Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Astragalus anserinus - Endangered Species

Astragalus anserinus - Endangered Species

Ratings: (0)|Views: 19 |Likes:

More info:

Published by: Friends of Utah Native Plant Society on Aug 08, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

08/29/2010

pdf

text

original

 
46521
Federal Register
/Vol. 74, No. 174/Thursday, September 10, 2009/Proposed Rules
the magnitude of risks in a project, andto help the project sponsor predict andestablish a project budget and schedule.The most important objective of riskassessment and management protocolsis to help the project sponsor predict the budget and schedule and to ensure thatthe sponsor can complete the projectwithin the budget and scheduleidentified in the FTA grant award.Project risks track the projectdevelopment process. In general terms,they can be described as follows:
Requirements Risk. The first step inproject development is to identify therequirements—risks associated withdefinition of basic project needs andtransit system requirements to meetthose needs;
Design Risk. The second step isproject design—risks involving theadequacy of the information available ateach stage of design and engineering,geotechnical conditions in particular,and the impact of redesign;
Market Risks. The third step is toidentify market risks—risks associatedwith both the procurement approachand the market conditions that canaffect the cost of materials and theavailability of bidders for constructionservices, materials, real estate, andmanufactured products like vehicles;and
Construction Risks. The final step isto identify construction risks—thoserisks associated with the actualconstruction and start-up of the system.Once risks are identified, FTA andproject sponsors must determine the best method for managing those risks.The preferred methods for managingrisk are avoidance, reduction, andmitigation. Because they are really onlyways of providing more up-frontfunding or reducing overall costs but donot reduce risk, less preferred riskmanagement techniques includeincreasing contingency, reducing projectscope, or reducing the level of service.FTA works with each project sponsor todetermine the most feasible strategy foreach project.Project sponsors document this risk-informed management process in theproject management plan. Includingthese strategies can help ensure that theproject sponsor has the requisitetechnical capacity and capability todeliver the project on time and within budget by ensuring that the projectsponsor understands methods foraddressing risks and that it implementsstrategies to avoid future delays.FTA can tailor these risk assessmentand management tools to take intoaccount the unique circumstances of aproject, such as sponsor organizationand technical capacity and capability,and the project complexity or status.
C. Questions
1. Should FTA assign PMOCs tooversee projects other than MajorCapital Projects? Please provide therationale for your recommendationsincluding how oversight of theseprojects should alternatively beprovided if PMOCs are not utilized.2. At what stage in the developmentprocess should FTA assign PMOCs toNew Starts projects? Explain the basisfor your recommendation.3. Other than a detailed review of agrantee’s financial plan, what othermethods might FTA utilize to ensure agrantee has the financial capacity toconstruct and operate a major capitalproject?4. Please comment on FTA’s RiskManagement approach. If you do notagree with FTA’s approach, pleaserecommend an alternative and providea basis for your recommendation.Following the close of the commentperiod on this ANRPM, FTA willsummarize and respond to thecomments and issue a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that positsexplicit text for a rewrite of theregulation at 49 CFR Part 633. Weexpect to publish such a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in 2009.
Issued this 4th day of September, 2009.
Peter M. Rogoff,
Administrator, Federal Transit Administration.
[FR Doc. E9–21849 Filed 9–9–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIORFish and Wildlife Service50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R1–ES–2009–0006][MO 922105 0082–B2]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlifeand Plants; 12-Month Finding on aPetition to List
Astragalus anserinus 
(Goose Creek milkvetch) asThreatened or Endangered
AGENCY
:
Fish and Wildlife Service,Interior.
ACTION
:
Notice of a 12–month petitionfinding.
SUMMARY
:
We, the U.S. Fish andWildlife Service (Service), announce our12–month finding on a petition to list
Astragalus anserinus
(Goose Creekmilkvetch) as a threatened orendangered species under theEndangered Species Act of 1973, asamended (Act). After a thorough reviewof all available scientific andcommercial information, we find thatlisting
A. anserinus
under the Act iswarranted. However, listing is currentlyprecluded by higher priority actions toamend the Lists of Endangered andThreatened Wildlife and Plants. Wehave assigned a listing priority number(LPN) of 5 to this species, because thethreats affecting it have a highmagnitude, but are non-imminent. Uponpublication of this 12–month petitionfinding,
A. anserinus
will be added toour candidate species list. We willdevelop a proposed rule to list
A.anserinus
as our priorities allow. Anydeterminations on critical habitat will be made during development of theproposed rule.
DATES
:
The finding announced in thisdocument was made on September 10,2009.
:
This finding is available onthe Internet at
atDocket NumberFWS–R1–ES–2009–0006. Supportingdocumentation we used to prepare thisfinding is available for publicinspection, by appointment duringnormal business hours at the U.S. Fishand Wildlife Service, Utah Field Office,2369 West Orton Circle Suite 50, WestValley City, Utah 84119. Please submitany new information, materials,comments, or questions concerning thisfinding to the above address or viaelectronic mail (e-mail) at
. 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
:
Larry Crist, Field Supervisor, U.S. Fishand Wildlife Service, Utah Field Office(see
ADDRESSES
)); by telephone at 801–975–3330; or by facsimile at 801–975–3331. If you use a telecommunicationsdevice for the deaf (TDD), call theFederal Information Relay Service(FIRS) at 800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
:
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act (16U.S.C. 1531
et seq.
) requires that, forany petition containing substantialscientific and commercial informationthat listing may be warranted, we makea finding within 12 months of the dateof receipt of the petition on whether thepetitioned action is: (a) Not warranted,(b) warranted, or (c) warranted, butimmediate proposal of a regulationimplementing the petitioned action isprecluded by other pending proposals todetermine whether species arethreatened or endangered, andexpeditious progress is being made toadd or remove qualified species from
VerDate Nov<24>2008 13:54 Sep 09, 2009Jkt 217001PO 00000Frm 00010Fmt 4702Sfmt 4702E:\FR\FM\10SEP1.SGM10SEP1
  e  r  o  w  e  o  n   D   S   K   5   C   L   S   3   C   1   P   R   O   D  w   i   t   h   P   R   O   P   O   S   A   L   S  -   1
 
46522
Federal Register
/Vol. 74, No. 174/Thursday, September 10, 2009/Proposed Rules
the Lists of Endangered and ThreatenedWildlife and Plants. Section 4(b)(3)(C) of the Act requires that we treat a petitionfor which the requested action is foundto be warranted but precluded as thoughresubmitted on the date of such finding;that is, requiring a subsequent finding to be made within 12 months. We mustpublish these 12–month findings in the
Federal Register
.
Previous Federal Actions
On February 3, 2004, we received apetition dated January 30, 2004, fromRed Willow Research, Inc., and 25 otherconcerned parties (the Prairie FalconAudubon Society Chapter Board,Western Watersheds Project, UtahEnvironmental Congress, SawtoothGroup of the Sierra Club, and 21 privatecitizens) requesting that we list
Astragalus anserinus
as threatened orendangered, emergency list the species,and designate critical habitatconcurrently with the listing (RedWillow Research Inc, in litt. 2004). Weacknowledged the receipt of the petitionin a letter to the petitioners in a letterdated February 19, 2004. In that letter,we advised the petitioners that ourinitial review of the petition determinedthat emergency listing was notwarranted, and that if conditions changewe would reevaluate the need foremergency listing. We informed thepetitioner that in light of resourceconstraints, we anticipated making ourinitial finding in Fiscal Year 2005 as towhether the petition containedsubstantial information indicating thatthe action may be warranted.On August 16, 2007, we published anotice of 90–day finding (72 FR 46023)that the petition presented substantialscientific or commercial informationindicating that listing
A. anserinus
may be warranted, and that we wereinitiating a status review of the species.For more information, refer to the 90–day finding that was published in the
Federal Register
on August 16, 2007 (72FR 46023). We received informationfrom the Bureau of Land Management,Idaho Department of Fish and Game,Red Willow Research Inc. (thepetitioner), and the Cassia County WeedControl office in response to the 90–dayfinding. All information received has been fully considered in this finding.In accordance with the President’smemorandum of April 29, 1994,Government-to-Government Relationswith Native American TribalGovernments (59 FR 22951), ExecutiveOrder 13175, and the Department of theInterior’s manual at 512 DM 2, wereadily acknowledge our responsibilityto communicate meaningfully withrecognized Federal Tribes on agovernment-to-government basis. Inaccordance with Secretarial Order 3206of June 5, 1997 (American Indian TribalRights, Federal-Tribal TrustResponsibilities, and the EndangeredSpecies Act), we readily acknowledgeour responsibilities to work directlywith the Tribes in developing programsfor healthy ecosystems, to acknowledgethat Tribal lands are not subject to thesame controls as Federal public lands,to remain sensitive to Indian culture,and to make information available toTribes. In fulfilling our trustresponsibilities for government-to-government consultation with Tribes,we met with the Shoshone Paiute Tribesregarding the process taken to conducta 12–month status review of 
Astragalusanserinus
. As an outcome of ourgovernment-to-governmentconsultation, we recognize the strongcultural significance of 
A. anserinus
tothe Shoshone Paiute Tribes andacknowledge that in this 12–monthfinding. This notice constitutes the 12–month finding on the January 30, 2004,petition to list
A. anserinus
asthreatened or endangered.
Species Information
Astragalus anserinus
was firstcollected in 1982 by Duane Atwoodfrom a location in Box Elder County,Utah, and subsequently described in1984 (Atwood
et al 
. 1984, p. 263). Thespecies is known only from tuffaceous(ashy) soils found near Goose Creek onthe Idaho, Nevada, and Utah border, anarea approximately 20 miles (mi)(32.5kilometers (km)) long and 4 mi (6.4 km)wide.
A. anserinus
is a low-growing,matted, perennial forb (flowering herb)in the pea or legume family (Fabaceae),with grey hairy leaves, pink-purpleflowers, and brownish-red curved seedpods (Mancuso and Moseley 1991, p. 4).This species is distinguished from
A.calycosus
(Torrey’s milkvetch),
A. purshii 
(woollypod milkvetch), and
A.newberryi 
(Newberry’s milkvetch), thethree other mat-forming
Astragalus
species found in the Goose Creekdrainage, primarily by its smallerleaflets and flowers, as well as the colorand shape of the seed pods (Baird andTuhy 1991, p. 1; Mancuso and Moseley1991, pp. 4–5). In our August 16, 2007,90–day finding (72 FR 46023), we usedthe common name for the species,‘‘Goose Creek milk-vetch.’’ Here we use‘‘
Astragalus anserinus
’’ for accuracy,and ‘‘Goose Creek milkvetch’’ (un-hyphenated) to make the taxonomymore consistent with today’s botanicalnomenclature.
Biology, Distribution, and AbundanceAstragalus anserinus
typically flowersfrom late May to early June. The speciesis assumed to be insect-pollinated, butthe specific pollinators are unknown(Baird and Tuhy 1991, p. 3). Fruit set begins in early June with fruitsremaining on the plants for severalmonths. Mechanisms of seed dispersalare also unknown, but may includewind dispersion of seed pods and insector bird agents (Baird and Tuhy 1991, p.3). Because
A. anserinus
often grows onslopes and because the seed pods arefound close to the ground below thevegetative portions of the plant, water orgravity dispersal may also be a dispersalmechanism. In 2004 and 2005, clustersof seedlings were occasionally observedon abandoned ant hills, which couldsuggest some ant dispersal. Littlescientific research specific to
A.anserinus
has been conducted beyond a basic species description and varioussurvey efforts.Limited information is availableregarding
Astragalus anserinus
longevity. In September 2004, the U.S.Bureau of Land Management (BLM)Field Office in Burley, Idaho (BLM-Idaho), permanently marked 10seedlings in a wash at the base of atuffaceous outcrop (soils comprised of volcanic ash and particulates) at one site(Site 1), 8 seedlings and 7 adults at the base of a slope at a second site (Site 2),and 12 seedlings and 10 adults at a thirdsite (Site 3) (A. Feldhausen, BurleyBLM, in litt. 2007a, pp. 8–9). The resultsof this effort are summarized in Table 1 below. In a separate monitoring effort,BLM-Idaho conducted annual countingof 
A. anserinus
individuals at two sites(Big Site 1 and Big Site 7) from 2004 to2007. These results are depicted inTable 2 below. In combination, thesetwo studies demonstrate largefluctuations in the number of individuals between years, with Table 2reflecting almost a doubling or halvingin magnitude between the numbers of individuals observed in successiveyears.
VerDate Nov<24>2008 13:54 Sep 09, 2009Jkt 217001PO 00000Frm 00011Fmt 4702Sfmt 4702E:\FR\FM\10SEP1.SGM10SEP1
  e  r  o  w  e  o  n   D   S   K   5   C   L   S   3   C   1   P   R   O   D  w   i   t   h   P   R   O   P   O   S   A   L   S  -   1
 
46523
Federal Register
/Vol. 74, No. 174/Thursday, September 10, 2009/Proposed Rules
T
ABLE
1. S
HORT
-
TERM TRACKING OF
Astragalus anserinus 
INDIVIDUALS
(2004–2006) (A. F
ELDHAUSEN
,
IN LITT
. 2007
A
,
PP
. 8–9).
YearSite 1 Site 2 Site 3Seedlings Seedlings Adults Seedlings Adults2004 10 seedlings 8 seedlings 7 adults 12 seedlings 10 adults2005 4 dead, 2 smallseedlings (15leaves each), 4small adult plantswith pods6 dead, 1 smallseedling (12leaves), 1 youngadult1 dead, 6 alive 1 stake missing, 5dead, 6 smalladults (3 withpods)1 dead, 9 with des-iccated leaves andnumerous pods2006 All 6 remaining plantsswept away bywater in a washOf the 7 remainingadult plants, 2dead and 5 aliveOf the 6 remainingstakes: 1 stakemissing, 4 dead, 1adult7 dead, 3 stakesmissing
T
ABLE
2. M
ONITORING OF
Astragalus anserinus 
AT TWO SITES IN
I
DAHO
 (A. F
ELDHAUSEN
,
IN LITT
. 2007
A
,
PP
. 8–9; I
DAHO
C
ONSERVATION
 D
ATA
C
ENTER
(IDCDC) 2007
A
,E
LEMENT
O
CCURRENCE
(EO) 003).
Year Big Site 1 Big Site 72004 123 total (2dead, 73seedlings,48 adults)138 total (42seedlings,96 adults)2005 136 total (8dead, 13seedlings,115adults)67 total (3dead, 6seedlings,58 adults)2006 88 total 135 total2007 73 total 69 total
These wide-ranging fluctuations inthe number of 
Astragalus anserinus
individuals observed suggests that thespecies is either short-lived or that adultplants may remain dormant duringsome growing seasons. If the species isshort-lived, correspondingaugmentation of seedlings to replacelost individuals would be expected;however, this has not been observed.During spring census efforts, seedlings(defined as young developing plantshaving 3 or fewer leaves) made up 1,433of the 30,281 individuals that werecounted in 2005 (4.7 percent), and 167of the 4,087 individuals counted in 2008(4.1 percent) (Service 2008a, p. 1). Thedefinition of seedlings used forpurposes of Table 2 is different than thatused in the 2004, 2005, and 2008 censusefforts; with seedlings in Table 2 beingdefined by young developing plantswith cotyledons (the first leaves toemerge from the ground) present.Seedlings made up 59.3 percent of thetotal individuals at Big Site 1 in 2004,and 9.6 percent of the total individualsin 2005. Seedlings also made up 30.4percent of the total individuals at BigSite 2 in 2004, and 8.9 percent of thetotal individuals in 2005 (J. Tharp,Burley BLM, in litt., 2008a, p. 1).Although we have no direct informationon
A. anserinus
seedling germination, itwould likely be more or less abundantdepending on the time of year sampled.We expect spring would be the mostlikely time to observe
A. anserinus
seedlings, like many other plants, andthe seedlings could be more numerousin years when climatic conditions aremore amenable to their germination andestablishment. One such climatic factorcould be annual precipitation; theamount and timing of this precipitationover the course of a year could influenceseed germination and seedlingrecruitment.During field surveys, several smaller
Astragalus anserinus
plants werepartially excavated and observed to beattached to large woody roots. Parts of some individual plants frequentlyappeared to be dead, with only a smallgreen portion remaining. This suggeststhat vegetative growth may vary duringsuccessive years, and that plant sizemay not necessarily correspond to theage of the individual. This also suggeststhat some
A. anserinus
individuals mayremain dormant for an entire growingseason. In at least one other species of 
Astragalus
(
A. ampullarioides
), adultplants can exhibit dormancy (aninactive state) during a growing season,and the perennial rootstock allows theplant to survive dry years (Van Burenand Harper 2003b in Service 2006a, p.8). However, monitoring studies todetermine whether
A. anserinus
alsohas this ability have not beenconducted.Table 2 also demonstrates thatfluctuations in the number of 
Astragalusanserinus
individuals can vary acrosssites during a given year. For example,the number of individuals counted atBig Site 1 decreased from 136 to 88 between 2005 and 2006, whereas thenumber of individuals counted at BigSite 7 increased from 67 to 135 duringthe same time period. However, between 2006 and 2007, the number of individuals counted at Big Site 1decreased from 88 to 73 and the numberof individuals counted at Big Site 7decreased 135 to 69. Since these sitesare approximately 0.5 mi (0.8 km) aparton similar aspects, this suggests thatlocal weather patterns may not be apredominant factor influencing plantabundance and annual survival.Although we acknowledge there aresome uncertainties with regard tolongevity, plant dormancy, and theeffect of climatic factors on
A.anserinus
, the observed populationtrend has been a decrease in the numberof observed individuals.
Astragalus anserinus
is endemic tothe Goose Creek drainage in CassiaCounty, Idaho; Elko County, Nevada;and Box Elder County, Utah. The GooseCreek drainage occurs within the GreatBasin ecosystem; this drainage receivesan annual rainfall average of less than12 inches (30 centimeters). ElementOccurrences (EOs) are areas where aspecies was or is recorded to be present.The known EOs of 
A. anserinus
occurat elevations ranging between 4,900 to5,885 feet (ft) (1,494 to 1,790 meters (m))(Idaho Conservation Data Center(IDCDC) 2007b, p. 2; Smith 2007, Table1). Most
A. anserinus
EOs are within anapproximate 20-mi (32-km) long by 4-mi(6.4-km) wide area, oriented in asouthwest to northeasterly directionalong Goose Creek. However one
A.anserinus
EO has been documentedoutside of the Goose Creek watershedapproximately 2 mi (3.2 km) south of any other EOs. The geographic range of the species has not been extended fromthat presented in the 90–day finding (72FR 46023; August 16, 2007). Based onnew information from surveys
VerDate Nov<24>2008 13:54 Sep 09, 2009Jkt 217001PO 00000Frm 00012Fmt 4702Sfmt 4702E:\FR\FM\10SEP1.SGM10SEP1
  e  r  o  w  e  o  n   D   S   K   5   C   L   S   3   C   1   P   R   O   D  w   i   t   h   P   R   O   P   O   S   A   L   S  -   1

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->