Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Removal of White Sedge (Carex albida) From the List of Endangered and Threatened Plants, 54758-54761 [2024-14402]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
54758
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 127 / Tuesday, July 2, 2024 / Proposed Rules
submissions, the EPA’s role is to
approve State choices, provided that
they meet the criteria of the CAA.
Accordingly, this proposed action
merely proposes to approve a State plan
element as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those
imposed by State law. For that reason,
this proposed action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993), 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011) and 14094 (88 FR
21879, April 11, 2023);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001); and
• Is not subject to requirements of
section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA.
In addition, the SIP is not approved
to apply on any Indian reservation land
or in any other area where the EPA or
an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the proposed rule does
not have Tribal implications and will
not impose substantial direct costs on
Tribal governments or preempt Tribal
law as specified by Executive Order
13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
Executive Order 12898 (Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
Feb. 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies
to identify and address
‘‘disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects’’
of their actions on minority populations
and low-income populations to the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:59 Jul 01, 2024
Jkt 262001
greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law. The EPA defines
environmental justice (EJ) as ‘‘the fair
treatment and meaningful involvement
of all people regardless of race, color,
national origin, or income with respect
to the development, implementation,
and enforcement of environmental laws,
regulations, and policies.’’ The EPA
further defines the term fair treatment to
mean that ‘‘no group of people should
bear a disproportionate burden of
environmental harms and risks,
including those resulting from the
negative environmental consequences of
industrial, governmental, and
commercial operations or programs and
policies.’’
The State did not evaluate EJ
considerations as part of its SIP
submittal; the CAA and applicable
implementing regulations neither
prohibit nor require such an evaluation.
The EPA did not perform an EJ analysis
and did not consider EJ in this proposed
action. Due to the nature of this
proposed action, if finalized, this action
is expected to have a neutral to positive
impact on the air quality of the various
ozone nonattainment areas covered by
this proposed action. Consideration of
EJ is not required as part of this action,
and there is no information in the
record inconsistent with the stated goal
of Executive Order 12898, to achieve EJ
for people of color, low-income
populations, and Indigenous peoples.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: June 25, 2024.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2024–14349 Filed 7–1–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2023–0088;
FF09E22000 FXES1113090FEDR 245]
RIN 1018–BG50
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Removal of White Sedge
(Carex albida) From the List of
Endangered and Threatened Plants
AGENCY:
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
ACTION:
Proposed rule.
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), propose to
remove the white sedge (Carex albida)
from the Federal List of Endangered and
Threatened Plants (i.e., ‘‘delist’’ the
species). Our review of the best
available scientific and commercial data
indicate that the white sedge is not a
discrete taxonomic entity and does not
meet the definition of a species as
defined by the Endangered Species Act
of 1973, as amended (Act). White sedge
has been synonymized with Lemmon’s
sedge (Carex lemmonii). This taxonomic
revision means that the white sedge is
no longer a scientifically accepted
species. If we finalize this rule as
proposed, the prohibitions and
conservation measures provided by the
Act, particularly through sections 7 and
9, would no longer apply to the white
sedge.
DATES: We will accept comments
received or postmarked on or before
September 3, 2024. Comments
submitted electronically using the
Federal eRulemaking Portal (see
ADDRESSES, below) must be received by
11:59 p.m. eastern time on the closing
date. We must receive requests for
public hearings, in writing, at the
address shown in FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT by August 16,
2024.
SUMMARY:
You may submit comments
by one of the following methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. In the Search box,
enter FWS–R8–ES–2023–0088, which is
the docket number for this rulemaking.
Then, click on the Search button. On the
resulting page, in the Search panel on
the left side of the screen, under the
Document Type heading, click on the
Proposed Rule box to locate this
document. You may submit a comment
by clicking on ‘‘Comment.’’
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail
to: Public Comments Processing, Attn:
FWS–R8–ES–2023–0088, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, MS: PRB/3W, 5275
Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041–
3803.
We request that you send comments
only by the methods described above.
We will post all comments on https://
www.regulations.gov. This generally
means that we will post any personal
information you provide us (see
Information Requested, below, for more
information).
Availability of supporting materials:
This proposed rule and supporting
documents, including a copy of the 5year review referenced throughout this
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM
02JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 127 / Tuesday, July 2, 2024 / Proposed Rules
document, are available at https://
www.regulations.gov under Docket No.
FWS–R8–ES–2023–0088.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael Fris, Field Supervisor, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Sacramento
Fish and Wildlife Office, 2800 Cottage
Way, Sacramento, CA 95825; telephone
916–414–6700. Individuals in the
United States who are deaf, deafblind,
hard of hearing, or have a speech
disability may dial 711 (TTY, TDD, or
TeleBraille) to access
telecommunications relay services.
