81_FR_70239 81 FR 70043 - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Removal of Solidago albopilosa (White-haired Goldenrod) From the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Plants

81 FR 70043 - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Removal of Solidago albopilosa (White-haired Goldenrod) From the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Plants

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 196 (October 11, 2016)

Page Range70043-70059
FR Document2016-24249

We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), are removing the plant Solidago albopilosa (white-haired goldenrod) from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Plants. This action is based on a thorough review of the best available scientific and commercial information, which indicates that the threats to this species have been eliminated or reduced to the point that the species no longer meets the definition of an endangered or threatened species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. This rule also announces the availability of a final post-delisting monitoring (PDM) plan for white- haired goldenrod.

Federal Register, Volume 81 Issue 196 (Tuesday, October 11, 2016)
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 196 (Tuesday, October 11, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 70043-70059]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2016-24249]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2014-0054; FXES11130900000 167 FF09E42000]
RIN 1018-BA46


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Removal of 
Solidago albopilosa (White-haired Goldenrod) From the Federal List of 
Endangered and Threatened Plants

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Final rule and notice of availability of final post-delisting 
monitoring plan.

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

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), are removing 
the plant Solidago albopilosa (white-haired goldenrod) from the Federal 
List of Endangered and Threatened Plants. This action is based on a 
thorough review of the best available scientific and commercial 
information, which indicates that the threats to this species have been 
eliminated or reduced to the point that the species no longer meets the 
definition of an endangered or threatened species under the Endangered 
Species Act of 1973, as amended. This rule also announces the 
availability of a final post-delisting monitoring (PDM) plan for white-
haired goldenrod.

DATES: This rule is effective on November 10, 2016.

ADDRESSES: This final rule and the PDM plan are available on the 
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov at Docket Number FWS-R4-ES-2014-
0054. Comments and materials received, as well as supporting 
documentation used in the preparation of this rule, will be available 
for public inspection by appointment, during normal business hours, at 
the Service's Kentucky Ecological Services Field Office, 330 West 
Broadway, Suite 265, Frankfort, KY 40601.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Virgil Lee Andrews, Jr., Field 
Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Kentucky Ecological 
Services Field Office, 330 West Broadway, Suite 265, Frankfort, KY 
40601; telephone (502) 695-0468. Individuals who are hearing-impaired 
or speech-impaired may call the Federal Information Relay Service at 
(800) 877-8339 for TTY assistance 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Executive Summary

    This document contains: (1) A final rule to remove Solidago 
albopilosa from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Plants at 
50 CFR 17.12(h); and (2) a notice of availability of a final PDM plan.
    Species addressed--Solidago albopilosa (white-haired goldenrod) is 
an upright, herbaceous plant with soft, white hairs covering its leaves 
and stems (Andreasen and Eshbaugh 1973, p. 123). The species produces 
clusters of small, fragrant, yellow flowers from September to November. 
S. albopilosa is restricted to sandstone rock shelters or rocky ledges 
of a highly dissected region known as the Red River Gorge in Menifee, 
Powell, and Wolfe Counties, KY.
    The Service listed Solidago albopilosa as a threatened species 
under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act; 16 U.S.C. 
1531 et seq.), primarily because of its limited range and threats 
associated with ground disturbance and trampling caused by unlawful 
archaeological activities and recreational activities such as camping, 
hiking, and rock climbing (53 FR 11612, April 7, 1988). Other 
identified threats included the inadequacy of regulatory mechanisms and 
minor vegetational changes in the surrounding forest.
    When the recovery plan for S. albopilosa (white-haired goldenrod) 
(Recovery Plan) was completed in 1993, the Service knew of 90 extant 
occurrences of S. albopilosa (Service 1993, p. 2), containing an 
estimated 45,000 stems (each individual plant can

[[Page 70044]]

have multiple stems (or branches); stem counts have been the focus of 
most survey efforts, rather than the number of individual plants, which 
is often not discernable) (Service 1993, p. 2). The Recovery Plan 
defined an occurrence as a ``discrete group of plants beneath a single 
rock shelter or on a single rock ledge.'' All of these locations were 
situated within the proclamation boundary of the Daniel Boone National 
Forest (DBNF), and 69 occurrences (77 percent) were in Federal 
ownership.
    Currently, 117 extant occurrences of S. albopilosa are known, 
containing an estimated 174,000 stems. All extant occurrences continue 
to be located within the proclamation boundary of the DBNF, and 111 
occurrences (95 percent) are in Federal ownership and receive 
management and protection through DBNF's Land and Resource Management 
Plan (LRMP) (U.S. Forest Service (USFS) 2004, pp. 1.1-1.10). We 
consider 81 of the extant occurrences (69 percent) to be stable, 
meaning no change has been detected in their general rank or status 
over the last 12 years. We consider 46 of the 81 stable occurrences to 
be adequately protected and self-sustaining as defined by the Recovery 
Plan, and these occurrences account for approximately 131,000 stems, or 
about 75 percent of the species' total number.
    Over the past 12 years, the Service has worked closely with the 
Kentucky State Nature Preserves Commission (KSNPC) and DBNF on the 
management and protection of the species. Management activities have 
included trail diversion (away from S. albopilosa occurrences), 
installation of protective fencing, and placement of informational 
signs in rock shelters, along trails, and at trailheads. These 
activities and other management actions included in the DBNF's LRMP 
(USFS 2004, pp. 3.5-3.8) have assisted in recovery of the species. 
Furthermore, a new cooperative management agreement among the Service, 
DBNF, and KSNPC, which was signed on August 29, 2016, will assist in 
the long-term protection of the species.
    Considering the number of stable, self-sustaining, protected 
occurrences, the management and protection of habitats provided by 
DBNF's LRMP and the new cooperative management agreement, and the lack 
of significant threats to the species or its habitats, we conclude that 
Solidago albopilosa no longer meets the definition of a threatened 
species under the Act.
    Purpose of the Regulatory Action--The purpose of this action is to 
remove Solidago albopilosa from the Federal List of Endangered and 
Threatened Plants, based on the reduction or removal of threats.
    Basis for the Regulatory Action--Under the Act, we may determine 
that a species is an endangered or threatened species because of one or 
more of the five factors described in section 4(a)(1) of the Act. We 
must consider the same factors in removing a species from the List 
(delisting). Further, we may delist a species if the best scientific 
and commercial data indicate the species is neither a threatened 
species nor an endangered species for one or more of the following 
reasons: (1) the species is extinct; (2) the species has recovered and 
is no longer threatened or endangered; or (3) the original scientific 
data used at the time the species was classified were in error. Here, 
in addition to the application of the five factors, we are delisting 
the species based on recovery.
    We reviewed the best available scientific and commercial 
information pertaining to the five threat factors for white-haired 
goldenrod. All 4 peer reviewers and 7 of 10 public commenters supported 
the proposed action to delist white-haired goldenrod. Our results are 
summarized as follows:
     We consider Solidago albopilosa to be recovered because 
all substantial threats to this species have been eliminated or reduced 
and adequate regulatory mechanisms exist.
     The species has met all recovery criteria as outlined in 
the Recovery Plan (there is a sufficient number of distinct, stable, 
self-sustaining, and adequately protected occurrences).

Previous Federal Actions

    Please refer to the proposed rule to remove Solidago albopilosa 
from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Plants (80 FR 52717, 
September 1, 2015) for a detailed description of previous Federal 
actions concerning this species. We reopened the comment period for the 
proposed rule on February 26, 2016 (81 FR 9798), in order to conduct 
peer review and provide interested parties an additional opportunity to 
comment on the proposed rule and draft post-delisting monitoring plan. 
We requested that all interested parties submit written comments by 
March 28, 2016.

Background

    It is our intent to discuss in this final rule only those topics 
directly relevant to the removal of Solidago albopilosa from the 
Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Plants.

Species Information

    The following section contains information updated from that 
presented in the proposed rule.
    Species Description and Life History--Solidago albopilosa (Braun 
1942) is an upright to slightly arching, herbaceous, perennial plant 
that attains a height of 30 to 100 centimeters (12 to 39 inches). The 
species is commonly multi-stemmed because it produces rhizomes 
(horizontal, usually underground stems) that often root below and 
produce new stems above. Because of this, the number of plants at a 
single site is often not discernable from above ground stem 
distributions. The long, soft, white hairs that cover the leaves and 
stems are the species' most distinguishing characteristic (Andreasen 
and Eshbaugh 1973, p. 123). The alternate leaves of S. albopilosa are 
widest at their base and are prominently veined with a dark-green upper 
surface and a pale underside. They vary in length from 6 to 10 
centimeters (2.5 to 4.0 inches), with the larger leaves closer to the 
base of the stem. Hairs cover both surfaces of the leaves and are most 
dense along the veins. The stem is cylindrical and densely covered with 
fine white hairs. Axillary (positioned along the main axis of the 
plant) clusters of small, fragrant, yellow flowers begin blooming in 
late August. The flower heads are composed of three to five ray florets 
(small flowers in the marginal part of the flower head) and more than 
15 disk florets (small flowers in the central part of the flower head). 
The ray florets are about 6 mm long (0.24 inch), and the disk flowers 
are about 3 mm long (0.12 inch). The pale-brown, pubescent, oblong 
achenes (dry single-seed fruits) appear in October (Braun 1942, pp. 1-
4; Andreasen and Eshbaugh 1973, p. 123; Service 1993, p. 1).
    Solidago albopilosa flowers from September through November and 
sets fruit in mid-October through December. The flowers are visited by 
bees (Families Apidae and Halictidae), moths (Order Lepidoptera), and 
syrphid flies (Family Syrphidae), which are likely attracted by the 
fragrant, yellow flowers (Braun 1942, pp. 1-4; Service 1993, p. 6). 
Viability of the species' pollen is reported to be high (Andreason and 
Eshbaugh 1973, pp. 129-130). Seeds are most likely dispersed by wind, 
but germination rates and the extent of vegetative reproduction in the 
wild are unknown (Service 1993, p. 6). Seedlings are observed 
frequently in the wild, but the percentage of seeds that germinate in 
the wild is unknown (Taylor 2016, U.S. Forest Service, pers. comm.). 
Germination of seed collected from the

[[Page 70045]]

wild has high viability in the laboratory (near 100 percent), and 
plants grow readily from seed (Taylor 2016, pers. comm.).
    Braun (1942, pp. 1-4) described S. albopilosa based on specimens 
discovered in the summer of 1940 in the Red River Gorge area of Menifee 
County, KY. S. albopilosa is in the family Asteraceae, and there are no 
synonyms for the species. Andreasen and Eshbaugh (1973, pp. 126-128) 
studied variation among four separate occurrences (populations) of S. 
albopilosa in Menifee and Powell Counties. Their population analysis of 
characteristics such as plant height, leaf length and width, stem 
pubescence, and number of ray flowers per head showed that some 
morphological characteristics (e.g., plant height, leaf shape and size, 
stem pubescence) can vary widely between populations.
    Solidago albopilosa can be distinguished from its closest relative, 
S. flexicaulis (broad-leaf goldenrod), by its shorter height, smaller 
and thinner leaves, and generally downy (hairy) appearance (the leaves 
of S. flexicaulis have a slick, smooth appearance) (Medley 1980, p. 6). 
The two species also differ in habitat preference. S. albopilosa is 
restricted to sandstone rock shelters or ledges, while S. flexicaulis 
is a woodland species that occurs on the forest floor. Esselman and 
Crawford (1997, pp. 245-256) used molecular and morphological analyses 
to examine the relationship between S. albopilosa and S. flexicaulis. 
They concluded that S. albopilosa is most closely related to S. 
flexicaulis; however, there was no evidence that either S. flexicaulis 
or S. caesia (wreath or blue-stemmed goldenrod) is a parent or has a 
recent close relationship with S. albopilosa as was previously 
speculated by Braun (1942, pp. 1-4). Esselman and Crawford (1997, pp. 
245-256) also examined genetic diversity within the species S. 
albopilosa (using Random Amplified Polymorphic DNA and isozyme markers) 
and reported genetic variation both within and between populations 
(genetic diversity is widely spread among populations, and populations 
are not very genetically homogenous). The highest level of genetic 
diversity was observed among (across) versus within populations. 
Consequently, Esselman and Crawford (1997, pp. 245-256) recommended 
that conservation efforts include the maintenance of as many 
populations as possible to capture the full genetic diversity of the 
species.
    Solidago albopilosa is restricted to outcroppings of Pottsville 
sandstone in a rugged, highly dissected area known as the Red River 
Gorge in Menifee, Powell, and Wolfe Counties, KY (Service 1993, p. 2; 
White and Drozda 2006, p. 124). The Red River Gorge is well known for 
its scenic beauty and outdoor recreational opportunities, and much of 
the area is located within the DBNF, an approximate 2,860-km\2\ 
(706,000-acre) area in eastern Kentucky that is managed by the U.S. 
Forest Service (White and Drozda 2006, p. 124). The Red River Gorge 
lies within the Northern Forested Plateau Escarpment of the Western 
Allegheny Plateau ecoregion (Woods et al. 2002, p. 1). The hills and 
ridges of this region are characterized as rugged and highly dissected, 
with erosion-resistant, Pennsylvanian quartzose sandstone (contains 90 
percent quartz) capping the ridges and exposed layers of Mississippian 
limestone, shale, and siltstone on lower slopes and in the valleys.
    Solidago albopilosa occurs on the floors of sandstone rock shelters 
(natural, shallow, cave-like formations) and on sheltered cliffs 
(cliffs with overhanging ledges) at elevations between 243 and 396 m 
(800 and 1,300 ft) (Andreasen and Eshbaugh 1973; Service 1993, p. 5). 
The species may also be found on ledges or vertical walls of these 
habitats, but, regardless of the specific location, S. albopilosa is 
restricted to areas of partial shade behind the dripline (53 FR 11612; 
April 7, 1988) and typically does not grow in the deepest part of rock 
shelters (Harker et al. 1981, p. 4). Campbell et al. (1989, p. 40) 
noted that this plant species is known from all possible moisture 
regimes and aspects in these habitats, but plants on northern exposures 
appeared to be smaller than average. Seven of nine occurrences examined 
by Nieves and Day (2014, pp. 8-9) were located in easterly or northerly 
facing shelters, which receive minimal direct sunlight. Nieves and Day 
examined only a small percentage of the species' 117 known occurrences 
(8 percent), so further study is required to determine the importance 
of the solar aspect on the species' biology and distribution. Ten rock 
shelter habitats examined by Nieves and Day (2014, p. 7) were 
significantly cooler and more humid than the surrounding environment 
(areas outside and above the rock shelter), but the species' 
requirements with respect to air temperature and relative humidity are 
unknown.
    Typical herbaceous associates of this plant include roundleaf 
catchfly (Silene rotundifolia) and alumroot (Heuchera parviflora) and 
less commonly white baneberry (Actaea pacypoda), maidenhair fern 
(Adiantum pedatum), fourleaf yam (Dioscorea quaternata), intermediate 
woodfern (Dryopteris intermedia), Indian cucumber-root (Medeola 
virginiana), Japanese stilt grass (Microstegium vimineum; invasive, 
non-native), Christmas fern (Polystichum acrostichoides), rhododendron 
(Rhododendron maximum), and little mountain meadow-rue (Thalicturm 
mirabile) (Braun 1942, pp. 1-4; Andreason and Eshbaugh 1973, p. 128; 
Kral 1983, p. 1253; Campbell et al. 1989, p. 40; White and Drozda 2006, 
p. 124). Associated woody species of the mixed mesophytic forest 
adjacent to S. albopilosa occurrences include red maple (Acer rubrum), 
sugar maple (Acer saccharum), American beech (Fagus grandifolia), 
American holly (Ilex opaca), mountain laurel (Kalmia latifolia), tulip 
poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), bigleaf magnolia (Magnolia 
macrophylla), umbrella magnolia (M. tripetala), black gum (Nyssa 
sylvatica), oaks (Quercus spp.), basswood (Tilia americana), and 
eastern hemlock (Tsuga canadensis) (Andreason and Eshbaugh 1973, p. 
128; Kral 1983, p. 1253; Campbell et al. 1989, p. 40).
    When the Recovery Plan was completed in 1993, 90 extant occurrences 
were known (Service 1993, p. 2), containing an estimated 45,000 stems 
(Service 1993, p. 2). All of these locations were situated within the 
proclamation boundary of the DBNF, and 69 occurrences (approximately 76 
percent) were located on Federal lands. The remaining occurrences (21) 
were located on private property. Rather than try to determine what 
constituted a population, the Recovery Plan (Service 1993, p. 1) used 
``occurrence,'' defining it as a ``discrete group of plants beneath a 
single rock shelter or on a single rock ledge.'' In making this 
definition, the Service (1993, p. 6) explained that pollinators (bees 
and syrphid flies) likely carried pollen between rock shelters and may 
even move between adjacent ravines. If there were sufficient gene flow 
between occurrences via pollinators, clusters of nearby rock shelters 
or adjacent ravines could comprise a population. However, without 
additional research, it was impossible to determine the species' actual 
population boundaries.
    Subsequently, the KSNPC completed surveys in 1996, 1999, 2002, 
2004, and 2005 (White and Drozda 2006, pp. 124-128; KSNPC 2010, p. 4), 
and these surveys documented an increase in the number of S. albopilosa 
occurrences from 90 to 141. Despite the increased number of 
occurrences, the total range of S. albopilosa did not increase 
significantly as it was still restricted to

[[Page 70046]]

the same general area within the Red River Gorge. KSNPC (2010, pp. 4-8) 
completed the first range-wide survey during the 2008 and 2009 field 
seasons. During this 2-year period, KSNPC ranked each occurrence based 
on population size and viability, habitat condition, and degree of 
threat. KSNPC also evaluated the stability of each occurrence by 
comparing their 2008-2009 survey data with data collected in previous 
years. The following specifications were used to rank the occurrences 
(KSNPC 2010, p. 21):
    A (excellent estimated viability): 2,500 or more stems in habitat 
with low degree of recreational impact or a minimum of 4,000 stems 
where the degree of recreational impact is medium or high.
    B (good estimated viability): 1,000 to 2,499 stems and some areas 
of habitat with a low degree of recreational impact or higher numbers 
of stems (2,500 to 4,000) at sites where the degree of recreational 
impact is medium or high.
    C (fair estimated viability): 300 to 999 stems where recreational 
impacts are low or higher numbers of stems (1,000 to 2,000) at sites 
affected by a medium or high degree of recreational impact; may also 
include sites with little opportunity for habitat recovery or 
population expansion.
    D (poor estimated viability): fewer than 300 stems in any habitat.
    H (historical): taxon or natural community has not been reliably 
reported in Kentucky since 1990 but is not considered extinct or 
extirpated.
    X (extirpated): A taxon for which habitat loss has been pervasive 
and/or concerted efforts by knowledgeable biologists to collect or 
observe specimens within appropriate habitats have failed.
    F (failed to find): occurrence not located in current survey; 
original mapping may be in wrong location.
    During their 2-year range wide survey, KSNPC (2010, p. 6) 
documented a total of 116 extant occurrences, producing ranks with the 
following categorical results: A-rank (11 occurrences), B (26), C (25), 
and D (54) (see table 1). The remaining 25 occurrences were considered 
to be historical, extirpated, or could not be relocated (failed to 
find). The goldenrod's range has been searched extensively by KSNPC and 
of the 116 extant occurrences, only 6 were located on private land, 
with the remainder located on the DBNF. There is limited private 
ownership in the area where this plant occurs and the species' habitat 
as described above has only been located in a few privately-owned 
occurrences and nowhere else that has been surveyed. For all extant 
occurrences, 79 (68 percent) were considered to be stable, including 
ranks of A (10 occurrences), B (21), C (18), and D (30). Stability was 
estimated through comparisons of historical and more recent survey 
data. Occurrences were considered ``stable'' if no change was detected 
in their general rank/status over the course of monitoring, stem 
numbers increased over the course of monitoring, and/or slight 
decreases in stem numbers could be attributed to natural climatic 
variation. Ranks were based on population size and perceived viability, 
habitat condition, and degree of threat. For all stable occurrences, 
KSNPC reported an average monitoring period of 10.2 years and an 
average of 3.6 monitoring events for each occurrence. Also, the level 
or degree of recreational impact is based on KSNPC's assessment of 
recreational use and threats from that use at each occurrence. For 
those sites where the degree of impact was higher, more stems were 
required to achieve a higher rank (i.e., fair to excellent viability). 
For example, 4 of the 11 ``A'' ranked occurrences had a medium/high 
degree of impact (equals a minimum of 4,000 stems). The rest of the 11 
``A'' ranked occurrences had a low degree of impact (equals 2,500 stems 
or more). All of the ``A'' ranked occurrences have proven stable (for 
over 11 years) with a high number of stems. Due to future conservation 
actions with DBNF, we expect the 4 ``A'' ranked occurrences with medium 
to high recreational impacts to remain stable (numbers of stems will 
remain constant or increase) and the degree of recreational impact may 
decrease.

 Table 1--Summary of Solidago albopilosa Ranks and Status Based on Range-Wide Surveys Completed by the Kentucky
                               State Nature Preserves Commission in 2008 and 2009
                                                  [KSNPC 2010]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Ranks of extant occurrences
             Status              -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         A               B               C               D             Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stable..........................              10              21              18              30              79
Declining.......................               0               5               4              22              31
Unknown.........................               1               0               3               2               6
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................              11              26              25              54             116
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the remaining extant occurrences, 31 were considered to be 
declining and 6 were of unknown status. For the declining occurrences, 
ranks included B (5 occurrences), C (4), and D (22). For the unknown 
occurrences, ranks included A (1 occurrence), C (3), and D (2). 
Occurrences were considered to be declining if a negative change was 
detected in the general rank/status over the course of monitoring and/
or there was a greater than 30 percent decline in stem count. Unknown 
status meant surveys of that occurrence were not performed more than 
once or prior surveys could not be compared to more recent surveys due 
to discrepancies in survey methodology.
    KSNPC and the Service completed additional surveys from June to 
October 2013 at 30 widely separated occurrences, resulting in the 
discovery of one new occurrence and revised status information for two 
unknown occurrences (USFWS 2014, entire). Combining these results with 
occurrence totals reported by KSNPC (2010, 24 pp.), there are now 81 
stable occurrences with the following categorical results: A (11 
occurrences), B (22), C (18), and D (30) (table 2). The average 
monitoring period increased from 10.2 to 11.1 years, with an average of 
3.7 monitoring events for each occurrence. The total number of stems 
now stands at 174,357, compared to 45,000 when the Recovery Plan was 
completed.

[[Page 70047]]



  Table 2--Summary of Current Solidago albopilosa Ranks and Status (KSNPC 2010, 2014) Showing an Increase in A-
                                            and B-Ranked Occurrences
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Ranks of extant occurrences
             Status              -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         A               B               C               D             Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stable..........................              11              22              18              30              81
Declining.......................               0               5               4              23              32
Unknown.........................               0               0               2               2               4
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................              11              27              24              55             117
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In summary, considering recent survey efforts by KSNPC and the 
Service (KSNPC 2010, entire; USFWS 2014, entire), the following 
conditions exist for white-haired goldenrod:
    (1) A total of 117 extant occurrences are known. Of these, 81 
occurrences are considered to be stable with the following categorical 
results: A (11 occurrences), B (22), C (18), and D (30). As of 2015, 
the average monitoring period per occurrence was 11.1 years, with an 
average of 3.7 monitoring events for each occurrence.
    (2) Fifty-one of the 81 stable occurrences (all A-, B-, and C-
ranked occurrences) are considered to be self-sustaining as defined by 
the Recovery Plan. These occurrences are considered to be self-
sustaining because there is evidence of successful reproduction and the 
number of stems is stable or increasing.
    (3) Forty-six of the 51 stable, self-sustaining occurrences are 
adequately protected as defined by the recovery plan (species is 
legally protected, has received adequate physical protection, and is 
assured of all required management).
    (4) The total number of stems now stands at approximately 174,000, 
and the 46 secure, self-sustaining occurrences contain approximately 
131,000 stems, or about 75 percent of the species' total number.

Recovery and Recovery Plan Implementation

    Background--Section 4(f) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) 
directs us to develop and implement recovery plans for the conservation 
and survival of endangered and threatened species unless we determine 
that such a plan will not promote the conservation of the species. 
Under section 4(f)(1)(B)(ii), recovery plans must, to the maximum 
extent practicable, include objective, measurable criteria which, when 
met, would result in a determination, in accordance with the provisions 
of section 4 of the Act, that the species be removed from the list. 
However, revisions to the list (adding, removing, or reclassifying a 
species) must reflect determinations made in accordance with sections 
4(a)(1) and 4(b) of the Act. Section 4(a)(1) requires that the 
Secretary determine whether a species is endangered or threatened (or 
not) because of one or more of five threat factors. Section 4(b) of the 
Act requires that the determination be made ``solely on the basis of 
the best scientific and commercial data available.'' Therefore, 
recovery criteria should help indicate when we would anticipate that an 
analysis of the five threat factors under section 4(a)(1) would result 
in a determination that the species is no longer an endangered species 
or threatened species because of any of the five statutory factors (see 
Summary of Factors Affecting the Species section). However, while 
recovery plans provide important guidance to the Service, States, and 
other partners on methods of minimizing threats to listed species and 
measurable criteria against which to measure progress towards recovery, 
they are not regulatory documents and cannot substitute for the 
determinations and promulgation of regulations required under section 
4(a)(1) of the Act. A decision to revise the status of or remove a 
species from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Plants at 50 
CFR 17.12(h) is ultimately based on an analysis of the best scientific 
and commercial data available to determine whether a species is no 
longer an endangered or threatened species, regardless of whether that 
information differs from the recovery plan.
    Recovery plans may be revised to address continuing or new threats 
to the species, as new, substantive information becomes available. The 
recovery plan identifies site-specific management actions that will 
achieve recovery of the species, measurable criteria that set a trigger 
for review of the species' status, and methods for monitoring recovery 
progress. Recovery plans are intended to establish goals for long-term 
conservation of listed species and define criteria that are designed to 
indicate when the substantial threats facing a species have been 
removed or reduced to such an extent that the species may no longer 
need the protections of the Act.
    There are many paths to accomplishing recovery of a species, and 
recovery may be achieved without all criteria being fully met. For 
example, one or more criteria may be exceeded while other criteria may 
not yet be accomplished. In that instance, we may determine that the 
threats are minimized sufficiently and the species is robust enough to 
delist. In other cases, recovery opportunities may be discovered that 
were not known when the recovery plan was finalized. These 
opportunities may be used instead of methods identified in the recovery 
plan. Likewise, information on the species may be discovered that was 
not known at the time the recovery plan was finalized. The new 
information may change the extent to which criteria need to be met for 
recognizing recovery of the species. Recovery of a species is a dynamic 
process requiring adaptive management that may, or may not, fully 
follow the guidance provided in a recovery plan.
    Recovery Planning and Implementation--The Recovery Plan was 
approved by the Service on September 28, 1993 (Service 1993, 40 pp.). 
The Recovery Plan includes recovery criteria intended to indicate when 
threats to the species have been adequately addressed, and prescribes 
actions necessary to achieve those criteria. We first discuss progress 
on completing the primary recovery actions, then discuss recovery 
criteria. The Recovery Plan identifies five primary actions necessary 
for recovering S. albopilosa:
    (1) Protect existing occurrences;
    (2) Continue inventories;
    (3) Conduct studies on life history and ecological requirements;
    (4) Maintain plants and seeds ex situ; and
    (5) Provide the public with information.
    Three of five recovery actions (1, 2, and 5) have been 
accomplished. Completion of the remaining actions (3

[[Page 70048]]

and 4) is discussed in greater detail below.
    The Service entered into a cooperative agreement with KSNPC in 
1986, under section 6 of the Act, for the conservation of endangered 
and threatened plant species. This agreement has provided a mechanism 
for KSNPC to acquire Federal funds that have supported much of the 
recovery work described here. The Commonwealth of Kentucky and other 
partners have also provided matching funds under this agreement that 
have assisted in the species' recovery.

