Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 104 / Tuesday, June 1, 2010 / Proposed Rules 30313 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Dated: May 20, 2010. 

Ira W. Leighton, 

Acting, Regional Administrator, EPA New 

England. 

[FR Doc. 2010–13083 Filed 5–28–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

[Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2009-0020] 

[MO 92210-0-0008-B2] 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a 

Petition To List Castanea pumila var. 

ozarkensis 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of petition finding and 

initiation of status review. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), announce a 

90–day finding on a petition to list 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis (Ozark 

chinquapin), a tree, as endangered or 

threatened under the Endangered 

Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). 

Based on our review, we find that the 

petition presents substantial scientific 

or commercial information indicating 

that listing this species may be 

warranted. Therefore, with the 

publication of this notice, we are 

initiating a status review of the species 

to determine if listing Castanea pumila 

var. ozarkensis is warranted. To ensure 

that the review is comprehensive, we 

are requesting scientific and commercial 

data and other information regarding 

this species. Based on the status review, 

we will issue a 12 month finding on the 

petition, which will address whether 

the petitioned action is warranted, as 

provided in section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act. 

DATES: To allow us adequate time to 

conduct this review, we request that we 

receive information on or before August 

2, 2010. Please note that if you are using 

the Federal eRulemaking Portal (see 

‘‘ADDRESSES’’ section, below), the 

deadline for submitting an electronic 

comment is 11:59 p.m. Eastern Daylight 

Savings Time on this date. 

After August 2, 2010, you must 

submit information directly to the Field 

Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section below). Please note that 

we might not be able to address or 

incorporate information that we receive 

after the above requested date. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit 

information by one of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. In the box that 

reads ‘‘Enter Keyword or ID,’’ enter the 

Docket number for this finding, which 

is FWS-R4-ES-2009-0020. Check the box 

that reads ‘‘Open for Comment/ 

Submission,’’ and click the Search 

button. You should then see an icon that 

reads ‘‘Submit a Comment.’’ Please 

ensure that you have found the correct 

rulemaking before submitting your 

comment. 

• U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public 

Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R4- 

ES-2009-0020; Division of Policy and 

Directives Management; U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, 

Suite 222; Arlington, VA 22203. 

We will post all information we 

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

This generally means that we will post 

any personal information you provide 

us (see the Request for Information 

section below for more details). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mark Sattelberg, Field Supervisor, 

Arkansas Ecological Services Field 

Office, 110 South Amity Road, Suite 

300, Conway, AR 72032; by telephone 

(501-513-4470); or by facsimile (501- 

513-4480). If you use a 

telecommunications device for the deaf 

(TDD), please call the Federal 

Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800- 

877-8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Request for Information 

When we make a finding that a 

petition presents substantial 

information indicating that listing a 

species may be warranted, we are 

required to promptly review the status 

of the species (status review). For the 

status review to be complete and based 

on the best available scientific and 

commercial information, we request 

information on Castanea pumila var. 

ozarkensis from governmental agencies, 

Native American Tribes, the scientific 

community, industry, and any other 

interested parties. We seek information 

on: 

(1) The species’ biology, range, and 

population trends, including: 

(a) Habitat requirements for feeding, 

breeding, and sheltering; 

(b) Genetics and taxonomy; 

(c) Historical and current range, 

including distribution patterns; 

(d) Historical and current population 

levels, and current and projected trends; 

and 

(e) Past and ongoing conservation 

measures for the species, its habitat, or 

both. 

(2) The factors that are the basis for 

making a listing determination for a 

species under section 4(a) of the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

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

which are: 

(a) The present or threatened 

destruction, modification, or 

curtailment of its habitat or range; 

(b) Overutilization for commercial, 

recreational, scientific, or educational 

purposes; 

(c) Disease or predation; 

(d) The inadequacy of existing 

regulatory mechanisms; or 

(e) Other natural or manmade factors 

affecting its continued existence. 

(3) The potential effects of climate 

change on this species and its habitat. 

If, after the status review, we 

determine that listing Castanea pumila 

var. ozarkensis is warranted, we will 

propose critical habitat (see definition 

in section 3(5)(A) of the Act), in 

accordance with section 4 of the Act, to 

the maximum extent prudent and 

determinable at the time we propose to 

list the species. Therefore, within the 

geographical range currently occupied 

by Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis, we 

request data and information on: 

(1) What may constitute ‘‘physical or 

biological features essential to the 

conservation of the species,’’ 

(2) Where these features are currently 

found, and 

(3) Whether any of these features may 

require special management 

considerations or protection. 

In addition, we request data and 

information on ‘‘specific areas outside 

the geographical area occupied by the 

species’’ that are ‘‘essential to the 

conservation of the species.’’ Please 

provide specific comments and 

information as to what, if any, critical 

habitat you think we should propose for 

designation if the species is proposed 

for listing, and why such habitat meets 

the requirements of section 4 of the Act. 

