[Federal Register: June 7, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 108)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 33015-33033]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr07jn05-12]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
RIN 1018-AJ10
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of
Critical Habitat for Allium munzii (Munz's onion)
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), designate
176 acres (ac) (71 hectares (ha)) of Federal land as critical habitat
for the Federally endangered Allium munzii (Munz's onion) pursuant to
the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). The designated
critical habitat is within the Cleveland National Forest at Elsinore
Peak in western Riverside County, California.
DATES: This rule becomes effective on July 7, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Comments and materials received, as well as supporting
documentation used in the preparation of this final rule, will be
available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal business
hours, at the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, 6010 Hidden Valley Road, Carlsbad, CA 92009 (telephone: 760/
431-9440). The final rule, economic analysis (EA), and map will also be
available via the Internet at http://carlsbad.fws.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Field Supervisor, Carlsbad Fish and
Wildlife Office (telephone 760/431-9440; facsimile 760/431-9618).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Designation of Critical Habitat Provides Little Additional Protection
to Species
In 30 years of implementing the ESA, the Service has found that the
designation of statutory critical habitat provides little additional
protection to most listed species, while consuming significant amounts
of conservation resources. The Service's present system for designating
critical habitat is driven by litigation rather than biology, limits
our ability to fully evaluate the science involved, consumes enormous
agency resources, and imposes huge social and economic costs. The
Service believes that additional agency discretion would allow our
focus to return to those actions that provide the greatest benefit to
the species most in need of protection.
Role of Critical Habitat in Actual Practice of Administering and
Implementing the Act
While attention to and protection of habitat is paramount to
successful conservation actions, we have consistently found that, in
most circumstances, the designation of critical habitat is of little
additional value for most listed species, yet it consumes large amounts
of conservation resources. Sidle (1987) stated, ``Because the ESA can
protect species with and without critical habitat designation, critical
habitat designation may be redundant to the other consultation
requirements of section 7.'' Currently, only 473 species, or 38 percent
of the 1,253 listed species in the U.S. under the jurisdiction of the
Service, have designated critical habitat.
We address the habitat needs of all 1,253 listed species through
conservation mechanisms such as listing, section 7 consultations, the
Section 4 recovery planning process, the Section 9 protective
prohibitions of unauthorized take, Section 6 funding to the States, and
the Section 10 incidental take permit process. In the case of listed
plants, such as Allium munzii, Section 9 of the Act prohibits any
person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States from removing
and reducing to possession any such species from areas under Federal
jurisdiction; maliciously damaging or destroying any such species on
such area; or removing, cutting, digging up, or damaging or destroying
any such species on any other area in knowing violation of any law or
regulation of any state or in the course of any violation of a State
criminal trespass law. The Service believes that it is these measures
that may make the difference between extinction and survival for many
species.
We note, however, that two courts found our definition of adverse
modification to be invalid (March 15, 2001, decision of the United
States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, Sierra Club v. U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service et al., F.3d 434, and the August 6, 2004, Ninth
Circuit judicial opinion, Gifford Pinchot Task Force v. United States
Fish and Wildlife Service). In response to these decisions, we are
reviewing the regulatory definition of adverse modification in relation
to the conservation of the species.
Procedural and Resource Difficulties in Designating Critical Habitat
We have been inundated with lawsuits regarding critical habitat
designation, and we face a growing number of lawsuits challenging
critical habitat determinations once they are made. These lawsuits have
subjected the Service to an ever-increasing series of court orders and
court-approved settlement agreements, compliance with which now
consumes nearly the entire listing program budget. This leaves the
Service with little ability to prioritize its activities to direct
scarce listing resources to the listing program actions with the most
biologically urgent species conservation needs.
The consequence of the critical habitat litigation activity is that
limited listing funds are used to defend active lawsuits and to comply
with the growing number of adverse court orders. As a result, the
Service's own proposals to undertake conservation actions based on
biological priorities are significantly delayed.
The accelerated schedules of court-ordered designations have left
the Service with almost no ability to provide for additional public
participation beyond that minimally required by the Administrative
Procedures Act (APA), the Act, and the Service's implementing
regulations, or to take additional time for review of comments and
information to ensure the rule has addressed all the pertinent issues
before making decisions on listing and critical habitat proposals, due
to the risks associated with noncompliance with judicially imposed
deadlines. This in turn fosters a second round of litigation in which
those who will suffer adverse impacts from these decisions challenge
them. The cycle of litigation appears endless, is very expensive, and
in the final analysis provides little additional protection to listed
species.
The costs resulting from the designation include legal costs, the
cost of preparation and publication of the designation, the analysis of
the economic effects and the cost of requesting and responding to
public comment, and in some cases the costs of compliance with the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA); all are part of the cost of
critical habitat designation. These costs result in minimal benefits to
the species that are not already afforded by the protections
[[Page 33016]]
of the Act enumerated earlier, and they directly reduce the funds
available for direct and tangible conservation actions.
Background
We intend to discuss only those topics directly relevant to the
designation of critical habitat in this final rule. For more
information on Allium munzii, please refer to the final listing rule
published in the Federal Register on October 13, 1998 (63 FR 54975),
proposed critical habitat rule published in the Federal Register on
June 4, 2004 (69 FR 31569), and the notice of availability of the draft
economic analysis (DEA) and reopening of the public comment period for
Allium munzii published in the Federal Register on December 1, 2004 (69
FR 69878).
Previous Federal Action
Please refer to the proposed rule to designate critical habitat for
Allium munzii (69 FR 31569) and the notice of availability of the draft
economic analysis and reopening of the public comment period for Allium
munzii (69 FR 69878) for more information on previous Federal actions
concerning Munz's onion.
Summary of Comments and Recommendations
We requested written comments from the public on the proposed
designation of critical habitat for Allium munzii (69 FR 31569) and the
notice of availability of the draft economic analysis and reopening of
the public comment period for Allium munzii ( 69 FR 69878). We also
contacted appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies; scientific
organizations; and other interested parties and invited them to comment
on the proposed rule.
During the comment period that opened on June 4, 2004, and closed
on August 3, 2004, we received 7 comment letters directly addressing
the proposed critical habitat designation: 3 from peer reviewers, 1
from a Federal agency, and 3 from organizations or individuals. During
the comment period that opened on December 1, 2004, and closed on
January 3, 2005, we received 4 comment letters directly addressing the
proposed critical habitat designation and the draft economic analysis.
Of these latter comments, 1 was from a Federal agency, and 3 were from
organizations. One commenter concurred with the designation of critical
habitat for Allium munzii and 8 commenters recommended modifications to
the proposed designation. Comments received were grouped into general
issues specifically relating to the proposed critical habitat
designation for Allium munzii and are addressed in the following
summary and incorporated into the final rule as appropriate. We did not
receive any requests for a public hearing.
Peer Review
In accordance with our policy published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR
34270), we solicited expert opinions from five knowledgeable
individuals with scientific expertise that included familiarity with
the species, the geographic region in which the species occurs, and
conservation biology principles. We received responses from three of
the peer reviewers. The peer reviewers provided additional information,
clarifications, and suggestions to improve the final critical habitat
rule. These recommendations included clarification of occurrences,
improvements to the primary constituent elements, identification of
essential occurrences, and correction of factual errors. Two of the
peer reviewers recommended that the essential habitat and occurrences
within the Western Riverside County Multiple-Species Habitat
Conservation Plan (MSHCP) be designated as critical habitat. One of the
peer reviewers agreed with the designation of critical habitat at
Elsinore Peak and expressed cautious support of the areas excluded
within the Western Riverside County MSHCP under section 4(b)(2) of the
Act. Peer reviewer comments are addressed in the following summary and
incorporated into the final rule as appropriate.
We reviewed all comments received from the peer reviewers and the
public for substantive issues and new information regarding critical
habitat for Allium munzii, and addressed them in the following summary.
Peer Reviewer Comments
Comment 1. Two peer reviewers disagreed with our exclusion of
critical habitat within the Western Riverside County MSHCP based on our
justification of the ``presumed effectiveness of approved and draft
habitat conservation plans, in particular, the Western Riverside County
MSHCP,'' and their concerns that ``known localities within the
jurisdiction of the MSHCP currently have no established reserves, or
proposed management procedures for this species.''
Our Response. Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, the ``Secretary may
exclude any area from critical habitat if he determines that the
benefits of such exclusion outweigh the benefits of specifying such
areas as part of critical habitat, unless he determines, based on the
best scientific and commercial data available, that the failure to
designate such area as critical habitat will result in the extinction
of the species concerned.'' We evaluated the benefits of excluding
critical habitat against the benefits of including critical habitat
within approved Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs), including the
Western Riverside County MSHCP, the Rancho Bella Vista HCP, and the
Long-Term Stephen's Kangaroo Rat (SKR) HCP. A major benefit of
exclusion is that it will allow us to continue to work with the
signatory agencies in Riverside County (for the Western Riverside
County MSHCP) in a spirit of cooperation and partnership and to
encourage landowners, local jurisdictions, and other entities to work
cooperatively with us to develop HCPs in other areas. A possible
benefit of including critical habitat on such lands is education about
the species and its habitat needs. However, we considered that this
educational benefit has largely already been met by the public
participation process that occurred in the development of approved
HCPs, including the Western Riverside County MSHCP, and therefore, that
this would not be a particularly important benefit of critical habitat
designation. Maps depicting the distribution and location of Allium
munzii are widely available to the public as part of the Western
Riverside County MSHCP planning process. We have concluded, therefore,
that the benefits of excluding critical habitat from such lands exceed
the value of including the lands as critical habitat. See additional
discussion under ``Exclusions Under Section 4(b)(2) of the Act.''
Our approval of the Western Riverside County MSHCP indicates our
strong belief that the plan will be effective in conserving Allium
munzii. The Western Riverside County MSHCP provides specific
conservation objectives to ensure that suitable habitat and known
populations of Allium munzii will persist. Under the Western Riverside
County MSHCP, at least 21,260 ac (8,604 ha) of modeled habitat for
Allium munzii will be included in the MSHCP Conservation Area. The
permittees will implement management and monitoring practices within
the Additional Reserve Lands, including surveys for Allium munzii.
Cooperative management and monitoring are anticipated on public and PQP
lands. Surveys for Allium munzii will be conducted at least every 8
years to verify occupancy at a minimum of 75 percent of the known
locations. If surveys document that the distribution of Allium munzii
has
[[Page 33017]]
declined below this 75 percent threshold, management measures will be
triggered, as appropriate, to meet the species-specific objectives.
Other management actions described in the MSHCP include addressing
competition with non-native plant species, clay mining, off-road
vehicle use, and disking activities. Implementation of these management
actions will help to avoid and minimize adverse effects to Allium
munzii. Thus, the Western Riverside County MSHCP establishes reserves
and management procedures for Allium munzii.
The Western Riverside County MSHCP provides a greater level of
management for Allium munzii on private lands than would designation of
critical habitat on private lands. The designation of critical habitat
only affects activities conducted, funded, or permitted by Federal
agencies. Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires Federal agencies to
ensure that actions they fund, authorize, or carry out are not likely
to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened
species or destroy or adversely modify critical habitat. Critical
habitat designation on private (non-Federal) lands would not obligate
or trigger any requirement by a private (non-Federal) landowner to
manage their lands to conserve Allium munzii.
All known occurrences of this species would be protected: (1) By
approved HCPs (Rancho Bella Vista and SKR HCPs); (2) on existing PQP
lands, proposed conceptual reserve design lands, and lands targeted for
conservation within the Western Riverside County MSCHP; and (3) in
areas where a conservation strategy authorized through the section 7
consultation process has provided for protection and long-term
management of Allium munzii. Thus, we have concluded that the exclusion
of such lands would not result in the extinction of Allium munzii.
Please see ``Relationship of Critical Habitat to Approved Habitat
Conservation Plans and Other Approved Conservation Strategies'' for a
more detailed discussion.
Comment 2. Two peer reviewers recommended that critical habitat be
designated for additional known occurrences/populations and areas of
suitable clay soils. These are: (1) Known occurrences at Harford
Springs and Harford Springs County Park and adjacent clay habitat on
the Gavilan Plateau (Elemental Occurrence (EO) 2); (2) all of the
occurrences on and adjacent to Estelle Mountain (EO 9); (3) an
occurrence south of Steele Peak (no element occurrence identified,
possibly EO 15); (4) all of the habitat on Elsinore Peak and all
localities on Elsinore Peak (EO 13); (5) an occurrence in the Temescal
Wash near Indian Wash, and the area between Indian Wash and Horsethief
Wash south of DePalma Road in Temescal Canyon (EO3 and EO8); (6)
occurrences on the southern flank of Alberhill Mountain (EO 6); (7)
occurrences on Bachelor Mountain (EO 12); and (8) an occurrence on
North Domenigoni Hills (EO 10).
One of the peer reviewers did not recommend critical habitat for
the occurrences at Skunk Hollow (Rancho Bella Vista HCP) (EO 4), Briggs
and Scott Roads (EO 14), or Indian Truck Trail and De Palma Roads
(Sycamore Creek) (EO 7) because of the small size, fragmentation, and
impacts to these populations. The peer reviewers did not provide the EO
numbers for these populations and we attempted to match their
descriptions with the EO for our response.
Our Response. Considered together, the three categories of (1)
approved HCPs (Rancho Bella Vista and SKR HCPs); (2) existing PQP
lands, proposed conceptual reserve design lands, and lands targeted for
conservation within the Western Riverside County MSCHP; and (3) lands
where conservation strategies approved through the section 7
consultation process have provided protection, long-term management,
and funding to conserve Allium munzii provide a significant level of
conservation for Allium munzii. Thus, all of the occurrences of Allium
munzii within (1) approved HCPs (Rancho Bella Vista and SKR); (2)
existing PQP lands, proposed conceptual reserve design lands, and lands
targeted for conservation within the Western Riverside County MSCHP;
and (3) on lands where conservation strategies approved through the
section 7 consultation process have provided protection, long-term
management, and funding to conserve Allium munzii.
Within PQP lands, the species occurs on lands in: (1) The southern
border of Harford Springs County Park (owned by the County of
Riverside) (EO 2); (2) Barry Jones Wetland Mitigation Bank (previously
called the Skunk Hollow Wetland Mitigation Bank) (private lands) (EO
4); (3) Lake Mathews--Estelle Mountain Reserve northwest of the Estelle
Mountain summit in the Gavilan Hills (owned by the County of Riverside)
(EO 9); (4) Southwestern Riverside County Multi-Species Reserve
(SRCMSR) in the north Domenigoni Hills on either side of Old Mine Road
(owned by the Metropolitan Water District) (EO 10); (5) SRCMSR lands at
Lake Skinner (owned by the Bureau of Land Management and Metropolitan
Water District) (EO 11); (6) SRCMSR lands on the south slope of
Bachelor Mountain (owned by the Metropolitan Water District) (EO 12);
and (7) Elsinore Peak on the Cleveland National Forest (EO 13).
Within proposed conceptual reserve lands, lands specifically
targeted to be included within the Reserve, and/or within the Narrow
Endemic Plant Species Survey Area, the plant occurs in: (1) Private
lands across Ida Leona Road in the Gavilan Hills adjacent to Harford
Springs County Park (EO 2); (2) private land immediately adjacent to
the Sycamore Creek development, northwest of I-15 and Indian Truck
Trail Road, in Temescal Canyon (EO 3 and EO 8); (3) Upper Dawson Canyon
in the Gavilan Hills (EO 5); (4) private land on the south side of
Alberhill Mountain, west of I-15, in the City of Lake Elsinore (EO 6);
(5) private land east of I-15, west of De Palma's Italian Village,
between Indian Canyon and Horsethief Canyon (EO7); (6) west of
Lindenberger Road, 0.8 miles (mi) south of Scott Road, southeast of Sun
City on a 36.3-ac (15 ha) parcel conserved as the result of a
conservation strategy approved through the section 7 consultation
process regarding a Sempra gas pipeline (Service 2001) and on a 65.5-ac
(27 ha) parcel conserved as a result of a conservation strategy
approved through the section 7 consultation process associated with the
Warmington development (Service 2002) (EO 14); (7) northern boundary of
the City of Lake Elsinore, within the North Peak Specific Plan Area on
lands purchased and conserved by Riverside County (EO 15); (8) 1.2 mi
northeast of the intersection of Lake Street and I-15 (EO 16); (9) land
owned by Metropolitan Water District of Southern California on the
north slope of Bachelor Mountain (EO 17); (10) Temescal Valley, west of
I-15, between Nichols Road and Riverside Drive, on a low hill adjacent
to Collier Marsh (Alberhill Marsh); and (11) near Temescal Wash (EO
18).
In addition, at least 21,260 ac (8,604 ha) of modeled habitat for
Allium munzii will be included in the MSHCP Conservation Area (Service
2004). According to the Western Riverside County MSHCP, at least 13
localities within Temescal Valley and the southwestern portion of Plan
Area, including the following Core Areas, are to be included within the
MSHCP Conservation Area (County of Riverside 2002): (1) Harford Springs
Park (EO 2); and (2) a population on private lands in Temescal Valley
(EO 5), Alberhill (EO 6), De Palma Road (EO 7), Estelle Mountain (EO
9), Domenigoni Hills (EO
[[Page 33018]]
10), Lake Skinner (EO 11), Bachelor Mountain (EO 12), Elsinore Peak (EO
13), Scott Road (EO 14), North Peak (EO 15), and northeast of Alberhill
(EO 16). Populations that are currently on public lands or within
preservation areas include Harford Springs Park (about half the plants
and habitat) (EO 2) and at Estelle Mountain (EO 7), North Domenigoni
Hills (EO 10), Bachelor Mountain (two populations) (EO 11 and EO 12),
North Peak (EO 15), and Cleveland National Forest lands at Elsinore
Peak (EO 13) (County of Riverside 2002).
The occurrence at the Sycamore Creek development (EO 3 and EO 8)
receives management (funded through the homeowners' association; the
management plan is to be provided to the resource agencies prior to any
construction actions by the developer) as part of a conservation
strategy approved through the section 7 consultation process. The
occurrence on private lands west of Lindenberger Road (EO 14) receives
management as part of a conservation strategy approved through section
7 consultation processes for a Southern California Gas Company gas
pipeline and the Warmington development.
Thus, the nine occurrences recommended to be designated as critical
habitat by the peer reviewers (EO 2, EO 3, EO 8, EO 6, EO 9, EO 10, EO
12, EO 13, and EO 15) are already conserved (1) within approved HCPs
(Rancho Bella Vista and SKR HCPs); (2) on existing PQP lands, proposed
conceptual reserve design lands, and lands targeted for conservation
within the Western Riverside County MSCHP; and (3) on lands where
conservation strategies approved through the section 7 consultation
process have provided protection, long-term management, and funding to
conserve Allium munzii. We have excluded these lands, except for the
occurrence on U.S. Forest Service lands, under section 4(b)(2) of the
Act in this final rule.
Comment 3. One peer reviewer noted that the large population of
Allium munzii on State of California lands immediately adjacent to the
Cleveland National Forest lands at Elsinore Peak is subject to
increasing levels of off-highway vehicle (OHV) use. The commenter
expressed concern that excluding this area from critical habitat may
lead to further OHV (and other) damage to this population and would not
give the State of California incentive to prevent this impact.
Our Response. The Cleveland National Forest requested approval from
the State Lands Commission to place barriers on State lands to
discourage unauthorized OHV use in this area (U.S. Forest Service
2002). We do not agree that the exclusion of critical habitat from the
State lands may lead to further OHV damage or that the designation of
critical habitat would give the State an incentive to prevent this
activity. Designation of critical habitat only affects activities
conducted, funded, or permitted by Federal agencies. Activities lacking
any Federal nexus, such as OHV activity on State lands, would not be
affected by the critical habitat designation.
Comment 4. One peer reviewer suggested that the Service ``needs to
designate areas that are ``critical'' to the species, and review the
current management and protection procedures.
Our Response. The definition of critical habitat includes areas
containing the physical or biological features (1) essential to the
conservation of the species and (2) which may require special
management considerations or protection. If the physical or biological
features are not essential or may not require special management
considerations or protection, then the area would not meet the
definition of critical habitat. Please see ``Special Management
Considerations and Protection'' for a further discussion of this
subject.
Comment 5. Two peer reviewers (and a public review commenter)
questioned the number and description of occurrences of Allium munzii
described in the proposed rule.
Our Response. The proposed rule stated that there are 19
occurrences of Allium munzii according to the California Natural
Diversity Database (CNDDB) (CNDDB 2004). We have reviewed the CNDDB
records to clarify any discrepancies in the number of occurrences of
Allium munzii (Service 2003). The CNDDB reported 21 element occurrences
(EO) (Service 2003). Of these records, EO 1 is extirpated and EO 19 is
an error. Thus, we concluded that there were 19 occurrences. Our
further review of the CNDDB indicates that EO 20 and EO 21 are older
records and have not been recently verified, and EO 3 and EO 8 may
represent the same population and should be treated as a single
occurrence. Hence, in the final rule, we describe 16 extant populations
of Allium munzii (see also ``Criteria Used to Identify Critical
Habitat'' for a listing of these 16 populations).
Comments Related to Designation and Exclusion of Critical Habitat
Comment 1. Several commenters disagreed with our exclusion of
critical habitat within approved HCPs including the Western Riverside
County MSHCP. They stated that we did not provide any scientific or
biological reasons for not including critical habitat within the
boundaries of HCPs including the Western Riverside County MSHCP.
Our Response. We disagree. Please see our response to Peer Reviewer
Comment 1 for a detailed explanation.
Comment 2. A commenter recommended that critical habitat be
expanded to include important populations within HCP areas, including
the extensive population on Alberhill, Harford County Park and adjacent
lands, and North Peak.
Our Response. We disagree. Please see our response to Peer Reviewer
Comment 2 for a detailed explanation.
Comment 3. A commenter stated that the Cleveland National Forest
should not be designated as critical habitat because these lands are
within the boundary of the Western Riverside County MSHCP.
Our Response. We agree that the Cleveland National Forest lands are
within the Western Riverside County MSHCP Plan Area. However, unlike
private landowners and local jurisdictions, Federal agencies, such as
the U.S. Forest Service, do not receive take authorization for any
species covered by the Western Riverside County MSHCP. While lands
within the Cleveland National Forest were considered as part of the
environmental baseline, the U.S. Forest Service is not a signatory
agency to the Western Riverside County MSHCP, nor is it they bound to
comply with the regional HCP. Thus, we have only excluded private lands
within the Western Riverside County MSHCP from critical habitat
designation in this and other final critical habitat designation rules.
