Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Withdrawal of Proposed Listing of Two Plants as Endangered, and Four Plants as Threatened From the Foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountains in California

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

RIN 1018-AC99

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Withdrawal of

Proposed Listing of Two Plants as Endangered, and Four Plants as

Threatened From the Foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountains in

California

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.

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

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

proposal to list Lupinus citrinus var. deflexus (Mariposa lupine) and

Mimulus shevockii (Kelso Creek monkeyflower) as endangered species, and

Allium tuolumnense (Rawhide Hill onion), Carpenteria californica

(carpenteria), Fritillaria striata (Greenhorn adobe lily), and

Navarretia setiloba (Piute Mountains navarretia) as threatened species

under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). The Service

finds that available information does not support the listing of these

species as endangered or threatened. While current and future

urbanization, off-highway vehicle (OHV) use, agricultural land

conversion, potential overgrazing, and/or trampling variously threaten

some populations of these six taxa, there is not substantive evidence

that these threats are sufficiently widespread to pose a significant

threat. Some of these plants are vulnerable to extirpation from random

events due to their small population size, small numbers of

populations, and/or small range but this vulnerability, in and of

itself, is not sufficient justification to warrant their listing.

Therefore, the Service finds that the six plant species are not

threatened with extinction throughout all or a significant portion of

their ranges in the foreseeable future and do not meet the definition

of threatened or endangered species.

DATES: This withdrawal is made on September 14, 1998.

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

inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the

Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,

3310 El Camino Avenue, Suite 130, Sacramento, California 95821-6340.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Diane Elam, Kenneth Fuller, or Dwight

Harvey at the above address or by telephone (916) 979-2120.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On October 4, 1994, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service)

published in the Federal Register (59 FR 50540) a proposal to list as

endangered or threatened 10 plant species from the foothills of the

Sierra Nevada Mountains in California. Included among these 10 taxa

were the six subject taxa of this notice, Allium tuolumnense (Rawhide

Hill onion), Carpenteria californica (carpenteria), Fritillaria striata

(Greenhorn adobe lily), Lupinus citrinus var. deflexus (Mariposa

lupine), Mimulus shevockii (Kelso Creek monkeyflower), and Navarretia

setiloba (Piute Mountains navarretia). The remaining four taxa,

Brodiaea pallida (Chinese Camp brodiaea), Calyptridium pulchellum

(Mariposa pussypaws), Clarkia springvillensis (Springville clarkia),

and Verbena californica (Red Hills vervain), are addressed separately

in a final rule published concurrently with this notice.

Allium tuolumnense was first recognized as distinct by Marion

Ownbey (Munz and Keck 1959), who referred to it as Allium sanbornii

var. tuolumnense, although the first valid published description of the

plant was by Hamilton P. Traub (1972). Stella Dension and Dale McNeal

(1989) revised the A. sanbornii qcomplex and elevated the variety to a

species based upon the position of stamens and styles and the length

and shape of perianth segments (sepals and petals).

Allium tuolumnense is an erect, herbaceous perennial of the lily

family (Liliaceae) that grows from underground bulbs. This species has

fleshy, green entire leaves that reach a height of 25 to 50 centimeters

(cm) (10 to 20 inches (in)). The loose, 20 to 60 flowered, white- or

pink-flushed inflorescence appears in late March to early May. Allium

tuolumnense differs from A. sanbornii and A. jepsonii in its entire,

spreading perianth segments, fringed ovarian bumps (processes), and

early blooming period that does not overlap with any other Allium

species within its range. Although this plant can reproduce from seed,

A. tuolumnense tends to reproduce asexually from its underground bulb,

forming small colonies of usually fewer than 100 plants per colony

(BioSystems Analysis 1984). Allium tuolumnense is a highly restricted

endemic that grows only on serpentine soils in the foothills of the

Sierra Nevada Mountains in southwestern Tuolumne County between 400 and

600 meters (m) (1,310 to 1,970 feet (ft)) in elevation. Allium

tuolumnense is known from four localities-- Table Mountain, Quartz

Mountain, the Red Hills, and the Moccasin area. The entire range of the

species comprises a 342 square kilometer (sq km) (132 square mile (sq

mi)) area. Occupied habitat within the range of the species is

estimated to be approximately 388 hectares (ha) (960 acres (ac))

(California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) 1997). Approximately 25

percent of A. tuolumnense occupied habitat is found on private lands

and 75 percent on lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management

(BLM). At the time of the proposed rule, populations of A. tuolumnense

were thought to be variously threatened by placer mining, urbanization,

and potentially by overgrazing.

John C. Fremont collected Carpenteria californica from an area in

the Kings River watershed on his third expedition to California in

1846. John Torrey (1852) first described C. californica from specimens

sent to him by John Fremont. The species is the only member of the

genus Carpenteria, one of California's many endemic genera that are

relicts without close relatives. The genus probably had a wider range

in early Tertiary time (Barbour and Major 1988). An estimated one-third

of the total distribution of species has been lost to habitat loss and/

or alteration since the species was discovered in the 1840's

[[Page 49066]]

(California Department Fish and Game (CDFG) 1989). Although land and

road development appear to have been major causes of past habitat

losses and fragmentation, pending development proposals are

insufficient to pose a substantial threat of further losses and

degradation of occupied habitat.

Carpenteria californica belongs to the mock orange family

(Philadelphaceae). The species is an erect to spreading evergreen

shrub, growing to 1 to 2 m (3 to 6.5 ft) in height. Some individuals

grow to 4 m (13 ft) tall. Plants have glossy green, opposing leaves,

and smooth pale bark that peels in large sheets in the late summer.

Terminal, white, showy flowers appear in May or June and last through

July at higher elevations. Carpenteria californica requires fire for

seed germination and reduction of competition, and rest from grazing

for three years after germination to facilitate longterm survival.

Carpenteria californica is found along drainages and mesic areas on

mostly granitic soils from 460 to 1,220 m (1,500 to 4,000 ft) within

the chaparral and woodland communities of the western foothills of the

Sierra Nevada Mountains primarily in eastern Fresno County. A newly

discovered occurrence of about 40 individuals was found in 1997 in

Madera County just to the north of Fresno County (Joanna Clines et al.,

United States Forest Service, Sierra National Forest, in litt. 1997).

At the time of the proposed rule, Carpenteria californica was known

from six occurrences distributed over a 583 sq km (225 sq mi) area in

Fresno County. One of these occurrences is on private land, four are on

lands administered by the U.S. Forest Service, Sierra National Forest,

and one is on both private and Forest Service lands. The Madera County

population is on the Sierra National Forest (J. Clines et al., in litt.

1997). The total number of individual plants among these seven

occurrences is estimated to be 8,000 (J. Clines, in litt. 1997), and

the estimated habitat area is approximately 7,117 ha (17,587 ac) (CNDDB

1997). Approximately 30 percent of C. californica individuals occur on

private lands, and most of the remaining 70 percent occur on Federal

lands (James Boynton, Sierra National Forest, in litt. 1993). The

Sierra National Forest has established a 101-ha (250-ac) Carpenteria

Botanical Reserve to protect one part of an occurrence of this species.

Individual plants also occur within the Sierra National Forest's

Backbone Natural Research Area. A portion of one occurrence of C.

californica is protected on a 121-ha (300-ac) private preserve owned by

The Nature Conservancy (TNC). At the time of the proposed rule, C.

californica was thought to be variously threatened by urbanization,

fire management, overgrazing and/or trampling by cattle, and inadequate

State regulatory mechanisms, and to be potentially threatened by

illegal dumping, highway construction, maintenance of road rights-of-

way activities, and competition from native brush species.

