Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Reclassifying Hesperocyparis abramsiana (=Cupressus abramsiana) as Threatened, 8408-8418 [2016-03296]
Download as PDF
8408
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 33 / Friday, February 19, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Name of non-regulatory SIP
revision
Applicable geographic area
*
*
*
Interstate Pollution Transport
Statewide ...............................
Requirements for the 2010
NO2 NAAQS.
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2013–0092;
4500030113]
RIN 1018–AY77
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Reclassifying
Hesperocyparis abramsiana
(=Cupressus abramsiana) as
Threatened
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
Final rule.
ACTION:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), determine
threatened species status under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act),
as amended, for Hesperocyparis
abramsiana (=Cupressus abramsiana)
(Santa Cruz cypress), a plant species
found in Santa Cruz and San Mateo
Counties in west-central California. We
also finalize the correction to the
scientific name of Santa Cruz cypress on
the List of Endangered and Threatened
Plants. The effect of this regulation will
be to change the listing status of Santa
Cruz cypress from an endangered
species to a threatened species on the
List of Endangered and Threatened
Plants.
DATES: This rule becomes effective
March 21, 2016.
ADDRESSES: This final rule is available
on the internet at https://
www.regulations.gov under Docket No.
FWS–R8–ES–2013–0092 and at https://
www.fws.gov/ventura/. Comments and
materials we received, as well as
supporting documentation we used in
preparing this rule, are available for
public inspection at https://
www.regulations.gov. All of the
comments, materials, and
documentation that we considered in
this rulemaking are available by
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:06 Feb 18, 2016
Jkt 238001
*
6/6/14
EPA approval date
*
2/19/16 [Insert Federal Register citation].
appointment, during normal business
hours at: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office, 2493
Portola Road, Suite B, Ventura,
California 93003; telephone 805–644–
1766; facsimile 805–644–3958.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Stephen P. Henry, Field Supervisor,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ventura
Fish and Wildlife Office, 2493 Portola
Road, Suite B, Ventura, CA 93003;
telephone 805–644–1766; facsimile
805–644–3958. Persons who use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD) may call the Federal Information
Relay Service (FIRS) at 800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[FR Doc. 2016–03394 Filed 2–18–16; 8:45 am]
AGENCY:
State
submittal
date
Previous Federal Action
On September 3, 2013, we proposed
to reclassify the Santa Cruz cypress from
an endangered species to a threatened
species (78 FR 54221) on the List of
Endangered and Threatened Plants in
part 17 of title 50 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR). Please refer to the
proposed reclassification rule for the
Santa Cruz cypress (78 FR 54221;
September 3, 2013) for a detailed
description of the previous Federal
actions concerning this species. This
final rule constitutes our final action
regarding the petition to reclassify the
Santa Cruz cypress from endangered to
threatened (Pacific Legal Foundation
2011, pp. 1–11).
Background
For a detailed discussion of Santa
Cruz cypress’s description, taxonomy,
life history, habitat, soils, distribution,
abundance, age and size distribution,
and role of fire in regeneration, please
see the Santa Cruz Cypress
Hesperocyparis [Cupressus] abramsiana
Species Report (Service 2015, pp. 1–57)
(Species Report), which is available for
review under Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–
2013–0092 at https://
www.regulations.gov. Please refer to the
proposed reclassification rule for the
Santa Cruz cypress (78 FR 54221;
September 3, 2013) (Service 2013b) for
a summary of information about the
species and the proposed change in
taxonomy: In this final rule, we replace
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Additional explanation
*
*
This action addresses the infrastructure element of CAA
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), or
the good neighbor provision, for the 2010 NO2
NAAQS.
the entry for Cupressus abramsiana
from 50 CFR 17.12(h) with an entry for
Hesperocyparis abramsiana.
Summary of Biological Status and
Factors Affecting the Species
This section introduces and
summarizes the biological status and
factors affecting Santa Cruz cypress
identified at each period of the species’
review history. We have described the
level of threats using a scale of low,
moderate, and high (as discussed in
Appendix 1 of the Species Report). A
low-level threat indicates a threat that
has the potential to occur at any time,
although the possibility is unlikely that
this threat will affect the species across
its range or interrupt the species’
persistence into the future. A moderatelevel threat indicates a threat that is
currently affecting the long-term
persistence of the species in a particular
population or across its range, but does
not pose an imminent threat to the
persistence of the species. A high-level
threat indicates a well-documented,
imminent threat to a large number of
individuals that has the potential to
disrupt the long-term persistence of the
species in a particular population or
across its range.
At the time of listing, the primary
threats to Santa Cruz cypress were
residential development, agricultural
conversion, logging, oil and gas drilling,
genetic introgression, and alteration of
the natural frequency of fires that
threatened to destroy portions of each
population (52 FR 675; January 8, 1987).
Other (secondary) threats in 1987
included vandalism, disease, and
inadequate regulatory mechanisms (52
FR 675). Of the primary threats in 1987,
residential development, agricultural
conversion, and logging threatened
individual Santa Cruz cypress trees and
stands with imminent destruction.
Other threats identified in the Recovery
Plan for the Santa Cruz Cypress (Service
1998) also included oil and gas
development, reproductive isolation,
introgression, and competition from
nonnative species.
E:\FR\FM\19FER1.SGM
19FER1
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 33 / Friday, February 19, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
On May 21, 2010, we notified the
public in the Federal Register of the
availability of the 5-year review for
Santa Cruz cypress (75 FR 28636). The
5-year review was completed on August
17, 2009 (Service 2009, entire), and
resulted in a recommendation to change
the status of the species from an
endangered species to a threatened
species. At the time of the 2009 5-year
review, we reported that the threats to
Santa Cruz cypress from residential
development, agricultural conversion,
and logging had decreased since the
time of listing. This decrease was
achieved primarily through the
acquisition of lands for conservation by
the California Department of Pesticide
Regulation (CDPR) and the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife
(CDFW) and through other private land
transfers. No evidence existed that oil
and gas drilling was a threat to the
species. The 5-year review also found
information that the population size
(number of individuals at each site) of
the species was greater than known at
the time of listing. The threats from
alteration of fire frequencies, disease or
predation, reproductive isolation,
genetic introgression, vandalism, and
competition with nonnative species
remained at the same level as identified
during the development of the Recovery
Plan (Service 1998).
The 5-year review identified low
levels of regeneration (new recruitment
of seedlings and young plants) and the
effects of climate change as concerns for
the long-term persistence of the Santa
Cruz cypress (Service 2009, pp. 9–13).
Climate change was classified as a
moderate-level threat because
projections indicated that the regional
Santa Cruz climate will become warmer
and drier, which would directly affect
Santa Cruz cypress across its range over
the next century (Service 2009, pp. 10–
11).
In accordance with section 4(a)(1) of
the Act, our assessment of the current
status of a species is based on whether
a species is in danger of extinction or
likely to become so because of any of
five factors: (A) The present or
threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range; (B)
overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D)
the inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms; or (E) other natural or
manmade factors affecting its continued
existence.
Current or potential future threats to
Santa Cruz cypress include alteration of
the fire regime (Factors A and E),
competition with nonnative species
(Factors A and E), climate change
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Feb 18, 2016
Jkt 238001
(Factor A), genetic introgression (Factor
E), and vandalism and unauthorized
recreational activities (Factors A and E).
The acquisition of lands for
conservation by State agencies and
designation of lands as sensitive areas
by Santa Cruz County have resulted in
protection of all or large portions of
each population, but currently do not
provide protections from the threats
listed above (Factor D). Other potential
impacts evaluated and found either to
be of no concern, insignificant concern,
or negligible at this time include
residential development, agricultural
conversion, logging, and oil and gas
drilling (Factor A); overutilization
(Factor B); disease or predation (Factor
C); and reproductive isolation (Factor
E). Please see Table 1, Table 4, and the
‘‘Discussion of Threats to the Species’’
section of the Species Report for a
thorough discussion of all potential and
current threats (Service 2015, pp. 3, 22–
40).
We note, however, that, although the
threats of residential development and
agricultural conversion to Santa Cruz
cypress have been ameliorated
considerably compared to the time of
listing (to the point that we consider
them insignificant at this time), they
may still occur at two of the populations
(i.e., the Bracken Brae and Bonny Doon
populations), although the likelihood is
less than previously identified in the
Recovery Plan. Specifically, while these
lands are not in permanent conservation
ownership, the likelihood of potential
residential development is reduced at
the Bracken Brae population because
the land is owned by a conservationoriented landowner (Service 2015, p.
45) and Santa Cruz County designation
of these lands as a sensitive area places
a restriction on certain kinds of
development. We do not expect this
county designation as a sensitive area to
change in the future, even when the
species is reclassified to threatened or if
it is eventually delisted. Additionally,
potential impacts of agricultural
conversion is currently reduced (to an
insignificant level) at the Bonny Doon
population as a result of a large
proportion of the population (i.e.,
approximately 70 percent) now
occurring on lands designated as a
reserve (Service 2015, pp. 15, 16, 45).
The portion that is not part of the
reserve (i.e., approximately 30 percent)
is still subject to potential agricultural
conversion, although potential loss of
this area outside the reserve is relatively
unlikely due to the county’s designation
of these lands as a sensitive area, thus
agricultural conversion is a low-
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
8409
magnitude threat overall for the
population and the species as a whole.
The following sections provide a
summary of the current threats
impacting the Santa Cruz cypress. As
identified above, these threats include
alteration of the fire regime (Factors A
and E), competition with nonnative
species (Factors A and E), climate
change (Factor A), genetic introgression
(Factor E), vandalism and unauthorized
recreational activities (Factors A and E),
and the inadequacy of existing
regulatory mechanisms (Factor D). As
identified above some of the same
potential activities that affect the habitat
(Factor A) of Santa Cruz cypress can
also affect individuals (Factor E). Where
appropriate, we discuss impacts to both
the habitat and to individuals of Santa
Cruz cypress together for ease of
discussion and analysis.
Alteration of Fire Regime
The long-term persistence of Santa
Cruz cypress populations can be
affected by the disruption of the natural
fire frequency because Santa Cruz
cypress requires fire (or potentially
mechanical disturbance in lieu of, or in
combination with, fire) to reproduce.
Most Santa Cruz cypress populations
are located close to residential areas,
where natural fires from surrounding
wildland areas are excluded by the
creation of fire breaks and fuels
reduction projects. Both fire exclusion
and fire suppression lengthen the
interval between fires, thus altering the
natural fire regime and increasing the
risk of extirpation from senescence
(growth phase from full maturity to
death). Conversely, human ignitions
contribute to fire intervals that are too
short, which in turn can inhibit Santa
Cruz cypress from reaching its
reproductive potential if stands burn
prior to trees reaching reproductive age.
With prevalent fire exclusion on lands
surrounding Santa Cruz cypress
occurring, other techniques such as
mechanical disturbance of the ground,
removal of litter and nonnative invasive
species, and clearing the canopy to
allow sunlight to reach the ground may
need to be utilized to achieve
regeneration of the species. Currently,
mechanical disturbance and litter
removal at the Bonny Doon Ecological
Reserve are being implemented on a
limited basis following the Draft
Management Plan developed for the
Bonny Doon Ecological Reserve (Service
2015, pp. 37, 41, 42). Additionally in
2005, CAL FIRE developed a vegetation
management plan for the Bonny Doon
Ecological Reserve that included
enhancing sensitive habitat for listed
species and improving forest health
E:\FR\FM\19FER1.SGM
19FER1
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
8410
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 33 / Friday, February 19, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
(CAL FIRE 2005, p. 3). This plan has not
been fully implemented and is currently
delayed (Service 2015, p. 42).
The altered fire regime presents a
high-level threat to the long-term
persistence of all of the Santa Cruz
cypress populations and their habitat.
Santa Cruz cypress depends on fire to
maintain appropriate habitat conditions
and to release many of the seeds stored
in cones in the canopy. As adult trees
senesce and die, seed production
decreases, such that there is insufficient
seed available to regenerate the stand
(McGraw 2007, p. 24; Service 2015, p.
25). In the absence of fire, recruitment
still occurs, but at a low level that is
likely not sufficient for stand
replacement (McGraw 2011, p. 2;
Service 2015, p. 25). To germinate in
large numbers, the species requires open
ground and canopy conditions created
by fires intense enough to kill the parent
tree. In the absence of fire the species is
only able to germinate opportunistically
in rock outcroppings or small areas that
have been disturbed. Without
appropriate disturbance from fire, the
stands could eventually senesce,
resulting in minimal reproduction in
small rock outcrops that may be
inadequate to maintain population
viability.
Within the range of the Santa Cruz
cypress, recent and past fires have been
documented at the Bonny Doon (2008)
and Eagle Rock populations (Service
2015, pp. 23–24), although even-aged
stands at the Butano Ridge, Bracken
Brae, and Majors Creek populations
suggest that past fires have occurred in
these areas as well. We estimate that
approximately 50 percent (1,500 Santa
Cruz cypress individuals) of the Bonny
Doon population was killed within the
severely burned areas (Service 2012,
unpubl. data). This is based on visual
inspection of the burn intensity map
and our knowledge of the distribution of
this population. In 1905, a severe fire
also destroyed a large portion of the
Eagle Rock population (Wolf and
Wagener 1948, p. 218). Prior to the fire,
there was a ‘‘considerable stand’’ of
Santa Cruz cypresses, which were used
by the landowner for timber to build
barns and other buildings (Wolf and
Wagener 1948, p. 218). According to
Lyons (1988, pp. 19–20), another fire
burned through a majority of the Eagle
Rock population in 1942, killing most of
the cypresses. Lyons (1988, p. 19) noted
that some larger individuals at the Eagle
Rock site, estimated to be 40–60 years
old, appeared to have survived the fire.
Despite fire occurring within the
known range of Santa Cruz cypress,
McGraw (2011, p. 2) states that the
current demographics and natural
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Feb 18, 2016
Jkt 238001
recruitment rates observed in the Majors
Creek, Eagle Rock, and Butano Ridge
populations appear to be insufficient to
maintain the populations in the absence
of fire (Service 2015, p. 22).
Additionally, active management to
address this concern is not occurring at
this time. The altered fire regime
presents a threat to the long-term
persistence of all of the Santa Cruz
cypress populations, and we consider
altered fire regime to be a high-level
threat to the species (Service 2015 p.
24). See additional discussion in the
‘‘Alteration of Fire Regime’’ section of
the Species Report (Service 2015, pp.
23–25).
Most stands of Santa Cruz cypress
contain reproductive individuals, so
most stands are currently facing a
senescence risk from the absence of fire.
Recruitment in at least four populations
(the portion of Bonny Doon population
that burned in the 2008 Martin Fire, and
the Eagle Rock, Butano Ridge, and
Majors Creek populations) is evident;
however, the current level of
recruitment is not sufficient to maintain
the populations in the absence of fire
(Service 2015, p. 26). This is likely also
the case with the Bracken Brae
population and the portion of the Bonny
Doon population that did not burn.
Under these conditions most trees
would become senescent (postreproductive) prior to a return fire,
resulting in lower stand vitality,
reduced cone production, and reduced
seedling establishment. The risk of
extirpation exists if cypresses senesce
and their seeds are no longer viable by
the time fire returns to a stand. This
may occur if the fire interval is longer
than the lifespan of trees (Ne’eman et al.
