[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 233 (Tuesday, December 5, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 70479-70483]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-20317]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding on
a Petition To Delist the Sacramento Mountains Thistle (Cirsium
vinaceum) and Initiation of 5-Year Status Review
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition finding and initiation of 5-year
status review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
90-day finding on a petition to remove the threatened Sacramento
Mountains thistle (Cirsium vinaceum) (thistle) from the Federal List of
Threatened and Endangered Plants, under the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (Act). We find the petition does not present
substantial information indicating that delisting of the thistle may be
warranted. Therefore, we will not initiate a further 12-month status
review in response to this petition under section 4(b)(3)(B) of the
Act. However, we are initiating a 5-year review of this species under
section 4(c)(2)(A) of the Act to consider information that has become
available since we listed the species as threatened on June 16, 1987
(52 FR 22933). This will provide the public an opportunity to submit
new information on the status of the species. We invite all interested
parties to submit comments or information regarding this species.
DATES: The finding in this document was made on December 5, 2006. To be
considered in the 5-year review, comments and information should be
submitted to us (see ADDRESSES section) on or before March 5, 2007.
However, we will continue to accept new information about any listed
species at any time.
ADDRESSES: Data, comments, information, or questions concerning this
petition finding and 5-year review should be submitted to the Field
Supervisor, New Mexico Ecological Services Field Office, 2105 Osuna
Road NE, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87113. You may send your comments by
electronic mail (e-mail) directly to the Service at
[email protected]. The petition, supporting data, and comments
will be made available for public inspection, by appointment, during
normal business hours at the above address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Field Supervisor, New Mexico
Ecological Services Field Office (see ADDRESSES above) (telephone 505-
346-2525, facsimile 505-346-2542).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires
that we make a finding on whether a petition to list, delist, or
reclassify a species presents substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted. We
are to base this finding on information provided in the petition. To
the maximum extent practicable, we are to make this finding within 90
days of our receipt of the petition, and publish our notice of this
finding promptly in the Federal Register.
Our 90-day finding under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Sec.
424.14(b) of our regulations is limited to a determination of whether
the information in the petition meets the ``substantial information''
threshold. ``Substantial information'' is defined in 50 CFR 424.14(b)
as ``that amount of information that would lead a reasonable person to
believe that the measure proposed in the petition may be warranted.''
Petitioners need not prove that the petitioned action is warranted to
support a ``substantial'' finding; instead, the key consideration in
evaluating whether or not a petition presents ``substantial''
information involves demonstration of the reliability and adequacy of
the information supporting the action advocated by the petition.
[[Page 70480]]
We have to satisfy the Act's requirement that we use the best
available scientific and commercial information to make our decisions.
However, we do not conduct additional research at this point, nor do we
subject the petition to rigorous critical review. Rather, at the 90-day
finding stage, we accept the petitioner's sources and characterizations
of the information, to the extent that they appear to be based on
accepted scientific principles (such as citing published and peer
reviewed articles, or studies done in accordance with valid
methodologies), unless we have specific information to the contrary.
Our finding considers whether the petition states a reasonable case for
delisting on its face. Thus, our 90-day finding expresses no view as to
the ultimate issue of whether the species should no longer be
classified as a threatened species. We make no determinations as to the
currency, accuracy, completeness, or veracity of the petition. The
contents of this finding summarize that information that was available
to us at the time of the petition review.
In making this finding, we relied on information provided by the
petitioners and information available in our files at the time we
reviewed the petition, and we evaluated that information in accordance
with 50 CFR 424.14(b). Our process for making a 90-day finding under
section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Sec. 424.14(b) of our regulations is
limited to a determination of whether the information contained in the
petition meets the ``substantial information'' threshold.
