[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 112 (Wednesday, June 11, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 31740-31748]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-15245]



Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

RIN 1018-AC52

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of 
Threatened Status for Castilleja levisecta (Golden Paintbrush)

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Final rule.


SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) determines 
threatened status pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 
amended (Act), for the plant Castilleja levisecta (golden paintbrush). 
This species once occurred from Oregon to Vancouver Island in British 
Columbia, Canada. Ten populations of this plant now exist in open 
grasslands ranging from south of Olympia in Thurston County, 
Washington, north through the Puget Trough to southwest British 
Columbia, Canada. Threats to the species include competition with 
encroaching native and non-native plant species; habitat modification 
through succession in the absence of fire; and grazing by herbivores. 
Direct human-caused threats include conversion of habitat for 
residential and commercial development, conversion to agriculture, and 
possible damage associated with road maintenance. This rule implements 
the Federal protections afforded by the Act for this plant.

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 11, 1997.

ADDRESSES: The complete file for this rule is available for inspection, 
by appointment, during normal business hours at the Western Washington 
Office, North Pacific Coast Ecoregion, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 
510 Desmond Drive S.E., Suite 101, Lacey, Washington 98503-1273.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dave Frederick, Supervisor, at the 
above Lacey address (telephone 360/753-9440).



    Castilleja levisecta (golden paintbrush) was first collected near 
Mill Plain, Washington, by Thomas Jefferson Howell in 1880 and was 
described by Jesse More Greenman in 1898 (Greenman 1898). A perennial 
herb of the figwort family (Scrophulariaceae), C. levisecta typically 
has 1 to 15 erect to spreading unbranched stems, reaches a height of 30 
centimeters (cm) (12 inches (in)), and is covered with soft, sticky 
hairs. The lower leaves are entire and narrowly pointed; the upper 
leaves are broader, usually with one to three pairs of short lateral 
lobes on the distal end. The flower, mostly hidden by the overlapping 
bracts, has a calyx 15 to 18 millimeters (mm) (0.6 to 0.7 in) long and 
deeply cleft, and a corolla 20 to 23 mm (0.8 to 0.9 in) long, with a 
slender galea (concave upper lip) three to four times the length of the 
unpouched lower lip (Hitchcock and Cronquist 1973). It is distinguished 
from the other Castilleja species within its range by brilliant golden 
to yellow floral bracts. The plant flowers from April to June. When not 
flowering, the plant is less conspicuous. The species may be semi-
parasitic like other members of the genus Castilleja, possibly 
requiring a host plant for seedling development in its native habitat 
(Heckard 1962, Sheehan and Sprague 1984). However, greenhouse 
experiments indicate it does not require a host to survive and flower 
(Wentworth 1994).
    The plant tends to grow in clumps. One genetic individual may 
consist of 1 to 15 stems, making the determination of exact numbers of 
individual plants in the field difficult. The number of stems per plant 
varies site to site. In addition, researchers have used a variety of 
census methods over the years. Therefore, population estimates can vary 
and a consistent approach is needed. Experimentally designed sampling 
surveys have been conducted where individual plants were tagged and 
counted (Wentworth 1994). Year to year variation in population 
densities can be high (G. Douglas, Conservation Data Center, British 
Columbia Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, pers. comm. 1996; 
Wentworth 1994).
    Castilleja levisecta occurs in open grasslands at elevations below 
100 meters (m) (328 feet (ft)) around the periphery of the Puget 
Trough. Most populations occur on glacially derived soils, either 
gravelly glacial outwash or clayey glacio-lacustrine sediments

[[Page 31741]]