1999, p. 240). For the purposes of this
discussion, we estimate the potential
lifespan of individual Santa Cruz
cypress trees to be about 100 years
based on Lyons’ (1988, pp. 2–39)
estimate (see the ‘‘Life History’’
discussion in the Species Report
(Service 2015, pp. 8–9) for additional
discussion).
As discussed above, without fire or
other appropriate disturbance, we
expect low recruitment and decreasing
reproduction as existing trees become
senescent. This scenario would most
likely result in population declines as a
result of mortality of currently existing
trees, and lack of replacement due to
low recruitment and declining
reproduction. The frequency, location,
and intensity of fire in an area is
variable and difficult to predict, and
depends on many factors including
environmental and human-caused
factors, management, and suppression
efforts. For the Santa Cruz cypress there
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
have only been one or two recorded
fires over the past 100 years within the
areas occupied by the species, and we
do not expect the fire conditions,
frequency, or management to change
significantly in the near future. As a
result, we do not currently consider the
fire interval to be adequate to maintain
populations of the species over the long
term and consider the extended fire
interval to be a threat that is likely to
put the species at risk of extinction in
the future.
Competition With Nonnative Species
The presence of nonnative, invasive
species impacts the long-term
persistence of Santa Cruz cypress and
its habitat both currently and in the
future through competition and habitat
modification. Many nonnative species
have been introduced into Santa Cruz
cypress habitat through a variety of past
impacts (e.g., development,
infrastructure). Significant impacts
result from Acacia dealbata (silver
wattle) and Genista monspessulana
(French broom). Silver wattle and
French broom are currently impacting
two populations (i.e., Majors Creek and
Bonny Doon) and are likely to impact,
at minimum, two additional
populations (i.e., Eagle Rock and
Bracken Brae) due to the cypress’s
proximity to residential areas where
ground disturbance activities promote
nonnative plant invasions.
Silver wattle is significantly
impacting the Majors Creek population
and its habitat by creating dense
canopies, which can inhibit germination
and growth of seedlings by blocking
sunlight needed for cypress growth
(McGraw 2007, p. 23; Service 2015, pp.
31–32). French broom is one of the most
prevalent invasive species in Santa Cruz
County, distributed at elevations where
all but a portion of one Santa Cruz
cypress population occurs (Moore 2002,
p. 6; Service 2015, p. 32). French broom
is impacting the Bonny Doon
population and its habitat by inhibiting
Santa Cruz cypress seedling
establishment through competition for
open, recently disturbed soils that have
access to abundant sunlight.
Additionally, but to a lesser degree,
European annual grasses (present at all
populations) are known to impact Santa
Cruz cypress by precluding the
establishment of seedlings. These
nonnative shrubs and annual grasses are
impacting most of the populations of
Santa Cruz cypress and are expected to
continue to do so over the long term. We
consider competition with nonnative
species to be a moderate-level threat to
the Santa Cruz cypress. See additional
discussion in the ‘‘Competition With
E:\FR\FM\19FER1.SGM
19FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 33 / Friday, February 19, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Nonnative Plant Species’’ section of the
Species Report (Service 2015, pp. 31–
33).
Climate Change
Our analyses under the Act include
consideration of ongoing and projected
changes in climate. The terms ‘‘climate’’
and ‘‘climate change’’ are defined by the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC). The term ‘‘climate’’
refers to the mean and variability of
different types of weather conditions
over time, with 30 years being a typical
period for such measurements (IPCC
2013, p. 1450). The term ‘‘climate
change’’ thus refers to a change in the
mean or variability of one or more
measures of climate (e.g., temperature or
precipitation) that persists for an
extended period, whether the change is
due to natural variability or human
activity (IPCC 2013, p. 1450). Various
changes in climate may have direct or
indirect effects on species. These effects
may be positive, neutral, or negative,
and they may change over time,
depending on the species and other
relevant considerations, such as threats
in combination and interactions of
climate with other variables (for
example, habitat fragmentation) (IPCC
2014, pp. 4–11). Within central-western
California (i.e., California coastal
counties from San Francisco south to
Santa Barbara, including the range of
the Santa Cruz cypress), predictions
indicate warmer winter temperatures,
earlier warming in the spring, and
increased summer temperatures (Point
Reyes Bird Observatory (PRBO)
Conservation Science 2011, p. 35), all of
which will likely result in shifts in
vegetation types. This can, for example,
result in increased competition between
species like Santa Cruz cypress and
other native and nonnative species
(Loarie et al. 2008, pp. 1–10), or result
in habitat changes resulting from altered
fire frequency and water availability
(Service 2015, pp. 28–29). Drier
conditions and increased fire frequency
that may result from climate change
could also make conditions somewhat
more favorable for Santa Cruz cypress.
However, we anticipate continuing fire
suppression and fire exclusion practices
would outweigh any potential favorable
effects. Thus, while impacts of climate
change could potentially have either
positive or negative effects to Santa Cruz
cypress, the altered fire regime as a
result of fire exclusion and fire
suppression practices remains a primary
threat to the species. We therefore
consider climate change to be a
moderate-level threat to the Santa Cruz
cypress. See additional discussion in
the ‘‘Climate Change’’ section of the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Feb 18, 2016
Jkt 238001
Species Report (Service 2015, pp. 26–
29).
Genetic Introgression
If individuals of different cypress
species are planted in close proximity,
they can exchange pollen and may
produce fertile hybrid offspring, as has
been documented in a number of plant
species (Rhymer and Simberloff 1996,
pp. 98–99). By this means, genes from
one species can infiltrate into another,
a process called genetic introgression.
Santa Cruz cypress may be affected by
introgression from residential plantings
of Hesperocyparis macrocarpa
(Monterey cypress) near the Bonny
Doon population (V. Haley 1993, pers.
obs.), plantings of Cupressus glabra
(Arizona cypress) near the Eagle Rock
population, and potentially by plantings
near other populations due to their close
proximity to residential areas where
plantings of other cypress species could
occur. Examination of genetic variation
among Santa Cruz cypress populations
and between Santa Cruz cypress and
neighboring species (Millar and Westfall
1992, p. 350) indicates the potential that
hybridization may occur between Santa
Cruz cypress and the neighboring
species. The main harmful genetic effect
of such hybridization on native species
is the loss of both genetic diversity and
the ability of native populations to
continue to persist due to potential loss
of locally adapted characteristics. The
resulting hybrid taxa can also reduce the
growth of, or replace, native species and
compete for resources otherwise
available (Vila et al. 2000, pp. 207–217).
We consider genetic introgression to
be a low-level threat to the Santa Cruz
cypress because it is probably a concern
for only two populations. Genetic
introgression has not been documented
for Santa Cruz cypress, but is a potential
threat given the proximity of non-native
cypress and the ease with which cypress
species hybridize. However,
introgression is a long-term process in
itself, generally taking many generations
for significant population-level impacts
to occur. Given the long generation time
of the species, genetic introgression is
currently considered a potential threat
rather than an imminent threat. See
additional discussion in the ‘‘Genetic
Introgression’’ section of the Species
Report (Service 2015, pp. 30–31).
Vandalism and Unauthorized
Recreational Activities
Vandalism and unauthorized
recreational activities have been
documented to impact multiple Santa
Cruz cypress populations and their
habitat. These activities result in
construction of unauthorized trails
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
8411
(such as those within the Majors Creek
population at Wilder Creek State Park)
(CDPR 2000; K. Barry, Service, 2012,
pers. obs.), which in turn result in
erosion (McGraw 2007, p. 22) and
potentially prevention of seedling
establishment. Additionally, trails wear
away substrate from the base of mature
cypress trees. Although vandalism and
unauthorized recreational activities are
not considered to impact the
populations significantly at this time
(considered a low-level threat because
only a small proportion of trees and
habitat across the species’ range are
affected by these activities), they remain
a concern due to the likelihood of
increased inhabitants in the urbanwildland interface where Santa Cruz
cypress occurs. See additional
discussion in the ‘‘Vandalism and
Unauthorized Recreational Activities’’
section of the Species Report (Service
2015, p. 33).
Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
Reclassifying Santa Cruz cypress from
endangered to threatened would not
significantly change the protections
afforded to this species under the Act.
Santa Cruz cypress conservation has
been addressed in some local, State, and
Federal plans, laws, regulations, and
policies. Now that most of the trees
reside in fully protected areas on State
or County park lands, the inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms is
considered a low-level threat to Santa
Cruz cypress. The threat of habitat
alteration has been substantially
reduced, and, therefore, the concern
regarding inadequate legal protections
on the landscape scale has been
reduced. Although existing regulations
have resulted in conservation of Santa
Cruz cypress habitat, inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms is still
considered a low-level threat because
the potential remains for destruction or
alteration of Santa Cruz cypresses and
their habitat on private lands. However,
the main concern currently and into the
future is the lack of ongoing
management to prevent senescence and
ensure population persistence. If current
Santa Cruz cypress habitat becomes
unfavorable to the species due to lack of
adequate management, Santa Cruz
cypress may not persist even if the land
is sufficiently conserved. See additional
discussion in the ‘‘Legal Protection’’
section of the Species Report (Service
2015, pp. 34–37).
Combination of Threats
The threat to the long-term
persistence of Santa Cruz cypress is
compounded by multiple interacting
factors, specifically: (1) The alteration of
E:\FR\FM\19FER1.SGM
19FER1
8412
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 33 / Friday, February 19, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
fire regimes and lack of species
management; and (2) human activities,
nonnative species, and fire. With the
prevalence of fire exclusion and
suppression near residential
communities within the range of the
species, the opportunity for Santa Cruz
cypress to regenerate in large pulses
following fire is reduced. This fire
suppression coupled with the lack of
species-specific management is
resulting in minimal regeneration for
the species as a whole, which could be
exacerbated if this situation continues
into the future. The ability of land
managers to adequately maintain
cypress populations on public lands is
subject to constraints and physical
barriers, such as the difficulty or
inability of using fire as a management
tool due to proximity to development or
because of air quality standards.
Additionally, human intrusion into
previously undisturbed areas
contributes to colonization of nonnative
plant species in the remote areas of
Santa Cruz cypress forests (see the
‘‘Competition with Nonnative Plant
Species’’ section of the Species Report
(Service 2015, pp. 31–33)). This activity
exacerbates the likelihood for the
creation of open conditions (e.g., bike
trails, road cuts, and firebreaks),
allowing nonnative plants to proliferate
and compete with the cypress for soil,
nutrients, and light. If a wildfire is then
introduced into these new (open)
conditions, nonnative species that
compete with Santa Cruz cypress could
then easily spread. The presence or
increase in nonnative species can
inhibit cypress seedlings by blocking
the sunlight they need to grow (McGraw
2007, p. 23). See ‘‘Compounding
Threats’’ section of the Species Report
(Service 2015, pp. 37–38).
Overall Summary of Factors Affecting
Santa Cruz Cypress
Impacts to the long-term persistence
of Santa Cruz cypress populations from
alteration of the fire regime (Factors A
and E) remains a significant concern
currently and in the future (i.e., at least
approximately 100 years, based on the
potential lifespan of individual Santa
Cruz cypress trees per Lyons’ (1988, pp.
2–39) estimate and based on past fire
interval (two to three documented fires
in two populations over the past 110
years)). Because the germination and
establishment of new seedlings depends
either on natural fire or a managed
substitute (e.g., controlled burns or
mechanical disturbance), appropriate
fire or disturbance regimes are needed
to manage the demographic profile of
the five populations. Lack of fire or
other disturbance to promote
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Feb 18, 2016
Jkt 238001
germination and seedling establishment
poses a senescence risk to the stands
and populations of Santa Cruz cypress
(Service 2015, p. 30). Without
recruitment of new individuals, trees in
the current even-aged stands may
become senescent (or no longer
reproductive) and no longer produce
cones and seeds necessary for long-term
reproductive success and persistence of
the populations (which has been
observed in Santa Cruz cypress
populations by McGraw (2007, pp. 20–
21)). While most of the populations
have been protected through acquisition
of lands for conservation, no active
management is currently occurring to
manage the demographic profile of the
populations. Research on suitable
management methods has only begun
recently at Bonny Doon Ecological
Reserve (McGraw 2011, entire); future
management of this population is
expected to provide additional
understanding of conditions that would
promote regeneration, thus providing
beneficial management
recommendations that could be applied
to all populations.
Although the altered fire regime is
identified as a high-level impact to
Santa Cruz cypress at this time, the level
of impact does not currently place the
species in danger of extinction because
of the expected continued presence of
the populations into the future based on
the lifespan of individuals and the
current age structure, and the
recruitment (albeit minimal overall) that
has been observed to date. Because the
majority of individuals in the
populations are reproductive, additional
recruitment can be expected, although it
likely will not be at a level sufficient to
sustain the populations over the long
term.
In addition to altered fire regime,
other impacts to Santa Cruz cypress and
its habitat are currently occurring or
potentially occurring in the future, but
to a lesser degree than the overall
impact from an altered fire regime.
These include competition with
nonnative, invasive species (Factors A
and E); climate change (Factor A);
genetic introgression (Factor E); and
vandalism or unauthorized recreational
activities (Factors A and E). Nonnative
plants are competing with Santa Cruz
cypress by invading open areas where
cypress seedlings could become
established, thus competing for soil,
nutrients, and light (Service 2015, pp.
31–33). Climate change may cause
vegetation shifts and promote more
frequent and larger stand removal
wildfires under which the species has
not evolved (Service 2015, pp. 26–29).
Genetic introgression of Santa Cruz
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
cypress with at least two different
cypress species could result in
hybridization and result in the loss of
Santa Cruz cypress’s competitive
advantage in its preferred habitat
(Service 2015, pp. 31–32). Vandalism
and unauthorized recreational activities
may inhibit seedling establishment and
increase erosion (Service 2015, p. 33).
Additionally, although substantial
mechanisms are currently in place to
protect Santa Cruz cypress and its
habitat, the existing regulatory
mechanisms are inadequate to fully
protect the species from the threats
described above (Factor D). Based on
our current analysis and the current
level of management being
implemented, the remaining impacts are
expected to influence Santa Cruz
cypress’s habitat suitability and its
ability to reproduce and survive in the
future.
In summary, impacts from
development, agricultural conversion,
logging, and oil and gas development,
which were considered imminent at the
time of listing, have been substantially
reduced or ameliorated. Other impacts
identified at or since listing (i.e.,
alteration of fire regime; competition
with nonnative, invasive species;
climate change; genetic introgression;
and vandalism, including unauthorized
recreational activities) continue to
impact Santa Cruz cypress or are
expected to impact the species in the
future. Although individually these
impacts (with the exception of altered
fire regime) are of low or moderate
concern to the species, their cumulative
impact can promote and accelerate
unnatural conditions (Service 2015, pp.
37–38). For example, human intrusion
into previously undisturbed areas
contributes to colonization of nonnative
plant species in the remote areas of
Santa Cruz cypress forests, which in
turn may result in increased wildfires
and potentially increased community
concern for wildfire suppression
activities. These types of interactions
could become a greater concern to Santa
Cruz cypress in the future if there is
increased human activity in cypress
forests.
The high-level impact of an altered
fire regime to Santa Cruz cypress and its
habitat is of greatest concern at this
time. The threat to long-term persistence
of Santa Cruz cypress posed by this
high-level impact is exacerbated by the
lack of species management, resulting in
continued effects to the age structure
and demographic profile of the species.
Although operating on the species
currently, the impacts from an altered
fire regime, either alone or in
combination with the other impacts
E:\FR\FM\19FER1.SGM
19FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 33 / Friday, February 19, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
identified above, do not place the
species at immediate risk of extinction.
Reproduction and recruitment is
evident (although not at a level
sufficient for long-term persistence)
based on recent data in at least four
populations (i.e., the portion of the
Bonny Doon population that burned in
the 2008 Martin Fire, and at the Eagle
Rock, Butano Ridge, and Majors Creek
populations) (Service 2015, p. 46).
However, if fire or other disturbance
does not occur in the future to promote
germination and seedling establishment
(whether through a natural fire event or
active management), senescence could
result in a downward population trend
that is likely to place the species in
danger of extinction.
Distinguishing Threats for Both Cypress
Varieties
As described in the proposed rule and
Species Report (78 FR 54223; September
3, 2013; Service 2015, pp. 7–8), recent
taxonomic evaluations of
Hesperocyparis abramsiana identified
two varieties: H. a. var. butanoensis
(Butano Ridge population) and H. a. var.
abramsiana (Eagle Rock, Bracken Brae,
Bonny Doon, and Majors Creek
populations) (Adams and Bartel 2009,
pp. 287–299). Therefore, the threats
analysis provided in the Species Report
(Service 2015, entire) and summarized
in this document includes a separate
evaluation for each of the five
populations, in part to distinguish the
level of impact the current threats have
on the two separate varieties. The
information summarized below is
evaluated and described in detail in the
‘‘Discussion of Threats to the Two
Separate Varieties’’ section of the
Species Report (Service 2015, pp. 38–
40).
The Butano Ridge population
(Hesperocyparis abramsiana var.
butanoensis) is primarily threatened by
changes in the historical fire regime and
the impacts as a result of the changed
fire regime (Factors A and E). The
population is located away from
developed areas, but because it is near
a lumber operation, fire exclusion and
suppression activities that alter the fire
regime are likely in the vicinity. Other
impacts identified at the time of listing
are no longer impacting this population
or are no longer considered significant
(e.g., logging, oil and gas drilling), in
large part due to this population now
being fully protected and managed
within the boundaries of Pescadero
Creek County Park. Although this
variety is not considered a separate
species, its status as a separate variety
indicates its divergence from other
populations of the species. Further
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Feb 18, 2016
Jkt 238001
divergence, and potentially the process
of speciation, may continue through
sustained reproductive isolation from
other Santa Cruz cypress populations.
Additionally, this is the only location
for this variety, and it is composed of a
single stand, thus making it vulnerable
to an impact such as disease if exposed.
However, at this time it is highly
unlikely that potential impacts such as
development, disease, predation, and
others (as described in the Species
Report (Service 2015, pp. 23–40)) would
occur at the Butano Ridge population.
An altered fire regime is the main
concern present at this population, with
potential concerns currently or in the
future related to competition with
nonnative species (Factors A and E) and
climate change (Factor A).
Similar to the Butano Ridge
population described above, the primary
impact to the Eagle Rock, Bracken Brae,
Bonny Doon, and Majors Creek
populations (Hesperocyparis
abramsiana var. abramsiana) is the
alteration of the fire regime (Factors A
and E), which was identified at the time
of listing. This impact remains present
at all populations of the Santa Cruz
cypress, although management actions
at the Bonny Doon Ecological Reserve
have included some mechanical
vegetation removal in an attempt to
reduce this impact (Service 2015, pp.
39–40). Impacts from competition with
nonnative species (Factors A and E) and
climate change (Factor A) also threaten
the long-term persistence of both
varieties of Santa Cruz cypress (in
addition to vandalism and unauthorized
recreational activities (Factors A and E),
and genetic introgression (Factor E)
potentially impacting the H. a. var.
abramsiana populations), and there are
no management actions proposed to
address these concerns. The existing
regulatory mechanisms protect the
species from development activities but
are inadequate to fully protect the
species from these other impacts (Factor
D). Please see the ‘‘Current Threats’’ and
‘‘Discussion of Threats to the Two
Separate Varieties’’ sections of the
Species Report for additional discussion
related to current or potential threats to
these Santa Cruz cypress populations
(Service 2015, pp. 23–40).
Recovery and Recovery Plan
Implementation
Section 4(f) of the Act directs us to
develop and implement recovery plans
for the conservation and survival of
endangered and threatened species
unless we determine that such a plan
will not promote the conservation of the
species. A recovery plan for the Santa
Cruz cypress was developed in
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
8413
September 1998 (Service 1998, entire).
Under section 4(f)(1)(B)(ii), recovery
plans must, to the maximum extent
practicable, include: ‘‘Objective,
measurable criteria which, when met,
would result in a determination, in
accordance with the provisions of
[section 4 of the Act], that the species
be removed from the list.’’ However,
revisions to the list (adding, removing,
or reclassifying a species) must reflect
determinations made in accordance
with sections 4(a)(1) and 4(b) of the Act.
Section 4(a)(1) requires that the
Secretary determine whether a species
is endangered or threatened (or not)
because of one or more of five threat
factors. Section 4(b) of the Act requires
that the determination be made ‘‘solely
on the basis of the best scientific and
commercial data available.’’ Therefore,
recovery criteria should help indicate
when we would anticipate an analysis
of the five threat factors under section
4(a)(1) to result in a determination that
the species is no longer an endangered
species or threatened species because of
any of the five statutory factors.
Thus, while recovery plans provide
important guidance to the Service,
States, and other partners on methods of
minimizing threats to listed species and
measurable objectives against which to
measure progress towards recovery, they
are not regulatory documents and
cannot substitute for the determinations
and promulgation of regulations
required under section 4(a)(1) of the
Act. A decision to revise the status of or
remove a species from the Federal List
of Endangered and Threatened Plants
(50 CFR 17.12) is ultimately based on an
analysis of the best scientific and
commercial data then available to
determine whether a species is no
longer an endangered species or a
threatened species, regardless of
whether that information differs from
the recovery plan.
The Recovery Plan states that Santa
Cruz cypress can be reclassified to
threatened status when protection is
secured for all five populations and
their habitat from the primary threats of
logging, agricultural conversion, and
development (Service 1998, p. 30). This
criterion was intended to address the
point at which imminent threats to the
species had been ameliorated so that the
populations were no longer in
immediate risk of extirpation. Because
of its limited range and distribution, we
determined that essentially all of the
known habitat is necessary to conserve
the species. At the time the Recovery
Plan was prepared, we estimated that
areal extent totaled 356 ac (144 ha).
After more accurate mapping (McGraw
2007, entire), we now estimate that areal
E:\FR\FM\19FER1.SGM
19FER1
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
8414
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 33 / Friday, February 19, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
extent totals approximately 188 ac (76
ha) (Service 2015, p. 43). Additionally,
estimated abundance of individuals in
all populations has changed over time,
from approximately 2,300 individuals at
the time of listing in 1987, to a current
range of 33,000 to 44,000 individuals
(although the latter estimate is variable
due to mortality and regeneration
following the 2008 Martin Fire that
burned 520 ac (210 ha) of land and a
portion of the Bonny Doon population)
(see Table 1 and the Bonny Doon
population discussion under the
‘‘Population Descriptions’’ section of the
Species Report (Service 2015, pp. 6, 15–
17)). It is important to note that the
updated estimates for species
abundance and areal extent do not
illustrate trends but rather improved
information about the species over time.
As explained in more detail in the
Species Report (Service 2015, p. 43),
three of five populations occur
primarily or entirely on lands that are
being managed for conservation
purposes, including the Butano Ridge
population at Pescadero Creek County
Park, the Bonny Doon population at
Bonny Doon Ecological Reserve
managed by the California Department
of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and the
Eagle Rock population at Big Basin State
Park managed by the California
Department of Parks and Recreation
(CDPR). A fourth population (Majors
Creek) is primarily on lands at Gray
Whale Ranch State Park, with a small
portion on privately owned land. The
fifth population (Bracken Brae) is
entirely on private lands owned by a
conservation-oriented landowner; this
land is also designated by the County of
Santa Cruz as environmentally sensitive
habitat, which places restrictions on
most development. Because four of the
five populations, either wholly or
primarily, occur on park or reserve
lands, most of the individuals in the
Bonny Doon, Butano Ridge, Majors
Creek, and Eagle Rock populations are
protected against the threats identified
as imminent (logging, agricultural
conversion, and development) at the
time of listing and in the Recovery Plan.
Because the Bracken Brae population is
being managed by a conservationoriented landowner and county
restrictions are in place that would
restrict most development,
development-related threats to this
population appear negligible. Therefore,
we conclude that the downlisting
criterion has been substantially met.
The Recovery Plan also states that
Santa Cruz cypress can be delisted
when all five populations are assured of
long-term reproductive success, with
insurance against failure provided by
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Feb 18, 2016
Jkt 238001
the availability of banked seed (Service
1998, p. 45). This criterion was intended
to address the point at which long-term
threats to the species’ persistence had
been addressed and its persistence
ensured. As explained in more detail in
the Species Report (Service 2015, pp.
18–20), Santa Cruz cypress requires fire
or other disturbance for germination of
seeds and recruitment of new
individuals into the populations. As
detailed above in the Summary of
Biological Status and Factors Affecting
the Species section and in the Species
Report (Service 2015, pp. 23–25),
alteration of fire regime and lack of
management are likely to significantly
impact the long-term persistence of the
species. Additionally, only seed for the
Bonny Doon, Majors Creek, and Bracken
Brae populations is stored in a
conservation bank; no seed has been
banked for the Eagle Rock or Butano
Ridge populations. Therefore, based on
our analysis of the best available
information, we conclude that the
delisting criterion for the species has
not been met.
In addition to the significant
protections now afforded to Santa Cruz
cypress as outlined above, various
studies have occurred since
development of the Recovery Plan that
aid in our understanding of the status of
Santa Cruz cypress. For example:
• Recent surveys indicate that four of
the five stands of Santa Cruz cypress
contain a larger number of individuals
than was estimated at the time of listing
and in the Recovery Plan (Service 2015,
p. 43).
• Although data indicate the majority
of trees are reproductive, many trees (as
indicated by surveys conducted
specifically at Butano Ridge and Majors
Creek populations) are even-aged (occur
in stands or populations with
individuals all of approximately the
same age). Even-aged stands indicate
that vigorous recruitment (survival of
seedlings to reproductive age and into
the adult population) is not evident
(McGraw 2011, p. 26). In contrast,
vigorous recruitment would be
indicated by stands or populations
including individuals of multiple sizes
or age classes representing various life
stages of the species.
• While seed production appears to
be strong at each of the sampled
populations, recruitment, which
depends more on extrinsic factors such
as the availability of appropriate habitat
for seedling survival, is more variable
among stands even within a population.
These and other data that we have
analyzed indicate that most threats
identified at listing and during the
development of the Recovery Plan are
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
reduced in areas occupied by Santa
Cruz cypress and that the status of Santa
Cruz cypress has improved, primarily
due to the habitat protection provided
by CDFW, CDPR, the County of San
Mateo, and the County of Santa Cruz.
However, threats associated with a lack
of habitat management and alterations
of the fire regime continue to impede
the species’ ability to recover.
Additional information on recovery
and recovery plan implementation are
described in the ‘‘Progress Toward
Recovery’’ section of the Species Report
(Service 2015, pp. 39–43).
Summary of Changes From the
Proposed Rule
In the Species Report, we state
‘‘Historical distribution of Santa Cruz
cypress beyond the five currently
recognized populations is unknown
(Service 2015, p. 11).’’ This should be
corrected to say ‘‘Historical distribution
of Santa Cruz cypress beyond the range
of five currently recognized populations
is unknown.’’ As stated in the Species
Report, there are reports of a few
scattered trees along Empire Grade Road
(Service 2015, p. 13) that are not
believed to be interbreeding with any of
the five main populations. In addition to
this occurrence, there is a California
Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB
2014) record of a historical occurrence
that was found near Mount Hermon in
the Santa Cruz Mountains (CNDDB
element occurrence index 72235). This
record was not included in the previous
report because the exact area of
collection was unspecified, and this
occurrence has never been reaffirmed
after the initial collection was made in
1940. The inclusion of this historical
occurrence falls within the currently
recognized species range, and does not
change the existing information we have
on this species.
We have not made any substantive
changes in this final rule based on the
comments that were received during the
comment period, but have added or
corrected text to clarify the information
that was presented. One peer reviewer
provided new information stating that
Santa Cruz cypress populations are most
likely experiencing a net reduction in
fire frequency relative to what they
experienced prior to Euro-American
settlement, and it is unknown if
regeneration of the populations can be
sustained in the absence of human
intervention. This information was
incorporated into the Species Report for
the species (Service 2015, pp. 18–20,
25).
On July 1, 2014, we published a final
policy interpreting the phrase
‘‘significant portion of its range’’ (79 FR
E:\FR\FM\19FER1.SGM
19FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 33 / Friday, February 19, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
37578). We have revised our discussion
of ‘‘significant portion of its range’’ as it
relates to the Santa Cruz cypress in the
Determination section below to be
consistent with our new policy.
Although the final policy’s approach for
determining whether a ‘‘significant
portion of its range’’ analysis is required
is different than that discussed in the
proposed rule (78 FR 54221), applying
the policy did not affect the outcome of
the final status determination for the
Santa Cruz cypress.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Summary of Comments and
Recommendations
In the proposed rule published on
September 3, 2013 (78 FR 54221), we
requested that all interested parties
submit written comments on the
proposal by November 4, 2013. We also
contacted appropriate Federal and State
agencies, scientific experts and
organizations, and other interested
parties and invited them to comment on
the proposal. Newspaper notices
inviting general public comment were
published in the local Santa Cruz
Sentinel and San Mateo County Times.
We did not receive any requests for a
public hearing.
During the comment period, we
received four peer review comment
letters and one other comment on the
proposed reclassification of Santa Cruz
cypress. All substantive information
related to the reclassification of the
species or the taxonomic change for
Santa Cruz cypress provided during the
comment period was fully considered in
development of this final determination
and is addressed in the responses to
comments, below. All public and peer
review comments are available at
www.regulations.gov (Docket No. FWS–
R8–ES–2013–0092) and from our
Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office by
request (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT).
Peer Reviewer Comments
In accordance with our peer review
policy published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR
34270), we solicited expert opinion
from six knowledgeable individuals
with scientific expertise that included
familiarity with Santa Cruz cypress and
its habitat, the ecology of similar
cypress species, and the role of fire in
cypress ecology and the Santa Cruz
mountains. We received responses from
four of the peer reviewers.
We reviewed all comments received
from the peer reviewers for substantive
issues and new information regarding
the reclassification of Santa Cruz
cypress. Two peer reviewers supported
our finding that the Santa Cruz cypress
warranted reclassification to threatened,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Feb 18, 2016
Jkt 238001
and provided no additional comments.
Two other peer reviewers replied with
comments, and generally concurred
with our methods, but disagreed about
the appropriateness of reclassifying the
species without meeting the recovery
criteria identified in the Recovery Plan
(Service 1998, p. 30). The two peer
reviewers provided additional
information, clarifications, and
recommendations on how to manage for
the conservation of Santa Cruz cypress
and its habitat. All recommendations
have been acknowledged and will be
considered during the development of
future management and recovery
strategies.
Response to Peer Reviewer Comments
(1) Comment: Two peer reviewers
stated that Santa Cruz cypress does not
meet the criteria for reclassification
from endangered to threatened found in
the Recovery Plan for the Santa Cruz
Cypress (Service 1998, p. 30).
