![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Rule to Reclassify the Plant Isotria medeoloides (Small Whorled Pogonia) From Endangered to Threatened
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: October 6, 1994]
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
RIN 1018-AC11
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Rule to
Reclassify the Plant Isotria medeoloides (Small Whorled Pogonia) From
Endangered to Threatened
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) determines that
Isotria medeoloides (small whorled pogonia) warrants reclassification
from endangered to threatened. The determination is based on the
fulfillment of reclassification criteria as stated in the Small Whorled
Pogonia (Isotria medeoloides) Recovery Plan: First Revision (U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service 1992) and substantial improvement in the status of
this orchid species. As outlined in the revised Recovery Plan,
reclassification of Isotria medeoloides from endangered to threatened
should proceed when a minimum of 25 percent of the known viable sites
(as of 1992) are protected. Currently, 61 percent of the viable
populations are permanently protected. This rule implements the Federal
protection and recovery provisions for threatened species as provided
by the Act.
EFFECTIVE DATE: November 7, 1994.
ADDRESSES: The complete file for this rule is available for inspection,
by appointment, during normal business hours at the New England Field
Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 22 Bridge Street--Unit 1,
Concord, New Hampshire 03301-4986.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Susanna von Oettingen at the above
address (telephone: 603/225-1411, FAX 603/225-1467).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Isotria medeoloides (small whorled pogonia), a member of the orchid
family (Orchidaceae), was first described by Frederick Pursh in 1814 as
Arethusa medeoloides. In 1838, this orchid was placed in its own genus
and recognized as Isotria medeoloides; however, it also became known as
Pogonia affinis and Isotria affinis. M.L. Fernald clarified the
nomenclature in 1947, making the latter names synonyms of Isotria
medeoloides.
Isotria medeoloides is an herbaceous perennial with slender, hairy,
fibrous roots that radiate from a crown or rootstock. The five or six
milky-green or grayish-green, elliptic and somewhat pointed leaves
(four leaves in some vegetative plants) are displayed in a whorl at the
apex of a smooth, green stem. Isotria medeoloides flowers from mid-May
in the south to mid-June in the northern part of its range. A single
yellowish-green flower, or occasionally flower pair, stands in the
center of the whorl of leaves.
An individual plant is usually single-stemmed, although two or more
stems may occur; however, closely grouped double stems may in fact be
two single plants (Bill Brumback, New England Wildflower Society, in
litt. 1993). Because of the difficulty in differentiating double
stemmed plants from closely neighboring plants, population estimates
are often based on the number of stems, as opposed to the number of
plants.
Isotria medeoloides can be confused with Isotria verticillata
(Willd.) Raf. (large whorled pogonia), the only other species in the
genus Isotria. Characteristics that distinguish I. medeoloides from I.
verticillata include the stem and flower color, the relative lengths of
the sepals and petals, and the length of the stem of the fruit capsule
in relation to the length of the capsule itself (Rawinski 1989a).
Colonies of Isotria verticillata are often found near colonies of
Isotria medeoloides in the extensive region in which they occur
together (A. Belden, Virginia Division of Natural Heritage, in litt.
1991). They have also been reported to grow mixed together (Dixon and
Cook 1988).
Isotria medeoloides occurs both in fairly young forests and in
maturing stands of mixed-deciduous or mixed-deciduous/coniferous
forests. The majority of small whorled pogonia sites share several
common characteristics. These may include sparse to moderate ground
cover in the microhabitat (except when among ferns), a relatively open
understory canopy, and proximity to old logging roads, streams, or
other features that create long-persisting breaks in the forest canopy
(Mehrhoff 1989a). The soil in which the shallow-rooted small whorled
pogonia grows is usually covered with leaf litter and decaying material
(Mehrhoff 1980, Sperduto 1993). The spectrum of habitats includes dry,
rocky, wooded slopes to moist slopes or slope bases crisscrossed by
vernal streams.
Isotria medeoloides is widely distributed with a primary range
extending from southern Maine and New Hampshire through the Atlantic
seaboard States to northern Georgia and southeastern Tennessee.
