[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 185 (Wednesday, September 24, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 57032-57041]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-22668]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R8- ES-2014-0039; 4500030113]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Finding
on a Petition To List Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii and Eriogonum
diatomaceum
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
[[Page 57033]]
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 the plants Eriogonum diatomaceum
(Churchill Narrows buckwheat) and Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii
(Las Vegas buckwheat) as endangered or threatened species and to
designate critical habitat under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act). After review of the best available scientific and
commercial information, we find that listing either Eriogonum
diatomaceum or Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii is not warranted at
this time. However, we ask the public to submit to us any new
information that becomes available concerning the threats to the
Eriogonum diatomaceum or Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii or their
habitats at any time.
DATES: The finding announced in this document was made on September 24,
2014.
ADDRESSES: This finding is available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov at Docket Number FWS-R8-ES-2014-0039. Supporting
documentation we used in preparing this finding is available for public
inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Nevada Fish and Wildlife Office, 1340
Financial Boulevard, Suite 234, Reno, NV 89502; telephone 775-861-6300;
or facsimile 775-861-6301.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Edward D. Koch, State Supervisor, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Nevada Fish and Wildlife Office, 1340
Financial Boulevard, Suite 234, Reno, NV 89502; telephone 775-861-6300;
or facsimile 775-861-6301. If you use a telecommunications device for
the deaf (TDD), please call the Federal Information Relay Service
(FIRS) at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Previous Federal Actions
We identified Eriogonum diatomaceum as a candidate species in the
May 4, 2004, candidate notice of review (CNOR; 69 FR 24876). Eriogonum
diatomaceum was included in all subsequent annual CNORs (70 FR 24870,
May 11, 2005; 71 FR 53756, September 12, 2006; 72 FR 69034, December 6,
2007; 73 FR 75176, December 10, 2008; 74 FR 57804, November 9, 2009; 75
FR 69222, November 10, 2010; 76 FR 66370, October 26, 2011; 77 FR
69994, November 21, 2012; 78 FR 70104, November 22, 2013). When it was
first identified as a candidate, we assigned a listing priority number
(LPN) of 2, reflecting a species with threats that were high in
magnitude and imminent. The LPN was changed to 5 in 2008 (73 FR 75176,
December 10, 2008) to reflect a species with threats that were high in
magnitude but not imminent; the LPN remained at 5 in all subsequent
CNORs.
We identified Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii as a candidate
species in the December 6, 2007, CNOR (72 FR 69034). Eriogonum
corymbosum var. nilesii was included in all subsequent annual CNORs (73
FR 75176, December 10, 2008; 74 FR 57804, November 9, 2009; 75 FR
69222, November 10, 2010; 76 FR 66370, October 26, 2011; 77 FR 69994,
November 21, 2012; 78 FR 70104, November 22, 2013). On April 22, 2008,
we received a petition (Center for Biological Diversity 2008) to list
E. c. var. nilesii as endangered or threatened under the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). We did
not publish separate substantial 90-day and warranted-but-precluded 12-
month petition findings, but made these findings in the 2008 CNOR (73
FR 75176, December 10, 2008). When it was first identified as a
candidate, we assigned a LPN of 6, reflecting a species with threats
that were high in magnitude but not imminent; the LPN remained at 6 in
all subsequent CNORs.
Background
We completed comprehensive assessments of the biological status of
Eriogonum diatomaceum and Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii, and we
prepared reports of the assessments (Species Reports), which provide a
thorough account for each of the plants. This finding is based upon
these Species Reports for Eriogonum diatomaceum and Eriogonum
corymbosum var. nilesii and scientific analyses of available
information prepared by the Service and an application of section 4(a)
of the Act. The Species Reports contain the best scientific and
commercial data available concerning the status of Eriogonum
diatomaceum and Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii, including the past,
present, and future stressors to the plants. As such, the Species
Reports provide 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. The Species
Reports (including all references) and other materials relating to this
finding can be found on the Nevada Fish and Wildlife Office Web site
at: http://www.fws.gov/nevada/highlights/speciesactions/
speciesactions.html and at http://www.regulations.gov at
Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2014-0039.
A summary of the biology, taxonomy, life history, and distribution
for each of the plants follows. The reader is directed to the Species
Reports for a more detailed discussion of these topics as well as the
current conditions of Eriogonum diatomaceum and Eriogonum corymbosum
var. nilesii (Service 2014a; Service 2014b; http://www.fws.gov/nevada/
highlights/speciesactions/speciesactions.html).
Eriogonum diatomaceum
Eriogonum diatomaceum is a member of the Polygonaceae (buckwheat
family). It is a low, matted, herbaceous perennial forb with leaves
that have densely matted, wooly hairs and with head-like clusters of
creamy-white flowers. Flowering typically occurs between the months of
June and September. E. diatomaceum occurs between 4,300 and 4,560 feet
(ft) (1,311 and 1,390 meters (m)) in elevation on diatomaceous
outcrops, and is a narrow endemic of the Lahontan Basin section of the
western Great Basin (Service 2014a, pp. 3-6). We recognize four
populations of this species that are restricted to approximately 3
square miles (7.8 square kilometers) in the Churchill Narrows area of
the Pine Nut Mountains in Lyon County, Nevada. These four populations
occupy approximately 18 acres (ac) (7.3 hectares (ha)) on lands managed
entirely by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) (Service 2014a, pp. 7-
10), and E. diatomaceum's historical range is the same as its current
range. E. diatomaceum was added to the Nevada State list of fully
protected species of native flora in 2004. In addition, E. diatomaceum
is recognized by the BLM as a sensitive species (Service 2014a, p. 3).