Please include sufficient information 

with your submission (such as scientific 

journal articles or other publications) to 

allow us to verify any scientific or 

commercial information you include. 

Submissions merely stating support 

for or opposition to the action under 

consideration without providing 

supporting information, although noted, 

will not be considered in making a 

determination. Section 4(b)(1)(A) of the 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
30314 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 104 / Tuesday, June 1, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

Act directs that determinations as to 

whether any species is an endangered or 

threatened species must be made ‘‘solely 

on the basis of the best scientific and 

commercial data available.’’ 

You may submit your information 

concerning this status review by one of 

the methods listed in the ADDRESSES

section. If you submit information via 

http://www.regulations.gov, your entire 

submission—including any personal 

identifying information—will be posted 

on the website. If you submit a 

hardcopy that includes personal 

identifying information, you may 

request at the top of your document that 

we withhold this personal identifying 

information from public review. 

However, we cannot guarantee that we 

will be able to do so. We will post all 

hardcopy submissions on http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

Information and supporting 

documentation that we received and 

used in preparing this finding, will be 

available for you to review at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, or you may make 

an appointment during normal business 

hours at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Arkansas Ecological Services 

Field Office (see FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT). 

Background 

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

U.S.C. 1533(b)(3)(A)) requires that we 

make a finding on whether a petition to 

list, delist, or reclassify a species 

presents substantial scientific or 

commercial information indicating that 

the petitioned action may be warranted. 

We are to base this finding on 

information provided in the petition, 

supporting information submitted with 

the petition, and information otherwise 

available in our files. To the maximum 

extent practicable, we are to make this 

finding within 90 days of our receipt of 

the petition and publish our notice of 

the finding promptly in the Federal 

Register. 

Our standard for substantial scientific 

or commercial information within the 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) with 

regard to a 90–day petition finding is 

‘‘that amount of information that would 

lead a reasonable person to believe that 

the measure proposed in the petition 

may be warranted’’ (50 CFR 424.14(b)). 

If we find that substantial scientific or 

commercial information was presented, 

we are required to promptly review the 

status of the species, which is 

subsequently summarized in our 12– 

month finding. 

Petition History 

On January 6, 2004, we received a 

petition, dated December 28, 2003, from 

Mr. Joe Glenn of Hodgen, Oklahoma, 

requesting that the Castanea pumila var. 

ozarkensis (Ozark chinquapin) be listed 

under the Act as a candidate species. 

The petition clearly identified itself as 

such and included the requisite 

identification information for the 

petitioner(s), as required by 50 CFR 

424.14(a). The petition contained 

supporting information regarding the 

species’ ecology, threats to the species, 

and survey and occurrence data for a 

portion of the Ouachita Highlands in 

southeastern Oklahoma. We 

acknowledged receipt of the petition in 

a February 2, 2004, letter to Mr. Glenn. 

In that letter, we advised the petitioner 

that, due to a significant number of 

court orders and settlement agreements 

in Fiscal Year 2004, we would not be 

able to address the petitioned request at 

that time. 

Previous Federal Action 

On July 1, 1975 (40 FR 27924), 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis was 

included as one of the 3000 plant 

species under status review. It was 

proposed or reviewed by the Service for 

federal listing as an endangered species 

under the Act in 1976 (41 FR 17 24524). 

We, however, did not finalize that 

proposed rule (U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service 1988). Castanea pumila var. 

ozarkensis became a category 2 

candidate on December 15, 1980 (45 FR 

82480 82569). It was again advertised as 

a category 2 candidate on September 27, 

1985 (50 FR 53640 53670). The status 

changed on February 21, 1990 (55 FR 

6184 6229) to a category 1 candidate 

species . On September 30, 1993 (58 FR 

51144 51190) the status changed back to 

a category 2 candidate species for 

listing. 

Species Information 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis was 

first identified as a separate species 

(Castanea ozarkensis) by Ashe (1923, p. 

60). Ashe described the range of the 

species as ‘‘common north of the 

Arkansas River and westward from 

Center Ridge, Arkansas, northward to 

southwestern Missouri and westward to 

the Valley of the White River’’ (Tucker 

1983, p. 2). Ashe (1923, p. 361) also 

described a second species, Castanea 

arkansana, in Arkansas. Ashe (1924, p. 

45) reduced Castanea arkansana to 

varietal status as Castanea ozarkensis 

var. arkansana. Little (1953, p. 2, in 

Tucker 1983) reduced Castanea 

arkansana to synonymy with Castanea 

ozarkensis. Tucker (1975, p. 2, in 

Tucker 1983) reduced Castanea 

ozarkensis to a variety of the more 

common Castanea pumila (Castanea 

pumila var. ozarkensis (Ashe) Tucker) 

and concurred with Little’s (1953) 

treatment of Castanea arkansana. 

