Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 106 / Thursday, June 1, 2000 / Proposed Rules 35025

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

RIN 1018–AG09

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife

and Plants; Proposed Endangered

Status for Three Plants From the

Mariana Islands and Guam

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,

Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service (Service), propose

endangered status pursuant to the

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as

amended (Act), for three plants (no

common names): Nesogenes rotensis,

Osmoxylon mariannense, and

Tabernaemontana rotensis. Nesogenes

rotensis and O. mariannense are found

only on the island of Rota in the U.S.

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana

Islands (CNMI). Tabernaemontana

rotensis occurs on both Rota and the

United States Territory of Guam. The

three plant species and their habitats

have been affected or are now

threatened by one or more of the

following: habitat degradation or

destruction by feral deer and pigs;

competition for space, light, water, and

nutrients with introduced vegetation;

road construction and maintenance

activities; recreational activities; natural

disasters or random environmental

events; fire; vandalism; development of

agricultural homesteads; resorts and golf

courses; limited reproductive vigor; and

potential insect, mouse, or rat predation.

This proposal, if made final, would

implement the Federal protection and

recovery provisions of the Act.

DATES: Comments from all interested

parties must be received by July 31,

2000. Public hearing requests must be

received by July 17, 2000.

ADDRESSES: If you wish to comment,

you may submit your comments and

materials concerning this proposal by

any one of several methods.

(1) You may submit written comments

to the Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service, Pacific Islands Office,

300 Ala Moana Boulevard, Room 3–122,

P.O. Box 50088, Honolulu, Hawaii

96850;

(2) You may send comments by e-mail

to 3mplantslpr@fws.gov (see

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for file

formats and other information about

electronic filing); or

(3) You may hand-deliver comments

to our Pacific Islands Office, 300 Ala

Moana Boulevard, Room 3–122,

Honolulu, Hawaii 96850.

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: Paul

Henson, Field Supervisor, at the above

address (telephone 808–541–3441;

facsimile 808–541–3470).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Nesogenes rotensis, Osmoxylon

mariannense, and Tabernaemontana

rotensis occur on the island of Rota in

the United States Commonwealth of

Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI).

Tabernaemontana rotensis also occurs

in the United States Territory of Guam.

The island of Rota (lat. 14 degrees 01

minutes, long. 145 degrees) is located

approximately 134 kilometers (km) (80

miles (mi)) northwest of the Territory of

Guam. In general, the islands are raised

limestone terraces on extinct volcanic

peaks and slopes, with limited areas of

volcanic soils protruding through

limestone. Rota, 86 square kilometers

(sq km) (33 square miles (sq mi)), is

significantly smaller in area than Guam,

which is approximately 500 sq km (200

sq mi), although both islands have

similar maximum elevation of 490

meters (m) (1,612 feet (ft)) and 406 m

(1,167 ft) above sea level, respectively.

The climate on Rota and Guam is

tropical marine with high humidity and

uniform temperatures throughout the

year. Average daytime temperatures are

approximately 26.4° Celsius (80°

Fahrenheit) with approximately 200

centimeters (cm) (80 inches (in)) of

rainfall and about 80 percent humidity.

Rainfall averages 26.8 cm (10.7 in) per

month during the wet season and 9.5 cm

(3.8 in) per month during the dry season

(Resources Northwest 1997). The dry

season generally occurs from January to

June, and trade winds of 24 to 40 km (15

to 25 mi) per hour from the east and

northeast are common. The trade winds

degenerate during the rainy season,

which generally occurs from July to

December. During this period, westward

moving storms develop along and above

the equator in an area known as the

Intertropical Convergence Zone. These

storms occasionally reach typhoon

strength and can cause extensive

damage to crops, homes, community

infrastructure, and island forests

(Resources Northwest 1997).

The vegetation of Rota and Guam falls

into four general classes: forest,

secondary vegetation, agroforest, and

nonforest areas (Falanruw et al. 1989).

The forest class includes five primary

types: native limestone forest,

introduced trees, mangrove (Rhizophora

spp.) forest, ironwood (Casuarina sp.)

forest, and atoll forest (Falanruw et al.

1989). Historically, native limestone

forest varied from semidry forest to

more or less dry-season deciduous

forests on the lower terraces to wet

cloud forest on the highest terraces.

Osmoxylon mariannense occurs in the

cloud forest on the highest terrace, or

sabana, of Rota. Tabernaemontana

rotensis occurs in or on the edges of the

drier semideciduous limestone forests.

Nesogenes rotensis occurs along the

lowest terrace or coastal plain in strand

vegetation on open limestone sea cliffs.

Much of the original native forests on

Rota and Guam was cleared for

agriculture and timber harvest or by

military activities, including bombing

during World War II (Fosberg 1960).

However, both Rota and Guam have

extensive secondary native forests of

medium stature that have regrown since

the peak disturbance period associated

with Japanese and American occupation

of the islands during World War II.

These forests, however, have

subsequently been degraded by

agricultural practices, logging, and

development (Fosberg 1960).

These three plant species occur on

private land, land owned by the CNMI

(public park area), and Federal land

(Andersen Air Force Base).

Discussion of the Three Plant Species

Nesogenes Rotensis

The type collection of Nesogenes

rotensis, collected on April 23, 1982, by

Derral Herbst and Marjorie Falanruw,

was from Haaniya Point (Pon ̃a Point

Fishing Cliff), Palie area, on the island

of Rota, growing on exposed, dry raised

limestone, at 100 m (328 ft) elevation

(Fosberg and Herbst 1983). It was

growing in association with Scaevola

sericea (nanaso), Terminalia samoensis

(talisai ganu), Hedyotis strigulosa

(paode ́do ́), Pogonatherum paniceum,

and Bikkia tetrandra (gausali). Fosberg

and Herbst (1983) formally described

and published the name Nesogenes

rotensis and placed it in the family

Chloanthaceae, a largely Australian

family. This placement was a change

from the historic placement of the genus

in the family Verbenaceae and its

subsequent placement in its own family,

Nesogenaceae. Presently, Mabberly

(1990) recognizes Nesogenes as a genus

of Verbenaceae, but states that it may

simply be a matter of preference as to

how to treat the genus Nesogenes.