Alice Eastwood (1931) described Fritillaria striata from specimens

collected by Roy Weston on the Rattlesnake Grade in the Greenhorn

Mountains of Kern County. Fritillaria is a genus of slender,

herbaceous, bulb-forming perennials in the lily family (Liliaceae). An

unbranched stem grows 5 to 10 cm (2 to 4 in) above the surface of the

ground from an underground bulb. The underground, spherical bulb is

found 20 to 35 cm (8 to 13 in) deep underground and is 15 to 20

millimeters (mm) (0.6 to 0.8 in) in diameter. The predominantly basal,

alternate to opposite leaves are oblong to lance-shaped, 1 to 2 cm (0.4

to 0.8 in) wide and 6 to 10 cm (2 to 4 in) long. The upper leaves are

narrower and undulate. One to four fragrant, bell-shaped flowers appear

from February through April. Fritillaria striata differs from the

related F. pluriflora (adobe lily), which occurs in the northern

Sacramento Valley foothills, in the shape, size, and coloring of the

flowers, the conspicuous nectaries, and the converging stigmas

(Stebbins 1989, Eastwood 1931).

Fritillaria striata is found on heavy, usually red, clay soils in

the annual grasslands and in the blue oak (Quercus dougaslii) woodlands

of the southeastern San Joaquin Valley and western Sierra Nevada

foothills and the northern foothills of the Tehachapi Mountains. At the

time the proposed rule was published, 14 occurrences of F. striata were

known in Kern County, and 3 occurrences were known from Tulare County

(CNDDB 1997). During the fourth comment period for the proposed rule,

six additional occurrences of F. striata in Kern County were reported

(Dennis Mullins, Tejon Ranch, in litt. 1997). Occurrences of F. striata

are scattered discontinuously over a 7,250 sq km (2,800 sq mi) area;

however, the estimated occupied area of the occurrences is less than

202 ha (500 ac) (CNDDB 1997). The 23 occurrences range in elevation

from 300 to 1,430 m (1,000 to 4,800 ft). All occurrences occur on

private land. Although no occurrences are protected in public

ownership, F. striata appear to be actively managed for the protection

of the plants at two locations (CNDDB 1997). At the time of the

proposed rule, F. striata was thought to be variously threatened by

urbanization, agricultural land conversion, road widening, emergency

road maintenance, inadequate State regulatory mechanisms, livestock

use, competition from non-native grasses, and OHV use.

Joseph Congdon (1904) described Lupinus deflexus from specimens

that he collected near Mariposa Creek in Mariposa County in 1903.

Willis Jepson (1936) revised the treatment of this species and reduced

the plant to varietal status, Lupinus citrinus var. deflexus. Lupinus

citrinus var. deflexus is an erect, diffusely-branched annual herb

belonging to the pea family (Fabaceae). The 3 to 5 decimeter (dm) (12

to 20 in) high plants are short, hairy to hairless, and have palmately

compound leaves that are 15 to 25 mm (0.5 to 1.0 in) long. The six to

nine leaflets are about one-third as wide as they are long and are

linear or spatulate in shape with rounded or obtuse tips. White flowers

that may have pink or lavender tips appear from April through May.

Lupinus citrinus var. deflexus grows on decomposed granitic sands

on ridgetops and hillsides in openings in the foothill woodlands from

475 to 580 m (1,400 to 1,900 ft) in elevation. The six occurrences of

this plant occur on private lands in Mariposa County over a 40 sq km

(15 sq mi) area. Two of the six occurrences grow with Calyptridium

pulchellum, a species the Service is listing as threatened in the final

rule being published concurrently with this withdrawal. At the time of

the proposed rule, L. c. var. deflexus was thought to be threatened by

urbanization, inadequate State regulatory mechanisms, and potentially

by overgrazing.

Lawrence Heckard and Rimo Bacigalupi (1986) first described Mimulus

shevockii from specimens collected by James Shevock around the Kelso

Creek area near the east base of the Piute Mountains in Kern County.

Mimulus shevockii is an erect, desert annual in the snapdragon family

(Scrophulariaceae). This plant grows to 1 dm (4 in) in height and has

opposite, sessile, somewhat fleshy leaves along reddish stems.

Asymmetric flowers appear from late March to May. The corolla is two-

lipped. The upper flower lip has two short, entire, lateral maroon-

purple lobes. The lower flower lip is similar but larger in size and

has an additional large, partially divided yellow lobe with red

mottling. Mimulus androsaceus (rockjasmine monkeyflower) and M.

fremontii (Fremont's monkeyflower) grow with M. shevockii and have some

similar vegetative features but differ in flower

[[Page 49067]]

color. Mimulus androsaceus has a red-purple flower and M. fremontii has

a rose-purple flower.

Mimulus shevockii occurs predominately in loamy, coarse sands on

alluvial fans and deposits of granitic origin within the Joshua tree

(Yucca brevifolia) or California juniper (Juniperus californica) xeric

woodlands in Kern County. Mimulus shevockii is found within an

elevational range of 975 to 1,250 m (3,200 to 4,100 ft). Seven of the

eight known occurrences of M. shevockii are within a 31 sq km (12 sq

mi) area, with the remaining occurrence 14 km (9 mi) to the northwest.

Four occurrences of M. shevockii are found on BLM land, one is on

private land, and three occur partially on BLM land and partially on

private land (CNDDB 1997). Approximately 400 occupied ha (990 ac) of M.

shevockii occur on BLM land, and approximately 408 occupied ha (1,000

ac) occur on private land (Susan Carter, BLM, pers. comm. 1997a). Since

the proposed rule was published, three new occurrences have been found

(S. Carter, in litt. 1995a, 1995b; CNDDB 1997), and approximately 645

ha (1,600 ac) of potential, unsurveyed habitat on BLM land have been

identified (S. Carter, in litt. 1996). At the time of the proposed

rule, M. shevockii was thought to be threatened by urbanization, OHV

use, and agricultural land conversion.

Frederick Coville (1893) described Navarretia setiloba from plants

that he collected from a ridge between Kernville and Havilah in Kern

County. Navarretia setiloba is an erect annual plant in the phlox

family (Polemoniaceae). The species grows 8 to 20 cm (3 to 8 in) tall

and has a few branches. The linear, pinnately-lobed leaves have rigid,

spinose lobes. The terminal lobe is broadly lanceolate and often

purplish. The inflorescence is about 10 mm (0.4 in) long, has 20 to 30

purple flowers, and appears from April through June. The flowers are

subtended by spiny bracts that are constricted in the middle.

Navarretia setiloba is distinguished from closely related species

(sympatric congeners) in the same locations by the broad terminal lobe

on each leaf and by its purple flowers.

Navarretia setiloba grows on heavy, often red-colored, clay soils

within blue oak (Quercus douglasii), foothill pine (Pinus sabbiniana),

or juniper (Juniperus californica) woodlands between 300 and 960 m

(1,000 to 3,200 ft). Six small occurrences of N. setiloba are known

from Kern County and are scattered over a 4,000 sq km (1,560 sq mi)

area. The known occupied habitat of N. setiloba is less than 6.5 ha (16

ac) (CNDDB 1997). One occurrence is found on land administered by the

BLM, and five occurrences are found on private lands (CNDDB 1997). At

the time of the proposed rule, N. setiloba was thought to be threatened

by urbanization and OHV use.

Finding and Withdrawal

The Service finds that the various threats to all or most of the

populations within the ranges of Allium tuolumnense, Carpenteria

californica, Fritillaria striata, Lupinus citrinus var. deflexus,

Mimulus shevockii, and Navarretia setiloba are insufficient to warrant

listing these species.

Summary of Comments and Recommendations

In the October 4, 1994, proposed rule (59 FR 50540) and associated

notifications, all interested parties were requested to submit factual

reports or information that might contribute to development of a final

rule. Appropriate Federal agencies, State agencies, County and City

governments, scientific organizations, and other interested parties

were contacted and requested to provide comments. Newspaper notices

inviting public comment were published in the Bakersfield Californian

and Porterville Recorder on October 10, 1994, and the Fresno Bee and

Tuolumne Union Democrat on October 25, 1994. The comment period closed

on December 5, 1994.

