[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 193 (Thursday, October 6, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-24713]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: October 6, 1994]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

RIN 1018-AC11

 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Rule to 
Reclassify the Plant Isotria medeoloides (Small Whorled Pogonia) From 
Endangered to Threatened

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) determines that 
Isotria medeoloides (small whorled pogonia) warrants reclassification 
from endangered to threatened. The determination is based on the 
fulfillment of reclassification criteria as stated in the Small Whorled 
Pogonia (Isotria medeoloides) Recovery Plan: First Revision (U.S. Fish 
and Wildlife Service 1992) and substantial improvement in the status of 
this orchid species. As outlined in the revised Recovery Plan, 
reclassification of Isotria medeoloides from endangered to threatened 
should proceed when a minimum of 25 percent of the known viable sites 
(as of 1992) are protected. Currently, 61 percent of the viable 
populations are permanently protected. This rule implements the Federal 
protection and recovery provisions for threatened species as provided 
by the Act.

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 7, 1994.

ADDRESSES: The complete file for this rule is available for inspection, 
by appointment, during normal business hours at the New England Field 
Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 22 Bridge Street--Unit 1, 
Concord, New Hampshire 03301-4986.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Susanna von Oettingen at the above 
address (telephone: 603/225-1411, FAX 603/225-1467).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Isotria medeoloides (small whorled pogonia), a member of the orchid 
family (Orchidaceae), was first described by Frederick Pursh in 1814 as 
Arethusa medeoloides. In 1838, this orchid was placed in its own genus 
and recognized as Isotria medeoloides; however, it also became known as 
Pogonia affinis and Isotria affinis. M.L. Fernald clarified the 
nomenclature in 1947, making the latter names synonyms of Isotria 
medeoloides.
    Isotria medeoloides is an herbaceous perennial with slender, hairy, 
fibrous roots that radiate from a crown or rootstock. The five or six 
milky-green or grayish-green, elliptic and somewhat pointed leaves 
(four leaves in some vegetative plants) are displayed in a whorl at the 
apex of a smooth, green stem. Isotria medeoloides flowers from mid-May 
in the south to mid-June in the northern part of its range. A single 
yellowish-green flower, or occasionally flower pair, stands in the 
center of the whorl of leaves.
    An individual plant is usually single-stemmed, although two or more 
stems may occur; however, closely grouped double stems may in fact be 
two single plants (Bill Brumback, New England Wildflower Society, in 
litt. 1993). Because of the difficulty in differentiating double 
stemmed plants from closely neighboring plants, population estimates 
are often based on the number of stems, as opposed to the number of 
plants.
    Isotria medeoloides can be confused with Isotria verticillata 
(Willd.) Raf. (large whorled pogonia), the only other species in the 
genus Isotria. Characteristics that distinguish I. medeoloides from I. 
verticillata include the stem and flower color, the relative lengths of 
the sepals and petals, and the length of the stem of the fruit capsule 
in relation to the length of the capsule itself (Rawinski 1989a). 
Colonies of Isotria verticillata are often found near colonies of 
Isotria medeoloides in the extensive region in which they occur 
together (A. Belden, Virginia Division of Natural Heritage, in litt. 
1991). They have also been reported to grow mixed together (Dixon and 
Cook 1988).
    Isotria medeoloides occurs both in fairly young forests and in 
maturing stands of mixed-deciduous or mixed-deciduous/coniferous 
forests. The majority of small whorled pogonia sites share several 
common characteristics. These may include sparse to moderate ground 
cover in the microhabitat (except when among ferns), a relatively open 
understory canopy, and proximity to old logging roads, streams, or 
other features that create long-persisting breaks in the forest canopy 
(Mehrhoff 1989a). The soil in which the shallow-rooted small whorled 
pogonia grows is usually covered with leaf litter and decaying material 
(Mehrhoff 1980, Sperduto 1993). The spectrum of habitats includes dry, 
rocky, wooded slopes to moist slopes or slope bases crisscrossed by 
vernal streams.
    Isotria medeoloides is widely distributed with a primary range 
extending from southern Maine and New Hampshire through the Atlantic 
seaboard States to northern Georgia and southeastern Tennessee. 
Outlying colonies have been found in the western half of Pennsylvania, 
Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, and Ontario, Canada.
    There are three main population centers of Isotria medeoloides. The 
northernmost concentration, comprising 66 sites in 1993, is centered in 
the foothills of the Appalachian Mountains in New England and northern 
coastal Massachusetts, with one outlying site in Rhode Island. A second 
grouping of 18 sites is located at the southern extreme of the 
Appalachian chain in the Blue Ridge Mountains where North Carolina, 
South Carolina, Georgia, and Tennessee join. The third center, with 13 
sites, is concentrated in the coastal plain and piedmont provinces of 
Virginia, with outliers in Delaware and New Jersey. Seven sites 
scattered in the outlying States and Ontario are considered disjunct 
populations.