35026 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 106 / Thursday, June 1, 2000 / Proposed Rules

Nesogenes rotensis is an herbaceous

plant with small, opposite, broadly

lanceolate, coarsely toothed leaves.

Flowers are axillary and tubular, with

five white petals; often a flowering

branch grows upright, which might aid

in pollination or seed dispersal

(Raulerson and Rinehart 1997). Each

plant typically branches near the base at

about five to seven nodes, and is

subprostrate to ascending, scrambling

over appressed shrubs, with whole

plants up to almost 1 m (3 ft) in

diameter (Fosberg and Herbst 1983).

One population of fewer than 100

plants was reported in 1982 by Derral

Herbst at the Pon ̃a Point Fishing Cliff,

public park land owned by the CNMI

(under jurisdiction of the CNMI

Department of Land and Natural

Resources (DLNR)) and the site of the

only known population (Loyal

Mehrhoff, Service, pers. comm. 1993).

In 1994, Raulerson and Rinehart (1997)

reported a population of about 20

plants, occupying 200 sq m (240 sq

yards (yd)) of habitat, at the Pon ̃a Point

Fishing Cliff. Apparently, this was the

same population as was reported by

Herbst in 1983; Herbst was uncertain of

the original location when he made the

herbarium sheet (D. Herbst, Bishop

Museum, pers. comm. 1997).

Based on information from

collections, Nesogenes rotensis flowered

April 23, 1982 (Herbst and Falanruw

6739), and was fruiting and flowering in

November 1994 (Raulerson 26222). In

January (Dan Grout, Service, pers.

comm. 1997) and February 1997

(Christa Russell, Service, in litt. 1997),

no plants were found at this site. In

January 1998, approximately 30 plants

were observed in seed, but not in flower

(Guy Hughes, Service, pers. comm.

1998). There were several volunteer

seedlings near the larger plants, and the

entire population was scattered over an

area of approximately 200 sq m (240 sq

yd). Many of the larger individuals were

senescent, with many dried branches

and only a few green leaves on one or

a few of the branches. The dried

branches were lined with cuplike

structures that contained seeds. All the

available information and recent

observations suggest that these plants

are perennials, but their above-ground

parts die back annually.

The only known population of this

species occurs in an area that has

increasingly been overutilized by

people. Because of activities, such as

collecting, trampling by fishermen and

tourists, or expansion of the park’s

facilities, human activities has become

the primary threat to the species. The

nonnative Casuarina equisetifolia

(ironwood) is presently colonizing the

Pon ̃a Point Fishing Cliff area and also

represents a major threat to N. rotensis.

Casuarina equisetifolia is a large, fastgrowing tree that reaches up to 20 m (65

ft) in height (Wagner et al. 1990). It

forms monotypic stands, shades out

other plants, takes up much of the

available nutrients, and possibly

releases a chemical agent that prevents

other plants from growing beneath it

(Neal 1965, Smith 1985). In addition,

given the limited distribution of N.

rotensis, random environmental events,

such as typhoons, storm surges, and

high surf, also threaten the one

remaining population.

Osmoxylon Mariannense

Osmoxylon mariannense was first

collected on Rota by French naturalist

Alfred Marche, an active botanical

explorer in the Mariana Islands from

1887–1889 (Stone 1970). It was not until

1933, when a study of Marche’s

collection was made, that Kanehira first

described the species as

Boerlagiodendron mariannense

(Kanehira 1933). In 1980, Fosberg and

Sachet (1980) published the currently

accepted recombination, Osmoxylon

mariannense, which has been upheld by

Raulerson and Rinehart (1991).

Osmoxylon mariannense, endemic to

Rota, is a spindly, soft-wooded tree in

the Ginseng family (Araliaceae), which

can reach 10 m (33 ft) in height. It has

several ascending, gray-barked branches

that bear conspicuous leaf scars. Leaves

vary in size; mature leaves are palmately

lobed and about 30 cm (1 ft) long and

50 cm (1.7 ft) wide. The seven to nine

lobes are coarsely toothed, and each

lobe has a conspicuous, depressed midvein. The leaves are alternate, or

whorled, at branch tips; the petioles are

35–40 cm (1–1.5 ft) long and based in

distinctive, conspicuous green multiple

‘‘sockets’’ (Raulerson and Rinehart

1991).

Historically, Osmoxylon mariannense

occurred in dense primary forest at

about 400 m (1,320 ft) elevation

(Kanehira 1933). Reports from 1980 to

1995 indicate that approximately 20

individuals from one scattered

population were in the same vicinity as

reported by Kanehira (Lynn Raulerson,

University of Guam, pers. comm. 1998;

D. Grout and L. Mehrhoff, pers. comms.

1997). Currently, all known individuals

of this species occur in small

subpopulations along a simple system of

unimproved roads crossing the top of

the sabana (highest elevation terraces) of

Rota. One of the larger subpopulations

had approximately nine individuals in

1994, but typhoons appeared to have

damaged many of the trees, and only

two were visible in 1997 (Raulerson and

Rinehart 1997).

Osmoxylon mariannense can be

found on both private (approximately 2

individuals) and publicly owned

(CNMI) (approximately 18 individuals)

land in limestone forests. It occurs as an

understory species in Pisonia

umbellifera and Hernandia labyrinthica

forests, and is often hard to see until

some trunks are tall enough to mingle

with the trunks of the other two species

(Raulerson and Rinehart 1997). In

January 1998, shortly after typhoon

Paka, five of the subpopulations,

containing a total of eight trees, were

located along the sabana road

(Estanislau Taisacan, CNMI, Division of

Fish and Wildlife (DFW) and G. Hughes,

pers. comms. 1998). The plants in each

subpopulation were completely

defoliated and damaged by the high

typhoon winds. E. Taisacan [supported

by Raulerson and Rinehart (1997)]

indicated that the total population of

Osmoxylon mariannense had

significantly declined in the past 10

years (G. Hughes, pers. comm. 1998).

