[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 99 (Thursday, May 22, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 27973-27978]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-13412]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
RIN 1018-AC74
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of
Threatened Status for Helianthus eggertii (Eggert's Sunflower)
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) determines
threatened status for Helianthus eggertii (Eggert's sunflower) under
the authority of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act).
This rare plant is presently known from an estimated 34 populations in
14 counties--in Alabama, one population in Blount County; in Kentucky,
one population from Grayson and Hardin counties, two populations from
Edmonson and Barren counties, and seven populations from Hart County;
in Tennessee, one population each in Dickson, Marion, and Williamson
counties, two (and a portion of a third) in Maury County, three in
Lewis County, four in Lawrence County, and six in Coffee County. It is
threatened throughout its range by habitat alteration; residential,
commercial, or industrial development; plant succession; and conversion
of its limited habitat to pasture or croplands. Herbicide use,
particularly along roadsides, also poses a threat. This action extends
Federal protection under the Act to Eggert's sunflower.
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 23, 1997.
ADDRESSES: The complete file for this rule is available for public
inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the
Asheville Field Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 160 Zillicoa
Street, Asheville, North Carolina 28801.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. J. Allen Ratzlaff at the above
address (704/258-3939, Ext. 229).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Helianthus eggertii (Small) (Eggert's sunflower) is a perennial
member of the aster family (Asteraceae) known only from Kentucky,
Tennessee, and Alabama. It is a tall (to 2.5 meters [8 feet]) plant
arising from a short, thick base, perennating by shallow elongate,
fleshy rhizomes that can form an extensive network. The plant is
smooth, except for some slight roughening on the upper leaf surfaces,
and it has a blue-waxy coloration. The lower leaves are conspicuously
whitened. The plant's opposite (rarely whorled) leaves are mostly
lanceolate to narrowly ovate, the largest being 10 to 20 centimeters
(3.9 to 5.7 inches) in length. Leaf edges are smooth or minutely
toothed, and the tip is usually pointed. Large yellow flowers (8
centimeters [3 inches]) are borne on the upper third of the stem.
Cypsalas (seeds) are blackish or grayish and mottled, 5 to 6
millimeters (0.25 inches) long, faintly striated, and with a few
scattered trichomes (hairs). Flowering begins in early August and
continues through mid-September, and achenes mature from early
September to early October (Jones 1991). Jones (1991) observed fruit
set at between 5 and 25 seeds per flower head. Seed germination rates
are generally low (rarely exceeding 25 percent) and most require
exposure to cold to break dormancy (Heiser et al. 1969).
Eggert's sunflower develops an extensive rhizome system, and these
rhizomes can live for many years. Thus, the plant does not have to
produce seeds every year to ensure its survival. If environmental
conditions change
[[Page 27974]]
(e.g., increased competition, shading, etc.); it can survive for
several years by vegetative means, as Jones (1991) noted was the case
in several populations.
Small (1903) designated the type locality of Eggert's sunflower as
near White Bluff in Dickson County, Tennessee, from specimens collected
by H. Eggert. Beatley (1963) considered this plant a distinct species
and that it was ``conspicuous because of the colonial habit and
glaucescense.'' In a comprehensive essay on Helianthus, Heiser et al.
(1969) retained H. eggertii as a distinct species and placed it in the
series Divaricati, being distinguished by its nearly sessile, glaucous,
and glabrous leaves. This work pointed out that H. eggertii is a
hexaploid (n=51) and could have arisen from a cross between H.
laevigatus (n=34), a shale barren species of the Allegheny Mountains,
and H. decapetalus (n=17), a widespread species of the eastern United
States.
Spring and Schilling (1991) found H. eggertii to have a unique
chemical profile. Of the related sunflowers, it is most similar to H.
laevigatus, which shares 9 of 12 chemical compounds. Smith (1957)
considered H. eggertii to be a local minor variant of H. strumosus, but
this species is dissimilar biochemically although the two species
appear to readily hybridize.