Outlying colonies have been found in the western half of Pennsylvania,
Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, and Ontario, Canada.
There are three main population centers of Isotria medeoloides. The
northernmost concentration, comprising 66 sites in 1993, is centered in
the foothills of the Appalachian Mountains in New England and northern
coastal Massachusetts, with one outlying site in Rhode Island. A second
grouping of 18 sites is located at the southern extreme of the
Appalachian chain in the Blue Ridge Mountains where North Carolina,
South Carolina, Georgia, and Tennessee join. The third center, with 13
sites, is concentrated in the coastal plain and piedmont provinces of
Virginia, with outliers in Delaware and New Jersey. Seven sites
scattered in the outlying States and Ontario are considered disjunct
populations.
Previous Federal Action
Isotria medeoloides was listed as endangered on September 10, 1982
(47 FR 39827-39831). At that time, records for the species were known
from 48 counties in 16 States and Canada, though there were only 17
extant sites, in 10 States and Ontario, Canada. These sites had less
than 500 stems. Subsequent searches led to the discovery of many new
sites. In 1991, 86 sites in 15 States and Canada (U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service 1992) were known. By 1993, 17 additional sites in New
Hampshire and 1 site in Maine were discovered, bringing the total to
104 extant sites (Table 1). A number of States currently have only
historic sites; these include Vermont, New York, Maryland, Missouri,
and the District of Columbia.
Table 1.--Isotria Medeoloides Site Distribution
# Sites # Sites
# Sites (# protected
State 1985 Viable) 1993 (#
1993 Viable)
Maine.................................... 2 17(7) 4(4)
New Hampshire............................ 16 42(15) 11(6)
Massachusetts............................ 1 5(2) 2(2)
Rhode Island............................. 1 1(0) 0(0)
Connecticut.............................. 1 1(0) 1(0)
Pennsylvania............................. 1 3(0) 3(0)
New Jersey............................... 2 3(1) 1(0)
Delaware................................. 0 1(0) 0(0)
Virginia................................. 3 9(6) 7(4)
North Carolina........................... 2 5(2) 2(2)
South Carolina........................... 1 4(2) 4(2)
Georgia.................................. 1 8(4) 7(4)
Tennessee................................ 0 1(0) 0(0)
Ohio..................................... 0 1(0) 1(0)
Michigan................................. 1 1(0) 1(0)
Illinois................................. 1 1(0) 1(0)
Ontario, Canada.......................... 1 1(0) 1(0)
Total 34 104(39) 46(24)
\1\Protection as defined in the criteria for reclassification in the
Small Whorled Pogonia Recovery Plan: First Revision (U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service 1992), also discussed below.
The first Small Whorled Pogonia Recovery Plan was completed in 1985
(U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1985). The original objective, outlined
in the 1985 recovery plan and based on the best available information
at that time, was to locate and protect 30 populations (sites) of at
least 20 individuals each, with at least 15 of the sites to be located
in New England. Implementation of several recovery tasks generated
additional life history and population information, the identification
of new sites and protection of those sites deemed important to the
survival and recovery of this species.
Upon review of new life history and site information, this recovery
objective was no longer considered appropriate. Viability, based on the
reproductive status and persistence of a population, as opposed to
merely a stem count, is now considered to be an important factor in
determining the recoverability of this species.
The Small Whorled Pogonia Recovery Plan: First Revision, was
completed and approved in 1992. New recovery goals for the
reclassification and delisting of Isotria medeoloides and tasks for the
recovery of this species were developed using the most recent
information regarding population trends and dynamics, life history, and
previous recovery efforts. The current recovery strategy is based on a
multi-faceted approach of habitat protection and management (on a site
specific basis), threat reduction, and environmental education.
