[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 94 (Tuesday, May 15, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 22392-22401]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-10206]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2016-0130; FXES11130900000-178-FF09E42000]
RIN 1018-BB90
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Reclassifying
Tobusch Fishhook Cactus From Endangered to Threatened and Adopting a
New Scientific Name
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), reclassify
Tobusch fishhook cactus (Sclerocactus brevihamatus ssp. tobuschii;
currently listed as Ancistrocactus tobuschii), from endangered to
threatened on the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Plants.
This determination is based on a thorough review of the best available
scientific and commercial information, which indicates that the threats
to this plant have been reduced to the point that it is no longer in
danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its
range, but it remains threatened with becoming endangered within the
foreseeable future. In addition, we accept the new taxonomic
classification for Tobusch fishhook cactus as the subspecies
Sclerocactus brevihamatus ssp. tobuschii.
DATES: This rule becomes effective June 14, 2018.
ADDRESSES: This final rule is available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2016-0130 and the
Service's websites at http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/AustinTexas/ESA_Species_news.html and http://www.fws.gov/endangered. Comments and
materials received, as well as supporting documentation used in the
preparation of this rule, are available for public inspection, by
appointment, during normal business hours at: U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Austin Ecological Services Field Office, 10711 Burnet Road,
Suite 200, Austin, TX 78727; telephone 512-490-0057; facsimile 512-490-
0974. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD)
may call the Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8339.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Adam Zerrenner, Field Supervisor, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Austin Ecological Services Field Office (see
ADDRESSES) telephone 512-490-0057, or by facsimile 512-490-0974.
Individuals who are hearing impaired or speech-impaired may call the
Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8339 for TTY assistance.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act; 16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), a species is an endangered or threatened species
based on any one or a combination of the five listing factors
established under section 4(a)(1) of the Act: (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.
After conducting a review of its biological status and threats, we
have determined that Tobusch fishhook cactus is no longer in danger of
extinction throughout all or a signification portion of its range;
however, the subspecies is likely to become endangered within the
foreseeable future as a result of changes in vegetation and wildfire
frequency (Factor A), insect parasites and feral hog rooting (Factor
C), and the demographic and genetic consequences of small population
sizes and densities (Factor E).
We sought comments from independent specialists to ensure that our
determination is based on scientifically sound data, assumptions, and
analyses. We invited these peer reviewers to comment on our
reclassification proposal, and we considered all comments and
information received during the public comment period.
This rule finalizes the reclassification of Tobusch fishhook cactus
from an endangered to a threatened species, and adopts the latest
taxonomic assignment of the scientific name, changing it from
Ancistrocactus tobuschii to Sclerocactus brevihamatus ssp. tobuschii on
the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Plants.
[[Page 22393]]
Previous Federal Actions
We published a final rule to list Tobusch fishhook cactus as an
endangered species under the Act on November 7, 1979 (44 FR 64736). At
that time, we also determined that it was not prudent to designate
critical habitat. On March 18, 1987, we finalized a recovery plan for
Tobusch fishhook cactus. On January 5, 2010, a status review (``5-year
review'') was completed under section 4(c)(2)(A) of the Act, which
recommended that Tobusch fishhook cactus be reclassified from
endangered to threatened (Service 2010).
On July 16, 2012, we received a petition dated July 11, 2012, from
The Pacific Legal Foundation, Jim Chilton, the New Mexico Cattle
Growers' Association, New Mexico Farm & Livestock Bureau, New Mexico
Federal Lands Council, and Texas Farm Bureau requesting that Tobusch
fishhook cactus be reclassified as threatened based on the analysis and
recommendation contained in the 5-year review. The Service published a
90-day finding on September 9, 2013 (78 FR 55046), that the petition
contained substantial scientific or commercial information indicating
that the petitioned action may be warranted. On November 20, 2015, the
Service received a complaint (New Mexico Cattle Growers' Association et
al. v. United States Department of the Interior et al., No. 1:15-cv-
01065-PJK-LF (D. N.M.)) for declaratory judgment and injunctive relief
from the New Mexico Cattle Growers' Association, Jim Chilton, New
Mexico Farm & Livestock Bureau, New Mexico Federal Lands Council, and
Texas Farm Bureau to compel the Service to make a 12-month finding on
the petition. On December 29, 2016, the Service published a combined
12-month warranted finding and proposed rule to reclassify Tobusch
fishhook cactus from endangered to threatened (81 FR 95932).
Summary of Biological Status and Threats
We prepared a Species Status Assessment (SSA) for Tobusch fishhook
cactus (Service 2016; available at http://www.regulations.gov and
http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/AustinTexas/ESA_Species_news.html),
which includes a thorough review of the subspecies' taxonomy, natural
history, habitats, ecology, populations, and range. We used the best
available scientific and commercial data to analyze individual,
population, and subspecies requirements, as well as factors affecting
the subspecies' survival and its current conditions, to assess the
current and future viability of Tobusch fishhook cactus in terms of
resilience, redundancy, and representation. We solicited peer review of
the draft SSA Report from three objective and independent scientific
experts, and considered their comments in finalization of the SSA
Report. The following is a summary of our results and conclusions.
Please refer to section IV of the SSA Report for a more detailed
discussion of the factors affecting Tobusch fishhook cactus (Service
2016, pp. 38-46).
Description
Tobusch fishhook cactus is a rare, endemic plant of the Edwards
Plateau of central Texas that is armed with curved ``fishhook'' spines.
In the wild, this globose or columnar cactus rarely exceeds 5
centimeters (2 inches) in diameter and in height (Poole and Janssen
2002, p. 7).
Classification
The taxonomic classifications of Tobusch fishhook cactus include
several published synonyms. We listed it as a species, Ancistrocactus
tobuschii (44 FR 64736, November 7, 1979), and retained this
classification for the recovery plan (Service 1987). However, recent
phylogenetic evidence supports classifying Tobusch fishhook cactus as
subspecies tobuschii of Sclerocactus brevihamatus (Porter and Prince
2011, pp. 40-47). It is distinguished morphologically from its closest
relative, S. brevihamatus ssp. brevihamatus, on the basis of yellow
versus pink- or brown-tinged flowers, fewer radial spines, and fewer
ribs (Marshall 1952, p. 79; Poole et al. 2007, p. 442; Porter and
Prince 2011, pp. 42-45). Additionally, S. brevihamatus ssp. tobuschii
is endemic to limestone outcrops of the Edwards Plateau, while S.
brevihamatus ssp. brevihamatus occurs in alluvial soils in the
Tamaulipan Shrublands and Chihuahuan Desert. A recent investigation
confirmed genetic divergence between the two subspecies, although they
may interact genetically in a narrow area where their ranges overlap
(Rayamajhi 2015, pp. 67, 98; Sharma 2015, p. 1). We officially accept
the new scientific name of Tobusch fishhook cactus as Sclerocactus
brevihamatus ssp. tobuschii.