As a result of receiving seven requests for one or more public

hearings, the Service reopened and extended the comment period until

February 13, 1995 (59 FR 67268). The Service held informational

meetings with interested parties about the proposed rule in Fresno on

January 25, 1995, in Visalia on January 26, 1995, and in Bakersfield on

January 27, 1995. On January 31, 1995, the Service conducted a public

hearing in Bakersfield. The Service received three requests to postpone

or delay the hearing and three additional requests to extend the

comment period beyond February 13, 1995. Responding to these requests,

the Service extended the comment period until June 4, 1995 (60 FR

8342). The Service reopened the comment period on February 4, 1997 (62

FR 5199), and again on June 30, 1997 (62 FR 35116), to update and

clarify information received during the two prior comment periods.

The Service received 314 comments (i.e., letters, phone calls,

facsimiles, and oral testimony) from 96 individuals or agency or group

representatives concerning the proposed rule to list the six species

which are now part of the withdrawal notice. Twenty-six people provided

60 comments supporting the proposed listing of the species in this

withdrawal notice, 28 people opposed the proposed listing and provided

162 comments, and 42 people provided 92 informational comments. Several

commenters provided additional information that, along with other

clarifications, has been incorporated into the ``Background'' or

``Summary of Factors Affecting the Species'' sections of this

withdrawal. Opposing and technical comments have been organized into

eight specific issues. These issues and the Service's response to each,

are summarized below.

Issue 1--Sufficiency and Admissibility of Data

Comment: Several commenters stated that data used in the proposed

rule to list these six plants in this withdrawal notice were either

incomplete, inaccurate, insufficient, erroneous, unsubstantiated,

inadequate, unscientific, subjective, unsupported, or based only on

biased opinions in favor of listing the species, or required additional

research.

Service Response: Information used by the Service in proposing to

list and withdraw the species was gathered from a variety of sources,

including Federal and State agencies, local governments, and private

individuals, including species experts and scientists. Information

received during public comment periods, including peer reviewer

comments and comments made at public hearings, provide the foundation

for determining the withdrawal of the six taxa in this notice. All

information received was carefully evaluated in accordance with the

interagency policy on information standards under the Act, published on

July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271). Criteria for what information may be

considered are discussed in the ``Summary of Factors Affecting the

Species'' section of this rule.

Comment: Several commenters stated that data were or may have been

collected by trespass and questioned the legality and admissibility of

the data under those circumstances.

Service Response: Among the information sources used by the Service

is information from Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), a part of the

Natural Heritage Program of the California Department of Fish and Game

(CDFG). The data are submitted to CNDDB on a standardized form and

carefully reviewed by the staff at CNDDB. However, the form does not

ask if written or verbal permission was requested to access any lands,

including private lands. Many of the older observations may predate the

more

[[Page 49068]]

recent heightened sensitivity of landowners to individuals searching

for rare plants on private lands. Neither the Service nor the CDFG

condone trespassing.

Comment: Several commenters stated that the information was

accurate, and that the Service would not have proposed these species if

the data did not support the proposed listing.

Service Response: The Service gathered the best available

information in order to make an accurate determination related to these

plant species. The Service received additional information on the

status, distribution, and threats to the six taxa in this withdrawal

notice over the course of four comment periods; October 10, 1994 to

December 5, 1994, December 29, 1994 to June 4, 1995, February 4, 1997

to March 6, 1997, and June 30, 1997 to August 30, 1997. Based upon all

the comments received, the Service determined that the six taxa in this

notice did not meet the definitions of either endangered or threatened

as stated in the Act and implementing regulations (50 CFR 424 subpart

A).

Issue 2--Species are or are not Threatened or Threats are not

Substantiated

Comment: Several commenters stated that some of the species were

more common than indicated in the proposed rule, or some, if not all,

of the species were not threatened by one or more factors across the

range of the species.

Service Response: The Service concurs with the comment. Additional

information regarding the status of the six taxa in this notice is

discussed in the ``Summary of Factors Affecting the Species'' section

of this withdrawal. The Service has determined that none of these six

plant taxa meet the definition of a threatened or endangered species

under the Act. A list of all references used to formulate this

withdrawal notice is available at the Sacramento Fish and Wildlife

Office upon written request (see ADDRESSES section).

Issue 3--Fire Management

Comment: The U.S. Forest Service can use controlled fires to

improve Carpenteria californica habitat. California Department of

Forestry and Fire Protection (CDFFP) vegetation management practices

such as fire suppression and controlled burns could and should be used

to benefit C. californica on private lands.

Service Response: The Service agrees that vegetation management

through controlled burning may have some benefits for selected plant

species. To illustrate, controlled burning can promote the needed

sexual reproduction of Carpenteria californica by reducing the

competition of native brush species and allowing for seeds of C.

californica to germinate and grow. The U.S. Forest Service started to

construct firebreaks on lands administered by the Sierra National

Forest in 1997 as part of a five year program of controlled burning to

promote the sexual reproduction of C. californica (J. Clines, in litt.

1997) (discussed in detail in Factor E, below). However, in regards to

private lands, please see the next comment and response.

Comment: Firebreaks are used as one means to control wildfires and

can minimize severe impacts of fire to vegetation, and should

facilitate the burning of native brush and grasses, and thus promote

the propagation of Carpenteria californica. The U.S. Forest Service and

CDFFP have a new fire suppression facility that will reduce response

time for initial attacks on wildfires and thus reduce the effects of

wildfires, and the urban interface issue with C. californica. The CDFFP

promotes the use of prescribed burns to control native and non-native

vegetation without which C. californica may decline.

Service Response: The Service agrees that controlled burning on

private lands may promote the longterm reproduction of some selected

plant species. However, the CDFFP has not conducted any controlled or

prescribed burns in C. californica habitat to facilitate the needed

seed germination and seedling establishment of C. californica on

private lands in the last five years. Furthermore, controlled burning

alone is insufficient to insure that seedlings of C. californica will

survive any subsequent cattle trampling or grazing. Please see Factor E

of the ``Summary of Factors Affecting the Species'' section for further

discussion.

Issue 4--Cultivation and Horticulture

Comment: Several commenters stated that Carpenteria californica

should not be listed because it can be commercially produced in

California from nursery (non-wild) stock. Populations of C. californica

are expanding throughout its range and in England from the nursery

trade. Successful cultivation guarantees that the plant is not

threatened or endangered under intent of the ESA.

Service Response: One of the purposes of the Act is to provide a

means whereby the ecosystems upon which endangered and threatened

species depend may be conserved. Successful cultivation of a species

such as Carpenteria californica for the nursery trade does not meet the

purposes of the Act. Nursery cultivation and sales of C. californica do

not constitute a native population or range expansion or extension of a

wild ecosystem nor do those activities by themselves ensure the

conservation or protection of a wild ecosystem. Although reintroduction

into potential suitable habitat may be an important recovery tool, such

reintroduction of C. californica does not necessarily ensure the long-

term survival of the species.

Issue 5--Range and Distribution

Comment: The Service received comments regarding the incomplete

data addressing the range and distribution of Allium tuolumnense,

Fritillaria striata, and Mimulus shevockii.

Service Response: Some commenters provided no additional specific

information regarding the range and distribution of Allium tuolumnense,

Fritillaria striata, and Mimulus shevockii that could be used in this

withdrawal notice. Other commenters provided specific information

regarding Fritillaria striata and Mimulus shevockii that was used in

the development of this withdrawal notice. Please see the

``Background'' and ``Summary of Factors Affecting the Species''

sections for further discussion.

Issue 6--Existing Regulatory Mechanisms

Comment: Several commenters stated that the existing regulatory

measures available through State, Federal and local laws, rules and

regulations provide adequate protection for the six species in this

notice. Other commenters stated that the existing regulatory mechanisms

were not sufficient to protect the species included in this notice of

withdrawal, and therefore the listing should go forward to provide the

protection necessary for the continued existence of these species.

Service Response: Because the Service has not found evidence of

sufficient threats to any of these species to warrant listing, the

question as to whether existing regulatory measures are adequate to

protect them is irrelevant. See the discussion under Factor D of the

``Summary of Factors Affecting the Species'' section for further

detail.

Issue 7--Grazing

Comment: One commenter stated that Fritillaria striata is not

adversely impacted by cattle grazing and trampling because no

scientifically documented studies exist to demonstrate the speculation

of adverse impacts, nor is it threatened at the five sites which are

noted in the proposed

[[Page 49069]]

rule to have heavy grazing or overgrazing as a threat because the

visits were done by people who had no range management knowledge or

training and were done at the wrong times of year, nor is it threatened

by competition from non-native plants. The same commenter stated F.

striata has no habitat at the Element Occurrence 2, and, therefore, has

not been extirpated due to heavy grazing as was stated in the proposed

rule.

Service Response: The Service received no data to support the

contention that grazing did not have adverse impacts to any occurrences

of Fritillaria striata as stated in the proposed rule. Virtually all

the information regarding adverse impacts to occurrences of F. striata

that the Service received was anecdotal information. No special

training in range management or other science is needed to observe that

individual plants of F. striata are consumed and flowers are trampled

across a small area that contains a few hundred individual plants. The

timing of observations of cattle consuming and trampling flowers has

varied. The Service also received plant count data for a single year on

10 previously unknown sites of F. striata which have been historically

grazed at various seasons of use. Although other extirpations have

occurred to populations of F. striata, reports to the CDFG's Natural

Heritage Program indicate that the Natural Diversity Data Base Element

Occurrence Number 2 had experienced heavy grazing in 1990, but is still

extant (CNDDB 1997). Anecdotal observations of adverse or neutral

impacts to occurrences F. striata are part of the public record. Please

see Factor C in the ``Summary of Factors Affecting the Species''

section for further discussion of grazing as it relates to these

species.

Comment: One commenter stated that cattle do not eat Carpenteria

californica flowers. Another commenter stated that grazing reduces the

competition to C. californica from grasses and other species. Another

commenter stated that Carpenteria californica is only grazed and

trampled for about three years after a burn. Lastly, one commenter

stated that grazing does not affect the C. californica occurrence

located next to Highway 168.

Service Response: In the proposed rule, the Service stated that

overgrazing was adversely affecting portions of two populations of

Carpenteria californica in Fresno County. The Service has not ever

stated that cattle eat the flowers of C. californica or that cattle

were adversely affecting that portion of a population of C. californica

at California State Highway 168. As a mature plant, Carpenteria

californica is not readily grazed by livestock. However, in a three-

year study of the effects of cattle grazing and trampling, over 90

percent of 400 marked seedlings were killed by grazing and trampling

(Clines 1994).

Comment: One commenter stated that grazing reduces competition to

Carpenteria californica from grasses and other species. Another

commenter stated that competition from native brush species may

adversely affect C. californica.

Service Response: Neither commenter provided the Service with any

information nor data to support their respective contentions.

Scientific literature on the effects of grazing or competition from

native brush species to C. californica is lacking. The Service is not

aware of any data that supports or refutes that competition from other

plant species affects C. californica, or that livestock grazing reduces

competition between other species and C. californica. For more

discussion on the effects of livestock grazing, please see Factor C in

the ``Summary of Factors Affecting the Species'' section.

Comment: Navarretia setiloba only occurs on one section of public

lands in the Piute Mountains and grazing is not likely to adversely

affect this species.

Service Response: With the exception of the two occurrences of

Navarretia setiloba that occur within an urban setting (e.g., inside an

existing mobile home park in one case), all known occurrences of N.

setiloba, including the one on public lands in the Piute Mountains, are

found on open rangelands that are likely grazed by livestock. At the

time of the proposed rule, the Service did not state that livestock

grazing was adversely affecting any of the populations of N. setiloba

and is not aware currently that any one of the occurrences is adversely

affected by livestock grazing.

Comment: Some occurrences of Mimulus shevockii receive some grazing

but it does not significantly impact them.

Service Response: At the time of the proposed rule, the Service did

not state that livestock grazing adversely affected or threatened any

of the known populations of Mimulus shevockii.

Comment: Several commenters stated that grazing and/or trampling is

good for the six species in this withdrawal notice by promoting plant

vigor, or creates a better seedbed. One commenter stated that the

Service holds the position that all grazing is overgrazing. One

commenter stated that other environmental factors (e.g., rainfall) are

more of an issue for these species than grazing.

Service Response: The Service is unable to support the general

position that grazing is either beneficial or detrimental for the six

species in this withdrawal notice. Many factors involved in livestock

management and grazing practices, such as season of use, intensity,

duration, and stocking levels, as well as varying climatic conditions

may contribute to beneficial, neutral, or negative impacts to

individual plant species and the ecosystem these species inhabit. Life

and growth stages of individual plant species may also enter into

accounting of any effects from livestock grazing and are often coupled

with complex interactions of competition with other plant species and

other indirect effects. This lack of available scientific literature,

along with site specific observations and local extirpations of some

taxa, fails to support a position that grazing is always beneficial to

the six taxa in this withdrawal notice. The Service does not maintain,

however, that all grazing is overgrazing or that all populations are

threatened by overgrazing, but rather that grazing at some locations

has been observed to have adverse impacts on Carpenteria californica

and Fritillaria striata.

Virtually all the information that the Service collected regarding

adverse, beneficial, and neutral livestock grazing effects on the six

taxa is anecdotal. However, repeated observations over time coupled

with knowledge of historical land uses suggests some levels of grazing

may adversely affect Carpenteria californica, Fritillaria striata, and

Lupinus citrinus var. deflexus. However, information that was provided

for some of locations of some of the taxa in this withdrawal notice

indicates that some levels of livestock grazing may be a compatible

land use with Allium tuolumnense, Mimulus shevockii, and Navarretia

setiloba. The effects of herbivory by any animal, including livestock,

is addressed under Factor C, ``Disease and Predation'' section of this

withdrawal notice.

Comment: Several commenters stated that threats associated with

livestock grazing were either false, or purely speculative, or lacked

any scientific credence.

Service Response: In order to make a final determination whether to

list 10 plant species, the Service evaluated site specific observations

of known plant occurrences and reviewed an extensive body of literature

on the impacts of non-native mammals to plant species. The Service also

reviewed some data regarding plant counts of Fritillaria

[[Page 49070]]

striata at 13 sites, 10 of which were unknown before the proposed

listing. Please refer to Factor C in the ``Summary of Factors Affecting

the Species'' section of this rule for further discussion of grazing.

Issue 8--Alternative Status

Comment: Several commenters requested that the species considered

in this notice should either not be listed at this time, be listed, be

listed with an alternate status, or retain current status indefinitely.

Service Response: Substantive information provided by commenters in

support of arguments for alternative listing status, including delay or

withdrawal, has been incorporated into the final rule and this

withdrawal notice. Please refer to the ``Summary of Factors Affecting

the Species'' section for further discussion.

Peer Review

In accordance with the interagency policy published on July 1, 1994

(59 FR 34270), the Service solicited the expert opinions of seven

independent and appropriate specialists regarding pertinent scientific

or commercial data and assumptions relating to the taxonomy, population

status, and biological and ecological information of the 10 proposed

plants. Five of the seven requested reviewers provided comments. It is

important to note that the peer reviewers were not aware that many of

the threats to these six taxa had been reduced or removed since the

proposal in 1994 and that additional occurrences (populations and

additional plants had been located. Not all reviewers commented on all

of the taxa that were proposed for listing. One reviewer supported the

listing of the species addressed in this withdrawal, noted that each

species is taxonomically distinct, and commented that the low numbers

of individuals in populations make them especially susceptible to

genetically based and detrimental phenomena. These phenomena include

inbreeding depression and loss of genetic variability. The reviewer

characterized population sizes of Lupinus citrinus var. deflexus and

Mimulus shevockii as ``perilously low'' and the populations of Allium

tuolumnense, Carpenteria californica, Fritillaria striata, and

Navarretia setiloba as approaching that condition. A second reviewer

also supported the listing of the species addressed in this withdrawal

and commented specifically on C. californica, F. striata, L. c. var.

deflexus, M. shevockii, and N. setiloba. The reviewer noted that the

absence of sexual reproduction in C. californica and F. striata

augments the argument that the species are endangered. Further, the

reviewer noted because we do not understand why the species fail to

reproduce sexually or how to remedy it, the long-term prospects for

these species are ``exceedingly dubious.'' The same reviewer also

commented that further reductions in populations of L. c. var.

deflexus, M. shevockii, and N. setiloba may place them in danger of

extinction by random natural events. A third reviewer addressed C.

californica, F. striata, and L. c. var. deflexus. The reviewer noted

that the primary threat to C. californica from grazing and trampling is

immediately following a fire, that fire suppression is a potential

threat to C. californica, that alteration of fire frequency may effect

the long-term viability of F. striata populations, and that the limited

number of populations and known distribution of L. c. var. deflexus

suggest that protection is needed. A fourth reviewer provided

information on the taxonomic distinctiveness, ecology, and non-native

competitors of N. setiloba. The fourth reviewer emphasized the

importance of conserving the species. The fifth reviewer provided no

specific comments but supported the listing of the six taxa addressed

in this withdrawal.

The Service has reviewed all the comments received during the four

comment periods. Only comments specific to the six taxa that are the

subject of this notice are addressed herein. General comments received

on all ten taxa and specific comments that were received pertaining to

the four taxa that the Service is listing as threatened Brodiaea

pallida (Chinese Camp brodiaea), Calyptridium pulchellum (Mariposa

pussypaws), Clarkia springvillensis (Springville clarkia), and Verbena

californica (Red Hills vervain) are addressed in a separate Federal

Register final rule published concurrently with this withdrawal.

Summary of Factors Affecting the Species

The Service must consider five factors described in section 4(a)(1)

of the Act when determining whether to list a species. These factors,

and their application to the Service's decision to withdraw the

proposal to list Allium tuolumnense (Traub) Denison and McNeal (Rawhide

Hill onion), Carpenteria californica Torr. (carpenteria), Fritillaria

striata Eastw. (Greenhorn adobe lily), Lupinus citrinus Kell. var.

deflexus (Congd.) Jeps. (Mariposa lupine), Mimulus shevockii Heckard

and Bacig. (Kelso Creek monkeyflower), and Navarretia setiloba Cov.

(Piute Mountains navarretia) are as follows:

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

of its Habitat or Range

One occurrence of Allium tuolumnense is threatened by a subdivision

at the Rawhide Hill locality. This occurrence is the type locality that

once covered several hundred hectares but has now been reduced to 14 ha

(35 ac) as a result of land clearing activities to build houses (CNDDB

1997). Another occurrence of A. tuolumnense is threatened by

development of a subdivision near Chinese Camp at the Jamestown

locality (Brad Michalk and Robin Wood, Tuolumne County Planning

Department, pers. comm. 1997; CNDDB 1997). Land clearing activities for

the subdivision near the Chinese Camp involved the construction of

roads, fences, and house locations, which reduced colonies numbering

from 10,000 plants to just a few individual plants (Pat Stone,

California Native Plant Society, in litt. 1997; Rich Hunter, Central

Sierra Environmental Resources Center, pers. comm. 1997). An additional

occurrence of A. tuolumnense occurs in the open spaces of a recently

approved subdivision; however, the occurrence is not directly

threatened by the construction of houses (Robert Preston, LSA

Consultants, Inc., in litt. 1994). Urbanization has destroyed one

occurrence of A. tuolumnense and firebreak construction and road

construction have destroyed another portion of another occurrence

(Blaine Rogers, botanist, in litt. 1983, 1990; CNDDB 1997). An

estimated 75 percent of the occupied habitat of A. tuolumnense,

however, occurs on lands administered by the BLM and is not threatened

by urbanization. Another occurrence of A. tuolumnense on land owned by

the Tuolumne County Irrigation District has been irrigated through the

spring, summer, and fall with reclaimed wastewater from Quartz in 1996

and 1997 (P. Stone, pers comm. 1997). Effects of irrigation to this

occurrence are unknown. Four occurrences that were reported as being

threatened by commercial placer gold mining at the time of the proposed

rule are no longer threatened as the mining company has gone out of

business (R. Wood, pers comm. 1997).

Threats to two occurrences of Carpenteria californica by

development that were cited at the time of the proposed rule have not

been substantiated by construction of any specific proposed

subdivisions or specific development proposals

[[Page 49071]]

(CNDDB 1997). Future subdivisions still could threaten some of the

habitat of the estimated 30 percent of the plants that occur on private

lands. However, urbanization does not threaten the remaining 70 percent

of the range of C. californica that occurs on lands managed by the

Sierra National Forest. The construction of a new University of

California campus that could have potentially threatened one occurrence

of C. californica in western Fresno County is no longer a threat

because a Merced County site was selected for the new campus location.

Although illegal dumping has been reported to occur at two occurrences

of C. californica on the Sierra National Forest, no further impacts to

these occurrences have been reported since 1987 (CNDDB 1997). The

Service considers illegal dumping to be a minor, localized threat of

little significance to the overall status of the species. The continued

grading of access roads underneath powerlines and around power towers

continues to pose a potential threat to part of one occurrence of C.

californica on the Sierra National Forest. The Service also considers

this to be a minor threat. The small-scale logging impacts to C.

californica on the Sierra National Forest reported in the proposed rule

have not occurred and are not anticipated to occur at a significant

enough level to warrant continued consideration as a threat at this

time. The proposed realignment and expansion of a portion of California

State Highway 168 into a four-lane freeway that was reported to

potentially threaten portions of two occurrences of C. californica in

the proposed rule will most likely not be constructed within the next

20 years (Dana York, California Department of Transportation, pers.

comm. 1997), and, therefore, is not currently a threat to the species.

Prior to the publication of the proposed rule, three occurrences of

Fritillaria striata in Tulare County and one occurrence in Kern County

had been extirpated as a result of urbanization and agricultural land

conversion (CDFG 1991; CNDDB 1997). Agricultural land conversion

threatens two extant occurrences of F. striata in Tulare County (CNDDB

1997). A firebreak bisects part of one occurrence of F. striata in Kern

County (CNDDB 1997). Road maintenance threatens another occurrence of

F. striata in Kern County (CNDDB 1997). No specific threats have been

identified to the remaining 20 or more sites of F. striata. Moreover,

the Service received two reports regarding a total of at least ten and

as many as sixteen previously unknown populations of F. striata (Ralph

L. Phillips, University of California Cooperative Extension, in litt.

1997; Mark Mebane, Kern County Cattlemen's Association, in litt. 1995).

The Service is unable to identify any threats to these previously

unknown populations of F. striata.

Two occurrences of Lupinus citrinus var. deflexus may be threatened

directly or indirectly by urbanization. Disturbance associated with

suburban foothill development damaged one occurrence of L. c. var.

deflexus in the early 1980s. Since then, this occurrence appears to be

recovering (CDFG 1989). Lupinus citrinus var. deflexus plants at this

site comprise approximately 14 percent of the occupied acreage (CNDDB

1997). A pad for a house was prepared approximately 12 m (40 ft) up

slope from the plants (CDFG 1992b; Michael Ross, Yosemite Institute, in

litt. 1992), and a garage, driveway, domestic trees and a drip system

have also impacted the area of this occurrence (Lynn Lozier and Rich

Reiner, The Nature Conservancy, in litt. 1990). The plants may be

indirectly impacted by overwatering and use of herbicides or pesticides

(M. Ross, in litt. 1992). A second occurrence of L. c. var. deflexus,

including approximately 57 percent of the known acreage, occurs on a

ranch that has been for sale (Ann Mendershausen, Mariposa Resource

Conservation District, pers. comm. 1993, 1997; CNDDB 1997). The four

remaining occurrences of L. c. var. deflexus are not threatened by

specific development proposals at this time.