The Service identified recovery criteria required for the
reclassification of Isotria medeoloides from endangered to threatened
in the 1992 recovery plan. Reclassification would be pursued when a
minimum of 25 percent of the known, viable sites (as of 1992) is
permanently protected. A site is considered viable if it has a
geometric mean (over 3 years) of 20 emergent stems, of which at least
25 percent are flowering stems. Though not discussed in the recovery
plan, an alternative viability definition has since been developed for
sites located in the southern part of the range. This definition was
based upon information provided by botanists familiar with these small,
yet persistent populations (B. Sanders, U.S. Forest Service, pers.
comm. 1993). Viability for smaller populations may be considered for
those sites where less than 20 stems have persistently emerged for over
15 years. A determination of viability based on a stem count of less
than 20 stems would require a long-term commitment to monitoring a
site.
In addition to site viability and protection, reclassification
necessitates that the protected, viable sites be distributed
proportionally throughout the species' current range. Site protection
should include a sufficient buffer zone around the populations to allow
the potential for natural colonization of adjacent, unoccupied habitat.
As defined in the 1992 recovery plan, protection can be
accomplished through--(1) Ownership by a government agency or a private
organization that considers maintenance of the I. medeoloides
population to be a management objective for the site, or (2) a deeded
easement or covenant that effectively commits present and future
landowners to protecting the population and allowing the implementation
of management activities when appropriate. This high level of landowner
commitment to site protection may be critical if it is determined that
the species needs management to counteract the loss of nearby
unoccupied habitat. The need for habitat management would be reviewed
on a site-by-site basis, and be dependent upon the completion of Task
2.1 of the 1992 recovery plan, which is to determine appropriate
management strategies.
Adequate protection for the purposes of reclassification has been
achieved for approximately 50 percent of the viable New England center
populations; 57 percent of viable populations in the Virginia center;
and 100 percent of the viable populations in the Blue Ridge center. No
populations in the outlying States are considered to be viable, though
4 of the 6 extant populations are protected. As a result of meeting the
reclassification criteria outlined in the 1992 recovery plan, the
Service published a proposed rule to reclassify Isotria medeoloides
from endangered to threatened in the Federal Register on October 19,
1993 (FR 53904).
The ultimate goal of the 1992 recovery plan is to ensure long-term
viability of Isotria medeoloides, facilitating the removal of the
species from the Federal list. This objective would be reached when a
minimum of 61 sites (75 percent of the number of viable sites known in
1992) are permanently protected.
As in the reclassification criteria, the distribution of these
sites must be proportionate among the three geographic centers and the
outliers. Viable sites for delisting the species are those sites with
self-sustaining populations having an average of 20 emergent stems
(over a 10-year period), of which an average of 25 percent are
flowering stems. The extended period of monitoring time is required to
ensure long-term viability, and should factor in the potential for
naturally induced dormancy of individual plants. An alternative
definition for viability of smaller populations in the southern portion
of the small whorled pogonia's range may be considered and
substantiated through the recovery process for sites where less than 20
stems, of which an average of 25 percent are flowering, have
persistently emerged for over 15 years.
Ideally, unoccupied habitat adjacent to existing colonies must also
be protected to allow for natural colonization and maintenance of a
self-sustaining population. In some cases, only the immediate area
encompassing Isotria medeoloides populations has been protected, while
surrounding habitat has been destroyed. For these sites, management
strategies to maintain self-sustaining populations may need to replace
the historical availability of additional habitat.
The management strategies would be dependent upon completion of
Tasks 2.1 and 5.2 of the 1992 recovery plan.
Summary of Comments and Recommendations
In the October 19, 1993 proposed rule and associated notifications,
all interested parties were requested to submit factual reports or
information that might contribute to the development of a final rule.
Appropriate State agencies, county governments, Federal agencies,
scientific organizations, and other interested parties were contacted
and requested to comment. Newspaper notices that invited general public
comment were published in--The Kennebec Journal (Maine), The Portsmouth
Daily Times (Ohio), and The New Jersey Herald (New Jersey) on November
3, 1993; The Richmond Times-Dispatch (Virginia), The State JournalRegister
(Illinois) and The State (South Carolina) on November 4, 1993;
The Portland Newspaper (Maine) and The Atlanta Journal (Georgia) on
November 5, 1993; The Herald-Palladium (Michigan) and The Chattanooga
News-Free Press (Tennessee) on November 8, 1993; The New Journal
(Delaware) and The Wilmington News-Journal (Delaware) on November 9,
1993; and The Asheville Citizen-Times (North Carolina) on November 10,
1993. Eleven letters were received, nine supported the ruling, one was
in opposition and one did not support or oppose the reclassification of
I. medeoloides, but did provide comments.
Comments questioning the soundness of reclassification are
discussed below.
