[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 181 (Thursday, September 18, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 56029-56040]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-22224]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2014-0034; 4500030113]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Finding
on a Petition To List Eriogonum kelloggii (Red Mountain buckwheat) and
Sedum eastwoodiae (Red Mountain stonecrop) as Endangered or Threatened
Species
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 12-month petition finding.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
12-month finding on a petition to list Eriogonum kelloggii (Red
Mountain buckwheat) and Sedum eastwoodiae (Red Mountain stonecrop) as
endangered or threatened species under the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (Act). After a review of the best available scientific
and commercial information, we find that listing Eriogonum kelloggii
and Sedum eastwoodiae is not warranted at this time. However, we ask
the public to submit to us any new information that becomes available
concerning threats to the two species or their habitat at any time.
DATES: The finding announced in this document was made on September 18,
2014.
ADDRESSES: This finding is available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2014-0034 and at http://www.fws.gov/arcata/. Supporting documentation we used in preparing this
finding is available for public inspection, by appointment, during
normal business hours at: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Arcata Fish
and Wildlife Office, 1655 Heindon Road, Arcata, CA 95521; telephone
707-822-7201; facsimile 707-822-8411. Please submit any new
information, materials, or questions concerning this finding to the
above street address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bruce Bingham, Field Supervisor, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office, 1655
Heindon Road, Arcata, CA 95521; telephone 707-822-7201; facsimile 707-
822-8411. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-
8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Eriogonum kelloggii and Sedum eastwoodiae were first identified as
candidate species for Federal listing on July 1, 1975 (40 FR 27823),
and December 15, 1980 (45 FR 82479), respectively. The two species
remained candidates, and information on their status and threats facing
the two species were summarized in our annual candidate notices of
review (CNORs). See the Species Profiles for Eriogonum kelloggii and
Sedum eastwoodiae on our Environmental Conservation Online System
(ECOS) at http://ecos.fws.gov/ecos/home for additional information on
the history of candidate assessments for the two species.
In 2011, in resolution of litigation brought by WildEarth Guardians
and the Center for Biological Diversity, we agreed to submit either a
proposed rule or a not-warranted finding for 251 candidate species no
later than September 30, 2016 (re Endangered Species Act Section 4
Deadline Litigation, Misc. Action No. 10-377 (EGS), MDL Docket No. 2165
(D.D.C., September 9, 2011)). This determination regarding whether
Eriogonum kelloggii or Sedum eastwoodiae should be proposed for listing
is made in compliance with the 2011 settlement.
Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires
that, for any petition to revise the Federal Lists of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife and Plants that contains substantial scientific or
commercial information that listing the species may be warranted, we
make a finding within 12 months of the date of receipt of the
[[Page 56030]]
petition. As discussed above, in this finding, we have determined that
adding Eriogonum kelloggii and Sedum eastwoodiae to the Federal List of
Endangered or Threatened Plants is not warranted.
This finding is based upon the Species Report for Two Red Mountain
Plants: Red Mountain Buckwheat (Eriogonum kelloggii) and Red Mountain
Stonecrop (Sedum eastwoodiae) (Service 2014, entire) (Species Report)
and scientific analyses of available information prepared by Service
biologists from the Service's Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office, the
Pacific Southwest Regional Office, and the Headquarters Office. The
Species Report contains the best scientific and commercial data
available concerning the status of E. kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae,
including the past, present, and future threats to the species. As
such, the Species Report provides the scientific basis that informs our
regulatory decision in this document, which involves the further
application of standards within the Act and its regulations and
policies.
For a detailed discussion of Eriogonum kelloggii's or Sedum
eastwoodiae's description, taxonomy, life history, habitat, soils,
distribution, and abundance, please see the Species Report for Two Red
Mountain Plants: Red Mountain Buckwheat (Eriogonum kelloggii) and Red
Mountain Stonecrop (Sedum eastwoodiae) (Species Report, Service 2014,
entire) available for review under Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2014-0034 at
http://www.regulations.gov. Also refer to the most recent species
assessment forms for both species at http://ecos.fws.gov/ecos/home for
a summary of additional species information (Service 2012a and 2012b,
entire).
Previous Federal Action
On January 9, 1974, as directed by the Act, the Secretary for the
Smithsonian Institution submitted a report to Congress on potential
endangered and threatened plant species of the United States
(Smithsonian 1975, entire). The report identified 1,999 plant species
as either endangered or threatened, including Eriogonum kelloggii
(Smithsonian 1975, p. 92). On July 1, 1975, we published in the Federal
Register (40 FR 27823) our notification that we considered this report
to be a petition to list E. kelloggii as either endangered or
threatened under the Act. The notice solicited information from Federal
and State agencies, and the public, on the status of the species. In
1978, the Smithsonian Institution submitted an additional report
(Ayensu and DeFilipps 1978, entire) that revised the list of plant
species to be considered as endangered or threatened. We considered
this revised report as a supplement to the original 1975 petition. The
revised report identified Sedum eastwoodiae [as Sedum laxum ssp.
eastwoodiae] as a potential endangered or threatened species (Ayensu
and DeFilipps 1978, p. 106). On December 15, 1980, we published in the
Federal Register (45 FR 82479) our notice of review of plant taxa for
listing as endangered or threatened species. Both E. kelloggii and S.
eastwoodiae were identified as Category 1 species (taxa for which we
had enough biological information to support listing as either
endangered or threatened). As a result, we considered E. kelloggii and
S. eastwoodiae to be candidates for addition to the Federal List of
Endangered and Threatened Plants. The December 15, 1980, Federal
Register notice (45 FR 82479) again solicited information from Federal
and State agencies, and the public, on the status of the two species
(Service 1981, pp. 1, 4-5).
Both species were included in our annual candidate notices of
review (CNORs) between 1983 (48 FR 53640; November 28, 1983) and 2013
(78 FR 70103; November 22, 2013) for Eriogonum kelloggii; and between
1985 (50 FR 39525; September 27, 1985) and 2013, for Sedum eastwoodiae.
In our September 19, 1997, CNOR (62 FR 49397), which identified listing
priority numbers for candidate species, these two species were assigned
priority numbers of 5 (threats facing the two species were of high
magnitude but nonimminent) as outlined in our Listing Priority Guidance
(48 FR 43098; September 21, 1983). We were petitioned to list both
species by the Center for Biological Diversity and others on May 11,
2004 (Center for Biological Diversity, et al., 2004). In the November
22, 2013, CNOR, we stated that we would be conducting a review of the
two species for listing under the Act (78 FR 70103). This notice
constitutes our review and final action regarding the petitions to list
E. kelloggii or S. eastwoodiae as endangered or threatened under the
Act.
Taxonomy
Eriogonum kelloggii: Gray (1870, p. 293) described this taxon from
specimens collected in 1869, by Dr. A. Kellogg from the type locality
at Red Mountain, Mendocino County, California. The species is sometimes
known as Kellogg's buckwheat (Hickman 1993, p. 874; CDFG 2005,
unpaginated; CDFW 2013, p. 9).
Sedum eastwoodiae: Nathaniel Britton first described this taxon as
Gormania eastwoodiae in 1903, based on specimens from Red Mountain,
Mendocino County, California, collected by Alice Eastwood (Britton and
Rose 1903, p. 31). Nomenclatural changes followed, and in 1975, the
taxon was reduced to the sub-specific level by Robert Clausen, renaming
it S. laxum ssp. eastwoodiae (Clausen 1975, pp. 399-403). Melinda
Denton returned the species to S. eastwoodiae (Denton 1982, p. 65;
Denton 1993, pp. 531-533).
