[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 192 (Thursday, October 3, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 61273-61293]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-24173]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2013-0033; 4500030113]
RIN 1018-AZ15


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposed 
Endangered Status for Brickellia mosieri (Florida Brickell-bush) and 
Linum carteri var. carteri (Carter's Small-flowered Flax)

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose to 
list Brickellia mosieri (Florida brickell-bush) and Linum carteri var. 
carteri (Carter's small-flowered flax), as endangered species under the 
Endangered Species Act. If we finalize this rule as proposed, it would 
extend the Act's protections to these plants.

DATES: We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before 
December 2, 2013. Comments submitted electronically using the Federal 
eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES section, below) must be received by 
11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the closing date. We must receive requests 
for public hearings, in writing, at the address shown in FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT by November 18, 2013.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:
    (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. In the search box, enter FWS-R4-ES-2013-0033, 
which is the docket number for this rulemaking. You may submit a 
comment by clicking on ``Comment Now!'' If your comments will fit in 
the comment box provided, please use this feature of http://www.regulations.gov, as it is most compatible with our comment review 
procedures. If you attach your comments as a separate document, our 
preferred file format is Microsoft Word. If you attach multiple 
comments (such as form letters), our preferred format is a spreadsheet 
in Microsoft Excel.
    (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public 
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R4-ES-2013-0033; Division of Policy and 
Directives Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax 
Drive, MS 2042-PDM; Arlington, VA 22203.
    We request that you send comments only by the methods described 
above. We will post all information received on http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any 
personal information you provide us (see the Information Requested 
section below for more information).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Williams, Field Supervisor, U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service, South Florida Ecological Services Office, 
1339 20th Street, Vero Beach, FL 32960, by telephone 772-562-3909, or 
by facsimile 772-562-4288. Persons who use a telecommunications device 
for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service 
(FIRS) at 800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Executive Summary

    Why we need to publish a rule. Under the Act, if we intend to list 
a species as endangered or threatened throughout all or a significant 
portion of its range, we are required to promptly publish a proposal in 
the Federal Register and make a final determination on our proposal 
within one year. Listing a species as an endangered or threatened

[[Page 61274]]

species can only be completed by issuing a rule.
    This document consists of a proposed rule to list Brickellia 
mosieri and Linum carteri var. carteri as endangered species. Elsewhere 
in today's Federal Register, we propose to designate critical habitat 
for Brickellia mosieri and Linum carteri var. carteri under the Act. 
Both plants are candidate taxa (i.e., species or varieties) for which 
we have on file sufficient information on biological vulnerability and 
threats to support preparation of a listing proposal, but for which 
development of a listing regulation has been precluded by other higher 
priority listing activities. This rule reassesses all available 
information regarding status of and threats to both plants.
    The basis for our action. Under the Act, we may determine that a 
species is an endangered or threatened species based on any of five 
factors: (A) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or 
curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) overutilization for 
commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes; (C) 
disease or predation; (D) the inadequacy of existing regulatory 
mechanisms; or (E) other natural or manmade factors affecting its 
continued existence. We have determined that the threats to both 
Brickellia mosieri and Linum carteri var. carteri consist primarily of 
habitat loss and modification through urban and agricultural 
development, and lack of adequate fire management (Factor A); 
proliferation of nonnative invasive plants, and sea level rise (Factor 
E); and these threats are not reduced by existing regulatory mechanisms 
(Factor D).
    We will seek peer review. We are seeking comments from 
knowledgeable individuals with scientific expertise to review our 
analysis of the best available science and application of that science 
and to provide any additional scientific information to improve this 
proposed rule. Because we will consider all comments and information 
received during the comment period, our final determinations may differ 
from this proposal.

Information Requested

    We intend that any final action resulting from this proposed rule 
will be based on the best scientific and commercial data available and 
be as accurate and as effective as possible. Therefore, we request 
comments or information from the public, other concerned governmental 
agencies, Native American tribes, the scientific community, industry, 
or any other interested parties concerning this proposed rule. We 
particularly seek comments concerning:
    (1) Both plants' biology, range, and population trends, including:
    (a) Habitat requirements for feeding, breeding, and sheltering;
    (b) Genetics and taxonomy;
    (c) Historical and current range including distribution patterns;
    (d) Historical and current population levels, and current and 
projected trends; and
    (e) Past and ongoing conservation measures for the plants, their 
habitat, or both.
    (2) The factors that are the basis for making a listing 
determination for a species under section 4(a) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 
1531 et seq.), which are:
    (a) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or 
curtailment of their habitat or range;
    (b) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or 
educational purposes;
    (c) Disease or predation;
    (d) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or
    (e) Other natural or manmade factors affecting their continued 
existence.
    (3) Biological, commercial trade, or other relevant data concerning 
any threats (or lack thereof) to these plants and regulations that may 
be addressing those threats.
    (4) Additional information concerning the historical and current 
status, range, distribution, and population size of these plants, 
including the locations of any additional populations of these plants.
    (5) Current or planned activities in the areas occupied by these 
plants and possible impacts of these activities on these plants.
    (6) Additional information concerning the biological or ecological 
requirements of these plants, including pollination and pollinators.
    Please note that submissions merely stating support for or 
opposition to the action under consideration without providing 
supporting information, although noted, will not be considered in 
making a determination, as section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that 
determinations as to whether any species is an endangered or threatened 
species must be made ``solely on the basis of the best scientific and 
commercial data available.''
    You may submit your comments and materials concerning this proposed 
rule by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. We request that you 
send comments only by the methods described in ADDRESSES.
    If you submit information via http://www.regulations.gov, your 
entire submission--including any personal identifying information--will 
be posted on the Web site. If your submission is made via a hardcopy 
that includes personal identifying information, you may request at the 
top of your document that we withhold this information from public 
review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We 
will post all hardcopy submissions on http://www.regulations.gov. 
Please include sufficient information with your comments to allow us to 
verify any scientific or commercial information you include.
    Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting 
documentation we used in preparing this proposed rule, will be 
available for public inspection on http://www.regulations.gov, or by 
appointment, during normal business hours, at the U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service, South Florida Ecological Services Office (see FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

Previous Federal Actions

    Brickellia mosieri was first recognized as a candidate for possible 
future listing on September 27, 1985 (50 FR 39526), and we assigned the 
species a listing priority number (LPN) of 2. Candidate species are 
assigned LPNs based on immediacy and magnitude of threats, as well as 
taxonomic status. The lower the LPN, the higher priority that species 
is for us to determine appropriate action using our available resources 
(September 21, 1983; 48 FR 43100). Category 2 candidates were those 
taxa for which information contained in our files indicated that 
listing may be appropriate, but for which additional data were needed 
to support a listing proposal.
    Linum carteri var. carteri was also first recognized as a candidate 
for possible future listing on September 27, 1985 (50 FR 39526), and 
assigned an LPN of 1. Category 1 candidates were those taxa for which 
the Service had substantial information on biological vulnerability and 
threats to support the appropriateness of proposing to list them as 
endangered or threatened species. On February 21, 1990, we downgraded 
this variety to a category 2 candidate (55 FR 6184).
    Both Brickellia mosieri and Linum carteri var. carteri remained on 
the candidate list as published in what is now known as the Candidate 
Notice of Review (CNOR) until 1993 (55 FR 6184, February 21, 1990; 58 
FR 51144, September 30, 1993). Both plants were removed from the 
candidate list from 1996 to 1998 because there was not sufficient 
information on their biological vulnerability and threats to

[[Page 61275]]

support issuance of a proposed rule. Both plants were again placed on 
the candidate list in the 1999 CNOR (October 25, 1999, 64 FR 57534), in 
which we determined that listing was warranted, but was precluded due 
to workloads and priorities. B. mosieri was assigned an LPN of 5, 
meaning that the magnitude of threats for the species remained high but 
were not imminent. L. c. var. carteri was assigned an LPN of 3, meaning 
that the magnitude of threats remained both high and immediate and 
reflected its taxonomic status at the varietal level.
    Both plants remained on the candidate list as published in the 
CNORs from 2001 to 2004 (66 FR 54808, October 30, 2001; 67 FR 40657, 
June 13, 2002; 69 FR 24876, May 4, 2004). On May 11, 2005, we published 
findings for both plants in the 2005 CNOR (70 FR 24869) in response to 
a petition received on May 11, 2004. Brickellia mosieri remained on the 
candidate list, but we changed the LPN from a 5 to an 8, meaning that 
the magnitude of threats to the species were moderate, but immediate 
(70 FR 24869). A primary factor noted in this downgrading was the 
occurrence of 13 of the 17 known populations on conservation lands, 
which were being managed appropriately with prescribed fire and control 
of invasive nonnative species. Linum carteri var. carteri also remained 
on the candidate list, with an unchanged LPN of 3 (70 FR 24869). B. 
mosieri and L. c. var. carteri remained on the candidate list as 
published in the CNORs from 2006 to 2012, with LPNs of 8 and 3, 
respectively (71 FR 53756, September 12, 2006; 72 FR 69034, December 6, 
2007; 73 FR 75176, December 10, 2008; 74 FR 57804, November 9, 2009; 75 
FR 69222, November 10, 2010; 76 FR 66370, October 26, 2011; and 77 FR 
69994, November 21, 2012).
    On May 10, 2011, as part of an agreement with one of the agency's 
most frequent plaintiffs, the Service filed a workplan with the U.S. 
District Court for the District of Columbia. The workplan will enable 
the agency to, over a period of 6 years, systematically review and 
address the needs of more than 250 species listed within the 2010 CNOR, 
including Brickellia mosieri and Linum carteri var. carteri, to 
determine if these plants should be added to the Federal Lists of 
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. This workplan will 
enable the Service to again prioritize its workload based on the needs 
of candidate species, while also providing state wildlife agencies, 
stakeholders, and other partners clarity and certainty about when 
listing determinations will be made. On July 12, 2011, the Service 
reached an agreement with another frequent plaintiff group and further 
strengthened the workplan, which will allow the agency to focus its 
resources on the species most in need of protection under the Act. 
These agreements were approved by the court on September 9, 2011.

Status Assessment for Brickellia mosieri and Linum carteri var. carteri

Background

    It is our intent to discuss below only those topics directly 
relevant to the listing of Brickellia mosieri and Linum carteri var. 
carteri as endangered in this proposed rule.

Brickellia mosieri

Description
    Brickellia mosieri (Family: Asteraceae) is a perennial herb. Mature 
plants are 0.3-1.1 meters (m) (1.0-3.5 feet (ft)) tall, slender, erect, 
and branching (Chafin 2000, page numbers not applicable). Leaves are 1-
3 centimeters (cm) (0.4-1.2 inches (in)) long, alternate, narrow, 
linear, thick, usually spreading or curved downward, entire or slightly 
toothed, and resin-dotted (Chafin 2000, page numbers not applicable). 
The flower heads are in loose, open clusters at the ends of branches 
(Chafin 2000, page numbers not applicable). Disk flowers are white in 
small, dense heads surrounded by hairy, slightly ribbed bracts; there 
are no ray flowers, although long-style branches (white, sometimes 
brown) may appear to be rays (Chafin 2000, page numbers not 
applicable).
Taxonomy
    Brickellia mosieri was first described by Small in 1933 as Kuhnia 
mosieri (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 11). In 1970, Long called the 
species Kuhnia eupatorioides var. floridana, reducing it to a variety 
of a more widespread species occurring in the eastern United States 
(Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 11). In 1971, Shinners included all members 
of the genus Kuhnia in Brickellia and restored the plant to species 
status, calling it Brickellia mosieri (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 11). 
In a 1989 study of the Brickellia eupatorioides complex, Turner 
identified it as a variety of the more widespread Brickellia 
eupatorioides, and gave it the new name Brickellia eupatorioides var. 
floridana. Wunderlin and Hansen (2003, pp. 300-301) recognized 
Brickellia mosieri, thinking the plant to be specifically distinct from 
Brickellia eupatorioides (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 11) and 
differentiating the species by leaf width and margin (i.e., B. mosieri 
having 1-3 millimeter (mm) (0.04-0.12 in) wide, entire or obscurely 
toothed leaves versus B. eupatorioides having 5-40 mm (0.2-1.6 in) 
wide, coarsely toothed leaves).
    While some sources (Integrated Taxonomic Information System (ITIS) 
2013a, page numbers not applicable) indicate that Brickellia 
eupatorioides var. floridana is the accepted taxonomy, local sources 
including the online Atlas of Florida Vascular Plants (Wunderlin and 
Hansen 2008, page numbers not applicable), the Florida Department of 
Agriculture and Consumer Services (FDACS; Coile and Garland 2003, p. 
7), and the Institute for Regional Conservation (IRC) all use 
Brickellia mosieri. Although there is not complete agreement on whether 
this taxon is a variety or a species, there is consensus that it is a 
distinct taxon. Based upon the best available scientific information, 
Brickellia mosieri is a distinct taxon, endemic to Miami-Dade County in 
Florida. Synonyms include Brickellia eupatorioides var. floridana, 
Kuhnia eupatorioides var. floridana, and Kuhnia mosieri (Wunderlin and 
Hansen 2008, page numbers not applicable).
Climate
    The climate of south Florida where Brickellia mosieri occurs is 
classified as tropical savanna and is characterized by distinct wet and 
dry seasons and a monthly mean temperature above 18 degrees Celsius 
([deg]C) (64.4 degrees Fahrenheit ([deg]F)) in every month of the year 
(Gabler et al. 1994, p. 211). Freezes can occur in the winter months, 
but are infrequent at this latitude in south Florida. Rainfall in the 
pine rockland community where B. mosieri occurs exclusively, varies 
from an annual average of 153-165 cm (60-65 in) in the northern portion 
of the Miami Rock Ridge to an average of 140-153 cm (55-60 in) in the 
southern portion (Snyder et al. 1990, p. 238). Approximately 75 percent 
of yearly rainfall occurs during the wet season from June through 
September (Snyder et al. 1990, p. 238).
Habitat
    Brickellia mosieri grows exclusively on the Miami Rock Ridge in 
Miami-Dade County outside the boundaries of Everglades National Park 
(ENP). This area extends from the ENP boundary, near the Park entrance 
road, northeast approximately 72 kilometers (km) (45 miles (mi)) to its 
end near North Miami. Habitat conditions more specific to this area are 
highlighted below. The pine rocklands are a unique ecosystem found

