[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 196 (Tuesday, October 11, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 70282-70308]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-24140]



[[Page 70281]]

Vol. 81

Tuesday,

No. 196

October 11, 2016

Part II





 Department of the Interior





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





Fish and Wildlife Service





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





50 CFR Part 17





 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposed Threatened 
Species Status for Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense 
(Everglades Bully), Digitaria pauciflora (Florida Pineland Crabgrass), 
and Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum (Pineland Sandmat) and 
Endangered Species Status for Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana 
(Florida Prairie-Clover); Proposed Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 81 , No. 196 / Tuesday, October 11, 2016 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 70282]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2016-0090;4500030113]
RIN 1018-BB48


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposed 
Threatened Species Status for Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense (Everglades Bully), Digitaria pauciflora (Florida 
Pineland Crabgrass), and Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum (Pineland 
Sandmat) and Endangered Species Status for Dalea carthagenensis var. 
floridana (Florida Prairie-Clover)

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose 
threatened species status under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 
(Act), as amended, for Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense 
(Everglades bully), Digitaria pauciflora (Florida pineland crabgrass) 
and Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum (pineland sandmat), and 
endangered species status for Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana 
(Florida prairie-clover). All four plants are from south Florida. If we 
finalize this rule as proposed, it would extend the Act's protections 
to these plants. The effect of this regulation will be to add these 
species to the List of Endangered and Threatened Plants.

DATES: We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before 
December 12, 2016. Comments submitted electronically using the Federal 
eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES 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 25, 2016.

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-2016-0090, 
which is the docket number for this rulemaking. Then, in the Search 
panel on the left side of the screen, under the Document Type heading, 
click on the Proposed Rules link to locate this document. You may 
submit a comment by clicking on ``Comment Now!''
    (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public 
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R4-ES-2016-0090; U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service Headquarters, MS: BPHC, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 
22041-3803.
    We request that you send comments only by the methods described 
above. We will post all comments on http://www.regulations.gov. This 
generally means that we will post any personal information you provide 
us (see Public Comments below for more information).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roxanna Hinzman, 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 determine that 
a species is an endangered or threatened species throughout all or a 
significant portion of its range, we are required to promptly publish a 
proposal in the Federal Register and make a determination on our 
proposal within 1 year. Listing a species as an endangered or 
threatened species and designations and revisions of critical habitat 
can only be completed by issuing a rule.
    What this proposed rule does. This document proposes the listing of 
the Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, 
and Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum as threatened species, and 
Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana as an endangered species. The four 
plants are currently candidate species 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 until now been precluded by other higher 
priority listing activities. This proposed rule reassesses all 
available information regarding status of and threats to the four 
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 Sideroxylon 
reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce 
deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana 
consist primarily of habitat loss and modification through urban and 
agricultural development, and lack of adequate fire management (Factor 
A) and proliferation of nonnative invasive plants, stochastic events 
(hurricanes and storm surge), maintenance practices used on roadsides 
and disturbed sites, and sea level rise (SLR) (Factor E).
    We will seek peer review. We will seek comments from independent 
specialists to ensure that our proposed designation is based on 
scientifically sound data, assumptions, and analyses. We will invite 
these peer reviewers to comment on our listing proposal.

Information Requested

Public Comments

    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) The four plants' biology, range, and population trends, 
including:
    (a) Biological or ecological requirements of these plants, 
including habitat requirements for establishment, growth, and 
reproduction;
    (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) Factors that may affect the continued existence of these 
plants, which may include habitat modification or destruction, 
overutilization, disease, predation, the inadequacy of existing 
regulatory mechanisms, or other natural or manmade factors.
    (3) Biological, commercial trade, or other relevant data concerning 
any threats (or lack thereof) to these plants and existing regulations 
that may be addressing those threats.
    (4) Current or planned activities in the areas occupied by these 
plants and

[[Page 70283]]

potential effects (positive or negative) of these activities on these 
plants.
    (5) Additional information concerning the biological or ecological 
requirements of these plants, including pollination and pollinators.
    (6) Additional information concerning the current and projected 
effects of climate change, including sea level rise, on these plants 
and their habitat.
    (7) Scientific information or analysis informing whether these 
plants more closely meet the definition of an endangered species or of 
a threatened species under the Act.
    Please include sufficient information with your submission (such as 
scientific journal articles or other publications) to allow us to 
verify any scientific or commercial information you include.
    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 a threatened or endangered 
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.
    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).

Public Hearing

    Section 4(b)(5) of the Act provides for one or more public hearings 
on this proposal, if requested. Requests for public hearings must be 
received within 45 days after the date of publication of this proposed 
rule in the Federal Register (see DATES). 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.

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 listing determination and critical habitat designation are 
based on scientifically sound data, assumptions, and analyses. The peer 
reviewers will have expertise in the biology, habitat, and conservation 
status of these plants, to help inform our determination.

Previous Federal Actions

    Digitaria pauciflora was first recognized as a candidate species on 
September 27, 1985 (50 FR 39526). The 1990 Candidate Notice of Review 
(CNOR) published in the Federal Register on February 21, 1990 (55 FR 
6184), included Digitaria pauciflora as a candidate for listing under 
the Act. We determined at that time that listing was warranted, but 
precluded due to workloads and competing priorities.
    Digitaria pauciflora remained on the candidate list as published in 
the CNOR in 1993 (58 FR 51144, September 30, 1993). The CNOR was not 
published again until October 25, 1999, and it retained Digitaria 
pauciflora as a candidate and assigned a listing priority number (LPN) 
of 6; the 1999 CNOR first recognized Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. 
pinetorum as a candidate and assigned an LPN of 12 and Dalea 
carthagenensis var. floridana as a candidate and assigned an LPN of 3 
(64 FR 57534). 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.
    Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and 
Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana remained on the candidate list from 
2001 to 2004 (66 FR 54808, October 30, 2001; 67 FR 40657, June 13, 
2002; 69 FR 24876, May 4, 2004). Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense was first recognized May 4, 2004, and was assigned an 
LPN of 12 (69 FR 24876, May 4, 2004). We published a finding for 
Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and Dalea 
carthagenensis var. floridana in the 2005 CNOR on May 11, 2005 (70 FR 
24870), in response to a petition received on May 11, 2004.
    All four species remained candidates from 2005 to 2015 (70 FR 
24870, May 11, 2005; 71 FR 53756, September 12, 2006; 73 FR 75176, 
December 10, 2008; 74 FR 57804, November 9, 2009; 75 FR 69222, November 
10, 2010; 76 FR 66370, October 26, 2011; 77 FR 69994, November 21, 
2012; 78 FR 70104, November 22, 2013; 79 FR 72450, December 5, 2014; 80 
FR 80584, December 24, 2015).
    On September 9, 2011, the Service entered into two settlement 
agreements regarding species on the candidate list at that time 
(Endangered Species Act Section 4 Deadline Litigation, No. 10-377 
(EGS), MDL Docket No. 2165 (D.D.C. May 10, 2011)). This proposed 
listing rule fulfills the requirements of those settlement agreements 
for the 4 plant species.

Background

    It is our intent to discuss below only those topics directly 
relevant to the listing of Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, and Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. 
pinetorum as threatened species and Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana 
as an endangered species in this proposed rule.

Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense (Everglades bully)

Species Description
    Corogin and Judd (2014, pp. 410-412) provide a detailed description 
of Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense. The plant is a single- 
to many-stemmed shrub, 3-6 feet (ft) (1-2 meters (m)) tall. The 
branches are smooth, slightly bent, and somewhat spiny. The leaves are 
thin, oval-shaped, 0.8-2 inches (in) (2-5 centimeters (cm)) long, 
evergreen, lance-shaped, and fuzzy on their undersides. The flowers are 
in axillary cymes (Long and Lakela 1971, p. 679).
    Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense is distinguished from 
the similar subspecies S. reclinatum ssp. reclinatum in Florida by its 
leaves, which are persistently pubescent (fuzzy) on their undersides, 
rather than smooth or pubescent only along the leaf midvein (Wunderlin 
and Hansen 2003, p. 603). Corogin and Judd (2014, p. 404) indicated the 
two subspecies are most reliably distinguished by differences in the 
micromorphology of the leaf epidermis, and by the extent of

[[Page 70284]]

distribution of S. r. ssp. austrofloridense, which is limited to 
extreme southern peninsular Florida.
Taxonomy
    The genus Sideroxylon is represented by eight species in Florida. 
All of these species were previously assigned to the genus Bumelia. 
Sideroxylon reclinatum, the Florida bully, is represented by three 
subspecies that range nearly throughout Florida and into neighboring 
States. The Everglades subspecies was first recognized by Whetstone 
(1985, pp. 544-547) as Bumelia reclinata var. austrofloridense, then 
transferred to the genus Sideroxylon (Kartesz and Gandhi 1990, pp. 421-
427). Kartesz and Gandhi (1990, pp. 421-427) made Sideroxylon 
reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense a subspecies rather than a variety; 
however, in plant nomenclature, the ranks of variety and subspecies are 
interchangeable. Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense is used 
in the current treatment of the Florida flora (Wunderlin and Hansen 
2016, p. 1).
    The Integrated Taxonomic Information System (2016, p. 1) indicates 
that the taxonomic standing for Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense (Whetstone) Kartesz and Gandhi is accepted. The online 
Atlas of Florida Vascular Plants (Wunderlin and Hansen 2016, p. 1) uses 
the name S. reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense (Whetstone), as does 
NatureServe (2016, p. 1).
    Corogin and Judd (2014, p. 408) indicate that Sideroxylon 
reclinatum subsp. austrofloridense is differentiated from S. reclinatum 
subsp. reclinatum by a set of distinct characters at the 
micromorphological level.
    The two taxa are also separated eco-geographically. Sideroxylon 
reclinatum subsp. austrofloridense is a narrow endemic, restricted to 
pine rockland and marl prairie habitats in a well-defined area of 
extreme southeastern peninsular Florida. Conversely, Sideroxylon 
reclinatum subsp. reclinatum is more wide-ranging, occurring coastally 
from southern Georgia west to Louisiana, and throughout Florida as far 
south as Broward County in the east, and Collier and Monroe Counties in 
the west. The only place where plants of both species overlap is within 
Big Cypress National Preserve (BCNP), at the western fringe of 
Everglades bully's range (Corrogin and Judd 2014, p. 409).
Climate
    The climate of south Florida where Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense 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. Rainfall in 
the area where Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense occurs 
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. Approximately 75 percent of yearly rainfall 
occurs during the wet season from June through September (Snyder et al. 
1990, p. 238).
Habitat
    Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense grows in pine rockland 
habitat, marl prairie habitat, and within the ecotone between both 
habitats (Gann et al. 2006, p. 12; Bradley et al. 2013, p. 4, Gann 
2015, p. 31). These habitats are maintained by regular fire, and are 
prone, particularly marl prairie, to annual flooding for several months 
during the wet season (Gann et al. 2006, p. 13; Bradley et al. 2013, p. 
4). Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense also grows on the 
sunny edges of rockland hammock habitat (Gann 2015, p. 412), which is 
fire-resistant. Historically, fire served to maintain the boundary 
between pine rockland and rockland hammock by eliminating the 
encroachment of hardwoods into pine rocklands. Absent natural or 
prescribed fire, many pine rocklands have succeeded to rockland hammock 
(FNAI 2010, p. 25). Canopy cover on the interior of rockland hammock is 
too dense to support herbs and smaller shrub species, such as S. r. 
ssp. austrofloridense, that require more sunlight.

Pine Rockland

    Pine rockland is characterized by an open canopy of South Florida 
slash pine (Pinus elliottii var. densa) with a patchy understory of 
tropical and temperate shrubs and palms and a rich herbaceous layer of 
mostly perennial species including numerous species endemic to South 
Florida. Outcrops of weathered oolitic (small rounded particles or 
grains) limestone, known locally as pinnacle rock, are common, and 
solution holes may be present. This subtropical, pyrogenic flatland can 
be mesic or xeric depending on landscape position and associated 
natural communities (Florida Natural Areas Inventory (FNAI) 2010, p. 
61).
    Pine rockland has an open canopy of South Florida slash pine, 
generally with multiple age classes. The diverse, open shrub and 
subcanopy layer is composed of more than 100 species of palms and 
hardwoods, most derived from the tropical flora of the West Indies 
(FNAI 2010, p. 61). Many of these species vary in height depending on 
fire frequency, getting taller with time since fire. These include saw 
palmetto (Serenoa repens), cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto), silver palm 
(Coccothrinax argentata), brittle thatch palm (Thrinax morrisii), wax 
myrtle (Myrica cerifera), myrsine (Rapanea punctata), poisonwood 
(Metopium toxiferum), locustberry (Byrsonima lucida), varnishleaf 
(Dodonaea viscosa), tetrazygia (Tetrazygia bicolor), rough velvetseed 
(Guettarda scabra), marlberry (Ardisia escallonioides), mangrove berry 
(Psidium longipes), willow bustic (Sideroxylon salicifolium), and 
winged sumac (Rhus copallinum). Short-statured shrubs include running 
oak (Quercus elliottii), white indigoberry (Randia aculeata), Christmas 
berry (Crossopetalum ilicifolium), redgal (Morinda royoc), and 
snowberry (Chiococca alba).
    Grasses, forbs, and ferns make up a diverse herbaceous layer 
ranging from mostly continuous in areas with more soil development and 
little exposed rock to sparse where more extensive outcroppings of rock 
occur. Typical herbaceous species include bluestems (Andropogon spp., 
Schizachyrium gracile, S. rhizomatum, and S. sanguineum), arrowleaf 
threeawn (Aristida purpurascens), lopsided indiangrass (Sorghastrum 
secundum), hairawn muhly (Muhlenbergia capillaris), Florida white-top 
sedge (Rhynchospora floridensis), pineland noseburn (Tragia saxicola), 
devil's potato (Echites umbellata), pineland croton, several species of 
sandmats (Chamaesyce spp.), partridge pea (Chamaecrista fasciculata), 
coontie (Zamia pumila), maidenhair pineland fern (Anemia adiantifolia), 
Bahama brake (Pteris bahamensis), and lacy bracken (Pteridium aquilinum 
var. caudatum) (FNAI 2010, p. 62).
    Pine rockland occurs on relatively flat, moderately to well drained 
terrain from 2 to 7 m (6.5 to 23 ft) above sea level (FNAI 2010, p. 
62). The oolitic limestone is at or very near the surface, and there is 
very little soil development. Soils are generally composed of small 
accumulations of nutrient-poor sand, marl, clayey loam, and organic 
debris in depressions and crevices in the rock surface. Organic acids 
occasionally dissolve the surface limestone causing collapsed 
depressions in the surface rock called solution holes (FNAI 2010, p. 
62). Drainage varies according to the porosity of the limestone 
substrate, but is generally rapid. Consequently, most

[[Page 70285]]

sites are wet for only short periods following heavy rains. During the 
rainy season, however, some sites may be shallowly inundated by slow-
flowing surface water for up to 60 days each year (FNAI 2010, p. 62).
    Pine rockland is maintained by regular fire, and susceptible to 
other natural disturbances such as hurricanes, frost events, and sea-
level rise (Ross et al. 1994, pp. 144-156). Fires historically burned 
on an interval of approximately every 3 to 7 years (FNAI 2010, p. 63) 
and were typically started by lightning strikes during the frequent 
summer thunderstorms (FNAI 2010, p. 63).
    Presently, prescribed fire must be periodically introduced into 
pine rocklands to sustain community structure, prevent invasion by 
woody species, maintain high herbaceous diversity (Loope and Dunevitz 
1981, pp. 5-6; FNAI 2010, p. 63), and prevent succession to rockland 
hammock. The amount of woody understory growth is directly related to 
the length of time since the last fire. Herbaceous diversity declines 
with time since last fire. The ecotone between pine rockland and 
rockland hammock is abrupt when regular fire is present in the system. 
However when fire is removed, the ecotone becomes more gradual and 
subtle as hammock hardwoods encroach into the pineland (FNAI 2010, p. 
63).

