[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 249 (Wednesday, December 29, 1999)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 72993-73003]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-33781]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
RIN 1018-AF86
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposed
Endangered Status for Ambrosia pumila (San Diego Ambrosia) from
Southern California
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, propose to list
Ambrosia pumila (San Diego ambrosia) as endangered under the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). This plant is restricted to San
Diego and Riverside Counties, California and Baja California, Mexico,
from Colonet to Lake Chapala. Ambrosia pumila is primarily restricted
to flat or sloping grasslands, often along valley bottoms or areas
adjacent to vernal pools. This species is threatened by the following;
destruction, fragmentation, and degradation of habitat by recreational
and commercial development; highway construction and maintenance;
construction and maintenance activities associated with a utility
easement; competition from non-native plants; trampling by horses and
humans; off-road vehicle (ORV) use; and inadequate regulatory
mechanisms. This proposed rule, if made final, would extend protection
under the Act to Ambrosia pumila.
DATES: Comments from all interested parties must be received by
February 28, 2000. Requests for public hearings must be received by
February 14, 2000.
ADDRESSES: If you wish to comment, you may submit your comments and
[[Page 72994]]
materials concerning this proposal by any one of several methods.
You may submit written comments to the Deputy Field Supervisor,
Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2730
Loker Avenue West, Carlsbad, California 92008.
You may send comments by e-mail to ambrosia__pr@fws.gov. Please
submit these comments as an ASCII file and avoid the use of special
characters and any form of encryption. Please also include ``Attn: [RIN
number]'' and your name and return address in your e-mail message. If
you do not receive a confirmation from the system that we have received
your e-mail message, contact us directly by calling our Carlsbad Fish
and Wildlife Office at phone number 760-431-9440.
You may hand-deliver comments to our Carlsbad office at 2730 Loker
Avenue West, Carlsbad, California.
Comments and materials received, as well as supporting
documentation used in the preparation of this proposed rule, will be
available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal business
hours at the above address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary D. Wallace, Botanist, at the
above address (telephone 760/431-9440; facsimile 760/918-0638).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Ambrosia is a genus of 35 to 50 wind-pollinated species of annuals
and perennials in the Asteraceae (sunflower) family. The perennial taxa
range from woody shrubs to herbaceous rhizomatous (possessing
underground stems) taxa. Payne (1976) notes that self-pollination and
self-fertility contribute strong inbreeding, as does seed longevity.
Members of the genus occur predominantly in the Western Hemisphere,
especially North America. Species are generally found in arid or
semiarid areas.
Ambrosia pumila (San Diego ambrosia), was originally described as
Franseria pumila by Thomas Nuttall (Nuttall 1840) based on a specimen
he collected near San Diego in 1836. Delpino (1871) transferred the
species to another genus he erected based on a character of the fruit
and published the combination Hemiambrosia pumila (Nutt.) Delpino. Asa
Gray (1882), after seeing specimens of the plant with fruits, decided
it was closely related to members of the genus Ambrosia and published
the currently accepted combination, Ambrosia pumila (Nutt.) A. Gray.
This has been recognized by current systematic and floristic treatments
(Payne 1963; Munz 1935, 1974; Munz and Keck 1959; Ferris 1960;
Beauchamp 1986; Payne 1993).
Ambrosia pumila is an herbaceous perennial arising from a branched
system of rhizome-like roots. This rhizomatous perennial habit results
in groupings of aerial stems, often termed clones, that are, or at
least were at one time, all attached to one another. References to
clones derive from the presence of currently separated specimens whose
interconnections have degenerated leaving genetically identical but
organically separate individuals. The aerial stems sprout in early
spring after the winter rains and deteriorate in late summer.
Therefore, the plant may not be evident from late summer to early
spring. The aerial stems are 0.5 to 3 decimeter (dm) (2 to 12 inches
(in)) rarely to 5 dm (20 in) tall and densely covered with short hairs.
The leaves are 3 to 4 times pinnately divided into many small segments
and are covered with short soft, gray-white, appressed hairs. This
species is monoecious, with separate male and female flowers on the
same plant, and is wind-pollinated. The male flower clusters (heads)
are borne on terminal racemes, and the female flower clusters (heads)
are in the axils of the leaves below the male inflorescences. The
fruiting heads are enclosed by cup-like structures that have no spines,
although some reports note a few vestigial spines. Ambrosia pumila may
be distinguished from other species of Ambrosia in the area by its
leaves which are twice divided, involucres (cup-like structures)
lacking hooked spines, and lack of longer stiff hairs on the stems and
leaves. This species flowers from May through October.
Several factors make it difficult to determine the extent of an
individual plant. The species is rhizomatous, plants produce a few to
many aerial stems each year, the rhizomatous connections among the
aerial stems may deteriorate over time resulting in physically separate
but genetically identical individuals, and plants may have
intermingling rhizomes resulting in intermixed aerial stems that appear
identical. Because this species is a clonal plant, the numbers of
genetically different individuals in an occurrence, especially small
occurrences, could be very low. It is possible that an occurrence that
supports even 1,000 aerial stems may consist of very few plants. This
suggests that the low genetic diversity within the smaller occurrences
may relegate these occurrences to extinction (Barrett & Kohn 1991).
Seven of the 13 extant occurrences fall into this category of
reportedly supporting 1,000 or fewer aerial stems. It is also possible
that even the largest reported number of aerial stems (10,000) may
represent fewer than 100 plants. Some surveys have reported numbers of
plants, when in fact, only numbers of aerial stems have been counted,
and the actual number of separate plants is not determinable (CNDDB
1999).
Ambrosia pumila is found on upper terraces of rivers and drainages
as well as in open grasslands, openings in coastal sage scrub habitat,
and dry lake beds. The species may also be found in disturbed sites
such as fuel breaks and roadways. Associated native plant taxa include
Distichlis spicata (saltgrass), Orcuttia californica (California Orcutt
grass), Baccharis salicifolia (Mule-fat), and Eremocarpus setigerus
(Turkey-mullein). Populations of Ambrosia pumila occur on Federal,
State, local government, and private lands in western San Diego County,
western Riverside County, and in the northern state of Baja California,
Estado de Baja California, Mexico.
This species has been reported from 49 occurrences in the United
States (CNDDB 1999). Four were combined with other occurrences, six
were based on misidentified specimens, and two that were based on old
collections have not been documented since 1936 (CNDDB 1999). Three
occurrences consist of transplanted plants from other occurrences that
were subsequently partially or totally eliminated (CNDDB 1999). There
are, therefore, 34 verifiable native reported occurrences of this
species. Twenty of these have been extirpated since the 1930's, nearly
all by commercial development and activities associated with highway
construction. One occurrence, with a single stem in 1996, is considered
non-viable due to the small size of the occurrence and the high level
of disturbance of the site (CNDDB 1999). Subtracting this non-viable
occurrence, there are currently 13 extant native occurrences of this
species. Two recent occurrences (CNDDB 1999; T. Stewart, CDFG in
litt.1999) are incorporated here into previously known occurrences.
