Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of Endangered or Threatened Status for Four Southwestern California Plants from Vernal Wetlands and Clay Soils

SUMMARY: The Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) determines endangered

status pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended

(Act), for two plants--Allium munzii (Munz's onion) and Atriplex

coronata var. notatior (San Jacinto Valley crownscale), and determines

threatened status for two plants--Brodiaea filifolia (thread-leaved

brodiaea) and Navarretia fossalis (spreading navarretia). These four

plants occur in vernal pools and other wetlands or on clay soils and

moist grasslands throughout their respective ranges in southwestern

California and northwestern Baja California, Mexico. These plant are

variously threatened by one or more of the following: habitat

destruction and fragmentation from agricultural and urban development,

pipeline construction, alteration of wetland hydrology by draining or

excessive flooding, channelization, off-road vehicle activity, cattle

and sheep grazing, weed abatement, fire suppression practices

(including discing (plowing)), and competition from alien plant

species. This rule implements the Federal protection and recovery

provisions afforded by the Act for these four plants.

DATES: This rule is effective on November 12, 1998.

ADDRESSES: The complete file for this rule is available for inspection,

by appointment, during normal business hours at the U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Field Office, 2730 Loker Avenue West,

Carlsbad, California, 92008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary Wallace (see ADDRESSES above),

telephone (760) 431-9440.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Allium munzii (Munz's onion), Brodiaea filifolia (thread-leaved

brodiaea), Atriplex coronata var. notatior (San Jacinto Valley

crownscale), and Navarretia fossalis (spreading navarretia) occur in

clay soils or in vernal wetlands that have a clay hardpan or silty

alkaline substrate. These habitats are restricted or unique, often

associated with a specific soil type or hydrologic regime, or both. The

composite range of these four plants encompasses the interior lowlands

and foothills of Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Orange, and Riverside

counties south into coastal San Diego County, California, and the

northwestern State of Baja California, Mexico. Although some of these

plants are relatively wide-ranging, all are localized in distribution

within their respective ranges because of the restricted and patchy

nature of the habitats in which they are found.

Allium munzii (Munz's onion), a member of the lily family

(Liliaceae), was first referred to as Allium fimbriatum var. munzii by

Marion Ownbey (Munz and Keck 1959). The varietal epithet was attributed

to Ownbey and H. Aase. This name was not validly published because it

lacked a proper description and citation, which were provided by Traub

(1972), who published the name as Allium fimbriatum var. munzii Ownbey

ex Traub, based on a specimen collected by Philip Munz south of Glen

Ivy, Riverside County, California, in 1922. McNeal (1992) elevated this

taxon to species status (Allium munzii (Traub) D. McNeal).

Allium munzii is a perennial herb, 15 to 35 centimeters (cm) (0.5

to 1.2 feet (ft)) tall, originating from a bulb with a papery, reddish-

brown outer coat and light brown inner coat. The single leaf is teretes

(cylindrical in shape) and up to 1.5 times as long as the stalk of the

inflorescence (scape). The inflorescence (flower cluster) is umbellate,

consisting of 10 to 35 flowers. The flowers have six perianth segments

(undifferentiated petals and sepals) that are white, or white with a

red midvein, becoming red with age. They are 6 to 8 millimeters (mm)

(0.2 to 0.3 inches (in)) long. The ovary is crested with fine,

irregularly dentate (pointed) processes and the fruit is a three-lobed

capsule (Munz 1974, McNeal 1993).

Allium munzii can be distinguished from other members of the genus

within its range by its solitary cylindric leaves, elliptic to ovate

perianth segments, generally white flowers, and finely and irregularly

dentate ovary crests.

Allium munzii is restricted to mesic clay soils in western

Riverside County, California. This species is frequently found in

association with southern needlegrass grassland, mixed grassland, and

grassy openings in coastal sage scrub or, occasionally, in cismontane

juniper woodlands (California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) 1989,

Orlando Mistretta, Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden, in litt. 1993). A.

munzii is known from 13 extant populations. Only one of these

populations is partially on Federal land (Roberts 1993a, California

Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) 1997, Jeff Newman, U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service, pers. comm. 1996). Five populations occur in the

Gavilan Hills, including one at Harford Springs County Park, and one on

lands managed by the Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency

(RCHCA). One population occurs in the Temescal Valley on private land;

another population may still be extant but is likely extirpated. One

population occurs north of Walker Canyon on private land. Five small

populations occur in or near the Paloma Valley, including near the

Scott Road, Skunk Hollow, Domenigoni Hills, and Bachelor Mountain

areas. These populations are on land managed by the Reserve Management

Committees (Domenigoni Hills and Bachelor Mountain) for the Riverside

County multispecies plans, or on private land. One population is in the

Elsinore Mountains, partly on Federal land in the Cleveland National

Forest and partly on private lands (Boyd and Mistretta 1991).

The Service estimates that there are about 20,000 to 70,000

individuals of A. munzii (Roberts 1993a, CNDDB 1997, U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service unpublished data). In response to rainfall and other

factors, perennial bulbs may not produce aerial leaves or flowers in a

given year or may produce only leaves. As a result, fluctuations in

numbers of observed individuals can be misleading. Five populations are

large (over 2,000 individuals) and cover as much as 8 hectares (ha) (20

acres (ac)). Most populations contain fewer than 1,000 individuals and

their areas range from several meters to less than 1 ha (2.5 ac).

Atriplex coronata var. notatior (San Jacinto Valley crownscale), a

member of the goosefoot family (Chenopodiaceae), was described by Epson

(1914), based on a specimen he collected in 1901 from the dried bed of

San Jacinto Lake (= Mystic Lake), Riverside County, California. Hall

and Clements (1923) considered this taxon a minor variant and submerged

it in A. coronata. Atriplex coronata var. notatior has subsequently

been recognized by Munz (1935, 1974) and Taylor and Wilken (1993).

Atriplex coronata var. notatior is an erect, gray-scurfy annual, 1

to 3 decimeters (dm) (4 to 12 in) tall. The grayish leaves are sessile,

alternate, 8 to

[[Page 54976]]

20 mm (0.3 to 0.8 in) long and elliptic to ovate-triangular in outline.

This taxon is monoecious (male and female flowers on the same plant).

The female flowers are obscure and develop spherical bracts in the

fruiting phase. These bracts have dense tubercles (nodule) that are

roughly equal in number to the marginal teeth (Munz 1974, Taylor and

Wilken 1993).

Atriplex coronata var. notatior can be distinguished from the more

northern A. coronata var. coronata by its erect stature, the spheric

shape of the bracts together in fruiting stage, and the more numerous

tubercles and marginal teeth on the bracts. The distributions of the

two varieties do not overlap. Atriplex coronata var. coronata is found

in the Sacramento, San Joaquin, and neighboring valleys, while A.c.

var. notatior is restricted to Riverside County. A.c. var. notatior

occurs with eight other native and one introduced species of Atriplex

within its range (D. Bramlet 1993b, Bramlet in litt. 1995, U.S. Fish

and Wildlife Service, unpubl. data). It can be distinguished from these

taxa by a combination of characteristics, including annual habit, the

shape of the leaf, and the size and form of the bract (Munz 1974,

Taylor and Wilken 1993).

Atriplex coronata var. notatior is restricted to highly alkaline,

silty-clay soils in association with the Traver-Domino-Willows soil

association (see Soil Conservation Service and Bureau of Indian Affairs

1971 for soil descriptions). Most populations are associated with the

Willows soil series. It occurs in alkali sink scrub, alkali playa,

vernal pools, and, to a lesser extent, in annual alkali grassland

communities (Bramlet 1993a, Roberts 1993b). These areas are typically

flooded by winter rains. The duration and extent of flooding are

extremely variable from one year to the next. A. coronata var. notatior

germinates after the water has receded. It usually flowers in April and

May and sets fruit by May or June (D. Bramlet, in litt. 1992).

Atriplex coronata var. notatior is restricted to the San Jacinto,

Perris, Menifee and Elsinore Valleys of western Riverside County,

California. This taxon consists of 11 population centers that are

primarily associated with the San Jacinto River and Old Salt Creek

tributary drainages (Roberts 1993b, Roberts and McMillan 1997, CNDDB

1997). One additional isolated and small population has recently been

discovered in Willows soils near Lake Elsinore (Roberts and McMillan

1997).

The number of individuals of Atriplex coronata var. notatior in a

population complex varies in any given year in response to rainfall,

extent of winter flooding, and temperature. Disturbance (discing,

dryland farming, pipeline construction, out of season inundation) has

become an increasingly important factor in limiting the number of

individuals in a population.

Between 1990 and 1994, an estimated 78,000 Atriplex coronata var.

notatior individuals were located (Metropolitan Water District (MWD)

1992, Ogden 1993, D. Bramlet, in litt. 1993, CNDDB 1997, Roberts

1993b). These plants occupied about 145 ha (400 ac) of about 3,300 ha

(8,200 ac) of potentially suitable habitat (alkali scrub, alkali playa,

and annual alkali grassland vegetation associations). The majority of

the individuals (about 75 percent) were associated with three

population centers (Mystic Lake, the Nuevo-Ramona Expressway segment of

the San Jacinto River, and west Hemet) (Roberts 1993b). Since 1993, the

population has apparently declined significantly as a result of major

flooding in the winter of 1992-1993 and the subsequent conversion or

alteration of potential habitat (Roberts and McMillan 1997). Several

new populations have since been discovered near historic populations

(e.g., 5,200 individuals on the San Jacinto River and fewer than 200

individuals near Elsinore, California). However, new discoveries have

not appreciably balanced the reduction of populations due to activities

and events described above. About 45 ha (115 ac) of nearly 2,200 ha

(5,500 ac) of available potentially suitable habitat are currently

occupied by about 26,500 individuals of A. coronata var. notatior.

About 12 ha (30 ac) of 1,000 ha (2,500 ac) of marginal habitat that has

been substantially disturbed are currently occupied by about 500

individuals of this taxon (Roberts and McMillan 1997). Atriplex

coronata var. notatior appears to have declined about 70 percent since

1992.

The majority of the population centers of A. coronata var. notatior

are located on privately owned lands. Three populations are on State

land (San Jacinto Wildlife Area), one population is partially on County

lands (RCHCA along the San Jacinto River), and one population is on a

private preserve managed by MWD. This plant is not known to occur on

Federal lands.

Brodiaea filifolia, a member of the lily family (Liliaceae), was

described by Watson (1882) based on a specimen collected by S. B and W.

F. Parish in 1880 at Arrowhead Hot Springs, San Bernardino County,

California (Niehaus 1971). Greene (1887) transferred B. filifolia to

the genus Hookera. However, monographic and floristic treatments accept

B. filifolia as the name for this taxon (Niehaus 1971, Munz 1974,

Beauchamp 1986, Keator 1993). Brodiaea orcuttii (Greene) Baker was

included as a variety of B. filifolia by Epson (1922) but subsequent

authors have recognized this taxon as a distinct species (Niehaus 1971,

Munz and Keck 1973, Munz 1974, Keator 1993).

Brodiaea filifolia is a perennial herb with dark-brown, fibrous-

coated corms. The flower stalks (scapes) are 2 to 4 dm (8 to 16 in)

tall with several narrow leaves that are shorter than the scape. The

flowers bloom from May to June and are arranged in a loose umbel. The

six perianth segments are violet, spreading, and 9 to 12 mm (0.4 to 0.5

in) long. The broad and notched anthers are 3 to 5 mm (0.1 to 0.2 in)

long. The fruit is a capsule (Munz 1974, Keator 1993).

Brodiaea filifolia can be distinguished from the other species of

Brodiaea that occur within its range (B. orcuttii, B. jolonensis, and

B. terrestris ssp. kernensis) by its narrow, pointed staminodia, rotate

perianth lobes (i.e., a saucer-shaped flower), and a thin perianth

tube, which is split by developing fruit (Niehaus 1971, Munz 1974).

Brodiaea filifolia is known to hybridize with B. orcuttii, B.

terrestris, and possibly B. jolonensis, where these species coexist

(Sandy Morey, CDFG, in litt. 1995, Boyd, et. al. 1992, CNDDB 1997).

Significant hybridization is evident on the Santa Rosa Plateau between

B. filifolia and B. orcuttii, or B. filifolia and B. terrestris (S.

Morey, in litt. 1995). At least one major population in the vicinity of

Miller Mountain (San Diego County) in the Cleveland National Forest

appears to represent a hybrid swarm between B. orcuttii and B.

filifolia (Boyd et al. 1992). The Miller Mountain population alone

occupies nearly 45 percent of reported occupied habitat for B.

filifolia. Hybridization among these Brodiaea species is a natural

phenomenon. However, these plants relied on relatively species-specific

native bee species for pollination in the past and the introduction of

non-native honeybees, which tend to be species-generalist, may have

increased the potential for hybridization (Gary Bell, The Nature

Conservancy (TNC), pers. comm. 1997, S. Morey, in litt. 1995).

This species typically occurs on gentle hillsides, valleys, and

floodplains in mesic, southern needlegrass grassland and alkali

grassland plant communities in association with clay, loamy sand, or

alkaline silty-clay soils (CDFG 1981, Bramlet 1993a). Sites occupied by

this species are frequently intermixed with, or near, vernal pool

[[Page 54977]]

complexes, such as near San Marcos (San Diego County), the Santa Rosa

Plateau, and southwest of Hemet in Riverside County.

The historical range of B. filifolia extends from the foothills of

the San Gabriel Mountains at Glendora (Los Angeles County), east to

Arrowhead Hot Springs in the western foothills of the San Bernardino

Mountains (San Bernardino County), and south through eastern Orange and

western Riverside Counties to Carlsbad in northwestern San Diego

County, California (S. Morey, in litt. 1995, CNDDB 1997).

Forty-six populations of B. filifolia have been reported. At least

nine of these populations have been extirpated, primarily in San Diego

County, California. Thirty-seven populations are presumed extant.

Nearly half of these remaining populations are clustered in the growing

cities of Vista, San Marcos, and Carlsbad (nine populations) and in the

vicinity of the Santa Rosa Plateau in southwestern Riverside County,

California (six populations). The remaining 22 populations are

scattered within the counties of Orange, Los Angeles, Riverside, San

Bernardino, and San Diego.