Comments Related to the Economic Analysis of Critical Habitat
Comment 1. We received several comment letters related to the draft
economic analysis (DEA) and proposed designation of critical habitat
for the Lake Elsinore Advanced Pumped Storage Project (LEAPS).
Our Response. We analyzed the information contained in the comment
letters, soil maps, aerial photography, and distribution of Allium
munzii populations along the easternmost edge of the proposed critical
habitat unit. No known populations of Allium munzii occur within the
LEAPS transmission line corridor, and the nearest population is west of
the corridor on soils mapped as Bosanko clay (identified as a clay soil
in the primary constituent element 1) and Las Posas gravelly
loam (identified as a soil series of sedimentary or igneous origin with
a clay subsoil in
[[Page 33019]]
primary constituent element 1). The soil maps indicate that
the LEAPS transmission corridor crosses soils mapped as Cieneba-rock
outcrop complex and the available information indicates that Allium
munzii does not occur on this soil type. Thus, we have not included the
LEAPS transmission corridor in the designation of critical habitat in
the final rule. Since no critical habitat is being designated within
the LEAPS transmission corridor, we did not, and do not need to,
consider economic impacts related to the LEAPS project.
Comment 2. A commenter stated that the DEA fails to clearly state
that critical habitat has no legal implications on private lands and no
burden on his/her property absent Federal nexus.
Our Response. A description of the legal implications of critical
habitat can be found in this Final Rule under ``Effects of Critical
Habitat Designation.''
Comment 3. We received several comments concerning the scope of the
economic analysis. One commenter stated that distributing costs among
other endangered species likely to co-exist with Allium munzii violates
the co-extensive analysis that is required, while another commenter
stated that the cost of Allium munzii conservation should not include
costs associated with the listing of Allium munzii or other regulatory
requirements (such as NEPA) that afford protection to the species.
Our Response. The primary purpose of the economic analysis is to
estimate the potential economic impacts associated with the designation
of critical habitat for Allium munzii. The Act defines critical habitat
to mean those specific areas that are essential to the conservation of
the species. The Act also defines conservation to mean the use of all
methods and procedures necessary to bring any endangered species or
threatened species to the point at which the measures of the Act are no
longer necessary. Thus we interpret the Act to mean that the economic
analysis should include all of the economic impacts associated with the
conservation of the species, which may include some of the effects
associated with listing because the species was listed prior to the
proposed designation of critical habitat. We note that the Act
generally requires critical habitat to be designated at the time of
listing, and, that had we conducted an economic analysis at that time,
the impacts associated with listing would not be readily
distinguishable from those associated with critical habitat
designation.
The DEA discusses other relevant regulations and protection efforts
for other listed species that include Allium munzii and its habitat. In
general, the analysis errs conservatively in order to make certain the
economic effects have not been missed. It treats as ``co-extensive''
other Federal and State requirements that may result in overlapping
protection measures (e.g., California Environmental Quality Act) for
the plant. In some cases, however, non-habitat-related regulations will
limit land use activities within critical habitat in ways that will
directly or indirectly benefit Allium munzii or its habitat (e.g.,
local zoning ordinances). These impacts were not considered to be ``co-
extensive'' with Allium munzii listing or designation for two reasons.
First, such impacts would occur even if Allium munzii were not listed.
Second, we must be able to differentiate economic impacts solely
associated with the conservation of Allium munzii and its habitat in
order to understand whether the benefit of excluding any particular
area from Allium munzii critical habitat outweighs the benefit of
including the area.
The economic analysis distributes the cost of conserving Allium
munzii habitat equally among the number of other listed species likely
to co-exist with Allium munzii as indicated by the historical
consultations. None of the past Allium munzii consultations focused
solely on Munz's onion but rather on other listed animal species co-
occurring in the area. Within a biological opinion that covers several
species, we are unable to accurately segregate out the cost for an
individual species from the rest of the species covered in the
biological opinion.
Comment 5. A few commenters stated that the DEA failed to address
the implications of the Gifford Pinchot Task Force v. United States
Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 378 F.3d 1059, 1069 (Ninth Circuit
2004) ruling on future Allium munzii conservation costs.
Our Response: The Service notes that a recent Ninth Circuit
judicial opinion, Gifford Pinchot Task Force v. USFWS, has invalidated
the Service's regulation defining destruction or adverse modification
of critical habitat. The Service is currently reviewing the decision to
determine what effect it (and to a limited extent Center for Biological
Diversity v. Bureau of Land Management (Case No. C-03-2509-SI, N.D.
Cal.)) may have on the outcome of consultations pursuant to section 7
of the Act.
Comment 6. A commenter stated that additional explanation should be
provided concerning the reasons behind the cost variation for the three
historical real estate projects involving Service consultation on
Allium munzii.
Our Response. The EA estimates the historical costs associated with
the Allium munzii conservation efforts on real estate development
projects based on information contained within the three past
consultations that included Allium munzii (Rancho Bella Vista, Sycamore
Creek development, and the Warmington Murrieta Scott Road LLC
subdivision). Each consultation addressed the impacts of the proposed
action not only to Allium munzii but also to other listed species. The
impacts to each project varied based on the amount of habitat being
affected and the degree of impact. In general, projects that had to
preserve more habitat had higher economic costs because the land could
not be put to its highest economic use.
Comment 7. A commenter stated that the DEA overestimates the
historical cost associated with the conservation of Allium munzii
because it inappropriately assumes that the cost affiliated with the
conservation of Allium munzii is equally weighted with the other
covered species when in fact conservation efforts for animal species
involve higher costs than plant species.
Our Response. While animal species may in fact involve higher level
of monitoring and active management efforts, the DEA errs
conservatively in order to make certain the past economic effects
associated with the conservation of Allium munzii have not been
understated.
Comment 8. A commenter stated that the $30,000 estimate for Allium
munzii's portion of the Western Riverside MSHCP preparation cost is an
overestimation, because the section in the document addressing the
plant is boilerplate rather than compiled from detailed research.
Our Response. The DEA estimates the portion of the MSHCP
preparation cost attributable to Allium munzii by equally distributing
the total cost of the MSHCP preparation among 145 species covered by
the MSHCP. While other covered species may in fact involve higher level
of research and documentation, the DEA errs conservatively in order to
make certain economic effects have not been understated. Although this
is a simplistic approach for estimating the historical coextensive cost
for Allium munzii, we do not believe that the error introduced by this
method will have a significant effect on our final critical habitat
decision.
Comment 9. A commenter stated that the DEA fails to acknowledge any
benefit of conserving a species that is threatened by extinction from
[[Page 33020]]
developments. The same commenter also requested that the final EA
incorporate a quantitative estimate of benefits of open space since
conservation of Allium munzii contributes to overall preservation of
open space.
Our Response. Section 4(b)(2) of the Act requires the Secretary to
designate critical habitat based on the best scientific data available
after taking into consideration the economic impact, and any other
relevant impact, of specifying any particular area as critical habitat.
Our approach for estimating economic impacts includes both economic
efficiency and distributional effects. The measurement of economic
efficiency is based on the concept of opportunity costs, which reflects
the value of goods and services foregone in order to comply with the
effects of the designation (e.g., lost economic opportunity associated
with restrictions on land use). Where data are available, our analyses
do attempt to measure the net economic impact. For example, the
analysis recognizes the potential for benefits associated with the
preservation of open space. It describes that in certain cases real
estate development that effectively incorporates the Allium munzii
habitat set-aside on-site might realize a value premium typically
associated with additional open space. Any such premium will offset
land preservation costs borne by landowners/developers. However, while
this scenario remains a possibility, reliable data revealing the
premium that the market places on nearby open space in Southern
California is not readily available. Moreover, the value premium
associated with habitat preservation is likely to be limited given that
recreational uses associated with habitat preserves may be generally
restricted to low-impact activities.
The value of open space, along with other ancillary benefits,
reflects broader social values, which are not the same as economic
impacts. While the Secretary must consider economic and other relevant
impacts as part of the final decision-making process under section
4(b)(2) of the Act, the Act explicitly states that it is the
government's policy to conserve all threatened and endangered species
and the ecosystems upon which they depend. Thus we believe that
explicit consideration of broader social values for the species and its
habitat, beyond the more traditionally defined economic impacts, is not
necessary as Congress has already clarified the social importance for
us. As a practical matter, we note the difficulty in being able to
develop credible estimates of such values as they are not readily
observed through typical market transactions.
Comment 10. A commenter stated that the DEA should explain how
future management costs of Allium munzii habitat were estimated given
that management requirements have not been clearly identified by the
Western Riverside MSHCP/Natural Community Conservation Plans (NCCP).
Our Response. The MSHCP budget reveals an average annual management
cost of approximately $84 per acre, in 2004 dollars. Because the MSHCP
does not list specific management requirements for Allium munzii, the
Service relies on this overall per-acre cost to estimate future
management cost for Allium munzii. We believe this to be a reasonable
estimate to use in forecasting conservation costs.
Comment 11. A commenter stated that, contrary to a statement made
in the DEA that not every acre in the habitat contains Allium munzii or
the primary constituent elements of habitat, the essential habitats all
have primary constituent elements by definition.
Our Response. This statement has been corrected in the EA.
Comments From States
Section 4(i) of the Act states, the Secretary shall submit to the
State agency a written justification for her failure to adopt
regulations consistent with the State agency's comments or petition.
The California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) did not provide
comments on the proposed rule to designate critical habitat for Allium
munzii or the draft economic analysis for critical habitat for Allium
munzii. In the case of other proposed rules for critical habitat, CDFG
has supported the exclusion of NCCPs/HCPs that covered the particular
species of interest. Consistent with their previous comments on other
critical habitat rules, we have excluded critical habitat for Allium
munzii from lands within the Western Riverside County MSHCP and other
approved HCPs. No State lands are designated as critical habitat for
Allium munzii.
Summary of Changes From Proposed Rule
We are not including critical habitat along the eastern boundary of
the Western Riverside County Unit because the area does not contain the
primary constituent elements for Allium munzii. The soil maps indicate
that the LEAPS transmission corridor crosses soils mapped as Cieneba-
rock outcrop complex and the available information indicates that
Allium munzii does not occur on this soil type. Thus, we have not
included the LEAPS transmission corridor in the designation of critical
habitat in the final rule. This revision has resulted in a reduction
from the proposed critical habitat of 227 ac (92 ha) to 176 ac (71 ha)
in the final rule.
Critical Habitat
Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the Act as (i) the
specific areas within the geographic area occupied by a 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) that may require special management considerations
or protection; and (ii) specific areas outside the geographic area
occupied by a species at the time it is listed, upon a determination
that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species.
``Conservation'' means the use of all methods and procedures that are
necessary to bring an endangered or a threatened species to the point
at which listing under the Act is no longer necessary. No specific
areas outside the geographical area occupied by Allium munzii at the
time of listing are designated as critical habitat in this final rule.
The area designated as critical habitat (Elsinore Peak in the Cleveland
National Forest) was described in the final listing rule (63 FR 54975).
Critical habitat receives protection under section 7 of the Act
through the prohibition against destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat with regard to actions carried out, funded, or
authorized by a Federal agency. Section 7 requires consultation on
Federal actions that are likely to result in the destruction or adverse
modification of 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 government or public access to private lands.
To be included in a critical habitat designation, the habitat
within the area occupied by the species must first have features that
are ``essential to the conservation of the species.'' 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 (i.e., areas on which are found the
primary constituent elements, as defined at 50 CFR 424.12(b)).