Marl Prairie

    Marl prairie is a sparsely vegetated, grass-dominated community 
found on marl substrates in South Florida. Marls are fine white 
calcareous muds formed from calcite precipitated by a mixture of green 
algae, blue green algae, and diatoms, known as periphyton. It is 
seasonally inundated (2 to 4 months) to a shallow depth averaging about 
20 cm (8 in). Marl prairie is a diverse community, which may contain 
more than 100 species. Most of the marl prairie plant species 
contribute little cover and more than 90 percent of the cover is 
contributed by only two or three dominant species in any given area 
(FNAI 2010, p. 107). Dominants may include one or more of the 
following: Gulf hairawn muhly (Muhlenbergia sericea), spreading 
beaksedge (Rhynchospora divergens), Florida little bluestem 
(Schizachyrium rhizomatum), black bogrush (Schoenus nigricans), 
Elliott's lovegrass (Eragrostis elliottii), sand cordgrass (Spartina 
bakeri), and a short form of sawgrass (Cladium jamaicense) (Porter, Jr. 
1967, pp. 937-942; FNAI 2010, p. 107). (Taxonomy of Schizachyrium and 
Muhlenbergia follows treatments in Flora of North America (2007)). 
Other characteristic species include southern beaksedge (Rhynchospora 
microcarpa), bluejoint panicum (Panicum tenerum), Gulfdune paspalum 
(Paspalum monostachyum), rosy camphorweed (Pluchea rosea), starrush 
whitetop (Rhynchospora colorata), alligator lily (Hymenocallis 
palmeri), arrowfeather threeawn (Aristida purpurascens), and narrowleaf 
yellowtops (Flaveria linearis) (Porter, Jr. 1967, pp. 937-942; FNAI 
2010, p. 107).
    Marl prairie depends on a short hydroperiod of 2 to 4 months. 
Longer hydroperiods favor the development of peat and the dominance of 
sawgrass; shorter hydroperiods permit the invasion of woody species.
    Marl prairie normally dries out during the winter and is subject to 
fires at the end of the dry season; the most acres naturally burn in 
May (FNAI 2010, p. 108). Fires at this time (in contrast to dormant 
season fires) stimulate flowering of the dominant grasses (Main and 
Barry 2002, pp. 430-434). The herbaceous species recover rapidly from 
fire, and biomass reaches pre-fire levels at the end of 2 years. For 
the first 2 years after fire, this community will burn only patchily, 
if at all (FNAI 2010, p. 108). Reasons for the presence of dwarf 
cypress in some marl prairies and not others are unknown (FNAI 2010, p. 
108). Wade et al. (1980, pp. 67-79) estimated dwarf cypress stands in 
marl prairie burn about once a decade due to low fire-carrying capacity 
of their sparse understory.
Historical Range
    All known historical and current records for Sideroxylon reclinatum 
ssp. austrofloridense are summarized in table 1. The historical range 
of S. reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense is limited to Collier, Miami-
Dade, and Monroe Counties, Florida. In Miami-Dade County, the plant was 
known from central and southern Miami-Dade County along the Miami Rock 
Ridge, which extends from Long Pine Key in the Everglades northward 
through urban Miami to the Miami River. In Monroe County, the plant was 
known from BCNP on the mainland, and was collected as far south as Key 
Largo, in the Florida Keys. In Collier County, the species has been 
recorded only within BCNP. This area constitutes a historical range of 
approximately 42 miles (mi) (66 kilometers (km)) (Gann et al. 2002, p. 
526; Corogin and Judd 2014, p. 412).
Current Range, Population Estimates, and Status
    The current range of Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense 
is BCNP, the Long Pine Key region of Everglades National Park (ENP), 
and pine rocklands adjacent to ENP (Hodges and Bradley 2006, p. 42; 
Gann et al. 2006, p. 11; K. Bradley, pers. comm. 2007; J. Possley, 
pers. comm. 2011a; 2011b; J. Sadle, pers. comm. 2011; Bradley et al. 
2013, p. 4; Gann 2015, p. 30). The species is apparently extirpated 
from Key Largo. Hodges and Bradley (2006, p. 42) did not find 
Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense in their surveys of pine 
rocklands on Key Largo, Big Pine Key, Cudjoe Key, and Lower Sugarloaf 
Key. This area constitutes a current range of approximately 42 mi (66 
km) (Gann et al. 2002, p. 526; Corogin and Judd 2014, p. 412).
    The largest population occurs at Long Pine Key in ENP (Hodges and 
Bradley 2006, p. 42; Gann et al. 2006, p. 11; Gann 2015, p. 9). The 
most recent information indicates that the baseline abundance estimate 
at Long Pine Key based on a log10 abundance estimate is 
10,000-100,000 plants (Gann et al. 2006, pp. 9-11; Gann 2015, p. 29). 
Recent surveys of ENP have identified 14 occurrences of Sideroxylon 
reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense in Long Pine Key, expanding the known 
range in ENP (Gann 2015, p. 30).
    In Miami-Dade County, outside ENP, pine rocklands tracts are orders 
of magnitude smaller and exist in a matrix of agricultural, commercial, 
and residential development. Possley and McSweeney (2005, p. 1) 
observed approximately 73 plants at Larry and Penny Thompson Park, 
within the Richmond Pine Rocklands. Possley (Fairchild Tropical Botanic 
Garden (FTBG), pers. comm. 2011a; 2011b) found extant populations at 
Quail Roost Pineland (two plants), Navy Well Pineland Preserve (four 
plants), and Sunny Palms Pinelands (two plants). The species had been 
observed in pine rocklands at Grant Hammock, and Pine Ridge Sanctuary 
(Bradley et al. 2013, p. 1). The species no longer occurs at the Nixon-
Smiley Preserve.
    Bradley et al. (2013, pp. 1-8) conducted surveys in the Gum Slough 
region of Lostmans Pines in BCNP and reported finding Sideroxylon 
reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense to have limited distribution within 
the study area. Seventeen plants were counted within pine rockland 
plots that were associated with marl prairie habitats (Bradley et al. 
2013, p. 4).

[[Page 70286]]



        Table 1--Summary of the Status and Trends of the Known Occurrences of Sideroxylon Reclinatum ssp.
                                                Austrofloridense
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Most recent
          Population               Ownership        population          Status                  Trend
                                                 estimate  (Year)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everglades National Park.....  National Park     10,000- 100,000   Extant..........  Increasing.
                                Service.          (2013).
Big Cypress National Preserve  National Park     17 (2013).......  Extant..........  Insufficient data.
                                Service.
Larry Penny Thompson Park....  Miami-Dade        73 (2005).......  Extant..........  Insufficient data.
                                County.
Nixon-Smiley Preserve........  Miami-Dade        0 (Unknown).....  Extirpated......  ...........................
                                County.
Navy Wells Pineland Preserve.  Miami-Dade        4 (2011)........  Extant..........  Insufficient data.
                                County.
Sunny Palms Pineland.........  Miami-Dade        2 (2011)........  Extant..........  Insufficient data.
                                County.
Pine Ridge Sanctuary.........  Private.........  Unknown.........  Extant..........  Insufficient data.
Lucille Hammock..............  Miami-Dade        11-100 (2007)...  Extant..........  Insufficient data.
                                County.
South Dade Wetlands..........  Miami-Dade        Unknown (2007)..  Extant..........  Insufficient data.
                                County.
Natural Forest Community #P-   Private.........  2-10 (2007).....  Extant..........  Insufficient data.
 300.
Natural Forest Community #P-   Private.........  11-100 (2007)...  Extant..........  Insufficient data.
 310.
Quail Roost Pineland.........  Miami-Dade        2 (2011)........  Extant..........  Insufficient data.
                                County.
Grant Hammock................  Unknown.........  Unknown           Extirpated......  ...........................
                                                  (Unknown).
Key Largo....................  Unknown.........  No estimate       Extirpated......  ...........................
                                                  (1948).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Biology
Life History and Reproduction
    Little is known about the life history of Sideroxylon reclinatum 
ssp. austrofloridense, including pollination biology, seed production, 
and dispersal (Gann 2015, p. 31). Reproduction is sexual, with new 
plants generated from seeds. The species produces flowers from April to 
May, and fruit ripen from June to July (Corogin and Judd 2014, pp. 410-
412). The plants can stand partial inundation with fresh water for a 
portion of the year, but do not tolerate salinity.
Fire Ecology and Demography
    There have been no detailed studies of Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense relationship towards fire; however, periodic fire is 
extremely important to maintaining habitat for this species (Corogin 
and Judd 2014, p. 414). Therefore, historical declines have been 
partially attributed to habitat loss from fire suppression or 
inadequate fire management (ENP 2014, p. 173).

Digitaria pauciflora (Florida pineland crabgrass)

Species Description
    Digitaria pauciflora is a small perennial clump-grass, appearing 
blue-green to gray with reddish-brown stems, typically 0.5-1 m (1.5-3 
ft) tall (Small 1933, p. 51). The leaves form a subtle zig-zag pattern 
as the leaf blades come off the stem at an angle. The leaf blades are 
7-18 cm (2.8-7.1) in) long, 1.0-2.2 mm (0.04-0.08 in) wide, and number 
2-8 per stem. Both the lower and upper surface and stems are hairy but 
become glabrous (smooth or hairless) with age. The nodes are mostly 
glabrous, the sheath auricles (an ear-like projection at the base of 
the leaf) are 1.5 mm (0.06 in) long, and the sheaths are hairy but 
becoming glabrous with age. The ligule (a small bract located at the 
leaf-stem junction) is 1.5-2.0 mm (0.06-0.08 in) long. The flowers are 
dull green, very small, and are borne on wispy spikes on the ends of 
the leafy stems, with usually only a few flower clusters forming per 
clump of grass. The lemma (a tiny bract adjacent to the flower) of 
upper floret (flower) is purple. Stolons (aboveground horizontal stems) 
are not present, but the plant produces rhizomes (belowground 
horizontal stems) that allow for vegetative spread (Webster and Hatch, 
1990, pp. 161-162). Digitaria pauciflora is known to reproduce sexually 
(Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 50), with fruit production in the fall 
(Wendelberger and Maschinski 2006, p. 3).
Taxonomy
    Digitaria pauciflora was first described in 1928 based on specimens 
collected in 1903 (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 49). Small (1933, pp. 50-
51) later placed it in the genus Syntherisma. Subsequent authors 
(Hitchcock 1935, p. 561; Webster & Hatch 1990, p. 161; Wunderlin 1998) 
have retained it in the genus Digitaria (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 49).
    The online Atlas of Florida Vascular Plants uses the name Digitaria 
pauciflora (Wunderlin and Hansen 2016, p. 1), the Integrated Taxonomic 
System (ITIS 2016, p. 1), NatureServe (2016, p. 1), and the Florida 
Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (FDACS) (Coile and 
Garland 2003, p. 19) indicates that its taxonomic status is accepted. 
We have carefully reviewed all taxonomic data to determine that 
Digitaria pauciflora is a valid taxon. The only synonym is Syntherisma 
pauciflora (Hitchcock) Hitchcock ex Small (ITIS 2016, p. 1).
Climate
    The climate of south Florida where Digitaria pauciflora occurs is 
classified as tropical savanna, as described above for Sideroxylon 
reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense.
Habitat
    Digitaria pauciflora occurs predominantly within the seasonally 
flooded ecotone between pine rockland and marl prairie, although the 
species may overlap somewhat into both habitats (Bradley and Gann 1999, 
p. 49; Fellows et al. 2002, p. 79). Plants can withstand inundation 
with fresh water for one to several months each year (ENP 2014, p. 
172). These habitats are maintained by regular fire, and are prone, 
particularly marl prairie, to annual flooding for several months during 
the wet season (Gann et al. 2006, p. 13). Pine rocklands and marl 
prairies are described in detail above for Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense.
Historical Range
    All known historical and current records for Digitaria pauciflora 
are summarized in table 2. The historical range of D. pauciflora 
consists of central and southern Miami-Dade County along the Miami Rock 
Ridge, from the

[[Page 70287]]

southern Miami to Long Pine Key region of ENP, a range of approximately 
42 mi (67.6 km) (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 49). Specimens of D. 
pauciflora were collected early in the twentieth century throughout 
Miami-Dade County.
    D. pauciflora was absent from collections from 1939 until 1973, 
when it was rediscoverd at Long Pine Key in Everglades National Park 
(Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 49). D. pauciflora has subsequently been 
encountered consistently within Long Pine Key (Bradley and Gann 1999, 
p. 49).
    A single Digitaria pauciflora plant was discovered in 1995 within 
marl prairie habitat at the Martinez Pinelands in the Richmond Pine 
Rocklands, an area of Miami-Dade County that retains the largest 
contiguous areas of pine rockland habitat outside of the Everglades. 
However, this plant has since disappeared (Herndon 1998, p. 88; Bradley 
and Gann 1999, p. 49; Gann 2015, p. 142). Three other historical 
occurrences in Miami-Dade County have been documented: (1) a site 
between Cutler and Longview Camp (last observed in 1903); (2) Jenkins 
Homestead (date unspecified); and (3) South Miami (last observed in 
1939) (K. Bradley, pers. comm. 2007); however, little is known 
regarding the status of these populations. The species was not found 
during a 2-year project to survey and map rare and exotic plants along 
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) right-of-ways within Miami-
Dade and Monroe Counties (Gordon et al. 2007, pp. 1, 38).
Current Range, Population Estimates, and Status
    The current range of Digitaria pauciflora includes ENP and BCNP 
(Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 49; Gann et al. 2006, p. 3; Bradley, pers. 
comm. 2005a; Gann 2015, p. 142). Ongoing surveys suggest the species 
occurs throughout Long Pine Key of ENP (Gann et al. 2006, p. 7; 2015, 
p. 144; Gann 2015, p. 144) and is much wider-ranging than previously 
known in ENP. Joyce Maschinski (FTBG, pers. comm. 2007) characterized 
the populations within ENP as abundant.
    In 2002, Bradley et al. (2013, p. 2) discovered Digitaria 
pauciflora within the Lostmans Pines region of BCNP in Monroe County. 
This discovery represented the first known D. pauciflora occurrence 
outside Miami-Dade County (FNAI 2007, p. 191). The species is widely 
distributed within Lostmans Pines (Bradley et al. 2013, pp. 1-8). 
Subsequent surveys for the species within BCNP have documented up to 
nine occurrences, some of which contain an estimated 500-600 plants 
(Maschinski et al. 2003, p. 141). Bradley et al. (2013, pp. 1-8) 
conducted surveys in the Gum Slough region of Lostmans Pines and 
indicated that the species is widely distributed within the study area. 
A total of 2,365 plants was counted within pineland and sawgrass based 
survey plots (Bradley et al. 2013, pp. 3-4). The range-wide population 
estimate for D. pauciflora is 1,000-10,000 individuals at Long Pine Key 
(Gann 2015, p. 142) and >10,000 individuals within BCNP (K. Bradley, 
pers. comm. 2007). Large-scale stochastic events such as wildfire and 
flooding can drastically reduce the size of D. pauciflora populations. 
For example, in the spring months of 2016, wildfires in areas occupied 
by D. pauciflora likely reduced populations in ENP. The populations 
will likely rebound; however, regeneration could be severely hampered, 
based on the amount and duration of flooding during the region's late 
summer storm season. While Digitaria pauciflora populations remain 
abundant within ENP and BCNP, these areas represent only half of the 
species' historical range (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 25; Gann 2015, p. 
167). While D. pauciflora was known to occur throughout Miami-Dade 
County, all other populations are likely extirpated.