Previous Federal Action

    Isotria medeoloides was listed as endangered on September 10, 1982 
(47 FR 39827-39831). At that time, records for the species were known 
from 48 counties in 16 States and Canada, though there were only 17 
extant sites, in 10 States and Ontario, Canada. These sites had less 
than 500 stems. Subsequent searches led to the discovery of many new 
sites. In 1991, 86 sites in 15 States and Canada (U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service 1992) were known. By 1993, 17 additional sites in New 
Hampshire and 1 site in Maine were discovered, bringing the total to 
104 extant sites (Table 1). A number of States currently have only 
historic sites; these include Vermont, New York, Maryland, Missouri, 
and the District of Columbia.

             Table 1.--Isotria Medeoloides Site Distribution            
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      # Sites   # Sites 
                                            # Sites     (#     protected
                  State                      1985     Viable)   1993 (# 
                                                       1993     Viable) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maine....................................         2     17(7)       4(4)
New Hampshire............................        16    42(15)      11(6)
Massachusetts............................         1      5(2)       2(2)
Rhode Island.............................         1      1(0)       0(0)
Connecticut..............................         1      1(0)       1(0)
Pennsylvania.............................         1      3(0)       3(0)
New Jersey...............................         2      3(1)       1(0)
Delaware.................................         0      1(0)       0(0)
Virginia.................................         3      9(6)       7(4)
North Carolina...........................         2      5(2)       2(2)
South Carolina...........................         1      4(2)       4(2)
Georgia..................................         1      8(4)       7(4)
Tennessee................................         0      1(0)       0(0)
Ohio.....................................         0      1(0)       1(0)
Michigan.................................         1      1(0)       1(0)
Illinois.................................         1      1(0)       1(0)
Ontario, Canada..........................         1      1(0)       1(0)
                                          ------------------------------
      Total                                      34   104(39)     46(24)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Protection as defined in the criteria for reclassification in the    
  Small Whorled Pogonia Recovery Plan: First Revision (U.S. Fish and    
  Wildlife Service 1992), also discussed below.                         

    The first Small Whorled Pogonia Recovery Plan was completed in 1985 
(U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1985). The original objective, outlined 
in the 1985 recovery plan and based on the best available information 
at that time, was to locate and protect 30 populations (sites) of at 
least 20 individuals each, with at least 15 of the sites to be located 
in New England. Implementation of several recovery tasks generated 
additional life history and population information, the identification 
of new sites and protection of those sites deemed important to the 
survival and recovery of this species.
    Upon review of new life history and site information, this recovery 
objective was no longer considered appropriate. Viability, based on the 
reproductive status and persistence of a population, as opposed to 
merely a stem count, is now considered to be an important factor in 
determining the recoverability of this species.
    The Small Whorled Pogonia Recovery Plan: First Revision, was 
completed and approved in 1992. New recovery goals for the 
reclassification and delisting of Isotria medeoloides and tasks for the 
recovery of this species were developed using the most recent 
information regarding population trends and dynamics, life history, and 
previous recovery efforts. The current recovery strategy is based on a 
multi-faceted approach of habitat protection and management (on a site 
specific basis), threat reduction, and environmental education.
    The Service identified recovery criteria required for the 
reclassification of Isotria medeoloides from endangered to threatened 
in the 1992 recovery plan. Reclassification would be pursued when a 
minimum of 25 percent of the known, viable sites (as of 1992) is 
permanently protected. A site is considered viable if it has a 
geometric mean (over 3 years) of 20 emergent stems, of which at least 
25 percent are flowering stems. Though not discussed in the recovery 
plan, an alternative viability definition has since been developed for 
sites located in the southern part of the range. This definition was 
based upon information provided by botanists familiar with these small, 
yet persistent populations (B. Sanders, U.S. Forest Service, pers. 
comm. 1993). Viability for smaller populations may be considered for 
those sites where less than 20 stems have persistently emerged for over 
15 years. A determination of viability based on a stem count of less 
than 20 stems would require a long-term commitment to monitoring a 
site.
    In addition to site viability and protection, reclassification 
necessitates that the protected, viable sites be distributed 
proportionally throughout the species' current range. Site protection 
should include a sufficient buffer zone around the populations to allow 
the potential for natural colonization of adjacent, unoccupied habitat.
    As defined in the 1992 recovery plan, protection can be 
accomplished through--(1) Ownership by a government agency or a private 
organization that considers maintenance of the I. medeoloides 
population to be a management objective for the site, or (2) a deeded 
easement or covenant that effectively commits present and future 
landowners to protecting the population and allowing the implementation 
of management activities when appropriate. This high level of landowner 
commitment to site protection may be critical if it is determined that 
the species needs management to counteract the loss of nearby 
unoccupied habitat. The need for habitat management would be reviewed 
on a site-by-site basis, and be dependent upon the completion of Task 
2.1 of the 1992 recovery plan, which is to determine appropriate 
management strategies.
    Adequate protection for the purposes of reclassification has been 
achieved for approximately 50 percent of the viable New England center 
populations; 57 percent of viable populations in the Virginia center; 
and 100 percent of the viable populations in the Blue Ridge center. No 
populations in the outlying States are considered to be viable, though 
4 of the 6 extant populations are protected. As a result of meeting the 
reclassification criteria outlined in the 1992 recovery plan, the 
Service published a proposed rule to reclassify Isotria medeoloides 
from endangered to threatened in the Federal Register on October 19, 
1993 (FR 53904).
    The ultimate goal of the 1992 recovery plan is to ensure long-term 
viability of Isotria medeoloides, facilitating the removal of the 
species from the Federal list. This objective would be reached when a 
minimum of 61 sites (75 percent of the number of viable sites known in 
1992) are permanently protected.
    As in the reclassification criteria, the distribution of these 
sites must be proportionate among the three geographic centers and the 
outliers. Viable sites for delisting the species are those sites with 
self-sustaining populations having an average of 20 emergent stems 
(over a 10-year period), of which an average of 25 percent are 
flowering stems. The extended period of monitoring time is required to 
ensure long-term viability, and should factor in the potential for 
naturally induced dormancy of individual plants. An alternative 
definition for viability of smaller populations in the southern portion 
of the small whorled pogonia's range may be considered and 
substantiated through the recovery process for sites where less than 20 
stems, of which an average of 25 percent are flowering, have 
persistently emerged for over 15 years.
    Ideally, unoccupied habitat adjacent to existing colonies must also 
be protected to allow for natural colonization and maintenance of a 
self-sustaining population. In some cases, only the immediate area 
encompassing Isotria medeoloides populations has been protected, while 
surrounding habitat has been destroyed. For these sites, management 
strategies to maintain self-sustaining populations may need to replace 
the historical availability of additional habitat.
    The management strategies would be dependent upon completion of 
Tasks 2.1 and 5.2 of the 1992 recovery plan.