Helianthus eggertii typically occurs on rolling to flat uplands and
in full sun or partial shade. It is often found in open fields or in
thickets along woodland borders and with other tall herbs and small
trees. The distribution of this species shows a strong correlation with
the barrens (and similar habitats) of the Interior Low Plateau
Physiographic Province, with a few records from the Cumberland Plateau
Section of the Appalachian Plateau Physiographic Province. The
following is a description of the species' status within each State
where it occurs. The term ``population'' is used loosely in these
descriptions because it is not known how distant individual plants must
be from one another to prevent cross-pollination. Populations described
below are groups of ``occurrences'' in general proximity to each other
and may or may not correspond to true biological populations.
Alabama
The only known location for Eggert's sunflower in Alabama (Blount
County) was discovered in 1981 by Robert Kral (Jones 1991). This site,
although presently vigorous, could be affected by local development and
Interstate 65 maintenance and improvements.
Tennessee
The following information on Eggert's sunflower in Tennessee is
primarily from Jones (1991) and the Tennessee Natural Heritage Program
database.
Prior to the status survey conducted by Jones (1991), there were 12
counties in Tennessee with records (a total of 13) of H. eggertii. Four
sites were found to have been extirpated (one each in Coffee, Davidson,
Lawrence, and Williamson counties) and four were found to be erroneous
records (one each in Dekalb, Grundy, Clay, and Morgan counties).
Additional occurrences were discovered during the status survey and
later by the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation
(TDEC) (1993, in litt.) and the U.S. Air Force, Arnold Engineering
Development Center (AEDC). Several sites in Coffee, Franklin, Lawrence,
and Lewis counties are probably single populations and are treated as
such in this document, including the occurrences on AEDC in Coffee and
Franklin counties. The 20 known populations in Tennessee are
distributed as follows: Coffee County--six populations; Lawrence
County--four populations; Franklin County--two populations plus a
portion of the occurrences on AEDC; Lewis County--three populations;
Maury County--two populations; and one population each in Dickson,
Marion, and Williamson counties. Most of these populations (about 50
percent) are small, having fewer than 20 individual plants. The other
populations contain several hundred stems. Most of the Tennessee
populations are threatened either by roadside maintenance, weedy
invaders, fire suppression, or development. The largest known
population is found on Federal lands (AEDC), three occur entirely or
partially on State lands, and the remainder are found in roadside
rights-of-way or on private lands.
Kentucky
The following information on Eggert's sunflower in Kentucky is
primarily derived from Jones (1991) and the Kentucky State Nature
Preserves Commission (KSNPC) (1996, in litt.).
Populations of Eggert's sunflower in Kentucky are known from the
Mammoth Cave Plateau subsection and Eastern Highlands Rim subsection of
the Interior Low Plateau Physiographic Provinces. Prior to the status
survey conducted by Jones (1991), there were three counties in Kentucky
with single records of occurrence for H. eggertii. One site, in
Edmonson County, has been extirpated, and the other two records have
proven to be erroneous (one each in Lincoln and Jackson counties).
However, seven new populations were discovered during the status
survey, and additional sites were later discovered by R. Seymour in the
Mammoth Cave area (D. White, KSNPC, 1996, in litt.). The 13 known sites
in Kentucky are distributed as follows--one population from Grayson and
Hardin counties, two populations from Edmonson and Barren counties, and
seven populations from Hart County. Most of these populations have
fewer than 15 individual plants, with four having only five or fewer
plants. Only two populations occur on barrens, and half of these are
threatened by weedy competitors and/or road maintenance. Five of the
thirteen Kentucky populations are found entirely or partially on
Federal lands (Mammoth Cave National Park), two on The Nature
Conservancy's (TNC) land and the remainder are found along roadside
rights-of-way or on private lands.
Previous Federal Action
Federal government actions on this species began with section 12 of
the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). It directed the Secretary of the
Smithsonian Institution (Smithsonian) to prepare a report on those
plants considered to be endangered, threatened, or extinct. This
report, designated as House Document No. 94-51, was presented to
Congress on January 9, 1975. On July 1, 1975, the Service published a
notice (40 FR 27823) that formally accepted the Smithsonian report as a
petition within the context of section 4(c)(2) (now section 4(b)(3)) of
the Act. By accepting this report as a petition, the Service also
acknowledged its intention to review the status of those plant taxa
named within the report. Helianthus eggertii was included in the
Smithsonian report and also in the July 1, 1975, Notice of Review. On
June 16, 1976, the Service published a proposed rule (41 FR 24523) that
determined approximately 1,700 vascular plant taxa, including H.
eggertii, to be endangered pursuant to section 4 of the Act.
