Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Removal of Ute Ladies'-Tresses From the List of Endangered and Threatened Plants, 1054-1078 [2024-30380]
Download as PDF
1054
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 4 / Tuesday, January 7, 2025 / Proposed Rules
Dated: December 27, 2024.
Kimberlee Trzeciak,
Deputy Commissioner for Policy, Legislation,
and International Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2024–31528 Filed 1–6–25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R6–ES–2024–0115;
FXES1113090FEDR–256–FF09E22000]
RIN 1018–BH97
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Removal of Ute Ladies’Tresses From the List of Endangered
and Threatened Plants
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), propose to
remove Ute ladies’-tresses (Spiranthes
diluvialis) from the Federal List of
Endangered and Threatened Plants. This
determination also serves as our 12month finding on a petition to delist Ute
ladies’-tresses. After a review of the best
available scientific and commercial
information, we find that delisting the
species is warranted. Our review
indicates that the threats to Ute ladies’tresses have been eliminated or reduced
to the point that the species no longer
meets the definition of an endangered or
threatened species under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act). Accordingly, we
propose to delist Ute ladies’-tresses. 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 Ute ladies’-tresses. We
request information and comments from
the public regarding this proposed rule
and the draft post-delisting monitoring
(PDM) plan for Ute ladies’-tresses.
DATES: We will accept comments
received or postmarked on or before
March 10, 2025. 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 February 21, 2025.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by one of the following methods:
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:20 Jan 06, 2025
Jkt 265001
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. In the Search box,
enter FWS–R6–ES–2024–0115, 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, check 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–R6–ES–2024–0115, 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 the 5-year review,
draft recovery plan, draft post-delisting
monitoring plan (PDM), and the species
status assessment (SSA) report, are
available at https://www.regulations.gov
under Docket No. FWS–R6–ES–2024–
0115 and on the Service’s website at
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2159.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
George Weekley, Field Office
Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Utah Ecological Services Field
Office, 2369 West Orton Circle, Suite 50,
West Valley City, UT 84119; telephone
801–239–0561. 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–R6–ES–2024–0115 on
https://www.regulations.gov for a
document that summarizes this
proposed rule.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Summary
Why we need to publish a rule. Under
the Act, a species warrants delisting if
it no longer meets the definition of an
endangered species (in danger of
extinction throughout all or a significant
portion of its range) or a threatened
species (likely to become an endangered
species within the foreseeable future
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
throughout all or a significant portion of
its range). Ute ladies’-tresses is listed as
threatened, and we are proposing to
delist it. We have determined Ute
ladies’-tresses does not meet the Act’s
definition of an endangered or
threatened species. Delisting a species
can be completed only by issuing a rule
through the Administrative Procedure
Act rulemaking process (5 U.S.C. 551 et
seq.).
What this document does. This action
proposes to remove Ute ladies’-tresses
from the List of Endangered and
Threatened Plants (i.e., ‘‘delist’’ the
species) based on its recovery.
The basis for our action. Under the
Act, we may determine that a species is
an endangered species or a threatened
species 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. The determination to delist a
species must be based on an analysis of
the same factors.
Under the Act, we must review the
status of all listed species at least once
every 5 years. We must delist a species
if we determine, based on the best
available scientific and commercial
data, that the species is neither an
endangered species nor a threatened
species. Our regulations at 50 CFR
424.11(e) identify four reasons why we
might determine a species shall be
delisted: (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. We have determined that Ute
ladies’-tresses has recovered to the point
at which it no longer meets the
definition of an endangered species or a
threatened species; therefore, we are
proposing to delist it.
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
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 4 / Tuesday, January 7, 2025 / Proposed Rules
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 Ute ladies’-tresses from the List
of Endangered and Threatened Plants;
(2) Relevant data concerning any
threats (or lack thereof) to Ute ladies’tresses, particularly any data on the
possible effects of climate change as it
relates to habitat, as well as the extent
of State protection and management that
would be provided to this plant as a
delisted species;
(3) Current or planned activities
within the geographic range of Ute
ladies’-tresses that may have either a
negative or positive impact on the
species; and
(4) Considerations for post-delisting
monitoring, including monitoring
protocols and length of time monitoring
is needed, as well as triggers for
reevaluation.
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,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:20 Jan 06, 2025
Jkt 265001
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 species should
remain listed as threatened, or we may
conclude that the species should be
reclassified from threatened to
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
A species status assessment (SSA)
team prepared an SSA report for Ute
ladies’-tresses. The SSA team was
composed of Service biologists, in
consultation with other species experts
from Federal agencies, State wildlife
and heritage programs, and local
conservation groups. The SSA report
represents a compilation of the best
scientific and commercial data available
concerning the status of the species,
including the impacts of past, present,
and future factors (both negative and
beneficial) affecting the species.
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 solicited independent
scientific review of the information
contained in the Ute ladies’-tresses SSA
report. The Service sent the SSA report
to seven independent peer reviewers
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1055
and received three responses. Results of
this structured peer review process can
be found at https://www.regulations.gov
at Docket No. FWS–R6–ES–2024–0115.
In preparing this proposed rule, we
incorporated the results of these
reviews, as appropriate, into the final
SSA report, which is the foundation for
this proposed rule.
Summary of Peer Reviewer Comments
As discussed in Peer Review above,
we received comments from three peer
reviewers on the draft SSA report. We
reviewed all comments we received
from the peer reviewers for substantive
issues and new information regarding
the contents of the SSA report. As
discussed above, because we conducted
this peer review prior to this proposed
rule, we have already incorporated all
applicable peer review comments in
version 1.1 of the SSA report, which is
the foundation for this proposed rule.
The peer reviewers provided
additional information, clarifications,
and recommendations pertaining to our
analysis of Ute ladies’-tresses’ current
and future condition. We either
incorporated or clarified substantial
comments in the SSA report or address
them below. In addition to substantive
comments on the SSA report, we
received several comments requesting
the inclusion of additional biological
information about orchids, more detail
on the methods used in the suitable
habitat model, and suggestions for
climate change models to consider.
Those comments were incorporated in
the SSA report where applicable and are
not summarized here.
(1) Comment: One reviewer was
concerned with how we scored the
overall current resiliency of analytical
units (AUs). The reviewer stated that
our scoring does not necessarily identify
truly high resiliency conditions but
rather provides a relative evaluation of
AU resiliency, noting that an overall
high resiliency score can be achieved
even if one metric, such as vegetative
habitat, is in low condition.
Our response: We developed our
current condition evaluation in
coordination with species experts, and
our scoring reflects the relative
contribution of each metric (e.g.,
hydrological condition, vegetative
habitat) to overall AU resiliency as
discussed below in Current Condition.
Ute ladies’-tresses is adapted to
disturbance and changing hydrological
and habitat conditions, and AUs may
maintain high resiliency even when
some of the species’ needs are not being
optimally met at individual occurrences
or portions of those occurrences.
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
1056
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 4 / Tuesday, January 7, 2025 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Therefore, our scoring of overall AU
resiliency is appropriate.
(2) Comment: One reviewer
commented that the comparisons of AU
resiliency using the suitable habitat and
connectivity metrics is problematic
because different modeling approaches
were used to generate suitable habitat in
each AU based on the opinions of
different biologists across the species’
range. Therefore, the suitable habitat
models were much more conservative,
and therefore limited, for some AUs
compared to others, resulting in
inconsistencies in how AUs were
evaluated for resiliency. The reviewer
recommended that we use a
standardized, rangewide method for the
suitable habitat model.
Our response: We initially considered
using a draft suitable habitat model
using consistent methods recommended
by the reviewer; however, input from
species experts indicated that this
model and other draft models
overpredicted, rather than reasonably
predicted, suitable habitat across the
species’ range. The modeling approach
used in the SSA reflects local conditions
and the variation across the range based
on occurrence data within each AU,
which would not be reflected using a
standardized, rangewide method as
recommended by the reviewer. When
developing the final suitable habitat
model, we incorporated
recommendations from Service
biologists in every State within the
species’ range to evaluate whether
model predictions were a good
reflection of suitable habitat for their
respective AUs. The final model we
relied on for our evaluation of suitable
habitat in the SSA report is a
combination of AU-level hydrologic
unit code (HUC) 6 models and expert
opinion, and we consider that model to
provide the best representation of
potentially suitable habitat for Ute
ladies’-tresses given the species’ lifehistory traits, occurrence data, and
variation across its range.
Previous Federal Actions
On September 27, 1985, we published
a notice of review in the Federal
Register (50 FR 39526) issuing a list of
plant taxa being considered for listing as
endangered or threatened. Ute ladies’tresses was included on this list as a
Category 2 species. Category 2 species
were taxa for which information in
possession of the Service indicated that
proposing to list them as endangered or
threatened species was possibly
appropriate, but we lacked conclusive
data on biological vulnerability and
threats to support the immediate
preparation of a proposed rule.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:20 Jan 06, 2025
Jkt 265001
On February 21, 1990, we published
a notice of review in the Federal
Register (55 FR 6184) reclassifying Ute
ladies’-tresses from a Category 2 species
to a Category 1 species based on a
review of information collected since
1985. Category 1 species were taxa for
which we had on file enough substantial
information on biological vulnerability
and threat(s) to support proposed rules
to list them as endangered or threatened
species. However, a proposed rule to list
Ute ladies’-tresses was not issued
because the action was precluded at the
time by other listing activity. In the
1990 notice of review, we used the
common name ‘‘plateau lady’s tresses’’
for Spiranthes diluvialis.
On November 13, 1990, we published
in the Federal Register (55 FR 47347) a
proposed rule to list Ute ladies’-tresses
as a threatened species due to the
primary threat of water development
and urbanization in its riparian habitat.
At that time, the species was known to
be comprised of fewer than 3,000 plants
in 7 populations. Our proposed rule
used ‘‘Ute ladies’-tresses’’ as the
common name for Spiranthes diluvialis
in recognition of the fact that the
species’ known historical range was
used largely by the Ute Indian Tribe. We
determined that it would not be prudent
to designate critical habitat because the
publication of critical habitat
descriptions and maps would make this
orchid species more vulnerable to
collection.
Three additional populations were
identified in Utah and Nevada prior to
the final listing rule, for a total of 10
known populations with an estimated
population size of fewer than 6,000
plants. On January 17, 1992, we
published in the Federal Register (57
FR 2048) a final rule to list Ute ladies’tresses as a threatened species. The final
rule included a determination that the
designation of critical habitat for Ute
ladies’-tresses was not prudent.
When we listed Ute ladies’-tresses as
a threatened species (see 57 FR 2048,
January 17, 1992), we identified habitat
loss and modification due to water
development and urbanization (Factor
A) as the primary threat to the species.
We considered collection (Factor B) to
be a threat because it is an orchid
species. Disease and predation (Factor
C) were not considered threats.
Regulatory mechanisms (Factor D)
included a limited degree of protection
for the species’ wetland habitat under
the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et
seq.), and international trade for all
orchids is regulated by the Convention
on International Trade in Endangered
Species of Wild Flora and Fauna
(CITES; 27 U.S.T. 1087, March 3, 1973).
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Finally, we identified the species’ small
and scattered populations, variable
demographic structure of populations,
and a presumed slow reproductive rate
(Factor E) as making the species more
vulnerable to other threats and stressors.
In 1995, we completed a draft
recovery plan for the species (Service
1995, entire). To date, this plan has not
been finalized.
On May 10, 1996, we received a
petition from the Central Utah Water
Conservancy District (CUWCD) to delist
Ute ladies’-tresses pursuant to the Act
(Christiansen 1996, entire). A ‘‘Special
Status Species Update’’ for Ute ladies’tresses, dated April 1996, accompanied
the petition as supporting information
(CUWCD 1996, entire). In response to
the petitioner’s request to delist Ute
ladies’-tresses, we sent a letter to the
petitioner on June 10, 1996, explaining
our inability to act upon the petition
due to the low priority assigned to
delisting petitions in our 1996 Listing
Priority Guidance (61 FR 24722, May
16, 1996).
On October 12, 2004, we published in
the Federal Register (69 FR 60605) a 90day finding that the 1996 petition
contained substantial information
indicating that delisting Ute ladies’tresses may be warranted. However,
higher priority work continued to
preclude our ability to take further
action on this petition. This proposed
rule constitutes our 12-month finding
on the May 10, 1996, petition to delist
Ute ladies’-tresses under the Act.
In 2023, we completed an SSA report
to evaluate the species’ rangewide status
and inform a 5-year status review. On
August 8, 2023, we completed a 5-year
review that recommended delisting Ute
ladies’-tresses due to recovery.
Background
Species Description and Habitat
Information
A thorough review of the taxonomy,
life history, and ecology of Ute ladies’tresses is presented in the SSA report,
version 1.1 (Service 2024, entire). Ute
ladies’-tresses is an herbaceous (not
woody), perennial plant in the orchid
family (Orchidaceae) found in the
western United States and Canada. It is
a terrestrial orchid (grows in the ground)
and inhabits naturally occurring and
human-created wetland habitats. When
it was first described as a species in
1984, Ute ladies’-tresses was known to
occur only in Utah and Colorado
(Sheviak 1984, entire). Today, the
species is found in eight U.S. States
(Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nebraska,
Nevada, Utah, Washington, and
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 4 / Tuesday, January 7, 2025 / Proposed Rules
Wyoming) and southern British
Columbia, Canada (Service 2024, p. 4).
Ute ladies’-tresses is a naturally
occurring allopolyploid species,
meaning it has more than one pair of
chromosomes derived from the
hybridization of two genetically distinct
species (Szalanski et al. 2001, pp. 178–
179). Ute ladies’-tresses is fertile
(produces fertile offspring) but is not
cross-compatible with either of its
parent species, hooded lady’s tresses
(Spiranthes romanzoffiana) and Great
Plains lady’s tresses (S.
magnicamporum) (Szalanski et al. 2001,
pp. 178–179; Fertig et al. 2005, pp. 7–
8). The ranges of hooded lady’s tresses
and Great Plains lady’s tresses do not
currently overlap with each other, but
may have overlapped during the
Pleistocene, a geological epoch that
ended approximately 11,700 years ago
(Sheviak 1984, p. 9). The hooded lady’s
tresses is present within the range of Ute
ladies’-tresses but generally occupies
higher elevations than Ute ladies’tresses (above 7,000 feet (ft) (2,133
meters (m))), so the two species are
mostly spatially separate within their
overlapping ranges. Where they cooccur in Idaho, hooded lady’s tresses
flowers earlier than Ute ladies’-tresses
(Moseley 2000, pp. 1–2).
A genetic study of Ute ladies’-tresses
identified an unusually high degree of
genetic variability within samples from
several occurrences in Colorado and
Utah, which suggests the species may
have evolved from two or more separate
hybridization events between hooded
lady’s tresses and Great Plains lady’s
tresses (Arft and Ranker 1998, p. 119).
However, little genetic differentiation
was found between samples from
various occurrences in Colorado, Idaho,
Montana, Nebraska, Utah, and
Wyoming, suggesting that there may be
a high degree of gene flow between Ute
ladies’-tresses in those areas. No genetic
studies have been conducted on Ute
ladies’-tresses in the Upper Columbia
basin of Washington and British
Columbia, which is highly disjunct
without any known connectivity to
other occupied basins, or in the Lower
Colorado-Lake Mead basin of Nevada,
which contains a single isolated
occurrence.
Ute ladies’-tresses plants are
approximately 4.7 to 23.6 inches (in) (12
to 60 centimeters (cm)) tall and grow
from tuberous-thickened roots (enlarged
fleshy roots that store starch and
nutrients). Basal leaves are grass-like, up
to 11 in (28 cm) long, and leaves become
progressively smaller up the stem
(Sheviak 1984, entire). Flowers are
small (0.3 to 0.6 in (7.5–15 millimeters
(mm) long)), white or ivory-colored, and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:20 Jan 06, 2025
Jkt 265001
arranged in a gradual spiral along the
flowering stalks (inflorescences) that
inspired the ladies’-tresses part of the
common name (Service 2024, p. 30).
One diagnostic feature that
distinguishes Ute ladies’-tresses from
hooded lady’s tresses is how fused the
sepals (lower part of the flower that
supports the petals) are to each other;
the sepals of Ute ladies’-tresses are
separate or fused only at the base,
whereas the sepals of hooded lady’s
tresses are fused into a hood-like
structure. Fruits are cylindric capsules
with numerous seeds (Sheviak 1984,
entire; Fertig et al. 2005, p. 7).
Ute ladies’-tresses has five life stages:
seeds, seedlings, dormant plants,
vegetative plants, and reproductive
plants (Fertig 2020, p. 67; Service 2024,
p. 31). Plants are perennial, appear to be
long-lived, and likely depend on a
specific symbiotic mycorrhizal (fungal)
association during all life stages based
on studies of other terrestrial orchids
(Batty et al. 2002, pp. 196–197). Many
terrestrial orchids have lifespans of 20
to 30 years or more, with at least one
Spiranthes species having a lifespan of
more than 60 years (Willems and
Dorland 2010, p. 346; Shefferson et al.
2020, pp. 318–319).
Ute ladies’-tresses can likely
reproduce asexually through root
splitting (Fertig et al. 2005, p. 67), but
the species primarily reproduces
sexually through seed production.
Plants cannot produce seeds without
pollinators. The primary pollinators of
Ute ladies’-tresses are bumblebees
(Bombus spp.), solitary bees of the
Anthophora genus, and honeybees (Apis
mellifera) (Sipes and Tepedino 1995,
entire; Sipes et al. 1995, pp. 1–3, 15–17;
Pierson and Tepedino 2000, pp. 8, 16,
27–28). Plants typically flower in
August and September (Fertig et al.
2005, p. 54), but the timing varies by
location and local environmental
conditions. Flowering has been
documented as early as the beginning of
July in Nevada, a hotter and drier part
of the range, and as late as October in
cooler, higher elevation occurrences
(Great Basin Institute (GBI) 2009, p. 3;
Ute ladies’-tresses Technical Team (ULT
Tech) 2021, entire).
Orchid seeds are extremely small (the
size of dust particles), are easily
dispersed by wind and water, and do
not provide much nourishment for the
embryo (undeveloped plant) after
germination (Sipes et al. 1995, p. 23). If
the embryo can quickly form a
mycorrhizal association, it is able to
obtain nutrients directly from the soil
fungi without relying on photosynthesis
(Hildebrand 1998, p. 4; McGonigle and
Sheridan 2004, p. 11; Yeung 2017, pp.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1057
8–9). Seedlings persist underground and
rely on the mycorrhizal association to
develop shoots and leaves. It is
unknown how long seedlings remain
underground before transitioning to
other life stages (vegetative or adult
plants). We assume that Ute ladies’tresses persist as a seedling for at least
1 year.
Ute ladies’-tresses may transition from
being vegetative to reproductive or from
reproductive to vegetative in subsequent
aboveground years, and periods of
dormancy below ground may occur
throughout a plant’s life (Yeung 2017,
entire; ULT Tech 2021, entire; Service
2024, pp. 31–32). Plants can survive
unfavorable conditions in a state of
dormancy for multiple years (11
consecutive years or longer), either as a
germinated seedling in a symbiotic
mycorrhizal (fungal) association, known
as a protocorm, or as an adult root mass
(Fertig et al. 2005, p. 61). Adult plants
do not emerge above ground or flower
every year; flowering likely depends on
environmental conditions and when the
plant last flowered—a plant that
flowered in the previous year may be
more likely to remain vegetative or
become dormant the following year
(Willems and Dorland 2010, p. 345). It
is difficult to track these cycles because
humans can only reliably detect
flowering plants, not other life stages
(seeds, seedlings, dormant or vegetative
plants), in the field (ULT Tech 2021,
entire).
Ute ladies’-tresses has a ruderal (early
colonizer of disturbed habitats) lifehistory strategy in which it can disperse
within watersheds and quickly establish
and produce seeds in favorable habitat
conditions that may only be available
for short periods of time (Gadgil and
Solbrig 1972, entire). Ruderal plants are
also able to persist in place and wait for
favorable habitat conditions to return
following disturbance events. The
species disperses along connected
waterways (river corridors, perennial
streams, canals, lakeshores, wet
meadows, and agricultural ditches), and
plants appear in newly created or
disturbed features (such as islands,
point bars, shorelines) within the
watershed. The species also persists in
unsuitable habitat conditions that were
previously suitable. Dormant Ute
ladies’-tresses plants or seedlings can
survive in late-seral successional
habitats or unsuitable habitats below
ground for years and then emerge above
ground after disturbance reestablishes
early- to mid-seral successional habitat
conditions or adequate moisture is
restored (Heidel 2001, entire). As
mentioned above, we can only reliably
detect flowering plants, and the species
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
1058
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 4 / Tuesday, January 7, 2025 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
does not necessarily flower every year.
Therefore, Ute ladies’-tresses may
appear to be extirpated from an area
when in fact dormant or nonreproductive individuals are still
present.
Range, Distribution, Abundance, and
Trends of Ute Ladies’-Tresses
The current range of Ute ladies’tresses spans eight States in the western
United States (Colorado, Idaho,
Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, Utah,
Washington, and Wyoming) and the
Canadian province of British Columbia
(Service 2024, pp. 39–40). There are 62
extant Ute ladies’-tresses element
occurrences (occurrences) distributed
across 18 watershed basins, referred to
as analytical units (AUs) and defined as
populations in the SSA report. An AU
may contain one or more element
occurrences. The current range is much
larger than the three States (Colorado,
Nevada, and Utah) known to be
occupied at the time of listing in 1992.
Ute ladies’-tresses has not been found in
Arizona, even though that State is
considered to be part of two AUs (Lower
Colorado-Lake Mead and Upper
Colorado-Dirty Devil), because the
species occurs in other States within
those watersheds. Across its wide range,
Ute ladies’-tresses is found in 3 different
ecological classifications (Great Plains,
North American Deserts, and Western
Forested Mountains), 12 level-III
ecoregions, and 7 habitat types (Fertig et
al. 2005, pp. 21–33; U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency 2013, entire; Service
2024, pp. 123–125).
At the time of listing in 1992, we
reported 10 extant occurrences (defined
as populations in the listing rule) with
fewer than 6,000 plants and occurring
on approximately 170 acres (ac) (69
hectares (ha)) of habitat (see 57 FR 2048,
January 17, 1992). By 2005, there were
known to be 52 extant occurrences with
at least 83,316 flowering plants on 674
to 783 ac (273 to 317 ha) of habitat
(Fertig et al. 2005, pp. 34–62). The 2005
flowering plant estimate was based on
the maximum number of flowering
plants reported over a multi-year period
for each occurrence, since most surveys
underestimate the number of dormant,
vegetative, and fruiting plants in an
occurrence (Fertig et al. 2005, p. 62).
The current number of known extant
occurrences has increased to 62. The
number of flowering plants detected has
likely also increased, but we do not
provide an estimate of flowering plants
in the SSA report for the following
reasons: (1) there is a lack of consistent
monitoring methods; (2) monitoring
does not account for the geographic
shifts in occupied habitat; and (3)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:20 Jan 06, 2025
Jkt 265001
monitoring does not account for four of
the five life stages (seeds, seedlings,
dormant plants, and vegetative plants)
(ULT Tech 2021, entire). When a plant
population contains dormant
individuals, population size and trend
can be accurately determined if we
know the average number of years a
plant is dormant and we can account for
at least three life stages (dormant,
vegetative, and flowering plants) (Lesica
and Steele 1994, entire; Heidel 2001, p.
8; Fertig et al. 2005, pp. 61–62).
However, this information is not
available for Ute ladies’-tresses.
Ute ladies’-tresses occurrences
demonstrate metapopulation structure
within watersheds (AUs) where
persistence is governed by the processes
of patch colonization, extirpation (local
extinction), and recolonization (Sipes et
al. 1995, p. 26; Freckleton and
Watkinson 2002, p. 419). These
metapopulations are important to the
viability of the species, as long-term
persistence is generally higher in
metapopulations than in small, isolated
occurrences (Lesica 1992, p. 420).
Consequently, identification of
metapopulations and the availability of
potentially suitable habitat is important
for assessing the status of Ute ladies’tresses (Freckleton and Watkinson 2002,
p. 432; Service 2024, pp. 89–91).
In the SSA report, we delineated
occurrences based on NatureServe
criteria for water and land dispersal
distances, which are grouped by plant
locations connected by suitable habitat
and generally less than 6.2 miles (mi)
(10 kilometers (km)) and 1.2 mi (2 km)
from each other along waterways and
over land, respectively (NatureServe
2020, p. 6; Service 2024, p. 26). We
know of 75 Ute ladies’-tresses
occurrences, and we consider 62 of
those occurrences to be currently
occupied. We considered the 62
currently occupied occurrences in our
analysis of current conditions if suitable
habitat was still present, even if we had
some negative observation data for a
location. This assumption is consistent
with field observations, expert opinion,
and long-term monitoring data of
occurrences in Nevada, Washington,
and Utah (ULT Tech 2021, entire;
Service 2024, pp. 31–32). In the SSA
report, we also considered 13 historical
occurrences, one of which was the only
known occurrence in its AU (Upper
Arkansas), to be extirpated based on the
loss of occupied or suitable habitat due
to development, change in hydrology, or
imprecise historical records (Service
2024, pp. 100–110). We considered 11
of these historical occurrences, located
in or near densely populated areas of
Utah, Colorado, and Montana, to be
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
extirpated because of urban
development. Despite these losses, the
current distribution of the species
appears to be stable.
We refer to the watershed basins as
AUs in the SSA report and consider
them to be a surrogate for populations
to better account for the species’
widespread, dynamic distribution and
complex life history. Given the
detectability and monitoring limitations
mentioned above, we consider the
metapopulation structure—the number
of occupied occurrences within a
watershed (AU)—to be a better measure
of population size rather than
abundance counts of flowering plants.
Considerably more occurrences have
been discovered since listing in 1992,
and new occurrences have been located
every year for at least the past 10 years
within known AUs. The most recent
occurrence was discovered in 2023,
after the species’ 5-year status review
was finalized, and in 2020, one
occurrence was discovered in an AU
previously considered extirpated (Atkin
2020, pers. comm.; Billings and Wheeler
2021, entire; Heidel 2023, entire;
Service 2024, p. 77). However, this does
not necessarily indicate an increasing
population size or positive population
trend for the species; it could be the
result of an increased survey effort and
awareness. Based on our measure of
population size (i.e., the number of
occupied occurrences within an AU),
the population trend for the species
appears to be stable.
Our evaluation of population trend is
based on our assessment of the
availability of potentially suitable
habitat within AUs. The suitable habitat
model provides a relative estimate of the
species’ potential abundance within an
AU to evaluate whether a watershed
would continue to support
metapopulation dynamics and the
species’ population needs (see Current
Condition, below for more information).
Roughly 95 percent of the species’
range occurs in the United States, with
the remaining 5 percent of its range
occurring in the province of British
Columbia, Canada. In the United States,
approximately 37 percent of land where
the species occurs is federally owned or
managed by the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM), the U.S. Bureau of
Reclamation (USBR), the U.S. Forest
Service (USFS), the Service, the
National Park Service (NPS), and the
Department of Defense (DOD). Almost
half of the land, approximately 47
percent, is under private ownership.
There is a small amount (approximately
3 percent) of Ute ladies’-tresses habitat
where the land ownership is not known.
The remaining 13 percent of the species’
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 4 / Tuesday, January 7, 2025 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
range is on State and Tribal lands
(Service 2024, p. 39).
Recovery Criteria
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. 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 Lists of Endangered
and Threatened Wildlife and Plants.
Recovery plans provide a roadmap for
us and our partners on methods of
enhancing conservation and minimizing
threats to listed species, as well as
measurable criteria against which to
evaluate progress towards recovery and
assess the species’ likely future
condition. However, they are not
regulatory documents and do not
substitute for the determinations and
promulgation of regulations required
under section 4(a)(1) of the Act. A
decision to revise the status of a species
or to delist a species is ultimately based
on an analysis of the best scientific and
commercial data 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.
There are many paths to
accomplishing recovery of a species,
and recovery may be achieved without
all of the criteria in a recovery plan
being fully met. For example, one or
more criteria may be exceeded while
other criteria may not yet be
accomplished. In that instance, we may
determine that the threats are
minimized sufficiently and that the
species is robust enough that it no
longer meets the definition of an
endangered species or a threatened
species. In other cases, we may discover
new recovery opportunities after having
finalized the recovery plan. Parties
seeking to conserve the species may use
these opportunities instead of methods
identified in the recovery plan.
Likewise, we may learn new
information about the species after we
finalize the recovery plan. The new
information may change the extent to
which existing criteria are appropriate
for identifying recovery of the species.
The recovery of a species is a dynamic
process requiring adaptive management
that may, or may not, follow all of the
guidance provided in a recovery plan.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:20 Jan 06, 2025
Jkt 265001
Here, we provide a summary of
progress made toward achieving the
draft recovery criteria for Ute ladies’tresses. More detailed information
related to conservation efforts can be
found below under Summary of
Biological Status and Threats. We
completed a draft recovery plan for Ute
ladies’-tresses in 1995 that has not been
finalized (Service 1995, entire);
however, the draft plan is nearly 3
decades old and no longer reflects the
best scientific information available for
Ute ladies’-tresses.
The draft plan describes a process for
watershed-level planning and
management to maintain and restore
watershed conditions (i.e., natural flows
and hydrography, stream gradients, and
soils) for the long-term persistence of
the species (Service 1995, p. 15). The
draft plan attempts to interpret and
define ‘‘ecosystem management’’ and
apply it to the recovery of Ute ladies’tresses. The draft plan also states the
expectation that population levels
(occurrences in this case) and the
amount of suitable habitat will fluctuate
over time within a watershed (Service
1995, p. 15).
The draft plan states that specific
population metrics were not identified
because population viability is
determined by habitat conditions and
the maintenance of natural watershed
processes. Therefore, the significance of
population size and distribution can
only be assessed in the ability of the
watershed to support the species, and
those linkages between watershed
processes, habitat conditions, and
population response are complex and
not completely understood (Service
1995, p. 15).
Below, we identify the two delisting
criteria described in the 1995 Ute
ladies’-tresses draft recovery plan
(Service 1995, p. 15), and the progress
made to date in achieving the criteria.
However, we acknowledge that because
of advances in our understanding of Ute
ladies’-tresses, the delisting criteria are
not measurable, no longer reflect the
best available science about the species,
and may no longer be relevant.
Criteria for Delisting
Recovery Criterion 1: Viable
populations throughout Ute ladies’tresses’ historical range and
representative of its genetic endowment
are maintained in riparian habitats of
streams in a state of dynamic
equilibrium.
Progress: We have a much better
understanding of Ute ladies’-tresses
current range since the time of listing in
1992. The known current range of Ute
ladies’-tresses has expanded from three
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1059
U.S. States (Utah, Colorado, and
Nevada) to eight U.S. States (Colorado,
Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada,
Utah, Washington, and Wyoming) and
the Canadian province of British
Columbia (Service 2024, pp. 39–40).
Based on information through 2023,
there are a total of 62 extant occurrences
of Ute ladies’-tresses distributed across
18 watershed basins (AUs defined as
populations in the SSA report). The
species’ current range includes 14 more
AUs than known at the time of listing
when we apply the AU-scale to the
known populations in 1992. We
consider AUs to be synonymous with
the criterion’s use of ‘‘populations,’’ and
the criterion does not specify the
number of AUs needed to achieve
recovery.
We note that the criterion references
Ute ladies’-tresses’ historical range.
However, it is more appropriate to
define recovery based on Ute ladies’tresses’ current range, because
endangered and threatened species and
their recovery are defined and evaluated
based on their current range under the
Act (see the definitions of ‘‘endangered
species’’ and ‘‘threatened species’’ at 16
U.S.C. 1532(6) and (20), respectively).
There is much uncertainty about Ute
ladies’-tresses’ historical range, and we
may never know its true extent.
Regarding the species’ genetic
endowment, preliminary genetic
information indicates high genetic
diversity in Ute ladies’-tresses
occurrences assessed in six of the eight
U.S. States within the current range (see
Summary of Biological Status and
Threats, below). We now consider
morphological and ecological diversity
in addition to genetic diversity in our
evaluation of representation. While Ute
ladies’-tresses does not exhibit
morphological diversity, it has a high
level of ecological diversity across its
wide range, occupying 12 ecoregions
and 7 habitat types (Service 2024, pp.
123–127).
Given what we now know about Ute
ladies’-tresses ecological diversity, we
consider all habitat types important for
recovery, not just the riparian and
stream habitats mentioned in the
criterion. Therefore, we evaluated the
viability of AUs in our SSA report for
those AUs in riparian and perennial
stream habitats as well as in the five
other habitat types where it occurs
(canals, wet meadows, springs,
lakeshores, and artificial/depressional
wetlands) (for more information, see
Current Condition and Future Scenarios
and Future Condition, below).
Recovery Criterion 2: Wet meadow,
seep, and spring habitats are protected
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
1060
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 4 / Tuesday, January 7, 2025 / Proposed Rules
and managed so as to sustain viable
populations.
Progress: At the time of the draft
recovery plan (1995), we thought that it
was important to distinguish Ute
ladies’-tresses’ wet meadow, seep, and
spring habitats that are groundwater-fed
from other types of habitats. These
habitat types require land management
practices such as grazing or mowing to
provide the regular disturbance needed
to support the species, whereas the
riparian and stream habitats referenced
in criterion 1 are surface water-fed and
receive regular or periodic flooding
disturbance. In the SSA report, we
consider seeps and springs together and
refer to them as spring habitats (Service
2024, p. 125). These habitats can be
isolated from other water features or
occur in combination with riparian,
stream, or lakeshore habitats. We have
better information now about Ute
ladies’-tresses’ current range and the
habitat types the species occupies than
we did at the time of the draft recovery
plan.
Given what we know about Ute
ladies’-tresses’ resiliency, redundancy,
and representation, we no longer
consider it necessary to provide a
separate criterion for wet meadow, seep,
and spring habitats. As we state above
for criterion one, we consider all habitat
types in the SSA report and in our
evaluation of Ute ladies’-tresses’
viability (for more information, see
Current Condition and Future Scenarios
and Future Condition, below).
The majority (roughly 95 percent) of
Ute ladies’-tresses’ current range occurs
in the United States, with the remaining
5 percent of its range occurring in
British Columbia, Canada. In the United
States, approximately 37 percent of the
land where the species occurs is
federally owned or managed (by the
BLM, USBR, USFS, the Service, NPS, or
DOD) with management plans in place
to protect the species’ habitat from
habitat loss associated with urban
development. For Ute ladies’-tresses and
its habitat, Federal land management
adequately supports the needs and
viability of the species, and we expect
that will continue in the future (see
Conservation Efforts and Regulatory
Mechanisms, below).
Approximately 60 percent of the land
where Ute ladies’-tresses occurs in the
United States is under non-Federal
ownership (private, State, or Tribal
lands). Some occurrences in three AUs
(Jordan, Bear River, and South Platte)
have management plans in place to
protect the species and its habitat on
non-Federal lands. However, little to no
protection exists for Ute ladies’-tresses
on the remaining non-Federal lands
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:20 Jan 06, 2025
Jkt 265001
other than habitat protections afforded
by the Clean Water Act for occurrences
along riparian, stream, and some
lakeshore habitats, or habitat protections
afforded to federally listed fish species
(see Conservation Efforts and Regulatory
Mechanisms, below).
Despite the lack of protections on
many non-Federal lands for Ute ladies’tresses, current and projected future
AU-level threats are adequately
addressed or managed on these lands for
at least 10 AUs to maintain high or
moderate resilience to stochastic events
now and into the future. In addition, at
least 16 AUs are projected to remain
extant and provide additional
redundancy and representation in the
12 ecoregions and 7 habitat types across
Ute ladies’-tresses’ range (see Future
Scenarios and Future Condition, below).
Thus, although not all 18 extant AUs are
considered protected, we conclude that
the intent of recovery criteria 1 and 2 to
ensure that sufficient AUs are protected
from threats into the future has been
met for at least 10 AUs. While the 1995
recovery criteria are not measurable,
and do not reflect the best available
scientific information, as we describe
below, we find that the Ute ladies’tresses has sufficient resiliency,
redundancy, and representation given
what we now know about the species.
Regulatory and Analytical Framework
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.
The Act defines an ‘‘endangered
species’’ as a species that is in danger
of extinction throughout all or a
significant portion of its range, and a
‘‘threatened species’’ as a species that is
likely to become an endangered species
within the foreseeable future throughout
all or a significant portion of its range.
The Act requires that we determine
whether any species is an endangered
species or a threatened species because
of any of the following 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
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(E) Other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence.
These factors represent broad
categories of natural or human-caused
actions or conditions that could have an
effect on a species’ continued existence.
In evaluating these actions and
conditions, we look for those that may
have a negative effect on individuals of
the species, as well as other actions or
conditions that may ameliorate any
negative effects or may have positive
effects. The determination to delist a
species must be based on an analysis of
the same five factors.
We use the term ‘‘threat’’ to refer in
general to actions or conditions that are
known to or are reasonably likely to
negatively affect individuals of a
species. The term ‘‘threat’’ includes
actions or conditions that have a direct
impact on individuals (direct impacts),
as well as those that affect individuals
through alteration of their habitat or
required resources (stressors). The term
‘‘threat’’ may encompass—either
together or separately—the source of the
action or condition or the action or
condition itself.
However, the mere identification of
any threat(s) does not necessarily mean
that the species meets the statutory
definition of an ‘‘endangered species’’ or
a ‘‘threatened species.’’ In determining
whether a species meets either
definition, we must evaluate all
identified threats by considering the
species’ expected response and the
effects of the threats—in light of those
actions and conditions that will
ameliorate the threats—on an
individual, population, and species
level. We evaluate each threat and its
expected effects on the species, then
analyze the cumulative effect of all of
the threats on the species as a whole.
We also consider the cumulative effect
of the threats in light of those actions
and conditions that will have positive
effects on the species—such as any
existing regulatory mechanisms or
conservation efforts. The Secretary
determines whether the species meets
the definition of an ‘‘endangered
species’’ or a ‘‘threatened species’’ only
after conducting this cumulative
analysis and describing the expected
effect on the species now and in the
foreseeable future.
The Act does not define the term
‘‘foreseeable future,’’ which appears in
the statutory definition of ‘‘threatened
species.’’ Our implementing regulations
at 50 CFR 424.11(d) set forth a
framework for evaluating the foreseeable
future on a case-by-case basis which is
further described in the 2009
Memorandum Opinion on the
foreseeable future from the Department
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 4 / Tuesday, January 7, 2025 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
of the Interior, Office of the Solicitor
(M–37021, January 16, 2009; ‘‘MOpinion,’’ available online at https://
www.doi.gov/sites/
doi.opengov.ibmcloud.com/files/
uploads/M-37021.pdf). The foreseeable
future extends as far into the future as
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
National Marine Fisheries Service
(hereafter, the Services) can make
reasonably reliable predictions about
the threats to the species and the
species’ responses to those threats. We
need not identify the foreseeable future
in terms of a specific period of time. We
will describe the foreseeable future on a
case-by-case basis, using the best
available data and taking into account
considerations such as the species’ lifehistory characteristics, threat-projection
timeframes, and environmental
variability. In other words, the
foreseeable future is the period of time
over which we can make reasonably
reliable predictions. ‘‘Reliable’’ does not
mean ‘‘certain’’; it means sufficient to
provide a reasonable degree of
confidence in the prediction, in light of
the conservation purposes of the Act.
Analytical Framework
The SSA report documents the results
of our comprehensive biological review
of the best scientific and commercial
data regarding the status of the species,
including an assessment of the potential
threats to the species. The SSA report
does not represent our decision on
whether the species should be proposed
for delisting. However, it does provide
the scientific basis that informs our
regulatory decisions, which involve the
further application of standards within
the Act and its implementing
regulations and policies.
To assess the viability of Ute ladies’tresses, we used the three conservation
biology principles of resiliency,
redundancy, and representation (Shaffer
and Stein 2000, pp. 306–310). Briefly,
resiliency is the ability of the species to
withstand environmental and
demographic stochasticity (for example,
wet or dry, warm or cold years);
redundancy is the ability of the species
to withstand catastrophic events (for
example, droughts, large pollution
events), and representation is the ability
of the species to adapt to both near-term
and long-term changes in its physical
and biological environment (for
example, climate conditions, pathogen).
In general, species viability will
increase with increases in resiliency,
redundancy, and representation (Smith
et al. 2018, p. 306). Using these
principles, we identified the species’
ecological requirements for survival and
reproduction at the individual,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:20 Jan 06, 2025
Jkt 265001
population, and species levels, and
described the beneficial and risk factors
influencing the species’ viability.
The SSA process can be categorized
into three sequential stages. During the
first stage, we evaluated individual
species’ life-history needs. The next
stage involved an assessment of the
historical and current condition of the
species’ demographics and habitat
characteristics, including an
explanation of how the species arrived
at its current condition. The final stage
of the SSA involved making predictions
about the species’ responses to positive
and negative environmental and
anthropogenic influences. Throughout
all of these stages, we used the best
available information to characterize
viability as the ability of a species to
sustain populations in the wild over
time, which we then used to inform our
regulatory decision.
The following is a summary of the key
results and conclusions from the SSA
report; the full SSA report can be found
at Docket No. FWS–R6–ES–2024–0115
on https://www.regulations.gov.
Summary of Biological Status and
Threats
In this discussion, we review the
biological condition of the species and
its resources, and the threats that
influence the species’ current and future
condition, in order to assess the species’
overall viability and the risks to that
viability. In addition, the SSA report
(Service 2024, entire) documents our
comprehensive biological status review
for the species, including an assessment
of the potential threats to the species.
The following is a summary of this
status review and the best available
information gathered since that time
that have informed this decision.
Individual Needs
Individuals of Ute ladies’-tresses need
adequate soil moisture during the
growing season, access to full or partial
sunlight, and suitable soil mycorrhizae
to establish, grow, and flower (Service
2024, pp. 31–34). While we do not know
the species’ surface or subsurface
moisture requirements, soil moisture is
generally provided by surface or
subsurface water within 2 ft (0.6 m) of
the ground surface (ULT Tech 2021,
entire). An open canopy (little to no
shade from plants above) is needed to
provide full or partial sunlight to plants
(Fertig et al. 2005, p. 34).
While we do not know the specific
mycorrhizal fungi needed by Ute
ladies’-tresses, their presence in the
habitat is likely a limiting factor for the
establishment and reproduction of Ute
ladies’-tresses (Fertig et al. 2005, p. 67;
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1061
ULT Tech 2021, entire). Bumblebees
and other appropriate pollinators are
needed for seed production (Sipes and
Tepedino 1995, entire).
Individuals need certain habitat
factors, including: a low- to midelevation climate (elevations ranging
between 0 to 7,000 ft (0 to 2,133 m);
early- to mid-seral stage successional
wetland habitats; and some kind of
periodic disturbance (flooding or
scouring events, livestock grazing,
agricultural mowing, fire, etc.) to
maintain the habitat’s seral stage (see
Background, above).
Population Needs
To be resilient, populations require
recruitment, survivorship, and
reproduction at rates able to sustain
populations, in addition to pollinator
connectivity between individuals
within populations. We consider the
significant determinants of population
(AU) resiliency to be a healthy
demography and sufficient quality
habitat to support this demography
(Service 2024, pp. 93–96). Resilient
populations also contain enough
individuals in multiple habitat areas to
bounce back after experiencing
environmental stressors such as
drought, livestock grazing, habitat
disturbance, and demographic
stochasticity (births, deaths, and
reproductive events that fluctuate over
time). While we do not know the
number of individuals or amount of
habitat needed for Ute ladies’-tresses
populations to be resilient, we assume
that Ute ladies’-tresses populations are
most resilient if they contain multiple
occurrences connected by potentially
suitable habitat and if they occur within
habitats that maintain adequate
hydrology and the appropriate seral
successional stage (Service 2024, pp.
95–98).
Species Needs
The number of populations (AUs)
across the landscape influences the
redundancy of Ute ladies’-tresses. More
populations across the range increase
the species’ ability to withstand
catastrophic events. Individuals and
populations inhabiting diverse
ecological settings and exhibiting
genetic or phenological variation add to
the level of representation across the
species’ range. The greater diversity
observed in Ute ladies’-tresses’ habitats,
genetics, and morphology, the more
likely the species is to be able to adapt
to change over time. Ute ladies’-tresses
exhibits a high level of ecological
diversity, occupying 12 ecoregions and
7 habitat types (Service 2024, pp. 123–
125). Additionally, the species showed
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
1062
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 4 / Tuesday, January 7, 2025 / Proposed Rules
high genetic variability within some
occurrences and low variability between
occurrences, which suggests a high level
of genetic exchange between
populations historically and possibly
currently (Arft and Ranker 1998, p. 119;
Service 2024, p. 91).
In summary, the species needs (1) a
sufficient number and distribution of
resilient populations to withstand
catastrophic events (redundancy) and
(2) a range of variation that allows the
species to adapt to changing
environmental conditions
(representation) (Service 2024, pp. 88–
89). The SSA report provides additional
detail on the species’ individual-,
population-, and species-level needs
(Service 2024, pp. 29–38, 86–89).
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Threats (Stressors/Risk Factors/Etc.)
In the SSA report, we evaluated
stressors and other actions that can
positively or negatively affect Ute
ladies’-tresses at the individual,
population, or species levels, either
currently or into the future (Service
2024, pp. 89–95, 128–137). In this
proposed rule, we will discuss only
those factors in detail that could
meaningfully impact the status of the
species. The main stressors are
anthropogenic activities (urban
development, water management,
agriculture, livestock grazing,
recreation, and invasive plants) and
environmental conditions (vegetative
succession, drought, and climate
change) that influence or could
influence the species’ viability (Service
2024, pp. 89–95, 128–137). We grouped
the various anthropogenic activities
together and the environmental
conditions together to consider their
synergistic and cumulative effect on Ute
ladies’-tresses at the population and
species levels, because none of the
individual stressors alone act intensely
or broadly enough to alter Ute ladies’tresses’ status across its range (ULT
Tech 2021, entire). Those stressors that
are not known to have negative or longterm effects on Ute ladies’-tresses
populations, such as loss of pollinators
and flooding, are not discussed here but
are evaluated in the SSA report (Service
2024, p. 95).
Urban Development
Urban development has the potential
to result in plant mortality and loss or
degradation of Ute ladies’-tresses habitat
(Service 2024, p. 90). We assessed the
urban development stressor to Ute
ladies’-tresses based on our evaluation
of disturbance, as well as roads and
other infrastructure, in and near known
populations. Urban development has
resulted in the loss of eight occurrences
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:20 Jan 06, 2025
Jkt 265001
in or near densely populated areas—in
Utah, six occurrences were lost in the
Jordan and Weber AUs along the
Wasatch Front, and in Colorado, two
occurrences were lost in the South
Platte and Upper Arkansas AUs along
the Front Range, resulting in the
extirpation of the Upper Arkansas AU
(Service 2024, pp. 100–109). One
occurrence in Utah (in the Upper
Colorado-Dirty Devil AU) is likely
extirpated due to change in the
hydrology and habitat loss because of
road construction (Fertig et al. 2005, p.
54; Service 2024, p. 67). Two
occurrences in Montana (in the Upper
Missouri AU) occur in borrow pits
created to support road construction
projects; however, Montana Department
of Transportation has prioritized their
protection and long-term monitoring
(Service 2024, p. 73).
We incorporated this stressor in our
evaluation of current resiliency by
assessing the land use, habitat
condition, and hydrological condition of
occurrences (Service 2024, pp. 96–135).
We incorporated this stressor in our
evaluation of future resiliency by
evaluating projected changes in land use
and the human population (Service
2024, pp. 129–196).
Water Management
Water management has the potential
to result in hydrologic changes that
impact the amount of suitable habitat,
soil moisture, and the successional stage
of Ute ladies’-tresses habitat (Service
2024, p. 91). Water flow is managed for
irrigation and flood control along many
of the river corridors occupied by Ute
ladies’-tresses, which may lead to
additional suitable habitat in some areas
and the loss of suitable habitat in other
areas (Grams et al. 2002, entire; Fertig et
al. 2005, p. 82, Service 2024, pp. 129–
136). Water management has the
potential to benefit Ute ladies’-tresses by
maintaining flows in low water years,
but negative impacts may occur if water
releases are unpredictable and not
consistent with the natural hydrologic
regime. We discuss the effects of flood
control, in particular the reduction of
large flood events, on the successional
stage of Ute ladies’-tresses habitat below
(see ‘‘Vegetative Succession,’’ below).
Despite management of hydrology for
purposes other than Ute ladies’-tresses
conservation, the species has
proliferated in areas with greatly altered
wetland, riparian, and lakeshore
habitats that occasionally experience
10,000-year flood events (e.g., Diamond
Fork occurrence (Jordan AU), Lower
Green River AU) (Central Utah Water
Conservation District (CUWCD) 1996,
pp. 4–3–4–9, 4–11–4–12; Central Utah
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Project Completion Act Office (CUPCA)
1999, entire; Ward and Naumann 1998,
entire; Grams et al. 2002, entire; Black
and Gruwell 2004, entire; USBR 2005a,
entire). Water management for
hydropower or irrigation has augmented
natural flows in some streams,
especially in late summer when natural
stream flows were historically low (e.g.,
Diamond Fork occurrence (Jordan AU),
Lower Green River AU). This
augmentation has expanded the amount
of streamside habitat with suitable
hydrology to support large numbers of
Ute ladies’-tresses (Ward and Naumann
1998, pp. 25–26; Black and Gruwell
2004, pp. 8–9).
Ute ladies’-tresses plants are
frequently encountered along streams
and canals and in wet hay pastures in
the Uinta Basin, Utah (Lower Green
River AU), even though an extensive
irrigation canal system was constructed
in the early 1900s and natural streams
are nearly dry all summer (Fertig et al.
2005, pp. 19, 44, 48; Goodrich 2005,
entire; Jordan 2006, entire). The species
has colonized wetlands left behind
when peat was mined, and it occurs in
drainage ditches alongside roads and
railroad tracks (Fertig et al. 2005, pp. 16,
19, 32–33, 36–37, 45, 50, 52).
In growing urban areas, primarily in
the urban areas of Utah and Colorado
(see Urban Development, above) and
possibly Nevada, an increased demand
for municipal water and conversion of
irrigation water to municipal water may
lead to dewatering of Ute ladies’-tresses
habitat (Riedel 2004, p. 2). One
occurrence in Utah (Jordan AU) may be
extirpated due to dewatering in the last
decade, although it is possible dormant
plants remain and could emerge if the
hydrological regime again becomes
suitable for Ute ladies’-tresses (Fertig et
al. 2005, p. 82; Trater 2020, pers.
comm.; Service 2024, p. 47). Dewatering
may exacerbate the effects of drought
and climate change.
We incorporated this stressor in our
evaluation of current resiliency by
assessing the hydrologic condition of
occurrences (Service 2024, pp. 97–98).
We incorporated this stressor in our
evaluation of future resiliency by
evaluating projected changes in drought
severity and frequency at the occurrence
and AU levels (Service 2024, pp. 129–
134).
Agriculture
Agricultural practices have the
potential to result in the loss of plants
and habitat under cultivation
(croplands) and with herbicide use, or
they can support or maintain suitable
habitat conditions for Ute ladies’-tresses
under managed pastures (irrigated
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 4 / Tuesday, January 7, 2025 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
pastures with some mowing or haying)
or irrigation canals (Fertig et al. 2005,
pp. 83, 85; Service 2024, p. 92). Some
occurrences in five AUs (Great Salt
Lake, Jordan, Lower Bear, Lower Green
River, South Platte) are in irrigated
pastures that function as wet meadow
habitat and support the species (Service
2024, pp. 43–51; Fertig et al. 2005, pp.
13, 17, 19). Conversely, negative
impacts to Ute ladies’-tresses have also
been documented along irrigation canals
that have been converted to water
pipelines in one AU (Lower Green
River), but these impacts are localized
and have not resulted in the total loss
of an occurrence (ULT Tech 2021,
entire; Service 2024, p. 51). Non-Federal
landowners actively manage irrigation
water at two occurrences in Utah and
Colorado (Lower Bear and South Platte
AUs) to support the Ute ladies’-tresses
on lands used for the species’
preservation and for recreation,
respectively (Riedel 2004, p. 2; Bear
River Land Conservancy 2014, pp. 5–14;
Service 2024, p. 49).
We incorporated this stressor in our
evaluation of current resiliency by
assessing the agricultural land use,
habitat condition, and hydrological
condition of occurrences (Service 2024,
pp. 96–121). For future resiliency, we
considered the effects of this stressor as
part of our evaluation of projected
changes in land use and anthropogenic
effects (Service 2024, pp. 134–135).
Livestock Grazing
Livestock grazing, haying, and
mowing have the potential to result in
the loss of plants or flowers but can also
result in beneficial effects by removing
competing vegetation and maintaining
an open canopy (Fertig et al. 2005, pp.
70, 79, 81; Sipes et al. 1995, pp. 24–25;
Service 2024, p. 91). Ute ladies’-tresses
appears to need these types of
disturbances in meadow or spring
habitats that experience less frequent
disturbance events than rivers and
streams (Arft 1995, pp. 122–153, 157–
159; Allison 2001, pp. 1–10; Fertig et al.
2005, pp. 81–82). The results of Ute
ladies’-tresses population projections in
wet meadow habitat conditions under
various management practices identified
the importance of livestock grazing or
grazing and mowing to support
population persistence (Arft 1995, pp.
122–153, 157–159; Hazlett 1996, p. 7).
Long-term studies of wet meadow
habitat in Colorado found that Ute
ladies’-tresses’ recruitment and
flowering density were significantly
higher in grazed and mowed habitat
compared to undisturbed habitat (Arft
1995, pp. 122–153, 157–159; Allison
2001, pp. 1–10). Winter grazing or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:20 Jan 06, 2025
Jkt 265001
mowing also appears to be beneficial in
reducing the negative impact of field
vole (Microtus pennsylvanicus and M.
ochrogaster) herbivory on Ute ladies’tresses fruit and seed production by
removing vegetation and litter that
support vole populations (Arft 1995, pp.
153, 157–159; Fertig et al. 2005, p. 70).
Where wet meadow habitat is protected
and managed for Ute ladies’-tresses in
Colorado and Utah (South Platte and
Lower Bear AUs), managers recommend
timed haying, livestock grazing, and
irrigation practices to maintain optimal
habitat conditions and minimize
impacts to flowering plants (Allison,
2001, pp. 1–3; Bear River Land
Conservancy 2014, pp. 7–8, 14, 16;
Service 2024, pp. 49, 84). Excessive or
improperly timed livestock grazing,
haying, and mowing may negatively
impact the species (Fertig et al. 2005, p.
81; Service 2024, p. 35).
We incorporated this stressor in our
evaluation of current resiliency by
assessing the land use and habitat
condition of occurrences (Service 2024,
pp. 96–121). For future resiliency, we
considered the effects of this stressor as
part of our evaluation of projected
changes in land use (Service 2024, pp.
134–135).
Recreation
Recreation has the potential to result
in plant damage and mortality through
trampling as well as provide a land use
that conserves Ute ladies’-tresses habitat
(Service 2024, p. 91). Many occurrences
in Colorado, Nevada, Utah, Idaho, and
Washington (Lower Colorado-Lake
Mead, Jordan, Upper Green, South
Platte, Snake Headwaters, and Upper
Columbia AUs) are located on lands
where recreation occurs; however,
recreation was only identified as a
current or potential stressor at a few
occurrences in Colorado, Idaho, and
Utah where trampling from fishing,
boating, and off-road vehicle access has
been reported (Fertig et al. 2005, pp. 35–
53; Service 2024, p. 63).
We incorporated this stressor in our
evaluation of current resiliency by
assessing the land use and habitat
condition of occurrences (Service 2024,
pp. 96–121). For future resiliency, we
considered the effects of this stressor as
part of our evaluation of projected
changes in land use (Service 2024, pp.
134–135).
Invasive Plants
Invasive plants have the potential to
directly compete with Ute ladies’-tresses
plants for water, nutrients, and sunlight
(Service 2024, p. 94). Some invasive
plants are adapted to the same early- to
mid-seral successional habitats as Ute
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1063
ladies’-tresses and are highly effective
competitors. Fourteen invasive plants
commonly occur with Ute ladies’tresses, including upland plants such as
thistles (Cirsium spp.) and leafy spurge
(Euphorbia esula), wetland plants such
as purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria)
and reed canary grass (Phalaris
arundinacea), and woody invasives
such as tamarisk (Tamarix spp.) and
Russian olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia)
(Murphy 2001, pp. 19–20; Naumann
2003, entire; Murphy 2004, p. 10; Fertig
et al. 2005, p. 83; Jones 2006, entire).
While invasive plants are present in
Ute ladies’-tresses habitat, and some
occurrences may have been partially
overtaken by invasive plants, the best
available information indicates this
stressor has not resulted in Ute ladies’tresses’ plant mortality or the
extirpation of occurrences (Fertig et al.
2005, pp. 45–47, 50; Service 2024, p.
94).
We considered this stressor in our
evaluation of current resiliency as part
of our occurrence habitat condition
assessment (Service 2024, pp. 96–121).
For future resiliency, we considered the
effects of this stressor as part of our
evaluation of projected changes in land
use and effects of climate change
(Service 2024, pp. 134–135).
Collection
We identified overcollection as a
threat to Ute ladies’-tresses in the final
listing rule (57 FR 2048 at 2051 and
2052, January 17, 1992). Despite the one
documented instance of ‘‘essence of
Spiranthes’’ derived from Ute ladies’tresses flowers in the late 1990s, the
threat of collection is low, given that the
species is less showy than tropical
orchids and other Spiranthes species are
available for purchase (Kratz 1998,
entire; Fertig et al. 2005, p. 86; Alaskan
Essences 2024, entire; Carnivorous Plant
Nursery 2024, entire; Microsoft Bing
2024, entire; Plant Delights Nursery
2024, entire). There is no evidence that
collection is currently impacting Ute
ladies’-tresses or is likely to do so in the
future.
Vegetative Succession
Vegetative succession has the
potential to change the habitat condition
and suitability for Ute ladies’-tresses
due to lack of sunlight and competition
for resources (Fertig et al. 2005, p. 84;
Service 2024, p. 94). Flooding is the
primary disturbance along river and
stream corridors that influences
vegetative succession. Water level
fluctuations in combination with land
use activities such as mowing and
grazing, and occasionally fire, appear to
be the primary disturbances in
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
1064
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 4 / Tuesday, January 7, 2025 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
lakeshore, wet meadow, and spring
habitats (Fertig et al. 2005, p. 32).
The extent of woody encroachment
and late-seral successional habitats
within Ute ladies’-tresses occurrences is
variable and site-specific depending on
the degree to which the hydrologic and
disturbance regimes have been altered.
The best available information indicates
that vegetative succession is currently
only affecting individual plants and
portions of an occurrence (Fertig et al.
2005, p. 66; Black 2006, entire). The
primary driver of vegetative succession
is the hydrologic regime or land use
associated with the habitat. Therefore,
this stressor is not having a populationlevel effect to Ute ladies’-tresses on its
own unless vegetative succession is
associated with a major change to the
hydrology or land use of the occurrence.
We incorporated this stressor in our
evaluation of current resiliency by
assessing the habitat condition of
occurrences (Service 2024, pp. 113–
116). For future resiliency, we evaluated
projected changes to the vegetative
resiliency metric based on projected
land use changes (Service 2024, pp.
139–195).
Disease or Predation
Predation (herbivory) on Ute ladies’tresses was mentioned in the final
listing rule because excessive livestock
grazing was thought to be detrimental,
and plants are highly palatable and
preferentially grazed by small
herbivores (57 FR 2048 at 2051, January
17, 1992). Although livestock grazing
was categorized as a stressor under
Factor C at the time of listing, we
consider the effects of livestock grazing
to be better characterized by Factor A
(see ‘‘Livestock Grazing,’’ above).
Herbivory of flowers and inflorescences
(entire flowering stems) by field voles
has been documented at a few
occurrences in Colorado and Utah (Arft
1995, pp. iv, 79–87, 103–104, 113–117;
Sipes et al. 1995, pp. 9–10; Heidel 2001,
p. 8; Black and Gruwell 2004, p. 10;
Fertig et al. 2005, pp. 89–90; Black 2006,
entire). Additional monitoring indicates
that winter livestock grazing or mowing
maintains early seral habitat conditions
favored by Ute ladies’-tresses and
reduces vole herbivory by removing
thatch buildup, which serves as a
protective cover favored by voles, in the
habitat (Arft 1995, pp. 79–87, 103–104,
113–117; Sipes et al. 1995, pp. 9–11;
Peles and Barrett 1996, entire; Skopec et
al. 2017, pp. 5–6). The best available
information indicates that vole
herbivory occasionally impacts
individual plants and may locally affect
some populations; however, it is
seasonal in nature and unpredictable
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:20 Jan 06, 2025
Jkt 265001
(Skopec et al. 2017, pp. 5–6; Andreassen
et al. 2021, pp. 601–605). Most
occurrences along rivers and streams
occur in early- to mid-seral habitat
conditions with little to no thatch
buildup, and most meadow or seep
habitats are grazed or mowed to remove
thatch buildup. We did not find that
vole herbivory occurs at spatial and
temporal scales large enough to affect
the overall status of Ute ladies’-tresses
given the plant’s current status. We are
not aware of any issues or potential
stressors related to disease or insect
predation. Therefore, we did not
include this stressor in our evaluation of
current and future resiliency.
Drought
Drought has the potential to result in
the loss of Ute ladies’-tresses plants;
changes in vegetation, hydrology, and
soil saturation; and temporary or
permanent loss of habitat depending on
the severity and duration of drought
conditions (Service 2024, p. 92). Water
management has ameliorated summer
drought conditions in some river
corridors (see ‘‘Water Management,’’
above), but increases in municipal water
use (dewatering or loss of irrigation
water) could exacerbate the effects of
drought in Ute ladies’-tresses habitat
(Fertig et al. 2005, p. 85).
The best available information
indicates that this stressor is not having
a population-level effect to Ute ladies’tresses. Ute ladies’-tresses tolerates a
range of soil moisture as well as drought
conditions, and, while drought
conditions may temporarily reduce the
number of flowering plants, Ute ladies’tresses is able to remain dormant during
periods of drought. The species’ reliance
on mycorrhizae may also mitigate the
effects of drought stress (Ahluwalia et
al. 2021, p. 7). The hydrology of its
wetland habitat likely buffers the effects
of minor reductions in precipitation or
available water. We do not have a clear
understanding of how Ute ladies’-tresses
responds to severe or extreme droughts
(defined as ¥3.0 or less on the Palmer
Drought Index) (Dai et al. 2023, p. 1).
However, we assume that an increase in
the frequency of severe and extreme
droughts will have a negative impact on
the species. Therefore, we incorporated
this stressor in our evaluation of current
resiliency by assessing the hydrologic
condition of occurrences (Service 2024,
pp. 129–134). We incorporated this
stressor in our evaluation of future
resiliency based on the frequency of
severe and extreme droughts at the
occurrence level as part of the climate
change stressor, which is discussed
below (Service 2024, pp. 113–116).
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Climate Change
Climate change has the potential to
impact Ute ladies’-tresses if the
frequency of severe and extreme
droughts increases in the future (see
‘‘Drought,’’ above), and it may place an
added stress on the species and its
habitat, particularly when other
stressors are present. We used the
Standardized Precipitation Evaporation
Index (SPEI) that allowed us to project
drought severity and frequency at the
occurrence level, and we used a
precipitation-evaporation model
ensemble (of 20 models) to evaluate
how annual moisture availability is
projected to change at the AU level
(Service 2024, pp. 132–134). These
models allowed us to evaluate future
hydrologic conditions at the occurrence
level, and the projected changes in
water availability at the AU level. The
SSA report describes other models and
their limitations in detail (Service 2024,
pp. 131–133). We used two different
emission scenarios, a stabilization
emission scenario using representative
concentration pathway (RCP) 4.5 and a
rising greenhouse gas emissions
scenario using RCP 8.5 developed by the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC).
The SPEI index accounts for
precipitation and temperature changes
that are useful indicators for detecting
and measuring drought severity and
duration within a variety of habitats and
over a range of climate projections
(Vicente-Serrano et al. 2010, entire). For
occurrences, we used the SPEI index
data for the spring and summer months
(March through August) that are
important for plant growth and
reproduction to calculate and compare
the historical (1980–2019) and future
(2023–2074) decadal frequency of severe
and extreme droughts (North Central
Climate Adaptation Science Center (NC
CASC) 2022, data set; Service 2024, pp.
132–134). The results of our evaluation
indicate that the frequency of severe or
extreme droughts during the spring and
summer months varies across the
species’ range. At most occurrences,
drought frequency is projected to
increase by at least one but fewer than
three additional severe or extreme
droughts per decade; at some
occurrences, drought frequency is
projected to remain similar to or slightly
increased from the historical frequency;
and several occurrences project a slight
decrease in drought frequency under
one or both climate scenarios. Northern
Utah, Idaho, and Washington are
projected to generally remain stable or
even see slight decreases in severe and
extreme drought frequencies under both
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 4 / Tuesday, January 7, 2025 / Proposed Rules
scenarios. Occurrences along the
southern part of the range, as well as
those in Montana, are projected to see
the greatest increase in drought severity
and frequency. Lower elevation
occurrences in desert ecosystems see the
most extreme increases overall, and are
more vulnerable to extirpation (Service
2024, pp. 198–199).
The precipitation-evaporation model
ensemble accounts for larger scale
changes to regional water availability
(e.g., dry getting drier, wet getting
wetter) that we applied to the AU level
as a proxy for future changes to the
amount of potentially suitable habitat
for Ute ladies’-tresses (Service 2024, pp.
134–136). While we do not know
exactly how the amount of potentially
suitable habitat will change in response
to regional or watershed changes in
water availability, we assumed that the
amount of potentially suitable habitat
within an AU would not change if
future water availability in an AU
remained within one standard deviation
of historical levels. We compared the
historical (1980–2020) and future
(2020–2074) water availability in AUs.
We found there was no meaningful
change in water availability from
historical levels under the two emission
scenarios to indicate a decline in the
amount of potentially suitable habitat
(Willey 2024, entire; Service 2024, pp.
134–136).
Both intermediate and high emission
scenarios (RCP 4.5 and 8.5) indicate that
the range of Ute ladies’-tresses will be
warmer and drier throughout the
southern part of the range and warmer
but with similar or slightly increased
precipitation in northern Utah, Idaho,
and Washington State in the future
(through 2074) compared to historical
conditions (Alder 2022, entire; Service
2024, pp. 13, 198). The frequency of
severe or extreme droughts is expected
to increase throughout most, although
not all, of Ute ladies’-tresses’ range.
There is substantial uncertainty in how
Ute ladies’-tresses will respond to more
frequent severe or extreme droughts in
many AUs within its range. When we
considered characteristics that
contribute to its ability to adapt to
changing climate conditions, Ute
ladies’-tresses has many attributes
indicating moderate to high levels of
adaptive capacity; these attributes
include the species’ large range
occupying 12 ecoregions, its variable
dispersal ability and moderately high
dispersal distance along waterways, its
general habitat requirements, and its
flexible ability to reduce its exposure to
climate stressors by remaining dormant
during unfavorable conditions
(Thurman et al. 2020, entire; Service
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:20 Jan 06, 2025
Jkt 265001
2024, pp. 123–129). We incorporated
this stressor in our evaluation of future
resiliency as part of the combined
results of climate change and the human
population change stressor in the SSA
report and below (see Future Scenarios
and Future Condition, below; Service
2024, pp. 129–199).
Human Population Change
Human population change within the
range of Ute ladies’-tresses may increase
the negative effects of anthropogenic
stressors and environmental stressors to
the species. The future rate and location
of these changes is unclear, but human
population growth is projected to
increase at a regional scale within the
species’ range in the western United
States (Weldon Cooper Center for Public
Service 2024, entire).
We incorporated this stressor in our
evaluation of future resiliency by
evaluating the projected loss of Ute
ladies’-tresses habitat in occurrences
(Service 2024, pp. 129–136). We report
the combined results of climate change
and the human population change
stressor in the SSA report and below
(see Future Scenarios and Future
Condition, below; Service 2024, pp.
129–199).
Current Condition
To assess the current condition of Ute
ladies’-tresses across its extensive range,
we broke the range into 18 smaller
analytical units (AUs) based on USGS 6digit hydrological unit code (HUC–6)
watershed basins in consultation with
species experts (see table 1 below; Jones
et al. 2022, pp. 2, 5; Service 2024, pp.
26–28). This watershed scale provides a
biologically meaningful delineation of
areas where regular gene flow likely
occurs between occurrences (Service
2024, pp. 23–26). As discussed above,
we consider Ute ladies’-tresses AUs to
be surrogates for populations (see
Background, above). A map of these
AUs is available in the SSA report
(Service 2024, p. 4, figure 1).
In our SSA report, we evaluate
current condition by examining current
levels of resiliency in the 18 extant Ute
ladies’-tresses AUs and implications for
redundancy and representation. Here,
we summarize our evaluation of the
current condition for the resiliency,
redundancy, and representation of Ute
ladies’-tresses. Additional detail
regarding our analysis is provided in the
SSA report (Service 2024, pp. 100–127).
Resiliency
We describe the resiliency for each of
the 18 AUs in terms of the demographic
and habitat factors needed by Ute
ladies’-tresses (Service 2024, pp. 93–96).
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1065
We developed a categorical model to
calibrate resiliency based on the range
of demographic and habitat conditions
in each AU. We first identified resource
or demographic factors that contribute
to the species’ resiliency; these factors
align with the individual resource needs
and population-level needs we
identified in the SSA analysis. We then
defined threshold values for each
identified resource or demographic
factor that represent high, moderate, or
low levels of that factor. Finally, we
evaluated whether the current levels of
each resource or demographic factor in
a population fall within the
predetermined thresholds for a high,
moderate, or low score for the category;
we then averaged these scores for each
category to develop an overall current
resiliency score for each population.
For Ute ladies’-tresses, our categorical
model assessed the resiliency of each
AU by evaluating (1) hydrologic
condition, a qualitative evaluation of the
hydrologic regime; (2) vegetative habitat
condition, a qualitative evaluation of
floral resources for Ute ladies’-tresses
pollinators and successional stage; (3)
abundance, the number of occupied
occurrences within the AU; (4) potential
habitat availability, the percentage of
modeled suitable habitat within the AU;
and (5) connectivity, the number of
occurrences connected by modeled
suitable habitat. We selected these
habitat and demographic factors based
on their importance to the species’
resiliency and because we could
evaluate them relatively consistently
across all 18 AUs.
Resiliency categories, thresholds, and
scores were established based on the
best available information and
professional opinion of species experts.
Hydrologic condition was based on
expert opinion, available survey reports,
and inspection of aerial imagery to
assess surface or subsurface water in the
habitat and the frequency of extreme
flooding or year-round inundation.
Vegetative habitat condition was based
on expert opinion and available survey
reports to assess whether the condition
was good, moderate, or poor for Ute
ladies’-tresses. Abundance was based on
State heritage program database
information and available survey reports
to identify the number of extant
occurrences within AUs. Percentage of
potential habitat availability and
connectivity (the number of occurrences
connected by potentially suitable
habitat) within each AU were based on
Service modeled suitable habitat
(Service 2024, pp. 96–99, appendix I).
We applied equal weight to four factors
(hydrologic condition, vegetative habitat
condition, abundance, and connectivity)
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
1066
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 4 / Tuesday, January 7, 2025 / Proposed Rules
and applied one-half the weight (0.5) to
the potential habitat availability factor
because we have less confidence in the
results compared to the other factors, as
the potential habitat availability model
only represents the potential for the
species to recolonize into new areas
following a possible extirpation and
may overpredict potential habitat in
AUs.