An individual suggested that reclassification was premature because
the Service's definition of viability is based on the population's
reproductive status as opposed to a stem count and reproductive status.
However, the Service's definition of a viable population for this
species includes both stem counts (geometric mean of 20 plants over a
3-year period) and reproductive status of the population (25 percent of
the population must have flowering individuals). Therefore, the Service
believes the definition for viable populations requires both constancy
of stem emergence and reproduction, and provides for the best possible
determination given current life history information.
Another comment questioned the Service's standard of an average of
20 stems over a 10-year period for a viable population. The individual
suggested that the majority of extant populations be monitored for 10
years prior to determining the viability for all populations with 20
stems or more. The Service assumes that the commenter is referring to
the delisting criteria. The stated recovery criteria are based on the
best scientific and professional judgment available and were given
public review during the revision of the recovery plan in 1992. No
comments were received at that time opposing the criteria. Furthermore,
the majority of populations averaging 20 or more stems have been
monitored periodically for close to 10 years or since their discovery.
Waiting to reclassify this species until such time as 10 years have
passed for all sites with 20 stems or more would delay reclassification
indefinitely, given that new populations continue to be discovered. The
Service believes that the reclassification criteria are sufficiently
protective and adequately define viability.
The commenter also interpreted the Service's recovery strategy to
include habitat management and questioned its inclusion given the lack
of information on appropriate and successful management. While it is
true that habitat management strategies currently have not been
developed, the Service believes that the potential for habitat
management may exist. Habitat management will only be an aspect of the
recovery strategy should it be deemed a useful tool. The proposed rule
did not mean to imply that this was a given.
The Service was requested to consider reclassifying the species in
a section of its range. The Act does not provide for the separate
listing or reclassification of plant populations.
Two commenters questioned the protection afforded threatened plants
under the Act. The Service does not believe that protection will be
significantly lessened by reclassification to threatened. The
protection given to this threatened species under sections 7 and 9 of
the Act is essentially the same as when listed as endangered. The only
exception to future protection is the exemption given to seeds from
cultivated specimens of threatened plants. Cultivated Isotria
medeoloides seeds will be exempt from the trade prohibitions of section
9(a)(2) of the Act, provided that a statement of ``cultivated origin''
appears on their containers. However, retention of threatened status
reflects the Service's awareness that threats continue to exist for
Isotria medeoloides, though it is no longer in immediate danger of
extinction.
Summary of Factors Affecting the Species
After a thorough review and consideration of all information
available, the Service has determined that Isotria medeoloides should
be reclassified as a threatened species. Procedures found in section
4(a)(1) of the Act and regulations implementing the listing provisions
of the Act (50 CFR part 424) for reclassifying species on the Federal
lists were followed. A species may be listed or reclassified as
threatened or endangered due to one or more of the five factors
described in section 4(a)(1). These factors and their application to
Isotria medeoloides (Pursh) Raf. (small whorled pogonia) are as
follows:
A. The present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range. Following the listing of Isotria
medeoloides as endangered, recovery activities carried out by Federal
and State agencies, private organizations, and the academic community
resulted in the discovery of many new sites. The number of extant sites
has more than tripled in the 11 years since the orchid was listed, with
approximately 48 percent of the I. medeoloides sites afforded some
level of protection.
Isotria medeoloides and its habitat continue to be vulnerable to
development pressures throughout its range. With the exception of a few
States, the upland habitat in which it is found receives limited
protection through State or Federal regulatory means when occurring on
private land. Residential and commercial development, both directly and
indirectly, are primarily responsible for the destruction of Isotria
medeoloides habitat. Of the 104 extant I. medeoloides sites, 2 States,
Maine and New Hampshire, account for 57 percent (59 sites) of all of
the known sites. Only 15 of the 59 sites in these 2 States are
protected.