Recovery Action (1): Protect Existing Occurrences

    The Recovery Plan states that an occurrence will be ``adequately 
protected'' when it is legally protected, has received adequate 
physical protection, and is assured of all required management (USFWS 
1993, 40 pp.). Based on these criteria, we consider a total of 46 A-, 
B-, or C-ranked occurrences on the DBNF to be adequately protected. We 
base our decision regarding their level of protection on the location 
of these occurrences (all are in DNBF ownership, and many are in remote 
locations not visited by the public); trends in occurrence data 
gathered by KSNPC, DBNF, and the Service; observations about threats 
reported by KSNPC (2010, pp. 5-18); conservation actions described in 
DBNF's Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP); and information in our 
files concerning specific DBNF conservation actions, such as trail 
closure, placement of signs, and fencing. We have chosen to exclude 
five, stable, self-sustaining occurrences from the list of 
``protected'' occurrences because they are in private ownership, and no 
conservation agreement or plan is in place to ensure their long-term 
protection.
    The species' primary threat has been identified as ground 
disturbance and trampling associated with recreational activities 
(i.e., camping, hiking, and rock-climbing) within the Red River Gorge. 
To address these threats, the DBNF began to redirect trails and install 
fencing (chicken wire) around selected S. albopilosa rock shelters in 
February 2000. The DBNF focused on these occurrences because they were 
near DBNF user-defined trails and were suffering obvious recreational 
impacts--trampling and ground disturbance associated with camping, rock 
climbing, and hiking. The DBNF also placed informational signs at these 
shelters and at trailheads, alerting visitors to the presence of the 
species and warning them against potential damage to plants.
    Signs or fencing were placed and have been maintained at a total of 
21 occurrences identified as being impacted in the past, and DBNF 
personnel continue to visit these sites annually, checking the 
condition of signs and fencing and making repairs as needed. To guard 
against future impacts, the DBNF and KSNPC have proposed the addition 
of new or expanded fencing at five occurrences. As stated below in this 
recovery section, this new and expanded fencing is included as a 
conservation action in the Service's signed cooperative management 
agreement with DBNF and KSNPC (USFWS August 2016).
    Monitoring results show that implementation of the LRMP, including 
specific conservation actions described above (fencing and sign 
placement), have had a positive effect on the species (KSNPC 2010, 24 
pp.). Specifically, it has been demonstrated that disturbance from 
trampling, camping, and rock climbing is low at remote occurrences, and 
impacts have been reduced at more visited sites. The number of stems 
has remained stable or increased at 20 of 21 occurrences (95 percent) 
where fencing or informational signs have been added. For all extant 
occurrences on the DBNF, 75 (68 percent) of 111 extant occurrences are 
considered stable to increasing, and we consider 46 occurrences to be 
self-sustaining (A-, B-, or C-ranked occurrences that are stable and 
reproducing). Based on all these factors, we consider this recovery 
action to be complete.

Recovery Action (2): Continue Inventories

    There were 90 extant occurrences of S. albopilosa when the Recovery 
Plan was completed (Service 1993, p. 2). In subsequent years, KSNPC 
completed surveys within the Red River Gorge in 1996, 1999, 2002, 2004, 
and 2005 (White and Drozda 2006, pp. 124-128; KSNPC 2010, p. 2), 
raising the number of documented S. albopilosa occurrences from 90 to 
141. Surveys in other areas of Kentucky and adjacent States with 
suitable habitat (e.g., sandstone rock shelters) did not show evidence 
of additional occurrences of the species (Campbell et al. 1989, pp. 29-
43; Palmer-Ball et al. 1988, pp. 19-25; Walck et al. 1996, pp. 339-341; 
Norris and Harmon 2000, pp. 2-3). The first range-wide survey in the 
Red River Gorge was completed during the field seasons of 2008 and 2009 
(KSNPC 2010, pp. 4-8), and KSNPC and the Service completed follow-up 
surveys at 30 extant occurrences in 2013 (See the Species Information 
section above for detail on surveys). During these efforts, KSNPC and 
the Service documented a total of 117 extant occurrences, and, of 
these, we consider the A-, B-, and C-ranked occurrences (total of 46) 
to be secure and self-sustaining. Because systematic searches for new 
occurrences have been conducted since the completion of the Recovery 
Plan and led to the discovery of previously unknown occurrences, we 
consider this recovery action to be completed.

Recovery Action (3): Conduct Studies on Life History and Ecological 
Requirements

    This recovery action is incomplete (not all subactivities have been 
addressed completely) but significant progress has been made. Since 
publication of the Recovery Plan (Service 1993), studies of the 
species' life history and ecological requirements have included 
Esselman (1995, pp. 5-10), Esselman and Crawford (1997, pp. 246-251), 
White and Drozda (2006, p. 125), KSNPC (2010, p. 5), and Nieves and Day 
(2014, pp. 1-12). Esselman (1995, pp. 5-10) and Esselman and Crawford 
(1997, pp. 246-251) studied the ancestry of S. albopilosa, examined 
gene flow and genetic diversity within and between populations, and 
investigated life-history traits (i.e., seed set, importance of 
pollinators, self-incompatibility (the inability of a plant to produce 
seeds when its flowers are pollinated from its own flowers or from 
flowers of plants that are genetically the same)). The ancestry of S. 
albopilosa was unclear, but it had the most morphological and genetic 
similarity with S. flexicaulis. Despite this, the two species were 
reported as genetically different, and there was no evidence of recent 
gene flow. Esselman (1995, pp. 16-23) and Esselman and Crawford (1997, 
pp. 251-253) observed the highest levels of genetic diversity between 
populations rather than within populations. The levels of seed 
production appeared to be about equal to that of other goldenrods, but 
the amount of seed set varied between populations and appeared to 
increase with increasing occurrence size. Pollination experiments 
indicated that pollinators are necessary for seed set, and the species 
is self-incompatible.
    During field surveys between 1996 and 2009, KSNPC collected 
occurrence information throughout the species' range, recording such 
information as stem count, patch size, percent vegetative versus sexual 
reproduction, recreational disturbance (ranked from low to high), other 
perceived threats, and general habitat condition (White and Drozda 
2006, p. 125; KSNPC 2010, p. 5). In its 2-year range-wide study,

[[Page 70049]]

KSNPC (2010, p. 5) used a two-page plant survey form to record more 
detailed biological information at each occurrence: Population 
structure (percent stems exhibiting vegetative versus reproductive 
growth), occurrence size (square meters [m\2\]), plant height, number 
of stems, number of rosettes, population density, plant vigor, and an 
evaluation of threats (e.g., trampling, camping, invasive plants, 
herbivory). KSNPC (2010, p. 5) also photographed each occurrence and 
made sketches that showed individual patch locations within each 
occurrence or rock shelter.
    Nieves and Day (2014, pp. 1-12) conducted a preliminary assessment 
of the microclimatic and pedological (soil) conditions of 10 rock 
shelters inhabited by the species. They documented significant 
differences between the inside of rock shelters and the surrounding 
environment with respect to temperature and relative humidity (habitats 
inside rock shelters were wetter and more humid) but no significant 
differences with respect to soil characteristics (macronutrients and 
acidity/alkalinity (pH)). Most of the rock shelters they investigated 
were easterly or northerly facing, but their small sample size prevents 
any significant conclusions with respect to the importance of sunlight 
and solar radiation.
    Under recovery action 3.0, two of seven subactivities remain to be 
completed--the use of quantitative, permanent plots (3.1) and 
determination of specific habitat requirements (3.3). Permanent plots 
have not been established, but the species' known occurrences have been 
visited and evaluated repeatedly (average of 3.6 times) since 
completion of the recovery plan. These visits have allowed us to 
evaluate the species' status and track the number of stems and flowers. 
The purpose of recovery subactivity 3.1 was to evaluate demography, and 
we believe the visits and work done in cooperation with KSNPC provided 
enough population data on this plant for us to propose delisting it 
without establishing permanent plots. The species' specific habitat 
requirements (e.g., light, moisture, soils) are not well understood, 
but preliminary investigations into the microclimate and soil 
conditions of rock shelters were completed by Nieves and Day (2014, pp. 
1-12), and additional research is planned (Nieves and Day 2014, pp. 11-
12). In partnership with DBNF and KSNPC, we have done extensive work 
together to reduce threats such as disturbance. The purpose of recovery 
subactivity 3.3 was to learn about habitat requirements of this plant 
for the purposes of determining if reintroduction or artificial 
propagation may be necessary to help recover this plant. Solidago 
albopilosa occurrences have grown in number and size as recovery 
implementation actions have been implemented and threats have been 
removed or reduced. These successful actions have negated the necessity 
of having to reintroduce or augment plants. We will continue to learn 
more about the species' habitat requirements as we work with DBNF and 
KSNPC through post-delisting monitoring. In the course of this work, if 
a new threat of any kind presents itself, we have identified in the PDM 
plan how we will evaluate it.
    The majority of recovery subactivities (3.2, 3.4-3.7) have been 
addressed; information has been gained regarding the species' life 
history and ecological requirements; and the species' status has 
improved since publication of the recovery plan. We were able to obtain 
the intended information identified in recovery subactivity 3.3 
(analyze habitat requirements) through implementation of other actions. 
Although the need to conduct subactivity 3.3 has been removed with 
positive progress in this plant's recovery program, we intend 
throughout post-delisting monitoring to continue to work closely with 
researchers as they learn more about this species and its habitat.

Recovery Action (4): Maintain Plants and Seeds Ex Situ

    Seeds and plants of S. albopilosa have not been maintained ex situ 
in any museum, botanical garden, or other seed storage facility; 
however, an August 29, 2016, conservation agreement between the 
Service, the Kentucky Natural Lands Trust, and the Missouri Botanical 
Garden (MOBOT) will facilitate a seed-banking effort for S. albopilosa. 
Through the agreement, MOBOT has secured funding that will allow it to 
collect, curate, and maintain genetically diverse and representative 
seed-bank accessions to safeguard against future population declines. 
These efforts will take place as part of post-delisting monitoring 
activities and will involve collection of seed from across the species' 
range with deposition of the material at the MOBOT. Seed collection 
will occur in the fall of 2016. Because of the conservation agreement 
described above, which outlines future seed-banking activities by 
MOBOT, we consider this recovery action to be on a path toward 
completion and sufficient to contribute towards delisting.

Recovery Action (5): Provide the Public With Information

    The KSNPC and DBNF have prepared several species factsheets and 
signs that have been posted at gas stations, restaurants, kiosks, and 
trailheads throughout the Red River Gorge. These signs are intended to 
educate Red River Gorge visitors about the species and its threats. 
Signs about S. albopilosa have also been posted in five 
archaeologically sensitive rock shelters to aid in the protection of 
historical artifacts while promoting the conservation of S. albopilosa. 
DBNF also displays photographs and provides information on S. 
albopilosa at its Gladie Cultural-Environmental Learning Center. KSNPC 
makes available on its Web site (http://naturepreserves.ky.gov) an S. 
albopilosa factsheet and several threatened and endangered species 
lists that include information on S. albopilosa. In June 2009, the 
Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources published 2,000 
copies of a revised threatened and endangered species booklet (second 
edition), which contained a species account for S. albopilosa. Because 
of the numerous public information and education projects listed above, 
we consider this recovery action completed.

Recovery Criteria

    The Recovery Plan states that S. albopilosa will be considered for 
delisting when 40 geographically distinct, self-sustaining occurrences 
are adequately protected and have been maintained for 10 years. An 
occurrence is considered as self-sustaining if there is evidence of 
successful reproduction and the number of stems is stable or 
increasing. An occurrence is considered to be adequately protected when 
it is legally protected, receives adequate physical protection, and is 
assured of all required management. The Recovery Plan also noted that 
the requirements for delisting were preliminary and could change as 
more information about the biology of the species was known. Based on 
our current understanding of the species' range, biology, and threats, 
we believe that the delisting criteria continue to be relevant. While 
the number of occurrences has increased since completion of the 
Recovery Plan, the species' overall range and the type of threats have 
not changed dramatically. Furthermore, our current knowledge of the 
species' biology indicates that multiple, distinct populations should 
be maintained in order to provide redundancy (protect against 
stochastic events) and preserve genetic diversity. We believe the 
recovery goal of 40 stable, self-

[[Page 70050]]

sustaining, and protected occurrences is sufficient to address these 
needs. The species' current number of stable, self-sustaining, and 
protected occurrences (46) has exceeded this recovery goal (see 
discussion of Recovery Action 1 above). These occurrences are 
distributed across the species' range and contain more than 75 percent 
of the species' total number of stems.
    The criteria for delisting S. albopilosa have been met, as 
described below. Additionally, the level of protection currently 
afforded to the species and its habitat, as well as the current status 
of threats, are outlined below in the Summary of Factors Affecting the 
Species section.
    Currently, there are 117 extant occurrences. As described above, an 
occurrence is defined as a ``discrete group of plants beneath a single 
rock shelter or on a single rock ledge,'' and each occurrence is 
considered ``geographically distinct'' as described in the recovery 
criteria. We currently consider 81 (69 percent) of the 117 extant 
Solidago albopilosa occurrences to be stable, meaning no change has 
been detected (over an average monitoring period of 11.1 years) in 
their general rank or status. Of these, we consider the A-, B-, and C-
ranked occurrences (total of 46) to be adequately protected and self-
sustaining as defined by the Recovery Plan. We consider these 
occurrences to be self-sustaining for the following reasons:
    (1) The number of stems at these occurrences has been stable or 
increasing over an average monitoring period of 11.1 years;
    (2) these natural occurrences contain a relatively high number of 
stems (range of 797-9,200);
    (3) the estimated viability of these occurrences ranges from fair 
to excellent;
    (4) the threat level at these occurrences is generally low (average 
recreational impact of 2.5 or less on a scale of 1 (low impact) to 5 
(high)); and
    (5) the observed reproduction (flowering stems) at these 
occurrences has been relatively high, averaging 75-90 percent of stems 
in nearly all cases (KSNPC 2010, p. 10).
    We consider these occurrences to be adequately protected because of 
their location (all are located on DBNF land); trends in occurrence 
data gathered by KSNPC, DBNF, and the Service; observations about 
threats reported by KSNPC (2010, pp. 5-18); conservation actions 
described in DBNF's LRMP; and information in our files concerning 
specific DBNF conservation actions, such as trail closure, placement of 
signs, and fencing. We do not consider the stable, D-ranked occurrences 
(total of 30) to be self-sustaining, primarily due to their poor 
estimated viability and the low number of stems (fewer than 300) 
observed at these sites. However, due to the existence of 46 
geographically distinct, self-sustaining occurrences, we conclude that 
we have met and exceeded the criterion of 40 geographically distinct, 
self-sustaining occurrences.
    While we consider only 46 out of the 117 total extant occurrences 
to currently be secure (adequately protected) and self-sustaining 
(approximately 39 percent of the total occurrences), these occurrences 
contain the majority of the total number of stems of the species. The 
total number of stems now stands at approximately 174,000, and the 46 
secure, self-sustaining occurrences contain approximately 131,000 
stems, or about 75 percent of the species' total number. If we consider 
the five additional self-sustaining occurrences located on private 
property, the total number of stems increases to 140,500 stems, or 
about 81 percent of the species' total number. While the remaining 65 
occurrences on DBNF are not currently considered self-sustaining, all 
of these occurrences will continue to receive protection and management 
under DBNF's LRMP and we expect, based on the past 10 years of 
monitoring, their status will likely remain stable or continue to 
improve.
    With respect to protection, 111 of 117 extant occurrences (95 
percent) occur on the DBNF and receive management and protection 
through DBNF's LRMP (USFS 2004, pp. 1.1-1.10). As specified in the 
LRMP, S. albopilosa habitats receive protection and management 
consideration as part of the Cliffline Community Prescription (or 
management) Area (USFS 2004, pp. 3.5-3.8). The Cliffline Community is 
defined as the area between 100-feet slope-distance from the top of the 
cliff and 200-feet slope-distance from the dripline of the cliffline. A 
cliffline is defined as a naturally occurring, exposed, and nearly 
vertical rock structure at least 10 feet (3.05 meters (m)) tall and 100 
feet (30.05 m) long. All known S. albopilosa occurrences occur within 
habitats fitting this description and, therefore, are included in this 
Prescription Area. For the Cliffline Community area, conservation goals 
in the LRMP include: (1) Maintenance of the unique physical and 
microclimatic conditions in these habitats, (2) the recovery of S. 
albopilosa, and (3) the protection of these habitats against 
anthropogenic disturbance (USFS 2004, p. 3.6). To meet these goals, the 
following activities or resource uses are prohibited within the 
cliffline zone: Mineral, oil, or gas exploration and development 
(Forest Service Standard 1.C-MIN-1); road construction (1.C-ENG-1); 
recreational facilities (1.C-REC-1); recreational activities such as 
rock climbing and rappelling (C-REC-2); camping (1.C-REC-3); and 
campfires (1.C-REC-4). Other activities such as wildlife management 
(1.C-WLF) and vegetation management (1.C-VEG) are limited and strictly 
controlled. This Prescription Area is classified as ``Unsuitable for 
Timber Production,'' but timber harvests may occur on an unscheduled 
basis to attain a desired future condition. Harvest of wood products 
may occur only as an output in pursuing other resource objectives (USFS 
2004, pp. 3.5-3.8). DBNF monitors cliffline habitats and protects them 
as needed through law enforcement activities, construction of fences, 
trail diversion, and placement of signs.
    Since the species was listed, we have worked closely with KSNPC and 
DBNF on the management and protection of S. albopilosa. Management 
activities have included trail diversion (away from S. albopilosa 
occurrences), installation of protective fencing, and placement of 
informational signs in rock shelters, along trails, and at trailheads. 
These activities and other management actions included in the DBNF's 
LRMP (USFS 2004, pp. 3.5-3.8) have assisted in recovery of the species, 
as reflected in the large number of stable occurrences (81), self-
sustaining occurrences (51 occurrences with ranks of A, B, or C), and 
the long period (greater than 11 years) during which this trend has 
been maintained. On August 29, 2016, we finalized a cooperative 
management agreement among the Service, DBNF, and KSNPC that will 
provide for the long-term protection of the species. The management 
agreement outlines a number of conservation actions that will benefit 
the species:
    (1) Maintenance of current fencing;
    (2) installation and maintenance of fencing at five new 
occurrences;
    (3) evaluation of trail diversion, rerouting, or closure at 39 
occurrences identified by KSNPC (2010, entire);
    (4) placement of new informational signs at occurrences with high 
visitation;
    (5) monitoring of extant occurrences;
    (6) protection of extant occurrences through DBNF patrols; and
    (7) continuation of education and outreach efforts. The cooperative 
management agreement will remain in place until August 2022.
    In summary, most major recovery actions are complete, and 
significant

[[Page 70051]]

progress has been made on the remaining actions (life history/
ecological studies and ex situ seed conservation). Completion of these 
actions has contributed to achieving and exceeding the recovery 
criteria: 40 geographically distinct, self-sustaining occurrences are 
adequately protected and have been maintained for over 10 years. The 46 
secure, self-sustaining occurrences contain 75 percent of the species' 
total number of stems, and thus represent 75 percent of the species' 
total population. These secure, self-sustaining occurrences, as well as 
93 percent of the species' remaining occurrences, currently receive 
protection and management through implementation of DBNF's LRMP. 
Therefore, we conclude that the goals and criteria outlined in the 
Recovery Plan have been achieved.

Summary of Comments and Recommendations

    In the proposed rule published September 1, 2015 (80 FR 52717), we 
requested that all interested parties submit written comments on the 
proposal by November 2, 2015. We also contacted appropriate Federal and 
State agencies, scientific experts and organizations, and other 
interested parties and invited them to comment on the proposal. Legal 
notices inviting general public comment were published in the Lexington 
Herald-Leader and Louisville Courier Journal. We reopened the comment 
period on February 26, 2016 (81 FR 9798), in order to conduct peer 
review and provide interested parties an additional opportunity to 
comment on the proposed rule and draft post-delisting monitoring plan. 
We requested that all interested parties submit written comments by 
March 28, 2016.
    During both comment periods for the proposed rule, we received a 
total of 14 comment letters or statements directly addressing the 
proposed action. These included 4 comment letters from peer reviewers 
and 10 comment letters from the general public that are posted on 
Federal docket no. FWS-R4-ES-2014-0054. All 4 peer reviewers and 7 of 
10 public commenters supported the proposed action to delist white-
haired goldenrod. Three public commenters objected to the proposed 
action.
    Several public commenters simply expressed opposition to or support 
for the proposed delisting of Solidago albopilosa without providing any 
additional supporting information. We have noted those responses but, 
as stated in our proposed rule, submissions merely stating support for 
or opposition to the action under consideration without providing 
supporting information will not be considered in making a 
determination, as section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that a 
determination 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.''

State and Peer Review Comments

    In accordance with our peer review policy, which was published on 
July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), we solicited expert opinion on the proposed 
rule and the draft post-delisting monitoring plan from four 
knowledgeable, independent individuals with scientific expertise that 
includes familiarity with Solidago albopilosa and its habitat, 
biological needs, threats, and recovery efforts. We received responses 
from all four peer reviewers. All peer reviewers supported our 
conclusions and provided additional information, clarifications, and 
suggestions to improve the final rule.
    Section 4(b)(5)(A)(ii) of the Act states that the Secretary must 
give actual notice of a proposed regulation under section 4(a) to the 
State agency in each State in which the species is believed to occur, 
and invite the comments of such agency. Section 4(i) of the Act directs 
that the Secretary will submit to the State agency a written 
justification for his or her failure to adopt regulations consistent 
with the agency's comments or petition. The Service submitted the 
proposed regulation to KNSPC, the State agency responsible for the 
conservation of listed plants in Kentucky. KSNPC's chief botanist 
provided peer review of the proposed rule.
    We reviewed all comments received from the peer reviewers for 
substantive issues and new information regarding the delisting of 
white-haired goldenrod. Peer reviewer comments are addressed in the 
following summary.
    Comment (1): Two peer reviewers stated that management may be 
needed beyond the period (5 years) covered by the post-delisting 
monitoring plan to address potential impacts from invasive plants and 
recreational activities (e.g., hiking, rock climbing). This comment 
relates to just our PDM plan. Both reviewers commented that cooperative 
efforts among the Service, DBNF, and KSNPC should address any future 
threats to the species.
    Our response: We agree with the reviewers that invasive plants and 
recreational use in some areas may adversely affect S. albopilosa 
occurrences in the future; however, the best scientific and commercial 
data available to the Service demonstrate that S. albopilosa is 
recovered and no longer requires the protection of the Act. 
Nonetheless, the Service intends to work closely with all Federal and 
State conservation agencies during the course of post-delisting 
monitoring. We will follow the benchmarks in the plan for evaluating 
success of efforts for this plant. We also believe protections outlined 
by DBNF's LRMP, which are described in the Recovery Criteria section of 
this document, will provide long-lasting benefits to the species. 
DBNF's LRMP was completed in 2004 and is still in effect, and USFS 
LRMPs are generally revised every 10 to 15 years or when conditions 
change significantly. Actually, the last LRMP to cover DBNF was in 
effect for 18 years (1985 to 2003). Also, on August 29, 2016, we 
finalized a cooperative management agreement among the Service, DBNF, 
and KSNPC that will provide for the long-term protection of the species 
until 2022.

Public Comments

    Comment (2): Three commenters disagreed with the proposed delisting 
of white-haired goldenrod. In general, they stated that an insufficient 
number of protected, viable occurrences were known for delisting to be 
considered.
    Our response: Under the Recovery Plan, Solidago albopilosa may be 
considered for delisting when 40 geographically distinct, self-
sustaining occurrences are adequately protected and have been 
maintained for 10 years. Currently, a total of 46 geographically 
distinct occurrences are considered to be self-sustaining (viable) and 
adequately protected, and these occurrences have been maintained for 
more than 11 years. All remaining occurrences (of all ranks) will 
contribute to the viability and persistence of S. albopilosa into the 
future. Therefore, the recovery criteria for this species have been 
met. In addition, threats to this plant have been removed or reduced to 
a point where it no longer requires protection under the Act.
    Comment (3): One commenter agreed with the delisting of Solidago 
albopilosa but stated that the State of Kentucky should conduct routine 
monitoring of rare plants, such as S. albopilosa, and pass legislation 
that protects these species.
    Our response: Most Solidago albopilosa occurrences (about 95 
percent) are located on Federal property (DBNF) and receive management 
and protection under DBNF's LRMP. The remaining occurrences are located 
on private property and, while they could benefit from protections 
provided by State legislation, the Service cannot

[[Page 70052]]

require a State to pass such legislation. With respect to monitoring 
and protection of rare plants like S. albopilosa, the DBNF and KSNPC 
have worked closely with the Service and other conservation partners 
over the past 20 years to implement conservation actions, including 
monitoring, that have benefited this and other rare species. We expect 
these collaborations to continue.

Summary of Changes From the Proposed Rule

    We have considered all comments and information received during 
both comment periods for the proposed rule to delist white-haired 
goldenrod. In this final rule, we have made only minor changes based on 
comments received during the public comment period. We received 
supplementary information from DBNF on seed germination, seedling 
viability, and the potential threat posed by fungal infection. These 
details have been incorporated into this final rule.

Summary of Factors Affecting the Species

    Section 4 of the Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR part 
424) set forth the procedures for listing species, reclassifying 
species, or removing species from listed status. We may determine that 
a species is an endangered or threatened species because of one or more 
of the five factors described in section 4(a)(1) of the Act:
    (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 must consider these same five factors in delisting a species.
    A recovered species is one that no longer meets the Act's 
definition of endangered or threatened. Determining whether the status 
of a species has improved to the point that it can be delisted or 
downlisted requires consideration of same five categories of threats 
identified above. This analysis is an evaluation of both the threats 
currently facing the species and the threats that are reasonably likely 
to affect the species in the foreseeable future following the delisting 
and the removal of the Act's protections.
    The following analysis examines all five factors currently 
affecting or that are likely to affect S. albopilosa within the 
foreseeable future. It contains updated information from that presented 
in the proposed rule (80 FR 52717, September 1, 2015).

