2011 Federal Register, 76 FR 45078; Centralized Library: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - Federal Register, Volume 76 Issue 144 (Wednesday, July 27, 2011)

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 144 (Wednesday, July 27, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 45078-45128]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-18428]

[[Page 45077]]

Vol. 76

Wednesday,

No. 144

July 27, 2011

Part IV

Department of the Interior

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

Fish and Wildlife Service

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

50 CFR Part 17

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical
Habitat for Ipomopsis polyantha (Pagosa skyrocket), Penstemon debilis
(Parachute beardtongue), and Phacelia submutica (DeBeque phacelia);
Proposed Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2011 /
Proposed Rules

[[Page 45078]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[Docket No. FWS-R6-ES-2011-0040; MO 92210-0-0009]
RIN 1018-AX75

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of
Critical Habitat for Ipomopsis polyantha (Pagosa skyrocket), Penstemon
debilis (Parachute beardtongue), and Phacelia submutica (DeBeque
phacelia)

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 Ipomopsis polyantha (Pagosa skyrocket),
Penstemon debilis (Parachute beardtongue), and Phacelia submutica
(DeBeque phacelia) under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended
(Act). Approximately 9,894 acres (4,004 hectares) are being proposed
for designation as critical habitat for I. polyantha. Approximately
19,155 acres (7,752 hectares) are being proposed for designation as
critical habitat for P. debilis. Approximately 24,987 acres (10,112
hectares) are being proposed for designation as critical habitat for P.
submutica. In total, approximately 54,036 acres (21,868 hectares) are
being proposed for designation as critical habitat for the three
species. The proposed critical habitat is located in Archuleta,
Garfield, and Mesa Counties, Colorado.

DATES: We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before
September 26, 2011. We must receive requests for public hearings, in
writing, at the address shown in the ADDRESSES section by September 12,
2011.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. In the Enter Keyword or ID box, enter Docket No.
FWS-R6-ES-2011-0040, which is the docket number for this rulemaking.
Then, in the Search panel at the top of the screen, under the Document
Type heading, check the box next to Proposed Rules to locate this
document. You may submit a comment by clicking on ``Submit a Comment.''
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R6-ES-2011-0040; Division of Policy and
Directives Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax
Drive, MS 2042-PDM; Arlington, VA 22203.
We will not accept e-mail or faxed comments. We will post all
comments on http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we
will post any personal information you provide us (see the Public
Comments section below for more information).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Allan Pfister, Western Colorado
Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Western Colorado Ecological
Services Office, 764 Horizon Drive, Suite B, Grand Junction, CO 81506-
3946; telephone 970-243-2778; facsimile 970-245-6933. If you use a
telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Comments

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 concerned government agencies, the
scientific community, industry, or any other interested party
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 whether there are threats to the species from human
activity, the degree of which can be expected to increase due to the
designation, and whether that increase in threat outweighs the benefit
of designation such that the designations of critical habitat may not
be prudent;
(2) Specific information on:
(a) The amount and distribution of Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon
debilis, and Phacelia submutica habitat;
(b) What areas, that are occupied and that contain features
essential to the conservation of these species, should be included in
the designation and why;
(c) 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;
(d) What areas not occupied at the time of listing are essential
for the conservation of the species and why; and
(e) Means to quantify the amount of natural and human-caused
disturbance these species prefer or can tolerate.
(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 Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia
submutica and proposed critical habitat.
(5) Any probable economic, national security, or other relevant
impacts of designating any area that may be included in the final
designation; in particular, any impacts on small entities or families,
and the benefits of including or excluding areas that exhibit these
impacts.
(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, especially the Mount Callahan and Mount Callahan
Saddle Natural Areas for Penstemon debilis, 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.
(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.
You may submit your comments and materials concerning this proposed
rule by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. We will not
accept comments sent by e-mail or fax or to an address not listed in
the ADDRESSES section. We will post your entire comment--including your
personal identifying information--on http://www.regulations.gov. You
may request at the top of your document that we withhold personal
information such as your street address, phone number, or e-mail
address from public review; however, we cannot guarantee that we will
be able to do so.
Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting
documentation we used in preparing this proposed rule, will be
available for public inspection on http://www.regulations.gov, or by
appointment, during normal business hours, at the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Western Colorado Ecological Services Office (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

Background

It is our intent to discuss only those topics directly relevant to
the designation of critical habitat in this proposed rule. For more
information on Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia
submutica, refer to the proposed rule published in the Federal Register
on June 23, 2010 (75

[[Page 45079]]

FR 35721) or the final listing rule that is published in the Rules and
Regulations section of today's Federal Register. See also the
discussion of habitat in the ``Physical and Biological Features''
section below. Please note that we have used scientific names for rare
species, because oftentimes these names are better known than the
common names; and, we have used common names for species that are
better known and where the common name may be easier for the reader to
understand. In this rule we used scientific names for rare species,
because where a common name is less standardized, the scientific name
avoids confusion.
Ipomopsis polyantha is a biennial (living only 2 years) or short-
lived perennial (living for more than 2 years) herb in the
Polemoniaceae (phlox) family that has white flowers flecked with purple
dots; it flowers only once before dying. Penstemon debilis is a long-
lived perennial herb in the Plantaginaceae (plantain) family that grows
along the ground and has purple flowers. Phacelia submutica is a very
small annual (living only one season) herb in the Hydrophyllaceae
(waterleaf) family with small white flowers that are hidden within the
leaves of the plant.

Geographic Range, Habitat, and Threats

Ipomopsis polyantha is known from only two populations in Archuleta
County, Colorado. A minimum convex polygon (enclosing all the points to
create a convex polygon with no concave areas) around both populations
encloses an area of 13,825 acres (ac) (5,595 hectares (ha)) and
measures 13 miles (mi) (21 kilometers km)) in length and 3 mi (5 km) in
width. The total footprint of area actually occupied by plants is 388.4
ac (157.1 ha), of which 86.4 percent is on private lands, 9.1 percent
is on highway right-of-ways (ROWs), 1.9 percent is on lands managed by
the Town of Pagosa Springs, and 2.5 percent is on lands managed by the
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) (Service 2011a, p. 2). Between the
actual occupied areas there are interspaces of unoccupied habitat, so
the acreage occupied by the species including these interspaces is
larger than the acres listed above. We roughly estimate there are
roughly 340,000 I. polyantha individuals (Service 2011b, p. 1). The
plant is specific to Mancos shale soils at elevations of 6,725 to 7,776
feet (ft) (2,050 to 2,370 meters (m)) () (Service 2011c, p. 1). Plants
are found in sparsely vegetated areas along the margins of Pinus
ponderosa (Ponderosa pine) forests and extending into the adjacent
grassland or shrublands. The species' highly restricted soil
requirements and geographic range make it particularly susceptible to
extinction at any time due to commercial, municipal, and residential
development; associated road and utility improvements and maintenance;
heavy livestock use; inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms;
fragmented habitat; and prolonged drought. Eighty-six percent of the
species' occupied habitat is on private land with no limits on
development.
Penstemon debilis is known from only six populations on the Roan
Plateau escarpment in Garfield County, Colorado. A minimum convex
polygon around all six populations encloses an area of 7,161 ac (2,898
ha) and measures 18 mi (29 km) in length and 1 mi (2 km) in width. The
total footprint of area actually occupied by the plants is 91.8 ac
(37.2 ha), of which 66.6 percent is on private lands, and 33.3 percent
is on lands managed by the BLM (Service 2011a, p. 3). Between the
actual occupied areas there are interspaces of unoccupied habitat, so
the acreage occupied by the species including these interspaces is
quite a bit larger than the acres listed above. We roughly estimate
there are 4,100 P. debilis individuals (Service 2011b, p. 2). The plant
is specific to oil shale cliffs of the Parachute Creek Member and the
Lower Part of the Green River Formation at elevations of 5,600 to 9,229
ft (1,707 to 2,813 m) (Service 2011c, p. 2; Tweto 1979). Plants are
found on unstable shale soils with little other vegetation. The other
vegetation comprises primarily other plant species endemic (known only)
to the oil shale. Extremely low numbers and a highly restricted
geographic range make the species particularly susceptible to becoming
endangered in the forseeable future. Threats to the species and its
habitat include energy development, road maintenance, inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms, and stochastic events.
Phacelia submutica is known from 9 populations (and 22 occurrences)
centered on the town of DeBeque in Mesa and Garfield Counties,
Colorado. A minimum convex polygon around all nine populations encloses
an area of 82,231 ac (34,896 ha) and measures 19 mi (30 km) in length
and 11 mi (17 km) in width. The total footprint of area actually
occupied by the plants is 625.9 ac (253.3 ha), of which 80.9 percent is
on lands managed by the BLM, 11.9 percent is on private lands, 6.4
percent is on lands managed by the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), and 0.7
percent is on lands managed by the Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW)
(Service 2011a, pp. 6-7). Between the actual occupied areas there are
interspaces of unoccupied habitat, so the acreage occupied by the
species including these interspaces is quite a bit larger than the
acres listed above. We estimate there may be as many as 68,000 P.
submutica individuals in years when climatic conditions are favorable
(Service 2011b, p. 4). The plant is known only from clay soils on the
Atwell and Shire members of the Wasatch Formation at elevations of
5,080 to 7,100 ft (1,548 to 2,157 m) (Service 2011c, p. 3). The plants
are found on clay barrens with little other vegetation. Surrounding
these barren areas is a landscape of Juniperus spp. (juniper),
Artemisia spp. (sagebrush), Atriplex spp. (saltbush), and nonnative
invasive Bromus tectorum (cheatgrass). The current range of P.
submutica is subject to human-caused modifications from natural gas
exploration and production with associated expansion of pipelines,
roads, and utilities; development within the Westwide Energy Corridor;
increased access to the habitat by off-highway vehicles (OHVs); soil
and seed disturbance by livestock and other disturbances; and the
inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms.
Previous Federal Actions
A complete description of previous Federal actions for Ipomopsis
polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia submutica is included in the
final listing rule published concurrently with this proposal to
designate critical habitat. On June 23, 2010, we proposed to list I.
polyantha as an endangered species and we proposed to list P. debilis
and P. submutica as threatened species under the Act (75 FR 35721).

Critical Habitat

Background
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.
(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.

[[Page 45080]]

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 insure, 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. Such designation does not allow the government
or public to access private lands. Such designation does not require
implementation of restoration, recovery, or enhancement measures by
non-Federal landowners. Where a landowner seeks or requests Federal
agency funding or authorization for an action that may affect a listed
species or critical habitat, the consultation requirements of section
7(a)(2) would apply, but even in the event of a destruction or adverse
modification finding, the obligation of the Federal action agency and
the landowner is not to restore or recover the species, but to
implement reasonable and prudent alternatives to avoid destruction or
adverse modification of critical habitat.
For inclusion in a critical habitat designation, the habitat within
the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it was listed
must contain physical and biological features which are essential to
the conservation of the species and which may require special
management considerations or protection. Critical habitat designations
identify, to the extent known using the best scientific and commercial
data available, those physical and biological features that are
essential to the conservation of the species (such as space, food,
cover, and protected habitat), focusing on the principal biological or
physical constituent elements (primary constituent elements) within an
area that are essential to the conservation of the species (such as
roost sites, nesting grounds, seasonal wetlands, water quality, tide,
soil type). Primary constituent elements are the elements of physical
and biological features that, when laid out in the appropriate quantity
and spatial arrangement to provide for a species' life-history
processes, are essential to the conservation of the species.
Under the Act, 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. We designate critical habitat in areas outside the
geographical area occupied by a species only when a designation limited
to its current range would be inadequate to ensure the conservation of
the species. When the best available scientific data do not demonstrate
that the conservation needs of the species require such additional
areas, we will not designate critical habitat in areas outside the
geographical area occupied by the species. An area currently occupied
by the species but that was not occupied at the time of listing may,
however, be essential to the conservation of the species and may be
included in the critical habitat designation.
Section 4 of the Act requires that we designate critical habitat on
the basis of the best scientific and commercial data available.
Further, our Policy on Information Standards under the 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 developed during the listing process for the species.
Additional information sources may include the recovery plan for the
species, articles in peer-reviewed journals, conservation plans
developed by States and counties, scientific status surveys and
studies, biological evaluations or National Environmental Policy Act
documents, or other unpublished materials and expert opinion or
personal knowledge. In this case, we do not yet have recovery plans for
these species.
Habitat is dynamic, and species may move from one area to another
over time. Climate change will be a particular challenge for
biodiversity because the interaction of additional stressors associated
with climate change and current stressors may push species beyond their
ability to survive (Lovejoy 2005, pp. 325-326). The synergistic
implications of climate change and habitat fragmentation are the most
threatening facet of climate change for biodiversity (Hannah et al.
2005, p. 4). The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was
established in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization and the
United Nations Environment Program in response to growing concerns
about climate change and, in particular, the effects of global warming.
The IPCC has concluded that the warming of the climate system is
unequivocal, as evidenced from observations of increases in global
average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice,
and rising global average sea level (IPCC 2007, pp. 6, 30; Karl et al.
2009, p. 17). Changes in the global climate system during the 21st
century are likely to be larger than those observed during the 20th
century (IPCC 2007, p. 19). Several scenarios are virtually certain or
very likely to occur in the 21st century including: (1) Over most land,
there will be warmer and fewer cold days and nights, and warmer and
more frequent hot days and nights; (2) areas affected by drought will
increase; and (3) the frequency of warm spells and heat waves over most
land areas will likely increase (IPCC 2007, pp. 13, 53).
The IPCC predicts that the resiliency of many ecosystems is likely
to be exceeded this century by an unprecedented combination of climate
change, associated disturbances (e.g., flooding, drought, wildfire, and
insects), and other global drivers (IPCC 2007, pp. 31-33). With medium
confidence, IPCC predicts that approximately 20 to 30 percent of plant
and animal species assessed by the IPCC so far are likely to be at an
increased risk of extinction if increases in global average temperature
exceed 3 to 5 [deg]Fahrenheit (F) (1.5 to 2.5 [ordm]Celsius (C)) (IPCC
2007, p. 48). Plant species with restricted ranges that also are
climatically limited may experience population declines as a result of
climate change (Schwartz and Brigham 2003, p. 11).
Regional projections indicate the Southwest, including western
Colorado,

[[Page 45081]]

may experience the greatest temperature increase of any area in the
lower 48 States (IPCC 2007, p. 30). Drought probability is predicted to
increase in the Southwest (Karl et al. 2009, pp. 129-134), with summers
warming more than winters, and annual temperature increasing
approximately 4 [deg]F (2.2 [deg]C) by 2050 (Ray et al. 2008, p. 29).
Additionally, the number of days over 90 [deg]F (32 [deg]C) could
double by the end of the century (Karl et al. 2009, p. 34). Projections
also show declines in snowpack across the West with the most dramatic
declines at lower elevations (below 8,200 ft (2,500 m)) (Ray et al.
2008, p. 29). A 10 to 30 percent decrease in precipitation in mid-
latitude western North America is projected by the year 2050, based on
an ensemble of 12 climate models (Milly et al. 2005, p. 1). Overall,
future projections for the Southwest include increased temperatures;
more intense and longer-lasting heat waves; and increased probability
of drought exacerbated by higher temperatures, heavier downpours,
increased flooding, and increased erosion (Karl et al. 2009, pp. 129-
134).
To obtain climate projections specific to the range of the three
plant species of interest, we used a statistically downscaled model
from the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) for a region
covering western Colorado. The resulting projections indicate that
temperature could increase an average of 4.5 [deg]F (2.5 [deg]C) by
2050 with the following seasonal increases: Summer (July to September)
+ 5.0 [deg]F (2.8 [deg]C); fall (October to December) + 4.0 [deg]F (2.2
[deg]C); winter (January to March) + 4.1 [deg]F (2.3 [deg]C); and
spring (April to June) + 4.5 [deg]F (2.5 [deg]C) (University
Corporation of Atmospheric Research (UCAR) 2009, pp. 1-14). In western
Colorado, multi-model averages show a shift toward increased winter
precipitation and decreased spring and summer precipitation by the end
of the century (Ray et al. 2008, p. 34; Karl et al. 2009, p. 30).
Similarly, the NCAR results show the highest probability of a 7.5
percent increase in average winter precipitation; an 11.4 percent
decrease in average spring precipitation; a 2.1 percent decrease in
average summer precipitation; and a 1.3 percent increase in average
fall precipitation with an overall very slight decrease in 2050 (UCAR
2009, pp. 1-14).
Over the past 30 years, annual average temperature in west-central
Colorado has increased by 0.9 [deg]C (1.6 [deg]F) and in the greater
Pagosa Springs area temperature has increased 1.1 [deg]C (1.9 [deg]F)
(Ray et al. 2008, p. 10). In Colorado, high variability in annual
precipitation (because of the extreme changes in elevation) precludes
detection of long-term trends at the local levels (Ray et al. 2008, p.
5). Only general assumptions and predictions can be made from these
data. To examine local climate trends, we gathered temperature and
precipitation data from the last 100 years at five weather stations
(High Plains Regional Climate Center 2011, pp. 1-34; Service 2011d, pp.
1-72) in the vicinity of the three plant species (table 1). These data
appear to be consistent with local trends in temperature discussed in
the models above. Change in temperature averaged across the weather
stations is approximately 1.68 [deg]F (0.93 [deg]C); change in
temperature per century averaged across the weather stations is
approximately 2.06 [deg]F (1.14 [deg]C). As noted previously,
precipitation is variable across these weather stations and trend
cannot be reasonably determined.

Table 1--Climate Trends at Select Weather Stations
[1890s-2010].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parachute (Grand Pagosa
Altenbern Collbran Valley) Palisade springs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species in Vicinity..................... Penstemon Phacelia Penstemon debilis; Penstemon Ipomopsis
debilis; submutica Phacelia submutica debilis; polyantha
Phacelia Phacelia
submutica submutica
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TEMPERATURE ([deg]F)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Data Period(s)\1\....................... 1958-2010 1900-1966; 1904-1914; 1965- 1911-2010 1906-1917;
1970-1976; 1981 1928-1932;
1978-1999 1934-1998
Change in Average Annual Temperature +1.79 +1.45 +.76 +2.9 +1.48
([deg]F)...............................
Approximate Change in Temperature per +3.37 +1.46 +.97 +2.9 +1.59
Century ([deg]F).......................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRECIPITATION (inches)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Data Period(s)\1\....................... 1947-2010 1893-1966; 1904-1914; 1965- 1911-1919; 1906-1917;
1970-1976; 1981 1922-2010 1928-1932;
1978-1999 1934-1998
Change in Average Annual Precipitation +1.76 +1.49 -4.06 +1.77 -2.59
(inches)...............................
Approximate Change in Precipitation per +2.84 +1.41 -5.2 +1.77 -2.79
Century (inches).......................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ As indicated by time periods, data gaps exist for some weather stations.
\2\ Data for some years is partial (less than 12 months of data); e.g., data collection may have begun in
September, or weather station was nonfunctioning for a period of time.

Recent analyses of long-term data sets show accelerating rates of
climate change over the past 2 or 3 decades, indicating that the
extension of plant and animal species' geographic range boundaries
towards the poles or to higher elevations by progressive establishment
of new local occurrences will become increasingly apparent in the short
term (Hughes 2000, p. 60). Climate change may exacerbate the frequency
and intensity of droughts in this area and result in reduced species'
viability as the dry years become more common. Under drought
conditions, plants generally are less vigorous and less successful in
reproduction and may require several years to recover following drought
(Weltzin et al. 2003, p. 946). With small populations and their
inherent risk of genetic

[[Page 45082]]

complications, lowered reproduction could result in reduced population
viability (Newman and Pilson 1997, pp. 354-362).
Climate modeling at this time has not been refined to a level that
we can predict the amount of temperature and precipitation change
locally within the limited range of Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon
debilis, or Phacelia submutica. Therefore, we generally address what
could happen based on current climate predictions for the region.
The limited geographic range of the Mancos shale substrate that
underlies the entire Ipomopsis polyantha habitat likely limits the
ability of the species to adapt by shifting its range in response to
climatic conditions. I. polyantha is sensitive to the timing and amount
of moisture due to its biennial life history. Thus, if climate change
results in local drying, the species could experience a reduction in
its reproductive output. In the ``Physical and Biological Features''
section below, we have conservatively adjusted to known elevations
occupied by the species upward and downward 328 ft (100 m) in an
attempt to account for climate change.
It is unknown how Penstemon debilis responds to drought; however,
for most plant species that grow in arid regions, plant numbers
decrease during drought years, but recover in subsequent seasons that
are less dry (Lauenroth et al. 1987, pp. 117-124; McDowell et al. 2008,
pp. 719-739). Drought years could result in a loss of plants. The
limited geographic range of the oil shale substrate that makes up the
entire P. debilis habitat could limit the ability of the species to
adapt to changes in climatic conditions by progressive establishment of
new populations. In the ``Physical and Biological Features'' section
below, we have conservatively adjusted to known elevations occupied by
the species upward and downward 328 ft (100 m) in an attempt to account
for climate change.
Climate change is likely to affect Phacelia submutica because seed
germination, seed dormancy, and persistence of the seed bank are all
directly dependent on precipitation and temperature patterns (Levine et
al. 2008, p. 805). Future changes in the timing of the first major
spring rains each year, and temperatures associated with these rains,
may more strongly affect germination and persistence of ephemeral
annual plants than changes in season-long rainfall (barring severe
droughts) (Levine et al. 2008, p. 805). Increasing environmental
variance might decrease extinction risk for rare desert ephemeral
plants, because these plants typically rely on extremely good years to
restock the persistent seed bank while extremely bad years have little
impact (Meyer et al. 2006, p. 901). A persistent seed bank enables the
species to survive drought. However, extremely long droughts resulting
from climate change, with no good years for replenishing the seed bank,
would likely cause P. submutica to become endangered.
Because the soil can remain bare of Phacelia submutica plants for
several years, it is difficult to identify and protect the seemingly
unoccupied habitat that occurs in small, isolated patches that are
easily destroyed by small-scale disturbances, and can be overlooked
during habitat assessments. The longer the species remains dormant, the
less likely it is that we will know if an area is occupied, reducing
our ability to avoid impacts to the species and protect it from
becoming endangered. While current climate change predictions are not
reliable enough at the local level for us to draw conclusions about its
effects on P. submutica, it is likely that there will be drying trends
in the future and the seeds will remain dormant for long periods. This
would make it increasingly difficult to detect occupied habitat and
avoid destruction of habitat. In the ``Physical and Biological
Features'' section below, we have conservatively adjusted to known
elevations occupied by the species upward and downward 328 ft (100 m)
in an attempt to account for climate change.
We recognize that critical habitat designated at a particular point
in time may not include all of the habitat areas 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 required for
recovery of these three 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 insure their actions are not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened
species, and (3) the penalties and enforcement provisions of section 11
of the Act if the prohibitions of section 9 of the Act have been
violated. 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 this
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 these planning
efforts calls for a different outcome.
Physical and Biological Features
In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) and 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act and
regulations at 50 CFR 424.12, in determining which areas within the
geographical area occupied at the time of listing to designate as
critical habitat, we consider the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the species and which may require
special management considerations or protection. These include, but are
not limited to:
(1) Space for individual and population growth and for normal
behavior;
(2) Food, water, air, light, minerals, or other nutritional or
physiological requirements;
(3) Cover or shelter;
(4) Sites for breeding, reproduction, or rearing (or development)
of offspring; and
(5) Habitats that are protected from disturbance or are
representative of the historical, geographical, and ecological
distributions of a species.
We derive the specific physical and biological features required
for Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia submutica from
studies of these species' habitat, ecology, and life history as
described below. Additional information on these species' habitats,
ecology, and life histories can be found in the final listing rule
published in today's Federal Register.

