[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 174 (Tuesday, September 9, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 53315-53344]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-21232]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2013-0040;4500030114]
RIN 1018-AZ79
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of
Critical Habitat for Agave eggersiana, Gonocalyx concolor, and Varronia
rupicola
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), designate
critical habitat for three Caribbean plants, Agave eggersiana (no
common name), Gonocalyx concolor (no common name), and Varronia
rupicola (no common name), under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act). In total, we are designating approximately 50.6 acres
(20.5 hectares) of critical habitat for A. eggersiana in St. Croix,
U.S. Virgin Islands (USVI), 198 ac (80.1 ha) for G. concolor in Puerto
Rico, and 6,547 ac (2,648 ha) for V. rupicola in southern Puerto Rico
and Vieques Island. The effect of this regulation is to conserve
habitat for these plants under the Act.
DATES: This rule is effective October 9, 2014.
ADDRESSES: This final rule is available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov and at the Caribbean Ecological Services Field
Office. Comments and materials we received, as well as some supporting
[[Page 53316]]
documentation we used in preparing this rule, are available for public
inspection at http://www.regulations.gov. All of the comments,
materials, and documentation that we considered in this rulemaking are
available by appointment, during normal business hours at: U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, Caribbean Ecological Services Field Office, P.O.
Box 491, Road 301 Km. 5.1, Boquer[oacute]n, PR 00622; telephone (787)
851-7297; facsimile (787) 851-7440.
The coordinates or plot points or both from which the maps are
generated are included in the administrative record for this critical
habitat designation and are available at http://www.regulations.gov at
Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2013-0040, and at the Caribbean Ecological
Services Field Office or at http://www.fws.gov/caribbean (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). Any additional tools or supporting
information that we developed for this critical habitat designation
will also be available at the Fish and Wildlife Service Web site and
Field Office set out above, and may also be included in the preamble
and at http://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marelisa Rivera, Deputy Field
Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Caribbean Ecological
Services Field Office, (see ADDRESSES). Persons who use a
telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Summary
Why we need to publish a rule. Under the Act, when we determine
that a species is endangered or threatened, we must designate critical
habitat to the maximum extent prudent and determinable. Designations of
critical habitat can only be completed by issuing a rule.
This rule consists of: A final rule for designation of critical
habitat for Agave eggersiana, Gonocalyx concolor, and Varronia
rupicola. We are designating:
Approximately 50.6 acres (20.5 hectares) of critical
habitat for A. eggersiana on six units in St. Croix, U.S. Virgin
Islands (USVI).
Approximately 198 ac (80.1 ha) for G. concolor on two
units in Puerto Rico.
Approximately 6,547 ac (2,648 ha) for V. rupicola on seven
units in southern Puerto Rico and Vieques Island.
The final rule listing Agave eggersiana and Gonocalyx concolor as
endangered species, and Varronia rupicola as a threatened species, is
published elsewhere in today's Federal Register.
We have prepared an economic analysis of the designation of
critical habitat. We have prepared an analysis of the economic impacts
of the critical habitat designations and related factors. We announced
the availability of the draft economic analysis (DEA) in the Federal
Register on May 21, 2014 (79 FR 29150), allowing the public to provide
comments on our analysis. We have analyzed the comments. We have
completed a final economic analysis (FEA) concurrently with this final
determination.
Peer review and public comment. We sought comments from nine
independent specialists to review our technical assumptions and
analysis, and whether or not we used the best information, to ensure
that this designation of critical habitat is based on scientifically
sound data and analyses. We obtained opinions from one of those
individuals. This peer reviewer generally concurred with our methods
and conclusions. We also considered all comments and information we
received from the public during the comment period.
Previous Federal Actions
Please refer to the proposed listing rule for Agave eggersiana,
Gonocalyx concolor, and Varronia rupicola published on October 22, 2013
(78 FR 62560) for a detailed description of previous Federal actions
concerning these species.
Summary of Comments and Recommendations
We requested written comments from the public on the proposed
designation of critical habitat for Agave eggersiana, Gonocalyx
concolor, and Varronia rupicola during two comment periods. The first
comment period opened with the publication of the proposed rule (78 FR
62529) on October 22, 2013, and closed on December 23, 2013. We also
requested comments on the proposed critical habitat designation and DEA
during a comment period that opened May 21, 2014, and closed on June
20, 2014 (79 FR 29150). We also contacted appropriate Federal, State,
and local agencies; scientific organizations; and other interested
parties and invited them to comment on the proposed rule and draft
economic analysis during these comment periods.
During the first comment period, we received two comment letters
addressing the proposed critical habitat designation. During the second
comment period, we did not receive any comment letters addressing the
proposed critical habitat designation or the draft economic analysis.
We did not receive any requests for a public hearing during either
comment period. All substantive information provided during comment
periods has either been incorporated directly into this final
determination or is addressed below.
Peer Review
In accordance with our peer review policy published on July 1, 1994
(59 FR 34270), we solicited expert opinions from nine knowledgeable
individuals with scientific expertise that included familiarity with
the species, the geographic region in which the species occurs, and
conservation biology principles. We received a response from one of the
peer reviewers. Although the peer reviewer was supportive of the
proposed critical habitat designation, he did not provide any
additional information, clarifications, or suggestions to improve this
final critical habitat rule.
Public Comments
During the public comment periods, we received one comment letter
addressing the proposed critical habitat. The information in the letter
was positive and in support of the proposed designation.
The commenter did state that critical habitat must buffer the
species from climate change; the designation should not protect only
occupied areas. We did not have specific information on potential
climate-change-related, on-the-ground effects in these areas or on
these plants, nor did we receive any information as a result of our
request for such information in the proposed rule. However, based on
the best available scientific and commercial information, we believe
that the designation is sufficient to provide for the recovery of the
species. In addition, according to our evaluation of the area, we
included unoccupied areas for Agave eggersiana and Varronia rupicola
that we determined to be essential for the conservation of the species
(see Criteria Used to Identify Critical Habitat, below).
Summary of Changes From Proposed Rule
Information we received during the comment periods did not result
in any substantive changes to this final rule.
Critical Habitat
Background
Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531
et seq.) as:
(1) The specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the
[[Page 53317]]
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.
Conservation, as defined under section 3 of the Act, means to use
and the use of all methods and procedures that are necessary to bring
an endangered or threatened species to the point at which the measures
provided pursuant to the Act are no longer necessary. Such methods and
procedures include, but are not limited to, all activities associated
with scientific resources management such as research, census, law
enforcement, habitat acquisition and maintenance, propagation, live
trapping, and transplantation, and, in the extraordinary case where
population pressures within a given ecosystem cannot be otherwise
relieved, may include regulated taking.
Critical habitat receives protection under section 7 of the Act
through the requirement that Federal agencies ensure, in consultation
with the Service, that any action they authorize, fund, or carry out is
not likely to result in the destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat. The designation of critical habitat does not affect
land ownership or establish a refuge, wilderness, reserve, preserve, or
other conservation area. 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 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)
of the Act 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.
Under the first prong of the Act's definition of critical habitat,
areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time
it was listed are included in a critical habitat designation if they
contain physical or biological features (1) which are essential to the
conservation of the species and (2) which may require special
management considerations or protection. For these areas, critical
habitat designations identify, to the extent known using the best
scientific and commercial data available, those physical or biological
features that are essential to the conservation of the species (such as
space, food, cover, and protected habitat). In identifying those
physical or biological features within an area, we focus on the
principal biological or physical constituent elements (primary
constituent elements such as roost sites, nesting grounds, seasonal
wetlands, water quality, tide, soil type) that are essential to the
conservation of the species. Primary constituent elements are those
specific elements of the physical or biological features that provide
for a species' life-history processes and are essential to the
conservation of the species.
Under the second prong of the Act's definition of critical habitat,
we can designate critical habitat in areas outside the geographical
area occupied by the species at the time it is listed, upon a
determination that such areas are essential for the conservation of the
species. For example, an area currently occupied by the species but
that was not occupied at the time of listing may be essential to the
conservation of the species and may be included in the critical habitat
designation. We designate critical habitat in areas outside the
geographical area occupied by a species only when a designation limited
to its range would be inadequate to ensure the conservation of the
species.
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 Endangered
Species Act (published in the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR
34271)), the Information Quality Act (section 515 of the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L.
106-554; H.R. 5658)), and our associated Information Quality Guidelines
provide criteria, establish procedures, and provide guidance to ensure
that our decisions are based on the best scientific data available.
They require our biologists, to the extent consistent with the Act and
with the use of the best scientific data available, to use primary and
original sources of information as the basis for recommendations to
designate critical habitat.
When we are determining which areas should be designated as
critical habitat, our primary source of information is generally the
information 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 assessments, other unpublished materials, or
experts' opinions or personal knowledge.
Habitat is dynamic, and species may move from one area to another
over time. We recognize that critical habitat designated at a
particular point in time may not include all of the habitat 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 needed
for recovery of the species. Areas that are important to the
conservation of the species, both inside and outside the critical
habitat designation, will 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) section 9 of the Act's prohibitions on taking any
individual of the species, including taking caused by actions that
affect habitat. Federally funded or permitted projects affecting listed
species outside their designated critical habitat areas may still
result in jeopardy findings in some cases. These protections and
conservation tools will 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 or 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 by the species at the time of listing to
designate as critical habitat, we consider the physical or biological
features essential to the conservation of the species and which may
require special management considerations or
[[Page 53318]]
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 or biological features essential
for Agave eggersiana, Gonocalyx concolor, and Varronia rupicola from
studies of these species' habitat, ecology, and life history as
described in the Critical Habitat section of the proposed rule to
designate critical habitat published in the Federal Register on October
22, 2013 (78 FR 62529), and in the information presented below.
Unfortunately, little is known of the specific habitat requirements for
the three Caribbean plants. To identify the physical and biological
needs of the species, we have relied on current conditions at locations
where the three species exist and the limited information available for
these species. Additional information can be found in the final listing
rule published in elsewhere in today's Federal Register. We have
determined that the following physical or biological features are
essential for Agave eggersiana, Gonocalyx concolor, and Varronia
rupicola.
Space for Individual and Population Growth and for Normal Behavior
Agave eggersiana
Agave eggersiana is endemic to the island of St. Croix, USVI. The
species is found growing in the subtropical dry forest zone, which
covers about 72 percent of the surface of St. Croix. The variables used
to delineate any given life zone are defined by mean annual
precipitation and mean annual bio-temperature (Ewel and Whitmore 1973,
p. 2), and are characterized by an association of animals and plants
(Mac et al. 1998, p. 317). Subtropical dry forests are lowland semi-
deciduous and lowland drought deciduous forest. The vegetation in this
life zone usually consists of a nearly continuous, single-layered
canopy, with little ground cover. Tree heights usually do not exceed 49
feet (ft) (15 meters (m)), and crowns are typically broad, spreading,
and flattened (Ewel and Whitmore 1973, p. 10).
Dry forest structure is greatly influenced by wind, salt spray, and
the presence of fresh water. Some of the native tree species that are
common in subtropical dry forest in the USVI are Bursera simaruba (L.)
