13200 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 43 / Monday, March 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2021–04720 Filed 3–5–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

[Docket No. FWS–R1–ES–2019–0013; 

FF09E22000 FXES11130900000 212] 

RIN 1018–BD59 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Removing Bradshaw’s 

Lomatium (Lomatium bradshawii) 

From the Federal List of Endangered 

and Threatened Plants 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), remove 

Bradshaw’s lomatium (Lomatium 

bradshawii, also known as Bradshaw’s 

desert parsley), a plant found in western 

Oregon and southwestern Washington, 

from the Federal List of Endangered and 

Threatened Plants. Our review of the 

best available scientific and commercial 

data indicates that the threats to 

Bradshaw’s lomatium have been 

eliminated or reduced to the point that 

the species no longer meets the 

definition of an endangered or 

threatened species under the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (Act). 

DATES: This rule is effective April 7, 

2021. 

ADDRESSES: This final rule is available 

on the internet at http://

www.regulations.gov under Docket No. 

FWS–R1–ES–2019–0013. Comments 

and materials we received, as well as 

supporting documentation we used in 

preparing this rule, are available for 

public inspection at http://

www.regulations.gov under FWS–R1– 

ES–2019–0013. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul 

Henson, State Supervisor, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, Oregon Fish and 

Wildlife Office, 2600 SE 98th Avenue, 

Suite 100, Portland, OR 97266; 

telephone 503–231–6179. If you use a 

telecommunications device for the deaf 

(TDD), please call the Federal Relay 

Service at 800–877–8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Previous Federal Actions 

On November 26, 2019, we published 

in the Federal Register (84 FR 65067) a 

proposed rule to remove Bradshaw’s 

lomatium from the List of Endangered 

and Threatened Plants (i.e., to ‘‘delist’’ 

the species). Please refer to that 

proposed rule for a detailed description 

of the Federal actions concerning this 

species that occurred prior to November 

26, 2019. 

Summary of Changes From the 

Proposed Rule 

In response to public comments and 

in the process of developing this final 

rule, we have made the following 

changes from our November 26, 2019, 

proposed rule (84 FR 65067): 

• We added language in the final 

post-delisting monitoring plan to 

indicate that additional Bradshaw’s 

lomatium populations may be visited 

upon occasion, as time and resources 

allow, to provide for a ‘‘spot check’’ on 

the status of additional populations that 

are outside of the 18 priority sites 

identified for regular visits during the 

post-delisting monitoring period. These 

abbreviated field visits may collect 

information through assessment of 

population abundance, photo points, 

and/or evaluation of management 

practices and habitat condition. 

• We incorporated into the preamble 

to this final rule mention of the recently 

developed MOU among the U.S. Army 

Core of Engineers, the Bureau of Land 

Management, the Natural Resource 

Conservation Service and the Service, to 

provide for the long-term conservation 

of Bradshaw’s lomatium, regardless of 

listing status. 

• We made minor editorial changes in 

the preamble of this final rule, including 

revising our description of how we 

develop and implement recovery plans, 

adding additional discussion about 

which recovery criteria were met, 

inserting an updated description of our 

regulatory and analytical frameworks, 

updating our description of how we 

determine species status throughout all 

or a portion of the species’ range, and 

making minor textual updates to our 

assessment of Bradshaw’s lomatium’s 

status throughout a portion of its range. 

I. Final Delisting Determination 

Background 

Status Assessment for Bradshaw’s 

Lomatium 

A thorough review of the taxonomy, 

life history, and ecology of Bradshaw’s 

lomatium is presented in the document 

‘‘Species Status Assessment Report for 

Bradshaw’s lomatium (Lomatium 

bradshawii (Rose ex. Math.) Mathias & 

Constance) Version 1.0’’ (SSA report) 

(Service 2018), which is available at 

http://www.regulations.gov in Docket 

No. FWS–R1–ES–2019–0013, under 

Supporting Documents. The SSA report 

documents the results of our 

comprehensive biological status review 

for Bradshaw’s lomatium, and has 

undergone peer review. The SSA report 

does not represent any decision by the 

Service regarding the status of 

Bradshaw’s lomatium under the Act (16 

U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). It does, however, 

provide the scientific basis that 

informed our most recent 5-year status 

review, which resulted in a 

recommendation that the species should 

be removed from the List. The SSA 

report also served as one of the bases for 

this final rule and our regulatory 

decision, which involves the further 

application of standards within the Act 

and its implementing regulations and 

policies. 

In this final rule, we present only a 

summary of the key results and 

conclusions from the SSA report; the 

full report is available at http://

www.regulations.gov, as referenced 

above. 

Summary of the Biology of the Species 

Bradshaw’s lomatium is a perennial 

herb in the carrot or parsley family 

(Apiaceae) that is endemic to wet prairie 

habitats in western Oregon’s Willamette 

Valley and adjacent southwestern 

Washington. These seasonally wet 

habitats may be flooded in the spring, or 

have soils saturated at or near the 

surface due to factors such as heavy 

precipitation in winter and spring, 

flooding, and poor drainage. A high 

light environment is important for 

Bradshaw’s lomatium to complete its 

life cycle and reproduce, as reduced 

sunlight is associated with lower flower 

and seed production (Alverson 1993, 

unpublished data). This species is often 

associated with tufted hairgrass 

(Deschampsia cespitosa), and frequently 

occurs on and around the small mounds 

created by senescent tufted hairgrass 

plants. In wetter areas, Bradshaw’s 

lomatium occurs on the edges of tufted 

hairgrass or sedges in patches of bare or 

open soil. In drier areas, it is found in 

low areas, such as small depressions, 

trails, or seasonal channels, with open, 

exposed soils. Self-fertilization is rare in 

Bradshaw’s lomatium (Kaye and 

Kirkland 1994, p. 8), indicating that 

pollinator-mediated outcrossing is 

required for reproduction. Over 30 

species of solitary bees, flies, wasps, and 

beetles have been observed visiting the 

flowers (Kaye 1992, p. 3; Kaye and 

Kirkland 1994, p. 9; Jackson 1996, pp. 

72–76). Bradshaw’s lomatium does not 

reproduce asexually and depends 

exclusively on seeds for reproduction 

(Kaye 1992, p. 2), but does not maintain 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 43 / Monday, March 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 13201 

a persistent seed bank in the soil. 

Although some fruit survives in the soil 

for 1 year, the seeds are not viable (Kaye 

et al. 2001, p. 1376). Further 

information on the basic biology and 

ecology of Bradshaw’s lomatium is 

summarized in the SSA report (Service 

2018, entire). 

Recovery and Recovery Plan 

Implementation 

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 must, to the 

maximum extent practicable, include 

objective, measurable criteria which, 

when met, would result in a 

determination, in accordance with the 

provisions of section 4 of the Act, that 

the species be removed from the List. 

Recovery plans provide a roadmap for 

us and our partners on methods of 

enhancing conservation and minimizing 

threats to listed species, as well as 

measurable criteria against which to 

evaluate progress towards recovery and 

assess the species’ likely future 

condition. However, they are not 

regulatory documents and do not 

substitute for the determinations and 

promulgation of regulations required 

under section 4(a)(1) of the Act. A 

decision to revise the status of a species, 

or to delist a species, is ultimately based 

on an analysis of the best scientific and 

commercial data available to determine 

whether a species is no longer an 

endangered species or a threatened 

species, regardless of whether that 

information differs from the recovery 

plan. 

There are many paths to 

accomplishing recovery of a species, 

and recovery may be achieved without 

all of the criteria in a recovery plan 

being fully met. For example, one or 

more criteria may be exceeded while 

other criteria may not yet be 

accomplished. In that instance, we may 

determine that the threats are 

minimized sufficiently and that the 

species is robust enough that it no 

longer meets the definition of an 

endangered species or a threatened 

species. In other cases, we may discover 

new recovery opportunities after having 

finalized the recovery plan. Parties 

seeking to conserve the species may use 

these opportunities instead of methods 

identified in the recovery plan. 

Likewise, we may learn new 

information about the species after we 

finalize the recovery plan. The new 

information may change the extent to 

which existing criteria are appropriate 

for identifying recovery of the species. 

The recovery of a species is a dynamic 

process requiring adaptive management 

that may, or may not, follow all of the 

guidance provided in a recovery plan. 

In 2010, we finalized the revised 

recovery plan for Bradshaw’s lomatium 

(Service 2010). The recovery plan states 

that Bradshaw’s lomatium could be 

considered for downlisting to 

threatened status when there are 12 

populations and 60,000 plants 

distributed in such a way as to reflect 

the species’ historical geographic 

distribution, when the number of 

individuals in the populations have 

been stable or increasing over a period 

of 10 years, when sites are managed to 

meet established habitat quality 

guidelines, when a substantial portion 

of the species’ habitat is protected for 

conservation, and when populations are 

managed to ensure maintenance of 

habitat and to control threats. 

The recovery plan states that, in 

addition to the criteria described above, 

Bradshaw’s lomatium could be 

considered for delisting when there are 

20 populations and 100,000 plants 

properly distributed, genetic material is 

stored in a facility approved by the 

Center for Plant Conservation, and postdelisting monitoring plans and 

monitoring agreements are in place. 

