Proposed Rule2022-21587
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for Chamaecrista lineata var. keyensis (Big Pine Partridge Pea), Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. serpyllum (Wedge Spurge), Linum arenicola (Sand Flax), and Argythamnia blodgettii (Blodgett's Silverbush)
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
October 14, 2022
Issuing agencies
Interior DepartmentFish and Wildlife Service
Abstract
We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose to designate critical habitat for Chamaecrista lineata var. keyensis (Big Pine partridge pea), Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. serpyllum (wedge spurge), Linum arenicola (sand flax), and Argythamnia blodgettii (Blodgett's silverbush) under the Endangered Species Act (Act). In total, approximately 1,462 acres (592 hectares) for Big Pine partridge pea and approximately 1,379 acres (558 hectares) for wedge spurge, in Monroe County, Florida, and approximately 5,090 acres (2,060 hectares) for sand flax and 16,635 acres (6,732 hectares) for Blodgett's silverbush in Miami-Dade and Monroe Counties, Florida, fall within the boundaries of the proposed critical habitat designations. If we finalize this rule as proposed, it would extend the Act's protections to the species' critical habitat. We also announce the availability of a draft economic analysis of the proposed designation of critical habitat for these four plant species.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 87 Issue 198 (Friday, October 14, 2022)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 198 (Friday, October 14, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 62502-62562]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2022-21587]
[[Page 62501]]
Vol. 87
Friday,
No. 198
October 14, 2022
Part II
Department of the Interior
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fish and Wildlife Service
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical
Habitat for Chamaecrista lineata var. keyensis (Big Pine Partridge
Pea), Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. serpyllum (Wedge Spurge), Linum
arenicola (Sand Flax), and Argythamnia blodgettii (Blodgett's
Silverbush); Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 87 , No. 198 / Friday, October 14, 2022 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 62502]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2022-0116; FF09E21000 FXES1111090FEDR 223]
RIN 1018-BE51
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of
Critical Habitat for Chamaecrista lineata var. keyensis (Big Pine
Partridge Pea), Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. serpyllum (Wedge Spurge),
Linum arenicola (Sand Flax), and Argythamnia blodgettii (Blodgett's
Silverbush)
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose to
designate critical habitat for Chamaecrista lineata var. keyensis (Big
Pine partridge pea), Chamaesyce deltoidea ssp. serpyllum (wedge
spurge), Linum arenicola (sand flax), and Argythamnia blodgettii
(Blodgett's silverbush) under the Endangered Species Act (Act). In
total, approximately 1,462 acres (592 hectares) for Big Pine partridge
pea and approximately 1,379 acres (558 hectares) for wedge spurge, in
Monroe County, Florida, and approximately 5,090 acres (2,060 hectares)
for sand flax and 16,635 acres (6,732 hectares) for Blodgett's
silverbush in Miami-Dade and Monroe Counties, Florida, fall within the
boundaries of the proposed critical habitat designations. If we
finalize this rule as proposed, it would extend the Act's protections
to the species' critical habitat. We also announce the availability of
a draft economic analysis of the proposed designation of critical
habitat for these four plant species.
DATES: We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before
December 13, 2022. Comments submitted electronically using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES below) must be received by 11:59 p.m.
eastern time on the closing date. We must receive requests for public
hearings, in writing, at the address shown in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT by November 28, 2022.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. In the Search box, enter FWS-R4-ES-2022-0116,
which is the docket number for this rulemaking action. Then, click on
the Search button. On the resulting page, in the panel on the left side
of the screen, under the Document Type heading, check the Proposed Rule
box to locate this document. You may submit a comment by clicking on
``Comment.''
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail to: Public Comments
Processing, Attn: FWS-R4-ES-2022-0116, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
MS: PRB/3W, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.
We request that you send comments only by the methods described
above. We will post all comments on <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. This
generally means that we will post any personal information you provide
us (see Information Requested, below, for more information).
Availability of supporting materials: For the proposed critical
habitat designation, the coordinates or plot points or both from which
the maps are generated are included in the decision file and are
available at <a href="https://www.fws.gov/office/florida-ecological-services/library">https://www.fws.gov/office/florida-ecological-services/library</a> and at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> under Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-
2022-0116. Any supporting information that we developed for this
critical habitat designation will be available on the Service's website
or at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lourdes Mena, Classification and
Recovery Division Manager, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Florida
Ecological Services Field Office, 7915 Baymeadows Way, Suite 200,
Jacksonville, FL 32256; by telephone 904-731-3134; or by facsimile 904-
731-3045. Individuals in the United States who are deaf, deafblind,
hard of hearing, or have a speech disability may dial 711 (TTY, TDD, or
TeleBraille) to access telecommunications relay services. Individuals
outside the United States should use the relay services offered within
their country to make international calls to the point-of-contact in
the United States.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Summary
Why we need to publish a proposed rule. Under the Act, when we
determine that any species is a threatened or endangered species, we
must designate critical habitat, to the maximum extent prudent and
determinable. Designations and revisions of critical habitat can only
be completed by issuing a rule through the Administrative Procedure Act
rulemaking process (5 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
What this document does. This document proposes to designate
critical habitat for three plant species, Big Pine partridge pea, wedge
spurge, and sand flax, listed as endangered species under the Act, and
one plant species, Blodgett's silverbush, listed as a threatened
species under the Act (September 29, 2016 (81 FR 66842)).
The basis for our action. Section 3(5)(A) of the Act defines
critical habitat as (i) the specific areas within the geographical area
occupied by the species, at the time it is listed, on which are found
those physical or biological features (I) essential to the conservation
of the species and (II) which may require special management
considerations or protections; and (ii) specific areas outside the
geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is listed,
upon a determination by the Secretary that such areas are essential for
the conservation of the species. Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states that
the Secretary must make the designation on the basis of the best
scientific data available and after taking into consideration the
economic impact, the impact on national security, and any other
relevant impacts of specifying any particular area as critical habitat.
Draft economic analysis of the proposed designation of critical
habitat. We have prepared an analysis of the probable economic impacts
of the proposed critical habitat designation and related factors. In
this document, we announce the availability of the draft economic
analysis and seek additional public review and comment.
Public comment. We are seeking comments and soliciting information
from the public on our proposed designation to make sure we consider
the best scientific and commercial information available in developing
our final designation. Because we will consider all comments and
information we receive during the comment period, our final
determination may differ from this proposal. We will respond to
substantive comments we receive during the comment period in our final
rule.
Peer review. In accordance with our joint policy on peer review
published in the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), and
our August 22, 2016, memorandum updating and clarifying the role of
peer review of determinations under section 4 of the Act, including
listing determinations and critical habitat designations, we are
seeking comments from independent specialists. The purpose of peer
review is to ensure that our critical habitat
[[Page 62503]]
designation is based on scientifically sound data, assumptions, and
analyses. The peer reviewers have expertise in the biology, habitat,
and threats to the species addressed herein. We have invited these peer
reviewers to comment on our specific assumptions and conclusions in
this critical habitat proposal during the public comment period for
this proposed rule (see DATES, above).
Information Requested
We intend that any final action resulting from this proposed rule
will be based on the best scientific and commercial data available and
be as accurate and as effective as possible. Therefore, we request
comments or information from other governmental agencies, Native
American tribes, the scientific community, industry, or any other
interested parties concerning this proposed rule. We particularly seek
comments concerning:
(1) The reasons why we should or should not designate habitat as
``critical habitat'' under section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.), including information regarding the following factors that the
regulations identify as reasons why designation of critical habitat may
be not prudent:
(a) The species is threatened by taking or other human activity and
identification of critical habitat can be expected to increase the
degree of such threat to the species; or
(b) Such designation of critical habitat would not be beneficial to
the species. In determining whether a designation would not be
beneficial, the factors the Services may consider include but are not
limited to: whether the present or threatened destruction,
modification, or curtailment of a species' habitat or range is not a
threat to the species, or whether any areas meet the definition of
``critical habitat.''
(2) Specific information on:
(a) The amount and distribution of Big Pine partridge pea, wedge
spurge, sand flax, and Blodgett's silverbush habitat.
(b) Any additional areas occurring within the range of the species,
i.e., south and central Florida peninsula and the Florida Keys, that
should be included in the designation because they (i) were occupied at
the time of listing in 2016 and contain the physical or biological
features that are essential to the conservation of the species and that
may require special management considerations, or (ii) were unoccupied
at the time of listing, and are essential for the conservation of the
species, because they have potential to successfully support introduced
or reintroduced populations of these species.
(c) While we seek comments on any additional areas under (b)(i) and
(ii) above, we particularly seek comments on the following unoccupied
areas, including information on whether these areas have the potential
to support introduced or reintroduced populations: No Name Key, Upper
and Lower Sugarloaf Keys, Cudjoe Key, and Little Pine Key in Monroe
County, Florida; and Trinity Pinelands, Nixon Smiley, Quail Roost
Pineland, and Navy Wells in Miami-Dade County, Florida.
(d) Special management considerations or protection that may be
needed in critical habitat areas we are proposing, including managing
for the potential effects of climate change.
(e) Whether we have appropriately identified the physical or
biological features that are essential to the conservation for each
species.
(3) Land use designations and current or planned activities in the
subject areas and their possible impacts on proposed critical habitat.
(4) Information on the projected and reasonably likely impacts of
climate change on Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, sand flax, and
Blodgett's silverbush and proposed critical habitat.
(5) Information on the extent to which the description of probable
economic impacts in the draft economic analysis is a reasonable
estimate of the likely economic impacts and any additional information
regarding probable economic impacts that we should consider.
(6) Whether any specific areas we are proposing for critical
habitat designation should be considered for exclusion under section
4(b)(2) of the Act, and whether the benefits of potentially excluding
any specific area outweigh the benefits of including that area under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act. If you think we should exclude any
additional areas, please provide information regarding the existence of
a meaningful economic or other relevant impact supporting a benefit of
exclusion.
(7) Whether we could improve or modify our approach to designating
critical habitat in any way to provide for greater public participation
and understanding, or to better accommodate public concerns and
comments.
Please include sufficient information with your submission (such as
scientific journal articles or other publications) to allow us to
verify any scientific or commercial information you include. Please
note that submissions merely stating support for, or opposition to, the
action under consideration without providing supporting information,
although noted, will not be considered in making a final critical
habitat determination. Section 4(b)(2) of the Act directs that the
Secretary shall designate critical habitat on the basis of the best
scientific information data available.
You may submit your comments and materials concerning this proposed
rule by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. We request that you
send comments only by the methods described in ADDRESSES.
If you submit information via <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>, your
entire submission--including any personal identifying information--will
be posted on the website. If your submission is made via a hardcopy
that includes personal identifying information, you may request at the
top of your document that we withhold this information from public
review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We
will post all hardcopy submissions on <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>.
Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting
documentation we used in preparing this proposed rule, will be
available for public inspection on <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>.
Because we will consider all comments and information we receive
during the comment period, our final designation may differ from this
proposal. Based on the new information we receive (and any comments on
that new information), our final designation may not include all areas
proposed, may include some additional areas that meet the definition of
critical habitat, or may exclude some areas if we find the benefits of
exclusion outweigh the benefits of inclusion. Such final decisions
would be a logical outgrowth of this proposal, as long as we: (1) base
the decisions on the best scientific and commercial data available
after considering all of the relevant factors; (2) do not rely on
factors Congress has not intended us to consider; and (3) articulate a
rational connection between the facts found and the conclusions made,
including why we changed our conclusion.
Public Hearing
Section 4(b)(5) of the Act provides for a public hearing on this
proposal, if requested. Requests must be received by the date specified
in DATES. Such requests must be sent to the address shown in FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. We will schedule a public hearing on this
proposal, if requested, and announce the date, time, and place of the
hearing, as well as how to obtain reasonable accommodations, in the
[[Page 62504]]
Federal Register and local newspapers at least 15 days before the
hearing. We may hold the public hearing in person or virtually via
webinar. We will announce any public hearing on our website, in
addition to the Federal Register. The use of virtual public hearings is
consistent with our regulation at 50 CFR 424.16(c)(3).
Acronyms Used in This Document
For the convenience of the reader, we provide this list of some of
the acronyms used in this proposed rule:
CCAA = candidate conservation agreements with assurances
CCP = comprehensive conservation plan
DoD = Department of Defense
ENP = Everglades National Park
FKWEA = Florida Keys Wildlife and Environmental Area
FNAI = Florida Natural Areas Inventory
HARB = Homestead Air Reserve Base
HCP = habitat conservation plan
INRMP = integrated natural resources management plan
KWNAS = Key West Naval Air Station
NKDR = National Key Deer Refuge
NWRs = National Wildlife Refuges
SHA = safe harbor agreements
SOCSO = Special Operations Command South
USDA = U.S. Department of Agriculture
Previous Federal Actions
On September 29, 2015, we proposed to list Big Pine partridge pea,
wedge spurge, and sand flax as endangered species and Blodgett's
silverbush as a threatened species under the Act (80 FR 58536). On
September 29, 2016, we finalized the listing (81 FR 66842). At the time
of our proposal, we determined that critical habitat was prudent, but
not determinable because we lacked specific information on the impacts
of our designation. In our final listing rule, we stated we were in the
process of obtaining information on the impacts of the designation (81
FR 66842). All previous Federal actions for Big Pine partridge pea,
wedge spurge, sand flax, and Blodgett's silverbush are described in
detail in our final rule listing the four plant species as endangered
and threatened species under the Act (81 FR 66842).
It is our intent to discuss in this proposed rule only those topics
directly relevant to the designation of critical habitat for Big Pine
partridge pea, wedge spurge, sand flax, and Blodgett's silverbush. For
more information on the taxonomy, life history, habitat, population
descriptions, and factors affecting the species, please refer to the
September 29, 2015, proposed listing rule for these species (80 FR
58536) and the September 29, 2016, final listing rule (81 FR 66842).
Critical Habitat
Background
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and the implementing
regulations in title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations set forth
the procedures for determining whether a species is an endangered
species or a threatened species, issuing protective regulations for
threatened species, and designating critical habitat for threatened and
endangered species. In 2019, jointly with the National Marine Fisheries
Service, the Service issued final rules that revised the regulations in
50 CFR parts 17 and 424 regarding how we add, remove, and reclassify
threatened and endangered species and the criteria for designating
listed species' critical habitat (84 FR 45020 and 84 FR 44752; August
27, 2019). At the same time the Service also issued final regulations
that, for species listed as threatened species after September 26,
2019, eliminated the Service's general protective regulations
automatically applying to threatened species the prohibitions that
section 9 of the Act applies to endangered species (collectively, the
2019 regulations).
However, on July 5, 2022, the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of California vacated the 2019 regulations (Center for
Biological Diversity v. Haaland, No. 4:19-cv-05206-JST, Doc. 168 (N.D.
Cal. July 5, 2022) (CBD v. Haaland)), reinstating the regulations that
were in effect before the effective date of the 2019 regulations as the
law governing species classification and critical-habitat decisions.
Accordingly, in developing the analysis contained in this proposal, we
applied the pre-2019 regulations, which may be reviewed in the 2018
edition of the Code of Federal Regulations at 50 CFR 424.02 and
424.12(a)(1) and (b)(2). Because of the ongoing litigation regarding
the court's vacatur of the 2019 regulations, and the resulting
uncertainty surrounding the legal status of the regulations, we also
undertook an analysis of whether the proposal would be different if we
were to apply the 2019 regulations. That analysis, which we described
in a separate memo in the decisional file and posted on <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>, concluded that we would have reached the same
proposal if we had applied the 2019 regulations. For the four plants,
we find that critical habitat is prudent under either regulatory scheme
because we determined that the present or threatened destruction,
modification, or curtailment of habitat or range is a threat to all
four species. In addition, in the final listing rule (81 FR 66842;
September 29, 2016), illegal collection of any of the four Florida Keys
plants was not identified as a threat under Factor B, and
identification and mapping of critical habitat is not expected to
initiate any such threat. We also determined the occupied areas may be
adequate to ensure the conservation of these species. For Blodgett's
silverbush, the amount and distribution of critical habitat we are
proposing for designation in occupied areas would allow existing and
future established populations to maintain their existing
distributions; expand their distributions into suitable nearby areas
(needed to offset habitat loss and fragmentation); increase the size of
each population to a level where the threats of genetic, demographic,
and normal environmental uncertainties are diminished; and maintain
their ability to withstand local or unit-level environmental
fluctuations or catastrophic events. Accordingly, we have not
identified unoccupied areas that are essential for the conservation of
this species at this time. For Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge,
and sand flax, we identified areas of remaining pine rockland habitat
that we are considering whether these areas meet the definition of
unoccupied critical habitat for these three species.
On September 21, 2022, the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the
Ninth Circuit stayed the district court's July 5, 2022, order vacating
the 2019 regulations until a pending motion for reconsideration before
the district court is resolved (In re: Cattlemen's Ass'n, No. 22-
70194). The effect of the stay is that the 2019 regulations are
currently the governing law. Because a court order requires us to
submit this proposal to the Federal Register by September 30, 2022, it
is not feasible for us to revise the proposal in response to the Ninth
Circuit's decision. Instead, we hereby adopt the analysis in the
separate memo that applied the 2019 regulations as our primary
justification for the proposal. However, due to the continued
uncertainty resulting from the ongoing litigation, we also retain the
analysis in this preamble that applies the pre-2019 regulations and we
conclude that, for the reasons stated in our separate memo analyzing
the 2019 regulations, this proposal would have been the same if we had
applied the 2019 regulations.
Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the Act as:
(1) The specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the
species, at the time it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which
are found those physical or biological features
[[Page 62505]]
(a) Essential to the conservation of the species, and
(b) Which may require special management considerations or
protection; and
(2) Specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the
species at the time it is listed, upon a determination that such areas
are essential for the conservation of the species.
Our regulations at 50 CFR 424.02 define the geographical area
occupied by the species as an area that may generally be delineated
around species' occurrences, as determined by the Secretary (i.e.,
range). Such areas may include those areas used throughout all or part
of the species' life cycle, even if not used on a regular basis (e.g.,
migratory corridors, seasonal habitats, and habitats used periodically,
but not solely by vagrant individuals).
Conservation, as defined under section 3 of the Act, means to use
and the use of all methods and procedures that are necessary to bring
an endangered or threatened species to the point at which the measures
provided pursuant to the Act are no longer necessary. Such methods and
procedures include, but are not limited to, all activities associated
with scientific resources management such as research, census, law
enforcement, habitat acquisition and maintenance, propagation, live
trapping, and transplantation, and, in the extraordinary case where
population pressures within a given ecosystem cannot be otherwise
relieved, may include regulated taking.
Critical habitat receives protection under section 7 of the Act
through the requirement that Federal agencies ensure, in consultation
with the Service, that any action they authorize, fund, or carry out is
not likely to result in the destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat. The designation of critical habitat does not affect
land ownership or establish a refuge, wilderness, reserve, preserve, or
other conservation area. Designation also does not allow the government
or public to access private lands, nor does designation require
implementation of restoration, recovery, or enhancement measures by
non-Federal landowners. Where a landowner requests Federal agency
funding or authorization for an action that may affect a listed species
or critical habitat, the Federal agency would be required to consult
with the Service under section 7(a)(2) of the Act. However, even if the
Service were to conclude that the proposed activity would result in
destruction or adverse modification of the critical habitat, the
Federal action agency and the landowner are not required to abandon the
proposed activity, or to restore or recover the species; instead, they
must implement ``reasonable and prudent alternatives'' to avoid
destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat.