Individuals outside the United States
should use the relay services offered
within their country to make
international calls to the point-ofcontact in the United States. Please see
Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2023–0088 on
https://www.regulations.gov for a
document that summarizes this
proposed rule.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Information Requested
We intend that any final action
resulting from this proposed rule will be
based on the best scientific and
commercial data available and be as
accurate and as effective as possible.
Therefore, we request comments or
information from other concerned
governmental agencies, Native
American Tribes, the scientific
community, industry, or any other
interested parties concerning this
proposed rule.
We particularly seek comments
concerning:
(1) Reasons we should or should not
remove the white sedge from the List of
Endangered and Threatened Plants; and
(2) Additional taxonomic or other
relevant data concerning the white
sedge.
Please include sufficient information
with your submission (such as scientific
journal articles or other publications) to
allow us to verify any scientific or
commercial information you include.
Please note that submissions merely
stating support for, or opposition to, the
action under consideration without
providing supporting information,
although noted, do not provide
substantial information necessary to
support a determination. Section
4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that
determinations as to whether any
species is an endangered species or a
threatened species must be made solely
on the basis of the best scientific and
commercial data available.
You may submit your comments and
materials concerning this proposed rule
by one of the methods listed in
ADDRESSES. We request that you send
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:59 Jul 01, 2024
Jkt 262001
comments only by the methods
described in ADDRESSES.
If you submit information via https://
www.regulations.gov, your entire
submission—including any personal
identifying information—will be posted
on the website. If your submission is
made via a hardcopy that includes
personal identifying information, you
may request at the top of your document
that we withhold this information from
public review. However, we cannot
guarantee that we will be able to do so.
We will post all hardcopy submissions
on https://www.regulations.gov.
Comments and materials we receive,
as well as supporting documentation we
used in preparing this proposed rule,
will be available for public inspection
on https://www.regulations.gov.
Our final determination may differ
from this proposal because we will
consider all comments we receive
during the comment period as well as
any information that may become
available after this proposal. For
example, based on the new information
we receive (and, if relevant, any
comments on that new information), we
may conclude that the white sedge
should remain listed as endangered. We
will clearly explain our rationale and
the basis for our final decision,
including why we made changes, if any,
that differ from this proposal.
Public Hearing
Section 4(b)(5) of the Act provides for
a public hearing on this proposal, if
requested. Requests must be received by
the date specified in DATES. Such
requests must be sent to the address
shown in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT. We will schedule a public
hearing on this proposal, if requested,
and announce the date, time, and place
of the hearing, as well as how to obtain
reasonable accommodations, in the
Federal Register and local newspapers
at least 15 days before the hearing. We
may hold the public hearing in person
or virtually via webinar. We will
announce any public hearing on our
website, in addition to the Federal
Register. The use of these virtual public
hearings is consistent with our
regulation at 50 CFR 424.16(c)(3).
Peer Review
In accordance with our joint policy on
peer review published in the Federal
Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270),
and our August 22, 2016, memorandum
updating and clarifying the role of peer
review of listing and recovery actions
under the Act, we will seek
independent scientific reviews from at
least three appropriate and independent
specialists regarding scientific data and
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
54759
interpretations contained in this
proposed rule. We will send copies of
this proposed rule to the peer reviewers
immediately following publication in
the Federal Register. We will ensure
that the opinions of peer reviewers are
objective and unbiased by following the
guidelines set forth in the Director’s
Memo, which updates and clarifies
Service policy on peer review (U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service 2016). The purpose
of such review is to ensure that our
decisions are based on scientifically
sound data, assumptions, and analysis.
Accordingly, our final decision may
differ from this proposal. Comments
from peer reviewers will be posted at
https://www.regulations.gov and
included in the decision file for the final
rule.
Previous Federal Action
Federal Government actions on white
sedge began as a result of section 12 of
the Act, which directed the Secretary of
the Smithsonian Institution to prepare a
report on those plants considered to be
endangered, threatened, or extinct in the
United States. This report, designated as
House Document No. 94–51, was
presented to Congress on January 9,
1975, and included white sedge as an
endangered species (Ripley 1975, p. 56).
We published a notice on July 1, 1975
(40 FR 27823), of our acceptance of the
report of the Smithsonian Institution as
a petition within the context of section
4(c)(2) of the Act (petition provisions
are now found in section 4(b)(3) of the
Act) and our intention thereby to review
the status of the plant taxa named
therein. White sedge was included in
the July 1, 1975, notice (40 FR 27823 at
27833). On June 16, 1976, we published
a proposal (41 FR 24523) to determine
approximately 1,700 vascular plant
species, including white sedge, to be
endangered species pursuant to section
4 of the Act. The list of 1,700 plant taxa
was assembled based on comments and
data received by the Smithsonian
Institution and the Service in response
to House Document No. 94–51 and our
July 1, 1975, notice (40 FR 27823 at
27833). General comments received
related to the 1976 proposal were
summarized in an April 26, 1978, rule
(43 FR 17909).