The population of B. filifolia reported to have the largest number

of individuals is on private land in the City of San Marcos (S. Morey,

in litt. 1995). The populations with the largest extent of potentially

suitable habitat are on the Santa Rosa Plateau, where only about 15 ha

(38 ac) of the plateau is reported as occupied by B. filifolia, but

about 120 ha (300 ac) is potentially suitable habitat (MWD 1991, CNDDB

1997). These lands are primarily managed by TNC.

The only populations of Brodiaea filifolia known to occur on

Federal land are on Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton in San Diego

County (CNNDB 1997, U. S. Marine Corps 1997), where three populations

were recently discovered in an abandoned weapons impact area. Six

populations were recently discovered in Orange County. Most of the

recently discovered populations of Brodiaea filifolia in Orange County

are relatively small. The largest population (Forster Ranch) supports

about 60 percent of the B. filifolia individuals and about 80 percent

of the occupied habitat in Orange County. Only two of the Orange County

populations (Casper's Regional Park and Aliso-Woods Canyon Regional

Park), with fewer than 1,000 individuals combined, are on lands managed

by the County government (Michael Brandman Associates 1996, CNDDB

1997). Brodiaea filifolia has also been found on the San Jacinto

Wildlife Management Area in Riverside County, managed by the CDFG.

Brodiaea filifolia, in its entire range, occupies about 330 ha (825

ac) of suitable habitat (mesic needlegrass grassland, mixed native-non-

native grassland with clay soils, or alkali annual grassland with

alkaline silty clay soils). The total number of individuals of this

species and the extent of occupied habitat vary on an annual basis in

response to the timing and amount of rainfall, as well as temperature

patterns. Fewer than 2,000 individuals have been observed at most

populations. Most of these populations occupy less than 5 ha (13 ac)

(CNDDB 1997, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpubl. data). The largest

extant population in Riverside County, Santa Rosa Plateau, has been

estimated to contain over 30,000 observed individuals and occupies

about 15 ha (38 ac) of habitat (MWD 1991, CNDDB 1997). In San Diego

County, the largest confirmed population is on an isolated 16 ha (40

ac) parcel in San Marcos, California. This population may support as

many as 342,000 individual plants (S. Morey, in litt. 1995). The number

of observed individuals often does not correlate with the number of

corms present at a site. For example, at one residential development

site, Taylor and Burkhart (1992) reported 20 individuals of B.

filifolia, but more than 8,000 corms were found during the effort to

transplant B. filifolia to another site.

Brodiaea filifolia and its suitable habitat have been significantly

reduced by urbanization, agricultural conversion, and discing for fire

and weed control. In Riverside County, California, most of the annual

alkaline grassland near the San Jacinto River and southwest of Hemet

has been urbanized or converted to dryland farming or more intensive

cultivation (see discussion under A. coronata var. notatior above).

Additionally, Brodiaea filifolia is vulnerable to deep discing or

repeated discing. Thus, areas that were disced and have partially

recovered after being left fallow for a period of time tend to support

reduced and gradually declining populations of B. filifolia, if any

have survived. For example, at least two B. filifolia populations have

been reported in the San Jacinto River flood plain in the vicinity of

the I-215 highway crossing. Since 1992, 80 percent of the potentially

suitable habitat in this area has been disced for dryland farming

(Roberts and McMillan 1997, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, unpubl.

data). The most significant threat to this species is urbanization,

conversion to farming, and discing for fire and weed control.

In San Diego County, California, the majority of the B. filifolia

populations are concentrated within the cities of San Marcos, Vista,

and Carlsbad and are highly correlated with the distribution of clay

soils and soils with clay subsoils. Data available from the Soil

Conservation Service and Forest Service (1973) and other sources (U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service, unpubl. data) indicate that there are about

3,300 ha (8,280 ac) of clay soils and over 1,570 ha (3,940 ac) of soils

with clay subsoils in these three cities. By 1994, nearly 65 percent of

the clay soils and about 75 percent of the soils with clay subsoils had

been developed or urbanized in these three cities and were no longer

available for B. filifolia or its associated habitat (U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service, unpubl. data). In the City of Carlsbad, most B.

filifolia populations occur in association with a specific soil series:

the Altamont Clay soil series. There are about 1,085 ha (2,715 ac) of

this soil in Carlsbad. By 1994, about 82 percent had been cultivated or

overlain by urban development and was no longer available as habitat

for conservation or recovery of this species (U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service, unpubl. data).

Based on the historic and current distribution of soils within the

Vista, San Marcos, and Carlsbad area, it is likely that substantial

unreported populations of B. filifolia were extirpated in this area. Of

the 16 historically-known populations within these cities, at least 5

have been extirpated. Collectively, these sites were known to support

as many as 128,000 individuals over at least 9 ha (23 ac) of occupied

habitat (CNDDB 1997, Roberts and Vanderwier 1997). One additional major

population was significantly reduced from about 8 ha (20 ac) to 1.6 ha

(4 ac) around 1990 (WESTEC 1988, Taylor and Burkhart 1992, CNDDB 1997).

Navarretia fossalis (spreading navarretia), a member of the phlox

family (Polemoniaceae), was described by Reid Moran in 1977 based on a

specimen he collected in 1969 near La Mision in northwestern Baja

California, Mexico (Moran 1977). Navarretia fossalis is a low, mostly

spreading or ascending, annual herb, 10 to 15 cm (4 to 6 in) tall. The

lower portions of the stems are mostly glabrous. The leaves are soft

and finely divided, 1 to 5 cm (0.4 to 2 in) long, and spine-tipped when

dry. The flowers are white to lavender white with linear petals and are

arranged in flat-topped, compact, leafy heads. The fruit is an ovoid,

2-chambered capsule (Moran 1977, Day 1993).

[[Page 54978]]

Several other species of Navarretia occur within the range of N.

fossalis. Two of them, N. intertexta and N. prostrata, can occur in

similar habitat. N. fossalis is distinguished from them by its linear

or narrowly ovate corolla lobes, erect habit, cymose inflorescences,

size and shape of the calyx, and the position of the corolla relative

to the calyx. All Navarretia species can be distinguished by the

appearance of the pollen grain surface (Day 1993, Steve Spencer, Rancho

Santa Ana Botanical Garden, in litt. 1993)

The primary habitat of N. fossalis is vernal pools. This species

occasionally occurs in ditches and other artificial depressions, which

often occur in degraded vernal pool habitat (Moran 1977). In western

Riverside County, N. fossalis has been found in relatively undisturbed

and moderately disturbed vernal pools within a larger vernal wetland

plain dominated by annual alkali grassland (Bramlet 1993a).

Navarretia fossalis is distributed from northwestern Los Angeles

County and western Riverside County, south through coastal San Diego

County, California to San Quintin in northwestern Baja California,

Mexico. Fewer than 30 populations exist in the United States. Nearly 60

percent of these populations are concentrated in three locations: Otay

Mesa in southern San Diego County, along the San Jacinto River in

western Riverside County, and near Hemet in Riverside County (Bauder

1986, Bramlet 1993a, CNDDB 1997). Others are scattered in southern

Riverside County, Los Angeles County, and coastal San Diego County.

The number of individuals of N. fossalis varies annually in

response to the timing and amount of rainfall and temperature. In

Riverside County, one population contains 300,000 individuals. Another

population contains 75,000 individuals. However, each of these

populations occupies less than 3 ha (8 ac) of habitat. The majority of

populations contain fewer than 1,000 individuals and occupy less than

0.5 ha (1 ac) of habitat (D. Bramlet, in litt. 1992, CNDDB 1997). The

Service estimates that less than 120 ha (300 ac) of habitat in the

United States is occupied by this species. The most pressing threat to

Navarretia fossalis is the ongoing degradation of vernal pools and

their outright destruction due to widespread urbanization, agricultural

practices, off-road vehicles, and the longer-term threats from flood

control and development.

The majority of N. fossalis populations are on privately owned

lands. At least one population occurs on the federally owned Marine

Corps Base, Camp Pendleton, and the plant occurs at three locations on

Naval Air Station Miramar (J.S. Walker, Naval Base San Diego, in litt.

1997).

In Mexico, N. fossalis is known from fewer than 10 populations

clustered in three areas: along the international border, on the

plateaus south of the Rio Guadalupe, and on the San Quintin coastal

plain (Moran 1977).

Previous Federal Action

Federal government actions on these four plants began as a result

of section 12 of the Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) which

directed the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution to prepare a

report on those plants considered to be endangered, threatened, or

extinct in the United States. This report, designated as House Document

No. 94-51, and was presented to Congress on January 9, 1975, and

included B. filifolia as endangered. The Service published a notice in

the July 1, 1975, Federal Register (40 FR 27823), of its acceptance of

the report as a petition within the context of section 4(c)(2)

(petition provisions are now found in section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act)

and its intention thereby to review the status of the plant taxa named

therein, including B. filifolia. The Service published a proposal in

the June 16, 1976, Federal Register (41 FR 24523) to determine

approximately 1,700 vascular plant species to be endangered species

pursuant to section 4 of the Act. The list of 1,700 plant taxa was

assembled on the basis of comments and data received by the Smithsonian

Institution and the Service in response to House Document No. 94-51 and

the July 1, 1975, Federal Register publication. Brodiaea filifolia was

included as endangered in the June 16, 1976, Federal Register notice.

General comments received in relation to the 1976 proposal were

summarized in an April 26, 1978, Federal Register publication (43 FR

17909). The Endangered Species Act amendments of 1978 required that all

proposals more than 2 years old be withdrawn. A one-year grace period

was given to those proposals already more than two years old. In the

December 10, 1979, Federal Register (44 FR 70796), the Service

published a notice of withdrawal of the June 16, 1976, proposal, along

with four other proposals that had expired.

The Service published an updated notice of review of plants in the

Federal Register on December 15, 1980 (45 FR 82480). This notice

included Brodiaea filifolia and Navarretia fossalis as category 1

candidates. Category 1 species were those for which the Service had on

file substantial information on biological vulnerability and threats to

support preparation of listing proposals.

On November 28, 1983, the Service published in the Federal Register

a supplement to the Notice of Review (48 FR 53640). The plant notice of

review was again revised on September 27, 1985 (50 FR 39526). B.

filifolia and N. fossalis were included in the 1983 and 1985

supplements as category 2 candidates. Category 2 included taxa for

which information in the possession of the Service indicated that a

listing proposal was possibly appropriate, but for which sufficient

data on biological vulnerability and threat were not available to

support a proposed rule. Allium munzii (then known as Allium fimbriatum

var. munzii) was included in the 1985 notice of review as a category 2

taxon. On February 21, 1990, a revised notice of review was published

in the Federal Register (55 FR 6184) that included A. fimbriatum var.

munzii and B. filifolia as category 1 candidate taxa, and A. coronata

var. notatior as a category 2 candidate taxon; the status of N.

fossalis remained unchanged from the 1985 notice of review. All four

plant taxa were listed as category 1 candidate species in the September

30, 1993, notice of review (58 FR 51144).

Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act 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 on October 13, 1982, be treated as having been

newly submitted on that date. That was the case for Brodiaea filifolia

because the 1975 Smithsonian report had been accepted as a petition. On

October 13, 1983, the Service found that the petitioned listing of

these species was warranted, but precluded by other pending listing

actions, in accordance with section 4(b)(3)(B)(iii) of the Act;

notification of this finding was published on January 20, 1984 (49 FR

2485). Such a finding requires the petition to be recycled, pursuant to

section 4(b)(3)(C)(I) of the Act. The finding was reviewed in October

of 1984 through 1993.

On December 15, 1994 (59 FR 64812), the Service published a

proposed rule to list Allium munzii and Atriplex coronata var. notatior

as endangered, and Brodiaea filifolia and Navarretia fossalis as

threatened. This proposed rule constituted the warranted petition

finding for Brodiaea filifolia.

Based upon information received during public comment periods

subsequent to the publication of the proposed rule, the Service now

[[Page 54979]]

determines Allium munzii and Atriplex coronata var. notatior to be

endangered species, and Brodiaea filifolia and Navarretia fossalis to

be threatened species.

The processing of this final rule follows the Service's fiscal

years 1998 and 1999 Listing Priority Guidance published in the Federal

Register on May 8, 1998 (63 FR 25502). The guidance establishes the

order in which the Service will process rulemakings. 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

outstanding proposed listings, processing new listing proposals,

processing administrative petition findings, processing a limited

number of delisting and reclassification actions. Processing critical

habitat determinations is included in Tier 3 of the guidance. This

final rule is a Tier 2 action and is being completed in accordance with

the current listing priority guidance.

Summary of Comments and Recommendations

In the December 15, 1994, proposed rule (59 FR 64812) and

associated notifications, all interested parties were requested to

submit factual reports or information that might contribute to the

development of a final rule. The first comment period closed on

February 13, 1995. Appropriate State agencies, county governments,

Federal agencies, and other interested parties were contacted and

requested to comment. Public notices announcing the publication of the

proposed rule were published in the Press Enterprise in Riverside

County on January 5, 1995; the Orange County Register on January 11,

1995; and San Diego Union Tribune in San Diego County on January 13,

1995. Numerous requests for a public hearing were received. On March 7,

1995, a notice was published in the Federal Register announcing that a

public hearing would be held on March 23, 1995, at the City of

Riverside, in Riverside County, California (60 FR 12531). Copies of

this notice were sent to parties that requested a public hearing. This

notice also announced the reopening of the public comment period until

May 20, 1995. Notices were published in the Orange County Register

(March 7, 1995), San Diego Union Tribune (March 7, 1995), and Perris

Progress (March 8, 1995), announcing the public hearing and extension

of the public comment period.

The Service received a total of 65 written comments. Ten commenters

supported the listing of these taxa. Five commenters neither supported

nor opposed the proposed listing. Forty-four commenters opposed the

proposed listing. During the public hearing, 21 commenters spoke, most

of whom also sent written comments. Information from a number of these

comments has been incorporated into the final rule. Seventeen issues

were raised in these comments. The Service's response to each is as

follows:

Issue 1: Concerns about taxonomy and identification. Several

commenters questioned the taxonomic status of Atriplex coronata var.

notatior. One commenter supported listing A. coronata var. notatior but

doubted that it was taxonomically distinct from A. c. var. coronata of

central California. The commenter noted that A. c. var. coronata

appeared at least as uncommon as A. c. var. notatior, and suggested

that the entire species should be listed. Other commenters stated that

A. coronata var. notatior is a discrete entity. At least one commenter

objected to the Service proposing to list a taxon of lower rank than a

full species. Another commenter questioned the validity of the

identification of reports of Navarretia in Riverside County,

California, and suggested that N. fossalis may be more common than

currently believed.

Service Response: The Service is required to make listing

determinations based on the best available scientific and commercial

data according to Section 4 (b)(1)(A) of the Act, as amended. Section

3(16) defines the term ``species'' to include any species or subspecies

of fish or wildlife or plants. In plant nomenclature, a taxon

recognized as a variety can alternatively be recognized as a

subspecies, so varieties qualify for listing. Atriplex coronata var.

notatior has been recognized as a distinct taxon from A. coronata var.

coronata in floristic treatments since 1935 (Munz 1935, 1971, 1974) as

well as in the most recent statewide systematic treatment of the genus

(Taylor and Wilken 1993). While the status of A. c. var. coronata is

also declining, this taxon is not the subject of this rule.

All available collections of Navarretia similar to N. fossalis in

Riverside County have been reviewed by an expert on the genus.

Navarretia fossalis is the primary wetlands dependent species in

Riverside County. No new populations of N. fossalis from Riverside

County have been reported recently (S. Spencer, in litt. 1993, S.

Spencer, pers. comm. 1997).

Issue 2: One commenter noted that in the years before the proposed

listing, an extreme drought had taken place within Riverside County,

California. The commenter suggested that these species were represented

by low numbers and isolated populations as a direct result of the

drought and that the taxa would likely not be rare in wetter years.

Service Response: The Service agrees that wetland plants generally

are both more widely distributed and more numerous in wet years than in

dry years. However, wetlands plants are at their greatest risk of

extinction or endangerment during dry years. Navarretia fossalis and A.

coronata var. notatior populations have declined significantly since

the proposed rule was published, irrespective of climatic conditions.

Both species have been affected by increased farming activity and other

threats that have resulted in continuing habitat disturbance and

degradation.

Issue 3: Several commenters stated that the Service closed the

public comment period before additional surveys could be performed and

that these surveys were necessary for a final listing determination.

Another commenter noted that letters originating from the Service in

1991 indicated that A. coronata var. notatior was a category 2

candidate for listing as threatened or endangered, thus indicating that

there was not enough data to determine if listing was warranted. Then,

3 years later, the Service proposed to list A. coronata var. notatior.

Other commenters suggested that the Service should postpone listing of

this species until citizen concerns were addressed.

Service Response: The Service utilizes the best available

scientific information in determining whether a species qualifies for

Federal protection. Although the Service acknowledges that private

landowners have legitimate economic and land use concerns, the Service

reviews only the biological data in determining whether a species

qualifies for Federal protection (See also Issues 2 and 13). Although

additional surveys could be useful, they are unnecessary to make a

final determination because the majority of the suitable habitat for

these species remains threatened. The Service has continued to monitor

habitat for these taxa since the proposed rule was published. Analyses

of the relevant data reveal that three of the four species have

declined considerably since the proposed rule was published in 1994.

Although additional localities of B. filifolia have been reported in

Orange County and in San Diego County, few of these populations are

protected and several are threatened by urbanization.

Atriplex coronata var. notatior appeared in the 1990 Plant notice

of

[[Page 54980]]

review (55 FR 6184) as a category 2 candidate. Category 2 candidates

were taxa that the Service considered potentially at risk of extinction

but did not have data to support a listing proposal. Information newly

acquired by the Service between 1992 and 1993 indicated that the

species qualified for Federal protection. In the September 30, 1993

plant notice of review (58 FR 51144), the Service elevated the status

of this taxon to category 1, indicating that the Service possessed

enough data in its files to support a listing proposal.

Issue 4: One commenter indicated that the Service failed to

consider populations of A. coronata var. notatior at Mystic Lake and

the extensive suitable habitat in the area.

Service Response: The known populations of A. coronata var.

notatior in the vicinity of Mystic Lake were considered in this

determination. The Mystic Lake bed and surrounding shoreline areas

potentially support over 400 ha (1,000 ac) of suitable habitat for A.

coronata var. notatior. In fact, the largest known population was

reported in this area in 1992. However, prior to 1992, a significant

portion of the lake bottom was under cultivation. In 1993, major

flooding filled the lake and this population and several others were

inundated. The lake did not recede enough to expose the former

population until 1996. Few plants have been reported where 20,000 were

once reported. Most of the Mystic Lake area is not within the San

Jacinto Wildlife Area and has no formal protection. It has been

proposed that reclaimed water be piped into Mystic Lake. The addition

of water outside the normal rainy season will undoubtedly slow recovery

of suitable habitat for Atriplex coronata var. notatior in this area.

Issue 5: Several commenters questioned the reliability of the data

the Service used in preparation of the proposed rule. Several

commenters noted that the Service did not incorporate existing reports

that contained important data necessary to the decision making process.

Several commenters specifically noted that the San Jacinto River

Improvement Project Biological Assessment (Tierra Madre Consultants

1991) was not cited in the proposed rule. Another commenter indicated

that the results from a number of other reports, such as a floral

survey of March Air Force Base (James 1992), imply that these species

are more widespread than the Service has indicated.

Another commenter noted that the soils which species like Atriplex

coronata var. notatior appear to rely upon are not restricted to

Riverside County. Similar soils occur from Solano to Santa Clara

Counties in central California, and the Service did not indicate that

surveys for this taxon were conducted in this area. By contrast,

another commenter noted that the presence of similar soils outside the

known range of A. coronata var. notatior does not necessarily indicate

that the plant occurs there; such areas are likely to be occupied by a

different variety, A. coronata var. coronata, which is also declining

in central California habitat that has been largely converted to

cultivation.

Service Response: The Service has used the best available

scientific information upon which to make its findings. Although

several of the commenters mentioned that the distribution and abundance

of populations of these four species may be greater than indicated in

the proposed rule, only two provided data to support their assertion.

The Service acknowledges that the San Jacinto River Improvement Project

Biological Assessment (Tierra Madre Consultants 1991) was not cited in

the proposed rule. The Service incorporated the results of this report

into this final determination. The Service notes that this report, in

discussing A. coronata var. notatior states: ``[i]mpacts to the San

Jacinto saltbush on lands to be reclaimed and subsequently developed as

residential, commercial, and industrial areas, are direct. Populations

of this species that have been reported in this document to occur on

natural lands in the 100-year floodplain will suffer local extirpations

if valley saltbush scrub habitat is destroyed. Proposed project

developments in the 100-year floodplain that impact these remaining

parcels of natural habitat should be reviewed by the Riverside County

and the City of Perris planning departments on a case-by-case basis and

substantial portions of these areas should be designated as `open

space' (not parks), or be included as part of the Habitat Conservation

Plan for Riverside County.''

Information from several of the other documents, when appropriate,

also has been incorporated into this determination. However, the

Service notes that several other documents cited by commenters, such as

a floral survey of March Air Force Base (James 1992), indicated only

that subject species were known from a given general area, and not

necessarily found within the study site.

The general distribution of the four plants addressed herein is

well documented (Munz and Keck 1973, Munz 1974, Taylor and Wilken 1993,

Skinner and Pavlik 1994). Several researchers (e.g., Boyd, Bramlet, and

Sanders) have conducted directed surveys in Riverside County for these

plants over several to many years. In the process, these researchers

have verified the plants' habitat-specificity and have documented

fluctuations in abundance. Although the Service acknowledges that

additional populations of these plant taxa may be identified, it is

unlikely, given the fairly specific habitat requirements of these taxa,

that significant populations remain undiscovered. If so, it is likely

that they would be subject to the same threats that currently place

known populations at risk. The Service acknowledges that similar soils

that could potentially be suitable habitat for these species occur in

central California. However, there is no evidence that two of these

species (Navarretia fossalis and Brodiaea filifolia) have ever been

documented in central California and in the case of Atriplex coronata,

these soils are occupied by a related but distinct taxon (A. c. var.

coronata).

Issue 6: Several commenters stated that the Service did not

adequately consider the conservation benefits that will result from

regional Natural Communities Conservation Planning (NCCP).

Service Response: Two of the proposed taxa, Brodiaea filifolia and

Navarretia fossalis, are covered species under the Multiple Species

Conservation Plan (MSCP) in San Diego County. However, significant

populations of both species are found outside of the MSCP boundary.

Large populations of both taxa also occur in the Multiple Habitat

Conservation Plan (MHCP) area of northern San Diego County. This plan

is still in the data analysis stage, and species coverage for these two

taxa has yet to be determined. Populations of Brodiaea filifolia and

Navarretia fossalis are also found, along with Atriplex coronata var.

notatior and Allium munzii, in western Riverside County, where a

multiple species planning program is being initiated but conservation

levels have not yet been determined.

Populations of Brodiaea filifolia also occur in Orange, Los

Angeles, and San Bernardino Counties. In these counties, planning

efforts for areas with these plants are either not yet complete or

lacking (See discussion under Factor D). Significant populations of

Navarretia fossalis occur in areas such as western Los Angeles County

and western Riverside County where protection is still limited to

existing land-use and regulatory mechanisms that have not

[[Page 54981]]

proven adequate in the past to conserve the species effectively.

Issue 7: Several commenters indicated that Brodiaea filifolia

should be listed as endangered and not threatened.

Service Response: Brodiaea filifolia has one of the widest

distributions of the four plants, being found in Los Angeles, Orange,

western Riverside, southwestern San Bernardino, and San Diego Counties.

The population with the largest area of potentially suitable habitat is

protected in TNC's Santa Rosa Plateau Preserve. Other populations are

protected at the CDFG's San Jacinto Wildlife Area. Several new

populations have also recently been discovered in Orange County and San

Diego County. As such, B. filifolia does not meet the definition of an

endangered species under the Act and listing as threatened is

appropriate.

Issue 8: Two respondents stated that the Service's notification to

the public on this proposal was inadequate. One of these commenters

stated specifically that the Service failed to give notice of the

proposal to the County of Riverside, Riverside County Flood Control,

and that the Service failed to publish notice of the proposed rule in a

newspaper of general circulation within Riverside County. Two

commenters stated that a single public hearing was inadequate to obtain

full public input on the proposal. These same commenters requested that

public hearings be held in more than one location. Additionally,

several commenters also stated that the Service had not provided enough

opportunity for the public to respond.

Service Response: The Service is obligated to hold one public

hearing on a listing proposal if requested to do so within 45 days of

publication of the proposal (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(5)(E)). Considering the

limited geographic distribution of the species, the Service determined

that holding a single public hearing was not an impediment or undue

inconvenience to those wishing to attend. In addition, the Service went

through an extensive notification process to make the public aware of

this proposal. This process, which is described in detail above, fully

satisfied the requirements of the Act.

As was indicated above, newspaper notices were published in the

Orange County Register, San Diego Union Tribune, and the Press

Enterprise. All three papers are widely available in western Riverside

County. A large number of interested parties, including the County of

Riverside Planning Department and the Riverside County Flood Control

District, were sent copies of the proposed rule on December 27, 1994.

The Service is obligated to allow 60 days for the public to respond

to a proposed rule. The Service extended the comment period for an

additional 60 days to allow for additional public response.

Issue 9: One commenter stated that the intention of the signed

Memorandum of Understanding for the San Jacinto River Corridor Plan

(MOU) was to ``avoid the need to list the saltbush'' and to cooperate

in the development of a plan to protect the saltbush. Thus, although a

plan was developed in accordance with the criteria delineated in the

MOU, ``the Service has failed to approve this plan in blatant disregard

of its commitments established in the MOU.''

Service Response: The intent of the MOU was to reduce the threats

to the San Jacinto Valley crownscale (saltbush), Atriplex coronata var.

notatior, by developing a conservation plan that accommodates

channelization of the San Jacinto River while protecting saltbush

habitat along the river. The MOU does not cover the entire range of the

saltbush; approximately two-thirds of the range of the species is

outside of the MOU area. Therefore, the proposal to list the saltbush

does not violate the terms of the MOU. The MOU is still in effect, and

the Service stands by its signatory responsibilities. However, to date,

the Service has not received a plan that provides adequate protection

and conservation measures for the species. The Service pledges to

continue working with all interested parties to develop a conservation

plan for the saltbush along the San Jacinto River that adequately and

simultaneously meets the conservation needs of the species and the

needs of the stakeholders.

Issue 10: Several commenters have stated that the Service has not

appropriately taken into account the planning and preservation efforts

by local jurisdictions. One commenter noted that ``the City of Hemet

has undertaken a separate proactive planning effort which the Service

also failed to consider when preparing this rule.''

Service Response: The Service has considered planning and

preservation efforts by local jurisdictions in preparation of this

determination. For example, although the City of Hemet initiated a

conservation plan for the vernal pools and vernal wetlands along the

western edge of the city in 1994, the plan apparently has not yet

resulted in significant conservation of any of the taxa in this final

rule.

Issue 11: One commenter stated that the proposed rule discloses

inconsistencies in the Service's mitigation recommendations or

requirements for various projects that could impact the species

addressed herein.

Service Response: The commenter apparently is referring to the

disparity between the mitigation accepted for pipeline projects versus

that accepted for flood control projects. Pipeline projects involve

temporary impacts and have fewer indirect effects than channelization

projects, which permanently alter the habitat and prevent natural

habitat recovery within the natural flood plan.

Issue 12: Four commenters stated that personal letters and informal

correspondence should not be considered a legitimate source of

information. They felt that the Service had not accounted for bias on

the part of these parties.

Service Response: The Act requires the Service to use the best

available scientific information as the sole basis for its listing

decision. This information may take the form of published papers, peer

review by acknowledged experts on a given subject, scientific reports,

letters, and personal communications. The Service considers

professional judgment and expert opinion by knowledgeable biologists in

making decisions. All such information is subject to peer review during

the listing process.

Issue 13: Two commenters stated the proposed rule failed to

consider the protections provided by State and local statutes to the

species listed herein. One commenter stated that listing of these

species would not provide them with additional protection.

Service response: The Service considered all the existing

applicable regulatory mechanisms that deal with the species listed

herein on private, State, and Federal lands throughout their range.

These issues are discussed in the Summary of Factors section, Factor D.

