37108 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 114 / Tuesday, June 13, 2000 / Proposed Rules

governments may choose to directly or

indirectly implement actions that may

have property implications, they would

do so as a result of their own decisions,

not as a result of this policy. This policy

has no provision that would take private

property rights.

Federalism. In accordance with

Executive Order 13132, this draft policy

does not have significant Federalism

effects.

Civil Justice Reform. In accordance

with Executive Order 12988, this draft

policy does not unduly burden the

judicial system and meets the

requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)

of the Order. With the guidance

provided in the draft policy,

requirements under section 4 of the

Endangered Species Act will be clarified

to entities that voluntarily develop

formalized conservation efforts.

National Environmental Policy Act.

We have analyzed this draft policy in

accordance with the criteria of the

National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA) and the Department of the

Interior Manual (318 DM 2.2(g) and

6.3(D)). This draft policy does not

constitute a major Federal action

significantly affecting the quality of the

human environment. The Service has

determined that the issuance of the draft

policy is categorically excluded under

the Department of the Interior’s NEPA

procedures in 516 DM 2, Appendix 1

and 516 DM 6, Appendix 1. The

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration (NOAA) has determined

that the issuance of this policy qualifies

for a categorical exclusion as defined by

NOAA 216–6 Administrative Order,

Environmental Review Procedure.

Section 7 Consultation. The Service

has determined that issuance of this

draft policy will not affect species listed

as threatened or endangered under the

Endangered Species Act, and, therefore,

a section 7 consultation on this draft

policy is not required.

Government-to-Government

Relationship With Tribes. In accordance

with the President’s memorandum of

April 29, 1994, ‘‘Government-toGovernment Relations with Native

American Tribal Governments’’ (59 FR

22951) and 512 DM 2, this draft policy

does not directly affect Tribal resources.

The effect of this draft policy on Native

American Tribes would be determined

on a case-by-case basis with individual

evaluations of formalized conservation

efforts. Under Secretarial Order 3206,

the Service will, at a minimum, share

with the entity that developed the

formalized conservation effort any

information provided by the Tribes,

through the public comment period or

formal submissions, and advocate the

incorporation of conservation efforts

that will restore or enhance Tribal trust

resources. After consultation with the

Tribes and the entity that developed the

formalized conservation effort and after

careful consideration of the Tribe’s

concerns, the Service must clearly state

the rationale for the recommended final

decision and explain how the decision

relates to the Service’s trust

responsibility. Accordingly:

a. We have not yet consulted with the

affected Tribe(s). This requirement will

be addressed with individual

evaluations of formalized conservation

efforts.

b. We have not yet treated Tribes on

a government-to-government basis. This

requirement will be addressed with

individual evaluations of formalized

conservation efforts.

c. We will consider Tribal views in

individual evaluations of formalized

conservation efforts.

d. We have not yet consulted with the

appropriate bureaus and offices of the

Department about the identified effects

of this draft policy on Tribes. This

requirement will be addressed with

individual evaluations of formalized

conservation efforts.

Dated: April 9, 2000.

Jamie Rappaport Clark,

Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.

Dated: May 19, 2000.

Penelope D. Dalton,

Assistant Administrator for Fisheries,

National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 00–14731 Filed 6–12–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife

and Plants; 90-day Finding for

Petitions To List Horkelia hendersonii

(Henderson’s horkelia) and Lupinus

aridus ssp. ashlandensis (Ashland

lupine) as Threatened or Endangered

and Commencement of Status Review

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,

Interior.

ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition

finding and initiation of status review.

SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife

Service (Service), announce a 90-day

finding on two petitions to list Horkelia

hendersonii (Henderson’s horkelia) and

Lupinus aridus ssp. ashlandensis

(Ashland lupine) as endangered or

threatened species throughout their

ranges under the Endangered Species

Act of 1973, as amended (Act). We find

that the petitions presented substantial

information indicating that listing of

both species may be warranted. We are

initiating a status review to determine if

listing of either or both species is

warranted.