Johnson (1988, p. 43) published a 

revision of Castanea sect. 

Balanocastanion concurring with 

Tucker’s reduction of Castanea 

ozarkensis to a variety of Castanea 

pumila. Tucker’s reduction is further 

supported in Smith’s (1994, p. 54) Keys 

to the Flora of Arkansas. 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis is a 

tree in the beech family (Fagaceae). 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis has 

leaves 10 to 25 centimeters (4 to 10 

inches (in)) long, broadly lanceolate to 

elliptical, with coarse teeth that are 2.5 

to 9 millimeters (mm) (0.1 to 0.35 in) 

long with whitish or yellowish-cream 

stellate (star-shaped) hairs on the lower 

surfaces. The bark is light brown to 

reddish brown or grayish, with broad 

flat ridges that break into loose platelike scales. The fruits are subglobose to 

ovoid nuts up to approximately 20 mm 

(0.8 in) long enclosed in a spiny burr 

with burrs being solitary or in groups of 

two or three. The subspecies is 

distinguished from Castanea pumila 

var. pumila (Allegheny chinquapin) by 

the larger leaf size, larger teeth, and 

larger fruit, which also have hairs 

(Steyermark 1963, p. 531; Smith 1994, 

p. 54). 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis was 

historically a medium-sized tree species 

that once grew to 20 meters (m) (65 feet 

(ft)), although usually much shorter, but 

now rarely reaches heights of more than 

9 m (30 ft). Trunks develop from stump 

sprouts as well as from seeds, but in 

recent years, new growth is generally 

from sprouts. Trees reaching the age to 

produce fruit (4 to 5 years; Paillet 1993, 

p. 262) are increasingly rare due to the 

fungus parasite (Cryphonectria 

parasitica) that is responsible for the 

chestnut blight disease, which has 

adversely affected many Castanea spp. 

populations in the United States 

(Tucker 1983, pp. 8-9; Steyermark 1963, 

p. 531). Paillet (1991, p. 10; 1993, pp. 

261-262) noted an area on the Ozark 

National Forest that was cut 4-5 years 

previously that was full of broad 

chinquapin crowns and the ground 

littered with burs from the summer’s 

nut crop. Based on Paillet’s observation 

nearly 20 years ago, it is plausible to 

assume that Castanea pumila var. 

ozarkensis may produce fruit prior to 

succumbing to the blight at some 

localities. However, Paillet (1993, p. 

262) reported that these sites were 

increasingly rare in the early 1990’s. 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis has 

been described as historically common 

in thin woods, edges of woods, and midsuccessional woods (Tucker 1983, pp. 8- 

9). This tree historically occupied 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 104 / Tuesday, June 1, 2010 / Proposed Rules 30315 

canopy and subcanopy positions on a 

variety of habitats, including dry upland 

deciduous or mixed hardwood-pine 

communities on acid soils of ridge-tops, 

upper slopes adjacent to ravines and 

gorges, and the tops of sandstone bluffs 

(C. McDonald 1987, personal 

communication (pers. comm.)). 

Associated trees in these habitats 

include Quercus alba (white oak), 

Quercus stellata (post oak), Quercus 

rubra (northern red oak), Nyssa 

sylvatica (black gum), Pinus echinata 

(short-leaf pine), Morus rubra 

(mulberry), Carya spp. (hickories), 

Ulmus americana (American elm), and 

Ostrya virginiana (ironwood) 

(Steyermark 1963, p. 531; G. Tucker 

1976, pers. comm.). Soil conditions 

typically are acid and sandstonederived, and moisture conditions vary 

from mesic to dry; shade is variable (G. 

Tucker 1976, pers. comm.; C. McDonald 

1987, pers. comm.). 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis is 

generally fire tolerant, but sprouts may 

be damaged by fire (Kral 1983, p. 287). 

Due to blight, dead sprouts and dead 

stump wood may act as a fuel for fire 

and affect the remaining live sprouts. 

Distribution and Status 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis is 

located throughout the Interior 

Highlands in Arkansas (34 counties), 

Missouri (9 counties), and Oklahoma (8 

counties)(Kratesz 1994). Castanea 

pumila var. ozarkensis currently 

remains widespread within the Interior 

Highlands of Arkansas and is less 

common and widespread within the 

uplands of southwestern Missouri and 

eastern Oklahoma. Localities with seedproducing trees are greatly diminished 

from pre-blight era. However, asexually 

reproducing populations still occur 

throughout the tree’s historic 

distribution. Herbarium specimens are 

all that remains to support the existence 

of Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis in 

Alabama (four localities in the 

Appalachian Mountains). Data to 

support the abundance and distribution 

of Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis in 

the Appalachian Mountains is lacking, 

and researchers have been unable to 

find extant populations in this region. 

