Federal Register, Volume 76, Number 149, August 3, 2011, Pages 46595-47054 Page: 46,645

Federal Register/Vol. 76, No. 149 /Wednesday, August 3, 2011 /Rules and Regulations

endangered or threatened because of
one or more of the five factors described
in section 4(a)(1) of the Act. We must
consider these same five factors in
reclassifying or delisting a species. We
may delist a species according to 50
CFR 424.11(d) if the best available
scientific and commercial data indicate
that the species is neither endangered
nor threatened for the following reasons:
(1) The species is extinct; (2) the species
has recovered and is no longer
endangered or threatened; and/or (3) the
original scientific data used at the time
the species were classified was in error.
Under section 3 of the Act, a species
is "endangered" if it is in danger of
extinction throughout all or a
"significant portion of its range" and is
"threatened" if it is likely to become
endangered within the foreseeable
future throughout all or a "significant
portion of its range." The word "range"
refers to the range in which the species
currently exists, and the word
"significant" refers to the value of that
portion of the range being considered to
the conservation of the species. The
"foreseeable future" is the period of
time over which events or effects
reasonably can or should be anticipated,
or trends extrapolated. A recovered
species is one that no longer meets the
Act's definition of endangered or
threatened. Determining whether or not
a species is recovered requires
consideration of the same five categories
of threats specified in section 4(a)(1) of
the Act. For species that are already
listed as endangered or threatened, the
analysis for a delisting due to recovery
must include an evaluation of the
threats that existed at the time of listing,
the threats currently facing the species,
and the threats that are reasonably likely
to affect the species in the foreseeable
future following the delisting or
downlisting and the removal of the
Act's protections.
The following analysis examines all
five factors currently affecting, or that
are likely to affect Echinacea
tennesseensis within the foreseeable
future. In making this final
determination, we have considered all
scientific and commercial information
available, which includes information
received during the public comment
period on our proposed delisting rule
(75 FR 48896, August 12, 2010),
reanalyzed data from monitoring
conducted during 1998 through 2004,
and monitoring data collected in 2008
(TDEC unpublished data).

Factor A. The Present or Threatened
Destruction, Modification, or
Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range
The final rule to list Echinacea
tennesseensis as endangered (44 FR
32604) identified the following habitat
threats: Habitat loss due to residential
and recreational development and
succession of cedar glade communities
in which the species occurred.
Losses of cedar glade habitat and
colonies of Echinacea tennesseensis to
residential development have posed a
significant threat to E. tennesseensis. At
the time of listing, one population of E.
tennesseensis had been reduced in size
due to housing construction and another
was destroyed during the construction
of a trailer park. The three extant
occurrences at that time were all located
on private lands, one of which was
imminently threatened by surrounding
residential development. This Davidson
County occurrence has since been
protected as a DSNA. Approximately
two-thirds of the Wilson County
occurrence that was on public lands is
now a DSNA, and one-third remains on
private lands. The Rutherford County
occurrence was located in a gravel
parking lot of a commercial property
and has been destroyed. Since the time
of listing, protection of natural colonies
on publicly owned conservation lands
and establishment of additional colonies
through introductions have effectively
diminished the threat residential
development once posed to the survival
of E. tennesseensis.
The final listing rule for Echinacea
tennesseensis described recreational
development as a threat facing the
Davidson County (i.e., Mount View)
population, but did not specifically
address the nature of the recreational
development. The Mount View, Allvan,
and Couchville populations occur in
close proximity to J. Percy Priest
Reservoir, construction of which was
completed in 1967. It is possible that
development of recreational facilities
following completion of the reservoir
presented a threat to E. tennesseensis or
cedar glade habitats. However, four of
the secure and self-sustaining colonies
(i.e., colonies 1.2, 1.4, 4.2, and 5.8) are
located within the now-protected lands
buffering the reservoir, three of which
were designated as Environmentally
Sensitive Areas in the J. Percy Priest
2007 Master Plan Update (U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers 2007, pp. 3-1-4-3).
Therefore, recreational development no
longer poses a threat to the survival of
E. tennesseensis.
There are now 27 colonies,
distributed among the six populations of

Echinacea tennesseensis, which occur

entirely or primarily on conservation
lands in either State or Federal
ownership. The lone exception to public
ownership of these conservation lands
is the Gattinger Glade DSNA, which is
managed by TDEC but privately owned
and protected under a conservation
easement. We consider 19 of these
colonies to be secure and self-
sustaining. Sixteen colonies, all but two
of which are secure, are located entirely
or primarily within DSNAs that were
designated at various times between
1974 and 2009. TDEC manages most of
these DSNAs, in some cases
cooperatively with TDF, for the purpose
of conserving E. tennesseensis and the
cedar glades and barrens ecosystem that
the species depends on for its survival.
All but one of these DSNAs lie within
or adjacent to State or Federal
conservation lands that provide
complementary conservation benefits by
maintaining functioning ecosystems
within which these colonies occur and
harboring additional protected colonies
of E. tennesseensis.
The non-DSNA lands in the Cedars of
Lebanon State Forest also contain three
colonies, therefore providing a large,
protected cedar glade and forest
ecosystem connected to the Vesta Cedar
Glade, Vine Cedar Glade, and Cedars of
Lebanon State Forest DSNAs. An
additional colony is located at the
Cedars of Lebanon State Park, which is
adjacent to the Cedars of Lebanon State
Forest. Long Hunter State Park contains
six colonies and provides a functioning
ecosystem buffer to the Couchville
Cedar Glade and Barrens DSNA. COE
lands at J. Percy Priest Reservoir provide
habitat for three colonies in addition to
the colonies in the Elsie Quarterman
Cedar Glade and Fate Sanders Barrens
DSNAs that lie within these lands. The
Gattinger Cedar Glade is the only DSNA
on private land that contains a colony
of Echinacea tennesseensis. While this
property is not buffered by other public
lands, it lies within a large tract of land
owned by the Nashville Super
Speedway, which has been a partner in
the conservation of E. tennesseensis.
The three colonies at Stones River
National Battlefield are included among
the 16 within DSNAs, and lie within a
protected buffer provided by NPS lands.
We believe the colonies that are
located in DSNAs or on recently
acquired lands that will be added to
Tennessee's natural area system, with
the exceptions of colonies 2.4 and 2.7,
will receive adequate long-term
protection and necessary management
to control vegetation succession and
disturbance from human activities,
given the statutory protections afforded

these lands and TDEC's demonstrated

46645