17498 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 58 / Monday, March 26, 2012 / Notices 

for recommending which new studies or 

methods/metrics developers should use 

is not identified in the Guidelines. The 

Service will consider the best way to 

incorporate new science as it becomes 

available. 

Comment: The Guidelines should 

adopt a risk-based approach to study 

duration as opposed to requiring a 

minimum of 3 years of preconstruction 

studies. 

Response: The Service received many 

differing opinions on the appropriate 

duration of preconstruction studies in 

Tier 3. While some felt that a minimum 

of 3 years is prohibitive, others felt that 

it was not long enough. The final 

Guidelines remove the default of 3 years 

of preconstruction monitoring and 

instead recommend that studies be of 

sufficient duration and intensity to 

ensure that adequate data are collected 

to characterize wildlife use of the 

proposed project area as determined in 

communication with the Service. This 

approach allows for data collection 

commensurate with the level of risk, as 

opposed to an across-the-board standard 

that does not take into consideration the 

circumstances at individual sites. 

Comment: The scope of the 

Guidelines should be ‘‘species of 

concern’’ as originally used by the 

Committee in their recommendations, as 

opposed to ‘‘fish, wildlife and their 

habitats.’’ 

Response: After reviewing the 

definition of ‘‘species of concern,’’ the 

Service agrees that this term is most 

appropriate as it narrows the focus of 

developer’s studies to species that may 

potentially be significantly impacted by 

a wind energy project. The final 

Guidelines use the term ‘‘species of 

concern’’ for scope of species covered. 

Comment: The Guidelines should not 

apply to distributed and communityscale wind energy projects. The costs 

associated with adhering to the 

Guidelines are prohibitive for smaller 

scale projects and will stall or prevent 

the development of small-scale wind 

energy. 

Response: The Service recognizes that 

studies have not shown small-scale 

wind energy projects to have significant 

adverse impacts to wildlife. However, 

the Service also recognizes that a poorly 

sited project, no matter the size, has the 

potential to cause significant impacts. 

For this reason, distributed and 

community-scale projects are not 

‘‘exempted’’ from the Guidelines. The 

Guidelines are voluntary. No wind 

energy developer is bound to follow 

them. The final Guidelines clarify that, 

in most cases, small-scale wind energy 

projects will not have significant 

adverse impacts, but developers should 

still do a Tier 1 and/or Tier 2 analysis 

using publicly available information 

(e.g., internet searches) to ensure that 

the risk for potential impacts is low. 

The final Guidelines preserve many 

elements from the previous drafts 

including descriptions of the 

information needed to identify, assess, 

mitigate, and monitor the potential 

adverse effects of wind energy projects 

on wildlife and their habitats; and 

flexibility to accommodate the unique 

circumstances of each project. The 

framework helps developers understand 

how to avoid or minimize effects to 

certain species, which is important for 

compliance with a number of laws, 

including MBTA, BGEPA, and ESA. 

The levels of surveying, monitoring, 

assessing, and collecting other 

information will vary among different 

wind-energy projects due to the diverse 

geographic, climatological, and 

ecological features of potential wind 

development sites. Founded upon a 

‘‘tiered approach’’ for assessing 

potential effects to species of concern 

and their habitats, the guidelines are 

intended to promote: Compliance with 

relevant laws and statutes; the use of 

scientifically rigorous survey, 

monitoring, assessment, and research 

designs proportionate to the potential 

risk to affected species; the 

accumulation of comparable data across 

the landscape; the identification of 

trends and patterns of effects; and, 

ultimately, the improved ability to 

predict and resolve effects locally, 

regionally, and nationally. 

Authority: The authorities for this action 

are the Endangered Species Act of 1973 as 

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

Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 as 

amended (16 U.S.C. 703–711); and the Bald 

and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940, as 

amended (16 U.S.C. 668–668d). 

Dated: March 20, 2012. 

Daniel M. Ashe, 

Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7011 Filed 3–23–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[FWS–R4–ES–2012–N032; 

FXES11130400000C2] 

Recovery Plan for the Endangered 

Spigelia gentianoides (Gentian 

Pinkroot) 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of document availability. 

SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife 

Service, announce the availability of the 

final recovery plan for Spigelia 

gentianoides (Gentian pinkroot), a 

threatened species restricted to six 

locations within three counties in the 

Florida Panhandle and two counties in 

Alabama. The recovery plan includes 

specific recovery objectives and criteria 

to be met in order to reclassify this 

species from endangered to threatened 

status under the Endangered Species 

Act of 1973, as amended (Act). 

ADDRESSES: You may obtain a copy of 

the recovery plan by contacting the 

Panama City Field Office (PCFO), by 

U.S. mail at U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, 1601 Balboa Ave, Panama City, 

FL 32405, or by telephone at (850) 769– 

0552. Alternatively, you may visit the 

Fish and Wildlife Service’s recovery 

plan Web site at http://www.fws.gov/ 

endangered/species/recovery-plans.html 

or the PCFO Web site at http:// 

www.fws.gov/panamacity/ 

listedplants.html. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

Vivian Negro ́n-Ortiz, at the above 

address, or by telephone at (850) 769– 

0552, ext. 231. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

We listed Spigelia gentianoides 

(Gentian pinkroot) as an endangered 

species under the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et 

seq.) on November 26, 1990 (55 FR 

49046). Spigelia gentianoides is a small 

herbaceous plant and has two varieties: 

Var. gentianoides is restricted to five 

locations within three counties in the 

Florida Panhandle and southern 

Alabama, and var. alabamensis is 

limited to Bibb County, Alabama. The 

loss or alteration of habitat is thought to 

be the primary reason for the species’ 

decline. The extant plants of var. 

gentianoides are located in firedependent longleaf pine-wiregrass and 

pine-oak-hickory ecosystems. Much of 

this habitat has been reduced in its 

range, converted to pine plantation, and 

managed without fire. Variety 

alabamensis is a narrow endemic, 

restricted to the Bibb County Glades 

(open, almost treeless areas within 

woodlands). Some of the glades are 

owned and protected by The Nature 

Conservancy. However, this variety is 

threatened by potential development of 

privately owned glades. 

Restoring an endangered or 

threatened animal or plant to the point 

where it is again a secure, selfsustaining member of its ecosystem is a 

primary goal of the endangered species 

program. To help guide the recovery 

effort, we are preparing recovery plans 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 58 / Monday, March 26, 2012 / Notices 17499 

for most listed species. Recovery plans 

describe actions considered necessary 

for conservation of the species, establish 

criteria for downlisting or delisting, and 

estimate time and cost for implementing 

recovery measures. 

The Act requires the development of 

recovery plans for listed species, unless 

such a plan would not promote the 

conservation of a particular species. 

Section 4(f) of the Act requires us to 

provide a public notice and an 

opportunity for public review and 

comment during recovery plan 

development. We made the draft of this 

recovery plan available for public 

comment from March 23 through May 

23, 2011 (76 FR 16439). We considered 

information we received during this 

public comment period and information 

from peer reviewers in our preparation 

of this final recovery plan. Some 

sections of the recovery plan were 

edited based on peer reviewer and 

public comments. However, no 

substantial changes were made to the 

final plan. 

Recovery Plan Criteria 

The goal of this plan is to provide a 

framework to conserve and recover S. 

gentianoides so it may be reclassified to 

threatened status. Spigelia gentianoides 

will be considered for reclassification to 

threatened status when: 

• Extant populations and newly 

discovered sites are identified and 

mapped; 

• Inventories have been conducted 

across the species’ historic sites and/or 

on new locations; 

• Monitoring programs and 

management protocols on selected 

populations are established for 15 years 

to track threats to the species and its 

habitat; 

• Extant populations located on 

public land are stable; 

• The minimum viable population 

(MVP) size has been determined for 

each variety; 

• Research on key aspects related to 

demography, reproductive biology, and 

seed ecology is accomplished; and 

• Collect viable seeds from at least 50 

percent of the populations for each 

variety and store them ex situ (off site— 

that is, in designated seed storage 

facilities). 