Species Information
The thistle is a stout plant, 3.3 to 5.9 feet (ft) (1 to 1.8 meters
(m)) tall. Thistle stems are brown-purple and highly branched. The
basal leaves are green, 12 to 20 inches (in) (30 to 50 centimeters
(cm)) long, and up to 8 in (20 cm) wide, with ragged edges. The thistle
presently occurs on both the eastern and western slopes of the
Sacramento Mountains in Otero County, New Mexico. The thistle occurs
primarily on National Forest System lands of the Lincoln National
Forest in south-central New Mexico (Service 1993, p. 3). A few occupied
sites lie on the extreme southern end of the Mescalero Apache Indian
Reservation and a few private land inholdings within the Lincoln
National Forest (Service 1993, p. 3). In this area, the thistle occurs
within the mixed conifer zone, between 7,500 and 9,500 ft (2,300 and
2,900 m), in limestone substrate. The thistle is an obligate riparian
species that requires saturated soils with surface or sub-surface water
flow. Waters at these sites are rich in calcium carbonate that often
precipitates out to create large areas of travertine (calcium
carbonate) deposits, which occasionally become large bluffs or hills.
Travertine deposits are the most common habitats of the thistle.
On June 16, 1987, we listed the thistle as a threatened species
based on threats from water development, grazing, recreation, logging,
and the invasion of exotic plants (52 FR 22933). A recovery plan for
the species was finalized on September 27, 1993 (Service 1993, pp. 1-
23).
Review of the Petition
For this finding, the Service evaluated the statements and
information in the petition by comparing these with information
contained in our files. The Act identifies the five factors to be
considered, either singly or in combination, to determine whether a
species may be threatened or endangered or whether a listed species
should be reclassified or removed from the list. The following
discussion presents our evaluation of the petition, based on
information provided in the petition, information available in our
files, and our current understanding of the species.
On April 30, 2004, we received a petition from Mr. Doug Moore,
Otero County Commissioner, New Mexico, to delist the thistle as a
threatened species. In response to the petitioner's request to delist
the thistle, we sent a letter to the petitioner dated August 31, 2005,
explaining that the Service would review the petition and determine
whether or not the petition presents substantial information indicating
that delisting the thistle may be warranted.
The petition references the June 16, 1987, final listing rule (52
FR 22933) and lists the following threats for the species: (1) Loss of
water; (2) trampling or ground disturbance by cattle, wildlife, or
humans; (3) grazing of plants; and (4) logging. The supporting
information provided by the petitioner includes only a portion of one
recent biological assessment and a portion of one recent biological
opinion conducted for a USDA Forest Service (Forest Service) grazing
allotment (Forest Service 2003, pp. 1, 57-68; Service 2004, pp. 1, 25-
27). The petition also provides the following summary statements
regarding the thistle: (1) The range of the species is 500 percent
greater than when it was listed in 1987; (2) the known population size
is 2,800 percent greater than when it was listed; and (3) the known
threats that can be managed have been virtually removed. The petitioner
states that monitoring has determined that grazing and disturbance no
longer threaten the species, and that logging has never impacted the
thistle. The petition also cites a biological assessment prepared by
the Forest Service (Forest Service 2003, pp. 41-68) that indicates the
thistle's abundance and range have increased since the species was
listed.
Finally, the petitioner disagrees with the Recovery Plan's strategy
of encouraging the State of New Mexico to adopt water law standards
that recognize the need for preservation of in-stream flow to benefit
plants, fish, and other wildlife (Service 1993, p. 9). The petitioner
suggests that proactive watershed restoration would be a more effective
strategy to insure the availability of water at the springs and bogs
which provide habitat for the species. The Petitioner also suggests
that the availability of water, air, and sunshine are aspects of the
natural world which do not need to be guaranteed by the Service before
a species can be delisted.
Conservation Status
Under section 4 of the Act, we may list or delist a species,
subspecies, or Distinct Population Segment of vertebrate taxa on the
basis of any of the following five factors: (A) Present or threatened
destruction, modification, or curtailment of habitat or range; (B)
overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D) inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E) other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence. This 90-day finding is not a status
assessment and does not constitute a status review under the Act.
Therefore, what follows below is a preliminary review of the factors
affecting this species.
A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment
of Its Habitat or Range
The June 16, 1987, listing (52 FR 22933) and subsequent recovery
plan (Service 1993, pp. 4-6) list habitat destruction or alteration by
domestic livestock, water development (e.g., withdrawal from springs
and reservoir construction), trampling by recreationists, road
maintenance, and logging as threats to the species' habitat and range.