[[Page 61276]]

on limestone substrates in three areas in Florida--the Miami Rock 
Ridge, in the Florida Keys, and in the Big Cypress Swamp. The pine 
rocklands differ to some degree between and within these areas with 
regard to substrate (e.g., amount of exposed limestone, type of soil), 
elevation, hydrology, and species composition (both plant and animal).
    Pine rockland occurs on relatively flat terrain, approximately 2-7 
m (6.5-23.0 ft) above sea level with an average elevation of 
approximately 3 m (9.8 ft) (Service 1999, p. 3-167; Florida Natural 
Areas Inventory (FNAI) 2010, p. 62). On the Miami Rock Ridge, oolitic 
limestone is at or very near the surface, and solution holes 
occasionally form where the surface limestone is dissolved by organic 
acids. There is typically very little soil development, consisting 
primarily of accumulations of low-nutrient sand, marl, clayey loam, and 
organic debris found in solution holes, depressions, and crevices on 
the limestone surface (FNAI 2010, p. 62). However, extensive sandy 
pockets can be found at the northern end of the Miami Rock Ridge, 
beginning from approximately North Miami Beach and extending south to 
approximately SW. 216 Street (which runs east-west approximately one-
half mile south of Quail Roost Pineland) (Service 1999, p. 3-162). 
Brickellia mosieri tends to occur on exposed limestone with minimal 
organic litter and in areas with only minor amounts of substrate 
disturbance (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 11).
    Pine rocklands are generally moderately to well drained, depending 
on the porosity of the limestone substrate and landscape position, 
including nearby associated natural communities. In pine rocklands on 
the Miami Rock Ridge outside of ENP, the water table seldom reaches the 
surface (Service 1999, p. 3-167). Bradley and Gann (1999) found one 
occurrence of Brickellia mosieri in a low-elevation pine rockland (2-3 
m above sea level) very close to a marl prairie. The pine rockland that 
contains this occurrence may have flooded periodically during the 
summer wet season. Known populations of B. mosieri are found at 
elevations ranging from approximately 1.7-4.8 m (5.5-15.8 ft). While 
species occurrences are distributed throughout this range, there are 
two elevational groupings in the landscape--one with average elevations 
of approximately 1.7-2.1 m (5.5-7.0 ft) and the other, larger grouping 
between approximately 2.7 and 4.0 m (9.0 and 13.0 ft).
    Pine rockland is characterized by an open canopy of South Florida 
slash pine (Pinus elliottii var. densa). Subcanopy development is rare 
in well-maintained pine rocklands, with only occasional hardwoods such 
as Lysiloma bahamensis (wild tamarind) and Quercus virginiana (live 
oak) growing to tree size in Miami Rock Ridge pinelands (Snyder et al. 
1990, p. 253). The shrub/understory layer is a diverse mix of species 
including both temperate and tropical shrubs and palms. Dominant plants 
in the shrub layer of pine rocklands vary based on elevation, soils, 
and location, including nearby associated natural communities. The pine 
rocklands where Brickellia mosieri occurs are characterized by an open 
shrub canopy of Serenoa repens (saw palmetto), Myrica cerifera (wax 
myrtle), Metopium toxiferum (poisonwood), and Sideroxylon salicifolium 
(willow bustic) as well as species with more restricted distribution 
within pine rocklands including Sideroxylon reclinatum (buckthorn), 
Callicarpa americana (beauty berry), Dodonaea angustifolia (varnish 
leaf), and Ilex cassine (dahoon holly) (Snyder et al. 1990, p. 254; 
Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 12). The shrub layer in pinelands occurring 
in the northern end of the Miami Rock Ridge more closely resembles pine 
flatwoods as a result of the amount of sandy soils in this area, with 
species such as Lyonia fruticosa (staggerbush), Quercus minima (dwarf 
live oak), Quercus pumila (running oak), and Vaccinium myrsinites 
(shiny blueberry) becoming more common (Snyder et al. 1990, p. 255). 
The height and density of the shrub layer vary based on fire frequency, 
with understory plants growing taller and more dense as time since fire 
increases.
    Pine rocklands in all three areas of Florida also boast a richly 
diverse herbaceous layer, including a large number of rare and endemic 
species such as Brickellia mosieri. The diversity of the herbaceous 
layer decreases as the density of the shrub layer increases (i.e., as 
understory openness decreases), and pine rockland on the mainland has a 
more diverse herbaceous layer due to the presence of temperate species 
and some tropical species that do not occur in the Florida Keys (FNAI 
2010, p. 63). The herbaceous layer can range from mostly continuous in 
areas with more soil development and little exposed limestone, to 
sparse where much of the limestone is at the surface. Most herbaceous 
species in pine rocklands are perennials (Snyder et al. 1990, p. 257). 
Common herbaceous associates of B. mosieri in the Miami Rock Ridge pine 
rocklands include Schizachyrium sanguineum (crimson bluestem), 
Schizachyrium gracile (wire bluestem), Aster adnatus (scaleleaf aster), 
and Acalypha chamaedrifolia (bastard copperleaf) (Bradley and Gann 
1999, p. 12). B. mosieri may also be found in close association with 
several other rare plants, including Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. 
deltoidea (deltoid spurge), Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. adhaerens (wedge 
sandmat), Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum (pineland sandmat), 
Galactia smallii (Small's milkpea), Polygala smallii (tiny polygala), 
and Argythamnia blodgettii (Blodgett's silverbush) (Bradley and Gann 
199, p. 12).
    Pine rockland occurs in a mosaic with primarily two other natural 
community types--rockland hammock and marl prairie. Pine rockland 
grades into rockland hammock; pine rockland has an open pine canopy, 
and rockland hammock has a closed, hardwood canopy. Pine rockland is a 
fire-maintained ecosystem--a well-maintained pine rockland is a 
savanna-like forest, but, in the absence of fire, it will eventually 
succeed into rockland hammock. Historically, fires often started in the 
adjacent prairie wetlands and swept into the pinelands, which often 
have suitable fuel conditions to support surface fires that consume 
primarily leaf litter (pine needles and herbaceous fuel) and some 
understory vegetation (Snyder et al. 1990, p. 258). Pine rockland 
plants have adapted to frequent fires. Mature South Florida slash pine 
is a highly fire-resistant variety, and even its seedlings have thicker 
stems and are more fire-resistant than typical slash pine seedlings 
(Snyder et al. 1990, p. 259). Aboveground portions of hardwood shrubs 
are typically killed by fire, but often resprout below ground; palms 
typically produce new growth post-fire from their unaffected apical 
buds. Pine rockland herbs, including Brickellia mosieri, respond 
favorably to fire with rapid regrowth and increased flowering. On one 
private conservation area, B. mosieri has only been observed in flower 
immediately after prescribed burning has occurred (Pine Ridge 
Sanctuary; Glancy 2013, pers. comm.).
    Fire is important for the removal of litter accumulation from the 
limestone substrate and stimulation of herbaceous growth as well as for 
maintaining an open shrub layer. Evaluation of herbaceous layers post-
fire suggests that pine rocklands may have evolved under a wide range 
of fire frequency, and some degree of variation in burn season, 
suggesting that pine rockland habitat historically existed as a mosaic 
in the landscape. The natural fire regime of pine rockland is believed 
to be approximately 3-7 years, or twice per decade, on average, with 
fires primarily

[[Page 61277]]

occurring in the summer (wet season) in association with lightning 
strikes. As time since fire increases, leaf litter deepens and the 
shrub layer becomes denser, eventually shading out understory species 
and preventing germination of new plants, which require exposed 
substrate and high light conditions. If fire is excluded for 20-30 
years, hardwoods will come to dominate the community and hammock 
conditions will prevail, which further discourage fires from spreading 
except in drought conditions.
    Pine rocklands are also susceptible to natural disturbances such as 
hurricanes and other severe storms, during which trees may be killed, 
thereby helping to maintain the open canopy that is essential to pine 
rockland plants such as Brickellia mosieri. This species was first 
observed in flower on Pine Ridge Sanctuary after Hurricane Andrew made 
landfall in south Florida in 1992 (Glancy 2013, pers. comm.). During 
such events, pine rocklands near the coast may be temporarily inundated 
by saltwater which can also kill or damage vegetation (Snyder et al. 
1990, p. 251; URS Corporation Southern et al. 2007, p. 11). In 
addition, though rare, freeze events can kill tropical plants in the 
open understory, helping to reduce hardwood encroachment (Service 1999, 
p. 3-167; FNAI 2010, p. 63). These sporadic, but potentially major, 
disturbances along with burning, create the dynamic nature of the pine 
rockland habitat, in which some currently unsuitable areas may become 
open in the future, while areas currently open may develop more dense 
canopy over time, eventually rendering that portion of the pineland 
unsuitable for B. mosieri and other pine rockland endemic plants.
    Pine rockland on the Miami Rock Ridge can also occur within lower, 
seasonally flooded marl prairies, which differ from pine rockland in 
having no pines, an understory dominated by grasses and sedges, and a 
minimal cover of shrubs (FNAI 2010, p. 63). Where pine rockland occurs 
close to the ocean, it may be bordered by mangrove swamp or salt marsh 
and can receive flooding by extremely high tides (FNAI 2010, p. 63). 
Pine rocklands on the northern Miami Rock Ridge grade into scrub and 
sandhill vegetation where the three communities intermix in areas with 
deep sands and rock outcrops (Snyder et al. 1990, p. 257).
Historical Range
    Brickellia mosieri is endemic to the pine rocklands of the Miami 
Rock Ridge in Miami-Dade County. It was historically known from central 
and southern Miami-Dade County from South Miami to Florida City, a 
range of approximately 36.2 km (22.5 mi), along the Miami Rock Ridge 
(Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 11). However, Bradley and Gann (1999, p. 11) 
state that herbarium specimens have not been studied from the New York 
Botanical Garden, so the full extent of its historical range is 
unknown. Available herbarium specimens and other records for this plant 
(Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 16; Wunderlin and Hansen 2008, page numbers 
not applicable) do not give precise or accurate location information.
Current Range, Population Estimates, and Status
    Brickellia mosieri is currently distributed from central and 
southern Miami-Dade County from SW 120 St. (latitude ca. 25'' 39.4) to 
Florida City (latitude ca. 25'' 26.0), suggesting its historical range 
has contracted at least 4.8 km (3 mi), or more than 13 percent (Bradley 
and Gann 1999, p. 11). At least 9 known populations on private lands 
have been extirpated including: Sunset Drive and 71 Court (site 
developed; last observation in 1968); Palms Woodlawn Cemetery (site 
developed; last observation in 1992); Turnpike Extension and 93rd 
Terrace (site destroyed; confirmed extirpated in 2007); plus at least 6 
of 18 undated occurrences reported by Alan Herndon (Bradley and Gann 
1999, p. 12; Bradley 2007, pers. comm.). In addition, several of 
Herndon's 18 sites experienced impacts to habitat through disturbance 
or invasion by nonnative plants or dense hardwoods, and B. mosieri may 
no longer occur at these sites (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 12).
    The number of extant occurrences of this species is somewhat 
uncertain due to the lack of complete and recent survey information, 
which is primarily a function of the number of populations that occur 
on private lands, making them difficult to survey. In addition, 
Brickellia mosieri can be extremely difficult to identify when not in 
flower, making it difficult to confidently determine when a population 
has been extirpated. The most complete survey that included the species 
was the 2004-2005 mapping by IRC of natural forest communities (NFCs; 
pinelands and hardwoods) in Miami-Dade County outside of ENP. IRC 
mapped both public and private NFCs where the county government 
obtained landowner permission or determined it was not necessary. This 
survey found B. mosieri on six privately owned parcels, including on 
the University of Miami Richmond campus (formerly the U.S. Naval 
Observatory). Surveys of populations on public lands, specifically 
those owned or managed by the County, occur more commonly and provide a 
more detailed assessment of the species' status on selected preserves. 
B. mosieri was not found during a 2-year project intended to survey and 
map nonnative and rare plants along Florida Department of 
Transportation (FDOT) rights-of-way within Miami-Dade County (Gordon et 
al. 2007, pp. 1, 36).
    Based on the best available data, we classified those occurrences 
of Brickellia mosieri that have not been confirmed extirpated as either 
extant (status confirmed within the last 10 years), possibly extant 
(reliable data are greater than 10 years but less than 15 years old; 
habitat is still extant), or unknown/historical (observation does not 
include sufficient detail, or data are more than 15 years old; habitat 
is still extant) (Table 1). Using this classification, populations of 
B. mosieri are believed to occur on at least 17 (extant or presumed 
extant) sites, and may possibly occur on up to another 5 (possibly 
extant) sites, although most of these latter sites have been searched 
in recent years without the species being found. B. mosieri may also 
occur at three historical sites, although additional confirmation is 
needed. Of the 17 extant occurrences, 9 occur on public conservation 
lands, 4 occur on private lands managed for conservation, and 4 occur 
on private lands with unknown management (Table 1). Four of the 
populations on public conservation lands, including two of the three 
large (>100 plants) monitored populations, occur adjacent to one 
another in the Richmond Pineland Complex.
    Bradley and Gann (1999, p. 12) estimated population size using a 
logarithmic scale. On that scale, the total population of the species 
in 1999 was estimated at 1,001-10,000 plants (with the exact number 
probably between 5,000 and 7,000 plants), and was thought to be 
declining (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 12). Since that time, the estimate 
for the largest population (Larry and Penny Thompson Park, 1,001-10,000 
plants in 1999) has decreased to 101-1,000 plants, with adjacent areas 
(University of Miami, Zoo Miami, Martinez Pineland) estimated to hold 
another 112-1,100 plants combined (Possley 2013b, pers. comm.). 
Additional plants are suspected to occur on adjacent privately owned 
parcels in the Richmond Pineland Complex (Possley 2013a, pers. comm.). 
The only other monitored population estimated to be composed of greater 
than 100 plants occurs on the Navy Wells Pineland Preserve, located 
approximately 20 km (12.5 mi) southwest at the southern end

[[Page 61278]]

of the species' current range. Another large population was observed on 
a private parcel situated between Navy Wells and the Richmond 
Pinelands; however this property has not been surveyed since 2004. 
Smaller populations occur on pine rockland fragments spread across the 
landscape, most no more than approximately 3.2 km (2 mi) from their 
nearest neighboring population--the major exception to this is a 7.2-km 
(4.5-mi) gap between the populations on Quail Roost Pineland and Camp 
Owaissa Bauer. Based on the 17 populations considered to be extant, the 
current total population estimate is between 515 and 4,935 plants, 
although the actual number of individuals is probably closer to between 
2,150 and 3,700 (Table 1). Based on current estimates, the total 
population of B. mosieri has apparently declined by approximately 50 
percent since 1999.

  Table 1--Extant and Historical Populations of Brickellia mosieri--for
  Those Populations Occurring Within a County-Designated Natural Forest
  Community (NFC) Parcel, NFC Number Is Provided if Available. The NFC
  Number Format Is a Letter Designating Primary Habitat Type Within the
   NFC (``P'' for Pine Rockland, ``H'' for Hammock), Followed by a 1-3
                   Digit Number Assigned by the County
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Ownership (*      Population range
  Population (NFC  if       denotes lands     (number of plants
    applicable (P-))         managed for         and year if
                                     conservation)        available)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Extant: Regularly monitored populations--status confirmed within last 5
                                 years.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Navy Wells Pineland Preserve (P-  State of Florida    101-1,000 (272 in
 415).                             (Florida Keys       2009).\1\
                                   Aqueduct
                                   Authority) and
                                   Miami-Dade
                                   County*.
Pine Shore Pineland Preserve (P-  Miami-Dade County*  11-100 (77-118 in
 48).                                                  2009).\1\
Quail Roost Pineland (P-144)....  State of Florida--  11-100 (23 in
                                   managed by Miami-   2011).\1\
                                   Dade County*.
Richmond Pinelands Complex--      Miami-Dade County*  101-1,000 (815 in
 Larry and Penny Thompson Park                         2008).\1\
 (P-391).
Richmond Pinelands Complex--Zoo   Miami-Dade County*  101-1,000 (742 in
 Miami (P-391).                                        2009).\1\
Rockdale Pineland (P-52)........  State of Florida--  1-10 (5 in
                                   managed by Miami-   2010).\1\
                                   Dade County*.
Ron Ehman Park..................  Miami-Dade School   11-100 (31-45 in
                                   Board--managed by   2011).\1\
                                   Miami-Dade
                                   County*.
West Biscayne Pineland (P-295)..  State of Florida--  11-100 (15-150 in
                                   managed by Miami-   2008).\1\
                                   Dade County*.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Presumed Extant: Populations not regularly monitored--status confirmed
                          within last 10 years.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
P-132...........................  Private*..........  1-10.\2\
P-295...........................  Private...........  101-1,000.\2\
P-297...........................  Private...........  11-100.\2\
P-316...........................  Private*..........  11-100.\2\
P-365...........................  Private...........  11-100.\2\
Pine Ridge Sanctuary (P-310)....  Private*..........  11-100.\3\
Porter Russell Pineland Preserve  Private--Tropical   10-15.\4\
 (P-160).                          Audubon Society*.
Richmond Pinelands Complex --     Miami-Dade County*  Unknown
 Martinez Pineland (P-391).                            (previously
                                                       grouped with
                                                       Larry and Penny
                                                       Thompson Park).
Richmond Pinelands Complex --     Private--Universit  11-100.\2\
 University of Miami, Richmond     y of Miami.
 Campus (P-391).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Possibly Extant: Habitat extant but status last confirmed 10-15 years
                                  ago.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Camp Choee (P-397)..............  Private--Girls      11-100.\5\
                                   Scouts of
                                   Tropical Florida.
Camp Owaissa Bauer (H-681)......  Miami-Dade County*  11-100.\5\
Panther Pineland (P-338)........  Private*..........  11-100.\5\
Seminole Wayside Park (P-365)...  Miami-Dade County*  11-100.\5\
Tamiami Pinelands Complex         State of Florida--  10-100.\5\
 Addition (P-6.00).                managed by Miami-
                                   Dade County*.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Unknown/Historical: Habitat extant but records regarding occurrence are
                 limited and/or 15 years old.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ingram Pineland (P-360).........  State of Florida--  Unknown.\6\
                                   managed by Miami-
                                   Dade County*.
Navy Wells 2 (P-329)...  Miami-Dade School   Unknown.\7\
                                   Board.
Nixon Smiley Pineland Preserve    Miami-Dade County*  Unknown.\8\
 (P-370).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Possley 2013b, pers. comm.
\2\ Bradley and Gann 2005, page numbers not applicable.
\3\ Glancy 2013, pers. comm.
\4\ Bradley 2008a, pers. comm.
\5\ Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 15.
\6\ IRC 2005, page numbers not applicable.
\7\ FNAI 2011, page numbers not applicable.
\8\ IRC 1999, p. 2; IRC 2013, page numbers not applicable.


[[Page 61279]]

Demographic, Reproductive Biology, and Population Genetics
    Little research has been done into the demography, reproductive 
biology, or genetics of Brickellia mosieri. Field observations indicate 
that the species does not usually occur in great abundance--populations 
are typically sparse and contain a low density of plants even in well-
maintained pine rockland habitat (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 12). 
Reproduction is sexual (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 12). While specific 
pollinators or dispersers are unknown, flower morphology suggests this 
species may be pollinated by butterflies, bees, or both (Koptur 2013, 
pers. comm.); wind is one likely dispersal vector (Gann 2013b, pers. 
comm.). Flowering takes place primarily in the fall (August-October), 
but individuals may be found in flower during most of the year (Bradley 
and Gann 1999, p. 12).

Linum carteri var. carteri

Description
    Linum carteri var. carteri (Family: Linaceae) is an annual or 
short-lived perennial herb endemic to Miami-Dade County, where it grows 
in pine rocklands, particularly in disturbed pine rocklands (Bradley 
and Gann 1999, p. 70). Its stem is erect, 23-36 cm (9.0-14.2 in) tall, 
commonly branched near the base, and puberulent (covered with minute 
hairs). Its leaves are slender (18-26 mm (0.7-1.0 in) long and 0.8-1.2 
mm (0.03-0.05 in) wide), entire, alternate, and closely overlap at the 
base of the plant. This variety has stipules (pair of appendages at the 
base of the petiole, which is the stalk by which a leaf is attached to 
a stem) with paired dark glands. Its inflorescence (cluster of flowers 
arranged on a branching stem) is an ascending or spreading cyme 
(usually flat-topped or convex flower cluster in which the main axis 
and each branch end in a flower that opens before the flowers below or 
to the side of it), with yellow petals that are broadly obovate (egg-
shaped), 9-17 mm (0.35-0.67 in) long, and quickly deciduous. The fruit 
is straw-colored, ovoid, 4.1-4.6 mm (0.16-0.18 in) long, 3.4-3.7 mm 
(0.13-0.15 in) in diameter, and dehisces (opens spontaneously at 
defined places) into five two-seeded segments; seeds are narrowly 
ovoid-elliptic, 2.3-2.8 mm (0.09-0.11 in) long, 1.0-1.3 mm (0.04-0.05 
in) wide. In habit and flower, the plant closely resembles Piriqueta 
caroliniana (Pitted stripeseed) in the Turneraceae (Bradley and Gann 
1999, p. 70).
Taxonomy
    According to Bradley and Gann (1999, p. 70), Linum carteri was 
named by Small in 1905; in 1907, he put it in a segregate genus, 
calling it Cathartolinum carteri. His concept of the taxon included 
both pubescent and glabrous (smooth, without hairs) plants, with or 
without stipular (having stipules) glands. In 1963, Rogers renamed the 
plants as a variety of Linum rigidum, noting the close relationship of 
Florida plants to those in the Western United States. In 1968, he split 
the taxon into two varieties, calling pubescent plants Linum carteri 
var. carteri, and segregating the glabrous plants as Linum carteri var. 
smallii, basing the division on new genetic data from Mosquin and 
Hayley (1967, pp. 1278-1283) and his own morphological data (Bradley 
and Gann 1999, p. 70). L. c. var. carteri was treated as endemic to 
Miami-Dade County, while L. c. var. smallii was slightly more 
widespread in southern Florida (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 70). Long and 
Lakela (1971), Robertson (1971), and Wunderlin (1998) have used this 
same taxonomy (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 70). ITIS (2013, page numbers 
not applicable) uses the name Linum carteri var. carteri and indicates 
that this species' taxonomic standing is accepted. Based upon the best 
available scientific information, Linum carteri var. carteri is a 
distinct taxon, endemic to Miami-Dade County in Florida. Synonyms 
include Cathartolinum carteri and Linum rigidum var. carteri (ITIS 
2013b, page numbers not applicable).
Climate
    The climate of south Florida where Linum carteri var. carteri 
occurs is described above for Brickellia mosieri.
Habitat
    Like Brickellia mosieri, Linum carteri var. carteri grows 
exclusively on the Miami Rock Ridge in Miami-Dade County outside the 
boundaries of ENP. Its known populations are found at elevations 
ranging from approximately 1.6-4.8 m (5.2-15.9 ft), with occurrences 
distributed fairly regularly throughout this range. Herbarium label 
data indicated that L. c. var. carteri once occurred in pine rocklands 
with sand or marl deposits (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 75). In addition, 
one specimen was taken from Brickell Hammock, but it is more likely 
that the plant was collected outside of the hammock or along the 
roadside (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 75). Currently, this variety is 
associated with pine rocklands that have undergone some sort of 
substrate disturbance (e.g., firebreaks, canal banks, edges of railway 
beds). All known occurrences are within either scarified pine rockland, 
disturbed areas adjacent to or within pine rocklands, or in completely 
disturbed areas having a limestone substrate (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 
71; Bradley 2013, pers. comm.). None of the known occurrences over the 
last 15 years have been from a completely undisturbed pine rockland. L. 
c. var. carteri responds positively to low competition and high light 
conditions, and responds negatively to shading or litter accumulation. 
Thus, it may have been excluded from much of its former habitat by 
inadequate fire management (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 71). 
Alternatively, this variety may only proliferate on sites where exposed 
substrate occurs following disturbance; historically this may have 
occurred following hurricanes (e.g., under tip-up mounds), animal 
disturbance, or fire (Gann 2013a, pers. comm.). More information is 
needed to understand how this variety behaved in intact habitat before 
modern human disturbance (Gann 2013a, pers. comm.).
    The pine rockland community is described above for Brickellia 
mosieri. The scarified pine rocklands and disturbed areas where Linum 
carteri var. carteri occurs often supports a subset of the pine 
rockland flora, as well as a component of weedy native and nonnative 
plants, including Bidens alba var. radiata (beggarticks), Eremochloa 
ophiuroides (centipede grass), Desmodium spp. (ticktrefoil), and 
Stenotaphrum secundatum (St. Augustine grass) (Bradley and Gann 1999, 
p. 71). L. c. var. carteri may grow in association with several other 
rare species including Linum arenicola (sand flax), Dalea 
carthagenensis var. floridana (Florida prairie-clover), and Argythamnia 
blodgettii (Blodgett's silverbush) (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 71).
    The natural disturbance regime for pine rocklands is discussed 
above for Brickellia mosieri and also applies to Linum carteri var. 
carteri. Fellows et al. (2004, p. 95) suggested that fire could be 
beneficial as it creates openings in the habitat, but that the 
potential for adults to survive from rootstock is unknown (although 
population recovery may be supported by the seed bank). Because areas 
where the variety now exists support native pine rockland herbaceous 
and grass plant species, periodic mowing of these areas may partially 
replace the role of fire in maintaining an open understory.

[[Page 61280]]

Historical Range
    Linum carteri var. carteri was first collected in 1903 between the 
Coconut Grove and Cutler areas of Miami, and since that time, it has 
been found in pine rocklands from as far north as the Brickell Hammock 
area to as far south as the Naranja area (Gann et al. 2002, p. 463). 
Bradley and Gann (1999, p. 70) indicated that it has been found at many 
widespread locations, from Coconut Grove (latitude 25[deg] 43.8') to 
southern Miami-Dade County, terminating near SW 280 Street (latitude 
25[deg] 30.4'), a range of about 39 km (24 mi). However, they believe 
that several of these occurrences represented misidentifications, and 
that the plants actually were either Linum arenicola (sand flax) or 
Linum carteri var. smallii (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 72). For example, 
a previous report of the plant occurring at Homestead Air Reserve Base 
site is now considered to be erroneous (Bradley 2008b, pers. comm.). 
Austin et al. (1980, page number not applicable) noted that there were 
four historical sites for this variety in a study of southern Florida, 
although only one site remained in 1980; they attributed the 75 percent 
decline to urbanization.
Current Range, Population Estimates, and Status
    Linum carteri var. carteri is currently found from R. Hardy 
Matheson Preserve (near Pinecrest) southwest to Naranja/Modello, with a 
distance of approximately 27.3 km (17 mi) between the farthest 
locations. The apparent reduction in its historical range (11.2 km (7.2 
mi), or 30 percent) has occurred entirely in the northern portion, 
between Pinecrest and Coconut Grove, primarily due to urban 
development. Similarly, much of the habitat within the variety's 
current range has been destroyed (Gann et al. 2002, p. 463). At least 
five known populations have been extirpated including: Brickell Hammock 
(site developed; last observation in 1911); Red Road/114 Terrace (site 
developed; last observation in 1969); Deering Estate at Cutler (not 
sighted since 1980s; unknown reason); Ponce and Riviera Pineland (site 
developed in 2004); and Cocoplum Development (site developed in 2005) 
(Bradley 2007, pers. comm.; Bradley and van der Heiden 2013, pp. 14-
16). Bradley and Gann (1999, p. 71) described nine known populations 
(only three of these occurring on conservation lands) with an estimated 
total population of 100-1,000 individuals; its status was thought to be 
possibly declining. Fellows et al. (2001, p. 2) estimated the total 
population to be 9,540-10,300 plants across six populations in 2001, 
with one population sustaining the vast majority (Chapman Field, U.S. 
Department of Agriculture (USDA) Subtropical Horticultural Research 
Station; 7,500 individuals). L. c. var. carteri was not found during a 
2-year project intended to survey and map nonnative and rare plants 
along FDOT rights-of-way within Miami-Dade County (Gordon et al. 2007, 
pp. 1, 36).
    In 2012, IRC (Bradley and van der Heiden 2013, entire) conducted a 
status survey for Linum carteri var. carteri to include extant 
occurrences, historical locations, and new survey stations. Because 
they had previously conducted a comprehensive survey of all pine 
rockland habitat in 2004-2005 (during which, L. c. var. carteri was not 
found on any new sites), this habitat was excluded from new surveys. 
Canals within urban Miami-Dade County that intersected with the pine 
rockland soils of the Miami Rock Ridge were surveyed, as were 
additional disturbed sites with remnant native vegetation in close 
proximity to existing sites. L. c. var. carteri was found at seven 
locations containing approximately 1,313 individuals; populations 
ranged in size from a single plant to 700 plants, with a median of 18 
plants (Table 2; Bradley and van der Heiden 2013, p. 6). One occurrence 
(at Gifford Arboretum Pineland), which had not been observed since the 
1990s but whose habitat was still extant, was deemed ``Historical'' and 
may reappear there (Bradley and van der Heiden 2013, p. 14). Of the 
seven extant occurrences, five populations are on publicly owned lands, 
but only three of these are managed for the conservation of natural 
resources (Table 2). Four of the populations occur near the north end 
of the variety's range (near R. Hardy Matheson Preserve), and three 
occur near the south end (near Camp Owaissa Bauer), with an 
approximately 16-km (10-mi) gap between the closest populations of 
these groups. Within each grouping, populations are approximately 1.3-
4.3 km (0.8-2.7 mi) apart.
    Because this variety is known to be a short-lived perennial with 
widely fluctuating numbers of individuals (Maschinski et al. 2003, p. 
v; 2004, p. iv), as well as being difficult to find when not in flower, 
we include an estimate of population range using the logarithmic scale 
(Table 2) to account for these characteristics and to provide a 
comparison to the previous total population estimates. Using the 
logarithmic scale, the total population estimate is 337-3,310 plants. 
However, it should be noted that most 2012 observations were at the low 
end of the corresponding logarithmic range such that the resulting high 
end for the total population estimate may be a gross overestimate of 
the actual population. Based strictly on 2012 observations, the total 
population estimate may be closer to 1,300 individuals. Comparing these 
estimates to the 1999 and 2003 population estimates generally supports 
the boom-and-bust nature of Linum carteri var. carteri, although the 
significant decline since 2001 could also potentially indicate a 
declining trend in one or more populations (especially USDA Chapman 
Field and R. Hardy Matheson Preserve).

    Table 2--Extant and Historical Populations of Linum carteri var.
   carteri--for Those Populations Occurring Within a County-Designated
    Natural Forest Community (NFC) Parcel, NFC Number is Provided if
Available. The NFC Number Format is a Letter Designating Primary Habitat
    Type Within the NFC (``P'' for Pine Rockland, ``H'' for Hammock),
          Followed by a 1-3 Digit Number Assigned by the County
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                Ownership (*
Population (NFC  if   denotes lands     Population range (est.
  applicable (P-))     managed  for      number of  plants in
                               conservation)           2012) \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Extant: Population status confirmed in 2012 surveys conducted by IRC.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
C-103 Canal.................  State of         1-10 (1).
                               Florida--South
                               Florida Water
                               Management
                               District.
Camp Owaissa Bauer Addition   State of         11-100 (13).
 (P-255.4).                    Florida--manag
                               ed by Miami-
                               Dade County*.
Chapman Field, USDA           Federal--U.S.    101-1,000 (700).
 Subtropical Horticultural     Department of
 Research Station (portions    Agriculture.
 are P-63).
Montgomery Botanical Center.  Private--Montgo  11-100 (12).
                               mery Botanical
                               Center.
Old Dixie Pineland..........  Private........  11-100 (18).