(Sheehan and Sprague 1984, Gamon 1995). Associated species include 
Festuca idahoensis, F. rubra, Camassia quamash, Holcus lanatus, 
Achillea millefolium, Pteridium aquilinum, Vicia spp., and Bromus spp. 
(Gamon 1995). Frequent, low intensity fires can be important in 
maintaining habitat for plant species such as C. levisecta. 
Historically, periodic fires in the Puget Trough were instrumental in 
maintaining native grassland habitat by limiting successional 
encroachment of trees and shrubs (Agee 1993, Kruckeberg 1991, Sheehan 
and Sprague 1984).
    Historically, Castilleja levisecta has been reported from over 30 
sites in the Puget Trough of Washington and British Columbia, and as 
far south as the Willamette Valley of Oregon (Sheehan and Sprague 1984, 
Gamon 1995). In 1984, the Service granted funding to the Washington 
Natural Heritage Program (Washington Department of Natural Resources) 
to conduct an assessment of the status of the species throughout its 
range. The plant was found to be extirpated from more than 20 historic 
sites (Sheehan and Sprague 1984, Gamon 1995). Many populations were 
found to be extirpated due to conversion of habitat to agricultural, 
residential, and commercial development. In Oregon, C. levisecta 
historically occurred in the grasslands and prairie of the Willamette 
Valley; the species has been extirpated from all of these sites as the 
habitat has disappeared. The area around the type locality at Mill 
Plain, Washington, was converted to pasture and orchards some time 
after the plant was first collected there in 1880. Housing developments 
currently occupy the site (Sheehan and Sprague 1984, Gamon 1995).
    Western Oregon and Washington (and southern Vancouver Island) have 
a maritime climate, characterized by wet, mild winters and cool, 
relatively dry summers. Annual precipitation averages 800 to 1350 mm 
(31 to 53 in) in the Puget-Willamette Trough (Sheehan and Sprague 
    Castilleja levisecta is now known from 10 extant populations. Eight 
populations occur in Washington--1 population south of Olympia in 
Thurston County, 5 populations on Whidbey Island in Island County, 1 
population on San Juan Island in San Juan County, and 1 population on 
Lopez Island, Island County. The Lopez Island population consisted of 4 
plants in May 1996 (J. Wentworth, Washington Natural Heritage Program, 
Botanist, pers. comm. 1996). A population of fewer than five 
individuals likely is not viable (J. Gamon, Washington Natural Heritage 
Program, scientist, pers. comm. 1996). In British Columbia, Canada, 2 
populations exist on islands off of the southern coast of Vancouver 
Island (Ryan and Douglas 1994). A historic population at Beacon Hill in 
Victoria on Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada, has been 
surveyed annually from 1991 through 1996. Three plants were observed in 
1991 but subsequent surveys have not found any plants and the site is 
presumed to be extirpated (Gamon 1995; G. Douglas, pers. comm. 1996).
    The southernmost population of Castilleja levisecta occurs at the 
Rocky Prairie site south of Olympia, in Thurston County, Washington. 
The site is owned by the Washington Department of Natural Resources and 
is designated as a Natural Area Preserve that is managed primarily for 
protection of C. levisecta and Aster curtus (white-topped aster), and 
conservation of the remnant native grasslands of Festuca idahoenis 
(Idaho fescue) (J. Gamon, pers. comm. 1996). In 1983, the time of the 
last complete census, 15,000 plants were sporadically distributed 
throughout the 15-hectare (ha) (37-acre) site. A fire in 1985 reduced 
the southernmost patch of C. levisecta, and in 1991 the total 
population was estimated to be about 7,000 plants (R. Schuller, pers. 
comm. 1991, 1996).
    Five populations are located on the north half of Whidbey Island, 
Island County, in Puget Sound. Three of these populations are located 
within the administrative boundary of the Ebey's Landing National 
Historic Reserve (Ebey's Landing, Fort Casey, and Bocker property), and 
are managed by a private landowner, Washington State Parks, and Seattle 
Pacific University, respectively.
    The largest of the Whidbey Island populations occurs near Forbes 
Point at Crescent Harbor and is owned by the Department of Defense 
(Whidbey Island Naval Air Station). A census conducted for Castilleja 
levisecta in 1985 counted more than 10,000 flowering stems at the site 
(Clampitt 1985); the number of individual plants was not provided. The 
population was monitored in 1990, when it was estimated to be in the 
thousands, and again in 1991, when a reduction in density of about 25 
percent was observed. A census was completed in May 1995. The 
population numbered 1,346 plants with 5,243 stems; approximately 50 
percent of the 1985 total (Gamon 1995). The site has been mapped and 
measures about 20 by 60 m (66 by 197 ft) (Matt Klope, Whidbey Island 
Naval Air Station, pers. comm. 1996).
    A second population on Whidbey Island is located at Fort Casey 
State Park where approximately 230 plants occur on a 0.04-ha (0.10-
acre) site (Gamon 1995). The population declined from between 500 and 
1,000 plants in the early 1980's, to 120 plants in 1993 (Gamon 1993; 
Fayette Krause, The Nature Conservancy, in litt., 1994), and currently 
harbors about 230 individuals (Gamon 1995). This State-owned historic 
site is managed as a park for recreational use (Ken Hageman, Fort Casey 
State Park Manager, Washington Department of Parks, pers. comm. 1994).
    A third Whidbey Island population of Castilleja levisecta occurs on 
and adjacent to the Bocker property. This population consists of 3 
colonies--1 colony is 60 x 150 m (197 x 492 ft) on the property, a 
second colony is adjacent to the property in a 4 m2 (43 
ft2) area, and a third colony is located near the 
``Admiral's'' house and covers an area of 4.5 x 9 m (15 x 30 ft). In 
1996, 306 individual plants existed (Wentworth, pers. comm. 1996), down 
from an estimated 1,200 plants in the mid-1980's (Krause, in litt. 
1994). The property is owned by Seattle Pacific University and is used 
for environmental education courses (Keith Ludemann, Environmental 
Education Supervisor, Bocker Environmental Preserve, pers. comm. 1992), 
but no covenants or other restrictions on the property exist that 
prevent development.
    A fourth Whidbey Island population occurs at Ebey's Landing in a 
10-20 m  x 100 m (33-66 ft x 328 ft) area. This population on private 
land was estimated to be from 300 to 400 plants in 1984 (Sheehan and 
Sprague 1984) and more than 4,000 individuals in 1993 (Sheehan, in 
litt., 1994; Gamon 1995). Differences in estimation techniques, such as 
counting individuals rather than flowering stems and estimates based on 
sampled population density are thought to contribute to the differences 
in population estimates between 1984 and 1993.
    The fifth Whidbey Island population of Castilleja levisecta is 
located at West Beach, on a site less than 0.40 ha (1 acre) in size. 
The property is privately owned and is bisected by a county road. In 
1991, the east side of the road supported 10 to 20 plants (M. Klope, 
pers. comm. 1991), whereas the entire West Beach population was 
estimated at approximately 200 plants in 1984 (Sheehan and Sprague 
1984). A 1993 census of the site found 496 plants, while the 1995 
census counted 550 plants west of the road (Gamon 1995). The apparent 
increase in this population may represent (1) a real increase in the 
population, (2) natural year-to-year fluctuation in population size, 
(3) differences in the way

[[Page 31742]]

individual plants were determined between 1993 and 1995, or (4) a more 
complete count was conducted in 1995. In a letter to the Island County 
engineer, a citizen reported that roadside maintenance activities by 
the county had resulted in the elimination of the plants on the east 
side of the road (Steve Erickson, Whidbey Environmental Action Network, 
in litt., 1991). Subsequent field inspection by Washington Natural 
Heritage Program staff confirmed that the population on the east side 
of the road had been reduced to about five plants; however, the direct 
cause of the decline east of the road is unknown (Sheehan, in litt., 
1992; 1994).
    The population on San Juan Island (San Juan County) is located on a 
privately owned parcel near the Mar Vista Resort at False Bay. The site 
is less than 1 acre in size, and supports a population of 128 plants 
(Gamon 1995).
    The remaining population of Castilleja levisecta from the United 
States is on private land at Davis Point on Lopez Island, Island 
County, Washington. When first discovered in 1994, this occurrence 
consisted of a single plant. A census conducted in May 1996 found four 
plants. The viability of this population is questionable. Recently 
located photographic evidence from within the last 2 decades but prior 
to 1994, indicates the population was historically larger, with an 
estimated population size of approximately 100 plants. However, the 
area is now dominated by non-native grasses that likely have 
outcompeted C. levisecta at the site (Sheehan, in litt. 1994; J. 
Wentworth, pers. comm. 1996).
    Two extant populations of Castilleja levisecta occur in British 
Columbia, Canada, on small islands near Victoria. Historically, C. 
levisecta was documented from nine sites on southeastern Vancouver 
Island, and on two adjacent islands. All but the two populations found 
on islands are extirpated or of unknown status but likely have been 
extirpated (Ryan and Douglas 1994). One population is located on Alpha 
Islet, consisting of 1,000 plants in an area of 100 m2 (33 by 33 ft), 
and is under the management of the Ministry of Parks (Ryan and Douglas 
1994). A second population, estimated at 2,560 plants, in an area of 
about 0.5 ha (1.2 acre), is located on the Trial Islands and is 
currently managed by the Ministry of Parks as an Ecological Reserve (G. 
Douglas, pers. comm. 1996).
    Castilleja levisecta is threatened by habitat modification through 
succession of grassland to shrub and forest habitat. Potential for 
expansion and persistence of refugia is low due to reduction of 
habitat. In addition, because the current distribution of the species 
has been greatly fragmented and reduced from the historic distribution, 
the species is vulnerable to other threats such as interspecific 
competition with native and alien woody species, reduced vigor and 
reproductive potential due to grazing by herbivores, and trampling or 
collecting during public recreational use of sites. Five sites are 
vulnerable because they are zoned for residential development or 
commercial use.

Previous Federal Action

    Federal action on this species began when the Service published a 
Notice of Review for plants on December 15, 1980 (45 FR 82480). In this 
notice, Castilleja levisecta was included as a category 1 candidate. 
Category 1 candidates were formerly designated as those species for 
which the Service had on file substantial information on biological 
vulnerability and threats to support preparation of listing proposals, 
but for which listing proposals had not been prepared due to other 
higher priority listing actions. Pending completion of updated status 
surveys, the status was changed to category 2 in the November 28, 1983, 
supplement to the Notice of Review (48 FR 53640). Category 2 candidates 
were formerly designated as those species for which information in 
possession of the Service indicated that proposing to list as 
endangered or threatened was possibly appropriate, but for which 
conclusive data on biological vulnerability and threat were not 
currently available to support a proposed rule. Castilleja levisecta 
remained a category 2 candidate in the September 27, 1985, Notice of 
Review for plants (50 FR 39526). In the February 21, 1990, Notice of 
Review (55 FR 6184), C. levisecta was elevated to category 1 status, 
based on additional data collected by the Washington Natural Heritage 
Program. The species remained in category 1 in the September 30, 1993, 
Notice of Review for plants. On May 10, 1994, the Service published in 
the Federal Register (59 FR 24106) a proposal to list C. levisecta as 
threatened. The Service noted that the species was a proposed 
threatened species in the February 28, 1996, Notice of Review for 
Plants and Animals (61 FR 7596).
    The 1994 proposal to list Castilleja levisecta as threatened was 
based primarily on information contained in status reports prepared by 
the Washington Natural Heritage Program and on personal communications 
with knowledgeable resource scientists and site managers. The comment 
period, originally scheduled to close on July 11, 1994, was extended 
for 30 days in a July 7, 1994, Federal Register publication (59 FR 
34784) and closed on August 11, 1994.
    The processing of this final rule conforms with the Service's 
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 following two related events--1) The 
lifting, on April 26, 1996, of the moratorium on final listings imposed 
on April 10, 1995 (Pub. L. 104-6), and 2) the restoration of funding 
for listing through passage of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation law on 
April 26, 1996, following severe funding constraints imposed by a 
number of continuing resolutions between November 1995 and April 1996. 
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 final 
rule falls under Tier 2. At this time there are no pending Tier 1 
actions. This rule has been updated to reflect any changes in 
distribution, status and threats since the effective date of the 
listing moratorium. This additional information was not of a nature to 
alter the Service's decision to list the species.

Summary of Comments and Recommendations

    In the May 10, 1994, proposed rule (59 FR 24106) 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 Federal and State agencies, county governments, 
scientific organizations, The Nature Conservancy, and other interested 
parties were contacted and requested to comment. The Service published 
newspaper notices in The Seattle Times, The Olympian, The Whidbey News 
Times, The Centralia Chronicle, and The Journal of the San Juan Islands 
on July 13, 1994, inviting general public comment. Eleven comments, 
including those of one Federal agency (National Park Service), one 
State agency (Washington Department of Natural Resources Natural 
Heritage Program), one county agency, three conservation organizations, 
one university, two Canadian agencies, and two individuals, were 
received during the open comment period. All commenters supported the 
listing of Castilleja levisecta under the Endangered Species Act.

[[Page 31743]]

    Several commenters provided information on the status of various 
populations of Castilleja levisecta that updated the information 
presented in the proposed rule. That information has been incorporated 
into the Background and Summary of Factors sections of this final rule. 
The primary issue of concern raised by commenters is the Service's 
intent to list this species as threatened rather than endangered. The 
five commenters that raised this issue all believe that endangered 
designation more accurately reflects the status of C. levisecta. 
Several arguments were expressed to support the contention that 
endangered status is warranted for Castilleja levisecta. Commenters 
stated that few populations of this species can be considered secure, 
even though several sites are designated as preserves or parks; the 2 
populations at Fort Casey State Park and the Bocker property have 
documented declines; 5 privately owned sites (False Bay, Davis Point, 
Bocker property, Ebey's Landing, and West Beach) have the potential for 
development; populations in British Columbia, Canada, should not be 
assumed to be secure because the Service has little if any influence 
over how these populations are managed; the number of populations is 
down from at least 30 to only 10; and sites with fewer than 10 to 30 
plants likely are not viable populations. The Service responds to the 
issue of preferred status as follows.
    The Service considered several factors in proposing threatened 
status for Castilleja levisecta, including the number of populations, 
number of plants, rate of decline, distribution of the populations, 
current management of populations, and availability of techniques for 
reversing the decline. Castilleja levisecta was historically reported 
from more than 30 sites in Washington, Oregon, and British Columbia; 
today 10 sites are extant. These 10 sites are distributed in 3 counties 
in Washington and two islands in British Columbia, Canada. Five of the 
10 extant populations contain 1,000 or more plants. Though 2 
populations have declined in number by over 50 percent in the last 
decade, 2 populations contain higher numbers of plants than reported in 
the proposed rule. Active management to benefit C. levisecta is 
occurring at 4 sites (Rocky Prairie, Fort Casey, Forbes Point and West 
Beach). The Service agrees that designation of sites as preserves or 
parks does not in and of itself guarantee the reduction or removal of 
threats to a species such as C. levisecta. However, these designations 
do afford some level of protection against certain threats such as 
destruction of habitat, and can provide greater potential for 
implementing conservation measures to benefit the plant. With half the 
populations containing significant numbers of plants (i.e., 1,000 or 
greater), and the distribution spread across several counties in the 
United States and into southwestern Canada, the Service believes that 
threatened status is appropriate for C. levisecta.