In addition, the following specific 

actions must be completed for each 

variety: 

Æ Var. gentianoides: 

D Sizes of populations # 1 to # 4 (out 

of 5) are increased via prescribed burns 

until plant numbers are stabilized; 

D At least one new population is 

found; and 

D At least one population is reestablished within the historic range. 

Æ Var. alabamensis: 

D Fifty percent of the Bibb County 

glades known to support the variety on 

private land are protected through 

conservation agreements, easements, or 

land acquisition. 

As reclassification criteria are met the 

status of the species will be reviewed, 

and the species will be considered for 

reclassification to threatened status. 

Defining delisting criteria is not 

possible at this time, given the current 

low numbers of populations and 

individuals, lack of information about 

the species’ biology, and the magnitude 

of current threats from development. 

Reclassification criteria will be 

reevaluated and delisting criteria will be 

created as new scientific data and 

information become available and 

recovery actions are implemented. 

Authority 

The authority for this action is section 

4(f) of the Endangered Species Act, 16 

U.S.C. 1533(f). 

Dated: January 24, 2012. 

Mark J. Musaus, 

Acting Regional Director, Southeast Region. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7180 Filed 3–23–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Land Management 

[LLCO956000.L14200000 BJ0000] 

Notice of Filing of Plats 

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of filing of plats; 

Colorado. 

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM) Colorado State 

Office is publishing this notice to 

inform the public of the intent to file the 

land survey plats listed below, and to 

afford all affected parties a proper 

period of time to protest this action, 

prior to the plat filing. 

DATES: Unless there are protests of this 

action, the filing of the plats described 

in this notice will happen on April 25, 

2012. 

ADDRESSES: BLM Colorado State Office, 

Cadastral Survey, 2850 Youngfield 

Street, Lakewood, Colorado 80215– 

7093. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Randy Bloom, Chief Cadastral Surveyor 

for Colorado, (303) 239–3856. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The plat 

and field notes of the dependent 

resurvey in Township 10 South, Range 

70 West, Sixth Principal Meridian, 

Colorado, were accepted on January 13, 

2012. 

The plat and field notes of the 

dependent resurvey and survey in 

Township 9 South, Range 71 West, 

Sixth Principal Meridian, Colorado, 

were accepted on January 13, 2012. 

The plat and field notes of the 

dependent resurvey and survey in 

Township 10 South, Range 71 West, 

Sixth Principal Meridian, Colorado, 

were accepted on January 13, 2012. 

The supplemental plat, in 4 sheets, of 

Section 8, in Township 1 North, Range 

71 West, Sixth Principal Meridian, 

Colorado, was accepted on January 20, 

2012. 

The supplemental plat of Section 13, 

in Township 1 North, Range 72 West, 

Sixth Principal Meridian, Colorado, was 

accepted on January 27, 2012. 

The plat incorporating the field notes, 

in 2 sheets, of the dependent resurvey 

in Township 51 North, Range 5 East, 

New Mexico Principal Meridian, 

Colorado, was accepted on February 3, 

2012. 

The plat and field notes of the section 

subdivision and survey in Township 7 

South, Range 95 West, Sixth Principal 

Meridian, Colorado, were accepted on 

February 8, 2012. 

The plat and field notes of the 

corrective dependent resurvey in 

Township 36 North, Range 11 West, 

New Mexico Principal Meridian, 

Colorado, were accepted on February 

21, 2012. 

Randy Bloom, 

Chief Cadastral Surveyor for Colorado. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7163 Filed 3–23–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–JB–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Land Management 

[LLCO956000.L14200000 BJ0000] 

Notice of Filing of Plats 

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of Filing of Plats; 

Colorado. 

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM) Colorado State 

Office is publishing this notice to 

inform the public of the filing of the 

land survey plats listed below. 

DATES: The plats described in this notice 

were filed on March 12, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: BLM Colorado State Office, 

Cadastral Survey, 2850 Youngfield 

Street, Lakewood, Colorado 80215– 

7093. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES