Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of Threatened Status for Helianthus eggertii (Eggert's Sunflower)

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

RIN 1018-AC74

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of

Threatened Status for Helianthus eggertii (Eggert's Sunflower)

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) determines

threatened status for Helianthus eggertii (Eggert's sunflower) under

the authority of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act).

This rare plant is presently known from an estimated 34 populations in

14 counties--in Alabama, one population in Blount County; in Kentucky,

one population from Grayson and Hardin counties, two populations from

Edmonson and Barren counties, and seven populations from Hart County;

in Tennessee, one population each in Dickson, Marion, and Williamson

counties, two (and a portion of a third) in Maury County, three in

Lewis County, four in Lawrence County, and six in Coffee County. It is

threatened throughout its range by habitat alteration; residential,

commercial, or industrial development; plant succession; and conversion

of its limited habitat to pasture or croplands. Herbicide use,

particularly along roadsides, also poses a threat. This action extends

Federal protection under the Act to Eggert's sunflower.

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 23, 1997.

ADDRESSES: The complete file for this rule is available for public

inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the

Asheville Field Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 160 Zillicoa

Street, Asheville, North Carolina 28801.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. J. Allen Ratzlaff at the above

address (704/258-3939, Ext. 229).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Helianthus eggertii (Small) (Eggert's sunflower) is a perennial

member of the aster family (Asteraceae) known only from Kentucky,

Tennessee, and Alabama. It is a tall (to 2.5 meters [8 feet]) plant

arising from a short, thick base, perennating by shallow elongate,

fleshy rhizomes that can form an extensive network. The plant is

smooth, except for some slight roughening on the upper leaf surfaces,

and it has a blue-waxy coloration. The lower leaves are conspicuously

whitened. The plant's opposite (rarely whorled) leaves are mostly

lanceolate to narrowly ovate, the largest being 10 to 20 centimeters

(3.9 to 5.7 inches) in length. Leaf edges are smooth or minutely

toothed, and the tip is usually pointed. Large yellow flowers (8

centimeters [3 inches]) are borne on the upper third of the stem.

Cypsalas (seeds) are blackish or grayish and mottled, 5 to 6

millimeters (0.25 inches) long, faintly striated, and with a few

scattered trichomes (hairs). Flowering begins in early August and

continues through mid-September, and achenes mature from early

September to early October (Jones 1991). Jones (1991) observed fruit

set at between 5 and 25 seeds per flower head. Seed germination rates

are generally low (rarely exceeding 25 percent) and most require

exposure to cold to break dormancy (Heiser et al. 1969).

Eggert's sunflower develops an extensive rhizome system, and these

rhizomes can live for many years. Thus, the plant does not have to

produce seeds every year to ensure its survival. If environmental

conditions change

[[Page 27974]]

(e.g., increased competition, shading, etc.); it can survive for

several years by vegetative means, as Jones (1991) noted was the case

in several populations.

Small (1903) designated the type locality of Eggert's sunflower as

near White Bluff in Dickson County, Tennessee, from specimens collected

by H. Eggert. Beatley (1963) considered this plant a distinct species

and that it was ``conspicuous because of the colonial habit and

glaucescense.'' In a comprehensive essay on Helianthus, Heiser et al.

(1969) retained H. eggertii as a distinct species and placed it in the

series Divaricati, being distinguished by its nearly sessile, glaucous,

and glabrous leaves. This work pointed out that H. eggertii is a

hexaploid (n=51) and could have arisen from a cross between H.

laevigatus (n=34), a shale barren species of the Allegheny Mountains,

and H. decapetalus (n=17), a widespread species of the eastern United

States.

Spring and Schilling (1991) found H. eggertii to have a unique

chemical profile. Of the related sunflowers, it is most similar to H.

laevigatus, which shares 9 of 12 chemical compounds. Smith (1957)

considered H. eggertii to be a local minor variant of H. strumosus, but

this species is dissimilar biochemically although the two species

appear to readily hybridize.

Helianthus eggertii typically occurs on rolling to flat uplands and

in full sun or partial shade. It is often found in open fields or in

thickets along woodland borders and with other tall herbs and small

trees. The distribution of this species shows a strong correlation with

the barrens (and similar habitats) of the Interior Low Plateau

Physiographic Province, with a few records from the Cumberland Plateau

Section of the Appalachian Plateau Physiographic Province. The

following is a description of the species' status within each State

where it occurs. The term ``population'' is used loosely in these

descriptions because it is not known how distant individual plants must

be from one another to prevent cross-pollination. Populations described

below are groups of ``occurrences'' in general proximity to each other

and may or may not correspond to true biological populations.

Alabama

The only known location for Eggert's sunflower in Alabama (Blount

County) was discovered in 1981 by Robert Kral (Jones 1991). This site,

although presently vigorous, could be affected by local development and

Interstate 65 maintenance and improvements.

Tennessee

The following information on Eggert's sunflower in Tennessee is

primarily from Jones (1991) and the Tennessee Natural Heritage Program

database.

Prior to the status survey conducted by Jones (1991), there were 12

counties in Tennessee with records (a total of 13) of H. eggertii. Four

sites were found to have been extirpated (one each in Coffee, Davidson,

Lawrence, and Williamson counties) and four were found to be erroneous

records (one each in Dekalb, Grundy, Clay, and Morgan counties).

Additional occurrences were discovered during the status survey and

later by the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation

(TDEC) (1993, in litt.) and the U.S. Air Force, Arnold Engineering

Development Center (AEDC). Several sites in Coffee, Franklin, Lawrence,

and Lewis counties are probably single populations and are treated as

such in this document, including the occurrences on AEDC in Coffee and

Franklin counties. The 20 known populations in Tennessee are

distributed as follows: Coffee County--six populations; Lawrence

County--four populations; Franklin County--two populations plus a

portion of the occurrences on AEDC; Lewis County--three populations;

Maury County--two populations; and one population each in Dickson,

Marion, and Williamson counties. Most of these populations (about 50

percent) are small, having fewer than 20 individual plants. The other

populations contain several hundred stems. Most of the Tennessee

populations are threatened either by roadside maintenance, weedy

invaders, fire suppression, or development. The largest known

population is found on Federal lands (AEDC), three occur entirely or

partially on State lands, and the remainder are found in roadside

rights-of-way or on private lands.

Kentucky

The following information on Eggert's sunflower in Kentucky is

primarily derived from Jones (1991) and the Kentucky State Nature

Preserves Commission (KSNPC) (1996, in litt.).

Populations of Eggert's sunflower in Kentucky are known from the

Mammoth Cave Plateau subsection and Eastern Highlands Rim subsection of

the Interior Low Plateau Physiographic Provinces. Prior to the status

survey conducted by Jones (1991), there were three counties in Kentucky

with single records of occurrence for H. eggertii. One site, in

Edmonson County, has been extirpated, and the other two records have

proven to be erroneous (one each in Lincoln and Jackson counties).

However, seven new populations were discovered during the status

survey, and additional sites were later discovered by R. Seymour in the

Mammoth Cave area (D. White, KSNPC, 1996, in litt.). The 13 known sites

in Kentucky are distributed as follows--one population from Grayson and

Hardin counties, two populations from Edmonson and Barren counties, and

seven populations from Hart County. Most of these populations have

fewer than 15 individual plants, with four having only five or fewer

plants. Only two populations occur on barrens, and half of these are

threatened by weedy competitors and/or road maintenance. Five of the

thirteen Kentucky populations are found entirely or partially on

Federal lands (Mammoth Cave National Park), two on The Nature

Conservancy's (TNC) land and the remainder are found along roadside

rights-of-way or on private lands.

Previous Federal Action

Federal government actions on this species began with section 12 of

the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). It directed the Secretary of the

Smithsonian Institution (Smithsonian) to prepare a report on those

plants considered to be endangered, threatened, or extinct. This

report, designated as House Document No. 94-51, was presented to

Congress on January 9, 1975. On July 1, 1975, the Service published a

notice (40 FR 27823) that formally accepted the Smithsonian report as a

petition within the context of section 4(c)(2) (now section 4(b)(3)) of

the Act. By accepting this report as a petition, the Service also

acknowledged its intention to review the status of those plant taxa

named within the report. Helianthus eggertii was included in the

Smithsonian report and also in the July 1, 1975, Notice of Review. On

June 16, 1976, the Service published a proposed rule (41 FR 24523) that

determined approximately 1,700 vascular plant taxa, including H.

eggertii, to be endangered pursuant to section 4 of the Act.

The 1978 amendments to the Act require that all proposals that are

not finalized within two years be withdrawn. On December 10, 1979 (44

FR 70796), the Service published a notice withdrawing all plant species

proposed in the June 16, 1976 rule. The revised Notice of Review for

Native Plants published on December 15, 1980 (45 FR 82480), now

included H. eggertii as a category 2 species. It was subsequently

retained as a category 2 species when the Notice of Review for Native

Plants was revised in 1983 (48 FR 53640), in 1985 (50 FR 39526), and

again in 1990 (50 FR 61184). In 1990, category 2 species were those

taxa for

[[Page 27975]]

which the Service had information indicating that proposing to list

them as endangered or threatened might be appropriate; or for which

substantial data on biological vulnerability and threats were not known

at this time or were not on file to support the listing. This was the

case with H. eggertii; the Service believed that additional surveys of

potential habitat and further identification of threats were needed

before a decision could be made on whether to propose listing the

species. In 1989, the Service funded a survey to determine the status

of H. eggertii in Alabama, Kentucky, and Tennessee; a final report on

these surveys (Jones 1991) was accepted by the Service in 1991.

All plant taxa included in the comprehensive plant notices are

treated as if under a petition. Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act, as

amended in 1982, requires the Secretary to make certain findings on

pending petitions within 12 months of their receipt. Section 2(b)(1) of

the 1982 amendments further requires that all petitions pending as of

October 13, 1982, be treated as having been newly submitted on that

date. This was the case for H. eggertii because of the acceptance of

the 1975 Smithsonian report as a petition. In 1983, the Service found

that the petition calling for the listing of H. eggertii was not

warranted because of insufficient data on its distribution,

vulnerability, and degrees of threat. Information contained in the

above-mentioned status survey completed these informational gaps and

was sufficient and conclusive to warrant preparation of a proposed rule

to list the species. Helianthus eggertii was accepted as a category 1

species on August 30, 1993, and was included in this category in the

revised Notice of Review for Native Plants published on September 30,

1993 (50 FR 51144). On September 9, 1994 (59 FR 46607), the Service

published a proposed rule to list Eggert's sunflower as threatened

under the Act.

The processing of this final rule conforms with the Service's final

listing priority guidance published in the Federal Register on December

5, 1996 (61 FR 64475). The guidance clarifies the order in which the

Service will process rulemakings during fiscal year 1997. The guidance

calls for giving highest priority to handling emergency situations

(Tier 1) and second highest priority (Tier 2) to resolving the listing

status of the outstanding proposed listings. This rule falls under Tier

2. Presently, there are no pending Tier 1 actions in Region 4.

Summary of Comments and Recommendations

In the September 9, 1994, proposed rule (59 FR 46607) to list

Eggert's sunflower as threatened and through other associated

notifications, all interested parties were requested to submit factual

reports and information that might contribute to the development of a

final rule for this sunflower. Appropriate Federal and State agencies,

county governments, scientific organizations, and interested parties

were contacted by letter dated September 29, 1994. Legal notices were

published in the Hart County News Herald, Democrat-Union

(Lawrenceburg), and Daily Herald (Columbia) on September 27, 1994; in

the Blount Countian, State Journal (Frankfort), Chattanooga Times, and

Dickson Herald on September 28, 1994; in the Edmonson News, Herald

Chronicle (Hart County), Daily News (Bowling Green), and Lewis County

Herald on September 29, 1994, and in the Manchester Times on October 5,

1994.

Six individuals provided written responses on the proposed rule to

list Eggert's sunflower. Four of the individuals who responded

supported the listing, one requested information but did not support or

oppose the listing, and one provided additional information but neither

supported nor opposed the listing. All of these comments were

incorporated into the final rulemaking.

The comment period on the proposed rule (59 FR 46607) was reopened

on August 30, 1996 (61 FR 45931). Through associated notifications,

interested parties were requested to submit factual reports and

information that might contribute to the development of a final rule

for this sunflower. One hundred and thirty-eight Federal and State

agencies, county governments, scientific organizations, and interested

parties were contacted by letter dated September 6, 1996. Legal notices

were published in the Herald Chronicle on September 2, 1996; in the

Hart County News Herald and Nashville Banner on September 3, 1996; in

the Blount Countian, Daily Herald (Columbia, TN) Chattanooga Times, and

Dickson Herald on September 4, 1996; in the Edmonson News and Lewis

County Herald on September 5, 1996; in the Frankfort State Journal on

September 6, 1996; and in the Manchester Times on September 11, 1996.

Eight written responses were received during the reopening of the

comment period on the proposed rule to list Eggert's sunflower. One

individual supported the listing and provided additional information;

two State agencies supported the listing and provided additional

information (KSNPC and TDEC); two private conservation organizations

supported the listing and provided additional information (the Kentucky

and Tennessee Chapters of TNC); one Federal agency supported the

listing and provided additional information (AEDC); one Federal agency

supported the listing but provided no additional information (U.S.

Natural Resources Conservation Service, Tennessee); and one Federal

agency (U.S. Forest Service) neither supported nor opposed the listing,

but did provide additional information. These comments were also

incorporated into the final rule.

The Service also solicited the expert opinions of three independent

specialists regarding pertinent scientific and commercial data and

assumptions relating to taxonomy and biological and ecological

information for this species. The Service received one response from

the specialists and these comments are incorporated into this final

rule.

Summary of Factors Affecting the Species

After a thorough review and consideration of all available

information, the Service has determined that Eggert's sunflower should

be classified as a threatened species. Section 4(a)(1) of the Act and

regulations (50 CFR part 424) promulgated to implement the listing

provisions of the Act were followed. 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). These factors and their

application to H. eggertii (Eggert's sunflower) are as follows:

A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment

of its Habitat or Range

Most of the known populations of H. eggertii are threatened with

destruction or adverse modification of their habitat. Over 50 percent

of the known H. eggertii sites are threatened by the encroachment of

more competitive herbaceous vegetation and/or woody plants that produce

shade and compete with this species for limited water and nutrients.

Active management is required to ensure that Eggert's sunflower

continues to survive at all sites.

Since most of the sites where this species survives are artificial

(not true barrens) or manmade habitats, such as rights-of-way or

similar habitats that mimic barrens; direct destruction of this

[[Page 27976]]

habitat for commercial, residential, or industrial development or

intensive rights-of-way maintenance (e.g., herbicide use) is a

significant threat to most of the known populations.

Barrens habitat, which is preferred by Eggert's sunflower, is

disappearing from the south-central United States at a rapid rate. Most

of this type of habitat has been converted to croplands, pasture, or

has been developed as residential or industrial sites. DeSelm (1989),

in a study on Tennessee barrens, reported that all of his study sites

were in the later stages of succession, with the prevention of fires

being the major contributing factor.

As its natural habitat disappears, Eggert's sunflower is now found

in habitats that replicate the species' ecological requirements. These

sites, having the accompanying assortment of weedy vegetation

associated with disturbed areas, typically are disturbed habitats, such

as roadside rights-of-way, ditches, road cuts, or mounds of soil.

Colonization most likely occurs soon after a disturbance to the

habitat. Eggert's sunflower can initially compete with other

vegetation. However, as successional stages progress, this species is

consequently reduced to vegetative growth from rhizomes and is

eventually eliminated. Periodic burning, mowing, or thinning of

vegetation on these sites favors the species by lessening competition.

This sunflower is persisting at several sites due to the current mowing

regime.

B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or

Educational Purposes

At this time, there is little, if any, commercial trade in H.

eggertii. Most populations are very small and cannot support the

collection of plants for scientific and/or other purposes.

Inappropriate collecting for scientific purposes or as novelties pose a

threat to the species.

C. Disease or Predation

Disease and predation are presently not factors affecting the

continued existence of the species. However, in several populations,

larval insects were found to have destroyed nearly all the mature seeds

in several flower heads (Jones 1991; personal observations, Ratzlaff

1992).

D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms

Helianthus eggertii is a Species of Special Concern in Tennessee,

and it does not receive any formal protection since it is not listed as

endangered under the State's Rare Plant Protection and Conservation

Act. In Alabama, the species does not receive any State protection, and

in Kentucky, it is listed as endangered by the Kentucky Academy of

Science and KSNPC (Branson et al. 1981, Warren et al. 1986). However,

these lists have no legal standing in the State.

The Act will afford additional protection to populations that occur

on Federal lands and will protect other populations when the taking is

in violation of any State law, including State criminal trespass laws.

Protection from inappropriate interstate commercial trade will also be

provided for under the Act.

E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting its Continued Existence

An additional factor that threatens the survival of H. eggertii is

extended drought. Dry conditions cause higher than normal mortality of

seedlings in the natural populations. If drought continues over an

extended period of time, it could have an adverse effect on the

survival of the species, itself. Additionally, dwindling numbers in the

populations of this species could increase the potential for inbreeding

depression and other reproductive-related problems.

In determining to make this rule final, the Service has carefully

assessed the best scientific and commercial information available

regarding the past, present, and future threats faced by this species.

Based on this evaluation, the preferred action is to list Eggert's

sunflower as threatened. This sunflower is presently known from 34

populations in 14 counties--in Alabama, one population in Blount

County; in Kentucky, one population from Grayson and Hardin counties,

two populations from Edmonson and Barren counties, and seven

populations from Hart County; in Tennessee, one population each in

Dickson, Marion, and Williamson counties, two in Maury County, two in

Franklin County and two ``occurrences'' are included as a portion of

the AEDC population in Coffee County, three in Lewis County, four in

Lawrence County, and six in Coffee County. The species is threatened

throughout its range by habitat alteration; residential, commercial,

and industrial development; plant succession; and the conversion of its

limited habitat to pasture or croplands. Additionally, herbicide use,

particularly along roadsides, also poses a threat. See the ``Critical

Habitat'' section for a discussion of why critical habitat is not being

proposed for this plant.

Critical Habitat

Section 4(a)(3) of the Act and implementing regulations (50 CFR

424.12) require that, to the maximum extent prudent and determinable,

the Secretary designate critical habitat at the time the species is

determined to be endangered or threatened. The Service finds that

designation of critical habitat is not prudent at this time for H.

eggertii. Service regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)) state that

designation of critical habitat is not prudent when one or both of the

following situations exist--(1) The species is threatened by taking or

other human activity, and identification of critical habitat can be

expected to increase the degree of threat to the species, or (2) the

designation of critical habitat would not be beneficial to the species.

Section 7(a)(2) and regulations codified at 50 CFR part 402 require

Federal agencies, in consultation and with the assistance of the

Service, to ensure that those activities they authorize, fund, or carry

out are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed

species or destroy or adversely modify its critical habitat, if any is

designated. Section 7(a)(4) requires Federal agencies to confer

informally with the Service on any action that is likely to jeopardize

the continued existence of a proposed species or result in the

destruction or adverse modification of its proposed critical habitat

(see ``Available Conservation Measures'' section for a further

discussion of section 7). As part of the development of this rule,

Federal and State agencies were notified of the plant's general

distribution, and they were requested to provide any and all data on

proposed Federal actions that might adversely affect the species. No

specific projects were identified during the initial comment period.

However, during the listing moratorium, the Arnold Engineering

Development Center of the U.S. Air Force (AEDC) entered into section 7

consultation with the Service (Cookeville Field Office) concerning the

proposed training of the National Guard on a base where H. eggertii

occurs. The Air Force has since requested a formal conference. The

Service has been working closely with the AEDC on a conservation plan

that benefits the species and allows the Air Force to carry out its

mission. No additional projects were identified during the second

comment period. Should any future projects be proposed in areas

inhabited by this plant, the involved Federal agency will be given the

general distributional data necessary to determine if the species would

be

[[Page 27977]]

impacted by their action. If needed, more specific distributional

information will be provided.

Most populations of this species are small, and even the loss of a

few plants to such activities as scientific collecting, could extirpate

this sunflower from several locations. Therefore, publication of

critical habitat descriptions and maps would increase the vulnerability

of the species to vandalism without significantly increasing

protection. The private landowners and local, State and Federal

managers on whose property that all the known populations of H.

eggertii occur, will be made aware of the location of existing plants

and the importance of protecting them and their habitat. No additional

benefits would result from the designation of critical habitat.

Therefore, the Service concludes that it is not prudent at this time to

designate critical habitat for the species. Existing precise locality

data will be made available to appropriate Federal, State, and local

government agencies from the Service office described in the ADDRESSES

section or from the Service's Cookeville Field Office, 446 Neal Street,

Cookeville, Tennessee 38501.

Available Conservation Measures

Conservation measures provided to species listed as endangered or

threatened under the Act include recognition, recovery actions,

requirements for Federal protection, and prohibitions against certain

activities. Recognition through listing results in public awareness and

conservation actions to be taken by Federal, State, and local agencies,

private organizations, and individuals. The Act provides for possible

land acquisition and cooperation with the States and requires that

recovery actions be carried out for all listed species. The protection

required of Federal agencies and the prohibitions against certain

activities involving listed plants are discussed, in part, below.

Section 7(a) of the Act requires Federal agencies to evaluate their

actions with respect to any species that is being proposed or is

already listed as endangered or threatened and with respect to critical

habitat, if any is being designated. Regulations implementing this

interagency cooperation provision of the Act are codified at 50 CFR

part 402. Section 7(a)(2) requires Federal agencies to ensure that

activities they authorize, fund, or carry out are not likely to

jeopardize the continued existence of such a species or to destroy or

adversely modify its critical habitat. If a Federal action adversely

affects a listed species or its critical habitat, the responsible

Federal agency must enter into consultation with the Service. Most H.

eggertii populations are found on privately-owned or State-owned lands.

However, one entire population and portions of four others are found in

Mammoth Cave National Park (U.S. Park Service) and one population (that

includes 62 ``occurrences'') of H. eggertii is on AEDC lands.

The Act and its implementing regulations set forth a series of

general prohibitions and exceptions that apply to all threatened

plants. All prohibitions of section 9(a)(2) of the Act, implemented by

50 CFR 17.67, apply. These prohibitions, in part, make it illegal for

any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to import

or export, transport in interstate or foreign commerce in the course of

a commercial activity, sell or offer for sale in interstate or foreign

commerce, or remove and reduce the species to possession from areas

under Federal jurisdiction. In addition, for plants listed as

endangered, the Act prohibits the malicious damage or destruction on

areas under Federal jurisdiction and the removal, cutting, digging up,

damaging or destroying of such plants in knowing violation of any State

law or regulation, including State criminal trespass law. Section 4(d)

of the Act allows for the provision of such protection to threatened

species through regulation. This protection will apply to this species

in the future if such regulations are promulgated. Seeds from

cultivated specimens of threatened plants are exempt from these

prohibitions provided, when commercially shipped, the containers are

marked ``Of Cultivated Origin.'' Certain exceptions to the prohibitions

apply to agents of the Service and State conservation agencies.

The Act and 50 CFR 17.72 also provide for the issuance of permits

to carry out otherwise prohibited activities involving threatened

plants under certain circumstances. Such permits are available for

scientific purposes and to enhance the propagation and/or the survival

of the species. For threatened plants, permits are also available for

botanical or horticultural exhibition, educational purposes, and/or

special purposes consistent with the purposes of the Act. It is

anticipated that few commercial permits would ever be sought or issued

since the species is not in cultivation and is not common in the wild.

It is the policy of the Service (59 FR 34272) to identify, to the

maximum extent practicable at the time a species is listed, those

activities that would or would not constitute a violation of section 9

of the Act. The intent of this policy is to increase public awareness

of the effect of the listing on proposed and ongoing activities within

the species' range. Of the 34 remaining populations of Eggert's

sunflower, six populations are found entirely or partially on Federal

lands. Collection, damage, or destruction of this species on public

lands is prohibited, although in appropriate cases a Federal endangered

species permit may be issued to allow collection. Removal, cutting,

digging up, or damaging or destroying endangered plants on non-Federal

lands constitutes a violation of section 9 only if conducted in knowing

violation of any State law or regulation, including State criminal

trespass law. This would not affect any activities in Alabama, or

Kentucky, as neither Alabama nor Kentucky State laws provide any

protection for plants. In Tennessee, Helianthus eggertii is protected

under the Rare Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1985, which

controls the removal of plants from State properties for scientific,

educational, or propagative purposes, and the disturbance of the

species on private lands is not allowed without the landowner's

consent. The Service is not aware of any otherwise lawful activities

being conducted or proposed by the public that will be affected by this

listing which could result in a violation of section 9 of the Act.

Questions on whether specific activities could or will constitute a

violation of section 9 should be directed to the Field Supervisor of

the Service's Asheville Field Office (see the ``Addresses'' section) or

to the Cookeville Field Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 446

Neal Street, Cookeville, Tennessee 38501 (615/528-6481). Requests for

copies of regulations regarding listed species and inquiries about

prohibitions and permits should be addressed to the U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service, Ecological Services Division, 1875 Century Boulevard,

Atlanta, Georgia 30345 (Phone 404/679-7313; Fax 404/679-7081).

National Environmental Policy Act

The Service has determined that Environmental Assessments and

Environmental Impact Statements, as defined under the authority of the

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, need not be prepared in

connection with regulations adopted pursuant to section 4(a) of the

Act. A notice outlining the Service's reasons for this determination

was published in the Federal Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR

49244).

[[Page 27978]]

Required Determinations

The Service has examined this regulation under the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 and found it to contain no information collection

requirements. This rulemaking was not subject to review by the Office

of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866.

References Cited

Beatley, J. C. 1963. The sunflowers (genus Helianthus) in Tennessee.

Journal of the Tennessee Academy of Science 38:135-154.

Branson, B. A., D. F. Harker, Jr., J. M. Baskin, M. E. Medley, D. L.

Batch, M. L. Warren, Jr., W. H. Davis, W. C. Houtcooper, B. Monroe,

Jr., L. R. Phillippe, and P. Cupp. 1981. Endangered, threatened, and

rare animals and plants of Kentucky. Transactions of the Kentucky

Academy of Science 42:77-89.

DeSelm, H. R. 1989. The barrens of Tennessee. Journal of the

Tennessee Academy of Sci. 64:89-95.

Heiser, C. B., Jr., D. M. Smith, S. B. Clevenger, and W. C. Martin,

Jr. 1969. The North American Sunflowers. Memoirs of the Torrey

Botanical Club 22(3):1-218.

Jones, R. L. 1991. Status Report on Helianthus eggertii Small.

Unpublished report to the Asheville Field Office, U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service, Asheville, North Carolina. 99 pp.

Small, J. K. 1903. Flora of the Southeastern United States.

Published by the author. New York.

Smith, D. M. 1957. The taxonomy of Helianthus strumosus and related

species. Ph.D. Dissertation. Indiana University, Bloomington.

Spring, O., and E. E. Schilling. 1991. The sesquiterpene lactone

chemistry of Helianthus Sect. Atrorubentes (Asteraceae:

Heliantheae). Biochemical Systematics and Ecology 19:59-79.

Warren, M. L., Jr., W. H. Davis, R. R. Hannan, M. Evans, D. L.

Batch, B. D. Anderson, B. Palmer-Hall, Jr., J. R. MacGregor, R. R.

Cicerello, R. Athey, B. A. Branson, G. J. Fallo, B. M. Burr, M. E.

Medley, and J. M. Baskin. 1986. Endangered, threatened, and rare

plants and animals of Kentucky. Transactions of the Kentucky Academy

of Science 47:84-97.

Author

The primary author of this final rule is Mr. J. Allen Ratzlaff,

Asheville Field Office, (See ADDRESSES section).

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements, and Transportation.

Regulation Promulgation

Accordingly, part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the

Code of Federal Regulations, is amended as set forth below:

PART 17--[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; 16 U.S.C.

4201-4245; Pub. L. 99-625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted.

2. Section 17.12(h) is amended by adding the following, in

alphabetical order under FLOWERING PLANTS, to the List of Endangered

and Threatened Plants to read as follows:

Sec. 17.12 Endangered and threatened plants.

* * * * *

(h) * * *

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Species

-------------------------------------------------------- Historic range Family Status When Critical Special

Scientific name Common name listed habitat rules

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FLOWERING PLANTS:

* * * * * * *

Helianthus eggertii.......... Sunflower, Eggert's. U.S.A. (AL, TN, KY)...... Asteraceae............... T 613 NA NA

* * * * * * *

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: April 8, 1997.

John G. Rogers,

Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.

[FR Doc. 97-13412 Filed 5-21-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-55-P