The 1978 amendments to the Act require that all proposals that are
not finalized within two years be withdrawn. On December 10, 1979 (44
FR 70796), the Service published a notice withdrawing all plant species
proposed in the June 16, 1976 rule. The revised Notice of Review for
Native Plants published on December 15, 1980 (45 FR 82480), now
included H. eggertii as a category 2 species. It was subsequently
retained as a category 2 species when the Notice of Review for Native
Plants was revised in 1983 (48 FR 53640), in 1985 (50 FR 39526), and
again in 1990 (50 FR 61184). In 1990, category 2 species were those
taxa for
[[Page 27975]]
which the Service had information indicating that proposing to list
them as endangered or threatened might be appropriate; or for which
substantial data on biological vulnerability and threats were not known
at this time or were not on file to support the listing. This was the
case with H. eggertii; the Service believed that additional surveys of
potential habitat and further identification of threats were needed
before a decision could be made on whether to propose listing the
species. In 1989, the Service funded a survey to determine the status
of H. eggertii in Alabama, Kentucky, and Tennessee; a final report on
these surveys (Jones 1991) was accepted by the Service in 1991.
All plant taxa included in the comprehensive plant notices are
treated as if under a petition. Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act, as
amended in 1982, requires the Secretary to make certain findings on
pending petitions within 12 months of their receipt. Section 2(b)(1) of
the 1982 amendments further requires that all petitions pending as of
October 13, 1982, be treated as having been newly submitted on that
date. This was the case for H. eggertii because of the acceptance of
the 1975 Smithsonian report as a petition. In 1983, the Service found
that the petition calling for the listing of H. eggertii was not
warranted because of insufficient data on its distribution,
vulnerability, and degrees of threat. Information contained in the
above-mentioned status survey completed these informational gaps and
was sufficient and conclusive to warrant preparation of a proposed rule
to list the species. Helianthus eggertii was accepted as a category 1
species on August 30, 1993, and was included in this category in the
revised Notice of Review for Native Plants published on September 30,
1993 (50 FR 51144). On September 9, 1994 (59 FR 46607), the Service
published a proposed rule to list Eggert's sunflower as threatened
under the Act.
The processing of this final rule conforms with the Service's final
listing priority guidance published in the Federal Register on December
5, 1996 (61 FR 64475). The guidance clarifies the order in which the
Service will process rulemakings during fiscal year 1997. The guidance
calls for giving highest priority to handling emergency situations
(Tier 1) and second highest priority (Tier 2) to resolving the listing
status of the outstanding proposed listings. This rule falls under Tier
2. Presently, there are no pending Tier 1 actions in Region 4.
Summary of Comments and Recommendations
In the September 9, 1994, proposed rule (59 FR 46607) to list
Eggert's sunflower as threatened and through other associated
notifications, all interested parties were requested to submit factual
reports and information that might contribute to the development of a
final rule for this sunflower. Appropriate Federal and State agencies,
county governments, scientific organizations, and interested parties
were contacted by letter dated September 29, 1994. Legal notices were
published in the Hart County News Herald, Democrat-Union
(Lawrenceburg), and Daily Herald (Columbia) on September 27, 1994; in
the Blount Countian, State Journal (Frankfort), Chattanooga Times, and
Dickson Herald on September 28, 1994; in the Edmonson News, Herald
Chronicle (Hart County), Daily News (Bowling Green), and Lewis County
Herald on September 29, 1994, and in the Manchester Times on October 5,
1994.
Six individuals provided written responses on the proposed rule to
list Eggert's sunflower. Four of the individuals who responded
supported the listing, one requested information but did not support or
oppose the listing, and one provided additional information but neither
supported nor opposed the listing. All of these comments were
incorporated into the final rulemaking.