We published a proposed rule to list
the white sedge as endangered on
August 2, 1995 (60 FR 39314), and
invited public comment. Processing of
the proposed rule was delayed by a
congressional moratorium on activities
associated with final listings from April
10, 1995, through April 26, 1996 (Pub.
L. 104–6, 109 Stat. 73, 86 (1995)). After
the moratorium was lifted, we reopened
the comment period on September 11,
E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM
02JYP1
54760
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 127 / Tuesday, July 2, 2024 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
1996, and scheduled a public hearing on
October 3, 1996 (61 FR 47856). We
published the final rule to list white
sedge as an endangered species on
October 22, 1997 (62 FR 55791).
We published a 5-year status review
for the species on May 2, 2019, and
recommended white sedge be removed
from the List of Endangered and
Threatened Plants based on taxonomic
error (Service 2019, pp. 3–4). White
sedge has been synonymized with (i.e.,
considered to be the same species as)
Lemmon’s sedge (Carex lemmonii), a
wide-ranging and abundant taxon
endemic to California that is distributed
throughout the Northern Coast and
Sierra-Cascade mountain ranges
(Calflora 2022, entire; Zika et al. 2015,
entire). Therefore, white sedge is no
longer considered a valid species that is
distinct from the more widely abundant
and distributed Lemmon’s sedge.
Background
White sedge, as previously identified,
is an herbaceous perennial in the sedge
family (Cyperaceae). The first white
sedge specimen was collected in 1854
by Dr. Jacob M. Bigelow during an
exploratory expedition to find a railway
route from the Mississippi River to the
Pacific Ocean (Torrey and Gray 1857, p.
98). This specimen was collected from
Santa Rosa Creek in the Laguna de Santa
Rosa wetland complex in Sonoma
County (Howell 1957, pp. 178–179; Best
et al. 1996, p. 252). No additional
locations were recorded until the 1900s
(Howell 1957, p. 178). The immaturity
of the specimen when collected and
lack of additional collections in the
following decades resulted in doubt
regarding its taxonomic validity (Zika
and Wilson 2012, p. 171).
Several early taxonomic studies
questioned the validity of white sedge
as a distinct species, resulting in
numerous taxonomic revisions. In 1922,
white sedge was combined with
woodrush sedge (C. luzulina)
(Mackenzie 1922, p. 64). In 1935, white
sedge was grouped with Lemmon’s
sedge (Mackenzie 1935, p. 314; 1940,
pp. 198–199). In 1937, white sedge was
described as the distinct species C.
sonomensis (Stacey 1937, pp. 63–64),
and in 1957, white sedge and C.
sonomensis were grouped together and
the grouped entity was described as
distinct from Lemmon’s sedge (Howell
1957, pp. 178–180; 1965, pp. 1454–
1455). This nomenclature was followed
for The Jepson Manual (Mastrogiuseppe,
1993, p. 1111), which was the most
current information considered for the
listing of white sedge as an endangered
species in 1997. This nomenclature
continued to be followed for Flora of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:59 Jul 01, 2024
Jkt 262001
North America (Ball and
Mastrogiuseppe, 2002, pp. 479–480).
The 2nd edition of The Jepson Manual
(Zika et al. 2012, p. 1328), based on
analysis of the characteristics of white
sedge and Lemmon’s sedge (Zika and
Wilson, 2012, pp. 176–177), treats white
sedge as a synonym for Lemmon’s
sedge.
Taxonomic studies used
morphological characters of foliage,
perigynia (scale-like leaf enclosing a
pistil (female flower)), achenes (small,
dry seed or fruit), and inflorescences
(group of flowers) to distinguish white
sedge from other species of Carex (Zika
and Wilson 2012, p. 171). White sedge
has inflorescences with staminate (male)
flowers above the pistillate (female)
flowers (especially on the terminal
inflorescence), lateral spikelets, and
leaves that are shorter than the stems,
measuring 3 to 5 mm (0.1 to 0.2 in) wide
(62 FR 55791 at 55793, October 22,
1997). The final rule to designate white
sedge as an endangered species notes
that some individuals may resemble
Lemmon’s sedge but differ in
perigynium and achene size, or in other
respects (62 FR 55791 at 55793, October
22, 1997). Taxonomists often use the
shape of perigynia to separate closely
related Carex species (Zika and Wilson
2012, p. 173).
To clarify previous taxonomic
classifications of white sedge and to
explain the revised classification in Zika
et al. (2012, p. 1328), 18 morphological
characters that have been used to
differentiate white sedge and Lemmon’s
sedge were compared and evaluated
(Zika and Wilson 2012, p. 173). In a
preliminary study, the range of variation
of 13 characters was determined for 39
herbarium specimens of white sedge
and 270 specimens of Lemmon’s sedge
(Zika and Wilson 2012, p. 172).
