Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised Critical Habitat for Navarretia fossalis, 62192-62255 [2010-24763]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
62192
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2009–0038]
[MO 92210-0-0009]
RIN 1018–AW22
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Revised Critical Habitat for
Navarretia fossalis (Spreading
Navarretia)
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), designate
final revised critical habitat for
Navarretia fossalis (spreading
navarretia) under the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended. In
total, approximately 6,720 acres (ac)
(2,720 hectares (ha)) of habitat in Los
Angeles, Riverside, and San Diego
Counties, California, fall within the
boundaries of the critical habitat
designation. This final rule constitutes
an overall increase of approximately
6,068 ac (2,456 ha) from the 2005
critical habitat designation for N.
fossalis.
SUMMARY:
This rule becomes effective on
November 8, 2010.
ADDRESSES: This final rule and the
associated economic analysis are
available on the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov and https://
www.fws.gov/carlsbad/. Comments and
materials received, as well as supporting
documentation used in preparing this
final rule are available for public
inspection, by appointment, during
normal business hours, at the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Fish and
Wildlife Office, 6010 Hidden Valley
Road, Suite 101, Carlsbad, CA 92011;
telephone 760–431–9440; facsimile
760–431–5901.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim
Bartel, Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Fish and
Wildlife Office, 6010 Hidden Valley
Road, Suite 101, Carlsbad, CA 92011
(telephone 760–431–9440; facsimile
760–431–5901). If you use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD), call the Federal Information
Relay Service (FIRS) at 800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
DATES:
Background
It is our intent to discuss only those
topics directly relevant to the
development of the revised designation
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
of critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis
under the Endangered Species Act of
1973 as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.) (Act), in this final rule. For more
information on the taxonomy, biology,
and ecology of N. fossalis, refer to the
final listing rule published in the
Federal Register (FR) on October 13,
1998 (63 FR 54975), the final
designation of critical habitat for N.
fossalis published in the Federal
Register on October 18, 2005 (70 FR
60658), the proposed revised
designation of critical habitat published
in the Federal Register on June 10, 2009
(74 FR 27588), and the document
announcing the availability of the draft
economic analysis (DEA) published in
the Federal Register on April 15, 2010
(75 FR 19575). Additionally,
information on this species can be
found in the Recovery Plan for the
Vernal Pools of Southern California
(Recovery Plan) finalized on September
3, 1998 (Service 1998).
New Information on Subspecies’
Description, Life History, Ecology,
Habitat, and Range
We did not receive any new
information pertaining to the
description, life history, or ecology of
Navarretia fossalis following the 2009
proposed rule to revise critical habitat
(74 FR 27588; June 10, 2009). However,
the following paragraphs discuss new
information that we received regarding
the species’ habitat, geographic range
and status, and the areas needed for N.
fossalis conservation.
Habitat
Navarretia fossalis habitat was
discussed in detail in the proposed
revised critical habitat rule (74 FR
27588; June 10, 2009). One commenter
provided information during the first
public comment period on the proposed
rule, noting several habitat
characteristics they felt we should have
discussed (see Comment 15 below);
therefore, we are providing additional
discussion and clarification here.
Navarretia fossalis grows in vernal pool
habitat, seasonally flooded alkali vernal
plain habitat (a habitat that includes
alkali playa, alkali scrub, alkali vernal
pool, and alkali annual grassland
communities), and irrigation ditches
and detention basins (Bramlet 1993a,
pp. 10, 14, 21–23; Ferren and Fiedler
1993, pp. 126–127; Spencer 1997, pp. 8,
13). Within alkali annual grasslands,
this species is restricted to small vernal
pools or other depressions (Bramlet
2009, p. 3). Researchers have also
described ‘‘riverine pools’’ where N.
fossalis occurs as having unique floristic
elements, such as Trichocoronis wrightii
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
var. wrightii (limestone bugheal or
Wright’s trichocoronis); N. fossalis and
T. wrightii are only known to co-occur
in the San Jacinto River (Bramlet 2009,
p. 7). Suitability of hydrological
conditions for the germination of this
species varies on an annual basis;
therefore, N. fossalis can be
undetectable for a number of years and
the number of plants varies depending
on the timing, duration, and extent of
ponding (Bramlet 2009, p. 3). For more
habitat information, please see the
Habitat section in the proposed revised
critical habitat designation published in
the Federal Register on June 10, 2009
(74 FR 27588).
Areas Needed for Conservation: Core
and Satellite Habitat Areas
In the proposed revised critical
habitat rule (74 FR 27588; June 10,
2009), we discussed the areas that
represent core habitat areas and satellite
habitat areas for Navarretia fossalis.
During the first public comment period,
one peer reviewer expressed concern
regarding our use of the word ‘‘core’’ and
the biological connotation of such
terminology. The terms ‘‘core habitat
area’’ and ‘‘satellite habitat area’’ are
descriptive terms defined for the
purpose of this rulemaking and are not
intended to be synonymous with similar
terms used in other documents, or to
describe a population distribution. We
defined these terms in the proposed
revised critical habitat designation
published in the Federal Register on
June 10, 2009 (74 FR 27588). Core
habitat is defined as areas that contain
the highest concentrations of N. fossalis
and the largest contiguous blocks of
habitat for this species. Satellite areas
are defined as habitat areas that support
occurrences that are smaller than those
supported by the ‘‘core habitat areas,’’
but provide the means to significantly
contribute to the recovery of N. fossalis
(for further discussion of this issue see
Comment 4 in the Summary of
Comments and Recommendations
section and our response). For more
information on ‘‘core habitat area’’ and
‘‘satellite habitat area,’’ please see the
Areas Needed for Conservation: Core
and Satellite Habitat Areas section in
the proposed revised critical habitat
designation published in the Federal
Register on June 10, 2009 (74 FR 27588).
Previous Federal Actions
On October 18, 2005 (70 FR 60658),
we published our final designation of
critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis.
On December 19, 2007, the Center for
Biological Diversity filed a complaint in
the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of California challenging our
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
62193
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
designation of critical habitat for N.
fossalis and Brodiaea filifolia (Center for
Biological Diversity v. United States
Fish and Wildlife Service et al., Case No.
07–CV–02379–W–NLS). This lawsuit
challenged the validity of the
information and reasoning we used to
exclude areas from the 2005 critical
habitat designation for N. fossalis. On
July 25, 2008, we reached a settlement
agreement in which we agreed to submit
a proposed revised critical habitat
designation for N. fossalis to the Federal
Register for publication by May 29,
2009, and a final revised critical habitat
designation for publication by May 28,
2010. By order dated January 21, 2010,
the district court approved a
modification to the settlement
agreement that extends to September 30,
2010, the deadline for submission of a
final revised critical habitat designation
to the Federal Register. The proposed
revised critical habitat designation
published in the Federal Register on
June 10, 2009 (74 FR 27588).
Summary of Changes From the
Proposed Revised Rule and the
Previous Critical Habitat Designation
The areas designated as critical
habitat in this final rule constitute a
revision of the critical habitat for
Navarretia fossalis we designated on
October 18, 2005 (70 FR 60658). For this
revised rulemaking process we:
(1) Refined the primary constituent
elements (PCEs) to more accurately
define the physical and biological
features that are essential to the
conservation of N. fossalis;
(2) Revised criteria to more accurately
identify critical habitat;
(3) Improved mapping methodology
to more accurately define critical habitat
boundaries and better represent areas
that contain PCEs;
(4) Evaluated areas considered for
exclusion from critical habitat
designation under section 4(b)(2) of the
Act, including identifying whether or
not areas are conserved and managed for
the benefit of N. fossalis;
(5) Reanalyzed the economic impacts
to identify baseline and incremental
costs associated with critical habitat
designation; and
(6) Added, subtracted, and revised
areas that do or do not meet the
definition of critical habitat. Table 1
provides an overview of the differences
between critical habitat rules for N.
fossalis at the unit level.
TABLE 1. CHANGES BETWEEN THE OCTOBER 18, 2005, CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION; THE JUNE 10, 2009, PROPOSED
CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION; THE APRIL 15, 2010, CHANGES TO THE JUNE 10, 2009 PROPOSAL (AVAILABILITY OF
THE DEA); AND THIS REVISED CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION.
County
October 2005 critical
habitat designation
June 2009 proposed
revised critical habitat
designation
April 2010 changes
to proposed revised
critical habitat
designation
September 2010
revised critical habitat
designation
Unit 1: Los Angeles
Basin-Orange
Management Area
Los Angeles
326 ac
(132 ha)
161 ac
(65 ha)
176 ac
(71 ha)
176 ac
(71 ha)
Unit 2: San Diego:
Northern Coastal
Mesa Management
Area
San Diego
22 ac
(9 ha)
9 ac
(4 ha)
9 ac
(4 ha)
9 ac
(4 ha)
Unit 3: San Diego:
Central Coastal
Mesa Management
Area
San Diego
0 ac
(0 ha)
110 ac
(45 ha)
108 ac
(44 ha)
103 ac
(42 ha)
Unit 4: San Diego:
Inland Management
Area
San Diego
159 ac
(64 ha)
206 ac
(83 ha)
206 ac
(83 ha)
206 ac
(83 ha)
Unit 5: San Diego:
Southern Coastal
Mesa Management
Area
San Diego
145 ac
(59 ha)
711 ac
(288 ha)
753 ac
(305 ha)
749 ac
(303 ha)
Unit 6: Riverside
Management Area
Riverside
0 ac
(0 ha)
5,675 ac
(2,297 ha)
6,356 ac
(2,572 ha)
5,477 ac
(2,217 ha)
652 ac
(264 ha)
6,872 ac
(2,781 ha)
7,608 ac
(3,079 ha)
6,720 ac
(2,720 ha)
Critical habitat unit in
this final rule
Totals*
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
*Values in this table may not sum due to rounding.
In 2005, we designated approximately
652 ac (264 ha) as critical habitat for
Navarretia fossalis in 4 units with 10
subunits (70 FR 60658; October 18,
2005). In our 2009 proposed revised
critical habitat, we proposed
approximately 6,872 ac (2,781 ha) as
critical habitat in 6 units with 22
subunits (74 FR 27588; June 10, 2009).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
In response to information received as
public comments on our 2009 proposed
revised critical habitat, we changed the
2009 proposed revised rule to propose
approximately 7,608 ac (3,079 ha) as
critical habitat in 6 units with 23
subunits (75 FR 19575; April 15, 2010).
In this revised critical habitat rule, we
are designating approximately 6,720 ac
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(2,720 ha) as critical habitat in 6 units
with 19 subunits, reflecting exclusion of
approximately 871 ac (353 ha) in all or
portions of 2 units (3 subunits) based on
consideration of relevant impacts under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act. Lands that
contain the physical and biological
features essential to the conservation of
N. fossalis on Marine Corps Air Station
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
62194
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
(MCAS) Miramar and Marine Corps
Base (MCB) Camp Pendleton are exempt
from this critical habitat designation
based on section 4(a)(3)(B) of the Act.
All lands designated as critical habitat
in this revised rule were included in the
2009 proposed revised rule (74 FR
27588) or the document that made
available the DEA (75 FR 19575). Table
2 provides detailed information about
differences between the 2005 final
critical habitat designation, the 2009
proposed revised critical habitat
designation, and this revised critical
habitat designation for N. fossalis. The
changes between the 2005 final
designation, the 2009 proposed
revisions, and this final designation are
described below.
TABLE 2. A COMPARISON OF THE AREAS IDENTIFIED AS CONTAINING THE PHYSICAL AND BIOLOGICAL FEATURES ESSENTIAL
TO THE CONSERVATION OF Navarretia fossalis IN THE 2005 CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION, THE 2009 PROPOSED
REVISED CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION, AND THIS REVISED CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION.
2005 Critical Habitat
Designation
Location*
Subunit
2009 Proposed Revised Critical
Habitat
Area Containing
Essential
Features
Subunit
Area Containing
Essential
Features
2010 Revised Critical Habitat
Designation
Subunit
Area Containing
Essential
Features
Unit 1: Los Angeles Basin-Orange Management Area
Cruzan Mesa
1A
294 ac
(119 ha)
1A
129 ac
(52 ha)
1A
156 ac
(63 ha)
Plum Canyon
1B
32 ac
(13 ha)
1B
32 ac
(13 ha)
1B
20 ac
(8 ha)
Unit 2: San Diego: Northern Coastal Mesa Management Area
MCB Camp
Pendleton
4(a)(3) exemption
Poinsettia Lane
Commuter
Station
67 ac
(27 ha)
4(a)(3) exemption
145 ac
(59 ha)
4(a)(3) exemption
145 ac
(59 ha)
2; partially
excluded under
section 4(b)(2)
22 ac
(9 ha)
2
9 ac
(4 ha)
2
9 ac
(4 ha)
Unit 3: San Diego: Central Coastal Mesa Management Area
Santa Fe Valley
Proposed as
Unit 3, but
determined not
essential
—
Not proposed
—
Not proposed
—
Santa Fe Valley
(Crosby
Estates)
—
—
3A
5 ac
(2 ha)
Excluded under
section 4(b)(2)
5 ac
(2 ha)
Carroll Canyon
—
—
3B
20 ac
(8 ha)
3B
18 ac
(7 ha)
Nobel Drive
—
—
3C
37 ac
(15 ha)
3C
37 ac
(15 ha)
4(a)(3) exemption
61 ac
(25 ha)
4(a)(3) exemption
69 ac
(28 ha)
4(a)(3) exemption
69 ac
(28 ha)
Excluded under
section 4(b)(2)
38 ac
(16 ha)
3D
48 ac
(20 ha)
3D
48 ac
(20 ha)
MCAS Miramar
Montgomery Field
Unit 4: San Diego: Inland Management Area
4C1
34 ac
(14 ha)
4C1
34 ac
(14 ha)
4C1
34 ac
(14 ha)
San Marcos
(Universal Boot)
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
San Marcos
(Upham)
4C2
32 ac
(13 ha)
4C2
32 ac
(13 ha)
4C2
32 ac
(13 ha)
San Marcos (Bent
Avenue)
4D
7 ac
(3 ha)
4D
5 ac
(2 ha)
4D
5 ac
(2 ha)
Ramona
4E
86 ac
(35 ha)
4E
135 ac
(55 ha)
4E
135 ac
(55 ha)
Unit 5: San Diego: Southern Coastal Mesa Management Area
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
62195
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 2. A COMPARISON OF THE AREAS IDENTIFIED AS CONTAINING THE PHYSICAL AND BIOLOGICAL FEATURES ESSENTIAL
TO THE CONSERVATION OF Navarretia fossalis IN THE 2005 CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION, THE 2009 PROPOSED
REVISED CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION, AND THIS REVISED CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION.—Continued
2005 Critical Habitat
Designation
Location*
Subunit
2009 Proposed Revised Critical
Habitat
Area Containing
Essential
Features
2010 Revised Critical Habitat
Designation
Subunit
Area Containing
Essential
Features
Subunit
Area Containing
Essential
Features
Sweetwater
Vernal Pools
(S1-3)
5A; partially
excluded under
section 4(b)(2)
89 ac
(36 ha)
Excluded
74 ac
(30 ha)
5A
95 ac
(38 ha)
5A
95 ac
(38 ha)
Otay River Valley
(K1 and K2)
Excluded under
section 4(b)(2)
57 ac
(23 ha)
Not proposed,
determined not
essential
—
Not proposed,
determined not
essential
—
Otay River Valley
(M2)
5B and excluded
under section
4(b)(2)
42 ac
(17 ha)
Excluded
67 ac
(27 ha)
5B
24 ac
(10 ha)
5B
24 ac
(10 ha)
Otay Mesa (J26)
5C and excluded
under section
4(b)(2)
14 ac
(6 ha)
Not proposed,
determined not
essential
—
5C***
42 ac
(17 ha)
Arnie’s Point
Proposed as
Subunit 5D, but
determined not
essential
—
Not proposed
—
Not proposed
—
Proctor Valley
(R1-2)
—
—
5F
88 ac
(36 ha)
5F
88 ac
(36 ha)
Otay Lakes (K3-5)
—
—
5G
140 ac
(57 ha)
5G
140 ac
(57 ha)
Western Otay
Mesa vernal
pool complexes
Excluded under
section 4(b)(2)
117 ac
(47 ha)
5H
143 ac
(58ha)
5H
143 ac
(58ha)
Eastern Otay
Mesa vernal
pool complexes
Excluded under
section 4(b)(2)
277 ac
(112 ha)
5I
221 ac
(89 ha)
5I
221 ac
(89 ha)
Unit 6: Riverside Management Area
Excluded under
section 4(b)(2)
10,774 ac
(4,360 ha)
6A
3,550 ac
(1,437 ha)
6A***
4,312 ac
(1,745 ha)
Salt Creek
Seasonally
Flooded Alkali
Plain
Excluded under
section 4(b)(2)
2,233 ac
(904 ha)
6B
1,054 ac
(427 ha)
6B
930 ac
(376 ha)
Wickerd Road
and Scott Road
Pools
Excluded under
section 4(b)(2)
275 ac
(111 ha)
6C
205 ac
(83 ha)
6C***
235 ac
(95 ha)
Skunk Hollow
Excluded under
section 4(b)(2)
306 ac
(124 ha)
6D
158 ac
(64 ha)
Excluded under
section 4(b)(2)
158 ac
(64 ha)
Mesa de Burro
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
San Jacinto River
Excluded under
section 4(b)(2)
4,396 ac
(1,779 ha)
6E
708 ac
(287 ha)
Excluded under
section 4(b)(2)
708 ac
(287 ha)
—
19,399 ac
(7,851 ha)
—
7,086 ac
(2,868 ha)
—
7,804 ac
(3,158 ha)
Total Area
Essential for the
Conservation of
Navarretia
fossalis**
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
62196
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 2. A COMPARISON OF THE AREAS IDENTIFIED AS CONTAINING THE PHYSICAL AND BIOLOGICAL FEATURES ESSENTIAL
TO THE CONSERVATION OF Navarretia fossalis IN THE 2005 CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION, THE 2009 PROPOSED
REVISED CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION, AND THIS REVISED CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION.—Continued
2005 Critical Habitat
Designation
Location*
2009 Proposed Revised Critical
Habitat
2010 Revised Critical Habitat
Designation
Subunit
Area Containing
Essential
Features
Subunit
Area Containing
Essential
Features
Subunit
Area Containing
Essential
Features
Total Area
Exempt Under
Section
4(a)(3)**
—
128 ac
(52 ha)
—
213 ac
(86 ha)
—
213 ac
(86 ha)
Total Area
Excluded Under
Section
4(b)(2)**
—
18,619 ac
(7,535 ha)
—
0 ac
(0 ha)
—
871 ac
(353 ha)
Total Area
Designated as
Critical Habitat
for Navarretia
fossalis**
—
652 ac
(264 ha)
—
N/A
—
6,720 ac
(2,720 ha)
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
*This table does not include all locations that are occupied by Navarretia fossalis. It includes only those locations that were designated as critical habitat in 2005 or proposed in 2009 or discussed in this critical habitat rule.
**Values in this table may not sum due to rounding.
***Acreage added in 75 FR 19575 (June 10, 2009) revision.
Summary of Changes From the 2005
Final Designation of Critical Habitat
In the 2005 final rule, we did not
designate areas containing essential
habitat features if those habitat features
were already conserved and managed
for the benefit of Navarretia fossalis
because we concluded that the areas did
not meet the second part of the
definition of critical habitat under
section 3(5)(a)(i) of the Act. We have
reconsidered our approach in light of
subsequent court decisions and have
decided that areas containing essential
habitat features that ‘‘may require’’
special management considerations or
protection do meet the definition of
critical habitat irrespective of whether
the habitat features are currently
receiving special management or
protection. Current protection or
management does not disqualify an area
from meeting the definition of critical
habitat, rather it is a relevant factor to
consider under section 4(b)(2) of the Act
when we weigh the benefits of
including a particular area in critical
habitat against the benefits of excluding
the area. In this rule we identified
essential areas that are conserved and
managed for the benefit of the species,
determined they meet the definition of
critical habitat, and then analyzed
whether the benefits of exclusion from
critical habitat designation outweigh the
benefits of including these areas under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
This rule also uses a new economic
analysis to identify and estimate the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
potential economic effects on small
business entities resulting from
implementation of conservation actions
associated with the proposed revision of
critical habitat. The analysis focuses on
the estimated incremental impacts
associated with critical habitat
designation.
Of the 652 ac (264 ha) of land
included in the 2005 final critical
habitat rule, approximately 469 ac (190
ha) are included in this revised critical
habitat designation. Some areas
designated in 2005 are not designated in
this final rule because we used a grid of
2.47–ac (1–ha) cells (100 m grid) to
identify essential habitat in our GIS
analysis in 2005. In this revised critical
habitat, we identified essential habitat
with heads-up digitizing at various
scales using imagery of 1–meter
resolution, resulting in a more precise
identification.
Additionally, we are designating as
critical habitat 6,251 ac (2,530 ha) of
land identified as meeting the definition
of critical habitat that were not
designated in 2005. The primary reason
revised designated critical habitat is
greater than the 2005 designated area is
that we included several areas that were
excluded from the 2005 critical habitat
designation under section 4(b)(2) of the
Act. A summary of specific changes
from the 2005 critical habitat
designation is provided below. In
addition to revisions to specific
subunits, we also revised the PCEs, the
criteria used to identify critical habitat,
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
the economic impacts to include
incremental impacts, and the mapping
methodology for this revised critical
habitat designation. For a detailed
discussion of the changes between the
2005 critical habitat rule and the 2009
proposed revision, please see the
Summary of Changes From Previously
Designated Critical Habitat section in
the proposed revised rule (74 FR 27588;
June 10, 2009).
In this revised critical habitat
designation for Navarretia fossalis,
comparisons to the 2005 critical habitat
designation are described below using
three categories:
(1) Areas designated in 2005 and also
designated in this rule,
(2) Areas designated in 2005 but not
designated in this rule, and
(3) Areas not designated in 2005 that
are designated in this rule.
(1) Areas designated in 2005 and also
designated in this rule are found in
Subunits 1A, 1B, 2, 4C1, 4C2, 4D, 4E,
5A, 5B, and 5C. We analyzed each of
these areas and determined these areas
are not conserved and managed for the
benefit of Navarretia fossalis and the
benefits of inclusion outweigh the
benefits of exclusion.
(2) Areas designated in 2005 but not
designated in this rule include land in
Subunits 1A, 1B, 2, 4D, 5A, and 5B as
described in the 2005 designation. The
difference of these subunits between the
previous rule and this final rule is
mostly due to our discontinued use of
a 100–m grid to map critical habitat,
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
which captured areas that we
determined in this rule did not meet the
definition of critical habitat.
Additionally, the difference in Subunit
1B was due to more precise Navarretia
fossalis habitat location data in the
vicinity of Plum Canyon.
(3) Areas not designated in 2005 that
are designated in this rule include areas
within Subunits 1B, 3B, 3C, 3D, 4D, 4E,
5A, 5B, 5F, 5G, 5H, 5I, 6A, 6B, and 6C,
and part of 5C. Some of these subunits
meet the definition of critical habitat
based on new information. Subunits 1B,
4D, 4E, and 5B include new areas due
to mapping refinements made to better
capture local watersheds. Subunits 3B,
3D, 5F, 5G, 5H, and 5I include vernal
pool complexes that provide habitat for
Navarretia fossalis that were not
included in the 2005 final rule, but meet
the definition of critical habitat for this
species (see the 2009 proposed rule for
details (74 FR 27588; June 10, 2009)).
Other subunits have been designated
based on our determination under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act that the
benefits of inclusion outweigh the
benefits of exclusion of these areas
because they are not currently
conserved and managed for the benefit
of N. fossalis. All or portions of
Subunits 3D, 5A, 5B, 5H, 5I, 6A, and 6C
are the same as areas that met the
definition of critical habitat in 2005, but
were excluded from the 2005
designation under section 4(b)(2) of the
Act. The only areas excluded from
critical habitat in the current rule under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act are those that
are conserved and managed for the
benefit of N. fossalis, and where the
exclusion would not result in extinction
of the species (see the Application of
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act section of this
rule).
Summary of Changes From the 2009
Proposed Rule To Revise Critical
Habitat
We evaluated lands considered for
exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the
Act to determine if the benefits of
exclusion outweigh the benefits of
inclusion. We excluded 871 ac (353 ha)
of lands under section 4(b)(2) of the Act
that are conserved and managed for the
benefit of Navarretia fossalis We
excluded certain lands under two
habitat conservation plans (HCPs),
summarized below and discussed in
detail in the Exclusions section.
(1) In the proposed revised rule, we
considered for exclusion under section
4(b)(2) of the Act lands covered by the
Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan
(Carlsbad HMP) under the San Diego
Multiple Habitat Conservation Program
(MHCP). In this revised rule, we
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
determined the benefits of inclusion
outweigh the benefits of exclusion for
all of the lands covered by the Carlsbad
HMP because these lands are not both
conserved and managed for the benefit
of Navarretia fossalis. However, we
recognize the efforts made by permittees
of the Carlsbad HMP to assist in the
conservation of N. fossalis and other
listed species. We look forward to
continuing to work with these partners
to assure that long-term conservation
and management is assured for N.
fossalis. See the Exclusions section
below for a summary evaluation of
lands considered for exclusion under
the Carlsbad HMP and our rationale for
including these lands in this revised
critical habitat designation.
(2) In the proposed revised rule, we
considered lands proposed as critical
habitat within the County of San Diego
Subarea Plan under the San Diego
Multiple Species Conservation Program
(MSCP; County of San Diego Subarea
Plan) for exclusion under section 4(b)(2)
of the Act. In this revised rule, we
determined the benefits of exclusion
outweigh the benefits of inclusion for a
portion (5 ac (2 ha) in Subunit 3A) of
lands under the County of San Diego
Subarea Plan that are both conserved
and managed for the benefit of
Navarretia fossalis, and determined
exclusion of these lands will not result
in extinction of the species. However,
we determined the benefits of inclusion
outweigh the benefits of exclusion for
81 ac (33 ha) of lands within the County
of San Diego Subarea Plan. As a result,
we excluded approximately 5 ac (2 ha)
of these lands under section 4(b)(2) of
the Act, and included approximately 81
ac (33 ha) within the revised critical
habitat designation. For a complete
discussion of the benefits of inclusion
and exclusion for all lands within the
County of San Diego Subarea Plan, see
the Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the
Act section below.
(3) In the proposed revised rule, we
considered for exclusion under section
4(b)(2) of the Act lands owned by or
under the jurisdiction of the permittees
of the Western Riverside County
Multiple Species Habitat Conservation
Plan (Western Riverside County
MSHCP). In this revised rule, we
determined the benefits of exclusion
outweigh the benefits of inclusion for
866 ac (351 ha) of the lands owned by
or under the jurisdiction of the
permittees of the Western Riverside
County MSHCP that are conserved and
managed (Subunits 6D and 6E), and
determined exclusion of these lands
will not result in extinction of the
species. We determined the benefits of
inclusion outweigh the benefits of
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
62197
exclusion for 5,477 ac (2,217 ha) of
lands owned by or under the
jurisdiction of the permittees of the
Western Riverside County MSHCP. As a
result, we excluded approximately 866
ac (351 ha) of these lands under section
4(b)(2) of the Act, and included
approximately 5,477 ac (2,217 ha)
within the revised critical habitat
designation. For a complete discussion
of the benefits of inclusion and
exclusion for all lands within the
Western Riverside County MSHCP, see
the Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the
Act section below.
Critical Habitat
Background
Critical habitat is defined in section 3
of the Act as:
(i) The specific areas within the
geographical area occupied by the
species, at the time it is listed in
accordance with the Act, on which are
found those physical or biological
features
(I) essential to the conservation of the
species and
(II) which may require special
management considerations or
protection; and
(ii) 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 the use of
all methods and procedures that are
necessary to bring any endangered or
threatened species to the point at which
the measures provided under 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,
transplantation, and in the
extraordinary case where population
pressures within a given ecosystem
cannot otherwise be relieved, regulated
taking.
Critical habitat receives protection
under section 7 of the Act through the
prohibition against Federal agencies
carrying out, funding, or authorizing the
destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat. Section 7(a)(2) of the Act
requires consultation on Federal actions
that may affect 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
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
62198
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
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 seeks or 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 in the event of a
destruction or adverse modification
finding, the Federal action agency’s and
the applicant’s obligation is not to
restore or recover the species, but to
implement reasonable and prudent
alternatives to avoid destruction or
adverse modification of critical habitat.
For inclusion in a critical habitat
designation, the habitat within the
geographical area occupied by the
species at the time it was listed must
contain the physical and biological
features essential to the conservation of
the species, and be included if those
features may require special
management considerations or
protection. Critical habitat designations
identify, to the extent known using the
best scientific and commercial data
available, habitat areas that provide
essential life cycle needs of the species
(areas on which are found the physical
and biological features laid out in the
appropriate quantity and spatial
arrangement for the conservation of the
species). Under the Act and regulations
at 50 CFR 424.12, we can designate
critical habitat in areas outside the
geographical area occupied by the
species at the time it is listed only when
we determine that those areas are
essential for the conservation of the
species and that designation limited to
the geographical area occupied at the
time of listing 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
recommendations to designate critical
habitat.
When 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, or other unpublished
materials and expert opinion or
personal knowledge.
Habitat is often dynamic, and species
may move from one area to another over
time. Climate change will be a particular
challenge for biodiversity because the
interaction of additional stressors
associated with climate change and
current stressors may push species
beyond their ability to survive (Lovejoy
2005, pp. 325–326). The synergistic
implications of climate change and
habitat fragmentation are the most
threatening facet of climate change for
biodiversity (Hannah et al. 2005, p.4).
Current climate change predictions for
terrestrial areas in the Northern
Hemisphere indicate warmer air
temperatures, more intense
precipitation events, and increased
summer continental drying (Field et al.
1999, pp. 1–3; Hayhoe et al. 2004, p.
12422; Cayan et al. 2005, p. 6;
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC) 2007, p. 1181). Climate
change may also affect the duration and
frequency of drought and these climatic
changes may even more dramatic and
intense (Graham 1997). Documentation
of climate-related changes that have
already occurred in California (Croke et
al. 1998, pp. 2128, 2130; Brashears et al.
2005, p. 15144), and future drought
predictions for California (such as Field
et al. 1999, pp. 8–10; Lenihen et al.
2003, p. 1667; Hayhoe et al. 2004, p.
12422; Brashears et al. 2005, p. 15144;
Seager et al. 2007, p. 1181) and North
America (IPCC 2007, p. 9) indicate
prolonged drought and other climaterelated changes will continue in the
foreseeable future.
We anticipate these changes could
affect a number of native plants,
including Navarretia fossalis
occurrences and habitat. If the amount
and timing of precipitation or the
average temperature increases in
southern California, the long term
viability of N. fossalis may be affected
in several ways, including the
following: (1) Drier conditions may
result in a lower germination rate and
smaller population sizes; (2) a shift in
the timing of annual rainfall may favor
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
nonnative species that impact the
quality of habitat for this species; or (3)
drier conditions may result in increased
fire frequency, making the ecosystems
in which N. fossalis currently grows
more vulnerable to the threats of
subsequent erosion and nonnative plant
invasion.
At this time, we are unable to identify
the specific ways that climate change
may impact Navarretia fossalis;
therefore, we are unable to determine if
any additional areas may be appropriate
to include in this final critical habitat
rule to address the effects of climate
change. Additionally, 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 required for recovery of the
species.
Areas that are important to the
conservation of the species, but are
outside the critical habitat designation,
will continue to be subject to
conservation actions we implement
under section 7(a)(1) of the Act. Areas
that support populations are also subject
to the regulatory protections afforded by
the section 7(a)(2) jeopardy standard, as
determined on the basis of the best
available scientific and commercial
information at the time of the agency
action. Federally funded or permitted
projects affecting listed species outside
their designated critical habitat areas
may still result in jeopardy findings in
some cases. 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, HCPs, or other species
conservation planning efforts if new
information available at the time of
these planning efforts calls for a
different outcome.
Physical and 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 and biological
features essential to the conservation of
the species and which may require
special management considerations or
protection. These include, but are not
limited to:
(1) Space for individual and
population growth and for normal
behavior;
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
(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
historic, geographical, and ecological
distributions of a species.
We consider the specific physical and
biological features essential to the
conservation of the species and laid out
in the appropriate quantity and spatial
arrangement for the conservation of the
species. We derive those specific
essential physical and biological
features for Navarretia fossalis from the
biological needs of this species as
described in the Critical Habitat section
of the proposed rule to designate critical
habitat for N. fossalis published in the
Federal Register on June 10, 2009 (74
FR 27588).
The area designated as final revised
critical habitat consists of ephemeral
wetland habitat for the reproduction
and growth of Navarretia fossalis,
intermixed wetland and upland habitats
that comprise the local watershed to
support ephemeral wetland habitat, and
the topography and soils required for
ponding during winter and spring
months. The methods of dispersal and
pollination for N. fossalis are not well
understood; therefore, elements
required for these processes may not be
geographically captured by this revised
critical habitat designation. Likewise,
delineating larger watershed areas that
support ephemeral wetland habitat may
require hydrological data and modeling
that are not available; therefore, areas
beyond the local watershed are not
included in this revised critical habitat
designation. The physical and biological
features essential to the conservation of
N. fossalis are derived from studies of
this species’ habitat, ecology, and life
history as described below, in the
Background section of the proposed
revised critical habitat designation
published in the Federal Register on
June 10, 2009 (74 FR 27588), the critical
habitat designation published in the
Federal Register on October 18, 2005
(70 FR 60658), and the final listing rule
published in the Federal Register on
October 13, 1998 (63 FR 54975).
Habitats That Are Representative of the
Historical, Geographical, and Ecological
Distribution of Navarretia fossalis
Navarretia fossalis is restricted to
ephemeral wetlands in southern
California and northwestern Baja
California, Mexico (Moran 1977, pp.
155–156; Oberbauer 1992, p. 7; Day
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
1993, p. 847; California Natural
Diversity Database (CNDDB) 2008, pp.
1–44), and primarily associated with
vernal pools and seasonally flooded
alkali vernal plain habitats (Moran 1977,
pp. 155–156; Bramlet 1993a, p. 10; Day
1993, p. 847; Ferren and Fiedler 1993,
pp. 126–127). In Los Angeles County, N.
fossalis is known to occur in vernal
pools on Cruzan Mesa and the
associated drainage of Plum Canyon
(such as CNDDB 2008, Element
Occurrence (EO) 31, 32, and 41). In
Riverside County, N. fossalis is known
to occur in large vernal pools with
basins that range in size from 0.5 ac (0.2
ha) to 10.0 ac (4.0 ha) (such as CNDDB
2008, EO 42, 43, and 44), and in
temporary wetlands that are described
as seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain
habitat along the San Jacinto River and
near Salt Creek/Stowe Pool in Hemet
(such as CNDDB 2008, EO 22, 23, and
24). In San Diego County, N. fossalis is
found in vernal pools that are smaller
than those in Riverside County, ranging
in size from 0.01 ac (0.005 ha) to 0.2 ac
(0.09 ha) and are often found in clusters
of several vernal pools typically referred
to as vernal pool complexes (such as
CNDDB 2008, EO 4, 14, and 19). In
Mexico, N. fossalis is known from fewer
than 12 occurrences, most of which are
clustered in three areas of Baja
California: along the international
border, on the plateaus south of the Rio
Guadalupe, and on the San Quintin
coastal plain (Moran 1977, p. 156).
Ephemeral Wetland Habitat
Despite variation in the types of
habitat where Navarretia fossalis is
found (i.e., vernal pool habitat and
seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain
habitat), these ephemeral wetlands all
share the same temporary nature (i.e.,
areas fill with water during the winter
and spring and dry completely during
summer and fall). Navarretia fossalis
depends on both the inundation and
drying of its habitat for survival. This
type of ephemerally wet habitat
excludes upland plants that live in a dry
environment year round, or wetland
plants that require year-round moisture
to become established (Keeler-Wolf et
al. 1998).
Navarretia fossalis primarily occurs in
ephemeral wetland habitat, more
specifically, vernal pool and seasonally
flooded alkali vernal plain habitat
(Moran 1977, pp. 156–157; Bramlet
1993a, p. 10; Bramlet 1993b, p. 14; Day
1993, p. 847). Vernal pools form during
the winter rains in depressions that are
part of a gently sloping and undulating
landscape, where soil mounds are
interspersed with basins (mima-mound
topography; Cox 1984, pp. 1397–1398).
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
62199
Water ponds in vernal pools in part due
to an underlying impervious soil layer
(hard pan or clay pan). Navarretia
fossalis can also occur in ditches and
other artificial depressions associated
with degraded vernal pool habitat
(Moran 1977, p. 155).
Seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain
habitat includes alkali playa, alkali
scrub, alkali vernal pool, and alkali
annual grassland vegetation types. The
hydrologic regime for this habitat
involves sporadic seasonal flooding (as
described above) combined with slow
drainage of the alkaline soils. Largescale inundation of flood plains occur
approximately every 20 to 50 years,
which is necessary for long-term
maintenance of the habitat by removing
scrub vegetation (Roberts 2004, p. 4).
During a typical seasonal flooding cycle
dry period, alkali scrub vegetation
expands its distribution into the
seasonally flooded areas of alkali vernal
plains habitat and crowds out the
species associated more with ephemeral
wetlands. During a large-scale flood,
standing and slow-draining waters
remain for weeks or months and kill
alkali scrub vegetation, resulting in
favorable conditions for annual
ephemeral wetland-associated species
(such as Navarretia fossalis) to expand
their range (Bramlet 2004, p. 8; Roberts
2004, p. 4). Although uncommon, largescale flooding events maintain N.
fossalis habitat and likely provide a
species dispersal mechanism (Bramlet
2009, p. 3). Seasonally flooded alkali
vernal plain can also persist in lightly
to moderately disturbed habitat that
may obscure or suppress expression of
PCEs, especially when disturbance
consists of soil amendments or dryland
farming activities (Roberts 2009, p. 2).