Ipomopsis polyantha

We have determined that Ipomopsis polyantha requires the following
physical and biological features:

Space for Individual and Population Growth

Plant Community and Competitive Ability--Ipomopsis polyantha is
found on barren shales, or in the open montane grassland (primarily
Festuca arizonica (Arizona fescue)) understory at the edges of open
Pinus ponderosa (Ponderosa pine), Pinus ponderosa and Juniperus
scopulorum (Rocky Mountain juniper), or J. osteosperma (Utah

[[Page 45083]]

juniper) and Quercus gambellii (oak) plant communities (Anderson 2004,
p. 20). Within these plant communities, the plant is found in open or
more sparsely vegetated areas where plant cover is less than 5 or 10
percent, although these interspaces can be small within the greater
plant community (less than 100 ft\2\ (10 m\2\)). Because the plant is
found in these open areas it is thought to be a poor competitor. Dense
stands of nonnative invasive grasses such as Bromus inermis (smooth
brome) appear to almost totally exclude the species (Anderson 2004, p.
36).
Complexity in I. polyantha plant communities is important because
pollinator diversity at I. polyantha sites is higher at more
vegetatively diverse sites (Collins 1995, p. 107). The importance of
pollinators for I. polyantha is further discussed under
``Reproduction'' below. Therefore, based on the information above, we
identify sparsely vegetated, barren shales, Ponderosa pine margins,
Ponderosa pine and juniper, or juniper and oak plant communities to be
a physical or biological feature for this plant. Given that much of the
area where I. polyantha currently exists has already been altered to
some degree, these plant communities may be historical. For example,
the adjacent forest that would have naturally occurred in I. polyantha
habitat may have been thinned or removed. In another example, forage
species may have been planted in habitat that was once more suitable
for I. polyantha.
Elevation--Known populations of Ipomopsis polyantha are found from
6,750 to 7,775 ft (2,050 to 2,370 m) (Service 2011c, p. 1). Because
plants have not been identified outside of this elevation band and
because growing conditions frequently change across elevation
gradients, we have identified elevations from 6,400 to 8,100 ft (1,950
to 2,475 m) to be a physical or biological feature for this plant. We
have extended the elevation range 328 ft (100 m) upward and downward in
an attempt to provide areas where the plant could migrate, given
shifting climates (Callaghan et al. 2004, pp. 418-435; Crimmins et al.
2011, pp. 324-327). We consider this 328 ft (100 m) to be a
conservative allowance since studies elsewhere on climate change
elevational shifts have found more dramatic changes even in the last
century: 95 ft (29 m) upward per decade (Lenoir et al. 2008, pp. 1768-
1770), or an average of 279 ft (85 m) downward since the 1930s
(Crimmins et al. 2011, pp. 324-327). We do not have information
specific to I. polyantha elevational shifts. The above studies were
done in different areas, western Europe and California, and looking at
different species. Mancos shale habitats extend into these higher and
lower elevations.

Food, Water, Air, Light, Minerals, or Other Nutritional or
Physiological Requirements

Soils--Ipomopsis polyantha is found on Mancos shale soils from the
Upper Cretaceous period. These shales comprise a heavy gray clay loam
alluvium (loose, unconsolidated) derived from shale, sandstone, clay,
and residuum that is unconsolidated, weathered mineral material that
has accumulated as consolidated rock and disintegrated in place
(Collins 1995, pp. 2-4). These shale soils do not retain soil moisture
and are difficult for plant survival. I. polyantha seeds grow best when
germinated in these Mancos shale soils (Collins 1995, p. 87). We assume
the soils where I. polyantha are found are among the harshest local
sites for plant growth because of the lack of vegetation at occupied
sites, and because the soils are heavy, droughty, and deficient in
nutrients. Species that occupy such sites have been called ``stress-
tolerators'' (Grime 1977, p. 1196). Because I. polyantha plants are
found only on Mancos shale soils, and because greenhouse trials have
found that seedlings grow best in Mancos shale soils, we have
identified these Mancos shale soils as a physical or biological feature
for this plant.
Climate--Average annual rainfall in Pagosa Springs is 20 inches
(in.) (51 centimeters (cm)) (Anderson 2004, p. 21). Winters are cold
with snow cover commonly present throughout the winter months. Winter
snow is important for preventing severe frost damage to some plants
during the winter months (Bannister et al. 2005, pp. 250-251) and may
be important for Ipomopsis polyantha. Freezing temperatures can occur
into June and even July, indicating that I. polyantha can tolerate
frost because it grows and blooms during this time (Anderson 2004, p.
21). May and June, when I. polyantha blooms, are on average the driest
months of the year (Anderson 2004, p. 21; Service 2011d, p. 52).
Because I. polyantha has evolved in these climatic conditions, we have
roughly identified suitable precipitation; cold, dry springs; and
winter snow as physical or biological features for this plant. These
climatic conditions are influenced, in part, by elevation.

Cover or Shelter

While Ipomopsis polyantha seeds and seedlings certainly require
``safe sites'' for their germination and establishment, these
microclimates are too small to be considered or managed here as a
physical or biological feature for this plant. Safe sites are those
where the appropriate conditions for seedling germination and growth
exist. We believe these features are encompassed in the ``Plant
Community and Competitive Ability'' and ``Soils'' sections discussed
above.

Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, or Rearing (or Development) of
Offspring

Reproduction--Ipomopsis polyantha sets far less fruit when self-
pollinated (2 to 9 percent fruit set [self-pollinated] versus 47
percent fruit set in the presence of pollinator[s]) (Collins 1995, p.
36). Also, male and female reproductive parts are separated both
spatially and temporally (Collins 1995, pp. 34-35). Therefore, we
conclude that pollinators are necessary for the long-term successful
reproduction and conservation of the plant. Over 30 different insects
have been collected visiting I. polyantha flowers (Collins 1995, pp.
47-74). The primary pollinators are all bee species; these include the
nonnative honeybee (Apis mellifera) and native bees that nest in the
ground or twigs including species of Augochlorella (a type of Halictid
or sweat bee), Anthophora (digger bees), Bombus (bumblebee), Dialictus
(another type of Halictid or sweat bee), Megachile (leafcutter bees),
and Lasioglossum (another type of Halictid or sweat bee) (Collins 1995,
p. 71). Most of these pollinators are solitary and do not live
communally, with the exception of the honeybee. Pollinator diversity
was higher at I. polyantha sites with more complex plant communities
(Collins 1995, p. 107). Because the evidence presented above
demonstrates that pollinators are necessary for pollination of I.
polyantha, we have identified pollinators and their associated habitats
as an essential biological feature for this plant.

Habitats Protected From Disturbance or Representative of the
Historical, Geographical, and Ecological Distributions of the Species

Disturbance Regime--The native habitat of Ipomopsis polyantha has
been extensively modified (Anderson 2004, p. 28). The species is
considered a ruderal species, which means it is one of the first plant
species to colonize disturbed lands. Seeds are not thought to disperse
far. Plants are able to colonize nearby disturbed areas quickly. The
species is found in light to moderately disturbed areas, such as rills
(small, narrow, shallow incisions in

[[Page 45084]]

topsoil layers caused by erosion by overland flow or surface runoffs),
areas that are only occasionally disturbed, or areas with previous
disturbances that have been colonized and not subsequently disturbed
(i.e., previously cleared areas that have had some time to recover)
(Anderson 2004, p. 23; 75 FR 35724-35726). Some of these disturbances
are now maintained or created by human activities (such as light
grazing or the recolonization of Mancos shale substrate roads that are
no longer used) that mimic the constant erosion that occurs on the
highly erosive Mancos shale soils and seem to maintain I. polyantha at
a site. I. polyantha sites with constant or repetitive disturbance,
especially sites with constant heavy grazing or repeated mowing, have
been lost (Mayo 2008, pp. 1-2). Fire also may have played a role in
maintaining open habitats and disturbances for I. polyantha in the past
(Anderson 2004, p. 22), as it historically did in all Ponderosa pine
forests across the West (USFS 2000, p. 97).
Interestingly, Ipomopsis polyantha individuals at newly disturbed
sites were slightly more likely to self-pollinate than were plants in
later successional areas (Collins 1995, p. 99), demonstrating that
disturbance is important enough to I. polyantha that it may influence
reproductive success (self-pollinated individuals are less
reproductively successful) and possibly genetic diversity (self-
pollination leads to lowered genetic diversity). Managing for an
appropriate disturbance type and/or level can be difficult since we
lack research to better quantify these measures. In this document we
use qualitative terms, but specifically solicit further input on
methods or mechanisms that can better quantify or describe these
measures. Because I. polyantha is found only within areas with light to
moderate or discontinuous disturbances, we have identified the
disturbance regime to be a physical or biological feature for this
plant.

Penstemon debilis

We have determined that Penstemon debilis requires the following
physical and biological features:

Space for Individual and Population Growth

Plant Community and Competitive Ability--Penstemon debilis is found
on steep, constantly shifting shale cliffs with little vegetation. The
decline or loss of several populations has been attributed to
encroaching vegetation; therefore, it is assumed that P. debilis is a
poor competitor (McMullen 1998, p. 72). The areas where P. debilis are
found are characterized as ``Rocky Mountain cliff and canyon''
(Southwest Regional Gap Analysis Project 2004). The plant community
where P. debilis is found is unique, because instead of being dominated
by one or two common species as most plant communities are, it has a
high diversity of uncommon species that also are oil shale endemics
(McMullen 1998, p. 5). These uncommon species include Mentzelia
rhizomata (Roan Cliffs blazingstar), Thalictrum heliophilum (sun-loving
meadowrue), Astragalus lutosus (dragon milkvetch), and the somewhat
more common Lesquerella parviflora (Piceance bladderpod), Penstemon
osterhoutii (Osterhout's beardtongue), and Festuca dasyclada (Utah or
oil shale fescue) (McMullen 1998, p. 5). More common species include
Holodiscus discolor (oceanspray), Penstemon caespitosus (Mat
penstemon), Cercocarpus montanus (Mountain mahogany), and Chrysothamnus
viscidiflorus (Yellow rabbitbrush) (O'Kane & Anderson 1987, p. 415;
McMullen 1998, p. 5). We consider sparse vegetation (with less than 10
percent plant cover), assembled of other oil shale specific plants and
not dominated by any one species, to be a physical or biological
feature for this plant.
Elevation--Known populations of Penstemon debilis are found from
5,600 to 9,250 ft (1,700 to 2,820 m) in elevation (Service 2011c, p.
3). Because plants have not been identified outside of this elevation
band and because growing conditions frequently change across elevation
gradients, we have identified elevations from 5,250 to 9,600 ft (1,600
to 2,920 m) to be a physical or biological feature for this plant. We
have extended the elevation range 328 ft (100 m) upward and downward in
an attempt to provide areas where the plant could migrate, given
shifting climates (Callaghan et al. 2004, pp. 418-435; Crimmins et al.
2011, pp. 324-327). We consider this 328 ft (100 m) to be a
conservative allowance since studies on climate change elevational
shifts have found more dramatic changes even in the last century: 95 ft
(29 m) upward per decade (Lenoir et al. 2008, pp. 1768-1770), or an
average of 279 ft (85 m) downward since the 1930s (Crimmins et al.
2011, pp. 324-327). We do not have information specific to P. debilis
elevational shifts. The above studies were done in different areas,
western Europe and California, and looking at different species. Oil
shale habitats extend into these higher and lower elevations.
Slope--Penstemon debilis is generally found only on steep slopes
(mean of 37 percent slope) and between cliff bands where the oil shale
is constantly shifting and moving downhill (Service 2011c, p. 2). The
plant also can be found on relatively flat sites, although nearby
habitats are often steep. In general, the plant is found on steep,
constantly eroding slopes; therefore, we identify moderate to steep
slopes, generally over 15 percent slope, to be a physical or biological
feature for this plant.

Food, Water, Air, Light, Minerals, or Other Nutritional or
Physiological Requirements

Soils--Penstemon debilis is known only from oil shale cliffs on the
Roan Plateau escarpment and was previously described as occurring only
on the Parachute Creek Member of the Green River Formation (McMullen
1998, p. 57). Our mapping exercises have found that the plant also is
found on the Lower Part of the Green River Formation (Tweto 1979, pp.
1, 4). Populations are generally located either directly above or below
the geologic feature known as the Mahogany Ledge (McMullen 1998, p.
63). All occupied sites are similar in soil morphology (form and
structure) and are characterized by a surface layer of small to
moderate shale channers (small flagstones) that shift continually due
to the steep slopes (McMullen 1998, p. 64). Below the channers is a
weakly developed calcareous, sandy to loamy layer with 40 to 90 percent
coarse material.
Toxic elements in the soil such as arsenic and selenium accumulate
in the tissues of P. debilis (McMullen 1998, p. 65) and may allow P.
debilis to grow in areas that are more toxic to other species thereby
reducing plant competition. Toxic elements in the soil vary between
populations. In a greenhouse setting, P. debilis plants were grown
easily in potting soil. Soil may not directly influence P. debilis'
distribution, but may instead have an indirect effect on the plant's
distribution by limiting the establishment of other vegetation
(McMullen 1998, p. 67). Soil morphology, rather than soil chemistry,
appears to better explain the plant's distribution (McMullen 1998, p.
74). Because the plant is only found on the Parachute Creek Member and
Lower Part of the Green River Formation and because of the consistent
soil morphology between sites, we are identifying these geologic
formations as a physical or biological feature for the plant. We also
looked at soil type as discussed below in ``Criteria Used to Identify
Critical Habitat'' but do not include it here as a physical or
biological feature because it is a

[[Page 45085]]

component of the soil characteristics already described.
Climate--The average annual precipitation in the area where
Penstemon debilis is found ranges from 12 to 18 in. (30 to 46 cm)
(McMullen 1998, p. 63). Winters are cold (averaging roughly 30 [deg]F
(-1 [deg]C) with snow staying on the ground in flatter areas, and
summers are warmer (averaging roughly 65 [deg]F (18 [deg]C). Because P.
debilis has evolved under these climatic conditions, we have identified
suitable precipitation and suitable temperatures as physical or
biological features for this plant. These climatic conditions are
likely influenced, in part, by elevation.

Cover or Shelter

While Penstemon debilis seed and seedlings certainly require ``safe
sites'' for their germination and establishment, these microclimates
are too small to be considered or managed here as a physical or
biological feature for this plant. We believe these features are
encompassed in the ``plant community and competitive ability'' and
``soils'' sections discussed above.

Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, or Rearing (or Development) of
Offspring

Reproduction--Penstemon debilis requires insect pollinators for
reproduction and is twice as reproductively successful if pollen comes
from another plant (McMullen 1998, pp. 25, 43). Over 40 species of
pollinators have been collected from P. debilis; the primary
pollinators include four Osmia (mason bee) species, Atoposmia elongata
(a close relative of Osmia), several Bombus (bumblebee) species, and a
native wasp Pseudomasaris vespoides. All of these pollinators are
ground or twig nesting. None of these pollinators are rare, nor are
they specialists on P. debilis, although some of these pollinators,
such as Osmia, are specialists within the genus Penstemon (McMullen
1998, p. 11). The number and type of pollinators differ between P.
debilis sites (McMullen 1998, p. 27). Fruit set is not limited by
inadequate numbers of pollinators (McMullen 1998, p. 27). Because the
evidence presented above demonstrates that pollinators are necessary
for pollination of P. debilis, we have identified pollinators and their
associated habitats as a physical or biological feature for this plant.

Habitats Protected From Disturbance or Representative of the
Historical, Geographical, and Ecological Distributions of the Species

Disturbance Regime--Penstemon debilis is found on steep oil shale
slopes that are constantly shifting. The plant has underground stems
(rhizomes) that are an adaptation to this constant shifting (McMullen
1998, p. 58). As the shale shifts downward, the underground stems and
clusters of leaves emerge downhill. A single plant may actually appear
as many different plants that are connected by these underground stems
(McMullen 1998, p. 58). In sites where the soils have stabilized and
vegetation has encroached, P. debilis has been extirpated (lost)
(McMullen 1998, p. 72). Managing for an appropriate disturbance type
and/or level can be difficult since we lack research to better quantify
these measures. In this document we use qualitative terms, but
specifically solicit further input on methods or mechanisms that can
better quantify or describe these measures. For these reasons, we
consider these unstable and slow to moderate levels of constantly
shifting shale slopes to be a physical or biological feature for the
species.

Phacelia submutica

We have determined that Phacelia submutica requires the following
physical and biological features:

Space for Individual and Population Growth

Plant Community and Competitive Ability--Predominant vegetation
classifications within the occupied range of Phacelia submutica include
clay badlands, mixed salt desert scrub, and Artemisia tridentata (big
sagebrush) shrubland, within the greater Pinus edulis (pinyon)-
Juniperus spp. (juniper) woodlands type (O'Kane 1987, pp. 14-15;
Ladyman 2003, pp. 14-16). Within these vegetated areas, P. submutica is
found on sparsely vegetated barren areas with total plant cover
generally less than 10 percent (Burt and Spackman 1995, p. 20). On
these barren areas, P. submutica can be found alone or in association
with other species. Associated plant species at sites occupied by P.
submutica include: the nonnative Bromus tectorum (cheatgrass) and
native species Grindelia fastigiata (pointed gumweed), Eriogonum
gordonii (Gordon's buckwheat), Monolepis nuttalliana (Nuttall's
povertyweed), and Oenothera caespitosa (tufted evening primrose) (Burt
and Spackman 1995, p. 20; Ladyman 2003, pp. 15-16). Many of these
associated species also are annuals (growing for only 1 year). Because
of the harshness and sometimes the steepness of occupied sites, these
areas are maintained in an early successional state (Ladyman, 2003, p.
18). Therefore, the species found in these habitats are regarded as
pioneers that are continually colonizing these bare areas and then
dying (O'Kane 1987, p. 15). Pioneer species are often assumed to be
poor competitors (Grime 1977, p. 1169). For the reasons discussed
above, we identify barren clay badlands with less than 20 percent cover
of other plant species to be a physical or biological feature for this
plant. We have adjusted the relative plant cover upwards to capture the
potential plant cover in moist years when other species may be somewhat
more abundant.
Elevation--Known populations of Phacelia submutica occur within a
narrow range of elevations from about 5,000 to 7,150 ft (1,500 to 2,175
m) (Service 2011c, p. 3). Elevation is a key factor in determining the
temperature and moisture microclimate of this species. Because plants
have not been identified outside of this elevation band and because
growing conditions frequently change across elevation gradients, we
have identified elevations from 4,600 to 7,450 ft (1,400 to 2,275 m) to
be a physical or biological feature for this plant. We have extended
the elevation range 328 ft (100 m) upward and downward in an attempt to
provide areas where the plant could migrate, given shifting climates
(Callaghan et al. 2004, pp. 418-435; Crimmins et al. 2011, pp. 324-
327). We consider this 100 meters to be a conservative allowance since
studies on climate change elevational shifts have found more dramatic
changes even in the last century: 95 ft (29 m) upward per decade
(Lenoir et al. 2008, pp. 1768-1770), or an average of 279 ft (85 m)
downward since the 1930s (Crimmins et al. 2011, pp. 324-327). We do not
have information specific to P. submutica elevational shifts. The above
studies were done in different areas, western Europe and California,
and looking at different species. Suitable habitats extend into these
higher and lower elevations.
Topography (surface shape)--Phacelia submutica is found on slopes
ranging from almost flat to 42 degrees, with the average around 14
degrees (Service 2011c, p. 3). Plants are generally found on moderately
steep slopes, benches, and ridge tops adjacent to valley floors
(Ladyman 2003, p. 15). The relative position of P. submutica is
consistent from site to site; therefore, we recognize appropriate
topography (suitable slopes, benches and ridge tops, or moderately
steep slopes adjacent to valley floors) as a physical or biological
feature for the plant.

[[Page 45086]]

Food, Water, Air, Light, Minerals, or Other Nutritional or
Physiological Requirements

Soils--Phacelia submutica grows only on barren clay soils derived
from the Atwell Gulch and Shire members of the Eocene and Paleocene
Wasatch geological formation (Donnell 1969, pp. M13-M14; O'Kane 1987,
p. 10). The Atwell Gulch member is found below the bluish gray Molina
member, and the Shire member is found above the Molina member (Decker
et al. 2005, p. 3). The plant is found in unique, very small areas
(from 10 to 1,000 ft\2\ (1 to 100 m\2\)) on colorful exposures of
chocolate to purplish brown, dark charcoal gray, and tan clay soils
(Burt and Spackman 1995, pp. 15, 20; Ladyman 2003, p. 15; Grauch 2011,
pers. comm.). We do not fully understand why P. submutica is limited to
the small areas where it is found, but the plant usually grows on the
one unique small spot of shrink-swell clay that shows a slightly
different texture and color than the similar surrounding soils (Burt
and Spackman 1995, p. 15). Ongoing species-specific soil analyses have
found that the alkaline soils (with specific pH ranging from 7 to 8.9)
where P. submutica are found have higher clay content than nearby
unoccupied soils, although there is some overlap (Grauch 2011, pers.
comm.). The shrink-swell action of these clay soils and the cracks that
are formed upon drying appear essential to maintenance of the species'
seed bank since the cracks capture the seeds and maintain the seed bank
on site (O'Kane 1988, p. 462; Ladyman 2003, pp 16-17). Based on the
information above, we consider the small soil inclusions where P.
submutica is found that are characterized by shrink-swell alkaline clay
soils within the Atwell Gulch and Shire members of the Wasatch
Formation to represent a physical or biological feature for P.
submutica.
Climate--Phacelia submutica abundance varies considerably from year
to year. In 1 year almost no plants may emerge at a site, and in
another year at the same site, hundreds or even thousands of
individuals may grow (Burt and Spackman 1995, p. 24). We do not
understand what environmental factors (temperature, rainfall, or
snowfall) affect these dramatic changes in abundance from 1 year to the
next, but it is assumed they are climatic in nature (Burt and Spackman
1885, p. 24). Wetter years seem to produce more individuals (O'Kane
1987, p. 16). However, without the right combination of precipitation
and temperature within a short window of time in the spring, the
species may produce very few seedlings or mature plants, sometimes for
several consecutive years. We believe it is necessary to conserve
habitat across the entire range of the species to account for the
variation in local weather events, to allow for plants to grow at some
sites and not others on an annual basis. Because climatic factors
dramatically influence the number of P. submutica individuals that are
produced in a given year, we identify climate as a physical or
biological feature for the plant; however, we recognize that we are
unable to identify exactly what these climatic factors encompass except
that the amount of moisture and its timing is critical. Climatic data
from four weather stations (Table 1) indicate that average annual
precipitation is between 10 to 16 in. (25 and 41 cm), with less
precipitation generally falling in June (as well as December-February)
than other months, and with cold winters (sometimes with snow cover)
and warmer summers.

Cover or Shelter

While Phacelia submutica seed and seedlings certainly require
``safe sites'' for their germination and establishment, these
microclimates are too small to be considered or managed here as a
physical or biological feature for this plant. We believe these
features are encompassed in the ``plant community and competitive
ability'' and ``soils'' sections discussed above.

Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, or Rearing (or Development) of
Offspring

Reproduction and Seed Banks--We do not yet understand the
pollination and seed dispersal mechanisms of Phacelia submutica.
Pollinators have not been observed visiting the flowers of P.
submutica. Currently it is believed that pollinators may not be
required for reproduction because of the minute flower size, a lack of
obvious pollinators, and because the reproductive parts are hidden
within the petals. We also do not understand how seeds are dispersed.
Seed banks are established where seeds fall into the cracks of shrink-
swell clay (O'Kane 1988, p. 462). We recognize that habitat conducive
for successful reproduction is a physical or biological feature for P.
submutica but do not understand more specifically what features are
important for this reproduction. In addition, seed banks are especially
important for annual species that may not emerge when climatic
conditions are unfavorable (Levine et al. 2008, pp. 795-806; Meyer et
al. 2005, pp. 15-16, 21). For this reason, we identify boom years at
regular intervals such that the seed bank is maintained as a physical
or biological feature for P. submutica. We lack further information on
how long-lived seeds are in the seed bank and at what intervals the
seed bank needs to be replenished to provide specifics but are hopeful
that ongoing research will assist in answering some of these questions.

Habitats Protected From Disturbance or Representative of the
Historical, Geographical, and Ecological Distributions of the Species

Disturbance Regime--The steeper clay barrens where Phacelia
submutica is sometimes found experience some erosion, and the shrinking
and swelling of clay soils creates a continuous disturbance (Ladyman
2003, p. 16). Phacelia submutica has adapted to these light to moderate
disturbances, although occasionally plants are pushed out of the
shrinking or swelling soils and die (O'Kane 1987, p. 20). Clay soils
are relatively stable when dry but are extremely vulnerable to
disturbances when wet (Rengasmy et al. 1984, p. 63). P. submutica has
evolved with some light natural disturbances, mostly in the form of
erosion and shrink-swell process. Heavy disturbances, and even light
disturbances when soils are wet, could impact the species and its seed
bank. These disturbances can include OHV use, livestock and wild
ungulate grazing, and activities associated with oil and gas
development. Managing for an appropriate disturbance type and/or level
can be difficult since we lack research to better quantify these
measures. In this document we use qualitative terms, but specifically
solicit further input on methods or mechanisms that can better quantify
or describe these measures. For the reasons discussed above, we
identify an environment free from moderate to heavy disturbances when
soils are dry and free from all disturbances when soils are wet to be a
physical or biological feature for P. submutica.

Primary Constituent Elements for Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon
debilis, and Phacelia submutica

Under the Act and its implementing regulations, we are required to
identify the physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia
submutica in geographic areas occupied at the time of listing, focusing
on the features' primary constituent elements. We consider primary
constituent elements to be the elements of physical and biological
features that provide for a species' life-

[[Page 45087]]

history processes and are essential to the conservation of the species.

Ipomopsis polyantha

Based on our current knowledge of the physical or biological
features and habitat characteristics required to sustain the species'
life-history processes, we determine that the primary constituent
elements specific to Ipomopsis polyantha are:
(i) Mancos shale soils.
(ii) Elevation and climate. Elevations from 6,400 to 8,100 ft
(1,950 to 2,475m) and current climatic conditions similar to those that
historically occurred around Pagosa Springs, Colorado. Climatic
conditions include suitable precipitation; cold, dry springs; and
winter snow.
(iii) Plant Community.
a. Suitable native plant communities (as described in b. below)
with small (less than 100 ft \2\ (10 m \2\) or larger (several hectares
or acres) barren areas with less than 20 percent plant cover in the
actual barren areas.
b. Appropriate native plant communities, although these communities
may not be like they were historically because they have already been
altered. Therefore, the species can be found in areas where only the
potential for the appropriate native plant community exists. For
example, Ponderosa pine forests may have been cut or areas that had
native vegetation may have been scraped. Native habitats and plants are
desirable; however, because of the state of the habitat, altered
habitats including some nonnative invasive species should not be
discounted. These plant communities include:
i. Barren shales,
ii. Open montane grassland (primarily Arizona fescue) understory at
the edges of open Ponderosa pine, or
iii. Clearings within the ponderosa pine and Rocky Mountain juniper
and Utah juniper and oak communities.
(iv) Habitat for pollinators. Please see ``Special Management
Considerations'' for further discussions of habitat fragmentation and
pollinator habitats and foraging ranges.
a. Pollinator ground and twig nesting areas. Habitats suitable for
a wide array of pollinators and their life history and nesting
requirements. A mosaic of native plant communities generally would
provide for this diversity.
b. Connectivity between areas allowing pollinators to move from one
site to the next within each population.
c. Availability of other floral resources; this would include other
flowering plant species that provide nectar and pollen for pollinators.
Grass species do not provide resources for pollinators.
d. To conserve and accommodate these pollinator requirements, we
have identified a 3,280-ft (1,000-m) area beyond occupied habitat to
conserve the pollinators essential for reproduction.
(v) Appropriate disturbance regime. Please see ``Physical and
Biological Features'' above for a further discussion of the qualitative
terms discussed below.
a. Appropriate disturbance levels--Light to moderate, or
intermittent or discontinuous.
b. Naturally maintained disturbances through soil erosion or human
maintained disturbances that can include light grazing, occasional
ground clearing, and other disturbances that are not severe or
continual.
With this proposed designation of critical habitat, we intend to
identify the physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of the species through the identification of the primary
constituent elements sufficient to support the life-history processes
of the species. Two units proposed to be designated as critical habitat
are currently occupied by Ipomopsis polyantha and contain the primary
constituent elements to support the life-history needs of the species.
Because two populations do not offer adequate redundancy for the
survival and recovery of Ipomopsis polyantha, we have determined that
unoccupied areas are essential for the conservation of the species. Two
additional units proposed to be designated as critical habitat are
currently unoccupied by I. polyantha. We consider these units essential
for the conservation of the species, as discussed below under ``Special
Management Considerations.'' In addition, we believe the unoccupied
units contain the primary constituent elements in the appropriate
quantity and spatial arrangement sufficient to support the life-history
needs of the species.

Penstemon debilis

[[Page 45088]]

currently occupied by Penstemon debilis and contain the primary
constituent elements to support the life-history needs of the species.
Two additional units proposed to be designated as critical habitat are
currently unoccupied by P. debilis. Currently occupied areas do not
adequately provide for the conservation of the species, because of a
lack of redundancy. We consider these units essential for the
conservation of the species, as discussed below under ``Special
Management Considerations.'' In addition, we believe the unoccupied
units contain the primary constituent elements to support the life-
history needs of the species.

Phacelia submutica

Based on our current knowledge of the physical or biological
features and habitat characteristics required to sustain the species'
life-history processes, we determine that the primary constituent
elements specific to Phacelia submutica are:
(i) Suitable Soils and Geology.
a. Atwell Gulch and Shire members of the Wasatch formation.
b. Within these larger formations, small areas (from 10 to 1,000 ft
\2\ (1 to 100 m \2\)) on colorful exposures of chocolate to purplish
brown, light to dark charcoal gray, and tan clay soils are especially
important. These small areas are slightly different in texture and
color than the similar surrounding soils. Occupied sites are
characterized by alkaline (pH range from 7 to 8.9) soils with higher
clay content than similar nearby unoccupied soils.
c. Clay soils that shrink and swell dramatically upon drying and
wetting and are likely important in the maintenance of the seed bank.
(ii) Topography. Moderately steep slopes, benches, and ridge tops
adjacent to valley floors. Occupied slopes range from 2 to 42 degrees
with an average of 14 degrees.
(iii) Elevation and climate.
a. Elevations from 4,600 to 7,450 ft (1,400 to 2,275 m).
b. Climatic conditions similar to those around DeBeque, Colorado,
including suitable precipitation and temperatures. Annual fluctuations
in moisture (and probably temperature) greatly influences the number of
Phacelia submutica individuals that grow in a given year and are thus
able to set seed and replenish the seed bank.
(iv) Plant Community.
a. Small (from 10 to 1,000 ft\2\ (1 to 100 m\2\)) barren areas with
less than 20 percent plant cover in the actual barren areas.
b. Presence of appropriate associated species that can include (but
are not limited to) the natives Grindelia fastigiata, Eriogonum
gordonii, Monolepis nuttalliana, and Oenothera caespitosa. If sites
become dominated by Bromus tectorum or other invasive nonnative
species, they should not be discounted because Phacelia submutica may
still be found there.
c. Appropriate plant communities within the greater pinyon-juniper
woodlands that include:
(i) Clay badlands within the mixed salt desert scrub, or
(ii) Clay badlands within big sagebrush shrublands.
(v) Maintenance of the Seed Bank and Appropriate Disturbance
Levels. Please see ``Physical and Biological Features'' above for a
further discussion of the qualitative terms discussed below.
a. Within suitable soil and geologies (see Suitable Soils and
Geology above), undisturbed areas where seed banks are left undamaged.
b. Areas with light disturbance when dry and no disturbance when
wet. Clay soils are relatively stable when dry but are extremely
vulnerable to disturbances when wet.
Phacelia submutica has evolved with some light natural
disturbances, including erosional and shrink-swell processes. However,
human disturbances that are either heavy or light when soils are wet
could impact the species and its seed bank. Because we do not
understand how the seed bank may respond to disturbances, more heavily
disturbed areas should be evaluated, over the course of several years,
for the species' presence.
With this proposed designation of critical habitat, we intend to
identify the physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of the species through the identification of the primary
constituent elements sufficient to support the life-history processes
of the species. All units and subunits proposed to be designated as
critical habitat are currently occupied by Phacelia submutica and
contain the primary constituent elements sufficient to support the
life-history needs of the species.
Special Management Considerations or Protection
When designating critical habitat, we assess whether the physical
and biological features 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. All areas proposed for
designation as critical habitat will require some level of management
to address the current and future threats to the physical and
biological features essential to the conservation of the three plants.
In all units, special management will be required to ensure that the
habitat is able to provide for the growth and reproduction of the
species.
A detailed discussion of threats to Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon
debilis, and Phacelia submutica and their habitat can be found in the
final listing rule elsewhere in today's Federal Register. The primary
threats impacting the physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of I. polyantha, P. debilis, and P. submutica that may
require special management considerations or protection within the
proposed critical habitat include, but are not limited to, the
following:
Ipomopsis polyantha
The features essential to the conservation of this species (plant
community and competitive ability, elevation, soils, climate,
reproduction, and disturbance regime) may require special management
considerations or protection to reduce threats. Ipomopsis polyantha's
highly restricted soil requirements and geographic range make it
particularly susceptible to extinction at any time from commercial,
municipal, and residential development; associated road and utility
improvements and maintenance; heavy livestock use; inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms; fragmented habitat; and prolonged
drought. Over 86 percent of the species' occupied habitat is on private
land with no limits on development (75 FR 35740; June 23, 2010).
Special management considerations or protections are required
within critical habitat areas to address these threats. Management
activities that could ameliorate these threats include (but are not
limited to): Introducing new Ipomopsis polyantha populations;
establishing permanent conservation easements or land acquisition to
protect the species on private lands; developing zoning regulations
that could serve to protect the species; establishing conservation
agreements on private and Federal lands to identify and reduce threats
to the species and its features; eliminating the use of smooth brome
and other competitive species in areas occupied by the species;
promoting/encouraging habitat restoration; developing other regulatory
mechanisms to further protect the species; placing roads and utility
lines away from the species; minimizing

[[Page 45089]]

heavy use of habitat by livestock; and minimizing habitat
fragmentation.
These management activities would protect the primary constituent
elements for the species by preventing the loss of habitat and
individuals, maintaining or restoring plant communities and natural
levels of competition, protecting the plant's reproduction by
protecting its pollinators, and managing for appropriate levels of
disturbance.

Penstemon debilis

The features essential to the conservation of this species (plant
community and competitive ability, elevation, slope, soils, climate,
reproduction, and disturbance regime) may require special management
considerations or protection to reduce threats. Extremely low numbers
and a highly restricted geographic range make Penstemon debilis
particularly susceptible to becoming endangered in the foreseeable
future. Threats to the species and its habitat include energy
development, road maintenance, and inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms (75 FR 35740; June 23, 2010).
Special management considerations or protections are required
within critical habitat areas to address these threats. Management
activities that could ameliorate these threats include (but are not
limited to): the introduction of new Penstemon debilis populations; the
establishment of permanent conservation easements or land acquisition
to protect the species on private lands; regulations and/or agreements
that balance conservation with energy development in areas that would
affect the species and its pollinators; the designation of protected
areas with specific provisions and protections for the plant; the
elimination or avoidance of activities that alter the morphology and
status of the shale slopes; and avoidance of placing roads in habitats
that would affect the plant or its pollinators.
These management activities would protect the primary constituent
elements for the species by preventing the loss of habitat and
individuals, maintaining or restoring plant communities and natural
levels of competition, protecting the plant's reproduction by
protecting its pollinators, and managing for appropriate levels and
types of disturbance.

Phacelia submutica

The features essential to the conservation of this species (plant
community and competitive ability, elevation, topography, soils,
climate, reproduction and seed bank, and disturbance regime) may
require special management considerations or protection to reduce
threats. The current range of Phacelia submutica is subject to human-
caused modifications from natural gas exploration and production with
associated expansion of pipelines, roads, and utilities; development
within the Westwide Energy Corridor; increased access to the habitat by
OHVs; soil and seed disturbance by livestock and other human-caused
disturbances; nonnative invasive species including Bromus tectorum and
Halogeton glomeratus (halogeton); and inadequate regulations (75 FR
35741; June 23, 2010).
Special management considerations or protections are required
within critical habitat areas to address these threats. Management
activities that could ameliorate these threats include (but are not
limited to): Development of regulations and/or agreements to balance
conservation with energy development and minimize its effects in areas
where the species resides; minimization of OHV use; placement of roads
and utility lines away from the species and its habitat; minimization
of livestock use or other human-caused disturbances that disturb the
soil or seeds; and the minimization of habitat fragmentation.
These management activities would protect the primary constituent
elements for the species by preventing the loss of habitat and
individuals, protecting the plant's habitat and soils, and managing for
appropriate levels of disturbance.
Criteria Used To Identify Critical Habitat
As required by section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act, we use the best
scientific and commercial data available to designate critical habitat.
We review all available information pertaining to the habitat
requirements of the species.
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 and biological features essential for the conservation of
Penstemon debilis and Phacelia submutica. 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. In the case of Ipomopsis polyantha, because the plant is often
found growing on partially developed sites, around buildings, or
immediately adjacent to roads, we did not attempt to exclude buildings,
pavement, and other structures. For all three species, any developed
lands left inside critical habitat boundaries shown on the maps of this
proposed rule are not proposed for designation as critical habitat as
per regulation. Therefore, if the critical habitat is finalized as
proposed, a Federal action involving these lands would not trigger
section 7 consultations with respect to critical habitat and the
requirement of no adverse modification unless the specific action would
affect the physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of the species within adjacent critical habitat.
All units are proposed for designation based on sufficient elements
of physical and biological features being present to support Ipomopsis
polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia submutica life-history
processes. Some units contain all of the identified elements of
physical and biological features and supported multiple life-history
processes. Unoccupied units contain only the elements of the physical
and biological features necessary to support the species' particular
use of that habitat but not the multiple life-history processes since
they are unoccupied.
Small populations and plant species with limited distributions,
like those of Ipomopsis polyantha and Penstemon debilis, are vulnerable
to relatively minor environmental disturbances (Given 1994, pp. 66-67;
Frankham 2005, pp. 135-136), and are subject to 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 includes the creation of new sites or reintroductions to
ameliorate these effects.
Genetic analysis of Ipomopsis polyantha has not been conducted;
therefore, we do not understand the genetic diversity of this species.
Given the species' limited extent and presence

[[Page 45090]]

in only two populations, we expect the species may be suffering from
low genetic diversity or could in the future.
Genetic research on Penstemon debilis has found that there is more
genetic diversity in larger populations than smaller populations, that
the northeastern populations are more closely related to one another
than to the southwestern populations, that inbreeding is common within
each population, and that genetic diversity for the species is low when
compared with other species of plants with similar life history traits
(Wolfe 2010, p. 1). Small population sizes with few individuals are a
problem for this species, as supported by this research.
When designating critical habitat for a species, we attempt to
consider the species' survival and recoverability, as outlined in the
destruction or adverse modification standard. Realizing that the
current occupied habitat is not enough for the survival and recovery of
Ipomopsis polyantha and Penstemon debilis, we worked with species'
experts to identify unoccupied habitat essential for the conservation
of these two species. The justification for why unoccupied habitat is
essential to the conservation of these species and methodology used to
identify the best unoccupied areas for consideration for inclusion is
described under ``Criteria Used to Identify Critical Habitat'' section
below.
Habitat fragmentation can have negative effects on biological
populations, especially rare plants, and affect survival and recovery
(Aguilar et al. 2008, pp. 5177-5188). Fragments are often not of
sufficient size to support the natural diversity prevalent in an area
and thus exhibit a decline in biodiversity (Noss and Cooperrider 1994,
pp. 50-54). 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). Habitat fragmentation has
been shown to disrupt plant-pollinator interactions and predator-prey
interactions (Steffan-Dewenter and Tscharntke 1999, pp. 432-440), alter
seed germination percentages (Menges 1991, pp. 158-164), and result in
low fruit set (Cunningham 2000, pp. 1149-1152). Extensive habitat
fragmentation can result in dramatic fluxes in available solar
radiation, water, and nutrients (Saunders et al. 1991, pp. 18-32).
Shaffer and Stein (2000) identify a methodology for conserving
imperiled species known as the three Rs: Representation, resiliency,
and redundancy. Representation, or preserving some of everything, means
conserving not just a species but its associated plant communities,
pollinators, and pollinator habitats. Resiliency and redundancy ensure
there is enough of a species so it can survive into the future.
Resiliency means ensuring that the habitat is adequate for a species
and its representative components. Redundancy ensures an adequate
number of sites and individuals. This methodology has been widely
accepted as a reasonable conservation methodology (Tear et al. 2005, p.
841).
We have addressed representation through our primary constituent
elements for each species (as discussed above) and by providing habitat
for pollinators of Ipomopsis polyantha and Penstemon debilis (as
discussed further under ``Ipomopsis polyantha'' below). For Phacelia
submutica, we believe that the occupied habitat provides for both
resiliency and redundancy and that with conservation of these areas,
the species should be conserved and sustained into the future. For I.
polyantha, there are only two known populations, both with few or no
protections in place (low resiliency). For adequate resiliency, we
believe it is necessary for the survival and recovery of I. polyantha
that additional populations with further protections be established.
Therefore, we have identified two unoccupied areas as proposed critical
habitat units (CHUs) for I. polyantha. For P. debilis, there are only
approximately 4,000 known individuals (low redundancy) and all within
two concentrated areas (low resiliency). For adequate redundancy and
resiliency, we believe it is necessary for survival and recovery that
additional populations of P. debilis be established. Therefore, we have
identified two unoccupied areas as proposed CHUs for P. debilis.