Specifically, one reviewer commented
that protection has not been secured for
all five populations and their habitat
from the threat of development, as
stated in the criteria for reclassification
in the Recovery Plan. This reviewer
identified the Bracken Brae population
as unprotected because it is owned by
a private landowner.
Our Response: In the Recovery and
Recovery Plan Implementation section
above and in the ‘‘Progress Toward
Recovery’’ section of the Species Report
(Service 2015, pp. 39–43), we
acknowledge that all known habitat is
important to the conservation of the
Santa Cruz cypress, and that the
Bracken Brae population is important
for the recovery of the species, and
explain our rationale for why the
recovery criterion has been substantially
met for downlisting. While the Bracken
Brae population is not in conservation
ownership, county restrictions are in
place that would restrict development.
As discussed above and further in the
next response, we conclude that
development-related threats appear
negligible for this population. This
situation, along with protection of all or
the majority of the other four
populations on State lands, leads us to
conclude that the criterion to reclassify
the species to threatened has been
substantially met.
Additionally, since the Recovery Plan
criteria were developed, we now know
there are more individuals within all of
the Santa Cruz cypress populations than
was known at the time of listing. The
greater number of individuals within
each population, in combination with
the conservation of much of the habitat
on public lands, suggests that this
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
8415
species is no longer facing imminent
destruction from the threats identified
in the Recovery Plan (i.e., logging,
agricultural conversion, and
development). Thus, while the Recovery
Plan provides important guidance on
the direction and strategy for recovery,
and can indicate when a rulemaking
process may be initiated, the
determination to reclassify a species on
the Federal List of Endangered and
Threatened Plants (50 CFR 17.12) is
ultimately based on an analysis of
whether a species meets the definition
of an endangered species or threatened
species. Please see the ‘‘Progress
Toward Recovery’’ section of the
Species Report (Service 2015, pp. 39–
43) and the Recovery and Recovery Plan
Implementation section above and in
the proposed rule (78 FR 54221) for
more detailed discussions of the
Recovery Plan criteria.
(2) Comment: One peer reviewer did
not agree that the threat of land use
conversion in the Bracken Brae
population had been diminished since
the time of listing to a ‘‘minor concern.’’
This peer reviewer specifically stated
that the Bracken Brae population is not
secured from the threat of development
or conversion because legal constraints
have not been placed on development of
the land.
Our Response: The County of Santa
Cruz has designated the area where the
Bracken Brae population occurs as an
environmentally sensitive habitat area
which requires that this habitat be
preserved through County ordinance as
part of the County’s General Plan
(Chapter 16.32.090(C)(1)(a) and
(C)(2)(b)) (County of Santa Cruz 2012,
entire). Designated environmentally
sensitive habitat, although not
completely secure from development
activities, has certain specific
development restrictions that are
intended to protect these areas and
includes restrictions specifically related
to protecting Santa Cruz cypress groves.
In addition to the County restrictions,
the species would still remain listed as
endangered by the State, and threatened
by the Federal Government, both of
which offer protections for the species
(when there is a Federal nexus) and its
habitat that are discussed in the ‘‘Legal
Protection’’ section of the Species
Report (Service 2015, p. 34).
Although the Bracken Brae
population does not have the same level
of habitat conservation as other Santa
Cruz cypress populations, the remaining
County, State, and Federal protections
will guide the future use of the private
land for the continued protection of the
species. Further, the land is currently
owned by a conservation-oriented
E:\FR\FM\19FER1.SGM
19FER1
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
8416
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 33 / Friday, February 19, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
landowner, and development is not
anticipated. Therefore, we have
determined that the threat of land
conversion for the Bracken Brae
population should still be classified as
a minor concern compared to other
potential impacts. We also conclude
that the intent of the recovery criterion
was to preserve the habitat from any
imminent threats (see Service 1998, pp.
iii, 1, 29) and has been met.
(3) Comment: One peer reviewer
stated that all of the Santa Cruz cypress
populations near developed areas were
essentially unprotected because
development has an indirect impact on
the ability of the species to persist by
altering the fire regime such that
regeneration is no longer possible at
levels necessary to sustain populations.
Our Response: We agree that adjacent
developed areas can have indirect
impacts on the alteration of the fire
regime. In the Species Report (Service
2015, p. 25), we discuss how either a
longer or shorter fire return interval can
disrupt the ecology of the cypresses and
be detrimental to their long-term
survival, and that fire-return intervals
are most likely to be disrupted near
areas of residential or commercial
development. While we acknowledge
that the populations near developed
areas are at a higher risk of a disrupted
fire-return interval, we have determined
that the habitat is still protected from
imminent destruction and that the level
of threat is commensurate to a
threatened rather than an endangered
species.
(4) Comment: One peer reviewer
commented that Santa Cruz cypress
populations are most likely
experiencing a net reduction in fire
frequency relative to what they
experienced prior to Euro-American
settlement, and it is unknown if
regeneration of the populations can be
sustained in the absence of human
intervention. The reviewer provided a
personal observation of how the absence
of stand-replacing fires in a similar
cypress species (MacNab cypress
[Hesperocyparis macnabiana]) can lead
to the gradual decline of the population.
Our Response: See our response to
comment (3) above for a discussion and
our evaluation of the impacts of fire
ecology on Santa Cruz cypress. We
appreciated this new information based
on the peer reviewer’s observation of a
related species. Studies of closely
related species with similar life-history
characteristics can offer insight into the
ecology of Santa Cruz cypress. Studies
of similar species (i.e., surrogate
species) can bolster our knowledge of
their life history. This information
builds upon our previous knowledge
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Feb 18, 2016
Jkt 238001
and provides additional insight into the
fire ecology necessary for Santa Cruz
cypress persistence. We consider this
complementary biological and
ecological information and have
included this information as an
addendum to the Species Report.
Comments from the State and Counties
Section 4(b)(5)(A)(ii) of the Act states,
‘‘the Secretary shall . . . give actual
notice of the proposed regulation
(including the complete text of the
regulation) to the State agency in each
State in which the species is believed to
occur, and to each county or equivalent
jurisdiction in which the species is
believed to occur, and invite the
comment of such agency, and each such
jurisdiction, thereon.’’ We submitted the
proposed regulation to the State of
California but received no formal
comments from the State regarding the
proposal. Although formal comments
were not received, we note that Santa
Cruz cypress is listed by the State as an
endangered species; therefore, the
reclassification of the species from
federally endangered to federally
threatened would likely have little or no
effect on existing State protections. We
also provided notice to the Counties of
San Mateo and Santa Cruz at the time
of the proposed rulemaking. We did not
receive any comments from the two
counties.
Public Comments
We received one public comment
letter during the comment period for
this rule.
(5) Comment: The commenter stated
that Santa Cruz cypress should remain
at the highest level of protection
‘‘because of climate change and habitat
loss.’’ The commenter did not include
any supporting information or analyses
regarding Santa Cruz cypress or the
ecology of the Santa Cruz area.
Response: We discuss both the effects
of climate change and habitat loss on
Santa Cruz cypress in the Species
Report (Service 2015, pp. 26–29, 38).
With respect to both of these impacts,
the commenter did not provide any new
or additional supporting information
that was specific to the effects on Santa
Cruz cypress which we have not already
evaluated. While we acknowledge that
the effects of climate change and habitat
loss are still a concern for the species,
we have determined that the level of
threat is commensurate to a threatened
species rather than an endangered
species.
(6) Comment: The commenter
expressed concern with the peer review
process, and questioned the bias of the
peer review panel.
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Response: In order to ensure the
quality and credibility of the scientific
information we use to make decisions,
we have implemented a formal ‘‘peer
review’’ process for listing and recovery
documents, as required according to our
guidelines for peer review, which
published in the Federal Register on
July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270). We consult
experts to ensure that our decisions are
based on sound science. The selection
of participants in a peer review is based
on expertise, with due consideration
given to independence and potential
conflicts of interest. The peer reviewers
for the Santa Cruz cypress were chosen
based on their expertise demonstrated
by published research on western
hemisphere cypress taxonomy,
population dynamics, serotiny
(ecological relationships of cone-bearing
plants to fire), California fire regimes, or
the ecology of Santa Cruz area flora.
Determination
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533),
and its implementing regulations at 50
CFR part 424, set forth the procedures
for adding species to the Federal Lists
of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants. An assessment of the need
for a species’ protection under the Act
is based on whether a species is in
danger of extinction or likely to become
so because of any of five factors: (A) The
present or threatened destruction,
modification, or curtailment of its
habitat or range; (B) overutilization for
commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes; (C) disease or
predation; (D) the inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E)
other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence. As
required by section 4(a)(1) of the Act,
we conducted a review of the status of
this plant and assessed the five factors
to evaluate whether Santa Cruz cypress
is in danger of extinction or likely to
become so in the foreseeable future
throughout all of its range.
We have carefully assessed the best
scientific and commercial information
available regarding the past, present,
and future threats faced by the Santa
Cruz cypress. We reviewed information
presented in the 2011 petition,
information available in our files and
gathered through our 90-day finding (77
FR 32922; June 24, 2012) in response to
this petition, and other available
published and unpublished
information. We also consulted with
species experts and land management
staff with CDFW, CDPR, the County of
San Mateo, and the County of Santa
Cruz, who are actively managing for the
conservation of Santa Cruz cypress.
E:\FR\FM\19FER1.SGM
19FER1
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 33 / Friday, February 19, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
In considering what factors might
constitute threats, we must look beyond
the mere exposure of the species to the
factor to determine whether the
exposure causes actual impacts to the
species. If there is exposure to a factor,
but no response, or only a positive
response, that factor is not a threat. If
there is exposure and the species
responds negatively, the factor may be
a threat and we then attempt to
determine how significant the threat is.
If the threat is significant, it may drive,
or contribute to, the risk of extinction of
the species such that the species
warrants listing as endangered or
threatened as those terms are defined by
the Act. This does not necessarily
require empirical proof of a threat. The
combination of exposure and some
corroborating evidence of how the
species is likely impacted could suffice.
The mere identification of factors that
could impact a species negatively is not
sufficient to compel a finding that
listing is appropriate; we require
evidence that these factors are operative
threats that act on the species to the
point that the species meets the
definition of endangered or threatened
under the Act.
The Act defines an endangered
species as any species that is ‘‘in danger
of extinction throughout all or a
significant portion of its range’’ and a
threatened species as any species
‘‘which is likely to become an
endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range.’’ We find
that the Santa Cruz cypress is not
presently in danger of extinction
throughout its entire range based on the
severity and immediacy of threats
currently impacting the species. As a
result of recent information, we know
that there are a significantly larger
number of Santa Cruz cypress
individuals than were known at the
time of listing (Service 2009, p. 13;
Service 2015, p. 45) and that there is
significant conservation of lands that
support the populations. Significant
impacts at the time of listing that could
have resulted in the extirpation of all or
parts of populations have been
eliminated or reduced since listing. We
conclude that the previously recognized
impacts to Santa Cruz cypress from
present or threatened destruction,
modification, or curtailment of its
habitat or range (specifically, residential
development, agricultural conversion,
logging, and oil and gas drilling) (Factor
A); overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes (Factor B); disease or
predation (Factor C); and other natural
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Feb 18, 2016
Jkt 238001
or human-made factors affecting its
continued existence (specifically,
reproductive isolation) (Factor E) do not
rise to a level of significance, either
individually or in combination, such
that the species is currently in danger of
extinction.
However, alteration of the fire regime
(Factors A and E) has the potential to
disrupt the long-term persistence of the
species across its entire range (resulting
in the species potentially facing a
senescence risk in the future) if fire
continues to be excluded or suppressed
near these populations. At least four
populations of Santa Cruz cypress
contain some proportion of reproductive
individuals and also exhibit some level
of recruitment (the portion of Bonny
Doon population that burned in the
2008 Martin Fire, and the Eagle Rock,
Butano Ridge, and Majors Creek
populations). However, without fire or
other appropriate disturbance to
simulate fire, we expect the level of
reproduction and recruitment to
decrease as existing trees become
senescent. Given the potential lifespan
of the Santa Cruz cypress of
approximately 100 years, we would
expect to see population declines over
this timeframe as a result of mortality of
currently existing trees, and lack of
replacement due to low recruitment and
declining reproduction, leading
eventually to the species becoming in
danger of extinction in the future.
Santa Cruz cypress also will continue
to be impacted by competition with
nonnative, invasive species (Factors A
and E); genetic introgression (Factor E);
vandalism and unauthorized
recreational activities (Factors A and E);
and the effects of climate change (Factor
A and E). Additionally, the existing
regulatory mechanisms are inadequate
to fully protect the species from the
threats listed above (Factor D). However,
the severity and magnitude of threats,
both individually and in combination,
and the likelihood that any one event
would affect all populations is
significantly reduced as a result of the
removal of multiple threats, the reduced
impact of most remaining threats, and
the extensive amount of conservation
occurring throughout the range of the
species (including, but not limited to,
the extensive preservation of occupied
lands in perpetuity and development of
management plans or guidance within
at least one population (Bonny Doon)).
In conclusion, after review of the best
available scientific and commercial
information pertaining to the species
and its habitat, we have determined that
the ongoing threats are not of sufficient
imminence, intensity, or magnitude to
indicate that Santa Cruz cypress is
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
8417
presently in danger of extinction
throughout all its range. Although
threats to Santa Cruz cypress still exist
and will continue into the foreseeable
future, the implementation of
conservation measures or regulatory
actions has greatly reduced the
imminence and severity of threats to the
Santa Cruz cypress and its habitat. All
five populations are primarily
threatened by changes in the historical
fire regime. Additionally, threats from
competition with nonnative species and
climate change exist for all populations.
Our evaluation of the best available
information indicates that the overall
level of threats is not significantly
different at any of these populations
(Service 2015, pp. 24–41), with the
primary current threat to all populations
being alteration of fire regime. We,
therefore, conclude that Santa Cruz
cypress is not currently in danger of
extinction, but is threatened with
becoming an endangered species within
the foreseeable future throughout all of
its range.
Because we have determined that
Santa Cruz cypress is likely to become
endangered in the foreseeable future
throughout all of its range, no portion of
its range can be ‘‘significant’’ for
purposes of the definitions of
‘‘endangered species’’ and ‘‘threatened
species.’’ See the Service’s final policy
interpreting the phrase ‘‘Significant
Portion of Its Range’’ (79 FR 37578; July
1, 2014). Therefore, on the basis of the
best available scientific and commercial
information, we find that the Santa Cruz
cypress now meets the definition of a
threatened species (i.e., is likely to
become an endangered species within
the foreseeable future throughout all of
its range) and are reclassifying the Santa
Cruz cypress from an endangered
species to a threatened species in
accordance with sections 3(20) and
4(a)(1) of the Act.
Effects of This Rule
This rule will revise 50 CFR 17.12(h)
to reclassify Santa Cruz cypress from
endangered to threatened on the List of
Endangered and Threatened Plants.
However, this reclassification does not
significantly change the protections
afforded this species under the Act.