The comment period on the proposed rule (59 FR 46607) was reopened
on August 30, 1996 (61 FR 45931). Through associated notifications,
interested parties were requested to submit factual reports and
information that might contribute to the development of a final rule
for this sunflower. One hundred and thirty-eight Federal and State
agencies, county governments, scientific organizations, and interested
parties were contacted by letter dated September 6, 1996. Legal notices
were published in the Herald Chronicle on September 2, 1996; in the
Hart County News Herald and Nashville Banner on September 3, 1996; in
the Blount Countian, Daily Herald (Columbia, TN) Chattanooga Times, and
Dickson Herald on September 4, 1996; in the Edmonson News and Lewis
County Herald on September 5, 1996; in the Frankfort State Journal on
September 6, 1996; and in the Manchester Times on September 11, 1996.
Eight written responses were received during the reopening of the
comment period on the proposed rule to list Eggert's sunflower. One
individual supported the listing and provided additional information;
two State agencies supported the listing and provided additional
information (KSNPC and TDEC); two private conservation organizations
supported the listing and provided additional information (the Kentucky
and Tennessee Chapters of TNC); one Federal agency supported the
listing and provided additional information (AEDC); one Federal agency
supported the listing but provided no additional information (U.S.
Natural Resources Conservation Service, Tennessee); and one Federal
agency (U.S. Forest Service) neither supported nor opposed the listing,
but did provide additional information. These comments were also
incorporated into the final rule.
The Service also solicited the expert opinions of three independent
specialists regarding pertinent scientific and commercial data and
assumptions relating to taxonomy and biological and ecological
information for this species. The Service received one response from
the specialists and these comments are incorporated into this final
rule.
Summary of Factors Affecting the Species
After a thorough review and consideration of all available
information, the Service has determined that Eggert's sunflower should
be classified as a threatened species. Section 4(a)(1) of the Act and
regulations (50 CFR part 424) promulgated to implement the listing
provisions of the Act were followed. A species may be determined to be
an endangered or threatened species due to one or more of the five
factors described in Section 4(a)(1). These factors and their
application to H. eggertii (Eggert's sunflower) are as follows:
A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment
of its Habitat or Range
Most of the known populations of H. eggertii are threatened with
destruction or adverse modification of their habitat. Over 50 percent
of the known H. eggertii sites are threatened by the encroachment of
more competitive herbaceous vegetation and/or woody plants that produce
shade and compete with this species for limited water and nutrients.
Active management is required to ensure that Eggert's sunflower
continues to survive at all sites.
Since most of the sites where this species survives are artificial
(not true barrens) or manmade habitats, such as rights-of-way or
similar habitats that mimic barrens; direct destruction of this
[[Page 27976]]
habitat for commercial, residential, or industrial development or
intensive rights-of-way maintenance (e.g., herbicide use) is a
significant threat to most of the known populations.
Barrens habitat, which is preferred by Eggert's sunflower, is
disappearing from the south-central United States at a rapid rate. Most
of this type of habitat has been converted to croplands, pasture, or
has been developed as residential or industrial sites. DeSelm (1989),
in a study on Tennessee barrens, reported that all of his study sites
were in the later stages of succession, with the prevention of fires
being the major contributing factor.
As its natural habitat disappears, Eggert's sunflower is now found
in habitats that replicate the species' ecological requirements. These
sites, having the accompanying assortment of weedy vegetation
associated with disturbed areas, typically are disturbed habitats, such
as roadside rights-of-way, ditches, road cuts, or mounds of soil.
Colonization most likely occurs soon after a disturbance to the
habitat. Eggert's sunflower can initially compete with other
vegetation. However, as successional stages progress, this species is
consequently reduced to vegetative growth from rhizomes and is
eventually eliminated. Periodic burning, mowing, or thinning of
vegetation on these sites favors the species by lessening competition.
This sunflower is persisting at several sites due to the current mowing
regime.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
At this time, there is little, if any, commercial trade in H.
eggertii. Most populations are very small and cannot support the
collection of plants for scientific and/or other purposes.
Inappropriate collecting for scientific purposes or as novelties pose a
threat to the species.
C. Disease or Predation
Disease and predation are presently not factors affecting the
continued existence of the species. However, in several populations,
larval insects were found to have destroyed nearly all the mature seeds
in several flower heads (Jones 1991; personal observations, Ratzlaff
1992).