Habitat occupied at the time of listing may be included in critical
habitat only if the essential features thereon may require special
management or
[[Page 33021]]
protection. Thus, we do not include areas where existing management is
sufficient to conserve the species. (As discussed below, such areas may
also be excluded from critical habitat pursuant to section 4(b)(2).)
Accordingly, when the best available scientific and commercial data do
not demonstrate that the conservation needs of the species so require,
we will not designate critical habitat in areas outside the geographic
area occupied by the species at the time of listing. An area currently
occupied by the species but that was not known to be occupied at the
time of listing will likely be essential to the conservation of the
species and, therefore, will be included in the critical habitat
designation.
The Service's Policy on Information Standards Under the Endangered
Species Act, published in the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR
34271), and Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106-554; H.R. 5658)
and the associated Information Quality Guidelines issued by the
Service, provide criteria, establish procedures, and provide guidance
to ensure that decisions made by the Service represent the best
scientific and commercial data available. They require Service
biologists to the extent consistent with the Act and with the use of
the best scientific and commercial data available, to use primary and
original sources of information as the basis for recommendations to
designate critical habitat. When determining which areas are critical
habitat, a primary source of information is generally the listing
package for the species. Additional information sources 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. All information is
used in accordance with the provisions of Section 515 of the Treasury
and General Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L.
106-554; H.R. 5658) and the associated Information Quality Guidelines
issued by the Service.
Section 4 of the Act requires that we designate critical habitat on
the basis of the best scientific data available. Habitat is often
dynamic, and species may move from one area to another over time.
Furthermore, we recognize that designation of critical habitat may not
include all of the habitat areas that may eventually be determined to
be necessary for the recovery of the species. For these reasons,
critical habitat designations do not signal that habitat outside the
designation is unimportant or may not be required for recovery.
Areas that support populations, but are outside the critical
habitat designation, will continue to be subject to conservation
actions implemented under section 7(a)(1) of the Act and to the
regulatory protections afforded by the section 7(a)(2) jeopardy
standard, as determined on the basis of the best available information
at the time of the 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, habitat conservation plans, or
other species conservation planning efforts if new information
available to these planning efforts calls for a different outcome.
Methods
As required by section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act, we used the best
scientific and commercial data available in determining areas that are
essential to the conservation of Allium munzii. These included data
from research and survey observations published in peer-reviewed
articles and other documents, regional Geographic Information System
(GIS) vegetation, soil, and species coverages (including layers for
Riverside County), and data compiled in the CNDDB. In addition,
information provided in comments on the proposed critical habitat
designation and draft economic analysis were evaluated and considered
in the development of the final designation for Allium munzii. We
designated no areas outside of the geographic area presently occupied
by the species.
After all the information about the known occurrences of Allium
munzii was compiled, we created maps indicating the essential habitat
associated with each of the occurrences. We used the information
outlined above to aid in this task. The essential habitat was mapped
using GIS and refined using topographical and aerial map coverages.
These essential habitat areas were further refined by discussing each
area in detail with Fish and Wildlife Service biologists familiar with
each area.
After creating a GIS coverage of the essential areas, we created
legal descriptions of the essential areas. We used a 100-meter grid to
establish Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) North American Datum 27
(NAD 27) coordinates which, when connected, provided the boundaries of
the essential areas.
Primary Constituent Elements
In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) of the Act and regulations at
50 CFR 424.12, in determining which areas to propose as critical
habitat, we are required to base critical habitat determinations on the
best scientific and commercial data available and to consider those
physical and biological features (primary constituent elements (PCEs))
that are essential to the conservation of the species, and that may
require special management considerations and protection. These
include, but are not limited to: Space for individual and population
growth and for normal behavior; food, water, air, light, minerals, or
other nutritional or physiological requirements; cover or shelter;
sites for breeding, reproduction, and rearing (or development) of
offspring; and habitats that are protected from disturbance or are
representative of the historic geographical and ecological
distributions of a species.
The specific primary constituent elements or biological and
physical features required for Allium munzii are derived from the
biological needs of the species as described in the background section
of the proposed critical habitat rule (69 FR 31569).
Space for Individual and Population Growth and Food, Water, Air, Light,
Minerals, or Other Nutritional or Physiological Requirements
Allium munzii is restricted to mesic clay soils in western
Riverside County, California, along the southern edge of the Perris
basin (primary constituent elements 1 and 2). The
clay soils are scattered in a band several miles wide and extending 40
miles from Gavilan Hills to west of Temescal Canyon and Lake Elsinore
at the eastern foothills of the Santa Ana Mountains and along the
Elsinore Fault Zone to the southwestern foothills of the San Jacinto
Mountains near Lake Skinner. Clay soil associations include Altamont,
Auld, Bosanko, Claypit and Porterville clay soil types. At least one
population (North Domenigoni Hills) was reported by Bramlet in 1991 to
be associated with pyroxenite outcrops instead of clay (CNDDB 2003).
Rounded cobbles and boulders are embedded within clay, which has a
sticky, adobe consistency when wet and large cracks when dry. Allium
munzii is typically found on the more mesic sites within the clay
deposits (Boyd 1988). These mesic areas
[[Page 33022]]
within the clay deposits typically support grassland vegetation within
a surrounding scrub community. Allium munzii occurs at elevations from
984 to 3,511 feet (ft) (300 to 1,070 meters (m)), and on level or
slightly sloping lands.
The Western Riverside County Unit contains Bosanko clay soils
identified as a clay soil series of sedimentary origin as well as Las
Posas gravelly loam (identified as a soil series of sedimentary or
igneous origin with a clay subsoil) at a suitable elevation for this
species (primary constituent element 1 and 3). This
unit is also within open native and non-native grassland plant
communities (primary constituent element 1). The soils,
aspect, elevation, and plant communities present in this unit provide
space for individual and population growth. The soils, aspect, and
elevation of the unit (primary constituent element 3) provide
food, water, air, light, minerals and other nutritional and
physiological requirements for Allium munzii.
Sites for Reproduction, Germination, or Pollination
Allium munzii is typically found in open native grasslands and,
increasingly, non-native grasslands, which can be either the dominant
community or found in a mosaic with Riversidean sage scrub, scrub oak
chaparral, chamise chaparral, coast live oak woodland, or peninsular
juniper woodland and scrub (Holland 1986). Based upon the dominant
species, the plant communities where Allium munzii is found have been
further divided into series which include, but are not limited to,
California annual grassland, nodding needlegrass, purple needlegrass,
foothill needlegrass, black sage, white sage, California buckwheat,
California buckwheat-white sage, California sagebrush, California
sagebrush-black sage, California sagebrush-California buckwheat, mixed
sage, chamise, chamise-black sage, coast live oak, scrub oak, and
California juniper (Sawyer and Keeler-Wolf 1994).
A characteristic ``clay soil flora'' is associated with the island-
like clay deposits in southwestern Riverside County. This includes
herbaceous annuals, such as Harpagonella palmeri (Palmer's grappling
hook), Chorizanthe polygonoides var. longispina (knot-weed spine
flower), Achyrachaena mollis, Ancistrocarphus filagineus, Convolvulus
simulans (small-flowered morning-glory), Erodium macrophyllum, and
Microseris doulasii spp. Platycarpha (small-flowered microseris), and
herbaceous perennials, such as Fritillaria biflora (chocolate lily),
Sanicula bipinnatifida (purple sanicle), S. arguta (snakeroot),
Lomatium utriculatum (common lomatium), L. dasycarpum (lace parsnip),
Dodecatheon clevelandii (Cleveland's shooting star), Bloomeria crocea
(goldenstar), Chlorogalum parviflorum (soaproot), Dudleya multicaulis
(many-stemmed dudleya), Allium haematochiton (red-skinned onion) and A.
munzii (Boyd 1988). The plant communities within this unit provide
sites for reproduction, germination, or pollination.
Disturbance, Protection, and the Historical Geographical Distributions
The area designated as critical habitat is within the Cleveland
National Forest (see also Western Riverside County Unit, Riverside
County, California for a description of this unit). This locality
represents the southwesternmost and highest elevation occurrence of
Allium munzii. The Elsinore Peak population is considered to be the
most undisturbed and pristine of any of the known occurrences of this
species (Boyd and Mistretta 1991) (primary constituent element
2). This population is estimated to be more than 1,000 plants
and is ranked as a top conservation priority by a working group
assembled by the California Department of Fish and Game (Mistretta
1993). The Forest Service developed the Allium munzii Species
Management Guide to ensure that ``National Forest lands are managed to
maintain viable populations of all native plants and animals'' (U.S.
Forest Service 1992). Thus, this location represents a significant
habitat that is protected from disturbance and is within the historical
geographical distribution of this species.
Primary Constituent Elements for Allium munzii
Based on our current knowledge of the life history, biology, and
ecology of the species and the requirements of the habitat to sustain
the essential life history functions of the species, we have determined
that primary constituent elements for Allium munzii are:
(1) Clay soil series of sedimentary origin (e.g., Altamont, Auld,
Bosanko, Claypit, Porterville), or clay lenses (pockets of clay soils)
of such that may be found as unmapped inclusions in other soil series,
or soil series of sedimentary or igneous origin with a clay subsoil
(e.g., Cajalco, Las Posas, Vallecitos), found on level or slightly
sloping landscapes; generally between the elevations of 985 ft and
3,500 ft (300 m and 1,068 m) above mean sea level (AMSL), and as part
of open native or non-native grassland plant communities and ``clay
soil flora'' which can occur in a mosaic with Riversidean sage scrub,
chamise chaparral, scrub oak chaparral, coast live oak woodland, and
peninsular juniper woodland and scrub; or
(2) Alluvial soil series of sedimentary or igneous origin (e.g.,
Greenfield, Ramona, Placentia, Temescal) and terrace escarpment soils
found as part of alluvial fans underlying open native or non-native
grassland plant communities that can occur in a mosaic with Riversidean
sage scrub generally between the elevations of 985 ft and 3,500 ft (300
m and 1,068 m) AMSL, or Pyroxenite deposits of igneous origin found on
Bachelor Mountain as part of non-native grassland and Riversidean sage
scrub generally between the elevations of 985 ft and 3,500 ft (300 m
and 1,068 m) AMSL; and
(3) Clay soils or other soil substrate as described above with
intact, natural surface and subsurface structure that have been
minimally altered or unaltered by ground-disturbing activities (e.g.,
disked, graded, excavated, re-contoured); and,
(4) Within areas of suitable clay soils, microhabitats that are
moister than surrounding areas because of (A) north or northeast
exposure or (B) seasonally available moisture from surface or
subsurface runoff.
All areas designated as critical habitat for Allium munzii are
within the geographic area occupied by the species, were known to be
occupied at the time of listing, and contain one or more primary
constituent elements (e.g., soil, associated plant community) essential
for its conservation.