Ten years before, many of the

subpopulations visited in 1998 had

several trees each (E. Taisacan, pers.

comm. 1998). Almost all of these

subpopulations have now been reduced

to a single tree, and none of these trees

are reproducing naturally (G. Hughes,

pers. comm. 1998).

Due to several exacerbating factors,

the primary threat to Osmoxylon

mariannense is the lack of regeneration

in disturbed forests. Although Rota has

historically experienced typhoon

disturbances, intense typhoons and

super typhoons have occurred with high

frequency in the past 10 years. These

repeated storms have considerably

opened the canopy of the sabana forest,

creating conditions favored by invasive

alien plants and vines and perhaps

prohibiting the regeneration of O.

mariannense (L. Mehrhoff, in. litt.

1995). For example, during the 1998 site

visit, Taisacan indicated the once manybranched, 10 m (33 ft) high tree

appearing in the photograph in

Raulerson and Rinehart’s (1991) Guide

to the Trees and Shrubs of the Mariana

Islands, had been reduced to a small

stump 2 m (6.5 ft) high with scandent

leaves after a decade of exposure to

frequent typhoons (G. Hughes, pers.

comm. 1998). Feral pigs (Sus scrofa) and

deer (Cervus mariannus) occur on Rota,

and their browsing and trampling are a

potential threat to unfenced individuals

(G. Hughes, pers. comm. 1998). Insect,

mouse (Mus musculus), or rat (Rattus

spp.) predation of seeds on the ground

is a suspected cause of the lack of

reproductive vigor exhibited by this

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 106 / Thursday, June 1, 2000 / Proposed Rules 35027

species. Since several individuals occur

close to roadways, bulldozers could

destroy plants during routine

maintenance or road improvement.

Finally, the identification of rare species

through management activities such as

fencing and signage may result in

vandalism from individuals who

perceive rare species as threats to

development (Raulerson and Rinehart

1997).

Tabernaemontana Rotensis

Kanehira (1936) first described the

species as Ervatamia rotensis from his

type collection from Rota (Kanehira

3666). Stone (1965, 1970) recognized the

species from the Rota and Guam

collections (Stone 5256, Kanehira 3666,

Hosokawa 9832) as Tabernaemontana

rotensis. Leeuwenburg (1991) examined

1,400 specimens and adopted a very

broad species concept when he lumped

52 species (including T. rotensis),

ranging from China, Taiwan, Thailand,

Java, Sabah, Australia, and Micronesia,

into a single species, T. pandacaqui.

However, Forster (1992) challenged

Leeuwenberg’s broad species concept

for Tabernaemontana species in

Australia. Forster’s research led to the

conclusion that there are two species in

Australia, T. orientalis and T.

pandacaqui. Based on Forster’s

analysis, Derral Herbst, Bishop

Museum, speculated that Leeuwenberg’s

broad concept of lumping all

Tabernaemontana species into one

species is not valid (D. Herbst, pers.

comm. 2000). This concept of

combining species, which occur both on

the Asian mainland and scattered,

isolated islands covering a very wide

geographic range, was also rejected by

Dr. Fosberg of the Smithsonian

Institution (L. Raulerson, pers. comm.

1997). In addition, no genetic

investigations have been published that

would support Leeuwenberg’s

conclusion. Therefore, although the

taxonomy of this species is still in

dispute, we have determined that we

have sufficient information to consider

T. rotensis as a species in its own right.

Tabernaemontana rotensis is a small

tree in the Dogbane family

(Apocynaceae). It grows to heights of

perhaps 6 m (20 ft) and is rather weak

and spindly in appearance, with large,

yellow-green to dark-green leaves and

thin, milky sap. The inflorescence

consists of a few to over 30 flowers with

5 spirally arranged, united white petals

that appear slightly folded until they

flare at the tips. The fruits occur singly

or twinned and have one to three ridges.

Each fruit is relatively small, 3 to 7 cm

(1.2 to 2.8 in) long, dehiscent (they open

at maturity), and contains 4 to 10 seeds

in a red pulp. Herbarium specimens

show flowering in Guam plants has

occurred in January, May, and July;

specimens collected on Rota were in

flower in October and November.

Historically, Tabernaemontana

rotensis was known from lowland dry

forest on Rota, where Kanehira (1936)

described it as ‘‘very abundant in the

northern side of the island, but not

found elsewhere.’’ On Guam, T. rotensis

was known from individual specimens

in the limestone forests along clifflines

at Asanite, on the University of Guam

campus, and at the ‘‘Japanese Overlook’’

of the Naval Magazine (Raulerson and

Rinehart 1997). While the tree at the

University of Guam may possibly still

exist, it has not recently been surveyed.

However, the tree at the Naval Magazine

was destroyed in a typhoon when other

trees fell on it, and the tree at the

Asanite cliffs was not found during a

recent survey (Raulerson and Rinehart

1997).

Currently, there is one scattered

population of Tabernaemontana

rotensis on Rota, consisting of two

individuals. One of the trees occurs in

the Mochong area on CNMI land, and

the other individual occurs in the

Chenchon area on private land. Both

individuals are located close to roads. In

January 1998, both individuals were

observed to be healthy and in flower,

but it is not known if these plants have

ever produced fruit (G. Hughes, pers.

comm. 1998).

Regarding the population on Guam,

Gary Wiles, Guam Division of Aquatic

and Wildlife Resources (DAWR),

recently reported a scattered population

of about 28 mature trees from Pati Point

westward to Ritidian Point within the

overlay refuge on Andersen Air Force

Base (G. Wiles, DAWR, pers. comm.

2000). The overlay refuge is part of the

Guam National Wildlife Refuge (GNWR)

that is on land owned and administered

by Andersen Air Force Base, but

managed for wildlife purposes through

a Memorandum of Agreement with us.

This population also includes 4 trees

and approximately 30 saplings and

seedlings within Area 50, a 24-hectare

(ha) (60-acre (ac)) section of forest being

intensively managed to determine the

effects of removal of feral ungulates and

brown tree snakes on native limestone

forest habitat. In addition, 2 mature

trees, approximately 30 saplings, and 70

seedlings have been located along the

road to Ritidian Point within GNWR.