Ipomopsis polyantha

In accordance with the Act and its implementing regulation at 50
CFR 424.12(e), we consider whether designating additional areas--
outside those currently occupied as well as those occupied at the time
of listing--are necessary to ensure the conservation of the species.
For Ipomopsis polyantha, we are proposing to designate critical habitat
in areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the
time of listing in 2011. We also are proposing to designate specific
areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the time
of listing, because such areas are essential for the conservation of
the species.
Occupied critical habitat was identified by delineating all known
sites within a population (Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP)
2010b, p. 1), placing a minimum convex polygon around the perimeter of
all sites, and then adding an additional 3,280-ft (1,000-m) area for
pollinator habitat. The distance that pollinators can travel is
significant to plants including Ipomopsis polyantha because pollen
transfer and seed dispersal are the only mechanisms for genetic
exchange. Both pollen and seed dispersal can vary widely by plant
species (Ellstrand 2003, p. 1164). In general, pollinators will focus
on small areas where floral resources are abundant; however, occasional
longer distance pollination will occur, albeit infrequently. No
research has been conducted on flight distances of I. polyantha's
pollinators. Therefore, we rely on general pollinator travel distances
described in the literature.
Typically, pollinators fly distances that are in relation to their
body sizes, with smaller pollinators flying shorter distances than
larger pollinators (Greenleaf et al. 2007, pp. 589-596). If a
pollinator can fly long distances, pollen transfer is also possible
across these distances. The largest pollinators of Ipomopsis polyantha
are bumblebee species (Bombus spp.). In one study, the buff-tailed
bumblebee (Bombus terrestris) flew a maximum distance of 2,037 ft (621
m) (Osborne et al. 1999, pp. 524-526). The bumblebee-pollinated plant
species, Scabiosa columbaria (dove pincushions), experienced decreased
pollen flow at a patch isolation distance of 82 ft (25 m), and little
to no pollen transfer when patches were isolated by 656 ft (200 m)
(Velterop 2000, p. 65).
In contrast, another study found that displaced buff-tailed
bumblebee individuals were able to return to their nests from distances
over 5.6 mi (9 km) (Goulson and Stout 2001, p. 108). Another study
found that buff-tailed bumblebee workers (resource collectors) were
recaptured while foraging on super-abundant resources at distances of
1.1 mi (1.75 km) from the nest (Walther-Hellwig and Frankl 2000, p.
303). These studies suggest variability in the distances over which
pollen transfer may occur and over which bumblebee species can travel.
Ipomopsis polyantha sites within populations can be separated by more
than 3,280 ft (1000 m) making conservation of these large pollinators
especially important for genetic exchange between sites. In the
interest of protecting Ipomopsis polyantha's pollinators, we have
identified a 3,280-ft (1,000-m) wide

[[Page 45091]]

pollinator area. This area has the added benefit of providing more
habitat for I. polyantha to potentially expand into, in the future.
A recovery plan has not yet been written for Ipomopsis polyantha.
However, as described above, with only two known populations of I.
polyantha, both of which are located largely on private lands with few
protections, we expect that future recovery efforts will include
efforts to improve resiliency by increasing the number of populations;
therefore, we also are proposing to designate unoccupied habitat. We
determined that not all potential habitat (Mancos shale soil layer near
the town of Pagosa Springs) for I. polyantha was essential to the
conservation of the species, and in keeping with section 3(5)(C) of the
Act, which states that critical habitat may not include the entire
geographical area which can be occupied by the species, we carefully
refined the area proposed for designation.
To assist us in determining which specific areas may be essential
to the conservation of the species and considered for inclusion in this
proposal, we not only evaluated the biological contribution of an area,
but also evaluated the conservation potential of the area through the
overlay of a designation of critical habitat. While we recognize that
there is an education value to designating an area as critical habitat,
the more prevailing benefit is consultation under section 7 of the Act
on activities that may affect critical habitat on Federal lands or
where a Federal action may exist. Thus, in evaluating the potential
conservation value of an unoccupied area for inclusion in critical
habitat, we first focused on lands that are biologically important to
the species and then considered which of those lands were under Federal
ownership or likely to have a Federal action occur on them. If the
inclusion of areas that met those criteria were not sufficient to
conserve the species, we then evaluated other specific areas on private
lands that were not likely to have a Federal action on them. Unoccupied
critical habitat was identified by overlaying the Mancos shale soil
layer around Pagosa Springs with Federal ownership (Service 2011e, p.
1). As little overlap occurred where Mancos shale soils and Federal
lands intersected with habitat supporting the appropriate plant
communities for future I. polyantha introductions, habitat is somewhat
limited in suitable areas. Upon discussions with local species and area
experts as well as land managers, we identified two areas on USFS lands
as potential recovery or introduction areas for I. polyantha. These two
areas include the O'Neal Hill Special Botanical Area and Eight Mile
Mesa, both managed by USFS. These areas contain the primary constituent
elements sufficient to support the life-history needs of the species,
including Mancos shale soils and appropriate plant communities, and
when added to the proposed occupied areas would provide sufficient
resiliency, redundancy, and representation for the conservation of the
species.
We delineated the critical habitat unit (CHU) boundaries for
Ipomopsis polyantha using the following steps:
(1) In determining what areas were occupied by Ipomopsis polyantha,
we used data collected by the CNHP (O'Kane 1985, maps; Lyon 2002, p. 3;
Lyon and Mayo 2005, pp. 2-7; CNHP 2008; 2010a, pp. 1-8), BLM (Brinton
2010, pers. comm.), USFS (Brinton 2010, pers. comm.), the Service (Mayo
2005, pp. 1-35; Glenne and Mayo 2009, spatial data; Langton and Mayo
2010, spatial data), research efforts (Collins 1995, maps), and
consulting firms (JGB Consulting 2005, pp. 2-7) to map specific
locations of I. polyantha. These data were input into ArcMap 9.3.1.
Based on criteria developed by the CNHP, sites were classified into
discrete populations if they were within 2 mi (3 km) of each other and
were not separated by unsuitable habitat (CNHP 2010b, p. 1).
(2) For currently occupied CHUs, we delineated proposed critical
habitat areas by creating minimum convex polygons around each
population and adding a 3,280-ft- (1,000-m)-wide area for pollinator
habitat as previously described.
(3) For currently unoccupied CHUs, we identified two areas where
the Mancos shale (Tweto 1979, spatial data) was intersected with
Federal ownership (COMaP version 8--Theobald et al. 2010, spatial
data). COMaP version 8 is the most updated geospatial data layer
available for land ownership in Colorado. We delineated these areas by
following the Federal land management boundary, and identifying
suitable habitats based on species and area experts' input and aerial
imagery. Our reasoning for identifying unoccupied units is further
described above.
We are proposing for designation of critical habitat lands that we
have determined are occupied at the time of listing and contain
sufficient elements of physical and biological features to support
life-history processes essential for the conservation of the species,
as well as lands outside of the geographical area occupied at the time
of listing that we have determined are essential for the conservation
of Ipomopsis polyantha.

Penstemon debilis

In accordance with the Act and its implementing regulation at 50
CFR 424.12(e), we consider whether designating additional areas--
outside those currently occupied as well as those occupied at the time
of listing--are necessary to ensure the conservation of the species. We
are proposing to designate critical habitat in areas within the
geographical area occupied by the species at the time of listing in
2011. We also are proposing to designate specific areas outside the
geographical area occupied by the species at the time of listing,
because such areas are essential for the conservation of the species.
Occupied critical habitat was identified by delineating all known
sites within a population (CNHP 2010b, p. 6), placing a minimum convex
polygon around the perimeter of all these sites, and then adding a
3,280-ft (1,000-m) area for pollinator habitat as previously described.
Like Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon debilis' largest pollinators are
the bumblebee species (Bombus sp.) (discussed above under I.
polyantha).
A recovery plan has not yet been written for Penstemon debilis.
With only 4,100 known individuals of P. debilis concentrated in two
areas, we conclude that future recovery efforts will necessitate
actions to improve redundancy by increasing the number of individuals
and sites. Therefore, we also are proposing to designate unoccupied
habitat as critical habitat. Unoccupied critical habitat was delineated
by identifying potential habitat on large contiguous areas of Federal
ownership (see Number 3 below) (Service 2011e, p. 2). Occupied areas
were expanded into adjacent areas containing this same potential
habitat, as delineated and described below. This roughly doubled the
size of these occupied units, providing more potential habitat for
future recovery and introduction efforts. We determined that not all
potential habitat (as defined below) for P. debilis was essential to
the conservation of the species, and in keeping with section 3(5)(C) of
the Act, which states that critical habitat may not include the entire
geographical area which can be occupied by the species, we carefully
refined the area proposed for designation.
To assist us in determining which specific areas may be essential
to the conservation of the species and considered for inclusion in this
proposal, we not only evaluated the biological contribution of an area,
but also evaluated the conservation

[[Page 45092]]

potential of the area through the overlay of a designation of critical
habitat. While we recognize that there is an education value to
designating an area as critical habitat, the more prevailing benefit is
consultation under section 7 of the Act on activities that may affect
critical habitat on Federal lands or where a Federal action may exist.
Thus, in evaluating the potential conservation value of an unoccupied
area for inclusion in critical habitat, we first focused on lands that
are biologically important to the species and then considered which of
those lands were under Federal ownership or likely to have a Federal
action occur on them. If the inclusion of areas that met those criteria
were not sufficient to conserve the species, we then evaluated other
specific areas on private lands that were not likely to have a Federal
action on them. Upon discussions with local species and area experts,
as well as land managers, we identified two areas on BLM lands as
potential recovery or introduction areas for P. debilis. These two
areas include Brush Mountain and Cow Ridge, both managed by BLM. These
areas contain the primary constituent elements sufficient to support
the life-history needs of the species, including oil shale soils and
appropriate plant communities.
We delineated the CHU boundaries for Penstemon debilis using the
following steps:
(1) In determining what areas were occupied by Penstemon debilis,
we used data collected by the CNHP (O'Kane and Anderson 1986, p. 1;
Spackman et al. 1996, p. 7; CNHP 2010a, spatial data), the BLM (Scheck
and Kohls 1997, p. 3; DeYoung et al. 2010, p. 1; DeYoung 2011, pers.
comm.), CNAP (CNAP 2006, maps, pp. 4-7), the Service (Ewing 2009,
spatial data and map), and a consulting firm (Graham 2009, spatial
data) to map populations using ArcMap 9.3.1. These locations were
classified into discrete element occurrences (populations) by CNHP
(2010b, p. 6).
(2) We delineated preliminary units by creating minimum convex
polygons around each population and adding a 3,280-ft- (1,000-m)-wide
area for pollinator habitat as described above.
(3) We then identified potential habitat (Service 2011e, p. 2) in
ArcMap 9.3.1 by intersecting the following criteria: The Parachute
Creek Member and the Lower part of the Green River Formation geological
formations (Tweto 1979), with elevations between 6,561 to 9,350 ft
(2,000 and 2,850 m), with suitable soil types that included five soil
series (Irigul-Starman channery loams, Happle-Rock outcrop association,
Rock outcrop-Torriorthents complec,Torriorthents-Camborthids-Rock
outcrop complex, and Tosca channery loam) which represented 89 percent
of all known Penstemon debilis sites (Service 2011c, p. 2; NRCS 2010,
spatial data), and with the ``Rocky Mountain cliff and canyon''
landcover classification SW ReGAP 2004, spatial data). We chose the
``Rocky Mountain cliff and canyon'' landcover classification because 75
percent of all the known P. debilis locations fall within this mapping
unit (and all sites outside are either on artificially created habitats
or are directly below this classification where both oil shale
substrate and P. debilis seed dispersal down drainage constantly
occurs. We did not include the lower elevations currently occupied by
Penstemon debilis in our minimum convex polygon edges that we used for
delineating pollinator habitat (step 2) or in our potential habitat
analysis (step 3), because there are few plants in these more ephemeral
wash-out habitat types and because these unusual habitat types do not
seem to represent the species' typical habitat requirements. However,
it should be noted that these unusual sites are still included within
the boundaries of Unit 3 (as delineated by step 2).
(4) From this potential habitat analysis (as delineated in step 3),
we took the two continuous bands of potential habitat that include the
areas where Penstemon debilis is currently found and added them to our
existing polygons, including pollinator habitat (as delineated in step
2). We did this by again creating a minimum convex polygon. This
condensed all known populations into two currently occupied CHUs (Units
3 and 4).
(5) For currently unoccupied CHUs, we identified two areas where
our potential habitat was intersected with Federal ownership (COMaP
version 8--Theobald et al. 2010, spatial data). COMaP version 8 is the
most updated geospatial data layer available for land ownership in
Colorado. The boundaries are clipped to our potential habitat layer and
the Federal ownership layer. Our reasoning for identifying unoccupied
units is further described above.
We are proposing for designation of critical habitat lands that we
have determined are occupied at the time of listing and contain
sufficient elements of physical and biological features to support
life-history processes essential for the conservation of the species,
and lands outside of the geographical area occupied at the time of
listing that we have determined are essential for the conservation of
Penstemon debilis.

Phacelia submutica

In accordance with the Act and its implementing regulation at 50
CFR 424.12(e), we consider whether designating additional areas--
outside those currently occupied as well as those occupied at the time
of listing--are necessary to ensure the conservation of the species. We
are not currently proposing to designate any areas outside the
geographical area occupied by the species because occupied areas are
sufficient for the conservation of the species if the threats are
addressed with appropriate management.
Occupied critical habitat was identified by delineating all known
sites within a population (CNHP 2010b, p. 11), and placing a minimum
convex polygon around the perimeter of all these sites. We then added a
328-ft- (100-m)-wide area to account for indirect effects from factors
such as edge effects from roads, nonnative species, dust impacts, and
others (as discussed above).
Phacelia submutica has a large enough range (sufficient
representation and resiliency), enough populations (sufficient
redundancy), and enough individuals (sufficient redundancy) that we
felt that the occupied habitat alone, if protected from threats, would
be adequate for the future survival and recovery of the species.
Therefore, no unoccupied habitat was included in this critical habitat
designation.
We delineated the CHU boundaries for Phacelia submutica using the
following steps:
(1) In determining what areas were occupied by Phacelia submutica,
we used data collected by CNHP (CNHP 1982, pp. 1-17; Burt and Spackman
1995, pp. 10-14; Burt and Carston 1995, p. 3; Spackman and Fayette
1996, p. 5; Lyon 2008, spatial data; 2009, spatial data; Lyon and
Huggins 2009a, p. 3; Lyon and Huggins 2009b, p. 3; Lyon 2010, pers.
comm.; CNHP 2010a, spatial data), the Colorado Native Plant Society
(Colorado Native Plant Society [CNPS] 1982, pp. 1-9), the BLM (BLM
pers. comm. 2010, spatial data; DeYoung 2009, pers. comm.), USFS
(Johnston 2010, pers. comm.; Kirkpatrick 2011, pers. comm.; Potter
2010, spatial data; Proctor 2010, pers. comm.), CNAP (Wenger 2008;
2009; 2010, spatial data), the Service (Ewing and Glenne 2009, spatial
data; Langton 2010, spatial data), and consulting firms (Ellis and
Hackney 1982, pp. 7-8; WestWater Engineering [WWE] 2007a, spatial data;
2007b, spatial data; 2010, pp. 17-19, maps and spatial data) to map
specific locations of P. submutica using ArcMap 9.3.1. These locations
were classified into discrete

[[Page 45093]]

element occurrences or populations if they were within 1.2 mi (2 km)
and were not separated by unsuitable habitat, based on criteria
developed by CNHP (CNHP 2010b, p. 11). Then, we used 2009 aerial
imagery (NAIP 2009, spatial data) to look at all sites that were
considered historically occupied because they had not been revisited in
the last 20 years. Based on our analysis, we determined all
historically occupied sites were suitable habitat and considered these
sites still in existence and occupied at the time of listing.
(2) We delineated proposed critical habitat areas by creating
minimum convex polygons around each population and buffering the
polygons by 328 ft (100 m) to account for indirect effects as described
immediately above.
(3) We then modified these proposed critical habitat polygon
boundaries to exclude unsuitable habitat as defined by a potential
habitat model (Decker et al. 2005, p. 9). From this modeling exercise,
we chose the more restrictive of the two habitat models (the envelope
model) to further refine our critical habitat polygons. This model was
developed by comparing occupied areas with environmental variables,
such as elevation, slope, precipitation, temperature, geology, soil
type, and vegetation type. The environmental variables with the highest
predictive abilities influence the potential habitat the model then
identifies.
We are proposing for designation of critical habitat lands that we
have determined are occupied at the time of listing and contain
sufficient elements of physical and biological features to support
life-history processes essential for the conservation of Phacelia
submutica.

Proposed Critical Habitat Designation

Ipomopsis polyantha
We are proposing four units as critical habitat for Ipomopsis
polyantha. The CHUs we describe below meet the definition of critical
habitat for I. polyantha. The four units we propose as critical habitat
are: (1) Dyke, (2) O'Neal Hill Special Botanical Area, (3) Pagosa
Springs, and (4) Eight Mile Mesa. Table 2 shows the proposed units.

Table 2--Occupancy of Ipomopsis polyantha by proposed critical habitat
units
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit Currently occupied?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Dyke................................... Yes.
2. O'Neal Hill Special Botanical Area..... No.
3. Pagosa Springs......................... Yes.
4. Eight Mile Mesa........................ No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The approximate area of each proposed CHU is shown in table 3.

Table 3--Proposed Critical Habitat Units (CHUs) for Ipomopsis polyantha
[Area estimates reflect all land within CHU boundaries]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Critical habitat unit Land ownership Size of unit
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Dyke............................... BLM........................... 42 ac (17 ha).
Private....................... 1,415 ac (573 ha).
Archuleta County (County Road 5 ac (2 ha).
ROWs).
Colorado Department of 13 ac (5 ha).
Transportation (CDOT).
Total for Dyke Unit........... 1,475 ac (597 ha).
2. O'Neal Hill Special Botanical Area. USFS-San Juan National Forest. 784 ac (317 ha).
3. Pagosa Springs..................... Town of Pagosa Springs........ 599 ac (242 ha).
CDOW.......................... 28 ac (11 ha).
Private....................... 5,652 ac (2,288 ha).
State Land Board.............. 110 ac (44 ha).
Archuleta County (County Road 18 ac (7 ha).
ROWs).
CDOT (Highway ROWs)........... 50 ac (20 ha).
Total for Pagosa Spring Unit.. 6,456 ac (2,613 ha).
4. Eight Mile Mesa.................... USFS-San Juan National Forest. 1,180 ac (478 ha).
-----------------------------------------
Total............................. .............................. 9,894 ac (4,004 ha).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Note: Area sizes may not sum due to rounding.

