities could include clearing, disking, plowing, and harvesting of row crop fields; site preparation, operation of heavy equipment, and construction and maintenance of log landings, loading decks, skid trails, and haul roads for silvicultural activities; and maintenance of transportation rights-of-way. These activities could result in the removal of soils, which would remove any whorled sunflower plants, rhizomes, or seeds present in the soil. These activities also could cause soil compaction, which could limit root and rhizome development or reduce water infiltration, or lead to increased soil erosion and loss of organic matter and nutrients. (2) Actions that would promote encroachment of woody species into old fields, prairie remnants, or woodlands with herbaceous vegetation that is characteristic of moist prairie remnants. Such activities could include the E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 planting of forest stands with high stem densities; planting forested stream buffers; or neglecting to conduct periodic mechanical disturbance, herbicide application, or prescribed burning. Planting forest stands with high stem densities or planting forested stream buffers would eventually lead to development of a canopy that would prevent whorled sunflower from receiving adequate light for growth and reproduction. Neglecting to conduct periodic management in suitable habitat, such as mechanical disturbance, careful herbicide application, or prescribed burning, would lead to encroachment by shrubs or trees that would eventually prevent whorled sunflower from receiving adequate light for growth and reproduction. (3) Actions that cause mortality of whorled sunflower plants or that disrupt growth and prevent individuals from producing flowers. Such activities could include indiscriminate herbicide application or mowing for transportation right-of-way maintenance, agriculture, or silviculture, or actions described above that cause removal of soils and plant parts they contain. Herbicide application or removal of soil and any plant parts contained therein could result in direct mortality of individual whorled sunflower plants. Poorly timed mowing could disrupt growth and prevent flower production. Either of these activities could permanently or temporarily reduce the number of compatible mates within a population, reducing the potential for viable achene production to occur. Fleshy-Fruit Gladecress (1) Actions that would remove, severely alter, or significantly reduce limestone outcrops. Such activities could include, but are not limited to, construction of interstate pipelines and associated structures that are regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers-issued Clean Water Act section 404 and River and Harbors Act section 10 permits for wetland crossings for linear projects (pipelines, transmission lines, and roads); road development (expansions and improvements) funded by the Federal Highway Administration; and U.S. Department of Agriculture funding and technical assistance for conversion of glades and surroundings to pine plantations or for brush control programs involving herbicide applications. These actions could directly eliminate a site or alter the hydrology, open sunny aspect, and substrate conditions, reducing VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 suitability of a location to a point that it no longer provides the environment necessary to sustain the species. In the case of some types of herbicide applications, the habitat may become unsuitable for germination and successful growth of seedlings. These activities would permanently alter the habitat that fleshy-fruit gladecress is dependent on to complete its life cycle. (2) Actions that would significantly alter natural flora, including disturbance activities such as digging, disking, blading or construction work; introduction of nonnative species for erosion control along rights-of-way or in other areas; and a lack of management of nonnative or native woody species. Exemptions Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the Act The Sikes Act Improvement Act of 1997 (Sikes Act) (16 U.S.C. 670a) required each military installation that includes land and water suitable for the conservation and management of natural resources to complete an integrated natural resources management plan (INRMP) by November 17, 2001. An INRMP integrates implementation of the military mission of the installation with stewardship of the natural resources found on the base. Each INRMP includes: (1) An assessment of the ecological needs on the installation, including the need to provide for the conservation of listed species; (2) A statement of goals and priorities; (3) A detailed description of management actions to be implemented to provide for these ecological needs; and (4) A monitoring and adaptive management plan. Among other things, each INRMP must, to the extent appropriate and applicable, provide for fish and wildlife management; fish and wildlife habitat enhancement or modification; wetland protection, enhancement, and restoration where necessary to support fish and wildlife; and enforcement of applicable natural resource laws. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Pub. L. 108– 136) amended the Act to limit areas eligible for designation as critical habitat. Specifically, section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(B)(i)) now provides: ‘‘The Secretary shall not designate as critical habitat any lands or other geographic areas owned or controlled by the Department of Defense, or designated for its use, that are subject to an integrated natural resources management plan prepared PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 47077 under section 101 of the Sikes Act (16 U.S.C. 670a), if the Secretary determines in writing that such plan provides a benefit to the species for which critical habitat is proposed for designation.’’ There are no Department of Defense lands with a completed INRMP within the proposed critical habitat designation. Exclusions Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states that the Secretary shall designate and make revisions to critical habitat on the basis of the best available scientific data after taking into consideration the economic impact, national security impact, and any other relevant impact of specifying any particular area as critical habitat. The Secretary may exclude an area from critical habitat if she determines that the benefits of such exclusion outweigh the benefits of specifying such area as part of the critical habitat, unless she determines, based on the best scientific data available, that the failure to designate such area as critical habitat will result in the extinction of the species. In making that determination, the statute on its face, as well as the legislative history, are clear that the Secretary has broad discretion regarding which factor(s) to use and how much weight to give to any factor. Economic Impacts Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we consider the economic impacts of specifying any particular area as critical habitat. In order to consider economic impacts, we are preparing an analysis of the economic impacts of the proposed critical habitat designation and related factors. We will announce the availability of the draft economic analysis as soon as it is completed, at which time we will seek public review and comment. At that time, copies of the draft economic analysis will be available for downloading from the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2013–0086, or by contacting the Tennessee Ecological Services Fish and Wildlife Office directly (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section). During the development of a final designation, we will consider economic impacts, public comments, and other new information, and areas may be excluded from the final critical habitat designation under section 4(b)(2) of the Act and our implementing regulations at 50 CFR 424.19. E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 47078 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules National Security Impacts Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we consider whether there are lands owned or managed by the Department of Defense where a national security impact might exist. In preparing this proposal, we have determined that no lands within the proposed designation of critical habitat for the whorled sunflower and fleshy-fruit gladecress are owned or managed by the Department of Defense. The Department of Defense owns or manages land, adjacent to Corps of Engineers reservoirs, where critical habitat is proposed for Short’s bladderpod. However, we anticipate no impact on national security from designating this land as critical habitat. Consequently, the Secretary does not propose to exercise his discretion to exclude any areas from the final designation based on impacts on national security. Other Relevant Impacts Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we consider any other relevant impacts, in addition to economic impacts and impacts on national security. We consider a number of factors, including whether the landowners have developed any HCPs or other management plans for the area, or whether there are conservation partnerships that would be encouraged by designation of, or exclusion from, critical habitat. In addition, we look at any tribal issues, and consider the government-togovernment relationship of the United States with tribal entities. We also consider any social impacts that might occur because of the designation. In preparing this proposal, we have determined that there are currently no HCPs or other management plans for the Short’s bladderpod, whorled sunflower, nor fleshy-fruit gladecress, and the proposed designation does not include any tribal lands or trust resources. We anticipate no impact on tribal lands, partnerships, or HCPs from this proposed critical habitat designation. Accordingly, the Secretary does not propose to exercise her discretion to exclude any areas from the final designation based on other relevant impacts. emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Peer Review In accordance with our joint policy on peer review published in the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), we will seek the expert opinions of at least three appropriate and independent specialists regarding this proposed rule. The purpose of peer review is to ensure that our critical habitat designation is based on scientifically sound data, and VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 analyses. We have invited these peer reviewers to comment during this public comment period on our proposed designation of critical habitat for these species. We will consider all comments and information we receive during this comment period on this proposed rule during our preparation of a final determination. Accordingly, the final decision may differ from this proposal. Public Hearings Section 4(b)(5) of the Act provides for one or more public hearings on this proposal, if requested. Requests must be received within 45 days after the date of publication of this proposed rule in the Federal Register. Such requests must be sent to the address shown in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. We will schedule public hearings on this proposal, if any are requested, and announce the dates, times, and places of those hearings, as well as how to obtain reasonable accommodations, in the Federal Register and local newspapers at least 15 days before the hearing. Required Determinations Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563) Executive Order 12866 provides that the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) will review all significant rules. The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has determined that this rule is not significant. Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866 while calling for improvements in the nation’s regulatory system to promote predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and to use the best, most innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory ends. The executive order directs agencies to consider regulatory approaches that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for the public where these approaches are relevant, feasible, and consistent with regulatory objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes further that regulations must be based on the best available science and that the rulemaking process must allow for public participation and an open exchange of ideas. We have developed this rule in a manner consistent with these requirements. Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA; 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA; 5 U.S.C 801 et seq.), PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 whenever an agency is required to publish a notice of rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must prepare and make available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis that describes the effects of the rule on small entities (small businesses, small organizations, and small government jurisdictions). However, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head of the agency certifies the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The SBREFA amended the RFA to require Federal agencies to provide a certification statement of the factual basis for certifying that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. According to the Small Business Administration, small entities include small organizations such as independent nonprofit organizations; small governmental jurisdictions, including school boards and city and town governments that serve fewer than 50,000 residents; and small businesses (13 CFR 121.201). Small businesses include such businesses as manufacturing and mining concerns with fewer than 500 employees, wholesale trade entities with fewer than 100 employees, retail and service businesses with less than $5 million in annual sales, general and heavy construction businesses with less than $27.5 million in annual business, special trade contractors doing less than $11.5 million in annual business, and forestry and logging operations with fewer than 500 employees and annual business less than $7 million. To determine whether small entities may be affected, we will consider the types of activities that might trigger regulatory impacts under this designation as well as types of project modifications that may result. In general, the term ‘‘significant economic impact’’ is meant to apply to a typical small business firm’s business operations. Importantly, the incremental impacts of a rule must be both significant and substantial to prevent certification of the rule under the RFA and to require the preparation of an initial regulatory flexibility analysis. If a substantial number of small entities are affected by the proposed critical habitat designation, but the per-entity economic impact is not significant, the Service may certify. Likewise, if the per-entity economic impact is likely to be significant, but the number of affected entities is not substantial, the Service may also certify. Under the RFA, as amended, and following recent court decisions, Federal agencies are only required to E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules evaluate the potential incremental impacts of rulemaking on those entities directly regulated by the rulemaking itself, and not the potential impacts to indirectly affected entities. The regulatory mechanism through which critical habitat protections are realized is section 7 of the Act, which requires Federal agencies, in consultation with the Service, to ensure that any action authorized, funded, or carried by the agency is not likely to adversely modify critical habitat. Therefore, only Federal action agencies are directly subject to the specific regulatory requirement (avoiding destruction and adverse modification) imposed by critical habitat designation. Under these circumstances, it is our position that only Federal action agencies will be directly regulated by this designation. Therefore, because Federal agencies are not small entities, the Service may certify that the proposed critical habitat rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. We acknowledge, however, that in some cases, third-party proponents of the action subject to permitting or funding may participate in a section 7 consultation, and thus may be indirectly affected. We believe it is good policy to assess these impacts if we have sufficient data before us to complete the necessary analysis, whether or not this analysis is strictly required by the RFA. While this regulation does not directly regulate these entities, in our draft economic analysis we will conduct a brief evaluation of the potential number of third parties participating in consultations on an annual basis in order to ensure a more complete examination of the incremental effects of this proposed rule in the context of the RFA. In conclusion, we believe that, based on our interpretation of directly regulated entities under the RFA and relevant case law, this designation of critical habitat will only directly regulate Federal agencies which are not by definition small business entities. As such, certify that, if promulgated, this designation of critical habitat would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small business entities. Therefore, an initial regulatory flexibility analysis is not required. However, though not necessarily required by the RFA, in our draft economic analysis for this proposal we will consider and evaluate the potential effects to third parties that may be involved with consultations with Federal action agencies related to this action. VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use— Executive Order 13211 Executive Order 13211 (Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use) requires agencies to prepare Statements of Energy Effects when undertaking certain actions. We do not expect the designation of this proposed critical habitat to significantly affect energy supplies, distribution, or use, because: (1) Areas where critical habitat is being proposed for whorled sunflower and fleshy-fruit gladecress are not presently used for energy production, and (2) areas where critical habitat is being proposed for Short’s bladderpod are not adversely affected as a result of hydropower generation by the Corps of Engineers. The authorized project purposes for Cheatham, Old Hickory, and Cordell Hull dams are navigation and hydropower. The overall reservoir system serves multiple purposes, including flood control, hydropower, navigation, recreation, water supply, and water quality. The preferred method of releasing water from these reservoirs is through hydropower turbines, and, to the extent possible, release schedules are developed to best meet peak power demands. However, storage capacity in these reservoirs constrains the upper limit at which reservoir stage can be maintained, sometimes requiring the Corps of Engineers to release water through spillways in addition to hydropower turbines, and limits the extent to which the lower elevations within proposed critical habitat units adjacent to these reservoirs are inundated or subjected to erosion due to stage fluctuation that could adversely modify features essential to the conservation of Short’s bladderpod. Therefore, this action is not a significant energy action, and no Statement of Energy Effects is required. However, we will further evaluate this issue as we conduct our economic analysis, and review and revise this assessment as warranted. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) In accordance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.), we make the following findings: (1) This rule would not produce a Federal mandate. In general, a Federal mandate is a provision in legislation, statute, or regulation that would impose an enforceable duty upon State, local, or tribal governments, or the private sector, and includes both ‘‘Federal intergovernmental mandates’’ and ‘‘Federal private sector mandates.’’ PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 47079 These terms are defined in 2 U.S.C. 658(5)–(7). ‘‘Federal intergovernmental mandate’’ includes a regulation that ‘‘would impose an enforceable duty upon State, local, or tribal governments’’ with two exceptions. It excludes ‘‘a condition of Federal assistance.’’ It also excludes ‘‘a duty arising from participation in a voluntary Federal program,’’ unless the regulation ‘‘relates to a then-existing Federal program under which $500,000,000 or more is provided annually to State, local, and tribal governments under entitlement authority,’’ if the provision would ‘‘increase the stringency of conditions of assistance’’ or ‘‘place caps upon, or otherwise decrease, the Federal Government’s responsibility to provide funding,’’ and the State, local, or tribal governments ‘‘lack authority’’ to adjust accordingly. At the time of enactment, these entitlement programs were: Medicaid; Aid to Families with Dependent Children work programs; Child Nutrition; Food Stamps; Social Services Block Grants; Vocational Rehabilitation State Grants; Foster Care, Adoption Assistance, and Independent Living; Family Support Welfare Services; and Child Support Enforcement. ‘‘Federal private sector mandate’’ includes a regulation that ‘‘would impose an enforceable duty upon the private sector, except (i) a condition of Federal assistance or (ii) a duty arising from participation in a voluntary Federal program.’’ The designation of critical habitat does not impose a legally binding duty on non-Federal Government entities or private parties. Under the Act, the only regulatory effect is that Federal agencies must ensure that their actions do not destroy or adversely modify critical habitat under section 7. While nonFederal entities that receive Federal funding, assistance, or permits, or that otherwise require approval or authorization from a Federal agency for an action, may be indirectly impacted by the designation of critical habitat, the legally binding duty to avoid destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat rests squarely on the Federal agency. Furthermore, to the extent that non-Federal entities are indirectly impacted because they receive Federal assistance or participate in a voluntary Federal aid program, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act would not apply, nor would critical habitat shift the costs of the large entitlement programs listed above onto State governments. (2) We do not believe that this rule would significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The majority of lands being proposed for critical habitat E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 47080 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules designation are privately owned or owned by the Federal government, although Ashland City, Tennessee, and Frankfort, Kentucky, own small portions of lands proposed as critical habitat for Short’s bladderpod. Small governments will be affected only to the extent that any programs having Federal funds, permits, or other authorized activities must ensure that their actions will not adversely affect the critical habitat. Therefore, a Small Government Agency Plan is not required. However, we will further evaluate these issues as we conduct our economic analysis, and review and revise this assessment as warranted. emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Takings—Executive Order 12630 In accordance with Executive Order 12630 (‘‘Government Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Private Property Rights’’), we have analyzed the potential takings implications of designating critical habitat for the Short’s bladderpod, whorled sunflower, and fleshy-fruit gladecress in takings implications assessments. Based on the best available information, the takings implications assessments conclude that the designations of critical habitat for the Short’s bladderpod, whorled sunflower, and fleshy-fruit gladecress do not pose significant takings implications. However, we will further evaluate this issue as we develop our final designation, and review and revise this assessment as warranted. Federalism—Executive Order 13132 In accordance with Executive Order 13132 (Federalism), this proposed rule does not have significant Federalism effects. A federalism summary impact statement is not required. In keeping with Department of the Interior and Department of Commerce policy, we requested information from, and coordinated development of, this proposed critical habitat designation with appropriate State resource agencies in Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, and Tennessee. The designation of critical habitat in areas currently occupied by Short’s bladderpod, whorled sunflower, and fleshy-fruit gladecress imposes no additional restrictions to those that would be put in place by the listing of the species and, therefore, has little incremental impact on State and local governments and their activities. The designation may have some benefit to these governments because the areas that contain the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species are more clearly defined, and the elements of the features VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 necessary to the conservation of the species are specifically identified. This information does not alter where and what federally sponsored activities may occur. However, it may assist local governments in long-range planning (rather than having them wait for caseby-case section 7 consultations to occur). Where State and local governments require approval or authorization from a Federal agency for actions that may affect critical habitat, consultation under section 7(a)(2) would be required. While non-Federal entities that receive Federal funding, assistance, or permits, or that otherwise require approval or authorization from a Federal agency for an action, may be indirectly impacted by the designation of critical habitat, the legally binding duty to avoid destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat rests squarely on the Federal agency. Civil Justice Reform—Executive Order 12988 In accordance with Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform), the Office of the Solicitor has determined that the rule does not unduly burden the judicial system and that it meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of the Order. We have proposed designating critical habitat in accordance with the provisions of the Act. To assist the public in understanding the habitat needs of the species, the rule identifies the elements of physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species. The designated areas of critical habitat are presented on maps, and the rule provides several options for the interested public to obtain more detailed location information, if desired. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) This rule does not contain any new collections of information that require approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This rule will not impose recordkeeping or reporting requirements on State or local governments, individuals, businesses, or organizations. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) It is our position that, outside the jurisdiction of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, we do not need to prepare environmental analyses PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 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)). Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes In accordance with the President’s memorandum of April 29, 1994 (Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal Governments; 59 FR 22951), Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments), and the Department of the Interior’s manual at 512 DM 2, we readily acknowledge our responsibility to communicate meaningfully with recognized Federal Tribes on a government-to-government basis. In accordance with Secretarial Order 3206 of June 5, 1997 (American Indian Tribal Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust Responsibilities, and the Endangered Species Act), we readily acknowledge our responsibilities to work directly with tribes in developing programs for healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge that tribal lands are not subject to the same controls as Federal public lands, to remain sensitive to Indian culture, and to make information available to tribes. We determined that there are no tribal lands occupied by Short’s bladderpod, whorled sunflower, or fleshy-fruit gladecress at the time of listing that contain the features essential for conservation of the species, and no tribal lands unoccupied by these species that are essential for the conservation of the species. Therefore, we are not proposing to designate critical habitat for the Short’s bladderpod, whorled sunflower, or fleshy-fruit gladecress on tribal lands. 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 E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules (5) Use lists and tables wherever possible. If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us comments by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. To better help us revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as possible. For example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections or paragraphs that are unclearly written, which sections or sentences are too long, the sections where you feel lists or tables would be useful, etc. References Cited A complete list of references cited in this rulemaking is available on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2013– 0086 and upon request from the Tennessee Ecological Services Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). Authors The primary authors of this package are the staff members of the Tennessee and Alabama Ecological Services Field Offices. List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Transportation. Proposed Regulation Promulgation Accordingly, we propose to amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below: PART 17—ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS 1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows: emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 ■ VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531– 1544; 4201–4245, unless otherwise noted. 2. Amend § 17.96 paragraph (a) as follows: ■ a. By adding an entry in alphabetical order under Family Asteraceae for ‘‘Helianthus verticillatus (whorled sunflower)’’; and ■ b. By adding entries in alphabetical order under Family Brassicaceae for ‘‘Leavenworthia crassa (fleshy-fruit gladecress)’’ and ‘‘Physaria globosa (Short’s bladderpod)’’. The additions read as follows: ■ § 17.96 Critical habitat—plants. * * * * * (a) Flowering plants. * * * * * Family Asteraceae: Helianthus verticillatus (whorled sunflower) (1) Critical habitat units are depicted for Cherokee County, Alabama; Floyd County, Georgia; and Madison and McNairy Counties, Tennessee, on the maps below. (2) Within these areas, the primary constituent elements of the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of whorled sunflower consist of three components: (i) Silt loam, silty clay loam, or fine sandy loam soils on land forms including broad uplands, depressions, stream terraces, and floodplains within the headwaters of the Coosa River in Alabama and Georgia and the East Fork Forked Deer and Tuscumbia rivers in Tennessee. (ii) Sites in which forest canopy is absent, or where woody vegetation is present at sufficiently low densities to provide full or partial sunlight to whorled sunflower plants for most of the day, and which support vegetation PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 47081 characteristic of moist prairie communities. Invasive, nonnative plants must be absent or present in sufficiently low numbers to not inhibit growth or reproduction of whorled sunflower. (iii) Occupied sites in which a sufficient number of compatible mates are present for outcrossing and production of viable achenes to occur. (3) Critical habitat does not include manmade structures (such as buildings, aqueducts, runways, roads, and other paved areas) and the land on which they are located existing within the legal boundaries on the effective date of this rule. (4) Critical habitat map units. Data layers defining map units were created on a base of Bing Maps digital aerial photography supplied by the Harris Corporation, Earthstar Geographics LLC, and the Microsoft Corporation. Critical habitat units were then mapped using the USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Projection with a NAD 83 datum. The maps in this entry, as modified by any accompanying regulatory text, establish the boundaries of the critical habitat designation. The coordinates or plot points or both on which each map is based are available to the public at the Service’s Internet site at https:// www.fws.gov/cookeville, at https:// www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2013–0086, and at the field office responsible for this designation. You may obtain field office location information by contacting one of the Service regional offices, the addresses of which are listed at 50 CFR 2.2. BILLING CODE4310–55–P E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 47082 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 EP02AU13.002</GPH> emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 (5) Index map follows: Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 47083 VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 EP02AU13.003</GPH> emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 (6) Unit 1: Mud Creek, Cherokee County, Alabama, Map of Unit 1 follows: 47084 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 EP02AU13.004</GPH> emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 (7) Unit 2: Coosa Valley Prairie, Floyd County, Georgia. Map of Unit 2 follows: Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 47085 VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 EP02AU13.005</GPH> emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 (8) Unit 3: Prairie Branch, McNairy County, Tennessee. Map of Unit 3 follows: 47086 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules * * * * * Family Brassicaceae: Leavenworthia crassa (fleshy-fruit gladecress) (1) Critical habitat units are depicted for Lawrence and Morgan Counties, Alabama, on the maps below. (2) Within these areas, the primary constituent elements of the physical or VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 biological features essential to the conservation of fleshy-fruit gladecress consist of three components: (i) Shallow-soiled, open areas with exposed limestone bedrock or gravel that are dominated by herbaceous vegetation characteristic of glade communities. PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 (ii) Open or well-lighted areas of exposed limestone bedrock or gravel that ensure fleshy-fruit gladecress plants remain unshaded for a significant portion of the day. (iii) Glade habitat that is protected from both native and invasive, nonnative plants to minimize E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 EP02AU13.006</GPH> emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 (9) Unit 4: Pinson, Madison County, Tennessee. Map of Unit 4 follows: Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 competition and shading of fleshy-fruit gladecress. (3) Critical habitat does not include manmade structures (such as buildings, aqueducts, runways, roads, and other paved areas) and the land on which they are located existing within the legal boundaries on the effective date of this rule. (4) Critical habitat map units. Data layers defining map units were created on a base of Bing Maps digital aerial VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 photography supplied by the Harris Corporation, Earthstar Geographics LLC, and the Microsoft Corporation. Critical habitat units were then mapped using the USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Projection with a NAD 83 datum. The maps in this entry, as modified by any accompanying regulatory text, establish the boundaries of the critical habitat designation. The coordinates or plot points or both on which each map is PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 47087 based are available to the public at the Service’s Internet site at https:// www.fws.gov/cookeville, at https:// www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2013–0086, and at the field office responsible for this designation. You may obtain field office location information by contacting one of the Service regional offices, the addresses of which are listed at 50 CFR 2.2. E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 47088 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 EP02AU13.007</GPH> emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 (5) Index map follows: Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 47089 (7) Unit 2: Stover Branch Glades, Lawrence County, Alabama. Map of VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 Unit 2 is provided at paragraph (6) of this entry. PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 EP02AU13.008</GPH> emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 (6) Unit 1: Bluebird Glades, Lawrence County, Alabama. Map of Units 1 and 2 follows: 47090 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 EP02AU13.009</GPH> emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 (8) Unit 3: Indian Tomb Hollow Glade, Lawrence County, Alabama. Map of Unit 3 follows: Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 47091 (10) Unit 5: Cedar Plains North, Morgan County, Alabama. Map of Unit 5 is provided at paragraph (8) of this entry. (11) Unit 6: Massey Glade, Morgan County, Alabama. Map of Unit 6 is provided at paragraph (8) of this entry. * * * * * VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 Family Brassicaceae: Physaria globosa (Short’s bladderpod) (1) Critical habitat units are depicted for Posey County, Indiana; Clark, Franklin, and Woodford Counties, Kentucky; and Cheatham, Davidson, Dickson, Jackson, Montgomery, Smith, PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 and Trousdale Counties, Tennessee, on the maps below. (2) Within these areas, the primary constituent elements of the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of Short’s bladderpod consist of three components: E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 EP02AU13.010</GPH> emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 (9) Unit 4: Cedar Plains South, Morgan County, Alabama. Map of Units 4, 5, and 6 follows: 47092 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 (i) Bedrock formations and outcrops of calcareous limestone, sometimes with interbedded shale or siltstone, in close proximity to the mainstem or tributaries of the Kentucky and Cumberland rivers. These outcrop sites or areas of suitable bedrock geology should be located on steeply sloped hillsides or bluffs, typically on south- to west-facing aspects. (ii) Shallow or rocky, well-drained soils formed from the weathering of underlying calcareous bedrock formations, which are undisturbed or subjected to minimal disturbance, so as to retain habitat for ground-nesting pollinators and potential for maintenance of a soil seed bank. (iii) Forest communities with low levels of canopy closure or openings in VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 the canopy to provide adequate sunlight for individual and population growth. Invasive, nonnative plants must be absent or present in sufficiently low numbers to not inhibit growth or reproduction of Short’s bladderpod. (3) Critical habitat does not include manmade structures (such as buildings, aqueducts, runways, roads, and other paved areas) and the land on which they are located existing within the legal boundaries on the effective date of this rule. (4) Critical habitat map units. Data layers defining map units were created on a base of Bing Maps digital aerial photography supplied by the Harris Corporation, Earthstar Geographics LLC, and the Microsoft Corporation. Critical habitat units were then mapped using PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 the USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Projection with a NAD 83 datum. The maps in this entry, as modified by any accompanying regulatory text, establish the boundaries of the critical habitat designation. The coordinates or plot points or both on which each map is based are available to the public at the Service’s Internet site at https:// www.fws.gov/cookeville, at https:// www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2013–0086, and at the field office responsible for this designation. You may obtain field office location information by contacting one of the Service regional offices, the addresses of which are listed at 50 CFR 2.2. E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 47093 VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 EP02AU13.011</GPH> emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 (5) Index map follows: 47094 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 EP02AU13.012</GPH> emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 (6) Unit 1: Kings and Queens Bluff, Montgomery County, Tennessee. Map of Unit 1 follows: Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 47095 (8) Unit 3: Jarrel Ridge Road, Montgomery County, Tennessee. Map of VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 Unit 3 is provided at paragraph (7) of this entry. PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 EP02AU13.013</GPH> emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 (7) Unit 2: Lock B Road, Montgomery County, Tennessee. Map of Units 2 and 3 follows: 47096 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 EP02AU13.014</GPH> emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 (9) Unit 4: Cheatham Lake, Cheatham County, Tennessee. Map of Unit 4 follows: Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 47097 (11) Unit 6: Montgomery Bell Bridge, Cheatham and Dickson Counties, VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 Tennessee. Map of Unit 6 is provided at paragraph (10) of this entry. PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 EP02AU13.015</GPH> emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 (10) Unit 5: Harpeth River, Cheatham County, Tennessee. Map of Units 5 and 6 follows: 47098 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 EP02AU13.016</GPH> emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 (12) Unit 7: Nashville and Western Railroad, Cheatham County, Tennessee. Map of Unit 7 follows: Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 47099 VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 EP02AU13.017</GPH> emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 (13) Unit 8: River Trace, Cheatham and Davidson Counties, Tennessee. Map of Unit 8 follows: 47100 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules (15) Unit 10: Coleman-Winston Bridge, Trousdale County, Tennessee. VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 Map of Unit 10 is provided at paragraph (14) of this entry. PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 EP02AU13.018</GPH> emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 (14) Unit 9: Old Hickory Lake, Trousdale County, Tennessee. Map of Units 9 and 10 follows: Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 47101 VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 EP02AU13.019</GPH> emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 (16) Unit 11: Cordell Hull Reservoir, Smith County, Tennessee. Map of Unit 11 follows: 47102 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules (18) Unit 13: Wartrace Creek, Jackson County, Tennessee. Map of Unit 13 is provided at paragraph (17) of this entry. VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 EP02AU13.020</GPH> emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 (17) Unit 12: Funns Branch, Jackson County, Tennessee. Map of Units 12 and 13 follows: Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 47103 VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 EP02AU13.021</GPH> emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 (19) Unit 14: Camp Pleasant Branch, Franklin County, Kentucky. Map of Unit 14 follows: 47104 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules (21) Unit 16: Owenton Road, Franklin County, Kentucky. Map of Unit 16 is provided at paragraph (20) of this entry. VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 EP02AU13.022</GPH> emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 (20) Unit 15: Kentucky River, Franklin County, Kentucky. Map of Units 15 and 16 follows: Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 47105 VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 EP02AU13.023</GPH> emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 (22) Unit 17: Little Benson Creek, Franklin County, Kentucky. Map of Unit 17 follows: 47106 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 EP02AU13.024</GPH> emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 (23) Unit 18: Boone Creek, Clark County, Kentucky. Map of Unit 18 follows: Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules 47107 VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 EP02AU13.025</GPH> emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 (24) Unit 19: Delaney Ferry Road, Woodford County, Kentucky. Map of Unit 19 follows: 47108 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 / Proposed Rules * * * * Dated: July 19, 2013. Rachel Jacobson, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks. * [FR Doc. 2013–18456 Filed 8–1–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–55–C VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:59 Aug 01, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\02AUP2.SGM 02AUP2 EP02AU13.026</GPH> emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 (25) Unit 20: Bonebank Road, Posey County, Indiana. Map of Unit 20 follows:

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 149 (Friday, August 2, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 47059-47108]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-18456]

[[Page 47059]]

Vol. 78

Friday,

No. 149

August 2, 2013

Part II

Department of the Interior

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

Fish and Wildlife Service

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

50 CFR Part 17

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical
Habitat for Physaria globosa (Short's bladderpod), Helianthus
verticillatus (whorled sunflower), and Leavenworthia crassa (fleshy-
fruit Gladecress); Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants;
Endangered Status for Physaria globosa (Short's bladderpod), Helianthus
verticillatus (whorled sunflower), and Leavenworthia crassa (fleshy-
fruit gladecress); Proposed Rules

Federal Register / Vol. 78 , No. 149 / Friday, August 2, 2013 /
Proposed Rules

[[Page 47060]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2013-0086; 4500030114]
RIN 1018-AZ60

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, propose to designate
critical habitat for Physaria globosa (Short's bladderpod), Helianthus
verticillatus (whorled sunflower), and Leavenworthia crassa (fleshy-
fruit gladecress) under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended
(Act). If we finalize this rule as proposed, it would extend the Act's
protections to the habitats of Physaria globosa (Short's bladderpod),
Helianthus verticillatus (whorled sunflower), and Leavenworthia crassa
(fleshy-fruit gladecress) to conserve these habitats under the Act.

DATES: We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before
October 1, 2013. Comments submitted electronically using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES section, below) must be received by
11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the closing date. We must receive requests
for public hearings, in writing, at the address shown in FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT by September 16, 2013.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. In the Search field, enter Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-
2013-0086, 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 ``Comment Now!''
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R4-ES-2013-0086; Division of Policy and
Directives Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax
Drive, MS 2042-PDM; Arlington, VA 22203.
We request that you send comments only by the methods described
above. We will post all comments on https://www.regulations.gov. This
generally means that we will post any personal information you provide
us (see the Information Requested section below for more information).
The coordinates or plot points or both from which the maps are
generated are included in the administrative record for this critical
habitat designation and are available at https://www.fws.gov/cookeville,
at https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2013-0086, and at
the Tennessee Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT). Any additional tools or supporting information
that we may develop for this critical habitat designation will also be
available at the Fish and Wildlife Service Web site and Field Office
set out above, and may also be included in the preamble and/or at
https://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary E. Jennings, Field Supervisor,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Tennessee Ecological Services Fish and
Wildlife Office, 446 Neal Street, Cookeville, TN 38501; telephone 931-
528-6481. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD),
call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Executive Summary

Why we need to publish a rule. Critical habitat shall be
designated, to the maximum extent prudent and determinable, for any
species determined to be an endangered or threatened species under the
Act. Designations and revisions of critical habitat can only be
completed by issuing a rule. Elsewhere in today's Federal Register, we
propose to list Physaria globosa (Short's bladderpod), Helianthus
verticillatus (whorled sunflower), and Leavenworthia crassa (fleshy-
fruit gladecress) as endangered species under the Act.
This rule consists of a proposed critical habitat designation for
Physaria globosa (Short's bladderpod), Helianthus verticillatus
(whorled sunflower), and Leavenworthia crassa (fleshy-fruit gladecress)
under the Act.
The basis for our action. Under the Act, to the maximum extent
prudent and determinable, we must designate critical habitat for a
species concurrently with listing the species as endangered or
threatened. These three plant species are proposed for listing as
endangered, and therefore we also propose to:
Designate approximately 373 hectares (ha) (925.5 acres
(ac)) of critical habitat for Short's bladderpod in Posey County,
Indiana; Clark, Franklin, and Woodford Counties, Kentucky; and
Cheatham, Davidson, Dickson, Jackson, Montgomery, Smith, and Trousdale
Counties, Tennessee.
Designate approximately 624 ha (1,542 ac) of critical
habitat for whorled sunflower in Cherokee County, Alabama; Floyd
County, Georgia; and Madison and McNairy Counties, Tennessee.
Designate approximately 8.4 ha (20.5 ac) of critical
habitat for fleshy-fruit gladecress in Lawrence and Morgan Counties,
Alabama.
We will seek peer review. We are seeking comments from independent
specialists to ensure that our critical habitat proposal is based on
scientifically sound data and analyses. We have invited these peer
reviewers to comment on our specific assumptions and conclusions in
this critical habitat proposal. Because we will consider all comments
and information we receive during the comment period, our final
determinations may differ from this proposal.

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 other concerned government agencies, the
scientific community, industry, or any other interested party
concerning this proposed rule. We particularly seek comments
concerning:
(1) The reasons why we should or should not designate habitat as
``critical habitat'' under section 4 of the Act including whether there
are threats to the species from human activity, the degree of which can
be expected to increase due to the designation, and whether that
increase in threat outweighs the benefit of designation such that the
designation of critical habitat may not be prudent.
(2) Specific information on:
(a) The amount and distribution of Short's bladderpod, whorled
sunflower, or fleshy-fruit gladecress habitat;
(b) What areas, that were occupied at the time of listing (or are
currently occupied) and that contain features essential to the
conservation of the species, should be included in the designation and
why;

[[Page 47061]]

(c) Special management considerations or protection that may be
needed in critical habitat areas we are proposing, including managing
for the potential effects of climate change; and
(d) What areas not occupied at the time of listing are essential
for the conservation of the species and why.
(3) Land use designations and current or planned activities in the
subject areas and their possible impacts on proposed critical habitat.
(4) Information on the projected and reasonably likely impacts of
climate change on Short's bladderpod, whorled sunflower, fleshy-fruit
gladecress, and proposed critical habitat.
(5) Any probable economic, national security, or other relevant
impacts of designating any area that may be included in the final
designation; in particular, we seek information on any impacts on small
entities or families, and the benefits of including or excluding areas
that exhibit these impacts.
(6) Whether any specific areas we are proposing for critical
habitat designation should be considered for exclusion under section
4(b)(2) of the Act, and whether the benefits of potentially excluding
any specific area outweigh the benefits of including that area under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
(7) Whether we could improve or modify our approach to designating
critical habitat in any way to provide for greater public participation
and understanding, or to better accommodate public concerns and
comments.
You may submit your comments and materials concerning this proposed
rule by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. We request that you
send comments only by the methods described in the ADDRESSES section.
We will post your entire comment--including your personal
identifying information--on https://www.regulations.gov. You may request
at the top of your document that we withhold personal information such
as your street address, phone number, or email address from public
review; however, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.
Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting
documentation we used in preparing this proposed rule, will be
available for public inspection on https://www.regulations.gov, or by
appointment, during normal business hours, at the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Tennessee Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

Previous Federal Actions

All previous Federal actions are described in the proposed rule to
list Short's bladderpod, whorled sunflower, and fleshy-fruit gladecress
as endangered species under the Act, published elsewhere in today's
Federal Register.

Background

It is our intent to discuss below only those topics directly
relevant to the designation of critical habitat for Short's bladderpod,
whorled sunflower, and the fleshy-fruit gladecress. For information
related to the listing of these species, see the proposed rule to list
these species as endangered, published elsewhere in today's Federal
Register.