Peer Review

    The Service solicited the expert opinions of appropriate and 
independent specialists regarding pertinent scientific or commercial 
data relating to the biological and ecological information for 
Castilleja levisecta. Comments provided by John Gamon and Jane 
Wentworth, botanists with the Washington Department of Natural 
Resources' Natural Heritage Program were incorporated into the final 
rule. Mr. Gamon and Ms. Wentworth provided information supporting the 
position of the Service that C. levisecta was threatened by several 
factors at each occurrence of the species found in western Washington. 
Dr. George Douglas, Director, Conservation Data Center, Victoria, 
British Columbia, provided information supporting the position of the 
Service that C. levisecta was facing several threats at the two 
occurrences found in British Columbia, Canada.

Summary of Factors Affecting the Species

    After a thorough review and consideration of all information 
available, the Service has determined that Castilleja levisecta should 
be classified as a threatened species. Procedures found at section 4 of 
the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and regulations 
implementing the listing provisions of the Act (50 CFR part 424) 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 C. levisecta Greenman 
(golden paintbrush) are as follows:
    A. The present or threatened destruction, modification, or 
curtailment of its habitat or range. Historic loss of prairie and 
grassland habitat in the Puget Trough has reduced the range of 
Castilleja levisecta, and habitat loss continues to be the primary 
threat to remaining populations. Currently, encroachment by native and 
alien woody species, as discussed in more detail under Factor E, is the 
primary cause of this habitat modification.
    Development for residential or commercial use is a potential threat 
at five of the privately owned sites, False Bay, Davis Point, Bocker 
property, Ebey's Landing and West Beach. The three sites on Whidbey 
Island (Bocker property, Ebey's Landing and West Beach) are zoned for 
residential development (County Planning, Island Co. pers. comm. 1996). 
The site on San Juan Island (False Bay) is designated rural (Planning 
Department, San Juan Island County, pers. comm. 1996), indicating that 
the area is dominated by agricultural, forestry and recreational uses 
and can be used for the extraction of sand, gravel, and mineral 
deposits. This designation also allows residential development. The 
Davis Point population on Lopez Island is ``designated conservancy'' 
(Planning Department, San Juan Island County, pers. comm., 1996), which 
allows the construction of homes and the management of resources on a 
sustained-yield basis. Although no plans for development have been 
initiated at these sites, the habitat for these populations remains 
vulnerable to threats from adjacent areas that receive high human use 
(see Factor E for a more detailed discussion), and to the potential for 
development on these privately owned sites.
    In recent history (since 1850), the suppression of fire has played 
a critical role in the reduction of grassland habitat in the Puget 
Trough (Kruckeberg 1991) and, therefore, in the reduction in numbers 
and sizes of Castilleja levisecta populations. In contrast, a large, 
high intensity fire at any of the remaining sites where C. levisecta 
occurs may eliminate populations, although the Service is unaware of 
permanent extirpations of this species due to fire.
    Loss of suitable habitat from either encroachment of woody species 
or development in the areas surrounding the disjunct populations 
prevents expansion of the species and affords no refugia in the case of 
catastrophic events that affect existing populations. Because the 
grassland habitat in the areas surrounding the existing populations has 
been lost, it is doubtful that the populations would expand naturally. 
Thus, the continued existence of Castilleja levisecta is threatened by 
the absence of available habitat for recruitment and colonization.
    B. Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or 
educational purposes. Castilleja levisecta has no known commercial use. 
Because of its showy golden-yellow bracts, C. levisecta is vulnerable 
to picking and collection at public sites. Fort Casey State Park, 
Bocker property, and Forbes Point are

[[Page 31744]]