Pursuant to section 7 of the Act, all
Federal agencies must ensure that any
actions they authorize, fund, or carry
out are not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of Santa Cruz
cypress. Whenever a species is listed as
threatened, the Act allows promulgation
of special rules under section 4(d) that
modify the standard protections for
threatened species found under section
9 of the Act and Service regulations at
E:\FR\FM\19FER1.SGM
19FER1
8418
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 33 / Friday, February 19, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
50 CFR 17.31 (for wildlife) and 17.71
(for plants), when it is deemed
necessary and advisable to provide for
the conservation of the species. No
special section 4(d) rules are proposed,
or anticipated to be proposed, for Santa
Cruz cypress, because there is currently
no conservation need to do so for this
species. Recovery actions directed at
Santa Cruz cypress will continue to be
implemented, as funding allows, as
outlined in the Recovery Plan for this
species (Service 1998, entire).
Required Determinations
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.
No tribal lands are within the range of
the Santa Cruz cypress.
National Environmental Policy Act (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)
We determined that environmental
assessments and environmental impact
statements, as defined under the
authority of the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.), need not be prepared in
connection with regulations adopted
pursuant to Section 4(a) of the
Endangered Species Act. We published
a notice outlining our reasons for this
determination in the Federal Register
on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244).
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited
in this final rule is available on the
Internet at https://www.regulations.gov
under Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2013–
0092 or upon request from the Field
Supervisor, Ventura Fish and Wildlife
Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT).
Authors
The primary authors of this final rule
are employees of the Pacific Southwest
Regional Office in Sacramento,
California, in coordination with
employees of the Ventura Fish and
Wildlife Office in Ventura, California.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species,
Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements,
Transportation.
Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we amend part 17,
subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the
Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:
PART 17—[AMENDED]
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.
2. Amend § 17.12(h) as follows:
■ a. By removing the entry for
‘‘Cupressus abramsiana’’ under
CONIFERS, and
■ b. By adding an entry for
‘‘Hesperocyparis abramsiana’’ under
CONIFERS to read as follows:
■
§ 17.12
*
Endangered and threatened plants.
*
*
(h) * * *
*
Species
Historic range
Scientific name
*
CONIFERS
*
*
Hesperocyparis
abramsiana.
*
*
*
Santa Cruz cypress
*
*
*
*
Family
Status
*
*
*
U.S.A. (CA) .............
*
*
*
*
*
T
*
252
*
*
Cupressaceae ........
*
ACTION:
50 CFR Part 679
SUMMARY:
[Docket No. 141021887–5172–02]
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
RIN 0648–XE450
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic
Zone Off Alaska; Reallocation of
Pollock in the Bering Sea and Aleutian
Islands
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
AGENCY:
16:19 Feb 18, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Special
rules
*
*
NA
NA
*
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[FR Doc. 2016–03296 Filed 2–18–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
Critical
habitat
*
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Dated: February 1, 2016.
Stephen Guertin,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
When listed
Common name
*
Temporary rule.
NMFS is reallocating the
projected unused amounts of the
Community Development Quota pollock
directed fishing allowance from the
Aleutian Islands subarea to the Bering
Sea subarea. This action is necessary to
provide opportunity for harvest of the
2016 total allowable catch of pollock,
consistent with the goals and objectives
of the Fishery Management Plan for
Groundfish of the Bering Sea and
Aleutian Islands Management Area.
E:\FR\FM\19FER1.SGM
19FER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 33 (Friday, February 19, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 8408-8418]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-03296]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2013-0092; 4500030113]
RIN 1018-AY77
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Reclassifying
Hesperocyparis abramsiana (=Cupressus abramsiana) as Threatened
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), determine
threatened species status under the Endangered Species Act of 1973
(Act), as amended, for Hesperocyparis abramsiana (=Cupressus
abramsiana) (Santa Cruz cypress), a plant species found in Santa Cruz
and San Mateo Counties in west-central California. We also finalize the
correction to the scientific name of Santa Cruz cypress on the List of
Endangered and Threatened Plants. The effect of this regulation will be
to change the listing status of Santa Cruz cypress from an endangered
species to a threatened species on the List of Endangered and
Threatened Plants.
DATES: This rule becomes effective March 21, 2016.
ADDRESSES: This final rule is available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2013-0092 and at https://www.fws.gov/ventura/. Comments and materials we received, as well as
supporting documentation we used in preparing this rule, are available
for public inspection at https://www.regulations.gov. All of the
comments, materials, and documentation that we considered in this
rulemaking are available by appointment, during normal business hours
at: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office,
2493 Portola Road, Suite B, Ventura, California 93003; telephone 805-
644-1766; facsimile 805-644-3958.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen P. Henry, Field Supervisor,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office, 2493
Portola Road, Suite B, Ventura, CA 93003; telephone 805-644-1766;
facsimile 805-644-3958. Persons who use a telecommunications device for
the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at
800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Previous Federal Action
On September 3, 2013, we proposed to reclassify the Santa Cruz
cypress from an endangered species to a threatened species (78 FR
54221) on the List of Endangered and Threatened Plants in part 17 of
title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). Please refer to the
proposed reclassification rule for the Santa Cruz cypress (78 FR 54221;
September 3, 2013) for a detailed description of the previous Federal
actions concerning this species. This final rule constitutes our final
action regarding the petition to reclassify the Santa Cruz cypress from
endangered to threatened (Pacific Legal Foundation 2011, pp. 1-11).
Background
For a detailed discussion of Santa Cruz cypress's description,
taxonomy, life history, habitat, soils, distribution, abundance, age
and size distribution, and role of fire in regeneration, please see the
Santa Cruz Cypress Hesperocyparis [Cupressus] abramsiana Species Report
(Service 2015, pp. 1-57) (Species Report), which is available for
review under Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2013-0092 at https://www.regulations.gov. Please refer to the proposed reclassification rule
for the Santa Cruz cypress (78 FR 54221; September 3, 2013) (Service
2013b) for a summary of information about the species and the proposed
change in taxonomy: In this final rule, we replace the entry for
Cupressus abramsiana from 50 CFR 17.12(h) with an entry for
Hesperocyparis abramsiana.
Summary of Biological Status and Factors Affecting the Species
This section introduces and summarizes the biological status and
factors affecting Santa Cruz cypress identified at each period of the
species' review history. We have described the level of threats using a
scale of low, moderate, and high (as discussed in Appendix 1 of the
Species Report). A low-level threat indicates a threat that has the
potential to occur at any time, although the possibility is unlikely
that this threat will affect the species across its range or interrupt
the species' persistence into the future. A moderate-level threat
indicates a threat that is currently affecting the long-term
persistence of the species in a particular population or across its
range, but does not pose an imminent threat to the persistence of the
species. A high-level threat indicates a well-documented, imminent
threat to a large number of individuals that has the potential to
disrupt the long-term persistence of the species in a particular
population or across its range.
At the time of listing, the primary threats to Santa Cruz cypress
were residential development, agricultural conversion, logging, oil and
gas drilling, genetic introgression, and alteration of the natural
frequency of fires that threatened to destroy portions of each
population (52 FR 675; January 8, 1987). Other (secondary) threats in
1987 included vandalism, disease, and inadequate regulatory mechanisms
(52 FR 675). Of the primary threats in 1987, residential development,
agricultural conversion, and logging threatened individual Santa Cruz
cypress trees and stands with imminent destruction. Other threats
identified in the Recovery Plan for the Santa Cruz Cypress (Service
1998) also included oil and gas development, reproductive isolation,
introgression, and competition from nonnative species.
[[Page 8409]]
On May 21, 2010, we notified the public in the Federal Register of
the availability of the 5-year review for Santa Cruz cypress (75 FR
28636). The 5-year review was completed on August 17, 2009 (Service
2009, entire), and resulted in a recommendation to change the status of
the species from an endangered species to a threatened species. At the
time of the 2009 5-year review, we reported that the threats to Santa
Cruz cypress from residential development, agricultural conversion, and
logging had decreased since the time of listing. This decrease was
achieved primarily through the acquisition of lands for conservation by
the California Department of Pesticide Regulation (CDPR) and the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and through other
private land transfers. No evidence existed that oil and gas drilling
was a threat to the species. The 5-year review also found information
that the population size (number of individuals at each site) of the
species was greater than known at the time of listing. The threats from
alteration of fire frequencies, disease or predation, reproductive
isolation, genetic introgression, vandalism, and competition with
nonnative species remained at the same level as identified during the
development of the Recovery Plan (Service 1998).
The 5-year review identified low levels of regeneration (new
recruitment of seedlings and young plants) and the effects of climate
change as concerns for the long-term persistence of the Santa Cruz
cypress (Service 2009, pp. 9-13). Climate change was classified as a
moderate-level threat because projections indicated that the regional
Santa Cruz climate will become warmer and drier, which would directly
affect Santa Cruz cypress across its range over the next century
(Service 2009, pp. 10-11).
In accordance with section 4(a)(1) of the Act, our assessment of
the current status of a species is based on whether a species is in
danger of extinction or likely to become so because of any of five
factors: (A) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) overutilization for
commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes; (C)
disease or predation; (D) the inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms; or (E) other natural or manmade factors affecting its
continued existence.
Current or potential future threats to Santa Cruz cypress include
alteration of the fire regime (Factors A and E), competition with
nonnative species (Factors A and E), climate change (Factor A), genetic
introgression (Factor E), and vandalism and unauthorized recreational
activities (Factors A and E). The acquisition of lands for conservation
by State agencies and designation of lands as sensitive areas by Santa
Cruz County have resulted in protection of all or large portions of
each population, but currently do not provide protections from the
threats listed above (Factor D). Other potential impacts evaluated and
found either to be of no concern, insignificant concern, or negligible
at this time include residential development, agricultural conversion,
logging, and oil and gas drilling (Factor A); overutilization (Factor
B); disease or predation (Factor C); and reproductive isolation (Factor
E). Please see Table 1, Table 4, and the ``Discussion of Threats to the
Species'' section of the Species Report for a thorough discussion of
all potential and current threats (Service 2015, pp. 3, 22-40).
We note, however, that, although the threats of residential
development and agricultural conversion to Santa Cruz cypress have been
ameliorated considerably compared to the time of listing (to the point
that we consider them insignificant at this time), they may still occur
at two of the populations (i.e., the Bracken Brae and Bonny Doon
populations), although the likelihood is less than previously
identified in the Recovery Plan. Specifically, while these lands are
not in permanent conservation ownership, the likelihood of potential
residential development is reduced at the Bracken Brae population
because the land is owned by a conservation-oriented landowner (Service
2015, p. 45) and Santa Cruz County designation of these lands as a
sensitive area places a restriction on certain kinds of development. We
do not expect this county designation as a sensitive area to change in
the future, even when the species is reclassified to threatened or if
it is eventually delisted. Additionally, potential impacts of
agricultural conversion is currently reduced (to an insignificant
level) at the Bonny Doon population as a result of a large proportion
of the population (i.e., approximately 70 percent) now occurring on
lands designated as a reserve (Service 2015, pp. 15, 16, 45). The
portion that is not part of the reserve (i.e., approximately 30
percent) is still subject to potential agricultural conversion,
although potential loss of this area outside the reserve is relatively
unlikely due to the county's designation of these lands as a sensitive
area, thus agricultural conversion is a low-magnitude threat overall
for the population and the species as a whole.
The following sections provide a summary of the current threats
impacting the Santa Cruz cypress. As identified above, these threats
include alteration of the fire regime (Factors A and E), competition
with nonnative species (Factors A and E), climate change (Factor A),
genetic introgression (Factor E), vandalism and unauthorized
recreational activities (Factors A and E), and the inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms (Factor D). As identified above some of
the same potential activities that affect the habitat (Factor A) of
Santa Cruz cypress can also affect individuals (Factor E). Where
appropriate, we discuss impacts to both the habitat and to individuals
of Santa Cruz cypress together for ease of discussion and analysis.
Alteration of Fire Regime
The long-term persistence of Santa Cruz cypress populations can be
affected by the disruption of the natural fire frequency because Santa
Cruz cypress requires fire (or potentially mechanical disturbance in
lieu of, or in combination with, fire) to reproduce. Most Santa Cruz
cypress populations are located close to residential areas, where
natural fires from surrounding wildland areas are excluded by the
creation of fire breaks and fuels reduction projects. Both fire
exclusion and fire suppression lengthen the interval between fires,
thus altering the natural fire regime and increasing the risk of
extirpation from senescence (growth phase from full maturity to death).
Conversely, human ignitions contribute to fire intervals that are too
short, which in turn can inhibit Santa Cruz cypress from reaching its
reproductive potential if stands burn prior to trees reaching
reproductive age. With prevalent fire exclusion on lands surrounding
Santa Cruz cypress occurring, other techniques such as mechanical
disturbance of the ground, removal of litter and nonnative invasive
species, and clearing the canopy to allow sunlight to reach the ground
may need to be utilized to achieve regeneration of the species.
Currently, mechanical disturbance and litter removal at the Bonny Doon
Ecological Reserve are being implemented on a limited basis following
the Draft Management Plan developed for the Bonny Doon Ecological
Reserve (Service 2015, pp. 37, 41, 42). Additionally in 2005, CAL FIRE
developed a vegetation management plan for the Bonny Doon Ecological
Reserve that included enhancing sensitive habitat for listed species
and improving forest health
[[Page 8410]]
(CAL FIRE 2005, p. 3). This plan has not been fully implemented and is
currently delayed (Service 2015, p. 42).
The altered fire regime presents a high-level threat to the long-
term persistence of all of the Santa Cruz cypress populations and their
habitat. Santa Cruz cypress depends on fire to maintain appropriate
habitat conditions and to release many of the seeds stored in cones in
the canopy. As adult trees senesce and die, seed production decreases,
such that there is insufficient seed available to regenerate the stand
(McGraw 2007, p. 24; Service 2015, p. 25). In the absence of fire,
recruitment still occurs, but at a low level that is likely not
sufficient for stand replacement (McGraw 2011, p. 2; Service 2015, p.
25). To germinate in large numbers, the species requires open ground
and canopy conditions created by fires intense enough to kill the
parent tree. In the absence of fire the species is only able to
germinate opportunistically in rock outcroppings or small areas that
have been disturbed. Without appropriate disturbance from fire, the
stands could eventually senesce, resulting in minimal reproduction in
small rock outcrops that may be inadequate to maintain population
viability.
Within the range of the Santa Cruz cypress, recent and past fires
have been documented at the Bonny Doon (2008) and Eagle Rock
populations (Service 2015, pp. 23-24), although even-aged stands at the
Butano Ridge, Bracken Brae, and Majors Creek populations suggest that
past fires have occurred in these areas as well. We estimate that
approximately 50 percent (1,500 Santa Cruz cypress individuals) of the
Bonny Doon population was killed within the severely burned areas
(Service 2012, unpubl. data). This is based on visual inspection of the
burn intensity map and our knowledge of the distribution of this
population. In 1905, a severe fire also destroyed a large portion of
the Eagle Rock population (Wolf and Wagener 1948, p. 218). Prior to the
fire, there was a ``considerable stand'' of Santa Cruz cypresses, which
were used by the landowner for timber to build barns and other
buildings (Wolf and Wagener 1948, p. 218). According to Lyons (1988,
pp. 19-20), another fire burned through a majority of the Eagle Rock
population in 1942, killing most of the cypresses. Lyons (1988, p. 19)
noted that some larger individuals at the Eagle Rock site, estimated to
be 40-60 years old, appeared to have survived the fire.
Despite fire occurring within the known range of Santa Cruz
cypress, McGraw (2011, p. 2) states that the current demographics and
natural recruitment rates observed in the Majors Creek, Eagle Rock, and
Butano Ridge populations appear to be insufficient to maintain the
populations in the absence of fire (Service 2015, p. 22). Additionally,
active management to address this concern is not occurring at this
time. The altered fire regime presents a threat to the long-term
persistence of all of the Santa Cruz cypress populations, and we
consider altered fire regime to be a high-level threat to the species
(Service 2015 p. 24). See additional discussion in the ``Alteration of
Fire Regime'' section of the Species Report (Service 2015, pp. 23-25).