D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
Helianthus eggertii is a Species of Special Concern in Tennessee,
and it does not receive any formal protection since it is not listed as
endangered under the State's Rare Plant Protection and Conservation
Act. In Alabama, the species does not receive any State protection, and
in Kentucky, it is listed as endangered by the Kentucky Academy of
Science and KSNPC (Branson et al. 1981, Warren et al. 1986). However,
these lists have no legal standing in the State.
The Act will afford additional protection to populations that occur
on Federal lands and will protect other populations when the taking is
in violation of any State law, including State criminal trespass laws.
Protection from inappropriate interstate commercial trade will also be
provided for under the Act.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting its Continued Existence
An additional factor that threatens the survival of H. eggertii is
extended drought. Dry conditions cause higher than normal mortality of
seedlings in the natural populations. If drought continues over an
extended period of time, it could have an adverse effect on the
survival of the species, itself. Additionally, dwindling numbers in the
populations of this species could increase the potential for inbreeding
depression and other reproductive-related problems.
In determining to make this rule final, the Service has carefully
assessed the best scientific and commercial information available
regarding the past, present, and future threats faced by this species.
Based on this evaluation, the preferred action is to list Eggert's
sunflower as threatened. This sunflower is presently known from 34
populations in 14 counties--in Alabama, one population in Blount
County; in Kentucky, one population from Grayson and Hardin counties,
two populations from Edmonson and Barren counties, and seven
populations from Hart County; in Tennessee, one population each in
Dickson, Marion, and Williamson counties, two in Maury County, two in
Franklin County and two ``occurrences'' are included as a portion of
the AEDC population in Coffee County, three in Lewis County, four in
Lawrence County, and six in Coffee County. The species is threatened
throughout its range by habitat alteration; residential, commercial,
and industrial development; plant succession; and the conversion of its
limited habitat to pasture or croplands. Additionally, herbicide use,
particularly along roadsides, also poses a threat. See the ``Critical
Habitat'' section for a discussion of why critical habitat is not being
proposed for this plant.
Critical Habitat
Section 4(a)(3) of the Act and implementing regulations (50 CFR
424.12) require that, to the maximum extent prudent and determinable,
the Secretary designate critical habitat at the time the species is
determined to be endangered or threatened. The Service finds that
designation of critical habitat is not prudent at this time for H.
eggertii. Service regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)) state that
designation of critical habitat is not prudent when one or both of the
following situations exist--(1) The species is threatened by taking or
other human activity, and identification of critical habitat can be
expected to increase the degree of threat to the species, or (2) the
designation of critical habitat would not be beneficial to the species.
Section 7(a)(2) and regulations codified at 50 CFR part 402 require
Federal agencies, in consultation and with the assistance of the
Service, to ensure that those activities they authorize, fund, or carry
out are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed
species or destroy or adversely modify its critical habitat, if any is
designated. Section 7(a)(4) requires Federal agencies to confer
informally with the Service on any action that is likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of a proposed species or result in the
destruction or adverse modification of its proposed critical habitat
(see ``Available Conservation Measures'' section for a further
discussion of section 7). As part of the development of this rule,
Federal and State agencies were notified of the plant's general
distribution, and they were requested to provide any and all data on
proposed Federal actions that might adversely affect the species. No
specific projects were identified during the initial comment period.
However, during the listing moratorium, the Arnold Engineering
Development Center of the U.S. Air Force (AEDC) entered into section 7
consultation with the Service (Cookeville Field Office) concerning the
proposed training of the National Guard on a base where H. eggertii
occurs. The Air Force has since requested a formal conference. The
Service has been working closely with the AEDC on a conservation plan
that benefits the species and allows the Air Force to carry out its
mission. No additional projects were identified during the second
comment period. Should any future projects be proposed in areas
inhabited by this plant, the involved Federal agency will be given the
general distributional data necessary to determine if the species would
be
[[Page 27977]]
impacted by their action. If needed, more specific distributional
information will be provided.
Most populations of this species are small, and even the loss of a
few plants to such activities as scientific collecting, could extirpate
this sunflower from several locations. Therefore, publication of
critical habitat descriptions and maps would increase the vulnerability
of the species to vandalism without significantly increasing
protection. The private landowners and local, State and Federal
managers on whose property that all the known populations of H.
eggertii occur, will be made aware of the location of existing plants
and the importance of protecting them and their habitat. No additional
benefits would result from the designation of critical habitat.