Criteria Used To Identify Critical Habitat
All areas known to support extant populations of Allium munzii are
considered essential habitat for the species because they include those
physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the
species and which may require special management considerations or
protection. Allium munzii is known only from a narrow geographical
range and, within that range, is limited to clay soils. Currently 16
populations of this plant are known to exist. Extant populations of
Allium munzii occur at the following locations: (1) Southern border of
Harford Springs County Park and extending onto private lands across Ida
Leona Road in the Gavilan Hills (population estimates from surveys
between 1986 and 1998 range from 2,000 to 51,000 plants) (EO 2); (2)
private land immediately adjacent to the Sycamore Creek development,
northwest of I-15 and Indian Truck Trail Road, in Temescal Canyon
[[Page 33023]]
(estimate of approximately 300 plants) (EO 3 and 8); (3) Barry Jones
Wetland Mitigation Bank (Skunk Hollow Wetland Conservation Bank)
(approximately 250 plants) (EO 4); (4) private land on the south flank
of Upper Dawson Canyon in the Gavilan Hills (estimate of approximately
2,000 plants) (EO 5); (5) private land on the south side of Alberhill
Mountain, west of I-15, in the City of Lake Elsinore (estimate of
approximately 7,700 plants) (EO 6); (6) private land east of I-15, west
of De Palma's Italian Village, between Indian Canyon and Horsethief
Canyon (estimate of approximately 1,000 plants) (EO7); (7) Lake
Mathews--Estelle Mountain Reserve northwest of the Estelle Mountain
summit in the Gavilan Hills (estimate of approximately 2,000 plants
based on a 1986 survey) (EO 9); (8) Southwestern Riverside County
Multi-Species Reserve (SRCMSR) in the north Domenigoni Hills on either
side of Old Mine Road (estimate of approximately 440 plants) (EO 10);
(9) south slope of Bachelor Mountain, along a maintenance road
associated with Lake Skinner Dam (population estimates from surveys
conducted between 1989 and 1992 range from 200 and 4,400 plants) (EO
11); (10) south slope of Bachelor Mountain, about a mile east of the
population described above (9) (estimate of approximately 150
plants) (EO 12); (11) Elsinore Peak, west of the City of Lake Elsinore,
on the Cleveland National Forest and adjacent State of California lands
(population estimate of more than 1,000 plants) (EO 13); (12) west of
Lindenberger Road, 0.8 miles south of Scott Road, southeast of Sun City
on a 36.3-acre (15 ha) parcel and on a 65.5-acre (27 ha) associated
with the Warmington development (estimate of approximately 1,000 plants
prior to project impacts) (EO 14); (13) northern boundary of the City
of Lake Elsinore, within the North Peak Specific Plan Area on lands
purchased and conserved by Riverside County (estimate of several
thousand plants) (EO 15); (14) private lands northeast of Alberhill,
1.0 miles north of I-15 and 1.2 miles northeast of the intersection of
Lake Street and I-15 (estimate of approximately 300 plants) (EO 16);
(15) land owned by Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
on the north slope of Bachelor Mountain (estimate of 2 plants) (EO 17);
and (16) Temescal Valley, west of I-15, between Nichols Road and
Riverside Drive, on a low hill adjacent to Collier Marsh (Alberhill
Marsh) and near Temescal Wash (population estimate not known) (EO 18).
We are designating critical habitat on lands we have determined
were occupied at the time of listing and contain the primary
constituent elements and those additional areas found to be essential
to the conservation of Allium munzii.
Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act authorizes us to issue permits for
the take of listed species incidental to otherwise lawful activities.
An incidental take permit application must be supported by a habitat
conservation plan (HCP) that identifies conservation measures that the
permittee agrees to implement for the species to minimize and mitigate
the impacts of the requested incidental take. We often exclude non-
Federal public lands and private lands that are covered by an existing
operative HCP and executed implementation agreement (IA) under section
10(a)(1)(B) of the Act from designated critical habitat because the
benefits of exclusion outweigh the benefits of inclusion as discussed
in section 4(b)(2) of the Act. All but one occurrence of Allium munzii
are in areas subject to: (1) Management plans related to approved HCPs
(Rancho Bella Vista and SKR HCPs); (2) existing PQP lands, proposed
conceptual reserve design lands, and lands targeted for conservation
within the Western Riverside County MSCHP; and (3) conservation
strategies approved through the section 7 consultation process that
have provided protection, long-term management, and funding to conserve
Allium munzii.
When determining critical habitat boundaries, we made every effort
to avoid designating developed areas such as buildings, paved areas,
radio and communication towers, and other structures that lack PCEs for
Allium munzii. Any such structures inadvertently left inside designated
critical habitat boundaries are not considered part of the designated
unit. This also applies to the land on which such structures sit
directly. Therefore, Federal actions limited to these areas would not
trigger section 7 consultations, unless they affect the species and/or
primary constituent elements in adjacent critical habitat.
A brief discussion of the area designated as critical habitat is
provided in the description below. Additional detailed documentation
concerning the essential nature of this area is contained in our
supporting record for this rulemaking.
Special Management Considerations or Protections
When designating critical habitat, we assess whether the areas
determined to be essential for conservation may require special
management considerations or protections. As we undertake the process
of designating critical habitat for a species, we first evaluate lands
defined by those physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of the species for inclusion in the designation pursuant
to section 3(5)(A) of the Act. Secondly, we then evaluate lands defined
by those features to assess whether they may require special management
considerations or protection.
As discussed throughout this rule, Allium munzii and its habitat
are threatened by a number of factors. Threats to those features that
define essential habitat (primary constituent elements) are caused by
various types of development, dry-land farming activities, off-road
vehicle activity, clay mining, and competition with non-native plants.
Habitat loss continues to be the greatest threat to Allium munzii. It
is essential for the survival of this species to protect those features
that define the remaining essential habitat, through purchase or
special management plans, from irreversible threats and habitat
conversion.
The Western Riverside County Unit is entirely on Federal lands
within the Cleveland National Forest (Cleveland NF). The Cleveland NF
has developed a Species Management Guide for Allium munzii (Allium
munzii) (Guide) (U.S. Forest Service 1992). The Guide, plus subsequent
documentation from Cleveland NF (U.S. Forest Service 2002), describes
threats to Allium munzii from off-road vehicles, competition from non-
native plants, wildfire management, development, habitat fragmentation,
and species viability. The ongoing and pervasive nature of these
threats demonstrates that the PCEs for Allium munzii require ongoing
special management considerations or protection within this unit. For
example, maintaining the integrity of the clay soils (primary
constituent elements 1 and 2) to support Allium
munzii requires the ongoing efforts by the Forest Service to control
unauthorized off-road vehicle use and grazing in habitats occupied by
Allium munzii. Grazing would have unacceptably high impacts on Allium
munzii through trampling and compaction of the soil, and enhancement of
non-native grass species populations (U.S. Forest Service 1992).
Protecting surrounding lands from development, grading, and erosion
that maintain the mesic microhabitat conditions require continued
management oversight by the Forest Service (primary constituent element
[[Page 33024]]
3). In addition, fire management to sustain Allium munzii is
under Forest Service control.
The Guide includes a large number of management actions designed to
reduce these specific threats to Allium munzii within the Cleveland NF:
(1) Future development at the Elsinore Peak electronic site will be
designed to avoid adverse effects to Allium munzii; (2) illegal off-
road vehicle activity in the Elsinore Peak area of the Trabuco Ranger
District and other areas of Allium munzii habitat, as needed, will be
eliminated through construction of barriers and fencing; (3) future
management of the slopes of Elsinore Peak and other areas of Allium
munzii habitat allows minimal development; (4) fire management of
habitat includes a number of specific prescriptions (e.g., related to
``free-burn'' areas, fuelbreaks and fire suppression activities, earth-
moving on slopes, location of fire camps, and site rehabilitation after
fire; (5) the parcel of land in Section 36 that supports Allium munzii
will be a high priority target for acquisition in future land
exchanges; (6) the Cleveland NF will confer with California Department
of Fish and Game and the Service regarding possible outplantings of
Allium munzii and monitor outplantings; and (7) no new grazing
allotments or special use permits for grazing will be issued for the
Elsinore Peak area.
The occurrences on non-Federal lands that are: (1) Within approved
HCPs (Rancho Bella Vista and SKR HCPs); (2) on existing PQP lands,
proposed conceptual reserve design lands, and lands targeted for
conservation within the Western Riverside County MSCHP; and (3) on
lands where conservation strategies approved through the section 7
consultation process have provided protection, long-term management,
and funding to conserve Allium munzii may require special management
considerations or protection. Occurrences within the Western Riverside
County MSHCP are threatened by competition with non-native plant
species, clay mining, off-road vehicle use, and disking activities. The
Western Riverside County MSHCP proposes that the Reserve Managers will
manage known and future occurrences of this species to minimize these
threats, and the persistence of 75 percent of the known locations will
be monitored every 8 years. Other management actions described in the
Western Riverside County MSHCP include addressing competition with non-
native plant species, clay mining, off-road vehicle use, and disking
activities.
The Rancho Bella Vista HCP provides both interim and long-term
management to address threats to PCEs from development, invasive
plants, trampling and fire. The SKR HCP provides for the establishment
of core reserves, adaptive management of the reserve, and management
and restoration of habitats for the Stephens' kangaroo rat. The core
preserves and management plans reduce threats to the PCEs for Munz's
onion by protecting habitat and limiting fragmentation of habitat from
future urban and agricultural development; controlling trespass and
unauthorized uses of preserve lands by the installation of barriers,
gates, signage, and fences; fire management plans including fire break
management, fire controls, and fire suppression logistics; and
controlling recreation. Protecting habitat will maintain and minimize
disturbances to suitable soils and vegetation communities associated
with Allium munzii. Access and recreation management will protect
occurrences of Allium munzii from impacts by off-highway vehicles and
trampling. The fire management planning will avoid occurrences and
maintain the vegetation communities associated with Allium munzii.
The occurrence at the Sycamore Creek development (EO 3 and EO 8)
was threatened by activities that would disturb or remove vegetation
and Altamont clay soils. The occurrence on private lands west of
Lindenberger Road (EO 14) was faced with similar threats to vegetation
and soil disturbance and removal. Prior to the conservation of this
occurrence, this population may have been affected by light grazing
and/or dry land farming (CNDDB 2003).
Critical Habitat Designation
Designated critical habitat includes Allium munzii habitat at a
single location in the species' range and is located entirely within
Riverside County, California. The majority of essential habitat for
this species has been excluded under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. As a
result, only Federal lands are designated as critical habitat. Table 1
depicts areas determined to be essential to the Allium munzii, lands
being excluded from critical habitat pursuant to section 4(b)(2) of the
Act, and the approximate area designated as critical habitat for the
Allium munzii by land ownership.
Table 1.--Summary of Essential Habitat Acreage for Allium munzii
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal* Local/state Private Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Essential habitat............... 176 ac (71 ha).... 73 ac (30 ha)..... 995 ac (403 ha)... 1,244 ac (503 ha).
Excluded under 4(b)(2).......... 0 ac (0 ha)....... 73 ac (30 ha)..... 995 ac (403 ha)... 1,068 ac (433 ha).
Designated critical habitat..... 176 ac (71 ha).... 0 ac (0 ha)....... 0 ac (0 ha)....... 176 ac (71 ha).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Federal lands include U.S. Forest Service lands.
Western Riverside County Unit, Riverside County, California (176 ac (71
ha))
As discussed above, the lands that are: (1) Approved HCPs (Rancho
Bella Vista and SKR HCPs); (2) on existing PQP lands, proposed
conceptual reserve design lands, and lands targeted for conservation
within the Western Riverside County MSCHP; and (3) on lands where
conservation strategies approved through the section 7 consultation
process have provided protection, long-term management, and funding to
conserve Allium munzii currently, or will, provide for the conservation
of all known occurrences of Allium munzii. Only the habitat located on
U.S. Forest Service lands is designated as critical habitat. This area
was occupied at the time of listing, contains the primary constituent
elements, is essential to the conservation of the species, requires
special management, and the activities of Federal agencies are not
covered under the Western Riverside County MSHCP section 10(a)(1)(B)
permit. A map of the areas identified as essential habitat can be
viewed on our Web site at http://carlsbad.fws.gov.