Critical Habitat

Background

Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the Act as:
(1) The specific areas within the geographic 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, live
trapping, and transplantation, and, in the extraordinary case where
population pressures within a given ecosystem cannot be otherwise
relieved, may include regulated taking.
Critical habitat receives protection under section 7 of the Act
through the requirement that Federal agencies 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
non-Federal landowners. Where a landowner 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.
Under the first prong of the Act's definition of critical habitat,
areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time
it was listed are included in a critical habitat designation if they
contain physical or biological features (1) which are essential to the
conservation of the species and (2) which may require special
management considerations or protection. For these areas, critical
habitat designations identify, to the extent known using the best
scientific and commercial data available, those physical or biological
features that are essential to the conservation of the species (such as
space, food, cover, and protected habitat). In identifying those
physical and biological features within an area, we focus on the
principal biological or physical constituent elements (primary
constituent elements such as roost sites, nesting grounds, seasonal
wetlands, water quality, tide, soil type) that are essential to the
conservation of the species. Primary constituent elements are those
specific elements of the physical or biological features that provide
for a species' life-history processes and are essential to the
conservation of the species.
Under the second prong of the Act's definition of critical habitat,
we can designate critical habitat in areas outside the geographical
area occupied by the species at the time it is listed, upon a
determination that such areas are essential for the conservation of the
species. For example, an area currently occupied by the species but
that was not occupied at the time of listing may be essential to the
conservation of the species and may be included in the critical habitat
designation. We designate critical habitat in areas outside the
geographical area occupied by a species only when a designation

[[Page 47062]]

limited to its range would be inadequate to ensure the conservation of
the species.
Section 4 of the Act requires that we designate critical habitat on
the basis of the best scientific data available. Further, our Policy on
Information Standards Under the Act (published in the Federal Register
on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271)), the Information Quality Act (section
515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for
Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106-554; H.R. 5658)), and our associated
Information Quality Guidelines, provide criteria, establish procedures,
and provide guidance to ensure that our decisions are based on the best
scientific data available. They require our biologists, to the extent
consistent with the Act and with the use of the best scientific data
available, to use primary and original sources of information as the
basis for recommendations to designate critical habitat.
When we are determining which areas should be designated as
critical habitat, our primary source of information is generally the
information developed during the listing process for the species.
Additional information sources may include the recovery plan for the
species, articles in peer-reviewed journals, conservation plans
developed by States and counties, scientific status surveys and
studies, biological assessments, other unpublished materials, or
experts' opinions or personal knowledge.
Habitat is dynamic, and species may move from one area to another
over time. Climate change will be a particular challenge for
biodiversity because the interaction of additional stressors associated
with climate change and current stressors may push species beyond their
ability to survive (Lovejoy 2005, pp. 325-326). The synergistic
implications of climate change and habitat fragmentation are the most
threatening facet of climate change for biodiversity (Hannah and
Lovejoy 2005, p. 4). Current climate change predictions for terrestrial
areas in the Northern Hemisphere indicate warmer air temperatures, more
intense precipitation events, and increased summer continental drying
(Field et al. 1999, pp. 1-3; Hayhoe et al. 2004, p. 12422; Cayan et al.
2005, p. 6; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2007, p.
1181). Climate change may lead to increased frequency and duration of
severe storms and droughts (Golladay et al. 2004, p. 504; McLaughlin et
al. 2002, p. 6074; Cook et al. 2004, p. 1015).
We recognize that critical habitat designated at a particular point
in time may not include all of the habitat areas that we may later
determine are necessary for the recovery of the species. For these
reasons, a critical habitat designation does not signal that habitat
outside the designated area is unimportant or may not be needed for
recovery of the species. Areas that are important to the conservation
of the species, both inside and outside the critical habitat
designation, will continue to be subject to: (1) Conservation actions
implemented under section 7(a)(1) of the Act, (2) regulatory
protections afforded by the requirement in section 7(a)(2) of the Act
for Federal agencies to ensure their actions are not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened
species, and (3) section 9 of the Act's prohibitions on taking any
individual of the species, including taking caused by actions that
affect habitat. Federally funded or permitted projects affecting listed
species outside their designated critical habitat areas may still
result in jeopardy findings in some cases. These protections and
conservation tools will continue to contribute to recovery of this
species. Similarly, critical habitat designations made on the basis of
the best available information at the time of designation will not
control the direction and substance of future recovery plans, habitat
conservation plans (HCPs), or other species conservation planning
efforts if new information available at the time of these planning
efforts calls for a different outcome.

Prudency 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 shall designate critical
habitat at the time the species is determined to be an endangered or
threatened species. 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, collection, 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.
There is currently no imminent threat of take attributed to
collection or vandalism for any of these species (see the Factor B
analysis in the proposed listing rule, published elsewhere in today's
Federal Register), and identification and mapping of critical habitat
is not expected to initiate any such threat. In the absence of finding
that the designation of critical habitat would increase threats to a
species, if there are any benefits to a critical habitat designation,
then a prudent finding is warranted. Here, the potential benefits of
designation include: (1) Triggering consultation under section 7 of the
Act, in new areas for actions in which there may be a Federal nexus
where it would not otherwise occur because, for example, it is or has
become unoccupied or the occupancy is in question; (2) focusing
conservation activities on the most essential features and areas; (3)
providing educational benefits to State or county governments or
private entities; and (4) preventing people from causing inadvertent
harm to the species. Therefore, because we have determined that the
designation of critical habitat will not likely increase the degree of
threat to the species and may provide some measure of benefit, we find
that designation of critical habitat is prudent for Short's bladderpod,
whorled sunflower, and fleshy-fruit gladecress.

Critical Habitat Determinability

Having determined that designation is prudent, under section
4(a)(3) of the Act we must find whether critical habitat for the three
species is determinable. Our regulations at 50 CFR 424.12(a)(2) state
that critical habitat is not determinable when one or both of the
following situations exist:
(i) Information sufficient to perform required analyses of the
impacts of the designation is lacking, or
(ii) The biological needs of the species are not sufficiently well
known to permit identification of an area as critical habitat.
We reviewed the available information pertaining to the biological
needs of the species and habitat characteristics where these species
are located. This and other information represent the best scientific
data available and have led us to conclude that the designation of
critical habitat is determinable for Short's bladderpod, whorled
sunflower, and fleshy-fruit gladecress.

Physical or Biological Features

In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) and 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act and
regulations at 50 CFR 424.12, in determining which areas within the
geographical area occupied by the species at the time of listing to
designate as critical habitat, we consider the physical or biological
features that are essential to the conservation of the species and
which may require special management

[[Page 47063]]

considerations or protection. These include, but are not limited to:
(1) Space for individual and population growth and for normal
behavior;
(2) Food, water, air, light, minerals, or other nutritional or
physiological requirements;
(3) Cover or shelter;
(4) Sites for breeding, reproduction, or rearing (or development)
of offspring; and
(5) Habitats that are protected from disturbance or are
representative of the historic geographical and ecological
distributions of a species.
We derive the specific physical or biological features required for
Short's bladderpod, whorled sunflower, and fleshy-fruit gladecress from
studies of these species' habitats, ecology, and life history as
described below.
Space for Individual and Population Growth and for Normal Behavior
Short's bladderpod. This species occurs in Kentucky and Tennessee
on soils and outcrops of calcareous geologic formations along the
mainstem or tributaries of the Kentucky and Cumberland Rivers,
respectively. The calcareous bedrock formations on which Short's
bladderpod primarily is found are limestones of Mississippian,
Silurian, or Ordivician age, with siltstone or shale interbedded at
some occurrences (Kentucky Geological Survey, https://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=d32dc6edbf9245cdbac3fd7e255d3974; Moore et al. 1967;
Wilson 1972, 1975, 1979; Wilson et al. 1972, 1980; Marsh et al. 1973;
Finlayson et al. 1980; Kerrigan and Wilson 2002). Soils where Short's
bladderpod occurs in the Kentucky and Cumberland River drainages have
formed from weathering of the underlying calcareous bedrock formations,
producing shallow or rocky, well-drained soils in which bedrock
outcrops are common (USDA 1975, pp. 12-17; USDA 1981, pp. 46-47; USDA
1985, p. 64; USDA 2001, pp. 19-20, 28, 59, 64; USDA 2004a, pp. 22-23,
36-37, 83, 87; USDA 2004b, pp. 21, 75, 82). The species inhabits these
outcrops and soils where they occur on steeply sloped bluffs or
hillsides, primarily with a south- to west-facing aspect (Shea 1993, p.
16). The combination of calcareous outcrops and shallow soils, steep
slopes, and hot and dry conditions present on south- to west-facing
slopes regulates the encroachment of herbaceous and woody species that
exclude Short's bladderpod from vegetation communities present on more
mesic sites. Where these conditions occur near the mainstem and
tributaries of the Kentucky River in Kentucky and Cumberland River in
Tennessee, they provide space for Short's bladderpod's individual and
population growth.
Therefore, based on the above information, we identify steeply
sloped hillsides or bluffs with calcareous outcrops or shallow or
rocky, well-drained soils, typically on south- to west-facing aspects
as an essential physical or biological feature for this species.
Whorled sunflower. This species occurs in remnant prairie habitats
found in uplands and swales of headwater streams in the Coosa River
watershed in Georgia and Alabama and in the East Fork Forked Deer and
Tuscumbia Rivers' watersheds in Tennessee. The soil types are silt
loams, silty clay loams, and fine sandy loams at the sites where
whorled sunflower occurs. These soils share the characteristics of
being strongly to extremely acidic and having low to moderate natural
fertility and low to medium organic matter content (USDA 1997, pp. 73-
76; USDA 1978a, pp. 24-54; USDA 1978b, p. 20; USDA 1978c, p. 44). The
silt loams occupy various land forms ranging from broad upland ridges
to low stream terraces. These soils formed from weathered limestone or
shale (USDA 1978a, pp. 24-54) or in alluvium (clay, silt, sand, gravel,
or similar material deposited by running water) derived from loess
(predominantly silt-sized sediment, which is formed by the accumulation
of wind-blown dust) and are moderately well-drained to well-drained.
The silty clay loams formed in alluvium or weathered limestone on
floodplains, stream terraces, or upland depressions and are poorly
drained. The fine sandy loams are on floodplains and are occasionally
flooded during winter and early spring. Where these physical features
occur within the headwaters of the Coosa River in Alabama and Georgia
and the East Fork Forked Deer and Tuscumbia Rivers in Tennessee, they
provide space for the whorled sunflower's individual and population
growth.
Therefore, based on the information above, we identify silt loam,
silty clay loam, or fine sandy loam soils on land forms including broad
uplands, depressions, stream terraces, and floodplains as an essential
physical or biological feature for this species.
Fleshy-fruit gladecress. This species is endemic to glade
communities associated with limestone outcrops in Lawrence and Morgan
Counties, Alabama (Rollins 1963). The terms glade and cedar glades
refer to shallow-soiled, open areas that are dominated by herbaceous
plants and characterized by exposed sheets of limestone or gravel, with
Juniperus virginiana (eastern red cedar) frequently occurring in the
deeper soils along their edges (Hilton 1997, p. 1; Baskin et al. 1986,
p. 138; Baskin and Baskin 1985, p. 1). Much of the cedar glade habitat
in northern Alabama is in a degraded condition, and populations of
fleshy-fruit gladecress, in many cases, persist in glade-like remnants
exhibiting various degrees of disturbance including pastures, roadside
rights-of-way, and cultivated or plowed fields (Hilton 1997, p. 5). The
limestone outcrops, gravel, and shallow soils present in cedar glades
and glade-like remnants provide space for individual and population
growth of fleshy-fruit gladecress by regulating the encroachment of
herbaceous and woody vegetation that would exclude fleshy-fruit
gladecress from plant communities found on deeper soils.
Therefore, based on the information above, we identify shallow-
soiled, open areas with exposed limestone bedrock or gravel that are
dominated by herbaceous plants as an essential physical or biological
feature for this species.
Food, Water, Air, Light, Minerals, or Other Nutritional or
Physiological Requirements
Short's bladderpod. Within the physical settings described above
and the atypical physical setting where the species occurs in Indiana,
the most vigorous (Shea 1992, p. 24) and stable (TDEC 20098, p. 1)
Short's bladderpod occurrences are found in patches within forested
sites where the canopy has remained relatively open over time.
Overstory shading has been implicated as a factor contributing to the
disappearance of Short's bladderpod from four historically occupied
sites and has been identified as a limiting factor at nearly one-fifth
of remaining extant occurrences. Competition or shading from invasive,
nonnative, herbaceous and shrub species is a documented threat to one-
third of the extant Short's bladderpod occurrences. Therefore, based on
the information above, we identify forest communities with low levels
of canopy closure or openings in the canopy, in which invasive,
nonnative plants are absent or are present at sufficiently low levels
of abundance that would not inhibit growth or reproduction of Short's
bladderpod plants, to be an essential physical or biological feature
for this species.
Whorled sunflower. This species is found in moist, prairie-like
remnants, which in a more natural condition exist as openings in
woodlands and along

[[Page 47064]]

adjacent creeks. Today, these conditions are most often found in small
remnant patches or old field habitats adjacent to roadsides, railroad
rights-of-way, and streams bordered by agricultural lands. Whorled
sunflower grows most vigorously where there is little to no forest
canopy cover, plants receive full sunlight for most of the day (Schotz
2011, p. 5) and herbaceous species that are characteristic of moist-
site prairie vegetation are found.
Dominant grasses include Schizachyrium scoparium (little bluestem),
Sorghastrum nutans (Indian grass), Andropogon gerardii (big bluestem),
and Panicum virgatum (switch grass). Other common herbaceous associates
include Bidens bipinnata (Spanish needles), Carex cherokeensis
(Cherokee sedge), Hypericum sphaerocarpum (roundseed St. Johnswort),
Helianthus angustifolius (swamp sunflower), Helenium autumnale (common
sneezeweed), Lobelia cardinalis (cardinal flower), Pycnanthemum
virginianum (Virginia mountainmint), Physostegia virginiana (obedient
plant), Saccharum giganteum (sugarcane plumegrass), Silphium
terebinthinaceum (prairie rosinweed), Sporobolus heterolepis (prairie
dropseed), Symphyotrichum novae-angliae (New England aster), (Tennessee
Division of Natural Areas 2008, p. 5; Matthews et al. 2002, p. 23;
Schotz 2001, p. 3). Encroachment by woody vegetation is a threat to
whorled sunflower populations when left unmanaged in old fields,
transportation rights-of-way, and borders of agricultural field, as
well as in densely shaded silvicultural plantations or forested sites.
To prevent excessive shading or competition, these sites should be
subjected to periodic disturbance or management to reduce or minimize
encroachment of woody vegetation where a forest canopy is not present,
or to provide low levels of canopy and midstory closure where they
occur in woodlands.
Therefore, based on the information above, we identify sites in old
fields, woodlands, and along streams, which receive full or partial
sunlight for most of the day and where vegetation characteristics of
moist prairie communities is present, to be an essential physical or
biological feature for this species.
Fleshy-fruit gladecress. In Morgan, Lawrence, Franklin and Colbert
Counties in northwestern Alabama, glades occur in association with
outcrops of Bangor Limestone, typically as level areas with exposed
sheets of limestone or limestone gravel interspersed with fingers of
cedar-hardwood vegetation. The Bangor Limestone is often near the soil
surface, and can be seen in rocky cultivated fields and as small
outcroppings at the base of low-lying forested hills (Hilton 1997).
All species within the small genus Leavenworthia are adapted to the
unique physical characteristics of glade habitats, perhaps the most
important of these being a combination of shallow soil depth and the
resulting tendency to maintain temporary high moisture content at or
very near the surface (Rollins 1963, pp. 4-6). Typically, only a few
centimeters of soil overlie the bedrock, or, in spots, the soil may be
almost lacking and the surface barren. The glade habitats that support
all Leavenworthia species are extremely wet during the late winter and
early spring and become extremely dry in summer (Rollins 1963, p. 5).
These glades can vary in size from as small as a few meters to larger
than 1 square kilometer (km\2\) (0.37 square miles (mi\2\)) and are
characterized as having an open, sunny aspect (lacking canopy)
(Quarterman 1950, p. 1; Rollins 1963, p. 5).
Fleshy-fruit gladecress populations are restricted to well-lighted
portions of limestone outcroppings. Baskin and Baskin (1988, p. 837)
indicated that a high light requirement was common among the endemic
plants of rock outcrop plant communities in the un-glaciated eastern
United States. This obligate need for high light has been supported by
field observations showing that these eastern outcrop endemics, such as
fleshy-fruit gladecress, grow on well-lighted portion of the outcrops
but not in adjacent shaded forests; photosynthesize best in full sun,
with a reduction in the presence of heavy shading; and compete poorly
with plants that shade them (Baskin and Baskin 1988, p. 837). The most
vigorous populations of fleshy-fruit gladecress are located in areas
which receive full, or near full, sunlight at the canopy level, and
have limited herbaceous competition (Hilton 1997, p. 5). Under these
conditions, herbaceous species commonly found in glades in association
with fleshy-fruit gladecress are listed in Table 1. Shading and
competition are potential threats at the two largest populations of
fleshy-fruit gladecress (Hilton 1997, p. 68). Nonnative plants
including Ligustrum vulgare (common privet) and Lonicera maackii (bush
honeysuckle) are a significant threat in many glades due to the ever
present disturbances that allow for their colonization (Hilton 1997, p.
68).

Table 1--Characteristic Flora of Cedar Glade Habitat
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scientific name Common name
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary Characteristic Herbs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Astragalus tennesseensis............... Tennessee milkvetch.
Leavenworthia alabamica................ Alabama gladecress.
Leavenworthia uniflora................. Michaux's gladecress.
Petalostemum spp....................... Prairie clover.
Delphinium tricorne.................... Dwarf larkspur.
Arabis laevigata....................... Smooth rockcress.
Schoenolirion croceum.................. Yellow sunnybell.
Scutellaria parvula.................... Small skullcap.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Frequent Woody Species
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Juniperus virginiana................... Eastern red cedar.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Therefore, based on the information above, we identify open, sunny
exposures of limestone outcrops of the Bangor formation within glade
plant communities that are characterized by the species listed in Table
1 and have relatively thin, rocky soils that are classified within the
Colbert or Talbot soils mapping units as an essential

[[Page 47065]]

physical or biological feature for this species.
Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, or Rearing (or Development) of
Offspring
Short's bladderpod. This species likely is self-incompatible, and
nearly 50 percent of extant occurrences are threatened with adverse
effects associated with small populations including loss of genetic
variation, inbreeding depression, and reduced availability of
compatible mates. For this reason, it is essential that habitat for
pollinators be conserved in close proximity to known occurrences to
increase the likelihood of pollen exchange among compatible mates.
Where possible, habitat patches should be protected that would reduce
fragmentation between multiple occurrences among which pollinator
dispersal could facilitate gene flow.
Pollinators specific to Short's bladderpod have not been studied.
Bees from the families Halictidae, Apidae, and Andrenidae were found to
be the most common pollinators visiting four other species in the genus
Physaria, and flies from the families Syrphidae, Tachinidae, and
Conopidae also carried Physaria pollen (Edens-Meier et al. 2011, p.
293; Tepedino et al. 2012, pp. 143-145). In their study of pollinators
of three species of Physaria, Tepedino et al. (2012, p. 144) estimated
that maximum flight distance ranged from 100 m (330 ft) to 1.4 km (0.9
mi) for Andrenids and 40 to 100 m (130 to 330 ft) for Halictid bees.
Because native, ground-nesting bees in the Andrenidae and Halictidae
were the most reliable visitors and pollinators of the Physaria species
they studied, Tepedino et al. (2012, p. 145) recommended avoiding
physical disruption of the soil nesting substrate and its drainage
patterns in sites harboring bee nests.
Short's bladderpod is thought to form soil seed banks (Dr. Carol
Baskin, Professor, University of Kentucky, pers. comm., December 2012),
and persistence of populations likely is dependent on formation and
maintenance of this pool of dormant individuals. Sites where the
species occurs should not be subjected to activities that would remove
the soil seed bank. Moderate soil disturbance, however, could promote
germination from the seed bank in locations where overstory shading and
competition from herbaceous and shrub species have caused population
declines. Positive responses have been observed following removal of
competing vegetation and soil disturbance associated with grading of
the roadside at the site where Short's bladderpod occurs in Indiana.
Therefore, based on the information above, we identify reproduction
sites containing extant occurrences of the species within habitat
patches providing suitable pollinator habitat, and in which surface
features and bladderpod seedbed are not subjected to heavy disturbance,
to be an essential physical or biological feature for this species.
Whorled sunflower. This species is self-incompatible, and the lack
of compatible mates has been suggested as a possible cause of reduced
achene production in one population (Ellis et al. 2009, p. 1840).
Degraded habitat conditions also contribute to poor individual growth
and reproductive output in whorled sunflower. Where woody vegetation
encroaches on whorled sunflower populations, growth and flower
production are reduced. While the species can produce new stems via
shoot generation from rhizomes, the production of genetically distinct
individuals needed to support population growth and maintain genetic
variation within the species is dependent on flowering and outcrossing
of compatible mates and production of viable achenes. Therefore, based
on the information above, we identify the presence of compatible mates
in sites which receive full or partial sunlight for most of the day to
be an essential physical or biological feature for this species.
Fleshy-fruit gladecress. Glades where fleshy-fruit gladecress grows
have very shallow soils overlying horizontally bedded limestone.
Precipitation tends to be very seasonal within the species' geographic
range, with wet weather concentrated in the winter and early spring and
summer (Lyons and Antonovics 1991).
Fleshy-fruit gladecress is an annual species, the seeds of which
germinate in the fall, overwinter as rosettes, and commence a month-
long flowering period beginning in mid-March. The first seeds mature in
late April, and during most years, the plants dry and drop all of their
seeds by the end of May. Leavenworthia species are dormant by early
summer, helping them to survive the dry period as seed; this dormancy
is likely one of the major evolutionary adaptations in this genus
enabling its species to endure the extreme drought conditions of late
summer (Quarterman 1950, p. 5). As an annual, this species' long-term
survival is dependent upon its ability to reproduce and reseed an area
every year. Thus, populations decline and move toward extinction if
conditions remain unsuitable for reproduction for many consecutive
years.
The most vigorous populations of fleshy-fruit gladecress are
located in areas which receive full, or near full, sunlight at the
canopy level and have limited herbaceous competition (Hilton 1997).
Rollins (1963) documented the loss of fleshy-fruit gladecress
individuals caused by invading weedy species in fallow agricultural
fields in northern Alabama. Under natural conditions, glades are
edaphically (related to or caused by particular soil conditions)
maintained through processes of drought and erosion interacting with
other processes that disrupt encroachment of competing vegetation. The
shallow soil, exposed rock, and frequently hot, dry summers create
xeric conditions that regulate competition and shading from encroaching
vegetation (Hilton 1997, p. 5; McDaniel and Lyons 1987, p. 6; Baskin et
al. 1986, p. 138; Rollins 1963, p. 5).
Therefore, based on this information, we identify the presence of
shallow soil and exposed rock that discourage competition and shading
from encroaching vegetation to be an essential physical or biological
feature for this species.