Therefore, the Service concludes that it is not prudent at this time to
designate critical habitat for the species. Existing precise locality
data will be made available to appropriate Federal, State, and local
government agencies from the Service office described in the ADDRESSES
section or from the Service's Cookeville Field Office, 446 Neal Street,
Cookeville, Tennessee 38501.
Available Conservation Measures
Conservation measures provided to species listed as endangered or
threatened under the Act include recognition, recovery actions,
requirements for Federal protection, and prohibitions against certain
activities. Recognition through listing results in public awareness and
conservation actions to be taken by Federal, State, and local agencies,
private organizations, and individuals. The Act provides for possible
land acquisition and cooperation with the States and requires that
recovery actions be carried out for all listed species. The protection
required of Federal agencies and the prohibitions against certain
activities involving listed plants are discussed, in part, below.
Section 7(a) of the Act requires Federal agencies to evaluate their
actions with respect to any species that is being proposed or is
already listed as endangered or threatened and with respect to critical
habitat, if any is being designated. Regulations implementing this
interagency cooperation provision of the Act are codified at 50 CFR
part 402. Section 7(a)(2) requires Federal agencies to ensure that
activities they authorize, fund, or carry out are not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of such a species or to destroy or
adversely modify its critical habitat. If a Federal action adversely
affects a listed species or its critical habitat, the responsible
Federal agency must enter into consultation with the Service. Most H.
eggertii populations are found on privately-owned or State-owned lands.
However, one entire population and portions of four others are found in
Mammoth Cave National Park (U.S. Park Service) and one population (that
includes 62 ``occurrences'') of H. eggertii is on AEDC lands.
The Act and its implementing regulations set forth a series of
general prohibitions and exceptions that apply to all threatened
plants. All prohibitions of section 9(a)(2) of the Act, implemented by
50 CFR 17.67, apply. These prohibitions, in part, make it illegal for
any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to import
or export, transport in interstate or foreign commerce in the course of
a commercial activity, sell or offer for sale in interstate or foreign
commerce, or remove and reduce the species to possession from areas
under Federal jurisdiction. In addition, for plants listed as
endangered, the Act prohibits the malicious damage or destruction on
areas under Federal jurisdiction and the removal, cutting, digging up,
damaging or destroying of such plants in knowing violation of any State
law or regulation, including State criminal trespass law. Section 4(d)
of the Act allows for the provision of such protection to threatened
species through regulation. This protection will apply to this species
in the future if such regulations are promulgated. Seeds from
cultivated specimens of threatened plants are exempt from these
prohibitions provided, when commercially shipped, the containers are
marked ``Of Cultivated Origin.'' Certain exceptions to the prohibitions
apply to agents of the Service and State conservation agencies.
The Act and 50 CFR 17.72 also provide for the issuance of permits
to carry out otherwise prohibited activities involving threatened
plants under certain circumstances. Such permits are available for
scientific purposes and to enhance the propagation and/or the survival
of the species. For threatened plants, permits are also available for
botanical or horticultural exhibition, educational purposes, and/or
special purposes consistent with the purposes of the Act. It is
anticipated that few commercial permits would ever be sought or issued
since the species is not in cultivation and is not common in the wild.
It is the policy of the Service (59 FR 34272) to identify, to the
maximum extent practicable at the time a species is listed, those
activities that would or would not constitute a violation of section 9
of the Act. The intent of this policy is to increase public awareness
of the effect of the listing on proposed and ongoing activities within
the species' range. Of the 34 remaining populations of Eggert's
sunflower, six populations are found entirely or partially on Federal
lands. Collection, damage, or destruction of this species on public
lands is prohibited, although in appropriate cases a Federal endangered
species permit may be issued to allow collection. Removal, cutting,
digging up, or damaging or destroying endangered plants on non-Federal
lands constitutes a violation of section 9 only if conducted in knowing
violation of any State law or regulation, including State criminal
trespass law. This would not affect any activities in Alabama, or
Kentucky, as neither Alabama nor Kentucky State laws provide any
protection for plants. In Tennessee, Helianthus eggertii is protected
under the Rare Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1985, which
controls the removal of plants from State properties for scientific,
educational, or propagative purposes, and the disturbance of the
species on private lands is not allowed without the landowner's
consent. The Service is not aware of any otherwise lawful activities
being conducted or proposed by the public that will be affected by this
listing which could result in a violation of section 9 of the Act.
Questions on whether specific activities could or will constitute a
violation of section 9 should be directed to the Field Supervisor of
the Service's Asheville Field Office (see the ``Addresses'' section) or
to the Cookeville Field Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 446
Neal Street, Cookeville, Tennessee 38501 (615/528-6481). Requests for
copies of regulations regarding listed species and inquiries about
prohibitions and permits should be addressed to the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Ecological Services Division, 1875 Century Boulevard,
Atlanta, Georgia 30345 (Phone 404/679-7313; Fax 404/679-7081).
National Environmental Policy Act
The Service has determined that Environmental Assessments and
Environmental Impact Statements, as defined under the authority of the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, need not be prepared in
connection with regulations adopted pursuant to section 4(a) of the
Act. A notice outlining the Service's reasons for this determination
was published in the Federal Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR
49244).
[[Page 27978]]
Required Determinations
The Service has examined this regulation under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 and found it to contain no information collection
requirements. This rulemaking was not subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866.
References Cited
Beatley, J. C. 1963. The sunflowers (genus Helianthus) in Tennessee.
Journal of the Tennessee Academy of Science 38:135-154.
Branson, B. A., D. F. Harker, Jr., J. M. Baskin, M. E. Medley, D. L.
Batch, M. L. Warren, Jr., W. H. Davis, W. C. Houtcooper, B. Monroe,
Jr., L. R. Phillippe, and P. Cupp. 1981. Endangered, threatened, and
rare animals and plants of Kentucky. Transactions of the Kentucky
Academy of Science 42:77-89.
DeSelm, H. R. 1989. The barrens of Tennessee. Journal of the
Tennessee Academy of Sci. 64:89-95.
Heiser, C. B., Jr., D. M. Smith, S. B. Clevenger, and W. C. Martin,
Jr. 1969. The North American Sunflowers. Memoirs of the Torrey
Botanical Club 22(3):1-218.
Jones, R. L. 1991. Status Report on Helianthus eggertii Small.
Unpublished report to the Asheville Field Office, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Asheville, North Carolina. 99 pp.
Small, J. K. 1903. Flora of the Southeastern United States.
Published by the author. New York.
Smith, D. M. 1957. The taxonomy of Helianthus strumosus and related
species. Ph.D. Dissertation. Indiana University, Bloomington.
Spring, O., and E. E. Schilling. 1991. The sesquiterpene lactone
chemistry of Helianthus Sect. Atrorubentes (Asteraceae:
Heliantheae). Biochemical Systematics and Ecology 19:59-79.
Warren, M. L., Jr., W. H. Davis, R. R. Hannan, M. Evans, D. L.
Batch, B. D. Anderson, B. Palmer-Hall, Jr., J. R. MacGregor, R. R.
Cicerello, R. Athey, B. A. Branson, G. J. Fallo, B. M. Burr, M. E.
Medley, and J. M. Baskin. 1986. Endangered, threatened, and rare
plants and animals of Kentucky. Transactions of the Kentucky Academy
of Science 47:84-97.
Author
The primary author of this final rule is Mr. J. Allen Ratzlaff,
Asheville Field Office, (See ADDRESSES section).
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, and Transportation.
Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the
Code of Federal Regulations, is amended as set forth below:
PART 17--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; 16 U.S.C.
4201-4245; Pub. L. 99-625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted.
2. Section 17.12(h) is amended by adding the following, in
alphabetical order under FLOWERING PLANTS, to the List of Endangered
and Threatened Plants to read as follows:
Sec. 17.12 Endangered and threatened plants.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species
-------------------------------------------------------- Historic range Family Status When Critical Special
Scientific name Common name listed habitat rules
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FLOWERING PLANTS:
* * * * * * *
Helianthus eggertii.......... Sunflower, Eggert's. U.S.A. (AL, TN, KY)...... Asteraceae............... T 613 NA NA
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dated: April 8, 1997.
John G. Rogers,
Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 97-13412 Filed 5-21-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P