Eleven occurrences are in San Diego County, and two are in western
Riverside County.
San Diego County
In San Diego County, two occurrences are protected on the
Sweetwater River watershed in the recently established San Diego
National Wildlife Refuge (SDNWR). One of these was reported to be 0.6
hectares (ha) (0.25 acres(ac)) in size in 1996, and 0.15 ha (0.06 ac)
in 1998 (Julie Vanderwier, USFWS in litt.1998). Numbers of aerial stems
have
[[Page 72995]]
not been reported in the various surveys of this site. The 1998 survey
indicated an unknown number of stems at this site and additionally a
few plants nearby to the northeast. These few plants are included here
in the earlier known occurrence. The second occurrence on the San Diego
National Wildlife Refuge was reported to support 50 plants in 1996. It
must be pointed out that throughout this discussion reports that
include numbers of ``plants'' are, in fact, indicating only the numbers
of aerial stems. It is not possible to determine the extent of a single
genetically distinct plant from the numbers of aerial stems because a
plant may consist of numerous aerial stems produced by interconnected
underground rhizomes. These rhizomes may deteriorate over time,
resulting in physically separate but genetically identical plants. A
survey in 1998 (Vanderwier in litt.1998) reported that this site
covered 0.07 ha (0.03 ac). This same survey discovered a large number
of individuals just to the northeast in a 0.7-ha (1.75-ac) site,
considered here as an extension of the second occurrence. Another
occurrence on the Sweetwater River watershed is in El Cajon on a 0.02-
ha (0.06-ac) vacant lot owned by California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans) which supported 10,000 stems in 1997
(Vanderwier in litt.1997). In 1998 an additional occurrence was found
in El Cajon on a group of vacant lots of 1.9 ha (4.8 ac) supporting
6,500 plants (aerial stems) (CNDDB 1999).
Three occurrences occur on the San Diego River watershed. The
largest one is in Mission Trails Regional Park (MTRP) managed by the
City of San Diego, and on adjacent private land. That portion of the
occurrence on MTRP land managed by the City of San Diego occupies 13.6
ha (34 ac) and supported 1,500 stems in 1994. The adjacent private
lands portion of this occurrence is afforded protections under the City
of San Diego's Subarea Plan of the Multiple Species Conservation
Program (MSCP) (City of San Diego 1997). The second occurrence on the
San Diego River watershed and also in MTRP supports an unknown number
of individuals (CNDDB 1999). Both occurrences in MTRP are afforded
protected under provisions of City of San Diego's Subarea Plan (City of
San Diego 1997). The third occurrence on the San Diego River watershed
occurs at Gillespie Field, where there are small remnants of native
populations scattered near the south side of the airfield. The current
status of these remnants is unknown.
The four remaining occurrences in San Diego County may eventually
be protected under provisions of the Multiple Habitats Conservation
Program (MHCP) or the City of San Diego's north segment MSCP Subarea
Plan. Three are small occurrences on the San Luis Rey River watershed
near Bonsall--1) Some plants are presumed extant in a fenced area on
Caltrans lands, and some are on private land. However, the current
number of aerial stems or the area of this occurrence is not known; (2)
Another occurrence in the area is 2.6 ha (6.6 ac) in size and supported
about 700 plants (aerial stems) in 1996; and (3) the third occurrence
on the San Luis Rey River watershed is on jointly private and Caltrans-
owned lands near Bonsall and reportedly supported 2,000 to 3,000 plants
(aerial stems) in 1997 (CNDDB 1999). The remaining extant occurrence in
San Diego County is on the San Dieguito River watershed. The privately
owned site is 31.7 ha (79.2 ac) in size and reportedly supported 2,000
stems in 1997 (CNDDB 1999). Recent site visits found fewer than 100
stems in an area less than 0.4 ha (1 ac) (Wallace in litt. 1999). The
area is degraded and immediately adjacent to a bulldozed area of a
development (Wallace in litt. 1999).
Riverside County
Two occurrences are known from Riverside County on privately owned
lands. One occurrence along Nichols Road, Lake Elsinore supported an
estimated 3,400 stems in 1997, and another occurrence at a fenced
mitigation bank area at Skunk Hollow supported about 100-300 stems in
1998 (Brenda McMillan USFWS in litt.1999).
Baja California, Mexico
The current documented range of Ambrosia pumila in Baja California,
Mexico extends from Colonet south to Lake Chapala. Two of the three
documented sites were confirmed by Hogan and Burrascano (1996).
Although additional occurrences may exist in Baja California, the
species is not considered to be widespread because of lack of
appropriate habitat and impacts from agriculture and urban development,
especially near the coast.
Previous Federal Action
Federal Government action on this species began as a result of
section 12 of the Act, which directed the Secretary of the Smithsonian
Institution to prepare a report on those plants considered to be
threatened, endangered, or extinct in the United States. This report,
designated House Document No. 94-51 was presented to Congress on
January 9, 1975. (Ambrosia pumila was not included in this document). A
revision of the Smithsonian report (Ayensu and DeFilipps 1978) provided
new lists based on additional data on taxonomy, geographic range, and
endangered status of taxa, as well as suggestions of taxa to be
included or deleted from the earlier listing. Ambrosia pumila, not
included in the first Smithsonian report, was recommended for
threatened status in the Ayensu and DeFilipps (1978) report. We
published an updated Notice of Review of plants on December 15, 1980
(45 FR 82479). This notice included Ambrosia pumila as a category 1
candidate. Category 1 candidates were taxa for which we had sufficient
information on biological vulnerability and threats to support
preparation of listing proposals.
Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act requires the Secretary to make
findings on petitions within 12 months of their receipt. Section
2(b)(1) of the 1982 amendments further requires that all petitions
pending on October 13, 1982, be treated as having been newly submitted
on that date. This was the case for Ambrosia pumila because the 1978
Smithsonian report (Ayensu and DeFilipps 1978) had been accepted as a
petition. On October 13, 1983, we found that the petitioned listing of
this species was warranted but precluded by other pending listing
actions, in accordance with section 4(b)(3)(B)(iii) of the Act.