Sarg. (gumbo limbo), Amyris elemifera L. (torch wood), Capparis
cynophallophora L. (Jamaican caper), Cordia rickseckeri Millsp. (black
manjack), Pisonia subcordata Sw. (water mampoo), Plumeria alba L.
(white frangipani), and Pictetia aculeata (Vahl) Urban (fustic)
(Brandeis and Oswalt, 2007, p. 13; Ewel and Whitmore 1973, p. 16;
Chakroff 2010, p. 8).
Plant communities where Agave eggersiana occurs are coastal cliffs
with sparse or no vegetation and coastal shrubland areas. The plant
community in these areas is predominately native vegetation and no
competitive, nonnative, invasive plant species or such species in
quantities low enough to have minimal effects on the survival of A.
eggersiana. These communities and their associated native plant species
are provided in the Status Assessment for A. eggersiana (see Habitat
section of our proposed listing rule published on October 22, 2013 (78
FR 62560)).
Therefore, based on the above information, we identify the
vegetation composition areas (e.g., dry coastal cliffs and dry
shrubland) as an essential physical or biological feature for this
species.
Gonocalyx concolor
Gonocalyx concolor is a Puerto Rican endemic plant species that has
been found growing only in the elfin and ausubo (Manilkara bidentata)
forests within the Carite Commonwealth Forest, which lies within the
municipalities of Cayey, Patillas, and San Lorenzo in east-central
Puerto Rico. Zonation of forests within montane habitats on tropical
islands is condensed into a narrow altitudinal range (Weaver et al.
1986, p. 79). Both the elfin and ausubo forests are within the
subtropical lower montane very wet forest life zone and have similar
climate conditions (Ewel and Whitmore 1973, p. 32).
The elfin forest is found on exposed peaks and ridges of Cerro La
Santa, above 2,900 ft (880 m) in elevation from sea level, occupying
approximately 24.9 acres (ac) (10.1 hectares (ha)) in the Carite
Commonwealth Forest (Silander et al. 1986, p. 178). The elfin forest
vegetation is characterized by gnarled trees less than 7 meters tall,
high basal area, small diameters, a large number of stems per unit
area, and extremely slow growth rates (Ewel and Whitmore 1973, p. 45).
The vegetation is commonly saturated with moisture, frequently
enveloped in clouds, and both aerial and superficial roots are common
(Weaver et al.1986, p. 79). The plant association in this area is
generally comprised by few species of native trees and native ferns,
and is dense with epiphytes, including bromeliads and mosses (Weaver et
al. 1986, p. 79). The native tree composition includes: Tabebuia
schumanniana (roble colorado), Tabebuia rigida (roble de sierra),
Ocotea spathulata (nemoca cimarrona), Eugenia borinquensis (guayabota),
Clusia minor (cupey de monte), and Prestoea acuminata var. montana
(sierra palm) (Weaver et al. 1986, p. 80; Silander et al. 1986, p.
191). Additionally, some areas were planted with Eucalyptus robusta (O.
Monsegur, UPRM, unpublished data, 2006).
The ausubo forest is only found along the Rio Grande de Patillas
River basin and intermittent streams between 2,000 ft (620 m) and 2,300
ft (720 m) of elevation (DNR 1976, p. 169), occupying approximately
179.2 ac (72.5 ha) in the Charco Azul area within the Carite
Commonwealth Forest (Silander et al. 1986, p.190). The ausubo forest is
characterized by evergreen vegetation, high species richness, rapid
growth rate of successional trees, epiphytic ferns, bromeliads, and
orchids (Ewel and Whitmore 1973, p. 32). The vegetation in this area is
generally comprised of native trees (i.e., Manilkara bidentata
(ausubo), Dacryodes excelsa (tabonuco), Guarea guidonia (guaraguao),
and Cyrilla racemiflora (swamp titi)) (Francis and Lowe 2000, p. 345;
DNER 2008, p. 2).
Gonocalyx concolor has been found growing on the canopy of the
tallest tree areas, growing on tree trunks (epiphytic), clambering
(using other vegetation as support), and lying on the litter in the
forest floor (C. Pacheco and O. Monsegur, Service, unpublished report,
2013, p. 3). The life history of this species has not been studied;
however, it seems that the elfin and the ausubo forests provide space
for individuals and population growth of G. concolor. Furthermore, the
climate in these forests appears to support the normal behavior,
growth, and viability of G. concolor during most of its life stages,
suggesting the species may be a dwell obligate of these types of
habitat, as it has not been found elsewhere. Changes in temperature,
humidity, and solar insolation result in changes in habitat condition
and vegetation composition, with serious effects on G. concolor (see
the Summary of Factors Affecting the Species section of our final
listing rule, which is published elsewhere in today's Federal
Register).
[[Page 53319]]
Therefore, based on the above information, we identify the
vegetation composition found in the elfin and the ausubo forests as an
essential physical or biological feature for this species.
Varronia rupicola
Varronia rupicola is a Puerto Rican bank (biogeographical area)
endemic that grows within the subtropical dry forest life zone
overlying a limestone substrate (Ewel and Whitmore 1973, p. 72). The
Puerto Rican bank is a geographical unit that includes the main island
of Puerto Rico, Vieques, Culebra, the USVI (excluding St. Croix), and
the Island of Anegada. In Puerto Rico, this life zone is mainly located
on the south coast extending 74 miles (mi) (120 kilometers (km)) from
the Municipality of Cabo Rojo to the Municipality of Guayama, and to
the eastern of Puerto Rico, including the Island of Vieques (Ewel and
Whitmore 1973, p. 72; Murphy and Lugo 1986, p. 89).
The species has been recorded in forested hills with open to
relatively dense scrub and shrub lands 6.5 to 9.8 ft (2 to 3 m) in
height; in low forest with canopy from 8 to 15 ft (3 to 5 m) high; and
at the edge of a dense, low, coastal shrubland and forest. Varronia
rupicola is associated with dry forest native vegetation dominated by
Gymnanthes lucida (shiny oysterwood, or yait[iacute]), Exostema
caribaeum (princewood, or albarillo), Pisonia albida (corcho), Pictetia
aculeata (fustic, or tachuelo), Thouinia portoricensis (ceboruquillo,
or serrazuela), Coccoloba krugii (whitewood), Pilosocereus royenii
(Royen's tree cactus, or sebuc[aacute]n), Bursera simaruba (gumbo
limbo, or almacigo), Erithalis fruticosa (black torch), Guettarda
krugii (frogwood, or cucubano), Tabebuia heterophylla (pink trumpet
tree, or roble), Hypelate trifoliata (inkwood), Coccoloba diversifolia
(pigeonplum, or uvilla), Cassine xylocarpa (marbletree, or
coscorr[oacute]n), Krugiodendron ferreum (black ironwood, or palo de
hierro), Jacquinia berterii (barkwood), Bourreria succulenta
(strongbark, or palo de vaca), Crossopetalum rhacoma (maidenberry, or
pico de paloma), Antirhea acutata (placa chiquitu, or quina), and
Amyris elemifera (torchwood).
In the island of Anegada (British Virgin Islands), Varronia
rupicola was found in open limestone pavement and sand dunes. During a
recent study in this island, the species was found in higher abundance
(based on percentage occurrence across plots) on limestone, but also
widespread within the sand dunes (Clubbe et al. 2004, p. 344).
Therefore, based on the above information, we identify remnants of
scrubland and shrubland forest that occurs within the subtropical dry
forest life zone overlying limestone substrate as an essential physical
or biological feature for this species.
Food, Water, Air, Light, Minerals, or Other Nutritional or
Physiological Requirements
Agave eggersiana
The island of St. Croix, USVI, is located in the Caribbean, where
the warm sea stabilizes air temperatures and diurnal temperature
changes approximate annual fluctuations. The mean annual temperature of
the region at sea level is lower than 75 degrees Fahrenheit ([deg]F)
(24 degrees Celsius ([deg]C)). This subtropical climate results from
the location of St. Croix at the lower limit of the tropical region
(Ewel and Whitmore 1973 p. 8; Mac et al. 1998, p. 315).
The island of St. Croix has easterly trade winds of 15 miles per
hour (24 kilometers per hour) or more, which keep the humidity
relatively low (Chakroff 2010, p. 7). This island is much drier than
most of the Greater Antilles, averaging 40 inches (in) (102 centimeters
(cm)) of rain in the west, and about 30 in (76 cm) in the east. Rain
usually comes in the form of brief tropical showers. The wettest and
hottest months are July to October. Hurricane season falls within these
same months, with September being the most active for tropical storms.
The USVI have been hit by four major hurricanes in recent years: Hugo
(1989), Luis and Marilyn (1995), Lenny (1999), and Omar (2008) (Mac et
al. 1998, p. 316; Chakroff 2010, p. 7; http://www.srh.noaa.gov/sju/
?n=meanannualprecipitation2). The average mid-island
temperature is 78.8[emsp14][deg]F (26 [deg]C), with a variation of only
5 to 9[emsp14][deg]F (3 to 5 [deg]C) between the warmest and coolest
months (Mac et al. 1998, p. 316). This type of climate regime regulates
the dry forest structure conditions necessary for the establishment of
the species.
Soil substrates supporting Agave eggersiana for anchoring or
nutrient absorption vary depending on the habitat and location. The
natural populations of A. eggersiana grow on top of various soil
classifications. Cramer, Glynn, Hasselberg, Southgate, and Victory
series are among the ones where the species can be found. The general
description of the soils mentioned above are provided in the Status
Assessment for A. eggersiana (see Habitat section of our proposed
listing rule published on October 22, 2013 (78 FR 62560)). The soils
are all well-drained, and although there are rainy months, the ground
does not retain excess water and change the vegetation of the dry
forest structure.
Therefore, based on the information above, we identify the dry
climate regime that regulates the dry forest structure and the well-
drained soils of Cramer, Glynn, Hasselberg, Southgate, and Victory
series to be physical or biological features for this species.
Gonocalyx concolor
The variables used to delineate any given life zone are mean annual
precipitation and mean annual temperature. The life zones and
associations of which they are comprised only define the potential
vegetation or range of vegetation types that might be found in an area
(Ewel and Whitmore 1973, p. 5). The mean annual precipitation at the
Carite Commonwealth Forest is 88.7 in (225.3 cm), with February to
April the drier months (NOAA 2013, http://www.srh.noaa.gov/sju/
?n=climocayey). The mean temperature is 72.3[emsp14][deg]F
(22.7 [deg]C), varying from 68[emsp14][deg]F (20 [deg]C) in January to
73[emsp14][deg]F (24 [deg]C) in July (Silander et al. 1986, p.183).
The Carite Commonwealth Forest is underlain by volcanic-sedimentary
rock (DNR 1976, p. 168). The forest topography is rough and highly
dissected by intermittent streams, with steep slopes ranging from 20 to
60 percent. The forest's soil is primarily comprised by Los Guineos
complex (Silander et al. 1986, p. 179). Los Guineos soils were formed
from residuum gathering from sandstone parental material and consist of
very deep, acidic, clayey, well-drained soils on side slopes of
mountains (NRCS 2013, p. 11). This type of soil occupies more than 80
percent (5,860.1 ac (2,371.5 ha)) of the Carite Commonwealth Forest, at
elevations from 1,900 ft (580 m) to 3,000 ft (900 m) from sea level
(Silander et al. 1986, p. 179).