Under the first prong of the Act's definition of critical habitat,
areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time
it was listed are included in a critical habitat designation if they
contain physical or biological features (1) which are essential to the
conservation of the species and (2) which may require special
management considerations or protection. For these areas, critical
habitat designations identify, to the extent known using the best
scientific and commercial data available, those physical or biological
features that are essential to the conservation of the species (such as
space, food, cover, and protected habitat). In identifying those
physical or biological features that occur in specific occupied areas,
we focus on those features that are essential to support the life-
history needs of the species, including, but not limited to, water
characteristics, soil type, geological features, prey, vegetation,
symbiotic species, or other features. A feature may be a single habitat
characteristic or a more complex combination of habitat
characteristics. Features may include habitat characteristics that
support ephemeral or dynamic habitat conditions. Features may also be
expressed in terms relating to principles of conservation biology, such
as patch size, distribution distances, and connectivity.
Under the second prong of the Act's definition of critical habitat,
we can designate critical habitat in areas outside the geographical
area occupied by the species at the time it is listed, upon a
determination that such areas are essential for the conservation of the
species.
Section 4 of the Act requires that we designate critical habitat on
the basis of the best scientific data available. Further, our Policy on
Information Standards Under the Endangered Species Act (published in
the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271)), the Information
Quality Act (section 515 of the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106-554; H.R. 5658)),
and our associated Information Quality Guidelines provide criteria,
establish procedures, and provide guidance to ensure that our decisions
are based on the best scientific data available. They require our
biologists, to the extent consistent with the Act and with the use of
the best scientific data available, to use primary and original sources
of information as the basis for recommendations to designate critical
habitat.
When we are determining which areas should be designated as
critical habitat, our primary source of information is generally the
information from the listing process for the species. Additional
information sources may include any generalized conservation strategy,
criteria, or outline that may have been developed for the species; the
recovery plan for the species; articles in peer-reviewed journals;
conservation plans developed by States and counties; scientific status
surveys and studies; biological assessments; other unpublished
materials; or experts' opinions or personal knowledge.
Habitat is dynamic, and species may move from one area to another
over time. We recognize that critical habitat designated at a
particular point in time may not include all of the habitat that we may
later determine are necessary for the recovery of the species. For
these reasons, a critical habitat designation does not signal that
habitat outside the designated area is unimportant or may not be needed
for recovery of the species. Areas that are important to the
conservation of the species, both inside and outside the critical
habitat designation, will continue to be subject to: (1) Conservation
actions implemented under section 7(a)(1) of the Act; (2) regulatory
protections afforded by the requirement in section 7(a)(2) of the Act
for Federal agencies to ensure their actions are not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened
species; and (3) section 9 of the Act's prohibitions on taking any
individual of the species, including taking caused by actions that
affect habitat. Federally funded or permitted projects affecting listed
species outside their designated critical habitat areas may still
result in jeopardy findings in some cases. These protections and
conservation tools will continue to contribute to recovery of the
species. Similarly, critical habitat designations made on the basis of
the best available information at the time of designation will not
control the direction and substance of future recovery plans, habitat
conservation plans (HCPs), or other species conservation planning
efforts if new information available at the time of those planning
efforts calls for a different outcome.
Prudency Determination
Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as amended, and implementing
regulations
[[Page 62506]]
(50 CFR 424.12) require that, to the maximum extent prudent and
determinable, the Secretary shall designate critical habitat at the
time the species is determined to be an endangered or threatened
species. Our regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)) state that a designation
of critical habitat is not prudent when any of the following situations
exist:
(i) The species is threatened by taking or other human activity,
and identification of critical habitat can be expected to increase the
degree of such threat to the species; or
(ii) Such designation of critical habitat would not be beneficial
to the species. In determining whether a designation would not be
beneficial, the factors the Services may consider include but are not
limited to: Whether the present or threatened destruction,
modification, or curtailment of a species' habitat or range is not a
threat to the species, or whether any areas meet the definition of
``critical habitat.''
As discussed in the final listing rule (81 FR 66842), there is
currently no imminent threat of take attributed to collection or
vandalism identified under Factor B for these species, and
identification and mapping of critical habitat is not expected to
initiate or increase the degree of any such threat. In our listing
determination for these species, we determined that the present or
threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of habitat or
range is a threat to these species. Accordingly, the designation of
critical habitat is likely to be beneficial. Therefore, because none of
the circumstances enumerated in our regulations at 50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)
have been met, we have determined that the designation of critical
habitat is prudent for Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, sand flax,
and Blodgett's silverbush.
Critical Habitat Determinability
Having determined that designation of critical habitat is prudent
for each species, under section 4(a)(3) of the Act, we must find
whether critical habitat for Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, sand
flax, and Blodgett's silverbush is determinable. Our regulations at 50
CFR 424.12(a)(2) state that critical habitat is not determinable when
one or both of the following situations exist:
(i) Data sufficient to perform required analyses are lacking, or
(ii) The biological needs of the species are not sufficiently well
known to identify any area that meets the definition of ``critical
habitat.''
When critical habitat is not determinable, the Act allows the
Service an additional year to publish a critical habitat designation
(16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(6)(C)(ii)).
At the time of our proposal, we determined that critical habitat
was prudent, but not determinable because we lacked specific
information on the impacts of our designation (80 FR 58536). In our
final listing rule, we stated we were in the process of obtaining
information on the impacts of the designation (81 FR 66842). We
reviewed the available information pertaining to the biological needs
of the species and habitat characteristics where these species are
located. This and other information represent the best scientific data
available and led us to conclude that the designation of critical
habitat is determinable for Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, sand
flax, and Blodgett's silverbush.
Physical or Biological Features
In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) of the Act and regulations at
50 CFR 424.12(b), in determining which areas we will designate as
critical habitat from within the geographical area occupied by the
species at the time of listing, we consider the physical or biological
features that are essential to the conservation of the species and that
may require special management considerations or protection. The
regulations at 50 CFR 424.02 define ``physical or biological features''
as the features that support the life-history needs of the species,
including, but not limited to, water characteristics, soil type,
geological features, sites, prey, vegetation, symbiotic species, or
other features. A feature may be a single habitat characteristic or a
more complex combination of habitat characteristics. Features may
include habitat characteristics that support ephemeral or dynamic
habitat conditions. Features may also be expressed in terms relating to
principles of conservation biology, such as patch size, distribution
distances, and connectivity. For example, physical features essential
to the conservation of the species might include gravel of a particular
size required for spawning, alkali soil for seed germination,
protective cover for migration, or susceptibility to flooding or fire
that maintains necessary early-successional habitat characteristics.
Biological features might include prey species, forage grasses,
specific kinds or ages of trees for roosting or nesting, symbiotic
fungi, or absence of a particular level of nonnative species consistent
with conservation needs of the listed species. The features may also be
combinations of habitat characteristics and may encompass the
relationship between characteristics or the necessary amount of a
characteristic essential to support the life history of the species.
In considering whether features are essential to the conservation
of the species, the Service may consider an appropriate quality,
quantity, and spatial and temporal arrangement of habitat
characteristics in the context of the life-history needs, condition,
and status of the species. These characteristics include, but are not
limited to, space for individual and population growth and for normal
behavior; food, water, air, light, minerals, or other nutritional or
physiological requirements; cover or shelter; sites for breeding,
reproduction, or rearing (or development) of offspring; and habitats
that are protected from disturbance.
We derive the specific physical or biological features essential to
Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, sand flax, and Blodgett's
silverbush from studies of the species' habitat, ecology, and life
history as described below. Additional information can be found in the
September 29, 2015, proposed listing rule (80 FR 58536) and the
September 29, 2016, final listing rule (81 FR 66842) for these species.
We have determined that the following physical or biological features
are essential to the conservation of Big Pine partridge pea, wedge
spurge, sand flax, and Blodgett's silverbush.
Big Pine Partridge Pea, Wedge Spurge, and Sand Flax
Space for Individual and Population Growth and for Normal Behavior
Plant Community and Competitive Ability
Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, and sand flax occur in the
lower Florida Keys in Monroe County in communities classified as pine
rockland and on disturbed sites adjacent to pine rocklands, such as
roadside and mowed areas still dominated by native species (see more
detailed description of disturbed sites below). In addition, sand flax
occurs on the Miami Rock Ridge in Miami-Dade County in pine rockland,
on disturbed sites adjacent to pine rockland, and on two canal banks
that likely incorporated pine rockland substrate as fill (Bradley and
Gann 1999, p. 61; Hodges and Bradley 2006, p. 37). These communities
and their associated native plant species are described in the
Background section of the September 29, 2015, proposed listing rule (80
FR 58536) and in the September 29, 2016, final listing rule (81 FR
66842) for Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, and sand flax. These
habitats and their associated plant communities provide
[[Page 62507]]
vegetation structure that allows for adequate growing space, moisture,
sunlight, pollinators, and a competitive regime that is required for
Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, and sand flax to persist and
spread.
Pine rocklands are a fire-maintained ecosystem characterized by an
open canopy, understory, and a limestone substrate (often exposed).
Open canopy conditions are required to allow sufficient sunlight to
reach the herbaceous layer and permit growth and flowering of Big Pine
partridge pea, wedge spurge, and sand flax (Ross and Ruiz 1996, pp. 5-
6; Bradley and Saha 2009, p. 4). These species also require a
calcareous limestone substrate that varies from nearly bare to thin
layers or small pockets of shallow soil to provide suitable growing
conditions (e.g., pH, nutrients, anchoring, and proper drainage). As a
result of these marginal soil conditions, plants such as Big Pine
partridge pea, wedge spurge, and sand flax rely on sparse competition
and periodic disturbance to thrive and persist. This combination of
ecosystem characteristics (i.e., open canopy with a partially exposed
limestone substrate and periodic disturbance) occurs only in pine
rockland habitats (as opposed to rockland hammock, which occurs in
conjunction with pine rockland and has a limestone substrate but a
closed canopy).
Disturbed areas that support Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge,
and sand flax consist of sites that formerly were pine rocklands, but
in most cases have no remaining pine canopy because of previous
disturbance from clearing or scraping. In addition, some disturbed
areas that support sand flax are sites where pine rockland substrate
was used as fill. These include roadsides, firebreaks, and other areas
that are infrequently mowed, or have no pine canopy but retain native
pine rockland herbs, grass species, and substrate (Bradley and van der
Heiden 2013, pp. 7-12; Bradley 2006, p. 37: Bradley and Gann 1999, p.
61).
Sand flax occurrences reported from marl prairie are at sites that
have been artificially drained (Bradley and Van Der Heiden 2013, p. 11)
or are scraped pine rocklands that function more like marl prairie
(Kernan and Bradley 1996, p. 11). As with disturbed roadside habitats,
it is possible that dry marl prairies have become refugia for the sand
flax as fire regimes and natural areas were altered and destroyed over
the last century. However, the Service does not consider marl prairie
to be a primary habitat for sand flax.
The total remaining area of pine rockland in the lower Florida Keys
(Monroe County) is now approximately 1,899 acres (ac) (769 hectares
(ha)), most of which is on Big Pine Key (1,480 ac (599 ha)) (U.S.
Geological Survey (USGS) 2019). In mainland south Florida (Miami-Dade
County), development and agriculture have reduced pine rockland habitat
by 90 percent. Recent vegetation mapping in Everglades National Park
(ENP) indicates there are a total of 14,211 ac (5,751 ha) of pine
rocklands remaining in ENP, which includes the largest remaining area
of pine rockland (approximately 10,895 ac (4,409 ha)) in Florida (Long
Pine Key) (Ruiz 2022). Outside of ENP, pine rockland habitat decreased
from approximately 185,329 ac (75,000 ha) in the early 1900s to only
3,707 ac (1,500 ha) in 2014 (Possley et al. 2014, p. 154) and 2,275 ac
(921 ha) in 2019 (USGS 2019), leaving only about 1.2 percent of the
pine rocklands on the Miami Rock Ridge remaining, and much of what is
left are small remnants scattered throughout the Miami metropolitan
area, isolated from other natural areas (Herndon 1998, p. 1). Based on
the data presented above, outside of ENP the total remaining area of
pine rockland in Miami-Dade and Monroe Counties is now 4,174 ac (1,689
ha) (approximately 2,275 ac (921 ha) in Miami-Dade County and 1,899 ac
(769 ha) in the Florida Keys (Monroe County)). The extreme rarity of
high-quality pine rockland habitat supporting Big Pine partridge pea,
wedge spurge, and sand flax elevates the importance of disturbed
remnant sites that still retain some pine rockland species.
We consider pine rockland to be the primary habitat for Big Pine
partridge pea, wedge spurge, and sand flax. However, adjacent disturbed
areas currently supporting the species are considered essential when
adjacent pine rocklands do not support an existing population or are of
insufficient size or connectivity to support a population of Big Pine
partridge pea, wedge spurge, and sand flax. Therefore, based on the
information above, we identify upland habitats consisting of pine
rocklands and adjacent disturbed areas to be a physical or biological
feature essential to the conservation of these species.
Food, Water, Air, Light, Minerals, or Other Nutritional or
Physiological Requirements
Climate (Temperature and Precipitation)
Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, and sand flax require
adequate rainfall and do not tolerate prolonged freezing temperatures.
The climate of south Florida where these species occur is characterized
by distinct wet and dry seasons, a monthly mean temperature above
64.4[deg]F (F) (18[deg] Celsius (C)) in every month of the year, and
annual rainfall averaging 30 to 60 inches (in) (75 to 150 centimeters
(cm)) (Gabler et al. 1994, p. 211). Rainfall within the range of sand
flax varies from an annual average of 60-65 in (153-165 cm) in the
northern portion of the Miami Rock Ridge to an average of 35-40 in (89-
102 cm) in the lower Florida Keys (Snyder et al. 1990, p. 238). Areas
of pine rockland that are adjacent to wetlands may experience prolonged
flooded periods lasting up to 60 days, while those at higher elevation
have shorter or no annual flooding period (Florida Natural Areas
Inventory (FNAI) 2010a, p. 2). Freezes can occur in the winter months
but are very infrequent at this latitude in Florida. Therefore, based
on the information above, we determined a subtropical humid (Miami-Dade
County) or tropical humid (Monroe County) climate to be an essential
physical feature for Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, and sand
flax.
Soils
Substrates supporting Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, and
sand flax are composed of oolitic limestone that is at or very near the
surface. Solution holes occasionally form where the surface limestone
is dissolved by organic acids. There is typically very little soil
development, consisting primarily of accumulations of low-nutrient
sand, marl, clayey loam, and organic debris found in solution holes,
depressions, and crevices on the limestone surface (FNAI 2010a, p. 62).
However, extensive sandy pockets can be found at the northern end of
the Miami Rock Ridge, beginning from approximately North Miami Beach
and extending south to approximately SW 216 Street (which runs east-
west approximately one-half mile south of Quail Roost Pineland)
(Service 1999, p. 3-162).
These substrates provide anchoring, nutrients, moisture regime, and
suitable soil chemistry for Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, and
sand flax; they facilitate a community of associated plant species that
creates competition which allows Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge,
and sand flax to persist and spread. Therefore, based on the
information above, we identify substrates derived from calcareous
limestone (often exposed with little soil development) that provide
nutritional requirements and suitable growing conditions (e.g., pH,
nutrients, anchoring and drainage) to be an essential physical feature
for Big Pine
[[Page 62508]]
partridge pea, wedge spurge, and sand flax.
Cover or Shelter
As mentioned previously, Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, and
sand flax occur in pine rocklands and adjacent disturbed areas in the
lower Florida Keys (Bradley and Gann 1999, pp. 17-18; Bradley 2006, p.
21). In addition, sand flax occurs in pine rocklands on the Miami Rock
Ridge in Miami-Dade County. These pine rocklands are characterized by
an open canopy of Pinus elliottii var. densa (South Florida slash
pine). The shrub/understory layer is also characteristically open,
although the height and density of the shrub layer varies based on fire
frequency, with understory plants growing taller and denser as time
since fire increases. The open canopy and understory of pine rocklands
are required to allow sufficient sunlight to reach the herbaceous layer
and permit growth and flowering of Big Pine partridge pea, wedge
spurge, and sand flax (Bradley and Gann 1999, pp. 17-18; Bradley 2006,
p. 37).
Disturbed areas that are adjacent to pine rocklands that support
Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, and sand flax may have little to
no pine canopy, but an herbaceous layer dominated by native herbs and
grasses. Usually, these are former (remnant) pine rocklands that have a
history of disturbance (clearing or scraping). These sites tend to be
infrequently (every 2-3 months) mowed areas adjacent to existing pine
rocklands, such as roadsides and fields. These areas can provide the
open conditions required by Big Pine partridge pea, wedge surge, and
sand flax (Bradley 2006, p. 37).
Therefore, based on the information above, we identify vegetation
composition and structure characterized by an open canopy of South
Florida slash pine and understory that allows for sufficient sunlight
and space for individual growth and population expansion to be an
essential feature for Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, and sand
flax.
Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, or Rearing (or Development) of
Offspring
Big Pine partridge pea reproduction is sexual, and flowers require
insect visitation for pollination. Though many types of insects visit
Big Pine partridge pea flowers, effective pollination can be performed
only by buzz-pollinating bees (Liu and Koptur 2003, pp. 1184-1186).
Seed production is higher when cross-pollination occurs. In addition,
seed germination rates are higher from cross-pollinated flowers,
suggesting that inbreeding depression occurs in seeds produced through
self-pollination (Liu and Koptur 2003, pp. 1184-1186). Taken together,
these findings indicate that insect pollination is crucial to the
plant's reproduction and progeny fitness. Declines in pollinator
visitation may cause decreased seed production, which could lead to
lower seedling establishment and numbers of mature plants.
The biology and demography of wedge spurge have received
considerable study. Small groups of the plant are scattered widely
across the pine rocklands of Big Pine Key (Herndon 1993, in Bradley and
Gann 1999, p. 31), with a population estimated at 368,557 in 2014
(Bradley et al. 2015, p. 21). The population was confirmed to still be
present in 2019 (Lange et al. 2019, p. 16). Wedge spurge reproduction
is sexual and likely requires insect visitation for pollination. Other
species of Chamaesyce are completely reliant on insects for pollination
and seed production while others are capable of self-pollination.
Pollinators may include bees, flies, ants, and wasps (Ehrenfeld 1976,
pp. 95-97, 406).
Little is known about the life history of sand flax, including
pollination biology, seed production, or dispersal. Sand flax
reproduction is sexual, with new plants generated from seeds. A recent
study found that pollinators are important in fruit production of sand
flax (Harris and Koptur 2022, pp. 7-8). Effective pollination has been
found from small bees and flies that visit the flowers of sand flax
(Harris and Koptur 2022, pp. 4-6). This recent information suggests
that insect pollination is important to the species' reproduction.