sites with high levels of public use where collection and/or trampling 
are threats (see Factor E). For example, Fort Casey State Park receives 
a high amount of recreational use, and the potential for overcollection 
is considered a genuine threat. Visitor use has increased within the 
last decade, and park users have been observed picking the flowering 
plant (K. Hageman, pers. comm. 1994). Once numbering over 500 plants 
(Hageman, pers. comm. 1994; Krause, in litt. 1994), the Fort Casey 
State Park population had declined to approximately 230 individuals by 
1995 (J. Gamon 1995; Krause, in litt. 1994). Castilleja levisecta may 
become vulnerable to collection by concerned citizens, amateur 
botanists and the general public as a result of increased publicity 
following publication of the final rule.
    C. Disease or predation. Disease is not known to be a factor 
threatening Castilleja levisecta. Populations may have been reduced 
from historical levels by grazing by livestock and rabbits (Sheehan and 
Sprague 1984, Gamon 1995, J. Wentworth, pers. comm. 1996). Grazing of 
the flowering stems of C. levisecta, probably by rabbits and/or deer, 
has been observed at the Bocker property. Though the effect is unknown, 
presumably grazing affects seed number and reproductive viability (K. 
Ludemann, pers. comm. 1991; J. Wentworth, pers. comm. 1996)). Livestock 
and exotic feral rabbits also graze the False Bay population (Sheehan 
and Sprague 1984). In 1990 and 1991 at the Forbes Point site, Klope 
(pers. comm. 1996) observed heavy predation on herbaceous material and 
seeds by rodents. Grazing also was noted at Forbes Point in 1984 and 
1985 (Clampitt 1985), which may be reducing the reproductive potential 
at that site. At Fort Casey State Park, all flowering stems of a small 
colony of C. levisecta were eaten by rabbits during the spring of 1996, 
thus eliminating seed set and reproduction for the current year (J. 
Wentworth, pers. comm. 1996).
    The Rocky Prairie Natural Area Preserve population of Castilleja 
levisecta has historically harbored a population of the Whulge 
checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas editha taylori), a State sensitive 
species that is a potential seed predator. Because C. levisecta is not 
a specific host and no individual butterflies were observed at the site 
in 1991, the threat is likely low (M. Sheehan, pers. comm. 1991; F. 
Krause, The Nature Conservancy, pers. comm. 1996). Insect larvae have 
been observed feeding on inflorescences (flowering parts) of C. 
levisecta (Gamon 1995). Although several species of caterpillar were 
known to prey on C. levisecta (Sheehan and Sprague 1984, Evans et al. 
1984), they are not believed to currently pose a threat (J. Wentworth, 
pers. comm. 1996).
    Predation (grazing and seed predation) by native species is one of 
the natural pressures historically faced by Castilleja levisecta, but 
populations that have been reduced or stressed due to other factors are 
more vulnerable to decline and are less able to rebound after periods 
of heavy predation.
    D. The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms. Currently, no 
regulatory mechanism provides for the protection of Castilleja 
levisecta or its habitat. Castilleja levisecta is listed as endangered 
by the Washington Natural Heritage Program (Washington Natural Heritage 
Program 1994). However, no State Endangered Species Act exists for 
plants in Washington and no legal protection is provided by the 
Washington Natural Heritage Program listing classification of 
endangered. The province of British Columbia uses The Nature 
Conservancy's rating system and has designated C. levisecta as a 
category G1S1 species (critically imperilled due to extreme rarity or 
because of vulnerability to extinction, and with typically less than 5 
occurrences) (G. Douglas, pers. comm. 1996). Four sites are included 
among the Natural Heritage Program's Registry of Natural Areas (Laura 
Smith, Associate Director, The Nature Conservancy, Washington State 
Office, pers. comm. 1996). All of these designations are important 
because they recognize the sensitive status of the species and 
encourage private land owners and management agencies to consider the 
species in management plans; however, they provide no legal protection. 
Therefore, changing land management priorities or inadequate funding 
for protection could leave the species vulnerable at several of the 
    The Rocky Prairie Natural Area Preserve population has the highest 
level of protection of the 10 sites. This State-owned site has been 
actively managed to eliminate alien species, including the use of 
prescribed burning and hand removal of invasive plants. Seven acres of 
the encroaching Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) were directionally 
felled and removed from Rocky Prairie during the winter of 1996. This 
effort was accomplished through a cooperative agreement between the 
Service's Washington State Ecosystems Conservation Program and the 
Washington Department of Natural Resource's Natural Heritage Program. 
Despite these efforts to restore prairie composition and structure by 
reducing shade onto the site and improve the conditions of the native 
prairie habitat, continued funding of restoration cannot be assured. 
Additionally, efforts by the Washington Department of Natural Resources 
to eliminate the invasive Cytisus scoparius (Scotch broom) and 
Hieracium pilosella (mouse-ear hawkweed) at this site are voluntary and 
not statutorially required. This population continues to face threats 
from invasion of woody species.
    Another publicly-owned population occurs in Fort Casey State Park. 
Park managers have implemented vegetation management measures (mowing, 
clipping and removing vegetation) to improve the conditions of the 
grassland habitat, and protective measures (fencing) to restrict 
trampling the Castilleja levisecta plants. However, the plant continues 
to be vulnerable to encroaching vegetation, picking (see Factor B), 
trampling, grazing and seed predation.
    The Forbes Point population occurs on Federal land at Whidbey 
Island Naval Air Station. The Department of Defense is participating in 
the Washington Registry of Natural Areas Program. A Navy staff 
biologist has undertaken measures to evaluate the status of the 
population. Efforts have also been made to eradicate some invasive non-
native species. A fence has been constructed to restrict people 
trampling or picking the plants and to keep rabbits from browsing 
Castilleja levisecta; however, rodents still enter the fenced area and 
consume seed (M. Klope, pers. comm. 1996). Signs have been erected 
designating the site as a research area, but the Navy does not prohibit 
public use of this site, which receives occasional foot traffic 
associated with a nearby popular beach (M. Klope, pers. comm. 1996).
    The populations of Castilleja levisecta at Ebey's Landing and the 
Bocker property are also listed on the Washington Registry of Natural 
Areas. Ebey's Landing is on private property within the designated 
boundary of Ebey's Landing National Historic Reserve. The Bocker 
property, owned by Seattle Pacific University, is currently managed as 
a natural area used for education purposes with no active management to 
retain grassland habitat. The Bocker property is also located within 
the designated boundary of Ebey's Landing National Historic Reserve. 
Although C. levisecta is considered in the current management of the 
Historic Reserve, management is not specifically directed toward the 
long-term conservation of the plant. As a result, the population is 
threatened by predation and invasion of native Douglas-fir and alien 
woody plants.