The Interior Highlands contain the only 

known extant populations of Castanea 

pumila var. ozarkensis at this time 

(Johnson 1988, pp. 43-45). 

At present, there are greater than 300 

element occurrences in the Interior 

Highlands. Individual site records 

commonly report multiple Castanea 

pumila var. ozarkensis sprout clumps. 

These vary from tens to hundreds of 

individual sprout clumps at an element 

occurrence record site (Kratesz 1994). At 

present, Castanea pumila var. 

ozarkensis occurrence and status is 

tracked by all of the State heritage 

programs and the U.S. Department 

Agriculture’s Forest Service within the 

tree’s range. 

Evaluation of Information for this 

Finding 

Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) 

and its implementing regulations at 50 

CFR 424 set forth the procedures for 

adding a species to, or removing a 

species from, the Federal Lists of 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants. A species may be 

determined to be an endangered or 

threatened species due to one or more 

of the five factors described in section 

4(a)(1) of the Act: 

(A) The present or threatened 

destruction, modification, or 

curtailment of its habitat or range; 

(B) Overutilization for commercial, 

recreational, scientific, or educational 

purposes; 

(C) Disease or predation; 

(D) The inadequacy of existing 

regulatory mechanisms; or 

(E) Other natural or manmade factors 

affecting its continued existence. 

In making this 90–day finding, we 

evaluated whether information 

regarding threats to the Castanea pumila 

var. ozarkensis, as presented in the 

petition and other information available 

in our files, is substantial, thereby 

indicating that the petitioned action 

may be warranted. Our evaluation of 

this information is presented below. 

A. The Present or Threatened 

Destruction, Modification, or 

Curtailment of Habitat or Range 

Information Provided in the Petition 

The petition cites several factors 

regarding the destruction and 

modification of Castanea pumila var. 

ozarkensis habitat, including: 

(1) The range of Castanea pumila var. 

ozarkensis has been reduced over past 

times (geologic time scale) because it 

once could have occupied the entire 

Lower Mississippi Valley. Based on the 

petitioner’s personal observations, 

several million acres of suitable habitat 

in the Interior Highlands on both public 

(particularly on national forest lands in 

the region) and private lands have been 

lost since the 1960s, mostly due to 

anthropogenic (human) disturbance. 

(2) Late successional habitats have 

been reduced through ‘‘pine plantation 

style’’ forest management, which has 

reduced habitat quality through 

prescribed burning (including the fact 

that vigorous Castanea pumila var. 

ozarkensis growth did not occur at 

prescribed burn sites studied by the 

petitioner in Oklahoma). 

(3) Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis is 

a late successional obligate as it relates 

to seedling establishment. 

Evaluation of Information Provided in 

the Petition and Available in Service 

Files 

With regard to the amount of habitat 

modification and alteration that has 

occurred within the range of Castanea 

pumila var. ozarkensis, we generally 

find that the information presented by 

the petition is speculative and not 

substantial. Further, no supporting 

information was presented to verify the 

petition’s claim that Castanea pumila 

var. ozarkensis could have once 

occupied the entire Lower Mississippi 

Valley. Information provided in the 

petition and available in our files 

includes references to records from 

Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama. 

Johnson (1988, pp. 41-45) recognized 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis records 

from the Interior Highlands and 

Appalachian Mountains. While there is 

support for an Appalachian-Ozarkian 

floristic relationship, floristic 

relationships to the lower Mississippi 

Valley and Gulf Coastal Plain can only 

be considered speculative at this time 

(Johnson 1988, p. 47). 

The habitat loss claims in the petition 

are not supported in available, peerreviewed literature and are contrary to 

other existing information in our files. 

The Ozark–Ouachita Highlands 

Assessment (OOHA) 1999 Terrestrial 

Vegetation and Wildlife Report, 

prepared by a collaborative team of 

natural resource specialists and research 

scientists, examined historic and 

existing forest conditions throughout 

the Interior Highlands of Arkansas, 

Missouri, and Oklahoma (U.S. Forest 

Service 1999, section 5). The area of 

analysis overlaps much of the range of 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis. OOHA 

descriptions of vegetation cover or 

silvicultural practices do not indicate 

significant reductions in suitable habitat 

for Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis. 

Oak–hickory and oak–pine forest types 

continue to be common forest types in 

the Interior Highlands. The upland oak– 

hickory forest type provided the 

dominant cover within the region at the 

time of the OOHA. It covered 15 million 

acres (6.1 million hectares) or about 36 

percent of the area. The oak–pine forest 

type provided the second most 

extensive cover. It covered 4.4 million 

acres (1.8 million hectares) or 11 

percent of the area. 

Ashe (1923) described the range of the 

species as ‘‘common north of the 

Arkansas River and westward from 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
30316 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 104 / Tuesday, June 1, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

Center Ridge, Arkansas, northward to 

southwestern Missouri and westward to 

the Valley of the White River.’’ 