The thistle also has been impacted by off-road vehicles (ORVs),
motorcycles, road grading, and other activities (Service 1993, pp. 4-6;
Forest Service 2004, pp. 625-629).
[[Page 70481]]
Information Provided in the Petition
The petitioner maintains that loss of water may threaten the
thistle, but suggests that the availability of water, air, and sunshine
are aspects of the natural world which do not need to be guaranteed by
the Service. The petitioner notes that proactive watershed restoration
would be more appropriate than acquiring water rights for the thistle.
The petitioner also states that logging has not impacted the thistle
because forest management discourages these activities near areas
considered habitat (springs and bogs). Finally, the petitioner
maintains that the plant's known population size is 2,800 percent
greater than when it was listed.
Evaluation of Information in the Petition
We agree with the petitioner that reduction in the availability of
water could threaten the species. As noted, the thistle is an obligate
riparian species that requires surface or immediately sub-surface water
flows. The loss of water can be: (1) Naturally caused due to drought
conditions; (2) caused by other factors that may cause a spring to go
dry (i.e., rerouting of underground channels); or (3) caused by human
impacts such as spring development or loss of water flow to an occupied
site through diversion by roads or trails (Service 1993, pp. 4-5;
Service 2004, p. 35). Since 1999, New Mexico has been in a drought
(Piechota et al. 2004, pp. 303-305); however, the length or severity of
the current drought cycle is not known, and the Southwest may be
entering a period of prolonged drought (McCabe et al. 2004, pp. 4138-
4140). Droughts of the 20th century are minor in comparison to droughts
in the last 2000 years. For example, droughts prior to 1600 are
characterized by longer duration (multidecadal) and greater spatial
extent than droughts of today (Woodhouse and Overpeck 1998, pp. 2698-
2706; Piechota et al. 2004, pp. 303-305). It is unknown how the springs
in the Sacramento Mountains would respond to extended drought and an
increase in the level of water withdrawals (e.g., groundwater pumping).
It is likely that the seasonal distribution of yearly precipitation
also plays a role in water availability for the thistle. Spring
desiccation at occupied sites has led to a reduction in the number of
individual plants, and in some cases, caused a loss of all plants at
previously occupied sites (Forest Service 2003, pp. 35-36). We will
consider the petitioner's suggestion for alternative methods of
providing water in future recovery planning efforts.
We generally agree with the statement that logging does not
currently threaten the thistle. At present, the Forest Service applies
a minimum 200 ft (60 m) protective buffer around thistle occurrences
during forest management activities (Service 2002, p. 3; Service 2004,
pp. 4-13; Service 2005a, p. 3). Still, the petition does not provide
substantial scientific information that the present or threatened
destruction, modification, or curtailment of habitat or range no longer
threatens the thistle.
Information in our files indicates that at the time of listing, the
range of the thistle consisted of approximately 20 known population
areas (within 6 large canyon drainages) containing an estimated 10,000
to 15,000 sexually reproducing individuals (52 FR 22933; Service 1993,
p. 2). Presently, the thistle occurs in small, dense populations at 86
sites on the Lincoln National Forest with an estimated population of
350,000 to 400,000 plants (Service 2005b, pp. 695-697). The extent of
occupied sites and plant numbers fluctuates with rainfall and the
amount of surface flow available. Populations generally expand in years
of higher spring flows, with plants establishing farther downstream and
scattered along the springs' outflow creeks. In years of lower flow,
populations contract back to the wetter areas around the springs
(Forest Service 2004, pp. 625-629).
As discussed above, information in our files indicates that the
petitioner's claim that the number of populations and range of the
thistle are greater than what was known in 1987 is reliable and
accurate. However, the petitioner has presented no information or
analysis to suggest these increased numbers would indicate that listing
is no longer warranted, nor to suggest that threats under Factor A no
longer impact the species. Impacts to habitat remain substantial
factors impacting the long-term viability of this species.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
The petition provides no information addressing this factor. The
original listing did not cite this factor as significant.
