DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (DOI) United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) 50 CFR Part 17 Final rule: Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of Endangered Status for the Plant Limnanthes Floccosa ssp. Californica (Butte County Meadowfoam) / RIN 1018-Ab52 Effective Date: 06/08/92 *Rules and Regulations* (FEDREGISTER 57 FR 24192 06/08/92; 962 lines.) Item Key: 13638 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 RIN 1018-AB52 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of Endangered Status for the Plant Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica (Butte County Meadowfoam) AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) determines endangered status for a plant, Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica (Butte County meadowfoam). The subspecies is threatened principally by urban development in the undeveloped northern and eastern portions of the city of Chico in Butte County, California. In addition, conversion of the plant's habitat, vernal pools and ephermeral drainages, for agricultural purposes threatens the plant. Road widening or realignment, overgrazing by livestock, garbage dumping, off-road vehicle use, competing alien vegetation, and stochastic (random) extinction by virtue of the small isolated nature of the remaining populations threaten the subspecies to some degree. This rule implements the protection and recovery provisions afforded by the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act), for this species. EFFECTIVE DATE: June 8, 1992. ADDRESSES: The complete file for this rule is available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Sacramento Field Office, 2800 Cottage Way, room E-1803, Sacramento, California 95825. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Jim Bartel at the above address (916/978-4866 or FTS 460-4866). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica, a member of the false mermaid family (Limnanthaceae), was first collected in 1917 by Amos Heller 10 miles (16 kilometers (km)) north of Chico in Butte County, California. In a paper revising the taxonomy of L. floccosa, a species that ranges from Jackson County in Oregon to Butte County, Mary Kalin de Arroyo (1973) described L. floccosa ssp. california from a 1970 collection she made 0.5 miles (0.8 km) south of Shippee Road along State Route 99 in Butte County. The Butte County meadowfoam is a densely pubescent, winter annual herb. Its stems, which range from 1 to 10 inches (3 to 25 centimeters (cm)) in length, generally lie flat on the ground with the tips curved upward. Appearing in late March through April, the flowers of L. floccosa ssp. californica are white with dark yellow veins at the base of each of the five petals (McNeill and Brown 1979). Though similar in appearance, differences in nutlet (seed) ornamentation, inflorescence, flower shape during full bloom, and sepal fusion and vestiture (i.e., coloring and type of hairiness) separate L. floccosa ssp. californica from L. floccosa ssp. floccosa (Jokerst 1989) In addition, electrophoretic (Arroyo 1975) and allozyme (Brown and Jain 1979, McNeill and Jain 1983) studies demonstrated the genetic distinctiveness of L. floccosa ssp. californica. Butte County meadowfoam is restricted to a narrow 25-mile (40 km) strip along the eastern flank of the Sacramento Valley from central Butte County to the northern portion of Chico (Jokerst 1989). According to James Jokerst (1989), Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica has two centers of distribution; near the type locality in central Butte County, and in and around Chico. Although Arroyo (1973) reported the subspecies from the summit of Table Mountain in Butte County, this locality is based on a 1949 collection by Herbert Mason that is probably mislabeled (James Jokerst, consulting botanist, pers. comm., 1987). Three other Limnanthes taxa occasionally are associated with the Butte County meadowfoam; L. alba ssp. alba, L. douglasii var. rosea, and L. floccosa ssp. floccosa which reaches its southern distributional limits in the northern portion of Chico. However, using allozyme and morphometric data, Jefferey Dole and Mei Sun (in press) reported finding no evidence of introgression (i.e., hybridization) at sympatric sites of L. floccosa ssp. californica and L. alba ssp. alba. They also found that the Butte County meadowfoam had only an average of 1.2 percent of polymorphic loci, which is an extremely low level of genetic variation compared to other restricted species or Limnanthes taxa (Karron 1991). Like other annual flowering plants (Hamrick et al. 1991), the proportion of genetic diversity of L. floccosa ssp. californica existed among rather than within its populations. Consequently, the subspecies' continued existence likely will depend on the long-term conservation of most, if not all, populations (Dole, U.C. Davis researcher, pers. comm., April 30, 1991) Arroyo (1973) noted that Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica grew on the ``[e]dges of deep vernal pools in undisturbed areas.'' Jokerst (1989), however, stated that the subspecies occurs in three types of seasonal wetlands; ``ephemeral drainages, vernal pool depressions in ephemeral drainages, occasionally around the edges of isolated vernal pools (i.e., those not connected with other pools by ephemeral drainages).'' Vernal pools form in regions with Mediterranean climates where shallow depressions fill with water during fall and winter rains. Downward percolation is prevented by the presence of an impervious subsurface layer, such as a clay bed, hardpan, or volcanic stratum (Holland 1986). Plant species occurring in vernal pools are uniquely adapted to this ``amphibious ecosystem,'' seasonal alteration of very wet and very dry conditions (Zedler 1987, Stone 1990). Upland plants cannot tolerate the temporarily saturated to flooded soils of winter and spring, while the seasonal drying makes the pool basins unsuitable for marsh or aquatic species requiring a permanent source of water. Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica is primarily threatened by urban development in and around Chico in Butte County, California. In a study funded by the City of Chico, Dole (1988) conducted a field survey of the subspecies' vernal pool and ephemeral drainage habitat to precisely delimit the number and distribution of the Butte County meadowfoam populations in the vicinity of the city. He identified 10 populations in the Chico area, whereas Jokerst (1989) identified an eleventh population (``Diesel'') in the northern portion of the city. Construction of an apartment complex, however, destroyed this population. In addition, the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) reported that a twelfth site located west of the junction of Paradise Skyway and Bruce Road in Chico was destroyed by the construction of a shopping center in 1985. Recently, Jokerst (pers. comm., May 6, 1991) reported another Chico-area population, which is immediately north of the ``Humboldt'' population along State Route 32. This ``Highway 32'' population was severely disturbed 15 years ago when topsoil was removed from the site. Hundreds of plants now persist in this area, which is grazed by horses (Jokerst, pers. comm., May 6, 1991). Additionally, Jokerst (pers. comm., May 6, 1991) identified a southerly extension of the ``Doe Mill'' population and three easterly outlying stands east of the ``Rancho Arroyo'' population. Of the 11 remaining populations in or immediately adjacent to Chico, 8 populations are entirely on private land and zoned for urban development. Two populations and a small portion of another occur on City-owned property surrounding Chico Municipal Airport (Jokerst 1989). The City-owned portions of these three populations, which were reportedly graded or leveled in the past (Patrick Kelley, local botanist, California Native Plant Society (CNPS), pers. comm., March 20, 1990), may be subject to some airport maintenance activities (City of Chico 1989). As a result, the 11 remaining populations in the Chico area are subject to urbanization or airport-related maintenance. According to the CNDDB, an additional five ``occurrences'' (i.e., population sites) of Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica exist or existed outside of the Chico area. Though Jokerst (1989) noted that only four ``non-Chico'' populations exist today, Valerie Campbell (pers. comm., May 6, 1991) of the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in Marysville reported that her staff located approximately 40 pools and swales harboring L. floccosa ssp. californica within one section (1 square mile) along State Route 149. These sites can be grouped into three populations; one population between Cottonwood Creek and Gold Run (which was previously reported by the CNDDB and included in the four extant non-Chico populations cited above), and two new populations between Gold Run and Dry Creek. In addition, Mary Meyer (local botanist, CNPS, pers. comm., April 20, 1991) found a new population of L. floccosa ssp. californica consisting of four plants west of Dry Creek and 1.5 miles (2.4 km) east of State Route 70. This new population is near Pentz approximately 5 miles (8 km) northeast of the populations clustered about the type locality. All seven non-Chico populations are bisected by or immediately adjacent to paved roads, while three of the seven populations exist on parcels smaller than 50 acres in size. Such small parcels of grazing land are often subject to ``ranchette'' development. The transformation of essentially unaltered lands into cultivated fields (``ag-land conversion'') also threatens six of these populations outside of the Chico area. Three of the non-Chico sites were surveyed by Caltrans biologists in anticipation of a possible widening or realigning of State Route 149. In sum, 16 of the 18 remaining populations of L. floccosa ssp. californica occur entirely or largely on private land and are subject to urban development, ag- land conversion, and highway widening or realignment. Numerous development proposals awaiting approval in the Chico area pose an imminent threat to the plant. The two populations and a small portion of another that occur on City-owned property may be subject to airport maintenance activities. Other potential threats include overgrazing by livestock, garbage dumping, off-road vehicle use, and competing alien vegetation. Moreover, employing Jokerst's (1989) estimated population size data and reports from other commenters, less than 200,000 plants likely existed in the 16 censused sites in 1988. Because 13 of these 16 populations consisted of less than 9,000 plants, stochastic extinction by virtue of the small isolated nature of the remaining populations threatens the subspecies. Federal government actions on this plant began when the Service published a revised notice of review in the Federal Register (45 FR 82480) on December 15, 1980, of native plants considered for listing under the Act. Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica was included as a category-1 candidate (species for which the Service has sufficient data in its possession to support a listing proposal). On November 28, 1983, the Service published in the Federal Register (48 FR 53640) a supplement to the 1980 notice of review. Because this supplement did not include L. floccosa ssp. californica, the subspecies remained a category-1 candidate. Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica was included as a category 1 candidate in both the September 27, 1985, (50 FR 39526) and the February 21, 1990, (55 FR 6184) notices of review. The California Native Plant Society (CNPS) petitioned the Service to emergency list Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica as an endangered species on February 22, 1988. The Service issued a 90-day finding that substantial information exists indicating that the requested action may be warranted in the Federal Register (53 FR 53030) on December 30, 1988. A conservation plan (Jokerst 1989) detailing additional data on the status of the plant confirmed the need for listing. On February 15, 1991 (56 FR 6345), the Service published a proposal to list Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica as an endangered species. Because Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act, as amended in 1982, requires the Secretary to make findings on certain pending petitions within 12 months of their receipt, publication of the proposed rule constituted the final finding for the petitioned action. The Service now determines the Butte County meadowfoam to be an endangered species with the publication of this rule. Summary of Comments and Recommendations In the February 15, 1991, proposed rule (56 FR 6345) and associated notifications, all interested parties were requested to submit factual reports or information that might contribute to the development of a final rule. Appropriate State agencies, county and city governments, Federal agencies, scientific organizations, and other interested parties were contacted and requested to comment. Newspaper notices were published inviting general public comment. On March 12, 1991, the Service received a written request for a public hearing from Mr. Tom Guarino of the Greater Chico Chamber of Commerce. Subsequently, the Service received another public hearing request from Mr. Thomas J. Lando of the Community Services Department of the City of Chico on March 21, 1991. As a result, the Service published (56 FR 14055) a notice of a public hearing on April 5, 1991, and extended the deadline for the comment period to May 6, 1991. The Service conducted the hearing on April 25, 1991, at the City of Chico Council Chambers in Chico, California. Testimony was taken from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m. Notice of the proposal and public hearing were published in the Chico Enterprise-Record and Sacramento Bee. During the comment period, the Service received 44 comments (e.g., letters and oral testimony) from 31 individuals. The California Department of Fish and Game (Fish and Game) was among 12 commenters expressing support for the listing proposal, while 11 commenters opposed or asked for a delay in the listing action. Eight commenters were neutral and the information they provided was generally non- substantive, although some of these individuals provided locality or miscellaneous data on the subspecies or they inquired as to the possible effects of listing on their activities or interests. Written comments or oral statements obtained during the public hearing and comment period are combined in the following discussion. Opposing comments and other comments questioning the rule can be organized into approximately eight specific issues. These categories of comments and the Service's response to each are listed below: Comment 1: Many commenters requested the Service delay or not list Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica because additional distributional and autecological data are needed to determine the subspecies' true status. In addition, they variously contended that past surveys cited in the proposed rule, Dole (1988) and Jokerst (1989), were inadequate. Though the rationale varied, most of the support for this contention was that areas outside the known range of the plant may harbor additional populations. To support the need for further field work, two commenter cited the discovery by Caltrans biologists of three new populations within the known range of the subspecies. Others, however, asserted that the distribution of the Butte County meadowfoam, which has been the subject of botanical study for nearly 20 years by several researchers and local members of the CNPS, is well known and not in need of further study. Service response: Only four commenters provided precise data on new populations or extensions of known sites beyond that detailed in the two principal surveys of Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica (Dole 1988 and Jokerst 1989), which were the primary basis of the proposed rule. Kelley (pers. comm., March 20, 1990) detailed two L. floccosa ssp. californica populations: (1) ``some scattered plants'' immediately north of the ``Humboldt'' population along State Route 32, and (2) an isolated stand east of the ``Rancho Arroyo'' population along a tributary of Sycamore Creek. Subsequently, Kelley (pers. comm., April 4, 1991) stated that the latter site was actually L. floccosa ssp. floccosa. Jokerst (pers. comm., May 6, 1991) reported three new populations or extension: (1) the same Butte County meadowfoam north of the ``Humboldt'' population described by Kelley, (2) a southerly extension of the ``Doe Mill'' population, and (3) three easterly outlying stands east of the ``Rancho Arroyo'' population. These ``Rancho Arroyo'' stands differed in their precise locality from population of L. floccosa ssp. floccosa reported by Kelley from the same general area. Mary Meyer (pers. comm., April 20, 1991) found a new population of L. floccosa ssp. californica consisting of four plants west of Dry Creek and 1.5 miles (2.4 km) east of State Route 70. As discussed earlier, Caltrans staff located approximately 40 pools and swales harboring L. floccosa ssp. californica within one section (1 square mile) along State Route 149. These sites can be grouped into three populations; one population between Cottonwood Creek and Gold Run (which was previously reported by the CNDDB and included in the proposed rule), and two new populations between Gold Run and Dry Creek. These population data have been incorporated into this rule. Nonetheless, no new significant distributional data affecting the status of the subspecies were reported by any respondent. In addition, despite claims of populations in Tehama and Yuba Counties, no populations are reported from outside the known range of the Butte County meadowfoam and no data were presented to contradict the Service's contention that the subspecies is imminently threatened by rapid urban development and other threats in Butte County (see Factor A in ``Summary of Factors Affecting the Species''). Although future surveys likely will reveal additional small and isolated pool sites within less-accessible portions of Butte County, these newly discovered sites likely will be threatened by the same activities affecting the other known populations. The Service maintains that this decision is based on the best and most current information available. In addition, the Service believes that sufficient information is available on L. floccosa ssp. californica to warrant making a determination on its status. Comment 2: Congressman Herger asserted that ``the Butte County meadowfoam does not appear to be facing an immediate threat to its survival'' because of the considerable attention and cooperation the subspecies is receiving in the Chico area from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), Fish and Game, and City of Chico. In this regard, one respondent noted that a large development proposed for northeast Chico would not adversely affect the Butte County meadowfoam and that 62 acres would be designated a ``natural open space.'' Five respondents, including the congressman, suggested or implied that the mitigation program adopted by the City of Chico to conserve Limnanthes floccosa ssp. floccosa should be given a chance. However, other commenters claimed that the protection afforded the subspecies by the three agencies, especially the City's program, was insufficient. One respondent listed examples of the City of Chico's past failure to live up to environmental protection agreements, while another contended that the City program essentially ``calls for further destruction of the remaining Butte County meadowfoam sites within the city.'' Service response: Regarding the adequacy of local and State regulation, the mitigation program adopted by the City of Chico generates no acquisition funding and relies on developer dedication, either via fee title or conservation easement, of preserved pool habitat. Perhaps as a result of the voluntary nature of the mitigation program, only one 14.76-acre parcel within a secondary preserve area (``Doe Mill'') has been established to date, though two other landowners reportedly are negotiating with the City of Chico (Thomas J. Lando, City of Chico, pers. comm., May 3, 1991). Moreover, the alternative