[[Page 61281]]

 
R. Hardy Matheson Preserve    State of         101-1,000 (374).
 (H-634).                      Florida--manag
                               ed by Miami-
                               Dade County *.
Rockdale Pineland Addition    Miami-Dade       101-1,000 (195).
 (P-52).                       County *.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Historical: Population not observed for 10 years, but habitat
                                 extant.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gifford Arboretum Pineland..  Private........  0.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Source for number of plants is Bradley and van der Heiden (2013, pp.
  12-16).

Demographics, Reproductive Biology and Population Genetics
    The reproductive ecology and biology of Linum carteri var. carteri 
is not well understood, but reproduction is sexual (Bradley and Gann 
1999, p. 71). L. c. var. carteri is capable of flowering throughout the 
year, but tends to have most abundant flowering and fruiting following 
rain (Maschinski and Walters 2008, p. 28). Tatje (1980, p. 2) indicated 
that the variety requires disturbance to bloom, although this theory 
was not supported by observations of Maschinski et al. (2003, pp. 37-
39). While specific pollinators are unknown, flower morphology suggests 
this variety may be pollinated by butterflies, bees, or both (Koptur 
2013, pers. comm.). Alternatively, Mosquin and Hayley (1967, p. 1278) 
suggested L. c. var. carteri may be self-pollinated. Dispersers are 
also unknown, although historically water may have played a role in 
dispersal when summer high-water conditions in adjacent wet prairies 
may have inundated portions of pine rocklands (Gann 2013b, pers. 
comm.). The maximum magnitude and frequency of seed production is 
unknown, although Maschinski and Walters (2007, p. 56) indicate plants 
can produce up to 62 fruits. Some fruits dehisce in a characteristic 5-
parted star pattern, while others never dehisce (Fellows 2002, Appendix 
D2 p. 1).
    Preliminary demographic monitoring of Linum carteri var. carteri 
showed that, for adult reproductive plants, average plant growth was 
fairly constant from July through October, flowering and fruit 
production were most abundant in July, and plant mortality increased 
during the fall months (Maschinski et al. 2002, p. iv). Maschinski and 
Walters (2008, p. 27) studied in situ germination and growth-to-
maturity of plants growing in the wild at two sites (mown and 
undisturbed) from January 2006 until July 2007. Field germination 
varied across sites and season of seed production, with seed produced 
in winter (January) having low to no germination and longer germination 
times than seeds produced in summer (July). Of the 51 seeds that 
germinated across all trials, they followed the growth of 32 
seedlings--of these, only 6 set fruit (Maschinski and Walters 2008, p. 
27). The mean time to set first bud was 197  2.4 days, 
while mean time to first fruit set was 226  2.3 days 
(Maschinski and Walters 2008, p. 27). The 226-day growth-to-maturity 
enables this variety to contribute seeds to a next generation in a 
relatively short period (Maschinski and Walters 2008, p. 28). Once 
mature, individuals may live one to several years producing multiple 
fruits (Maschinski and Walters 2008, p. 28). Growth-to-maturity may be 
influenced by season of germination, with summer-germinating seeds 
possibly reaching maturity more rapidly than seedlings that germinate 
in the fall or winter (Maschinski and Walters 2008, p. 28). Similarly, 
seeds produced during different seasons may differ in their germination 
rates, dormancy breaking requirements, and rates of growth (Maschinski 
and Walters 2008, p. 28).
    To examine population viability in response to disturbance, long-
term demographic studies were conducted from June 2003 through July 
2007 at a disturbed (mown) site and an undisturbed site; in May 2006, a 
site having both disturbed and undisturbed sections was added 
(Maschinski 2006, p. 82; Maschinski and Walters 2007, p. 55). Results 
were mixed with regard to demographic responses between sites. 
Maschinski (2006, p. 83) reported that Linum carteri var. carteri has 
typical behavior for an early successional plant. Significantly higher 
densities of plants were found at the mown sites where competition with 
other plants is decreased, although changes in number of plants between 
sites and treatments were variable (Maschinski and Walters 2007, p. 
56). Germination varied across sites and season of seed production as 
discussed above, although there was greater germination on the 
undisturbed site in both seasons. Fruiting was also variable across 
years and sites; while there was no clear effect of mowing, plants 
growing on mown sites were shorter, which may affect fruiting 
magnitude. While mowing does not usually kill adult plants, if mowing 
occurs prior to plants reaching reproductive status, it can also delay 
reproduction (Maschinski and Walters 2007 pp. 56-57). If such mowing 
occurs repeatedly, reproduction of those plants would be entirely 
eliminated. If, instead, mowing occurs at least three weeks after 
flowering, there would be a higher probability of adults setting fruit 
prior to mowing; mowing may then act as a positive disturbance by both 
scattering seeds and reducing competition (Maschinski and Walters 2007, 
p. 57). The exact impacts of mowing thus depend on the timing of the 
mowing event, rainfall prior to and following mowing, and the numbers 
of plants in the population that have reached a reproductive state.
    Although population viability models projected declines in mown 
sites, and fairly stable population growth in undisturbed sites, high 
variation in the models suggest caution be used in interpreting 
results. One likely factor in the high year-to-year variation observed 
is variation in weather, which was most apparent in the model for 
undisturbed habitat. Preliminary models indicated that population 
viability was greatly affected by reproductive rates and whether there 
is a persistent seed bank (Maschinski 2006, p. 83; Maschinski and 
Walters 2007, p. 56). Models indicate that the transition from seedling 
to adult and adult reproduction greatly influence population 
trajectories (Maschinski and Walters 2007, p. 56). However, more 
frequent monitoring (with frequency partially dependent of

[[Page 61282]]

mowing regime) is needed to determine threshold reproductive values for 
population growth and whether disturbance regime has a persistent 
impact on population demographics (Maschinski 2013, pers. comm.).

Summary of Factors Affecting the Species

    Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533), and its implementing 
regulations at 50 CFR part 424, set forth the procedures for adding 
species to the Federal Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and 
Plants. Under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, we may determine a species to 
be endangered or threatened due to one or more of the following five 
factors: (A) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or 
curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) overutilization for 
commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes; (C) 
disease or predation; (D) the inadequacy of existing regulatory 
mechanisms; or (E) other natural or manmade factors affecting its 
continued existence. Listing actions may be warranted based on any of 
the above threat factors, singly or in combination. Each of these 
factors as applied to these two plants is discussed below.

A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment 
of Its Habitat or Range

    Brickellia mosieri and Linum carteri var. carteri have experienced 
substantial destruction, modification, and curtailment of their habitat 
and range (see Status Assessment, above). Specific threats to these 
plants included in this factor include habitat loss, fragmentation, and 
modification caused by development (i.e., conversion to both urban and 
agricultural land uses) and inadequate fire management. Each of these 
threats and its specific effects on these plants are discussed in 
detail below.
Human Population Growth and Development
    The pine rockland community of south Florida, to which both plants 
are endemic, is critically imperiled globally (FNAI 2012, p. 27). Since 
the 1800s, residential and commercial development and agriculture have 
drastically reduced the habitat for these plants throughout pine 
rocklands in south Florida. When the Florida East Coast (FEC) Railroad 
reached Miami in 1896, industrial logging began and pinelands were 
clearcut over the next 50 years (Snyder et al. 1990, p. 271). Groves of 
tropical trees were planted on well-drained (and previously cleared) 
pinelands; with the invention of the ``rock plow'' in 1954, large-scale 
clearing of pinelands for row crops began (Snyder et al. 1990, p. 272). 
Due to these impacts combined with increased residential development 
from the early 1900s, pine rockland habitat in Miami-Dade County, 
including ENP, was reduced to about 11 percent of its natural extent, 
from approximately 74,000 hectares (ha) (183,000 acres (ac)) to only 
8,140 ha (20,100 ac) in 1996 (Kernan and Bradley 1996, p. 2). Outside 
of ENP, only about 1 percent of the Miami Rock Ridge pinelands have 
escaped clearing, and much of what is left is in small remnant blocks 
isolated from other natural areas (Herndon 1998, p. 1). Habitat loss 
continues to occur in these plants' ranges, and most remaining suitable 
habitat has been negatively altered by human activity.
    While Miami-Dade County has developed a network of public 
conservation lands including some of these pine rocklands, much of the 
remaining habitat occurs on private lands as well as publically owned 
lands not managed for conservation. Species occurrences and suitable 
habitat remaining on these lands are threatened by habitat loss and 
degradation, and threats are expected to accelerate with increased 
development. The human population within Miami-Dade County, which 
comprises the historical and current ranges for these plants and, 
therefore, supports all of the remaining occurrences, is currently 
greater than 2.4 million people, and the population is expected to grow 
to more than 4 million by 2060, an annual increase of roughly 30,000 
people (Zwick and Carr 2006, p. 20). Approximately 47 percent (8 sites) 
of extant Brickellia mosieri occurrences, and 28 percent (2 sites) of 
extant Linum carteri var. carteri occurrences, are located on private 
land within this County; however, it is likely that these plants will 
be lost from most of these sites, with increased development pressure.
    Development, such as road construction, can also threaten these 
plants' habitat on public lands. This is especially true for Linum 
carteri var. carteri, whose association with disturbed areas is more 
likely to result in occurrences in firebreaks and other edge areas 
subject to increased development pressure and effects. For example, one 
colony of 11-100 L. c. var. carteri individuals located within the FEC 
Railway right-of-way at Old Dixie Pineland was destroyed by the 
construction of the South Miami-Dade Busway in 2007 (Bradley and van 
der Heiden 2013, p. 15). In addition, one of the two colonies of L. c. 
var. carteri on Camp Owaissa Bauer Addition occurs along the edge of 
pine rockland along Krome Avenue, and is threatened by the proposed 
widening of that road.
    Another human-related factor that can modify public and private 
lands alike is the potential for high levels of nutrients from 
agricultural and urban areas to enter into pine rockland systems. Such 
chemical alteration of pine rockland soil, which has naturally low 
amounts of phosphorus and nitrogen, can result in changes to vegetation 
composition and structure, at the expense of pine rockland endemics 
such as Brickellia mosieri and Linum carteri var. carteri. This is 
currently not considered a problem in most intact pine rockland 
systems, but could likely be an issue where restoration is required 
(Gann 2013a, pers. comm.).
Habitat Fragmentation
    Habitat fragmentation reduces the size of plant populations, and 
increases spatial isolation of remnants. Barrios et al. (2011, p. 1062) 
investigated the effects of fragmentation on a threatened pine rockland 
plant, Angadenia berteroi (pineland golden trumpet), and found that 
abundance and fragment size were positively related. Possley et al. 
(2008, p. 385) studied the effects of fragment size on species 
composition in south Florida pine rocklands, and found that plant 
species richness and fragment size were positively correlated (although 
some small fragments supported nearly as many species as the largest 
fragment). Composition of fragmented habitat typically differs from 
that of intact forests, as isolation and edge effects increase leading 
to increased abundance of disturbance-adapted species (weedy species, 
nonnative invasive species) and lower rates of pollination and 
propagule dispersal (Laurence and Bierregaard 1997, pp. 347-350.; Noss 
and Csuti 1997, pp. 284-299). The degree to which fragmentation 
threatens the dispersal abilities of Brickellia mosieri and Linum 
carteri var. carteri is unknown. Because B. mosieri is thought to be 
dispersed, to some degree, by wind, dispersal-related impacts are 
probably less than those experienced by L. c. var. carteri, which has 
heavier seeds. In the historical landscape, where pine rockland 
occurred within a mosaic of wetlands, water may have acted as a 
dispersal vector for all pine rockland seeds, and especially for plants 
such as L. c. var. carteri. In the current, fragmented landscape, this 
type of dispersal would no longer be possible. While additional 
dispersal vectors for L. c. var. carteri may include animals and (in 
certain locations) mowing equipment, it is likely that

[[Page 61283]]