Finally, a single tree exists under the

powerline near the main road

connecting the main airfield and the

Munitions Storage Area on Andersen

Air Force Base. Two trees are also

known from the Ano Conservation

Reserve, on Government of Guam land

(G. Wiles, in litt. 1998).

The primary threat to

Tabernaemontana rotensis is the lack of

reproductive vigor and seed distribution

due to reduced numbers of individuals.

This situation includes a lack of

observed seed production on Rota,

which may be due to either the lack of

a pollinator or predation by insects,

mice, or rats (G. Hughes, pers. comm.

1998). On Guam, seeds have been

observed to mold in the seed case

without separating from the fruit,

indicating that birds may be useful in

distributing the seeds (G. Wiles, in litt.

1998). Competition with the nonnative

vines Momordica charantia (balsam

pear), Mikania scandens (mile-a-minute

vine), and Passiflora suberosa (wild

passionfruit) may threaten seedlings and

saplings (G. Wiles, in litt. 1998). Since

T. rotensis appears to be an edge species

and now grows along roadsides, it is

threatened by road widening or

maintenance activities. One of the two

remaining individuals on Rota was

nearly destroyed by a bulldozer in the

Chenchon area. Also, wildfires on Guam

and fires apparently set by deer

poachers on Rota have increased in

frequency during the past decade and

are a significant threat to this species. In

1996, an intentionally set fire burned

nearby sections of the Chenchon area,

one of the two known locations of this

species on Rota (E. Taisacan, pers.

comm. 1998). Signs of feral pig are

abundant in the Northwest Field of

Andersen Air Force Base, and browsing

and trampling are a potential threat to

unfenced individuals on Guam (G.

Hughes, per. comm. 1998). Finally, this

species is threatened by vandalism from

local residents who perceive rare

species as a threat to development, as a

T. rotensis tree on Rota was cut down

and set on fire after its location was

given to people planning a golf course

in the area (Raulerson and Rhinehart

1997).

Previous Federal Action

Federal action on these plants began

with the publication on February 28,

1996, of the Notice of Review (NOR) of

Plant and Animal Taxa (61 FR 7596). In

this document, Nesogenes rotensis,

Osmoxylon mariannense, and

Tabernaemontana rotensis were

considered candidate species. These

three species were, again, listed as

candidate species in the September 19,

1997, NOR (62 FR 49398). Candidate

species are those for which we have

sufficient information on biological

vulnerability and threats to support

proposals to list them as endangered or

threatened species.

35028 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 106 / Thursday, June 1, 2000 / Proposed Rules

The processing of this proposed rule

conforms with our Final 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 (Priority 3) 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 (Priority 4).

The processing of this proposed rule is

a Priority 3 action.

Summary of Factors Affecting the

Species

The procedures for adding species to

the Federal Lists are found in section 4

of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and

the accompanying regulations (50 CFR

part 424). A species may be determined

to be an endangered or a threatened

species due to one or more of the five

factors described in section 4(a)(1). The

primary threats facing the three species

in this proposed rule are summarized in

Table 1.

TABLE 1.—SUMMARY OF PRIMARY THREATS

Species Feral animals Fire Mice/rats

Nonnative

plants

Invertabrates

Development/

road

work

Typhoons/

storms

Collecting/

trampling

by humans

VandalismLimited

numbers

Nesogenes

rotensis.

............... ............... ............... ............... ......................... Significant

threat.

Significant

threat.

Significant

threat.

Potential

threat.

Significant

threat.1

Osmoxylon

mariannense.

Potential

threat.

............... Potential

threat.

Significant

threat.

Potential threat Significant

threat.

Significant

threat.

............... Potential

threat.

Significant

threat.1 *

Tabernaemontana

rotensis.

Potential

threat.

Significant

threat.

............... Potential

threat.

Potential threat Significant

threat.

Significant

threat.

............... Significant

threat.

Significant

threat.

*= No more than 25 individuals; 1 = No more than 1 population.

These factors and their application to

Nesogenes rotensis Fosberg and Herbst,

Osmoxylon mariannense (Kanehira)

Fosberg & Sachet, and

Tabernaemontana rotensis (Kanehira)

Fosberg ex Stone are as follows:

A. The present or threatened

destruction, modification, or

curtailment of its habitat or range.

Native vegetation on Guam and Rota has

undergone extreme alteration because of

past and present land use practices,

including ranching, deliberate and

unintentional alien animal and plant

introductions, agricultural development,

and military activities, including

bombing, during World War II

(Falanruw et al. 1989, Fosberg 1960). On

Guam, land development and feral

animals altered most of the island’s

native vegetation. Probably no more

than 30 percent of Guam’s land area is

covered by native limestone and ravine

forest; federally owned lands in

northern Guam represent the largest

contiguous forest areas.

Rota experienced extensive

agricultural development by the

Japanese prior to World War II, but was

not invaded by allied forces during

World War II. The absence of an

invasion, combined with rugged

topography, resulted in the persistence

of stands of native forest. However,

today, Rota retains less than 60 percent

of its native forest (Falanruw et al.

1989). The continued loss of native

forest is being exacerbated by the

Agricultural Homestead Act of 1990,

which allows for the distribution of 1-

ha (2.5-ac) parcels of public land to

eligible participants. Past land use plans

have proposed approximately 45

percent of Rota should be designated

private agricultural homestead land or

as land likely to be converted to

agricultural homesteads. Currently,

about 324 ha (809 ac), or 4 percent of

Rota, in the Chenchon area, where one

of the two individuals of

Tabernaemontana rotensis occurs, is

being considered for future agricultural

homesteads. This agricultural

development, along with the completion

of an 18-hole golf resort and plans for

additional, large-scale development,

continue to threaten the remaining

limestone forest with fragmentation and

degradation.