There are 18 Ute ladies’-tresses AUs
comprised of 62 occurrences, and
according to our current condition
are distributed across the species’ range,
are present in all 8 U.S. States and
Canada, and are present in 10 of the 12
ecoregions (see table 1, below). Five
AUs have low resiliency due to low
abundance and two or more additional
factors with low scores. Notably, all 18
AUs have moderate or high resiliency
scores for hydrological condition. The
13 AUs with high or moderate resiliency
are at less risk from potential stochastic
events, such as climatic variation, than
the AUs with low resiliency.
analysis in the SSA report, 5 have high
resiliency, 8 have moderate resiliency,
and 5 have low resiliency (see table 1,
below; Service 2024, pp. 122–123). The
13 AUs with high and moderate
resiliency maintain moderate or high
hydrologic condition; moderate or high
population abundance (the exception is
Lower Bear AU with low abundance);
and a range of scores for vegetative
habitat condition, connectivity, and
potential habitat availability. The 13
AUs with high or moderate resiliency
TABLE 1—CURRENT CONDITION RESILIENCY RANKINGS FOR UTE LADIES’-TRESSES AUS
Number of
extant
occurrences
AU name
(States * or Canada)
AU resiliency
Level-III ecoregions
Northwestern Great Plains.
Southern Rockies.
Central Basin and Range.
Central Basin and Range, Wasatch and Uinta
Mountains.
Central Basin and Range, Wasatch and Uinta
Mountains.
Wasatch and Uinta Mountains, Colorado Plateaus.
Central Basin and Range.
Middle Rockies.
High Plains.
High Plains.
Snake River Plain, Middle Rockies.
Southern Rockies, High Plains.
Colorado Plateau.
Columbia Plateau, North Cascades.
Wasatch and Uinta Mountains, Colorado Plateau,
Wyoming Basin.
Middle Rockies.
Snake River Plain, Middle Rockies.
Central Basin and Range.
Cheyenne (WY, SD, NE) .......................................
Colorado Headwaters (CO) ....................................
Great Salt Lake (UT, NV) .......................................
Jordan (UT) ............................................................
1
2
1
5
Low ................................
Moderate ........................
Low ................................
High ................................
Lower Bear (UT, ID) ...............................................
1
Moderate ........................
Lower Colorado-Lake Mead (NV, UT, AZ) ............
1
Low ................................
Lower Green River (UT, CO) .................................
Missouri Headwaters (MT, WY) .............................
Niobrara (WY, SD, NE) ..........................................
North Platte (WY, NE, CO) ....................................
Snake Headwaters (ID, WY) ..................................
South Platte (WY, CO, NE) ....................................
Upper Colorado-Dirty Devil (UT, AZ) .....................
Upper Columbia (WA, Canada) .............................
Upper Green (UT, CO) ...........................................
13
9
2
3
2
6
1
6
2
High ................................
High ................................
Moderate ........................
High ................................
Moderate ........................
Moderate ........................
Low ................................
Moderate ........................
High ................................
Upper Missouri (MT) ..............................................
Upper Snake (ID, WY, UT, NV) .............................
Weber (UT, WY) .....................................................
2
4
1
Moderate ........................
Moderate ........................
Low ................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
* State abbreviations are Arizona (AZ), Colorado (CO), Idaho (ID), Montana (MT), Nebraska (NE), Nevada (NV), South Dakota (SD), Utah
(UT), Washington (WA), and Wyoming (WY).
Redundancy
Redundancy describes the number
and distribution of AUs, and the greater
the number and the wider the
distribution of the AUs, the better Ute
ladies’-tresses can withstand
catastrophic events. The plausibility of
catastrophic events also influences
species’ redundancy; if catastrophic
events are unlikely within the range of
the species, catastrophic risk is
inherently lower. We identified severe
to extreme drought conditions as a
plausible catastrophic event that may
affect one or more population
simultaneously. We evaluated the risk
of this catastrophic event and its impact
on species redundancy in our future
scenarios (see Future Scenarios and
Future Condition, below). Ute ladies’tresses’ redundancy is characterized by
18 AUs (watersheds) distributed across
its large range; AUs are separated by the
Northern and Middle Rocky Mountains,
and distances of approximately 350
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:20 Jan 06, 2025
Jkt 265001
miles for the more isolated Upper
Columbia AU. As we mentioned above,
the 13 AUs with high or moderate
resiliency are distributed across the
species’ range, are present in all 8 U.S.
States and Canada, and are present in 10
of the 12 ecoregions. Thus, the 13 higher
resiliency populations and their
distribution help spread the risk of
catastrophic drought conditions over a
larger geographic area and contribute to
the species’ ability to withstand
catastrophic events. We are aware of one
AU (Upper Arkansas) that is extirpated
in Colorado due to urban development
(Service 2024, pp. 65–66, 100–109).
Representation
Ute ladies’-tresses exhibits
considerable ecological diversity; the
species is found in 3 different ecological
classifications (Great Plains, North
American Deserts, and Western Forested
Mountains), 12 level-III ecoregions, and
7 habitat types (see Background, above).
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
High genetic diversity was documented
in populations located in six of the eight
States within the species’ range, and
there is very little morphological
variability across the range. The species
has greater levels of representation than
we previously understood at the time
Ute ladies’-tresses was listed in 1992,
because of our better understanding of
the species, including more known
occurrences and AUs, and a broader
known distribution.
Future Scenarios and Future Condition
In our SSA report, we forecasted the
resiliency of Ute ladies’-tresses AUs and
the redundancy and representation of
the species for approximately 50 years
(to 2074) using a range of three plausible
future scenarios. We relied on combined
IPCC climate and land use projections
out to 2074 (the timeframe for which
they were available). These projections
informed our evaluation of habitat loss
from anthropogenic activities. This
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 4 / Tuesday, January 7, 2025 / Proposed Rules
timeframe encompasses approximately
2 to 3 generations of the species, the
duration (30 years) of the applicable
Federal land management plans by
USFS and BLM, and the duration (50
years or more) of dam operation
contracts or licenses. We can reasonably
determine projected changes in the
climate change and anthropogenic
activities/stressors using geospatial data
sets and the species’ likely responses to
those stressors within this 50-year
timeframe (i.e., the foreseeable future).
We developed three plausible future
scenarios using three climate models
that were downscaled to the Ute ladies’tresses’ AUs. By developing a range of
plausible future scenarios, we assume
that actual future conditions will likely
fall somewhere between these three
scenarios. We consider the driving
factors of the species’ viability to be two
separate, but interconnected
influences—the effects of anthropogenic
activity related to loss of habitat from
stressors that include urban
development, water management,
agriculture, recreation, and land
conversion, and the effects of climate
change influencing the amount of water
available in a watershed. The primary
negative influence of anthropogenic
activity to AU resiliency is the loss of
Ute ladies’-tresses plants and habitat,
regardless of the particular
anthropogenic stressor(s). We then used
existing models and data to project the
effects of climate change and
anthropogenic activities on the
demographic and habitat factors that
influence resiliency, redundancy, and
representation. We calculated the future
resiliency score using the same methods
as the current condition score. If
anthropogenic activity was projected to
cause extirpation of an occurrence (50
percent or more potential suitable
habitat loss was projected), it was
removed from the AU prior to the
evaluation of climate change effects. If
the AU future resiliency ranking fell
below 0.9 (lowest possible original
score), we assumed the AU would
become extirpated (a condition lower
than the low condition category and
unlikely to be resilient to stochastic
events) in the foreseeable future under
that scenario.
For anthropogenic activity, we
evaluated the projected loss of Ute
ladies’-tresses habitat in occurrences
based on changes in land use and land
cover (Service 2024, pp. 134–136). We
used USGS land cover projections out to
2074 that correspond to the three
climate change and human population
change scenarios (B1, B2, and A2)
developed by the IPCC (Sohl et al. 2018,
data set; USGS 2019, dataset). Detailed
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:20 Jan 06, 2025
Jkt 265001
descriptions of each scenario are
available in the SSA report (Service
2024, pp. 129–199). Scenario 1 (B1)
represents a stabilization of emissions
(RCP 4.5) and a slowed rate of human
population growth. The B1 or
stabilization climate scenario describes
a global population that peaks in midcentury and declines thereafter under
intermediate emissions. Scenario 2 (B2)
represents the continuation of the
current rate of human population
growth into the future with technology
mitigating some growth under high
emissions (RCP 8.5), and Scenario 3
(A2) represents a largely unchecked
population growth under high
emissions (RCP 8.5) (IPCC 2000, pp. 9–
11).
The USGS land cover projections
identify changes on non-Federal lands
because they have a higher risk of
development and other anthropogenic
stressors compared to Federal lands.
This is consistent with our
understanding of the development risk
for the species’ wetland habitats. We
consider there to be a low risk of future
development in Ute ladies’-tresses
habitat on Federal lands, and we
assumed no habitat loss from
development on Federal lands in our
future projections.
We consider the USGS emergent
wetlands, woody wetlands, and hay or
pasture land cover categories to
represent suitable habitat for Ute ladies’tresses, and we calculated the amount of
habitat loss based on projected changes
to those land cover categories. We
assumed the loss of habitat if suitable
habitat for Ute ladies’-tresses within an
occurrence was converted to moderately
or highly developed land or to
cultivated cropland categories. If there
was 50 percent or more suitable habitat
loss within an occurrence, then we
considered the occurrence to be
extirpated.
Depending on the scenario, some
occurrences in rapidly urbanizing areas
are projected to be extirpated; however,
there is very little habitat loss projected
for most of the occurrences (Service
2024, pp. 139–199). In the B1 scenario,
human population change and
associated anthropogenic stressors were
projected to result in the loss of three
occurrences in Utah and Colorado
(within the Jordan, Lower Green River,
and South Platte AUs). In the B2
scenario, we project a loss of 10
occurrences in Utah, Colorado,
Montana, and Idaho (within the Jordan,
Lower Green River, Missouri
Headwaters, South Platte, Upper
Colorado-Dirty Devil, Upper Snake
AUs). In the A2 scenario, we project a
loss of 11 occurrences in Utah,
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1067
Colorado, Nevada, Montana, and Idaho
(within the Jordan, Lower ColoradoLake Mead, Lower Green River,
Missouri Headwaters, South Platte,
Upper Colorado-Dirty Devil, Upper
Missouri, Upper Snake AUs). For some
occurrences, if they were projected to be
extirpated because of a loss of
hydrologic condition, we did not assess
their projected extirpation risk from
human activities.
As discussed above, we evaluated
climate change effects to occurrence
hydrologic condition using SPEI index
projections of severe and extreme
drought frequency out to 2074 (see
‘‘Climate Change,’’ above). We used
SPEI index projections under
intermediate emissions (RCP 4.5) for
Scenario 1, and SPEI index projections
under high emissions (RPC 8.5) for
Scenarios 2 and 3. For each occurrence,
we compared the historical and
projected future decadal frequency (to
2074) of severe and extreme droughts
within the species’ range. We made no
change to an occurrence’s projected
hydrologic or vegetative condition
category if the drought frequency was
projected to remain similar to the
historical drought frequency (less than
one additional severe or extreme
drought per decade above the historical
frequency). For all three scenarios, we
reduced an occurrence’s future
hydrologic condition by one category
(from high to moderate; moderate to
low) if the drought frequency was
projected to increase by 1 to 1.9 severe
to extreme drought(s) per decade above
the historical frequency, and by two
categories if the frequency was projected
to increase by 2 to 3 severe to extreme
droughts per decade above the historical
frequency.
For climate change effects to
occurrence vegetative habitat condition,
we assumed that there was no change in
the condition category under
intermediate emissions (RCP 4.5) for
Scenario 1. However, we assumed that
vegetative habitat condition would
change the same amount as hydrologic
condition for a given occurrence under
the two high emissions scenarios,
Scenarios 2 and 3 (Service 2024, p. 133).
In Scenario 1 (B1), anthropogenic
activities are projected to increase in
two States within the range; associated
habitat loss would result in the
extirpation of three occurrences in Utah
and Colorado (within the Jordan, Lower
Green River, and South Platte AUs).
However, the extirpations of these
occurrences do not affect the overall AU
resiliency scores.
The frequency of severe and extreme
droughts varies across the species’
range. Small increases in decadal
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
1068
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 4 / Tuesday, January 7, 2025 / Proposed Rules
drought frequency are projected for
most occurrences in northern Utah,
Idaho, and Washington, although a few
occurrences in those States show a
small decrease in drought frequency
relative to current trends. The remaining
States and Canada show a larger per
decade increase in drought frequency
(by approximately 1 to 2 more
additional severe to extreme droughts
per decade) at most occurrences. No
occurrences were projected to have an
increase of three or more severe to
extreme droughts in any scenario.
Occurrences in Montana and those at
the southern edges of the range in
Nevada and southern Utah are projected
to see the largest increases in drought
frequency. Projected climate change
effects and associated declines in
occurrence hydrologic condition result
in the extirpation of five occurrences in
Montana, Colorado, and Utah (within
the Missouri Headwaters, South Platte,
Upper Colorado-Dirty Devil AUs). The
one extirpated occurrence in the Upper
Colorado-Dirty Devil AU results in the
extirpation of that AU, since that is the
only occurrence in that AU.
We project the resiliency of 15 AUs
will remain the same as current
conditions, 2 AUs (Missouri
Headwaters, North Platte) will drop
from high to moderate overall
resiliency, and 1 AU (Upper ColoradoDirty Devil) will drop from low
resiliency to extirpated (see table 2,
below). Declines in AU resiliency were
driven by climate change effects.
Redundancy declines because 17 AUs
remain and 1 is extirpated, and
representation remains the same as
current conditions in terms of
represented ecoregions and habitat
types.
Ute ladies’-tresses is projected to
maintain 13 AUs with high or moderate
resiliency in Scenario 1 (B1), and these
AUs are at less risk from potential
stochastic events, such as climatic
variation, than the 4 AUs with low
resiliency.
In Scenario 2 (B2), anthropogenic
activities increase in four States within
the range; projections of this stressor
and associated habitat loss result in the
extirpation of nine occurrences in Utah,
Colorado, Montana, and Idaho (within
the Jordan, Lower Green River, Missouri
Headwaters, South Platte, and Upper
Snake AUs).
The frequency of severe and extreme
droughts is projected to increase in most
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:20 Jan 06, 2025
Jkt 265001
AUs by one to less than three additional
severe to extreme droughts per decade
over current trends. Similar to Scenario
1, Utah, Idaho, and Washington
experience the smallest increases in
drought frequency, and in some cases
smaller than the frequencies projected
in Scenario 1, which is considered the
less extreme climate scenario. However,
occurrences in Montana and at the
southern edges of the range in Nevada
and southern Utah are projected to have
the largest increases in drought
frequency. Projected climate change
effects and associated declines in
occurrence hydrologic condition result
in the extirpation of the Upper
Colorado-Dirty Devil AU and two
additional occurrences in Montana in
the Missouri Headwaters AU.
We project the overall resiliency of 13
AUs will remain the same as the current
condition, 2 AUs (Jordan, North Platte)
will drop from high to moderate
condition, 1 AU (Missouri Headwaters)
will drop from high to low condition, 1
AU (South Platte) will drop from
moderate to low condition, and 1 AU
(Upper Colorado-Dirty Devil) will drop
from low to extirpated condition (see
table 2, below). Declines in AU
resiliency were driven by anthropogenic
activities in the Jordan AU, the
combination of anthropogenic activities
and climate change effects in the
Missouri Headwaters and South Platte
AUs, and climate change effects in the
North Platte and Upper Colorado-Dirty
Devil AUs. Redundancy declines
because 17 AUs remain and 1 is
extirpated, and representation remains
the same as current conditions in terms
of represented ecoregions and habitat
types.
The increase in climate change and
anthropogenic effects compared to
current conditions under Scenario 2 has
the potential to negatively impact
vegetative condition. We expect
dormant seedlings and plants to remain
viable under this scenario and to
support population resiliency. Despite
some reduction in resiliency, Ute
ladies’-tresses is projected to maintain
11 AUs with high or moderate resiliency
in this scenario, and these AUs are at
less risk from potential stochastic
events, such as climatic variation, than
the 6 AUs with low resiliency.
In Scenario 3 (A2), anthropogenic
activities increase in 5 States within the
species’ range; associated habitat loss
results in the extirpation of 11
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
occurrences in Utah, Colorado,
Montana, Idaho, and Nevada (within the
Jordan, Lower Green River, Missouri
Headwaters, South Platte, Upper Snake,
Upper Missouri, and Lower ColoradoLake Mead AUs).
As in Scenario 2, more occurrences
are projected to see increases of one to
less than three additional severe to
extreme droughts per decade over
current trends, and these effects are
compounded by more anthropogenic
activity. Projected climate change effects
and associated declines in occurrence
hydrologic condition result in the
extirpation of the Upper Colorado-Dirty
Devil AU, as well as three occurrences
in Colorado and Montana (within the
South Platte and Missouri Headwaters
AUs).
We project the overall resiliency of 11
AUs will remain the same as the current
condition, 2 AUs (Jordan, North Platte)
will drop from high to moderate
condition, 1 AU (Missouri Headwaters)
will drop from high to low condition, 2
AUs (South Platte and Upper Missouri)
will drop from moderate to low
condition, and 2 AUs (Upper ColoradoDirty Devil and Lower Colorado-Lake
Mead) will drop from low to extirpated
condition (see table 2, below). Declines
in AU resiliency were driven by
anthropogenic activities in the Jordan
and Lower Colorado-Lake Mead AUs;
the combination of anthropogenic
activities and climate change effects in
the Missouri Headwaters, Upper
Missouri, and South Platte AUs; and
climate change effects in the North
Platte and Upper Colorado-Dirty Devil
AUs. Redundancy declines because 16
AUs remain and 2 are extirpated, and
representation remains the same as
current conditions in terms of
represented ecoregions and habitat
types.
The increase in climate change and
anthropogenic effects compared to
current conditions under Scenario 3 has
the potential to negatively impact
vegetative condition. We expect
dormant seedlings and plants to remain
viable under this scenario and to
support population resiliency. Despite
some reduction in resiliency, Ute
ladies’-tresses is projected to maintain
10 AUs with high or moderate resiliency
in this scenario, and these AUs are at
less risk from potential stochastic
events, such as climatic variation, than
the 6 AUs with low resiliency.
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
1069
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 4 / Tuesday, January 7, 2025 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 2—SUMMARY OF UTE LADIES’-TRESSES RESILIENCY FOR THE CURRENT CONDITION AND THREE FUTURE
SCENARIOS
Resiliency
AU
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Cheyenne .............................................................................................................
Colorado Headwaters ..........................................................................................
Great Salt Lake ....................................................................................................
Jordan ..................................................................................................................
Lower Bear ..........................................................................................................
Lower Colorado-Lake Mead ................................................................................
Lower Green River ..............................................................................................
Missouri Headwaters ...........................................................................................
Niobrara ...............................................................................................................
North Platte ..........................................................................................................
Snake Headwaters ..............................................................................................
South Platte .........................................................................................................
Upper Colorado-Dirty Devil ..................................................................................
Upper Columbia ...................................................................................................
Upper Green ........................................................................................................
Upper Missouri .....................................................................................................
Upper Snake ........................................................................................................
Weber ..................................................................................................................
Under all three future scenarios, the
overall resiliency of at least 11 AUs is
projected to remain the same as the
current condition. Declines in overall
resiliency for the remaining AUs were
driven by climate change in Scenario 1
and the combination of anthropogenic
activities and climate change in
Scenarios 2 and 3. Under all three future
scenarios, Ute ladies’-tresses is
projected to maintain at least 10 AUs
with high or moderate resiliency, and
these AUs are at less risk from potential
stochastic events, such as climatic
variation, than the AUs with low
resiliency. AUs along large, mainstem
rivers with multiple occurrences (Upper
Green, Lower Green River, Upper
Columbia, Upper Snake, Lower Bear,
Niobrara, Colorado Headwaters) are the
most resilient; they maintain their
overall resiliency scores across all future
scenarios despite projected declines in
abundance and connectivity. The Upper
Colorado-Dirty Devil AU in the southern
part of the range is the least resilient
and is projected to be extirpated in all
three future scenarios due to climate
change.
Under all three future scenarios, some
genetic diversity within populations
could be lost. However, even in the
most pessimistic plausible scenario
(Scenario 3), 16 AUs are expected to
remain extant and ecological variation
will continue to be represented by the
12 ecoregions and 7 habitat types across
Ute ladies’-tresses’ range.
We note that, by using the SSA
framework to guide our analysis of the
scientific information documented in
the SSA report, we have analyzed the
cumulative effects of identified threats
and conservation actions on the species.
To assess the current and future
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:20 Jan 06, 2025
Jkt 265001
Current
condition
Future scenario 1
Future scenario 2
Low .......................
Moderate ...............
Low .......................
High ......................
Moderate ...............
Low .......................
High ......................
High .......................
Moderate ...............
High .......................
Moderate ...............
Moderate ...............
Low .......................
Moderate ...............
High .......................
Moderate ...............
Moderate ...............
Low .......................
Low .......................
Moderate ...............
Low .......................
High ......................
Moderate ...............
Low .......................
High ......................
Moderate ...............
Moderate ...............
Moderate ...............
Moderate ...............
Moderate ...............
Extirpated ..............
Moderate ...............
High ......................
Moderate ...............
Moderate ...............
Low .......................
Low .......................
Moderate ...............
Low .......................
Moderate ...............
Moderate ...............
Low .......................
High .......................
Low .......................
Moderate ...............
Moderate ...............
Moderate ...............
Low .......................
Extirpated ..............
Moderate ...............
High .......................
Moderate ...............
Moderate ...............
Low .......................
condition of the species, we evaluate the
effects of all the relevant factors that
may be influencing the species,
including threats and conservation
efforts. Because the SSA framework
considers not just the presence of the
factors, but to what degree they
collectively influence risk to the entire
species, our assessment integrates the
cumulative effects of the factors and
replaces a standalone cumulative-effects
analysis.
See the SSA report (Service 2024,
entire) for a more detailed discussion of
our evaluation of the biological status of
Ute ladies’-tresses and the stressors that
may affect its continued existence. Our
conclusions in the SSA report, which
form the basis for the determination
below, are based upon the best available
scientific and commercial data.
Conservation Efforts and Regulatory
Mechanisms
There are several regulatory
mechanisms, as well as conservation
efforts, that may minimize the effect of
stressors or provide benefits to Ute
ladies’-tresses. Due to the broad
distribution of Ute ladies’-tresses in the
United States and Canada, management
of this species falls under numerous
jurisdictions. Roughly 95 percent of the
species’ range occurs in the United
States, with the remaining 5 percent of
its range occurring in British Columbia,
Canada. In the United States,
approximately 37 percent of land where
the species occurs is federally owned or
managed by the BLM, USBR, USFS,
Service, NPS, and DOD. Almost half of
the land, approximately 47 percent, is
under private ownership. There is a
small amount (approximately 3 percent)
of Ute ladies’-tresses habitat where the
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Future scenario 3
Low.
Moderate.
Low.
Moderate.
Moderate.
Extirpated.
High.
Low.
Moderate.
Moderate.
Moderate.
Low.
Extirpated.
Moderate.
High.
Low.
Moderate.
Low.
land ownership is not known. The
remaining 13 percent of the species’
range is on State and Tribal lands
(Service 2024, p. 39).
International Regulatory Mechanisms
International trade in all orchids is
regulated by the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered
Species of Wild Flora and Fauna
(CITES; 27 U.S.T. 1087, March 3, 1973),
an international agreement ratified by
most countries worldwide since 1975.
The purpose of CITES is to regulate the
international wildlife trade to safeguard
certain species from over-exploitation.
Ute ladies’-tresses is listed as an
appendix II species of CITES and would
remain an appendix II species if delisted
under the Act because it is an orchid.
Under CITES, exporters must obtain a
permit for international shipment of
specimens. Export permits for an
appendix II species are issued only
when the following findings are made:
(1) a scientific finding of non-detriment
(i.e., data or expert scientific opinion on
the biological status of the species
indicating that the export is not likely
to be detrimental to species survival);
and (2) a finding that specimens were
acquired legally (i.e., evidence that
specimens to be exported were not
obtained in violation of any State,
Federal, or other jurisdictional law).
More information on CITES can be
found at: https://cites.org/eng/disc/
what.php.
In Canada, the Committee on the
Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada
(COSEWIC) designated Ute ladies’tresses as a schedule 1 endangered
species under the Canadian Species at
Risk Act (SARA) in November 2018, due
to the high risk of extirpation
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
1070
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 4 / Tuesday, January 7, 2025 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
(COSEWIC 2018, entire). This
designation provides protection from
harming, killing, collecting, buying,
selling, or possessing Ute ladies’-tresses
on Federal Crown lands. In Canada, the
species occurs on lands within an
Ecological Reserve that are permanently
protected and managed by British
Columbia Parks for their biodiversity,
and on lands within the Osoyoos Indian
Reserve with no conservation status
(COSEWIC 2018, pp. 43–44).
Federal Regulatory Mechanisms
Clean Water Act—The Clean Water
Act (CWA) was designed, in part, to
protect surface waters of the United
States from unregulated pollution from
point sources. The CWA provides some
benefit to Ute ladies’-tresses through the
regulation of discharge into surface
waters through a permitting process;
however, the historical threats to Ute
ladies’-tresses habitat have not typically
been associated with point sources of
pollution, and the best available
information indicates that pollution is
not a stressor.
Under section 404 of the CWA, the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
regulates the discharge of fill material
into waters of the United States,
including wetlands that meet certain
jurisdictional requirements. In general,
the term ‘‘wetland’’ refers to areas
meeting the USACE’s criteria of hydric
soils, hydrology (either sufficient annual
flooding or water on the soil surface),
and hydrophytic vegetation (plants
specifically adapted for growing in
wetlands).
The USACE and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
amended the definition of ‘‘waters of the
United States’’ as it applies to the CWA
and the jurisdictional authority of the
USACE on September 8, 2023 (88 FR
61964), to comply with a 2023 Supreme
Court Decision, Sackett v.
Environmental Protection Agency.
Under the new definition, jurisdictional
(that is, regulated under the authority of
the CWA) wetlands are those wetlands
adjacent to navigable waters defined as
interstate waters, and relatively
permanent, standing or continuously
flowing bodies of water with continuous
surface connection to certain other
bodies of water (see 33 CFR 328.3(a)(1)
and (a)(4), and 40 CFR 120.2(a)(4)); and
jurisdictional ‘‘waters of the United
States’’ include certain intrastate lakes
and ponds (see 33 CFR 328.3(a)(5)).
Under this definition of waters of the
United States, Ute ladies’-tresses
occurrences along interstate waters or
along intrastate lakes, ponds, streams, or
wetlands that are relatively permanent,
standing or continuously flowing bodies
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:20 Jan 06, 2025
Jkt 265001
of water with a continuous surface
connection to certain waterbodies
would be considered as occurring in
jurisdictional waters/wetlands, and we
expect the protections of the CWA to
remain if we delist Ute ladies’-tresses
under the Act. However, in some cases,
occurrences in wet meadow, spring, or
seep habitats that do not meet the
definition would not be considered
jurisdictional waters/wetlands under
the CWA. This means the loss of
indirect protections under the CWA for
occurrences on non-Federal lands in the
United States. Under the previous and
new definition of ‘‘waters of the United
States,’’ certain farming activities,
ditches, artificially irrigated areas that
would revert to dry land if irrigation
ceased, and artificial lakes, ponds, or
waterfilled depressions incidental to
construction activity are not considered
waters of the United States and are
excluded from the CWA’s section 404
regulations.
National Environmental Policy Act—
Environmental review of potential
effects of Federal actions is mandated
under the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.). When NEPA analysis reveals
significant environmental effects, the
Federal agencies must disclose those
effects to the public and consider
mitigation that could offset the effects.
These mitigations usually provide some
protections for listed species. However,
NEPA does not require that adverse
impacts be mitigated, only disclosed.
Therefore, it is unclear what level of
protection would be conveyed to Ute
ladies’-tresses through NEPA, in the
absence of protections under the Act.
National Park Organic Act—Federal
activities on National Park Service
(NPS) lands are subject to the National
Park Service Organic Act (54 U.S.C.
100101 et seq.). The Organic Act
specifies that the NPS will promote and
regulate the use of the National Park
System (System) by means and
measures that conform to the
fundamental purpose of the System
units, which purpose is to conserve the
scenery, natural and historic objects,
and wild life in the System units and to
provide for the enjoyment of the
scenery, natural and historic objects,
and wild life in such manner and by
such means as will leave them
unimpaired for the enjoyment of future
generations (54 U.S.C. 100101(a)).
The NPS manages Ute ladies’-tresses
occurrences in Dinosaur National
Monument along the Green River in
northwestern Colorado (Upper Green
and Lower Green River AUs) and a
historical occurrence in Capitol Reef
National Park in Utah (Fertig et al. 2005,
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
pp. 74, 77–78, 82, 89–90; Hendricks
2005, entire; Service 2024, pp. 67, 71,
84–85). For listed species, NPS provides
habitat protections from conflicting land
use; however, the NPS does not control
the hydrology of the Green or Fremont
Rivers. We expect habitat protections to
continue along the Green River if we
delist Ute ladies’-tresses based on the
regulatory mechanisms provided by the
Organic Act.
National Wildlife Refuge System
Improvement Act—As directed by the
National Wildlife Refuge System
Improvement Act (Pub. L. 105–57),
Service refuge managers have the
authority and responsibility to protect
native ecosystems, fulfill the purposes
for which an individual refuge was
founded, and implement strategies to
achieve the goals and objectives stated
in management plans. In the Lower
Green River AU, Browns Park National
Wildlife Refuge contained habitat for
Ute ladies’-tresses along the Green River
in northwestern Colorado upstream of
Dinosaur National Monument as
recently as 1999. Since then, flood and
scour events have reduced the amount
of occupied and suitable Ute ladies’tresses habitat on the refuge (Horne
2024, pers. comm.). Browns Park
National Wildlife Refuge’s
comprehensive conservation plan (CCP)
is a land management plan that directs
the protection and restoration of
riparian and wetland habitats, including
Ute ladies’-tresses habitat on the refuge
(Service 1999, p. 22). Browns Park
National Wildlife Refuge will continue
to protect riparian and wetland habitats
that include Ute ladies’-tresses habitat
regardless of the Federal listing status of
Ute ladies’-tresses (Horne 2024, pers.
comm.).
In addition to specific protections for
Ute ladies’-tresses provided under CCPs,
the species is permanently protected by
the mission of the National Wildlife
Refuge System to administer a national
network of lands and waters for the
conservation, management, and where
appropriate, restoration of the fish,
wildlife, and plant resources and their
habitats within the United States for the
benefit of present and future generations
of Americans (16 U.S.C. 668dd(a)(2)).
National Forest Management Act—
Federal activities on U.S. Forest Service
(USFS) lands are subject to the National
Forest Management Act of 1976 (NFMA;
16 U.S.C. 1600 et seq.). The NFMA
requires the development and
implementation of resource
management plans to guide the
maintenance of ecological conditions
that support natural distributions and
abundance of species and not contribute
to their extirpation.
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 4 / Tuesday, January 7, 2025 / Proposed Rules
The USFS manages Ute ladies’-tresses
occurrences in the Ashley National
Forest in northeastern Utah (Lower
Green River AU), the Uinta-Wasatch
Cache National Forest in northcentral
Utah (Jordan AU), and the CaribouTarghee National Forest in Idaho (Snake
Headwaters AU) (Service 2024, pp. 47,
51, 61). Guidance for conservation of
Ute ladies’-tresses is included in the
Caribou-Targhee, Uinta, and Ashley
National Forest plans (USFS 1997, p.
III–14; USFS 2003, pp. 2–6, 5–51–5–53;
USFS 2023, pp. 20–21, 54, 90, 93). The
Uinta-Wasatch Cache National Forest
designated the portion of the Diamond
Fork Creek occurrence as a ‘‘riparian
habitat conservation area class I,’’ which
affords the highest level of protection
(300-ft (91-m) avoidance buffer) for Ute
ladies’-tresses in that area (USFS 2003,
pp. D–1, D–2).
If we delist Ute ladies’-tresses, the
species may still be recognized as a
USFS species of conservation concern
whereby the agency is directed to
provide ecological conditions necessary
to maintain viable populations of the
species (77 FR 21162, April 9, 2012; 36
CFR 219.9; Hayward et al. 2016, pp. 8,
21–28). The USFS in each respective
region has the authority to designate Ute
ladies’-tresses as regional forester
sensitive species (RFSS), which is
similar to a USFS species of
conservation concern (77 FR 21162 at
21175, April 9, 2012; 36 CFR 219.9(c)).
If, in the future, Ute ladies’-tresses
undergoes a downward trend and its
viability is a concern, the USFS has the
authority to designate it as a species of
conservation concern. In addition, if
delisted, Ute ladies’-tresses occupying
riparian habitats on USFS lands will
continue to receive levels of protection
for riparian habitats identified in the
forest plans (USFS 1997, pp. III–9–III–
12; USFS 2003, pp. 3–2–3–5, 3–9–3–10,
3–14–3–15, 3–22, 3–25–3–27, D–1, D–2;
USFS 2023, pp. 17–18, 46, 50, 53–54,
92).
Federal Land Policy and Management
Act—The Federal Land Policy and
Management Act (FLPMA; 43 U.S.C.
1701 et seq.) applies to the BLM with
regard to the conservation and use of
public lands under their management.
The BLM manages Ute ladies’-tresses
occurrences in Colorado, Utah, Idaho,
Washington, and Wyoming (Colorado
Headwaters, Lower Colorado-Lake
Mead, Upper Colorado-Dirty Devil,
Lower Green River, Upper Green, Snake
Headwaters, Upper Snake, Upper
Columbia, North Platte, and Cheyenne
AUs) (Fertig et al. 2005, pp. 38–55;
Service 2024, pp. 84–85).
Guidance for Ute ladies’-tresses
conservation is included in some BLM
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:20 Jan 06, 2025
Jkt 265001
resource management plans (RMPs) that
include surveys, monitoring, avoidance
buffers, and invasive species control
(BLM 2020, pp. F–24–F–25; BLM 2015a,
appendix J; BLM 2000, pp. 15–17; BLM
2007, appendix Z; BLM 2008a,
appendix 14; BLM 2010, appendix T;
BLM 2014, appendix P; BLM 2015b,
appendix K; BLM 2015c, appendix K;
BLM 2015d, appendix K; BLM 2016,
appendix 28; BLM 2023a, pp. 3–12, 3–
13, and 4–81–4–82; Carroll 2005,
entire).
The one extant occurrence along Deer
Creek in the Upper Colorado-Dirty Devil
AU is located in the Grand Staircase
National Monument in Utah,
established in 1996 to preserve geologic,
archaeologic, and ecological
communities and provide for scientific
research, education, and exploration
(Presidential Proclamation 6920,
September 18, 1996; BLM 2020, p. F–
24–F–25). Occurrences in the Upper
Snake River, Idaho (Upper Snake AU),
are located along the floodplain of the
Snake and Henry’s Fork Rivers. The
Snake River area of critical
environmental concern (ACEC) includes
21,954 ac (8,884 ha) of BLM-managed
public lands designated to protect and
conserve riparian-wetland habitat. This
ACEC is the top priority wetland in the
State of Idaho, and we consider it to
contain the highest-quality cottonwood
riparian zone in the western United
States (BLM 1985, pp. 25–26; Fertig et
al. 2005, pp. 38–44; Velman 2005,
entire; BLM 2023b, pp. 8–9; BLM 2023c
pp. 90–91). Occurrences in the Green
River (Lower Green River AU) are found
in the Browns Park ACEC in Utah; the
ACEC comprises 18,480 ac (7,479 ha)
and protects high value scenery,
wildlife habitat, and cultural resources
(Fertig et al. 2005, p. 46; BLM 2008b, p.