Given our current understanding of this 

species, the criteria addressing 

abundance, distribution, and site 

management and protection are the 

most important in assessing recovery. 

Accordingly, these criteria are the basis 

of our analysis of resiliency, 

redundancy, and representation, and the 

focus of the discussion that follows. The 

remaining two criteria have also been 

met; genetic material is preserved at the 

Institute of Applied Ecology seed bank, 

and post-delisting monitoring plans and 

agreements are in place (see PostDelisting Monitoring). 

To reflect the historical distribution of 

Bradshaw’s lomatium, the species’ range 

was divided into eight recovery zones 

(Southwest Washington, Portland, 

Salem West, Salem East, Corvallis West, 

Corvallis East, Eugene West, and Eugene 

East), and targets for number of 

populations and number of plants for 

each zone were established based on 

historical presence, to the extent known 

(Service 2010, pp. IV–1—IV–6, IV–31— 

IV–34). 

Two of the recovery zones (Portland 

and Salem West) are within the range of 

Bradshaw’s lomatium, but do not have 

population targets for the species based 

on a lack of historical occurrence data. 

These recovery zones were nonetheless 

retained because if any populations of 

Bradshaw’s lomatium were to be 

discovered or introduced within these 

zones, they could be considered as 

contributing to the recovery criteria for 

the species (under the category 

‘‘Additional Populations’’). 

The expression of recovery criteria in 

terms of population abundance, 

numbers of populations, and 

distribution across recovery zones 

reflects a foundational principle of 

conservation biology: That there is a 

positive relationship between the 

relative viability of a species over time 

and the resiliency, redundancy, and 

representation of its constituent 

populations (Shaffer and Stein 2000, pp. 

307–310; Wolf et al. 2015, entire). To 

look at it another way, extinction risk is 

generally reduced as a function of 

increased population abundance 

(resiliency), numbers of populations 

(redundancy), and distribution or 

geographic or genetic diversity 

(representation). The recovery criteria 

laid out in the recovery plan for 

Bradshaw’s lomatium were, therefore, 

informative for our review of the status 

of the species, as that analysis leans 

upon these measures of viability to 

assess the current and future status of 

the species (Service 2018, pp. 1–2). 

The downlisting criteria for number 

and distribution of populations and 

numbers of plants were intended to help 

identify the point at which imminent 

threats to Bradshaw’s lomatium had 

been ameliorated so that the 

populations were no longer in 

immediate risk of extirpation; the 

delisting criteria for number and 

distribution of populations and numbers 

of plants were intended to identify the 

point at which the species was unlikely 

to become in danger of extinction. In 

our analysis, only populations with 

moderate to high overall condition and 

with more than 200 plants were 

considered to have met the recovery 

criteria, as populations with lower 

overall condition or abundance were 

considered too high risk to be counted 

toward recovery. An estimated 

11,276,253 plants in 17 populations 

meet this standard (Service 2018, p. 39, 

updated based on Wilderman 2018, 

entire), an increase from approximately 

25,000 to 30,000 individuals in 11 

populations at listing in 1988. An 

additional 1,361 plants, distributed 

among 7 populations, comprise the 

grand total number of known 

Bradshaw’s lomatium plants. In total, 24 

populations occur on 71 distinct sites 

that are owned by a mix of Federal, 

State, and local governments; 

nongovernmental organizations (NGOs); 

and private citizens. Multiple sites are 

considered to be part of the same 

population when those sites are within 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
13202 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 43 / Monday, March 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

a defined pollinator flight distance of 3 

kilometers (km) (2 miles (mi)) of each 

other. The current population estimate 

is the combined count data from all 

sites; for some sites the plant count was 

the result of a full census (54 sites), 

while for others it was derived by visual 

estimate or calculated from count 

subsamples that were then extrapolated 

over the total area of the site (17 sites). 

The increase in known populations and 

number of plants over time is due to a 

combination of population 

augmentation and introductions, 

improved habitat management, and 

increased survey effort across the range 

of the species. Bradshaw’s lomatium has 

been the focus of concentrated recovery 

efforts since it was listed in 1988. We 

now estimate there are likely more 

plants across the range of Bradshaw’s 

lomatium than we have accounted for 

because not all areas of suitable habitat 

within the range of the species have 

been surveyed, and recent visits to 

previously unsurveyed areas have 

resulted in the identification of formerly 

unknown populations (e.g., Service 

2018, p. 10). 

In our SSA report, we evaluated and 

ranked the resiliency of each population 

of Bradshaw’s lomatium using the 

following criteria: (1) Population size, 

(2) current habitat conditions, (3) 

protection of the site from development, 

and (4) site management to restore and 

maintain appropriate habitat condition. 

Using these criteria, each population 

was given a rank of high, moderate, or 

low condition (Service 2018, pp. 26–30). 

The resiliency score for each population 

incorporates the degree to which the 

primary threats to the species have been 

addressed at each site as well as 

recovery criteria (population size and 

habitat quality), site protection 

(addressing habitat loss), and site 

management (addressing woody 

encroachment and invasive species). For 

details on evaluation and ranking of 

population condition, see the SSA 

report (Service 2018, pp. 26–43). 

The table below summarizes our 

current knowledge of the abundance 

and distribution of Bradshaw’s 

lomatium relative to the downlisting 

and delisting criteria presented in the 

recovery plan for the species (from 

Service 2018, p. 39, updated based on 

Wilderman 2018, entire). Because the 

table below summarizes only the 

abundance and distribution data for the 

species, the information in the table 

must be considered in conjunction with 

the five-factor analysis of threats to 

arrive at the status determination for 

Bradshaw’s lomatium. 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–P 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 43 / Monday, March 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 13203 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER08MR21.000</GPH>
13204 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 43 / Monday, March 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

Based on the most recent count, the 

number of plants counted towards 

recovery is 11,276,253, with an 

additional 1,361 plants occurring in 

populations with fewer than 200 

individuals, which we did not count 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER08MR21.001</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 43 / Monday, March 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 13205 

toward recovery. Of the total number of 

known plants, an estimated 10,790,658 

occur in a single population in 

southwestern Washington. The other 

approximately 486,956 plants are within 

23 populations in Oregon. If we 

consider only the populations in 

moderate or high condition, and with 

more than 200 plants (i.e., those we are 

counting toward recovery and presented 

in the table), we estimate there are 

485,595 plants within Oregon 

populations. These populations are 

distributed from southeast of Salem, 

Oregon, south to Creswell, Oregon, both 

east and west of the Willamette River. 

The greatest density of populations 

occurs in the southern portion of the 

Willamette Valley near Eugene, Oregon. 

Therefore, the most recent counts of 

Bradshaw’s lomatium identify nearly 

500,000 individuals in 23 known 

populations across the historical range 

of the species in Oregon and distributed 

among 69 known sites under various 

types of land ownership. We considered 

the abundance and distribution of 

Bradshaw’s lomatium without including 

the roughly 10.8 million individuals 

concentrated in a single population 

(made up of 2 sites) in southwestern 

Washington to ensure our evaluation 

considered the abundance and 

distribution of the species across its 

entire range and also to ensure our 

overall evaluation was not unduly 

influenced by this single extremely large 

population. Of the 71 known sites, 51 

are in public ownership, are within a 

public right-of-way, or are owned by a 

conservation-oriented NGO. Of the 20 

remaining sites, 9 are under 

conservation easement or are enrolled in 

the Service’s Partners for Fish and 

Wildlife Program (Service 2018, pp. 30– 

35, 36, 38, Appendix A). The remaining 

11 sites are on private lands and are not 

currently under any formal protection 

agreements. 

The figure below shows the results of 

this assessment across the range of the 

species. Of the 24 known populations, 

4 are in low condition, 9 are in 

moderate condition, 10 are in high 

condition, and 1 is in unknown 

condition due to a lack of data (Service 

2018, pp. 36–39). Populations occur in 

all recovery zones that have population 

goals. As noted above, the Portland and 

Salem West Recovery Zones contain no 

known current populations, were not 

assigned specific targets by the Recovery 

Team, and have no documented 

historical occurrences of the species 

within them. 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–C 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
13206 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 43 / Monday, March 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

Based on this information, we 

conclude Bradshaw’s lomatium is much 

more numerous than at the time of 

listing and is distributed throughout its 

known historical range. Across the 23 

populations in Oregon, greater than 99 

percent of known Bradshaw’s lomatium 

plants are found on sites receiving some 

degree of protection from development 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER08MR21.002</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 43 / Monday, March 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 13207 

such as public lands, conservancy 

lands, or private lands with 

conservation easements (Service 2018, 

Appendix A). Two sites in southwestern 

Washington collectively comprise the 

single largest population of the species 

with millions of plants. The vast 

majority of plants in the southwestern 

Washington population occur on private 

property that is not under formal 

protection, but over the years the site 

has been consistently managed in a 

manner conducive to supporting the 

largest population of Bradshaw’s 

lomatium known. The other portion of 

the population in southwestern 

Washington, owned by the Washington 

Department of Natural Resources 

(WDNR), contains approximately 658 

plants. The WDNR has been actively 

protecting, managing, and augmenting 

this smaller portion of the southwestern 

Washington population, and they are 

currently working to further expand 

protection at this site. Furthermore, the 

WDNR is working to conserve the 

sizeable Bradshaw’s lomatium site that 

is on private land. 