The Service has concluded that existing regulatory mechanisms do not

currently provide adequate protection for these plants. The listing of

these species will protect them from a variety of unauthorized

activities including removal or reduction to possession from areas

under Federal jurisdiction or in violation of a State law, including

criminal trespass, and will allow review of projects with a Federal

nexus to determine whether such actions may affect the listed species.

Issue 14: Numerous commenters stated that critical habitat would

impose an unnecessary economic burden on property owners or requested

that the

[[Page 54982]]

boundaries of proposed critical habitat be modified to exclude their

properties.

Service Response: Because critical habitat is not being designated

in this rule, comments regarding critical habitat have not been

addressed.

Issue 15: One commenter stated that existing regulatory mechanisms

are adequate but regulatory agencies have failed to enforce these

regulations.

Service Response: The adequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms is

discussed under ``D.'' The Service acknowledges that not all regulatory

mechanisms are strictly enforced.

Issue 16: Eight commenters expressed concern about adverse economic

effects of the listing.

Service Response: Under section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act, a listing

determination must be based solely on the best scientific and

commercial data available. The legislative history of this provision

clearly states the intent of Congress to ``ensure'' that listing

decisions are ``* * * based solely on biological criteria and to

prevent nonbiological considerations from affecting such decisions ``*

* *,'' (H.R. Rep. No. 97-835, 97th Cong. 2nd Sess. 19 (9182)). As

further stated in the legislative history, ``* * * economic

considerations have no relevance to determinations regarding the status

of the species * * *'' (Id. at 20). Because the Service is specifically

precluded from considering economic impacts, either positive or

negative, in making listing decisions, the Service does not evaluate or

consider the economic impacts of listing species.

Peer Review

In accordance with interagency policy published in the Federal

Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), the Service solicited the

expert opinions of three independent specialists regarding pertinent

scientific or commercial data and assumptions relating to the taxonomy,

population models, and supportive biological and ecological information

for the taxa under consideration for listing. The purpose of such

review is to ensure listing decisions are based on scientifically sound

data, assumptions, and analyses, including input from appropriate

experts and specialists. One of the three specialists sent a supportive

letter during the public comment period. No additional comments were

received from the other specialists.

Summary of Factors Affecting the Species

Section 4 of the Act and regulations (50 CFR part 424) promulgated

to implement the listing provisions of the Act, set forth the

procedures for adding species to the Federal lists. 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 Allium munzii (Traub) D. McNeal (Munz's onion),

Atriplex coronata S. Watson var. notatior Jeps. (San Jacinto Valley

crownscale), Brodiaea filifolia S. Watson (thread-leaved brodiaea), and

Navarretia fossalis Moran (spreading navarretia) are as follows and

summarized in Table 1.

Table 1.--Summary of Threats

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

Agriculture/ Alteration Trampling/ Alien

Species urbanization ORV use \1\ Mining of hydrology grazing species

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

Allium munzii............... X X X ............ X X

Atriplex coronata var.

notatior................... X X ............ X X X

Brodiaea filifolia.......... X ............ ............ ............ X X

Navarretia fossalis......... X X ............ X X X

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

\1\ ORV=off road vehicle.

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

of Their Habitat or Range

The natural plant communities of coastal Orange and San Diego

counties, western Riverside and southwestern San Bernardino counties,

California, and northwestern Baja California, Mexico, have undergone

significant changes as a result of both direct and indirect human-

caused activities. The rapid urbanization of this region (which

currently harbors over 17 million people) has already eliminated a

significant portion of the habitat for these four plants. The remaining

patches of habitat are frequently isolated and have been, or are being,

degraded and/or fragmented by agricultural practices, streambed

channelization and other hydrological alterations, weed abatement, fire

suppression practices, and grazing.

Allium munzii occurs in grassy openings in coastal sage scrub and

mesic native perennial grasslands. The majority of B. filifolia

populations are known to occur in mesic native perennial grasslands.

The extent of these plant communities has undergone significant

reduction due to urban and agricultural development (U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service 1993, Oberbauer and Vanderwier 1991). Approximately 59

percent of the coastal sage scrub in Riverside County has been

destroyed since 1945, and as much as 71 percent has been destroyed

since 1930 (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1993). In San Diego County,

95 percent of the native perennial grasslands and 72 percent of the

coastal sage scrub have been destroyed (Oberbauer and Vanderwier 1991).

Native perennial grasslands continue to be at risk and are threatened

by urbanization and agricultural conversion throughout the range of

Allium munzii and Brodiaea filifolia.

Little is known concerning the historical distribution of A.

munzii. owever, as much as 80 to 90 percent of the clay soils in

western Riverside County that may have supported habitat for A. munzii

have been adversely modified through extensive agriculture,

urbanization, and clay mining (CDFG 1989).

Allium munzii has recently been extirpated from at least two sites

as a result of agricultural development, clay mining, and highway

construction. Other populations of this species have been impacted by

reduction of available habitat and numbers of individuals. One

population of A. munzii was partially eliminated in 1982 by the

realignment of the Interstate 15 freeway corridor in the Temescal

Valley of Riverside County (Roberts 1993a). Another population was

reduced when part of its habitat was inundated for a reservoir (CDFG

1989).

Two of the remaining 13 populations of Allium munzii are within the

boundaries of proposed development (Roberts 1993a, Royce Rigging and

Associates, in litt. March 1998, Brenda McMillan, U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service, pers. comm. 1998). Combined these projects contain

over 470 ha (1,175 ac) of which a substantial area is potential habitat

for A. munzii. Discing for the weed abatement or dry land

[[Page 54983]]

farming may destroy habitat and cause population declines of A. munzii.

These activities, or off-road vehicle activity, are affecting six of

the thirteen known sites of A. munzii (CNDDB 1997, Steve Boyd, Rancho

Santa Ana Botanical Garden and D. Bramlet, pers. comm. 1993). One site,

for example, that has been persistently disced for dryland farming

since it was reported as supporting 1,000 individuals in 1992, was

found to contain fewer than 10 individuals in 1998 (B. McMillan, pers.

comm. 1998). Altogether 7 of the 13 populations (over 50 percent)

supporting about 20 percent of the individuals are threatened by loss

of habitat through development, discing, and off-road vehicle activity.

Over 25 percent of B. filifolia populations have been eliminated by

urbanization and agricultural conversion (Roberts and Vanderwier 1997).

Over the last 15 years, nearly 60 ha (150 ac) of occupied habitat

containing over 80,000 plants have been eliminated in the cities of San

Marcos and Vista (CNDDB 1997, Taylor and Burkhart 1992, Wayne

Armstrong, Palomar College, pers. comm. 1993, Roberts and Vanderwier

1997). Urbanization continues to be the most significant threat to this

species. About 20 percent (about 8) of the remaining populations of B.

filifolia in San Diego and Riverside counties are currently within

proposed or approved development projects. Another 10 percent (4) of

the populations are zoned for urbanization or threatened by discing for

fire suppression activities or dryland farming. Suitable habitat is at

even greater risk. For example, Brodiaea filifolia is associated with

clay soils and soils with clay subsoils. In 1994, about 1,595 ha (3,990

ac) of these soils (about 30 percent of the historical figure) remained

available in the cities of San Marcos, Vista, and Carlsbad. In 1996 and

1997, at least 120 ha (300 ac) of clay soils and soils with clay

subsoils, in part occupied by B. filifolia, was graded in the City of

Carlsbad alone. Two approved projects in the City of Carlsbad are

likely to reduce these available appropriate soils by at least 400 ha

(1,000 ac) (Soil Conservation Service and Forest Service, et. al. 1973,

City of Carlsbad and Fieldstone/La Costa Associates 1994, Sweetwater

Environmental Biologists 1994).

It is probable that the only known population of B. filifolia

reported for San Bernardino County in nearly 70 years will be removed

by a major pipeline project (Robert Thorne, Rancho Santa Ana Botanical

Garden, pers. comm. 1993, Edna Rey, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,

pers. comm. 1993).

Most of the recently discovered populations of Brodiaea filifolia

in Orange County, California are relatively small and are not at

immediate risk (2 are on protected land). However, the largest

population known in Orange County is within the proposed grading

footprint of a 1,600-unit residential development (City of San Clemente

1997). This population occupies about 6 ha (15 ac) and supports about

60 percent of the reported B. filifolia individuals and about 80

percent of the habitat occupied by this species in Orange County. As

currently proposed, nearly the entire native population at this site

would be impacted.

The largest reported population of B. filifolia occurs on 16 ha (40

ac) of habitat located near downtown San Marcos in San Diego County,

which is zoned for industrial development (Kutz 1997). Other

populations in San Marcos, although not as extensive, are also

threatened. For example, a 9 ha (20 ac) parcel near the largest site is

proposed for recreational development (San Diego Union Tribune, January

29, 1998).

The only populations of Brodiaea filifolia known to occur on

Federal land are on Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton in San Diego

County (CNNDB 1997, U.S. Marine Corps 1997). Several populations have

recently been discovered in an abandoned weapons impact area. While no

populations are currently reported as directly threatened by

development on the base, a recently-proposed project may alter up to 54

ha (134 ac) of highly suitable habitat that is immediately adjacent to

known occupied habitat (U.S. Marine Corps 1997).

As discussed below (vernal wetlands discussion), habitat that

supports 5 of 6 populations of Brodiaea filifolia within the San

Jacinto River flood plain and Old Salt Creek near Hemet is threatened

by alteration of hydrology (duck ponds), channelization, discing for

dry land farming and fire suppression practices, and urbanization

(Roberts and Vanderwier 1997). These populations represent about one

third of the populations and over 40 percent of the potential habitat

for this species in Riverside County.

At least 12 of the remaining 37 populations of Brodiaea filifolia

within San Bernardino, Orange, Riverside, and San Diego County are

threatened by the destruction of habitat that will result from

urbanization, discing for dry land farming or fire suppression. These

populations include a significant portion of the occupied habitat and

the largest populations of Brodiaea filifolia within San Diego and

Orange Counties. The reduction of these populations will result in a

significant decline in the species.

Vernal pools have undergone an extraordinary reduction in number

and have nearly been eliminated in Los Angeles, Orange, and San Diego

counties, and have been greatly reduced in Riverside County. In San

Diego County, over 97 percent of vernal pool habitat occupied, in part,

by Navarretia fossalis, had been lost by 1990 (Bauder 1986, Oberbauer

and Vanderweir 1991).

Loss estimates for vernal pools and vernal wetlands in Riverside

County are less certain and are based on the status of soil types that

support these kinds of habitat. The Service estimates that about 12,800

ha (32,000 ac) in the Perris, western San Jacinto, and Menifee Valleys

were historically dominated by alkali scrub, alkali playa, alkali

grassland, or vernal pool plant communities that contained significant

populations of B. filifolia, A. coronata var. notatior, and N.

fossalis. About 75 percent of the 12,800 ha (32,000 ac) has been

impacted by a combination of intensive cultivation, urbanization, or

watercourse channelization; being filled; or otherwise being highly

disturbed and, therefore, unlikely to return to supporting these native

plants. A significant portion of the remaining 3,300 ha (8,200 ac) of

alkali and vernal pool habitat suitable for these plants has been

disturbed, predominantly by dryland farming activities (Tierra Madre

Consultants 1992, Roberts 1993b, Roberts and McMillan 1997).

About 95 percent of the populations of A. coronata var. notatior,

about 15 percent of the populations of B. filifolia, and about 50

percent of the populations of N. fossalis are associated with the San

Jacinto River and a tributary of Old Salt Creek just west of the city

of Hemet. Much of this area has been subject to dry land farming or

irrigated farming at some time during the last 100 years. However, a 5-

year drought contributed significantly to a reduction in agricultural

activity, particularly along the San Jacinto River. Conversely, in some

areas, the soils have routinely been too wet and too alkaline for dry

land farming. Both factors have contributed to the continued existence

of these taxa in this area.

Major commercial and urban development, transportation, and flood

control projects have been proposed in General and Specific Plans for

both the San Jacinto River Valley and the area west of Hemet. According

to documents on file with the County of Riverside and the City of

Perris in 1994, these proposals could result in over 19,000 new

residential units, as well as hotel and commercial developments

[[Page 54984]]

encompassing over 3,200 ha (8,000 ac) (Riverside County Planning

Department 1991, Louis Massey, Department of Planning, City of Perris,

pers. comm. 1993, Mark Goldberg, City of Hemet, pers. comm. 1993).

Although not all of these projects may move forward, potential habitat

for A. coronata var. notatior, N. fossalis, and B. filifolia could be

reduced by over 1,400 ha (3,500 ac) (Roberts 1993b). And, although the

urbanization that could result from these major projects and others

associated with the cities of San Jacinto and Hemet may not occur for

up to five years, these same areas are more imminently threatened by a

recent increase in pipeline construction, dry land farming, and weed

abatement activities.

Three pipeline projects have recently destroyed vernal pool, alkali

grassland, and alkali playa habitat and directly impacted 5 of 11

populations of A. coronata var. notatior, N. fossalis, and at least one

historical site for B. filifolia in the San Jacinto River flood plain

(Roger Turner, Eastern Municipal Water District, pers. comm. 1992,

1993, Tierra Madre Consultants 1992). At least one additional pipeline

project will further reduce one population of A. coronata var. notatior

and N. fossalis (Roberts and McMillan 1997).

In 1993, more than 200 ha (500 ac) of occupied or potential habitat

for A. coronata var. notatior, B. filifolia, and N. fossalis were

disced for weed abatement or fire suppression purposes (Roberts 1993b).

In June 1993, an additional 80 ha (200 ac) of habitat containing A.

coronata var. notatior and N. fossalis were disced and seeded for dry

land farming (Bill Sweeney, landowner, pers. comm. 1993). Additional

discing along the San Jacinto River has been reported since 1993. At

least 42 stands of A. coronata var. notatior, including 4 of the

largest, have been adversely modified since 1990. This has resulted in

the decline in total numbers of A. coronata var. notatior plants,

throughout its range, of nearly 70 percent since 1992 (Roberts and

McMillan 1997).

While Atriplex coronata var. notatior has displayed some ability to

persist despite dryland farming in its habitat, its severe decline

since 1992, combined with extensive plans for flood control and further

urban development in its habitat show that this plant is in danger of

extinction in much of its remaining habitat. The existing protected

areas, as discussed below, do not appear to offer adequate area or

management to prevent endangerment. Nearly half of the known

populations of Navarretia fossalis occur within the same habitat that

is occupied by A. coronata var. notatior. However, the distribution of

N. fossalis is even more restricted in that it can only persist in the

wettest areas of the San Jacinto River flood plain and the vernal pools

at Hemet. The loss of these populations will result in a significant

decline in the species.