Therefore, based on the information above, we identify mean annual
precipitation of 88.7 in (225.3 cm), mean annual temperature of
72.3[emsp14][deg]F (22.7 [deg]C), and Los Guineos type of soil (i.e.,
very deep, acidic, clayey, well-drained soils on side slopes of
mountains) to be physical or biological features for this species.
Varronia rupicola
Like Agave eggersiana, Varronia rupicola occurs within the
subtropical dry forest life zone (sensu Holdridge 1967). Moisture
availability as a function of shallow soils plus low rainfall and its
seasonality determines the forest productivity, growth
[[Page 53320]]
characteristics, water loss, and physiognomy in subtropical dry forest
life zones where temperature tends to be constant throughout the year
(Lugo et al. 1978, p. 278). Average rainfall for the Gu[aacute]nica
Forest (important area for the species in Puerto Rico) is 860 mm (Lugo
et al. 1996, p. 2).
The majority of the suitable habitat and known populations of
Varronia rupicola in Puerto Rico lie within the Ponce limestone
formation, a Mid-Tertiary pink to white, fine-grain limestone (Lugo et
al. 1996, p. 2). In Puerto Rico, this formation extends from the
western end of the Gu[aacute]nica Commonwealth Forest, east toward the
Municipality of Ponce (El Tuque). The soils at the Gu[aacute]nica
Forest are described as shallow, alkaline, and derived from limestone
rock (Molina and Lugo 2006, p. 355). According to Murphy and Lugo
(1986, p. 56), these soils are nutrient-rich, but only a small fraction
of the total phosphate and potassium is readily available. These soil
factors increase the effects of low rainfall and its seasonality on the
vegetation.
Therefore, based on the information above, we identify shallow and
alkaline soils derived from limestone rock and an average rainfall of
34 in (86 cm) to be physical or biological features for this species.
Cover or Shelter
Agave eggersiana
Agave eggersiana occurs in open canopy and open understory habitats
and thrives in areas of full sun exposure (O. Monsegur and M. Vargas,
Service, pers. obs. 2010 and 2013). The coastal shrublands typically
show a low canopy, ranging from 3.2 to 16.4 ft (1 to 5 m) (Moser et al.
2010, Appendix A, p. 8-11; O. Monsegur and M. Vargas, Service, pers.
obs. 2013). In areas where native species remains dominant and
nonnatives have not occupied the understory, these coastal shrublands
provide suitable habitat for the natural recruitment of A. eggersiana.
In addition, the bare rock of coastal cliffs seems to provide an
ecological niche for A. eggersiana. Once the species gets established
on cliff areas, it may become dominant as observed on the South Shore
(Cane Garden) population. Therefore, based on the information above, we
identify open cover habitats (e.g., open canopy or open understory) to
be a physical or biological feature for this species.
Gonocalyx concolor
Very little is known about habitat parameters specifically relating
to cover or shelter for Gonocalyx concolor. In remnants and late
successional vegetation of elfin forest, the species is normally found
growing as epiphytic and clambering on dead and live stand trees, and
crawling over the forest floor (C. Pacheco and O. Monsegur, Service,
unpublished data, 2013). In the ausubo forest, this species has been
described growing only as epiphytic and clambering on dead and live
stand trees (O. Monsegur, unpublished data, 2006). Both types of forest
show a single canopy layer that seldom exceeds 22 ft (7 m) in height.
Therefore, based on the information above, we identify the remnants and
late successional vegetation of elfin and ausubo forests with a single
canopy layer of about 22 ft (7 m) in height to be physical or
biological features for this species.
Varronia rupicola
This species has been recorded in forested hills with open to
relatively dense shrublands ranging between 6.5 to 9.8 ft (2 to 3 m) in
height; in low forest with canopy from 8 to 15 ft (3 to 5 m) high; and
at the edge of a dense, low, coastal shrubland and forest. On the
island of Anegada, the species is located on open limestone pavement
and sand dunes. Despite the species' preference for gaps, it remains
associated to remnants of native forest.
In a recent study at Anegada, Varronia rupicola was found in higher
abundance (based on percentage occurrence across plots) on limestone,
but also widespread within the sand dunes (Clubbe et al. 2004, p. 344).
This kind of forest structure provides protection against environmental
variation and stochastic events, allowing the species to recover
without compromising population numbers. The species is associated to
remnants of native dry forest vegetation. At the Gu[aacute]nica
Commonwealth Forest, the most abundant species are Gymnanthes lucida,
Exostema caribaeum, Pisonia albida, Pictetia aculeata, Thouinia
portoricensis, Coccoloba krugii, and Pilosocereus royenii (Murphy and
Lugo 1986, p. 91). These species account for 50 percent of the
importance value (abundance) within the forest and characterize the
Deciduous Forest and Scrub Forest vegetation described by Murphy et al.
(1995, p. 187). Other dominant species within the V. rupicola habitat
include Bursera simaruba, Erithalis fruticosa, Guettarda krugii,
Tabebuia heterophylla, Hypelate trifoliata, Coccoloba diversifolia,
Cassine xylocarpa, Krugiodendron ferreum, Jacquinia berterii, Bourreria
succulenta, Crossopetalum rhacoma, Antirhea acutata, and Amyris
elemifera (Murphy and Lugo 1986, p. 91). The species is also associated
with a shrub layer dominated by Croton humilis, Eupatorium sinuatum,
Lantana reticulata, and Turnera diffusa.
Therefore, based on the information above, we identify forested
hills with open to relatively dense shrubland forest dominated by
native species to be physical or biological features for this species.
Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, or Rearing (or Development) of
Offspring
Agave eggersiana
Agave eggersiana dies after producing flowers (monocarpic life
cycle) and produces a large flowering scape (massive inflorescence; a
group or cluster of flowers arranged on a stem that is composed of a
main branch or a complicated arrangement of branches) (Rogers 2000, p.
218). After flowering, the panicles (inflorescence) produce numerous
small vegetative bulbs (bulbils) (Proctor and Acevedo-Rodr[iacute]guez
2005, p. 118). The small vegetative bulbils will fall near the parental
agave and attach to the ground on the coastal cliffs and dry coastal
shrubland. Coastal cliffs, which include bare rock or sparse native
vegetation, create an environment where the canopy is less than 1 meter
in height, and allow the bulbils to compete for ground area. The dry
coastal shrubland includes dry forest structures where the open canopy
and open understory habitat also allows the bulbils to compete for
ground area. These open canopy or open understory structures allow A.
eggersiana good sun exposure where the species seems to thrive (for
further discussion of these communities and their associated native
plant species, see the Status Assessment for A. eggersiana in the
Habitat section of our proposed listing rule, published on October 22,
2013 (78 FR 62560)). Therefore, based on the information above, we
identify the vegetation communities in the coastal cliffs and dry
coastal shrublands where A. eggersiana occurs to be a physical or
biological feature for this species.
Gonocalyx concolor
The reproductive biology and ecology of Gonocalyx concolor have not
been studied. We have no information available beyond the habitat where
the species is found and its behavior in that habitat. However, as
indicated above, it seems that the conditions of the elfin and ausubo
forests support the normal behavior, growth, and viability of G.
concolor during most of its life stages. Therefore, based on the
information above, we identify the elfin and ausubo
[[Page 53321]]
forests to be physical or biological features for this species.
Varronia rupicola
Varronia rupicola has been reported flowering and fruiting in
December to January (Breckon and Kolterman 1996, p. 4), and in June-
July (Monsegur and Breckon 2007, p. 1). Fruit production in the wild at
the Gu[aacute]nica Commonwealth Forest and in the Municipality of Ponce
seem to be high, and there is evidence of recruitment associated to the
majority of the clusters of individuals (Monsegur, USFWS, pers. obs.
2013). Under greenhouse conditions, seed germination has been reported
at no less than 67 percent (Wenger et al. 2010, p. 23). Germination in
the wild has also been observed to be high, particularly on shrubs
growing exposed to sunlight. However, there seems to be a high
mortality (natural thinning) of seedlings, and only a few individuals
make the transition to sapling stages (O. Monsegur, Service, pers. obs.
2013). Furthermore, despite the showy red fruits of V. rupicola, its
dispersion seems to be limited by gravity, as the majority of the
seedlings lie under the parent tree or downslope. The wide range of the
species suggests a former animal disperser, probably a bird.
Material germinated in the Service greenhouse at Cabo Rojo National
Wildlife Refuge flowered and produced fruits about 1 year after planted
(O. Monsegur, Service, pers. obs. 2013). The rapid development of the
species as reproductive individuals, and the finding of individuals
along recently disturbed sites (i.e., new dirt roads) and natural
forest gaps, may indicate that Varronia rupicola is an early colonizer
(pioneer) species of dry coastal forest. The above information
highlights the importance of open to relatively low dense shrubland
forest (scrub forest and deciduous forest or shrubland) dominated by
native species for the self-recruitment of the species and
sustainability of the natural populations. As previously mentioned,
moisture availability as a function of shallow soils, plus low rainfall
and its seasonality, are the factors suggested as determining forest
productivity, growth characteristics, water loss, and physiognomy. The
diversity within the dry coastal native forest of Puerto Rico is
explained by the wide diversity of habitats produced by the proximity
of the limestone basement to the surface and the subsequent variation
in soil depth. These unique native forests provide the adequate and
stable environmental conditions for the reproduction and natural
recruitment of the species.
Therefore, based on the information above, we identify open to
relatively dense shrubland forest (scrub forest and deciduous forest or
shrubland) dominated by native species to be a physical or biological
feature for this species.
Habitats Protected From Disturbance or Representative of the
Historical, Geographic, and Ecological Distributions of the Species
Agave eggersiana
There are reports from Britton and Wilson (1923, p. 156) that Agave
eggersiana occurred in the eastern dry areas in St. Croix. This area
harbors dry forest conditions and native vegetation that provide
suitable habitat for A. eggersiana. Most of that eastern end is
currently owned and managed for conservation by the USVI Government and
The Nature Conservancy. The upper slopes and steep areas of eastern St.
Croix provide essential dry forest habitat conditions for the
reintroduction and the recovery of the species. These forest harbors
xeric native vegetation and forest structure that provides shelter,
space for growing and breeding, and food and water resources necessary
for the species. However, we do not have current evidence that A.
eggersiana occurs in this area.
Since 2007, Agave eggersiana has been introduced within U.S.
National Park Service (NPS) properties (i.e., Salt River National Park
and Ecological Preserve, and Buck Island Reef Monument) that are
outside the known historical range of the species. In addition, there
is an intra-agency agreement under the Service's Coastal Program to
restore habitat in the area and plant native flora in Salt River
National Park and Ecological Preserve. A. eggerisana is one of the
plants used as part of the native plant restoration agreement.
Therefore, based on the information above, we identify the dry
forest conditions in the eastern side of St. Croix to be part of the
physical or biological features for this species.