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

    The final rule to list S. albopilosa as threatened (53 FR 11612, 
April 7, 1988) identified the following habitat threats: ground 
disturbance and trampling associated with unlawful archaeological 
activities and recreational activities such as camping, hiking, and 
rock climbing. The species occupies a scenic and unique geological area 
that is heavily visited by hikers, campers, rock-climbers, and other 
nature enthusiasts. The U.S. Forest Service estimates recreational use 
of the Red River Gorge at approximately 500,000 visitor days per year 
(Taylor pers. comm. 2013). Recreational activities such as camping, 
hiking, and rock climbing can pose a threat to the species through 
inadvertent trampling and ground disturbance of S. albopilosa habitats. 
Evidence of trampling and ground disturbance within rock shelters has 
been observed repeatedly by KSNPC and DBNF personnel (KSNPC 2010, pp. 
13-14).
    Habitat disturbance and trampling associated with recreational 
activities (camping, hiking, and rock climbing) and archaeological 
looting in the past have posed a significant threat to the species. The 
Red River Gorge is a popular recreational area (Taylor pers. comm. 
2013). Many trails and recreational areas within the Gorge are located 
near Solidago albopilosa occurrences, and rock shelters are often 
targeted as rock climbing, hiking, and camping sites. Use of rock 
shelters and cliff lines by campers, hikers, and rock climbers has 
contributed to physical habitat disturbance and has led to trampling of 
plants in rock shelters (Service 1993, p. 7; White and Drozda 2006, pp. 
124-125; KSNPC 2010, pp. 13-14). In addition to habitat disturbance 
caused by recreationists, the presence of Native American artifacts 
within the Red River Gorge has contributed to digging and 
archaeological looting in S. albopilosa habitats (rock shelters). 
Approximately 18 Solidago albopilosa occurrences have been extirpated 
due to human activities, and many heavily visited rock shelters have 
been modified to the point that these habitats are no longer suitable 
for the species (KSNPC 2010, pp. 6-7).
    According to the DBNF, impacts from archaeological looting are now 
infrequent, and these activities no longer pose a significant threat to 
S. albopilosa within the Red River Gorge (Taylor pers. comm. 2013). As 
for recreational impacts, most Solidago albopilosa occurrences are 
located in remote ravines of the Red River Gorge or grow along 
inaccessible cliff lines that are seldom visited or disturbed by 
campers, hikers, and rock climbers. Therefore, the threat magnitude at 
these sites is low.
    Occurrences located in areas with more frequent visitor use, 
typically areas near DBNF and user-defined trails, generally have 
suffered more severe habitat disturbance and trampling in the past. 
Site protection and habitat management efforts by DBNF, working 
cooperatively with KSNPC and the Service, have helped to reduce the 
magnitude of threats at these sites. These occurrences have benefited 
from their location on the DBNF and management and protective actions 
provided under DBNF's LRMP (USFS 2004, pp. 1.1-1.10), which prevents 
general land disturbance and prohibits or limits logging and other 
DBNF-defined activities near cliffline habitats. The LRMP also protects 
rock shelters from vandalism and forbids removal of threatened and 
endangered species from these areas (see details in Recovery Criteria 
section).
    The DBNF monitors these sites and protects them as needed through 
law enforcement efforts, construction of fences, trail diversion, and 
placement of signs. To protect occurrences from trampling, fire-
building, and digging, signs have been posted at all entry points to 
the Red River Gorge asking visitors not to remove or disturb historical 
resources and providing visitors with biological and status information 
on S. albopilosa. Similar signs were also placed inside at least five 
archaeologically significant rock shelters that contained S. 
albopilosa. Beginning in February 2000, DBNF began to redirect trails 
and install fencing (chicken wire) around selected rock shelters (those 
with greatest visitation) containing S. albopilosa. Signs were also 
placed at these shelters, alerting visitors to the presence of the 
species and warning them against potential damage to plants. Signs and/
or fencing were placed and have been maintained at a total of 21 
occurrences, and DBNF personnel continue to visit these sites annually, 
checking the condition of signs and fencing and making repairs as 
needed.
    Monitoring results show that implementation of DBNF's LRMP and the 
completion of additional conservation actions such as fencing and sign 
placement have had a positive effect on the species, the number of 
stems has increased, and the level of

[[Page 70053]]

habitat disturbance and trampling associated with recreational 
activities has been reduced (KSNPC 2010, 24 pp.). Of the 21 occurrences 
on the DBNF where fencing and signs were added, 20 are considered to be 
stable and the 1 declining occurrence will be protected through 
expanded fencing. Additional evidence that these conservation efforts 
have improved the status of S. albopilosa occurrences on the DBNF is 
the large number of stable occurrences (75) and the relatively high 
number of secure, self-sustaining occurrences (46) observed by DBNF, 
KSNPC, and the Service. The 46 secure, self-sustaining occurrences 
exceed the number identified in the recovery criteria to allow 
consideration of delisting.
    Additional evidence that conservation actions have had a positive 
effect on the species is the relatively low recreational impacts 
observed by KSNPC (2010, pp. 13-14) at the majority of DBNF 
occurrences. Recreational impacts have been assessed by KSNPC since the 
mid-1990s (White and Drozda 2006, pp. 124-125; KSNPC 2010, pp. 13-14). 
Their qualitative ranking scheme estimates the percent disturbance of 
available habitat and uses a scale of 1 (little or no impact) to 5 
(high impact, greater than 50 percent of available habitat disturbed) 
to produce a disturbance rank. Based on recent evaluations by KSNPC 
(KSNPC 2010, 40 pp.; White pers. comm. 2014), 70 occurrences (60 
percent) are classified as low impact (rank of 1-2), 8 occurrences (7 
percent) are classified as medium impact (rank of 3), and 39 
occurrences (33 percent) are classified as high impact (rank of 4-5). 
Overall, 67 percent of DBNF's occurrences are considered to be exposed 
to low to medium recreational impacts. KSNPC (2010, p. 14) also noted 
that they did not observe many new recreational impacts during their 
surveys in 2008 and 2009. Most of the documented recreational impacts 
such as established trails, permanent structures within rock shelters 
(couches, chairs, fire pits), and camp sites had been in place since 
before S. albopilosa monitoring began in 1996 (KSNPC 2010, p. 14).
    The six occurrences on privately owned lands currently do not 
benefit from any formal protection or management and, therefore, could 
face higher magnitude threats (e.g., habitat disturbance) than those 
located on the DBNF. However, based on recent survey results by KSNPC, 
all six of these private occurrences have been ranked as ``stable,'' 
and five of the six are considered to be self-sustaining (A-, B-, or C-
rank) (KSNPC 2010, p. 8). While these occurrences potentially could 
face a greater level of threats, they currently do not appear to be 
facing a greater level of impact, and they represent a small proportion 
(five percent) of the overall population of the species.
    Summary of Factor A: Impacts associated with archaeological looting 
and recreational activities have been well documented in the past, but 
current monitoring data suggest that the magnitude of these threats has 
sufficiently decreased. Implementation of the DBNF's LRMP and specific 
conservation actions such as fencing and sign placement have had a 
positive effect on the species and have reduced the threat associated 
with recreational disturbance. The recovery goal of 40 stable, self-
sustaining, protected occurrences has been exceeded by 6, and these 
trends have held for more than 10 years. Because we expect that the 
lands containing the 46 secure and self-sustaining occurrences will 
remain permanently protected in Federal ownership and will be managed 
to maintain or improve current habitat conditions (see Service 2016, 
entire), we find that the present or threatened destruction, 
modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range is no longer a 
threat to the continued existence of S. albopilosa.

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

    Both the final rule to list S. albopilosa as threatened (53 FR 
11612, April 7, 1988) and the Recovery Plan (Service 1993, p. 7) 
identified overutilization for recreational purposes as a threat to the 
species. However, while the use of habitat for recreational purposes, 
as discussed under Factor A, has impacted the species in the past, 
there is no evidence that the plant itself is or was utilized for 
commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes. We, 
therefore, discuss impacts from recreational use of habitat for S. 
albopilosa under Factor A above.
    Summary of Factor B: We conclude that overutilization is not a 
threat to S. albopilosa.

C. Disease or Predation

    The listing rule for S. albopilosa (53 FR 11612, April 7, 1988) did 
not identify disease or predation as a threat to the species. Plants 
are occasionally browsed by herbivores, such as white-tailed deer 
(Odocoileus virginianus), wood rats (Neotoma spp.), and caterpillars 
(Order Lepidoptera), but we have no information that grazing by these 
species represents a threat to the species (Taylor 2016, pers. comm.). 
In 2014, the DBNF observed a rust fungus on the leaves in one 
population, but the fungus was not extensive within the population and 
did not appear to harm the plants. The fungus may have been triggered 
by weather conditions in 2014 and was not observed by DBNF in 2015 
(Taylor 2016, pers. comm.).
    Summary of Factor C: We continue to conclude that neither disease 
nor predation are threats to S. albopilosa.

D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms

    Populations of S. albopilosa within the DBNF are protected from 
damage and unauthorized taking by Federal regulation (36 CFR 261.9). 
This regulation would apply regardless of whether the species is listed 
because S. albopilosa would still be considered a sensitive, rare, or 
unique species on the DBNF under this Federal regulation. However, the 
final listing rule (53 FR 11612, April 7, 1988) identified inadequate 
regulatory mechanisms as a threat to S. albopilosa because limited 
manpower and the remoteness of many occurrences on the DBNF makes 
enforcement difficult. The DBNF has taken several steps to remedy this 
situation. As noted above, S. albopilosa receives management and 
protection through DBNF's LRMP and its conservation goals for the 
Cliffline Community Prescription Area. The National Forest Management 
Act (NFMA), and regulations and policies implementing the NFMA are the 
main regulatory mechanisms that guide land management on the DBNF, 
which contains 111 of the 117 extant occurrences of S. albopilosa. 
Since listing, the DBNF has included S. albopilosa and its habitat in 
its resource management plans. These plans are required by the NFMA and 
the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976. The NFMA requires 
revision of the Plans every 15 years; however, plans may be amended or 
revised as needed. Management plans are required to be in effect at all 
times (in other words, if the revision does not occur, the previous 
plan remains in effect) and to be in compliance with various Federal 
regulations. We expect continued implementation of the LRMP and expect 
that any future revisions will consider conservation of S. albopilosa 
and its Cliffline Community habitats.
    Specific actions that DBNF has taken under the LRMP include 
measures to reduce impacts of recreational activities to S. albopilosa 
and its habitat as discussed under Factor A. As discussed above, these 
and other protection and management actions taken by DBNF under their 
LRMP (USFS 2004, pp. 1.1-1.10) have been successful at improving the 
status of the species. Monitoring

[[Page 70054]]

results from these occurrences show that these efforts have had a 
positive effect on the species. Specifically, disturbance from 
trampling, camping, and rock climbing has been reduced in these areas, 
and the number of stems has increased.
    The species is listed as endangered by the State of Kentucky (KSNPC 
2005), but this designation conveys no legal protection to occurrences 
located on private property. Consequently, occurrences on privately 
owned land could face higher magnitude threats (e.g., habitat 
disturbance) than those located on the DBNF. Based on recent survey 
results by KSNPC, however, only 6 of 117 extant S. albopilosa 
occurrences (5 percent) are located on private land, and 5 of these 
occurrences have been ranked as ``stable'' (A-, B-, or C-rank) by KSNPC 
(KSNPC 2010, p. 8). Therefore, based on this greater than 10-year data 
set, the majority of private occurrences are also stable.
    Summary of Factor D: Occurrences of S. albopilosa located on the 
DBNF receive protection due to their location on Federal property, and 
these occurrences are managed and protected under DBNF's LRMP (USFS 
2004, pp. 1.1-1.10). This protected status and management actions 
included in the LRMP will continue to provide adequate regulatory 
protection for these occurrences. Monitoring results show that DBNF's 
management actions have had a positive effect on the species. 
Specifically, disturbance from trampling, camping, and rock climbing 
has been reduced and the number of stems has stabilized or increased. 
Based on the best available information for both private and public 
lands occurrences, and the fact that existing regulatory mechanisms and 
associated management practices will continue on public lands, we 
conclude that existing regulatory mechanisms are adequate.

E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued Existence

    Other natural or manmade factors were first identified as a threat 
to Solidago albopilosa due to the species' specialized habitats 
(sandstone rock shelters and cliff habitats of the Red River Gorge) and 
the perceived vulnerability of these habitats to any physical or 
climatic change (52 FR 13798, April 24, 1987; 53 FR 11612, April 7, 
1988). In the species' final listing rule (53 FR 11612) published in 
1988, the Service concluded that even minor changes in the surrounding 
forest (e.g., loss of canopy trees) could impact the species through 
drying, erosion, and competition with sun-tolerant species. At the 
time, these potential changes were not considered to be an imminent 
threat to white-haired goldenrod, but the final listing rule identified 
the need for management planning that would take into account the 
requirements of the species to ensure its continued existence.
    Some surveys and status assessments of Solidago albopilosa 
identified several potential threats under Factor E. These included 
competition from invasive plants, the loss of eastern hemlock (Tsuga 
canadensis), low genetic diversity and small population size, and the 
effects of climate change (Service 2009a, p. 9; Service 2009b, p. 2; 
KSNPC 2010, pp. 13-14). KSNPC (2010, p. 14) reported several invasive 
plant species in habitats occupied by white-haired goldenrod, but the 
most common species included Japanese stilt grass (Microstegium 
vimineum), princess tree (Paulownia tomentosa), Japanese spiraea 
(Spiraea japonica), common chickweed (Stellaria media), and common 
mullein (Verbascum thapsus). Of the invasive plant species, Japanese 
stilt grass was the most common species. It was observed growing in 
direct competition with 23 S. albopilosa occurrences. However, invasive 
species were absent from 94 of 117 extant S. albopilosa occurrences 
(about 80 percent) and 53 of 81 stable occurrences (65 percent) (KSNPC 
2010, p. 14; Service 2014, pp. 1-6). For the 23 occurrences in direct 
competition with invasive plants, most (16 of 23 (70 percent)) were 
stable or increased over the 10-year monitoring period (KSNPC 2010, p. 
14; Service 2014, pp. 1-6).
    We do not have data that specifically address the effects of 
climate change with regard to invasive species attributes such as 
distribution or range and the relation to white haired goldenrod. There 
are some data showing that more common aggressive invasive species like 
kudzu (Pueraria lobata) may expand into greater ranges due to possible 
effects of climate change (Bradley et al. 2009). However, species like 
Japanese stilt grass are more recent invaders to this area of the 
Southeast, and other than the data presented above, we do not have 
further information or data that indicates competition from invasive 
plants will change in significance as a threat to the species. Our 
current data suggest that Japanese stilt grass is not a significant 
threat to S. albopilosa as 70 percent of occurrences in direct 
competition with Japanese stilt grass were stable or increased over the 
last 10 years. Therefore, we do not believe that competition from 
invasive plants is a significant threat to the species now or in the 
foreseeable future.
    The hemlock woolly adelgid (Adeleges tsugae), an aphid-like insect 
that is native to Asia, has been identified as a potential threat to 
Solidago albopilosa because it has the potential to severely damage 
stands of eastern hemlocks (Tsuga canadensis) that occur near rock 
shelters and cliffs occupied by the species (Service 2009b, p. 2; KSNPC 
2010, p. 15). The hemlock woolly adelgid was introduced in the Pacific 
Northwest during the 1920s and has since spread throughout the eastern 
United States, reaching Kentucky by 2006. The species creates an 
extreme amount of damage to natural stands of hemlock, specifically 
eastern hemlock and Carolina hemlock (Tsuga caroliniana). The Recovery 
action plan (Service 2009b, p. 2) concluded that the loss of eastern 
hemlock within the Red River Gorge could result in microclimatic 
changes (increased light, decreased moisture, increased leaf litter) in 
and near rock shelters that may negatively affect white-haired 
goldenrod. Despite this potential threat, KSNPC (2010, p. 15) 
demonstrated in their evaluation that eastern hemlock was actually a 
minor component of the canopy surrounding rock shelters inhabited by 
the species. Consequently, the eventual loss of eastern hemlocks would 
not represent a significant change to the canopy surrounding these rock 
shelters and would, therefore, not represent a significant threat to 
the species.
    Potential impacts that may be associated with low genetic 
variability such as inbreeding depression, reduced fitness, or reduced 
adaptive capacity (ability to respond to and adapt to changing 
conditions) have been identified as a potential threat to other listed 
plant species, but we have no information suggesting that low genetic 
variability affects S. albopilosa (53 FR 11614, April 7, 1988; Service 
2009a, entire; KSNPC 2010, 24 pp.). Esselman and Crawford (1997, pp. 
245-257) reported that S. albopilosa exhibits genetic diversity both 
within and between populations (genetic diversity is widely spread 
among populations, and populations are not genetically homogenous). The 
highest level of genetic diversity was observed within (as opposed to 
between) populations. Consequently, we do not believe that the 
potential effects associated with low genetic variability threaten the 
continued existence of S. albopilosa now or in the foreseeable future.
    Some Solidago albopilosa occurrences may be more vulnerable to 
extirpation due to their small population size and poor estimated 
viability. The low number of stems

[[Page 70055]]

(typically less than 300), poor estimated viability, and high 
recreational impacts associated with D-ranked occurrences make these 
occurrences more vulnerable to stochastic events. Currently, 62 of the 
species' 117 extant occurrences (53 percent) are D-ranked. Even though 
these occurrences may be more vulnerable to extirpation, the overall 
threat to the species is minimal because these occurrences contain less 
than 20 percent of the species' total number of stems. Additionally, a 
small population size in and of itself is not indicative of being in 
danger of extinction, and this was likely never a naturally common or 
abundant species. Some Solidago albopilosa occurrences may have always 
had fewer plants in rock shelters with less favorable conditions (e.g., 
small size, drier conditions).
    The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concluded that 
warming of the climate system is unequivocal (IPCC 2014, p. 3). Effects 
associated with changes in climate have been observed including changes 
in arctic temperatures and ice, widespread changes in precipitation 
amounts, ocean salinity, and wind patterns and aspects of extreme 
weather including droughts, heavy precipitation, heat waves, and the 
intensity of tropical cyclones (IPCC 2014, p. 4). Species that are 
dependent on specialized habitat types, limited in distribution, or at 
the extreme periphery of their range may be most susceptible to the 
impacts of climate change (Byers and Norris 2011, p. 17; Anacker and 
Leidholm 2012, p. 2). However, while continued change is certain, the 
magnitude and rate of change is unknown in many cases. The magnitude 
and rate of change could be affected by many factors (e.g., circulation 
patterns), but we have no additional information or data regarding 
these factors with respect to white-haired goldenrod.
    There is evidence that some terrestrial plant populations have been 
able to adapt and respond to changing climatic conditions (Franks et 
al. 2013, entire). Both plastic (phenotypic change such as leaf size or 
phenology) and evolutionary (shift in allelic frequencies) responses to 
changes in climate have been detected. Both can occur rapidly and often 
simultaneously (Franks et al. 2013, p. 135). Relatively few studies are 
available, however, that (1) directly examine plant responses over 
time, (2) clearly demonstrate adaptation or the causal climatic driver 
of the responses, or (3) use quantitative methods to distinguish 
plastic versus evolutionary responses (Franks et al. 2013, p. 135).
    To generate future climate projections across the range of white-
haired goldenrod, one tool we used was the National Climate Change 
Viewer (NCCV), a climate-visualization Web site tool developed by the 
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) that allows the user to visualize climate 
projections at the State, county, and watershed level (Adler and 
Hostetler 2013, entire; http://www.usgs.gov/climate_landuse/clu_rd/nccv.asp). Initially, the viewer was designed to provide information 
for States and counties on projected temperature and precipitation 
through the 21st century. The viewer was expanded in 2014 to provide 
information on associated projected changes in snowpack, soil moisture, 
runoff, and evaporative deficit for U.S. States and counties and for 
USGS Hydrologic Units or watersheds as simulated by a simple water-
balance model. The model provides a way to simulate the response of the 
water balance to changes in temperature and precipitation in the 
climate models (30 separate models developed by the National Aeronautic 
and Space Administration). Combining the climate data with the water 
balance data provides further insights into the potential for climate-
driven change in water resources. The viewer uses tools such as 
climographs (plots of monthly averages); histograms showing the 
distribution or spread of model simulations; monthly time series 
spanning 1950-2099; and tables that summarize changes (and extremes) in 
temperature and precipitation during these periods. The application 
also provides access to comprehensive, three-page summary reports for 
States, counties, and watersheds.
    Using the NCCV and assuming the more extreme Representative 
Concentration Pathways (RCP) greenhouse gas emission scenario (RCP 
8.5), in which greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise unchecked 
through the end of the century leading to an equivalent radiative 
forcing of 8.5 Watts m\2\, we calculated projected annual mean changes 
for maximum temperature (+3.6 degrees Celsius ([deg]C) (+6.5 degrees 
Fahrenheit ([deg]F)), precipitation (+0.02-0.03 cm/day (+0.008-0.012 
in/day)), runoff (-0.25 cm/month (-0.1 in/month), snowfall (-0.5 cm (-
0.2 in)), soil storage (-2.5 cm (-1.0 in)), and evaporative deficit 
(+0.75 cm/month (+0.3 in/month)) for the period 2050-2074 in Menifee, 
Powell, and Wolfe Counties (Adler and Hostetler 2013, entire). Based on 
these results, all three counties within the range of Solidago 
albopilosa will be subjected to higher maximum temperatures (annual 
mean increase of 3.6 [deg]C (6.5 [deg]F)) and slightly higher 
precipitation (annual mean increase of 0.02-0.03 cm/day (+0.008-0.012 
in/day)) relative to the period 1950-2005. Because the average annual 
increase in precipitation is predicted to be only slightly higher, the 
increased evaporative deficit and the loss in runoff, snowfall, and 
soil storage is primarily a result of higher maximum and minimum 
temperatures. The most dramatic shift is predicted for soil storage, 
which will decrease significantly between mid-May and late November 
relative to 1950-2005. Despite the slight increase in predicted 
precipitation, the coincident warming means that habitats are unlikely 
to maintain their current moisture status.
    To evaluate the vulnerability of Solidago albopilosa to the effects 
of climate change, we also used NatureServe's Climate Change 
Vulnerability Index (CCVI) (Young et al. 2015, entire), a climate 
change model that uses downscaled climate predictions from tools such 
as Climate Wizard (Givertz et al. 2009, entire) and combines these with 
readily available information about a species' natural history, 
distribution, and landscape circumstances to predict whether it will 
likely suffer a range contraction and/or population reductions due to 
the effects of climate change. The CCVI uses an Excel platform that 
allows users to enter numerical or categorical weighted responses to a 
series of questions about risk factors related to species exposure and 
sensitivity to climate change. The CCVI separates vulnerability into 
its two primary components: A species' exposure to changes in climate 
within a particular assessment area and its inherent sensitivity to the 
effects of climate change. The tool gauges 20 scientifically documented 
factors and indicators of these components, as well as documented 
responses to climate change where they exist.
    While the Index calculates anticipated increases or declines in 
populations of individual species, it also accommodates inherent 
uncertainties about how species respond within their ecological 
contexts. The CCVI generated a vulnerability rating of ``extremely 
vulnerable'' to ``highly vulnerable'' for white-haired goldenrod, 
suggesting that the species' abundance and/or range extent could change 
substantially or possibly disappear by 2050 (Young et al. 2015, p. 44). 
Factors influencing the species' high vulnerability were its poor 
movement/dispersal ability, its connection with uncommon geologic 
features, and its unique hydrological niche (humid, shaded rock 
shelters). Byers and Norris (2011, p. 16) completed a CCVI for plants 
in an

[[Page 70056]]

adjacent state, West Virginia, and concluded that top risk factors 
included poor dispersal ability, natural and anthropogenic barriers to 
dispersal, dependence on wetland habitats, restriction to areas with 
unique geology, and genetic bottlenecks (Byers and Norris 2011, p. 16).
    Although the CCVI model (Young et al. 2015, entire) suggested that 
Solidago albopilosa is greatly exposed and sensitive to climate change 
and could be adversely affected in future years, Anacker and Leidholm 
2012 (pp. 16-17) noted that there are a number of weaknesses associated 
with the CCVI: (1) It is weighted too heavily towards direct exposure 
to climate change (projected changes to future temperature and 
precipitation conditions that have high levels of uncertainties); (2) 
some important plant attributes are missing (mating system and 
pollinator specificity); (3) it is very difficult to complete scoring 
for a given species because some information is simply lacking; and (4) 
some scoring guidelines are too simplistic (Anacker and Leidholm (2012, 
pp. 16-17). Topographic complexity was considered to be a potential 
complementary factor in assessing vulnerability to climate change 
(Anacker and Leidholm 2012, pp. 12-16). Topographically complex areas, 
such as the Red River Gorge region, have been predicted to be less 
vulnerable to the effects of climate change (Anacker and Leidholm 2012, 
pp. 15-16), so species such as Solidago albopilosa may also be less 
vulnerable to such effects as compared to plants that occur in areas 
with low topographic complexity.
    Additionally, Phillips (2010, entire) found that efforts to predict 
responses to climate change and to interpret both modern and 
paleoclimate indicators are influenced by several levels of potential 
amplifiers, which can either increase or exaggerate climate impacts, 
and/or filters, which reduce or mute impacts. He notes that climate 
forcings (factors that drive or ``force'' the climate system to change 
such as the energy output of the sun, volcanic eruptions, or changes in 
greenhouse gases) are partly mediated by ecological, hydrological, and 
other processes that may amplify or filter impacts on surface processes 
and landforms. For example, resistance or resilience of geomorphic 
systems may minimize the effects of changes. Thus, a given geomorphic 
response to climate could represent amplification and/or filtering 
(Phillips 2010, p. 571). Due to white-haired goldenrod's habitat 
specificity in rock shelters and cliff overhangs, the effects of 
climate change are likely muted or diminished due to this species' 
specific habitat conditions.
    Based on observations of climatic conditions over a period of 25 
years (KSNPC (2010, p. 13), there is some biological and historical 
evidence to suggest that S. albopilosa is adapted to endure some of the 
potential effects of climate change, including more frequent droughts 
and an estimated 2.6-3.6 [deg]C (4.7-6.5 [deg]F) increase in average 
annual maximum temperature. Habitats within the Red River Gorge often 
experience multiyear droughts, and S. albopilosa occurrences can become 
stressed during these periods. For example, the Cumberland Plateau 
region of Kentucky experienced a several-year drought prior to KSNPC's 
2008-2009 survey. These dry conditions continued during 2008, and KSNPC 
observed many drought-stressed occurrences. The following year (2009) 
was relatively wet, and several of these drought-stressed occurrences 
quickly improved (KSNPC 2010, p. 13). Despite this most recent dry 
period and others in the past, the species has demonstrated a 
resiliency to prolonged periods of drought. Although downscaling models 
exist at the county level (Alder and Hostetler 2013), we do not have 
data at the proper scale (inside rock shelters or in cliff overhangs) 
to determine, for example, how the species is affected by decreased 
relative humidity during a drought year, but periodic drought may be a 
normal cyclical event needed to increase production. The shaded, 
cooler, and more humid environment of rock shelters (Nieves and Day 
2014, p. 7) and the topographic complexity of the Red River Gorge 
region (Anacker and Leidholm 2012, pp. 15-16) may offer some relief 
from drying and may contribute to the species' ability to survive these 
conditions.
    Although climate change is almost certain to affect terrestrial 
habitats in the Red River Gorge region of Kentucky (Adler and Hostetler 
2013, entire), there is uncertainty about the specific effects of 
climate change on white-haired goldenrod. Currently, we have no 
evidence that climate change effects observed to date have had any 
adverse impact on S. albopilosa or its habitats, and we are uncertain 
about how projected future changes in temperature, precipitation, and 
other factors will influence the species. However, the best available 
information indicates that the effects of climate change do not 
represent an imminent threat now or in the foreseeable future.
    Summary of Factor E: Other potential threats such as minor 
vegetational changes in the surrounding forest, competition with 
invasive species, low genetic variability, small population size, and 
the effects of climate change have been identified as potential threats 
to S. albopilosa. Invasive species occur in only 23 of 117 extant 
occurrences, and most of these occurrences (16) have remained stable. 
We do not expect the loss of eastern hemlock to have a significant 
impact on the species because eastern hemlock is a minor component of 
the forest canopy surrounding S. albopilosa occurrences. The potential 
effects of low genetic diversity do not represent a threat as the 
species has relatively high genetic diversity. Small populations may be 
vulnerable to stochastic events, but these occurrences contain only a 
small proportion of the species' total number of stems. We do not 
consider climate change to be an imminent threat based on the species' 
current status, its demonstrated resiliency to periods of drought, and 
our uncertainty regarding the species' vulnerability to the effects of 
climate change. Based on all these factors, we find that other natural 
or manmade factors considered here are no longer a significant threat 
to S. albopilosa.