Reproduction
Tobusch fishhook cactus grows slowly, reaching a reproductive size
of about 2 centimeters (0.8 inches) in diameter after 9 years (Emmett
1995, pp. 168-169). It flowers between late January and mid-March, and
its major pollinators are honey bees and halictid bees (Emmett 1995,
pp. 74-75; Lockwood 1995, pp. 428-430; Reemts and Becraft 2013, pp. 6-
7; Langley 2015, pp. 21-23). The breeding system is primarily out-
crossing, requiring fertilization between unrelated individuals;
relatively few viable seeds are produced from self-fertilized flowers
(Emmett 1995, p. 70; Langley 2015, pp. 24-28). Reproductive individuals
produce an average of 112 seeds per year (Emmett 1995, p. 108). Ants
may be seed predators, dispersers, or both (Emmett 1995, pp. 112-114,
124). Mammals or birds may also accomplish longer distance seed
dispersal (Emmett 1995, pp. 115-116, 126). There is little evidence
that seeds persist in the soil (Emmett 1995, pp. 120-122).
Habitats
When listed as endangered in 1979, fewer than 200 individuals of
Tobusch fishhook cactus were known from 4 riparian sites, 2 of which
had been destroyed by floods (44 FR 64736, November 7, 1979; Service
1987, pp. 4-5). We now understand that those riparian habitats were
atypical; the great majority of populations that have now been
documented occur in upland sites dominated by Ashe juniper-live oak
woodlands and savannas on the Edwards Plateau (Poole and Janssen 2002,
p. 2). Soils are classified in the Tarrant, Ector, Eckrant, and similar
series. Within a matrix of woodland and savanna, the subspecies occurs
in discontinuous patches of very shallow, gravelly soils where bare
rock and rock fragments comprise a large proportion of the surface
cover (Sutton et al. 1997, pp. 442-443). Associated vegetation includes
small bunch grasses and forbs. The subspecies' distribution within
habitat patches is clumped and tends to be farther from woody plant
cover (Reemts 2014, pp. 9-10). The presence of cryptograms, primitive
plants that reproduce by spores rather than seeds, may be a useful
indicator of fine-scale habitat suitability (Service 2010, p. 17).
Wildfire (including prescribed burning) causes negligible damage to
Tobusch fishhook cactus populations (Emmett 1995, p. 42; Poole and
Birnbaum 2003, p. 12). The subspecies probably does not require fire
for germination, establishment, or reproduction, but periodic burning
may be necessary to prevent the encroachment of woody plants into its
habitats.
Populations and Range
A population of an organism is a group of individuals within a
geographic area that are capable of interbreeding or interacting.
Although
[[Page 22394]]
the term is conceptually simple, it may be difficult to determine the
extent of a population of rare or cryptic species, and this is
certainly the case for Tobusch fishhook cactus. Thorough surveys on
public lands, such as State parks and highway rights-of-way, have
detected groups of individuals, but since the vast majority of the
surrounding private land has not been surveyed, we do not know if these
are small, isolated populations, or parts of larger interacting
populations or metapopulations. In instances where we are unable to
define the extent of the local population, we often informally use the
terms ``site,'' referring to a place where the subspecies was found,
and ``colony,'' referring to a cluster of individuals.
Populations of Tobusch fishhook cactus are now confirmed in eight
central Texas counties: Bandera, Edwards, Kerr, Kimble, Kinney, Real,
Uvalde, and Val Verde. The Texas Native Diversity Database (2016, pp.
1-202) listed 97 element occurrences, areas in which the plant was
present (EOs; NatureServe 2002, p. 10), of Tobusch fishhook cactus,
totaling 3,336 individuals. In addition, recent surveys conducted
through Section 7 consultations and at preserves managed by The Nature
Conservancy, that are not included in the TXNDD report, bring the total
number of documented individuals to approximately 4,500. Although the
numbers of individuals at each site fluctuate over time, due to the
combined, continuing effects of mortality and recruitment of new
individuals, our best estimate of the total live individuals at all
documented sites at any one time is 4,500.
Summary of Subspecies Requirements
Tobusch fishhook cactus plants occur in patches of very shallow,
rocky soil overlying limestone. The immediate vicinity of plants is
sparsely vegetated with small bunch grasses and forbs and there is
little or no woody plant cover. Individual plants require an estimated
9 years to reach a reproductive size of about 2 centimeters (0.8
inches) in diameter. Reproduction is primarily by out-crossing between
unrelated individuals, and the known pollinators include honey bees and
halictid bees. Out-crossing requires genetically diverse cactus
populations within the foraging range of pollinators, and is less
likely to occur in small, isolated populations. Healthy pollinator
populations, in turn, require intact, diverse, native plant
communities. Halictid bees are frequent natural pollinators of Tobusch
fishhook cactus. We expect the foraging range of these bees, given
their relatively small size, to be fairly limited. Therefore, the
health and diversity of native vegetation within the vicinity of
Tobusch fishhook cactus plants (a range of 50 to 500 meters (164 to
1,640 feet)) may be particularly important for successful cactus
reproduction. Healthy pollinator populations also require the least
possible exposure to agricultural pesticides within their foraging
ranges.
Resilient populations are those that exhibit stable or increasing
demographic trends. The assessment of demographic trends, however,
depends on how populations are delineated (81 FR 95932, December 29,
2016). For Tobusch fishhook cactus, we conclude that it is more
appropriate to track the collective populations of multiple colonies
that interact on a landscape scale (i.e., metapopulations). Resilience
of metapopulations requires recruitment of new colonies and/or
reestablishment at sites of former colonies that previously collapsed.