Historical records exist for localities throughout the small
whorled pogonia's range. The habitat of many of these known historical
sites has been destroyed; for example, sites in Vermont, Maryland, New
Jersey, and the District of Columbia were lost to habitat destruction,
primarily from development. Recent intensive efforts to relocate
historical sites in eastern Pennsylvania, New York, Vermont, and
Missouri have been unsuccessful (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1992).
Since the listing of Isotria medeoloides, New Hampshire has seen
the destruction of a large, viable population by the construction of
summer housing and the potential destruction of a second, recently
discovered (1992) population. This second population of over 30 stems
will most likely be severely impacted, if not destroyed, within the
next few years as the habitat is developed for a subdivision. In
Virginia, one of the larger sites will most likely be destroyed within
the next few years as its habitat, and adjoining suitable habitat, is
developed for housing. Without voluntary landowner protection, many
more I. medeoloides populations could be destroyed as development
pressures increase.
Development in areas surrounding Isotria medeoloides habitat could
indirectly be responsible for habitat destruction as roads, power lines
and sewer mains are designed to connect settled areas. In addition,
housing developments, though not necessarily directly destroying
habitat, may cause the alteration of habitat parameters by creating
large, permanent openings in the canopy that in turn encourage denser
understory growth. Disturbance to populations through increased
visitation (however unintentional) from people and pets might also
cause direct damage to plants, and eventually a decline in affected
populations.
This plant primarily appears to reproduce sexually, though little
is known at this time regarding seed dispersal and seed banking. The
formation of barriers to seed dispersal, either through development of
adjacent habitat or from logging or land clearing, may prevent the
recolonization of suitable habitat by naturally declining populations.
Careful and selective logging may not be harmful to a population;
however, heavy timbering and clear-cutting may have long-term impacts
on Isotria medeoloides populations and their habitat. The creation of
logging roads and use of heavy machinery that severely alters soil
composition could significantly modify the habitat and cause the direct
loss of plants.
B. Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes. The 1982 final listing identified the collecting
for scientific purposes as contributing to the loss of Isotria
medeoloides in the past. Since the listing and the release of both
recovery plans, collecting for these purposes is no longer considered
to be a threat to the species. However, the potential collecting by
wildflower garden enthusiasts for transplanting is still great due to
the rarity of this orchid. One landowner in North Carolina was
literally harassed by orchid and wildflower enthusiasts when a local
garden club publicized the location of his I. medeoloides population
(Nora Murdock, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, in litt. 1993).
Furthermore, vandalism of populations (either out of capriciousness or
for private collections) whose locations were publicized continue to be
documented (Rawinski 1986b).
Significant commercial trade in the species is not known or
expected in the future, nor is any significant import or export of this
species expected. Therefore, taking of I. medeoloides for these
purposes is not considered to be a factor in its decline.
C. Disease or predation. Herbivory by white-tailed deer and
invertebrates, including slugs and camel crickets is a known threat of
currently unknown extent. Increasing development pressure near Isotria
medeoloides populations results in the concentration of deer onto
smaller parcels of woodland and may decrease local hunting pressure on
suburban deer populations. As the local deer herd increases and is
forced onto less land, there is a greater likelihood of herbivory on
Isotria medeoloides. In Virginia, the magnitude of threat from deer
browse of I. medeoloides populations may be second only to development
of its habitat (D. Ware, College of William and Mary, pers. comm.
1994). The precipitous decline of a large Virginia I. medeoloides
population located near a housing development, appears to be primarily
due to grazing (Ware 1991). However, symbolic fencing placed around
four subpopulations appears to have prevented deer from grazing on the
orchids. In 1993, no plants were observed to have been browsed, prior
to the fencing a majority of the plants were impacted by deer browse
(D. Ware, pers. comm. 1994).
Additional threats include wild pigs trampling or uprooting I.
medeoloides plants and herbivory by rabbits in the southern portion of
the small whorled pogonia's range (B. Sanders, pers. comm. 1993) and
occasionally trampling or herbivory by moose in the northern portion of
its range.