Distribution
The Red Mountain buckwheat (Eriogonum kelloggii) and Red Mountain
stonecrop (Sedum eastwoodiae) are plant species endemic to serpentine
habitat of lower montane forest in the northern Coast Range at Red
Mountain in Mendocino County, California (Kruckeberg 1984, pp. 113,
121). Eriogonum kelloggii is found on dry ridges in rocky barren
openings associated with serpentine habitat between 1,900 and 4,100 ft
(580 and 1,250 m) in elevation (Munz and Keck 1973, p. 339; Jennings
2003, pp. 1-8). Sedum eastwoodiae occupies relatively barren rocky
openings and cliffs, generally on west-faced slopes associated with
serpentine habitats between 1,900 to 4,100 ft (580 to 1,250 m) in
elevation (Jennings 2003, p. 2). Serpentine habitats are thinly soiled
and usually contain high levels of heavy metals and other minerals and
often support plant species which have become uniquely adapted to this
harsher environment (Kruckeberg as cited in Whittaker 1954, pp. 258-
288; Kruckeberg 1984, pp. 6-12, 18-21, 34-35, 48-50; University of
California 1993, pp. 1-3). The majority of the range of both species
overlap except where E. kelloggii extends farther south than S.
eastwoodiae to a 900-square-foot (ft\2\) (84-square-meter (m\2\)) area
on adjacent Little Red Mountain. The area occupied by both species at
Red Mountain is scattered over approximately 4 square miles (mi\2\)
(10.4 square kilometers (km\2\)). Limited monitoring indicates that
both species have fairly stable populations relative to their
distribution. The exact lifespans of E. kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae
are not known. Other Eriogonum species occupying similar restricted
habitats and which are adapted to similar environmental and ecological
conditions (e.g., xeric conditions, limited resources, tolerance of
unique soils) have long lifespans and tend to grow slowly and favor
individual persistence (Anderson 2006, pp. 1-73). Based on the
persistence of monitored
[[Page 56031]]
E. kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae populations we would expect the
lifespan of plants to be long.
Land Ownership and Management
The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and California Department of
Fish and Wildlife (CDFW; formerly known as the California Department of
Fish and Game (CDFG)) are the two largest land managers in the Red
Mountain area. Both agencies support plant conservation and have
participated in monitoring and reducing threats on the two species and
their habitat.
In 1979, BLM designated 6,173 acres (ac) (2,498 hectares (ha)) of
BLM land at Red Mountain as a wilderness study area (WSA). In 1984
(updated in 1989), BLM also designated 6,895 ac (2,790 ha) of the area
as an Area of Critical Environmental Concern and Research Natural Area
(ACEC/RNA). These designations provide protection and focused
management direction toward conservation of the unique botanical and
soils values of the Red Mountain area (BLM 1995, pp. 3-6 to 3-9). As a
result of these designations, BLM developed a resource management plan
(RMP) for the area (BLM 1995, pp. 2-32 to 2-37). The Red Mountain ACEC/
RMP is site-specific and excludes livestock grazing and off-road
vehicle use from the area and guides overall management activities
within BLM's Arcata Field Office's jurisdiction. In addition, the BLM
lands in the Red Mountain area (including those identified above) have
also been designated by Congress as part of the South Fork Eel River
Wilderness Area through the Northern California Coastal Wild Heritage
Wilderness Act of October 17, 2006 (Pub. L. 109-362). The designation
removed the WSA status for the area and officially designated the area
as wilderness. Under the designation, BLM is directed to manage
designated wilderness in a manner that retains the wilderness character
for future generations. Within wilderness areas, no new roads can be
developed and no mechanical equipment can be used. The BLM has acquired
and is working to acquire additional private lands from willing
landowners within the area that would help consolidate its ownership.
The majority of areas containing Eriogonum kelloggii and Sedum
eastwoodiae populations are within the Red Mountain ACEC and South Fork
Eel River Wilderness Area (see Figure 5 of the Species Report (Service
2014)).
The portion of Little Red Mountain containing one population of
Eriogonum kelloggii is owned and managed by CDFW as an ecological
reserve (Little Red Mountain Ecological Reserve). State ecological
reserves are established to provide protection for rare, endangered, or
threatened native plants, wildlife, aquatic organisms and specialized
terrestrial or aquatic habitat types. The CDFW designated E. kelloggii
as a State endangered plant in April of 1982 (CDFG 2005, unpaginated;
CDFW 2013, p. 9). Public entry and use of ecological reserves are to be
compatible with the primary purposes of the reserve, and subject to the
applicable general rules and regulations for conservation of the area
as outlined in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations at
section 630 (CDFW 2014, pp. 1-14).
Summary of Factors Affecting the Species
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and implementing regulations
(50 CFR 424) set forth procedures for adding species to, removing
species from, or reclassifying species on the Federal Lists of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. Under section 4(a)(1) of
the Act, a species may be determined to be endangered or threatened
based on any of the following 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.
In making this finding, information pertaining to Eriogonum
kelloggii and Sedum eastwoodiae in relation to the five factors
provided in section 4(a)(1) of the Act is discussed below. In
considering what factors might constitute threats, we must look beyond
the mere exposure of the species to the factor to determine whether the
species responds to the factor in a way that causes actual impacts to
the species. If there is exposure to a factor, but no response, or only
a positive response, that factor is not a threat. If there is exposure
and the species responds negatively, the factor may be a threat and we
then attempt to determine how significant a threat it is. If the threat
is significant, it may drive or contribute to the risk of extinction of
the species such that the species warrants listing as endangered or
threatened as those terms are defined by the Act. This does not
necessarily require empirical proof of a threat. The combination of
exposure and some corroborating evidence of how the species is likely
impacted could suffice. The mere identification of factors that could
impact a species negatively is not sufficient to compel a finding that
listing is appropriate; we require evidence that these factors are
operative threats that act on the species to the point that the species
meets the definition of an endangered or threatened species under the
Act.
In making our 12-month finding on the petition we considered and
evaluated the best available scientific and commercial information.
The primary stressor identified as impacting Eriogonum kelloggii
and Sedum eastwoodiae and their habitat at the time the species were
first considered as candidates was the potential for surface mining for
chromium, nickel, and potentially cobalt. Other stressors identified
throughout our CNORs between 1983 and 2013 consisted of unauthorized
off-highway vehicle (OHV) use, illegal marijuana cultivation, wildfire,
wildfire suppression, vegetation encroachment, small population size,
and the effects of climate change. The potential threat of large-scale
surface mining has greatly diminished. The following sections provide a
summary of the current stressors impacting E. kelloggii and S.
eastwoodiae.
Stressors previously identified as impacting Eriogonum kelloggii
and Sedum eastwoodiae include mining activities (Factors A and E);
habitat disturbance activities (unauthorized OHV use (Factors A and E),
trail construction (Factor A), illegal marijuana cultivation (Factors A
and E)); wildfire and wildfire management (alteration of the fire
regime or fire suppression activities) (Factors A and E); vegetation
encroachment (competition with native plant species (Factors A and E));
climate change (Factor A and E); small population size (Factor E); and
the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms (Factor D). Listing
actions may be warranted based on any of the above factors, singly or
in combination. The information pertaining to the two species organized
by the five factors is discussed for the two species below. In
addition, Table 1 below summarizes the stressors identified for both
species over time since the two species were first identified as
candidates for listing, and compares these with the situation today. A
complete characterization and discussion of the stressors impacting
these two species is in the Species Report (Service 2014, pp. 10-28).
[[Page 56032]]
Table 1--Stressors Identified as Impacting Eriogonum kelloggii and Sedum eastwoodiae Over Time
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At time of
Stressor petitions 1974/ As candidates 1980- Present 2013-2014 Current scope
1978 2012
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mining.......................... Yes............... Ongoing........... Greatly Reduced or Red Mountain.
Eliminated.
OHV Use......................... Not Identified.... Yes............... Decreased......... Red Mountain.
Road Construction............... Not Identified.... Yes............... Decreased......... Red Mountain.
Trail Construction (authorized). Not Identified.... Potential......... Potential......... Red Mountain.
Illegal Marijuana Cultivation... Not Identified.... Yes............... Decreased......... Lower Elevations.
Wildfire (Mgt. and Suppression). Not Identified.... Yes............... Stable............ Everywhere.
Vegetation Encroachment/Mgt..... Not Identified.... Yes............... Potential......... Portions of Range.
Effects of Climate Change....... Not Identified.... Yes............... Stable (changes Entire Range.
may offset each
other).
Small Population Size........... Yes............... Yes............... Stable (adapted to Entire Range.
small population
size).
Inadequacy of Regulatory Yes............... Yes............... No................ Entire Range.
Mechanisms.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Factor A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or
Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range
Some of the same potential activities that affect the habitat of
Eriogonum kelloggii and Sedum eastwoodiae can also affect individual E.
kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae plants. While these impacts to E.
kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae fit under Factor E (Other Natural or
Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued Existence), they are included
here in the Factor A discussion for ease of analysis.
Mining
Mining activities that occur, have occurred, or potentially could
occur at Red Mountain include recreational, small-scale, and potential
commercial (large-scale) mining operations. The historical mining
activity that has occurred has been minimal (BLM 1994, pp. 1-2).
Recreational and Small-Scale Mining: Recreational mining includes
individuals with hand equipment (e.g., shovels, picks), mostly
collecting rocks or looking for other mineral deposits and would
involve digging and movement of rocks and other small-impact
disturbance. Such activity could also destroy or trample individual
plants if it occurred within an area occupied by Eriogonum kelloggii or
Sedum eastwoodiae. This type of recreational mining activity has
occurred in the past but most likely has diminished due to designation
of most of the Red Mountain area as an ACEC and Wilderness Area. Mining
activity has also included small-scale mining efforts using mechanical
equipment that have been conducted in the past by individuals prior to
the area being designated as an ACEC or Wilderness Area or currently on
private lands by individual landowners. These areas are typically
localized and limited in scope. According to U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS) information on mine locations at Red Mountain, 13 mine locations
have been identified within the area (USGS-Mineral Resource On-line
Spatial Data 2014). Of these mine sites, only two are located within
the areas known to contain E. kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae. This type
of activity if it was to occur within an area occupied by E. kelloggii
or S. eastwoodiae, would most likely destroy individual plants by
direct removal, crushing, or burying. Review of aerial imagery of these
two mine sites shows very limited habitat disturbance of the two areas
and no recent activity. In order for mining activities to resume at
these small-scale mining sites, they would require authorization by BLM
within the ACEC and Wilderness Area. See Figure 6 in the Species Report
for mine sites identified in the Red Mountain area (Service 2014,
entire).
If recreational or small-scale mining activities occur in areas
occupied by Eriogonum kelloggii and Sedum eastwoodiae, there may be
some limited destruction of plants and habitat. However, the amount of
wide-scale recreational and small-scale mining activity on Red Mountain
is minimal due to access constraints and these activities have not
impacted E. kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae populations or habitat to a
large degree since they were identified as candidate species.
Commercial Mining: Commercial mining activity has not occurred on
Red Mountain to date, although the potential for large-scale mining
activity exists for the entire Red Mountain area, as it contains
widespread deposits of chromium, nickel, and potentially cobalt. The
entire known distribution of Eriogonum kelloggii and Sedum eastwoodiae
at Red Mountain is held under unpatented lode or placer mining claims,
or occurs on privately owned lands owned by individuals with past or
current mining interests (BLM 2009, unpaginated). The one population of
E. kelloggii at Little Red Mountain within the Little Red Mountain
Ecological Reserve is protected from any mining activity (recreational
or commercial) through State regulation (CDFW 2014, pp. 1-14).
Commercial mining on Red Mountain would most likely be an open-face
bench type mining that would involve removal and processing of the
mineral-bearing ore containing nickel, chromium, and possibly cobalt
(Service 1990, p. 14). Commercial mining activities would remove
plants, degrade habitat, alter drainage, compact soils, and introduce
contaminants in the affected area. Although an operation plan for such
mining activities would require restoration of the affected areas,
plant species composition would undoubtedly be altered. Moreover, there
is no evidence in the literature indicating Eriogonum kelloggii and
Sedum eastwoodiae are able to recolonize soils once they are disturbed.
With regard to the potential for Red Mountain to be commercially
mined, a Bureau of Mines Preliminary Feasibility Study conducted at Red
Mountain in 1978 concluded the nickel deposits met the minimum tonnage
grade test at the time (i.e., 35 million short tons of material
containing an average 0.8 percent nickel) (K. Geer, Service, pers.
comm. 1995). However, commercial mining at Red Mountain was not
considered economically feasible at the time due to the relatively low
grade of the resource (low metal concentrations) and the high cost of
mining the material (Geer, pers. comm. 1995). According to current USGS
data (Kelly and Matos 2013 [Comps.], entire) on nickel and chromium
production and pricing between 1900 and 2014, the unit value (as
calculated in 1998 dollars) of both
[[Page 56033]]
nickel and chromium has not increased significantly since the values
reported in 1978 (USGS 2014a, pp. 1-7; USGS 2014b, pp. 1-8). The unit
value (1998 dollars) for cobalt as of 2012 has decreased since the
values reported in 1978 (USGS 2014c, pp. 1-6). The likelihood and
extent of future mining will depend on the future economic feasibility
and demand for minerals found in the area. The economic feasibility of
mining will be determined by the current market value of the mined ore,
as well as cost of extraction, processing, and transportation. As
discussed above, over the past 35 years since the last economic
feasibility report, the price of nickel, chromium, and cobalt has
either risen only slightly or decreased. In addition, because Red
Mountain is within designated wilderness, avoidance and mitigation
measures to reduce or offset impacts to wilderness characteristics may
be added to the cost of extraction and feasibility of mining the area.
The majority of Eriogonum kelloggii and Sedum eastwoodiae
occurrences are within the South Fork Eel River Wilderness Area. The
legislation designating the wilderness area specifically retained valid
land rights, such as mining claims, in existence on the date of
enactment (October 17, 2006). However, the area was withdrawn from all
new forms of: (1) Entry to, appropriation, or disposal of lands under
the public land laws; (2) locating, entering, and establishing new
patents under Federal Mining Law; and (3) disposition under all laws
pertaining to mineral and geothermal leasing or mining of materials.
Consequently, no new mining claims can be established within the South
Fork Eel River Wilderness Area.
For the existing mining claims within the South Fork Eel River
Wilderness Area, a plan of operation must be developed and approved by
the BLM before any permitting of operations can take place (43 CFR
3809.11). Before BLM may approve a mining plan of operations on
existing claims, it must conduct a validity examination to determine if
the claim is valid and if so develop a Mineral Examination Report (S.
Flanagan, BLM, pers. comm., 2014; 43 CFR 3809.100). The validity
examination includes a determination of whether the mining claim was
valid before the wilderness withdrawal, and whether it remains valid.
Because there are different claimholders on Red Mountain that likely
filed claims at different times, separate validity exams would need to
be performed for each claim, raising the cost of conducting the
examination. Due to the high cost of the validity examinations, BLM
typically only does them when a plan of operations is filed by a
claimholder (S. Flanagan, BLM, pers. comm., 2014). The BLM has 60 days
to determine if sufficient information was provided to conduct a
validity examination, and then 2 years to complete the examination. If
the validity examination fails, the claim is cancelled. If the claim is
determined to be valid, the claimant may file patent to gain ownership
to the land, although for short-lived mining operations a patent is
often not filed. The BLM does not have the right to deny such a patent;
however, it can impose protective measures that avoid or reduce impacts
to wilderness characteristics. However, the majority of recently
conducted validity examinations in California have failed, and BLM does
not expect any new validity examinations to be conducted within the
area (S. Flanagan, BLM, pers. comm., 2014).
Currently, no small-scale or commercial mining activities are being
conducted on BLM or adjacent private lands, and no validity exams have
been conducted on any of the mining claims within the Red Mountain
area. Some recreational mining activities have occurred in the area in
the past; however, with the designation of the majority of the area as
an ACEC and Wilderness Area, we do not expect these types of activities
to be a major concern for Eriogonum kelloggii or Sedum eastwoodiae or
their habitat now or in the future. As discussed above and in the
Species Report, the majority of private lands where E. kelloggii or S.
eastwoodiae occur has been acquired by BLM and are within designated
wilderness, and subject to BLM's management. As a result of land use
designation and management changes and continued economic
infeasibility, we also do not consider large-scale mining to be a
threat to E. kelloggii or S. eastwoodiae or their habitat now or in the
future.
Habitat Disturbance Activities
Activities associated with habitat disturbance in the Red Mountain
area other than those discussed above under mining include: Road
construction, wildfire management construction activities, unauthorized
off-highway vehicle (OHV) use, illegal marijuana cultivation, and trail
development. The majority of past habitat disturbance in the Red
Mountain area has been caused by road construction, both for access and
fire control (Imper and Wheeler, unpubl. data 2009). However, due to
the designation of the Red Mountain area as an ACEC and part of the
South Fork Eel River Wilderness Area and Little Red Mountain as a State
ecological reserve, no new road construction or use of mechanical
equipment is permitted in the area. One exception that would still be
permitted in the area is for the purpose of wildfire management
activities (which may include presuppression, fire-break construction,
and access road construction) (16 U.S.C. 1133(d)(1)). See the Wildfire
and Wildfire Management section, below, for further discussion of these
activities and how they may affect Eriogonum kelloggii and Sedum
eastwoodiae and their habitat.
The current unauthorized OHV use and associated habitat disturbance
at Red Mountain is largely related to illegal marijuana cultivation.
Unauthorized OHV use by illegal marijuana growers crushes vegetation
and loosens soil, making it more likely to erode during a rain event.
Clearing of vegetation, creation of water impoundments, and diversion
of streams can also greatly alter local site conditions. These types of
activities should they occur in occupied areas would remove, crush, or
destroy individual Eriogonum kelloggii or Sedum eastwoodiae plants and
disturb or alter their habitat. However, currently the majority of
known sites on Red Mountain where marijuana cultivation has occurred
are at the lower elevation areas adjacent to private lands, near
existing roads, or with access to streams, and not near locations where
E. kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae occur (J. Knisley, BLM, pers. comm.
2014). The Red Mountain area where E. kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae
occur is more open to observation and has less forest or vegetation
cover, and as a result is most likely less desirable for illegal
marijuana cultivation sites. BLM, CDFW, and County law enforcement
officials have been working with a local nonprofit organization to
remove the growing infrastructure (i.e., irrigation, planting
materials, and other debris) from the area (Eel River Recovery Project
2014, pp. 1-6). General public access to the area by vehicle is
controlled. Considering the extent of illegal marijuana cultivation in
northern California, the potential for these activities to be a threat
to E. kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae and their habitat is a concern.
However, based on the current extent of these activities within the Red
Mountain area and the best available scientific and commercial
information, we do not consider these activities to result in
significant impacts to E. kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae as a whole, or
to their habitat, nor do we
[[Page 56034]]
expect them to become significant in the future.
A proposal to enhance recreational use of the South Fork Eel River
Wilderness Area through construction of a foot or horse trail would
encourage public use and likely discourage marijuana growing and
unauthorized vehicle use (J. Wheeler, pers. comm. 2009). Trail
construction will be considered once a wilderness management plan is
developed for Red Mountain, and would likely be simple delineation
using posts rather than soil disturbance (J. Wheeler, pers. comm.
2013). Habitat for Eriogonum kelloggii and Sedum eastwoodiae could also
potentially be impacted by logging operations, such as cable logging
(C. Golec, CDFW, pers. comm. 2005); however, logging of any kind in the
absence of a wilderness management plan will not occur. BLM currently
does not have a specific timeline for development of a wilderness
management plan for the area, and as a result, no trail or logging
activities will be authorized for the area in the near future. Due to
the tendency of E. kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae to occur on rock
outcrops and rocky slopes, none of the above activities is expected to
impact a significant portion of the two species' habitat now or in the
future.
Wildfire and Wildfire Management
Fire has been shown to be an important factor affecting vegetation
patterns and maintenance of many open habitats, similar to the habitat
of Eriogonum kelloggii and Sedum eastwoodiae, across the Klamath
Bioregion (Skinner et al. 2006, pp. 175-178; Skinner et al. 2009, pp.
76-98). Historically in California, frequent natural and cultural
ignitions maintained these disturbance-prone ecosystems dependent on
recurrent fire (Holmes et al. 2008, pp. 551-552). Pre-European
settlement fire-return intervals for mixed conifer stands are thought
to have been variable and in some cases ranged as little as 6 to 8
years between events (Skinner et al. 2009, pp. 83-84). A decline in
fire frequency since European settlement has allowed conifer
encroachment or establishment of dense shrub stands in many areas of
the region. BLM's general policy is to restore fire to its natural role
in the ecosystem (BLM 2012a, pp. 1-25--1-27), except where these
activities threaten human life, property, or high value resources on
adjacent nonwilderness lands, or where these would result in
unacceptable change to the wilderness resource. Wildfire or prescribed
burning under certain specific conditions may be used as a wildlife
management tool if carefully designed to maintain or enhance the
wilderness resource (BLM 2012a, pp. 1-25--1-27).
BLM may conduct fire suppression activities within wilderness
areas. Fire suppression activities involving uses generally prohibited
in wilderness areas (use of motorized equipment or motor vehicles,
mechanical transport, construction of roads, and construction of
structures or installations) can only occur if authorized by the
applicable BLM State Director, unless this authority has been delegated
to the District or Field Manager (BLM 2012a, pp. 1-12--1-15, 1-26).
These types of activities may have a direct impact on Eriogonum
kelloggii and Sedum eastwoodiae by removing or crushing plants and
their habitat.
Indirectly, fire suppression impacts Eriogonum kelloggii and Sedum
eastwoodiae by allowing vegetation to encroach and to become decadent.
Relatively dense growth adjacent to areas occupied by E. kelloggii and
S. eastwoodiae can lead to shading, changing the micro-climate around
plant clusters, and using moisture in a xeric landscape. Another
consequence of long-term fire suppression is the increase in fire
hazards when vegetation is permitted to become relatively dense in a
dry environment. This could lead to a potential for more severe fire
events, which may lead to greater habitat destruction. The threat of
fire is lessened for E. kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae in that the plants
occur mostly in rocky areas, which in most cases do not contain large
build-ups of vegetation. Natural and prescribed fires will be
supervised and may be allowed to burn under certain conditions. When
fire threatens human life or property, motorized equipment may be used
to eliminate or minimize the threat. However, in all cases, the
equipment and tactics used to manage fires are designed to minimize the
impact to wilderness values (BLM 2012a, pp. 1-25--1-27).
Two recorded fires appear to have influenced the Red Mountain area
over the past 90 years: The 1952 Lynch Fire and the 2008 Red Mountain
Fire (Baad 202, pp. 6-7; California Department of Forestry and Fire
Protection 2009). An undocumented fire also occurred in the area and
may have influenced localized vegetation patterns at Red Mountain
(Goforth 1980, pp. 16-19; Service 2013, p. 18) (see Vegetation
Encroachment section below). The 1952 Lynch Fire was the only fire
included in the Fire and Resource Map Project's (FRAP) online
historical fire database (California Department of Forestry and Fire
Protection 2009) for the immediate area of Red Mountain since the
1920s. Evidence suggests the Lynch Fire may have stimulated germination
and growth of Pinus attenuata (knobcone pine) in some areas within the
distribution of Eriogonum kelloggii and Sedum eastwoodiae on the
mountain, which has encroached on their habitat (Service 2013, p. 18),
but only in a few cases (Goforth 1980, pp. 16-19). See the Vegetation
Encroachment section, below, for further discussion of the potential
effects of vegetation encroachment.
The 2008 Red Mountain fire, which was caused by lightning, burned
approximately 3,000 ac (1,214 ha) within the South Fork Eel River
Wilderness Area (BLM 2008, p. 1). The fire burned some 1,000 ac (405
ha) at the top of Red Mountain, with reportedly 80 percent mortality of
brush and 10 percent tree mortality (J. Wheeler, BLM, pers. comm.
2008). The actual burn footprint was highly irregular, and the majority
of the burned habitat appeared to have experienced a relatively low-
intensity ground fire, with little crowning (Imper and Wheeler,
unpublished data 2009). The fire also extended to Little Red Mountain
and burned to near the boundary of one of the populations of Eriogonum
kelloggii; the population may have been impacted by the fire control
efforts, but no survey of the area was completed (S. Koller, CDFW,
pers. comm. 2009). Regardless, in an attempt to restore the impacts of
the fire suppression activities, CDFW staff worked extensively with
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CalFire) to
redistribute the pushed up earth material back over the disturbed areas
that had been created for safety zones during the 2008 fires (S.
Koller, CDFW, pers. comm. 2014). Some 25 percent of the polygons
occupied by Sedum eastwoodiae and 42 percent of the polygons occupied
by E. kelloggii mapped by Jennings (2003, pp. 2 and 8) occur within the
boundary of 2008 fire, but the extent to which habitat occupied by
either species was directly affected by the fire is unknown.
The effects of climate change may also impact habitat conditions
and fire frequency and intensity for the Red Mountain area. Changes to
wildfire regimes (frequency and intensity) and factors influencing fire
(temperature, precipitation, vegetation) have been predicted as a
result of climate change (Lenihan et al. 2003, pp. 1678-1680; Fried et
al. 2004, pp. 177-188; Westerling and Bryant 2008, pp. 244-248;
Krawchuk et al. 2009, pp. 8-10; Cornwell et al. 2012, pp. 1-89).
However, the results of fire modeling
[[Page 56035]]
are variable, as the likelihood of future fires and wildfire severity
depend on many factors, including pre-suppression activities, fire
suppression strategies, human settlement patterns, ignition sources,
variability of local climatic conditions, vegetation type, and fuel
loading (Fried et al. 2004, p. 185; Westerling and Bryant 2008, pp.
231-235; Krawchuk et al. 2009, p. 1; Point Reyes Bird Observatory
(PRBO) Conservation Science 2011, pp. 1-59). A 2004 modeling study on
the effects of climate change and fire frequency for northern
California suggested that there may be an increase in fire risk for
northern California as a whole (Fried et al. 2004, pp. 177-188), but
that northern coastal areas (as represented by the CalFire Humboldt
Ranger District and including Red Mountain and Little Red Mountain)
would not change. This was attributed to the model's prediction of
slower winds and higher humidity offsetting any temperature increases
(Fried et al. 2004, p. 177). The researchers stated that the majority
of fires under both present and predicted future climate scenarios
would be of moderate intensity and rates of spread, and are unlikely to
become large, damaging fires (Fried et al. 2004, p. 177). Consequently,
we do not currently consider climate change and its potential effects
on fire frequency to be a significant threat to the habitat of
Eriogonum kelloggii or Sedum eastwoodiae now or into the future.
With the history of only two recorded fires over the past 90 years,
with one of those fires being a low-intensity ground fire with little
crowning, the Red Mountain area being more open and less vegetated than
surrounding areas, and management focus increased as a result of its
designation as wilderness in part for the conservation of rare plants,
we do not currently consider wildfire or wildfire suppression to be a
significant threat to Eriogonum kelloggii and Sedum eastwoodiae or
their habitat, and do not expect the fire conditions or management to
change significantly in the near future.
Vegetation Encroachment
Habitat modification as a result of natural vegetation changes in
the absence of, or as a result of, fire is a stressor to Eriogonum
kelloggii and Sedum eastwoodiae. Encroachment of vegetation into E.
kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae habitat results in the modification of
ecological conditions through shading, competition for resources
(light, water, nutrients), and greater susceptibility to the effects of
fire due to increased fuel. These habitat changes may result in
conditions that are not suitable for populations of E. kelloggii and S.
eastwoodiae and may lead to loss of individual plants for both species.
As stated above, an undocumented fire may have stimulated
germination and growth of Pinus attenuata (knobcone pine) in some areas
within the distribution of Eriogonum kelloggii and Sedum eastwoodiae on
the mountain and encroached on their habitat, but only in a few cases
(Goforth 1980, pp. 16-19; Service 2013, p. 18). In addition, Baad
(2002, pp. 6-7) recognized suppressed reproductive output in E.
kelloggii at one site on Red Mountain, and attributed the impact to
conifer invasion following a fire that occurred 40 years previously.
Baad's monitoring efforts (2002, entire) did not observe specific
impacts from vegetation encroachment on S. eastwoodiae, but the study
was not designed to provide that information. In absence of fire, Baad
concluded that S. eastwoodiae located on rocky ridge tops and with
little woody vegetation appeared relatively stable, but populations
situated on deeper soils in more sheltered sites are more vulnerable to
shading by competing vegetation (Baad 2002, pp. 6-7). The manner and
degree to which the 2008 Red Mountain Fire affected E. kelloggii or S.
eastwoodiae, either positively, by setting back natural succession
within their habitat, or negatively, by killing plants, is not known.
Although vegetation encroachment is a concern for both Eriogonum
kelloggii and Sedum eastwoodiae, based on the extent of observed
effects, persistence of known populations, and increased management of
the area, we do not consider vegetation encroachment to be a
significant threat to E. kelloggii or S. eastwoodiae or to their
habitat now or into the future.
Factor B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
Due to the remoteness of the area and access constraints, little
visitor use occurs in the area. As a result there is a low potential
for collection or overutilization for any purpose. Status surveys and
other informal monitoring have not shown that overutilization is a
concern. As a result, the best available scientific and commercial
information does not indicate that overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational purposes is now, or will be in
the future, a threat to Eriogonum kelloggii or Sedum eastwoodiae.
Factor C. Disease or Predation
It is likely that predation from invertebrates, insects, and
animals on Eriogonum kelloggii's and Sedum eastwoodiae's seeds,
vegetative tissue, and roots is occurring on an ongoing basis. Service
biologists have documented severed flowering stems, which most likely
occurred from small mammal predation (Ken Fuller, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, pers. comm. 1994). Because E. kelloggii and S.
eastwoodiae have evolved within this habitat, both species have adapted
to some level of predation. There is no evidence from observations of
predation on E. kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae that individuals have been
killed from this activity. It is more likely that predation reduces the
vigor, including reproductive output, of the two species. However, the
best available scientific and commercial information indicates that
this level of predation is not a current or expected future threat to
E. kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae. In addition, disease is not known to
be a current or expected future threat to E. kelloggii and S.
eastwoodiae.
Factor D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
The Act requires that the Secretary assess available regulatory
mechanisms in order to determine whether existing regulatory mechanisms
are adequate to address threats to the species (Factor D). The Species
Report includes a discussion of applicable regulatory mechanisms that
apply to Eriogonum kelloggii and Sedum eastwoodiae (Service 2014,
entire). In the Species Report, the Service examines the applicable
Federal, State, and other statutory and regulatory mechanisms to
determine whether these mechanisms provide protections to E. kelloggii
or S. eastwoodiae. As described in the Species Report and outlined
below, several Federal and State statutes provide protections to E.
kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae and their habitat.
Under this factor, we examine whether existing regulatory
mechanisms are inadequate to address the potential threats to E.
kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae discussed under other factors. We give
strongest weight to statutes and their implementing regulations, and
management direction that stems from those laws and regulations. Such
laws and regulations are nondiscretionary and enforceable, and are
considered a regulatory mechanism under this analysis. Examples include
State government actions enforced under a State statute or
[[Page 56036]]
constitution, or Federal action under statute.
Some other programs are more voluntary in nature or dependent upon
available funding (see Conservation Measures Planned or Implemented,
discussed below); in those cases, we analyze the specific facts for
that effort to ascertain its effectiveness at mitigating the threat and
the extent to which it can be relied upon in the future. Having
evaluated the significance of the threat as mitigated by any such
conservation efforts, we analyze under Factor D the extent to which
existing regulatory mechanisms adequately address the specific threats
identified for the species. We consider relevant Federal, State, and
tribal laws and regulations when evaluating the status of a species.
Regulatory mechanisms, if they exist, may preclude the need for listing
if we determine that such mechanisms adequately address the threats to
the species such that listing is not warranted. Only existing
ordinances, regulations, and laws that have a direct connection to a
stressor are applicable.
Federal Protections
Special Status Species Management: BLM's policy for Special Status
Species Management (BLM Manual 6840) includes guidance for the
conservation of BLM special status species and their habitat on BLM-
administered lands. BLM special status plant species include federally
endangered or threatened species and species requiring special
management (as determined by BLM State Directors). Management actions
are to promote the special status plant conservation for recovery and
reduce the likelihood and need for any potential future listing under
the Act. Species with ``Special Status'' receive a higher level of
scrutiny on proposed projects with a greater emphasis on species
conservation under existing environmental laws and implementing
regulations. BLM accomplishes this by implementing proactive
conservation measures that reduce or eliminate threats to species BLM
has categorized as sensitive. These measures include: (1) Development
of rangewide and or site-specific management plans; (2) implementation
of BLM actions that are consistent with objectives for management of
those species; (3) actions that at least maintain or improve the
species and its habitat at each occurrence; and (4) monitoring
populations to determine whether management objectives are being met
(BLM 2012b, entire; BLM 2012c, entire). The California Native Plant
Society has ranked plant species according to their conservation status
and considers Eriogonum kelloggii and Sedum eastwoodiae as 1B species
(endemic species considered rare throughout their range) (Smith and
Berg 1988, pp. XV, 49, 104). The BLM California State Director has
identified California 1B ranked species (including Eriogonum kelloggii
and Sedum eastwoodiae) as BLM Special Status Plants for management and
conservation purposes (BLM 2013, pp. 1-6).
Areas of Critical Environmental Concern: As stated above, BLM
designated the Red Mountain Area as an Area of Critical Environmental
Concern (ACEC) Research Natural Area (RNA) in 1984. The area was
established in part to protect and conserve sensitive animal and plant
species on the specialized habitat at Red Mountain (BLM 1989, p. 2).
The management objectives include: (1) Protect and monitor existing
populations of E. kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae; (2) acquire private
lands from willing sellers to consolidate and enhance land management
within the Red Mountain area; (3) develop a fire management plan and
implement measures to reduce the impacts of suppression activities on
sensitive species and their habitat; (4) close the area to public
vehicle use and limit private vehicle access to existing roads; (5)
close the area to grazing activities; and (6) post boundary signs to
assist in appropriate visitor access (BLM 1989, pp. 1-17; BLM 1995, pp.
2-32 to 2-37).
South Fork Eel River Wilderness Area Designation: As stated above,
the Red Mountain Area was designated as part of the South Fork Eel
River Wilderness Area in 2006. Wilderness areas are those Federal lands
recognized as an area where the earth and its community of life are
untrammeled by human activity and retain their primeval character and
influence, without permanent improvements or human habitation. These
areas are protected and managed so as to preserve their natural
conditions and (1) generally appear to have been affected primarily by
the forces of nature, with the imprint of man's work substantially
unnoticeable; (2) have outstanding opportunities for solitude or a
primitive and unconfined type of recreation; (3) have at least 5,000 ac
(2,023 ha) of land or are of sufficient size as to make practicable
their preservation and use in an unimpaired condition; and (4) may also
contain ecological, geological, or other features of scientific,
educational, scenic, or historical value.
Under the designation, BLM is directed to manage the designated
wilderness at Red Mountain in a manner that retains the wilderness
character for future generations. Within wilderness areas, there shall
be no commercial enterprise, no permanent roads, and except as
necessary to meet minimum requirements for the administration of the
area, there shall be no temporary roads, no use of motor vehicles, no
use of motorized equipment, no landing of aircraft, no other form of
mechanical transport, and no structure or installation within any such
area.
State Protections
California Endangered Species Act: The California Endangered
Species Act (CESA) makes it illegal to import, export, ``take,''
possess, purchase, sell, or attempt to do any of those actions to
species that are designated as endangered, threatened, or candidates
for listing, unless permitted by CDFW. ``Take'' is defined as ``hunt,
pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch,
capture, or kill.'' Under CESA, CDFW may permit take or possession of
endangered, threatened, or candidate species for scientific,
educational, or management purposes, and may also permit take of these
species that is incidental to otherwise lawful activities if certain
conditions are met. Some of the conditions for incidental take are that
the take is minimized and fully mitigated, adequate funding is ensured
for this mitigation, and that the activity will not jeopardize the
continued existence of the species.
California Native Plant Protection Act: The California Native Plant
Protection Act (NPPA) was enacted in 1977, and allows the California
Fish and Game Commission to designate plants as rare or endangered. The
NPPA prohibits take of rare or endangered native plants, but includes
some exceptions for agricultural, nursery, and timber operations;
emergencies; mining assessments; and after properly notifying CDFW for
vegetation removal from canals, roads, and other sites, changes in land
use, and in certain other situations. Section 1911 of the NPPA requires
that all State departments and agencies to consult with the CDFW, and
use their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of
rare or endangered native plants. Such programs include, but are not
limited to, the identification, delineation, and protection of habitat
critical to the continued survival of rare or endangered native plants
(California Fish and Game Code section 1900 et seq.).
California Environmental Quality Act: The California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) is a law that requires public
[[Page 56037]]
agencies to analyze and publicly disclose the environmental impacts
from projects they approve, and adopt feasible alternatives and
mitigation measures to mitigate for the significant impacts they
identify. During CEQA review, State public agencies must evaluate and
disclose impacts to plant species protected under CESA, and in most
cases must mitigate all significant impacts to these species to a level
of less than significant. In addition, during the CEQA process, public
agencies must also address plant species that may not be listed under
CESA, but that may nevertheless meet the definition of rare or
endangered provided in CEQA. The CDFW advises public agencies during
the CEQA process to help ensure that the actions they approve do not
significantly impact such resources and often advises that plant
species with an appropriate California Rare Plant Rank (as identified
by the State or California Native Plant Society) be properly analyzed
by the lead agency during project review to ensure compliance with
CEQA.
The State of California listed Eriogonum kelloggii as endangered
under CESA in 1982 (CDFG 2005, unpaginated; CDFW 2014, p. 4). As a
State-listed species, E. kelloggii is subject to the conservation
provisions of CESA and NPPA, and to the provisions of CEQA. Sedum
eastwoodiae is not listed by the State of California as an endangered,
threatened, or candidate species, but it is identified as a 1B species
(rare throughout its range) by the California Native Plant Society
(CNPS) (Smith and Berg (eds.) 1988, pp. 49, 104). Therefore, impacts to
S. eastwoodiae are evaluated by the lead agency under CEQA, and the
lead agency must adopt feasible mitigation measures to mitigate for any
significant impacts that they identify.
Based on the analyses contained within the Species Report and
outlined above on the existing regulatory mechanisms for Eriogonum
kelloggii and Sedum eastwoodiae, we conclude that the best available
scientific and commercial information does not indicate that the
existing regulatory mechanisms are inadequate to address impacts to E.
kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae from the identified potential threats, and
these mechanisms provide protections to these two species that were not
available when the species were first identified as Federal candidate
species.
Factor E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued
Existence
For ease of discussion, the impacts to individual Eriogonum
kelloggii and Sedum eastwoodiae plants from mining, habitat disturbance
activities (unauthorized OHV use, illegal marijuana cultivation, and
trail development), wildfire suppression and management, and vegetation
encroachment associated with this factor are discussed under Factor A.
For a complete discussion of potential impacts to both habitat and
individual plants from these activities, see our Factor A discussion,
above.
Small Population Size
Other natural or human-caused stressors for Eriogonum kelloggii and
Sedum eastwoodiae are related to its small distribution and overall
population size, and the potential impacts of climate change on the
species and its habitat. Generally, small populations are more prone to
impacts from random environmental events, and from genetic
impoverishment as a result of habitat fragmentation, genetic isolation,
and declining effective population size (Saunders et al. 1991, pp. 18-
32; Meffe and Carroll 1997, pp. 269-304).
General conservation principles indicate that endemic species
limited to small areas are inherently more vulnerable to extinction
than are widespread species, because of the increased risk of genetic
bottlenecks; random demographic fluctuations; climate change effects;
and localized catastrophes, such as drought and fire due to changes in
demography, the environment, genetics, or other factors (Gilpin and
Soul[eacute] 1986, pp. 24-34; Pimm et al. 1988, p. 757; Mangel and Tier
1994, p. 607). These problems are further magnified when these
geographically restricted and small numbers of populations contain
small numbers of individuals in these populations. Small, isolated
populations can often also exhibit reduced levels of genetic
variability, which diminishes the species' capacity to adapt and
respond to environmental changes, thereby lessening the probability of
long-term persistence (Barrett and Kohn 1991, p. 4; Newman and Pilson
1997, p. 361). Small, isolated populations are also more susceptible to
reduced reproductive vigor due to ineffective pollination and
inbreeding depression. Although a tenet of conservation biology is that
larger, well-distributed populations of species are less vulnerable and
insure persistence, many narrow endemic plants combine small population
ranges and sizes with long-term persistence, depending on how they have
adapted to their unique environments (Lavergne et al. 2004, pp. 505-
518; Matthies et al. 2004, pp. 481-488; Garc[iacute]a 2008, pp. 106-
113).
For Eriogonum kelloggii and Sedum eastwoodiae, their small
population size and the extent of stress factors impacting the two
species were among the primary reasons they were first identified as
Federal candidate species. As stated above, the distribution of the two
species is extremely limited, and the identified potential threats
facing the two species occur throughout their distribution. However,
the known distribution and population size of the species has always
been limited and small in size. Eriogonum kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae
are narrow endemic species that have evolved and adapted to the
particular serpentine habitats in which they occur. Although there are
stressors acting on the two species, their populations are dispersed
throughout the Red Mountain area, making it less likely for a single or
multiple single events to significantly impact the species. In
addition, the populations of E. kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae have
persisted and remained stable since the two species were first
identified as Federal candidate species. As a result, we do not
consider small population size a threat to E. kelloggii or S.
eastwoodiae now or in the near future.
The Effects of Climate Change
The effects of climate change may be affecting both Eriogonum
kelloggii and Sedum eastwoodiae's habitat (Factor A) and individual
plants (Factor E) through several means. For the ease of analysis, the
discussion of the effects of climate change has been included with
discussion of each applicable threat or is discussed below.
The terms ``climate'' and ``climate change'' are defined by the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The term ``climate''
refers to the mean and variability of different types of weather
conditions over time, with 30 years being a typical period for such
measurements (IPCC 2013a, p. 1450). The term ``climate change'' thus
refers to a change in the mean or variability of one or more measures
of climate (for example, temperature or precipitation) that persists
for an extended period, whether the change is due to natural
variability or human activity (IPCC 2013a, p. 1450). Various types of
changes in climate can have direct or indirect effects on species.
Scientific measurements spanning several decades demonstrate
[[Page 56038]]
that changes in climate are occurring, and that the rate of change has
increased since the 1950s. Examples include warming of the global
climate system, and substantial increases in precipitation in some
regions of the world and decreases in other regions (for these and
other examples, see Solomon et al. 2007, pp. 35-54, 82-85; IPCC 2013b,
pp. 3-29; IPCC 2014, pp. 1-32).
Climate change predictions are variable for the area within the
range of Eriogonum kelloggii and Sedum eastwoodiae. Predictions for
terrestrial areas in the Northern Hemisphere indicate warmer air
temperatures, more intense precipitation events, and increased summer
continental drying (Field et al. 1999; Cayan et al. 2005; IPCC 2007).
According to one downscaled climate model (California Natural Resources
Agency 2012, pp. 7-12) for northern California, temperatures and
drought intensity would increase. The effects of climate change can
impact and influence any one of the stressors impacting E. kelloggii
and S. eastwoodiae and outside the threat of large-scale mining may be
the greatest influence on the two species. The effects of climate
change may result in shifts in vegetation types, increased competition
between species like E. kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae and other native
and nonnative species (Loarie et al. 2008, pp. 1-10), or result in
habitat changes resulting from altered fire frequency as discussed
above. However, another study found that the area would experience
slower winds (less drying effect) and higher humidity, thereby
offsetting any temperature increases and limiting the effects of
climate change (Fried et al. 2004, p. 177).
Predicting how Eriogonum kelloggii and Sedum eastwoodiae may react
to the effects of climate change is difficult. The majority of the
distribution of E. kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae occurs in upland, often
exposed, xeric habitats that are expected to offer less refuge under
drying or warming conditions. The distribution of both species is also
limited to specific edaphic and geologic features on the landscape,
which would limit the two plants' ability to spread to more hospitable
or suitable habitat over time. Despite these concerns, the populations
of both species have remained stable based on the limited survey
information available. Although more recent modeling shows the area may
be affected by climate change, without long-term information or
observed population declines the impacts of such climate change are
difficult to determine or predict. Based on the best available
information, we do not find that the effects of climate change are
negatively impacting populations of E. kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae now
or into the foreseeable future.
Combination of Threats and Cumulative Threats
When conducting our analysis about the potential threats affecting
Eriogonum kelloggii and Sedum eastwoodiae, we also assessed whether the
two species may be affected by a combination of factors (see
``Combination of Threats and Cumulative Threats'' section of the
Species Report (Service 2014, entire)). In the Species Report (Service
2014, entire), we identified multiple potential threats that may have
interrelated impacts on E. kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae or their
habitat.
For example, mining activities and exploration may result in the
loss of habitat. Depending on the nature of mining activities, these
impacts can be permanent and irreversible (conversion to land uses
unsuitable to the species) or less so (minor ground-disturbance and
loss of individual plants) (Factors A and E). When mineral development
and exploration occurs in-between (but not within) populations, this
can eliminate corridors for pollinator movement, seed dispersal, and
population expansion. Fire suppression activities, such as grading fire
breaks and maintaining access roads, may have direct impacts by
removing and crushing plants and eliminating suitable habitat.
Indirectly, fire suppression impacts Eriogonum kelloggii and Sedum
eastwoodiae by allowing other vegetation to encroach and to become
dominant. Relatively dense growth can lead to shading of E. kelloggii
and S. eastwoodiae, changing the micro-climate around plant clusters,
and can also result in competition for space, moisture, nutrients, and
light with other plant species in a xeric (dry) landscape. Another
consequence of long-term fire suppression is the increase in fire
hazards when vegetation is permitted to become relatively dense in a
dry environment, thereby leading to a potential of more severe or
frequent fire events, which may lead to greater habitat destruction or
alteration. Off highway vehicle and other road corridors can exacerbate
habitat loss and fragmentation, and tend to be associated with
(accompanying or following) fire suppression, recreational, or illegal
marijuana cultivation activities (Factors A and E). Off highway vehicle
and road corridors tend to create conditions that favor increased
habitat disturbance beyond the footprint of the road or OHV corridor,
leading to further deterioration of habitat because of increased access
(Factors A and E). Climate change has the potential to alter landscape
features and conditions, including precipitation and temperature
regimes that in turn influence the establishment and persistence of
vegetation, which then may influence the frequency and intensity of
wildfire (Factors A and E). Because of the limited distribution and
restricted nature of the habitat available to the two species, climate
change and altered precipitation and temperature regimes may interfere
with seedling recruitment and persistence of the two species on the
landscape (Factors A and E).
However, the current best available scientific and commercial
information does not show that these combined impacts are resulting in
significant impacts to either species as a whole. Therefore, we do not
consider the cumulative impact of threats to Eriogonum kelloggii and
Sedum eastwoodiae to be substantial at this time, nor into the future.
All or some of the potential stressors could also act in concert to
result as a cumulative threat to Eriogonum kelloggii and Sedum
eastwoodiae. However, the best available scientific and commercial
information currently does not indicate that these stressors singularly
or cumulatively are causing now or will cause in the future a
substantial decline of the total extant population of the species or
have large impacts to E. kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae at the species
level. Therefore, we do not consider the cumulative impact of these
stressors to E. kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae to be a substantial threat
at this time, nor into the future.
Conservation Measures Planned or Implemented
The designation of 6,173 ac (2,498 ha) of BLM land at Red Mountain
as a wilderness study area (WSA) in 1979, and 6,895 ac (2,790 ha) as an
Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC)/Research Natural Area
(RNA) in 1984 (updated in 1989), and the recent designation of the area
as a Wilderness Area has focused management concern and direction
toward conservation of the unique botanical and soils values of the Red
Mountain area, including conservation of Eriogonum kelloggii and Sedum
eastwoodiae (BLM 1995, pp. 3-6 to 3-9). Site visits to Red Mountain are
generally conducted annually by BLM staff to ensure that no new road
construction occurs (J. Wheeler, BLM, pers. comm. 2014). Most, or all,
of the occupied or suitable habitat for E. kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae
in the
[[Page 56039]]
vicinity of the South Fork Eel River Wilderness Area was recommended
for acquisition (willing landowners) in the resource management plan
(RMP) for the area (BLM 1995, pp. 2-32 to 2-37), and several parcels
have been acquired. The RMP excludes livestock grazing and off-road
vehicle use from the area, guides overall BLM management activities,
and is site-specific. There is overlap with the management designations
of the Red Mountain ACEC/RNA and the South Fork Eel River Wilderness
Area as the entire ACEC/RNA is encompassed by the Wilderness Area
designation (J. Wheeler, BLM, pers. comm. 2013).
Conservation measures implemented in 2009 for Eriogonum kelloggii
and Sedum eastwoodiae included only a visual inspection and photo-
documentation of a portion of their habitat. Previous conservation
measures included initiation of the long-term life history and
population monitoring in 1987 (Baad 2002, pp. 2-8); field mapping of
occupied habitat on public lands in 2003 (Jennings 2003, pp. 1-8); and
general ongoing public outreach activities, such as public field trips
and academic visitation. BLM staff applied for grant funding in 2010,
to conduct an ecological assessment for the two species. That effort
was unsuccessful, but both Service and BLM staff will continue to seek
funding to implement complete population inventories, and ecological
assessments of the two species and their habitat.
South Fork Eel River Wilderness Area
The designation of the area as the South Fork Eel River Wilderness
Area has invoked numerous conservation measures related to maintaining
and protecting Eriogonum kelloggii and Sedum eastwoodiae and their
habitat. Signs indicating the wilderness boundary have been posted in
many locations. Mechanized or motorized vehicles are not allowed in the
wilderness area. Camping is allowed but limited to 14 days. Campfires
are allowed unless prohibited during seasonal fire restrictions.
Gathering wood for campfires, when permitted, is limited to dead and
down materials, and cutting live vegetation is prohibited.