36). The protections provided by ACEC
designations are not contingent upon
the species’ federally listed status. The
BLM’s ACECs do not have an expiration
date, and removing an ACEC
designation is not simple. A withdrawal
of an ACEC can be made only by the
Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) or,
if delegated by the Secretary, an
individual in the Office of the Secretary
who has been appointed by the
President, by and with the advice and
consent of the Senate (43 U.S.C.
1714(a)). The Snake River and Browns
Park ACECs were designated to protect
multiple species and resources in
addition to Ute ladies’-tresses.
Therefore, the ACEC designations will
not change under the current BLM RMP,
even if Ute ladies’-tresses is delisted.
Even without the protections of the
Act, Ute ladies’-tresses orchid would
remain a BLM sensitive species for at
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1071
least 5 years (BLM 2008c, pp. 36, 47).
The BLM in each respective State has
the authority to designate Ute ladies’tresses as a BLM sensitive species,
which would provide protections
equivalent to a Federal candidate
species (BLM 2008c, pp. 43, 47). If, in
the future, Ute ladies’-tresses undergoes
a downward trend and its viability is at
risk such that it meets the definition of
a BLM sensitive species, the BLM has
the authority to designate it as a BLM
sensitive species (BLM 2008c, pp. 36–
37).
If delisted, Ute ladies’-tresses
occupying riparian habitats on BLM
lands would also receive the levels of
protection for riparian habitats
identified in the RMPs, including
avoidance buffers, livestock grazing
provisions, and invasive species control
(BLM 1985, p. 39; BLM 2000, pp. 8–12,
15–18, 37–40, 45–49, 54, 61; BLM 2007,
pp. 2–10, 2–18–2–24, 2–40, 2–44; BLM
2008a, pp. 2–19, 2–35, 2–42, 2–46–2–50,
and appendix 14; BLM 2008b, pp. 44,
113–115; BLM 2010, pp. 2–24–2–25, 2–
30, 2–33–2–38, 2–45–2–49, 2–60, and
appendix T; BLM 2014, pp. 18–19, 39–
41, 46–48, 52, 58, 67, 98–99; BLM
2015a, pp. 33–48, and appendices B and
J; BLM 2015b, pp. 6, 10, 32, 36–37, 47,
54, 59, 62, 73, 75–76, 85, 86, 97, 101–
102, 106, 117–118, 125–126, 148–150,
161, 179–180; BLM 2015c, pp. 5, 27, 33–
34, 42–43, 55, 60, 72, 75–76, 81, 85, 93,
105, 115, 121–123; BLM 2015d, pp. 5,
33–34, 42–43, 55, 60, 71, 74–76, 80, 84,
91, 103, 115, 126–128; BLM 2016, pp.
1–5–1–7, 2–3, 2–15–2–19, 2–25, 2–41–
2–43, 2–55, 2–65–2–66, and appendix
28; BLM 2020, pp. ROD–17, ARMPs-14–
15, C–16–C–17, C–20, F–9–F–11, F–25;
BLM 2023a, pp. 2–14, 2–16–4–231).
Reclamation Act of 1902—The U.S.
Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) is
responsible for the management and
development of many large Federal
dams, water diversion structures, and
water storage project construction in the
western United States subject to the
Reclamation Act of 1902 (Pub. L. 57–
161; 43 U.S.C. 371 et seq.), and section
4007 of the Water Infrastructure
Improvements for the Nation Act (WIIN
Act, Pub. L. 114–322; 43 U.S.C. 390b
note). The USBR has the authority to
manage water flows and water releases
along the Green River in Colorado and
Utah, and the South Fork Snake River
in Idaho. The USBR has delegated its
authority in some areas to commissions
(e.g., the Utah Reclamation Mitigation
and Conservation Commission
(URMCC)) or Water Conservation
Districts to manage smaller rivers such
as the Provo, Duchesne, and Diamond
Fork Rivers in Utah.
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
1072
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 4 / Tuesday, January 7, 2025 / Proposed Rules
The USBR and other cooperating
agencies have implemented
management actions to benefit federally
listed fish in river corridors where Ute
ladies’-tresses occurs, and we expect
these management actions to continue if
Ute ladies’-tresses is delisted. The
USBR, commissions, or Water
Conservation Districts manage peak and
base flows to support a more natural
hydrograph and contribute to the
creation of wetland habitats to support
conservation of federally listed and
native fish species such as the
humpback chub (Gila cypha), Colorado
pikeminnow (Ptychocheilus lucius),
razorback sucker (Xyrauchen texanus),
June sucker (Chasmistes liorus), and
bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus). Fish
conservation actions indirectly benefit
Ute ladies’-tresses by creating suitable
habitat and allowing a more natural
hydrograph that allows for periodic
flood and scour events to maintain
early- to mid-seral habitat conditions.
Examples of management actions
taken by the USBR include: (1) In the
Upper Green and Lower Green River
AUs, as part of the Upper Colorado
River endangered fish recovery program
(UCRRP) established in 1988, the USBR
manages peak and base flows of the
Green River to support a more natural
hydrograph and contributes to the
creation of wetland habitats to support
conservation of native fish species
(UCRRP 1988 and 2022, entire); (2) in
the Jordan AU, as part of the June sucker
recovery implementation program, the
USBR and URMCC are restoring,
enhancing, and creating wetland habitat
conditions along the lower Provo River
and Provo River Delta where it connects
to Utah Lake (Service 2016, entire). The
Provo River Delta restoration project
(PRDRP) has already protected Ute
ladies’-tresses and was complete in 2024
(Service 2016, entire; US Department of
Interior 2024, entire); and (3) in the
Snake River AU, as part of the
consultation for the operations and
maintenance of USBR projects in the
Snake River Basin above Brownlee
Reservoir, the USBR manages flows to
support a more natural hydrograph
(USBR 2005b, entire).
Sikes Act and Sikes Act Improvement
Act—Federal activities on Department
of Defense (DOD) lands are subject to
the Sikes Act (Pub. L. 86–797; 16 U.S.C.
670 et seq.) and Sikes Act Improvement
Act (SAIA; Pub. L. 105–85). The Sikes
Act and SAIA provide for cooperation
by the DOD, the Department of the
Interior (including the Service), and
State fish and wildlife agencies in the
planning, development, and
maintenance of fish and wildlife
resources on military installations
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:20 Jan 06, 2025
Jkt 265001
throughout the United States. Each
military department is required to
develop and implement an integrated
natural resources management plan
(INRMP) that must be reviewed on a
regular basis, but not less often than
every 5 years, and must reflect the
agreement of the parties concerning
conservation, protection, and
management of fish and wildlife
resources.
Ute ladies’-tresses was found on the
F.E. Warren Air Force Base (FEWAFB)
in Wyoming during Colorado butterfly
plant (Gaura neomexicana var.
coloradensis) monitoring in August
2023 (Heidel 2023, entire). Given the
recent discovery of Ute ladies’-tresses
there, the current INRMP does not
include protections or conservation
measures for Ute ladies’-tresses (INRMP
2022, p. 48). However, the species’
habitat is managed under a formal
conservation agreement for the Colorado
butterfly plant, a plant species delisted
under the Act in 2019 (see 84 FR 59570,
November 5, 2019), and Preble’s
meadow jumping mouse (Zapus
hudsonius preblei), a threatened species
under the Act. Management actions
include annual monitoring, noxious
weed control, avoidance buffers, public
access restrictions, riparian habitat
protections, and targeted grazing for
noxious weed control (FEWAFB 2004,
pp. 7–9). These management actions are
also beneficial to Ute ladies’-tresses, and
we expect them to continue in the
future to conserve Preble’s meadow
jumping mouse and achieve the
INRMP’s goal of protecting and
conserving populations of native plants,
fish, and wildlife on FEWAFB.
Federal Power Act—The Federal
Power Act (16 U.S.C. 791 et seq.)
provides for the equal protection of fish
and wildlife and other aspects of
environmental quality as power and
development. As with NEPA, we have
the authority to participate in the
environmental evaluation process, but
acceptance and implementation of our
recommendations by a Federal action
agency is not required. Under the
Federal Power Act, the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (FERC) is
responsible for the regulation of
hydropower projects and other
interstate energy sources transmission of
natural gas, oil, and electricity. In
Washington, FERC requires the Chelan
Public Utility District (PUD) and Grant
PUD to control noxious weeds where
Ute ladies’-tresses occurs, conduct
regular surveys to document plant
numbers and distribution, and conduct
a survey of suitable habitats every 5
years to identify new populations (Pope
and Cordell 2023, p. 2). The Chelan
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
PUD recently acquired an easement on
private land to protect the species and
implemented conservation actions to
control invasive plants on all
landownerships (Pope and Cordell
2023, p. 7). These protections at the
Chelan PUD-managed Rocky Reach and
Rock Islands occurrences will likely
continue, at a minimum, through the
post-delisting monitoring period; these
protections will continue regardless of
the species’ listing status under the Act
at the Grant PUD-managed Vantage
occurrence (LeMoine 2024, entire).
Other Federal Regulatory Mechanisms
We considered the wetland
protections from croplands on private
lands afforded under the Food Security
Act (16 U.S.C. 3801 et seq.), but the best
available information does not indicate
that crops or cropland conversion are
stressors to Ute ladies’-tresses.
Various Executive Orders provide
guidance for Federal land management
agencies to manage for habitat
characteristics essential for the
conservation of Ute ladies’-tresses. They
include Executive Order 11990
(Protection of Wetlands) (May 24, 1977),
Executive Order 11988 (Floodplain
Management) (May 24, 1977), and
Executive Order 13112 (Invasive
Species) (February 3, 1999).
State Regulatory Mechanisms
In the United States, Ute ladies’tresses has State protections in
Washington as ‘‘endangered,’’ in
Nebraska as ‘‘threatened,’’ and in
Nevada as ‘‘fully protected’’
(Washington Natural Heritage Program
2021, pp. 1–2, 104–106; title 163 of the
Nebraska Administrative Code at
chapter 4, section 163–4–004; and
chapter 527 of the Nevada
Administrative Code at section 527.010,
respectively). In Washington State, the
designation of Ute ladies’-tresses as a
State endangered plant species
prioritizes the conservation of its
wetland habitat, and mitigation may be
required to offset habitat impacts
(Rocchio 2024, entire). In Nebraska,
State-listed plant protections generally
mirror the Act for endangered and
threatened plant species; however,
exceptions are provided for normal
agricultural practices (title 163 of the
Nebraska Administrative Code at
chapter 4, section 163–4–004). In
Nevada, fully protected species are
declared to be threatened with
extinction and require a special permit
for removal or destruction on public and
private lands (chapter 527 of the Nevada
Administrative Code at section 527.010,
and title 47 of the Nevada Revised
Statutes at chapter 527, sections 527.050
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 4 / Tuesday, January 7, 2025 / Proposed Rules
and 527.270). There are no State
protections for Ute ladies’-tresses in
Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Utah, or
Wyoming. Ute ladies’-tresses’ habitat is
protected where it occurs in State
wildlife areas in Washington, Idaho, and
Utah (Fertig et al. 2005, pp. 72–76; Pope
and Cordell 2023, p. 8).
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
County/City Regulatory Mechanisms
Multiple occurrences (Boulder Creek,
South Boulder Creek, and Clear Creek)
in the South Platte AU are protected in
natural areas and managed by the City
of Boulder Open Space and Mountain
Parks (OSMP) to conserve rare or
endangered plant species and their
habitats (see title 33 of the Colorado
Revised Statutes at section 33–33–104).
The City of Boulder’s OSMP manages
open space in perpetuity to preserve
natural areas, water resources,
floodplains, and wildlife habitats
(Riedel 2004, p. 1; City of Boulder
OSMP 2024, p. 4). Most of the Ute
ladies’-tresses plants in Boulder County
are protected in the South Boulder
Creek State Natural Area and Tallgrass
Natural Area, which include
approximately 1,347 ac (545 ha) of
remnant tallgrass prairie habitat (Riedel
2002, pp. 1, 7; City of Boulder OSMP
2023, entire). Boulder’s OSMP would
likely continue to protect Ute ladies’tresses if Federal protections are
removed (Riedel 2024, pers. comm.).
Additionally, the title 9 of the City of
Boulder’s Municipal Code at section 9–
3–9 (Stream, Wetlands, and Water Body
Protection) ensures the preservation,
protection, restoration, and
enhancement of the quality and
diversity of wetlands and water bodies;
this city regulation would continue to
protect Ute ladies’-tresses habitat if the
species is delisted under the Act.
Private Lands
Conservation efforts that have been
performed by private entities to benefit
and conserve Ute ladies’-tresses are
discussed here.
In the Lower Bear AU, the single
occurrence, Mendon Meadows, is
protected as a preserve specifically for
Ute ladies’-tresses, and the land is
managed solely for the species (Bear
River Land Trust (BRLT) 2014, entire).
Management practices include regular
surveys, irrigation, seasonal grazing or
mowing that avoids the flowering
period, a prohibition on recreation and
development, and restrictions on
herbicide use (BRLT 2014, pp. 6, 14,
16). Long-term habitat protections are
provided for this Ute ladies’-tresses
occurrence, and if we delist the species,
any future changes would need Service
approval (BRLT 2014, pp. 3, 5–6).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:20 Jan 06, 2025
Jkt 265001
Tribal Lands
Occurrences in the Lower Green
River, Upper Snake, and Upper
Columbia AUs occur on Tribal lands
(Fertig et al. 2005, pp. 71, 74, 77–78;
Service 2024, pp. 39, 51, 69, 75). We are
not aware of regulations that provide
protections to Ute ladies’-tresses on
Tribal lands.
Overall, the conservation measures
and regulatory mechanisms afforded to
wetland riparian habitats on Federal,
State, and private lands in the United
States and on British Columbia Parks
and Federal Crown lands in Canada
minimize the effects of anthropogenic
stressors to Ute ladies’-tresses, in
particular the threat of urban
development to the species’ habitat,
regardless of the species’ status under
the Act.
Proposed Determination of Ute Ladies’Tresses’ Status
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533)
and its implementing regulations (50
CFR part 424) set forth the procedures
for determining whether a species meets
the definition of an endangered species
or a threatened species. The Act defines
an ‘‘endangered species’’ as a species
that is in danger of extinction
throughout all or a significant portion of
its range, and a ‘‘threatened species’’ as
a species that is likely to become an
endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range. The Act
requires that we determine whether a
species meets the definition of an
endangered species or a threatened
species because of any of the following
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.
When we listed Ute ladies’-tresses as
threatened in 1992 (see 57 FR 2048;
January 17, 1992), we identified habitat
loss and modification due to water
development and urbanization (Factor
A) as the primary threat to the species.
We considered collection (Factor B) to
be a threat because it is an orchid
species. Disease and predation (Factor
C) were not considered threats.
Regulatory mechanisms (Factor D)
included a limited degree of protection
for the species’ wetland habitat under
the Clean Water Act and for the species
itself through the regulation of
international trade for all orchids by
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1073
CITES. Finally, we identified small and
scattered populations, the variable
demographic structure of populations,
and a presumed slow reproductive rate
(Factor E) as vulnerabilities to threats
and stressors. In our SSA report, we
evaluated these stressors and additional
stressors that were identified after the
time of listing. Much more is presently
known about the species and its
stressors than at the time of listing. The
best available information indicates that
habitat loss from anthropogenic
activities (Factor A) and climate change
(Factor E) are the most influential
threats affecting Ute ladies’-tresses now
and into the future, although we
acknowledge there is uncertainty about
the future impacts of anthropogenic
activities and climate change to the
species and its habitats.
We consider the severity and
magnitude of the primary threat, habitat
loss and modification due to
urbanization and water development
(we refer to this threat as water
management here and in the SSA
report) (Factor A) to be much lower now
than we believed at the time of listing,
given the increase in the number of
known Ute ladies’-tresses populations
and the increase in the extent of the
species’ known range based on new
information over the past 32 years.
While this threat has resulted in the
localized loss of occurrences and the
extirpation of one historical AU (Upper
Arkansas), it does not result in a
species-level impact given the much
larger number of known occurrences,
AUs, and species’ range that comprise
the species’ current status. Future
projections of this threat in combination
with other anthropogenic stressors
indicate that this threat will increase in
the future, but will remain localized
within the species’ range and will be
minimized by conservation measures
and regulatory mechanisms afforded to
wetland riparian habitats on Federal,
State, and private lands in the United
States and on British Columbia Parks
and Federal Crown lands in Canada
regardless of Ute ladies’-tresses’ status
under the Act (see Conservation Efforts
and Regulatory Mechanisms, above).
Collection (Factor B) from the wild
has not occurred at the level anticipated
at the time of listing presumably
because the species is less showy than
the tropical orchids and other
Spiranthes species available for
purchase (see ‘‘Collection,’’ above).
Protections from collection and
international trade are also afforded by
CITES for all orchids; these protections
are not contingent on an orchid species
being federally listed. Disease and
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
1074
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 4 / Tuesday, January 7, 2025 / Proposed Rules
predation (Factor C) have not
materialized since listing.
Climate change (Factor E) and drought
(Factor A) are not currently having a
population-level or species-level effect
on Ute ladies’-tresses and are not
projected to result in a species-level
effect in the future. The best available
information indicates that these
stressors have not resulted in the
extirpation of occurrences or AUs.
Future projections of climate change
indicate that the frequency of severe and
extreme droughts may decrease or
remain the same in some areas of the
range, but in much of the range, the
frequency will increase above current
trends. Ute ladies’-tresses is droughttolerant and adapted to a range of soil
moisture conditions, which increases its
resilience to potential future increases
in severe and extreme drought
frequency. The resiliency of Ute ladies’tresses AUs varies across the species’
range. Ute ladies’-tresses AUs along
large, mainstem rivers with multiple
occurrences (Upper Green, Lower Green
River, Upper Columbia, Upper Snake,
Lower Bear, Niobrara, Colorado
Headwaters) are the most resilient; they
maintain their overall resiliency scores
across all future scenarios despite
projected declines in abundance and
connectivity. The Upper Colorado-Dirty
Devil AU in the southern part of the
range is the least resilient and is
projected to be extirpated in all three
future scenarios due to climate change.
Based on the best available information,
the majority of AUs are tolerant of the
effects of climate change (Factor E) and
are able to withstand the cumulative
effects of all stressors (Factor E).
We also evaluated a variety of
conservation efforts and regulatory
mechanisms (Factor D) that either
reduce or ameliorate stressors and
improve or maintain habitat conditions
and population resiliency in the absence
of the Act’s protections. The Clean
Water Act provides some habitat
protections for Ute ladies’-tresses
occurrences in jurisdictional waters/
wetlands, such along interstate waters
or along intrastate lakes, ponds, streams,
and wetlands that are relatively
permanent, standing or continuously
flowing bodies of water with a
continuous surface connection to
certain waterbodies. Habitat protections
for wetland and riparian habitats are
also afforded to the species on Federal
lands by regulatory mechanisms
provided by the NPS Organic Act on
NPS lands in Colorado and Utah; the
National Wildlife Refuge System
Improvement Act on Service refuge
lands in Colorado; the National Forest
Management Act of 1976 and USFS
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:20 Jan 06, 2025
Jkt 265001
National Forest plans on USFS lands in
Utah and Idaho; the Federal Land Policy
and Management Act and BLM RMPs
and ACEC designations on BLM lands
in Colorado, Utah, Idaho, Washington,
and Wyoming; and the Sikes Act and
Sikes Act Improvement Act and
INRMPs on DOD lands in Wyoming (see
Conservation Efforts and Regulatory
Mechanisms, above). The USBR and
FERC regulate the hydrological regime
and, in doing so, provide some habitat
protection along rivers and streams in
some watersheds for the benefit of
federally listed fish species and other
resources, which indirectly benefits Ute
ladies’-tresses.
In Canada, Ute ladies’-tresses is
protected within an Ecological Reserve
managed by British Columbia Parks as
well as on Federal Crown land as a
schedule 1 endangered species under
SARA. Ute ladies’-tresses also receives
partial protections on State lands in
Washington, Nevada, and Nebraska and
on open space lands in Boulder County,
Colorado. Due in part to the regulatory
mechanisms described here on Federal
lands and other protected lands, the
anthropogenic threats to the species,
particularly the threat of urban
development to the habitat of Ute
ladies’-tresses, have been sufficiently
reduced.
Status Throughout All of Its Range
Endangered Throughout Its Range
Determination
Our evaluation of the current
condition of Ute ladies’-tresses found
that there are currently 18 AUs
distributed across eight U.S. States and
one Canadian Province. Ute ladies’tresses’ current condition represents a
marked improvement from what we
understood its condition to be when we
first listed it as a threatened species in
1992. Over the last three decades, many
more occurrences have been discovered
in an additional 14 AUs, increasing both
numbers and the species’ known
geographic range. Thirteen AUs have
high or moderate resilience to stochastic
events, and these AUs are distributed
across 6 U.S. States and Canada. The
high or moderately resilient AUs
typically display a combination of
resilient habitat (based on vegetative
habitat condition and hydrologic
condition) and demographic factors
(based on the number of occurrences,
connectivity within the AU, and
potentially suitable habitat within the
AU) that enable them to adequately
withstand environmental and
demographic stochasticity. The five AUs
with low resiliency are less able to
withstand stochastic events.
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
While some stressors have impacted
occurrences and AUs, none are having
species-level impacts individually or
cumulatively. The severity and
magnitude of the primary threat, habitat
loss and modification due to
urbanization and water development, is
much lower now than believed at the
time of listing; it has resulted in the
extirpation of localized occurrences
across the range, including one
historical AU (Upper Arkansas),
representing 5 percent of the species’ 19
historical AUs, and some of the
occurrences in three extant AUs (South
Platte, Jordan, and Weber) in Colorado
and Utah (see ‘‘Urban Development,’’
above). Despite these impacts, the South
Platte and Jordan AUs remain in
moderate and high current condition,
respectively (see table 1, above). Ute
ladies’-tresses is tolerant of and adapted
to the altered habitat conditions in AUs
from various stressors, as well drought
and climate change and the cumulative
effects of all stressors.
With 18 AUs distributed across 12
ecoregions and 7 habitat types, the
species currently has sufficient
resiliency, redundancy, and
representation to withstand stochastic
and catastrophic events and adapt to
changes. Therefore, we find that Ute
ladies’-tresses is not in danger of
extinction throughout all of its range.
Threatened Throughout Its Range
Determination
Under the Act, a threatened species is
any species that is likely to become an
endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range (16
U.S.C. 1532(20)). The foreseeable future
extends only so far into the future as the
Service can make reasonably reliable
predictions about the threats to the
species and the species’ responses to
those threats (50 CFR 424.11(d)). The
Service describes the foreseeable future
on a case-by-case basis, using the best
available data and taking into account
considerations such as the species’ lifehistory characteristics, threat-projection
timeframes, and environmental
variability (50 CFR 424.11(d)). The key
statutory difference between a
threatened species and an endangered
species is the timing of when a species
may be in danger of extinction, either
now (endangered species) or in the
foreseeable future (threatened species).
For the purposes of our analysis, we
defined the foreseeable future for Ute
ladies’-tresses as approximately 50 years
(to 2074). We relied on combined
climate and land use projections by the
IPCC out to 2074, the timeframe for
which they were available. These
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 4 / Tuesday, January 7, 2025 / Proposed Rules
projections provide the best available
evaluation of the primary stressors to
the species. After 2074, we do not have
information that reliably projects the
combined effects of climate change and
habitat loss from anthropogenic
activities within the species’ range. We
also selected this timeframe because it
allows us to reliably project changes in
other species’ stressors and land
management and is biologically
meaningful to the species to begin to
understand the response of ecosystems
to those changes. By 2074, we anticipate
a range of plausible future conditions
for Ute ladies’-tresses.
Our evaluation of the projected future
condition of Ute ladies’-tresses found
that resiliency and redundancy are
projected to decline under all three
plausible future scenarios based on the
future impacts of anthropogenic
activities and climate change. In
general, the species’ range is projected
to become hotter and drier under all
three future scenarios, even under the
most optimistic scenario (Scenario 1).
Declines in resiliency and redundancy
were driven by climate change in
Scenario 1 and the combination of
anthropogenic activities and climate
change in Scenarios 2 and 3. Despite the
combined effects of anthropogenic
activities and climate change, Ute
ladies’-tresses’ life-history
characteristics (such as its capability for
extended, underground dormancy
during unfavorable conditions including
drought and habitat changes (e.g.,
vegetative succession); its dispersal and
colonization ability within watersheds
to escape land use and habitat changes;
and its ability to thrive in humanmanaged water systems that have
altered flow regimes) confer sufficient
resiliency to the projected hotter, drier
hydrological conditions, as well as
habitat and land use changes.
The plausible future condition of Ute
ladies’-tresses in 2074 ranges from 17
AUs across the range with 13 of those
AUs being highly or moderately
resilient to stochastic events (Scenario
1) to 16 AUs across the range with 10
of those AUs being highly or moderately
resilient (Scenario 3). While the species’
actual future condition may fall
anywhere between Scenarios 1 and 3,
even if we assume that Scenario 3 (the
worst-case) were to occur, the species is
projected to maintain 16 AUs across its
range, with 11 of those AUs projected to
maintain the same condition as their
current condition. Ten of the 16 AUs in
6 States (Colorado, Idaho, Nebraska,
Utah, Wyoming, and Washington) and
Canada are projected to be highly or
moderately resilient to stochastic
events. Ute ladies’-tresses’ redundancy
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:20 Jan 06, 2025
Jkt 265001
declines slightly from 18 AUs to 16
AUs, with a contraction along the
southern part of its current range due to
projected extirpations in Nevada (Lower
Colorado-Lake Mead AU) and southern
Utah (Upper Colorado-Dirty Devil AU).
Representation is projected to be similar
to current conditions, as the species is
projected to maintain the same number
of ecoregions (12) and habitat types (7)
across its range. Therefore, even in the
worst-case scenario, our analysis
suggests that losses of resiliency and
redundancy would be modest, with 16
AUs remaining across the range, and 10
of those AUs remaining in moderate or
high condition, with no major changes
in representation expected. Collectively,
this suggests that in 50 years, viability
of the species will not be significantly
reduced (Service 2024, pp. 198–199).
Recovery efforts, particularly survey
efforts that have identified many more
occurrences, have increased Ute ladies’tresses’ known resiliency, redundancy,
and representation such that the species
is now better able to recover from
impacts noted at the time of listing, and
we anticipate that Ute ladies’-tresses
will retain sufficient levels of resiliency,
redundancy, and representation in the
foreseeable future.
Two factors support the maintenance
of the current condition in 11 AUs and
the moderate to high future resiliency of
at least 10 AUs: (1) regulatory
mechanisms and conservation efforts,
and (2) the species’ biological
characteristics. First, the maintenance of
the current condition and the high to
moderate resiliency of more than half of
Ute ladies’-tresses AUs is, in part, due
to habitat protections and regulations
implemented by Canada; U.S. Federal
agencies; the States of Washington,
Nebraska, and Nevada; the City of
Boulder; and private entities (Factor D)
that will continue to be implemented
into the future, even in the absence of
protections afforded by the Act, as
described above under Conservation
Efforts and Regulatory Mechanisms.
These protections will continue to limit
the potential effects of stressors on Ute
ladies’-tresses in the future.
Second, independent of future
regulatory mechanisms and
conservation efforts, Ute ladies’-tresses’
biological characteristics moderate its
response to increasing stressors. Ute
ladies’-tresses’ ruderal life-history
strategy; adaptation and resilience to
disturbance (stochastic events) such as
flooding, mowing, and grazing; its
dispersal and colonization ability in
many habitat types; and its drought
tolerance all increase its resilience to
potential future increases in stressors
and habitat and environmental changes
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1075
(representation) evidenced by the
species’ past ability to maintain high
and moderate resiliency in the face of
ongoing stressors in the Jordan and
South Platte AUs. Although habitat
conditions could become considerably
drier under Scenario 3, Ute ladies’tresses is hardy and already adapted to
periods of drought. Individuals may live
many decades and have maintained
healthy recruitment and survival
despite drought conditions and other
climatic variation in the past.
We recognize that some habitatrelated threats remain present, and they
have ongoing impacts to Ute ladies’tresses AUs. We acknowledge that the
specific effects of climate change on Ute
ladies’-tresses and its habitat are
uncertain and may have a negative
impact. However, we found that current
and expected patterns in site protection
and habitat management (Factor D) and
the species’ adaptation and resilience to
disturbance are sufficient to prevent
effects at the species level.
After evaluating threats to the species
and assessing the cumulative effect of
the threats under the Act’s section
4(a)(1) factors, and considering the
levels of resiliency, redundancy, and
representation projected under the
current and future scenarios described
in the SSA report, Ute ladies’-tresses
will be able to withstand stochastic
events, catastrophic events, and
environmental change now and into the
foreseeable future. Thus, after assessing
the best available information, we
conclude that Ute ladies’-tresses is not
in danger of extinction now or likely to
become so within the foreseeable future
throughout all of its range.
Status Throughout a Significant Portion
of Its Range
Under the Act and our implementing
regulations, a species may warrant
listing if it is in danger of extinction or
likely to become so within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range. Having
determined that Ute ladies’-tresses is
not in danger of extinction or likely to
become so within the foreseeable future
throughout all of its range, we now
consider whether it may be in danger of
extinction (i.e., endangered) or likely to
become so within the foreseeable future
(i.e., threatened) in a significant portion
of its range—that is, whether there is
any portion of the species’ range for
which both (1) the portion is significant;
and (2) the species is in danger of
extinction or likely to become so within
the foreseeable future in that portion.
Depending on the case, it might be more
efficient for us to address the
‘‘significance’’ question or the ‘‘status’’
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
1076
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 4 / Tuesday, January 7, 2025 / Proposed Rules
question first. We can choose to address
either question first. Regardless of
which question we address first, if we
reach a negative answer with respect to
the first question that we address, we do
not need to evaluate the other question
for that portion of the species’ range.
In undertaking this analysis for Ute
ladies’-tresses, we choose to address the
status question first. We began by
identifying portions of the range where
the biological status of the species may
be different from its biological status
elsewhere in its range. For this purpose,
we considered information pertaining to
the geographic distribution of (a)
occurrences of the species, (b) the
threats that the species faces, and (c) the
resiliency condition of AUs
(populations).
We evaluated the range of Ute ladies’tresses to determine if the species is in
danger of extinction now or likely to
become so within the foreseeable future
in any portion of its range. The range of
a species can theoretically be divided
into portions in an infinite number of
ways. We focused our analysis on
portions of the species’ range that may
meet the Act’s definition of an
endangered species or a threatened
species. For Ute ladies’-tresses, we
considered whether the threats or their
effects on the species are greater in any
biologically meaningful portion of the
species’ range than in other portions
such that the species is in danger of
extinction now or likely to become so
within the foreseeable future in that
portion. We examined the following
threats: anthropogenic activities
including urban development, water
management, agriculture, livestock
grazing, recreation, invasive plants, and
collection; and environmental
conditions including vegetative
succession, disease or predation,
drought, climate change, and human
population change, including
cumulative effects.
We examined the range of Ute ladies’tresses for biologically meaningful
portions that may be at a higher risk of
extirpation, as reflected by potentially
larger climate change effects and
anthropogenic effects to the species. We
determined that by itself, any single AU
is too small to be considered a
biologically meaningful portion of the
range for Ute ladies’-tresses because
each AU represents a small percentage
(6 percent) of the total number of the 18
AUs rangewide, and each AU contains
only a small area of the species’ range.
Therefore, even though the Upper
Columbia AU is separate from the rest
of the range, we do not consider it to be
a biologically meaningful portion on its
own.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:20 Jan 06, 2025
Jkt 265001
We identified seven AUs that are a
geographically concentrated grouping at
a biologically meaningful scale along
the southern edge of Ute ladies’-tresses’
overall range; those seven AUs are the
Great Salt Lake, Jordan, Lower
Colorado-Lake Mead, Upper ColoradoDirty Devil, Lower Green River,
Colorado Headwaters, and South Platte
AUs. Relative to the remainder of the
range, this portion of the range is
impacted by elevated levels of drought,
climate change, and anthropogenic
stressors now and into the future.
This portion may be at higher risk of
extirpation, as reflected by the current
and future resiliency of the seven AUs.
Currently, three of these seven AUs
have low resiliency, so they are at a
greater risk of extirpation than the other
four AUs, two of which have high
resiliency and two have moderate
resiliency. We examined the following
threats, for the reasons described above:
anthropogenic activities including
urban development, water management,
agriculture, livestock grazing,
recreation, invasive plants, and
collection; and environmental
conditions including vegetative
succession, disease or predation,
drought, climate change, and human
population change, including
cumulative effects. We concluded that
although almost half of the AUs in this
portion have low resiliency, the species
has sufficient resiliency, redundancy,
and representation across the seven AUs
in the portion. The three AUs in low
condition (Great Salt Lake, Lower
Colorado-Lake Mead, Upper ColoradoDirty Devil) have sufficiently high or
moderate hydrologic condition to
remain viable in the near term despite
lower scores for other metrics such as
AU abundance and connectivity. The
seven AUs cover a wide geographic area
that spans portions of four States across
a variety of climatic and habitat types
from north-to-south and east-to-west,
such that there is no stochastic or
catastrophic event that would extirpate
the portion in the near term. Therefore,
we conclude that the risk of extinction
in the portion is not low now, and the
species in this portion does not meet the
Act’s definition of an endangered
species.
We also evaluated the status of this
portion into the foreseeable future. In
the future, three of the seven AUs are
projected to have low resiliency or be
extirpated (Great Salt Lake, Upper
Colorado-Dirty Devil, Lower ColoradoLake Mead), one AU may have moderate
to low resiliency (South Platte), and the
other three AUs have moderate to high
resiliency (Jordan, Lower Green River,
Colorado Headwaters). We examined
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the same threats described above for the
species: anthropogenic activities
including urban development, water
management, agriculture, livestock
grazing, recreation, invasive plants,
collection; and environmental
conditions including vegetative
succession, disease or predation,
drought, climate change, human
population change, including
cumulative effects. We concluded that
although two AUs in this portion may
be extirpated, the species has sufficient
resiliency, redundancy, and
representation in the remaining five
AUs in the portion. The one AU
consistently in low condition (Great Salt
Lake) is projected to maintain
sufficiently moderate hydrologic and
vegetative condition to remain viable
into the foreseeable future despite lower
scores for other metrics such as AU
abundance and connectivity. The five
AUs cover a wide geographic area that
spans portions of three States across a
variety of climatic and habitat types
from north-to-south and east-to-west,
such that there is no stochastic or
catastrophic event that would extirpate
the portion in the foreseeable future.
Even with two AUs in low condition
and the slight increase in extinction risk
under Scenario 3, we found that the
current and projected patterns of habitat
management and protection, the
hydrologic condition of the AUs, and
the species’ adaptation to disturbance
are sufficient to prevent effects to the
species that would cause it to meet the
Act’s definition of an endangered
species or a threatened species.
Therefore, we conclude that the risk of
extinction in the portion is low in the
foreseeable future and the species in
this portion does not meet the Act’s
definition of a threatened species.
As a result, we found no portion of
Ute ladies’-tresses’ range where the
biological condition of the species
differs from its condition elsewhere in
its range such that the status of the
species in that portion differs from any
other portion of the species’ range.
Therefore, the portion both currently
and into the future has enough
resiliency such that it is not at risk of
extinction now or within the foreseeable
future. Because we determined that this
portion does not have a different status,
we did not need to assess its potential
significance.
Therefore, we find that the species is
not in danger of extinction now or likely
to become so within the foreseeable
future in any significant portion of its
range. This does not conflict with the
courts’ holdings in Desert Survivors v.
Department of the Interior, 336 F. Supp.
3d 1131 (N.D. Cal. 2018), and Center for
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 4 / Tuesday, January 7, 2025 / Proposed Rules
Biological Diversity v. Jewell, 248 F.