D. The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms. Isotria
medeoloides is afforded protection by the Endangered Species Act. The
Act prohibits the take of endangered and threatened plants from lands
under Federal jurisdiction or in knowing violation of any State law or
regulation, and prohibits the violation of any regulation pertaining to
any endangered or threatened species of plant. Under the Act, Federal
agencies are required to ensure that their actions do not jeopardize
the continued existence of listed species and must consult (under
section 7) when an activity may affect a listed species or critical
habitat.
Section 7(a)(1) requires Federal agencies to carry out programs for
the conservation of threatened and endangered species. In this respect,
several Federal agencies have intensified their search and protection
efforts on behalf of Isotria medeoloides. In Virginia, the National
Park Service provided funding for research and monitoring, and is
seeking ways to prevent disturbance to sites under its jurisdiction.
The Department of Defense has also facilitated searches and monitoring
of populations at two bases in Virginia. In Georgia, the U.S. Forest
Service has been particularly successful in finding new sites. The
Forest Service in this State conducts plant surveys in areas
potentially impacted by management activities and regularly monitors
known sites (B. Sanders, in litt. 1993). In 1993, two sites were
located on the White Mountain National Forest in New Hampshire. Base
maps for potential I. medeoloides habitat were developed for the White
Mountain National Forest; the Forest Service now consults the Service
on all activities proposed for those areas.
Consultations under section 7 of the Act can provide protection for
this species; a road and sewer main near an Isotria medeoloides
population in Virginia were re-routed to avoid direct destruction of
the plants and their habitat. Coordination with State and local
agencies, as well as private developers, has resulted in the avoidance
of adverse impacts to Isotria medeoloides and its habitat. In
Connecticut, a trail was re-routed to avoid a population in a State
forest.
Additional protection through Federal and State legislation has
been provided since Isotria medeoloides was listed. All States with
current and historical populations have cooperative plant agreements
with the Fish and Wildlife Service as specified under section 6(c)(2)
of the Act. The 1988 amendments to the Act increased protection for
plant species not on Federal lands, where State endangered species laws
provide specific protection to endangered plant species.
Twenty-seven sites have been discovered on lands under State and
Federal jurisdiction and are afforded some level of protection. For
those populations on private lands, conservation easements or
agreements with the landowners have been actively pursued. Eight sites
are on lands owned by private conservation organizations, while two
other sites have deeded conservation easements ensuring the protection
of the plants and their habitat. Some State agencies pursue voluntary
registration of I. medeoloides sites. While such registration does not
guarantee habitat protection, it does seek to recognize the importance
of the site in the hopes of voluntary protection on the part of the
landowners.
The number of States protecting I. medeoloides has increased from 6
in 1985 to include all States in its present range. With the exceptions
of New Jersey, Rhode Island and South Carolina, all States have enacted
laws that prohibit the take of State listed plants, including I.
medeoloides, without the landowner's permission. However, plants
growing on privately owned lands are subject to take by the landowner.
Massachusetts, Michigan and Vermont provide additional protection to
listed plants in that permits are required for take on both private and
public lands.
In Georgia, Isotria medeoloides is protected under a regional
Forest Service Manual regulation, 2670.44 R-8 supp 37. Since this
species is federally listed, it qualifies as a Forest Service Potential
Endangered, Threatened or Sensitive (PET) species, and as such should
receive a level of protection that will lead to identification of
possible recovery opportunities and ensure that no adverse effects
occur to plants on lands under the Forest Service's jurisdiction.
The Service does not believe that reclassification to threatened
status will result in substantive changes in the protection afforded
this species under these regulatory mechanisms.
E. Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued
existence. Recovery efforts have been directed toward research and
environmental education. A predictive habitat model was developed using
Geographical Information System (GIS); 10 additional sites were
discovered in 1993 using maps delineating potential habitat (Sperduto
1993). Educational materials in the form of posters, brochures and fact
sheets were designed and made available to the general public. Ongoing
research includes the investigation of mycorrhizal relationships (Larry
Zetler, Clemson University, in litt. 1993), and habitat manipulation to
encourage or stabilize I. medeoloides populations (Alison Dibble,
University of Maine, in litt. 1993).