Overall Summary of Factors Affecting White-Haired Goldenrod

    The primary factors that led to white-haired goldenrod's listing 
under the Act were its limited range and habitat threats associated 
with ground disturbance and trampling caused by unlawful archaeological 
activities and recreational activities such as camping, hiking, and 
rock climbing. Other factors included the inadequate protection of 
occurrences on the DBNF and potential minor vegetational changes in 
forests surrounding Solidago albopilosa occurrences. We have carefully 
assessed the best scientific and commercial information available 
regarding the threats faced by white-haired goldenrod. These threats 
have been removed or ameliorated by conservation actions of multiple 
conservation partners for more than 20 years. These activities and 
other management actions included in the DBNF's LRMP (USFS 2004, pp. 
3.5-3.8) have assisted in recovery of the species as reflected in the 
large number of stable, self-sustaining, protected occurrences (46), 
and the long period (greater than 11 years) during which this trend has 
been maintained. Furthermore, a new cooperative management agreement 
among the Service, DBNF, and KSNPC was signed on August 29, 2016, and 
will provide for the long-term protection of the species.
    Based on our assessment of factors potentially impacting the 
species and its habitat, the species' improved status (a

[[Page 70057]]

sufficient number of viable occurrences), and multiple conservation 
efforts by the Service and its partners, we conclude that Solidago 
albopilosa is not in danger of extinction throughout all of its range 
or likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout 
all of its range.

Determination

    Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533), and its implementing 
regulations at 50 CFR part 424, set forth the procedures for adding 
species to and removing species from the Federal Lists of Endangered 
and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. An assessment of the need for a 
species' protection under the Act is based on whether a species is in 
danger of extinction or likely to become so because of any of five 
factors as required by section 4(a)(1) of the Act. We conducted a 
review of the status of this species and assessed the five factors to 
evaluate whether Solidago albopilosa is endangered or threatened 
throughout all of its range. We examined the best scientific and 
commercial information available regarding the past, present, and 
future threats faced by Solidago albopilosa and its habitat. We 
reviewed the information available in our files and other available 
published and unpublished information, and we consulted with recognized 
experts and other Federal and State agencies.
    In considering what factors might constitute threats, we must look 
beyond the mere exposure of the species to the factor to determine 
whether the exposure causes actual impacts to the species. If there is 
exposure to a factor, but no response, or only a positive response, 
that factor is not a threat. If there is exposure and the species 
responds negatively, the factor may be a threat and we then attempt to 
determine how significant the threat is. If the threat is significant, 
it may drive, or contribute to, the risk of extinction of the species 
such that the species warrants listing as endangered or threatened as 
those terms are defined by the Act. This determination does not 
necessarily require empirical proof of a threat. The combination of 
exposure and some corroborating evidence of how the species is likely 
impacted could suffice. The mere identification of factors that could 
impact a species negatively is not sufficient to compel a finding that 
listing is appropriate; we require evidence that these factors are 
operative threats that act on the species to the point that the species 
meets the definition of an endangered species or threatened species 
under the Act.
    During our analysis, we did not identify any factors that reach a 
magnitude that threaten the continued existence of the species. 
Significant impacts at the time of listing that could have resulted in 
the extirpation of all or parts of populations have been eliminated or 
reduced since listing, and we do not expect any of these conditions to 
substantially change post-delisting and into the foreseeable future. We 
conclude that the previously recognized impacts to Solidago albopilosa 
from the present or threatened destruction, modification, or 
curtailment of its habitat or range (Factor A), the inadequacy of 
regulatory mechanisms (Factor D), and minor vegetational changes in the 
surrounding forest (Factor E), have been ameliorated or reduced such 
that S. albopilosa is no longer in danger of extinction throughout all 
of its range or likely to become endangered within the foreseeable 
future throughout all of its range. We, therefore, conclude that S. 
albopilosa does not meet the definition of a threatened species, nor is 
it likely to become so in the foreseeable future.

Significant Portion of the Range Analysis

Background

    Under the Act and our implementing regulations, a species may 
warrant listing if it is in danger of extinction or likely to become so 
throughout all or a significant portion of its range. Having determined 
that Solidago albopilosa is not endangered or threatened throughout all 
of its range, we next consider whether there are any significant 
portions of its range in which Solidago albopilosa is in danger of 
extinction or likely to become so. We published a final policy 
interpreting the phrase ``Significant Portion of its Range'' (SPR) (79 
FR 37578; July 1, 2014). In pertinent part, the final policy states 
that (1) if a species is found to be endangered or threatened 
throughout a significant portion of its range, the entire species is 
listed as endangered or threatened, respectively, and the Act's 
protections apply to all individuals of the species wherever found; (2) 
a portion of the range of a species is ``significant'' if the species 
is not currently endangered or threatened throughout all of its range, 
but the portion's contribution to the viability of the species is so 
important that, without the members in that portion, the species would 
be in danger of extinction, or likely to become so in the foreseeable 
future, throughout all of its range; and (3) the range of a species is 
considered to be the general geographical area within which that 
species can be found at the time the Service makes any particular 
status determination.
    The procedure for analyzing whether any portion is an SPR is 
similar, regardless of the type of status determination we are making. 
The first step in our analysis of the status of a species is to 
determine its status throughout all of its range. If we determine that 
the species is in danger of extinction, or likely to become endangered 
in the foreseeable future throughout all of its range, we list the 
species as an endangered species or threatened species and no SPR 
analysis will be required. If the species is neither in danger of 
extinction nor likely to become so throughout all of its range, as we 
have found here, we next determine whether the species is in danger of 
extinction or likely to become so throughout a significant portion of 
its range. If it is, we will continue to list the species as an 
endangered species or threatened species, respectively; if it is not, 
we conclude that listing the species is no longer warranted.
    When we conduct an SPR analysis, we first identify any portions of 
the species' range that warrant further consideration. The range of a 
species can theoretically be divided into portions in an infinite 
number of ways. However, there is no purpose in analyzing portions of 
the range that have no reasonable potential to be significant or in 
analyzing portions of the range in which there is no reasonable 
potential for the species to be endangered or threatened. To identify 
only those portions that warrant further consideration, we determine 
whether substantial information indicates that: (1) The portions may be 
``significant'' and (2) the species may be in danger of extinction 
there or likely to become so within the foreseeable future. Depending 
on the biology of the species, its range, and the threats it faces, it 
might be more efficient for us to address the significance question 
first or the status question first. Thus, if we determine that a 
portion of the range is not ``significant,'' we do not need to 
determine whether the species is endangered or threatened there; if we 
determine that the species is not endangered or threatened in a portion 
of its range, we do not need to determine if that portion is 
``significant.'' In practice, a key part of the determination that a 
species is in danger of extinction in a significant portion of its 
range is whether the threats are geographically concentrated in some 
way. If the threats to the species are affecting it uniformly 
throughout its range, no portion is likely to have a greater risk of 
extinction, and thus would not warrant further

[[Page 70058]]

consideration. Moreover, if any concentration of threats apply only to 
portions of the range that clearly do not meet the biologically based 
definition of ``significant'' (i.e., the loss of that portion clearly 
would not be expected to increase the vulnerability to extinction of 
the entire species), those portions would not warrant further 
consideration. We emphasize that answering these questions in the 
affirmative is not a determination that the species is endangered or 
threatened throughout a significant portion of its range--rather, it is 
a step in determining whether a more detailed analysis of the issue is 
required.
    If we identify any portions that may be both (1) significant and 
(2) endangered or threatened, we engage in a more detailed analysis to 
determine whether these standards are indeed met. The identification of 
an SPR does not create a presumption, prejudgment, or other 
determination as to whether the species in that identified SPR is 
endangered or threatened. We must go through a separate analysis to 
determine whether the species is endangered or threatened in an SPR. To 
determine whether a species is endangered or threatened throughout an 
SPR, we will use the same standards and methodology that we use to 
determine if a species is endangered or threatened throughout its 
range.
    Depending on the biology of the species, its range, and the threats 
it faces, it may be more efficient to address the ``significant'' 
question first, or the status question first. Thus, if we determine 
that a portion of the range is not ``significant,'' we do not need to 
determine whether the species is endangered or threatened there; if we 
determine that the species is not endangered or threatened in a portion 
of its range, we do not need to determine if that portion is 
``significant.''

SPR Analysis for White-Haired Goldenrod

    Applying the process described above, in considering delisting S. 
albopilosa, we evaluated the range of this plant to determine if any 
areas could be considered a significant portion of its range. While 
there is some variability in the habitats occupied by S. albopilosa 
across its range, the basic ecological components required for the 
species to complete its life cycle (e.g., adequate sunlight, shade, 
moisture, soils) are present throughout the habitats occupied by the 
species. No specific location within the current range of the species 
provides a unique or biologically significant function that is not 
found in other portions of the range. The currently occupied range of 
S. albopilosa encompasses approximately 114 km\2\ (44 mi\2\) in 
Menifee, Powell, and Wolfe Counties, KY. Based on examination of 
information on the biology and life history of the species, we 
determined that there are no separate areas of the range that are 
significantly different from others or that are likely to be of greater 
biological or conservation importance than any other areas.
    We next examined whether any threats are geographically 
concentrated in some way that would indicate the species could be in 
danger of extinction, or likely to become so, in that area. Through our 
review of potential threats, we identified some areas where Solidago 
albopilosa may experience greater threats or a greater likelihood of 
extirpation and, therefore, may be in danger of extinction or likely to 
become so in those areas. These include occurrences on private lands 
and occurrences that are not currently considered self-sustaining. The 
majority (94.8 percent) of Solidago albopilosa occurrences are now 
located on DBNF and benefit from management and conservation actions 
implemented under the LRMP. The remaining (6 of the 117) extant 
occurrences are located on private lands. As explained above, these 
occurrences currently do not benefit from any formal protection or 
management and, therefore, could face higher magnitude threats. While 
these occurrences do not receive any formal protection, five of the six 
occurrences are considered to be stable and self-sustaining, indicating 
a low level of current impacts to those occurrences. Although the 
occurrences on private lands could face greater threats in the future 
due to lack of formal protections, these occurrences represent only 5 
percent of extant occurrences and a very small proportion of the range 
of the species. Additionally, even if future potential threats were to 
cause the loss of these occurrences, that loss would not appreciably 
reduce the long-term viability of the species, much less cause the 
species in the remainder of its range to be in danger of extinction or 
likely to become so.
    We also evaluated whether the occurrences that are not considered 
self-sustaining could be considered a significant portion of the 
species' range. We have determined that 46 secure and self-sustaining 
occurrences presently are distributed throughout the species' range, 
which accounted for more than 75 percent of the total stems estimated 
to exist in 2013. Of the remaining 71 extant occurrences, the 6 
occurrences on private lands are not considered secure (but all 6 have 
been shown to be stable, and 5 have been shown to be self-sustaining). 
These occurrences were discussed above.
    The remaining 65 occurrences are on DBNF land, and thus protected, 
but currently are not considered self-sustaining. Some of these 
occurrences have a status of declining or their status is unknown, 
while others are considered not self-sustaining primarily due to poor 
estimated viability and low number of stems observed. These occurrences 
could be at greater risk of extinction due to vulnerability to 
demographic and environmental stochasticity because of their smaller 
population sizes. These 65 occurrences, along with the 6 occurrences on 
private lands, account for the remaining 25 percent of the total stems 
estimated to exist in 2013. The threats to these occurrences from 
recreational activities are being managed and are not different from 
the threats affecting the 46 secure, self-sustaining occurrences.
    Because these 46 occurrences exhibit stable or increasing trends, 
contain a relatively high number of stems, have fair to excellent 
viability, and exhibit relatively high reproductive rates, we expect 
these occurrences to persist into the future. While most of the 
remaining occurrences also receive protections and are not at immediate 
risk of extirpation, their lower population sizes and poorer viability 
put them at a greater risk of extirpation. However, while these 
occurrences may have a greater potential to become extirpated due to 
demographic or environmental stochasticity, the loss of some or all of 
those occurrences would not cause the species in the remainder of its 
range to be in danger of extinction or likely to become so.
    In conclusion, we have determined that none of the existing or 
potential threats, either alone or in combination with others, are 
likely to cause S. albopilosa to be in danger of extinction throughout 
all or a significant portion of its range, nor is it likely to become 
endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a 
significant portion of its range. On the basis of this evaluation, we 
conclude S. albopilosa no longer requires the protection of the Act, 
and remove S. albopilosa from the Federal List of Endangered and 
Threatened Plants (50 CFR 17.12 (h)).

Conservation Measures

    Section 4(g)(1) of the Act requires us, in cooperation with the 
States, to implement a monitoring program for not less than 5 years for 
all species that have been delisted due to recovery. Post-delisting 
monitoring (PDM) refers to

[[Page 70059]]

activities undertaken to verify that a species that has been delisted 
due to recovery remains secure from the risk of extinction after the 
protections of the Act no longer apply. The primary goal of PDM is to 
ensure that the species' status does not deteriorate, and if a decline 
is detected, to take measures to halt the decline so that proposing it 
as threatened or endangered is not again needed. If, at any time during 
the monitoring period, data indicate that protective status under the 
Act should be reinstated, we can initiate listing procedures, 
including, if appropriate, emergency listing under section 4(b)(7) of 
the Act. At the conclusion of the monitoring period, we will review all 
available information to determine if relisting, the continuation of 
monitoring, or the termination of monitoring is appropriate.

Post-Delisting Monitoring (PDM) Plan Overview

    In August 2016, the Service finalized a final PDM plan in 
cooperation with DBNF and KSNPC (Service 2016, entire). The Plan:
    (1) Summarizes the species' status at the time of delisting;
    (2) Defines thresholds or triggers for potential monitoring 
outcomes and conclusions;
    (3) Lays out frequency and duration of monitoring;
    (4) Articulates monitoring methods including sampling 
considerations;
    (5) Outlines data compilation and reporting procedures and 
responsibilities; and
    (6) Provides a post-delisting monitoring implementation schedule 
including timing and responsible parties.
    We will post the final PDM plan and any future revisions if 
necessary on our national Web site (http://endangered.fws.gov) and on 
the Kentucky Fish and Wildlife Office's Web site (http://www.fws.gov/frankfort).

Effects of the Rule

    This final rule revises 50 CFR 17.12 by removing Solidago 
albopilosa from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Plants. 
Therefore, as of the effective date of this rule (see DATES), the 
prohibitions and conservation measures provided by the Act, 
particularly through sections 7 and 9, no longer apply to white-haired 
goldenrod. Removal of S. albopilosa from the Federal List of Endangered 
and Threatened Plants relieves Federal agencies from the need to 
consult with us under section 7 of the Act.

Required Determinations

National Environmental Policy Act

    We have determined that environmental assessments and environmental 
impact statements, as defined under the authority of the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), need not be 
prepared in connection with regulations pursuant to section 4(a) of the 
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

    In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994, 
``Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal 
Governments'' (59 FR 22951), Executive Order 13175, and the Department 
of the Interior's manual at 512 DM 2, we readily acknowledge our 
responsibility to communicate meaningfully with recognized Federal 
Tribes on a government-to-government basis. We have determined that no 
tribal lands or interests are affected by this rulemaking action.

References Cited

    A complete list of all references cited in this final rule is 
available at http://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2014-
0054, or upon request from the Kentucky Fish and Wildlife Office (see 
ADDRESSES).

Authors

    The primary author of this rule is Dr. Michael A. Floyd in the 
Service's Kentucky Fish and Wildlife Service Office (see ADDRESSES and 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

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

Regulation Promulgation

    Accordingly, we amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 
of the Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:

PART 17--[AMENDED]

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

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


Sec.  17.12  [Amended]

0
2. Amend Sec.  17.12(h) by removing the entry for ``Solidago 
albopilosa'' under ``FLOWERING PLANTS'' from the List of Endangered and 
Threatened Plants.

    Dated: September 28, 2016.
Stephen Guertin,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-24249 Filed 10-7-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4310-55-P



                                                            Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 11, 2016 / Rules and Regulations                                         70043

                                           has determined that this action will not                commodities in the table below.                       ADDRESSES:       This final rule and the PDM
                                           have a substantial direct effect on States              Compliance with the tolerance levels                      plan are available on the Internet at
                                           or tribal governments, on the                           specified below is to be determined by                    http://www.regulations.gov at Docket
                                           relationship between the national                       measuring only mandestrobin, 2-[(2,5-                     Number FWS–R4–ES–2014–0054.
                                           government and the States or tribal                     dimethylphenoxy)methyl]-a-methoxy-                        Comments and materials received, as
                                           governments, or on the distribution of                  N-methylbenzeneacetamide.                                 well as supporting documentation used
                                           power and responsibilities among the                                                                              in the preparation of this rule, will be
                                           various levels of government or between                                                              Parts per    available for public inspection by
                                                                                                              Commodity
                                           the Federal Government and Indian                                                                     million     appointment, during normal business
                                           tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined                 Berry, low growing, subgroup
                                                                                                                                                             hours, at the Service’s Kentucky
                                           that Executive Order 13132, entitled                       13–07G, except cranberry ....                      3.0 Ecological Services Field Office, 330
                                           ‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10,                 Fruit, small vine climbing, ex-                           West Broadway, Suite 265, Frankfort,
                                           1999) and Executive Order 13175,                           cept fuzzy kiwifruit, subgroup                         KY 40601.
                                           entitled ‘‘Consultation and Coordination                   13–07F ..................................          5.0 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
                                           with Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR                 Grape, raisin .............................           7.0 Virgil Lee Andrews, Jr., Field
                                           67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply                                                                             Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
                                           to this action. In addition, this action                   (b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. Service, Kentucky Ecological Services
                                           does not impose any enforceable duty or                 [Reserved]                                                Field Office, 330 West Broadway, Suite
                                           contain any unfunded mandate as                            (c) Tolerances with regional                           265, Frankfort, KY 40601; telephone
                                           described under Title II of the Unfunded                registrations. [Reserved]                                 (502) 695–0468. Individuals who are
                                           Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C.                       (d) Indirect or inadvertent tolerances. hearing-impaired or speech-impaired
                                           1501 et seq.).                                          [Reserved]                                                may call the Federal Information Relay
                                              This action does not involve any                     [FR Doc. 2016–24492 Filed 10–7–16; 8:45 am]               Service at (800) 877–8339 for TTY
                                           technical standards that would require                  BILLING CODE 6560–50–P                                    assistance 24 hours a day, 7 days a
                                           Agency consideration of voluntary                                                                                 week.
                                           consensus standards pursuant to section
                                                                                                                                                         SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
                                           12(d) of the National Technology
                                           Transfer and Advancement Act                            DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
                                                                                                                                                         Executive Summary
                                           (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).                           Fish and Wildlife Service                               This document contains: (1) A final
                                           VII. Congressional Review Act                                                                                 rule to remove Solidago albopilosa from
                                             Pursuant to the Congressional Review                  50 CFR Part 17                                        the Federal List of Endangered and
                                           Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), EPA will                                                                          Threatened Plants at 50 CFR 17.12(h);
                                                                                                   [Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2014–0054;                      and (2) a notice of availability of a final
                                           submit a report containing this rule and                FXES11130900000 167 FF09E42000]
                                           other required information to the U.S.                                                                        PDM plan.
                                           Senate, the U.S. House of                               RIN 1018–BA46                                           Species addressed—Solidago
                                           Representatives, and the Comptroller                                                                          albopilosa (white-haired goldenrod) is
                                           General of the United States prior to                   Endangered and Threatened Wildlife                    an upright, herbaceous plant with soft,
                                           publication of the rule in the Federal                  and Plants; Removal of Solidago                       white hairs covering its leaves and
                                           Register. This action is not a ‘‘major                  albopilosa (White-haired Goldenrod)                   stems (Andreasen and Eshbaugh 1973,
                                           rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).                   From the Federal List of Endangered                   p. 123). The species produces clusters of
                                                                                                   and Threatened Plants                                 small, fragrant, yellow flowers from
                                           List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180                                                                           September to November. S. albopilosa is
                                                                                                   AGENCY:   Fish and Wildlife Service,                  restricted to sandstone rock shelters or
                                             Environmental protection,
                                                                                                   Interior.                                             rocky ledges of a highly dissected region
                                           Administrative practice and procedure,
                                           Agricultural commodities, Pesticides                    ACTION: Final rule and notice of                      known as the Red River Gorge in
                                           and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping                  availability of final post-delisting                  Menifee, Powell, and Wolfe Counties,
                                           requirements.                                           monitoring plan.                                      KY.
                                                                                                                                                           The Service listed Solidago albopilosa
                                             Dated: September 30, 2016.                            SUMMARY:   We, the U.S. Fish and                      as a threatened species under the
                                           Jack E. Housenger,                                      Wildlife Service (Service), are removing              Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
                                           Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.                 the plant Solidago albopilosa (white-                 amended (Act; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.),
                                                                                                   haired goldenrod) from the Federal List               primarily because of its limited range
                                             Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
                                                                                                   of Endangered and Threatened Plants.                  and threats associated with ground
                                           amended as follows:
                                                                                                   This action is based on a thorough                    disturbance and trampling caused by
                                           PART 180—[AMENDED]                                      review of the best available scientific               unlawful archaeological activities and
                                                                                                   and commercial information, which                     recreational activities such as camping,
                                           ■ 1. The authority citation for part 180                indicates that the threats to this species            hiking, and rock climbing (53 FR 11612,
                                           continues to read as follows:                           have been eliminated or reduced to the                April 7, 1988). Other identified threats
                                               Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.          point that the species no longer meets                included the inadequacy of regulatory
                                                                                                   the definition of an endangered or                    mechanisms and minor vegetational
                                           ■ 2. Add § 180.690 to subpart C to read                 threatened species under the
                                           as follows:                                                                                                   changes in the surrounding forest.
                                                                                                   Endangered Species Act of 1973, as                      When the recovery plan for S.
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                           § 180.690 Mandestrobin; tolerances for                  amended. This rule also announces the                 albopilosa (white-haired goldenrod)
                                           residues.                                               availability of a final post-delisting                (Recovery Plan) was completed in 1993,
                                             (a) General. Tolerances are                           monitoring (PDM) plan for white-haired                the Service knew of 90 extant
                                           established for residues of                             goldenrod.                                            occurrences of S. albopilosa (Service
                                           mandestrobin, including its metabolites                 DATES: This rule is effective on                      1993, p. 2), containing an estimated
                                           and degradates, in or on the                            November 10, 2016.                                    45,000 stems (each individual plant can


                                      VerDate Sep<11>2014   14:37 Oct 07, 2016   Jkt 241001   PO 00000   Frm 00045   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11OCR1.SGM   11OCR1


                                           70044            Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 11, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

                                           have multiple stems (or branches); stem                 Plants, based on the reduction or                     Species Information
                                           counts have been the focus of most                      removal of threats.                                      The following section contains
                                           survey efforts, rather than the number of                  Basis for the Regulatory Action—                   information updated from that
                                           individual plants, which is often not                   Under the Act, we may determine that                  presented in the proposed rule.
                                           discernable) (Service 1993, p. 2). The                  a species is an endangered or threatened                 Species Description and Life
                                           Recovery Plan defined an occurrence as                  species because of one or more of the                 History—Solidago albopilosa (Braun
                                           a ‘‘discrete group of plants beneath a                  five factors described in section 4(a)(1)             1942) is an upright to slightly arching,
                                           single rock shelter or on a single rock                 of the Act. We must consider the same                 herbaceous, perennial plant that attains
                                           ledge.’’ All of these locations were                    factors in removing a species from the                a height of 30 to 100 centimeters (12 to
                                           situated within the proclamation                        List (delisting). Further, we may delist              39 inches). The species is commonly
                                           boundary of the Daniel Boone National                   a species if the best scientific and                  multi-stemmed because it produces
                                           Forest (DBNF), and 69 occurrences (77                   commercial data indicate the species is               rhizomes (horizontal, usually
                                           percent) were in Federal ownership.                     neither a threatened species nor an                   underground stems) that often root
                                              Currently, 117 extant occurrences of                 endangered species for one or more of                 below and produce new stems above.
                                           S. albopilosa are known, containing an                  the following reasons: (1) the species is             Because of this, the number of plants at
                                           estimated 174,000 stems. All extant                     extinct; (2) the species has recovered                a single site is often not discernable
                                           occurrences continue to be located                      and is no longer threatened or                        from above ground stem distributions.
                                           within the proclamation boundary of                     endangered; or (3) the original scientific            The long, soft, white hairs that cover the
                                           the DBNF, and 111 occurrences (95                       data used at the time the species was                 leaves and stems are the species’ most
                                           percent) are in Federal ownership and                   classified were in error. Here, in                    distinguishing characteristic (Andreasen
                                           receive management and protection                                                                             and Eshbaugh 1973, p. 123). The
                                                                                                   addition to the application of the five
                                           through DBNF’s Land and Resource                                                                              alternate leaves of S. albopilosa are
                                                                                                   factors, we are delisting the species
                                           Management Plan (LRMP) (U.S. Forest                                                                           widest at their base and are prominently
                                                                                                   based on recovery.
                                           Service (USFS) 2004, pp. 1.1–1.10). We                                                                        veined with a dark-green upper surface
                                           consider 81 of the extant occurrences                      We reviewed the best available                     and a pale underside. They vary in
                                           (69 percent) to be stable, meaning no                   scientific and commercial information                 length from 6 to 10 centimeters (2.5 to
                                           change has been detected in their                       pertaining to the five threat factors for             4.0 inches), with the larger leaves closer
                                           general rank or status over the last 12                 white-haired goldenrod. All 4 peer                    to the base of the stem. Hairs cover both
                                           years. We consider 46 of the 81 stable                  reviewers and 7 of 10 public                          surfaces of the leaves and are most
                                           occurrences to be adequately protected                  commenters supported the proposed                     dense along the veins. The stem is
                                           and self-sustaining as defined by the                   action to delist white-haired goldenrod.              cylindrical and densely covered with
                                           Recovery Plan, and these occurrences                    Our results are summarized as follows:                fine white hairs. Axillary (positioned
                                           account for approximately 131,000                          • We consider Solidago albopilosa to               along the main axis of the plant) clusters
                                           stems, or about 75 percent of the                       be recovered because all substantial                  of small, fragrant, yellow flowers begin
                                           species’ total number.                                  threats to this species have been                     blooming in late August. The flower
                                              Over the past 12 years, the Service has              eliminated or reduced and adequate                    heads are composed of three to five ray
                                           worked closely with the Kentucky State                  regulatory mechanisms exist.                          florets (small flowers in the marginal
                                           Nature Preserves Commission (KSNPC)                                                                           part of the flower head) and more than
                                                                                                      • The species has met all recovery
                                           and DBNF on the management and                                                                                15 disk florets (small flowers in the
                                                                                                   criteria as outlined in the Recovery Plan
                                           protection of the species. Management                                                                         central part of the flower head). The ray
                                                                                                   (there is a sufficient number of distinct,
                                           activities have included trail diversion                                                                      florets are about 6 mm long (0.24 inch),
                                                                                                   stable, self-sustaining, and adequately
                                           (away from S. albopilosa occurrences),                                                                        and the disk flowers are about 3 mm
                                                                                                   protected occurrences).
                                           installation of protective fencing, and                                                                       long (0.12 inch). The pale-brown,
                                           placement of informational signs in rock                Previous Federal Actions                              pubescent, oblong achenes (dry single-
                                           shelters, along trails, and at trailheads.                                                                    seed fruits) appear in October (Braun
                                           These activities and other management                     Please refer to the proposed rule to                1942, pp. 1–4; Andreasen and Eshbaugh
                                           actions included in the DBNF’s LRMP                     remove Solidago albopilosa from the                   1973, p. 123; Service 1993, p. 1).
                                           (USFS 2004, pp. 3.5–3.8) have assisted                  Federal List of Endangered and                           Solidago albopilosa flowers from
                                           in recovery of the species. Furthermore,                Threatened Plants (80 FR 52717,                       September through November and sets
                                           a new cooperative management                            September 1, 2015) for a detailed                     fruit in mid-October through December.
                                           agreement among the Service, DBNF,                      description of previous Federal actions               The flowers are visited by bees
                                           and KSNPC, which was signed on                          concerning this species. We reopened                  (Families Apidae and Halictidae), moths
                                           August 29, 2016, will assist in the long-               the comment period for the proposed                   (Order Lepidoptera), and syrphid flies
                                           term protection of the species.                         rule on February 26, 2016 (81 FR 9798),               (Family Syrphidae), which are likely
                                              Considering the number of stable,                    in order to conduct peer review and                   attracted by the fragrant, yellow flowers
                                           self-sustaining, protected occurrences,                 provide interested parties an additional              (Braun 1942, pp. 1–4; Service 1993, p.
                                           the management and protection of                        opportunity to comment on the                         6). Viability of the species’ pollen is
                                           habitats provided by DBNF’s LRMP and                    proposed rule and draft post-delisting                reported to be high (Andreason and
                                           the new cooperative management                          monitoring plan. We requested that all                Eshbaugh 1973, pp. 129–130). Seeds are
                                           agreement, and the lack of significant                  interested parties submit written                     most likely dispersed by wind, but
                                           threats to the species or its habitats, we              comments by March 28, 2016.                           germination rates and the extent of
                                           conclude that Solidago albopilosa no                    Background                                            vegetative reproduction in the wild are
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                           longer meets the definition of a                                                                              unknown (Service 1993, p. 6). Seedlings
                                           threatened species under the Act.                         It is our intent to discuss in this final           are observed frequently in the wild, but
                                              Purpose of the Regulatory Action—                    rule only those topics directly relevant              the percentage of seeds that germinate
                                           The purpose of this action is to remove                 to the removal of Solidago albopilosa                 in the wild is unknown (Taylor 2016,
                                           Solidago albopilosa from the Federal                    from the Federal List of Endangered and               U.S. Forest Service, pers. comm.).
                                           List of Endangered and Threatened                       Threatened Plants.                                    Germination of seed collected from the