Therefore, like Big Pine partridge pea and wedge spurge, declines in
pollinator visitation may cause decreased seed or fruit production of
sand flax, which could lead to lower seedling establishment and numbers
of mature plants.
The pine rocklands and adjacent disturbed habitats identified above
as essential physical or biological features provide a plant community
with associated plant species that foster a competitive regime suitable
to Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, and sand flax and contain
adequate open space for the recruitment of new plants. Associated plant
species in these habitats attract and provide cover for insect
pollinators required for Big Pine partridge pea pollination, wedge
spurge, and sand flax.
Therefore, based on the information above, we identify pine
rockland habitat and adjacent disturbed areas containing the presence
of native pollinators for natural pollination and reproduction to be an
essential feature for Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, and sand
flax.
Habitats Representative of the Historical, Geographical, and Ecological
Distributions of the Species
Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, and sand flax continue to
occur in habitats that are representative of the species' historical,
geographical, and ecological distribution, although their current
ranges have been reduced. These species are currently found in pine
rocklands, and they also occur in adjacent disturbed areas, such as
roadsides. As described above, these habitats provide a community of
associated plant and animal species that are compatible with Big Pine
partridge pea, wedge spurge, and sand flax. In addition, these habitats
provide the vegetation structure that provides adequate sunlight levels
and open space for plant growth and regeneration, and substrates with
adequate moisture availability and suitable soil chemistry needed for
these species. Representative communities are located on Federal,
State, local, and private conservation lands that implement
conservation measures benefitting these species.
Disturbance Regime
Pine rockland habitat that could support or currently supports Big
Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, and sand flax depend on a disturbance
regime of wild or prescribed fire to open the canopy in order to
provide light levels sufficient to support these species. Fire return
intervals of 5 to 7 years generate the lowest extinction and population
decline probabilities for Big Pine partridge pea (Liu et al. 2005, p.
210). The historical frequency and magnitude of fire allowed for the
persistence of Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, and sand flax by
maintaining an open canopy and understory and preventing succession
(transition) of pine rocklands to hardwood-dominated community
(rockland hammock). In the absence of fire, some areas of pine rockland
may have closed canopies, resulting in areas lacking enough available
sunlight to support Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, and sand
flax. Most of these areas can be enhanced if habitats are managed with
a combination of mechanical hardwood removal and prescribed fire.
Disturbed sites that support Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, and
sand flax are typically maintained by infrequent mowing. Mowing is
similar in effect to fire in that
[[Page 62509]]
it limits encroachment of hardwood species and maintains open canopy
conditions suitable for these species. We consider wildfire to be the
natural disturbance factor for pine rocklands and Big Pine partridge
pea, wedge spurge, and sand flax. In adjacent disturbed areas currently
supporting the species, mowing serves some of the ecological function
of fire and maintains suitable habitat conditions (open canopy) for
these species.
Therefore, based on the information above, we identify periodic
natural (e.g., fire) or nonnatural (e.g., prescribed fire, mowing)
disturbance regimes to maintain open canopy conditions in South Florida
pine rocklands, to be an important process to maintain essential
features for Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, and sand flax.
Summary of Physical or Biological Features Essential to the
Conservation of Big Pine Partridge Pea, Wedge Spurge, and Sand Flax
Based on the best available science related to the life history and
ecology of these species, as outlined in the discussion above, we have
determined that the following physical or biological features are
essential to the conservation of Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge,
and sand flax:
South Florida pine rockland habitat and adjacent disturbed areas:
(1) Consisting of calcareous limestone substrate (often exposed
with little soil development) that provides nutritional requirements
and suitable growing conditions (e.g., pH, nutrients, anchoring and
drainage);
(2) Characterized by an open canopy of Pinus elliottii var. densa
(South Florida slash pine) and understory with a high proportion of
native pine rockland plant species to provide for sufficient sunlight
to permit growth and flowering;
(3) Subjected to a monthly mean temperature characteristic of the
subtropical humid classification in Miami-Dade County and tropical
humid classification in Monroe County in every month of the year and
short hydroperiods ranging of up to 60 days each year;
(4) Subjected to periodic natural (e.g., fire) or nonnatural (e.g.,
prescribed fire, mowing) disturbance regimes to maintain open canopy
conditions; and
(5) Containing the presence of native pollinators for natural
pollination and reproduction.
Blodgett's Silverbush
Space for Individual and Population Growth and for Normal Behavior
Plant Community and Competitive Ability
Blodgett's silverbush occurs in the Florida Keys in Monroe County
and on the Miami Rock Ridge in Miami-Dade County in communities
classified as pine rockland, rockland hammock, and coastal berm, as
well as disturbed sites adjacent to these habitats, such as roadsides
and mowed areas still dominated by native species (Bradley and Gann
1999, p. 3). These communities and their associated native plant
species are described in the final listing rule for Blodgett's
silverbush published in the Federal Register on September 29, 2016 (81
FR 66842). These habitats and their associated plant communities
provide vegetation structure that allows for adequate growing space,
moisture, sunlight, pollinators, and a competitive regime that is
required for Blodgett's silverbush to persist and spread. As discussed
above for Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, and sand flax, pine
rocklands are a fire-maintained ecosystem characterized by an open
canopy and understory and a limestone substrate (often exposed).
Rockland hammock is a species-rich tropical hardwood forest on upland
sites in areas where limestone is very near the surface and often
exposed. Coastal berms are landscape features found along low-energy
coastlines in south Florida and the Florida Keys. Coastal berm is a
short forest or shrub thicket found on long, narrow, storm-deposited
ridges (sand dunes) of loose sediment formed by a mixture of coarse
shell fragments, pieces of coralline algae, and other coastal debris.
Similar to the other species, open canopy conditions are required
to allow sufficient sunlight to reach the herbaceous layer and permit
growth and flowering of Blodgett's silverbush. These conditions are
maintained by fire in pine rocklands. In rockland hammocks, only the
edges and canopy disruption in the interior provide enough sunlight for
Blodgett's silverbush. Canopy disruption on rockland hammocks can occur
due to natural events such as hurricanes and storm surge. Human
disturbance, especially mowing, also maintains suitable conditions in
disturbed areas, as discussed above for Big Pine partridge pea, wedge
spurge, and sand flax. The plant also requires a calcareous limestone
substrate that varies from nearly bare to thin layers or small pockets
of shallow soil in pine rocklands, to shallow organic soils over
calcareous limestone in rockland hammocks, and deep, calcareous sandy
soils typical of coastal berm to provide suitable growing conditions
(e.g., pH, nutrients, anchoring, and proper drainage). As a result of
these marginal soil conditions, plants such as Blodgett's silverbush
rely on sparse competition and periodic disturbance to thrive and
persist. This combination of ecosystem characteristics (i.e., open
canopy and limestone substrate) occurs in pine rocklands, along edges
and gaps in rockland hammocks, and in coastal berm.
Disturbed areas that support Blodgett's silverbush consist of sites
that formerly were pine rocklands or rockland hammocks, but in most
cases have no remaining pine or hardwood canopy because of previous
disturbance (clearing or scraping). These include roadsides,
firebreaks, and other areas that are infrequently mowed or have no tree
canopy but retain native herbs, grass species, and substrate (Bradley
2006, p. 37: Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 61).
Loss of pine rockland habitat in Miami-Dade and Monroe County is
discussed above for Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, and sand
flax. In addition, modification and destruction from residential and
commercial development have severely impacted rockland hammocks and
coastal berm that support Blodgett's silverbush. Rockland hammocks were
once abundant in Miami-Dade and Monroe Counties but are now considered
imperiled locally and globally (FNAI 2010b, pp. 24-26). The tremendous
development and agricultural pressures in south Florida have resulted
in significant reductions of rockland hammock (Phillips 1940, p. 167;
Snyder et al. 1990, pp. 271-272; FNAI 2010b, pp. 24-26).
The extreme rarity of high-quality pine rockland, rockland hammock,
and coastal berm habitat supporting Blodgett's silverbush in Miami-Dade
and Monroe Counties elevates the importance of disturbed remnant sites
that still retain some habitat values.
We consider pine rocklands, edges or gaps in rockland hammocks, and
coastal berm to be the primary habitats for Blodgett's silverbush.
However, adjacent disturbed areas currently supporting the species are
considered more important when adjacent pine rocklands, rockland
hammocks, or coastal berm do not support an existing population, or are
of insufficient size or connectivity to support a population of
Blodgett's silverbush. Therefore, based on the information above, we
identify upland
[[Page 62510]]
habitats consisting of pine rocklands, rockland hammocks, coastal
berms, and adjacent disturbed areas to be physical or biological
features essential to the conservation of Blodgett's silverbush.
Food, Water, Air, Light, Minerals, or Other Nutritional or
Physiological Requirements
Climate (Temperature and Precipitation)
Blodgett's silverbush requires adequate rainfall and does not
tolerate prolonged freezing temperatures. The climate of south Florida
where Blodgett's silverbush occurs is classified as subtropical humid
(Miami-Dade County) and tropical humid (Monroe County), as described
above for Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, and sand flax. Rainfall
within the range of Blodgett's silverbush varies from an annual average
of 60-65 in (153-165 cm) in the northern portion of the Miami Rock
Ridge to an average of 35-40 in (89-102 cm) in the lower Florida Keys
(Snyder et al. 1990, p. 238). Areas of pine rockland that are adjacent
to wetlands may experience prolonged flooded periods lasting up to 60
days, while those at higher elevation have shorter or no annual
flooding period (FNAI 2010a, p. 2). Freezes can occur in the winter
months but are very infrequent at this latitude in Florida. Therefore,
based on the information above, we determined this type of climate to
be an essential physical feature for Blodgett's silverbush.
Soils
Substrates supporting Blodgett's silverbush are composed of oolitic
limestone that is at or very near the surface. Solution holes
occasionally form where the surface limestone is dissolved by organic
acids. In pine rocklands, there is typically very little soil
development, consisting primarily of accumulations of low-nutrient
sand, marl, clayey loam, and organic debris found in solution holes,
depressions, and crevices on the limestone surface (FNAI 2010a, p. 62).
However, extensive sandy pockets can be found at the northern end of
the Miami Rock Ridge, beginning from approximately North Miami Beach
and extending south to approximately SW 216 Street (which runs east-
west approximately one-half mile south of Quail Roost Pineland)
(Service 1999, p. 3-162). Rockland hammock occurs on a thin layer of
highly organic soil covering limestone on high ground that does not
regularly flood (FNAI 2010b p. 1). In coastal berms, deep, calcareous
sandy soils are the typical substrate of this habitat.
These substrates provide anchoring, nutrients, moisture regime, and
suitable soil chemistry for Blodgett's silverbush; and facilitate a
community of associated plant species that create a competitive regime
that allows Blodgett's silverbush to persist and spread. Therefore,
based on the information above, we identify substrates derived from
calcareous limestone (often exposed with little soil development in
pine rocklands; with a thin to thick organic soil layer in the case of
rockland hammocks; deep, calcareous soils in coastal berm) that provide
nutritional requirements and suitable growing conditions (e.g., pH,
nutrients, anchoring and drainage) to be an essential physical feature
for Blodgett's silverbush.
Cover or Shelter
As previously mentioned, Blodgett's silverbush occurs in pine
rockland, rockland hammock, and coastal berm habitats in the lower
Florida Keys in Monroe County and the Miami Rock Ridge in Miami-Dade
County; and adjacent disturbed areas (Bradley and Gann, 1999, p. 3).
Pine rocklands of the Florida Keys are characterized by an open canopy
of South Florida slash pine. The shrub/understory layer is also
characteristically open, although the height and density of the shrub
layer varies based on fire frequency, with understory plants growing
taller and denser as time since fire increases. The open canopy and
understory of pine rocklands are required to allow sufficient sunlight
to reach the herbaceous layer and permit growth and flowering of
Blodgett's silverbush (Ross and Ruiz 1996, pp. 5-6; Bradley and Saha
2009, p.4).
Rockland hammock forest floor is largely covered by leaf litter and
may have an organic soil layer of variable depth. Rockland hammocks
typically have larger, more mature trees and deep organic soil layer in
the interior, while the margins can be almost impenetrable in places
with dense growth of smaller shrubs, trees, and vines and shallow
organic soil layer. Mature hammocks may be open beneath a tall, well-
defined canopy and subcanopy. More commonly, in less mature or
disturbed hammocks, dense woody vegetation of varying heights from
canopy to short shrubs is often present. Herbaceous species are
occasionally present and generally sparse in coverage (FNAI 2010b p.
1).
Coastal berm is a short forest or shrub thicket found on long,
narrow, storm-deposited ridges (sand dunes). Structure and composition
of the vegetation is variable depending on height and time since the
last storm event. The most stable berms may share some tree species
with rockland hammocks, but generally have a greater proportion of
shrubs and herbs. This is a structurally variable community that may
appear in various stages of succession following storm disturbance,
from scattered herbaceous beach colonizers to a dense stand of tall
shrubs (FNAI 2010c, p. 2).
Disturbed areas that are adjacent to pine rocklands, rockland
hammocks, and coastal berms that support Blodgett's silverbush may have
little to no pine or hardwood canopy, but an herbaceous layer dominated
by native herbs and grasses. Usually these are former (remnant) pine
rocklands or rockland hammocks that have a history of disturbance
(clearing or scraping). These sites tend to be infrequently (every 2-3
months) mowed areas adjacent to existing pine rocklands or rockland
hammocks, such as roadsides and fields. These areas provide the open
conditions required by Blodgett's silverbush (Bradley 2006, p. 37).
Therefore, based on the information above, we identify vegetation
composition and structure characterized by an open canopy and
understory that allows for sufficient sunlight, and space for
individual growth and population expansion, to be an essential feature
for Blodgett's silverbush.
Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, or Rearing (or Development) of
Offspring
Little is known about the life history of Blodgett's silverbush,
including pollination biology, seed production, or dispersal.
Blodgett's silverbush reproduction is sexual, with new plants generated
from seeds. This species likely requires insect visitation for
pollination, although there is limited information on this.
The pine rocklands, rockland hammocks, coastal berms, and adjacent
disturbed habitats identified above as physical or biological features
provide a plant community with associated plant species that foster a
competitive regime suitable to Blodgett's silverbush and contain
adequate open space for the recruitment of new plants. Associated plant
species in these habitats attract and provide cover for insect
pollinators required for Blodgett's silverbush pollination.
Therefore, based on the information above, we identify pine
rockland, rockland hammock, and coastal berm habitat and adjacent
disturbed areas containing the presence of native pollinators for
natural pollination and reproduction to be an essential feature for
Blodgett's silverbush.
[[Page 62511]]
Habitats Representative of the Historical, Geographic, and Ecological
Distributions of the Species
Blodgett's silverbush continues to occur in habitats that are
representative of the species' historical, geographical, and ecological
distribution although its range has been reduced. The species is
currently found in pine rocklands, rockland hammocks, and coastal
berms, and it also occurs in adjacent disturbed areas. As described
above, these habitats provide a community of associated plant and
animal species that are compatible with Blodgett's silverbush,
vegetation structure that provides adequate sunlight levels and open
space for plant growth and regeneration, and substrates with adequate
moisture availability and suitable soil chemistry. Representative
communities are located on Federal, State, local, and private
conservation lands that implement conservation measures benefitting the
species.
Disturbance Regime
Pine rockland habitat that could or currently support Blodgett's
silverbush depend on a disturbance regime of wild or prescribed fire to
open the canopy and provide light levels sufficient to support
Blodgett's silverbush. The historical frequency and magnitude of fire
allowed for the persistence of Blodgett's silverbush, maintaining an
open canopy and understory, and preventing succession (transition) of
pine rocklands to hardwood-dominated community (rockland hammock). In
the absence of fire, some areas of pine rockland may have closed
canopies, resulting in areas lacking enough available sunlight to
support Blodgett's silverbush. Most of these areas can be restored if
habitats are managed with a combination of mechanical hardwood removal
and prescribed fire.
Rockland hammock is susceptible to fire, frost, canopy disruption,
and ground water reduction. Rockland hammock can be the advanced
successional stage of pine rockland, especially in cases where rockland
hammock is adjacent to pine rockland. In such cases, when fire is
excluded from pine rockland for 15 to 25 years, it can succeed to
rockland hammock vegetation. Historically, rockland hammocks in south
Florida evolved with fire in the landscape, fire most often
extinguished near the edges when it encountered the hammock's moist
microclimate and litter layer. However, rockland hammocks are
susceptible to damage from fire during extreme drought or when the
water table is lowered. In these cases, fire can cause tree mortality
and consume the organic soil layer. Rockland hammocks are also
sensitive to the strong winds and storm surge associated with
hurricanes (FNAI 2010b p. 2).
Coastal berms are deposited by storm waves along low-energy coasts.
Their distance inland depends on the height of the storm surge. Coastal
berms that are deposited far enough inland and remain undisturbed may
in time succeed to hammock. This is a structurally variable community
that may appear in various stages of succession following storm
disturbance, from scattered herbaceous beach colonizers to a dense
stand of tall shrubs (FNAI 2010c, p. 2).
The sparsely vegetated edges or interior portions laid open by
canopy disruption are the areas of rockland hammock and coastal berm
that have light levels sufficient to support Blodgett's silverbush.
However, the dynamic nature of the habitat means that areas not
currently open may become open in the future as a result of canopy
disruption from hurricanes, while areas currently open may develop
denser canopy over time, eventually rendering that portion of the
hammock unsuitable for Blodgett's silverbush.
Disturbed sites that support Blodgett's silverbush are typically
maintained by infrequent mowing. Mowing is similar in effect to fire in
that it limits encroachment of hardwood species and maintains open
canopy conditions suitable for Blodgett's silverbush. We consider
wildfire to be the natural disturbance factor for pine rocklands.
Periodic hurricanes and storm surge are the natural disturbance factors
for rockland hammock and coastal berm. In adjacent disturbed areas
currently supporting the species, mowing serves some of the ecological
function of fire and maintains suitable habitat conditions (open
canopy) for the species.
Therefore, based on the information above, we identify periodic
natural (e.g., fire, hurricanes) or nonnatural (e.g., prescribed fire,
mowing) disturbance regimes that maintain open canopy conditions to be
essential features for Blodgett's silverbush.
Summary of Physical or Biological Features Essential to the
Conservation of Blodgett's Silverbush
Based on the best available science related to the life history and
ecology of the species, as outlined in the discussion above, we have
determined that the following physical or biological features are
essential to the conservation of Blodgett's silverbush:
South Florida pine rockland, rockland hammock, or coastal berm
habitats and adjacent disturbed areas:
(1) Consisting of limestone substrate that provides nutritional
requirements and suitable growing conditions (e.g., pH, nutrients,
anchoring and drainage);
(2) Characterized by an open canopy and understory with a high
proportion of native plant species to provide for sufficient sunlight
to permit growth and flowering;
(3) Subjected to a monthly mean temperature characteristic of the
subtropical humid classification in Miami-Dade County and tropical
humid classification in Monroe County in every month of the year, with
short hydroperiods ranging of up to 60 days each year;
(4) Subjected to periodic natural (e.g., fire, hurricanes, storm
surge) or nonnatural (e.g., prescribed fire, mowing) disturbance
regimes to maintain open canopy conditions; and
(5) Containing the presence of native pollinators for natural
pollination and reproduction.