Steyermark (1963, p. 531) states that 

Louisiana and Mississippi are 

sometimes included as part of the 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis range, 

but specimens examined from those 

States have been proven not to be 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis. This is 

contrary to the statements made by the 

petitioner which states that the species 

occurs in Louisiana and Mississippi. 

With regard to the reduction of late 

successional habitats, the OOHA 

recognized Castanea pumila var. 

ozarkensis as a species of viability 

concern, the habitat description being 

‘‘woodland, fire maintained’’ (U.S. 

Forest Service 1999, p. 137). Loss of 

natural fire regimes is recognized as a 

threat to the health and sustainability of 

oak–hickory and oak–pine ecosystems 

in which Castanea pumila var. 

ozarkensis occurs (Spetich 2004, pp. 49- 

50 and 65-66). However, given the 

understanding of fire as it relates to 

ecosystem health and sustainability 

within most of the habitats where 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis is 

known to occur, we cannot conclude 

that prescribed burning is negatively 

influencing the species, even with the 

knowledge that individual sprout 

clumps may be top-killed during 

prescribed burns. Prescribed fire 

reduces fuel availability in the forest, 

which reduces the threat of catastrophic 

wildfires that are likely a greater threat 

to Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis than 

prescribed fire. 

The petition claims, based on the 

petitioner’s personal observations, that 

the species is dependent on mesic 

conditions for seedling establishment 

and growth. The petition also states that 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis occurs 

in areas with abrupt changes in 

topography, including talus flow 

margins, drainage margins, steep upper 

slopes, rocky outcrops, and ridge tops; 

he also quoted a historical reference 

(Palmer 1923) that stated a similar array 

of habitat types. These descriptions tend 

to be more indicative of drier type areas 

and not of mesic, closed canopy forest. 

While the species is known to occur on 

mesic sites, mesic site obligation is not 

in alignment with widely accepted 

ecological descriptions and dynamics 

known to sustain most of the forested 

ecosystems where this species is 

currently found. Castanea pumila var. 

ozarkensis is common in dry deciduous 

or mixed hardwood-pine communities. 

Turner (1937) said of Castanea pumila 

var. ozarkensis, ‘‘Although it grows 

better in soils fairly well supplied with 

moisture, it also grows on rocky, rather 

dry slopes and hilltops.’’ It is most 

common on upland slopes and ridges, 

cliff margins, and talus slopes, where it 

is found on soils derived from 

sandstone, limestone, or on chert-rich, 

clayey soils. 

The petition also states that Castanea 

pumila var. ozarkensis is a late seral 

obligate and that excessive shading 

contributes to branch mortality and 

crown retardation. These characteristics 

would not be expected in a species that 

needs late successional forest conditions 

for optimal growth. Tucker (1983, p. 15) 

stated that Castanea pumila var. 

ozarkensis formerly was a member of 

the climax community, but presently is 

one of the first species to regenerate 

following a disturbance (e.g., clear-cut, 

prescribed fire). Paillet (1991, p. 10; 

1993, pp. 261-262) noted an area on the 

Ozark National Forest that was cut 4 to5 years previously that was full of broad 

chinquapin crowns and the ground 

littered with burs from the summer’s 

nut crop. The species requires sunlight 

to establish seedlings, which, again, is 

not characteristic of late successional 

forest conditions that were firemaintained. Information in our files 

does not support the petitioner’s claim 

that this species is a late seral obligate. 

The species is found on a variety of 

aspects and forest community types on 

the Ouachita and Ozark National 

Forests. Information in our files 

indicates that Castanea pumila var. 

ozarkensis prefers forests at an early 

seral stage. 

Summary of Factor A 

The information in our files does not 

support the petition’s claim that 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis has 

suffered a significant range reduction. 

While there is support for an 

Appalachian-Ozarkian floristic 

relationship, floristic relationships to 

the lower Mississippi Valley and Gulf 

Coastal Plain can only be considered 

speculative at this time (Johnson 1988, 

p. 47). Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis 

is still widespread and abundant 

throughout the majority of its extant 

range in the Interior Highlands, 

particularly on public lands. 

The information in our files also does 

not support the petition’s claim that 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis habitat 

has been reduced due to prescribed 

burning. The habitat description for 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis is 

described as ‘‘woodland, fire 

maintained’’ (U.S. Forest Service 1999, 

p. 137). Loss of natural fire regimes is 

recognized as a threat to the health and 

sustainability of oak–hickory and oak– 

pine ecosystems in which Castanea 

pumila var. ozarkensis occurs (Spetich 

2004, pp. 49-50 and 65-66). 