Designated critical habitat is located in the vicinity of Elsinore
Peak in the Cleveland National Forest. The easternmost stand of Allium
munzii at this location is considered to be the most undisturbed and
pristine of any of the known occurrences of this species (Boyd and
Mistretta 1991). The land identified for this unit of critical habitat
supports the primary constituent elements discussed above. The habitat
is
[[Page 33025]]
characterized by mixed native/non-native grassland and chaparral
vegetation. Allium munzii occurs primarily in the grassland and the
transitional vegetation between the grassland and chaparral. The soils
are primarily mapped as Bosanko clay, Cieneba-blasingame-rock outcrop
complex, and Cieneba-rock outcrop complex. The stands of Allium munzii
are associated with mesic microhabitats, such as the mesic exposures on
cobble deposits and at the bottom of slopes. This population is
estimated at 5,000 plants and is ranked as a top conservation priority
by a working group assembled by the California Department of Fish and
Game (Mistretta 1993).
This site represents the southwesternmost extent of the range for
Allium munzii. The habitat at this location is high quality. This site
also supports three other species of wild onion, A. haematochition, A.
lacunosum, and A. peninsulare. This composition of four Allium species
at a single location is important to understanding the evolutionary
history and divergence of the Allium genus in southern California. The
southwestern portion of the essential habitat at this site is located
on land that will be subject to the terms and conditions of the Western
Riverside County MSHCP. All essential habitat on non-Federal lands
within the Western Riverside County MSHCP Plan Area is excluded from
critical habitat under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. Only the essential
habitat that may require special management considerations or
protection on Forest Service land is designated as critical habitat.
Effects of Critical Habitat Designation
Section 7 Consultation
Section 7 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. In our
regulations at 50 CFR 402.2, we define destruction or adverse
modification as ``a direct or indirect alteration that appreciably
diminishes the value of critical habitat for both the survival and
recovery of a listed species. Such alterations include, but are not
limited to: Alterations adversely modifying any of those physical or
biological features that were the basis for determining the habitat to
be critical.'' We are currently reviewing the regulatory definition of
adverse modification in relation to the conservation of the species.
Section 7(a) of the Act requires Federal agencies, including the
Service, to evaluate their actions with respect to any species that is
proposed or listed as endangered or threatened and with respect to its
critical habitat, if any is proposed or designated. Regulations
implementing this interagency cooperation provision of the Act are
codified at 50 CFR part 402.
Section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires Federal agencies to confer with
us on any action that is likely to jeopardize the continued existence
of a proposed species or result in destruction or adverse modification
of proposed critical habitat. Conference reports provide conservation
recommendations to assist the agency in eliminating conflicts that may
be caused by the proposed action. We may issue a formal conference
report if requested by a Federal agency. Formal conference reports on
proposed critical habitat contain an opinion that is prepared according
to 50 CFR 402.14, as if critical habitat were designated. We may adopt
the formal conference report as the biological opinion when the
critical habitat is designated, if no substantial new information or
changes in the action alter the content of the opinion (see 50 CFR
402.10(d)). The conservation recommendations in a conference report are
advisory.
If a species is listed or critical habitat is designated, section
7(a)(2) requires Federal agencies to ensure that activities they
authorize, fund, or carry out are not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of such a 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. Through this consultation, the
action agency ensures that its actions do not destroy or adversely
modify critical habitat.
When we issue a biological opinion concluding that a project is
likely to result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical
habitat, we also provide reasonable and prudent alternatives to the
project, if any are identifiable. ``Reasonable and prudent
alternatives'' are defined at 50 CFR 402.02 as alternative actions
identified during consultation that can be implemented in a manner
consistent with the intended purpose of the action, that are consistent
with the scope of the Federal agency's legal authority and
jurisdiction, that are economically and technologically feasible, and
that the Director believes would avoid destruction or adverse
modification of 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 critical
habitat is subsequently designated and the Federal agency has retained
discretionary involvement or control over the action or such
discretionary involvement or control is authorized by law.
Consequently, some Federal agencies may request reinitiation of
consultation or conference with us on actions for which formal
consultation has been completed, if those actions may affect designated
critical habitat or adversely modify or destroy proposed critical
habitat.
Federal activities that may affect Allium munzii or its critical
habitat will require section 7 consultation. Activities on private or
State lands requiring a permit from a Federal agency, such as a permit
from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under section 404 of the Clean
Water Act, a section 10(a)(1)(B) permit from the Service, or some other
Federal action, including funding (e.g., Federal Highway Administration
or Federal Emergency Management Agency funding), will also continue to
be subject to the section 7 consultation process. Federal actions not
affecting listed species or critical habitat and actions on non-Federal
and private lands that are not federally funded, authorized, or
permitted do not require section 7 consultation.
Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us to briefly evaluate and
describe in any proposed or final regulation that designates critical
habitat those activities involving a Federal action that may destroy or
adversely modify such habitat, or that may be affected by such
designation. Activities that may destroy or adversely modify critical
habitat may also jeopardize the continued existence of the Allium
munzii. Federal activities that, when carried out, may adversely affect
critical habitat for the Allium munzii include, but are not limited to:
(1) Actions that would permanently alter the function of the
underlying clay soil layer to hold and retain water. Damage or
alternation of the clay soil layer would eliminate the function of this
primary constituent element for providing space for individual and
population growth and for normal behavior; water and physiological
requirements; and sites for breeding, reproduction, and pollination.
Actions that could permanently alter the function of the underlying
soil layer to hold and retain water include, but are
[[Page 33026]]
not limited to, mining, grading or earthmoving work that disrupts or
rips into the soil layer.
(2) Actions that would permanently degrade the plant community or
the mesic microhabitats. Degradation of the plant community or
microhabitat would reduce the ability of these primary constituent
elements to provide space for individual and population growth; water
and physiological requirements; and sites for breeding, reproduction,
and pollination. Actions that could degrade these elements include, but
are not limited to, erosion of sediments from fill material, and soils
disturbed by grading, earthmoving work, off-highway vehicle use,
grazing, vegetation removal, or road construction within the watershed
of the mesic microhabitats.
(3) Any activity that could alter watershed or soil characteristics
in ways that would appreciably alter or reduce the quality or quantity
of surface and subsurface water flow needed to maintain Allium munzii
habitat. These activities could include, but are not limited to,
altering the natural fire regime; development, including road building;
livestock grazing; and vegetation manipulation such as clearing or
grubbing in the watershed upslope from A. munzii.
(4) Road construction and maintenance, right-of-way designation,
and regulation of agricultural activities, or any activity funded or
carried out by the Department of Transportation or Department of
Agriculture that results in discharge of dredged or fill material, or
mechanized land clearing of Allium munzii habitat.
All lands designated as critical habitat are within the
geographical area occupied by the species and are necessary for the
conservation of Allium munzii. Federal agencies already consult with us
on actions that may affect Allium munzii to ensure that their actions
do not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Thus, we do
not anticipate substantial additional regulatory protection will result
from critical habitat designation.
If you have questions regarding whether specific activities will
constitute destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat,
contact the Field Supervisor, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office (see
ADDRESSES section). Requests for copies of the regulations on listed
wildlife and plants and inquiries about prohibitions and permits may be
addressed to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Branch of Endangered
Species, 911 N.E. 11th Ave, Portland, OR 97232 (telephone 503/231-2063;
facsimile 503/231-6243).
Exclusions Under Section 4(b)(2) of the Act
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states that critical habitat shall be
designated, and revised, on the basis of the best available scientific
data available after taking into consideration the economic impact,
effects to national security, and any other relevant impact, of
specifying any particular area as critical habitat. An area may be
excluded from critical habitat if it is determined, following an
analysis, that the benefits of such exclusion outweigh the benefits of
specifying a particular area as critical habitat, unless the failure to
designate such area as critical habitat will result in the extinction
of the species. Consequently, we may exclude an area from designated
critical habitat based on economic impacts, effects to national
security, or other relevant impacts such as preservation of
conservation partnerships, if we determine the benefits of excluding an
area from critical habitat outweigh the benefits of including the area
in critical habitat, provided the action of excluding the area will not
result in the extinction of the species.
In our critical habitat designations we have used the provisions
outlined in section 4(b)(2) of the Act to evaluate those specific areas
that are proposed for designation as critical habitat and those areas
which are subsequently finalized (i.e., designated). We have applied
the provisions of this section of the Act to lands essential to the
conservation of the subject species to evaluate them and either exclude
them from final critical habitat or not include them in proposed
critical habitat. Lands which we have either excluded from or not
included in critical habitat based on those provisions include but are
not limited to those covered by: (1) Legally operative HCPs that cover
the species and provide assurances that the conservation measures for
the species will be implemented and effective; (2) draft HCPs that
cover the species, have undergone public review and comment, and
provide assurances that the conservation measures for the species will
be implemented and effective (i.e., pending HCPs); (3) Tribal
conservation plans that cover the species and provide assurances that
the conservation measures for the species will be implemented and
effective; (4) State conservation plans that provide assurances that
the conservation measures for the species will be implemented and
effective; and (5) Service National Wildlife Refuge System
Comprehensive Conservation Plans that provide assurances that the
conservation measures for the species will be implemented and
effective. Within the essential habitat for Allium munzii, there are no
tribal lands or lands owned by the Department of Defense.
Relationship of Critical Habitat to Approved Habitat Conservation Plans
(HCPs) and Other Approved Conservation Strategies
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act requires us to consider other relevant
impacts, in addition to economic impacts, when designating critical
habitat. Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act authorizes us to issue permits
for the take of listed wildlife species incidental to otherwise lawful
activities. Development of an HCP is a prerequisite for the issuance of
an incidental take permit pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act.
An incidental take permit application must be supported by an HCP that
identifies conservation measures that the permittee agrees to implement
for the species to minimize and mitigate the impacts of the permitted
incidental take.
Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we have excluded critical habitat
from non-Federal lands within: (1) Approved HCPs (Rancho Bella Vista
and SKR HCPs); and (2) existing PQP lands, proposed conceptual reserve
design lands, and lands targeted for conservation within the Western
Riverside County MSCHP. We believe the benefits of excluding lands
within these legally operative HCPs from the final critical habitat
designation will outweigh the benefits of including them.
In addition, we have excluded three areas where conservation
strategies approved through the section 7 consultation process have
provided protection, long-term management, and funding to conserve
Allium munzii. Again, we believe the benefits of excluding these lands
from the final critical habitat designation outweigh the benefits of
including them. The analysis which led us to the conclusion that the
benefits of excluding these areas exceed the benefits of designating
them as critical habitat, and will not result in the extinction of the
species, follows.
Allium munzii is a covered species under the Western Riverside
County MSHCP. The Western Riverside County MSHCP has three conservation
objectives to conserve and monitor Allium munzii populations. First,
the MSHCP Conservation Area includes at least 21,260 acres of modeled
habitat (grassland, coastal sage scrub, chaparral and peninsular
juniper woodland between 300 and 1,000 m in the Riverside Lowlands and
Santa Ana Mountains Bioregions). This will
[[Page 33027]]
include at least 2,070 acres of clay soils: Altamont (190 acres), Auld
(250 acres), Bosanko (600 acres), Claypit (100 acres), and Porterville
(930 acres) soils underlying the suitable habitat. Second, the MSHCP
Conservation Area includes at least 13 occurrences within Temescal
Valley and the southwestern portion of the Plan Area, including the
following Core Areas: Harford Springs Park, privately owned EO 5
population in Temescal Valley, Alberhill, De Palma Rd, Estelle
Mountain, Domenigoni Hills, Lake Skinner, Bachelor Mountain, Elsinore
Peak, Scott Road, North Peak, and northeast of Alberhill (EO 16).