At the time of the proposed rule, six occurrences of Mimulus

shevockii were thought to be threatened by mobile home development and

associated road construction. The Service has been able to verify that

development on private land may directly impact two of these six

occurrences. Development on private land may directly impact M.

shevockii at two occurrences that are each a mixture of private and BLM

lands (S. Carter, in litt. 1995c, 1996; CNDDB 1997). At two of the new

M. shevockii occurrences, house construction was occurring on land

where M. shevockii grows (S. Carter, in litt. 1996). The private land

at the second site is subdivided (S. Carter, in litt. 1995c), but the

Service is unaware of specific development plans for the site.

Additionally, at two occurrences managed by BLM, development of

adjacent private lands may indirectly impact M. shevockii growing on

the BLM lands (S. Carter, in litt. 1995b; CNDDB 1997). Agricultural

land conversion may also threaten the species at one of these same

sites (CNDDB 1997). The remaining occurrences representing BLM,

private, and a mixture of private and BLM lands are not known to be

threatened by urbanization at this time.

One occurrence of Navarretia setiloba is threatened by urbanization

where activities such as construction of a housing pad and parking area

have impacted the species (Lynn Overtree, The Nature Conservancy, in

litt. 1993, 1994, 1995; CNDDB 1997). At the time of the proposed rule,

two additional occurrences of N. setiloga were reportedly threatened by

urbanization, one in the Lake Isabella area and one near Grapevine Peak

(Diane Mitchell, botanist, pers. comm. 1992). The Service has been

unable to verify specific threats to these two occurrences and to the

occurrence of N. setiloga in the Caliente area. Additionally, recent

survey information is lacking for the southernmost occurrence of N.

setiloga near Grapevine Peak and for the two westernmost occurrences of

N. setiloga in the Greenhorn Mountains. Although threats from

urbanization to one of the six occurrences of N. setiloga have been

verified, the Service is unaware of specific development proposals that

would affect the other five occurrences of N. setiloga. Therefore, the

Service finds that N. setiloga is not imminently threatened due to

these activities at this time.

B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or

Educational Purposes

Overutilization is not known to be a factor affecting the taxa

considered in this withdrawal.

C. Disease or Predation

In the proposed rule (59 FR 50545), livestock grazing was

identified as a potential threat to eight occurrences of Allium

tuolumnense on BLM lands in the Red Hills Area of Critical

Environmental Concern (ACEC). Although the BLM authorized livestock

grazing in the Red Hills in 1995 through 1997, no impacts to A.

tuolumnense from livestock grazing have been reported.

Two occurrences of Carpenteria californica on Sierra National

Forest lands were cited in the proposed rule (59 FR 50546) as

threatened by overgrazing. It is now known that cattle do not readily

consume mature plants (J. Clines, in litt. 1997), and the Service no

longer believes livestock grazing to be a threat to mature individuals.

However, livestock grazing and trampling destroys seedlings of C.

californica. In a three-year study of seedling establishment after a

wildfire, less than 10 percent of

[[Page 49072]]

C. californica seedlings survived and most of them were destroyed by

livestock grazing and trampling (Clines 1994). Livestock, however, do

not graze all populations of Carpenteria. For example, several square

miles of occupied Carpenteria habitat occur within the Carpenteria

Botanical Area, an area not grazed by livestock because it is not in an

allotment and not subject to trespass grazing because of impassable

terrain (J. Clines, in litt. 1997). In addition, successful sexual

reproduction does occur in areas accessible to livestock, such as a

cohort that established after a 1989 wildlife and have now reached

heights of up to 240 cm (94 in) (J. Clines, in litt. 1997).

Livestock grazing occurs at most of the occurrences of Fritillaria

striata. Seven observers have reported a variety of livestock grazing

impacts to many of the occurrences of F. striata (CNDDB 1997). These

seven observers were not trained in range management nor did they have

knowledge of grazing history at some locations of F. striata. Based

upon visual observations regarding the amount and severity of impacts

to individual plants and the habitat of F. striata,, the reports have

ranged from light grazing pressure on three occurrences of F. striata

in Kern County to overgrazing and/or trampling as serious threats to

the species at three other locations of F. striata in Kern County

(CNDDB 1997). The latter reports have led to the interpretation that

such observations of grazing impacts to F. striata were general

descriptions of rangeland conditions reflecting poorly on good land

stewardship and/or grazing practices, or that livestock must be

excluded to ensure the survival of the species. Some of the same

observers, however, have reported that low levels of livestock grazing

with avoidance during the flowering season may benefit the species

(CDFG 1992c). The long term effects of grazing and/or trampling to F.

striata are currently unknown. The Service concludes that direct

consumption of the plant and/or destruction caused by trampling of the

flowers has been repeatedly and independently observed. The Service

finds, therefore, that not all livestock grazing threatens the species,

but under some circumstances, livestock overgrazing and/or trampling

may threaten three occurrences of F. striata in Kern County (CNDDB

1997).

In the proposed rule, overgrazing by cattle was also identified as

a potential threat to Lupinus citrinus var. deflexus (59 FR 50540), but

this threat has not been substantiated. Since grazing was identified as

a threat in the early 1980's, the plants are now apparently recovering

in the two occurrences where grazing and trampling were reported to

have damaged populations of L. c. var. deflexus (CDFG 1989; CNPS 1990;

CDFG 1992b). At least one occurrence of L. c. var. deflexus is

currently grazed by livestock, but it is not thought to be a threat to

the population (CDFG 1989, CNDDB 1997, A. Mendershausen, pers. comm.

1997). The long-term effects of light grazing or trampling on the

plants are currently unknown (CDFG 1989, CNDDB 1997).

D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms

The State of California Fish and Game Commission has listed

Carpenteria californica, Fritillaria striata, and Lupinus deflexus (now

known as Lupinus citrinus var. deflexus) as threatened species (Chapter

1.5 Sec. 2050 et seq. of the California Fish and Game Code and Title 14

California Code of Regulations 670.2). Although the ``take'' of State-

listed plants is prohibited (California Native Plant Protection Act,

Chapter 10 Sec. 1908 and California Endangered Species Act, Chapter 1.5

Sec. 2080), State law exempts the taking of such plants via habitat

modification or land use changes by the owner. After CDFG notifies a

landowner that a State-listed plant grows on his or her property, State

law only requires that the land owner notify the agency ``at least 10

days in advance of changing the land use to allow salvage of such a

plant'' (Native Plant Protection Act, Chapter 10 Sec. 1913).

On September 29, 1997, legislation was approved for the California

Fish and Game Code that ``declares that if any provision of this

chapter requires a person to provide mitigation measures or

alternatives to address a particular impact on a candidate species,

threatened species, or endangered species, the measures or alternatives

required shall be roughly proportional in extent to any impact on those

species that is caused by that person. Where various measures or

alternatives are available to meet this obligation, the measures or

alternatives required shall maintain the person's objectives to the

greatest extent possible with this section'' (Johnston and Machado

1997). California Senate Bill 879, passed in 1997 and effective January

1, 1998, requires individuals to obtain a section 2081(b) permit from

CDFG to take a listed species incidental to otherwise lawful

activities, and requires that all impacts be fully mitigated and all

measures be capable of successful implementation. These requirements

have not been tested and several years will be required to evaluate

their effectiveness for conservation of species.

The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a full

disclosure of the potential environmental impacts of proposed projects.