Analysis of variance (ANOVA), nonmetric multidimensional scaling (NMS),
and principal components analysis
(PCA) were applied on a subset of 6
specimens of white sedge and 57
specimens of Lemmon’s sedge across 18
morphological characters (Zika and
Wilson 2012, p. 172).
In those analyses, Lemmon’s sedge
could be distinguished from similar
sedges, including C. luzulina, C.
luzufolia, and C. fissuricola, through
perigynia differences (Zika and Wilson
2012, p. 173). However, Lemmon’s
sedge plants from Sonoma County (i.e.,
populations previously referred to as
white sedge) are not distinguishable
from specimens in Mariposa County
(Zika and Wilson 2012, p. 173).
Similarly, variations in perigynia of C.
sonomensis are consistent with
variations in perigynia of Lemmon’s
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
sedge. Analyses of other characters
resulted in similar conclusions; there
were no characters that reliably
distinguished between white sedge and
Lemmon’s sedge (Zika and Wilson 2012,
p. 173). Additionally, Lemmon’s sedge
individuals from Butte, Mariposa, and
San Bernardino Counties exhibited a
wide variation in many characters,
resulting in some individuals that
closely resembled herbarium specimens
and cultivated plants of white sedge
(Zika and Wilson 2012, p. 174).
ANOVA results for all quantitative
characters indicate that white sedge is
not morphologically distinct from
Lemmon’s sedge (Zika and Wilson 2012,
p. 175). Except for leaf width, all white
sedge morphological traits are within
the range of variation found among the
57 Lemmon’s sedge specimens (Zika
and Wilson 2012, p. 175). When
considered alone, the variation of leaf
width between the two taxa is
statistically significant (Zika and Wilson
2012, p. 176). However, there is
considerable overlap in leaf width
variation, and Zika and Wilson (2012,
pp. 174–175) do not consider this
character to have practical taxonomic
significance. PCA and NMS yield
similar results (Zika and Wilson 2012,
p. 176). Therefore, statistical results fail
to distinguish white sedge and
Lemmon’s sedge as distinct entities
based on morphological characters.
Because Lemmon’s sedge was described
before white sedge, it is appropriate to
synonymize both entities under the
same scientific name of Carex lemmonii.
Following the findings of Zika and
Wilson (2012, pp. 176–177), white sedge
was removed from the California Native
Plant Society’s Rare Plant Inventory and
from Global Rank G1 (critically
imperiled) and State Rank S1 (critically
imperiled) of the California Natural
Diversity Database (Sims and Lazar
2013, p. 2). Further, the California
Natural Diversity Database (2023, p. 4)
no longer tracks white sedge, as they
consider white sedge a synonym of
Lemmon’s sedge.
Regulatory Framework
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533)
and the implementing regulations in
title 50 of the Code of Federal
Regulations set forth the procedures for
determining whether a species is an
endangered species or a threatened
species, issuing protective regulations
for threatened species, and designating
critical habitat for endangered and
threatened species. On April 5, 2024,
jointly with the National Marine
Fisheries Service, the Service issued a
final rule that revised the regulations in
50 CFR part 424 regarding how we add,
E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM
02JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 127 / Tuesday, July 2, 2024 / Proposed Rules
remove, and reclassify endangered and
threatened species and what criteria we
apply when designating listed species’
critical habitat (89 FR 24300). This final
rule is now in effect and is incorporated
into the current regulations. ‘‘Species’’
is defined by the Act as including any
subspecies of fish or wildlife or plants,
and any distinct population segment of
any species of vertebrate fish or wildlife
that interbreeds when mature (16 U.S.C.
1532(16)).
Our regulations at 50 CFR 424.11(e)
identify four reasons why, after
conducting a status review based on the
best scientific and commercial data
available, we shall delist a species: (1)
The species is extinct; (2) the species
has recovered to the point at which it no
longer meets the definition of an
endangered species or a threatened
species; (3) new information that has
become available since the original
listing decision shows the listed entity
does not meet the definition of an
endangered species or a threatened
species; or (4) new information that has
become available since the original
listing decision shows the listed entity
does not meet the definition of a
species.
Determination of White Sedge Status
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
In accordance with our regulations at
50 CFR 424.11(e)(4) currently in effect,
our review of the best scientific and
commercial data available indicates that
the white sedge does not meet the
statutory definition of a species.
Therefore, we propose to remove the
white sedge from the Federal List of
Endangered and Threatened Plants. The
white sedge does not require a postdelisting monitoring (PDM) plan
because the requirements for a PDM do
not apply to delisting species due to the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:59 Jul 01, 2024
Jkt 262001
54761
listed entity no longer meeting the
statutory definition of a species.
long, the sections where you feel lists or
tables would be useful, etc.
Effects of This Proposed Rule
This proposed rule, if made final,
would revise 50 CFR 17.12(h) by
removing the white sedge from the
Federal List of Endangered and
Threatened Plants. The prohibitions and
conservation measures provided by the
Act, particularly through sections 7 and
9, would no longer apply to this species.
Federal agencies would no longer be
required to consult with the Service
under section 7 of the Act in the event
that activities they authorize, fund, or
carry out may affect the white sedge.
There is no critical habitat designated
for this species, so there would be no
effect to 50 CFR 17.96.
References Cited
Required Determinations
Clarity of the Rule
We are required by Executive Orders
12866 and 12988 and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1,
1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule we
publish must:
(1) Be logically organized;
(2) Use the active voice to address
readers directly;
(3) Use clear language rather than
jargon;
(4) Be divided into short sections and
sentences; and
(5) Use lists and tables wherever
possible.
If you feel that we have not met these
requirements, send us comments by one
of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To
better help us revise the rule, your
comments should be as specific as
possible. For example, you should tell
us the numbers of the sections or
paragraphs that are unclearly written,
which sections or sentences are too
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
A complete list of references cited in
this rulemaking is available on the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov
and upon request from the Sacramento
Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authors
The primary authors of this proposed
rule are staff members of the Service’s
Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office
(see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species,
Exports, Imports, Plants, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements,
Transportation, Wildlife.
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we propose to amend
part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title
50 of the Code of Federal Regulations,
as set forth below:
PART 17—ENDANGERED AND
THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS
1. The authority citation for part 17
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531–
1544; and 4201–4245, unless otherwise
noted.
2. In § 17.12, amend paragraph (h) by
removing the entry for ‘‘Carex albida
(White sedge)’’ under Flowering Plants
from the List of Endangered and
Threatened Plants.
■
Martha Williams,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2024–14402 Filed 7–1–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM
02JYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 127 (Tuesday, July 2, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 54758-54761]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-14402]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2023-0088; FF09E22000 FXES1113090FEDR 245]
RIN 1018-BG50
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Removal of White
Sedge (Carex albida) From the List of Endangered and Threatened Plants
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose to
remove the white sedge (Carex albida) from the Federal List of
Endangered and Threatened Plants (i.e., ``delist'' the species). Our
review of the best available scientific and commercial data indicate
that the white sedge is not a discrete taxonomic entity and does not
meet the definition of a species as defined by the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended (Act). White sedge has been synonymized with
Lemmon's sedge (Carex lemmonii). This taxonomic revision means that the
white sedge is no longer a scientifically accepted species. If we
finalize this rule as proposed, the prohibitions and conservation
measures provided by the Act, particularly through sections 7 and 9,
would no longer apply to the white sedge.
DATES: We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before
September 3, 2024. Comments submitted electronically using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES, below) must be received by 11:59
p.m. eastern time on the closing date. We must receive requests for
public hearings, in writing, at the address shown in FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT by August 16, 2024.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter FWS-R8-ES-2023-0088,
which is the docket number for this rulemaking. Then, click on the
Search button. On the resulting page, in the Search panel on the left
side of the screen, under the Document Type heading, click on the
Proposed Rule box to locate this document. You may submit a comment by
clicking on ``Comment.''
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail to: Public Comments
Processing, Attn: FWS-R8-ES-2023-0088, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
MS: PRB/3W, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.
We request that you send comments only by the methods described
above. We will post all comments on https://www.regulations.gov. This
generally means that we will post any personal information you provide
us (see Information Requested, below, for more information).
Availability of supporting materials: This proposed rule and
supporting documents, including a copy of the 5-year review referenced
throughout this
[[Page 54759]]
document, are available at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No.
FWS-R8-ES-2023-0088.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Fris, Field Supervisor, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office, 2800
Cottage Way, Sacramento, CA 95825; telephone 916-414-6700. Individuals
in the United States who are deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have
a speech disability may dial 711 (TTY, TDD, or TeleBraille) to access
telecommunications relay services. Individuals outside the United
States should use the relay services offered within their country to
make international calls to the point-of-contact in the United States.
Please see Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2023-0088 on https://www.regulations.gov for a document that summarizes this proposed rule.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Information Requested
We intend that any final action resulting from this proposed rule
will be based on the best scientific and commercial data available and
be as accurate and as effective as possible. Therefore, we request
comments or information from other concerned governmental agencies,
Native American Tribes, the scientific community, industry, or any
other interested parties concerning this proposed rule.
We particularly seek comments concerning:
(1) Reasons we should or should not remove the white sedge from the
List of Endangered and Threatened Plants; and
(2) Additional taxonomic or other relevant data concerning the
white sedge.