Summary of Comments and Recommendations

    In the October 19, 1993 proposed rule and associated notifications, 
all interested parties were requested to submit factual reports or 
information that might contribute to the development of a final rule. 
Appropriate State agencies, county governments, Federal agencies, 
scientific organizations, and other interested parties were contacted 
and requested to comment. Newspaper notices that invited general public 
comment were published in--The Kennebec Journal (Maine), The Portsmouth 
Daily Times (Ohio), and The New Jersey Herald (New Jersey) on November 
3, 1993; The Richmond Times-Dispatch (Virginia), The State Journal-
Register (Illinois) and The State (South Carolina) on November 4, 1993; 
The Portland Newspaper (Maine) and The Atlanta Journal (Georgia) on 
November 5, 1993; The Herald-Palladium (Michigan) and The Chattanooga 
News-Free Press (Tennessee) on November 8, 1993; The New Journal 
(Delaware) and The Wilmington News-Journal (Delaware) on November 9, 
1993; and The Asheville Citizen-Times (North Carolina) on November 10, 
1993. Eleven letters were received, nine supported the ruling, one was 
in opposition and one did not support or oppose the reclassification of 
I. medeoloides, but did provide comments.
    Comments questioning the soundness of reclassification are 
discussed below.
    An individual suggested that reclassification was premature because 
the Service's definition of viability is based on the population's 
reproductive status as opposed to a stem count and reproductive status. 
However, the Service's definition of a viable population for this 
species includes both stem counts (geometric mean of 20 plants over a 
3-year period) and reproductive status of the population (25 percent of 
the population must have flowering individuals). Therefore, the Service 
believes the definition for viable populations requires both constancy 
of stem emergence and reproduction, and provides for the best possible 
determination given current life history information.
    Another comment questioned the Service's standard of an average of 
20 stems over a 10-year period for a viable population. The individual 
suggested that the majority of extant populations be monitored for 10 
years prior to determining the viability for all populations with 20 
stems or more. The Service assumes that the commenter is referring to 
the delisting criteria. The stated recovery criteria are based on the 
best scientific and professional judgment available and were given 
public review during the revision of the recovery plan in 1992. No 
comments were received at that time opposing the criteria. Furthermore, 
the majority of populations averaging 20 or more stems have been 
monitored periodically for close to 10 years or since their discovery. 
Waiting to reclassify this species until such time as 10 years have 
passed for all sites with 20 stems or more would delay reclassification 
indefinitely, given that new populations continue to be discovered. The 
Service believes that the reclassification criteria are sufficiently 
protective and adequately define viability.
    The commenter also interpreted the Service's recovery strategy to 
include habitat management and questioned its inclusion given the lack 
of information on appropriate and successful management. While it is 
true that habitat management strategies currently have not been 
developed, the Service believes that the potential for habitat 
management may exist. Habitat management will only be an aspect of the 
recovery strategy should it be deemed a useful tool. The proposed rule 
did not mean to imply that this was a given.
    The Service was requested to consider reclassifying the species in 
a section of its range. The Act does not provide for the separate 
listing or reclassification of plant populations.
    Two commenters questioned the protection afforded threatened plants 
under the Act. The Service does not believe that protection will be 
significantly lessened by reclassification to threatened. The 
protection given to this threatened species under sections 7 and 9 of 
the Act is essentially the same as when listed as endangered. The only 
exception to future protection is the exemption given to seeds from 
cultivated specimens of threatened plants. Cultivated Isotria 
medeoloides seeds will be exempt from the trade prohibitions of section 
9(a)(2) of the Act, provided that a statement of ``cultivated origin'' 
appears on their containers. However, retention of threatened status 
reflects the Service's awareness that threats continue to exist for 
Isotria medeoloides, though it is no longer in immediate danger of 
extinction.