[[Page 31745]]

Ebey's Landing, Bocker property, West Beach, Davis Point, and False Bay 
populations of the species are on private property and receive no legal 
    The Ebey's Landing National Historic Reserve was established by the 
combined efforts of the local land owners, the National Park Service, 
and the U.S. Congress to give recognition to the local land owners for 
maintaining their dwellings and landscapes in a specific historic 
fashion. The Historic Reserve designation serves as a form of covenants 
that restrict the type of landscaping and architectural design used for 
the maintenance or remodeling of any existing structures or the 
construction of new structures within Ebey's Landing National Historic 
Reserve. The National Historic Reserve designation does not prohibit 
development or extraction of natural resources and provides no 
protection for biological resources. The National Park Service's 
jurisdiction over Ebey's Landing National Historic Reserve is only 
advisory in nature and is limited to providing technical assistance to 
State and local governments and local land owners in the management, 
protection, and interpretation of the Historic Reserve (Gretchen 
Luxenberg, National Park Service, pers. comm. 1997; Curt Soper, 
Director of Agency Relations, The Nature Conservancy, pers. comm. 1997; 
Stacey Tucker, Island County Planning and Community Development 
Department, pers. comm. 1997).
    The Castilleja levisecta populations in Canada receive no 
regulatory protection. Legislation to protect endangered species has 
been proposed to the British Columbia government, but currently no 
Federal or Provincial law protects sensitive species. The Trial 
Islands, offshore from the city of Victoria, are designated as an 
Ecological Reserve by the British Columbia Ministry of Parks. The small 
population at Alpha Islet also is located within a designated 
Ecological Reserve. Ecological Reserves are protected areas that 
generally require permits for entry and do not allow consumptive 
activities, like plant collection or other activities destructive to 
resources (L. Ramsey, Conservation Data Center, Ministry of 
Environment, Lands and Parks, British Columbia, pers. comm. 1997). 
However, the Ecological Reserve designation does not require specific 
management recommendations for the plant. Because this designation is 
an administrative one, it could potentially be reversed by 
administrative decision, and the site could be used for other purposes 
(G. Douglas, pers. comm. 1996).
    In summary, most populations occur in areas designated as reserves 
or parks; 4 sites receive active management to benefit the species and 
help prevent habitat destruction. However, habitat management for 
Castilleja levisecta is not assured nor coordinated among the various 
population sites.
    E. Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued 
existence. Grassland habitat has historically been maintained by 
periodic fires that prevented encroachment of woody plant species 
(Sheehan and Sprague 1984; J. Agee, pers. comm. 1996). Fire suppression 
in recent years has led to invasion of grasslands by native species 
such as Douglas-fir, Rosa sp. (wild rose), and Berberis aquifolium 
(barberry). Encroachment by alien species such as Cytisus scoparius and 
Hieracium pilosella also occurs. These species are invasive and can 
dominate some areas and compete with Castilleja levisecta for space, 
light, and nutrients.
    Interspecific competition is a serious threat to the continued 
existence of Castilleja levisecta. Loss of grassland habitat due, in 
part, to invasion of woody species threatens the plant at the Rocky 
Prairie Natural Area Preserve (J. Wentworth, pers. comm. 1996; Krause, 
in litt. 1994; Sheehan, in litt. 1994), Bocker property (K. Ludemann, 
pers. comm. 1991; Krause, in litt. 1994; Sheehan, in litt. 1994; J. 
Wentworth, pers. comm. 1996), Ebey's Landing (Jim Larson, Chief, 
Division of Natural Resources, National Park Service, pers. comm. 1991; 
J. Gamon pers. comm. 1996), West Beach (M. Mills, pers. comm. 1996; 
Krause, in litt. 1994; Sheehan, in litt. 1994), and Forbes Point (M. 
Klope, pers. comm. 1996; Krause, in litt. 1994; Sheehan, in litt. 1994) 
sites. Castilleja levisecta cannot survive under a closed canopy, such 
as that formed by Douglas-fir, wild rose, barberry and the alien 
Cytisus scoparius. Those species may also outcompete C. levisecta for 
root space and nutrients (Sheehan and Sprague 1984). The species 
appears to be unable to compete successfully against species that tend 
toward monoculture (J. Gamon, pers. comm. 1996).
    Four populations of Castilleja levisecta on Whidbey Island (Fort 
Casey State Park, Forbes Point, Bocker property, and West Beach) are 
also threatened with tree and/or shrub succession. If left unchecked, 
encroachment of wild rose and Rubus sp. (blackberry) will eliminate the 
population at the West Beach site (M. Mills, pers. comm. 1996). 
Clampitt (1985) noted the encroachment of several aggressive plants 
into C. levisecta habitat at Forbes Point, like blackberry, Vicia sp. 
(vetch), and Trifolium sp. (clover). Invasive shrubs and Douglas-fir, 
which shades out C. levisecta, are competing with C. levisecta at the 
Bocker property site. Numbering over 1,200 individuals in 1984, the 
population had declined to 295 individuals by 1995 (J. Gamon 1995).
    While fire may improve the grassland habitat for Castilleja 
levisecta, the impacts associated with fire prevention may be a threat. 
An example of this took place August 9-11, 1996, in Thurston County, 
Washington. A fire was ignited from the spark of a train that runs 
adjacent to Rocky Prairie. The fire burned grasses and shrubs for 
greater than 10 miles of the railroad right-of-way and emergency 
vehicles were activated to suppress the fire. To access the fire 
adjacent to Rocky Prairie, the fence surrounding Rocky Prairie Natural 
Area Preserve was cut at two locations to allow access of fire 
prevention vehicles. Vehicles ran directly over a portion of the C. 
levisecta population, breaking and compacting individual plants. Damage 
to plants and habitat are often the result of the fire suppression 
activities associated with wildfires (James Agee, pers. comm. 1996).
    Trampling by recreationists may threaten the plant at Fort Casey 
State Park on Whidbey Island where paths had been worn into the soil 
and pass directly through a Castilleja levisecta population. A 
decorative fence erected in 1995 partially restricts foot traffic 
through the C. levisecta population and trampling by the public at this 
site has been reduced (J. Gamon, pers. comm. 1996), although invasion 
by wild rose remains a threat. The few plants that formerly occurred in 
Beacon Hill Municipal Park in Victoria were located in a heavily used 
area of the park. Trampling by the public may have contributed to the 
species extirpation at Beacon Hill (G. Douglas, pers. comm. 1996).
    None of the private ownerships have been fenced or are otherwise 
protected. The West Beach occurrence of Castilleja levisecta is 
surrounded by beach front homes and foot traffic passes through the 
population to access the beach. Adjacent property owners maintain their 
lawns with fertilizers and herbicides. Aerial drift from these chemical 
treatments that come in contact with C. levisecta is a potential 
threat. Across Fort Casey Road from several new homes, the population 
on the Bocker property is threatened by foot traffic. At False Bay, 
several foot paths have been established through the population and 
individual plants have been trampled. The only access to the