Supp. 3d. 946, 959 (D. Ariz. 2017)
because, in reaching this conclusion, we
did not apply the aspects of the Final
Policy on Interpretation of the Phrase
‘‘Significant Portion of Its Range’’ in the
Endangered Species Act’s Definitions of
‘‘Endangered Species’’ and ‘‘Threatened
Species’’ (79 FR 37578; July 1, 2014),
including the definition of ‘‘significant’’
that those court decisions held to be
invalid.
Determination of Status
Our review of the best available
scientific and commercial information
indicates that Ute ladies’-tresses does
not meet the Act’s definition of
endangered species or threatened
species in accordance with sections 3(6)
and 3(20) of the Act. In accordance with
our current regulations at 50 CFR
424.11(e)(2), Ute ladies’-tresses has
recovered and no longer warrants
listing. Therefore, we propose to remove
Ute ladies’-tresses from the Federal List
of Endangered and Threatened Plants.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Effects of This Rule
This proposed rule, if made final,
would revise 50 CFR 17.12(h) by
removing Ute ladies’-tresses 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 if activities
they authorize, fund, or carry out may
affect Ute ladies’-tresses.
There is no critical habitat designated
for this species, so there would be no
effect to 50 CFR 17.96.
Post-Delisting Monitoring
Section 4(g)(1) of the Act requires us,
in cooperation with the States, to
implement a monitoring program for not
less than 5 years for all species that have
been recovered. Post-delisting
monitoring (PDM) refers to activities
undertaken to verify that a species
delisted due to recovery remains secure
from the risk of extinction after the
protections of the Act no longer apply.
The primary goal of PDM is to monitor
the species to ensure that its status does
not deteriorate, and if a decline is
detected, to take measures to halt the
decline so that proposing it as
endangered or threatened is not again
needed. If, at any time during the
monitoring period, data indicate that
protective status under the Act should
be reinstated, we can initiate listing
procedures, including, if appropriate,
emergency listing.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:20 Jan 06, 2025
Jkt 265001
We have prepared a draft PDM plan
for Ute ladies’-tresses. The draft PDM
plan: (1) summarizes the status of Ute
ladies’-tresses at the time of proposed
delisting; (2) describes the frequency
and duration of monitoring; (3)
discusses monitoring methods and
potential sampling regimes; (4) defines
what potential triggers will be evaluated
to address the need for additional
monitoring; (5) outlines reporting
requirements and procedures; (6)
proposes a schedule for implementing
the PDM plan; and (7) defines
responsibilities. It is our intent to work
with our partners towards maintaining
the recovered status of Ute ladies’tresses. We appreciate any information
on what should be included in postdelisting monitoring strategies for this
species (see Information Requested,
above).
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.
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
federally recognized Tribes on a
government-to-government basis. In
accordance with Secretary’s Order 3206
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1077
of June 5, 1997 (American Indian Tribal
Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust
Responsibilities, and the Endangered
Species Act), we readily acknowledge
our responsibilities to work directly
with Tribes in developing programs for
healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge that
Tribal lands are not subject to the same
controls as Federal public lands, to
remain sensitive to Indian culture, and
to make information available to Tribes.
We notified and invited the following
Tribes to participate in the SSA process
and to provide information at the
beginning of the SSA process:
Shoshone-Bannock Tribes, Eastern
Shoshone Tribe, Confederated Salish
and Kootenai Tribes, Blackfeet Nation,
Ute Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray
Reservation, Confederated Tribes of the
Colville Reservation, and Confederated
Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation.
We did not receive a response from any
Tribe. We will continue to work with
Tribal entities during the development
of a final delisting determination for Ute
ladies’-tresses.
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 Utah
Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authors
The primary authors of this proposed
rule are the staff members of the Fish
and Wildlife Service’s Species
Assessment Team and the Utah
Ecological Services Field Office.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species,
Exports, Imports, Plants, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements,
Transportation, Wildlife.
Signing Authority
Martha Williams, Director of the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, approved this
action on November 18, 2024. Acting
Director Steve Guertin approved these
packages December 15, 2024. On
December 16, 2024, the acting Director
authorized the undersigned to sign the
document electronically and submit it
to the Office of the Federal Register for
publication as an official document of
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
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:
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
1078
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 4 / Tuesday, January 7, 2025 / Proposed Rules
PART 17—ENDANGERED AND
THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS
1. The authority citation for part 17
continues to read as follows:
■
§ 17.12
[Amended]
2. In 17.12, in paragraph (h), amend
the List of Endangered and Threatened
Plants by removing the entry for
■
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531–
1544; 4201–4245, unless otherwise noted.
‘‘Spiranthes diluvialis’’ under
FLOWERING PLANTS.
Madonna Baucum,
Regulations and Policy Chief, Division of
Policy, Economics, Risk Management, and
Analytics of the Joint Administrative
Operations, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2024–30380 Filed 1–6–25; 8:45 am]
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:20 Jan 06, 2025
Jkt 265001
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 4 (Tuesday, January 7, 2025)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 1054-1078]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-30380]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R6-ES-2024-0115; FXES1113090FEDR-256-FF09E22000]
RIN 1018-BH97
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Removal of Ute
Ladies'-Tresses 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 Ute ladies'-tresses (Spiranthes diluvialis) from the Federal
List of Endangered and Threatened Plants. This determination also
serves as our 12-month finding on a petition to delist Ute ladies'-
tresses. After a review of the best available scientific and commercial
information, we find that delisting the species is warranted. Our
review indicates that the threats to Ute ladies'-tresses have been
eliminated or reduced to the point that the species no longer meets the
definition of an endangered or threatened species under the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). Accordingly, we propose to
delist Ute ladies'-tresses. 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 Ute
ladies'-tresses. We request information and comments from the public
regarding this proposed rule and the draft post-delisting monitoring
(PDM) plan for Ute ladies'-tresses.
DATES: We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before
March 10, 2025. 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 February 21, 2025.
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-R6-ES-2024-0115,
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, check 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-R6-ES-2024-0115, 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 the 5-year review, draft recovery plan,
draft post-delisting monitoring plan (PDM), and the species status
assessment (SSA) report, are available at https://www.regulations.gov
under Docket No. FWS-R6-ES-2024-0115 and on the Service's website at
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2159.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: George Weekley, Field Office
Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Utah Ecological Services
Field Office, 2369 West Orton Circle, Suite 50, West Valley City, UT
84119; telephone 801-239-0561. 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-
R6-ES-2024-0115 on https://www.regulations.gov for a document that
summarizes this proposed rule.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Summary
Why we need to publish a rule. Under the Act, a species warrants
delisting if it no longer meets the definition of an endangered species
(in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its
range) or a threatened species (likely to become an endangered species
within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion
of its range). Ute ladies'-tresses is listed as threatened, and we are
proposing to delist it. We have determined Ute ladies'-tresses does not
meet the Act's definition of an endangered or threatened species.
Delisting a species can be completed only by issuing a rule through the
Administrative Procedure Act rulemaking process (5 U.S.C. 551 et seq.).
What this document does. This action proposes to remove Ute
ladies'-tresses from the List of Endangered and Threatened Plants
(i.e., ``delist'' the species) based on its recovery.
The basis for our action. Under the Act, we may determine that a
species is an endangered species or a threatened species 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. The determination to delist a
species must be based on an analysis of the same factors.
Under the Act, we must review the status of all listed species at
least once every 5 years. We must delist a species if we determine,
based on the best available scientific and commercial data, that the
species is neither an endangered species nor a threatened species. Our
regulations at 50 CFR 424.11(e) identify four reasons why we might
determine a species shall be delisted: (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. We have
determined that Ute ladies'-tresses has recovered to the point at which
it no longer meets the definition of an endangered species or a
threatened species; therefore, we are proposing to delist it.
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
[[Page 1055]]
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 Ute ladies'-tresses from
the List of Endangered and Threatened Plants;
(2) Relevant data concerning any threats (or lack thereof) to Ute
ladies'-tresses, particularly any data on the possible effects of
climate change as it relates to habitat, as well as the extent of State
protection and management that would be provided to this plant as a
delisted species;
(3) Current or planned activities within the geographic range of
Ute ladies'-tresses that may have either a negative or positive impact
on the species; and
(4) Considerations for post-delisting monitoring, including
monitoring protocols and length of time monitoring is needed, as well
as triggers for reevaluation.
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 species
should remain listed as threatened, or we may conclude that the species
should be reclassified from threatened to 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
A species status assessment (SSA) team prepared an SSA report for
Ute ladies'-tresses. The SSA team was composed of Service biologists,
in consultation with other species experts from Federal agencies, State
wildlife and heritage programs, and local conservation groups. The SSA
report represents a compilation of the best scientific and commercial
data available concerning the status of the species, including the
impacts of past, present, and future factors (both negative and
beneficial) affecting the species.
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 solicited independent
scientific review of the information contained in the Ute ladies'-
tresses SSA report. The Service sent the SSA report to seven
independent peer reviewers and received three responses. Results of
this structured peer review process can be found at https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-R6-ES-2024-0115. In preparing
this proposed rule, we incorporated the results of these reviews, as
appropriate, into the final SSA report, which is the foundation for
this proposed rule.
Summary of Peer Reviewer Comments
As discussed in Peer Review above, we received comments from three
peer reviewers on the draft SSA report. We reviewed all comments we
received from the peer reviewers for substantive issues and new
information regarding the contents of the SSA report. As discussed
above, because we conducted this peer review prior to this proposed
rule, we have already incorporated all applicable peer review comments
in version 1.1 of the SSA report, which is the foundation for this
proposed rule.
The peer reviewers provided additional information, clarifications,
and recommendations pertaining to our analysis of Ute ladies'-tresses'
current and future condition. We either incorporated or clarified
substantial comments in the SSA report or address them below. In
addition to substantive comments on the SSA report, we received several
comments requesting the inclusion of additional biological information
about orchids, more detail on the methods used in the suitable habitat
model, and suggestions for climate change models to consider. Those
comments were incorporated in the SSA report where applicable and are
not summarized here.
(1) Comment: One reviewer was concerned with how we scored the
overall current resiliency of analytical units (AUs). The reviewer
stated that our scoring does not necessarily identify truly high
resiliency conditions but rather provides a relative evaluation of AU
resiliency, noting that an overall high resiliency score can be
achieved even if one metric, such as vegetative habitat, is in low
condition.
Our response: We developed our current condition evaluation in
coordination with species experts, and our scoring reflects the
relative contribution of each metric (e.g., hydrological condition,
vegetative habitat) to overall AU resiliency as discussed below in
Current Condition. Ute ladies'-tresses is adapted to disturbance and
changing hydrological and habitat conditions, and AUs may maintain high
resiliency even when some of the species' needs are not being optimally
met at individual occurrences or portions of those occurrences.
[[Page 1056]]
Therefore, our scoring of overall AU resiliency is appropriate.
(2) Comment: One reviewer commented that the comparisons of AU
resiliency using the suitable habitat and connectivity metrics is
problematic because different modeling approaches were used to generate
suitable habitat in each AU based on the opinions of different
biologists across the species' range. Therefore, the suitable habitat
models were much more conservative, and therefore limited, for some AUs
compared to others, resulting in inconsistencies in how AUs were
evaluated for resiliency. The reviewer recommended that we use a
standardized, rangewide method for the suitable habitat model.
Our response: We initially considered using a draft suitable
habitat model using consistent methods recommended by the reviewer;
however, input from species experts indicated that this model and other
draft models overpredicted, rather than reasonably predicted, suitable
habitat across the species' range. The modeling approach used in the
SSA reflects local conditions and the variation across the range based
on occurrence data within each AU, which would not be reflected using a
standardized, rangewide method as recommended by the reviewer. When
developing the final suitable habitat model, we incorporated
recommendations from Service biologists in every State within the
species' range to evaluate whether model predictions were a good
reflection of suitable habitat for their respective AUs. The final
model we relied on for our evaluation of suitable habitat in the SSA
report is a combination of AU-level hydrologic unit code (HUC) 6 models
and expert opinion, and we consider that model to provide the best
representation of potentially suitable habitat for Ute ladies'-tresses
given the species' life-history traits, occurrence data, and variation
across its range.
Previous Federal Actions
On September 27, 1985, we published a notice of review in the
Federal Register (50 FR 39526) issuing a list of plant taxa being
considered for listing as endangered or threatened. Ute ladies'-tresses
was included on this list as a Category 2 species. Category 2 species
were taxa for which information in possession of the Service indicated
that proposing to list them as endangered or threatened species was
possibly appropriate, but we lacked conclusive data on biological
vulnerability and threats to support the immediate preparation of a
proposed rule.
On February 21, 1990, we published a notice of review in the
Federal Register (55 FR 6184) reclassifying Ute ladies'-tresses from a
Category 2 species to a Category 1 species based on a review of
information collected since 1985. Category 1 species were taxa for
which we had on file enough substantial information on biological
vulnerability and threat(s) to support proposed rules to list them as
endangered or threatened species. However, a proposed rule to list Ute
ladies'-tresses was not issued because the action was precluded at the
time by other listing activity. In the 1990 notice of review, we used
the common name ``plateau lady's tresses'' for Spiranthes diluvialis.
On November 13, 1990, we published in the Federal Register (55 FR
47347) a proposed rule to list Ute ladies'-tresses as a threatened
species due to the primary threat of water development and urbanization
in its riparian habitat. At that time, the species was known to be
comprised of fewer than 3,000 plants in 7 populations. Our proposed
rule used ``Ute ladies'-tresses'' as the common name for Spiranthes
diluvialis in recognition of the fact that the species' known
historical range was used largely by the Ute Indian Tribe. We
determined that it would not be prudent to designate critical habitat
because the publication of critical habitat descriptions and maps would
make this orchid species more vulnerable to collection.
Three additional populations were identified in Utah and Nevada
prior to the final listing rule, for a total of 10 known populations
with an estimated population size of fewer than 6,000 plants. On
January 17, 1992, we published in the Federal Register (57 FR 2048) a
final rule to list Ute ladies'-tresses as a threatened species. The
final rule included a determination that the designation of critical
habitat for Ute ladies'-tresses was not prudent.
When we listed Ute ladies'-tresses as a threatened species (see 57
FR 2048, January 17, 1992), we identified habitat loss and modification
due to water development and urbanization (Factor A) as the primary
threat to the species. We considered collection (Factor B) to be a
threat because it is an orchid species. Disease and predation (Factor
C) were not considered threats. Regulatory mechanisms (Factor D)
included a limited degree of protection for the species' wetland
habitat under the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and
international trade for all orchids is regulated by the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna
(CITES; 27 U.S.T. 1087, March 3, 1973). Finally, we identified the
species' small and scattered populations, variable demographic
structure of populations, and a presumed slow reproductive rate (Factor
E) as making the species more vulnerable to other threats and
stressors.
In 1995, we completed a draft recovery plan for the species
(Service 1995, entire). To date, this plan has not been finalized.
On May 10, 1996, we received a petition from the Central Utah Water
Conservancy District (CUWCD) to delist Ute ladies'-tresses pursuant to
the Act (Christiansen 1996, entire). A ``Special Status Species
Update'' for Ute ladies'-tresses, dated April 1996, accompanied the
petition as supporting information (CUWCD 1996, entire). In response to
the petitioner's request to delist Ute ladies'-tresses, we sent a
letter to the petitioner on June 10, 1996, explaining our inability to
act upon the petition due to the low priority assigned to delisting
petitions in our 1996 Listing Priority Guidance (61 FR 24722, May 16,
1996).
On October 12, 2004, we published in the Federal Register (69 FR
60605) a 90-day finding that the 1996 petition contained substantial
information indicating that delisting Ute ladies'-tresses may be
warranted. However, higher priority work continued to preclude our
ability to take further action on this petition. This proposed rule
constitutes our 12-month finding on the May 10, 1996, petition to
delist Ute ladies'-tresses under the Act.
In 2023, we completed an SSA report to evaluate the species'
rangewide status and inform a 5-year status review. On August 8, 2023,
we completed a 5-year review that recommended delisting Ute ladies'-
tresses due to recovery.
Background
Species Description and Habitat Information
A thorough review of the taxonomy, life history, and ecology of Ute
ladies'-tresses is presented in the SSA report, version 1.1 (Service
2024, entire). Ute ladies'-tresses is an herbaceous (not woody),
perennial plant in the orchid family (Orchidaceae) found in the western
United States and Canada. It is a terrestrial orchid (grows in the
ground) and inhabits naturally occurring and human-created wetland
habitats. When it was first described as a species in 1984, Ute
ladies'-tresses was known to occur only in Utah and Colorado (Sheviak
1984, entire). Today, the species is found in eight U.S. States
(Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, Utah, Washington, and
[[Page 1057]]
Wyoming) and southern British Columbia, Canada (Service 2024, p. 4).
Ute ladies'-tresses is a naturally occurring allopolyploid species,
meaning it has more than one pair of chromosomes derived from the
hybridization of two genetically distinct species (Szalanski et al.
2001, pp. 178-179). Ute ladies'-tresses is fertile (produces fertile
offspring) but is not cross-compatible with either of its parent
species, hooded lady's tresses (Spiranthes romanzoffiana) and Great
Plains lady's tresses (S. magnicamporum) (Szalanski et al. 2001, pp.
178-179; Fertig et al. 2005, pp. 7-8). The ranges of hooded lady's
tresses and Great Plains lady's tresses do not currently overlap with
each other, but may have overlapped during the Pleistocene, a
geological epoch that ended approximately 11,700 years ago (Sheviak
1984, p. 9). The hooded lady's tresses is present within the range of
Ute ladies'-tresses but generally occupies higher elevations than Ute
ladies'-tresses (above 7,000 feet (ft) (2,133 meters (m))), so the two
species are mostly spatially separate within their overlapping ranges.
Where they co-occur in Idaho, hooded lady's tresses flowers earlier
than Ute ladies'-tresses (Moseley 2000, pp. 1-2).
A genetic study of Ute ladies'-tresses identified an unusually high
degree of genetic variability within samples from several occurrences
in Colorado and Utah, which suggests the species may have evolved from
two or more separate hybridization events between hooded lady's tresses
and Great Plains lady's tresses (Arft and Ranker 1998, p. 119).
However, little genetic differentiation was found between samples from
various occurrences in Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, Utah, and
Wyoming, suggesting that there may be a high degree of gene flow
between Ute ladies'-tresses in those areas. No genetic studies have
been conducted on Ute ladies'-tresses in the Upper Columbia basin of
Washington and British Columbia, which is highly disjunct without any
known connectivity to other occupied basins, or in the Lower Colorado-
Lake Mead basin of Nevada, which contains a single isolated occurrence.
Ute ladies'-tresses plants are approximately 4.7 to 23.6 inches
(in) (12 to 60 centimeters (cm)) tall and grow from tuberous-thickened
roots (enlarged fleshy roots that store starch and nutrients). Basal
leaves are grass-like, up to 11 in (28 cm) long, and leaves become
progressively smaller up the stem (Sheviak 1984, entire). Flowers are
small (0.3 to 0.6 in (7.5-15 millimeters (mm) long)), white or ivory-
colored, and arranged in a gradual spiral along the flowering stalks
(inflorescences) that inspired the ladies'-tresses part of the common
name (Service 2024, p. 30). One diagnostic feature that distinguishes
Ute ladies'-tresses from hooded lady's tresses is how fused the sepals
(lower part of the flower that supports the petals) are to each other;
the sepals of Ute ladies'-tresses are separate or fused only at the
base, whereas the sepals of hooded lady's tresses are fused into a
hood-like structure. Fruits are cylindric capsules with numerous seeds
(Sheviak 1984, entire; Fertig et al. 2005, p. 7).
Ute ladies'-tresses has five life stages: seeds, seedlings, dormant
plants, vegetative plants, and reproductive plants (Fertig 2020, p. 67;
Service 2024, p. 31). Plants are perennial, appear to be long-lived,
and likely depend on a specific symbiotic mycorrhizal (fungal)
association during all life stages based on studies of other
terrestrial orchids (Batty et al. 2002, pp. 196-197). Many terrestrial
orchids have lifespans of 20 to 30 years or more, with at least one
Spiranthes species having a lifespan of more than 60 years (Willems and
Dorland 2010, p. 346; Shefferson et al. 2020, pp. 318-319).
Ute ladies'-tresses can likely reproduce asexually through root
splitting (Fertig et al. 2005, p. 67), but the species primarily
reproduces sexually through seed production. Plants cannot produce
seeds without pollinators. The primary pollinators of Ute ladies'-
tresses are bumblebees (Bombus spp.), solitary bees of the Anthophora
genus, and honeybees (Apis mellifera) (Sipes and Tepedino 1995, entire;
Sipes et al. 1995, pp. 1-3, 15-17; Pierson and Tepedino 2000, pp. 8,
16, 27-28). Plants typically flower in August and September (Fertig et
al. 2005, p. 54), but the timing varies by location and local
environmental conditions. Flowering has been documented as early as the
beginning of July in Nevada, a hotter and drier part of the range, and
as late as October in cooler, higher elevation occurrences (Great Basin
Institute (GBI) 2009, p. 3; Ute ladies'-tresses Technical Team (ULT
Tech) 2021, entire).
Orchid seeds are extremely small (the size of dust particles), are
easily dispersed by wind and water, and do not provide much nourishment
for the embryo (undeveloped plant) after germination (Sipes et al.
1995, p. 23). If the embryo can quickly form a mycorrhizal association,
it is able to obtain nutrients directly from the soil fungi without
relying on photosynthesis (Hildebrand 1998, p. 4; McGonigle and
Sheridan 2004, p. 11; Yeung 2017, pp. 8-9). Seedlings persist
underground and rely on the mycorrhizal association to develop shoots
and leaves. It is unknown how long seedlings remain underground before
transitioning to other life stages (vegetative or adult plants). We
assume that Ute ladies'-tresses persist as a seedling for at least 1
year.
Ute ladies'-tresses may transition from being vegetative to
reproductive or from reproductive to vegetative in subsequent
aboveground years, and periods of dormancy below ground may occur
throughout a plant's life (Yeung 2017, entire; ULT Tech 2021, entire;
Service 2024, pp. 31-32). Plants can survive unfavorable conditions in
a state of dormancy for multiple years (11 consecutive years or
longer), either as a germinated seedling in a symbiotic mycorrhizal
(fungal) association, known as a protocorm, or as an adult root mass
(Fertig et al. 2005, p. 61). Adult plants do not emerge above ground or
flower every year; flowering likely depends on environmental conditions
and when the plant last flowered--a plant that flowered in the previous
year may be more likely to remain vegetative or become dormant the
following year (Willems and Dorland 2010, p. 345). It is difficult to
track these cycles because humans can only reliably detect flowering
plants, not other life stages (seeds, seedlings, dormant or vegetative
plants), in the field (ULT Tech 2021, entire).
Ute ladies'-tresses has a ruderal (early colonizer of disturbed
habitats) life-history strategy in which it can disperse within
watersheds and quickly establish and produce seeds in favorable habitat
conditions that may only be available for short periods of time (Gadgil
and Solbrig 1972, entire). Ruderal plants are also able to persist in
place and wait for favorable habitat conditions to return following
disturbance events. The species disperses along connected waterways
(river corridors, perennial streams, canals, lakeshores, wet meadows,
and agricultural ditches), and plants appear in newly created or
disturbed features (such as islands, point bars, shorelines) within the
watershed. The species also persists in unsuitable habitat conditions
that were previously suitable. Dormant Ute ladies'-tresses plants or
seedlings can survive in late-seral successional habitats or unsuitable
habitats below ground for years and then emerge above ground after
disturbance reestablishes early- to mid-seral successional habitat
conditions or adequate moisture is restored (Heidel 2001, entire). As
mentioned above, we can only reliably detect flowering plants, and the
species
[[Page 1058]]
does not necessarily flower every year. Therefore, Ute ladies'-tresses
may appear to be extirpated from an area when in fact dormant or non-
reproductive individuals are still present.
Range, Distribution, Abundance, and Trends of Ute Ladies'-Tresses
The current range of Ute ladies'-tresses spans eight States in the
western United States (Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada,
Utah, Washington, and Wyoming) and the Canadian province of British
Columbia (Service 2024, pp. 39-40). There are 62 extant Ute ladies'-
tresses element occurrences (occurrences) distributed across 18
watershed basins, referred to as analytical units (AUs) and defined as
populations in the SSA report. An AU may contain one or more element
occurrences. The current range is much larger than the three States
(Colorado, Nevada, and Utah) known to be occupied at the time of
listing in 1992. Ute ladies'-tresses has not been found in Arizona,
even though that State is considered to be part of two AUs (Lower
Colorado-Lake Mead and Upper Colorado-Dirty Devil), because the species
occurs in other States within those watersheds. Across its wide range,
Ute ladies'-tresses is found in 3 different ecological classifications
(Great Plains, North American Deserts, and Western Forested Mountains),
12 level-III ecoregions, and 7 habitat types (Fertig et al. 2005, pp.
21-33; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2013, entire; Service 2024,
pp. 123-125).
At the time of listing in 1992, we reported 10 extant occurrences
(defined as populations in the listing rule) with fewer than 6,000
plants and occurring on approximately 170 acres (ac) (69 hectares (ha))
of habitat (see 57 FR 2048, January 17, 1992). By 2005, there were
known to be 52 extant occurrences with at least 83,316 flowering plants
on 674 to 783 ac (273 to 317 ha) of habitat (Fertig et al. 2005, pp.
34-62). The 2005 flowering plant estimate was based on the maximum
number of flowering plants reported over a multi-year period for each
occurrence, since most surveys underestimate the number of dormant,
vegetative, and fruiting plants in an occurrence (Fertig et al. 2005,
p. 62). The current number of known extant occurrences has increased to
62. The number of flowering plants detected has likely also increased,
but we do not provide an estimate of flowering plants in the SSA report
for the following reasons: (1) there is a lack of consistent monitoring
methods; (2) monitoring does not account for the geographic shifts in
occupied habitat; and (3) monitoring does not account for four of the
five life stages (seeds, seedlings, dormant plants, and vegetative
plants) (ULT Tech 2021, entire). When a plant population contains
dormant individuals, population size and trend can be accurately
determined if we know the average number of years a plant is dormant
and we can account for at least three life stages (dormant, vegetative,
and flowering plants) (Lesica and Steele 1994, entire; Heidel 2001, p.
8; Fertig et al. 2005, pp. 61-62). However, this information is not
available for Ute ladies'-tresses.
Ute ladies'-tresses occurrences demonstrate metapopulation
structure within watersheds (AUs) where persistence is governed by the
processes of patch colonization, extirpation (local extinction), and
recolonization (Sipes et al. 1995, p. 26; Freckleton and Watkinson
2002, p. 419). These metapopulations are important to the viability of
the species, as long-term persistence is generally higher in
metapopulations than in small, isolated occurrences (Lesica 1992, p.
420). Consequently, identification of metapopulations and the
availability of potentially suitable habitat is important for assessing
the status of Ute ladies'-tresses (Freckleton and Watkinson 2002, p.
432; Service 2024, pp. 89-91).
In the SSA report, we delineated occurrences based on NatureServe
criteria for water and land dispersal distances, which are grouped by
plant locations connected by suitable habitat and generally less than
6.2 miles (mi) (10 kilometers (km)) and 1.2 mi (2 km) from each other
along waterways and over land, respectively (NatureServe 2020, p. 6;
Service 2024, p. 26). We know of 75 Ute ladies'-tresses occurrences,
and we consider 62 of those occurrences to be currently occupied. We
considered the 62 currently occupied occurrences in our analysis of
current conditions if suitable habitat was still present, even if we
had some negative observation data for a location. This assumption is
consistent with field observations, expert opinion, and long-term
monitoring data of occurrences in Nevada, Washington, and Utah (ULT
Tech 2021, entire; Service 2024, pp. 31-32). In the SSA report, we also
considered 13 historical occurrences, one of which was the only known
occurrence in its AU (Upper Arkansas), to be extirpated based on the
loss of occupied or suitable habitat due to development, change in
hydrology, or imprecise historical records (Service 2024, pp. 100-110).
We considered 11 of these historical occurrences, located in or near
densely populated areas of Utah, Colorado, and Montana, to be
extirpated because of urban development. Despite these losses, the
current distribution of the species appears to be stable.
We refer to the watershed basins as AUs in the SSA report and
consider them to be a surrogate for populations to better account for
the species' widespread, dynamic distribution and complex life history.
Given the detectability and monitoring limitations mentioned above, we
consider the metapopulation structure--the number of occupied
occurrences within a watershed (AU)--to be a better measure of
population size rather than abundance counts of flowering plants.
Considerably more occurrences have been discovered since listing in
1992, and new occurrences have been located every year for at least the
past 10 years within known AUs. The most recent occurrence was
discovered in 2023, after the species' 5-year status review was
finalized, and in 2020, one occurrence was discovered in an AU
previously considered extirpated (Atkin 2020, pers. comm.; Billings and
Wheeler 2021, entire; Heidel 2023, entire; Service 2024, p. 77).
However, this does not necessarily indicate an increasing population
size or positive population trend for the species; it could be the
result of an increased survey effort and awareness. Based on our
measure of population size (i.e., the number of occupied occurrences
within an AU), the population trend for the species appears to be
stable.
Our evaluation of population trend is based on our assessment of
the availability of potentially suitable habitat within AUs. The
suitable habitat model provides a relative estimate of the species'
potential abundance within an AU to evaluate whether a watershed would
continue to support metapopulation dynamics and the species' population
needs (see Current Condition, below for more information).
Roughly 95 percent of the species' range occurs in the United
States, with the remaining 5 percent of its range occurring in the
province of British Columbia, Canada. In the United States,
approximately 37 percent of land where the species occurs is federally
owned or managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the U.S.
Bureau of Reclamation (USBR), the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), the
Service, the National Park Service (NPS), and the Department of Defense
(DOD). Almost half of the land, approximately 47 percent, is under
private ownership. There is a small amount (approximately 3 percent) of
Ute ladies'-tresses habitat where the land ownership is not known. The
remaining 13 percent of the species'
[[Page 1059]]
range is on State and Tribal lands (Service 2024, p. 39).
Recovery Criteria
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. 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 Lists of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife and Plants.
Recovery plans provide a roadmap for us and our partners on methods
of enhancing conservation and minimizing threats to listed species, as
well as measurable criteria against which to evaluate progress towards
recovery and assess the species' likely future condition. However, they
are not regulatory documents and do not substitute for the
determinations and promulgation of regulations required under section
4(a)(1) of the Act. A decision to revise the status of a species or to
delist a species is ultimately based on an analysis of the best
scientific and commercial data 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.
There are many paths to accomplishing recovery of a species, and
recovery may be achieved without all of the criteria in a recovery plan
being fully met. For example, one or more criteria may be exceeded
while other criteria may not yet be accomplished. In that instance, we
may determine that the threats are minimized sufficiently and that the
species is robust enough that it no longer meets the definition of an
endangered species or a threatened species. In other cases, we may
discover new recovery opportunities after having finalized the recovery
plan. Parties seeking to conserve the species may use these
opportunities instead of methods identified in the recovery plan.
Likewise, we may learn new information about the species after we
finalize the recovery plan. The new information may change the extent
to which existing criteria are appropriate for identifying recovery of
the species. The recovery of a species is a dynamic process requiring
adaptive management that may, or may not, follow all of the guidance
provided in a recovery plan.
Here, we provide a summary of progress made toward achieving the
draft recovery criteria for Ute ladies'-tresses. More detailed
information related to conservation efforts can be found below under
Summary of Biological Status and Threats. We completed a draft recovery
plan for Ute ladies'-tresses in 1995 that has not been finalized
(Service 1995, entire); however, the draft plan is nearly 3 decades old
and no longer reflects the best scientific information available for
Ute ladies'-tresses.
The draft plan describes a process for watershed-level planning and
management to maintain and restore watershed conditions (i.e., natural
flows and hydrography, stream gradients, and soils) for the long-term
persistence of the species (Service 1995, p. 15). The draft plan
attempts to interpret and define ``ecosystem management'' and apply it
to the recovery of Ute ladies'-tresses. The draft plan also states the
expectation that population levels (occurrences in this case) and the
amount of suitable habitat will fluctuate over time within a watershed
(Service 1995, p. 15).
The draft plan states that specific population metrics were not
identified because population viability is determined by habitat
conditions and the maintenance of natural watershed processes.
Therefore, the significance of population size and distribution can
only be assessed in the ability of the watershed to support the
species, and those linkages between watershed processes, habitat
conditions, and population response are complex and not completely
understood (Service 1995, p. 15).
Below, we identify the two delisting criteria described in the 1995
Ute ladies'-tresses draft recovery plan (Service 1995, p. 15), and the
progress made to date in achieving the criteria. However, we
acknowledge that because of advances in our understanding of Ute
ladies'-tresses, the delisting criteria are not measurable, no longer
reflect the best available science about the species, and may no longer
be relevant.
Criteria for Delisting
Recovery Criterion 1: Viable populations throughout Ute ladies'-
tresses' historical range and representative of its genetic endowment
are maintained in riparian habitats of streams in a state of dynamic
equilibrium.
Progress: We have a much better understanding of Ute ladies'-
tresses current range since the time of listing in 1992. The known
current range of Ute ladies'-tresses has expanded from three U.S.
States (Utah, Colorado, and Nevada) to eight U.S. States (Colorado,
Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming) and
the Canadian province of British Columbia (Service 2024, pp. 39-40).
Based on information through 2023, there are a total of 62 extant
occurrences of Ute ladies'-tresses distributed across 18 watershed
basins (AUs defined as populations in the SSA report). The species'
current range includes 14 more AUs than known at the time of listing
when we apply the AU-scale to the known populations in 1992. We
consider AUs to be synonymous with the criterion's use of
``populations,'' and the criterion does not specify the number of AUs
needed to achieve recovery.
We note that the criterion references Ute ladies'-tresses'
historical range. However, it is more appropriate to define recovery
based on Ute ladies'-tresses' current range, because endangered and
threatened species and their recovery are defined and evaluated based
on their current range under the Act (see the definitions of
``endangered species'' and ``threatened species'' at 16 U.S.C. 1532(6)
and (20), respectively). There is much uncertainty about Ute ladies'-
tresses' historical range, and we may never know its true extent.
Regarding the species' genetic endowment, preliminary genetic
information indicates high genetic diversity in Ute ladies'-tresses
occurrences assessed in six of the eight U.S. States within the current
range (see Summary of Biological Status and Threats, below). We now
consider morphological and ecological diversity in addition to genetic
diversity in our evaluation of representation. While Ute ladies'-
tresses does not exhibit morphological diversity, it has a high level
of ecological diversity across its wide range, occupying 12 ecoregions
and 7 habitat types (Service 2024, pp. 123-127).
Given what we now know about Ute ladies'-tresses ecological
diversity, we consider all habitat types important for recovery, not
just the riparian and stream habitats mentioned in the criterion.
Therefore, we evaluated the viability of AUs in our SSA report for
those AUs in riparian and perennial stream habitats as well as in the
five other habitat types where it occurs (canals, wet meadows, springs,
lakeshores, and artificial/depressional wetlands) (for more
information, see Current Condition and Future Scenarios and Future
Condition, below).
Recovery Criterion 2: Wet meadow, seep, and spring habitats are
protected
[[Page 1060]]
and managed so as to sustain viable populations.
Progress: At the time of the draft recovery plan (1995), we thought
that it was important to distinguish Ute ladies'-tresses' wet meadow,
seep, and spring habitats that are groundwater-fed from other types of
habitats. These habitat types require land management practices such as
grazing or mowing to provide the regular disturbance needed to support
the species, whereas the riparian and stream habitats referenced in
criterion 1 are surface water-fed and receive regular or periodic
flooding disturbance. In the SSA report, we consider seeps and springs
together and refer to them as spring habitats (Service 2024, p. 125).
These habitats can be isolated from other water features or occur in
combination with riparian, stream, or lakeshore habitats. We have
better information now about Ute ladies'-tresses' current range and the
habitat types the species occupies than we did at the time of the draft
recovery plan.