Due to ongoing threats from woody 

encroachment and the spread of 

nonnative, invasive plants, sites 

containing Bradshaw’s lomatium 

require regular management to maintain 

the open prairie conditions that support 

robust populations. Management 

activities may include, but are not 

limited to, herbicide application, 

mowing, and prescribed fire. Although 

guarantee of management into 

perpetuity exceeds the requirements of 

the Act in evaluating whether a species 

meets the statutory definition of 

endangered or threatened, it is 

necessary to evaluate whether current 

and expected future management is 

sufficient to maintain resilient 

populations of Bradshaw’s lomatium 

into the foreseeable future. Across the 

range of Bradshaw’s lomatium, 75 

percent of sites receive some form of 

management as described above, 

accounting for greater than 99 percent of 

known Bradshaw’s lomatium plants. 

Sites receiving management span all 

ownership types. Rangewide, 58 percent 

of sites have a management plan with 

goals for the conservation of Bradshaw’s 

lomatium, or with goals for maintenance 

of the wet prairie habitat upon which 

this species depends. Sites with 

management plans include those owned 

by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 

Bureau of Land Management, the 

Service, The Nature Conservancy, and 

privately owned sites covered by the 

Natural Resources Conservation 

Service’s Wetland Reserve Program 

(Service 2018, pp. 30–35, Appendix A). 

Although not considered as a basis for 

this delisting, a memorandum of 

understanding (MOU) among the 

Bureau of Land Management, the 

Natural Resources Conservation Service, 

the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and 

the Service has been developed with the 

express purpose of providing for the 

long-term conservation and sustained 

recovery of Bradshaw’s lomatium 

(Service et al. 2020, entire). Together 

these agencies own or manage at least 

35 of the 71 known Bradshaw’s 

lomatium sites. The MOU describes the 

ongoing commitment of the cooperating 

management agencies to maintain wet 

prairie habitats containing Bradshaw’s 

lomatium populations at a sufficient 

quality to support the resilience of those 

populations, to the best of their abilities, 

irrespective of any change in the 

species’ legal status and its standing 

under the Act. This MOU did not enter 

into our consideration of the delisting of 

Bradshaw’s lomatium. However, it is 

added evidence of the strength of the 

ongoing collaborative efforts of 

conservation partners dedicated to the 

recovery of the native prairie species 

and ecosystems of the Willamette 

Valley. 

These and other data that we analyzed 

indicate that most threats identified at 

listing and in the recovery plan are 

reduced in areas occupied by 

Bradshaw’s lomatium. The status of the 

species has improved primarily due to: 

(1) Discovery of previously unknown 

populations; (2) reestablishment and 

augmentation of populations over the 30 

years since the species was listed; (3) 

improvement in habitat management; 

and (4) an increase in protection from 

development. 

Regulatory and Analytical Framework 

Regulatory Framework 

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 is an 

‘‘endangered species’’ or a ‘‘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 any species is an endangered 

species or a 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. 

These factors represent broad 

categories of natural or human-caused 

actions or conditions that could have an 

effect on a species’ continued existence. 

In evaluating these actions and 

conditions, we look for those that may 

have a negative effect on individuals of 

the species, as well as other actions or 

conditions that may ameliorate any 

negative effects or may have positive 

effects. We consider these same five 

factors in delisting (removal from the 

Federal Lists of Endangered and 

Threatened Wildlife and Plants) or 

downlisting (reclassification from 

endangered to threatened) a species (see 

50 CFR 424.11(c) through (e)). 

We use the term ‘‘threat’’ to refer in 

general to actions or conditions that are 

known to or are reasonably likely to 

negatively affect individuals of a 

species. The term ‘‘threat’’ includes 

actions or conditions that have a direct 

impact on individuals (direct impacts), 

as well as those that affect individuals 

through alteration of their habitat or 

required resources (stressors). The term 

‘‘threat’’ may encompass—either 

together or separately—the source of the 

action or condition or the action or 

condition itself. 

However, the mere identification of 

any threat(s) does not necessarily mean 

that the species meets the statutory 

definition of an ‘‘endangered species’’ or 

a ‘‘threatened species.’’ In determining 

whether a species meets either 

definition, we must evaluate all 

identified threats by considering the 

species’ expected response and the 

effects of the threats—in light of those 

actions and conditions that will 

ameliorate the threats—on an 

individual, population, and species 

level. We evaluate each threat and its 

expected effects on the species, then 

analyze the cumulative effect of all of 

the threats on the species as a whole. 

We also consider the cumulative effect 

of the threats in light of those actions 

and conditions that will have positive 

effects on the species—such as any 

existing regulatory mechanisms or 

conservation efforts. The Secretary 

determines whether the species meets 

the definition of an ‘‘endangered 

species’’ or a ‘‘threatened species’’ only 

after conducting this cumulative 

analysis and describing the expected 

effect on the species now and in the 

foreseeable future. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
13208 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 43 / Monday, March 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

The Act does not define the term 

‘‘foreseeable future,’’ which appears in 

the statutory definition of ‘‘threatened 

species.’’ Our implementing regulations 

at 50 CFR 424.11(d) set forth a 

framework for evaluating the foreseeable 

future on a case-by-case basis. The term 

foreseeable future extends only so far 

into the future as we can reasonably 

determine that both the future threats 

and the species’ responses to those 

threats are likely. In other words, the 

foreseeable future is the period of time 

in which we can make reliable 

predictions. ‘‘Reliable’’ does not mean 

‘‘certain’’; it means sufficient to provide 

a reasonable degree of confidence in the 

prediction. Thus, a prediction is reliable 

if it is reasonable to depend on it when 

making decisions. 

It is not always possible or necessary 

to define foreseeable future as a 

particular number of years. Analysis of 

the foreseeable future uses the best 

scientific and commercial data available 

and should consider the timeframes 

applicable to the relevant threats and to 

the species’ likely responses to those 

threats in view of its life-history 

characteristics. Data that are typically 

relevant to assessing the species’ 

biological response include speciesspecific factors such as lifespan, 

reproductive rates or productivity, 

certain behaviors, and other 

demographic factors. 

Analytical Framework 

The SSA report documents the results 

of our comprehensive biological review 

of the best scientific and commercial 

data regarding the status of the species, 

including an assessment of the potential 

threats to the species. The SSA report 

does not represent our decision on 

whether the species should be 

downlisted or delisted under the Act. It 

does, however, provide the scientific 

basis that informs our regulatory 

decisions, which involve the further 

application of standards within the Act 

and its implementing regulations and 

policies. The following is a summary of 

the key results and conclusions from the 

SSA report; the full SSA report can be 

found at Docket FWS–R1–ES–2019– 

0013 on http://www.regulations.gov. 

To assess the viability of Bradshaw’s 

lomatium, we used the three 

conservation biology principles of 

resiliency, redundancy, and 

representation (Shaffer and Stein 2000, 

pp. 306–310). Briefly, resiliency 

supports the ability of the species to 

withstand environmental and 

demographic stochasticity (for example, 

wet or dry, warm or cold years); 

redundancy supports the ability of the 

species to withstand catastrophic events 

(for example, droughts, large pollution 

events); and representation supports the 

ability of the species to adapt over time 

to long-term changes in the environment 

(for example, climate changes). In 

general, the more resilient and 

redundant a species is and the more 

representation it has, the more likely it 

is to sustain populations over time, even 

under changing environmental 

conditions. Using these principles, we 

identified the species’ ecological 

requirements for survival and 

reproduction at the individual, 

population, and species levels, and 

described the beneficial and risk factors 

influencing the species’ viability. 

The SSA process can be categorized 

into three sequential stages. During the 

first stage, we evaluated the individual 

species’ life-history needs. The next 

stage involved an assessment of the 

historical and current condition of the 

species’ demographics and habitat 

characteristics, including an 

explanation of how the species arrived 

at its current condition. The final stage 

of the SSA involved making predictions 

about the species’ responses to positive 

and negative environmental and 

anthropogenic influences. Throughout 

all of these stages, we used the best 

available information to characterize 

viability as the ability of a species to 

sustain populations in the wild over 

time. We use this information to inform 

our regulatory decision. 

Summary of Biological Status and 

Threats 

In this discussion, we review the 

biological condition of Bradshaw’s 

lomatium and its resources, and the 

threats that influence the species’ 

current and future condition, in order to 

assess the species’ overall viability and 

the risks to that viability. 

We consider 25 to 50 years to be a 

reasonable period of time within which 

reliable predictions can be made for 

potential stressors and responses for 

Bradshaw’s lomatium. This period of 

time is sufficient to observe population 

trends for the species, based on its life 

history characteristics, and captures the 

terms of many of the management plans 

that are in effect at Bradshaw’s 

lomatium sites; it is also the length of 

time over which we conclude we can 

make reliable prediction about the 

anticipated effects of climate change. 

Although information exists regarding 

potential impacts from climate change 

beyond a 50-year timeframe, the 

projections depend on an increasing 

number of assumptions, and thus 

become more uncertain with 

increasingly long timeframes. We, 

therefore, use a maximum timeframe of 

50 years to provide the best balance of 

scope of impacts considered versus the 

certainty of those impacts being 

realized. 

At the time of listing, the primary 

threats to Bradshaw’s lomatium were 

habitat loss due to land use conversion 

for agriculture or urbanization and the 

invasion of prairie vegetation by various 

woody plant species (53 FR 38449– 

38450; September 30, 1988). The listing 

rule did not find that overutilization for 

commercial, recreational, scientific, or 

educational purposes posed a threat to 

Bradshaw’s lomatium. The listing rule 

noted that several parasitic organisms (a 

fungus, spittle bug, and two aphids) 

could potentially have negative effects 

on smaller, stressed populations of the 

plant (but not the species as a whole) 

and questioned whether inbreeding 

depression might pose a threat to the 

species since the populations known at 

the time appeared to be small and 

isolated from one another. The rule 

noted that further study was required to 

determine the significance of any such 

threats. Finally, the listing rule noted 

that State and Federal regulations 

existing at the time did not adequately 

protect the plant from habitat loss or 

other potential threats (53 FR 38450; 

September 30, 1988). By the time the 

recovery plan was developed in 1993, 

these same threats were still considered 

relevant (Service 1993, p. 12). There are 

three potential threats that were either 

not known or considered at the time of 

listing: (1) Competition from nonnative, 

invasive plant species; (2) potential 

impacts resulting from the effects of 

climate change; and (3) predation by 

voles (Microtus spp.), which has been 

observed within Bradshaw’s lomatium 

sites. Subsequently, we conducted a 5- 

year status review based on the SSA 

report for Bradshaw’s lomatium that 

includes an analysis of all factors 

known to affect the viability of the 

species (Service 2018, entire). 

As discussed in our 2018 SSA report, 

the threat of habitat loss from land 

conversion for agriculture and 

urbanization has decreased since the 

time of listing due to land protection 

efforts. Although a few privately owned 

sites are still at risk, land use conversion 

is no longer considered a significant 

threat to the viability of Bradshaw’s 

lomatium due to the number of sites 

now receiving some degree of protection 

from development (Service 2018, pp. 

36–39, Appendix A). In Oregon, which 

supports 23 of the 24 known 

populations of the species, greater than 

99 percent of known Bradshaw’s 

lomatium plants occur on sites 

protected through public or NGO 

ownership, through designation as a 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 43 / Monday, March 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 13209 

right-of-way, or by conservation 

easements on private lands. In 

Washington, one of two sites that 

support Bradshaw’s lomatium is owned 

by the WDNR, and the State is actively 

working toward the conservation of the 

very large adjacent site that supports the 

majority of known individuals of the 

species. As the threat posed to 

Bradshaw’s lomatium from habitat loss 

is no longer considered significant, we 

additionally no longer consider State or 

Federal protections to be inadequate to 

address this threat. 

The present threat to Bradshaw’s 

lomatium from modification of habitat 

due to invasion of prairies by nonnative, 

invasive plants and by woody species 

has been reduced in many populations 

due to active habitat management using 

herbicides, mowing, and prescribed fire, 

but ongoing habitat management is 

required to maintain these 

improvements. As noted above, across 

the range of Bradshaw’s lomatium, 75 

percent of the known sites receive active 

management that benefits the species, 

and 58 percent of total sites have a 

management plan in place with goals for 

the conservation of Bradshaw’s 

lomatium, or for maintenance of the wet 

prairie habitat upon which it depends 

(Service 2018, pp. 36–39, Appendix A). 

Based on the high proportion of sites 

protected or managed, the history of 

positive management observed to date, 

and ongoing efforts to further restore 

and protect wet prairie habitats, we 

have confidence that management of 

Bradshaw’s lomatium sites will 

continue to provide adequate protection 

to the species in the long term. This 

confidence is affirmed by the MOU 

committing to long-term conservation of 

Bradshaw’s lomatium on Federal lands 

regardless of its listing status. We found 

no evidence that negative impacts due 

to parasitic organisms constitute a threat 

to the viability of Bradshaw’s lomatium. 

Predation by voles appears to vary year 

to year, and can substantially reduce 

aboveground biomass and reproduction 

in years when vole abundance is high. 

However, the effect on populations is 

estimated to be minimal over time as 

long as there is sufficient time for 

Bradshaw’s lomatium to regenerate 

taproot reserves between vole outbreaks 

(Drew 2000, pp. 54–55), and no 

consistent long-term declines 

attributable to vole predation have been 

reported (Service 2018, p. 20). 

Concerns over the possibility of 

inbreeding depression expressed at the 

time of listing are now reduced due to 

a subsequent study indicating that 

overall genetic diversity in Bradshaw’s 

lomatium is relatively high for a rare 

species (Gitzendanner and Soltis 2001, 

pp. 352–353), and is greater than that 

found in other rare Lomatium species 

(Gitzendanner and Soltis 2000, p. 787), 

although the most disjunct population 

in southwestern Washington showed 

relatively lower genetic diversity than 

less geographically isolated populations 

(Gitzendanner and Soltis 2001, p. 353). 

The threat of inbreeding depression is 

further considered reduced since we 

now understand Bradshaw’s lomatium 

to be primarily an outcrossing species 

(which promotes increased genetic 

diversity), rather than an obligate selfpollinating species as was believed at 

the time of listing (Service 2018, pp. 7, 

20). 

The potential threat posed to 

Bradshaw’s lomatium from the effects of 

climate change is difficult to predict. 

The primary threat to the species from 

the effects of climate change is likely 

reduced moisture availability due to 

warmer temperatures and alterations to 

precipitation patterns resulting in 

increased evapotranspiration (Bachelet 

et al. 2011, p. 414; Steel et al. 2011, pp. 

43; Kaye et al. 2013, p. 18. The 

vulnerability of Bradshaw’s lomatium to 

the effects of climate change, assessed 

over a range of potential future 

emissions scenarios, has been ranked as 

anywhere from low to moderate (Steel et 

al. 2011, pp. 25, 89) to highly vulnerable 

(Kaye et al. 2013, p. 20). Possible effects 

of climate change on Bradshaw’s 

lomatium include increased 

reproduction after increased early 

precipitation, temporal shifts in life 

cycle completion to earlier in spring 

(earlier germination and seed set), 

increased mortality, and decreased 

recruitment (USFWS 2018, p. 43). We 

assessed the potential impacts of 

climate change on Bradshaw’s lomatium 

projected out over a period up to 50 

years in the future. Published 

assessments provide only qualitative 

appraisals of the potential response of 

Bradshaw’s lomatium to the effects of 

climate change; therefore, we 

characterized a ‘‘worst case’’ future 

scenario in terms we could use in our 

analysis of future condition. In 

consultation with species experts and 

conservation partners, we defined the 

worst case scenario as one where 

increased mortality and decreased 

recruitment culminate in a 50 percent 

reduction of all populations. We 

considered this to be a conservative 

approach, in that the actual effects on 

populations size are likely to be more 

moderate. Even in the face of such a 

severe population reduction, the species 

is anticipated to remain viable as 

indicated by appreciable levels of 

resiliency, redundancy, and 

representation. We estimated that 

populations currently in low condition 

or with very low abundance may be 

extirpated due to the combined effects 

of climate change impacts and 

stochastic events; this translated to an 

estimated loss of up to five small 

populations, with other populations 

reduced in size. However, even with a 

presumed 50 percent reduction in 

abundance, at least 14 to 16 populations 

of Bradshaw’s lomatium in moderate or 

high condition are expected to remain 

on the landscape with ongoing 

management. We do not anticipate any 

significant effect on representation, that 

is, the ability of the species to adapt to 

changing environmental conditions over 

time (Service 2018, pp. 42–46). 

Cumulative Impacts 

When multiple stressors co-occur, one 

may exacerbate the effects of the other, 

leading to effects not accounted for 

when each stressor is analyzed 

individually. The full impact of these 

synergistic effects may be observed 

within a short period of time or may 

take many years before they are 

noticeable. For example, high levels of 

predation on Bradshaw’s lomatium 

during vole outbreaks can cause large 

temporary population declines but are 

not generally considered a significant 

threat to long-term viability; 

populations that are relatively large and 

well-distributed should be able to 

withstand such naturally occurring 

events. However, the relative impact of 

predation by voles may be intensified 

when outbreaks occur in conjunction 

with other factors that may lessen the 

resiliency of Bradshaw’s lomatium 

populations, such as prolonged woody 

species encroachment; extensive 

nonnative, invasive plant infestations; 

or possible hydrological alterations 

resulting from the effects of climate 

change. 

Although the types, magnitude, or 

extent of potential cumulative impacts 

are difficult to predict, we are not aware 

of any combination of factors that is 

likely to co-occur with significant 

negative consequences for the species. 