Primary Constituent Elements

Under the Act and its implementing regulations, we are required to
identify the physical or biological features essential to the
conservation of Short's bladderpod, whorled sunflower, and fleshy-fruit
gladecress in areas occupied at the time of listing, focusing on the
features' primary constituent elements (PCEs). We consider PCEs to be
those specific elements of the physical or biological features and
habitat characteristics required to sustain the species' life-history
processes and are essential to the conservation of the species.
Based on our current knowledge of the physical or biological
features and habitat characteristics required to sustain the species'
life-history processes, we determine that the PCEs described below are
specific to these three plants.
Short's Bladderpod
(1) PCE 1--Bedrock formations and outcrops of calcareous limestone,
sometimes with interbedded shale or siltstone, in close proximity to
the mainstem or tributaries of the Kentucky and Cumberland rivers.
These outcrop sites or areas of suitable bedrock geology should be
located on steeply sloped hillsides or bluffs, typically on south- to
west-facing aspects.
(2) PCE 2--Shallow or rocky, well-drained soils formed from the

[[Page 47066]]

weathering of underlying calcareous bedrock formations, which are
undisturbed or subjected to minimal disturbance, so as to retain
habitat for ground-nesting pollinators and potential for maintenance of
a soil seed bank.
(3) PCE 3--Forest communities with low levels of canopy closure or
openings in the canopy to provide adequate sunlight for individual and
population growth. Invasive, nonnative plants must be absent or present
in sufficiently low numbers to not inhibit growth or reproduction of
Short's bladderpod.
Whorled Sunflower
(1) PCE 1--Silt loam, silty clay loam, or fine sandy loam soils on
land forms including broad uplands, depressions, stream terraces, and
floodplains within the headwaters of the Coosa River in Alabama and
Georgia and the East Fork Forked Deer and Tuscumbia rivers in
Tennessee.
(2) PCE 2--Sites in which forest canopy is absent, or where woody
vegetation is present at sufficiently low densities to provide full or
partial sunlight to whorled sunflower plants for most of the day, and
which support vegetation characteristic of moist prairie communities.
Invasive, nonnative plants must be absent or present in sufficiently
low numbers to not inhibit growth or reproduction of whorled sunflower.
(3) PCE 3--Occupied sites in which a sufficient number of
compatible mates are present for outcrossing and production of viable
achenes to occur.
Fleshy-fruit Gladecress
(1) PCE 1--Shallow-soiled, open areas with exposed limestone
bedrock or gravel that are dominated by herbaceous vegetation
characteristic of glade communities.
(2) PCE 2--Open or well-lighted areas of exposed limestone bedrock
or gravel that ensure fleshy-fruit gladecress plants remain unshaded
for a significant portion of the day.
(3) PCE 3--Glade habitat that is protected from both native and
invasive, nonnative plants to minimize competition and shading of
fleshy-fruit gladecress.

Special Management Considerations or Protection

When designating critical habitat, we assess whether the specific
areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time
of listing contain physical and biological features which are essential
to the conservation of the species and which may require special
management considerations or protection. We believe each unit included
in these designations requires special management and protections.
Short's Bladderpod
The features essential to the conservation of Short's bladderpod
may require special management considerations or protection to reduce
the following threats: (1) Actions that would directly result in
removal of soils or indirectly cause their loss due to increased rates
of erosion; (2) building, paving, or grazing of livestock within or
upslope of Short's bladderpod sites that alters water movement or
causes soil erosion that results in sediment deposition in suitable
habitat; (3) blasting or removal of hard rock and soil substrates; (4)
dumping of trash and debris; (5) prolonged inundation of sites due to
manipulation of regulated waters for flood control or other purposes;
(6) indiscriminate maintenance of transportation rights-of-way,
including grading, mowing, or herbicide application; and (8) shading
and competition due to forest canopy closure and encroachment of
invasive, nonnative plants.
Management activities that could ameliorate these threats include,
but are not limited to: (1) Avoiding areas located in or upslope of
Short's bladderpod sites when planning for location of commercial or
residential development; maintenance, construction, or expansion of
utility and transportation infrastructure; and access for livestock;
(2) removing trash and debris that are dumped onto or upslope of
Short's bladderpod sites; (3) locating suitable habitat, determining
presence or absence of Short's bladderpod, and protecting or restoring
as many sites or complexes of sites as possible; (4) evaluating the
effects of flow regulation on Short's bladderpod occurrences within the
fluctuation zone of regulated river reaches and adjusting management to
avoid or minimize prolonged periods of inundation; (5) reaching out to
all landowners, including private, State, and Federal landowners, to
raise awareness of the plant and its habitat; (5) providing technical
or financial assistance to landowners to help in the design and
implementation of management actions that protect the plant and its
habitat; (6) managing, including reducing, canopy cover and competition
from native and invasive, nonnative plants to maintain an intact native
forest community with canopy openings or low levels of canopy closure.
Whorled Sunflower
The features essential to the conservation of whorled sunflower may
require special management considerations or protection to reduce the
following threats: (1) Soil disturbance due to silvicultural site
preparation, timber harvest, or cultivation of row crops; (2)
indiscriminate herbicide use or mowing; (3) conversion of remnant
prairie habitat to agricultural or industrial forestry uses; and (4)
excessive shading or competition from native woody species or invasive,
nonnative plants.
Management activities that could ameliorate these threats include,
but are not limited to: (1) Avoiding areas located in close proximity
to whorled sunflower sites when planning for establishing new sites for
agriculture or pulpwood and timber production; (2) ensuring that
herbicide use or mowing does not occur in whorled sunflower sites
during the species' growing season; (3) locating suitable habitat,
determining presence or absence of whorled sunflower, and protecting or
restoring as many sites or complexes of sites as possible; (4)
managing, including prescribed burning, mowing, and bush-hogging, to
reduce canopy cover, minimize competition from native and invasive,
nonnative plants, and maintain characteristic moist prairie vegetation;
(5) reaching out to all landowners, including private, State, and
Federal landowners, to raise awareness of the plant and its habitat;
and (6) providing technical or financial assistance to landowners to
help in the design and implementation of management actions that
protect the plant and its habitat.
Fleshy-Fruit Gladecress
The features essential to the conservation of fleshy-fruit
gladecress may require special management considerations or protection
to reduce the following threats: (1) Actions that remove the soils and
alter the surface geology of the glades; (2) building or paving over
the glades; (3) construction or excavation up slope that alters water
movement (sheet flow or seepage) down slope to gladecress sites; (4)
planting trees adjacent to the edges of an outcrop resulting in shading
of the glade and accumulations of leaf litter and tree debris; (5)
encroachment by nonnative and native invading trees, shrubs, and vines
that shade the glade; (6) the use and timing of application of certain
herbicides that can harm gladecress seedlings; and (7) access by cattle
to gladecress sites where habitat and plants may be trampled.
Management activities that could ameliorate these threats include
(but are not limited to): (1) Avoiding limestone glades when planning
development,

[[Page 47067]]

conversion to agriculture, and other disturbances to glade complexes;
(2) avoiding above-ground construction and/or excavations in locations
that would interfere with natural water movement to gladecress habitat
sites; (3) locating suitable habitat and determining the presence or
absence of the species and identifying areas with glade complexes and
protecting or restoring as many complexes as possible; (4) reaching out
to all landowners, including private and State landowners, to raise
awareness of the plant and its specialized habitat; (5) providing
technical or financial assistance to landowners to help in the design
and implementation of management actions that protect the plant and its
habitat; (6) avoiding pine tree plantings near glades; and (7)
managing, including brush removal, to maintain an intact native glade
vegetation community.
More information on the special management considerations for each
critical habitat unit is provided in the individual unit descriptions
below.

Criteria Used To Identify Critical Habitat

As required by section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we use the best
scientific data available to designate critical habitat. We review
available information pertaining to the habitat requirements of the
species. In accordance with the Act and its implementing regulation at
50 CFR 424.12(e), we also consider whether designating additional areas
outside those occupied at the time of listing is necessary to ensure
the conservation of the species. As discussed in more detail below, we
are not currently proposing to designate any areas outside the
geographical area occupied by the species because occupied areas are
sufficient for the conservation of the species, and we have no evidence
that these species existed beyond their current geographical ranges in
habitat types that are not represented by the critical habitat units we
propose below. Below we go into more detail about the criteria used to
identify critical habitat for Short's bladderpod, whorled sunflower,
and fleshy-fruit gladecress.
Areas Occupied by Short's Bladderpod
For the purpose of proposing critical habitat for Short's
bladderpod, we define the geographical area currently occupied by the
species as required by section 3(5)(A)(i) of the Act. We considered
those sites to be occupied where (1) Element Occurrence Records from
State conservation agencies (INHDC 2012; KNHP 2012; TNHID 2012)
indicate that the species was extant at the time of proposed listing
rule (i.e., is considered currently extant), and (2) we determine that
forest communities are present and no evidence of substantial ground
disturbance is visible from inspection of aerial photography, available
through Google Earth.
Areas Not Occupied by Short's Bladderpod
We considered whether there were any specific areas outside the
geographical area found to be occupied by Short's bladderpod that are
essential for the conservation of the species as required by section
3(5)(A)(i) of the Act. First, we considered whether there was
sufficient area for the conservation of the species within the occupied
areas determined above. In doing so, we evaluated whether protection or
management of currently occupied sites and nearby suitable habitats
would provide adequate representation, redundancy, and resiliency for
Short's bladderpod conservation. The 26 extant occurrences of Short's
bladderpod included in critical habitat units proposed below are
distributed among habitats that are representative of those in which
the species' occurred in its historical geographic range and, if
conserved, should provide adequate redundancy for the species to endure
localized, stochastic disturbances. While populations are small at some
of these occurrences, there is sufficient habitat available to support
population growth; however, some management might be necessary to
improve habitat conditions and population growth rates. Conserving or
restoring habitat and viable populations at all occupied sites should
provide conditions necessary for successful reproduction and population
growth and resiliency for the species to recover from acute demographic
effects of localized disturbances. Therefore, no areas outside of the
currently occupied geographical areas would be essential for the
conservation of the species, and we have not proposed any additional
areas.
Mapping Short's Bladderpod Critical Habitat
Once we determined the occupied areas, we next delineated proposed
critical habitat unit boundaries based on the presence of primary
constituent elements. We used data for geology (Kentucky Geological
Survey, available online at https://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=d32dc6edbf9245cdbac3fd7e255d3974; Moore I. 1967; Wilson
1972, 1975, 1979; Wilson I. 1972, 1980; Marsh I. 1973; Finlayson I.
1980; Kerrigan and Wilson 2002), soils (USDA, Soil Survey Geographic
Database, available online at https://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov),
topographic contours, and locations of sites occupied by Short's
bladderpod (INHDC 2012; KNHP 2012; TNHID 2012) as a basis for
delineating units in ArcGIS. Additionally, we used aerial photography
available through Google Earth to determine vegetation cover and for
three-dimensional viewing of topographic features. We delineated units
around occupied sites, with boundaries determined by the combined
spatial arrangement of limestone bedrock, sometimes with interbedded
shale or siltstone; shallow or rocky, well-drained soils; steeply
sloped topography; and forest vegetation. In order to reduce threats
from adjacent land uses, we extended unit boundaries from ridge tops or
bluff lines above Short's bladderpod occurrences downslope to either
obvious breaks in slope gradient or to the edge of water bodies that
form a unit boundary. These units typically include individual occupied
sites; however, where appropriate we delineated units so that they
encompass more than one occupied site and span intervening areas in
which the primary constituent elements are present. We delineated units
spanning multiple occupied sites in order to minimize fragmentation and
provide areas for pollinator nesting and dispersal to promote gene flow
among extant occurrences.
Areas Occupied by Whorled Sunflower
For the purpose of designating critical habitat for whorled
sunflower, we defined the geographical area currently occupied by the
species as required by section 3(5)(A)(i) of the Act. We define
occupied areas in Georgia and Alabama as those areas where the species
was present during site visits by the Service during 2012. The most
recent survey data available from TNHID (2012) confirmed the presence
of whorled sunflower during 2005 and 2009, at the Madison and McNairy
County, Tennessee, populations, respectively. Based on inspection of
aerial photography for these locations, available through Google Earth,
habitat still is present at these sites and no evidence of substantial
ground disturbance was apparent; thus, we consider these sites to still
be occupied by whorled sunflower.
Areas Not Occupied by Whorled Sunflower
We considered whether there were any specific areas outside the
geographical area found to be occupied

[[Page 47068]]

by whorled sunflower that are essential for the conservation of the
species as required by section 3(5)(A)(i) of the Act. First, we
considered whether there was sufficient area for the conservation of
the species within the occupied areas determined above. In doing so, we
evaluated whether protection or management of currently occupied sites
and nearby suitable habitats would provide adequate representation,
redundancy, and resiliency for whorled sunflower's conservation. The
four extant populations of whorled sunflower are distributed among
habitats that we believe are representative of those in which the
species' occurred in its historical geographic range and, if conserved,
should provide adequate redundancy for the species to endure localized,
stochastic disturbances. While populations are small at most of these
occurrences, there is sufficient habitat available to support
population growth; however, management will be necessary to improve
habitat conditions and population growth rates. Conserving or restoring
habitat and viable populations at all occupied sites should provide
conditions necessary for successful reproduction and population growth
and resiliency for the species to recover from acute demographic
effects of localized disturbances. Therefore, no areas outside of the
currently occupied geographical areas would be essential for the
conservation of the species, and we have not proposed any additional
areas.
Mapping Whorled Sunflower Critical Habitat
Once we determined the occupied areas, we next delineated proposed
critical habitat unit boundaries based on the presence of primary
constituent elements. We used data for soils (USDA, Soil Survey
Geographic Database, available online at https://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov) and locations of sites occupied by whorled
sunflower as a basis for delineating units in ArcGIS. Additionally, we
used aerial photography available through Google Earth to determine
vegetation cover and for three-dimensional viewing of topographic
features. We delineated units around occupied sites, with boundaries
determined by the spatial arrangement of suitable soils (described
above in PCE 1 for whorled sunflower) and to provide opportunities for
minimizing fragmentation among subpopulations by restoring
characteristic prairie vegetation in areas currently used for
agricultural or industrial forestry purposes.
Areas Occupied by Fleshy-Fruit Gladecress
For the purpose of designating critical habitat for fleshy-fruit
gladecress, we defined the geographical area currently occupied by the
species as required by section 3(5)(A)(i) of the Act. We define
occupied areas as those where recent surveys in 2011 confirmed the
species was present (Shotz 2012, pers. comm.).
Areas Not Occupied by Fleshy-Fruit Gladecress
We considered whether there were any specific areas outside the
geographical area found to be occupied by the fleshy-fruit gladecress
that are essential for the conservation of the species as required by
section 3(5)(A)(ii) of the Act. First, we evaluated whether there was
sufficient area for the conservation of the species within the occupied
areas determined as described above. To guide what would be considered
needed for the species' conservation, we evaluated the six sites where
the species is known to occur. Currently occupied sites are distributed
across the historical range of the species and are representative of
the landscape settings and soil types that have been documented at
gladecress occurrences. Five of the six units proposed within occupied
areas contain suitable habitat (with special management) for natural
expansion of existing populations or possible future augmentation if
determined necessary during future recovery planning and
implementation. Therefore, no areas outside of the currently occupied
geographical areas would be essential for the conservation of the
species, and we have not proposed any additional areas.
Mapping Fleshy-Fruit Gladecress Critical Habitat
Once we determined the occupied areas, we next delineated proposed
critical habitat unit boundaries based on the presence of primary
constituent elements. We used various GIS layers, soil surveys, aerial
photography, and known locations of the extant and historical
populations. We used ArcGIS to delineate units around occupied sites,
encompassing adjacent areas where the primary constituent elements were
present to provide suitable habitat for natural expansion of the
populations. The six units in the proposed designation include the
species' entire historical range. All of the units contain the primary
constituent elements essential for the conservation of fleshy-fruit
gladecress.
When determining proposed critical habitat boundaries for all three
species, we made every effort to avoid including developed areas such
as lands covered by buildings, pavement, and other structures because
such lands lack physical or biological features necessary for the three
plants. The scale of the maps we prepared under the parameters for
publication within the Code of Federal Regulations may not reflect the
exclusion of such developed lands. Any such lands inadvertently left
inside critical habitat boundaries shown on the maps of this proposed
rule have been excluded by text in the proposed rule and are not
proposed for designation as critical habitat. Therefore, if the
critical habitat is finalized as proposed, a Federal action involving
these lands would not trigger section 7 consultation with respect to
critical habitat and the requirement of no adverse modification unless
the specific action would affect the physical or biological features in
adjacent critical habitat.
We are proposing for designation of critical habitat lands that we
have determined are occupied at the time of listing and contain
sufficient elements of physical or biological features to support life-
history processes essential for the conservation of Short's bladderpod,
whorled sunflower, or fleshy-fruit gladecress. Some units contain all
of the identified elements of physical or biological features and
support multiple life-history processes. Some units contain only some
elements of the physical or biological features necessary to support
the use of that particular habitat by Short's bladderpod, whorled
sunflower, or fleshy-fruit gladecress.
The critical habitat designation is defined by the map or maps, as
modified by any accompanying regulatory text, presented at the end of
this document in the Proposed Regulation Promulgation section. We
include more detailed information on the boundaries of the critical
habitat designation in the preamble of this document. We will make the
coordinates or plot points or both on which each map is based available
to the public on https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-
2013-0086, on our Internet site at https://www.fws.gov/cookeville, and
at the field office responsible for the designation (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT above).