fragmentation has effectively reduced this taxon's ability to disperse.
    While pollination research has not been conducted for Brickellia 
mosieri or Linum carteri var. carteri, research regarding other species 
and ecosystems provides valuable information regarding potential 
effects of fragmentation to these plants. Effects of fragmentation on 
pollinators may include changes to the pollinator community as a result 
of limitation of pollinator-required resources (e.g., reduced 
availability of rendezvous plants, nesting and roosting sites, and 
nectar/pollen); these changes may include changes to pollinator 
community composition, species abundance and diversity, and pollinator 
behavior (Rathcke and Jules 1993, pp. 273-275; Kremen and Ricketts 
2000, p. 1227; Harris and Johnson 2004, pp. 30-33). As a result, plants 
in fragmented habitats may experience lower visitation rates, which in 
turn may result in reduced seed production of the pollinated plant 
(which may lead to reduced seedling recruitment), reduced pollen 
dispersal, increased inbreeding, reduced genetic variability, and 
ultimately reduced population viability (Rathcke and Jules 1993, p. 
275; Goverde et al. 2002, pp. 297-298; Harris and Johnson 2004, pp. 33-
34).
    In addition to effects on pollination, fragmentation of natural 
habitats often alters other ecosystems' functions and disturbance 
regimes. Fragmentation results in an increased proportion of ``edge'' 
habitat, which in turn has a variety of effects, including changes in 
microclimate and community structure at various distances from the edge 
(Margules and Pressey 2000, p. 248), altered spatial distribution of 
fire (greater fire frequency in areas nearer the edge) (Cochrane 2001, 
pp. 1518-1519), and increased pressure from nonnative invasive plants 
and animals that may out-compete or disturb native plant populations. 
The effects of fragmentation on fire go beyond edge effects and include 
reduced likelihood and extent of fires, and altered behavior and 
characteristics (e.g., intensity) of those fires that do occur. Habitat 
fragmentation encourages the suppression of naturally occurring fires, 
and has prevented fire from moving across the landscape in a natural 
way, resulting in an increased amount of habitat suffering from these 
negative impacts. High fragmentation of small habitat patches within an 
urban matrix discourages the use of prescribed fire as well due to 
logistical difficulties (see Fire Management, below). Forest fragments 
in urban settings are also subject to increased likelihood of certain 
types of human-related disturbance, such as the dumping of trash 
(Chavez and Tynon 2000, p. 405). The many effects of habitat 
fragmentation may work in concert to threaten the local persistence of 
a species; when a species' range of occurrence is limited, threats to 
local persistence increase extinction risk.
Fire Management
    One of the primary threats to both of these plants is habitat 
modification and degradation through inadequate fire management, which 
includes both the lack of prescribed fire and suppression of natural 
fires. Where the term ``fire-suppressed'' is used below, it describes 
degraded pine rockland conditions resulting from a lack of adequate 
fire (natural or prescribed) in the landscape. Historically, frequent 
(approximately twice per decade), lightning-induced fires were a vital 
component in maintaining native vegetation and ecosystem functioning 
within south Florida pine rocklands (see Status Assessment, above). A 
period of just 10 years without fire may result in a marked decrease in 
the number of herbaceous species due to the effects of shading and 
litter accumulation (FNAI 2010, p. 63). Exclusion of fire for 
approximately 25 years will likely result in gradual hammock 
development over that time period, leaving a system that is very fire 
resistant if additional pre-fire management (e.g., mechanical hardwood 
removal) is not undertaken.
    Now, natural fires are unlikely to occur or are likely to be 
suppressed in the remaining, highly fragmented pine rockland habitat. 
The suppression of natural fires has reduced the size of the areas that 
burn, and habitat fragmentation has prevented fire from moving across 
the landscape in a natural way. Without fire, successional climax from 
pine rockland to rockland hammock is rapid, and displacement of native 
species by invasive nonnative plants often occurs. Understory plants 
such as Brickellia mosieri and Linum carteri var. carteri are shaded 
out by hardwoods and nonnatives alike. Shading may also be caused by a 
fire-suppressed (and, in some cases, planted) pine canopy that has 
evaded the natural thinning effects that fire has on seedlings and 
smaller trees. Gann (2013a, pers. comm.) indicates this is also a 
threat to pine rockland habitat on the Miami Rock Ridge. Whether the 
dense canopy is composed of pine, hardwoods, nonnatives, or a 
combination, seed germination and establishment are inhibited in fire-
suppressed habitat due to accumulated leaf litter, which also changes 
soil moisture and nutrient availability (Hiers et al. 2007, pp. 811-
812). This alteration to microhabitat can also inhibit seedling 
establishment as well as negatively influence flower and fruit 
production (Wendelberger and Maschinski 2009, pp. 849-851), thereby 
reducing sexual reproduction in fire-adapted species such as B. mosieri 
and L. c. var. carteri (Geiger 2002, pp. 78-79, 81-83).
    After an extended period of inadequate fire management in pine 
rocklands, it becomes necessary to control invading native hardwoods 
mechanically, since excess growth of native hardwoods would result in a 
hot fire, which can be destructive. Mechanical treatments cannot 
entirely replace fire because pine trees, understory shrubs, grasses, 
and herbs all contribute to an ever-increasing layer of leaf litter, 
covering herbs and preventing germination, as discussed above. Leaf 
litter will continue to accumulate even if hardwoods are removed 
mechanically. In addition, the ashes left by fires provide important 
post-fire nutrient cycling, which is not provided via mechanical 
removal.
    Brickellia mosieri--All occurrences of Brickellia mosieri are 
affected by some degree of inadequate fire management, with the primary 
threat being shading by hardwoods (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 15; 
Bradley and Gann 2005, page numbers not applicable). While management 
of some County conservation lands (e.g., those in Richmond Pinelands 
complex and Navy Wells Pineland Preserve) includes regular burning, 
other such lands can be severely fire-suppressed. For example, the B. 
mosieri population at Pine Shore Pineland Preserve may be the most 
endangered (due to lack of adequate fire management), and is expected 
to be extirpated within 10 years if fires are not reintroduced (Possley 
2013a, pers. comm.). Even in areas under active management, some 
portions are typically fire-suppressed, thereby threatening populations 
of this species.
    Linum carteri var. carteri--Of the seven extant occurrences of 
Linum carteri var. carteri, six are threatened to some degree by 
inadequate fire management. Three of these populations (Camp Owaissa 
Bauer Addition, Montgomery Botanical Center, and Rockdale Pineland) 
occur adjacent to fire-suppressed pine rocklands (Bradley and van der 
Heiden 2013, pp. 13-16). One population (R. Hardy Matheson Preserve) 
occurs in previously cleared pine rockland habitat in areas of open 
canopy gaps and exposed bare rock substrate (Bradley and van der Heiden 
2013, p. 16). Pine rocklands at Chapman Field, USDA Subtropical 
Horticultural Research Station are severely fire-

[[Page 61284]]

suppressed, and the plant now occurs only adjacent to the pine 
rocklands or in nearby open fields (Bradley and van der Heiden 2013, p. 
13). In addition, one historical population (at Gifford Arboretum 
Pineland) may have been extirpated due to the effects of inadequate 
fire management (Bradley and van der Heiden 2013, p. 14). Bradley and 
Gann (1999, pp. 71-72) suggested that the lack of fires in most forest 
fragments in Miami-Dade County during the last century may be one of 
the reasons why this taxon occurs primarily in disturbed areas.
    Implementation of a prescribed fire program in Miami-Dade County 
has been hampered by a shortage of resources, and by logistical 
difficulties and public concern related to burning next to residential 
areas. Many homes have been built in a mosaic of pine rockland, so the 
use of prescribed fire in many places has become complicated because of 
potential danger to structures and smoke generated from the burns. 
Nonprofit organizations such as IRC have similar difficulties in 
conducting prescribed burns due to difficulties with permitting and 
obtaining the necessary permissions as well as hazard insurance 
limitations (Gann 2013a, pers. comm.). Few private landowners have the 
means and/or desire to implement prescribed fire on their property, and 
doing so in a fragmented urban environment is logistically difficult 
and may be costly. One of the few privately owned pine rocklands that 
is successfully managed with prescribed burning is Pine Ridge 
Sanctuary, located in a more agricultural (less urban) matrix in the 
southwestern portion of Brickellia mosieri's current range, which was 
last burned in November 2010 (Glancy 2013, pers. comm.).
Conservation Efforts To Reduce the Present or Threatened Destruction, 
Modification, or Curtailment of Habitat or Range
    In 1979, Miami-Dade County enacted the Environmentally Endangered 
Lands (EEL) Covenant Program, which reduces taxes for private 
landowners of natural forest communities (NFCs; pine rocklands and 
tropical hardwood hammocks) who agree not to develop their property and 
manage it for a period of 10 years, with the option to renew for 
additional 10-year periods (Service 1999, p. 3-177). Although these 
temporary conservation easements provide valuable protection for their 
duration, they are not considered under Factor D, below, because they 
are voluntary agreements and not regulatory in nature. Miami-Dade 
County currently has approximately 59 pine rockland properties enrolled 
in this program, preserving 69.4 ha (172 ac) of pine rockland habitat 
(Johnson 2012, pers. comm.). The vast majority of these properties are 
small--only three are larger than 2 ha (5 ac)--and many are in need of 
habitat management such as prescribed fire and removal of nonnative 
invasive plants. Of the 59 pine rockland properties, three have known 
populations of Brickellia mosieri. Two of these, a 1.3-ha (3.3-ac) 
parcel and a 5.7-ha (14-ac) parcel, are in good overall condition. The 
other, a 5.75-ha (14.2-ac) parcel, has heavy cover by exotics, and 
illegal clearing of NFC vegetation was observed during a 2013 site 
inspection. Thus, while EEL covenant lands have the potential to 
provide valuable habitat for these plants and reduce threats in the 
near term, the actual effect of these conservation lands is largely 
determined by whether individual land owners follow prescribed EEL 
management plans and NFC regulations (see Local under Factor D).
    Since 2005, the Service has funded IRC to facilitate restoration 
and management of privately owned pine rockland habitats in Miami-Dade 
County. These programs included prescribed burns, nonnative plant 
control, light debris removal, hardwood management, reintroduction of 
pines where needed, and development of management plans. One of these 
programs, called the Pine Rockland Initiative, includes 10-year 
cooperative agreements between participating landowners and the 
Service/IRC to ensure restored areas will be managed appropriately 
during that time. Although most of these objectives have been achieved, 
IRC has not been able to conduct the desired prescribed burns, due to 
logistical difficulties as discussed above (see Fire Management).
    Fairchild Tropical Botanic Garden (FTBG), with the support of 
various Federal, State, local, and nonprofit organizations, has 
established the ``Connect to Protect Network.'' The objective of this 
program is to encourage widespread participation of citizens to create 
corridors of healthy pine rocklands by planting stepping stone gardens 
and rights-of-way with native pine rockland species, and restoring 
isolated pine rockland fragments. By doing this, FTBG hopes to increase 
the probability that pollination and seed dispersal vectors can find 
and transport seeds and pollen across developed areas that separate 
pine rockland fragments to improve gene flow between fragmented plant 
populations and increase the likelihood that these plants will persist 
over the long term. Although these projects may serve as valuable 
components toward the conservation of pine rockland species and 
habitat, they are dependent on continual funding, as well as 
participation from private landowners, both of which may vary through 
time.

B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or 
Educational Purposes

    We have no evidence suggesting that overutilization for commercial, 
recreational, scientific, or educational purposes is a threat to 
Brickellia mosieri. Except for its rarity, the species does not possess 
any attributes that would make it desirable to collectors, such as 
showy foliage or flowers, and there are no known medicinal, culinary, 
or religious uses for this species. We also have no evidence that 
overutilization is a threat for Linum carteri var. carteri. However, 
FTBG states that the species is a member of the Linum rigidum complex 
and, therefore, may contain the [alpha]-carotenoids leutin and 5,6-
monoepoxide (Robertson 1971, p. 658), both of which are hypothesized to 
reduce the risk of certain cancers (Fellows et al. 2004, p. 96). At 
this time, we have no evidence indicating that L. c. var. carteri is 
being used for this purpose. Therefore, we believe that collection for 
medicinal purposes is not a threat at this time. Based on our analysis 
of the best available scientific and commercial information, we find 
that collecting for commercial or scientific reasons or recreational 
activities is not a threat to B. mosieri or L. c. var. carteri in any 
portion of their ranges at this time and is not likely to become so in 
the future. Threats to these plants related to other aspects of 
recreation and similar human activities (i.e., not related to 
overutilization) are discussed in Factor E.

C. Disease or Predation

    No diseases or incidences of predation have been reported for 
Brickellia mosieri and Linum carteri var. carteri.

D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms

    Under this factor, we examine whether existing regulatory 
mechanisms are inadequate to address the threats to the species 
discussed under the other factors. Section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act 
requires the Service to take into account ``those efforts, if any, 
being made by any State or foreign nation, or any political subdivision 
of a State or foreign nation, to protect such species. . . .'' In 
relation to Factor D, we interpret this language to require the Service 
to consider

[[Page 61285]]

relevant Federal, State, and tribal laws, plans, regulations, and other 
such mechanisms that may minimize any of the threats we describe in 
threat analyses under the other four factors, or otherwise enhance 
conservation of the species. We give strongest weight to statutes and 
their implementing regulations and to management direction that stems 
from those laws and regulations. An example would be State governmental 
actions enforced under a State statute or constitution, or Federal 
action under statute.
Federal
    These plants have no Federal regulatory protection in their known 
occupied and suitable habitat. Neither taxon occurs on National 
Wildlife Refuge or National Park land. Brickellia mosieri is known to 
occur on Federal lands within the Richmond Pinelands Complex, including 
lands owned by the U.S. Coast Guard and the National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Association (NOAA; small portion of Martinez Pineland). The 
only known Federal occurrence of Linum carteri var. carteri is on 
Chapman Field USDA Subtropical Horticultural Research Station. There 
are no Federal protections for candidate species on these properties. 
These plants primarily occur on State- or County-owned and private land 
(Tables 1 and 2), and development of these areas will likely require no 
Federal permit or other authorization. Therefore, projects that affect 
them are usually not analyzed under the National Environmental Policy 
Act (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).
State
    Brickellia mosieri and Linum carteri var. carteri are listed on the 
Regulated Plant Index as endangered under Chapter 5B-40, Florida 
Administrative Code. The Regulated Plant Index also includes all 
federally listed endangered and threatened plant species. This listing 
provides little or no habitat protection beyond the State's Development 
of Regional Impact process, which discloses impacts from projects, but 
provides no regulatory protection for State-listed plants on private 
lands.
    Florida Statutes 581.185 sections (3)(a) and (b) prohibit any 
person from willfully destroying or harvesting any species listed as 
endangered or threatened on the Index, or growing such a plant on the 
private land of another, or on any public land, without first obtaining 
the written permission of the landowner and a permit from the Florida 
Department of Plant Industry. The statute further provides that any 
person willfully destroying or harvesting; transporting, carrying, or 
conveying on any public road or highway; or selling or offering for 
sale any plant listed in the Index as endangered must have a permit 
from the State at all times when engaged in any such activities.
    In addition, subsections (8)(a) and (b) of the statute waive State 
regulation for certain classes of activities for all species on the 
Regulated Plant Index, including the clearing or removal of regulated 
plants for agricultural, forestry, mining, construction (residential, 
commercial, or infrastructure), and fire-control activities by a 
private landowner or his or her agent. However, section (10) of the 
statute provides for consultation similar to section 7 of the Federal 
Act for listed species by requiring the Department of Transportation to 
notify the FDACS and the Endangered Plant Advisory Council of planned 
highway construction at the time bids are first advertised, to 
facilitate evaluation of the project for listed plant populations, and 
to ``provide for the appropriate disposal of such plants'' (i.e., 
transplanting).
Local
    In 1984, Section 24-49 of the Code of Miami-Dade County established 
regulation of County-designated NFCs, which include both pine rocklands 
and tropical hardwood hammocks. These regulations were placed on 
specific properties throughout the county by an act of the Board of 
County Commissioners in an effort to protect environmentally sensitive 
forest lands. The Miami-Dade County Department of Regulatory and 
Economic Resources (RER) has regulatory authority over NFCs and is 
charged with enforcing regulations that provide partial protection on 
the Miami Rock Ridge. Miami-Dade Code typically allows up to 20 percent 
of a pine rockland designated as NFC to be developed, and requires that 
the remaining 80 percent be placed under a perpetual covenant. In 
certain circumstances, where the landowner can demonstrate that 
limiting development to 20 percent does not allow for ``reasonable 
use'' of the property, additional development may be approved. NFC 
landowners are also required to obtain an NFC permit for any work, 
including removal of nonnatives within the boundaries of the NFC on 
their property. The NFC program is responsible for ensuring that NFC 
permits are issued in accordance with the limitations and requirements 
of the code and that appropriate NFC preserves are established and 
maintained in conjunction with the issuance of an NFC permit. The NFC 
program currently regulates approximately 600 pine rockland or pine 
rockland/hammock properties, comprising approximately 1,200 ha (3,000 
ac) of habitat (Joyner 2013, pers. comm.). NFC regulations are designed 
to prevent clearing or destruction of native vegetation within 
preserved areas; however, illegal development and destruction of pine 
rockland continues to occur, despite these regulations. When 
discovered, RER pursues unpermitted work through appropriate 
enforcement action and seeks restoration when possible.
Fee Title Properties
    In 1990, Miami-Dade County voters approved a 2-year property tax to 
fund the acquisition, protection, and maintenance of environmentally 
endangered lands. The EEL Program identifies and secures these lands 
for preservation. Under this program to date, Miami-Dade County has 
acquired a total of approximately 255 ha (630 ac) of pine rockland. In 
addition, approximately 445 ha (1,100 ac) of pine rockland are owned by 
the Miami-Dade County Parks and Recreation Department and managed by 
the EEL Program, including some of the largest remaining areas of pine 
rockland habitat on the Miami Rock Ridge outside of ENP (e.g., Larry 
and Penny Thompson Park, Zoo Miami pinelands, and Navy Wells Pineland 
Preserve).
    While State and local regulations, and fee title properties, do 
provide for protection of these plants specifically, and pine rockland 
habitat in general, they are either not effective or not implemented 
sufficiently to alleviate the threats to these plants or their habitat.

E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued Existence

    Brickellia mosieri and Linum carteri var. carteri are both 
threatened by other natural or manmade factors that affect each taxon 
to varying degrees. Specific threats to these plants included in this 
factor consist of the spread of nonnative invasive plants, potentially 
incompatible management practices (such as mowing and herbicide use), 
direct impacts to plants from recreation and other human activities, 
small population size and isolation, climate change, and the related 
risks from environmental stochasticity (extreme weather) on these small 
populations. Each of these threats and its specific effect on these 
plants are discussed in detail below.

[[Page 61286]]

Nonnative Plant Species
    Nonnative plants have significantly affected pine rocklands, and 
threaten all occurrences of Brickellia mosieri and Linum carteri var. 
carteri to some degree (Bradley and Gann 1999, pp. 15, 72; Bradley and 
Gann 2005, page numbers not applicable; Bradley 2007, pers. comm.; 
Bradley and van der Heiden 2013, pp. 12-16). As a result of human 
activities, at least 277 taxa of nonnative plants have invaded pine 
rocklands throughout south Florida (Service 1999, p. 3-175). Neyraudia 
neyraudiana (Burma reed) and Schinus terebinthifolius (Brazilian 
pepper) threaten both plants (Bradley and Gann 1999, pp. 13, 72). S. 
terebinthifolius, a nonnative tree, is the most widespread and one of 
the most invasive species. It forms dense thickets of tangled, woody 
stems that completely shade out and displace native vegetation (Loflin 
1991, p. 19; Langeland and Craddock Burks 1998, p. 54). Acacia 
auriculiformis (earleaf acacia), Rhynchelytrum repens (natal grass), 
Lantana camara (shrub verbena), and Albizia lebbeck (tongue tree) are 
some of the other nonnative species in pine rocklands. More species of 
nonnative plants could become problems in the future, such as Lygodium 
microphyllum (Old World climbing fern), which is a serious threat 
throughout south Florida.
    Nonnative invasive plants compete with native plants for space, 
light, water, and nutrients, and make habitat conditions unsuitable for 
both Brickellia mosieri and Linum carteri var. carteri, which respond 
positively to open conditions. They also affect the characteristics of 
a fire when it does occur. Historically, pine rocklands had an open, 
low understory where natural fires remained patchy with low temperature 
intensity, thus sparing many native plants such as B. mosieri and L. c. 
var. carteri. Dense infestations of Neyraudia neyraudiana and Schinus 
terebinthifolius cause higher fire temperatures and longer burning 
periods. With the presence of invasive nonnative species, it is 
uncertain how fire, even under a managed situation, will affect these 
plants. Bradley and Gann (1999, pp. 13, 71-72) indicated that the 
control of nonnative plants is one of the most important conservation 
actions for these plants and a critical part of habitat maintenance.
    Management of nonnative invasive plants in pine rocklands in Miami-
Dade County is further complicated because the vast majority of pine 
rocklands are small, fragmented areas bordered by urban development. 
Areas near managed pine rockland that contain nonnative species can act 
as a seed source of nonnatives allowing them to continue to invade the 
surrounding pine rockland (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 13).
Mowing
    Linum carteri var. carteri's occurrence in disturbed, open areas 
such as firebreaks and road rights-of-way makes it much more 
susceptible than Brickellia mosieri to disturbance factors such as 
mowing. According to Bradley and van der Heiden (2013, pp. 12-16), five 
of the seven extant populations of this variety are vulnerable to 
changes in mowing practices. Mowing can serve to maintain an open 
understory in the absence of fire (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 71; 
Maschinski and Walters 2007, p. 56). For example, at the Montgomery 
Botanical Center, occasional mowing is thought to keep competing 
vegetation at bay while still allowing the plants to complete their 
life cycle (Maschinski 2011, pers. comm.). However, mowing can also 
threaten this variety depending on the timing, frequency, and intensity 
of its application (see Status Assessment, above). If not properly 
applied, mowing can eliminate reproduction entirely in very young 
plants or delay reproductive maturation (Maschinski and Walters 2007, 
p. 56; 2008, p. 28). In some instances, adult plants may be killed, but 
typically mowing simply disrupts the apical meristem (as with natural 
levels of herbivory) and triggers production of additional lateral 
branches; plants can produce compensatory branches following mowing and 
live to reproduce at a later time as long as the mowing regime is not 
too frequent (Maschinski and Walters 2008, p. 28). The impact of mowing 
can be modified by the timing and frequency of the mowing event, 
rainfall prior to and following the event, and the numbers of plants 
that have reached reproductive state prior to mowing (Maschinski and 
Walters 2008, p. 27). Maschinski and Walters (2008, p. 28) recommended 
adjusting the timing of mowing to occur at least three weeks after 
flowering is observed to allow a higher probability of adults setting 
fruit prior to the mowing event. With flexibility and proper 
instructions to land managers and ground crews, mowing practices could 
be implemented in such a way as to scatter seeds and reduce competition 
with little effect on population reproductive output for the year 
(Maschinski and Walters 2008, p. 28).
Herbicides
    As with mowing, the use of herbicides is more likely to threaten 
populations of Linum carteri var. carteri, due to the variety's 
occurrence in disturbed, open areas, which are also the typical habitat 
of weedy and nonnative plant species. Two of the seven extant L. c. 
var. carteri occurrences--the C-103 Canal and Chapman Field USDA 
Subtropical Horticultural Research Station--are in such areas. The use 
of herbicides for weed control here would be detrimental to these 
populations.
Recreation and Other Human Activities
    Linum carteri var. carteri's occurrence in disturbed, open areas 
such as firebreaks and road rights-of-way also makes it much more 
susceptible than Brickellia mosieri to recreational and other human 
activities. These activities may inadvertently impact some populations 
of L. c. var. carteri. In the past, mountain biking has been identified 
as a threat at R. Hardy Matheson Preserve (Bradley and Gann 1999, pp. 
71, 74; Bradley 2007, pers. comm.), but this was remedied by placement 
of protective fencing (Possley 2012, pers. comm.). More recently, a 
colony of L. c. var. carteri at Camp Owaissa Bauer Addition has been 
impacted by ``yard sales'' and car parking along Krome Avenue (Bradley 
and van der Heiden 2013, p. 13). While these impacts are usually some 
distance from the plants, they sometimes encroach on the edge of the 
natural area and have the potential to trample the plants. This plant 
occurs in similar habitat on Rockdale Pineland, where it is found along 
the edges of the abandoned FEC Railroad tracks, adjacent to pine 
rockland habitat (Bradley and van der Heiden 2013, p. 16). Here, plants 
have also been trampled from parking vehicles and machinery along the 
edges of the railroad right-of-way (Bradley and van der Heiden 2013, p. 
16). While these activities have affected individual plants in some 
populations, they are not likely to have caused significant population 
declines in the taxon.
Effects of Small Population Size and Isolation
    Endemic species whose populations exhibit a high degree of 
isolation are extremely susceptible to extinction from both random and 
nonrandom catastrophic natural or human-caused events. Species that are 
restricted to geographically limited areas are inherently more 
vulnerable to extinction than widespread species because of the 
increased risk of genetic bottlenecks, random demographic fluctuations, 
climate change, and localized catastrophes such as hurricanes and 
disease outbreaks (Mangel and Tier

[[Page 61287]]

1994, p. 607; Pimm et al. 1988, p. 757). These problems are further 
magnified when populations are few and restricted to a very small 
geographic area, and when the number of individuals is very small. 
Populations with these characteristics face an increased likelihood of 
stochastic extinction due to changes in demography, the environment, 
genetics, or other factors (Gilpin and Soule 1986, pp. 24-34).
    Small, isolated populations, such as those in fragmented habitat, 
often exhibit reduced levels of genetic variability, although the 
ultimate effect of these changes is dependent on a plant's specific 
life history, reproductive system, and interaction with pollinators and 
dispersal vectors (which may themselves be affected by fragmentation) 
(Young et al. 1996, p. 413). While research results clearly indicate 
that isolation/fragmentation has population genetic consequences for 
plants, consequences are varied and for some species there may be a 
``fragmentation threshold'' below which genetic variation is not lost 
(Young et al. 1996, p. 416). No such study has been conducted for 
Brickellia mosieri or Linum carteri var. carteri, so whether these 
plants exhibit such a threshold is not known. Reduced genetic 
variability generally diminishes a species' capacity to adapt and 
respond to environmental changes, thereby decreasing the probability of 
long-term persistence (e.g., Barrett and Kohn 1991, p. 4; Newman and 
Pilson 1997, p. 361). Very small plant populations may experience 
reduced reproductive vigor due to ineffective pollination or inbreeding 
depression. Isolated individuals have difficulty achieving natural 
pollen exchange, which limits the production of viable seed. The 
problems associated with small population size and vulnerability to 
random demographic fluctuations or natural catastrophes are further 
magnified by synergistic (interaction of two or more components) 
effects with other threats, such as those discussed above.
    Only small and fragmented occurrences of these two plants remain. 
The current ranges of Brickellia mosieri and Linum carteri var. carteri 
span such a small geographic area--a narrow band (no more than 4.0 km 
(2.5 mi) in width) along the ridge approximately 30.1 km (18.7 mi) and 
26.9 km (16.7 mi) in length, respectively--that all populations could 
be affected by a single event (e.g., hurricane). Four of the seven 
remaining populations of L. c. var. carteri have fewer than 20 
individual plants (see Table 2). B. mosieri populations occur in higher 
numbers (Table 1) but are still not considered sizable. L. c. var. 
carteri shows great differences in plant numbers from year to year, 
probably because individuals typically live 1-2 years and grow from 
seed. This trait makes them more vulnerable than perennials to changes 
in environment. Viable plant populations for small, short-lived herbs 
may consist of tens of thousands of plants (Menges 1991, p. 48; Lande 
1995, p. 789). Although robust population viability analyses (including 
minimum viable population calculations) have not been conducted for 
these plants, indications are that most existing populations for both 
plants are at best marginal. Lack of dispersal between occurrences may 
also be a threat (see Habitat Fragmentation under Factor A).
Climate Change
    Climatic changes, including sea level rise (SLR), are major threats 
to south Florida, including Brickellia mosieri and Linum carteri var. 
carteri. Our analyses under the Act include consideration of ongoing 
and projected changes in climate. The terms ``climate'' and ``climate 
change'' are defined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 
(IPCC). The term ``climate'' refers to the mean and variability of 
different types of weather conditions over time, with 30 years being a 
typical period for such measurements, although shorter or longer 
periods also may be used (IPCC 2007, p. 78). The term ``climate 
change'' thus refers to a change in the mean or variability of one or 
more measures of climate (e.g., temperature or precipitation) that 
persists for an extended period, typically decades or longer, whether 
the change is due to natural variability, human activity, or both (IPCC 
2007, p. 78).
    Scientific measurements spanning several decades demonstrate that 
changes in climate are occurring, and that the rate of change has been 
faster since the 1950s. Examples include warming of the global climate 
system, and substantial increases in precipitation in some regions of 
the world and decreases in other regions. (For these and other 
examples, see IPCC 2007, p. 30; and Solomon et al. 2007, pp. 35-54, 82-
85.)
    Scientists use a variety of climate models, which include 
consideration of natural processes and variability, as well as various 
scenarios of potential levels and timing of greenhouse gas (GHG) 
emissions, to evaluate the causes of changes already observed and to 
project future changes in temperature and other climate conditions 
(e.g., Meehl et al. 2007, entire; Ganguly et al. 2009, pp. 11555, 
15558; Prinn et al. 2011, pp. 527, 529). Although projections of the 
magnitude and rate of warming differ after about 2030, the overall 
trajectory of all the projections is one of increased global warming 
through the end of this century, even for the projections based on 
scenarios that assume that GHG emissions will stabilize or decline. 
Thus, there is strong scientific support for projections that warming 
will continue through the 21st century, and that the magnitude and rate 
of change will be influenced substantially by the extent of GHG 
emissions (IPCC 2007, pp. 44-45; Meehl et al. 2007, pp. 760-764 and 
797-811; Ganguly et al. 2009, pp. 15555-15558; Prinn et al. 2011, pp. 
527, 529).
    Various changes in climate may have direct or indirect effects on 
species. These effects may be positive, neutral, or negative, and they 
may change over time, depending on the species and other relevant 
considerations, such as interactions of climate with other variables 
(e.g., habitat fragmentation) (IPCC 2007, pp. 8-14, 18-19).
    Projected changes in climate and related impacts can vary 
substantially across and within different regions of the world (e.g., 
IPCC 2007, pp. 8-12). Therefore, we use ``downscaled'' projections when 
they are available and have been developed through appropriate 
scientific procedures (see Glick et al. 2011, pp. 58-61, for a 
discussion of downscaling). With regard to our analysis for Brickellia 
mosieri and Linum carteri var. carteri, downscaled projections suggest 
that SLR is the largest climate-driven challenge to low-lying coastal 
areas in the subtropical ecoregion of southern Florida (U.S. Climate 
Change Science Program (USCCSP) 2008, pp. 5-31, 5-32). Several 
populations of B. mosieri occur at elevations less than 2 m (6.6 ft) 
above sea level. In addition, approximately 50 percent of the known 
occurrences of L. c. var. carteri are located along a coastal ridge, 
making the species highly susceptible to increased storm surges and 
related impacts associated with SLR.
    The long-term record at Key West shows that sea level rose on 
average 0.229 cm (0.090 in) annually between 1913 and 2013 (National 
Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) 2013, p. 1). This 
equates to approximately 22.9 cm (9.02 in) over the last 100 years. 
IPCC (2008, p. 28) emphasized it is very likely that the average rate 
of SLR during the 21st century will exceed the historical rate. The 
IPCC Special Report on Emission Scenarios (2000, entire) presented a 
range of scenarios based on the computed amount of change in the 
climate system due to various potential