DATES: The finding announced in this

document was made May 31, 2000. To

be considered in the 12-month finding

for this petition, information and

comments should be submitted to us by

September 11, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Data, information,

comments, or questions concerning this

petition should be submitted to the

State Supervisor, Oregon State Office,

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2600 SE.

98th Avenue, Suite 100, Portland,

Oregon 97266. The petition finding,

supporting data, and comments will be

available for public inspection, by

appointment, during normal business

hours at the above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.

Andrew F. Robinson, Jr. (see ADDRESSES

section) (telephone 503/231–6179).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act (16

U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that we

make a finding on whether a petition to

list, delist, or reclassify a species, or to

revise a critical habitat designation,

presents substantial scientific or

commercial information to demonstrate

that the petitioned action may be

warranted. To the maximum extent

practicable, this finding is to be made

within 90 days of the receipt of the

petition, and we are to publish the

finding promptly in the Federal

Register. If the finding is that

substantial information was presented,

we are also required to promptly

commence a review of the status of the

involved species and to disclose its

findings within 12 months (12-month

finding).

We received two separate formal

petitions from the Rogue Group Sierra

Club of Ashland, Oregon, both dated

September 9, 1999, to list Horkelia

hendersonii (Henderson’s horkelia) and

Lupinus ariduse ssp. ashlandensis

(Ashland lupine) as endangered or

threatened throughout their ranges, and

to designate critical habitat.

Accompanying the petitions was

supporting information relating to

taxonomy, ecology, threats, and past

and present distribution of H.

hendersonii and L. aridus ssp.

ashlandensis.

The processing of the petitions

conforms with our Listing Priority

Guidance published in the Federal

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 114 / Tuesday, June 13, 2000 / Proposed Rules 37109

Register on October 22, 1999 (64

FR57114). The guidance clarifies the

order in which we will process

rulemakings. Highest priority is

processing emergency listing rules for

any species determined to face a

significant and imminent risk to its

well-being (Priority 1). Second priority

(Priority 2) is processing final

determinations on proposed additions

to the lists of endangered and

threatened wildlife and plants. Third

priority is processing new proposals to

add species to the lists. The processing

of administrative petition findings

(petitions filed under section 4 of the

Act) is the fourth priority. The

processing of this petition finding is a

Priority 4 action and is being completed

in accordance with the current Listing

Priority Guidance.

Horkelia hendersonii, a member of the

rose family, is a perennial, mat-forming,

rhizomatous herb with several stems

arising from a branching, woody crown,

approximately 10–15 centimeters (cm)

(3.9–5.9 inches (in.)) high. Leaves are

silky, 4–6 cm (1.6–3.3 in.) long with 11–

19 leaflets arranged pinnately. Flowers

are white to pink with petals 4

millimeters (mm) (0.16 in.) long in a

somewhat clustered terminal

inflorescence. The species occurs in

alpine areas between 1,829–2,286

meters (m) (6,000 to 7,500 feet (ft))

elevation, in habitat that includes open

granitic gravels, alpine forblands, and

dwarf shrublands.

Lupinus aridus ssp. ashlandensis is

an erect perennial herb forming clumps

15–20 cm (5.9–7.9 in.) in diameter and

7–12 cm (2.8–4.7 in.) tall. The leaves are

palmately compound with 5 to 7 leaflets

that are up to 3 cm (1.2 in.) long. Leaves

are numerous and crowded from the

basal crown, with pubescent (downy)

undersurfaces and glabrous (smooth)

upper sides. Flowers are blue with

petals 10–12 mm (0.39–0.47 in.) long.

The banner is glabrous and the keel

ciliate (fringed with hairlike processes)

on the margin. L. a. ssp. ashlandensis

grows on gravelly, granitic soils on the

south to southwest slopes near the

summit at elevations from 2,100 m

(6,900 ft) to 2,280 m (7,480 ft). The

lupine will not grow in dense brush.