Notification of this finding was published in the Federal Register on
January 20, 1984 (49 FR 2485). Such a finding requires the petition to
be recycled annually, pursuant to section 4(b)(3)(C)(i) of the Act. On
November 28, 1983, we published a supplement (48 FR 53639) to the
December 15, 1980, Notice of Review of plant taxa for listing. The
status of Ambrosia pumila was changed to category 2. Category 2
candidates were taxa for which information then in our possession
indicated that proposing to list the taxa as endangered or threatened
was possibly appropriate, but for which substantial data on biological
vulnerability and threats were not currently known or on file to
support proposed rules. The status of Ambrosia pumila remained
unchanged through, and including, the Notice of Review we published in
the Federal Register on September 30, 1993 (58 FR 51143). On February
28, 1996, we published in the Federal Register (61 FR 7595) a Notice of
Review of plant and animal taxa that are candidates for listing as
endangered or threatened. In that notice we announced changes to the
way that we identify species that are candidates for listing under the
Act, and we
[[Page 72996]]
discontinued maintenance of a list of species that were previously
identified as ``category 2 candidates.'' Thus, as a category 2
candidate, Ambrosia pumila was not included in the February 28, 1996,
Notice of Review.
On January 9, 1997, we received a petition dated November 12, 1996,
from Mr. David Hogan of the Southwest Center for Biodiversity and Ms.
Cindy Burrascano of the California Native Plant Society, San Diego
Chapter, requesting that Ambrosia pumila (San Diego ambrosia) be listed
as endangered pursuant to section 4 of the Act. Additionally, the
petition appealed for emergency listing pursuant to section 4(b)(7) of
the Act. The petitioners further requested that critical habitat be
designated for Ambrosia pumila concurrent with the listing pursuant to
50 CFR 424.12 and the Administrative Procedures Act 50 U.S.C. 5.53. On
January 23, 1997, we notified the petitioners that we received their
petition and that their petition would be processed based on the
listing priority guidance then in effect.
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires that we make a finding on
whether a petition presents substantial information indicating that the
action may be warranted. To the maximum extent practicable, this
finding should be made within 90 days of the receipt of the petition
and it should be published promptly in the Federal Register. If we
determine that listing the species may be warranted, section 4(b)(3)(B)
of the Act requires us to make a finding within 12 months of the date
of the receipt of the petition on whether the petitioned action is (a)
not warranted, (b) warranted, or (c) warranted but precluded from
immediate proposal by other pending proposals of higher priority.
However, because of budgetary restraints, we processed petitions in
accordance with the 1997 listing priority guidance published in the
Federal Register on December 5, 1996 (61 FR 64475). This guidance
identified four tiers of listing activities to be conducted by us with
appropriate funds. Tier 1, the highest priority, covered emergency
listings of species facing an imminent risk of extinction as defined
under the emergency listing provisions of section (4)(b)(7) of the Act.
Tier 2, the second priority, included processing of final
determinations for species currently proposed for listing. Tier 3, the
third priority, addressed efforts under the Act to resolve the
conservation status of candidate species and process administrative
findings on petitions to add species to the lists or reclassify
threatened species to endangered status. Tier 4, the lowest priority,
covered the processing of critical habitat determinations, delisting
actions, and reclassification of endangered species to threatened
status. Under the priority system and because of the backlog of species
proposed for listing and awaiting final listing determinations at that
time, we deferred action on listing petitions except where an emergency
existed and where the immediacy of the threat was so great to a
significant portion of the population that the routine listing process
would not be sufficient to prevent large losses that might result in
extinction.
We reviewed the petition and supporting documentation to determine
whether Ambrosia pumila faced a significant risk to its well-being
under the emergency listing provisions of section 4(b)(7) of the Act
(61 FR 64479). On July 15, 1997, we concluded that emergency listing
and the designation of critical habitat were not warranted, and that
the petition should be processed as a Tier 3 priority task pursuant to
the listing priority guidance for fiscal year 1997. A notice published
in the Federal Register (62 FR 55268) on October 23, 1997, announced
the extension of the fiscal year 1997 listing priority guidance until
such time as the fiscal year 1998 appropriation bill for the Department
of the Interior became law and new final guidance was published in the
Federal Register. In this notice there were no changes made in the tier
system.
On October 1, 1997, Southwest Center for Biodiversity and the
California Native Plant Society filed a lawsuit in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of California challenging our
failure to produce timely administrative 90-day and 12-month findings
for Ambrosia pumila.
On May 8, 1998, new listing priority guidance for Fiscal Years 1998
and 1999 was published in the Federal Register (63 FR 10931). This new
guidance changed the four tier priority system to a three tier priority
system. Highest priority, Tier 1, was processing emergency listing
rules for any species determined to face a significant and imminent
risk to its well being. Second priority, Tier 2, was processing final
determinations on pending proposed listings; the processing of new
proposals to add species to the lists; the processing of administrative
petition findings to add species to the lists, and petitions to delist
species, or reclassify listed species (petitions filed under section 4
of the Act); and a limited number of delisting and reclassifying
actions. Lowest priority, Tier 3, was the processing of proposed or
final critical habitat designations. Under that guidance, the
administrative review process for this petition fell under Tier 2. We
published a 90-day finding on the petition to list Ambrosia pumila as
endangered in the Federal Register (64 FR 19108) on April 19, 1999. We
found that substantial information existed indicating listing may be
warranted and solicited comments and information regarding the finding.
However, we did not receive any comments by May 19, 1999, the close of
the comment period. On October 28, 1999, the District Court ordered us
to complete a 12-month finding for Ambrosia pumila on or before
December 10, 1999. This proposed rule constitutes the 12-month finding
on the petition.
The processing of this final rule conforms with our current Listing
Priority Guidance published in the Federal Register on October 22, 1999
(64 FR 57114). The guidance clarifies the order in which we will
process rulemakings. Highest priority is processing emergency listing
rules for any species determined to face a significant and imminent
risk to its well-being (Priority 1). Second priority (Priority 2) is
processing final determinations on proposed additions to the lists of
endangered and threatened wildlife and plants. Third priority is
processing new proposals to add species to the lists. The processing of
administrative petition findings (petitions filed under section 4 of
the Act) is the fourth priority. The processing of critical habitat
determinations (prudency and determinability decisions) and proposed or
final designations of critical habitat will be funded separately from
other section 4 listing actions and will no longer be subject to
prioritization under the Listing Priority Guidance. This final rule is
a Priority 2 action and is being completed in accordance with the
current Listing Priority Guidance.
Peer Review
In accordance with interagency policy published on July 1, 1994 (59
FR 34270), upon publication of this proposed rule in the Federal
Register we will solicit expert reviews by at least three specialists
regarding pertinent scientific or commercial data and assumptions
relating to the taxonomic, biological, and ecological information for
Ambrosia pumila. The purpose of such a review is to ensure that listing
decisions are based on scientifically sound data, assumptions, and
analyses, including the input of appropriate experts.