We anticipate that any negative 

consequence of co-occurring threats will 

be successfully addressed through the 

same active management actions that 

have contributed to the ongoing 

recovery of Bradshaw’s lomatium and 

that are expected to continue into the 

future. The best scientific and 

commercial data available indicate that 

Bradshaw’s lomatium is composed of 

multiple populations, primarily in 

moderate to high condition, which are 

sufficiently resilient, well distributed, 

protected, and managed such that they 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
13210 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 43 / Monday, March 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

will be robust in the face of potential 

cumulative effects to which they may be 

exposed. 

Overall, we conclude that under 

current conditions, most populations of 

Bradshaw’s lomatium are resilient, 

because they have abundant numbers of 

individuals. There are redundant 

populations of Bradshaw’s lomatium, 

meaning that multiple populations 

occur in most recovery zones, indicating 

that the species has the ability to 

minimize potential loss from 

catastrophic events. The concern at the 

time of listing about a possible genetic 

bottleneck has been alleviated by 

genetic studies demonstrating that 

Bradshaw’s lomatium has relatively 

high genetic diversity for a rare species. 

Also, with populations distributed 

across the known historical range of the 

species (Service 2018, p. 40), 

Bradshaw’s lomatium has likely 

retained much of its adaptive capacity 

(i.e., representation). We also 

considered the potential future 

conditions of Bradshaw’s lomatium, 

taking into account the current 

condition and additional stressors not 

considered at the time of recovery plan 

development (e.g., the effects of climate 

change). Projecting 25 to 50 years into 

the future, under a conservative 

estimate that conditions could 

potentially worsen such that all existing 

populations are reduced by half, the 

species would retain its resiliency and 

redundancy. With an estimated 14 to 16 

populations in moderate or high 

condition expected to remain on the 

landscape with ongoing management, 

representation was not anticipated to be 

affected (Service 2018, p. 44). As noted 

earlier, the degree to which threats to 

the species have been successfully 

addressed is incorporated into the 

evaluation of population resiliency at 

each site (i.e., site protection and 

management actions were considered in 

the scoring of each population’s current 

condition; Service 2018, p. 28). The 

continuation of these conservation 

measures was an assumption of our 

projection. 

We note that, by using the SSA 

framework to guide our analysis of the 

scientific information documented in 

the SSA report, we have not only 

analyzed individual effects on the 

species, but we have also analyzed their 

potential cumulative effects. We 

incorporate the cumulative effects into 

our SSA analysis when we characterize 

the current and future condition of the 

species. Our assessment of the current 

and future conditions encompasses and 

incorporates the threats individually 

and cumulatively. Our current and 

future condition assessment is iterative 

because it accumulates and evaluates 

the effects of all the factors that may be 

influencing the species, including 

threats and conservation efforts. 

Because the SSA framework considers 

not just the presence of the factors, but 

to what degree they collectively 

influence risk to the entire species, our 

assessment integrates the cumulative 

effects of the factors and replaces a 

standalone cumulative effects analysis. 

See the SSA report (Service 2018, 

entire) for a more detailed discussion of 

our evaluation of the biological status of 

Bradshaw’s lomatium and the 

influences that may affect its continued 

existence. Our conclusions are based 

upon the best available scientific and 

commercial data and the expert 

opinions of the species status 

assessment team members. 

Summary of Comments and 

Recommendations 

In the proposed rule published in the 

Federal Register on November 26, 2019 

(84 FR 65067), we requested that all 

interested parties submit written 

comments on our proposal to delist 

Bradshaw’s lomatium by January 27, 

2020. 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 Oregonian. We 

did not receive any requests for a public 

hearing. All substantive information 

provided during the comment period 

has either been incorporated directly 

into this final rule or is addressed 

below. 

Public Comments 

We received three comments from the 

public on our November 26, 2019, 

proposed rule. One of these generally 

opposed the delisting of Bradshaw’s 

lomatium but did not provide 

substantive comments to respond to or 

address. The remaining two provided 

substantive comments on the proposed 

rule or the draft post-delisting 

monitoring plan, and are addressed 

below. 

Comment (1): One commenter 

expressed concerns that Federal 

delisting of Bradshaw’s lomatium would 

likely result in a petition for State 

delisting as well, resulting in a potential 

threat from the inadequacy of regulatory 

mechanisms to require habitat 

maintenance for the species (Factor D). 

The commenter states that habitat 

management benefitting this 

conservation-reliant species may not 

necessarily continue after delisting, 

which would again expose populations 

of Bradshaw’s lomatium to the threat of 

habitat degradation through 

encroachment of woody vegetation and 

nonnative plants. In particular, the 

commenter argued that if only 58 

percent of total sites have a management 

plan with conservation goals for 

Bradshaw’s lomatium or wet prairie 

habitat, a ‘‘worst case’’ future scenario 

could leave the remaining 42 percent of 

sites unmanaged, or under-managed, in 

terms of habitat maintenance. Overall, 

the commenter suggested that more 

measures are needed to formalize the 

commitment of landowners to continue 

Bradshaw’s lomatium habitat 

management efforts to ensure habitat for 

the species remains protected from 

degradation following delisting, with 

particular emphasis on non-Federal 

public sites and the large population in 

Washington. 

Our Response: Our evaluation of the 

level of protection and active 

management provided to populations of 

Bradshaw’s lomatium, required to 

effectively ameliorate the threat of 

habitat degradation now and into the 

future, was one of our primary 

considerations in determining the 

appropriate status of the species. As 

described in the November 26, 2019, 

proposed rule (84 FR 65067) and in 

Appendix A of the SSA report, our 

information indicates that in Oregon, 

where 69 of the 71 sites of Bradshaw’s 

lomatium are found, nearly 99 percent 

of Bradshaw’s lomatium individuals 

now receive protection from further 

habitat loss and fragmentation due to 

land ownership by Federal, State, or 

other public entities, or by NGOs, or due 

to protections through management 

agreements or conservation easements 

on private lands. Nearly all of these 

management commitments are longterm or perpetual (61), and the shortterm management agreements (8) are 

renewable. Of the 71 total known sites, 

51 are in public ownership and 9 have 

either a conservation easement or 

Partners for Fish and Wildlife agreement 

in place. There are only 11 sites on 

privately owned lands without a formal 

agreement in place, but even without 

formal protections, several of these are 

managed such that they provide habitat 

for Bradshaw’s lomatium, and they 

support relatively few plants overall. 

The 58 percent of sites with a 

management plan mentioned by the 

commenter refers only to those sites that 

have a plan specific to Bradshaw’s 

lomatium or the maintenance of wet 

prairie habitat; even without such a 

plan, many of these sites do have 

management plans, and the majority of 

sites experience some degree of habitat 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 43 / Monday, March 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 13211 

protection and management that 

benefits the species, even if that benefit 

is incidental to, and not focused 

specifically on, Bradshaw’s lomatium. 

Based on all of these considerations, we 

do not foresee a future in which it is 

likely that up to 42 percent of sites 

would be unmanaged or undermanaged, as the commenter suggests. 

The largest single population of 

Bradshaw’s lomatium plants, located in 

southwestern Washington, is privately 

owned, and WDNR continues to actively 

pursue avenues for the perpetual 

conservation and management of this 

site. However, as noted above and as 

described earlier in this document, even 

without formal protections, the regular 

mowing that occurs at this site on a 

consistent basis year after year has 

provided for the most vast and robust 

population of the species known, the 

owners have voluntarily placed signs to 

alert the public to the presence of the 

plant, and the site faces no known 

threats. 

The fact that the majority of 

Bradshaw’s lomatium sites are in some 

form of public or NGO ownership, or 

under conservation easement or other 

agreement, gives us confidence that 

appropriate habitat management is 

likely to continue into the foreseeable 

future. The MOU committing to longterm conservation of Bradshaw’s 

lomatium on Federal lands regardless of 

its listing status, recently developed by 

the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 

Bureau of Land Management, Natural 

Resources Conservation Service, and the 

Service, which collectively own or 

manage at least 35 of the 71 known 

Bradshaw’s lomatium sites, further adds 

to this confidence (Service et al. 2020, 

entire). As noted above, this MOU did 

not enter into our consideration of the 

potential delisting of Bradshaw’s 

lomatium. However, it offers further 

support for our confidence in the 

strength of the established conservation 

alliances for the preservation of prairie 

species and ecosystems in the 

Willamette Valley, and the likelihood 

that these efforts are likely to continue. 

Monitoring under the post-delisting 

monitoring plan (see our response to 

Comment (2), below) is designed to 

confirm that appropriate management 

continues and that degradation of 

habitat for the species does not follow 

delisting. 

Details about the State of Oregon’s 

criteria for delisting plants from the 

State Endangered Species List can be 

found in Oregon Administrative Rule 

(OAR) 603–073–0030. Under this OAR, 

when a plant is removed from the 

Federal list, it is not automatically 

removed from the State list, but must 

undergo review if delisting is initiated. 

This review process can take years. 

Removal from the State list is, therefore, 

not necessarily imminent. In addition, 

the habitat protections afforded listed 

plants by both Federal and State laws 

are limited. Under the provisions of 

both the Act and Oregon State law (see 

OAR 603–073–0090 and Oregon Revised 

Statute (ORS) 564.120), listed plants are 

protected by prohibitions from certain 

activities (for example, cutting, digging, 

damaging, destroying; transport and 

sale) but nothing in either law requires 

the maintenance of habitat for listed 

plants. We, therefore, would not expect 

State delisting of Bradshaw’s lomatium 

to have much practical effect on the 

maintenance of habitat for the species or 

protection from habitat degradation. 