In addition, information in our files 

does not support the petition’s claim 

that Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis 

habitat and seedling establishment have 

been reduced due to a reduction in late 

successional and mesic habitat. Tucker 

(1983, p. 15) stated that Castanea 

pumila var. ozarkensis formerly was a 

member of the climax community, but 

presently is one of the first species to 

regenerate following a disturbance (e.g., 

clear-cut, prescribed fire). Paillet (1991, 

p. 10; 1993, pp. 261-262) noted an area 

on the Ozark National Forest that was 

cut 4 to 5 years previously that was full 

of broad chinquapin crowns and the 

ground littered with burs from the 

summer’s nut crop. 

In summary, we find that the 

information provided in the petition, as 

well as other information in our files, 

does not present substantial scientific or 

commercial information indicating that 

the petitioned action may be warranted 

due the present or threatened 

destruction, modification, or 

curtailment of habitat or range. 

However, we will further investigate the 

potential threat of the present or 

threatened destruction, modification, or 

curtailment of habitat or range in our 

status review for this species. 

B. Overutilization for Commercial, 

Recreational, Scientific, or Educational 

Purposes 

No information was presented in the 

petition, or is available in our files, to 

indicate that Castanea pumila var. 

ozarkensis may warrant listing due to 

overutilization for commercial, 

recreational, scientific, or educational 

purposes. 

C. Disease or Predation 

Information Provided in the Petition 

The petition cites two diseases that 

threaten Castanea pumila var. 

ozarkensis populations: 

(1) Ink disease, caused by Phytopthora 

cinnamomi, is known to attack the root 

systems of all North American Castanea 

species. Phytopthora cinnamomi spores 

spread through groundwater, and thus is 

most prevalent in low-lying areas. The 

petition did not identify it as an 

immediate threat because the current 

range of Castanea pumila var. 

ozarkensis is restricted to upland areas 

of the Interior Highlands. Phytopthora 

cinnamomi is prevalent in many areas 

of the Gulf Coastal Plain, and the 

petitioner believes that this portion of 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis’ 

historic range is presently unsuitable for 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 104 / Tuesday, June 1, 2010 / Proposed Rules 30317 

occupation due to the disease 

infestation. 

(2) Chestnut blight, caused by the 

fungal parasite Cryphonectria 

parasitica, attacks the stems of all North 

American Castanea species but is not 

directly pathogenic to the root system. 

Since its introduction, chestnut blight 

has severely impacted Castanea pumila 

var. ozarkensis throughout the Interior 

Highlands by causing the loss of the 

majority of mature stems. The species 

continues to survive because the root 

systems have remained intact and 

continue to sprout new stems that are 

eventually killed by the chestnut blight. 

An unpublished, non-peer-reviewed 

report written by the petitioner 

described personal observations of 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis on a 

portion of the Ouachita National Forest 

in LeFlore County, Oklahoma. The 

report described the petitioner’s 

assessments of the life expectancy of 

blight-affected sprout clumps of various 

sizes with assumptions of varying 

degrees of blight resistance. The report 

concluded that based on observations, 

environmental factors also had 

contributed to the decline of the species. 

The report also describes the 

petitioner’s assessment that factors such 

as genetic resistance and early maturity 

of stems have not halted seed 

production of Castanea pumila var. 

ozarkensis, at the evaluated sites. The 

petitioner indicates that chestnut blight 

may not present an insurmountable 

threat to the survival of the species. 

Evaluation of Information Provided in 

the Petition and Available in Service 

Files 

We are not aware of any information 

to indicate that ink disease poses a 

significant threat to Castanea pumila 

var. ozarkensis at this time. On the other 

hand, information provided in the 

petition and in our files does indicate 

that chestnut blight is widely 

recognized as the dominant threat to 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis. 

Chestnut blight was first noticed in 

American chestnut trees (Castanea 

dentata) in New York City in 1904. Over 

a period of about 20 years, the blight 

spread throughout the range of the 

American chestnut, reducing this 

important forest tree to a multiplestemmed shrub. The fungus enters 

wounds in the bark and grows under the 

bark, eventually killing the cambium all 

the way around the infected area. This 

results in the death of most of the aboveground portion of the tree. After top-kill, 

sprouts develop at the base of the tree 

from dormant buds. These sprouts grow, 

become infected, and die, and the 

process is repeated (Anagnostakis 2000, 

p. 1). The blight affects all North 

American Castanea species, and its 

effect on Castanea pumila var. 

ozarkensis was noted beginning in the 

1940s. 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis, like 

the American chestnut (Castanea 

dentata), has sprout clumps that are 

capable of persisting in the understory 

of established woodlands for many 

years without seed production. 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis sprouts 

are released when seed production is 

suppressed. In one Arkansas locality, 

the sprouts experience rapid growth and 

produced seeds within a few years of 

release (Paillet, 1993, p. 267). However, 

localities with fruit production were 

increasingly rare by the 1970’s (Tucker, 

1983, pp. 9, 16). Tucker (1983, pp. 9, 16) 

could locate only two sexually 

reproducing populations out of several 

hundred localities investigated in the 

Interior Highlands from 1967 – 1983. 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis also 

responds favorably to forest thinning. 