Summary of Factors Affecting the Species

    After a thorough review and consideration of all information 
available, the Service has determined that Isotria medeoloides should 
be reclassified as a threatened species. Procedures found in section 
4(a)(1) of the Act and regulations implementing the listing provisions 
of the Act (50 CFR part 424) for reclassifying species on the Federal 
lists were followed. A species may be listed or reclassified as 
threatened or endangered due to one or more of the five factors 
described in section 4(a)(1). These factors and their application to 
Isotria medeoloides (Pursh) Raf. (small whorled pogonia) are as 
follows:
    A. The present or threatened destruction, modification, or 
curtailment of its habitat or range. Following the listing of Isotria 
medeoloides as endangered, recovery activities carried out by Federal 
and State agencies, private organizations, and the academic community 
resulted in the discovery of many new sites. The number of extant sites 
has more than tripled in the 11 years since the orchid was listed, with 
approximately 48 percent of the I. medeoloides sites afforded some 
level of protection.
    Isotria medeoloides and its habitat continue to be vulnerable to 
development pressures throughout its range. With the exception of a few 
States, the upland habitat in which it is found receives limited 
protection through State or Federal regulatory means when occurring on 
private land. Residential and commercial development, both directly and 
indirectly, are primarily responsible for the destruction of Isotria 
medeoloides habitat. Of the 104 extant I. medeoloides sites, 2 States, 
Maine and New Hampshire, account for 57 percent (59 sites) of all of 
the known sites. Only 15 of the 59 sites in these 2 States are 
protected.
    Historical records exist for localities throughout the small 
whorled pogonia's range. The habitat of many of these known historical 
sites has been destroyed; for example, sites in Vermont, Maryland, New 
Jersey, and the District of Columbia were lost to habitat destruction, 
primarily from development. Recent intensive efforts to relocate 
historical sites in eastern Pennsylvania, New York, Vermont, and 
Missouri have been unsuccessful (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1992).
    Since the listing of Isotria medeoloides, New Hampshire has seen 
the destruction of a large, viable population by the construction of 
summer housing and the potential destruction of a second, recently 
discovered (1992) population. This second population of over 30 stems 
will most likely be severely impacted, if not destroyed, within the 
next few years as the habitat is developed for a subdivision. In 
Virginia, one of the larger sites will most likely be destroyed within 
the next few years as its habitat, and adjoining suitable habitat, is 
developed for housing. Without voluntary landowner protection, many 
more I. medeoloides populations could be destroyed as development 
pressures increase.
    Development in areas surrounding Isotria medeoloides habitat could 
indirectly be responsible for habitat destruction as roads, power lines 
and sewer mains are designed to connect settled areas. In addition, 
housing developments, though not necessarily directly destroying 
habitat, may cause the alteration of habitat parameters by creating 
large, permanent openings in the canopy that in turn encourage denser 
understory growth. Disturbance to populations through increased 
visitation (however unintentional) from people and pets might also 
cause direct damage to plants, and eventually a decline in affected 
populations.
    This plant primarily appears to reproduce sexually, though little 
is known at this time regarding seed dispersal and seed banking. The 
formation of barriers to seed dispersal, either through development of 
adjacent habitat or from logging or land clearing, may prevent the 
recolonization of suitable habitat by naturally declining populations. 
Careful and selective logging may not be harmful to a population; 
however, heavy timbering and clear-cutting may have long-term impacts 
on Isotria medeoloides populations and their habitat. The creation of 
logging roads and use of heavy machinery that severely alters soil 
composition could significantly modify the habitat and cause the direct 
loss of plants.
    B. Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or 
educational purposes. The 1982 final listing identified the collecting 
for scientific purposes as contributing to the loss of Isotria 
medeoloides in the past. Since the listing and the release of both 
recovery plans, collecting for these purposes is no longer considered 
to be a threat to the species. However, the potential collecting by 
wildflower garden enthusiasts for transplanting is still great due to 
the rarity of this orchid. One landowner in North Carolina was 
literally harassed by orchid and wildflower enthusiasts when a local 
garden club publicized the location of his I. medeoloides population 
(Nora Murdock, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, in litt. 1993). 
Furthermore, vandalism of populations (either out of capriciousness or 
for private collections) whose locations were publicized continue to be 
documented (Rawinski 1986b).
    Significant commercial trade in the species is not known or 
expected in the future, nor is any significant import or export of this 
species expected. Therefore, taking of I. medeoloides for these 
purposes is not considered to be a factor in its decline.
    C. Disease or predation. Herbivory by white-tailed deer and 
invertebrates, including slugs and camel crickets is a known threat of 
currently unknown extent. Increasing development pressure near Isotria 
medeoloides populations results in the concentration of deer onto 
smaller parcels of woodland and may decrease local hunting pressure on 
suburban deer populations. As the local deer herd increases and is 
forced onto less land, there is a greater likelihood of herbivory on 
Isotria medeoloides. In Virginia, the magnitude of threat from deer 
browse of I. medeoloides populations may be second only to development 
of its habitat (D. Ware, College of William and Mary, pers. comm. 
1994). The precipitous decline of a large Virginia I. medeoloides 
population located near a housing development, appears to be primarily 
due to grazing (Ware 1991). However, symbolic fencing placed around 
four subpopulations appears to have prevented deer from grazing on the 
orchids. In 1993, no plants were observed to have been browsed, prior 
to the fencing a majority of the plants were impacted by deer browse 
(D. Ware, pers. comm. 1994).
    Additional threats include wild pigs trampling or uprooting I. 
medeoloides plants and herbivory by rabbits in the southern portion of 
the small whorled pogonia's range (B. Sanders, pers. comm. 1993) and 
occasionally trampling or herbivory by moose in the northern portion of 
its range.
    D. The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms. Isotria 
medeoloides is afforded protection by the Endangered Species Act. The 
Act prohibits the take of endangered and threatened plants from lands 
under Federal jurisdiction or in knowing violation of any State law or 
regulation, and prohibits the violation of any regulation pertaining to 
any endangered or threatened species of plant. Under the Act, Federal 
agencies are required to ensure that their actions do not jeopardize 
the continued existence of listed species and must consult (under 
section 7) when an activity may affect a listed species or critical 
habitat.
    Section 7(a)(1) requires Federal agencies to carry out programs for 
the conservation of threatened and endangered species. In this respect, 
several Federal agencies have intensified their search and protection 
efforts on behalf of Isotria medeoloides. In Virginia, the National 
Park Service provided funding for research and monitoring, and is 
seeking ways to prevent disturbance to sites under its jurisdiction. 