C. Disease or Predation
Information Provided in the Petition
The petition indicates that herbivory does not adversely affect the
species because vigorous growth of thistle was observed in areas
following heavy use.
Evaluation of Information in the Petition
The original listing suggested the amount of predation by
herbivores was minimal (52 FR 22933, June 16, 1987). Livestock can
trample vulnerable seedlings, rosettes, and flowering stalks, as well
as damage travertine and soft substrates in occupied and potential
habitat (Thomson 1991, pp. 44-52; Service 2004, pp. 62-63). The
petition includes information indicating that livestock use of occupied
habitat results in trampling and herbivory, but reduced livestock
stocking levels and fencing around springs has led to large increases
in thistle abundance (Forest Service 2003, pp. 53-56; Service 2004, p.
35; Service 2005b, pp. 698-703). For example, more than 10-fold
increases have been observed in some areas following the construction
and maintenance of exclosures (Forest Service 2003, pp. 53-56). Grazing
exclosures have protected thistles from trampling and herbivory, and
allowed populations inside the exclosures to expand outside fenced
areas (Forest Service 2003, pp. 53-56). Forty of the 86 population
sites located within the Lincoln National Forest have been fenced to
exclude livestock or are considered to be inaccessible (Service 2005b,
p. 698). Exclosures total approximately 120 ha (290 ac), protecting
occupied thistle habitat from the negative impacts associated with
livestock use (Service 2005b, p. 698). Although thistles have been
documented to recover within a few weeks from light grazing (i.e.,
grazing impacting less than 10 percent of known plants), livestock
grazing on the thistle's flowering stalks and the leaves of rosettes
can contribute to the loss of the entire reproductive output of the
plant (Forest Service 2003, p. 53, 59; Service 2005b, p. 697). The
petitioner did present evidence that threats from grazing can be
reduced by using exclosures but did not present evidence that grazing
no longer is a threat to the species.
D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
The petition does not discuss the adequacy of regulatory
mechanisms. The original listing did not cite this factor as
significant except to briefly mention that take was prohibited by
existing Forest Service regulations and that no other State and Federal
regulations protected the species.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued Existence
The petition does not discuss other natural or manmade factors. The
original listing discussed the impacts of livestock grazing on range
and the impacts of competition from introduced exotic species. As
livestock grazing was
[[Page 70482]]
also discussed under Factor C in the original listing, the petition's
discussion of this issue and our response is covered under Predation
above.
Finding
We have reviewed the petition and evaluated the information in
relation to other pertinent literature and information available in our
files. The thistle's population numbers and range are greater today
than at the time of the June 16, 1987, listing. The petitioner states
the threats are no longer significant, and requested that we delist the
species. However, the petition does not analyze any new scientific
information in relation to the five factors we must consider before
proposing to delist a species. In addition, the petitioner includes
very little detailed justification for the suggested delisting of the
thistle, does not provide information regarding the status of the
species over a significant portion of its range, does not describe or
analyze how the threats relate to past or present numbers and
distribution of the thistle, and includes only a small amount of
supporting documentation. After this review and evaluation, we find the
petition does not present substantial information to indicate that
delisting the thistle may be warranted at this time.
5-Year Review
Our regulations at 50 CFR 424.21 require that we publish a notice
in the Federal Register announcing those species currently under active
review. This notice announces our initiation of a 5-year review for the
threatened thistle.
Why Is a 5-Year Review Conducted?
Section 4(c)(2)(A) of the Act requires that we conduct a review of
listed species at least once every 5 years. We are then, under section
4(c)(2)(B) of the Act, to determine, on the basis of such a review,
whether or not any species should be removed from the List of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife (50 CFR 17.11) or the List of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife Plants (50 CFR 17.12) (delisted), or
reclassified from endangered to threatened (downlisted), or from
threatened to endangered (uplisted).
The 5-year review is an assessment of the best scientific and
commercial data available at the time of the review. Therefore, we are
requesting submission of any new scientific and commercial data on the
thistle. Considering the best scientific and commercial information
available, the Service will recommend whether or not a change is
warranted in the Federal classification of the thistle. Any change in
Federal classification would require a separate rulemaking. As part of
our 5-year review, we will ensure that the information used is
complete, accurate, and consistent with the requirements of the Act,
the Service's Policy on Information Standards under the Endangered
Species Act, published in the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR
34271), and Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106-554; H.R. 5658)
and the associated Information Quality Guidelines issued by the
Service.