Please include sufficient information with your submission (such as
scientific journal articles or other publications) to allow us to
verify any scientific or commercial information you include.
Please note that submissions merely stating support for, or
opposition to, the action under consideration without providing
supporting information, although noted, do not provide substantial
information necessary to support a determination. Section 4(b)(1)(A) of
the Act directs that determinations as to whether any species is an
endangered species or a threatened species must be made solely on the
basis of the best scientific and commercial data available.
You may submit your comments and materials concerning this proposed
rule by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. We request that you
send comments only by the methods described in ADDRESSES.
If you submit information via https://www.regulations.gov, your
entire submission--including any personal identifying information--will
be posted on the website. If your submission is made via a hardcopy
that includes personal identifying information, you may request at the
top of your document that we withhold this information from public
review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We
will post all hardcopy submissions on https://www.regulations.gov.
Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting
documentation we used in preparing this proposed rule, will be
available for public inspection on https://www.regulations.gov.
Our final determination may differ from this proposal because we
will consider all comments we receive during the comment period as well
as any information that may become available after this proposal. For
example, based on the new information we receive (and, if relevant, any
comments on that new information), we may conclude that the white sedge
should remain listed as endangered. We will clearly explain our
rationale and the basis for our final decision, including why we made
changes, if any, that differ from this proposal.
Public Hearing
Section 4(b)(5) of the Act provides for a public hearing on this
proposal, if requested. Requests must be received by the date specified
in DATES. Such requests must be sent to the address shown in FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. We will schedule a public hearing on this
proposal, if requested, and announce the date, time, and place of the
hearing, as well as how to obtain reasonable accommodations, in the
Federal Register and local newspapers at least 15 days before the
hearing. We may hold the public hearing in person or virtually via
webinar. We will announce any public hearing on our website, in
addition to the Federal Register. The use of these virtual public
hearings is consistent with our regulation at 50 CFR 424.16(c)(3).
Peer Review
In accordance with our joint policy on peer review published in the
Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), and our August 22,
2016, memorandum updating and clarifying the role of peer review of
listing and recovery actions under the Act, we will seek independent
scientific reviews from at least three appropriate and independent
specialists regarding scientific data and interpretations contained in
this proposed rule. We will send copies of this proposed rule to the
peer reviewers immediately following publication in the Federal
Register. We will ensure that the opinions of peer reviewers are
objective and unbiased by following the guidelines set forth in the
Director's Memo, which updates and clarifies Service policy on peer
review (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2016). The purpose of such
review is to ensure that our decisions are based on scientifically
sound data, assumptions, and analysis. Accordingly, our final decision
may differ from this proposal. Comments from peer reviewers will be
posted at https://www.regulations.gov and included in the decision file
for the final rule.
Previous Federal Action
Federal Government actions on white sedge began as a result of
section 12 of the Act, which directed the Secretary of the Smithsonian
Institution to prepare a report on those plants considered to be
endangered, threatened, or extinct in the United States. This report,
designated as House Document No. 94-51, was presented to Congress on
January 9, 1975, and included white sedge as an endangered species
(Ripley 1975, p. 56). We published a notice on July 1, 1975 (40 FR
27823), of our acceptance of the report of the Smithsonian Institution
as a petition within the context of section 4(c)(2) of the Act
(petition provisions are now found in section 4(b)(3) of the Act) and
our intention thereby to review the status of the plant taxa named
therein. White sedge was included in the July 1, 1975, notice (40 FR
27823 at 27833). On June 16, 1976, we published a proposal (41 FR
24523) to determine approximately 1,700 vascular plant species,
including white sedge, to be endangered species pursuant to section 4
of the Act. The list of 1,700 plant taxa was assembled based on
comments and data received by the Smithsonian Institution and the
Service in response to House Document No. 94-51 and our July 1, 1975,
notice (40 FR 27823 at 27833). General comments received related to the
1976 proposal were summarized in an April 26, 1978, rule (43 FR 17909).
We published a proposed rule to list the white sedge as endangered
on August 2, 1995 (60 FR 39314), and invited public comment. Processing
of the proposed rule was delayed by a congressional moratorium on
activities associated with final listings from April 10, 1995, through
April 26, 1996 (Pub. L. 104-6, 109 Stat. 73, 86 (1995)). After the
moratorium was lifted, we reopened the comment period on September 11,
[[Page 54760]]
1996, and scheduled a public hearing on October 3, 1996 (61 FR 47856).
We published the final rule to list white sedge as an endangered
species on October 22, 1997 (62 FR 55791).
We published a 5-year status review for the species on May 2, 2019,
and recommended white sedge be removed from the List of Endangered and
Threatened Plants based on taxonomic error (Service 2019, pp. 3-4).