Given what we know about Ute ladies'-tresses' resiliency,
redundancy, and representation, we no longer consider it necessary to
provide a separate criterion for wet meadow, seep, and spring habitats.
As we state above for criterion one, we consider all habitat types in
the SSA report and in our evaluation of Ute ladies'-tresses' viability
(for more information, see Current Condition and Future Scenarios and
Future Condition, below).
The majority (roughly 95 percent) of Ute ladies'-tresses' current
range occurs in the United States, with the remaining 5 percent of its
range occurring in British Columbia, Canada. In the United States,
approximately 37 percent of the land where the species occurs is
federally owned or managed (by the BLM, USBR, USFS, the Service, NPS,
or DOD) with management plans in place to protect the species' habitat
from habitat loss associated with urban development. For Ute ladies'-
tresses and its habitat, Federal land management adequately supports
the needs and viability of the species, and we expect that will
continue in the future (see Conservation Efforts and Regulatory
Mechanisms, below).
Approximately 60 percent of the land where Ute ladies'-tresses
occurs in the United States is under non-Federal ownership (private,
State, or Tribal lands). Some occurrences in three AUs (Jordan, Bear
River, and South Platte) have management plans in place to protect the
species and its habitat on non-Federal lands. However, little to no
protection exists for Ute ladies'-tresses on the remaining non-Federal
lands other than habitat protections afforded by the Clean Water Act
for occurrences along riparian, stream, and some lakeshore habitats, or
habitat protections afforded to federally listed fish species (see
Conservation Efforts and Regulatory Mechanisms, below).
Despite the lack of protections on many non-Federal lands for Ute
ladies'-tresses, current and projected future AU-level threats are
adequately addressed or managed on these lands for at least 10 AUs to
maintain high or moderate resilience to stochastic events now and into
the future. In addition, at least 16 AUs are projected to remain extant
and provide additional redundancy and representation in the 12
ecoregions and 7 habitat types across Ute ladies'-tresses' range (see
Future Scenarios and Future Condition, below). Thus, although not all
18 extant AUs are considered protected, we conclude that the intent of
recovery criteria 1 and 2 to ensure that sufficient AUs are protected
from threats into the future has been met for at least 10 AUs. While
the 1995 recovery criteria are not measurable, and do not reflect the
best available scientific information, as we describe below, we find
that the Ute ladies'-tresses has sufficient resiliency, redundancy, and
representation given what we now know about the species.
Regulatory and Analytical Framework
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.
The Act defines an ``endangered species'' as a species that is in
danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its
range, and a ``threatened species'' as a species that is likely to
become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout
all or a significant portion of its range. The Act requires that we
determine whether any species is an endangered species or a threatened
species because of any of the following 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.
These factors represent broad categories of natural or human-caused
actions or conditions that could have an effect on a species' continued
existence. In evaluating these actions and conditions, we look for
those that may have a negative effect on individuals of the species, as
well as other actions or conditions that may ameliorate any negative
effects or may have positive effects. The determination to delist a
species must be based on an analysis of the same five factors.
We use the term ``threat'' to refer in general to actions or
conditions that are known to or are reasonably likely to negatively
affect individuals of a species. The term ``threat'' includes actions
or conditions that have a direct impact on individuals (direct
impacts), as well as those that affect individuals through alteration
of their habitat or required resources (stressors). The term ``threat''
may encompass--either together or separately--the source of the action
or condition or the action or condition itself.
However, the mere identification of any threat(s) does not
necessarily mean that the species meets the statutory definition of an
``endangered species'' or a ``threatened species.'' In determining
whether a species meets either definition, we must evaluate all
identified threats by considering the species' expected response and
the effects of the threats--in light of those actions and conditions
that will ameliorate the threats--on an individual, population, and
species level. We evaluate each threat and its expected effects on the
species, then analyze the cumulative effect of all of the threats on
the species as a whole. We also consider the cumulative effect of the
threats in light of those actions and conditions that will have
positive effects on the species--such as any existing regulatory
mechanisms or conservation efforts. The Secretary determines whether
the species meets the definition of an ``endangered species'' or a
``threatened species'' only after conducting this cumulative analysis
and describing the expected effect on the species now and in the
foreseeable future.
The Act does not define the term ``foreseeable future,'' which
appears in the statutory definition of ``threatened species.'' Our
implementing regulations at 50 CFR 424.11(d) set forth a framework for
evaluating the foreseeable future on a case-by-case basis which is
further described in the 2009 Memorandum Opinion on the foreseeable
future from the Department
[[Page 1061]]
of the Interior, Office of the Solicitor (M-37021, January 16, 2009;
``M-Opinion,'' available online at https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.opengov.ibmcloud.com/files/uploads/M-37021.pdf). The foreseeable
future extends as far into the future as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service and National Marine Fisheries Service (hereafter, the Services)
can make reasonably reliable predictions about the threats to the
species and the species' responses to those threats. We need not
identify the foreseeable future in terms of a specific period of time.
We will describe the foreseeable future on a case-by-case basis, using
the best available data and taking into account considerations such as
the species' life-history characteristics, threat-projection
timeframes, and environmental variability. In other words, the
foreseeable future is the period of time over which we can make
reasonably reliable predictions. ``Reliable'' does not mean
``certain''; it means sufficient to provide a reasonable degree of
confidence in the prediction, in light of the conservation purposes of
the Act.
Analytical Framework
The SSA report documents the results of our comprehensive
biological review of the best scientific and commercial data regarding
the status of the species, including an assessment of the potential
threats to the species. The SSA report does not represent our decision
on whether the species should be proposed for delisting. However, it
does provide the scientific basis that informs our regulatory
decisions, which involve the further application of standards within
the Act and its implementing regulations and policies.
To assess the viability of Ute ladies'-tresses, we used the three
conservation biology principles of resiliency, redundancy, and
representation (Shaffer and Stein 2000, pp. 306-310). Briefly,
resiliency is the ability of the species to withstand environmental and
demographic stochasticity (for example, wet or dry, warm or cold
years); redundancy is the ability of the species to withstand
catastrophic events (for example, droughts, large pollution events),
and representation is the ability of the species to adapt to both near-
term and long-term changes in its physical and biological environment
(for example, climate conditions, pathogen). In general, species
viability will increase with increases in resiliency, redundancy, and
representation (Smith et al. 2018, p. 306). Using these principles, we
identified the species' ecological requirements for survival and
reproduction at the individual, population, and species levels, and
described the beneficial and risk factors influencing the species'
viability.
The SSA process can be categorized into three sequential stages.
During the first stage, we evaluated individual species' life-history
needs. The next stage involved an assessment of the historical and
current condition of the species' demographics and habitat
characteristics, including an explanation of how the species arrived at
its current condition. The final stage of the SSA involved making
predictions about the species' responses to positive and negative
environmental and anthropogenic influences. Throughout all of these
stages, we used the best available information to characterize
viability as the ability of a species to sustain populations in the
wild over time, which we then used to inform our regulatory decision.
The following is a summary of the key results and conclusions from
the SSA report; the full SSA report can be found at Docket No. FWS-R6-
ES-2024-0115 on https://www.regulations.gov.
Summary of Biological Status and Threats
In this discussion, we review the biological condition of the
species and its resources, and the threats that influence the species'
current and future condition, in order to assess the species' overall
viability and the risks to that viability. In addition, the SSA report
(Service 2024, entire) documents our comprehensive biological status
review for the species, including an assessment of the potential
threats to the species.
The following is a summary of this status review and the best
available information gathered since that time that have informed this
decision.
Individual Needs
Individuals of Ute ladies'-tresses need adequate soil moisture
during the growing season, access to full or partial sunlight, and
suitable soil mycorrhizae to establish, grow, and flower (Service 2024,
pp. 31-34). While we do not know the species' surface or subsurface
moisture requirements, soil moisture is generally provided by surface
or subsurface water within 2 ft (0.6 m) of the ground surface (ULT Tech
2021, entire). An open canopy (little to no shade from plants above) is
needed to provide full or partial sunlight to plants (Fertig et al.
2005, p. 34).
While we do not know the specific mycorrhizal fungi needed by Ute
ladies'-tresses, their presence in the habitat is likely a limiting
factor for the establishment and reproduction of Ute ladies'-tresses
(Fertig et al. 2005, p. 67; ULT Tech 2021, entire). Bumblebees and
other appropriate pollinators are needed for seed production (Sipes and
Tepedino 1995, entire).
Individuals need certain habitat factors, including: a low- to mid-
elevation climate (elevations ranging between 0 to 7,000 ft (0 to 2,133
m); early- to mid-seral stage successional wetland habitats; and some
kind of periodic disturbance (flooding or scouring events, livestock
grazing, agricultural mowing, fire, etc.) to maintain the habitat's
seral stage (see Background, above).
Population Needs
To be resilient, populations require recruitment, survivorship, and
reproduction at rates able to sustain populations, in addition to
pollinator connectivity between individuals within populations. We
consider the significant determinants of population (AU) resiliency to
be a healthy demography and sufficient quality habitat to support this
demography (Service 2024, pp. 93-96). Resilient populations also
contain enough individuals in multiple habitat areas to bounce back
after experiencing environmental stressors such as drought, livestock
grazing, habitat disturbance, and demographic stochasticity (births,
deaths, and reproductive events that fluctuate over time). While we do
not know the number of individuals or amount of habitat needed for Ute
ladies'-tresses populations to be resilient, we assume that Ute
ladies'-tresses populations are most resilient if they contain multiple
occurrences connected by potentially suitable habitat and if they occur
within habitats that maintain adequate hydrology and the appropriate
seral successional stage (Service 2024, pp. 95-98).
Species Needs
The number of populations (AUs) across the landscape influences the
redundancy of Ute ladies'-tresses. More populations across the range
increase the species' ability to withstand catastrophic events.
Individuals and populations inhabiting diverse ecological settings and
exhibiting genetic or phenological variation add to the level of
representation across the species' range. The greater diversity
observed in Ute ladies'-tresses' habitats, genetics, and morphology,
the more likely the species is to be able to adapt to change over time.
Ute ladies'-tresses exhibits a high level of ecological diversity,
occupying 12 ecoregions and 7 habitat types (Service 2024, pp. 123-
125). Additionally, the species showed
[[Page 1062]]
high genetic variability within some occurrences and low variability
between occurrences, which suggests a high level of genetic exchange
between populations historically and possibly currently (Arft and
Ranker 1998, p. 119; Service 2024, p. 91).
In summary, the species needs (1) a sufficient number and
distribution of resilient populations to withstand catastrophic events
(redundancy) and (2) a range of variation that allows the species to
adapt to changing environmental conditions (representation) (Service
2024, pp. 88-89). The SSA report provides additional detail on the
species' individual-, population-, and species-level needs (Service
2024, pp. 29-38, 86-89).
Threats (Stressors/Risk Factors/Etc.)
In the SSA report, we evaluated stressors and other actions that
can positively or negatively affect Ute ladies'-tresses at the
individual, population, or species levels, either currently or into the
future (Service 2024, pp. 89-95, 128-137). In this proposed rule, we
will discuss only those factors in detail that could meaningfully
impact the status of the species. The main stressors are anthropogenic
activities (urban development, water management, agriculture, livestock
grazing, recreation, and invasive plants) and environmental conditions
(vegetative succession, drought, and climate change) that influence or
could influence the species' viability (Service 2024, pp. 89-95, 128-
137). We grouped the various anthropogenic activities together and the
environmental conditions together to consider their synergistic and
cumulative effect on Ute ladies'-tresses at the population and species
levels, because none of the individual stressors alone act intensely or
broadly enough to alter Ute ladies'-tresses' status across its range
(ULT Tech 2021, entire). Those stressors that are not known to have
negative or long-term effects on Ute ladies'-tresses populations, such
as loss of pollinators and flooding, are not discussed here but are
evaluated in the SSA report (Service 2024, p. 95).
Urban Development
Urban development has the potential to result in plant mortality
and loss or degradation of Ute ladies'-tresses habitat (Service 2024,
p. 90). We assessed the urban development stressor to Ute ladies'-
tresses based on our evaluation of disturbance, as well as roads and
other infrastructure, in and near known populations. Urban development
has resulted in the loss of eight occurrences in or near densely
populated areas--in Utah, six occurrences were lost in the Jordan and
Weber AUs along the Wasatch Front, and in Colorado, two occurrences
were lost in the South Platte and Upper Arkansas AUs along the Front
Range, resulting in the extirpation of the Upper Arkansas AU (Service
2024, pp. 100-109). One occurrence in Utah (in the Upper Colorado-Dirty
Devil AU) is likely extirpated due to change in the hydrology and
habitat loss because of road construction (Fertig et al. 2005, p. 54;
Service 2024, p. 67). Two occurrences in Montana (in the Upper Missouri
AU) occur in borrow pits created to support road construction projects;
however, Montana Department of Transportation has prioritized their
protection and long-term monitoring (Service 2024, p. 73).
We incorporated this stressor in our evaluation of current
resiliency by assessing the land use, habitat condition, and
hydrological condition of occurrences (Service 2024, pp. 96-135). We
incorporated this stressor in our evaluation of future resiliency by
evaluating projected changes in land use and the human population
(Service 2024, pp. 129-196).
Water Management
Water management has the potential to result in hydrologic changes
that impact the amount of suitable habitat, soil moisture, and the
successional stage of Ute ladies'-tresses habitat (Service 2024, p.
91). Water flow is managed for irrigation and flood control along many
of the river corridors occupied by Ute ladies'-tresses, which may lead
to additional suitable habitat in some areas and the loss of suitable
habitat in other areas (Grams et al. 2002, entire; Fertig et al. 2005,
p. 82, Service 2024, pp. 129-136). Water management has the potential
to benefit Ute ladies'-tresses by maintaining flows in low water years,
but negative impacts may occur if water releases are unpredictable and
not consistent with the natural hydrologic regime. We discuss the
effects of flood control, in particular the reduction of large flood
events, on the successional stage of Ute ladies'-tresses habitat below
(see ``Vegetative Succession,'' below).
Despite management of hydrology for purposes other than Ute
ladies'-tresses conservation, the species has proliferated in areas
with greatly altered wetland, riparian, and lakeshore habitats that
occasionally experience 10,000-year flood events (e.g., Diamond Fork
occurrence (Jordan AU), Lower Green River AU) (Central Utah Water
Conservation District (CUWCD) 1996, pp. 4-3-4-9, 4-11-4-12; Central
Utah Project Completion Act Office (CUPCA) 1999, entire; Ward and
Naumann 1998, entire; Grams et al. 2002, entire; Black and Gruwell
2004, entire; USBR 2005a, entire). Water management for hydropower or
irrigation has augmented natural flows in some streams, especially in
late summer when natural stream flows were historically low (e.g.,
Diamond Fork occurrence (Jordan AU), Lower Green River AU). This
augmentation has expanded the amount of streamside habitat with
suitable hydrology to support large numbers of Ute ladies'-tresses
(Ward and Naumann 1998, pp. 25-26; Black and Gruwell 2004, pp. 8-9).
Ute ladies'-tresses plants are frequently encountered along streams
and canals and in wet hay pastures in the Uinta Basin, Utah (Lower
Green River AU), even though an extensive irrigation canal system was
constructed in the early 1900s and natural streams are nearly dry all
summer (Fertig et al. 2005, pp. 19, 44, 48; Goodrich 2005, entire;
Jordan 2006, entire). The species has colonized wetlands left behind
when peat was mined, and it occurs in drainage ditches alongside roads
and railroad tracks (Fertig et al. 2005, pp. 16, 19, 32-33, 36-37, 45,
50, 52).
In growing urban areas, primarily in the urban areas of Utah and
Colorado (see Urban Development, above) and possibly Nevada, an
increased demand for municipal water and conversion of irrigation water
to municipal water may lead to dewatering of Ute ladies'-tresses
habitat (Riedel 2004, p. 2). One occurrence in Utah (Jordan AU) may be
extirpated due to dewatering in the last decade, although it is
possible dormant plants remain and could emerge if the hydrological
regime again becomes suitable for Ute ladies'-tresses (Fertig et al.
2005, p. 82; Trater 2020, pers. comm.; Service 2024, p. 47). Dewatering
may exacerbate the effects of drought and climate change.
We incorporated this stressor in our evaluation of current
resiliency by assessing the hydrologic condition of occurrences
(Service 2024, pp. 97-98). We incorporated this stressor in our
evaluation of future resiliency by evaluating projected changes in
drought severity and frequency at the occurrence and AU levels (Service
2024, pp. 129-134).
Agriculture
Agricultural practices have the potential to result in the loss of
plants and habitat under cultivation (croplands) and with herbicide
use, or they can support or maintain suitable habitat conditions for
Ute ladies'-tresses under managed pastures (irrigated
[[Page 1063]]
pastures with some mowing or haying) or irrigation canals (Fertig et
al. 2005, pp. 83, 85; Service 2024, p. 92). Some occurrences in five
AUs (Great Salt Lake, Jordan, Lower Bear, Lower Green River, South
Platte) are in irrigated pastures that function as wet meadow habitat
and support the species (Service 2024, pp. 43-51; Fertig et al. 2005,
pp. 13, 17, 19). Conversely, negative impacts to Ute ladies'-tresses
have also been documented along irrigation canals that have been
converted to water pipelines in one AU (Lower Green River), but these
impacts are localized and have not resulted in the total loss of an
occurrence (ULT Tech 2021, entire; Service 2024, p. 51). Non-Federal
landowners actively manage irrigation water at two occurrences in Utah
and Colorado (Lower Bear and South Platte AUs) to support the Ute
ladies'-tresses on lands used for the species' preservation and for
recreation, respectively (Riedel 2004, p. 2; Bear River Land
Conservancy 2014, pp. 5-14; Service 2024, p. 49).
We incorporated this stressor in our evaluation of current
resiliency by assessing the agricultural land use, habitat condition,
and hydrological condition of occurrences (Service 2024, pp. 96-121).
For future resiliency, we considered the effects of this stressor as
part of our evaluation of projected changes in land use and
anthropogenic effects (Service 2024, pp. 134-135).
Livestock Grazing
Livestock grazing, haying, and mowing have the potential to result
in the loss of plants or flowers but can also result in beneficial
effects by removing competing vegetation and maintaining an open canopy
(Fertig et al. 2005, pp. 70, 79, 81; Sipes et al. 1995, pp. 24-25;
Service 2024, p. 91). Ute ladies'-tresses appears to need these types
of disturbances in meadow or spring habitats that experience less
frequent disturbance events than rivers and streams (Arft 1995, pp.
122-153, 157-159; Allison 2001, pp. 1-10; Fertig et al. 2005, pp. 81-
82). The results of Ute ladies'-tresses population projections in wet
meadow habitat conditions under various management practices identified
the importance of livestock grazing or grazing and mowing to support
population persistence (Arft 1995, pp. 122-153, 157-159; Hazlett 1996,
p. 7). Long-term studies of wet meadow habitat in Colorado found that
Ute ladies'-tresses' recruitment and flowering density were
significantly higher in grazed and mowed habitat compared to
undisturbed habitat (Arft 1995, pp. 122-153, 157-159; Allison 2001, pp.
1-10). Winter grazing or mowing also appears to be beneficial in
reducing the negative impact of field vole (Microtus pennsylvanicus and
M. ochrogaster) herbivory on Ute ladies'-tresses fruit and seed
production by removing vegetation and litter that support vole
populations (Arft 1995, pp. 153, 157-159; Fertig et al. 2005, p. 70).
Where wet meadow habitat is protected and managed for Ute ladies'-
tresses in Colorado and Utah (South Platte and Lower Bear AUs),
managers recommend timed haying, livestock grazing, and irrigation
practices to maintain optimal habitat conditions and minimize impacts
to flowering plants (Allison, 2001, pp. 1-3; Bear River Land
Conservancy 2014, pp. 7-8, 14, 16; Service 2024, pp. 49, 84). Excessive
or improperly timed livestock grazing, haying, and mowing may
negatively impact the species (Fertig et al. 2005, p. 81; Service 2024,
p. 35).
We incorporated this stressor in our evaluation of current
resiliency by assessing the land use and habitat condition of
occurrences (Service 2024, pp. 96-121). For future resiliency, we
considered the effects of this stressor as part of our evaluation of
projected changes in land use (Service 2024, pp. 134-135).
Recreation
Recreation has the potential to result in plant damage and
mortality through trampling as well as provide a land use that
conserves Ute ladies'-tresses habitat (Service 2024, p. 91). Many
occurrences in Colorado, Nevada, Utah, Idaho, and Washington (Lower
Colorado-Lake Mead, Jordan, Upper Green, South Platte, Snake
Headwaters, and Upper Columbia AUs) are located on lands where
recreation occurs; however, recreation was only identified as a current
or potential stressor at a few occurrences in Colorado, Idaho, and Utah
where trampling from fishing, boating, and off-road vehicle access has
been reported (Fertig et al. 2005, pp. 35-53; Service 2024, p. 63).
We incorporated this stressor in our evaluation of current
resiliency by assessing the land use and habitat condition of
occurrences (Service 2024, pp. 96-121). For future resiliency, we
considered the effects of this stressor as part of our evaluation of
projected changes in land use (Service 2024, pp. 134-135).
Invasive Plants
Invasive plants have the potential to directly compete with Ute
ladies'-tresses plants for water, nutrients, and sunlight (Service
2024, p. 94). Some invasive plants are adapted to the same early- to
mid-seral successional habitats as Ute ladies'-tresses and are highly
effective competitors. Fourteen invasive plants commonly occur with Ute
ladies'-tresses, including upland plants such as thistles (Cirsium
spp.) and leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula), wetland plants such as purple
loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) and reed canary grass (Phalaris
arundinacea), and woody invasives such as tamarisk (Tamarix spp.) and
Russian olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia) (Murphy 2001, pp. 19-20; Naumann
2003, entire; Murphy 2004, p. 10; Fertig et al. 2005, p. 83; Jones
2006, entire).
While invasive plants are present in Ute ladies'-tresses habitat,
and some occurrences may have been partially overtaken by invasive
plants, the best available information indicates this stressor has not
resulted in Ute ladies'-tresses' plant mortality or the extirpation of
occurrences (Fertig et al. 2005, pp. 45-47, 50; Service 2024, p. 94).
We considered this stressor in our evaluation of current resiliency
as part of our occurrence habitat condition assessment (Service 2024,
pp. 96-121). For future resiliency, we considered the effects of this
stressor as part of our evaluation of projected changes in land use and
effects of climate change (Service 2024, pp. 134-135).
Collection
We identified overcollection as a threat to Ute ladies'-tresses in
the final listing rule (57 FR 2048 at 2051 and 2052, January 17, 1992).
Despite the one documented instance of ``essence of Spiranthes''
derived from Ute ladies'-tresses flowers in the late 1990s, the threat
of collection is low, given that the species is less showy than
tropical orchids and other Spiranthes species are available for
purchase (Kratz 1998, entire; Fertig et al. 2005, p. 86; Alaskan
Essences 2024, entire; Carnivorous Plant Nursery 2024, entire;
Microsoft Bing 2024, entire; Plant Delights Nursery 2024, entire).
There is no evidence that collection is currently impacting Ute
ladies'-tresses or is likely to do so in the future.
Vegetative Succession
Vegetative succession has the potential to change the habitat
condition and suitability for Ute ladies'-tresses due to lack of
sunlight and competition for resources (Fertig et al. 2005, p. 84;
Service 2024, p. 94). Flooding is the primary disturbance along river
and stream corridors that influences vegetative succession. Water level
fluctuations in combination with land use activities such as mowing and
grazing, and occasionally fire, appear to be the primary disturbances
in
[[Page 1064]]
lakeshore, wet meadow, and spring habitats (Fertig et al. 2005, p. 32).
The extent of woody encroachment and late-seral successional
habitats within Ute ladies'-tresses occurrences is variable and site-
specific depending on the degree to which the hydrologic and
disturbance regimes have been altered. The best available information
indicates that vegetative succession is currently only affecting
individual plants and portions of an occurrence (Fertig et al. 2005, p.
66; Black 2006, entire). The primary driver of vegetative succession is
the hydrologic regime or land use associated with the habitat.
Therefore, this stressor is not having a population-level effect to Ute
ladies'-tresses on its own unless vegetative succession is associated
with a major change to the hydrology or land use of the occurrence. We
incorporated this stressor in our evaluation of current resiliency by
assessing the habitat condition of occurrences (Service 2024, pp. 113-
116). For future resiliency, we evaluated projected changes to the
vegetative resiliency metric based on projected land use changes
(Service 2024, pp. 139-195).
Disease or Predation
Predation (herbivory) on Ute ladies'-tresses was mentioned in the
final listing rule because excessive livestock grazing was thought to
be detrimental, and plants are highly palatable and preferentially
grazed by small herbivores (57 FR 2048 at 2051, January 17, 1992).
Although livestock grazing was categorized as a stressor under Factor C
at the time of listing, we consider the effects of livestock grazing to
be better characterized by Factor A (see ``Livestock Grazing,'' above).
Herbivory of flowers and inflorescences (entire flowering stems) by
field voles has been documented at a few occurrences in Colorado and
Utah (Arft 1995, pp. iv, 79-87, 103-104, 113-117; Sipes et al. 1995,
pp. 9-10; Heidel 2001, p. 8; Black and Gruwell 2004, p. 10; Fertig et
al. 2005, pp. 89-90; Black 2006, entire). Additional monitoring
indicates that winter livestock grazing or mowing maintains early seral
habitat conditions favored by Ute ladies'-tresses and reduces vole
herbivory by removing thatch buildup, which serves as a protective
cover favored by voles, in the habitat (Arft 1995, pp. 79-87, 103-104,
113-117; Sipes et al. 1995, pp. 9-11; Peles and Barrett 1996, entire;
Skopec et al. 2017, pp. 5-6). The best available information indicates
that vole herbivory occasionally impacts individual plants and may
locally affect some populations; however, it is seasonal in nature and
unpredictable (Skopec et al. 2017, pp. 5-6; Andreassen et al. 2021, pp.
601-605). Most occurrences along rivers and streams occur in early- to
mid-seral habitat conditions with little to no thatch buildup, and most
meadow or seep habitats are grazed or mowed to remove thatch buildup.
We did not find that vole herbivory occurs at spatial and temporal
scales large enough to affect the overall status of Ute ladies'-tresses
given the plant's current status. We are not aware of any issues or
potential stressors related to disease or insect predation. Therefore,
we did not include this stressor in our evaluation of current and
future resiliency.
Drought
Drought has the potential to result in the loss of Ute ladies'-
tresses plants; changes in vegetation, hydrology, and soil saturation;
and temporary or permanent loss of habitat depending on the severity
and duration of drought conditions (Service 2024, p. 92). Water
management has ameliorated summer drought conditions in some river
corridors (see ``Water Management,'' above), but increases in municipal
water use (dewatering or loss of irrigation water) could exacerbate the
effects of drought in Ute ladies'-tresses habitat (Fertig et al. 2005,
p. 85).
The best available information indicates that this stressor is not
having a population-level effect to Ute ladies'-tresses. Ute ladies'-
tresses tolerates a range of soil moisture as well as drought
conditions, and, while drought conditions may temporarily reduce the
number of flowering plants, Ute ladies'-tresses is able to remain
dormant during periods of drought. The species' reliance on mycorrhizae
may also mitigate the effects of drought stress (Ahluwalia et al. 2021,
p. 7). The hydrology of its wetland habitat likely buffers the effects
of minor reductions in precipitation or available water. We do not have
a clear understanding of how Ute ladies'-tresses responds to severe or
extreme droughts (defined as -3.0 or less on the Palmer Drought Index)
(Dai et al. 2023, p. 1). However, we assume that an increase in the
frequency of severe and extreme droughts will have a negative impact on
the species. Therefore, we incorporated this stressor in our evaluation
of current resiliency by assessing the hydrologic condition of
occurrences (Service 2024, pp. 129-134). We incorporated this stressor
in our evaluation of future resiliency based on the frequency of severe
and extreme droughts at the occurrence level as part of the climate
change stressor, which is discussed below (Service 2024, pp. 113-116).
Climate Change
Climate change has the potential to impact Ute ladies'-tresses if
the frequency of severe and extreme droughts increases in the future
(see ``Drought,'' above), and it may place an added stress on the
species and its habitat, particularly when other stressors are present.
We used the Standardized Precipitation Evaporation Index (SPEI) that
allowed us to project drought severity and frequency at the occurrence
level, and we used a precipitation-evaporation model ensemble (of 20
models) to evaluate how annual moisture availability is projected to
change at the AU level (Service 2024, pp. 132-134). These models
allowed us to evaluate future hydrologic conditions at the occurrence
level, and the projected changes in water availability at the AU level.
The SSA report describes other models and their limitations in detail
(Service 2024, pp. 131-133). We used two different emission scenarios,
a stabilization emission scenario using representative concentration
pathway (RCP) 4.5 and a rising greenhouse gas emissions scenario using
RCP 8.5 developed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC).
The SPEI index accounts for precipitation and temperature changes
that are useful indicators for detecting and measuring drought severity
and duration within a variety of habitats and over a range of climate
projections (Vicente-Serrano et al. 2010, entire). For occurrences, we
used the SPEI index data for the spring and summer months (March
through August) that are important for plant growth and reproduction to
calculate and compare the historical (1980-2019) and future (2023-2074)
decadal frequency of severe and extreme droughts (North Central Climate
Adaptation Science Center (NC CASC) 2022, data set; Service 2024, pp.
132-134). The results of our evaluation indicate that the frequency of
severe or extreme droughts during the spring and summer months varies
across the species' range. At most occurrences, drought frequency is
projected to increase by at least one but fewer than three additional
severe or extreme droughts per decade; at some occurrences, drought
frequency is projected to remain similar to or slightly increased from
the historical frequency; and several occurrences project a slight
decrease in drought frequency under one or both climate scenarios.
Northern Utah, Idaho, and Washington are projected to generally remain
stable or even see slight decreases in severe and extreme drought
frequencies under both
[[Page 1065]]
scenarios. Occurrences along the southern part of the range, as well as
those in Montana, are projected to see the greatest increase in drought
severity and frequency. Lower elevation occurrences in desert
ecosystems see the most extreme increases overall, and are more
vulnerable to extirpation (Service 2024, pp. 198-199).
The precipitation-evaporation model ensemble accounts for larger
scale changes to regional water availability (e.g., dry getting drier,
wet getting wetter) that we applied to the AU level as a proxy for
future changes to the amount of potentially suitable habitat for Ute
ladies'-tresses (Service 2024, pp. 134-136). While we do not know
exactly how the amount of potentially suitable habitat will change in
response to regional or watershed changes in water availability, we
assumed that the amount of potentially suitable habitat within an AU
would not change if future water availability in an AU remained within
one standard deviation of historical levels. We compared the historical
(1980-2020) and future (2020-2074) water availability in AUs. We found
there was no meaningful change in water availability from historical
levels under the two emission scenarios to indicate a decline in the
amount of potentially suitable habitat (Willey 2024, entire; Service
2024, pp. 134-136).
Both intermediate and high emission scenarios (RCP 4.5 and 8.5)
indicate that the range of Ute ladies'-tresses will be warmer and drier
throughout the southern part of the range and warmer but with similar
or slightly increased precipitation in northern Utah, Idaho, and
Washington State in the future (through 2074) compared to historical
conditions (Alder 2022, entire; Service 2024, pp. 13, 198). The
frequency of severe or extreme droughts is expected to increase
throughout most, although not all, of Ute ladies'-tresses' range. There
is substantial uncertainty in how Ute ladies'-tresses will respond to
more frequent severe or extreme droughts in many AUs within its range.
When we considered characteristics that contribute to its ability to
adapt to changing climate conditions, Ute ladies'-tresses has many
attributes indicating moderate to high levels of adaptive capacity;
these attributes include the species' large range occupying 12
ecoregions, its variable dispersal ability and moderately high
dispersal distance along waterways, its general habitat requirements,
and its flexible ability to reduce its exposure to climate stressors by
remaining dormant during unfavorable conditions (Thurman et al. 2020,
entire; Service 2024, pp. 123-129). We incorporated this stressor in
our evaluation of future resiliency as part of the combined results of
climate change and the human population change stressor in the SSA
report and below (see Future Scenarios and Future Condition, below;
Service 2024, pp. 129-199).
Human Population Change
Human population change within the range of Ute ladies'-tresses may
increase the negative effects of anthropogenic stressors and
environmental stressors to the species. The future rate and location of
these changes is unclear, but human population growth is projected to
increase at a regional scale within the species' range in the western
United States (Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service 2024, entire).
We incorporated this stressor in our evaluation of future
resiliency by evaluating the projected loss of Ute ladies'-tresses
habitat in occurrences (Service 2024, pp. 129-136). We report the
combined results of climate change and the human population change
stressor in the SSA report and below (see Future Scenarios and Future
Condition, below; Service 2024, pp. 129-199).
Current Condition
To assess the current condition of Ute ladies'-tresses across its
extensive range, we broke the range into 18 smaller analytical units
(AUs) based on USGS 6-digit hydrological unit code (HUC-6) watershed
basins in consultation with species experts (see table 1 below; Jones
et al. 2022, pp. 2, 5; Service 2024, pp. 26-28). This watershed scale
provides a biologically meaningful delineation of areas where regular
gene flow likely occurs between occurrences (Service 2024, pp. 23-26).
As discussed above, we consider Ute ladies'-tresses AUs to be
surrogates for populations (see Background, above). A map of these AUs
is available in the SSA report (Service 2024, p. 4, figure 1).
In our SSA report, we evaluate current condition by examining
current levels of resiliency in the 18 extant Ute ladies'-tresses AUs
and implications for redundancy and representation. Here, we summarize
our evaluation of the current condition for the resiliency, redundancy,
and representation of Ute ladies'-tresses. Additional detail regarding
our analysis is provided in the SSA report (Service 2024, pp. 100-127).
Resiliency
We describe the resiliency for each of the 18 AUs in terms of the
demographic and habitat factors needed by Ute ladies'-tresses (Service
2024, pp. 93-96). We developed a categorical model to calibrate
resiliency based on the range of demographic and habitat conditions in
each AU. We first identified resource or demographic factors that
contribute to the species' resiliency; these factors align with the
individual resource needs and population-level needs we identified in
the SSA analysis. We then defined threshold values for each identified
resource or demographic factor that represent high, moderate, or low
levels of that factor. Finally, we evaluated whether the current levels
of each resource or demographic factor in a population fall within the
predetermined thresholds for a high, moderate, or low score for the
category; we then averaged these scores for each category to develop an
overall current resiliency score for each population.
For Ute ladies'-tresses, our categorical model assessed the
resiliency of each AU by evaluating (1) hydrologic condition, a
qualitative evaluation of the hydrologic regime; (2) vegetative habitat
condition, a qualitative evaluation of floral resources for Ute
ladies'-tresses pollinators and successional stage; (3) abundance, the
number of occupied occurrences within the AU; (4) potential habitat
availability, the percentage of modeled suitable habitat within the AU;
and (5) connectivity, the number of occurrences connected by modeled
suitable habitat. We selected these habitat and demographic factors
based on their importance to the species' resiliency and because we
could evaluate them relatively consistently across all 18 AUs.
Resiliency categories, thresholds, and scores were established
based on the best available information and professional opinion of
species experts. Hydrologic condition was based on expert opinion,
available survey reports, and inspection of aerial imagery to assess
surface or subsurface water in the habitat and the frequency of extreme
flooding or year-round inundation. Vegetative habitat condition was
based on expert opinion and available survey reports to assess whether
the condition was good, moderate, or poor for Ute ladies'-tresses.