The public agency with primary authority or jurisdiction over the

project is designated as the lead agency, and is responsible for

conducting a review of the project and consulting with the other

agencies concerned with the resources affected by the project. Section

15065 of the CEQA Guidelines requires a finding of significance if a

project has the potential to ``reduce the number or restrict the range

of a rare or endangered plant or animal.'' Species that are eligible

for listing as rare, threatened, or endangered but are not so listed

are given the same protection as those species that are officially

listed with the State or Federal governments. Once significant effects

are identified, the lead agency has the option to require mitigation

for effects through changes in the project or to decide that overriding

considerations make mitigation infeasible. In the latter case, projects

may be approved that cause significant environmental damage, such as

destruction of endangered species. Protection of listed species through

CEQA is therefore dependent upon the discretion of the agency involved.

In addition, CEQA guidelines recently have been revised in ways which,

if made final, may weaken protections for threatened, endangered, and

other sensitive species.

Despite the potential inadequacies in existing regulatory

mechanisms, the Service has found insufficient substantive evidence of

threats to the six plant taxa in this notice of withdrawal to warrant

their listing as threatened or endangered species under the Act. In the

absence of such threats, the potential inadequacies of these regulatory

mechanisms are irrelevant.

E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting its Continued Existence

OHV use has been reported as a threat to Allium tuolumnense,

Lupinus citrinus var. deflexus, Mimulus shevockii, and Navarretia

setiloba. However, only one occurrence of A. tuolumnense inside the BLM

Red Hills ACEC is threatened by OHV use (CNDDB 1997). Historic damages

to two other occurrences of A. tuolumnense have been reported from OHV

use, but no recent impacts have been noted at those locations (CNDDB

1997). OHV use was reported as a threat to parts of four occurrences of

Carpenteria californica. Because no further impacts to these

occurrences have been reported since

[[Page 49073]]

1987, the Service considers that there are no threats to these four

occurrences. Previously, OHV use destroyed some plants at one

occurrence of L. c. var. deflexus (CDFG 1989). However, the Service has

not received information regarding any further OHV use or recent damage

at this site. An OHV road bisects one occurrence of M. shevockii and a

gravel road bisects another occurrence (CNDDB 1997). Ongoing OHV

activity could threaten this plant at this one location. Currently,

off-highway vehicle use has been observed at four sites where M.

shevockii occurs (S. Carter, in litt. 1995b, 1995c, 1995d, 1996; CNDDB

1997), but the Service has not received information indicating that the

magnitude of the impacts to M. shevockii are likely to threaten the

continued existence of the species. One occurrence of N. setiloba has

been disturbed by OHV use in the past (CNDDB 1997), but the Service has

not received further information indicating that this activity

continues to be a threat at the site.

Fire suppression activities and development took place in the

northerly occurrence of Mimulus shevockii in 1997. A bulldozer was

driven through part of the occurrence and a log deck built on top of

another part of the occurrence. Mimulus shevockii plants and habitat

were directly impacted by these activities (S. Carter, pers. comm.

1997b). Events like these are considered by the Service to be localized

and do not pose a significant threat to the survival of the species.

Since the time of the proposed rule, the need for fire management

for the successful sexual reproduction of Carpenteria californica on

the Sierra National Forest was recognized, and work is underway in the

Kings River and Pineridge ranger districts constructing a network of

the necessary fuelbreaks prior to commencement of a five-year

controlled burning program (J. Clines, in litt. 1997). The first area

scheduled to be burned is the Carpenteria Botanical Area because the

area is not in a cattle allotment. Trespass cattle will not be a

problem due to the rocky terrain, eliminating the conflict with cattle

grazing after prescribed burns (J. Clines, in litt. 1997). Although the

Sierra National Forest has taken some necessary steps to proactively

conserve the species on Federal lands, the difficulties in conducting

necessary prescribed burns with multiple private land owners may pose a

threat to C. californica on private lands which contain the remaining

30 percent of the species. To date, no prescribed burns of C.

californica on private forest lands have been conducted with the

assistance of the California Department of Forestry and Fire under its

Vegetation Management Program, the enhancement of sexual reproduction

of the species (Bill Richards, California Department of Forestry and

Fire Protection, pers comm. 1997). Therefore, the Service considers the

lack of necessary fire management of C. californica on private lands to

be a potential threat to the species.

Although Fritillaria striata may be threatened by competition from

non-native grasses such as Avena (wild oat) and Bromus (brome) as

mentioned in the proposed rule, the Service has received no credible

scientific data to suggest that any populations of F. striata have been

adversely affected or losses of populations have occurred as a result

of such competition.

Small population size or fluctuations to small size increase the

susceptibility of a population to extirpation from random demographic,

environmental and/or genetic events (Shaffer 1981, 1987; Lande 1988;

Meffe and Carroll 1994). Population sizes of 100 or fewer are known for

one or more populations of Allium tuolumnense, Fritillaria striata,

Lupinus citrinus var. deflexus, and Navarretia setiloba (CNDDB 1997).

Because of the clonal nature of A. tuolumnense (BioSystems Analysis

1984), actual numbers of genetic individuals in populations of this

species may be even smaller than reported. Demographic events that may

put small populations of these four species at risk involve random

fluctuations in survival and reproduction of individuals (Shaffer 1981,

1987; Lande 1988; Meffe and Carroll 1994). Environmental events that

may put small populations at risk include random or unpredictable

fluctuations in the physical environment such as changes in the weather

(Shaffer 1981, 1987; Primack 1993; Meffe and Carroll 1994). These

species may be subject to increased genetic drift and inbreeding as a

consequence of their small population sizes (Menges 1991, Ellstrand and

Elam 1993). Populations that are continually small in size are

particularly susceptible to genetic changes due to drift. However,

drift may also cause genetic changes in populations that occasionally

fluctuate to small sizes (e.g. undergo population bottlenecks).

Increased homozygosity resulting from genetic drift and inbreeding may

lead to a loss of the ability of individuals to survive and reproduce

(genetic fitness) in small populations. In addition, reduced genetic

variation in small populations may make any species less able to

successfully adapt to future environmental changes (Ellstrand and Elam

1993). Thus, portions of four of the six species are threatened by

potential loss of genetic fitness and/or genetic variability as well as

by demographic and environmental uncertainty associated with small

population sizes.

Five of the six species addressed in this rule are known from few

populations and/or from very small ranges. Carpenteria californica,

Lupinus citrinus var. deflexus, Mimulus shevockii, and Navarretia

setiloba are each known from eight or fewer occurrences (CNDDB 1997).

Although Allium tuolumnense is known from more than eight occurrences,

the species is known only from four general localities comprising a 342

sq km (132 sq mi) area. The distribution in each locality is much

smaller than the overall range indicates, approximately 90 sq km (35 sq

mi) in the Red Hills, 23 sq km (9 sq mi) at Quartz Mountain, 10 sq km

(4 sq mi) at Table Mountain, and less than 3 sq km (1 sq mi) in the

Moccasin area (CNDDB 1997). Similarly, N. setiloba is composed of a few

small, widely scattered populations within a larger 4,000 sq km (1,560

sq mi) range. Currently, known occupied habitat of N. setiloba consists

of less than 6.5 ha (16 ac) (CNDDB 1997). Lupinus citrinus var.

deflexus and M. shevockii are known from very small ranges. The range

of L. c. var. deflexus is only 40 sq km (15 sq mi) (CNDDB 1997).

Mimulus shevockii grows within two general areas, the larger southern

portion comprising about 31 sq km (12 sq mi) (CNDDB 1997). Few

populations, small range, and/or restricted habitat make these five

species highly susceptible to extinction or extirpation from a

significant portion of their ranges due to random events, such as

flood, drought, disease, or other occurrences (Shaffer 1981, 1987;

Meffe and Carroll 1994). Such events are not usually a concern until

the number of populations or geographic distribution become severely

limited, as is the case with the species discussed here. Once the

number of populations, the range, or the plant population size is

reduced, the remnant populations, or portions of populations, have a

higher probability of extinction from random events.