           Table 2--Summary of the Status and Trends of the Known Occurrences of Digitaria Pauciflora
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Most recent
           Population                 Ownership          population            Status               Trend
                                                          estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everglades National Park.......  National Park       1,000-10,000        Extant............  Stable.
                                  Service.            (2007).
Big Cypress National Preserve..  National Park       >10,000 (2007)....  Extant............  Stable.
                                  Service.
Martinez Pineland..............  Miami-Dade County.  0 (1999)..........  Extirpated.         ...................
Cutler and Longview Camp.......  Unknown...........  Unknown (1903)....  Extirpated.         ...................
Jenkins Homestead..............  Unknown...........  Unknown (date       Extirpated.         ...................
                                                      unspecified).
South Miami....................  Unknown...........  Unknown (1939)....  Extirpated.         ...................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Biology
Life History and Reproduction
    Little is known about the life history of Digitaria pauciflora, 
including pollination biology, seed production, and dispersal. 
Reproduction is sexual, with new plants generated from seeds (Bradley 
and Gann, 1999, p. 53). The species produces flowers from summer to 
late fall on both new and older growth; some plants have been observed 
to finish seeding as late as December (Fellows et al. 2002, p. 2; Gann 
2015, p. 172). Plants can also spread clonally via rhizomes (Webster 
and Hatch, 1990, pp. 161-162). The plants can stand partial inundation 
with fresh water for a portion of the year, but do not tolerate 
salinity.
Fire Ecology and Demography
    Digitaria pauciflora population demographics and longevity have not 
been studied (Bradley and Gann, 1999, p. 53; Fellows et al. 2002, p. 
2). There have been no studies of the plant's relationship to fire; 
however, periodic fire is extremely important to maintaining habitat 
for this species (Bradley and Gann, 1999, p. 53; ENP 2014, p. 226). 
Therefore, historical declines have been partially attributed to 
habitat loss from fire suppression or inadequate fire management. Gann 
(2015, p. 142) indicates that the species shows patch dynamics, 
colonizing new areas and undergoing local extinctions with high rates 
of turnover. Plants with `flashy' or `boom and bust' demographic 
patterns are more susceptible to stochastic extinction events. ENP has 
burned populations of D. pauciflora during the wet and dry season, and 
both appear suitable to maintain populations of the plant (ENP 2014, p. 
226).

Chamaesyce deltoidea spp. pinetorum (pineland sandmat)

Species Description
    Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum is an ascending to erect 
perennial herb. The stems are villous (hairy), and often reddish. The 
leaf blades range from kidney-shaped or triangle-shaped and elliptic to 
oval. The involucres (a cup-like structure enclosing the flowers) are 1 
mm long, and pubescent, and possess green, even-edged glands with very 
narrow appendages. The fruit is a 2-mm broad, pubescent capsule. The 
seeds are 1 mm long, transversely wrinkled, and yellowish in color 
(Small 1933, p. 795).

[[Page 70288]]

C. deltoidea ssp. pinetorum is known to reproduce sexually (Bradley and 
Gann 1999, p. 25). Fruit production is year-round, with a peak in the 
fall (Wendelberger and Maschinski 2006, p. 2).
Taxonomy
    Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum was first described by Small in 
1905, based on specimens collected in eastern Miami-Dade County (Small 
1905, pp. 429-430). Initially, Small referred to these specimens as C. 
pinetorum but recognized that it was closely related to Chamaesyce 
deltoidea. Herndon (1993, pp. 38-51) included C. pinetorum within the 
C. deltoidea complex, which is composed of three other taxa, two 
occurring further north on the Miami Rock Ridge, and one occurring on 
Big Pine Key in the lower Florida Keys (Monroe County). The three taxa 
on the Miami Rock Ridge have distinct, but adjacent ranges. 
Subsequently, Herndon (1993, pp. 38-51) has placed all four taxa at the 
same taxonomic level, treating each as a distinct subspecies under 
Chamaesyce deltoidea (C. deltoidea ssp. pinetorum; C. deltoidea ssp. 
serpyllum, C. deltoidea ssp. adhaerens; C. deltoidea ssp. deltoidea). 
Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. deltoidea and C. deltoidea ssp. adhaerens 
occur north of known C. deltoidea ssp. pinetorum populations, while 
Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. serpyllum is endemic to Big Pine Key. 
Wunderlin and Hansen (2016, p. 1) follow Herndon's treatment in using 
C. deltoidea ssp. pinetorum. Some modern authors place the genus 
Chamaesyce into the genus Euphorbia sensu lato (Yang and Berry 2011, 
pp. 1486-1503). Gann (2015, p. 168) indicates that if the pineland 
sandmat is placed into the genus Euphorbia, the correct name is 
Euphorbia deltoidea ssp. pinetorum.
    The online Atlas of Florida Vascular Plants uses the name 
Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum (Small) Herndon (Wunderlin and 
Hansen 2016, p. 1). NatureServe (2016, p. 1) and FDACS (Coile and 
Garland 2003, p. 11) indicate that C. deltoidea ssp. pinetorum is 
accepted. However, the Integrated Taxonomic System (ITIS 2016, p. 1) 
accepts Euphorbia deltoidea ssp. pinetorum as the scientific name for 
the species (Gann 2015, p. 168). We have carefully reviewed all 
taxonomic data and have determined that C. deltoidea ssp. pinetorum is 
a valid taxon.
Climate
    The climate of south Florida where Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. 
pinetorum occurs is classified as tropical savanna, as described above 
for Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense.
Habitat
    Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum occurs in pine rocklands 
(Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 24). Pine rocklands are maintained by 
regular fire, and are prone to annual flooding for several months 
during the wet season (Gann et al. 2006, p. 13). However, Gann (2015, 
p. 169), indicates that C. deltoidea ssp. pinetorum generally occurs in 
higher elevation pine rocklands at Long Pine Key in ENP, in areas 
rarely subject to flooding. Pine rockland habitat is described in 
detail above in the Habitat section for Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense.
Historical Range
    All known historical and current records for Chamaesyce deltoidea 
ssp. pinetorum are summarized in table 3. Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. 
pinetorum occurred historically only within the southern portion of the 
Miami Rock Ridge, from the Richmond Pine Rocklands of southern Miami to 
the Long Pine Key region of Everglades National Park, a range of 
approximately 42 mi (67.6 km) (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 24). C. 
deltoidea ssp. pinetorum has been encountered consistently within Long 
Pine Key, as well as in several County-owned conservation lands 
adjacent to the ENP (Gann 2015, p. 167).
Current Range, Population Estimates, and Status
    The current range of Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum is similar 
to the historical range, although 98 percent of the pine rocklands (the 
species' only habitat) outside of the ENP has been lost to development 
(Kernan and Bradley 1996, p. 2). The total population size of 
Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum is estimated to be between 14,500-
146,000 individuals, with the majority of the population occurring on 
Long Pine Key (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 25; Gann 2015, p. 167). 
However, while Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum is most abundant 
within ENP, pine rockland fragments outside of the Everglades represent 
about half the species' extant range (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 25; 
Bradley pers. comm. 2007; Gann 2015, p. 167). Elsewhere in Miami-Dade 
County, a 2011 survey of the privately owned Pine Ridge Sanctuary 
confirmed the plant remains at this site (FNAI 2011, p. 5). A recent 
survey of Larry and Penny Thompson Park located no individuals (J. 
Possley, FTBG, pers. comm. 2011c).

    Table 3--Summary of the Status and Trends of the Known Occurrences of Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Most recent
          Population               Ownderhip        population          Status                  Trend
                                                     estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everglades National Park.....  National Park     10,000-100,000    Extant..........  Increasing.
                                Service.          (2011).
Florida City Pineland........  Miami-Dade        100-1,000 (2007)  Extant..........  Increasing.
                                County.
Navy Wells...................  Miami-Dade        1,000-10,000      Extant..........  Insufficient data.
                                County.           (2007).
Navy Wells #2................  Miami-Dade        100-1,000 (2007)  Extant..........  Insufficient data.
                                County.
Navy Wells #39...............  Miami-Dade        1,000-10,000      Extant..........  Insufficient data.
                                County.           (2007).
Palm Drive Pineland..........  Miami-Dade        10-100 (2007)...  Extant..........  Insufficient data.
                                County.
Pine Ridge Sanctuary.........  Private.........  10-100 (2011)...  Extant..........  Insufficient data.
Rock Pit #39.................  Miami-Dade        11-1,000 (2007).  Extant..........  Insufficient data.
                                County.
Seminole Wayside Park........  Miami-Dade        100-1,000 (2007)  Extant..........  Insufficient data.
                                County.
Fuchs Hammock Addition.......  Miami-Dade        11-100 (2007)...  Extant..........  Insufficient data.
                                County.
Sunny Palms Pineland.........  Miami-Dade        100-1,000 (2007)  Extant..........  Insufficient data.
                                County.
Larry and Penny Thompson Park  Miami-Dade        0 (2011)........  Extirpated......  Insufficient data.
                                County.
John Kunkel Small Pineland...  Institute for     Present (2006)..  Extant..........  Insufficient data.
                                Regional
                                Conservation.
Natural Forest Community       Private.........  11-100 (2007)...  Extant..........  Insufficient data.
 [NFC] #P330.

[[Page 70289]]

 
Natural Forest Community       Private.........  1,001-10,000      Extant..........  Insufficient data.
 #P338.                                           (2007).
Natural Forest Community       Private.........  11-100 (2007)...  Extant..........  Insufficient data.
 #P339.
Natural Forest Community       Private.........  11-100 (2007)...  Extant..........  Insufficient data.
 #P347.
Natural Forest Community       Private.........  101-1,000 (2007)  Extant..........  Insufficient data.
 #P411.
Natural Forest Community       Private.........  11-100 (2007)...  Extant..........  Insufficient data.
 #P413.
Natural Forest Community       Private.........  11-100 (2007)...  Extant..........  Insufficient data.
 #P416.
Natural Forest Community       Private.........  1,001-10,000      Extant..........  Insufficient data.
 #P445.                                           (2007).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Biology
Life History and Reproduction
    Little is known about the life history of Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. 
pinetorum. Reproduction is sexual, but little is known about the 
reproductive biology and ecology of the species (Bradley and Gann 1999, 
p. 25; Gann 2015, p. 167). Herndon (1998, pp. 13-14) studied the life 
history and population trends of C. deltoidea ssp. pinetorum and found 
up to 88 percent of plants survived more than 3 years, showing that it 
is a somewhat long-lived taxon. Herndon (1998, pp. 13-14) hypothesized 
that some of the plants that had been recorded as dead may have instead 
been in a cryptic phase (Gann 2015, p. 167). The extensive root system 
of C. deltoidea ssp. pinetorum also suggests that it is a long-lived 
plant (Maschinski et al. 2003, p. 179). Pollinators are unknown; other 
species of Chamaesyce are completely reliant on insects for pollination 
and seed production, while others are self-pollinating (Maschinski et 
al. 2003, p. 179; Gann 2015, p. 168). Pollinators may include bees, 
flies, ants, and wasps (Ehrenfeld 1979, p. 95; Gann 2015, p. 168). 
Dispersal is unknown for Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum; however, 
many seed capsules in similar Chamaesyce species are explosively 
dehiscent, a form of dispersal that flings seeds far from the parent 
plant (Maschinski et al., p. 179; Gann 2015, p. 168). This species is 
known to flower and fruit year round (Wendelberger and Maschinski 2006, 
p. 2). Peaks in fruiting for C. deltoidea ssp. pinetorum occur in the 
fall and are stimulated by fire (Wendelberger and Maschinski 2006, p. 
2). The plants can stand partial inundation with fresh water for a 
portion of the year, but do not tolerate salinity.
Fire Ecology and Demography
    There have been no studies of Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum 
population demographics. However, the species is not shade tolerant, 
and it requires periodic low-intensity fires to reduce competition by 
woody species to maintain habitat for this species (Bradley and Gann, 
1999, p. 26; ENP 2014, p. 170). Therefore, historical declines have 
been partially attributed to habitat loss from fire suppression or 
inadequate fire management.

Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana (Florida prairie-clover)

Species Description
    Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana is a short-lived (less than 7 
years) perennial shrub 2.6-9.8 ft (0.8-3.0 m) tall with a light-brown 
woody stem and non-woody, light-brown or reddish branches. The leaves 
are composed of 9-15 oval, gland-tipped leaflets, and are gland-dotted 
on the underside. The flowers are in small loose heads at ends of 
hairy, glandular stalks, less than 0.4 in long. The flower color is 
white and maroon; each of the petals is different lengths and shapes. 
The fruit is a small one-seeded pod, mostly enclosed by the hairy, 
gland-dotted calyx (bracts at base of each flower) (adapted from Long 
and Lakela 1971, p. 478; Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 42; Maschinski et 
al. 2014, p. 44).
Taxonomy
    Chapman (1886, p. 102) was the first to report this taxon in 
Florida, calling it the tropical Dalea domingensis, based on specimens 
collected on Key Biscayne. Small (1913, p. 89) accepted this 
characterization but included the taxon in the genus Parosela, making 
the plant P. domingensis. Rydberg (1920, p. x) renamed the plant, 
calling it Parosela floridana, and this name was retained by Small 
(1933, pp. 694-695). Clausen (1946a, p. 85) reviewed the taxonomy of 
Florida and West Indian Dalea and considered them all to be the same 
species. Clausen (1946a, p. 85) also found that the name D. domingensis 
was a homonym of D. emphysodes, and published the name D. emphysodes 
ssp. domingensis. Clausen (1946b, p. 572) later discovered that his use 
of the name D. emphysodes was in error, and renamed the plants D. 
carthagenensis ssp. domingensis. Long and Lakela (1971, p. 478) 
accepted this usage. Barneby (1977), in a monograph of the genus, also 
found that Florida plants were distinct from West Indian plants, citing 
differences in leaf characters, naming the Florida species D. 
carthagenensis var. floridana. Wunderlin (1998) has followed this 
treatment.
    The Integrated Taxonomic Information System (2016, p. 1) indicates 
that the taxonomic standing for Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana 
(Rydb.) Barneby is accepted. The online Atlas of Florida Vascular 
Plants (Wunderlin and Hansen 2016, p. 1) uses the name D. 
carthagenensis var. floridana, as does NatureServe (2016, p. 1). FDACS 
uses the name Dalea carthagenensis and notes that D. carthagenensis 
var. floridana is endemic (Coile and Garland 2003, p. 17). In summary, 
there is consensus that D. carthagenensis var. floridana is a distinct 
taxon. We have carefully reviewed the available taxonomic information 
to reach the conclusion that D. carthagenensis var. floridana is a 
valid taxon.
Climate
    The climate of south Florida where Dalea carthagenensis var. 
floridana occurs is classified as tropical savanna

[[Page 70290]]

as described above for Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense.
Habitat
    Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana grows in pine rockland, 
rockland hammock, marl prairie, coastal berm, and in the ecotones 
between these habitats (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 43). The species may 
also occur along roadsides within these habitats (Gann et al. 2006, p. 
10). Pine rockland and marl prairie habitat are described in detail 
above in the Habitat section for Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense.