We present brief descriptions of all units included in this
proposed critical habitat designation and reasons why they meet the
definition of critical habitat for Ipomopsis polyantha. The units are
listed in order geographically west to east.
Unit 1. Dyke
Unit 1, the Dyke Unit, consists of 1,475 ac (597 ha) of Federal and
private lands. The Unit is located at the junction of U.S. Hwy 160 and
Cat Creek Road (County Road 700) near the historic town of Dyke in
Archuleta County, Colorado. Ninety-seven percent of this Unit is on
private lands; of these private lands, 1 percent is within highway
ROWs. Three percent is on Federal land managed by the BLM, through the
Pagosa Springs Field Office of the San Juan Public Lands Center. This
Unit is currently occupied.
This Unit currently has all the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the species including a collection of
all three communities (barren shales, open montane grassland (primarily
Arizona fescue) understory at the edges of open Ponderosa pine, or
clearings within the ponderosa pine and Rocky Mountain juniper and Utah
juniper and oak communities), pockets of shale with little to no
competition from other species, suitable elevational ranges from 6,720
to 7,285 ft (2,048 to 2,220 m), Mancos shale soils, suitable climate,
pollinators and habitat for these pollinators, and areas where the
correct disturbance regime is present. Lands within this Unit are
largely agricultural although some housing is present within the Unit.
A large hunting ranch also falls within this Unit. While these lands
currently have the physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of Ipomopsis polyantha, because of a lack of cohesive
management and protections, special management will be required to
maintain these features in this Unit.
Threats to Ipomopsis polyantha in this Unit include highway
maintenance and disturbance (several hundred plants

[[Page 45094]]

have been documented along Highway 160 (CNHP 2010a, p. 5)), grazing,
agricultural use, Bromus inermis encroachment, potential development,
and a new road that was constructed through the I. polyantha
population. These threats should be addressed as detailed above in the
``Special Management Considerations or Protection'' section.
Unit 2. O'Neal Hill Special Botanical Area
Unit 2, the O'Neal Hill Botanical Area consists of 784 ac (317 ha)
of USFS land that is managed by the San Juan Public Lands Center. The
Unit is north of Pagosa Springs, roughly 13 mi (21 km) north along
Piedra Road. Roughly half the acreage of this Unit (308 ac (125 ha))
falls within the O'Neal Hill Special Botanical Area that was designated
to protect another Mancos shale endemic, Lesquerella pruinosa (Pagosa
bladderpod). Because L. pruinosa is sometimes found growing with I.
polyantha, we believe the site has high potential for introduction of
I. polyantha. This Unit is not currently occupied.
This Unit currently has all the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the species including a collection of
all three plant communities, pockets of shale with little to no
competition from other species, suitable elevational ranges from 7,640
to 8,360 ft (2,330 to 2,550 m), Mancos shale soils, suitable climate,
habitat for pollinators (although we do not know if Ipomopsis polyantha
pollinators are found here), and areas where the correct disturbance
regime is present. Because of the presence of these features, we
believe this may make a good introduction area for Ipomopsis polyantha
in the future and is needed to ensure conservation of the species.
Threats to Ipomopsis polyantha in this Unit include road
maintenance and disturbance, low levels of recreation, some hunting,
deer and elk use, and a utility corridor and related maintenance
(Brinton 2011, pers. comm). The threats should be addressed as detailed
above in the ``Special Management Considerations or Protection''
section.
Ipomopsis polyantha is known from only two populations, both with
few or no protections (little resilience). For adequate resiliency and
protection we believe it is necessary for survival and recovery that
additional populations with further protections be established. Because
this area receives low levels of use and because it is already
partially protected through the special botanical area, the area would
make an ideal site for future introductions of I. polyantha. Therefore,
we have identified this Unit as a proposed CHU for I. polyantha.
Unit 3. Pagosa Springs
Unit 3, the Pagosa Springs Unit, is the largest of the four
Ipomopsis polyantha CHUs and consists of 6,456 ac (2,613 ha) of
municipal, State, and private lands. The Unit is located at the
junction of Highways 160 and 84, south along Highway 84, west along
County Road 19, and east along Mill Creek Road. Ownership of the land
in Unit 3 is divided as follows: 87.7 percent is under private
ownership, 9.2 percent is owned by the Town of Pagosa Springs, 1.7
percent is owned and operated by the Colorado State Land Board, 0.8
percent falls within the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT)
ROWs, 0.4 percent is found on CDOW lands, and 0.3 percent is located on
Archuleta County ROWs. This Unit is currently occupied and contains the
majority of I. polyantha individuals.
This Unit currently has all the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the species, including a collection of
all three plant communities, pockets of shale with little to no
competition from other species, suitable elevational ranges from 6,960
to 7,724 ft (2,120 to 2,350 m), Mancos shale soils, suitable climate,
pollinators and habitat for these pollinators, and areas where the
correct disturbance regime is present. Lands within this Unit fall into
a wide array of land management scenarios, including agricultural use,
junkyards, urban areas, small residential lots, and large 30- to 40-ac
(12- to 16-ha) residential parcels. While these lands currently have
the physical and biological features essential to the conservation of
Ipomopsis polyantha, because of a lack of cohesive management and
protections, special management will be required to maintain these
features in this Unit.
Since almost 88 percent of this Unit is under private ownership,
the primary threat to the species in this Unit is agricultural or urban
development. Other threats include highway ROW disturbances, Bromus
inermis and other nonnative invasive species, excessive livestock
grazing, and mowing. These threats should be addressed as detailed
above in the ``Special Management Considerations or Protection''
section.
Unit 4: Eight Mile Mesa
Unit 4, Eight Mile Mesa, consists of 1,180 ac (478 ha) of USFS
lands that are managed by the Pagosa Springs Field Office of the San
Juan Public Lands Center. This Unit is located roughly 6.5 mi (10.5 km)
south of the intersections of Highways 160 and 84 in Pagosa Springs,
Colorado, and on the western side of Highway 84. This Unit is not
currently occupied.
This Unit currently has all the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the species including a collection of
all three plant communities, pockets of shale with little to no
competition from other species, suitable elevational ranges from 7,320
to 7,858 ft (2,230 to 2,395 m), Mancos shale soils, suitable climate,
habitat for pollinators, and areas where the correct disturbance regime
is present. Because there are so few Mancos shale sites on Federal
lands, and because this site has an array of habitat types, it provides
the best potential area for introduction of I. polyantha in the future.
Threats to Ipomopsis polyantha in this Unit include a road running
through the site, recreational use, horseback riding, dispersed camping
and hunting, and firewood gathering. The Unit has some dense Ponderosa
pine stands, and several small wildfires, that are actively suppressed,
occur every year. There is a vacant grazing allotment at this Unit, and
noxious weeds are being actively controlled (Brinton 2011, pers.
comm.). These threats should be addressed as detailed above in the
``Special Management Considerations or Protection'' section.
Ipomopsis polyantha is known from only two populations, both with
few or no protections (little resilience). For adequate resiliency and
protection we believe it is necessary for survival and recovery that
additional populations with further protections be established.
Therefore, we have identified this Unit and one other unoccupied area
as proposed CHUs for I. polyantha.

Penstemon debilis

We are proposing four units as critical habitat for Penstemon
debilis. The CHUs we describe below constitute our current best
assessment of locations that meet the definition of critical habitat
for P. debilis. The four units we propose as critical habitat are: (1)
Brush Mountain, (2) Cow Ridge, (3) Mount Callahan, and (4) Anvil
Points. Table 4 shows the occupancy of the units.

Table 4--Occupancy of Penstemon debilis by Proposed Critical Habitat
Unit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Currently
Unit occupied?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Brush Mountain.......................................... No.
2. Cow Ridge............................................... No.
3. Mount Callahan.......................................... Yes.

[[Page 45095]]

4. Anvil Points............................................ Yes.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The approximate area of each proposed CHU is shown in table 5.

Table 5--Proposed Critical Habitat Units (CHUs) for Penstemon debilis
[Area estimates reflect all land within CHU boundaries.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Land ownership by type
Critical habitat unit -------------------------------------------------- Size of unit
Federal Private
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Brush Mountain................... 1,437 ac (582 ha)...... ....................... 1,437 ac (582 ha).
2. Cow Ridge........................ 4,819 ac (1,950 ha).... ....................... 4,819 ac (1,950 ha).
3. Mount Callahan................... 4,338 ac (1,756 ha).... 3,675 ac (1,487 ha).... 8,013 ac (3,243 ha).
4. Anvil Points..................... 3,424 ac (1,386 ha).... 1,461 ac (591 ha)...... 4,885 ac (1,977 ha).
Total........................... 13,888 ac (5,621 ha)... 4,824 ac (1,952 ha).... 19,155 ac (7,752 ha).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Note: Area sizes may not sum due to rounding.

We present brief descriptions of all units included in the proposed
critical habitat designation and reasons why they meet the definition
of critical habitat for Penstemon debilis. The units are listed in
order geographically west to east, and north to south.
Unit 1. Brush Mountain
Unit 1, the Brush Mountain Unit, consists of 1,437 ac (582 ha) of
federally owned lands, managed by BLM through the Grand Junction Field
Office. It is located approximately 16 mi (26 km) northwest of the town
of DeBeque in Garfield County, Colorado. It is northwest of the
intersection of Roan Creek Road (County Road 204) and Brush Creek Road
(County Road 209). This Unit is not currently occupied.
This Unit has all the physical and biological features essential to
the conservation of the species, including the Rocky Mountain Cliff and
Canyon plant community (SW ReGAP 2004, spatial data) with less than 10
percent plant cover, suitable elevational ranges of 6,234 to 8,222 ft
(1,900 to 2,506 m), outcrops of the Parachute Creek Member of the Green
River Formation, steep slopes of these soil outcrops that lend to the
appropriate disturbance levels, pollinator habitat, and a climate with
between 12 to 18 in. (30 and 46 cm) in annual rainfall and winter snow.
Because of the presence of these features, we believe this may make a
good introduction area for Penstemon debilis in the future and is
needed to ensure conservation of the species.
The primary threat to Penstemon debilis in this Unit is energy
development. This threat should be addressed as detailed above in the
``Special Management Considerations or Protection'' section. P. debilis
consists of only 4,100 known individuals (little redundancy), and all
occur within two concentrated areas (little resilience). For adequate
redundancy and resiliency, we believe it is necessary for survival and
recovery that additional populations be established. Therefore, we have
identified this Unit as a proposed CHU for P. debilis.
Unit 2. Cow Ridge
Unit 2, the Cow Ridge Unit, is 4,819 ac (1,950 ha) of federally
owned lands managed by BLM through the Grand Junction Field Office. It
is located approximately 8 mi (13 km) northwest of the town of DeBeque
in Garfield County, Colorado, and north of Dry Fork Road. This Unit is
not currently occupied.
This Unit has all the physical and biological features essential to
the conservation of the species, including the Rocky Mountain Cliff and
Canyon plant community (SW ReGAP 2004, spatial data) with less than 10
percent cover, suitable elevational ranges of 6,273 to 8,284 ft (1,912
to 2,525 m), outcrops of the Parachute Creek Member of the Green River
Formation, steep slopes of these soil outcrops that lend to the
appropriate disturbance levels, habitat for pollinators, and a climate
with between 12 to 18 in. (30 and 46 cm) in annual rainfall and winter
snow. Because of the presence of these features, we believe this may
make a good introduction area for Penstemon debilis in the future and
is needed to ensure conservation of the species.
The primary threat to Penstemon debilis in this Unit is energy
development. This threat should be addressed as detailed above in the
``Special Management Considerations or Protection'' section. P. debilis
consists of only 4,100 known individuals (little redundancy) and all
within 2 concentrated areas (low resilience). For adequate redundancy
and resiliency, we believe it is necessary for survival and recovery
that additional populations be established. Therefore, we have
identified this Unit as a proposed CHU for P. debilis.
Unit 3. Mount Callahan
Unit 3, the Mount Callahan Unit, consists of 8,013 ac (3,243 ha) of
Federal and private land. It is located approximately 2 mi (3 km) west
of the town of Parachute on the south-facing slopes of Mount Callahan
and westward along the cliffs of the Roan Plateau. Fifty-four percent
of Unit 3 is managed by the BLM under the management of two field
offices: 80 percent of these Federal lands are managed by the Colorado
River Valley Field Office and 20 percent are managed by the Grand
Junction Field Office. Eight percent of this Unit (674 ac (273 ha)) has
been designated as two Colorado Natural Areas (Mount Callahan and Mount

[[Page 45096]]

Callahan Saddle). These privately owned lands are currently protected
from energy development, but are in close proximity to oil wells and
associated infrastructure. We are considering these two Natural Areas
for exclusion from this CHU. These exclusions are discussed in further
detail below under ``Exclusions--Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the
Act.'' Thirty-five percent of this Unit falls on private lands with no
protections. This Unit is currently occupied.
This Unit currently has all the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of Penstemon debilis, including the Rocky
Mountain Cliff and Canyon plant community (SW ReGAP 2004, spatial data)
with less than 10 percent cover, suitable elevational ranges of 5,413
to 8,809 ft (1,650 to 2,685 m), outcrops of the Parachute Creek Member
of the Green River Formation, suitable pollinators and habitat for
these pollinators, steep slopes of these soil outcrops that lend to the
appropriate disturbance levels, and a climate with between 12 to 18 in.
(30 and 46 cm) in annual rainfall and winter snow.
The primary threat to Penstemon debilis and its habitat in this
Unit is energy development. This threat should be addressed as detailed
above in the ``Special Management Considerations or Protection''
section.
Unit 4. Anvil Points
Unit 4, the Anvil Points Unit, consists of 4,885 ac (1,977 ha) of
Federal and private land. It is located approximately 1 mi (2 km) north
of the town of Rulison in Garfield County, Colorado. Seventy percent of
this Unit is managed by the BLM, Colorado River Valley Field Office.
Twenty-three percent of the Unit (1,102 ac (446 ha)) is within several
potential BLM Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs). If these
become ACECs, they would have several stipulations to protect Penstemon
debilis, particularly from oil and gas development. These areas are
discussed further in the proposed (75 FR 35732; June 23, 2010) and
final listing rules (in today's Rules and Regulations section of the
Federal Register). Thirty percent of this Unit is on private lands.
This Unit is currently occupied.
This Unit currently has all the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of Penstemon debilis, including the Rocky
Mountain Cliff and Canyon plant community (SW ReGAP 2004, spatial data)
with less than 10 percent plant cover, suitable elevational ranges of
6,318 to 9,288 ft (1,926 to 2,831 m), outcrops of the Parachute Creek
Member of the Green River Formation, suitable pollinators and habitat
for these pollinators, steep slopes of these soil outcrops that lend to
the appropriate disturbance levels, and a climate with between 12 to 18
in. (30 and 46 cm) in annual rainfall and winter snow.
Threats to Penstemon debilis and its habitat in this Unit is
primarily energy development. This threat should be addressed as
detailed above in the ``Special Management Considerations or
Protection'' section.

Phacelia submutica

We are proposing nine units as critical habitat for Phacelia
submutica. The critical habitat areas we describe below constitute our
current best assessment of areas that meet the definition of critical
habitat for P. submutica. The nine units we propose as critical habitat
are: (1) Sulphur Gulch, (2) Pyramid Rock, (3) Roan Creek, (4) DeBeque,
(5) Mount Logan, (6) Ashmead Draw, (7) Baugh Reservoir, (8) Horsethief
Mountain, and (9) Anderson Gulch. Table 6 shows the proposed critical
habitat units.

Table 6--Proposed Critical Habitat Units (CHUs) for Phacelia submutica
[Area estimates reflect all land within CHU boundaries.]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Land ownership by type
Unit /Unit name ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Size of unit
Federal State Private
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Sulphur Gulch.................. 1,046 ac (423 ha)......... ..................... ......................... 1,046 ac (423 ha).
2. Pyramid Rock................... 15,429 ac (6,244 ha)...... ..................... 1,892 ac (766 ha)........ 17,321 ac (7,010 ha).
3. Roan Creek..................... 2 ac (1 ha)............... ..................... 52 ac (21 ha)............ 54 ac (22 ha).
4. DeBeque........................ 401 ac (162 ha)........... ..................... 129 ac (52 ha)........... 530 ac (215 ha).
5. Mount Logan.................... 242 ac (98 ha)............ ..................... 35 ac (14 ha)............ 277 ac (112 ha).
6. Ashmead Draw................... 1,046 ac (423 ha)......... ..................... 174 ac (71 ha)........... 1,220 ac (494 ha).
7. Baugh Reservoir................ 19 ac (8 ha).............. ..................... 10 ac (4 ha)............. 28 ac (12 ha).
8. Horsethief Mountain............ 3,614 ac (1,463 ha)....... ..................... 594 ac (240 ha).......... 4,209 ac (1,703 ha).
9. Anderson Gulch................. .......................... 173 ac (70 ha)....... 128 ac (52 ha)........... 301 ac (122 ha).
Total......................... 21,800 ac (8,822 ha)...... 173 ac (70 ha)....... 3,014 ac (1,220 ha)...... 24,987 ac (10,112 ha).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Note: Area sizes may not sum due to rounding.

We present brief descriptions of all units included in the proposed
critical habitat designation and reasons why they meet the definition
of critical habitat for Phacelia submutica. The units are listed in
order geographically west to east.
Unit 1. Sulphur Gulch
Unit 1, the Sulphur Gulch Unit, consists of 1,046 ac (423 ha) of
federally owned land. The Unit is located approximately 7.7 mi (12.5
km) southwest of the town of DeBeque in Mesa County, Colorado. This
Unit is managed by BLM, through the Grand Junction Field Office. This
Unit is currently occupied.
This Unit currently has all the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the species including barren clay
badlands with less than 20 percent plant/vegetation cover, suitable
elevational ranges of 5,480 to 6,320 ft (1,670 to 1,926 m), appropriate
topography, and shrink-swell alkaline clay soils within the Atwell
Gulch and Shire members of the Wasatch Formation. All lands within this
Unit are leased as grazing allotments, and less than 1 percent is
managed as an active pipeline ROW by the BLM. While these lands
currently have the physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of Phacelia submutica, because of a lack of cohesive
management and protections, special management will be required to
maintain these features in this Unit.
Threats to Phacelia submutica and its habitat in this Unit include
energy development, recreation (especially OHVs), domestic and wild
ungulate grazing and use, and nonnative invasive species, such as
Bromus tectorum. These threats should be addressed as

[[Page 45097]]

detailed above in the ``Special Management Considerations or
Protection'' section.
Unit 2. Pyramid Rock
Unit 2, the Pyramid Rock Unit, is the largest Unit we are proposing
and consists of 17,321 ac (7,010 ha) of federally and privately owned
lands in Mesa and Garfield Counties, Colorado. This Unit is
approximately 1.6 mi (2.6 km) west of the town of DeBeque. The eastern
boundary borders Roan Creek, and Dry Fork Creek runs through the
northern quarter of the Unit. Eighty-nine percent is managed by BLM
through the Grand Junction Field Office, and 11 percent is under
private ownership. Three percent of this Unit is within the Pyramid
Rock Natural Area and Pyramid Rock ACEC that was designated, in part,
to protect the species as discussed in the proposed (75 FR 35739; June
23, 2010) and final listing rules (in the Rules and Regulations section
of today's Federal Register). This Unit is currently occupied.
This Unit currently has all the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the species including barren clay
badlands with less than 20 percent plant/vegetation cover, suitable
elevational ranges of 4,960 to 6,840 ft (1,512 to 2,085 m), the
appropriate topography, and shrink-swell alkaline clay soils within the
Atwell Gulch and Shire members of the Wasatch Formation. Ninety-four
percent of this Unit is managed as a grazing allotment by the BLM.
Additionally, 11 percent of this Unit is managed as an active pipeline
ROW. While these lands currently have the physical and biological
features essential to the conservation of Phacelia submutica, because
of a lack of cohesive management and protections, special management
will be required to maintain these features in this Unit.
Threats to Phacelia submutica and its habitat in this Unit include
energy development, recreation (especially OHV use), livestock and wild
ungulate grazing and use, and nonnative invasive species including
Bromus tectorum and Halogeton glomeratus. The Westwide Energy corridor
runs through this Unit. The corridor covers almost 10 percent of this
Unit (Service 2011a, p. 9). These threats should be addressed as
detailed above in the ``Special Management Considerations or
Protection'' section.
Unit 3. Roan Creek
Unit 3, the Roan Creek Unit, consists of 54 ac (22 ha) of Federal
and privately owned lands in Garfield County, Colorado. The Unit is
located 3.3 mi (5.4 km) north of the town of DeBeque and for 1.7 mi
(2.7 km) along both sides of County Road 299. Ninety-seven percent of
this Unit is privately owned. Three percent of this Unit is managed by
BLM through the Grand Junction Field Office. This Unit is currently
occupied.
This Unit currently has all the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the species including barren clay
badlands with less than 20 percent cover, suitable elevational ranges
of 5,320 to 5,420 ft (1,622 to 1,652 m), the appropriate topography,
and shrink-swell alkaline clay soils within the Atwell Gulch and Shire
members of the Wasatch Formation. The entire Unit is within a grazing
allotment. While these lands currently have the physical and biological
features essential to the conservation of Phacelia submutica, because
of a lack of cohesive management and protections, special management
will be required to maintain these features in this Unit.
Threats to Phacelia submutica and its habitat in this Unit include
recreation (especially OHV use), livestock and wild ungulate grazing
and use, invasion by nonnative invasive species including Bromus
tectorum and Halogeton glomeratus, and a lack of protections on private
lands. These threats should be addressed as detailed above in the
``Special Management Considerations or Protection'' section.
Unit 4. DeBeque
Unit 4, the DeBeque Unit, consists of 530 ac (215 ha) of Federal
and private lands in Mesa County, Colorado. This Unit is located 0.25
mile north of DeBeque between Roan Creek Road and Cemetery Road.
Seventy-six percent of this Unit is managed by BLM through the Grand
Junction Field Office. This Unit is currently occupied.
This Unit currently has all the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the species including barren clay
badlands with less than 20 percent plant/vegetation cover, suitable
elevational ranges of 5,180 to 5,400 ft (1,579 to 1,646 m), the
appropriate topography, and shrink-swell alkaline clay soils within the
Atwell Gulch and Shire members of the Wasatch Formation. While these
lands currently have the physical and biological features essential to
the conservation of Phacelia submutica, because of a lack of cohesive
management and protections, special management will be required to
maintain these features in this Unit.
Threats to Phacelia submutica and its habitat in this Unit include
energy development, residential development, recreation (especially OHV
use), livestock and wild ungulate grazing and use, and nonnative
invasive species including Bromus tectorum and Halogeton glomeratus.
Since 24 percent of the Unit is privately owned and borders the north
of the town of DeBeque, this Unit is threatened by potential urban or
agricultural development. The Westwide Energy corridor runs through
this Unit. The corridor covers almost 66 percent of this Unit (Service
2011a, p. 9). These threats should be addressed as detailed above in
the ``Special Management Considerations or Protection'' section.
Unit 5. Mount Logan
Unit 5, the Mount Logan Unit, consists of 277 ac (112 ha) of
Federal and private lands in Garfield County, Colorado. The Unit is
located 2.7 mi (4.4 km) north, northeast of the town of DeBeque,
Colorado, and 0.5 mi (0.8 km) west of Interstate 70. Eighty-eight
percent of this Unit is managed by BLM through the Grand Junction Field
Office. The remainder of this Unit is privately owned. This Unit is
currently occupied.
This Unit currently has all the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the species including barren clay
badlands with less than 20 percent plant/vegetation cover, suitable
elevational ranges of 4,960 to 5,575 ft (1,512 to 1,699 m), the
appropriate topography, and shrink-swell alkaline clay soils within the
Atwell Gulch and Shire members of the Wasatch Formation. Eighty-eight
percent of this Unit is managed as a grazing allotment by BLM, and 53
percent is managed as an active pipeline ROW. An access road runs
through the Unit connecting several oil wells and associated
infrastructure. While these lands currently have the physical and
biological features essential to the conservation of Phacelia
submutica, because of a lack of cohesive management and protections,
special management will be required to maintain these features in this
Unit.
Threats to Phacelia submutica and its habitat in this Unit include
energy development, recreation (especially OHV use), livestock and wild
ungulate grazing and use, and nonnative invasive species, including
Bromus tectorum and Halogeton glomeratus. These threats should be
addressed as detailed above in the ``Special Management Considerations
or Protection'' section.
Unit 6. Ashmead Draw
Unit 6, the Ashmead Draw Unit, consists of 1,220 ac (494 ha) of
both Federal and private lands in Mesa County, Colorado. The Unit is
located

[[Page 45098]]