A major cause of mortality is infestation by insect larvae, mainly by
an undescribed species of Gerstaeckeria (cactus weevil), and one or
more species of cactus longhorn beetles (Moneilema spp.). The adults of
these parasites are flightless, so their dispersal to new colonies is
likely to be very limited. When individual colonies of the cactus die
off, the parasites also die off, rendering those patches of suitable
habitat available for cactus re-colonization. Hence, these periodic
infestations of parasite larvae greatly influence the population
dynamics of Tobusch fishhook cactus. The distance between colonies has
two opposing effects on their persistence. Greater distance reduces
susceptibility to parasite infestation, but also reduces the amount of
gene flow, by means of pollinators vectoring pollen, or through seed
dispersal, between colonies. Thus, the persistence of entire
metapopulations would require fairly large landscapes where
discontinuous patches of suitable habitat are distributed and populated
at a density just low enough to hold the parasites at bay, but just
high enough for halictid bees and other pollinators and seed dispersers
to vector genes between them.
One measure of population resilience is minimum viable population
(MVP), which is an estimate of the minimum population size that has a
high probability of enduring a specified period of time. Poole and
Birnbaum (2003, p. 1) estimated an MVP of 1,200 individuals for Tobusch
fishhook cactus, using a surrogate species approach (Pavlik 1996, pp.
136-137). Although some Tobusch fishhook cactus individuals live for
decades, annual mortality rates are often greater than 20 percent, and
relatively few individuals live long enough to reproduce. Mortality
within monitored colonies often exceeds recruitment, and some colonies
have died out. Nevertheless, even where individual colonies have
collapsed, the total documented population sizes at many protected
natural areas are stable or increasing, due to discoveries of new
individuals and colonies. For this reason, MVP levels are more
appropriately applied to metapopulations rather than individual
colonies of this cactus.
The degree of genetic diversity within Tobusch fishhook cactus
populations is important for several reasons. First, diversity within
populations should confer greater resistance to pathogens and parasites
and greater adaptability to environmental stochasticity (random
variations, such as annual rainfall and temperature patterns) and the
effects from climate change. Second, low genetic diversity within
interbreeding populations leads to a higher incidence of inbreeding,
and potentially to inbreeding depression (reduced biological fitness),
which lowers a population's ability to survive and reproduce. Finally,
the breeding system of Tobusch fishhook cactus is primarily out-
crossing, so populations with too little genetic diversity would
produce fewer progeny.
Fire, whether natural or prescribed, appears to have little effect
on individual Tobusch fishhook cactus plants. This outcome is because
the plants occur where vegetation is very sparse, and the plants
protrude very little above the ground and are protected by surrounding
rocks from the heat of vegetation burning nearby. On the other hand,
periodic fire is likely to be necessary for population persistence to
reduce juniper encroachment into suitable habitats. Furthermore, the
diverse shrub and forb vegetation that sustains healthy pollinator
populations is maintained by periodic wildfire; without fire, dense
juniper groves frequently displace these shrubs and forbs. Hence, if
the native plant diversity of entire landscapes surrounding Tobusch
fishhook cactus populations succumbs to juniper encroachment,
pollinator populations will likely decline, and reproduction of Tobusch
fishhook cactus and gene flow between its colonies may be reduced.
In addition to population resilience, we assessed the subspecies'
viability in terms of its redundancy (ability to withstand catastrophic
events) and representation (ability to adapt to changing environmental
conditions).
[[Page 22395]]
Given that insect parasites are able to devastate large, dense
populations, a few large populations are much more vulnerable than many
small populations. The viability of Tobusch fishhook cactus derives not
merely from the size of metapopulations, but also their density.
Metapopulations with a low density of colonies may incur loss of
genetic diversity and increased potential for inbreeding. Conversely,
vulnerability to insect parasitism increases when metapopulations
become too dense, or when individual colonies become too large.
Assessments of resilience (metapopulation size and demographics) and
redundancy (number of metapopulations within the subspecies' range)
depend on how metapopulations are delineated. We believe that there
must be some optimal range of metapopulation density, i.e., the
distance between metapopulations, and of colony size, although we do
not currently know what those are.
One influence on representation is genetic diversity, both within
and among populations, that is necessary to conserve long-term adaptive
capability (Shaffer and Stein 2000, pp. 307-308). Genetic diversity
within a population can be measured by the numbers of variant forms of
genes represented in that population. One measure of this within-
population genetic diversity is called heterozygosity; possible values
range from 0 (all members of a population are genetically identical for
specified genes) to 1.0 (all members of a population are genetically
different). Another useful measure is the inbreeding coefficient
(FIS), which ranges from -1 (all members of the population
are heterozygous, containing two forms of specific genes, and there is
no evidence of inbreeding) to 1.0 (all members are homozygous,
containing only one form of specific genes, and inbred). Although there
are no heterozygosity levels or inbreeding coefficients that are
considered healthy for all species, we may assess the genetic health of
Tobusch fishhook cactus by comparison to the observed values of
reference species, such as other cactus species with similar life
histories that are abundant and widespread (Rayamajhi 2015, pp. 56, 63;
Schwabe et al. 2015, pp. 449, 454-455).
A study by Rayamajhi (2015, entire) determined that the mean
expected heterozygosity (He) for nine populations of Tobusch
fishhook cactus was 0.59, and the mean observed heterozygosity
(Ho) was 0.37 (p. 57). These results indicate relatively low
levels of genetic differentiation among the nine populations; however,
this situation is not unusual for endemic taxa and may also indicate a
recent divergence of subspecies tobuschii from subspecies brevihamatus.
Through comparison to other columnar cactus species that are endemic or
have limited geographic distribution, Rayamajhi (2015) concluded that
for Tobusch fishhook cactus, He was moderately high and
Ho was moderate (pp. 58-61). The moderate Ho may
be attributed to small population sizes and elevated levels of
inbreeding within populations (p. 57). By comparison, He and
Ho for Sclerocactus glaucus, a federally listed threatened
cactus species from Colorado, were 0.66 and 0.47, respectively, while
for Sclerocactus parviflorus, a relatively widespread cactus species,
He and Ho were 0.62 and 0.39 (Schwabe et al.
2015, p. 449). Despite low levels of genetic differentiation, the same
study found evidence of substantial gene flow among Tobusch fishhook
cactus populations and healthy levels of outbreeding, with a mean
inbreeding coefficient (FIS) of 0.38 (range of 0.15 to 0.63)
for ssp. tobuschii and 0.47 for ssp. brevihamatus (pp. 63-64). For
comparison, the average FIS for S. glaucus and S.
parviflorus was 0.28 and 0.37 (Schwabe et al. 2015, p. 449). These
results suggest that Tobusch fishhook cactus currently possesses
sufficient genetic representation to conserve long-term adaptive
capability.