Federal action on Lupinus aridus ssp.

ashlandensis began as a result of section

12 of the Act, which directed the

Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution

to prepare a report on those plants

considered to be endangered,

threatened, or extinct in the United

States. This report (House Document

No. 94–51) was presented to Congress

on January 9, 1975, and included L.

aridus ssp. ashlandensis as threatened.

We published a notice in the July 1,

1975, Federal Register (40 FR 27823) of

our acceptance of the Smithsonian

Institution report as a petition within

the context of section 4(c)(2) (petition

provisions are now found in section

4(b)(3)) of the Act, and our intention to

review the status of the reported plant

species.

Both Horkelia hendersonii and

Lupinus aridus ssp. ashlandensis were

included as category 2 candidates in a

Notice of Review (NOR) published on

December 15, 1980 (45 FR 82510).

Category 2 formerly included species for

which information in our possession

indicated that proposing to list as

endangered or threatened was possibly

appropriate, but for which sufficient

data on biological vulnerability and

threats were not available to support a

proposed rule. The plant NOR was again

revised on September 27, 1985 (50 FR

39526). In this notice, Horkelia

hendersonii and L. aridus ssp.

ashlandensis remained category 2

candidates. Another revision of the

plant notice was published on February

21, 1990 (55 FR 6184), which again

included H. hendersonii as a category 2

candidate. However, L. aridus ssp.

ashlandensis was upgraded to category

1 status. Category 1 candidates were

formerly defined as species for which

we had on file substantial information

on biological vulnerability and threats

to support preparation of listing

proposals, but issuance of proposed

rules was precluded by other listing

activities of higher priority. On February

28, 1996, we published an NOR in the

Federal Register (61 FR 7596) that

discontinued the designation of category

2 species as candidates. In response to

the decision to discontinue the category

2 designation, H. hendersonii and other

former category 2 candidates were not

retained as candidates. In addition, L.

aridus ssp. ashlandensis was dropped

from the candidate list based on our

interpretation of data supplied by the

U.S. Forest Service (USFS) (Rolle 1993).

The petitions contained substantial

amounts of information relating to the

distribution of and threats to Horkelia

hendersonii and Lupinus aridus ssp.

ashlandensis. Both species occur within

about 1.6 kilometers (1 mile) of the

summit on the western slope of Mt.

Ashland, Oregon, on the Rogue River

and Klamath National Forests. In

addition, H. hendersonii is found in

both National Forests, along the

Siskiyou Crest in the Dutchman PeakJackson Gap area, at Observation Peak,

and on and near McDonald Peak in

Oregon, and at Dry Lake Lookout in the

Klamath National Forest in California. L.

aridus ssp. ashlandensis occurs as a

single population on the top and

western ridge of Mount Ashland. Timeseries monitoring studies were started

by the Forest Service in 1995, but the

results are not available to us at this

time (Kagan 1995). Horkelia hendersonii

has been found in 16 habitat patches,

but population trends are not known.

The petitions provided information

regarding effects of habitat alteration

and development activities on Horkelia

hendersonii and Lupinus aridus ssp.

ashlandensis. According to the

petitions, the Mount Ashland

populations of both species are

threatened by the expansion of the ski

facilities, the communication facilities,

and parking lot, road widening, and

maintenance; development of a crosscountry ski corridor; and erosion,

compaction, and invasion of roadside

weeds caused by off-road vehicle

activities. The Mount Ashland Bowl

patch of H. hendersonii, with 15 plants,

is located on a proposed ski area

expansion site (U.S. Department of

Agriculture 1991). A proposed crosscountry ski corridor would cut through

a large portion of the eastern edge of the

Mount Ashland habitat patch and could

affect up to 5,000 individual H.

hendersonii and up to 4,500 individual

L. aridus ssp. ashlandensis (Kagan and

Zika 1987a,b). In addition to the

proposed ski area expansion, 8

individual H. hendersonii and 13

individual L. aridus ssp. ashlandensis

are growing in areas of potential

disturbance for the expansion of the

U.S. Weather Bureau Radar Station (SRI

International 1994, 1995). An existing

four-wheel drive track, leading west

from the summit access road at the first

switchback, provides an avenue for the

introduction of roadside weeds into the

meadow and flat area that supports a

sizeable population (4,900 plants) of H.

hendersonii and a small population (350

plants) of L. aridus ssp. ashlandensis

(Kagan and Zika 1987a,b; Zika 1987;

Kagan 1995).