Most stands of Santa Cruz cypress contain reproductive individuals,
so most stands are currently facing a senescence risk from the absence
of fire. Recruitment in at least four populations (the portion of Bonny
Doon population that burned in the 2008 Martin Fire, and the Eagle
Rock, Butano Ridge, and Majors Creek populations) is evident; however,
the current level of recruitment is not sufficient to maintain the
populations in the absence of fire (Service 2015, p. 26). This is
likely also the case with the Bracken Brae population and the portion
of the Bonny Doon population that did not burn. Under these conditions
most trees would become senescent (post-reproductive) prior to a return
fire, resulting in lower stand vitality, reduced cone production, and
reduced seedling establishment. The risk of extirpation exists if
cypresses senesce and their seeds are no longer viable by the time fire
returns to a stand. This may occur if the fire interval is longer than
the lifespan of trees (Ne'eman et al. 1999, p. 240). For the purposes
of this discussion, we estimate the potential lifespan of individual
Santa Cruz cypress trees to be about 100 years based on Lyons' (1988,
pp. 2-39) estimate (see the ``Life History'' discussion in the Species
Report (Service 2015, pp. 8-9) for additional discussion).
As discussed above, without fire or other appropriate disturbance,
we expect low recruitment and decreasing reproduction as existing trees
become senescent. This scenario would most likely result in population
declines as a result of mortality of currently existing trees, and lack
of replacement due to low recruitment and declining reproduction. The
frequency, location, and intensity of fire in an area is variable and
difficult to predict, and depends on many factors including
environmental and human-caused factors, management, and suppression
efforts. For the Santa Cruz cypress there have only been one or two
recorded fires over the past 100 years within the areas occupied by the
species, and we do not expect the fire conditions, frequency, or
management to change significantly in the near future. As a result, we
do not currently consider the fire interval to be adequate to maintain
populations of the species over the long term and consider the extended
fire interval to be a threat that is likely to put the species at risk
of extinction in the future.
Competition With Nonnative Species
The presence of nonnative, invasive species impacts the long-term
persistence of Santa Cruz cypress and its habitat both currently and in
the future through competition and habitat modification. Many nonnative
species have been introduced into Santa Cruz cypress habitat through a
variety of past impacts (e.g., development, infrastructure).
Significant impacts result from Acacia dealbata (silver wattle) and
Genista monspessulana (French broom). Silver wattle and French broom
are currently impacting two populations (i.e., Majors Creek and Bonny
Doon) and are likely to impact, at minimum, two additional populations
(i.e., Eagle Rock and Bracken Brae) due to the cypress's proximity to
residential areas where ground disturbance activities promote nonnative
plant invasions.
Silver wattle is significantly impacting the Majors Creek
population and its habitat by creating dense canopies, which can
inhibit germination and growth of seedlings by blocking sunlight needed
for cypress growth (McGraw 2007, p. 23; Service 2015, pp. 31-32).
French broom is one of the most prevalent invasive species in Santa
Cruz County, distributed at elevations where all but a portion of one
Santa Cruz cypress population occurs (Moore 2002, p. 6; Service 2015,
p. 32). French broom is impacting the Bonny Doon population and its
habitat by inhibiting Santa Cruz cypress seedling establishment through
competition for open, recently disturbed soils that have access to
abundant sunlight. Additionally, but to a lesser degree, European
annual grasses (present at all populations) are known to impact Santa
Cruz cypress by precluding the establishment of seedlings. These
nonnative shrubs and annual grasses are impacting most of the
populations of Santa Cruz cypress and are expected to continue to do so
over the long term. We consider competition with nonnative species to
be a moderate-level threat to the Santa Cruz cypress. See additional
discussion in the ``Competition With
[[Page 8411]]
Nonnative Plant Species'' section of the Species Report (Service 2015,
pp. 31-33).
Climate Change
Our analyses under the Act include consideration of ongoing and
projected changes in climate. The terms ``climate'' and ``climate
change'' are defined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC). The term ``climate'' refers to the mean and variability of
different types of weather conditions over time, with 30 years being a
typical period for such measurements (IPCC 2013, p. 1450). The term
``climate change'' thus refers to a change in the mean or variability
of one or more measures of climate (e.g., temperature or precipitation)
that persists for an extended period, whether the change is due to
natural variability or human activity (IPCC 2013, p. 1450). Various
changes in climate may have direct or indirect effects on species.
These effects may be positive, neutral, or negative, and they may
change over time, depending on the species and other relevant
considerations, such as threats in combination and interactions of
climate with other variables (for example, habitat fragmentation) (IPCC
2014, pp. 4-11). Within central-western California (i.e., California
coastal counties from San Francisco south to Santa Barbara, including
the range of the Santa Cruz cypress), predictions indicate warmer
winter temperatures, earlier warming in the spring, and increased
summer temperatures (Point Reyes Bird Observatory (PRBO) Conservation
Science 2011, p. 35), all of which will likely result in shifts in
vegetation types. This can, for example, result in increased
competition between species like Santa Cruz cypress and other native
and nonnative species (Loarie et al. 2008, pp. 1-10), or result in
habitat changes resulting from altered fire frequency and water
availability (Service 2015, pp. 28-29). Drier conditions and increased
fire frequency that may result from climate change could also make
conditions somewhat more favorable for Santa Cruz cypress. However, we
anticipate continuing fire suppression and fire exclusion practices
would outweigh any potential favorable effects. Thus, while impacts of
climate change could potentially have either positive or negative
effects to Santa Cruz cypress, the altered fire regime as a result of
fire exclusion and fire suppression practices remains a primary threat
to the species. We therefore consider climate change to be a moderate-
level threat to the Santa Cruz cypress. See additional discussion in
the ``Climate Change'' section of the Species Report (Service 2015, pp.
26-29).
Genetic Introgression
If individuals of different cypress species are planted in close
proximity, they can exchange pollen and may produce fertile hybrid
offspring, as has been documented in a number of plant species (Rhymer
and Simberloff 1996, pp. 98-99). By this means, genes from one species
can infiltrate into another, a process called genetic introgression.
Santa Cruz cypress may be affected by introgression from residential
plantings of Hesperocyparis macrocarpa (Monterey cypress) near the
Bonny Doon population (V. Haley 1993, pers. obs.), plantings of
Cupressus glabra (Arizona cypress) near the Eagle Rock population, and
potentially by plantings near other populations due to their close
proximity to residential areas where plantings of other cypress species
could occur. Examination of genetic variation among Santa Cruz cypress
populations and between Santa Cruz cypress and neighboring species
(Millar and Westfall 1992, p. 350) indicates the potential that
hybridization may occur between Santa Cruz cypress and the neighboring
species. The main harmful genetic effect of such hybridization on
native species is the loss of both genetic diversity and the ability of
native populations to continue to persist due to potential loss of
locally adapted characteristics. The resulting hybrid taxa can also
reduce the growth of, or replace, native species and compete for
resources otherwise available (Vila et al. 2000, pp. 207-217).
We consider genetic introgression to be a low-level threat to the
Santa Cruz cypress because it is probably a concern for only two
populations. Genetic introgression has not been documented for Santa
Cruz cypress, but is a potential threat given the proximity of non-
native cypress and the ease with which cypress species hybridize.
However, introgression is a long-term process in itself, generally
taking many generations for significant population-level impacts to
occur. Given the long generation time of the species, genetic
introgression is currently considered a potential threat rather than an
imminent threat. See additional discussion in the ``Genetic
Introgression'' section of the Species Report (Service 2015, pp. 30-
31).
Vandalism and Unauthorized Recreational Activities
Vandalism and unauthorized recreational activities have been
documented to impact multiple Santa Cruz cypress populations and their
habitat. These activities result in construction of unauthorized trails
(such as those within the Majors Creek population at Wilder Creek State
Park) (CDPR 2000; K. Barry, Service, 2012, pers. obs.), which in turn
result in erosion (McGraw 2007, p. 22) and potentially prevention of
seedling establishment. Additionally, trails wear away substrate from
the base of mature cypress trees. Although vandalism and unauthorized
recreational activities are not considered to impact the populations
significantly at this time (considered a low-level threat because only
a small proportion of trees and habitat across the species' range are
affected by these activities), they remain a concern due to the
likelihood of increased inhabitants in the urban-wildland interface
where Santa Cruz cypress occurs. See additional discussion in the
``Vandalism and Unauthorized Recreational Activities'' section of the
Species Report (Service 2015, p. 33).
Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
Reclassifying Santa Cruz cypress from endangered to threatened
would not significantly change the protections afforded to this species
under the Act. Santa Cruz cypress conservation has been addressed in
some local, State, and Federal plans, laws, regulations, and policies.
Now that most of the trees reside in fully protected areas on State or
County park lands, the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms is
considered a low-level threat to Santa Cruz cypress. The threat of
habitat alteration has been substantially reduced, and, therefore, the
concern regarding inadequate legal protections on the landscape scale
has been reduced. Although existing regulations have resulted in
conservation of Santa Cruz cypress habitat, inadequacy of existing
regulatory mechanisms is still considered a low-level threat because
the potential remains for destruction or alteration of Santa Cruz
cypresses and their habitat on private lands. However, the main concern
currently and into the future is the lack of ongoing management to
prevent senescence and ensure population persistence. If current Santa
Cruz cypress habitat becomes unfavorable to the species due to lack of
adequate management, Santa Cruz cypress may not persist even if the
land is sufficiently conserved. See additional discussion in the
``Legal Protection'' section of the Species Report (Service 2015, pp.
34-37).
Combination of Threats
The threat to the long-term persistence of Santa Cruz cypress is
compounded by multiple interacting factors, specifically: (1) The
alteration of
[[Page 8412]]
fire regimes and lack of species management; and (2) human activities,
nonnative species, and fire. With the prevalence of fire exclusion and
suppression near residential communities within the range of the
species, the opportunity for Santa Cruz cypress to regenerate in large
pulses following fire is reduced. This fire suppression coupled with
the lack of species-specific management is resulting in minimal
regeneration for the species as a whole, which could be exacerbated if
this situation continues into the future. The ability of land managers
to adequately maintain cypress populations on public lands is subject
to constraints and physical barriers, such as the difficulty or
inability of using fire as a management tool due to proximity to
development or because of air quality standards.
Additionally, human intrusion into previously undisturbed areas
contributes to colonization of nonnative plant species in the remote
areas of Santa Cruz cypress forests (see the ``Competition with
Nonnative Plant Species'' section of the Species Report (Service 2015,
pp. 31-33)). This activity exacerbates the likelihood for the creation
of open conditions (e.g., bike trails, road cuts, and firebreaks),
allowing nonnative plants to proliferate and compete with the cypress
for soil, nutrients, and light. If a wildfire is then introduced into
these new (open) conditions, nonnative species that compete with Santa
Cruz cypress could then easily spread. The presence or increase in
nonnative species can inhibit cypress seedlings by blocking the
sunlight they need to grow (McGraw 2007, p. 23). See ``Compounding
Threats'' section of the Species Report (Service 2015, pp. 37-38).
Overall Summary of Factors Affecting Santa Cruz Cypress
Impacts to the long-term persistence of Santa Cruz cypress
populations from alteration of the fire regime (Factors A and E)
remains a significant concern currently and in the future (i.e., at
least approximately 100 years, based on the potential lifespan of
individual Santa Cruz cypress trees per Lyons' (1988, pp. 2-39)
estimate and based on past fire interval (two to three documented fires
in two populations over the past 110 years)). Because the germination
and establishment of new seedlings depends either on natural fire or a
managed substitute (e.g., controlled burns or mechanical disturbance),
appropriate fire or disturbance regimes are needed to manage the
demographic profile of the five populations. Lack of fire or other
disturbance to promote germination and seedling establishment poses a
senescence risk to the stands and populations of Santa Cruz cypress
(Service 2015, p. 30). Without recruitment of new individuals, trees in
the current even-aged stands may become senescent (or no longer
reproductive) and no longer produce cones and seeds necessary for long-
term reproductive success and persistence of the populations (which has
been observed in Santa Cruz cypress populations by McGraw (2007, pp.
20-21)). While most of the populations have been protected through
acquisition of lands for conservation, no active management is
currently occurring to manage the demographic profile of the
populations. Research on suitable management methods has only begun
recently at Bonny Doon Ecological Reserve (McGraw 2011, entire); future
management of this population is expected to provide additional
understanding of conditions that would promote regeneration, thus
providing beneficial management recommendations that could be applied
to all populations.
Although the altered fire regime is identified as a high-level
impact to Santa Cruz cypress at this time, the level of impact does not
currently place the species in danger of extinction because of the
expected continued presence of the populations into the future based on
the lifespan of individuals and the current age structure, and the
recruitment (albeit minimal overall) that has been observed to date.
Because the majority of individuals in the populations are
reproductive, additional recruitment can be expected, although it
likely will not be at a level sufficient to sustain the populations
over the long term.
In addition to altered fire regime, other impacts to Santa Cruz
cypress and its habitat are currently occurring or potentially
occurring in the future, but to a lesser degree than the overall impact
from an altered fire regime. These include competition with nonnative,
invasive species (Factors A and E); climate change (Factor A); genetic
introgression (Factor E); and vandalism or unauthorized recreational
activities (Factors A and E). Nonnative plants are competing with Santa
Cruz cypress by invading open areas where cypress seedlings could
become established, thus competing for soil, nutrients, and light
(Service 2015, pp. 31-33). Climate change may cause vegetation shifts
and promote more frequent and larger stand removal wildfires under
which the species has not evolved (Service 2015, pp. 26-29). Genetic
introgression of Santa Cruz cypress with at least two different cypress
species could result in hybridization and result in the loss of Santa
Cruz cypress's competitive advantage in its preferred habitat (Service
2015, pp. 31-32). Vandalism and unauthorized recreational activities
may inhibit seedling establishment and increase erosion (Service 2015,
p. 33). Additionally, although substantial mechanisms are currently in
place to protect Santa Cruz cypress and its habitat, the existing
regulatory mechanisms are inadequate to fully protect the species from
the threats described above (Factor D). Based on our current analysis
and the current level of management being implemented, the remaining
impacts are expected to influence Santa Cruz cypress's habitat
suitability and its ability to reproduce and survive in the future.
In summary, impacts from development, agricultural conversion,
logging, and oil and gas development, which were considered imminent at
the time of listing, have been substantially reduced or ameliorated.
Other impacts identified at or since listing (i.e., alteration of fire
regime; competition with nonnative, invasive species; climate change;
genetic introgression; and vandalism, including unauthorized
recreational activities) continue to impact Santa Cruz cypress or are
expected to impact the species in the future. Although individually
these impacts (with the exception of altered fire regime) are of low or
moderate concern to the species, their cumulative impact can promote
and accelerate unnatural conditions (Service 2015, pp. 37-38). For
example, human intrusion into previously undisturbed areas contributes
to colonization of nonnative plant species in the remote areas of Santa
Cruz cypress forests, which in turn may result in increased wildfires
and potentially increased community concern for wildfire suppression
activities. These types of interactions could become a greater concern
to Santa Cruz cypress in the future if there is increased human
activity in cypress forests.