Paillet (2002, pp. 1522, 1523) observed 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis sprouts 

dominating the biomass of recent clearcuts in the Ozark Mountains of northern 

Arkansas. In the absence of competition, 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis is often 

able to survive several years until it 

becomes infected with the blight. It 

persists despite the blight, mainly 

because of its ability to sprout new 

stems asexually as opposed to sexual 

reproduction through fruit production. 

Sexually reproducing stands were 

increasingly rare by the early 1970’s 

(Tucker, 1983, pp. 9, 16), and it is 

plausible to conclude that even fewer 

stands may persist via sexual 

reproduction two decades later. 

Despite the shift in reproductive 

strategy and a shorter life span for the 

stems, chestnut blight has not affected 

the distribution and abundance of 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis in the 

Interior Highlands of Arkansas, 

Missouri, and Oklahoma. Information in 

our files indicates that Castanea pumila 

var. ozarkensis has degenerated to 

stands consisting mostly of stump 

sprouts. There have been some isolated 

localities in which sprouts have 

survived 5 or more years and produced 

fruit post-blight infection but 

indications are that these sites have 

become increasingly rare since the early 

1990’s. Tucker (1983, p. 25) states that 

chestnut blight is responsible for the 

mortality of extant sexually reproducing 

populations, reducing populations to 

primarily asexual reproduction, and that 

sexually reproductive populations may 

become extirpated. 

We do not have sufficient information 

to substantiate the current distribution 

and status of sexually reproductive 

populations to determine whether blight 

infestation in Castanea pumila var. 

ozarkensis will result in the extirpation 

of these populations, which would limit 

all remaining populations to asexual 

reproduction. There also is no data in 

the Service’s files to predict what effect 

the loss of sexually reproducing 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis would 

have on the survival of the species. 

Therefore, we rely on data in our files 

related to other Castanea species to use 

as a surrogate for comparison. Stillwell 

et al. (2003, pp. 3-4) discuss several 

effects to Castanea dentata as a 

consequence of chestnut blight, 

including from ecological changes and 

the diminished importance of sexual 

reproduction on the amount and 

distribution of genetic diversity in the 

species. First, the chestnut blight 

significantly alters the ecology of 

Castanea species, which may reduce the 

overall level of genetic diversity. 

Secondly, chestnut blight may affect the 

distribution of genetic variance within 

and among populations. This could 

occur by genetic drift from the reduced 

population size or from the vegetative 

expansion of root collars, both of which 

would tend to diminish genetic variance 

within patches. 

Knowles and Grant (1981, p. 4, in 

Stillwell et al. 2003) and Mitton and 

Grant (1980, p. 4, in Stillwell et al. 

2003) present contrasting information 

on long-lived trees and the general 

perception that more heterozygous 

individuals are less variable and better 

adapted in fluctuating environments. 

Many long-lived tree species show an 

excess of heterozygosity suggesting that 

selection favoring heterozygotes is 

relatively subtle and hence is more 

likely to have an effect over the course 

of a long lifespan. Subtle differences in 

the performance of genotypes may be 

magnified in importance as Castanea 

clones have aged over the last 70 plus 

years and even relatively small fitness 

effects may accumulate to have 

conspicuous effects on the genetics of 

populations (Stillwell et al. 2003, p. 4). 

The results of Stillwell et al. (2003, 

pp. 9-11) suggest that the chestnut blight 

has had significant effects on the 

genetics of Castanea dentata 

populations. They found that a slight 

growth advantage for heterozygous 

genotypes has resulted in a profound 

excess of heterozygotes within 

populations. Studies of different age 

classes (seeds, seedlings, and stands of 

differing age) show an increase in 

heterozygosity with increasing age 

within other tree species. The difference 

observed by Stillwell et al. (2003, pp. 9- 

11) is that all extant Castanea dentata 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
30318 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 104 / Tuesday, June 1, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

genotypes are more than 70 years old 

and many that succumbed to the blight 

as mature canopy trees are much older. 

Therefore, as selection favors a 

population of heterozygous individuals, 

there are no new recruits to restore the 

population toward Hardy-Weinberg 

equilibrium (a constant state of genetic 

variation in a population from one 

generation to the next in the absence of 

disturbance). Prolonged absence of 

sexual reproduction in Castanea 

dentata has resulted in a change in 

population genetics. 