program does not provide for the preservation of, at least, portions of all populations in the Chico area, including the two largest stands ``Bruce-Stilson'' and ``Cohasset'' (Dole, pers. comm., April 30, 1991). Such a strategy is likely essential for the long-term survival of this genetically depauperate subspecies. Thus, the long-term effectiveness of the City of Chico's mitigation program in protecting and managing the vernal pool habitat is questionable and likely insufficient. The County of Butte, which declared bankruptcy in 1990, has undertaken no actions to date to protect Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica (Jokerst, pers. comm., May 5, 1991). Reportedly, the County has allowed the conversion of over 1,000 acres of Butte County meadowfoam habitat over the last 5 years (Jokerst, pers. comm., May 5, 1991). Regarding the adequacy of Federal regulation, the Corps' report (Art Champ, Regulatory Section, Sacramento District, pers. comm., April 1, 1991) of numerous ongoing or future permit actions affecting most of the remaining Butte County meadowfoam populations in and around Chico attests to the precarious state of Federal protection now provided to the subspecies. See the discussion under Factor D (``Summary of Factors Affecting the Species'') for a complete discussion on the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms for Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica. Comment 3: One respondent stated that seeds of Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica collected from destroyed pools within the ``Humboldt'' population should be sown elsewhere. Service response: Any effort to sow the Butte County meadowfoam on another site would require, at a minimum, a large source of genetically uncontaminated seed, and appropriate, unoccupied, vernal pool or swale habitat within the known range of the subpsecies. Moreover, such an introduction effort must provide for the long-term protection of the introduction site. Even when such conditions can be found, success cannot be guaranteed. For example, one commenter reported that an introduced population of Macoun's meadowfoam (Limnanthes macounii) in apparently suitable habitat declined and slowly disappeared for no obvious reason after 7 years of monitoring (Adolf Ceska, botanist and Limnanthes researcher, Royal British Columbia Museum, pers. comm., April 19, 1991). As a result, introduction efforts, like that suggested by the respondent, likely will offer only limited mitigation opportunities in the future. Comment 4: A few people expressed concerns over the economic impact of listing the plant. For example, one respondent claimed that the listing of Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica would be costly for people ``struggling to purchase their first home.'' Another commenter stated that any action resulting in a monetary loss regarding his land would not be acceptable. Service response: Under section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act, a listing determination must be based solely on the best scientific and commercial data available. The legislative history of this provision clearly states the intent of Congress to ``ensure'' that listing decisions are ``based solely on biological criteria and to prevent non-biological considerations from affecting such decisions'' H.R. Rep. No. 97-835, 97th Cong. 2d Sess. 19 (1982). As further stated in the legislative history, ``economic considerations have no relevance to determinations regarding the status of species '' Id. at 20. Because the Service is specifically precluded from considering economic impacts in a final decision on a proposed listing, the Service does not respond to comments concerning possible economic consequences of listing the Butte County meadowfoam. Comment 5: One commenter was concerned that listing of Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica would force local developers to change mitigation agreements made with the City of Chico. Apprehension over potential changes in current agreements likely prompted one respondent to detail the story of 3 years of trying to obtain necessary permits from the Corps to construct church facilities on vernal pool habitat east of Chico. Similarly, two other respondents strongly asserted that the construction of church facilities should be allowed to proceed. Service response: As discussed under the ``Available Conservation Measures'' section below, section 7(a) of the Act requires all Federal agencies, like the Corps, to evaluate their actions with respect to Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica and to ensure that activities the agency authorizes, funds, or otherwise carries out are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species. Though the Corps would become involved with this plant species through its permitting authority under section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the fate of such consultations with the Corps or any consultations with other Federal agencies is not known at this time. As a result, the effect of listing the Butte County meadowfoam on such local projects, including the church, cannot be precisely predicted. Regardless, the listing of the plant may result in a revisiting of past mitigation agreements. Comment 6: One commenter contested the claim in the proposed rule that all species of Limnanthes have the potential to be of high agronomic value because of the oil contained within their seeds (see discussion under Factor D in the ``Summary of Factors Affecting the Species''). This commenter stated that L. floccosa ssp. californica likely has no commercial value because of its narrow habitat requirements and its short stature (usually less than 8 inches (20 cm) tall), which would make cultivation and harvest difficult. However, another respondent noted that Gary Jolliff (crop scientist, Oregon State University) reported during a talk on meadowfoam cultivation at California State University, Chico on April 19, 1991, that meadowfoam is ``[i]ncredibly encouraging as a crop potential.'' This respondent also brought to the public hearing a few meadowfoam-based products (e.g., hand cream, face cream) to demonstrate the potential commercial value of the genus. Service response: As stated under Factor D in the ``Summary of Factors Affecting the Species,'' crop breeding studies at the University of California Davis suggest that Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica has desirable traits for future agricultural use (Jokerst 1989). Regardless as to the eventual commercial value of the Butte County meadowfoam, the Service maintains that the subspecies has not been and likely will not be overutilized in this regard. Comment 7: One commenter suggested that it would be worthwhile to examine more definitively the taxonomic status of the Butte County meadowfoam in relation to Limnanthes alba and other subspecies of L. floccosa. Without providing any details or specimens, this commenter also implied that hybrids of L. floccosa ssp. californica may exist in Yuba County. Service response: Aside from the electrophoretic (Arroyo 1975) and allozyme (Brown and Jain 1979, McNeill and Jain 1983) studies that demonstrated the gentic distinctiveness of Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica, Dole and Sun (in press) reported finding no evidence of hybridization at sympatric sites of L. floccosa ssp. californica and L. alba ssp. alba using allozyme and morphometric data. Using the best and latest systematic and genetic information from a number of reliable sources, the Service maintains that these studies are conclusive and that no additional taxonomic work is necessary. Comment 8: One respondent stated that the Service should make a ``concerted effort'' to designate critical habitat for the Butte County meadowfoam as required by section 4 of the Act. Service response: Under section 4(a)(3)(A) of the Act, the Secretary must designate critical habitat to the maximum extent prudent and determinable at the time a species is determined to be endangered or threatened. In the proposed rule, the Service found that determination of critical habitat was not prudent for these species. As discussed under the ``Critical Habitat'' section below, the Service continues to find that designation of critical habitat for Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica is not prudent at this time, because such designation likely would increase the degree of threat from vandalism, collecting, or other human activities. Summary of Factors Affecting the Species Section 4 of the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and regulations (50 CFR part 424) promulgated to implement the listing provisions of the Act set forth the procedures for adding species to the Federal Lists. A species may be determined to be an endangered or threatened species due to one or more of the five factors described in section 4(a)(1). These factors and their application to Limnanthes floccosa Howell ssp. californica Arroyo are as follows: A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment of its Habitat or Range As discussed in the ``Background'' section, 9 of the 11 remaining populations occurring either partially or totally on private lands in the Chico area are threatened by urbanization. These sites have been zoned by the City of Chico for various types of urban uses, like residential, neighborhood commercial, or manufacturing-industrial park (Jokerst 1989). Because 3 of the 7 remaining non-Chico area populations may be suited to ranchette development, 12 of the remaining 18 populations of the Butte County meadowfoam are vulnerable to urban development. In addition, the publicly owned populations on lands surrounding Chico Municipal Airport (Jokerst 1989) may be subject to airport maintenance activities (City of Chico 1989). As discussed in the ``Background'' section, ag-land conversion also threatens the six of the seven populations outside of the Chico area. For example, 90 percent of the population of Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica growing at the type locality was lost as a result of ag- land conversion for rice production in the early 1980's (Jokerst 1989). The other non-Chico population is threatened by the proposed construction of housing funded by U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. In addition, highway widening or realignment threatens portions of the three populations recently surveyed by Caltrans. As a result, all known remaining populations of the Butte County meadowfoam are subject to urban development, airport maintenance activities, ag- land conversion, and/or road widening or realignment. B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or Educational Purposes All species of Limnanthes have high potential agronomic value because of the oil contained within their seeds. Because the lubricating qualities of Limnanthes oil are retained under high temperature and pressure, the seed oil is similar to that produced by sperm whales (Jain et al. 1977). Crop breeding studies at the University of California Davis suggest that L. floccosa ssp. californica has desirable traits for future agricultural use (Jokerst 1989). Nonetheless, no overutilization has occurred in this regard and h) 0*0*0*none is expected. C. Disease or Predation According to Jokerst (1989), intensive long-term grazing by livestock evidently has eliminated the Butte County meadowfoam from apparently suitable pool habitat in the Chico area. Jokerst (1989) reports that the ``Cohasset'' population abruptly ends at the fenceline of an overgrazed pasture, while the ``North Enloe'' and ``Bruce-Stilson'' populations increased in numbers when grazing pressure was reduced. Dole (1988) similarly noted high population numbers in ungrazed pastures. Albert Beck (local consultant, pers. comm., April 25, 1991) noted that grazing by horses damages meadowfoam populations the most, followed by sheep and then cattle. Nevertheless, Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica seems to have persisted in areas receiving light to moderate to periodic heavy grazing pressure (Jokerst 1989). Though the overall effect of livestock grazing is not completely understood, overgrazing doubtlessly has adversely affected and likely continues to threaten the plant. D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms Under the Native Plant Protection Act (chapter 1.5 section 1990 et seq. of the Fish and Game Code) and California Endangered Species Act (chapter 1.5 section 2050 et seq.), the California Fish and Game Commission has listed Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica as endangered (14 California Code of Regulations section 670.2). Though both statutes prohibit the ``take'' of State-listed plants (chapter 1.5 section 1908 and section 2080), State law appears to exempt the taking of such plants via habitat modification or land use change by the landowner. After the California Department of Fish and Game notifies a landowner that a State-listed plant grows on his or her property, State law evidently requires only that the landowner notify the agency ``at least 10 days in advance of changing the land use to allow salvage of such plant.'' (chapter 1.5 section 1913) Jokerst (1989) drafted a conservation plan for the City of Chico that details various actions designed to conserve Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica in the Chico area ``while recognizing the need for future urban growth.'' Though the City of Chico ``adopted'' the conservation plan on October 17, 1989, an alternative mitigation program or addendum to the plan was approved simultaneously, which actually instituted the City's mitigation procedure for projects affecting the subspecies. The alternative plan calls for the immediate establishment of two ``core preserves'' and four ``secondary preserves'' (City of Chico 1989). The plan, which generates no acquisition funding, relies on developer dedication, either via fee title or conservation easement, of preserved pool habitat. Perhaps as a result of the voluntary nature of the mitigation program, only one 14.76-acre parcel within a secondary preserve area (``Doe Mill'') has been established to date, though two other landowners reportedly are negotiating with the City of Chico (Thomas J. Lando, City of Chico, pers. comm., May 3, 1991). Reportedly the large development proposed for northeast Chico would not adversely affect the ``Rancho Arroyo'' population of Butte County meadowfoam because Crocker Development will designate 62 acres as ``natural open space'' (B. Demar Hooper, attorney, Hackard, Taylor & Phillips, pers. comm., April 16, 1991). Regardless as to the outcome of this development, the alternative program does not provide for the preservation of, at least, portions of all populations in the Chico area, including the two largest stands ``Bruce-Stilson'' and ``Cohasset'' (Dole, pers. comm., April 30, 1991). Such a strategy is likely essential for the long-term survival of this genetically depauperate subspecies. As a result, the long-term effectiveness of the City of Chico's mitigation program in protecting and managing the vernal pool habitat is questionable and likely insufficient. The County of Butte, which declared bankruptcy in 1990, has undertaken no actions to date to protect Limnanthes floccosa spp. californica (Jokerst, pers. comm., May 5, 1991). Reportedly, the County has allowed the conversion of over 1,000 acres of Butte County meadowfoam habitat over the last 5 years (Jokerst, pers. comm., May 5, 1991). Under section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regulates the discharge of fill into waters and adjacent wetlands of the United States. To be in compliance with the Clean Water Act, potential permit applicants are required to notify the Corps prior to undertaking any activity (e.g., grading, discharge of soil or other fill material) that would result in the fill of wetlands. Nationwide Permit Number 26 (33 CFR 330.5), which was reissued on November 22, 1991, and became effective on January 21, 1992, (56 FR 59110), addresses fills of headwaters and isolated waters. This permit was issued to regulate the fill of wetlands that are relatively small, less than 10 acres. Most proposals involving the fill of wetlands smaller than 1 acre in size would qualify under Nationwide Permit Number 26. Where fill would occur in a wetland 1 to 10 acres in size, the Corps circulates for comment a predischarge notification to the Service and other interested parties prior to determining whether or not the proposed fill activity qualifies under Nationwide Permit Number 26. Because the Corps must respond within 20 days or the proposed activity will be authorized under Nationwide Permit 26, many projects are authorized by default. Individual permits are required for the discharge of fill into wetlands greater than 10 acres in size. The review process for the issuance of individual permits is more rigorous, and conditions may be included that require the avoidance or mitigation of environmental impacts. The Corps has discretionary authority and can require an applicant to seek an individual permit if the Corps believes that the resources are sufficiently important, regardless of the size of the wetland. In practice, the Corps rarely requires an individual permit when a project would qualify for a nationwide permit. With respect to the vernal pools harboring Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica, most individual pools and ephemeral drainages in Butte County encompass less than 10 acres. As a result, even large projects can qualify for Nationwide Permit 26. For example, the Corps confirmed a wetland delineation of 7.8 acres of vernal pools on property owned by Crocker Development within the ``Rancho Arroyo'' population, although, to reiterate, the proposed development reportedly will not adversely affect the subspecies. Although the Sacramento District of the Corps has not required individual permits for projects that involve the filling of vernal pools or ephemeral drainages, the District did issue a cease and desist order to a landowner that graded 0.4 acres of vernal pool habitat on a 10.83-acre parcel in violation of section 404 of the Clean Water Act. However, the District notified two applicants (i.e., Century Industrial Park, Pleasant Valley Assembly of God) that proposed fills of vernal pool habitat of L. floccosa ssp. californica qualified for Nationwide Permit 26. In addition, five landowners have submitted or are preparing wetland delineations for their respective properties in the Chico area, each of which likely will involve less than 10 acres of wetlands (Champ, Core of Engineers, Sacramento District, pers. comm., April 1, 1991). The issuance of Nationwide Permit 26 or disclaimers does not allow for the assessment of cumulative impacts to the vernal pools or the plant species under consideration herein. Thus, Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica is not currently afforded protection under section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The Corps cannot determine that a project qualifies for a nationwide permit if a federally listed endangered or threatened species may be adversely affected by the proposed project until the Corps has complied with section 7 of the Act (see discussion below under ``Available Conservation Measures''). In addition, federally listed species are known to be important to the Nation and its people, and the issuance of further disclaimers would be unlikely upon the listing of the plant as endangered. E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting its Continued Existence Alien, annual grasses and forbs invaded the low-elevation, plant communities of California during the days of the Franciscan missionaries. Today, these grasses, which account for 50 to 90 percent of the vegetative cover (Heady 1977) and can stand up to a meter (3.3 feet) in height (Holland 1986), dominate most grasslands in California. By germinating in late fall prior to native forbs, alien grasses have outcompeted these natives (for nutrients and water) and displaced much of the native flora throughout California. Although vernal pools are ``relatively immune'' to the competition of alien plants (Zedler 1987), Jokerst (1989) reported that soil disturbance or reductions in the frequency and length of time pool soil is saturated facilitate the invasion of the vernal pool habitat by weedy species. The effect of grazing livestock (see Factor C ``Summary of Factors Affecting the Species'') in concert with the ubiquitous presence of alien plants on Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica needs further study. Natural fluctuations in rainfall patterns resulting in little to no water in the vernal pools may effect localized extinctions (Jokerst 1989). Though climatic-induced extirpations have not been documented for Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica, the small isolated nature of h) 0*0*0*the remaining populations make stochastic extinction more likely. A prolonged drought of several years is the most likely stochastic phenomenon that would result in the localized extinction of a vernal pool plant like the Butte County meadowfoam. In addition, because of the proximity of the subspecies to roads and urban development, Jokerst (1989) reports that garbage dumping, and off-road vehicle use may adversely affect some populations of Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica. In light of recent Caltrans survey activity along State Route 149, highway widening or realignment may also threaten portions of three populations. The Service has carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial information available regarding the past, present, and future threats faced by Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica in determining to issue this rule. Based on this evaluation, the preferred action is to list L. floccosa ssp. californica as endangered. At least two populations have been lost due to urbanization in the Chico Area, while 90 percent of a third site has been converted to a rice field. Of the remaining 18 populations of the Butte County meadowfoam, all are subject to urban development, airport maintenance activities, and/or ag-land conversion. In addition, road widening or realignment, overgrazing by livestock, garbage dumping, off-road vehicle use, competing alien vegetation, and stochastic extinction by virtue of the small isolated nature of the remaining populations threaten the entire range of the subspecies to some degree. Federal listing will provide opportunities for protection of populations from natural and anthropogenic (human-induced) loss and degradation of vernal pools and their associated watersheds. Critical Habitat Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as amended, requires that to the maximum extent prudent and determinable, the Secretary designate critical habitat at the time a species is determined to be endangered or threatened. The Service finds that determination of critical habitat is not prudent for this species at this time. Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica occurs primarily on private land that has been and is subject to urban development and ag-land conversion (see Factor A in ``Summary of Factors Affecting the Species''). The vernal pool and ephemeral drainage habitat of the plant is usually small and easily identified. Therefore, the publication of precise maps and descriptions of critical habitat in the Federal Register would make this plant more vulnerable to incidents of vandalism and could contribute to the decline of the species. A listing of L. floccosa ssp. californica as endangered also would publicize the rarity of this plant and, thus, could make it attractive to researchers or collectors of rare plants. The proper agencies have been notified of the locations and management needs of this plant. Landowners were notified of this listing action and the importance of protecting habitat of this subspecies. Nonetheless, some landowners reportedly indicated that if the ``level of protection gets higher,'' ``they would make attempts to destroy those populations'' (Gaylord Enns, pastor, Pleasant Valley Assembly of God, pers. comm., April 25, 1991). Another commenter described one incident where a landowner threatened to disc under any meadowfoam populations on his property (Dole, pers. comm., April 30, 1991). Protection of these species' habitats will be addressed through the recovery process and through the section 7 consultation process. The Service believes that Federal involvement in the areas where these plants occur can be identified without the designation of critical habitat. Therefore, the Service finds that designation of critical habitat for this plant is not prudent at this time, because such designation likely would increase the degree of threat from vandalism, collecting, or other human activities. Available Conservation Measures Conservation measures provided to species listed as endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act include recognition, recovery actions, requirements for Federal protection, and prohibitions against certain activities. Recognition through listing encourages and results in conservation actions by Federal, State, and private agencies, groups, and individuals. The Endangered Species Act provides for possible land acquisition and cooperation with the States and requires that recovery actions be carried out for all listed species. Such actions are initiated by the Service following listing. The protection required of Federal agencies and the prohibitions against taking are discussed, in part, below. Section 7(a) of the Act, as amended, requires Federal agencies to evaluate their actions with respect to any species that is proposed or listed as endangered or threatened and with respect to its critical habitat, if any is being designated. Regulations implementing this interagency cooperation provision of the Act are codified at 50 CFR part 402. Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires Federal agencies to insure that activities they authorize, fund, or carry out are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a species or to 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 formal consultation with the Service. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will become involved with this subspecies through its permitting authority under section 404 of the Clean Water Act. By regulation, nationwide permits may not be issued where a federally listed endangered or threatened species would be affected by the proposed project without first completing formal consultation pursuant to section 7 of the Act. The presence of listed species would highlight the national importance of these resources, thus rendering any disclaimers of jurisdiction unlikely. In addition, if the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development proposes to insure housing loans in areas that presently support Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica, like the recently discovered population near Pentz, the funding of these loans would be subject to review by the Service under section 7 of the Act. Airport development at Chico Municipal Airport, if proposed, likely would be subject to review and/or approval by the Federal Aviation Administration and, thus, subject to section 7 consultation. Listing of Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica provides for the development of a recovery plan and will bring together State and Federal efforts involving the conservation of the plant. The plan would establish a framework for agencies to coordinate activities and cooperate with each other in their conservation efforts. The plan would set recovery priorities and estimate costs of various tasks necessary to accomplish recovery. It would also describe site-specific management actions needed to achieve conservation and survival of the subspecies. The Act and its implementing regulations found at 50 CFR 17.61, 17.62, and 17.63 for endangered plant species set forth a series of general prohibitions and exceptions that apply to all endangered plants. With respect to the Butte County meadowfoam, all trade prohibitions of section 9(a)(2) of the Act, implemented by 50 CFR 17.61, apply. These prohibitions, in part, make it illegal with respect to any endangered plant 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 species from areas under Federal jurisdiction; maliciously damage or destroy any such species on any area under Federal jurisdiction; or remove, cut, dig up, damage, or destroy 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. Certain exceptions can apply to agents of the Service and State conservation agencies. The Act and 50 CFR 17.62 and 17.63 also provide for the issuance of permits to carry out otherwise prohibited activities involving endangered plant species under certain circumstances. Though the seeds of Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica likely have high agronomic value (see Factor B ``Summary of Factors Affecting the Species''), the Service anticipates that few trade permits would be sought or issued for this species. Requests for copies of the regulations on plants and inquiries regarding them may be addressed to the Office of Management Authority, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, room 432, Arlington, Virginia 22203-3507 (703/358-2104). National Environmental Policy Act The Service has determined that an Environmental Assessment, as defined under the authority of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, need not be prepared in connection with regulations adopted pursuant to section 4(a) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. A notice outlining the Service's reasons for this determination was published in the Federal Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244). References Cited Arroyo, M.T.K. de. 1973. A taximetric study of infraspecific variation in autogamous Limnanthes floccosa (Limnanthaceae). Brittonia 25:177- 191. Arroyo, M.T.K. de. 1975. Electrophoretic studies of genetic variation in natural populations of allogamous Limnanthes alba and autogamous Limnanthes floccosa (Limnanthaceae). Heredity 35:153-164. Brown, C.R. and S.K. Jain. 1979. Reproductive system and pattern of genetic variation in two Limnanthes species. Theor. Appl. Genetics 54:181-190. City of Chico. 1989. Addendum to the draft plan for the conservation of Butte County meadowfoam in the City of Chico. Unpubl. rep., City of Chico, Calif. 6 pp. Dole, J.A. 1988. Results of a field survey for the Butte County meadowfoam in the vicinity of the City of Chico, California. Univ. Calif., Davis. Unpubl. rep., Univ. Calif. Davis. 34 pp. Dole, J.A. and M. Sun. in press. Field and genetic survey of the endangered Butte County meadowfoam-Limnanthes floccosa subsp. californica (Limnanthaceae). Draft manuscript submitted to Conserv. Biol. Hamrick, J.L., M.J.W. Godt, D.A. Murawski, and M.D. Loveless. 1991. Correlations between species traits and allozyme diversity: Implications for conservation biology. Pages 75-86 in D.A. Falk and K.E. Holsinger, eds. Genetics and conservation of rare plants. Oxford Univ. Press, New York. Heady, H.F. 1977. Valley grassland. Pages 491-514 in M.G. Barbour and J. Major, eds. Terrestrial vegetation of California. John Wiley and Sons, New York. Holland, R.F. 1986. Preliminary descriptions of the terrestrial natural communities of California. Unpubl. rep., Calif. Dept. Fish and Game. 156 pp. Jain, S.K., R.O. Pierce, and H. Hauptli. 1977. Meadowfoam: Potential new oil crop. Calif. Ag. 18-20 March. Jokerst, J.D. 1989. A draft plan for the conservation of Butte County meadowfoam in the City of Chico, Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica. Unpubl. rep., Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc. Sacramento, Calif. Karron, J.D. 1991. Patterns of genetic variation and breeding systems in rare plant species. Pages 87-98 in D.A. Falk and K.E. Holsinger, eds. Genetics and conservation of rare plants. Oxford Univ. Press, New York. McNeill, C. and C. Brown. 1979. Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica Arroyo; Butte County Meadowfoam. Unpubl. rep., California Native Plant Society. 3 pp. McNeill, C.I. and S.K. Jain. 1983. Genetic differentiation studies and phylogenetic inference in the plant genus Limnanthes (section Inflexae). Theor. Appl. Genetics 66: 257-269. Stone, R.D. 1990. California's endemic vernal pool plants: Some factors influencing their rarity and endangerment. Pages 89-107 in D.H. Ikeda and R.A. Schlising, eds. Vernal pool plants-Their habitat and biology. Calif. State Univ., Chico. Zedler, P.H. 1987. The ecology of southern California vernal pools: A community profile. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serv. Biol. Rep. 85(7.11). Author The primary author of this proposed rule is Jim A. Bartel, Sacramento Field Office (see ADDRESSES section). List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements and Transportation. Regulation Promulgation PART 17-[AMENDED] Accordingly, part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as set forth below: 1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows: Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201-4245; Pub. L. 99-625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted. 2. Amend Sec. 17.12(h) by adding the following, in alphabetical order under the family indicated, to the List of Endangered and Threatened Plants: Sec. 17.12 Endangered and threatened plants.** (h) * * * Species Limnanthaceae-False mermaid family: Scientific name Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica Common name Butte County meadowfoam Historic range U.S.A. (CA) Status E When listed 471 Critical habitat NA Special rules NA Dated: May 18, 1992. Richard N. Smith, Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. h) 0*0*0* [FR Doc. 92-13253 Filed 6-5-92; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-M