Throughout the Mariana Islands,

goats, pigs, cattle, and deer have caused

severe damage to forest vegetation by

browsing on plants, causing erosion

(Kessler 1997, Marshall et al. 1995), and

retarding forest growth and regeneration

(Lemke 1992). Thus, all of these islands

retain only a fraction of their historical

forested habitat, and this remaining

habitat is threatened by the

fragmentation and degradation

associated with development of resorts,

agricultural fields, and bulldozing for

road maintenance and widening (D.

Grout and L. Mehrhoff, pers. comms.

1997). For example, individuals of

Osmoxylon mariannense and

Tabernaemontana rotensis on Rota were

almost destroyed during recent roadwidening activities (D. Grout and L.

Mehrhoff, pers. comms. 1997).

B. Overutilization for commercial,

recreational, scientific, or educational

purposes. At this time, overutilization is

not known to be an important factor, but

unrestricted scientific or horticultural

collecting or excessive visits by

individuals interested in seeing rare

plants could seriously impact all three

species, whose low numbers make them

especially vulnerable to disturbances. In

addition, the only known population of

Nesogenes rotensis, located in a public

park, is threatened with trampling by

tourists and fishermen. Vandalism is

also a threat to all three species, as

evidenced by the destruction of a

Tabernaemontana rotensis tree on Rota,

which was hacked to the ground and set

on fire after its location was given to

people planning a golf course in the area

(Raulerson and Rinehart 1997).

C. Disease and predation. No diseases

or predators of these three species have

been documented. However, an

unidentified caterpillar was observed

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 106 / Thursday, June 1, 2000 / Proposed Rules 35029

causing defoliation damage to one

Tabernaemontana rotensis tree (L.

Mehrhoff and C. Russell, Service, pers.

comms. 1997), and individuals of

Osmoxylon mariannense have

reportedly suffered defoliation by an

unknown agent (E. Taisacan, pers.

comm. 1997). Although why O.

mariannense is declining is unclear,

invertebrate pests, rats, or disease are

suspected, judging by the poor health of

the leaves, the lack of seedlings or

juveniles, and the fact that several of the

previously mapped older individuals

have died in recent years (D. Grout,

pers. comm. 1997).

In the Hawaiian Islands, two rat

species, the black rat (Rattus rattus) and

the Polynesian rat (R. exulans), and to

a lesser extent other introduced rodents

such as the European house mouse (Mus

domesticus), eat large, fleshy fruits and

strip the bark of some native plants

(Cuddihy and Stone 1990, Tomich 1986,

Wagner et al. 1985). Introduced rats (R.

tanezumi and R. exulans) or house mice

(M. musculus) on Rota also may be a

threat to Osmoxylon mariannense and

Tabernaemontana rotensis, since no

regeneration of these species has been

observed (Earl Campbell, U.S.

Geological Survey, Biological Resources

Division, pers. comm. 1998).

Although no predation or trampling

by ungulates has been documented,

Osmoxylon mariannense and

Tabernaemontana rotensis on both

islands are potentially threatened by

adverse effects from feral pigs and deer.

Four of the T. rotensis trees on Guam are

protected from ungulates inside Area

50, which is fenced, though whether the

trees’ occurrence in this location

resulted from the exclusion of ungulates

is not clear. However, three individuals

of T. rotensis on Guam are not currently

fenced and could be browsed or

trampled by feral animals. On Rota,

cooperative efforts between the Service

and the Rota Division of Fish and

Wildlife resulted in the construction of

fenced exclosures around the two

known T. rotensis trees and several

individuals of O. mariannense.

D. The inadequacy of existing

regulatory mechanisms. Currently, these

species receive no formal protection

from Federal, Government of Guam, or

CNMI laws. While Government of Guam

laws would prohibit the take of

endangered species, the CNMI has no

similar regulations to protect listed

species, although they sometimes

provide limited species protection to

specific islands regardless of overall

species distributions (e.g., Mariana fruit

bat). A Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP)

for the island of Rota is now under

development (Resources Northwest

1997) by the CNMI Government and

local Rota residents with technical

assistance from the U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service, Pacific Islands Office.

Initiated largely for the conservation of

the Mariana crow (Corvus kubaryi),

most of the land that is under

discussion for possible inclusion in

conservation areas under the HCP is

limestone forest, which may provide

potential habitat for these three plant

species. However, the HCP has not yet

been submitted as part of an application

for an Endangered Species Act section

10 permit, and we have not made any

decision regarding whether it would

meet statutory issuance criteria.

The Guam National Wildlife refuge

overlay was established to develop and

implement a long-term comprehensive

program to conserve and restore

endangered and threatened species and

other native flora and fauna, consistent

with the national defense mission of the

Air Force. For example, some of the

Tabernaemontana rotensis individuals

occurring in the overlay refuge are

within Area 50, a protected section of

forest. However, as discussed in Factor

C, other individuals of this species are

not currently fenced and could be

browsed or trampled by feral animals. In

addition, while the Air Force consults

with us on actions that may affect listed,

proposed, and candidate species and

their habitats, nothing in the

cooperative agreements establishing the

overlay refuge would prohibit the Air

Force from carrying out its mission on

such lands, consistent with applicable

law. Therefore, military missions such

as troop training actions that occur

within habitat supporting candidate

species (e.g., T. rotensis) could take

precedence over conservation of

candidate species.

E. Other natural or manmade factors

affecting its continued existence. The

combination of increased storm

disturbance frequency and competition

from alien species may be significantly

altering the condition of habitat

occupied by Tabernaemontana rotensis

and Osmoxylon mariannense. Guam

and Rota have a long history of

disturbances by tropical typhoons (Weir

1991), and the native biota may be

adapted to these events; however, in the

past decade, frequent typhoons have

severely impacted both islands. In

addition, all three species are threatened

by competition from one or more

nonnative plant species.