Subsurface Water Flow That Creates A
Local Watershed of Intermixed Wetland
and Upland Habitats
Vernal pools within a complex are
hydrologically connected by subsurface
water, which creates a landscape that is
intermixed with wetland and upland
habitats. This entire area comprises a
local watershed and provides the
appropriate physical and biological
features necessary to maintain vernal
pools within each complex. Seasonally
flooded alkali vernal plain habitats are
also hydrologically connected by
flowing water when it flows over the
surface from one vernal pool to another
or across the seasonally flooded alkali
vernal plain. Due to an impervious hard
pan, water flows and collects below
ground as the soil becomes saturated.
Movement of the water through vernal
pool and seasonally flooded alkali
vernal plain systems results in pools
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
62200
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
filling and holding water continuously
for a number of days (Hanes et al. 1990,
p. 51). For this reason, these ephemeral
wetlands are best described from a
watershed perspective. The local
watershed associated with a vernal pool
complex or seasonally flooded alkali
vernal plain includes all surfaces in the
surrounding area from which water
flows into the complex or plain habitat.
Some ephemeral wetlands included in
this rule (such as the San Jacinto River
and the Salt Creek Seasonally Flooded
Alkali Plain) have large watersheds
where the overland flow of water
contributes to the ponding that supports
Navarretia fossalis, while other
ephemeral wetlands have comparatively
small watersheds (such as Carroll
Canyon and Nobel Drive) and fill almost
entirely from direct rainfall (Hanes et al.
1990, p. 53; Hanes and Stromberg 1998,
p. 38). It is also possible that subsurface
flow occurs within a watershed and
contributes water to some vernal pools
and seasonally flooded alkali vernal
plains (Hanes et al. 1990, p. 53; Hanes
and Stromberg 1998, p. 48). In
summary, N. fossalis depends on an
entire local watershed that includes
subsurface water flow over an area that
is comprised of intermixed wetland and
upland habitats.
Topography and Soils That Support
Ponding During Winter and Spring
Topography and soils support
ponding that occurs during winter and
spring months. Impervious subsurface
layers combined with flat to gently
sloping topography serve to inhibit
rapid infiltration of rainwater, resulting
in ponding of vernal pools and
seasonally flooded alkali vernal plains
(Bramlet 1993a, p. 1; Bauder and
McMillian 1998, pp. 57–59). Soils also
function to moderate water chemistry
and rate of water loss to evaporation
(Zedler 1987, pp. 17–30). In Los Angeles
County, vernal pools that support
Navarretia fossalis are found on
Cieneba-Pismo-Caperton soils (NRCS
SSURGO, ca676. In western Riverside
County, seasonally flooded alkali vernal
plain habitats that support N. fossalis
are found on Domino, Traver, Waukena,
Chino, (Bramlet 1993a, pp. 1, 10) (59 FR
64812; December 15, 1994) and Willows
soils (Bramlet 2009, p. 4). In San Diego
County, vernal pool habitats that
support N. fossalis are found on
Huerhuero, Placentia, Olivenhain,
Stockpen, and Redding soils (NRCS
SSURGO, ca073).
Primary Constituent Elements for
Navarretia Fossalis
Under the Act and its implementing
regulations, we are required to identify
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of
Navarretia fossalis. The physical and
biological features are the primary
constituent elements (PCEs) laid out in
the appropriate quantity and spatial
arrangement essential to the
conservation of the species. Areas
designated as critical habitat for N.
fossalis were occupied at the time of
listing (see the Geographic Range and
Status section of the proposed revised
rule for a more detailed explanation),
are currently occupied, are within the
species’ historic geographical range, and
contain sufficient PCEs to support N.
fossalis.
Based on our current knowledge of
the life history, biology, and ecology of
Navarretia fossalis, and habitat
characteristics required to sustain the
essential life history functions of the
species, we determined that the PCEs
specific to N. fossalis are:
(1) PCE 1—Ephemeral wetland
habitat. Vernal pools (up to 10 ac (4 ha))
and seasonally flooded alkali vernal
plains that become inundated by winter
rains and hold water or have saturated
soils for 2 weeks to 6 months during a
year with average rainfall (i.e., years
where average rainfall amounts for a
particular area are reached during the
rainy season (between October and
May)). This period of inundation is long
enough to promote germination,
flowering, and seed production for
Navarretia fossalis and other native
species typical of vernal pool and
seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain
habitat, but not so long that true
wetland species inhabit the areas.
(2) PCE 2—Intermixed wetland and
upland habitats that act as the local
watershed. Areas characterized by
mounds, swales, and depressions within
a matrix of upland habitat that result in
intermittently flowing surface and
subsurface water in swales, drainages,
and pools described in PCE 1.
(3) PCE 3—Soils that support ponding
during winter and spring. Soils found in
areas characterized in PCEs 1 and 2 that
have a clay component or other property
that creates an impermeable surface or
subsurface layer. These soil types
include, but are not limited to: CienebaPismo-Caperton soils in Los Angeles
County; Domino, Traver, Waukena,
Chino, and Willows soils in Riverside
County; and Huerhuero, Placentia,
Olivenhain, Stockpen, and Redding
soils in San Diego County.
With this revised designation of
critical habitat, we intend to conserve
the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
species, through the identification of the
appropriate quantity and spatial
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
arrangement of the PCEs sufficient to
support the life-history functions of the
species. For Navarretia fossalis, the size
of the ephemeral wetland habitat can
vary a great deal, but the most important
factor (i.e., the appropriate quantity and
spatial arrangement of the PCEs) in any
of the subunits designated as critical
habitat is that the vernal pool or alkali
playa habitat has intact and functioning
hydrology and intact adjacent upland
areas that ensure a functioning
ecosystem. All units and subunits
designated as critical habitat contain the
PCEs in the appropriate quantity and
spatial arrangement essential to the
conservation of this species and are
currently occupied by N. fossalis.
Special Management Considerations or
Protection
When designating critical habitat, we
assess whether the areas within the
geographical area occupied by the
species at the time of listing contain the
features that are essential to the
conservation of the species and which
may require special management
considerations or protection.
Researchers estimate that greater than
90 percent of the vernal pool habitat in
southern California has been converted
as a result of past human activities
(Bauder and McMillian 1998, pp. 56–67;
Keeler-Wolf et al. 1998, pp. 10, 60–61,
63–64). A detailed discussion of threats
to Navarretia fossalis and its habitat can
be found in the final listing rule (63 FR
54975; October 13, 1998), the previous
critical habitat designation (70 FR
60658; October 18, 2005), and the
Recovery Plan for Vernal Pools of
Southern California (Service 1998, pp.
1–113, appendices). The features
essential to the conservation of N.
fossalis may require special
management considerations or
protection to reduce the following
threats: habitat destruction and
fragmentation from urban and
agricultural development; pipeline
construction; alteration of hydrology
and floodplain dynamics; excessive
flooding; channelization; water
diversions; off-road vehicle (OHV)
activity; trampling by cattle and sheep;
weed abatement; fire suppression
practices (including discing and
plowing to remove weeds and create fire
breaks); competition from nonnative
plant species; direct and indirect
impacts from some human recreational
activities (63 FR 54975, October 13,
1998; Service 1998, p. 7); and manure
dumping (Roberts 2009, pp. 2–14).
In particular, manure dumping on
private property along the San Jacinto
River area is impacting habitat within
the Western Riverside County MSHCP
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
62201
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
area. These impacts are occurring
despite identification of these areas as
important for the survival and recovery
of Navarretia fossalis and other
sensitive species (such as Brodiaea
filifolia) addressed in the Western
Riverside County MSHCP. Dumping of
manure and sewage sludge should be
avoided in all areas containing
populations of N. fossalis. As outlined
in the Western Riverside County
MSHCP, we have been working with
permittees to implement additional
ordinances that will help to control
activities (such as manure dumping)
that may impact the implementation of
the Western Riverside County MSHCP
conservation objectives. To date, the
City of Hemet is the only Western
Riverside County MSHCP permittee that
has addressed the negative impacts that
manure dumping has on species such as
N. fossalis and B. filifolia and their
habitat trough the enactment of
Ordinance 1666 (i.e., the ordinance that
prevents manure dumping activities and
educates its citizens). We will continue
to work with Riverside County and
permittees of the Western Riverside
County MSHCP to address activities that
may impact the species within this plan
area, as well as other HCPs and plan
areas that may have other activities that
impact N. fossalis and its habitat.
Special management considerations
or protection are required within critical
habitat areas to address these threats.
Management activities that could
ameliorate these threats include (but are
not limited to) fencing Navarretia
fossalis occurrences to prevent soil
compaction and providing signage to
discourage encroachment by hikers,
cattle, sheep, and OHV activity; control
of nonnative plants using methods
shown to be effective; guiding the
design of development projects to avoid
impacts to N. fossalis habitat; enacting
local ordinances to prohibit manure
dumping; and restoring and maintaining
natural hydrology and floodplain
dynamics of watersheds associated with
N. fossalis occurrences where feasible.
These management activities will
protect the PCEs for the species by
reducing soil compaction to help
maintain an impermeable surface (PCE
3) that supports ephemeral wetland
habitat (PCE 1), which is needed to
promote germination, flowering, and
seed production for N. fossalis.
Additionally, management of critical
habitat lands will help maintain both
the wetland and upland habitat that acts
as the local watershed and provides
intermittent flowing water on the
surface and subsurface (PCEs 2 and 3).
Criteria Used To Identify Critical
Habitat
As required by section 4(b) of the Act,
we used the best scientific and
commercial data available to designate
critical habitat. We only designate areas
outside the geographical area occupied
by a species when a designation limited
to its present range would be inadequate
to ensure the conservation of the species
(50 CFR 424.12 (e)). We are not
designating any areas outside the
geographical area occupied by
Navarretia fossalis because occupied
areas are sufficient for the conservation
of the species.
This revised rule updates our 2005
final designation of critical habitat for
Navarretia fossalis with the best
available scientific information. For
some areas analyzed in 2005, we have
new information from survey reports
and public comments that led us to
either add or remove areas from critical
habitat designation.
This section provides details of the
process and criteria we used to
delineate a final revised critical habitat
designation for Navarretia fossalis. This
revised rule is based largely on areas
that are identified as required for the
conservation of N. fossalis in the
Recovery Plan for Vernal Pools of
Southern California (Service 1998,
pp.1–113, appendices), the 2005 final
critical habitat designation, and new
information obtained since that
designation. Table 3 in this rule depicts
the areas essential for N. fossalis
conservation; it does not include all
locations occupied by N. fossalis. It
includes only those locations that were:
(1) Included in Appendix F or G of
the Recovery Plan;
(2) designated, excluded, or exempt in
the 2005 final critical habitat
designation;
(3) proposed as critical habitat in the
2009 rule or proposed as critical habitat
in the Federal Register notice published
on April 15, 2010 (75 FR 19575); or
(4) designated, excluded, or exempt in
this final revised critical habitat
designation.
The unit names used in this revised
critical habitat for N. fossalis are based
on those used for management areas in
the 1998 Recovery Plan. The specific
changes made to the 2005 final critical
habitat designation are summarized in
the Summary of Changes From
Previously Designated Critical Habitat
section of this rule.
We analyzed the biology, life history,
ecology, and distribution (historical, at
the time of listing, and current) of
Navarretia fossalis. Based on this
information, we are designating revised
critical habitat in areas within the
geographical area occupied by N.
fossalis at the time of listing and
currently occupied that contain the
PCEs in the quantity and spatial
arrangement to support life-history
functions essential to the conservation
of the species (see the Geographic
Range and Status section in the
proposed revised rule (74 FR 27588;
June 10, 2009) for more information).
We are not designating any areas
outside the geographical area occupied
by the species at the time of listing. All
units and subunits contain the PCEs in
the appropriate quantity and spatial
arrangement essential to the
conservation of N. fossalis.
TABLE 3. AREAS NECESSARY FOR Navarretia fossalis CONSERVATION AS DESCRIBED IN THE 1998 RECOVERY PLAN, 2005
FINAL CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION, 2009 PROPOSED REVISED CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION, 2010 REVISIONS
PROPOSED IN THE AVAILABILITY OF THE DEA, AND THIS 2010 FINAL REVISED CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION.
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
Location*
Recovery Plan Appendix
Final Critical Habitat
Subunits (2005)
Proposed Revised Critical
Habitat Subunits (based
on 2009 proposal and
2010 availability of the
DEA)
Final Revised Critical
Habitat Subunits (2010)
Unit 1: Los Angeles Basin-Orange Management Area
Cruzan Mesa
F
1A
1A
1A
Plum Canyon
N/A
1B
1B
1B
Unit 2: San Diego: Northern Coastal Mesa Management Area
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
62202
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 3. AREAS NECESSARY FOR Navarretia fossalis CONSERVATION AS DESCRIBED IN THE 1998 RECOVERY PLAN, 2005
FINAL CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION, 2009 PROPOSED REVISED CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION, 2010 REVISIONS
PROPOSED IN THE AVAILABILITY OF THE DEA, AND THIS 2010 FINAL REVISED CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION.—Continued
Proposed Revised Critical
Habitat Subunits (based
on 2009 proposal and
2010 availability of the
DEA)
Final Revised Critical
Habitat Subunits (2010)
Location*
Recovery Plan Appendix
Final Critical Habitat
Subunits (2005)
Stuart Mesa, Marine Corps
Base (MCB) Camp
PendletonRecovery plan
(RP)** name: Stuart
Mesa
F
4(a)(3) exemption
4(a)(3) exemption
4(a)(3) exemption
Wire Mountain, MCB
Camp Pendleton RP
name: Wire Mountain
F
—
4(a)(3) exemption
4(a)(3) exemption
Poinsettia Lane Commuter
Station RP name: JJ 2
Poinsettia Lane
F
2 (partially excluded under
section 4(b)(2))
2
2
Unit 3: San Diego: Central Coastal Mesa Management Area
Santa Fe Valley (Crosby
Estates)
N/A
—
3A
Excluded under section
4(b)(2)
Carroll Canyon (D 5-8)
—
—
3B
3B
Nobel Drive (X 5)
—
—
3C
3C
Large Pool northwest of
runway, MCAS Miramar
N/A
—
4(a)(3) exemption
4(a)(3) exemption
EE1-2, MCAS Miramar RP
name: EE1-2, Miramar
Interior
F
4(a)(3) exemption
—
—
N/A
4(a)(3) exemption
—
—
New Century (BB 2)RP
name: BB 2 New
Century
G
—
—
—
Montgomery Field RP
name: N1-4, 6
Montgomery Field
F
Excluded under section
4(b)(2)
3D
3D
Kearny Mesa (U 19)
Unit 4: San Diego: Inland Management Area
G
—
—
—
San Marcos (Northwest L
14)RP name: L 7, 8, 1420
G
—
—
—
San Marcos (L 1-6)RP
name: L 1-6, 9-13 San
Marcos
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
San Marcos (North L
15)RP name: L 7, 8, 1420
F
4C1
4C1
4C1
San Marcos (L 9-10)RP
name: L 1-6, 9-13 San
Marcos
F
4C2
4C2
4C2
San Marcos (L 11-13)RP
name: L 1-6, 9-13 San
Marcos
F
4D
4D
4D
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
62203
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 3. AREAS NECESSARY FOR Navarretia fossalis CONSERVATION AS DESCRIBED IN THE 1998 RECOVERY PLAN, 2005
FINAL CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION, 2009 PROPOSED REVISED CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION, 2010 REVISIONS
PROPOSED IN THE AVAILABILITY OF THE DEA, AND THIS 2010 FINAL REVISED CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION.—Continued
Proposed Revised Critical
Habitat Subunits (based
on 2009 proposal and
2010 availability of the
DEA)
Final Revised Critical
Habitat Subunits (2010)
Location*
Recovery Plan Appendix
Final Critical Habitat
Subunits (2005)
San Marcos (North L
15)RP name: L 7, 8, 1420
G
—
—
—
Ramona RP name:
Ramona
F
—
—
—
Ramona RP name:
Ramona T
G
4E
4E
4E
Unit 5: San Diego: Southern Coastal Mesa Management Area
F
5A ( partially excluded
under section 4(b)(2))
5A
5A
Otay River Valley (M2)
—
5B
5B
5B
Otay Mesa (J26)RP name:
J 26 Otay Mesa
F
5C
5C
5C
Proctor Valley (R1)RP
name: R Proctor Valley
F
—
5F
5F
Otay Reservoir (K3-5)RP
name: K3-5 Otay River
F
—
5G
5G
K1, 2 RP name: K 1, 2, 6,
7 Otay River
G
Excluded under section
4(b)(2)
Does not meet the
definition of Critical
Habitat
—
K 6, 7 RP name: K 1, 2, 6,
7 Otay River
G
—
—
—
Western Otay Mesa vernal
pool complexes RP
name: J 2, 5, 7, 11-21,
23-30 Otay Mesa / J 3
Otay Mesa
F/G
Excluded under section
4(b)(2)
5H / 5I
5H / 5I
Western Otay Mesa vernal
pool complexes (J 32
(West Otay A + B), J 33
(Sweetwater High
School))
N/A
—
5H
5H
Eastern Otay Mesa vernal
pool complexes RP
name: 23-30 Otay Mesa
/ J 22 Otay Mesa
F/G
Excluded under section
4(b)(2)
5H / 5I
5H / 5I
Eastern Otay Mesa vernal
pool complexes RP
name: J 19, 27, 28E,
28W Otay Mesa
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
Sweetwater Vernal Pools
(S1-3)RP name:
Sweetwater Lake
—
Excluded under section
4(b)(2)
Does not meet the
definition of Critical
Habitat
—
RP name: J (undescribed)
G
—
—
—
6A
6A
Unit 6: Riverside Management Area
San Jacinto River RP
name: San Jacinto
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
F
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Excluded under section
4(b)(2)
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
62204
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 3. AREAS NECESSARY FOR Navarretia fossalis CONSERVATION AS DESCRIBED IN THE 1998 RECOVERY PLAN, 2005
FINAL CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION, 2009 PROPOSED REVISED CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION, 2010 REVISIONS
PROPOSED IN THE AVAILABILITY OF THE DEA, AND THIS 2010 FINAL REVISED CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION.—Continued
Proposed Revised Critical
Habitat Subunits (based
on 2009 proposal and
2010 availability of the
DEA)
Final Revised Critical
Habitat Subunits (2010)
Location*
Recovery Plan Appendix
Final Critical Habitat
Subunits (2005)
Salt Creek Seasonally
Flooded Alkali Plain RP
name: Hemet/ Salt
Creek
F
Excluded under section
4(b)(2)
6B
6B
Wickerd Road and Scott
Road Pools
N/A
—
6C
6C
Skunk Hollow RP name:
Skunk Hollow
—
Excluded under section
4(b)(2)
6D
Excluded under Section
4(b)(2)
RP name: Temecula
F
—
—
—
Mesa de Burro RP name:
Santa Rosa Plateau
F
Excluded under section
4(b)(2)
6E
Excluded under Section
4(b)(2)
Total Areas (out of 39
areas listed in this table)
27
22
28
28
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
*This table does not include all locations occupied by Navarretia fossalis. It includes only those locations included in Appendix F or G of the
Recovery Plan (‘‘RP’’ in above table); designated, excluded, or exempt in 2005; proposed as critical habitat in the 2009 rule; proposed as revisions to proposed rule as identified in the document making available the DEA; or designated, excluded, or exempt in this final rule. Note: The
alpha-numeric vernal pool labels were applied in the Recovery Plan.
**RP name = Name in Recovery Plan, if different from the current rule.
Appendices F and G of the Recovery
Plan provide information on the areas
needed to stabilize (prevent extinction
of) Navarretia fossalis (Appendix F) and
the areas that should be conserved and
managed to reclassify or recover N.
fossalis (Appendix G). In Table 3, we
summarized the data from the Recovery
Plan. According to this summary, 27
locations were highlighted as areas that
should be conserved and managed to
recover N. fossalis. Our 2005 final rule
to designate critical habitat (70 FR
60658; October 18, 2005) used the
Recovery Plan as the basis for
designating critical habitat; however,
the rule included some additions to and
subtractions from those areas deemed
essential to the conservation of N.
fossalis in the Recovery Plan. Nine areas
that the Recovery Plan identified as
necessary for recovery were not
identified in the 2005 final rule as
essential to the conservation of N.
fossalis, and four areas not in the
Recovery Plan were added. These nine
areas were sites where we did not have
specific occurrence data or areas where
recent surveys had not found N. fossalis.
The four areas added to the 2005 final
rule were locations where occurrence
data indicated that these areas
contained the features essential to the
conservation of N. fossalis. A total of 22
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
areas were identified in the 2005 final
rule as essential to the conservation of
Navarretia fossalis (see Table 3).
We did not include seven occurrences
of N. fossalis highlighted in the
Recovery Plan in the proposed revised
critical habitat designation or this final
rule. We do not have detailed
information on these occurrences, and
N. fossalis has not been observed during
recent surveys at some of these sites.
Additionally, we included areas in this
revised critical habitat (based on new
data) that were not identified as
necessary for recovery in the Recovery
Plan. While some of the areas are
different, non-inclusion of some areas in
the Recovery Plan and inclusion of
other areas for which we have better
data will achieve the overall goal of the
Recovery Plan for N. fossalis and
provide for conservation of this species.
In this revised designation of critical
habitat for Navarretia fossalis, using the
best scientific and commercial
information, we selected areas that
possess those physical and biological
features essential to the conservation of
the species, and which may require
special management considerations or
protection. We took into account past
conservation planning for N. fossalis in
the Recovery Plan and in the 2005
critical habitat designation. For this
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
revised rule, we completed the
following steps to delineate critical
habitat:
(1) Compiled all available data on N.
fossalis into a GIS database;
(2) Reviewed data to ensure accuracy;
(3) Determined which occurrences
were known to occur at the time of
listing;
(4) Determined which areas are
currently occupied;
(5) Defined the areas containing the
features essential to the conservation of
N. fossalis in terms of core habitat areas
and satellite habitat areas;
(6) Determined if each occupied area
represents core habitat or satellite
habitat and, therefore, should be
designated as critical habitat; and
(7) For both core and satellite habitat
areas, mapped the specific locations that
contain the essential physical and
biological features (PCEs in the
appropriate quantity and spatial
arrangement needed to support lifehistory functions essential to the
conservation of N. fossalis).
These steps are described in detail
below.
(1) We compiled all available data on
Navarretia fossalis into a GIS database.
Data on locations where N. fossalis
occurs were based on collections and
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
observations made by botanists (both
amateur and professional), biological
consultants, and academic researchers.
We compiled data from the following
sources to create our GIS database for N.
fossalis: (a) Data used in the Recovery
Plan and in the 2005 final critical
habitat rule for N. fossalis (70 FR
60658); (b) the CNDDB data report for N.
fossalis and accompanying GIS records
(CNDDB 2008, pp. 1–44); (c) data
presented in the City of San Diego’s
Vernal Pool Inventory for 2002–2003
(City of San Diego 2004, pp. 1–125,
appendices); (d) the data report for N.
fossalis from the California Consortium
of Herbaria and accompanying Berkeley
Mapper GIS records (Consortium of
California Herbaria 2008, pp. 1–17); (e)
the Western Riverside County MSHCP
species GIS database; and (f) the
Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office’s
internal species GIS database, which
includes the species data used for the
San Diego MSCP and the San Diego
MHCP, reports from section 7
consultations, and Service observations
of N. fossalis (Carlsbad Fish and
Wildlife Office’s internal species GIS
database).
(2) We reviewed the Navarretia
fossalis data that we compiled to ensure
its accuracy. We checked each data
point in our database to ensure that it
represented an original collection or
observation of N. fossalis. Data that did
not represent an original collection or
observation were removed from our
database. We checked each data point to
ensure that it was mapped in the correct
location. Data points that did not match
the description for the original
collection or observation were
remapped in the correct location or
removed from our database.
(3) We determined which Navarretia
fossalis occurrences existed at the time
of listing. We concluded that all known
occurrences, except for a single
occurrence translocated after this
species was listed, were extant at the
time of listing. We drew this conclusion
because N. fossalis has limited dispersal
capabilities. We believe the
documentation of additional
occurrences after the species was listed
was due to an increased effort to survey
for this species. In other words, we do
not believe this species has naturally
colonized any new areas since it was
listed.
(4) We determined which areas are
currently occupied by Navarretia
fossalis. For areas where we had past
occupancy data for the species, we
assumed the area is currently occupied
unless: (a) Two or more rare plant
surveys conducted during the past 10
years did not find N. fossalis (providing
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
the surveys were conducted in years
with average rainfall (i.e., years where
average rainfall amounts for a particular
area are reached during the rainy season
between October and May)) and during
the appropriate months to find this
species (i.e., March, April, and May); or
(b) the site was significantly disturbed
since the last observation of the species
at that location.
(5) We defined the areas necessary for
conservation of Navarretia fossalis in
terms of ‘‘core habitat areas’’ and
‘‘satellite habitat areas.’’ See the Areas
Needed for Conservation: Core and
Satellite Habitat Areas section in this
rule for definitions of these areas.
(6) We determined if each occupied
area represents core habitat or satellite
habitat. In the final listing rule (63 FR
54975; October 13, 1998), we stated that
60 percent of the known Navarretia
fossalis occurrences are concentrated in
three locations: Otay Mesa in southern
San Diego County, along the San Jacinto
River in western Riverside County, and
near Hemet in Riverside County
(referred to as the Salt Creek Seasonally
Flooded Alkali Plain in this final critical
habitat rule). These three areas represent
core habitat for N. fossalis. In addition
to these three core habitat areas, Mesa
de Burro in Riverside County represents
core habitat for this species due to the
large species abundance observed there
in 2008, and the large amount of intact
vernal pool habitat on this mesa. In
total, we identified four core habitat
areas for N. fossalis. Large populations
of N. fossalis are currently present in
these four areas, but there have been
significant impacts to these areas in the
form of habitat fragmentation, nonnative
plant invasion, agricultural activities,
and unauthorized recreational use.
Because these four areas represent large,
interconnected ephemeral wetland areas
and large N. fossalis populations, they
are essential to, and will serve as
anchors for, the overall conservation
effort for this species. Additionally, the
conservation of these four areas will
sustain the largest populations of N.
fossalis, allowing the species to persist
where it will be less constrained by the
threats that negatively impact its
essential habitat features (PCEs).
Habitat areas outside the four core
habitat areas also support stable, intact
occurrences of Navarretia fossalis.
These satellite areas represent unique
habitat within this species’ range that
also contain the PCEs laid out in the
appropriate quantity and spatial
arrangement essential to the
conservation of the species. The satellite
habitat areas occur over a wide range of
soils and at various elevations that
include several occurrences over a range
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
62205
of environmental variables, the
preservation of which will help
maintain the genetic diversity of N.
fossalis. The satellite habitat areas are
essential to the conservation of N.
fossalis because they allow for
connections between existing
occurrences of the species, and together
with the core habitat areas, will create
a sustainable matrix of habitat for N.
fossalis that will enable it to evolve and
potentially respond to future
environmental changes.
Areas of essential habitat that are
smaller than core habitat areas were
selected as satellite habitat areas if
Navarretia fossalis persists from year to
year (i.e., areas that may be isolated and
likely to be genetically unique), and are:
(a) on the periphery of this species’
geographical distribution; (b)
geographically isolated from other
occurrences; or (c) provide connections
between other satellite or core habitat
areas. Additional discussion about
exceptions to the assignment of satellite
areas is found below in the Critical
Habitat Units section of this rule.
(7) For the core and satellite habitat
areas, we mapped the specific areas that
contain the physical and biological
features (the PCEs) in the quantity and
spatial arrangement needed to support
life history functions essential to
Navarretia fossalis. We first mapped the
ephemeral wetland habitat in the
occupied area using occurrence data,
aerial imagery, and 1:24,000
topographic maps. We then mapped the
intermixed wetland and upland habitats
that make up the local watersheds and
the topography and soils that support
the occupied ephemeral wetland
habitat. We identified the gently sloping
area associated with ephemeral wetland
habitat and any adjacent areas that slope
toward and contribute to the hydrology
of the ephemeral wetland habitat. In
most cases, we delineated the border of
revised critical habitat around the
occupied ephemeral wetlands and
associated local watershed areas to
follow natural breaks in the terrain such
as ridgelines, mesa edges, and steep
canyon slopes.
When determining the revised critical
habitat boundaries, we made every
effort to map precisely only the areas
that contain the PCEs and provide for
the conservation of Navarretia fossalis.
However, due to the mapping scale that
we use to draft critical habitat
boundaries, we cannot guarantee that
every fraction of revised critical habitat
contains the PCEs. Additionally, we
made every attempt to avoid including
developed areas such as lands
underlying buildings, paved areas, and
other structures that lack PCEs for N.
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
62206
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
fossalis. 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 areas. Any
developed structures and the land under
them inadvertently left inside critical
habitat boundaries shown on the maps
of this revised critical habitat
designation are excluded by text in this
rule and are not designated as critical
habitat. Therefore, Federal actions
involving these lands would not trigger
section 7 consultation with respect to
critical habitat and the requirement of
no adverse modification unless the
specific actions may affect the species or
PCEs in adjacent critical habitat.
Revised Critical Habitat Designation
We are designating 6 units that
include 19 subunits as critical habitat
for Navarretia fossalis. Table 4 identifies
the approximate area of each critical
habitat subunit by land ownership.
These subunits, which generally
correspond to the geographic area of the
subunits delineated in the 2005
designation, replace the current critical
habitat designation for N. fossalis in 50
CFR 17.96(a). The critical habitat areas
we describe below constitute our best
assessment of areas determined to be
occupied at the time of listing that
contain the primary constituent
elements in the appropriate quantity
and spatial arrangement (i.e., essential
features) which may require special
management considerations or
protection. We are not designating any
unoccupied areas or areas outside of the
species’ historical range because we
determined that occupied lands within
the species’ historical range are
sufficient for the conservation of N.
fossalis provided that these lands are
protected or receive special
management considerations for N.
fossalis.
TABLE 4. AREA AND OWNERSHIP FOR LANDS INCLUDED IN THE Navarretia fossalis REVISED CRITICAL HABITAT
DESIGNATION.
Location
Federal
State Government
Local Government
Private
Total
Unit 1: Los Angeles Basin-Orange Management Area
1A. Cruzan Mesa
—
—
—
156 ac
(63 ha)
156 ac
(63 ha)
1B. Plum Canyon
—
—
—
20 ac
(8 ha)
20 ac
(8 ha)
3 ac
(1 ha)
9 ac
(4 ha)
17 ac
(7 ha)
1 ac
(< 1 ha)
18 ac
(7 ha)
37 ac
(15 ha)
—
37 ac
(15 ha)
48 ac
(20 ha)
—
48 ac
(20 ha)
Unit 2: San Diego: Northern Coastal Mesa Management Area
2. Poinsettia Lane
Commuter Station
—
—
6 ac
(3 ha)
Unit 3: San Diego: Central Coastal Mesa Management Area
3B. Carroll Canyon
—
3C. Nobel Drive
—
3D. Montgomery Field
—
—
—
Unit 4: San Diego: Inland Management Area
4C1. San Marcos
(Upham)
—
—
—
34 ac
(14 ha)
34 ac
(14 ha)
4C2. San Marcos
(Universal Boot)
—
—
15 ac
(6 ha)
17 ac
(7 ha)
32 ac
(13 ha)
4D. San Marcos (Bent
Avenue)
—
—
—
5 ac
(2 ha)
5 ac
(2 ha)
4E. Ramona
—
—
3 ac
(1 ha)
132 ac
(53 ha)
135 ac
(55 ha)
Unit 5: San Diego: Southern Coastal Mesa Management Area
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
5A. Sweetwater
Vernal Pools (S1-3)
23 ac
(9 ha)
1 ac
(<1 ha)
71 ac
(29 ha)
—
95 ac
(38 ha)
5B. Otay River Valley
(M2)
—
—
—
24 ac
(10 ha)
24 ac
(10 ha)
5C. Otay Mesa (J26)
—
2 ac
(1 ha)
24 ac
(10 ha)
16 ac
(7 ha)
42 ac
(17 ha)
5F. Proctor Valley
(R1-2)
—
—
51 ac
(21 ha)
37 ac
(15 ha)
88 ac
(36 ha)
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
62207
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 4. AREA AND OWNERSHIP FOR LANDS INCLUDED IN THE Navarretia fossalis REVISED CRITICAL HABITAT
DESIGNATION.—Continued
Location
Federal
State Government
Local Government
Private
Total
5G. Otay Lakes (K35)
—
—
140 ac
(57 ha)
—
140 ac
(57 ha)
5H. Western Otay
Mesa vernal pool
complexes
—
—
41 ac
(17 ha)
98 ac
(40 ha)
139 ac
(56 ha)
5I. Eastern Otay Mesa
vernal pool
complexes
—
—
—
221 ac
(89 ha)
221 ac
(89 ha)
Unit 6: Riverside Management Area
6A. San Jacinto River
—
1,504 ac
(608 ha)
—
2,808 ac
(1,136 ha)
4,312 ac
(1,745 ha)
6B. Salt Creek
Seasonally Flooded
Alkali Plain
—
—
—
930 ac
(376 ha)
930 ac
(376 ha)
6C. Wickerd Road
and Scott Road
Pools
—
—
—
235 ac
(95 ha)
235 ac
(95 ha)
23 ac
(9 ha)
1,507 ac
(610 ha)
453 ac
(183 ha)
4,737 ac
(1,917 ha)
6,720 ac
(2,720 ha)*
Total
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
*Values in this table may not sum due to rounding.
Critical Habitat Units
Presented below are brief descriptions
of all subunits included in the
Navarretia fossalis revised critical
habitat designation and reasons why
they meet the definition of critical
habitat for the species. The units in this
revised critical habitat correspond to the
management areas described in the 1998
Recovery Plan for Vernal Pools of
Southern California. Each subunit
contains either: (1) A core habitat area;
or (2) a satellite habitat area that
provides connectivity between core
habitat areas or other satellite habitat
areas. Areas identified as subunits that
harbor satellite habitat areas were
identified as containing features
essential to the conservation of the
species (compared to other areas not
identified as essential habitat) due to a
combination of their geographic
proximity to core habitat areas, their
status as an area that supports a stable
occurrence (representing occurrences
that continue to persist within a given
geographic area), and the likelihood that
these particular habitat areas support
genetically unique occurrences. Other
areas not qualifying as satellite areas are
occurrences that are represented by one
or more of the following characteristics:
Occurrence consisting of few
individuals; no detailed information on
occurrence; lack of observations during
recent surveys; locations not identified
in the Recovery Plan; or areas have low
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
likelihood of persistence due to
fragmentation or enclosure by
developed areas.
Unit 1: Los Angeles Basin—Orange
Management Area
Unit 1 is located in northwestern Los
Angeles County and consists of two
subunits totaling 176 ac (71 ha) of
private land.
Subunit 1A: Cruzan Mesa
Subunit 1A is located near the City of
Santa Clarita in Los Angeles County.
This subunit is on Cruzan Mesa,
northwest of Forest Park and the Sierra
Highway and southwest of Vasquez
Canyon Road. Subunit 1A consists of
156 ac (63 ha) of private land and meets
our selection criteria as satellite habitat.
Cruzan Mesa is one of the only areas in
Los Angeles County that supports mesatop vernal pools. As satellite habitat,
this subunit supports a stable
occurrence of Navarretia fossalis,
provides potential connectivity with
Subunit 1B, and likely supports a
genetically distinct occurrence because
of the separation of these two northern
occurrences from other occurrences of
N. fossalis. This subunit and Subunit 1B
(described below) represent the most
northern occurrences of this species.
Subunit 1A contains the physical and
biological features that are essential to
the conservation of N. fossalis,
including ephemeral wetland habitat
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(PCE 1), intermixed wetland and upland
habitats that act as the local watershed
(PCE 2), and the topography and soils
that support ponding during winter and
spring months (PCE 3). The physical
and biological features essential to the
conservation of the species in this
subunit may require special
management considerations or
protection to address threats from
nonnative plant species and activities
(such as mowing or grading) that occur
in the vernal pool basins. Please see the
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to N. fossalis
habitat and potential management
considerations.
Subunit 1B: Plum Canyon
Subunit 1B is located near the City of
Santa Clarita in Los Angeles County.
This subunit is in Plum Canyon, west of
Forest Park and the Sierra Highway and
north of Plum Canyon Road. Subunit 1B
consists of 20 ac (8 ha) of private land
and meets our selection criteria as
satellite habitat. As satellite habitat, this
subunit supports a stable occurrence of
Navarretia fossalis, provides potential
connectivity with Subunit 1A, and
likely supports a genetically distinct
occurrence because of the separation of
these two northern occurrences from
other occurrences of N. fossalis. The
Plum Canyon vernal pool habitat occurs
on a flat area down-slope from the
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
62208
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
vernal pools on Cruzan Mesa. The
vernal pools on Cruzan Mesa (Subunit
1A) and Plum Canyon represent the
only habitat for N. fossalis in Los
Angeles County and the most northern
occurrences of this species. Subunit 1B
contains the physical or biological
features essential to the conservation of
N. fossalis, including ephemeral
wetland habitat (PCE 1), intermixed
wetland and upland habitats that act as
the local watershed (PCE 2), and the
topography and soils that support
ponding during winter and spring
months (PCE 3). The physical and
biological features essential to the
conservation of the species in this
subunit may require special
management considerations or
protection to address threats from
nonnative plant species within this
subunit. Please see the Special
Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to N. fossalis
habitat and potential management
considerations.
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
Unit 2: San Diego—Northern Coastal
Mesa Management Area
Poinsettia Lane Commuter Station
Unit 2 is located in the City of
Carlsbad in San Diego County and
contains 6 ac (3 ha) of land owned by
the North County Transit District and 3
ac (1 ha) of private land. This unit is
loosely bounded by Avenida Encinas on
the north, a housing development on the
east, Poinsettia Lane on the south, and
train tracks on the west. Unit 2 meets
our selection criteria as satellite habitat
because it supports a stable occurrence
of Navarretia fossalis and provides
potential connectivity between
occurrences on MCB Camp Pendleton
and Subunits 4C1, 4C2, and 4D. The
Poinsettia Lane vernal pool complex
consists of a series of vernal pools that
run parallel to a berm created by the
train tracks. Unit 2 contains the physical
and biological features that are essential
to the conservation of N. fossalis,
including ephemeral wetland habitat
(PCE 1), intermixed wetland and upland
habitats that act as the local watershed
(PCE 2), and the topography and soils
that support ponding during winter and
spring months (PCE 3). The physical
and biological features essential to the
conservation of the species in this unit
may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats from nonnative plant species
and activities (such as unauthorized
recreational use) that occur in the vernal
pool basins. Please see the Special
Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
discussion of the threats to N. fossalis
habitat and potential management
considerations.
Unit 3: San Diego—Central Coastal Mesa
Management Area
Unit 3 is located in central coastal San
Diego County and consists of three
subunits totaling 103 ac (42 ha). This
unit contains 102 ac (42 ha) owned by
State and local governments, and
approximately 1 ac (less than 1 ha) of
private land.
Subunit 3B: Carroll Canyon
Subunit 3B is located in the City of
San Diego in San Diego County. This
subunit is located to the southwest of
the intersection of Parkdale Avenue and
Osgood Way, and is loosely bounded by
residential development on the north,
open space to the east, and a quarry to
the south and west. Subunit 3B consists
of approximately 18 ac (7 ha) that
includes 17 ac (7 ha) of land owned by
State or local governments and 1 ac (less
than 1 ha) of private land. Subunit 3B
meets our selection criteria as satellite
habitat because it supports a stable
occurrence of Navarretia fossalis and
provides potential connectivity between
occurrences in Subunits 3A and 3C. The
Carroll Canyon vernal pool complex
consists of a group of vernal pools on
the edge of a mesa north of Carroll
Canyon. Historically, there may have
been more habitat for this species;
however, the majority of vernal pool
habitat in the vicinity of this subunit
has been developed. Subunit 3B
contains the physical and biological
features that are essential to the
conservation of N. fossalis, including
ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1),
intermixed wetland and upland habitats
that act as the local watershed (PCE 2),
and the topography and soils that
support ponding during winter and
spring months (PCE 3). The physical
and biological features essential to the
conservation of the species in this
subunit may require special
management considerations or
protection to address threats from
nonnative plant species and activities
(such as trespass or illegal trash
dumping) that occur in the vernal pool
basins. Please see the Special
Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to N. fossalis
habitat and potential management
considerations.
Subunit 3C: Nobel Drive
Subunit 3C is located in the City of
San Diego in San Diego County. This
subunit is loosely bounded by the 805
interstate on the northeast, train tracks
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
on the south, and Nobel Drive on the
northwest. Subunit 3C consists of 37 ac
(15 ha) of land owned by local
government and meets our selection
criteria as satellite habitat because it
supports a stable occurrence of
Navarretia fossalis and provides
potential connectivity between
occurrences in Subunits 3B and 3D. The
Nobel Drive vernal pool complex
consists of a group of vernal pools on a
mesa-top north of Rose Canyon. Subunit
3C contains the physical and biological
features that are essential to the
conservation of N. fossalis, including
ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1),
intermixed wetland and upland habitats
that act as the local watershed (PCE 2),
and the topography and soils that
support ponding during winter and
spring months (PCE 3). The physical
and biological features essential to the
conservation of the species in this
subunit may require special
management considerations or
protection to address threats from
nonnative plant species and activities
(such as unauthorized recreational use)
that occur in the vernal pool basins.
Please see the Special Management
Considerations or Protection section of
this rule for a discussion of the threats
to N. fossalis habitat and potential
management considerations.
Subunit 3D: Montgomery Field
Subunit 3D is located in the City of
San Diego in San Diego County. This
subunit is located at Montgomery Field
(airport) to the northeast of the runway
area. Subunit 3D consists of 48 ac (20
ha) of land owned by the City of San
Diego and meets our selection criteria as
satellite habitat. As satellite habitat, this
subunit supports a stable occurrence of
Navarretia fossalis and provides
potential connectivity with the
occurrence in Subunit 3C. The
Montgomery Field vernal pool complex
consists of a large group of vernal pools
east of the runway area at Montgomery
Field, although only the northeastern
portion of this vernal pool complex is
being designated as critical habitat
because the southeastern portion of this
vernal pool complex has been
hydrologically disconnected from other
vernal pools by past development, is
now isolated, and does not meet the
definition of essential habitat.
Navarretia fossalis has not been
documented in the southeastern portion
of this vernal pool complex. Subunit 3D
contains the physical and biological
features that are essential to the
conservation of N. fossalis, including
ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1),
intermixed wetland and upland habitats
that act as the local watershed (PCE 2),
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
and the topography and soils that
support ponding during winter and
spring months (PCE 3). The physical
and biological features essential to the
conservation of the species in this
subunit may require special
management considerations or
protection to address threats from
nonnative plant species that occur in
the vernal pool basins. Please see the
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to N. fossalis
habitat and potential management
considerations.
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
Unit 4: San Diego—Inland Management
Area
Unit 4 is located within inland San
Diego County and consists of four
subunits totaling 206 ac (83 ha). This
unit contains 18 ac (7 ha) owned by
State and local governments, and 188 ac
(76 ha) of private land.
Subunits 4C1, 4C2, and 4D: San Marcos
Subunits 4C1, 4C2, and 4D are located
in the City of San Marcos in San Diego
County. These three subunits consist of
three separate vernal pool complexes.
The first (Subunit 4C1) is loosely
bounded by La Mirada Drive on the
northeast, Las Posas Road on the
southeast, Linda Vista Drive on the
southwest, and South Pacific Street on
the northwest. The second (Subunit
4C2) is loosely bounded by Linda Vista
Drive on the northeast, Las Posas Road
on the east, West San Marcos Boulevard
on the south, and South Pacific Street
on the west. The third (Subunit 4D) is
loosely bounded by South Bent Avenue
on the northeast, commercial
development on the southeast and
southwest, and Linda Vista Drive on the
northwest. Subunit 4C1 consists of 34 ac
(14 ha) of private land, Subunit 4C2
consists of 15 ac (6 ha) of land owned
by local government and 17 ac (7 ha) of
private land, and Subunit 4D consists of
5 ac (2 ha) of private land. These three
subunits meet our selection criteria as
satellite habitat areas because they
support stable occurrences of Navarretia
fossalis and provide potential
connectivity between occurrences in
Unit 2 and Subunit 4E. We grouped
these vernal pool complexes because of
the clustered nature of these
occurrences. These subunits have
separate subunit numbers to be
consistent with the numbering
identified in the 2005 critical habitat
designation. Subunits 4C1, 4C2, and 4D
contain the physical and biological
features that are essential to the
conservation of N. fossalis, including
ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1),
intermixed wetland and upland habitats
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
that act as the local watershed (PCE 2),
and the topography and soils that
support ponding during winter and
spring months (PCE 3). The physical
and biological features essential to the
conservation of the species in these
subunits may require special
management considerations or
protection to address threats from
nonnative plant species and activities
(such as commercial development,
trespass, or OHV use) that occur in the
vernal pool basins. Please see the
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to N. fossalis
habitat and potential management
considerations.
Subunit 4E: Ramona
Subunit 4E is located in the
unincorporated community of Ramona.
This subunit is loosely bounded by the
Ramona Airport and Ramona Airport
Road on the north, Sawday Road on the
east, Santa Maria Creek on the south,
and a series of rock outcrops on the
west. Subunit 4E consists of
approximately 135 ac (55 ha) that
includes 3 ac (1 ha) of land owned by
State or local governments and 132 ac
(53 ha) of private land. Subunit 4E
meets our selection criteria as satellite
habitat because it supports a stable
occurrence of Navarretia fossalis and
provides potential connectivity with
occurrences in Subunits 4C1, 4C2, and
4D. The vernal pools in this subunit
occur in gently sloping grassland habitat
and are at the highest elevation where
N. fossalis is known to occur. Subunit
4E contains the physical and biological
features that are essential to the
conservation of N. fossalis, including
ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1),
intermixed wetland and upland habitats
that act as the local watershed (PCE 2),
and the topography and soils that
support ponding during winter and
spring months (PCE 3). The physical
and biological features essential to the
conservation of the species in this
subunit may require special
management considerations or
protection to address threats from
nonnative plant species and activities
(such as agricultural activities or
recreational use) that occur in the vernal
pool basins. Please see the Special
Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to N. fossalis
habitat and potential management
considerations.
Unit 5: San Diego—Southern Coastal
Mesa Management Area
Unit 5 is located in southern San
Diego County and consists of six
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
62209
subunits totaling 748 ac (303 ha). This
unit contains 28 ac (11 ha) of federally
owned land, 330 ac (134 ha) of land
owned by State and local governments,
and 390 ac (158 ha) of private land.
Subunit 5A: Sweetwater Vernal Pools
Subunit 5A is located southwest of
the Sweetwater Reservoir. This subunit
is loosely bounded by the Sweetwater
Reservoir on the north, steeply sloping
topography on the east, State Route 125
on the south, and an unnamed drainage
on the west. Subunit 5A consists of
approximately 95 ac (38 ha) and
includes 23 ac (9 ha) of Federal land
that is part of the San Diego National
Wildlife Refuge Complex, 1 ac (less than
1ha) of land owned by the State, and 71
ac (29 ha) of land owned by local
government. This subunit meets our
selection criteria as satellite habitat.
This satellite habitat subunit supports a
stable occurrence of Navarretia fossalis
and provides potential connectivity
between occurrences in Subunits 5B
and 5F. Some of the area occupied by
N. fossalis was lost during the
construction of State Route 125. The soil
from that area was salvaged and is being
used to restore other vernal pools in this
subunit. Subunit 5A contains the
physical and biological features that are
essential to the conservation of N.
fossalis, including ephemeral wetland
habitat (PCE 1), intermixed wetland and
upland habitats that act as the local
watershed (PCE 2), and the topography
and soils that support ponding during
winter and spring months (PCE 3). The
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
species in this subunit may require
special management considerations or
protection to address threats from
nonnative plant species and activities
(such as unauthorized recreational use)
that occur in the vernal pool basins.
Please see the Special Management
Considerations or Protection section of
this rule for a discussion of the threats
to N. fossalis habitat and potential
management considerations.
Subunit 5B: Otay River Valley
Subunit 5B is located in the City of
Chula Vista and unincorporated San
Diego County. This subunit is loosely
bounded by Olympic Parkway on the
north, a housing development on the
east, and a landfill to the southwest.
Subunit 5B consists of 24 ac (10 ha) of
private land and meets our selection
criteria as satellite habitat because it
supports a stable occurrence of
Navarretia fossalis and provides
potential connectivity between
occurrences of N. fossalis in Subunits
5A and 5H. Subunit 5B contains the
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
62210
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
physical and biological features that are
essential to the conservation of N.
fossalis, including ephemeral wetland
habitat (PCE 1), intermixed wetland and
upland habitats that act as the local
watershed (PCE 2), and the topography
and soils that support ponding during
winter and spring months (PCE 3). The
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
species in this subunit may require
special management considerations or
protection to address threats from
nonnative plant species and activities
(such as unauthorized recreational use)
that occur in the vernal pool basins.
Please see the Special Management
Considerations or Protection section of
this rule for a discussion of the threats
to N. fossalis habitat and potential
management considerations.
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
Subunit 5C: Otay Mesa
Subunit 5C is located on the eastern
portion of Otay Mesa, directly northwest
of and adjacent to the George F. Bailey
Detention Facility at the terminus of
Alta Road. Subunit 5C consists of 26 ac
(11 ha) of State and local governmentowned land, and 16 ac (7 ha) of private
land, and it meets our selection criteria
as satellite habitat because it supports a
stable occurrence of Navarretia fossalis
and provides potential connectivity
between occurrences of N. fossalis in
Subunits 5G and 5I. Subunit 5C
contains the physical and biological
features that are essential to the
conservation of N. fossalis, including
ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1),
intermixed wetland and upland habitats
that act as the local watershed (PCE 2),
and the topography and soils that
support ponding during winter and
spring months (PCE 3). The physical
and biological features essential to the
conservation of the species in this
subunit may require special
management considerations or
protection to address threats from
nonnative plant species and activities
(such as unauthorized recreational use)
that occur in the vernal pool basins.
Please see the Special Management
Considerations or Protection section of
this rule for a discussion of the threats
to N. fossalis habitat and potential
management considerations.
Subunit 5F: Proctor Valley
Subunit 5F is located between the
unincorporated communities of Eastlake
and Jamul in San Diego County. This
subunit is located along Proctor Valley
Road in Proctor Valley. Subunit 5F
consists of approximately 88 ac (36 ha)
and includes 51 ac (21 ha) of land
owned by the City of San Diego and 37
ac (15 ha) of private land. Subunit 5F
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
meets our selection criteria as satellite
habitat because it supports a stable
occurrence of Navarretia fossalis and
provides potential connectivity between
occurrences of N. fossalis in Subunits
5A and 5G. The vernal pools in this
subunit occur in Proctor Valley on a flat
area that is slightly elevated from the
stream channel that runs through this
valley. The vernal pools in this subunit
to the west of Proctor Valley Road are
severely impacted by OHV use, but the
vernal pools to the east of Proctor Valley
road remain relatively intact. Subunit
5F contains the physical and biological
features that are essential to the
conservation of N. fossalis, including
ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1),
intermixed wetland and upland habitats
that act as the local watershed (PCE 2),
and the topography and soils that
support ponding during winter and
spring months (PCE 3). The physical
and biological features essential to the
conservation of the species in this
subunit may require special
management considerations or
protection to address threats from
nonnative plant species and activities
(such as unauthorized recreational use
or OHV use) that occur in the vernal
pool basins. Please see the Special
Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to N. fossalis
habitat and potential management
considerations.
Subunit 5G: Otay Lakes
Subunit 5G is located east of the City
of Chula Vista in San Diego County.
This subunit is loosely bounded by
Lower Otay Reservoir to the north and
west and by the slopes of Otay
Mountain to the southeast. Subunit 5G
consists of 140 ac (57 ha) of land owned
by State or local governments and meets
our selection criteria as satellite habitat
because this location supports a stable
occurrence of Navarretia fossalis and
provides potential connectivity between
occurrences of N. fossalis in Subunits
5F and 5I. The vernal pool complexes in
this subunit are located on the flat areas
to the south of Lower Otay Reservoir.
Subunit 5G contains the physical and
biological features that are essential to
the conservation of N. fossalis,
including ephemeral wetland habitat
(PCE 1), intermixed wetland and upland
habitats that act as the local watershed
(PCE 2), and the topography and soils
that support ponding during winter and
spring months (PCE 3). The physical
and biological features essential to the
conservation of the species in this
subunit may require special
management considerations or
protection to address threats from
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
nonnative plant species and activities
(such as unauthorized recreational use)
that occur in the vernal pool basins.
Please see the Special Management
Considerations or Protection section of
this rule for a discussion of the threats
to N. fossalis habitat and potential
management considerations.
Subunit 5H: Western Otay Mesa vernal
pool complexes
Subunit 5H is located within the Otay
Mesa Community planning area of the
City of San Diego. Subunit 5H consists
of approximately 139 ac (56 ha) that
includes 41 ac (17 ha) of land owned by
local governments and 98 ac (40 ha) of
private land. Subunit 5H and Subunit 5I
encompass the core habitat on Otay
Mesa. As core habitat, this subunit
contains a large area of habitat that
supports sizable occurrences of
Navarretia fossalis and provides
potential connectivity between
occurrences in Subunits 5G and 5I. This
subunit contains several mesa-top
vernal pool complexes on western Otay
Mesa (Bauder vernal pool complexes J
2N, J 2S, J 2W, J 4, J 13N, J 13S, J 14,
J 33, J 34 as in Appendix D of City of
San Diego, 2004). Subunit 5H contains
the physical and biological features that
are essential to the conservation of N.
fossalis, including ephemeral wetland
habitat (PCE 1), intermixed wetland and
upland habitats that act as the local
watershed (PCE 2), and the topography
and soils that support ponding during
winter and spring months (PCE 3). The
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
species in this subunit may require
special management considerations or
protection to address threats from
nonnative plant species and activities
(such as unauthorized recreational use
or residential and commercial
development) that occur in the vernal
pool basins. Please see the Special
Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to N. fossalis
habitat and potential management
considerations.
Subunit 5I: Eastern Otay Mesa vernal
pool complexes
Subunit 5I is located in the City of
San Diego. This subunit contains several
mesa top vernal pool complexes on
eastern Otay Mesa. Subunit 5I consists
of 221 ac (89 ha) of private land.
Subunit 5I and Subunit 5H encompass
the core habitat on Otay Mesa. As core
habitat, Subunit 5I contains a large area
of habitat that supports sizable
occurrences of Navarretia fossalis and
provides potential connectivity between
occurrences in Subunits 5B and 5H.
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
This subunit contains several mesa-top
vernal pool complexes on eastern Otay
Mesa (Bauder vernal pool complexes J
22, J 29, J 30, J 31N, J 31S as in
Appendix D of City of San Diego, 2004
and Service GIS). Subunit 5I contains
the physical and biological features that
are essential to the conservation of N.
fossalis, including ephemeral wetland
habitat (PCE 1), intermixed wetland and
upland habitats that act as the local
watershed (PCE 2), and the topography
and soils that support ponding during
winter and spring months (PCE 3). The
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
species in this subunit may require
special management considerations or
protection to address threats from
nonnative plant species and activities
(such as unauthorized recreational use
or residential and commercial
development) that occur in the vernal
pool basins. Please see the Special
Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to N. fossalis
habitat and potential management
considerations.
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
Unit 6: Riverside Management Area
Unit 6 is located in western Riverside
County and consists of three subunits
totaling 5,477 ac (2,217 ha). This unit
contains 1,504 ac (609 ha) of land
owned by the State of California’s
Department of Fish and Game and 3,973
ac (1,608 ha) of private land.
Subunit 6A: San Jacinto River
Subunit 6A is generally located along
the San Jacinto River near the cities of
Hemet and Perris in Riverside County.
This subunit is loosely bounded by
Mystic Lake on the northeast and by the
Perris Airport on the southwest. Subunit
6A consists of approximately 4,312 ac
(1,745 ha), including 1,504 ac (609 ha)
of land owned by State or local
governments and 2,808 ac (1,136 ha) of
private land. Subunit 6A encompasses
core habitat along the San Jacinto River.
As core habitat, this subunit contains a
large area of habitat that supports
sizable occurrences of Navarretia
fossalis and provides potential
connectivity between occurrences in
Subunits 6B and 6C. This subunit
consists of seasonally flooded alkali
vernal plains that occur along the San
Jacinto River. Subunit 6A contains the
physical and biological features that are
essential to the conservation of N.
fossalis, including ephemeral wetland
habitat (PCE 1), intermixed wetland and
upland habitats that act as the local
watershed (PCE 2), and the topography
and soils that support ponding during
winter and spring months (PCE 3). The
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
species in this subunit may require
special management considerations or
protection to address threats from
nonnative plant species and activities
(such as manure dumping or flood
control) that occur in the vernal pool
basins and associated watershed area.
Please see the Special Management
Considerations or Protection section of
this rule for a discussion of the threats
to N. fossalis habitat and potential
management considerations.
Subunit 6B: Salt Creek Seasonally
Flooded Alkali Plain
Subunit 6B is located near the City of
Hemet and west of the Hemet-Ryan
Airport in Riverside County. This
subunit is loosely bounded by
Devonshire Avenue on the north, the
boundary for the City of Hemet on the
east, train tracks on the south, and lowlying hills on the west. Subunit 6B
consists of 930 ac (376 ha) of private
land that encompasses the core habitat
along the Upper Salt Creek drainage
west of the City of Hemet. As core
habitat, this subunit contains a large
area of habitat that supports sizable
occurrences of Navarretia fossalis and
provides potential connectivity between
occurrences in Subunits 6A and 6C.
This subunit consists of seasonally
flooded alkali vernal plains not subject
to U.S. Army Corps of Engineer
jurisdiction. Subunit 6B contains the
physical and biological features that are
essential to the conservation of N.
fossalis, including ephemeral wetland
habitat (PCE 1), intermixed wetland and
upland habitats that act as the local
watershed (PCE 2), and the topography
and soils that support ponding during
winter and spring months (PCE 3). The
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
species in this subunit may require
special management considerations or
protection to address threats from
nonnative plant species and activities
(such as manure dumping, grazing,
flood control, or discing for vegetation
control) that occur in the vernal pool
basins and associated watershed area.
Please see the Special Management
Considerations or Protection section of
this rule for a discussion of the threats
to N. fossalis habitat and potential
management considerations.
Subunit 6C: Wickerd and Scott Road
Pools
Subunit 6C is located in the City of
Menifee in Riverside County, California.
This subunit is loosely bounded by low
lying hills north of Garbani Road on the
north, Briggs Road on the east, Scott
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
62211
Road on the south, and Menifee Road on
the west. Subunit 6C consists of 235 ac
(95 ha) of private land. This subunit
meets our selection criteria as satellite
habitat because this location supports a
stable occurrence of Navarretia fossalis
and provides potential connectivity
among occurrences of N. fossalis in
Subunits 6A, 6B, and with Subunit 6D
that we are excluding under section
4(b)(2) of the Act (see Application
Section 4(b)(2) of the Action section).
This subunit consists of two large vernal
pools. Subunit 6C contains the physical
and biological features that are essential
to the conservation of N. fossalis,
including ephemeral wetland habitat
(PCE 1), intermixed wetland and upland
habitats that act as the local watershed
(PCE 2), and the topography and soils
that support ponding during winter and
spring months (PCE 3). The physical
and biological features essential to the
conservation of the species in this
subunit may require special
management considerations or
protection to address threats from
nonnative plant species and activities
(such as manure dumping, residential or
agricultural development, discing for
vegetation control, or maintenance of
existing pipelines) that occur in the
vernal pool basins and associated
watershed area. Please see the Special
Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to N. fossalis
habitat and potential management
considerations.
Effects of Critical Habitat Designation
Section 7 Consultation
Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires
Federal agencies, including the Service,
to ensure that actions they fund,
authorize, or carry out are not likely to
destroy or adversely modify critical
habitat. Decisions by the Fifth and
Ninth Circuit Courts of Appeals have
invalidated our 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 et al., 245 F.3d 434,
442F (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 statutory 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 remain functional
(or retain those physical and biological
features that relate to the ability of the
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
62212
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
area to periodically support the species)
to serve its intended conservation role
for the species (Service 2004a, p. 3).
If a species is listed or critical habitat
is designated, section 7(a)(2) of the Act
requires Federal agencies to ensure that
activities they authorize, fund, or carry
out are not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of the species or to
destroy or adversely modify its critical
habitat. 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. As a result of this 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 designated critical habitat; or
(2) A biological opinion for Federal
actions that are likely to adversely affect
listed species or designated critical
habitat.
When we issue a biological opinion
concluding that a project is likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of a
listed species or destroy or adversely
modify critical habitat, we also provide
reasonable and prudent alternatives to
the project, if any are identifiable. 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 jeopardizing the continued
existence of the listed species or
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 may need to request
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
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.
Federal activities that may affect
Navarretia fossalis or its designated
critical habitat require section 7
consultation under the Act. Activities
on State, Tribal, local, or private lands
requiring a Federal permit (such as a
permit from the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) under section 404 of
the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et
seq.) or a permit from us under section
10 of the Act) or involving some other
Federal action (such as funding from the
Federal Highway Administration,
Federal Aviation Administration, or the
Federal Emergency Management
Agency) are subject to the section 7
consultation process. Federal actions
not affecting listed species or critical
habitat, and actions on State, Tribal,
local, or private lands that are not
federally funded, authorized, or
permitted, do not require section 7
consultations.
Application of the ‘‘Adverse
Modification’’ Standard
The key factor related to the adverse
modification determination is whether,
with implementation of the proposed
Federal action, the affected critical
habitat would remain functional to
serve its intended conservation role for
the species. Activities that may destroy
or adversely modify critical habitat are
those that alter the physical and
biological features to an extent that
appreciably reduces the conservation
value of critical habitat for Navarretia
fossalis. As discussed above, the role of
critical habitat is to support the life
history needs of the species and provide
for the conservation of the species. For
N. fossalis, this includes supporting
viable occurrences and recovery of the
species in core habitat areas and
satellite habitat areas.
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, when carried out,
funded, or authorized by a Federal
agency, may affect critical habitat and,
therefore, should result in consultation
for Navarretia fossalis include, but are
not limited to (please see Special
Management Considerations or
Protection section for a more detailed
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
discussion on the impacts of these
actions to the listed species):
(1) Actions that would impact the
ability of an ephemeral wetland to
continue to provide habitat for
Navarretia fossalis and other native
species that require this specialized
habitat type. Such activities could
include, but are not limited to, water
impoundment, stream channelization,
water diversion, water withdrawal, and
development activities. These activities
could alter the biological and physical
features essential to the conservation of
N. fossalis that provide the appropriate
habitat for the species by eliminating
ponding habitat; changing the duration
and frequency of the ponding events on
which this species relies; making the
habitat too wet, thus allowing obligate
wetland species to become established;
making the habitat too dry, thus
allowing upland species to become
established; causing large amounts of
sediment or manure to be deposited in
N. fossalis habitat; or causing increased
erosion and incising of waterways.
(2) Actions that would impact the soil
and topography that cause water to
pond during the winter and spring
months. Such activities could include,
but are not limited to, deep ripping of
soils, trenching, soil compaction, and
development activities. These activities
could alter the biological and physical
features essential to the conservation of
Navarretia fossalis that provide the
appropriate habitat for the species by
eliminating ponding habitat, impacting
the impervious nature of the soil layer,
or making the soil so impervious that
water pools for an extended period that
is detrimental to N. fossalis (as
described in the PCEs).
Exemptions
Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the Act
The Sikes Act Improvement Act of
1997 (Sikes Act) (16 U.S.C. 670a)
required each military installation that
includes land and water suitable for the
conservation and management of
natural resources to complete an
integrated natural resources
management plan (INRMP) by
November 17, 2001. An INRMP
integrates implementation of the
military mission of the installation with
stewardship of the natural resources
found on the base. Each INRMP
includes:
(1) An assessment of the ecological
needs on the installation, including the
need to provide for the conservation of
listed species;
(2) A statement of goals and priorities;
(3) A detailed description of
management actions to be implemented
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
to provide for these ecological needs;
and
(4) A monitoring and adaptive
management plan.
Among other things, each INRMP
must, to the extent appropriate and
applicable, provide for fish and wildlife
management; fish and wildlife habitat
enhancement or modification; wetland
protection, enhancement, and
restoration where necessary to support
fish and wildlife; and enforcement of
applicable natural resource laws.
The National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Pub. L. 108136) amended the Act to limit areas
eligible for designation as critical
habitat. Specifically, section 4(a)(3)(B)(i)
of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(B)(i))
now provides: ‘‘The Secretary shall not
designate as critical habitat any lands or
other geographical areas owned or
controlled by the Department of
Defense, or designated for its use, that
are subject to an integrated natural
resources management plan 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.’’
We consult with the military on the
development and implementation of
INRMPs for installations with federally
listed species. Any INRMPs developed
by military installations located within
the range of Navarretia fossalis and that
contain those features essential to the
species’ conservation were analyzed for
exemption under the authority of
section 4(a)(3)(B) of the Act.
Both MCB Camp Pendleton and
MCAS Miramar have approved INRMPs
that address Navarretia fossalis, and the
Marine Corps (on both installations) has
committed to work closely with us,
California Department of Fish and Game
(CDFG), and California Department of
Parks and Recreation to continually
refine the existing INRMPs as part of the
Sikes Act’s INRMP review process. In
accordance with section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of
the Act, we determined that
conservation efforts identified in the
INRMPs will provide a benefit to N.
fossalis occurring in habitats within or
adjacent to MCB Camp Pendleton and
MCAS Miramar (see the following
sections that detail this determination
for each installation). Therefore, 213 ac
(86 ha) of habitat on MCB Camp
Pendleton and MCAS Miramar are
exempt from this revised critical habitat
for N. fossalis under section 4(a)(3) of
the Act.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton
(MCB Camp Pendleton)
In the previous final critical habitat
designation for Navarretia fossalis (70
FR 60658; October 18, 2005) and the
proposed revised critical habitat
designation (74 FR 27588; June 10,
2009), we exempted MCB Camp
Pendleton from the designation of
critical habitat. We based this decision
on the conservation benefits to N.
fossalis identified in the INRMP
developed by MCB Camp Pendleton in
November 2001 and the updated INRMP
that was prepared by MCB Camp
Pendleton in March 2007 (Marine Corp
Base Camp Pendleton 2007). We
determined that conservation efforts
identified in the INRMP provide a
benefit to the occurrences of N. fossalis
and vernal pool habitat occurring on
MCB Camp Pendleton (Marine Corps
Base Camp Pendleton 2007, Section 4,
pp. 51–76). This conservation protects
the 145 ac (59 ha) of habitat that we
believe to be essential for the
conservation of N. fossalis on Stuart
Mesa and near the Wire Mountain
Housing Complex. Therefore, lands
containing features essential to the
conservation of N. fossalis on this
installation are exempt from this revised
critical habitat for N. fossalis under
section 4(a)(3) of the Act. For more
information on the conservation benefits
afforded to N. fossalis at MCB Camp
Pendleton, please see the Exemptions
Under Section 4(a)(3) of the Act section
in the proposed revised critical habitat
rule (74 FR 27610).
Marine Corps Air Station Miramar
(MCAS Miramar)
In the previous final critical habitat
designation for Navarretia fossalis (70
FR 60658; October 18, 2005) and the
proposed revised critical habitat
designation (74 FR 27588; June 10,
2009), we exempted MCAS Miramar
from the designation of critical habitat
(70 FR 60658; October 18, 2005). We
based this decision on the conservation
benefits to N. fossalis identified in the
INRMP developed by MCAS Miramar in
May 2000 and the updated INRMP
prepared by MCAS Miramar in October
2006 (Gene Stout and Associates et al.
2006). We determined that conservation
efforts identified in the INRMP provide
a benefit to the occurrences of N.
fossalis and vernal pool habitat on the
69 ac (28 ha) of habitat on the western
portion of MCAS Miramar (Gene Stout
and Associates et al. 2006, Section 7,
pp. 17–23). Therefore, lands containing
features essential to the conservation of
N. fossalis on this installation are
exempt from the revised critical habitat
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
62213
for N. fossalis under section 4(a)(3) of
the Act. For more information on the
conservation benefits afforded to N.
fossalis at MCAS Miramar, please see
the Exemptions Under Section 4(a)(3) of
the Act section in the proposed revised
critical habitat rule (74 FR 27610).
Exclusions
Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states that
the Secretary must designate and revise
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 he
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 legislative history is clear that the
Secretary has broad discretion regarding
which factor(s) to use and how much
weight to give to any factor.
In the following paragraphs, we
address a number of general issues that
are relevant to our analysis under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we
may exclude an area from designated
critical habitat based on economic
impacts, national security impacts, or
any other relevant impacts. In
considering whether to exclude a
particular area from the designation, we
must identify the benefits of including
the area in the designation, identify the
benefits of excluding the area from the
designation, and determine whether the
benefits of exclusion outweigh the
benefits of inclusion. If based on this
analysis, we make this determination,
then we can exclude the area only if
such exclusion would not result in the
extinction of the species.
When considering the benefits of
inclusion for an area, we consider the
additional regulatory benefits that area
would receive from the protection from
adverse modification or destruction as a
result of actions with a Federal nexus;
the educational benefits of mapping
essential habitat for recovery of the
listed species; and any benefits that may
result from a designation due to State or
Federal laws that may apply to critical
habitat.
When considering the benefits of
exclusion, we consider, among other
things, whether exclusion of a specific
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
62214
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
area is likely to result in long–term
conservation; the continuation,
strengthening, or encouragement of
partnerships that result in conservation
of listed species; or implementation of
a management plan that provides equal
to or more conservation than a critical
habitat designation would provide.
Specifically, when evaluating a
conservation plan we consider, among
other factors: whether the plan is
finalized; how it provides for the
conservation of the essential physical
and biological features; whether the
conservation management strategies and
actions contained in a management plan
are in place and there is a strong
likelihood they will be implemented
into the future; whether the
conservation strategies in the plan are
likely to be effective; and whether the
plan contains a monitoring program or
adaptive management to ensure that the
conservation measures are effective and
can be adapted in the future in response
to new information.
After evaluating the benefits of
inclusion and the benefits of exclusion,
we carefully weigh the two sides to
determine whether the benefits of
exclusion outweigh those of inclusion.
If we determine that they do, we then
determine whether exclusion would
result in extinction. If exclusion of an
area from critical habitat will result in
extinction, we will not exclude it from
the designation.
In the case of Navarretia fossalis, the
revised critical habitat designation does
not include any Tribal lands or trust
resources. However, this revised critical
habitat designation does include some
lands covered by three completed HCPs
for N. fossalis. No new HCP or
conservation plan covering the
distribution of this species has been
approved since the proposed revised
designation that published in the
Federal Register on June 10, 2009 (74
FR 27588).
Based on the information provided by
entities seeking exclusion, as well as
other comments we received, we
evaluated whether certain lands in the
proposed critical habitat Units 3 and 6
were appropriate for exclusion from this
final designation.
After considering the following areas
under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we are
excluding them from the critical habitat
designation for Navarretia fossalis:
Subunit 3A within the County of San
Diego Subarea Plan under the MSCP,
and Subunits 6D and 6E within the
Western Riverside County MSHCP (see
Table 5 below). As described in the
following exclusion analyses for the two
HCPs, we made this determination
because we believe that:
(1) Their value for N. fossalis
conservation will be preserved for the
foreseeable future by existing protective
actions, and
(2) They are appropriate for exclusion
under the ‘‘other relevant factor’’
provisions of section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
TABLE 5. AREAS BEING EXCLUDED UNDER SECTION 4(B)(2) OF THE ACT FROM THIS REVISED CRITICAL HABITAT
DESIGNATION.
Subunit
Area excluded
County of San Diego Subarea Plan under the San Diego MSCP
3A. Santa Fe Valley: Crosby Estates
5 ac (2 ha)
Subtotal County of San Diego Subarea Plan under the San Diego MSCP
5 ac (2 ha)
Western Riverside County MSHCP
6D. Skunk Hollow
158 ac (64 ha)
6E. Mesa de Burro
708 ac (287 ha)
Subtotal for Western Riverside County MSHCP
866 ac (351 ha)
Total
871 ac (353 ha)*
*Values in this table may not sum due to rounding.
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
Exclusions Based on Other Relevant
Factors Habitat Conservation Plans
4(b)(2) of the Act, as described in detail
below.
We believe that the benefits of
excluding from critical habitat portions
of the essential habitat we identified
within the County of San Diego Subarea
Plan under the MSCP and the Western
Riverside County MSHCP outweigh the
benefits of including these areas;
therefore, we are excluding these areas
from this revised critical habitat
designation. Lands covered by the
Carlsbad HMP under the MHCP, and
portions of the lands covered by the
County of San Diego Subarea Plan under
the MSCP, and the Western Riverside
County MSHCP do not result in the
benefits of exclusion outweighing the
benefits of inclusion under section
Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan
(HMP)— San Diego Multiple Habitat
Conservation Program (MHCP).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
We considered exclusion of a portion
of essential habitat covered by the
Carlsbad HMP under the MHCP for
exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the
Act. The lands that were under
consideration for exclusion within the
City of Carlsbad include a portion of one
vernal pool complex located east of the
railroad tracks at the Poinsettia Lane
Commuter Station. The vernal pool
complex is partially on land that is
covered by the Carlsbad HMP (i.e., the
3 ac (1 ha) considered for exclusion
under section 4(b)(2) of the Act) and
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
partially on land that is owned by the
North County Transportation District (6
ac (2 ha)), which is not a participating
entity to the Carlsbad HMP and was not
considered for exclusion. We
determined that the benefits of
inclusion for 3 ac (1 ha) of Unit 2 lands
within the Carlsbad HMP area are
greater than the benefits of exclusion. In
making our final decision with regard to
these HMP–covered lands, we
considered several factors, including
our relationship with the City of
Carlsbad, our relationship with other
MHCP stakeholders, existing
consultations, conservation measures in
place on these lands that benefit
Navarretia fossalis, implementation of
long–term management strategies, and
impacts to current and future
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
partnerships. We recognize N. fossalis
conservation measures outlined in the
Carlsbad HMP will be implemented
eventually on covered lands as the plan
is carried out regardless of critical
habitat designation. This vernal pool
complex in Unit 2 is also benefiting
from conservation efforts as a result of
actions associated with four other
federally listed vernal pool species (i.e.,
San Diego fairy shrimp (Branchinecta
sandiegonensis) and its designated
critical habitat, and Riverside fairy
shrimp (Streptocephalus woottoni) and
its designated critical habitat, and
Eryngium aristulatum var. parishii (San
Diego button–celery), and Orcuttia
californica (California Orcutt grass)).
However, the 3 ac (1 ha) portion
considered for exclusion under section
4(b)(2) of the Act is not conserved and
managed for the long–term protection of
the species and its habitat at this time.
Once this area is conserved and
managed, it will help with the long–
term protection of this vernal pool
complex, not only for N. fossalis, but
also the four other federally endangered
vernal pool species that already receive
protection under the plan.
Protection of this vernal pool area is
particularly important considering the
surrounding area has already been
developed. Conservation measures for
lands within the Carlsbad HMP are
outlined in the Carlsbad HMP biological
opinion (Service 2004c, pp. 312–316).
We recognize that these lands have been
avoided by development associated
with the Water’s End housing project
and have been identified as open space
for the protection of the vernal pool
habitat, as outlined in a consultation
conducted with the Corps (Service
1994) prior to the development of the
Carlsbad HMP. The developer of the
Water’s End project agreed to grant a
conservation easement over the
Navarretia fossalis habitat to CDFG and
provide a management plan with an
endowment ($100,000) to the City of
Carlsbad for management and
monitoring in perpetuity. Additionally,
the land–owners recently completed a
5–year restoration of the upland portion
of the vernal pool complex with coastal
sage scrub vegetation (City of Carlsbad
2009, p. 7). However, a conservation
easement has not yet been placed over
the property and long–term
management of the property is not yet
in place. Thus, we made the
determination that the benefits of
inclusion outweigh the benefits of
exclusion and have included all lands
in this area (i.e., 9 ac (4 ha in Unit 2))
as critical habitat for N. fossalis. We
recognize and appreciate the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
conservation actions taken to date at
this location, such as the $100,000
provided by the Water’s End project
along with an additional $50,000 from
the North Coast Transit District that are
being held by CDFG and will be used to
develop and implement long–term
management to benefit vernal pool
species occurring at this site, including
N. fossalis. We look forward to working
with the North Coast Transit District
and CDFG in the near future to ensure
that both conservation and long–term
management are implemented for N.
fossalis and its essential habitat at this
location.
San Diego Multiple Species
Conservation Program (MSCP)—County
of San Diego Subarea Plan.
We determined approximately 86 ac
(35 ha) of habitat in Subunits 3A, 5B,
5F, and 5I within the County of San
Diego Subarea Plan of the MSCP contain
the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of
Navarretia fossalis that may require
special management considerations or
protection and therefore, these lands
meet the definition of critical habitat
under the Act. In making our final
decision with regard to lands within the
County of San Diego Subarea Plan, we
considered several factors, including
our relationship with the participating
MSCP jurisdiction, our relationship
with other MSCP stakeholders, non–
covered activities, existing
consultations, long–term conservation
measures management in place on these
lands that benefit N. fossalis, and
impacts to current and future
partnerships. We recognize N. fossalis
conservation measures outlined in the
County of San Diego Subarea Plan will
be implemented as the plan is carried
out regardless of whether covered areas
are designated as critical habitat. Under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we are
excluding 5 ac (2 ha) of land in Subunit
3A covered by the County of San Diego
Subarea Plan from this revised critical
habitat designation that are currently
assured of long–term conservation and
management. The remaining 81 ac (33
ha) of land in Subunits 5B, 5F, and 5I
covered by the County of San Diego
Subarea Plan are not excluded, and we
have designated these areas as critical
habitat for N. fossalis.
The MSCP is a subregional HCP made
up of several subarea plans that has
been in place for more than a decade.
The subregional plan area encompasses
approximately 582,243 ac (235,626 ha)
(County of San Diego 1997, p. 1–1;
MSCP 1998, pp. 2–1, and 4–2 to 4–4)
and provides for conservation of 85
federally listed and sensitive species
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
62215
(‘‘covered species’’) through the
establishment and management of
approximately 171,920 ac (69,574 ha) of
preserve lands within the Multi–Habitat
Planning Area (MHPA) (City of San
Diego) and Pre–Approved Mitigation
Areas (PAMA) (County of San Diego).
The MSCP was developed in support of
applications for incidental take permits
for several federally listed species by 12
participating jurisdictions and many
other stakeholders in southwestern San
Diego County. Under the umbrella of the
MSCP, each of the 12 participating
jurisdictions is required to prepare a
subarea plan that implements the goals
of the MSCP within that particular
jurisdiction. Navarretia fossalis was
evaluated in the subregional plan as
well as the permitted subarea plans.
Upon completion of the plan that
identifies where mitigation activities
should be focused, approximately
171,920 ac (69,574 ha) of the 582,243 ac
(235,626 ha) MSCP plan area will be
preserved (MSCP 1998, pp. 2–1 and 4–
2 to 4–4). San Diego County Subarea
Plan identifies areas where mitigation
activities should be focused to assemble
its preserve areas (i.e., PAMA). Those
areas of the MSCP preserve that are
already conserved, as well as those areas
that are designated for inclusion in the
preserve under the plan, are referred to
as the ‘‘preserve area’’ in this revised
critical habitat designation. When the
preserve is completed, the public sector
(i.e., Federal, State, and local
governments, and general public) will
have contributed 108,750 ac (44,010 ha)
(63.3 percent) to the preserve, of which
81,750 ac (33,083 ha) (48 percent) was
existing public land when the MSCP
was established and 27,000 ac (10,927
ha) (16 percent) will have been
acquired. At completion, the private
sector will have contributed 63,170 ac
(25,564 ha) (37 percent) to the preserve
as part of the development process,
either through avoidance of impacts or
as compensatory mitigation for impacts
to biological resources outside the
preserve. Currently and in the future,
Federal and State governments, local
jurisdictions, special districts, and
managers of privately owned lands will
manage and monitor their lands in the
preserve for species and habitat
protection (MSCP 1998, pp. 2–1 and 4–
2 to 4–4).
We considered excluding lands
within the County of San Diego Subarea
Plan. After reviewing the areas covered
by the County of San Diego Subarea
Plan, we are excluding approximately 5
ac (2 ha) in Subunit 3A that are
currently conserved and managed. The
areas within the plan boundaries of the
County of San Diego Subarea Plan in
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
62216
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
Subunits 5B, 5F, and 5I were not
excluded because we do not believe that
the benefits of exclusion outweigh the
benefits of inclusion at this time. The
lands in these subunits are not currently
conserved under this HCP, and non–
covered activities (such as illegal OHV
use) that could adversely affect
Navarretia fossalis and its essential
habitat are occurring on these lands.
Therefore, we believe the conservation
benefit of including these areas as
critical habitat for N. fossalis may be
significant. Additionally, portions of
Subunits 5B and 5I are designated as
major/minor Amendment Areas under
the subarea plan and their conservation
depends upon the approval of future
amendments to the plan. Therefore, we
did not consider these major/minor
amendment areas for exclusion under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
The County of San Diego Subarea
Plan provides additional conservation
for the Navarretia fossalis habitat in
Subunit 3A (Crosby Estates) beyond
what occurred when the area was
initially developed and conserved (i.e.,
in 1995 prior to the Subarea Plan
development). Subunit 3A consists of 5
ac (2 ha) of private land within the
northern portion of the County of San
Diego Subarea Plan. This area was set
aside in 1995 when the surrounding
area was developed, and the vernal pool
habitat area was restored and managed
for a 5–year period to ensure the
conservation of N. fossalis and other
vernal pool species. Under the County
of San Diego Subarea Plan, the area will
continue to receive periodic monitoring
beyond the initial 5–year period. The
long–term management requirements
applicable for this area are explained in
the ‘‘The Crosby at Rancho Santa Fe,
Habitat Management Plan, Annual
Report, 2008’’ (Rincon Consultants, Inc.
2008, pp. 1–6). Such management will
include monitoring and management of
invasive species, implementing erosion
control measures, monitoring and
removal of trash/debris, creating natural
fencing barriers to address unauthorized
off–trail activity, installing signage, and
developing educational website and
materials (Rincon Consultants, Inc.
2008, pp. 4–15).
Benefits of Inclusion—County of San
Diego Subarea Plan
The principle benefit of including an
area in a critical habitat designation is
the requirement of Federal agencies to
ensure actions they fund, authorize, or
carry out are not likely to result in the
destruction or adverse modification of
any designated critical habitat, the
regulatory standard of section 7 of the
Act under which consultation is
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
completed. Federal agencies must
consult with the Service on actions that
may affect critical habitat and must
avoid destroying or adversely modifying
critical habitat. Federal agencies must
also consult with us on actions that may
affect a listed species and refrain from
undertaking actions that are likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of
such species. The analysis of effects to
critical habitat is a separate and
different analysis from that of the effects
to the species. Therefore, the difference
in outcomes of these two analyses
represents the regulatory benefit of
critical habitat. For some species
(including Navarretia fossalis), and in
some locations, the outcome of these
analyses will be similar, because effects
to habitat will often also result in effects
to the species. However, the regulatory
standard is different, as the jeopardy
analysis investigates the action’s impact
to survival and recovery of the species,
while the adverse modification analysis
investigates the action’s effects to the
designated habitat’s contribution to
conservation. This will, in many
instances, lead to different results and
different regulatory requirements. Thus,
critical habitat designations may
provide greater benefits to the recovery
of a species than would listing alone.
Critical habitat may provide a
regulatory benefit for Navarretia fossalis
when there is a Federal nexus present
for a project that might adversely
modify critical habitat. Also, where
federally listed animal species, such as
the Riverside fairy shrimp or San Diego
fairy shrimp co–occur with N. fossalis
and are likely to be taken by a proposed
action that otherwise lacks a Federal
nexus, the project proponent would be
required to obtain an incidental take
permit under section 10 of the Act, thus
resulting an intra–Service section 7
consultation that would also include N.
fossalis. In the areas that we considered
for exclusion within the County of San
Diego Subarea Plan, Riverside fairy
shrimp or San Diego fairy shrimp are
present in Subunits 3A, 5F, and 5I. In
this context, we anticipate that projects
that meet the definition of critical
habitat within Subunits 3A, 5F, and 5I
will require a consultation with the
Service regardless of whether critical
habitat is designated. It is possible that
in Subunit 5B (where no federally listed
fairy shrimp are known to exist) the
designation of critical habitat will result
in an increase in the likelihood that
consultations with the Service will
occur. It is also possible that the number
of consultations that occur in the local
watershed areas of Subunits 5F and 5I
would increase by approximately 20
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
percent as a result of critical habitat
designation for N. fossalis within the
non–ponded/watershed areas (Service
2009, p. 2). Therefore, for Subunit 5B
and to a certain extent Subunits 5F and
5I, it is probable that conservation
achieved under the Act would increase
if the areas are designated as critical
habitat for N. fossalis, resulting in a
small regulatory benefit associated with
the designation of critical habitat in
these subunits.
When consulting under section 7 of
the Act in designated critical habitat, we
conduct independent analyses for
jeopardy and adverse modification.
However, with regard to vernal pool
species such as Navarretia fossalis, the
outcomes of those analyses (in terms of
potential restrictions on development)
are almost always the same. In general,
a properly functioning hydrologic
regime is critical to sustain listed vernal
pool species and their immediate vernal
pool habitat (i.e., local watershed).
Avoidance or adequate minimization of
impacts to the wetland area and its
associated watershed (which
collectively creates the hydrologic
regime necessary to support N. fossalis)
is important not only to enable the
critical habitat unit to carry out its
conservation function (i.e., to avoid
adverse modification), but also to avoid
jeopardy to the listed species.
Navarretia fossalis is completely
dependent on a properly functioning
vernal pool system for its survival;
therefore, it is not possible to
differentiate conservation measures
needed to avoid adverse modification of
critical habitat from those needed to
avoid jeopardy to the species. Impacts to
both wetland features where N. fossalis
occurs and to the associated local
watershed necessary to maintain those
wetland features should generally be
avoided to prevent jeopardy to N.
fossalis or to prevent adverse
modification to N. fossalis critical
habitat. Service biologists regularly
negotiate with project proponents to
avoid impacts to vernal pool and
ephemeral wetland habitat. Whenever
possible; these negotiations include
conservation measures that would avoid
impacts to both the pools and the
associated local watershed area.
Therefore, we do not believe
conservation achieved under the Act
would differ greatly whether or not the
areas are designated as critical habitat
for N. fossalis. However, while the
outcome of individual section 7
consultation may not differ, we believe
designation of lands in Subunits 5B, 5F,
and 5I as critical habitat may provide a
small regulatory benefit by increasing
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
the likelihood and number of
consultations in these areas and thereby
increase the overall level of
conservation for N. fossalis.
Another possible benefit of including
lands in a critical habitat designation is
the educational value of the designation
to landowners and the public regarding
the potential conservation value of an
area. For example, a critical habitat
designation for Navarretia fossalis may
help local governments or the public
focus conservation efforts on areas of
high conservation value for this species.
Past efforts have highlighted the
importance of the essential habitat for
N. fossalis within the jurisdiction of the
County of San Diego Subarea Plan.
These past efforts include public
meetings and opportunities for public
comment that occurred during the
process of creating the HCP, the
development of the Habitat Management
Plan for the Crosby at Rancho Santa Fe,
and development of our Recovery Plan
for Southern California Vernal Pool
Species (Service 1998). While these
efforts have helped to identify important
conservation areas for N. fossalis in the
County of San Diego Subarea Plan, some
of these areas (i.e., Subunits 5B, 5F, and
5I) still suffer impacts from activities
such as grazing on non–agricultural
lands (an activity covered by the plan),
and illegal off–highway vehicle (OHV)
use. By designating critical habitat in
these areas that continue to receive
impacts, we will better educate the
public regarding these and other threats
to N. fossalis and the physical and
biological features essential to the
conservation of the species. The
educational information provided in
this revised rule and the 2005 final rule
(70 FR 60658; October 18, 2005) can be
used by the public to learn about N.
fossalis priority conservation areas. The
inclusion in revised critical habitat of
the approximately 81 ac (33 ha) of lands
in subunits 5B, 5F, and 5I that are not
currently protected and managed would
formally identify these areas as essential
for the conservation and recovery of N.
fossalis and in doing so provide a
significant educational benefit to the
conservation of N. fossalis. In contrast,
we believe the educational benefit of
designating Subunit 3A would be
insignificant because this area is already
conserved.
We considered that the designation of
critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis
may strengthen or reinforce some of the
provisions in other State and Federal
laws, such as the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) or
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA). These laws analyze the
potential for projects to significantly
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
affect aspects of the environment. In this
case for N. fossalis, vernal pools and
vernal pool species have been a focus of
conservation in San Diego County for
more than 20 years and have been
addressed in CEQA and NEPA
throughout this time period; therefore,
we do not believe designation of critical
habitat for N. fossalis will provide a
significant additional benefit to analyses
conducted under these laws.
In summary, we believe designating
Subunits 3A, 5B, 5F, and 5I as revised
critical habitat may provide some
regulatory benefits under section 7 of
the Act, particularly in Subunits 5B, 5F,
and 5I, where designation may increase
the likelihood and number of
consultations and thus the overall level
of conservation for this species and its
essential habitat, but we do not believe
that the outcome of these consultations
will change greatly with the designation
of critical habitat. Additionally, we
believe that there may be a significant
benefit associated with the designation
of critical habitat due to the educational
component provided by critical habitat
in areas that are not currently
conserved; specifically, we believe that
these benefits are significant in Subunits
5B, 5F, and 5I.
Benefits of Exclusion—County of San
Diego Subarea Plan
We believe significant benefits would
be realized by forgoing designation of
critical habitat on lands covered by the
County of San Diego Subarea Plan
including:
(1) Continuance and strengthening of
our effective working relationships with
all MSCP jurisdictions and stakeholders
to promote conservation of Navarretia
fossalis and its habitat;
(2) Allowance for continued
meaningful collaboration and
cooperation in working toward
recovering this species, including
conservation benefits that might not
otherwise occur;
(3) Encouragement for other
jurisdictions to complete subarea plans
under the MSCP (including the City of
Santee); and
(4) Encouragement of additional HCP
and other conservation plan
development in the future on other
private lands for this and other federally
listed and sensitive species.
The County of San Diego Subarea
Plan provides substantial protection and
management for Navarretia fossalis and
the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
species, and addresses conservation
issues from a coordinated, integrated
perspective rather than a piecemeal,
project–by–project approach (as would
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
62217
occur under sections 7 and 9 of the Act).
Many landowners perceive critical
habitat as an unfair and unnecessary
regulatory burden given the expense
and time involved in developing and
implementing complex regional and
jurisdiction–wide HCPs, such as the
MSCP. Exclusion of these lands from
critical habitat could help preserve the
partnerships we developed with the
County of San Diego in the development
of the MSCP and County of San Diego
Subarea Plan, and foster future
partnerships and development of future
HCPs.
The primary benefit of excluding
lands owned by or under the
jurisdiction of the County of San Diego
Subarea Plan permittees from critical
habitat under the MSCP is strengthening
of our existing partnership with the
County of San Diego. The County of San
Diego requested that we exclude lands
covered by their subarea plan during the
public comment period. If the County of
San Diego believes that a revised critical
habitat designation will impact its
ability to implement their subarea plan,
then designating County of San Diego
lands may affect our partnership with
them.
In summary, we believe that
excluding lands covered by the County
of San Diego Subarea Plan from critical
habitat provides the significant benefit
of maintaining existing regional HCP
partnerships and fostering new ones.
Weighing Benefits of Exclusion Against
Benefits of Inclusion—County of San
Diego Subarea Plan
We reviewed and evaluated the
benefits of inclusion and benefits of
exclusion for all lands within the
County of San Diego Subarea Plan under
the MSCP proposed as critical habitat
for Navarretia fossalis. The benefits of
including lands currently conserved
under the MSCP in the critical habitat
designation are small. All of the
approximately 5 ac (2 ha) of land in
Subunit 3A are already conserved and
managed for the preservation of vernal
pool species, including N. fossalis.
Therefore, designating this area as
critical habitat is unlikely to provide
significant regulatory or educational
benefits. This area is currently being
managed under a habitat management
plan developed in part because the area
is covered by the County of San Diego
Subarea Plan. The exclusion of
conserved areas of Subunit 3A will
benefit the partnership that we have
with the County of San Diego and
encourage the conservation of lands
associated with the development and
implementation of future HCPs.
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
62218
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
Including lands in Subunits 5B, 5F,
and 5I in the critical habitat designation
for Navarretia fossalis that are not
currently conserved or protected from
activities such as illegal OHV use and
unregulated grazing in critical habitat
will provide additional regulatory
protection for N. fossalis and its
essential habitat under section 7(a) of
the Act when there is a Federal nexus,
and designation will act as an
educational tool for the public regarding
the conservation of N. fossalis.
Therefore, designating these areas as
critical habitat for N. fossalis is likely to
provide additional regulatory benefits as
well as a significant educational benefit
to the species. We believe that
excluding these areas under section
4(b)(2) of the Act would provide a
significant benefit to the partnership
that we have with the County of San
Diego, but we believe that the
conservation benefits of including these
lands as critical habitat outweighs the
benefit of exclusion.
In summary, we find that the benefits
of excluding lands in areas that are
conserved and managed for the purpose
of protecting Navarretia fossalis
(Subunit 3A) outweigh the benefits of
including those lands as critical habitat
for N. fossalis. We find that the benefits
of including lands that are being
impacted by activities covered under
the County of San Diego Subarea Plan
and are not yet conserved and managed
(Subunits 5B, 5F, and 5I) outweigh the
benefits of excluding those lands as
critical habitat for N. fossalis.
Exclusion Will Not Result in Extinction
of the Species—County of San Diego
Subarea Plan
We determined that the exclusion of
approximately 5 ac (2 ha) of habitat in
Subunit 3A within the County of San
Diego Subarea Plan from the revised
designation of critical habitat for
Navarretia fossalis will not result in
extinction of the species. The County of
San Diego Subarea Plan and ‘‘The
Crosby at Rancho Santa Fe Habitat
Management Plan’’ provide protection
and long–term management of lands
that meet the definition of critical
habitat for N. fossalis in Subunit 3A.
Additionally, the jeopardy standard of
section 7 of the Act for N. fossalis in
Subunit 3A provides assurances that the
species will not go extinct as a result of
exclusion from critical habitat
designation. The consultation
requirements of section 7(a)(2) and the
attendant requirement to avoid jeopardy
to N. fossalis for projects with a Federal
nexus will provide significant
protection to the species. Therefore,
based on the above discussion we are
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
excluding approximately 5 ac (2 ha) of
habitat in Subunit 3A within the County
of San Diego Subarea Plan from this
revised critical habitat designation.
Western Riverside County Multiple
Species Habitat Conservation Plan
(Western Riverside County MSHCP)
We determined that approximately
6,343 ac (2,567 ha) of land owned by or
under the jurisdiction of the permittees
of the Western Riverside County
MSHCP contain the physical and
biological features essential to the
conservation of Navarretia fossalis that
may require special management
considerations or protection, and
therefore, these lands meet the
definition of critical habitat under the
Act. In making our final decision with
regard to these lands, we considered
several factors including our
relationships with participating
jurisdictions, our relationships with
other stakeholders, existing
consultations, conservation measures
and management in place on these lands
that benefit N. fossalis, and impacts to
current and future partnerships. We
recognize N. fossalis conservation
measures outlined in the Western
Riverside County MSHCP will be
implemented as the plan is carried out
regardless if covered areas are
designated as revised critical habitat.
Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we are
excluding 866 ac (351 ha) of land
meeting the definition of critical habitat
owned by or under the jurisdiction of
the Western Riverside County MSHCP
permittees within Unit 6 (Subunits 6D
and 6E) from this revised critical habitat
designation. We are including 5,477 ac
(2,217 ha) of land that meets the
definition of critical habitat owned by or
under the jurisdiction of Western
Riverside County MSHCP permittees
within Unit 6 (Subunits 6A, 6B, and 6C)
in this revised critical habitat
designation. As described in our section
4(b)(2) analysis below, we reached this
determination in consideration of the
benefits associated with the designation
of each area in revised critical habitat
balanced against the benefits of
excluding the area in the final critical
habitat designation, including such
factors as (but not limited to) the
existence of co–occurring listed species
(such as the San Diego and Riverside
fairy shrimp species) resulting in
redundant conservation measures,
implementation of conservation
measures, and non–covered activities.
The Western Riverside County
MSHCP is a large–scale, multi–
jurisdictional HCP encompassing
approximately 1.26 million ac (510,000
ha) of land in western Riverside County.
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
The Western Riverside County MSHCP
addresses 146 listed and unlisted
‘‘covered species,’’ including Navarretia
fossalis. Participants in the Western
Riverside County MSHCP include 14
cities; the County of Riverside,
including the Riverside County Flood
Control and Water Conservation Agency
(County Flood Control), Riverside
County Transportation Commission,
Riverside County Parks and Open Space
District, and Riverside County Waste
Department; California Department of
Parks and Recreation; and the California
Department of Transportation. The
Western Riverside County MSHCP is a
multi–species conservation program
that minimizes and mitigates the
expected loss of habitat and associated
incidental take of covered species. On
June 22, 2004, the Service issued a
single incidental take permit (Service
2004b, TE–088609–0) under section
10(a)(1)(B) of the Act to 22 permittees
under the Western Riverside County
MSHCP for a period of 75 years.
The Western Riverside County
MSHCP will establish approximately
153,000 ac (61,917 ha) of new
conservation lands (Additional Reserve
Lands) to complement the approximate
347,000 ac (140,426 ha) of pre–existing
natural and open space areas (Public/
Quasi–Public (PQP) lands) in the plan
area. These PQP lands include those
under Federal ownership, primarily
managed by the United States Forest
Service (USFS) and Bureau of Land
Management (BLM), and also permittee–
owned or controlled open–space areas,
primarily managed by the State and
Riverside County. Collectively, the
Additional Reserve Lands and PQP
lands form the overall Western
Riverside County MSHCP Conservation
Area. The configuration of the 153,000
ac (61,916 ha) of Additional Reserve
Lands is not mapped or precisely
identified (‘‘hard–lined’’) in the Western
Riverside County MSHCP. Rather, it is
based on textual descriptions of habitat
conservation necessary to meet the
conservation goals for all covered
species within the bounds of the
approximately 310,000 ac (125,453 ha)
Criteria Area and is interpreted as
implementation of the Western
Riverside County MSHCP takes place.
Specific conservation objectives in the
Western Riverside County MSHCP for
Navarretia fossalis include providing
6,900 ac (2,792 ha) of occupied or
suitable habitat for the species in the
MSHCP Conservation Area. This acreage
goal can be attained through acquisition
or other dedications of land assembled
from within the Criteria Area (i.e., the
Additional Reserve Lands) or Narrow
Endemic Plan Species Survey Area and
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
through coordinated management of
existing PQP lands. We internally
mapped a ‘‘Conceptual Reserve Design,’’
which illustrates existing PQP lands and
predicts the geographic distribution of
the Additional Reserve Lands based on
our interpretation of the textual
descriptions of habitat conservation
necessary to meet conservation goals.
Our Conceptual Reserve Design was
intended to predict one possible future
configuration of the eventual
approximately 153,000 ac (61,916 ha) of
Additional Reserve Lands. The Western
Riverside County MSHCP states that at
least 6,900 ac (2,792 ha) of vernal pool
and playa habitat suitable for N. fossalis
within the San Jacinto River, Mystic
Lake, and Salt Creek areas will be
included within the MSHCP
Conservation Area (Service 2004b, p.
376; FWS–WRIV–870.19).
Preservation and management of
approximately 6,900 ac (2,792 ha) of
Navarretia fossalis habitat under the
Western Riverside County MSHCP will
contribute to the conservation and
ultimate recovery of this species.
Navarretia fossalis is threatened
primarily by agricultural activities,
development, manure dumping (Roberts
2009, pp. 2–14), and fuel modification
actions within the plan area (Service
2004b, pp. 369–378). The Western
Riverside County MSHCP will remove
and reduce threats to N. fossalis and the
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
species as the plan is implemented by
placing large blocks of occupied and
unoccupied habitat into preservation
throughout the Conservation Area.
Areas identified for preservation and
conservation include 13 of the known
locations of the species at Skunk
Hollow, the Santa Rosa Plateau, the San
Jacinto Wildlife Area, floodplains of the
San Jacinto River from the Ramona
Expressway to Railroad Canyon, and
upper Salt Creek west of Hemet.
The Western Riverside County
MSHCP Conservation Area will
maintain floodplain processes along the
San Jacinto River and along Salt Creek
to provide for the distribution of
Navarretia fossalis to shift over time as
hydrologic conditions and seed bank
sources change. Additionally, the
Western Riverside County MSHCP
requires surveys for N. fossalis as part
of the project review process for public
and private projects where suitable
habitat is present within a defined
narrow endemic species survey area (see
Narrow Endemic Species Survey Area
Map, Figure 6–1 of the Western
Riverside County MSHCP, Volume I, in
Dudek 2003). For locations with
positive survey results for N. fossalis, 90
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
percent of those portions of the property
that provide long–term conservation
value for the species will be avoided
until it is demonstrated that the
conservation objectives for the species
are met. Once the objectives are met,
avoided areas would be evaluated to
determine whether they should be
released for development or included in
the MSHCP Conservation Area (see
Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant
Species; Western Riverside County
MSHCP, Volume 1, section 6.1.3, in
Dudek and Associates, Inc. 2003).
The survey requirements, avoidance
and minimization measures, and
management for Navarretia fossalis and
its PCEs provided for in the Western
Riverside County MSHCP are expected
to benefit this species on public and
private lands covered by the plan. We
determined that approximately 6,343 ac
(2,567 ha) of private and permittee–
owned or controlled PQP lands in Unit
6 (Subunits 6A through 6E), within the
Western Riverside County MSHCP Plan
Area, meet the definition of critical
habitat for N. fossalis. Projects in areas
meeting the definition of critical habitat
for N. fossalis conducted or approved by
Western Riverside County MSHCP
permittees are subject to the
conservation requirements of the
MSHCP. For projects that may impact N.
fossalis, various HCP policies (i.e.,
Narrow Endemic Plant Species Policy,
and the Riparian/Riverine and Vernal
Pool Policy in Dudek and Associates,
Inc. 2003) provide additional
conservation requirements.
The Western Riverside County
MSHCP incorporates several processes
that allow for Service oversight and
participation in program
implementation. These processes
include:
(1) Consultation with the Service on
a long–term management and
monitoring plan;
(2) Submission of annual monitoring
reports;
(3) Annual status meetings with the
Service; and
(4) Submission of annual
implementation reports to the Service
(Service 2004b, pp. 9–10).
Below, we provide a brief analysis of
the lands in Unit 6 that we are
excluding under section 4(b)(2) of the
Act and lands we are including in the
revised critical habitat designation, and
how each area is covered by the Western
Riverside County MSHCP or other
conservation measures.
Two of the subunits, Subunit 6D
(Skunk Hollow) and Subunit 6E (Mesa
de Burro), consist of lands that are
managed and already in permanent
conservation. The majority of Subunit
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
62219
6D was conserved as a result of the
Rancho Bella Vista HCP (Rancho Bella
Vista 1999, p. 2; CNLM 2009a, p. 1) and
the remainder of the land in Subunit 6D
was conserved as a result of the
Assessment District 161 HCP (CNLM
2009b, p. 1), both HCPs of which were
incorporated into the larger, subregional
Western Riverside County MSHCP upon
its completion. In total, 100 percent of
the lands in Subunit 6D are conserved
and managed specifically for the
purpose of preserving the vernal pool
habitat. Subunit 6E is conserved as part
of the Santa Rosa Plateau Ecological
Reserve. This Reserve has four
landowners: the CDFG, the County of
Riverside, the Metropolitan Water
District of Southern California, and The
Nature Conservancy. The landowners
and the Service (which owns no land on
the Plateau) signed a cooperative
management agreement on April 16,
1991 (Dangermond and Associates, Inc.
1991), and meet regularly to implement
management of the Reserve (Riverside
County Parks 2009, p. 2). The vernal
pools within Subunit 6E are managed
and monitored to preserve the unique
vernal pool plants and animals that
occur on the Santa Rosa Plateau.
The other three units (Subunit 6A, 6B,
and 6C) are not conserved or managed
for Navarretia fossalis at this time;
however, as the Western Riverside
County MSHCP is implemented, we
believe that additional areas in these
subunits may be conserved. Subunit 6A
is 99 percent within the Narrow
Endemic Plant Species Survey Area
(NEPSSA), and Subunits 6B and 6C are
entirely within the NEPSSA. Therefore,
biological surveys for N. fossalis will
occur prior to development of any
suitable habitat within these subunits.
Furthermore, Subunits 6A and 6B have
additional protections in place either
from past conservation efforts (such as
the establishment of the San Jacinto
Wildlife Area and the Metropolitan
Water District Upper Salt Creek Wetland
Preserve), or through additional project
review requirements within the Criteria
Area (Joint Project/Acquisition Review
Process as described in the Western
Riverside County MSHCP (Service
2004b, pp. 23, 25; Western Riverside
County MSHCP, Volume 1, section 6.6.2
in Dudek and Associates, Inc. 2003, pp.
6–82–6–84)). We anticipate that these
areas will receive management that
would benefit N. fossalis at some point
in the near future; however, at this time
these areas do not receive active
management that would benefit N.
fossalis, as described further below.
A large portion of Subunit 6A (1,504
ac (609 ha), or approximately 35
percent) is within the San Jacinto
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
62220
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
Wildlife Area, a wildlife area owned
and operated by CDFG. This area
consists of restored wetlands that
provide habitat for waterfowl and
wading birds, and seasonally flooded
vernal plain habitat along the San
Jacinto River north of the Ramona
Expressway that supports Navarretia
fossalis. Though conserved from
development, the CDFG has not
implemented a management plan that is
beneficial to N. fossalis (E. Konno,
CDFG Biologist, pers. comm. 2010) . In
addition to the portion of Subunit 6A
owned by CDFG, 68 percent (2,919 ac
(1,181 ha)) of the remaining land is
within the Criteria Area. Projects in this
area will be implemented through the
Joint Project Review Process to ensure
that the requirements of the MSHCP
permit and the Implementing
Agreement are properly met (Western
Riverside County MSHCP, Volume 1,
section 6.6.2 in Dudek and Associates,
Inc. 2003, p. 6–82); however, these areas
are not currently conserved and
managed to benefit N. fossalis.
The majority of Subunit 6B is within
the Criteria Area (56 percent; 525 ac
(212 ha) out of a total 943 ac (382 ha))
and projects in this area will be
implemented through the Joint Project
Review Process. A portion of this
subunit is in the area referred to as West
Hemet, which is under the jurisdiction
of the City of Hemet. Although the West
Hemet area is not conserved, the City is
actively working on addressing issues
on sensitive vernal pool resources (such
as updating the general plan), and
recently implemented an ordinance
against manure dumping, which is a
threat to the species in this subunit (see
the Special Management
Considerations and Protection section).
Subunit 6C is not within the Criteria
Area for the Western Riverside County
MSHCP; however, impacts to the pools
in this subunit should be avoided,
minimized, or offset through
implementation of the Protection of
Species Associated with Riparian/
Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools
guidelines and NEPSSA guidelines. For
example, the NEPSSA guidelines
include protection measures that require
surveys in suitable habitat for narrow
endemic species in an attempt to find
areas that should be considered as
priorities for Western Riverside County
MSHCP Conservation Area acquisition
(Western Riverside County MSHCP,
Volume 1, section 6.0 in Dudek and
Associates, Inc. 2003). Additionally, for
populations identified in NEPSSA
surveys, impacts to 90 percent of those
portions of the property that provide for
long–term conservation value of the
identified Narrow Endemic Plant
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
Species shall be avoided until it is
demonstrated that Conservation goals
for the particular species are met
(Western Riverside County MSHCP,
Volume 1, section 6.1.3 in Dudek and
Associates, Inc. 2003, p. 6–39). The
Protection of Species Associated with
Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal
Pools guidelines require assessments of
potentially significant project effects as
required by CEQA (Western Riverside
County MSHCP, Volume 1, section 6.1.2
in Dudek and Associates, Inc. 2003, p.
6–20).
The Benefits of Inclusion—Western
Riverside County MSHCP
The principle benefit of including an
area in a critical habitat designation is
the requirement of Federal agencies to
ensure actions they fund, authorize, or
carry out are not likely to result in the
destruction or adverse modification of
any designated critical habitat, the
regulatory standard of section 7(a)(2) of
the Act under which consultation is
completed. Federal agencies must
consult with the Service on actions that
may affect critical habitat and must
avoid destroying or adversely modifying
critical habitat. Federal agencies must
also consult with us on actions that may
affect a listed species and refrain from
undertaking actions that are likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of
such species. The analysis of effects to
critical habitat is a separate and
different analysis from that of the effects
to the species. Therefore, the difference
in outcomes of these two analyses
represents the regulatory benefit of
critical habitat. For some species
(including Navarretia fossalis), and in
some locations, the outcome of these
analyses will be similar, because effects
to habitat will often also result in effects
to the species. However, the regulatory
standard is different, as the jeopardy
analysis investigates the action’s impact
to survival and recovery of the species,
while the adverse modification analysis
investigates the action’s effects to the
designated habitat’s contribution to
conservation. This will, in many
instances, lead to different results and
different regulatory requirements. Thus,
critical habitat designations may
provide greater benefits to the recovery
of a species than would listing alone.
Federal agencies must consult with us
on actions that may affect critical
habitat and must avoid destroying or
adversely modifying critical habitat.
Critical habitat may provide a regulatory
benefit for Navarretia fossalis when
there is a Federal nexus present for a
project that might adversely modify
critical habitat. However, all of the
approximately 866 ac (351 ha) of land
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
we are excluding within Units 6
(Subunits 6D and 6E) are protected open
space or on private property, with no
expected Federal nexus, including no
areas connected to navigable waters that
would typically result in a U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers’ Federal nexus. For
N. fossalis critical habitat where no
federally listed fairy shrimp occur, we
believe it is unlikely there will be
Federal nexus because projects that will
adversely modify critical habitat should
not occur in areas conserved under the
Western Riverside County MSHCP, and
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(Corps) typically does not assume
jurisdiction under section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.)
when vernal pool complexes are not
hydrologically connected to navigable
waters of the United States.
Furthermore, two federally listed fairy
shrimp species, Riverside fairy shrimp
and vernal pool fairy shrimp
(Branchinecta lynchii), are also present
in some of the vernal pool habitat
managed under the Western Riverside
County MSHCP, and the terms and
conditions of the biological opinion
(USFWS 2004b, pp. 11441153) would
also conserve N. fossalis. Therefore, we
believe there will be indirect benefits to
N. fossalis in excluded areas covered by
the Western Riverside County MSHCP
based on conservation actions achieved
under the Act in habitat also occupied
by a federally listed fairy shrimp
species.
The consultation provisions under
section 7(a) of the Act constitute the
regulatory benefits of designating lands
as critical habitat. As discussed above,
Federal agencies must consult with us
on actions that may affect critical
habitat and must avoid destroying or
adversely modifying critical habitat.
Critical habitat may provide a regulatory
benefit for Navarretia fossalis when
there is a Federal nexus present for a
project that might adversely modify
critical habitat. Specifically, we expect
projects along the San Jacinto River
would require a 404 permit under the
Clean Water Act from the Corps.
Therefore, critical habitat designation in
Subunits 6A, 6B, and 6C will provide an
additional regulatory benefit to the
conservation of N. fossalis by
prohibiting adverse modification of
habitat essential for the conservation of
this species.
As discussed above, the Western
Riverside County MSHCP mandates
protection of Navarretia fossalis habitat
considered necessary for survival and
recovery of the species. For locations
with positive survey results, impacts to
90 percent of portions of the property
that provide long–term conservation
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
value for the species will be avoided
(referring to the ephemeral wetland
habitat that supports N. fossalis and the
local watershed area that allows the
ephemeral wetland habitat to function
properly) until it is demonstrated that
the conservation objectives for the
species have been met (see Protection of
Narrow Endemic Plant Species; Western
Riverside County MSHCP, Volume 1,
section 6.1.3, in Dudek and Associates,
Inc. 2003). However, the MSHCP does
not prohibit manure dumping and other
soil amendments in habitat that has not
yet been conserved. As discussed in
Comments 6, 13, and 22 below, this
threat is significant and ongoing within
the Western Riverside County MSHCP
plan area (specifically in Subunits 6A,
6B, and 6C) in habitat that has not been
conserved and managed to benefit the
species. Manure dumping is not a
covered activity under the plan.
Therefore, for activities covered under
the plan, we believe that protections
provided by the designation of critical
habitat will be partially redundant with
protections provided by the HCP;
however, additional regulatory
protection from manure dumping and
other soil amendments is needed in
Subunits 6A, 6B, and 6C.
Local ordinances may address
activities not covered by an HCP that
impact threatened or endangered
species, particularly if they accompany
permanent conservation and
management of an area. For example,
the City of Hemet enacted local
Ordinance No. 1666 on April 9, 2002, to
control the practice of dumping manure
on biologically sensitive sites such as
the vernal pool complex along Salt
Creek (Subunit 6B). Although
Ordinance No. 1666 provides an added
level of protection above and beyond
that provided by the Western Riverside
County MSHCP (because manure
dumping is not a covered activity under
the Western Riverside County MSHCP),
and complements the regulatory
protection that would be provided by
critical habitat designation, these lands
are not yet conserved and managed for
N. fossalis.
Another possible benefit of including
lands in critical habitat is public
education regarding the potential
conservation value of an area that may
help focus conservation efforts on areas
of high conservation value for certain
species. Any information about
Navarretia fossalis and its habitat that
reaches a wide audience, including
parties engaged in conservation
activities, is valuable. The inclusion of
lands in the N. fossalis critical habitat
designation that are owned by or under
the jurisdiction of the permittees of the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
Western Riverside County MSHCP
could be beneficial to the species
because while the plan establishes
conservation goals for N. fossalis and
identifies criteria for identifying habitat
to be conserved, the critical habitat
designation specifically identifies those
lands essential to the conservation of
the species and which may require
special management considerations or
protection. The process of proposing
revised critical habitat provided an
opportunity for peer review and public
comment on habitat we determined
meets the definition of critical habitat.
This process is valuable to land owners
and managers in prioritizing
conservation and management of
identified areas. Information on N.
fossalis and its habitat also has been
provided to the public in the past,
through meetings, educational materials
provided by the County of Riverside,
and recommendations provided in our
Recovery Plan for Southern California
Vernal Pool Species (Service 1998). In
general, we believe the designation of
critical habitat for N. fossalis will
provide additional information for the
public concerning the importance of
essential habitat in Subunits 6A, 6B,
and 6C that has not already been
available.
The benefit of educating the public
about Navarretia fossalis habitat is
significant because the distribution of
vernal pool and alkali playa habitat in
Riverside County is not well known and
the importance of these habitat areas
may not be known to the public.
Activities that harm habitat where N.
fossalis occurs (including the associated
local watershed areas) are taking place
in Riverside County possibly due to the
lack of public awareness. For example,
manure dumping on private property
along the San Jacinto River and in the
vicinity of the Wicker Road Pool is
adversely affecting habitat within the
Western Riverside County MSHCP plan
area (Roberts 2009, pp. 2–14). We have
been working with permittees to
implement ordinances that will help to
control activities (such as manure
dumping) that may impact the
implementation of the Western
Riverside County MSHCP conservation
objectives. To date, the City of Hemet is
the only Western Riverside County
MSHCP permittee that has addressed
the negative impacts (alters the physical
and biological features essential to the
conservation of N. fossalis) that manure
dumping has on N. fossalis and its
habitat through the enactment of
Ordinance 1666 (i.e., the ordinance that
prevents manure dumping activities,
thereby educating its citizens and
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
62221
reducing the educational benefits of
including this land as critical habitat).
We believe including areas in the N.
fossalis revised critical habitat
designation where manure dumping
still occurs on non–conserved and non–
managed lands will provide information
to the public and local jurisdictions
regarding the importance of addressing
this threat throughout the areas where
manure dumping occurs. Therefore, we
believe there is an overall significant
educational conservation benefit of
critical habitat designation of essential
habitat within Subunits 6A, 6B and 6C
in the Western Riverside County
MSHCP because designation will
specifically identify for the public and
plan participants those areas essential
for conservation of the species that are
not currently protected and managed
under the plan, and particularly for
areas outside of the City of Hemet where
Ordinance 1666 has been enacted, will
help educate the public about the
threats to these areas posed by manure
dumping.
The designation of Navarretia fossalis
critical habitat may also strengthen or
reinforce some of the provisions in other
State and Federal laws, such as CEQA
or NEPA. These laws analyze the
potential for projects to significantly
affect the environment. In Riverside
County, the additional protections
associated with critical habitat may be
beneficial in areas not currently
conserved. Critical habitat may signal
the presence of habitat that is not
conserved or protected that could
otherwise be missed in the review
process for these other environmental
laws.
In summary, we believe that
designating critical habitat is unlikely to
provide regulatory benefits under the
Act in essential habitat areas that are
currently conserved and managed. In
areas that are not currently conserved
and managed, we believe that there are
significant regulatory and educational
benefits that would result from critical
habitat designation. The educational
benefits of designation are somewhat
reduced in the non-conserved portion of
Subunit 6B within the City of Hemit
where an ordinance exists to protect N.
fossalis habitat from manure dumping.
Benefits of Exclusion—Western
Riverside County MSHCP
We believe benefits would be realized
by forgoing designation of critical
habitat for Navarretia fossalis on lands
covered by the Western Riverside
County MSHCP including:
(1) Continuance and strengthening of
our effective working relationships with
all Western Riverside County MSHCP
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
62222
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
jurisdictions and stakeholders to
promote conservation of N. fossalis and
its habitat;
(2) Allowance for continued
meaningful collaboration and
cooperation in working toward
recovering this species, including
conservation benefits that might not
otherwise occur;
(3) Encouragement for local
jurisdictions to fully participate in the
Western Riverside County MSHCP; and
(4) Encouragement of additional HCP
and other conservation plan
development in the future on other
private lands for this and other federally
listed and sensitive species.
The Western Riverside County
MSHCP provides substantial protection
and management for Navarretia fossalis
and the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
species, and addresses conservation
issues from a coordinated, integrated
perspective rather than a piecemeal,
project-by-project approach (as would
occur under sections 7 and 9 of the Act
or smaller HCPs). Many landowners
perceive critical habitat as an unfair and
unnecessary regulatory burden given the
expense and time involved in
developing and implementing complex
regional and jurisdiction-wide HCPs,
such as the Western Riverside County
MSHCP (as discussed further in
Comment 22 below in the Summary of
Comments and Recommendations
section of this rule). Exclusion of the
Western Riverside County MSHCP lands
from critical habitat would help
preserve the partnerships we developed
with the County of Riverside, the City
of Hemet, and other local jurisdictions
in the development of the Western
Riverside County MSHCP, and foster
future partnerships and development of
future HCPs.
In summary, we believe excluding
land covered by the Western Riverside
County MSHCP from critical habitat
could provide the significant benefit of
maintaining existing regional HCP
partnerships and fostering new ones.
Weighing Benefits of Exclusion Against
Benefits of Inclusion—Western
Riverside County MSHCP
We reviewed and evaluated the
benefits of inclusion and benefits of
exclusion for all lands owned by or
under the jurisdiction of Western
Riverside County MSHCP permittees as
critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis.
The benefits of including conserved and
managed lands in the critical habitat
designation are small. All of the
approximately 158 ac (64 ha) of land in
Subunit 6D at Skunk Hollow and all of
the approximately 708 ac (287 ha) of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
land in Subunit 6E at Mesa de Burro are
already managed and conserved, and
provide a benefit to N. fossalis. It is also
unlikely that a project with a Federal
nexus will occur in Subunits 6D, and
6E; therefore, designating these areas as
critical habitat is unlikely to provide
significant regulatory benefit.
Additionally, the educational benefits
of critical habitat designation and the
potential benefits designation may
confer under other statutes (such as
CEQA and NEPA) are also small in
Subunits 6D and 6E because these areas
are already conserved and managed in
perpetuity. Therefore, designation of N.
fossalis critical habitat in Subunits 6D
or 6E will not provide a substantial
educational benefit.
In summary, we find that excluding
lands from critical habitat in areas that
are receiving long-term conservation
and management for the purpose of
protecting Navarretia fossalis (Subunits
6D and 6E) will help preserve our
partnership with the County of
Riverside and other permittees in the
Western Riverside County MSHCP and
encourage the conservation of lands
associated with development and
implementation of future HCPs. These
partnership benefits are significant and
outweigh the small potential regulatory
and educational benefits of including
these already conserved and managed
lands as critical habitat for N. fossalis.
With regards to lands within the City of
Hemet, we acknowledge the City’s
proactive efforts to protect N. fossalis
through enactment of Ordinance 1666
prohibiting manure dumping in
essential N. fossalis habitat. This effort
somewhat reduces the regulatory and
educational benefits of designation of
that portion of Subunit 6B within the
City of Hemit. However, these lands are
not receiving long-term conservation
and management to benefit N. fossalis.
We find that including City of Hemet
lands (Subunit 6B) and other nonconserved and non-managed lands
within the Western Riverside County
MSHCP (Subunits 6A and 6C) as critical
habitat outweigh the benefits of
exclusion. We believe that critical
habitat designation in these areas will
provide additional regulatory protection
under section 7(a) of the Act when there
is a Federal nexus, and act as an
educational tool for the public to lead to
conservation and management of N.
fossalis and its essential habitat.
Therefore, designating these areas as
critical habitat for N. fossalis is likely to
provide a regulatory as well as
educational benefit to the species. While
we acknowledge that excluding these
areas under section 4(b)(2) of the Act
would provide a significant benefit to
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
the partnership that we have with the
Western Riverside County MSHCP
permittees (including the City of
Hemet), we believe that the
conservation value of including these
non-conserved, non-managed lands as
critical habitat outweighs the benefit of
exclusion.
Exclusion Will Not Result in Extinction
of the Species—Subunits 6D and 6E,
Western Riverside County MSHCP
We determined that the exclusion of
866 ac (351 ha) of land in Unit 6
(Subunits 6D and 6E) owned by or
under the jurisdiction of Western
Riverside County MSHCP permittees
from the revised designation of critical
habitat for Navarretia fossalis will not
result in extinction of the species. These
areas are permanently conserved and
managed to provide a benefit to N.
fossalis and its habitat. Additionally, the
jeopardy standard of section 7 of the Act
provides assurances the species will not
go extinct as a result of exclusion from
critical habitat designation. The
consultation requirements of section
7(a)(2) and the attendant requirement to
avoid jeopardy to N. fossalis for projects
with a Federal nexus will provide
significant protection to the species.
Therefore, based on the above
discussion, we are excluding
approximately 866 ac (351 ha) of
conserved and managed land in Unit 6
(Subunits 6D and 6E) owned by or
under the jurisdiction of Western
Riverside County MSHCP permittees
from this revised critical habitat
designation.
Economics
An analysis of the economic impacts
for the previous proposed critical
habitat designation for Navarretia
fossalis was conducted and made
available to the public on August 31,
2005 (70 FR 51742). That economic
analysis was finalized for the final rule
to designate critical habitat for N.
fossalis published in the Federal
Register on October 18, 2005 (70 FR
60658). The analysis determined that
the costs associated with critical habitat
for N. fossalis across the entire area
considered for designation (across
designated and excluded areas) were
primarily a result of the potential effects
of critical habitat designation on land
development, flood control, and
transportation. After excluding land in
Riverside and San Diego Counties from
the 2004 proposed critical habitat (69
FR 60110; October 7, 2004), the
economic impact was estimated to be
between $13.9 and $32.1 million over
the next 20 years. Based on the 2005
economic analysis, we concluded that
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
the designation of critical habitat for N.
fossalis, as proposed in 2004, would not
result in significant small business
impacts. This analysis is presented in
the document making available the
economic analysis published in the
Federal Register on August 31, 2005 (70
FR 51742).
We prepared a new economic impact
analysis associated with this revised
critical habitat designation for
Navarretia fossalis. In the revised DEA,
we evaluated the potential economic
effects on small business entities
resulting from implementation of
conservation actions related to the
proposed revision to critical habitat for
N. fossalis. The analysis is based on the
estimated incremental impacts
associated with the proposed
rulemaking as described in sections 3
through 10 of the analysis. We
announced the availability of the draft
economic analysis in the Federal
Register on April 15, 2010 (75 FR
19575).
The final economics analysis
determined that the costs associated
with critical habitat for Navarretia
fossalis, across the entire area
considered for designation (both
designated and excluded areas), are
primarily a result of the potential effects
of critical habitat designation on
transportation, land development, and
flood control. The incremental
economic impact of designating critical
habitat was estimated to be between
$846,000 and $1.2 million over the next
20 years using a 7 percent discount rate
($70,000 and $100,000 annualized)
(Entrix 2010, p. ES-3). The difference
between the economic impacts
projected with this designation
compared to those in the 2005
designation are due to the use of an
incremental analysis in this designation
rather than the broader coextensive
analysis used in the 2005 designation.
Additionally, the economic analysis for
the 2005 designation included all
31,086 ac (12,580 ha) of essential habitat
while the 2010 analysis included only
the 7,609 ac (3,079 ha) that were
proposed for designation. Based on the
2010 final economic analysis, we
concluded that the designation of
critical habitat for N. fossalis, as
proposed in 2009, would not result in
significant small business impacts. This
analysis is presented in the Final
Economic Analysis of Proposed Revised
Critical Habitat Designation for
Spreading Navarretia (FEA)(Entrix
2010).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
Summary of Comments and
Recommendations
We requested written comments from
the public on the proposed rule to revise
critical habitat for the Navarretia
fossalis during two comment periods.
The first comment period opened with
the publication of the proposed revised
rule in the Federal Register on June 10,
2009 (74 FR 27588), and closed on
August 10, 2009. The second comment
period opened with the publication of
the availability of the DEA published in
the Federal Register on April 15, 2010
(75 FR 19575) and closed on May 17,
2010. During both public comment
periods, we contacted appropriate
Federal, State, and local agencies;
scientific organizations; and other
interested parties and invited them to
comment on the proposed rule to revise
critical habitat for this species and the
associated DEA. During the comment
periods, we requested all interested
parties submit comments or information
related to the proposed revisions to
critical habitat, including (but not
limited to) the following: unit
boundaries; species occurrence
information and distribution; land use
designations that may affect critical
habitat; potential economic effects of the
proposed designation; benefits
associated with critical habitat
designation; areas proposed for
designation and associated rationale for
the non-inclusion or considered
exclusion of these areas; and methods
used to designate critical habitat.
During the first comment period, we
received 12 comments directly
addressing the proposed revised critical
habitat designation, 4 from peer
reviewers and 8 from public
organizations or individuals. During the
second comment period, we received
one comment from local government
addressing the proposed critical habitat
designation and the DEA. We did not
receive any requests for a public
hearing.
Peer Review
In accordance with our peer review
policy published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR
34270), we solicited expert opinions
from four knowledgeable individuals
with scientific expertise that included
familiarity with the species, the
geographic region in which it occurs,
and conservation biology principles
pertinent to the species. We received
responses from all four peer reviewers
who provided additional information,
clarifications, and suggestions that we
incorporated into the rule to improve
the revised critical habitat designation.
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
62223
We reviewed all comments received
from the peer reviewers and the public
for substantive issues and new
information regarding the designation of
critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis.
All comments are addressed in the
following summary and incorporated
into the final rule as appropriate.
Peer Reviewer Comments
Comment 1: One peer reviewer was
supportive of the proposed revised
critical habitat rule. The reviewer stated
the proposed rule was well thought-out,
based on sound data, and presented a
thorough analysis. The reviewer further
stated that Navarretia fossalis’ specific
needs for ephemerally wet habitats and
limited dispersal ability were
appropriately analyzed and considered
in the proposed revised rule. The
reviewer concluded our revised
methods were thorough, logical and
biologically supported, and limited the
proposed designation to areas necessary
for maintaining N. fossalis persistence.
Our Response: We appreciate the peer
reviewer’s critical review.
Comment 2: One peer reviewer stated
that large, well-established Navarretia
fossalis populations need to be
protected; therefore, the reviewer
believe the definition of ‘‘core habitat
areas’’ as relatively large areas of intact
habitat with existing populations in the
proposed revised rule was reasonable.
The reviewer further stated that limited
gene flow among populations and the
range of soil and water conditions
among habitats suggest significant
range-wide genetic variability of N.
fossalis; therefore, the reviewer believes
populations on the periphery of the
geographical range and those that
occupy unique non-core habitats are
important to species preservation. The
reviewer stated that designating only
relatively large intact habitat areas as
critical habitat could lead to significant
loss of genetic diversity and preclude
species’ survival and recovery and
therefore, agreed with our inclusion of
both large and smaller areas for N.
fossalis.
Our Response: We appreciate the peer
reviewer’s critical review and have
incorporated their comments into the
rule as appropriate.
Comment 3: One peer reviewer
offered technical and organizational
comments. The reviewer stated the
proposal writing style was professional
and understandable. The reviewer noted
the proposal was better organized than
past critical habitat proposals on
Navarretia fossalis, as well as other
critical habitat designations for listed
species that occur in similar habitat, and
the use of tables to help explain
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
62224
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
differences between the 2005 and 2009
proposals was helpful. The reviewer
further stated the usefulness of maps in
the printed rule for public review of
specific units was limited, and the lack
of UTM coordinates and a 100-m grid
made it difficult for the public to
reproduce maps at different scales,
overlay features with mapping
programs, and confirm map accuracy.
Our Response: We appreciate the peer
reviewer’s comments and will consider
this advice when publishing future
proposed critical habitat designations.
Comment 4: One peer reviewer
commented on text in the Areas Needed
for Conservation: Core and Satellite
Habitat Areas section of the proposed
rule. The reviewer stated since the
Service clearly based these proposed
areas on new information, there should
have been a citation or explanation as to
why Mesa de Burro was considered a
‘‘core population.’’ The reviewer stated
they were able to verify reports of large
populations qualifying Mesa de Burro as
a ‘‘core population,’’ but the Mesa de
Burro site may not be biologically
equivalent with the other ‘‘core
population complexes.’’ The reviewer
defined ‘‘core population complexes’’ as
numerous vernal pools and argued the
Mesa de Burro occurrence appears to be
restricted to a small number of pools.
The reviewer suggested it was probably
best to describe Mesa de Burro as a
‘‘large and important population,’’ since
it is not really a complex of populations
or occurrences.
Our Response: We understand the
peer reviewer’s concern regarding the
ecological connotation of terms used for
the Navarretia fossalis critical habitat
designation; however, we never used
the terms ‘‘core population’’ or ‘‘core
population complexes’’ in the proposed
rule. The only term used in the
proposed revised rule and in this
document with the word ‘‘core’’ is ‘‘core
habitat area,’’ which is a descriptive
term of convenience. As described in
the proposed revised rule (74 FR 27588)
and the Areas Needed for Conservation:
Core and Satellite Habitat Areas section
of this rule, ‘‘core habitat area’’ denotes
those areas that contain the highest
concentrations of N. fossalis and the
largest contiguous blocks of habitat for
this species and are therefore the most
critical areas for conservation of this
species. The term was not intended to
be synonymous with similar terms used
in other documents. The term ‘‘vernal
pool complex’’ is used in Table 3 to refer
to more than one geographically
proximal pool, but was not further
defined.
Regarding the peer reviewer’s
suggested description of Mesa de Burro
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
as a ‘‘large important population,’’ we do
not share this opinion. We are not aware
of any formal definition of
‘‘occurrences’’ or descriptions of
associated pools in a biologically
delineated population. Mesa de Burro
contains a relatively large abundance of
observed individuals occupying
multiple vernal pools, and we believe
this description appropriately describes
the current level of scientific
knowledge. In general, we are
conservative with use of the term
‘‘population’’ because of the term’s
frequent misapplication in gray
literature. We refrain from using the
term ‘‘population’’ to describe a
geographically specific occupied area
unless data indicate appropriate rates of
genetic exchange exist among spatially
clustered individuals and a geographical
population distribution has been
delineated. Therefore, we believe the
peer reviewer’s concerns regarding our
use of inappropriate terminology are not
well founded. We have edited the Areas
Needed for Conservation: Core and
Satellite Habitat Areas section to clarify
the above issues.
Comment 5: Regarding the discussion
of the PCEs in the proposed rule, one
peer reviewer recommended changing,
‘‘During a typical seasonal flooding
period, alkali scrub vegetation expands
its distribution into deeper areas of the
seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain
habitat and crowds out the more
ephemeral wetland species’’ to ‘‘During
a typical seasonal flooding cycle, alkali
scrub vegetation expands its
distribution during the dry periods into
deeper areas of the seasonally flooded
alkali vernal plains habitat...’’ The peer
reviewer also stated that light to
moderate disturbance can mask or
suppress some PCEs within seasonally
flooded vernal alkali plains habitat.
Therefore, the reviewer recommended
the final rule include the following
qualification regarding habitat quality:
‘‘Seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain
can persist in light to moderately
disturbed habitat that may obscure or
suppress expression of PCEs, especially
soil amendments and dryland farming
activities. Reasonably restorable habitat
is considered to have the applicable
PCEs within the San Jacinto River flood
plain and at Old Salt Creek. Many of
these sites, although currently in
degraded condition, are restorable and
may be necessary to the recovery of the
species.’’ The peer reviewer also noted
an apparent omission of the species’
occurrence within the alkali Chino
series soils at Old Salt Creek.
Our Response: We considered the
suggested edits provided by the peer
reviewer and made changes to the text
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
above as appropriate (see Primary
Constituent Elements section).
Comment 6: Regarding the Special
Management Considerations or
Protection section of the proposed rule,
one peer reviewer recommended adding
soil chemistry alteration and manure
dumping to the list of threats for
Navarretia fossalis. The reviewer stated
manure dumping has reduced or
eliminated alkali vernal pools over large
portions of the San Jacinto River flood
plain and may now be the most
significant immediate threat to N.
fossalis. The reviewer cited numerous
communications with the Carlsbad Fish
and Wildlife Office in which the
reviewer had documented manure
dumping in vernal pool habitat.
Our Response: We considered the
suggested text edits to this revised
critical habitat rule and made changes
as appropriate (see Special Management
Considerations or Protection section).
We agree that manure dumping is a
significant threat to Navarretia fossalis,
and we agree that this activity is
ongoing. We are in the process of
working with local jurisdictions in
Western Riverside County (including
the County of Riverside) to address
manure dumping through initiatives
like Ordinance No. 1666 that was
enacted by the City of Hemet. We hope
to work further with our partners in
Riverside County to reduce the threat of
manure dumping (see also responses to
Comments 12 and 13 below, and the
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule).
Comment 7: Regarding the Criteria
Used To Identify Critical Habitat
section of the proposed revised rule, one
peer reviewer argued that based on data
for similar species, two or more negative
surveys during the past 10 years is an
insufficient effort to confirm extirpation
in lightly disturbed habitat. The
reviewer advised that a lack of positive
surveys for a decade suggests a
population is declining or scarce, but
without significant habitat disturbance
as well, does not mean it is extirpated.
The peer reviewer recommended that in
circumstances where habitat has not
been significantly altered, the Service
should not conclude absence based on
lack of documentation. In the case of
comprehensive but negative survey
results, the peer reviewer believes 20
years would be a more reliable indicator
of population extirpation. The peer
reviewer further noted that while this
change in methodology may not change
what areas meet the definition of critical
habitat for Navarretia fossalis, the
limitations of current methods should
be considered in future critical habitat
analyses.
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
Our Response: We appreciate the peer
reviewer’s concerns and have
considered the argument that more than
20 years without positive survey data in
suitable habitat is an appropriate
criterion for determining likely absence
of Navarretia fossalis. We would like to
reassure the peer reviewer that we used
more complex criteria than two negative
surveys over a period of 10 years to
determine occupancy. Negative surveys
must have occurred under appropriate
conditions, while habitat status was also
considered. As discussed in the Criteria
Used To Identify Critical Habitat
section, we assume an area is currently
occupied for areas where we had past
occupancy data unless: (a) Two or more
rare plant surveys conducted during the
past 10 years did not find N. fossalis
(providing the surveys were conducted
in years where average rainfall amounts
for a particular area are reached during
the rainy season (between October and
May)) and during the appropriate
months to find this species (March,
April, and May); or (b) the site was
significantly disturbed since the last
observation of the species at that
location. Therefore, we believe our
current methodology is appropriate.
Comment 8: One peer reviewer
expressed concerns regarding
occupancy status of specific pools. The
reviewer argued the description of a
vernal pool in Subunit 5G (Otay Lakes)
as partly unoccupied may be
inappropriate, because Navarretia
fossalis is likely still present if habitat
is intact and minimally disturbed. The
reviewer stated a better criterion for
occupancy determination would be
habitat status within the vicinity of
vernal pools, rather than a lack of
occupancy data for the past 10 years.
The peer reviewer stated they were not
necessarily suggesting that the vernal
pool ‘‘populations’’ at Otay River Valley
and Otay Lakes (Unit 5) be included in
critical habitat, only that the assumption
of species’ absence may be false.
The peer reviewer also stated that
because the vernal pool complex in
Subunit 5C occurs within a core habitat
area (Otay Mesa) that has experienced
significant habitat loss, faces significant
threats, and is identified in the Recovery
Plan as necessary for recovery, it seems
prudent to include it in critical habitat,
or offer a more compelling argument for
non-inclusion.
Our Response: In such a scenario of
limited survey periods, we use the
available surveys as the best available
science. This situation underscores the
need for us to address new information
as it is received. We understand the peer
reviewer’s concern and have considered
their argument; however, habitat
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
availability and condition does not
always necessarily equate to occupancy
for vernal pools species because other
habitat characteristics such as
hydroperiod, pool depth, soil type and
other physical features also play a role.
Critical habitat designations are to use
the best available commercial and
scientific data to identify lands that we
believe contain the physical and
biological features essential to the
conservation of the species. Without
more site specific investigation on
occupancy for Subunit 5G, we cannot
ascertain for certain that all of the areas
are occupied solely on habitat status as
recommended by the peer reviewer and
have relied on our criteria for
occupancy as stated above. Please see
the response to Comment 7 above for
further discussion regarding occupancy
data and criteria used to identify critical
habitat.
We agree with the peer reviewer that
Subunit 5C meets the definition of
critical habitat. Based on information in
our files inadvertently excluded from
our initial Geographic Information
System (GIS) analysis, we determined
that the previously proposed Subunit 5C
(69 FR 60110; October 1, 2004) has
documented occupancy within the past
10 years and meets the definition of
critical habitat. We proposed
designation of subunit 5C in our
revision to the 2009 proposed. We
proposed adding subunit 5C in the
document that made available the DEA
for the proposed revised critical habitat
published in the Federal Register on
April 15, 2010 (72 FR 19575). We are
designating subunit 5C as critical
habitat in this final rule. Please see
edited Summary of Changes From the
2009 Proposed Rule To Revise Critical
Habitat and Critical Habitat Units
sections for more information.
Comment 9: One peer reviewer noted
that although the proposal stated that
slopes facing away from Cruzan Mesa
were removed from Subunit 1A
(compared to the 2005 designation), an
examination of Google Earth imagery
indicated some of the mesa top was also
removed. The reviewer recommended
subunit boundaries be modified to
include the full mesa top.
Our Response: We appreciate the peer
reviewer’s critical review. We
considered the suggested changes and
revised the designated critical habitat
boundary for Subunit 1A to include
those areas containing the physical and
biological features essential to the
conservation of the species. We
explained the revised proposed
boundary in the document we
published in the Federal Register on
April 15, 2010 (75 FR 19575). The
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
62225
revision increased the designated total
for Subunit 1A by 27 ac (11 ha),
reflected in Table 2. For more
information, see the Summary of
Changes From Previously Designated
and Proposed Revised Critical Habitat
section.
Comment 10: One peer reviewer
suggested there may not be sufficient
data to demonstrate the Plum Canyon
vernal pool in Subunit 1B meets the
definition of critical habitat. The
reviewer noted that although there are
two collection records from 1996 and
2003, the CNDDB notes the ‘‘site
requires more field work,’’ which
usually means there is some debate on
specific location or population status.
The peer reviewer added they were not
able to confirm the location of this
vernal pool through examination of
aerial photographs. The peer reviewer
also recommended the western portion
of Subunit 3B should not be designated
critical habitat because Google Earth
imagery indicates this area has been
graded and is unlikely to ever support
the PCEs for this species.
Our Response: We appreciate the peer
reviewer’s critical review. We
considered the suggested changes and
revised this final designation by
removing the western portion of
Subunit 3B as discussed in the
document making available the DEA (75
FR 19575; April 15, 2010). However, we
believe Subunit 1B (Plum Canyon)
meets the definition of critical habitat
because this subunit supports a stable
occurrence of Navarretia fossalis,
provides potential connectivity with
Subunit 1A, and likely supports a
genetically distinct occurrence. We
believe Subunit 3B (Carroll Canyon)
meets the definition of critical habitat
because it supports a stable occurrence
of N. fossalis and provides potential
connectivity between occurrences of N.
fossalis in Subunits 3A and 3C. For
more information, see the Critical
Habitat Units, Criteria Used To Identify
Critical Habitat, and Summary of
Changes From Previously Designated
and Proposed Revised Critical Habitat
sections.
Comment 11: One peer reviewer
recommended multiple changes to the
boundary of Subunit 6B as follows:
(1) Remove a central section south of
Stetson Road that has been developed or
disturbed for many years;
(2) expand the eastern edge boundary
to include vernal pools at the western
end of the airport because this site
includes the PCEs, has documented
historical occupation, includes pools
that are more reliably filled than pools
that were proposed for designation, and
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
62226
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
this land has a likely Federal Aviation
Administration Federal nexus;
(3) include vernal pools and wet
depressions that form fairly reliably in
the northwest portion of the subunit;
(4) remove the drier area at the
northern end just south of Devonshire
Road; and
(5) remove the eastern corner because
it either has active residential
development or an approved
development proposal and is heavily
degraded.
Our Response: We appreciate the peer
reviewer’s critical review. We
considered the suggested changes and
revised the final critical habitat
boundary as noticed in the NOA of the
DEA (75 FR 19575; April 15, 2010). For
more information see the Summary of
Changes From the Proposed Revised
Rule and the Previous Critical Habitat
Designation.
Comment 12: One peer reviewer
believes that manure dumping should
be specifically mentioned in the section
of this critical habitat designation that
outlines activities that, when carried
out, funded, or authorized by a Federal
agency, may affect critical habitat and,
therefore, should result in consultation
for Navarretia fossalis: Effects of Critical
Habitat Designation section, subsection
(2) titled Application of the ‘Adverse
Modification’ Standard section,
paragraph describing ‘‘Actions that
would impact soil and topography.’’ The
peer reviewer argued that widespread
manure dumping along the San Jacinto
River, which alters soil chemistry
(reducing alkalinity and clay and silt
composition ratios) and topography
(elevates soil surface and suppresses
depressions formation), is a significant
threat to the species.
Our Response: We considered the
peer reviewer’s suggested edits when
preparing this revised critical habitat
rule and made changes to the Effects of
Critical Habitat Designation,
Application of the ‘Adverse
Modification’ Standard section. We
agree that manure dumping is a
significant threat to Navarretia fossalis
and the PCEs require special
management considerations or
protection to reduce the threat (see the
Special Management Considerations or
Protection). The Western Riverside
County MSHCP does not prohibit
permittees from engaging in manure
dumping on non-conserved lands where
a Federal nexus is present and there is
no local ordinance to prevent dumping;
therefore, we determined that
designation of critical habitat would
provide significant additional habitat
protection. We also determined that
education has been inadequate in some
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
areas with regard to the severity of this
threat; therefore, designation of critical
habitat where manure dumping can
occur would provide a significant
educational conservation benefit (see
also response to Comments 6 and 13,
and the Western Riverside County
Multiple Species Habitat Conservation
Plan (Western Riverside County
MSHCP) section).
Comment 13: One peer reviewer
believes that exclusion of lands owned
under the jurisdiction of the Western
Riverside County MSHCP permittees
should not be excluded from critical
habitat based on partnership benefits.
As an example, the peer reviewer stated
that areas along the San Jacinto River
and near the city of Hemet have not
been adequately protected. These areas
were identified in the Western Riverside
County MSHCP as necessary for the
conservation of Navarretia fossalis and
were excluded from the 2005 final
critical habitat designation. The peer
reviewer asserted that habitat vandalism
and incidental destruction in all vernal
pools within the Western Riverside
County MSHCP plan area have
continued, and in some areas increased,
since the Western Riverside County
MSHCP was permitted. The peer
reviewer discussed at length and in
detail evidence that they believe
suggests land-owners who are aware of
the conservation value of vernal pools
are working to eradicate habitat rather
than ‘‘partnering with regulators’’ to
conserve it. Additionally, the peer
reviewer argued that unlike other
approved HCPs, the reviewers believe
the Service has evidence that the
Western Riverside County MSHCP is
not providing the benefits ‘‘claimed to
justify exclusion in the proposed
revised critical habitat rule.’’ The
reviewers further hypothesized that
should impacts continue at the rate and
magnitude as occurred during the first
5 years of the Western Riverside County
MSHCP implementation, there could be
almost no habitat left in 5 years outside
the San Jacinto Wildlife Area and the
Metropolitan Water District Vernal Pool
Preserve.
Our Response: We appreciate the peer
reviewer’s concerns regarding adequate
protection of Navarretia fossalis under
the Western Riverside County MSHCP.
Although not specifically stated by the
peer reviewer, the comment indicates
the reviewer believes:
(1) The benefits of exclusion (based
primarily on partnerships benefits)
would be lower than the benefits of
inclusion because these partnerships
have provided less benefit to N. fossalis
to-date than anticipated; and
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(2) The benefits of inclusion (nonredundant protections and education
provided by critical habitat designation)
are greater because conservation actions
mandated by the HCP are not being
implemented.
Benefits provided by existing HCPs
are not considered a benefit of exclusion
because they would remain in place
regardless of critical habitat designation;
however, they do minimize the benefits
of inclusion to the extent they are
redundant with protection measures
that would be provided by a critical
habitat designation. As described in the
Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act
section, the likelihood of a project with
a Federal nexus occurring in Subunits
6D (Barry Jones Wetland Mitigation
Bank) and 6E (PQP lands) in the
Western Riverside County MSHCP
revised critical habitat is small because
these areas are currently conserved and
managed; therefore, the regulatory and
educational benefits of inclusion are
insignificant. Additionally, the portion
of Subunit 6B that is in the City of
Hemet is protected by an ordinance that
addresses illegal manure dumping, an
activity that is not covered by the
Western Riverside County MSHCP;
however, this area does not receive
long-term conservation and
management for the benefit of
Navarretia fossalis and its habitat. Due
to this additional protection from
manure dumping, the benefits of
inclusion of this portion of Subunit 6B
as critical habitat are somewhat
lessened.
Regarding the benefits of exclusion,
the adequacy of Navarretia fossalis
protection under an HCP is relevant to
the value of partnerships to the extent
it demonstrates the overall conservation
value of a regional HCP permit. We
believe the Western Riverside County
MSHCP generally incorporates ongoing
management and protection that should
benefit the conservation of N. fossalis
and its habitat over the long term. Please
refer to the Application of Section
4(b)(2) of the Act section for further
discussion on the Western Riverside
County MSHCP, including discussion
on areas receiving long-term
conservation and management that we
have excluded under section 4(b)(2) of
the Act.
Based on new information, we did
find the benefits of inclusion in critical
habitat to be greater in some areas
within the Western Riverside County
MSHCP than we estimated in the
October 18, 2005, critical habitat rule
(70 FR 60658). We determined that
designation of critical habitat for
Navarretia fossalis would provide
significant additional habitat protection
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
in Subunits 6A, 6B, and 6C. We came
to this determination because the
Western Riverside County MSHCP does
not currently provide for the long-term
conservation and management of N.
fossalis in these subunits, and the HCP
does not prohibit permittees from
engaging in manure dumping activities
(a significant new threat on nonconserved lands that was not identified
in the HCP or the associated biological
opinion (Service 2004b, pp. 369–378)).
Therefore, in areas where a Federal
nexus exists (see also Comments 6 and
12 above), we concluded that the
significant regulatory benefit of
including the areas in critical habitat
outweigh the partnership benefits of
exclusion. We also determined that
education to date has been inadequate
in some areas with regard to the severity
of manure dumping; therefore,
designation of N. fossalis critical habitat
where manure dumping can occur
would provide a significant educational
conservation benefit.
In summary, we found the benefits of
exclusion of lands covered by the
Western Riverside County MSHCP to be
greater than the minimal benefits of
including these lands in the critical
habitat designation for those areas that
are currently conserved and managed
(i.e., Subunits 6D and 6E). Alternatively,
the benefits of inclusion are greater for
non-conserved, non-managed lands
within the plan area (i.e., Subunit 6A,
6B, and 6C). See the Application of
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act section
(particularly the Weighing Benefits of
Exclusion Against Benefits of
Inclusion—Western Riverside County
MSHCP section) for a complete
discussion of the Western Riverside
County MSHCP exclusion analysis.
Issues discussed by the peer reviewer,
while they may reflect valid concerns
with regard to HCP implementation, do
not reduce the benefits of exclusion for
Subunits 6D and 6E. We believe that
conservation is adequate in these areas
as a result of the long-term conservation
and management of Subunits 6D and 6E
(see Benefits of Exclusion—Western
Riverside County MSHCP and the
Weighing Benefits of Exclusion Against
Benefits of Inclusion—Western
Riverside County MSHCP sections).
However, we will consider the
information submitted by the peer
reviewer in our ongoing assessments of
the Western Riverside County MSHCP,
and continue to work with permittees to
ensure that the HCP is properly
implemented to benefit Navarretia
fossalis and its habitat.
Comment 14: One peer reviewer
stated that the Service should not
exclude habitat within the plan area of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
HCP permits that are not yet issued. The
reviewer stated draft plans provide no
guarantee that the final HCPs will
provide adequate species conservation.
Our Response: We did not exclude
any habitat from this revised critical
habitat designation that falls within the
plan area of an HCP permit that has not
yet been issued.
Other Comments
Comment 15: Two commenters
provided biological information for our
consideration.
(1) One commenter provided
information about the presence of
Navarretia fossalis at one location in
San Marcos, California, including
reference to a website with detailed
biological information about this
location. The commenter indicated that
they believe the future of the site is
uncertain and N. fossalis grows in the
larger vernal pools onsite.
(2) A second commenter stated that
although ‘‘scrub’’ habitat elements may
expand into alkali playa, the more
common process currently observed is
replacement of alkali playa by alkali
grassland (regarding the Primary
Constituent Elements– Ephemeral
Wetland Habitat section of the proposed
rule). The second commenter also noted
that in some of the known species’
localities, alkali grassland has become
dominated by species less commonly
found in the wetter areas of the alkali
playa, possibly due to alteration of
hydrology.
(3) The second commenter described
distinct ‘‘riverine pools’’ characterized
by unique floristic elements, such as
Trichocoronis wrightii (limestone
bugheal), which only occur with
Navarretia fossalis within the San
Jacinto River Unit.
(4) The second commenter stated that
‘‘general anecdotal observations’’ of
habitat conditions at the Salt Creek
Seasonally Flooded Alkali Plain
indicate a recent decline in Navarretia
fossalis densities, especially at the
Stowe vernal pool. The commenter
acknowledged these observations may
reflect a response to rainfall patterns,
but stated the habitat does appear to
have experienced drying of the
ephemeral wetlands and vernal pools,
along with an expansion of Hordeum
marinum subsp. gussoneanum (cheat
grass).
(5) The second commenter stated that
a number of the larger vernal pools in
the Perris plain region occur on Willows
soils.
(6) Finally, the second commenter
noted the proposed expansion of
waterfowl ponds and wet soil
management in portions of the San
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
62227
Jacinto Wildlife Area (under the
Western Riverside County MSHCP) may
negatively affect Navarretia fossalis. The
expansion could benefit N. fossalis by
providing more habitat for this species;
however, ponding duration and exotic
plant species used to increase the
waterfowl habitat suitability could
conflict with existing or expanded N.
fossalis populations within the San
Jacinto Wildlife Area.
Our Response: We appreciate all
information provided. We are aware of
the San Marcos vernal pools
information, which is identified in
Table 2 as Subunit 4C1 in the San
Marcos Upham location. Additionally,
the Service regularly works with CDFG
to ensure that the seasonally flooded
alkali vernal plain habitat in the San
Jacinto Wildlife Area continues to
function and provide a benefit to
Navarretia fossalis and other sensitive
species that use this habitat. We will
consider the information regarding the
proposed expansion of waterfowl ponds
and wet soil management in portions of
the San Jacinto Wildlife Area in future
conservation recommendations and
decisions; however, we do not believe it
is relevant to this revised critical habitat
designation for N. fossalis.
We considered the other information
provided and edited this revised critical
habitat rule as appropriate (see Primary
Constituent Elements—Ephemeral
Wetland Habitat and Background—
Geographic Range and Status sections
above).
Comment 16: One commenter
recommended that the total number of
Navarretia fossalis localities be carefully
reviewed and possibly updated
(regarding the Background—
Geographic Range and Status section of
the proposed rule). The commenter
stated that they believe the section
failed to cite some potentially important
references, including Brown’s (2003)
listing of ephemeral pools in western
Riverside County, and CNDDB
collection records from the ElsinoreMurrieta area and from San Luis Obispo
County.
Our Response: Regarding the
suggested Background section citations,
the data in Brown’s (2003) record table
is part of our Service files and was
incorporated in our GIS database, we are
not aware of any CNDDB collection
records from the Elsinore-Murrieta area
(and none were provided by the
commenter), and the San Luis Obispo
County record has never been verified;
therefore, we did not include those
suggested record citations in this final
rule.
Comment 17: Two commenters
expressed general opposition to revising
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
62228
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
critical habitat because of the resulting
costs to taxpayers and private
companies.
Our Response: According to sections
3(5)(A) and 4(b) of the Act and our
implementing regulations under 50 CFR
424.12, we are required to designate
critical habitat for federally listed
species. Following the listing of
Navarretia fossalis in 1998 and the
subsequent designation of the species’
critical habitat in 2005, the Center for
Biological Diversity filed a complaint on
December 19, 2007, in the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of
California challenging the 2005
designation. This lawsuit challenged the
validity of the information and
reasoning we used to exclude areas from
the 2005 critical habitat designation for
N. fossalis. On July 25, 2008, the parties
reached a settlement agreement, in
which we agreed to reconsider the
critical habitat designation for the
species. The action of revising the
designation is the result of our following
a court order. Therefore, while we
acknowledge the commenters’ concern
that revising critical habitat is costly, we
do not have discretion with regard to
completion of court-ordered actions (see
Previous Federal Actions section above
for more information regarding
completion of this revised rule).
Comment 18: Two commenters
provided suggestions regarding the
proposed critical habitat designation
review process. One commenter stated
that graphics provided in the proposed
rule did not allow detailed review of
areas proposed as revised critical habitat
and thus recommended the Service post
topographic maps or aerial photographs
on the Internet during open comment
periods. A second commenter requested
that no additional areas be proposed as
revised critical habitat without
recirculation of the entire rule for notice
and comment.
Our Response: We agree it would be
advantageous to provide more detailed
graphics for public review and will
consider the practicality of doing so
when publishing future proposed
critical habitat designations.
According to section 4(b)(5) of the Act
and the Administrative Procedure Act (5
U.S.C. Subchapter II), we are required to
provide an adequate opportunity for the
public to comment on any critical
habitat rule. Although it is not fiscally
practical for us to recirculate an entire
rule for notice and comment, any areas
proposed as revised critical habitat for
Navarretia fossalis that are in addition
to those listed in the proposed revised
critical habitat rule (74 FR 27588; June
10, 2009) were described in the
document that made available the DEA
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
(75 FR 19575; April 15, 2010). As a
result, the opportunity for public review
and comment prior to designation of
this revised critical habitat designation
occurred as a result of an initial public
comment period between June 10, 2009,
and August 10, 2009, and a second
public comment period between April
15, 2010, and May 17, 2010.
Comment 19: Two commenters
recommended adding or removing areas
from the Navarretia fossalis proposed
revised critical habitat. The first
commenter recommended proposed
revised critical habitat be expanded at
the ‘‘northern and southern boundaries’’
of the San Jacinto River subunit
(Subunit 6A). Specifically they
recommended proposed revised critical
habitat be expanded at the following
locations:
(1) At the northern boundary east to
include pond areas within the San
Jacinto Wildlife Area;
(2) Around 13th Street east of the
County owned property;
(3) Eastward near Simpson Road in
the area of San Jacinto Avenue to
include areas north of Ellis Avenue;
(4) North of the San Jacinto river to
near Redlands Avenue;
(5) To include the entire vernal pool
found south off Case Road;
(6) South of the San Jacinto River,
possibly to the boundary of Green
Valley Parkway;
(7) Westward to include pools in the
northwestern corner of the Hemet
Airport within the Salt Creek Seasonally
Flooded Alkali Plain; and
(8) At the southern end of the
Wickerd Road and Scott Road locality.
A second commenter asserted that the
proposed critical habitat designation
falls short of the Act’s ‘‘recovery
requirement’’ by focusing solely on
species’ survival. They asserted in
particular that additional areas need to
be proposed to ensure ecological
features required for species’ recovery
are maintained, such as water quality,
inundation frequency, and habitat
connectivity.
Our Response: We considered the
changes suggested by the first
commenter and revised this final
revised critical habitat designation as
appropriate as discussed in the
document making available DEA (75 FR
19575; April 15, 2010). For more
information see the Summary of
Changes From the Proposed Revised
Rule and the Previous Critical Habitat
Designation section and our response to
Comment 11
Regarding the second commenter’s
assertion that additional critical habitat
areas need to be proposed to meet the
‘‘[Act’s] recovery requirement,’’ we
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
believe we have designated all the
specific occupied areas which are found
those physical or biological features that
are essential to the conservation of the
species. We recognize that the
designation of critical habitat may not
include all of the habitat that may
eventually be determined to be
necessary for the recovery of Navarretia
fossalis, and critical habitat designations
do not signal that habitat outside the
designation is unimportant or may not
contribute to recovery. Areas outside the
revised critical habitat designation will
continue to be subject to conservation
actions implemented under section
7(a)(1) of the Act and regulatory
protections afforded by the section
7(a)(2) jeopardy standard and the
prohibitions of section 9 of the Act if
actions occurring in these areas may
affect N. fossalis; these protections and
conservation tools will continue to
contribute to recovery of this species.
The second commenter did not suggest
specific additional areas for inclusion in
the proposed revised critical habitat
designation, and we are not aware of
any additional areas required for species
recovery that should be proposed as
revised critical habitat.
Comment 20: One commenter
suggested edits to the proposed revised
critical habitat rule text. The commenter
stated that more information could have
been included in the Background
section of the proposed rule regarding
the different substrates, hydrology, and
habitat status of each core habitat area.
The commenter also recommended we
expand our discussion of the extent of
protection during the early phase of
HCP implementation and for plant
species under the Act. The commenter
specifically recommended the following
edits:
(1) Note that Navarretia fossalis is
generally restricted to vernal pools and
alkali playas, and that in the alkali
grasslands, this species is restricted to
small vernal pools or other depressions
within this community (Background—
Habitat subsection);
(2) Note that suitability of
hydrological conditions for the
germination of this species vary on an
annual basis, which means that N.
fossalis can be absent for a number of
years and the total number of plants can
vary depending on the timing, duration,
and extent of ponding (Background—
Habitat subsection);
(3) Describe the unique nature of the
ephemeral wetlands found along the
San Jacinto River, especially how large
scale flooding events, although
uncommon, appear to maintain N.
fossalis habitat and provide a species
dispersal mechanism (Primary
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
Constituent Elements; Ephemeral
Wetland Habitat subsection);
(4) Discuss the importance of specific
microtopography required to provide
sufficient ponding duration (hydrology)
to support this species and the threat
posed by alteration of microtopography
(Primary Constituent Elements;
Ephemeral Wetland Habitat
subsection); and
(5) Mention a number of the larger
vernal pools in the Perris Plain region
occur on the Willows Soil Series
(Primary Constituent Elements:
Topography and Soils that Support
Ponding During Winter and Spring
subsection).
With regard to PCEs in general, the
commenter stated:
(1) The importance of overland water
flow and the size of the local watershed
required to maintain ephemeral
wetlands needs to be emphasized; and
(2) More information should be
provided on the current condition of the
PCEs in each subunit.
The commenter made the following
specific edit recommendations for the
Criteria Used to Identify Critical
Habitat section:
(1) Step 3 should be expanded to note
how total proposed area reductions in
essential habitat were determined and
the extent of local watershed inclusion
in a unit; and
(2) Step 4 should include notes of any
recent field or site condition
observations.
The commenter made the following
specific edit recommendations for the
Summary of Changes from Previously
Designated Critical Habitat section of
the proposed revised rule:
(1) Regarding ‘‘Cruzan Mesa’’
subsection, they stated the pools could
not fill by overland flow of water on the
mesa, and recommended we explain
how the habitat could be self-sustaining
if the watershed area outside of
proposed revised critical habitat
boundaries was lost;
(2) Regarding ‘‘Wickerd Road and
Scott Road’’ subsection, they stated more
information should be provided on the
current condition at this pool complex;
and
(3) Regarding the ‘‘Santa Rosa Plateau’’
subsection, they recommended
providing a summary of known Mesa de
Burro species’ distribution information.
The commenter made the following
specific edit recommendations for the
Critical Habitat Units section of the
proposed revised rule:
(1) Expand the discussion of current
habitat conditions and threats regarding
the ‘‘San Jacinto River’’ and ‘‘Salt Creek
Seasonally Flooded Alkali Plain’’
subsections;
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
(2) Discuss what habitat conservation
has been or will be achieved under the
Western Riverside County MSHCP at
important occupied localities; and
(3) Note the presence of regionally
significant vernal pools in addition to
the areas of alkali playa and grassland;
generally these pools are floristically
distinct from these communities.
Our Response: We appreciate these
editorial recommendations and have
made changes to the text of this final
rule, where appropriate (see
Background, Primary Constituent
Elements, Criteria Used to Identify
Critical Habitat, Summary of Changes
From the Proposed Revised Rule and
the Previous Critical Habitat
Designation, and Critical Habitat Units
sections above). In some cases, the
amount of detail requested by the
commenter was not appropriate for the
purpose of designating critical habitat;
therefore some information was not
incorporated.
Comment 21: Two commenters stated
that they believe lands owned or under
the jurisdiction of the Western Riverside
County MSHCP permittees should be
excluded from the revised Navarretia
fossalis critical habitat designation. The
commenters argued for exclusion
because the HCP already adequately
provides for the survival and recovery of
the species, and under section 6.9 of the
HCP and section 14.10 of the associated
Implementing Agreement, no critical
habitat should be designated in the HCP
Plan Area. The first commenter also
argued that case law (‘‘15 vernal pool
species court case’’) supports exclusion
where the court upheld the exclusion of
the Western Riverside County MSHCP.
The second commenter stated that
although the Western Riverside Flood
Control and Water Conservation District
is a Western Riverside County MSHCP
permittee whose projects are currently
subject to the provisions of the HCP,
critical habitat designation may affect
the continued operation, maintenance,
and restoration of existing flood control
facilities as well as the construction of
future flood control improvements along
the San Jacinto River and within the
Salt Creek watershed. The second
commenter also argued designating
critical habitat within the Western
Riverside County MSHCP Plan
boundaries would create duplicative
regulatory efforts without any additional
benefits to the species.
Our Response: With regard to the
commenters’ assertions that lands
owned or under the jurisdiction of the
Western Riverside County MSHCP
should be excluded because the HCP
adequately provides for the survival and
recovery of the species, or because the
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
62229
HCP is being fully implemented, we
agree that the protection afforded
Navarretia fossalis and its essential
habitat under the MSHCP is a relevant
consideration in our section 4(b)(2)
exclusion analysis. Exclusion is based
on our determination that the benefits of
exclusion outweigh the benefits of
inclusion, and that exclusion of an area
will not result in extinction of a species.
We found the benefits of exclusion of
lands covered by the Western Riverside
County MSHCP to be greater than the
minimal benefits of including these
lands in the critical habitat designation
in areas that receive long-term
conservation and management for the
species and its habitat (i.e., Subunits 6D
and 6E). For more information, see
response to Comment 13 and the
Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act
section for a detailed discussion.
After public review and comment on
the proposed revision to critical habitat
for Navarretia fossalis, we determined
through our analysis under section
4(b)(2) of the Act that the maximum
extent of allowable exclusions under the
Western Riverside County MSHCP was
limited to the exclusion of lands owned
by or under the jurisdiction of the
permittees of the Western Riverside
County MSHCP in Subunits 6D and 6E
where lands are conserved and managed
in perpetuity (see Application of
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act—Western
Riverside County Multiple Species
Habitat Conservation Plan (Western
Riverside County MSHCP) section
above for a detailed discussion of the
exclusion analysis.
We do not foresee additional effects of
critical habitat designation on flood
control operations along the San Jacinto
River and within the Salt Creek
watershed as a result of mandated
habitat conservation actions. We believe
any impacts to partnerships (a benefit of
exclusion) would be outweighed by the
benefits of inclusion as explained above.
Therefore, the commenter’s argument
that lands owned by or under the
jurisdiction of Western Riverside
County MSHCP permittees should be
excluded because of possible impacts to
the flood control facilities and future
flood control improvements is not
adequately supported.
Comment 22: Two commenters
suggested that the Service should not
exclude lands owned or under the
jurisdiction of the Western Riverside
County MSHCP permittees from the
revised Navarretia fossalis critical
habitat designation. The first commenter
opposed to exclusion argued that no
biological benefits are achieved by
excluding habitat within HCP Plan areas
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
62230
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
from critical habitat designation
because:
(1) Research demonstrates species
with designated critical habitat are less
likely to be declining, and twice as
likely to be recovering, than species
without critical habitat (cited Taylor et
al. 2005);
(2) The Western Riverside County
MSHCP fails to address degradation of
habitat inside the reserves, especially
the ongoing problem of manure
dumping activities; and
(3) There are nonsignatory agencies
that have jurisdiction within the
Western Riverside County MSHCP plan
area who conduct activities outside of
the HCP process that require section 7
consultation.
The second commenter opposed to
exclusion gave the following reasons:
(1) Critical habitat designation
provides potential for enhanced
protection and recovery of this species
within the HCP plan area, because these
areas require ‘‘special management
considerations or protection,’’ and it is
not a ‘‘hindrance to the conservation
process’’;
(2) Habitat continues to be lost due to
the common practices of disking, soil
amendment, and hydrology alteration
within the plan area because the
Western Riverside County MSHCP does
not address these existing land use
practices and did not provide
procedures for conserving specific
populations of Navarretia fossalis;
(3) The benefits of critical habitat
designation are especially great along
the San Jacinto River, (Upper) Salt
Creek, and the Wickerd Road and Scott
Road vernal pools because threats are
high and there is a potential Federal
nexus in this area; and
(4) The proposed flood control plan
for the San Jacinto River is a covered
activity under the Western Riverside
County MSHCP and the loss of
infrequent, major flooding events may
negatively affect the ‘‘metapopulation
ecology’’ (dispersal required to
recolonize pools where subpopulations
have been extirpated) of N. fossalis.
Our Response: With regard to the
commenters’ assertions that lands
owned or under the jurisdiction of the
Western Riverside County MSHCP
should not be excluded because the
HCP may not adequately provide for the
survival and recovery of the species, or
because is not being fully implemented,
we agree that the protection afforded
Navarretia fossalis and its essential
habitat under the Western Riverside
County MSHCP is a relevant
consideration in our section 4(b)(2)
exclusion analysis. Exclusion is based
on our determination that the benefits of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
exclusion outweigh the benefits of
inclusion, and that exclusion of an area
will not result in extinction of a species.
We found the benefits of exclusion of
lands covered by the Western Riverside
County MSHCP to be greater than the
minimal benefits of including these
lands in the critical habitat designation
in areas that are currently receiving
long-term conservation and
management to benefit the species (i.e.,
Subunits 6D and 6E). For more
information, see response to Comment
13 and the Application of Section
4(b)(2) of the Act section for a detailed
discussion.
We do not agree with the commenter
that Taylor et al.’s (2005, pp. 360–367)
conclusions compel a finding that lands
covered by the Western Riverside
County MSHCP should be included in
the revised Navarretia fossalis critical
habitat designation. The results of
Taylor et al. (2005, pp. 360–367) do
indicate a significant conservation
benefit of critical habitat designation;
however, that study did not analyze or
discuss the effects of HCP-based
exclusions or the above-described
exclusion determination process for N.
fossalis. The benefits of excluding lands
covered by a particular HCP based on
partnerships must be analyzed
independently and balanced against the
benefits of inclusion (based on
protections provided by critical habitat
that are not redundant with HCP
protections) because HCPs:
(1) Are variable in scope;
(2) Contain variable conservation and
management planning efforts; and
(3) Use species abundance trends that
may not be apparent for many years to
determine effects of conservation
measures.
Therefore, the general conclusions in
the literature cited by the commenter do
not warrant the specific conclusion that
all essential habitat covered by HCPs
should be included in critical habitat.
We agree with the commenter that
when there are agencies with
jurisdiction in the HCP plan area that
are not HCP signatories who may
conduct activities requiring section 7
consultation; the regulatory benefits of
critical habitat designation may be
higher in situations where the likely
protections afforded through the section
7 consultation are not redundant with,
but would go beyond, those afforded
under the HCP. However the benefits of
including or excluding particular areas
may vary even within a specific HCP,
and determining those relative benefits
requires an evaluation of the
circumstances affecting each area. The
mere fact that a Federal nexus exists
does not mean that regulatory benefits
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
of designation will outweigh the
benefits of exclusion.
Regarding the comment that areas
should be included in critical habitat
designation because they require special
management considerations or
protection, this language refers to the
definition of critical habitat, not the
exclusion process. Section 3(5)(A)(i) of
the Act defines critical habitat, in part,
as areas which may require special
management considerations or
protection. Section 4(b)(2) of the Act
directs the Secretary to consider the
impacts of designating such areas as
critical habitat and provides the
Secretary with discretion to exclude
particular areas if the benefits of
exclusion outweigh the benefits of
inclusion. In this rule, we do not state
that areas that are being adequately
managed and protected do not meet the
definition of critical habitat under
section 3(5)(A) of the Act. Rather, we
considered the management and
protection of particular areas that do
meet the definition of critical habitat in
our exclusion analyses under section
4(b)(2) of the Act. Please see Critical
Habitat and Application of Section
4(b)(2) of the Act sections above for
more detailed discussions of the
definition of critical habitat and
exclusion analyses.
Comment 23: One commenter
requested that if we designate new
critical habitat, the revised critical
habitat rule should include clear
guidance to other Federal agencies by
stating that proof of Western Riverside
County MSHCP compliance will allow
the agency to make a ‘‘no effect’’
determination with regard to projects in
designated critical habitat to ensure that
section 7 consultations are consistent
with the Western Riverside County
MSHCP and are completed in a timely
manner.
Our Response: A ‘‘no effect’’
determination is the appropriate
determination when the Federal action
agency determines its proposed action
will not affect a listed species or
designated critical habitat. This requires
a project (and species-specific)
evaluation and analysis of effects to
reach a ‘‘no effect’’ determination.
Therefore, we are unable at this time to
concur with any ‘‘no effect’’
determinations made by other Federal
agencies for any future projects that may
occur in Navarretia fossalis critical
habitat.
Comment 24: One commenter
requested that we exclude Subunit 4E
from the revised critical habitat
designation for Navarretia fossalis based
on partnership benefits. They stated the
Ramona Grasslands Open Space
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
Preserve in Subunit 4E is being
managed and monitored according to
Area Specific Management Directives
built from the scientific framework laid
out in the Framework Management and
Monitoring Plan for the Ramona
Grasslands Open Space Preserve: San
Diego County. The commenter further
stated that preserve management goals
will be revised and updated to comply
with the requirements of the North
County MSCP once it is approved. The
commenter provided a list of current
management actions and specific goals
for the conservation of N. fossalis.
Our Response: As discussed in the
responses to Comments 13 and 21,
exclusions under section 4(b)(2) of the
Act are not based on partnership
benefits alone, but whether the benefits
of exclusion outweigh the benefits of
inclusion. We reviewed the Area
Specific Management Directives
referenced by the commenter and
determined that they do describe and
provide beneficial conservation
measures for Navarretia fossalis that are
redundant with conservation measures
provided by critical habitat designation,
and therefore would reduce the benefits
of inclusion in critical habitat if
implementation were assured into the
future. When considering the benefits of
exclusion, we consider a variety of
factors, including but not limited to
whether the plan is finalized (i.e.,
approved by all parties) and there is a
reasonable expectation that
conservation management strategies and
actions will be implemented into the
future (see Application of Section
4(b)(2) of the Act section for further
discussion). The HCP under which
these measures will be assured of future
implementation is not yet finalized;
therefore, we determined the benefits of
exclusion do not outweigh the benefits
of inclusion for lands within the
Ramona Grasslands Open Space
Preserve portion of Subunit 4E from N.
fossalis critical habitat designation at
this time.
Comment 25: Two commenters
expressed concerns regarding the
inclusion or exclusion of lands owned
or under the jurisdiction of MSCP
permittees in the Navarretia fossalis
final revised critical habitat designation.
The first commenter opposed to
exclusion argued that no biological
benefits are achieved by excluding
habitat within HCP plan areas from
critical habitat designation because:
(1) Research demonstrates species
with designated critical habitat are less
likely to be declining, and twice as
likely to be recovering, than species
without critical habitat (cited Taylor et
al. 2005);
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
(2) The MSCP fails to address
degradation of habitat inside the
conserved areas, especially where illegal
OHV activities have ‘‘severely’’ impacted
vernal pools; and
(3) There are nonsignatory agencies
that have jurisdiction within the MSCP
plan area who conduct activities outside
of the HCP process that require section
7 consultation.
The second commenter stated the
MSCP provides for the conservation of
Navarretia fossalis and therefore lands
owned by or under the jurisdiction of
permittees should be excluded from
critical habitat designation under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
Our Response: A decision to exclude
lands from critical habitat is based on an
evaluation of the benefits of exclusion
in comparison to the benefits of
inclusion. Please see response to
Comment 13 above regarding arguments
for and against exclusion of lands
owned by or under the jurisdiction of
regional HCP permittees. We found the
benefits of exclusion of lands covered
by the County of San Diego Subarea
Plan under the MSCP outweighed the
benefits of inclusion for areas that are
receiving long-term conservation and
management (Subunit 3A); however, we
found that the benefits of inclusion
outweighed the benefits of exclusion on
lands that are currently not conserved
and being impacted by activities that
were not covered by the County of San
Diego Subarea Plan because there were
potential significant benefits to the
conservation of Navarretia fossalis that
may come from the designation of
critical habitat on these lands (Subunits
5B, 5F, and 5I). See response to
Comment 13 and 22 and Application of
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act section for a
complete discussion.
Comment 26: One commenter
recommended critical habitat be
designated on military bases where
applicable, and stated it is not
appropriate to rely on integrated natural
resources management plans (INRMPs)
for protection of Navarretia fossalis.
Our Response: We do not have
discretion to designate critical habitat
on the military bases within proposed
revised critical habitat as suggested by
the commenter. The National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004
(Pub. L. 108–136) amended the Act to
limit areas eligible for designation as
critical habitat. Specifically, section
4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act (16 U.S.C.
1533(a)(3)(B)(i)) now provides: ‘‘The
Secretary shall not designate as critical
habitat any lands or other geographical
areas owned or controlled by the
Department of Defense, or designated
for its use, that are subject to an
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
62231
integrated natural resources
management plan (INRMP) prepared
under section 670a of this title, if the
Secretary determines in writing that
such plan provides a benefit to the
species for which critical habitat is
proposed for designation.’’ (See
Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the Act
section above for further discussion).
We determined the INRMPs for MCB
Camp Pendleton and MCAS Miramar
(Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton
2007; Gene Stout and Associates et al.
2006) provide benefits to Navarretia
fossalis; therefore, the Act mandates we
exempt these military bases from critical
habitat designation (see Application of
Section 4(a)(3) of the Act section above
for further discussion).
Comment 27: One commenter stated
that no areas should be excluded from
critical habitat designation based on
HCPs that have not been finalized and
implemented because there is no
guarantee that proposed HCPs will be
finalized.
Our Response: We did not exclude
any habitat from this revised critical
habitat designation within the plan area
of an HCP permit that has not yet been
issued (see responses to Comments 14
and 24).
Comment 28: One commenter stated
that areas of Unit 6 covered by the
Western Riverside County MSHCP
should be excluded from critical habitat
designation based on the Service’s
permitting Biological Opinion for the
Western Riverside County MSHCP
(Service 2004b) for several reasons:
(1) The Service’s reasoning in the
2005 rule that excluded the same areas
in the 2005 designation;
(2) The proposed designation of these
areas covered by the Western Riverside
County MSHCP is not beneficial to the
species;
(3) The Western Riverside County
MSHCP precludes designation of critical
habitat;
(4) Several species for which critical
habitats were not designated occur on
Western Riverside County MSHCP
covered lands; and
(5) The idea that designations of
critical habitat within the Western
Riverside County MSHCP ultimately
function as disincentives to such
planning processes.
Our Response: For lands within the
jurisdiction of the Western Riverside
County MSHCP, this rule excludes a
portion (Subunits 6D and 6E) and
includes the remaining covered lands
(Subunits 6A, 6B, and 6C) as designated
critical habitat. When we conduct an
exclusion analysis under section 4(b)(2)
of the Act, each exclusion is based on
weighing the benefits of exclusion with
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
62232
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
the benefits of inclusion. We found the
benefits of exclusion of lands covered
by the Western Riverside County
MSHCP to be greater than the minimal
benefits of including these lands in the
critical habitat designation in areas that
receive long-term conservation and
management of the species and its
habitat (i.e., Subunits 6D and 6E). Please
see the Application of Section 4(b)(2) of
the Act section for a detailed discussion
on our exclusion analyses (including
why areas covered by the Western
Riverside County MSHCP that are
designated as critical habitat are
beneficial to the species) for those areas
we considered for exclusion in the
proposed revised critical habitat
designation (74 FR 27588), the
associated document announcing the
DEA (75 FR 19575), and our response to
Comment 13.
With regard to the commenters
concern of designating areas in this rule
that were excluded in the 2005 critical
habitat designation, we did not
designate areas containing essential
habitat features if those habitat features
were already conserved and managed
for the benefit of Navarretia fossalis
because we concluded that the areas did
not meet the second part of the
definition of critical habitat under
section 3(5)(a)(i) of the Act. We have
reconsidered our approach in this rule
in light of subsequent court decisions
and have decided that areas containing
essential habitat features that ‘‘may
require’’ special management
considerations or protection do meet the
definition of critical habitat irrespective
of whether the habitat features are
currently receiving special management
or protection. See the Summary of
Changes From the 2005 Final
Designation of Critical Habitat section
for further discussion of why some areas
were included as critical habitat in this
rule that were excluded in the 2005
rule.
With regard to the commenter’s belief
that critical habitat should not be
designated in the Western Riverside
County MSHCP Plan Area based on
language in section 6.9 of the HCP and
the associated Implementing
Agreement, section 14.10 of the
Implementing Agreement does not
preclude critical habitat designation
within the plan area (Dudek and
Associates 2003, p. 63). See our
response to Comment 20 for a
discussion of why critical habitat is not
precluded under an HCP Implementing
Agreement.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
Required Determinations
Regulatory Planning and Review—
Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has determined that this rule is
not significant and has not reviewed
this rule under Executive Order 12866
(E.O. 12866). OMB bases its
determination upon the following four
criteria:
(1) Whether the rule will have an
annual effect of $100 million or more on
the economy or adversely affect an
economic sector, productivity, jobs, the
environment, or other units of the
government.
(2) Whether the rule will create
inconsistencies with other Federal
agencies’ actions.
(3) Whether the rule will materially
affect entitlements, grants, user fees,
loan programs, or the rights and
obligations of their recipients.
(4) Whether the rule raises novel legal
or policy issues.
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 is required to 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
effect of the rule on small entities (small
businesses, small organizations, and
small government jurisdictions), as
described below. 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 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.
In this final rule, we are certifying that
the critical habitat designation for
Navarretia fossalis will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The following discussion explains our
rationale.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
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 to these
small entities are significant, we
considered the types of activities that
might trigger regulatory impacts under
this rule, as well as 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.
To determine if the revised
designation of critical habitat for
Navarretia fossalis would significantly
affect a substantial number of small
entities, we consider the number of
small entities affected within particular
types of economic activities, such as
residential and commercial
development. We apply the ‘‘substantial
number’’ test individually to each
industry to determine if certification is
appropriate. However, the SBREFA does
not explicitly define ‘‘substantial
number’’ or ‘‘significant economic
impact.’’ Consequently, to assess
whether a ‘‘substantial number’’ of small
entities is affected by this designation,
this analysis considers the relative
number of small entities likely to be
impacted in an area. In some
circumstances, especially with critical
habitat designations of limited extent,
we may aggregate across all industries
and consider whether the total number
of small entities affected is substantial.
In estimating the number of small
entities potentially affected, we also
consider whether their activities have
any Federal involvement.
Designation of critical habitat only
affects activities authorized, funded, or
carried out by Federal agencies. Some
kinds of activities are unlikely to have
any Federal involvement and so will not
be affected by critical habitat
designation. In areas where the
Navarretia fossalis is present, Federal
agencies already are required to consult
with us under section 7 of the Act on
activities they authorize, fund, or carry
out that may affect the species. Federal
agencies also must consult with us if
their activities may affect critical
habitat. Designation of critical habitat,
therefore, could result in an additional
economic impact on small entities due
to the requirement to reinitiate
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
consultation for ongoing Federal
activities (see Application of the
‘‘Adverse Modification’’ Standard
section).
In our final economic analysis of the
critical habitat designation, we
evaluated the potential economic effects
on small business entities resulting from
implementation of conservation actions
related to the revised designation of
critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis.
The analysis is based on the estimated
impacts associated with the rulemaking
as described in sections 3 through 9 of
the analysis and evaluates the potential
for economic impacts related to:
residential, commercial and industrial
development; conservation lands
management; transportation; pipeline
projects; flood control; agriculture; and
fire management (Entrix 2010, p. A-1).
The FEA estimates the total incremental
impacts associated with development as
a whole to be $112,000 to $431,000 over
the 20–year timeframe of the FEA. The
FEA identifies incremental impacts to
small entities to occur only in the
development sector (Entrix 2010, p. A2). The other categories of projects
either will have no impacts
(conservation land management,
pipeline projects, agriculture, or fire
management) or are Federal, State, or
public entities not considered small or
exceed the criteria for small business
status (Entrix 2010, pp. A-1–A-2). Of the
approximately 3,143 ac (1,272 ha) land
considered developable in the
designation, only 1,130 ac (457 ha) has
been forecasted to be developed over the
next 20–year timeframe (Entrix 2010, p.
A-3). The FEA equates this acreage to 38
projects, with one developer per project
(Entrix 2010, p. A-3). The FEA
summarizes that two developers
annually may be affected by the
designation of critical habitat resulting
in total annualized incremental impacts
to small entities of $10,565 to $40,644
(Entrix 2010, pp. A-3, A-4). The FEA
assumes all developers are considered
small and states that this estimate may
overstate impacts if not all of the
developers are small (Entrix 2010, p. A4). The FEA also states (Section 3 of the
FEA) that where substitute land is
readily available to developers, costs
will be passed on to affected
landowners in the form of decreased
land value and that under such
circumstances most of the costs will not
be borne by developers (Entrix 2010, p.
A-4). Please refer to our final economic
analysis of critical habitat designation
for N. fossalis for a more detailed
discussion of potential economic
impacts.
In summary, we considered whether
this designation would result in a
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
significant economic effect on a
substantial number of small entities.
The total number of small businesses
impacted annually by the designation is
estimated to be two, with an annualized
impact of approximately of $10,565 to
$40,644. This impact is less than 10
percent of the total incremental impact
identified for development activities
and may be an overestimate of the
impacts considering that not all
developers will be small and that some
of these costs may be passed on to
landowners. Based on the above
reasoning and currently available
information, we concluded this rule
would not result in a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities for
transportation, development, and flood
control impacts as identified in the FEA
(Entrix 2010, pp. A-1–A-4). Therefore,
we are certifying that the designation of
critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis
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
On May 18, 2001, the President issued
Executive Order 13211 (E.O. 13211;
‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use’’) on regulations that
significantly affect energy supply,
distribution, and use. E.O. 13211
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 finds that none of
these criteria are relevant to this
analysis. Thus, based on information in
the economic analysis, energy-related
impacts associated with Navarretia
fossalis 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, the Service
makes the following findings:
(1) This rule will not produce a
Federal mandate. In general, a Federal
mandate is a provision in legislation,
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
62233
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 [T]ribal
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 nonFederal 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
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
62234
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
shift the costs of the large entitlement
programs listed above onto State
governments.
(2) As discussed in the FEA of the
revised designation of critical habitat for
Navarretia fossalis, we do not believe
that this rule would significantly or
uniquely affect small governments
because it would 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 . The FEA
concludes incremental impacts may
occur due to administrative costs of
section 7 consultations for development,
transportation, and flood control
projects activities; however, these are
not expected to significantly affect small
governments. Incremental impacts
stemming from various species
conservation and development control
activities are expected to be borne by
the Federal Government, California
Department of Transportation, CDFG,
Riverside County, Riverside County
Flood Control and Water Conservation
District, and City of Perris, which are
not considered small governments.
Consequently, we do not believe that
the revised critical habitat designation
would significantly or uniquely affect
small government entities. As such, a
Small Government Agency Plan is not
required.
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
Takings—Executive Order 12630
In accordance with E.O. 12630
(‘‘Government Actions and Interference
with Constitutionally Protected Private
Property Rights’’), we have analyzed the
potential takings implications of
designating critical habitat for
Navarretia fossalis in a takings
implications assessment. Critical habitat
designation does not affect landowner
actions that do not require Federal
funding or permits, nor does it preclude
development of habitat conservation
programs or issuance of incidental take
permits to permit actions that do require
Federal funding or permits to go
forward. The takings implications
assessment concludes that this
designation of critical habitat for N.
fossalis does not pose significant takings
implications for lands within or affected
by the designation.
Federalism—Executive Order 13132
In accordance with E.O. 13132
(Federalism), the rule does not have
significant Federalism effects. A
Federalism assessment is not required.
In keeping with Department of the
Interior, we requested information from,
and coordinated development of the
proposed critical habitat designation
with appropriate State resource agencies
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
in California. 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 primary constituent elements 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 E.O. 12988 (Civil
Justice Reform), this rule 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. This final rule uses standard
property descriptions and identifies the
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
subspecies within the designated areas
to assist the public in understanding the
habitat needs of Navarretia fossalis.
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
(NEPA) (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
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
prepare environmental analyses as
defined by NEPA 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), E.O. 13175,
and the Department of the Interior’s
manual at 512 DM 2, we have a
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.
We determined that there are no tribal
lands occupied at the time of listing that
contain the features essential for the
conservation of the species, nor are
there any unoccupied tribal lands that
are essential for the conservation of
Navarretia fossalis. Therefore, we are
not designating critical habitat for N.
fossalis on tribal lands.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited
in this rulemaking is available on https://
www.regulations.gov and upon request
from the Field Supervisor, Carlsbad Fish
and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section).
Authors
The primary authors of this notice are
the staff members of the Carlsbad Fish
and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section).
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species,
Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements,
Transportation.
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
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]
1. 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. In § 17.96(a), revise the entry for
‘‘Navarretia fossalis (spreading
navarretia)’’ under family
Polemoniaceae to read as follows:
■
§ 17.96
Critical habitat—plants.
(a) Flowering plants.
*
*
*
*
*
Family Polemoniaceae: Navarretia
fossalis (spreading navarretia)
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
(1) Critical habitat units are depicted
for Los Angeles, Riverside, and San
Diego Counties, California, on the maps
below.
(2) Within these areas, the primary
constituent elements (PCEs) for
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
Navarretia fossalis consist of three
components:
(i) PCE 1—Ephemeral wetland
habitat. Vernal pools (up to 10 ac (4 ha))
and seasonally flooded alkali vernal
plains that become inundated by winter
rains and hold water or have saturated
soils for 2 weeks to 6 months during a
year with average rainfall (i.e., years
where average rainfall amounts for a
particular area are reached during the
rainy season (between October and
May)). This period of inundation is long
enough to promote germination,
flowering, and seed production for
Navarretia fossalis and other native
species typical of vernal pool and
seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain
habitat, but not so long that true
wetland species inhabit the areas.
(ii) PCE 2—Intermixed wetland and
upland habitats that act as the local
watershed. Areas characterized by
mounds, swales, and depressions within
a matrix of upland habitat that result in
intermittently flowing surface and
subsurface water in swales, drainages,
and pools described in PCE 1.
(iii) PCE 3—Soils that support
ponding during winter and spring. Soils
found in areas characterized in PCEs 1
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
62235
and 2 that have a clay component or
other property that creates an
impermeable surface or subsurface
layer. These soil types include, but are
not limited to: Cieneba-Pismo-Caperton
soils in Los Angeles County; Domino,
Traver, Waukena, Chino, and Willows
soils in Riverside County; and
Huerhuero, Placentia, Olivenhain,
Stockpen, and Redding soils in San
Diego County.
(3) Critical habitat does not include
manmade structures existing on the
effective date of this rule and not
containing one of more of the primary
constituent elements, such as buildings,
aqueducts, airports, and roads, and the
land on which such structures are
located.
(4) Critical habitat map units. Data
layers defining map units were created
using a base of U.S. Geological Survey
7.5’ quadrangle maps. Critical habitat
units were then mapped using Universal
Transverse Mercator (UTM) zone 11,
North American Datum (NAD) 1983
coordinates.
(5) Note: Index Map of critical habitat
units for Navarretia fossalis (spreading
navarretia) follows:
BILLING CODE 4310–55–S
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
(6) Unit 1: Los Angeles Basin–Orange
Management Area, Los Angeles County,
CA. Subunit 1A: Cruzan Mesa.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle
Mint Canyon. Land bounded by the
following Universal Transverse
Mercator (UTM) North American Datum
of 1983 (NAD83) coordinates (E, N):
367454, 3813696; 367493, 3813876;
367443, 3813933; 367418, 3814003;
367396, 3814159; 367387, 3814304;
367454, 3814474; 367517, 3814549;
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
367580, 3814651; 367676, 3814752;
367807, 3814866; 367996, 3814923;
368172, 3815075; 368198, 3815107;
368375, 3815036; 368318, 3814957;
368262, 3814889; 368198, 3814795;
368181, 3814768; 368108, 3814754;
368073, 3814710; 367963, 3814624;
367921, 3814549; 367938, 3814421;
368014, 3814343; 368006, 3814230;
368048, 3814134; 368070, 3814110;
368060, 3814070; 368014, 3814065;
367972, 3814041; 367955, 3813970;
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
367935, 3813962; 367866, 3813938;
367834, 3813913; 367795, 3813849;
367740, 3813818; 367720, 3813762;
367640, 3813619; 367577, 3813595;
367520, 3813592; 367481, 3813628;
367454, 3813696; thence returning to
367454, 3813696.
(ii) Note: Map of Subunit 1A (Cruzan
Mesa) is provided at paragraph (7)(ii) of
this entry.
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
ER07OC10.002</GPH>
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
62236
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
366266, 3812973; 366271, 3813010;
366295, 3813063; 366333, 3813106;
366370, 3813141; 366424, 3813157;
366448, 3813168; 366505, 3813193;
366585, 3813271; 366601, 3813269;
366600, 3813233; 366619, 3813163;
366628, 3813088; 366619, 3813004;
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
366612, 3812959; 366602, 3812939;
366532, 3812913; 366490, 3812911;
366441, 3812920; 366405, 3812925;
thence returning to 366405, 3812925.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 1, Subunits 1A
(Cruzan Mesa) and 1B (Plum Canyon)
follows:
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
ER07OC10.003</GPH>
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
(7) Unit 1: Los Angeles Basin–Orange
Management Area, Los Angeles County,
CA. Subunit 1B: Plum Canyon.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle
Mint Canyon. Land bounded by the
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E,
N): 366405, 3812925; 366364, 3812918;
366339, 3812957; 366287, 3812974;
62237
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
(8) Unit 2: San Diego: Northern
Coastal Mesa Management Area—
Poinsettia Lane Commuter Station, San
Diego County, CA.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle
Encinitas. Land bounded by the
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E,
N): 470268, 3663409; 470278, 3663384;
470281, 3663385; 470287, 3663371;
470291, 3663351; 470291, 3663350;
470312, 3663306; 470317, 3663288;
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
470319, 3663280; 470359, 3663184;
470392, 3663084; 470440, 3662935;
470487, 3662900; 470520, 3662863;
470515, 3662828; 470501, 3662798;
470529, 3662710; 470522, 3662706;
470515, 3662703; 470501, 3662700;
470476, 3662766; 470454, 3662825;
470429, 3662892; 470404, 3662960;
470386, 3663008; 470368, 3663055;
470361, 3663075; 470296, 3663238;
470184, 3663499; 470163, 3663558;
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
470195, 3663563; 470209, 3663563;
470210, 3663559; 470213, 3663548;
470223, 3663527; 470234, 3663498;
470242, 3663476; 470248, 3663458;
470251, 3663445; 470251, 3663440;
470260, 3663420; 470264, 3663415;
thence returning to 470268, 3663409.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 2 (Poinsettia
Lane Commuter Station) follows:
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
ER07OC10.004</GPH>
62238
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
485008, 3639919; 485017, 3639943;
485017, 3639943; 485018, 3639947;
485035, 3639991; 485533, 3639996;
485537, 3639996; 485537, 3639996;
485525, 3639961; 485476, 3639931;
485440, 3639908; 485440, 3639908;
485338, 3639845; 485223, 3639815;
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
485221, 3639814; 485179, 3639804;
485179, 3639803; 485158, 3639798;
485086, 3639788; 485070, 3639828;
485008, 3639919; thence returning to
485008, 3639919.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 3, Subunit 3B
(Carroll Canyon) follows:
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
ER07OC10.005</GPH>
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
(9) Unit 3: San Diego: Central Coastal
Mesa Management Area, San Diego
County, CA. Subunit 3B: Carroll
Canyon.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle
Del Mar. Land bounded by the following
UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N):
62239
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
(10) Unit 3: San Diego: Central Coastal
Mesa Management Area, San Diego
County, CA. Subunit 3C: Nobel Drive.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle La
Jolla. Land bounded by the following
UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N):
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
481837, 3636331; 481667, 3636273;
481510, 3636284; 481409, 3636370;
481393, 3636384; 481475, 3636442;
481708, 3636763; 481796, 3636699;
481797, 3636697; 481797, 3636697;
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
481877, 3636570; 481965, 3636407;
481837, 3636331; thence returning to
481837, 3636331.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 3, Subunit 3C
(Nobel Drive) follows:
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
ER07OC10.006</GPH>
62240
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
487233, 3630813; 487194, 3630830;
487232, 3630926; 487248, 3630966;
487260, 3630999; 487281, 3631001;
487306, 3630997; 487327, 3630977;
487330, 3630975; 487334, 3630978;
487336, 3630979; 487341, 3630983;
487343, 3630991; 487359, 3631033;
487363, 3631045; 487361, 3631049;
487357, 3631057; 487377, 3631099;
487386, 3631117; 487376, 3631131;
487375, 3631131; 487326, 3631133;
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
487336, 3631175; 487340, 3631237;
487346, 3631328; 487347, 3631333;
487384, 3631352; 487437, 3631378;
487571, 3631443; 487594, 3631446;
487598, 3631422; 487598, 3631310;
487575, 3631296; 487573, 3630977;
thence returning to 487573, 3630977.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 3, Subunit 3D
(Montgomery Field) follows:
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
ER07OC10.007</GPH>
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
(11) Unit 3: San Diego: Central Coastal
Mesa Management Area, San Diego
County, CA. Subunit 3D: Montgomery
Field.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle La
Jolla. Land bounded by the following
UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N):
487573, 3630977; 487591, 3630964;
487627, 3630940; 487619, 3630908;
487617, 3630896; 487645, 3630880;
487577, 3630651; 487447, 3630712;
62241
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
(12) Unit 4: San Diego: Inland
Management Area, San Diego County,
CA. Subunit 4C1: San Marcos (Upham).
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle
San Marcos. Land bounded by the
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E,
N): 481857, 3666532; 481841, 3666524;
481458, 3666685; 481587, 3666988;
481974, 3666823; 481857, 3666532;
thence returning to 481857, 3666532.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 4, Subunit 4C1
is provided at paragraph (14)(ii) of this
entry.
(13) Unit 4: San Diego: Inland
Management Area, San Diego County,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
CA. Subunit 4C2: San Marcos (Universal
Boot).
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle
San Marcos. Land bounded by the
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E,
N): 481373, 3666492; 481676, 3666355;
481700, 3666464; 481813, 3666423;
481809, 3666367; 481877, 3666133;
481805, 3666113; 481825, 3666048;
481669, 3666007; 481641, 3666000;
481639, 3666000; 481639, 3666002;
481618, 3666066; 481555, 3666266;
481317, 3666363; 481373, 3666492;
thence returning to 481373, 3666492.
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 4, Subunit 4C2
is provided at paragraph (14)(ii) of this
entry.
(14) Unit 4: San Diego: Inland
Management Area, San Diego County,
CA. Subunit 4D: San Marcos (Bent
Avenue).
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle
San Marcos. Land bounded by the
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E,
N): 482781, 3666563; 482772, 3666562;
482716, 3666750; 482842, 3666785;
482865, 3666703; 482781, 3666563;
thence returning to 482781, 3666563.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 4, Subunits
4C1, 4C2, and 4D (San Marcos) follows:
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
ER07OC10.008</GPH>
62242
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
3654982; 508357, 3654989; 508270,
3655050; 508115, 3655137; 508036,
3655159; 507889, 3655176; 507807,
3655222; 507750, 3655265; 507772,
3655380; 507758, 3655500; 507813,
3655500; 507965, 3655470; 508357,
3655383; 508363, 3655347; 508363,
3655345; 508375, 3655275; 508376,
3655265; 509073, 3655260; 509073,
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
3655260; 509073, 3655260; 509180,
3655257; 509181, 3655234; 509181,
3655233; 509209, 3654862; 509082,
3654835; 508896, 3654822; 508768,
3654813; thence returning to 508768,
3654813.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 4, Subunit 4E
(Ramona) follows:
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
ER07OC10.009</GPH>
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
(15) Unit 4: San Diego: Inland
Management Area, San Diego County,
CA. Subunit 4E: Ramona.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle
San Pasqual. Land bounded by the
following UTM NAD83 (E, N): 508768,
3654813; 508597, 3654751; 508493,
3654857; 508382, 3654971; 508373,
3654977; 508373, 3654977; 508366,
62243
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
(16) Unit 5: San Diego: Southern
Coastal Mesa Management Area, San
Diego County, CA. Subunit 5A:
Sweetwater Vernal Pools.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle
Jamul Mountains. Land bounded by the
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E,
N): 501084, 3616605; 501096, 3616520;
501078, 3616418; 501054, 3616382;
501054, 3616382; 501051, 3616377;
501051, 3616376; 501051, 3616376;
501051, 3616376; 501049, 3616374;
501052, 3616122; 501052, 3616122;
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
501052, 3616121; 501053, 3616099;
501005, 3616101; 501004, 3616101;
501002, 3616102; 500915, 3616106;
500913, 3616107; 500913, 3616107;
500814, 3616112; 500775, 3616112;
500775, 3616112; 500775, 3616112;
500769, 3616112; 500562, 3616233;
500497, 3616288; 500462, 3616334;
500436, 3616380; 500420, 3616409;
500402, 3616428; 500327, 3616508;
500312, 3616524; 500300, 3616596;
500356, 3616639; 500425, 3616639;
500468, 3616628; 500511, 3616617;
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
500591, 3616596; 500640, 3616597;
500651, 3616619; 500670, 3616713;
500671, 3616718; 500685, 3616767;
500770, 3616826; 500802, 3616841;
500872, 3616836; 500903, 3616834;
500952, 3616822; 501051, 3616760;
501075, 3616669; 501075, 3616667;
501076, 3616663; 501084, 3616607;
501084, 3616605; 501084, 3616605;
thence returning to 501084, 3616605.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 5, Subunit 5A
(Sweetwater Vernal Pools) follows:
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
ER07OC10.010</GPH>
62244
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
499815, 3607834; 499768, 3607839;
499731, 3607866; 499747, 3607899;
499762, 3607949; 499818, 3607996;
499843, 3608025; 499843, 3608079;
499818, 3608100; 499815, 3608107;
499784, 3608170; 499796, 3608236;
499838, 3608323; 499855, 3608364;
499880, 3608400; 499909, 3608415;
499921, 3608415; 499944, 3608404;
499957, 3608370; 499997, 3608238;
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
499997, 3608196; 499994, 3608161;
499992, 3608144; 499988, 3608082;
499962, 3608026; 499936, 3607993;
499920, 3607960; 499923, 3607916;
499939, 3607872; 499957, 3607827;
499953, 3607783; thence returning to
499953, 3607783.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 5, Subunit 5B
(Otay River Valley) follows:
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
ER07OC10.011</GPH>
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
(17) Unit 5: San Diego: Southern
Coastal Mesa Management Area, San
Diego County, CA. Subunit 5B: Otay
River Valley.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles
Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa. Land
bounded by the following UTM NAD83
coordinates (E, N): 499953, 3607783;
499924, 3607743; 499882, 3607749;
499871, 3607775; 499868, 3607814;
62245
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
(18) Unit 5: San Diego: Southern
Coastal Mesa Management Area, San
Diego County, CA. Subunit 5C: Otay
Mesa.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle
Otay Mesa. Land bounded by the
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E,
N): 506759, 3606253; 506757, 3606201;
506702, 3606219; 506663, 3606258;
506601, 3606362; 506590, 3606382;
506575, 3606411; 506575, 3606411;
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
506535, 3606490; 506509, 3606580;
506503, 3606601; 506485, 3606661;
506481, 3606693; 506531, 3606734;
506581, 3606748; 506599, 3606760;
506600, 3606760; 506617, 3606771;
506634, 3606848; 506641, 3606869;
506642, 3606870; 506660, 3606918;
506706, 3606936; 506750, 3606885;
506777, 3606855; 506777, 3606854;
506792, 3606837; 506829, 3606785;
506880, 3606730; 506913, 3606679;
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
506915, 3606602; 506915, 3606597;
506918, 3606535; 506901, 3606523;
506901, 3606523; 506885, 3606512;
506841, 3606510; 506807, 3606502;
506776, 3606485; 506776, 3606485;
506768, 3606480; 506768, 3606473;
506768, 3606473; 506759, 3606253;
506759, 3606253; thence returning to
506759, 3606253.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 5, Subunit 5C
(Otay Mesa) follows:
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
ER07OC10.012</GPH>
62246
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
507239, 3615163; 507269, 3615226;
507269, 3615275; 507213, 3615335;
507188, 3615393; 507188, 3615433;
507194, 3615465; 507194, 3615465;
507194, 3615465; 507196, 3615476;
507211, 3615508; 507298, 3615529;
507316, 3615587; 507301, 3615676;
507301, 3615723; 507301, 3615800;
507362, 3615808; 507402, 3615865;
507403, 3615866; 507448, 3615906;
507488, 3615906; 507526, 3615872;
507556, 3615806; 507605, 3615706;
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
507590, 3615601; 507537, 3615580;
507514, 3615518; 507556, 3615510;
507654, 3615493; 507669, 3615405;
507661, 3615318; 507661, 3615220;
507674, 3615164; 507678, 3615148;
507680, 3615073; 507679, 3615062;
507679, 3615062; 507679, 3615062;
507676, 3615007; thence returning to
507676, 3615007.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 5, Subunit 5F
(Proctor Valley) follows:
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
ER07OC10.013</GPH>
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
(19) Unit 5: San Diego: Southern
Coastal Mesa Management Area, San
Diego County, CA. Subunit 5F: Proctor
Valley.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle
Jamul Mountains. Land bounded by the
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E,
N): 507676, 3615007; 507616, 3614943;
507548, 3614930; 507458, 3614918;
507386, 3614907; 507320, 3614907;
507247, 3614939; 507190, 3614947;
507173, 3614947; 507188, 3615018;
62247
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
(20) Unit 5: San Diego: Southern
Coastal Mesa Management Area, San
Diego County, CA. Subunit 5G: Otay
Lakes.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles
Jamul Mountains and Otay Mesa. Land
bounded by the following UTM NAD83
coordinates (E, N): 508045, 3609784;
508120, 3609675; 508188, 3609745;
508194, 3609751; 508316, 3609736;
508337, 3609733; 508400, 3609730;
508423, 3609791; 508450, 3609898;
508460, 3609936; 508570, 3609926;
508651, 3609926; 508671, 3609898;
508672, 3609897; 508707, 3609847;
508714, 3609756; 508646, 3609718;
508323, 3609536; 508199, 3609465;
508094, 3609406; 508033, 3609385;
507917, 3609374; 507800, 3609334;
507695, 3609287; 507595, 3609248;
507467, 3609283; 507394, 3609229;
507308, 3609250; 507303, 3609341;
507359, 3609406; 507392, 3609455;
507371, 3609565; 507383, 3609658;
507366, 3609763; 507387, 3609868;
507392, 3609895; 507404, 3609959;
507455, 3609968; 507572, 3609922;
507715, 3609896; 507742, 3609891;
507912, 3609880; 508045, 3609784;
thence returning to 508045, 3609784.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 5, Subunit 5G
(Otay Lakes) follows:
BILLING CODE 4310–55–C
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
ER07OC10.014</GPH>
62248
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
(21) Unit 5: San Diego: Southern
Coastal Mesa Management Area, San
Diego County, CA. Subunit 5H: Western
Otay Mesa Vernal Pool Complexes.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles
Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa. Land
bounded by the following UTM NAD83
coordinates (E, N): 498398, 3601961;
498398, 3601927; 498482, 3601937;
498514, 3601914; 498495, 3601822;
498463, 3601742; 498434, 3601651;
498324, 3601579; 498154, 3601581;
498025, 3601666; 498008, 3601765;
498093, 3601864; 498185, 3601904;
498223, 3601940; 498240, 3602001;
498268, 3602119; 498268, 3602251;
498375, 3602256; 498461, 3602258;
498495, 3602211; 498468, 3602159;
498468, 3602158; 498463, 3602148;
498450, 3602119; 498450, 3602119;
498436, 3602087; 498407, 3602039;
498398, 3601961; thence returning to
498398, 3601961.
(ii) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles
Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa. Land
bounded by the following UTM NAD83
coordinates (E, N): 497444, 3602605;
497382, 3602601; 497311, 3602614;
497263, 3602633; 497255, 3602688;
497270, 3602708; 497270, 3602708;
497287, 3602732; 497379, 3602732;
497424, 3602725; 497443, 3602708;
497443, 3602707; 497447, 3602704;
497529, 3602702; 497546, 3602702;
497545, 3602698; 497545, 3602698;
497529, 3602651; 497518, 3602636;
497515, 3602631; 497455, 3602606;
497444, 3602605; 497444, 3602605;
thence returning to 497444, 3602605.
(iii) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles
Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa. Land
bounded by the following UTM NAD83
coordinates (E, N): 498002, 3602859;
497981, 3602853; 497930, 3602857;
497929, 3602859; 497911, 3602885;
497934, 3602916; 497946, 3602955;
497985, 3602951; 497981, 3602939;
497985, 3602920; 498000, 3602888;
498012, 3602861; 498002, 3602859;
thence returning to 498002, 3602859.
(iv) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles
Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa. Land
bounded by the following UTM NAD83
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
coordinates (E, N): 499680, 3603156;
499688, 3603148; 499683, 3603090;
499717, 3603078; 499739, 3603039;
499829, 3603005; 499812, 3602945;
499754, 3602867; 499676, 3602836;
499584, 3602794; 499553, 3602833;
499536, 3602889; 499519, 3602920;
499485, 3602983; 499483, 3603035;
499478, 3603172; 499490, 3603173;
499497, 3603173; 499577, 3603174;
499584, 3603178; 499607, 3603175;
499624, 3603162; 499680, 3603156;
thence returning to 499680, 3603156.
(v) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles
Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa. Land
bounded by the following UTM NAD83
coordinates (E, N): 499158, 3603493;
499170, 3603456; 499130, 3603457;
499083, 3603458; 499083, 3603495;
499075, 3603541; 499070, 3603572;
499121, 3603582; 499130, 3603565;
499141, 3603546; 499158, 3603493;
thence returning to 499158, 3603493.
(vi) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles
Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa. Land
bounded by the following UTM NAD83
coordinates (E, N): 499007, 3603851;
499012, 3603773; 499051, 3603691;
499044, 3603640; 498993, 3603609;
498983, 3603633; 498993, 3603652;
498993, 3603655; 498986, 3603722;
498984, 3603778; 498983, 3603805;
498979, 3603807; 498953, 3603817;
498947, 3603819; 498903, 3603790;
498852, 3603749; 498857, 3603715;
498823, 3603688; 498741, 3603676;
498702, 3603688; 498719, 3603715;
498763, 3603742; 498826, 3603776;
498874, 3603817; 498930, 3603831;
498957, 3603847; 499000, 3603873;
499007, 3603851; thence returning to
499007, 3603851.
(vii) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles
Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa. Land
bounded by the following UTM NAD83
coordinates (E, N): 499259, 3603894;
499303, 3603885; 499344, 3603890;
499383, 3603892; 499384, 3603882;
499390, 3603749; 499393, 3603531;
499431, 3603514; 499458, 3603487;
499461, 3603449; 499189, 3603449;
499221, 3603587; 499233, 3603618;
499247, 3603633; 499267, 3603642;
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
62249
499269, 3603664; 499267, 3603679;
499209, 3603701; 499182, 3603768;
499184, 3603807; 499177, 3603877;
499186, 3603886; 499206, 3603907;
499259, 3603894; thence returning to
499259, 3603894.
(viii) From USGS 1:24,000
quadrangles Imperial Beach and Otay
Mesa. Land bounded by the following
UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N):
499359, 3604115; 499359, 3604025;
499350, 3604018; 499347, 3604016;
499320, 3604033; 499314, 3604043;
499286, 3604091; 499257, 3604115;
499221, 3604110; 499177, 3604098;
499160, 3604125; 499160, 3604197;
499148, 3604270; 499143, 3604287;
499153, 3604292; 499223, 3604309;
499293, 3604299; 499330, 3604270;
499361, 3604239; 499387, 3604214;
499398, 3604205; 499383, 3604178;
499359, 3604159; 499359, 3604122;
499359, 3604115; thence returning to
499359, 3604115.
(ix) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles
Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa. Land
bounded by the following UTM NAD83
coordinates (E, N): 499618, 3604583;
499662, 3604524; 499662, 3604352;
499620, 3604367; 499541, 3604418;
499504, 3604459; 499475, 3604484;
499446, 3604510; 499436, 3604546;
499451, 3604575; 499475, 3604575;
499475, 3604575; 499528, 3604566;
499562, 3604568; 499618, 3604583;
thence returning to 499618, 3604583.
(x) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles
Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa. Land
bounded by the following UTM NAD83
coordinates (E, N): 500083, 3603092;
500026, 3603130; 499985, 3603143;
499944, 3603149; 499903, 3603164;
499898, 3603164; 499885, 3603170;
499886, 3603218; 499880, 3603221;
499880, 3603325; 499949, 3603340;
499967, 3603344; 499969, 3603407;
500093, 3603400; 500083, 3603092;
500083, 3603092; thence returning to
500083, 3603092.
(xi) Note: Map of Unit 5, Subunit 5H
(Western Otay Mesa Vernal Pool
Complexes) follows:
BILLING CODE 4310–55–S
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
(22) Unit 5: San Diego: Southern
Coastal Mesa Management Area, San
Diego County, CA. Subunit 5I: Eastern
Otay Mesa Vernal Pool Complexes.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle
Otay Mesa. Land bounded by the
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
N): 505882, 3604195; 505900, 3603953;
505859, 3603974; 505832, 3603989;
505798, 3604009; 505753, 3604040;
505721, 3604065; 505690, 3604091;
505662, 3604118; 505633, 3604147;
505608, 3604176; 505569, 3604222;
505539, 3604260; 505527, 3604287;
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
505547, 3604326; 505587, 3604372;
505626, 3604399; 505733, 3604393;
505828, 3604330; 505863, 3604289;
505865, 3604259; 505882, 3604195;
thence returning to 505882, 3604195.
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
ER07OC10.015</GPH>
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
62250
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
503050, 3605001; 503061, 3605030;
503092, 3605139; 503130, 3605145;
503160, 3605149; 503223, 3605127;
thence returning to 503223, 3605127.
(iii) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle
Otay Mesa. Land bounded by the
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E,
N):504614, 3605172; 504617, 3605127;
504583, 3605128; 504550, 3605129;
504519, 3605130; 504519, 3605122;
504540, 3604842; 503733, 3604867;
503681, 3604857; 503658, 3604846;
503624, 3604830; 503406, 3605134;
503467, 3605162; 503530, 3605134;
503588, 3605119; 503598, 3605139;
503598, 3605200; 503672, 3605223;
503753, 3605309; 503847, 3605347;
503912, 3605382; 503925, 3605389;
504011, 3605433; 504067, 3605433;
504096, 3605387; 504102, 3605377;
504186, 3605344; 504240, 3605309;
504283, 3605282; 504358, 3605268;
504475, 3605246; 504552, 3605221;
504561, 3605218; 504587, 3605196;
504614, 3605172; thence returning to
504614, 3605172.
(iv) Note: Map of Unit 5, Subunit 5I
(Eastern Otay Mesa Vernal Pool
Complexes) follows:
BILLING CODE 4310–55–C
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
ER07OC10.016</GPH>
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
(ii) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle
Otay Mesa. Land bounded by the
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E,
N): 503223, 3605127; 503429, 3604767;
503325, 3604734; 503153, 3604635;
503028, 3604559; 502978, 3604516;
502955, 3604458; 502942, 3604387;
502909, 3604331; 502856, 3604268;
502838, 3604202; 502733, 3604206;
502719, 3604815; 502735, 3605001;
502742, 3605091; 502788, 3605114;
502833, 3605086; 502840, 3605001;
502847, 3604914; 502930, 3604871;
502988, 3604876; 503021, 3604924;
62251
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
62252
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
(23) Unit 6: Riverside: Riverside
Management Area, Riverside County,
CA. Subunit 6A: San Jacinto River.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles
Perris and Lakeview. Land bounded by
the following UTM NAD83 coordinates
(E, N): 480115, 3736015; 480123,
3736089; 480006, 3736246; 479961,
3736644; 479978, 3736737; 480068,
3736890; 481015, 3736904; 481258,
3737111; 481423, 3736990; 481474,
3736952; 481500, 3736933; 481500,
3736933; 481545, 3736899; 481546,
3736899; 481550, 3736896; 481717,
3736773; 481889, 3736646; 481884,
3736589; 481807, 3736439; 481388,
3735908; 481199, 3735637; 481101,
3735567; 480929, 3735516; 480866,
3735513; 480742, 3735505; 480700,
3735490; 480699, 3735490; 480658,
3735471; 480615, 3735434; 480604,
3735421; 480565, 3735397; 480520,
3735296; 480463, 3735138; 480410,
3735025; 480359, 3734946; 480274,
3734884; 480175, 3734856; 480102,
3734839; 480006, 3734830; 479843,
3734847; 479783, 3734918; 479733,
3735028; 479744, 3735177; 479783,
3735259; 479899, 3735327; 479936,
3735397; 479969, 3735510; 480020,
3735584; 480071, 3735637; 480106,
3735671; 480115, 3736015; thence
returning to 480115, 3736015.
(ii) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles
Perris and Lakeview. Land bounded by
the following UTM NAD83 coordinates
(E, N):482086, 3737103; 481896,
3737158; 481736, 3737152; 481607,
3737005; 481565, 3737040; 481565,
3737040; 481499, 3737095; 481495,
3737098; 481495, 3737098; 481460,
3737128; 481498, 3737171; 481607,
3737294; 481659, 3737308; 481659,
3737308; 481675, 3737312; 481806,
3737364; 481806, 3737365; 481828,
3737373; 481884, 3737410; 482049,
3737423; 482228, 3737521; 482293,
3737565; 482301, 3737570; 482305,
3737714; 482307, 3737840; 482332,
3738252; 482381, 3738399; 482400,
3738519; 482406, 3738559; 482498,
3738780; 482590, 3738989; 482670,
3739143; 482799, 3739259; 483002,
3739302; 483057, 3739329; 483058,
3739329; 483102, 3739351; 483154,
3739376; 483180, 3739388; 483352,
3739505; 483481, 3739579; 483555,
3739659; 483622, 3739714; 483733,
3739714; 483849, 3739726; 483914,
3739777; 483935, 3739794; 483942,
3739923; 483946, 3739994; 483948,
3740021; 483997, 3740083; 484071,
3740101; 484109, 3740101; 484175,
3740101; 484286, 3740101; 484409,
3740101; 484491, 3740101; 484556,
3740101; 484562, 3740101; 484660,
3740101; 484724, 3740101; 484808,
3740101; 484740, 3740015; 484724,
3740003; 484593, 3739911; 484558,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
3739876; 484507, 3739825; 484310,
3739634; 484095, 3739438; 484078,
3739426; 483978, 3739358; 483961,
3739335; 483914, 3739275; 483904,
3739263; 483910, 3738133; 483780,
3737932; 483550, 3737726; 483330,
3737413; 483310, 3737372; 483104,
3737308; 483107, 3736913; 482312,
3736913; 482230, 3736937; 482203,
3736962; 482172, 3737005; 482086,
3737103; thence returning to 482086,
3737103.
(iii) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles
Perris and Lakeview. Land bounded by
the following UTM NAD83 coordinates
(E, N): 485275, 3740138; 484724,
3740131; 484574, 3740129; 484505,
3740129; 484256, 3740126; 484305,
3740158; 484305, 3740158; 484397,
3740217; 484483, 3740273; 484649,
3740476; 484723, 3740618; 484725,
3740623; 484725, 3740623; 484760,
3740691; 484853, 3740957; 484956,
3741250; 485150, 3741749; 485159,
3741772; 485184, 3741895; 485202,
3742006; 485218, 3742268; 485221,
3742307; 485244, 3742361; 485288,
3742466; 485368, 3742554; 485531,
3742733; 485534, 3742737; 485537,
3742748; 485537, 3742748; 485552,
3742804; 485575, 3743092; 485589,
3743271; 485662, 3743360; 485679,
3743380; 485711, 3743419; 485761,
3743480; 485917, 3743485; 485964,
3743486; 486099, 3743615; 486204,
3743695; 486326, 3743781; 486336,
3743800; 486369, 3743867; 486376,
3743928; 486369, 3743936; 486336,
3743974; 486296, 3744021; 486336,
3744125; 486339, 3744131; 486366,
3744163; 486366, 3744163; 486492,
3744315; 486519, 3744332; 486551,
3744352; 486640, 3744408; 486787,
3744549; 486855, 3744586; 487051,
3744586; 487135, 3744567; 487242,
3744543; 487425, 3744461; 487477,
3744437; 487488, 3744432; 487690,
3744377; 487905, 3744309; 487899,
3744260; 487824, 3744168; 487824,
3744168; 487795, 3744131; 487690,
3744039; 487631, 3743972; 487543,
3743873; 487346, 3743928; 487236,
3743799; 487150, 3743627; 487133,
3743609; 487027, 3743486; 486935,
3743418; 486907, 3743363; 486867,
3743283; 486818, 3743136; 486763,
3743062; 486707, 3742964; 486535,
3742804; 486366, 3742612; 486356,
3742601; 486351, 3742595; 486348,
3742590; 486334, 3742565; 486330,
3742557; 486111, 3742165; 486057,
3742013; 486019, 3741907; 486012,
3741890; 486090, 3741855; 485750,
3741117; 486062, 3740960; 485546,
3740143; 485276, 3740138; 485275,
3740138; thence returning to 485275,
3740138.
(iv) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles
Perris and Lakeview. Land bounded by
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
the following UTM NAD83 coordinates
(E, N): 488922, 3746032; 488976,
3746028; 489134, 3746103; 489376,
3746196; 489562, 3746326; 489603,
3746429; 489618, 3746466; 489662,
3746610; 489663, 3746613; 489672,
3746642; 489684, 3746680; 489690,
3746700; 489701, 3746735; 489768,
3746809; 489887, 3746940; 490083,
3747089; 490231, 3747126; 490425,
3747178; 490511, 3747200; 490519,
3747205; 490546, 3747218; 490585,
3747238; 490687, 3747247; 490836,
3747135; 490966, 3746959; 491124,
3746819; 491199, 3746726; 491199,
3746680; 491199, 3746678; 491199,
3746661; 491152, 3746652; 491125,
3746646; 491106, 3746642; 491056,
3746617; 491047, 3746613; 491045,
3746612; 490864, 3746522; 490864,
3746522; 490827, 3746503; 490652,
3746443; 490404, 3746359; 490390,
3746354; 490083, 3746252; 489983,
3746182; 489983, 3746182; 489979,
3746179; 489897, 3746121; 489785,
3745870; 489785, 3745793; 489785,
3745582; 489785, 3745424; 489601,
3745328; 489571, 3745312; 489292,
3745284; 489059, 3745266; 488827,
3745117; 488810, 3745111; 488810,
3745111; 488806, 3745110; 488787,
3745103; 488557, 3745024; 488514,
3745000; 488514, 3745000; 488493,
3744988; 488464, 3744972; 488408,
3744940; 488338, 3744897; 488306,
3744877; 488290, 3744867; 488287,
3744866; 488287, 3744689; 488272,
3744656; 488222, 3744549; 488212,
3744537; 488205, 3744528; 488205,
3744528; 488101, 3744401; 488027,
3744317; 487969, 3744341; 487537,
3744523; 487537, 3744523; 487500,
3744539; 487497, 3744540; 487476,
3744546; 487427, 3744559; 487255,
3744605; 487148, 3744610; 487135,
3744611; 487125, 3744611; 487059,
3744615; 487056, 3744615; 487023,
3744616; 486974, 3744619; 486934,
3744621; 486934, 3744621; 486864,
3744624; 486911, 3744726; 486945,
3744784; 486975, 3744834; 487054,
3744967; 487060, 3744979; 487067,
3744989; 487148, 3745127; 487357,
3745480; 487712, 3746290; 487720,
3746307; 487739, 3746356; 487857,
3746655; 488073, 3747200; 488202,
3747526; 488288, 3747745; 488297,
3747768; 488361, 3747950; 488408,
3748084; 488539, 3748177; 488574,
3748178; 488582, 3748178; 488595,
3748178; 488800, 3748180; 488805,
3748180; 489137, 3748184; 489217,
3748185; 489329, 3748186; 489346,
3748182; 489436, 3748160; 489441,
3748159; 489498, 3748067; 489520,
3748032; 489520, 3748032; 489534,
3748010; 489605, 3747930; 489701,
3747824; 489701, 3747749; 489690,
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
3747561; 489067, 3747400; 489032,
3747312; 488911, 3747005; 488873,
3746800; 488881, 3746769; 488887,
3746746; 488901, 3746689; 488994,
3746568; 488966, 3746456; 488920,
3746317; 488855, 3746187; 488845,
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
3746066; 488845, 3746038; 488922,
3746032; thence returning to 488922,
3746032.
(v) Note: Map of Unit 6, Subunit 6A
(San Jacinto River) follows:
BILLING CODE 4310–55–S
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
ER07OC10.017</GPH>
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
3747746; 489608, 3747724; 489608,
3747724; 489605, 3747723; 489497,
3747693; 489391, 3747693; 489293,
3747693; 489279, 3747693; 489255,
3747693; 489240, 3747677; 489217,
3747653; 489134, 3747563; 489133,
62253
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
(24) Unit 6: Riverside: Riverside
Management Area, Riverside County,
CA. Subunit 6B: Salt Creek Seasonally
Flooded Alkali Plain.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles
Lakeview and Winchester. Land
bounded by the following UTM NAD83
coordinates (E, N): 496999, 3734333;
496995, 3733632; 496993, 3733374;
496993, 3733353; 496992, 3733079;
496991, 3733046; 496991, 3732939;
496990, 3732731; 497270, 3732723;
497270, 3732391; 496987, 3732276;
496986, 3732133; 496979, 3732133;
496441, 3732133; 495871, 3732118;
495855, 3732117; 495791, 3731864;
495754, 3731720; 496288, 3731734;
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
496176, 3731442; 496130, 3731321;
496119, 3731293; 496110, 3731269;
496105, 3731257; 496098, 3731238;
495840, 3731139; 495783, 3731117;
495764, 3731110; 495673, 3731075;
495539, 3731023; 495370, 3730958;
495370, 3730958; 495344, 3730948;
495344, 3731276; 495344, 3731308;
495344, 3731312; 495203, 3731319;
495197, 3731308; 495182, 3731281;
495169, 3731258; 495144, 3731229;
495122, 3731204; 495028, 3731204;
494990, 3731228; 494954, 3731251;
494929, 3731288; 494917, 3731307;
494913, 3731312; 494806, 3731312;
494766, 3731420; 494693, 3731621;
494724, 3731768; 494749, 3731819;
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
494811, 3731848; 494835, 3731935;
494886, 3732013; 494875, 3732052;
494962, 3732078; 495080, 3732115;
495080, 3732115; 495095, 3732120;
495368, 3732124; 495546, 3732126;
495551, 3732348; 495558, 3732640;
495560, 3732698; 495566, 3732880;
495578, 3732932; 495579, 3732936;
495783, 3732925; 496065, 3733488;
496058, 3733755; 496057, 3733807;
496043, 3734174; 496173, 3734170;
496461, 3734174; 496505, 3734333;
thence returning to 496999, 3734333.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 6, Subunit 6B
(Salt Creek Seasonally Flooded Alkali
Plain) follows:
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
ER07OC10.018</GPH>
62254
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
(ii) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle
Romoland. Land bounded by the
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E,
N): 485922, 3723029; 485730, 3723232;
485911, 3723435; 485930, 3724021;
486317, 3724020; 486317, 3723305;
486412, 3723293; 486417, 3723421;
486512, 3723424; 486506, 3723229;
486714, 3723225; 486716, 3723220;
486716, 3723210; 486716, 3723200;
486716, 3723196; 486716, 3723094;
*
486716, 3723072; 486716, 3723031;
486716, 3722986; 486716, 3722964;
486716, 3722954; 486716, 3722915;
486716, 3722899; 486716, 3722885;
486716, 3722830; 486699, 3722435;
486116, 3722429; 486118, 3722817;
486016, 3722821; 486016, 3722931;
485922, 3723029; thence returning to
485922, 3723029.
(iii) Note: Map of Unit 6, Subunit 6C
(Wickerd and Scott Road Pools) follows:
Dated: September 23, 2010
Eileen Sobeck,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and
Wildlife and Parks.
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2010–24763 Filed 10–6–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–C
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:49 Oct 06, 2010
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\07OCR2.SGM
07OCR2
ER07OC10.019</GPH>
jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
(25) Unit 6: Riverside: Riverside
Management Area, Riverside County,
CA. Subunit 6C: Wickerd and Scott
Road Pools.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle
Romoland. Land bounded by the
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E,
N): 485930, 3722429; 485737, 3722429;
485737, 3722611; 485930, 3722611;
485930, 3722429; thence returning to
485930, 3722429.
62255
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 194 (Thursday, October 7, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 62192-62255]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-24763]
[[Page 62191]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part II
Department of the Interior
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fish and Wildlife Service
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised Critical
Habitat for Navarretia fossalis (Spreading Navarretia); Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 62192]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2009-0038]
[MO 92210-0-0009]
RIN 1018-AW22
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised Critical
Habitat for Navarretia fossalis (Spreading Navarretia)
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), designate
final revised critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis (spreading
navarretia) under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. In
total, approximately 6,720 acres (ac) (2,720 hectares (ha)) of habitat
in Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Diego Counties, California, fall
within the boundaries of the critical habitat designation. This final
rule constitutes an overall increase of approximately 6,068 ac (2,456
ha) from the 2005 critical habitat designation for N. fossalis.
DATES: This rule becomes effective on November 8, 2010.
ADDRESSES: This final rule and the associated economic analysis are
available on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov and https://www.fws.gov/carlsbad/. Comments and materials received, as well as
supporting documentation used in preparing this final rule are
available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal business
hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Fish and
Wildlife Office, 6010 Hidden Valley Road, Suite 101, Carlsbad, CA
92011; telephone 760-431-9440; facsimile 760-431-5901.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim Bartel, Field Supervisor, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office, 6010
Hidden Valley Road, Suite 101, Carlsbad, CA 92011 (telephone 760-431-
9440; facsimile 760-431-5901). If you use a telecommunications device
for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS)
at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
It is our intent to discuss only those topics directly relevant to
the development of the revised designation of critical habitat for
Navarretia fossalis under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 as amended
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) (Act), in this final rule. For more
information on the taxonomy, biology, and ecology of N. fossalis, refer
to the final listing rule published in the Federal Register (FR) on
October 13, 1998 (63 FR 54975), the final designation of critical
habitat for N. fossalis published in the Federal Register on October
18, 2005 (70 FR 60658), the proposed revised designation of critical
habitat published in the Federal Register on June 10, 2009 (74 FR
27588), and the document announcing the availability of the draft
economic analysis (DEA) published in the Federal Register on April 15,
2010 (75 FR 19575). Additionally, information on this species can be
found in the Recovery Plan for the Vernal Pools of Southern California
(Recovery Plan) finalized on September 3, 1998 (Service 1998).
New Information on Subspecies' Description, Life History, Ecology,
Habitat, and Range
We did not receive any new information pertaining to the
description, life history, or ecology of Navarretia fossalis following
the 2009 proposed rule to revise critical habitat (74 FR 27588; June
10, 2009). However, the following paragraphs discuss new information
that we received regarding the species' habitat, geographic range and
status, and the areas needed for N. fossalis conservation.
Habitat
Navarretia fossalis habitat was discussed in detail in the proposed
revised critical habitat rule (74 FR 27588; June 10, 2009). One
commenter provided information during the first public comment period
on the proposed rule, noting several habitat characteristics they felt
we should have discussed (see Comment 15 below); therefore, we are
providing additional discussion and clarification here. Navarretia
fossalis grows in vernal pool habitat, seasonally flooded alkali vernal
plain habitat (a habitat that includes alkali playa, alkali scrub,
alkali vernal pool, and alkali annual grassland communities), and
irrigation ditches and detention basins (Bramlet 1993a, pp. 10, 14, 21-
23; Ferren and Fiedler 1993, pp. 126-127; Spencer 1997, pp. 8, 13).
Within alkali annual grasslands, this species is restricted to small
vernal pools or other depressions (Bramlet 2009, p. 3). Researchers
have also described ``riverine pools'' where N. fossalis occurs as
having unique floristic elements, such as Trichocoronis wrightii var.
wrightii (limestone bugheal or Wright's trichocoronis); N. fossalis and
T. wrightii are only known to co-occur in the San Jacinto River
(Bramlet 2009, p. 7). Suitability of hydrological conditions for the
germination of this species varies on an annual basis; therefore, N.
fossalis can be undetectable for a number of years and the number of
plants varies depending on the timing, duration, and extent of ponding
(Bramlet 2009, p. 3). For more habitat information, please see the
Habitat section in the proposed revised critical habitat designation
published in the Federal Register on June 10, 2009 (74 FR 27588).
Areas Needed for Conservation: Core and Satellite Habitat Areas
In the proposed revised critical habitat rule (74 FR 27588; June
10, 2009), we discussed the areas that represent core habitat areas and
satellite habitat areas for Navarretia fossalis. During the first
public comment period, one peer reviewer expressed concern regarding
our use of the word ``core'' and the biological connotation of such
terminology. The terms ``core habitat area'' and ``satellite habitat
area'' are descriptive terms defined for the purpose of this rulemaking
and are not intended to be synonymous with similar terms used in other
documents, or to describe a population distribution. We defined these
terms in the proposed revised critical habitat designation published in
the Federal Register on June 10, 2009 (74 FR 27588). Core habitat is
defined as areas that contain the highest concentrations of N. fossalis
and the largest contiguous blocks of habitat for this species.
Satellite areas are defined as habitat areas that support occurrences
that are smaller than those supported by the ``core habitat areas,''
but provide the means to significantly contribute to the recovery of N.
fossalis (for further discussion of this issue see Comment 4 in the
Summary of Comments and Recommendations section and our response). For
more information on ``core habitat area'' and ``satellite habitat
area,'' please see the Areas Needed for Conservation: Core and
Satellite Habitat Areas section in the proposed revised critical
habitat designation published in the Federal Register on June 10, 2009
(74 FR 27588).
Previous Federal Actions
On October 18, 2005 (70 FR 60658), we published our final
designation of critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis. On December
19, 2007, the Center for Biological Diversity filed a complaint in the
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California challenging
our
[[Page 62193]]
designation of critical habitat for N. fossalis and Brodiaea filifolia
(Center for Biological Diversity v. United States Fish and Wildlife
Service et al., Case No. 07-CV-02379-W-NLS). This lawsuit challenged
the validity of the information and reasoning we used to exclude areas
from the 2005 critical habitat designation for N. fossalis. On July 25,
2008, we reached a settlement agreement in which we agreed to submit a
proposed revised critical habitat designation for N. fossalis to the
Federal Register for publication by May 29, 2009, and a final revised
critical habitat designation for publication by May 28, 2010. By order
dated January 21, 2010, the district court approved a modification to
the settlement agreement that extends to September 30, 2010, the
deadline for submission of a final revised critical habitat designation
to the Federal Register. The proposed revised critical habitat
designation published in the Federal Register on June 10, 2009 (74 FR
27588).
Summary of Changes From the Proposed Revised Rule and the Previous
Critical Habitat Designation
The areas designated as critical habitat in this final rule
constitute a revision of the critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis
we designated on October 18, 2005 (70 FR 60658). For this revised
rulemaking process we:
(1) Refined the primary constituent elements (PCEs) to more
accurately define the physical and biological features that are
essential to the conservation of N. fossalis;
(2) Revised criteria to more accurately identify critical habitat;
(3) Improved mapping methodology to more accurately define critical
habitat boundaries and better represent areas that contain PCEs;
(4) Evaluated areas considered for exclusion from critical habitat
designation under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, including identifying
whether or not areas are conserved and managed for the benefit of N.
fossalis;
(5) Reanalyzed the economic impacts to identify baseline and
incremental costs associated with critical habitat designation; and
(6) Added, subtracted, and revised areas that do or do not meet the
definition of critical habitat. Table 1 provides an overview of the
differences between critical habitat rules for N. fossalis at the unit
level.
Table 1. Changes between the October 18, 2005, critical habitat designation; the June 10, 2009, proposed critical habitat designation; the April 15,
2010, changes to the June 10, 2009 proposal (availability of the DEA); and this revised critical habitat designation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
April 2010 changes to
Critical habitat unit in this final October 2005 critical June 2009 proposed proposed revised September 2010
rule County habitat designation revised critical critical habitat revised critical
habitat designation designation habitat designation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 1: Los Angeles Basin-Orange Los Angeles 326 ac 161 ac 176 ac 176 ac
Management Area (132 ha).............. (65 ha).............. (71 ha).............. (71 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 2: San Diego: Northern Coastal San Diego 22 ac 9 ac 9 ac 9 ac
Mesa Management Area (9 ha)................ (4 ha)............... (4 ha)............... (4 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
;Unit 3: San Diego: Central Coastal San Diego 0 ac 110 ac 108 ac 103 ac
Mesa Management Area (0 ha)................ (45 ha).............. (44 ha).............. (42 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 4: San Diego: Inland San Diego 159 ac 206 ac 206 ac 206 ac
Management Area (64 ha)............... (83 ha).............. (83 ha).............. (83 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 5: San Diego: Southern Coastal San Diego 145 ac 711 ac 753 ac 749 ac
Mesa Management Area (59 ha)............... (288 ha)............. (305 ha)............. (303 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 6: Riverside Management Area Riverside 0 ac 5,675 ac 6,356 ac 5,477 ac
(0 ha)................ (2,297 ha)........... (2,572 ha)........... (2,217 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals* 652 ac 6,872 ac 7,608 ac 6,720 ac
(264 ha).............. (2,781 ha)........... (3,079 ha)........... (2,720 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Values in this table may not sum due to rounding.
In 2005, we designated approximately 652 ac (264 ha) as critical
habitat for Navarretia fossalis in 4 units with 10 subunits (70 FR
60658; October 18, 2005). In our 2009 proposed revised critical
habitat, we proposed approximately 6,872 ac (2,781 ha) as critical
habitat in 6 units with 22 subunits (74 FR 27588; June 10, 2009). In
response to information received as public comments on our 2009
proposed revised critical habitat, we changed the 2009 proposed revised
rule to propose approximately 7,608 ac (3,079 ha) as critical habitat
in 6 units with 23 subunits (75 FR 19575; April 15, 2010). In this
revised critical habitat rule, we are designating approximately 6,720
ac (2,720 ha) as critical habitat in 6 units with 19 subunits,
reflecting exclusion of approximately 871 ac (353 ha) in all or
portions of 2 units (3 subunits) based on consideration of relevant
impacts under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. Lands that contain the
physical and biological features essential to the conservation of N.
fossalis on Marine Corps Air Station
[[Page 62194]]
(MCAS) Miramar and Marine Corps Base (MCB) Camp Pendleton are exempt
from this critical habitat designation based on section 4(a)(3)(B) of
the Act. All lands designated as critical habitat in this revised rule
were included in the 2009 proposed revised rule (74 FR 27588) or the
document that made available the DEA (75 FR 19575). Table 2 provides
detailed information about differences between the 2005 final critical
habitat designation, the 2009 proposed revised critical habitat
designation, and this revised critical habitat designation for N.
fossalis. The changes between the 2005 final designation, the 2009
proposed revisions, and this final designation are described below.
Table 2. A comparison of the areas identified as containing the physical and biological features essential to the conservation of Navarretia fossalis in
the 2005 critical habitat designation, the 2009 proposed revised critical habitat designation, and this revised critical habitat designation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2005 Critical Habitat Designation 2009 Proposed Revised Critical 2010 Revised Critical Habitat
---------------------------------------- Habitat Designation
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location* Area Containing Area Containing Area Containing
Subunit Essential Subunit Essential Subunit Essential
Features Features Features
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 1: Los Angeles Basin-Orange Management Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cruzan Mesa 1A 294 ac 1A 129 ac 1A 156 ac
(119 ha).......... (52 ha)........... (63 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Plum Canyon 1B 32 ac 1B 32 ac 1B 20 ac
(13 ha)........... (13 ha)........... (8 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 2: San Diego: Northern Coastal Mesa Management Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MCB Camp Pendleton 4(a)(3) exemption 67 ac 4(a)(3) exemption 145 ac 4(a)(3) exemption 145 ac
(27 ha)........... (59 ha)........... (59 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Poinsettia Lane Commuter Station 2; partially 22 ac 2 9 ac 2 9 ac
excluded under (9 ha)............ (4 ha)............ (4 ha)
section 4(b)(2).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 3: San Diego: Central Coastal Mesa Management Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Santa Fe Valley Proposed as -- Not proposed -- Not proposed --
Unit 3, but.......
determined not
essential.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Santa Fe Valley (Crosby Estates) -- -- 3A 5 ac Excluded under 5 ac
(2 ha)............ section 4(b)(2) (2 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carroll Canyon -- -- 3B 20 ac 3B 18 ac
(8 ha)............ (7 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nobel Drive -- -- 3C 37 ac 3C 37 ac
(15 ha)........... (15 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MCAS Miramar 4(a)(3) exemption 61 ac 4(a)(3) exemption 69 ac 4(a)(3) exemption 69 ac
(25 ha)........... (28 ha)........... (28 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Montgomery Field Excluded under 38 ac 3D 48 ac 3D 48 ac
section 4(b)(2) (16 ha)........... (20 ha)........... (20 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 4: San Diego: Inland Management Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Marcos (Upham) 4C1 34 ac 4C1 34 ac 4C1 34 ac
(14 ha)........... (14 ha)........... (14 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Marcos (Universal Boot) 4C2 32 ac 4C2 32 ac 4C2 32 ac
(13 ha)........... (13 ha)........... (13 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Marcos (Bent Avenue) 4D 7 ac 4D 5 ac 4D 5 ac
(3 ha)............ (2 ha)............ (2 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ramona 4E 86 ac 4E 135 ac 4E 135 ac
(35 ha)........... (55 ha)........... (55 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 5: San Diego: Southern Coastal Mesa Management Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 62195]]
Sweetwater Vernal Pools (S1-3) 5A; partially 89 ac 5A 95 ac 5A 95 ac
excluded under (36 ha)........... (38 ha)........... (38 ha)
section 4(b)(2). Excluded..........
74 ac.............
(30 ha)...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Otay River Valley (K1 and K2) Excluded under 57 ac Not proposed, -- Not proposed, --
section 4(b)(2) (23 ha)........... determined not determined not
essential. essential.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Otay River Valley (M2) 5B and excluded 42 ac 5B 24 ac 5B 24 ac
under section (17 ha)........... (10 ha)........... (10 ha)
4(b)(2) Excluded..........
67 ac.............
(27 ha)...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Otay Mesa (J26) 5C and excluded 14 ac Not proposed, -- 5C*** 42 ac
under section (6 ha)............ determined not (17 ha)
4(b)(2) essential.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arnie's Point Proposed as -- Not proposed -- Not proposed --
Subunit 5D, but
determined not
essential
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proctor Valley (R1-2) -- -- 5F 88 ac 5F 88 ac
(36 ha)........... (36 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Otay Lakes (K3-5) -- -- 5G 140 ac 5G 140 ac
(57 ha)........... (57 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Western Otay Mesa vernal pool Excluded under 117 ac 5H 143 ac 5H 143 ac
complexes section 4(b)(2) (47 ha)........... (58ha)............ (58ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eastern Otay Mesa vernal pool Excluded under 277 ac 5I 221 ac 5I 221 ac
complexes section 4(b)(2) (112 ha).......... (89 ha)........... (89 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 6: Riverside Management Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Jacinto River Excluded under 10,774 ac 6A 3,550 ac 6A*** 4,312 ac
section 4(b)(2) (4,360 ha)........ (1,437 ha)........ (1,745 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Salt Creek Seasonally Flooded Excluded under 2,233 ac 6B 1,054 ac 6B 930 ac
Alkali Plain section 4(b)(2) (904 ha).......... (427 ha).......... (376 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wickerd Road and Scott Road Excluded under 275 ac 6C 205 ac 6C*** 235 ac
Pools section 4(b)(2) (111 ha).......... (83 ha)........... (95 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Skunk Hollow Excluded under 306 ac 6D 158 ac Excluded under 158 ac
section 4(b)(2) (124 ha).......... (64 ha)........... section 4(b)(2) (64 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mesa de Burro Excluded under 4,396 ac 6E 708 ac Excluded under 708 ac
section 4(b)(2) (1,779 ha)........ (287 ha).......... section 4(b)(2) (287 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Area Essential for the -- 19,399 ac -- 7,086 ac -- 7,804 ac
Conservation of Navarretia (7,851 ha)........ (2,868 ha)........ (3,158 ha)
fossalis**
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 62196]]
Total Area Exempt Under Section -- 128 ac -- 213 ac -- 213 ac
4(a)(3)** (52 ha)........... (86 ha)........... (86 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Area Excluded Under -- 18,619 ac -- 0 ac -- 871 ac
Section 4(b)(2)** (7,535 ha)........ (0 ha)............ (353 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Area Designated as -- 652 ac -- N/A -- 6,720 ac
Critical Habitat for Navarretia (264 ha).......... (2,720 ha)
fossalis**
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*This table does not include all locations that are occupied by Navarretia fossalis. It includes only those locations that were designated as critical
habitat in 2005 or proposed in 2009 or discussed in this critical habitat rule.
**Values in this table may not sum due to rounding.
***Acreage added in 75 FR 19575 (June 10, 2009) revision.
Summary of Changes From the 2005 Final Designation of Critical Habitat
In the 2005 final rule, we did not designate areas containing
essential habitat features if those habitat features were already
conserved and managed for the benefit of Navarretia fossalis because we
concluded that the areas did not meet the second part of the definition
of critical habitat under section 3(5)(a)(i) of the Act. We have
reconsidered our approach in light of subsequent court decisions and
have decided that areas containing essential habitat features that
``may require'' special management considerations or protection do meet
the definition of critical habitat irrespective of whether the habitat
features are currently receiving special management or protection.
Current protection or management does not disqualify an area from
meeting the definition of critical habitat, rather it is a relevant
factor to consider under section 4(b)(2) of the Act when we weigh the
benefits of including a particular area in critical habitat against the
benefits of excluding the area. In this rule we identified essential
areas that are conserved and managed for the benefit of the species,
determined they meet the definition of critical habitat, and then
analyzed whether the benefits of exclusion from critical habitat
designation outweigh the benefits of including these areas under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
This rule also uses a new economic analysis to identify and
estimate the potential economic effects on small business entities
resulting from implementation of conservation actions associated with
the proposed revision of critical habitat. The analysis focuses on the
estimated incremental impacts associated with critical habitat
designation.
Of the 652 ac (264 ha) of land included in the 2005 final critical
habitat rule, approximately 469 ac (190 ha) are included in this
revised critical habitat designation. Some areas designated in 2005 are
not designated in this final rule because we used a grid of 2.47-ac (1-
ha) cells (100 m grid) to identify essential habitat in our GIS
analysis in 2005. In this revised critical habitat, we identified
essential habitat with heads-up digitizing at various scales using
imagery of 1-meter resolution, resulting in a more precise
identification.
Additionally, we are designating as critical habitat 6,251 ac
(2,530 ha) of land identified as meeting the definition of critical
habitat that were not designated in 2005. The primary reason revised
designated critical habitat is greater than the 2005 designated area is
that we included several areas that were excluded from the 2005
critical habitat designation under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. A
summary of specific changes from the 2005 critical habitat designation
is provided below. In addition to revisions to specific subunits, we
also revised the PCEs, the criteria used to identify critical habitat,
the economic impacts to include incremental impacts, and the mapping
methodology for this revised critical habitat designation. For a
detailed discussion of the changes between the 2005 critical habitat
rule and the 2009 proposed revision, please see the Summary of Changes
From Previously Designated Critical Habitat section in the proposed
revised rule (74 FR 27588; June 10, 2009).
In this revised critical habitat designation for Navarretia
fossalis, comparisons to the 2005 critical habitat designation are
described below using three categories:
(1) Areas designated in 2005 and also designated in this rule,
(2) Areas designated in 2005 but not designated in this rule, and
(3) Areas not designated in 2005 that are designated in this rule.
(1) Areas designated in 2005 and also designated in this rule are
found in Subunits 1A, 1B, 2, 4C1, 4C2, 4D, 4E, 5A, 5B, and 5C. We
analyzed each of these areas and determined these areas are not
conserved and managed for the benefit of Navarretia fossalis and the
benefits of inclusion outweigh the benefits of exclusion.
(2) Areas designated in 2005 but not designated in this rule
include land in Subunits 1A, 1B, 2, 4D, 5A, and 5B as described in the
2005 designation. The difference of these subunits between the previous
rule and this final rule is mostly due to our discontinued use of a
100-m grid to map critical habitat,
[[Page 62197]]
which captured areas that we determined in this rule did not meet the
definition of critical habitat. Additionally, the difference in Subunit
1B was due to more precise Navarretia fossalis habitat location data in
the vicinity of Plum Canyon.
(3) Areas not designated in 2005 that are designated in this rule
include areas within Subunits 1B, 3B, 3C, 3D, 4D, 4E, 5A, 5B, 5F, 5G,
5H, 5I, 6A, 6B, and 6C, and part of 5C. Some of these subunits meet the
definition of critical habitat based on new information. Subunits 1B,
4D, 4E, and 5B include new areas due to mapping refinements made to
better capture local watersheds. Subunits 3B, 3D, 5F, 5G, 5H, and 5I
include vernal pool complexes that provide habitat for Navarretia
fossalis that were not included in the 2005 final rule, but meet the
definition of critical habitat for this species (see the 2009 proposed
rule for details (74 FR 27588; June 10, 2009)). Other subunits have
been designated based on our determination under section 4(b)(2) of the
Act that the benefits of inclusion outweigh the benefits of exclusion
of these areas because they are not currently conserved and managed for
the benefit of N. fossalis. All or portions of Subunits 3D, 5A, 5B, 5H,
5I, 6A, and 6C are the same as areas that met the definition of
critical habitat in 2005, but were excluded from the 2005 designation
under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. The only areas excluded from critical
habitat in the current rule under section 4(b)(2) of the Act are those
that are conserved and managed for the benefit of N. fossalis, and
where the exclusion would not result in extinction of the species (see
the Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act section of this rule).
Summary of Changes From the 2009 Proposed Rule To Revise Critical
Habitat
We evaluated lands considered for exclusion under section 4(b)(2)
of the Act to determine if the benefits of exclusion outweigh the
benefits of inclusion. We excluded 871 ac (353 ha) of lands under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act that are conserved and managed for the
benefit of Navarretia fossalis We excluded certain lands under two
habitat conservation plans (HCPs), summarized below and discussed in
detail in the Exclusions section.
(1) In the proposed revised rule, we considered for exclusion under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act lands covered by the Carlsbad Habitat
Management Plan (Carlsbad HMP) under the San Diego Multiple Habitat
Conservation Program (MHCP). In this revised rule, we determined the
benefits of inclusion outweigh the benefits of exclusion for all of the
lands covered by the Carlsbad HMP because these lands are not both
conserved and managed for the benefit of Navarretia fossalis. However,
we recognize the efforts made by permittees of the Carlsbad HMP to
assist in the conservation of N. fossalis and other listed species. We
look forward to continuing to work with these partners to assure that
long-term conservation and management is assured for N. fossalis. See
the Exclusions section below for a summary evaluation of lands
considered for exclusion under the Carlsbad HMP and our rationale for
including these lands in this revised critical habitat designation.
(2) In the proposed revised rule, we considered lands proposed as
critical habitat within the County of San Diego Subarea Plan under the
San Diego Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP; County of San
Diego Subarea Plan) for exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. In
this revised rule, we determined the benefits of exclusion outweigh the
benefits of inclusion for a portion (5 ac (2 ha) in Subunit 3A) of
lands under the County of San Diego Subarea Plan that are both
conserved and managed for the benefit of Navarretia fossalis, and
determined exclusion of these lands will not result in extinction of
the species. However, we determined the benefits of inclusion outweigh
the benefits of exclusion for 81 ac (33 ha) of lands within the County
of San Diego Subarea Plan. As a result, we excluded approximately 5 ac
(2 ha) of these lands under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, and included
approximately 81 ac (33 ha) within the revised critical habitat
designation. For a complete discussion of the benefits of inclusion and
exclusion for all lands within the County of San Diego Subarea Plan,
see the Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act section below.
(3) In the proposed revised rule, we considered for exclusion under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act lands owned by or under the jurisdiction of
the permittees of the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat
Conservation Plan (Western Riverside County MSHCP). In this revised
rule, we determined the benefits of exclusion outweigh the benefits of
inclusion for 866 ac (351 ha) of the lands owned by or under the
jurisdiction of the permittees of the Western Riverside County MSHCP
that are conserved and managed (Subunits 6D and 6E), and determined
exclusion of these lands will not result in extinction of the species.
We determined the benefits of inclusion outweigh the benefits of
exclusion for 5,477 ac (2,217 ha) of lands owned by or under the
jurisdiction of the permittees of the Western Riverside County MSHCP.
As a result, we excluded approximately 866 ac (351 ha) of these lands
under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, and included approximately 5,477 ac
(2,217 ha) within the revised critical habitat designation. For a
complete discussion of the benefits of inclusion and exclusion for all
lands within the Western Riverside County MSHCP, see the Application of
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act section below.
Critical Habitat
Background
Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the Act as:
(i) The specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the
species, at the time it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which
are found those physical or biological features
(I) essential to the conservation of the species and
(II) which may require special management considerations or
protection; and
(ii) 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 the use
of all methods and procedures that are necessary to bring any
endangered or threatened species to the point at which the measures
provided under 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, transplantation, and in the extraordinary case where
population pressures within a given ecosystem cannot otherwise be
relieved, regulated taking.
Critical habitat receives protection under section 7 of the Act
through the prohibition against Federal agencies carrying out, funding,
or authorizing the destruction or adverse modification of critical
habitat. Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires consultation on Federal
actions that may affect 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
[[Page 62198]]
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 seeks or 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 in the event of a
destruction or adverse modification finding, the Federal action
agency's and the applicant's obligation is not to restore or recover
the species, but to implement reasonable and prudent alternatives to
avoid destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat.
For inclusion in a critical habitat designation, the habitat within
the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it was listed
must contain the physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of the species, and be included if those features may
require special management considerations or protection. Critical
habitat designations identify, to the extent known using the best
scientific and commercial data available, habitat areas that provide
essential life cycle needs of the species (areas on which are found the
physical and biological features laid out in the appropriate quantity
and spatial arrangement for the conservation of the species). Under the
Act and regulations at 50 CFR 424.12, we can designate critical habitat
in areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the
time it is listed only when we determine that those areas are essential
for the conservation of the species and that designation limited to the
geographical area occupied at the time of listing 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 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, or other unpublished materials and expert opinion or
personal knowledge.
Habitat is often dynamic, and species may move from one area to
another over time. Climate change will be a particular challenge for
biodiversity because the interaction of additional stressors associated
with climate change and current stressors may push species beyond their
ability to survive (Lovejoy 2005, pp. 325-326). The synergistic
implications of climate change and habitat fragmentation are the most
threatening facet of climate change for biodiversity (Hannah et al.
2005, p.4). Current climate change predictions for terrestrial areas in
the Northern Hemisphere indicate warmer air temperatures, more intense
precipitation events, and increased summer continental drying (Field et
al. 1999, pp. 1-3; Hayhoe et al. 2004, p. 12422; Cayan et al. 2005, p.
6; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2007, p. 1181).
Climate change may also affect the duration and frequency of drought
and these climatic changes may even more dramatic and intense (Graham
1997). Documentation of climate-related changes that have already
occurred in California (Croke et al. 1998, pp. 2128, 2130; Brashears et
al. 2005, p. 15144), and future drought predictions for California
(such as Field et al. 1999, pp. 8-10; Lenihen et al. 2003, p. 1667;
Hayhoe et al. 2004, p. 12422; Brashears et al. 2005, p. 15144; Seager
et al. 2007, p. 1181) and North America (IPCC 2007, p. 9) indicate
prolonged drought and other climate-related changes will continue in
the foreseeable future.
We anticipate these changes could affect a number of native plants,
including Navarretia fossalis occurrences and habitat. If the amount
and timing of precipitation or the average temperature increases in
southern California, the long term viability of N. fossalis may be
affected in several ways, including the following: (1) Drier conditions
may result in a lower germination rate and smaller population sizes;
(2) a shift in the timing of annual rainfall may favor nonnative
species that impact the quality of habitat for this species; or (3)
drier conditions may result in increased fire frequency, making the
ecosystems in which N. fossalis currently grows more vulnerable to the
threats of subsequent erosion and nonnative plant invasion.
At this time, we are unable to identify the specific ways that
climate change may impact Navarretia fossalis; therefore, we are unable
to determine if any additional areas may be appropriate to include in
this final critical habitat rule to address the effects of climate
change. Additionally, 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 required for recovery of the species.
Areas that are important to the conservation of the species, but
are outside the critical habitat designation, will continue to be
subject to conservation actions we implement under section 7(a)(1) of
the Act. Areas that support populations are also subject to the
regulatory protections afforded by the section 7(a)(2) jeopardy
standard, as determined on the basis of the best available scientific
and commercial information at the time of the agency action. Federally
funded or permitted projects affecting listed species outside their
designated critical habitat areas may still result in jeopardy findings
in some cases. 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, HCPs,
or other species conservation planning efforts if new information
available at the time of these planning efforts calls for a different
outcome.
Physical and 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 and biological
features essential to the conservation of the species and which may
require special management considerations or protection. These include,
but are not limited to:
(1) Space for individual and population growth and for normal
behavior;
[[Page 62199]]
(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 historic, geographical, and ecological
distributions of a species.
We consider the specific physical and biological features essential
to the conservation of the species and laid out in the appropriate
quantity and spatial arrangement for the conservation of the species.
We derive those specific essential physical and biological features for
Navarretia fossalis from the biological needs of this species as
described in the Critical Habitat section of the proposed rule to
designate critical habitat for N. fossalis published in the Federal
Register on June 10, 2009 (74 FR 27588).
The area designated as final revised critical habitat consists of
ephemeral wetland habitat for the reproduction and growth of Navarretia
fossalis, intermixed wetland and upland habitats that comprise the
local watershed to support ephemeral wetland habitat, and the
topography and soils required for ponding during winter and spring
months. The methods of dispersal and pollination for N. fossalis are
not well understood; therefore, elements required for these processes
may not be geographically captured by this revised critical habitat
designation. Likewise, delineating larger watershed areas that support
ephemeral wetland habitat may require hydrological data and modeling
that are not available; therefore, areas beyond the local watershed are
not included in this revised critical habitat designation. The physical
and biological features essential to the conservation of N. fossalis
are derived from studies of this species' habitat, ecology, and life
history as described below, in the Background section of the proposed
revised critical habitat designation published in the Federal Register
on June 10, 2009 (74 FR 27588), the critical habitat designation
published in the Federal Register on October 18, 2005 (70 FR 60658),
and the final listing rule published in the Federal Register on October
13, 1998 (63 FR 54975).
Habitats That Are Representative of the Historical, Geographical, and
Ecological Distribution of Navarretia fossalis
Navarretia fossalis is restricted to ephemeral wetlands in southern
California and northwestern Baja California, Mexico (Moran 1977, pp.
155-156; Oberbauer 1992, p. 7; Day 1993, p. 847; California Natural
Diversity Database (CNDDB) 2008, pp. 1-44), and primarily associated
with vernal pools and seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain habitats
(Moran 1977, pp. 155-156; Bramlet 1993a, p. 10; Day 1993, p. 847;
Ferren and Fiedler 1993, pp. 126-127). In Los Angeles County, N.
fossalis is known to occur in vernal pools on Cruzan Mesa and the
associated drainage of Plum Canyon (such as CNDDB 2008, Element
Occurrence (EO) 31, 32, and 41). In Riverside County, N. fossalis is
known to occur in large vernal pools with basins that range in size
from 0.5 ac (0.2 ha) to 10.0 ac (4.0 ha) (such as CNDDB 2008, EO 42,
43, and 44), and in temporary wetlands that are described as seasonally
flooded alkali vernal plain habitat along the San Jacinto River and
near Salt Creek/Stowe Pool in Hemet (such as CNDDB 2008, EO 22, 23, and
24). In San Diego County, N. fossalis is found in vernal pools that are
smaller than those in Riverside County, ranging in size from 0.01 ac
(0.005 ha) to 0.2 ac (0.09 ha) and are often found in clusters of
several vernal pools typically referred to as vernal pool complexes
(such as CNDDB 2008, EO 4, 14, and 19). In Mexico, N. fossalis is known
from fewer than 12 occurrences, most of which are clustered in three
areas of Baja California: along the international border, on the
plateaus south of the Rio Guadalupe, and on the San Quintin coastal
plain (Moran 1977, p. 156).
Ephemeral Wetland Habitat
Despite variation in the types of habitat where Navarretia fossalis
is found (i.e., vernal pool habitat and seasonally flooded alkali
vernal plain habitat), these ephemeral wetlands all share the same
temporary nature (i.e., areas fill with water during the winter and
spring and dry completely during summer and fall). Navarretia fossalis
depends on both the inundation and drying of its habitat for survival.
This type of ephemerally wet habitat excludes upland plants that live
in a dry environment year round, or wetland plants that require year-
round moisture to become established (Keeler-Wolf et al. 1998).
Navarretia fossalis primarily occurs in ephemeral wetland habitat,
more specifically, vernal pool and seasonally flooded alkali vernal
plain habitat (Moran 1977, pp. 156-157; Bramlet 1993a, p. 10; Bramlet
1993b, p. 14; Day 1993, p. 847). Vernal pools form during the winter
rains in depressions that are part of a gently sloping and undulating
landscape, where soil mounds are interspersed with basins (mima-mound
topography; Cox 1984, pp. 1397-1398). Water ponds in vernal pools in
part due to an underlying impervious soil layer (hard pan or clay pan).
Navarretia fossalis can also occur in ditches and other artificial
depressions associated with degraded vernal pool habitat (Moran 1977,
p. 155).
Seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain habitat includes alkali
playa, alkali scrub, alkali vernal pool, and alkali annual grassland
vegetation types. The hydrologic regime for this habitat involves
sporadic seasonal flooding (as described above) combined with slow
drainage of the alkaline soils. Large-scale inundation of flood plains
occur approximately every 20 to 50 years, which is necessary for long-
term maintenance of the habitat by removing scrub vegetation (Roberts
2004, p. 4). During a typical seasonal flooding cycle dry period,
alkali scrub vegetation expands its distribution into the seasonally
flooded areas of alkali vernal plains habitat and crowds out the
species associated more with ephemeral wetlands. During a large-scale
flood, standing and slow-draining waters remain for weeks or months and
kill alkali scrub vegetation, resulting in favorable conditions for
annual ephemeral wetland-associated species (such as Navarretia
fossalis) to expand their range (Bramlet 2004, p. 8; Roberts 2004, p.
4). Although uncommon, large-scale flooding events maintain N. fossalis
habitat and likely provide a species dispersal mechanism (Bramlet 2009,
p. 3). Seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain can also persist in
lightly to moderately disturbed habitat that may obscure or suppress
expression of PCEs, especially when disturbance consists of soil
amendments or dryland farming activities (Roberts 2009, p. 2).
Subsurface Water Flow That Creates A Local Watershed of Intermixed
Wetland and Upland Habitats
Vernal pools within a complex are hydrologically connected by
subsurface water, which creates a landscape that is intermixed with
wetland and upland habitats. This entire area comprises a local
watershed and provides the appropriate physical and biological features
necessary to maintain vernal pools within each complex. Seasonally
flooded alkali vernal plain habitats are also hydrologically connected
by flowing water when it flows over the surface from one vernal pool to
another or across the seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain. Due to an
impervious hard pan, water flows and collects below ground as the soil
becomes saturated. Movement of the water through vernal pool and
seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain systems results in pools
[[Page 62200]]
filling and holding water continuously for a number of days (Hanes et
al. 1990, p. 51). For this reason, these ephemeral wetlands are best
described from a watershed perspective. The local watershed associated
with a vernal pool complex or seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain
includes all surfaces in the surrounding area from which water flows
into the complex or plain habitat. Some ephemeral wetlands included in
this rule (such as the San Jacinto River and the Salt Creek Seasonally
Flooded Alkali Plain) have large watersheds where the overland flow of
water contributes to the ponding that supports Navarretia fossalis,
while other ephemeral wetlands have comparatively small watersheds
(such as Carroll Canyon and Nobel Drive) and fill almost entirely from
direct rainfall (Hanes et al. 1990, p. 53; Hanes and Stromberg 1998, p.
38). It is also possible that subsurface flow occurs within a watershed
and contributes water to some vernal pools and seasonally flooded
alkali vernal plains (Hanes et al. 1990, p. 53; Hanes and Stromberg
1998, p. 48). In summary, N. fossalis depends on an entire local
watershed that includes subsurface water flow over an area that is
comprised of intermixed wetland and upland habitats.
Topography and Soils That Support Ponding During Winter and Spring
Topography and soils support ponding that occurs during winter and
spring months. Impervious subsurface layers combined with flat to
gently sloping topography serve to inhibit rapid infiltration of
rainwater, resulting in ponding of vernal pools and seasonally flooded
alkali vernal plains (Bramlet 1993a, p. 1; Bauder and McMillian 1998,
pp. 57-59). Soils also function to moderate water chemistry and rate of
water loss to evaporation (Zedler 1987, pp. 17-30). In Los Angeles
County, vernal pools that support Navarretia fossalis are found on
Cieneba-Pismo-Caperton soils (NRCS SSURGO, ca676. In western Riverside
County, seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain habitats that support N.
fossalis are found on Domino, Traver, Waukena, Chino, (Bramlet 1993a,
pp. 1, 10) (59 FR 64812; December 15, 1994) and Willows soils (Bramlet
2009, p. 4). In San Diego County, vernal pool habitats that support N.
fossalis are found on Huerhuero, Placentia, Olivenhain, Stockpen, and
Redding soils (NRCS SSURGO, ca073).
Primary Constituent Elements for Navarretia Fossalis
Under the Act and its implementing regulations, we are required to
identify the physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of Navarretia fossalis. The physical and biological
features are the primary constituent elements (PCEs) laid out in the
appropriate quantity and spatial arrangement essential to the
conservation of the species. Areas designated as critical habitat for
N. fossalis were occupied at the time of listing (see the Geographic
Range and Status section of the proposed revised rule for a more
detailed explanation), are currently occupied, are within the species'
historic geographical range, and contain sufficient PCEs to support N.
fossalis.
Based on our current knowledge of the life history, biology, and
ecology of Navarretia fossalis, and habitat characteristics required to
sustain the essential life history functions of the species, we
determined that the PCEs specific to N. fossalis are:
(1) PCE 1--Ephemeral wetland habitat. Vernal pools (up to 10 ac (4
ha)) and seasonally flooded alkali vernal plains that become inundated
by winter rains and hold water or have saturated soils for 2 weeks to 6
months during a year with average rainfall (i.e., years where average
rainfall amounts for a particular area are reached during the rainy
season (between October and May)). This period of inundation is long
enough to promote germination, flow