Gonocalyx concolor
The elfin and the ausubo forest where Gonocalyx concolor currently
exists are owned by the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. This land has been
managed for conservation by the Puerto Rico Department of Natural and
Environmental Resources (DNER) since 1975 (back then, Department of
Natural Resources; DNR 1976, p. 169). Before 1975, the elfin forest
area in Cerro La Santa (Carite Commonwealth Forest) was managed by the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico as a preferred site for the installation of
telecommunication tower facilities for television and radio, and for
military and governmental purposes. These types of activities may have
caused disturbance to the habitat of G. concolor, because Cerro La
Santa is one of the two known locations of the species. Although the
Carite Commonwealth Forest is under local government protection, the
area of Cerro La Santa is still vulnerable to habitat modification
resulting from maintenance and potential expansion of existing
telecommunication facilities. Therefore, based on the information
above, we identify the elfin and ausubo forests found within the Carite
Commonwealth Forest to be physical or biological features for this
species.
Varronia rupicola
The species has been historically recorded from the geographical
area comprising the Gu[aacute]nica Commonwealth Forest in southwestern
Puerto Rico, and the area of the Vieques National Wildlife Refuge (NWR)
in the island of Vieques, eastern Puerto Rico. The Gu[aacute]nica
Forest was designated as a Commonwealth forest in 1917, by Governor
Arthur Yager, and has been protected and managed since 1930 (Lugo et
al. 1996, p. 2; Murphy and Lugo 1990, p. 15). It is now the largest
Commonwealth-protected area over limestone substrate in Puerto Rico,
with an estimated area of about 10,872 ac (4,400 ha) (Miguel Canals,
DNER, pers. comm. 2009). The Gu[aacute]nica Commonwealth Forest is
divided in two main contiguous areas: the east section, which includes
the original forest area; and the west section, added after 1950 (Lugo
et al. 1996, p. 2). This forest is considered one of the best examples
of a subtropical dry forest in the world (Murphy and Lugo 1990, p. 15;
Ewel and Whitmore 1973, p. 72). The Gu[aacute]nica Commonwealth Forest
harbors remnants of native dry forest vegetation over limestone
pavement, some of these considered as pristine forest. Since the forest
has been protected and managed for over 90 years, native vegetation has
recovered from previous deforestation for charcoal production. As a
result of this, the forest harbors populations of several of the rarest
plants endemic to the dry forest of Puerto Rico, and the presence of
stands of invasive nonnatives remains associated to areas previously
inhabited and along roads within the forest. However, it is important
to notice that Varronia rupicola also occurs within privately owned
lands outside the Gu[aacute]nica Commonwealth Forest, which makes it
vulnerable to habitat destruction.
[[Page 53322]]
On Vieques Island, about 54 percent of the land is a National
Wildlife Refuge managed by the Service (Vieques NWR CCP & EIS 2007, p.
2). Some areas within the refuge harbor suitable habitat for Varronia
rupicola, providing protection to the species' habitat and probably to
undetected populations (Vieques NWR CCP & EIS 2007, p. 2). However,
only three patches of dry forest vegetation over limestone substrate
that harbor V. rupicola populations have been currently identified in
the island of Vieques and only two are located within the Vieques NWR.
The remaining third patch belongs to the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.
These three natural areas are adjacent and represent the remnant of the
prime habitat for the species in Vieques.
Therefore, based on the information above, we identify remnants of
scrubland and shrubland forest that occurs within the subtropical dry
forest life zone overlying limestone substrate to be physical or
biological features for this species.
Primary Constituent Elements
Under the Act and its implementing regulations, we are required to
identify the physical or biological features essential to the
conservation of A. eggersiana, G. concolor, and V. rupicola in areas
occupied at the time of listing, focusing on the features' primary
constituent elements. Primary constituent elements (PCEs) are those
specific elements of the physical or biological features that provide
for a species' life-history processes and are essential to the
conservation of the species.
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 PCEs specific to these
three Caribbean plants are:
Agave eggersiana
(1) Areas consisting of coastal cliffs and dry coastal shrublands.
(a) Coastal cliff habitat includes:
(i) Bare rock; and
(ii) Sparse vegetation.
(b) Dry coastal shrubland habitat includes:
(i) Dry forest structure; and
(ii) A plant community of predominately native vegetation.
(2) Well-drained soils from the series Cramer, Glynn, Hasselberg,
Southgate, and Victory.
(3) Habitat of sufficient area to sustain viable populations in the
coastal cliffs and dry coastal shrublands listed in PCEs (1) and (2),
above.
Gonocalyx concolor
(1) Elfin forest at elevations over 2,900 ft (880 m) in Cerro La
Santa, Puerto Rico, which includes:
(a) Forest with single canopy layer with trees seldom exceeding 22
ft (7 m) in height.
(b) Associated native vegetation dominated by species such as
Tabebuia schumanniana, Tabebuia rigida, Ocotea spathulata, Eugenia
borinquensis, Clusia minor, and Prestoea acuminata var. montana, native
ferns, and dense cover with epiphytes, including bromeliads and mosses.
(2) Ausubo forest at elevations between 2,000 to 2,300 ft (620 to
720 m) in the Charco Azul, which includes:
(a) Forest with single canopy layer with trees exceeding 22 ft (7
m) in height.
(b) Plant association comprised by few species of native trees and
associated native vegetation (e.g., Manilkara bidentata, Dacryodes
excelsa, Guarea guidonia, and Cyrilla racemiflora), native ferns, and
dense cover with epiphytes, including bromeliads and mosses.
(3) The type locations described in PCEs (1) and (2), above, for
this species should have mean annual precipitation of 88.7 in (225.3
cm), mean annual temperature of 72.3[emsp14][deg]F (22.7 [deg]C), and
Los Guineos type of soil (i.e., very deep, acidic, clayey, well-drained
soils on side slopes of mountains).
Varronia rupicola
(1) Remnants of native shrubland and scrubland forest on limestone
substrate within the subtropical dry forest life zone. Dry shrubland
and scrubland forest includes:
(a) Shrubland vegetation with canopy from 6.5 to 9.8 ft (2 to 3 m)
high;
(b) Limestone pavement;
(c) Associated native vegetation; and
(d) A shrub layer dominated by Croton humilis, Eupatorium sinuatum,
Lantana reticulata, and Turnera diffusa.
(2) Semi-deciduous dry forest on limestone substrate within the
subtropical dry forest life zone. Dry limestone semi-deciduous forest
includes:
(a) Low forest with canopy from 8 to 15 ft (3 to 5 m) high;
(b) Limestone pavement;
(c) Associated dry forest native vegetation; and
(d) A shrub layer dominated by Croton humilis, Eupatorium sinuatum,
Lantana reticulata, and Turnera diffusa.
(3) The type locations described in PCEs (1) and (2), above, for
this species should have shallow and alkaline soils derived from
limestone rock and an average rainfall of 34 in (86 cm).
Special Management Considerations or Protections
When designating critical habitat, we assess whether the specific
areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time
of listing contain features that are essential to the conservation of
the species and which may require special management considerations or
protection.
Agave eggersiana and Varronia rupicola
The primary threats to the physical or biological features (PBFs)
that Agave eggersiana and Varronia rupicola depend on include: (1)
Habitat destruction and modification by development; (2) competition
with nonnative plant species; (3) human-induced fire; and (4)
hurricanes and storm surge. The majority of these threats can be
addressed by special management considerations or protection, while
others (e.g., hurricanes and storm surges) are beyond the control of
land owners and managers. Management activities that could ameliorate
these threats include, but are not limited to, establishment of
permanent conservation easements or land acquisition to protect the
species and its habitat on private lands; establishment of conservation
agreements on private, nongovernment, and government lands to protect
the habitat; implementation of control of invasive, nonnative plant
species to reduce competition and prevent habitat degradation;
implementation of management practices to control fires; and creation
or revision of management plans for the identification of the areas
where current developments exist and to better guide the implementation
of conservation measures for the species. For A. eggersiana,
precautions are needed to avoid inadvertent mowing and cutting of the
species in the course of landscaping activities. In addition, for both
A. eggersiana and V. rupicola, development of residential and tourism
projects should avoid impacting these habitats directly or indirectly,
and habitat fragmentation should be limited as much as possible to
maintain connectivity between populations and to avoid habitat
degradation due to the colonization by nonnative, invasive plants.
Gonocalyx concolor
The primary threats to the PBFs that G. concolor depends on
include: (1) Habitat destruction and modification by development of
telecommunication
[[Page 53323]]
towers and associated facilities on the mountain top of Cerro La Santa;
(2) vegetation management; (3) hurricanes and tropical storms; (4)
landslides; (5) invasive species; and (6) human-induced fire. The
majority of these threats can be addressed by special management
considerations or protection while others (e.g., hurricanes,
landslides, and climate change) are beyond the control of land owners
and managers. Management activities that could ameliorate these threats
include, but are not limited to, implementation of conservation
measures with DNER to reduce threats to the species in the Carite
Commonwealth Forest; minimization of habitat disturbance,
fragmentation, and destruction resulting from maintenance of
telecommunication facilities; prevention of fires; and controlling
invasive plant species.
Criteria Used To Identify Critical Habitat
As required by section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we use the best
scientific data available to designate critical habitat. In accordance
with the Act and our implementing regulations at 50 CFR 424.12(b), we
review available information pertaining to the habitat requirements of
the species and identify occupied areas at the time of listing that
contain the features essential to the conservation of the species. If,
after identifying currently occupied areas, we determine that those
areas are inadequate to ensure conservation of the species we then
consider, in accordance with the Act and our implementing regulations
at 50 CFR 424.12(e), whether designating additional areas outside those
currently occupied is essential for the conservation of the species. As
discussed in further detail below, we are designating critical habitat
in areas within the geographical area occupied by the three Caribbean
plant species at the time of listing. We also are designating specific
areas outside the geographical area occupied by A. eggersiana and V.
rupicola that were historically occupied, but are presently unoccupied
at the time of listing, because we have determined that such areas are
essential for the conservation of the species. For G.concolor, we are
not designating any areas outside the geographical area occupied by the
species because occupied areas are sufficient for the conservation of
the species.
Sites were considered occupied if the species was documented by
reports and if biologists observed them on site visits to the areas. We
also reviewed available information that pertains to habitat
requirements for the three Caribbean plants. Sources of data for the
three Caribbean species and their habitat included multiple databases
maintained by universities and by State and Federal agencies from
Puerto Rico and USVI, reports on assessments and surveys throughout the
species' range, and assessments of current conditions of the three
Caribbean species and their habitat at known locations (e.g., Monsegur
and Vargas, Service, pers. obs. 2013; Dalmida-Smith, DPNR 2010; Moser
et al. 2010). We reviewed the best available information pertaining to
the habitat requirements of the species. Specifically, the sources of
information included, but were not limited to:
(1) Data used to prepare the listing package;
(2) Observations gathered on field visits by various agencies
(Service, DPNR, and DNER);
(3) Peer-reviewed articles and various agency reports;
(4) Information from species experts; and
(5) Regional Geographic Information System (GIS) data (such as
species occurrence data, topography, aerial imagery, and land ownership
maps) for area calculations and mapping.