Proposed Critical Habitat Designation

Short's Bladderpod

We are proposing 20 units as critical habitat for Short's
bladderpod. The critical habitat areas we describe below constitute our
current best assessment of

[[Page 47069]]

areas that meet the definition of critical habitat for Short's
bladderpod. All these units are occupied at the time of listing. The
areas we propose as critical habitat are: (1) Kings and Queens Bluff,
(2) Lock B Road, (3) Jarrel Ridge Road, (4) Cheatham Lake, (5) Harpeth
River, (6) Montgomery Bell Bridge, (7) Nashville and Western Railroad,
(8) River Trace, (9) Old Hickory Lake, (10) Coleman-Winston Bridge,
(11) Cordell Hull Reservoir, (12) Funns Branch, (13) Wartrace Creek,
(14) Camp Pleasant Branch, (15) Kentucky River, (16) Owenton Road, (17)
Little Benson Creek, (18) Boone Creek, (19) Delaney Ferry Road, and
(20) Bonebank Road. The approximate area of each proposed critical
habitat unit, broken down by land ownership, is shown in Table 20.

Table 2--Proposed Critical Habitat Units for Short's Bladderpod
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State/local ha Size of unit ha
Critical habitat unit Private ha (ac) (ac) Federal ha (ac) (ac)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Kings and Queens Bluff............... 7.6 (18.9) ................ * 3.0 (7.3) 7.6 (18.9)
2. Lock B Road.......................... 10.1 (25.0) ................ * 0.3 (0.8) 10.1 (25.0)
3. Jarrel Ridge Road.................... 5.2 (12.8) ................ * 0.4 (1.1) 5.2 (12.8)
4. Cheatham Lake........................ 19.1 (47.2) 3.4 (8.3) 4.9 (12.0) 27.3 (67.5)
5. Harpeth River........................ 8.2 (20.3) ................ 17.3 (42.8) 25.5 (63.1)
6. Montgomery Bell Bridge............... 2.1 (5.3) ................ 9.0 (22.3) 11.2 (27.7)
7. Nashville and Western Railroad....... 20.8 (51.4) 8.1 (20.0) 1.5 (3.8) 30.5 (75.3)
8. River Trace.......................... 42.8 (105.7) ................ * 5.6 (13.8) 42.8 (105.7)
9. Old Hickory Lake..................... 1.9 (4.8) ................ 2.9 (7.1) 4.8 (11.9)
10. Coleman-Winston Bridge.............. 4.1 (10.1) ................ 3.3 (8.1) 7.4 (18.2)
11. Cordell Hull Reservoir.............. ................ ................ 12.3 (34.2) 12.3 (34.2)
12. Funns Branch........................ ................ ................ 20.8 (51.3) 20.8 (51.3)
13. Wartrace Creek...................... ................ ................ 37.5 (92.6) 37.5 (92.6)
14. Camp Pleasant Branch................ 17.4 (42.9) ................ ................ 17.4 (42.9)
15. Kentucky River...................... 83.7 (206.7) 9.4 (23.3) ................ 93.1 (230.0)
16. Owenton Road........................ 1.3 (3.3) 1.5 (3.7) ................ 2.8 (7.0)
17. Little Benson Creek................. 9.4 (23.3) ................ ................ 9.4 (23.3)
18. Boone Creek......................... 5.0 (12.4) ................ ................ 5.0 (12.4)
19. Delaney Ferry Road.................. 0.6 (1.4) ................ ................ 0.6 (1.4)
20. Bonebank Road....................... ................ 1.7 (4.3) ................ 1.7 (4.3)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Total............................... 239.3 (591.5) 24.1 (59.6) 118.8 (297.2) 373.0 (925.5)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Area sizes may not sum due to rounding.
* Indicates U.S. Army Corps of Engineers easements, which are not added to Size of Unit because these lands are
included in ha (ac) figure given for the private lands on which easements are held.

We present brief descriptions of all units, and reasons why they
meet the definition of critical habitat for Short's bladderpod, below.
All of the proposed critical habitat units are currently occupied and,
except as specified below, contain all of the primary constituent
elements of the physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of the species.
Unit 1: Kings and Queens Bluff
Unit 1 consists of 7.6 ha (18.9 ac) of private land, but the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (Corps of Engineers) holds flood easements on
approximately 40 percent of this land. This unit is located in
Montgomery County, Tennessee, on a bluff on the right descending bank
of the Cumberland River within the city limits of Clarksville,
approximately 0.16 km (0.10 mi) south of the intersection of State
Route 12 (Ashland City Road) and Queens Bluff Way. Beginning
approximately 0.28 km (0.18 mi) south of the easternmost intersection
of Ashland City Road (US-41a Bypass) and Queens Bluff Road, this unit
parallels the Cumberland River in a downstream direction for
approximately 1.7 km (1.1 mi).
The features essential to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management considerations or protection to
address threats related to erosion or prolonged inundation due to water
level manipulation; changes in land use, including residential or
commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest vegetation
or soils or soil loss due to erosion; and shading and competition due
to encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative plants.
Unit 2: Lock B Road
Unit 2 consists of 10.1 ha (25.0 ac) of privately owned land, but
the Corps of Engineers holds flood easements on approximately 3 percent
of this land. This unit is located in Montgomery County, Tennessee,
approximately 6.9 km (4.3 mi) south of the city limits of Clarksville,
on a hillside that lies to the east and west of Lock B Road North,
beginning approximately 0.8 km (0.5 mi) south of its junction with
Gholson Road and continuing south for approximately 0.4 km (0.25 mi),
at which point Lock B Road North veers to the southwest. From this
point, this unit continues south for approximately 1.0 km (0.6 mi)
along the hillside that is east of Lock B Road North. The features
essential to the conservation of the species in this unit may require
special management considerations or protection to address threats
related to potential right-of-way construction or maintenance using
herbicides or mechanized equipment along Lock B Road North or the
Illinois Central Railroad, both of which traverse portions of the unit,
and shading or competition due to encroachment of native and invasive,
nonnative plants.
Unit 3: Jarrel Ridge Road
Unit 3 consists of 5.2 ha (12.8 ac) of privately owned lands, but
the Corps of Engineers holds flood easements on approximately 8 percent
of this land. This unit is located in Montgomery County, Tennessee,
approximately 10 km south of the city limit of Clarksville, on a
hillside that lies west and north of the southern terminus of Jarrel
Ridge Road.
The features essential to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management considerations or protection to
address threats related to erosion or prolonged

[[Page 47070]]

inundation due to water level manipulation; changes in land use,
including residential or commercial construction, which could cause
removal of forest vegetation or soils or soil loss due to erosion;
potential right-of-way construction or maintenance using herbicides or
mechanized equipment along Jarrel Ridge Road at the unit boundary or
the Illinois Central Railroad, which traverses the unit; and shading or
competition due to encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative
plants.
Unit 4: Cheatham Lake
Unit 4 consists of 27.3 ha (67.5 ac) of privately owned, local
government, and federal lands. This unit is located in Cheatham County,
Tennessee, approximately 9.0 km (5.6 mi) west-northwest of the city
limits of the town of Ashland City, on a series of hillsides that
begins approximately 0.8 km (0.5 mi) northeast of the junction of Beech
Grove Road and Cheatham Dam Road and arcs in a southeasterly direction
for approximately 2.2 km (1.4 mi). Here, the unit crosses Cheatham Dam
Road, and continues for approximately 2.2 km in a southeasterly arc to
its eastern boundary on the right descending bank of the Cumberland
River, approximately 0.18 km (0.11 mi) south of Kimbrough Road. The
land within this unit is approximately 70 percent privately owned, 12
percent owned by Ashland City, and 18 percent owned by the Corps of
Engineers.
The features essential to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management considerations or protection to
address threats related to erosion or prolonged inundation due to water
level manipulation; changes in land use, including residential or
commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest vegetation
or soils or soil loss due to erosion; potential right-of-way
construction or maintenance using herbicides or mechanized equipment
along the Illinois Central Railroad, which traverses the unit; and
shading or competition due to encroachment of native and invasive,
nonnative plants.
Unit 5: Harpeth River
Unit 5 consists of 25.5 ha (63.1 ac) of privately owned and federal
land in Cheatham County, Tennessee. This unit is located approximately
5 km (3.1 mi) west of the city limits of the town of Ashland City, on
the west slope of a hillside and associated bluffs that begin on the
point of land formed by the confluence of Cumberland and Harpeth rivers
and extend upstream along the right descending bank of the Harpeth
River, reaching the unit's southernmost boundary approximately 0.6 km
(0.4 mi) east of SR-49, where it crosses the Harpeth River. The land
within this unit is approximately 32 percent privately owned, and 68
percent is owned by the Corps of Engineers.
The features essential to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management considerations or protection to
address threats related to erosion or prolonged inundation due to water
level manipulation; changes in land use, including residential or
commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest vegetation
or soils or soil loss due to erosion; and shading or competition due to
encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative plants.
Unit 6: Montgomery Bell Bridge
Unit 6 consists of 11.2 ha (27.7 ac) of privately owned and federal
land in Cheatham and Dickson Counties, Tennessee. This unit is located
approximately 5.5 km (3.4 mi) west of the city limits of the town of
Ashland City, on a hillside and bluffs on the left descending bank of
the Harpeth River that begin approximately 0.4 km (0.27 mi) east of the
Montgomery Bell Bridge, where SR-49 crosses the river and bisects the
unit, and parallels the river in an upstream direction for
approximately 1.8 km (1.1 mi). The land within this unit is
approximately 19 percent privately owned, and 81 percent is owned by
the Corps of Engineers.
The features essential to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management considerations or protection to
address threats related to erosion or prolonged inundation due to water
level manipulation; changes in land use, including residential or
commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest vegetation
or soils or soil loss due to erosion; and shading or competition due to
encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative plants.
Unit 7: Nashville and Western Railroad
Unit 7 consists of 30.5 ha (75.3 ac) of privately owned, local
government, and federal land in Cheatham County, Tennessee. This unit
is located along the southwest city limit of the town of Ashland City,
on hillsides and bluffs that begin approximately 0.26 km (0.16 mi) east
of the confluence of Marrowbone Creek and the Cumberland River and
extend upstream on the right descending bank of the Cumberland River
for approximately 2.3 km (1.4 mi). Here, the unit continues in a
southeasterly direction for approximately 0.9 km (0.5 mi) from the
point where the river veers away from the hillside and bluffs. The land
within this unit is approximately 68 percent privately owned, 27
percent owned by the Cheatham County Rail Association, and 5 percent
owned by the Corps of Engineers.
The features essential to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management considerations or protection to
address threats related to erosion or prolonged inundation due to water
level manipulation; changes in land use, including residential or
commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest vegetation
or soils or soil loss due to erosion; potential right-of-way
construction or maintenance using herbicides or mechanized equipment
along the Nashville and Western Railroad, which traverses the unit; and
shading or competition due to encroachment of native and invasive,
nonnative plants.
Unit 8: River Trace
Unit 8 consists of 42.8 ha (105.7 ac) of privately owned land, with
the exception of the River Trace road right-of-way. The Corps of
Engineers holds flood easements on approximately 13 percent of the
lands within the unit. This unit is located in Davidson and Cheatham
Counties, Tennessee, on hillsides and bluffs approximately 0.9 km (0.6
mi) southeast of the city limit of the town of Ashland City, beginning
at the western extent of River Trace and extending along both sides of
this road in a southeasterly direction for a distance of approximately
2.3 km (1.4 mi). Here, the unit leaves River Trace and continues along
the hillside and bluffs on the right descending bank of the Cumberland
River in an upstream direction for approximately 2.1 km (1.3 mi).
The features essential to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management considerations or protection to
address threats related to erosion or prolonged inundation due to water
level manipulation; changes in land use, including residential or
commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest vegetation
or soils or soil loss due to erosion; potential right-of-way
construction or maintenance using herbicides or mechanized equipment
along River Trace or the Nashville and Western Railroad, both of which
traverse the unit; and shading or competition due to encroachment of
native and invasive, nonnative plants.

[[Page 47071]]

Unit 9: Old Hickory Lake
Unit 9 consists of 4.8 ha (11.9 ac) of privately owned and federal
lands in Trousdale County, Tennessee. This unit is located
approximately 3.5 km (2.2 mi) west of the southern city limits of the
town of Hartsville and 0.5 km (0.3 mi) south of Oldham Road, on a
hillside and bluffs on the right descending bank of the Cumberland
River. Beginning approximately 0.4 km (0.25 mi) downstream of the mouth
of Second Creek, this unit parallels the Cumberland River in a
downstream direction for approximately 0.7 km (0.4 mi). The land within
this unit is approximately 40 percent privately owned, and 60 percent
is owned by the Corps of Engineers.
The features essential to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management considerations or protection to
address threats related to erosion or prolonged inundation due to water
level manipulation; changes in land use, including residential or
commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest vegetation
or soils or soil loss due to erosion; and shading or competition due to
encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative plants.
Unit 10: Coleman-Winston Bridge
Unit 10 consists of 7.4 ha (18.2 ac) of privately owned and federal
lands in Trousdale County, Tennessee. The unit is located at the
southern city limit of the town of Hartsville, on a hillside and bluffs
overlooking the Cumberland River. Beginning on the right descending
bank approximately 0.5 km (0.3 mi) east of SR-141, which bisects the
unit where it crosses the Cumberland River at the Coleman-Winston
Bridge, this unit parallels the river in a downstream direction for
approximately 1.1 km (0.7 mi). The land within this unit is
approximately 55 percent privately owned, and 45 percent is owned by
the Corps of Engineers.
The features essential to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management considerations or protection to
address threats related to erosion or prolonged inundation due to water
level manipulation; changes in land use, including residential or
commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest vegetation
or soils or soil loss due to erosion; potential right-of-way
construction or maintenance using herbicides or mechanized equipment
along SR-141, which bisects the unit; and shading or competition due to
encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative plants.
Unit 11: Cordell Hull Reservoir
Unit 11 consists of 12.3 ha (34.2 ac) of federal lands in Smith
County, Tennessee. This unit is located approximately 4.3 km (2.7 mi)
north of the city limits of the town of Carthage, on hillsides and
bluffs on the right descending bank of the Cumberland River. Beginning
approximately 2.0 km (1.25 mi) upstream of the Cordell Hull Dam, this
unit parallels the river in an upstream direction for approximately 0.6
km (0.4 mi), where it crosses a 0.3-km (0.2-mi) expanse of open water,
and then continues paralleling the river for a distance of 1.2 km (0.7
mi). All of the land within this unit is owned by the Corps of
Engineers, and the open water is not included in the area of the unit
reported above.
The features essential to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management considerations or protection to
address threats related to erosion or prolonged inundation due to water
level manipulation; changes in land use, including residential or
commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest vegetation
or soils or soil loss due to erosion; and shading or competition due to
encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative plants.
Unit 12: Funns Branch
Unit 12 consists of 20.8 ha (51.3 ac) of federal lands in Jackson
County, Tennessee. This unit is located approximately 12.1 km (7.5 mi)
southwest of the city limits of the town of Gainesboro, on hillsides
and bluffs on the right descending bank of the Cumberland River.
Beginning approximately 0.4 km (0.2) mi upstream of the mouth of Funns
Branch, this unit parallels the river in an upstream direction for
approximately 1.0 km (0.65 mi) where it crosses a 0.3-km (0.2-mi)
expanse of open water, and then continues paralleling the river for a
distance of approximately 1.0 km (0.64 mi). All of the land within this
unit is owned by the Corps of Engineers, and the open water is not
included in the area of the unit reported above.
The features essential to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management considerations or protection to
address threats related to erosion or prolonged inundation due to water
level manipulation; changes in land use, including residential or
commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest vegetation
or soils or soil loss due to erosion; and shading or competition due to
encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative plants.
Unit 13: Wartrace Creek
Unit 13 consists of 37.5 ha (92.6 ac) of federal lands in Jackson
County, Tennessee. This unit is located approximately 7.7 km (4.8 mi)
west of the city limits of the town of Gainesboro, on hillsides and
bluffs on the right descending bank of the Cumberland River. Beginning
at the mouth of Indian Creek, this unit parallels the river in a
downstream direction for approximately 1.6 km (1.0 mi), where it
crosses the mouth of Wartrace Creek, and then continues paralleling the
river for a distance of 2.5 km (1.5 mi). All of the land within this
unit is owned by the Corps of Engineers, and areas of open water are
not included in the area of the unit reported above.
The features essential to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management considerations or protection to
address threats related to erosion or prolonged inundation due to water
level manipulation; changes in land use, including residential or
commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest vegetation
or soils or soil loss due to erosion; and shading or competition due to
encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative plants.
Unit 14: Camp Pleasant Branch
Unit 14 consists of 17.4 ha (42.9 ac) of privately owned lands in
Franklin County, Kentucky. This unit is located approximately 8.3 km
(5.8 mi) north of the city limits of Frankfort, on hillsides near Camp
Pleasant Branch, a tributary to Elkhorn Creek. Beginning approximately
0.29 km (0.18 mi) west of the intersection of Indian Gap Road and Camp
Pleasant Road, the unit begins in a hollow north of Indian Gap Road and
extends to the east and north along hillsides above the right
descending bank of Camp Pleasant Branch for approximately 0.75 km (0.5
mi) to the intersection of Camp Pleasant Road and Gregory Woods Road.
Here the unit crosses Gregory Woods Road and extends north for a
distance of approximately 0.58 km (0.36 mi), encompassing the hillside
to the east of the road.
The features essential to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management considerations or protection to
address threats related to changes in land use, including residential
or commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest
vegetation or soils or soil loss due to erosion; potential right-of-way
construction or maintenance using herbicides or mechanized