The high-level impact of an altered fire regime to Santa Cruz
cypress and its habitat is of greatest concern at this time. The threat
to long-term persistence of Santa Cruz cypress posed by this high-level
impact is exacerbated by the lack of species management, resulting in
continued effects to the age structure and demographic profile of the
species. Although operating on the species currently, the impacts from
an altered fire regime, either alone or in combination with the other
impacts
[[Page 8413]]
identified above, do not place the species at immediate risk of
extinction. Reproduction and recruitment is evident (although not at a
level sufficient for long-term persistence) based on recent data in at
least four populations (i.e., the portion of the Bonny Doon population
that burned in the 2008 Martin Fire, and at the Eagle Rock, Butano
Ridge, and Majors Creek populations) (Service 2015, p. 46). However, if
fire or other disturbance does not occur in the future to promote
germination and seedling establishment (whether through a natural fire
event or active management), senescence could result in a downward
population trend that is likely to place the species in danger of
extinction.
Distinguishing Threats for Both Cypress Varieties
As described in the proposed rule and Species Report (78 FR 54223;
September 3, 2013; Service 2015, pp. 7-8), recent taxonomic evaluations
of Hesperocyparis abramsiana identified two varieties: H. a. var.
butanoensis (Butano Ridge population) and H. a. var. abramsiana (Eagle
Rock, Bracken Brae, Bonny Doon, and Majors Creek populations) (Adams
and Bartel 2009, pp. 287-299). Therefore, the threats analysis provided
in the Species Report (Service 2015, entire) and summarized in this
document includes a separate evaluation for each of the five
populations, in part to distinguish the level of impact the current
threats have on the two separate varieties. The information summarized
below is evaluated and described in detail in the ``Discussion of
Threats to the Two Separate Varieties'' section of the Species Report
(Service 2015, pp. 38-40).
The Butano Ridge population (Hesperocyparis abramsiana var.
butanoensis) is primarily threatened by changes in the historical fire
regime and the impacts as a result of the changed fire regime (Factors
A and E). The population is located away from developed areas, but
because it is near a lumber operation, fire exclusion and suppression
activities that alter the fire regime are likely in the vicinity. Other
impacts identified at the time of listing are no longer impacting this
population or are no longer considered significant (e.g., logging, oil
and gas drilling), in large part due to this population now being fully
protected and managed within the boundaries of Pescadero Creek County
Park. Although this variety is not considered a separate species, its
status as a separate variety indicates its divergence from other
populations of the species. Further divergence, and potentially the
process of speciation, may continue through sustained reproductive
isolation from other Santa Cruz cypress populations. Additionally, this
is the only location for this variety, and it is composed of a single
stand, thus making it vulnerable to an impact such as disease if
exposed. However, at this time it is highly unlikely that potential
impacts such as development, disease, predation, and others (as
described in the Species Report (Service 2015, pp. 23-40)) would occur
at the Butano Ridge population. An altered fire regime is the main
concern present at this population, with potential concerns currently
or in the future related to competition with nonnative species (Factors
A and E) and climate change (Factor A).
Similar to the Butano Ridge population described above, the primary
impact to the Eagle Rock, Bracken Brae, Bonny Doon, and Majors Creek
populations (Hesperocyparis abramsiana var. abramsiana) is the
alteration of the fire regime (Factors A and E), which was identified
at the time of listing. This impact remains present at all populations
of the Santa Cruz cypress, although management actions at the Bonny
Doon Ecological Reserve have included some mechanical vegetation
removal in an attempt to reduce this impact (Service 2015, pp. 39-40).
Impacts from competition with nonnative species (Factors A and E) and
climate change (Factor A) also threaten the long-term persistence of
both varieties of Santa Cruz cypress (in addition to vandalism and
unauthorized recreational activities (Factors A and E), and genetic
introgression (Factor E) potentially impacting the H. a. var.
abramsiana populations), and there are no management actions proposed
to address these concerns. The existing regulatory mechanisms protect
the species from development activities but are inadequate to fully
protect the species from these other impacts (Factor D). Please see the
``Current Threats'' and ``Discussion of Threats to the Two Separate
Varieties'' sections of the Species Report for additional discussion
related to current or potential threats to these Santa Cruz cypress
populations (Service 2015, pp. 23-40).
Recovery and Recovery Plan Implementation
Section 4(f) of the Act directs us to develop and implement
recovery plans for the conservation and survival of endangered and
threatened species unless we determine that such a plan will not
promote the conservation of the species. A recovery plan for the Santa
Cruz cypress was developed in September 1998 (Service 1998, entire).
Under section 4(f)(1)(B)(ii), recovery plans must, to the maximum
extent practicable, include: ``Objective, measurable criteria which,
when met, would result in a determination, in accordance with the
provisions of [section 4 of the Act], that the species be removed from
the list.'' However, revisions to the list (adding, removing, or
reclassifying a species) must reflect determinations made in accordance
with sections 4(a)(1) and 4(b) of the Act. Section 4(a)(1) requires
that the Secretary determine whether a species is endangered or
threatened (or not) because of one or more of five threat factors.
Section 4(b) of the Act requires that the determination be made
``solely on the basis of the best scientific and commercial data
available.'' Therefore, recovery criteria should help indicate when we
would anticipate an analysis of the five threat factors under section
4(a)(1) to result in a determination that the species is no longer an
endangered species or threatened species because of any of the five
statutory factors.
Thus, while recovery plans provide important guidance to the
Service, States, and other partners on methods of minimizing threats to
listed species and measurable objectives against which to measure
progress towards recovery, they are not regulatory documents and cannot
substitute for the determinations and promulgation of regulations
required under section 4(a)(1) of the Act. A decision to revise the
status of or remove a species from the Federal List of Endangered and
Threatened Plants (50 CFR 17.12) is ultimately based on an analysis of
the best scientific and commercial data then available to determine
whether a species is no longer an endangered species or a threatened
species, regardless of whether that information differs from the
recovery plan.
The Recovery Plan states that Santa Cruz cypress can be
reclassified to threatened status when protection is secured for all
five populations and their habitat from the primary threats of logging,
agricultural conversion, and development (Service 1998, p. 30). This
criterion was intended to address the point at which imminent threats
to the species had been ameliorated so that the populations were no
longer in immediate risk of extirpation. Because of its limited range
and distribution, we determined that essentially all of the known
habitat is necessary to conserve the species. At the time the Recovery
Plan was prepared, we estimated that areal extent totaled 356 ac (144
ha). After more accurate mapping (McGraw 2007, entire), we now estimate
that areal
[[Page 8414]]
extent totals approximately 188 ac (76 ha) (Service 2015, p. 43).
Additionally, estimated abundance of individuals in all populations has
changed over time, from approximately 2,300 individuals at the time of
listing in 1987, to a current range of 33,000 to 44,000 individuals
(although the latter estimate is variable due to mortality and
regeneration following the 2008 Martin Fire that burned 520 ac (210 ha)
of land and a portion of the Bonny Doon population) (see Table 1 and
the Bonny Doon population discussion under the ``Population
Descriptions'' section of the Species Report (Service 2015, pp. 6, 15-
17)). It is important to note that the updated estimates for species
abundance and areal extent do not illustrate trends but rather improved
information about the species over time.
As explained in more detail in the Species Report (Service 2015, p.
43), three of five populations occur primarily or entirely on lands
that are being managed for conservation purposes, including the Butano
Ridge population at Pescadero Creek County Park, the Bonny Doon
population at Bonny Doon Ecological Reserve managed by the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and the Eagle Rock population
at Big Basin State Park managed by the California Department of Parks
and Recreation (CDPR). A fourth population (Majors Creek) is primarily
on lands at Gray Whale Ranch State Park, with a small portion on
privately owned land. The fifth population (Bracken Brae) is entirely
on private lands owned by a conservation-oriented landowner; this land
is also designated by the County of Santa Cruz as environmentally
sensitive habitat, which places restrictions on most development.
Because four of the five populations, either wholly or primarily, occur
on park or reserve lands, most of the individuals in the Bonny Doon,
Butano Ridge, Majors Creek, and Eagle Rock populations are protected
against the threats identified as imminent (logging, agricultural
conversion, and development) at the time of listing and in the Recovery
Plan. Because the Bracken Brae population is being managed by a
conservation-oriented landowner and county restrictions are in place
that would restrict most development, development-related threats to
this population appear negligible. Therefore, we conclude that the
downlisting criterion has been substantially met.
The Recovery Plan also states that Santa Cruz cypress can be
delisted when all five populations are assured of long-term
reproductive success, with insurance against failure provided by the
availability of banked seed (Service 1998, p. 45). This criterion was
intended to address the point at which long-term threats to the
species' persistence had been addressed and its persistence ensured. As
explained in more detail in the Species Report (Service 2015, pp. 18-
20), Santa Cruz cypress requires fire or other disturbance for
germination of seeds and recruitment of new individuals into the
populations. As detailed above in the Summary of Biological Status and
Factors Affecting the Species section and in the Species Report
(Service 2015, pp. 23-25), alteration of fire regime and lack of
management are likely to significantly impact the long-term persistence
of the species. Additionally, only seed for the Bonny Doon, Majors
Creek, and Bracken Brae populations is stored in a conservation bank;
no seed has been banked for the Eagle Rock or Butano Ridge populations.
Therefore, based on our analysis of the best available information, we
conclude that the delisting criterion for the species has not been met.
In addition to the significant protections now afforded to Santa
Cruz cypress as outlined above, various studies have occurred since
development of the Recovery Plan that aid in our understanding of the
status of Santa Cruz cypress. For example:
Recent surveys indicate that four of the five stands of
Santa Cruz cypress contain a larger number of individuals than was
estimated at the time of listing and in the Recovery Plan (Service
2015, p. 43).
Although data indicate the majority of trees are
reproductive, many trees (as indicated by surveys conducted
specifically at Butano Ridge and Majors Creek populations) are even-
aged (occur in stands or populations with individuals all of
approximately the same age). Even-aged stands indicate that vigorous
recruitment (survival of seedlings to reproductive age and into the
adult population) is not evident (McGraw 2011, p. 26). In contrast,
vigorous recruitment would be indicated by stands or populations
including individuals of multiple sizes or age classes representing
various life stages of the species.
While seed production appears to be strong at each of the
sampled populations, recruitment, which depends more on extrinsic
factors such as the availability of appropriate habitat for seedling
survival, is more variable among stands even within a population.
These and other data that we have analyzed indicate that most
threats identified at listing and during the development of the
Recovery Plan are reduced in areas occupied by Santa Cruz cypress and
that the status of Santa Cruz cypress has improved, primarily due to
the habitat protection provided by CDFW, CDPR, the County of San Mateo,
and the County of Santa Cruz. However, threats associated with a lack
of habitat management and alterations of the fire regime continue to
impede the species' ability to recover.
Additional information on recovery and recovery plan implementation
are described in the ``Progress Toward Recovery'' section of the
Species Report (Service 2015, pp. 39-43).
Summary of Changes From the Proposed Rule
In the Species Report, we state ``Historical distribution of Santa
Cruz cypress beyond the five currently recognized populations is
unknown (Service 2015, p. 11).'' This should be corrected to say
``Historical distribution of Santa Cruz cypress beyond the range of
five currently recognized populations is unknown.'' As stated in the
Species Report, there are reports of a few scattered trees along Empire
Grade Road (Service 2015, p. 13) that are not believed to be
interbreeding with any of the five main populations. In addition to
this occurrence, there is a California Natural Diversity Database
(CNDDB 2014) record of a historical occurrence that was found near
Mount Hermon in the Santa Cruz Mountains (CNDDB element occurrence
index 72235). This record was not included in the previous report
because the exact area of collection was unspecified, and this
occurrence has never been reaffirmed after the initial collection was
made in 1940. The inclusion of this historical occurrence falls within
the currently recognized species range, and does not change the
existing information we have on this species.
We have not made any substantive changes in this final rule based
on the comments that were received during the comment period, but have
added or corrected text to clarify the information that was presented.
One peer reviewer provided new information stating that Santa Cruz
cypress populations are most likely experiencing a net reduction in
fire frequency relative to what they experienced prior to Euro-American
settlement, and it is unknown if regeneration of the populations can be
sustained in the absence of human intervention. This information was
incorporated into the Species Report for the species (Service 2015, pp.
18-20, 25).
On July 1, 2014, we published a final policy interpreting the
phrase ``significant portion of its range'' (79 FR
[[Page 8415]]
37578). We have revised our discussion of ``significant portion of its
range'' as it relates to the Santa Cruz cypress in the Determination
section below to be consistent with our new policy. Although the final
policy's approach for determining whether a ``significant portion of
its range'' analysis is required is different than that discussed in
the proposed rule (78 FR 54221), applying the policy did not affect the
outcome of the final status determination for the Santa Cruz cypress.
Summary of Comments and Recommendations
In the proposed rule published on September 3, 2013 (78 FR 54221),
we requested that all interested parties submit written comments on the
proposal by November 4, 2013. We also contacted appropriate Federal and
State agencies, scientific experts and organizations, and other
interested parties and invited them to comment on the proposal.
Newspaper notices inviting general public comment were published in the
local Santa Cruz Sentinel and San Mateo County Times. We did not
receive any requests for a public hearing.
During the comment period, we received four peer review comment
letters and one other comment on the proposed reclassification of Santa
Cruz cypress. All substantive information related to the
reclassification of the species or the taxonomic change for Santa Cruz
cypress provided during the comment period was fully considered in
development of this final determination and is addressed in the
responses to comments, below. All public and peer review comments are
available at www.regulations.gov (Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2013-0092) and
from our Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office by request (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
Peer Reviewer Comments
In accordance with our peer review policy published on July 1, 1994
(59 FR 34270), we solicited expert opinion from six knowledgeable
individuals with scientific expertise that included familiarity with
Santa Cruz cypress and its habitat, the ecology of similar cypress
species, and the role of fire in cypress ecology and the Santa Cruz
mountains. We received responses from four of the peer reviewers.
We reviewed all comments received from the peer reviewers for
substantive issues and new information regarding the reclassification
of Santa Cruz cypress. Two peer reviewers supported our finding that
the Santa Cruz cypress warranted reclassification to threatened, and
provided no additional comments. Two other peer reviewers replied with
comments, and generally concurred with our methods, but disagreed about
the appropriateness of reclassifying the species without meeting the
recovery criteria identified in the Recovery Plan (Service 1998, p.
30). The two peer reviewers provided additional information,
clarifications, and recommendations on how to manage for the
conservation of Santa Cruz cypress and its habitat. All recommendations
have been acknowledged and will be considered during the development of
future management and recovery strategies.
Response to Peer Reviewer Comments
(1) Comment: Two peer reviewers stated that Santa Cruz cypress does
not meet the criteria for reclassification from endangered to
threatened found in the Recovery Plan for the Santa Cruz Cypress
(Service 1998, p. 30). Specifically, one reviewer commented that
protection has not been secured for all five populations and their
habitat from the threat of development, as stated in the criteria for
reclassification in the Recovery Plan. This reviewer identified the
Bracken Brae population as unprotected because it is owned by a private
landowner.
Our Response: In the Recovery and Recovery Plan Implementation
section above and in the ``Progress Toward Recovery'' section of the
Species Report (Service 2015, pp. 39-43), we acknowledge that all known
habitat is important to the conservation of the Santa Cruz cypress, and
that the Bracken Brae population is important for the recovery of the
species, and explain our rationale for why the recovery criterion has
been substantially met for downlisting. While the Bracken Brae
population is not in conservation ownership, county restrictions are in
place that would restrict development. As discussed above and further
in the next response, we conclude that development-related threats
appear negligible for this population. This situation, along with
protection of all or the majority of the other four populations on
State lands, leads us to conclude that the criterion to reclassify the
species to threatened has been substantially met.
Additionally, since the Recovery Plan criteria were developed, we
now know there are more individuals within all of the Santa Cruz
cypress populations than was known at the time of listing. The greater
number of individuals within each population, in combination with the
conservation of much of the habitat on public lands, suggests that this
species is no longer facing imminent destruction from the threats
identified in the Recovery Plan (i.e., logging, agricultural
conversion, and development). Thus, while the Recovery Plan provides
important guidance on the direction and strategy for recovery, and can
indicate when a rulemaking process may be initiated, the determination
to reclassify a species on the Federal List of Endangered and
Threatened Plants (50 CFR 17.12) is ultimately based on an analysis of
whether a species meets the definition of an endangered species or
threatened species. Please see the ``Progress Toward Recovery'' section
of the Species Report (Service 2015, pp. 39-43) and the Recovery and
Recovery Plan Implementation section above and in the proposed rule (78
FR 54221) for more detailed discussions of the Recovery Plan criteria.
(2) Comment: One peer reviewer did not agree that the threat of
land use conversion in the Bracken Brae population had been diminished
since the time of listing to a ``minor concern.'' This peer reviewer
specifically stated that the Bracken Brae population is not secured
from the threat of development or conversion because legal constraints
have not been placed on development of the land.
Our Response: The County of Santa Cruz has designated the area
where the Bracken Brae population occurs as an environmentally
sensitive habitat area which requires that this habitat be preserved
through County ordinance as part of the County's General Plan (Chapter
16.32.090(C)(1)(a) and (C)(2)(b)) (County of Santa Cruz 2012, entire).
Designated environmentally sensitive habitat, although not completely
secure from development activities, has certain specific development
restrictions that are intended to protect these areas and includes
restrictions specifically related to protecting Santa Cruz cypress
groves. In addition to the County restrictions, the species would still
remain listed as endangered by the State, and threatened by the Federal
Government, both of which offer protections for the species (when there
is a Federal nexus) and its habitat that are discussed in the ``Legal
Protection'' section of the Species Report (Service 2015, p. 34).
Although the Bracken Brae population does not have the same level
of habitat conservation as other Santa Cruz cypress populations, the
remaining County, State, and Federal protections will guide the future
use of the private land for the continued protection of the species.
Further, the land is currently owned by a conservation-oriented
[[Page 8416]]
landowner, and development is not anticipated. Therefore, we have
determined that the threat of land conversion for the Bracken Brae
population should still be classified as a minor concern compared to
other potential impacts. We also conclude that the intent of the
recovery criterion was to preserve the habitat from any imminent
threats (see Service 1998, pp. iii, 1, 29) and has been met.
(3) Comment: One peer reviewer stated that all of the Santa Cruz
cypress populations near developed areas were essentially unprotected
because development has an indirect impact on the ability of the
species to persist by altering the fire regime such that regeneration
is no longer possible at levels necessary to sustain populations.
Our Response: We agree that adjacent developed areas can have
indirect impacts on the alteration of the fire regime. In the Species
Report (Service 2015, p. 25), we discuss how either a longer or shorter
fire return interval can disrupt the ecology of the cypresses and be
detrimental to their long-term survival, and that fire-return intervals
are most likely to be disrupted near areas of residential or commercial
development. While we acknowledge that the populations near developed
areas are at a higher risk of a disrupted fire-return interval, we have
determined that the habitat is still protected from imminent
destruction and that the level of threat is commensurate to a
threatened rather than an endangered species.
(4) Comment: One peer reviewer commented that Santa Cruz cypress
populations are most likely experiencing a net reduction in fire
frequency relative to what they experienced prior to Euro-American
settlement, and it is unknown if regeneration of the populations can be
sustained in the absence of human intervention. The reviewer provided a
personal observation of how the absence of stand-replacing fires in a
similar cypress species (MacNab cypress [Hesperocyparis macnabiana])
can lead to the gradual decline of the population.
Our Response: See our response to comment (3) above for a
discussion and our evaluation of the impacts of fire ecology on Santa
Cruz cypress. We appreciated this new information based on the peer
reviewer's observation of a related species. Studies of closely related
species with similar life-history characteristics can offer insight
into the ecology of Santa Cruz cypress. Studies of similar species
(i.e., surrogate species) can bolster our knowledge of their life
history. This information builds upon our previous knowledge and
provides additional insight into the fire ecology necessary for Santa
Cruz cypress persistence. We consider this complementary biological and
ecological information and have included this information as an
addendum to the Species Report.
Comments from the State and Counties
Section 4(b)(5)(A)(ii) of the Act states, ``the Secretary shall . .
. give actual notice of the proposed regulation (including the complete
text of the regulation) to the State agency in each State in which the
species is believed to occur, and to each county or equivalent
jurisdiction in which the species is believed to occur, and invite the
comment of such agency, and each such jurisdiction, thereon.'' We
submitted the proposed regulation to the State of California but
received no formal comments from the State regarding the proposal.
Although formal comments were not received, we note that Santa Cruz
cypress is listed by the State as an endangered species; therefore, the
reclassification of the species from federally endangered to federally
threatened would likely have little or no effect on existing State
protections. We also provided notice to the Counties of San Mateo and
Santa Cruz at the time of the proposed rulemaking. We did not receive
any comments from the two counties.
Public Comments
We received one public comment letter during the comment period for
this rule.
(5) Comment: The commenter stated that Santa Cruz cypress should
remain at the highest level of protection ``because of climate change
and habitat loss.'' The commenter did not include any supporting
information or analyses regarding Santa Cruz cypress or the ecology of
the Santa Cruz area.
Response: We discuss both the effects of climate change and habitat
loss on Santa Cruz cypress in the Species Report (Service 2015, pp. 26-
29, 38). With respect to both of these impacts, the commenter did not
provide any new or additional supporting information that was specific
to the effects on Santa Cruz cypress which we have not already
evaluated. While we acknowledge that the effects of climate change and
habitat loss are still a concern for the species, we have determined
that the level of threat is commensurate to a threatened species rather
than an endangered species.
(6) Comment: The commenter expressed concern with the peer review
process, and questioned the bias of the peer review panel.
Response: In order to ensure the quality and credibility of the
scientific information we use to make decisions, we have implemented a
formal ``peer review'' process for listing and recovery documents, as
required according to our guidelines for peer review, which published
in the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270). We consult
experts to ensure that our decisions are based on sound science. The
selection of participants in a peer review is based on expertise, with
due consideration given to independence and potential conflicts of
interest. The peer reviewers for the Santa Cruz cypress were chosen
based on their expertise demonstrated by published research on western
hemisphere cypress taxonomy, population dynamics, serotiny (ecological
relationships of cone-bearing plants to fire), California fire regimes,
or the ecology of Santa Cruz area flora.
Determination
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533), and its implementing
regulations at 50 CFR part 424, set forth the procedures for adding
species to the Federal Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and
Plants. An assessment of the need for a species' protection under the
Act is based on whether a species is in danger of extinction or likely
to become so because of any of five factors: (A) The present or
threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or
range; (B) overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D) the inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E) other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence. As required by section 4(a)(1) of
the Act, we conducted a review of the status of this plant and assessed
the five factors to evaluate whether Santa Cruz cypress is in danger of
extinction or likely to become so in the foreseeable future throughout
all of its range.
We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial
information available regarding the past, present, and future threats
faced by the Santa Cruz cypress. We reviewed information presented in
the 2011 petition, information available in our files and gathered
through our 90-day finding (77 FR 32922; June 24, 2012) in response to
this petition, and other available published and unpublished
information. We also consulted with species experts and land management
staff with CDFW, CDPR, the County of San Mateo, and the County of Santa
Cruz, who are actively managing for the conservation of Santa Cruz
cypress.
[[Page 8417]]
In considering what factors might constitute threats, we must look
beyond the mere exposure of the species to the factor to determine
whether the exposure causes actual impacts to the species. If there is
exposure to a factor, but no response, or only a positive response,
that factor is not a threat. If there is exposure and the species
responds negatively, the factor may be a threat and we then attempt to
determine how significant the threat is. If the threat is significant,
it may drive, or contribute to, the risk of extinction of the species
such that the species warrants listing as endangered or threatened as
those terms are defined by the Act. This does not necessarily require
empirical proof of a threat. The combination of exposure and some
corroborating evidence of how the species is likely impacted could
suffice. The mere identification of factors that could impact a species
negatively is not sufficient to compel a finding that listing is
appropriate; we require evidence that these factors are operative
threats that act on the species to the point that the species meets the
definition of endangered or threatened under the Act.
The Act defines an endangered species as any species that is ``in
danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its
range'' and a threatened species as any species ``which is likely to
become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout
all or a significant portion of its range.'' We find that the Santa
Cruz cypress is not presently in danger of extinction throughout its
entire range based on the severity and immediacy of threats currently
impacting the species. As a result of recent information, we know that
there are a significantly larger number of Santa Cruz cypress
individuals than were known at the time of listing (Service 2009, p.
13; Service 2015, p. 45) and that there is significant conservation of
lands that support the populations. Significant impacts at the time of
listing that could have resulted in the extirpation of all or parts of
populations have been eliminated or reduced since listing. We conclude
that the previously recognized impacts to Santa Cruz cypress from
present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its
habitat or range (specifically, residential development, agricultural
conversion, logging, and oil and gas drilling) (Factor A);
overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes (Factor B); disease or predation (Factor C); and
other natural or human-made factors affecting its continued existence
(specifically, reproductive isolation) (Factor E) do not rise to a
level of significance, either individually or in combination, such that
the species is currently in danger of extinction.
However, alteration of the fire regime (Factors A and E) has the
potential to disrupt the long-term persistence of the species across
its entire range (resulting in the species potentially facing a
senescence risk in the future) if fire continues to be excluded or
suppressed near these populations. At least four populations of Santa
Cruz cypress contain some proportion of reproductive individuals and
also exhibit some level of recruitment (the portion of Bonny Doon
population that burned in the 2008 Martin Fire, and the Eagle Rock,
Butano Ridge, and Majors Creek populations). However, without fire or
other appropriate disturbance to simulate fire, we expect the level of
reproduction and recruitment to decrease as existing trees become
senescent. Given the potential lifespan of the Santa Cruz cypress of
approximately 100 years, we would expect to see population declines
over this timeframe as a result of mortality of currently existing
trees, and lack of replacement due to low recruitment and declining
reproduction, leading eventually to the species becoming in danger of
extinction in the future.
Santa Cruz cypress also will continue to be impacted by competition
with nonnative, invasive species (Factors A and E); genetic
introgression (Factor E); vandalism and unauthorized recreational
activities (Factors A and E); and the effects of climate change (Factor
A and E). Additionally, the existing regulatory mechanisms are
inadequate to fully protect the species from the threats listed above
(Factor D). However, the severity and magnitude of threats, both
individually and in combination, and the likelihood that any one event
would affect all populations is significantly reduced as a result of
the removal of multiple threats, the reduced impact of most remaining
threats, and the extensive amount of conservation occurring throughout
the range of the species (including, but not limited to, the extensive
preservation of occupied lands in perpetuity and development of
management plans or guidance within at least one population (Bonny
Doon)).
In conclusion, after review of the best available scientific and
commercial information pertaining to the species and its habitat, we
have determined that the ongoing threats are not of sufficient
imminence, intensity, or magnitude to indicate that Santa Cruz cypress
is presently in danger of extinction throughout all its range. Although
threats to Santa Cruz cypress still exist and will continue into the
foreseeable future, the implementation of conservation measures or
regulatory actions has greatly reduced the imminence and severity of
threats to the Santa Cruz cypress and its habitat. All five populations
are primarily threatened by changes in the historical fire regime.
Additionally, threats from competition with nonnative species and
climate change exist for all populations. Our evaluation of the best
available information indicates that the overall level of threats is
not significantly different at any of these populations (Service 2015,
pp. 24-41), with the primary current threat to all populations being
alteration of fire regime. We, therefore, conclude that Santa Cruz
cypress is not currently in danger of extinction, but is threatened
with becoming an endangered species within the foreseeable future
throughout all of its range.
Because we have determined that Santa Cruz cypress is likely to
become endangered in the foreseeable future throughout all of its
range, no portion of its range can be ``significant'' for purposes of
the definitions of ``endangered species'' and ``threatened species.''
See the Service's final policy interpreting the phrase ``Significant
Portion of Its Range'' (79 FR 37578; July 1, 2014). Therefore, on the
basis of the best available scientific and commercial information, we
find that the Santa Cruz cypress now meets the definition of a
threatened species (i.e., is likely to become an endangered species
within the foreseeable future throughout all of its range) and are
reclassifying the Santa Cruz cypress from an endangered species to a
threatened species in accordance with sections 3(20) and 4(a)(1) of the
Act.
Effects of This Rule
This rule will revise 50 CFR 17.12(h) to reclassify Santa Cruz
cypress from endangered to threatened on the List of Endangered and
Threatened Plants. However, this reclassification does not
significantly change the protections afforded this species under the
Act. Pursuant to section 7 of the Act, all Federal agencies must ensure
that any actions they authorize, fund, or carry out are not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of Santa Cruz cypress. Whenever a
species is listed as threatened, the Act allows promulgation of special
rules under section 4(d) that modify the standard protections for
threatened species found under section 9 of the Act and Service
regulations at
[[Page 8418]]
50 CFR 17.31 (for wildlife) and 17.71 (for plants), when it is deemed
necessary and advisable to provide for the conservation of the species.
No special section 4(d) rules are proposed, or anticipated to be
proposed, for Santa Cruz cypress, because there is currently no
conservation need to do so for this species. Recovery actions directed
at Santa Cruz cypress will continue to be implemented, as funding
allows, as outlined in the Recovery Plan for this species (Service
1998, entire).
Required Determinations
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. No tribal lands are within the range
of the Santa Cruz cypress.
National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)
We determined that environmental assessments and environmental
impact statements, as defined under the authority of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), need not be
prepared in connection with regulations adopted pursuant to Section
4(a) of the Endangered Species Act. We published a notice outlining our
reasons for this determination in the Federal Register on October 25,
1983 (48 FR 49244).
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited in this final rule is
available on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket
No. FWS-R8-ES-2013-0092 or upon request from the Field Supervisor,
Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authors
The primary authors of this final rule are employees of the Pacific
Southwest Regional Office in Sacramento, California, in coordination
with employees of the Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office in Ventura,
California.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.
Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50
of the Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:
PART 17--[AMENDED]
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. 17.12(h) as follows:
0
a. By removing the entry for ``Cupressus abramsiana'' under CONIFERS,
and
0
b. By adding an entry for ``Hesperocyparis abramsiana'' under CONIFERS
to read as follows:
Sec. 17.12 Endangered and threatened plants.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species
-------------------------------------------------------- Historic range Family Status When listed Critical Special
Scientific name Common name habitat rules
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Conifers
* * * * * * *
Hesperocyparis abramsiana........ Santa Cruz cypress.. U.S.A. (CA)........ Cupressaceae....... T 252 NA NA
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Dated: February 1, 2016.
Stephen Guertin,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-03296 Filed 2-18-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P