Areas for critical habitat designation were selected based on the
limited information we have gathered on the species and the quality of
the element occurrence(s), condition of the habitat, and distribution
within the species' range. Typically, selected areas contain natural
habitat that contain native flora as observed in field visits. However,
some lower quality occurrences, with restoration potential, were
included to ensure that critical habitat is being designated across the
species' range and to avoid a potential reduction of the distribution
of the three Caribbean plants. The habitats upon which the species
depends is often easily viewed using aerial photography. Additionally,
aerial photography provided an overview of the land use surrounding the
areas where the species are located. Topographic maps and elevation
data provided contours and drainage patterns that were used to help
identify potential areas for growth and expansion of the species. A
combination of these tools, in a GIS interface, allowed for the
determination of the critical habitat boundaries.
We plotted all occurrence records of the three Caribbean plants on
maps in geographic information system as points and polygons. Then, we
used U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic maps, aerial
photographs, and U.S. Forest Service (USFS)-International Institute of
Tropical Forestry (IITF) land cover layers to delineate the critical
habitat units. Critical habitat units were then mapped using ArcMap
version 10 (Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc.), a
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) program.
We are also designating specific areas outside the geographical
area occupied by Agave eggersiana at the time of listing (areas
reported as historical) and Varronia rupicola, because the current
amount of habitat that is occupied is not sufficient for the recovery
of the species. Specifically, we analyzed and selected areas that
contained the PCEs, the PBF necessary for the establishment of the
species, and natural areas of pristine or remnants of pristine habitat
(habitat with native vegetation and no or few exotics species) that
could be used to introduced individuals with a high expectancy of
survivorship and recovery. These unoccupied areas would safeguard other
established populations in case of any stochastic event that occurs
within habitats currently occupied by the species. In the case of Agave
eggersiana, we also took under consideration historical areas, and for
Varronia rupicola, we considered the area as a single ecological unit
where ecological interactions and genetic flow is expected to occur
between the unoccupied and occupied areas. Small populations and plant
species with limited distributions, like those of Agave eggersiana and
Gonocalyx concolor, are vulnerable to relatively minor environmental
disturbances (Frankham 2005, pp. 135-136), and are subject to the loss
of genetic diversity from genetic drift (Ellstrand and Elam 1993, pp.
217-237; Leimu et al. 2006, pp. 942-952; Honnay and Jacquemyn, 2007, p.
824). 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. When designating critical habitat, we
consider future recovery efforts and conservation of the species.
The habitat of these species must be conserved to fulfill their
recovery. Furthermore, it is important to ensure there are enough
individuals of the
[[Page 53324]]
species to secure their survival into the future as well as to ensure
the habitat (with all associated plant communities) is adequate for the
species. At present, there are only approximately 300 known adult
individuals of Agave eggersiana, 31 individuals of Gonocalyx concolor,
75 individuals of Varronia rupicola, and only few areas where the three
species have been documented. Although at this moment we do not know
how many individuals would suffice to safeguard these species, having
limited populations in limited areas is detrimental to the species, and
even more detrimental if threats are not ameliorated.
When determining critical habitat boundaries within this final
rule, we made every effort to avoid including developed areas such as
lands covered by buildings, pavement, and other structures because such
lands lack physical or biological features for Agave eggersiana,
Gonocalyx concolor, and Varronia rupicola. The scale of the maps we
prepared under the parameters for publication within the Code of
Federal Regulations may not reflect the exclusion of such developed
lands. Any such lands inadvertently left inside critical habitat
boundaries shown on the maps of this final rule have been excluded by
text in the rule and are not designated as critical habitat. Therefore,
a Federal action involving these lands will not trigger section 7
consultation with respect to critical habitat and the requirement of no
adverse modification unless the specific action would affect the
physical or biological features in the adjacent critical habitat.
The critical habitat designation is defined by the map or maps, as
modified by any accompanying regulatory text, presented at the end of
this document in the Regulation Promulgation section. We include more
detailed information on the boundaries of the critical habitat
designation in the preamble of this document. We will make the
coordinates or plot points or both on which each map is based available
to the public on http://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-
2013-0040, and at the field office responsible for the designation (see
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Final Critical Habitat Designation
We are designating six units as critical habitat for Agave
eggersiana, two units for Gonocalyx concolor, and seven units for
Varronia rupicola as critical habitat. The critical habitat areas
described below constitute our best assessment at this time of areas
that meet the definition of critical habitat. The units are: (1) Cane
Garden, (2) Manchenil, (3) Great Pond, (4) Protestant Cay, (5) East End
South, and (6) East End North for Agave eggersiana; (1) Cerro La Santa
and (2) Charco Azul for Gonocalyx concolor; (1) Montalva, (2)
Gu[aacute]nica Commonwealth Forest, (3) Montes de Barina, (4)
Pe[ntilde][oacute]n de Ponce, (5) Punta Negra, (6) Puerto Ferro, and
(7) Cerro Playuela for Varronia rupicola. Tables 1, 2, and 3 shows the
critical habitat units for Agave eggersiana, Gonocalyx concolor, and
Varronia rupicola, respectively.
Agave eggersiana
Table 1--Occupancy of Agave Eggersiana by Designated Critical Habitat Units
[Area estimates reflect all land within critical habitat unit boundaries.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Size of unit
Critical habitat unit Occupied at time of Land ownership in acres
listing (hectares)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agave eggersiana
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Cane Garden.......................... Yes....................... Private................... 6.9 (2.8)
2. Manchenil............................ Yes....................... Private................... 1.5 (0.61)
3. Great Pond........................... Yes....................... Territory................. 0.8 (0.32)
4. Protestant Cay....................... Yes....................... Territory, but leased to 0.4 (0.16)
private.
5. East End South....................... No........................ Private................... 19 (7.7)
6. East End North....................... No........................ Territory................. 22 (8.9)
Total............................... .......................... .......................... 50.6 (20.5)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Area sizes may not sum due to rounding.
Unit 1: Cane Garden
Unit 1 consists of 6.9 ac (2.8 ha) of privately owned lands located
at Estate Cane Garden and Estate Peters Mindle, Christiansted, St.
Croix, USVI. This unit is located in the south-central portion of the
island, approximately 0.17 mi (0.27 km) south of Road 62 and
approximately 0.2 mi (0.3 km) northeast of Vagthus Point, along the
northeast coast of Canegarden Bay and south of a private trail. It is
within the geographical area occupied at the time of listing. This unit
contains all the PCEs. The PCEs in this unit may require special
considerations to address threats of nonnative plant species, effects
of hurricanes (i.e., storm surge and erosion), and habitat modification
(e.g., trails expansion).
Unit 2: Manchenil
Unit 2 consists of 1.5 ac (0.61 ha) of privately owned lands
located at Estate Granard, Christiansted, St. Croix, USVI. This unit is
located in the south-central portion of the island, approximately 0.50
mi (0.82 km) south of Road 62 and approximately 0.02 mi (0.03 km) east
of South Shore Road, along the northeast coast of Manchenil Bay. It is
within the geographical area occupied at the time of listing. This unit
contains all the PCEs. The PCEs in this unit may require special
considerations to address threats of fires, nonnative plant species,
effects of hurricanes (i.e., storm surge), and habitat modification.
Unit 3: Great Pond
Unit 3 consists of 0.8 ac (0.32 ha) of territory-owned land located
at Estate Great Pond, Christiansted, St. Croix, USVI. This unit is
located in the south of the island, approximately 6.5 ft (2 m) south of
Road 62 and east of the entrance of East End Marine Park offices. It is
within the geographical area occupied at the time of listing. This unit
contains all the PCEs. The PCEs in this unit may require special
considerations to address threats of fire, nonnative plant species, and
habitat modification (i.e., landscaping).
Unit 4: Protestant Cay
Unit 4 consists of 0.4 ac (0.16 ha) of territory-owned lands that
are leased to a private party and are located at Protestant Cay, St.
Croix, USVI. The Cay is located approximately 0.33 km (0.20 mi) north
of Christiansted town. The unit is located on the northeast side of
[[Page 53325]]
the Cay. It is within the geographical area occupied at the time of
listing. This unit contains all the PCEs. The PCEs in this unit may
require special considerations to address threats of nonnative plant
species, effects of hurricanes (i.e., storm surge and erosion), and
habitat modification (i.e., hotel landscaping and maintenance).
The Protestant Cay unit is also currently designated as critical
habitat for the St. Croix ground lizard (Ameiva polops) (42 FR 47840;
September 22, 1977).
Unit 5: East End South
Unit 5 consists of 19 ac (7.7 ha) of privately owned lands located
at Estate Jack's Bay and Estate Isaac's Bay, Christiansted, St. Croix,
USVI. This unit is located south of the eastern end portion of the
island, approximately 0.93 mi (1.5 km) southwest of Point Udall,
approximately 0.02 mi (0.04 km) east of Point Road, along the north
coast of Jack's Bay, and south of a Jack's and Issac's Bay Preserve
trail. It is owned by The Nature Conservancy and managed as
conservation land. This unit is not occupied at the time of listing.
However, it is part of the historical range of the species. This unit
is essential for the conservation of the species because it contains
the PCEs and because its designation will safeguard other established
populations in case of any stochastic event that occurs within habitats
currently occupied by the species.
Unit 6: East End North
Unit 6 consists of 22 ac (8.9 ha) of territory-owned land located
at Estate Cotton Garden, Christiansted, St. Croix, USVI. This unit is
located north of the eastern end portion of the island, approximately
0.86 mi (1.4 km) northwest of Point Udall, north of Road 82 along the
eastern coast of Cotton Garden Bay and western coast of Boiler Bay.
This unit is not occupied at the time of listing. However, it is part
of the historical range of the species. This unit is essential for the
conservation of the species because it contains the PCEs and because
its designation will safeguard other established populations in case of
any stochastic event that occurs within habitats currently occupied by
the species.
Gonocalyx concolor
Table 2--Occupancy of Gonocalyx concolor by designated critical habitat units
[Area estimates reflect all land within critical habitat unit boundaries.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Size of unit
Critical habitat unit Occupied at time of Land ownership in acres
listing (hectares)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gonocalyx concolor
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Cerro La Santa....................... Yes....................... Commonwealth of Puerto 18.8 (7.6)
Rico.
2. Charco Azul.......................... Yes....................... Commonwealth of Puerto 179.2 (72.5)
Rico.
Total............................... .......................... .......................... 198 (80.1)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Area sizes may not sum due to rounding.
Unit 1: Cerro La Santa
Unit 1 consists of 18.8 ac (7.6 ha) of elfin forest located on
exposed peaks and ridges of Cerro La Santa, above 2,890 ft (880 m) in
elevation from sea level. This unit is located in the Sierra de Cayey
on Road PR 184, Km 27.1 in Espino Ward, between the Municipalities of
Cayey and San Lorenzo. This unit is within the geographical area
occupied by the species at the time of listing. This unit contains all
PCEs. The PCEs in this unit may require special considerations to
address threats of habitat modification resulting from maintenance and
potential expansion of existing telecommunication facilities, human-
induced fires, invasive species, and degradation of forest quality.