Roadsides

    Roadsides are a potentially important habitat for Dalea 
carthagenensis var. floridana (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 43). Where 
endemics such as D. carthagenensis var. floridana are found on 
shoulders, the ground cover is dominated mostly by native herbs and 
grasses where exotic lawn grasses have not been planted. Maintaining 
the roadsides in this condition through regular mowing, without 
planting sod, should continue to provide suitable habitat for Dalea 
carthagenensis var. floridana (Bradley 2006, p. 37).

Rockland Hammock

    Rockland hammock is a species-rich tropical hardwood forest on 
upland sites in areas where limestone is very near the surface and 
often exposed. The forest floor is largely covered by leaf litter with 
varying amounts of exposed limestone and has few herbaceous species. 
Rockland hammocks typically have larger, more mature trees in the 
interior, while the margins can be almost impenetrable in places with 
dense growth of smaller shrubs, trees, and vines. Typical canopy and 
subcanopy species include Bursera simaruba, Lysiloma latisiliquum 
(false tamarind), Coccoloba diversifolia (pigeon plum), Sideroxylon 
foetidissimum (false mastic), Ficus aurea (strangler fig), Piscidia 
piscipula (Jamaican dogwood), Ocotea coriacea (lancewood), Drypetes 
diversifolia, Simarouba glauca (paradisetree), Sideroxylon salicifolium 
(willow bustic), Krugiodendron ferreum (black ironwood), Exothea 
paniculata (inkwood), Metopium toxiferum, and Swietenia mahagoni (West 
Indies mahogany). Mature hammocks may be open beneath a tall, well-
defined canopy and subcanopy. More commonly, in less mature or 
disturbed hammocks, dense woody vegetation of varying heights from 
canopy to short shrubs is often present. Species that generally make up 
the shrub layers within rockland hammock include several species of 
Eugenia (stoppers), Thrinax morrisii and T. radiata (thatch palms), 
Amyris elemifera (sea torchwood), Ardisia escallonioides (marlberry), 
Psychotria nervosa (wild coffee), Chrysophyllum oliviforme (satinleaf), 
Sabal palmetto (cabbage palm), Guaiacum sanctum (lignum-vitae), Ximenia 
americana (tallow wood), Colubrina elliptica (soldierwood), 
Pithecellobium unguis-cati (cat claw blackbead) and Pithecellobium 
keyense (Florida keys blackbead), Coccoloba uvifera (sea grape), and 
Colubrina arborescens (greenheart). Vines can be common and include 
Toxicodendron radicans (eastern poison ivy), Smilax auriculata (earleaf 
greenbrier), Smilax havanensis (Everglades greenbrier), Parthenocissus 
quinquefolia (Virginia creeper), Hippocratea volubilis (medicine vine), 
and Morinda royoc (redgal). The typically sparse, short shrub layer may 
include Zamia pumila (coontie) and Acanthocereus tetragonus (triangle 
cactus). Herbaceous species are occasionally present and generally 
sparse in coverage. Characteristic species include Lasiacis divaricata 
(smallcane), Oplismenus hirtellus (basketgrass), and many species of 
ferns (FNAI 2010, p. 24).
    Rockland hammock occurs on a thin layer of highly organic soil 
covering limestone on high ground that does not regularly flood, but it 
is often dependent upon a high water table to keep humidity levels 
high. Rockland hammocks are frequently located near wetlands; in the 
Everglades they can occur on organic matter that accumulates on top of 
the underlying limestone (FNAI 2010, p. 25).
    Rockland hammock is susceptible to fire, frost, canopy disruption, 
and ground water reduction. Rockland hammock can be the advanced 
successional stage of pine rockland, especially in cases where rockland 
hammock is adjacent to pine rockland. In such cases, when fire is 
excluded from pine rockland for 15 to 25 years, it can succeed to 
rockland hammock vegetation. Historically, rockland hammocks in south 
Florida evolved with fire in the landscape. Fire most often 
extinguished near the edges when it encountered the hammock's moist 
microclimate and litter layer. However, rockland hammocks are 
susceptible to damage from fire during extreme drought or when the 
water table is lowered. In these cases, fire can cause tree mortality 
and consume the organic soil layer (FNAI 2010, p. 25).
    Rockland hammocks are also sensitive to the strong winds and storm 
surge associated with infrequent hurricanes. Canopy damage often 
occurs, which causes a change in the microclimate of the hammock. 
Decreased relative humidity and drier soils can leave rockland hammocks 
more susceptible to fire. Rockland hammock can transition into glades 
marsh, mangrove swamp, salt marsh, coastal rock barren, pine rockland, 
maritime hammock, or marl prairie (FNAI 2010, p. 26).
    The sparsely vegetated edges or interior portions laid open by 
canopy disruption are the areas of rockland hammock that have light 
levels sufficient to support Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana. 
However, the dynamic nature of the habitat means that areas not 
currently open may become open in the future as a result of canopy 
disruption from hurricanes, while areas currently open may develop more 
dense canopy over time, eventually rendering that portion of the 
hammock unsuitable for Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana.

Coastal Berm

    Coastal berms are landscape features found along low-energy 
coastlines in south Florida and the Florida Keys. Coastal berm is a 
short forest or shrub thicket found on long, narrow, storm-deposited 
ridges of loose sediment formed by a mixture of coarse shell fragments, 
pieces of coralline algae, and other coastal debris. These ridges 
parallel the shore and may be found on the seaward edge or landward 
edge of the mangroves or farther inland depending on the height of the 
storm surge that formed them. They range in height from 0.30 to 3.05 m 
(1 to 10 ft). Structure and composition of the vegetation is variable 
depending on height and time since the last storm event. The most 
stable berms may share some tree species with rockland hammocks, but 
generally have a greater proportion of shrubs and herbs. Tree species 
may include Bursera simaruba (gumbo limbo), Coccoloba uvifera 
(seagrape), Coccothrinax argentata (silver palm), Guapira discolor 
(blolly), Drypetes diversifolia (milkbark), Genipa clusiifolia (seven 
year apple), and Metopium toxiferum (poisonwood). Characteristic tall 
shrub and short tree species include Eugenia foetida (Spanish stopper), 
Ximenia americana (hog plum), Randia aculeata (white indigoberry), 
Pithecellobium keyense (Florida Keys blackbead), and Sideroxylon 
celastrinum (saffron plum). Short shrubs and herbs include Hymenocallis 
latifolia (perfumed spiderlily), Capparis flexuosa (bayleaf capertree), 
Lantana involucrata (buttonsage), and Rivina humilis

[[Page 70291]]

(rougeplant). More seaward berms or those more recently affected by 
storm deposition may support a suite of plants similar to beaches, 
including shoreline Sesuvium portulacastrum (sea purslane), Distichlis 
spicata (saltgrass), and Sporobolus virginicus (seashore dropseed), or 
scattered to dense shrub thickets with Conocarpus erectus (buttonwood), 
stunted Avicennia germinans (black mangrove), Rhizophora mangle (red 
mangrove), Laguncularia racemosa (white mangrove), Suriana maritima 
(bay cedar), Manilkara jaimiqui (wild dilly), Jacquinia keyensis 
(joewood), and Borrichia frutescens (bushy seaside oxeye) (Florida 
Natural Areas Inventory (FNAI) 2010a, p. 1).
    Coastal berms are deposited by storm waves along low-energy coasts. 
Their distance inland depends on the height of the storm surge. Tall 
berms may be the product of repeated storm deposition. Coastal berms 
that are deposited far enough inland and remain long-undisturbed may in 
time succeed to hammock. This is a structurally variable community that 
may appear in various stages of succession following storm disturbance, 
from scattered herbaceous beach-colonizing plants to a dense stand of 
tall shrubs (FNAI 2010a, p. 2).
Historical Range
    All known historical and current records for Dalea carthagenensis 
var. floridana are summarized in table 4. The historical range of D. 
carthagenensis var. floridana includes Miami-Dade, Monroe, Collier, and 
Palm Beach Counties (Gann et al. 2015, pp. 25-26). There have been no 
reports of this plant from Palm Beach County since 1918 (Bradley and 
Gann 1999, p. 42). In Miami-Dade County, the species has been 
extirpated from a number of historical locations, including Castellow 
Hammock, ENP, the Coral Gables area, pinelands south of the Miami 
River, and Cox Hammock (Bradley and Gann 1999, pp. 42-43; Maschinski et 
al. 2014, p. 39). Gann et al. (2002, pp. 408-411) accounted for 
essentially every herbarium specimen and reliable sighting. Gann (2015, 
pp. 25-26) did not find D. carthagenensis var. floridana in ENP, and it 
is presumed to be extirpated at this location. One of the previous 
records at ENP was originally misidentified and has recently been 
confirmed as a specimen of Aeschynomene pratensis (J. Sadle, NPS, pers. 
comm. 2014). The other ENP herbarium specimen was correctly identified, 
but the plant is currently considered to be extirpated from the 
historical location (J. Sadle, NPS, pers. comm. 2014).
Current Range, Population Estimates, and Status
    The current range of Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana includes 
BCNP (Monroe and Collier Counties), three Miami-Dade County 
conservation areas, and three unprotected lands within the Cutler Bay 
region of Miami-Dade County (Maschinski et al. 2014, p. 39)
    In 1999, Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana was rediscovered 
within BCNP (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 42). Maschinski et al. (2014, p. 
31) subsequently surveyed the four extant populations on BCNP, finding 
them at two locations. An area north of Oasis Visitor Center contained 
236 plants (of various ages) and represents the largest extant 
population within BCNP. The second extant population was in the 
Pinecrest region (along Loop Road) of BCNP, an historic location within 
the Park; however, only 17 plants were encountered. The species was not 
found at 11-Mile Road, or at a second location along Loop Road during 
the surveys.
    Maschinski et al. (2014, pp. 31-34) have extensively surveyed 
extant Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana populations at Charles 
Deering Estate, R. Hardy Matheson Preserve, and Crandon Park within 
Miami-Dade County over the past decade.
    During 2003 to 2007, the population at Charles Deering Estate 
ranged from between 50 and 80 individuals, with the number of seedlings 
ranging from 3 to 54. However, beginning in 2008, Maschinski et al. 
(2014, p. 33) have documented pulses in seedling establishment. In 
2010, the total population size (seedlings and woody plants) was 356 
individuals. The majority of these were seedlings and basal re-sprouts 
from a fire that affected approximately one-third of the population 
(Maschinski et al. 2010, p. 24). A 2014 survey found 347 plants, 
suggesting the population remains stable (Maschinski et al. 2015, p. 
30).
    The population at R. Hardy Matheson Preserve had declined from 31 
plants in 2004 to just 1 woody plant and 3 seedlings in 2008. However, 
the population increased to 330 and 200 seedlings in 2009 and 2010, 
respectively. The most recent surveys indicated stable populations of 
98 and 307 individuals, in 2014 and 2015, respectively (Maschinski et 
al. 2010, p. 30; 2014, p. 34).
    In 2003, Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana was discovered within 
coastal uplands at Crandon Park for the first time since 1966 
(Maschinski et al. 2010, p. 28). The population at Crandon Park appears 
to be stable; however, it is highly localized to a small area of 
approximately 145 m\2\ (Possley and Maschinski 2009, p. 10). During 
2007, FTBG initiated a demographic study of the species. Sampling plots 
found 200 plants of various sizes, resulting in a population estimate 
of 966 plants at the site (J. Maschinski, pers. comm. 2007; Possley and 
Maschinski 2009, p. 10). Subsequent surveys have shown the population 
to vary considerably, possibly due to a short lifespan or plant 
dormancy (Possley and Maschinski 2009, p. 10). Surveys at Crandon Park 
identified 288 and 168 individuals, in 2014 and 2015, respectively 
(Maschinski et al. 2015, p. 32). Additional known populations within 
Miami-Dade County are summarized in table 4.

    Table 4--Summary of the Status and Trends of the Known Occurrences of Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Most recent
          Population               Ownership        population          Status                  Trend
                                                     estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everglades National Park.....  National Park     ................  Extirpated        ...........................
                                Service.                            (1964).
Big Cypress National           National Park     236 (2013)......  Extant..........  Insufficient data.
 Preserve, North of Oasis       Service.
 Visitor Center.
Big Cypress National           National Park     0 (2013)........  Extirpated        Insufficient data.
 Preserve, 11-Mile Road.        Service.                            (2014).
Big Cypress National           National Park     17 (2013).......  Extant..........  Insufficient data.
 Preserve, Pinecrest.           Service.
Charles Deering Estate.......  Miami-Dade        347 (2014)......  Extant..........  Stable.
                                County.

[[Page 70292]]

 
Virginia Key (reintroduction)  City of Miami...  4 (2010)........  Extant..........  Insufficient data.
R. Hardy Matheson Preserve...  Miami-Dade        307 (2015)......  Extant..........  Stable.
                                County.
Crandon Park.................  Miami-Dade        168 (2015)......  Extant..........  Stable.
                                County.
Strawberry Fields Hammock      Private.........  17 (2014).......  Extant..........  Insufficient data.
 (next to Natural Forest
 Community).
HRS, Inc.....................  Private.........  21 (2014).......  Extant..........  Insufficient data.
Florida Power and Light        Florida Power     2-10 (2007).....  Extant..........  Insufficient data.
 property.                      and Light.
Coral Gables area............  Private.........  ................  Extirpated        ...........................
                                                                    (1967).
Cox Hammock..................  Private.........  ................  Extirpated        ...........................
                                                                    (1930).
Castellow Hammock Preserve...  Miami-Dade        ................  Extirpated        ...........................
                                County.                             (1975).
Pineland South of Miami River  Unknown.........  Unknown.........  Unknown.          ...........................
Palm Beach County............  Private.........  ................  Extirpated        ...........................
                                                                    (1918).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Biology
Life History and Reproduction
    Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana appears to be a short-lived 
(less than 7 years) perennial with a persistent seed bank (Maschinski 
et al. 2014, p. 45). The species produces flowers from October to 
March, and fruit ripen from November to April. The seed maturation 
period is January to May, with a peak in February and March. Larger 
plants can produce more than 500 seeds. Seedling recruitment varies 
widely from year to year, with lower recruitment in drier years. 
Seedlings and juveniles experience rapid growth in their first 2 years 
(Maschinski et al. 2014, p. 45). The plants can stand partial 
inundation with fresh water for a portion of the year, but do not 
tolerate salinity.
    Maschinski et al. (2014, p. 41) used ongoing survey data from the 
Crandon Park population to conduct a preliminary population viability 
analysis (PVA). The population at Crandon Park declined by 33 percent 
from 2007 to 2009. High seedling recruitment increased numbers in 2010, 
which stabilized the population until 2014, when a pulse of high 
recruitment occurred. The demographic study indicated that 3 years had 
declining population growth and 4 years were stable or increasing, a 
cyclic pattern characteristic of short-lived species. The PVA indicated 
that the external cues (temperature and soil moisture) required to 
break dormancy positively influenced Dalea carthagenensis var. 
floridana population dynamics. However, if coupled with seedling 
mortality, serious population decline resulted. Low winter temperature 
coupled with average rainfall resulted in high seedling recruitment and 
good seedling survival; however, if high rainfall followed cold winter 
temperatures, as was noted for winter 2010, seedling mortality was high 
(Maschinski et al. 2014, p. 41).
Fire Ecology and Demography
    There have been no studies of Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana 
relationship to fire; however, periodic fire is extremely important to 
maintaining habitat for this species (Maschinski et al. 2014, p. 47). 
Therefore, historical declines have been partially attributed to 
habitat loss from fire suppression or inadequate fire management.