1.5 mi (2.5 km) southeast of the town of DeBeque, Colorado, and east of
45.5 Road (DeBeque Cut-off Road). Eighty-six percent of this Unit is
managed by BLM through the Grand Junction Field Office. This Unit is
currently occupied.
This Unit currently has all the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the species including barren clay
badlands with less than 20 percent plant/vegetation cover, suitable
elevational ranges of 4,940 to 5,808 ft (1,506 to 1,770 m), the
appropriate topography, and shrink-swell alkaline clay soils within the
Atwell Gulch and Shire members of the Wasatch Formation. A network of
access roads runs through the Unit. Eighty eight percent of this Unit
is within a BLM grazing allotment, and 84 percent is within the Grand
Junction Field Office's designated energy corridor. Thirty percent of
the Unit is managed as an active pipeline ROW. While these lands
currently have the physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of Phacelia submutica, because of a lack of cohesive
management and protections, special management will be required to
maintain these features in this Unit.
Threats to Phacelia submutica and its habitat in this Unit include
energy development, recreation (especially OHV use), livestock and wild
ungulate grazing and use, and nonnative invasive species, including
Bromus tectorum and Halogeton glomeratus. The Westwide Energy corridor
runs through this Unit. The corridor covers almost 84 percent of this
Unit (Service 2011a, p. 9). These threats should be addressed as
detailed above in the ``Special Management Considerations or
Protection'' section.
Unit 7. Baugh Reservoir
Unit 7, the Baugh Reservoir Unit, consists of 29 ac (12 ha) of
Federal and private lands in Mesa County, Colorado. The Unit is located
6 mi (10 km) south of DeBeque, Colorado, near Kimball Mesa and Horse
Canyon Road. Sixty-six percent is managed by BLM through the Grand
Junction Field Office, and the remaining 34 percent is on private
lands. This Unit is currently occupied.
This Unit currently has all the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the species, including barren clay
badlands with less than 20 percent plant/vegetation cover, a suitable
elevational range of 5,400 to 5,700 ft (1,646 to 1,737 m), the
appropriate topography, and shrink-swell alkaline clay soils within the
Atwell Gulch and Shire members of the Wasatch Formation. An access road
runs through the Unit, close to the occurrence of Phacelia submutica.
While these lands currently have the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of P. submutica, because of a lack of
cohesive management and protections, special management will be
required to maintain these features in this Unit.
Threats to Phacelia submutica and its habitat in this Unit include
energy development, recreation, livestock and wild ungulate grazing and
use, and nonnative invasive species including Bromus tectorum and
Halogeton glomeratus. The Westwide Energy corridor runs through this
Unit. The corridor covers almost 66 percent of this Unit (Service
2011a, p. 9). These threats should be addressed as detailed above in
the ``Special Management Considerations or Protection'' section.
Unit 8. Horsethief Mountain
Unit 8, the Horsethief Mountain Unit, consists of 4,209 ac (1,703
ha) of Federal and private lands in Mesa County, Colorado. It is
located approximately 3.5 mi (5.6 km) southeast of DeBeque, Colorado,
and along the eastern side of Sunnyside Road (V Road). Thirty-four
percent is managed by BLM through the Grand Junction Field Office, 29
percent by the White River National Forest, 23 percent by the Grand
Mesa Uncompahgre National Forest, and 14 percent is on private lands.
This Unit is currently occupied.
This Unit currently has all the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the species, including barren clay
badlands with less than 20 percent plant/vegetation cover, a suitable
elevational range of 5,320 to 6,720 ft (1,622 to 2,048 m), the
appropriate topography, and shrink-swell alkaline clay soils within the
Atwell Gulch and Shire members of the Wasatch Formation. While these
lands currently have the physical and biological features essential to
the conservation of Phacelia submutica, because of a lack of cohesive
management and protections, special management will be required to
maintain these features in this Unit.
Threats to Phacelia submutica and its habitat in this Unit include
energy development, recreation (especially OHV use), livestock and wild
ungulate grazing and use, and nonnative invasive species, including
Bromus tectorum and Halogeton glomeratus. These threats should be
addressed as detailed above in the ``Special Management Considerations
or Protection'' section.
Unit 9. Anderson Gulch
Unit 9, the Anderson Gulch Unit, consists of 301 ac (122 ha) of
State and private lands in Mesa County, Colorado. It is located 11 mi
(17 km) southeast of DeBeque, Colorado, and 3.5 mi (5.5 km) north of
the town of Molina, Colorado. Within the Unit, 57 percent of the lands
are managed by CDOW, within the Plateau Creek State Wildlife Area, and
43 percent is private. This Unit is currently occupied.
This Unit currently has all the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the species, including barren clay
badlands with less than 20 percent plant/vegetation cover, a suitable
elevational range of 5,860 to 6,040 ft (1,786 to 1,841 m), the
appropriate topography, and shrink-swell alkaline clay soils within the
Atwell Gulch and Shire members of the Wasatch Formation. Forty-two
percent of the Unit is a pending pipeline ROW. While these lands
currently have the physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of Phacelia submutica, because of a lack of cohesive
management and protections on State and private land, special
management may be required to maintain these features in this Unit.
Threats to Phacelia submutica and its habitat in this Unit include
energy development, recreation (especially from OHVs), livestock and
wild ungulate grazing and use, and nonnative invasive species,
including Bromus tectorum and Halogeton glomeratus. These threats
should be addressed as detailed above in the ``Special Management
Considerations or Protection'' section.

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.
Decisions by the 5th and 9th Circuit Courts of Appeals have
invalidated our regulatory definition of ``destruction or adverse
modification'' (50 CFR 402.02) (see Gifford Pinchot Task Force v. U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, 378 F. 3d 1059 (9th Cir. 2004) and Sierra
Club v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service et al., 245 F. 3d 434, 442 (5th
Cir. 2001)), and we

[[Page 45099]]

do not rely on this regulatory definition when analyzing whether an
action is likely to destroy or adversely modify critical habitat. Under
the statutory provisions of the Act, we determine destruction or
adverse modification on the basis of whether, with implementation of
the proposed Federal action, the affected critical habitat would
continue to serve its intended conservation role for the species.
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
or authorized, do not require section 7 consultation.
As a result of section 7 consultation, we document compliance with
the requirements of section 7(a)(2) 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 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 require Federal agencies to reinitiate
consultation on previously reviewed actions in instances where we have
listed a new species or subsequently designated critical habitat that
may be affected and the Federal agency has retained discretionary
involvement or control over the action (or the agency's discretionary
involvement or control is authorized by law). Consequently, Federal
agencies sometimes may need to request reinitiation of consultation
with us on actions for which formal consultation has been completed, if
those actions with discretionary involvement or control may affect
subsequently listed species or designated critical habitat.
Application of the ``Adverse Modification'' Standard
As we described above, we do not currently have a valid regulation
that defines adverse modification. The key factor related to the
adverse modification determination is whether, with implementation of
the proposed Federal action, the affected critical habitat would
continue to serve its intended conservation role for the species.
Activities that may destroy or adversely modify critical habitat are
those that alter the physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of these species to an extent that appreciably reduces the
conservation value of critical habitat for Ipomopsis polyantha,
Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia submutica. As discussed above, the role
of critical habitat is to support life-history needs of the 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 destroy or
adversely modify such habitat, or that may be affected by such
designation.
Activities that may affect critical habitat, when carried out,
funded, or authorized by a Federal agency, should result in
consultation for Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia
submutica.
For Ipomopsis polyantha these activities include, but are not
limited to:
(1) Actions that would lead to the destruction or alteration of the
plants or their habitat; or actions that would result in continual or
excessive disturbance or prohibit overland soil erosion on Mancos shale
soils. Such activities could include, but are not limited to, removing
soils to a depth that the seed bank has been removed, repeatedly
scraping areas, repeated mowing, excessive grazing, continually driving
vehicles across areas, permanent developments, the construction or
maintenance of utility or road corridors, and ditching. These
activities could remove the seed bank, reduce plant numbers by
prohibiting reproduction, impede or accelerate beyond historical levels
the natural or artificial erosion processes on which the plant relies
(as described above in ``Physical and Biological Features''), or lead
to the total loss of a site.
(2) Actions that would result in the loss of pollinators or their
habitat, such that reproduction could be diminished. Such activities
could include, but are not limited to, destroying ground or twig
nesting habitat, habitat fragmentation that prohibits pollinator
movements from one area to the next, spraying pesticides that will kill
pollinators, and eliminating other plant species on which pollinators
are reliant for floral resources (this could include replacing native
species that provide floral resources with grasses, which do not
provide floral resources for pollinators). These activities could
result in reduced fruit production for Ipomopsis polyantha, or increase
the incidence of self-pollination, thereby reducing genetic diversity
and seed production.
(3) Actions that would result in excessive plant competition at
Ipomopsis polyantha sites. Such activities could include, but are not
limited to, revegetation efforts that include competitive nonnative
invasive species such as Bromus inermis, Medicago sativa (alfalfa),
Meliotus spp. (sweetclover); planting native species, such as Pinus
ponderosa, into open areas where the plant is found; and creating
disturbances that allow nonnative invasive species to invade. These
activities could cause I. polyantha to be outcompeted and subsequently
either lost at sites, or reduced in numbers of individuals.
For Penstemon debilis these activities include, but are not limited
to:
(1) Actions that would lead to the destruction or alteration of the
plants or

[[Page 45100]]

their habitat. Such activities could include, but are not limited to,
activities associated with oil shale mining, including the mines
themselves, pipelines, roads, and associated infrastructure; activities
associated with oil and gas development, including pipelines, roads,
well pads, and associated infrastructure; activities associated with
reclamation activities, utility corridors, or infrastructure; and road
construction and maintenance. These activities could lead to the loss
of individuals, fragment the habitat, impact pollinators, cause
increased dust deposition, introduce nonnative invasive species, and
alter the habitat such that important downhill movement or the shale
erosion no longer occurs.
(2) Actions that would alter the highly mobile nature of the sites.
Such activities could include, but are not limited to, activities
associated with oil shale mining, including pipelines, roads, and
associated infrastructure; activities associated with oil and gas
development, including pipelines, roads, well pads, and associated
infrastructure; activities associated with reclamation activities,
utility corridors, or infrastructure; and road construction and
maintenance. These activities could lead to increased soil formation
and a subsequent increase in vegetation, alterations to the soil
morphology, the loss of Penstemon debilis plants and habitat.
(3) Actions that would result in the loss of pollinators or their
habitat, such that reproduction could be diminished. Such activities
could include, but are not limited to, destroying ground or twig
nesting habitat; habitat fragmentation that prohibits pollinator
movements from one area to the next; spraying pesticides that will kill
pollinators; and eliminating other plant species on which pollinators
are reliant for floral resources. These activities could result in
reduced fruit production for Penstemon debilis, or increase the
incidence of self-pollination, thereby further reducing genetic
diversity and reproductive potential.
For Phacelia submutica these activities include, but are not
limited to:
(1) Actions that would lead to the destruction or alteration of the
plants, their seed bank, or their habitat, or actions that would
destroy the fragile clay soils where Phacelia submutica is found. Such
activities could include, but are not limited to, activities associated
with oil and gas development, including pipelines, roads, well pads,
and associated infrastructure; utility corridors or infrastructure;
road construction and maintenance; excessive OHV use; and excessive
livestock grazing. Clay soils are most fragile when wet, so activities
that occur when soils are wet are especially harmful. These activities
could lead to the loss of individuals, fragment the habitat, impact
pollinators, cause increased dust deposition, and alter the habitat
such that important erosional processes no longer occur.
(2) Actions that would result in excessive plant competition at
Phacelia submutica sites. Such activities could include, but are not
limited to, using highly competitive species in restoration efforts, or
creating disturbances that allow nonnative invasive species, such as
Bromus tectorum and Halogeton glomeratus, to invade. These activities
could cause P. submutica to be outcompeted and subsequently either lost
or reduced in numbers of individuals.

Exemptions

Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the Act

The Sikes Act Improvement Act of 1997 (Sikes Act) (16 U.S.C. 670a)
required each military installation that includes land and water
suitable for the conservation and management of natural resources to
complete an integrated natural resources management plan (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)) now provides: ``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 (16 U.S.C. 670a), if
the Secretary determines in writing that such plan provides a benefit
to the species for which critical habitat is proposed for
designation.''
No Department of Defense lands occur within any of the proposed
critical habitat designations.

Exclusions

Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act

Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states that the Secretary must designate
and revise 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 critical habitat if he/she determines that the benefits of
such exclusion outweigh the benefits of specifying such area as part of
the critical habitat, unless he/she determines, based on the best
scientific data available, that the failure to designate such area as
critical habitat will result in the extinction of the species. In
making that determination, 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.
Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we may exclude an area from
designated critical habitat based on economic impacts, impacts on
national security, or any other relevant impacts. In considering
whether to exclude a particular area from the designation, we must
identify the benefits of including the area in the designation,
identify the benefits of excluding the area from the designation, and
determine whether the benefits of exclusion outweigh the benefits of
inclusion. If, based on this analysis, we make this determination, then
we can exclude the area only if such exclusion would not result in the
extinction of the species.
When identifying the benefits of inclusion for an area, we consider
the additional regulatory benefits that area would receive from the
protection from adverse modification or destruction as a result of
actions with a Federal action; the educational benefits of mapping
essential habitat for recovery of the listed species; and any benefits
that may result from a designation due to State or Federal laws that
may apply to critical habitat.

[[Page 45101]]

When identifying the benefits of exclusion, we consider, among
other things, whether exclusion of a specific area is likely to result
in conservation; the continuation, strengthening, or encouragement of
partnerships; or implementation of a management plan that provides
equal to or more conservation than a critical habitat designation would
provide.
In the case of Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia
submutica, the benefits of critical habitat include public awareness of
their presence and the importance of habitat protection, and in cases
where a Federal nexus exists, increased habitat protection for I.
polyantha, P. debilis, and P. submutica due to the protection from
adverse modification or destruction of critical habitat. We are not
currently proposing or considering any exclusions from critical habitat
for I. polyantha or P. submutica, but we are considering two exclusions
on private lands for P. debilis and are requesting public input on
whether these areas should be excluded. For these three species, all of
which are plants that do not receive protection from take under the
Act, the primary impact and benefit of designating critical habitat
will be on Federal lands or in instances where there is a Federal nexus
for projects on private lands.
When we evaluate the existence of a conservation plan when
considering the benefits of exclusion, we consider a variety of
factors, including but not limited to, whether the plan is finalized;
how it provides for the conservation of the essential physical and
biological features; whether there is a reasonable expectation that the
conservation management strategies and actions contained in a
management plan will be implemented into the future; whether the
conservation strategies in the plan are likely to be effective; and
whether the plan contains a monitoring program or adaptive management
to ensure that the conservation measures are effective and can be
adapted in the future in response to new information.
After identifying the benefits of inclusion and the benefits of
exclusion, we carefully weigh the two sides to determine whether the
benefits of exclusion outweigh those of inclusion. If we determine that
they do, we then determine whether exclusion would result in
extinction. If exclusion of an area from critical habitat will result
in extinction, we will not exclude it from the designation.
Based on the information provided by entities seeking exclusion, as
well as any additional public comments received, we will evaluate
whether certain lands in the proposed Penstemon debilis CHU 3 (Mount
Callahan) are appropriate for exclusion from the final designation
pursuant to section 4(b)(2) of the Act. If our analysis results in a
determination that the benefits of excluding lands from the final
designation outweigh the benefits of designating those lands as
critical habitat, then we will exclude the lands from the final
designation, provided we find that the failure to designate such areas
as critical habitat will not result in the extinction of the species.
The only exclusions we are considering are for the two Natural
Areas that fall within Penstemon debilis Unit 3, Mount Callahan (see
Map 7). These two areas are designated as the Mount Callahan Natural
Area and the Mount Callahan Saddle Natural Area (CNAP 2010a, pp. 1-11).
These two State Natural Areas were designated specifically to allow the
CNAP to assist the landowner in protecting P. debilis. The Natural
Areas have a long list of activities that can and cannot take place and
best management practices also have been developed for these areas (see
``Mount Callahan Natural Area and Mount Callahan Saddle Natural Area
Articles of Designation and accompanying Best Management Practices''
below) designed to conserve the species and protect the essential
physical and biological features (CNAP 2010a, pp. 4-6 and Exhibit B;
CNAP 2010b, pp. 1-4). Although these agreements can be terminated at
any time, we do not believe they will be, since the Mount Callahan
Natural Area has been in existence since 1987, and was recently
expanded to include the Mount Callahan Saddle Natural Area. Extensive
time and care has been taken to protect P. debilis in these areas.
Providing incentives to private landowners for voluntary conservation
actions is one of the factors we are considering for these exclusions.
This issue is discussed in further detail under ``Exclusions Based on
Other Relevant Impacts'' below. We are seeking public input on the
inclusion or exclusion of these Natural Areas in our critical habitat
designation.
After considering the following areas under section 4(b)(2) of the
Act, we are considering excluding them from the critical habitat
designation for Penstemon debilis:

The Mount Callahan Natural Area

The Mount Callahan Saddle Natural Area

We are considering excluding the areas described above because we
believe that:
(1) Their value for conservation will be preserved for the
foreseeable future by existing protective actions, and
(2) They are appropriate for exclusion under the ``other relevant
factor'' provisions of section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
However, we specifically solicit comments on the inclusion or
exclusion of such areas. In the paragraphs below, we provide a detailed
analysis of our exclusion of these lands under section 4(b)(2) of the
Act.

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 economic impacts, we are preparing an analysis of the economic
impacts of the proposed critical habitat designation and related
factors. Many of the CHUs, as proposed, include private lands. Federal
lands with oil and gas leases, grazing permits, and recreational uses
also are included. Several State parcels are included where hunting or
recreational activities occur.
We will announce the availability of the draft economic analysis as
soon as it is completed, at which time we will seek public review and
comment. At that time, copies of the draft economic analysis will be
available for downloading from the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov, or by contacting the Western Colorado Ecological
Services Office directly (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section).
During the development of a final designation, we will consider
economic impacts, public comments, and other new information, and areas
may be excluded from the final critical habitat designation under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act and our implementing regulations at 50 CFR
424.19.

Exclusions Based on National Security Impacts

Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we consider whether there are
lands owned or managed by the Department of Defense (DOD) where a
national security impact might exist. In preparing this proposal, we
have determined that the lands within the designation of critical
habitat for Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia
submutica are not owned or managed by the Department of Defense, and,
therefore, we anticipate no impact on national security. Consequently,
the Secretary does not propose to exert his discretion to exclude any
areas from the proposed designation based on impacts on national
security.

[[Page 45102]]

Exclusions Based on Other Relevant Impacts

Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we consider any other relevant
impacts, in addition to economic impacts and impacts on national
security. We consider a number of factors including whether the
landowners have developed any HCPs or other management plans for the
area, or whether there are conservation partnerships that would be
encouraged by designation of, or exclusion from, critical habitat. In
addition, we look at any tribal issues, and consider the government-to-
government relationship of the United States with tribal entities (none
of the proposed critical habitat units contain any tribal lands). We
also consider any social impacts that might occur because of the
designation.

Land and Resource Management Plans, Conservation Plans, or Agreements
Based on Conservation Partnerships

We consider a current land management or conservation plan (HCPs as
well as other types) to provide adequate management or protection if it
meets the following criteria:
(1) The plan is complete and provides the same or better level of
protection from adverse modification or destruction than that provided
through a consultation under section 7 of the Act;
(2) There is a reasonable expectation that the conservation
management strategies and actions will be implemented for the
foreseeable future, based on past practices, written guidance, or
regulations; and
(3) The plan provides conservation strategies and measures
consistent with currently accepted principles of conservation biology.
We believe that the Mount Callahan Natural Area and the Mount
Callahan Saddle Natural Area fulfill the above criteria, and we are
considering the exclusion of the non-Federal lands covered by this plan
that provide for the conservation of Penstemon debilis. We are
requesting comments on the benefits to P. debilis from the Mount
Callahan Natural Area and the Mount Callahan Saddle Natural Area and
their potential exclusion from critical habitat.
Mount Callahan Natural Area and Mount Callahan Saddle Natural Area
Articles of Designation and Accompanying Best Management Practices
The Mount Callahan Natural Area was designated in 1987, shortly
after the discovery of Penstemon debilis (CNAP 1987, pp. 1-7). The
Mount Callahan Saddle Natural Area was designated in 2008 (CNAP 2008,
pp. 1-11). Both Natural Areas were designated primarily to protect P.
debilis. The agreement (both areas are in the same agreement) is
between the CNAP and OXY USA. The articles of designation (for both
areas) identify the following conservation measures: Camping is
prohibited, noxious weed management is conducted to minimize damage to
P. debilis, grazing is limited to preserve natural qualities, and
motorized vehicle use is prohibited. The best management practices that
apply within 328 ft (100 m) of occupied habitat provide guidelines for
surveys, limit surface disturbance, address the protection of
pollinators, limit projects that will affect storm water flows, limit
undercutting, provide fencing stipulations for disturbances within 328
ft (100 m), address dust abatement activities, and address monitoring
(CNAP 2008a, pp. 8-11). Ongoing management of the Mount Callahan
Natural Area since 1987, consistent with the conservation measures and
best management practices, demonstrates a long-term commitment by both
parties. Furthermore, the Mount Callahan Saddle Natural Area was added
in 2008, demonstrating an expansion of and commitment to conservation
efforts.
Table 7 provides approximate areas of lands that meet the
definition of critical habitat or are under our consideration for
possible exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the Act from the final
critical habitat rule. Table 7 also provides our reasons for proposed
exclusions.

Table 7--Exemptions and Areas Considered for Exclusion by Critical Habitat Unit for Penstemon debilis
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basis for exclusion/ Areas meeting definition Areas considered for possible
Unit Specific area exemption of critical habitat exclusion
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3.................................. Mount Callahan Natural 4(b)(2)--Natural Area 7,571 ac (3,064 ha)...... 357 ac (144 ha).
Area. Designation.
Mount Callahan Saddle 4(b)(2)--Natural Area ......................... 317 ac (128 ha).
Natural Area. Designation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Peer Review

In accordance with our joint policy on peer review published in the
Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), we will seek the expert
opinions of at least three appropriate and independent specialists
regarding this proposed rule. The purpose of peer review is to ensure
that our critical habitat designation is based on scientifically sound
data, assumptions, and analyses. We have invited these peer reviewers
to comment during this public comment period on our specific
assumptions and conclusions in this proposed designation of critical
habitat.
We will consider all comments and information we receive during
this comment period on this proposed rule during our preparation of a
final determination. Accordingly, the final decision may differ from
this proposal.