[[Page 31746]]

beach from the resort at False Bay is through the population. At Davis 
Point, C. levisecta is found on a small patch within a 30-acre 
overgrown lot; pasture grasses and wild rose are abundant and threaten 
to overtake C. levisecta. This site has not been managed and the C. 
levisecta population has declined from about 100 plants prior to 1994 
to 4 individuals in 1996 (Wentworth 1996). The Ebey's Landing 
occurrence is adjacent to a road on a steep hillslope overlooking the 
ocean. Erosion and slumping have occurred on the slope and potentially 
threaten the species at this location. Ebey's Landing is a recreation 
area with foot paths leading to the plants and trampling has been 
documented (Jane Wentworth, pers. comm. 1997).
    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 list Castilleja 
levisecta as threatened. Threats to C. levisecta include habitat 
modification through succession of prairie and grassland habitats to 
shrub and forest lands; development of property for commercial, 
residential and agricultural use; low potential for expansion and 
refugia due to constriction of habitat; recreational picking; and 
    Several of the sites are designated as preserves or afforded some 
level of protection from certain threats through current management 
efforts, and 50 percent of the populations contain 1,000 or more 
individuals. The Service, therefore, believes the species is not 
currently in danger of extinction. However, because the remaining 
populations are threatened by the chronic factors described above, like 
successional modification and potential development of its habitat, 
Castilleja levisecta is likely to become endangered within the 
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its 
range. The species, therefore, fits the definition of threatened as 
defined by the Act. Critical habitat is not being proposed for this 
species for reasons discussed in the Critical Habitat section of this 

Critical Habitat

    Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as amended, requires that, to the 
maximum extent prudent and determinable, the Secretary designate 
critical habitat concurrently with determining a species to be 
endangered or threatened. The Service finds that designation of 
critical habitat is not prudent for this species. Such a determination 
would provide no additional protection to Castilleja levisecta and 
could increase the degree of threat to the species. As discussed above 
under Factor B in the Summary of Factors Affecting the Species, C. 
levisecta is vulnerable to collecting. Publication of precise maps and 
critical habitat descriptions in the Federal Register would be likely 
to increase the degree of threats from collecting and vandalism, and 
would increase enforcement problems.
    Critical habitat protections apply only to Federal actions and, 
therefore, critical habitat provides no protection for populations 
occurring on State or private land absent a Federal nexus. In addition, 
even where such a nexus occurs, designation of critical habitat 
generally provides no additional protection beyond that provided by 
listing. In particular, even though three populations of Castilleja 
levisecta located within the administrative boundary of Ebey's Landing 
National Historic Reserve (the first population is on private property, 
the second population is on State park land, and the third population 
is owned by Seattle Pacific University), the enabling legislation 
(National Parks and Recreation Act, 1978, P.L. 95-625, section 508) 
that established Ebey's Landing National Historic Reserve does not 
provide the National Park Service the authority to manage biological 
resources on the private or State property within this National 
Historic Reserve. The National Park Service's jurisdiction over Ebey's 
Landing National Historic Reserve is only advisory in nature (G. 
Luxenberg, National Park Service, pers. comm. 1997).
    Critical habitat receives consideration under section 7 of the Act 
with regard to actions carried out, authorized, or funded by a Federal 
agency. As such, designation of critical habitat may affect non-Federal 
lands only where such a Federal nexus exists. Federal agencies must 
insure that their actions do not result in destruction or adverse 
modification of critical habitat. Aside from this added consideration 
under section 7, the Act does not provide any 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 
    In addition, all involved parties and landowners have been notified 
of the importance of the species' habitat. Protection of its habitat 
can be addressed through the recovery and section 7 consultation 
processes. Therefore, the Service finds that designation of critical 
habitat for Castilleja levisecta is not prudent at this time, because a 
designation would increase the threat posed by taking (i.e., vandalism, 
collection) and other human activities, and because the designation of 
critical habitat would not be beneficial to the species.

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 can encourage and result in 
conservation actions by Federal, State, and private agencies, groups, 
and individuals. Recovery efforts encourage communication and 
cooperative efforts among various land managers and owners. The Act 
provides for possible land acquisition and cooperation with the State 
and requires that recovery actions be carried out for all listed 
species. Funding may be available through section 6 of the Act for the 
State to conduct recovery activities. This may assist in protection and 
recovery efforts at Rocky Prairie Natural Area Preserve and Fort Casey 
State Park, sites owned by the State of Washington. The protection 
required by Federal agencies and 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. Regulations implementing this 
interagency cooperation provision of the Act are codified at 50 CFR 
part 402. Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires Federal agencies to 
insure that activities they authorize, fund, or carry out are not 
likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species. If a 
Federal action may affect a listed species, regardless of whether the 
activity occurs on Federal or non-Federal lands, the responsible 
Federal agency must enter into formal consultation with the Service. 
The population of Castilleja levisecta at Forbes Point occurs on 
Federal land at Whidbey Island Naval Air Station. Federal actions there 
would be subject to section 7 requirements. The National Park Service 
administers Ebey's Landing National Historic Reserve, where three 
populations of C. levisecta are located on private lands. The National 
Park Service's jurisdiction over the Reserve is advisory in nature.