Third, as part of the Western Riverside County MSHCP, surveys will be
conducted for Allium munzii as part of the project review process for
public and private projects within the Narrow Endemic Plant Species
survey area where suitable habitat is present (see Narrow Endemic Plant
Species Survey Area Map, Figure 6-1 of the MSHCP, Volume I). Allium
munzii located as a result of survey efforts shall be conserved in
accordance with procedures described within Section 6.1.3 of the MSHCP,
Volume I. In addition, the MSHCP proposes that the Reserve Managers
will manage known and future occurrences of this species for
competition with non-native plant species, clay mining, off-road
vehicle use, and disking activities and that the persistence of 75
percent of the known locations will be monitored every 8 years. Other
management actions described in the Western Riverside County MSHCP
include addressing competition with non-native plant species, clay
mining, off-road vehicle use, and disking activities. This management
will help maintain Allium munzii populations and habitat.
The Rancho Bella Vista HCP provides both interim and long-term
management for Allium munzii. Interim management actions were initiated
upon approval of the HCP and included the maintenance of existing
access controls, cleanup of conserved habitat areas where unauthorized
trash dumping occurred, development of an interim management plan, and
implementation of project-specific impact minimization and mitigation.
Long-term management included transfer of the open space to an approved
management agency, assessment of exotic plants, access control,
development of a fire management plan and public information programs
and materials, monitoring of sensitive plants and animals, and
providing annual monitoring reports to the Service.
The SKR HCP provides for the establishment of core reserves,
adaptive management of the core reserves to ensure the permanent
conservation, preservation, restoration of SKR and SKR habitats, and
limiting projects within the core reserves. While these lands were
conserved for the Stephens' kangaroo rat, the core preserves and
management plans also provide a conservation benefit to Allium munzii
by reducing threats to PCEs by ground disturbance, alteration of
vegetation, and invasive plants.
We have excluded three areas where conservation strategies approved
through the section 7 consultation process have provided protection,
long-term management, and funding to conserve Allium munzii. The
strategy for the Sycamore Creek Development includes avoidance,
preservation, and relocation of Altamont clay soils within an area
protected by a conservation easement, and interim and long-term
management and funding. To address effects to Allium munzii, the
conservation strategy includes measures to avoid and preserve 18.3
acres of Altamont clay soils on site in the conservation easement;
relocate additional clay soils from the development area to the
conservation easement for the purposes of restoring Allium munzii and
Riversidean sage scrub; release additional clay soils for passive
recolonization through removal of the paved surface of De Palma Road;
relocate occupied clay soils within areas proposed for development to
the wildlife corridor and/or other suitable conserved habitat; provide
a funding mechanism to provide management of the on site conservation
areas for Allium munzii; and prohibit the planting of invasive plant
species adjacent to the corridor. The strategy for Southern California
Gas Company includes the acquisition of a 36.3-acre site to conserve
habitat for Allium munzii that includes 24.5 acres of Riversidean sage
scrub and 11.82 acres of agricultural land, funding of a management
endowment that assures the management of the 36.32-acres conservation
area in perpetuity, and a preliminary and long-term management plan.
The strategy for the Warmington Project includes avoidance and on-site
conservation of the known occurrence of Allium munzii and adjacent
potential habitat and the transfer of this 65.5-acre parcel of land to
Riverside County Parks for protection and management. We concurred with
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers that the proposed project would not
adversely affect Allium munzii because the applicant agreed to protect
and conserve the known occurrence of Allium munzii and adjacent
potential habitat in the south-central, 65.5-acre portion of the
proposed site. In addition, Riverside County Parks has agreed to
protect and manage this parcel for conservation.
(1) Benefits of Inclusion
A benefit of including an area as critical habitat designation is
the education of landowners and the public regarding the potential
conservation value of these areas. The inclusion of an area as critical
habitat may focus and contribute to conservation efforts by other
parties by clearly delineating areas of high conservation values for
certain species. However, we believe that this educational benefit has
largely been achieved for Allium munzii. The public outreach and
environmental impact reviews required under NEPA for the Rancho Bella
Vista and SKR HCPs and Western Riverside County MSHCP provided
significant opportunities for public education regarding the
conservation of the areas occupied by Allium munzii. For instance, the
Western Riverside County MSHCP identifies specific populations of
Allium munzii for conservation. Therefore, we believe the education
benefits which might arise from a critical habitat designation have
largely already been generated as a result of the significant outreach
for the Rancho Bella Vista and SKR HCPs and Western Riverside County
MSHCP. Moreover, in our final listing rule (63 FR 54975), we noted
that, where the species occurs, landowners are aware of its presence
and status since all occurrences were known, including the populations
on Forest Service land in the Cleveland National Forest, Harford
Springs County Park, and lands managed by the Riverside County Habitat
Conservation Agency.
The areas excluded are currently occupied by the species. If these
areas were designated as critical habitat, any actions with a Federal
nexus that might adversely modify the critical habitat would require a
consultation with us, as explained above, in the section of this notice
entitled ``Effects of Critical Habitat Designation.'' However, inasmuch
as this area is currently occupied by the species, consultation for
activities with a Federal nexus which might adversely impact the
species, including habitat modification, would be required even without
the critical habitat designation.
The Western Riverside County MSHCP provides a greater level of
management for Allium munzii on private lands than would designation of
critical habitat on private lands. Thus, consultation for Federal
activities that
[[Page 33028]]
might adversely impact the species would be required even without the
critical habitat designation. Moreover, inclusion of these non-Federal
lands as critical habitat would not necessitate additional management
and conservation activities that exceed the approved HCPs and their
implementing agreements. The lands conserved by conservation strategies
approved through the section 7 consultation process have no further
Federal discretionary action and critical habitat would not result in
the reinitiation of a section 7 consultation.
In summary, we believe that designating critical habitat on any
non-Federal lands that are: (1) Within approved HCPs; (2) on existing
PQP lands, proposed conceptual reserve design lands, and on lands
targeted for conservation within the Western Riverside County MSCHP;
and (3) on lands where conservation strategies approved through the
section 7 consultation process have provided protection, long-term
management, and funding to conserve Allium munzii would provide little
additional Federal regulatory benefits for the species. Under the
Gifford Pinchot decision, critical habitat designations may provide
benefits to recovery of a species different than was previously
believed, but it is not possible to quantify this at present. Because
the excluded areas are occupied by the species, there must be
consultation with the Service over any action with a Federal nexus that
may affect these populations. The additional educational benefits that
might arise from critical habitat designation have been largely
accomplished through the process of public review and comment on the
environmental impact documents which accompanied the development of the
Rancho Bella Vista and SKR HCPs and Western Riverside County MSHCP.
(2) Benefits of Exclusion
The exclusion of critical habitat from non-Federal lands that are:
(1) Within approved HCPs (Rancho Bella Vista and SKR HCPs); (2) on
existing PQP lands, proposed conceptual reserve design lands, and lands
targeted for conservation within the Western Riverside County MSCHP;
and (3) on lands where conservation strategies approved through the
section 7 consultation process have provided protection, long-term
management, and funding to conserve Allium munzii would benefit permit
holders and landowners because they would avoid any additional
regulatory costs related to complying with the critical habitat
designation. Since most of the occurrences of Allium munzii on non-
Federal lands are within the three categories stated immediately
preceding, available funding would be directed towards conservation
rather than toward complying with critical habitat requirements that
would not provide the species with additional benefits. Excluding these
lands from critical habitat would ensure that funding remains available
for implementation, rather than spending limited resources on ensuring
compliance with the regulatory requirements potentially triggered by a
critical habitat designation that would not be likely to provide
additional benefit to the species.
We also believe that excluding these lands, and thus helping
landowners avoid the additional costs that would result from the
designation, will foster continued cooperation and partnership needed
for implementation, and also that it will contribute to a more positive
climate for HCPs and other active conservation measures that provide
greater conservation benefits than would result from designation of
critical habitat. In our final listing rule (63 FR 54975), we noted
that the designation of critical habitat on lands owned by the
Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency would not change the way
those lands are managed or require specific management actions to take
place, and designation could be detrimental because of potential
landowner misunderstandings about the real effects of critical habitat
designation on private lands.
(3) The Benefits of Exclusion Exceed the Benefits of Inclusion
We do not believe that the benefits from the designation of
critical habitat for lands we have decided to exclude--a limited
educational benefit and very limited regulatory benefit, which are
largely otherwise provided for, as discussed above--exceed the benefits
of exclusion that would allow for the avoidance of increased regulatory
costs and would provide little or no benefit and a potential reduction
in available implementation funding for conservation actions with
partners.
We also believe that excluding these lands, and thus helping
landowners avoid the additional costs that would result from the
designation, will contribute to a more positive climate for HCPs and
other active conservation measures which provide greater conservation
benefits than would result from designation of critical habitat. We
therefore find that the benefits of excluding these areas from this
designation of critical habitat outweigh the benefits of including them
in the designation.
(4) Exclusion Will Not Result in Extinction of the Species
We believe that exclusion of the three categories--(1) lands within
approved HCPs (Rancho Bella Vista and SKR HCPs); (2) existing PQP
lands, proposed conceptual reserve design lands, and lands targeted for
conservation within the Western Riverside County MSCHP; and (3) lands
where conservation strategies approved through the section 7
consultation process have provided protection, long-term management,
and funding to conserve Allium munzii--will not result in extinction of
the species since these lands will be conserved and managed for the
benefit of Allium munzii. Any actions with a Federal nexus that might
adversely affect Allium munzii must undergo a consultation with the
Service under the requirements of section 7 of the Act. The exclusions
leave these protections unchanged. In addition, as discussed above,
there are a substantial number of HCPs and other active conservation
measures underway for the species, which provide greater conservation
benefits than would result from a designation. There is accordingly no
reason to believe that these exclusions would result in extinction of
the species.
Economic Analysis
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act requires us to designate critical
habitat on the basis of the best scientific and commercial information
available and to consider the economic and other relevant impacts of
designating a particular area as critical habitat. We may exclude areas
from critical habitat upon a determination that the benefits of such
exclusions outweigh the benefits of specifying such areas as critical
habitat. We cannot exclude such areas from critical habitat when such
exclusion will result in the extinction of the species concerned.
Following the publication of the proposed critical habitat
designation, we conducted an economic analysis to estimate the
potential economic effect of the designation. The draft analysis was
made available for public review on December 1, 2004 (69 FR 69878). We
accepted comments on the draft analysis until January 3, 2005.
The primary purpose of the economic analysis is to estimate the
potential economic impacts associated with the designation of critical
habitat for Allium munzii. This information is intended to assist the
Secretary in making decisions about whether the benefits of excluding
[[Page 33029]]
particular areas from the designation outweigh the benefits of
including those areas in the designation. This economic analysis
considers the economic efficiency effects that may result from the
designation, including habitat protections that may be coextensive with
the listing of the species. It also addresses distribution of impacts,
including an assessment of the potential effects on small entities and
the energy industry. This information can be used by the Secretary to
assess whether the effects of the designation might unduly burden a
particular group or economic sector.
This analysis focuses on the direct and indirect costs of the rule.
However, economic impacts to land use activities can exist in the
absence of critical habitat. These impacts may result from, for
example, local zoning laws, State and natural resource laws, and
enforceable management plans and best management practices applied by
other State and Federal agencies. Economic impacts that result from
these types of protections are not included in the analysis because
they are considered to be part of the regulatory and policy baseline.
Only U.S. Forest Service lands at Elsinore Peak within the
Cleveland National Forest were designated as critical habitat in the
final rule. The economic analysis projected $33,849 in cost impacts
from 2005 to 2025 from the designation of critical habitat on U.S.
Forest Service lands. The analysis estimated that the future costs
associated with conservation efforts for Allium munzii (prescribed
burning, fence replacement, fencing electric tower site, and
monitoring) by the U.S. Forest Service was $26,146. The administrative
cost to the U.S. Forest Service associated with future section 7
consultations was estimated at $7,704. All other lands identified as
essential habitat in the proposed rule were not designated as critical
habitat in the final rule. No lands were excluded from critical habitat
based on the economic impact under section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
The final economic analysis and supporting documents are included
in our administrative record and may be obtained by contacting U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Branch of Endangered Species (see ADDRESSES
section) or for downloading from the Internet at http://carlsbad.fws.gov
.
Required Determinations
Regulatory Planning and Review
In accordance with Executive Order 12866, this document is a
significant rule in that it may raise novel legal and policy issues,
but will not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or
more or affect the economy in a material way. Due to the tight timeline
for publication in the Federal Register, the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has not formally reviewed this rule. As explained above,
we prepared an economic analysis of this action. We used this analysis
to meet the requirement of section 4(b)(2) of the Act to determine the
economic consequences of designating the specific areas as critical
habitat. We also used it to help determine whether to exclude any area
from critical habitat, as provided for under section 4(b)(2), if we
determine that the benefits of such exclusion outweigh the benefits of
specifying such area as part of the critical habitat, unless we
determine, based on the best scientific and commercial data available,
that the failure to designate such area as critical habitat will result
in the extinction of the species.
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (as amended by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996),
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 (i.e., small businesses, small
organizations, and small government jurisdictions). 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 the RFA to
require Federal agencies to provide a statement of factual basis for
certifying that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities. The SBREFA also amended the RFA
to require a certification statement.
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; as well as small businesses. Small businesses 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 consider the types of
activities that might trigger regulatory impacts under this rule, as
well as the 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 rule could significantly affect a substantial
number of small entities, we consider the number of small entities
affected within particular types of economic activities (e.g., housing
development, grazing, oil and gas production, timber harvesting). 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 conducted,
funded, or permitted 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 species is present,
Federal agencies already are required to consult with us under section
7 of the Act on activities they fund, permit, or implement that may
affect Allium munzii. 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 consultation for
ongoing Federal activities.
The draft economic analysis (September 22, 2004) predicted
potential costs for both lands included in the final designation and
proposed for exclusion. In this final designation, as in the proposed
designation, only U.S. Forest Service lands at Elsinore
[[Page 33030]]
Peak within the Cleveland National Forest were designated as critical
habitat in the final rule; all other lands, namely private lands, have
been excluded. Based on this analysis, it was determined that the total
future impacts cost of the critical habitat designation to the Forest
Service is $33,849, and the cost of past impacts is $9,101. In
addition, it was projected that the Forest Service would incur an
additional $7,704 in administrative costs for project modifications to
forest management activities, such as access control (fencing and
gating) and prescribed burning for Allium munzii conservation efforts.
The special permit holders for the electric tower site include
Riverside County, Spectrasite Communications, Inc., Comcast
Corporation, and Elsinore Peak Facility Corporation. Of the four
special permit holders, Elsinore Peak Facility Corporation is the only
small entity. With annual revenue of $150,000, the potential impact to
this small business is $250 to $1,000 (in 1 year) and represents 0.2 to
0.4 percent of the revenue. No significant impact to small entities
will likely result from this final designation of critical habitat. As
such, we are certifying that this designation of critical habitat would
not result in a significant impact on a substantial number of small
entities and that a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (5 U.S.C 801 et
seq.)
Under SBREFA, this rule is not a major rule. Our detailed
assessment of the economic effects of this designation is described in
the economic analysis. Based on the effects identified in the economic
analysis, we believe that this rule will not have an annual effect on
the economy of $100 million or more, will not cause a major increase in
costs or prices for consumers, and will not have significant adverse
effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity,
innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with
foreign-based enterprises. Refer to the final economic analysis for a
discussion of the effects of this determination.
Executive Order 13211
On May 18, 2001, the President issued Executive Order 13211 with
respect to regulations that significantly affect energy supply,
distribution, and use. Executive Order 13211 requires agencies to
prepare Statements of Energy Effects when undertaking certain actions.
This final rule to designate critical habitat for Allium munzii 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. We have not designated
critical habitat on U.S. Forest Service lands that fall within the
LEAPS corridor. Our analysis indicates that the primary constituent
elements are not present along the easternmost boundary of the proposed
critical habitat unit and, therefore, those lands have not been
designated as critical habitat.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.)
In accordance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501
et seq.), we make the following findings:
(a) This rule will not produce a Federal mandate. In general, a
Federal mandate is a provision in legislation, 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 tribal 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; AFDC 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 non-Federal entities who 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 shift the costs of the large entitlement programs listed above
onto State governments.
(b) We do not believe that this rule will significantly or uniquely
affect small governments because it will 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 designation of critical habitat imposes no obligations on
State or local governments. As such, Small Government Agency Plan is
not required.
Federalism
In accordance with Executive Order 13132, the rule does not have
significant Federalism effects. A Federalism assessment is not
required. In keeping with DOI and Department of Commerce policy, we
requested information from, and coordinated development of, this final
critical habitat designation with appropriate State resource agencies
in California. The designation of critical habitat in areas currently
occupied by Allium munzii imposes no additional restrictions to those
currently in place and, therefore, has little incremental impact on
State and local governments and their activities. The designation may
have some benefit to these governments in that the areas essential to
the conservation of the species are more clearly defined, and the
primary constituent elements of the habitat necessary to the survival
of the species are specifically identified. While making this
definition and identification does not alter where and what federally
sponsored activities may occur, it may assist these local governments
in long-range planning (rather than waiting for case-by-case section 7
consultations to occur).
[[Page 33031]]
Civil Justice Reform
In accordance with Executive Order 12988, the Office of the
Solicitor has determined that the rule does not unduly burden the
judicial system and that it meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of the Order. We are designating critical habitat in accordance
with the provisions of the Endangered Species Act. This final rule uses
standard property descriptions and identifies the primary constituent
elements within the designated areas to assist the public in
understanding the habitat needs of Allium munzii.
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. 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
It is our position that, outside the Tenth Circuit, we do not need
to prepare environmental analyses as defined by the NEPA in connection
with designating critical habitat under the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended. We published a notice outlining our reasons for this
determination in the Federal Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR
49244). This assertion was upheld in the courts of the Ninth Circuit
[Douglas County v. Babbitt, 48 F.3d 1495 (9th Cir. Ore. 1995), cert.
denied 116 S. Ct. 698 (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), Executive Order 13175, and the Department
of Interior's manual at 512 DM 2, we readily acknowledge our
responsibility to communicate meaningfully with recognized Federal
Tribes on a government-to-government basis. We have determined that
there are no tribal lands essential for the conservation of Allium
munzii. Therefore, designation of critical habitat for Allium munzii
has not been designated on Tribal lands.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited herein, as well as others,
is available upon request from the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office
(see ADDRESSES section).
Author
The primary authors of this notice are the Carlsbad Fish and
Wildlife Office staff (see ADDRESSES section).
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.
Regulation Promulgation
0
Accordingly, we amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of
the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 17--[AMENDED]
0
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.
0
2. In Sec. 17.12(h), revise the entry for Allium munzii under
``FLOWERING PLANTS'' to read as follows:
Sec. 17.12 Endangered and threatened plants.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species
-------------------------------------------------------- Historic range Family Status When listed Critical Special
Scientific name Common name habitat rules
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flowering Plants
* * * * * * *
Allium munzii.................... Munz's onion........ U.S.A. (CA)........ Liliaceae-Lily..... E 650 17.96(a) NA
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
3. In Sec. 17.96, amend paragraph (a) by adding an entry for Allium
munzii in alphabetical order under Family Liliaceae to read as follows:
Sec. 17.96 Critical habitat--plants.
(a) Flowering plants.
* * * * *
Family Liliaceae: Allium munzii (Munz's onion)
(1) Critical habitat unit for Allium munzii is depicted for
Riverside County, California, on the map below.
(2) The primary constituent elements of critical habitat for Allium
munzii are:
(i) Clay soil series of sedimentary origin (e.g., Altamont, Auld,
Bosanko, Claypit, Porterville), or clay lenses (pockets of clay soils)
of such that may be found as unmapped inclusions in other soil series,
or soil series of sedimentary or igneous origin with a clay subsoil
(e.g., Cajalco, Las Posas, Vallecitos), found on level or slightly
sloping landscapes, generally between the elevations of 985 ft and
3,500 ft (300 m and 1,068 m) above mean sea level (AMSL), and as part
of open native or non-native grassland plant communities and ``clay
soil flora'' that can occur in a mosaic with Riversidean sage scrub,
chamise chaparral, scrub oak chaparral, coast live oak woodland, and
peninsular juniper woodland and scrub; or
(ii) Alluvial soil series of sedimentary or igneous origin (e.g.,
Greenfield, Ramona, Placentia, Temescal) and terrace escarpment soils
found as part of alluvial fans underlying open native or non-native
grassland plant communities that can occur in a mosaic with Riversidean
sage scrub generally between the elevations of 985 ft and 3,500 ft (300
m and 1,068 m) AMSL, or Pyroxenite deposits of igneous origin found on
Bachelor Mountain as part of non-native grassland and Riversidean sage
scrub generally between the elevations of 985 ft and 3,500 ft (300 m
and 1,068 m) AMSL; and
(iii) Clay soils or other soil substrate as described above with
intact, natural surface and subsurface structure that have been
minimally altered or unaltered by ground-disturbing activities (e.g.,
disked, graded, excavated, re-contoured); and,
(iv) Within areas of suitable clay soils, microhabitats that are
moister than surrounding areas because of (A) north or northeast
exposure or (B) seasonally available moisture from surface or
subsurface runoff.
[[Page 33032]]
(3) Critical habitat for Allium munzii does not include existing
features and structures, such as buildings, roads, aqueducts,
railroads, airport runways, radio and communication towers, and
buildings, other paved areas, lawns, and other urban landscaped areas
not containing one or more of the primary constituent elements.
(4) Critical habitat unit for Allium munzii is described below.
(i) Map Unit 1: Riverside County, California. From USGS 1:24,000
quadrangle map Wildomar, California, land bounded by the following UTM
11 NAD27 coordinates (E, N): 467900, 3718200; 468700, 3718200; 468700,
3717800; 468850, 3717800; 468850, 3717700; 468800, 3717300; 468500,
3717300; 468500, 3717500; 468100, 3717500; 468100, 3717400; thence east
to the U.S. Forest Service, Cleveland National Forest boundary at y-
coordinate 3717400; thence northwest following the U.S. Forest Service,
Cleveland National Forest boundary to y-coordinate 371800; thence east
to 467700, 3718000; 467700, 3718100; 467900, 3718100; returning to
467900, 3718200.
(ii) Note: Map of critical habitat unit follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07JN05.000
[[Page 33033]]
Dated: May 31, 2005.
Craig Manson,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 05-11167 Filed 6-6-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C