After the protections of the Act no 

longer apply, we are planning for a 6- 

year post-delisting monitoring period to 

ensure Bradshaw’s lomatium’s status 

does not deteriorate. If a substantial 

decline in the species (numbers of 

individuals or populations) or an 

increase in threats is detected during 

that period, we will implement 

measures to halt the species’ decline so 

that re-proposing it as an endangered or 

threatened species is not needed. The 

objective of the post-delisting 

monitoring plan is to verify that 

Bradshaw’s lomatium remains secure 

from the risk of extinction after the 

protections of the Act have been 

removed. The plan is specifically 

designed to detect any significant 

declines in Bradshaw’s lomatium 

populations, should any occur, with 

reasonable certainty and precision (see 

also our response to Comment (2), 

below). 

Comment (2): One commenter 

expressed concerns that the draft postdelisting monitoring plan prioritizes 

monitoring of only 18 sites, or about 25 

percent of all known sites, which could 

leave the status of most sites unknown 

and possibly allow a serious decline in 

critical populations to be missed. The 

commenter recommended including 

more sites, and choosing those sites 

based on their recovery value; including 

smaller, more vulnerable populations 

that play an important role in terms of 

species viability (redundancy or 

representation) as a priority for 

monitoring; and prioritizing sites for 

monitoring that lack management plans 

or are otherwise at high risk of being 

threatened following delisting. With 

regard to some of the smaller 

populations that are contributing to 

recovery, the commenter suggested that 

population trend information be 

presented in addition to measures of 

plant abundance. 

In addition, this commenter suggested 

expedited site visits to additional lower 

priority sites after delisting. These visits 

could include collection of data that is 

informative but less time-consuming to 

collect, such as identifying whether 

management is continuing, identifying 

whether flowering plants are present, 

photo monitoring, and estimating 

population size-class. 

Our Response: Monitoring a 

representative subsample of sites as 

outlined in the draft post-delisting 

monitoring plan will give us an early 

indication if declines are occurring or if 

threats such as habitat degradation are 

resurgent. Limited resources preclude 

our ability to completely survey all of 

the known Bradshaw’s lomatium sites 

each year; thus, we endeavored to craft 

a post-delisting monitoring plan that 

would effectively capture trends in 

population size, habitat quality, and 

management direction across a 

representative sample of sites. 

The 18 priority sites for post-delisting 

monitoring have been selected to 

represent the full geographic range of 

the species, a variety of ownerships 

(informative regarding habitat 

management; see below), and a range of 

population sizes. We specifically 

designed post-delisting monitoring to 

address whether, and what type of, 

management has occurred on the site in 

the previous year, as well as the 

ownership status of the site, precisely 

because Bradshaw’s lomatium is a 

conservation-reliant species and is so 

dependent on appropriate habitat 

management. Conservation programs 

offered through the Service’s Partners 

for Fish and Wildlife Program and 

various Farm Bill programs 

administered through the Natural 

Resources Conservation Service will 

continue to be available to private 

landowners for the long-term 

maintenance and protection of 

important Bradshaw’s lomatium 

populations on private lands after the 

species is delisted. As described in the 

post-delisting monitoring plan, a 6-year 

post-delisting monitoring period will 

provide time for sites to undergo two to 

three management cycles, allowing 

monitoring efforts to identify potential 

deficiencies in management outcomes. 

The sites chosen for monitoring 

include representation from all of the 

recovery zones across the range of the 

species, different land ownerships, and 

different population sizes (ranging from 

as few as 83 individuals to nearly 

75,000). The monitoring history of sites 

was an important consideration in their 

selection for post-delisting monitoring; 

to the extent possible we chose sites that 

have already been monitored for long 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
13212 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 43 / Monday, March 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

periods of time and have established 

population trends, which allows us to 

build on this existing data set and 

provides a more robust analysis of trend 

information post-delisting. The plan 

calls for post-delisting monitoring to 

follow methods previously used at each 

site so that reliable long-term trends can 

be determined based on standardized 

data collection. 

Of the 18 sites, 4 are privately owned, 

and only 2 of those are without 

conservation and management 

agreements. Fourteen of the 18 sites are 

on Federal, State, municipal, or other 

conservation ownership with active 

management plans. The 18 priority sites 

are just that: The priority sites for 

monitoring. Additional sites may be 

monitored as resources allow, and the 

post-delisting monitoring plan 

specifically allows for future 

modification as needed or appropriate. 

We have incorporated the commenter’s 

recommendation to add expedited site 

visits and abbreviated data collection at 

additional sites as time and opportunity 

allows, which would provide for an 

occasional check on the status of other 

Bradshaw’s lomatium populations, into 

our final post-delisting monitoring plan. 

Through the implementation of the 

post-delisting monitoring plan, the 

implementation of the aforementioned 

MOU, and the continued work of the 

various native plant work groups and 

conservation partnerships focused on 

the recovery of native plants, we 

conclude that sufficient monitoring is in 

place to detect any significant changes 

in the populations of Bradshaw’s 

lomatium. If data show that the species 

is declining, or if one or more factors 

that have the potential to cause a 

decline are identified, we may continue 

monitoring beyond the 6-year period 

and modify the post-delisting 

monitoring plan based on an evaluation 

of the results, or reinitiate listing if 

necessary. 

Section 4(g)(2) of the Act directs the 

Service to make prompt use of its 

emergency listing authorities under 

section 4(b)(7) of the Act to prevent a 

significant risk to the well-being of any 

recovered species. While not 

specifically mentioned in section 4(g) of 

the Act, authorities to list species in 

accordance with the process prescribed 

in sections 4(b)(5) and 4(b)(6) of the Act 

may also be used to reinstate species on 

the List, if warranted. 

Determination of Bradshaw’s 

Lomatium’s Status 

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. For a 

more detailed discussion on the factors 

considered when determining whether a 

species meets the definition of an 

endangered species or a threatened 

species and our analysis on how we 

determine the foreseeable future in 

making these decisions, please see 

Regulatory and Analytical Framework, 

above. 

Status Throughout All of Its Range 

After evaluating threats to the species 

and assessing the cumulative effect of 

the threats under the Act’s section 

4(a)(1) factors, we found that the known 

range of Bradshaw’s lomatium was 

considered dramatically reduced when 

we listed it as an endangered species in 

1988; at that time, we estimated that 

there were 11 small populations that 

included a total of roughly 25,000 to 

30,000 individuals. In addition, the 

species faced threats from habitat loss 

due to land conversion for agriculture 

and urbanization, as well as natural 

succession to woody species dominance 

due to loss of historical disturbance 

regimes. As such, the species was 

perceived to be upon the brink of 

extinction. Bradshaw’s lomatium has 

been the subject of intensive recovery 

efforts since it was listed under the Act 

30 years ago, and the discovery of new, 

previously unknown populations; 

success in augmentation and habitat 

restoration and management efforts; and 

the protection of Bradshaw’s lomatium 

populations and habitats on public 

lands and on private lands through 

conservation easements and 

management agreements with NGOs and 

other parties have led to a significant 

reduction in threats and improvement 

in the status of the species since listing. 

Recovery goals for delisting 

Bradshaw’s lomatium were set at a 

minimum of 20 populations with a total 

of 100,000 individual plants distributed 

across the species’ historical range. 

Under current conditions, 24 

populations of Bradshaw’s lomatium are 

distributed throughout the species’ 

historical range; if we consider only 

those populations in high or moderate 

condition and containing at least 200 

individuals as contributing to recovery, 

17 such populations occur throughout 

the range of the species (see table, 

above). Considering only those 17 

populations in high or moderate 

condition and with greater than 200 

plants, the most recent counts 

demonstrate an estimated 485,595 

known individuals are distributed 

throughout the historical range of the 

species (this count does not include the 

southwestern Washington population to 

ensure our evaluation was not unduly 

influenced by this single extremely large 

population). 

Our analysis of current population 

condition on the basis of plant 

abundance, habitat quality, 

management, and protection from 

development resulted in rankings of 10 

populations in high condition overall, 9 

populations in moderate condition, and 

4 populations in low condition. 

Therefore, we are significantly less 

concerned about small population sizes 

or limited distribution of the species 

than we were at the time of listing. The 

increase in known populations is due in 

large part to increased survey efforts and 

incidental discovery of more occupied 

habitat, leaving open the potential of 

finding even more populations of 

Bradshaw’s lomatium in the future. 

Acquisition by conservation NGOs, or 

enrollment into conservation easement 

programs, of sites containing 

Bradshaw’s lomatium populations has 

substantially reduced the risk of habitat 

and population losses due to land use 

conversion (Factor A). In addition, 

population augmentation or 

introduction, combined with ongoing 

active management of woody 

encroachment and of nonnative, 

invasive plant infestations, has 

ameliorated the threat posed by these 

processes (Factor A) and increased the 

resilience of many Bradshaw’s 

lomatium populations on protected 

sites. Other potential threats identified 

at the time of listing have either never 

materialized (parasitism by other 

organisms (Factor C), negative effects of 

inbreeding depression (Factor E)) or 

have been addressed through other 

means (i.e., habitat protections and 

management, addressing Factor D). 