White sedge has been synonymized with (i.e., considered to be the same
species as) Lemmon's sedge (Carex lemmonii), a wide-ranging and
abundant taxon endemic to California that is distributed throughout the
Northern Coast and Sierra-Cascade mountain ranges (Calflora 2022,
entire; Zika et al. 2015, entire). Therefore, white sedge is no longer
considered a valid species that is distinct from the more widely
abundant and distributed Lemmon's sedge.
Background
White sedge, as previously identified, is an herbaceous perennial
in the sedge family (Cyperaceae). The first white sedge specimen was
collected in 1854 by Dr. Jacob M. Bigelow during an exploratory
expedition to find a railway route from the Mississippi River to the
Pacific Ocean (Torrey and Gray 1857, p. 98). This specimen was
collected from Santa Rosa Creek in the Laguna de Santa Rosa wetland
complex in Sonoma County (Howell 1957, pp. 178-179; Best et al. 1996,
p. 252). No additional locations were recorded until the 1900s (Howell
1957, p. 178). The immaturity of the specimen when collected and lack
of additional collections in the following decades resulted in doubt
regarding its taxonomic validity (Zika and Wilson 2012, p. 171).
Several early taxonomic studies questioned the validity of white
sedge as a distinct species, resulting in numerous taxonomic revisions.
In 1922, white sedge was combined with woodrush sedge (C. luzulina)
(Mackenzie 1922, p. 64). In 1935, white sedge was grouped with Lemmon's
sedge (Mackenzie 1935, p. 314; 1940, pp. 198-199). In 1937, white sedge
was described as the distinct species C. sonomensis (Stacey 1937, pp.
63-64), and in 1957, white sedge and C. sonomensis were grouped
together and the grouped entity was described as distinct from Lemmon's
sedge (Howell 1957, pp. 178-180; 1965, pp. 1454-1455). This
nomenclature was followed for The Jepson Manual (Mastrogiuseppe, 1993,
p. 1111), which was the most current information considered for the
listing of white sedge as an endangered species in 1997. This
nomenclature continued to be followed for Flora of North America (Ball
and Mastrogiuseppe, 2002, pp. 479-480). The 2nd edition of The Jepson
Manual (Zika et al. 2012, p. 1328), based on analysis of the
characteristics of white sedge and Lemmon's sedge (Zika and Wilson,
2012, pp. 176-177), treats white sedge as a synonym for Lemmon's sedge.
Taxonomic studies used morphological characters of foliage,
perigynia (scale-like leaf enclosing a pistil (female flower)), achenes
(small, dry seed or fruit), and inflorescences (group of flowers) to
distinguish white sedge from other species of Carex (Zika and Wilson
2012, p. 171). White sedge has inflorescences with staminate (male)
flowers above the pistillate (female) flowers (especially on the
terminal inflorescence), lateral spikelets, and leaves that are shorter
than the stems, measuring 3 to 5 mm (0.1 to 0.2 in) wide (62 FR 55791
at 55793, October 22, 1997). The final rule to designate white sedge as
an endangered species notes that some individuals may resemble Lemmon's
sedge but differ in perigynium and achene size, or in other respects
(62 FR 55791 at 55793, October 22, 1997). Taxonomists often use the
shape of perigynia to separate closely related Carex species (Zika and
Wilson 2012, p. 173).
To clarify previous taxonomic classifications of white sedge and to
explain the revised classification in Zika et al. (2012, p. 1328), 18
morphological characters that have been used to differentiate white
sedge and Lemmon's sedge were compared and evaluated (Zika and Wilson
2012, p. 173). In a preliminary study, the range of variation of 13
characters was determined for 39 herbarium specimens of white sedge and
270 specimens of Lemmon's sedge (Zika and Wilson 2012, p. 172).
Analysis of variance (ANOVA), non-metric multidimensional scaling
(NMS), and principal components analysis (PCA) were applied on a subset
of 6 specimens of white sedge and 57 specimens of Lemmon's sedge across
18 morphological characters (Zika and Wilson 2012, p. 172).
In those analyses, Lemmon's sedge could be distinguished from
similar sedges, including C. luzulina, C. luzufolia, and C.
fissuricola, through perigynia differences (Zika and Wilson 2012, p.
173). However, Lemmon's sedge plants from Sonoma County (i.e.,
populations previously referred to as white sedge) are not
distinguishable from specimens in Mariposa County (Zika and Wilson
2012, p. 173). Similarly, variations in perigynia of C. sonomensis are
consistent with variations in perigynia of Lemmon's sedge. Analyses of
other characters resulted in similar conclusions; there were no
characters that reliably distinguished between white sedge and Lemmon's
sedge (Zika and Wilson 2012, p. 173). Additionally, Lemmon's sedge
individuals from Butte, Mariposa, and San Bernardino Counties exhibited
a wide variation in many characters, resulting in some individuals that
closely resembled herbarium specimens and cultivated plants of white
sedge (Zika and Wilson 2012, p. 174).