Finding
The Act defines an endangered species as any species that is ``in
danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its
range'' and a threatened species as any species ``that is likely to
become endangered throughout all or a significant portion of its range
within the foreseeable future.'' After review of the best available
scientific and commercial information pertaining to Eriogonum kelloggii
and Sedum eastwoodiae and their habitat, we have determined that the
ongoing threats are not of sufficient imminence, intensity, or
magnitude to indicate that E. kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae are
presently in danger of extinction throughout all of their range or
likely to become so in the foreseeable future. As stated in the Species
Report (Service 2014, p. 11), the location, distribution, and abundance
of E. kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae populations coincide with their
known historical distribution and have remained stable relative to
their distribution over at least the past 30 years. Both species have a
relatively long lifespan, and thus their stable distribution and the
persistence of the populations over time (1975-2014) allow us to
predict to some degree their persistence into the future. We have
determined that the risk of threats acting on these populations are
minimal: The fire frequency for the area is low (2 recorded and one
unrecorded fire over the past 90 years) and the impacts of those fires
have been minimal due to the open nature of the habitat being less
prone to intense habitat destruction (Service 2014, pp. 23-25). OHV use
has decreased due to the designation of the area as ACEC and
Wilderness. Mining interests have also greatly diminished due to
numerous factors and no existing claims are currently active or
anticipated in the future. If the two species continue to persist in
their current distribution, we conclude that they will have sufficient
resiliency, redundancy, and representation to persist now and into the
future. For E. kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae, we define foreseeable
future as approximately 20 to 30 years. This period is based on the
timeframes associated with population studies and informal monitoring
for the two species (1986-2014) and the persistence of the populations
over time (1975-2014), which demonstrate stable populations over time
that are likely to persist over a similar time frame into the future.
The period is also based on the minimal fire frequency for the area,
the future management of the area as an ACEC and Wilderness, and the
relatively long lifespan of individual plants, all of which lead us to
conclude that 20-30 years is a time period in which we can reasonably
rely on predictions regarding the future populations, status, trends,
and threats to each species.
Although some stressors still impact the two species and will
continue to do so into the foreseeable future, these threats have
either not materialized (commercial mining), or they are not of such
magnitude to have population-level impacts. In addition, the
implementation of conservation measures and regulatory actions has
greatly reduced the imminence and severity of these stressors on
Eriogonum kelloggii and Sedum eastwoodiae and their habitat.
Significant Portion of the Range Determination
Under the Act and our implementing regulations, a species may
warrant listing if it is an endangered or a threatened species
throughout all or a significant portion of its range. The Act defines
``endangered species'' as any species which is ``in danger of
extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range,'' and
``threatened species'' as any species which is ``likely to become an
endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range.'' The term ``species'' includes ``any
subspecies of fish or wildlife or plants, and any distinct population
segment [DPS] of any species of vertebrate fish or wildlife which
interbreeds when mature.'' On July 1, 2014, we published a final policy
interpreting the phrase ``significant portion of its range'' (SPR) (79
FR 37578). The final policy states that (1) if a species is found to be
an endangered or a threatened species throughout a significant portion
of its range, the entire species is listed as an endangered or a
threatened species, respectively, and the Act's protections apply to
all individuals of the species wherever found; (2) a portion of the
range of a species is ``significant'' if the species is not currently
an endangered or a threatened species throughout all of its range, but
the portion's contribution to the viability of the species is so
important that, without the members in that portion, the species would
be in danger of extinction, or likely to become so in the foreseeable
future, throughout all of its range; (3) the range of a species is
considered to be the general geographical area within which that
species can be found at the time the Service or the National Marine
Fisheries Service makes any particular status determination; and (4) if
a vertebrate species is an endangered or a threatened species
throughout an SPR, and the population in that significant portion is a
valid DPS, we will list the DPS rather than the entire taxonomic
species or subspecies.
The SPR policy is applied to all status determinations, including
analyses for the purposes of making listing, delisting, and
reclassification determinations. The procedure for
[[Page 56040]]
analyzing whether any portion is an SPR is similar, regardless of the
type of status determination we are making. The first step in our
analysis of the status of a species is to determine its status
throughout all of its range. If we determine that the species is in
danger of extinction, or likely to become so in the foreseeable future,
throughout all of its range, we list the species as an endangered (or
threatened) species, and no SPR analysis will be required. If the
species is neither an endangered nor a threatened species throughout
all of its range, we determine whether the species is an endangered or
a threatened species throughout a significant portion of its range. If
it is, we list the species as an endangered or a threatened species,
respectively; if it is not, we conclude that listing the species is not
warranted.
When we conduct an SPR analysis, we first identify any portions of
the species' range that warrant further consideration. The range of a
species can theoretically be divided into portions in an infinite
number of ways. However, there is no purpose to analyzing portions of
the range that are not reasonably likely to be significant and either
an endangered or a threatened species. To identify only those portions
that warrant further consideration, we determine whether there is
substantial information indicating that (1) the portions may be
significant and (2) the species may be in danger of extinction in those
portions or likely to become so within the foreseeable future. We
emphasize that answering these questions in the affirmative is not a
determination that the species is an endangered or a threatened species
throughout a significant portion of its range--rather, it is a step in
determining whether a more detailed analysis of the issue is required.
In practice, a key part of this analysis is whether the threats are
geographically concentrated in some way. If the threats to the species
are affecting it uniformly throughout its range, no portion is likely
to warrant further consideration. Moreover, if any concentration of
threats apply only to portions of the range that clearly do not meet
the biologically based definition of ``significant'' (i.e., the loss of
that portion clearly would not be expected to increase the
vulnerability to extinction of the entire species), those portions will
not warrant further consideration.
If we identify any portions that may be both (1) significant and
(2) endangered or threatened, we engage in a more detailed analysis to
determine whether these standards are indeed met. The identification of
an SPR does not create a presumption, prejudgment, or other
determination as to whether the species in that identified SPR is an
endangered or a threatened species. We must go through a separate
analysis to determine whether the species is an endangered or a
threatened species in the SPR. To determine whether a species is an
endangered or a threatened species throughout an SPR, we will use the
same standards and methodology that we use to determine if a species is
an endangered or a threatened species throughout its range.
Depending on the biology of the species, its range, and the threats
it faces, it may be more efficient to address the ``significant''
question first, or the status question first. Thus, if we determine
that a portion of the range is not ``significant,'' we do not need to
determine whether the species is an endangered or a threatened species
there; if we determine that the species is not an endangered or a
threatened species in a portion of its range, we do not need to
determine if that portion is ``significant.''
We consider the ``range'' of Eriogonum kelloggii and Sedum
eastwoodiae to include all populations within the Red Mountain area in
Mendocino County, California. The range of the populations of E.
kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae overlap, except for the one population of
E. kelloggii on adjacent Little Red Mountain. These populations account
for the current and known historical distribution of the two species.
In considering any significant portion of the range of the two
species, we considered whether the threats facing Eriogonum kelloggii
and Sedum eastwoodiae might be different at any of the locations where
the two species have been found. Our evaluation of the best available
information indicates that the overall level of threats is not
significantly different at any of the areas where the two species occur
(Service 2014, entire), and that the threats that are impacting or have
the potential to impact the range of the two species are widespread
across the two species' ranges (Service 2014, entire). Therefore, it is
our conclusion, based on our evaluation of the current potential
threats to E. kelloggii and S. eastwoodiae at each of the locations
where the two species occur (see Summary of Factors Affecting the
Species section of this finding and the ``Discussion of Threats to the
Species'' section of the Species Report (Service 2014, entire)), that
threats are neither sufficiently concentrated nor of sufficient
magnitude to indicate that either of the two species are in danger of
extinction at any of the areas that support populations.
Our review of the best available scientific and commercial
information indicates that neither Eriogonum kelloggii nor Sedum
eastwoodiae is in danger of extinction (an endangered species) or
likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future (a threatened
species), throughout all or a significant portion of their ranges.
Therefore, we find that listing either of these plant species as an
endangered or threatened species under the Act is not warranted at this
time.
We request that you submit any new information concerning the
status of, or threats to, Eriogonum kelloggii or Sedum eastwoodiae to
our Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES) whenever it becomes
available. New information will help us monitor these two species and
encourage their conservation. If an emergency situation develops for
either of these plant species, we will act to provide immediate
protection.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited in this final rule is
available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket
No. FWS-R8-ES-2014-0034 or upon request from the Field Supervisor,
Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authors
The primary authors of this finding are staff from the Pacific
Southwest Regional Office in Sacramento, California, in coordination
with staff from the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office in Arcata,
California.
Authority
The authority for this section is section 4 of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: September 8, 2014.
Stephen Guertin,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-22224 Filed 9-17-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P