Tabernaemontana rotensis may be

threatened by Momordica charantia,

Mikania scandens, and Passiflora

suberosa. Nesogenes rotensis is

threatened by Casuarina equisetifolia,

which is becoming established in the

coastal strand habitat at Pon ̃a Point

Fishing Cliff. C. equisetifolia will likely

spread and may significantly change the

coastal scrubland into a forest habitat

with no understory plants or available

sunlight. Destruction of the sabana

forest canopy by typhoons in recent

years has not only destroyed individual

O. mariannense trees (Raulerson and

Rinehart 1997), but has also altered

subcanopy habitat conditions over the

long term by opening up and drying out

older, closed forest habitat (E. Taisacan,

pers. comm. 1998). In opened forest

areas, various opportunistic, weedy

vines such as M. charantia, M.

scandens, and P. suberosa cover the

ground (Fosberg 1960; Guy Hughes,

pers. comm. 1998) and may not provide

the conditions for seed germination and

seedling growth as is provided in

closed-canopy, high-stature forests

covered with mosses and various

epiphytic species like orchids.

The small number of individuals of

the three species covered by this

proposed rule increases the potential for

extinction from natural or humancaused random events. The limited gene

pool may depress reproductive vigor, or

a single human-caused or natural

environmental disturbance could

destroy a significant percentage of the

individuals or whole populations. For

example, a typhoon could cause the

destruction of the remaining individuals

of Tabernaemontana rotensis on the

Guam Naval Magazine, or a storm surge

could destroy the only remaining

population of Nesogenes rotensis.

We have carefully assessed the best

scientific and commercial information

available on the past, present, and

future threats facing these species in

determining to propose this rule. Based

on this evaluation, we propose to list

Nesogenes rotensis, Osmoxylon

mariannense, and Tabernaemontana

rotensis as endangered. These three

species are threatened by one or more of

the following: habitat degradation or

destruction by feral deer and pigs;

competition for space, light, water, and

nutrients with naturalized, introduced

plant species; road construction and

maintenance activities; recreational

activities; natural disasters or random

environmental events; fire; vandalism;

development of agricultural

homesteads, resorts, and golf courses;

limited reproductive vigor; and

potentially insect, mouse, or rat

predation. Osmoxylon mariannense is

known from 1 scattered population of

approximately 20 individuals, while

Nesogenes rotensis is known from 1

population of approximately 30 plants.

Only around 30 adult Tabernaemontana

rotensis trees are known from two

35030 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 106 / Thursday, June 1, 2000 / Proposed Rules

scattered populations on Guam and

Rota. Small population size and limited

distribution make these species

particularly vulnerable to extinction

from reduced reproductive vigor or

random environmental events.

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 that may

require special management

considerations or protection; and

specific areas outside the geographical

area occupied by a 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 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 activity and the

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.

We propose that critical habitat is

prudent for Nesogenes rotensis,

Osmoxylon mariannense, and

Tabernaemontana rotensis. 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 the designation of critical

habitat for these species would be

prudent.

Due to the small population sizes, the

three species are vulnerable to

unrestricted collection, vandalism, or

other disturbance. We remain concerned

that these threats might be exacerbated

by the publication of critical habitat

maps and further dissemination of

locational information. However,

although we are aware of specific

evidence of vandalism, we do not

believe that the designation of critical

habitat will increase the degree of

threat. In addition, we have not found

specific evidence of collection or trade

of these 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 these species of taking or

other human activity.

In the absence of a finding that critical

habitat would increase threats to a

species, if any benefits would result

from critical habitat designation, then a

prudent finding is warranted. In the

case of these species, some benefits may

result from 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, in

some instances section 7 consultation

might be triggered only if critical habitat

is designated. Examples could include

unoccupied habitat or occupied habitat

that may become unoccupied in the

future. Designating critical habitat may

also provide some educational or

informational benefits. Therefore, we

find that critical habitat is prudent for

these three species.

However, we cannot propose critical

habitat designations for these species at

this time. Our Hawaiian field office,

which would have the lead for such

proposals, is in the process of

complying with the court order in

Conservation Council for Hawaii v.

Babbitt, CIV NO. 97–00098 ACK (D.

Haw. Mar. 9 and Aug. 10, 1998). In that

case, the United States District Court for

the District of Hawaii remanded to the

Service its ‘‘not prudent’’ findings on

critical habitat designation for 245

species of Hawaiian plants. The court

ordered us not only to reconsider these

findings, but also to designate critical

habitat for any species for which we

determine on remand that critical

habitat designation is prudent. Proposed

designations or nondesignations for 100

species are to be published by

November 30, 2000. Proposed

designations or nondesignations for the

remaining 145 species are to be

published by April 30, 2002. Final

designations or nondesignations are to

be published within 1 year of each

proposal. Compliance with this court

order is a huge undertaking involving

critical habitat determinations for over

one-fifth of all species that have ever

been listed under the Endangered

Species Act, and over one-third of all

listed plant species. In addition, we

have been ordered to include in this

effort critical habitat designations for an

additional 10 plants that are the subject

of another lawsuit. See Conservation

Council for Hawaii v. Babbitt, CIV. NO.

99–00283 HG. We cannot develop

proposed critical habitat designations

for these three plant species without

significant disruption of the field

office’s intensive efforts to comply with

these court orders.

To attempt to do so could also affect

the listing program Region-wide.

Administratively, the Service is divided

into seven geographic regions. These

three species are under the jurisdiction

of Region 1, which includes California,

Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Nevada,

Hawaii, and other Pacific Islands. About

one-half of all listed species occur in

Region 1. Region 1 receives by far the

largest share of listing funds of any

Service region because it has the

heaviest listing workload. Region 1 must

also expend its listing resources to

comply with existing court orders or

settlement agreements. In fact, in the

last fiscal year, all of the Region’s

funding allocation for critical habitat

actions were expended to comply with

court orders. If we were to immediately

prepare proposed critical habitat

designations for these 3 species

notwithstanding the court order

pertaining to 245 Hawaiian plant

species, efforts to provide protection to

many other species that are not yet

listed would be delayed. While we

believe there may be some benefits to

designating critical habitat for these

species, these benefits are significantly

fewer in comparison to the benefits of

listing a species under the Endangered

Species Act because, as discussed

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 106 / Thursday, June 1, 2000 / Proposed Rules 35031

above, the primary regulatory effect of

critical habitat is limited to the section

7 requirement that Federal agencies

refrain from taking any action that

destroys or adversely modifies critical

habitat.