Public Hearings

Section 4(b)(5) of the Act provides for one or more public hearings
on this proposal, if requested. Requests must be received within 45
days after the date of publication of this proposed rule in the Federal
Register. Such requests must be sent to the address shown in the
ADDRESSES section. We will schedule public hearings on this proposal,
if any are requested, and announce the dates, times, and places of
those hearings, as well as how to obtain reasonable accommodations, in
the Federal Register and local newspapers at least 15 days before the
hearing.

Required Determinations

Our draft economic analysis will be completed after this proposed
rule is published. Therefore, we will defer our Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use--
Executive Order 13211, Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et
seq.), and Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA),
findings until after this analysis is done.
Regulatory Planning and Review--Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has determined that this
rule is not significant and has not reviewed this proposed rule under
Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review). The OMB bases
its

[[Page 45103]]

determination upon the following four criteria:
(1) Whether the rule will have an annual effect of $100 million or
more on the economy or adversely affect an economic sector,
productivity, jobs, the environment, or other units of the government.
(2) Whether the rule will create inconsistencies with other Federal
agencies' actions.
(3) Whether the rule will materially affect entitlements, grants,
user fees, loan programs, or the rights and obligations of their
recipients.
(4) Whether the rule raises novel legal or policy issues.
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA; 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) as
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
(SBREFA) of 1996 (5 U.S.C 801 et seq.), whenever an agency publishes a
notice of rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must prepare
and make available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis
that describes the effects of the rule on small entities (small
businesses, small organizations, and small government jurisdictions).
However, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head of
the agency certifies the rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The SBREFA amended
the RFA to require Federal agencies to provide a certification
statement of the factual basis for certifying that the rule will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
At this time, we lack the available economic information necessary
to provide an adequate factual basis for the required RFA finding.
Therefore, we defer the RFA finding until completion of the draft
economic analysis prepared under section 4(b)(2) of the Act and
Executive Order 12866. This draft economic analysis will provide the
required factual basis for the RFA finding. Upon completion of the
draft economic analysis, we will announce its availability in the
Federal Register and reopen the public comment period for the proposed
designation. We will include with this announcement, as appropriate, an
initial regulatory flexibility analysis or a certification that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities accompanied by the factual basis for that
determination.
Land use sectors that could be affected by this proposed rule
include: Federal land managers, private landowners with lands that have
a Federal nexus within proposed CHUs, commercial or residential
developers with lands or activities that have a Federal nexus within
proposed CHUs, oil and gas or oil shale companies with Federal leases
that fall within proposed CHUs, livestock owners with permits that fall
within proposed CHUs, and OHV users that may or are utilizing proposed
CHUs.
We have concluded that deferring the RFA finding until completion
of the draft economic analysis is necessary to meet the purposes and
requirements of the RFA. Deferring the RFA finding in this manner will
ensure that we make a sufficiently informed determination based on
adequate economic information and provide the necessary opportunity for
public comment.
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use--Executive Order 13211
Executive Order 13211 (Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use) requires
agencies to prepare Statements of Energy Effects when undertaking
certain actions. Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia
submutica all occur in areas where utility corridors are or may affect
populations. In addition, both P. debilis and P. submutica are in areas
with extensive oil and gas activity. Well pads and their existing
infrastructure are within proposed CHUs. On Federal lands, entities
conducting oil and gas related activities as well as power companies
will need to consult within areas designated as critical habitat.
Although we do not believe these impacts will rise to the level of
significant, we are deferring our finding until the draft economic
analysis has been completed. We will further evaluate this issue as we
conduct our economic analysis, and review and revise this assessment as
warranted.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.)
In accordance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501
et seq.), we make the following findings:
(1) This rule will not produce a Federal mandate. In general, a
Federal mandate is a provision in legislation, statute, or regulation
that would impose an enforceable duty upon State, local, or tribal
governments, or the private sector, and includes both ``Federal
intergovernmental mandates'' and ``Federal private sector mandates.''
These terms are defined in 2 U.S.C. 658(5)-(7). ``Federal
intergovernmental mandate'' includes a regulation that ``would impose
an enforceable duty upon State, local, or tribal governments'' with two
exceptions. It excludes ``a condition of Federal assistance.'' It also
excludes ``a duty arising from participation in a voluntary Federal
program,'' unless the regulation ``relates to a then-existing Federal
program under which $500,000,000 or more is provided annually to State,
local, and tribal governments under entitlement authority,'' if the
provision would ``increase the stringency of conditions of assistance''
or ``place caps upon, or otherwise decrease, the Federal Government's
responsibility to provide funding,'' and the State, local, or tribal
governments ``lack authority'' to adjust accordingly. At the time of
enactment, these entitlement programs were: Medicaid; Aid to Families
with Dependent Children work programs; Child Nutrition; Food Stamps;
Social Services Block Grants; Vocational Rehabilitation State Grants;
Foster Care, Adoption Assistance, and Independent Living; Family
Support Welfare Services; and Child Support Enforcement. ``Federal
private sector mandate'' includes a regulation that ``would impose an
enforceable duty upon the private sector, except (i) A condition of
Federal assistance or (ii) a duty arising from participation in a
voluntary Federal program.''
The designation of critical habitat does not impose a legally
binding duty on non-Federal Government entities or private parties.
Under the Act, the only regulatory effect is that Federal agencies must
ensure that their actions do not destroy or adversely modify critical
habitat under section 7. While non-Federal entities that receive
Federal funding, assistance, or permits, or that otherwise require
approval or authorization from a Federal agency for an action, may be
indirectly impacted by the designation of critical habitat, the legally
binding duty to avoid destruction or adverse modification of critical
habitat rests squarely on the Federal agency. Furthermore, to the
extent that non-Federal entities are indirectly impacted because they
receive Federal assistance or participate in a voluntary Federal aid
program, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act would not apply, nor would
critical habitat shift the costs of the large entitlement programs
listed above onto State governments.
(2) We do not believe that this rule will significantly or uniquely
affect small governments because only a small percentage of the total
land ownership fall on small government lands such as the Town of
Pagosa Springs, Archuleta

[[Page 45104]]

County, and lands owned and operated by the State of Colorado.
Therefore, a Small Government Agency Plan is not required. We do not
believe that this rule would significantly or uniquely affect small
governments because it will not produce a Federal mandate of $100
million or greater in any year, that is, it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. However, we
will further evaluate this issue as we conduct our economic analysis,
and review and revise this assessment if appropriate.
Takings--Executive Order 12630
In accordance with Executive Order 12630 (Government Actions and
Interference with Constitutionally Protected Private Property Rights),
we have analyzed the potential takings implications of designating
critical habitat for Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and
Phacelia submutica in a takings implications assessment. Critical
habitat designation does not affect landowner actions that do not
require Federal funding or permits, nor does it preclude development of
habitat conservation programs or issuance of incidental take permits to
permit actions that do require Federal funding or permits to go
forward. The takings implications assessment concludes that this
designation of critical habitat for I. polyantha, P. debilis, and P.
submutica does not pose significant takings implications for lands
within or affected by the designation.
Federalism--Executive Order 13132
In accordance with Executive Order 13132 (Federalism), this
proposed rule does not have significant Federalism effects. A
Federalism assessment is not required. In keeping with Department of
the Interior and Department of Commerce policy, we requested
information from, and coordinated development of, this proposed
critical habitat designation with appropriate State resource agencies
in Colorado. The designation of critical habitat in areas currently
occupied by the Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia
submutica may impose nominal additional regulatory restrictions to
those currently in place and, therefore, has little incremental impact
on State and local governments and their activities. The designation
may have some benefit to these governments because the areas that
contain the physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of the species are more clearly defined, and the elements
of the features of the habitat necessary to the conservation of the
species are specifically identified. This information does not alter
where and what federally sponsored activities may occur. However, it
may assist local governments in long-range planning (rather than having
them wait for case-by-case section 7 consultations to occur).
Where State and local governments require approval or authorization
from a Federal agency for actions that may affect critical habitat,
consultation under section 7(a)(2) would be required. While non-Federal
entities that receive Federal funding, assistance, or permits, or that
otherwise require approval or authorization from a Federal agency for
an action, may be indirectly impacted by the designation of critical
habitat, the legally binding duty to avoid destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat rests squarely on the Federal agency.
Civil Justice Reform--Executive Order 12988
In accordance with Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform),
the Office of the Solicitor has determined that the rule does not
unduly burden the judicial system and that it meets the requirements of
sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of the Order. We have proposed designating
critical habitat in accordance with the provisions of the Act. This
proposed rule uses standard property descriptions and identifies the
elements of physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of the Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and
Phacelia submutica within the designated areas to assist the public in
understanding the habitat needs of the species.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)
This rule does not contain any new collections of information that
require approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This rule will not impose recordkeeping or
reporting requirements on State or local governments, individuals,
businesses, or organizations. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and
a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)
It is our position that, outside the jurisdiction of the U.S. Court
of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, we do not need to prepare
environmental analyses pursuant to the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) in connection with designating
critical habitat under the Act. We published a notice outlining our
reasons for this determination in the Federal Register on October 25,
1983 (48 FR 49244). This position was upheld by the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Douglas County v. Babbitt, 48 F.3d 1495
(9th Cir. 1995), cert. denied 516 U.S. 1042 (1996)). However, when the
range of the species includes States within the Tenth Circuit, such as
that of Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia submutica,
under the Tenth Circuit ruling in Catron County Board of Commissioners
v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 75 F.3d 1429 (10th Cir. 1996), we
will undertake NEPA analysis for critical habitat designation and
notify the public of the availability of the draft environmental
assessment for this proposal when it is finished.
Clarity of the Rule
We are required by Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule we publish must:
(1) Be logically organized;
(2) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
(3) Use clear language rather than jargon;
(4) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
(5) Use lists and tables wherever possible.
If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us
comments by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. To
better help us revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as
possible. For example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections
or paragraphs that are unclearly written, which sections or sentences
are too long, the sections where you feel lists or tables would be
useful, etc.
Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes
In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994
(Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal
Governments; 59 FR 22951), Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and
Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments), and the Department of the
Interior's manual at 512 DM 2, we readily acknowledge our
responsibility to communicate meaningfully with recognized Federal
Tribes on a government-to-government basis. In accordance with
Secretarial Order 3206 of June 5, 1997 (American Indian Tribal

[[Page 45105]]

Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust Responsibilities, and the Endangered
Species Act), we readily acknowledge our responsibilities to work
directly with Tribes in developing programs for healthy ecosystems, to
acknowledge that tribal lands are not subject to the same controls as
Federal public lands, to remain sensitive to Indian culture, and to
make information available to Tribes.
We determined that there are no tribal lands that were occupied by
Ipomopsis polyantha, Penstemon debilis, and Phacelia submutica at the
time of listing that contain the features essential for conservation of
the species, and no tribal lands unoccupied by the I. polyantha, P.
debilis, and P. submutica that are essential for the conservation of
the species. Therefore, we are not proposing to designate critical
habitat for I. polyantha, P. debilis, and P. submutica on tribal lands.

References Cited

A complete list of references cited is available on the Internet at
http://www.regulations.gov and upon request from the Western Colorado
Ecological Services Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

Authors

The primary authors of this package are the staff members of the
Western Colorado Ecological Services Office.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

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

Proposed Regulation Promulgation

Accordingly, we propose to amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter
I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below:

PART 17--ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS

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

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; 16 U.S.C.
4201-4245; Public Law 99-625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise
noted.

2. In Sec. 17.12(h), revise the entry for ``Ipomopsis polyantha,''
``Penstemon debilis,'' and ``Phacelia submutica'' under ``Flowering
Plants'' in the List of Endangered and Threatened Plants to read as
follows:

Sec. 17.12 Endangered and threatened plants.

* * * * *
(h) * * *

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species
-------------------------------------------------- Historic range Family Status When listed Critical habitat Special
Scientific name Common name rules
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flowering Plants:

* * * * * * *
Ipomopsis polyantha....... Pagosa skyrocket. U.S.A. (CO) Polemoniaceae.... E 792.............. 17.96(a)......... NA

* * * * * * *
Penstemon debilis......... Parachute U.S.A. (CO) Plantaginaceae... T 792.............. 17.96(a)......... NA
beardtongue.

* * * * * * *
Phacelia submutica........ DeBeque phacelia. U.S.A. (CO) Hydrophyllaceae.. T 792.............. 17.96(a)......... NA

* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. In Sec. 17.96, amend paragraph (a) by adding entries for
``Phacelia submutica (DeBeque phacelia)'' in alphabetical order under
Family Hydrophyllaceae, ``Penstemon debilis (Parachute penstemon)'' in
alphabetical order under Family Plantaginaceae, and ``Ipomopsis
polyantha (Pagosa skyrocket)'' in alphabetical order under Family
Polemoniaceae to read as follows:

Sec. 17.96 Critical habitat--plants.

(a) Flowering plants.
* * * * *
Family Hydrophyllaceae: Phacelia submutica (DeBeque phacelia)

(1) Critical habitat units are designated for Garfield and Mesa
Counties, Colorado.
(2) Within these areas, the primary constituent elements (PCEs) of
the physical and biological features essential to the conservation of
Phacelia submutica consist of five components:
(i) Suitable soils and geology.
(A) Atwell Gulch and Shire members of the Wasatch formation.
(B) Within these larger formations, small areas (from 10 to 1,000
ft\2\ (1 to 100 m\2\)) on colorful exposures of chocolate to purplish
brown, light to dark charcoal gray, and tan clay soils. These small
areas are slightly different in texture and color than the similar
surrounding soils. Occupied sites are characterized by alkaline (pH
range from 7 to 8.9) soils with higher clay content than similar nearby
unoccupied soils.
(C) Clay soils that shrink and swell dramatically upon drying and
wetting and are likely important in the maintenance of the seed bank.
(ii) Topography. Moderately steep slopes, benches, and ridge tops
adjacent to valley floors. Occupied slopes range from 2 to 42 degrees
with an average of 14 degrees.
(iii) Elevation and climate.
(A) Elevations from 4,600 ft (1,400 m) to 7,450 ft (2,275 m).
(B) Climatic conditions similar to those around DeBeque, Colorado,
including suitable precipitation and temperatures. Annual fluctuations
in moisture (and probably temperature) greatly influences the number of
Phacelia submutica individuals that grow in a given year and are thus
able to set seed and replenish the seed bank.
(iv) Plant community.
(A) Small (from 10 to 1,000 ft\2\ (1 to 100 m\2\)) barren areas
with less than 20 percent plant cover in the actual barren areas.
(B) Presence of appropriate associated species that can include
(but are not limited to) the natives Grindelia fastigiata, Eriogonum
gordonii, Monolepis nuttalliana, and Oenothera caespitosa. If sites
become dominated by Bromus tectorum or other invasive nonnative
species, they should not be discounted because Phacelia submutica may
still be found there.
(C) Appropriate plant communities within the greater pinyon-juniper
woodlands that include:
(1) Clay badlands within the mixed salt desert scrub; or
(2) Clay badlands within big sagebrush shrublands.

[[Page 45106]]

(v) Maintenance of the seed bank and appropriate disturbance
levels.
(A) Within suitable soil and geologies (see paragraph (2)(i) of
this entry), undisturbed areas where seed banks are left undamaged.
(B) Areas with light disturbance when dry and no disturbance when
wet. Clay soils are relatively stable when dry but are extremely
vulnerable to disturbances when wet. While Phacelia submutica has
evolved with some light natural disturbances including erosional and
shrink-swell processes, human disturbances that are either heavy or
light when soils are wet could impact the species and its seed bank.
More heavily disturbed areas should be evaluated over the course of
several years for the species' presence.
(3) Critical habitat does not include manmade structures (such as
buildings, aqueducts, runways, roads, and other paved areas) and the
land on which they are located existing within the legal boundaries on
the effective date of this rule.
(4) Critical habitat map units. Data layers defining map units were
created on a base of both satellite imagery (NAIP 2009) as well as USGS
geospatial quadrangle maps and were mapped using NAD 83 Universal
Transverse Mercator (UTM), zone 13N coordinates. Location information
came from a wide array of sources. A habitat model prepared by the
Colorado Natural Heritage Program also was utilized.
(5) Note: Index map of critical habitat for Phacelia submutica
follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P

[[Page 45107]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JY11.006

(6) Unit 1: Mesa County, Colorado.
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13 N coordinates
(E,N): 206056.41, 4354673.68; 206059.46, 4354708.47; 206068.50,
4354742.21; 206083.26, 4354773.87; 206103.29, 4354802.48; 206127.99,
4354827.18; 206156.61, 4354847.21; 206188.26, 4354861.97; 206214.13,
4354868.90; 208172.81, 4355368.77; 208189.62, 4355371.81; 208221.50,

[[Page 45108]]

4355372.48; 211387.70, 4355153.18; 211410.39, 4355151.28; 211445.58,
4355146.74; 211486.68, 4355135.00; 211547.06, 4355091.87; 211556.23,
4355027.68; 211558.18, 4354988.68; 211544.57, 4354945.59; 211505.83,
4354878.16; 211464.05, 4354854.86; 210208.15, 4354271.78; 210182.91,
4354265.02; 210158.47, 4354262.88; 206249.74, 4354473.91; 206222.00,
4354476.34; 206188.26, 4354485.38; 206156.60, 4354500.14; 206127.99,
4354520.17; 206103.29, 4354544.87; 206083.26, 4354573.48; 206068.50,
4354605.14; 206059.46, 4354638.88; and returning to 206056.41,
4354673.68.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 1 of critical habitat for Phacelia submutica
is provided at paragraph (7)(ii) of this entry.
(7) Unit 2: Garfield and Mesa Counties, Colorado.
(i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates
(E,N): 212167.61, 4358240.79; 212181.41, 4358305.17; 216874.61,
4369051.20; 216886.19, 4369076.04; 216906.22, 4369104.65; 216930.92,
4369129.35; 216959.53, 4369149.38; 216988.08, 4369162.70; 217007.08,
4369169.20; 217052.79, 4369178.50; 217098.42, 4369178.50; 217147.50,
4369168.62; 217185.45, 4369148.30; 217228.09, 4369111.07; 217246.04,
4369073.00; 217374.92, 4368485.88; 217316.01, 4367553.09; 218906.65,
4364145.98; 219044.12, 4362859.72; 220022.38, 4362778.06; 220029.81,
4362750.34; 220754.51, 4358989.62; 220756.77, 4358963.78; 220763.05,
4358652.76; 220758.37, 4358594.29; 219463.44, 4356169.16; 219454.46,
4356156.34; 219441.47, 4356143.35; 219429.06, 4356134.66; 218497.76,
4355625.60; 218409.92, 4355581.68; 218172.63, 4355513.88; 215567.84,
4354836.96; 215521.83, 4354844.15; 213794.77, 4355190.30; 213727.43,
4355250.15; and returning to 212167.61, 4358240.79.
(ii) Note: Map of Units 1 and 2 of critical habitat for Phacelia
submutica follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P

[[Page 45109]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JY11.007

(8) Unit 3: Garfield County, Colorado.
(i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates
(E,N): 221791.53, 4364704.92; 221793.82, 4364731.04; 221800.60,
4364756.36; 221811.68, 4364780.12; 221826.71, 4364801.59; 221845.25,
4364820.12; 221866.72, 4364835.16; 221890.48, 4364846.24; 221915.80,
4364853.02; 221941.92, 4364855.31; 221968.03, 4364853.02; 221993.35,
4364846.24; 222017.11, 4364835.16;

[[Page 45110]]

222038.58, 4364820.12; 222057.11, 4364801.59; 222070.52, 4364782.44;
222216.47, 4364510.68; 222225.04, 4364492.29; 222231.83, 4364466.97;
222234.11, 4364440.85; 222232.54, 4364422.94; 222216.07, 4364254.88;
222209.42, 4364230.07; 222198.34, 4364206.31; 222183.30, 4364184.84;
222164.77, 4364166.30; 222143.30, 4364151.27; 222119.54, 4364140.19;
222094.22, 4364133.40; 222068.10, 4364131.12; 222041.99, 4364133.40;
222016.67, 4364140.19; 221992.91, 4364151.27; 221971.44, 4364166.30;
221952.90, 4364184.84; 221937.87, 4364206.31; 221927.38, 4364228.80;
221798.70, 4364660.60; 221793.82, 4364678.81; and returning to
221791.53, 4364704.92.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 3 of critical habitat for Phacelia submutica
is provided at paragraph (10)(ii) of this entry.
(9) Unit 4: Mesa County, Colorado.
(i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates
(E,N): 221750.44, 4360417.57; 221910.53, 4360544.11; 222011.30,
4360532.40; 224377.86, 4359858.22; 224479.87, 4359777.31; 224505.92,
4359669.86; 224162.67, 4359105.67; 224121.94, 4359039.96; 224061.14,
4358997.20; 223982.52, 4358972.67; 223916.23, 4358974.09; 223647.66,
4358996.02; 221914.01, 4359996.02; 221888.97, 4360013.55; 221864.27,
4360038.25; 221844.24, 4360066.86; 221829.48, 4360098.52; 221822.43,
4360124.80; and returning to 221750.44, 4360417.57.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 4 of critical habitat for Phacelia submutica
is provided at paragraph (10)(ii) of this entry.
(10) Unit 5: Garfield County, Colorado.
(i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates
(E,N): 224674.62, 4362880.00; 224676.90, 4362906.11; 224683.69,
4362931.43; 224694.77, 4362955.19; 224709.80, 4362976.66; 224723.94,
4362990.81; 225361.43, 4363566.66; 225380.81, 4363580.23; 225404.57,
4363591.31; 225429.89, 4363598.10; 225456.00, 4363600.38; 225476.05,
4363598.63; 226724.37, 4363422.10; 226741.36, 4363417.55; 226799.80,
4363398.33; 226821.01, 4363388.44; 226842.49, 4363373.40; 226861.02,
4363354.87; 226876.06, 4363333.40; 226887.14, 4363309.64; 226893.92,
4363284.32; 226896.21, 4363258.20; 226893.92, 4363232.09; 226887.14,
4363206.77; 226876.06, 4363183.01; 226861.02, 4363161.54; 226842.49,
4363143.01; 226821.01, 4363127.97; 226797.26, 4363116.89; 226777.13,
4363111.50; 224847.74, 4362731.61; 224825.00, 4362729.62; 224798.89,
4362731.90; 224773.57, 4362738.69; 224749.81, 4362749.77; 224728.34,
4362764.80; 224709.80, 4362783.34; 224694.77, 4362804.81; 224683.69,
4362828.57; 224676.90, 4362853.89; and returning to 224674.62,
4362880.00.
(ii) Note: Map of Units 3, 4, and 5 of critical habitat for
Phacelia submutica follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P