Summary of Biological Status and Threats

    The Act directs us to determine whether any species is an 
endangered species or a threatened species because of any factors 
affecting its continued existence. In this section, we summarize the 
biological condition of each of the plant species and its resources, 
and the influences on such, to assess the species' overall viability 
and the risks to that viability.

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

    Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, 
Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. 
floridana have experienced substantial destruction, modification, and 
curtailment of their habitat and range (see Background, 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, Development, and Agricultural Conversion
    The modification and destruction of the habitats that support 
Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, 
Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. 
floridana has been extreme in most areas of Miami-Dade and Monroe 
Counties, thereby reducing the plants' current range and abundance in 
Florida. The pine rockland community of south Florida, in which these 
species primarily occur, is critically imperiled locally and globally 
(FNAI 2010, p. 62). Destruction of pine rocklands and rockland hammocks 
has occurred since the beginning of the 1900s. Extensive land-clearing 
for human population growth, development, and agriculture in Miami-Dade 
and Monroe Counties has altered, degraded, or destroyed thousands of 
acres of these once-abundant ecosystems.
    In Miami-Dade County, development and agriculture have reduced pine 
rockland habitat by 90 percent in mainland south Florida. Pine rockland 
habitat in Miami-Dade County, including ENP, was reduced to about 11 
percent of its natural extent, from approximately 74,000 ha (183,000 
ac) in the early 1900s, to only 8,140 ha (20,100 ac) in 1996 (Kernan 
and Bradley 1996, p. 2). The largest remaining intact pine rockland 
(approximately 2,313 ha (5,716

[[Page 70293]]

ac)) is Long Pine Key in ENP. Outside of ENP, only about 1 percent of 
the pine rocklands on the Miami Rock Ridge have escaped clearing, and 
much of what is left are small remnants scattered throughout the Miami 
metropolitan area, isolated from other natural areas (Herndon 1998, p. 
1). Habitat loss continues to occur in these plants' range, and most 
remaining suitable habitat has been negatively altered through human 
activity (illegal clearing, dumping), preclusion of fire, and 
introduction of nonnative species.
    Significant remaining pine rockland habitat occurs on private lands 
and publicly owned lands that are not dedicated to or 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 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). Some of the known populations of Sideroxylon 
reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce 
deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana occur 
on public conservation lands. Miami-Dade County has developed a network 
of publicly owned conservation lands within Miami-Dade County, but 
prescribed fire is lacking at many of these sites. ENP and BCNP 
actively manage their respective pine rockland habitat with prescribed 
fire (tables 1-4). However, any extant populations of these plants or 
suitable habitat that may occur on non-conservation public or private 
land, such as within the Richmond Pine Rocklands, are vulnerable to 
habitat loss directly from development or indirectly by lack of 
management.
    The marl prairie habitat that also supports Sideroxylon reclinatum 
ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. 
pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana has similarly been 
destroyed by the rapid development of Miami-Dade and Monroe Counties. 
At least some of the occurrences reported from this habitat may be the 
result of colonization that occurred after the habitat was artificially 
dried-out due to local or regional drainage. Marl prairie on non-
conservation public or private land remains vulnerable to development, 
which could lead to the loss of populations of the species.
    Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense occurs in numerous 
pine rocklands outside of ENP within Miami-Dade County, most of which 
are impacted be some degree by development. Two privately owned sites 
in Miami-Dade County supporting Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense are vulnerable to habitat loss from development. Eight 
sites that support the species are public land, which provides for some 
management and protection. However, one population on public land, the 
county-owned Nixon-Smiley Preserve, is extirpated due to inadequate 
management.
    Both extant populations of Digitaria pauciflora are located at ENP 
and BCNP, which are public lands managed for conservation. However, D. 
pauciflora is extirpated from four sites outside ENP and BCNP, which 
comprise half of the species' historical range (Bradley and Gann 1999, 
p. 25; Gann 2015, p. 167). Outside the protected lands of ENP and BCNP, 
Digitaria pauciflora occurred throughout Miami-Dade County, including 
as recently as 1995 within the pine rockland and marl prairie habitats 
of the Martinez Pineland. Martinez Pineland is adjacent to several 
other remnant pine rocklands that form the largest contiguous area of 
pine rockland habitat in Miami-Dade County. However, D. pauciflora has 
since disappeared (Herndon 1998, p. 88; Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 49) 
from Martinez Pineland, and plans are being reviewed for development of 
private portions (see discussion of Richmond Pine Rocklands, below). 
Gordon et al. (2007, pp. 1, 38) did not document other extant D. 
pauciflora populations during surveys to map rare and exotic plants 
along FDOT right-of-ways within Miami-Dade and Monroe Counties. Three 
other historical occurrences in Miami-Dade County had been documented; 
however, no population estimates were made prior to these areas being 
destroyed by habitat loss.
    Eight populations of Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum located on 
private land are vulnerable to habitat loss due to development. Ten 
extant populations occur on public land and are largely protected from 
development. A historical population of Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. 
pinetorum within Larry and Penny Thompson Park (also part of the 
Richmond Pine Rocklands) has been extirpated due to lack of prescribed 
fire (J. Possley, FTBG, pers. comm. 2011).
    Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana has been extirpated from a 
number of historical locations within Miami-Dade County, including ENP 
for unknown reasons, and by development at Castellow Hammock, in the 
Coral Gables area, the pinelands south of the Miami River, and Cox 
Hammock (Bradley and Gann 1999, pp. 42-43; Maschinski et al. 2014, p. 
39). In addition, there have been no reports of this species from Palm 
Beach County since 1918, and this area is now densely developed 
(Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 42). Six populations occur on public lands 
and are protected from development. Three extant populations occur on 
private land and are vulnerable to habitat loss from development.
    Currently, there are plans to develop 55 ha (137 ac) of the largest 
remaining parcel of pine rockland habitat in Miami-Dade County, the 
Richmond Pine Rocklands, with a shopping center and residential 
construction (Ram 2014, p. 2). Bradley and Gann (1999, p. 4) called the 
345-ha (853-ac) Richmond Pine Rocklands, ``the largest and most 
important area of pine rockland in Miami-Dade County outside of 
Everglades National Park.'' Although both Digitaria pauciflora and 
Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum have been extirpated from Richmond 
Pine Rocklands, populations of Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. 
Austrofloridense, along with numerous other federally listed species, 
still occur there.
    The Miami-Dade County Department of Environmental Resources 
Management has completed a management plan for portions of the Richmond 
Pine Rocklands under a grant from the Service and is leading the 
restoration and management of the Richmond Pine Rocklands (Bradley and 
Gann 1999, p. 4). The developer has proposed to enter into a Habitat 
Conservation Plan in conjunction with their plans to develop their 
portion of the site and was required by Miami-Dade County Natural 
Forest Community (NFC) regulations to set aside and manage 17 ha (43 
ac) of pine rockland and associated habitats. A second project that 
would result in the loss of pine rockland habitat has been proposed for 
the Richmond Pine Rocklands. It includes expanding the Miami Zoo 
complex to develop an amusement park and commercial entities. These 
development projects will result in the loss of pine rockland habitat 
that maintains a population of Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense as well as several federally listed species, and may 
preclude future recovery options for the four plants (such as 
compromising the land managers ability to burn within Richmond Pine 
Rocklands).
Habitat Fragmentation
    The remaining pine rocklands in the Miami metropolitan area are 
severely

[[Page 70294]]

fragmented and isolated from each other. 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 Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, 
Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. 
floridana is unknown. 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. In the current fragmented 
landscape, this type of dispersal would no longer be possible for any 
of the Miami-Dade populations, because they exist in isolated habitat 
patches surrounded by miles of unsuitable habitat (agriculture and 
urban development) on every side. While additional dispersal vectors 
may include animals and (in certain locations) mowing equipment, it is 
likely that fragmentation has effectively reduced these plants' ability 
to disperse.
    While pollination research has not been conducted for Sideroxylon 
reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce 
deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana, 
research regarding other species and ecosystems provides valuable 
information regarding potential effects of fragmentation to these 
plants. Effects of fragmentation 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).
    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) and illegal clearing. 
The many effects of habitat fragmentation may work in concert to 
threaten the local persistence of a species, especially of small 
populations (see discussion below); when a species' range of occurrence 
is limited, as with these four plants, threats to local persistence 
increase extinction risk.
Fire Management
    One of the primary threats to Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. 
pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana 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.
    Today, 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 takes 10 to 25 years, and 
displacement of native species by invasive nonnative plants often 
occurs. All occurrences of Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. 
pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana 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). 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 (2013, pers. comm.) indicates this is also a threat 
to pine rockland habitat on the Miami Rock Ridge. Understory plants 
such as Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria 
pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and Dalea 
carthagenensis var. floridana are shaded out after just 10 years 
without fire, by hardwoods and nonnatives alike.
    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 
Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, 
Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. 
floridana (Geiger 2002, pp. 78-79, 81-83).

[[Page 70295]]

    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 cause mortality of pines and destroys the 
rootstocks and seed banks of other native plants. 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.
    The impacts of fire on Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. 
pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana are not entirely 
understood. Fire is critical in maintaining the open understory and 
species diversity in pine rocklands and marl prairies where these 
species occur, as well as to reduce populations of nonnative plant 
species. Fire maintains the ecotone (transition) between saw grass 
marsh, pine rockland, and rockland hammock habitats where S. reclinatum 
ssp. austrofloridense grows.
    Some natural mortality of Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. 
pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana may occur from fire, 
especially more intense fires. S. reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense and 
C. deltoidea ssp. pinetorum grow in wet marl soils and soil deposits 
within cracks in the limestone bedrock, which provides protection to 
the roots and allows plants to resprout following fire. C. deltoidea 
ssp. pinetorum, in particular, possesses a well-developed rootstock 
that is protected from fire (ENP 2014, p. 203). Herndon (1998, p. 28) 
pointed out that the life history of C. deltoidea ssp. pinetorum 
includes a cryptic stage, making interpretation of mortality of 
aboveground parts difficult.
    Currently, limited information is available on differences in 
mortality or long-term population impacts of Sideroxylon reclinatum 
ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. 
pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana resulting from wet 
or dry season burns. Indirect evidence suggests that burning in either 
season is suitable to maintain populations of S. reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense, D. pauciflora, and C. deltoidea ssp. pinetorum in 
pine rocklands. Prescribed fire in ENP was originally conducted during 
the dry season. Fire management was gradually shifted to wet-season 
burning in an effort to better mimic natural lightning-ignited fire 
patterns. As a result, pinelands and marl prairies in ENP where S. 
reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, D. pauciflora, and C. deltoidea ssp. 
pinetorum occur have been burned in both the wet season and dry season. 
Long-term maintenance of populations in those areas indicates that 
either practice will sustain populations of these species.
    Federal (Service, NPS), State (Florida Department of Environmental 
Protection (FDEP), Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission 
(FWC), and County (Miami-Dade DERM) land managers, and nonprofit 
organizations (Institute for Regional Conservation (IRC)) implement 
prescribed fire on public and private lands within the ranges of 
Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, 
Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. 
floridana. While management of some County conservation lands includes 
regular burning, other lands remain severely fire-suppressed. Even in 
areas under active management, some portions are typically fire-
suppressed. Nevertheless, all of these sites retain a contingent of 
native species and a seedbank capable of responding to fire.
    While ENP, BCNP, and various Miami-Dade County conservation lands 
(e.g., Navy Wells Pineland Preserve) each attempt to administer 
prescribed burns, the threat of inadequate fire management still 
remains. The pine rocklands in the Long Pine Key region of ENP remained 
largely fire-suppressed for the past decade as the Park updated its 
fire management plan. Although prescribed fire was returned to Long 
Pine Key in early 2016, many areas retained substantial amounts of 
unburned understory vegetation. As a result, despite reintroduction of 
a fire regime, several large-scale wildfires ignited during the spring 
months of 2016, which burned up to 50 percent of the pine rocklands in 
Long Pine Key. Ultimately, this combination of prescribed burns and 
natural fires (if not too hot or lasting too long) is likely to improve 
conditions for Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria 
pauciflora, and Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum populations within 
ENP. For example, at 3 to 6 months post-burn, these species appear to 
be recolonizing burned areas (Sadle, pers. comm. 2016; Salvato, pers. 
obs. 2016). However, this chain of events also demonstrated the threat 
that prolonged or insufficient fire management may pose to local 
populations of an imperiled species, even on public conservation lands.
    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 2013, 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 of Miami-
Dade, which was last burned in November 2010 (Glancy 2013, pers. comm.) 
and retains populations of both Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense and Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum. Similarly, 
extant populations of Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana within the 
privately owned Charles Deering Estate and County-owned Crandon Park, 
are managed with fire.
Conservation Efforts To Reduce the Present or Threatened Destruction, 
Modification, or Curtailment of Habitat or Range
Miami-Dade County Environmentally Endangered Lands Covenant Program
    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,