As explained in detail in the Final

Listing Priority Guidance for FY2000

(64 FR 57114), our listing budget is

currently insufficient to allow us to

immediately complete all of the listing

actions required by the Act. 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. Deferral of a proposal to

designate critical habitat for these three

species 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 these three Mariana Islands plants

without further delay. Therefore, given

the current workload in Region 1 and,

particularly, the Hawaiian field office,

we expect that we will be unable to

develop a proposal to designate critical

habitat for these three plants until

FY2004.

We will make the final critical habitat

determination with the final listing

determination for these three species. If

this final critical habitat determination

is that critical habitat is prudent, we

will develop a proposal to designate

critical habitat for these species as soon

as feasible, considering our workload

priorities.

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 practices.

Recognition through listing encourages

and results in conservation actions by

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. The protection

required of Federal agencies and the

prohibitions against taking and harm are

discussed, 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 action may

affect a listed species or its critical

habitat, the responsible Federal agency

must enter into formal consultation with

us.

Federal agency actions that require

conference and/or consultation as

described in the preceding paragraph

may include, but not be limited to:

Army Corps of Engineers projects, such

as the construction of roads, firebreaks

and bridges; various U.S. armed forces

activities on Guam, and possibly the

northern Mariana Islands, such as

combat and mobility training, and

construction; Natural Resource

Conservation Service projects; Federal

Emergency Management Agency

activities; and U.S. Department of

Housing and Urban Development

projects. Conservation of these plant

species may be consistent with some

ongoing operations at these sites;

however, the proposed listing of these

species in Guam and the CNMI could

result in some restrictions on certain

activities and the use of certain lands.

Listing Nesogenes rotensis,

Osmoxylon mariannense, and

Tabernaemontana rotensis provides for

the development and implementation of

a recovery plan for these species. These

plans will bring together Federal, State,

and regional agency efforts for

conservation of the species. Recovery

plans will establish a framework for

agencies to coordinate their recovery

efforts. The plans will set recovery

priorities and estimate the costs of the

tasks necessary to accomplish the

priorities. They will also describe the

site-specific management actions

necessary to achieve conservation and

survival of these species.

The Act and its implementing

regulations, found at 50 CFR 17.61,

17.62, and 17.63, set forth a series of

general prohibitions and exceptions that

apply to all endangered plant species.

Under these prohibitions, it is 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 any

such species from areas under Federal

jurisdiction. In addition, the Act

prohibits the malicious damage or

destruction of areas under Federal

jurisdiction and the removal, cutting,

digging up, or damaging or destroying of

such plants in knowing violation of any

State/Commonwealth/Territory law or

regulation, or in the course of a

violation of State/Commonwealth/

Territory criminal trespass law. Certain

exceptions to the prohibitions apply to

our agents 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.

We anticipate that few permits would

ever be sought or issued because these

three species are not common in

cultivation or in the wild.

Our policy, as published in the

Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR

34272), is to identify, to the maximum

extent practicable, those activities that

would or would not constitute a

violation of section 9 of the Act if a

species is listed. The intent of this

policy is to increase public awareness as

to the effects of the listing on future and

ongoing activities within a species’

range. Only one of these species,

Tabernaemontana rotensis, has a

population on Federal land under U.S.

Air Force jurisdiction within the Guam

National Wildlife Refuge. Collection,

damage, or destruction of this species

on Federal land is prohibited without a

Federal permit. Such activities

involving any of the three species on

non-Federal lands would constitute a

violation of section 9 if conducted in

knowing violation of Government of

Guam or CNMI laws or regulations. The

Service is not aware of any trade in

these species.

Questions regarding whether specific

activities would constitute a violation of

section 9 should be directed to the Field

Supervisor of the Pacific Islands Office

(see ADDRESSES section). Requests for

copies of the regulations for listed

plants and inquiries about prohibitions

and permits may be addressed to the

Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological

Services, Permits Branch, 911 N.E. 11th

Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97232–4181

(telephone 503–231–2063; FAX 503–

231–6243).

35032 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 106 / Thursday, June 1, 2000 / Proposed Rules

Public Comments Solicited

We intend that any final action

resulting from this proposal will be as

accurate and effective as possible.

Comments or suggestions from the

public, other concerned governmental

agencies, the scientific community,

industry, or any other interested party

concerning this proposed rule are

requested. Comments are particularly

sought concerning:

(1) Biological, commercial trade, or

other relevant data concerning any

threat (or lack thereof) to these species;

(2) The location of any additional

populations of these species and reasons

why any habitat should or should not be

designated as critical habitat;

(3) Additional information on the

range, distribution, and population size

of these species; and

(4) Current or planned activities in the

subject area and their possible impacts

on these species.

Final issuance of regulations for these

three species will take into

consideration the comments and any

additional information received by the

Service, and such communications may

lead to a final regulation that differs

from this proposal. 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 the three species. 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. We will summarize

the opinions of these reviewers in the

final decision document. The final

determination may differ from this

proposal based upon the information we

receive.

You may request a public hearing on

this proposal. Your request for a hearing

must be made in writing and filed

within 45 days of the date of publication

of this proposal in the Federal Register.

Address your requests to the Field

Supervisor (see ADDRESSES section).

Our practice is to make comments,

including names and home addresses of

respondents, available for 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. In

some circumstances, we would

withhold from the rulemaking record a

respondent’s identity, as allowable by

law. If you wish for us to withhold your

name and/or address, you must state

this request 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.

Electronic Access and Filing

You may send comments by e-mail to

3mplants_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 1018–AG09’’ 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 Pacific

Islands Office at phone number 808–

541–3441.

Executive Order 12866

Executive Order 12866 requires each

agency to write regulations that are easy

to understand. We invite your

comments on how to make this rule

easier to understand including answers

to the following: (1) Are the

requirements of the rule clear? (2) Is the

discussion of the rule in the

Supplementary Information section of

the preamble helpful to understanding

the rule? (3) What else could we do to

make the rule easier to understand?

National Environmental Policy Act

We have determined that preparation

of an environmental assessment or

environmental impact statement, as

defined under the authority of the

National Environmental Policy Act of

1969, is not necessary when issuing

regulations adopted under section 4(a)

of the Endangered Species Act of 1973,

as amended. We published a notice

outlining our reasons for this decision

in the Federal Register on October 25,

1983 (48 FR 49244).

References Cited

A complete list of all references cited

herein is available upon request from

the Pacific Islands Ecoregion Office.

(See ADDRESSES section.)

Author: The author of this proposed

rule is Guy D. Hughes (see ADDRESSES

section) (808/541–3441).

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

Endangered and threatened species,

Exports, Imports, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements,

Transportation.

Proposed Regulation Promulgation

Accordingly, we propose to amend

part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title

50 of the Code of Federal Regulations,

as set forth below:

PART 17—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 17

continues to read as follows:

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

1531–1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201–4245; 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:

§ 17.12 Endangered and threatened plants.

* * * * *

(h) * * *

Species

Historic range Family Status When listed Critical

habitat

Special

rules Scientific name Common name

FLOWERING PLANTS

*******

Nesoqenes rotensis None ....................... Western Pacific

Ocean—U.S.A.

(Commonwealth

of the Northern

Mariana Islands).

Verbenaceae .......... E .................... NA NA

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 106 / Thursday, June 1, 2000 / Proposed Rules 35033

Species

Historic range Family Status When listed Critical

habitat

Special

rules Scientific name Common name

*******

Osmoxylon

mariannense.

None ....................... Western Pacific

Ocean—U.S.A.

(Commonwealth

of the Northern

Mariana Islands).

Araliaceae ............... E .................... NA NA

*******

Tabernaemontana

rotensis.

None ....................... Western Pacific

Ocean—U.S.A.

(Commonwealth

of the Northern

Mariana Islands

and Guam).

Apocynaceae .......... E .................... NA NA

*******

Dated: May 2, 2000.

Jamie Rappaport Clark,

Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.

[FR Doc. 00–13707 Filed 5–31–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

RIN 1018–AGO4

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife

and Plants; Proposed Endangered

Status for the Buena Vista Lake Shrew

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,

Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service (Service), propose to

list the Buena Vista Lake shrew, Sorex

ornatus relictus, as endangered pursuant

to the Endangered Species Act of 1973,

as amended (Act). Prior to 1986, this

subspecies had not been observed since

it was first described in 1932. In 1986,

three Buena Vista Lake shrews were

observed at a permanent pond located

within a former preserve, approximately

26 kilometers (km) (16 miles (mi)) south

of Bakersfield, CA. No more than 38

individuals have been observed since

they were rediscovered in 1986. The

only known extant Buena Vista Lake

shrew population is threatened

primarily by agricultural activities,

modifications and potential impacts to

local hydrology, uncertainty of water

delivery, possible toxic effects from

selenium poisoning, and random

naturally occurring events. This

proposal, if made final, would

implement the Federal protection and

recovery provisions afforded by the Act

for the Buena Vista Lake shrew.

DATES: We must receive comments from

all interested parties by July 31, 2000.

Public hearing requests must be

received by July 17, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Send your comments and

materials concerning this proposal to

the Field Supervisor, Sacramento Fish

and Wildlife Office, U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service, 2800 Cottage Way, Rm

W–2605, Sacramento, California 95825.

Comments and materials received, as

well as the supporting documentation

used in preparing the rule, will be

available for public inspection, by

appointment, during normal business

hours at the above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dwight Harvey, Sacramento Fish and

Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES section)

(telephone 916/414–6600; facsimile

916/414–6710).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The Buena Vista Lake shrew, Sorex

ornatus relictus, is one of nine

subspecies within the ornate shrew

Sorex ornatus species complex known

to occur in California (Hall 1981; Owen

and Hoffmann 1983; Maldonado 1992).

Sorex ornatus belongs to the order

Insectivora and family Soricidae,

subfamily Soricinae, and the tribe

Soricini, with three subgenera (Owen

and Hoffmann 1983; Junge and

Hoffmann 1981).

Sorex ornatus relictus are primarily

insectivorous mammals that are the

approximate size of a mouse. They have

a long snout, tiny bead-like eyes, ears

that are concealed, or nearly concealed,

by soft fur, and five toes on each foot

(Ingles 1965; Burt and Grossenheider

1964). Sorex ornatus relictus are active

day or night. When they are not

sleeping, they are searching for food.

These shrews eat more than their own

weight each day (Burt and

Grossenheider 1964) to withstand

starvation and maintain their body

weight at high rates of metabolism

(McNab 1991). Sorex ornatus relictus

can have an impact on surrounding

plant communities by consuming large

quantities of insects, slugs, and other

invertebrates that can influence such

things as plant succession and control

the irruptions of pest insects

(Maldonado 1992; Williams 1991).

Sorex ornatus relictus also may be an

important prey species for raptors,

snakes, and carnivores (Maldonado

1992).

Grinnell (1932) was the first to

describe Sorex ornatus relictus.

According to Grinnell’s description, the

Buena Vista Lake shrew’s back is

predominantly black with a buffy-brown

speckling pattern, its sides are more

buffy-brown than the upper surface, and

its underside is smoke-gray. The tail is

faintly bicolor and blackens toward the

end both above and below. The Buena

Vista Lake shrew weighs approximately

4 grams (g) (0.14 ounces (oz)) (Kathy

Freas, Stanford University, pers. comm.

1994) and has a total length ranging

from 98 to 105 millimeters (mm) (3.85

to 4.13 inches (in.)) with a tail length of

35 to 39 mm (1.38 to 1.54 in.) (Grinnell

1932). The Buena Vista Lake shrew

differs from its geographically closest

subspecies, the ornate shrew Sorex

ornatus spp. ornatus, by having darker,

grayish-black coloration, rather than

brown. In addition, S. o. ssp. relictus

has a slightly larger body size; shorter

tail; skull with a shorter, heavier

rostrum; and a higher and more angular

brain-case in dorsal view than S. o. ssp.

ornatus (Grinnell 1932).

Ornate shrews, on the average, rarely

live longer than 12 months, and

evidence indicates that the normal