Although both species occur in open

gravelly soils, including the gravelly

margins of the access road, neither will

colonize the compacted soils of existing

roads (even if vehicle use was reduced

or eliminated). Neither H. hendersonii

nor L. aridus ssp. ashlandensis was

found on the gravelly fill around the ski

area lift towers or building, and both are

apparently restricted to natural

undisturbed substrates (Kagan and Zika

1987a,b; Zika 1987).

In the Dutchman Peak-Jackson Gap

area, road maintenance and

construction and widening of firebreaks

threaten three of the habitat patches that

support Horkelia hendersonii.

Construction of firebreaks could also

involve disturbance of the loose,

37110 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 114 / Tuesday, June 13, 2000 / Proposed Rules

granitic gravels on the ridges where H.

hendersonii grows.

Livestock grazing has been observed

in Horkelia hendersonii habitat at

Observation Peak, south of McDonald

Peak, and at Dry Lake. Cattle cause

damage by trampling, and, although we

have no direct evidence that cattle find

H. hendersonii particularly palatable,

some damage from foraging has been

seen (Kagan and Zika 1987a). On the

most northern habitat patch on

McDonald Peak, 100 H. hendersonii

plants were found in 1985, but only 22

in 1987 (Kagan and Zika 1987a). No

cause was presented for the reduction in

numbers.

In 1963, the passage of the Oregon

Wildflower Law (ORS 564.010–564.040)

established protection for Oregon’s

natural botanical resources. The law

was designed to protect showy plants,

such as lilies, shooting stars, orchids,

and rhododendrons, from collection by

horticulturists interested in these

species’ domestication. The law

prohibits the collection of wildflowers

from within 61 meters (200 feet) of a

State highway. Although protective in

spirit, the Oregon Wildflower Law

carries minimal penalties and is rarely

enforced. In addition, since there are no

Horkelia hendersonii or Lupinus aridus

ssp. ashlandensis populations close to

State highways, this law provided very

little protection for these species.

In 1987, Oregon Senate Bill 533 (ORS

564.100) was passed to augment the

legislative actions available for the

protection of the State’s threatened and

endangered species, both plant and

animal. That bill, known as the Oregon

Endangered Species Act (OESA),

mandated responsibility for threatened

and endangered plant species in Oregon

to the Oregon Department of Agriculture

(ODA). The OESA directs the ODA to

maintain a strong program to conserve

and protect native plant species

threatened or endangered with

extinction. Although the ODA is able to

regulate the import, export, or

trafficking of State-listed plant species

(under ORS 564.120), their ability to

protect plant populations is limited to

State-owned or State-leased lands.

Lupinus aridus ssp. ashlandensis is

State-listed as endangered, receiving

protection under OESA on Statemanaged lands. Horkelia hendersonii is

a candidate for listing under OESA, but

currently receives no protection on

State-owned or State-leased lands.

Currently, both species are considered

sensitive species by the USFS, and may

be afforded some protection during

USFS project planning processes and

implementation.

It is possible that Horkelia

hendersonii and Lupinus aridus ssp.

ashlandensis could be negatively

affected by the expansion of brushfields

and the establishment of trees onto open

alpine on Mount Ashland due to fire

suppression. The two species are not

seen in dense herbaceous vegetation,

brush, or the full shade of conifers (Zika

1987). The boundary of both

populations on the southwest side of

Mount Ashland corresponds closely to

the brushfield boundary (Rolle 1993).

Continued fragmentation of the

populations by construction and

widening of roads and other

development can reduce genetic

exchange between patches, reducing the

viability of the populations.