Abundance was based on State heritage program database information and
available survey reports to identify the number of extant occurrences
within AUs. Percentage of potential habitat availability and
connectivity (the number of occurrences connected by potentially
suitable habitat) within each AU were based on Service modeled suitable
habitat (Service 2024, pp. 96-99, appendix I). We applied equal weight
to four factors (hydrologic condition, vegetative habitat condition,
abundance, and connectivity)
[[Page 1066]]
and applied one-half the weight (0.5) to the potential habitat
availability factor because we have less confidence in the results
compared to the other factors, as the potential habitat availability
model only represents the potential for the species to recolonize into
new areas following a possible extirpation and may overpredict
potential habitat in AUs.
There are 18 Ute ladies'-tresses AUs comprised of 62 occurrences,
and according to our current condition analysis in the SSA report, 5
have high resiliency, 8 have moderate resiliency, and 5 have low
resiliency (see table 1, below; Service 2024, pp. 122-123). The 13 AUs
with high and moderate resiliency maintain moderate or high hydrologic
condition; moderate or high population abundance (the exception is
Lower Bear AU with low abundance); and a range of scores for vegetative
habitat condition, connectivity, and potential habitat availability.
The 13 AUs with high or moderate resiliency are distributed across the
species' range, are present in all 8 U.S. States and Canada, and are
present in 10 of the 12 ecoregions (see table 1, below). Five AUs have
low resiliency due to low abundance and two or more additional factors
with low scores. Notably, all 18 AUs have moderate or high resiliency
scores for hydrological condition. The 13 AUs with high or moderate
resiliency are at less risk from potential stochastic events, such as
climatic variation, than the AUs with low resiliency.
Table 1--Current Condition Resiliency Rankings for Ute Ladies'-Tresses AUs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of
AU name (States * or Canada) extant AU resiliency Level-III ecoregions
occurrences
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cheyenne (WY, SD, NE)............... 1 Low.................................. Northwestern Great
Plains.
Colorado Headwaters (CO)............ 2 Moderate............................. Southern Rockies.
Great Salt Lake (UT, NV)............ 1 Low.................................. Central Basin and
Range.
Jordan (UT)......................... 5 High................................. Central Basin and
Range, Wasatch and
Uinta Mountains.
Lower Bear (UT, ID)................. 1 Moderate............................. Central Basin and
Range, Wasatch and
Uinta Mountains.
Lower Colorado-Lake Mead (NV, UT, 1 Low.................................. Wasatch and Uinta
AZ). Mountains, Colorado
Plateaus.
Lower Green River (UT, CO).......... 13 High................................. Central Basin and
Range.
Missouri Headwaters (MT, WY)........ 9 High................................. Middle Rockies.
Niobrara (WY, SD, NE)............... 2 Moderate............................. High Plains.
North Platte (WY, NE, CO)........... 3 High................................. High Plains.
Snake Headwaters (ID, WY)........... 2 Moderate............................. Snake River Plain,
Middle Rockies.
South Platte (WY, CO, NE)........... 6 Moderate............................. Southern Rockies, High
Plains.
Upper Colorado-Dirty Devil (UT, AZ). 1 Low.................................. Colorado Plateau.
Upper Columbia (WA, Canada)......... 6 Moderate............................. Columbia Plateau,
North Cascades.
Upper Green (UT, CO)................ 2 High................................. Wasatch and Uinta
Mountains, Colorado
Plateau, Wyoming
Basin.
Upper Missouri (MT)................. 2 Moderate............................. Middle Rockies.
Upper Snake (ID, WY, UT, NV)........ 4 Moderate............................. Snake River Plain,
Middle Rockies.
Weber (UT, WY)...................... 1 Low.................................. Central Basin and
Range.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* State abbreviations are Arizona (AZ), Colorado (CO), Idaho (ID), Montana (MT), Nebraska (NE), Nevada (NV),
South Dakota (SD), Utah (UT), Washington (WA), and Wyoming (WY).
Redundancy
Redundancy describes the number and distribution of AUs, and the
greater the number and the wider the distribution of the AUs, the
better Ute ladies'-tresses can withstand catastrophic events. The
plausibility of catastrophic events also influences species'
redundancy; if catastrophic events are unlikely within the range of the
species, catastrophic risk is inherently lower. We identified severe to
extreme drought conditions as a plausible catastrophic event that may
affect one or more population simultaneously. We evaluated the risk of
this catastrophic event and its impact on species redundancy in our
future scenarios (see Future Scenarios and Future Condition, below).
Ute ladies'-tresses' redundancy is characterized by 18 AUs (watersheds)
distributed across its large range; AUs are separated by the Northern
and Middle Rocky Mountains, and distances of approximately 350 miles
for the more isolated Upper Columbia AU. As we mentioned above, the 13
AUs with high or moderate resiliency are distributed across the
species' range, are present in all 8 U.S. States and Canada, and are
present in 10 of the 12 ecoregions. Thus, the 13 higher resiliency
populations and their distribution help spread the risk of catastrophic
drought conditions over a larger geographic area and contribute to the
species' ability to withstand catastrophic events. We are aware of one
AU (Upper Arkansas) that is extirpated in Colorado due to urban
development (Service 2024, pp. 65-66, 100-109).
Representation
Ute ladies'-tresses exhibits considerable ecological diversity; the
species is found in 3 different ecological classifications (Great
Plains, North American Deserts, and Western Forested Mountains), 12
level-III ecoregions, and 7 habitat types (see Background, above). High
genetic diversity was documented in populations located in six of the
eight States within the species' range, and there is very little
morphological variability across the range. The species has greater
levels of representation than we previously understood at the time Ute
ladies'-tresses was listed in 1992, because of our better understanding
of the species, including more known occurrences and AUs, and a broader
known distribution.
Future Scenarios and Future Condition
In our SSA report, we forecasted the resiliency of Ute ladies'-
tresses AUs and the redundancy and representation of the species for
approximately 50 years (to 2074) using a range of three plausible
future scenarios. We relied on combined IPCC climate and land use
projections out to 2074 (the timeframe for which they were available).
These projections informed our evaluation of habitat loss from
anthropogenic activities. This
[[Page 1067]]
timeframe encompasses approximately 2 to 3 generations of the species,
the duration (30 years) of the applicable Federal land management plans
by USFS and BLM, and the duration (50 years or more) of dam operation
contracts or licenses. We can reasonably determine projected changes in
the climate change and anthropogenic activities/stressors using
geospatial data sets and the species' likely responses to those
stressors within this 50-year timeframe (i.e., the foreseeable future).
We developed three plausible future scenarios using three climate
models that were downscaled to the Ute ladies'-tresses' AUs. By
developing a range of plausible future scenarios, we assume that actual
future conditions will likely fall somewhere between these three
scenarios. We consider the driving factors of the species' viability to
be two separate, but interconnected influences--the effects of
anthropogenic activity related to loss of habitat from stressors that
include urban development, water management, agriculture, recreation,
and land conversion, and the effects of climate change influencing the
amount of water available in a watershed. The primary negative
influence of anthropogenic activity to AU resiliency is the loss of Ute
ladies'-tresses plants and habitat, regardless of the particular
anthropogenic stressor(s). We then used existing models and data to
project the effects of climate change and anthropogenic activities on
the demographic and habitat factors that influence resiliency,
redundancy, and representation. We calculated the future resiliency
score using the same methods as the current condition score. If
anthropogenic activity was projected to cause extirpation of an
occurrence (50 percent or more potential suitable habitat loss was
projected), it was removed from the AU prior to the evaluation of
climate change effects. If the AU future resiliency ranking fell below
0.9 (lowest possible original score), we assumed the AU would become
extirpated (a condition lower than the low condition category and
unlikely to be resilient to stochastic events) in the foreseeable
future under that scenario.
For anthropogenic activity, we evaluated the projected loss of Ute
ladies'-tresses habitat in occurrences based on changes in land use and
land cover (Service 2024, pp. 134-136). We used USGS land cover
projections out to 2074 that correspond to the three climate change and
human population change scenarios (B1, B2, and A2) developed by the
IPCC (Sohl et al. 2018, data set; USGS 2019, dataset). Detailed
descriptions of each scenario are available in the SSA report (Service
2024, pp. 129-199). Scenario 1 (B1) represents a stabilization of
emissions (RCP 4.5) and a slowed rate of human population growth. The
B1 or stabilization climate scenario describes a global population that
peaks in mid-century and declines thereafter under intermediate
emissions. Scenario 2 (B2) represents the continuation of the current
rate of human population growth into the future with technology
mitigating some growth under high emissions (RCP 8.5), and Scenario 3
(A2) represents a largely unchecked population growth under high
emissions (RCP 8.5) (IPCC 2000, pp. 9-11).
The USGS land cover projections identify changes on non-Federal
lands because they have a higher risk of development and other
anthropogenic stressors compared to Federal lands. This is consistent
with our understanding of the development risk for the species' wetland
habitats. We consider there to be a low risk of future development in
Ute ladies'-tresses habitat on Federal lands, and we assumed no habitat
loss from development on Federal lands in our future projections.
We consider the USGS emergent wetlands, woody wetlands, and hay or
pasture land cover categories to represent suitable habitat for Ute
ladies'-tresses, and we calculated the amount of habitat loss based on
projected changes to those land cover categories. We assumed the loss
of habitat if suitable habitat for Ute ladies'-tresses within an
occurrence was converted to moderately or highly developed land or to
cultivated cropland categories. If there was 50 percent or more
suitable habitat loss within an occurrence, then we considered the
occurrence to be extirpated.
Depending on the scenario, some occurrences in rapidly urbanizing
areas are projected to be extirpated; however, there is very little
habitat loss projected for most of the occurrences (Service 2024, pp.
139-199). In the B1 scenario, human population change and associated
anthropogenic stressors were projected to result in the loss of three
occurrences in Utah and Colorado (within the Jordan, Lower Green River,
and South Platte AUs). In the B2 scenario, we project a loss of 10
occurrences in Utah, Colorado, Montana, and Idaho (within the Jordan,
Lower Green River, Missouri Headwaters, South Platte, Upper Colorado-
Dirty Devil, Upper Snake AUs). In the A2 scenario, we project a loss of
11 occurrences in Utah, Colorado, Nevada, Montana, and Idaho (within
the Jordan, Lower Colorado-Lake Mead, Lower Green River, Missouri
Headwaters, South Platte, Upper Colorado-Dirty Devil, Upper Missouri,
Upper Snake AUs). For some occurrences, if they were projected to be
extirpated because of a loss of hydrologic condition, we did not assess
their projected extirpation risk from human activities.
As discussed above, we evaluated climate change effects to
occurrence hydrologic condition using SPEI index projections of severe
and extreme drought frequency out to 2074 (see ``Climate Change,''
above). We used SPEI index projections under intermediate emissions
(RCP 4.5) for Scenario 1, and SPEI index projections under high
emissions (RPC 8.5) for Scenarios 2 and 3. For each occurrence, we
compared the historical and projected future decadal frequency (to
2074) of severe and extreme droughts within the species' range. We made
no change to an occurrence's projected hydrologic or vegetative
condition category if the drought frequency was projected to remain
similar to the historical drought frequency (less than one additional
severe or extreme drought per decade above the historical frequency).
For all three scenarios, we reduced an occurrence's future hydrologic
condition by one category (from high to moderate; moderate to low) if
the drought frequency was projected to increase by 1 to 1.9 severe to
extreme drought(s) per decade above the historical frequency, and by
two categories if the frequency was projected to increase by 2 to 3
severe to extreme droughts per decade above the historical frequency.
For climate change effects to occurrence vegetative habitat
condition, we assumed that there was no change in the condition
category under intermediate emissions (RCP 4.5) for Scenario 1.
However, we assumed that vegetative habitat condition would change the
same amount as hydrologic condition for a given occurrence under the
two high emissions scenarios, Scenarios 2 and 3 (Service 2024, p. 133).
In Scenario 1 (B1), anthropogenic activities are projected to
increase in two States within the range; associated habitat loss would
result in the extirpation of three occurrences in Utah and Colorado
(within the Jordan, Lower Green River, and South Platte AUs). However,
the extirpations of these occurrences do not affect the overall AU
resiliency scores.
The frequency of severe and extreme droughts varies across the
species' range. Small increases in decadal
[[Page 1068]]
drought frequency are projected for most occurrences in northern Utah,
Idaho, and Washington, although a few occurrences in those States show
a small decrease in drought frequency relative to current trends. The
remaining States and Canada show a larger per decade increase in
drought frequency (by approximately 1 to 2 more additional severe to
extreme droughts per decade) at most occurrences. No occurrences were
projected to have an increase of three or more severe to extreme
droughts in any scenario. Occurrences in Montana and those at the
southern edges of the range in Nevada and southern Utah are projected
to see the largest increases in drought frequency. Projected climate
change effects and associated declines in occurrence hydrologic
condition result in the extirpation of five occurrences in Montana,
Colorado, and Utah (within the Missouri Headwaters, South Platte, Upper
Colorado-Dirty Devil AUs). The one extirpated occurrence in the Upper
Colorado-Dirty Devil AU results in the extirpation of that AU, since
that is the only occurrence in that AU.
We project the resiliency of 15 AUs will remain the same as current
conditions, 2 AUs (Missouri Headwaters, North Platte) will drop from
high to moderate overall resiliency, and 1 AU (Upper Colorado-Dirty
Devil) will drop from low resiliency to extirpated (see table 2,
below). Declines in AU resiliency were driven by climate change
effects. Redundancy declines because 17 AUs remain and 1 is extirpated,
and representation remains the same as current conditions in terms of
represented ecoregions and habitat types.
Ute ladies'-tresses is projected to maintain 13 AUs with high or
moderate resiliency in Scenario 1 (B1), and these AUs are at less risk
from potential stochastic events, such as climatic variation, than the
4 AUs with low resiliency.
In Scenario 2 (B2), anthropogenic activities increase in four
States within the range; projections of this stressor and associated
habitat loss result in the extirpation of nine occurrences in Utah,
Colorado, Montana, and Idaho (within the Jordan, Lower Green River,
Missouri Headwaters, South Platte, and Upper Snake AUs).
The frequency of severe and extreme droughts is projected to
increase in most AUs by one to less than three additional severe to
extreme droughts per decade over current trends. Similar to Scenario 1,
Utah, Idaho, and Washington experience the smallest increases in
drought frequency, and in some cases smaller than the frequencies
projected in Scenario 1, which is considered the less extreme climate
scenario. However, occurrences in Montana and at the southern edges of
the range in Nevada and southern Utah are projected to have the largest
increases in drought frequency. Projected climate change effects and
associated declines in occurrence hydrologic condition result in the
extirpation of the Upper Colorado-Dirty Devil AU and two additional
occurrences in Montana in the Missouri Headwaters AU.
We project the overall resiliency of 13 AUs will remain the same as
the current condition, 2 AUs (Jordan, North Platte) will drop from high
to moderate condition, 1 AU (Missouri Headwaters) will drop from high
to low condition, 1 AU (South Platte) will drop from moderate to low
condition, and 1 AU (Upper Colorado-Dirty Devil) will drop from low to
extirpated condition (see table 2, below). Declines in AU resiliency
were driven by anthropogenic activities in the Jordan AU, the
combination of anthropogenic activities and climate change effects in
the Missouri Headwaters and South Platte AUs, and climate change
effects in the North Platte and Upper Colorado-Dirty Devil AUs.
Redundancy declines because 17 AUs remain and 1 is extirpated, and
representation remains the same as current conditions in terms of
represented ecoregions and habitat types.
The increase in climate change and anthropogenic effects compared
to current conditions under Scenario 2 has the potential to negatively
impact vegetative condition. We expect dormant seedlings and plants to
remain viable under this scenario and to support population resiliency.
Despite some reduction in resiliency, Ute ladies'-tresses is projected
to maintain 11 AUs with high or moderate resiliency in this scenario,
and these AUs are at less risk from potential stochastic events, such
as climatic variation, than the 6 AUs with low resiliency.
In Scenario 3 (A2), anthropogenic activities increase in 5 States
within the species' range; associated habitat loss results in the
extirpation of 11 occurrences in Utah, Colorado, Montana, Idaho, and
Nevada (within the Jordan, Lower Green River, Missouri Headwaters,
South Platte, Upper Snake, Upper Missouri, and Lower Colorado-Lake Mead
AUs).
As in Scenario 2, more occurrences are projected to see increases
of one to less than three additional severe to extreme droughts per
decade over current trends, and these effects are compounded by more
anthropogenic activity. Projected climate change effects and associated
declines in occurrence hydrologic condition result in the extirpation
of the Upper Colorado-Dirty Devil AU, as well as three occurrences in
Colorado and Montana (within the South Platte and Missouri Headwaters
AUs).
We project the overall resiliency of 11 AUs will remain the same as
the current condition, 2 AUs (Jordan, North Platte) will drop from high
to moderate condition, 1 AU (Missouri Headwaters) will drop from high
to low condition, 2 AUs (South Platte and Upper Missouri) will drop
from moderate to low condition, and 2 AUs (Upper Colorado-Dirty Devil
and Lower Colorado-Lake Mead) will drop from low to extirpated
condition (see table 2, below). Declines in AU resiliency were driven
by anthropogenic activities in the Jordan and Lower Colorado-Lake Mead
AUs; the combination of anthropogenic activities and climate change
effects in the Missouri Headwaters, Upper Missouri, and South Platte
AUs; and climate change effects in the North Platte and Upper Colorado-
Dirty Devil AUs. Redundancy declines because 16 AUs remain and 2 are
extirpated, and representation remains the same as current conditions
in terms of represented ecoregions and habitat types.
The increase in climate change and anthropogenic effects compared
to current conditions under Scenario 3 has the potential to negatively
impact vegetative condition. We expect dormant seedlings and plants to
remain viable under this scenario and to support population resiliency.
Despite some reduction in resiliency, Ute ladies'-tresses is projected
to maintain 10 AUs with high or moderate resiliency in this scenario,
and these AUs are at less risk from potential stochastic events, such
as climatic variation, than the 6 AUs with low resiliency.
[[Page 1069]]
Table 2--Summary of Ute Ladies'-Tresses Resiliency for the Current Condition and Three Future Scenarios
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resiliency
AU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current condition Future scenario 1 Future scenario 2 Future scenario 3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cheyenne........................ Low............... Low............... Low............... Low.
Colorado Headwaters............. Moderate.......... Moderate.......... Moderate.......... Moderate.
Great Salt Lake................. Low............... Low............... Low............... Low.
Jordan.......................... High.............. High.............. Moderate.......... Moderate.
Lower Bear...................... Moderate.......... Moderate.......... Moderate.......... Moderate.
Lower Colorado-Lake Mead........ Low............... Low............... Low............... Extirpated.
Lower Green River............... High.............. High.............. High.............. High.
Missouri Headwaters............. High.............. Moderate.......... Low............... Low.
Niobrara........................ Moderate.......... Moderate.......... Moderate.......... Moderate.
North Platte.................... High.............. Moderate.......... Moderate.......... Moderate.
Snake Headwaters................ Moderate.......... Moderate.......... Moderate.......... Moderate.
South Platte.................... Moderate.......... Moderate.......... Low............... Low.
Upper Colorado-Dirty Devil...... Low............... Extirpated........ Extirpated........ Extirpated.
Upper Columbia.................. Moderate.......... Moderate.......... Moderate.......... Moderate.
Upper Green..................... High.............. High.............. High.............. High.
Upper Missouri.................. Moderate.......... Moderate.......... Moderate.......... Low.
Upper Snake..................... Moderate.......... Moderate.......... Moderate.......... Moderate.
Weber........................... Low............... Low............... Low............... Low.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under all three future scenarios, the overall resiliency of at
least 11 AUs is projected to remain the same as the current condition.
Declines in overall resiliency for the remaining AUs were driven by
climate change in Scenario 1 and the combination of anthropogenic
activities and climate change in Scenarios 2 and 3. Under all three
future scenarios, Ute ladies'-tresses is projected to maintain at least
10 AUs with high or moderate resiliency, and these AUs are at less risk
from potential stochastic events, such as climatic variation, than the
AUs with low resiliency. AUs along large, mainstem rivers with multiple
occurrences (Upper Green, Lower Green River, Upper Columbia, Upper
Snake, Lower Bear, Niobrara, Colorado Headwaters) are the most
resilient; they maintain their overall resiliency scores across all
future scenarios despite projected declines in abundance and
connectivity. The Upper Colorado-Dirty Devil AU in the southern part of
the range is the least resilient and is projected to be extirpated in
all three future scenarios due to climate change.
Under all three future scenarios, some genetic diversity within
populations could be lost. However, even in the most pessimistic
plausible scenario (Scenario 3), 16 AUs are expected to remain extant
and ecological variation will continue to be represented by the 12
ecoregions and 7 habitat types across Ute ladies'-tresses' range.
We note that, by using the SSA framework to guide our analysis of
the scientific information documented in the SSA report, we have
analyzed the cumulative effects of identified threats and conservation
actions on the species. To assess the current and future condition of
the species, we evaluate the effects of all the relevant factors that
may be influencing the species, including threats and conservation
efforts. Because the SSA framework considers not just the presence of
the factors, but to what degree they collectively influence risk to the
entire species, our assessment integrates the cumulative effects of the
factors and replaces a standalone cumulative-effects analysis.
See the SSA report (Service 2024, entire) for a more detailed
discussion of our evaluation of the biological status of Ute ladies'-
tresses and the stressors that may affect its continued existence. Our
conclusions in the SSA report, which form the basis for the
determination below, are based upon the best available scientific and
commercial data.
Conservation Efforts and Regulatory Mechanisms
There are several regulatory mechanisms, as well as conservation
efforts, that may minimize the effect of stressors or provide benefits
to Ute ladies'-tresses. Due to the broad distribution of Ute ladies'-
tresses in the United States and Canada, management of this species
falls under numerous jurisdictions. Roughly 95 percent of the species'
range occurs in the United States, with the remaining 5 percent of its
range occurring in British Columbia, Canada. In the United States,
approximately 37 percent of land where the species occurs is federally
owned or managed by the BLM, USBR, USFS, Service, NPS, and DOD. Almost
half of the land, approximately 47 percent, is under private ownership.
There is a small amount (approximately 3 percent) of Ute ladies'-
tresses habitat where the land ownership is not known. The remaining 13
percent of the species' range is on State and Tribal lands (Service
2024, p. 39).
International Regulatory Mechanisms
International trade in all orchids is regulated by the Convention
on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna
(CITES; 27 U.S.T. 1087, March 3, 1973), an international agreement
ratified by most countries worldwide since 1975. The purpose of CITES
is to regulate the international wildlife trade to safeguard certain
species from over-exploitation. Ute ladies'-tresses is listed as an
appendix II species of CITES and would remain an appendix II species if
delisted under the Act because it is an orchid. Under CITES, exporters
must obtain a permit for international shipment of specimens. Export
permits for an appendix II species are issued only when the following
findings are made: (1) a scientific finding of non-detriment (i.e.,
data or expert scientific opinion on the biological status of the
species indicating that the export is not likely to be detrimental to
species survival); and (2) a finding that specimens were acquired
legally (i.e., evidence that specimens to be exported were not obtained
in violation of any State, Federal, or other jurisdictional law). More
information on CITES can be found at: https://cites.org/eng/disc/what.php.
In Canada, the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in
Canada (COSEWIC) designated Ute ladies'-tresses as a schedule 1
endangered species under the Canadian Species at Risk Act (SARA) in
November 2018, due to the high risk of extirpation
[[Page 1070]]
(COSEWIC 2018, entire). This designation provides protection from
harming, killing, collecting, buying, selling, or possessing Ute
ladies'-tresses on Federal Crown lands. In Canada, the species occurs
on lands within an Ecological Reserve that are permanently protected
and managed by British Columbia Parks for their biodiversity, and on
lands within the Osoyoos Indian Reserve with no conservation status
(COSEWIC 2018, pp. 43-44).
Federal Regulatory Mechanisms
Clean Water Act--The Clean Water Act (CWA) was designed, in part,
to protect surface waters of the United States from unregulated
pollution from point sources. The CWA provides some benefit to Ute
ladies'-tresses through the regulation of discharge into surface waters
through a permitting process; however, the historical threats to Ute
ladies'-tresses habitat have not typically been associated with point
sources of pollution, and the best available information indicates that
pollution is not a stressor.
Under section 404 of the CWA, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) regulates the discharge of fill material into waters of the
United States, including wetlands that meet certain jurisdictional
requirements. In general, the term ``wetland'' refers to areas meeting
the USACE's criteria of hydric soils, hydrology (either sufficient
annual flooding or water on the soil surface), and hydrophytic
vegetation (plants specifically adapted for growing in wetlands).
The USACE and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
amended the definition of ``waters of the United States'' as it applies
to the CWA and the jurisdictional authority of the USACE on September
8, 2023 (88 FR 61964), to comply with a 2023 Supreme Court Decision,
Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency. Under the new definition,
jurisdictional (that is, regulated under the authority of the CWA)
wetlands are those wetlands adjacent to navigable waters defined as
interstate waters, and relatively permanent, standing or continuously
flowing bodies of water with continuous surface connection to certain
other bodies of water (see 33 CFR 328.3(a)(1) and (a)(4), and 40 CFR
120.2(a)(4)); and jurisdictional ``waters of the United States''
include certain intrastate lakes and ponds (see 33 CFR 328.3(a)(5)).
Under this definition of waters of the United States, Ute ladies'-
tresses occurrences along interstate waters or along intrastate lakes,
ponds, streams, or wetlands that are relatively permanent, standing or
continuously flowing bodies of water with a continuous surface
connection to certain waterbodies would be considered as occurring in
jurisdictional waters/wetlands, and we expect the protections of the
CWA to remain if we delist Ute ladies'-tresses under the Act. However,
in some cases, occurrences in wet meadow, spring, or seep habitats that
do not meet the definition would not be considered jurisdictional
waters/wetlands under the CWA. This means the loss of indirect
protections under the CWA for occurrences on non-Federal lands in the
United States. Under the previous and new definition of ``waters of the
United States,'' certain farming activities, ditches, artificially
irrigated areas that would revert to dry land if irrigation ceased, and
artificial lakes, ponds, or waterfilled depressions incidental to
construction activity are not considered waters of the United States
and are excluded from the CWA's section 404 regulations.
National Environmental Policy Act--Environmental review of
potential effects of Federal actions is mandated under the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). When NEPA
analysis reveals significant environmental effects, the Federal
agencies must disclose those effects to the public and consider
mitigation that could offset the effects. These mitigations usually
provide some protections for listed species. However, NEPA does not
require that adverse impacts be mitigated, only disclosed. Therefore,
it is unclear what level of protection would be conveyed to Ute
ladies'-tresses through NEPA, in the absence of protections under the
Act.
National Park Organic Act--Federal activities on National Park
Service (NPS) lands are subject to the National Park Service Organic
Act (54 U.S.C. 100101 et seq.). The Organic Act specifies that the NPS
will promote and regulate the use of the National Park System (System)
by means and measures that conform to the fundamental purpose of the
System units, which purpose is to conserve the scenery, natural and
historic objects, and wild life in the System units and to provide for
the enjoyment of the scenery, natural and historic objects, and wild
life in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for
the enjoyment of future generations (54 U.S.C. 100101(a)).
The NPS manages Ute ladies'-tresses occurrences in Dinosaur
National Monument along the Green River in northwestern Colorado (Upper
Green and Lower Green River AUs) and a historical occurrence in Capitol
Reef National Park in Utah (Fertig et al. 2005, pp. 74, 77-78, 82, 89-
90; Hendricks 2005, entire; Service 2024, pp. 67, 71, 84-85). For
listed species, NPS provides habitat protections from conflicting land
use; however, the NPS does not control the hydrology of the Green or
Fremont Rivers. We expect habitat protections to continue along the
Green River if we delist Ute ladies'-tresses based on the regulatory
mechanisms provided by the Organic Act.
National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act--As directed by the
National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act (Pub. L. 105-57),
Service refuge managers have the authority and responsibility to
protect native ecosystems, fulfill the purposes for which an individual
refuge was founded, and implement strategies to achieve the goals and
objectives stated in management plans. In the Lower Green River AU,
Browns Park National Wildlife Refuge contained habitat for Ute ladies'-
tresses along the Green River in northwestern Colorado upstream of
Dinosaur National Monument as recently as 1999. Since then, flood and
scour events have reduced the amount of occupied and suitable Ute
ladies'-tresses habitat on the refuge (Horne 2024, pers. comm.). Browns
Park National Wildlife Refuge's comprehensive conservation plan (CCP)
is a land management plan that directs the protection and restoration
of riparian and wetland habitats, including Ute ladies'-tresses habitat
on the refuge (Service 1999, p. 22). Browns Park National Wildlife
Refuge will continue to protect riparian and wetland habitats that
include Ute ladies'-tresses habitat regardless of the Federal listing
status of Ute ladies'-tresses (Horne 2024, pers. comm.).
In addition to specific protections for Ute ladies'-tresses
provided under CCPs, the species is permanently protected by the
mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System to administer a national
network of lands and waters for the conservation, management, and where
appropriate, restoration of the fish, wildlife, and plant resources and
their habitats within the United States for the benefit of present and
future generations of Americans (16 U.S.C. 668dd(a)(2)).
National Forest Management Act--Federal activities on U.S. Forest
Service (USFS) lands are subject to the National Forest Management Act
of 1976 (NFMA; 16 U.S.C. 1600 et seq.). The NFMA requires the
development and implementation of resource management plans to guide
the maintenance of ecological conditions that support natural
distributions and abundance of species and not contribute to their
extirpation.
[[Page 1071]]
The USFS manages Ute ladies'-tresses occurrences in the Ashley
National Forest in northeastern Utah (Lower Green River AU), the Uinta-
Wasatch Cache National Forest in northcentral Utah (Jordan AU), and the
Caribou-Targhee National Forest in Idaho (Snake Headwaters AU) (Service
2024, pp. 47, 51, 61). Guidance for conservation of Ute ladies'-tresses
is included in the Caribou-Targhee, Uinta, and Ashley National Forest
plans (USFS 1997, p. III-14; USFS 2003, pp. 2-6, 5-51-5-53; USFS 2023,
pp. 20-21, 54, 90, 93). The Uinta-Wasatch Cache National Forest
designated the portion of the Diamond Fork Creek occurrence as a
``riparian habitat conservation area class I,'' which affords the
highest level of protection (300-ft (91-m) avoidance buffer) for Ute
ladies'-tresses in that area (USFS 2003, pp. D-1, D-2).
If we delist Ute ladies'-tresses, the species may still be
recognized as a USFS species of conservation concern whereby the agency
is directed to provide ecological conditions necessary to maintain
viable populations of the species (77 FR 21162, April 9, 2012; 36 CFR
219.9; Hayward et al. 2016, pp. 8, 21-28). The USFS in each respective
region has the authority to designate Ute ladies'-tresses as regional
forester sensitive species (RFSS), which is similar to a USFS species
of conservation concern (77 FR 21162 at 21175, April 9, 2012; 36 CFR
219.9(c)). If, in the future, Ute ladies'-tresses undergoes a downward
trend and its viability is a concern, the USFS has the authority to
designate it as a species of conservation concern. In addition, if
delisted, Ute ladies'-tresses occupying riparian habitats on USFS lands
will continue to receive levels of protection for riparian habitats
identified in the forest plans (USFS 1997, pp. III-9-III-12; USFS 2003,
pp. 3-2-3-5, 3-9-3-10, 3-14-3-15, 3-22, 3-25-3-27, D-1, D-2; USFS 2023,
pp. 17-18, 46, 50, 53-54, 92).
Federal Land Policy and Management Act--The Federal Land Policy and
Management Act (FLPMA; 43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) applies to the BLM with
regard to the conservation and use of public lands under their
management. The BLM manages Ute ladies'-tresses occurrences in
Colorado, Utah, Idaho, Washington, and Wyoming (Colorado Headwaters,
Lower Colorado-Lake Mead, Upper Colorado-Dirty Devil, Lower Green
River, Upper Green, Snake Headwaters, Upper Snake, Upper Columbia,
North Platte, and Cheyenne AUs) (Fertig et al. 2005, pp. 38-55; Service
2024, pp. 84-85).
Guidance for Ute ladies'-tresses conservation is included in some
BLM resource management plans (RMPs) that include surveys, monitoring,
avoidance buffers, and invasive species control (BLM 2020, pp. F-24-F-
25; BLM 2015a, appendix J; BLM 2000, pp. 15-17; BLM 2007, appendix Z;
BLM 2008a, appendix 14; BLM 2010, appendix T; BLM 2014, appendix P; BLM
2015b, appendix K; BLM 2015c, appendix K; BLM 2015d, appendix K; BLM
2016, appendix 28; BLM 2023a, pp. 3-12, 3-13, and 4-81-4-82; Carroll
2005, entire).
The one extant occurrence along Deer Creek in the Upper Colorado-
Dirty Devil AU is located in the Grand Staircase National Monument in
Utah, established in 1996 to preserve geologic, archaeologic, and
ecological communities and provide for scientific research, education,
and exploration (Presidential Proclamation 6920, September 18, 1996;
BLM 2020, p. F-24-F-25). Occurrences in the Upper Snake River, Idaho
(Upper Snake AU), are located along the floodplain of the Snake and
Henry's Fork Rivers. The Snake River area of critical environmental
concern (ACEC) includes 21,954 ac (8,884 ha) of BLM-managed public
lands designated to protect and conserve riparian-wetland habitat. This
ACEC is the top priority wetland in the State of Idaho, and we consider
it to contain the highest-quality cottonwood riparian zone in the
western United States (BLM 1985, pp. 25-26; Fertig et al. 2005, pp. 38-
44; Velman 2005, entire; BLM 2023b, pp. 8-9; BLM 2023c pp. 90-91).
Occurrences in the Green River (Lower Green River AU) are found in the
Browns Park ACEC in Utah; the ACEC comprises 18,480 ac (7,479 ha) and
protects high value scenery, wildlife habitat, and cultural resources
(Fertig et al. 2005, p. 46; BLM 2008b, p. 36). The protections provided
by ACEC designations are not contingent upon the species' federally
listed status. The BLM's ACECs do not have an expiration date, and
removing an ACEC designation is not simple. A withdrawal of an ACEC can
be made only by the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) or, if
delegated by the Secretary, an individual in the Office of the
Secretary who has been appointed by the President, by and with the
advice and consent of the Senate (43 U.S.C. 1714(a)). The Snake River
and Browns Park ACECs were designated to protect multiple species and
resources in addition to Ute ladies'-tresses. Therefore, the ACEC
designations will not change under the current BLM RMP, even if Ute
ladies'-tresses is delisted.
Even without the protections of the Act, Ute ladies'-tresses orchid
would remain a BLM sensitive species for at least 5 years (BLM 2008c,
pp. 36, 47). The BLM in each respective State has the authority to
designate Ute ladies'-tresses as a BLM sensitive species, which would
provide protections equivalent to a Federal candidate species (BLM
2008c, pp. 43, 47). If, in the future, Ute ladies'-tresses undergoes a
downward trend and its viability is at risk such that it meets the
definition of a BLM sensitive species, the BLM has the authority to
designate it as a BLM sensitive species (BLM 2008c, pp. 36-37).
If delisted, Ute ladies'-tresses occupying riparian habitats on BLM
lands would also receive the levels of protection for riparian habitats
identified in the RMPs, including avoidance buffers, livestock grazing
provisions, and invasive species control (BLM 1985, p. 39; BLM 2000,
pp. 8-12, 15-18, 37-40, 45-49, 54, 61; BLM 2007, pp. 2-10, 2-18-2-24,
2-40, 2-44; BLM 2008a, pp. 2-19, 2-35, 2-42, 2-46-2-50, and appendix
14; BLM 2008b, pp. 44, 113-115; BLM 2010, pp. 2-24-2-25, 2-30, 2-33-2-
38, 2-45-2-49, 2-60, and appendix T; BLM 2014, pp. 18-19, 39-41, 46-48,
52, 58, 67, 98-99; BLM 2015a, pp. 33-48, and appendices B and J; BLM
2015b, pp. 6, 10, 32, 36-37, 47, 54, 59, 62, 73, 75-76, 85, 86, 97,
101-102, 106, 117-118, 125-126, 148-150, 161, 179-180; BLM 2015c, pp.