Special Management Considerations or Protection
When designating critical habitat, we assess whether the specific
areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time
of listing contain features which are essential to the conservation of
the species and which may require special management considerations or
protection. The features essential to the conservation of Big Pine
partridge pea, wedge spurge, sand flax, and Blodgett's silverbush may
require special management considerations or protection to reduce
threats related to habitat loss, fragmentation, and modification
primarily due to development; inadequate fire management; nonnative
plants; hurricanes and storm surge; changes in disturbance regime; and
sea level rise. For an in-depth discussion of threats, see Summary of
Factors Affecting the Species in our September 29, 2015, proposed
listing rule (80 FR 58536) and September 29, 2016, final listing rule
(81 FR 66842).
Some of these threats (e.g., habitat loss, inadequate fire
management) can be addressed by special management considerations or
protection while others (e.g., sea level rise, hurricanes, storm surge)
may be beyond the control of landowners and managers. However, even
when landowners or land managers may not be able to control all the
threats, they may be able to address or ameliorate the effects of the
threats. Habitat loss is a primary threat to Big Pine partridge pea,
wedge spurge, sand
[[Page 62512]]
flax, and Blodgett's silverbush. Loss of pine rocklands, rockland
hammock, and coastal berm to development has reduced these habitats in
Monroe and Miami-Dade Counties.
Habitat fragmentation can have negative effects on populations,
especially rare plants, and can affect survival and recovery (Aguilar
et al. 2006, pp. 968-980; Aguilar et al. 2008, pp. 5177-5188; Potts et
al. 2010, pp. 345-352). In general, habitat fragmentation causes
habitat loss, habitat degradation, habitat isolation, changes in
species composition, changes in species interactions, increased edge
effects, and reduced habitat connectivity (Fahrig 2003, pp. 487-515;
Fischer and Lindenmayer 2007, pp. 265-280). Habitat fragments are often
functionally smaller than they appear because edge effects (such as
increased nonnative, invasive species or wind speeds) impact the
available habitat within the fragment (Lienert and Fischer 2003, p.
597). For example, decreases in Big Pine partridge pea seed production
near urban areas due to increased seed predation, compared with areas
away from development have been reported (Liu and Koptur 2003, p.
1184).
Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, sand flax, and Blodgett's
silverbush occur on a mix of private and publicly owned lands, most of
which are managed for conservation. Populations that occur on private
land or non-conservation public land are vulnerable to habitat loss,
while populations on conservation lands are vulnerable to the effects
of habitat degradation if disturbance regimes are disrupted (e.g.,
through inadequate fire management or change in management practices on
disturbed sites that support the species). Prolonged lack of fire in
pine rockland typically results in succession to rockland hammock, and
displacement of native species by invasive, nonnative plants often
occurs. Changes in management practices at disturbed sites may include
changes in mowing frequency or height, herbicide use, deposition of
fill material, and sodding. Further development and degradation of pine
rockland, rockland hammock, and coastal berm increase fragmentation and
decrease the conservation value of the remaining functioning habitats.
In addition, pine rocklands are expected to be further degraded and
fragmented due to anticipated sea level rise, which would fully or
partially inundate most pine rocklands and increase salinity of the
water table and soils. These impacts are likely to cause vegetation
shifts in additional pine rocklands, particularly in the lower Florida
Keys. Some existing pine rockland, rockland hammock, and coastal berm
areas are also projected to be developed for housing as the human
population grows and adjusts to rising sea levels.
In summary, the features essential to the conservation of Big Pine
partridge pea, wedge spurge, sand flax, and Blodgett's silverbush may
require special management considerations or protection to reduce
threats and conserve these features. Actions that could ameliorate
threats include, but are not limited to:
(1) Increase habitat restoration and management efforts, including
fire management and nonnative plant control;
(2) Protect, restore, or enhance inland or higher elevation
habitats where these species occur and are predicted to be unaffected
or less affected by sea level rise;
(3) Augment existing small populations; and
(4) Conduct annual or seasonal monitoring efforts, or monitoring
conducted prior to, but coordinated with habitat and fire management
planning to refine management efforts over time.
Criteria Used To Identify Critical Habitat
As required by section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we use the best
scientific data available to designate critical habitat. In accordance
with the Act and our implementing regulations at 50 CFR 424.12(b), we
review available information pertaining to the habitat requirements of
the species and identify specific areas within the geographical area
occupied by the species at the time of listing and any specific areas
outside the geographical area occupied by the species to be considered
for designation as critical habitat.
We are proposing to designate critical habitat in areas within the
geographical area occupied by these species at the time of listing in
2016. At this time, we have not identified specific areas outside the
geographical range occupied by the species that are essential for the
species' conservation. However, as discussed below, we are considering
whether areas outside the geographical range of the Big Pine Partridge
Pea, wedge spurge, and sand flax at the time of listing meet the
definition of critical habitat. If we determine some or all of those
areas are critical habitat for these species, we will include them in
our final designation.
We anticipate that full recovery for Big Pine partridge pea, wedge
spurge, sand flax, and Blodgett's silverbush will require continued
protection of the remaining extant populations and habitat and
augmenting existing small populations. Recovery of Big Pine partridge
pea, wedge spurge, and sand flax may also require reestablishing
populations in additional areas (i.e., unoccupied areas) to approximate
more closely the species' historical distribution to ensure adequate
numbers of plants exist in stable populations and these populations
occur over their entire geographic range. This scenario could help to
reduce the chance that catastrophic events, such as storms, will
simultaneously affect all known populations. However, some of the
historical locations no longer contain suitable habitat, and thus are
not proposed.
Small plant populations or those with limited distributions, such
as Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, and sand flax, are vulnerable
to relatively minor environmental disturbances (Frankham 2005, pp. 135-
136) that could result in the loss of genetic diversity from genetic
drift, the random loss of genes, and inbreeding (Ellstrand and Elam
1993, pp. 217-237; Leimu et al. 2006, pp. 942-952). Plant populations
with lowered genetic diversity are more prone to local extinction
(Barrett and Kohn 1991, pp. 4, 28). Smaller plant populations generally
have lower genetic diversity, and lower genetic diversity may in turn
lead to even smaller populations by decreasing the species' ability to
adapt, thereby increasing the probability of population extinction
(Newman and Pilson 1997, p. 360; Palstra and Ruzzante 2008, pp. 3428-
3447). Because of the dangers associated with small populations or
limited distributions, the recovery of many rare plant species, such as
Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, and sand flax, may include the
creation of new sites or reintroductions to ameliorate these effects.
In considering our proposal of critical habitat, we identified the
following conservation strategy and goals for Big Pine partridge pea,
wedge spurge, sand flax, and Blodgett's silverbush:
(1) Conserve existing viable populations with sufficient native
habitat;
(2) Work with partners to conserve existing populations, and
implement efforts that will benefit the species and its habitat; and
(3) Augment existing populations and facilitate establishment/
reestablishment of populations into suitable protected habitat.
To facilitate the application of our conservation strategy and
goals for these species, we utilized the Shaffer and Stein (2000,
entire) methodology for
[[Page 62513]]
conserving the resiliency, representation, and redundancy of imperiled
species. Resiliency is the ability to sustain populations through the
natural range of favorable and unfavorable conditions. Representation
ensures adaptive capacity within a species and allows it to respond to
environmental changes. This can be facilitated by conserving not just
genetic diversity, but also the species' associated habitat type and
plant communities. Redundancy ensures an adequate number of sites with
resilient populations such that the species has the ability to
withstand catastrophic events. Implementation of this methodology has
been widely accepted as a reasonable conservation strategy (Tear et al.
2005, p. 841).
Big Pine Partridge Pea
Big Pine partridge pea is endemic to the lower Florida Keys in
Monroe County, Florida. Historical records exist for occurrences in
pine rocklands on five islands: Big Pine Key, Ramrod Key, Cudjoe Key,
No Name Key, and Lower Sugarloaf Key (Hodges and Bradley 2006, pp. 20-
21). At the time of listing and currently, native populations of the
plant occur only on Big Pine Key and Cudjoe Key since the species has
been extirpated from Ramrod Key and Lower Sugarloaf Key (Bradley and
Gann 1999, p. 18; Hodges and Bradley 2006, p. 21; Lange et al. 2019).
In 2019, a population was successfully introduced in NKDR on No Name
Key. Except for Ramrod Key, all these Keys still contain pine rockland
habitat. While the Big Pine Key population is relatively large,
estimated at 313,914 plants in 2013 (Bradley et al. 2015, p. 21), the
Cudjoe Key population was relatively small, consisting of approximately
150 individuals ((Hodges and Bradley 2006, p. 21), and recent surveys
did not find the species there (Lange et al. 2019, p. 16). Therefore,
if the species is not found at Cudjoe Key during future surveys,
reintroductions may be needed at Cudjoe Key.
Given the species occurs only within the lower Florida Keys, it has
inherently low redundancy; with only two extant populations at the time
of listing, the current redundancy of native populations has been even
further reduced from historical levels. In addition, because there
currently are three populations (two native and one reintroduced)
across the naturally limited historical range of the species, Big Pine
partridge pea is vulnerable to stochastic extinction events from
natural or other disturbances (such as hurricanes or storm surge) that
could affect the entire geographic range of the species. Both natural
populations occur on small islands where the amount of suitable
remaining habitat is limited (low resiliency), and much of the
remaining habitat may be lost to sea level rise over the next century.
Therefore, we are proposing critical habitat units that contain the
physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the
species and that support both extant populations at the time of
listing.
Additionally, we acknowledge that areas unoccupied at the time of
listing may be essential for the conservation of the Big Pine partridge
pea. We are considering whether areas of remaining pine rockland
habitat on Little Pine Key, No Name Key, and Sugarloaf Keys meet the
definition of critical habitat. The area on Little Pine Key consists of
approximately 97 ac (39 ha) of pine rockland habitat in Monroe County
and is comprised entirely of lands in Federal ownership, 100 percent of
which are located within NKDR. Pine rocklands cover about two-thirds of
the interior portion of the island. We note that this area wholly
overlaps with designated critical habitat for silver rice rat and
Bartram's scrub-hairstreak butterfly. The area on No Name Key includes
approximately 123 ac (50 ha) of pine rockland habitat in Monroe County
comprised of a combination of Federal lands within NKDR, State lands,
County lands, and property in private or other ownership). State lands
are interspersed within NKDR lands and managed as part of the Refuge.
We note that this area wholly overlaps with designated critical habitat
for Bartram's scrub-hairstreak butterfly. Finally, on Sugarloaf Keys,
we are considering approximately 73 ac (30 ha) of pine rockland habitat
north of U.S. 1, comprised of a combination of Federal lands within
NKDR, County lands, and property in private or other ownership. We note
that these areas on Sugarloaf Keys wholly overlap with the areas being
proposed as critical habitat for the sand flax and the endangered key
deer occurs throughout this area. We will determine whether these areas
are essential to protect habitat needed to recover the species and
establish new populations within the range of the species such that
they meet the definition of critical habitat. If we decide some or all
of these areas are essential to the conservation of the Big Pine
partridge pea, we will include them in our final critical habitat
determination (see also Information Requested, above).
Wedge Spurge
Wedge spurge is endemic to the lower Florida Keys in Monroe County,
Florida. Its historical range encompassed pine rocklands on Big Pine
Key. At the time of listing and currently, the only native population
of the plant currently occurs on Big Pine Key, with small groups of
plants scattered widely across the island. The Big Pine population is
relatively large, estimated at 368,557 individuals in 2014 (Bradley et
al. 2015, pp. 24-25); the presence of this population was verified in
2019 (Lange et al. 2019, p. 16). However, since the time the species
was listed, a population was successfully introduced in NKDR on No Name
Key. While the Big Pine Key population is relatively large, estimated
at 368,557 individuals in 2014 (Bradley et al. 2015, pp. 24-25), it is
the only extant native population.
Given the species occurs within the lower Florida Keys, it has
inherently low redundancy; with only one extant populations at the time
of listing, the current redundancy of native population has been
reduced from historical levels. Because there currently are only two
populations (one native and one introduced) across the naturally
limited historical range, wedge spurge is vulnerable to stochastic
extinction events from natural or other disturbances (such as
hurricanes or storm surge) that could affect the entire geographic
range of wedge spurge. The sole natural population occurs on a small
island where the amount of suitable habitat is limited (low resiliency)
and much of that habitat may be lost to sea level rise over the next
century. Therefore, the resiliency of the population and redundancy of
the wedge spurge will continue to be limited by the amount of pine
rockland habitat remaining in the lower Florida Keys. We are proposing
a critical habitat unit that contains the physical or biological
features essential to the conservation of the species and supports the
single native population on Big Pine Key extant at the time of listing.
Additionally, we acknowledge that areas unoccupied at the time of
listing may be essential for the conservation of the wedge spurge. We
are considering whether areas of remaining pine rockland habitat on
Little Pine Key, No Name Key, Cudjoe Key, and Sugarloaf Keys of the
wedge spurge meet the definition of critical habitat. The area on
Little Pine Key consists of approximately 97 ac (39 ha) of pine
rockland habitat in Monroe County and is comprised entirely of lands in
Federal ownership, 100 percent of which are located within NKDR. Pine
rocklands cover about two-thirds of the interior portion of the island.
We note that this area wholly overlaps with designated critical habitat
for silver rice rat and
[[Page 62514]]
Bartram's scrub-hairstreak butterfly. The area on No Name Key includes
approximately 123 ac (50 ha) of pine rockland habitat in Monroe County
comprised of a combination of Federal lands within NKDR, State lands,
County lands, and property in private or other ownership. State lands
are interspersed within NKDR lands and managed as part of the Refuge.
We note that this area wholly overlaps with designated critical habitat
for Bartram's scrub-hairstreak butterfly. The area on Cudjoe Key
consists of approximately 88 ac (33 ha) of pine rockland habitat in
Monroe County and is comprised of a combination of Federal lands within
NKDR, State lands, County lands, and property in private or other
ownership. State lands are interspersed within NKDR lands and managed
as part of the Refuge. We note that this area wholly overlaps with
designated critical habitat for silver rice rat. Finally, on Sugarloaf
Keys, we are considering approximately 73 ac (30 ha) of pine rockland
habitat north of U.S. 1, comprised of a combination of Federal lands
within NKDR, County lands, and property in private or other ownership.
We note that these areas on Sugarloaf Keys wholly overlap with the
areas being proposed as critical habitat for the sand flax and the
endangered key deer occurs throughout this area. We will determine
whether these areas are essential to protect habitat needed to recover
the species and establish new populations within the range of the
species such that they meet the definition of critical habitat. If we
decide some or all of these areas are essential for the conservation of
the wedge spurge, we will include them in our final critical habitat
determination (see also Information Requested, above).
Sand Flax
Sand flax has a historical range consisting of central and southern
Miami-Dade County and Monroe County in the lower Florida Keys (Bradley
and Gann 1999, p. 61). At the time of listing and currently, there were
twelve extant populations of sand flax, with eight extant populations
in Miami-Dade County and four extant populations in the Florida Keys.
In Miami-Dade County, historical records for the species were
widespread from the Coconut Grove area to the southern part of the
county, close to what is now the main entrance to ENP and Turkey Point
(Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 61). In 2013, sand flax populations were
found at six sites, containing an estimated total of 107,060 plants
(Bradley and van der Heiden 2013, p. 4). In Miami-Dade County, recent
observations include confirmation of the species' continued presence at
the Richmond Pinelands, Martinez Pineland Preserve, Department of
Defense (DoD) Special Operations Command South (SOCSO) and Homestead
Air Reserve Base (HARB), and the C-102 and L-31E canal levee
populations. Additionally, a new population was established at Rockdale
Pineland in 2019 (Possley, pers. comm. 2019). The four largest
populations of sand flax include Homestead, Florida (located on the
HARB and SOCSO DoD sites), estimated at 96,037 individuals; the C-102
canal levee and L-31E canal levee sites, estimated at 1,000 to 10,000
plants, respectively; and Big Pine Key, estimated at 2,676 individuals.
All other sites have fewer than 100 individuals, except Martinez
pinelands (100-200 individuals) and Lower Sugarloaf Key (531
individuals). Two populations occupy levees that cannot be restored to
pine rockland habitat, rendering sand flax vulnerable to stochastic
extinction events from natural or other disturbances (such as
hurricanes or storm surge) that could affect the entire geographic
range of sand flax.
In the Florida Keys (Monroe County), there are historical records
of the species from Big Pine Key, Ramrod Key, Upper and Lower Sugarloaf
Keys, Park Key, Boca Chica Key, Middle Torch Key (Bradley and Gann
1999, p. 61), and Big Torch Key (Hodges 2010, p. 10). The current
distribution of sand flax includes four islands: Big Pine Key, Upper
and Lower Sugarloaf Keys, and Big Torch Key. Additionally, a population
was successfully introduced in NKDR on No Name Key since the time of
listing.
Resiliency of sand flax will continue to be limited by the reduced
amount of pine rockland habitat remaining in Florida. All Miami-Dade
populations are on small remnant pine rockland sites and adjacent
disturbed areas, while all Monroe County populations occur on small
islands. In both cases, the amount of suitable remaining habitat is
limited (low resiliency) and much of the remaining habitat may be lost
to sea level rise over the next century. Therefore, we are proposing
critical habitat units that contain the physical or biological features
essential to the conservation of the species and support the seven
extant populations at the time of listing.
Additionally, we acknowledge that areas unoccupied at the time of
listing may be essential for the conservation of the sand flax. We are
considering whether areas of remaining pine rockland habitat on Little
Pine Key, No Name Key, Cudjoe Key, and Sugarloaf Keys of the wedge
spurge meet the definition of critical habitat. The area on Little Pine
Key consists of approximately 97 ac (39 ha) of pine rockland habitat in
Monroe County and is comprised entirely of lands in Federal ownership,
100 percent of which are located within NKDR. Pine rocklands cover
about two-thirds of the interior portion of the island. We note that
this area wholly overlaps with designated critical habitat for silver
rice rat and Bartram's scrub-hairstreak butterfly. The area on No Name
Key includes approximately 123 ac (50 ha) of pine rockland habitat in
Monroe County comprised of a combination of Federal lands within NKDR,
State lands, County lands, and property in private or other ownership.
State lands are interspersed within NKDR lands and managed as part of
the Refuge. We note that this area wholly overlaps with designated
critical habitat for Bartram's scrub-hairstreak butterfly. The area on
Cudjoe Key consists of approximately 88 ac (33 ha) of pine rockland
habitat in Monroe County and is comprised of a combination of Federal
lands within NKDR, State lands, County lands, and property in private
or other ownership. State lands are interspersed within NKDR lands and
managed as part of the Refuge. We note that this area wholly overlaps
with designated critical habitat for silver rice rat. The area of
Trinity Pinelands consists of approximately 48 ac (19 ha) of pine
rockland habitat in Miami-Dade County and is comprised of a combination
of State lands, County lands, and property in private or other
ownership. We note that this area wholly overlaps with designated
critical habitat for Carter's small-flowered flax (Linum carteri var.
carteri) and Florida brickell-bush. The area of Nixon Smiley consists
of approximately 264 ac (107 ha) of pine rockland habitat in Miami-Dade
County comprised of a combination of State lands, County lands, and
property in private or other ownership. We note that this area wholly
overlaps with designated critical habitat for Carter's small-flowered
flax and Florida brickell-bush. The area of U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA) Subtropical Horticulture Research Station consists
of approximately 297 ac (120 ha) of pine rockland habitat in Miami-Dade
County and is comprised of a combination of Federal lands, State lands,
and property in private or other ownership. We note that this area
wholly overlaps with designated critical habitat for Carter's small-
flowered flax and Florida brickell-bush. The area of Quail's Roost
consists of approximately 256 ac (104 ha) of pine rockland habitat in
Miami-Dade County and is comprised
[[Page 62515]]
of a combination of State lands, County lands, and property in private
or other ownership. We note that this area wholly overlaps with
designated critical habitat for Carter's small-flowered flax, Florida
brickell-bush, and Bartram's scrub hairstreak butterfly. The area of
Navy Wells consists of approximately 558 ac (226 ha) of pine rockland
habitat in Miami-Dade County and is comprised of a combination of State
lands, County lands, and property in private or other ownership. We
note that this area wholly overlaps with designated critical habitat
for Carter's small-flowered flax, Florida brickell-bush, Bartram's
scrub hairstreak butterfly, and Florida leafwing butterfly. We will
determine whether these areas are essential to protect habitat needed
to recover the species and establish new populations within the range
of the species such that they meet the definition of critical habitat.
If we decide some or all of these areas are essential for the
conservation of the wedge spurge, we will include them in our final
critical habitat determination (see also Information Requested, above).
Blodgett's Silverbush
Blodgett's silverbush historically occurred from central and
southern Miami-Dade County from Brickell Hammock to Long Pine Key in
ENP, and in Monroe County throughout the Florida Keys (Monroe County)
from Totten Key south to Key West (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 2). At the
time of listing and currently, the Blodgett's silverbush consists of 20
extant populations in Miami-Dade County and Monroe County in the
Florida Keys. Blodgett's silverbush is currently known from central
Miami-Dade County from Coral Gables and southern Miami-Dade County to
Long Pine Key in ENP, and from nine islands in the Florida Keys, from
Windley Key (Bradley and Gann 1999, p. 3) southwest to Boca Chica Key
(Hodges and Bradley 2006, pp. 10, 43). At least eight of the 20 extant
populations of Blodgett's silverbush consist of fewer than 100
individuals. These small populations are at risk of adverse effects
from reduced genetic variation, an increased risk of inbreeding
depression, and reduced reproductive output. Many of these populations
are small and isolated from each other, decreasing the likelihood that
they could be naturally reestablished if extinction from one location
occurred.
Resiliency will continue to be limited by the reduced amount of
pine rockland, rockland hammock, and coastal habitat remaining in
Miami-Dade and Monroe Counties. All Miami-Dade County populations are
on small remnant pine rockland, rockland hammock, and coastal berm
sites and adjacent disturbed areas, while all Monroe County populations
occur on small islands. In both cases, the amount of suitable remaining
habitat is limited (low resiliency) and much of the remaining habitat
may be lost to sea level rise over the next century. Therefore, we are
proposing to designate critical habitat units within the historical
range of Blodgett's silverbush and that contain the physical or
biological features essential to the conservation of the species, where
the species was extant at the time of listing.
The amount and distribution of critical habitat being proposed for
designation would allow existing (native) populations of Blodgett's
silverbush to:
(1) Maintain their existing distribution;
(2) Expand their distribution into suitable nearby areas (needed to
offset habitat loss and fragmentation);
(3) Use habitat depending on habitat availability (response to
changing nature of coastal habitat including sea level rise) and
support genetic diversity;
(4) Increase the size of each population to a level where the
threats of genetic, demographic, and normal environmental uncertainties
are diminished; and
(5) Maintain their ability to withstand local or unit-level
environmental fluctuations or catastrophes.
Sources of Data to Identify Critical Habitat Boundaries
We have determined that all areas known to be occupied at the time
of listing should be proposed for critical habitat designation because
all occupied sites are necessary to conserve the species. To determine
the location and boundaries of occupied critical habitat, the Service
used sources of data and information for Big Pine partridge pea, wedge
spurge, sand flax, and Blodgett's silverbush that include the
following:
(1) Species occurrence spatial data and ArcGIS geographic
information system software to spatially depict the location and extent
of documented populations of the species;
(2) Reports prepared by FNAI, Fairchild Tropical Botanical Garden,
Institute for Regional Conservation, National Park Service, and Florida
Department of Environmental Protection;
(3) Historical records found in reports and associated voucher
specimens housed at herbaria, all of which are referenced in the above-
mentioned reports;
(4) Digitally produced habitat maps provided by Miami-Dade and
Monroe Counties; and
(5) Aerial images of Miami-Dade and Monroe Counties. The presence
of pine rocklands was determined through the use of GIS spatial data
depicting the current habitat status. These habitat data for the
Florida Keys were developed by Monroe County from 2006 aerial images,
and ground conditions for many areas were checked in 2009. Habitat data
from Monroe County identifies pine rockland habitat. Habitat data for
Miami-Dade County were developed by Miami-Dade Department of
Environmental Protection for the Natural Forest Community program and
include pine rocklands and rockland hammocks. Pine rockland, rockland
hammock, and coastal berm habitat follow predictable landscape patterns
and have a recognizable signature in the aerial imagery. Aerial imagery
was utilized to identify disturbed areas adjacent to pine rocklands,
rockland hammock, and coastal berm.
We delineated critical habitat unit boundaries for these species
using the following criteria:
(1) The delineation included space to allow for the successional
nature of the habitats (i.e., gain and loss of areas with sufficient
light availability due to disturbance of the vegetation, driven by
natural events such as inundation and hurricanes, or through natural or
prescribed fire) and habitat transition or loss due to sea level rise.
(2) All areas (i.e., physical or biological features) will require
special management to be able to support a higher density of plants
within the occupied space. These areas generally are habitats where
some of the habitat features have been degraded or lost through natural
or human causes. These areas would help to offset the anticipated loss
and degradation of habitat occurring or expected from the effects of
climate change (such as sea level rise) or development.
(3) The areal extent of a plant population is dynamic over time
within suitable habitat, while a survey represents a snapshot in time.
Unsurveyed areas near mapped populations likely support plants
currently or did in the past.
Areas Occupied at the Time of Listing
The proposed occupied critical habitat designation for Big Pine
partridge pea, wedge spurge, sand flax, and Blodgett's silverbush
focuses on areas within the historical range that have retained the
necessary habitat characteristics that will allow for the maintenance
and expansion of existing
[[Page 62516]]
populations, and the establishment or reestablishment of populations
through reintroduction (i.e., Cudjoe Key for Big Pine partridge pea).
The proposed occupied critical habitat units were delineated based on
documented extant populations at the time of listing. These units
include the mapped extent of the population and nearby areas that
contain one or more of the physical or biological features essential to
the conservation of the species.
In summary, for areas within the geographic area occupied by Big
Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, and sand flax at the time of listing,
we delineated critical habitat unit boundaries using the following
criteria:
(1) Pine rockland habitat that was occupied by the species at the
time of listing;
(2) Presence of suitable pine rockland habitat and sufficient
essential features; and
(3) Whether the pine rockland habitat is natural versus human-made
habitat that was not historically pine rockland.
For Big Pine partridge pea, two occupied units (Big Pine Key and
Cudjoe Key) are proposed as critical habitat. We consider pine rockland
to be the primary habitat for Big Pine partridge pea. Adjacent
disturbed areas currently supporting the species are also considered
essential when adjacent pine rocklands do not support an existing
population or are of insufficient size or connectivity to support a
population of the species. While pine rockland habitat occurs on
numerous other Keys, including nearby Sugarloaf Keys and Little Pine
Key, none support existing populations of Big Pine partridge pea now
nor did they at the time of listing. As mentioned previously, after the
time of listing, a population of Big Pine partridge pea was introduced
on No Name Key, which has high-quality pine rockland habitat and
currently supports the reintroduced population. Plants and seeds were
introduced in 2019 by Fairchild Tropical Botanical Garden, in
cooperation with NKDR and the Florida Department of Agriculture and
Consumer Services. This action aligns with the recovery strategy that
the Service will seek to implement for this species. We are considering
whether areas on these Keys may be essential for the conservation of
the Big Pine partridge pea. If we determine they are, they will be
included in our final designation.
For wedge spurge, one unit (one population: Big Pine Key) is
proposed as critical habitat. We consider pine rockland to be the
primary habitat for wedge spurge. Adjacent disturbed areas currently
supporting the species are also considered essential when adjacent pine
rocklands do not support an existing population or are of insufficient
size or connectivity to support a population of the species. Even
though pine rockland habitat is present on numerous other Keys,
including nearby Little Pine Key, Cudjoe Key, and Sugarloaf Keys, none
support existing populations of the species now, nor did they at the
time of listing or historically. As mentioned previously, after the
time of listing, a population of wedge spurge was introduced on No Name
Key. We are considering whether areas on these Keys may be essential
for the conservation of the wedge spur. If we determine they are, they
will be included in our final designation.
For sand flax, five units containing seven populations are proposed
for critical habitat. We consider pine rockland to be the primary
habitat for sand flax. While pine rockland habitat occurs on numerous
other keys in Monroe County and other areas in Miami-Dade County, these
do not support existing populations of sand flax now, nor did they
historically or at the time of listing, and are therefore not proposed
as critical habitat. Adjacent disturbed areas currently supporting the
species are also considered essential when adjacent pine rocklands do
not support an existing population or are of insufficient size or
connectivity to support a population of sand flax. Such is the case for
the area we are proposing as critical habitat on Sugarloaf Key (see
below).
Two well-maintained levees in Miami-Dade County support large
populations of sand flax, which were established when fill used to
construct the levees included pine rockland substrate and the seeds of
pine rockland species, such as sand flax. While these levees support
robust populations of sand flax, they are not included in proposed
critical habitat because the habitat is human-made, and these
populations are not natural populations or purposefully established. In
addition, we do not expect these areas to support the needs of the
species long-term, as the maintenance of these areas may not be
compatible with the species over time. In addition, there are roadside
areas on Middle Torch Key, Big Torch Key, and Lower Sugarloaf Keys that
support sand flax, but are not associated with an adjacent pine
rockland. These populations may also have been established at these
sites through the deposition of fill. Because these areas are mowed
occasionally, they provide the open conditions required by sand flax
(Bradley 2006, p. 37). However, these areas are not included in
proposed critical habitat, because the habitat is human-made, do not
contain the physical or biological features (i.e., these disturbed
areas are not adjacent to native pine rockland and are not
characterized by an open canopy and understory with a high proportion
of native plant species occurring in pine rockland habitat), and they
are not adjacent to pine rockland that would facilitate expansion of
the population into natural habitat.
As mentioned previously, there is remaining pine rockland habitat
on numerous other Keys, including Little Pine Key and Cudjoe Key, and
areas in Miami-Dade County, including Trinity Pinelands, Nixon Smiley,
Quail's Roost, Navy Wells, and USDA Horticulture Research Station, but
these areas do not currently or at the time of listing support existing
populations of sand flax. No Name Key currently supports a reintroduced
populations of sand flax in NKDR. We are considering whether these
areas may be essential for the conservation of the sand flax. If so, we
will include them in our final designation.
For Blodgett's silverbush, for areas within the geographic area
occupied at the time of listing, we delineated critical habitat unit
boundaries using the following criteria:
(1) Pine rockland, rockland hammock, and coastal berm habitats that
were occupied by Blodgett's silverbush at the time of listing;
(2) Presence of suitable pine rockland, rockland hammock, and
coastal berm habitats and sufficient essential features; and
(3) Whether the pine rockland, rockland hammock, and coastal berm
habitats are natural versus human-made habitat that was not
historically pine rockland, rockland hammock, or coastal berm.
For Blodgett's silverbush, 13 occupied units contain 18 populations
are proposed as critical habitat for the species. We consider pine
rockland to be one of the primary habitats for Blodgett's silverbush.
In addition, we consider rockland hammock and coastal berm to be
primary habitats for the species. Adjacent disturbed areas currently
supporting the species are also considered essential when adjacent pine
rocklands, rockland hammocks, or coastal berms do not support an
existing population or are of insufficient size or connectivity to
support a population of sand flax. While pine rockland habitat,
rockland hammock, and coastal berm occurs on numerous other Keys and
areas in Miami-Dade County, these do not support existing populations
of Blodgett's silverbush now, nor did they
[[Page 62517]]
historically or at the time of listing, and therefore, are not proposed
as critical habitat. We have not identified any specific areas outside
the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it was listed
that are essential for the conservation of the species. Accordingly, we
are not proposing any unoccupied areas as critical habitat.
In summary, for areas within the geographical area occupied by Big
Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, and sand flax at the time of listing,
we delineated critical habitat unit boundaries by evaluating habitat
suitability of pine rockland habitat within the historical range of the
plant and retained those areas that contain some or all of the physical
or biological features essential to the conservation of the species and
that may require special management. For areas within the geographical
area occupied by Blodgett's silverbush at the time of listing, we
delineated critical habitat unit boundaries by evaluating habitat
suitability of pine rockland, rockland hammocks, and coastal berm
habitats within the historical range of the plant and retained those
areas that contain some or all of the physical or biological essential
to the conservation of the species and that may require special
management.
When determining proposed critical habitat boundaries, we made
every effort to avoid including developed areas such as lands covered
by buildings, pavement, and other structures because such lands lack
physical or biological features essential to the conservation of these
species, nor are they essential to the conservation of the species
themselves. The scale of the maps we prepared under the parameters for
publication within the Code of Federal Regulations may not reflect the
exclusion of such developed lands. Any such lands inadvertently left
inside critical habitat boundaries shown on the maps of this proposed
rule have been excluded by text in the proposed rule and are not
proposed for designation as critical habitat. Therefore, if the
critical habitat is finalized as proposed, a Federal action involving
these lands would not trigger section 7 consultation with respect to
critical habitat and the requirement of no adverse modification unless
the specific action would affect the physical or biological features in
the adjacent critical habitat.
We are proposing for designation as critical habitat those lands
that we have determined were occupied at the time of listing and which
contain one or more of the physical or biological features that are
essential to support life-history processes of the species. For Big
Pine partridge pea, two units are proposed for designation based on one
or more of the physical or biological features being present to support
the specie's life-history processes. Both units contain all of the
identified physical or biological features and support multiple life-
history processes. For wedge spurge, one unit is proposed for
designation based on one or more of the physical or biological features
being present to support wedge spurge's life-history processes. The
unit contains all of the identified physical or biological features and
supports multiple life-history processes. For sand flax, five units are
proposed for designation based on one or more of the physical or
biological features being present to support sand flax's life-history
processes. Some units contain all of the identified physical or
biological features and support multiple life-history processes. Some
units contain only some of the physical or biological features
necessary to support sand flax particular use of that habitat. For
Blodgett's silverbush, 13 units are proposed for designation based on
one or more of the physical or biological features being present to
support Blodgett's silverbush's life-history processes. Some units
contain all of the identified physical or biological features and
support multiple life-history processes. Some units contain only some
of the physical or biological features necessary to support Blodgett's
silverbush's particular use of that habitat.
The proposed critical habitat designation is defined by the map or
maps, as modified by any accompanying regulatory text, presented at the
end of this document under Proposed Regulation Promulgation. We include
more detailed information on the boundaries of the proposed critical
habitat designation in the preamble of this document. We will make the
coordinates or plot points or both on which each map is based available
to the public on <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> at Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-
2022-0116, on our internet site at <a href="https://www.fws.gov/office/florida-ecological-services/library">https://www.fws.gov/office/florida-ecological-services/library</a> and at the field office responsible for the
designation (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT above).
Proposed Critical Habitat Designation for Big Pine Partridge Pea
We are proposing to designate approximately 1,462 ac (592 ha) in
two units as critical habitat for Big Pine partridge pea. The critical
habitat areas we describe below constitute our current best assessment
of areas that meet the definition of critical habitat for Big Pine
partridge pea. The two areas we propose as critical habitat are:
(1) BPP1--Big Pine Key, Monroe County, Florida, and
(2) BPP2--Cudjoe Key in Monroe County, Florida.
Land ownership within the proposed critical habitat consists of
Federal (67 percent), State (16 percent), County (10 percent), and
private and other (7 percent). Other lands include areas for which
ownership information is unclear or unavailable. Table 1 shows each
critical habitat unit by area, land ownership, and occupancy.
Table 1--Proposed Critical Habitat Units for Big Pine Partridge Pea
[Includes total area, area by land ownership, and occupancy. All areas rounded to the nearest whole acre (ac) and hectare (ha)]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Private/other ac
Critical habitat unit Total ac (ha) Federal ac (ha) State ac (ha) County ac (ha) (ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BPP1--Big Pine Key....................................... 1,379 (558) 912 (369) 228 (92) 144 (58) 96 (39)
BPP2--Cudjoe Key......................................... 83 (33) 66 (27) 3 (1) 1 (0.5) 12 (5)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................................ 1,462 (592) 978 (396) 231 (93) 145 (59) 108 (44)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent of Total................................. ................. 67% 16% 10% 7%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Area sizes may not sum due to rounding or minor mapping discrepancies. Both units are occupied by the species.
Nearly all the lands (99.7 percent; all except approximately 4 ac
(2 ha)) contained within units proposed as critical habitat for Big
Pine partridge pea are designated critical habitat for other federally
listed species.
[[Page 62518]]
We present brief descriptions of each proposed critical habitat
unit and the justification for why each meets the definition of
critical habitat for Big Pine partridge pea, below.
Unit BPP1: Big Pine Key, Monroe County, Florida
Unit BPP1 consists of 1,379 ac (558 ha) in Monroe County, Florida.
This unit includes Federal lands within NKDR (912 ac (369 ha)), State
lands (228 ac (92 ha)), County lands (144 ac (58 ha)), and property in
private or other ownership (96 ac (39 ha)). State lands are
interspersed within NKDR lands and managed as part of the Refuge.
This unit was occupied at the time the species was listed and is
currently occupied by one Big Pine Partridge pea population. This unit
contains all the physical or biological features, including suitable
climate, hydrology, substrate, associated native plant species, and
disturbance regimes, essential to the conservation of the species.
Special management considerations or protection may be required
within this unit to address lack of fire; nonnative plant and animal
species; and sea level rise. Nonnative species control, prescribed
fire, and mechanical vegetation treatments are all actions that help
improve habitat that supports Big Pine partridge pea.
The unit is part of lands contained within the Lower Florida Keys
National Wildlife Refuges (NWRs), which includes NKDR, Key West NWR,
and Great White Heron NWR. The Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP)
for the Lower Florida Keys NWRs promotes the enhancement of wildlife
populations by maintaining and enhancing a diversity and abundance of
habitats for native plants and animals and provides specifically for
maintaining and expanding populations of plant species including Big
Pine partridge pea. The Service conducts nonnative species control and
prescribed fire in areas that could support Big Pine partridge pea.
Unit BPP1 is also designated critical habitat for the Florida
leafwing (Anaea troglodyta floridalis) and Bartram's scrub-hairstreak
(Strymon acis bartrami) butterflies.
Unit BPP2: Cudjoe Key, Monroe County, Florida
Unit BPP2 consists of 83 ac (33 ha) in Monroe County, Florida. This
unit includes Federal lands within NKDR (66 ac (27 ha)), State lands (3
ac (1 ha)), County lands (1 ac (0.5 ha)), and property in private or
other ownership (12 ac (5 ha)). State lands are interspersed within
NKDR lands and managed as part of the Refuge.
This unit was occupied at the time the species was listed, but the
population here may have since been extirpated (Possley 2020, pers.
comm.). The unit does, however, still contain all the physical or
biological features, including suitable climate, hydrology, substrate,
associated native plant species, and disturbance regimes, essential to
the conservation of the species.
Special management considerations or protection may be required
within this unit to address lack of fire; nonnative plant and animal
species; and sea level rise. Nonnative species control, prescribed
fire, and mechanical vegetation treatments are all actions that help
improve habitat that supports Big Pine partridge pea.
The unit is part of lands contained within the Lower Florida Keys
NWRs, which includes NKDR, Key West NWR, and Great White Heron NWR. The
CCP for the Lower Florida Keys NWRs promotes the enhancement of
wildlife populations by maintaining and enhancing a diversity and
abundance of habitats for native plants and animals and provides
specifically for maintaining and expanding populations of plant species
including Big Pine partridge pea. The Service conducts nonnative
species control in areas that could support Big Pine partridge pea.
The entirety of Unit BPP2 is also designated critical habitat for
the silver rice rat (Oryzomys palustris natator).
Proposed Critical Habitat Designation for Wedge Spurge
We are proposing to designate approximately 1,379 ac (558 ha) in
one unit as critical habitat for wedge spurge. The critical habitat
area we describe below constitutes our current best assessment of lands
that meet the definition of critical habitat for wedge spurge. The area
we propose as critical habitat is: WS1--Big Pine Key, Monroe County,
Florida.
Land ownership within the proposed critical habitat consists of
Federal (66 percent), State (16 percent), County (10 percent), and
private and other (7 percent). Other lands include areas for which
ownership information is unclear or unavailable. Table 2 shows these
units by land ownership, area, and occupancy.
Table 2--Proposed Critical Habitat Unit for Wedge Spurge
[Includes area, area by land ownership, and occupancy. All areas rounded to the nearest whole acre (ac) and hectare (ha)]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Private/other ac
Critical habitat unit Total ac (ha) Federal ac (ha) State ac (ha) County ac (ha) (ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WS1--Big Pine Key........................................ 1,379 (558) 912 (369) 228 (92) 144 (58) 96 (39)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................................ 1,379 (558) 912 (369) 228 (92) 144 (58) 96 (39)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent of Total................................. ................. 66% 16% 10% 7%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Area sizes may not sum due to rounding or minor mapping discrepancies. The one unit is occupied by the species.
Nearly all the lands (99.7 percent; all except approximately 4 ac
(2 ha)) contained within units proposed as critical habitat for wedge
spurge are designated critical habitat for other federally listed
species. Additionally, the lands in Unit WS1--Big Pine Key are the same
lands proposed for Big Pine partridge pea in BPP1, above.
We present brief descriptions of the proposed critical habitat unit
and the justification for why it meets the definition of critical
habitat for wedge spurge, below.
Unit WS1: Big Pine Key, Monroe County, Florida
Unit WS1 consists of 1,379 ac (558 ha) in Monroe County. This unit
includes Federal lands within NKDR (912 ac (369 ha)), State lands (228
ac (92 ha)), County land (144 ac (58 ha)), and property in private or
other ownership (96 ac (39 ha)). State lands are interspersed within
NKDR lands and managed as part of the Refuge.
This unit was occupied at the time the species was listed and is
currently occupied by one wedge spurge
[[Page 62519]]
population. This unit contains all the physical or biological features,
including suitable climate, hydrology, substrate, associated native
plant species, and disturbance regimes, essential to the conservation
of the species.
Special management considerations or protection may be required
within this unit to address lack of fire; nonnative plant and animal
species; and sea level rise. Nonnative species control, prescribed
fire, and mechanical vegetation treatments are all actions that help
improve habitat that supports wedge spurge.
The unit is part of lands contained within the Lower Florida Keys
NWRs, which includes NKDR, Key West NWR, and Great White Heron NWR. The
CCP for the Lower Florida Keys NWRs promotes the enhancement of
wildlife populations by maintaining and enhancing a diversity and
abundance of habitats for native plants and animals and provides
specifically for maintaining and expanding populations of candidate
plant species including wedge spurge. The Service conducts nonnative
species control and prescribed fire in areas that support wedge spurge.
Nearly all (99.7 percent; all except 4 ac (2 ha)) of unit WS1 is
also designated critical habitat for the Florida leafwing and Bartram's
scrub-hairstreak butterflies.
Proposed Critical Habitat Designation for Sand Flax
We are proposing to designate approximately 5,090 ac (2,060 ha) in
five units as critical habitat for sand flax. The critical habitat
areas we describe below constitute our current best assessment of areas
that meet the definition of critical habitat for sand flax.
The five areas we propose as critical habitat are:
(1) SF1--Big Pine Key, Monroe County, Florida;
(2) SF2--Upper and Lower Sugarloaf Keys, Monroe County, Florida;
(3) SF3--Richmond Pinelands, Miami-Dade County, Florida;
(4) SF4--Camp Owaissa Bauer, Miami-Dade County, Florida; and
(5) SF5--Homestead, Miami-Dade County, Florida.
We have determined that these five areas meet the definition of
critical habitat. While Unit 5 meets the definition of critical
habitat, a portion of the lands and features contained therein are on
lands of SOCSO and covered by their INRMP, and as a result the SOCSO
lands within this unit are being exempted from critical habitat (please
refer to the Exemptions: Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the Act
section of this proposed rule).
Land ownership within the proposed critical habitat consists of
Federal (49 percent), State (6 percent), County (35 percent), and
private and other (10 percent). Table 3 shows these units by land
ownership, area, and occupancy.
Table 3--Proposed Critical Habitat Units for Sand Flax
[Includes area, area by land ownership, and occupancy. All areas rounded to the nearest whole acres (ac) and hectares (ha)]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Private/other ac
Critical habitat unit Total ac (ha) Federal ac (ha) State ac (ha) County ac (ha) (ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF1--Big Pine Key........................................ 1,379 (558) 912 (369) 228 (92) 144 (58) 96 (39)
SF2--Upper and Lower Sugarloaf Keys...................... 116 (47) 63 (25) 38 (15) 10 (4) 6 (2)
SF3--Richmond Pinelands.................................. 987 (399) 191 (77) 0 (0) 609 (247) 187 (76)
SF4--Camp Owaissa Bauer.................................. 315 (128) 0 (0) 49 (20) 154 (62) 113 (46)
SF5--Homestead........................................... 2,292 (928) 1,334 (540) 0 (0) 867 (351) 91 (37)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................................ 5,090 (2,060) 2,499 (1,011) 314 (127) 1,783 (722) 493 (199)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent of Total................................. ................. 49% 6% 35% 10%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Area sizes may not sum due to rounding or minor mapping discrepancies. All 5 units are occupied by the species.
The Big Pine Key unit (SF1) proposed for sand flax in the Florida
Keys comprises the same lands proposed for Big Pine partridge pea
(BPP1) and wedge spurge (WS1) above. Of the five units, two are
currently designated under the Act as critical habitat for the silver
rice rat; five are designated as critical habitat for the Bartram's
scrub-hairstreak butterfly; three are designated as critical habitat
for the Florida leafwing butterfly; and two are designated as critical
habitat for the Florida brickell-bush (Brickellia mosieri) and Carter's
small-flowered flax (Linum carteri ssp. smallii).
Approximately half of the lands contained within units proposed as
critical habitat for sand flax (52 percent; 2,660 ac (1,076 ha)) are
designated critical habitat for other federally listed species.
We present brief descriptions of each proposed critical habitat
unit and the justification for why each meets the definition of
critical habitat for sand flax, below.
Unit SF1: Big Pine Key, Monroe County, Florida
Unit SF1 consists of 1,379 ac (558 ha) in Monroe County. This unit
includes Federal lands within NKDR (912 ac (369 ha)), State lands (228
ac (92 ha)), County land (144 ac (58 ha), and property in private or
other ownership (96 ac (39 ha)). State lands are interspersed within
NKDR lands and managed as part of the Refuge.
This unit was occupied at the time the species was listed and is
currently occupied by one sand flax population. This unit contains all
the physical or biological features, including suitable climate,
hydrology, substrate, associated native plant species, and disturbance
regimes, essential to the conservation of the species.
Special management considerations or protection may be required
within this unit to address lack of fire; nonnative plant and animal
species; and sea level rise. Nonnative species control, prescribed
fire, and mechanical vegetation treatments are all actions that help
improve habitat that supports sand flax.
The unit is part of lands contained within the Lower Florida Keys
NWRs, which includes NKDR, Key West NWR, and Great White Heron NWR. The
CCP for the Lower Florida Keys NWRs promotes the enhancement of
wildlife populations by maintaining and enhancing a diversity and
abundance of habitats for native plants and animals and provides
specifically for maintaining and expanding populations of candidate
plant species including sand flax. The Service conducts nonnative
species control and
[[Page 62520]]
prescribed fire in areas that support sand flax.
The entirety of unit SF1 is also designated critical habitat for
the Florida leafwing and Bartram's scrub-hairstreak butterflies.
Unit SF2: Sugarloaf Keys, Monroe County, Florida
Unit SF2 consists of 116 ac (47 ha) in Monroe County. This unit
includes Federal lands within NKDR (63 ac (25 ha)), State lands (38 ac
(15 ha)), County lands (10 ac (4 ha)), and property in private or other
ownership (6 ac (2 ha)).
This unit was occupied at the time the species was listed and is
currently occupied by one sand flax population. This unit contains all
the physical or biological features, including suitable climate,
hydrology, substrate, associated native plant species, and disturbance
regimes, essential to the conservation of the species.
Special management considerations or protection may be required
within this unit to address threats of lack of fire; nonnative plant
and animal species; and sea level rise. Nonnative species control,
prescribed fire, and mechanical vegetation treatments are all actions
that help improve habitat that supports sand flax. The unit is part of
lands contained within the Lower Florida Keys NWRs, which includes
NKDR, Key West NWR, and Great White Heron NWR. The CCP for the Lower
Florida Keys NWRs promotes the enhancement of wildlife populations by
maintaining and enhancing a diversity and abundance of habitats for
native plants and animals and provides specifically for maintaining and
expanding populations of candidate plant species including sand flax.
The Service conducts nonnative species control in areas that could
support sand flax.
Unit SF2 is not designated critical habitat for any other species.
Unit SF3: Richmond Pinelands and Surrounding Areas, Miami-Dade County,
Florida
Unit SF3 consists of approximately 987 ac (399 ha) in Miami-Dade
County. The unit comprises Federal lands owned by the U.S. Coast Guard
(USCG), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Federal Bureau of Prisons
(FBP), and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) (191
ac (77 ha)); County lands within and adjacent to Larry and Penny
Thompson Park, Martinez Preserve, Zoo Miami, and Eachus Pineland (609
ac (247 ha)); and parcels in private or other ownership (187 ac (76
ha)), including the onsite preserve and offsite mitigation areas
associated with the Coral Reef Commons HCP (110 ac (44.5) ha)).
This unit was occupied at the time the species was listed and is
currently occupied by two sand flax populations. This unit contains all
the physical or biological features, including suitable climate,
hydrology, substrate, associated native plant species, and disturbance
regimes, essential to the conservation of the species.
Special management considerations or protection may be required
within this unit to address lack of fire; nonnative plant and animal
species; and sea level rise. Nonnative species control, prescribed
fire, and mechanical vegetation treatments are all actions that help
improve habitat that supports sand flax.
Sand flax is a covered species under the Coral Reef Commons HCP.
Because sand flax is a covered species under this HCP and the preserves
included within this proposed critical habitat unit are being managed
for the conservation of the species and pine rockland habitat, the
onsite preserve and the offsite mitigation area are being considered
for exclusion from critical habitat under section 4(b)(2) of the Act
(please refer to Consideration of Impacts Under Section 4(b)(2) of the
Act section of this proposed rule).
The entirety of unit SF3 is also designated critical habitat for
Carter's small-flowered flax and Florida brickell-bush; significant
portions are designated for Bartram's scrub-hairstreak butterfly and
Florida leafwing butterfly.
Unit SF4: Camp Owaissa Bauer and Surrounding Areas, Miami-Dade County,
Florida
Unit SF4 consists of approximately 315 ac (128 ha) of habitat in
Miami-Dade County. The unit comprises State lands within Owaissa Bauer
Pineland Addition, Ingram Pineland, West Biscayne Pineland, and Fuchs
Hammock Addition (49 ac (20 ha)); County lands including Camp Owaissa
Bauer, Pine Island Lake Park, Seminole Wayside Park, and Northrop
Pineland (154 ac (62 ha)); and parcels in private and other ownership
(113 ac (46 ha)), including the private conservation area, Pine Ridge
Sanctuary.
This unit was occupied at the time the species was listed and is
currently occupied by one sand flax population. This unit contains all
the physical or biological features, including suitable climate,
hydrology, substrate, associated native plant species, and disturbance
regimes, essential to the conservation of the species.
Special management considerations or protection may be required
within this unit to address lack of fire; nonnative plant and animal
species; and sea level rise. Nonnative species control, prescribed
fire, and mechanical vegetation treatments are all actions that help
improve habitat that supports sand flax.
The entirety of unit SF4 is also designated critical habitat for
Carter's small-flowered flax and Florida brickell-bush; and large
portions of unit SF4 are designated critical habitat for Bartram's
scrub-hairstreak butterfly and Florida leafwing butterfly.
Unit SF5: Homestead and Surrounding Areas, Miami-Dade County, Florida
Unit SF5 consists of approximately 2,292 ac (928 ha) in Miami-Dade
County. The unit comprises Federal lands owned by DoD (1,334 ac (540
ha)), lands owned by Miami-Dade County (867 ac (351 ha)), and parcels
in private or other ownership (91 ac (37 ha)).
A portion (approximately 25 ac (10 ha)) of the lands and features
contained within this unit are on lands of SOCSO and covered by their
updated and signed INRMP, and as a result, the SOCSO lands within this
unit are being exempted from critical habitat (please refer to the
Exemptions: Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the Act section of this
proposed rule). The HARB is working with the Service to incorporate
additional conservation measures for sand flax in revisions to their
INRMP, but the revised INRMP is currently being drafted and has not yet
been approved and signed. Therefore, lands that are part of HARB that
have been determined to be essential to the conservation of sand flax
are not being exempted and are included in this proposal. If the
revised INRMP is approved and signed before we finalize this
designation, we would exempt this area in the final designation.
This unit was occupied at the time the species was listed and is
currently occupied by two sand flax populations. This unit contains all
the physical or biological features, including suitable climate,
hydrology, substrate, associated native plant species, and disturbance
regimes, essential to the conservation of the species.
Special management considerations or protection may be required
within this unit to address lack of fire; nonnative plant and animal
species; and sea level rise. Nonnative species control, prescribed
fire, and mechanical vegetation treatments are all actions that help
improve habitat that supports sand flax.
Unit SF5 does not contain previously designated critical habitat,
but the
[[Page 62521]]
endangered Small's milkpea (Galactia smallii) occurs throughout the
unit.
Proposed Critical Habitat Designation for Blodgett's Silverbush
We are proposing to designate approximately 16,667 ac (6,745 ha) in
13 units as critical habitat for Blodgett's silverbush. The critical
habitat areas we describe below constitute our current best assessment
of areas that meet the definition of critical habitat for Blodgett's
silverbush. The 13 areas we propose as critical habitat are:
(1) BS1--Key Largo, Monroe County, Florida;
(2) BS2--Plantation Key, Monroe County, Florida;
(3) BS3--Windley Key, Monroe County, Florida;
(4) BS4--Lignumvitae Key, Monroe County, Florida;
(5) BS5--Lower Matecumbe Key, Monroe County, Florida;
(6) BS6--Marathon, Monroe County, Florida;
(7) BS7--Big Pine Key, Monroe County, Florida;
(8) BS8--Big Munson Island, Monroe County, Florida;
(9) BS9--U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Subtropical
Horticulture Research Station, Miami-Dade County, Florida;
(10) BS10--Richmond Pineland, Miami-Dade County, Florida;
(11) BS11--Quail Roost Pineland, Miami-Dade County, Florida;
(12) BS12--Camp Owaissa Bauer, Miami-Dade County, Florida; and
(13) BS13--Everglades National Park, Miami-Dade County, Florida.
We have determined that these 13 areas meet the definition of
critical habitat. While the habitat within Key West Naval Air Station
(KWNAS) meets the definition of critical habitat, the lands and
features contained therein are covered under the KWNAS INRMP that
provides benefits to Blodgett's silverbush and its habitat and
therefore will be exempted from critical habitat (see Exemptions:
Application of Section 4(a) (3) of the Act, below).
Land ownership within the proposed critical habitat consists of
Federal (64 percent), State 17 (19 percent), County (7 percent), and
private and other (9 percent). Table 4 shows these units by land
ownership, area, and occupancy.
Table 4--Proposed Critical Habitat Units for Blodgett's Silverbush
[Including area, area by land ownership, and occupancy. All areas rounded to the nearest whole acre (ac) and hectare (ha)]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Private/other ac
Critical habitat unit Total ac (ha) Federal ac (ha) State ac (ha) County ac (ha) (ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BS1--Key Largo........................................... 3,060 (1,238) 595 (241) 2,024 (819) 214 (86) 227 (92)
BS2--Plantation Key...................................... 175 (71) 0 (0) 26 (10) 33 (13) 116 (47)
BS3--Windley Key......................................... 30 (12) 0 (0) 28 (11) 1 (1) 0 (0)
BS4--Lignumvitae Key..................................... 159 (64) 0 (0) 157 (64) 2 (1) 0 (0)
BS5--Lower Matecumbe Key................................. 64 (26) 0 (0) 27 (11) 6 (3) 31 (13)
BS6--Marathon............................................ 103 (42) 0 (0) 66 (27) 0 (0) 38 (15)
BS7--Big Pine Key........................................ 1,867 (756) 1,259 (509) 328 (133) 160 (65) 122 (49)
BS8--Big Munson Island................................... 28 (11) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 28 (11)
BS9--USDA Subtropical Horticulture Research Station...... 630 (255) 155 (63) 253 (103) 182 (74) 40 (16)
BS10--Richmond Pinelands................................. 987 (399) 191 (77) 0 (0) 609 (247) 187 (76)
BS11--Quail Roost Pineland............................... 412 (167) 0 (0) 174 (70) 100 (40) 139 (56)
BS12--Camp Owaissa Bauer................................. 392 (159) 0 (0) 69 (28) 184 (74) 139 (56)
BS13--Everglades National Park........................... 8,728 (3,532) 8,595 (3,478) 0 (0) 0 (0) 133 (54)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................................ 16,635 (6,732) 10,794 (4,368) 3,151 (1,275) 1,490 (603) 1,199 (485)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent of Total................................. ................. 64% 19% 7% 9%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Area sizes may not sum due to rounding or minor mapping discrepancies. All 13 units are occupied by the species.
Many of the lands contained within units proposed as critical
habitat for Blodgett's silverbush (15,247 ha (6,170 ha), or 91.5
percent) are designated critical habitat for other federally listed
species.
We present brief descriptions of each proposed critical habitat
unit and the justification for why each meets the definition of
critical habitat for Blodgett's silverbush, below.
Unit BS1: Key Largo, Monroe County, Florida
Unit BS1 consists of 3,060 ac (1,238 ha) in Monroe County. This
unit includes Federal lands within Crocodile Lake NWR (595 ac (241
ha)), State lands within Dagny Johnson Botanical State Park, John
Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park, and the Florida Keys Wildlife and
Environmental Area (FKWEA) (2,024 ac (819 ha)), County lands (214 ac
(86 ha)), and property in private or other ownership (227 ac (92 ha)).
This unit was occupied at the time the species was listed and is
currently occupied by two Blodgett's silverbush populations. This unit
contains all the physical or biological features, including suitable
climate, hydrology, substrate, associated native plant species, and
disturbance regimes, essential to the conservation of the species.
Special management considerations or protection may be required
within this unit to address lack of fire; nonnative plant and animal
species; and sea level rise. Nonnative species control, prescribed
fire, and mechanical vegetation treatments are all actions that help
improve habitat that supports Blodgett's silverbush.
Part of the unit is within the Crocodile Lake NWR. The CCP for
Crocodile Lake NWR promotes the enhancement of wildlife populations by
maintaining and enhancing a diversity and abundance of habitats for
native plants and animals and provides specifically for maintaining and
expanding populations of plant species including Blodgett's silverbush.
The Service conducts nonnative species control in areas that could
support the species.
The entirety of unit BS1 is included in designated critical habitat
for the American crocodile (Crocodylus acutus), Cape Sable thoroughwort
(Chromolaena frustrata), and Florida semaphore cactus (Consolea
corallicola).
[[Page 62522]]
Unit BS2: Plantation Key, Monroe County, Florida
Unit BS2 consists of 175 ac (71 ha) in Monroe County. This unit
includes State lands within the FKWEA (26 ac (10 ha)), County lands (33
ac (13 ha)), and property in private or other ownership (116 ac (47
ha)).
This unit was occupied at the time the species was listed and is
currently occupied by one Blodgett's silverbush population. This unit
contains all the physical or biological features, including suitable
climate, hydrology, substrate, associated native plant species, and
disturbance regimes, essential to the conservation of the species.
Special management considerations or protection may be required
within this unit to address lack of fire; nonnative plant and animal
species; and sea level rise. Nonnative species control, prescribed
fire, and mechanical vegetation treatments are all actions that help
improve habitat that supports Blodgett's silverbush.
The entirety of Unit BS2 is designated critical habitat for the
American crocodile.
Unit BS3: Windley Key, Monroe County, Florida
Unit BS3 consists of 30 ac (12 ha) in Monroe County. This unit
includes State lands within Windley Key Fossil Reef Geologic State Park
(28 ac (11 ha)) and County property (1 ac (0.5 ha)). The unit is
located on Windley Key on the north side of the Overseas Highway.
This unit was occupied at the time the species was listed and is
currently occupied by one Blodgett's silverbush population. This unit
contains all the physical or biological features, including suitable
climate, hydrology, substrate, associated native plant species, and
disturbance regimes, essential to the conservation of the species.
Special management considerations or protection may be required
within this unit to address lack of fire; nonnative plant and animal
species; and sea level rise. Nonnative species control, prescribed
fire, and mechanical vegetation treatments are all actions that help
improve habitat that supports Blodgett's silverbush.
The entirety of Unit BS3 includes designated critical habitat for
the American crocodile.
Unit BS4: Lignumvitae Key, Monroe County, Florida
Unit BS4 consists of 159 ac (64 ha) in Monroe County. This unit
comprises State lands in Lignumvitae Key Botanical State Park (157 ac
(64 ha)) and County property (1 ac (0.5 ha)). This unit includes the
entire upland area of Lignumvitae Key.
This unit was occupied at the time the species was listed and is
currently occupied by one Blodgett's silverbush population. This unit
contains all the physical or biological features, including suitable
climate, hydrology, substrate, associated native plant species, and
disturbance regimes, essential to the conservation of the species.
Special management considerations or protection may be required
within this unit to address lack of fire; nonnative plant and animal
species; and sea level rise. Nonnative species control, prescribed
fire, and mechanical vegetation treatments are all actions that help
improve habitat that supports Blodgett's silverbush.
The management activities implemented by Florida State Parks
promote the enhancement of wildlife populations by maintaining and
enhancing a diversity and abundance of habitats for native plants and
animals. Florida State Parks conducts nonnative species control in
areas that could support Blodgett's silverbush.
The entirety of unit BS4 is included in designated critical habitat
for the American crocodile and Cape Sable thoroughwort.
Unit BS5: Lower Matecumbe Key, Monroe County, Florida
Unit BS5 consists of 64 ac (26 ha) in Monroe County. This unit
includes State lands that are part of Lignumvitae Key Botanical State
Park (27 ac (11 ha)), County property (6 ac (3 ha)), and property in
private or other ownership (31 ac (13 ha)).
This unit was occupied at the time the species was listed and is
currently occupied by one Blodgett's silverbush population. This unit
contains all the physical or biological features, including suitable
climate, hydrology, substrate, associated native plant species, and
disturbance regimes, essential to the conservation of the species.
Special management considerations or protection may be required
within this unit to address lack of fire; nonnative plant and animal
species; and sea level rise. Nonnative species control, prescribed
fire, and mechanical vegetation treatments are all actions that help
improve habitat that supports Blodgett's silverbush.
The management activities implemented by Florida State Parks in
part of this unit promote the enhancement of wildlife populations by
maintaining and enhancing a diversity and abundance of habitats for
native plants and animals. Florida State Parks conducts nonnative
species control in areas that support Blodgett's silverbush.
The entirety of unit BS5 is included in designated critical habitat
for the American crocodile and Cape Sable thoroughwort.
Unit BS6: Marathon, Monroe County, Florida
Unit BS6 consists of 103 ac (42 ha) in Monroe County. This unit
includes State lands within FKWEA (66 ac (27 ha)) and property in
private or other ownership, including land owned by The Florida Keys
Land and Sea Trust (38 ac (15 ha)).
This unit was occupied at the time the species was listed and is
currently occupied by one Blodgett's silverbush population. This unit
contains all the physical or biological features, including suitable
climate, hydrology, substrate, associated native plant species, and
disturbance regimes, essential to the conservation of the species.
Special management considerations or protection may be required
within this unit to address lack of fire; nonnative plant and animal
species; and sea level rise. Nonnative species control, prescribed
fire, and mechanical vegetation treatments are all actions that help
improve habitat that supports Blodgett's silverbush.
Unit BS6 does not include any designated critical habitat for other
species.
Unit BS7: Big Pine Key, Monroe County, Florida
Unit BS7 consists of 1,867 ac (756 ha) in Monroe County. This unit
includes Federal lands within NKDR (1,259 ac (509 ha)), State lands
(328 ac (133 ha)), County lands (160 ac (65 ha)), and property in
private or other ownership (122 ac (49 ha)).
This unit was occupied at the time the species was listed and is
currently occupied by two Blodgett's silverbush populations. This unit
contains all the physical or biological features, including suitable
climate, hydrology, substrate, associated native plant species, and
disturbance regimes, essential to the conservation of the species.
Special management considerations or protection may be required
within this unit to address lack of fire; nonnative plant and animal
species; and sea level rise. Nonnative species control, prescribed
fire, and mechanical vegetation treatments are all actions that
[[Page 62523]]
help improve habitat that supports Blodgett's silverbush.
The unit is part of lands contained within the Lower Florida Keys
NWRs, which includes NKDR, Key West NWR, and Great White Heron NWR. The
CCP for the Lower Florida Keys NWRs promotes the enhancement of
wildlife populations by maintaining and enhancing a diversity and
abundance of habitats for native plants and animals and provides
specifically for maintaining and expanding populations of plant species
including Blodgett's silverbush. The Service conducts nonnative species
and prescribed fire control in areas that support Blodgett's
silverbush.
The entirety of unit BS7 is designated critical habitat for the
Florida leafwing and Bartram's scrub-hairstreak butterflies; Cape Sable
thoroughwort; and Florida semaphore cactus. The endangered Key Deer
occurs through the unit, but no critical habitat is designated for that
species.
Unit BS8: Big Munson Island, Monroe County, Florida
Unit BS8 consists of 28 ac (11 ha) in Monroe County. This unit is
composed entirely of lands owned by the Boy Scouts of America. The unit
includes all of the coastal berm and rockland hammock habitat on the
island.
This unit was occupied at the time the species was listed and is
currently occupied by one Blodgett's silverbush population. This unit
contains all the physical or biological features, including suitable
climate, hydrology, substrate, associated native plant species, and
disturbance regimes, essential to the conservation of the species.
Special management considerations or protection may be required
within this unit to address lack of fire; nonnative plant and animal
species; and sea level rise. Nonnative species control, prescribed
fire, and mechanical vegetation treatments are all actions that help
improve habitat that supports Blodgett's silverbush.
The entirety of unit BS8 is designated critical habitat for the
Cape Sable thoroughwort. The endangered Key deer occurs through the
unit, but no critical habitat is designated for that species.
Unit BS9: USDA Subtropical Horticulture Research Station and
Surrounding Areas, Miami-Dade County, Florida
Unit BS9 consists of approximately 630 ac (255 ha) of habitat in
Miami-Dade County. The unit comprises Federal lands within the USDA
Subtropical Horticulture Research Station (155 ac (63 ha)); State lands
within the R. Hardy Matheson Preserve, Ludlam Pineland, Deering Estate
at Cutler, and Deering Estate South Addition (253 ac (103 ha)); County
lands within Bill Sadowski Park and Matheson Hammock (182 ac (74 ha)),
and parcels in private ownership (40 ac (16 ha)).
This unit was occupied at the time the species was listed and is
currently occupied by two Blodgett's silverbush populations. This unit
contains all the physical or biological features, including suitable
climate, hydrology, substrate, associated native plant species, and
disturbance regimes, essential to the conservation of the species.
Special management considerations or protection may be required
within this unit to address lack of fire; nonnative plant and animal
species; and sea level rise. Nonnative species control, prescribed
fire, and mechanical vegetation treatments are all actions that help
improve habitat that supports Blodgett's silverbush.
The entirety of unit BS9 includes designated critical habitat for
the Carter's small-flowered flax and Florida brickell-bush.
Unit BS10: Richmond Pinelands and Surrounding Areas, Miami-Dade County,
Florida
Unit BS10 consists of approximately 987 ac (399 ha) in Miami-Dade
County. The unit comprises Federal lands owned by the USCG, USACE, FBP,
and NOAA (191 ac (77 ha)); County lands within and adjacent to Larry
and Penny Thompson Park, Martinez Preserve, Zoo Miami, and Eachus
Pineland (609 ac (247 ha)); and parcels in private or other ownership
(187 ac (76 ha)), including the onsite preserve and offsite mitigation
areas associated with the Coral Reef Commons HCP (110 ac (44.5) ha).
This unit was occupied at the time the species was listed and is
currently occupied by one Blodgett's silverbush population. This unit
contains all the physical or biological features, including suitable
climate, hydrology, substrate, associated native plant species, and
disturbance regimes, essential to the conservation of the species.
Special management considerations or protection may be required
within this unit to address lack of fire; nonnative plant and animal
species; and sea level rise. Nonnative species control, prescribed
fire, and mechanical vegetation treatments are all actions that help
improve habitat that supports Blodgett's silverbush.
Blodgett's silverbush is a covered species under the Coral Reef
Commons HCP. Because Blodgett's silverbush is a covered species under
this HCP and the preserves included within this proposed critical
habitat unit are being managed for the conservation of the species and
pine rockland habitat, the onsite preserve and the offsite mitigation
area are being considered for exclusion from critical habitat under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act (please refer to Consideration of Impacts
Under Section 4(b)(2) of the Act section of this proposed rule).
The entirety of unit BS10 is designated critical habitat for
Carter's small-flowered flax, Florida brickell-bush, Bartram's scrub
hairstreak butterfly, and Florida leafwing butterfly.
Unit BS11: Quail Roost Pineland and Surrounding Areas, Miami-Dade
County, Florida
Unit BS11 consists of approximately 412 ac (167 ha) in Miami-Dade
County. The unit comprises State lands within Quail Roost Pineland,
Goulds Pineland and Addition, Silver Palm Groves Pineland, Castellow
Hammock, Ross Hammock, Hardin Hammock, and Silver Palm Hammock (174 ac
(70 ha)); County/local lands including Medsouth Park, Black Creek
Forest, and Rock Pit #46 (100 ac (40 ha)); and parcels in private
ownership (139 ac (56 ha)), including Porter-Russell Pineland owned by
the Tropical Audubon Society.
This unit was occupied at the time the species was listed and is
currently occupied by one possibly extirpated Blodgett's silverbush
population and one population with uncertain status. This unit contains
all the physical or biological features, including suitable climate,
hydrology, substrate, associated native plant species, and disturbance
regimes, essential to the conservation of the species.
Special management considerations or protection may be required
within this unit to address lack of fire; nonnative plant and animal
species; and sea level rise. Nonnative species control, prescribed
fire, and mechanical vegetation treatments are all actions that help
improve habitat that supports Blodgett's silverbush.
The entirety of unit BS11 is designated critical habitat for the
Carter's small-flowered flax, Florida brickell-bush, and Bartram's
scrub hairstreak butterfly.
Unit BS12: Camp Owaissa Bauer and Surrounding Areas, Miami-Dade County,
Florida
Unit BS12 consists of approximately 392 ac (159 ha) of habitat in
Miami-
[[Page 62524]]
Dade County. The unit comprises State lands within Owaissa Bauer
Pineland Addition, West Biscayne Pineland, Ingram Pineland, Fuchs
Hammock Addition, and Meissner Hammock (69 ac (28 ha)); County lands,
including Camp Owaissa Bauer, Pine Island Lake Park, Seminole Wayside
Park, Northrop Pineland, Hattie Bauer Hammock, and Fuchs Hammock (184
ac (74 ha)); and parcels in private ownership (139 ac (56 ha)),
including the private conservation area, Pine Ridge Sanctuary.
This unit was occupied at the time the species was listed and is
currently occupied by three Blodgett's silverbush populations. This
unit contains all the physical or biological features, including
suitable climate, hydrology, substrate, associated native plant
species, and disturbance regimes, essential to the conservation of the
species.
Special management considerations or protection may be required
within this unit to address lack of fire; nonnative plant and animal
species; and sea level rise. Nonnative species control, prescribed
fire, and mechanical vegetation treatments are all actions that help
improve habitat that supports Blodgett's silverbush.
The entirety of Unit BS12 is designated critical habitat for
Carter's small-flowered flax, Florida brickell-bush, and Bartram's
scrub hairstreak butterfly.
Unit BS13: Everglades National Park--Pine Island and Surrounding Areas,
Miami-Dade County, Florida
Unit BS13 consists of approximately 8,728 ac (3,532 ha) in Miami-
Dade County. The unit comprises Federal lands in ENP (8,595 ac (3,478
ha)) and parcels in private or other ownership (133 ac (54 ha)). The
unit includes pine rocklands and numerous rockland hammocks in the
vicinity of Long Pine Key in ENP.
This unit was occupied at the time the species was listed and is
currently occupied by one Blodgett's silverbush population. This unit
contains all the physical or biological features, including suitable
climate, hydrology, substrate, associated native plant species, and
disturbance regimes, essential to the conservation of the species.
Special management considerations or protection may be required
within this unit to address lack of fire; nonnative plant and animal
species; and sea level rise. Nonnative species control, prescribed
fire, and mechanical vegetation treatments are all actions that help
improve habitat that supports Blodgett's silverbush.
The entirety of unit BS13 is designated critical habitat for
Bartram's scrub hairstreak butterfly and Florida leafwing butterfly.
Effects of Critical Habitat Designation
Section 7 Consultation
Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires Federal agencies, including the
Service, to ensure that any action they fund, authorize, or carry out
is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered
species or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse
modification of designated critical habitat of such species. In
addition, section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires Federal agencies to
confer with the Service on any agency action which is likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of any species proposed to be listed
under the Act or result in the destruction or adverse modification of
proposed critical habitat.
We published a final rule revising the definition of destruction or
adverse modification on February 11, 2016 (81 FR 7214) (although we
also published a revised definition after that (on August 27, 2019.
Destruction or adverse modification means a direct or indirect
alteration that appreciably diminishes the value of critical habitat
for the conservation of a listed species. Such alterations may include,
but are not limited to, those that alter the physical or biological
features essential to the conservation of a species or that preclude or
significantly delay development of such features.
If a Federal action may affect a listed species or its critical
habitat, the responsible Federal agency (action agency) must enter into
consultation with us. Examples of actions that are subject to the
section 7 consultation process are actions on State, Tribal, local, or
private lands that require a Federal permit (such as a permit from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) or a permit from the Service under section 10
of the Act) or that involve some other Federal action (such as funding
from the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Aviation
Administration, or the Federal Emergency Management Agency). Federal
actions not affecting listed species or critical habitat--and actions
on State, Tribal, local, or private lands that are not federally
funded, authorized, or carried out by a Federal agency--do not require
section 7 consultation.
Compliance with the requirements of section 7(a)(2) is documented
through our issuance of:
(1) A concurrence letter for Federal actions that may affect, but
are not likely to adversely affect, listed species or critical habitat;
or
(2) A biological opinion for Federal actions that may affect, and
are likely to adversely affect, listed species or critical habitat.
When we issue a biological opinion concluding that a project is
likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species and/or
destroy or adversely modify critical habitat, we provide reasonable and
prudent alternatives to the project, if any are identifiable, that
would avoid the likelihood of jeopardy and/or destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat. We define ``reasonable and prudent
alternatives'' (at 50 CFR 402.02) as alternative actions identified
during consultation that:
(1) Can be implemented in a manner consistent with the intended
purpose of the action,
(2) Can be implemented consistent with the scope of the Federal
agency's legal authority and jurisdiction,
(3) Are economically and technologically feasible, and
(4) Would, in the Service Director's opinion, avoid the likelihood
of jeopardizing the continued existence of the listed species and/or
avoid the likelihood of destroying or adversely modifying critical
habitat.
Reasonable and prudent alternatives can vary from slight project
modifications to extensive redesign or relocation of the project. Costs
associated with implementing a reasonable and prudent alternative are
similarly variable.