                                      VerDate Sep<11>2014   14:37 Oct 07, 2016   Jkt 241001   PO 00000   Frm 00046   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11OCR1.SGM   11OCR1


                                                            Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 11, 2016 / Rules and Regulations                                         70045

                                           wild has high viability in the laboratory               as the Red River Gorge in Menifee,                    fourleaf yam (Dioscorea quaternata),
                                           (near 100 percent), and plants grow                     Powell, and Wolfe Counties, KY                        intermediate woodfern (Dryopteris
                                           readily from seed (Taylor 2016, pers.                   (Service 1993, p. 2; White and Drozda                 intermedia), Indian cucumber-root
                                           comm.).                                                 2006, p. 124). The Red River Gorge is                 (Medeola virginiana), Japanese stilt
                                              Braun (1942, pp. 1–4) described S.                   well known for its scenic beauty and                  grass (Microstegium vimineum;
                                           albopilosa based on specimens                           outdoor recreational opportunities, and               invasive, non-native), Christmas fern
                                           discovered in the summer of 1940 in the                 much of the area is located within the                (Polystichum acrostichoides),
                                           Red River Gorge area of Menifee County,                 DBNF, an approximate 2,860-km2                        rhododendron (Rhododendron
                                           KY. S. albopilosa is in the family                      (706,000-acre) area in eastern Kentucky               maximum), and little mountain
                                           Asteraceae, and there are no synonyms                   that is managed by the U.S. Forest                    meadow-rue (Thalicturm mirabile)
                                           for the species. Andreasen and                          Service (White and Drozda 2006, p.                    (Braun 1942, pp. 1–4; Andreason and
                                           Eshbaugh (1973, pp. 126–128) studied                    124). The Red River Gorge lies within                 Eshbaugh 1973, p. 128; Kral 1983, p.
                                           variation among four separate                           the Northern Forested Plateau                         1253; Campbell et al. 1989, p. 40; White
                                           occurrences (populations) of S.                         Escarpment of the Western Allegheny                   and Drozda 2006, p. 124). Associated
                                           albopilosa in Menifee and Powell                        Plateau ecoregion (Woods et al. 2002, p.              woody species of the mixed mesophytic
                                           Counties. Their population analysis of                  1). The hills and ridges of this region are           forest adjacent to S. albopilosa
                                           characteristics such as plant height, leaf              characterized as rugged and highly                    occurrences include red maple (Acer
                                           length and width, stem pubescence, and                  dissected, with erosion-resistant,                    rubrum), sugar maple (Acer saccharum),
                                           number of ray flowers per head showed                   Pennsylvanian quartzose sandstone                     American beech (Fagus grandifolia),
                                           that some morphological characteristics                 (contains 90 percent quartz) capping the              American holly (Ilex opaca), mountain
                                           (e.g., plant height, leaf shape and size,               ridges and exposed layers of                          laurel (Kalmia latifolia), tulip poplar
                                           stem pubescence) can vary widely                        Mississippian limestone, shale, and                   (Liriodendron tulipifera), bigleaf
                                           between populations.                                    siltstone on lower slopes and in the                  magnolia (Magnolia macrophylla),
                                              Solidago albopilosa can be                           valleys.                                              umbrella magnolia (M. tripetala), black
                                           distinguished from its closest relative, S.                Solidago albopilosa occurs on the                  gum (Nyssa sylvatica), oaks (Quercus
                                           flexicaulis (broad-leaf goldenrod), by its              floors of sandstone rock shelters                     spp.), basswood (Tilia americana), and
                                           shorter height, smaller and thinner                     (natural, shallow, cave-like formations)              eastern hemlock (Tsuga canadensis)
                                           leaves, and generally downy (hairy)                     and on sheltered cliffs (cliffs with                  (Andreason and Eshbaugh 1973, p. 128;
                                           appearance (the leaves of S. flexicaulis                overhanging ledges) at elevations                     Kral 1983, p. 1253; Campbell et al. 1989,
                                           have a slick, smooth appearance)                        between 243 and 396 m (800 and 1,300                  p. 40).
                                           (Medley 1980, p. 6). The two species                    ft) (Andreasen and Eshbaugh 1973;                        When the Recovery Plan was
                                           also differ in habitat preference. S.                   Service 1993, p. 5). The species may                  completed in 1993, 90 extant
                                           albopilosa is restricted to sandstone                   also be found on ledges or vertical walls             occurrences were known (Service 1993,
                                           rock shelters or ledges, while S.                       of these habitats, but, regardless of the             p. 2), containing an estimated 45,000
                                           flexicaulis is a woodland species that                  specific location, S. albopilosa is                   stems (Service 1993, p. 2). All of these
                                           occurs on the forest floor. Esselman and                restricted to areas of partial shade                  locations were situated within the
                                           Crawford (1997, pp. 245–256) used                       behind the dripline (53 FR 11612; April               proclamation boundary of the DBNF,
                                           molecular and morphological analyses                    7, 1988) and typically does not grow in               and 69 occurrences (approximately 76
                                           to examine the relationship between S.                  the deepest part of rock shelters (Harker             percent) were located on Federal lands.
                                           albopilosa and S. flexicaulis. They                     et al. 1981, p. 4). Campbell et al. (1989,            The remaining occurrences (21) were
                                           concluded that S. albopilosa is most                    p. 40) noted that this plant species is               located on private property. Rather than
                                           closely related to S. flexicaulis;                      known from all possible moisture                      try to determine what constituted a
                                           however, there was no evidence that                     regimes and aspects in these habitats,                population, the Recovery Plan (Service
                                           either S. flexicaulis or S. caesia (wreath              but plants on northern exposures                      1993, p. 1) used ‘‘occurrence,’’ defining
                                           or blue-stemmed goldenrod) is a parent                  appeared to be smaller than average.                  it as a ‘‘discrete group of plants beneath
                                           or has a recent close relationship with                 Seven of nine occurrences examined by                 a single rock shelter or on a single rock
                                           S. albopilosa as was previously                         Nieves and Day (2014, pp. 8–9) were                   ledge.’’ In making this definition, the
                                           speculated by Braun (1942, pp. 1–4).                    located in easterly or northerly facing               Service (1993, p. 6) explained that
                                           Esselman and Crawford (1997, pp. 245–                   shelters, which receive minimal direct                pollinators (bees and syrphid flies)
                                           256) also examined genetic diversity                    sunlight. Nieves and Day examined only                likely carried pollen between rock
                                           within the species S. albopilosa (using                 a small percentage of the species’ 117                shelters and may even move between
                                           Random Amplified Polymorphic DNA                        known occurrences (8 percent), so                     adjacent ravines. If there were sufficient
                                           and isozyme markers) and reported                       further study is required to determine                gene flow between occurrences via
                                           genetic variation both within and                       the importance of the solar aspect on the             pollinators, clusters of nearby rock
                                           between populations (genetic diversity                  species’ biology and distribution. Ten                shelters or adjacent ravines could
                                           is widely spread among populations,                     rock shelter habitats examined by                     comprise a population. However,
                                           and populations are not very genetically                Nieves and Day (2014, p. 7) were                      without additional research, it was
                                           homogenous). The highest level of                       significantly cooler and more humid                   impossible to determine the species’
                                           genetic diversity was observed among                    than the surrounding environment                      actual population boundaries.
                                           (across) versus within populations.                     (areas outside and above the rock                        Subsequently, the KSNPC completed
                                           Consequently, Esselman and Crawford                     shelter), but the species’ requirements               surveys in 1996, 1999, 2002, 2004, and
                                           (1997, pp. 245–256) recommended that                    with respect to air temperature and                   2005 (White and Drozda 2006, pp. 124–
                                           conservation efforts include the                        relative humidity are unknown.                        128; KSNPC 2010, p. 4), and these
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                           maintenance of as many populations as                      Typical herbaceous associates of this              surveys documented an increase in the
                                           possible to capture the full genetic                    plant include roundleaf catchfly (Silene              number of S. albopilosa occurrences
                                           diversity of the species.                               rotundifolia) and alumroot (Heuchera                  from 90 to 141. Despite the increased
                                              Solidago albopilosa is restricted to                 parviflora) and less commonly white                   number of occurrences, the total range
                                           outcroppings of Pottsville sandstone in                 baneberry (Actaea pacypoda),                          of S. albopilosa did not increase
                                           a rugged, highly dissected area known                   maidenhair fern (Adiantum pedatum),                   significantly as it was still restricted to


                                      VerDate Sep<11>2014   14:37 Oct 07, 2016   Jkt 241001   PO 00000   Frm 00047   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11OCR1.SGM   11OCR1


                                           70046                   Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 11, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

                                           the same general area within the Red                                       reported in Kentucky since 1990 but is                 considered ‘‘stable’’ if no change was
                                           River Gorge. KSNPC (2010, pp. 4–8)                                         not considered extinct or extirpated.                  detected in their general rank/status
                                           completed the first range-wide survey                                         X (extirpated): A taxon for which                   over the course of monitoring, stem
                                           during the 2008 and 2009 field seasons.                                    habitat loss has been pervasive and/or                 numbers increased over the course of
                                           During this 2-year period, KSNPC                                           concerted efforts by knowledgeable                     monitoring, and/or slight decreases in
                                           ranked each occurrence based on                                            biologists to collect or observe                       stem numbers could be attributed to
                                           population size and viability, habitat                                     specimens within appropriate habitats                  natural climatic variation. Ranks were
                                           condition, and degree of threat. KSNPC                                     have failed.                                           based on population size and perceived
                                           also evaluated the stability of each                                          F (failed to find): occurrence not                  viability, habitat condition, and degree
                                           occurrence by comparing their 2008–                                        located in current survey; original                    of threat. For all stable occurrences,
                                           2009 survey data with data collected in                                    mapping may be in wrong location.                      KSNPC reported an average monitoring
                                           previous years. The following                                                 During their 2-year range wide survey,
                                           specifications were used to rank the                                                                                              period of 10.2 years and an average of
                                                                                                                      KSNPC (2010, p. 6) documented a total                  3.6 monitoring events for each
                                           occurrences (KSNPC 2010, p. 21):
                                                                                                                      of 116 extant occurrences, producing                   occurrence. Also, the level or degree of
                                             A (excellent estimated viability): 2,500
                                                                                                                      ranks with the following categorical                   recreational impact is based on KSNPC’s
                                           or more stems in habitat with low
                                           degree of recreational impact or a                                         results: A-rank (11 occurrences), B (26),              assessment of recreational use and
                                           minimum of 4,000 stems where the                                           C (25), and D (54) (see table 1). The                  threats from that use at each occurrence.
                                           degree of recreational impact is medium                                    remaining 25 occurrences were                          For those sites where the degree of
                                           or high.                                                                   considered to be historical, extirpated,               impact was higher, more stems were
                                             B (good estimated viability): 1,000 to                                   or could not be relocated (failed to find).            required to achieve a higher rank (i.e.,
                                           2,499 stems and some areas of habitat                                      The goldenrod’s range has been
                                                                                                                                                                             fair to excellent viability). For example,
                                           with a low degree of recreational impact                                   searched extensively by KSNPC and of
                                                                                                                                                                             4 of the 11 ‘‘A’’ ranked occurrences had
                                           or higher numbers of stems (2,500 to                                       the 116 extant occurrences, only 6 were
                                                                                                                      located on private land, with the                      a medium/high degree of impact (equals
                                           4,000) at sites where the degree of                                                                                               a minimum of 4,000 stems). The rest of
                                           recreational impact is medium or high.                                     remainder located on the DBNF. There
                                                                                                                      is limited private ownership in the area               the 11 ‘‘A’’ ranked occurrences had a
                                             C (fair estimated viability): 300 to 999
                                                                                                                      where this plant occurs and the species’               low degree of impact (equals 2,500
                                           stems where recreational impacts are
                                                                                                                      habitat as described above has only been               stems or more). All of the ‘‘A’’ ranked
                                           low or higher numbers of stems (1,000
                                           to 2,000) at sites affected by a medium                                    located in a few privately-owned                       occurrences have proven stable (for over
                                           or high degree of recreational impact;                                     occurrences and nowhere else that has                  11 years) with a high number of stems.
                                           may also include sites with little                                         been surveyed. For all extant                          Due to future conservation actions with
                                           opportunity for habitat recovery or                                        occurrences, 79 (68 percent) were                      DBNF, we expect the 4 ‘‘A’’ ranked
                                           population expansion.                                                      considered to be stable, including ranks               occurrences with medium to high
                                             D (poor estimated viability): fewer                                      of A (10 occurrences), B (21), C (18), and             recreational impacts to remain stable
                                           than 300 stems in any habitat.                                             D (30). Stability was estimated through                (numbers of stems will remain constant
                                             H (historical): taxon or natural                                         comparisons of historical and more                     or increase) and the degree of
                                           community has not been reliably                                            recent survey data. Occurrences were                   recreational impact may decrease.
                                            TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF Solidago albopilosa RANKS AND STATUS BASED ON RANGE-WIDE SURVEYS COMPLETED BY THE
                                                               KENTUCKY STATE NATURE PRESERVES COMMISSION IN 2008 AND 2009
                                                                                                                                          [KSNPC 2010]

                                                                                                                                                                    Ranks of extant occurrences
                                                                                   Status
                                                                                                                                            A                   B                C                D           Total

                                           Stable ...................................................................................               10                21               18             30              79
                                           Declining ..............................................................................                  0                 5                4             22              31
                                           Unknown ..............................................................................                    1                 0                3              2               6

                                                 Total ..............................................................................               11                26               25             54              116



                                             For the remaining extant occurrences,                                    surveys of that occurrence were not                    occurrence totals reported by KSNPC
                                           31 were considered to be declining and                                     performed more than once or prior                      (2010, 24 pp.), there are now 81 stable
                                           6 were of unknown status. For the                                          surveys could not be compared to more                  occurrences with the following
                                           declining occurrences, ranks included B                                    recent surveys due to discrepancies in                 categorical results: A (11 occurrences), B
                                           (5 occurrences), C (4), and D (22). For                                    survey methodology.                                    (22), C (18), and D (30) (table 2). The
                                           the unknown occurrences, ranks                                               KSNPC and the Service completed                      average monitoring period increased
                                           included A (1 occurrence), C (3), and D                                    additional surveys from June to October                from 10.2 to 11.1 years, with an average
                                           (2). Occurrences were considered to be                                     2013 at 30 widely separated                            of 3.7 monitoring events for each
                                           declining if a negative change was                                         occurrences, resulting in the discovery                occurrence. The total number of stems
                                           detected in the general rank/status over                                   of one new occurrence and revised
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                                                                                                                                                             now stands at 174,357, compared to
                                           the course of monitoring and/or there                                      status information for two unknown                     45,000 when the Recovery Plan was
                                           was a greater than 30 percent decline in                                   occurrences (USFWS 2014, entire).
                                                                                                                                                                             completed.
                                           stem count. Unknown status meant                                           Combining these results with




                                      VerDate Sep<11>2014         14:37 Oct 07, 2016         Jkt 241001      PO 00000        Frm 00048   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11OCR1.SGM   11OCR1


                                                                   Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 11, 2016 / Rules and Regulations                                                     70047

                                                   TABLE 2—SUMMARY OF CURRENT Solidago albopilosa RANKS AND STATUS (KSNPC 2010, 2014) SHOWING AN
                                                                            INCREASE IN A- AND B-RANKED OCCURRENCES
                                                                                                                                                                    Ranks of extant occurrences
                                                                                   Status
                                                                                                                                            A                   B                C                D           Total

                                           Stable ...................................................................................               11                22               18             30              81
                                           Declining ..............................................................................                  0                 5                4             23              32
                                           Unknown ..............................................................................                    0                 0                2              2               4

                                                 Total ..............................................................................               11                27               24             55              117



                                             In summary, considering recent                                           or reclassifying a species) must reflect               to such an extent that the species may
                                           survey efforts by KSNPC and the Service                                    determinations made in accordance                      no longer need the protections of the
                                           (KSNPC 2010, entire; USFWS 2014,                                           with sections 4(a)(1) and 4(b) of the Act.             Act.
                                           entire), the following conditions exist                                    Section 4(a)(1) requires that the                         There are many paths to
                                           for white-haired goldenrod:                                                Secretary determine whether a species                  accomplishing recovery of a species,
                                             (1) A total of 117 extant occurrences                                    is endangered or threatened (or not)                   and recovery may be achieved without
                                           are known. Of these, 81 occurrences are                                    because of one or more of five threat                  all criteria being fully met. For example,
                                           considered to be stable with the                                           factors. Section 4(b) of the Act requires              one or more criteria may be exceeded
                                           following categorical results: A (11                                       that the determination be made ‘‘solely                while other criteria may not yet be
                                           occurrences), B (22), C (18), and D (30).                                  on the basis of the best scientific and                accomplished. In that instance, we may
                                           As of 2015, the average monitoring                                         commercial data available.’’ Therefore,                determine that the threats are
                                           period per occurrence was 11.1 years,                                      recovery criteria should help indicate                 minimized sufficiently and the species
                                           with an average of 3.7 monitoring events                                   when we would anticipate that an                       is robust enough to delist. In other
                                           for each occurrence.                                                       analysis of the five threat factors under              cases, recovery opportunities may be
                                             (2) Fifty-one of the 81 stable                                           section 4(a)(1) would result in a                      discovered that were not known when
                                           occurrences (all A-, B-, and C-ranked                                      determination that the species is no                   the recovery plan was finalized. These
                                           occurrences) are considered to be self-                                    longer an endangered species or                        opportunities may be used instead of
                                           sustaining as defined by the Recovery                                      threatened species because of any of the               methods identified in the recovery plan.
                                           Plan. These occurrences are considered                                     five statutory factors (see Summary of                 Likewise, information on the species
                                           to be self-sustaining because there is                                     Factors Affecting the Species section).                may be discovered that was not known
                                           evidence of successful reproduction and                                    However, while recovery plans provide                  at the time the recovery plan was
                                           the number of stems is stable or                                           important guidance to the Service,                     finalized. The new information may
                                           increasing.                                                                States, and other partners on methods of               change the extent to which criteria need
                                             (3) Forty-six of the 51 stable, self-                                    minimizing threats to listed species and               to be met for recognizing recovery of the
                                           sustaining occurrences are adequately                                      measurable criteria against which to                   species. Recovery of a species is a
                                           protected as defined by the recovery                                       measure progress towards recovery, they                dynamic process requiring adaptive
                                           plan (species is legally protected, has                                    are not regulatory documents and                       management that may, or may not, fully
                                           received adequate physical protection,                                     cannot substitute for the determinations               follow the guidance provided in a
                                           and is assured of all required                                             and promulgation of regulations                        recovery plan.
                                           management).                                                               required under section 4(a)(1) of the                     Recovery Planning and
                                             (4) The total number of stems now                                        Act. A decision to revise the status of or             Implementation—The Recovery Plan
                                           stands at approximately 174,000, and                                       remove a species from the Federal List                 was approved by the Service on
                                           the 46 secure, self-sustaining                                             of Endangered and Threatened Plants at                 September 28, 1993 (Service 1993, 40
                                           occurrences contain approximately                                          50 CFR 17.12(h) is ultimately based on                 pp.). The Recovery Plan includes
                                           131,000 stems, or about 75 percent of                                      an analysis of the best scientific and                 recovery criteria intended to indicate
                                           the species’ total number.                                                 commercial data available to determine                 when threats to the species have been
                                                                                                                      whether a species is no longer an                      adequately addressed, and prescribes
                                           Recovery and Recovery Plan                                                                                                        actions necessary to achieve those
                                                                                                                      endangered or threatened species,
                                           Implementation                                                                                                                    criteria. We first discuss progress on
                                                                                                                      regardless of whether that information
                                             Background—Section 4(f) of the Act                                       differs from the recovery plan.                        completing the primary recovery
                                           (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) directs us to                                        Recovery plans may be revised to                    actions, then discuss recovery criteria.
                                           develop and implement recovery plans                                       address continuing or new threats to the               The Recovery Plan identifies five
                                           for the conservation and survival of                                       species, as new, substantive information               primary actions necessary for recovering
                                           endangered and threatened species                                          becomes available. The recovery plan                   S. albopilosa:
                                           unless we determine that such a plan                                       identifies site-specific management                       (1) Protect existing occurrences;
                                           will not promote the conservation of the                                   actions that will achieve recovery of the                 (2) Continue inventories;
                                           species. Under section 4(f)(1)(B)(ii),                                     species, measurable criteria that set a                   (3) Conduct studies on life history and
                                           recovery plans must, to the maximum                                        trigger for review of the species’ status,             ecological requirements;
                                           extent practicable, include objective,                                     and methods for monitoring recovery                       (4) Maintain plants and seeds ex situ;
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                           measurable criteria which, when met,                                       progress. Recovery plans are intended to               and
                                           would result in a determination, in                                        establish goals for long-term                             (5) Provide the public with
                                           accordance with the provisions of                                          conservation of listed species and define              information.
                                           section 4 of the Act, that the species be                                  criteria that are designed to indicate                    Three of five recovery actions (1, 2,
                                           removed from the list. However,                                            when the substantial threats facing a                  and 5) have been accomplished.
                                           revisions to the list (adding, removing,                                   species have been removed or reduced                   Completion of the remaining actions (3


                                      VerDate Sep<11>2014         14:37 Oct 07, 2016         Jkt 241001      PO 00000        Frm 00049   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11OCR1.SGM   11OCR1


                                           70048            Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 11, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