[[Page 72997]]
Summary of Factors Affecting the Species
Section 4 of the Act and regulations (50 CFR Part 424) issued to
implement the listing provisions of the Act, set forth the procedures
for adding species to the Federal list. We may determine that a species
is endangered or threatened due to one or more of the five factors
described in section 4(a)(1) of the Act. These factors and their
application to Ambrosia pumila (Nutt.) A. Gray are as follows.
A. The present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range. Twenty of the 34 reported native
occurrences of this species have been eliminated by urbanization,
recreational development and highway construction and alteration (CNDDB
1999). Of the remaining 14, one occurrence in a sidewalk crack in
National City, is considered non-viable (CNDDB 1999). Six of the 13
other extant occurrences, including three of the larger (reportedly
supporting more that 1,000 aerial stems) occurrences, are threatened
with habitat destruction associated with highway expansion or
maintenance activities or by maintenance of utility rights of way,
including mowing (CNDDB 1999). One of these is west of the Bonsall
Bridge and reportedly supported 2,000 to 3,000 stems in 1997 (CNDDB).
The two other smaller occurrences near Bonsall are also threatened by
Caltrans highway maintenance and expansion (CNDDB 1999). These are the
only three extant occurrences known within the San Luis Rey watershed.
Two occurrences near El Cajon within the San Diego River watershed,
both reportedly supporting more that 1,000 stems, are likewise
threatened by highway maintenance and highway widening (CNDDB 1999).
The last occurrence threatened by highway expansion or maintenance
activities or utility rights of way maintenance activities is a large
(500 to 1,000 stems reported in 1998) occurrence along Nicols Road in
Riverside County (CNDDB 1999). Two occurrences, both reportedly
supporting more that 1,000 aerial stems have been affected by
recreational development (CNDDB 1999). One of these is within a golf
course under construction near Del Dios. During a recent visit, this
site appeared to be significantly degraded by grading in the immediate
vicinity and less than 100 aerial stems were found on the site which
was less than 0.4 ha (1 ac) in size (Wallace in litt. 1999). The second
occurrence is located within and adjacent to Mission Trails Regional
Park, managed by the City of San Diego, which is required by the
Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP) to conserve and manage 90
percent of the large population on their lands. A 10 percent loss (0.2
ha or 0.05 ac) of this major population of Ambrosia pumila occurred in
1997 for development of a campground facility (CNDDB 1999) and was
allowed under the provisions of the City of San Diego's Subarea Plan
(City of San Diego 1997). If more than a 10 percent loss occurs, the
species will no longer be covered under the provisions of the MSCP
(City of San Diego 1997). It will be possible to verify future losses
and assess indirect effects of these losses when the biological
monitoring and management aspect of the MSCP Subarea Plans are in full
effect. An additional habitat loss for this species was an occurrence
on the San Luis Rey watershed that supported over 1,600 ``plants''
(aerial stems). This loss occurred in spite of an existing agreement
prohibiting impacts to this species (see discussion below regarding San
Diego Gas and Electric under factor D). The site was graded and the
plants extirpated in late 1996. Two other occurrences are threatened by
residential or commercial development. The larger of the two reportedly
supported 6,500 stems in 1998 (CNDDB 1999). This occurrence is on
vacant lots and back yards in a residential area of El Cajon (CNDDB
1999). In Riverside County, one occurrence, near Lake Elsinore, is
threatened by highway expansion activities, the other occurrence at
Skunk Hollow is threatened by indirect impacts associated with
urbanization surrounding the occurrence (CNDDB 1999).
B. Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes. Overutilization is not known to be a factor
affecting Ambrosia pumila at this time. However, rare taxa are favored
by some professional and amateur botanists for their collections or for
trade with other individuals. The potential threat to this species from
overcollection may increase upon publication of this proposed rule.
C. Disease or predation. Disease and predation are not known to be
factors affecting this plant species.
D. The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms. Existing
regulatory mechanisms that could provide some protection for this
species include--(1) Federal laws and regulations including the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Endangered Species Act in
those cases where this species occurs in habitat occupied by other
listed species, and section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act; (2)
State laws, including the Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA), the
California Endangered Species Act (CESA), the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), and section 1603 of the California Fish and Game
Code; (3) regional planning efforts pursuant to the California Natural
Community Conservation Planning Program (NCCP); (4) land acquisition
and management by Federal, State, or local agencies, or by private
groups and organizations; (5) local land use processes and ordinances;
and (6) enforcement of Mexican laws.
Federal Laws and Regulations
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 to
4347) requires disclosure of the environmental effects of projects
within Federal jurisdiction. NEPA requires that each of the project
alternatives recommend ways to protect, restore and enhance the
environment and avoid and minimize any possible adverse effects when
implementation poses significant adverse impacts. NEPA does not,
however, require that the lead agency select an alternative with the
least significant impact to the environment, nor does it prohibit
implementing a proposed action in an environmentally sensitive area (40
CFR 1500 et seq.). Only two of the extant occurrences of Ambrosia
pumila are on Federal lands.
The Federal Endangered Species Act (Act), as amended, may afford
protection to sensitive species if they coexist with species already
listed as threatened or endangered under the Act. A number of federally
listed species occur within the range of Ambrosia pumila and are known
or likely to co-occur with the species. Protection afforded by these
species, however, is minimal due to the lack of significantly
overlapping habitat requirements. These species include Riverside fairy
shrimp (Streptocephalus woottonii), Orcuttia californica (California
Orcutt grass), and Least Bell's vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus), listed
as endangered, and the coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila
californica californica), and Navarretia fossalis (spreading
navarretia), listed as threatened. These species are not known to
consistently co-occur in the same vegetation communities although they
may occur in nearby associated communities.
Conservation provisions under the Clean Water Act could afford some
protection to Ambrosia pumila. Ambrosia pumila could potentially be
affected by projects requiring a permit from the Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) under section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Under
section 404, the Corps regulates the discharge of fill material into
waters of the United States, which
[[Page 72998]]
includes navigable and isolated waters, headwaters, and adjacent
wetlands. Section 404 regulations require that applicants obtain an
individual permit for projects to place fill material affecting greater
than 1.2 ha (3 ac) of waters of the United States. Nationwide Permit 26
(33 CFR part 330, revised on December 20, 1996 (61 FR 65916) was
established by the Department of the Army to facilitate authorization
of discharges of fill into isolated waters (including wetlands and
vernal pools) that cause the loss of less than 1.2 ha (3 ac) of waters
of the United States, and that cause minimal individual and cumulative
environmental impacts. Projects affecting less than 0.1 ha (0.33 ac) of
isolated waters require no prior approval by the Corps. In addition,
other nationwide permits authorize activities that may affect Ambrosia
pumila without prior notification to the corps. Because the
distribution of this species occurs in non-wetland habitat and in
habitats associated with drainages and dry lakebeds, the instances and
extent of protection for this species under section 404 is unclear.
However, there are no specific provisions that adequately conserve rare
or candidate plant species.
Minimal impacts to the occurrences of Ambrosia pumila were incurred
on the San Diego National Wildlife Refuge as a consequence of efforts
to relocate burrowing owls onto the refuge. Throughout the relocation
process, the Ambrosia pumila were considered, and minimal impacts were
limited to an area of approximately eight square meters (9.6 square
yards). Similar relocation efforts will be coordinated to avoid direct
or indirect impacts to Ambrosia pumila. The San Diego National Wildlife
Refuge currently has no specific protections in place to prevent
trampling of the plant by horses and people who traverse one of the
occurrences, nor is there a weed abatement plan for the Ambrosia pumila
sites. However, future management includes abandonment of some trails
and installation of trail signs to direct horses and people away from
the Ambrosia pumila sites (Tom Roster, San Diego National Wildlife
Refuge pers. comm 1999.).
State Laws and Regulation
Although State laws, including CEQA, CESA, and NPPA at times may
provide a measure of protection to the species, these laws are not
adequate to protect the species in all cases. For example, under CEQA
where overriding social and economic considerations can be
demonstrated, a project may go forward even if adverse impacts to a
species are significant.
Ambrosia pumila is included on List 1B of the California Native
Plant Society Inventory (Skinner and Pavlik 1994), which, in accordance
with section 1901, chapter 10 of the California Department of Fish and
Game Code, makes it eligible for State listing. This species is not, as
yet, listed under the California Endangered Species Act.
The California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code,
section 21000 et seq.) pertains to projects on non-Federal lands and
requires that a project proponent publicly disclose the potential
environmental impacts of proposed projects. The public agency with
primary authority or jurisdiction over the project is designated as the
lead agency. The lead agency is responsible for conducting a review of
the project and consulting with other agencies concerned with the
resources affected by the project. Section 15065 of the CEQA Guidelines
requires a finding of significance if a project has the potential to
``reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant
or animal'' including those that are eligible for listing under the
NPPA or CESA. However, as noted above, under CEQA where overriding
social and economic considerations can be demonstrated, a project may
go forward even where adverse impacts to a species are significant.
Regional Planning Efforts
In 1991, the State of California established the NCCP program to
address conservation needs of natural ecosystems throughout the State.
The focus of the current planning program is the coastal sage scrub
community in Southern California, although other vegetative communities
are being addressed in an ecosystem approach. Ambrosia pumila is a
covered species under the Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP)
in southwestern San Diego County. Based on the MSCP, we issued a
Federal incidental take permit to the City of Poway in July 1996, City
of San Diego in July 1997, and to the County of San Diego in March
1998. The MSCP establishes a 68,800-ha (172,000-ac) preserve and
provides for monitoring and management for the 85 covered species
addressed in the permit, including Ambrosia pumila. Additionally,
Ambrosia pumila is defined by the MSCP as a narrow endemic. This
requires that unavoidable impacts associated with reasonable use or
essential public facilities must be minimized and mitigated within the
MSCP planning area both inside and outside the Multiple Habitat Plan
Area (MHPA).
Eight of the 11 extant occurrences in San Diego County are in the
MSCP planning area. Five of the eight known occurrences in the MSCP
planning area are currently afforded some level of protection within
approved permitted Subarea Plans. Two of the occurrences, both at
Mission Trails Regional Park (MTRP), are addressed under the approved
City of San Diego's Subarea Plan (City of San Diego 1997). Under this
plan, coverage for this species is dependent upon conservation of 90
percent of the only large population in the MSCP, located in and
adjacent to MTRP (CNDDB 1999). Provisions of the City of San Diego's
Subarea Plan require conservation of 100 percent of the portion of the
occurrence on private lands adjacent to MTRP near a radio tower. The
other occurrence at MTRP is also protected under provisions of the
approved City of San Diego's Subarea Plan (City of San Diego 1997). The
occurrence near Del Dios in the San Dieguito River watershed, is within
the approved County of San Diego's Subarea Plan (County of San Diego
1997). An additional three occurrences are located within the City of
El Cajon, which is in the process of preparing a subarea plan
consistent with the MSCP.
Within approved Subarea Plans, four of the six occurrences are
impacted due to trampling, (CNDDB 1999), and competition from non-
native species affects all the occurrences. There are likely other
indirect impacts from altered fire and hydrological regimes. The threat
from trampling, increased competition from non-native plants and
altered fire and hydrological regimes will likely be significantly
reduced or eliminated when the monitoring and management program
required by the MSCP and Subarea Plans is in place.
The San Diego Association of Governments Multiple Habitat
Conservation Plan (MHCP) in northwestern San Diego County is still in
the planning phase. It has been proposed that the only known occurrence
of this species within the planning area be conserved and that the
species be treated as a narrow endemic requiring surveys of suitable
habitat and in situ conservation of 80-100 percent of each occurrence
discovered in the area. One of the two occurrences in Riverside County
is at Skunk Hollow in a fenced mitigation bank. However, this site
suffered from sheep intrusion and grazing in March 1999 (Christine
Moen, USFWS in litt.1999).
San Diego Gas and Electric owns powerline easements for some of the
land at one of the occurrences on the
[[Page 72999]]
San Diego National Wildlife Refuge and for all of an occurrence in
Oceanside. The Service, CDFG, and San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E)
signed an implementation agreement and memorandum of understanding in
December 1995 under the Natural Community Conservation Program called
the San Diego Gas and Electric Subregion Plan (SDG&E Plan). Under the
provisions of this plan, Ambrosia pumila is a covered species and a
narrow endemic. The plan prohibits impacts to occupied habitat except
in emergency situations. Contrary to the SDG&E Plan, a 1996 SDG&E
project resulted in the extirpation of a relatively large occurrence at
Oceanside that reportedly supported 1,600 plants (aerial stems).
The County of Riverside is preparing the Western Riverside Multiple
Species Habitat Conservation Plan. Ambrosia pumila has been proposed
for coverage under this plan but analysis of the data have not yet been
completed.
Mexican Laws
We are not aware of any existing regulatory mechanisms in Mexico
that would protect Ambrosia pumila or its habitat. Although Mexico has
laws that could provide protection for rare plants, there are no
specific protections for this species or vernal pools with which it is
often associated. If specific protections were available and
enforceable in Mexico, the portion of the range in Mexico alone, in
isolation, would not be adequate to ensure long-term conservation of
this species.
E. Other natural or manmade factors affecting their continued
existence. Non-native plants threaten virtually all of the extant
occurrences of Ambrosia pumila (CNDDB 1999, Vanderwier in litt. 1998).
Non-native species of grasses and forbs have invaded many of Southern
California's plant communities. Their presence and abundance are often
an indirect result of persistent and repeated habitat disturbance from
development, discing, mowing, alteration of local hydrology and the
presence and maintenance of highways and trails. This species is
subject to displacement by non-native species, which also likely affect
the reproductive potential of this low growing wind-pollinated species
(CNDDB 1999). Non-native species found with Ambrosia pumila include
Brassica spp. (mustard), Vulpia spp. (annual fescue), Erodium spp.
(Crane's-bill), Bromus spp. (brome grass), and Foeniculum vulgare
(sweet fennel). The presence of these and other non-native plants is
likely to affect (1) pollen and fruit dispersal by increasing the
aerial density of plant material, (2) fire patterns by increasing the
fuel volume due to the influx of larger plants, and (3) hydrological
conditions by decreasing the amount of water available for Ambrosia
pumila. The cumulative and collective effects of non-native plants pose
a threat to this species which apparently has a low output of seeds.
Few preserved museum specimens have fertile fruits and field
collections have not provided evidence of production of significant
numbers of viable seeds. This species is also threatened by altered
hydrological regimes at several occurrences associated with roads,
rights of way, or locations mowed for fire breaks (CNDDB 1999). A 1998
survey (Vanderwier in litt. 1998) reported that non-native species are
common on the two occurrences in the San Diego National Wildlife Refuge
and a portion of one of these occurrences is in a fuel modification
zone where the plants are mowed. Several occurrences are threatened by
periodic mowing which, if done in late summer or early fall, is likely
to remove the flowering portions of the aerial stems and greatly reduce
or eliminate the reproductive output for the year. The effects on the
rhizomes by soil compaction from vehicle traffic is undocumented.
In at least one documented instance in 1999, an occurrence of
Ambrosia pumila at Skunk Hollow, Riverside County, was grazed by sheep
(Christine Moen, USFWS in litt. 1999). Grazing would likely eliminate
or severely reduce the annual reproductive output of Ambrosia pumila
and could also reduce the vegetative portions of the plants to a degree
that would threaten their capacity to persist.
Six of the 13 extant occurrences of Ambrosia pumila, including four
of the larger occurrences, are threatened due to the impacts of
trampling by horses and people as well as ORV traffic. Two of these
occurrences are on the San Diego National Wildlife Refuge (Vanderwier
in litt. 1998, Tom Roster SDNWR pers. comm.1999). Trampling likely is a
threat to any of the other accessible occurrences such as those with
utility easements for maintenance purposes or access roads. The two
occurrences near trails in Mission Trails Regional Park are threatened
by trampling by people (City of San Diego 1999). Additional discussion
of trampling may be found under Regional Planning Efforts, under factor
D of this rule. The two occurrences in El Cajon are threatened by
trampling by people and vehicles (CNDDB 1999).
Because Ambrosia pumila is a rhizomatous clonal species, a single
plant may be represented by many aerial stems. An occurrence,
especially some of the smaller ones, could be composed of one or only a
few plants. For example, an occurrence where 500 stems had been counted
could represent only 50 plants. This would likely reflect low genetic
variability, which is detrimental to the long-term persistence of the
species (Barrett and Kohn 1991). This condition exacerbates the other
threats to all other occurrences of this species.
Transplantation of Ambrosia pumila, previously employed in an
effort to salvage plants from native occurrences identified for
extirpation, has proven to be of limited success. Transplantation
protocols were generally lacking and likely did not include--meaningful
guidelines for site selection, sampling methods to ensure that as many
individual plants as possible are represented in the transplantation,
measures of success for survival and recruitment of new seedling
generations, and recourse for failure or limited success of any of
these aspects of transplantation. There does not appear to be a well
documented transplantation that meet the above measures. Maintenance of
a few of the aerial stems for a period of time does not demonstrate
that transplantation of this rhizomatous clonal perennial is an
effective means for perpetuating the genetic lineages that constitute
one or more of the occurrences of this species.
We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial
information available regarding the past, present, and future threats
faced by this taxon in determining to propose this rule. Based on this
evaluation, the preferred action is to list Ambrosia pumila (San Diego
ambrosia) as endangered. The species is threatened with extinction due
to habitat alteration and destruction resulting primarily from highway
and right-of-way widening and maintenance, urban development,
trampling, competition from non-native plants, and vulnerability to
naturally occurring events due to low numbers of individuals. Any of
the threats noted above is compounded by the fact that this species is
a rhizomatous, clonal, perennial that has wind-pollinated flowers and
apparently rarely sets seed. The number of genetically different plants
at a given site is unknown, but there may be more than 100 aerial stems
per plant. This means that some of the smaller occurrences could
represent a single plant. Seven of the 13 occurrences are on private
lands, some of these with rights-of-way access. Although conservation
measures are in place for 5 of the 13 occurrences, full protection
afforded by a monitoring and
[[Page 73000]]
management program is not yet in place. Even with full protection, this
would be less than half of the known occurrences and will likely not
protect sufficient numbers of genetically different plants. Also, as
yet there are no known examples of transplanted or reintroduced
occurrences of this species in which sexual reproduction has occurred
to sustain either a viable population or exhibit the genetic diversity
found in a naturally occurring population.
Critical Habitat
Critical habitat is defined in section 3, paragraph (5)(A) of the
Act as the specific areas within the geographical area occupied by a
species, at the time it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which
are found those physical or biological features essential to the
conservation of the species and which may require special management
considerations or protection; and specific areas outside the
geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is listed in
accordance with the provisions of section 4 of the Act, upon a
determination by the Secretary that such areas are essential for the
conservation of the species. ``Conservation'' means the use of all
methods and procedures needed to bring the species to the point at
which listing under the Act is no longer necessary.
Critical habitat designation, by definition, directly affects only
Federal agency actions through consultation under section 7(a)(2) of
the Act. Section 7(a)(2) requires Federal agencies to ensure that
activities they authorize, fund, or carry out are not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or destroy or
adversely modify its critical habitat.
Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as amended, and implementing
regulations (50 CFR 424.12) require that, to the maximum extent prudent
and determinable, we designate critical habitat at the time the species
is determined to be endangered or threatened. Our regulations (50 CFR
424.12(a)(1)) state that the designation of critical habitat is not
prudent when one or both of the following situations exist--(1) the
species is threatened by taking or other human activity, and
identification of critical habitat can be expected to increase the
degree of threat to the species, or (2) such designation of critical
habitat would not be beneficial to the species.
The Final Listing Priority Guidance for FY 1999/2000 (64 FR 57114)
states, ``The processing of critical habitat determinations (prudency
and determinability decisions) and proposed or final designations of
critical habitat will be funded separately from other section 4 listing
actions and will no longer be subject to prioritization under the
Listing Priority Guidance. Critical habitat determinations, which were
previously included in final listing rules published in the Federal
Register, may now be processed separately, in which case stand-alone
critical habitat determinations will be published as notices in the
Federal Register. We will undertake critical habitat determinations and
designations during FY 1999 and FY 2000 as allowed by our funding
allocation for that year.'' As explained in detail in the Listing
Priority Guidance, our listing budget is currently insufficient to
allow us to immediately complete all of the listing actions required by
the Act.
We propose that critical habitat is prudent for Ambrosia pumila. In
the last few years, a series of court decisions have overturned Service
determinations regarding a variety of species that designation of
critical habitat would not be prudent (e.g., Natural Resources Defense
Council v. U.S. Department of the Interior 113 F. 3d 1121 (9th Cir.
1997); Conservation Council for Hawaii v. Babbitt, 2 F. Supp. 2d 1280
(D. Hawaii 1998)). Based on the standards applied in those judicial
opinions, we believe that designation of critical habitat for would be
prudent for Ambrosia pumila.
Due to the small number of populations, Ambrosia pumila is
vulnerable to unrestricted collection, vandalism, or other disturbance.
We are concerned that these threats might be exacerbated by the
publication of critical habitat maps and further dissemination of
locational information. However, at this time we do not have specific
evidence for Ambrosia pumila of taking, vandalism, collection, or trade
of this species or any similarly situated species. Consequently,
consistent with applicable regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)(i)) and
recent case law, we do not expect that the identification of critical
habitat will increase the degree of threat to this species of taking or
other human activity.
In the absence of a finding that critical habitat would increase
threats to a species, if there are any benefits to critical habitat
designation, then a prudent finding is warranted. In the case of this
species, there may be some benefits to designation of critical habitat.
The primary regulatory effect of critical habitat is the section 7
requirement that Federal agencies refrain from taking any action that
destroys or adversely modifies critical habitat. While a critical
habitat designation for habitat currently occupied by this species
would not be likely to change the section 7 consultation outcome
because an action that destroys or adversely modifies such critical
habitat would also be likely to result in jeopardy to the species,
there may be instances where section 7 consultation would be triggered
only if critical habitat is designated. Examples could include
unoccupied habitat or occupied habitat that may become unoccupied in
the future. There may also be some educational or informational
benefits to designating critical habitat. Therefore, we propose that
critical habitat is prudent for Ambrosia pumila. However, the deferral
of the critical habitat designation for Ambrosia pumila will allow us
to concentrate our limited resources on higher priority critical
habitat and other listing actions, while allowing us to put in place
protections needed for the conservation of Ambrosia pumila without
further delay. We anticipate in FY 2000 and beyond giving higher
priority to critical habitat designation, including designations
deferred pursuant to the Listing Priority Guidance, such as the
designation for this species, than we have in recent fiscal years.
We plan to employ a priority system for deciding which outstanding
critical habitat designations should be addressed first. We will focus
our efforts on those designations that will provide the most
conservation benefit, taking into consideration the efficacy of
critical habitat designation in addressing the threats to the species,
and the magnitude and immediacy of those threats. We will make the
final critical habitat determination with the final listing
determination for Ambrosia pumila. If this final critical habitat
determination is that critical habitat is prudent, we will develop a
proposal to designate critical habitat for Ambrosia pumila as soon as
feasible, considering our workload priorities. Unfortunately, for the
immediate future, most of Region 1's listing budget must be directed to
complying with numerous court orders and settlement agreements, as well
as due and overdue final listing determinations.
Available Conservation Measures
Conservation measures provided to species listed as endangered or
threatened under the Act include recognition, recovery actions,
requirements for Federal protection, and prohibitions against certain
activities. Recognition through listing encourages and results in
conservation actions by
[[Page 73001]]
Federal, State, and private agencies, groups and individuals. The Act
provides for possible land acquisition and cooperation with the States
and requires that recovery actions be carried out for all listed
species. We discuss the protection required of Federal agencies and the
prohibitions against taking and harm, in part, below.
Section 7(a) of the Act, as amended, requires Federal agencies to
evaluate their actions with respect to any species that is proposed or
listed as endangered or threatened, and with respect to its critical
habitat, if any is being designated. Regulations implementing this
interagency cooperation provision of the Act are codified at 50 CFR
Part 402. Section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires Federal agencies to
confer informally with us on any action that is likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of a proposed species or result in destruction
or adverse modification of proposed critical habitat. If a species is
subsequently listed, section 7(a)(2) requires Federal agencies to
ensure that activities they authorize, fund, or carry out are not
likely to jeopardize the continued existence of such a species or to
destroy or adversely modify its critical habitat. If a Federal agency
action may affect a listed species or its critical habitat, the
responsible Federal agency must enter into consultation with us. The
association of Ambrosia pumila with dry waterways and lakebeds may
result in the Corps becoming involved through its permitting authority
under section 404 of the Clean Water Act, and the issuance of permits
necessary to build flood control structures associated with highway
projects.
The two occurrences of Ambrosia pumila on the San Diego National
Wildlife Refuge receive the general protection afforded biotic
resources on the refuge. However, there is currently no specific
management plan for this plant. The City of San Diego (1999) has
prepared a draft management plan for the occurrences of Ambrosia pumila
in Mission Trail Regional Park. This management plan has not yet been
finalized.
As noted above under factor D of the ``Summary of Factors Affecting
the Species'' section, eight of the occurrences in San Diego County are
in the MSCP planning area, five of which are within approved Subarea
Plans. According to the City of San Diego's Subarea Plan (City of San
Diego 1998), 90 percent of the only major population will be conserved
and 100 percent of the adjacent portion of the occurrence will be
preserved. The monitoring method is to include a site-specific
monitoring plan with management plans and directives to protect against
detrimental edge effects (City of San Diego 1998). This Subarea Plan
also treats this species as a narrow endemic requiring jurisdictions
and other participants to specify measures in their subarea plans to
ensure that impacts to these resources are avoided to the maximum
extent possible. Under the County of San Diego's Subarea Plan, Ambrosia
pumila is a narrow endemic requiring avoidance to the maximum extent
possible. Where avoidance is infeasible, a maximum encroachment may be
authorized of up to 20 percent of the population on site. Where impacts
are allowed, in-kind preservation shall be required at a 1:1 to 3:1
ratio depending upon the sensitivity of the species and population
size, as determined in a biological analysis approved by the Director
of the Fish and Wildlife Service.
Listing Ambrosia pumila provides for the development and
implementation of a recovery plan for the species. This plan will bring
together Federal, State, and regional agency efforts for conservation
of the species. A recovery plan will establish a framework for agencies
to coordinate their recovery efforts. The plan will set recovery
priorities and estimate the costs of the tasks necessary to accomplish
the priorities. It will also describe the site specific management
actions necessary to achieve conservation and survival of the species.
The Act and its implementing regulations set forth a series of
general prohibitions and exceptions that apply to all endangered
plants. All prohibitions of section 9(a)(2) of the Act, implemented by
50 CFR 17.61 for endangered plants, apply. These prohibitions, in part,
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 remove and reduce to possession
from areas under Federal jurisdiction. In addition, for plants listed
as endangered, the Act prohibits malicious damage or destruction on
areas under Federal jurisdiction, and the removal, cutting, digging up,
or damaging or destroying of such plants in knowing violation of any
State law or regulation or in the course of any violation of a State
criminal trespass law. Certain exceptions to the prohibitions apply to
agents of the Service and State conservation agencies.
The Act and 50 CFR 17.62 and 17.63 also provide for the issuance of
permits to carry out otherwise prohibited activities involving
endangered plant species under certain circumstances. Such permits are
available for scientific purposes and to enhance the propagation or
survival of the species. It is anticipated that few trade permits would
ever be sought or issued because this species is not common in
cultivation or common in the wild. Information collections associated
with these permits are approved under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq., and assigned Office of Management and Budget
clearance number 1018-0094. For additional information concerning these
permits and associated requirements, see 50 CFR 17.62. Requests for
copies of the regulations concerning listed plants and general
inquiries regarding prohibitions and permits may be addressed to the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Endangered Species Permits, 911 N.E.
11th Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97232-4181 (telephone 503/231-2063;
facsimile 503/231-6243).
It is our policy, published in the Federal Register (59 FR 34272)
on July 1, 1994, to identify to the maximum extent practicable those
activities that would or would not be likely to constitute a violation
of section 9 of the Act if a species is listed. The intent of this
policy is to increase public awareness of the effect of the species'
listing on proposed and ongoing activities within its range. Collection
of listed plants or activities that would damage or destroy listed
plants on Federal lands are prohibited without a Federal endangered
species permit. Such activities on non-Federal lands would constitute a
violation of section 9 of the Act if they were conducted in knowing
violation of California State law or regulation, or in the course of
violation of California State criminal trespass law. Otherwise such
activities would not constitute a violation of the Act on non-Federal
lands.
Questions on whether specific activities would likely constitute a
violation of section 9, should be directed to the Field Supervisor of
the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES section).
Public Comments Solicited
It is our intent that any final action resulting from this proposal
will be as accurate and as effective as possible. Therefore, we solicit
comments or suggestions from the public, other concerned governmental
agencies, the scientific community, industry, or any other interested
party concerning this proposed rule. Our practice is to make comments,
including names and home addresses of respondents, available for
[[Page 73002]]
public review during regular business hours. Individual respondents may
request that we withhold their home address from the rulemaking record,
which we will honor to the extent allowable by law. There also may be
circumstances in which we would withhold from the rulemaking record a
respondent's identity, as allowable by law. If you wish us to withhold
your name and/or address, you must state this prominently at the
beginning of your comment. However, we will not consider anonymous
comments. We will make all submissions from organizations or
businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as
representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, available
for public inspection in their entirety. All comments, including
written and e-mail, must be received in our Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife
Office by February 28, 2000. We particularly seek comments concerning:
(1) Biological, commercial, trade, or other relevant data
concerning threat (or lack thereof) to Ambrosia pumila.
(2) The location of any additional populations of Ambrosia pumila
and the reasons why any habitat should or should not be determined to
be critical habitat for this species pursuant to section 4 of the Act.
(3) Additional information concerning the essential habitat
features (biotic and abiotic), range, distribution, population size of
this taxon, and information relating to the distributions of
genetically distinct individuals within the population.
(4) Current or planned activities in the subject area and their
possible impacts on this taxon.
Final promulgation of the regulations on Ambrosia pumila will take
into consideration any comments and any additional information we
receive during the comment period, and such communications may lead to
a final regulation that differs from this proposal.
The Act provides for a public hearing on this proposal, if
requested. Requests must be received within 45 days of the date of
publication of the proposal in the Federal Register. Such requests must
be made in writing and be addressed to the Field Supervisor of the
Service's Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES section).
National Environmental Policy Act
We have determined that Environmental Assessments and Environmental
Impact Statements, as defined under the authority of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, need not be prepared in connection
with regulations adopted pursuant to Section 4(a) of the Act. A notice
outlining our reasons for this determination was published in the
Federal Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244).
Required Determinations
This rule does not contain any information collection requirements
for which Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval under the
Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., is required. Any
information collection related to the rule pertaining to permits for
endangered and threatened species has OMB approval and is assigned
clearance number 1018-0094. This rule does not alter that information
collection requirement. For additional information concerning permits
and associated requirements for endangered plants, see 50 CFR 17.62 and
17.63.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited herein is available, upon
request, from the Field Supervisor, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office
(see ADDRESSES section).
Author: The primary author of this proposed rule is Gary D.
Wallace, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife
Office (see ADDRESSES section).
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
For the reasons given in the preamble, we propose to amend part 17
as set forth below:
PART 17-- [AMENDED]
1. The authority for citation of part 17 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; 16 U.S.C.
4201-4205; Pub. L. 99-625, 100 Stat. 3500, unless otherwise noted.
2. Section 17.12(h) is amended by adding the following in
alphabetical order under FLOWERING PLANTS to the List of Endangered and
Threatened Plants:
Sec. 17.12 Endangered and threatened plants.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species
-------------------------------------------------------- Historic range Family Status When listed Critical Special
Scientific name Common name habitat rules
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flowering Plants
* * * * * * *
Ambrosia pumila.................. San Diego ambrosia.. U.S.A. (CA) Mexico. Asteraceae......... E NA NA
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 73003]]
Dated: December 9, 1999.
Jamie Rappaport Clark,
Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 99-33781 Filed 12-28-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