Since listing, we have become aware 

of the potential for the effects of climate 

change (Factor E) to affect organisms 

and ecosystems, including potentially 

Bradshaw’s lomatium. We considered 

the potential consequences of climate 

change and evaluated a range of future 

scenarios, including one with up to a 50 

percent reduction in the size of all 

known populations across the range of 

the species. Even in the face of such a 

severe population reduction, the species 

retained appreciable levels of resiliency, 

redundancy, and representation such 

that we do not consider the effects of 

climate change to pose a threat such that 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 43 / Monday, March 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 13213 

it would place the species at risk of 

extinction in the future (Service 2018, 

pp. 42–46). To be conservative, our 

analysis of future conditions did not 

consider that ongoing efforts to improve 

population sizes and habitat quality 

have the potential to further increase the 

number of resilient populations of 

Bradshaw’s lomatium. Many stressors to 

the species are being addressed through 

habitat management and population 

augmentation, but ongoing management 

is necessary to maintain resilient 

populations throughout the species’ 

range. 

In sum, significant impacts at the time 

of listing such as habitat loss due to 

land use conversion and woody 

encroachment that could have resulted 

in the extirpation of all or parts of 

populations have been either eliminated 

or reduced since listing. An assessment 

of likely future conditions, including 

the status of known stressors, 

management trends, and possible 

impacts of climate change, finds that 

although populations may decline in 

abundance, at least 14 to 16 populations 

across the range of the species are 

expected to maintain high or moderate 

resiliency over a timeframe of 25 to 50 

years into the future (Service 2018, pp. 

42–46). We, therefore, conclude that the 

previously recognized impacts to 

Bradshaw’s lomatium from present or 

threatened destruction, modification, or 

curtailment of its habitat or range 

(specifically, habitat development for 

agriculture or urbanization and invasion 

of prairie vegetation by various woody 

plant species) (Factor A); disease or 

predation (specifically, parasitism by 

insects and predation by voles) (Factor 

C); the inadequacy of existing regulatory 

mechanisms (Factor D); and other 

natural or manmade factors affecting its 

continued existence (specifically, 

genetic isolation, inbreeding depression, 

and the effects of climate change) 

(Factor E) do not rise to a level of 

significance, either individually or in 

combination, such that the species is in 

danger of extinction now or likely to 

become so within the foreseeable future. 

Overutilization for commercial, 

recreational, scientific, or educational 

purposes (Factor B) was not a factor in 

listing and based on the best available 

information, we conclude that it does 

not constitute a threat to Bradshaw’s 

lomatium now or in the foreseeable 

future. The Service recognizes that 

woody encroachment and nonnative, 

invasive plant species are stressors with 

ongoing impacts to Bradshaw’s 

lomatium, but finds that current and 

expected trends in site protection and 

habitat management are sufficient to 

prevent these stressors from constituting 

a threat to the species such that it would 

meet the definition of an endangered 

species or a threatened species. Thus, 

after assessing the best available 

information, we determine that 

Bradshaw’s lomatium is not in danger of 

extinction now or likely to become so in 

the foreseeable future throughout all of 

its range. 

Status Throughout a Significant Portion 

of Its Range 

Under the Act and our implementing 

regulations, a species may warrant 

listing if it is in danger of extinction or 

likely to become so in the foreseeable 

future throughout all or a significant 

portion of its range. Having determined 

that Bradshaw’s lomatium is not in 

danger of extinction or likely to become 

so in the foreseeable future throughout 

all of its range, we now consider 

whether it may be in danger of 

extinction or likely to become so in the 

foreseeable future in a significant 

portion of its range—that is, whether 

there is any portion of the species’ range 

for which both (1) the portion is 

significant, and (2) the species is in 

danger of extinction now or likely to 

become so in the foreseeable future in 

that portion. Depending on the case, it 

might be more efficient for us to address 

the ‘‘significance’’ question or the 

‘‘status’’ question first. We can choose to 

address either question first. Regardless 

of which question we address first, if we 

reach a negative answer with respect to 

the first question that we address, we do 

not need to evaluate the other question 

for that portion of the species’ range. In 

undertaking this analysis for Bradshaw’s 

lomatium, we choose to address the 

status question first—we consider 

information pertaining to the geographic 

distribution of both the species and the 

threats that the species faces to identify 

any portions of the range where the 

species is endangered or threatened. We 

considered whether the threats to 

Bradshaw’s lomatium are geographically 

concentrated in any portion of the 

species’ range at a biologically 

meaningful scale. We examined the 

following threats: Habitat loss from land 

conversion or invasion of prairies by 

nonnative, invasive, and woody species; 

parasitic organisms; predation by voles; 

inadequate State or Federal protections; 

inbreeding depression; climate change; 

and the cumulative effects of these 

threats. 

The threat of habitat loss from land 

conversion and invasion of prairies by 

nonnative, invasive, and woody species 

has decreased in all portions of the 

range since the time of listing, due to 

land protection efforts and active habitat 

management. Of the two sites that 

comprise the sole population of 

Bradshaw’s lomatium in southwestern 

Washington, one is located on a 

privately owned golf course and 

contained approximately 10.8 million 

Bradshaw’s lomatium plants at the most 

recent survey. This site currently has 

high-quality habitat. Current 

management at the site, as in past years, 

supports open, wet prairie conditions 

(Service 2018, pp. 29, 57), primarily 

through mowing. Although no formal 

protections are in place that would 

prevent future development, we have no 

information to indicate that it is likely 

the site would be developed or that 

habitat management will change in any 

way that would substantially impact 

Bradshaw’s lomatium. In addition, the 

areas occupied by Bradshaw’s lomatium 

are within wetlands, which may have 

protections from development under 

State or Federal law. Based on the 

current protections of the other 

Washington site, a preserve owned and 

managed by the WDNR, the lack of any 

present threat of destruction or 

degradation at the privately owned golf 

course site, and ongoing appropriate 

management at both sites, we have 

confidence that habitat at these sites 

will continue to support Bradshaw’s 

lomatium for the foreseeable future. In 

Oregon, greater than 99 percent of 

known Bradshaw’s lomatium plants 

occur on sites protected through public 

or NGO ownership, through designation 

as a right-of-way, or by conservation 

easements on private lands. Rangewide, 

75 percent of the known sites receive 

active management that benefits the 

species. Thus, we have found no 

evidence that the present or threatened 

destruction, modification, or 

curtailment of habitat (Factor A) is 

concentrated within any portion of 

Bradshaw’s lomatium’s range, or will be 

within the foreseeable future. 

We found no evidence that negative 

impacts due to parasitic organisms 

constitute a threat to the viability of 

Bradshaw’s lomatium in any part of its 

range, now or in the foreseeable future. 

Predation by voles appears to vary 

year to year and can substantially 

reduce aboveground biomass and 

reproduction of Bradshaw’s lomatium in 

years when vole abundance is high. 

However, the effect on populations is 

found to be minimal over time, as long 

as there is sufficient time for Bradshaw’s 

lomatium to regenerate taproot reserves 

between vole outbreaks (Drew 2000, pp. 

54–55), and no consistent long-term 

declines attributable to vole predation 

have been reported (Service 2018, p. 

20). The best available information does 

not indicate that predation is 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
13214 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 43 / Monday, March 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

concentrated with any portion of the 

range of Bradshaw’s lomatium, or will 

be within the foreseeable future (Factor 

C). 

Current State and Federal protections 

appear adequate to address the loss of 

Bradshaw’s lomatium habitat 

throughout its range, and we do not 

foresee changes to these protections in 

the foreseeable future (Factor D). As 

described above, we do not consider 

habitat loss to be concentrated within 

any portion of its range. Of the two 

known sites containing Bradshaw’s 

lomatium in southwestern Washington, 

one is protected through ownership by 

the WDNR. Although the second, larger 

site lacks formal protection, it faces no 

currently known threat of habitat loss or 

degradation, either now or within the 

foreseeable future. Additionally, the 

WDNR continues to make efforts to 

provide additional conservation at the 

site. Bradshaw’s lomatium remains 

listed as endangered by the State of 

Washington. 

Concerns over the possibility of 

inbreeding depression expressed at the 

time of listing are now reduced due to 

a subsequent study indicating that 

overall genetic diversity in Bradshaw’s 

lomatium is relatively high for a rare 

species (Gitzendanner and Soltis 2001, 

pp. 352–353), and is greater than that 

found in other rare Lomatium species 

(Gitzendanner and Soltis 2000, p. 787). 

Although the most disjunct population 

in southwestern Washington showed 

relatively lower genetic diversity than 

less geographically isolated populations 

(Gitzendanner and Soltis 2001, p. 353), 

the threat of inbreeding depression is 

considered reduced, as we now 

understand Bradshaw’s lomatium to be 

primarily an outcrossing species (which 

promotes increased genetic diversity), 

rather than an obligate self-pollinating 

species as was believed at the time of 

listing (Service 2018, pp. 7, 20). We 

have no information indicating that 

inbreeding depression constitutes a 

threat to the viability of Bradshaw’s 

lomatium in any part of its range, now 

or in the foreseeable future. 