[[Page 70296]]

preserving 69.4 ha (172 ac) of pine rockland habitat (Johnson 2012, 
pers. comm.). The program also has approximately 21 rockland hammocks 
properties enrolled in this program, preserving 20.64 ha (51 ac) of 
rockland hammock habitat (Joyner 2013b, pers. comm.). The vast majority 
of these properties are small, and many are in need of habitat 
management such as prescribed fire and removal of nonnative invasive 
plants. 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).
Fee Title Properties
    In 1990, Miami-Dade County voters approved a 2-year property tax to 
fund the acquisition, protection, and maintenance of natural areas by 
the EEL Program. The EEL Program purchases and manages natural lands 
for preservation. Land uses deemed incompatible with the protection of 
the natural resources are prohibited by current regulations; however, 
the County Commission ultimately controls what may happen with any 
County property, and land use changes may occur over time (Gil 2013, 
pers. comm.). To date, the Miami-Dade County EEL Program has acquired a 
total of approximately 313 ha (775 ac) of pine rockland, and 95 ha (236 
ac) of rockland hammocks (Guerra 2015 pers. comm.; Gil 2013, pers. 
comm.). The EEL Program also manages approximately 314 ha (777 ac) of 
pine rocklands and 639 ha (1,578 ac) of rockland hammocks owned by the 
Miami-Dade County Parks, Recreation and Open Spaces Department, 
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), and some 
of the largest remaining areas of rockland hammocks (e.g., Matheson 
Hammock Park, Castellow Hammock Park, and Deering Estate Park and 
Preserves).
    Conservation efforts in Miami's EEL Preserves have been under way 
for many years. In Miami-Dade County, conservation lands are and have 
been monitored by FTBG and IRC, in coordination with the EEL Program, 
to assess habitat status and determine any changes that may pose a 
threat to or alter the abundance of these species. Impacts to habitat 
via nonnative species and natural stochastic events are monitored and 
actively managed in areas where the taxon is known to occur. These 
programs are long term and ongoing in Miami-Dade County; however, 
programs are limited by the availability of annual funding. In 
particular, fire management remains inadequate at many sites.
    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).
Connect To Protect Program
    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.
National Park Service Lands
    The NPS General Management Plans (GMPs) for ENP (NPS 2015) and BCNP 
(BCNP 2008) serve to protect, restore, and maintain natural and 
cultural resources at the ecosystem level. Although these GMPs are not 
regulatory, and their implementation is not mandatory, they do include 
conservation measures for Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, 
Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, or Dalea 
carthagenensis var. floridana.
Summary of Factor A
    We have identified a number of threats to the habitat of the 
Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, 
Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. 
floridana that have operated in the past, are impacting these species 
now, and will continue to impact them in the future. Habitat loss, 
fragmentation, and degradation and associated pressures from increased 
human population are major threats; these threats are expected to 
continue, placing these plants at greater risk. Sideroxylon reclinatum 
ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. 
pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana may be impacted when 
pine rocklands are converted to other uses or when lack of fire causes 
the conversion to hardwood hammocks or other unsuitable habitats.
    On public lands, including Service, NPS, and Miami-Dade County-
owned lands, implementation of prescribed fire has not been sufficient 
because of legal constraints (permitting requirements) and inadequate 
funding. Any populations of these four plants found on private property 
could be destroyed due to lack of protection. Although efforts are 
being made to conserve natural areas and apply prescribed fire, most 
pine rocklands remain in poor fire condition, and the long-term effects 
of large-scale and wide-ranging habitat modification, destruction, and 
curtailment will last into the future, while ongoing habitat loss due 
to population growth, development, and agricultural conversion 
continues to pose a threat to these species outside of conservation 
lands.
    Therefore, based on the best information available, we have 
determined that the threats to Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. 
pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana from habitat 
destruction, modification, or curtailment are occurring throughout the 
entire range of these species and are expected to continue into the 
future.

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

    The best available data do not indicate that overutilization for 
commercial, recreational, scientific, or

[[Page 70297]]

educational purposes are a threat to Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. 
pinetorum, or Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana. 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.

Factor C. Disease or Predation

    No diseases or incidences of predation have been reported for 
Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, 
Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, or Dalea carthagenensis var. 
floridana.

Factor D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms

    Under this factor, we examine whether threats to these plants that 
are discussed under the other factors are continuing due to an 
inadequacy of an existing regulatory mechanism. 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 relevant Federal, State, and tribal laws, 
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.
    Having evaluated the impact of the threats as mitigated by any such 
conservation efforts, we analyze under Factor D the extent to which 
existing regulatory mechanisms address the specific threats to the 
species. Regulatory mechanisms, if they exist, may reduce or eliminate 
the impacts from one or more identified threats. In this section, we 
review existing Federal, State, and local regulatory mechanisms to 
determine whether they effectively reduce or remove threats to 
Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, 
Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. 
floridana.
Federal
    Populations of Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, 
Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and Dalea 
carthagenensis var. floridana within the Everglades and ENP and BCNP 
are protected by NPS regulations at 36 CFR 2.1, which prohibit visitors 
from harming or removing plants, listed or otherwise, from ENP or BCNP. 
However, the regulation does not address actions taken by NPS that 
cause mortality, or habitat loss or modification. NPS regulations do 
not require the application of prescribed fire or voluntary recovery 
actions for listed species.
    In addition to occurring on ENP and BCNP, Sideroxylon reclinatum 
ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. 
pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana may occur (we do not 
have recent surveys) on Federal lands within the Richmond Pine 
Rocklands, including lands owned by the U.S. Coast Guard and the 
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association (NOAA; small portion of 
Martinez Pineland). There are no Federal protections for candidate 
species, including these four plants, on these properties. Otherwise, 
these plants occur primarily on State, County, or private land (Tables 
1-4), 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
    Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, 
Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. 
floridana are listed on the Sate of Florida's Regulated Plant Index as 
endangered under Chapter 5B-40, Florida Administrative Code. 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.
    However, 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. On the other hand, 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 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

[[Page 70298]]

approximately 600 pine rockland or pine rockland/hammock properties, 
comprising approximately 1,200 ha (3,000 ac) of habitat (Joyner 2013a, 
pers. comm.).
    Although the NFC program is designed to protect rare and important 
upland (non-wetlands) habitats in south Florida, this regulatory 
strategy has limitations. For example, in certain circumstances where 
landowners can demonstrate that limiting development to 20 percent does 
not allow for ``reasonable use'' of the property, additional 
development may be approved. Furthermore, Miami-Dade County Code 
provides for up to 100 percent of the NFC to be developed on a parcel 
in limited circumstances for parcels less than 2.02 ha (5 ac) in size 
and requires coordination with the landowner only if the landowner 
plans to develop property or perform work within the NFC designated 
area. As such, the majority of the existing private forested NFC 
parcels consists of isolated fragments, without management obligations 
or preserve designation, as development has not been proposed at a 
level that would trigger the NFC regulatory requirements. Often, 
nonnative vegetation over time begins to dominate and degrade the 
undeveloped and unmanaged NFC landscape until it no longer meets the 
legal threshold of an NFC, which requires the land to be dominated by 
native vegetation. When development of such degraded NFCs is proposed, 
Miami-Dade County Code requires delisting of the degraded areas as part 
of the development process. Property previously designated as NFC is 
removed from the list even before development is initiated because of 
the abundance of nonnative species, making it no longer considered to 
be jurisdictional or subject to the NFC protection requirements of 
Miami-Dade County Code (Grossenbacher 2013, pers. comm.).
Summary of Factor D
    Currently, Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria 
pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and Dalea 
carthagenensis var. floridana are found on Federal, State, and County 
lands; however, there is no regulatory mechanism in place that provides 
substantive protection of actual habitat or of potentially suitable 
habitat at this time. NPS regulations provide some protection at ENP 
and BCNP sites, whichprotect the largest and best managed populations. 
State regulations provide protection against trade, but allow private 
landowners or their agents to clear or remove species on the Florida 
Regulated Plant Index. State Park regulations provide protection for 
plants within Florida State Parks. The NFC program in Miami is designed 
to protect rare and important upland (non-wetlands) habitats in south 
Florida; however, this regulatory strategy has several limitations (as 
described above) that reduce its ability to protect S. reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense, D. pauciflora, C. deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and D. 
carthagenensis var. floridana and their habitats.
    Although most populations of Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. 
pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana are afforded some 
level of protection because they are on public conservation lands, 
existing regulatory mechanisms have not led to a sufficient reduction 
of threats posed to these plants by a wide array of sources (see 
discussions under Factors A and E).

Factor E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued 
Existence

    Other natural or manmade factors affect Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. 
pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana to varying degrees, 
including 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 small 
populations. Each of these threats and its specific effect on these 
species are discussed in detail below.
Nonnative Plant Species
    Nonnative invasive plants compete with native plants for space, 
light, water, and nutrients, and make habitat conditions unsuitable for 
Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, 
Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. 
floridana, which prefer open conditions. Bradley and Gann (1999, pp. 
13, 71-72) indicated that the control of nonnative plants is one of the 
most important conservation actions for the four plants and a critical 
part of habitat maintenance.
    Nonnative plants have significantly affected pine rocklands, and 
negatively impact all occurrences of Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. 
pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana to some degree 
(Bradley 2006, pp. 25-26; Bradley and Gann 1999, pp. 18-19; Bradley and 
Saha 2009, p. 25; 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). Schinus terebinthifolius (Brazilian pepper) and Neyraudia 
neyraudiana (Burma reed) affect these species (Bradley and Gann 1999, 
pp. 13, 72). Brazilian pepper, 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). Lygodium microphyllum (Old World climbing fern) is also a serious 
threat throughout south Florida.
    Nonnative plants in pine rocklands can 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. S. ssp. austrofloridense, D. 
pauciflora, C. deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and D. carthagenensis var. 
floridana thrive under this fire regime. However, dense infestations of 
Neyraudia neyraudiana and Schinus terebinthifolius cause higher fire 
temperatures and longer burning periods.
    These nonnative species occur throughout the ranges of the four 
plants. In ENP and BCNP, invasives tend to be fewer due to the 
insularity of these sites and the NPS's control programs. Nevertheless, 
most areas require annual treatments to remove incipient invasions. 
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).
    Nonnative plant species are also a concern on private lands, where 
often they are not controlled due to associated costs, lack of 
interest, or lack of knowledge of detrimental impacts to the ecosystem. 
Undiscovered populations of Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. 
pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana on private lands 
could certainly be at risk. Overall, active management is necessary to 
control for nonnative

[[Page 70299]]

species and to protect unique and rare habitats where these plants 
occur (Snyder et al. 1990, p. 273).
Mowing
    While no studies have investigated the effect of mowing on 
Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, 
Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, or Dalea carthagenensis var. 
floridana, research has been conducted on the federally endangered 
Linum carteri var. carteri (which also occurs in pine rocklands). The 
study found significantly higher densities of plants at the mown sites 
where competition with other plants is decreased (Maschinski et al. 
2007, p. 56). However, plants growing on mown sites were shorter, which 
may affect fruiting magnitude. While mowing did not usually kill adult 
plants, it could delay reproduction if it occurred prior to plants 
reaching reproductive status (Maschinski et al. 2007, pp. 56-57). If 
such mowing occurs repeatedly, reproduction of those plants would be 
entirely eliminated. Maschinski et al. (2008, p. 28) recommended 
adjusting the timing of mowing to occur at least 3 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 et al. 2008, p. 28). The exact impacts of mowing also 
depend on the timing of rainfall prior to and following mowing, and the 
numbers of plants in the population that have reached a reproductive 
state.
Recreation and Other Human Activities
    Recreational use of off-road vehicles (ORV) is a threat to 
Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, and 
Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana occurrences within BCNP (K. Bradley 
et al. 2013, p. 3). Operators frequently veer off established trails, 
and plants can be harmed or destroyed (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 43). 
BCNP manages ORV access using a permit system, regulations, and 
designated trails. However, there are over 1,000 miles of ORV trails in 
BCNP, and only one enforcement officer (Pernas pers. comm., 2016), 
making enforcement of designated ORV trails a challenge. Current aerial 
imagery from the Lostman's Pine area of BCNP, where Digitaria 
pauciflora occurs, shows a criss-cross pattern of multiple ORV trails 
through the area. The Service is working with BCNP to determine the 
extent to which ORVs are affecting all three species at this site, 
particularly D. pauciflora, since it is one of only two sites where the 
species is known to exist. Damage from ORV use has also been documented 
for Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana within the Charles Deering 
Estate (J. Possley, pers. comm. 2008, 2009).
    Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana at the R. Hardy Matheson 
Preserve is also impacted by illegal mountain biking (Bradley and Gann 
1999, pp. 43-45). In the past, this pineland fragment was heavily used 
by mountain bikers. In response Miami-Dade County has erected fencing 
to protect this site, which appears to have reduced this threat 
(Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 43).
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, 
effects of climate change, and localized catastrophes such as 
hurricanes and disease outbreaks (Mangel and Tier 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 studies have been conducted for 
Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, 
Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. 
floridana, 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 (Factors A and C). Tables 1, 2, 3, and 4 above list the 
population sizes and the geographic ranges for S. reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense, D. pauciflora, C. deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and D. 
carthagenensis var. floridana. For example, table 2 lists Digitaria 
pauciflora as having 2 extant populations (ENP and BCNP), one estimated 
at 1,000-10,000 plants and the other with greater than 10,000 plants. 
The Service does not consider these as small populations; however, a 
large wildfire or severe flooding could be catastrophic. As shown in 
2016, D. pauciflora was impacted by fire in ENP and flooding in ENP and 
BCNP, proving that the small geographic extent of the existing 
populations is not sufficient to eliminate the risk posed by large-
scale disturbances.
Effects of Climate Change
    Climatic changes, including sea level rise (SLR), are major threats 
to the flora of south Florida, including Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. 
pinetorum, or Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana. Our analyses under 
the Act include consideration of ongoing and projected changes in 
climate. With regard to our analysis for Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. 
pinetorum, or Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana, 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).

[[Page 70300]]

    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 (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. Heat trapped by greenhouse gases causes atmospheric warming, but 
the ocean is a vast heat sink where most of the increased heat energy 
is stored. As the water increases in temperature, its volume expands. 
Due to the thermal dynamic properties of water, as projected 
temperatures increase, so does the volume of the ocean, and the rate of 
expansion. As a result, most models show a dramatic increase in the 
rate of SLR rise by mid-century. 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 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.
    Decades prior to inundation, pine rocklands are likely to undergo 
vegetation shifts related to climate change, triggered by changes to 
hydrology (wetter), salinity (higher) and increasing vulnerability to 
storm surge (pulse events causing massive erosion and salinization of 
soils) (Saha et al.2011, p. 82). Hydrology has a strong influence on 
plant distribution in these and other coastal areas (IPCC 2008, p. 57). 
Such communities typically grade from saltwater 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 time span, 
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 indications are 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) recognized 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 ft; 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), the land area 
of 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 this issue 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). These 
factors will likely cause an increase in wildfires and exacerbate 
complications related to prescribed burning (i.e., less predictability 
related to rainfall, fuel moisture, and winds) or other management 
needed to restore and maintain habitat for the four plants. While 
restoring fire to pine rocklands is essential to the long-term 
viability of Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria 
pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and Dalea 
carthagenensis var. floridana 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 occurrences, and relative 
isolation. Big, hot wildfires can destroy essential habitat features of 
pine rockland habitat. In addition, hot burns with long residence times 
(which are more likely under wildfire conditions)