The Department of Defense has also facilitated searches and monitoring 
of populations at two bases in Virginia. In Georgia, the U.S. Forest 
Service has been particularly successful in finding new sites. The 
Forest Service in this State conducts plant surveys in areas 
potentially impacted by management activities and regularly monitors 
known sites (B. Sanders, in litt. 1993). In 1993, two sites were 
located on the White Mountain National Forest in New Hampshire. Base 
maps for potential I. medeoloides habitat were developed for the White 
Mountain National Forest; the Forest Service now consults the Service 
on all activities proposed for those areas.
    Consultations under section 7 of the Act can provide protection for 
this species; a road and sewer main near an Isotria medeoloides 
population in Virginia were re-routed to avoid direct destruction of 
the plants and their habitat. Coordination with State and local 
agencies, as well as private developers, has resulted in the avoidance 
of adverse impacts to Isotria medeoloides and its habitat. In 
Connecticut, a trail was re-routed to avoid a population in a State 
forest.
    Additional protection through Federal and State legislation has 
been provided since Isotria medeoloides was listed. All States with 
current and historical populations have cooperative plant agreements 
with the Fish and Wildlife Service as specified under section 6(c)(2) 
of the Act. The 1988 amendments to the Act increased protection for 
plant species not on Federal lands, where State endangered species laws 
provide specific protection to endangered plant species.
    Twenty-seven sites have been discovered on lands under State and 
Federal jurisdiction and are afforded some level of protection. For 
those populations on private lands, conservation easements or 
agreements with the landowners have been actively pursued. Eight sites 
are on lands owned by private conservation organizations, while two 
other sites have deeded conservation easements ensuring the protection 
of the plants and their habitat. Some State agencies pursue voluntary 
registration of I. medeoloides sites. While such registration does not 
guarantee habitat protection, it does seek to recognize the importance 
of the site in the hopes of voluntary protection on the part of the 
landowners.
    The number of States protecting I. medeoloides has increased from 6 
in 1985 to include all States in its present range. With the exceptions 
of New Jersey, Rhode Island and South Carolina, all States have enacted 
laws that prohibit the take of State listed plants, including I. 
medeoloides, without the landowner's permission. However, plants 
growing on privately owned lands are subject to take by the landowner. 
Massachusetts, Michigan and Vermont provide additional protection to 
listed plants in that permits are required for take on both private and 
public lands.
    In Georgia, Isotria medeoloides is protected under a regional 
Forest Service Manual regulation, 2670.44 R-8 supp 37. Since this 
species is federally listed, it qualifies as a Forest Service Potential 
Endangered, Threatened or Sensitive (PET) species, and as such should 
receive a level of protection that will lead to identification of 
possible recovery opportunities and ensure that no adverse effects 
occur to plants on lands under the Forest Service's jurisdiction.
    The Service does not believe that reclassification to threatened 
status will result in substantive changes in the protection afforded 
this species under these regulatory mechanisms.
    E. Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued 
existence. Recovery efforts have been directed toward research and 
environmental education. A predictive habitat model was developed using 
Geographical Information System (GIS); 10 additional sites were 
discovered in 1993 using maps delineating potential habitat (Sperduto 
1993). Educational materials in the form of posters, brochures and fact 
sheets were designed and made available to the general public. Ongoing 
research includes the investigation of mycorrhizal relationships (Larry 
Zetler, Clemson University, in litt. 1993), and habitat manipulation to 
encourage or stabilize I. medeoloides populations (Alison Dibble, 
University of Maine, in litt. 1993).
    Mycorrhizal associations are important factors in the germination 
and seedling establishment of most orchids. Though a mycorrhizal fungus 
was isolated from the closely related Isotria verticillata, host-
specific mycorrhizae have not been identified for I. medeoloides. 
Alterations to I. medeoloides habitat that adversely affect the 
mycorrhizae would also result in adverse impacts to the orchid. 
However, until the specific mycorrhizal associate is determined, it 
will be difficult to understand the effects of subtle habitat 
alteration on the orchid or the fungal community.
    Recent monitoring results indicate a decline in viability of many 
of the populations that have been followed over a number of years. It 
appears that no obvious changes have occurred to the habitat of most of 
these populations and no causes for this decline have been determined. 
Though life history and demographic studies have provided some clues to 
the habitat requirements of this species, there is still a large gap in 
the understanding of what is required to maintain viable populations.
    Dormancy of Isotria medeoloides plants continues to be a matter of 
speculation and debate. The 1985 recovery plan provided preliminary 
information that a small whorled pogonia could go dormant for 10 to 20 
years. To date, this length of dormancy has not been verified. The 
length of dormancy might also vary throughout the range of the orchid. 
Mehrhoff (1989b) conducted a 6-year study and observed that no plants 
emerged after 3 or more consecutive years; other studies indicate that 
plants may be dormant up to 4 years and dormancy may vary by year and 
by site (Brumback and Fyler 1988; Vitt 1991). Without better 
clarification of specific dormancy periods, it is difficult to 
distinguish between a dead or dormant plant.
    As adjacent, suitable habitat is developed, precluding the natural 
colonization of suitable habitat, management may be the only 
alternative for maintaining viable populations. It may be vital to 
develop habitat management strategies for existing sites in order to 
maintain self-sustaining populations. Without the knowledge of key 
habitat characteristics, management and the precise identification of 
potential habitat will be impossible. Soil type (including texture and 
moisture), nutrient availability, overstory cover, understory density, 
slope position and aspect are some of the habitat characteristics that 
might be important factors in population viability. Other unknown 
parameters include the variation of climatological factors and relative 
humidity throughout the species' range, and how these differences 
impact population stability, plant reproduction, recolonization and 
viability.
    The dearth in knowledge of habitat characteristics and life history 
information may result in the further decline of many populations 
through benign neglect. The 1992 recovery plan identified a number of 
tasks required to advance the understanding of Isotria medeoloides in 
furtherance of its recovery.
    The Service has carefully assessed the best scientific and 
commercial information available regarding the past, present, and 
future threats faced by this species in determining to make this rule 
final. Based on this evaluation, the preferred action is to reclassify 
this species from endangered status to threatened status. Threatened 
status is more appropriate because the number of known populations has 
tripled since the species was listed and 61 percent of the current 
viable sites are afforded permanent protection. However, it may still 
be likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future 
without additional site protection and further investigation of its 
life history and habitat parameters.

Effects of the Rule

    This rule changes the status of Isotria medeoloides from endangered 
to threatened and formally recognizes that this species is no longer in 
imminent danger of extinction throughout a significant portion of its 
range. Reclassification to threatened does not significantly alter the 
protection for this species under the Act (see Summary of Comments and 
Recommendations).
    Conservation measures prescribed for Isotria medeoloides would 
proceed. The recovery program approved in 1992 prescribes continued 
efforts to--(1) protect known Isotria medeoloides populations and 
essential habitat; (2) develop habitat management strategies; (3) 
manage protected sites; (4) monitor sites and determine viability; (5) 
survey for new sites; (6) investigate population dynamics and species 
biology; and (7) provide public information and education.
    Many State and Federal agencies continue to monitor extant sites 
and search for new ones. The application of a predictive model should 
further assist in the location of new sites in New England. 
Investigations into the genetic structure of this species, the 
mycorrhizal relationships, and the development of habitat management 
measures have been targeted in the 1992 recovery plan as important 
tasks. These activities are either ongoing or proposed for the near 
future. Recovery activities are not expected to diminish as a result of 
this reclassification since the primary objective of the recovery 
strategy is delisting of the species.
    This action will not be an irreversible commitment on the part of 
the Service. Reclassifying Isotria medeoloides to endangered would be 
possible should changes occur in management, habitat, or other factors 
that alter the present threats to the species' survival and recovery.

National Environmental Policy Act

    The Fish and Wildlife Service has determined that Environmental 
Assessments and Environmental Impact Statements, as defined under the 
authority of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, need not be 
prepared in connection with regulations adopted pursuant to section 
4(a) of the 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).

References Cited

Brumback, W.E., and C.W. Fyler. 1988. Monitoring of Isotria 
medeoloides in New Hampshire--1988. Wildflower notes 3 (1):32-40. 
New England Wild Flower Society. Framingham, MA.
Dixon P., and R. Cook. 1988. Attempts to relocate Isotria 
medeoloides in New York State. Unpublished report. Cornell 
Plantations, Ithaca, NY. 3 pp.
Mehrhoff, L.A. 1980. The reproductive biology of the genus Isotria 
(Orchidaceae) and the ecology of Isotria medeoloides. M.S. Thesis, 
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, N.C. pp. 17-23.
Mehrhoff, L.A. 1989a. Reproductive vigor and environmental factors 
in populations of an endangered North American orchid, Isotria 
medeoloides (Pursh) Rafinesque. Biological Conservation 47: 281-296.
Mehrhoff, L.A. 1989b. The dynamics of declining populations of an 
endangered orchid, Isotria medeoloides. Ecology 70 (3): 783-786.
Rawinski, T. 1986a. Element stewardship abstract for Isotria 
medeoloides (Pursh) Raf. Unpublished report. Eastern Heritage Task 
Force, The Nature Conservancy, Boston, MA. 16 pp.
Rawinski, T. 1986b. Vandalism of the small whorled pogonia. 
Endangered Species Technical Bulletin. U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service. Vol. XI(12): 6.
Sperduto, M. 1993. Use of a geographic information system (GIS) to 
predict potential habitat for Isotria medeoloides (Pursh)Raf. in New 
Hampshire and Maine. M.S. Thesis, University of New Hampshire, 
Durham, New Hampshire. 106 pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1982. Endangered and threatened 
wildlife and plants; Determination of Isotria medeoloides (small 
whorled pogonia) to be an endangered species. Federal Register vol. 
47(176): 39827-39831.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1985. Small whorled pogonia recovery 
plan. Newton Corner, MA. 38 pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1992. Small whorled pogonia (Isotria 
medeoloides) recovery plan, first revision. Newton Corner, MA. 75 
pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1993. Endangered and threatened 
wildlife and plants; Proposed rule to reclassify the Plant Isotria 
medeoloides (small whorled pogonia) from endangered to threatened. 
Federal Register vol. 58(200): 53904-53909.
Vitt, P. 1991. Conservation of Isotria medeoloides: A federally 
endangered terrestrial orchid. M.S. Thesis, University of Maine, 
Orono, ME. 40 pp.
Ware, D.M.E. 1991. Small Whorled Pogonia (pp. 95-97). In: Karen 
Terwilliger, coord. Virginia's Endangered Species. Nongame and 
Endangered Species Program, Virginia Department of Game and Inland 
Fisheries. The McDonald and Woodward Publishing Company, Blacksburg, 
VA. 672 pp.

Author

    The primary author of this proposed rule is Susanna von Oettingen 
(see ADDRESSES section).

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

    Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, and Transportation.

Regulation Promulgation

    Accordingly, part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the 
Code of Federal Regulations, is amended as set forth below.

PART 17--[AMENDED]

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

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; 16 U.S.C. 
4201-4245; Pub. L. 99-625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted.

    2. Section 17.12(h) is amended by revising the ``Status'' column in 
the existing entry for ``Isotria medeoloides (Small whorled pogonia)'' 
under ``Orchidaceae'' on the List of Endangered and Threatened Plants 
to read ``T'' instead of ``E'' and the ``When Listed'' column to read 
``122, 556''.

    Dated: September 9, 1994.
Mollie H. Beattie,
Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 94-24713 Filed 10-5-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P