Unit 2: Charco Azul
Unit 2 consists of 179.2 ac (72.5 ha) of ausubo forest located
along the Rio Grande de Patillas River basin between 2,030 ft (620 m)
and 2,330 ft (720 m) in elevation from sea level. This unit is
approximately 2.0 mi (3.2 km) southeast of Unit 1. This unit is within
the geographical area occupied by the species at the time of listing.
This unit contains all PCEs. The PCEs in this unit may require special
considerations and protection to address threats of habitat
modification resulting from human-induced fires, invasive species, and
degradation of forest quality.
Varronia rupicola
Table 3--Occupancy of Varronia rupicola by Designated Critical Habitat Units
[Area estimates reflect all land within critical habitat unit boundaries.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Size of unit in
Critical habitat unit Occupied at time of Land ownership acres
listing (hectares)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Varronia rupicola
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Montalva............................ Yes....................... Commonwealth of Puerto 992 (401)
Rico.
2. Gu[aacute]nica Commonwealth Forest.. Yes....................... Commonwealth of Puerto 584 (236)
Rico.
3. Montes de Barina.................... Yes....................... Private.................. 2,002 (810)
4. Pe[ntilde][oacute]n de Ponce........ Yes....................... Private.................. 2,174 (880)
5. Punta Negra......................... No........................ Commonwealth of Puerto 291 (117)
Rico.
6. Puerto Ferro........................ Yes....................... Federal Government....... 381 (154)
7. Cerro Playuela...................... No........................ Federal Government....... 123 (50)
-----------------
[[Page 53326]]
Total.............................. .......................... ......................... 6,547 (2,648)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Area sizes may not sum due to rounding
Unit 1 consists of 992 ac (401 ha) of Commonwealth-owned lands
located at Montalva Ward in the Municipality of Gu[aacute]nica, Puerto
Rico. This unit is located just south of State Highway PR 324 and the
Town of Gu[aacute]nica, and includes Cerro Montalva. It is within the
geographical area occupied by the species at the time of listing. Due
to the marginal agricultural value, these forests were minimally
impacted by other land use practices (e.g., charcoal production and
ranching). Therefore, the prime and essential habitat for the species
has maintained its unique features, such as the dry coastal shrubland
habitat PCEs and PBFs, including suitable climate, substrates, and
associated native plants and forest structure. Despite its conservation
status the habitat has been affected by human-induced fires and
maintenance of access roads and rights-of-way. The PCEs in this unit
may require special considerations to address threats of nonnative
plant species, human-induced fires, hurricanes, and habitat
modification (e.g., urban development).
Unit 2: Gu[aacute]nica Commonwealth Forest
Unit 2 consists of 584 ac (236 ha) of Commonwealth-owned lands
located within Carenero and Barina Wards in the municipalities of
Gu[aacute]nica and Yauco, Puerto Rico. This unit is located within the
core of the east section of the Gu[aacute]nica Commonwealth Forest. The
forested habitat in this unit was minimally impacted by other land use
practices like charcoal production and ranching due to its marginal
agricultural value; hence, it has maintained its unique features. It is
within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time of
listing and contains the dry coastal shrubland habitat PCEs and PBFs,
including suitable climate, substrates, and associated native plants
and forest structure. Despite its conservation status, the habitat has
been affected by human-induced fires and maintenance of access roads
and rights-of-way. The PCEs in this unit may require special
considerations to address threats of nonnative plant species, human-
induced fires, hurricanes, and habitat modification (e.g., urban
development and right-of-way maintenance).
Unit 3: Montes de Barina
Unit 3 consists of 2,002 ac (810 ha) of privately owned lands
primarily located along Indios Ward in the municipality of Guayanilla.
A small section of this unit falls within the Barinas Ward in Yauco,
Puerto Rico. This unit is located just south of State Highway PR 2. The
forested habitat in this unit was minimally impacted by other land use
practices like charcoal production and ranching due to its marginal
agricultural value; hence, it has maintained its unique features. The
unit is within the geographical area occupied by the species at the
time of listing and contains the dry coastal shrubland habitat PCEs and
PBFs, including suitable climate, substrates, and associated native
plants and forest structure. The PCEs in this unit may require special
considerations to address threats of nonnative plant species, human-
induced fires, hurricanes, and habitat modification (e.g., urban
development).
Unit 4: Pe[ntilde][oacute]n de Ponce
Unit 4 consists of 2,174 ac (880 ha) of privately owned lands
located along Encarnaci[oacute]n and Canas Wards in the municipalities
of Pe[ntilde]uelas and Ponce, Puerto Rico. This unit is located just
north of State Highway PR 2 in the area known as Punta Cucharas. The
forested habitat in this unit was minimally impacted by other land use
practices like charcoal production and ranching due to its marginal
agricultural value; hence, it has maintained its unique features. It is
within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time of
listing and contains the dry coastal shrubland habitat PCEs and PBFs,
including suitable climate, substrates, and associated native plants
and forest structure. The PCEs in this unit may require special
considerations to address threats of nonnative plant species, human-
induced fires, hurricanes, and habitat modification (e.g., urban
development).
Unit 5: Punta Negra
Unit 5 is a small peninsula that consists of 291 ac (117 ha) of
Commonwealth-owned lands located within Puerto Real Ward on the island
of Vieques, Puerto Rico. This unit is located about 1.5 mi (2.5 km)
east of the town of Esperanza and west of Puerto Ferro, Vieques
National Wildlife Refuge (NWR). This natural area is managed by the
Puerto Rico DNER as part of the Puerto Mosquito Natural Reserve. The
forested habitat in this unit was minimally impacted by other land use
practices like charcoal production and ranching due to its marginal
agricultural value; hence, it has maintained its unique features. It is
adjacent to an area currently occupied by the species (Unit 6), forming
a continuous habitat and contains the dry coastal shrubland habitat
PCEs and PBFs, including suitable climate, substrates, and associated
native plants and forest structure. However, there is no specific
record of the species within this unit. This unit is essential for the
conservation of the species because it contains the PCEs and because
its designation will safeguard other established populations in case of
any stochastic event that occurs within habitats currently occupied by
the species.
Further, we consider Units 5, 6, and 7 to be a single ecological
unit. The species is expected to occur within this area, and ecological
interactions and genetic flow between this area and Units 6 and 7 may
be essential for the recovery of the species. It was not included as a
single unit with Units 6 and 7 because these peninsulas are united by a
narrow mangrove forest that does not provide habitat for the species.
The PCEs in this unit may require special considerations to address
threats of nonnative plant species, human-induced fires, and
hurricanes.
Unit 6: Puerto Ferro
Unit 6 is a small peninsula that consists of 381 ac (154 ha) of
federally owned lands managed by the Service as the Vieques NWR, and is
located within the Puerto Ferro Ward on the island of Vieques, Puerto
Rico. This unit is
[[Page 53327]]
located about 4 km (2.5 mi) east of the town of Esperanza. It is
located just between Unit 5 and Unit 7, forming a continuous habitat
and contains the dry coastal shrubland habitat PCEs and PBFs, and
therefore we consider Units 5, 6, and 7 to be a single ecological unit.
The forested habitat in this unit was minimally impacted by other land
use practices like charcoal production and ranching due to its marginal
agricultural value; hence, it has maintained its unique features. It is
within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time of
listing and contains the dry coastal shrubland habitat PCEs and PBFs,
including suitable climate, substrates, and associated native plants
and forest structure. It was not included as a single unit with Units 5
and 7 because these peninsulas are united by a narrow mangrove forest
that does not provide habitat for the species. The PCEs in this unit
may require special considerations to address threats of nonnative
plant species, human-induced fires, and hurricanes.
Unit 7: Cerro Playuela
Unit 7 is a small peninsula that consists of 123 ac (50 ha) of
federally owned lands managed by the Service as the Vieques NWR, and is
located within Puerto Ferro Ward on the island of Vieques, Puerto Rico.
This unit is located about 0.5 km (0.31 mi) south of the former airport
of Campamento Garc[iacute]a (Vieques NWR). The forested habitat in this
unit was minimally impacted by other land use practices like charcoal
production and ranching due to its marginal agricultural value; hence,
it has maintained its unique features. It is adjacent to an area
currently occupied by the species (Unit 6), forming a continuous
habitat. However, there is no specific record of the species within
this unit. This unit is essential for the conservation of the species
because it contains the PCEs and because its designation would
safeguard other established populations in case of any stochastic event
that occurs within habitats currently occupied by the species. Further,
we consider Units 5, 6, and 7 to be a single ecological unit. The
species is expected to occur within this area, and ecological
interactions and genetic flow between this area and Unit 6 may be
essential for the recovery of the species. It was not included as a
single unit with Units 5 and 6 because these peninsulas are united by a
narrow mangrove forest that does not provide habitat for the species.
The PCEs in this unit may require special considerations to address
threats of nonnative plant species, human-induced fires, and
hurricanes.
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, 245 F.3d 434 (5th Cir. 2001)),
and we do not rely on this regulatory definition when analyzing whether
an action is likely to destroy or adversely modify critical habitat.
Under the 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
The key factor related to the adverse modification determination is
whether,
[[Page 53328]]
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 or biological
features to an extent that appreciably reduces the conservation value
of critical habitat for Agave eggersiana, Gonocalyx concolor, and
Varronia rupicola. 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 Agave eggersiana, Gonocalyx concolor, and Varronia
rupicola. These activities include, but are not limited to:
(1) Actions that would appreciably degrade or destroy the physical
or biological features for the species. Such activities could include,
but are not limited to, clearing or cutting native live trees and
shrubs (e.g., bulldozing, vegetation pruning, construction, road
building, maintenance of rights-of-way for powerlines, and herbicide
application). These activities could pose a risk of take by fire to the
survival of Agave eggersiana, Gonocalyx concolor, and Varronia
rupicola.
(2) Actions that would introduce or encourage the spread of
nonnative plant species that would significantly alter vegetation
structure. Such activities may include, but are not limited to,
residential and commercial development and road construction. These
activities can affect the growth, reproduction, and survival of Agave
eggersiana, Gonocalyx concolor, and Varronia rupicola.
(3) Actions that would significantly alter the structure and
function of the elfin forest or the ausubo forest within the Carite
Commonwealth Forest. Removal of vegetation could alter or eliminate the
microclimate (e.g., change in temperature and humidity levels) and may
allow invasion of competitor species and thereby negatively affect the
habitat necessary for all life stages of Gonocalyx concolor.
Exemptions
Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the Act
Section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(B)(i))
provides that: ``The Secretary shall not designate as critical habitat
any lands or other geographic areas owned or controlled by the
Department of Defense, or designated for its use, that are subject to
an integrated natural resources management plan [INRMP] 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.'' There are no
Department of Defense lands with a completed INRMP within the critical
habitat designation.
Consideration of Impacts Under Section 4(b)(2) of the Act
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states that the Secretary shall
designate and make revisions to critical habitat on the basis of the
best available scientific data after taking into consideration the
economic impact, national security impact, and any other relevant
impact of specifying any particular area as critical habitat. The
Secretary may exclude an area from critical habitat if he determines
that the benefits of such exclusion outweigh the benefits of specifying
such area as part of the critical habitat, unless 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.
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 prepared an incremental effects
memorandum (IEM) and screening analysis which together with our
narrative and interpretation of effects constitute our draft economic
analysis (DEA) of the proposed critical habitat designation and related
factors (IEc 2014). The analysis was made available for public review
and we accepted public comments on the analysis from May 21, 2014,
through June 20, 2014 (79 FR 29150). Following the close of the comment
period, we reviewed and evaluated all information submitted during the
comment period that pertained to our consideration of the probable
incremental economic impacts of this critical habitat designation and
developed a final economic analysis (FEA). The FEA is summarized below
and available in the screening analysis for Agave eggersiana, Gonocalyx
concolor, and Varronia rupicola (IEc 2014), available at http://www.regulations.gov. Copies of the DEA, FEA, and any supporting
documents, may be obtained by contacting the Caribbean Ecological
Services Field Office (see ADDRESSES).
The FEA addresses how probable economic impacts are likely to be
distributed, including an assessment of any local or regional impacts
of habitat conservation and the potential effects of conservation
activities on government agencies, private businesses, and individuals.
Decision-makers can use this information to evaluate whether the
effects of the designation might unduly burden a particular group,
area, or economic sector. The FEA assesses the economic impacts of
Agave eggersiana, Gonocalyx concolor, and Varronia rupicola
conservation efforts associated with the following categories of
activity: Residential and commercial development; transportation
projects; recreational activities; agricultural activities; removal of
unexploded ordinance; and changes to the Commonwealth Forests' Master
Plan, which may trigger additional regulatory changes.
In general, in the occupied critical habitat units, because Agave
eggersiana, Gonocalyx concolor, and Varronia rupicola are narrow
endemic species, the quality of habitat is closely linked to the
species' survival (USFWS 2013). Consequently, the Service believes that
in most circumstances, there will be no conservation efforts needed to
prevent adverse modification of occupied critical habitat beyond those
that would be required to avoid jeopardy to the species. In the
unoccupied critical habitat units, the areas are already set aside for
conservation purposes, and all anticipated activities should be
consistent with protection of the species. Any anticipated incremental
costs of the critical habitat designation costs will predominantly be
administrative in nature and would not be significant. Furthermore, the
designation of critical habitat is not likely to result in an increase
of consultations, but rather only the additional administrative effort
within each consultation to address the effects of each proposed agency
action on critical habitat.
Our FEA did not identify any disproportionate costs that are likely
to result from the designation. Consequently, the Secretary is not
[[Page 53329]]
exercising her discretion to exclude any areas from this designation of
critical habitat for Agave eggersiana, Gonocalyx concolor, and Varronia
rupicola based on economic impacts.
Exclusions Based on National Security Impacts or Homeland Security
Impacts
Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we consider whether there are
lands owned or managed by the Department of Defense where a national
security impact might exist. In preparing this final rule, we have
determined that no lands within the designation of critical habitat for
Agave eggersiana, Gonocalyx concolor, and Varronia rupicola are owned
or managed by the Department of Defense or Department of Homeland
Security, and, therefore, we anticipate no impact on national security
or homeland security. Consequently, the Secretary is not exerting her
discretion to exclude any areas from this final designation based on
impacts on national security or homeland security.
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.
There is a Master Forest Management Plan that includes the Carite
Commonwealth Forests and Gu[aacute]nica Commonwealth Forest. Gonocalyx
concolor located within Carite Commonwealth Forest and Varronia
rupicola located within Gu[aacute]nica Commonwealth Forest are managed
by the Puerto Rico Department of Natural and Environmental Resources.
The Master Management Plan promotes the use and enjoyment of the
natural resources at the forests, although it establishes that the
activities should not affect important species for the Commonwealth of
Puerto Rico. The management plans do not include protection or
conservation measures specific for Gonocalyx concolor or Varronia
rupicola, and thus we do not consider them to be approved management
plans for these plants.
In preparing this final rule, we have determined that there are
currently no HCPs or other management plans for Agave eggersiana,
Gonocalyx concolor, or Varronia rupicola, and the final designation
does not include any tribal lands or trust resources. We anticipate no
impact on tribal lands, partnerships, or HCPs from this critical
habitat designation. Accordingly, the Secretary is not exercising her
discretion to exclude any areas from this final designation based on
other relevant impacts.
Required Determinations
Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563)
Executive Order 12866 provides that the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) will review all significant rules. The Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs has determined that this rule is
not significant.
Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866 while
calling for improvements in the nation's regulatory system to promote
predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and to use the best, most
innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory ends.
The executive order directs agencies to consider regulatory approaches
that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for
the public where these approaches are relevant, feasible, and
consistent with regulatory objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes further
that regulations must be based on the best available science and that
the rulemaking process must allow for public participation and an open
exchange of ideas. We have developed this rule in a manner consistent
with these requirements.
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 must
publish 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 an 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.
According to the Small Business Administration, small entities
include small organizations, such as independent nonprofit
organizations; small governmental jurisdictions, including school
boards and city and town governments that serve fewer than 50,000
residents; and small businesses (13 CFR 121.201). Small businesses
include manufacturing and mining concerns with fewer than 500
employees, wholesale trade entities with fewer than 100 employees,
retail and service businesses with less than $5 million in annual
sales, general and heavy construction businesses with less than $27.5
million in annual business, special trade contractors doing less than
$11.5 million in annual business, and agricultural businesses with
annual sales less than $750,000. To determine if potential economic
impacts on these small entities are significant, we consider the types
of activities that might trigger regulatory impacts under this rule, as
well as the types of project modifications that may result. In general,
the term ``significant economic impact'' is meant to apply to a typical
small business firm's business operations.
The Service's current understanding of the requirements under the
RFA, as amended, and following recent court decisions, is that Federal
agencies are only required to evaluate the potential incremental
impacts of rulemaking on those entities directly regulated by the
rulemaking itself, and therefore, not required to evaluate the
potential impacts to indirectly regulated entities. The regulatory
mechanism through which critical habitat protections are realized is
section 7 of the Act, which requires Federal agencies, in consultation
with the Service, to ensure that any action authorized, funded, or
carried by the agency is not likely to destroy or adversely modify
critical habitat. Therefore, under section 7 only Federal action
agencies are directly subject to the specific regulatory requirement
(avoiding destruction and adverse modification) imposed by critical
habitat designation. Consequently, it is our position that only Federal
action agencies will be directly regulated by this designation. There
is no requirement under RFA to evaluate the potential impacts to
entities not directly regulated. Moreover, Federal agencies are not
small entities. Therefore, because no small entities are directly
regulated by this rulemaking, the Service certifies that this final
critical habitat designation will not have
[[Page 53330]]
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
As discussed under Exclusions Based on Economic Impacts above,
during the development of this final rule we reviewed and evaluated all
information submitted during the comment period that may pertain to our
consideration of the probable incremental economic impacts of this
critical habitat designation. Based on this information, we affirm our
certification that this final critical habitat designation will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities, and a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required.
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. OMB has provided guidance for implementing this
Executive Order that outlines nine outcomes that may constitute ``a
significant adverse effect'' when compared to not taking the regulatory
action under consideration.
The economic analysis found that none of these criteria is relevant
to this analysis. Thus, based on information in the economic analysis,
energy-related impacts associated with Agave eggersiana, Gonocalyx
concolor, and Varronia rupicola conservation activities within critical
habitat are not expected. As such, the designation of critical habitat
is not expected to significantly affect energy supplies, distribution,
or use. Therefore, this action is not a significant energy action, and
no Statement of Energy Effects is required.
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 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. Small governments will be affected only to the extent that any
programs having Federal funds, permits, or other authorized activities
must ensure that their actions will not adversely affect the critical
habitat. The final economic analysis concludes incremental impacts may
occur due to administrative costs of section 7 consultations for
activities related to commercial, residential, and recreational
development and associated actions; however, these are not expected to
significantly affect small government entities. Consequently, a Small
Government Agency Plan is not required.
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 Agave eggersiana, Gonocalyx concolor,
and Varronia rupicola in a takings implications assessment. As
discussed above, the designation of critical habitat affects only
Federal actions. Although private parties that receive Federal funding,
receive assistance, or 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. The FEA found that no significant economic impacts are likely
to result from the designation of critical habitat for Agave
eggersiana, Gonocalyx concolor, and Varronia rupicola. Because the
Act's critical habitat protection requirements apply only to Federal
agency actions, few conflicts between critical habitat and private
property rights should result from this designation. Based on the best
available information, the takings implications assessment concludes
that this designation of critical habitat for Agave eggersiana,
Gonocalyx concolor, and Varronia rupicola does not pose significant
takings implications.
Federalism--Executive Order 13132
In accordance with E.O. 13132 (Federalism), this rule does not have
significant Federalism effects. A federalism summary impact statement
is not required. In keeping with Department of the Interior and
Department of Commerce policy, we requested information from, and
coordinated development of this critical habitat designation with,
appropriate State and Territorial resource agencies in St. Croix, USVI,
and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. From a federalism perspective, the
designation of critical habitat directly affects only the
responsibilities of Federal agencies.
[[Page 53331]]
The Act imposes no other duties with respect to critical habitat,
either for States and local governments, or for anyone else. As a
result, the rule does not have substantial direct effects either on the
States, or on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on the distribution of powers and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. The designation may have some benefit to
these governments because the areas that contain the features essential
to the conservation of the species are more clearly defined, and the
physical and biological 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 these local governments in
long-range planning (because these local governments no longer have to
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 applicable
standards set forth in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of the Order. We are
designating critical habitat in accordance with the provisions of the
Act. To assist the public in understanding the habitat needs of the
species, the rule identifies the elements of physical or biological
features essential to the conservation of the Agave eggersiana,
Gonocalyx concolor, and Varronia rupicola. The designated areas of
critical habitat are presented on maps, and the rule provides several
options for the interested public to obtain more detailed location
information, if desired.
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 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)).
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 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. As discussed above, we are not
designating critical habitat for Agave eggersiana, Gonocalyx concolor,
or Varronia rupicola on tribal lands.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited is available on the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov and upon request from the
Caribbean Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT).
Authors
The primary authors of this rulemaking are the staff members of the
Caribbean Ecological Services Field Office.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.
Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50
of the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below:
PART 17--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 1531-1544; 4201-4245, unless
otherwise noted.
0
2. In Sec. 17.96, amend paragraph (a) as follows:
0
a. By adding Family Agavaceae, in alphabetical order, to the list of
families.
0
b. By adding an entry for Agave eggersiana in alphabetical order under
Family Agavaceae.
0
c. By adding the word ``Family'' immediately before the word
``Boraginaceae'' in the heading of the entry ``Boraginaceae: Amsinckia
grandiflora (large-flowered fiddleneck).''
0
d. By adding an entry for Varronia rupicola in alphabetical order under
Family Boraginaceae.
0
e. By adding an entry for Gonocalyx concolor in alphabetical order
under Family Ericaceae.
These additions read as follows:
Sec. 17.96 Critical habitat--plants.
(a) Flowering plants.
* * * * *
Family Agavaceae: Agave eggersiana (No Common Name)
(1) Critical habitat units are depicted for St. Croix, USVI, on the
maps in this entry.
(2) Within these areas, the primary constituent elements of the
physical or biological features essential to the conservation of Agave
eggersiana consist of these components:
(i) Areas consisting of coastal cliffs and dry coastal shrublands.
(A) Coastal cliff habitat includes:
(1) Bare rock; and
(2) Sparse vegetation.
(B) Dry coastal shrubland habitat includes:
(1) Dry forest structure; and
(2) A plant community of predominately native vegetation.
[[Page 53332]]
(ii) Well-drained soils from the series Cramer, Glynn, Hasselberg,
Southgate, and Victory.
(iii) Habitat of sufficient area to sustain viable populations in
the coastal cliffs and dry coastal shrublands described in paragraphs
(2)(i)(A) and (2)(i)(B) of this entry.
(3) Critical habitat does not include manmade structures (such as
buildings, bridges, docks, aqueducts, roads, and other paved areas) and
the land on which they are located existing within the legal boundaries
on October 9, 2014.
(4) Critical habitat map units. Data layers defining map units were
created on a base of an aerial image (USCOE) and USFS-IITF Landcover
GAP raster. Critical habitat units were then mapped using Universal
Transverse Mercator (UTM) North American Datum (NAD) 1983 Zone 20 N
coordinates. The maps in this entry, as modified by any accompanying
regulatory text, establish the boundaries of the critical habitat
designation. The coordinates or plot points or both on which each map
is based are available to the public at the Service's Internet site at
http://www.fws.gov/caribbean/es, at http://www.regulations.gov at
Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2013-0040, and at the field office responsible for
this designation. You may obtain field office location information by
contacting one of the Service regional offices, the addresses of which
are listed at 50 CFR 2.2.
(5) Index map of critical habitat units for Agave eggersiana
follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09SE14.002
[[Page 53333]]
(6) Unit 1: Cane Garden, Estate Cane Garden and Estate Peters
Mindle, Christiansted, St. Croix, USVI.
(i) Unit 1 includes 6.9 acres (ac) (2.8 hectares (ha)).
(ii) Map of Unit 1 follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09SE14.003
(7) Unit 2: Manchenil, Estate Granard, Christiansted, St. Croix,
USVI.
(i) Unit 2 includes 1.5 ac (0.61 ha).
(ii) Map of Unit 2 follows:
[[Page 53334]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09SE14.004
(8) Unit 3: Great Pond, Estate Great Pond, Christiansted, St.
Croix, USVI.
(i) Unit 3 includes 0.8 ac (0.32 ha).
(ii) Map of Unit 3 follows:
[[Page 53335]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09SE14.005
(9) Unit 4: Protestant Cay, Protestant Cay, St. Croix, USVI.
(i) Unit 4 includes 0.4 ac (0.16 ha).
(ii) Map of Unit 4 follows:
[[Page 53336]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09SE14.006
(10) Unit 5: East End South, Estate Jack's Bay and Estate Issac's
Bay, Christiansted, St. Croix, USVI.
(i) Unit 5 includes 19 ac (7.7 ha).
(ii) Map of Units 5 and 6 follows:
[[Page 53337]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09SE14.007
(11) Unit 6: East End North, Estate Cotton Garden, Christiansted,
St. Croix, USVI.
(i) Unit 6 includes 22 ac (8.9 ha).
(ii) Map Unit 6 is provided at paragraph (10)(ii) of this entry.
* * * * *
Family Boraginaceae: Varronia rupicola
(1) Critical habitat units are depicted for the municipalities of
Gu[aacute]nica, Yauco, Guayanilla, Pe[ntilde]uelas, Ponce, and Vieques,
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, on the maps in this entry.
(2) Within these areas, the primary constituent elements of the
physical or biological features essential to the conservation of
Varronia rupicola consist of the following components:
(i) Remnants of native shrubland and scrubland forest on limestone
substrate within the subtropical dry forest life zone. Dry shrubland
and scrubland forest includes:
(A) Shrubland vegetation with canopy from 6.5 to 9.8 feet (ft) (2
to 3 meters (m)) high;
(B) Limestone pavement;
(C) Associated native vegetation; and
(D) A shrub layer dominated by Croton humilis, Eupatorium sinuatum,
Lantana reticulata, and Turnera diffusa.
(ii) Semi-deciduous dry forest on limestone substrate within the
subtropical dry forest life zone. Dry limestone semi-deciduous forest
includes:
(A) Low forest with canopy from 8 to 15 ft (3 to 5 m) high;
(B) Limestone pavement;
(C) Associated dry forest native vegetation; and
(D) A shrub layer dominated by Croton humilis, Eupatorium sinuatum,
Lantana reticulata, and Turnera diffusa.
(iii) The type locations described paragraphs (2)(i) and (2)(ii) of
this entry for this species should have shallow and
[[Page 53338]]
alkaline soils derived from limestone rock and an average rainfall of
34 in (86 cm).
(3) Critical habitat does not include manmade structures (such as
houses, bridges, aqueducts, and paved areas) and the land on which they
are located existing within the legal boundaries on October 9, 2014.
(4) Critical habitat map units. Data layers defining map units were
created on a base of an aerial image (ESRI image Basemap) and USFS-IITF
Landcover GAP raster. Critical habitat units were then mapped using the
Geographic Coordinate System-World Geodetic System (WGS) 1984 datum.
The maps in this entry, as modified by any accompanying regulatory
text, establish the boundaries of the critical habitat designation. The
coordinates or plot points or both on which each map is based are
available to the public at the Service's Internet site at http://www.fws.gov/caribbean/es, at http://www.regulations.gov at Docket No.
FWS-R4-ES-2013-0040, and at the field office responsible for this
designation. You may obtain field office location information by
contacting one of the Service regional offices, the addresses of which
are listed at 50 CFR 2.2.
(5) Index map of critical habitat units for Varronia rupicola
follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09SE14.008
(6) Unit 1: Montalva, municipality of Gu[aacute]nica, Puerto Rico.
(i) Unit 1 includes 992 acres (ac) (401 hectares (ha)).
(ii) Map of Units 1, 2, 3, and 4 follows:
[[Page 53339]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09SE14.009
(7) Unit 2: Gu[aacute]nica Commonwealth Forest, municipalities of
Gu[aacute]nica and Yauco, Puerto Rico.
(i) Unit 2 includes 584 ac (236 ha).
(ii) Map of Unit 2 is provided at paragraph (6)(ii) of this entry.
(8) Unit 3: Montes de Barina, municipalities of Yauco and
Guayanilla, Puerto Rico.
(i) Unit 3 includes 2,002 ac (810 ha).
(ii) Map of Unit 3 is provided at paragraph (6)(ii) of this entry.
(9) Unit 4: Pe[ntilde][oacute]n de Ponce, municipalities of
Pe[ntilde]uelas and Ponce, Puerto Rico.
(i) Unit 4 includes 2,174 ac (880 ha).
(ii) Map of Unit 4 is provided at paragraph (6)(ii) of this entry.
(10) Unit 5: Punta Negra, municipality of Vieques, Puerto Rico.
(i) Unit 5 includes 291 ac (117 ha).
(ii) Map of Units 5, 6, and 7 follows:
[[Page 53340]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09SE14.010
(11) Unit 6: Puerto Ferro, municipality of Viequez, Puerto Rico.
(i) Unit 6 includes 381 ac (154 ha).
(ii) Map of Unit 6 is provided at paragraph (10)(ii) of this entry.
(12) Unit 7: Cerro Playuela, municipality of Vieques, Puerto Rico.
(i) Unit 7 includes 123 ac (50 ha).
(ii) Map of Unit 7 is provided at paragraph (10)(ii) of this entry.
* * * * *
Family Ericaceae: Gonocalyx concolor
(1) Critical habitat units are depicted for the municipalities of
Cayey, San Lorenzo, and Patillas, Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, on the
maps in this entry.
(2) Within these areas, the primary constituent elements of the
physical or biological features essential to the conservation of
Gonocalyx concolor consist of these components:
(i) Elfin forest at elevations over 2,900 feet (ft) (880 meters
(m)) in Cerro La Santa, Puerto Rico, which includes:
(A) Forest with single canopy layer with trees seldom exceeding 22
ft (7 m) in height.
(B) Associated native vegetation dominated by species such as
Tabebuia schumanniana, Tabebuia rigida, Ocotea spathulata, Eugenia
borinquensis, Clusia minor, and Prestoea acuminata var. montana, native
ferns, and dense cover with epiphytes, including bromeliads and mosses.
(ii) Ausubo forest at elevations between 2,000 to 2,300 ft (620 to
720 m) in the Charco Azul, which includes:
(A) Forest with single canopy layer with trees exceeding 22 ft (7
m) in height.
(B) Plant association comprised by few species of native trees and
associated native vegetation (e.g., Manilkara bidentata, Dacryodes
excelsa, Guarea guidonia, and Cyrilla racemiflora), native ferns, and
dense cover with epiphytes, including bromeliads and mosses.
(iii) The type locations described in paragraphs (2)(i) and (2)(ii)
of this entry for this species should have mean annual precipitation of
88.7 in (225.3 cm), mean annual temperature of 72.3[emsp14][deg]F (22.7
[deg]C), and Los Guineos type of soil (i.e., very deep, acidic, clayey,
well-drained soils on side slopes of mountains).
(3) Critical habitat does not include manmade structures (such as
bridges, docks, and aqueducts) and the land on which they are located
existing within the legal boundaries on October 9, 2014.
(4) Critical habitat map units. Data layers defining map units were
created on a base of U.S. Geological Survey digital ortho-photo
quarter-quadrangles, and critical habitat units were then mapped using
aerial photos (ArcGis) to limits of the boundaries of the elfin forest
and ausubo forest. Critical habitat units were then mapped using ArcMap
version 10 (Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc.), a
Geographic Information Systems program. The maps in this entry, as
modified by any accompanying regulatory text, establish the boundaries
of the critical habitat designation. The coordinates or plot points or
both on which each map is based are available to the public at the
Service's Internet site at http://www.fws.gov/caribbean/es, at http://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2013-0040, and at the field
office responsible for this designation. You may obtain field office
location information by contacting one of the Service regional offices,
the addresses of which are listed at 50 CFR 2.2.
(5) Index map of critical habitat units for Gonocalyx concolor
follows:
[[Page 53341]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09SE14.011
(6) Unit 1: Cerro La Santa, Carite Commonwealth Forest, Puerto
Rico.
(i) Unit 1 includes 18.8 acres (ac) (7.6 hectares (ha)).
(ii) Map of Unit 1 follows:
[[Page 53342]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09SE14.012
(7) Unit 2: Charco Azul, Carite Commonwealth Forest, Puerto Rico.
(i) Unit 2 includes 179.2 ac (72.5 ha).
(ii) Map of Unit 2 follows:
[[Page 53343]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09SE14.013
[[Page 53344]]
* * * * *
Dated: August 26, 2014.
Michael J. Bean,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2014-21232 Filed 9-8-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C