What Information Is Considered in the Review?
A 5-year review considers all new information available at the time
of the review. This review will consider the best scientific and
commercial data that has become available since we listed the species
on June 16, 1987 such as: (A) Species biology, including, but not
limited to, population trends, distribution, abundance, demographics,
and genetics; ( B) habitat conditions, including but not limited to
amount, distribution, and suitability; (C) conservation measures that
have been implemented to benefit the species; (D) threat status and
trends (see five factors under heading ``How do we determine whether a
species is endangered or threatened?''); and (E) other new information,
data, or corrections, including, but not limited to, taxonomic or
nomenclatural changes, identification of erroneous information
contained in the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants,
and improved analytical methods.
How Is the Sacramento Mountains Thistle Currently Listed?
Under the Act, the Service maintains Lists of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife and Plant species (Lists) at 50 CFR 17.11 (for
animals) and 17.12 (for plants). Amendments to the Lists through final
rules are published in the Federal Register. The Lists are also
available on our Internet site at http://endangered.fws.gov/wildlife.html. The Sacramento Mountains Thistle (Cirsium vinaceum) is
listed as threatened, with an historic range of U.S.A. (New Mexico), in
the family Asteraceae. It does not have designated critical habitat,
and no 4(d) special rules apply to this plant.
Definitions Related to This Notice
The following definitions are provided to assist those persons who
contemplate submitting information regarding the species being
reviewed: (A) Species includes any species or subspecies of fish,
wildlife, or plant, and any distinct population segment of any species
of vertebrate, which interbreeds when mature; (B) Endangered means any
species that is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant
portion of its range; (C) Threatened means any species that is likely
to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future
throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
How Do We Determine Whether a Species Is Endangered or Threatened?
Section 4(a)(1) of the Act establishes that we determine whether a
species is endangered or threatened based on one or more of the five
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. Section 4(a)(1) of the Act requires
that our determination be made on the basis of the best scientific and
commercial data available.
What Could Happen as a Result of This Review?
If we find that there is new information concerning the Sacramento
Mountains thistle, indicating a change in classification may be
warranted, we may propose a new rule that could do one of the
following: (a) Reclassify the species from threatened to endangered
(uplist); or (b) remove the species from the List (delist). If we
determine that a change in classification is not warranted, then the
thistle will remain on the List under its current threatened status.
Public Solicitation of New Information
We request any new information concerning the status of the
Sacramento Mountains thistle. See ``What Information Is Considered in
the Review?'' heading for specific criteria. Information submitted
should be supported by documentation such as maps, bibliographic
references, methods used to gather and analyze the data, or copies of
any pertinent publications, reports, or letters by knowledgeable
sources. If you wish to submit information for the 5-year review, you
may submit information to the Field Supervisor, New Mexico Ecological
Services Field Office (see ADDRESSES).
Our practice is to make comments, including names and home
addresses of respondents, available for public review
[[Page 70483]]
during regular business hours. Individual respondents may request that
we withhold their home addresses from the rulemaking record, which we
will honor to the extent allowable by law. There also may be
circumstances in which we would withhold from the rulemaking record a
respondent's identity, as allowable by law. If you wish us to withhold
your name or address, you must state this prominently at the beginning
of your comment, but you should be aware that the Service may be
required to disclose your name and address under the Freedom of
Information Act. However, we will not consider anonymous comments. We
will make all submissions from organizations or businesses, and from
individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of
organizations or businesses, available for public inspection in their
entirety.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited in this notice is available
upon request from the New Mexico Ecological Services Field Office (see
ADDRESSES).
Author
The primary authors of this rule are the New Mexico Ecological
Services Field Office staff (see ADDRESSES).
Authority
The authority for this action is the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: November 14, 2006.
H. Dale Hall,
Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. E6-20317 Filed 12-4-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P