[[Page 47072]]

equipment along Indian Gap Road, Camp Pleasant Road, or Gregory Woods
Road, which are adjacent to the unit; and shading or competition due to
encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative plants.
Unit 15: Kentucky River
This unit consists of 93.1 ha (230.0 ac) of privately owned and
State land in Franklin County, Kentucky. This unit begins within the
northwestern city limit of Frankfort, on a hillside that parallels
U.S.-421 on its east side from approximately 0.21 km (0.13 mi)
southeast of its junction with Clifty Drive to approximately 0.23 km
(0.15 mi) northwest of its junction with U.S.-127. Here the unit
follows the topography of the hillside as it turns away from the road
to the east, leaving the city limits, and then arcs to the northeast,
before abruptly turning back in a westerly direction. From this point,
the hillside and this unit extend in a westerly direction for
approximately 0.7 km (0.4 mi) and then parallel the Kentucky River in a
downstream direction in an arc approximately 5.3 km (3.3 mi) in length
on its left descending bank, encompassing hillsides in two hollows that
extend from the river to the west. Approximately 90 percent of the land
in this unit is privately owned, and the Commonwealth of Kentucky owns
approximately 10 percent, which is part of a State nature preserve.
The features essential to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management considerations or protection to
address threats related to erosion or prolonged inundation due to water
level manipulation; changes in land use, including residential or
commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest vegetation
or soils or soil loss due to erosion; potential right-of-way
construction or maintenance using herbicides or mechanized equipment
along U.S. -421, where it parallels the unit; and shading or
competition due to encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative
plants.
Unit 16: Owenton Road
Unit 16 consists of 2.8 ha (7.0 acres) of privately owned and City
of Frankfort municipal park lands in Franklin County, Kentucky. The
unit is located approximately 0.1 km (0.08 mi) north of the city limits
of Frankfort on a hill that is adjacent to and west of U.S.-127
(Owenton Road), approximately 0.6 km (0.4 mi) north of the intersection
of U.S.-127 and U.S.-421. The land within this unit is approximately 46
percent privately owned, and 54 percent is owned by the City of
Frankfort.
The features essential to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management considerations or protection to
address threats related to changes in land use, including residential
or commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest
vegetation or soils or soil loss due to erosion; potential right-of-way
construction or maintenance using herbicides or mechanized equipment on
U.S.-127; and shading or competition due to encroachment of native and
invasive, nonnative plants.
Unit 17: Little Benson Creek
Unit 17 consists of 9.4 ha (23.3 ac) of privately owned lands in
Franklin County, Kentucky, located within the city limits of Frankfort.
Beginning approximately 1.1 km (0.7 mi) south of the intersection of
Mills Lane and Ninevah Road, this unit lies on a hillside on the east
side of Ninevah Road and extends to the south for approximately 0.5 km
(0.3 mi), where it crosses Ninevah Road and follows a hillside that
parallels Ninevah Road for approximately 1.0 km (0.65 mi) on its west
side.
The features essential to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management considerations or protection to
address threats related to changes in land use, including residential
or commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest
vegetation or soils or soil loss due to erosion; potential right-of-way
construction or maintenance using herbicides or mechanized equipment on
Ninevah Road; and shading or competition due to encroachment of native
and invasive, nonnative plants.
Unit 18: Boone Creek
Unit 18 consists of 5.0 ha (12.4 ac) of privately owned lands in
Clark County, Kentucky. This unit is located approximately 13.2 km (8.2
mi) southwest of the city limits of Winchester, and begins adjacent to
Grimes Mill Road approximately 0.17 km north of the Fayette and Clark
County line. From here, the unit extends on a hillside to the east for
a distance of approximately 0.21 km (0.13 mi), where the unit and
hillside then parallel a bend in Boone Creek on its left descending
bank for a distance of approximately 0.68 km (0.42 mi).
The features essential to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management considerations or protection to
address threats related to changes in land use, including residential
or commercial construction, which could cause removal of forest
vegetation or soils or soil loss due to erosion; potential right-of-way
construction or maintenance using herbicides or mechanized equipment on
Grimes Road; and shading or competition due to encroachment of native
and invasive, nonnative plants.
Unit 19: Delaney Ferry Road
Unit 19 consists of 0.6 ha (1.4 ac) of privately owned lands in
Woodford County, Kentucky. This unit is located approximately 7.8 km
(4.8 mi) south of the city of Versailles. Beginning approximately 2.1
km (1.3 mi) east of the intersection of Troy Pike and Delaney Ferry
Road, this unit extends approximately 0.08 km (0.05 mi) northeast along
Delaney Ferry Road, where the unit boundary turns to the northwest for
approximately 0.08 km (0.05 mi). From this northeast corner of the
unit, the boundary extends to the southwest approximately 0.05 km (0.03
mi), where it turns to the southeast, paralleling a driveway for 0.05
km (0.03 mi) before turning to the southwest for approximately 0.03 km
(0.02 mi). From this point the unit boundary turns to the southeast for
approximately 0.05 km (0.03 mi), returning to the starting point.
The features essential to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management considerations or protection to
address threats of shading or competition due to encroachment of native
and invasive, nonnative plants. The current landowner manages
encroaching vegetation to prevent shading and competition where Short's
bladderpod occurs within the unit.
Unit 20: Bonebank Road
Unit 20 consists of 1.7 ha (4.3 ac) of lands in Posey County,
Indiana, which are owned by the Indiana Department Natural Resources.
This unit is located approximately 13 km (8.1 mi) southwest of the city
limits of Mt. Vernon, beginning at the intersection of Graddy Road and
Bonebank Road and paralleling Bonebank Road on its west side for a
distance 0.73 km (0.45 mi) north of the intersection. The surface
geology at this site--Quaternary glacial outwash--and soils are
markedly different from other sites on calcareous geology throughout
the rest of the species' range. However, this site supports an
occurrence that has numbered in the hundreds to more than a thousand
individuals in the past, and the PCE of forest vegetation with canopy
openings (PCE 3) is present at the road edge.

[[Page 47073]]

The feature essential to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management considerations or protection to
address threats of shading or competition due to encroachment of native
and invasive, nonnative plants.

Whorled Sunflower

We are proposing four units as critical habitat for whorled
sunflower. The critical habitat areas we describe below constitute our
current best assessment of areas that meet the definition of critical
habitat for whorled sunflower. All these units are occupied at the time
of listing. The four areas we propose as critical habitat are: (1) Mud
Creek, (2) Coosa Valley Prairie, (2) Prairie Branch, and (4) Pinson.
The approximate area of each proposed critical habitat unit is shown in
Table 3. All of the proposed critical habitat units for this species
are located entirely on privately owned land.

Table 3--Proposed Critical Habitat Units for Whorled Sunflower.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Critical habitat unit County, state Hectares Acres
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Mud Creek................................... Cherokee, Alabama.................... 210.6 520.4
2. Coosa Valley Prairie........................ Floyd, Georgia....................... 366.9 906.5
3. Prairie Branch.............................. McNairy, Tennessee................... 6.0 14.9
4. Pinson...................................... Madison, Tennessee................... 40.7 100.5
-------------------------
Total...................................... ..................................... 624.2 1,542.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We present brief descriptions of all units, and reasons why they
meet the definition of critical habitat for whorled sunflower, below.
Unit 1: Mud Creek
Unit 1 consists of 210.6 ha (520.4 ac) in Cherokee County, Alabama,
located approximately 11.6 km (7.2 mi) southeast of the city limits of
Cedar Bluff. The unit begins approximately 0.06 km (0.04 mi) north of
the junction of CR-164 and CR-29 and extends in a northerly direction
to encompass much of the drainage area of an unnamed tributary to Mud
Creek and to the northeast to encompass much of the drainage area of a
second unnamed tributary to Mud Creek. The easternmost boundary of this
unit is adjacent to CR-101, from approximately 1.0 km (0.6 mi) to 1.4
km (0.9 mi) north of its junction with CR-164. Silt loam and silty clay
loam soils are present throughout the unit, spanning broad uplands, and
terraces and flood plains of headwater streams in the Coosa River
watershed (PCE 1).
The features essential to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management considerations or protection to
address threats of soil disturbance due to silvicultural site
preparation or timber harvest; indiscriminate herbicide use or mowing
for silvicultural purposes or road right-of-way maintenance; conversion
of remnant prairie habitat to agricultural or industrial forestry uses;
and excessive shading or competition from native woody species or
invasive, nonnative plants.
Unit 2: Coosa Valley Prairie
Unit 2 consists of 366.9 ha (906.5 ac) of privately owned lands in
Floyd County, Georgia, located approximately 4.5 km (2.8 mi) northwest
of the city limits of Cave Spring. This unit corresponds to the
boundary of The Nature Conservancy's conservation easement on lands
owned by The Campbell Group, a site commonly referred to as the Coosa
Valley Prairie. The northern boundary of this unit follows Jefferson
Road for approximately 1.4 km (0.9 mi) in a southeasterly direction,
beginning approximately 1.7 km (1.0 mi) east of the Alabama-Georgia
State line. From the eastern extent on Jefferson Road, the unit
boundary follows an unnamed dirt road south for a distance of
approximately 1.5 km (0.9 mi), where the boundary turns to the west and
south before turning back to the north and again to the west, reaching
the Alabama-Georgia State line. Here, the unit follows the State line
in a northwest direction for approximately 0.8 km (0.5 mi) before
turning east and following an unnamed dirt road in a northeasterly
direction for approximately 2.7 km (1.7 mi) and reuniting with the
northern boundary on Jefferson Road. Silt loam and silty clay loam
soils are present throughout the unit, spanning broad uplands,
depressions, and terraces and flood plains of headwater streams in the
Coosa River watershed (PCE 1). Prairie openings and woodlands with low
levels of canopy cover (PCE 2) are present throughout much of the unit.
While Ellis and McCauley (2009, pp. 1837-1838) found very few viable
achenes and low germination rates at this site, whorled sunflower has
responded favorably to habitat management efforts by increasing in
numbers, and there likely are now a sufficient number of compatible
mates for production of viable achenes (PCE 3) at this site.
The features essential to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management considerations or protection to
address threats of soil disturbance due to silvicultural site
preparation or timber harvest; indiscriminate herbicide use or mowing
for silvicultural purposes or road right-of-way maintenance; conversion
of remnant prairie habitat to agricultural or industrial forestry uses,
and excessive shading or competition from native woody species or
invasive, nonnative plants.
Unit 3: Prairie Branch
Unit 3 consists of 6.0 ha (14.9 ac) of privately owned land in
McNairy County, Tennessee, and is located approximately 0.6 km (0.5 mi)
south of the easternmost city limit of Ramer. This unit is located
along Prairie Branch, a tributary to Muddy Creek, beginning
approximately 0.42 km (0.26 mi) upstream of the point where it passes
under Mt. Vernon Road and extending downstream for approximately 2.0 km
(1.2 mi). Within this reach, the critical habitat unit extends forms a
buffer extending 15 m (50 ft) upslope from the tops of the banks on
both sides of Prairie Branch. Sandy loam soils (PCE 1) are present
throughout the unit, as are small patches of vegetation containing
whorled sunflower and other wet prairie species (PCE 2).
The features essential to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management considerations or protection to
address threats of soil disturbance due to agricultural practices;
indiscriminate herbicide use or mowing for road or railroad right-of-
way maintenance; conversion of remnant prairie habitat to

[[Page 47074]]

agricultural uses; and competition from invasive, nonnative plants.
Unit 4: Pinson
Unit 4 consists of 40.7 ha (100.5 ac) of privately owned land in
Madison County, Tennessee, and is located approximately 4.1 km (2.5 mi)
northwest of the city limits of Henderson, Tennessee. Beginning
approximately 0.7 km southeast of the junction of U.S.-45 and Bear
Creek Road, this unit extends approximately 0.08 km (0.05 mi) northeast
of U.S.-45, crossing a railroad track, and then turns in a
southeasterly direction, paralleling the track for a distance of
approximately 0.5 km (0.3 mi). From this corner, the unit boundary
turns southwest for a distance of approximately 0.79 km (0.49 mi), and
then turns to the northwest for a distance of approximately 0.65 km
(0.4 mi). From this corner, the unit boundary turns to the northeast
for a distance of approximately 0.63 km (0.39 mi). Silt loam soils (PCE
1) are present throughout the unit, small patches of vegetation
containing whorled sunflower and wet prairie species (PCE 2) are
present, and a sufficient number of compatible mates are present for
the production of a limited number of viable achenes (PCE 3) (Ellis and
McCauley 2009, p. 1838).
The features essential to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management considerations or protection to
address threats of soil disturbance due to agricultural practices;
indiscriminate herbicide use or mowing road or railroad right-of-way
maintenance; conversion of remnant prairie habitat to agricultural
uses; and excessive shading or competition from native woody species or
invasive, nonnative plants. Much of the land within this unit has been
converted to agricultural uses, but is included because of the
potential for decreasing fragmentation among the subpopulations that
are present in this unit by restoring suitable vegetation within
previously converted lands.

Fleshy-Fruit Gladecress

We are proposing six units as critical habitat for fleshy-fruit
gladecress. The critical habitat areas we describe below constitute our
current best assessment of areas that meet the definition of critical
habitat for fleshy-fruit gladecress. All these units are occupied at
the time of listing. The six areas we propose as critical habitat are:
(1) Bluebird Glades; (2) Stover Branch Glades; (3) Indian Tomb Hollow
Glade; (4) Cedar Plains South; (5) Cedar Plains North; and (6) Massey
Glade. The approximate area of each proposed critical habitat unit is
shown in Table 4.

Table 4--Proposed Critical Habitat Units for Fleshy-Fruit Gladecress
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Critical habitat unit County Ownership Hectares Acres
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Bluebird Glades................ Lawrence............. Private.............. 0.2 0.5
2. Stover Branch Glades........... Lawrence............. Private.............. 3.2 7.8
3. Indian Tomb Hollow Glade....... Lawrence............. Federal.............. 0.5 1.1
4. Cedar Plains South............. Morgan............... Private.............. 0.04 0.1
5. Cedar Plains North............. Morgan............... Private.............. 1.7 4.2
6. Massey Glade................... Morgan............... Private.............. 2.75 6.8
-------------------------------
Total......................... ..................... ..................... 8.4 20.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We present brief descriptions of all units, and reasons why they
meet the definition of critical habitat for fleshy-fruit gladecress,
below.
Unit 1: Bluebird Glades
Unit 1 consists of 0.2 ha (0.5 ac) of privately owned land located
in southeast Lawrence County, Alabama. The unit contains two
subpopulations and is located along Alabama State Route 157
approximately 3.5 km (2.2 mi) southeast of the intersections of State
Routes 36 and 157, approximately 3.7 km (2.3 mi) southwest of Danville,
Alabama. These plants are located within a highly disturbed, limestone
glade within a former mobile home site. Well-lighted, open areas (PCE
2), with shallow soils and exposed limestone bedrock or gravel that are
dominated by characteristic glade vegetation (PCE 1), are present
within the unit.
The features essential to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management considerations or protection to
address threats of the invasion of exotic species into open glades and
possible changes in land use, including road widening or development.
Due to human-derived disturbances, exotic species, most notably Chinese
privet and Japanese honeysuckle, threaten this site (Schotz 2009, pp.
13-14).
Unit 2: Stover Branch Glades
Unit 2 consists of 3.2 ha (7.8 ac) of privately owned land located
in southeast Lawrence County, Alabama. The unit contains two
subpopulations; one subpopulation is located on the southwest side of
County Road 203 approximately 1.4 km (0.9 mi) south-southeast of
Alabama State Route 157, and one subpopulation is located along the
southwest side of State Route 157, approximately 1.6 to 2.1 km (1 to
1.3 mi) southeast of State Route 36, in Speake, Alabama. These
subpopulations are located within a pasture and are actively maintained
by livestock grazing. Well-lighted, open areas (PCE 2), with shallow
soils and exposed limestone bedrock or gravel that are dominated by
characteristic glade vegetation (PCE 1), are present within the unit.
The features essential to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management considerations or protection to
address threats of invasive species into open glades and incompatible
livestock grazing. Invasive species encroachment and continuous
livestock grazing during the plant's reproductive cycle constitute
ongoing threats to this site (Schotz 2009, pp. 15-16).
Unit 3: Indian Tomb Hollow Glade
Unit 3 consists of 0.5 ha (1.1 ac) of federally owned land located
within the Bankhead National Forest in Lawrence County, Alabama. The
unit is located on the west and northwest side of County Road 86 at a
point roughly 4.5 km (2.8 mi) south of State Route 36 near Speake,
Alabama. Habitat in this unit consists of a relatively small glade
characterized by a flat limestone outcrop that is heavily buffered by
nearly impenetrable tangles of eastern red cedar and upland swamp
privet. Well-lighted, open areas (PCE 2), with shallow soils and
exposed limestone bedrock or gravel that are dominated by
characteristic glade vegetation (PCE 1), are present within the unit.
The U.S. Forest Service provides management to control encroachment of
invasive species (PCE 3).

[[Page 47075]]

The features essential to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management considerations or protection to
address threats of the invasion of exotic species into open glade and
damage from vehicles. Moderate encroachment of exotic species, most
notably Chinese privet and Japanese honeysuckle, threatens this site
along the glade periphery (Schotz 2009, pp. 18-19). This site also
shows minimal incidence of trash disposal and damage from recreational
vehicles.
Unit 4: Cedar Plains South
Unit 4 consists of 0.04 ha (0.1 ac) of privately owned land located
in Morgan County, Alabama. This unit is located on Cedar Plains Road,
1.2 km (0.75 mi) south of County Road 55 and approximately 8 km (5 mi)
west of the junction of U.S. Highway 31 and County Road 55 in
Falkville. This population represents an excellent landscape context
but contains the smallest number of plants of any of the known
occurrences. Habitat in this unit consists of a well-lighted limestone
glade opening (PCE 2) located within a limestone forest primarily
comprised of eastern red cedar and various other hardwoods. Herbaceous
vegetation characteristic of glade communities is present within the
well-lighted glade (PCE 1), and competition and shading from native and
invasive, nonnative plants are currently not a threat to the habitat in
this unit (PCE 3). The features essential to the conservation of the
species in this unit may require special management considerations or
protections to prevent future adverse effects due to competition and
shading caused by encroachment of native and invasive, nonnative
plants.
Unit 5: Cedar Plains North
Unit 5 consists of 1.7 ha (4.2 ac) of privately owned land located
in Morgan County, Alabama. This unit is located on Cedar Plains Road,
from 0.6 to 1 km (0.4 to 0.6 mi) north of County Road 55, approximately
8 km (5 mi) west of the junction of U.S. Highway 31 and County Road 55
in Falkville. These populations are located within a pasture and are
actively maintained by livestock grazing. Well-lighted, open areas (PCE
2), with shallow soils and exposed limestone bedrock or gravel that are
dominated by characteristic glade vegetation (PCE 1), are present
within the unit. This glade complex, although subjected to ongoing
agricultural interests, represents the greatest concentration of plants
currently known for the species.
The features essential to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management considerations or protection to
address threats of invasive species into open glades and incompatible
livestock grazing. Invasive species encroachment and continuous
livestock grazing during the plant's reproductive cycle constitute
ongoing threats to this site (Schotz 2009, pp. 23-24).
Unit 6: Massey Glade
Unit 6 consists of 2.75 ha (6.8 ac) of privately owned land located
in Morgan County, Alabama. This unit is located on County Road 55, 0.3
to 0.6 km (0.2 to 0.4 mi) west of Cedar Plains Road, approximately 8.3
km (5.2 mi) west of the junction of U.S. Highway 31 and County Road 55
in Falkville. This population is located within a highly disturbed
complex of limestone pavement barrens scattered in an actively utilized
pasture and within the yards and fields of nearby homes. Well-lighted,
open areas (PCE 2), with shallow soils and exposed limestone bedrock or
gravel that are dominated by characteristic glade vegetation (PCE 1),
are present within the unit.
The features essential to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management considerations or protection to
address threats of invasive species into open glades and incompatible
livestock grazing. Invasive species encroachment and continuous
livestock grazing during the plant's reproductive cycle constitute
ongoing threats to this site (Schotz 2009, pp. 25-26).

