Quiero saber acerca de...

jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES

43112

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 149 / Friday, August 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
Twenty-two running buffalo clover populations are currently under agreements that provide for ongoing management to maintain suitable habitat for running buffalo clover and adequately address or eliminate threats to those populations. While we acknowledge that delisting criterion 3
has not been fully met in the manner specifically identified in the recovery plan, we conclude that the intent of the criterion to ensure that sufficient populations are protected from threats into the foreseeable future has been met.
Additionally, the discovery of new populations at unmanaged sites indicates that the species does not wholly rely on management to maintain populations as we believed when the recovery criterion was drafted. Based on this information, we conclude that running buffalo clover has recovered and no longer meets the definition of an endangered or threatened species.
19 Comment: Two peer reviewers and a commenter identified nonnative invasive species as an ongoing threat to running buffalo clover that requires management, and these commenters specifically identified Japanese stiltgrass as causing declines of running buffalo clover.
Response: As discussed in the proposed listing rule and this final rule, nonnative invasive species, including Japanese stiltgrass, are present at several running buffalo clover sites. The management agreements in place for running buffalo clover include management actions to address nonnative invasive species, including Japanese stiltgrass. In addition, the PDM
plan provides for monitoring for the presence of nonnative invasive species at running buffalo clover sites.
Monitoring includes recording the level of severity of nonnative invasive species to prioritize sites for future monitoring.
20 Comment: One peer reviewer and three commenters expressed concern that running buffalo clover would no longer receive management or monitoring and that funding for efforts to maintain proper habitat conditions would not be available after delisting.
Response: The populations that are under management agreements will continue to receive management to address site-specific threats and habitat needs, and we do not expect delisting will alter the ability of partner agencies to continue funding and implementing management agreements for running buffalo clover. Several States have indicated that they will continue to protect and manage running buffalo clover populations under existing State regulations. If unforeseen threats arise that are determined to endanger or
VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:05 Aug 05, 2021

Jkt 253001

threaten the long-term viability of running buffalo clover such that it meets the definition of a threatened or endangered species, we can use our authorities under section 4 the Act, including the emergency listing authorities at section 4b7, to relist the species as appropriate.
21 Comment: One peer reviewer and several commenters expressed concern that many populations of running buffalo clover are not stable or secure and that the species recovery is a result of more surveys.
Response: Many populations of running buffalo clover have been discovered since 2007, with 175 extant populations known now compared to 102 in 2007. Seventy-six percent of the populations extant in 2007 were increasing or stable in 2016, indicating those populations are not in decline.
With 22 populations now under management agreements and another 66
populations occurring on publicly owned lands, threats to the species have been reduced or are being adequately managed such that they are not affecting the species viability. Based on this information, we conclude that running buffalo clover has recovered and no longer meets the definition of an endangered or threatened species.
22 Comment: One commenter stated that the methods for assessing viability prescribed in the Recovery Plan do not address the stress caused by invasion of exotic species or other emerging or impending factors that might impair the viability of the species.
Response: The PVA is just one factor used to consider the current trend of the species and whether it is declining, stable, or increasing. The PVA provides a guide in determining the minimum number of needed populations, as well as the size and physical distribution of those populations, and is only one part of the recovery criteria. In addition, recovery criterion 3 addresses habitatbased threats, such as nonnative invasive species. The 22 populations that have management agreements will be protected from the threat of succession by implementation of various management or disturbance actions to reset succession. The management agreements also include actions to address the threats of nonnative invasive species.
23 Comment: One commenter stated that populations in West Virginia are extensive and cover a wide range of habitat conditions, indicating that running buffalo clover may not be as limited in habitat requirements.
Response: Running buffalo clover populations in West Virginia are larger in quantity and area and occur in a
PO 00000

Frm 00038

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

wider range of habitat types than populations in other States. We note that all habitats are subject to succession, requiring periodic natural disturbance or targeted management to continue to maintain viable running buffalo clover populations.
24 Comment: One commenter stated that running buffalo clover was once widespread and abundant but most of the historically known sites are now extirpated and the species survives in a fraction of its former range.
Response: Running buffalo clover was not known historically as widespread and abundant. Fewer than 30 sites were known in 8 States, including 2
specimens from Arkansas and 1 from Kansas Brooks 1983. Although most of these historically known sites are extirpated, 175 extant running buffalo clover sites are now known across most of its historical range in 6 States.
25 Comment: One commenter stated that, although more than 150
occurrences are now known, the vast majority of those are very small and not ranked as good occurrences.
Response: Delisting criterion 1 states that 34 populations, in total, are distributed as follows: 2 A-ranked, 6 Branked, 6 C-ranked, and 20 D-ranked populations across at least 2 of the 3
regions in which running buffalo clover occurs Appalachian, Bluegrass, and Ozark. The number of populations in each rank is based on what would be required to achieve a 95 percent probability of the persistence within the next 20 years.
Populations are currently distributed as follows: 18 A-ranked, 47 B-ranked, 40
C-ranked, and 70 D-ranked. Although approximately two-thirds of running buffalo clover populations are ranked as C or D 99 or few rooted crowns or 33
or fewer crowns, respectively, delisting criterion 1 has been substantially exceeded. We conclude that a sufficient number of populations across the range of the species will continue to be viable over the foreseeable future; thus, we determine that the species no longer meets the Acts definitions of an endangered species or a threatened species.
26 Comment: One commenter expressed concern that small patches have a high probability of becoming extirpated and will not naturally recover without active restoration and management.
Response: Smaller populations may have a greater probability of becoming extirpated, but that does not indicate that all small populations will eventually become extirpated. Some small populations have continued to persist for years.

E:FRFM06AUR1.SGM

06AUR1