[[Page 61288]]

amounts of anthropogenic greenhouse gases and aerosols in 2100. Each 
scenario describes a future world with varying levels of atmospheric 
pollution leading to corresponding levels of global warming and 
corresponding levels of SLR. The IPCC Synthesis Report (2007, entire) 
provided an integrated view of climate change and presented updated 
projections of future climate change and related impacts under 
different scenarios.
    Subsequent to the 2007 IPCC Report, the scientific community has 
continued to model SLR. Recent peer-reviewed publications indicate a 
movement toward increased acceleration of SLR. Observed SLR rates are 
already trending along the higher end of the 2007 IPCC estimates, and 
it is now widely held that SLR will exceed the levels projected by the 
IPCC (Rahmstorf et al. 2012, p. 1; Grinsted et al. 2010, p. 470). Taken 
together, these studies support the use of higher end estimates now 
prevalent in the scientific literature. Recent studies have estimated 
global mean SLR of 1-2 m (3.3-6.6 ft) by 2100 as follows: 0.75-1.90 m 
(2.5-6.2 ft; Vermeer and Rahmstorf 2009, p. 21530), 0.8-2.0 m (2.6-6.6 
ft; Pfeffer et al. 2008, p. 1342), 0.9-1.3 m (3.0-4.3 ft; Grinsted et 
al. 2010, pp. 469-470), 0.6-1.6 m (2.0-5.2 ft; Jevrejeva et al. 2010, 
p. 4), and 0.5-1.40 m (1.6-4.6 ft; National Resource Council 2012, p. 
2).
    Other processes expected to be affected by projected warming 
include temperatures, rainfall (amount, seasonal timing, and 
distribution), and storms (frequency and intensity) (discussed more 
specifically under Environmental Stochasticity, below). The 
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) modeled several scenarios 
combining various levels of SLR, temperature change, and precipitation 
differences with human population growth, policy assumptions, and 
conservation funding changes (see Alternative Future Landscape Models, 
below). All of the scenarios, from small climate change shifts to major 
changes, indicate significant effects on coastal Miami-Dade County.
    Prior to inundation, pine rocklands are likely to undergo habitat 
transitions related to climate change, including changes to hydrology 
and increasing vulnerability to storm surge. Hydrology has a strong 
influence on plant distribution in these and other coastal areas (IPCC 
2008, p. 57). Such communities typically grade from salt to brackish to 
freshwater species. From the 1930s to 1950s, increased salinity of 
coastal waters contributed to the decline of cabbage palm forests in 
southwest Florida (Williams et al. 1999, pp. 2056-2059), expansion of 
mangroves into adjacent marshes in the Everglades (Ross et al. 2000, 
pp. 101, 111), and loss of pine rockland in the Keys (Ross et al. 1994, 
pp. 144, 151-155). In one Florida Keys pine rockland with an average 
elevation of 0.89 m (2.9 ft), Ross et al. (1994, pp. 149-152) observed 
an approximately 65 percent reduction in an area occupied by South 
Florida slash pine over a 70-year period, with pine mortality and 
subsequent increased proportions of halophytic (salt-loving) plants 
occurring earlier at the lower elevations. During this same timespan, 
local sea level had risen by 15 cm (6.0 in), and Ross et al. (1994, p. 
152) found evidence of groundwater and soil water salinization. 
Extrapolating this situation to pine rocklands on the mainland is not 
straightforward, but suggests that similar changes to species 
composition could arise if current projections of SLR occur and 
freshwater inputs are not sufficient to prevent salinization. 
Furthermore, Ross et al. (2009, pp. 471-478) suggested that 
interactions between SLR and pulse disturbances (e.g., storm surges) 
can cause vegetation to change sooner than projected based on sea level 
alone. Alexander (1953, pp. 133-138) attributed the demise of pinelands 
on northern Key Largo to salinization of the groundwater in response to 
SLR. Patterns of human development will also likely be significant 
factors influencing whether natural communities can move and persist 
(IPCC 2008, p. 57; USCCSP 2008, p. 7-6).
    The Science and Technology Committee of the Miami-Dade County 
Climate Change Task Force (Wanless et al. 2008, p. 1) recognizes that 
significant SLR is a very real threat to the near future for Miami-Dade 
County. In a January 2008 statement, the committee warned that sea 
level is expected to rise at least 0.9-1.5 m (3-5 ft) within this 
century (Wanless et al. 2008, p. 3). With a 0.9-1.2 m (3-4 ft) rise in 
sea level (above baseline) in Miami-Dade County: ``Spring high tides 
would be at about 6 to 7 feet; freshwater resources would be gone; the 
Everglades would be inundated on the west side of Miami-Dade County; 
the barrier islands would be largely inundated; storm surges would be 
devastating; landfill sites would be exposed to erosion contaminating 
marine and coastal environments. Freshwater and coastal mangrove 
wetlands will not keep up with or offset SLR of 2 ft per century or 
greater. With a 5-ft rise (spring tides at nearly +8 ft), Miami-Dade 
County will be extremely diminished'' (Wanless et al. 2008, pp. 3-4).
    Drier conditions and increased variability in precipitation 
associated with climate change are expected to hamper successful 
regeneration of forests and cause shifts in vegetation types through 
time (Wear and Greis 2012, p. 39). Although it has not been well 
studied, existing pine rocklands have probably been affected by 
reductions in the mean water table. Climate changes are also forecasted 
to extend fire seasons and the frequency of large fire events 
throughout the Coastal Plain (Wear and Greis 2012, p. 43). While 
restoring fire to pine rocklands is essential to the long-term 
viability of Brickellia mosieri and Linum carteri var. carteri 
populations, increases in the scale, frequency, or severity of 
wildfires could have negative effects on these plants considering their 
general vulnerability due to small population size, restricted range, 
few colonies, and relative isolation.
Alternative Future Landscape Models
    To accommodate the large uncertainty in SLR projections, 
researchers must estimate effects from a range of scenarios. Various 
model scenarios developed at MIT and GeoAdaptive Inc. have projected 
possible trajectories of future transformation of the south Florida 
landscape by 2060 based upon four main drivers: climate change, shifts 
in planning approaches and regulations, human population change, and 
variations in financial resources for conservation (Vargas-Moreno and 
Flaxman 2010, pp. 1-6). The scenarios do not account for temperature, 
precipitation, or species habitat shifts due to climate change, and no 
storm surge effects are considered. The current MIT scenarios range 
from an increase of 0.09-1.0 m (0.3-3.3 ft) by 2060.
    Based on the most recent estimates of SLR and the data available to 
us at this time, we evaluated potential effects of SLR using the 
current ``high'' range MIT scenario as well as comparing elevations of 
remaining pine rockland fragments and extant and historical occurrences 
of Brickellia mosieri and Linum carteri var. carteri occurrences. The 
``high'' range (or ``worst case'') MIT scenario assumes high SLR (1 m 
(3.3 ft) by 2060), low financial resources, a `business as usual' 
approach to planning, and a doubling of human population. Based on this 
scenario, pine rocklands along the coast in central Miami-Dade County, 
including one occurrence of L. c. var. carteri at R. Hardy Matheson 
Preserve, would become inundated. The ``new'' sea level would come up 
to the edge of pine rockland fragments at the southern end as well, 
translating to partial inundation or, at a minimum, vegetation

[[Page 61289]]

shifts in the pine rocklands in and around Navy Wells. While sea level 
would not overtake other pine rocklands in urban Miami-Dade County, 
changes in the salinity of the water table and soils would surely cause 
vegetation shifts in additional areas. In addition, many existing pine 
rockland fragments are projected to be developed for housing as the 
human population grows and adjusts to changing sea levels under this 
scenario. Actual impacts may be greater or less than anticipated based 
upon high variability of factors involved (e.g., SLR, human population 
growth) and assumptions made.
    When simply looking at current elevations of pine rockland 
fragments and occurrences of these plants, it appears that an SLR of 1 
m (3.3. ft) will inundate the coastal and southern pine rocklands and 
cause vegetation shifts largely as described above. SLR of 2 m (6.6 ft) 
appears to inundate much larger portions of urban Miami-Dade County, 
including all of Navy Wells and its surrounding area, and with it, 
several extant occurrences of Brickellia mosieri. The western part of 
urban Miami-Dade County would also be inundated (barring creation of 
sea walls or other barriers), creating a virtual island of the Miami 
Rock Ridge. After a 2-m rise in sea level, approximately 75 percent of 
the remaining pine rockland would still be above sea level but an 
unknown percentage of these fragments would be negatively impacted by 
salinization of the water table and soils, which would be exacerbated 
due to isolation from mainland fresh water flows. Above 2 m (6.6 ft) of 
SLR, very little pine rockland would remain, with the vast majority 
either being inundated or experiencing vegetation shifts.
Environmental Stochasticity
    The climate of southern Florida is driven by a combination of 
local, regional, and global events, regimes, and oscillations. There 
are three main ``seasons'': (1) the wet season, which is hot, rainy, 
and humid from June through October; (2) the official hurricane season 
that extends one month beyond the wet season (June 1 through November 
30), with peak season being August and September; and (3) the dry 
season, which is drier and cooler, from November through May. In the 
dry season, periodic surges of cool and dry continental air masses 
influence the weather with short-duration rain events followed by long 
periods of dry weather.
    According to the Florida Climate Center, Florida is by far the most 
vulnerable State in the United States to hurricanes and tropical storms 
(http://coaps.fsu.edu/climate_center/tropicalweather.shtml). Based on 
data gathered from 1856 to 2008, Klotzbach and Gray (2009, p. 28) 
calculated the climatological probabilities for each State being 
impacted by a hurricane or major hurricane in all years over the 152-
year timespan. Of the coastal States analyzed, Florida had the highest 
climatological probabilities, with a 51 percent probability of a 
hurricane (Category 1 or 2) and a 21 percent probability of a major 
hurricane (Category 3 or higher). From 1856 to 2008, Florida actually 
experienced 109 hurricanes and 36 major hurricanes. Given the low 
population sizes and restricted ranges of Brickellia mosieri and Linum 
carteri var. carteri, and the few isolated occurrences of L. c. var. 
carteri within locations prone to storm influences, these plants are at 
substantial risk from hurricanes, storm surges, and other extreme 
weather. Depending on the location and intensity of a hurricane or 
other severe weather event, it is possible that these plants could 
become extirpated or extinct.
    Hurricanes, storm surge, and extreme high tide events are natural 
events that can pose a threat to both plants. Hurricanes and tropical 
storms can modify habitat (e.g., through storm surge) and have the 
potential to destroy entire populations. Climate change may lead to 
increased frequency and duration of severe storms (Golladay et al. 
2004, p. 504; McLaughlin et al. 2002, p. 6074; Cook et al. 2004, p. 
1015). Both plants experienced these disturbances historically, but had 
the benefit of more abundant and contiguous habitat to buffer them from 
extirpations. With most of the historical habitat having been destroyed 
or modified, the few remaining populations of these plants could face 
local extirpations due to stochastic events.
    Other processes to be affected by climate change, related to 
environmental stochasticity, include temperatures, rainfall (amount, 
seasonal timing, and distribution), and storms (frequency and 
intensity). Temperatures are projected to rise from 2-5 [deg]C (3.6-9 
[deg]F) for North America by the end of this century (IPCC 2007, pp. 7-
9, 13). Based upon modeling, Atlantic hurricane and tropical storm 
frequencies are expected to decrease (Knutson et al. 2008, pp. 1-21). 
By 2100, there should be a 10-30 percent decrease in hurricane 
frequency. Hurricane frequency is expected to drop due to more wind 
shear impeding initial hurricane development. However, hurricane winds 
are expected to increase by 5-10 percent. This is due to more hurricane 
energy available for intense hurricanes. In addition to climate change, 
weather variables are extremely influenced by other natural cycles, 
such as El Ni[ntilde]o Southern Oscillation with a frequency of every 
4-7 years, solar cycle (every 11 years), and the Atlantic Multi-decadal 
Oscillation. All of these cycles influence changes in Floridian 
weather. The exact magnitude, direction, and distribution of all of 
these changes at the regional level are difficult to project.
Freezing Temperatures
    Occasional freezing temperatures that occur in south Florida are a 
threat to Brickellia mosieri and Linum carteri var. carteri, causing 
damage or death to individual plants. Under normal circumstances, 
occasional freezing temperatures would not result in a significant 
impact to populations of these plants; however, the small size of some 
populations means the loss from freezing events of even a few 
individuals can reduce the viability of the population.
Conservation Efforts To Reduce Other Natural or Manmade Factors 
Affecting Continued Existence
    An IRC program included reintroduction of both Brickellia mosieri 
and Linum carteri var. carteri in an effort to establish new 
occurrences of these plants and increase population sizes. To date, B. 
mosieri has been reintroduced to at least one site (George and Avery 
Pineland), although the status of these plants is currently unknown 
(Gann 2013b, pers. comm.).
    Ex-situ conservation by FTBG consists of seed collection of pine 
rockland plants, including Brickellia mosieri and Linum carteri var. 
carteri, to learn about their germination, storage, and cultivation 
requirements to help safeguard these plants from extinction. FTBG has 
22 seed accessions of B. mosieri, and a total of 1,589 seeds were 
provided to the National Center for Genetic Resources Preservation 
(NGRCP) for long-term storage (Maschinski et al. 2009, p. 26). Of L. c. 
var. carteri, FTBG has 59 accessions, and 2,643 seeds were provided to 
NGRCP for long-term storage (Maschinski et al. 2009, p. 27). Maschinski 
et al. (2009, p. 19 and 21) indicate that both plants are capable of 
orthodox seed storage. Frozen B. mosieri seeds germinated at 55 percent 
after 1 week of storage, compared to 54 percent of fresh seeds and 40 
percent of desiccated seeds (Maschinski et al. 2009, p. 19). Frozen L. 
c. var. carteri seeds germinated at 75 percent after 4 months of 
storage, compared to 69 percent of fresh seeds and 71-88

[[Page 61290]]

percent of desiccated seeds (Maschinski et al. 2009, p. 21). These 
results indicate that seed storage may be a useful strategy for future 
reintroductions and supplementation of existing populations to increase 
the numbers and sizes of populations of these plants. As part of FTBG's 
Connect To Protect Network, reintroduction of endemic pine rockland 
plants such as B. mosieri and L. c. var. carteri is planned in 
corridors (networks of private stepping-stone gardens and public 
rights-of-way) they hope to create.

Cumulative Effects of Threats

    The limited distributions and small population sizes of Brickellia 
mosieri and Linum carteri var. carteri make them extremely susceptible 
to further habitat loss, modification, and degradation and other 
anthropogenic threats. Mechanisms leading to the decline of these 
plants, as discussed above, range from local (e.g., lack of adequate 
fire management, mowing, herbicides), to regional (e.g., development, 
fragmentation, nonnative species), to global influences (e.g., climate 
change, SLR). The synergistic effects of threats (such as hurricane 
effects on a species with a limited distribution consisting of just a 
few small populations) make it difficult to predict population 
viability. While these stressors may act in isolation, it is more 
probable that many stressors are acting simultaneously (or in 
combination) on populations of B. mosieri and L. c. var. carteri.

Summary of Threats

    We have determined that the threats to both Brickellia mosieri and 
Linum carteri var. carteri consist primarily of habitat loss and 
modification through urban and agricultural development, lack of 
adequate fire management, proliferation of nonnative invasive plants, 
and SLR. Threats described under Factor A--habitat loss, fragmentation, 
and degradation resulting from development and inadequate fire 
management, and Factor E--competition from nonnative invasive plants, 
are believed to be the primary drivers in the historical and recent 
declines of B. mosieri and L. c. var. carteri. L. c. var. carteri has 
also been threatened by anthropogenic disturbances which threaten 
populations in disturbed habitats, such as firebreaks and road rights-
of-way, and both plants are suspected to be negatively affected by 
threats related to small, isolated populations (Factor E). All of these 
threats are expected to continue to impact populations of these plants 
in the future. Current local, State, and Federal regulatory mechanisms 
(Factor D) are inadequate to protect these plants from taking and 
habitat loss. Despite the existing regulatory mechanisms, B. mosieri 
and L. c. var. carteri continue to decline.
    Other factors that are likely to threaten Brickellia mosieri and 
Linum carteri var. carteri in the future are climate change (including 
SLR) and extreme weather events (hurricanes, frost events), especially 
as effects of these could be catastrophic on isolated, small 
populations of both plants (Factor E). The majority of the remaining 
populations of these plants are generally small and geographically 
isolated. The narrow distribution of their populations in hurricane-
prone south Florida makes them more susceptible to extirpation from a 
single catastrophic event. Furthermore, this level of isolation makes 
natural recolonization of extirpated populations virtually impossible 
without human intervention.
    The above-described threats have had substantial adverse effects on 
Brickellia mosieri and Linum carteri var. carteri populations and their 
habitats. Although attempts are ongoing to alleviate some of these 
threats at some locations, no populations appear to be without one or 
more major threats.