BLM monitored each of the four populations from 2005-2007 and in
2012. This sampling data and estimated abundance data for Eriogonum
diatomaceum in each monitoring location are presented in the Species
Report (Service 2014a, pp. 10-13). Overall, BLM sampled 1,104-1,604
plants during each sampling year, and of those, approximately 638-994
were live plants. The estimated abundance of Eriogonum diatomaceum in
each monitoring location extrapolated from data collected in BLM
monitoring macroplots, for each year of data collection, showed a range
from 35,950 to 59,307 plants present depending on
[[Page 57034]]
the year of the monitoring effort (Service 2014a, p. 13).
Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii
Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii (Las Vegas buckwheat) is a member
of the Polygonaceae (buckwheat family) (Service 2014b, pp. 4-8). It is
an open to somewhat spreading perennial shrub with numerous yellow to
pale yellow flowers. Flowering typically occurs between the months of
August and November. Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii occurs between
656 and 2,789 ft (200-850 m) in elevation on clayey, gravelly, or
rarely sandy flats and slopes (0-3 percent) or gypsum flats and mounds
(Service 2014b, pp. 17-18). We recognize the geographic range of E. c.
var. nilesii as restricted to southern Nevada, in contrast to some
prior accounts showing a range extending into southern Utah and
northern Arizona based on morphological and genetic data described in
detail in the Species Report (Service 2014b, pp. 4-11). In southern
Nevada, E. c. var. nilesii is found northwest of the Virgin River (in
Lincoln County) and west of Lake Mead (in Clark County). Within this
region, E. c. var. nilesii currently occupies a total of approximately
795.3 ac (321.85 ha) (Service 2014b, pp. 11-12). The majority (80
percent) of this occupied acreage is federally owned, with 72 percent
administered by the BLM, and another 8.15 percent by the Department of
Defense (DOD), at Nellis Air Force Base. Landownership for the
remainder of occupied habitat is as follows: City of Las Vegas (0.13
percent), Clark County (0.80 percent), State of Nevada (0.001 percent),
and private landowners (18.81 percent). Of 12 historically recognized
populations of the plant (all located in southern Nevada), 9
populations remain extant (4 in Las Vegas Valley, 2 in White Basin
Mountains, 1 in Muddy Mountains, 1 in Coyote Springs Valley, and 1 in
Toquop Wash), and 3 have been extirpated (2 in the Las Vegas Valley and
1 in the White Basin Mountains) (Service 2014b, pp. 14-16). In
addition, four of the extant populations (Las Vegas Valley) have been
partially extirpated. Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii is not listed
by the State of Nevada, but it is recognized as a sensitive species by
the BLM (Service 2014b, p. 3).
Expressed in terms of acreage, Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii
has been extirpated from 1,303.5 ac (527.5 ha) of formerly occupied
habitat, corresponding to nearly 62 percent of its range. Most of the
lands from which the plant has been extirpated are in private ownership
(94.9 percent) (Service 2014b, pp. 11-12). Within the range of the
plant, the combined total of available estimates of plants at the nine
extant populations ranges between 31,176-31,773 individuals across a
total of 795.3 ac (321.85 ha). Of the total 31,176-31,773 estimated
individuals, 7,529-7,817+ are located in four populations in Las Vegas
Valley, 296+ are located in one population in Muddy Mountains, 308-550+
are located in two populations in White Basin, 13,043-13,110+ are
located in Coyote Springs, and 10,000+ are located in Toquop Wash
(Service 2014b, pp. 14-16). However, reliable estimation of population
size or trends in E. c. var. nilesii is complicated by many factors
including varied survey methods, and as a result, the data are not
always directly comparable and must be interpreted with caution
(Service 2014b, pp. 18-19).
Summary of Biological Status and Threats
The Act directs us to determine whether any species is an
endangered species or a threatened species because of any factors
affecting its continued existence. We completed comprehensive
assessments of the biological status of Eriogonum diatomaceum and
Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii, and we prepared reports of the
assessments (Species Reports), which provide a thorough account for
each of the plants. In this section, we summarize the conclusions of
those reports, which can be accessed at Docket FWS-R8-ES-2014-0039 on
http://www.regulations.gov, and at http://www.fws.gov/nevada/
highlights/speciesactions/speciesactions.html.
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, and 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.
A species is an endangered species for purposes of the Act if it is
in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its
range, and is a threatened species if it is likely to become an
endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range. For purposes of this analysis, we
first evaluate the status of the species throughout all of its range,
and then consider whether the species is in danger of extinction or
likely to become so in any significant portion of its range.
In making this finding, information pertaining to Eriogonum
diatomaceum and Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii in relation to the
five factors provided in section 4(a)(1) of the Act is summarized
below, based on the analysis of stressors contained in the Species
Reports. 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 stressor 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 the scope and
severity of the potential threat. 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.
Analysis Under Section 4(a)(1) of the Act
The Act requires that the Secretary determine whether a species is
an endangered or threatened species because of any of the five factors
enumerated in 16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(1). Our discussion of the threats,
which we have categorized here under each of these five factors, is
contained in the Species Reports (can be accessed at Docket FWS-R8-ES-
2014-0039 on http://www.regulations.gov, and at http://www.fws.gov/
nevada/highlights/speciesactions/
speciesactions.html). In the Species Reports, we present
detailed discussions of current and future stressors to Eriogonum
[[Page 57035]]
diatomaceum and Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii. We consider in this
document how threats categorized under each of the five factors are
affecting each of the plants. In our Species Reports, we describe the
timing, scope, and severity for each stressor associated with each of
the plants. We describe the scope as the percentage of the plant's
distribution that is reasonably expected to be affected by a stressor
within a specified, foreseeable amount of time, given continuation of
current circumstances and trends. Within the scope of the threat, the
severity is the level of damage to the plant's population or breeding
occurrences that is reasonably expected from the stressor within a
specified, foreseeable amount of time, given continuation of current
circumstances and trends.