Effects of Critical Habitat Designation

Section 7 Consultation

Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires Federal agencies, including the
Service, to ensure that any action they fund, authorize, or carry out
is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered
species or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse
modification of designated critical habitat of such species. In
addition, section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires Federal agencies to
confer with the Service on any agency action which is likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of any species proposed to be listed
under the Act or result in the destruction or adverse modification of
proposed critical habitat.
Decisions by the 5th and 9th Circuit Courts of Appeals have
invalidated our regulatory definition of ``destruction or adverse
modification'' (50 CFR 402.02) (see Gifford Pinchot Task Force v. U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, 378 F.3d 1059 (9th Cir. 2004) and Sierra
Club v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 245 F.3d 434 (5th Cir. 2001)),
and we do not rely on this regulatory definition when analyzing whether
an action is likely to destroy or adversely modify critical habitat.
Under the statutory provisions of the Act, we determine destruction or
adverse modification on the basis of whether, with implementation of
the proposed Federal action, the affected critical habitat would
continue to serve its intended conservation role for the species.
If a Federal action may affect a listed species or its critical
habitat, the responsible Federal agency (action agency) must enter into
consultation with us. Examples of actions that are subject to the
section 7 consultation process are actions on State, tribal, local, or
private lands that require a Federal permit (such as a permit from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) or a permit from the Service under section 10
of the Act) or that involve some other Federal action (such as funding
from the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Aviation
Administration, or the Federal Emergency Management Agency). Federal
actions not affecting listed species or critical habitat, and actions
on State, tribal, local, or private lands that are not federally funded
or authorized, do not require section 7 consultation.
As a result of section 7 consultation, we document compliance with
the requirements of section 7(a)(2) through our issuance of:
(1) A concurrence letter for Federal actions that may affect, but
are not likely to adversely affect, listed species or critical habitat;
or
(2) A biological opinion for Federal actions that may affect and
are likely to adversely affect, listed species or critical habitat.
When we issue a biological opinion concluding that a project is
likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species and/or
destroy or adversely modify critical habitat, we provide reasonable and
prudent alternatives to the project, if any are identifiable, that
would avoid the likelihood of jeopardy and/or destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat. We define ``reasonable and prudent
alternatives'' (at 50 CFR 402.02) as alternative actions identified
during consultation that:
(1) Can be implemented in a manner consistent with the intended
purpose of the action,

[[Page 47076]]

(2) Can be implemented consistent with the scope of the Federal
agency's legal authority and jurisdiction,
(3) Are economically and technologically feasible, and
(4) Would, in the Director's opinion, avoid the likelihood of
jeopardizing the continued existence of the listed species and/or avoid
the likelihood of destroying or adversely modifying critical habitat.
Reasonable and prudent alternatives can vary from slight project
modifications to extensive redesign or relocation of the project. Costs
associated with implementing a reasonable and prudent alternative are
similarly variable.
Regulations at 50 CFR 402.16 require Federal agencies to reinitiate
consultation on previously reviewed actions in instances where we have
listed a new species or subsequently designated critical habitat that
may be affected and the Federal agency has retained discretionary
involvement or control over the action (or the agency's discretionary
involvement or control is authorized by law). Consequently, Federal
agencies sometimes may need to request reinitiation of consultation
with us on actions for which formal consultation has been completed, if
those actions with discretionary involvement or control may affect
subsequently listed species or designated critical habitat.

Application of the ``Adverse Modification'' Standard

The key factor related to the adverse modification determination is
whether, with implementation of the proposed Federal action, the
affected critical habitat would continue to serve its intended
conservation role for the species. Activities that may destroy or
adversely modify critical habitat are those that alter the physical or
biological features to an extent that appreciably reduces the
conservation value of critical habitat for Short's bladderpod, whorled
sunflower, or fleshy-fruit gladecress. As discussed above, the role of
critical habitat is to support life-history needs of the species and
provide for the conservation of the species.
Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us to briefly evaluate and
describe, in any proposed or final regulation that designates critical
habitat, activities involving a Federal action that may destroy or
adversely modify such habitat, or that may be affected by such
designation.
Activities that may affect critical habitat, when carried out,
funded, or authorized by a Federal agency, should result in
consultation for Short's bladderpod, whorled sunflower, or fleshy-fruit
gladecress. These activities include, but are not limited to:
Short's Bladderpod
(1) Actions that would remove, severely alter, or inundate portions
of bedrock formations or outcrops of calcareous limestones and
interbedded shales or siltstones (geologic substrates). Actions that
could remove or severely alter geologic substrates include, but are not
limited to, construction of bridges, buildings, quarries, roads,
railroad tracks, or interstate pipelines and associated structures.
These actions could directly remove or result in alteration of geologic
substrates due to blasting with explosive charges and removal or
disturbance by heavy machinery. Construction of new dams or raising
elevations of existing dams downstream of a critical habitat unit could
inundate geologic substrates.
(2) Actions that would remove, severely alter, or increase erosion
of soils. Such activities could include construction of bridges,
buildings, quarries, roads, railroad tracks, or interstate pipelines
and associated structures; maintenance of transportation rights-of-way;
removal of woody vegetation; and reservoir management. Construction
activities could directly remove soils during the course of grading and
site preparation. Establishing a quarry would involve removal of the
overburden, including soils, prior to excavating the geologic substrate
for a quarry. Transportation right-of-way maintenance that involved
grading or use of heavy equipment to remove vegetation could cause
removal, alteration, or erosion of soils. Removal of woody vegetation,
if done excessively, could result in soil erosion on the steeply sloped
sites in most critical habitat units. Reservoir management that caused
frequent changes in reservoir stage could lead to soil erosion,
especially at lower elevations of hillside and bluff habitats. Removal
or erosion of soils could lead to the loss or reduction of seed banks
formed by Short's bladderpod. Soil alteration due to grading or other
disturbance could cause soils to be overturned, resulting in burial of
seed banks formed by Short's bladderpod.
(3) Actions that would result in removal of forest communities,
promote development of woody vegetation with high stocking densities
that cause excessive shading and a lack of forest gaps, or introduce
invasive, nonnative plants into critical habitat. Such activities could
include timber harvest that severely reduces or completely removes
forest canopy; mechanical or chemical vegetation management for
transportation right-of-way maintenance; and introduction of invasive,
nonnative herbaceous and woody plants. Timber harvest that severely
reduces or completely removes forest canopy cover would promote forest
regeneration characterized by high stem densities and lack of a diverse
age structure, which could cause excessive shading. Mechanical or
chemical vegetation management for transportation right-of-way
maintenance potentially could be beneficial for Short's bladderpod if
well-planned and carefully executed. However, indiscriminate use of
chemical or mechanical methods for vegetation control could cause
complete removal of the forest canopy, which would promote regeneration
characterized by high stem densities and lack of a diverse age
structure, potentially leading to excessive shading. Introducing
invasive, nonnative herbaceous and woody plants could lead to excessive
shading and competition. Such species include, but are not limited to
Lonicera maackii (bush honeysuckle), L. japonica (Japanese
honeysuckle), Ailanthus altissima (tree-of-heaven), Ligustrum vulgare
and L. sinense (privet), Lespedeza cuneata (sericea lespedeza), and
Lespedeza bicolor (bicolor lespedeza). The effects of the activities
described above would eventually prevent Short's bladderpod from
receiving adequate light for growth and reproduction.
Whorled Sunflower
(1) Actions that would remove, severely alter, or increase erosion
of soils. Such activities could include clearing, disking, plowing, and
harvesting of row crop fields; site preparation, operation of heavy
equipment, and construction and maintenance of log landings, loading
decks, skid trails, and haul roads for silvicultural activities; and
maintenance of transportation rights-of-way. These activities could
result in the removal of soils, which would remove any whorled
sunflower plants, rhizomes, or seeds present in the soil. These
activities also could cause soil compaction, which could limit root and
rhizome development or reduce water infiltration, or lead to increased
soil erosion and loss of organic matter and nutrients.
(2) Actions that would promote encroachment of woody species into
old fields, prairie remnants, or woodlands with herbaceous vegetation
that is characteristic of moist prairie remnants. Such activities could
include the

[[Page 47077]]

planting of forest stands with high stem densities; planting forested
stream buffers; or neglecting to conduct periodic mechanical
disturbance, herbicide application, or prescribed burning. Planting
forest stands with high stem densities or planting forested stream
buffers would eventually lead to development of a canopy that would
prevent whorled sunflower from receiving adequate light for growth and
reproduction. Neglecting to conduct periodic management in suitable
habitat, such as mechanical disturbance, careful herbicide application,
or prescribed burning, would lead to encroachment by shrubs or trees
that would eventually prevent whorled sunflower from receiving adequate
light for growth and reproduction.
(3) Actions that cause mortality of whorled sunflower plants or
that disrupt growth and prevent individuals from producing flowers.
Such activities could include indiscriminate herbicide application or
mowing for transportation right-of-way maintenance, agriculture, or
silviculture, or actions described above that cause removal of soils
and plant parts they contain. Herbicide application or removal of soil
and any plant parts contained therein could result in direct mortality
of individual whorled sunflower plants. Poorly timed mowing could
disrupt growth and prevent flower production. Either of these
activities could permanently or temporarily reduce the number of
compatible mates within a population, reducing the potential for viable
achene production to occur.
Fleshy-Fruit Gladecress
(1) Actions that would remove, severely alter, or significantly
reduce limestone outcrops. Such activities could include, but are not
limited to, construction of interstate pipelines and associated
structures that are regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers-issued Clean Water Act section
404 and River and Harbors Act section 10 permits for wetland crossings
for linear projects (pipelines, transmission lines, and roads); road
development (expansions and improvements) funded by the Federal Highway
Administration; and U.S. Department of Agriculture funding and
technical assistance for conversion of glades and surroundings to pine
plantations or for brush control programs involving herbicide
applications. These actions could directly eliminate a site or alter
the hydrology, open sunny aspect, and substrate conditions, reducing
suitability of a location to a point that it no longer provides the
environment necessary to sustain the species. In the case of some types
of herbicide applications, the habitat may become unsuitable for
germination and successful growth of seedlings. These activities would
permanently alter the habitat that fleshy-fruit gladecress is dependent
on to complete its life cycle.
(2) Actions that would significantly alter natural flora, including
disturbance activities such as digging, disking, blading or
construction work; introduction of nonnative species for erosion
control along rights-of-way or in other areas; and a lack of management
of nonnative or native woody species.

Exemptions

Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the Act

The Sikes Act Improvement Act of 1997 (Sikes Act) (16 U.S.C. 670a)
required each military installation that includes land and water
suitable for the conservation and management of natural resources to
complete an integrated natural resources management plan (INRMP) by
November 17, 2001. An INRMP integrates implementation of the military
mission of the installation with stewardship of the natural resources
found on the base. Each INRMP includes:
(1) An assessment of the ecological needs on the installation,
including the need to provide for the conservation of listed species;
(2) A statement of goals and priorities;
(3) A detailed description of management actions to be implemented
to provide for these ecological needs; and
(4) A monitoring and adaptive management plan.
Among other things, each INRMP must, to the extent appropriate and
applicable, provide for fish and wildlife management; fish and wildlife
habitat enhancement or modification; wetland protection, enhancement,
and restoration where necessary to support fish and wildlife; and
enforcement of applicable natural resource laws.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Pub.
L. 108-136) amended the Act to limit areas eligible for designation as
critical habitat. Specifically, section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act (16
U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(B)(i)) now provides: ``The Secretary shall not
designate as critical habitat any lands or other geographic areas owned
or controlled by the Department of Defense, or designated for its use,
that are subject to an integrated natural resources management plan
prepared under section 101 of the Sikes Act (16 U.S.C. 670a), if the
Secretary determines in writing that such plan provides a benefit to
the species for which critical habitat is proposed for designation.''
There are no Department of Defense lands with a completed INRMP
within the proposed critical habitat designation.

Exclusions

Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act

Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states that the Secretary shall
designate and make revisions to critical habitat on the basis of the
best available scientific data after taking into consideration the
economic impact, national security impact, and any other relevant
impact of specifying any particular area as critical habitat. The
Secretary may exclude an area from critical habitat if she determines
that the benefits of such exclusion outweigh the benefits of specifying
such area as part of the critical habitat, unless she determines, based
on the best scientific data available, that the failure to designate
such area as critical habitat will result in the extinction of the
species. In making that determination, the statute on its face, as well
as the legislative history, are clear that the Secretary has broad
discretion regarding which factor(s) to use and how much weight to give
to any factor.
Economic Impacts
Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we consider the economic impacts
of specifying any particular area as critical habitat. In order to
consider economic impacts, we are preparing an analysis of the economic
impacts of the proposed critical habitat designation and related
factors.
We will announce the availability of the draft economic analysis as
soon as it is completed, at which time we will seek public review and
comment. At that time, copies of the draft economic analysis will be
available for downloading from the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2013-0086, or by
contacting the Tennessee Ecological Services Fish and Wildlife Office
directly (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section). During the
development of a final designation, we will consider economic impacts,
public comments, and other new information, and areas may be excluded
from the final critical habitat designation under section 4(b)(2) of
the Act and our implementing regulations at 50 CFR 424.19.

[[Page 47078]]

National Security Impacts
Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we consider whether there are
lands owned or managed by the Department of Defense where a national
security impact might exist. In preparing this proposal, we have
determined that no lands within the proposed designation of critical
habitat for the whorled sunflower and fleshy-fruit gladecress are owned
or managed by the Department of Defense. The Department of Defense owns
or manages land, adjacent to Corps of Engineers reservoirs, where
critical habitat is proposed for Short's bladderpod. However, we
anticipate no impact on national security from designating this land as
critical habitat. Consequently, the Secretary does not propose to
exercise his discretion to exclude any areas from the final designation
based on impacts on national security.
Other Relevant Impacts
Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we consider any other relevant
impacts, in addition to economic impacts and impacts on national
security. We consider a number of factors, including whether the
landowners have developed any HCPs or other management plans for the
area, or whether there are conservation partnerships that would be
encouraged by designation of, or exclusion from, critical habitat. In
addition, we look at any tribal issues, and consider the government-to-
government relationship of the United States with tribal entities. We
also consider any social impacts that might occur because of the
designation.
In preparing this proposal, we have determined that there are
currently no HCPs or other management plans for the Short's bladderpod,
whorled sunflower, nor fleshy-fruit gladecress, and the proposed
designation does not include any tribal lands or trust resources. We
anticipate no impact on tribal lands, partnerships, or HCPs from this
proposed critical habitat designation. Accordingly, the Secretary does
not propose to exercise her discretion to exclude any areas from the
final designation based on other relevant impacts.

Peer Review

In accordance with our joint policy on peer review published in the
Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), we will seek the expert
opinions of at least three appropriate and independent specialists
regarding this proposed rule. The purpose of peer review is to ensure
that our critical habitat designation is based on scientifically sound
data, and analyses. We have invited these peer reviewers to comment
during this public comment period on our proposed designation of
critical habitat for these species.
We will consider all comments and information we receive during
this comment period on this proposed rule during our preparation of a
final determination. Accordingly, the final decision may differ from
this proposal.

Public Hearings

Section 4(b)(5) of the Act provides for one or more public hearings
on this proposal, if requested. Requests must be received within 45
days after the date of publication of this proposed rule in the Federal
Register. Such requests must be sent to the address shown in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. We will schedule public hearings
on this proposal, if any are requested, and announce the dates, times,
and places of those hearings, as well as how to obtain reasonable
accommodations, in the Federal Register and local newspapers at least
15 days before the hearing.

Required Determinations

Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563)

Executive Order 12866 provides that the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) will review all significant rules. The Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs has determined that this rule is
not significant.
Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866 while
calling for improvements in the nation's regulatory system to promote
predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and to use the best, most
innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory ends.
The executive order directs agencies to consider regulatory approaches
that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for
the public where these approaches are relevant, feasible, and
consistent with regulatory objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes further
that regulations must be based on the best available science and that
the rulemaking process must allow for public participation and an open
exchange of ideas. We have developed this rule in a manner consistent
with these requirements.

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA; 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) as
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996 (SBREFA; 5 U.S.C 801 et seq.), whenever an agency is required to
publish a notice of rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must
prepare and make available for public comment a regulatory flexibility
analysis that describes the effects of the rule on small entities
(small businesses, small organizations, and small government
jurisdictions). However, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required
if the head of the agency certifies the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The SBREFA amended the RFA to require Federal agencies to provide a
certification statement of the factual basis for certifying that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
According to the Small Business Administration, small entities
include small organizations such as independent nonprofit
organizations; small governmental jurisdictions, including school
boards and city and town governments that serve fewer than 50,000
residents; and small businesses (13 CFR 121.201). Small businesses
include such businesses as manufacturing and mining concerns with fewer
than 500 employees, wholesale trade entities with fewer than 100
employees, retail and service businesses with less than $5 million in
annual sales, general and heavy construction businesses with less than
$27.5 million in annual business, special trade contractors doing less
than $11.5 million in annual business, and forestry and logging
operations with fewer than 500 employees and annual business less than
$7 million. To determine whether small entities may be affected, we
will consider the types of activities that might trigger regulatory
impacts under this designation as well as types of project
modifications that may result. In general, the term ``significant
economic impact'' is meant to apply to a typical small business firm's
business operations.
Importantly, the incremental impacts of a rule must be both
significant and substantial to prevent certification of the rule under
the RFA and to require the preparation of an initial regulatory
flexibility analysis. If a substantial number of small entities are
affected by the proposed critical habitat designation, but the per-
entity economic impact is not significant, the Service may certify.
Likewise, if the per-entity economic impact is likely to be
significant, but the number of affected entities is not substantial,
the Service may also certify.
Under the RFA, as amended, and following recent court decisions,
Federal agencies are only required to

[[Page 47079]]

evaluate the potential incremental impacts of rulemaking on those
entities directly regulated by the rulemaking itself, and not the
potential impacts to indirectly affected entities. The regulatory
mechanism through which critical habitat protections are realized is
section 7 of the Act, which requires Federal agencies, in consultation
with the Service, to ensure that any action authorized, funded, or
carried by the agency is not likely to adversely modify critical
habitat. Therefore, only Federal action agencies are directly subject
to the specific regulatory requirement (avoiding destruction and
adverse modification) imposed by critical habitat designation. Under
these circumstances, it is our position that only Federal action
agencies will be directly regulated by this designation. Therefore,
because Federal agencies are not small entities, the Service may
certify that the proposed critical habitat rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
We acknowledge, however, that in some cases, third-party proponents
of the action subject to permitting or funding may participate in a
section 7 consultation, and thus may be indirectly affected. We believe
it is good policy to assess these impacts if we have sufficient data
before us to complete the necessary analysis, whether or not this
analysis is strictly required by the RFA. While this regulation does
not directly regulate these entities, in our draft economic analysis we
will conduct a brief evaluation of the potential number of third
parties participating in consultations on an annual basis in order to
ensure a more complete examination of the incremental effects of this
proposed rule in the context of the RFA.
In conclusion, we believe that, based on our interpretation of
directly regulated entities under the RFA and relevant case law, this
designation of critical habitat will only directly regulate Federal
agencies which are not by definition small business entities. As such,
certify that, if promulgated, this designation of critical habitat
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small business entities. Therefore, an initial regulatory flexibility
analysis is not required. However, though not necessarily required by
the RFA, in our draft economic analysis for this proposal we will
consider and evaluate the potential effects to third parties that may
be involved with consultations with Federal action agencies related to
this action.