Navarretia fossalis also occurred historically in the vicinity of

Murrieta Hot Springs in Riverside County during the 1920's (Spencer, in

litt. 1993). Much of the Murrieta Hot Spring area has been urbanized or

converted to agriculture resulting in a significant reduction and

fragmentation of potential N. fossalis habitat (U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service, unpublished data). While there are no additional confirmed

populations of N. fossalis occurring in the Murrieta area, the

continued and rapid urbanization of this area reduces the opportunities

to conserve potential habitat for species recovery.

The larger of two recently discovered occurrences of Navarretia

fossalis in northwestern Los Angeles has apparently been partially

graded, (Tim Thomas, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, pers. comm. 1998),

leading to the ongoing deposition of fill material into the vernal

pool.

In San Diego County, N. fossalis occurs within vernal pool

complexes (Bauder 1986, CNDDB 1997). These areas have been and continue

to be impacted by urbanization and agricultural conversion (Bauder

1986, Nancy Gilbert and Ellen Berryman, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,

pers. comm. 1993).

One of the largest concentrations of N. fossalis occurs on Otay

Mesa in San Diego County. At least 37 proposed Precise Plans and

Tentative Maps for development have been filed pursuant to the

California Environmental Quality Act for this area. These plans

encompass about 80 percent of the undeveloped portion of the mesa

within the jurisdiction of the City of San Diego and all but four of

the remaining vernal pool complexes. Several of these projects will

impact N. fossalis. In addition, at least one major transportation

project has been proposed for Otay Mesa and could potentially affect

vernal pools occupied by N. fossalis (California Department of

Transportation 1993).

Navarretia fossalis and Brodiaea filifolia are found on Federal

lands managed by the Navy at Naval Air Station, Miramar and Marine

Corps Base, Camp Pendleton. These lands are used, in part, for military

training activities that involve off-road vehicle maneuvers that

adversely affect these species (D. Hogan, San Diego Biodiversity

Project, and D. Belk, The Lady of the Lake University, in litt. 1992,

CNDDB 1997).

Trash dumping has also degraded vernal pools in San Diego County.

Chunks of concrete, tires, refrigerators, furniture, and other pieces

of garbage or debris have been found in pools containing N. fossalis.

This trash crushes or shades vernal pool plants, disrupts the

hydrologic functions of the pool, and, in some cases, may release toxic

substances. Trash dumping continues to threaten vernal pools that

support this species (S. Wynn, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, pers.

comm. 1998).

Vernal pools in Riverside and San Diego counties and, to a lesser

extent, the alkali wetland habitats of Riverside County, have also been

degraded by off-road vehicles. These vehicles compact soils, crush

plants when water is present, cause turbidity, and leave deep ruts.

This type of damage may alter the microhydrology of the pools by

creating drainage channels or by disrupting the pool's water-retaining

hardpan. Dirt roads that go through or adjacent to pools are widened as

motorists try to avoid mud puddles, resulting in destruction of pool

margins inhabited by N. fossalis and B. filifolia. Pools are

incrementally destroyed, both as a result of destruction of vegetation

and alteration of hydrology.

For Navarretia fossalis, whose 30 known populations in the United

States are concentrated in Otay Mesa in southern San Diego County,

along the San Jacinto River in western Riverside County, and near Hemet

in Riverside County, the ongoing degradation of vernal pools and their

outright destruction due to widespread urbanization in Otay Mesa is the

most pressing threat, followed by agricultural practices and the

longer-term threats from flood control and development in the San

Jacinto-Hemet areas of Riverside County.

The vernal pool, alkali grassland, alkali playa, and alkali sink

habitats upon which N. fossalis, A. coronata var. notatior, and, to a

lesser extent, B. filifolia depend are also vulnerable to indirect

destruction due to an alteration of the supporting watershed. An

increase in water due to urban run-off leads to increased inundation,

which makes pools vulnerable to invasion by plants characteristic of

perennial wetlands, which results in decreased abundance of obligate

vernal pool plants. At the other extreme, some pools and alkali

wetlands have been drained or blocked from their source of water and

have shown an increased domination by upland plant species. Of

[[Page 54985]]

the species covered by this rule, N. fossalis is the most vulnerable to

alterations in hydrology because it is the most dependent on vernal

pools. The other species in the plan occur in microhabitats that are

more variable in wetness.

Agricultural and/or urban development adjacent to vernal pools and

alkali wetlands may cause adverse alterations in drainage and adverse

hydrological alterations to vernal pools. Drainage of wetlands for

agricultural purposes may render land suitable for urban development.

Wetland drainage is exemplified by recent activities near Hemet in

Riverside County, California. In 1989, drainage structures were built

in alkali grassland and vernal pools west of Hemet in association with

an Auto Mall (M. Goldberg, pers. comm. 1993). These structures have

significantly reduced standing water and are responsible for the

gradual drying of wetland vegetation as evidenced by relic stands of

Eleocharis palustris and other obligate wetland species (Wayne Ferren,

University of California, Santa Barbara, pers. comm. 1993). In another

example, a vernal pool supporting a large population of N. fossalis in

1994 was identified along the San Jacinto River. By 1997, the field had

been disced and there was no evidence of the vernal pool nor N.

fossalis.

Because Navarretia fossalis is an obligate wetland species,

drainage of the wetlands it inhabits will destroy it. The generally

small sizes of vernal pool wetlands render them highly vulnerable to

deliberate drainage, as discussed above, as well as to more or less

unintentional alteration through changes in drainage that occur during

development, and from the physical effects of off-road vehicles and

trash dumping. The loss of over 97 percent of vernal pool habitat in

San Diego County occupied, in part, by Navarretia fossalis, by 1990,

shows the intensity of economic and other pressures to develop clay-

soil areas with vernal pools. To judge from recent development

proposals, the remaining three percent of vernal pool habitat is likely

to be lost. On the more extensive alkali wetlands of Riverside County,

the effects of agricultural activities, drainage of wetlands,

alteration of drainage (from diking and rerouting of drainage) likewise

mean that the wetlands remaining available to this plant are much

smaller and much more vulnerable to the effects of surrounding

development than they were earlier in the century.

Livestock grazing typically changes the composition of native plant

communities by reducing or eliminating plants that cannot withstand

grazing and trampling and by enabling more resistant (usually non-

native) species to increase in abundance. Non-native plants often are

introduced and flourish under a grazing regime and may reduce or

replace native species. Plants in vernal pools or adjacent alkali

grasslands, playa, or scrub habitats may be trampled and killed or

grazed prior to seed production. For example, sheep are imported to

graze along the San Jacinto River and at Old Salt Creek annually, and

they frequently trample habitat occupied by Atriplex coronata var.

notatior, Navarretia fossalis, and Brodiaea filifolia (F. Roberts,

pers. obs.). At least two populations of Allium munzii are within areas

grazed by cattle (CNDDB 1997). Grazing also continues to impact vernal

pool habitat in San Diego County, which, in part, is occupied by

Navarretia fossalis, and on Otay Mesa where some of the most important

populations are found, or at Ramona (S. Wynn, pers. comm. 1998).

B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or

Educational Purposes

Overutilization is not currently known to be a factor for these

four plants, but unrestricted collecting for scientific or

horticultural purposes or excessive visits by individuals interested in

seeing rare plants could result from increased publicity as a result of

this final rule.

C. Disease or Predation

Neither disease nor natural predation are known to be a factor for

the four plants. Cattle grazing occurs on Otay Mesa in areas where

several vernal pool complexes contain N. fossalis. Intensive sheep

grazing occurs west of Hemet and along the San Jacinto River in habitat

occupied by N. fossalis, A. coronata var. notatior, and B. filifolia.

It is not anticipated that any of the four species are regular forage

for grazing animals, and thus effects from grazing are more likely to

be from trampling rather than predation.

D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms

Existing regulatory mechanisms that could provide some protection

for these species include: (1) listing under the California Endangered

Species Act (CESA); (2) the California Environmental Quality Act

(CEQA); (3) implementation of conservation plans pursuant to the

California NCCP program; (4) conservation provisions under the Federal

Clean Water Act; (5) the Act in cases where these species occur in

habitat occupied by a listed species; (6) land acquisition and

management by Federal, State, or local agencies, or by private groups

and organizations; (7) local laws and regulations; and (8) enforcement

of Mexican laws.

State Laws and Regulations

The California Fish and Game Commission has listed B. filifolia as

endangered and A. munzii (= A. fimbriatum var. munzii) as threatened

under the Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA) (Div. 2, chapter 10,

section 1900 et seq. of the California Fish and Game Code) and CESA

(chapter 1.5, section 2050 et seq.). A. coronata var. notatior and N.

fossalis are included on Lists 1B of the California Native Plant

Society's Inventory (Skinner and Pavlik 1994), which, in accordance

with section 1901, chapter 10 of the California Department of Fish and

Game Code, makes them eligible for State listing. Although both

statutes prohibit the ``take'' of State-listed plants (chapter 10

section 1908 and chapter 1.5 section 2080), populations of three of the

four species have continued to decline. For example, development

proposals in Carlsbad (San Diego County) and in the Gavilan Hills

(Riverside County) that involve direct impacts to A. munzii and B.

filifolia have proceeded without notification to the Department

(Roberts 1993a, Jim Dice, CDFG, pers. comm. 1993). In another case, a

landowner disced a stand of N. fossalis growing with the State-listed

Orcuttia californica for fire control without notifying the CDFG

(Howard Windsor, Riverside County Fire Department, pers. comm. 1993).

California Senate Bill 879, passed in 1997 and effective January 1,

1998, requires individuals and entities to obtain 2081(b) incidental

take permits to take listed species; however, the draft of proposed

regulations to implement Senate Bill 879 would except the prohibition

of take of listed plant species from major categories of activities,

including take incidental to agricultural operations, approved timber

harvest operations, mining assessment work, public works projects, and

removal or destruction of plants from building sites on private lands.

The extent to which the amended State Statute will afford protection to

State-listed plant species is uncertain at this time.

The majority of the known populations of the four plants considered

herein occur on privately owned land. Local lead agencies empowered to

uphold and enforce the regulations of the California Environmental

Quality Act (CEQA) have made determinations that have or will

[[Page 54986]]

adversely affect A. munzii, A. coronata var. notatior, B. filifolia,

and N. fossalis. Required biological surveys are often inadequate, and

project proponents may ignore the results of surveys if occurrences of

sensitive species are viewed as a constraint on project design.

Mitigation measures used to condition project approvals are essentially

experimental and fail to adequately guarantee long-term protection of

sustainable populations. In addition, relocation attempts often fail.

Project designs have also failed to provide an adequate buffer zone

around sensitive plant populations to protect their long-term viability

(WESTEC 1988, D. Bramlet, in litt. 1992, D. Hogan and D. Belk, in litt.

1992, and O. Mistretta, in litt. 1993).

The CEQA requires that a project proponent publicly disclose the

potential environmental impacts of proposed projects. The public agency

with the primary authority or jurisdiction over the project is

designated as the lead agency and is responsible for conducting review

of the project and consulting with other agencies concerned with

resources affected by the project. Required biological surveys are

sometimes inadequate and mitigation measures used to condition project

approvals are sometimes experimental and do not always adequately

guarantee protection of sustainable populations of the species

considered in this rule. 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.'' CEQA decisions are also subject to overriding social and

economic considerations, which allows the CEQA lead agency to approve a

project with significant adverse effects on a listed plant species

where the agency concludes that overriding considerations justify

approval of the project.

Even though impacts to rare plant taxa including N. fossalis, B.

filifolia, and A. coronata var. notatior were considered significant

under CEQA when several pipeline projects and Specific Plans were

proposed in Riverside County, California, only A. coronata var.

notatior was consistently considered in the environmental impact

analyses. These projects proposed either no or inadequate mitigation

for impacts to sensitive plant taxa (D. Bramlet, in litt. 1992, Roberts

1993b). In another case, a major development in San Marcos (San Diego

County) resulted in a 70 percent reduction in B. filifolia habitat.

Although 5 ha (12 ac) were set aside for preservation of this species,

the preserve is surrounded by residential development, has inadequate

buffers, and is poorly configured (WESTEC 1988).

Regional Planning Efforts

In 1991, the State of California established the NCCP Program to

address conservation needs of natural ecosystems throughout the State.

The focus of the current planning program is the coastal sage scrub

community in southern California, although other vegetation communities

are being addressed in an ecosystem-level approach. Brodiaea filifolia

and Navarretia fossalis are currently being considered under the MSCP,

MHCP, Central/Coastal Subregional NCCP/Habitat Conservation Plan

(Central/Coastal) or the Southern Subregional NCCP/Habitat Conservation

Plan of Orange County, California. All of these habitat conservation

plans are being conducted under the procedures of section 10(a)(1)(B)

of the Act, which allows incidental take permits for federally listed

animals in return for effective conservation plans.

The Central/Coastal NCCP of Orange County was approved in July of

1996. Only one of the four plants (Brodiaea filifolia) occurs within

the Central/Coastal NCCP. It is not considered a covered species

because of its recent discovery within the subregion. Covered species

are those species that have been adequately considered in terms of

long-term preservation within a Habitat Conservation Planning Area or

NCCP subregion. Under an agreement with participants, CDFG, and the

Service, future potential impacts for covered species are considered

adequately addressed through proposed preservation, mitigation, and

management. The single population of B. filifolia within the Central/

Coastal NCCP is situated on land preserved under the regional park

system of the County of Orange.

Five populations of B. filifolia are within the Southern Subregion

of the Orange County NCCP. Preserve design in the Southern Subregion is

still preliminary, and it is uncertain to what degree it will conserve

the four populations of this taxon. However, the largest of the four

populations (Forster Ranch) is within a proposed residential

development site and is unlikely to benefit from any future preserve

(City of San Clemente 1997).