The high mortality of Castanea 

dentata stems in conjunction with near 

total elimination of sexual reproduction 

could have resulted in the loss of some 

(mostly rare) alleles (Loveless and 

Hamrick 1984; Leberg 1992 in Stillwell 

et al). It is not clear, however, whether 

this slightly lower genetic diversity is a 

result of the blight epidemic...Huang et 

al 1998 suggested that the low genetic 

diversity of the American chestnut 

resulted in the high susceptibility to 

attack by blight, rather than that the low 

genetic diversity was a direct 

consequence of the blight pandemic, 

and that other Castanea species with 

more diverse allozyme variation are less 

susceptible to epidemics. In the absence 

of pre-blight genetic population 

structure, it is difficult to make any 

definitive statement on changes in 

genetic diversity due to the chestnut 

blight pandemic (Stillwell et al. 2003, p. 

10). 

Summary to Factor C 

Information provided by the 

petitioner and in our files indicates that 

ink disease does not pose a significant 

threat now or in the foreseeable future 

to the continued existence of extant 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis 

populations. Information in our files 

supports the petition’s assertion that 

chestnut blight may pose a substantial 

threat to the species and that chestnut 

blight is the greatest threat to the 

continued existence of Castanea pumila 

var. ozarkensis. 

While the personal observations cited 

by the petitioner of Castanea pumila 

var. ozarkensis described on a portion of 

the Ouachita National Forest are 

informative and useful in understanding 

the extent of chestnut blight occurrence 

in the western extreme of the species’ 

range, the information does not indicate 

any overall change in the species’ range, 

distribution, or abundance in spite of 

the continued existence of disease 

threats that have been acknowledged in 

the past and continue at present. 

However, information in our files 

indicates that chestnut blight has 

adversely affected the biology (sexually 

reproductive populations are greatly 

diminished from pre-blight status) of 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis and 

other Castanea species in the past 70 

years since infestation occurred and 

may threaten the reproductive status 

and genetic diversity of extant 

populations. While the overall level of 

genetic diversity within and among 

populations of Castanea pumila var. 

ozarkensis is not well understood, there 

is genetic information on other Castanea 

species to suggest that ecological 

changes and the diminished prevalence 

of sexual reproduction may reduce the 

amount and distribution of genetic 

diversity. 

In summary, the chestnut blight has 

disrupted the life cycle of Castanea 

pumila var. ozarkensis by reducing the 

sexual reproduction to isolated areas, 

forcing the species to survive mainly by 

asexual reproduction. The blight has 

threatened the reproductive status and 

may threaten the genetic diversity of 

extant populations. We find that the 

information provided in the petition, as 

well as other information in our files, 

presents substantial scientific or 

commercial information indicating that 

the petitioned action may be warranted 

due to disease from chestnut blight. 

D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory 

Mechanisms 

No information was presented in the 

petition, or is available in our files, to 

indicate that Castanea pumila var. 

ozarkensis may warrant listing due to 

the inadequacy of existing regulatory 

mechanisms. 

E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors 

Affecting the Species’ Continued 

Existence 

No information was presented in the 

petition, or is available in our files, to 

indicate that Castanea pumila var. 

ozarkensis may warrant listing due to 

other natural or manmade factors 

affecting the species’ continued 

existence. 

Finding 

On the basis of our evaluation of the 

information presented under section 

4(b)(3)(A) of the Act, we have 

determined that the petition presents 

substantial scientific or commercial 

information indicating that listing 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis 

throughout its entire range may be 

warranted due to disease or predation 

(Factor C). Following a review of the 

information presented in the petition 

and readily available in our files, we 

have determined that substantial 

information was not presented or 

available that suggests listing may be 

warranted due to the present or 

threatened destruction, modification or 

curtailment of habitat or range (Factor 

A). The petition did not include any 

information related to Factors B, D, and 

E. Because we have found that the 

petition presents substantial 

information indicating that listing 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis may be 

warranted, we are initiating a status 

review to determine whether listing 

Castanea pumila var. ozarkensis under 

the Act is warranted. 

The ‘‘substantial information’’ 

standard for a 90–day finding differs 

from the Act’s ‘‘best scientific and 

commercial data’’ standard that applies 

to a status review to determine whether 

a petitioned action is warranted. A 90– 

day finding does not constitute a status 

review under the Act. In a 12–month 

finding, we will determine whether a 

petitioned action is warranted after we 

have completed a thorough status 

review of the species, which is 

conducted following a substantial 90– 

day finding. Because the Act’s standards 

for 90–day and 12–month findings are 

different, as described above, a 

substantial 90–day finding does not 

mean that the 12–month finding will 

result in a warranted finding. 

References Cited 

A complete list of references cited is 

available on the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov and upon request 

from the Arkansas Ecological Services 

Field Office (see FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT). 

Authors 

The primary authors of this notice are 

the staff members of the Arkansas 

Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). 

Authority 

The authority for this action is section 

4 of the Endangered Species Act of 

1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et 

seq.). 

Dated: May 19, 2010. 

Gregory E. Siekaniec, 

Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–13069 Filed 5–28–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–S 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1