Review of the Recovery Plan
Section 4(f) of the Act directs us to develop and implement
recovery plans for the conservation and survival of endangered and
threatened species unless we determine that such a plan will not
promote the conservation of the species. Recovery plans identify site-
specific management actions that will achieve recovery of the species,
measurable criteria that set a trigger for review of the species'
status, and estimates of the time and cost to recovery.
Recovery plans are not regulatory documents; instead they are
intended to establish goals for long-term conservation of listed
species and define criteria that are designed to indicate when the
threats facing a species have been removed or reduced to such an extent
that the species may no longer need the protections of the Act, as well
as actions that may be employed to achieve reaching the criteria. There
are many paths to accomplishing recovery of a species, and recovery
may, at times, be achieved without all criteria being fully met or all
actions fully implemented. Recovery of a species is a dynamic process
requiring adaptive management that may, or may not, fully follow the
guidance provided in a recovery plan.
The Tobusch fishhook cactus recovery plan was approved by the
Service on March 18, 1987 (Service 1987). Delisting criteria were not
established in the recovery plan. However, the recovery plan did
establish a criterion of 3,000 individuals in each of 4 safe sites for
reclassification from endangered to threatened. The explanation for how
this level was calculated is not included in the recovery plan, and to
date this criterion has not been met. No individual colonies have
reached this size, and we now understand that insect parasites are able
to devastate large, dense populations of Tobusch fishhook cactus. Thus,
the downlisting criterion of 3,000 individuals per population may be
unattainable or unsustainable. Such large cactus populations would
eventually host very large parasite populations, leading to their
collapse (Service 2017, p. 40).
Currently, many small populations exist, and surveyors have
documented a total of approximately 4,500 Tobusch fishhook cactus
individuals in 8 counties of the Edwards Plateau. Monitored
populations, ranging from 34 to 1,090 individuals, occur on 12
properties managed either by the State or conservation organizations.
We conclude that a few large cactus populations are much more
vulnerable than many small populations, and we will consider revision
of the 1989 recovery plan to include delisting criteria based on our
new understanding of Tobusch fishhook cactus demographics.
Summary of Changes From the Proposed Rule
We have made no changes from the proposed rule.
Summary of Comments and Recommendations
In the proposed rule published on December 29, 2016 (81 FR 95932),
we requested that all interested parties submit written comments on the
proposal by February 27, 2017, and we reopened the public comment
period from June 13, 2017, to July 13, 2017 (82 FR 27033, June 13,
2017). We also contacted appropriate Federal and State agencies,
scientific experts and organizations, and other interested parties and
invited them to comment on the proposal. Newspaper notices inviting
general public comment were published in the San Antonio Express News
on June 13, 2017. We did not receive any requests for a public hearing.
All substantive information provided during comment periods has
[[Page 22396]]
either been incorporated directly into this final determination or is
addressed below.
In accordance with our peer review policy published on July 1, 1994
(59 FR 34270), we solicited expert opinions from three knowledgeable
individuals with scientific expertise that included familiarity with
Tobusch fishhook cactus and its habitat, biological needs, and threats.
We received responses from all three of the peer reviewers that they
concurred with our decision to reclassify Tobusch fishhook cactus as a
threatened subspecies. We received a total of five comments on the
proposed rule; one from the State of Texas and four from the public. We
did not receive comments from other Federal agencies or Tribes. We
reviewed all comments received during the two public comment periods
for substantive issues and new information regarding the proposed
reclassification of Tobusch fishhook cactus. Four commenters were in
favor of the proposed reclassification, and one commenter was in
support of delisting Tobusch fishhook cactus. Substantive comments we
received are addressed below.
(1) Comment: Although locating new populations of Tobusch fishhook
cactus does not yet ameliorate or offset the many threats to the
subspecies, Tobusch fishhook cactus does fit the definition of
threatened and warrants downlisting. As stated in the SSA, Tobusch
fishhook cactus requires continued conservation, management, and
protection. Downlisting Tobusch fishhook cactus to threatened will
allow for these continued efforts.
Our Response: We concur and look forward to continuing cooperative
efforts to conserve and recover Tobusch fishhook cactus.
(2) Comment: The reclassification of Tobusch fishhook cactus is
fully supported; however, the downlisting should also exempt the
subspecies from the take prohibition of the Act.
Our Response: The Act does not prohibit the taking of either
endangered or threatened plant species that occur on private lands.
While the Act prohibits the taking of endangered and threatened plant
species that occur on lands under Federal jurisdiction, the subspecies
is not known to occur on any Federal lands.
(3) Comment: We believe that the SSA, representing the Service's
understanding of the best available scientific and commercial
information, instead leads to a scientifically supportable conclusion
that Tobusch fishhook cactus is neither threatened nor endangered with
extinction within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range. We recommend that the Service modify
its proposed rule to instead remove Tobusch fishhook cactus from the
Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Plants on the basis that the
original listing was in error. Such a conclusion is both consistent
with and directed by the SSA developed by the Service.
Our Response: The best available scientific information indicates
that the subspecies remains at risk of extinction in the foreseeable
future. Our analysis indicates that Tobusch fishhook cactus is likely
to continue to be negatively affected by factors such as changes in
vegetation and wildfire frequency, infection from parasites, feral hog
rooting, and the demographic and genetic consequences of small
population sizes (see discussion under Reclassification Analysis
below). The subspecies persists but requires continued management,
conservation, and protection under the Act to fully alleviate these
threats.
We also recognize that the subspecies may be more abundant than
previously estimated at the time of listing; however, calculations of
true population size are difficult to make. In the SSA, we estimated
that the total subspecies population is about 480,000 individuals, and
total estimated potential habitat ranges over 5 million acres. However,
this estimate may overstate the actual population size, as only 4,564
Tobusch fishhook cactus individuals were actually detected from 2003 to
2015. In Appendix B of the SSA Report, we explained that the estimate
of the total population size of Tobusch fishhook cactus is a simple
extrapolation of the average population density within surveys of
potential habitat to the total amount of potential habitat. The
extremely uneven distribution of this cactus complicates estimates of
the true population size (Service 2016, p. 21). In the SSA Report, we
also stated that the estimated population size is not a precise
determination, but is the best estimate we are currently able to make
with available quantitative data that has been obtained from a small
number of areas (Service 2016, p. 32). One peer reviewer of the SSA
stated that the general approach we used to estimate the total number
of plants was sound, but because the areas surveyed were a biased
sample of potential habitats, our approach likely overestimated the
amount of potential habitat and population size. This overestimate is
because State parks and other areas surveyed are not representative of
all areas of potential habitat within the subspecies' range. We concur
with these comments. The survey sample size was small and was
unavoidably biased, and the method we used did not establish confidence
limits to the estimate. Due to the drastic collapse of many large
colonies from insect parasites, we require statistically rigorous
estimates of metapopulation trends to project long-term viability.
Although the available data do indicate that both the subspecies'
viability and population sizes are greater than when it was listed and
that it is not currently in danger of extinction, threats to the
subspecies remain unabated and Tobusch fishhook cactus is likely to
become endangered with extinction in the foreseeable future.
Reclassification Analysis
Under section 4 of the Act, we administer the Federal Lists of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants, which are set forth in
title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations at part 17 (50 CFR 17.11
and 17.12). We can determine, on the basis of the best scientific and
commercial data available, whether a species may be listed, delisted,
or reclassified as described in 50 CFR 424.11. Tobusch fishhook cactus
was listed as endangered in 1979 due to: Few known populations, habitat
destruction, and altered stream flows (Factor A); illegal collection
(Factor B); and very limited geographic range, small population sizes,
restricted gene pool, and lack of reproduction (Factor E). We now know
there are many more populations over a much wider area; approximately
4,500 individuals have been documented at more than 97 EOs and other
monitoring sites. Most habitats are relatively secure, given that they
are in remote, rocky areas that are unsuitable for growing crops.
However, the great majority is on private lands that are becoming
increasingly fragmented and may be subject to destruction or
modification. Many of the known populations are small and isolated, and
the monitored portions of numerous populations have declined.
Demographic population viability analyses predict an overall future
decline in subspecies' viability. However, we do not know how well
these analyses project the demographic trends of metapopulations
distributed over larger landscapes. We know that insect parasites are a
major cause of mortality and may naturally reduce populations to low
densities. Many populations have sufficient genetic diversity to confer
long-term adaptive capability, but some small, isolated populations
have higher levels of inbreeding and may be affected by
[[Page 22397]]
reduced fitness and reproduction. It is likely that projected climate
changes will affect Tobusch fishhook cactus, but we do not currently
know whether such changes will have a net positive or negative effect
on its viability.
Using the SSA framework, we have carefully assessed the best
scientific and commercial information available regarding the past,
present, and future threats to Tobusch fishhook cactus to consider what
the subspecies needs to maintain viability. We have determined that
Tobusch fishhook cactus is currently no longer in danger of extinction,
because it has larger, more numerous populations that are much more
widely distributed than we previously understood, and therefore the
subspecies has greater resilience, redundancy, and representation.
Nevertheless, it is likely to become endangered within the foreseeable
future because the following threats have not been fully ameliorated
and are expected to continue into the foreseeable future: Habitat
destruction and modification due to changes in vegetation and wildfire
frequency (Factor A), insect parasites and feral hog rooting (Factor
C), and the demographic and genetic consequences of small population
sizes and densities (Factor E). In the SSA Report, we projected what
the future viability of Tobusch fishhook cactus could be using the
timeframe 2050 to 2074. This is the same timeframe that has been used
to project future climate conditions for Edwards County, Texas (U.S.
Geological Survey 2015), and although climate change is not likely a
direct stressor to Tobusch fishhook cactus viability, the effects from
climate change on the threats to Tobusch fishhook cactus are likely to
impact the future viability of the species. We used the National
Climate Change Viewer (NCCV; U.S. Geological Survey 2015) to compare
past and projected future climate conditions. The baseline for
comparison was the observed mean values from 1950 through 2005, and 30
climate models were used to project future conditions. The NCCV
generates projections for three timeframes: 2025 to 2049, 2050 to 2074,
and 2075 to 2099. We chose the intermediate timeframe of 2050 to 2074
for our projections of the species status in the foreseeable future
because relatively few changes may be apparent in the earlier
timeframe, and projection uncertainty is greatest in the later
timeframe.
Below we present our analysis of threats to Tobusch fishhook
cactus. For a complete discussion of all threats, including those
considered significant at the time of listing and those considered
potential future threats, please refer to the SSA Report (Service
2016).
Changes in Vegetation and Wildfire Frequency (Factor A)
Bray (1904, pp. 14-15, 23-24) documented the rapid transition of
grasslands to woodlands in the Edwards Plateau occurring more than a
century ago; he attributed this change to overgrazing, the depletion of
grasses, and the cessation of wildfires. Fonteyn et al. (1988, p. 79)
state that savannas covered portions of the pre-settlement Edwards
Plateau, and since 1850 were transformed to shrubland or woodland
``primarily by suppression of recurring natural and anthropogenic fires
and the introduction of livestock.'' They list the fire-sensitive Ashe
juniper (Juniperus ashei) as the most successful of many woody plants
that have invaded grasslands. Reemts (2014 p. 1) lists the encroachment
of woody plants into the rocky, open habitat as one of several
remaining habitat-related threats that endanger Tobusch fishhook
cactus. In synthesis, unlike the mountainous conifer forests of the
arid southwest, where fire frequency has increased, in the Edwards
Plateau of Texas, poor rangeland management depleted the grass and forb
cover, and the lack of fine fuels reduced the incidence of wildfire.
Juniper trees that were formerly limited by relatively frequent
wildfires have now greatly increased in abundance and cover, and the
proportion of ground that is shaded has increased. Since Tobusch
fishhook cactus thrives in full sun, but does not tolerate dense shade,
these changes in vegetation cover, wildfire frequency, and juniper
cover threaten this cactus. Replacement of a diverse shrub and forb
community with monocultural (growth of a single plant species) stands
of juniper also reduces pollinator populations, which in turn may
reduce reproduction of Tobusch fishhook cactus and gene flow between
colonies (Service 2017, p. 37). We expect these threats to continue at
least through the 2050 to 2074 projection period (described above),
which we define as the foreseeable future for this threat.