[[Page 45111]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JY11.008

BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(11) Unit 6: Mesa County, Colorado.
(i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates
(E,N): 224130.10, 4355992.22; 224137.33, 4356027.59; 224164.10,
4356079.43; 225800.48, 4358995.39; 225813.35, 4359013.77; 225831.89,
4359032.31; 225853.36, 4359047.34; 225877.12, 4359058.42; 225902.44,
4359065.20; 225928.55, 4359067.49; 225954.67, 4359065.20; 225979.99,
4359058.42; 226003.74, 4359047.34;

[[Page 45112]]

226025.22, 4359032.31; 226043.75, 4359013.77; 226058.79, 4358992.30;
226069.86, 4358968.54; 226076.65, 4358943.22; 226078.93, 4358917.11;
226076.86, 4358893.40; 224608.12, 4352128.37; 224602.98, 4352109.18;
224591.90, 4352085.43; 224576.87, 4352063.95; 224558.33, 4352045.42;
224536.86, 4352030.38; 224513.10, 4352019.30; 224487.78, 4352012.52;
224467.81, 4352010.77; 224347.33, 4352006.47; 224323.80, 4352008.53;
224298.48, 4352015.31; 224274.72, 4352026.39; 224253.25, 4352041.43;
224234.71, 4352059.96; 224219.68, 4352081.44; 224208.60, 4352105.19;
224201.81, 4352130.52; 224199.99, 4352151.35; 224629.91, 4354119.91;
and returning to 224130.10, 4355992.22.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 6 of critical habitat for Phacelia submutica
is provided at paragraph (14)(ii) of this entry.
(12) Unit 7: Mesa County, Colorado.
(i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates
(E,N): 222895.27, 4348972.58; 222897.80, 4349033.20; 222915.05,
4349089.21; 222986.91, 4349165.50; 223071.80, 4349165.50; 223127.84,
4349151.49; 223191.28, 4349133.16; 223258.08, 4349099.76; 223289.13,
4349042.83; 223296.46, 4348986.16; 223281.88, 4348879.74; 223202.51,
4348825.62; 223135.45, 4348812.21; 223082.26, 4348808.17; 223046.13,
4348816.20; 222983.74, 4348834.55; 222946.47, 4348871.83; 222913.76,
4348920.89; and returning to 222895.27, 4348972.58.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 7 of critical habitat for Phacelia submutica
is provided at paragraph (14)(ii) of this entry.
(13) Unit 8: Mesa County, Colorado.
(i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates
(E,N): 227287.92, 4353124.64; 227363.29, 4353992.27; 227486.10,
4355236.26; 227494.99, 4355269.46; 227509.75, 4355301.11; 227529.79,
4355329.72; 227554.49, 4355354.42; 227580.17, 4355372.41; 229695.80,
4356548.43; 229713.96, 4356556.90; 229769.67, 4356573.00; 229791.21,
4356573.00; 229846.71, 4356568.20; 229895.06, 4356513.86; 229901.97,
4356503.99; 230681.73, 4355125.75; 228988.56, 4353080.54; 228569.46,
4352091.46; 229156.20, 4351102.39; 233728.76, 4349562.63; 233736.17,
4349546.74; 234244.43, 4348051.25; 234244.43, 4347992.84; 234223.25,
4347925.78; 234136.83, 4347851.71; 234053.14, 4347868.45; 234019.56,
4347882.27; 228869.43, 4350285.62; 228801.70, 4350322.67; 228248.13,
4350668.17; 228218.86, 4350689.66; 227621.62, 4351711.59; 227402.60,
4352451.12; 227394.12, 4352487.23; 227348.70, 4352740.95; and returning
to 227287.92, 4353124.64.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 8 of critical habitat for Phacelia submutica
is provided at paragraph (14)(ii) of this entry.
(14) Unit 9: Mesa County, Colorado.
(i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates
(E,N): 236060.14, 4347594.28; 236061.74, 4347612.58; 236066.50,
4347630.33; 236074.26, 4347646.98; 236084.79, 4347662.02; 236097.78,
4347675.01; 236112.83, 4347685.55; 236129.48, 4347693.31; 236147.22,
4347698.07; 236160.44, 4347699.22; 238599.07, 4347734.44; 238748.35,
4347678.56; 238818.30, 4347624.15; 238813.83, 4347530.21; 238505.71,
4347090.68; 238427.01, 4347093.30; 236169.29, 4347430.50; 236154.51,
4347434.46; 236137.86, 4347442.23; 236122.81, 4347452.76; 236109.83,
4347465.75; 236099.29, 4347480.80; 236094.26, 4347491.59; 236065.90,
4347560.46; 236061.74, 4347575.99; and returning to 236060.14,
4347594.28.
(ii) Note: Map of Units 6, 7, 8, and 9 of critical habitat for
Phacelia submutica follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P

[[Page 45113]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JY11.009

BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
* * * * *
Family Plantaginaceae: Penstemon debilis (Parachute penstemon)

(1) Critical habitat units are designated for Garfield County,
Colorado.
(2) Within these areas, the primary constituent elements (PCEs) of
the physical and biological features essential to the conservation of
Penstemon debilis consist of five components:
(i) Suitable soils and geology.
(A) Parachute Member and the Lower Part of the Green River
Formation, although soils outside these formations would be suitable
for pollinators (see paragraph (2)(v) of this regulation).
(B) Appropriate soil morphology characterized by a surface layer of
small to moderate shale channers (small

[[Page 45114]]

flagstones) that shift continually due to the steep slopes and below a
weakly developed calcareous, sandy to loamy layer with 40 to 90 percent
coarse material.
(ii) Elevation and climate. Elevations from 5,250 to 9,600 ft
(1,600 to 2,920 m) in elevation. Climatic conditions similar to those
of the Mahogany Bench, including suitable precipitation and
temperatures.
(iii) Plant community.
(A) Barren areas with less than 10 percent plant cover.
(B) Other oil shale endemics, which can include: Mentzelia
rhizomata, Thalictrum heliophilum, Astragalus lutosus, Lesquerella
parviflora, Penstemon osterhoutii, and Festuca dasyclada.
(iv) Habitat for pollinators.
(A) Pollinator ground and twig nesting habitats. Habitats suitable
for a wide array of pollinators and their life-history and nesting
requirements. A mosaic of native plant communities generally would
provide for this diversity (see paragraph (2)(iii) of this regulation).
These habitats can include areas outside of the soils identified in
paragraph (2)(i) of this regulation.
(B) Connectivity between areas allowing pollinators to move from
one population to the next within units.
(C) Availability of other floral resources such as other flowering
plant species that provide nectar and pollen for pollinators. Grass
species do not provide resources for pollinators.
(D) To conserve and accommodate these pollinator requirements, we
have identified a 3,280-ft (1,000-meter) area beyond occupied habitat
to conserve the pollinators essential for reproduction.
(v) High levels of natural disturbance.
(A) Very little to no soil formation.
(B) Slow to moderate but constant downward motion of the oil shale
that maintains the habitat in an early successional state.
(3) Critical habitat does not include manmade structures (such as
buildings, aqueducts, runways, roads, and other paved areas) and the
land on which they are located existing within the legal boundaries on
the effective date of this rule.
(4) Critical habitat map units. Data layers defining map units were
created on a base of both satellite imagery (NAIP 2009) as well as USGS
geospatial quadrangle maps and were mapped using NAD 83 Universal
Transverse Mercator (UTM), zone 13N coordinates. Location information
came from a wide array of sources. Geology, soil, and landcover layers
also were utilized.
(5) Note: Index map of critical habitat for Penstemon debilis
follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P

[[Page 45115]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JY11.010

BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(6) Unit 1: Garfield County, Colorado.
(i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates
(E,N): 202906.15, 4381320.29; 203687.82, 4381249.23; 203711.51,
4380870.24; 206127.56, 4380775.50; 206151.24, 4381130.80; 206743.41,

[[Page 45116]]

4381059.74; 207481.34, 4379882.89; 207546.04, 4379737.88; 207579.46,
4379590.78; 207560.32, 4379461.09; 207478.37, 4379389.00; 207474.54,
4379385.64; 207331.18, 4379313.30; 207242.86, 4379310.27; 205522.68,
4379335.39; 205374.75, 4379343.44; 203884.46, 4379765.47; 203832.32,
4379794.30; 203128.54, 4380665.06; 202917.56, 4380968.75; 202914.21,
4381113.81; and returning to 202906.15, 4381320.29.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 1 of critical habitat for Penstemon debilis
is provided at paragraph (7)(ii) of this entry.
(7) Unit 2: Garfield County, Colorado.
(i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates
(E,N): 200037.93, 4369152.60; 200064.07, 4369235.93; 200561.00,
4370149.00; 200968.81, 4370359.43; 202579.41, 4370903.05; 203616.76,
4371206.04; 204719.41, 4370944.44; 213659.95, 4368221.51; 213580.99,
4367281.93; 208401.49, 4367866.21; 206696.04, 4368647.87; 205938.06,
4369097.92; 205132.71, 4369500.59; 202432.42, 4369595.34; 201153.33,
4369263.73; 200171.00, 4369099.00; and returning to 200037.93,
4369152.6.
(ii) Note: Map of Units 1 and 2 of critical habitat for Penstemon
debilis follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P

[[Page 45117]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JY11.011

BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(8) Unit 3: Garfield County, Colorado.

(i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates
(E,N): 223794.63, 4365442.99; 226421.38, 4369052.84; 226846.74,
4369360.71; 231279.92, 4371117.43; 231538.71, 4371188.86; 231847.17,
4371187.49; 233083.49, 4371030.55; 234022.16, 4370823.43; 234684.25,
4370657.01; 233636.51, 4369246.26; 231875.03, 4367395.93; 228564.25,
4365920.22; 225627.45, 4365376.45; 224031.96, 4365135.93; and returning
to 223794.63, 4365442.99.]
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 3 of critical habitat for Penstemon debilis
follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P

[[Page 45118]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JY11.012

(9) Unit 4: Garfield County, Colorado
(i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates
(E,N): 242721.77, 4377480.02; 243191.00, 4378729.00; 245443.06,
4380986.80; 245458.93, 4381002.66; 245475.49, 4381017.80; 245509.28,
4381047.32; 245532.34, 4381066.29; 249608.89, 4384223.08; 249636.03,
4384243.26; 249649.77, 4384253.12; 249662.66, 4384262.04; 249667.22,
4384265.16; 249676.38, 4384271.35; 249699.98, 4384286.36; 249738.49,
4384309.37; 249778.00, 4384330.63; 249818.42, 4384350.10; 249838.85,

[[Page 45119]]

4384359.38; 249859.67, 4384367.73; 249901.68, 4384383.50; 249922.86,
4384390.91; 249944.35, 4384397.36; 249987.59, 4384409.30; 250031.33,
4384419.28; 250075.48, 4384427.29; 250138.32, 4384436.98; 250178.44,
4384442.24; 250223.13, 4384446.26; 250245.51, 4384447.77; 250267.95,
4384448.27; 250312.81, 4384448.27; 250335.24, 4384447.77; 250357.63,
4384446.26; 250402.32, 4384442.24; 250426.41, 4384439.48; 250430.89,
4384438.85; 250459.56, 4384434.76; 250479.91, 4384431.42; 250520.47,
4384423.91; 250562.42, 4384414.26; 250605.67, 4384402.32; 250648.34,
4384388.46; 250690.34, 4384372.69; 250711.17, 4384364.34; 250731.60,
4384355.06; 250772.02, 4384335.59; 250792.01, 4384325.41; 250811.53,
4384314.33; 250850.04, 4384291.32; 250887.49, 4384266.60; 250923.78,
4384240.23; 250941.63, 4384226.64; 250958.86, 4384212.26; 250992.65,
4384182.74; 251025.07, 4384151.74; 251056.08, 4384119.31; 251076.49,
4384096.62; 251086.93, 4384084.27; 251092.10, 4384078.05; 251109.95,
4384056.24; 251118.88, 4384045.00; 251136.41, 4384022.27; 251157.79,
4383992.34; 251182.51, 4383954.89; 251201.82, 4383923.11; 251216.21,
4383897.34; 251223.21, 4383884.35; 251236.10, 4383859.56; 251239.59,
4383852.72; 251246.47, 4383838.98; 251259.13, 4383811.66; 251276.77,
4383770.40; 251285.12, 4383749.58; 251292.53, 4383728.40; 251306.40,
4383685.73; 251315.85, 4383652.83; 251321.59, 4383629.94; 251324.33,
4383618.47; 251331.27, 4383587.73; 251333.50, 4383577.32; 251337.75,
4383556.47; 251343.27, 4383523.86; 251349.29, 4383479.40; 251353.31,
4383434.72; 251355.32, 4383389.90; 251355.83, 4383367.46; 251355.32,
4383345.03; 251353.31, 4383300.21; 251349.29, 4383255.53; 251343.27,
4383211.07; 251336.94, 4383174.60; 251330.90, 4383146.08; 251327.68,
4383131.86; 251319.74, 4383099.14; 251317.83, 4383091.52; 251313.89,
4383076.30; 251305.40, 4383047.21; 251291.54, 4383004.54; 251280.41,
4382973.76; 251272.78, 4382954.63; 251268.86, 4382945.10; 251257.95,
4382919.32; 251253.09, 4382908.20; 251243.09, 4382886.07; 251227.77,
4382855.08; 251206.51, 4382815.57; 251195.43, 4382796.06; 251183.50,
4382777.06; 251158.78, 4382739.62; 251132.41, 4382703.32; 251104.44,
4382668.24; 251090.06, 4382651.02; 251071.10, 4382629.21; 251042.63,
4382596.73; 251011.62, 4382564.31; 250979.20, 4382533.30; 250945.41,
4382503.78; 250928.19, 4382489.40; 250910.33, 4382475.81; 247067.01,
4379599.29; 247053.05, 4379588.99; 247024.77, 4379568.88; 245278.56,
4378356.07; 243539.79, 4377302.88; 243299.65, 4377257.84; 242735.72,
4377245.93; and returning to 242721.77, 4377480.02]
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 4 of critical habitat for Penstemon debilis
follows:

[[Page 45120]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JY11.013

BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
* * * * *
Family Polemoniaceae: Ipomopsis polyantha (Pagosa skyrocket)

(1) Critical habitat units are designated for Archuleta County,
Colorado.
(2) Within these areas, the primary constituent elements (PCEs) of
the physical and biological features essential to the conservation of
Ipomopsis polyantha consist of five components:
(i) Mancos shale soils.
(ii) Elevation and climate. Elevations from 6,400 to 8,100 ft
(1,950 to 2,475 m)

[[Page 45121]]

and current climatic conditions similar to those that historically
occurred around Pagosa Springs, Colorado. Climatic conditions include
suitable precipitation; cold, dry springs; and winter snow.
(iii) Plant community.
(A) Suitable native plant communities (as described in paragraph
(2)(iii)(B) of this entry) with small (less than 100 ft\2\ (10 m\2\))
or larger (several hectares or acres) barren areas with less than 20
percent plant cover in the actual barren areas.
(B) Appropriate potential native plant communities, although these
communities may not be like they were historically because they have
already been altered. Therefore, there only needs to be the potential
for the appropriate native plant community. For example, Ponderosa pine
forests may have been cut, or areas that had native vegetation may have
been scraped. Native habitats and plants would be preferred to habitats
dominated by nonnative invasive species. These plant communities
include:
(1) Barren shales;
(2) Open montane grassland (primarily Arizona fescue) understory at
the edges of open Ponderosa pine; or
(3) Clearings within the ponderosa pine/Rocky Mountain juniper and
Utah juniper/oak communities.
(iv) Habitat for pollinators.
(A) Pollinator ground and twig nesting areas. Habitats suitable for
a wide array of pollinators and their life-history and nesting
requirements. A mosaic of native plant communities generally would
provide for this diversity.
(B) Connectivity between areas allowing pollinators to move from
one site to the next within each population.
(C) Availability of other floral resources, such as other flowering
plant species that provide nectar and pollen for pollinators. Grass
species do not provide resources for pollinators.
(D) To conserve and accommodate these pollinator requirements, we
have identified a 3,280-ft (1,000-m) area beyond occupied habitat to
conserve the pollinators essential for reproduction.
(v) Appropriate disturbance regime.
(A) Appropriate disturbance levels--Light to moderate, or
intermittent or discontinuous.
(B) Naturally maintained disturbances through soil erosion or
human-maintained disturbances that can include light grazing,
occasional ground clearing, and other disturbances that are not severe
or continual.
(3) Critical habitat does not include manmade structures (such as
buildings, aqueducts, runways, roads, and other paved areas) and the
land on which they are located existing within the legal boundaries on
the effective date of this rule. However, because Ipomopsis polyantha
is found along the edges of roads and buildings, the edges of roads and
edges of structures are included in the designation.
(4) Critical habitat map units. Data layers defining map units were
created on a base of both aerial imagery (NAIP 2009) as well as USGS
geospatial quadrangle maps and were mapped using NAD 83 Universal
Transverse Mercator (UTM), zone 13N coordinates. Location information
came from a wide array of sources.
(5) Note: Index map of critical habitat for Ipomopsis polyantha
follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P

[[Page 45122]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JY11.014

(6) Unit 1: Archuleta County, Colorado.
(i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13 coordinates
(E,N): 303791.32, 4122535.03; 303793.45, 4122922.32; 304096.00,
4123362.40; 304369.56, 4123552.58; 304559.79, 4123642.82; 305688.95,
4123978.43; 306091.12, 4123810.03; 306288.11, 4123711.53; 306854.07,
4123177.90; 306682.38, 4122356.39; 306421.31, 4121926.16; 305629.19,
4121491.52;

[[Page 45123]]

305085.53, 4121418.90; 304527.32, 4121406.59; 303782.83, 4121898.71;
and returning to 303791.32, 4122535.03.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 1 of critical habitat for Ipomopsis
polyantha follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JY11.015

[[Page 45124]]

BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(7) Unit 2: Archuleta County, Colorado.
(i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13 coordinates
(E,N): 306215.91, 4143150.27; 306228.72, 4143313.61; 307003.79,
4143989.39; 307211.97, 4144018.22; 307840.95, 4143816.88; 308210.39,
4143809.74; 308215.75, 4143886.66; 308293.59, 4143872.46; 308346.60,
4143847.52; 309004.29, 4143385.20; 309534.52, 4142892.90; 309558.00,
4142861.72; 309548.26, 4142623.97; 309546.44, 4142621.82; 309498.44,
4142571.81; 309318.44, 4142432.81; 309132.45, 4142298.80; 309124.45,
4142295.80; 309054.45, 4142279.80; 309046.45, 4142278.80; 309016.45,
4142278.80; 308991.49, 4142282.38; 307639.65, 4142712.29; 307518.06,
4142804.69; 307308.93, 4142897.10; 307090.07, 4143115.96; 306885.80,
4143091.64; 306798.26, 4143140.28; 306666.95, 4143154.87; 306667.03,
4143009.21; and returning to 306215.91, 4143150.27.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 2 of critical habitat for Ipomopsis
polyantha follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P

[[Page 45125]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JY11.016

(8) Unit 3: Archuleta County, Colorado.
(i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates
(E,N): 321192.95, 4123901.22; 321219.78, 4124232.82; 321945.28,

[[Page 45126]]

4127008.59; 322719.45, 4127682.22; 323501.91, 4127905.25; 325613.28,
4127099.77; 326316.06, 4126714.67; 326499.78, 4125923.28; 325267.71,
4122561.16; 324767.28, 4121430.82; 324009.92, 4120447.34; 322039.88,
4121949.02; 321275.11, 4123556.12; and returning to 321192.95,
4123901.22.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 3 of critical habitat for Ipomopsis
polyantha is provided at paragraph (9)(ii) of this entry.
(9) Unit 4: Archuleta County, Colorado.
(i) Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83, zone 13N coordinates
(E,N): 325341.89, 4116396.61; 325387.72, 4117588.25; 326991.87,
4117571.07; 326986.14, 4116780.45; 328223.62, 4116654.41; 328223.62,
4116287.75; 327816.85, 4116316.40; 327799.67, 4115921.09; 327392.90,
4115932.55; 327369.98, 4114758.09; 326957.49, 4114763.82; 326963.22,
4115164.85; 326567.91, 4115187.77; 326562.18, 4115588.81; 326172.61,
4115594.53; 326161.15, 4115204.96; 325777.30, 4115210.69; 325576.78,
4115199.23; 325737.20, 4115554.43; 325754.39, 4115795.05; 325668.45,
4115886.72; 325324.70, 4115995.57; and returning to 325341.89,
4116396.61.
(ii) Note: Map of Units 3 and 4 of critical habitat for Ipomopsis
polyantha follows:

[[Page 45127]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JY11.017

[[Page 45128]]

* * * * *

Dated: July 12, 2011.
Eileen Sobeck,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2011-18428 Filed 7-26-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C