Mycorrhizal associations are important factors in the germination
and seedling establishment of most orchids. Though a mycorrhizal fungus
was isolated from the closely related Isotria verticillata, hostspecific
mycorrhizae have not been identified for I. medeoloides.
Alterations to I. medeoloides habitat that adversely affect the
mycorrhizae would also result in adverse impacts to the orchid.
However, until the specific mycorrhizal associate is determined, it
will be difficult to understand the effects of subtle habitat
alteration on the orchid or the fungal community.
Recent monitoring results indicate a decline in viability of many
of the populations that have been followed over a number of years. It
appears that no obvious changes have occurred to the habitat of most of
these populations and no causes for this decline have been determined.
Though life history and demographic studies have provided some clues to
the habitat requirements of this species, there is still a large gap in
the understanding of what is required to maintain viable populations.
Dormancy of Isotria medeoloides plants continues to be a matter of
speculation and debate. The 1985 recovery plan provided preliminary
information that a small whorled pogonia could go dormant for 10 to 20
years. To date, this length of dormancy has not been verified. The
length of dormancy might also vary throughout the range of the orchid.
Mehrhoff (1989b) conducted a 6-year study and observed that no plants
emerged after 3 or more consecutive years; other studies indicate that
plants may be dormant up to 4 years and dormancy may vary by year and
by site (Brumback and Fyler 1988; Vitt 1991). Without better
clarification of specific dormancy periods, it is difficult to
distinguish between a dead or dormant plant.
As adjacent, suitable habitat is developed, precluding the natural
colonization of suitable habitat, management may be the only
alternative for maintaining viable populations. It may be vital to
develop habitat management strategies for existing sites in order to
maintain self-sustaining populations. Without the knowledge of key
habitat characteristics, management and the precise identification of
potential habitat will be impossible. Soil type (including texture and
moisture), nutrient availability, overstory cover, understory density,
slope position and aspect are some of the habitat characteristics that
might be important factors in population viability. Other unknown
parameters include the variation of climatological factors and relative
humidity throughout the species' range, and how these differences
impact population stability, plant reproduction, recolonization and
viability.
The dearth in knowledge of habitat characteristics and life history
information may result in the further decline of many populations
through benign neglect. The 1992 recovery plan identified a number of
tasks required to advance the understanding of Isotria medeoloides in
furtherance of its recovery.
The Service has carefully assessed the best scientific and
commercial information available regarding the past, present, and
future threats faced by this species in determining to make this rule
final. Based on this evaluation, the preferred action is to reclassify
this species from endangered status to threatened status. Threatened
status is more appropriate because the number of known populations has
tripled since the species was listed and 61 percent of the current
viable sites are afforded permanent protection. However, it may still
be likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future
without additional site protection and further investigation of its
life history and habitat parameters.
Effects of the Rule
This rule changes the status of Isotria medeoloides from endangered
to threatened and formally recognizes that this species is no longer in
imminent danger of extinction throughout a significant portion of its
range. Reclassification to threatened does not significantly alter the
protection for this species under the Act (see Summary of Comments and
Recommendations).
Conservation measures prescribed for Isotria medeoloides would
proceed. The recovery program approved in 1992 prescribes continued
efforts to--(1) protect known Isotria medeoloides populations and
essential habitat; (2) develop habitat management strategies; (3)
manage protected sites; (4) monitor sites and determine viability; (5)
survey for new sites; (6) investigate population dynamics and species
biology; and (7) provide public information and education.
Many State and Federal agencies continue to monitor extant sites
and search for new ones. The application of a predictive model should
further assist in the location of new sites in New England.
Investigations into the genetic structure of this species, the
mycorrhizal relationships, and the development of habitat management
measures have been targeted in the 1992 recovery plan as important
tasks. These activities are either ongoing or proposed for the near
future. Recovery activities are not expected to diminish as a result of
this reclassification since the primary objective of the recovery
strategy is delisting of the species.