                                           and 4) is discussed in greater detail                      Signs or fencing were placed and have              KSNPC and the Service documented a
                                           below.                                                  been maintained at a total of 21                      total of 117 extant occurrences, and, of
                                             The Service entered into a cooperative                occurrences identified as being                       these, we consider the A-, B-, and C-
                                           agreement with KSNPC in 1986, under                     impacted in the past, and DBNF                        ranked occurrences (total of 46) to be
                                           section 6 of the Act, for the conservation              personnel continue to visit these sites               secure and self-sustaining. Because
                                           of endangered and threatened plant                      annually, checking the condition of                   systematic searches for new occurrences
                                           species. This agreement has provided a                  signs and fencing and making repairs as               have been conducted since the
                                           mechanism for KSNPC to acquire                          needed. To guard against future                       completion of the Recovery Plan and led
                                           Federal funds that have supported much                  impacts, the DBNF and KSNPC have                      to the discovery of previously unknown
                                           of the recovery work described here.                    proposed the addition of new or                       occurrences, we consider this recovery
                                           The Commonwealth of Kentucky and                        expanded fencing at five occurrences.                 action to be completed.
                                           other partners have also provided                       As stated below in this recovery section,
                                           matching funds under this agreement                                                                           Recovery Action (3): Conduct Studies on
                                                                                                   this new and expanded fencing is
                                           that have assisted in the species’                                                                            Life History and Ecological
                                                                                                   included as a conservation action in the
                                           recovery.                                                                                                     Requirements
                                                                                                   Service’s signed cooperative
                                                                                                   management agreement with DBNF and                       This recovery action is incomplete
                                           Recovery Action (1): Protect Existing                                                                         (not all subactivities have been
                                           Occurrences                                             KSNPC (USFWS August 2016).
                                                                                                      Monitoring results show that                       addressed completely) but significant
                                              The Recovery Plan states that an                     implementation of the LRMP, including                 progress has been made. Since
                                           occurrence will be ‘‘adequately                         specific conservation actions described               publication of the Recovery Plan
                                           protected’’ when it is legally protected,               above (fencing and sign placement),                   (Service 1993), studies of the species’
                                           has received adequate physical                          have had a positive effect on the species             life history and ecological requirements
                                           protection, and is assured of all required              (KSNPC 2010, 24 pp.). Specifically, it                have included Esselman (1995, pp. 5–
                                           management (USFWS 1993, 40 pp.).                        has been demonstrated that disturbance                10), Esselman and Crawford (1997, pp.
                                           Based on these criteria, we consider a                  from trampling, camping, and rock                     246–251), White and Drozda (2006, p.
                                           total of 46 A-, B-, or C-ranked                         climbing is low at remote occurrences,                125), KSNPC (2010, p. 5), and Nieves
                                           occurrences on the DBNF to be                           and impacts have been reduced at more                 and Day (2014, pp. 1–12). Esselman
                                           adequately protected. We base our                       visited sites. The number of stems has                (1995, pp. 5–10) and Esselman and
                                           decision regarding their level of                       remained stable or increased at 20 of 21              Crawford (1997, pp. 246–251) studied
                                           protection on the location of these                     occurrences (95 percent) where fencing                the ancestry of S. albopilosa, examined
                                           occurrences (all are in DNBF ownership,                 or informational signs have been added.               gene flow and genetic diversity within
                                           and many are in remote locations not                    For all extant occurrences on the DBNF,               and between populations, and
                                           visited by the public); trends in                       75 (68 percent) of 111 extant                         investigated life-history traits (i.e., seed
                                           occurrence data gathered by KSNPC,                      occurrences are considered stable to                  set, importance of pollinators, self-
                                           DBNF, and the Service; observations                     increasing, and we consider 46                        incompatibility (the inability of a plant
                                           about threats reported by KSNPC (2010,                  occurrences to be self-sustaining (A-, B-             to produce seeds when its flowers are
                                           pp. 5–18); conservation actions                         , or C-ranked occurrences that are stable             pollinated from its own flowers or from
                                           described in DBNF’s Land and Resource                   and reproducing). Based on all these                  flowers of plants that are genetically the
                                           Management Plan (LRMP); and                             factors, we consider this recovery action             same)). The ancestry of S. albopilosa
                                           information in our files concerning                     to be complete.                                       was unclear, but it had the most
                                           specific DBNF conservation actions,                                                                           morphological and genetic similarity
                                           such as trail closure, placement of signs,              Recovery Action (2): Continue                         with S. flexicaulis. Despite this, the two
                                           and fencing. We have chosen to exclude                  Inventories                                           species were reported as genetically
                                           five, stable, self-sustaining occurrences                  There were 90 extant occurrences of                different, and there was no evidence of
                                           from the list of ‘‘protected’’ occurrences              S. albopilosa when the Recovery Plan                  recent gene flow. Esselman (1995, pp.
                                           because they are in private ownership,                  was completed (Service 1993, p. 2). In                16–23) and Esselman and Crawford
                                           and no conservation agreement or plan                   subsequent years, KSNPC completed                     (1997, pp. 251–253) observed the
                                           is in place to ensure their long-term                   surveys within the Red River Gorge in                 highest levels of genetic diversity
                                           protection.                                             1996, 1999, 2002, 2004, and 2005                      between populations rather than within
                                              The species’ primary threat has been                 (White and Drozda 2006, pp. 124–128;                  populations. The levels of seed
                                           identified as ground disturbance and                    KSNPC 2010, p. 2), raising the number                 production appeared to be about equal
                                           trampling associated with recreational                  of documented S. albopilosa                           to that of other goldenrods, but the
                                           activities (i.e., camping, hiking, and                  occurrences from 90 to 141. Surveys in                amount of seed set varied between
                                           rock-climbing) within the Red River                     other areas of Kentucky and adjacent                  populations and appeared to increase
                                           Gorge. To address these threats, the                    States with suitable habitat (e.g.,                   with increasing occurrence size.
                                           DBNF began to redirect trails and install               sandstone rock shelters) did not show                 Pollination experiments indicated that
                                           fencing (chicken wire) around selected                  evidence of additional occurrences of                 pollinators are necessary for seed set,
                                           S. albopilosa rock shelters in February                 the species (Campbell et al. 1989, pp.                and the species is self-incompatible.
                                           2000. The DBNF focused on these                         29–43; Palmer-Ball et al. 1988, pp. 19–                  During field surveys between 1996
                                           occurrences because they were near                      25; Walck et al. 1996, pp. 339–341;                   and 2009, KSNPC collected occurrence
                                           DBNF user-defined trails and were                       Norris and Harmon 2000, pp. 2–3). The                 information throughout the species’
                                           suffering obvious recreational impacts—                 first range-wide survey in the Red River              range, recording such information as
                                           trampling and ground disturbance                        Gorge was completed during the field                  stem count, patch size, percent
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                           associated with camping, rock climbing,                 seasons of 2008 and 2009 (KSNPC 2010,                 vegetative versus sexual reproduction,
                                           and hiking. The DBNF also placed                        pp. 4–8), and KSNPC and the Service                   recreational disturbance (ranked from
                                           informational signs at these shelters and               completed follow-up surveys at 30                     low to high), other perceived threats,
                                           at trailheads, alerting visitors to the                 extant occurrences in 2013 (See the                   and general habitat condition (White
                                           presence of the species and warning                     Species Information section above for                 and Drozda 2006, p. 125; KSNPC 2010,
                                           them against potential damage to plants.                detail on surveys). During these efforts,             p. 5). In its 2-year range-wide study,


                                      VerDate Sep<11>2014   14:37 Oct 07, 2016   Jkt 241001   PO 00000   Frm 00050   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11OCR1.SGM   11OCR1


                                                            Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 11, 2016 / Rules and Regulations                                        70049

                                           KSNPC (2010, p. 5) used a two-page                      determining if reintroduction or                      Recovery Action (5): Provide the Public
                                           plant survey form to record more                        artificial propagation may be necessary               With Information
                                           detailed biological information at each                 to help recover this plant. Solidago                    The KSNPC and DBNF have prepared
                                           occurrence: Population structure                        albopilosa occurrences have grown in                  several species factsheets and signs that
                                           (percent stems exhibiting vegetative                    number and size as recovery                           have been posted at gas stations,
                                           versus reproductive growth), occurrence                 implementation actions have been                      restaurants, kiosks, and trailheads
                                           size (square meters [m2]), plant height,                implemented and threats have been                     throughout the Red River Gorge. These
                                           number of stems, number of rosettes,                    removed or reduced. These successful                  signs are intended to educate Red River
                                           population density, plant vigor, and an                 actions have negated the necessity of                 Gorge visitors about the species and its
                                           evaluation of threats (e.g., trampling,                 having to reintroduce or augment                      threats. Signs about S. albopilosa have
                                           camping, invasive plants, herbivory).                   plants. We will continue to learn more                also been posted in five archaeologically
                                           KSNPC (2010, p. 5) also photographed                    about the species’ habitat requirements               sensitive rock shelters to aid in the
                                           each occurrence and made sketches that                                                                        protection of historical artifacts while
                                                                                                   as we work with DBNF and KSNPC
                                           showed individual patch locations
                                                                                                   through post-delisting monitoring. In                 promoting the conservation of S.
                                           within each occurrence or rock shelter.
                                                                                                   the course of this work, if a new threat              albopilosa. DBNF also displays
                                             Nieves and Day (2014, pp. 1–12)
                                           conducted a preliminary assessment of                   of any kind presents itself, we have                  photographs and provides information
                                           the microclimatic and pedological (soil)                identified in the PDM plan how we will                on S. albopilosa at its Gladie Cultural-
                                           conditions of 10 rock shelters inhabited                evaluate it.                                          Environmental Learning Center. KSNPC
                                           by the species. They documented                                                                               makes available on its Web site (http://
                                                                                                     The majority of recovery subactivities
                                           significant differences between the                                                                           naturepreserves.ky.gov) an S. albopilosa
                                                                                                   (3.2, 3.4–3.7) have been addressed;
                                           inside of rock shelters and the                                                                               factsheet and several threatened and
                                                                                                   information has been gained regarding                 endangered species lists that include
                                           surrounding environment with respect                    the species’ life history and ecological
                                           to temperature and relative humidity                                                                          information on S. albopilosa. In June
                                                                                                   requirements; and the species’ status                 2009, the Kentucky Department of Fish
                                           (habitats inside rock shelters were                     has improved since publication of the
                                           wetter and more humid) but no                                                                                 and Wildlife Resources published 2,000
                                                                                                   recovery plan. We were able to obtain                 copies of a revised threatened and
                                           significant differences with respect to                 the intended information identified in
                                           soil characteristics (macronutrients and                                                                      endangered species booklet (second
                                                                                                   recovery subactivity 3.3 (analyze habitat             edition), which contained a species
                                           acidity/alkalinity (pH)). Most of the rock              requirements) through implementation
                                           shelters they investigated were easterly                                                                      account for S. albopilosa. Because of the
                                                                                                   of other actions. Although the need to                numerous public information and
                                           or northerly facing, but their small
                                                                                                   conduct subactivity 3.3 has been                      education projects listed above, we
                                           sample size prevents any significant
                                           conclusions with respect to the                         removed with positive progress in this                consider this recovery action completed.
                                           importance of sunlight and solar                        plant’s recovery program, we intend
                                                                                                   throughout post-delisting monitoring to               Recovery Criteria
                                           radiation.
                                             Under recovery action 3.0, two of                     continue to work closely with                            The Recovery Plan states that S.
                                           seven subactivities remain to be                        researchers as they learn more about                  albopilosa will be considered for
                                           completed—the use of quantitative,                      this species and its habitat.                         delisting when 40 geographically
                                           permanent plots (3.1) and determination                                                                       distinct, self-sustaining occurrences are
                                                                                                   Recovery Action (4): Maintain Plants                  adequately protected and have been
                                           of specific habitat requirements (3.3).
                                                                                                   and Seeds Ex Situ                                     maintained for 10 years. An occurrence
                                           Permanent plots have not been
                                           established, but the species’ known                                                                           is considered as self-sustaining if there
                                                                                                     Seeds and plants of S. albopilosa have
                                           occurrences have been visited and                                                                             is evidence of successful reproduction
                                                                                                   not been maintained ex situ in any
                                           evaluated repeatedly (average of 3.6                                                                          and the number of stems is stable or
                                                                                                   museum, botanical garden, or other seed
                                           times) since completion of the recovery                                                                       increasing. An occurrence is considered
                                                                                                   storage facility; however, an August 29,              to be adequately protected when it is
                                           plan. These visits have allowed us to                   2016, conservation agreement between
                                           evaluate the species’ status and track the                                                                    legally protected, receives adequate
                                                                                                   the Service, the Kentucky Natural Lands               physical protection, and is assured of all
                                           number of stems and flowers. The                        Trust, and the Missouri Botanical
                                           purpose of recovery subactivity 3.1 was                                                                       required management. The Recovery
                                                                                                   Garden (MOBOT) will facilitate a seed-                Plan also noted that the requirements
                                           to evaluate demography, and we believe
                                                                                                   banking effort for S. albopilosa. Through             for delisting were preliminary and could
                                           the visits and work done in cooperation
                                                                                                   the agreement, MOBOT has secured                      change as more information about the
                                           with KSNPC provided enough
                                                                                                   funding that will allow it to collect,                biology of the species was known. Based
                                           population data on this plant for us to
                                           propose delisting it without establishing               curate, and maintain genetically diverse              on our current understanding of the
                                           permanent plots. The species’ specific                  and representative seed-bank accessions               species’ range, biology, and threats, we
                                           habitat requirements (e.g., light,                      to safeguard against future population                believe that the delisting criteria
                                           moisture, soils) are not well understood,               declines. These efforts will take place as            continue to be relevant. While the
                                           but preliminary investigations into the                 part of post-delisting monitoring                     number of occurrences has increased
                                           microclimate and soil conditions of rock                activities and will involve collection of             since completion of the Recovery Plan,
                                           shelters were completed by Nieves and                   seed from across the species’ range with              the species’ overall range and the type
                                           Day (2014, pp. 1–12), and additional                    deposition of the material at the                     of threats have not changed
                                           research is planned (Nieves and Day                     MOBOT. Seed collection will occur in                  dramatically. Furthermore, our current
                                           2014, pp. 11–12). In partnership with                   the fall of 2016. Because of the                      knowledge of the species’ biology
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                           DBNF and KSNPC, we have done                            conservation agreement described                      indicates that multiple, distinct
                                           extensive work together to reduce                       above, which outlines future seed-                    populations should be maintained in
                                           threats such as disturbance. The                        banking activities by MOBOT, we                       order to provide redundancy (protect
                                           purpose of recovery subactivity 3.3 was                 consider this recovery action to be on a              against stochastic events) and preserve
                                           to learn about habitat requirements of                  path toward completion and sufficient                 genetic diversity. We believe the
                                           this plant for the purposes of                          to contribute towards delisting.                      recovery goal of 40 stable, self-


                                      VerDate Sep<11>2014   14:37 Oct 07, 2016   Jkt 241001   PO 00000   Frm 00051   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11OCR1.SGM   11OCR1


                                           70050            Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 11, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

                                           sustaining, and protected occurrences is                stable, D-ranked occurrences (total of                prohibited within the cliffline zone:
                                           sufficient to address these needs. The                  30) to be self-sustaining, primarily due              Mineral, oil, or gas exploration and
                                           species’ current number of stable, self-                to their poor estimated viability and the             development (Forest Service Standard
                                           sustaining, and protected occurrences                   low number of stems (fewer than 300)                  1.C–MIN–1); road construction (1.C–
                                           (46) has exceeded this recovery goal (see               observed at these sites. However, due to              ENG–1); recreational facilities (1.C–
                                           discussion of Recovery Action 1 above).                 the existence of 46 geographically                    REC–1); recreational activities such as
                                           These occurrences are distributed across                distinct, self-sustaining occurrences, we             rock climbing and rappelling (C–REC–
                                           the species’ range and contain more                     conclude that we have met and                         2); camping (1.C–REC–3); and campfires
                                           than 75 percent of the species’ total                   exceeded the criterion of 40                          (1.C–REC–4). Other activities such as
                                           number of stems.                                        geographically distinct, self-sustaining              wildlife management (1.C–WLF) and
                                              The criteria for delisting S. albopilosa             occurrences.                                          vegetation management (1.C–VEG) are
                                           have been met, as described below.                         While we consider only 46 out of the               limited and strictly controlled. This
                                           Additionally, the level of protection                   117 total extant occurrences to currently             Prescription Area is classified as
                                           currently afforded to the species and its               be secure (adequately protected) and                  ‘‘Unsuitable for Timber Production,’’
                                           habitat, as well as the current status of               self-sustaining (approximately 39                     but timber harvests may occur on an
                                           threats, are outlined below in the                      percent of the total occurrences), these              unscheduled basis to attain a desired
                                           Summary of Factors Affecting the                        occurrences contain the majority of the               future condition. Harvest of wood
                                           Species section.                                        total number of stems of the species.                 products may occur only as an output
                                              Currently, there are 117 extant                      The total number of stems now stands                  in pursuing other resource objectives
                                           occurrences. As described above, an                     at approximately 174,000, and the 46                  (USFS 2004, pp. 3.5–3.8). DBNF
                                           occurrence is defined as a ‘‘discrete                   secure, self-sustaining occurrences                   monitors cliffline habitats and protects
                                           group of plants beneath a single rock                   contain approximately 131,000 stems, or               them as needed through law
                                           shelter or on a single rock ledge,’’ and                about 75 percent of the species’ total                enforcement activities, construction of
                                           each occurrence is considered                           number. If we consider the five                       fences, trail diversion, and placement of
                                           ‘‘geographically distinct’’ as described                additional self-sustaining occurrences                signs.
                                           in the recovery criteria. We currently                  located on private property, the total                   Since the species was listed, we have
                                           consider 81 (69 percent) of the 117                     number of stems increases to 140,500                  worked closely with KSNPC and DBNF
                                           extant Solidago albopilosa occurrences                  stems, or about 81 percent of the                     on the management and protection of S.
                                           to be stable, meaning no change has                     species’ total number. While the                      albopilosa. Management activities have
                                           been detected (over an average                          remaining 65 occurrences on DBNF are                  included trail diversion (away from S.
                                           monitoring period of 11.1 years) in their               not currently considered self-sustaining,             albopilosa occurrences), installation of
                                           general rank or status. Of these, we                    all of these occurrences will continue to             protective fencing, and placement of
                                           consider the A-, B-, and C-ranked                       receive protection and management                     informational signs in rock shelters,
                                           occurrences (total of 46) to be                         under DBNF’s LRMP and we expect,                      along trails, and at trailheads. These
                                           adequately protected and self-sustaining                based on the past 10 years of                         activities and other management actions
                                           as defined by the Recovery Plan. We                     monitoring, their status will likely                  included in the DBNF’s LRMP (USFS
                                           consider these occurrences to be self-                  remain stable or continue to improve.                 2004, pp. 3.5–3.8) have assisted in
                                           sustaining for the following reasons:                      With respect to protection, 111 of 117             recovery of the species, as reflected in
                                              (1) The number of stems at these                     extant occurrences (95 percent) occur on              the large number of stable occurrences
                                           occurrences has been stable or                          the DBNF and receive management and                   (81), self-sustaining occurrences (51
                                           increasing over an average monitoring                   protection through DBNF’s LRMP                        occurrences with ranks of A, B, or C),
                                           period of 11.1 years;                                   (USFS 2004, pp. 1.1–1.10). As specified               and the long period (greater than 11
                                              (2) these natural occurrences contain                in the LRMP, S. albopilosa habitats                   years) during which this trend has been
                                           a relatively high number of stems (range                receive protection and management                     maintained. On August 29, 2016, we
                                           of 797–9,200);                                          consideration as part of the Cliffline                finalized a cooperative management
                                              (3) the estimated viability of these                 Community Prescription (or                            agreement among the Service, DBNF,
                                           occurrences ranges from fair to                         management) Area (USFS 2004, pp. 3.5–                 and KSNPC that will provide for the
                                           excellent;                                              3.8). The Cliffline Community is defined              long-term protection of the species. The
                                              (4) the threat level at these                        as the area between 100-feet slope-
                                                                                                                                                         management agreement outlines a
                                           occurrences is generally low (average                   distance from the top of the cliff and
                                                                                                                                                         number of conservation actions that will
                                           recreational impact of 2.5 or less on a                 200-feet slope-distance from the
                                                                                                                                                         benefit the species:
                                           scale of 1 (low impact) to 5 (high)); and               dripline of the cliffline. A cliffline is                (1) Maintenance of current fencing;
                                              (5) the observed reproduction                        defined as a naturally occurring,                        (2) installation and maintenance of
                                           (flowering stems) at these occurrences                  exposed, and nearly vertical rock                     fencing at five new occurrences;
                                           has been relatively high, averaging 75–                 structure at least 10 feet (3.05 meters                  (3) evaluation of trail diversion,
                                           90 percent of stems in nearly all cases                 (m)) tall and 100 feet (30.05 m) long. All            rerouting, or closure at 39 occurrences
                                           (KSNPC 2010, p. 10).                                    known S. albopilosa occurrences occur                 identified by KSNPC (2010, entire);
                                              We consider these occurrences to be                  within habitats fitting this description                 (4) placement of new informational
                                           adequately protected because of their                   and, therefore, are included in this                  signs at occurrences with high
                                           location (all are located on DBNF land);                Prescription Area. For the Cliffline                  visitation;
                                           trends in occurrence data gathered by                   Community area, conservation goals in                    (5) monitoring of extant occurrences;
                                           KSNPC, DBNF, and the Service;                           the LRMP include: (1) Maintenance of                     (6) protection of extant occurrences
                                           observations about threats reported by                  the unique physical and microclimatic                 through DBNF patrols; and
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                           KSNPC (2010, pp. 5–18); conservation                    conditions in these habitats, (2) the                    (7) continuation of education and
                                           actions described in DBNF’s LRMP; and                   recovery of S. albopilosa, and (3) the                outreach efforts. The cooperative
                                           information in our files concerning                     protection of these habitats against                  management agreement will remain in
                                           specific DBNF conservation actions,                     anthropogenic disturbance (USFS 2004,                 place until August 2022.
                                           such as trail closure, placement of signs,              p. 3.6). To meet these goals, the                        In summary, most major recovery
                                           and fencing. We do not consider the                     following activities or resource uses are             actions are complete, and significant


                                      VerDate Sep<11>2014   14:37 Oct 07, 2016   Jkt 241001   PO 00000   Frm 00052   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11OCR1.SGM   11OCR1


                                                            Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 11, 2016 / Rules and Regulations                                        70051

                                           progress has been made on the                           without providing supporting                          S. albopilosa is recovered and no longer
                                           remaining actions (life history/                        information will not be considered in                 requires the protection of the Act.
                                           ecological studies and ex situ seed                     making a determination, as section                    Nonetheless, the Service intends to
                                           conservation). Completion of these                      4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that a                  work closely with all Federal and State
                                           actions has contributed to achieving and                determination as to whether any species               conservation agencies during the course
                                           exceeding the recovery criteria: 40                     is a threatened or endangered species                 of post-delisting monitoring. We will
                                           geographically distinct, self-sustaining                must be made ‘‘solely on the basis of the             follow the benchmarks in the plan for
                                           occurrences are adequately protected                    best scientific and commercial data                   evaluating success of efforts for this
                                           and have been maintained for over 10                    available.’’                                          plant. We also believe protections
                                           years. The 46 secure, self-sustaining                                                                         outlined by DBNF’s LRMP, which are
                                                                                                   State and Peer Review Comments
                                           occurrences contain 75 percent of the                                                                         described in the Recovery Criteria
                                           species’ total number of stems, and thus                   In accordance with our peer review                 section of this document, will provide
                                           represent 75 percent of the species’ total              policy, which was published on July 1,                long-lasting benefits to the species.
                                           population. These secure, self-                         1994 (59 FR 34270), we solicited expert               DBNF’s LRMP was completed in 2004
                                           sustaining occurrences, as well as 93                   opinion on the proposed rule and the                  and is still in effect, and USFS LRMPs
                                           percent of the species’ remaining                       draft post-delisting monitoring plan                  are generally revised every 10 to 15
                                           occurrences, currently receive                          from four knowledgeable, independent                  years or when conditions change
                                           protection and management through                       individuals with scientific expertise that            significantly. Actually, the last LRMP to
                                           implementation of DBNF’s LRMP.                          includes familiarity with Solidago                    cover DBNF was in effect for 18 years
                                           Therefore, we conclude that the goals                   albopilosa and its habitat, biological                (1985 to 2003). Also, on August 29,
                                           and criteria outlined in the Recovery                   needs, threats, and recovery efforts. We              2016, we finalized a cooperative
                                           Plan have been achieved.                                received responses from all four peer                 management agreement among the
                                                                                                   reviewers. All peer reviewers supported               Service, DBNF, and KSNPC that will
                                           Summary of Comments and                                 our conclusions and provided                          provide for the long-term protection of
                                           Recommendations                                         additional information, clarifications,               the species until 2022.
                                             In the proposed rule published                        and suggestions to improve the final
                                           September 1, 2015 (80 FR 52717), we                     rule.                                                 Public Comments
                                           requested that all interested parties                      Section 4(b)(5)(A)(ii) of the Act states             Comment (2): Three commenters
                                           submit written comments on the                          that the Secretary must give actual                   disagreed with the proposed delisting of
                                           proposal by November 2, 2015. We also                   notice of a proposed regulation under                 white-haired goldenrod. In general, they
                                           contacted appropriate Federal and State                 section 4(a) to the State agency in each              stated that an insufficient number of
                                           agencies, scientific experts and                        State in which the species is believed to             protected, viable occurrences were
                                           organizations, and other interested                     occur, and invite the comments of such                known for delisting to be considered.
                                           parties and invited them to comment on                  agency. Section 4(i) of the Act directs                 Our response: Under the Recovery
                                           the proposal. Legal notices inviting                    that the Secretary will submit to the                 Plan, Solidago albopilosa may be
                                           general public comment were published                   State agency a written justification for              considered for delisting when 40
                                           in the Lexington Herald-Leader and                      his or her failure to adopt regulations               geographically distinct, self-sustaining
                                           Louisville Courier Journal. We reopened                 consistent with the agency’s comments                 occurrences are adequately protected
                                           the comment period on February 26,                      or petition. The Service submitted the                and have been maintained for 10 years.
                                           2016 (81 FR 9798), in order to conduct                  proposed regulation to KNSPC, the State               Currently, a total of 46 geographically
                                           peer review and provide interested                      agency responsible for the conservation               distinct occurrences are considered to
                                           parties an additional opportunity to                    of listed plants in Kentucky. KSNPC’s                 be self-sustaining (viable) and
                                           comment on the proposed rule and draft                  chief botanist provided peer review of                adequately protected, and these
                                           post-delisting monitoring plan. We                      the proposed rule.                                    occurrences have been maintained for
                                           requested that all interested parties                      We reviewed all comments received                  more than 11 years. All remaining
                                           submit written comments by March 28,                    from the peer reviewers for substantive               occurrences (of all ranks) will contribute
                                           2016.                                                   issues and new information regarding                  to the viability and persistence of S.
                                             During both comment periods for the                   the delisting of white-haired goldenrod.              albopilosa into the future. Therefore, the
                                           proposed rule, we received a total of 14                Peer reviewer comments are addressed                  recovery criteria for this species have
                                           comment letters or statements directly                  in the following summary.                             been met. In addition, threats to this
                                           addressing the proposed action. These                      Comment (1): Two peer reviewers                    plant have been removed or reduced to
                                           included 4 comment letters from peer                    stated that management may be needed                  a point where it no longer requires
                                           reviewers and 10 comment letters from                   beyond the period (5 years) covered by                protection under the Act.
                                           the general public that are posted on                   the post-delisting monitoring plan to                   Comment (3): One commenter agreed
                                           Federal docket no. FWS–R4–ES–2014–                      address potential impacts from invasive               with the delisting of Solidago albopilosa
                                           0054. All 4 peer reviewers and 7 of 10                  plants and recreational activities (e.g.,             but stated that the State of Kentucky
                                           public commenters supported the                         hiking, rock climbing). This comment                  should conduct routine monitoring of
                                           proposed action to delist white-haired                  relates to just our PDM plan. Both                    rare plants, such as S. albopilosa, and
                                           goldenrod. Three public commenters                      reviewers commented that cooperative                  pass legislation that protects these
                                           objected to the proposed action.                        efforts among the Service, DBNF, and                  species.
                                             Several public commenters simply                      KSNPC should address any future                         Our response: Most Solidago
                                           expressed opposition to or support for                  threats to the species.                               albopilosa occurrences (about 95
                                           the proposed delisting of Solidago                         Our response: We agree with the                    percent) are located on Federal property
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                           albopilosa without providing any                        reviewers that invasive plants and                    (DBNF) and receive management and
                                           additional supporting information. We                   recreational use in some areas may                    protection under DBNF’s LRMP. The
                                           have noted those responses but, as                      adversely affect S. albopilosa                        remaining occurrences are located on
                                           stated in our proposed rule, submissions                occurrences in the future; however, the               private property and, while they could
                                           merely stating support for or opposition                best scientific and commercial data                   benefit from protections provided by
                                           to the action under consideration                       available to the Service demonstrate that             State legislation, the Service cannot


                                      VerDate Sep<11>2014   14:37 Oct 07, 2016   Jkt 241001   PO 00000   Frm 00053   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11OCR1.SGM   11OCR1


                                           70052            Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 11, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

                                           require a State to pass such legislation.               the foreseeable future. It contains                   (Taylor pers. comm. 2013). As for
                                           With respect to monitoring and                          updated information from that                         recreational impacts, most Solidago
                                           protection of rare plants like S.                       presented in the proposed rule (80 FR                 albopilosa occurrences are located in
                                           albopilosa, the DBNF and KSNPC have                     52717, September 1, 2015).                            remote ravines of the Red River Gorge
                                           worked closely with the Service and                                                                           or grow along inaccessible cliff lines
                                                                                                   A. The Present or Threatened
                                           other conservation partners over the                                                                          that are seldom visited or disturbed by
                                                                                                   Destruction, Modification, or
                                           past 20 years to implement conservation                                                                       campers, hikers, and rock climbers.
                                                                                                   Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range
                                           actions, including monitoring, that have                                                                      Therefore, the threat magnitude at these
                                           benefited this and other rare species. We                  The final rule to list S. albopilosa as            sites is low.
                                           expect these collaborations to continue.                threatened (53 FR 11612, April 7, 1988)                  Occurrences located in areas with
                                                                                                   identified the following habitat threats:             more frequent visitor use, typically
                                           Summary of Changes From the                             ground disturbance and trampling                      areas near DBNF and user-defined trails,
                                           Proposed Rule                                           associated with unlawful archaeological               generally have suffered more severe
                                              We have considered all comments                      activities and recreational activities                habitat disturbance and trampling in the
                                           and information received during both                    such as camping, hiking, and rock                     past. Site protection and habitat
                                           comment periods for the proposed rule                   climbing. The species occupies a scenic               management efforts by DBNF, working
                                           to delist white-haired goldenrod. In this               and unique geological area that is                    cooperatively with KSNPC and the
                                           final rule, we have made only minor                     heavily visited by hikers, campers, rock-             Service, have helped to reduce the
                                           changes based on comments received                      climbers, and other nature enthusiasts.               magnitude of threats at these sites.
                                           during the public comment period. We                    The U.S. Forest Service estimates                     These occurrences have benefited from
                                           received supplementary information                      recreational use of the Red River Gorge               their location on the DBNF and
                                           from DBNF on seed germination,                          at approximately 500,000 visitor days                 management and protective actions
                                           seedling viability, and the potential                   per year (Taylor pers. comm. 2013).                   provided under DBNF’s LRMP (USFS
                                           threat posed by fungal infection. These                 Recreational activities such as camping,              2004, pp. 1.1–1.10), which prevents
                                           details have been incorporated into this                hiking, and rock climbing can pose a                  general land disturbance and prohibits
                                           final rule.                                             threat to the species through inadvertent             or limits logging and other DBNF-
                                                                                                   trampling and ground disturbance of S.                defined activities near cliffline habitats.
                                           Summary of Factors Affecting the                        albopilosa habitats. Evidence of                      The LRMP also protects rock shelters
                                           Species                                                 trampling and ground disturbance                      from vandalism and forbids removal of
                                              Section 4 of the Act and its                         within rock shelters has been observed                threatened and endangered species from
                                           implementing regulations (50 CFR part                   repeatedly by KSNPC and DBNF                          these areas (see details in Recovery
                                           424) set forth the procedures for listing               personnel (KSNPC 2010, pp. 13–14).                    Criteria section).
                                           species, reclassifying species, or                         Habitat disturbance and trampling                     The DBNF monitors these sites and
                                           removing species from listed status. We                 associated with recreational activities               protects them as needed through law
                                           may determine that a species is an                      (camping, hiking, and rock climbing)                  enforcement efforts, construction of
                                           endangered or threatened species                        and archaeological looting in the past                fences, trail diversion, and placement of
                                           because of one or more of the five                      have posed a significant threat to the                signs. To protect occurrences from
                                           factors described in section 4(a)(1) of the             species. The Red River Gorge is a                     trampling, fire-building, and digging,
                                           Act:                                                    popular recreational area (Taylor pers.               signs have been posted at all entry
                                              (A) The present or threatened                        comm. 2013). Many trails and                          points to the Red River Gorge asking
                                           destruction, modification, or                           recreational areas within the Gorge are               visitors not to remove or disturb
                                           curtailment of its habitat or range;                    located near Solidago albopilosa                      historical resources and providing
                                              (B) overutilization for commercial,                  occurrences, and rock shelters are often              visitors with biological and status
                                           recreational, scientific, or educational                targeted as rock climbing, hiking, and                information on S. albopilosa. Similar
                                           purposes;                                               camping sites. Use of rock shelters and               signs were also placed inside at least
                                              (C) disease or predation;                            cliff lines by campers, hikers, and rock              five archaeologically significant rock
                                              (D) the inadequacy of existing                       climbers has contributed to physical                  shelters that contained S. albopilosa.
                                           regulatory mechanisms; or                               habitat disturbance and has led to                    Beginning in February 2000, DBNF
                                              (E) other natural or manmade factors                 trampling of plants in rock shelters                  began to redirect trails and install
                                           affecting its continued existence.                      (Service 1993, p. 7; White and Drozda                 fencing (chicken wire) around selected
                                              We must consider these same five                     2006, pp. 124–125; KSNPC 2010, pp.                    rock shelters (those with greatest
                                           factors in delisting a species.                         13–14). In addition to habitat                        visitation) containing S. albopilosa.
                                              A recovered species is one that no                   disturbance caused by recreationists, the             Signs were also placed at these shelters,
                                           longer meets the Act’s definition of                    presence of Native American artifacts                 alerting visitors to the presence of the
                                           endangered or threatened. Determining                   within the Red River Gorge has                        species and warning them against
                                           whether the status of a species has                     contributed to digging and                            potential damage to plants. Signs and/
                                           improved to the point that it can be                    archaeological looting in S. albopilosa               or fencing were placed and have been
                                           delisted or downlisted requires                         habitats (rock shelters). Approximately               maintained at a total of 21 occurrences,
                                           consideration of same five categories of                18 Solidago albopilosa occurrences                    and DBNF personnel continue to visit
                                           threats identified above. This analysis is              have been extirpated due to human                     these sites annually, checking the
                                           an evaluation of both the threats                       activities, and many heavily visited rock             condition of signs and fencing and
                                           currently facing the species and the                    shelters have been modified to the point              making repairs as needed.
                                           threats that are reasonably likely to                   that these habitats are no longer suitable               Monitoring results show that
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                           affect the species in the foreseeable                   for the species (KSNPC 2010, pp. 6–7).                implementation of DBNF’s LRMP and
                                           future following the delisting and the                     According to the DBNF, impacts from                the completion of additional
                                           removal of the Act’s protections.                       archaeological looting are now                        conservation actions such as fencing
                                              The following analysis examines all                  infrequent, and these activities no                   and sign placement have had a positive
                                           five factors currently affecting or that                longer pose a significant threat to S.                effect on the species, the number of
                                           are likely to affect S. albopilosa within               albopilosa within the Red River Gorge                 stems has increased, and the level of


                                      VerDate Sep<11>2014   14:37 Oct 07, 2016   Jkt 241001   PO 00000   Frm 00054   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11OCR1.SGM   11OCR1


                                                            Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 11, 2016 / Rules and Regulations                                         70053

                                           habitat disturbance and trampling                       do not appear to be facing a greater level            fungus was not extensive within the
                                           associated with recreational activities                 of impact, and they represent a small                 population and did not appear to harm
                                           has been reduced (KSNPC 2010, 24 pp.).                  proportion (five percent) of the overall              the plants. The fungus may have been
                                           Of the 21 occurrences on the DBNF                       population of the species.                            triggered by weather conditions in 2014
                                           where fencing and signs were added, 20                     Summary of Factor A: Impacts                       and was not observed by DBNF in 2015
                                           are considered to be stable and the 1                   associated with archaeological looting                (Taylor 2016, pers. comm.).
                                           declining occurrence will be protected                  and recreational activities have been                    Summary of Factor C: We continue to
                                           through expanded fencing. Additional                    well documented in the past, but                      conclude that neither disease nor
                                           evidence that these conservation efforts                current monitoring data suggest that the              predation are threats to S. albopilosa.
                                           have improved the status of S.                          magnitude of these threats has
                                                                                                                                                         D. The Inadequacy of Existing
                                           albopilosa occurrences on the DBNF is                   sufficiently decreased. Implementation
                                                                                                                                                         Regulatory Mechanisms
                                           the large number of stable occurrences                  of the DBNF’s LRMP and specific
                                           (75) and the relatively high number of                  conservation actions such as fencing                     Populations of S. albopilosa within
                                           secure, self-sustaining occurrences (46)                and sign placement have had a positive                the DBNF are protected from damage
                                           observed by DBNF, KSNPC, and the                        effect on the species and have reduced                and unauthorized taking by Federal
                                           Service. The 46 secure, self-sustaining                 the threat associated with recreational               regulation (36 CFR 261.9). This
                                           occurrences exceed the number                           disturbance. The recovery goal of 40                  regulation would apply regardless of
                                           identified in the recovery criteria to                  stable, self-sustaining, protected                    whether the species is listed because S.
                                           allow consideration of delisting.                       occurrences has been exceeded by 6,                   albopilosa would still be considered a
                                              Additional evidence that conservation                and these trends have held for more                   sensitive, rare, or unique species on the
                                           actions have had a positive effect on the               than 10 years. Because we expect that                 DBNF under this Federal regulation.
                                           species is the relatively low recreational              the lands containing the 46 secure and                However, the final listing rule (53 FR
                                           impacts observed by KSNPC (2010, pp.                    self-sustaining occurrences will remain               11612, April 7, 1988) identified
                                           13–14) at the majority of DBNF                          permanently protected in Federal                      inadequate regulatory mechanisms as a
                                           occurrences. Recreational impacts have                  ownership and will be managed to                      threat to S. albopilosa because limited
                                           been assessed by KSNPC since the mid-                   maintain or improve current habitat                   manpower and the remoteness of many
                                           1990s (White and Drozda 2006, pp. 124–                  conditions (see Service 2016, entire), we             occurrences on the DBNF makes
                                           125; KSNPC 2010, pp. 13–14). Their                      find that the present or threatened                   enforcement difficult. The DBNF has
                                           qualitative ranking scheme estimates the                destruction, modification, or                         taken several steps to remedy this
                                           percent disturbance of available habitat                curtailment of its habitat or range is no             situation. As noted above, S. albopilosa
                                           and uses a scale of 1 (little or no impact)             longer a threat to the continued                      receives management and protection
                                           to 5 (high impact, greater than 50                      existence of S. albopilosa.                           through DBNF’s LRMP and its
                                           percent of available habitat disturbed) to                                                                    conservation goals for the Cliffline
                                           produce a disturbance rank. Based on                    B. Overutilization for Commercial,                    Community Prescription Area. The
                                           recent evaluations by KSNPC (KSNPC                      Recreational, Scientific, or Educational              National Forest Management Act
                                           2010, 40 pp.; White pers. comm. 2014),                  Purposes                                              (NFMA), and regulations and policies
                                           70 occurrences (60 percent) are                           Both the final rule to list S. albopilosa           implementing the NFMA are the main
                                           classified as low impact (rank of 1–2),                 as threatened (53 FR 11612, April 7,                  regulatory mechanisms that guide land
                                           8 occurrences (7 percent) are classified                1988) and the Recovery Plan (Service                  management on the DBNF, which
                                           as medium impact (rank of 3), and 39                    1993, p. 7) identified overutilization for            contains 111 of the 117 extant
                                           occurrences (33 percent) are classified                 recreational purposes as a threat to the              occurrences of S. albopilosa. Since
                                           as high impact (rank of 4–5). Overall, 67               species. However, while the use of                    listing, the DBNF has included S.
                                           percent of DBNF’s occurrences are                       habitat for recreational purposes, as                 albopilosa and its habitat in its resource
                                           considered to be exposed to low to                      discussed under Factor A, has impacted                management plans. These plans are
                                           medium recreational impacts. KSNPC                      the species in the past, there is no                  required by the NFMA and the Federal
                                           (2010, p. 14) also noted that they did not              evidence that the plant itself is or was              Land Policy and Management Act of
                                           observe many new recreational impacts                   utilized for commercial, recreational,                1976. The NFMA requires revision of
                                           during their surveys in 2008 and 2009.                  scientific, or educational purposes. We,              the Plans every 15 years; however, plans
                                           Most of the documented recreational                     therefore, discuss impacts from                       may be amended or revised as needed.
                                           impacts such as established trails,                     recreational use of habitat for S.                    Management plans are required to be in
                                           permanent structures within rock                        albopilosa under Factor A above.                      effect at all times (in other words, if the
                                           shelters (couches, chairs, fire pits), and                Summary of Factor B: We conclude                    revision does not occur, the previous
                                           camp sites had been in place since                      that overutilization is not a threat to S.            plan remains in effect) and to be in
                                           before S. albopilosa monitoring began in                albopilosa.                                           compliance with various Federal
                                           1996 (KSNPC 2010, p. 14).                                                                                     regulations. We expect continued
                                              The six occurrences on privately                     C. Disease or Predation                               implementation of the LRMP and expect
                                           owned lands currently do not benefit                       The listing rule for S. albopilosa (53             that any future revisions will consider
                                           from any formal protection or                           FR 11612, April 7, 1988) did not                      conservation of S. albopilosa and its
                                           management and, therefore, could face                   identify disease or predation as a threat             Cliffline Community habitats.
                                           higher magnitude threats (e.g., habitat                 to the species. Plants are occasionally                  Specific actions that DBNF has taken
                                           disturbance) than those located on the                  browsed by herbivores, such as white-                 under the LRMP include measures to
                                           DBNF. However, based on recent survey                   tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus),                 reduce impacts of recreational activities
                                           results by KSNPC, all six of these                      wood rats (Neotoma spp.), and                         to S. albopilosa and its habitat as
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                           private occurrences have been ranked as                 caterpillars (Order Lepidoptera), but we              discussed under Factor A. As discussed
                                           ‘‘stable,’’ and five of the six are                     have no information that grazing by                   above, these and other protection and
                                           considered to be self-sustaining (A-,                   these species represents a threat to the              management actions taken by DBNF
                                           B-, or C-rank) (KSNPC 2010, p. 8). While                species (Taylor 2016, pers. comm.). In                under their LRMP (USFS 2004, pp. 1.1–
                                           these occurrences potentially could face                2014, the DBNF observed a rust fungus                 1.10) have been successful at improving
                                           a greater level of threats, they currently              on the leaves in one population, but the              the status of the species. Monitoring


                                      VerDate Sep<11>2014   14:37 Oct 07, 2016   Jkt 241001   PO 00000   Frm 00055   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11OCR1.SGM   11OCR1


                                           70054            Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 11, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

                                           results from these occurrences show                     were not considered to be an imminent                    The hemlock woolly adelgid
                                           that these efforts have had a positive                  threat to white-haired goldenrod, but                 (Adeleges tsugae), an aphid-like insect
                                           effect on the species. Specifically,                    the final listing rule identified the need            that is native to Asia, has been
                                           disturbance from trampling, camping,                    for management planning that would                    identified as a potential threat to
                                           and rock climbing has been reduced in                   take into account the requirements of                 Solidago albopilosa because it has the
                                           these areas, and the number of stems                    the species to ensure its continued                   potential to severely damage stands of
                                           has increased.                                          existence.                                            eastern hemlocks (Tsuga canadensis)
                                              The species is listed as endangered by                  Some surveys and status assessments                that occur near rock shelters and cliffs
                                           the State of Kentucky (KSNPC 2005),                     of Solidago albopilosa identified several             occupied by the species (Service 2009b,
                                           but this designation conveys no legal                   potential threats under Factor E. These               p. 2; KSNPC 2010, p. 15). The hemlock
                                           protection to occurrences located on                    included competition from invasive                    woolly adelgid was introduced in the
                                           private property. Consequently,                         plants, the loss of eastern hemlock                   Pacific Northwest during the 1920s and
                                           occurrences on privately owned land                     (Tsuga canadensis), low genetic                       has since spread throughout the eastern
                                           could face higher magnitude threats                     diversity and small population size, and              United States, reaching Kentucky by
                                           (e.g., habitat disturbance) than those                  the effects of climate change (Service                2006. The species creates an extreme
                                           located on the DBNF. Based on recent                    2009a, p. 9; Service 2009b, p. 2; KSNPC               amount of damage to natural stands of
                                           survey results by KSNPC, however, only                  2010, pp. 13–14). KSNPC (2010, p. 14)                 hemlock, specifically eastern hemlock
                                           6 of 117 extant S. albopilosa                           reported several invasive plant species               and Carolina hemlock (Tsuga
                                           occurrences (5 percent) are located on                  in habitats occupied by white-haired                  caroliniana). The Recovery action plan
                                           private land, and 5 of these occurrences                goldenrod, but the most common                        (Service 2009b, p. 2) concluded that the
                                           have been ranked as ‘‘stable’’ (A-, B-, or              species included Japanese stilt grass                 loss of eastern hemlock within the Red
                                           C-rank) by KSNPC (KSNPC 2010, p. 8).                    (Microstegium vimineum), princess tree                River Gorge could result in
                                           Therefore, based on this greater than 10-               (Paulownia tomentosa), Japanese                       microclimatic changes (increased light,
                                           year data set, the majority of private                  spiraea (Spiraea japonica), common                    decreased moisture, increased leaf litter)
                                           occurrences are also stable.                            chickweed (Stellaria media), and                      in and near rock shelters that may
                                              Summary of Factor D: Occurrences of                                                                        negatively affect white-haired
                                                                                                   common mullein (Verbascum thapsus).
                                           S. albopilosa located on the DBNF                                                                             goldenrod. Despite this potential threat,
                                                                                                   Of the invasive plant species, Japanese
                                           receive protection due to their location                                                                      KSNPC (2010, p. 15) demonstrated in
                                                                                                   stilt grass was the most common
                                           on Federal property, and these                                                                                their evaluation that eastern hemlock
                                                                                                   species. It was observed growing in
                                           occurrences are managed and protected                                                                         was actually a minor component of the
                                                                                                   direct competition with 23 S. albopilosa
                                           under DBNF’s LRMP (USFS 2004, pp.                                                                             canopy surrounding rock shelters
                                                                                                   occurrences. However, invasive species
                                           1.1–1.10). This protected status and                                                                          inhabited by the species. Consequently,
                                           management actions included in the                      were absent from 94 of 117 extant S.
                                                                                                   albopilosa occurrences (about 80                      the eventual loss of eastern hemlocks
                                           LRMP will continue to provide adequate                                                                        would not represent a significant change
                                           regulatory protection for these                         percent) and 53 of 81 stable occurrences
                                                                                                   (65 percent) (KSNPC 2010, p. 14;                      to the canopy surrounding these rock
                                           occurrences. Monitoring results show                                                                          shelters and would, therefore, not
                                           that DBNF’s management actions have                     Service 2014, pp. 1–6). For the 23
                                                                                                                                                         represent a significant threat to the
                                           had a positive effect on the species.                   occurrences in direct competition with
                                                                                                                                                         species.
                                           Specifically, disturbance from                          invasive plants, most (16 of 23 (70                      Potential impacts that may be
                                           trampling, camping, and rock climbing                   percent)) were stable or increased over               associated with low genetic variability
                                           has been reduced and the number of                      the 10-year monitoring period (KSNPC                  such as inbreeding depression, reduced
                                           stems has stabilized or increased. Based                2010, p. 14; Service 2014, pp. 1–6).                  fitness, or reduced adaptive capacity
                                           on the best available information for                      We do not have data that specifically              (ability to respond to and adapt to
                                           both private and public lands                           address the effects of climate change                 changing conditions) have been
                                           occurrences, and the fact that existing                 with regard to invasive species                       identified as a potential threat to other
                                           regulatory mechanisms and associated                    attributes such as distribution or range              listed plant species, but we have no
                                           management practices will continue on                   and the relation to white haired                      information suggesting that low genetic
                                           public lands, we conclude that existing                 goldenrod. There are some data showing                variability affects S. albopilosa (53 FR
                                           regulatory mechanisms are adequate.                     that more common aggressive invasive                  11614, April 7, 1988; Service 2009a,
                                                                                                   species like kudzu (Pueraria lobata)                  entire; KSNPC 2010, 24 pp.). Esselman
                                           E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors                     may expand into greater ranges due to                 and Crawford (1997, pp. 245–257)
                                           Affecting Its Continued Existence                       possible effects of climate change                    reported that S. albopilosa exhibits
                                              Other natural or manmade factors                     (Bradley et al. 2009). However, species               genetic diversity both within and
                                           were first identified as a threat to                    like Japanese stilt grass are more recent             between populations (genetic diversity
                                           Solidago albopilosa due to the species’                 invaders to this area of the Southeast,               is widely spread among populations,
                                           specialized habitats (sandstone rock                    and other than the data presented above,              and populations are not genetically
                                           shelters and cliff habitats of the Red                  we do not have further information or                 homogenous). The highest level of
                                           River Gorge) and the perceived                          data that indicates competition from                  genetic diversity was observed within
                                           vulnerability of these habitats to any                  invasive plants will change in                        (as opposed to between) populations.
                                           physical or climatic change (52 FR                      significance as a threat to the species.              Consequently, we do not believe that
                                           13798, April 24, 1987; 53 FR 11612,                     Our current data suggest that Japanese                the potential effects associated with low
                                           April 7, 1988). In the species’ final                   stilt grass is not a significant threat to S.         genetic variability threaten the
                                           listing rule (53 FR 11612) published in                 albopilosa as 70 percent of occurrences               continued existence of S. albopilosa
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                           1988, the Service concluded that even                   in direct competition with Japanese stilt             now or in the foreseeable future.
                                           minor changes in the surrounding forest                 grass were stable or increased over the                  Some Solidago albopilosa
                                           (e.g., loss of canopy trees) could impact               last 10 years. Therefore, we do not                   occurrences may be more vulnerable to
                                           the species through drying, erosion, and                believe that competition from invasive                extirpation due to their small
                                           competition with sun-tolerant species.                  plants is a significant threat to the                 population size and poor estimated
                                           At the time, these potential changes                    species now or in the foreseeable future.             viability. The low number of stems


                                      VerDate Sep<11>2014   14:37 Oct 07, 2016   Jkt 241001   PO 00000   Frm 00056   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11OCR1.SGM   11OCR1


                                                            Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 11, 2016 / Rules and Regulations                                       70055

                                           (typically less than 300), poor estimated               National Climate Change Viewer                        precipitation (annual mean increase of
                                           viability, and high recreational impacts                (NCCV), a climate-visualization Web                   0.02–0.03 cm/day (+0.008–0.012 in/
                                           associated with D-ranked occurrences                    site tool developed by the U.S.                       day)) relative to the period 1950–2005.
                                           make these occurrences more vulnerable                  Geological Survey (USGS) that allows                  Because the average annual increase in
                                           to stochastic events. Currently, 62 of the              the user to visualize climate projections             precipitation is predicted to be only
                                           species’ 117 extant occurrences (53                     at the State, county, and watershed level             slightly higher, the increased
                                           percent) are D-ranked. Even though                      (Adler and Hostetler 2013, entire; http://            evaporative deficit and the loss in
                                           these occurrences may be more                           www.usgs.gov/climate_landuse/clu_rd/                  runoff, snowfall, and soil storage is
                                           vulnerable to extirpation, the overall                  nccv.asp). Initially, the viewer was                  primarily a result of higher maximum
                                           threat to the species is minimal because                designed to provide information for                   and minimum temperatures. The most
                                           these occurrences contain less than 20                  States and counties on projected                      dramatic shift is predicted for soil
                                           percent of the species’ total number of                 temperature and precipitation through                 storage, which will decrease
                                           stems. Additionally, a small population                 the 21st century. The viewer was                      significantly between mid-May and late
                                           size in and of itself is not indicative of              expanded in 2014 to provide                           November relative to 1950–2005.
                                           being in danger of extinction, and this                 information on associated projected                   Despite the slight increase in predicted
                                           was likely never a naturally common or                  changes in snowpack, soil moisture,                   precipitation, the coincident warming
                                           abundant species. Some Solidago                         runoff, and evaporative deficit for U.S.              means that habitats are unlikely to
                                           albopilosa occurrences may have always                  States and counties and for USGS                      maintain their current moisture status.
                                           had fewer plants in rock shelters with                  Hydrologic Units or watersheds as                        To evaluate the vulnerability of
                                           less favorable conditions (e.g., small                  simulated by a simple water-balance                   Solidago albopilosa to the effects of
                                           size, drier conditions).                                model. The model provides a way to                    climate change, we also used
                                              The Intergovernmental Panel on                       simulate the response of the water                    NatureServe’s Climate Change
                                           Climate Change (IPCC) concluded that                    balance to changes in temperature and                 Vulnerability Index (CCVI) (Young et al.
                                           warming of the climate system is                        precipitation in the climate models (30               2015, entire), a climate change model
                                           unequivocal (IPCC 2014, p. 3). Effects                  separate models developed by the                      that uses downscaled climate
                                           associated with changes in climate have                 National Aeronautic and Space                         predictions from tools such as Climate
                                           been observed including changes in                      Administration). Combining the climate                Wizard (Givertz et al. 2009, entire) and
                                           arctic temperatures and ice, widespread                 data with the water balance data                      combines these with readily available
                                           changes in precipitation amounts, ocean                 provides further insights into the                    information about a species’ natural
                                           salinity, and wind patterns and aspects                 potential for climate-driven change in                history, distribution, and landscape
                                           of extreme weather including droughts,                  water resources. The viewer uses tools                circumstances to predict whether it will
                                           heavy precipitation, heat waves, and the                such as climographs (plots of monthly                 likely suffer a range contraction and/or
                                           intensity of tropical cyclones (IPCC                    averages); histograms showing the                     population reductions due to the effects
                                           2014, p. 4). Species that are dependent                 distribution or spread of model                       of climate change. The CCVI uses an
                                           on specialized habitat types, limited in                simulations; monthly time series                      Excel platform that allows users to enter
                                           distribution, or at the extreme periphery               spanning 1950–2099; and tables that                   numerical or categorical weighted
                                           of their range may be most susceptible                  summarize changes (and extremes) in                   responses to a series of questions about
                                           to the impacts of climate change (Byers                 temperature and precipitation during                  risk factors related to species exposure
                                           and Norris 2011, p. 17; Anacker and                     these periods. The application also                   and sensitivity to climate change. The
                                           Leidholm 2012, p. 2). However, while                                                                          CCVI separates vulnerability into its two
                                                                                                   provides access to comprehensive,
                                           continued change is certain, the                                                                              primary components: A species’
                                                                                                   three-page summary reports for States,
                                           magnitude and rate of change is                                                                               exposure to changes in climate within a
                                                                                                   counties, and watersheds.
                                           unknown in many cases. The magnitude                                                                          particular assessment area and its
                                           and rate of change could be affected by                    Using the NCCV and assuming the                    inherent sensitivity to the effects of
                                           many factors (e.g., circulation patterns),              more extreme Representative                           climate change. The tool gauges 20
                                           but we have no additional information                   Concentration Pathways (RCP)                          scientifically documented factors and
                                           or data regarding these factors with                    greenhouse gas emission scenario (RCP                 indicators of these components, as well
                                           respect to white-haired goldenrod.                      8.5), in which greenhouse gas emissions               as documented responses to climate
                                              There is evidence that some terrestrial              continue to rise unchecked through the                change where they exist.
                                           plant populations have been able to                     end of the century leading to an                         While the Index calculates anticipated
                                           adapt and respond to changing climatic                  equivalent radiative forcing of 8.5 Watts             increases or declines in populations of
                                           conditions (Franks et al. 2013, entire).                m2, we calculated projected annual                    individual species, it also
                                           Both plastic (phenotypic change such as                 mean changes for maximum                              accommodates inherent uncertainties
                                           leaf size or phenology) and evolutionary                temperature (+3.6 degrees Celsius (°C)                about how species respond within their
                                           (shift in allelic frequencies) responses to             (+6.5 degrees Fahrenheit (°F)),                       ecological contexts. The CCVI generated
                                           changes in climate have been detected.                  precipitation (+0.02–0.03 cm/day                      a vulnerability rating of ‘‘extremely
                                           Both can occur rapidly and often                        (+0.008–0.012 in/day)), runoff (¥0.25                 vulnerable’’ to ‘‘highly vulnerable’’ for
                                           simultaneously (Franks et al. 2013, p.                  cm/month (¥0.1 in/month), snowfall                    white-haired goldenrod, suggesting that
                                           135). Relatively few studies are                        (¥0.5 cm (¥0.2 in)), soil storage (¥2.5               the species’ abundance and/or range
                                           available, however, that (1) directly                   cm (¥1.0 in)), and evaporative deficit                extent could change substantially or
                                           examine plant responses over time, (2)                  (+0.75 cm/month (+0.3 in/month)) for                  possibly disappear by 2050 (Young et al.
                                           clearly demonstrate adaptation or the                   the period 2050–2074 in Menifee,                      2015, p. 44). Factors influencing the
                                           causal climatic driver of the responses,                Powell, and Wolfe Counties (Adler and                 species’ high vulnerability were its poor
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                           or (3) use quantitative methods to                      Hostetler 2013, entire). Based on these               movement/dispersal ability, its
                                           distinguish plastic versus evolutionary                 results, all three counties within the                connection with uncommon geologic
                                           responses (Franks et al. 2013, p. 135).                 range of Solidago albopilosa will be                  features, and its unique hydrological
                                              To generate future climate projections               subjected to higher maximum                           niche (humid, shaded rock shelters).
                                           across the range of white-haired                        temperatures (annual mean increase of                 Byers and Norris (2011, p. 16)
                                           goldenrod, one tool we used was the                     3.6 °C (6.5 °F)) and slightly higher                  completed a CCVI for plants in an


                                      VerDate Sep<11>2014   14:37 Oct 07, 2016   Jkt 241001   PO 00000   Frm 00057   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11OCR1.SGM   11OCR1


                                           70056            Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 11, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

                                           adjacent state, West Virginia, and                      are likely muted or diminished due to                 genetic variability, small population
                                           concluded that top risk factors included                this species’ specific habitat conditions.            size, and the effects of climate change
                                           poor dispersal ability, natural and                        Based on observations of climatic                  have been identified as potential threats
                                           anthropogenic barriers to dispersal,                    conditions over a period of 25 years                  to S. albopilosa. Invasive species occur
                                           dependence on wetland habitats,                         (KSNPC (2010, p. 13), there is some                   in only 23 of 117 extant occurrences,
                                           restriction to areas with unique geology,               biological and historical evidence to                 and most of these occurrences (16) have
                                           and genetic bottlenecks (Byers and                      suggest that S. albopilosa is adapted to              remained stable. We do not expect the
                                           Norris 2011, p. 16).                                    endure some of the potential effects of               loss of eastern hemlock to have a
                                              Although the CCVI model (Young et                    climate change, including more frequent               significant impact on the species
                                           al. 2015, entire) suggested that Solidago               droughts and an estimated 2.6–3.6 °C                  because eastern hemlock is a minor
                                           albopilosa is greatly exposed and                       (4.7–6.5 °F) increase in average annual               component of the forest canopy
                                           sensitive to climate change and could be                maximum temperature. Habitats within                  surrounding S. albopilosa occurrences.
                                           adversely affected in future years,                     the Red River Gorge often experience                  The potential effects of low genetic
                                           Anacker and Leidholm 2012 (pp. 16–17)                   multiyear droughts, and S. albopilosa                 diversity do not represent a threat as the
                                           noted that there are a number of                        occurrences can become stressed during                species has relatively high genetic
                                           weaknesses associated with the CCVI:                    these periods. For example, the                       diversity. Small populations may be
                                           (1) It is weighted too heavily towards                  Cumberland Plateau region of Kentucky                 vulnerable to stochastic events, but
                                           direct exposure to climate change                       experienced a several-year drought prior              these occurrences contain only a small
                                           (projected changes to future temperature                to KSNPC’s 2008–2009 survey. These                    proportion of the species’ total number
                                           and precipitation conditions that have                  dry conditions continued during 2008,                 of stems. We do not consider climate
                                           high levels of uncertainties); (2) some                 and KSNPC observed many drought-                      change to be an imminent threat based
                                           important plant attributes are missing                  stressed occurrences. The following year              on the species’ current status, its
                                           (mating system and pollinator                           (2009) was relatively wet, and several of             demonstrated resiliency to periods of
                                           specificity); (3) it is very difficult to               these drought-stressed occurrences                    drought, and our uncertainty regarding
                                           complete scoring for a given species                    quickly improved (KSNPC 2010, p. 13).                 the species’ vulnerability to the effects
                                           because some information is simply                      Despite this most recent dry period and               of climate change. Based on all these
                                           lacking; and (4) some scoring guidelines                others in the past, the species has                   factors, we find that other natural or
                                           are too simplistic (Anacker and                         demonstrated a resiliency to prolonged                manmade factors considered here are no
                                                                                                   periods of drought. Although                          longer a significant threat to S.
                                           Leidholm (2012, pp. 16–17).
                                                                                                   downscaling models exist at the county                albopilosa.
                                           Topographic complexity was considered
                                                                                                   level (Alder and Hostetler 2013), we do
                                           to be a potential complementary factor                                                                        Overall Summary of Factors Affecting
                                                                                                   not have data at the proper scale (inside
                                           in assessing vulnerability to climate                                                                         White-Haired Goldenrod
                                                                                                   rock shelters or in cliff overhangs) to
                                           change (Anacker and Leidholm 2012,                                                                               The primary factors that led to white-
                                                                                                   determine, for example, how the species
                                           pp. 12–16). Topographically complex                                                                           haired goldenrod’s listing under the Act
                                                                                                   is affected by decreased relative
                                           areas, such as the Red River Gorge                                                                            were its limited range and habitat
                                                                                                   humidity during a drought year, but
                                           region, have been predicted to be less                                                                        threats associated with ground
                                                                                                   periodic drought may be a normal
                                           vulnerable to the effects of climate                                                                          disturbance and trampling caused by
                                                                                                   cyclical event needed to increase
                                           change (Anacker and Leidholm 2012,                      production. The shaded, cooler, and                   unlawful archaeological activities and
                                           pp. 15–16), so species such as Solidago                 more humid environment of rock                        recreational activities such as camping,
                                           albopilosa may also be less vulnerable                  shelters (Nieves and Day 2014, p. 7) and              hiking, and rock climbing. Other factors
                                           to such effects as compared to plants                   the topographic complexity of the Red                 included the inadequate protection of
                                           that occur in areas with low topographic                River Gorge region (Anacker and                       occurrences on the DBNF and potential
                                           complexity.                                             Leidholm 2012, pp. 15–16) may offer                   minor vegetational changes in forests
                                              Additionally, Phillips (2010, entire)                some relief from drying and may                       surrounding Solidago albopilosa
                                           found that efforts to predict responses to              contribute to the species’ ability to                 occurrences. We have carefully assessed
                                           climate change and to interpret both                    survive these conditions.                             the best scientific and commercial
                                           modern and paleoclimate indicators are                     Although climate change is almost                  information available regarding the
                                           influenced by several levels of potential               certain to affect terrestrial habitats in the         threats faced by white-haired goldenrod.
                                           amplifiers, which can either increase or                Red River Gorge region of Kentucky                    These threats have been removed or
                                           exaggerate climate impacts, and/or                      (Adler and Hostetler 2013, entire), there             ameliorated by conservation actions of
                                           filters, which reduce or mute impacts.                  is uncertainty about the specific effects             multiple conservation partners for more
                                           He notes that climate forcings (factors                 of climate change on white-haired                     than 20 years. These activities and other
                                           that drive or ‘‘force’’ the climate system              goldenrod. Currently, we have no                      management actions included in the
                                           to change such as the energy output of                  evidence that climate change effects                  DBNF’s LRMP (USFS 2004, pp. 3.5–3.8)
                                           the sun, volcanic eruptions, or changes                 observed to date have had any adverse                 have assisted in recovery of the species
                                           in greenhouse gases) are partly mediated                impact on S. albopilosa or its habitats,              as reflected in the large number of
                                           by ecological, hydrological, and other                  and we are uncertain about how                        stable, self-sustaining, protected
                                           processes that may amplify or filter                    projected future changes in temperature,              occurrences (46), and the long period
                                           impacts on surface processes and                        precipitation, and other factors will                 (greater than 11 years) during which this
                                           landforms. For example, resistance or                   influence the species. However, the best              trend has been maintained.
                                           resilience of geomorphic systems may                    available information indicates that the              Furthermore, a new cooperative
                                           minimize the effects of changes. Thus,                  effects of climate change do not                      management agreement among the
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                           a given geomorphic response to climate                  represent an imminent threat now or in                Service, DBNF, and KSNPC was signed
                                           could represent amplification and/or                    the foreseeable future.                               on August 29, 2016, and will provide for
                                           filtering (Phillips 2010, p. 571). Due to                  Summary of Factor E: Other potential               the long-term protection of the species.
                                           white-haired goldenrod’s habitat                        threats such as minor vegetational                       Based on our assessment of factors
                                           specificity in rock shelters and cliff                  changes in the surrounding forest,                    potentially impacting the species and its
                                           overhangs, the effects of climate change                competition with invasive species, low                habitat, the species’ improved status (a


                                      VerDate Sep<11>2014   14:37 Oct 07, 2016   Jkt 241001   PO 00000   Frm 00058   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11OCR1.SGM   11OCR1


                                                            Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 11, 2016 / Rules and Regulations                                          70057

                                           sufficient number of viable                             magnitude that threaten the continued                 at the time the Service makes any
                                           occurrences), and multiple conservation                 existence of the species. Significant                 particular status determination.
                                           efforts by the Service and its partners,                impacts at the time of listing that could                The procedure for analyzing whether
                                           we conclude that Solidago albopilosa is                 have resulted in the extirpation of all or            any portion is an SPR is similar,
                                           not in danger of extinction throughout                  parts of populations have been                        regardless of the type of status
                                           all of its range or likely to become                    eliminated or reduced since listing, and              determination we are making. The first
                                           endangered within the foreseeable                       we do not expect any of these                         step in our analysis of the status of a
                                           future throughout all of its range.                     conditions to substantially change post-              species is to determine its status
                                                                                                   delisting and into the foreseeable future.            throughout all of its range. If we
                                           Determination                                                                                                 determine that the species is in danger
                                                                                                   We conclude that the previously
                                              Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533),               recognized impacts to Solidago                        of extinction, or likely to become
                                           and its implementing regulations at 50                  albopilosa from the present or                        endangered in the foreseeable future
                                           CFR part 424, set forth the procedures                  threatened destruction, modification, or              throughout all of its range, we list the
                                           for adding species to and removing                      curtailment of its habitat or range                   species as an endangered species or
                                           species from the Federal Lists of                       (Factor A), the inadequacy of regulatory              threatened species and no SPR analysis
                                           Endangered and Threatened Wildlife                                                                            will be required. If the species is neither
                                                                                                   mechanisms (Factor D), and minor
                                           and Plants. An assessment of the need                                                                         in danger of extinction nor likely to
                                                                                                   vegetational changes in the surrounding
                                           for a species’ protection under the Act                                                                       become so throughout all of its range, as
                                                                                                   forest (Factor E), have been ameliorated
                                           is based on whether a species is in                                                                           we have found here, we next determine
                                                                                                   or reduced such that S. albopilosa is no
                                           danger of extinction or likely to become                                                                      whether the species is in danger of
                                           so because of any of five factors as                    longer in danger of extinction
                                                                                                                                                         extinction or likely to become so
                                           required by section 4(a)(1) of the Act.                 throughout all of its range or likely to
                                                                                                                                                         throughout a significant portion of its
                                           We conducted a review of the status of                  become endangered within the
                                                                                                                                                         range. If it is, we will continue to list the
                                           this species and assessed the five factors              foreseeable future throughout all of its
                                                                                                                                                         species as an endangered species or
                                           to evaluate whether Solidago albopilosa                 range. We, therefore, conclude that S.
                                                                                                                                                         threatened species, respectively; if it is
                                           is endangered or threatened throughout                  albopilosa does not meet the definition               not, we conclude that listing the species
                                           all of its range. We examined the best                  of a threatened species, nor is it likely             is no longer warranted.
                                           scientific and commercial information                   to become so in the foreseeable future.                  When we conduct an SPR analysis,
                                           available regarding the past, present,                  Significant Portion of the Range                      we first identify any portions of the
                                           and future threats faced by Solidago                    Analysis                                              species’ range that warrant further
                                           albopilosa and its habitat. We reviewed                                                                       consideration. The range of a species
                                           the information available in our files                  Background                                            can theoretically be divided into
                                           and other available published and                                                                             portions in an infinite number of ways.
                                           unpublished information, and we                            Under the Act and our implementing                 However, there is no purpose in
                                           consulted with recognized experts and                   regulations, a species may warrant                    analyzing portions of the range that
                                           other Federal and State agencies.                       listing if it is in danger of extinction or           have no reasonable potential to be
                                              In considering what factors might                    likely to become so throughout all or a               significant or in analyzing portions of
                                           constitute threats, we must look beyond                 significant portion of its range. Having              the range in which there is no
                                           the mere exposure of the species to the                 determined that Solidago albopilosa is                reasonable potential for the species to be
                                           factor to determine whether the                         not endangered or threatened                          endangered or threatened. To identify
                                           exposure causes actual impacts to the                   throughout all of its range, we next                  only those portions that warrant further
                                           species. If there is exposure to a factor,              consider whether there are any                        consideration, we determine whether
                                           but no response, or only a positive                     significant portions of its range in which            substantial information indicates that:
                                           response, that factor is not a threat. If               Solidago albopilosa is in danger of                   (1) The portions may be ‘‘significant’’
                                           there is exposure and the species                       extinction or likely to become so. We                 and (2) the species may be in danger of
                                           responds negatively, the factor may be                  published a final policy interpreting the             extinction there or likely to become so
                                           a threat and we then attempt to                         phrase ‘‘Significant Portion of its                   within the foreseeable future.
                                           determine how significant the threat is.                Range’’ (SPR) (79 FR 37578; July 1,                   Depending on the biology of the species,
                                           If the threat is significant, it may drive,             2014). In pertinent part, the final policy            its range, and the threats it faces, it
                                           or contribute to, the risk of extinction of             states that (1) if a species is found to be           might be more efficient for us to address
                                           the species such that the species                       endangered or threatened throughout a                 the significance question first or the
                                           warrants listing as endangered or                       significant portion of its range, the                 status question first. Thus, if we
                                           threatened as those terms are defined by                entire species is listed as endangered or             determine that a portion of the range is
                                           the Act. This determination does not                    threatened, respectively, and the Act’s               not ‘‘significant,’’ we do not need to
                                           necessarily require empirical proof of a                protections apply to all individuals of               determine whether the species is
                                           threat. The combination of exposure and                 the species wherever found; (2) a                     endangered or threatened there; if we
                                           some corroborating evidence of how the                  portion of the range of a species is                  determine that the species is not
                                           species is likely impacted could suffice.               ‘‘significant’’ if the species is not                 endangered or threatened in a portion of
                                           The mere identification of factors that                 currently endangered or threatened                    its range, we do not need to determine
                                           could impact a species negatively is not                throughout all of its range, but the                  if that portion is ‘‘significant.’’ In
                                           sufficient to compel a finding that                     portion’s contribution to the viability of            practice, a key part of the determination
                                           listing is appropriate; we require                      the species is so important that, without             that a species is in danger of extinction
                                           evidence that these factors are operative               the members in that portion, the species              in a significant portion of its range is
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                           threats that act on the species to the                  would be in danger of extinction, or                  whether the threats are geographically
                                           point that the species meets the                        likely to become so in the foreseeable                concentrated in some way. If the threats
                                           definition of an endangered species or                  future, throughout all of its range; and              to the species are affecting it uniformly
                                           threatened species under the Act.                       (3) the range of a species is considered              throughout its range, no portion is likely
                                              During our analysis, we did not                      to be the general geographical area                   to have a greater risk of extinction, and
                                           identify any factors that reach a                       within which that species can be found                thus would not warrant further


                                      VerDate Sep<11>2014   14:37 Oct 07, 2016   Jkt 241001   PO 00000   Frm 00059   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11OCR1.SGM   11OCR1


                                           70058            Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 11, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

                                           consideration. Moreover, if any                         range. The currently occupied range of                (but all 6 have been shown to be stable,
                                           concentration of threats apply only to                  S. albopilosa encompasses                             and 5 have been shown to be self-
                                           portions of the range that clearly do not               approximately 114 km2 (44 mi2) in                     sustaining). These occurrences were
                                           meet the biologically based definition of               Menifee, Powell, and Wolfe Counties,                  discussed above.
                                           ‘‘significant’’ (i.e., the loss of that                 KY. Based on examination of                              The remaining 65 occurrences are on
                                           portion clearly would not be expected to                information on the biology and life                   DBNF land, and thus protected, but
                                           increase the vulnerability to extinction                history of the species, we determined                 currently are not considered self-
                                           of the entire species), those portions                  that there are no separate areas of the               sustaining. Some of these occurrences
                                           would not warrant further                               range that are significantly different                have a status of declining or their status
                                           consideration. We emphasize that                        from others or that are likely to be of               is unknown, while others are
                                           answering these questions in the                        greater biological or conservation                    considered not self-sustaining primarily
                                           affirmative is not a determination that                 importance than any other areas.                      due to poor estimated viability and low
                                           the species is endangered or threatened                    We next examined whether any                       number of stems observed. These
                                           throughout a significant portion of its                 threats are geographically concentrated               occurrences could be at greater risk of
                                           range—rather, it is a step in determining               in some way that would indicate the                   extinction due to vulnerability to
                                           whether a more detailed analysis of the                 species could be in danger of extinction,             demographic and environmental
                                           issue is required.                                      or likely to become so, in that area.                 stochasticity because of their smaller
                                              If we identify any portions that may                 Through our review of potential threats,              population sizes. These 65 occurrences,
                                           be both (1) significant and (2)                         we identified some areas where                        along with the 6 occurrences on private
                                           endangered or threatened, we engage in                  Solidago albopilosa may experience                    lands, account for the remaining 25
                                           a more detailed analysis to determine                   greater threats or a greater likelihood of            percent of the total stems estimated to
                                           whether these standards are indeed met.                 extirpation and, therefore, may be in                 exist in 2013. The threats to these
                                           The identification of an SPR does not                   danger of extinction or likely to become              occurrences from recreational activities
                                           create a presumption, prejudgment, or                   so in those areas. These include                      are being managed and are not different
                                           other determination as to whether the                   occurrences on private lands and                      from the threats affecting the 46 secure,
                                           species in that identified SPR is                       occurrences that are not currently                    self-sustaining occurrences.
                                           endangered or threatened. We must go                    considered self-sustaining. The majority                 Because these 46 occurrences exhibit
                                           through a separate analysis to determine                (94.8 percent) of Solidago albopilosa                 stable or increasing trends, contain a
                                           whether the species is endangered or                    occurrences are now located on DBNF                   relatively high number of stems, have
                                           threatened in an SPR. To determine                      and benefit from management and                       fair to excellent viability, and exhibit
                                           whether a species is endangered or                      conservation actions implemented                      relatively high reproductive rates, we
                                           threatened throughout an SPR, we will                   under the LRMP. The remaining (6 of                   expect these occurrences to persist into
                                           use the same standards and                              the 117) extant occurrences are located               the future. While most of the remaining
                                           methodology that we use to determine                    on private lands. As explained above,                 occurrences also receive protections and
                                           if a species is endangered or threatened                these occurrences currently do not                    are not at immediate risk of extirpation,
                                           throughout its range.                                   benefit from any formal protection or                 their lower population sizes and poorer
                                              Depending on the biology of the                      management and, therefore, could face                 viability put them at a greater risk of
                                           species, its range, and the threats it                  higher magnitude threats. While these                 extirpation. However, while these
                                           faces, it may be more efficient to address              occurrences do not receive any formal                 occurrences may have a greater
                                           the ‘‘significant’’ question first, or the              protection, five of the six occurrences               potential to become extirpated due to
                                           status question first. Thus, if we                      are considered to be stable and self-                 demographic or environmental
                                           determine that a portion of the range is                sustaining, indicating a low level of                 stochasticity, the loss of some or all of
                                           not ‘‘significant,’’ we do not need to                  current impacts to those occurrences.                 those occurrences would not cause the
                                           determine whether the species is                        Although the occurrences on private                   species in the remainder of its range to
                                           endangered or threatened there; if we                   lands could face greater threats in the               be in danger of extinction or likely to
                                           determine that the species is not                       future due to lack of formal protections,             become so.
                                           endangered or threatened in a portion of                these occurrences represent only 5                       In conclusion, we have determined
                                           its range, we do not need to determine                  percent of extant occurrences and a very              that none of the existing or potential
                                           if that portion is ‘‘significant.’’                     small proportion of the range of the                  threats, either alone or in combination
                                                                                                   species. Additionally, even if future                 with others, are likely to cause S.
                                           SPR Analysis for White-Haired
                                                                                                   potential threats were to cause the loss              albopilosa to be in danger of extinction
                                           Goldenrod
                                                                                                   of these occurrences, that loss would                 throughout all or a significant portion of
                                              Applying the process described                       not appreciably reduce the long-term                  its range, nor is it likely to become
                                           above, in considering delisting S.                      viability of the species, much less cause             endangered within the foreseeable
                                           albopilosa, we evaluated the range of                   the species in the remainder of its range             future throughout all or a significant
                                           this plant to determine if any areas                    to be in danger of extinction or likely to            portion of its range. On the basis of this
                                           could be considered a significant                       become so.                                            evaluation, we conclude S. albopilosa
                                           portion of its range. While there is some                  We also evaluated whether the                      no longer requires the protection of the
                                           variability in the habitats occupied by S.              occurrences that are not considered self-             Act, and remove S. albopilosa from the
                                           albopilosa across its range, the basic                  sustaining could be considered a                      Federal List of Endangered and
                                           ecological components required for the                  significant portion of the species’ range.            Threatened Plants (50 CFR 17.12 (h)).
                                           species to complete its life cycle (e.g.,               We have determined that 46 secure and
                                           adequate sunlight, shade, moisture,                     self-sustaining occurrences presently are             Conservation Measures
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                           soils) are present throughout the                       distributed throughout the species’                     Section 4(g)(1) of the Act requires us,
                                           habitats occupied by the species. No                    range, which accounted for more than                  in cooperation with the States, to
                                           specific location within the current                    75 percent of the total stems estimated               implement a monitoring program for not
                                           range of the species provides a unique                  to exist in 2013. Of the remaining 71                 less than 5 years for all species that have
                                           or biologically significant function that               extant occurrences, the 6 occurrences on              been delisted due to recovery. Post-
                                           is not found in other portions of the                   private lands are not considered secure               delisting monitoring (PDM) refers to


                                      VerDate Sep<11>2014   14:37 Oct 07, 2016   Jkt 241001   PO 00000   Frm 00060   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\11OCR1.SGM   11OCR1


                                                            Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 11, 2016 / Rules and Regulations                                              70059

                                           activities undertaken to verify that a                  Kentucky Fish and Wildlife Office’s                   interests are affected by this rulemaking
                                           species that has been delisted due to                   Web site (http://www.fws.gov/frankfort).              action.
                                           recovery remains secure from the risk of
                                                                                                   Effects of the Rule                                   References Cited
                                           extinction after the protections of the
                                           Act no longer apply. The primary goal                      This final rule revises 50 CFR 17.12                 A complete list of all references cited
                                           of PDM is to ensure that the species’                   by removing Solidago albopilosa from                  in this final rule is available at http://
                                           status does not deteriorate, and if a                   the Federal List of Endangered and                    www.regulations.gov at Docket No.
                                           decline is detected, to take measures to                Threatened Plants. Therefore, as of the               FWS–R4–ES–2014–0054, or upon
                                           halt the decline so that proposing it as                effective date of this rule (see DATES),              request from the Kentucky Fish and
                                           threatened or endangered is not again                   the prohibitions and conservation                     Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES).
                                           needed. If, at any time during the                      measures provided by the Act,
                                           monitoring period, data indicate that                   particularly through sections 7 and 9, no             Authors
                                           protective status under the Act should                  longer apply to white-haired goldenrod.                 The primary author of this rule is Dr.
                                           be reinstated, we can initiate listing                  Removal of S. albopilosa from the                     Michael A. Floyd in the Service’s
                                           procedures, including, if appropriate,                  Federal List of Endangered and                        Kentucky Fish and Wildlife Service
                                           emergency listing under section 4(b)(7)                 Threatened Plants relieves Federal                    Office (see ADDRESSES and FOR FURTHER
                                           of the Act. At the conclusion of the                    agencies from the need to consult with                INFORMATION CONTACT).
                                           monitoring period, we will review all                   us under section 7 of the Act.
                                           available information to determine if                                                                         List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
                                                                                                   Required Determinations
                                           relisting, the continuation of                                                                                  Endangered and threatened species,
                                           monitoring, or the termination of                       National Environmental Policy Act                     Exports, Imports, Reporting and
                                           monitoring is appropriate.                                We have determined that                             recordkeeping requirements,
                                           Post-Delisting Monitoring (PDM) Plan                    environmental assessments and                         Transportation.
                                           Overview                                                environmental impact statements, as
                                                                                                   defined under the authority of the                    Regulation Promulgation
                                              In August 2016, the Service finalized
                                                                                                   National Environmental Policy Act of                    Accordingly, we amend part 17,
                                           a final PDM plan in cooperation with
                                                                                                   1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), need not               subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the
                                           DBNF and KSNPC (Service 2016,
                                                                                                   be prepared in connection with                        Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:
                                           entire). The Plan:
                                              (1) Summarizes the species’ status at                regulations pursuant to section 4(a) of
                                                                                                   the Act. We published a notice outlining              PART 17—[AMENDED]
                                           the time of delisting;
                                              (2) Defines thresholds or triggers for               our reasons for this determination in the
                                           potential monitoring outcomes and                       Federal Register on October 25, 1983                  ■ 1. The authority citation for part 17
                                           conclusions;                                            (48 FR 49244).                                        continues to read as follows:
                                              (3) Lays out frequency and duration of               Government-to-Government                                Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531–
                                           monitoring;                                                                                                   1544; 4201–4245, unless otherwise noted.
                                                                                                   Relationship With Tribes
                                              (4) Articulates monitoring methods
                                                                                                      In accordance with the President’s                 § 17.12    [Amended]
                                           including sampling considerations;
                                              (5) Outlines data compilation and                    memorandum of April 29, 1994,                         ■  2. Amend § 17.12(h) by removing the
                                           reporting procedures and                                ‘‘Government-to-Government Relations                  entry for ‘‘Solidago albopilosa’’ under
                                           responsibilities; and                                   with Native American Tribal                           ‘‘FLOWERING PLANTS’’ from the List
                                              (6) Provides a post-delisting                        Governments’’ (59 FR 22951), Executive                of Endangered and Threatened Plants.
                                           monitoring implementation schedule                      Order 13175, and the Department of the
                                           including timing and responsible                        Interior’s manual at 512 DM 2, we                       Dated: September 28, 2016.
                                           parties.                                                readily acknowledge our responsibility                Stephen Guertin,
                                              We will post the final PDM plan and                  to communicate meaningfully with                      Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
                                           any future revisions if necessary on our                recognized Federal Tribes on a                        Service.
                                           national Web site (http://                              government-to-government basis. We                    [FR Doc. 2016–24249 Filed 10–7–16; 8:45 am]
                                           endangered.fws.gov) and on the                          have determined that no tribal lands or               BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                      VerDate Sep<11>2014   14:37 Oct 07, 2016   Jkt 241001   PO 00000   Frm 00061   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 9990   E:\FR\FM\11OCR1.SGM    11OCR1



Document Created: 2018-02-13 16:33:51
Document Modified: 2018-02-13 16:33:51
CategoryRegulatory Information
CollectionFederal Register
sudoc ClassAE 2.7:
GS 4.107:
AE 2.106:
PublisherOffice of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
SectionRules and Regulations
ActionFinal rule and notice of availability of final post-delisting monitoring plan.
DatesThis rule is effective on November 10, 2016.
ContactVirgil Lee Andrews, Jr., Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Kentucky Ecological Services Field Office, 330 West Broadway, Suite 265, Frankfort, KY 40601; telephone (502) 695-0468. Individuals who are hearing-impaired or speech-impaired may call the Federal Information Relay Service at (800) 877-8339 for TTY assistance 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
FR Citation81 FR 70043 
RIN Number1018-BA46
CFR AssociatedEndangered and Threatened Species; Exports; Imports; Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements and Transportation

2024 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR