Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES

43106

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 149 / Friday, August 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
endangered species as a species that is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range, and a threatened species as a species that is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. The Act requires that we determine whether any species is an endangered species or a threatened species because of any of the following factors:
A The present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range;
B Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes;
C Disease or predation;
D The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or E Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence.
These factors represent broad categories of natural or human-caused actions or conditions that could have an effect on a species continued existence.
In evaluating these actions and conditions, we look for those that may have a negative effect on individuals of the species, as well as other actions or conditions that may ameliorate any negative effects or may have positive effects.
We must consider these same five factors in delisting a species. According to 50 CFR 424.11e, we shall delist a species if the best scientific and commercial data available indicate that:
1 The species is extinct; 2 the species does not meet the definition of an endangered species or a threatened species; or 3 the listed entity does not meet the statutory definition of a species.
We use the term threat to refer in general to actions or conditions that are known to or are reasonably likely to negatively affect individuals of a species. The term threat includes actions or conditions that have a direct impact on individuals direct impacts, as well as those that affect individuals through alteration of their habitat or required resources stressors. The term threat may encompasseither together or separatelythe source of the action or condition or the action or condition itself.
However, the mere identification of any threats does not necessarily mean that the species meets the statutory definition of an endangered species or a threatened species. In determining whether a species meets either definition, we must evaluate all identified threats by considering the expected response by the species, and the effects of the threatsin light of
VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:05 Aug 05, 2021

Jkt 253001

those actions and conditions that will ameliorate the threatson an individual, population, and species level. We evaluate each threat and its expected effects on the species, then analyze the cumulative effect of all of the threats on the species as a whole.
We also consider the cumulative effect of the threats in light of those actions and conditions that will have positive effects on the speciessuch as any existing regulatory mechanisms or conservation efforts. The Secretary determines whether the species meets the definition of an endangered species or a threatened species only after conducting this cumulative analysis and describing the expected effect on the species now and in the foreseeable future.
The Act does not define the term foreseeable future, which appears in the statutory definition of threatened species. Our implementing regulations at 50 CFR 424.11d set forth a framework for evaluating the foreseeable future on a case-by-case basis. The term foreseeable future extends only so far into the future as we can reasonably determine that both the future threats and the species responses to those threats are likely. In other words, the foreseeable future is the period of time in which we can make reliable predictions. Reliable does not mean certain; it means sufficient to provide a reasonable degree of confidence in the prediction. Thus, a prediction is reliable if it is reasonable to depend on it when making decisions.
It is not always possible or necessary to define foreseeable future as a particular number of years. Analysis of the foreseeable future uses the best scientific and commercial data available and should consider the timeframes applicable to the relevant threats and to the species likely responses to those threats in view of its life-history characteristics. Data that are typically relevant to assessing the species biological response include speciesspecific factors such as lifespan, reproductive rates or productivity, certain behaviors, and other demographic factors.
Summary of Biological Status and Threats In this section, we review the biological condition of the species and its resources, and the influences to assess the species overall viability and the risks to that viability.
Habitat Destruction and Succession The revised recovery plan for running buffalo clover Service 2007, p. 14
identified the major threats to this
PO 00000

Frm 00032

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

species throughout its range as habitat destruction, habitat succession, and invasive plant competition Factor A.
Land development and the consequential loss of habitat can also be a threat to running buffalo clover.
Natural succession from open to dense canopy in forests within the range of running buffalo clover occurs over a 30to 40-year time span, depending on the dominant species and aspect of the site.
Because the species relies on periodic disturbances to set back succession and/
or open the tree canopy to create and maintain the partial to filtered sunlight it requires, activities that interfere with natural disturbance processes can negatively affect populations of running buffalo clover. Conversely, activities that periodically set back natural succession can benefit the species.
Current logging practices may benefit running buffalo clover. At the Fernow Experimental Forest in north-central West Virginia, running buffalo clover is most often associated with skid roads in uneven-aged silvicultural areas Madarish and Schuler 2002, p. 121.
Populations may initially decrease after logging, but then rebound to higher than pre-disturbance levels Madarish and Schuler 2002, p. 127.
Depending on the circumstances, it appears that both overgrazing and no grazing at all can be threats to running buffalo clover. In Kentucky, overgrazing poses threats to running buffalo clover, but removal of cattle from clover populations has resulted in overshading and competition from other vegetation White et al. 1999, p. 10. Periodic grazing at the Bluegrass Army Depot has provided the moderate disturbance needed to maintain running buffalo clover Fields and White 1996, p. 14.
Nonnative species, such as bluegrass Poa pratensis and white clover Trifolium repens, compete with running buffalo clover for available resources Jacobs and Bartgis 1987, p.
441. Other nonnative species that affect running buffalo clover include Japanese stiltgrass, garlic mustard Alliaria petiolata, Japanese honeysuckle Lonicera japonica, Amur honeysuckle Lonicera maackii, and multiflora rose Rosa multiflora. Threats by invasive competition can be mediated by treating the invasive plants by hand removal, herbicide application, and/or mowing.
Although nonnative species are widespread across the range of running buffalo clover, not all running buffalo clover sites are affected by invasive species. For example, 14 of the 31 sites 45 percent in Ohio have one or more nonnative species present at varying densities, and 8 of those sites are managed for invasive species control.

E:FRFM06AUR1.SGM

06AUR1