[[Page 31747]]

However, in the event the National Park Service funded or carried out 
any activities that may affect the species, it would be required to 
consult with the Service. In addition, sections 2(c)(1) and 7(a)(1) of 
the Act require Federal agencies to utilize their authorities in 
furtherance of the purposes of the Act to carry out conservation 
programs for endangered and threatened species.
    The Act and implementing regulations found at 50 CFR 17.71 and 
17.72 set forth a series of general prohibitions and exceptions that 
apply to all threatened plants. With respect to Castilleja levisecta, 
all trade prohibitions of section 9(a)(2) of the Act, implemented by 50 
CFR 17.61, would apply. These prohibitions, in part, make it illegal 
any for any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to 
import or export endangered or threatened plants; transport any such 
plant in interstate or foreign commerce in the course of a commercial 
activity; sell or offer for sale such species in interstate or foreign 
commerce; remove and reduce such species to possession from areas under 
Federal jurisdiction. Seeds from cultivated specimens of threatened 
plant species are exempt from these prohibitions provided that a 
statement of ``cultivated origin'' appears on their containers. Certain 
exceptions apply to agents of the Service and State conservation 
agencies. The Act and 50 CFR 17.62, 17.63 and 17.72 also provide for 
the issuance of permits to carry out otherwise prohibited activities 
involving endangered and threatened plant species under certain 
circumstances. It is anticipated that few trade permits would ever be 
sought or issued because the species is not common in cultivation or in 
the wild.
    The proposal incorrectly stated that the Act prohibits any person 
from removing, cutting, digging up, damaging, or destroying any 
endangered or threatened plant on areas that are not under Federal 
jurisdiction in knowing violation of any State law or regulation or in 
the course of any violation of a State criminal trespass law. This 
prohibition under section 9(a)(2)(B) currently applies only to plant 
species listed as endangered. Section 4(d) of the Act allows for the 
provision of such protection to threatened plants through regulation. 
This protection may apply to threatened plants including Castilleja 
levisecta in the future if regulations are promulgated.
    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. Such information is intended to clarify the potential 
impacts of a species' listing on proposed and ongoing activities within 
the range of the species. In the case of Castilleja levisecta, 
unauthorized collection at Forbes Point would constitute a violation of 
section 9 because this site is under Federal jurisdiction; collection 
occuring under a Federal threatened species permit for scientific or 
recovery purposes would not result in a violation of section 9. 
Collection or destruction of C. levisecta on private or other non-
Federal lands are not a violation of section 9. However, when a project 
occurring on non-Federal lands requires Federal authorization, funding 
or permiting and the project may affect listed species, including 
listed plants, the action agency must consult with the Service under 
section 7 of the Act to ensure that the Federal action (e.g., issuance 
of a Federal permit) will not jeopardize the survival of the species. 
Absent a Federal action, the Act does not provide protection to 
threatened plants on private lands. Questions regarding whether 
specific activities will constitute a violation of section 9 should be 
directed to the Supervisor, Western Washington Office, North Pacific 
Coast Ecoregion, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 510 Desmond Drive, 
S.E., Suite 101, Lacey, Washington 98503-1273, telephone 360/753-9440.
    Requests for copies of the regulations on plants and inquiries 
regarding them, including permits, may be addressed to the U.S. Fish 
and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services, Endangered Species Permits, 
911 NE 11th Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97232-4181, telephone 503/231-

Required Determinations

    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. A notice outlining the Service's 
reasons for this determination was published in the Federal Register on 
October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244).
    The Service has examined this regulation under the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995 and found it to contain no information collection 

References Cited

Agee, J.K. 1993. Fire Ecology of Pacific Northwest Forests. Island 
Press. 493 pp.
Clampitt, C. 1985. Report: Census of Castilleja levisecta population 
at Forbes Point. Prepared for L. Smith, The Nature Conservancy, 
Washington Field Office, Seattle, Washington. 4pp.
Evans, S., R. Schuller, and E. Augenstein. 1984. A report on 
Castilleja levisecta Greenman at Rocky Prairie, Thurston County, 
Washington. Unpubl. Report to The Nature Conservancy, Washington 
Field Office, Seattle, Washington. 56pp.
Gamon, J. G. 1995. Report on the status of Castilleja levisecta 
(Greenman). Washington Natural Heritage Program, Department of 
Natural Resources, Olympia, Washington. 55pp.
Gamon, J. 1993. Castilleja levisecta Within Ebey's Landing National 
Historic Reserve: A report on the current status of the species, 
including preliminary management recommendations. Washington Natural 
Heritage Program, Department of Natural Resources, Olympia, 
Washington. 7pp.
Goodman, D. 1987. The demography of chance extinction. Pages 11-34 
in M.E. Soule', editor. Viable populations for conservation. 
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.
Greenman, J.M. 1898. Some new and other noteworthy plants of the 
Pacific Northwest. Bot. Gaz. 25:261-269.
Heckard, L.R. 1962. Root parasitism in Castilleja. Bot. Gaz. 124:21-
Hitchcock, C.L., and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific 
Northwest. Univ. of Washington Press, Seattle.
Kruckeberg, A.R. 1991. The Natural History of the Puget Sound 
Country. University of Washington Press, Seattle, Washington.
Ryan, M. and G. W. Douglas. 1994. Status report on the golden 
paintbrush Castilleja levisecta Greenm. Unpublished, draft report 
prepared by the British Columbia Ministry of Environment, Lands and 
Parks. Victoria, B.C.
Sheehan, M., and N. Sprague. 1984. Report on the status of 
Castilleja levisecta. Unpubl. Report submitted to the U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. 82pp.
Washington Natural Heritage Program. 1994. Endangered, threatened 
and sensitive vascular plants of Washington. Department of Natural 
Resources, Olympia. Second printing. 52pp.
Wentworth, Jane. 1994. The demography and population dynamics of 
Castilleja levisecta, an endangered perennial. Unpublished Master's 
thesis. University of Washington. 53pp.
Wentworth, J. 1996. Conservation recommendations for Castilleja 
levisecta in Washington. Washington Natural Heritage Program, 
Washington Department of Natural Resources, Olympia, Washington.


    The authors of this final rule are Leslie Propp and Ted Thomas, 

[[Page 31748]]

Fish and Wildlife Service (see ADDRESSES section).

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

    Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, 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:


    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) * * *

--------------------------------------------------------    Historic range           Family            Status      When listed    Critical     Special  
         Scientific name                Common name                                                                               habitat       rules   
         Flowering Plants                                                                                                                               
                   *                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *                  
Castilleja levisecta.............  Golden paintbrush...  U.S.A. (OR, WA),     Scrophulariaceae...  T                       615           NA           NA
                                                          Canada (B.C.).                                                                                
                  *                  *                  *                    *                  *                  *                  *                 

    Dated: May 16, 1997.
Jay L. Gerst,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 97-15245 Filed 6-10-97; 8:45 am]