Since the publication of the proposed rule, the MSCP, a regional

planning effort in southwestern San Diego County, has been finalized

and submitted to the Service as part of an application for a section

10(a)(1)(B) incidental take permit for 85 species, including Brodiaea

filifolia and Navarretia fossalis. The Service and the City of San

Diego have jointly prepared a Recirculated Environmental Impact

Statement, ``Issuance of Take Authorizations for Threatened and

Endangered Species due to urban Growth within the Multiple Species

Conservation Program (MSCP) Planning Area.'' This document, released on

August 30, 1996, and finalized in December 1996, assesses the effects

of land-use decisions that will be made by local jurisdictions to

implement the plan and the effects of the issuance of the incidental

take permit for the 85 species. A permit was issued to the City of San

Diego in July 1997 and for the County of San Diego in March 1998. A

permit is expected for Chula Vista in 1999.

The MSCP sets aside preserve areas and provides for monitoring and

management for the 85 ``covered species'' addressed in the permit

application, including Brodiaea filifolia and Navarretia fossalis.

``Covered species'' are taxa that will be adequately conserved by the

plan's proposed preservation and management. Project proponents in

areas outside the MSCP subregion will be required to coordinate with

the Service on these taxa where applicable.

About 20 percent of the known populations of N. fossalis in the

United States are in the MSCP subregion. The majority of these

populations will be conserved by the MSCP. In addition the species is

on the list of narrow endemics, which requires jurisdictions to specify

and implement measures in their subarea plan to avoid or minimize

impacts to all populations. However, significant populations of N.

fossalis remain outside the MSCP subregion. Only a single recently

reported population of B. filifolia occurs within the MSCP.

The MHCP area in northwestern San Diego County contains several

significant populations of N. fossalis and about half of the B.

filifolia populations. The MHCP, which will include the Carlsbad

Habitat Management Plan (HMP) program, is still in the early

developmental phase, and thus it is uncertain to what degree it will be

successful in providing protection for Brodiaea filifolia and

Navarretia fossalis.

About 50 percent of the populations of Navarretia fossalis occur in

western Riverside County, along the San Jacinto River and southwest of

Hemet. Riverside County is in the process of developing a multiple

species plan. However, the plan will not be finalized

[[Page 54987]]

this year. B. filifolia, A. coronata var. notatior, and Allium munzii

are also expected to benefit from the Riverside County plan when it is

finalized. Five of the six populations of B. filifolia in southern

Orange County are within multiple species planning areas in southern

Orange County and most of these are expected to be conserved through

the Southern Subregional NCCP. However, the largest and most

significant population (Forster Ranch) will not have substantial

conservation as a result of this planning effort. Small populations of

N. fossalis and B. filifolia are also known from Los Angeles and San

Bernardino County. These populations are generally in jurisdictions

that have not developed or implemented regional multispecies planning

programs.

Conservation Provisions Under the Clean Water Act

Atriplex coronata var. notatior and N. fossalis could potentially

be affected by projects requiring a permit from the Corps under section

404 of the Clean Water Act. In Riverside County, the Corps has not

required a permit or mitigation for filling of wetland habitat occupied

by A. coronata var. notatior, N. fossalis, or B. filifolia in instances

where the land had previously been used for agriculture or where the

wetland was determined not to be within the jurisdiction of the Corps.

The Corps has indicated a lack of certainty over whether hydric soils

existed on a particular site, even though hydric vegetation and

hydrologic features were present (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, in

litt. 1993). Even if the Corps establishes jurisdiction under the Clean

Water Act over vernal pools, this does not ensure their protection. At

least two vernal pool complexes that represented suitable habitat for

Navarretia fossalis that were under Corps jurisdiction in San Diego

County have been destroyed or degraded without a section 404 permit (J.

Dice, pers. comm. 1993, Carrie Phillips, U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service, pers. comm. 1993).

A permit was issued by the Corps for channelizing the San Jacinto

River in 1996. As a condition of approval, the permit was tied to a

plan that would be designed to conserve A. coronata var. notatior

habitat along a portion of the San Jacinto River. This plan is still in

the development stage. It is anticipated that this conservation plan,

when finalized, will provide adequate habitat for A. coronata var.

notatior and other rare plant species, including N. fossalis. It will

cover about one-third of the range of A. coronata var. notatior. This

conservation plan is intended to adequately conserve A. coronata var.

notatior (but not N. fossalis) in the covered area and to allow for its

full recovery once similar conservation measures are undertaken

elsewhere in its range.

Federal Endangered Species Act

The Act may afford protection to sensitive species if they co-exist

with species already listed as threatened or endangered under the Act.

Pogogyne abramsii (San Diego mesa mint), P. nudiuscula (Otay Mesa

mint), Orcuttia californica (California Orcutt grass), Eryngium

aristulatum var. parishii (San Diego button-celery), San Diego fairy

shrimp (Branchinecta sandiegoensis), and the Riverside fairy shrimp

(Streptocephalus wootoni) are listed as endangered under the Act and

occur in the same kinds of habitat type as several of the taxa listed

herein. However, these species are often not found in the same vernal

pool complexes as the taxa considered in this proposal. N. fossalis co-

exists with other listed species in only seven vernal pool complexes

(one in Riverside County, six in San Diego County).

The Stephens' kangaroo rat (Dipodomys stephensi) and the Quino

checkerspot (Euphydryas editha quino) are listed as endangered, and the

coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica) is listed as

threatened under the Act. These species occur in coastal sage scrub

(gnatcatcher) and grassland (kangaroo rat) habitats. Although A. munzii

is known from similar habitats, there is less than 30 percent overlap

between its populations and populations of these listed animals. Where

overlap does occur, the A. munzii populations are either already

preserved or potentially protected from development by other

regulations. However, in these cases, A. munzii is still threatened by

off-road vehicle activity and non-native plant species. Brodiaea

filifolia occurs in the vicinity of California gnatcatcher populations

in northern San Diego County but primarily inhabits a different habitat

type (mesic grasslands). Brodiaea filifolia is known to co-exist with

the Stephen's kangaroo rat at only one locality in Riverside County.

The Quino checkerspot, an extremely rare species, is not known to occur

with either species.

Land Acquisition and Management

Land acquisition and management by Federal, State, or local

agencies or by private groups and organizations has contributed to the

protection of some localities inhabited by the taxa under consideration

in this proposal. However, as discussed below, these efforts are often

directed at other species and are inadequate to assure the long-term

survival of the taxa considered in this proposal.

Allium munzii and Brodiaea filifolia are found in the Cleveland

National Forest and are recognized by the U.S. Forest Service (Forest

Service) as sensitive species (U.S. Forest Service 1992, Boyd, et. al.,

1992). The Forest Service has policies to protect sensitive plant taxa

and attempts to establish these species in suitable or historic

habitat. The Forest Service also encourages land ownership adjustments

to acquire and protect sensitive plant habitat. To this end, the Forest

Service (1992) has released a Management Guide for A. munzii. However,

only a portion of a single population actually occurs within the

Cleveland National Forest, and it continues to be threatened by off-

road vehicle activity. The population of B. filifolia on National

Forest lands, although one of the largest, is evidently a hybrid swarm

(Boyd, et. al., 1992, S. Morey, in. litt. 1995).

In 1993, the Service entered into a Memorandum of Understanding

(MOU) with local jurisdictions in Riverside County and the CDFG

concerning channelization of the San Jacinto River and protection of A.

coronata var. notatior habitat along the river. The purpose of this MOU

is to reconcile conflicts between the conservation of this floodplain

species and proposed flood control measures associated with major urban

development plans. The MOU does not address the conservation of N.

fossalis, B. filifolia, or other rare plants in the project area. The

proposed flood control project could result in significant urban

development and hydrological alterations that will contribute to the

decline of all these taxa. Since 1993, over 400 ha (1,000 ac) of

suitable A. coronata var. notatior habitat within the jurisdiction of

the MOU was disced for purposes of dryland farming and weed abatement

(Roberts 1993b, Roberts and McMillan 1997). Some of this altered

habitat is in areas that could potentially be preserved as habitat for

A. coronata var. notatior.

Recently, local property owners have been contributing

significantly to the conservation process. The goal is to allow

channelization of the San Jacinto River and to protect adequate habitat

south of the Ramona Expressway for local conservation of A. coronata

var. notatior. In so doing, it is anticipated that the habitat set

aside will be adequate for the conservation of other rare plant taxa,

including N. fossalis. However, this conservation plan, which is under

development, will protect only

[[Page 54988]]

part of the habitat occupied by the four plants listed herein.

Potentially suitable conservation lands have been identified, but a

mechanism to acquire them is still lacking.

At least two of the plants listed in this rule occur in the San

Jacinto Wildlife Area (SJWA), which is managed by the State of

California. Although this preserve provides protection from

urbanization and agriculture, it was originally established to mitigate

impacts of State water projects. The SJWA's mission is to address

multiple impacts such as loss of wetlands and to maintain waterfowl

hunting along the San Jacinto River. In meeting this objective, a

significant area of habitat for the plants listed in this rule has been

converted into habitat for migrating waterfowl. Protection of rare

plant habitat is only one of many potentially conflicting goals.

Although there are rare plant management goals, duck ponds are

inundated in regimes not necessarily conducive to the establishment of

N. fossalis, A. coronata var. notatior, or B. filifolia, and

significant portions of the SJWA support non-native grasses such as

Phalaris minor and Crypsis schoenoides (swamp timothy) that feed

migratory waterfowl but compete with native vegetation. Habitat within

the preserve is also threatened, in part, with destruction from

construction of utility lines (MWD 1992).

The Santa Rosa Plateau Preserve is managed by TNC and contains one

of the largest remaining population complexes of B. filifolia and a

single, small population of N. fossalis. Although these populations are

managed for long-term protection and viability and are very important

for the recovery of these plants, they represent a fraction of the

range of either species. Other protected areas will be needed to

adequately ensure their continued existence.

The RCHCA has initiated the preparation of a Multi-Species Habitat

Conservation Plan (MSHCP). Although the intent of this plan is to

identify and acquire areas with high biological diversity and sensitive

species, the program is in the early development stage and it is

uncertain to what degree it will be successful in providing protection

for these taxa. In 1996, one land owner donated about 25 ha (60 ac) of

land along the San Jacinto River to the RCHCA. This parcel supports

small populations of A. coronata var. notatior and N. fossalis. This

land will likely become part of a potential MSHCP preserve system.

Navarretia fossalis is present at 3 sites on Marine Corps Air

Station Miramar, and both it and Brodiaea filifolia are present on

Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton. These two facilities comprise some 90

percent of the remaining vernal pool habitat in San Diego County, so

they are essential to the conservation of Navarretia fossalis.

Navarretia fossalis is fully protected at the Marine Corps Air Station

at Miramar in vernal pool management zones through the Integrated

Natural Resource Management Plan (IRMP). This plan is a good example of

the permanent protective measures promoted by that the Endangered

Species Act. Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton has a Draft Isolated

Ephemeral Wetlands Management Plan that did not prevent the

unauthorized filling of a vernal pool in April 1998 (Lt. Col. Quigley,

U.S. Marine Corps, Environmental Security, Camp Pendleton, in litt.

June 1998), and the Service has not been able to review the plan (J.

Bartel, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, in litt. 1998).

Local Laws and Regulations

Local laws and regulations potentially offer some protection to

species considered within this proposal but these laws and regulations

are subject to overriding considerations, are seldom enforced, and, in

some cases, are conflicting. For example, the City of Hemet General

Plan requires that biological surveys be conducted at sites that may

contain sensitive plants before alteration of a site for development.

However, the City has also adopted an ordinance that requires vacant

land to be cleared for weed abatement (Ron Wrench, City of Hemet, Fire

Department, pers. comm. 1993). This activity has contributed to the

decline of A. coronata var. notatior, N. fossalis and other sensitive

plant species for which the City general plan requires surveys.

Habitat in Riverside County for A. coronata var. notatior, N.

fossalis, and B. filifolia has been degraded by discing for weed

abatement and fire management purposes. County ordinances require that

parcels smaller than 2 ha (5 ac) and up to 30 meters (100 feet)

adjacent to roads be cleared to reduce the potential for fire (Howard

Windsor, Riverside County Fire Abatement, pers. comm. 1993). These

activities have contributed to the decline of N. fossalis and the

federally-listed, endangered Orcuttia californica. In some cases,

landowners have exceeded the clearing requirements, which has resulted

in additional reduction of sensitive plant populations and the

destruction or perturbation (disturbance) of their habitat.

Mexican Laws

Navarretia fossalis also occurs in northwestern Baja California,

Mexico. The Service is not aware of any existing regulatory mechanisms

in Mexico that would protect this plant or its habitat. Although Mexico

has laws that could provide protection to rare plants, they are not

easily enforced. At this time there is no specific protections for

vernal pools or N. fossalis in Mexico. If specific protections were

available to this species in Mexico, the portion of the species range

in Mexico alone would not be adequate to assure long-term conservation

of this species.

E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Their Continued Existence

Non-native species of grasses and forbs have invaded many of

southern California's plant communities. Their presence and abundance

are often an indirect result of habitat disturbance from grazing,

development, mining, discing, and alteration of hydrology. All four

plant taxa in this final rule are subject to displacement by such non-

native plant species.

Many vernal pools on Otay Mesa and in San Marcos (San Diego County)

have become dominated by Lolium perenne, the non-native perennial

ryegrass that is very widely planted for lawns and other purposes.

Ryegrass is tolerant of inundation and displaces native species such as

Navarretia fossalis and Brodiaea filifolia in areas where significant

populations for both species are known to occur. In Riverside County,

Crypsis schoenoides, an aggressive non-native grass, has been seeded as

a food source for migratory waterfowl along the San Jacinto River. This

species is becoming widespread and has replaced, or is in the process

of replacing, native vernal pool (and other) native species, including

N. fossalis, B. filifolia, and A. coronata var. notatior, on the San

Jacinto Wildlife Area and in other areas west of Hemet (D. Bramlet, in

litt. 1992). The impact of this grass is extremely significant for N.

fossalis since the majority of populations are found within this area

and Crypsis schoenoides competes for the same habitat required by N.

fossalis.

Non-native grass species such as Avena barbata and Bromus

madritensis are dominant on the clay soils required by A. munzii.

Crowding and competition for resources from these grasses threaten the

majority of the 13 occurrences of Allium munzii (CNDDB 1997). For

example, one of the largest populations (Estelle Peak), has not been

located recently and increased competition from alien grasses is likely

[[Page 54989]]

the cause of this (B. McMillan, pers. comm. 1998). In San Diego County,

aggressive non-native species such as Cynara cardunculus (wild

artichoke) and Foeniculum vulgare (fennel) are impacting grassland

habitat supporting populations of Brodiaea filifolia (Roberts and

Vanderwier 1997, H. Wier, Dudek and Associates, pers. comm. 1997).