Finding and Withdrawal

After a thorough review and consideration of all information

available the Service has determined that listing of Allium

tuolumnense, Carpenteria californica, Fritillaria striata, Lupinus

citrinus var. deflexus, Mimulus shevockii, and Navarretia setiloba is

not needed at this time. The Service has carefully assessed the best

[[Page 49074]]

scientific and commercial information available in the determination of

whether to list these species.

At the time of the proposed rule, Allium tuolumnense was thought to

be threatened by urbanization, overgrazing, mining, and OHV use on 25

percent of its range on private lands. The remaining 75 percent of the

population on public lands was potentially threatened by grazing.

Subsequently, the Service has not been able to verify that overgrazing

occurs at the grazed sites on public or private lands. The threats

posed by commercial placer mining no longer exist because the mining

company is no longer in business. The development of three subdivisions

has impacted several occurrences of A. tuolumnense on private lands.

However, because 75 percent of the occurrences of A. tuolumnense are on

public lands, urbanization is not and will not be a major threat to the

species over most of its range. Although historic damage from OHV use

has been reported on two occurrences of A. tuolumnense, only one

occurrence is considered currently threatened by OHV use. Two

occurrences of A. tuolumnense are threatened by road maintenance. Thus,

collectively, the Service has been able to verify threats to 6 of the

21 occurrences of A. tuolumnense. The small range, its restricted

serpentine habitat, and clonal distribution of A. tuolumnense make this

species susceptible to local extirpation from portions of its range due

to random environmental events, but this threat, in the absence of

other significant threats to the species, is insufficient to warrant

listing under the Act. Therefore, the Service finds that A. tuolumnense

is not threatened with extinction throughout all or a significant

portion of its range nor is it likely to become an endangered species

within the foreseeable future and does not meet the definition of a

threatened or endangered species.

At the time of the proposed rule, Carpenteria californica was

thought to be threatened by urbanization, highway construction,

maintenance of roads and rights-of-way in connection with

hydroelectrical operations, competition from native brush species,

logging, illegal dumping, incompatible fire management activities,

overgrazing, inadequate regulatory mechanisms, and OHV use over one

third of its range on private lands. Carpenteria californica was

thought to be threatened by alteration of natural fire cycles, OHV use,

and maintenance of roads and rights-of-way on the remaining two-thirds

of its range on public lands. Historic impacts from urbanization,

illegal dumping, logging, OHV use, and road maintenance have occurred

on a small-scale basis and constitute low magnitude, imminence, and

frequency impacts to C. californica. Although 30 percent of the range

of C. californica has been lost, a low likelihood exists that a

significant portion of the remaining individual plants or habitat will

be lost in the foreseeable future because 70 percent of the remaining

plants exist on the Sierra National Forest which has started a program

to enhance the sexual reproduction of the species using prescribed

fire. Fire management for the successful reproduction of the species

followed by three years rest from livestock grazing needed for the

longterm survival of the species is not occurring on private lands.

Consequently, the Service considers that continued fire suppression and

non-management of C. californica on private lands threatens the species

across the 30 percent of its range on private lands. Highway

construction will not take place for at least another 20 years and

would impact one portion of one occurrence of C. californica. Although

the Service has information regarding the adverse impacts of

overgrazing and trampling to seedlings of C. californica, no

information has been presented to verify any adverse effects of grazing

on mature plants on private or public lands over the range of the

species. Further, no scientific information has been presented to

suggest that competition from native brush species has any adverse

impact to C. californica. Although C. californica is known from seven

localities, including a new occurrence since the publication of the

proposed rule, over a relatively large range, the species has few

occurrences and is susceptible to extirpations from random

environmental events. Therefore, the Service concludes that C.

californica is not threatened with extinction throughout all or

significant portion of its range nor is it likely to become an

endangered species within the foreseeable future and does not meet the

definition of threatened or endangered.

Prior to the proposed rule, agricultural land conversion extirpated

three occurrences of Fritillaria striata in Tulare County and one in

Kern County and continues to threaten two occurrences in Tulare County.

Road maintenance threatens one occurrence and livestock grazing may

threaten three occurrences of F. striata in Kern County. Five

occurrences of F. striata have populations numbers of less than 100

individuals each and are susceptible to extirpation from random

demographic, environmental and/or genetic events. The collective

threats to 11 of the 23 known occurrences, including six new

occurrences since the proposed rule was published, and the lack of

specific threats to the numerous unverified occurrences of F. striata

,are insufficient across the range of the species to warrant listing

the species at this time. Therefore, the Service finds that F. striata

is not threatened with extinction throughout all or a significant

portion of its range in the foreseeable future and does not meet the

definition of a threatened or endangered species.

At the time of the proposed rule, Lupinus citrinus var. deflexus

was thought to be threatened by urbanization and inadequate State

regulatory mechanisms, and potentially by overgrazing. Subsequently,

the Service has not been able to verify that overgrazing occurs at the

grazed sites where L. c. var. deflexus is found. Continued or future

urbanization may threaten at least two occurrences of L. c. var.

deflexus. Inadequate State regulatory mechanisms and extirpation from

random events due to small population sizes, small number of

populations, and the restricted range of the species may threaten all

occurrences of L. c. var. deflexus. However, the Service has been

unable to verify imminent threats to four of the six occurrences of L.

c. var. deflexus. Therefore, the Service finds that L. c. var. deflexus

is not threatened with extinction throughout all or significant portion

of its range nor is it likely to become an endangered species within

the foreseeable future and does not meet the definition of threatened

or endangered.

At the time of the proposed rule, occurrences of Mimulus shevockii

were threatened by urbanization, OHV use, and agricultural land

conversion. Currently, development on-site or on adjacent private land

and OHV use have been observed at four occurrences (S. Carter, in litt.

1995b, 1995c, 1995d, 1996; CNDDB 1997). During the comment periods, the

Service received information that the range of the species may be

greater than understood at the time of the proposed rule and that

potential additional habitat requires surveying. Agricultural land

conversion may also threaten one of these same occurrences (CNDDB

1997). The most threatened portion of the range may be the private

lands in the disjunct northwest occurrence. Reported threats to this

occurrence include development, OHV use, agricultural land conversion,

and fire suppression actions (S. Carter, in litt. 1995c, 1996; S.

Carter, pers. comm. 1997b; CNDDB 1997). Because this portion of the

range is both the most

[[Page 49075]]

northerly and disjunct, any activities that threaten its continued

existence may constitute a threat to the species as a whole. Although

urbanization, OHV use, agriculture land conversion, and random

extirpation from the small number of populations and the restricted

range of the species continue to put M. shevockii at risk, current

threats that warrant listing of the species have not been identified

and three additional occurrences have been discovered. Therefore, the

Service finds that M. shevockii is not threatened with extinction

throughout all or a significant portion of its range in the foreseeable

future and does not meet the definition of a threatened or endangered

species.

At the time of the proposed rule, Navarretia setiloba was thought

to be threatened by urbanization and OHV use. Current and future

urbanization and OHV use potentially threaten the two occurrences in

the Lake Isabella area (L. Overtree, in litt. 1993, 1994, 1995; CNDDB

1997). Future urbanization may threaten at least one other occurrence

of N. setiloba but no specific development proposals are known. This

species is at risk from random extirpation due to small population

sizes, small numbers of populations, and the restricted range of the

species. The Service lacks the specific information indicating that

listing is warranted for N. setiloba at this time. Based on all of this

information, the Service finds that N. setiloba is not threatened with

extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range, and it

is not likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable

future and does not meet the definition of a threatened or endangered

species.

References Cited

A list of all references cited herein is available upon request

from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Sacramento Fish and Wildlife

Office (see ADDRESSES section).

Author. The primary authors of this withdrawal notice are Diane

Elam, Kenneth Fuller, and Dwight Harvey, Sacramento Fish and Wildlife

Office Field Office (see ADDRESSES section).

Authority

The authority for this action is section 4(b)(6)(B)(ii) of the

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

Dated: September 1, 1998.

Jamie Rappaport Clark,

Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

[FR Doc. 98-24501 Filed 9-11-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-55-P