This action will not be an irreversible commitment on the part of
the Service. Reclassifying Isotria medeoloides to endangered would be
possible should changes occur in management, habitat, or other factors
that alter the present threats to the species' survival and recovery.
National Environmental Policy Act
The Fish and Wildlife Service has determined that Environmental
Assessments and Environmental Impact Statements, as defined under the
authority of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, need not be
prepared in connection with regulations adopted pursuant to section
4(a) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. A notice
outlining the Service's reasons for this determination was published in
the Federal Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244).
References Cited
Brumback, W.E., and C.W. Fyler. 1988. Monitoring of Isotria
medeoloides in New Hampshire--1988. Wildflower notes 3 (1):32-40.
New England Wild Flower Society. Framingham, MA.
Dixon P., and R. Cook. 1988. Attempts to relocate Isotria
medeoloides in New York State. Unpublished report. Cornell
Plantations, Ithaca, NY. 3 pp.
Mehrhoff, L.A. 1980. The reproductive biology of the genus Isotria
(Orchidaceae) and the ecology of Isotria medeoloides. M.S. Thesis,
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, N.C. pp. 17-23.
Mehrhoff, L.A. 1989a. Reproductive vigor and environmental factors
in populations of an endangered North American orchid, Isotria
medeoloides (Pursh) Rafinesque. Biological Conservation 47: 281-296.
Mehrhoff, L.A. 1989b. The dynamics of declining populations of an
endangered orchid, Isotria medeoloides. Ecology 70 (3): 783-786.
Rawinski, T. 1986a. Element stewardship abstract for Isotria
medeoloides (Pursh) Raf. Unpublished report. Eastern Heritage Task
Force, The Nature Conservancy, Boston, MA. 16 pp.
Rawinski, T. 1986b. Vandalism of the small whorled pogonia.
Endangered Species Technical Bulletin. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. Vol. XI(12): 6.
Sperduto, M. 1993. Use of a geographic information system (GIS) to
predict potential habitat for Isotria medeoloides (Pursh)Raf. in New
Hampshire and Maine. M.S. Thesis, University of New Hampshire,
Durham, New Hampshire. 106 pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1982. Endangered and threatened
wildlife and plants; Determination of Isotria medeoloides (small
whorled pogonia) to be an endangered species. Federal Register vol.
47(176): 39827-39831.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1985. Small whorled pogonia recovery
plan. Newton Corner, MA. 38 pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1992. Small whorled pogonia (Isotria
medeoloides) recovery plan, first revision. Newton Corner, MA. 75
pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1993. Endangered and threatened
wildlife and plants; Proposed rule to reclassify the Plant Isotria
medeoloides (small whorled pogonia) from endangered to threatened.
Federal Register vol. 58(200): 53904-53909.
Vitt, P. 1991. Conservation of Isotria medeoloides: A federally
endangered terrestrial orchid. M.S. Thesis, University of Maine,
Orono, ME. 40 pp.
Ware, D.M.E. 1991. Small Whorled Pogonia (pp. 95-97). In: Karen
Terwilliger, coord. Virginia's Endangered Species. Nongame and
Endangered Species Program, Virginia Department of Game and Inland
Fisheries. The McDonald and Woodward Publishing Company, Blacksburg,
VA. 672 pp.
Author
The primary author of this proposed rule is Susanna von Oettingen
(see ADDRESSES section).
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, and Transportation.
Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the
Code of Federal Regulations, is amended as set forth below.
PART 17--[AMENDED]
- The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; 16 U.S.C.
4201-4245; Pub. L. 99-625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted.
2. Section 17.12(h) is amended by revising the ``Status'' column in
the existing entry for ``Isotria medeoloides (Small whorled pogonia)''
under ``Orchidaceae'' on the List of Endangered and Threatened Plants
to read ``T'' instead of ``E'' and the ``When Listed'' column to read
``122, 556''.
Dated: September 9, 1994.
Mollie H. Beattie,
Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 94-24713 Filed 10-5-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P