All potential stressors currently acting upon Eriogonum diatomaceum
and Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii or likely to affect either of the
plants in the foreseeable future (and consistent with the five listing
factors identified above) are evaluated and addressed in the Species
Reports, and summarized in the following paragraphs. The reader is
directed to the Species Reports (can be accessed at Docket FWS-R8-ES-
2014-0039 on http://www.regulations.gov, and at http://www.fws.gov/
nevada/highlights/speciesactions/speciesactions.html)
for a more detailed discussion of the stressors summarized in this
document.
Eriogonum Diatomaceum
The Species Report evaluated the biological status of the species
and each of the potential stressors affecting its continued existence
(Service 2014a, entire). It was based upon the best available
scientific and commercial data and the expert opinion of the Species
Report team members. Based on the analysis and discussion contained in
the Species Report, we evaluated the potential threats under the five
statutory factors: Mineral exploration and development (Factors A and
E); livestock grazing (Factors A and E); herbivory (Factor C); off-
highway vehicle (OHV) activity and road development (Factors A and E);
nonnative, invasive plant species (Factors A and E); disease (Factor
C); and climate change (Factors A and E). We found that these factors
currently may have minor impacts on individuals in some locations, but
they are not impacting the species as a whole currently and are not
expected to in the future. The full analyses of these possible
stressors are documented in the Species Report and are summarized
below. Based on the analysis contained in the Species Report, we find
that the best available scientific and commercial information does not
indicate that these stressors are causing a decline in the species or
its habitat, either now or into the future.
Mineral Exploration and Development (Factors A and E)
Eriogonum diatomaceum occurs on diatomaceous soil deposits, which
is an economically valuable mineral that is in increasing demand.
Mineral activity (exploration and development of diatomaceous earth
deposits) has impacted E. diatomaceum habitat and resulted in the loss
of individual plants and habitat at one of the four populations,
corresponding to a loss of 5 ac (1.67 ha) or 22 percent of historically
occupied habitat for the species. Two active mining claims still remain
open within the plant's range, and 95 claims are closed within this
area; all lands occupied by E. diatomaceum are open to mineral entry.
The BLM requires that all operations comply with State law and permits,
and since E. diatomaceum is listed as threatened by the State, the BLM
requires claimants to be in compliance with State law (Service 2014a,
p. 29). The BLM has affirmed that protecting E. diatomaceum and its
habitat from impacts is clearly within the BLM's discretion when it
comes to mineral material sales, and expressed its intent to continue
managing the species as a Special Status Species, avoid impacts to the
species and its habitat, and otherwise coordinate with the Service to
develop effective mitigation measures (Service 2014a, p. 21). The scope
of the mining stressor historically was 100 percent, because all
populations were thought to be affected by the potential for mining. In
addition, the severity of the stressor of mining historically was
moderate, because of the loss of 5.5 ac (2.2 ha) of historically
occupied habitat from mining. However, this stressor is one of
historical significance, because it is not known to be occurring at
present. Given the limited number of mining claims and the active
management of these claims by BLM, we do not consider mining (Factors A
and E) to be a current or future threat to the species such that the
species would warrant listing.
Livestock Grazing (Factors A and E)
All populations of Eriogonum diatomaceum are within grazing
allotments and are potentially exposed to livestock grazing, so the
scope of livestock grazing is 100 percent. Livestock grazing may result
in impacts, such as trampling, resulting in broken stems and leaves of
plants, and soil compaction, to individual Eriogonum diatomaceum
plants, but we have no data indicating (qualitatively or
quantitatively) the numbers (or percentages) of individuals or habitat
acreage lost as a result of grazing. In addition, BLM monitored each of
the four populations from 2005-2007 and in 2012, and the results of
these surveys do not indicate that the population numbers are declining
or that grazing is affecting the species through habitat loss (Service
2014a, p. 13). Therefore, while livestock grazing may affect
individuals, based on the information that is available at this time,
the information does not indicate that grazing is a current or future
threat to the species such that the species would warrant listing.
Herbivory (Factor C)
Herbivory by jackrabbits, resulting in clipping of flower stems and
tunneling into roots, has been documented on individuals at all four
populations of Eriogonum diatomaceum; however, the best available
scientific information does not provide any indication of a significant
effect on recruitment of E. diatomaceum. In addition, BLM monitored
each of the four populations from 2005-2007 and in 2012, and the
results of these surveys do not indicate that the population numbers
are declining or that herbivory is affecting the species (Service
2014a, p. 13). Therefore, while herbivory may affect individuals, based
on the information that is available at this time, the information does
not indicate that herbivory is a current or future threat to the
species such that the species would warrant listing.
OHV Activity and Road Development (Factors A and E)
OHV activity and road development is known to occur at three of the
four Eriogonum diatomaceum populations; roads can alter the hydrology
of a site, and OHV activity can compact soils, crush plants, and
provide a means for nonnative plant species to invade otherwise remote,
intact habitats. However, we are currently not aware of individuals or
habitat having been lost as a result of these activities, and the best
available scientific information does not provide an indication of the
level to which OHV activity and road development currently affects E.
diatomaceum or is likely to affect the species into the future. In
addition, BLM monitored each of these populations from 2005-2007 and in
2012, and the results of these surveys do not indicate
[[Page 57036]]
that the population numbers are declining or that OHV activity and road
development is affecting the species through habitat loss (Service
2014a, p. 13). Therefore, while OHV activity and road development may
affect individuals, based on the information that is available at this
time, the information does not indicate that OHV activity and road
development is a current or future threat to the species such that the
species would warrant listing.