The four plants in this rule rely on seasonal rainfall. Drier

conditions, such as those that prevailed from 1986 to 1992, reduce the

number of individuals in populations. Such climatic conditions stress

species and reduce germination and survival rates. Negative effects of

habitat loss and degradation from other factors including development,

discing, and grazing, when combined with climatic conditions, increase

the level of threat to the involved species.

The Service has carefully assessed the best scientific and

commercial information available regarding the past, present, and

future threats faced by these four plants in determining to make this

final rule. Much of the remaining habitat for these species is

degraded. Based on this evaluation, the Service finds that Allium

munzii and A. coronata var. notatior are in danger of extinction

throughout all or a significant portion of their ranges. Allium munzii

is extremely threatened by competition from alien grass species

throughout its entire range, and urban development, dry land farming

activities, and off-road vehicle activities throughout a significant

portion of its range. A. coronata var. notatior is threatened by

alteration of hydrology of its vernal pool and alkali vernal wetland

plains habitats, urbanization, grazing, and discing associated with dry

land farming and fire suppression, as exemplified by a reduction of

over 50 percent of known individuals since this species was proposed

for listing as an endangered species in 1994.

For reasons discussed below, the Service finds that B. filifolia

and N. fossalis are likely to become endangered within the foreseeable

future throughout all or a significant portion of their ranges.

Although many populations of B. filifolia are threatened by

urbanization and agricultural development, trampling, grazing, and

competition from non-native plant taxa, the Service finds that

threatened status is appropriate for B. filifolia because, in part, one

of the largest remaining populations (Santa Rosa Plateau) is protected.

The Service finds that threatened status is appropriate for N. fossalis

because although many populations are threatened by urbanization and

agricultural development, alteration of hydrology of its vernal pool

habitat, trampling, and competition from exotic plant taxa, this taxon

has demonstrated resilience to some forms of disturbance. In addition,

both B. filifolia and N. fossalis occur in a large enough number of

populations and locations that they are not in immediate danger of

extinction.

Critical Habitat

Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the Act as the specific

areas within the geographical area occupied by a species, at the time

it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which are found those

physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the

species and that may require special management considerations or

protection; and specific areas outside the geographical area occupied

by the species at the time it is listed, upon determination that such

areas are essential for the conservation of the species.

``Conservation'' means the use of all methods and procedures needed to

bring the species to the point at which listing under the Act is no

longer necessary.

Section 4(a) (3) of the Act, as amended, and the Service's

implementing regulations (50 CFR 424.12) require that, to the maximum

extent prudent and determinable, the Secretary designate critical

habitat at the time a species is listed as endangered or threatened.

Service regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)) state that designation of

critical habitat is not prudent when: (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; and/or

(2) such designation of critical habitat would not be beneficial to the

species.

Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires Federal agencies to consult

with the Service to ensure that any action authorized, funded, or

carried out by such agency, does not jeopardize the continued existence

of a federally listed species or does not destroy or adversely modify

designated critical habitat. The requirement that Federal agencies

refrain from contributing to the destruction or adverse modification of

critical habitat in any action authorized, funded or carried out by

such agency (agency action) is in addition to the section 7 prohibition

against jeopardizing the continued existence of a listed species; and

it is the only mandatory legal consequence of a critical habitat

designation. The Service's implementing regulations (50 CFR part 402)

define ``jeopardize the continuing existence of'' and ``destruction or

adverse modification of'' in very similar terms. To jeopardize the

continuing existence of a species means to engage in an action ``that

reasonably would be expected to reduce appreciably the likelihood of

both the survival and recovery of a listed species.'' Destruction or

adverse modification of habitat means an ``alteration that appreciably

diminishes the value of critical habitat for both the survival and

recovery of a listed species in the wild by reducing the reproduction,

numbers, or distribution of that species.'' Common to both definitions

is an appreciable detrimental effect to both the survival and recovery

of a listed species. An action that appreciably diminishes habitat for

recovery and survival may also jeopardize the continued existence of

the species by reducing reproduction, numbers, or distribution because

negative impacts to such habitat may reduce population numbers,

decrease reproductive success, or alter species distribution through

habitat fragmentation.

For a listed plant species, an analysis to determine jeopardy under

section 7(a)(2) would consider loss of the species associated with

habitat impacts. Such an analysis would closely parallel an analysis of

habitat impacts conducted to determine adverse modification of critical

habitat. As a result, an action that results in adverse modification

also would almost certainly jeopardize the continued existence of the

species concerned. Because habitat degradation and destruction is the

primary threat to these species, listing them will ensure that section

7 consultation occurs, and potential impacts to the species and their

habitat are considered, for any Federal action that may affect these

species. In many cases, listing also ensures that Federal agencies

consult with the Service even when Federal actions may affect

unoccupied suitable habitat where such habitat is essential to the

survival and recovery of the species. This is especially important for

plant species where consideration must be given to the seed bank

component of the species, and associated pollinators and dispersal

agents, which are not necessarily visible in the habitat throughout the

year. In practice, the Service consults with Federal agencies proposing

projects in areas where there is potentially suitable but unoccupied

habitat, particularly when the species was known to recently occur

there or in similar nearby areas; or the area is known to harbor seed

banks.

[[Page 54990]]

Apart from section 7, the Act provides no additional protection to

lands designated as critical habitat. Designating critical habitat does

not create a management plan for the areas where the listed species

occurs; does not establish numerical population goals or prescribe

specific management actions (inside or outside of critical habitat);

and does not have a direct effect on areas not designated as critical

habitat.

Critical habitat would provide no benefit to the species addressed

in this rule on non-Federal lands (i.e., private, State, County or City

lands) beyond that provided by listing. Critical habitat provides

protection on non-Federal lands only if there is Federal involvement (a

Federal nexus) through authorization or funding of, or participation,

in a project or activity on non-Federal lands. In other words,

designation of critical habitat on non-Federal lands does not compel or

require the private or other non-Federal landowner to undertake active

management for the species or to modify any activities in the absence

of a Federal nexus. Possible Federal agency involvement or funding that

could involve the species addressed in this rule on non-Federal lands

include the Corps through section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the

Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development, Federal Aviation

Administration, the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service and the

Federal Highway Administration. Federal involvement, if it does occur,

will be addressed regardless of whether critical habitat is designated

because interagency coordination requirements such as the Fish and

Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) and section 7 of the Act are already

in place. When a plant species is listed, activities occurring on all

lands subject to Federal jurisdiction that may adversely affect the

species would prompt the requirement for consultation under section

7(a)(2) of the Act, regardless of whether critical habitat has been

designated.

While a designation of critical habitat on private lands would only

affect actions where a Federal nexus is present and would not confer

any additional benefit beyond that already provided by section 7

consultation because virtually any action that would result in an

adverse modification determination would also likely jeopardize the

species, a designation of critical habitat on private lands could

result in a detriment to the species. This is because the limited

effect of a critical habitat designation on private lands is often

misunderstood by private landowners whose property boundaries could be

included within a general description of critical habitat for a

specific species. Landowners may mistakenly believe that critical

habitat designation will be an obstacle to development and impose

restrictions on their use of their property. Unfortunately, inaccurate

and misleading statements reported through widely popular medium

available worldwide, are the types of misinformation that can and have

led private landowners to believe that critical habitat designations

prohibit them from making use of their private land when, in fact, they

face potential constraints only if they need a Federal permit or

receive Federal funding to conduct specific activities on their lands.

These types of misunderstandings, and the fear and mistrust they create

among potentially affected landowners, make it very difficult for the

Service to cultivate meaningful working relationships with such

landowners and to encourage voluntary participation in species

conservation and recovery activities. Without the participation of

landowners in the recovery process, the Service will find it very

difficult to recover species that occur on non-Federal lands.

A designation of critical habitat on private lands could actually

encourage habitat destruction by private landowners to rid themselves

of the perceived endangered species problem. Listed plants have limited

protection under the Act, particularly on private lands. Section

9(a)(2) of the Act, implemented by regulations at 50 CFR section 17.61

(endangered plants) and 50 CFR 17.71 (threatened plants) prohibits: (1)

Removal and reduction of listed plant species to possession from areas

under Federal jurisdiction, or their malicious damage or destruction on

areas under Federal jurisdiction; or (2) removal, cutting, digging up,

or damaging or destroying any such species in knowing violation of any

State law or regulation including State criminal trespass laws.

Generally, on private lands, collection of, or vandalism to, listed

plants must occur in violation of State law to be a violation of

section 9 of the Act. The Service is not aware of any State law in

California that generally regulates or prohibits the destruction or

removal of federally listed plants on private lands (see section 9

discussion under ``Available Conservation Measures'' section of this

rule). Thus, a private landowner concerned about perceived land

management conflicts resulting from a critical habitat designation

covering his property would likely face no legal consequences if the

landowner removed the listed species or destroyed its habitat. For

example, in the spring of 1998, a Los Angeles area developer buried one

of the only three populations of the endangered Astragalus brautonii in

defiance of efforts under the CEQA to negotiate mitigation for the

species (Tim Thomas, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, pers. comm. 1996).

The designation of critical habitat involves the publication of habitat

descriptions and mapped locations of the species in the Federal

Register, increasing the likelihood of potential search and removal

activities at specific sites.

The Service acknowledges that in some situations critical habitat

designation may provide some value to the species by notifying the

public about areas important for the species conservation and calling

attention to those areas in special need of protection. However, when

this limited benefit is weighed against the detriment to plant species

associated with the widespread misunderstanding about the effects of

such designation on private landowners and the environment of mistrust

and fear that such misunderstanding can create, the Service concludes

that the detriment to the species from a critical habitat designation

covering non-Federal lands outweighs the educational benefit of such

designation and that such designation is, therefore, not prudent. The

information and education process can more effectively be handled by

working directly with landowners and communities during the recovery

planning process and by the section 7 consultation and coordination

where the Federal nexus exists. The use of these existing processes

will impart the same knowledge to the landowners that critical habitat

designation would but without the confusion and misunderstandings that

may accompany a critical habitat designation.

For similar reasons, the Service also concludes that there would be

no additional benefits to the species covered in this rule beyond the

benefits conferred by listing from a designation of critical habitat on

Federal lands. In the case of each of these plant species, the existing

occurrences of the species are known by the DOD and the U.S. Forest

Service and any action that would result in adverse modification would

almost certainly result in likely jeopardy to the species, so that a

designation of critical habitat on Federal lands would not confer any

additional benefit on the species. On the other hand, particularly on

National Forest System lands, a designation of critical habitat could

increase the threats to

[[Page 54991]]

these species from vandalism and collection similar to the threats

identified in response to listing a species (Oberbauer 1992, Beauchamp

in litt. 1997). Simply listing a species can precipitate commercial or

scientific interest, both legal and illegal, which can threaten the

species through unauthorized and uncontrolled collection for both

commercial and scientific purposes. The listing of species as

endangered or threatened publicizes their rarity and may make them more

susceptible to collection by researchers or curiosity seekers (Mariah

Steenson pers. comm. 1997, M.Bosch, U.S. Forest Service in litt. 1997).

For example, the Service designated critical habitat for the mountain

golden heather (Hudsonia montana), a small shrub not previously known

to be commercially valuable or particularly susceptible to collection

or vandalism. After the critical habitat designation was published in

the Federal Register, unknown persons visited a Forest Service

wilderness area in North Carolina where the plants occurred and, with a

recently published newspaper article and maps of the plant's critical

habitat designation in hand, asked about the location of the plants.

Several plants the Service had been monitoring were later found to be

missing from unmarked Service study plots. (Nora Murdock, U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service, pers. comm. 1998).

The Service has weighed the lack of overall benefits of critical

habitat designation beyond that provided by listing as threatened or

endangered, along with the benefits of public notification against the

detrimental effects of the negative public response and

misunderstanding of what critical habitat designation means and the

increased threats of illegal collection and vandalism, and has

concluded that critical habitat designation is not prudent for Allium

munzii (Munz's onion), Brodiaea filifolia (thread-leaved brodiaea),

Atriplex coronata var. notatior (San Jacinto Valley crownscale), and

Navarretia fossalis (spreading navarretia). The specific reasons why

designation of critical habitat is not prudent for each of these

species are addressed in the following discussion.

Atriplex coronata var. notatior

In the December 15, 1994, proposed rule to list these taxa (59 FR

64812), the Service proposed to designate critical habitat in Riverside

County for A. coronata var. notatior. The Service has now determined to

withdraw that proposal, based on the plant's continued decline, by

perhaps 50 percent, since its listing was proposed. The decline is due

mostly to the end of a prolonged drought and a new source of reclaimed

water, which have allowed increased barley farming. Repeated discing of

significant areas of habitat occupied by this plant, including proposed

critical habitat, is likely to have contributed to the decline,

although the Service lacks information on the acreage involved, or the

frequency of discing. This continued decline makes it less likely that

A. coronata var. notatior will be found on sites that it currently does

not occupy, and increases the conservation importance of remaining

sites. This decline occurred despite the proposal of critical habitat,

so the proposal's map evidently provided no conservation benefit with

respect to notification of government agencies and others. In any case,

such parties can identify potential habitat for this plant at least as

easily and accurately by consulting the county soil survey as by

consulting the critical habitat map.

The majority of the population centers of A. coronata var. notatior

are located on privately owned lands. Three populations are on State

land (San Jacinto Wildlife Area), one population is partially on County

lands (RCHCA along San Jacinto River), and one population is on a

private preserve managed by MWD. This plant is not known to occur on

Federal lands. Federal involvement on these lands is unlikely because

they do not involve wetland areas or any other activity associated with

Federal agencies. If, in the future, there is Federal involvement

through permitting or funding, such as through the Federal Highway

Administration, then interagency coordination and consultation required

by section 7 would be in effect if such actions may affect this

species, once listed. As previously discussed, an analysis to determine

jeopardy under section 7(a)(2) would consider loss of individual plants

associated with habitat impacts. Such an analysis would closely

parallel any analysis of habitat impacts conducted to determine adverse

modification of critical habitat. A jeopardy finding would be

equivalent to a finding of adverse modification of critical habitat.

Therefore, there would be no additional conservation benefit to the

species from designation of critical habitat beyond that provided by

the species' listing.

Therefore, the Service finds that critical habitat is not prudent

for Atriplex coronata var. notatior at this time because the Service

believes no benefit over that provided by listing would result from

identification of critical habitat on the non-Federal lands where this

species occurs. The identification of critical habitat would not

increase management or conservation efforts on State or private lands

and could impair those efforts. The Service believes that conservation

of this species on private lands can best be addressed by working

directly with landowners and communities during the recovery planning

process and through the interagency coordination and consultation

processes of section 7 should there be any future unforeseen Federal

involvement.

Navarretia fossalis

The majority of N. fossalis populations are on privately owned

lands. At least one population occurs on Federal lands owned by the

Department of the Navy. The Department of the Navy is aware of the

occurrences and habitat of the species on their lands. Some of the

private land has Federal involvement because Navarretia fossalis is a

covered species under the MSCP and populations occur in the MHCP area

of northern San Diego County. Navarretia fossalis is protected at

Marine Corps Air Station, Miramar in vernal pool management zones

through the Integrated Natural Resource Management Plan (IRMP). This

plan is an example of the permanent protective measures promoted by the

Act. Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton has a similar Draft Isolated

Ephemeral Wetlands Management Plan (Lt. Col. Quigley, U.S. Marine

Corps, Environmental Security, Camp Pendleton, in litt. June 1998). The

Department of Navy consults with the Service under section 7 for

activities related to other listed species in the area and would be

subject to similar requirements as a result of this listing.

Designation of critical habitat would not necessarily require either

military agency to increase or change their commitment or management

efforts for this species, only to avoid adverse modification of such

critical habitat.

The Service finds that critical habitat is not prudent for

Navarretia fossalis at this time because such designation would provide

no benefit over that provided by listing on privately owned lands where

this species occurs. Landowners where the species occur are aware of

its presence and status. Critical habitat designation on these private

lands would not change the way those lands are managed or require

specific management actions to take place, and could be detrimental

because of potential landowner misunderstandings about the real effects

of critical habitat designation on private lands. The species is

currently known and

[[Page 54992]]

managed on Federal lands; no change in management would occur as a

result of critical habitat designation and all activities that may

affect the species on these Federal lands would be subject to section 7

consultation. The Service believes that the conservation of this

species on private lands can best be addressed by working directly with

landowners and communities during the recovery planning process and

through the interagency coordination and consultation processes of

section 7 for those activities with Federal agency involvement.

Allium munzii

A. munzii is known from 13 extant populations; only one of these

populations is partially on Federal land. Five populations occur in the

Gavilan Hills, including one at Harford Springs County Park, and one on

lands managed by the Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency

(RCHCA). Two populations occur on private land. Five small populations

occur on land managed by the Reserve Management Committees (Domenigoni

Hills and Bachelor Mountain) for the Riverside County multispecies

plans, or on private land. One population is in the Elsinore Mountains,

partly on Federal land in the Cleveland National Forest and partly on

private lands.

The Service finds that critical habitat is not prudent for Allium

munzii at this time because such designation would provide no benefit

over that provided by listing on privately owned lands where this

species occurs. Landowners where the species occur are aware of its

presence and status. The plant occurs on land owned by the RCHCA. Such

land is likely to become part of a Multi-Species Habitat Conservation

Plan preserve system. Critical habitat designation on these private

lands would not change the way those lands are managed or require

specific management actions to take place, and could be detrimental

because of potential landowner misunderstandings about the real effects

of critical habitat designation on private lands. The species is

currently known and managed on Federal lands; no change in management

would occur as a result of critical habitat designation and all

activities that may affect the species on these Federal lands would be

subject to section 7 consultation. The Service believes that the

conservation of this species on private lands can best be addressed by

working directly with landowners and communities during the recovery

planning process and through the interagency coordination and

consultation processes of section 7 for those activities with Federal

agency involvement.

Brodiaea filifolia

Brodiaea filifolia occurs on private land, including lands managed

by TNC. Two populations are on lands managed by the County government

and also on the San Jacinto Wildlife Management Area in Riverside

County, managed by the CDFG. The only populations of Brodiaea filifolia

known to occur on Federal lands managed by the Department of Navy.

Brodiaea filifolia is protected at Marine Corps Air Station, Miramar in

vernal pool management zones through the Integrated Natural Resource

Management Plan (IRMP). This plan is an example of the permanent

protective measures promoted by the Act. Marine Corps Base, Camp

Pendleton has a similar Draft Isolated Ephemeral Wetlands Management

Plan (Lt. Col. Quigley, U.S. Marine Corps, Environmental Security, Camp

Pendleton, in litt. June 1998). The Department of Navy consults with

the Service under section 7 for activities related to other listed

species in the area and would be subject to similar requirements as a

result of this listing. Designation of critical habitat would not

necessarily require either military agencies to increase or change

their commitment or management efforts for this species, only to avoid

adverse modification of such critical habitat. Some of the private land

has Federal involvement because Brodiaea filifolia is a covered species

under the MSCP and populations occur in the MHCP area of northern San

Diego County. Brodiaea filifolia habitat managed by the CDFG (San

Jacinto Wildlife Area) is not wetlands, so there is no Federal

involvement that would lead to protection through designation of

critical habitat.

The Service finds that critical habitat is not prudent for Brodiaea

filifolia at this time because such designation would provide no

benefit over that provided by listing on privately owned lands where

this species occurs. Landowners where the species occur are aware of

its presence and status. Critical habitat designation on these private

lands would not change the way those lands are managed or require

specific management actions to take place, and could be detrimental

because of potential landowner misunderstandings about the real effects

of critical habitat designation on private lands. The species is

currently known and managed on Federal lands; no change in management

would occur as a result of critical habitat designation and all

activities that may affect the species on these Federal lands would be

subject to section 7 consultation. The Service believes that the

conservation of this species on private lands can best be addressed by

working directly with landowners and communities during the recovery

planning process and through the interagency coordination and

consultation processes of section 7 for those activities with Federal

agency involvement.

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 encourages and results in

conservation actions by Federal, State, and local agencies, groups, and

individuals. The Act provides for possible land acquisition from

willing sellers and cooperation with the State 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, as amended, requires Federal agencies to

evaluate their actions with respect to any species that is proposed or

listed as endangered or threatened and with respect to its 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)(4) requires Federal agencies to confer with the

Service on any action that is likely to jeopardize the continued

existence of a species proposed for listing or result in destruction or

adverse modification of proposed critical habitat. If a species is

subsequently listed, 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

destroy or adversely modify its critical habitat. If a Federal action

may affect a listed species or its critical habitat, the responsible

Federal agency must enter into formal consultation with the Service.

Federal agencies expected to have involvement with Allium munzii,

Atriplex coronata var. notatior, Brodiaea filifolia, and Navarretia

fossalis include the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Environmental

Protection Agency due to their permit authority under section 404 of

the Clean Water Act. The Federal Aviation Administration has

jurisdiction over areas with vernal pools containing N.

[[Page 54993]]

fossalis near Montgomery Field within the city limits of San Diego and

on Brown Field on Otay Mesa in San Diego County. This jurisdiction

would also apply if any of the taxa considered in this rule are

discovered at Perris Airport or Ryan Airport in Riverside County. The

Federal Highways Administration may be involved through potential

funding of highway construction projects near Hemet (Riverside County)

and Otay Mesa (San Diego County). Because N. fossalis occurs on Naval

Air Station, Miramar and on Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton, these

facilities will also likely be involved through the pursuit of their

respective missions or the process of excessing surplus Federal lands.

The Immigration and Naturalization Service will need to evaluate the

effects of its activities on N. fossalis, which is known to occur along

the international border. The Department of Housing and Urban

Development may insure housing loans in areas that support some of

these species. The Forest Service has jurisdiction over at least part

of one population of A. munzii in Cleveland National Forest.

Listing Allium munzii, Atriplex coronata var. notatior, Brodiaea

filifolia, and Navarretia fossalis provides for the development and

implementation of recovery plans for the taxa. Such plans will bring

together State and Federal efforts for conservation of the species. A

recovery plan will establish a framework for agencies to coordinate

conservation efforts. A plan will set recovery priorities and estimate

the costs of tasks necessary to accomplish the priorities. It will also

describe site-specific management actions necessary to achieve

conservation and survival of the species.

The Act and its implementing regulations set forth a series of

prohibitions and exceptions that apply to all endangered or threatened

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

50 CFR parts 17.61, (endangered plants) and 17.71 (threatened plants)

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 to possession any such species from

areas under Federal jurisdiction. In addition, for plants listed as

endangered, the Act prohibits malicious damage or destruction any such

species on Federal lands or to remove, cut, dig up, damage, or destroy

of any such species in knowing violation of any State law or

regulation, including criminal trespass laws. Section 4(d) of the Act

allows for the provision of such protection to threatened species

through regulation. This protection may apply to these taxa in the

future if regulations are promulgated. Seeds from cultivated specimens

of threatened plant species are exempt from these regulations provided

that their containers are marked ``of cultivated origin.'' Certain

exceptions apply to agents of the Service and State conservation

agencies.

The Act and 50 CFR 17.62 and 17.63 for endangered plants, and 17.72

for threatened plants, provide for the issuance of permits to carry out

otherwise prohibited activities involving endangered or threatened

plants under certain circumstances. Such permits are available for

scientific purposes or for enhancing the propagation or survival of the

plants. For threatened plants, permits are also available for botanical

or horticultural exhibition, educational purposes, or special purposes

consistent with the Act. It is anticipated that few trade permits would

ever be sought or issued for the taxa considered herein because they

are not common in cultivation or in the wild. These species have

specific germination and growth requirements including, in some cases,

seasonal inundation that would be difficult to recreate in cultivation.

It is the policy of the Service, published in the Federal Register

on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34272), to increase public understanding of the

prohibited acts that will apply under section 9 of the Act. Allium

munzii, Brodiaea filifolia, Atriplex coronata var. notatior, and

Navarretia fossalis are known to occur on Federal lands under the

jurisdiction of the Forest Service. Collection, damage or destruction

of listed species on Federal lands is prohibited, except as authorized

under section 7 or section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Act. Such activities on

non-Federal lands would constitute a violation of section 9 of the Act

if activities were conducted in knowing violation of California State

law or regulation, or in violation of California State criminal

trespass law.

The Service believes that, based upon the best available

information, the following actions will not result in a violation of

section 9, provided these activities are carried out in accordance with

existing regulations and permit requirements:

(1) Activities authorized, funded, or carried out by Federal

agencies (e.g., grazing management, agricultural conversions,

wetland and riparian habitat modification, flood and erosion

control, residential development, recreational trail development,

road construction, hazardous material containment and cleanup

activities, prescribed burns, pesticide/herbicide application,

pipelines or utility lines crossing suitable habitat), when such

activity is conducted in accordance with any reasonable and prudent

measures given by the Service in a consultation conducted under

section 7 of the Act;

(2) Casual, dispersed human activities on foot or horseback

(e.g., bird watching, sightseeing, photography, camping, hiking);

(3) Activities on private lands that do not require Federal

authorization and do not involve Federal funding, such as grazing

management, agricultural conversions, flood and erosion control,

residential development, road construction, and pesticide/herbicide

application when consistent with label restrictions;

(4) Residential landscape maintenance, including the clearing of

vegetation around one's personal residence as a fire break;

The Service believes that the following might potentially result in

a violation of section 9; however, possible violations are not limited

to these actions alone:

(1) Unauthorized collecting of the species on Federal lands;

(2) Application of herbicides violating label restrictions;

(3) Interstate or foreign commerce and import/export without

previously obtaining an appropriate permit. Permits to conduct

activities are available for purposes of scientific research and

enhancement of propagation or survival of the species.

Questions regarding whether specific activities would constitute

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

the Service's Carlsbad Field Office (see ADDRESSES section). Requests

for copies of the regulations concerning listed plants (50 CFR 17.61

and 17.71) and general inquiries regarding prohibitions and permits may

be addressed to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological

Services, Endangered Species Permits, 911 N.E. 11th Avenue, Portland,

Oregon 97232-4181 (telephone 503/231-2063; facsimile 503/231-6243).

National Environmental Policy Act

The Fish and Wildlife Service has determined that Environmental

Assessments or 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 Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. A notice

outlining the Service's reasons for this determination was published in

the Federal Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244).

[[Page 54994]]

Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule does not contain any information collection requirements

for which the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval under the

Paperwork reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. is required. An

information collection related to the rule pertaining to permits for

endangered and threatened species has OMB approval and is assigned

clearance number 1018-0094. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a

person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless

it displays a currently valid OMB control number. This rule does not

alter that information collection requirement. For additional

information concerning permits and associated requirements for

threatened species, see 50 CFR 17.32.

References Cited

A complete list of all references cited herein is available, upon

request, from the Field Supervisor, Carlsbad Field Office (see

ADDRESSES section).

Author: This primary author of this final rule is Fred Roberts of

the Carlsbad Field Office (see ADDRESSES section).

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.

Regulations Promulgation

Accordingly, the Service amends part 17, subchapter B of chapter I,

title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, 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:

Sec. 17.12 Endangered and threatened plants.

* * * * *

(h) * * *

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

Species

------------------------------------------------------ Historic Range Family Status When Critical Special rules

Scientific Name Common name listed habitat

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

* * * * * * *

FLOWERING PLANTS

* * * * * * *

Allium munzii (=A. fimbriatum Munz's onion....... U.S.A. (CA)........ Liliaceae--Lily... E 650 NA NA

var. munzii).

* * * * * * *

Atriplex coronata var. notatior. San Jacinto Valley U.S.A. (CA)........ Chenopodiaceae--Go E 650 NA NA

Crownscale. osefoot.

* * * * * * *

Brodiaea filifolia.............. Thread-leaved U.S.A. (CA)........ Liliaceae--Lily... T 650 NA NA

brodiaea.

* * * * * * *

Navarretia fossalis............. Spreading U.S.A. (CA), Mexico Polemoniaceae--Phl T 650 NA NA

navarretia. (Baja California). ox.

* * * * * * *

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

Dated: September 29, 1998.

Jamie Rappaport Clark,

Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.

[FR Doc. 98-26861 Filed 10-9-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-55-U