ANOVA results for all quantitative characters indicate that white
sedge is not morphologically distinct from Lemmon's sedge (Zika and
Wilson 2012, p. 175). Except for leaf width, all white sedge
morphological traits are within the range of variation found among the
57 Lemmon's sedge specimens (Zika and Wilson 2012, p. 175). When
considered alone, the variation of leaf width between the two taxa is
statistically significant (Zika and Wilson 2012, p. 176). However,
there is considerable overlap in leaf width variation, and Zika and
Wilson (2012, pp. 174-175) do not consider this character to have
practical taxonomic significance. PCA and NMS yield similar results
(Zika and Wilson 2012, p. 176). Therefore, statistical results fail to
distinguish white sedge and Lemmon's sedge as distinct entities based
on morphological characters. Because Lemmon's sedge was described
before white sedge, it is appropriate to synonymize both entities under
the same scientific name of Carex lemmonii.
Following the findings of Zika and Wilson (2012, pp. 176-177),
white sedge was removed from the California Native Plant Society's Rare
Plant Inventory and from Global Rank G1 (critically imperiled) and
State Rank S1 (critically imperiled) of the California Natural
Diversity Database (Sims and Lazar 2013, p. 2). Further, the California
Natural Diversity Database (2023, p. 4) no longer tracks white sedge,
as they consider white sedge a synonym of Lemmon's sedge.
Regulatory Framework
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and the implementing
regulations in title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations set forth
the procedures for determining whether a species is an endangered
species or a threatened species, issuing protective regulations for
threatened species, and designating critical habitat for endangered and
threatened species. On April 5, 2024, jointly with the National Marine
Fisheries Service, the Service issued a final rule that revised the
regulations in 50 CFR part 424 regarding how we add,
[[Page 54761]]
remove, and reclassify endangered and threatened species and what
criteria we apply when designating listed species' critical habitat (89
FR 24300). This final rule is now in effect and is incorporated into
the current regulations. ``Species'' is defined by the Act as including
any subspecies of fish or wildlife or plants, and any distinct
population segment of any species of vertebrate fish or wildlife that
interbreeds when mature (16 U.S.C. 1532(16)).
Our regulations at 50 CFR 424.11(e) identify four reasons why,
after conducting a status review based on the best scientific and
commercial data available, we shall delist a species: (1) The species
is extinct; (2) the species has recovered to the point at which it no
longer meets the definition of an endangered species or a threatened
species; (3) new information that has become available since the
original listing decision shows the listed entity does not meet the
definition of an endangered species or a threatened species; or (4) new
information that has become available since the original listing
decision shows the listed entity does not meet the definition of a
species.
Determination of White Sedge Status
In accordance with our regulations at 50 CFR 424.11(e)(4) currently
in effect, our review of the best scientific and commercial data
available indicates that the white sedge does not meet the statutory
definition of a species. Therefore, we propose to remove the white
sedge from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Plants. The
white sedge does not require a post-delisting monitoring (PDM) plan
because the requirements for a PDM do not apply to delisting species
due to the listed entity no longer meeting the statutory definition of
a species.
Effects of This Proposed Rule
This proposed rule, if made final, would revise 50 CFR 17.12(h) by
removing the white sedge from the Federal List of Endangered and
Threatened Plants. The prohibitions and conservation measures provided
by the Act, particularly through sections 7 and 9, would no longer
apply to this species. Federal agencies would no longer be required to
consult with the Service under section 7 of the Act in the event that
activities they authorize, fund, or carry out may affect the white
sedge. There is no critical habitat designated for this species, so
there would be no effect to 50 CFR 17.96.
Required Determinations
Clarity of the Rule
We are required by Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule we publish must:
(1) Be logically organized;
(2) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
(3) Use clear language rather than jargon;
(4) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
(5) Use lists and tables wherever possible.
If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us
comments by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To better help us
revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as possible. For
example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections or paragraphs
that are unclearly written, which sections or sentences are too long,
the sections where you feel lists or tables would be useful, etc.
References Cited
A complete list of references cited in this rulemaking is available
on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov and upon request from
the Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT).
Authors
The primary authors of this proposed rule are staff members of the
Service's Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Plants,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Transportation, Wildlife.
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we propose to amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter
I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below:
PART 17--ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS
0
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 1531-1544; and 4201-4245, unless
otherwise noted.
0
2. In Sec. 17.12, amend paragraph (h) by removing the entry for
``Carex albida (White sedge)'' under Flowering Plants from the List of
Endangered and Threatened Plants.
Martha Williams,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2024-14402 Filed 7-1-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