Nonnative, Invasive Plant Species (Factors A and E)
Nonnative, invasive plant species can negatively affect Eriogonum
diatomaceum through competition with and displacement of native plant
species and degradation of habitat. When E. diatomaceum habitat is
undisturbed, nonnative, invasive plant species are not a threat because
the specialized habitat of E. diatomaceum does not appear to be
conducive to their spread. However, when soil disturbances occur within
occupied E. diatomaceum habitat, nonnative, invasive plant species can
impact E. diatomaceum due to their ability to potentially compete with
and displace this species from its habitat. Nonnative, invasive plant
species are present within all E. diatomaceum populations. However, the
severity of nonnative, invasive plant species is unknown because the
best available scientific information does not provide any indication
of the level to which nonnative, invasive plant species affect E.
diatomaceum. In addition, BLM monitored each of the four populations
from 2005-2007 and in 2012, and the results of these surveys do not
indicate that the population numbers are declining or that nonnative,
invasive plant species are affecting the species (Service 2014a, p.
13). Therefore, while nonnative, invasive plant species may affect
individuals, based on the information that is available at this time,
the information does not indicate that nonnative, invasive plant
species are a current or future threat to the species that the species
would warrant listing.
Disease (Factor C)
A rust (fungal) pathogen was observed on approximately 26 percent
of the overall Eriogonum diatomaceum population during survey work in
the late 1990s. At this time, no studies are known that identify this
pathogen, its origin, or its ultimate effect on this plant, and the
long-term survival rate of rust-infected plants has not been determined
or monitored. However, BLM monitored each of the four populations of E.
diatomaceum from 2005-2007 and in 2012, and the results of these
surveys do not indicate that the population numbers are declining or
that pathogens are affecting the species (Service 2014a, p. 13).
Therefore, based on the best information that is available at this
time, the information does not indicate that disease is a current or
future threat to the species such that the species would warrant
listing.
Climate Change (Factors A and E)
In the Great Basin, temperatures have risen, and current climate
change projections indicate further warming over the rest of the
century. Winter temperatures are projected to increase, which will
change the balance of temperature and precipitation resulting in
earlier spring snow runoff, declines in snowpack, and increased
frequency of drought and fire events. Warmer temperatures and greater
concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide can create conditions
favorable for nonnative, invasive plant species. We anticipate that the
alteration of precipitation and temperature patterns could result in
decreased survivorship of Eriogonum diatomaceum due to physiological
stress of individual plants, altered phenology, and reduced seedling
establishment and plant recruitment. However, the severity of climate
change is unknown because even though climate projections exist for the
Great Basin, we do not know how E. diatomaceum is likely to respond to
these climatic changes. In addition, BLM monitored each of the four
populations of E. diatomaceum from 2005-2007 and in 2012, and the
results of these surveys do not indicate that the population numbers
are declining or that climate change is currently affecting the species
(Service 2014a, p. 13). In addition, we do not know of any information
that demonstrates climate change is affecting the species. Therefore,
based on the information that is available at this time, the
information does not indicate that climate change is a current or
future threat to the species such that the species would warrant
listing.
Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms (Factor D)
The Act requires that the Secretary assess existing regulatory
mechanisms in order to determine whether they are adequate to address
threats to the species (Factor D). The Species Report includes
discussions of applicable regulatory mechanisms for Eriogonum
diatomaceum (Service 2014a, pp. 16-30). 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. diatomaceum. For E. diatomaceum, all four populations
occur on BLM land, and BLM has monitored these populations over time.
E. diatomaceum is identified as a BLM sensitive species, which means
that BLM's management objective is to initiate proactive conservation
measures that reduce or eliminate threats to minimize the likelihood of
and need for listing. Occupied and potential habitat for this species
was nominated as an Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) in
2008; however, BLM has postponed finalizing this ACEC designation
pending the completion of an amendment to the Carson City District
Resource Management Plan (RMP). A decision for the RMP is not expected
until 2016. During the preparation of the Species Report, we met with
BLM managers to discuss the status of E. diatomaceum and BLM's ongoing
management of the species. During those conversations, the BLM affirmed
its intent to continue managing the species as a BLM sensitive species,
regardless of the species' status under the Act, and to avoid impacts
to the species or its habitat, particularly in the context of mining
activity (Service 2014a, p. 16).
Based on the analysis contained within the Species Report, we
conclude that the best available scientific and commercial information
does not indicate that there is an inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms to address impacts from the identified potential threats
such that listing would be warranted.
Interaction Among Factors
When conducting our analysis about the potential threats affecting
Eriogonum diatomaceum, we also assessed whether the species may be
affected by a combination of factors. In the Species Report (Service
2014a, p. 30), we identified multiple potential stressors that may have
interrelated impacts on E. diatomaceum or its habitat. Mineral
development and exploration 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.
Livestock grazing may result in direct
[[Page 57037]]
impacts to individual Eriogonum diatomaceum plants due to trampling
(Factors A and E). Both livestock grazing and OHV/road corridors create
patterns of soil disturbance that in turn alter habitat function and
create conditions conducive to the invasion of nonnative plant species
(Factors A and E). Once nonnative, invasive plant species are
established, these species tend to spread beyond the footprint of
mineral development and exploration or OHV/road corridors, further
deteriorating otherwise intact habitat and native vegetation, including
E. diatomaceum. Herbivory, when combined with climate change and
altered precipitation and temperature regimes, may interfere with
seedling recruitment and persistence of the species on the landscape
(Factors A, C, and E). Each of these potential stressors may affect
individuals of E. diatomaceum. However, BLM monitored each of the four
populations of E. diatomaceum from 2005-2007 and in 2012, and the
results of these surveys do not indicate that the population numbers
are declining or that these stressors are currently affecting the
species (Service 2014a, p. 13). Therefore, the current best available
scientific and commercial information does not show that these combined
impacts are resulting in current or future impacts to the species such
that the species would warrant listing.
All or some of the potential stressors could act in concert to
result in cumulative stress on Eriogonum diatomaceum. However, the best
available scientific and commercial information currently does not
indicate that these stressors singularly or cumulatively are resulting
now or will in the future result in a substantial decline of the total
extant population of the plant or have impacts to E. diatomaceum at the
species level. Therefore, we do not consider the cumulative impact of
these stressors to E. diatomaceum to be substantial at this time, nor
into the future such that the species would warrant listing under the
Act.
Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii
The Species Report for Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii evaluated
the biological status of the plant and each of the potential stressors
affecting its continued existence (Service 2014b, entire). It was based
upon the best available scientific and commercial data and the expert
opinion of the Species Report team members. Based on the analysis and
discussion contained in the Species Report, we evaluated the potential
threats under the five statutory factors: Development for residential,
commercial, or other purposes (A and E); OHV use and road development
(Factors A and E); mineral exploration and development (Factors A and
E); nonnative, invasive plant species (Factors A and E); modified
wildfire regime (Factors A and E); and climate change (Factors A and
E). We found that these factors are not likely to impact the plant as a
whole currently and are not expected to in the future. The full
analyses of possible stressors are documented in the Species Report and
summarized below. Based on the analysis contained in the Species Report
and under the five statutory factors, we find that the best available
scientific and commercial information does not indicate that current
and future threats are causing or going to cause a decline in the plant
or its habitat, either now or into the future. We recognize that
habitat and individuals have been lost from 62 percent of the
historical occurrences of E. c. var. nilesii through past development
on private lands, and we anticipate that approximately 5.5 percent of
remaining habitat will be lost into the future as a result of
development. However, we do not anticipate future development to be a
threat to the remaining populations because most are on public lands
(many of which are in conservation areas) where we do not anticipate
similar losses.
Development for Residential, Commercial, or Other Purposes (Factors A
and E)
We found that past development has had an impact on Eriogonum
corymbosum var. nilesii and has resulted in the loss of 1,303.5 ac
(527.5 ha) of formerly occupied habitat mostly on private lands
(Service 2014b, pp. 11-12, 24)). Future development is likely to impact
an additional 43.93 ac (17.78 ha) of E. c. var. nilesii habitat
(Service 2014b, pp. 24-30). Development has occurred in the past and is
imminent into the future in these limited areas (43.93 ac (17.78 ha)).
The future development of 43.93 ac (17.78 ha) will result in partial
loss of two populations and entire loss of one population in Las Vegas
Valley, and it will also result in partial loss of one population in
Coyote Springs (Service 2014b, pp. 14-16). There should be no future
development loss in one other population in Las Vegas Valley, one
population in the Muddy Mountain Wilderness, two populations in White
Basin, and one population in Toquop Wash. Even though some limited
development will occur in the future, we found that development is not
imminent in the future over most of the remaining extant habitat,
because 80 percent of the remaining occupied habitat is on Federal
lands where development is unlikely due to conservation plans,
conservation areas, wilderness areas, ACECs, and other protective
means. The best available scientific and commercial information
indicates that even though development has resulted in losses of
historical occurrences of E. c. var. nilesii, we do not anticipate
future development to result in large losses that would be a threat to
the plant such that listing the plant would be warranted.
OHV Activity and Road Development (Factors A and E)
OHV use and road development can cause loss, degradation, and
fragmentation of Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii habitat and compact
soils, crush plants, and provide a means for nonnative plant species to
enter otherwise remote, intact habitats. OHV use and road development
is authorized and currently occurs to some degree in six of the nine
extant populations of E. c. var. nilesii. The 1998 BLM Las Vegas
District Resource Management Plan (RMP) includes provisions limiting
OHV activity to designated roads, trails, and/or dry washes in all
ACECs and Wilderness Study Areas. We do know that OHV use and road
development do occur to some degree in many of the extant populations,
but we are not currently aware of individuals or habitat having been
lost as a result of these activities (Service 2014b, pp. 30-31).
Therefore, while OHV activity and road development may affect
individuals, based on the information that is available at this time,
the information does not indicate that OHV activity and road
development are a current or future threat to the plant such that the
plant would warrant listing.
Mineral Exploration and Development (Factors A and E)
When Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii became a candidate for
Federal listing in 2007 (72 FR 69034, December 6, 2007), mining
activities were identified as having the potential to impact 2 of the
12 populations recognized in that document. In 2013, we reviewed the
status of all locatable mining claims within the legal sections
containing the plant. According to this review, there are 74 ``closed''
(an administrative term that indicates a prior claim that is no longer
current) and no ``active'' (meaning paperwork and fees filed with the
BLM in support of the claim are current) locatable mineral claims
within the sections
[[Page 57038]]
occupied by this plant (Service 2014b, p. 33).
With regard to the timing of mining-related impacts, although this
activity has been previously identified as having the potential to
affect Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii, we are unaware of mining
having directly affected this plant in the form of losses of
individuals or habitat. With regard to scope, to the best of our
knowledge, historically no populations have been affected by this
activity, and no open locatable mineral claims currently exist within
occupied habitat. In light of the above information, severity is low to
nonexistent.
Overall, mineral exploration and development has been previously
identified as having the potential to affect Eriogonum corymbosum var.
nilesii, but we are unaware of mining having directly affected this
plant in the form of losses of individuals or habitat. Historically, no
populations have been affected by this activity, and no open locatable
mineral claims currently exist within occupied habitat (Service 2014b,
pp. 31-33); therefore, we do not consider mining to be a current or
future threat to the plant such that the plant would warrant listing.
Nonnative, Invasive Plant Species (Factors A and E)
The majority of Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii habitat is not
affected by nonnative, invasive plant species, likely because the
specialized habitat of the plant has not experienced high levels of
soil disturbances conducive to their spread. However, in areas where
soil disturbances have occurred, nonnative, invasive plant species may
pose a threat to E. c. var. nilesii due to their ability to potentially
compete with and displace the plant and other native species from its
habitat. Nonnative, invasive plant species are present to some degree
in five of the nine extant populations; however, the severity of
nonnative, invasive plant species is unknown because the best available
scientific information does not provide any indication of the level of
which nonnative, invasive plant species affect E. c. var. nilesii, and
the majority of E. c. var. nilesii habitat is not affected by
nonnative, invasive plant species (Service 2014b, pp. 33-34).
Therefore, we do not consider nonnative, invasive plant species to be a
current or future threat to the plant such that the plant would warrant
listing.
Modified Wildfire Regime (Factors A and E)
Historically, wildfire has been infrequent in the Mojave Desert due
to limited fuels created by sparse vegetation. However, since the
1970s, fires have become more frequent due to recent invasions by
annual grasses (Service 2014b, p. 34). Due to increasing invasion by
nonnative, annual grasses, wildfire is now considered one of the
primary stressors to the conservation of native plants and animals and
to the maintenance of ecosystem integrity in the Mojave Desert.
Regardless of an overall increase of wildfire in the Mojave Desert,
there are no reported accounts of wildfire within Eriogonum corymbosum
var. nilesii habitat (Service 2014b, pp. 34-35). We are unaware of
wildfire having directly affected this plant in the form of losses of
individuals or habitat, and we do not have information indicating that
this plant would be negatively affected by wildfire. Therefore, based
on the information that is available at this time, the information does
not indicate that a modified wildfire regime is a current or future
threat to the plant such that the plant would warrant listing.
Climate Change (Factors A and E)
The direct, long-term impact from climate change to Eriogonum
corymbosum var. nilesii is yet to be determined. Current climate change
projections for the Mojave Desert indicating warming temperatures, and
climate predictions for the geographic range of E. c. var. nilesii
suggest there will be more frequent and/or prolonged drought. However,
predictions for this area in particular suggest localized, increasing
August precipitation. We anticipate that the alteration of
precipitation and temperature patterns could result in decreased
survivorship of E. c. var. nilesii due to physiological stress of
individual plants, altered phenology, and reduced seedling
establishment and plant recruitment. Climate change also may exacerbate
impacts from other factors currently affecting this plant and its
habitat. However, the severity of climate change is unknown because
even though climate projections indicating warming temperatures exist
for the Mojave Desert, we do not know how E. c. var. nilesii is likely
to respond to these climatic changes (Service 2014b, pp. 35-37). In
addition, we do not know of any information that demonstrates climate
change is affecting the plant. Therefore, based on the information that
is available at this time, the information does not indicate that
climate change is a current or future threat to the plant such that the
plant would warrant listing.
Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms (Factor D)
The Act requires that the Secretary assess existing regulatory
mechanisms in order to determine whether they are adequate to address
threats to the species (Factor D). The Species Report includes
discussions of applicable regulatory mechanisms (Service 2014b,
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 Eriogonum
corymbosum var. nilesii. E. c. var. nilesii is a BLM sensitive species
(Service 2014b, p. 3). In addition, BLM has entered into conservation
agreements (CA) for many lands to preserve, enhance, and restore
riparian areas and their associated uplands for the plant (Service
2014b, pp. 38-42).
In 2002, the Muddy Mountains Wilderness, which supports the Muddy
Mountains population of Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii, was added to
the National Wilderness Preservation System by the Clark County
Conservation of Public Land and Natural Resources Act of 2002 (Pub. L.
107-282). This designation protects this population from mining,
grazing, OHV use, and human development (Service 2014b, p. 41).
In 2005, BLM, the Service, Nevada Division of Forestry (NDF), and
the City of North Las Vegas entered a CA to retain 300 ac (121 ha) of
the Upper Las Vegas Wash area in Federal ownership to establish it as
the Eglington Preserve. The goal is to preserve, enhance, and restore
riparian areas and their associated uplands within the Eglington
Preserve. In 2011, the BLM established the 10,669-ac (4,318-ha)
conservation transfer area (CTA), which contains the 300-ac (121-ha)
Eglington Preserve, and encompasses one of the populations in the Las
Vegas Valley. The BLM's vision for the CTA is ``to preserve the natural
functioning of the Upper Wash, protect the sensitive resources within,
and support education, research, and low-impact recreational use. The
CTA is ecologically functional to the maximum extent possible and
managed to ensure the long-term integrity of the Las Vegas Formation
and associated fossil beds, the rare plant habitat for Arctomecon
californica, Arctomecon merriamii, and Eriogonum corymbosum var.
nilesii, as well as natural flood water capacity for present and future
generations.'' The BLM will require mitigation and monitoring measures
to minimize impacts to resources caused by future allowable uses in the
CTA as
[[Page 57039]]
determined on a case-by-case basis (Service 2014b, pp. 39-41).
In 2007, BLM re-purchased approximately 1,103 ac (446 ha) of land
that supports one of the White Basin populations of Eriogonum
corymbosum var. nilesii. Ongoing revisions to the Las Vegas BLM's RMP
are expected to include a proposal to designate the property and the
surrounding area as the Bitter Spring ACEC, for the protection of E. c.
var. nilesii and two other special status plant species (Service 2014b,
p. 41).
Another population in the Las Vegas Valley was designated as a
``Buckwheat Conservation Area'' by Clark County in 2010. Also in 2010,
the Nellis Air Force Base (AFB) established a conservation area where
sites containing Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii would remain
undeveloped unless military mission requirements dictate otherwise, and
the DOD would not allow further development for activities that are
purely recreational. In addition, Nellis AFB will also consult with NDF
and the Service to incorporate conservation measures for the plant if
development is to occur within occupied habitat.
As described in the Species Report, there are several Federal,
State, and County protections for Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii. In
addition, BLM has entered into CAs for many lands to preserve, enhance,
and restore riparian areas and their associated uplands for the plant
(Service 2014b, pp. 38-42). Overall, there are conservation protections
(such as conservation areas, ACECs, and wilderness areas) or limits on
activities (such as OHV activity) within eight of the nine extant
populations.
Based on the analysis contained within the Species Report, we
conclude that the best available scientific and commercial information
does not indicate that there is an inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms to address impacts from the identified potential threats
such that listing the plant would be warranted.
Interaction Among Factors
When conducting our analysis about the potential stressors
affecting Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii, we also assessed whether
the plant may be affected by a combination of factors. In the Species
Report (Service 2014b, p. 38), we identified multiple potential
stressors that may have interrelated impacts on E. c. var. nilesii or
its habitat. OHV and other road corridors can exacerbate habitat loss
and fragmentation, and tend to be associated with (accompanying or
following) development activities (Factors A and E). Development and
OHV/road corridors tend to create conditions that favor the
establishment of nonnative, invasive plant species; once established,
these species tend to spread well beyond the footprint of development
actions or OHV/road corridors, further deteriorating otherwise intact
habitat and native vegetation (Factors A and E). Some nonnative,
invasive plant species, particularly annual grasses, then increase the
frequency of wildfire, leading to modified wildfire regimes (Factors A
and E). Climate change has the potential to alter many patterns of land
use, including development and associated infrastructure, but also the
precipitation and temperature regimes that in turn influence the
establishment and persistence of vegetation, both native and nonnatives
alike (Factors A and E). However, the current best available scientific
and commercial information does not show that these combined impacts
are resulting in current impacts or are likely to result in future
impacts to the plant.
All or some of the potential stressors could act in concert to
result in cumulative stress on Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii.
However, the best available scientific and commercial information
currently does not indicate that these stressors singularly or
cumulatively are resulting now or will in the future result in a
substantial decline of the total extant population of the plant or have
impacts to E. c. var. nilesii at the taxon level. Therefore, we do not
consider the cumulative impact of these stressors to E. c. var. nilesii
to be substantial at this time, nor into the future.
Determination
As required in section 4(a)(1) of the Act, we conducted a review of
the status of Eriogonum diatomaceum and Eriogonum corymbosum var.
nilesii and assessed the five factors in consideration of whether E.
diatomaceum and E. c. var. nilesii are endangered or threatened species
throughout all of their ranges. We have carefully assessed the best
scientific and commercial information available regarding the past,
present, and future threats to these plants. We reviewed information
available in our files and other available published and unpublished
information. We also consulted with species experts and land managers
in the areas where these plants occur.
Eriogonum diatomaceum
We evaluated each of the potential stressors in the Species Report
for Eriogonum diatomaceum, and we determined that mineral exploration
and development (Factors A and E); livestock grazing (Factors A and E);
herbivory (Factor C); OHV activity and road development (Factors A and
E); nonnative, invasive plant species (Factors A and E); disease
(Factor C); and climate change (Factors A and E) are factors that have
had impacts on individuals in some locations, but they are not
impacting the species currently or into the future such that listing
would be warranted. Based on the analysis contained within the Species
Report, we conclude that the best available scientific and commercial
information does not indicate that these stressors are going to cause a
decline in the species or its habitat, either now or are likely to do
so into the future. In addition, we evaluated existing regulatory
mechanisms and did not determine an inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms for E. diatomaceum. Finally, although there is uncertainty
in extrapolations of population estimates based on survey results, the
best available scientific and commercial information shows that E.
diatomaceum population numbers do not appear to be in decline (Service
2014a, pp. 12-13).
Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii
We evaluated each of the potential stressors in the Species Report
for Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii, and we determined that
development for residential, commercial, or other purposes (Factors A
and E); OHV use and road development (Factors A and E); mineral
exploration and development (Factors A and E); nonnative, invasive
plant species (Factors A and E); modified wildfire regime (Factors A
and E); and climate change (Factors A and E) are factors that may have
impacts on individuals in some locations, but they are not impacting
the plants currently or into the future such that listing would be
warranted. Based on the analysis contained within the Species Report,
we conclude that the best available scientific and commercial
information does not indicate that these stressors currently are going
to cause a decline in the plant or its habitat, either now or are
likely to do so into the future. In addition, we evaluated existing
regulatory mechanisms and did not determine an inadequacy of existing
regulatory mechanisms for E. c. var. nilesii. Even though we found that
some of the potential stressors have caused the loss of E. c. var.
nilesii populations in the past, we do not anticipate that the
potential threats are likely to impact the remaining populations in the
future
[[Page 57040]]
such that listing the plant would be warranted, because of the large
amount of occupied habitat being conserved and the land ownership of
much of E. c. var. nilesii's habitat.
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.'' Based on our analyses conducted in the
Species Reports and summarized in this finding, and using the best
scientific and commercial information available, we find that the
magnitude and imminence of threats do not indicate that Eriogonum
diatomaceum or Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii are in danger of
extinction (endangered), or likely to become endangered within the
foreseeable future (threatened), throughout their ranges. In the
Species Report, we describe how our ability to project future trends in
the various factors identified as relevant to E. diatomaceum and E. c.
var. nilesii differs for each factor, with some factors better assessed
in terms of relatively short time periods, whereas others are more
appropriately assessed in terms of longer time horizons. Our ability to
project future trends in the various factors identified as relevant to
each of the plants differs for each factor, with some factors (such as
development and grazing) more easily predicted in terms of relatively
short time periods (such as the 1-10 years for which future development
is anticipated based on plans and the 10-15 year time period for
grazing allotment permits). Others (such as climate change) can often
be predicted over longer time horizons (such as 50 years for most
climate models). We do not have a single foreseeable future timeframe
because each of the potential stressors can be predicted into the
future over different time horizons, and we do not have data to support
a single foreseeable future timeframe.
In general, we assessed the potential stressors as a continuation
of current circumstances as discussed in the Species Reports (Service
2014, p. 17; Service 2014b, p. 24). In the case of Eriogonum
diatomaceum, as discussed above, the best available information
indicates that there is no evidence of population declines within the
species at current threat levels. In a continuation of current
conditions, it is therefore likely that the populations will remain
stable in the future. For Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii, our
information shows that development is likely to reduce the overall
population and habitat by a small percentage within a reasonably short
timeframe, however, aside from this stressor, the best available
information indicates that populations are not currently being affected
by other potential stressors. Additionally, much of the remaining
populations and habitat are in conserved areas, or areas with limited
activity, whereby the species would not likely be impacted by these
potential stressors or the species exposure to these potential
stressors would be reduced. Therefore, a continuation of current
conditions would indicate that the remaining populations will likely be
stable in the future. With regard to both species, although models can
predict climate changes over longer timeframes, the best available
scientific information does not indicate how climate change effects
will impact either of these plants into the future. Therefore, our
ability to predict future climate change effects is limited.
Therefore, based on our assessment of the best available scientific
and commercial information, we find that listing Eriogonum diatomaceum
or Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii throughout all or a significant
portion of their ranges as endangered or threatened species is not
warranted at this time.
Significant Portion of the Range
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.'' We published a final policy interpreting the
phrase ``significant portion of its range'' (SPR) (79 FR 37578, July 1,
2014). 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 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
[[Page 57041]]
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
applies 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 evaluated the current ranges of Eriogonum diatomaceum and
Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii to determine if there is any apparent
geographic concentration of potential threats for either of the plants.
We examined potential threats to E. diatomaceum from mineral
exploration and development; livestock grazing; herbivory; OHV activity
and road development; nonnative, invasive plant species; disease; and
climate change. We examined potential threats to E. c. var. nilesii
from development for residential, commercial, or other purposes; OHV
use and road development; mineral exploration and development;
nonnative, invasive plant species; modified wildfire regime; and
climate change. Even though we found that some of the potential threats
have caused the loss of E. c. var. nilesii populations in the past, we
do not anticipate that the potential threats are likely to impact the
remaining populations in the future such that listing the plant would
be warranted, because of the large amount of occupied habitat being
conserved and the land ownership of much of E. c. var. nilesii's
habitat. Overall, we found no current concentration of threats now or
into the future that suggests that either of these plants may be in
danger of extinction in a portion of its range. We found no portions of
their ranges where current or future potential threats are
significantly concentrated or substantially greater than in other
portions of their ranges. Therefore, we find that potential threats
affecting each plant are essentially uniform throughout its range,
indicating no portion of the range of either plant warrants further
consideration of possible endangered or threatened species status under
the Act.
Our review of the best available scientific and commercial
information indicates that neither Eriogonum diatomaceum nor Eriogonum
corymbosum var. nilesii are 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 two
plants 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 diatomaceum and Eriogonum
corymbosum var. nilesii to our Nevada Fish and Wildlife Office (see
ADDRESSES) whenever it becomes available. New information will help us
monitor these plants and encourage their conservation. If an emergency
situation develops for either of these two plants, we will act to
provide immediate protection.
References Cited
Service 2014a. Species Report for Eriogonum diatomaceum (Churchill
Narrows buckwheat). Nevada Fish and Wildlife Office. March 28, 2014.
Service 2014b. Species Report for Eriogonum corymbosum var. nilesii
(Las Vegas buckwheat). Nevada Fish and Wildlife Office. March 28,
2014.
A complete list of references cited in each of the Species Reports
(Service 2014a; Service 2014b) is available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov or at http://www.fws.gov/nevada/highlights/
speciesactions/speciesactions.html and upon request
from the Nevada Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT).
Authors
The primary authors of this finding are the staff members of the
Pacific Southwest Regional Office and the Nevada Fish and Wildlife
Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
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 12, 2014.
Stephen Guertin,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-22668 Filed 9-23-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P