Regulations at 50 CFR 402.16 set forth requirements for Federal
agencies to reinitiate formal consultation on previously reviewed
actions. These requirements apply when the Federal agency has retained
discretionary involvement or control over the action (or the agency's
discretionary involvement or control is authorized by law) and, if
subsequent to the previous consultation: (a) if the amount or extent of
taking specified in the incidental take statement is exceeded; (b) if
new information reveals effects of the action that may affect listed
species or critical habitat in a manner or to an extent not previously
considered; (c) if the identified action is subsequently modified in a
manner that causes an effect to the listed species or critical habitat
that was not considered in the biological opinion; or (d) if a new
species is listed or critical habitat designated that may be affected
by the identified action. In such situations, Federal agencies
sometimes may need to
[[Page 62525]]
request reinitiation of consultation with us, but the regulations also
specify some exceptions to the requirement to reinitiate consultation
on specific land management plans after subsequently listing a new
species or designating new critical habitat. See the regulations for a
description of those exceptions.
Application of the ``Destruction or Adverse Modification'' Standard
The key factor related to the destruction or adverse modification
determination is whether implementation of the proposed Federal action
directly or indirectly alters the designated critical habitat in a way
that appreciably diminishes the value of the critical habitat for the
conservation of the listed species. As discussed above, the role of
critical habitat is to support physical or biological features
essential to the conservation of a listed species and provide for the
conservation of the species.
Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us to briefly evaluate and
describe, in any proposed or final regulation that designates critical
habitat, activities involving a Federal action that may violate section
7(a)(2) of the Act by destroying or adversely modifying such habitat,
or that may be affected by such designation.
Activities that we may, during a consultation under section 7(a)(2)
of the Act, find are likely to destroy or adversely modify critical
habitat for Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, sand flax, and
Blodgett's silverbush include, but are not limited to:
(1) Actions that would significantly alter the hydrology or
substrate, such as ditching or filling. Such activities may include,
but are not limited to, road construction or maintenance, and
residential, commercial, or recreational development.
(2) Actions that would significantly alter vegetation structure or
composition, such as clearing vegetation for construction of roads,
residential and commercial development, recreational facilities, and
trails.
(3) Actions that would introduce nonnative species that would
significantly alter vegetation structure or composition. Such
activities may include, but are not limited to, residential and
commercial development and road construction.
Exemptions
Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the Act
Section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(B)(i))
provides that the Secretary shall not designate as critical habitat any
lands or other geographical areas owned or controlled by the DoD, or
designated for its use, that are subject to an integrated natural
resources management plan (INRMP) prepared under section 101 of the
Sikes Act Improvement Act of 1997 (16 U.S.C. 670a) (Sikes Act), if the
Secretary determines in writing that such plan provides a benefit to
the species for which critical habitat is proposed for designation.
The Sikes Act required each military installation that includes
land and water suitable for the conservation and management of natural
resources to complete an INRMP by November 17, 2001. An INRMP
integrates implementation of the military mission of the installation
with stewardship of the natural resources found on the base. Each INRMP
includes:
(1) An assessment of the ecological needs on the installation,
including the need to provide for the conservation of listed species;
(2) A statement of goals and priorities;
(3) A detailed description of management actions to be implemented
to provide for these ecological needs; and
(4) A monitoring and adaptive management plan.
Among other things, each INRMP must, to the extent appropriate and
applicable, provide for fish and wildlife management; fish and wildlife
habitat enhancement or modification; wetland protection, enhancement,
and restoration where necessary to support fish and wildlife; and
enforcement of applicable natural resource laws.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Pub.
L. 108-136) amended the Act to limit areas eligible for designation as
critical habitat. Specifically, section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act (16
U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(B)(i)) provides that: ``The Secretary shall not
designate as critical habitat any lands or other geographical areas
owned or controlled by the Department of Defense, or designated for its
use, that are subject to an integrated natural resources management
plan prepared under section 101 of the Sikes Act, if the Secretary
determines in writing that such plan provides a benefit to the species
for which critical habitat is proposed for designation.''
We consult with the military on the development and implementation
of INRMPs for installations with listed species. We analyzed INRMPs
developed by military installations located within the range of the
proposed critical habitat designation for Big Pine partridge pea, wedge
spurge, sand flax, and Blodgett's silverbush to determine if they meet
the criteria for exemption from critical habitat under section 4(a)(3)
of the Act. The following areas are DoD lands with completed, Service-
approved INRMPs within the proposed critical habitat designation for
Blodgett's silverbush: KWNAS and SOCSO.
Approved INRMPs
Key West Naval Air Station (KWNAS). We have determined that
approximately 133 ac (54 ha) of coastal berm and pine rocklands habitat
on Boca Chica Key contain the physical or biological features that are
essential to the conservation of Blodgett's silverbush. These specific
lands are owned and managed by DoD as part of the KWNAS. In July 2020,
KWNAS, in coordination with the Service, updated their INRMP to
included management and protective measures that provide a conservation
benefit to Blodgett's silverbush and its habitat. The Service has
approved these management and protective measures, and the INRMP has
been signed. As a result, the DoD lands on KWNAS that we have
determined contain the physical or biological features that are
essential to the conservation of Blodgett's silverbush are being
exempted from inclusion in critical habitat under section 4(a)(3)(B)(i)
of the Act. Therefore, these specific lands within this installation
are exempt from critical habitat designation under section 4(a)(3) of
the Act. We are not including approximately 133 ac (54 ha) of habitat
in this proposed critical habitat designation for Blodgett's silverbush
because of this exemption.
Special Operations Command South (SOCSO). We have determined that
approximately 25 ac (10 ha) pine rocklands habitat located within SOCSO
contain physical or biological features that are essential to the
conservation of Blodgett's silverbush. These specific lands are owned
and managed by DoD. In July 2020, SOCSO in coordination with the
Service, updated their INRMP to included management and protective
measures that provide a conservation benefit to Blodgett's silverbush
and its habitat. The Service has approved these management and
protective measures, and the INRMP has been signed. As a result, the
DoD lands on SOCSO that we have determined contain the physical or
biological features that are essential to the conservation of
Blodgett's silverbush are being exempted from inclusion in critical
habitat under section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act. Therefore, these
specific lands within this installation are exempt from critical
habitat designation under section 4(a)(3) of the Act. We are not
including approximately 25 ac (10 ha) of habitat in this proposed
critical habitat
[[Page 62526]]
designation for Blodgett's silverbush because of this exemption.
Homestead Air Reserve Base (HARB). We have determined that
approximately 1,309 ac (530 ha) of pine rocklands and adjacent
disturbed areas of habitat on HARB contain physical or biological
features that are essential to the conservation of sand flax. These
specific lands are owned and managed by DoD as part of the HARB. In
July 2020, HARB, in coordination with the Service, began discussions
about revising their INRMP to include management and protective
measures that provide a conservation benefit to sand flax and its
habitat. The Service will review these management and protective
measures. If the revised INRMP is approved and signed before we
finalize this designation, we would exempt this area in the final
designation.
Consideration of Impacts Under Section 4(b)(2) of the Act
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states that the Secretary shall
designate and make revisions to critical habitat on the basis of the
best available scientific data after taking into consideration the
economic impact, national security impact, and any other relevant
impact of specifying any particular area as critical habitat. The
Secretary may exclude an area from designated critical habitat based on
economic impacts, impacts on national security, or any other relevant
impacts. Exclusion decisions are governed by the regulations at 50 CFR
424.19 and the Policy Regarding Implementation of Section 4(b)(2) of
the Endangered Species Act, 81 FR 7226 (Feb. 11, 2016) (2016 Policy)--
both of which were developed jointly with the National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS). We also refer to a 2008 Department of the Interior
Solicitor's opinion entitled ``The Secretary's Authority to Exclude
Areas from a Critical Habitat Designation under Section 4(b)(2) of the
Endangered Species Act'' (M-37016). We explain each decision to exclude
areas, as well as decisions not to exclude, to demonstrate that the
decision is reasonable.
In considering whether to exclude a particular area from the
designation, we identify the benefits of including the area in the
designation, identify the benefits of excluding the area from the
designation, and evaluate whether the benefits of exclusion outweigh
the benefits of inclusion. If the analysis indicates that the benefits
of exclusion outweigh the benefits of inclusion, the Secretary may
exercise discretion to exclude the area only if such exclusion would
not result in the extinction of the species. In making the
determination to exclude a particular area, the statute on its face, as
well as the legislative history, are clear that the Secretary has broad
discretion regarding which factor(s) to use and how much weight to give
to any factor. We describe below the process that we undertook for
taking into consideration each category of impacts and our analyses of
the relevant impacts.
Consideration of Economic Impacts
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act and its implementing regulations require
that we consider the economic impact that may result from a designation
of critical habitat. To assess the probable economic impacts of a
designation, we must first evaluate specific land uses or activities
and projects that may occur in the area of the critical habitat. We
then must evaluate the impacts that a specific critical habitat
designation may have on restricting or modifying specific land uses or
activities for the benefit of the species and its habitat within the
areas proposed. We then identify which conservation efforts may be the
result of the species being listed under the Act versus those
attributed solely to the designation of critical habitat for this
particular species. The probable economic impact of a proposed critical
habitat designation is analyzed by comparing scenarios both ``with
critical habitat'' and ``without critical habitat.''
The ``without critical habitat'' scenario represents the baseline
for the analysis, which includes the existing regulatory and socio-
economic burden imposed on landowners, managers, or other resource
users potentially affected by the designation of critical habitat
(e.g., under the Federal listing as well as other Federal, State, and
local regulations). The baseline, therefore, represents the costs of
all efforts attributable to the listing of the species under the Act
(i.e., conservation of the species and its habitat incurred regardless
of whether critical habitat is designated). The ``with critical
habitat'' scenario describes the incremental impacts associated
specifically with the designation of critical habitat for the species.
The incremental conservation efforts and associated impacts would not
be expected without the designation of critical habitat for the
species. In other words, the incremental costs are those attributable
solely to the designation of critical habitat, above and beyond the
baseline costs. These are the costs we use when evaluating the benefits
of inclusion and exclusion of particular areas from the final
designation of critical habitat should we choose to conduct a
discretionary section 4(b)(2) exclusion analysis.
Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and 13563 direct Federal agencies to
assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives in
quantitative (to the extent feasible) and qualitative terms. Consistent
with the E.O. regulatory analysis requirements, our effects analysis
under the Act may take into consideration impacts to both directly and
indirectly affected entities, where practicable and reasonable. If
sufficient data are available, we assess to the extent practicable the
probable impacts to both directly and indirectly affected entities.
Section 3(f) of E.O. 12866 identifies four criteria when a regulation
is considered a ``significant'' rulemaking, and requires additional
analysis, review, and approval if met. The criterion relevant here is
whether the designation of critical habitat may have an economic effect
of greater than $100 million in any given year (section 3(f)(1)).
Therefore, our consideration of economic impacts uses a screening
analysis to assess whether a designation of critical habitat for these
species is likely to exceed the economically significant threshold.
For this particular designation, we developed an incremental
effects memorandum (IEM) considering the probable incremental economic
impacts that may result from this proposed designation of critical
habitat. The information contained in our IEM was then used to develop
a screening analysis of the probable effects of the designation of
critical habitat for Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, sand flax,
and Blodgett's silverbush (IEc 2021, entire). We began by conducting a
screening analysis of the proposed designation of critical habitat in
order to focus our analysis on the key factors that are likely to
result in incremental economic impacts. The purpose of the screening
analysis is to filter out particular geographic areas of critical
habitat that are already subject to such protections and are,
therefore, unlikely to incur incremental economic impacts. In
particular, the screening analysis considers baseline costs (i.e.,
absent critical habitat designation) and includes probable economic
impacts where land and water use may be subject to conservation plans,
land management plans, best management practices, or regulations that
protect the habitat area as a result of the Federal listing status of
the species. Ultimately, the screening analysis allows us to focus our
analysis on evaluating the specific areas or sectors that may incur
probable incremental economic impacts as a result of the designation.
The presence of the listed species in occupied areas of critical
habitat means
[[Page 62527]]
that any destruction or adverse modification of those areas will also
likely jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Therefore,
designating occupied areas as critical habitat typically causes few if
any incremental impacts above and beyond the impacts of listing the
species. Accordingly, the screening analysis focuses on areas of
unoccupied critical habitat. The screening analysis also assesses
whether units are unoccupied by the species and thus may require
additional management or conservation efforts as a result of the
critical habitat designation for the species; these additional efforts
may incur incremental economic impacts. This screening analysis
combined with the information contained in our IEM are what we consider
our draft economic analysis (DEA) of the proposed critical habitat
designation for Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge, sand flax, and
Blodgett's silverbush; our DEA is summarized in the narrative below.
As part of our screening analysis, we considered the types of
economic activities that are likely to occur within the areas that may
be affected by the critical habitat designation. In our evaluation of
the probable incremental economic impacts that may result from the
proposed designation of critical habitat for Big Pine partridge pea,
wedge spurge, sand flax, and Blodgett's silverbush, first we
identified, in the IEM dated September 15, 2021, probable incremental
economic impacts associated with the following categories of
activities:
(1) Land management and restoration (including, but not limited to,
nonnative species control, prescribed fire, and hydrologic
restoration);
(2) Roadway and bridge construction and maintenance;
(3) Right-of-way maintenance;
(4) Commercial or residential development; and
(5) Recreation (including construction and maintenance of
recreation infrastructure).
We considered each industry or category individually. Additionally,
we considered whether their activities have any Federal involvement.
Critical habitat designations generally will not affect activities that
do not have any Federal involvement; designation of critical habitat
only affects activities conducted, funded, permitted, or authorized by
Federal agencies. In areas where Big Pine partridge pea, wedge spurge,
sand flax, and Blodgett's silverbush are present, Federal agencies
already are required to consult with the Service under section 7 of the
Act on activities they authorize, fund, or carry out that may affect
the species. If we finalize this proposed critical habitat designation,
consultations to avoid the destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat would be incorporated into the existing consultation
process. In our IEM, we attempted to clarify the distinction between
the effects that will result from the species being listed and those
attributable to the critical habitat designation (i.e., difference
between the jeopardy and adverse modification standards) for Big Pine
partridge pea, wedge spurge, sand flax, and Blodgett's silverbush
critical habitat. Because the designation of critical habitat for these
species is being proposed several years following the listing of these
species, data, such as from consultation history, is available to help
us discern which conservation efforts are attributable to these species
being listed and those which will result solely from the designation of
critical habitat. The following specific circumstances in this case
help to inform our evaluation: (1) The essential physical or biological
features identified for critical habitat are the same features
essential for the life requisites of the species and (2) any actions
that would likely adversely affect the essential physical or biological
features of occupied critical habitat are also likely to adversely
affect these species. The IEM outlines our rationale concerning this
limited distinction between baseline conservation efforts and
incremental impacts of the designation of critical habitat for these
species. This evaluation of the incremental effects has been used as
the basis to evaluate the probable incremental economic impacts of this
proposed designation of critical habitat.
Approximately 1,462 ac (592 ha) in two units in Monroe County,
Florida, are being proposed for designation as critical habitat for the
Big Pine partridge pea. Both units are occupied by the Big Pine
partridge pea. Approximately 1,379 ac (558 ha) in one unit in Monroe
County, Florida, is being proposed for designation as critical habitat
for the wedge spurge; the unit is occupied by the species.
Approximately 5,090 ac (2,060 ha) in five units in Monroe and Miami-
Dade Counties, Florida, are being proposed for designation as critical
habitat for sand flax. All five units are occupied by sand flax.
Approximately 16,635 ac (6,732 ha) in 13 units in Miami-Dade and Monroe
Counties, Florida, are being proposed for designation as critical
habitat for the Blodgett's silverbush. All 13 units are occupied by the
Blodgett's silverbush. Land ownership across the units for all four
plants includes Federal lands (64 percent), State of Florida lands (17
percent), county lands (12 percent), and private lands (7 percent).
Approximately 83 percent of the total proposed designated critical
habitat area for all four plants overlaps with existing designated
critical habitat for other species.
Because all of the area proposed for designation is occupied, most
actions that may affect these species would also affect designated
critical habitat, and it is unlikely that any additional conservation
efforts would be recommended to address the adverse modification
standard over and above those recommended as necessary to avoid
jeopardizing the continued existence of these four plants. Therefore,
only administrative costs are expected in the proposed critical habitat
designation. While the analysis for adverse modification of critical
habitat will require time and resources by both the Federal action
agency and the Service, it is believed that, in most circumstances,
these costs would predominantly be administrative in nature and would
not be significant.
The economic costs of critical habitat designation for these
species will most likely be limited to additional administrative
efforts to consider adverse modification in section 7 consultations.
This finding is based on the following factors: (1) All of the proposed
critical habitat units for the four plants are considered occupied by
the species; (2) A number of additional baseline protections exist for
the species due to the presence of other listed species and designated
critical habitats, with approximately 83 percent of the proposed
critical habitat overlapping with designated critical habitat for other
pine rockland habitat species; and (3) A number of management plans and
conservation plans also provide baseline protections to the species in
proposed critical habitat areas. Additionally, if we finalize critical
habitat to include areas that are unoccupied by the Big Pine partridge
pea, wedge spurge, and sand flax, those areas under consideration
wholly overlap with other federally listed species or designated
critical habitat for other listed species. Accordingly, the costs
associated with designation of unoccupied areas would also likely be
limited to additional administrative efforts to consider adverse
modification in section 7 consultations.
In total, approximately 2 formal consultations, 39 informal
consultations, and 2 technical assistance efforts that will include
these species are anticipated to occur during the next 10 years in
proposed critical habitat
[[Page 62528]]
areas, with costs to the Service and action agencies of approximately
$11,500 annually. Although the specific geographic distribution of
these costs is uncertain, it appears likely that most costs would occur
in the ENP unit, which comprises 46 percent of proposed critical
habitat for these four plants. Any costs that would be associated with
unoccupied critical habitat would not significantly increase this
amount.
Potential private property value effects are possible due to public
perception of impacts to private lands. The designation of critical
habitat may cause some developers or landowners to perceive those
private lands will be subject to use restrictions or litigation from
third parties, resulting in costs. However, any costs associated with
public perception are speculative and not possible to quantify.
Further, only seven percent of the proposed critical habitat
designation is privately owned land, leading to, at most, nominal
incremental costs potentially arising from changes in public perception
of lands included in the designation.
The total annual incremental costs of critical habitat designation
for these four plants are anticipated to be approximately $11,500 per
year, and economic benefits are also anticipated to be small.
Therefore, critical habitat designation for these four plants is
unlikely to generate costs or benefits exceeding $100 million in a
single year, and this proposed rule is unlikely to meet the threshold
for an economically significant rule, with regard to costs under E.O.
12866.
We are soliciting data and comments from the public on the DEA
discussed above, as well as on all aspects of this proposed rule and
our required determinations. During the development of a final
designation, we will consider the information presented in the DEA and
any additional information on economic impacts we receive during the
public comment period to determine whether any specific areas should be
considered for exclusion from the final critical habitat designation
under authority of section 4(b)(2) and our implementing regulations at
50 CFR 424.19. We may exclude an area from critical habitat if we
determine that the benefits of excluding the area outweigh the benefits
of including the area, provided the exclusion will not result in the
extinction of this species.
Exclusions
Exclusions Based on Economic Impacts
Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we consider the economic impacts
of specifying any particular area as critical habitat. In order to
consider ec
[…truncated; see source link]Indexed from Federal Register on October 14, 2022.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.