In our SSA report, we assessed the 

potential impacts of climate change on 

Bradshaw’s lomatium projected up to 50 

years in the future, and conservatively 

evaluated a future scenario in which the 

potential negative effects of climate 

change were such that all populations 

were reduced in size by up to 50 

percent. Under such a scenario, we 

estimated that populations currently in 

low condition or with very low 

abundance may be extirpated due to the 

combined effects of climate change 

impacts and stochastic events; this 

translated to an estimated loss of up to 

five small populations, with other 

populations reduced in size. However, 

even with a presumed 50 percent 

reduction in abundance, at least 14 to 16 

populations of Bradshaw’s lomatium in 

moderate or high condition are expected 

to remain throughout the range with 

ongoing management. We, therefore, 

have no information to indicate that 

other natural or manmade factors pose 

a threat to the continued existence of 

Bradshaw’s lomatium (Factor E), now or 

within the foreseeable future, in any 

portion of the range. 

Although the types, magnitude, or 

extent of potential cumulative impacts 

are difficult to predict, we are not aware 

of any combination of factors that are 

likely to co-occur with significant 

negative consequences for the species 

within any portion of its range. We 

anticipate that any negative 

consequence of co-occurring threats will 

be successfully addressed through the 

same active management actions that 

have contributed to the ongoing 

recovery of Bradshaw’s lomatium and 

that are expected to continue into the 

future. 

We found no concentration of threats 

in any portion of Bradshaw’s 

lomatium’s range at a biologically 

meaningful scale. Therefore, no portion 

of the species’ range can provide a basis 

for determining that the species is in 

danger of extinction now or likely to 

become so in the foreseeable future in 

a significant portion of its range, and we 

find the species is not in danger of 

extinction now or likely to become so in 

the foreseeable future in any significant 

portion of its range. This is consistent 

with the courts’ holdings in Desert 

Survivors v. Department of the Interior, 

No. 16–cv–01165–JCS, 2018 WL 

4053447 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 2018), and 

Center for Biological Diversity v. Jewell, 

248 F. Supp. 3d, 946, 959 (D. Ariz. 

2017). 

Determination of Status 

Our review of the best available 

scientific and commercial information 

indicates that Bradshaw’s lomatium 

does not meet the definition of an 

endangered species or a threatened 

species in accordance with sections 3(6) 

and 3(20) of the Act. Therefore, we are 

removing Bradshaw’s lomatium from 

the List of Endangered and Threatened 

Plants. 

Effects of This Rule 

This rule revises 50 CFR 17.12(h) to 

remove Bradshaw’s lomatium from the 

Federal List of Endangered and 

Threatened Plants. 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, no longer 

apply to this species, and Federal 

agencies are no longer 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 Bradshaw’s lomatium. There is no 

critical habitat designated for this 

species, so there will be no change to 50 

CFR 17.96. 

Post-Delisting Monitoring 

Section 4(g)(1) of the Act requires the 

Secretary of the Interior, through the 

Service and in cooperation with the 

States, to implement a monitoring 

program for not less than 5 years for all 

species that no longer meet the 

definition of endangered or threatened 

and, therefore, have been delisted. The 

purpose of this post-delisting 

monitoring is to verify that a species 

remains secure from risk of extinction 

after the protections of the Act have 

been removed. The monitoring is 

designed to detect the failure of any 

delisted species to sustain itself without 

the protective measures provided by the 

Act. If, at any time during the 

monitoring period, data indicate that the 

protective status under the Act should 

be reinstated, we can initiate listing 

procedures, including, if appropriate, 

emergency listing under section 4(b)(7) 

of the Act. Section 4(g) of the Act 

explicitly requires us to cooperate with 

the States in post-delisting monitoring 

programs, but we remain responsible for 

compliance with section 4(g) of the Act 

and, therefore, must remain actively 

engaged in all phases of post-delisting 

monitoring. We also seek active 

participation of other entities that are 

expected to assume responsibilities for 

the species’ conservation post-delisting. 

We prepared a post-delisting 

monitoring plan for Bradshaw’s 

lomatium. The plan discusses the 

current status of the species and 

describes the methods for monitoring 

the species subsequent to its removal 

from the Federal List of Endangered and 

Threatened Plants. The final postdelisting monitoring plan is available at 

http://www.regulations.gov under 

Docket No. FWS–R1–ES–2019–0013. 

We will work closely with our partners 

to maintain the recovered status of 

Bradshaw’s lomatium and ensure postdelisting monitoring is conducted and 

future management strategies are 

implemented (as necessary) to benefit 

Bradshaw’s lomatium. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 43 / Monday, March 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 13215 

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 of 

1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), need not 

be prepared in connection with 

regulations pursuant to section 4(a) of 

the 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. 

We have determined that no Tribes will 

be affected by this rule because no 

Tribal lands, sacred sites, or resources 

will be affected by the removal of 

Bradshaw’s lomatium from the List of 

Endangered and Threatened Plants. 

References Cited 

A complete list of all references cited 

in this rule is available on the internet 

at http://www.regulations.gov under 

Docket No. FWS–R1–ES–2019–0013 or 

upon request from the State Supervisor, 

Oregon Fish and Wildlife Office (see 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). 

Authors 

The primary authors of this rule are 

the staff of the Oregon Fish and Wildlife 

Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT). 

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 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 17 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531– 

1544; 4201–4245, unless otherwise noted. 

§ 17.12 [Amended] 

■ 2. Amend § 17.12(h) by removing the 

entry for ‘‘Lomatium bradshawii’’ under 

FLOWERING PLANTS from the List of 

Endangered and Threatened Plants. 

Martha Williams, 

Principal Deputy Director Exercising the 

Delegated Authority of the Director, U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service. 

[FR Doc. 2021–04693 Filed 3–5–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 679 

[Docket No. 210210–0018; RTID 0648– 

XA787] 

Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic 

Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Cod by 

Catcher/Processors Using Hook-andLine Gear in the Western Regulatory 

Area of the Gulf of Alaska 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Temporary rule; closure. 

SUMMARY: NMFS is prohibiting directed 

fishing for Pacific cod by catcher/ 

processors using hook-and-line gear in 

the Western Regulatory Area of the Gulf 

of Alaska (GOA). This action is 

necessary to prevent exceeding the A 

season allowance of the 2021 total 

allowable catch (TAC) of Pacific cod by 

catcher/processors using hook-and-line 

gear in the Western Regulatory Area of 

the GOA. 

DATES: Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local 

time (A.l.t.), March 3, 2021, through 

1200 hrs, A.l.t., June 10, 2021. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Krista Milani, 907–581–2062. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS 

manages the groundfish fishery in the 

GOA exclusive economic zone 

according to the Fishery Management 

Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of 

Alaska (FMP) prepared by the North 

Pacific Fishery Management Council 

under authority of the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and 

Management Act. Regulations governing 

fishing by U.S. vessels in accordance 

with the FMP appear at subpart H of 50 

CFR part 600 and 50 CFR part 679. 

The A season allowance of the 2021 

Pacific cod TAC apportioned to catcher/ 

processors using hook-and-line gear in 

the Western Regulatory Area of the GOA 

is 588 metric tons (mt) as established by 

the final 2021 and 2022 harvest 

specifications for groundfish in the GOA 

(86 FR 10184, February 19, 2021). 

In accordance with § 679.20(d)(1)(i), 

the Regional Administrator has 

determined that the A season allowance 

of the 2021 Pacific cod TAC 

apportioned to catcher/processors using 

hook-and-line gear in the Western 

Regulatory Area of the GOA will soon 

be reached. Therefore, the Regional 

Administrator is establishing a directed 

fishing allowance of 588 mt and is 

setting aside the remaining 0 mt as 

bycatch to support other anticipated 

groundfish fisheries. In accordance with 

§ 679.20(d)(1)(iii), the Regional 

Administrator finds that this directed 

fishing allowance has been reached. 

Consequently, NMFS is prohibiting 

directed fishing for Pacific cod by 

catcher/processors using hook-and-line 

gear in the Western Regulatory Area of 

the GOA. 

While this closure is effective the 

maximum retainable amounts at 

§ 679.20(e) and (f) apply at any time 

during a trip. 

Classification 

NMFS issues this action pursuant to 

section 305(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens 

Act. This action is required by 50 CFR 

part 679, which was issued pursuant to 

section 304(b), and is exempt from 

review under Executive Order 12866. 

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), there 

is good cause to waive prior notice and 

an opportunity for public comment on 

this action, as notice and comment 

would be impracticable and contrary to 

the public interest, as it would prevent 

NMFS from responding to the most 

recent fisheries data in a timely fashion 

and would delay the closure of Pacific 

cod by catcher/processors using hookand-line gear in the Western Regulatory 

Area of the GOA. NMFS was unable to 

publish a notice providing time for 

public comment because the most 

recent, relevant data only became 

available as of March 2, 2021. 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES