Federal Register, Volume 76, Number 149, August 3, 2011, Pages 46595-47054 Page: 46,643
viii, 47054, iii p. ; 28 cm.View a full description of this periodical.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Federal Register/Vol. 76, No. 149 /Wednesday, August 3, 2011 /Rules and Regulations
(2006, p. 4) counted 237 flowering stems
at colony 6.2 and 852 flowering stems
at colony 6.3. The total number of
flowering stems in the Stones River
National Battlefield population in 2005
was 3,624 (TDEC 2006, 4). Based on
available quantitative and qualitative
data, we believe all colonies in this
population are secure and self-
sustaining.
Numerous partners are involved in
managing Echinacea tennesseensis
populations on their lands. TDEC
compared management options at the
Vesta Cedar Glade DSNA, including
mowing, discing, burning, and
application of selective herbicides for
removal of grasses (Clebsch 1993, pp. 2-
8). TDEC and TNC have used grazing of
goats, mechanical removal, and
herbicide applications to control woody
species encroachment on the margins of
cedar glade openings at Mount View
Glade DSNA (TDEC 2003, pp. 4-9).
TDEC applies prescribed fire or
mechanical removal, as needed and
within constraints imposed by locations
within the urban interface, to control
woody species, including the invasive
exotic privet (Ligustrum sp.), at many
DSNAs where E. tennesseensis occurs;
these include Mount View Glade, Vesta
Cedar Glade, Vine Cedar Glade, Cedars
of Lebanon State Forest Natural Area,
Gattinger's Cedar Glade and Barrens,
Elsie Quarterman Cedar Glade, Fate
Sanders Barrens, and Couchville Cedar
Glade and Barrens. TDEC works with
the Tennessee Division of Forestry
(TDF) to ensure that colonies in the
Cedars of Lebanon State Forest, which
includes three DSNAs, receive
necessary management and collaborates
with TDF to implement all prescribed
burns that are conducted on DSNAs.
TDEC also has cooperated with COE on
construction of fences or earthen berms
around sites at J. Percy Priest Reservoir
that have been threatened by urban
encroachment and illegal ORV use. The
NPS monitors the introduced
population at the Stones River National
Battlefield and controls woody plant
encroachment and vegetation
succession in the glade openings where
the colonies occur, as necessary.
Because TDEC and other entities have
monitored Echinacea tennesseensis
populations many times since the time
of listing and have managed colonies on
protected lands to minimize threats
from vegetation succession and ORV
use, and will continue to do so in the
foreseeable future, we consider thisrecovery action completed.
Recovery Action (6): Conduct Public
Education Projects
Echinacea tennesseensis was featured
in newspaper (Paine 2002, p. 6B) and
magazine (Simpson and Somers 1990,
pp. 14-16; Campbell 1992, p. 32; Daerr
1999, p. 50) articles to educate the
general public about the species, the
cedar glade ecosystem it occupies, and
the conservation efforts directed
towards them. The Service published
"An Educator's Guide to the Threatened
and Endangered Species and
Ecosystems of Tennessee," which
includes instructional materials about
the cedar glades of middle Tennessee
and two Federally listed plant species
found in the glades, E. tennesseensis
and Astragalus bibullatus (Pyne's
ground-plum) (Service no date, pp. 50-
53). TDEC personnel periodically lead
guided wildflower walks in the cedar
glades DSNAs and educate the public
about E. tennesseensis and other Federal
and State listed plant species during
those walks. In 2000, TDEC published
10,000 copies of an educational poster
featuring Tennessee's rare plants,
including E. tennesseensis. Because
numerous public education projects
have been conducted, we consider this
recovery action completed.
Summary of Comments and
Recommendations
During the open comment period for
the proposed rule (75 FR 48896, August
12, 2010), we requested that all
interested parties submit comments or
information concerning the proposed
delisting of Echinacea tennesseensis.
We directly notified and requested
comments from the State of Tennessee.
We contacted all appropriate State and
Federal agencies, county governments,
elected officials, scientific
organizations, and other interested
parties and invited them to comment.
We also published a newspaper notice
in The Tennesseean, a newspaper
serving the middle Tennessee region
where E. tennesseensis occurs, inviting
public comment.
As stated in the proposed rule (75 FR
48896, August 12, 2010), we accepted
comments for 60 days, ending October
12, 2010. During the comment period,
we received comments from two
individuals.
In accordance with our peer review
policy published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR
34270), and the Office of Management
and Budget's (OMB) December 16, 2004,
Final Information Quality Bulletin for
Peer Review, we solicited independent
opinions from 4 knowledgeable
individuals who have expertise with thespecies, who are within the geographic
region where the species occurs, or are
familiar with the principles of
conservation biology. We received
comments from one of the peer
reviewers.
We reviewed all comments received
from the peer reviewer and the public
for substantive issues and new
information regarding the proposed
delisting of Echinacea tennesseensis.
Substantive comments received during
the comment period are addressed
below and, where appropriate,
incorporated directly into this final rule
and into the post-delisting monitoring
plan.
Issue 1: One commenter requested
that we address the site quality for the
colonies that comprise the Allvan
population and the growth of these
colonies over time compared to other
colonies, despite the fact that this
population is not needed to meet the
criteria in the recovery plan that there
must be five populations with three
secure and self-sustaining colonies each.
This request was made because Drew
and Clebsch (1995, p. 64) observed
during surveys conducted in 1987 that
the Allvan site, where colony 4.1 was
located, had a much different plant
community assemblage than other
Echinacea tennesseensis sites due to
human disturbance and because the
commenter apparently believed that
colonies 4.2 and 4.3 also were located
at this disturbed site.
Response: Drew and Clebsch (1995, p.
62) concluded that human disturbance
had altered the vegetation community at
the site where the original colony (4.1)
of the Allvan population was located.
The dominant species they observed at
the Allvan site (Grindelia lanceolate,
Silphium trifoliatum, and Aster pilosus
var. priceae) were absent or present in
low frequency at other sites. Conversely,
the dominant species from the other
sites were only present in low frequency
and numbers at the site of colony 4.1.
These differences were likely
attributable to the intensive use that this
site, owned by a trucking company, had
experienced. The portion of the
property where E. tennesseensis once
occurred was used in the past as a
discard site for old engine parts and
other assorted scrap materials (TDEC
1996, Appendix I, p. XXI). As noted
above, the colony at this site was
destroyed prior to flowering stem counts
in 2005.
Colonies 4.2 and 4.3 of the Allvan site
were both established on COE lands, in
distinct sites from colony 4.1, from
introductions during the years 1989
through 1991. In contrast to the site
conditions where colony 4.1 was oncelocated, TDEC (1996, Appendix I, pp.
46643
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Periodical.
United States. Office of the Federal Register. Federal Register, Volume 76, Number 149, August 3, 2011, Pages 46595-47054, periodical, August 3, 2011; Washington D.C.. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc52326/m1/57/: accessed April 18, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.