Currently, we are working with the

USFS to develop a conservation

agreement for both species on Mount

Ashland. The process was initiated in

1995 through a cooperative agreement

with the Oregon Natural Heritage

Program to develop conservation

agreements for selected high-priority

candidate species. On July 26, 1999, we

provided a draft conservation agreement

to the Klamath National Forest and

Rogue River National Forest. The Rogue

River National Forest is currently

revising the draft conservation

agreement to cover only Mount Ashland

populations, but we have not received

that draft for evaluation. If that draft

conservation agreement is signed by all

parties and implemented, it may remove

some or all of the threats faced by H.

hendersonii and L. aridus ssp.

ashlandensis on Mount Ashland, but

may not reduce threats faced by smaller,

more isolated populations of H.

hendersonii on McDonald Peak, an

unnamed peak south of McDonald Peak,

Dutchman’s Peak, Observation Peak,

and at Dry Lake Lookout.

We have reviewed the petitions, as

well as other available information,

including published and unpublished

studies and reports, and agency files.

Based on that information, we find that

substantial information exists to

indicate that listing of Horkelia

hendersonii and Lupinus aridus ssp.

ashlandensis as threatened or

endangered throughout all of their

ranges may be warranted. The petitions

also requested designation of critical

habitat for both species. However,

designation of critical habitat is not

petitionable under the Act. If the 12-

month finding determines that listing H.

hendersonii and L. aridus ssp.

ashlandensis is warranted, then the

designation of critical habitat would be

addressed in the subsequent proposed

rule.

Information Solicited

When we make a positive 90-day

finding, we are required to promptly

commence a review of the status of the

species. To ensure that the status review

is complete and based on the best

available scientific and commercial

data, we are soliciting information on

Horkelia hendersonii and Lupinus

aridus ssp. ashlandensis concerning the

following: (1) Historic and current

distribution; (2) conditions in each

habitat patch; (3) basic biology

including age-frequency distribution of

the population(s) in each habitat patch;

(4) ongoing efforts to protect H.

hendersonii and L. aridus ssp.

ashlandensis and their habitat; and (5)

threats to either species and their

respective habitats in each occupied

habitat patch. Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the

Act requires that we make a finding

within 1 year from the date the petitions

were received as to whether listing H.

hendersonii and L. aridus ssp.

ashlandensis as threatened or

endangered is warranted (12-month

finding).

References Cited

Kagan, J. 1995. Monitoring of Lupinus

aridus ssp. ashlandensis—general

monitoring protocol and 1995 data.

Unpublished report. 24 pp.

Kagan, J. and P. Zika. 1987a. Species

management guide for Horkelia

hendersonii. Unpublished report,

Oregon Natural Heritage Data Base.

18 pp.

Kagan, J. and P. Zika. 1987b. Species

management guide for Lupinus

aridus ssp. ashlandensis.

Unpublished report. Oregon Natural

Heritage Data Base. 13 pp.

Rolle, W. 1993. Documentation, results,

and population estimates for

Lupinus aridus ssp. ashlandensis,

based on a partial census in August

and September 1991. Unpublished

report. 6 pp.

SRI International. 1994. Mt. Ashland

weather radar rare plant

reassessment. Unpublished report.

5 pp.

SRI International. 1995. NEXRAD indepth site survey report for the

Medford, Oregon, area (existing

site). Unpublished report. 5 pp.

United States Department of

Agriculture. 1991. Final

environmental impact statement,

Mount Ashland Ski Area. Ashland

Ranger District, Rogue River

National Forest. 15 pp.

Zika, P. F. 1987. Lupinus aridus

ashlandensis and Horkelia

hendersonii field survey.

Unpublished report. 13 pp. + maps.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 114 / Tuesday, June 13, 2000 / Proposed Rules 37111

Author: The primary author of this

document is Dr. Andrew F. Robinson, Jr.

(see ADDRESSES section).

Authority

The authority for this action is the

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as

amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

Dated: May 31, 2000.

Jamie Rappaport Clark,

Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

[FR Doc. 00–14497 Filed 6–12–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P