Vegetation and fire frequency may also be influenced by climate
changes. The means of 30 climate models project increasing temperatures
for the Edwards Plateau of Texas over the 2050 to 2074 projection
period (U.S. Geological Survey 2015). However, these models do not
simulate well the projected patterns of regional precipitation (IPCC
2013, p. 11). Average precipitation may increase or decrease, seasonal
rainfall patterns may change, and annual variation in rainfall may
increase. Consequently, we do not know what the net effect of climate
changes will be on vegetation and wildfire frequency nor how these
changes might affect the viability of Tobusch fishhook cactus.
Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes (Factor B)
The listing of Tobusch fishhook cactus as an endangered species (44
FR 64736) included collection from wild populations for the commercial
cactus trade as a threat to the species. Subsequently, we have detected
very little evidence of illicit collection from wild populations; this
potential threat has not substantively affected the species survival.
Insect Parasites (Factor C)
The Tobusch fishhook cactus weevil (Gerstaeckeria spp.) and cactus
longhorn beetle (Moneilema spp.) parasitize and kill Tobusch fishhook
cactus plants. Populations of these parasites increase rapidly in
large, dense cactus colonies and have caused drastic declines in many
of the larger populations (Calvert 2003, entire). Conversely, since the
parasites are flightless, smaller, widely dispersed colonies may be
less susceptible to parasite infestation. Periodic outbreaks of insect
parasitism appear to be an unavoidable natural cycle that may
exacerbate population declines from other causes, and currently there
are no management practices to prevent or minimize insect parasitism.
Therefore, this threat remains unabated, and we expect it will continue
at least through the foreseeable future (described above), which we
define as the foreseeable future for this threat.
Other Herbivory (Factor C)
The incidence of herbivory by jackrabbits, rodents, and other
native herbivores on Tobusch fishhook cactus is relatively minor (Poole
and Birnbaum (2003, pp. 11-12). However, introduced feral hogs are
abundant throughout the subspecies' range and have damaged and
destroyed Tobusch fishhook cactus individuals and habitats in many
sites (Reemts 2015, p. 1). Feral hog populations remain undiminished in
Texas despite active hunting and trapping efforts. Therefore, this
threat remains unabated, and we expect it will continue at least
through the 2050 to 2074 projection period (described above), which we
define as the foreseeable future for this threat.
[[Page 22398]]
The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms (Factor D)
Only a very small fraction of the potential habitat of Tobusch
fishhook cactus occurs on state parks or other public lands where the
habitat could be directly managed through regulatory mechanisms.
Regulatory mechanisms cannot ensure habitat management and species
conservation on the great majority of the species habitats that occur
on privately owned land. Thus the habitat-related threats and feral hog
issues described above are anticipated to continue to impact the
species regardless of existing regulatory mechanisms.
Demographic and Genetic Consequences of Small Population Size and
Density (Factor E)
Small populations are less able to recover from losses caused by
random environmental changes (Shaffer and Stein 2000, pp. 308-310),
such as fluctuations in recruitment (demographic stochasticity),
variations in rainfall (environmental stochasticity), or changes in the
frequency of wildfires. Poole and Birnbaum (2003, p. 1) estimated a
minimum viable population (MVP) size of 1,200 individuals for Tobusch
fishhook cactus (Service 2016, section II.7.5, available at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2016-0130). Since the
subspecies has a predominantly out-crossing breeding system, the
probability of successful fertilization between unrelated individuals
is reduced in small, isolated populations. The remaining plants would
produce fewer viable seeds, further reducing population recruitment and
engendering a downward spiral toward extirpation. The demographic
consequences of small population size are compounded by genetic
consequences, because reduced out-crossing corresponds to increased
inbreeding. In addition to population size, it is likely that
population density within metapopulations also influences population
viability; density must be high enough for gene flow within
metapopulations, but low enough to minimize parasite infestations.
Small, reproductively isolated populations are also susceptible to the
loss of genetic diversity, to genetic drift (random fluctuations in the
numbers of gene variants), and to inbreeding. The loss of genetic
diversity is likely to cause a loss of fitness and lower chance of
survival of populations and of the subspecies. Genetic drift may also
cause the loss of genetic diversity in small populations. Inbreeding
depression is the loss of fitness among offspring of closely related
individuals. Rayamajhi (2015, pp. 63-64) found relatively high
inbreeding coefficients in three of eight populations, which he
attributed to mating of close relatives within small, isolated
populations. We conclude that small population sizes, low densities,
and isolation of populations threaten the survival of Tobusch fishhook
cactus. We expect that abatement of these threats could not be overcome
for one or more lifespans. Tobusch fishhook cactus is able to reproduce
after about 10 years, and may live 50 years or more. Therefore, we
define the foreseeable future for this threat to be a period of about
50 years.
Determination
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and its implementing
regulations (50 CFR part 424) set forth the procedures for determining
whether a species meets the definition of ``endangered species'' or
``threatened species.'' The Act defines an ``endangered species'' as a
species that is ``in danger of extinction throughout all or a
significant portion of its range,'' and a ``threatened species'' as a
species that is ``likely to become an endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its
range.'' The Act requires that we determine whether a species meets the
definition of ``endangered species'' or ``threatened species'' because
of any of the following factors:
(A) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) Overutilization for
commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes; (C)
Disease or predation; (D) The inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms; or (E) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its
continued existence. The same factors apply whether we are analyzing
the species' status throughout all of its range or throughout a
significant portion of its range.
On July 1, 2014, we published a final policy interpreting the
phrase ``significant portion of its range'' (SPR) (79 FR 37578) (SPR
Policy). Aspects of that policy were vacated for species that occur in
Arizona by the United States District Court for the District of
Arizona. CBD v. Jewell, No. CV-14-02506-TUC-RM (Mar. 29, 2017),
clarified by the court, Mar. 29, 2017. Since the Tobusch fishhook
cactus does not occur in Arizona, for this finding we rely on the SPR
Policy, and also provide additional explanation and support for our
interpretation of the SPR phrase. In our policy, we interpret the
phrase ``significant portion of its range'' in the Act's definitions of
``endangered species'' and ``threatened species'' to provide an
independent basis for listing a species in its entirety; thus there are
two situations (or factual bases) under which a species would qualify
for listing: A species may be in danger of extinction or likely to
become so in the foreseeable future throughout all of its range; or a
species may be in danger of extinction or likely to become so
throughout a significant portion of its range. If a species is in
danger of extinction throughout an SPR, it, the species, is an
``endangered species.'' The same analysis applies to ``threatened
species.''
Our final policy addresses the consequences of finding that a
species is in danger of extinction in an SPR, and interprets what would
constitute an SPR. The final policy includes four elements: (1) If a
species is found to be endangered or threatened throughout a
significant portion of its range, the entire species is listed as an
endangered species 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 endangered or threatened 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 endangered or threatened 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 applies to analyses for all status determinations,
including listing, delisting, and reclassification determinations. As
described in the first element of our policy, once the Service
determines that a ``species''--which can include a species, subspecies,
or distinct population segment (DPS)--meets the definition of
``endangered species'' or ``threatened species,'' the species must be
listed in its entirety and the Act's protections applied consistently
to all individuals of the species wherever found (subject to
modification of protections through special rules under sections 4(d)
and 10(j) of the Act).
For the second element, the policy sets out the procedure for
analyzing
[[Page 22399]]
whether any portion is an SPR; the procedure is similar, regardless of
the type of status determination we are making. The first step in our
assessment of the status of a species is to determine its status
throughout all of its range. We subsequently examine whether, in light
of the species' status throughout all of its range, it is necessary to
determine its status throughout a significant portion 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 is required. The policy explains in detail the bases for this
conclusion--including that this process ensures that the SPR language
provides an independent basis for listing; maximizes the flexibility of
the Service to provide protections for the species; and eliminates the
potential confusion is a species could meet the definitions of both
``endangered species'' and ``threatened species'' based on its statuses
throughout its range and in a significant portion of its range. See,
e.g., SPR Policy, 79 FR at 37580-81.
We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial
information available regarding the past, present, and future threats
to Tobusch fishhook cactus. Based on the analysis in the SSA, and
information summarized above, we have determined that Tobusch fishhook
cactus' current viability is higher than was known at the time of
listing, and we believe that Tobusch fishhook cactus is not in danger
of extinction throughout all of its range. However, due to continued
threats from the demographic and genetic consequences of small
population sizes and geographic isolation, insect parasitism, feral hog
depredation, and changes in the wildfire cycle and vegetation, as well
as unknown long-term effects of land use changes and climate changes,
we find that Tobusch fishhook cactus is likely to become an endangered
subspecies within the foreseeable future throughout all of its range.
Consistent with our interpretation that there are two independent
bases for listing species as described above, after examining the
status of Tobusch fishhook cactus throughout all of its range, we now
examine whether it is necessary to determine its status throughout a
significant portion of its range. Per our final SPR policy, we must
give operational effect to both the ``throughout all'' of its range
language and the SPR phrase in the definitions of ``endangered
species'' and ``threatened species.'' As discussed earlier and in
greater detail in the SPR Policy, we have concluded that to give
operational effect to both the ``throughout all'' language and the SPR
phrase, the Service should conduct an SPR analysis if (and only if) a
species does not warrant listing according to the ``throughout all''
language.
Because we found that Tobusch fishhook cactus is likely to become
endangered in the foreseeable future throughout all of its range, per
our Service's Significant Portion of its Range (SPR) Policy (79 FR
37578, July 1, 2014), no portion of its range can be significant for
purposes of the definitions of endangered species and threatened
species. We therefore do not need to conduct an analysis of whether
there is any significant portion of its range where the species is in
danger of extinction or likely to become so in the foreseeable future.
Therefore, on the basis of the best available scientific and
commercial information, we are reclassifying Tobusch fishhook cactus as
a threatened species in accordance with sections 3(6) and 4(a)(1) of
the Act.
Under the Act and its implementing regulations, a determination
that a species is endangered or threatened also requires the Secretary,
to the maximum extent prudent, to specify any habitat of such species
which is considered to be critical habitat. The determination that it
would not be prudent to designate critical habitat for Tobusch fishhook
cactus that was made at the time the plant was listed as an endangered
species remains true (44 FR 64737, November 7, 1979). Publication of
critical habitat maps and cactus population locations increases the
plants' vulnerability to collection from areas not under Federal
jurisdiction, an activity that is not prohibited for plants under the
Act. While there has been no recent evidence of collection of this
species, collection is a threat to most cactus species, and is likely
to increase if population sites are publicized. Given the predominance
of private land ownership patterns for Tobusch fishhook cactus
habitats, collection still may become a threat in the foreseeable
future.
Available Conservation Measures
Conservation measures provided to species listed as endangered or
threatened species under the Act include recognition, recovery actions,
requirements for Federal protection, and prohibitions against certain
practices. Recognition through listing results in public awareness, and
conservation by Federal, State, Tribal, and local agencies, private
organizations, and individuals. The Act encourages cooperation with the
States and requires that recovery actions be carried out for all listed
species. The protection required by Federal agencies and the
prohibitions against certain activities are discussed, in part, below.
The primary purpose of the Act is the conservation of endangered
and threatened species and the ecosystems upon which they depend. The
ultimate goal of such conservation efforts is the recovery of these
listed species, so that they no longer need the protective measures of
the Act. Subsection 4(f) of the Act requires the Service to develop and
implement recovery plans for the conservation of endangered and
threatened species. The recovery planning process involves the
identification of actions that are necessary to halt or reverse the
species' decline by addressing the threats to its survival and
recovery. The goal of this process is to restore listed species to a
point where they are secure, self-sustaining, and functioning
components of their ecosystems.
Revisions of the plan may be done to address continuing or new
threats to the species, as new substantive information becomes
available. The current Tobusch fishhook cactus recovery plan was
approved by the Service on March 18, 1987 (Service 1987). As a result
of this reclassification, a revision of the plan is planned to address
continuing threats to the subspecies, and will also establish delisting
criteria. When completed, a revised draft and final recovery plan will
be available on our website (http://www.fws.gov/endangered) or from our
Austin Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT).
Implementation of recovery actions generally requires the
participation of a broad range of partners, including other Federal
agencies, States, Tribal, nongovernmental organizations, businesses,
and private landowners. Examples of recovery actions include habitat
restoration (e.g., restoration of native vegetation), research, captive
propagation and reintroduction, and outreach and education. The
recovery of many listed species cannot be accomplished solely on
Federal lands because their range may occur primarily or solely on non-
Federal lands. To achieve recovery of these species requires
cooperative conservation efforts on private, State, and Tribal lands.
Following publication of this final reclassification rule, funding
for recovery actions will continue to be available from a variety of
sources, including Federal budgets, State programs, and cost share
grants for non-Federal landowners, the academic
[[Page 22400]]
community, and nongovernmental organizations. In addition, pursuant to
section 6 of the Act, the State of Texas will continue to be eligible
for Federal funds to implement management actions that promote the
protection or recovery of Tobusch fishhook cactus. Information on our
grant programs that are available to aid species recovery can be found
at: http://www.fws.gov/grants.
Please let us know if you are interested in participating in
recovery efforts for Tobusch fishhook cactus. Additionally, we invite
you to submit any new information on this subspecies whenever it
becomes available and any information you may have for recovery
planning purposes (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Section 7(a) of the Act requires Federal agencies to evaluate their
actions with respect to any species that is listed as an endangered or
threatened species and with respect to its critical habitat, if any is
designated. Regulations implementing this interagency cooperation
provision of the Act are codified at 50 CFR part 402. Section 7(a)(2)
of the Act requires Federal agencies to ensure that activities they
authorize, fund, or carry out are not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or destroy
or adversely modify its critical habitat. If a Federal action may
affect a listed species or its critical habitat, the responsible
Federal agency must enter into consultation with the Service.
Federal agency actions within the species' habitat that may require
conference or consultation or both, as described in the preceding
paragraph, include management and any other landscape-altering
activities related to the issuance of section 404 Clean Water Act
permits by the Army Corps of Engineers, and construction and
maintenance of roads or highways by the Federal Highway Administration.
With respect to threatened plants, 50 CFR 17.71 provides that all
of the provisions in 50 CFR 17.61 shall apply to threatened plants.
These provisions make it illegal for any person subject to the
jurisdiction of the United States to import or export, transport in
interstate or foreign commerce in the course of a commercial activity,
sell or offer for sale in interstate or foreign commerce, or to remove
and reduce to possession any such plant species from areas under
Federal jurisdiction. In addition, the Act prohibits malicious damage
or destruction of any such species on any area under Federal
jurisdiction, and the removal, cutting, digging up, or damaging or
destroying of any such species on any other area in knowing violation
of any State law or regulation, or in the course of any violation of a
State criminal trespass law. However, there is the following exception
for threatened plants: Seeds of cultivated specimens of species treated
as threatened shall be exempt from all the provisions of 50 CFR 17.61,
provided that a statement that the seeds are of ``cultivated origin''
accompanies the seeds or their container during the course of any
activity otherwise subject to these regulations. Exceptions to these
prohibitions are outlined in 50 CFR 17.72.
We may issue permits to carry out otherwise prohibited activities
involving threatened plants under certain circumstances. Regulations
governing permits are codified at 50 CFR 17.72. With regard to
threatened plants, a permit issued under this section must be for one
of the following: Scientific purposes, the enhancement of the
propagation or survival of threatened species, economic hardship,
botanical or horticultural exhibition, educational purposes, or other
activities consistent with the purposes and policy of the Act.
It is our policy, as published in the Federal Register on July 1,
1994 (59 FR 34272), to identify to the maximum extent practicable at
the time a species is listed, those activities that would or would not
constitute a violation of section 9 of the Act. The intent of this
policy is to increase public awareness of the effect of a final listing
on proposed and ongoing activities within the range of a listed
species. Based on the best available information, the following actions
are unlikely to result in a violation of section 9, if these activities
are carried out in accordance with existing regulations and permit
requirements; this list is not comprehensive:
(1) Normal agricultural and silvicultural practices, including
herbicide and pesticide use, which are carried out in accordance with
any existing regulations, permit and label requirements, and best
management practices; and
(2) Normal residential landscape activities.
Questions regarding whether specific activities would constitute a
violation of section 9 of the Act should be directed to the Austin
Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Effects of the Rule
This final rule revises 50 CFR 17.12(h) to reclassify Tobusch
fishhook cactus from endangered to threatened on the Federal List of
Endangered and Threatened Plants, and changes the scientific name from
Ancistrocactus tobuschii to Sclerocactus brevihamatus ssp. tobuschii.
Because no critical habitat was ever designated for Tobusch fishhook
cactus, this rule will not affect 50 CFR 17.96.
On the effective date of this rule (see DATES, above), the
prohibitions and conservation measures provided by the Act,
particularly through sections 7 and 9, continue to apply to Tobusch
fishhook cactus. Federal agencies are required to consult with the
Service under section 7 of the Act in the event that activities they
authorize, fund, or carry out may affect Tobusch fishhook cactus.
Required Determinations
National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)
We have determined that environmental assessments and environmental
impact statements, as defined under the authority of the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), need not be
prepared in connection with listing a species as an endangered or
threatened species under the Endangered Species Act. We published a
notice outlining our reasons for this determination in the Federal
Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244).
Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes
In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994
(Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal
Governments; 59 FR 22951), Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and
Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments), and the Department of the
Interior's manual at 512 DM 2, we readily acknowledge our
responsibility to communicate meaningfully with recognized Federal
Tribes on a government-to-government basis. In accordance with
Secretarial Order 3206 of June 5, 1997 (American Indian Tribal Rights,
Federal-Tribal Trust Responsibilities, and the Endangered Species Act),
we readily acknowledge our responsibilities to work directly with
tribes in developing programs for healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge
that tribal lands are not subject to the same controls as Federal
public lands, to remain sensitive to Indian culture, and to make
information available to tribes.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited in this rulemaking is
available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov
[[Page 22401]]
and upon request from the Austin Ecological Services Field Office (see
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authors
The primary authors of this final rule are the staff members of the
Austin Ecological Services Field Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(see ADDRESSES).
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.
Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50
of the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below:
PART 17--ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS
0
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 1531-1544; and 4201-4245;
unless otherwise noted.
0
2. Amend Sec. 17.12(h) by removing the entry for ``Ancistrocactus
tobuschii'' and adding the following entry to the List of Endangered
and Threatened Plants in alphabetical order under Flowering Plants:
Sec. 17.12 Endangered and threatened plants.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Listing citations and
Scientific name Common name Where listed Status applicable rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flowering Plants
* * * * * * *
Sclerocactus brevihamatus ssp. Tobusch fishhook Wherever found.... T 44 FR 64736, 11/7/1979;
tobuschii. cactus. 83 FR [Insert Federal
Register page where
the document begins],
5/15/2018.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dated: April 20, 2018.
James W. Kurth,
Deputy Director Exercising the Authority of the Director, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-10206 Filed 5-14-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P