Proposed Determination

    We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial 
information available regarding the past, present, and future threats 
to Brickellia mosieri and Linum carteri var. carteri. Section 3(6) of 
the Act defines an endangered species as ``any species which is in 
danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its 
range'' and section 3(20) of the Act defines a threatened species as 
``any species which is likely to become an endangered species within 
the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its 
range.''
    As described in detail above, both plants are currently at risk 
throughout all of their respective ranges due to the immediacy, 
severity, and scope of threats from habitat destruction and 
modification (Factor A) and other natural or manmade factors affecting 
their continued existence (Factor E), and existing regulatory 
mechanisms are inadequate to reduce these threats (Factor D). Although 
actions are ongoing to alleviate some threats, no populations appear to 
be free of major threats. As a result, impacts from increasing threats, 
singly or in combination, are likely to result in the extinction of 
these plants.

Brickellia mosieri

    Brickellia mosieri has been extirpated from approximately 13 
percent of its historical range, and the primary threats of inadequate 
fire management (Factor A) and competition from nonnative invasive 
plants (Factor E) are currently active in the remaining populations. 
Populations of B. mosieri are relatively small and isolated from one 
another, and the species' ability to recolonize suitable habitat 
between populations is unknown at this time. Because of the current 
condition of the populations and life-history traits of the species, it 
is vulnerable to natural or human-caused changes in its currently 
occupied habitats. Existing regulatory mechanisms are inadequate to 
eliminate or even reduce these threats (Factor D). Numerous threats are 
occurring now and are likely to continue in the foreseeable future, at 
a high intensity, and across the species' entire range; therefore, we 
have determined the species is currently on the brink of extinction. 
Because these threats are placing the species in danger of extinction 
now and not only at some point in the foreseeable future, we find this 
species meets the definition of an endangered species rather than a 
threatened species. Therefore, we are proposing to list it as an 
endangered species. These threats are currently active, and will 
continue to affect the populations of B. mosieri into the foreseeable 
future, and these threats will individually and collectively contribute 
to the species' local extirpation and potential extinction.

Linum carteri var. carteri

    L. c. var. carteri has been extirpated from approximately 30 
percent of its historical range, and threats of inadequate fire 
management (Factor A) and competition from nonnative, invasive plants 
(Factor E), as well as other anthropogenic disturbances (Factor E), are 
currently active in the remaining populations. Populations of L. c. 
var. carteri are small, few in number, and isolated from one another; 
the taxon's ability to recolonize suitable habitat between populations 
is unknown at this time. Because of the current condition of the 
populations and life-history traits of the taxon, it is vulnerable to 
natural or human-caused changes in its currently occupied habitats. 
Existing regulatory mechanisms are inadequate to eliminate or even 
reduce these threats (Factor D). Numerous threats are occurring now and 
are likely to continue in the foreseeable future, at a high intensity, 
and across the taxon's entire range;

[[Page 61291]]

therefore, we have determined the taxon is currently on the brink of 
extinction. Because these threats are placing the taxon in danger of 
extinction now and not only at some point in the foreseeable future, we 
find this taxon meets the definition of an endangered species rather 
than a threatened species. Therefore, we are proposing to list it as an 
endangered species. The threats described above are currently active, 
and will continue to affect the populations of L. c. var. carteri into 
the foreseeable future, and these threats will individually and 
collectively contribute to the taxon's local extirpation and potential 
extinction.

Significant Portion of Its Range

    We evaluated the current ranges of Brickellia mosieri and Linum 
carteri var. carteri to determine if there is any apparent geographic 
concentration of potential threats for either taxon. Both plants are 
highly restricted in their ranges, and the threats occur throughout 
their ranges. We considered the potential threats due to habitat loss 
and modification from development, lack of adequate fire management, 
competition from nonnative plants, and SLR, as well as the threats of 
incompatible land management and other human activities, hurricanes and 
other extreme weather, and small populations with restricted range. We 
found no concentration of threats because of the plants' limited and 
curtailed ranges, and uniformity of the threats throughout their entire 
ranges. Having determined that B. mosieri and L. c. var. carteri are 
endangered throughout their entire ranges, it is not necessary to 
evaluate whether there are any significant portions of their ranges.

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 
practices. Recognition through listing results in public awareness and 
conservation by Federal, State, Tribal, and local agencies; private 
organizations; and individuals. The Act encourages cooperation with the 
States and requires that recovery actions be carried out for all listed 
species. The protection required by Federal agencies and the 
prohibitions against certain activities are discussed, in part, below.
    The primary purpose of the Act is the conservation of endangered 
and threatened species and the ecosystems upon which they depend. The 
ultimate goal of such conservation efforts is the recovery of these 
listed species, so that they no longer need the protective measures of 
the Act. Subsection 4(f) of the Act requires the Service to develop and 
implement recovery plans for the conservation of endangered and 
threatened species. The recovery planning process involves the 
identification of actions that are necessary to halt or reverse the 
species' decline by addressing the threats to its survival and 
recovery. The goal of this process is to restore listed species to a 
point where they are secure, self-sustaining, and functioning 
components of their ecosystems.
    Recovery planning includes the development of a recovery outline 
shortly after a species is listed, preparation of a draft and final 
recovery plan, and revisions to the plan as significant new information 
becomes available. The recovery outline guides the immediate 
implementation of urgent recovery actions and describes the process to 
be used to develop a recovery plan. The recovery plan identifies site-
specific management actions that will achieve recovery of the species, 
measurable criteria that determine when a species may be downlisted or 
delisted, and methods for monitoring recovery progress. Recovery plans 
also establish a framework for agencies to coordinate their recovery 
efforts and provide estimates of the cost of implementing recovery 
tasks. Recovery teams (comprising species experts, Federal and State 
agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and stakeholders) are often 
established to develop recovery plans. When completed, the recovery 
outline, draft recovery plan, and the final recovery plan will be 
available on our Web site (http://www.fws.gov/endangered), or from our 
South Florida Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT).
    Implementation of recovery actions generally requires the 
participation of a broad range of partners, including other Federal 
agencies, States, Tribal, nongovernmental organizations, businesses, 
and private landowners. Examples of recovery actions include habitat 
restoration (e.g., restoration of native vegetation), research, captive 
propagation and reintroduction, and outreach and education. The 
recovery of many listed species cannot be accomplished solely on 
Federal lands because their range may occur primarily or solely on non-
Federal lands. To achieve recovery of these plants requires cooperative 
conservation efforts on private, State, and Tribal lands.
    If these plants are listed, funding for recovery actions will be 
available from a variety of sources, including Federal budgets, State 
programs, and cost-share grants for non-Federal landowners, the 
academic community, and nongovernmental organizations. In addition, 
under section 6 of the Act, the State of Florida would be eligible for 
Federal funds to implement management actions that promote the 
protection and recovery of Brickellia mosieri and Linum carteri var. 
carteri. Information on our grant programs that are available to aid 
species recovery can be found at: http://www.fws.gov/grants.
    Although Brickellia mosieri and Linum carteri var. carteri are only 
proposed for listing under the Act at this time, please let us know if 
you are interested in participating in recovery efforts for these 
plants. Additionally, we invite you to submit any new information on 
these plants whenever it becomes available and any information you may 
have for recovery planning purposes (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT).
    Federal agencies are required to confer with us informally on any 
action that is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a 
species that is proposed for listing. Section 7(a)(4) requires Federal 
agencies to confer with the Service on any action that is likely to 
jeopardize the continued existence of a species proposed for listing or 
result in destruction or adverse modification of proposed critical 
habitat. If a species is listed subsequently, 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 the 
species or destroy or adversely modify its critical habitat. If a 
Federal action may adversely affect a listed species or its critical 
habitat, the responsible Federal agency must enter into formal 
consultation with the Service.
    Federal agency actions within these plants' habitat that may 
require conference or consultation or both as described in the 
preceding paragraph include, but are not limited to, the funding of, 
carrying out, or issuance of permits for resource management 
activities, development of facilities, road and trail construction, 
recreational programs and any other landscape-altering activities on 
Federal lands administered by the Department of Defense, National Park 
Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S. Forest Service; or the 
issuance of Federal permits under section 404 of the Clean Water Act 
(33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; 
construction and management of gas pipeline and power line rights-of-
way by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission; construction and

[[Page 61292]]

maintenance of roads or highways by the Federal Highway Administration; 
and disaster relief efforts conducted by the Federal Emergency 
Management Agency.
    The Act and its implementing regulations set forth a series of 
general prohibitions and exceptions that apply to endangered plants. 
All prohibitions of section 9(a)(2) of the Act, implemented by 50 CFR 
17.61, 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 an 
endangered species, the Act prohibits the malicious damage or 
destruction on areas under Federal jurisdiction and the removal, 
cutting, digging up, or damaging or destroying of such plants in 
knowing violation of any State law or regulation, including State 
criminal trespass law. Certain exceptions to the prohibitions apply to 
agents of the Service and State conservation agencies.
    Preservation of native flora of Florida (Florida Statutes 581.185) 
sections (3)(a) and (b) provide limited protection to species listed in 
the State of Florida Regulated Plant Index including Brickellia mosieri 
and Linum carteri var. carteri, as described under Factor D, The 
Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms. Federal listing increases 
protection for these plants by making violations of section 3 of the 
Florida Statute punishable as a Federal offense under section 9 of the 
Act. This provides increased protection from unauthorized collecting 
and vandalism for the plants on State and private lands, where they 
might not otherwise be protected by the Act, and increases the severity 
of the penalty for unauthorized collection, vandalism, or trade in 
these plants.
    We may issue permits to carry out otherwise prohibited activities 
involving endangered and threatened plant species under certain 
circumstances. Regulations governing permits are codified at 50 CFR 
17.62 for endangered plants, and at 50 CFR 17.72 for threatened plants. 
With regard to endangered plants, a permit must be issued for 
activities undertaken for scientific purposes or to enhance the 
propagation or survival of the species.
    The Service acknowledges that it cannot fully address some of the 
natural threats facing Brickellia mosieri and Linum carteri var. 
carteri (e.g., hurricanes, tropical storms) or even some of the other 
significant, long-term threats (e.g., climatic changes, SLR). However, 
through listing, we provide protection to the known populations and any 
new population of these plants that may be discovered (see discussion 
below). With listing, we can also influence Federal actions that may 
potentially impact these plants (see discussion below); this is 
especially valuable if either species is found at additional locations. 
With this action, we are also better able to deter illicit collection 
and trade.
    Our policy, as published in the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 
(59 FR 34272), is 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 a proposed 
listing on proposed and ongoing activities within the range of species 
proposed for listing. The following activities could potentially result 
in a violation of section 9 of the Act; this list is not comprehensive:
    (1) Import any such species into, or export any such species from, 
the United States;
    (2) Remove and reduce to possession any such species from areas 
under Federal jurisdiction; maliciously damage or destroy any such 
species on any such area; or remove, cut, dig up, or damage or destroy 
any such species on any other area in knowing violation of any law or 
regulation of any State or in the course of any violation of a State 
criminal trespass law;
    (3) Deliver, receive, carry, transport, or ship in interstate or 
foreign commerce, by any means whatsoever and in the course of a 
commercial activity, any such species;
    (4) Sell or offer for sale in interstate or foreign commerce any 
such species;
    (5) Introduce any nonnative wildlife or plant species to the State 
of Florida that compete with or prey upon Brickellia mosieri or Linum 
carteri var. carteri;
    (6) Release any unauthorized biological control agents that attack 
any life stage of Brickellia mosieri or Linum carteri var. carteri; or
    (7) Unauthorized manipulation or modification of the habitat of 
Brickellia mosieri or Linum carteri var. carteri on Federal lands.
    Questions regarding whether specific activities would constitute a 
violation of section 9 of the Act should be directed to the Field 
Supervisor of the Service's South Florida Ecological Services Office 
(see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). 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, Endangered Species Permits, 1875 Century 
Boulevard, Atlanta, GA 30345 (Phone 404-679-7140; Fax 404-679-7081).
    If Brickellia mosieri and Linum carteri var. carteri are listed 
under the Act, the State of Florida's Endangered Species Act (Florida 
Statutes 581.185) is automatically invoked, which would also prohibit 
take of these plants and encourage conservation by State government 
agencies. Further, the State may enter into agreements with Federal 
agencies to administer and manage any area required for the 
conservation, management, enhancement, or protection of endangered 
species (Florida Statutes 581.185). Funds for these activities could be 
made available under section 6 of the Act (Cooperation with the 
States). Thus, the Federal protection afforded to these plants by 
listing them as endangered species would be reinforced and supplemented 
by protection under State law.

Peer Review

    In accordance with our joint policy on peer review published in the 
Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), we will seek the expert 
opinions of at least three appropriate and independent specialists 
regarding this proposed rule. The purpose of peer review is to ensure 
that our proposed listing and critical habitat designation are based on 
scientifically sound data, assumptions, and analyses. We will invite 
these peer reviewers to comment during this public comment period on 
our specific proposed rule.
    We will consider all comments and information we receive during 
this comment period on this proposed rule during our preparation of a 
final determination. Accordingly, the final decision may differ from 
this proposal.

Public Hearings

    Section 4(b)(5) of the Act provides for one or more public hearings 
on this proposal, if requested. Requests must be received within 45 
days after the date of publication of this proposed rule in the Federal 
Register. Such requests must be sent to the address shown in FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. We will schedule public hearings on this 
proposal, if any are requested, and announce the dates, times, and 
places of those hearings, as well as how to obtain reasonable 
accommodations, in the Federal Register and local newspapers at least 
15 days before the hearing.

[[Page 61293]]

Required Determinations

Clarity of the Rule

    We are required by Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and by the 
Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain 
language. This means that each rule we publish must:
    (1) Be logically organized;
    (2) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
    (3) Use clear language rather than jargon;
    (4) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
    (5) Use lists and tables wherever possible.
    If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us 
comments by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To better help us 
revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as possible. For 
example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections or paragraphs 
that are unclearly written, which sections or sentences are too long, 
the sections where you feel lists or tables would be useful, etc.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)

    This rule does not contain any new collections of information that 
require approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This rule will not impose recordkeeping or 
reporting requirements on State or local governments, individuals, 
businesses, or organizations. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and 
a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information 
unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)

    We have determined that environmental assessments and environmental 
impact statements, as defined under the authority of the National 
Environmental Policy Act, need not be prepared in connection with 
listing a species as endangered or threatened under the Act. We 
published a notice outlining our reasons for this determination in the 
Federal Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244).

References Cited

    A complete list of references cited in this rulemaking is available 
on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov and upon request from the 
South Florida Ecological Services Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT).

Authors

    The primary authors of this package are the staff members of the 
South Florida Ecological Services Field Office.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

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

Proposed Regulation Promulgation

    Accordingly, we propose to amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter 
I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below:

PART 17--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 1531-1544; 4201-4245; unless 
otherwise noted.

0
2. Amend Sec.  17.12(h) by adding entries for ``Brickellia mosieri'' 
and ``Linum carteri var. carteri'', in alphabetical order under 
Flowering Plants, to the List of Endangered and Threatened Plants, to 
read as follows:


Sec.  17.11  Endangered and threatened wildlife.

* * * * *
    (h) * * *

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Species
------------------------------------------------------   Historical range          Family            Status      When listed    Critical       Special
         Scientific name              Common name                                                                                habitat        rules
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flowering Plants
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
Brickellia mosieri..............  Brickell-bush,       U.S.A. (FL)........  Asteraceae.........  E               ...........           NA            NA
                                   Florida.
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
Linum carteri var. carteri......  Flax, Carter's       U.S.A. (FL)........  Linaceae...........  E               ...........           NA            NA
                                   small-flowered.
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

    Dated: September 25, 2013.
Rowan W. Gould,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-24173 Filed 10-2-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P