5, 27, 33-34, 42-43, 55, 60, 72, 75-76, 81, 85, 93, 105, 115, 121-123;
BLM 2015d, pp. 5, 33-34, 42-43, 55, 60, 71, 74-76, 80, 84, 91, 103,
115, 126-128; BLM 2016, pp. 1-5-1-7, 2-3, 2-15-2-19, 2-25, 2-41-2-43,
2-55, 2-65-2-66, and appendix 28; BLM 2020, pp. ROD-17, ARMPs-14-15, C-
16-C-17, C-20, F-9-F-11, F-25; BLM 2023a, pp. 2-14, 2-16-4-231).
Reclamation Act of 1902--The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) is
responsible for the management and development of many large Federal
dams, water diversion structures, and water storage project
construction in the western United States subject to the Reclamation
Act of 1902 (Pub. L. 57-161; 43 U.S.C. 371 et seq.), and section 4007
of the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act (WIIN Act,
Pub. L. 114-322; 43 U.S.C. 390b note). The USBR has the authority to
manage water flows and water releases along the Green River in Colorado
and Utah, and the South Fork Snake River in Idaho. The USBR has
delegated its authority in some areas to commissions (e.g., the Utah
Reclamation Mitigation and Conservation Commission (URMCC)) or Water
Conservation Districts to manage smaller rivers such as the Provo,
Duchesne, and Diamond Fork Rivers in Utah.
[[Page 1072]]
The USBR and other cooperating agencies have implemented management
actions to benefit federally listed fish in river corridors where Ute
ladies'-tresses occurs, and we expect these management actions to
continue if Ute ladies'-tresses is delisted. The USBR, commissions, or
Water Conservation Districts manage peak and base flows to support a
more natural hydrograph and contribute to the creation of wetland
habitats to support conservation of federally listed and native fish
species such as the humpback chub (Gila cypha), Colorado pikeminnow
(Ptychocheilus lucius), razorback sucker (Xyrauchen texanus), June
sucker (Chasmistes liorus), and bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus).
Fish conservation actions indirectly benefit Ute ladies'-tresses by
creating suitable habitat and allowing a more natural hydrograph that
allows for periodic flood and scour events to maintain early- to mid-
seral habitat conditions.
Examples of management actions taken by the USBR include: (1) In
the Upper Green and Lower Green River AUs, as part of the Upper
Colorado River endangered fish recovery program (UCRRP) established in
1988, the USBR manages peak and base flows of the Green River to
support a more natural hydrograph and contributes to the creation of
wetland habitats to support conservation of native fish species (UCRRP
1988 and 2022, entire); (2) in the Jordan AU, as part of the June
sucker recovery implementation program, the USBR and URMCC are
restoring, enhancing, and creating wetland habitat conditions along the
lower Provo River and Provo River Delta where it connects to Utah Lake
(Service 2016, entire). The Provo River Delta restoration project
(PRDRP) has already protected Ute ladies'-tresses and was complete in
2024 (Service 2016, entire; US Department of Interior 2024, entire);
and (3) in the Snake River AU, as part of the consultation for the
operations and maintenance of USBR projects in the Snake River Basin
above Brownlee Reservoir, the USBR manages flows to support a more
natural hydrograph (USBR 2005b, entire).
Sikes Act and Sikes Act Improvement Act--Federal activities on
Department of Defense (DOD) lands are subject to the Sikes Act (Pub. L.
86-797; 16 U.S.C. 670 et seq.) and Sikes Act Improvement Act (SAIA;
Pub. L. 105-85). The Sikes Act and SAIA provide for cooperation by the
DOD, the Department of the Interior (including the Service), and State
fish and wildlife agencies in the planning, development, and
maintenance of fish and wildlife resources on military installations
throughout the United States. Each military department is required to
develop and implement an integrated natural resources management plan
(INRMP) that must be reviewed on a regular basis, but not less often
than every 5 years, and must reflect the agreement of the parties
concerning conservation, protection, and management of fish and
wildlife resources.
Ute ladies'-tresses was found on the F.E. Warren Air Force Base
(FEWAFB) in Wyoming during Colorado butterfly plant (Gaura neomexicana
var. coloradensis) monitoring in August 2023 (Heidel 2023, entire).
Given the recent discovery of Ute ladies'-tresses there, the current
INRMP does not include protections or conservation measures for Ute
ladies'-tresses (INRMP 2022, p. 48). However, the species' habitat is
managed under a formal conservation agreement for the Colorado
butterfly plant, a plant species delisted under the Act in 2019 (see 84
FR 59570, November 5, 2019), and Preble's meadow jumping mouse (Zapus
hudsonius preblei), a threatened species under the Act. Management
actions include annual monitoring, noxious weed control, avoidance
buffers, public access restrictions, riparian habitat protections, and
targeted grazing for noxious weed control (FEWAFB 2004, pp. 7-9). These
management actions are also beneficial to Ute ladies'-tresses, and we
expect them to continue in the future to conserve Preble's meadow
jumping mouse and achieve the INRMP's goal of protecting and conserving
populations of native plants, fish, and wildlife on FEWAFB.
Federal Power Act--The Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 791 et seq.)
provides for the equal protection of fish and wildlife and other
aspects of environmental quality as power and development. As with
NEPA, we have the authority to participate in the environmental
evaluation process, but acceptance and implementation of our
recommendations by a Federal action agency is not required. Under the
Federal Power Act, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) is
responsible for the regulation of hydropower projects and other
interstate energy sources transmission of natural gas, oil, and
electricity. In Washington, FERC requires the Chelan Public Utility
District (PUD) and Grant PUD to control noxious weeds where Ute
ladies'-tresses occurs, conduct regular surveys to document plant
numbers and distribution, and conduct a survey of suitable habitats
every 5 years to identify new populations (Pope and Cordell 2023, p.
2). The Chelan PUD recently acquired an easement on private land to
protect the species and implemented conservation actions to control
invasive plants on all landownerships (Pope and Cordell 2023, p. 7).
These protections at the Chelan PUD-managed Rocky Reach and Rock
Islands occurrences will likely continue, at a minimum, through the
post-delisting monitoring period; these protections will continue
regardless of the species' listing status under the Act at the Grant
PUD-managed Vantage occurrence (LeMoine 2024, entire).
Other Federal Regulatory Mechanisms
We considered the wetland protections from croplands on private
lands afforded under the Food Security Act (16 U.S.C. 3801 et seq.),
but the best available information does not indicate that crops or
cropland conversion are stressors to Ute ladies'-tresses.
Various Executive Orders provide guidance for Federal land
management agencies to manage for habitat characteristics essential for
the conservation of Ute ladies'-tresses. They include Executive Order
11990 (Protection of Wetlands) (May 24, 1977), Executive Order 11988
(Floodplain Management) (May 24, 1977), and Executive Order 13112
(Invasive Species) (February 3, 1999).
State Regulatory Mechanisms
In the United States, Ute ladies'-tresses has State protections in
Washington as ``endangered,'' in Nebraska as ``threatened,'' and in
Nevada as ``fully protected'' (Washington Natural Heritage Program
2021, pp. 1-2, 104-106; title 163 of the Nebraska Administrative Code
at chapter 4, section 163-4-004; and chapter 527 of the Nevada
Administrative Code at section 527.010, respectively). In Washington
State, the designation of Ute ladies'-tresses as a State endangered
plant species prioritizes the conservation of its wetland habitat, and
mitigation may be required to offset habitat impacts (Rocchio 2024,
entire). In Nebraska, State-listed plant protections generally mirror
the Act for endangered and threatened plant species; however,
exceptions are provided for normal agricultural practices (title 163 of
the Nebraska Administrative Code at chapter 4, section 163-4-004). In
Nevada, fully protected species are declared to be threatened with
extinction and require a special permit for removal or destruction on
public and private lands (chapter 527 of the Nevada Administrative Code
at section 527.010, and title 47 of the Nevada Revised Statutes at
chapter 527, sections 527.050
[[Page 1073]]
and 527.270). There are no State protections for Ute ladies'-tresses in
Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Utah, or Wyoming. Ute ladies'-tresses'
habitat is protected where it occurs in State wildlife areas in
Washington, Idaho, and Utah (Fertig et al. 2005, pp. 72-76; Pope and
Cordell 2023, p. 8).
County/City Regulatory Mechanisms
Multiple occurrences (Boulder Creek, South Boulder Creek, and Clear
Creek) in the South Platte AU are protected in natural areas and
managed by the City of Boulder Open Space and Mountain Parks (OSMP) to
conserve rare or endangered plant species and their habitats (see title
33 of the Colorado Revised Statutes at section 33-33-104). The City of
Boulder's OSMP manages open space in perpetuity to preserve natural
areas, water resources, floodplains, and wildlife habitats (Riedel
2004, p. 1; City of Boulder OSMP 2024, p. 4). Most of the Ute ladies'-
tresses plants in Boulder County are protected in the South Boulder
Creek State Natural Area and Tallgrass Natural Area, which include
approximately 1,347 ac (545 ha) of remnant tallgrass prairie habitat
(Riedel 2002, pp. 1, 7; City of Boulder OSMP 2023, entire). Boulder's
OSMP would likely continue to protect Ute ladies'-tresses if Federal
protections are removed (Riedel 2024, pers. comm.). Additionally, the
title 9 of the City of Boulder's Municipal Code at section 9-3-9
(Stream, Wetlands, and Water Body Protection) ensures the preservation,
protection, restoration, and enhancement of the quality and diversity
of wetlands and water bodies; this city regulation would continue to
protect Ute ladies'-tresses habitat if the species is delisted under
the Act.
Private Lands
Conservation efforts that have been performed by private entities
to benefit and conserve Ute ladies'-tresses are discussed here.
In the Lower Bear AU, the single occurrence, Mendon Meadows, is
protected as a preserve specifically for Ute ladies'-tresses, and the
land is managed solely for the species (Bear River Land Trust (BRLT)
2014, entire). Management practices include regular surveys,
irrigation, seasonal grazing or mowing that avoids the flowering
period, a prohibition on recreation and development, and restrictions
on herbicide use (BRLT 2014, pp. 6, 14, 16). Long-term habitat
protections are provided for this Ute ladies'-tresses occurrence, and
if we delist the species, any future changes would need Service
approval (BRLT 2014, pp. 3, 5-6).
Tribal Lands
Occurrences in the Lower Green River, Upper Snake, and Upper
Columbia AUs occur on Tribal lands (Fertig et al. 2005, pp. 71, 74, 77-
78; Service 2024, pp. 39, 51, 69, 75). We are not aware of regulations
that provide protections to Ute ladies'-tresses on Tribal lands.
Overall, the conservation measures and regulatory mechanisms
afforded to wetland riparian habitats on Federal, State, and private
lands in the United States and on British Columbia Parks and Federal
Crown lands in Canada minimize the effects of anthropogenic stressors
to Ute ladies'-tresses, in particular the threat of urban development
to the species' habitat, regardless of the species' status under the
Act.
Proposed Determination of Ute Ladies'-Tresses' Status
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and its implementing
regulations (50 CFR part 424) set forth the procedures for determining
whether a species meets the definition of an endangered species or a
threatened species. The Act defines an ``endangered species'' as a
species that is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant
portion of its range, and a ``threatened species'' as a species that is
likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future
throughout all or a significant portion of its range. The Act requires
that we determine whether a species meets the definition of an
endangered species or a threatened species because of any of the
following 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.
When we listed Ute ladies'-tresses as threatened in 1992 (see 57 FR
2048; January 17, 1992), we identified habitat loss and modification
due to water development and urbanization (Factor A) as the primary
threat to the species. We considered collection (Factor B) to be a
threat because it is an orchid species. Disease and predation (Factor
C) were not considered threats. Regulatory mechanisms (Factor D)
included a limited degree of protection for the species' wetland
habitat under the Clean Water Act and for the species itself through
the regulation of international trade for all orchids by CITES.
Finally, we identified small and scattered populations, the variable
demographic structure of populations, and a presumed slow reproductive
rate (Factor E) as vulnerabilities to threats and stressors. In our SSA
report, we evaluated these stressors and additional stressors that were
identified after the time of listing. Much more is presently known
about the species and its stressors than at the time of listing. The
best available information indicates that habitat loss from
anthropogenic activities (Factor A) and climate change (Factor E) are
the most influential threats affecting Ute ladies'-tresses now and into
the future, although we acknowledge there is uncertainty about the
future impacts of anthropogenic activities and climate change to the
species and its habitats.
We consider the severity and magnitude of the primary threat,
habitat loss and modification due to urbanization and water development
(we refer to this threat as water management here and in the SSA
report) (Factor A) to be much lower now than we believed at the time of
listing, given the increase in the number of known Ute ladies'-tresses
populations and the increase in the extent of the species' known range
based on new information over the past 32 years. While this threat has
resulted in the localized loss of occurrences and the extirpation of
one historical AU (Upper Arkansas), it does not result in a species-
level impact given the much larger number of known occurrences, AUs,
and species' range that comprise the species' current status. Future
projections of this threat in combination with other anthropogenic
stressors indicate that this threat will increase in the future, but
will remain localized within the species' range and will be minimized
by conservation measures and regulatory mechanisms afforded to wetland
riparian habitats on Federal, State, and private lands in the United
States and on British Columbia Parks and Federal Crown lands in Canada
regardless of Ute ladies'-tresses' status under the Act (see
Conservation Efforts and Regulatory Mechanisms, above).
Collection (Factor B) from the wild has not occurred at the level
anticipated at the time of listing presumably because the species is
less showy than the tropical orchids and other Spiranthes species
available for purchase (see ``Collection,'' above). Protections from
collection and international trade are also afforded by CITES for all
orchids; these protections are not contingent on an orchid species
being federally listed. Disease and
[[Page 1074]]
predation (Factor C) have not materialized since listing.
Climate change (Factor E) and drought (Factor A) are not currently
having a population-level or species-level effect on Ute ladies'-
tresses and are not projected to result in a species-level effect in
the future. The best available information indicates that these
stressors have not resulted in the extirpation of occurrences or AUs.
Future projections of climate change indicate that the frequency of
severe and extreme droughts may decrease or remain the same in some
areas of the range, but in much of the range, the frequency will
increase above current trends. Ute ladies'-tresses is drought-tolerant
and adapted to a range of soil moisture conditions, which increases its
resilience to potential future increases in severe and extreme drought
frequency. The resiliency of Ute ladies'-tresses AUs varies across the
species' range. Ute ladies'-tresses AUs along large, mainstem rivers
with multiple occurrences (Upper Green, Lower Green River, Upper
Columbia, Upper Snake, Lower Bear, Niobrara, Colorado Headwaters) are
the most resilient; they maintain their overall resiliency scores
across all future scenarios despite projected declines in abundance and
connectivity. The Upper Colorado-Dirty Devil AU in the southern part of
the range is the least resilient and is projected to be extirpated in
all three future scenarios due to climate change. Based on the best
available information, the majority of AUs are tolerant of the effects
of climate change (Factor E) and are able to withstand the cumulative
effects of all stressors (Factor E).
We also evaluated a variety of conservation efforts and regulatory
mechanisms (Factor D) that either reduce or ameliorate stressors and
improve or maintain habitat conditions and population resiliency in the
absence of the Act's protections. The Clean Water Act provides some
habitat protections for Ute ladies'-tresses occurrences in
jurisdictional waters/wetlands, such along interstate waters or along
intrastate lakes, ponds, streams, and wetlands that are relatively
permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water with a
continuous surface connection to certain waterbodies. Habitat
protections for wetland and riparian habitats are also afforded to the
species on Federal lands by regulatory mechanisms provided by the NPS
Organic Act on NPS lands in Colorado and Utah; the National Wildlife
Refuge System Improvement Act on Service refuge lands in Colorado; the
National Forest Management Act of 1976 and USFS National Forest plans
on USFS lands in Utah and Idaho; the Federal Land Policy and Management
Act and BLM RMPs and ACEC designations on BLM lands in Colorado, Utah,
Idaho, Washington, and Wyoming; and the Sikes Act and Sikes Act
Improvement Act and INRMPs on DOD lands in Wyoming (see Conservation
Efforts and Regulatory Mechanisms, above). The USBR and FERC regulate
the hydrological regime and, in doing so, provide some habitat
protection along rivers and streams in some watersheds for the benefit
of federally listed fish species and other resources, which indirectly
benefits Ute ladies'-tresses.
In Canada, Ute ladies'-tresses is protected within an Ecological
Reserve managed by British Columbia Parks as well as on Federal Crown
land as a schedule 1 endangered species under SARA. Ute ladies'-tresses
also receives partial protections on State lands in Washington, Nevada,
and Nebraska and on open space lands in Boulder County, Colorado. Due
in part to the regulatory mechanisms described here on Federal lands
and other protected lands, the anthropogenic threats to the species,
particularly the threat of urban development to the habitat of Ute
ladies'-tresses, have been sufficiently reduced.
Status Throughout All of Its Range
Endangered Throughout Its Range Determination
Our evaluation of the current condition of Ute ladies'-tresses
found that there are currently 18 AUs distributed across eight U.S.
States and one Canadian Province. Ute ladies'-tresses' current
condition represents a marked improvement from what we understood its
condition to be when we first listed it as a threatened species in
1992. Over the last three decades, many more occurrences have been
discovered in an additional 14 AUs, increasing both numbers and the
species' known geographic range. Thirteen AUs have high or moderate
resilience to stochastic events, and these AUs are distributed across 6
U.S. States and Canada. The high or moderately resilient AUs typically
display a combination of resilient habitat (based on vegetative habitat
condition and hydrologic condition) and demographic factors (based on
the number of occurrences, connectivity within the AU, and potentially
suitable habitat within the AU) that enable them to adequately
withstand environmental and demographic stochasticity. The five AUs
with low resiliency are less able to withstand stochastic events.
While some stressors have impacted occurrences and AUs, none are
having species-level impacts individually or cumulatively. The severity
and magnitude of the primary threat, habitat loss and modification due
to urbanization and water development, is much lower now than believed
at the time of listing; it has resulted in the extirpation of localized
occurrences across the range, including one historical AU (Upper
Arkansas), representing 5 percent of the species' 19 historical AUs,
and some of the occurrences in three extant AUs (South Platte, Jordan,
and Weber) in Colorado and Utah (see ``Urban Development,'' above).
Despite these impacts, the South Platte and Jordan AUs remain in
moderate and high current condition, respectively (see table 1, above).
Ute ladies'-tresses is tolerant of and adapted to the altered habitat
conditions in AUs from various stressors, as well drought and climate
change and the cumulative effects of all stressors.
With 18 AUs distributed across 12 ecoregions and 7 habitat types,
the species currently has sufficient resiliency, redundancy, and
representation to withstand stochastic and catastrophic events and
adapt to changes. Therefore, we find that Ute ladies'-tresses is not in
danger of extinction throughout all of its range.
Threatened Throughout Its Range Determination
Under the Act, a threatened species is any species that is likely
to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future
throughout all or a significant portion of its range (16 U.S.C.
1532(20)). The foreseeable future extends only so far into the future
as the Service can make reasonably reliable predictions about the
threats to the species and the species' responses to those threats (50
CFR 424.11(d)). The Service describes the foreseeable future on a case-
by-case basis, using the best available data and taking into account
considerations such as the species' life-history characteristics,
threat-projection timeframes, and environmental variability (50 CFR
424.11(d)). The key statutory difference between a threatened species
and an endangered species is the timing of when a species may be in
danger of extinction, either now (endangered species) or in the
foreseeable future (threatened species).
For the purposes of our analysis, we defined the foreseeable future
for Ute ladies'-tresses as approximately 50 years (to 2074). We relied
on combined climate and land use projections by the IPCC out to 2074,
the timeframe for which they were available. These
[[Page 1075]]
projections provide the best available evaluation of the primary
stressors to the species. After 2074, we do not have information that
reliably projects the combined effects of climate change and habitat
loss from anthropogenic activities within the species' range. We also
selected this timeframe because it allows us to reliably project
changes in other species' stressors and land management and is
biologically meaningful to the species to begin to understand the
response of ecosystems to those changes. By 2074, we anticipate a range
of plausible future conditions for Ute ladies'-tresses.
Our evaluation of the projected future condition of Ute ladies'-
tresses found that resiliency and redundancy are projected to decline
under all three plausible future scenarios based on the future impacts
of anthropogenic activities and climate change. In general, the
species' range is projected to become hotter and drier under all three
future scenarios, even under the most optimistic scenario (Scenario 1).
Declines in resiliency and redundancy were driven by climate change in
Scenario 1 and the combination of anthropogenic activities and climate
change in Scenarios 2 and 3. Despite the combined effects of
anthropogenic activities and climate change, Ute ladies'-tresses' life-
history characteristics (such as its capability for extended,
underground dormancy during unfavorable conditions including drought
and habitat changes (e.g., vegetative succession); its dispersal and
colonization ability within watersheds to escape land use and habitat
changes; and its ability to thrive in human-managed water systems that
have altered flow regimes) confer sufficient resiliency to the
projected hotter, drier hydrological conditions, as well as habitat and
land use changes.
The plausible future condition of Ute ladies'-tresses in 2074
ranges from 17 AUs across the range with 13 of those AUs being highly
or moderately resilient to stochastic events (Scenario 1) to 16 AUs
across the range with 10 of those AUs being highly or moderately
resilient (Scenario 3). While the species' actual future condition may
fall anywhere between Scenarios 1 and 3, even if we assume that
Scenario 3 (the worst-case) were to occur, the species is projected to
maintain 16 AUs across its range, with 11 of those AUs projected to
maintain the same condition as their current condition. Ten of the 16
AUs in 6 States (Colorado, Idaho, Nebraska, Utah, Wyoming, and
Washington) and Canada are projected to be highly or moderately
resilient to stochastic events. Ute ladies'-tresses' redundancy
declines slightly from 18 AUs to 16 AUs, with a contraction along the
southern part of its current range due to projected extirpations in
Nevada (Lower Colorado-Lake Mead AU) and southern Utah (Upper Colorado-
Dirty Devil AU). Representation is projected to be similar to current
conditions, as the species is projected to maintain the same number of
ecoregions (12) and habitat types (7) across its range. Therefore, even
in the worst-case scenario, our analysis suggests that losses of
resiliency and redundancy would be modest, with 16 AUs remaining across
the range, and 10 of those AUs remaining in moderate or high condition,
with no major changes in representation expected. Collectively, this
suggests that in 50 years, viability of the species will not be
significantly reduced (Service 2024, pp. 198-199). Recovery efforts,
particularly survey efforts that have identified many more occurrences,
have increased Ute ladies'-tresses' known resiliency, redundancy, and
representation such that the species is now better able to recover from
impacts noted at the time of listing, and we anticipate that Ute
ladies'-tresses will retain sufficient levels of resiliency,
redundancy, and representation in the foreseeable future.
Two factors support the maintenance of the current condition in 11
AUs and the moderate to high future resiliency of at least 10 AUs: (1)
regulatory mechanisms and conservation efforts, and (2) the species'
biological characteristics. First, the maintenance of the current
condition and the high to moderate resiliency of more than half of Ute
ladies'-tresses AUs is, in part, due to habitat protections and
regulations implemented by Canada; U.S. Federal agencies; the States of
Washington, Nebraska, and Nevada; the City of Boulder; and private
entities (Factor D) that will continue to be implemented into the
future, even in the absence of protections afforded by the Act, as
described above under Conservation Efforts and Regulatory Mechanisms.
These protections will continue to limit the potential effects of
stressors on Ute ladies'-tresses in the future.
Second, independent of future regulatory mechanisms and
conservation efforts, Ute ladies'-tresses' biological characteristics
moderate its response to increasing stressors. Ute ladies'-tresses'
ruderal life-history strategy; adaptation and resilience to disturbance
(stochastic events) such as flooding, mowing, and grazing; its
dispersal and colonization ability in many habitat types; and its
drought tolerance all increase its resilience to potential future
increases in stressors and habitat and environmental changes
(representation) evidenced by the species' past ability to maintain
high and moderate resiliency in the face of ongoing stressors in the
Jordan and South Platte AUs. Although habitat conditions could become
considerably drier under Scenario 3, Ute ladies'-tresses is hardy and
already adapted to periods of drought. Individuals may live many
decades and have maintained healthy recruitment and survival despite
drought conditions and other climatic variation in the past.
We recognize that some habitat-related threats remain present, and
they have ongoing impacts to Ute ladies'-tresses AUs. We acknowledge
that the specific effects of climate change on Ute ladies'-tresses and
its habitat are uncertain and may have a negative impact. However, we
found that current and expected patterns in site protection and habitat
management (Factor D) and the species' adaptation and resilience to
disturbance are sufficient to prevent effects at the species level.
After evaluating threats to the species and assessing the
cumulative effect of the threats under the Act's section 4(a)(1)
factors, and considering the levels of resiliency, redundancy, and
representation projected under the current and future scenarios
described in the SSA report, Ute ladies'-tresses will be able to
withstand stochastic events, catastrophic events, and environmental
change now and into the foreseeable future. Thus, after assessing the
best available information, we conclude that Ute ladies'-tresses is not
in danger of extinction now or likely to become so within the
foreseeable future throughout all of its range.
Status Throughout a Significant Portion of Its Range
Under the Act and our implementing regulations, a species may
warrant listing if it is in danger of extinction or likely to become so
within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion
of its range. Having determined that Ute ladies'-tresses is not in
danger of extinction or likely to become so within the foreseeable
future throughout all of its range, we now consider whether it may be
in danger of extinction (i.e., endangered) or likely to become so
within the foreseeable future (i.e., threatened) in a significant
portion of its range--that is, whether there is any portion of the
species' range for which both (1) the portion is significant; and (2)
the species is in danger of extinction or likely to become so within
the foreseeable future in that portion. Depending on the case, it might
be more efficient for us to address the ``significance'' question or
the ``status''
[[Page 1076]]
question first. We can choose to address either question first.
Regardless of which question we address first, if we reach a negative
answer with respect to the first question that we address, we do not
need to evaluate the other question for that portion of the species'
range.
In undertaking this analysis for Ute ladies'-tresses, we choose to
address the status question first. We began by identifying portions of
the range where the biological status of the species may be different
from its biological status elsewhere in its range. For this purpose, we
considered information pertaining to the geographic distribution of (a)
occurrences of the species, (b) the threats that the species faces, and
(c) the resiliency condition of AUs (populations).
We evaluated the range of Ute ladies'-tresses to determine if the
species is in danger of extinction now or likely to become so within
the foreseeable future in any portion of its range. The range of a
species can theoretically be divided into portions in an infinite
number of ways. We focused our analysis on portions of the species'
range that may meet the Act's definition of an endangered species or a
threatened species. For Ute ladies'-tresses, we considered whether the
threats or their effects on the species are greater in any biologically
meaningful portion of the species' range than in other portions such
that the species is in danger of extinction now or likely to become so
within the foreseeable future in that portion. We examined the
following threats: anthropogenic activities including urban
development, water management, agriculture, livestock grazing,
recreation, invasive plants, and collection; and environmental
conditions including vegetative succession, disease or predation,
drought, climate change, and human population change, including
cumulative effects.
We examined the range of Ute ladies'-tresses for biologically
meaningful portions that may be at a higher risk of extirpation, as
reflected by potentially larger climate change effects and
anthropogenic effects to the species. We determined that by itself, any
single AU is too small to be considered a biologically meaningful
portion of the range for Ute ladies'-tresses because each AU represents
a small percentage (6 percent) of the total number of the 18 AUs
rangewide, and each AU contains only a small area of the species'
range. Therefore, even though the Upper Columbia AU is separate from
the rest of the range, we do not consider it to be a biologically
meaningful portion on its own.
We identified seven AUs that are a geographically concentrated
grouping at a biologically meaningful scale along the southern edge of
Ute ladies'-tresses' overall range; those seven AUs are the Great Salt
Lake, Jordan, Lower Colorado-Lake Mead, Upper Colorado-Dirty Devil,
Lower Green River, Colorado Headwaters, and South Platte AUs. Relative
to the remainder of the range, this portion of the range is impacted by
elevated levels of drought, climate change, and anthropogenic stressors
now and into the future.
This portion may be at higher risk of extirpation, as reflected by
the current and future resiliency of the seven AUs. Currently, three of
these seven AUs have low resiliency, so they are at a greater risk of
extirpation than the other four AUs, two of which have high resiliency
and two have moderate resiliency. We examined the following threats,
for the reasons described above: anthropogenic activities including
urban development, water management, agriculture, livestock grazing,
recreation, invasive plants, and collection; and environmental
conditions including vegetative succession, disease or predation,
drought, climate change, and human population change, including
cumulative effects. We concluded that although almost half of the AUs
in this portion have low resiliency, the species has sufficient
resiliency, redundancy, and representation across the seven AUs in the
portion. The three AUs in low condition (Great Salt Lake, Lower
Colorado-Lake Mead, Upper Colorado-Dirty Devil) have sufficiently high
or moderate hydrologic condition to remain viable in the near term
despite lower scores for other metrics such as AU abundance and
connectivity. The seven AUs cover a wide geographic area that spans
portions of four States across a variety of climatic and habitat types
from north-to-south and east-to-west, such that there is no stochastic
or catastrophic event that would extirpate the portion in the near
term. Therefore, we conclude that the risk of extinction in the portion
is not low now, and the species in this portion does not meet the Act's
definition of an endangered species.
We also evaluated the status of this portion into the foreseeable
future. In the future, three of the seven AUs are projected to have low
resiliency or be extirpated (Great Salt Lake, Upper Colorado-Dirty
Devil, Lower Colorado-Lake Mead), one AU may have moderate to low
resiliency (South Platte), and the other three AUs have moderate to
high resiliency (Jordan, Lower Green River, Colorado Headwaters). We
examined the same threats described above for the species:
anthropogenic activities including urban development, water management,
agriculture, livestock grazing, recreation, invasive plants,
collection; and environmental conditions including vegetative
succession, disease or predation, drought, climate change, human
population change, including cumulative effects. We concluded that
although two AUs in this portion may be extirpated, the species has
sufficient resiliency, redundancy, and representation in the remaining
five AUs in the portion. The one AU consistently in low condition
(Great Salt Lake) is projected to maintain sufficiently moderate
hydrologic and vegetative condition to remain viable into the
foreseeable future despite lower scores for other metrics such as AU
abundance and connectivity. The five AUs cover a wide geographic area
that spans portions of three States across a variety of climatic and
habitat types from north-to-south and east-to-west, such that there is
no stochastic or catastrophic event that would extirpate the portion in
the foreseeable future. Even with two AUs in low condition and the
slight increase in extinction risk under Scenario 3, we found that the
current and projected patterns of habitat management and protection,
the hydrologic condition of the AUs, and the species' adaptation to
disturbance are sufficient to prevent effects to the species that would
cause it to meet the Act's definition of an endangered species or a
threatened species. Therefore, we conclude that the risk of extinction
in the portion is low in the foreseeable future and the species in this
portion does not meet the Act's definition of a threatened species.
As a result, we found no portion of Ute ladies'-tresses' range
where the biological condition of the species differs from its
condition elsewhere in its range such that the status of the species in
that portion differs from any other portion of the species' range.
Therefore, the portion both currently and into the future has enough
resiliency such that it is not at risk of extinction now or within the
foreseeable future. Because we determined that this portion does not
have a different status, we did not need to assess its potential
significance.
Therefore, we find that the species is not in danger of extinction
now or likely to become so within the foreseeable future in any
significant portion of its range. This does not conflict with the
courts' holdings in Desert Survivors v. Department of the Interior, 336
F. Supp. 3d 1131 (N.D. Cal. 2018), and Center for
[[Page 1077]]
Biological Diversity v. Jewell, 248 F. Supp. 3d. 946, 959 (D. Ariz.
2017) because, in reaching this conclusion, we did not apply the
aspects of the Final Policy on Interpretation of the Phrase
``Significant Portion of Its Range'' in the Endangered Species Act's
Definitions of ``Endangered Species'' and ``Threatened Species'' (79 FR
37578; July 1, 2014), including the definition of ``significant'' that
those court decisions held to be invalid.
Determination of Status
Our review of the best available scientific and commercial
information indicates that Ute ladies'-tresses does not meet the Act's
definition of endangered species or threatened species in accordance
with sections 3(6) and 3(20) of the Act. In accordance with our current
regulations at 50 CFR 424.11(e)(2), Ute ladies'-tresses has recovered
and no longer warrants listing. Therefore, we propose to remove Ute
ladies'-tresses from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened
Plants.
Effects of This Rule
This proposed rule, if made final, would revise 50 CFR 17.12(h) by
removing Ute ladies'-tresses 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 if activities they
authorize, fund, or carry out may affect Ute ladies'-tresses.
There is no critical habitat designated for this species, so there
would be no effect to 50 CFR 17.96.
Post-Delisting Monitoring
Section 4(g)(1) of the Act requires us, in cooperation with the
States, to implement a monitoring program for not less than 5 years for
all species that have been recovered. Post-delisting monitoring (PDM)
refers to activities undertaken to verify that a species delisted due
to recovery remains secure from the risk of extinction after the
protections of the Act no longer apply. The primary goal of PDM is to
monitor the species to ensure that its status does not deteriorate, and
if a decline is detected, to take measures to halt the decline so that
proposing it as endangered or threatened is not again needed. If, at
any time during the monitoring period, data indicate that protective
status under the Act should be reinstated, we can initiate listing
procedures, including, if appropriate, emergency listing.
We have prepared a draft PDM plan for Ute ladies'-tresses. The
draft PDM plan: (1) summarizes the status of Ute ladies'-tresses at the
time of proposed delisting; (2) describes the frequency and duration of
monitoring; (3) discusses monitoring methods and potential sampling
regimes; (4) defines what potential triggers will be evaluated to
address the need for additional monitoring; (5) outlines reporting
requirements and procedures; (6) proposes a schedule for implementing
the PDM plan; and (7) defines responsibilities. It is our intent to
work with our partners towards maintaining the recovered status of Ute
ladies'-tresses. We appreciate any information on what should be
included in post-delisting monitoring strategies for this species (see
Information Requested, above).
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.
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 federally recognized
Tribes on a government-to-government basis. In accordance with
Secretary's Order 3206 of June 5, 1997 (American Indian Tribal Rights,
Federal-Tribal Trust Responsibilities, and the Endangered Species Act),
we readily acknowledge our responsibilities to work directly with
Tribes in developing programs for healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge
that Tribal lands are not subject to the same controls as Federal
public lands, to remain sensitive to Indian culture, and to make
information available to Tribes. We notified and invited the following
Tribes to participate in the SSA process and to provide information at
the beginning of the SSA process: Shoshone-Bannock Tribes, Eastern
Shoshone Tribe, Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes, Blackfeet
Nation, Ute Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation, Confederated
Tribes of the Colville Reservation, and Confederated Tribes and Bands
of the Yakama Nation. We did not receive a response from any Tribe. We
will continue to work with Tribal entities during the development of a
final delisting determination for Ute ladies'-tresses.
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 Utah Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT).
Authors
The primary authors of this proposed rule are the staff members of
the Fish and Wildlife Service's Species Assessment Team and the Utah
Ecological Services Field Office.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Plants,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Transportation, Wildlife.
Signing Authority
Martha Williams, Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
approved this action on November 18, 2024. Acting Director Steve
Guertin approved these packages December 15, 2024. On December 16,
2024, the acting Director authorized the undersigned to sign the
document electronically and submit it to the Office of the Federal
Register for publication as an official document of the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service.
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:
[[Page 1078]]
PART 17--ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS
0
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 1531-1544; 4201-4245, unless
otherwise noted.
Sec. 17.12 [Amended]
0
2. In 17.12, in paragraph (h), amend the List of Endangered and
Threatened Plants by removing the entry for ``Spiranthes diluvialis''
under FLOWERING PLANTS.
Madonna Baucum,
Regulations and Policy Chief, Division of Policy, Economics, Risk
Management, and Analytics of the Joint Administrative Operations, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2024-30380 Filed 1-6-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P