Sonoma County Office of Education Habitat Conservation Plan, Dutton Avenue School, City of Santa Rosa, Sonoma County, CA, 38243-38245 [E8-15110]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 129 / Thursday, July 3, 2008 / Notices
every 15 years in accordance with the
Improvement Act and NEPA.
Significant issues addressed in the
Draft CCP/EA include: Management of
waterfowl and neotropical migratory
birds, the wilderness area, and invasive
species; recovery and protection of
threatened and endangered species
(particularly the red-cockaded
woodpecker, red wolf, and American
alligator); regional habitat loss and
fragmentation; turbidity in open waters;
land acquisition to include a minor
boundary expansion; and public uses of
the refuge.
CCP Alternatives, Including Our
Proposed Alternative
We developed three alternatives for
managing the refuge and chose
Alternative B as the proposed
alternative.
Alternatives
A full description of each alternative
is in the Draft CCP/EA. We summarize
each alternative below.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Alternative A: No Action Alternative
Under Alternative A, the no action
alternative, present management of the
refuge would continue at the current
level. The refuge would provide habitat
for migratory birds and threatened and
endangered species, particularly the
red-cockaded woodpecker, the red wolf,
and the American alligator. Current
surveying and monitoring for waterfowl,
wading and colonial nesting birds, and
land birds would continue, and no
active surveying or monitoring of other
birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians,
or fish would be conducted by refuge
staff. There would be few public use
and environmental education and
outreach programs. Fishing and hunting
of waterfowl would continue as
currently managed.
Alternative B: Moderately Expand
Programs (Proposed Alternative)
Under Alternative B, the proposed
alternative, the refuge would continue
to provide habitat for migratory birds,
threatened and endangered species, and
other waterfowl and fauna. Surveying
and monitoring would be expanded to
obtain baseline data on other species,
and would include other birds,
mammals, reptiles, amphibians, and
fish. The refuge would monitor the
effects of management activities on flora
and fauna and adapt as needed. The
public use and environmental education
and outreach programs would be
increased to include conducting two to
ten programs for local school groups.
Fishing and hunting opportunities
would be expanded by increasing the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:46 Jul 02, 2008
Jkt 214001
38243
number of use days and introducing
deer hunting with archery equipment.
An interpretive trail or boardwalk
would be developed to provide greater
access to the public.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Alternative C: Optimally Expand
Programs
Sonoma County Office of Education
Habitat Conservation Plan, Dutton
Avenue School, City of Santa Rosa,
Sonoma County, CA
Under Alternative C, the activities
under Alternative B would be further
expanded. More wildlife and habitat
surveying and monitoring would be
conducted; environmental education
and outreach programs would be
increased to include conducting ten to
fifteen programs for local school groups;
hunting and fishing use days would
increase and deer hunting with both
archery equipment and primitive
firearms would be introduced; an
interpretive trail or boardwalk would be
developed, as well as a canoe trail; and
a photo blind would be constructed. In
addition, development and management
of moist-soil units for migratory birds
would be considered.
Next Step
After the comment period ends, we
will analyze the comments and address
them in the form of a final CCP and
Finding of No Significant Impact.
Public Availability of Comments
Before including your address, phone
number, e-mail address, or other
personal identifying information in your
comment, you should be aware that
your entire comment—including your
personal identifying information—may
be made publicly available at any time.
While you can ask us in your comment
to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
Authority: This notice is published under
the authority of the National Wildlife Refuge
System Improvement Act of 1997, Public
Law 105–57.
Dated: May 19, 2008.
Cynthia K. Dohner,
Acting Regional Director.
[FR Doc. E8–15117 Filed 7–2–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
PO 00000
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS–R8–ES–2008–N00170; 1112–0000–
81420–F2]
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability: proposed
low-effect habitat conservation plan;
request for comment.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Sonoma County Office of
Education (SCOE or applicant) has
applied to the Fish and Wildlife Service
(Service) for a 5-year incidental take
permit for two species pursuant to
section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act).
The application addresses the potential
for ‘‘take’’ of one listed animals and one
listed plant. The applicant would
implement a conservation program to
minimize and mitigate the project
activities, as described in the SCOE
Low-Effect Habitat Conservation Plan
(plan). We request comments on the
applicant’s application and plan, and
the preliminary determination that the
plan qualifies as a ‘‘low-effect’’ habitat
conservation plan, eligible for a
Categorical Exclusion under the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969, as amended (NEPA). We discuss
our basis for this determination in our
Environmental Action Statement (EAS),
which is also available for public
review.
DATES: We must receive written
comments on or before August 4, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Please address written
comments to Mike Thomas,
Conservation Planning Branch, Fish and
Wildlife Service, Sacramento Fish and
Wildlife Office, 2800 Cottage Way, W–
2605, Sacramento, CA 95825.
Alternatively, you may send comments
by facsimile to (916) 414–6713.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mike Thomas, or Eric Tattersall, Branch
Chief, Conservation Planning Branch, at
the address shown above or at 916–414–
6600 (telephone).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Availability of Documents
Copies of the permit application,
plan, and EAS can be obtained from the
individuals named above (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). Copies
of these documents are available for
public inspection, by appointment,
during regular business hours, at the
Frm 00072
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\03JYN1.SGM
03JYN1
38244
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 129 / Thursday, July 3, 2008 / Notices
Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office
(see ADDRESSES).
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Public Availability of Comments
Before including your address, phone
number, e-mail address, or other
personal identifying information in your
comment, you should be aware that
your entire comment—including your
personal identifying information—may
be made publicly available at any time.
While you can ask us in your comment
to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
Background Information
Section 9 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531
et seq.) and its implementing Federal
regulations prohibit the ‘‘take’’ of fish or
wildlife species listed as endangered or
threatened. ‘‘Take’’ is defined under the
Act to include the following activities:
To harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot,
wound, kill, trap, capture or collect
listed animal species, or to attempt to
engage in such conduct. However,
under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act, we
may issue permits to authorize
incidental take of listed species.
‘‘Incidental take’’ is defined by the Act
as take that is incidental to, and not the
purpose of, carrying out an otherwise
lawful activity. Regulations governing
incidental take permits for endangered
and threatened species, respectively, are
in the Code of Federal Regulations at 50
CFR 17.22 and 50 CFR 17.32.
Although take of listed plant species
is not prohibited under the Act, and
therefore cannot be authorized under an
incidental take permit, plant species
may be included on a permit in
recognition of the conservation benefits
provided to them under a habitat
conservation plan. All species included
on the incidental take permit would
receive assurances under the Services’
‘‘No Surprises’’ regulations (50 CFR
17.22(b)(5) and 17.32(b)(5).
The applicant seeks an incident take
permit for covered activities within 4.42
acres of grassland and associated
wetlands owned by SCOE located in
Sonoma County, California. SCOE is
requesting permits for take of one
federally listed animal species, listed as
endangered: Sonoma County Distinct
Population Segment of the California
tiger salamander (Ambystoma
californiense) (tiger salamander). The
federally listed plant species is the
endangered Sebastopol meadowfoam
(Limnathese vinculans) (meadowfoam).
The proposed covered species do not
include any wildlife species not
currently listed under the Act.
Collectively, both of these species are
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:46 Jul 02, 2008
Jkt 214001
referred to as ‘‘covered species’’ in the
plan.
SCOE owns and manages lands in
Sonoma County, California. Lands
owned by SCOE include the proposed
community school on 4.42 acres at 3255
and 3261 Dutton Avenue in the City of
Santa Rosa.
Covered activities include the
following: Grading and ground leveling,
vegetation removal and planting, soil
compaction, building construction and
use of heavy equipment (including, but
not limited to bulldozers, cement trucks,
water trucks, and backhoes), erosion
control structures (such as silt fencing
and barriers), dust control (such as
watering surface soils), construction of
sidewalks and roads, trenching, and
installation of utilities and irrigation
systems.
The applicant proposes to avoid,
minimize, and mitigate the effects to the
covered species associated with the
covered activities by fully implementing
the plan. Minimization measures will
include, but are not limited to, an
employee education program; biological
monitoring during construction and
earthmoving; a storm water, erosion,
and dust control plan; daily pre-activity
surveys for listed species; tiger
salamander salvage in the winter prior
to construction, to exclude tiger
salamanders from the site and work
areas; and temporary removal of covered
species if they are observed within work
areas. General minimization measures
will include: limiting staging and work
areas to the project site only, regular
removal of all foods and food-related
trash, prohibiting pets from the project
site during construction, a 15 mile-perhour speed limit for vehicles,
maintenance of all equipment to avoid
fluid leaks, and storage of all hazardous
materials in sealable containers at least
200 feet from aquatic habitats.
Alternatives
The Service’s proposed action
consists of approving the applicant’s
plan and issuance of an incidental take
permit for the applicant’s Covered
Activities. As required by the Act, the
applicant’s plan considers alternatives
to the take under the proposed action.
The plan considers the environmental
consequences of two alternatives to the
proposed action, the No Action
alternative and the Reduced Take
alternative. Under the No Action
Alternative, no permit would be issued,
the proposed school project would not
be built, and no take would occur.
Under the Reduced Take alternative,
buildings and facilities would be
clustered closer together to reduce the
amount of tiger salamander and
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
meadowfoam habitat that would be lost
by construction of the school. Direct
affects due to habitat loss and take of
individuals would be reduced; however,
indirect affects to tiger salamander
migration corridors are unlikely to be
minimized by clustering because
existing pathways for migration are
limited on all sides except to the north
(there are two vacant grassland parcels
to the north, which are in turn bordered
by development) and any additional
construction, regardless of location on
the site would likely further restrict
movement of tiger salamanders. In
addition, grassland and wetland habitat
avoided on-site would be unlikely to
support a viable population of tiger
salamanders or meadowfoam due to the
small size of the site, lack of hydrologic
connection to other water bodies, and
blockage of movement corridors.
Under the proposed action
alternative, the Service would issue an
incidental take permit for the
applicant’s proposed project, which
includes the activities described above.
The proposed action alternative would
result in permanent loss of 4.13 acres of
upland tiger salamander habitat and
0.07 acres of seasonal wetland habitat.
To mitigate for these affects, the
applicant proposes to purchase 8.3 tiger
salamander credits and 0.105
meadowfoam credits at a Service
approved bank.
National Environmental Policy Act
As described in our EAS, we have
made the preliminary determination
that approval of the proposed plan and
issuance of the permit would qualify as
a categorical exclusion under NEPA (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), as provided by
Federal regulations (40 CFR 1500, 5(k),
1507.3(b)(2), 1508.4) and the
Department of the Interior Manual (516
DM 2 and 516 DM 8). Our EAS found
that the proposed plan qualifies as a
‘‘low-effect’’ habitat conservation plan,
as defined by the Service’s Habitat
Conservation Planning Handbook
(November 1996). Determination of loweffect habitat conservation plans is
based on the following three criteria: (1)
Implementation of the proposed plan
would result in minor or negligible
effects on federally listed, proposed, and
candidate species and their habitats; (2)
implementation of the proposed plan
would result in minor or negligible
effects on other environmental values or
resources; and (3) impacts of the plan,
considered together with the impacts of
other past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable similarly situated projects,
would not result, over time, in
cumulative effects to environmental
values or resources that would be
E:\FR\FM\03JYN1.SGM
03JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 129 / Thursday, July 3, 2008 / Notices
considered significant. Based upon the
preliminary determinations in the EAS,
we do not intend to prepare further
NEPA documentation. We will consider
public comments when making the final
determination on whether to prepare an
additional NEPA document on the
proposed action.
Public Review
We provide this notice pursuant to
section 10(c) of the Act and the NEPA
public-involvement regulations (40 CFR
1500.1(b), 1500.2(d), and 1506.6). We
will evaluate the permit application,
including the plan, and comments
submitted thereon to determine whether
the application meets the requirements
of section 10(a) of the Act. If the
requirements are met, we will issue a
permit to the applicant for the
incidental take of the Sonoma Distinct
Population Segment of the California
tiger salamander and the Sebastopol
meadowfoam from the implementation
of the covered activities described in the
plan, or from mitigation conducted as
part of this plan. We will make the final
permit decision no sooner than 30 days
after the date of this notice.
Dated: June 27, 2008.
Cay C. Goude,
Acting Field Supervisor, Sacramento Fish and
Wildlife Office, Sacramento, California.
[FR Doc. E8–15110 Filed 7–2–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[OR 050–08–1430–FR; HAG–8–0132]
Notice of Intent To Prepare a Resource
Management Plan Amendment and
Associated Environmental
Assessment for the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) Prineville District
Deschutes Resource Area, and a
Proposed Classification of Lands as
Suitable for Disposal
Bureau of Land Management,
Department of the Interior.
ACTION: Notice of Intent and Proposed
Classification of Lands as Suitable for
Disposal under Section 7 of the Taylor
Grazing Act (48 Stat. 1272), as amended
(43 U.S.C. 315f) and 43 CFR Part 2400.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This document provides
notice that the BLM intends to prepare
an amendment to the Upper Deschutes
Resource Management Plan for the
Prineville District, Deschutes Resource
Area and an associated Environmental
Assessment (EA). The proposed
amendment would reclassify some
lands designated for BLM retention and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:46 Jul 02, 2008
Jkt 214001
management (Z–1) in the existing
Resource Management Plan (RMP) as
suitable for disposal (Z–3). The BLM is
also providing notice of the proposed
classification of these same lands under
Section 7 of the Taylor Grazing Act as
suitable for disposal. These
classifications are required to allow
consideration of transfer of these lands
to the State of Oregon (‘‘the State’’)
under the State Indemnity Selection
process. When Oregon was admitted
into the Union in 1859, the Federal
government granted sections 16 and 36
within every township to the State for
support of public schools. However, if
the Federal government had already
disposed of these specific sections or
reserved them for some other purpose,
the State is allowed to select other
public lands ‘‘in-lieu’’ of the unavailable
sections. To date the State has received
approximately 3,000 of the 5,202 acres
owed. The State of Oregon Department
of State Lands has selected parcels with
potential to produce income for the
Common School Fund through
subsequent development of the lands.
The planning area is located in
Deschutes County, Oregon and is
described as follows:
T. 17 S., R. 12 E., Deschutes County:
Sec. 1, lots 1–4, S1⁄2N1⁄2, S1⁄2;
Sec. 12, lot 1, NE1⁄4NW1⁄4, NE1⁄4NE1⁄4,
W1⁄2NE1⁄4.
T. 17 S., R. 13 E., Deschutes County:
Sec. 5, lot 4, W1⁄2SW1⁄4NW1⁄4;
Sec. 6, lots 1–7, lots 9–11, S1⁄2NE1⁄4,
SE1⁄4NW1⁄4, E1⁄2SW1⁄4, NW1⁄4SE1⁄4;
Sec. 7, lots 1, 6, 7, 8, & 10.
These parcels are also commonly
referred to as the Deschutes Market
Road parcels and total 1577.42 acres of
public land. Of these acres,
approximately 85 acres are associated
with the historic Huntington Road, a
mid-19th century military route
between The Dalles and Fort Klamath,
and included within the larger (982
acres) Wagon Roads Area of Critical
Environmental Concern. The public
scoping process also serves as the
protest period for the proposed
classification as required by 32 CFR
2450.4.
This notice initiates the 30-day
public scoping period. Comments on
issues and the planning criteria can be
submitted in writing to the address
listed below and will be accepted
throughout the creation of the EA to
amend the RMP. All persons who wish
to protest the proposed classification
must submit comments, objections
during this 30-day period and identify
prior valid rights or other statutory
constraints that would bar
reclassification. All public meetings will
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
38245
be announced through the local news
media, newsletters, and the BLM Web
site https://www.blm.gov/or/districts/
prineville/index.php at least 15 days
prior to the event. A public meeting will
be held during the plan amendment
scoping period on Wednesday, July 23,
2008 at 7 p.m. at Pilot Butte Elementary
School Cafeteria, 1501 NE Neff Road,
Bend, Oregon. Early participation is
encouraged and will help determine the
issues to be addressed by the EA. In
addition to the ongoing public
participation process, an additional
formal opportunity for public
participation will be provided through a
comment period on a Draft EA.
ADDRESSES: Written comments and
classification protests should be sent to
the BLM, Prineville District, 3050 N.E.
3rd Street, Prineville, OR 97754; Fax:
541–416–6798; E-mail:
DSLSelection@blm.gov.
Documents pertinent to this proposal
may be examined at the Prineville
District Office during regular business
hours, 7:45 a.m. through 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except
holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
further information and/or to have your
name added to our mailing list, contact
Ms. Teal Purrington, BLM Planning
Lead, Telephone 541–416–6700; e-mail
DSLSelection@blm.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
February 6, 2008, the BLM received
from the State of Oregon, Department of
State Lands, an application (Serial No.
OR 61026) to select the above parcels as
indemnity for lands lost to the State as
provided for by the Oregon Admission
Act of February 14, 1859 (11 Stat. 383,
Title 43, U.S.C., Sections 851, 852).
Upon the filing of the State’s
application, the land selected was
segregated to the extent that it is not
open to appropriation under the public
land laws including the mining laws.
This segregation shall terminate either
upon the issuance of the document of
conveyance for the land to the State,
upon rejection of the application, or two
years from the date of filing of the
application, whichever comes first.
Processing the State’s application
requires the BLM to consider an
amendment to the Upper Deschutes
RMP and classification of the lands
under Section 7 of the Taylor Grazing
Act. It is the BLM’s intent to conduct all
classification, EA and plan amendment
activities and actions concurrently. The
BLM will work collaboratively with
interested parties to identify the
management decisions that are best
suited to local, regional, and national
needs and concerns. Preliminary issues
E:\FR\FM\03JYN1.SGM
03JYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 129 (Thursday, July 3, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38243-38245]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-15110]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS-R8-ES-2008-N00170; 1112-0000-81420-F2]
Sonoma County Office of Education Habitat Conservation Plan,
Dutton Avenue School, City of Santa Rosa, Sonoma County, CA
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability: proposed low-effect habitat
conservation plan; request for comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Sonoma County Office of Education (SCOE or applicant) has
applied to the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) for a 5-year
incidental take permit for two species pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B)
of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). The
application addresses the potential for ``take'' of one listed animals
and one listed plant. The applicant would implement a conservation
program to minimize and mitigate the project activities, as described
in the SCOE Low-Effect Habitat Conservation Plan (plan). We request
comments on the applicant's application and plan, and the preliminary
determination that the plan qualifies as a ``low-effect'' habitat
conservation plan, eligible for a Categorical Exclusion under the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA). We
discuss our basis for this determination in our Environmental Action
Statement (EAS), which is also available for public review.
DATES: We must receive written comments on or before August 4, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Please address written comments to Mike Thomas, Conservation
Planning Branch, Fish and Wildlife Service, Sacramento Fish and
Wildlife Office, 2800 Cottage Way, W-2605, Sacramento, CA 95825.
Alternatively, you may send comments by facsimile to (916) 414-6713.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mike Thomas, or Eric Tattersall,
Branch Chief, Conservation Planning Branch, at the address shown above
or at 916-414-6600 (telephone).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Availability of Documents
Copies of the permit application, plan, and EAS can be obtained
from the individuals named above (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Copies of these documents are available for public inspection, by
appointment, during regular business hours, at the
[[Page 38244]]
Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES).
Public Availability of Comments
Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or
other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be
aware that your entire comment--including your personal identifying
information--may be made publicly available at any time. While you can
ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be
able to do so.
Background Information
Section 9 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and its implementing
Federal regulations prohibit the ``take'' of fish or wildlife species
listed as endangered or threatened. ``Take'' is defined under the Act
to include the following activities: To harass, harm, pursue, hunt,
shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture or collect listed animal species, or
to attempt to engage in such conduct. However, under section
10(a)(1)(B) of the Act, we may issue permits to authorize incidental
take of listed species. ``Incidental take'' is defined by the Act as
take that is incidental to, and not the purpose of, carrying out an
otherwise lawful activity. Regulations governing incidental take
permits for endangered and threatened species, respectively, are in the
Code of Federal Regulations at 50 CFR 17.22 and 50 CFR 17.32.
Although take of listed plant species is not prohibited under the
Act, and therefore cannot be authorized under an incidental take
permit, plant species may be included on a permit in recognition of the
conservation benefits provided to them under a habitat conservation
plan. All species included on the incidental take permit would receive
assurances under the Services' ``No Surprises'' regulations (50 CFR
17.22(b)(5) and 17.32(b)(5).
The applicant seeks an incident take permit for covered activities
within 4.42 acres of grassland and associated wetlands owned by SCOE
located in Sonoma County, California. SCOE is requesting permits for
take of one federally listed animal species, listed as endangered:
Sonoma County Distinct Population Segment of the California tiger
salamander (Ambystoma californiense) (tiger salamander). The federally
listed plant species is the endangered Sebastopol meadowfoam
(Limnathese vinculans) (meadowfoam). The proposed covered species do
not include any wildlife species not currently listed under the Act.
Collectively, both of these species are referred to as ``covered
species'' in the plan.
SCOE owns and manages lands in Sonoma County, California. Lands
owned by SCOE include the proposed community school on 4.42 acres at
3255 and 3261 Dutton Avenue in the City of Santa Rosa.
Covered activities include the following: Grading and ground
leveling, vegetation removal and planting, soil compaction, building
construction and use of heavy equipment (including, but not limited to
bulldozers, cement trucks, water trucks, and backhoes), erosion control
structures (such as silt fencing and barriers), dust control (such as
watering surface soils), construction of sidewalks and roads,
trenching, and installation of utilities and irrigation systems.
The applicant proposes to avoid, minimize, and mitigate the effects
to the covered species associated with the covered activities by fully
implementing the plan. Minimization measures will include, but are not
limited to, an employee education program; biological monitoring during
construction and earthmoving; a storm water, erosion, and dust control
plan; daily pre-activity surveys for listed species; tiger salamander
salvage in the winter prior to construction, to exclude tiger
salamanders from the site and work areas; and temporary removal of
covered species if they are observed within work areas. General
minimization measures will include: limiting staging and work areas to
the project site only, regular removal of all foods and food-related
trash, prohibiting pets from the project site during construction, a 15
mile-per-hour speed limit for vehicles, maintenance of all equipment to
avoid fluid leaks, and storage of all hazardous materials in sealable
containers at least 200 feet from aquatic habitats.
Alternatives
The Service's proposed action consists of approving the applicant's
plan and issuance of an incidental take permit for the applicant's
Covered Activities. As required by the Act, the applicant's plan
considers alternatives to the take under the proposed action. The plan
considers the environmental consequences of two alternatives to the
proposed action, the No Action alternative and the Reduced Take
alternative. Under the No Action Alternative, no permit would be
issued, the proposed school project would not be built, and no take
would occur.
Under the Reduced Take alternative, buildings and facilities would
be clustered closer together to reduce the amount of tiger salamander
and meadowfoam habitat that would be lost by construction of the
school. Direct affects due to habitat loss and take of individuals
would be reduced; however, indirect affects to tiger salamander
migration corridors are unlikely to be minimized by clustering because
existing pathways for migration are limited on all sides except to the
north (there are two vacant grassland parcels to the north, which are
in turn bordered by development) and any additional construction,
regardless of location on the site would likely further restrict
movement of tiger salamanders. In addition, grassland and wetland
habitat avoided on-site would be unlikely to support a viable
population of tiger salamanders or meadowfoam due to the small size of
the site, lack of hydrologic connection to other water bodies, and
blockage of movement corridors.
Under the proposed action alternative, the Service would issue an
incidental take permit for the applicant's proposed project, which
includes the activities described above. The proposed action
alternative would result in permanent loss of 4.13 acres of upland
tiger salamander habitat and 0.07 acres of seasonal wetland habitat. To
mitigate for these affects, the applicant proposes to purchase 8.3
tiger salamander credits and 0.105 meadowfoam credits at a Service
approved bank.
National Environmental Policy Act
As described in our EAS, we have made the preliminary determination
that approval of the proposed plan and issuance of the permit would
qualify as a categorical exclusion under NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.),
as provided by Federal regulations (40 CFR 1500, 5(k), 1507.3(b)(2),
1508.4) and the Department of the Interior Manual (516 DM 2 and 516 DM
8). Our EAS found that the proposed plan qualifies as a ``low-effect''
habitat conservation plan, as defined by the Service's Habitat
Conservation Planning Handbook (November 1996). Determination of low-
effect habitat conservation plans is based on the following three
criteria: (1) Implementation of the proposed plan would result in minor
or negligible effects on federally listed, proposed, and candidate
species and their habitats; (2) implementation of the proposed plan
would result in minor or negligible effects on other environmental
values or resources; and (3) impacts of the plan, considered together
with the impacts of other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable
similarly situated projects, would not result, over time, in cumulative
effects to environmental values or resources that would be
[[Page 38245]]
considered significant. Based upon the preliminary determinations in
the EAS, we do not intend to prepare further NEPA documentation. We
will consider public comments when making the final determination on
whether to prepare an additional NEPA document on the proposed action.
Public Review
We provide this notice pursuant to section 10(c) of the Act and the
NEPA public-involvement regulations (40 CFR 1500.1(b), 1500.2(d), and
1506.6). We will evaluate the permit application, including the plan,
and comments submitted thereon to determine whether the application
meets the requirements of section 10(a) of the Act. If the requirements
are met, we will issue a permit to the applicant for the incidental
take of the Sonoma Distinct Population Segment of the California tiger
salamander and the Sebastopol meadowfoam from the implementation of the
covered activities described in the plan, or from mitigation conducted
as part of this plan. We will make the final permit decision no sooner
than 30 days after the date of this notice.
Dated: June 27, 2008.
Cay C. Goude,
Acting Field Supervisor, Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office,
Sacramento, California.
[FR Doc. E8-15110 Filed 7-2-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