[[Page 70301]]

can also sterilize the soil seed bank and cause a demographic crash in 
plant populations.
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. 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 SLR of 0.09-1.0 m (0.3-3.3 ft) by 
2060 (Vargas-Moreno and Flaxman 2010, pp. 1-6).
    Based on the most recent estimates of anticipated SLR, the upward 
trend in recent projections toward the higher range of earlier SLR 
estimates (discussed above), 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 Sideroxylon 
reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce 
deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana. 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.
    The rate of SLR will increase as time passes. This is due to 
atmospheric and ocean warming and the thermal expansion properties of 
water. In SLR models the rate of sea level rise is projected to 
increase dramatically around mid-century.
    Most populations of Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, 
Digitaria pauciflora, and Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum occur at 
elevations less than 2 m (6.6 ft) above sea level, making these species 
highly susceptible to increased storm surges and related impacts 
associated with SLR. Areas of the Miami Rock Ridge in Miami-Dade County 
(located to the east of ENP and BCNP) are higher elevation (maximum of 
7 m [22 ft] above sea level) than those in BCNP (FNAI 2010, p. 62). 
However, plant communities along South Florida's low-lying coasts are 
organized along a mild gradient in elevation, transitioning from 
mangroves at sea level to salinity-intolerant interior habitats, 
including pine rocklands and hardwood hammocks within an elevation 
change of 2 m (6.5 ft) above sea level. As a result, a rise of 1 m (3.3 
ft) in sea level is expected to render coastal systems susceptible to 
increased erosion and cause these areas to transition from upland 
forest habitats to saline wetland habitats.
    Prior to the onset of sustained inundation, there will be 
irreversible changes in vegetation composition within these habitats. 
Shifts in habitat toward hydric and saline ecosystems may occur decades 
in advance of full inundation, rendering the habitat unsuitable for 
salt-intolerant species including S. reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, 
D. pauciflora, C. deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and D. carthagenensis var. 
floridana (Saha et al.2011, p. 82). As interior habitats become more 
saline there will be a reduction in freshwater inflows to the estuarine 
portions of ENP and BCNP, accelerating losses in salinity-intolerant 
coastal plant communities (Saha et al. 2011, p. 105), such as S. 
reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, D. pauciflora, C. deltoidea ssp. 
pinetorum, or D. carthagenensis var. floridana.
    Actual impacts may be greater or less than anticipated based upon 
the high variability of factors involved (e.g., SLR, human population 
growth) and assumptions made, but based on the current ``high'' range 
MIT scenario, pine rocklands, marl prairies and associated habitats 
along the coast in central and southern Miami-Dade County would become 
inundated. The ``new'' sea level would occur at the southern end of the 
Miami Rock Ridge (the eastern edge of the Everglades). However, in 
decades prior to the fully anticipated sea level rise, changes in the 
water table and increased soil salinity from partial inundation and 
storm surge will result in vegetation shifts within BCNP, ENP, and 
conservation lands on the southern Miami Rock Ridge. Inundation will 
result in pine rocklands gaining increased marl prairie 
characteristics. Marl prairies, in turn, will transition to sawgrass or 
more hydric conditions, due to increased inundation.
    As a result, species such as Digitaria pauciflora and Sideroxylon 
reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, which are most abundant within the 
ecotone between pine rocklands and marl prairies, will gradually 
decline as these habitat types merge and eventually disappear. Under 
this scenario, by 2060, all extant populations of Digitaria pauciflora, 
as well as the largest populations of Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense and Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana, would likely 
be lost or significantly impacted by shifts in vegetation communities. 
Populations of Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Chamaesyce 
deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana would 
likely remain only at the highest elevations along the Miami Rock 
Ridge. 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.
Further or Additional Impacts Expected Beyond 2060
    Further direct losses to extant populations of all four plants are 
expected due to habitat loss and modification from SLR through 2100. We 
analyzed existing sites that support populations of the four plants 
using the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Sea 
Level Rise and Coastal Impacts viewer. Below we discuss general 
implications of sea level rise within the range of projections 
discussed above on the current distribution of these species. The NOAA 
tool uses 1-foot increments. Our analysis is based on 0.91 m (3 ft) and 
1.8 m (6 ft) of SLR.
    Based on a higher SLR of 1.8 m (6 ft), as projected by NOAA, much 
larger portions of urban Miami-Dade County, including conservation 
areas, such as Navy Wells Pineland Preserve, will be inundated by 2100. 
Under such a 1.8-meter SLR projection, both extant populations of D. 
pauciflora in ENP and BCNP would be almost entirely inundated by 2100, 
and the species will be extinct. Several extant occurrences of 
Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. 
pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana would also be lost. 
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.
    Following a 1.8-m (6-ft) rise in sea level, approximately 75 
percent of presently extant pine rocklands on the Miami Rock Ridge 
would still remain above sea level. However, an unknown percentage of 
remaining pine rockland fragments would be negatively impacted by water 
table and soil salinization, which would be further exacerbated due to 
isolation from mainland fresh water flows.
    Projections of SLR above 1.8 m (6 ft) indicate that very little 
pine rockland would remain, with the vast majority either being 
inundated or experiencing

[[Page 70302]]

vegetation shifts, resulting in the extirpation of all known 
populations of Digitaria pauciflora, Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and Dalea 
carthagenensis var. floridana.
Environmental Stochasticity
    Endemic species whose populations exhibit a high degree of 
isolation and narrow geographic distribution, such as Sideroxylon 
reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce 
deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana, are 
extremely susceptible to extinction from both random and nonrandom 
catastrophic natural or human-caused events. Small populations of 
species, without positive growth rates, are considered to have a high 
extinction risk from site-specific demographic and environmental 
stochasticity (Lande 1993, pp. 911-927).
    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.
    Florida is considered the most vulnerable State in the United 
States to hurricanes and tropical storms (Florida Climate Center, 
http://coaps.fsu.edu/climate_center). 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 2015, Florida actually experienced 109 hurricanes and 36 major 
hurricanes. While not every hurricane will pass over south Florida, 
given the low population sizes and restricted ranges of Sideroxylon 
reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce 
deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana 
within locations prone to storm influences, these species 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 the plants could become 
extirpated or extinct.
    Hurricanes, storm surge, and extreme high tide events are natural 
events that can negatively impact these four plants. Hurricanes and 
tropical storms can modify habitat (e.g., through storm surge) and have 
the potential to destroy entire populations, physically washing them 
away or leaving soil too saline for them to persist. 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). Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria 
pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, or Dalea 
carthagenensis var. floridana 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 species 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). These factors will likely cause an increase in wildfires and 
exacerbate complications related to prescribed burning or other 
management needed to restore and maintain habitat for the four plants. 
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, which will increase storm surge heights. This 
is due to more hurricane energy being 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 pose a 
risk to Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria 
pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, or Dalea 
carthagenensis var. floridana, 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.
Hydrology and Everglades Restoration
    Hydrology is a key ecosystem component that affects rare plant 
distributions and their viability (Gann et al. 2006, p. 4). 
Historically, sheet flow from Shark River Slough and Taylor Slough did 
not reach the upland portions of Long Pine Key, but during the wet 
season increased surface water flow in sloughs generated a rise in 
ground water across the region (Gann et al. 2006, p. 4). Water flow 
through Long Pine Key was originally concentrated in marl prairies, 
traversing in a north-south direction; however, construction of the 
main ENP road dissected Long Pine Key in an east-west direction, 
thereby impeding sheet flow across this area (Gann et al. 2006, p. 4). 
Water was either impounded to the north of the main ENP road or 
diverted around the southern portion of Long Pine Key through Taylor 
Slough and Shark River Slough (Gann et al. 2006, p. 4). As artificial 
drainage became more widespread, however, regional groundwater supplies 
declined.
    While projects designed to restore the historical hydrology of the 
Everglades and other natural systems in southern Florida, including ENP 
and BCNP (collectively known as the Comprehensive Everglades 
Restoration Plan (CERP)), are beneficial to the Everglades ecosystem, 
some may produce collateral impacts to extant pine rockland, marl 
prairies, and associated habitats within the region through inundation 
or increased hydroperiods. The effects of changes in regional hydrology 
through restoration may have impacts on the four plant species and 
their habitats. Sadle (2012, pers. comm.) suggested various CERP 
projects (such as C-111 spreader canal; L-31N seepage barrier), 
specifically the operation of pumps and associated detention areas 
along the ENP

[[Page 70303]]

boundary, may influence (through excessive water discharges) select 
portions of eastern Long Pine Key. Increased and longer-duration 
hydroperiods within the pine rockland and marl prairie habitats where 
these species occur may lead to a reduction in the amount of suitable 
habitat, a potential reduction in the area occupied and a reduction in 
the number of individuals found in ENP and BCNP. It is unclear to what 
extent this may occur, if at all. In an effort to establish a baseline 
assessment of future hydrologic modifications, long-term monitoring 
transects and plots for Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, 
Digitaria pauciflora, and Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum were 
established in Long Pine Key between 2003 and 2008 (Gann 2015, p. 169).
Conservation Efforts To Reduce Other Natural or Manmade Factors 
Affecting Continued Existence
    NPS, the Service, Miami-Dade County, and the State of Florida have 
ongoing nonnative plant management programs to reduce threats on public 
lands, as funding and resources allow. In Miami-Dade County, nonnative, 
invasive plant management is very active, with a goal to treat all 
publicly owned properties at least once a year and more often in many 
cases. IRC and FTBG conduct research and monitoring in various natural 
areas within Miami-Dade County and the Florida Keys for various 
endangered plant species and nonnative, invasive species. For the four 
plants, monitoring detects declines that lead to small population size, 
changes in habitat due to SLR, and declines due to stochastic events. 
For nonnatives, monitoring is an integral part of efforts to detect and 
control invasive plant and animal species.
Summary of Factor E
    We have discussed threats from other natural or manmade factors 
including: nonnative invasive plants, management practices (such as 
mowing and herbicide use), recreation (including ORV use), effects from 
small population size and isolation, limited geographic range, and 
stochastic events including hurricanes, storm surges, and wildfires. 
Additionally, these plants are particularly vulnerable to the effects 
of climate change, including SLR, as changes in the water table, 
increased soil salinity from partial inundation, and storm surge will 
likely result in vegetation shifts in the decades prior to the fully 
anticipated sea level rise. Some of these threats (e.g., nonnative 
species) may be reduced on public lands due to active programs by 
Federal, State, and County land managers. Many of the remaining 
populations of these plants are small and geographically isolated, and 
genetic variability is likely low, increasing the inherent risk due to 
overall low resilience of these plants. The threats act together to 
impact populations of Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, 
Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, or Dalea 
carthagenensis var. floridana.

Cumulative Effects of Threats

    When two or more threats affect populations of Sideroxylon 
reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce 
deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana, the 
effects of those threats could interact or become compounded, producing 
a cumulative adverse effect that is greater than the impact of either 
threat alone. The most obvious cases in which cumulative adverse 
effects would be significant are those in which small populations 
(Factor E) are affected by threats that result in destruction or 
modification of habitat (Factor A), ORV damage (Factor E), or 
stochastic events, such as hurricanes, storm surges, wildfires (Factor 
E). The limited distributions and/or small population sizes of many 
populations of S. reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, D. pauciflora, C. 
deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and D. carthagenensis var. floridana make 
them extremely susceptible to the detrimental effects of further 
habitat modification, degradation, and loss, as well as other 
anthropogenic threats. Mechanisms leading to the decline of S. 
reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, D. pauciflora, C. deltoidea ssp. 
pinetorum, and D. carthagenensis var. floridana, as discussed above, 
range from local (e.g., agriculture) to regional (e.g., development, 
fragmentation, nonnative species) to global influences (e.g., effects 
of climate change, SLR). The synergistic effects of threats, such as 
impacts from hurricanes on a species with a limited distribution and 
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 S. reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, D. pauciflora, C. 
deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and D. carthagenensis var. floridana, making 
them more vulnerable.

Proposed Determination

    We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial data 
available regarding the past, present, and future threats to 
Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, 
Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. 
floridana.

Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense

    Nine of 11 extant populations are located on publicly owned 
conservation lands. This includes 10,000-100,000 plants at ENP, and a 
small population at BCNP, where prescribed fire implementation has 
improved, and nonnative plant control efforts are adequate to 
beneficially manage habitat for native species. In contrast, in the 
scattered small populations on Miami-Dade habitat fragments, 
representing half of the species' historical range, habitat management 
currently is not adequate due to the inability to conduct prescribed 
fire. Increasing temperatures and changes in precipitation patterns 
associated with climate change will likely cause an increase in 
wildfires and exacerbate complications related to prescribed burning or 
other management needed to restore and maintain habitat for the 
species. In the current, fragmented landscape, dispersal and genetic 
exchange for any of these smaller Miami-Dade populations is unlikely, 
because they exist in isolated habitat patches surrounded by miles of 
unsuitable habitat (agriculture and urban development). Two privately 
owned sites in Miami supporting extant populations are vulnerable to 
development. The largest populations (ENP and BCNP) are vulnerable to 
hydrologic changes related to Everglades restoration projects and SLR.
    SLR projections suggest future inundation and modification to the 
majority of Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense habitat in ENP 
and BCNP by 2060. Decades prior to inundation, however, pine rocklands, 
marl prairies, and associated habitats within ENP and BCNP will undergo 
habitat transitions toward wetter, salt-tolerant plant communities, 
hydrological changes, and increasing vulnerability to storm surge. 
Although the effects of SLR within urban Miami-Dade fragments may be 
less severe, these pine rocklands will, at a minimum, experience 
partial inundations and vegetation shifts. In addition, many existing 
Miami-Dade pine rockland fragments are projected to be developed for 
housing as the human population grows and adjusts to changing sea 
levels under this scenario.

Digitaria pauciflora

    Only two of five historical Digitaria pauciflora locations are 
extant. They are located in BCNP (>10,000 plants) and

[[Page 70304]]

ENP (1,000-10,000 plants) on publicly owned conservation lands where 
habitat management (prescribed fire and nonnative plant control) is 
ongoing and includes addressing a backlog of long-unburned sites that 
could result in larger wildfires if burns are not implemented. In 
addition, although we do not have evidence of direct impacts, given the 
mapped overlap of ORV trails with Digitaria pauciflora locations, ORV 
use in BCNP has likely resulted in damage to Digitaria pauciflora 
plants and habitat. The scattered small populations that once occurred 
in Miami-Dade habitat fragments, representing the remainder of the 
species' historical range, are extirpated, and current habitat 
management does not allow for prescribed fire to be conducted on a 
consistent basis. Increasing temperatures and changes in precipitation 
patterns associated with climate change will likely cause an increase 
in wildfires and exacerbate complications related to prescribed burning 
or other management needed to restore and maintain habitat for the 
species.
    Digitaria pauciflora previously occurred within the Richmond Pine 
Rocklands, an area that retains the largest remaining contiguous 
privately and publicly owned pine rocklands in Miami-Dade County, 
outside of ENP. In terms of restoring the species' historical range, 
the Richmond Pine Rocklands would serve as one of the most important 
sites in Miami-Dade County for recovery efforts (i.e., reintroduction). 
The largest populations (ENP and BCNP) are vulnerable to hydrological 
changes related to Everglades restoration projects and SLR.
    SLR projections suggest future partial inundation and modification 
to the majority of D. pauciflora habitat by 2060. Decades prior to 
inundation, however, pine rocklands, marl prairies, and associated 
habitats within ENP and BCNP will undergo habitat transitions toward 
wetter, salt-tolerant plant communities, hydrological changes, and 
increase in vulnerability to storm surge. Although the effects of SLR 
within urban Miami-Dade fragments may be less severe, these pine 
rocklands will, at a minimum, experience partial inundations and 
vegetation shifts. In addition, many existing Miami-Dade pine rockland 
fragments are projected to be developed for housing as the human 
population grows and adjusts to changing sea levels under this 
scenario.

Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum

    Eleven of 20 extant populations are located on publicly owned 
conservation lands. This includes 10,000-100,000 plants at ENP and 
1,000 plants at Navy Wells pineland, where habitat management 
(prescribed fire and nonnative plant control) is ongoing, and includes 
addressing a backlog of long-unburned sites that could result in larger 
wildfires if burns are not implemented. In contrast, in the scattered 
small populations on Miami-Dade habitat fragments, representing half of 
the species' historical range, current habitat management does not 
allow for prescribed fire to be conducted on a consistent basis. 
Increasing temperatures and changes in precipitation patterns 
associated with climate change will likely cause an increase in 
wildfires and exacerbate complications related to prescribed burning or 
other management needed to restore and maintain habitat for the 
species. In the current, fragmented landscape, dispersal and genetic 
exchange for any of these smaller Miami-Dade populations is unlikely, 
because they exist in isolated habitat patches surrounded by miles of 
unsuitable habitat (agriculture and urban development). Eight privately 
owned sites in Miami supporting extant populations are vulnerable to 
development, two of which support 1,000-10,000 plants each. The largest 
population (Long Pine Key, ENP) is vulnerable to hydrological changes 
related to Everglades restoration projects and SLR.
    SLR projections suggest future inundation and modification to the 
majority of Chamaesyce deltoidea spp. pinetorum habitat by 2060. 
Decades prior to inundation, however, pine rocklands, marl prairies, 
and associated habitats within ENP and BCNP will undergo habitat 
transitions toward wetter, salt-tolerant plant communities, 
hydrological changes, and increasing vulnerability to storm surge. 
Although the effects of SLR within urban Miami-Dade fragments may be 
less severe, these pine rocklands will, at a minimum, experience 
partial inundations and vegetation shifts. In addition, many existing 
Miami-Dade pine rockland fragments are projected to be developed for 
housing as the human population grows and adjusts to changing sea 
levels under this scenario.

Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana

    Six of 9 extant populations are located on publicly owned 
conservation lands. This total includes 253 plants at BCNP (Monroe 
County), where prescribed fire and nonnative plant control efforts are 
adequate to beneficially manage habitat for native species. The two 
other largest populations occur in Miami-Dade County and consist of 347 
plants at Charles Deering Estate, and 307 plants at R. Hardy Matheson 
Preserve, where current habitat management does not allow for 
prescribed fire to be conducted on a consistent basis. Higher 
temperatures and changes in precipitation patterns associated with 
climate change will likely cause an increase in wildfires and 
exacerbate complications related to prescribed burning or other 
management needed to restore and maintain habitat for the species. In 
the current, fragmented landscape, dispersal and genetic exchange 
between Miami-Dade populations is unlikely, because they exist in 
isolated habitat patches surrounded by miles of unsuitable habitat 
(agriculture and urban development). Three privately owned sites in 
Miami supporting extant populations are vulnerable to development, two 
of which support 17 and 21 plants each. The population within BCNP is 
vulnerable to hydrological changes related to Everglades restoration 
projects and SLR.
    Numerous populations of all plants have been extirpated from these 
species' historical ranges, and the primary threats of habitat 
destruction and modification resulting from human population growth and 
development, agricultural conversion, and inadequate fire management 
(Factor A); competition from nonnative, invasive species (Factor E); 
changes in climatic conditions, including SLR and changes in hydrology 
(Factor E); and natural stochastic events, including hurricanes, storm 
surges, and wildfires (Factor E) are threats for the existing 
populations. Existing regulatory mechanisms have not reduced or removed 
threats impacting the four plants from the other factors (see Factor D 
discussion). These threats are ongoing, rangewide, and expected to 
continue in the future. A significant percentage of populations of the 
four plants are relatively small and isolated from one another, and 
their ability to recolonize suitable habitat is unlikely without human 
intervention, if at all. The threats have had and will continue to have 
substantial adverse effects on Sideroxlyon reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. 
pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana and their habitats. 
Although attempts are ongoing to alleviate or minimize some of these 
threats at certain locations, all populations appear to be impacted by 
one or more threats.
    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 a threatened species as ``any species

[[Page 70305]]

which is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable 
future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.'' We find 
that Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana is presently in danger of 
extinction throughout its entire range due to the immediacy and 
severity of threats currently impacting the species. The risk of 
extinction is high because there are few (9) extant populations and the 
majority of the populations are small and isolated, and have limited to 
no potential for recolonization. Therefore, on the basis of the best 
available scientific and commercial information, we propose to list 
Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana as an endangered species in 
accordance with sections 3(6) and 4(a)(1) of the Act. We find that a 
threatened species status is not appropriate for this species because 
of the contracted range and small population size of Dalea 
carthagenensis var. floridana and because of the current magnitude and 
severity of the threats on the plant. Because the species is already in 
danger of extinction throughout its range, a threatened species status 
is not appropriate.
    Sideroxlyon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, 
and Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum face threats similar to Dalea 
carthagenensis var. floridana. However, we find that endangered species 
status is not appropriate for these three species. While we have 
evidence of threats under Factors A and E affecting the species, large 
populations of these three species are protected and actively managed 
at ENP and BCNP (Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, ENP 
(10,000-100,000 plants); Digitaria pauciflora, BCNP (>10,000 plants), 
and ENP (1,000-10,000 plants); and Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum 
ENP (10,000-100,000 plants)). Short- and medium-term threats to these 
three species in these protected areas are being addressed. On the 
other hand, SLR is projected to have profound negative effects on the 
habitat of these plants in the foreseeable future. Therefore, based on 
the best available information, we find that Sideroxlyon reclinatum 
ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, and Chamaesyce deltoidea 
ssp. pinetorum are likely to become endangered species within the 
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its 
range, and we propose to list these species as threatened species in 
accordance with sections 3(20) and 4(a)(1) of the Act.
Significant Portion of the Range
    Because we have determined that we are proposing to list 
Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, and 
Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum as threatened species and Dalea 
carthagenensis var. floridana as an endangered species throughout all 
of their ranges, no portion of their ranges can be ``significant'' for 
purposes of the definitions of ``endangered species'' and ``threatened 
species.'' See the Service's SPR Policy (79 FR 37578, July 1, 2014).
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 other countries and calls for recovery actions to be carried 
out for 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 calls for 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 and preparation of a draft and final 
recovery plan. The recovery outline guides the immediate implementation 
of urgent recovery actions and describes the process to be used to 
develop a recovery plan. Revisions of the plan may be done to address 
continuing or new threats to the species, as new substantive 
information becomes available. The recovery plan also identifies 
recovery criteria for review of when a species may be ready for 
downlisting or delisting, 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 (composed of species 
experts, Federal and State agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and 
stakeholders) are often established to develop recovery plans. If these 
species are listed, a 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 Service 
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, Tribes, 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 species requires 
cooperative conservation efforts on private, State, and Tribal lands. 
If these species 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, 
pursuant to section 6 of the Act, the State of Florida would be 
eligible for Federal funds to implement management actions that promote 
the protection or recovery of the four plants. Information on our grant 
programs that are available to aid species recovery can be found at: 
http://www.fws.gov/grants.
    Although Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria 
pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and Dalea 
carthagenensis var. floridana 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 species. 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).
    Section 7(a) of the Act requires Federal agencies to evaluate their 
actions with respect to any species that is proposed or listed as an 
endangered or threatened species and with respect to its critical 
habitat, if any is designated. Regulations implementing

[[Page 70306]]

this interagency cooperation provision of the Act are codified at 50 
CFR part 402. Section 7(a)(4) of the Act 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) of the Act 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 affect a listed species or its critical habitat, the 
responsible Federal agency must enter into consultation with the 
Service.
    Federal agency actions within these species' habitat that may 
require conference or consultation or both as described in the 
preceding paragraph and include management and any other landscape-
altering activities on Federal lands administered by the U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service, National Park Service, and Department of Defense; 
issuance of section 404 Clean Water Act permits by the Army Corps of 
Engineers; construction and management of gas pipeline and power line 
rights-of-way by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission; construction 
and maintenance of roads or highways by the Federal Highway 
Administration; and disaster relief efforts conducted by the Federal 
Emergency Management Agency.
    With respect to endangered plants, prohibitions outlined at 50 CFR 
17.61 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 to remove and reduce to 
possession any such plant species from areas under Federal 
jurisdiction. In addition, for endangered plants, the Act prohibits 
malicious damage or destruction of any such species on any area under 
Federal jurisdiction, and the removal, cutting, digging up, or damaging 
or destroying of any such species on any other area in knowing 
violation of any State law or regulation, or in the course of any 
violation of a State criminal trespass law. Exceptions to these 
prohibitions are outlined in 50 CFR 17.62.
    With respect to threatened plants, the prohibitions outlined at 50 
CFR 17.71 include all of the provisions in 50 CFR 17.61 that apply to 
endangered plants, with one exception: seeds of cultivated specimens of 
species treated as threatened shall be exempt from all provisions of 50 
CFR 17.61, provided that a statement that the seeds are of ``cultivated 
origin'' accompanies the seeds or their container during the course of 
any activity otherwise subject to these regulations.
    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 Sideroxylon 
reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce 
deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana 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 provision 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.
    The Service acknowledges that it cannot fully address some of the 
natural threats facing Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, 
Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and Dalea 
carthagenensis var. floridana (e.g., hurricanes, storm surge) 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 this plant (see discussion 
below); this protection is especially valuable if these plants are 
found at additional locations.
    We may issue permits to carry out otherwise prohibited activities 
involving endangered plants under certain circumstances. Regulations 
governing permits are codified at 50 CFR 17.62 and 17.72. With regard 
to endangered plants, the Service may issue a permit authorizing any 
activity otherwise prohibited by 50 CFR 17.61 and 17.72 for scientific 
purposes or for enhancing the propagation or survival of endangered 
plants.
    It is our policy, as published in the Federal Register on July 1, 
1994 (59 FR 34272), to identify to the maximum extent practicable at 
the time a species is listed, those activities that would or would not 
constitute a violation of section 9 of the Act. The intent of this 
policy is to increase public awareness of the effect of a proposed 
listing on proposed and ongoing activities within the range of species 
proposed for listing. Based on the best available information, the 
following actions are unlikely to result in a violation of section 9, 
if these activities are carried out in accordance with existing 
regulations and permit requirements; 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 competes with or preys upon Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. 
pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana;
    (6) Release any unauthorized biological control agents that attack 
any life stage of Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, 
Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and Dalea 
carthagenensis var. floridana; or
    (7) Engage in unauthorized manipulation or modification of the 
habitat of Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria 
pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and Dalea 
carthagenensis var. floridana 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 Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria 
pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum,

[[Page 70307]]

and Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana 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 threatened or endangered species would 
be reinforced and supplemented by protection under State law.
    Activities that the Service believes could potentially harm these 
four plants include, but are not limited to:
    (1) Actions that would significantly alter the hydrology or 
substrate, such as ditching or filling. Such activities may include, 
but are not limited to, road construction or maintenance, and 
residential, commercial, or recreational development.
    (2) Actions that would significantly alter vegetation structure or 
composition, such as clearing vegetation for construction of 
residences, facilities, trails, and roads.
    (3) Actions that would introduce nonnative species that would 
significantly alter vegetation structure or composition. Such 
activities may include, but are not limited to, residential and 
commercial development, and road construction.
    (4) Application of herbicides, or release of contaminants, in areas 
where these plants occur. Such activities may include, but are not 
limited to, natural resource management, management of right of ways, 
residential and commercial development, and road construction.
    Questions regarding whether specific activities would constitute a 
violation of section 9 of the Act should be directed to the Service's 
South Florida Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT).

Critical Habitat

    Section 3(5)(A) of the Act defines critical habitat as ``(i) the 
specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the species, at 
the time it is listed . . . on which are found those physical or 
biological features (I) essential to the conservation of the species 
and (II) which may require special management considerations or 
protection; and (ii) specific areas outside the geographical area 
occupied by the species at the time it is listed upon a determination 
by the Secretary that such areas are essential for the conservation of 
the species. Section 3(3) of the Act defines conservation as to use and 
the use of all methods and procedures which are necessary to bring any 
endangered species or threatened species to the point at which the 
measures provided pursuant to the Act are no longer necessary.''
    Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as amended, and implementing 
regulations (50 CFR 424.12), require that, to the maximum extent 
prudent and determinable, the Secretary will designate critical habitat 
at the time the species is determined to be an endangered or threatened 
species. Our regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)) state that the 
designation of critical habitat is not prudent when one or both of the 
following situations exist:
    (1) The species is threatened by taking or other human activity, 
and identification of critical habitat can be expected to increase the 
degree of threat to the species, or
    (2) Such designation of critical habitat would not be beneficial to 
the species.
    There is currently no imminent threat of take attributed to 
collection or vandalism under Factor B for these species, and 
identification and mapping of critical habitat is not expected to 
initiate any such threat. Therefore, in the absence of finding that the 
designation of critical habitat would increase threats to a species, if 
there are any benefits to a critical habitat designation, a finding 
that designation is prudent is warranted. Here, the potential benefits 
of designation include: (1) Triggering consultation under section 7 of 
the Act, in new areas for actions in which there may be a Federal nexus 
where it would not otherwise occur because, for example, it is 
unoccupied; (2) focusing conservation activities on the most essential 
features and areas; (3) providing educational benefits to State or 
county governments or private entities; and (4) preventing people from 
causing inadvertent harm to these species.
    Because we have determined that the designation of critical habitat 
will not likely increase the degree of threat to the species and may 
provide some measure of benefit, we determine that designation of 
critical habitat is prudent for Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. 
austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. 
pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana.
    Our regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(2)) further state that critical 
habitat is not determinable when one or both of the following 
situations exists: (1) information sufficient to perform required 
analysis of the impacts of the designation is lacking; or (2) the 
biological needs of the species are not sufficiently well known to 
permit identification of an area as critical habitat. On the basis of a 
review of available information, we find that critical habitat for 
Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense, Digitaria pauciflora, 
Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. pinetorum, and Dalea carthagenensis var. 
floridana is not determinable because the specific information 
sufficient to perform the required analysis of the impacts of the 
designation is currently lacking.

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 proposed 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.

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 an endangered or threatened species under the 
Endangered Species Act. We published a notice outlining our reasons for 
this determination in the Federal Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 
49244).

Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes

    No Native American tribes are affected by the proposed rule.

[[Page 70308]]

References Cited

    A complete list of references cited in this rulemaking is available 
on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-
2016-0090 and upon request from the South Florida Ecological Services 
Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

Authors

    The primary authors of this proposed rule 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--ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS

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. In Sec.  17.12(h) add entries for ``Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. 
pinetorum'', ``Dalea carthagenensis var. floridana'', ``Digitaria 
pauciflora'', and ``Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp. austrofloridense'' to 
the List of Endangered and Threatened Plants in alphabetical order 
under Flowering Plants to read as set forth below:


Sec.  17.12  Endangered and threatened plants.

* * * * *
    (h) * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                           Listing citations and
        Scientific name              Common name           Where listed         Status       applicable rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        FLOWERING PLANTS
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp.        Pineland sandmat..  Wherever found.........  T           [Federal Register
 pinetorum.                                                                                citation of the final
                                                                                           rule].
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Dalea carthagenensis var.        Florida prairie-    Wherever found.........  E           [Federal Register
 floridana.                       clover.                                                  citation of the final
                                                                                           rule].
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Digitaria pauciflora...........  Florida pineland    Wherever found.........  T           Federal Register
                                  crabgrass.                                               citation of the final
                                                                                           rule].
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Sideroxylon reclinatum ssp.      Everglades bully..  Wherever found.........  T           [Federal Register
 austrofloridense.                                                                         citation of the final
                                                                                           rule].
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


     Dated: September 29, 2016.
 Stephen Guertin
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-24140 Filed 10-7-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4333-15-P