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use--Executive Order 13211

Executive Order 13211 (Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use) requires
agencies to prepare Statements of Energy Effects when undertaking
certain actions. We do not expect the designation of this proposed
critical habitat to significantly affect energy supplies, distribution,
or use, because: (1) Areas where critical habitat is being proposed for
whorled sunflower and fleshy-fruit gladecress are not presently used
for energy production, and (2) areas where critical habitat is being
proposed for Short's bladderpod are not adversely affected as a result
of hydropower generation by the Corps of Engineers. The authorized
project purposes for Cheatham, Old Hickory, and Cordell Hull dams are
navigation and hydropower. The overall reservoir system serves multiple
purposes, including flood control, hydropower, navigation, recreation,
water supply, and water quality. The preferred method of releasing
water from these reservoirs is through hydropower turbines, and, to the
extent possible, release schedules are developed to best meet peak
power demands. However, storage capacity in these reservoirs constrains
the upper limit at which reservoir stage can be maintained, sometimes
requiring the Corps of Engineers to release water through spillways in
addition to hydropower turbines, and limits the extent to which the
lower elevations within proposed critical habitat units adjacent to
these reservoirs are inundated or subjected to erosion due to stage
fluctuation that could adversely modify features essential to the
conservation of Short's bladderpod. Therefore, this action is not a
significant energy action, and no Statement of Energy Effects is
required. However, we will further evaluate this issue as we conduct
our economic analysis, and review and revise this assessment as
warranted.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.)

In accordance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501
et seq.), we make the following findings:
(1) This rule would not produce a Federal mandate. In general, a
Federal mandate is a provision in legislation, statute, or regulation
that would impose an enforceable duty upon State, local, or tribal
governments, or the private sector, and includes both ``Federal
intergovernmental mandates'' and ``Federal private sector mandates.''
These terms are defined in 2 U.S.C. 658(5)-(7). ``Federal
intergovernmental mandate'' includes a regulation that ``would impose
an enforceable duty upon State, local, or tribal governments'' with two
exceptions. It excludes ``a condition of Federal assistance.'' It also
excludes ``a duty arising from participation in a voluntary Federal
program,'' unless the regulation ``relates to a then-existing Federal
program under which $500,000,000 or more is provided annually to State,
local, and tribal governments under entitlement authority,'' if the
provision would ``increase the stringency of conditions of assistance''
or ``place caps upon, or otherwise decrease, the Federal Government's
responsibility to provide funding,'' and the State, local, or tribal
governments ``lack authority'' to adjust accordingly. At the time of
enactment, these entitlement programs were: Medicaid; Aid to Families
with Dependent Children work programs; Child Nutrition; Food Stamps;
Social Services Block Grants; Vocational Rehabilitation State Grants;
Foster Care, Adoption Assistance, and Independent Living; Family
Support Welfare Services; and Child Support Enforcement. ``Federal
private sector mandate'' includes a regulation that ``would impose an
enforceable duty upon the private sector, except (i) a condition of
Federal assistance or (ii) a duty arising from participation in a
voluntary Federal program.''
The designation of critical habitat does not impose a legally
binding duty on non-Federal Government entities or private parties.
Under the Act, the only regulatory effect is that Federal agencies must
ensure that their actions do not destroy or adversely modify critical
habitat under section 7. While non-Federal entities that receive
Federal funding, assistance, or permits, or that otherwise require
approval or authorization from a Federal agency for an action, may be
indirectly impacted by the designation of critical habitat, the legally
binding duty to avoid destruction or adverse modification of critical
habitat rests squarely on the Federal agency. Furthermore, to the
extent that non-Federal entities are indirectly impacted because they
receive Federal assistance or participate in a voluntary Federal aid
program, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act would not apply, nor would
critical habitat shift the costs of the large entitlement programs
listed above onto State governments.
(2) We do not believe that this rule would significantly or
uniquely affect small governments. The majority of lands being proposed
for critical habitat

[[Page 47080]]

designation are privately owned or owned by the Federal government,
although Ashland City, Tennessee, and Frankfort, Kentucky, own small
portions of lands proposed as critical habitat for Short's bladderpod.
Small governments will be affected only to the extent that any programs
having Federal funds, permits, or other authorized activities must
ensure that their actions will not adversely affect the critical
habitat. Therefore, a Small Government Agency Plan is not required.
However, we will further evaluate these issues as we conduct our
economic analysis, and review and revise this assessment as warranted.

Takings--Executive Order 12630

In accordance with Executive Order 12630 (``Government Actions and
Interference with Constitutionally Protected Private Property
Rights''), we have analyzed the potential takings implications of
designating critical habitat for the Short's bladderpod, whorled
sunflower, and fleshy-fruit gladecress in takings implications
assessments. Based on the best available information, the takings
implications assessments conclude that the designations of critical
habitat for the Short's bladderpod, whorled sunflower, and fleshy-fruit
gladecress do not pose significant takings implications. However, we
will further evaluate this issue as we develop our final designation,
and review and revise this assessment as warranted.

Federalism--Executive Order 13132

In accordance with Executive Order 13132 (Federalism), this
proposed rule does not have significant Federalism effects. A
federalism summary impact statement is not required. In keeping with
Department of the Interior and Department of Commerce policy, we
requested information from, and coordinated development of, this
proposed critical habitat designation with appropriate State resource
agencies in Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, and Tennessee. The
designation of critical habitat in areas currently occupied by Short's
bladderpod, whorled sunflower, and fleshy-fruit gladecress imposes no
additional restrictions to those that would be put in place by the
listing of the species and, therefore, has little incremental impact on
State and local governments and their activities. The designation may
have some benefit to these governments because the areas that contain
the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of
the species are more clearly defined, and the elements of the features
necessary to the conservation of the species are specifically
identified. This information does not alter where and what federally
sponsored activities may occur. However, it may assist local
governments in long-range planning (rather than having them wait for
case-by-case section 7 consultations to occur).
Where State and local governments require approval or authorization
from a Federal agency for actions that may affect critical habitat,
consultation under section 7(a)(2) would be required. While non-Federal
entities that receive Federal funding, assistance, or permits, or that
otherwise require approval or authorization from a Federal agency for
an action, may be indirectly impacted by the designation of critical
habitat, the legally binding duty to avoid destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat rests squarely on the Federal agency.

Civil Justice Reform--Executive Order 12988

In accordance with Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform),
the Office of the Solicitor has determined that the rule does not
unduly burden the judicial system and that it meets the requirements of
sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of the Order. We have proposed designating
critical habitat in accordance with the provisions of the Act. To
assist the public in understanding the habitat needs of the species,
the rule identifies the elements of physical or biological features
essential to the conservation of the species. The designated areas of
critical habitat are presented on maps, and the rule provides several
options for the interested public to obtain more detailed location
information, if desired.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)

This rule does not contain any new collections of information that
require approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This rule will not impose recordkeeping or
reporting requirements on State or local governments, individuals,
businesses, or organizations. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and
a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)

It is our position that, outside the jurisdiction of the U.S. Court
of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, we do not need to prepare
environmental analyses pursuant to the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et 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)).

Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes

In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994
(Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal
Governments; 59 FR 22951), Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and
Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments), and the Department of the
Interior's manual at 512 DM 2, we readily acknowledge our
responsibility to communicate meaningfully with recognized Federal
Tribes on a government-to-government basis. In accordance with
Secretarial Order 3206 of June 5, 1997 (American Indian Tribal Rights,
Federal-Tribal Trust Responsibilities, and the Endangered Species Act),
we readily acknowledge our responsibilities to work directly with
tribes in developing programs for healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge
that tribal lands are not subject to the same controls as Federal
public lands, to remain sensitive to Indian culture, and to make
information available to tribes.
We determined that there are no tribal lands occupied by Short's
bladderpod, whorled sunflower, or fleshy-fruit gladecress at the time
of listing that contain the features essential for conservation of the
species, and no tribal lands unoccupied by these species that are
essential for the conservation of the species. Therefore, we are not
proposing to designate critical habitat for the Short's bladderpod,
whorled sunflower, or fleshy-fruit gladecress on tribal lands.

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

[[Page 47081]]

(5) Use lists and tables wherever possible.
If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us
comments by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. To
better help us revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as
possible. For example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections
or paragraphs that are unclearly written, which sections or sentences
are too long, the sections where you feel lists or tables would be
useful, etc.

References Cited

A complete list of references cited in this rulemaking is available
on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R4-
ES-2013-0086 and upon request from the Tennessee Ecological Services
Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

Authors

The primary authors of this package are the staff members of the
Tennessee and Alabama Ecological Services Field Offices.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.

Proposed Regulation Promulgation

Accordingly, we propose to amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter
I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below:

PART 17--ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 1531-1544; 4201-4245, unless
otherwise noted.
0
2. Amend Sec. 17.96 paragraph (a) as follows:
0
a. By adding an entry in alphabetical order under Family Asteraceae for
``Helianthus verticillatus (whorled sunflower)''; and
0
b. By adding entries in alphabetical order under Family Brassicaceae
for ``Leavenworthia crassa (fleshy-fruit gladecress)'' and ``Physaria
globosa (Short's bladderpod)''.
The additions read as follows:

Sec. 17.96 Critical habitat--plants.

* * * * *
(a) Flowering plants.
* * * * *
Family Asteraceae: Helianthus verticillatus (whorled sunflower)
(1) Critical habitat units are depicted for Cherokee County,
Alabama; Floyd County, Georgia; and Madison and McNairy Counties,
Tennessee, on the maps below.
(2) Within these areas, the primary constituent elements of the
physical or biological features essential to the conservation of
whorled sunflower consist of three components:
(i) Silt loam, silty clay loam, or fine sandy loam soils on land
forms including broad uplands, depressions, stream terraces, and
floodplains within the headwaters of the Coosa River in Alabama and
Georgia and the East Fork Forked Deer and Tuscumbia rivers in
Tennessee.
(ii) Sites in which forest canopy is absent, or where woody
vegetation is present at sufficiently low densities to provide full or
partial sunlight to whorled sunflower plants for most of the day, and
which support vegetation characteristic of moist prairie communities.
Invasive, nonnative plants must be absent or present in sufficiently
low numbers to not inhibit growth or reproduction of whorled sunflower.
(iii) Occupied sites in which a sufficient number of compatible
mates are present for outcrossing and production of viable achenes to
occur.
(3) Critical habitat does not include manmade structures (such as
buildings, aqueducts, runways, roads, and other paved areas) and the
land on which they are located existing within the legal boundaries on
the effective date of this rule.
(4) Critical habitat map units. Data layers defining map units were
created on a base of Bing Maps digital aerial photography supplied by
the Harris Corporation, Earthstar Geographics LLC, and the Microsoft
Corporation. Critical habitat units were then mapped using the USA
Contiguous Albers Equal Area Projection with a NAD 83 datum. The maps
in this entry, as modified by any accompanying regulatory text,
establish the boundaries of the critical habitat designation. The
coordinates or plot points or both on which each map is based are
available to the public at the Service's Internet site at https://www.fws.gov/cookeville, at https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No.
FWS-R4-ES-2013-0086, and at the field office responsible for this
designation. You may obtain field office location information by
contacting one of the Service regional offices, the addresses of which
are listed at 50 CFR 2.2.
BILLING CODE4310-55-P

[[Page 47082]]

(5) Index map follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AU13.002

[[Page 47083]]

(6) Unit 1: Mud Creek, Cherokee County, Alabama, Map of Unit 1
follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AU13.003

[[Page 47084]]

(7) Unit 2: Coosa Valley Prairie, Floyd County, Georgia. Map of
Unit 2 follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AU13.004

[[Page 47085]]

(8) Unit 3: Prairie Branch, McNairy County, Tennessee. Map of Unit
3 follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AU13.005

[[Page 47086]]

(9) Unit 4: Pinson, Madison County, Tennessee. Map of Unit 4
follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AU13.006

* * * * *
Family Brassicaceae: Leavenworthia crassa (fleshy-fruit gladecress)
(1) Critical habitat units are depicted for Lawrence and Morgan
Counties, Alabama, on the maps below.
(2) Within these areas, the primary constituent elements of the
physical or biological features essential to the conservation of
fleshy-fruit gladecress consist of three components:
(i) Shallow-soiled, open areas with exposed limestone bedrock or
gravel that are dominated by herbaceous vegetation characteristic of
glade communities.
(ii) Open or well-lighted areas of exposed limestone bedrock or
gravel that ensure fleshy-fruit gladecress plants remain unshaded for a
significant portion of the day.
(iii) Glade habitat that is protected from both native and
invasive, nonnative plants to minimize

[[Page 47087]]

competition and shading of fleshy-fruit gladecress.
(3) Critical habitat does not include manmade structures (such as
buildings, aqueducts, runways, roads, and other paved areas) and the
land on which they are located existing within the legal boundaries on
the effective date of this rule.
(4) Critical habitat map units. Data layers defining map units were
created on a base of Bing Maps digital aerial photography supplied by
the Harris Corporation, Earthstar Geographics LLC, and the Microsoft
Corporation. Critical habitat units were then mapped using the USA
Contiguous Albers Equal Area Projection with a NAD 83 datum. The maps
in this entry, as modified by any accompanying regulatory text,
establish the boundaries of the critical habitat designation. The
coordinates or plot points or both on which each map is based are
available to the public at the Service's Internet site at https://www.fws.gov/cookeville, at https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No.
FWS-R4-ES-2013-0086, and at the field office responsible for this
designation. You may obtain field office location information by
contacting one of the Service regional offices, the addresses of which
are listed at 50 CFR 2.2.

[[Page 47088]]

(5) Index map follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AU13.007

[[Page 47089]]

(6) Unit 1: Bluebird Glades, Lawrence County, Alabama. Map of Units
1 and 2 follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AU13.008

(7) Unit 2: Stover Branch Glades, Lawrence County, Alabama. Map of
Unit 2 is provided at paragraph (6) of this entry.

[[Page 47090]]

(8) Unit 3: Indian Tomb Hollow Glade, Lawrence County, Alabama. Map
of Unit 3 follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AU13.009

[[Page 47091]]

(9) Unit 4: Cedar Plains South, Morgan County, Alabama. Map of
Units 4, 5, and 6 follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AU13.010

(10) Unit 5: Cedar Plains North, Morgan County, Alabama. Map of
Unit 5 is provided at paragraph (8) of this entry.
(11) Unit 6: Massey Glade, Morgan County, Alabama. Map of Unit 6 is
provided at paragraph (8) of this entry.
* * * * *
Family Brassicaceae: Physaria globosa (Short's bladderpod)
(1) Critical habitat units are depicted for Posey County, Indiana;
Clark, Franklin, and Woodford Counties, Kentucky; and Cheatham,
Davidson, Dickson, Jackson, Montgomery, Smith, and Trousdale Counties,
Tennessee, on the maps below.
(2) Within these areas, the primary constituent elements of the
physical or biological features essential to the conservation of
Short's bladderpod consist of three components:

[[Page 47092]]

(i) Bedrock formations and outcrops of calcareous limestone,
sometimes with interbedded shale or siltstone, in close proximity to
the mainstem or tributaries of the Kentucky and Cumberland rivers.
These outcrop sites or areas of suitable bedrock geology should be
located on steeply sloped hillsides or bluffs, typically on south- to
west-facing aspects.
(ii) Shallow or rocky, well-drained soils formed from the
weathering of underlying calcareous bedrock formations, which are
undisturbed or subjected to minimal disturbance, so as to retain
habitat for ground-nesting pollinators and potential for maintenance of
a soil seed bank.
(iii) Forest communities with low levels of canopy closure or
openings in the canopy to provide adequate sunlight for individual and
population growth. Invasive, nonnative plants must be absent or present
in sufficiently low numbers to not inhibit growth or reproduction of
Short's bladderpod.
(3) Critical habitat does not include manmade structures (such as
buildings, aqueducts, runways, roads, and other paved areas) and the
land on which they are located existing within the legal boundaries on
the effective date of this rule.
(4) Critical habitat map units. Data layers defining map units were
created on a base of Bing Maps digital aerial photography supplied by
the Harris Corporation, Earthstar Geographics LLC, and the Microsoft
Corporation. Critical habitat units were then mapped using the USA
Contiguous Albers Equal Area Projection with a NAD 83 datum. The maps
in this entry, as modified by any accompanying regulatory text,
establish the boundaries of the critical habitat designation. The
coordinates or plot points or both on which each map is based are
available to the public at the Service's Internet site at https://www.fws.gov/cookeville, at https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No.
FWS-R4-ES-2013-0086, and at the field office responsible for this
designation. You may obtain field office location information by
contacting one of the Service regional offices, the addresses of which
are listed at 50 CFR 2.2.

[[Page 47093]]

(5) Index map follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AU13.011

[[Page 47094]]

(6) Unit 1: Kings and Queens Bluff, Montgomery County, Tennessee.
Map of Unit 1 follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AU13.012

[[Page 47095]]

(7) Unit 2: Lock B Road, Montgomery County, Tennessee. Map of Units
2 and 3 follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AU13.013

(8) Unit 3: Jarrel Ridge Road, Montgomery County, Tennessee. Map of
Unit 3 is provided at paragraph (7) of this entry.

[[Page 47096]]

(9) Unit 4: Cheatham Lake, Cheatham County, Tennessee. Map of Unit
4 follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AU13.014

[[Page 47097]]

(10) Unit 5: Harpeth River, Cheatham County, Tennessee. Map of
Units 5 and 6 follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AU13.015

(11) Unit 6: Montgomery Bell Bridge, Cheatham and Dickson Counties,
Tennessee. Map of Unit 6 is provided at paragraph (10) of this entry.

[[Page 47098]]

(12) Unit 7: Nashville and Western Railroad, Cheatham County,
Tennessee. Map of Unit 7 follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AU13.016

[[Page 47099]]

(13) Unit 8: River Trace, Cheatham and Davidson Counties,
Tennessee. Map of Unit 8 follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AU13.017

[[Page 47100]]

(14) Unit 9: Old Hickory Lake, Trousdale County, Tennessee. Map of
Units 9 and 10 follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AU13.018

(15) Unit 10: Coleman-Winston Bridge, Trousdale County, Tennessee.
Map of Unit 10 is provided at paragraph (14) of this entry.

[[Page 47101]]

(16) Unit 11: Cordell Hull Reservoir, Smith County, Tennessee. Map
of Unit 11 follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AU13.019

[[Page 47102]]

(17) Unit 12: Funns Branch, Jackson County, Tennessee. Map of Units
12 and 13 follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AU13.020

(18) Unit 13: Wartrace Creek, Jackson County, Tennessee. Map of
Unit 13 is provided at paragraph (17) of this entry.

[[Page 47103]]

(19) Unit 14: Camp Pleasant Branch, Franklin County, Kentucky. Map
of Unit 14 follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AU13.021

[[Page 47104]]

(20) Unit 15: Kentucky River, Franklin County, Kentucky. Map of
Units 15 and 16 follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AU13.022

(21) Unit 16: Owenton Road, Franklin County, Kentucky. Map of Unit
16 is provided at paragraph (20) of this entry.

[[Page 47105]]

(22) Unit 17: Little Benson Creek, Franklin County, Kentucky. Map
of Unit 17 follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AU13.023

[[Page 47106]]

(23) Unit 18: Boone Creek, Clark County, Kentucky. Map of Unit 18
follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AU13.024

[[Page 47107]]

(24) Unit 19: Delaney Ferry Road, Woodford County, Kentucky. Map of
Unit 19 follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AU13.025

[[Page 47108]]

(25) Unit 20: Bonebank Road, Posey County, Indiana. Map of Unit 20
follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AU13.026

* * * * *

Dated: July 19, 2013.
Rachel Jacobson,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2013-18456 Filed 8-1-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.